A Little Touch Of Hillary Clinton In The Night

Americans really needed universal health care. Instead we got a Pelousy bill which transfers taxpayer wealth to Big Insurance and Big PhaRma. Things continue to fall apart. So, as a pick-me-up, it’s time for a little bit of Hillary in the night.

Before Hillary, let’s get some unpleasant Obamaish business out of the way first.

* * * * * *

As we’ve written before, there is a lot for Hillary supporters to be thankful for. Back in 2007 we here at Big Pink were alone but now there are wonderful Pink-kissed websites to frolic with. One smart website is Not Your Sweetie, which continues to document how the Dimocratic attacks on Eric Massa and David Paterson are drive-by revenge killings. Not to sweep away the current allegations, but if Paterson and Massa had done as they were told, the Obama thugs would not have ordered the hit.

Not Your Sweetie notes about the Paterson allegations that they are mostly “bogus”. As proof, a Daily News front page retraction is cited:

Investigators have found little direct evidence that Gov. Paterson tampered with a witness in a domestic abuse case against one of his top aides, the Daily News has learned.

While several key people have yet to be interviewed, the woman at the heart of the case, Sherr-una Booker, told probers she didn’t feel the governor threatened her in a phone conversation a day before a Feb. 8 hearing in the case.

Investigate Paterson and all the allegations thoroughly, but we suspect the perpetrators of the Paterson “hit” are at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. It’s a hit job to benefit Andrew Cuomo, the former “racist” turned Obama hero. It’s a gang bang with Cuomo and Obama trying to wipe out David Paterson and the memory of Carl McCall. Charlie Rangel and Tim Geithner get away with tax evasion but Paterson is not so lucky:

Cuomo is also investigating charges that Paterson lied under oath about freebie Yankees tickets he got for Game 1 of the World Series. Kuby said Cuomo has a different problem there – the case “is total silliness,” he said. “We really will be laughed out of the Union if we prosecute our governor for cheering on the Yankees at a World Series game.”

And there is more Obama-Cuomo-Paterson, along with the reasons why. Cuomo is running away from the investigatory gun, and, Not Your Sweetie quotes the Wall Street Journal as to why Here’s the Wall Street Journal:

Since taking on the investigations of Mr. Paterson, the state’s first African-American governor, Mr. Cuomo has seen a slip in his popularity, particularly among minority voters.

A poll released on Tuesday found that Mr. Cuomo’s approval rating among New York voters had dropped 13 percentage points to 54% in a week.

Mr. Cuomo, a Democrat, suffered a decline of 22 points among nonwhite voters in New York, according to the Marist Poll.

Watch out Andrew! Remember the old Al Capone warning: “If they do it for you, they’ll do it to you.”

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

Poor New Yorkers. They’ll have two hapless candidates, Cuomo and Lazio running for governor in November. Both deserve retirement, not promotion.

* * * * * *

Health Care. Remember the “Obama Health Plan Obama Supporters Do Not Want To Discuss”? Basement Angel reminds us today of this:

James Roosevelt, who was chair of the Rules and Bylaws Committee that decided to dock Michigan and Florida half of their delegates and award 4 of the delegates Clinton won in Michigan to Obama, as well as all of the uncommitted delegates, is the CEO of a health insurance company – Tufts Healthcare. Okay? Got that? The guy who made sure that Obama had the necessary to delegates to win the nomination – even to the point of assigning delegates another candidate won to him arbitrarily – is the CEO of a health insurance firm.

And what Roosevelt wants in a health insurance reform, is a reform that relies entirely upon private insurers. He does not want a public option. He wants a plan like Massachusetts has: http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/04/09/healthcare_lets_build_on_what_we_know/

I’m thinking he considers Barack Obama a man of his word.

James Roosevelt will learn soon enough:

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

* * * * * *

Can’t trust him. That’s what Desirée Rogers, the Michelle Obama and Barack Obama Chicago pal, has learned. Sorry Desirée, no pity party here, you got what you deserved from some sleazy characters. Keep in mind the Big Pink catechism:

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

* * * * * *

More to be thankful for: Add pink boots to match the Pink Grenades and the Pink cupcakes.

* * * * * *

More warnings to Barack Obama on his sinking, unqualified and inexperienced boobery and bumbling. Non-Republicans Stanley Greenberg, James Carville, Kate Monninger and Andrew Bauman of Democracy Corps are hoisting the red flag and desperately yelling to the boob-in-chief. In a PDF document on the latest polls on the economy the non-Republicans say this:

“The biggest challenge facing Democrats in 2010 after passing health care is getting the economy right – and this is even more important than health care.

While economic growth is better than contraction and stagnation, it poses immense problems for progressives wanting the support of voters – starting with the growing gap between improving macro-level indicators and lagging micro-level ones, like job and wage growth. There is reason to believe – confirmed by this survey – that progressives are losing many blue collar and non-college voters as elites focus on “economic success.”

We’ll translate, “Obama you boob, we know you don’t know what to do about the economy, but stop it with the heath care scam already, you are killing the Dimocratic Party. Your situation comedy coalition is a joke and that cannot be hidden anymore.”

Here’s some more C.Y.A. advice from the pollsters and strategists and more proof we have been right all along that Obama’s situation comedy coalition is a joke and a disaster and that the Democratic Party committed suicide with the massive Mistake In ’08. The pollsters, politely warn Obama:

“The second big and growing challenge is the gap between the hopes of the new progressive base voters who created a progressive majority in the country in the last four years – African-Americans and Latinos, young voters and unmarried women – and their own experiences in this economic crisis – loss of employment, wages and health care and cutbacks in state services. These voters are dominantly the “drop-off” voters – those who voted in the 2008
election but are not likely to in 2010. [snip]

The key findings are summarized below:
1. View of the economy worsens after one-year anniversary of the ‘stimulus.’ [snip]
2. The real economic indicators – job loss, reduced wages, and cuts in state services and state assistance – could fuel the blue-collar protest and demoralize the new base.[snip]
3. Knowing how people experienced the economic crash will help us understand how to reach them during the recovery.
4. The real economic indicators do show some gains and progressives must figure out how to use them effectively.
5. But always remember, the most important groups for this election may be experiencing and viewing all this differently.
6. Lack of confidence in Democratic approaches to the economy.

Notice how it is the pollsters that put the word “stimulus” in quotes. We were right about the “stimulus” flim-flam.

* * * * * *

Other Democratic pollsters are sounding the same warnings. While Patrick Caddell has long since drifted away, Doug Schoen is still essentially a Democrat. Both note the same warnings as the Greenberg/Carville Democracy Corps. Caddell and Shoen:

In “The March of Folly,” Barbara Tuchman asked, “Why do holders of high office so often act contrary to the way reason points and enlightened self-interest suggests?” Her assessment of self-deception — “acting according to wish while not allowing oneself to be deflected by the facts” — captures the conditions that are gripping President Obama and the Democratic Party leadership as they renew their efforts to enact health-care reform.

Their blind persistence in the face of reality threatens to turn this political march of folly into an electoral rout in November.

We laughed as we read, “At stake is the kind of mainstream, common-sense Democratic Party that we believe is crucial to the success of the American enterprise.” That Democratic party committed suicide in Denver guys.

First, the battle for public opinion has been lost. Comprehensive health care has been lost. If it fails, as appears possible, Democrats will face the brunt of the electorate’s reaction. If it passes, however, Democrats will face a far greater calamitous reaction at the polls. Wishing, praying or pretending will not change these outcomes.

Get the ShamWow! We’re laughing and the tears are flowing:

“Yes, most Americans believe, as we do, that real health-care reform is needed. [snip]

However, a solid majority of Americans opposes the massive health-reform plan. Four-fifths of those who oppose the plan strongly oppose it… Never in our experience as pollsters can we recall such self-deluding misconstruction of survey data.”

Get the 2×4, it’s an election year. Time to beat the senseless out of ’em.

This is the key point:

“Health care is no longer a debate about the merits of specific initiatives. Since the spectacle of Christmas dealmaking to ensure passage of the Senate bill, the issue, in voters’ minds, has become less about health care than about the government and a political majority that will neither hear nor heed the will of the people.”

You get it, you really get it. It’s the Arrogance!, stupid!

* * * * * *

Dee Dee Myers is also politely stroking while slapping Barack Obama. She writes: “Memo to President Obama: Get back in touch

Ha!

Dee Dee cites a real president who was qualified and had the necessary experience and fortitude and work ethic:

“Almost anyone who ever traveled with President Bill Clinton can tell a similar tale. At the end of a long day, Clinton would unwind by working the rope line. He would shake hands, clasp shoulders — and listen. When there were no stories left to hear, he would bound up the steps onto the plane, stretch out his arms and declare, “That was great!”

For his staff, this routine eventually lost its charm. But Clinton never tired of it. For him, politics began in the stories of those ordinary Americans. His continuing dialogue with them — in classrooms and on factory floors, at rallies and on television and, yes, along the rope line — kept him connected.

* * * * * *

Immigration reform? Ha! Whether you are “fer” or “agin” immigration reform, there is one thing you must remember:


Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

After promising the gullible (Gay-groups, black groups, women’s groups, Jewish groups, etc.) that in 2010 he would finally get around to their issues, Obama is running away. With a diaper full of excuses though:

“President Obama said Thursday that he would proceed with an overhaul of the immigration system this year if he could attract substantial Republican support. But a leading Republican who supports an overhaul said an immigration bill could not go forward if the president used a legislative shortcut sidestepping Republicans to pass his health care bill.

That’s some qualifier! Translation: Obama says “screw you” to the fools that thought immigration reform was going to happen. Obama has also given the Republicans an excuse (none was needed anyway) to continue to vote “NO” to his repulsive nonsense.

Hey! immigration groups:

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

You’ll get words, flowery words, but it’s all a lie.

* * * * * *

No Quarter given:



* * * * * *

Barack Obama and Michelle Obama are having vacation problems.

“Democratic aides said House leaders wanted the vote to occur before a two-week spring break scheduled to start on March 26. Otherwise, they said, wavering lawmakers might buckle to pressure from critics of the bill, who plan to step up their campaign against it during the recess.

President Obama plans to leave Thursday on a trip to Indonesia and Australia. With his health care bill hanging in the balance, he faces intensifying questions about whether he should put off the trip, which was timed to coincide with his daughters’ spring break.

Heavens! It’s a family vacation in the middle of what is supposed to be a major fight. No one knows what’s in the bill they are supposed to be voting for, but it’s Obama vacation time. The eventual mess of a bill that emerges is in trouble as more and more Dimocrats say they won’t buy a pig in a poke.

Why travel on vacation when every day is vacation day? It’s party time at the White House.

“President Barack Obama hosted a movie night at the White House for Hollywood heavyweights Tom Hanks and director Steven Spielberg on Thursday – at which they watched a preview of the star duo’s new World War Two miniseries “The Pacific.”

The Hillbuzz boys are not alone in wondering why it is always party time as the Party dies.

As we wrote, why travel on vacation when every day is vacation day? Things are so bad even the New York Times thinks the vacation should be canceled.

But Obama won’t cancel a vacation. Obama can’t wait to get back to bowing and scraping before foreign potentates. But as it turns out, the pressure is such that he will have to wait. The girls and Michelle will have to stay and try on old Desiree Rogers’ dresses. Obama will hang out a few more days before his vacation trip to Guam, Australia and Indonesia.

What did we learn from vacation-gate? (1) There is no vacation Obama will cancel (unless it is someone else’s vacation); and, (2) the March 18 Obama deadline for his health scam vote will, as other deadlines, not be met.

* * * * * *

No one knows what is in the latest health scam legislation. Is there any wonder why Dimocrats are omerta?

“Hardly any Democrat running for Congress seems to want to talk about healthcare.

Of the 26 leading Democratic House candidates contacted by The Hill, only one would commit to voting for the Senate healthcare bill if and when it comes to the House floor.

Out of the more than two dozen Democratic challengers and open-seat House candidates, only 10 commented for this story. Eight outright declined to comment.

Eight more didn’t respond to several days’ worth of requests via phone and e-mail.”

Run, little Dimocrats, run – away from Barack Obama.

* * * * * *

At long last, Hillary.

The Confluence too is feeling the love, with a “focus on something that’s working.”

Not much is working, but Hillary is for sure working. She doesn’t stop. Hillary’s work ethic inspires.

In Shakespeare’s Henry V, the future king, Prince Harry, before a dangerous battle, vastly outnumbered by the foe, goes quietly among the troops. It’s the prologue to Act IV,

“With cheerful semblance and sweet majesty;
That every wretch, pining and pale before,
Beholding him, plucks comfort from his looks;
A largess universal, like the sun,
His liberal eye doth give to every one,
Thawing cold fear, that mean and gentle all
Behold, as may unworthiness define,
A little touch of Harry in the night.

Thus, with Hillary.

Yesterday, the Washington Post took notice of Hillary at the helm:

“We have had other secretaries of state who have cared deeply for the institution,” said Patrick F. Kennedy, undersecretary for management and a senior Foreign Service officer. “None who have done as much internal outreach.”

The foreign officers must be kept organized until such time as a real president is in charge.

“Those interviewed inside and outside the agency say Clinton has done a good job of heading off the historical tensions between career employees and quadrennial political newcomers by relying on the counsel of senior Foreign Service operatives and reaching out in general.

She has walked the halls and popped into offices unexpectedly, created an electronic “sounding board,” and held seven internal town hall meetings to listen to gripes about everything from policy to cafeteria food to bullying in the workplace. She installed six new showers that joggers requested, is taking steps to remedy overseas pay inequities and instituted a policy that allows partners of gay diplomats to receive benefits. She became a heroine to the Foreign Service when she went to bat to get funding for 3,000 new Foreign Service positions for State operations and the U.S. Agency for International Development — the first boost of this magnitude in two decades.

Jeffrey Feltman, assistant secretary for the Near East and a Foreign Service officer, is one of those whom Clinton surprised — and won over. He was already looking for a new job when she tracked him down at his barbershop 24 hours after she was sworn in to seek his advice. A few weeks later, she asked him to stay on.

“We’ve heard it before: Yes, diplomacy matters. Yawn. Sounds great, but we tend to be cynical about such language in comparison to the actual resources devoted to DOD versus State,” Feltman said. “She has tried to demonstrate that it’s more than lip service by fighting for resources . . . and listening to us.”

Added Kennedy: “She fully understands that when she came in there was a weak and degraded platform. You need it to be refreshed with new people and new blood, and that’s what we are getting in now.”

Wily Hillary outsmarted her opponents. Husband Bill keeps the political fires burning. Hillary runs an operation with global reach, while waiting:

“Clinton had one condition that eclipsed all others as she considered Obama’s offer to be secretary of state: She demanded hiring authority at the department. To Team Clinton, this meant every political job — about 200 — from the most senior level to the 20-something researchers. Historically, it is the president who fills these political positions, and no one can recall a Cabinet secretary in recent memory requesting and receiving this kind of hiring latitude.

So rare are Obama people at the agency that Alec Ross — an Obama campaign Internet star who aggressively sought to work for Clinton — is jokingly referred to as the “Obama guy.”

Guarding the door at Foggy Bottom last year was a trio from the top echelon of Hillaryland. Among them — Cheryl Mills, who was deputy counsel in the Clinton White House; Hillary Clinton’s White House chief of staff, Maggie Williams; and Tamara Luzzatto, her Senate chief of staff — they knew everyone who had ever worked for Clinton over the years and who hoped to join her at State. They also recruited high-profile experts who had not worked for Clinton — but neither were they associated with Obama.

Of the three, only Mills joined State, as Clinton’s chief of staff, along with other longtime confidants and charter members of Hillaryland: global women’s expert Melanne Verveer; protocol chief Capricia Marshall; her Senate spokesman, Philippe Reines; traveling aide Huma Abedin; speechwriter Lissa Muscatine; and Jacob Lew, Office of Management and Budget director under President Bill Clinton and a deputy secretary of state.”

Keep the Obama thugs and boobs out of foreign policy. They’ve caused enough trouble.

“According to three sources with knowledge of State personnel decisions who spoke on the condition of anonymity, the White House made one significant request last year: that Clinton tap as her deputy James Steinberg, a foreign policy expert who had worked for her husband but whom Obama passed over for White House national security adviser. There are differing views as to whether Clinton was enthusiastic about hiring Steinberg, but there appears to be a single view on whether he’s a good fit: Numerous sources inside and outside the department describe Steinberg as unhappy in the job. He did not respond to two requests for an interview.

After bringing on Steinberg, Clinton hired Lew for a second deputy’s slot — filling the job for the first time since it was created a decade ago. Those close to her insist that the intent was not to undercut Steinberg but to ramp up efforts to increase the agency’s budget and take back control of its ability to manage development programs. Lew has an office adjoining that of Mills, whose office connects to Clinton’s.”

