Oh yes, Michael Ledeen -- one of the prime architects of the iraq fiasco. I'm sure I'll read what he has to say. Right.

"...Talking has failed for 30 years..."

Like McCain says, it is time to "bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, Iran" ! ! !

Talking Cure
Obama's flawed thinking.

By Michael Ledeen

Senator Barack Obama wants to talk to our Middle Eastern enemies, notably Iran. He can't imagine a happy resolution of the war without such talks. And he seems to think this desire is something new, maybe even revolutionary.

He apparently does not know that it is not at all new, and certainly not revolutionary. It is instead the fully tested "policy" of the United States for the past thirty years, ever since the seizure of power by the mullahs in 1979. We have had high-level and low-level talks, public and private talks, talks conducted by diplomats, by spooks, and by a colorful array of intermediaries ranging from former Spanish President Felipe Gonzales to nephews of Rafsanjani, Iranian-American businessmen, former NSC and CIA members, and others with more dubious qualifications.

All failed. As Ken Pollack recounts in his book, The Persian Puzzle, every carrot was offered and every stick was brandished. We tried everything. The Iranians were not interested. It reminds me of that great scene from Goldfinger, with James Bond spread-eagled on a sheet of gold, and a laser beam slicing through it, headed for his private parts.

"Do you expect me talk, Goldfinger?" he asks.

"No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die."

That's Iran. The mullahs want us to die.

These talks were approved by every president from Jimmy Carter to George W. Bush, Democrats and Republicans, lefties and righties, in varying circumstances. Why would Senator Obama, or any of the other advocates of talking to the mullahs, think that they could get a different result? Some smart person defined a madman as someone who keeps doing the same thing, hoping that the next time he'll get a different result.

Slowly but surely, even those who desperately want to avoid the knotty problem of Iran (nobody asked General Petraeus or Ambassador Crocker what they thought we should do about it) are coming to see that the issue is inescapable. That is because the mullahs declared war on us in 1979 and have been killing us ever since, as they are now in Iraq and Afghanistan. When Congressman Wexler asked General Petraeus to explain what we're fighting for in Iraq, the General made three points:

It has to do with the possible spread of sectarian conflict in Iraq, a conflict that had engulfed that country and had it on the brink of civil war.

It has to do with regional stability of a region that is of critical importance to the global economy.

And it has to do with certainly the influence of Iran, another obviously very important element in that region.

Talking has failed for 30 years, but the hubris of leaders overwhelms common sense. Every president from Carter to W. has come to believe that a grand bargain is in the offing, if only we tried hard enough. Thus, the humiliating apologies from Clinton and Albright; thus, the dogged participation in negotiations by W. alongside our feckless European allies; thus, the call for talks from former officials like Henry Kissinger, Jim Baker, Madeleine Albright and Brent Scowcroft, and now from Senator Obama.

In just one way, Senator Obama's proposal is indeed revolutionary. Previous presidents took a while before they embraced the talking cure. Obama would be the first one to call for it even before he's taken office.

Cazayoux definitely wins this one. It's hard to see him not winning.

But I think you overstate the African-American support that Baker had in the district. He wasn't hated per se, but he also hadn't seen a real race in 10 years. He voted against the renewal of the voting rights act, and he was the only one in the Louisiana delegation to do so. Throw in CHIPs and a few select other things and you paint a nasty picture. Cazayoux probably would have challenged him even if he hadn't decided to retire or to not run again.

But that's a moot point. It's easy to see a few targeted ads and robo calls into African-American households about Woody Jenkins really driving up turnout for Cazayoux. If Michael Jackson fully gets on board, then it's all over. And Jackson and Caz are good friends... there's no reason to think there's any real animosity between them.

Not to mention the fact that in the aggregate, Dem turnout was much higher than Republican and not very different percentage-wise in a district that is 2-to-1 Democrat.

Obama just nabbed another super, the Utah Dem chairman.

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_8877691

Polling data: "Sen. Hillary Clinton's lead over Sen. Barack Obama in the crucial primary state of Pennsylvania has dwindled to 4 points, a CNN average of recent polls calculated Thursday shows.

The New York senator now holds a 4 point advantage over her rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, 46 to 42 percent. Twelve percent of likely Democratic voters there remain unsure.

