Some exciting opinions and facts
Well, David Brooks may have thought the debate questions were really great, but most people were disgusted, and ABC got so many thousands of complaints that George Stephanopoulos actual felt he had to respond - although he doesn't think he did anything wrong. (And the LAT is so excited about the long thread following their article about it that they actually sent out an e-mail to bloggers to call our attention to it.) One of the more amusing aspects of last night's debacle is the number of people who imagine that, because Steph was once a member of the Clinton administration, he is in the tank for President Bill's wife, and that's why he was so mean to Obama. These are people who don't remember that Stephi was undermining the Clinton administration even while he was still in it and left to write a book that drove a deep wedge between himself and the Clintons. He has never spent a day since being anything but another media conduit for right-wing memes. There's no particular irony in the fact that he really did ask questions that came to him from Sean Hannity. (For those who missed the debates, Crooks and Liars has put together some lowlights.)
Down With Tyranny! reports that The Boston Globe has fallen out of love with John McCain, only a few months after having endorsed him. And Smerconish endorsed Obama.
Scott Lemieux on The Centrist Assumption Fallacy notes that "centrism" doesn't seem to have anything to do with having views that are anywhere near the center.
At the only source of Fafblog!, Giblets is the voice of the people: "Well Giblets knows the real Americans of the heartland, Barack Obama. He has flown over them and driven past them and grimaced amiably in their direction on the way to hotel rooms on numerous occasions, and in that time he has come to appreciate their primitive yet unique culture. These salt-of-the-earth folk don't need your condescending liberal elitism to tell them how they feel! They need Giblets's condescending conservative elitism to tell them how they feel!"
Congratulations to Digby, who isn't just a great woman blogger, but a first-rank writer and thinker. Yes, we do love you.
- Original article
- FILED UNDER: Guest Blogger
- April 17, 2008
Mean to Obama?
that's why he was so mean to Obama.
We ain't seen nothing yet.
And IF Obama's VP is Al Sharpton?
So far Obama has handled every smear you have thrown at him
Including your latest race-baiting, "And IF Obama's VP is Al Sharpton?"
As long as you're race-baiting, why not make his running mate Louis Farrakhan?... Hell, dig up Idi Amin's corpse and make him Obama's Veep!
What if Hillary makes Monica Lewinski her running mate?... Or Vince Foster's ghost?
I found it shocking that Hillary was so hawkish
Hillary's "tough talk" on Iran and having an umbrella of protection over the entire middle east is so right wing it is scary.
Now we know why she and others in the democratic party passed the bill to authorize the president to use force.
Where is the evidence that Iran plans to attack Israel? Where does she get this stuff?
Uhh, let's see, Iran's
Uhh, let's see, Iran's president says that he wants to push all the Jews into the ocean. It's guys like you that back in the day asked for evidence that Germany planned to invade Poland. But that's beside the point, Israel could kick the shit out of Iran anyway (and soon they will), what I care about is that Iran is supplying terrorists with weapons and training.
By bannedfrogg April 18, 2008 - 1:01am
Your apostrophe exploded
You lack self control.
"let's see" was a poor
"let*#!039;s see" was a poor choice of words, what I meant to say was something completely different that doesn't even have anything to do with what I was talking about to begin with.
It works for Obama, I figured I'd give it a try.
By bannedfroggApril 18, 2008 - 1:01am
Right ... and Saddam's WMD's are somewhere ... Meanwhile, bin Laden laughs in Afghanistan.
What I care about is the latest GAO report that indicates that neoconservative policy has been a dismal and dangerous failure.
Hello Libtards!!!
Well, your Democratic controlled Congress and Senate sure has done a lot to fix anything......
Oh yea, They havent done anything either!!!
What about Comrade Pelosi's "first 100 days" propaganda?
All 3 Presidential wannabe's are worthless! Can't we get any better than those clowns, from any party????
And Yes, Liberalism is STILL a Mental Disorder!!!!!!!