Hillary and Hillaryland know how to deal with bureaucratic plants and oafs.

Hillary also knows how to get the information she needs.

“Several career employees said they were caught off guard initially by Clinton’s level of engagement in internal management, particularly coming on the heels of her more reserved predecessor, Condoleezza Rice. On her first tour of the building, before she was sworn in, Clinton requested a budget briefing. Kennedy said it soon became clear what she meant: not an overview, but a line-by-line review that took three sessions to complete.

Shamila Chaudary — a self-described “backbencher” — had toiled for years as a faceless expert on the Pakistan desk when one day she found herself invited to brief Clinton. Chaudary, 32, said the two sparred over whether it was prudent to engage non-governmental power centers in Pakistan, with Clinton expressing skepticism.

Chaudary held her ground, making the point that “we’ve been seen as not engaging with them, and it’s hurt us a lot.” She said that although she and Clinton “didn’t necessarily agree . . . she said that it’s very important for us to debate like this. . . . This is how she said she wants to do business.”

Within 48 hours of their meeting, Chaudary was promoted to a front-line job in the office of policy planning.”

Thanks Hillary for light in the darkness.



Share

151 thoughts on “A Little Touch Of Hillary Clinton In The Night

  1. The Shamila Chaudary story totally contradicts the false meme that Hillary only wanted to hear from people who agreed with her. Excellent management.

    I hear the Dems will pass direct student loans in the reconciliation bill. That is a very good policy. Obama will be very lucky to get the credit on what has been a long held Democratic proposal. BC did implement a federal direct loan program but Bush rescinded it. In this case, it can not be rescinded because Congress will have ending the subsidies to private lenders.

  2. Yahoo headline:
    Health bill’s prospects abruptly improve; Obama delays trip

    I have to say this is some spin. I think the WH has put the House in the position of embarrassing the Pres. if they don’t pass the bill.

  3. They have the votes or he would not have canceled. Stupak suggested some of the 12 abortion holdouts may be peeling off . Sadly, we will have to watch him celebrate what will be called an historical bill….I do not like Pelosi at all, but her ability to get the votes is undeniably impressive.

  4. I am not surprised. They threaten people at the convention. What I don’t understand is how cowardly our elected officials are.

  5. Yesterday, the Washington Post took notice of Hillary at the helm:

    “We have had other secretaries of state who have cared deeply for the institution,” said Patrick F. Kennedy, undersecretary for management and a senior Foreign Service officer. “None who have done as much internal outreach.”
    &&&&&&&&

    ADMIN, today is your “Hot Rocks” (jbstonesfan knows this is one of their many, but by far biggest selling and most important, greatest hits).

    The Barack Obama party-all-the-time, Hillbuzz Boys link is revealing. And the comments section is chock full of outstanding commentary on the King and Queen saying “Let them eat cake” comments.

    As for Hillary’s ever widening circle, as compared to her previously “valuing loyalty”…Every major political figure values loyalty.

    Bobama is still surrounded by his campaign buddies.

    Gov. Paterson leaned on his close confidantes.

    JFK had RFK as his att. gen.

    Get the idea?

    The Hillary link above about her ever-expanding circle is DEFINITELY worth close examination.

    It shows how smart people exercise power, and pick their fights. Criticisms that Hillary is letting too much power go overlook her smart strategizing. The Maginot Line approach does not work. You must be flexible. You gotta pick the right fights.

    Perfect example of picking a bad fight, fighting it badly, then pulling everyone else into the quicksand, then leaving on vacation, is the current DickHead living it up at 1600.

    Yah.

  6. Dee Dee cites a real president who was qualified and had the necessary experience and fortitude and work ethic:
    *****************

    I lost a lot of respect for Dee Dee when BC was going thru the impeachment. She, at the end, voiced on a show, and I forget which one, that all these women could not be wrong. This is when they were parading out every narcissistic borderline bimbo they could drag out of the rocks. She really upset me. I have never forgiven her.

    I am hoping you are all wrong on the Fraudcare. Jesus, won’t congress PLEASE stand up to these thugs?

  7. from BP
    ***********

    College basketball anyone?

    >> Now this is transparecy in gubment at the highest level
    >>
    >> Who says the stimulus plan doesn’t work? Perfection.
    >>
    >>
    >> Some have said that the stimulus hasn’t saved any jobs, but here is a case where at least one job was saved.
    >> According to an unnamed source, Oregon State University Athletic Director Bob DeCarolis was considering firing their
    >> basketball coach, Craig Robinson, after an 8-11 start (2-5 in the Pac 10 conference).
    >> When word of this reached Washington , Undersecretary of Education Martha Kanter was dispatched to Corvallis with
    >> $17 million in stimulus money fo the university. The source now says that Craig Robinson’s job is safe for this year.
    >>
    >> Oh. . . .for the record, Coach Robinson is Michelle Obama’s brother.–

  8. jb:

    That was like the second album I ever owned.

    Over time, I went back in my greater detail all their albums, from the very first to later albums.

    Same for the Beatles. The Blue and Red albums, greatest hits, was my intro.

    Great groups invite further research, and respect for their roots, and keeping track of their progress (Led Zep qualifies on this too).

    Trashy fad bads come and go with their one-hit wonder approach.

    Obama = one hit wonder fad bad, reliant on stage craft, can’t sing a note, and caught lip synching.

    Hillary is a true diva, humble to not bother with the “you must worship me” bullshit, well versed in all phases of her craft, a true virtuoso.

  9. I guess it is all but over
    ***********

    Friday, March 12, 2010

    ‘They Just Want This Over’ [Robert Costa]

    Sitting in an airport, on his way home to Michigan, Rep. Bart Stupak, a pro-life Democrat, is chagrined. “They’re ignoring me,” he says, in a phone interview with National Review Online. “That’s their strategy now. The House Democratic leaders think they have the votes to pass the Senate’s health-care bill without us. At this point, there is no doubt that they’ve been able to peel off one or two of my twelve. And even if they don’t have the votes, it’s been made clear to us that they won’t insert our language on the abortion issue.”

    According to Stupak, that group of twelve pro-life House Democrats — the “Stupak dozen” — has privately agreed for months to vote ‘no’ on the Senate’s health-care bill if federal funding for abortion is included in the final legislative language. Now, in the debate’s final hours, Stupak says the other eleven are coming under “enormous” political pressure from both the White House and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.). “I am a definite ‘no’ vote,” he says. “I didn’t cave. The others are having both of their arms twisted, and we’re all getting pounded by our traditional Democratic supporters, like unions.”

    Stupak says he also doesn’t trust the “Slaughter solution,” a legislative maneuver being bandied about on Capitol Hill as a way to pass the Senate bill in the House without actually voting on it. “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me,” he says. “I don’t have a warm-and-fuzzy feeling about what I’m hearing.”

    Stupak notes that his negotiations with House Democratic leaders in recent days have been revealing. “I really believe that the Democratic leadership is simply unwilling to change its stance,” he says. “Their position says that women, especially those without means available, should have their abortions covered.” The arguments they have made to him in recent deliberations, he adds, “are a pretty sad commentary on the state of the Democratic party.”

    What are Democratic leaders saying? “If you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more. That’s one of the arguments I’ve been hearing,” Stupak says. “Money is their hang-up. Is this how we now value life in America? If money is the issue — come on, we can find room in the budget. This is life we’re talking about.”

    If Obamacare passes, Stupak says, it could signal the end of any meaningful role for pro-life Democrats within their own party. “It would be very, very hard for someone who is a right-to-life Democrat to run for office,” he says. “I won’t leave the party. I’m more comfortable here and still believe in a role within it for the right-to-life cause, but this bill will make being a pro-life Democrat much more difficult. They don’t even want to debate this issue. We’ll probably have to wait until the Republicans take back the majority to fix this.”

    “Throughout this debate, even when the House leaders have acknowledged us, it’s always been in a backhanded way,” he laments. “I’m telling the others to hold firm, and we’ll meet next week, but I’m disappointed in my colleagues who said they’d be with us and now they’re not. It’s almost like some right-to-life members don’t want to be bothered. They just want this over.”

    And the politics of the issue are pretty rough. “This has really reached an unhealthy stage,” Stupak says. “People are threatening ethics complaints on me. On the left, they’re really stepping it up. Every day, from Rachel Maddow to the Daily Kos, it keeps coming. Does it bother me? Sure. Does it change my position? No.”
    http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MzU0MDYxMWEyOTdiNGU1OGU3ZjYzYmE3Y2ZlZDQ5NTY=

  10. It seems like a repeat of the nomination. Nothing made sense. We are BROKE as a nation, we have 17% UNEMPLOYMENT. Who the hell is going to pay for this MONSTROSITY?

    I just talked to this guy who works for the same heath system I do , but @ another location in the city. He told me that Monday, they already have “orders” to walk 13 people out to their cars. This means 13 people are going to be terminated, from a hospital no less. My Sup told me last week that the system was going to not replace 200-300 jobs, by attrition, but now I see that is not the whole truth. When this bill comes into effect, many of us will be “escorted” to our cars….

  11. My letter at the time:

    Dear Chairman Roosevelt

    I am part of the traditional Democratic coalition which the party leadership seeks to replace or marginalize in its quest create a new coalition of latte liberals, African Americans and young voters described by Donna Brazille.
    Many of us were deeply disappointed by actions of your committee with respect to Michigan. It was painful to watch the votes of Americans twisted, carved up and rendered meaningless by their Party. The members who engineered this outcome have violated a sacred trust for the sake of political expediency.

    By what sophistry of reason can your committee : i) strip delegates from someone who earned them, ii) award delegates as well as superdelegates to someone who was not on the ballot and iii) invalidate the popular vote? Frankly, these are the actions of a banana republic—not a great political institution.

    Some claim this is a compromise. That is pure poppycock. This was a forfeiture of rights conferred to Senator Clinton by Michigan voters through a referendum. That forfeiture was inimical to the traditions of our country. At the same time it is an ominous sign of how this new leadership coalition would govern the country if they are able to win in the nomination and prevail in November. Caveat emptor.

    As one prominent Democrat pointed out this decision violates the bedrock principles of our democracy, and serves to disenfranchise 600,000 Democratic voters. To do this before the eyes of the world is a travesty. I urge you to reflect on this while this decision remains fresh in your mind.

    For better or worse, your committee has sent a powerful message to centrist Democrats that the Party no longer represents their interests. It reinforces the condescending words of Senator Obama and his hyper zealous supporters.

    It remains to be seen how centrists will react. But I seriously doubt they will be seduced or threatened into compliance this time around. They have seen too much. I rather suspect they will leave the Party or stay home in November if it fails to nominate Senator Clinton. How ironic since the stated objective of the decision was to promote unity. As always actions speak louder than words.

    wbboei

  12. “Stupak notes that his negotiations with House Democratic leaders in recent days have been revealing. “I really believe that the Democratic leadership is simply unwilling to change its stance,” he says. “Their position says that women, especially those without means available, should have their abortions covered.” The arguments they have made to him in recent deliberations, he adds, “are a pretty sad commentary on the state of the Democratic party.”

    Well, that is the best news I’ve heard about Democrats in a while. At least they have got it together on that issue.

  13. Friday, March 12, 2010

    Obamacare: Time to Pressure Wavering Representatives [Jeff Anderson & Andy Wickersham]

    President Obama has set a deadline of March 18 — just one week from now — for the House to vote on the Senate version of Obamacare. The Washington Post’s Ezra Klein writes that “Progressives . . . are on the cusp of winning an incredibly important war,” by passing legislation that’s “deeply, deeply progressive” and which “represents an enormous leftward shift for American social policy” (italics in original). Klein’s optimism is more rooted in hope than in reality, as the sheer number of Democrats residing in clearly red districts (see below) demonstrates how unlikely it is that President Obama will get the votes he needs. But, like many others on the Left, his depiction of Obamacare is far more honest than the president’s presentation.

    Now is the crucial time for those who oppose Obamacare to make their voices heard — loud and clear. This is especially true if your representative is one of the 40 key Democratic members of Congress listed below (in alphabetical order by state). Call, e-mail, write, or even visit your representative; attend marches or rallies; and encourage your friends and family to do the same. It’s winnin’ time.

    Key:

    “S” = voted for the Stupak Amendment. (According to Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, the Senate bill would “take a big step forward from where the House left it with the Stupak Amendment” by substituting abortion language that “was negotiated by Senators Barbara Boxer and Patty Murray.”

    “GOP +2” means that Republican presidential candidates have won in that district by an average of 2 percentage points over the past three elections; “Dem +5” means that Democratic presidential candidates have won by 5 points over that span. (Keep in mind that Democratic presidential candidates have won in Massachusetts by an average of 26 percentage points — so every member on this list represents a district that is at least 21 points more friendly to Republicans than is the case in Massachusetts.)

    “Yes” on Obamacare Last Time but Might Want to Switch:

    Gabrielle Giffords, (D., Ariz.) (GOP +6)
    Ann Kirkpatrick, (D., Ariz.) (GOP +8)
    Harry Mitchell, (D., Ariz.) (GOP +8)
    Vic Snyder, (D., Ariz.) (S) (GOP +5)
    Marion Berry, (D., Ark.) (S) (GOP +8)
    John Salazar, (D., Colo.) (S) (GOP +10)
    Melissa Bean, (D., Ill.) (GOP +4)
    Bill Foster, (D., Ill.) (GOP +4)
    Joe Donnelly, (D., Ind.) (S) (GOP +4)
    Brad Ellsworth, (D., Ind.) (S) (GOP +14) — running for Sen. in Ind. (GOP +12)
    Baron Hill, (D., Ind.) (S) (GOP +11)
    Bart Stupak, (D., Mich.) (S) (GOP +4)
    Michael Arcuri, (D., N.Y.) (GOP +1)
    Tim Bishop, (D., N.Y.) (Dem +4)
    Bob Etheridge, (D., N.C.) (S) (GOP +3)
    Earl Pomeroy, (D., N.D.) (S) (GOP +21)
    Steve Driehaus, (D., Ohio) (S) (Dem +1)
    Zach Space, (D., Ohio) (S) (GOP +12)
    Charlie Wilson, (D., Ohio) (S) (GOP +2)
    Chris Carney, (D., Pa.) (S) (GOP +15)
    Kathleen Dahlkemper, (D., Pa.) (S) (GOP +3)
    John Spratt, (D., S.C.) (S) (GOP +11)
    Ciro Rodriguez, (D., Texas) (S) (GOP +6)
    Solomon Ortiz, (D., Texas) (S) (GOP +1)
    Tom Perriello, (D., Va.) (S) (GOP +10)
    Alan Mollohan, (D., W.Va.) (S) (GOP +14)
    Nick Rahall, (D., W.Va.) (S) (GOP +6)

    “No” on Obamacare Last Time but Might Need Encouragement:

    Mike Ross, (D., Ark.) (S) (GOP +7)
    Betsy Markey, (D., Colo.) (GOP +13)
    Allen Boyd, (D., Fla.) (GOP +8)
    Suzanne Kosmas, (D., Fla.) (GOP +6)
    John Barrow, (D., Ga.) (S) (Dem +4)
    John Adler, (D., N.J.) (Dem +5)
    Michael McMahon, (D., N.Y.) (GOP +1)
    Scott Murphy, (D., N.Y.) (GOP +4)
    Larry Kissell, (D., N.C.) (GOP +4)
    John Boccieri, (D., Ohio) (S) (GOP +7)
    John Tanner, (D., Tenn.) (S) (GOP +5)
    Glenn Nye, (D., Va.) (GOP +9)
    Brian Baird, (D., Wash.) (Dem +1)
    03/12 09:52 AMShare

  14. March 12, 2010
    Lessons from the Coffee Party
    By Mark J. Fitzgibbons
    Desperate to glamorize any cause that’s contrapuntal to the hugely popular Tea Party Movement, the mainstream media have made much noise for the Coffee Party. But for the free publicity given by its allies in the media, the Coffee Party is pure boredom. Its statist mission combined with its slogan, “Wake Up and Stand Up,” puts all but the most dedicated progressives to sleep.

    Some conservative bloggers have wondered whether the Coffee Party is Astroturf. Regardless of how one defines Astroturf, I personally don’t care. Activists should be free to start causes. It’s the message that matters, and the Coffee Party’s is empty, bordering on nonexistent. (Sound familiar?)

    The organizations that I have problems with are those financed by politicians using taxpayer money. Private funding of causes, regardless of the native sources, is quite American. Some of the best causes have been started with that combination of activists financed with private money. Let the marketplace of ideas blossom, I say.

