HELLO NEWSHOLE, UPDATE YOUR BLOG PLEASE.

Obama looked like a blithering idiot. Hillary held her own, quite well I thought.

John Edwards handled himself intelligently and with dignity. He spoke clearly about the issues and his stand on the issues. I really felt he might be my candidate.

Oh wait, that's right, the media doesn't count Edwards as a viable candidate! What was I thinking! Thank God mainstream media is here to instruct us on who is a candidate and who isn't.

5 - It's rather amusing that what Bill Clinton says and does seems to get so much attention in this campaign, yet his support for Kerry didn't much matter in 2004. Perhaps he is being overly aggressive, but, by the same token, Obama is coming across as a bit of a whiner. The campaigns need to be about the issues, not a discussion about the conduct of the campaigns, yet that is what the MSM jumps on at every opportunity. Last night's debate is already being characterized as something akin to a cage match, and that is certainly how it started out, but the tenor of the dialogue at the end of the debate was much different. Nobody seems to have noticed that. (And can CNN handle a debate anymore without turning it into some sort of circus?)

4 - Chuck Norris' logic for choosing Huckabee over McCain is interesting. Personally, I can't trust the judgment of a man who looks in the mirror every day and thinks that dye job looks good.

3 - Let's see. James Brolin as Ronald Reagan in a controversial movie that got yanked from CBS. Josh Brolin as George W. Bush in an Oliver Stone film. If Streisand's husband ticked off the Republicans, something tells me her stepson won't have any better luck.

2 - Archie Manning must've missed that installment of the TKO Report. The poor man was clearly in agony.

WPiTW - I'm surprised Coulter is not leading a charge to have the Arnold Engineering Development Center's name changed back to Camp Forrest.

M&M (Sent Monday, January 21, 2008 10:38 PM)

Former President Jimmy Carter is far from classless --honesty is rare in politics isn't it?

Jimmy Carter is the most honest president this country has ever had; what he has done since leaving office is amazing --if MORE ex-presidents and vice presidents had spoken out against Bush before the Iraq war --perhaps things "may" have been different!! The "club of ex-presidents" is a club that should pack up --thank you Jimmy Carter!!

PEACE!!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/21/AR2008012102437.html?wpisrc=newsletter

Fuller coverage of the shouting match. This was and is an absolute disgrace, and I'm less inclined than ever to support either of these two juveniles.

The other spouses have been out there. They just aren't as fun to attack. Why attack a woman with cancer or a woman with kids who is doing exactly what every other female spouse of a candidate has done, which is stand by her man.

UPDATE THE BLOG

newshole,how many hours in between updates?

Newshole wake up

Anybody seen this article from today's NY Times about Guiliani?  Very interesting reading.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/22/us/politics/22giuliani.html?_r=1&hp=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1201024983-RguAd+4XzEvo06+dv5BqlA

Just what we need, another administration that digs up dirt on anyone who dares to question or express a dissenting opinion.

Just as well I got nothin' today.  Somebody's asleep at the switch.  If this were an oldtime train wreck ballad instead of a blog, somebody would done be saying a fond farewell to friends and loved ones.

Come to think of it, it is more like a train wreck than a blog.

Jon Stewart's reaction to Bill Clinton's claim was sceptical to say the least.  He was curious as to how Bill and Chelsea, who were surrounded by Secret Service and press, could hear anything while walking through a casino.  

It's one of these two URLs (both are funny).

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=148077
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=148079

Advantages are advantages. "Fairness" and "legitimacy" are cute and quaint and cuddly but don't get anyone elected president. Did GWB get into office thru hard work and dint of effort?  Mo Hammond (Sent Monday, January 21, 2008 7:01 PM)

Hi Mo -- How are things going?  I hope you and C A don’t mind if drop in on this discussion.  Cute and quaint and cuddly seem a little like my territory. Obviously, and C A knows this, too, all candidates use the advantages they have.  John Edwards uses his looks, and I’d be willing to bet that sympathy for his wife is something that has at least crossed the Edwardses’ minds.  As far as it goes, there’s nothing wrong with that.  But, however you feel about the Clintons, you have to agree that Bill Clinton’s presence weighs more heavily than Elizabeth Edwards’ presence, sympathy notwithstanding, and certainly more than Michelle Obama’s, attractive and articulate as she surely is.  As I said yesterday, if I were running, and Bill Clinton was my husband, I’d want him right there next to me.

