mkennedy130 asked why Gov. Napolitano's endorsement of Obama got more press coverage than Gov. Minner's endorsement of Clinton. I thought that was a good question, and have a few reasons why that may be:

Gov. Minner's endorsement came on Wednesday, the day after the NH primary, when the news was dominated by that primary and the surprising result it delivered along with lots of speculation about how so many of us got it so wrong. Napolitano's endorsement came after much of the NH primary discussion had died down.

Minner is a white woman who endorsed a white woman. This may seem less surprising than a white woman endorsing a black/biracial man. I think Clinton endorsements from black politicians, when the race is between a white woman and a black man, would get more attention. I think this happened when Rep. John Lewis came out for Clinton.

Obama was Napolitano's first choice. Minner had at first supported Biden, only shifting to Clinton when he dropped out.

DE is a small state--one of 7 that has just 1 House seat. AZ is an average sized state, and the 2nd most quickly growing one, with 8 House seats.

AZ is a swing/purple state. In particular, it has a large and growing Hispanic population. It's one of the Western/Southwestern states Democrats are heavily targeting these days. And it's adjacent to NV, which votes next on Jan. 19. DE is really not a swing state and less closely related to one of the early voting states.

I don't know if any of these are the real reasons, but they seem plausible to me. Maybe someone else can think of others.

First of all there are many resons why Obama is repugnant to me.

Why does he need endoresements from a looser like Kerry. Can't he stand on his own merit? He has no shame to try and run for office when he has not gone up through the chairs like most organized structures organizations do.

Indeed, the "Daughter's of the AmericanRevolution" are interested in voting for someone who has a background of American History...someone who might be a decendant of some of the original colonies. The relatives and decendants of the "Civil War" Veterans are not interested in having someone that the Civil War was started because of their ancestors.

Also, the man has a wife who is very black and he chose her, so it would seem he is partial to blacks. This could mean that Black criminals will not get arrested even though it is a fact that they commit most of the crime. This could man that our prisons could be emptied. Riots will on the streets.

In addition, he does not seem attractive to me. His lips look dark for some reason. His wife was seen jiving at the campaign....where is the dignity that we have had with Jacquelin Kennedy. Pat Nixon, Rosalyn Carter, Nancy Reagan and more recently, Laura Bush. They would never be seen like that.

we never hear or see him going to church.

In closing, I feel confident that when all of our states come together, he will fade away.

genadoll@yahoo.com

First of all there are many resons why Obama is repugnant to me.

Why does he need endoresements from a looser like Kerry. Can't he stand on his own merit? He has no shame to try and run for office when he has not gone up through the chairs like most organized structures organizations do.

Indeed, the "Daughter's of the AmericanRevolution" are interested in voting for someone who has a background of American History...someone who might be a decendant of some of the original colonies. The relatives and decendants of the "Civil War" Veterans are not interested in having someone that the Civil War was started because of their ancestors.

Also, the man has a wife who is very black and he chose her, so it would seem he is partial to blacks. This could mean that Black criminals will not get arrested even though it is a fact that they commit most of the crime. This could man that our prisons could be emptied. Riots will on the streets.

In addition, he does not seem attractive to me. His lips look dark for some reason. His wife was seen jiving at the campaign....where is the dignity that we have had with Jacquelin Kennedy. Pat Nixon, Rosalyn Carter, Nancy Reagan and more recently, Laura Bush. They would never be seen like that.

we never hear or see him going to church.

In closing, I feel confident that when all of our states come together, he will fade away.

USMC Mike: Qualifications?
I can't support Hillary for president! A woman hush crying just because she lost a primary? How about if she is our president and how can she face difficult situation? Is she going to be taken with fear and cry or she is going to have solid steel nerves to face any turmoil? I use to watch Tharcher, the ex-prime minister of Britain, the Iron Clad woman, how she used to deal with difficulties?

USMC_Mike, are you saying that Hillary got an experience? Can you tell what kind of experience she got? except she use to be a wife of ex-president lay down for him on his spare time?

Re: USMC Mike

Thank you for sparking an interesting discussion. It was food for thought.

Re: JKrishnamurti

No thanks for spamming an interesting thread. I know what facism was. Both my graduate and post-doc supervisors were children of Holocaust survivors. The term fascist should be used very carefully and you are extraordinarily careless. Fascism was a very specific movement that failed.

Government = facism? Might as well say that white = racist. Up = down. Black = white. Yada yada yada.

BB

"where was McCain in the lead-up to the war -- when the military was being dangerously downsized by the Clinton administration and McCain's friend, former Secretary of Defense Bill Cohen? "

So dangerously downsized that Rumsfeld strenuously resisted efforts by Congress to increase the size of the military.

"McCain-Kennedy -- the most far-reaching amnesty program in American history."

Since reagan

The McCain domestic record is a disaster. To say he fought spending, most particularly earmarks, is to nibble around the edges and miss the heart of the matter. For starters, consider
McCain-Feingold -- the most brazen frontal assault on political speech since Buckley v. Valeo.

McCain-Kennedy -- the most far-reaching amnesty program in American history.

McCain-Lieberman -- the most onerous and intrusive attack on American industry -- through reporting, regulating, and taxing authority of greenhouse gases -- in American history.

McCain-Kennedy-Edwards -- the biggest boon to the trial bar since the tobacco settlement, under the rubric of a patients' bill of rights.

McCain-Reimportantion of Drugs -- a significant blow to pharmaceutical research and development, not to mention consumer safety (hey Rudy, pay attention, see link).

And McCain's stated opposition to the Bush 2001 and 2003 tax cuts was largely based on socialist, class-warfare rhetoric -- tax cuts for the rich, not for the middle class. The public record is full of these statements. Today, he recalls only his insistence on accompanying spending cuts.

As chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, McCain was consistently hostile to American enterprise, from media and pharmaceutical companies to technology and energy companies.

McCain also led the Gang of 14, which prevented the Republican leadership in the Senate from mounting a rule change that would have ended the systematic use (actual and threatened) of the filibuster to prevent majority approval of judicial nominees.

And then there's the McCain defense record.

His supporters point to essentially one policy strength, McCain's early support for a surge and counterinsurgency. It has now evolved into McCain taking credit for forcing the president to adopt General David Petreaus's strategy. Where's the evidence to support such a claim?

Moreover, Iraq is an important battle in our war against the Islamo-fascist threat. But the war is a global war, and it most certainly includes the continental United States, which, after all, was struck on 9/11. How does McCain fare in that regard?

McCain-ACLU -- the unprecedented granting of due-process rights to unlawful enemy combatants (terrorists).

McCain has repeatedly called for the immediate closing of Guantanamo Bay and the introduction of al-Qaeda terrorists into our own prisons -- despite the legal rights they would immediately gain and the burdens of managing such a dangerous population.

While McCain proudly and repeatedly points to his battles with Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who had to rebuild the U.S. military and fight a complex war, where was McCain in the lead-up to the war -- when the military was being dangerously downsized by the Clinton administration and McCain's friend, former Secretary of Defense Bill Cohen? Where was McCain when the CIA was in desperate need of attention? Also, McCain was apparently in the dark about al-Qaeda like most of Washington, despite a decade of warnings.

My fingers are crossed that at the next debate, either Fred Thompson or Mitt Romney will find a way to address McCain's record. (Mike Huckabee won't, as he is apparently in the tank for him.)

rudy, get it together, we are counting on you.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YjUzOGY0ODA1YzBmNjFhOWE5NWU0OTY5NTZiOGNhOGQ=

"...Maybe Obama's post-IA bounce started to fade when the curtains closed? Makes more sense to me than IA voters being less racist than NH voters (apologies all around)..."

Judge, what if what happened in Iowa is attributable to a reverse Tom Bradley effect, i.e., no one wanting to be called racist, and given the very public vote?

I have as multi-culture a family as one can have, with all races represented. Having grown up on military bases and attending Department of Defense schools overseas most of my life, my family and military brat friends were shocked to experience or witness racism when we returned and spread out throughout the U.S. It's certainly better, but we as a nation are far from color blind. My African-American friends (& in-laws) in Denver, Phoenix, Austin, Las Vegas continue to experience racial profiling and stereotyping.