Recent CNN "poll of polls" suggest the race in Pennsylvania is tightening before the state's April 22 primary. A poll of polls calculated two days ago showed Clinton with a 6 point lead in Pennsylvania, and a poll of polls last Friday showed her on top by 11 points."

At the local meeting last night (and I know it is a mistake to extraoplate from one meeting, but...) people were mad as hell about the Colombia issue, one lady got up and said that she was pissed that Clinton thinks this is a game, that there are real families' livelihoods at stake here. What trust Hillary had is almost gone, except for a few diehards, I guess.

I don't think that votes are going to switch to Senator Obama, but many people who would have shown up after Ohio will be staying home. A combination of why bother since Obama is going to win anyways, plus Hillary is seen as having no credibillity on trade and American jobs.

I would be very worried if I was her.

On MSNBC : "Three superdelegates in one day. In addition to the pickup we mentioned earlier of former Pittsburgh Mayor Jackie Masloff, the New York senator's campaign just announced it has also picked up the support of CA Rep. Jackie Speier, who recently won the special election for the late Tom Lantos's seat, and the president of the Ohio state AFL-CIO, Bill Burga, a DNC member. "

George, Apparently if you cut the head off this snake, it just regrows. The two founders of Hamas, the cleric Ahmed Yassin and Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi, were killed by Israeli air strikes in 2004. Now we have Khaled Meshal, who lives in Syria to avoid being arrested by the Israeli government, where he is a guest of Bashar al-Assad's regime leading Hamas. This is the man that Carter is meeting with.

Their newspapers are already reporting it, the Arabic-language newspaper Al-Hayat that said Carter was preparing an unprecedented meeting with Khaled Meshal.

How is this supporting our allies? Oh, I forgot, Jimmy Carter doesn't concern himself with that minor detail.

What we should do is support our allies and legitiamte authority in the region, not undermine them.

You are wrong, Mr. Cannning.

I did see Senator Lieberman correct John McCain. But then I saw John McCain say it AGAIN. So, you Are wrong, George Canning.

I agree with you about Hamas, proud. Despicable terrorists.

Should we do more than "isolate"? Namely, take them out? Covertly, of course...

Actually, goodrepublicanandamerican, Iran is Shi'a and al-Qaeda in Iraq is Sunni. They would not work together. They hate each other -- fiercely.

McCain got that one wrong -- didn't you see Joe Lieberman correcting him?

George, The West (except for the Jimmy Carter wing of the Democrat Party) has long recognized that Hamas is a dangerous terrorist group. Not only the US, but also the European Union, Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and Japan have officially listed Hamas as a terrorist organization.

In addition, Hamas is responsible for suffering in Gaza of it's own people. And Hamas plans to establish a Muslim caliphate.

The actions of Hamas reveal its mad course, and its unwillingness to stand by the people and its Authority.

We must support the isolation of Hamas and so force it to recant and if possible rejoin the nation and its political system.

I think we should invade Hamas. And do some more nation building. Like Iraq. We're good at that.

John McCain understands the intricacies on the Middle East. It can be very complex there.

Like when John McCain talks about Iran helping the al-Qaida in Iraq.

He shows his thorough grasp the realities on the ground.

Should we attack Hamas, proud?

"We should just pretend that our enemies do not exist."

Jimmy Carter and his protege, Obama, would like to pretend just that...that if we just sit down at the table with these terrorist, then we'll all hold hands and sign kumbaya together forever and ever.

Hamas is the organiazation that uses cartoon animals depicting suicide bombing for the Palestinian children.

Hamas TV continues active promotion of Shahada (martyrdom) directed at children.

This video clip follows the growth of a young Palestinian boy from a child into a Hamas Shahid - Martyr for Allah. The video shows the young child going to the mosque, praying and reading from the Quran, and then holding an automatic rifle together with the Quran as he envisions future participation in violent acts.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FvXefcvXCM

This video directs Palestinian children to aspire to Shahada, reiterating a recurring music video theme of seven years that Shahada is expected of children. "Honor and glory" and "Shahada is sweet" are some of these messages specifically packaged for children on Hamas TV and Fatah controlled PA TV.