    I’ve recorded a training class on the legalities of how activist and Tea Party entities may be formed and financed. The Coffee Party is a good example of how the left does it. The left, which often thinks of itself as a partner with government, is far more advanced in these matters than conservatives because they have an array of networks for those purposes.

    The Coffee Party website says its 501(c)(4) tax-exempt status is pending with the IRS, which must approve some, but not all, tax-exempt activist entities. Any 501(c)(4) may engage in lobbying, so contributions to them are not deductible. The contribution landing page for the Coffee Party says that it partners with Democracyinaction.org, a 501(c)(3) organization, meaning contributions to the latter are tax-deductible.

    The About Page for Democracyinaction.org states that it gets funding from Open Society Institute, George Soros’s organization. Because contributions to 501(c)(3)s are tax-deductible, those funds may not be transferred to 501(c)(4)s, which are allowed to lobby.

    Democracyinaction.org offers professional services the same or similar to what many for-profit companies provide and is described at Guidestar.com as follows:

    DemocracyInAction is a nonprofit dedicated to leveraging the unique power of online communications for invigorating those committed to ecology, social justice and human rights. To a broad swath of these social change leaders, we provide cutting-edge e-advocacy tools for pennies on the dollar relative to the fees demanded by the private sector. In a word, we democratize e-activism, freeing practitioners to pour resources into mission and strategy.

    The most recent tax return for Democracyinaction.org (its IRS Form 990) shows it gets far less in grants than it earns in program service revenue, which I believe are fees it charges to its progressive clients.

    Democracyinaction.org is affiliated with for-profits Salsa Enterprise and Wired for Change. Wired for Change lists its “political organization” clients to include the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, and ACORN (and we thought ACORN wasn’t a political organization). Its candidate clients include Chuck Schumer and Jerry Brown.

    In other words, these organizations are consultants playing in the big leagues. Democracyinaction.org lists its address as 1700 Connecticut Ave, Washington, D.C., which is a high-rent district. That, however, does not convince me that the Coffee Party is Astroturf.

    What strikes me about Democracyinaction.org and its affiliation with for-profit consultants is that 501(c)(3)s are not only supposed to be engaging in a tax-exempt mission, but are also not supposed to use tax-deductible funds for lobbying or political purposes. Democracyinaction.org is tax-exempt, while its affiliates are for-profit. That doesn’t bother me, since I happen to believe that the First Amendment trumps the tax code. The IRS, however, does not typically withhold actions based on that same belief.

    None of the entanglements I’ve described convince me the Coffee Party is Astroturf, but all of them merely demonstrate how the left has a vast network already in place to enable the formation and financing of tens of thousands of start-up causes. It merely means that Coffee Party’s founders knew the progressive network and knew to rely on skilled consultants. I could be wrong.

    Many conservative start-up causes encounter some difficulty in establishing tax-exempt organizations. It may cost $2,500 to $5,000 and up to get a favorable determination from the IRS (527s and political action committees, which are also tax-exempt, do not need such approval).

    The bigger problem, however, may be in the financing of start-ups. To finance a start-up grassroots cause requires seed money. But before soliciting contributions, start-ups must first register with most states under what are called charitable solicitation laws.

    It’s impossible at this stage to tell whether the Coffee Party was financed by one or more benefactors, but it does solicit contributions through its website. Under what are called the Charleston Principles, even fundraising via the internet requires licensing to solicit contributions. This chicken-and-egg regulatory scheme requires start-ups to pay licensing fees and related costs before they solicit contributions so that they may solicit contributions. It’s a prior restraint on grassroots activism, and many a good cause have never gotten off the ground as a result.

    Conservative, Tea Party, and other small-government causes need not duplicate how the left has created these networks for start-up activist causes, but the model is there. If progressive 501(c)(3)s may provide professional consulting services to 501(c)(4)s, perhaps at discounted rates, then conservatives should at least entertain the idea of creating their own.

    Besides the mainstream media’s obsession with trying to take down small-government activists, there are legal barriers created by big-government politicians who want to silence dissent. Sadly, start-up causes may never get off the ground by relying on just passion and patriotism.

  15. I have always assumed that Jim Steinberg is a crybaby, an opportunist, and would sell his soul to the highest bidder. In my opinion he is an Obama plant. Yes, he worked for Bill, but he was like Craig in the sense that he was ungrateful and deserted Hillary and went with Obama. These kind of people never learn what it means to make a pact with the devil. You never come out ahead.

  16. wbboei
    March 12th, 2010 at 10:11 pm
    *************

    Could have written the same letter today…and we did leave the party and they still don’t give a shit.

    One has to wonder what the hell they have up their sleeves, as surly hell has no fury to compare to Nov…

  17. Personally, I don’t care. I’m pro-choice. Hillary’s answer to this in the 1990’s was of course our health plans will cover abortions health insurance plans already often do.

  18. I have been told by people who know that the work Hillary has done to rehabilitate the moribund State Department, to restore its leading role in foreign policy, and to elevate a flagging morale is nothing short than a miracle. The word is that people in the State Department feel energized, vital and they love Hillary, as much as we do here at Hillaryis44. She is the greatest leader of this generation.

  19. mj
    March 12th, 2010 at 10:42 pm

    People should not be forced to fund abortions. The older I get, the more I understand this.

  20. mj
    March 12th, 2010 at 10:42 pm
    Personally, I don’t care. I’m pro-choice. Hillary’s answer to this in the 1990’s was of course our health plans will cover abortions health insurance plans already often do.
    ———————————————————————————–

    I have to agree with this one. A co-worker’s daughter-in-law recently had her pregancy terminated, because the fetus was severely malformed. Under Stupak, she would not have been able to have the medically necessary procedure. The woman’s life wasn’t in danger, but the fetus wouldn’t have survived to full term. Must someone in that position have a medically necessary procedure denied, because the mother’s life wasn’t in immediate danger? There are too many uncertainties in life to have such rigid rules.

  21. Until we know what to believe I intend to keep the powder dry on this health care deform. I rather suspect the Republicans hope it passes on a party line vote so they can do what Rove promised and make it the campaign issue for the nest several election cycle and take control of Congress. That is the irony of this: the dims are working so hard to breath life into a movie with a bad script and an ugly cast and if perchance they succeed it will be box office poison. The name of the movie? Death Wish.

  22. birdgal
    March 12th, 2010 at 10:52 pm
    ****************

    It is her choice. All I am saying is that the public should not be forced to pay for it. People have profound beliefs on the sanctity of life. One persons malformed child is another’s angel. I am not making a judgment on the person seeking it. I just don’t feel others should be forced to pay for it and I understand where they are coming from, whereas in my youth, I did not.

  23. This coffee party concept will go nowhere. It is out of step with the zeigeist. The Tea Party rebellion is defuse, evanescent and attacks the weak points in the opposition. If it remains a pressure group and does not try to morph into a political party then it will be hard for the Obama establishment to defeat. See The Art of War.

  24. Yeah, I mean, I’m with Hill on this, pro-choice, and birdgal I know other women who have needed that procedure. By the way, no one would be “funding abortions”. First, under this bill this just relates to subsidies to PRIVATE insurance. Most insurance companies already cover reproductive care, so you would be taking away somebodies health care because the government is helping her pay for insurance. Not paying for the insurance mind you, just assisting. That’s ridiculous. As it is these are not government insurance programs we are talking about, which already don’t cover reproductive health thanks to Henry Hyde. These are PRIVATE insurance companies. Both Bill and Hill thought health coverage, federal and private, should cover womens reproductive health. It’s a human right issue. I’ll stick with them and NOT Henry Hyde.

  25. gonzotx
    March 12th, 2010 at 11:02 pm
    birdgal
    March 12th, 2010 at 10:52 pm
    ****************

    It is her choice. All I am saying is that the public should not be forced to pay for it. People have profound beliefs on the sanctity of life. One persons malformed child is another’s angel. I am not making a judgment on the person seeking it. I just don’t feel others should be forced to pay for it and I understand where they are coming from, whereas in my youth, I did not.

    Are you kidding? How is this woman supposed to find funding for the procedure if she is already poor and facing an emergency? That’s sick.

  26. You know what forget it. I supported Hillary and this is a Hillary sight because she was a liberal leaning, competent, smart, pro-choice Democrat. And, I will never become someone who thinks the Republicans were actually right on issues I so agreed with Hillary on. Just because I don’t like most of the things Obama dn the Democrats are doing doesn’t mean I lost my principles and became a Republican. Hardly. If anything, I think Obama’s policies are far too corporate.

  27. mj, you’re completely correct. It would be a take away for women with private insurance.

    ——————————————————————————————

    gonzotx
    March 12th, 2010 at 11:02 pm
    birdgal
    March 12th, 2010 at 10:52 pm
    ****************

    It is her choice. All I am saying is that the public should not be forced to pay for it. People have profound beliefs on the sanctity of life. One persons malformed child is another’s angel. I am not making a judgment on the person seeking it. I just don’t feel others should be forced to pay for it and I understand where they are coming from, whereas in my youth, I did not.

    Gontox, I am sure I am at least as old as you are, if not older. I am also a registered nurse. This woman had 3 different specialists advise her to terminate the pregnancy, because the fetus was not developing normally, was missing a portion of his brain, a limb, not gaining weight, and had incomplete organ formation. And you would want to put someone through that? As far as cost to the public, what about the long term care costs involved in caring for a severely deformed human being? Actually, most miscarriages probably occur due to something severely wrong with the fetus. It is not that black and white. As I have become older, there are many more gray areas than there used to be.

  28. I still think they are keeping Hillary out of the news as best they can ….Yes, she does all the hard work, yet, she is not getting the accolades she deserves from the MSM. They seem to only quote her when she has to carry out BO’s offensive and repulsive behavior towards Israel. Much like health care, BO will sacrifice Israel to get a Palestinian State…

  29. mj
    March 12th, 2010 at 11:06 pm
    *************

    No I am not kidding. By the way, caring a malformed child to term is not an emergency. A tragedy, not an emergency.

    I have worked and cared for the less unfortunate all of my life, including an intermediate care unit for infants born with just about everything you can imagine. Horrors to most of us, yet there were parents that, God bless them, were made of greater stuff than I, who worshiped their children for those precious moments they were alive and wouldn’t think of having had an abortion. Their strength, spirit, and love changed me forever.Obviously I believe in funding womens health and I don’t care to take anyone’s ‘right’ to have an abortion. But I do not believe others should be forced to partake in the funding. I really don’t feel I need to explain myself to you and don’t appreciate your sarcasm. And hey…I am not kidding…

  30. Carrying an ill fetus to term can be a health risk to the mother, it is certainly a personal tragedy. But again, I stand with Hillary and the rest of the pro-choice women and men in this country who would not seek to limit a woman’s reproductive health care choices because she is poor. That’s really all I have to say on the matter.

  31. One final thought, I really could care a less if people don’t want a slim share fo their tax dollars to go to completely legal health care in this country. Their tax payer dollars already pay for other things many of us don’t agree with. That’s life. The government does not tailor spending to every individuals certain preferences. To do so would be absurd.

  32. Actually mj, pregancy itself can be a risk to a mothers health.

    And that is all I have to say about it.

  33. Fine, gonzo, but I find it hypocritical to rag on pro-choice stances on a site devoted to a pro-choice woman, whose husband implored Democrats to be the pro-choice Party(this is why Rovert Casey Senior was not allowed to speak at the 1992 Democratic National Convention). You have a right to your opinions but I don’t think this is the right platform.

  34. I am not a Hypocrite. Like anyone else here I support Hillary. Because I do not support public funding of abortions does not make me less of a supporter than you. We do not agree on 100% of anything. If you read what I actually wrote you would actually see that I do not advocate against abortion, I just believe that people should not have to fund it because of their moral convictions. Enough! You are so freaking narrow minded.This tent is big enough for different views.

    I was responding to your comments so if any ragging on that was done, you were very involved.

  35. This morning I was confident that the healthcare bill will not pass. But this evening I am not so sure. I am moving to undecided (“may pass”) column. These are the tea leaves I am reading.

    1) Looks like Pelosi is only 4 votes short.

    2) Obama has postponed his trip. with the signing ceremony and all the hoopla, he is looking for 5 to 10 point poll gain and then goes on vac for a week down under.

    3) Stupak didn’t sound confident this evening. Says some of his 12 may get peeled off.

    4) Nancy will make all kinds of deals.
    Some earmark promises may never show up on budgets. The money will be programmed at the agency level and some house member bribes will never become public. (Senators are stupid. They ask for a lot of money since they have to bring it for the whole state and it becomes public. House members only need a million here, a million there – easy to manage under the table.)

    Are you all reading anything different?

  36. ecoast
    March 13th, 2010 at 12:00 am
    ****************

    I was never confident it was dead, but I agree with your assessment I am afraid.

  37. mj
    I supported Hillary and this is a Hillary sight because she was a liberal leaning, competent, smart, pro-choice Democrat. And, I will never become someone who thinks the Republicans were actually right on issues I so agreed with Hillary on.

    ===========

    Bravo, well said!

  38. gonzo,

    And who is going to pay for the care of all these malformed, brainless forever-patients?

    I have profound beliefs on the sanctity of ALL life. Yet my taxes pay for vivisection and for wars.

    I follow Hillary’s policy on abortion and funding for it.

    If we could all pick and choose what our taxes paid for, that would be good. But since we can’t — it’s wrong to privilege forced pregnancy above other issues.

  39. What kind of “signing ceremoney” would it be if it’s done in the middle of the night: no Republican standing there with him, and many Democrats who “had other things to do” not there either.

    I think Obama would be lucky at this point if the bill does not pass. Just shows that he couldn’t get a bad bill through.

    If it does pass, within a week everyone will realize a) that its constitutionality is debatable b) all the ugly devil-is-in-the-details will starting emerging. Then everyone will start saying, “I had no idea THIS or THAT was in the bill”. The damn thing is not a bill, it is a shifting sand. No one has read “it” yet because they have no idea what “it” is; even the horse traders don’t know what they are trading.

  40. Admin: Thanx for telling me who presided the May 31 ’08 RBC meeting that prompted PUMA. James Roosevelt: any relation?

    Since the day is devoted to Hillary light, I thought the following article from Jeffrey Goldberg might provide food for discussion:
    ——-

    Mar 12 2010

    Hillary Clinton has apparently chewed-out Bibi Netanyahu for allowing his rogue coalition partner, the Shas Party, to subvert Joe Biden’s trip to Israel, and more importantly, for creating conditions on the ground that subvert the moderate Palestinian government in Ramallah, and subvert any hopes for negotiations, direct or indirect. Hillary has picked a smart fight, which is to say, a fight that is not about Iran, a subject on which Israelis are unified, but a fight about East Jerusalem housing growth, a subject on which the majority of Israelis are ambivalent, or worse.

    It has been a truism that no Israeli prime minister can survive long in the job after having angered America; Bibi had been proving this truism wrong, because Israelis are more frightened of Iran’s nuclear program than they are of alienating the Obama Administration.

    But the majority of Israelis see settlements as a possible impediment to peace (to the degree that they even believe peace is possible), and they certainly don’t see a settlement freeze as an existential threat to their country.

    So Hillary has picked the right fight, and the Obama Administration has picked the right person to pick the fight: A former senator from New York who is married to one of Israel’s favorite ex-presidents. I might be over-optimistic here, but maybe this scolding will help Bibi focus on what’s important: Keeping Israel in America’s good graces so that the two countries can together figure out a way to neutralize the Iranian threat.

    (Jeffrey Goldberg is a national correspondent for The Atlantic. Author of the book Prisoners: A Story of Friendship and Terror, he has reported from the Middle East and Africa. He was Middle East correspondent, and Washington correspondent, for the New Yorker. Previously, he served as a correspondent for the New York Times Magazine, and New York Magazine. He has also written for the Forward, and was a columnist for The Jerusalem Post.)

  41. Hillary is the Orator.Her UN speech was a work of Art.She far surpasses BO in every area of speech-making.He is a Tele addict because he has nothing worthwhile to say but threats lies and deceptions.She is running folks in spite of FOX POX and what is left of the once proud media. Give a look.

    —————————————————–

    Secretary Clinton Delivers Remarks at UN Commission on the Status of Women

    Posted: 12 Mar 2010 09:19 AM PST

    U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton addressed the final day of the 54th session of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women in New York. Her remarks reflected on the progress achieved 15 years since the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing and on the work that still must be done to realize the dreams and potential of Beijing.