But maybe C A’s point (and I don’t presume to speak for him) is that this question of “fairness” is really just a matter of perspective. What if, for example, Nancy Reagan had run for president in 1988, capitalizing on Ronald Reagan’s 65 percent approval rating at the time?  I’m sure that some folks, democrat and republican alike, might have reasonably believed this was an unfair attempt to end run term limits.  And what if, as I blogged last week, Michael Bloomberg decides to enter the 2008 election as a third-party candidate?  If he does, he’s likely to bring at least a billion dollars to the table. Whichever way that money rolls, it’s going to tilt the table.  Viewed from the perspective of the other candidates, do we NOW say unfair?  On what basis?  And if so, then exactly where do we draw the line?  And then, what do we do about it?  To me, the last scenario, at the very least, counsels for campaign spending limits.  But it also highlights that, at least sometimes, there can be a level of unfairness that should not be tolerated.  I personally do not want to see Michael Bloomberg enter this race, and from what I read, Clinton supporters do not want to see that, either.  But like it or not, fair or unfair, it could easily happen.  

NEWSHOLE FOUR HOURS AND NO UPDATE. UPDATE YOUR BLOG PLEASE.

Senator Clinton is flying to California today, “to accept the backing of the United Farm Workers Union. Founded by famed labor activist Cesar Chavez, the union represents a heavily Hispanic work force. Clinton won Nevada's presidential caucuses Saturday in part because of a strong showing among Hispanic voters - a central part of her strategy to win several states holding contests Feb. 5, including California, Arizona and New Mexico.”

I think America has seen enough of George Bush to last us all a lifetime.  A movie about this idiot would be just too much to bear.  Bush has kept a war going for years, completely against the advice of the Pentagon, and at many times deliberatrly working at odds with the Pentagon, for nothing more than personal gain.  If  you want to find out what's really going on in Iraq, read the Asian Times on the net.  It will not only tell you the truth about what is going on in Iraq but scare the crap out of you.  For everyone but the 19% who would still worship George Bush if he took a whiz on their carpet, this non-mainstream media (i.e. not American) provides the information that Washington hides from you.  Look it up on the net.  You'll find today's column on Iraq quite interesting.

The Best Long Term Stimulus Program that the Government could do would be to Pay-Off the National Debt.

Beyond that, make doing Business Cheep here in the U.S.

A Business in a month, will make X amount of Money. From X, they have to pay, A (Utilities) B (Rent) C (Maintenance) D (Taxes) E (Employees) and F (Other Expenses) G (Equipment) which adds up to Y. With whatever left-over, if anything, as Profit.

A Smart Business will set some Profits aside as Capital Reserve for when X doesn't pay Y, and replenish it as soon as possible.

Now when the Government Mandates that the Business pays this and that, which suddenly increases the cost of Y, then the cost either gets passed on in their goods and services, cut expenses where they can, mix the two previous options, or after a time go out of business.

Increases in the Minimum Wage, mandating Health Care, and other things, only stresses the limited budget that that a Business has to work with. And can over time break a business.

I've worked 20hrs in a day in mine, only to make $2.00, or even less after daily expencies. (Thankfully, not everyday or I'd be doing something else.) Being the only person on Payroll, cutting pay means less in savings or spending, so far. But I do get to see how hard it is to make ends meet as I have to pay this, pay that, and pay the other just to be able to start-up yet another day. Last thing my Business needs is Politicos eyeballing it as a Piggybank for some new Social Engineering.

If Government would cut the cost of doing Business, then it would be easier for me to hire help, at lest during Spring, Summer and Fall when Business goes way up in the North Georgia Mountains.