PA schoolbooks likewise promote Shahada death among children.

Thye teach thier childre to sing:

"We have come!
Machine-gun and Quran in our hands,
We've grown and so has the right,
In the eyes of the wronged,
We swore to retrieve the land,
The pure blood will produce
Honor and glory.
[visual: see him (child now turned adult) shot dead as Shahid - Martyr]

These are the people that Carter is going to have high-level talks with. If hate and violence is preached by Hamas or Rev Wright, I guess it's ok with the libs.

We should respect them anyway.

I guess the Kurds will live happily ever after, too. Like the Sunni and the Shi'a. In their flourishing democracy. A shining example in the otherwise bleak Middle East.

Thank heavens for the visionary leadership of George W. Bush.

And thank heavens that we have John McCain to follow in George W. Bush's footsteps.

* McCain is doing an event in Brooklyn this afternoon at a company called Windows We Are, Inc. It looks like McCain's campaign didn't exactly check the place out first -- the company's employment application form asks applicants if they have kids, are married, and rent or own. I'm pretty sure employment law prohibits these questions. Given that McCain is supposed to be speaking about jobs, this might prove to be a little embarrassing for the campaign (which never seems to do its homework).

What about the Kurds, goodrepublicanandamerican? You didn't mention them? Are they not part of Iraq?

Carter is crazy. So is Obama. They want to talk with our enemies? What is wrong with them?

We should just pretend that our enemies do not exist. Maybe they will leave us alone. We should pretend that everything is fine. The Economy is fine. The Health Care situation is fine. The War in Iraq is fine.

Be patient, we are winning and the Sunni and Shi'a will become friends and live happily ever after. McCain is right.

Anon for proud by me. FIX THE LOGIN, CC!!!!!

proud,
Arafat's thug/terrorist legacy - the PLO, Carter's last best friend in the ME, has apparently gone too mainstream for him, you know, denouncing the suicide bombers and actually thinking of possibly talking to Israel. There is talk of an acutal endorsement by Carter for Obama, something Carter has refused to do in the past. What do you think are the odds that would happen while on the same stage as Hamas? It still mystifies me how the MSM still label Carter as "the best ex-president".

"We invaded Iraq without having any domestic Iraqi faction in mind to take over after us. The only "option" was the INC. In every meaningful way the INC meant Ahmad Chalabi, an Iranian agent who had such a profound constituency in the country that his bloc failed to win a single seat in Iraq's national election on December 15, 2005. So what was plan B? I'm glad you asked.

"There was no Phase IV plan" for occupying Iraq after the combat phase, writes Maj. Isaiah Wilson III, who served as an official historian of the campaign and later as a war planner in Iraq. While a variety of government offices had considered the possible situations that would follow a U.S. victory, Wilson writes, no one produced an actual document laying out a strategy to consolidate the victory after major combat operations ended.

***

(*) Tommy Franks on neocon Douglas Feith: "I have to deal with the f*cking stupidest guy on the face of the earth almost every day."

Former President Jimmy Carter's upcoming meeting with senior officials of the Palestinian terror group Hamas is "not in the interest of peace," according to the State Dept, but he won't be deterred by that!

Carter will travel to Syria next week for an unprecedented meeting with the senior leadership of Hamas, a group designated as a foreign terrorist organization.

Meanwhile, Senator Obama is taking notes and reminding the US' top general in the field that HE knows more about how the world works, and he'll be having high level talks with Ahmedinejad if elected.

Peanut and Peanut Jr., travelling the world in search of terrorists to negiotiate with.

CC - "Both theories will be put to the test over the next three weeks" with "fatally flawed" being one of those theories. Then later, you say Jenkins is best known for "the fine levied against him by the Federal Election Commission in 2002 for concealing the purchase a telephone list from former Ku Klux Klansman David Duke during Jenkins' 1996 Senate race" [now that is notariety] and also that Jenkins runs a very non-traditional campaign. My question is doesn't that put him in the "fatally flawed" category and contradict your arguement?

And fix the daggummed login already!

Hey Drindl, do you not have anything better to do with your day than post ridiculously long comments on a blog, or are you just like most Democrats and not have a real job?

very funny, poser. and fyi, I'm not a meat eater or a hater.

but other than that, i agree with your post.
:)

I would not have hated MLK, drindl.