    U.S. Policy in Somalia Update

    Posted: 12 Mar 2010 03:17 PM PST

    U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Johnnie Carson and Ambassador to the UN Mission in Rome Ertharin Cousin recently conducted a briefing on U.S. Policy in Somalia. During the event, Assistant Secretary Carson stated:

    “The Somali people have suffered tremendously throughout more than 20 years of conflict, and Somalia(tm)s turmoil destabilizes not only that country, but the region and also some aspects of the international community. The U.S. recognizes that any long-term solution to the crisis in Somalia must be an inclusive political solution. We continue to call upon all those who seek peace in Somalia to reject terrorism and violence, and to participate in the hard work of stabilizing the country for the benefit of Somalia•€(tm)s population.” Full Text

    Annual Country Reports on Human Rights

    Posted: 11 Mar 2010 06:21 AM PST

    Today, Secretary Clinton delivered remarks to the press on the release of the 2009 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. Secretary Clinton said:

    “The idea of human rights begins with a fundamental commitment to the dignity that is the birthright of every man, woman and child. Progress in advancing human rights begins with the facts. And for the last 34 years, the United States has produced the Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, providing the most comprehensive record available of the condition of human rights around the world.

    “These reports are an essential tool ” for activists who courageously struggle to protect rights in communities around the world; for journalists and scholars who document rights violations and who report on the work of those who champion the vulnerable; and for governments, including our own, as they work to craft strategies to encourage protection of human rights of more individuals in more places.

    “The principle that each person possesses equal moral value is a simple, self-evident truth, but securing a world in which all can exercise the rights that are naturally theirs is an immense practical challenge. To craft effective human rights policy, we need good assessments of the situation on the ground in the places we want to make a difference. We need a sophisticated, strategic understanding of how democratic governance and economic development can each contribute to creating an environment in which human rights are secured. We need to recognize that rights-protecting democracy and rights-respecting development reinforce each other. And we need the right tools and the right partners to implement the right policies.”

    The Secretary continued, “Human rights may be timeless, but our efforts to protect them must be grounded in the here and now. We find ourselves in a moment when an increasing number of governments are imposing new and crippling restrictions on the nongovernmental organizations working to protect rights and enhance accountability.

    “New technologies have proven useful both to oppressors and to those who struggle to expose the failures and the cowardice of the oppressors. And global challenges of our time — like food security and climate change; pandemic disease; economic crises; and violent extremism — impact the enjoyment of human rights today, and shape the global political context in which we must advance human rights over the long term.

    “Human rights are universal, but their experience is local. This is why we are committed to holding everyone to the same standard, including ourselves. This year, the United States is participating in the Universal Periodic Review process in conjunction with our participation in the UN Human Rights Council. In the fall, we will present a report, based on the input of citizens and NGOs, gathered online and in face-to-face meetings across the country attended by senior government officials. Assessing opportunities for progress and soliciting citizen engagement is one way that we demonstrate our commitment in word and deed to the basic principles that guide us toward a more perfect union and a more peaceful world.

    “As we work to protect human rights at home and abroad, we remember that human rights begin, as Eleanor Roosevelt said, ‘in small places close to home.’ So when we work to secure human rights, we are working to protect the experiences that make life meaningful, to preserve each person’s ability to fulfill his or her God-given potential — the potential within every person to learn, discover and embrace the world around them; the potential to join freely with others to shape their communities and their societies so that every person can find fulfillment and self-sufficiency; the potential to share life’s beauties and tragedies, laughter and tears with the people they love.”

    The Secretary concluded, “The reports released today are a record of where we are. They provide a fact base that will inform the United States’ diplomatic, economic and strategic policies toward other countries in the coming year. These reports are not intended to prescribe such policies, but they provide essential data points for everyone in the United States Government working on them. I view the these reports not as ends in themselves, but as an important tool in the development of practical and effective human rights strategies by the United States Government. That is a process to which I am deeply committed.

    “The timeless principles enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are a North Star guiding us toward the world we want to inhabit — a just world where, as President Obama has put it, peace rests on the ‘inherent rights and dignity of every individual.’ With the facts in hand and the goals clear in our heads and our hearts, we recommit ourselves to continue the hard work of making human rights a human reality.”

    Read the Secretary’s full remarks here.

  42. You’re right, ABM90, Hillary is the thrilling speaker because each time she opens her mouth, whether her remarks are prepared or not, she delivers insight, scope, depth – in short, substance that inspires, because you just know that she is in the process of doing everything she says. I could never understand people who were inspired by o’s words. I haven’t listened to many of o’s speeches, only those that were billed as important or inspiring, and I have never come away with anything but “words, words, words.”

  43. Several posts above I would like to comment on. First of all, current US law allows a women’s right to choice. HRC should is not the forum or method to take that right away. We all pay taxes for things we don’t approve of…whether it be a stimulus to banks or a war we don’t believe in.

    Regarding the beginning of admin’s post, I have posted several times about Paterson. Although I agree with your asssessment of Obama thuggery, please do not feel bad for Paterson. He was an unelected, accidental governor whom the poeple of NY do not want. We were being deprived of a primary and our right to choose a candidate.

    Further, Lazio and Cuomo may not be the only choices. Steve Levy, a very popular “conservative” democrat has been talking to the Repugs about changing party and running as a Repug and an Independent. He is the county Executive in Suffolk County and is just the type of politician we have been talking about…..bright, honest and capable. He is a no nonsense, no frills, common sense pol and I would be thrilled to vote for him.

  44. Scott Brown is a strong voice on this health care deform bill. Many people nation-wide will listen to what he says, as they did in Massachusetts. He needs to lead the tearing down of this bill, whether or not it passes. And those who voted for it, even if there is no second vote, should pay for it. Oh change is coming alright, but hot the kind Obama wants.
    ———————————————–

    GOP Accuses Dems of ‘Bitter’ Drive to Pass Health Bill

    AP

    Sen. Scott Brown of Massachusetts says in the weekly GOP radio and Internet address that ‘an entire year has gone to waste.’

    print email share recommend (5)

    WASHINGTON – Newly arrived Republican Sen. Scott Brown of Massachusetts accused President Barack Obama and Democrats on Saturday of a “bitter, destructive and endless” drive to pass health overhaul legislation that Brown warned would be disastrous.

    “An entire year has gone to waste,” Brown said in the weekly GOP radio and Internet address. “Millions of Americans have lost their jobs, and many more jobs are in danger. Even now, the president still hasn’t gotten the message.

    “Somehow, the greater the public opposition to the health care bill, the more determined they seem to force it on us anyway.”

    Brown himself can claim responsibility for the Democrats’ failure to pass health overhaul legislation to date. They were on the verge of doing so before Brown claimed the late Edward M. Kennedy’s Senate seat in a special election upset in January, depriving Democrats of their filibuster-proof supermajority and throwing the health care effort into limbo.

    It has been gradually revived, and Democrats are now pushing for final passage before Easter under complex Senate rules that would allow them to sidestep a Republican filibuster.

    Republicans in the House and Senate are unanimously opposed to the sweeping legislation, which would extend coverage to some 30 million uninsured Americans with a new mandate for nearly everyone to carry insurance.

    Brown, himself, as a state senator in Massachusetts, voted in favor of the universal-coverage law in that state. The bill he supported in Massachusetts has a number of features in common with the Democrats’ legislation, including a mandate for nearly everyone to be covered.

    But he campaigned on a promise to be the Republicans’ crucial 41st vote against Obama’s health plan, and said Saturday that his victory amounted to a message from voters that Washington should “get its priorities right.”

    “We need to drop this whole scheme of federally controlled health care, start over, and work together on real reforms at the state level that will contain costs and won’t leave America trillions of dollars deeper in debt,” Brown said.

  45. For those who succumbed to the dictator and ignored the will of their constituents who are adversely affected by this monster in countless ways, they need to do as the gladiators did in the old Colosseum, turn to the dictator, raise their rusty swords on high and scream “Hail Caesar! We who are about to die in November salute you.” Leaders, and sensible politicians would tell the Dictator I do not intend to die for you. Put something in front of me that you have read, I can understand, and my constituents can support, and I will be your bravest Centurion. But don’t ask me to fall on my sword for this piece of crap. I have read Profiles In Courage, and this is one of those defining moments which history will remember when the national interest compels me to put the American People ahead of partisan advantage. Patriotism, fundamental fairness, and the oath I took when I became a U.S. Representative requires nothing less. So kill me if you like, but I will not betray the American People for you Mr. President, or for anyone else. I hold that sacred trust inviolate.

  46. This post is a little long but again points out who is the best speaker thinker and messenger for stabilizing this dangerous world situation that we are facing since the great Gulliver took office and has done nothing but read and run and blame all the problems on his bad choices and nefarious schemes to unseat the black leader and self proclaimed King of the world black population Farrakan.Now for Hillary in an interview with Andrea Mitchell.

    —————————————————–

    Interview With NBC’S Andrea Mitchell

    Hillary Rodham Clinton
    Secretary of State
    New York City

    March 12, 2010

    ——————————————————————————–

    (Transcript Provided by NBC)

    QUESTION: Madame Secretary, thank you very much for doing this. Fifteen years ago, you were in Beijing– we were in Beijing. You declared, memorably, that women’s rights are human rights. A concept no one had ever suggested before? How have done in the last 15 years?

    SECRETARY CLINTON: We’ve made progress, Andrea. And I remember so well you were there with me. And I’ve seen the progress. I have talked about it. It is encouraging. But we have a long way to go. And this 15 year anniversary is a time for stock taking about what else lies ahead.

    And it’s important that the United States– be a leader in continuing to promote women’s rights and women’s equality. It is in our interest, our security interest. It is a moral imperative. And it creates a better basis for us to– seek a more peaceful, prosperous, progressive world.

    QUESTION: Now at the UN on this anniversary, you have said that progress in women’s rights are progress in human rights. But there’s still a big gap.

    SECRETARY CLINTON: There is a big gap. You know, I’m– I’m someone who likes to look at the progress, because then you can tell people, “Well, it is possible. Women in Kuwait are now voting. That wasn’t– available to them– in– 1995. Women in parts of Africa now can inherit property and own land, which wasn’t permitted.

    Countries have passed laws, and some are even enforcing them, against– domestic violence. We’ve made a lot of progress in the international effort against human trafficking. There are many points of progress. But there are still so many women who are deprived of education, deprived of health care, denied their basic right to– chart their own course. There are so many brave women who stand up to those rights.

    I will never forget meeting a young girl who had been married at the age of ten to a man much older than she by her family– in Yemen, who got away from the house and went to a courthouse and waited until somebody noticed her. And when they asked what she was doing there, she said, “I want a divorce.” I mean, I can’t even imagine the courage it must have taken for that child. I meet women who– were trafficked into prostitution who are now rescuing other women.

    I meet so many extraordinarily courageous women. But I would hope for them that their daughters and their granddaughters wouldn’t have to struggle so hard. That they would get to go to school. That they would get to have a better life.

    QUESTION: How do you elevate that to a prime issue of American diplomacy? U.S. Secretary of State have tried to do that. Do you think you’re penetrating?

    SECRETARY CLINTON:I do–

    QUESTION: Succeeding?

    SECRETARY CLINTON:I mean we have really worked to integrate gender issues across the board. Not just stuck over in a corner, but to be considered. So for example, three big initiatives that– the Obama administration is– promoting: global health. We are going to emphasize maternal and child health.

    Women still die in childbirth. Women are still grievously injured in childbirth. And there is a great need for the United States, along with other nations, to help build better health systems to protect the lives of women. If women are able to survive, if they have access to family planning, they have fewer children, they take better care of those children, it’s more likely those children will go to school.

    We’re gonna do the same with our food security initiative. The majority of the world’s farmers are women. Something that honestly, I didn’t know before we started working on this. And those women need the same access to seeds and irrigation and technology so that they can produce more from their small plots.

    And finally on climate change, we know that women will be in the forefront of having to bear the brunt. They’re the ones who have to go far afield, to find firewood and water, and some of them walk for miles and miles, for hours and hours every day. So these are the ways that we’re looking at issues that affect everyone. But we’re trying to– target a lot of our aid to women because what we have found over many years is that if you help a woman, she helps her family. And then the family and the children are better off.

    QUESTION: Nicholas Kristof at the celebration of vital voices the organization that you founded. He suggested that the real achievements of our century are going to be advancing women’s rights.

    SECRETARY CLINTON: I agree with him completely. I have said that many times myself before, it is a sea change. And it is something that– is long overdue, but you have to be patient and persistent. Change doesn’t happen just because you wish it. But I think that if you look at this century and you look at the instability, the conflicts that we have in so many places in the world, there’s a direct relationship between the subjugation and oppression of women and extremism. It is therefore in our interest to stand up for the rights of women. Because by doing so, we enhance our own security.

    QUESTION: When you spoke in your speech to the United Nations about how women are most often affected by conflict.

    SECRETARY CLINTON: Right.

    QUESTION: Yet they are kept from the negotiating table. Now you’re a secretary of state. So you’re not kept from the negotiating table. But here you are with the Middle East just beginning to approach negotiations and Israel announces an expansion of settlements. It was really a slap in the face to the visiting Vice President.

    SECRETARY CLINTON: It was, Andrea. And– I’ve expressed that directly to the prime minister. It was– not just an unfortunate incident of timing but the substance was– something that– is not needed as we are attempting to move toward– the resumption of negotiation. And the United States is a strong supporter of the security of Israel. Always have been, always will be.

    We share common values and there is so much that– Israel represents that we support. But we believe in the two state solution. The prime minister has said he believes in it. And we wanna see confidence building measures and actions that will– result in the resumption of negotiations and then a move toward the resolution on the final status issues.

    QUESTION: But this is a setback and insulting.

    SECRETARY CLINTON: It was insulting. And– it was insulting not just to the vice president, who– certainly didn’t deserve that. He was there with a very clear message of– commitment to the peace process solidarity with– the Israeli people. But it was an insult to the United States.

    I mean the United States is deeply invested in trying to– work with the parties in order to bring about– this resolution. We don’t get easily discouraged, so we’re– we’re working toward the resumption of the negotiation. But we expect– Israel and the Palestinians– to do their part, and not to take any action that– will undermine the chance that we can achieve the two state solution.

    QUESTION: And it doesn’t help as you are trying to work so hard to rally the Arab world for Israel’s benefit, as well as the United States, obviously, against Iran. The Iranians threat rests there, the Saudis recently went to China to try to persuade the Chinese that they would be– a good oil supply to them, even without Iranian oil. How do you get the Iranian negotiations on track?

    SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, we’re working very hard on that. And here at the United Nations– I had numerous meetings– about what we were– doing concerning the– the security council. We’re working to– obtain support for a strong resolution. And there are several reasons why this is so important.

    First, Iranians have violated their obligations under the Nonproliferation Treaty. They have– ignored the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Na– the UN Security Council before. And the international community has to demonstrate there are consequences–

    QUESTION: But it’s taken–

    SECRETARY CLINTON: –to that.

    QUESTION: –so long. The prior administration tried and failed to get the international community united. You have done– this administration has done better at getting the Russians, for instance, and the Europeans really on board. China’s still recalcitrant. How do you persuade Israel not to take military action?

    SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I think the international community has to demonstrate resolve so that no one takes unilateral action. We’re also worried about a lot of the neighbors engaging in their own arms race and creating even more instability with nuclear arms this time in an area that is already– volatile and from which we get a lot of our oil, as does the rest of the world.

    But we have been united. And up until now, we’ve had a very– clear message to the Iranians. Everyone says the same thing: They’re not entitled to and should not pursue nuclear weapons. And we’re making the case. We’ve made the case, I think– persuasively– to the Russians. They have– had experiences themselves which have– raised concerns in their own minds.

    The Chinese, they’re further removed. They don’t share a border with Iran. It seems like a long way away. But you’re correct that a number of nations, not just the United Na– United States, is delivering the same message. That if their concern is that they have a– dependency on oil coming from Iran, other countries can meet those needs.

    But even more importantly, if there were to be– a destabilized situation or a conflict– in the region, it would disrupt the oil supplies. It would send oil prices through the roof. That’s not good for China’s economy. So, you know, a lot t– a lot of times you just have to marshal your arguments. You have to come from many different perspectives to make them. And I think that’s what’s happening.

    QUESTION: All right. Just returning, finally, to the issue of women. You pointed out that this recent issue of the Economist–

    SECRETARY CLINTON: It’s just–

    QUESTION: –startling when you look at it.

    SECRETARY CLINTON: took my breath away. I– I– I– just took a quick glance at the cover and I thought it said “genocide,” a word that we’re all familiar with in many different settings. But no. It says, Gendercide: What happened to 100 million baby girls? There has– been– so many– cases– where girls are either not born or allowed to die or denied health care, so they die before they’re five years old.

    With the result that there is an imbalance between women and men of 100 million. Think of what that’s going to mean in certain parts of the world, particularly Asia– where this imbalance is most acute– when you have a h– very large population of young men who can’t find wives.