By now someone else has probably blogged this, but CNN is reporting that Senator Clinton and Senator Edwards met privately in Senator Edwards’ green room after last night’s debate.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

“One of the sources said the meeting happened by chance and the conversation consisted of light chatter. The source added that Clinton did jokingly take a jab at Edwards about his beating up on her during the debate.  In fact, the real fireworks were between Clinton and Barack Obama.  An Edwards source noted that it was not surprising the two senators met backstage. ‘That happens back there,’ said the source, who said it has happened ‘more often’ with Obama. ‘It’s tight quarters – we’re all on top of each other.’  The question is — with only two weeks before Super Tuesday — what else was discussed?”

What else?  My guess is that Mrs. Clinton was just looking for a recommendation for a good dry cleaner.  What’s your guess?  

Newshole, what the heck is going on with this blog? Update it or just get rid of it, this is horrible and insulting.

I get the feeling when I listen to Clinton and Edwards, that they would turn the Democratic Party into a National Socialist Worker's Party.

They both see the Government as the Means to solve every Social Problem with the Private Sector as their Bottomless Piggy bank to pay for every program they could dream of.

Which is why I hope that Obama wins the Nomination. As President, I don't think he would be as fast at picking my pocket, and just might even leave a few dollars behind when he's done.

Hey Laura from LA --

Since you seem to like animals as much as I do, I thought you might enjoy this article on how they play political games --

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/22/science/22angi.html?8dpc

“Just as there are myriad strategies open to the human political animal with White House ambitions, so there are a number of nonhuman animals that behave like textbook politicians. Researchers who study highly gregarious and relatively brainy species like rhesus monkeys, baboons, dolphins, sperm whales, elephants and wolves have lately uncovered evidence that the creatures engage in extraordinarily sophisticated forms of politicking, often across large and far-flung social networks…. Wherever animals must pool their talents and numbers into cohesive social groups, scientists said, the better to protect against predators, defend or enlarge choice real estate or acquire mates, the stage will be set for the appearance of political skills — the ability to please and placate, manipulate and intimidate, trade favors and scratch backs or, better yet, pluck those backs free of botflies and ticks.”

Please and placate, manipulate and intimidate, trade favors and scratch backs ….?  From what we’ve been seeing recently, this doesn’t seem that much different from the way humans do it.  Enjoy!

Have been a Democrat and feminist since 68.  I wonder what Hillary would say if she had to answer directly whether or not she was a feminist?  
I was okay with her until she brought Bill in.  The campaign was clean until then.  To my horror, I realize they are Karl Roving Obama.  His strenghth was a new kind of campaigning, so they twisted words and made things up until he had to go on defense and we got the shameful spectacle of last night.  Maybe he should just let her attack him, give her a puzzled look, and then talk about the issues.  It is so unfair to use your ex-president husband as your hatchet man. How is that a woman standing on her own?  What in the world would his role be in her administration?
My relatives in the Republican South like Obama!  If Hillary wins the nomination, Republicans do not want to vote for her.  On the other hand, people like McCain.  We can lose this!
I am distressed to find myself ready to re-register as a Green Independent after 40 years as an active, committed Democrat.  I do not like this!

Hello? Anybody home?? So, Senator Thompson is "out" of the presidential race. Um...was he ever "in" it?

Breaking news!  (crunch, crunch, crackle, crackle)  Fred Thompson is removing himself from the presidential race.  

Gee.  Wonder if that gig on Law 'n Order is still available, now that movies made out of Tom Clancy novels have become unfashionable.

I tuned into the debate for a little while. I find a need a much needed rest from all the political stuff. the part I tuned it to, unfortunately, was when Hillary and Barack were going at it. I didn't feel like listening to the Bickersons, so I tuned out after a little bit, but I did feel sorry for Edwards. He probably felt like that lamp post just waiting to get a word in.

I'm very glad to see the "big boy" seal, made it back into the ocean.