You misunderstand me. As long as you agree with me, I like you. You know about my kick boxing class, and for the people who disagree with me, well... they're going to get a good kick in the head from me. Because that IS what they deserve.

I like my ham and mayo (with American cheese) on white bread because that is the right way to eat. If you disagree, BAM, kick to the head for you.

Same with politics. Cut taxes, I say. If you disagree, BAM, kick to the head. Loser.

And for all you whining Libs out there reading this right now: if want to retreat from Iraq and lose another war for us, I'd like to give all of you a good kick to the head. BAM.

So, don't think I would have hated MLK, drindl... although I may have had to give him a good kick to head. BAM!!!

"But there is one important decision-maker that Petraeus and Bush don't seem to be listening to: Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki."

Maliki-Scmaliki. Do you really think it matters what the Iraqis think?

Cheney doesn't even care what AMERICANS think!!!

Think Cheney and Bush are gonna give a rats A** what Maliki wants?

I have been reading the remarks about my foreign policy philosophy and how close it is to the neo-conservative philosophy, and all I can say to that is ... shoot, what was the question again?

Gotta go - I just wet myself.

Don't be fooled. McCain is no moderate, he's closer to power-mad neocons than even bush or cheney:

"In a 2006 article tracking McCain's foreign policy views, John Judis wrote that, starting in 1998, McCain began to "place his new interventionist instincts within a larger ideological framework. That ideological framework was neoconservatism."

McCain began reading the Weekly Standard and conferring with its editors, particularly Bill Kristol...When McCain wanted to hire a new legislative aide, his chief of staff, Mark Salter-himself a former aide to neoconservative Jeanne Kirkpatrick, consulted with Kristol, who recommended a young protege named Daniel McKivergan...Randy Scheunemann, who had drafted the Iraq Liberation Act and was on the board of Kristol's Project for a New American Century, became McCain's foreign policy adviser. One person who has worked closely with Kristol says of Kristol and McCain, "They are exceptionally, exceptionally close."

The bottom line is that John McCain has been tied to the neocons, both personally and ideologically, for nearly a decade. Jacob Heilbrunn, author of They Knew They Were Right, a history of the noeconservatives (and a self-described former neocon himself) described the relationship this way: "McCain represents for the neocons the ultimate synthesis of war hero and politician."

And McCain, in turn, has been increasingly drawn to the neocons' militaristic vision of the U.S. as an empire that can set wrong aright around the globe.[...] If McCain becomes president, the neocons will be in charge."

I'm sure you would have hated MLK as much as you hate Obama proud -- just like most Republicans did in those days -- and still do.

So Maliki wants us to leave...

'Gen. David Petraeus, top U.S. commander in Iraq, told Congress this week that he is recommending to President Bush that the United States "pause" the draw down of troops in Iraq this July for at least 45 days in order to assess the security situation there.

Bush has now accepted Petraeus's recommendation, "leaving open the possibility that about 140,000 U.S. servicemen and women will still be in the war zone when the next president takes office."

But there is one important decision-maker that Petraeus and Bush don't seem to be listening to: Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. The AP reports that Maliki told Bush yesterday that he "disagrees" with Petraeus's recommendation "citing the capabilities of Iraq's own security forces":

The prime minister told Bush during a 20-minute telephone conversation on Wednesday that Iraqi security forces are capable of carrying out their duties and U.S. troops should be pulled out, according to a senior government adviser who sat in on the phone conversation.'

When the party thinks it has a good chance of keeping one of two seats, that party is in trouble.
The Democrats aren't going to pick up anywhere near all the special elections for red seats this year, but that they are in the running bodes ill for the GOP in November.

'Yet, we ought to have compassion for the elderly and the sick.'

--which a completely free market system will never have. We will simply come closer to a banana republic than we already are, with all health care only going to the few and the priveliged. No one else will be able to afford it.

USMC writes "That vote does not absolve our 'sins', nor should it be sold that way."

Your'e right, but that's exactly what Obama is selling to assuage the great white guilt of the nation.

One of the most offensive things I heard him say at his speech last week was when he quoted Martin Luther King Jr. who used the phrase "The moral arc is bending toward justice".