    A kind of– potential social instability that that breeds. So this is not only about the– the tragedy of young girls not being given what is needed in order to survive– and live, but what it might mean in terms of– too many young men.

    QUESTION: You and your generation have led the way on this. Your daughter was here to hear you speak at the United–

    SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes. Yes

    QUESTION: –Nations. Chelsea and her generation, how do you see them leading in this whole area?

    SECRETARY CLINTON: I am so impressed with young women today. I know– a lot of young women because they are– Chelsea’s friends, or the young women who work for me. They are confident. They’re independent. We now have more young women in universities and colleges than we have young men. So, come on young men, you know. (laughs) Let’s get back into the pipeline.

    We are very lucky in this country, and in– in many of advanced economies, to see– young women given opportunities that their mothers and grandmothers were not able to– pursue. And with that kind of– opportunity comes a responsibility.

    So I see a lot of young women who are very committed to public service, who are committed to charitable activities. Who give time and money in many different settings. Who are very interested in what’s going on around the world. And I think that they will continue to make the case for women’s– rights.

    QUESTION: And 15 years after Beijing, the State Department comes out with its annual Human Rights Report and reports that human rights are getting worse–

    SECRETARY CLINTON: In some places.

    QUESTION: –not better in some parts–

    SECRETARY CLINTON: Yeah.

    QUESTION: –of China.

    SECRETARY CLINTON: In some places, that’s right. Well, you know, this Human Rights Report is– an accounting that the United States has done for 34 years. And to the best of our ability, we do put the facts out. It’s the most comprehensive– document of its kind.

    And we try to be as– accurate as possible. And there are some disturbing trends. Because it’s not only gender-based– human rights violations that we’re concerned about. It’s the denial of free expression. It’s the censorship of the internet.

    It’s the– suppression of– religion. I mean, there are so many ways that– that governments now, as we’ve seen in Iran in the last months– use the tools that are available through modern technology to find new ways of invading people’s privacy, of intimidating them, of denying them their rights. And we are becoming much more aggressive in the State Department in fighting back. We’re gonna provide more tools to people in more places.

    We want to try to have a fair fight here. You know, for a government to close down internet sites, to shut down cell phones to prevent people from being able to communicate– is as– inimical to our beliefs as– the old First Amendment ways we used to operate, where you’d go out to the town square and speak. Well, the internet is the– is the global square now. So we’re– we’re in a battle to– do everything we can to advance human rights.

    QUESTION: Madame Secretary, thank you very much.

    SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you.

  47. After the Revolutionary War, some Americans wanted to make Washington the King or Dictator of the fledgling republic. He adamantly refused. Only now do we see someone who wants to be dictator. And so great is his fantasy that as a youth he referred to himself as “King Obama”. Under Article 2 of the Constitution, the President is required to faithfully execute the laws, and that means he is precluded from violating them. But whether it is the provision that relates to how a bill becomes law or why he should not presume to bribe public officials or candidates, it makes no difference. He believes not in the rule of law but the rule of men, and in his twisted mind he is the man. Here is the latest example:

    GOP Lawmaker: White House Job Offer to Sestak Would Have Been a ‘Crime’

    FOXNews.com

    A GOP lawmaker says that the White House committed a “crime” if it offered Democratic Rep. Joe Sestak a federal job in exchange for dropping his primary challenge to Sen. Arlen Specter, D-Pa.

    print email share recommend (1)

    Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif. (l), said Friday that the White House committed a “crime” if it offered Democratic Rep. Joe Sestak, (r) a federal job in exchange for dropping his primary challenge to Sen. Arlen Specter, D-Pa. (AP)
    A GOP lawmaker says that the White House committed a “crime” if it offered Democratic Rep. Joe Sestak a federal job in exchange for dropping his primary challenge to Sen. Arlen Specter, D-Pa.

    “That would be a crime to offer anybody a federal job,” Rep. Darrell Issa, the top Republican on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, told Fox News on Friday.

    For example, the California Republican said it would be a crime if he offered a staff job to anyone to help him win an election.

    “It’s the same for the executive branch,” he said. “You can’t promise ambassadorships to contributors and even worse, you cannot manipulate the races by saying we’ll give you something else if you drop out. You can’t do it.”

    Sestak, who is aggravating Democratic leaders by challenging Specter for the Senate nomination in Pennsylvania, said last month that the White House dangled a federal job in front of him last summer in an attempt to drop out of the state’s Democratic primary.

    video
    Did White House Try to Bribe Sestak?Issa wants answers from White House
    Sestak has refused to elaborate on the circumstances but has acknowledged that the job was a high-ranking position.

    Issa is seeking answers but the White House isn’t talking. White House spokesman Robert Gibbs promised Fox News on Tuesday to provide answers. But since then, Gibbs has stonewalled reporters.

    Issa wrote a letter to the White House counsel on Wednesday demanding information on Sestak’s claim.

    “While the White House may think this is politics as usual, what is spectacularly unusual is when a candidate – a U.S. Congressman no less – -freely acknowledges such a proposal,” he wrote to White House counsel Robert Bauer. “Almost always candidates keep quiet about such deals, and for good reason – they are against the law.”

    Issa told Fox News that he is trying to give the White House an opportunity to tell its side of the story.

    “Right now, they’re doing the ‘I won’t confirm or deny,’ and for us, it leaves two possibilities,” Issa said. “One is the promise of transparency in this administration is just shot. The second one is even worse, which is either Sestak is lying or the administration has done something wrong and is covering it up and they should be the first to want to clear that up even if they’re not wanting to support transparency as they said they would when they came to office.”

    Sestak stood by his claim this week.

    “And I answered that yes, and I answered it honestly,” Sestak told Fox News when asked if the White House offered him a job to not get in the primary.

    “I would never get out for a deal,” he said. “If I were to get out as I told this person, I would get out because it was the right thing to do. And the person responded, ‘Yes, I knew you’d say that but…'”

    Sestak declined to confirm that the position was for Navy secretary.

    “As I said, there’s nothing to be gained by focusing on this politics stuff,” he said.

    Specter told a local radio station Friday that Sestak could be committing a crime himself if the allegation is true and he hasn’t reported it to the proper authorities.

    “There’s a crime called misprision of a felony,” Specter said. “Misprision of a felony is when you don’t report a crime. So you’re getting into pretty deep areas here in these considerations

  48. Thieves, they operate at night and in the darkness, and biggest of them all is Obama. This is from a “progressive” blog.

    http://firedoglake.com/2010/03/12/late-night-march-madness/

    For some reason, a program that enjoys the support of overwhelming majorities of Democrats, independents, or Americans as a whole—slice it any way you like—has become synonymous with “hot potato.” No one wants to be the one who has to take the blame for killing it—but, bizarrely, absurdly, maddeningly, no one wants to be the one that gets the credit for passing it, either.

    In fact, the whole issue of health care reform, what was expected to be and should have been the signal accomplishment of this Democratic majority, is now something everyone just wishes would be “done with already.” Every major vote has been buried—the House’s initial bill passed on a November Saturday near midnight, the Senate “got ‘er done” on Christmas Eve, and now, with a vote set for March 19 or 20, Congress and the president will get this dirty business out of the way during the first big weekend of the NCAA basketball tournament.

    But, try as they might to hide it, many of us will notice.

  49. I have always said they would pass something. I will never forget the fraud election that was held at the convention. I the superdelegates had no courage or balls, why would the Sen and Reps have any. After all many of them were superduds. There is an old saying “a coward dies a thousand deaths, but a brave person dies but once” We have very few brave Dems in Washington.

    Personnel, evn with the HRC group I hung out with for so long, I am know as inflexible, and not willing to compromise. they don’t want to understand that they folded in and gave away their Democracy. They don’t understand that it would not have mattered to me who got screwed like that, I would have been outraged about it.

    Too bad we have cowards leading this country, because we really do need a Washington.

  50. Iit’s not that we no longer support some of the ideals and values of the former democratic party, but it is very hard to “cheer” this particular version of the party when we saw what they did to both Hillary and Bill.
    The current dimocrats are not interested in a middle of the road approach, but a “take it or leave it” attitude and many of us have chosen to leave. When/if a new democrat comes in to office and embraces the way the party operated under Bill, maybe then, some of us will return. Until them, as petty as may seem, we hope that Obama fails miserably.

  51. jbstonesfan

    I don’t consider it petty. He promised the people a public option and competitive drug pricing. None of that is in this bill and it will still cost us billions.

  52. gonzotx,

    I don’t want to fund the Iraqi war because we have killed thousands of our military and millions of innocent Iraqis – but I’m not given a choice on that.

    When we make it possible to withhold funding from lower income women who need abortions, we are discriminating against women as a priority. I don’t have a choice about funding wars. You shouldn’t have a choice about funding abortions. If you don’t approve, don’t have one. Go to work to make it possible for more women to carry these babies to term. But don’t claim a right, that only women pay the price for, that others don’t have.

    If I have to fund a war that I knew was bogus from the get go, you should have to fund abortions. Anything less, is grotesque discrimination against women.

  53. MAGNIFICENT, BUT NOT POLITICS

    By DICK MORRIS

    Published on TheHill.com on March 9, 2010

    Printer-Friendly Version

    And now the House Democrats line up at the instruction of their blind commanders for a final charge into glory as they battle to foist a healthcare system on a country that neither wants it nor can afford it.

    The charge may or may not reach its objective. But one thing is certain: The carnage among those who vote for healthcare will be reminiscent of the Battle of Balaclava during the Crimean War. As a French military leader who witnessed the spectacle said, “C’est magnifique, mais ce n’est pas la guerre” (It’s magnificent, but it’s not war). The sight of so many Democrats throwing away their political careers may be arresting, but it is not politics.

    Before this last, demented attempt to pass healthcare, the Democrats would have lost control of the House anyway. But with it, they face the loss of a historically high number of seats — perhaps more than 80.

    The final fight over healthcare boils down to a simple formulation: The People vs. Pelosi. In district after district, the next 10 days will feature an aroused citizenry demanding a “no” vote while an ideologically motivated Speaker demands assent. The echo of this push/pull will take place in the minds of the Democratic House members. Each will ask himself whether he is really prepared to throw away his career for this vote. Is this it? Is this legislation worth the end of line?

    To arouse public opinion, anti-ObamaCare groups are drilling down to the congressional district level and running ads in each swing congressman’s backyard pressuring their member to vote no. The League of American Voters is now running ads in the following districts: Baron Hill (D-Ind.), Mark Schauer (D-Mich.), Michael Arcuri (D-N.Y.), Dan Maffei (D-N.Y.), Kathy Dahlkemper (D-Pa.), Chris Carney (D-Pa.), Paul Kanjorski (D-Pa.), Tom Perriello (D-Va.), Steve Kagen (D-Wis.), Alan Mollohan (D-W.Va.) and Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.). It will shortly start running ads in these districts: Earl Pomeroy (D-N.D.), Allen Boyd (D-Fla.), Bill Owens (D-N.Y.), Jim Matheson (D-Utah), Ann Kirkpatrick (D-Ariz.), Harry Mitchell (D-Ariz.) and Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.).

    To support the League of American Voters in their efforts to stop Obama — Go Here Now.

    The ads all feature the telephone numbers of the representatives. They will be hearing — at some length, we suspect — from their constituents. Will the din of those who vote on their reelection drown out the pushing of the Speaker who doles out their privileges?

    For his part, President Obama is, pathetically, again switching his rationale for his program. Having started as an effort to cover the uninsured and then morphed into an attempt to lower health costs and then metastasized into a deficit-reduction measure, it has now become a vehicle for insurance regulation. Of course, voters realize that the regulatory features of this bill could easily stand alone and pass in a heartbeat. The only thing that is holding up their enactment is that Obama won’t sign a bill that doesn’t have his socialized-medicine designs in it.

    The dilemma each marginal Democrat faces is akin to that which confronted Republicans in 1974, when they wondered if they would go down with the ship opposing Nixon’s impeachment, or that which faced Democrats in 1968, when they dreaded defending the War in Vietnam one more election cycle. But those who refuse to follow the marching orders of their deranged leadership and who opt, instead, for the survival of their party — to say nothing of their own — will do themselves and their party a major service in voting no.

  54. Wbboei,

    There is nothing socialistic about this healthcare plan – in fact, it’s the exact opposite of socialism. It has more to do with fascism and nothing to do with socialism. You and i are going to be forced to buy private insurance that will not have similar mandates put in place to provide coverage – that’s an anathema to socialists.

    I think precision matter. Obama is a disaster for this nation but he is as far from a socialist as Reagan was.

  55. I am with basement angel, mj on the abortion issue. Not just sick or deformed babies, even healthy babies unplanned, unwanted, and abandoned (by their fathers) can become a social burden to not just the mother who is left to deal with it but also on the society. The disparity in the way the woman and the man are treated in life at large for precipitating this outcome is not good for a civil society. SC has weighed in using common sense when life begins and I agree that it is not at conception. Fetal viability is key to this issue and SC has rendered a reasonably common sense decision on this that most can agree with.

  56. f he is not a socialist, he sure has spent a large portion of his adult life associating himself with those whom undeniably favor socialism or even Marxism.
    These people certainly have played an important role in whatever you want to call Obama’s point of reference.

  57. jbstonesfan,

    He also spent a lot of his life hanging out with people who don’t advocate socialism. Rezko ain’t a lefty. The Wall Street CEOs who funded his run for the presidency are not socialists. Annenberg isn’t a lefty even if Bill Ayre’s is. Obama’s voting record is not the record of a liberal, much less a socialist. He willingly praises Reagan, while lying about Bill Clinton’s accomplishments.

    I’m not even sure Obama is to Palin’s left.

  58. basement angel….Yeah….you said it….I agree with it. LOL!!

    He is so far right he has wingnuts for shoelaces!

  59. Oh if we can just convince the middle that the is far left, we righties can win and win effectively for years to come…funny how people can be convinced so easily!

  60. There is nothing socialistic about this healthcare plan – in fact, it’s the exact opposite of socialism. It has more to do with fascism and nothing to do with socialism. You and i are going to be forced to buy private insurance that will not have similar mandates put in place to provide coverage – that’s an anathema to socialists.

    I think precision matter. Obama is a disaster for this nation but he is as far from a socialist as Reagan was.
    ——————————-
    I do not think Obama is a socialist as most of us understand the word. I think he is something much scarier. I think he is a proponent of of State Capitalism. Under this system, there is no democracy and no private enterprise. The government and multi national corporations run the entire show. This is like the system we see in China, and it is something which the global elites have been striving to create ever since the fall of the Berlin Wall. It is what Francis Fukayama referred to in his book The End of History–when he said ideology is dead and the future belongs to markets.

    On the other hand I could be wrong. There are people like Mort Zuckerman and David Horowitz who are alot smarter than I am who believe that is exactly what he is. David was a 60s radical, I know him personally, and I trust his judgment on this matter. I do not know Zuckerman personally but I respect him as well. They maintain that the end game here is to create a socialist order of the European variety. That may not be Obama himself. He may be nothing more than an empty shell. But the people who pull his strings are working toward that model, according to these experts. Also, as he arrogates more power to government what is to say that he will not pivot hard to the right.

    When I post articles like the one above I do so for other reasons. The part that interested me was the fact that the anti Obamacare forces which now include the Chamber are saturating the districts of swing state congressmen who are poised to vote in favor of this monstrous bill, as if to say “life I am coming”.

  61. I might add that James Roosevelt (Jr.iirc) is the grandson of Franklin Delano Roosevelt as well as an insurance CEO. He Chaired a most dispicable POS with the RBC on that day which I HOPE they will rue in my lifetime.

  62. OBAMA’S CORE PROBLEM:

    “Young man, the secret of my success is that at an early age I discovered that I was not God.”–Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. who said this to a journalist in response to a question on the auspicious occasion of his 90th birthday (8 March 1931).

  63. One other thing: if you are going to flatly deny that Obama is a socialist, then how do you explain the fact that a number of the people he has appointed to sub cabinet, ambassador and czar positions are of that very presuasion. We all remember Van Jones, but there have been others. Personally, I think this comes through Jarret who comes from a family of communists. That is what I would say if somebody asked. But Obama bears a certain amount of responsibility as well.

  64. ShortTermer
    March 13th, 2010 at 5:31 pm

    I share your feelings for Roosevelt, in spades. I remember watching the R and B meeting and going from thinking: “Wow, holy mackerel, is that really one of the Roosevelts”? To seeing him as a swollen toad. The picture of the fat cat that they post now and then on the Confluence reminds me of him. What a disgrace he is to his name, even if you have issues with FDR, you have to admit Teddy gave us all a chance to prosper.

  65. To seeing him as a swollen toad
    ——————————-
    Good description. And right beside him was Alexis Herman, Lest we forget, here was the cast and the assessment before the fact. If memory serves, the final vote was 8 to 17. So what happened?