Iran/Terrorist
It is interesting how half a truth is worse than a bald faced lie. Iran has been training a militia group of Iraqis for over 30 years. They were conducting a guerilla war against Saddam and his Sunni dominated secular dictatorship, so I guess these guys should be considered allies, right? The enemy of our enemy is our friend, right? (Now do you see how wrong the right really is) The group,the Badr Brigade, is the main militia to the same party that our friend Malaki is head of. Hmmm. Does that mean we are supporting terrorists by supporting Malaki who is being propped up by a "terrorist group" armed and trained in Iran who are the very Shia Terrorists that are killing American personnel with Iranian arms and are the source of those arms in Iraq? Sounds good to me.
That is incorrect.
One individual - the president of Iran, who has no real power - quoted a long-dead individual as saying that some day Israel will be gone from the map. That's not the same as announcing an intention to push Iran off the map. Someday probably most of the countries that exist today will be gone from the map, and someday they will have been forgotten. No biggie.
Various Americans from time to time have announced all sorts of stupid intentions, but that doesn't mean it's US policy and it certainly isn't an excuse to bomb Washington.
Only one country is threatening to start new, unprovoked wars, and that's the USA making threat's to attack Iran. Many individual Americans, including some in the administration and some of their supporters, have been advocating bombing Iran back to the stone age. Do you regard that as a "reason" to bomb the United States?
AC
More liberal media at The Sideshow.
What?
"Someday probably most of the countries that exist today will be gone from the map, and someday they will have been forgotten. No biggie."
Some day certainly all of the people that exist today will be gone and forgotten. So, it's ok to just kill them now?
What do you base this ignorant statement on? France, England, China ? Yeah, they are just flashes in the pan. When you talk about the Arab plans for Israel you're talking about genocide. Even the United Nations has been busting Irans' chops for the last few years. Is that a reason to bomb the United Nations? Iran and it's current government are threatening it's neighbors. They control the government of Lebanon through a terrorist group. You're kidding right?
When you men get home and face an anti-war protestor, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend because she knows she’s dating a pussy… ~ Attributed to General Tommy Franks
By IlluminatiHottie April 18, 2008 - 10:47am
When I read the right wing garbage and realize how clueless they are I just laugh.
Who'd have guessed that the nation's greatest comedians
aren't working at comedy clubs, but actually occupy the White House, and that those accomplished yukmeisters control a vast network of other comedians? Their concerted efforts have brought guffaws and bellylaughs to all of America and the rest of the world. Need proof? Just go to any other country in the world and tell the first person you see that you are an American, and you are a proud supporter of George W. Bush. The mirth you produce will be simply inspiring (assuming that citizen doesn't kill you just a few seconds later).
yeah
I guess we should poll the world to see who they would like to lead the US. Maybe someone like Mr. Rogers wouldn't upset their sensibilities. Let's go to the all powerful UN and have it govern the world with it's iron fist. Whe's Hands Blix when you need him?
Grow up.
-Dave
By darmbruster1 April 19, 2008 - 9:29am
Please get back to us with a list of all the good that has come from the Iraq war. No one ever tells us that.
Who's talking about genocide?
That's not what Ahmenadinajad said.
Besides, there are extremist Likudniks who say pretty much the same thing about the Palestinians and Jordan.
Not to mention that the Christian Zionists have plans to wipe them all out.
Who are you going to bomb over this?
AC
More liberal media at The Sideshow.
Uh oh, you just attacked the sacred cow of US politics...
that Israel is poor and defenseless, and is always the victim and never the victimizer. How could you say that? Could it be because you actually read some history and understand the full story? I guess Georgie's book-burning squads missed a few inflammatory tomes!
yap, asking for the truth
is a really horrible thing to do.
obama's friend said
sharon is a terrorist.
Now that's just plain wrong...
We all know Sharon wasn't a terrorist. War criminal is the proper term. Just ask the folks at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps that he helped slaughter.