I think this is a very real challenge for Obama, but no one is talking about this because it is a charged subject and some will accuse anyone other than a Black person who brings it up as being racist.

Long before anyone announced their candidacy, I wished for a Clinton/Obama ticket because I believed it would send the ultimate message to America and the world. I believe that Obama being VP for eight years would get Americans accustomed to the idea of a having a Black man in the 2nd most powerful position and make him a shoe-in in 2016.

I'm intrigued by the snarky dismissals of the periods of Senator Clinton's life when her husband was serving as governor of Arkansas and then as president. During the period she was "first lady of Arkansas," she was also the only female partner in the state's most prominent law firm. Neither insubstantial nor unsubstantive.

Can you imagine the firestorm that would have ensued if Senator Clinton had pursued outside employment while her husband was president? She made the most responsible choice open to her at the time. I don't find this risible.

Although I am very much a Clinton partisan (big surprise there), I find it exhilarating that we are likely to break one of the two most pernicious barriers (race and gender)to service in the presidency. Either Senator Clinton or Senator Obama will represent real and important change by his or her very election and both have the intellect and sufficient experience to lead us effectively.

so far:

As of today, the delegate count runs as follows, including the CNN estimate for Iowa and the Wyoming results:

Romney 30
Huckabee 21
McCain 10
Thompson 6
Paul 2
Hunter 1
Giuliani 1
Note that this count includes five ex-officio delegates from states that have not voted yet.

Upcoming:

Jan 15 - MI - 30 delgates by cong district
Huckabee, Romney, and McCain are almost certain to walk away with a few delegates each.
Jan 19 - NV - 34 delegates
Jan 19 - SC - 24 delegates
Right now, it looks like a McCain-Huckabee dogfight, although it could be the spot of Fred Thompson's revival now that Romney is backing out. McCain leads in at least one poll, but this is natural Huckabee territory.
Jan 22 - LA caucus - 47 delegates - proportional
Jan 29 - FL - 57 delegates -0 winner take all
feb 5 23 states - 1226 delegates
ny - 101 - winner take all
NJ - 52
CN - 30
DE - 18
CA - 173 - by district
OK - 38 winner take all
MO - 58 winner take all
AZ - 53 MAC
UT - 36 - Mitt
IL - 70 by district
AK - 34
AL - 29
MA - 43
TN - 52
TX - 140
AL - 48
ND - 26
MT - 25
MN - 41
CO - 46
ME - 21
HI - 20

After Super Tuesday, 1,484 of the 2,380 delegates will have been awarded.

February Stalemate?
What to make of all these numbers? Unless someone runs the table through February 5 -- probably McCain, but possibly Huckabee -- there will be a logjam on the Republican side after Super Tuesday.

If McCain and Huckabee trade a few victories in the coming weeks, Romney can remain viable. He can win congressional districts in Georgia, California, and Illinois, and then come in second in all or most of the proportional states that vote on February 5 -- they count for 500 delegates overall. He could amass just under 300 delegates by February 6. Giuliani will likely have no fewer than 250, no matter how badly he does, and perhaps more. The remaining 800 or so delegates would be split between Huckabee and McCain.

At that point -- with no clear leader or momentum -- money becomes the main consideration. Romney has an endless supply of it. McCain and Huckabee, both short of cash as a rule so far, may find themselves in the lead with delegates, but begging for cash to clinch the nomination.

At that point, we'll be hearing about the "crucial" winner-take-all primaries in Maryland (37 delegates), Virginia (63), and the District of Columbia (19) on February 12. The candidates could even go back to Iowa to influence delegates at the county conventions on March 15.

In short, the Republican race could very well start all over again on February 6.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OTFmY2Y3ZjBkZmFiMjcwMGY1NzVhYWI3M2YyMmMzOGQ=

Zouk must really be in a tizzy over the news that Rudy's campaign is running into financial trouble.

His series of posts on this board are mind-boggling.

all fundamentalists from the abrahamic tradition -- jews, muslims and christians-- which all devolved from the same origins share much of the same text [Bible] and many of the same figures, traditions and beliefs.

you constantly display your ignorance, zouk. i guess you're proud of it.

The ignorance of history displayed by the facists are liberals posts is breathtaking.

There were real socialists in the Nazi party, at the beginning. Remember that Hitler did not found the Nazi party, he took it over. Ernst Roehm, one of the founders, was the head of what might be called the left wing of the Nazi party. Hilter had Roehm and his followers murdered in 1934 in order to appease the military and his industrialist backers.

Hitler was funded and supported by a group of wealthy German industrialists who saw him as a bulwark against the left.

Social security pensions and workers comp type programs were introduced in Germany in the 19th century by Otto von Bismarck - the authoritarian, monarchist architect of a united Germany. So, these programs were in place long before Hitler left Austria.

Hitler was a vegetarian and non-smoker who did not allow anyone to smoke around him. Some of his followers had some bizarre spiritualist notions and there was a cult of Arayan mythology. Hitler consciously drew on these myths, which had been used by Wagner in his operas, to seduce the population with notions of Arayan supremacy. The reason a totalitarian government tried to reduce the influence of religion on society is that totalitarian governments try to reduce the influence of EVERY other institution so they can impose total control.

Any comparison between the Nazis and todays Democrats and Republicans is ludicrous and can only be made by someone who lacks the most basic understanding of history. Such comparisons actually trivialize the absolute evil perpetrated by the Nazis.

"Iowan cheese-heads

Judge, judge, judge. Wisconsinites are cheeseheads. Iowans are into the corn."

A surprising food gaffe considering the judge is from Ohiowa. :)

bsimon - there is also an expectations aspect of it. If you expect to win and don't, it is much worse then not trying and failing. Just look at clinton's "decisive" 3 point victory.

rudy can weather a loss in MI and SC, Huck, Mac and Mitt can't. now if rudy loses in FL - big trouble.

"the only non-incumbent candidate to win his party's caucus and go on to win the general election was George W. Bush in 2000"

What's the data look like for a guy coming in 4th or worse in the first 5 contests, then competing in super tuesday events to win the nomination?

Judge - the field of decision analysis is useful in this case, as it is in most cases. this phenom is referred to as "base-case neglect". It is when the human ignores the background information in favor of sensational news. hillary always had a strong presence and solid organization in NH. no amount of momentum was going to knock that over. the same can be said for upcoming primaries. momentum is vastly over-rated.

the explanation about IA vs NH racism can be explained by open caucus vs secret ballot.

but Iowa has always been a weak predictor of eventual victory.

the only non-incumbent candidate to win his party's caucus and go on to win the general election was George W. Bush in 2000

past winners include:
2004 - kerry
2000 - gore
1996 - clinton unopposed
1992 - Harkin
1988 - Gephardt
1984 - Mondale
1980 - carter (beat Kennedy)
1976 - uncommitted (beat carter, an omen for his presidency?)
1972 - uncommitted (beat Muskie)

Rs
1996 - dole
1992 - Bush unopposed
1988 - dole
1984 - reagan unopposed
1980 - Bush

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iowa_caucus

doesn't llok good for Obambi

"Iowan cheese-heads"

Judge, judge, judge. Wisconsinites are cheeseheads. Iowans are into the corn.

KOZ: yeah, I heard about that. Not sure if I believe it. Maybe Obama's post-IA bounce started to fade when the curtains closed? Makes more sense to me than IA voters being less racist than NH voters (apologies all around). I'd expect that those flinty Granite Staters would start to throw off the influence of the Iowan cheese-heads (again, apologies all around).

McCain's post-NH bounce may certainly fade, BTW, by the time SC's primary takes place. I'd expect to see Huckabee's numbers rebound by then (the 19th, isn't it?).

"Do I also need to point out the lesson we SHOULD have learned from New Hampshire? Even the aggregate polling data was wrong there."

While true, what is more important is watching the trends. What happened in NH is that the post-iowa bounce showed up in the polls released Sat & Sun, then the pollsters mostly stopped interviewing. Some claim that Monday polling started showing the Obama lead shrinking, but even then, when pollsters publish only the rolling data, the Monday numbers were still coupled with Fri, Sat & Sun, which still showed the Obama lead. In other words, the dynamic races that see a lot of change in a short period of time are tough to poll. With the IA caucuses on Thurs and a debate on Sat night, getting accurate polls for a Tues primary is very difficult. Between the excitement of the Obama win on Thurs & the size of the subsequent bounce, pretty much everybody - including the Clinton campaign - expected an entirely different outcome on Tues.