    Co-Chairs – no endorsement
    Alexis Herman (co-chair, Washington , D.C. )
    James Roosevelt, Jr. (co-chair, Massachusetts )

    Members – Clinton supporters (13)
    Hartina Flournay (DC)
    Donald Fowler (SC)
    Harold Ickes, Jr. (DC)
    Alice Huffman (CA)
    Ben Johnson (DC)
    Elaine Kamarck (MA)
    Eric Kleinfeld (DC)
    Mona Pasquil (CA)
    Mame Reiley (VA)
    Garry Shay (CA)
    Elizabeth Smith (DC)
    Michael Steed (MD)
    Jaime Gonzalez, Jr. (TX)

    Members – Obama supporters (8)
    Martha Fuller Clark (NH)
    Carol Khare Fowler (SC)
    Janice Griffin (MD)
    Thomas Hynes (IL)
    Allan Katz (FL)
    Sharon Stroschein (SD)
    Sarah Swisher (IA)
    Everett Ward (NC)

    Members – no known endorsement (7)
    Donna Brazille (DC)
    Mark Brewer (MI)
    Ralph Dawson (NY)
    Yvonne Gates ( NV)
    Alice Germond (DC) – DNC Secretary
    David McDonald (WA)
    Jerome Wiley Segovia (VA)

  66. Courage and Consequence: Less Memoir Than Hoax

    By Joseph Wilson on March 13, 2010 at 2:00 PM in Current Affairs
    Reprinted from The Huffington Post with the express permission of Joe Wilson.

    Karl Rove’s book Courage and Consequence is less memoir than hoax. The chapters that relate to the CIA leak scandal are yet another attempt to deflect attention from his central role in the betrayal of Valerie Plame Wilson’s identity as a covert CIA officer.

    His distortions and fabrications are consistent with his approach throughout this sordid and criminal affair. Wasting his opportunity to tell the truth, he offers absolutely nothing new, and his selective use of facts and quotes are a transparent effort to continue his long campaign to confuse people, unfortunately consistent with his past behavior.

    His book is a pathetically weak defense of the disastrous policies pursued by the Bush administration, involving our country in a war of choice based on false intelligence and badly tarnishing the good name of the United States of America.

    Nothing in Karl Rove’s book refutes those facts. His book, however, is illuminating in further exposing his political methods, especially his reliance on personal insults, not simply towards Valerie and myself, but also towards all those who opposed his unprincipled behavior.

    If any additional proof to the irrefutable historical record were needed, Rove’s book demonstrates once again the actions of a vindictive, angry and petty man. Karl Rove betrayed his nation; now he has betrayed history.

  67. basement angel
    March 13th, 2010 at 2:46 pm

    ================

    Right! “Not with tax money” is just a way to say “Not at all” to poor women.

  68. basement angel
    March 13th, 2010 at 3:05 pm
    There is nothing socialistic about this healthcare plan – in fact, it’s the exact opposite of socialism. It has more to do with fascism and nothing to do with socialism.

    ===============

    I sometimes wonder if it’s a conspiracy. 😉 The GOP calls Obama a socialist, and all the socialists believe them and vote for him. When he’s really a fascist in disguise.

    Socialist is too good a word, babe.

  69. jbstonesfan
    If he is not a socialist, he sure has spent a large portion of his adult life associating himself with those whom undeniably favor socialism or even Marxism.
    These people certainly have played an important role in whatever you want to call Obama’s point of reference.

    ================

    I’ve been thinking about that.

    Obama learned how to manipulate white guilt liberals by growing up (10-highschool) with his white guilt grandparents.

    Maybe what he learned from the socialists — is how to manipulate socialists.

  70. Wbboei,

    The proof is in the pudding. Actions speak louder than words. And all of that. Obama bailed out the banks at the expense of ordinary Americans. He’s expanding the wars. He’s talking about cutting entitlements and inviting people to his commission who want to dismantle Social Security. He’s refusing to prosecute white collar crime and has let the last administration completely off the hook. When push comes to shove, he sides with the wealthy and with the corporations. There is no pivot to the left in him. He has never once in his life shown an ounce of compassion or interest in ordinary people, much less poor people. As for his administration, he hasn’t put a single person in place that had a real liberal outlook that had the ability to create programs for ordinary Americans. When it mattered, say, at Treasury, he put in a pro-Wall Street lackey who has used his position to bail out his buddies.

    What Obama is, is a plain old Reaganite. Beginning, middle and end.

  71. TurndownObama,

    LOL – In point of fact, socialists have never liked him. His “creative class” bullshit didn’t sell in those quarters.

  72. wbboei
    One other thing: if you are going to flatly deny that Obama is a socialist, then how do you explain the fact that a number of the people he has appointed to sub cabinet, ambassador and czar positions are of that very presuasion.

    ===============

    Camouflage tokens? Are they going into positions where they have any real influence on the economy? What kind of people is he putting where there is real economic power?

  73. My goodness are they piling it on all over 1600 housing units in our eternal capital Jerusalem. It seems much more important to placate Palestinian leaders who still deny Israel’s right to exist than standing by a friend. Even the ADL FINALLY denounced the abusive statements made by this administration.
    I recognized early on( as all Jews should have) that Obama was an anti-Israeli as he associated with well known anti- Israel/Jew haters. Unfortunately, these are the times I knew I would regret Hillary accepting SOS….

  74. None of you know the life I have lead, nor the painful choices I have made and why I believe what I believe. I once felt very much like everyone here about abortion. My views have changed as my life experiences have. Because I feel it is a personal choice, I do not believe that it should be mandated by government, in any form, which includes limiting or financing it.
    The old adage that “oh my God all the POOR women will be denied the right to an abortion because they cannot afford one holds no merit for me.
    I have worked so many ER’s where the “indigent” come in with their ipods, gold jewelry, well dressed, cell phones that it almost becomes a challenge for us to hold our tongue’s. I have participated in public health for years presenting class after class after class on birth control and womens health to the indigent. Many just don’t care. Birth control is available cheap, real cheap, but unfortunately, like today, when the 17 year old female who is still in HS told me, I just didn’t want to bother, is 2 months pregnant, I want to scream. She admits she has had @ least 3 sex education classes and her mother took her to PPH. Frankly, I am tired of the abortion on demand, as if people are having their tonsils taken out.It is a life, a human life…

    I don’t want to pay for wars and I don’t want to pay for someone’s abortion. I don’t want to limit their choices, I just don’t want to be part of them.

    Some of you have been sanctimonious. We all have our views..I’m at peace with mine.

    And really, that is the last I have to say about it.

    Good night

  75. Camouflage tokens? Are they going into positions where they have any real influence on the economy? What kind of people is he putting where there is real economic power?
    ——————-
    You could very well be right Turndown.

  76. I’ve been thinking about that.

    Obama learned how to manipulate white guilt liberals by growing up (10-highschool) with his white guilt grandparents.

    Maybe what he learned from the socialists — is how to manipulate socialist
    ———————-
    That makes sense. However, there is no question that the people who put him in that position, specifically Soros do want to spread the wealth and he is on record to that effect. Then again Obama has failed to come thorough for them.

  77. The proof is in the pudding. Actions speak louder than words. And all of that. Obama bailed out the banks at the expense of ordinary Americans. He’s expanding the wars. He’s talking about cutting entitlements and inviting people to his commission who want to dismantle Social Security. He’s refusing to prosecute white collar crime and has let the last administration completely off the hook. When push comes to shove, he sides with the wealthy and with the corporations. There is no pivot to the left in him. He has never once in his life shown an ounce of compassion or interest in ordinary people, much less poor people. As for his administration, he hasn’t put a single person in place that had a real liberal outlook that had the ability to create programs for ordinary Americans. When it mattered, say, at Treasury, he put in a pro-Wall Street lackey who has used his position to bail out his buddies.
    ————————
    Like I said, I personally believe he is a shill for State capitalism and globalism. See above. I wrote a 12 chapter paper on Soros which proves it. I have no quarrel with you on this one. But just remember, once they have eliminated the middle class the global capitalists will give the rest of us bread and circuses. Obama is the circus.

  78. Come on, wbboei, you are too smart to believe Obama is a socialist. He’s to the right of Hillary on every single domestic issue, and she’s not a socialist. Remember conservatives consider FDR and LBJ socialists, and he’s no where near FDR or LBJ on the issues. Honestly, conservatives use the “socialism” label for a host of reasons, none of which are evidence-based. One, he’s black, and in this country, it’s a common knock on black politicians by whites that they are “socialist”. Second, Congress, and the last Congress under Bush for which the public associates more with the current president simply because of the timing, have had to infuse the economy with lots of capital, this can make someone to the right an easy mark for “socialism”, particularly to those who have never lived under a socialist leader, but remember the bank bailouts were passed under Bush, yet no one would call him a “socialist”. Finally, he speaks in very grandiose manner, which recalls several socialist (and facist) leaders of the past. Finally, the Democrats agenda items; health care, financial regulations, educational funding, environmental issues, are all issues that require at least some capital infusion from the feds, or some form of regulation. The Republicans never propose regulations, or government spending on things like health care so anything the Democrats do with these issues, these jokers will call socialism. The much more valid, evidence-based criticism of Obama comes from his left.

  79. wbboei
    March 13th, 2010 at 9:41 pm
    I’ve been thinking about that.

    Obama learned how to manipulate white guilt liberals by growing up (10-highschool) with his white guilt grandparents.

    Maybe what he learned from the socialists — is how to manipulate socialist
    ———————-
    That makes sense. However, there is no question that the people who put him in that position, specifically Soros do want to spread the wealth and he is on record to that effect. Then again Obama has failed to come thorough for them.

    First, governments essential do spread the “wealth” through taxation and spending. Second, in case you have not noticed the gap between the middle class and the wealthy has grown so much over the last 30 years that many would argue the distribution of wealth is too heavily tilted toward the very richest Americans. Third, do remember what Clinton’s first major success was, he rewrote the tax code to make it much more progressive. When the tax codes expire next year we will go back to Clinton’s tax policy, this policy essentially does spread the wealth more than current policy. Finally, I am always wary of billionaries that are said to want to “spread the wealth”.

  80. Here’s what happens when poor women can’t get abortions or contraceptives “with tax money.”

    Doubling of maternal deaths in U.S. ‘scandalous,’ rights group says.

    Deaths from pregnancy and childbirth in the United States have doubled in the past 20 years, a development that a human rights group called “scandalous and disgraceful” Friday.
    In addition, the rights group said, about 1.7 million women a year, one-third of pregnant women in the United States, suffer from pregnancy-related complications.
    Most of the deaths and complications occur among minorities and women living in poverty, it noted.

  81. mj,
    Obama is on record with a LOT of leftist/liberal promises he never comes through on.

    If we look at his actions, or the result of his inactions, it’s always the big money interests that are favored.

    I don’t know how Soros fits into this. If Soros is sincerely ‘socialist’ then maybe Obama manipulated him too. 😉

    ==============

    turndown wrote:
    Maybe what he learned from the socialists — is how to manipulate socialist

    mj wrote:
    That makes sense. However, there is no question that the people who put him in that position, specifically Soros do want to spread the wealth and he is on record to that effect. Then again Obama has failed to come thorough for them.

  82. Woops, I got the attribution wrong. It was WBBOEI who said this:
    “That makes sense. However, there is no question that the people who put him in that position, specifically Soros do want to spread the wealth and he is on record to that effect. Then again Obama has failed to come thorough for them.”

  83. gonzo said:
    The old adage that “oh my God all the POOR women will be denied the right to an abortion because they cannot afford one holds no merit for me.”

    ==================

    So where do you think poor women are getting abortions? Coat hangers are cheap I guess. Then they can go to the ER?

    Do you think there are no really poor women at all?

    It doesn’t matter if the woman has an attitude you condemn. What matters is that without an abortion an unwanted child will come into the world likely to be abused if normal. And if malformed and brainless — who is going to pay for their care for a whole lifetime?

  84. Remember those young people that Obama was bringing in, os we had to nominate Obama or they would be disappointed?

    Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) called it a “tragic mistake” that the White House fruitlessly chased Republican votes on health care rather than take advantage of the ripe environment to pass legislation.
    “What is very sad is we had hopes that [the] election was transformational in the sense of bringing people into the political process who have never been in it before,” Sanders said. “I tried very hard in Vermont to bring young people into the political process. It is very hard to do. Obama did it. But you know where those young people are now? They are not in the political process. They really aren’t. We have lost them. We have antagonized trade unionists. We have not done well with seniors. I don’t think we have done well with women. And I think that was a tragic mistake.”

  85. Forcing the kind of change that you discuss here would require a genuine leader – someone able to shift the earth under our very feet. What Obama has proved is that he not good at accomplishing things. He can advance himself effectively, but other than that, he gets nothing done. He may or may not be a state capitalist, but he isn’t a socialist and doesn’t have a socialist bone in his body. How can i take anything someone says seriously, if they’re calling Obama a socialist?

    I think it’s not productive to consider him a metaphysical villain with the kind of personal authority required for huge change. Obama isn’t going to change anything. His health care reform doesn’t actually reform anything – consider that.

    Remember, Reagan is his hero. Not FDR. Not Clinton. Not LBJ. Not Kennedy. Reagan. And he wants the kind of worship that Reagan has received. In the end, this is all about the boards that he’s going to be asked to sit on, and the parties he’ll be invited to. He’s the kind of guy who imagines the networks going on about his greatness when he dies.

  86. First, governments essential do spread the “wealth” through taxation and spending. Second, in case you have not noticed the gap between the middle class and the wealthy has grown so much over the last 30 years that many would argue the distribution of wealth is too heavily tilted toward the very richest Americans. Third, do remember what Clinton’s first major success was, he rewrote the tax code to make it much more progressive. When the tax codes expire next year we will go back to Clinton’s tax policy, this policy essentially does spread the wealth more than current policy. Finally, I am always wary of billionaries that are said to want to “spread the wealth”
    —————————
    1. to your first point, at one end of the spectrum you have the statement by Daniel Webster (and later Chief Justice Marshall) that the power to tax is the power to destroy. At the other end of the spectrum you have the statement by Justice Holmes that he liked paying taxes because it made him feel like he was buying civilization and when he died he left his entire estate to the United States of America. I believe that a progressive system of income taxation is valid and I believe that great fortunes should be taxed upon death and possibly broken up. I think this is important not only for the reasons outlined by Carnagie in The Gospel of Wealth, but no less because I am opposed in principle to plutocracy. On the other hand, I have serious misgivings over the fact that those tax dollars are then spent for pet projects of Congressmen rather than the pubic good. There used to be a guy in Congress named Proxmire who had his golden fleece award which purported to indict the worst offenders in the court of public opinion. And then of course there is the waste fraud and abuse which we see with Obama, and no less with his predecessor. So in sum, this business of spreading the wealth is not without its ambiguous effects. And when people in the middle class are sailing as close to the wind as they are now it is a precarious business to put the brunt of it on their shoulders as Obama’s policies clearly do.

    2. To your second point, I am keenly aware of the fact that the disparity between rich and poor has grown astronomically over the past thirty years. In a corporate environment some CEOs make as much as 250 times what line workers make. I am cognizant as well of the games insiders play to enrich themselves including huge bonuses for failing performance and issuing stock options in preparation for the sale of the company and leveraged buy-outs and all the rest, and outsourcing American jobs. But I also see it from the other end, where the rubber meets the road. I saw it in the closed factories and the stories of displaced factory workers in Indiana, and beautiful towns in central Pennsylvania like Kitani which sits on the banks of a great river Allegany River which was once a great place to raise a family and now has lost its economic base and when I canvassed there going from door to door to find Hillary’s supporters who were typically poor white and hispanics–not blacks, I found living conditions which were truly deplorable and reminded me of some of the rundown parts of New York City, with drug dealers sitting around in cars, and cops just looking the other way. Not only am I aware of the disparity, that along with the the loss of our competitive edge where what drew me to Hillary and her brilliant plan to put this nation on the right track, only to have that dream destroyed by the latest iteration of the corporate stooge.

    3. As to your third point, it is subsumed by the prior comments. The only additional point I would make is that there will be no economic recovery if he raises the tax rates on small business. They are the ones who produced 100% of the jobs last year and big corporations actually lost jobs. Where small business is concerned Webster got it right. For example, I have a friend in Indiana who has a friend that owns two Wendy’s franchises which she built up from scratch through many 70 hour weeks. Today she employs 120 employees, and tell my friend that if Obama mandates and tax increase go through then she will be forced to lay off half her workforce, because right now she is sailing close to the wind. Obama has never run so much as a hot dog stand nor have any of his Chicago cronies. How then can he understand that the power to tax is the power to destroy. And even if he did understand he would not give a damned.