The only way I'd buy that Bush film, if I really wanted to see it, would be out of the trunk of some bootlegger for $5 bucks. I may not really want to see it.

Glad Coultergeist, Dick Morris and Bolton made it as WPitW..they so richly deserve it.

So when will Rudy finally throw in the towel..he's done.

and..congrats Keith for making that very spot on prediction.

Pat, Boston, MA (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 10:29 AM)

Congratulatins, Pat.  By the way, is there any truth to the rumor that Tom Brady was seen walking around in a foot cast?  What’s that all about?

Hello to all,
I've been away for a few days and gotten way behind on what's been happening blogwise.  I don't have cable and only receive PBS, ABC, CBS, and NBC, So I pretty much have to depend on PBS and my computer for anything close to the truth about what's happening in the world beyond my own little isolated sancuary.
  Anyway while I was listening to the Packer game on the radio (my begrudging congratulations and good luck to you N.Y. fans),I was flipping through my limited t.v. channels and came across a pretty decent C.B.S. special on global warming. I know some of you are going to call it sour grapes over the Packer loss and perhaps it is to some degree. Be that as it may,  It got me to wondering how many gallons of fuel are consumed and how many tons of hydrocarbons and greenhouse gases are emitted each week in this country for the sake of such distractions. It has to be absolutely staggering. I mean we have all these sports at high school ,college, and professional levels. to say nothing of all of the motorized competition. NASCAR, Formula One ,etc. etc. etc.
(got a feeling I'm not making any friends with the rednecks here) Some of you people who are into statistics and good with numbers (big numbers) should probably do a little cipherin' here. I'm not saying all these things should be totally eliminated, but it appears to me that some cutbacks and concessions might not be a real bad idea.  One would think that a choice between our entertainment and our life support system would be a "no-brainer" unfortunately
"no-brainers" are one of the few things we're in no danger of running short of if the results of the 2004 election are to be believed.

I think a little levity is order here especially among the Obama and Clinton supporters here.
Remember just be thankful we're not Repugnicans.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/6/25723/26527/751/431492  
Enjoy it everyone!

crotalus (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 10:27 AM)

Loons don't drive and aren't allowed in the mall.

:)

Pam Bignardi this is for you.
Obama vs. Clinton Part II
Bill Clinton is throwing away his dignity in being Hillary's attack dog. Personally I think wants her to be President more than she does.
Obama is responding to some baseless allegations made by former President Clinton.
I have stated before that if Hillary is the Dem's nominee; I'll vote third party.
In this election there are only two certainties.
First: New York State is going to vote Democratic no matter who the nominees are in either party. I would wager that the percentages will be in the 65%-35% range or higher for the Dems.
Second: Whoever wins the election is going to inherit one hell of a mess next January.  

see through, anywhere (11:07 AM Post):

I will respond to you this one time to say why don't you use your real name that you have been blogging with in here for some time if you wish to discuss, disagree, or debate the candidates or an issue. I don't respond to those who hide behind false or secondary names. Thanks

Fred Thompson has decided to bow out of the race.  My opinion on him is that he is an honorable man, but didn't really catch on with the MSM.  He was the "republican establishment"s candidate, but his mannerisms and aw shucks approach isn't what America wants.  

News flash......Clinton and Obama are still sniping back and forth.  Boy, they are really risking losing credibility with the American people.  The GOP has to be sitting back and really enjoying this one.  

So now the GOP is down to Romney, McCain, Huckabee, and Guiliani.  Guiliani is fading like a old lampshade.  If he does not win Florida, he needs to call it quits.  I am concerned that if GOP nominee is McCain, the age thing is going to harm him just like it did Bob Dole.  He will have to pick a youthful vibrant VP running mate to counter those attacks.

Ralph Nader will let us know in a month whether he is running for president.  Just like Bloomberg, I am not holding my breath.  Oh the egos!!

To friends and foes alike: How about those Giants?
Whoo-Hoo! Don't count them out yet! That's why they play the game! GO JINTS!!