By Avedon-April 18, 2008 - 9:11am
Hell,even christians say they'll be gone from the map
Freedom forces people to think straight,which is impossible for those who can't handle freedom and are afflicted with mental rigidity. Barbara Hand Clow
Actually that individual
Actually that individual didn't say Israel will be gone from the map. He said the current regime will disappear from the pages of history. It was Khomeini who said it, and Ahmadinejad quoted Khomeini. He never said he wanted to wipe Israel off the map, nor did he say he was going to destroy Israel.
According to Juan Cole, a University of Michigan Professor of Modern Middle East and South Asian History, Ahmadinejad's statement should be translated as:
The Imam said that this regime occupying Jerusalem (een rezhim-e eshghalgar-e qods) must [vanish from] the page of time (bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad).
It was a mistranslation and mis-attribution (which I believe were intentional) which make the chicken hawks run into their bunkers and scream "Destroy! Destroy!"
.
.
Do you care that Saudi Arabia
is supplying "terrorists" with weapons? Iran is going nowhere. Hitler had the strongest military in the world when he started invading other countries and Iran is irrelevant.
They are doing the same thing Hussein did before Bush decided to hand Iraq over to Iran by removing him. They are blowhards that are merely posturing, but don't have to military capability to back it up, and they know this full well.
The question is whether we can exaggerate and inflate their threat potential in order to invade and occupy their oils fields, but the larger question is how Russia and China would respond to that.
China has the most powerful conventional military in the world today, thanks to the fascists that sold our economy out to them and built their military up through a crony anti-American-labor trade policy, in combination with Bush tearing our conventional military down in order to war profiteer in Iraq.
Yes we have nukes, but big fucking deal. If we use them, we too are toast. Russia would blow us to smithereens, which would also be irrelevant because the earth would not be inhabitable by humans once the first nuke went off and the retaliation started.
The bottom line is, it is conventional military that will be required to enforce a foreign policy agenda if we wish to have a planet to inhabit. We rely on China to supply us with enough steel to maintain ours, so go figure.
The reality is that greed got us into Iraq, and the repercussions were ignored. Iraq was waiting for iranian influence, all they needed was the removal of Iran's biggest enemy, a sunni dictator in Iraq.
Now that the neocons played right into Iran's hands, they want to approach this problem as ridiculously as we handled it in Iraq, through imperialism and aggression. Once again, this attempt to save neocon face ignores the potential repercussions from Iran's business partners.
I don't think WW3 is the answer.
you forget
that the regieme change policy in IRAQ was implemented under the Clinton administration. That was before they all flip-flopped of course. Like Hillary, many of you are beginning to believe your own lies.
-Dave
By darmbruster1 April 19, 2008 - 9:17am
Oh this guy is so wise. I'm simply in awe of his gifted intellect.
But seriously, no shit!
Having a policy in place to change the regime in Iraq is one thing. No one argues that was a good idea. But there has been no good outcome form this war in Iraq beyond the obvious removal of Saddam. As a matter of fact our situation is worse now than when he was in power.
So besides the removal of Saddam why don't you tell us all the wonderful things that have come from this war. Try not to rely on some school girls testimonial of how she loves the soldiers.
When are you going to open your eyes and see that
Ahmedinajad is a delusional windbag? Need proof? How about today's statement from the dwarfish moron, where he says that "Iran is the most powerful nation in the world"? This fool is even less believable than Bush on almost any and every subject, so when he says the will wipe Israel off the face of the earth, I equate that with him saying he will stop the sun from rising and the wind from blowing. Ahmedinajad is Iran's version of Lyndon LaRouche, our own home-grown nutjob. Ignore the little twerp, and undermine him by working to normalize relations with Iran. They are the most pro-western, pro-American citizenry in that part of the world outside of Israel. Stop treating them like a nation of rabid dogs, and you will see Ahmedinajad and the mullahs crumble.