  87. On second thought, I realize he does know that the power to tax is the power to destroy because that is what he proposes to do with the coal industry and other organizations he does not like.

  88. Come on, wbboei, you are too smart to believe Obama is a socialist. He’s to the right of Hillary on every single domestic issue, and she’s not a socialist. Remember conservatives consider FDR and LBJ socialists, and he’s no where near FDR or LBJ on the issues. Honestly, conservatives use the “socialism” label for a host of reasons, none of which are evidence-based. One, he’s black, and in this country, it’s a common knock on black politicians by whites that they are “socialist”. Second, Congress, and the last Congress under Bush for which the public associates more with the current president simply because of the timing, have had to infuse the economy with lots of capital, this can make someone to the right an easy mark for “socialism”, particularly to those who have never lived under a socialist leader, but remember the bank bailouts were passed under Bush, yet no one would call him a “socialist”. Finally, he speaks in very grandiose manner, which recalls several socialist (and facist) leaders of the past. Finally, the Democrats agenda items; health care, financial regulations, educational funding, environmental issues, are all issues that require at least some capital infusion from the feds, or some form of regulation. The Republicans never propose regulations, or government spending on things like health care so anything the Democrats do with these issues, these jokers will call socialism. The much more valid, evidence-based criticism of Obama comes from his left.
    —————————–
    If you go back and read what I wrote above you will see that my theory is that Obama is a proponent of state capitalism which is different from socialism.

    Let that sink in for a moment.

    And I also said I could be wrong.

    Give that a moment as well.

    Now let me tell you something else. I have a close friend who was borne in China, emigrated to Viet Nam, Laos and Thailand before coming to the United States. He personally witnessed three successful communist revolutions. He will swear to you that Obama is a communist. He said before they take power, the communists would tell everyone what they wanted to hear, complain about the status quo and promise that after the revolution, the they could call the bird from the heaven to the palm of their hand. But once they seized power everything “changed” and there was no longer any hope. My Cuban friend who witnessed the same phenomenon half a world away when Castro overthrew Baptista. Both of them see Obama as a leftist based on their own life experiences. So who are we to say they are wrong. Have we lived through what they did? My Cuban friend sees disquieting parallels between ACORN and Castro’s Committes for The Preservation of the Revolution.

  89. IMHO

    The Zero wants the messy healthcare debacle voted on, passed and put to rest this month because he wants to move on to Immigration. For Dims who are losing support fast, the focus now could be on keeping the hispanic vote in tact for November.

    Rise Hillary, Rise.

  90. Andersoen,

    I’m not sure what you are saying. But if you are for an amnesty bill for illegals to keep the Hispanic vote, then they will lose everyone else. The last amnesty bill paved the way for massive illegal immigration to this country which has been a disaster and enncouraged immigrants to believe that our laws are meaningless.

    I hope that Obama pursues this policy. It will be the end of him and his partyas it exists today.

  91. The fraud thinks that any health care bill is better than none. I guess we will determine how that works in November.

  92. BTW. I don’t remember voting on the US becoming a bilingual country or voting on what that second language would be. We do have a french speaking neighbor to our north.

    I speak 3 languages….none of them spanish. I am not particularly a fan of the spanish culture or language.
    We have effectively given over control of our country to people who entered or remained illegally…..they will be the largest voting block in just a few years.

    Much of California’s financial demise is rooted in an out of control illegal migration….beyond what they can afford to assimilate. I live in a town overrun with illegal immigrants. Our taxes have doubled, crime is increased and a host of other problems.

  93. Admin (and anyone else who might know…)

    May I ask…

    Do you have any information on whether the DNC ever investigated any of the 2,000 allegations of caucus fraud. Is there any documentation whatever or has this all been swept under the rug? (I’m sure I know the answer, but I was just curious whether Dean et al or Kaine ever put out any statement whatsoever, even to the extent of a “nothing to see here, folks.” I have not found anything).

    Many thanks.

  94. Carol,

    Amnesty. No, I am not in favor of that. I am a Native Californian, and the illegals have ruined the healthcare system, increased taxes and crime. I left the state.

    We are in agreement.

    Hi Anti!!

  95. NewMexicoFan said:
    The fraud thinks that any health care bill is better than none.

    ========================

    Unfortunately, some months ago Bill Clinton said the same thing about this bill.

  96. wbboei said:
    He personally witnessed three successful communist revolutions. He will swear to you that Obama is a communist. He said before they take power, the communists would tell everyone what they wanted to hear, complain about the status quo and promise that after the revolution, the they could call the bird from the heaven to the palm of their hand. But once they seized power everything “changed” and there was no longer any hope. My Cuban friend who witnessed the same phenomenon half a world away when Castro overthrew Baptista. Both of them see Obama as a leftist based on their own life experiences.

    ================

    By ‘communist’ and ‘leftist’, do they mean the same thing we mean?

    Possible undistributed middle there.

    I’ve heard that in Italy, anyone who supports birth control and divorce is called a ‘communist’ (because there’s a big conflict there between the communists and the Catholic Church).

  97. http://thehill.com/homenews/house/86577-scrambling-for-votes-dems-face-uphill-climb-to-pass-health-reform

    House Democratic leaders don’t have the votes to pass healthcare reform. At least not yet.

    Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has expressed confidence that when push comes to shove, healthcare reform will pass Congress. But there will be plenty of pushing in the days ahead.

    Pelosi is clearly down in the vote count. Thirty-four House Democrats are either firm no votes or leaning no, according to The Hill’s whip list. Dozens more are undecided. [snip]

    Two committee chairmen — Reps. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) and Collin Peterson (D-Minn.) — say they are firm nos and three others, Reps. John Spratt (D-S.C.), Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.) and Jim Oberstar (D-Minn.), are undecided.

    If every House member votes and all Republicans reject the bill as expected, Pelosi can only afford 37 Democratic defections. That breakdown of the votes would lead to a 216-215 tally.

    Of the 34 no votes/leaning no votes, eight of them backed the House-backed bill in November. Meanwhile, nine Democrats who voted no last fall are publicly on the fence.

    Friday’s decision by Democratic leaders to forge ahead without the backing of anti-abortion rights Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) has dealt a blow to the chances the lower chamber can pass a health bill.

  98. I have the sound off on Candy and Axelrod. Their is the smurky, smart axx look on his face especially the eyes. It is like he is saying who cares about this, I run EVERYTHING, and I really don’t care what the American people think.

    The convention all over again. How long will the Dims continue to let this happen. Are there no upright honest people left who are interesting in our democracy, and not power and money?

    I am not sure there are.

  99. That is the stupidest statement that has ever been said–the republicans had ten years to focus on cost.

    In other words, Bambi, the old captain was steering the Titanic in the direction of an iceberg prior to the time you took the helm. Right?

    Yes!!!! (The same blustery yes we heard when they asked him if he would sit down with Iran, Morth Korea and other fine Christian gentlemen within one year of taking office without pre-conditions)

    So then you come along, promise to “change” course and the American People (are stupid enough to) turn over the helm to you. Right?

    Yes!!!

    Even though you had never set foot aboard a ship before in your life?

    Yes!!! You don’t need experience, navigational training, all you need is an ounce of judgment and a pound of gall.

    Sure. But instead of changing course, you say full speed ahead damned the torpedoes, I have got my lifeboat commandeered, so sorry abut the rest of you, hope you know how to swim.

    Yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Well then . . . . fuck you Obama. We need a new captain before it is too late. Get out of the wheel house you delusional fool. You make Captain Queeg look like Lord Nelson.

  100. Please god make them stop calling this the health bill. It is toxic waste–and toxic waste is not known to be healthy. Unless you are an insurance company. In that case it is manna from heaven.

  101. wbboei, 0bama is a fucking wimp, a waffleman. He is passive aggressive. He can’t call into question Clinton’s policies or anything like that directly. He does not have the courage to say directly he, and he alone is better than the clown we had for 8 years and the other guy who preceded him. So he takes these indirect jabs. Indirect jabs that only a few can understand because he fears offending a majority if he is direct. He is a fucking coward. A megalomaniac plus a coward.

  102. The state of their delusion . . . dan perrin asks the pivotal question: “Is Passing This Health Care (deform) Bill Forgiveable?”–meaning will the electorate forgive the party? Here is his answer to that question. . .
    ————————————————–
    The vast majority of likely voters strongly oppose ObamaCare — and the best word to sum up the emotions and frustrations of those voters who have had to endure the insanity of the health care jihadists is that they hate ObamaCare.

    And the two largest subsets of those strongly opposed are independents and senior citizens. Just ask Scott Brown’s campaign staff. He figured out real early that he could just walk into a nursing home and tell the seniors ObamaCare would cut half a trillion from Medicare.

    Done. Next nursing home please.

    And then, this fall in the mid-term elections, add ridicule to Medicare cuts: Washington thinks you can lower the deficit by spending $2.5 trillion on ObamaCare. Really. Congress says so.

    Oh, lets also not forget the Senate. Their corruption of rules and fairness: the Christmas Eve vote, the buying and selling of an abortion vote and the Louisiana Purchase. (Senator Nelson and Senator Landrieu have already made one 60 second ad on, strangely, banking reform.)

    When the Bluest of Blue states sends to Washington a Senator who campaigned on shooting ObamaCare in the head, the irrational response from the Dems is that they redouble their efforts to pass ObamaCare anyway.

    The Dems message is one the likely voter is already familiar with when it comes to the Democrats and ObamaCare: we are not listening; we refuse to listen.

    By the way, humans generally get really angry when they keep trying to be speak up and be heard, but instead are ignored, dismissed and disrespected. They feel humiliated. They get angry. Humiliating and angering voters with the Dem’s open-wide-we-are-going-to-cram-this-down-your-throat will not be forgotten. Or forgiven.

    And the stench of corruption continues: we are going to have a vote that passes the bill in the House without voting on it. Ignoring the Constitution and making up your own rules to force something on the country the public hates will result in a reaction that is not pleasant.

    But the Dems think they are on a mission from God.

    All in a year where Dems are down in the polls, Congress has never been more disliked by the average citizen and the Speaker’s approval rating is near pond-scum. ObamaCare even shaved a third of the Trillion Dollar President’s approval rating off his Oneness.

    And ironically, Dems are being told that voting for ObamaCare is the morally right thing to do.

    Is the right thing to politically destroy yourself, your friends and your colleagues?

    Will the public forgive attempting to pass something they hate? Yes.

    Will the public forgive passing something they hate? No.

    Acting in your own political interest always trumps political suicide. Living to fight another day is not only moral, it is a smarter.

    Unless, of course, you are irrational and delusional and committed to political suicide. Then, you are very dangerous and very scary. And Americans reactions to people and things that are very dangerous and very scary vary widely.

    There are 34 No votes now, according to The Hill’s whip count. Just three more No votes means the bill dies. And there are dozens of Dems who are undecided.

    While the White House and the Speaker may be hell bent on destroying themselves, their party and their colleagues politically, there are at least three more Dems who are not.

  103. I have always felt that the Fraud doesn’t care about health care, he only wants to pass a health care ‘bill’ to claim success and trump Hillary’s real Universal Health Care bill.

    He is and has been jealous of her for all the reasons we admire her, and to pass this crap bill and put his ‘historical’ name on it……..is all he cares about.

    If the health care bill was important to him in content, he wouldn’t have left it to Reid and Nancy to construct it like a meatloaf of rotting food out of the fridge.

    He disgusts me to the core.

  104. If this health care deform bill passes then it will be “Pyrrhic Victory” for the dimocratic party. Six months ago I had lunch with a state campaign manager for McCain. I posted the results of that conversation on this blog, to give everyone a sense of how the other party was seeing things. He told me that cap and trade was doa, health care would pass but it would be nothing anyone would like and that Obama would be a one term president because his message of change would be shown to be nothing more than a charade and his Chicago would be exposed in a way that did not happen during the campaign. This was before New Jersey, Virginia and Massachusetts. If I spoke to him now he would probably say that the democratic party is between a rock and a hard place: a failure (which is actually a better scenario for them politically speaking) or a Pyrrhic Victory, which for the Republicans will prove to be the gift that keeps giving. The devil is not just the details, it is the risks and problems which will occur in implementation, and the fact that when the economic day of reckoning does take place the cost assumptions built into this monster will be shown to be a devil’s lie. And meanwhile Bob Woodward keeps writing his book about this White House–a sequel I am sure to Treasure Island. And while all this is going on the defectors can look themselves in the mirror and say: “dulce et decorum est, pro parti mori”–sweet is it to die for one’s party.

    Pyrrhic victory
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    A Pyrrhic victory (pronounced /ˈpɪrɪk/) is a victory with such devastating cost to the victor, it carries the implication that another such will ultimately cause defeat.

    The phrase is named after King Pyrrhus of Epirus, whose army suffered irreplaceable casualties in defeating the Romans at Heraclea in 280 BC and Asculum in 279 BC during the Pyrrhic War. After the latter battle, Plutarch relates in a report by Dionysius:
    The armies separated; and, it is said, Pyrrhus replied to one that gave him joy of his victory that one more such victory would utterly undo him. For he had lost a great part of the forces he brought with him, and almost all his particular friends and principal commanders; there were no others there to make recruits, and he found the confederates in Italy backward. On the other hand, as from a fountain continually flowing out of the city, the Roman camp was quickly and plentifully filled up with fresh men, not at all abating in courage for the loss they sustained, but even from their very anger gaining new force and resolution to go on with the war.[1]

  105. wbboei, 0bama is a fucking wimp, a waffleman. He is passive aggressive. He can’t call into question Clinton’s policies or anything like that directly. He does not have the courage to say directly he, and he alone is better than the clown we had for 8 years and the other guy who preceded him. So he takes these indirect jabs. Indirect jabs that only a few can understand because he fears offending a majority if he is direct. He is a fucking coward. A megalomaniac plus a coward.
    ——————————
    You will get no argument from me on this.

  106. By ‘communist’ and ‘leftist’, do they mean the same thing we mean?

    Possible undistributed middle there.

    I’ve heard that in Italy, anyone who supports birth control and divorce is called a ‘communist’ (because there’s a big conflict there between the communists and the Catholic Church).
    ———————————-
    That latter contention is hyperbole. The former is a matter of how it feels to people who have lived through communist revolutions, which the rest of us have not. Also, it is a proven fact that global bankers backed each of the communist revolutions of he 19th century. In Russia you had the Shiff group, in Cuba you had wealthy merchants like Julio Lobo, and I have no doubt that monied interests financed Mao–I just cannot tell you who they are off the top of my head. The German political philosopher and historian Oswald Spengler made this observation eighty years ago while writing his seminal book The Decline of the West.

  107. Shadowfax
    If the health care bill was important to him in content, he wouldn’t have left it to Reid and Nancy to construct it like a meatloaf of rotting food out of the fridge.

    ===============

    Alternatively, he is cooly and rationally doing just what his powerful insurance backers wanted: preventing any good Clintonian hc system that would threaten them, while producing a phoney hc bill that gives them a forced market.

    Backers like James Roosevelt of the Rules and By-Laws Committee — who is CEO of an insurance company.

  108. Shadowfax,

    He didn’t leave it to Reid and Pelosi. He gave it to Baucus directly and the inedible stew that Baucus chunked out, is what Obama wants. That simple.

    Does he care? Sure he does. He needs to repay James Roosevelt for giving him the nomination.

  109. wbboei said:
    Also, it is a proven fact that global bankers backed each of the communist revolutions of he 19th century. In Russia you had the Shiff group, in Cuba you had wealthy merchants like Julio Lobo, and I have no doubt that monied interests financed Mao–I just cannot tell you who they are off the top of my head. The German political philosopher and historian Oswald Spengler made this observation eighty years ago while writing his seminal book The Decline of the West.

    ===============

    Interesting. At this point I wouldn’t be surprised to hear that ALL messianic heroes who are successfully swept into office — are creations or at least pawns of money backers like Axelrod.

    As were Hitler and Franco, weren’t they? (Obviously. Axelrod ever forgot to change his mustache.)

  110. I’d exect the left-wing blogs would be on this, but just in case they’ve missed it (and in case it’s a correct quote) — here’s a chance for someone to compare Stupak’s words here to his actual voting record on programs to help poor children after they’re born.

    Attributed to Stupak:
    “If you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more. That’s one of the arguments I’ve been hearing,” Stupak says. “Money is their hang-up. Is this how we now value life in America? If money is the issue — come on, we can find room in the budget. This is life we’re talking about.”
    http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/rep._stupak_pro-choice_democrats_say_abortion_funding_needed_to_keep_too_ma/

  111. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gI9vyfvCnXmpztSiFtdbmIPngauwD9EEE7180

    The Democrat’s chief vote counter in the House says that right now there aren’t enough votes to pass President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul.