"Huckabee has also been endorsed by a number of black religious leaders but the MSM refers to them as conservative black leaders, not evangelicals. Does the MSM fear referring to them as black evangelicals because the MSM wants us to assume that evangelicals are a white, monolithic group to be feared and it threatens their template? If so, is this not a racist attitude let alone an attitude which exposes a bias against those the MSM labels as evangelicals?"

Steven Rennie, Fillmore, NY (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 11:52 AM)

The short answer may be that MSM doesn't know -- or doesn't want to know -- the difference. There are too many flavors of "conservative christian" religion to put out there in a 30-second sound bite so they don't even try.

Life is so much easier for the talking heads when the any population can be lumped together, i.e. southerners are all conservative, yanks are all liberals, African-Americans are all..., Hispanics are all..., Californians are all..., women are all...

FWIW, it's a matter of convenience rather than racism.

Pam B. 12:14 A.M.
Right on about Jimmy Carter. the man left more integrity in the commode every day than you could find in the whole damn bush regime. If it hadn't been for that sandstorm downing those choppers during the hostage rescue attempt he'd probably still be in office and we'd all be a lot better off.

Pam:

Because I criticize Hillary and disgree with her positons and express a lack of trust in her campaign I am slandering her. Yet when you criticize, disagree or express a lack of trust with another candidate whoever that may be it is ok.

Let me have my say on whoever I wish just as I let you have your say without telling you that you are slandering someone (which I have not done). Because someone does not agree with you or who does not support Hillary you claim she is being slandered. That is ridiculous and you know it. Like I stated sometime ago, you need to lighten up. There are many people in here who have criticized Hillary over and over again, and some who have come out and actually used the terms dirty politician and a liar concerning Hillary which I have not used.

SO GET OFF MY BACK PLEASE.

It sounds like I didn't miss much by sticking with COUNTDOWN as opposed to the "debate." I've seen nearly all the debates, anyway, and, if last night's tone is an indicator of coming attractions, I better crank out more Wiggum-Muntz '08 signs.

Suzanne of Texas, have you forgotten about the 700 FBI files the Clintons illegally had to dig up dirt on the Republicans???? I hope it was a slip. and not that your are ignoring it. The Clintons are slime, but we Republicans are rooting for her!!

Anna, yes - Tom Brady had a foot cast on yesterday. Last night he was in cowboy boots. In New York.

It's hard getting any real information on this team. They stay so close together as a team, not leaking out anything, unless it's intentional.

We're not panicking. Not yet anyway!

Steve Rennie (11:52 AM Post):

A good point Steve. Note how in addition to how Obama is reaching for support from the Dems he is also reaching for support from independents, republicans and last night mentioned even bringing under the fold those from the religious right. His comment that if they are ignored and not approached in a manner that may win them over or at least to gain compromise from them they will set their own agenda for this country and remain a strong force within the fabric of this country that is in opposition to what the Dems are trying to achieve. Obama is reaching out to all people and this should be appreciated as well as supported as a new beginning for this country wehther he is the elected candidate or not.

Anna Molly (: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 2:09 PM..Please and placate, manipulate and intimidate, trade favors and scratch backs....? From what we've been seeing recently, this doesn't seem that much different from the way humans do it. Enjoy!

I did, thanks so much for this wonderful article. I love the part about the elephants "They're constantly making decisions, debating among themselves, about food, water and security. You see it in the field. You can hear them vocally disagree. Typically, the matriarch has the final say, and the others abide to her decision. If a faction disagrees strongly enough and wants to try a different approach, "the group will split up and meet back again later". That's smart. Sort of like the union bargaining table...and who says animals are dumb..I never thought they were.

Thanks again.

What else?  My guess is that Mrs. Clinton was just looking for a recommendation for a good dry cleaner.  What’s your guess?  
Anna Molly (: (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 1:33 PM)

LOL!! I was wondering what they were discussing too; it did seem Edwards was a bit too chummy during the debate with her last night; now it all makes sense!!

PEACE!!