open your eyes
Uffdaguy is right. The Iranean people, the Persian peoples have been hijacked by this terrorist thug and his gang. They want nothing more than to see Ahmadinejad, (the Armageddonist,) with two in the turban. The Persians are not arabs, and about the time Jimmy Carter was destroying Iranian/US relations, Iranians were dressing their women in Paris fashions, driving BMW's, and enjoying a blossoming middle-class society under the Shah. At this time, Ahmadinejad and fellow students were busy holding American citizens hostage. Khomeini put Iran back into the Islamic stone age. Ahmadinejad believes that it is already written that they will obliterate Israel; this is a milestone, and a prerequisite to his glorious armageddon. He believes it MUST play out this way. READ HIS WRITINGS. You couldn't have a clearer example of a boxer telegraphing a punch than this fanatical dipshit. "Iran has the right to nukes too" I hear you liberal nincompoops whine. You say, "Israel has them!!!" How naive can one get? The first ICBM Iran produces will be fired into downtown Tel Aviv so Ahmadinejad can go down in muslem history books as the man that pleases Allah the most. He'll be at the right side of Allah. They are planning for this glorious afterlife. He is ITCHING for a nuke. Hey, guess what? He could also nuke the Mid Eastern oil fields, (or threaten to do so). The implications are enormous; like putting a loaded shotgun into a room with a monkey.
-Dave
He could no more lob a ICBM into downtown Tel Aviv
than I could, (by the way, he would only need an IRBM, as an ICBM has a much longer range than is necessary to hit Israel from Iran).
Once again, Israel can defend itself without a second thought from anything the Iranians could conceivably do.
As for destroying Iranian/US relations, you'll have to look to someone other than Carter to blame. Perhaps the CIA, who, during the repub Eisenhower administration, overthrew the democratically-elected government of Iran and installed a more amenable puppet, the Shah. Subsequent administrations, all the way up to and including Carter, looked the other way while the Shah brutally repressed his people with a secret police that was renowned throughout the world for its cruelty and ability to torture.
Yes, you truly demonstrate how very little you know about the subject whereof you speak.
iran does have missiles
that can hit tel aviv. but they said they would go after the nuclear power plant at dimona.
Nope -
Oppression under the Shah is nowhere near the oppression perpetrated by the mullahs. I work with three Persian people, all of whom detest the current regime. Further, all of them are involved in the Persian community here in California and say that the days under the Shah were far more preferable than life under the mullahs.
By Shedd April 19, 2008 - 2:40am
Regardless of the opinions of life under the Shah vs. the Mullahs, the fact remains that the Shah was a bastard of our own (US) creation. That made him our responsibility. And furthermore the poor US foreign policy of imposing our chosen leaders onto other countries played a role in bringing the mullahs to power. So they are in essence our unintended consequences.
The US continuously shows poor judgement in foreign policy. We continuously cause problems for ourselves while trying to blame others for the damage done.
that's right...
MA will not get the opportunity to lob one into Tel Aviv. At least you're not suggesting his Nuke program is for peacetime power production like many of your peers; (the ones who will have to have a nuclear explosion to see they were wrong.) But we are discussing his *intentions* here.
Jimmy Carter is the genesis of everything that went wrong in Iran. He was then, and is now, a babbling fool. Go ahead; defend the Carter presidency.
Your man Obama would be monumentally worse than Carter. Yes he will be the nominee. If you think the Clintonistas were hard on him wait until the the Repubs unleash on him. He has already shot himself in the foot. He is damaged goods and has no chance of winning amongst Democrats, let alone in a National election.
Algore could win. He has VP experience, is a veteran of Nam, and "was robbed" in 2000. He could unify the fragmented Dem party. HRC supporters will not vote for BHO; they will go McCain or stay home.
Democratic nominees are getting weaker and weaker. You nominated John Kerry for Pete's sake! John Kerry! And John Edwards!!!??? (woooo hooo hoo)
-Dave
By darmbruster1April 19, 2008 - 9:11am
Damaged goods? Repubs unleashing?
Please.
What are you wingnuts going to do? Pledge that not voting for McSame will mean they don't get another four years of the worst administration ever?
I like the Democratic party's odds.