So. When it comes to watching the polls for upcoming events, it is relevant to watch the trends & see who's moving up and who's moving down in the polls. As usual, the candidates that are winning in early events are moving up in the polls for subsequent events. Likewise, the candidates that quit and/or skip the early states are falling in the later states explicitly and the national polls generally. Perhaps Giuliani will find a way to reenter the news cycle; given the attention paid McCain, Romney & Huckabee it looks unlikely - to me - that Rudy will be successful with this strategy.

I see we have the "Loony Left", "Moonbats", "Snookems", Lamby Pie", and all the assorted "Kooks", along with the "Genius", what a day.

Judge - actually the R side of the polling was spot on accurate. the speculation about the failure of the Dem side runs toward the Bradley effect - a refusal by guilty white Libs to admit they won't vote for a black candidate.

http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/JohnHawkins/2008/01/11/how_the_bradley_effect_blew_up_the_new_hampshire_polling

More good news for the G-man:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/11/MNUBUDDU1.DTL&type=politics

"On Wednesday, the Politics Blog at SFGate.com reported that a private poll of likely California primary voters taken by a state Democratic strategist showed Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., leading the Golden State with 18 percent and Huckabee in second place with 15 percent. Giuliani was in fourth place with 12 percent, behind former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney at 14 percent. Giuliani led a Field Poll of California voters taken in December."

Oh. Wait. Coming in 4th in California isn't good news at all.

Nevermind.

I need to point out the lack of wisdom in reporting what any individual poll states.

Do I also need to point out the lesson we SHOULD have learned from New Hampshire? Even the aggregate polling data was wrong there.

Even the rightwing New York Post regularly bashes Rudey.

I wonder if that made him cry? I wonder if his spouse had to ride to the rescue?

"We all know how many of our firefighters and rescuers are dead now because of him."

Typical liberal america-last hater. Last I heard it was a bunch of Arabs who were responsible for those deaths.

By the way, I agree with claudialong, too - fundamentalism is the problem here, not the particular type. It's just that after we've started one war with a country based off of this administration's statements that they had weapons of mass distruction, and then found out that there weren't any, we get a little skeptical.

Billary Dynamic Duo talkative guys, fasten your seat belts:

RACIAL TENSIONS ROIL DEMOCRATIC RACE

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/7845.html

So in drindl's world islamic fundamentalists are equivilant to christians.

drindl - head of the mentally unstable and doesn't know it.

KOZ:
"Lately, I've been wondering if the folks who spread the rumor about the failure of torture to garner results are the same ones now insisting that Iran is not trying to develop a nuclear weapon"

You're right. They're called experts.

drindl - are the the only mentally stable person in your world?

'That brings us to the final question of the day, class: Why are America's liberals so anxious to believe the best of Islamic fanatics but only the worst of Christian fundamentalists?'

All fundamentalists are the same to me. They don't beleive in objective reality or science or modernity or equality for women, they don't beleive in objective reality, they live only for a post death world that i don't beleive exists, so I consider them all mentally unstable.

"We stand for the maintenance of private property ... We shall protect free enterprise as the most expedient, or rather the sole possible economic order."

- Adolph Hitler

He's be idolized in america today.

'rudy 5%' looks like the Rudaboom never will get off the ground.

'bsimon, the NYers on this site are exclusively extreme lefties. They are only representative of the upper west side, limousine liberal types. They are definitely not representative of NY (and even moreso, NJ) view of Rudy.'

Yeah, come take a ride in my limosine, folks! Sorry never lived on the West Side, JD. Strictly a downtowner--you have no idea what your are talking about. Have you been to NY? Talk regularly to people who live here? I thought not. How would you have nay idea what is respresentative of the state of NY? Wishful thinking. Even the rightwing New York Post regularly bashes Rudey. We all know how many of our firefighters and rescuers are dead now because of him.

But you are right about New Jersey. He does have a lot of Soprano family support out there.

Lately, I've been wondering if the folks who spread the rumor about the failure of torture to garner results are the same ones now insisting that Iran is not trying to develop a nuclear weapon. My understanding is that our so-called intelligence community came to this absurd conclusion based on having overheard a single telephone call, probably one between Ahmadinejad and the guy who supplies his windbreakers. I suspect that at least a few of these clowns on the CIA payroll were members of the O.J. jury.

The logical question is: Why Iran, a nation under the thumb of fanatical ayatollahs, fronted by a dwarf who spends half his time denying the Nazi holocaust and the other half promising to initiate one of his own, wouldn't spend a sizable portion of its oil revenue in developing a nuclear bomb?

That brings us to the final question of the day, class: Why are America's liberals so anxious to believe the best of Islamic fanatics but only the worst of Christian fundamentalists?

Any response drindl and coocoonon??????

http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/BurtPrelutsky/2008/01/11/a_few_words_in_defense_of_torture

"Clinton Backer Cuomo's 'shuck and jive' comment spurs controversy...

Hillary adviser: 'If you want Obama to be your imaginary hip black friend'... "

I know everyone is saying they are not racist, I guess because of affirmative action. their people sure do continue to make racist statemnts though.

Oh, and to me affirmative action is racist.

Referring to the Democrat candidates' responses in that New Hampshire debate, the Washington Post asked, "Why do Democratic candidates refuse to acknowledge progress in Iraq?" The answer is pretty obvious. It is hard to acknowledge progress at the same time you are arguing that you fought hardest against President Bush's "failed policy."

bsimon

I'm praying the Ken Doll Unstoppable Mittomania continues like the Energizer Bunny. The guy's a glutton for pain, deviant yet entertaining.

Don't stop now, Unstoppable Mittomania Ken Doll millionaire guy. We feel your pain and we like it.

Hillary says that Barack Obama "hasn't done the spade work" in front of millions of viewers?

Not a single, solitary word. And she goes on to post the upset victory over Obama in New Hampshire later in the week.

Dick Morris is a political genius.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/column.aspx?UrlTitle=the_clintons_play_dirty_--_and_the_media_lets_them&ns=MikeGallagher&dt=01/11/2008&page=2

"Idiocy
This guy is so idiotic I can refute him in two sentences.

"We stand for the maintenance of private property ... We shall protect free enterprise as the most expedient, or rather the sole possible economic order."

- Adolph Hitler

Who does this sound most like a liberal or a republican? DUH!

-- Chronotis"

"protect the "free" market." right zouk. Peas in a pod.

Peggy Noonan sez':

"And if we are to believe the new voice will be a softer, more conciliatory and more engaging one, how to square that with what is going on at hillaryis44.org, a Web site that is for all intents and purposes a back door to her war room? There you will see that federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald will soon "destroy" Barack Obama in a "scandal" involving an "indicted slumlord" who is Mr. Obama's "friend of 17 years" and with whom Mr. Obama has been involved in "shady deals."

This isn't a new voice, it is the old one, the one we know too well. The item was posted on Thursday, two days after Mrs. Clinton announced her new approach.

Between sobs she is going to try to destroy Mr. Obama. She is going to try to end him. She will pay a price for it--no one likes to see the end of a dream, no one likes a dream killer. But she will pay that price to win, and try to clean up the mess later."

http://www.hillaryis44.org/

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120000928241482363.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries

OUCH! Rasmussen's numbers (released today) for SC conflict with the 1/9 numbers above.

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/south_carolina/election_2008_south_carolina_republican_primary

McCain 27
Huck 24
...
Giuliani 6 (down from 10 in prior survey)

Hizzoner's trend lines are positively negative.

"D vs R
Raise taxes or lower them
surrender or win
spend or save
g'ment or markets

Easy choice when you put it that way.

Posted by: kingofzouk | January 11, 2008 02:36 PM
"

don't forget freedom vs fascism

bsimon, the NYers on this site are exclusively extreme lefties. They are only representative of the upper west side, limousine liberal types. They are definitely not representative of NY (and even moreso, NJ) view of Rudy.