Bill Rochester NY (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 3:05 PM

I can accept this Bill and thank you!! I am also considering voting third Party; I am also voting for Dennis Kucinich in the my Primary in California; I changed my mind last week and went with my heart and I'm glad!!

I resent the constant bashing of Hillary Clinton that has gone on since she won New Hampshire; it's unfair; I agree a dem will win NY just as a dem will win California; that's why I'm going with Kucinich also in my primary here in California!!

PEACE BILL; THANK YOU!!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080122/ap_on_el_pr/thompson

Well, our latest native son has dropped out. The Tennessee Waltz turned out not to be Fred Thompson's dance after all. Although I don't know of anyone except my redneck brother and Zach Wamp who seriously thought Fred could take it all the way. It takes more energy than he's got.

Krista 3:16 PM..I'm with you girl. Let's both put those signs up..

"Cute and quaint and cuddly seem a little like my territory.... But, however you feel about the Clintons, you have to agree that Bill Clinton’s presence weighs more heavily than Elizabeth Edwards’ presence, sympathy notwithstanding, and certainly more than Michelle Obama’s, attractive and articulate as she surely is....  

... And what if, as I blogged last week, Michael Bloomberg decides to enter the 2008 election as a third-party candidate?  If he does, he’s likely to bring at least a billion dollars to the table. Whichever way that money rolls, it’s going to tilt the table...."

Your quaint, cute and cuddly opinions are welcome so far as I'm concerned, Annie, so long as you don't kick.

The point I was trying to make is that Bill C is not some new species on the taxonomic charts, and that's a legitimate starting place for figuring out what he's up to. Yes, he does carry far more weight than the rest of the presidential spouses, and he is indeed stepping in to unknown territory, just as Hillary did all those years ago. For people clamoring for "change" as promised by Obama to be clamoring in the next moment at the "unfairness" of Bill living and demonstrating change is disingenuous, at the least. Obama, while promising change, is running a conventional campaign and keeping the little woman by his side. Where's the change?  Politicians have promised "change" when things are bad and "stay the course" when things are good since the Greek era.

Gazillionaires such as Bloomberg playing coy and tossing a lot of late money in can discombobulate an election but they've come and gone before and will again. What's "fair" have to do with it?  I in all seriousness cannot think of a billionaire who's actually won a national election via a third-party candidacy. Third party mavericks are a part of the landscape and, short of some constitutional jiggering, there's nothing to be done about them.

HM (11:59 AM Post):

I agree that Obama was starting to look just a bit of a whiner at the end of that madness between him and Hillary. But he had his say and now needs to move on and stay away from such complaints unless responding to a specific charge about his past history or record (but is that not what he was doing?).

In any case Obama needs to move forward, ignore Bill Clinton if he can friom here on out.

It is interesting how of the three candidates two acted very childish and were embarssing with their personal attacks against one another....nah, nah, nah, nah, nah. Obama was childish and embarssing. One might expect that from Obama to a degree based on Hillary's claim he is a young and inexperienced politician. I wonder what her excuse is however after claiming 35 years of experience in this game. You would think therefore that she would be capable of acting more mature and responsible. I did not see it did you?

"Loons don't drive and aren't allowed in the mall.

:)

gaviidae (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 3:03 PM)"

Do they run for office?

Keith, I'm counting on you to be the last journalist standing.  

Everyone is calling this a slug fest, a battle royale, whatever.

Anyone paying attention to reality knows it's a hatchet job.  

Obama's words and record have been spun and distorted by a former President.  They have him in a box.  Either he fights back and "sinks to their level" or he stays above the fray and "can't hold his own".  

Watch the tape.  Watch how Senator Clinton's claims change, until eventually she's reduced to saying: the truth! And tries desperately to spin it like it's bad.  

Obama should not have brought up the corporate lobbying for WalMart.  

But he said, repeatedly, he did not want to be in this fight.  She has said she considers this "the fun part".  

You can tell an honest narrative which favors one candidate without taking sides.  One candidate happens to have truth on his side in his particular instance.    

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):