"Where is the evidence"
ummm...let's see...maybe it's because Ahmadinejad has come out and said it? Maybe it's the fact that Hamas is a direct military wing (and takes it's orders from) of the Iranian government? Maybe it's because the rockets they fired into Israel during the recent Jordan/Israel conflict were manufactured in Iran and shipped through Syria.
Which administration changed the policy towards Iraq to Regime Change policy? Bush? Wrong, it was the Clinton Administration. Everyone knew, and said, he had WMD's. We even found them in the first war.
Where is the evidence Iran plans to attack Israel? Remember that letter Ahmadinejad sent to the American people a year or so ago? They want to drive a wedge between the US and Israel so they can obliterate it with little consequence. You don't need a Weatherman to tell which way the wind blows. You just need to have a slight understanding of history, current events, and the geopolitical climate.
If polls told her that popular opinion was to bomb Darfur, she would go along with it. A better example of a snollygoster I have never seen...(except maybe for John Edwards.) I hope she gets the nomination because there's no way she could win in a National election. Obama looks like the nominee at this point and he has less of a chance. His run will be a McGovern deja-vu.
Watching the Dems beat each other up over both of these socialist dipshits is amusing. If the dem party had any sense, they would dust off Algore and throw him in the ring at the convention. You all love all; he could reunite the party. And he could win because of your belief that he got robbed in 2000. His Globaloney movie has been thoroughly debunked but you don't care about that if you think with your heart anyway. If you believe something, it must be true...it just has to be.
-Dave
By darmbruster1April 18, 2008 - 12:36pm
Believing that Saddam had WMD and abandoning Afghanistan to invade and occupy Iraq are two very different things. The Iraq debacle belongs to your Great Decider.
Either one of the Democratic candidates will win in the General. Voters aren't interested in the 4 more years McCain is offering.
Enjoy watching Democrats in fighting while you can. I know I thoroughly enjoyed watching your fanatic pundits beat the hell out of McCain only to be rejected by voters. When the dust settles after Obama is declared the Democratic nominee, it's game on. I look forward to watching McMaverick flip his lid in the first debate. And if fund raising is any indicator, your party is screwed. Best get used to the idea of an increased majority in congress and a Democratic POTUS. See you in November.
Very impressive
You used a lot of space that said.....absolutely nothing of value.
You seem to be absolutely terrified of Iran, which means you are a good, loyal unquestioning lapdog for Bush and company. You actually seem to believe that Iran is capable of all the things that Ahmedinajad says, which also means you are incredibly gullible. You probably also believed the cigarette companies when they said that cigarettes don't cause cancer.
Today, Ahmedinajad said that Iran was the most powerful country in the world. Do you believe him? If you don't believe him on that, then why would you believe any of the rest of his preposterous blather? He could no more wipe Israel off the face of the earth than Richard Simmons could beat Lennox Lewis in a boxing match. Israel is one of the world's biggest nuclear powers, with some experts saying they may have more nukes than the UK or France. They not only have the ability to respond quickly and massively to any Iranian attack, they also have a missile defense system that may be better than ours, especially because any Iranian attack with a nuke (which they don't have) would probably consist of one or two single warhead missiles, which are far easier to take out than the multiple warhead ICBMs with decoys that our system still can't hit.
You claim to have a slight understanding of history, current events, and the geopolitical climate. I would say that you overestimate your understanding by several magnitudes.
By UffdaguyApril 18, 2008 - 12:52pm
I like that! Brilliant.
I heard they wanted to do it as a pay-per-view event
but no one could figure out how to charge $49.95 for a 5 second event.
You must know what you're
You must know what you're talking about, because when it comes to using a lot of space and saying nothing of value, you're the expert!
She has to be hawkish in
She has to be hawkish in order to get AIPAC's support. She's playing to Israel, not the US.
By Michtou April 19, 2008 - 12:04pm
Now she is trashing liberal activists.
I'm telling you she is going the way of Lieberman.