Although they will tell you they are.

KOZ: shrillary? lol

Ok, this seems to be a bit biased of a post...Gov. Ruth Ann Minner (a woman obviously) endorsed yesterday...a day before this endorsement...So Obama a day late, but gets the press??

Clinton has at least two male governors endorse her (ohio and oregon), where's the press on that issue? Come 'on let's try to be impartial here and make a fair fight on the issues.

Insider advantage Jan 7th poll in FL:
Rudy 24%
Mack 19%
Romney 13% (where will they go?)
thompson 8% (where will they go?)
Huck 19% (where will they go?)

this victory will put rudy in the lead as far as cumulative delegates. even before Feb 5th. Bring it on hilly and billy.

D vs R
Raise taxes or lower them
surrender or win
spend or save
g'ment or markets

Easy choice when you put it that way.

"It would appear that the huckaboom is over."

Based on those numbers, it would appear the Romney marketing plan is failing more than the 'huckaboom'; Romney's on track for the Bronze in SC; Huck is still looking to place, with the Silver.

Funnier thing is rudy rolling in last - below thompson, even.

"Conservatives are now so aware of this that they are attempting to spuriously redefine past Conservative thought to distance themselves."

Like with the republcain religon (mormonism). "He who controls the past controls th future."

"We're not racist. In the past maybe. We keep the titles but not what the title represents."

the label men/women put on THEMSELVES is not to be taken lightly. Of course the gop will not willingl accept the term fascists. If if you look at the definition, and actions and words, you see for yourself.

If a man tells you he's a chrsitian but does not follow the teachigns of the christ or the ten commandments, is he/she a christian? No. It is not possible. Can a fascist talk his way out of not being a fascist? Only if they repudiate their fascist past and eleiminate if from the future

Jan 9th opinion dynamics poll in SC:
McCain 25%
Romney 17%
Huck 18%
thompson 9%
rudy 5%

It would appear that the huckaboom is over. He won a single primary. Like Obama.

Look what I found:

Last Wedneday morning I commented in trademark understated fashion that Billary had created a "huge" opening. Here it comes, folks:

"WASHINGTON -- Representative James E. Clyburn of South Carolina, the highest-ranking African-American in Congress, said he was rethinking his neutral stance in his state's presidential primary out of disappointment at comments by Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton that he saw as diminishing the historic role of civil rights activists.

Mr. Clyburn, a veteran of the civil rights movement and a power in state Democratic politics, put himself on the sidelines more than a year ago to help secure an early primary for South Carolina, saying he wanted to encourage all candidates to take part. But he said recent remarks by the Clintons that he saw as distorting civil rights history could change his mind.

"We have to be very, very careful about how we speak about that era in American politics," said Mr. Clyburn, who was shaped by his searing experiences as a youth in the segregated South and his own activism in those days. "It is one thing to run a campaign and be respectful of everyone's motives and actions, and it is something else to denigrate those. That bothered me a great deal."

In an interview with Fox News on Monday, Mrs. Clinton, who was locked in a running exchange with Senator Barack Obama, a rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, over the meaning of the legacies of President John F. Kennedy and the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., tried to make a point about presidential leadership.

"Dr. King's dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964," Mrs. Clinton said in trying to make the case that her experience should mean more to voters than the uplifting words of Mr. Obama. "It took a president to get it done."

Quickly realizing that her comments could draw criticism, Mrs. Clinton returned to the subject at a later stop, recalling how Dr. King was beaten and jailed and how he worked with Johnson to pass the landmark law. Clinton advisers said her first remark had not captured what she meant to convey. And they said she would never detract from a movement that has driven her own public service."

Yeah, she also said that "some of us are ready , some are not" and more blah blah after that... like the story above.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/11/us/politics/11clyburn.html

so hillary wins by a scant three points and it is an amazing victory. yet when rudy is "only" ahead by three points it is cause for a premature burial. the polls get it wrong the day before an election yet now a few weeks ahead they can be trusted again. Like the NIE, the results are to be trusted if they go in your direction and highly suspect if not.

I admit rudy looks down now, but that was always expected. He did not perform majestically in the debate and the citing of his record is getting a little tired if you have seen it before. but many have not.

It still beats all the pomp and circumstance of the fairy tale candidates and their hollow claims. It also still beats all the superb crowd pleasing from bill who followed with interns and fecklessness. I don't need PT Barnum as president.

McCain won NH. this is not unexpected and leads to nothing really. can he beat huck in SC? If so he may tick up elsewhere. otherwise he is toast. If huck loses SC - he waves bye-bye. thompson and edwards are already gone. It will be huck or Mack vs rudy on the 5th.

that leaves rudy as the only definite until the 5th, along with hill and barry. If mitt can't win MI, which I doubt he can at this point, he is also cooked.

I consider Huck to be the weakest candidate, yet still superior to anything the Dems can offer - Obambi or shrillary.

"I'm glad I read this interview.I think this interview more clearly illustrates the Conservative mind (as well as how shoddy Goldberg's thesis is) than it does the Liberal mind. Conservatives have been on the losing end of history for so long they have an inherent inferiority complex. Even when they're winning Conservatives still aren't satisfied.

Think back to the beginnings of the Iraq War, before the insurgency and the attempt to rebuild the country. Remember how angry the Conservatives still were? How much they hated the anti-war left. They had gained everything they could possibly have wanted and they still weren't satisfied. I believe it's because they know that any Conservative gains have historically been temporary. The Liberal agenda marches on throughout history (not without setbacks, mind you) while the Conservatives always lose in the long run.

Conservatives are now so aware of this that they are attempting to spuriously redefine past Conservative thought to distance themselves. Goldberg merely redefines certain aspects of Fascism (which is already notoriously difficult to define) by ignoring the historical context and, apparently, the words of Fascist leaders as well. It's an easy trick. You could probably make Jesus look like a Fascist as well. Didn't Jesus allow gentiles and Jews into the same religion if they wanted. Well, it's an emphasis on "unity" just like Hitler and Barack Obama!

Other than that I thought the interviewer brought up some well researched exceptions, which Goldberg inelegantly stumbled over, without getting into some sort of shouting match. Goldberg's ideas are so ill-informed they easily fall on their own without much help.

-- RBatty024"

One more. You don't have to combat them .Just not fear them. Hold a mirror up.

"A new SurveyUSA poll has some bad news for Rudy Giuliani and his big-state strategy: He's only three points ahead of John McCain in his home state of New York:"

I've been wondering about the predictions that Giuliani would do well in New York. New Yorkers have reported here that he's not fondly remembered for his tenure as mayor; is that just a Dem perspective, or true of all NYers? Only for urbanites or a statewide sentiment?

proud, you think we haven't heard the last of Giuliani, which I sortof agree with, in that he can't be entirely counted out; but at the same time I can't see how he expects to get back into the race. The attention is focused on the candidates that are bothering to run in Michigan and South Carolina. Where's Rudy? Last I heard, his numbers are falling in FL. Are floridians starting to wonder if he's a 'winner'? His performance thus far has been pretty dismal. Since he's apparently not running in races between now & the FL event, can he credibly claim he's the 'only candidate competitive in 50 states'? Seems to me like the thinking voters will take a look at what Rudy says, compare it to reality & decide that Rudy is smoking something.

"USMC Mike -

It is interesting that the qualifications to be Commander-in-Chief are only being discussed in the 2008 election. The sad reality is that the voters decided in the 2000 election that there were no minimal standards to be Commander-in-Chief when so many cast their votes for George W. Bush who went AWOL from his own personal military obligation.

Posted by: lavinsr | January 11, 2008 02:04 PM

"

Mccain, the military man, is as bad as bush. He said this week, General Petreus should decide when the troops come home.

First the war czar now this. As former infantry, this angers me some. All so certain people do not take resonsibility for their actions. The more fal guys the better the gop thinks. NEvermind the good of teh nation. NEver mind getting the job done, in this case the terrorists and bin laden.

Colin -

Judgment does indeed matter. This is why no good American should vote for anyone who supported the decision to invade Iraq. This war of choice was based on a series of lies and a pattern of deception that was obvious even to those of us who do not have a top secret security clearance.