Obama closed his speech by saying that if Rev King were alive today and saw him, Barack Obama, standing there campaigning for the presidency, "he would say the arc is bending toward justice."

Aside from the fact that the phrase is stupid and meaningless, how the *&%#$# would Obama know what MLK would say....now THAT'S audacity.

McCain to Stick it Out in the Senate, Not Resign

A sign of pragmatisim or lack of confidence by McCain?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=2064

.

"Eating McDonalds every day makes you fat. Fat people have lots of health problems I shouldn't have to pay for."

Why is USMC_Mike getting a pass on being an expert on health care and M-16s, when all he has expertise on is McDonald's?

If you're a sh***y eater who never exercies, you deserve to pay more for health insurance.

Actually I exercise and try and eat well but was turned down by private healthcare and placed in a $1200/mo state pool b/c of reflux and allergies conditions I am sure mike you would agree are pretty prevalent and should not disqualify someone from healthcare. Oh mike I just passed 55 years old another nonstarter for private healthcare. I am sure you know a heck of a lot more about m16s then I do but those of us who have had to shop for small employee's helthcare likely know a little more about that than you.
Do you have a problem with tricare coverage a govt plan much like medicare that he gets b/c of a vietnam disability. My bros in law a vietnam vet tells me he pays $3 for prescriptions and likes his care but like you hates 'socialized medicine' . Do you not see the inconsistancies where your side slams dem healthcare plans but don't dare touch their medicare or tricare coverage.

Seems like Republicans are jumping ship before it goes down. Their party's policies over the preceding decade have been the "fatal flaw" for them. When you run the country into the ground for the sake of the minority of the extremely rich, of COURSE you are going to lose, and not just elections.
Tush is up in the White House just now, mumbling over and over "Apres moi, le deluge". You Republicans could blame him, but you are so guilty as well. And cowardly torturers too!!!

In the end, neither Democratic candidate gave any indication that they understand the stakes in Iraq. Nor was there any evidence that they - or anyone else in their party - would be willing to make the necessary if unpopular decisions needed for success. Sen. Joe Lieberman, himself gracelessly purged from his former party, was entirely on the mark when he described the Democrats' attitude this week as "hear no progress in Iraq, see no progress in Iraq, and most of all, speak of no progress in Iraq."

That left Sen. McCain the lone adult in the presidential race. Not shying away from the difficult questions - McCain pressed Petraeus about the underperformance of some Iraqi security forces - the senator nonetheless put the war in its proper context: "Successes is within reach," he said. "Yet should the United States instead choose to withdraw from Iraq before adequate security is established, we will exchange for this victory, a defeat that is terrible and long lasting." It was a statement that underscored yet again the difference between McCain and his Democratic counterparts. While Sens. Obama and Clinton are playing to the anti-war gallery, McCain, alone among the presidential contenders, is auditioning for the role of commander-in-chief.

It need hardly be said that success in Iraq is far from assured. But there is no gainsaying that progress - though often painfully slow - continues to be made. That was by no means obvious last fall, when top Democrats were mocking advocates of the surge as fantasists detached from reality. If General Petraeus's remarks confirmed one thing, it is that today it is the Democratic Party and its presidential paladins who are hopelessly out of touch.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=D435E843-61C1-44BA-B062-A6A9B86F06F2

Well at least race does not seem to be an issue for McShame anyway.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-MEy8NomVc

Thanks, Truth.

Our prayers go out to Lyle.

In the MS-1 special, Steve Holland is suing to get off the ballot while McCullough is staying on it. The GOP primary was less friendly than the Dem one. If Holland does get off the ballot, then it'll be Childers versus the two Republicans. I like his chances in that case.

Drindl, I started missing Ashcroft when Gonzo set up the White House political shop in justice.

Mike, Lyle has cancer, so I'm assuming he's in for surgery today.

Lyle, Let me add my best wishes for a good result to Mark's. Please keep us posted when you're up to it.

http://whathappenedtomycountry.blogspot.com

Still haven' fixed the name registration I see. I expect to see the juvenile delinquents posting under other names again.

Watch for me to say all sort of crazy liberal things again today.