Irans top moral cop busted for prostitution
Oklahoma sheriff charged with using inmates as sex slaves
Do you suppose
they were required to build naked pyramids? Did anyone check for leashes in the facility?
I predict this guy will get a medal and promotion from Bush.
Slick Willy says Hillary has never whined.
She whined like a spoiled little girl after the last debate in the very same city (Philadelphia). She's done nothing BUT play the victim from day one. Whaaa! The boys are ganging up on me! Whaaa! I always get the first question. Whaaa!
I guess Slick Willy's hearing is as weak as his morals.
Monica Lewinsky, Gennifer Flowers, Paula Corbin Jones, Elizabeth Ward Gracen, Sally Perdue, Dolly Kyle Browning, Juanita Broaddrick, Kathleen Willey... great scientists ponder as to whether or not this list even has an end.
Hey... If it doesn't bother her, it doesn't bother me.
Oh, stop it.
Making a crack about how the establishment in Washington is a "boys' club" is not "whining", it's just making a crack.
AC
More liberal media at The Sideshow.
I thought Obama proved he can handle the irrelevant,
sensationalized corporate media, RNC and republicanized Democrat (ie Clinton) smearing of him.
His explanation of the "cling to" comments satisfied my questions about them. This became much easier to do when it became clear the corporate oligarchy is working in overdrive to deprive Americans of their democracy.
Though I admire Hillary for admitting that she lied through her ass about Bosnia, she more than made up for this by participating in the Obama RNC talking point waterboard session.
Unfortunately there are alot of "Nashes" in this country. All I have to say is you deserve what you vote for. Perhaps a little poverty would go a long way to help you achieve your ideal body weight, Nash.
zionist terrorists
stole the land of the pals, says benny morris.
the definition of "tough" as in tough questions
My, my, my. Now questioning a candidate about his "refusal" to wear the flag pen is a tough????question. The continual vulgarization of the public debate via the television media is the dumbing down of America as never before. The perpetual self-aggrandizement of talking heads whether conservative or liberal, gives them a platform to self-congratulate or congratulate one another for their opinions. It is refreshing to listen to Rachel Maddow who doesn't spew her credentials which are impressive nor praise the banal comments of the provocateurs. I watch CNBC when she is on the panel knowing there is a least one insightful, thoughtful, and yes, intelligent commentator on the show. Scarborough is NOT a journalist nor Matthews nor Olbermann. They are opinionators with swelled heads who put themselves on the level of changemakers for Americans. Gibson, coming from a morning show, and Stephanapoulos coming from a political campaign have join this group of fatuous commentators. Their weaknesses were born than apparent Tuesday night. It goes without saying that political debates are not, in any real sense, debates at all and never have been. Seeing Nixon sweat on camera was more important that what Kennedy or he said. Obama believes he can change the political climate. Since mudslinging has been going on from day one of our democracy, it's not going to end. End the war in Iraq, make medical care accessible to all, improve educational opportunities for all, repair our roads and bridges for gosh sake, protect the consitutional rights of all such as privacy and habeas corpus.... Stop the reductum ad absurdum of the trivial, the trivialized, the meaningless.
From the( last of the Iraqis) blog
Here is the last iraqi answer to a question about OBL. The blog is about a iraqi that gives ground reports on his daily life.
http://last-of-iraqis.blogspot.com/
I don't know any but they might not be in Baghdad, I know about that, I know many westerners specially the ones who don't follow the world news closely thinks like the way you talked about…that was one of the reasons I started the blog….I wish I don't have to be anonymus so I could tell you guys more about the normal life of normal Iraqis and I don't think you will find much differences between ours and yours.
There are two scenarios in my mind for Osama…the first one: he is alive and well and that he is a US agent and his acts are based on US orders so that when ever they want to do something he gives them the reason to.
The second: he is dead or without any power but the US keeps it a secret for the same reason above; to give them the reason to do what they want……but I prefer the first.
Obama leads Clinton by 19 in Newsweek poll
Obama leads Clinton by 19 in Newsweek poll
the twirling toupee of temerity