USMC Mike -

It is interesting that the qualifications to be Commander-in-Chief are only being discussed in the 2008 election. The sad reality is that the voters decided in the 2000 election that there were no minimal standards to be Commander-in-Chief when so many cast their votes for George W. Bush who went AWOL from his own personal military obligation.

One more on this subject and I'm done. Although that first one destroys both Goldberg the right and zouk's bogus arguements to the fullest.

"Who is this joker ?Shame on the people at Doubleday for publishing this faux-history junk. The company that printed such great writers as Conrad and Maugham now offers us this. Mister Goldberg may address some interesting subjects in his book, but he is by no means an authority on any of them. Do not read this book expecting a critical analysis of modern history, it is mere political punditry and has very little (if any) literary value.

I would add that, in my opinion, Goldberg gets it wrong in this interview when he associates, or judges rather the supposed association of, fascism with evil. Fascist regimes bring about something far more terrible, stupidity, because they discourage, limit and ultimately suppress intelligent and free thought. I would agree that, as American popular culture is largely stupid, there are elements of fascism in our society, but to blame these on the present political parties or ideologies, be they left or right, is oversimplified. The real culprit is more likely economic of nature. Post World War II America, we all can plainly see, is financially driven. What makes money determines what we think. That is why this book was published and why men like Jonah Goldberg are undeservedly respected as true thinkers.

-- Hippocampe
"

Not all republicans are fascists. I like to generalize as does the right. to show them why it's not cool.

But some definatly are fascists. Like the right says to the terrorists. "Why do the moderate muslims not stand up to the terrorists." And I agree. They ARE fighting religous fascists. But so are we here. Why won't moderate muslims stand up to the terrorists? Bhutto.

Why won't the moderates in the republcain party stand up to the fascists? Now who's the fascist?

An example of the politics that this country doesn't need more of:

Hillary Clinton is attempting to reduce the damage done by failing to get the endorsement of the Nevada Culinary Workers' Union, by far the most powerful labor union in NV.

How, do you ask?

By enlisting the support of Hispanic politicians to fracture union political support along racial lines.

You would think that a Democrat would have more respect for organized labor than this.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2008/jan/11/power-culinary-union-hangs-balance-its-protege-kih/

Ok, Hillary supporters. Spin this one.

WADR to the Rudy-bashers, there remains a possibility that any of the top four R candidates could get the nom. CW had counted McCain out of the running six months ago when he had run out of cash, too. There's still a lot of states to go and a lot of votes to be cast, and I'm pretty sure we haven't heard the last yet from the former mayor.

"They believed in free health care and guaranteed jobs"

Fascism? I say that is called government.

"They purged the church from public policy, promoted a new form of pagan spirituality, and inserted the authority of the state into every nook and cranny of daily life"

who's they? The founding fathers?

"The Nazis led the world in organic farming and alternative medicine. Hitler was a strict vegetarian, and Himmler was an animal rights activist.
"

HAHAHHAHAHAHHA. In the article in question. The interviewer asks "The nazi's liek dog's, I like dog's. am I a nazi?"

You can't win this one zouk. your embarrassing your self. heathly food now?

"but. but. They took out trans fat in Ny."

HAHaHAHHAHAHA. you people are off the deep end. How you fooled america so long I'll never know.

Drindl -- it's mean to post facts showing that Rudy is dead in the water. It hurs KOZ's feelings tremendously. You should really try to be more considerate in the future. :)

How about it KOZ, can you spin the fact that Rudy is only tied in NEW YORK for the Gop nomination as good news? Especially in light of the previous reports that Rudy's top staff are currently going without pay b/c they're low on funds? Seriously, I can't wait to hear your take. Dollars to doughnuts it involves the words "moonbats, libs, Clinton, and Harry Reid" at least five times...

A new SurveyUSA poll has some bad news for Rudy Giuliani and his big-state strategy: He's only three points ahead of John McCain in his home state of New York:

Giuliani 32%
McCain 29%
Huckabee 12%
Romney 7%
Thompson 6%
New York's Republican primary is winner-take-all -- so if McCain rides him momentum and gets a plurality here, Rudy won't get any of the state's roughly 100 elected delegates.'

GO MCCAIN!

So I post that my brother and others in New York at the time referred to Giuliani as "Mayor Mussolini," and Zouk comes back with a book review which supposedly exposes fascist politics as 'liberal.' The conclusions are unavoidable:

1. Giuliani, in addition to being a power-mad authoritarian, supports some 'progressive' causes, such as homosexuality and reproductive choice. As his final year in NYC AND his recent tax proposals suggest, he is less attentive to the bottom line than he might be.

2. Giuliani had no compunction about using the anti-terrorist command center - situated, remember, in the WTC! - as a love nest, nor about charging taxpayers for his protective detail when he went a-courting.

3. Giuliani is thought by many to be a fascist, and therefore, according to conservative pundit Jonah Goldberg, a liberal.

4. Zouk is a strong supporter of Giuliani.

5. Zouk is a liberal.

Tune in next week as we explore the connection between D.B. Cooper, Jimmy Hoffa, and Fred Thompson. Also, Dennis Kucinich reveals who REALLY built the pyramids...

--except for euthenasia -- for jews, communists, homosexuals and socialists.

'They believed in free health care and guaranteed jobs. They confiscated inherited wealth and spent vast sums on public education. They purged the church from public policy, promoted a new form of pagan spirituality, and inserted the authority of the state into every nook and cranny of daily life. The Nazis declared war on smoking, supported abortion, euthanasia, and gun control. They loathed the free market, provided generous pensions for the elderly, and maintained a strict racial quota system in their universities--where campus speech codes were all the rage. '

btw, none of this is true.

"The quintessential Liberal Fascist isn't an SS storm trooper; it is a female grade school teacher with an education degree from Brown or Swarthmore.
"

they have went off teh deep end. What did I tell you people. Do not fear teh fascists pity them.

Oh, and watch out for those bake sales. The old ladies may spin the punch

'The modern heirs of this "friendly fascist" tradition include the New York Times, the Democratic Party, the Ivy League professoriate, and the liberals of Hollywood. The quintessential Liberal Fascist isn't an SS storm trooper; it is a female grade school teacher with an education degree from Brown or Swarthmore.'

This must surely be the most absurd and laughable piece of tripe I have ever read. Such terrible brain damage is painful to look at.

a major cause of World War II in Europe, in which more than 70 million people died.'
...was cowardice and failure to confront the enemy. Isolationsism and diplomacy in the face of certain evil. Yea, you guessed it - the liberal mantra.

"We often forget, for example, that Mussolini and Hitler had many admirers in the United States"

Right, and they are the fathers of your neo-con movement. Liek YOUR president's grandpa. You do my work for me. i thought the red scare was to stamp out "liberals" "socialists" and "progressives". What do you call mccarthy? A socialist? a republcain socialist fighting socialists? I say a fascist. Your party is a party of fascists. The children are leaning this, even though their histroy books do not record it.

The only one's balking are the fascists, and the resasons are obvious. But you cannot take accountaiblity for actions gop. you cannot do it. Rather than combatting the fascism in your party, you would say "we are all fascists". So you don't have to face faces. That's fine. Hide in your caves. Teh american people see you. Whether you acknoledge reality or not. Wouldn' be the first time

A little more on who helped Hitler rise to power and build his arsenal -- American industrialists:

Hitler struggled to write Mein Kampf, but his struggle was made less by the generous body of anti-jewish literature that Henry Ford had created. Hitler quoted Ford's "The International Jew: The World's Foremost Problem" extensively in Mein Kampf, thereby suffering less struggle to fill blank pages with writing. For most of his life Hitler had a lifesize portrait of Ford in his office.

Charles Lindbergh chose to defuse public opposition the rise of the Third Reich through conspicuous trading on his fame. He was the most public of this trio, scaring Britain and the US into appeasment of Hitler by falsely claiming the Luftwaft was more powerful than it actually was at the time. He served as the public figurehead for mass movements to remain neutral from the war in Europe, giving Hitler time to consolidate his gains.