    But Rep. James Clyburn of South Carolina says he’s confident that the legislation will pass. He says the White House and Democratic leaders in Congress have gotten to a point where there’s a way to send the measure to the president’s desk for his signature.

    Clyburn tells NBC’s “Meet the Press” that “a comfort level” has been reached among the House, Senate and White House on details about the sweeping legislation. But he concedes that House supporters don’t have the necessary votes right now.

  112. I actually think that the Fraud, Reid, Pel are on the billionaires bank roll. They don’t obviously care about the “party’ anymore than they “care” about the American people. Once the fix is in, they can ride into the sunset with the rewards promised to them by the billionaire club. People losing the jobs, Dem party imploding…they don’t give a rats a*s..:”I got mine”is the theme of the day…

    below from Ace…

    Follow on ObamaCare™ “fix” bill will likely destroy millions of part time jobs
    —Purple Avenger
    Continuing with our recent theme of unbridled optimism and joy.

    …A press report earlier this week about a possible new wrinkle in ObamaCare demonstrates that the Democratic Party’s alleged interest in job creation is feigned at best and hostile at worst. On Monday, the Associated Press reported that a new iteration of the bill pushed by House Democrats “would require businesses to count part-time workers when calculating penalties for failing to provide health coverage for employees. Smaller businesses would be exempt. The Senate bill would count only full-time workers in applying the penalties, but under the change, described by a Democratic aide, two part-time workers would count as one full-time worker.”

    Since the vast majority of companies do not make health coverage available to part-timers, this proposal is best seen as a direct payroll tax on companies who rely heavily on them. In the fantasy world of Washington, this appears to be an attempt to force companies to hire more people to work full-time or to extend coverage to part-timers on their own. If it ever arrives in the real world, what it will really do is raise prices, increase unemployment, impede economic growth, and put thousands of companies out of business. It will also virtually destroy the part-time employment market, shutting the door on students, homemakers, and others who can’t possibly commit to working full-time, and shouldn’t’t be required to…

  113. interesting…especially after the Fraud debacle with the SCOTUS
    ************************

    Clarence Thomas’ Wife Forms Tea Party to Fight Obama’s ‘Hard-Left Agenda’
    March 14, 2010
    (ChattahBox)—Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, may have some impartiality and conflicts of interest problems ahead. Thomas, a conservative Bush nominee, was part of the 5-4 majority decision in the controversial case, Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission, allowing corporations to use their unlimited profits to influence federal elections. Now, his wife Virginia Thomas, a fan of Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, is taking advantage of the newly released spigot of corporate cash. She has formed a tea party lobbying group to rake in corporate money to fight against President Obama’s “hard-left agenda.” She describes herself, as an “ordinary citizen,” but that’s obviously not the case. Besides being married to a judge on the highest court in the land, Virginia Thomas is a former right-wing political operative for the Heritage Foundation and former Republican Rep. Dick Armey, who now runs FreedomWorks, a front group for corporate interests that funds tea party groups.

    The LA Times reported on Virginia Thomas’ new tea party venture on Sunday. Thomas, 52, who goes by Ginny, formed Liberty Central Inc., in January, to solicit corporate donations to fund tea party activism based on conservative “core principles.” Her bio on the group’s Web site lists her as President and CEO and gushes that she “finds the new citizen activists inspirational!” And says, she plans to use Liberty Central, “as a clearinghouse for new and more effective online activism.” The LA Times noted, “As a a 501(c)(4) non-profit, Liberty Central can raise unlimited amounts of corporate money and largely avoid disclosing its donors.”

    Ginny Thomas points out she is a fan of hate talker Rush Limbaugh and other right-wing talk radio hosts:

    “Ginni, the ‘proud’ Nebraskan, is a fan of Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin and Laura Ingraham and other talk radio hosts. She is intrigued by Glenn Beck and listening carefully.”

    The list of names under the endorsements section of Liberty Central’s Web site, is even more revealing. At the top of the list is Mark Meckler and Jenny Beth Martin, of the Tea Party Patriots, which is closely associated with FreedomWorks. Other endorsers, include Donald Rumsfeld, former Secretary of Defense under the Bush administration, the Heritage Foundation and vilified Washington lobbyist Rick Berman, known as Dr. Evil and dubbed by 60 minutes, as “the booze and food industries’ weapon of mass destruction.”

    Ginny Thomas recently spoke at the CPAC conference, praising the teabaggers. “I adore all the new citizen patriots who are rising up across this country,” she said. “I have felt called to the front lines with you, with my fellow citizens, to preserve what made America great.”

    “I am an ordinary citizen from Omaha, Neb., who just may have the chance to preserve liberty along with you and other people like you,” she continued. And she pledged to fight against what she called President Obama’s “hard-left agenda.”

    Although there are no rules banning the political activism of Supreme Court Justices’ wives, the corporate money pouring into Ginny Thomas’ group will largely remain hidden, making it easy for pay-for-play schemes, in which a corporation with a case before the highest court may try to influence the outcome, by donating large sums of money to Liberty Central. In such cases, Justice Thomas would be required to disclose a possible conflict of interest, but recusal from the case would be entirely up to Thomas.

    Ginnie Thomas dismissed concerns of conflicts of interest, saying “I don’t involve myself in litigation.” Justice Thomas declined to comment.

    As pointed out by the LA Times, this is not the first time Ginnie Thomas’ right-wing activism has raised eyebrows:

    “In 2000, while at the Heritage Foundation, she was recruiting staff for a possible George W. Bush administration as her husband was hearing the case that would decide the election. When journalists reported her work, Thomas said she saw no conflict of interest and that she rarely discussed court matters with her husband.”

    Ginnie Thomas’ group Liberty Central plans to become involved in the November mid-term elections, but she was vague on specifics.

    See the LA Times for more.

  114. gonzotx
    March 14th, 2010 at 11:23 pm

    I actually think that the Fraud, Reid, Pel are on the billionaires bank roll. They don’t obviously care about the “party’ anymore than they “care” about the American people. Once the fix is in, they can ride into the sunset with the rewards promised to them by the billionaire club. People losing the jobs, Dem party imploding…they don’t give a rats a*s..:”I got mine”is the theme of the day…

    =================

    I’m inclinded to agree. Individual greed makes a lot more sense to me than some global philosophical plot.

  115. gonzotx,

    I heart you with regards to your thoughts on abortion. My beliefs have followed a similar path. Just to let you know, there are progressives who do not support abortion, and to me, their stance is more progressive than abortion supporters.

  116. By the way, to correct something above that needs to be corrected because no one should be led to believe incorrect information written as fact, there have not been “millions” killed in Iraq.

    Here’s a good website for info on this.

    http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

  117. Yes, many innocents have died in Iraq, and my comments above are not made to dispute that fact. Extreme exaggeration makes a weak foundation for
    an argument.

  118. All the speculation of Obama being or not being a socialist is nonsensical. It is obvious that he loves socialism for the little people, while privately coveting the lifestyle of the rich which seems to be trait that is so typical of many socialist/marxist elites. They’re special, so they don’t need to practice what they preach.

  119. RE: The state of their delusion . . . dan perrin asks the pivotal question: “Is Passing This Health Care (deform) Bill Forgiveable?”–meaning will the electorate forgive the party? Here is his answer to that question. . .
    _____________________________________________________________

    I am bitter about the product AND the process. I will cling to my bitterness. I will cling to my bitterness and to all those who voted for all the spending, deficits, and fundmental transformation(s) that will CHANGE my nation into one that my two little great-grandchildren will have to suffer through, there will be no rest for you for I make you one promise. When I am forced to take that RED pill by the government, I WILL COME BACK TO HAUNT YOU. There will be no rest for you.

  120. asks those in the ‘abortion’ debate to think of the method that my step-grandmother informed me about when I was a pre-teen. The answer to the present day abortion problems is birth control method answer she suggested. She told me that the best birth control was an aspriin.

    The instructions were: hold it between your knees and do not let it fall.

    I am all for providing as much aspirin as needed through MY government. But, I am NOT for financing someone else’s abortion,especially when used as a method of birth control.

  121. From a well-researched article at
    http://www.prochoiceforum.org.uk/psy_ocr2.php

    Both unintended and unwanted childbearing can have negative health, social, and psychological consequences. Health problems include greater chances for illness and death for both mother and child. In addition, such childbearing has been linked with a variety of social problems, including divorce, poverty, child abuse, and juvenile delinquency. In one study, unwanted children were found less likely to have had a secure family life. As adults they were more likely to engage in criminal behavior, be on welfare, and receive psychiatric services. Another found that children who were unintended by their mothers had lower self-esteem than their intended peers 23 years later.

    ….
    Longitudinal research has found that when abortion is denied, the resulting children are more likely to have a variety of social and psychological problems, even when they are born to adult women who are healthy with intact marriages and adequate economic resources. A long term study of children born in 1961-63 to women twice denied abortion for the same pregnancy and pair matched control children born to women who did not request abortion showed significant differences, always in disfavor of the unwanted children. All the children were born into complete families with similar socioeconomic circumstances. Being ‘born unwanted’ carried a risk of negative psychosocial development, especially for only children who had no siblings. At age nine they did poorer in school (despite no differences on intelligence tests), were less popular with classmates, and were more frequently described by mothers and teachers as being difficult. By age 21 -23 they reported less job satisfaction, more conflict with coworkers and supervisors, and more disappointments in love. By age 35 they had experienced more mental health problems.

  122. Here is the real reason BO decided to change his getaway travel plans to Indonesia and Australia.

    —————————————————-

    Islamic group protests Obama’s visit to Indonesia
    AP – Sunday, March 14SendIM StoryPrint.JAKARTA, Indonesia – Thousands of followers of a conservative Islamic group held peaceful demonstrations Sunday in several Indonesian cities against the planned visit of President Barack Obama.

    Witnesses and police said members of the Islamic group Hizb ut-Tahrir protested in East Java’s provincial capital of Surabaya, South Sulawesi’s capital of Makassar and three other cities. The group, an international network which believes Muslims should unite in a single global state governed by Islamic law, urged the Indonesian government to reject the American leader’s trip, scheduled for late March.

    “We know Obama spent his childhood in Indonesia, but as president his policy contradicts the people’s interests in Indonesia,” protest organizer Nasrudin said in Makassar.

    Hundreds of police monitored the protests, which drew around 2,000 people outside the U.S. Consulate in Surabaya and another 2,000 in the streets of Makassar. No violence was reported. Dozens of demonstrators also rallied in the Java city of Yogyakarta, the West Kalimantan town of Pontianak and the eastern town of Mataram.

    Men and women wearing black veils held up yellow banners reading “Reject the visit of Obama” as they marched in the streets of the two larger cities.

    “He doesn’t work for a peaceful world … on the contrary, Obama is the same as George Bush, who has destroyed the Muslim world in Iraq and Afghanistan. Therefore we have to reject the visit of Obama to Indonesia,” said Nasrudin, who, like many Indonesians, uses only one name.

    Indonesia is the world’s most populous Muslim nation. Most of its nearly 200 million Muslims practice a moderate form of the faith.

    The country’s largest Muslim organization, Nahdlatul Ulama, and its second largest, Muhamadyah, have both welcomed Obama’s visit.

  123. Some of the above comments here on abortion are shocking…just shocking and misinformed. There are many mature, married women whose contraception fails. There are victims of date rape. There are many varied circumstances that can put a woman in the situation of confronting an unwanted birth.

    No one is “pro” abortion. Available contraception, and good sex ed limit the unfortunate choice being necessary.

  124. Not to change the subject, but New Mexico has two teams going to the Big Dance. Now if the sports writers can learn the difference between UNM (University of New Mexico, located in Albuquerque), and NMSU (New Mexico State University, located in Las Cruces), we would be happy. But then a lot of people still think that New Mexico is a foreign country. Just read an article this morning referring to UNM, but they were called New Mexico State, and they get paid to write those errors.

    Sounds Like politics doesn’t it. I use to have a job where I had to perform 100% correct. Too bad that does not apply every where else.

  125. Oh yes, those who disagree surely must be misinformed. How else can they have a different opinion. You are misinformed about me being misinformed. See how that argument works? Not all Democrats support abortion. I accept that. When will pro-choice people do the same?

  126. Our girl never stops and remembers all that work for her and support her around the world.

    —————————————————–

    Daily Appointments: Daily Appointments Schedule for March 15, 2010
    Mon, 15 Mar 2010 08:34:59 -0500

    Daily Appointments Schedule for March 15, 2010

    Washington, DC

    March 15, 2010

    ——————————————————————————–

    SECRETARY OF STATE CLINTON

    10:15 a.m. Secretary Clinton hosts a Ribbon-Cutting Ceremony for the New Harry S. Truman Building Employee Showers, at the Department of State.
    (CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)

    10:30 a.m. Secretary Clinton hosts an Appreciation Event for Haiti Earthquake Task Force Volunteers, at the Department of State.
    (OPEN PRESS COVERAGE)
    Pre-set time for cameras: 9:30 a.m. from the 23rd Street Entrance.
    Final access time for journalists and still cameras: 10:00 a.m. at the 23rd Street Entrance.
    For more information, click here.

    11:00 a.m. Secretary Clinton meets with Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice, at the Department of State.
    (CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)

    2:40 p.m. Secretary Clinton meets with Special Representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke, at the Department of State.
    (CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)

    3:20 p.m. Secretary Clinton meets with Ambassador to Afghanistan Karl Eikenberry, at the Department of State.
    (CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)

    4:00 p.m. Secretary Clinton hosts a Swearing-In Ceremony for Assistant Secretary for Western Hemisphere Affairs Arturo Valenzuela, at the Department of State.
    (CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)

    PRESS BRIEFING SCHEDULE

    1:00 p.m. Daily Press Briefing

    ###

  127. What a tremendous new way to stay informed with others around the world.Hillary you must run again.The world needs you NOW.

    —————————————————–

    Press Releases: Department of State Launches New Tool to Foster Online Open Dialogue
    Mon, 15 Mar 2010 08:11:33 -0500

    Department of State Launches New Tool to Foster Online Open Dialogue

    Washington, DC

    March 15, 2010

    ——————————————————————————–

    The Department of State today launches “Opinion Space”, an interactive site hosted on State.gov that seeks to foster global conversations on foreign affairs.

    “Opinion Space will harness the power of connection technologies to provide a unique forum for international dialogue. This is an example of what we call 21st century statecraft and an opportunity to extend our engagement beyond the halls of government directly to the people of the world. I can’t wait to be a part of this exciting new conversation,” said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

    Opinion Space, developed jointly by the Department of State and the University of California at Berkeley’s Center for New Media (BCNM), is accessible to anyone around the world.

    Opinion Space invites users to share their perspectives and ideas on U.S. foreign policy in an innovative visual “opinion map” that will illustrate which ideas result in the most discussion and which ideas are judged most insightful by the community of participants

    “This map is not based on geography or predetermined categories, but on similarity of opinion,” said UC Professor and BCNM director Ken Goldberg, “Opinion Space is designed to ‘depolarize’ discussions by including all participants on a level playing field.”

    To join the discussion on Opinion Space visit: http://state.gov/opinionspace and see where you stand with respect to others around the world. You can already see the emerging opinion map in response to the first discussion question: “If you met U. S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, what issue would you tell her about, why is it important to you, and what specific suggestions do you have for addressing it?” Future discussion questions will be on a range of foreign policy priorities.

    For more information, please contact: Katie Dowd, Director of New Media @ State Department, DowdKW@State.gov or Ken Goldberg, Berkeley Center for New Media, at: goldberg@berkeley.edu or at 415-722-5649.

  128. nobomo,

    Try reading past the first sentence:
    From a well-researched article at
    http://www.prochoiceforum.org.uk/psy_ocr2.php

    …. has been linked …. In one study, unwanted children were found …. were more likely …. Another found that
    ….
    Longitudinal research has found that ….
    A long term study of children born in 1961-63 to women twice denied abortion for the same pregnancy and pair matched control children born to women who did not request abortion showed significant differences, always in disfavor of the unwanted children.
    …. they did poorer in school … By age 21 -23 they reported ….
    By age 35 they had experienced …. more mental health problems.

  129. I’m sorry, but linking to an obviously biased prochoice site that touts a couple of studies that you say are well researched (how did you determine that anyway?) is not helpful. Notice, I haven’t written that abortion should be illegal. I’ve only written my personal disdain for it based on my belief that life is being snuffed out for whatever reason given. I understand abortion in cases of rape, physical health danger
    to the mother, and possibly severe deformity of the fetus. If need be,
    I would not fight to keep it legal, though.

Comments are closed.