Beyond these three men were many others: rich, powerful, connected. IBM, ITT, General Motors, Du Pont, International Harvester, Standard Oil -- many more industrialists were enlisted for war profiteering. The "common plan" was racism at home to divert from racism over there: the Ku Klux Klan made a resurgence with terrorism and anti-imigration laws. Jews were denied immigration, and had nowhere to flee the holocaust.

Nazi recruiters worked openly in Ford's Detroit factory right up to the eve of America's entry into the war. Agents of the wealthy, such as John McCloy, Preston Bush and John Foster Dulles, worked to erase evidence before, during and after the war. McCloy was instrumental in keeping allied bombers from disrupting Auschwitz or rail service to it during the war, then afterwards pardoned I.G. Farben executives convicted at Nuremberg. The Dulles brothers set up I.G. Farben partnerships with US bankrollers, concealed treason, erased records, went on to fame and power in the US government.

They believed in free health care and guaranteed jobs. They confiscated inherited wealth and spent vast sums on public education. They purged the church from public policy, promoted a new form of pagan spirituality, and inserted the authority of the state into every nook and cranny of daily life. The Nazis declared war on smoking, supported abortion, euthanasia, and gun control. They loathed the free market, provided generous pensions for the elderly, and maintained a strict racial quota system in their universities--where campus speech codes were all the rage. The Nazis led the world in organic farming and alternative medicine. Hitler was a strict vegetarian, and Himmler was an animal rights activist.

if it walks like a duck......

You see what they really think? The zouks of the world are a lost cause. Even after all that has happened the last 30 years, teh zouks of the world refuse to acknowledge what we all know.

You show your face zouk. Like I said here many times, you sir are a fascist. No amount of "I know you are but what am I". Lie spinnng of discrediting will ever change that.

you want to stop the fascists. By all means. I can use all the help I get. But take responsibility for once. I know you and yoru party are allergic to accountability. But take responsibility for yoru fascist actions

amazing the lengths that the neofascist neocons like zouk will go to revise history, isn't it? and some of the more simple minded actually fall for it:

'Nazi ideology stressed the racial purity of the German people and persecuted those it perceived either as enemies or Lebensunwertes Leben, that is "life unworthy of life". (This included Jews, Slavs, Roma and homosexuals (See also Paragraph 175), along with Jehovah's Witnesses, the mentally and/or physically disabled, socialists, and communists) To carry out these beliefs, the party and the German state which it controlled organized the systemic murder of approximately 11 million people in what has become known as the Holocaust. Additionally, the Nazi concept of Lebensraum ("living space"), and the pursuit of the creation of "Greater Germany" to achieve it, was a major cause of World War II in Europe, in which more than 70 million people died.'

Socialists and communist were enemies of the Nazi state, and therefore persecuted along with jews, homosexuals, and non orthodox christians.

The NY Times reports that Rep James Clyburn of Soucth Carolina might endorse Obama because he is annoyed at the tone and tenor of Clinton's campaign. He carries enormous influence, especially with African Americans, in South Carolina. His endorsment, if it happens, could be the most significant yet.

novamatt 12:46 PM

I was around last Tuesday night. Went to bed too early and woke up next day in Oz.

Also, Hill found her voice!

Clinton just step into the middle of the immigration debate. While at a camaign stop, a man yelled that his wife is an illegal, and Clinton shouted back "No woman is illegal". She went on a bit, but basicly her position is to grant unconditional amnesty to all and every illegal immigrant, but especially women. (cite: http://www.lvrj.com/news/13702902.html )

Now, especially since we're entering into a recession where we don't,even know the number of illegal workers, but "best gues" estimates place them at somewhere between 22 and 38 million, we don't know whart they cost, but based on analysis of state and feederal budgets costs for 2006, the bets guess is around TWO tillion dollars a year, we do know they hav wrecked employmnet for mllions of American workers in the manufacturing, forestry, constrction, and every other unskilled and semi-skilled trade. I can't for people o start noticing that Cliton has just jumped into the middle of the cultural wars - she's now on record as pro-gay marriage, pro "special rights" for lesbians, for quite radical amnesty for illegals (she seems to want to grant automatic citizenship to them). Keep tuned! Clint0on and her minions are already proposing to remake this country in their insane imagine. What a bunch of very dangerous knuckleheads.

"Already ninth on amazon. another repudiation of liberalism. the market knows."

zouk

Just because FASCISTS BUY BOOKS FOR "THE maRKET TO SPEAK", does not mean you are not fascists. You are a joke zouk. Your time has come and pasted.

"Police say missing 20-year-old Marine Maria Lauterbach -- due to give birth any day -- is dead and an officer accused of raping her is the suspect."

Support the troops byt bringing them home

Sister Hillary, ready or not, the good Guv'nor of the Arizona folk thinks you are toast. I do, too.

But let's get something straight: Clinton wasn't emotional because she cares deeply about the country. She was near tears because she cares deeply about becoming the first woman president.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/KathleenParker/2008/01/11/tear-jerking_americas_chain?page=full&comments=true

Krauthammer....

The Democratic primary campaign has been breathtakingly empty. What passes for substance is an absurd contest of hopeful change (Obama) vs. experienced change (Clinton) vs. angry change (John Edwards) playing Hugo Chavez in English.

One does not have to be sympathetic to the Clintons to understand their bewilderment at Obama's pre-New Hampshire canonization. The man comes from nowhere with a track record as thin as Chauncey Gardiner's. Yet, as Bill Clinton correctly, if clumsily, complained, Obama gets a free pass from the press.

The freest of all passes to Obama is the general neglect of the obvious central contradiction of his candidacy -- the bipartisan uniter who would bring us together by transcending ideology is at every turn on every policy an unwavering, down-the-line, unreconstructed, uninteresting, liberal Democrat.

He doesn't even offer a modest deviation from orthodoxy. When the Gang of 14, seven Republican and seven Democratic senators, agreed to restore order and a modicum of bipartisanship to the judicial selection process, Obama refused to join lest he anger the liberal base.

Special interests? Obama is a champion of the Davis-Bacon Act, an egregious gift to Big Labor that makes every federal public-works project more costly. He not only vows to defend it, but proposes extending it to artificially raise wages for any guest worker program.

On Iraq, of course he denigrates the surge. That's required of Democratic candidates. But he further claims that the Sunnis turned against al-Qaeda and joined us -- get this -- because of the Democratic victory in the 2006 midterm elections.

Even if you believe that a Clinton restoration would be a disaster, you should still be grateful for New Hampshire. National swoons, like national hysterias, obliterate thought. The New Hampshire surprise has at least temporarily broken the spell.

Maybe now someone will lift the curtain and subject our newest man from hope to the scrutiny that every candidate deserves.

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=284858815417165

the doctor is IN.

bokonon

I believe JFK used to slip away from the White House and meet his girl friends in hotel rooms.

Already ninth on amazon. another repudiation of liberalism. the market knows.

"Fascists," "Brownshirts," "jackbooted stormtroopers"--such are the insults typically hurled at conservatives by their liberal opponents. Calling someone a fascist is the fastest way to shut them up, defining their views as beyond the political pale. But who are the real fascists in our midst?

Liberal Fascism offers a startling new perspective on the theories and practices that define fascist politics. Replacing conveniently manufactured myths with surprising and enlightening research, Jonah Goldberg reminds us that the original fascists were really on the left, and that liberals from Woodrow Wilson to FDR to Hillary Clinton have advocated policies and principles remarkably similar to those of Hitler's National Socialism and Mussolini's Fascism.

Contrary to what most people think, the Nazis were ardent socialists (hence the term "National socialism"). They believed in free health care and guaranteed jobs. They confiscated inherited wealth and spent vast sums on public education. They purged the church from public policy, promoted a new form of pagan spirituality, and inserted the authority of the state into every nook and cranny of daily life. The Nazis declared war on smoking, supported abortion, euthanasia, and gun control. They loathed the free market, provided generous pensions for the elderly, and maintained a strict racial quota system in their universities--where campus speech codes were all the rage. The Nazis led the world in organic farming and alternative medicine. Hitler was a strict vegetarian, and Himmler was an animal rights activist.

Do these striking parallels mean that today's liberals are genocidal maniacs, intent on conquering the world and imposing a new racial order? Not at all. Yet it is hard to deny that modern progressivism and classical fascism shared the same intellectual roots. We often forget, for example, that Mussolini and Hitler had many admirers in the United States. W.E.B. Du Bois was inspired by Hitler's Germany, and Irving Berlin praised Mussolini in song. Many fascist tenets were espoused by American progressives like John Dewey and Woodrow Wilson, and FDR incorporated fascist policies in the New Deal.

Fascism was an international movement that appeared in different forms in different countries, depending on the vagaries of national culture and temperament. In Germany, fascism appeared as genocidal racist nationalism. In America, it took a "friendlier," more liberal form. The modern heirs of this "friendly fascist" tradition include the New York Times, the Democratic Party, the Ivy League professoriate, and the liberals of Hollywood. The quintessential Liberal Fascist isn't an SS storm trooper; it is a female grade school teacher with an education degree from Brown or Swarthmore.

These assertions may sound strange to modern ears, but that is because we have forgotten what fascism is. In this angry, funny, smart, contentious book, Jonah Goldberg turns our preconceptions inside out and shows us the true meaning of Liberal Fascism.

"A war hero? I'm sure that the PT Boat Veterans for Truth could reduce that fact to smoking rubble."

Judge, I wonder if Marilyn Monroe ever wore a blue dress when visiting the White House.

FairlingtonBlade, I will grant you that the majority of the Democratic field does not have a great amount of experience time-wise, in FEDERAL office. McCain probably has the most of any candidate in either party, now that Biden and Dodd are out.

Two corrections, though - Romney has roughly 3 years experience as MA governor - one term, and he spent the last year-year and a half of it on the road for the GOP, badmouthing the state that elected him.

Or maybe better to say "elected a candidate who claimed to be moderate on social issues and a financial whiz." Romney was moderate on social issues only until he got antsy in Boston and decided to make a run at the big chair... and financially - well, he didn't raise taxes, and for the past 5 years has not missed an opportunity to pat himself on the back for that publicly.

He did raise fees, and he did slash/privatize government services and public education, and he did - after briefly balancing the budget - leave office with a 1.5 billion dollar deficit. As a MA citizen who survived his tenure, I can tell you that without question that he is an INexperienced, disinterested, and self-centered man whose credentials do not measure up to those of (most of) the other candidates.

I have less to say about Giuliani, not having lived in NYC when he was mayor. My brother and his wife did, however, and they confirmed for me my impression of a loud little man on a massive ego trip. A good manager? Maybe, although the city was in the red again when he left - and had been since BEFORE 09.11. And the reduction in crime for which he takes all the credit was begun under programs instituted by his DEMOCRATIC predecessor, David Dinkins, and mirrored a general drop in crime nationwide.

And despite the admittedly cosmopolitan nature of New York, my brother and other New Yorkers with whom I have discussed this point out that there is a real difference between regulating outdoor ethnic food push carts and negotiating with foreign heads of state. None of them feel that he is intellectually prepared to handle relations with Russia or China, or a crisis in the Middle East or in Pakistan.

He was seen by many as an egotistical tyrant who was unable to tolerate any disagreement from subordinates, and my brother called him "Mayor Mussolini."

"He's certainly brazen...When Mr Goldberg says, "It's an attempt to reconfigure...the standard understanding of the political and ideological context that frames most of the ideological debates that we have had since...World War II", it certainly indicates that conservatives have learned nothing about hubris from the last couple of years.

He completely misses the point(s):

- in my experience, 'socialism' is every bit as much of a dirty word in the US as fascism

- while fascism embraced state power it also rejected the ideas of equality central to socialism, and demonised difference in order to forge unity

- fascism existed in the new world as well as Europe, whether S.America or racist groups - the left embraces difference, the right is threatened by it, who are the intellectual heirs here?

- the war economy and states of emergency of the western democracies had some common points with socialism and fascism by necessity - this is not the same as the new deal (a mild form of social democracy)

- in power, it continues to be the right who demonise opposition, polarise society, weaken constitutional government, exhibit absolutist tendencies and profess will to power

This book belongs in the Anne Coulter slush pile...

-- davidhjones "

"Re: JKrishnamurti

With regards to who is best equipped to fight facism, the president who actually fought facists (the goose-stepping ones with swastikas) was FDR. Did it pretty well as a matter of fact.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | January 11, 2008 12:40 PM
"

Where is FDR now? How many decades ago. He may have fought it then. Who's fighting it now?

Actually, a president needs a heart too. Wisdom, courage, and a heart. Sounds like the Wizard of Oz.

The only qualities a president needs are wisdom and courage. I don't know that political experience builds either one. Political experience, at best, helps to show how to make things happen. But that's what advisors are for.

'U.S. President George W. Bush said on Friday the United States would have a long-term presence in Iraq that could "easily" last a decade.

In an interview with NBC News, Bush was asked about recent comments by Republican presidential hopeful Sen. John McCain that it would be fine with him to have a U.S. military presence in Iraq for 100 years.'

Let's see, at approximately 1000 casualties a year, that's a 100,000 dead americans. And that would be -- for what?

Is this really what republicans want? But we won't have to worry about that, because we will have sunk under the weight of our own debt -- or be a wholly-owned subsidiary of China. 'The United States of China, anyone? or maybe the United States of Saudi Arabia or Dubai...

Re: JKrishnamurti

With regards to who is best equipped to fight facism, the president who actually fought facists (the goose-stepping ones with swastikas) was FDR. Did it pretty well as a matter of fact.

BB

'
Today's Financial Times front page article that Moody's foresees the USA losing its AAA rating instantly rang alarm bells. For nearly a hundred years, the US Treasury has been the most creditworthy counterparty in the world, serving as the baseline against which all other credits are rated. Losing its AAA status as a creditor would undermine all US credit markets, the US dollar as a reserve currency and the global economy more generally as heightened uncertainty shakes up all credit evaluations.

But I'm not really afraid of any of those things, because I think the Moody's report is a Bush administration ploy to attack Medicare and Social Security before Bush leaves office. About the only way the stock market can be held up from collapse right now is if the massive cash flow from Social Security is diverted into equities and bonds. They are going to go for it in 2008.;

As far as predictions, this is what I see for 2008: Bush will once again try to divert Social Security funds into the stock market--using this as an excuse, and he will attack Iran, probably before summer.

'Rudy Giuliani's campaign is in trouble. First it was a dismal 6th place finish in Iowa. Then, it was an embarrassing 4th place finish in New Hampshire, in which Giuliani was barely able to squeak out 9% of the vote. To put that in perspective, John Edwards - who placed 3rd amongst Democrats in NH - still received almost more than 2 1/2 times as many votes as Giuliani.'

sounds to me like his stratergy wasn't a very good statergy,,

Article 2, Section 1 of the US Constitution says

"No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States."

People forget that last part--the requirement that you have to have lived in the US for the last 14 years.

There are 9 female governors right now (counting LA Gov. Blanco who leaves office Monday). Six Ds, 3 Rs. Of the Ds, only one other has endorsed a presidential candidate so far. DE Gov. Minner for Clinton.

USMC Mike: Gotcha again. Hillary is the only one the Repubs "FEAR" for one simple reason. They KNOW they can't beat her in the GE.

It seems like we have collected so far...

Intelligence
Judgement
Integrity
Meaningful Experience
Patience
Courage
Collaboration
Communication

Lincoln had far less experience than any of the current major contenders for the presidency. He had served one two year term in Congress and a few terms in the Illinois state legislature. Although the machinery of the federal government was far less complicated in 1860, the crisis facing the country was far graver. Lincoln had judgement, patience, courage, perseverance and vision.

Lincoln was self-confident enough to populate his cabinet with most of his Republican rivals for the presidency - all of whom felt themselves far more qualified to be president. Lincoln was widely ridiculed at the time as a backwoods, inept, funny looking puppet of the Republican powers that be. His Secretary of State, William Seward, thought he should function as a prime minister and really run the country because Lincoln was "obviously" not up to the job. Seward soon came to realize Lincoln's greatness, although Salmon Chase, his Secretary of the Treasury, firmly believed he would have been a better president to the end of his life.

I strongly recommend Doris Kearns Goodwin's "Team of Rivals" to anyone with the slightest interest in Lincoln, presidential history or the Civil War.

http://my.telegraph.co.uk/nathanielhook/january_2008/why_hillary_clinton_must_win_the_nomination.htm
Why Hillary Clinton Must Win the Nomination

Posted by nathanielhook at 11:26 on 02 Jan 2008 Telegraph, London, England

I believe with fervent passion that Hillary Clinton is the best equipped and best qualified candidate to be the next President of the United States. You may ask why I, as a British citizen, have such a strong personal interest in the outcome of the upcoming elections in the US. I would respond by underscoring that the world in which we live is increasingly international, with globalization being the defining theme of the new millennium. Put simply, what happens in the US is inextricably linked to what happens to us here in the UK and the complexity of socio-political developments worldwide serves only to underline the absolute folly associated with the Bush administration's ongoing policy of ever-burgeoning isolationism and its covert agenda of neo-conservative imperialism.

Read the whole article......

This is something MOST voters are missing! We must VOTE in a GLOBAL SENSE! The young voters supporting Obama and creating his wave echo words on the Internet defining themselves as "cynical", "optimistic", and we hear Opra exclaim, "He is the one". This election is more than a social evangelical movement taking a step for either a "blackman" or a "woman". It is about who can do the job that has to get done! THINK!

"Does that exclude experience from being necessary?"

If its just experience, why don't we just find the oldest living American every 4 years?

amd write under that.

hahahahhahaha .Great minds think alike :)

"So there!Goldberg could have saved a lot of paper and ink by simply crossing his little arms and yelling at liberals: "I know YOU are but what am I???"

And I understand that Salon wants to show that it is open-minded and all, but there's a point where somebody giving polite and thoughtful consideration to such moronic assertions is just embarrassing to read.
"

r

u

f

u

s

Kudos to that az lady yesterday.

i saw this post today and have to pass it on

"Friendly fascismBertram Gross wrote Friendly Fascism in 1980, which explores the evolution of the fascist idea after its supposed defeat in WWII. Although he wouldn't have termed it "liberal fascism" the way Jonah Goldberg has (no doubt in an effort to give American reactionaries a brush to tar liberals with), that's basically what it is -- fascism with a friendly face, instead of the classical fascist boot in the face. As for his line about thinking that liberals and conservatives would likely fight fascism were it to emerge, I think he's wrong; I think it's already here, and has been for a long time.

I think liberals particularly are ill-suited to combat fascism -- I think their tendency toward ecumenical thinking makes them ill-disposed to combat fascists. They're too busy trying to accommodate and manage fascists, and only too late realize that they've been played and outmaneuvered.

Conservatives aren't very motivated to battle fascists, because it meets what they see as pressing social needs -- protecting business from too much democracy, smashing labor unions, disempowering intellectuals and teachers, crushing effete bourgeois liberalism (and its corrupting effects on natural society), ending civil and human rights in the interests of state power, and, of course, killing socialism.

Richard Evans' "The Coming of the Third Reich" and "The Third Reich in Power" are both useful (and frightening, in the light of the Bush Years) history books on Nazism, and how it came to be, written by an actual historian. For anybody in Bush's America, vital reading.

I can't entirely object to what Goldberg is talking about, although I think he's writing this as a bludgeon to attack liberalism in general (even as he, paradoxically, touts liberal free-market-driven societies). But isn't the Market as totalitarian as any other abstraction? Seems like any time you subordinate living people to some abstraction, be it God, State, Party, Race, Gender, Market -- you end up in a totalitarian mess, and people get hurt.

The 21st century's battlefront will be between human rights and property rights. Given the state of the world, I think property rights are winning -- torture, secret prisons, extraordinary rendition, suspension of habeas corpus, permanent war -- these things are destroying human rights, and yet they're in place. But property rights are safer than ever. You can see where the priorities are. The friendly fascist will be gung-ho on property rights, and won't give a rat's ass about human rights.

-- Slackie Onassis"

http://letters.salon.com/news/feature/2008/01/11/goldberg/view/?show=ec

In regards to Jonah goldbergs piece of garbage book. Also since the fascists are playing the "I know you are but what am I", game

Let's not lose focus of the importance of who's at the top of the ticket.

If anything, Clinton at the top of the ticket would jeopardize state legislature gains for Dems in Red States. Even if Obama didn't turn the tide in State Senate/House races, he would be seen as a unifying figure, a nice guy, and just pleasant enough to let "politics be local".

Real solutions happen close to home. This country can't afford massive state legis. losses in 2008.

"Straight Talk Express" lost major credibility when McCain paraded through an Iraqi market and declared it to be safe. It was safe all right....he had 20 or more armed guards escorting him through there and U.S. attack helicopters above circling above.

He pimped himself on that one he's a liar just like most politicians.

"He had lived overseas and, of course, was a war hero.
Posted by: jimd52 | January 11, 2008 11:52 AM"

Obviously, then, he was a Muslim plant a la the Manchurian Candidate. Time spent overseas with them 'furriners means that he was corrupted by the Scary World outside the US.

A war hero? I'm sure that the PT Boat Veterans for Truth could reduce that fact to smoking rubble.

Re: USMC_Mike

It's an interesting question. The conventional wisdom is that a governor or VP will beat a senator every time. So, it would seem that the electorate has valued executive experience over legislative. It just didn't happen this time, especially if McCain wins. This seems to be an unusual election, harkening back to Kennedy-Nixon.

I'll admit I find it quite exciting. Either a Clinton or Obama nomination would be historic. The Republican race is the most interesting muddle I've ever seen in my life. Excluding Thompson, whom I think is just hanging around, each of the 4 leading Republicans presents fascinating contrasts. With the exception of Romney, each is an unconventional candidate. Romney's attempt to be conventional has fallen flat and come across as pandering.

So, I guess it seems like the "vision" thing is important for the Democrats and "authenticity" for the Republicans. Not exactly what one would expect.

BB

'7. Have great, abiding respect for the Constitution of the United States of America.'

YIKES! Judge, my bad. Maybe most important of all/

MCCain is to old. Plus he let a whimp like W beat him. He also sold his soul to the devil. He is a sell out and the people know it. He comes from big name family too. What did he do but get shot down in an airplane over vietnam. that would qualify many people.

His time is far past. McCain isn't not qualified anymore.

Does anyone know if Kucinich or another person on his behalf has officially filed a recount request yet with New Hampshire None of the major media outlets have provided any updates to the initial story about the recount.

Thanks.

What do the American People care about? Isn't that the question we try to answer in every election?

Each candidate takes a stand and essentially places a bet that the issue that matters most to them is the same issue that matters to most of the voting public.

- McCain is betting that Americans care most about National Security.

- Clinton is betting that Americans care most about experience.

- Giuliani is betting that Americans care most about leadership in times of crisis.

- Obama is betting that Americans care most about moving beyond partisanship.

- Huckabee is betting that Americans care most about family values.

- Edwards is betting that Americans care most about lessening the gap between rich and poor.

- Romney is betting that Americans... I can't figure out what his core message is. That might be his problem.

While the above list is, of course, a gross oversimplification, whoever is most correct wins the presidency. Not a new concept in politics, and certainly not in American politics.

To add to Muddy_Buddy's list and incorporate cmfalter's comment:

7. Have great, abiding respect for the Constitution of the United States of America.

Bush, Romney and Guiliani are not qualified to be POTUS based on this stipulation. McCain: sure. Huckabee: I worry. Paul: nope.

All the D's seem likely to comply.

JFK had more experience than most people realize - he was elected to the House in 1946 and the Senate in 1952 so he had 14 years in Congress when elected President. Additionally, he knew the world better than most Americans of his day - he was very well travelled. He had lived overseas and, of course, was a war hero.

Endorsements by governors help with the state party apparatus. Voter list, organizers, big donors, etc. IMO, it helps much more than one from Senators or Congressman.

Qualifications?

Not be anything like George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. A real outsider. How many running right now in either party can say that?

connie -- absolutely. Intelligence-most important, but must be hand in hand with sound judgement and empathy -- an understanding of people from different circumstances than yourself, a willingness to choose wise counsel, listen and learn.

Fairness, patience, stability of mind, confiidence without egotism, courage, ability to lead and inspire, the competence to get 'er done.

I can dream, can't I?