Pragmatists fear that neocon extremists have taken control of McCain's mind:

"One of the chief concerns of the pragmatists is that Mr. McCain is susceptible to influence from the neoconservatives because he is not as fully formed on foreign policy as his campaign advisers say he is, and that while he speaks authoritatively, he operates too much off the cuff and has not done the deeper homework required of a presidential candidate.

In a trip to the Middle East last month, Mr. McCain made an embarrassing mistake when he said several times that he was concerned that Iran was training Al Qaeda in Iraq. (The United States believes that Iran, a Shiite country, has been training Shiite extremists in Iraq, but not Al Qaeda, a Sunni insurgent group.) He repeated the mistake on Tuesday at hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

The worry about Mr. McCain is centered among a group of foreign policy realists who have long been close to him and who lost out to the hawks in the intense ideological battles of the first term of the current White House. The group includes former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, former Deputy Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage and Brent Scowcroft, the national security adviser to the first President Bush.

the chronically and acutely ill, anyone with a pre-exisitng condition, the middle-aged and the disabled all get shafted.

Posted by: drindl | April 10, 2008 11:36 AM

get shafted by paying the fair market price?

Barack, I demand I pay less for things I want. fix it.

What's been missing in America's trade policy is a preference for Americans.

What's been missing in left-America's war policy is a preference for Americans.

If you're a sh***y driver, you pay more for auto insurance.

If you're a sh***y eater who never exercies, you deserve to pay more for health insurance.

I liked Mike Huckabee's "prevention" approach to healthcare, although I don't want a nanny state telling me what I can/can't eat.

"they can do that now. and as individuals, they are charged according to their individual risk. thus, the young and healthy get good rates, the chronically and acutely ill, anyone with a pre-exisitng condition, the middle-aged and the disabled all get shafted."

There is a fine balance, I think.

Eating McDonalds every day makes you fat. Fat people have lots of health problems I shouldn't have to pay for.

Yet, we ought to have compassion for the elderly and the sick.

I think, if the market were truly open, competetive, with a safety net for those truly deserving (not a 31 year old mother of 8 who weighs 350 lbs and has diabetes), things might be better.

Why should your boss buy your doctors anyway?

"What do you think would happen if individuals could shop for healthcare wherever they wanted,"

they can do that now. and as individuals, they are charged according to their individual risk. thus, the young and healthy get good rates, the chronically and acutely ill, anyone with a pre-exisitng condition, the middle-aged and the disabled all get shafted.

"Unfortunately, cheap tricks are a feasable substitute for argument to idiots."

You parrot the paranoid worldview of the neo-con fringe, then write about idiot arguments? Please.

As inappropriate as the comment was, don't try to have us believe that you have ever responded to any argument that doesn't appeal to the baser human emotions.

The above "I would never vote a colored man" obviously wasn't posted by me, FYI. [Unfortunately, cheap tricks are a feasable substitute for argument to idiots].

Posted by: USMC_Mike | April 10, 2008 11:22 AM
----------------
Didn't think it was you. Chris should really have a better way to secure posts, like other blogs do by checking email address. Some of the idiot trolls here are such losers.

"Mike... I am curious if you have actually shopped the healthcare market to buy healthcare for small business... the CURRENT [costs are] outrageous.... We can't shop in the same healthcare pools that large corporations..."

I personally haven't shopped for insurance. Have you personally fired an M-16? No? Well, didn't you hear, that's a pre-requisite to discussing military issues.

OK, childishness aside...

What do you think would happen if individuals could shop for healthcare wherever they wanted, and that healthcare went with them from job to job?

I'm looking forward to seeing the Geiko of health insurance. Their commercials are funny.

While I don't disagree with your point Mike, but wasn't this post by Chris about the House race?

By the way, the poor parents of the kid who was killed here got visas to come take him back home. What a nightmare for the family.

-------------------------------------------------
Yes, but no one was talking about the House Race, so I thread-jacked. Sorry.

Nightmare is a good adj. Poor souls.

The above "I would never vote a colored man" obviously wasn't posted by me, FYI. [Unfortunately, cheap tricks are a feasable substitute for argument to idiots].

Mike as a small business person myself I am curious if you have actually shopped the healthcare market to buy healthcare for small business and are you aware of the CURRENT outrageous costs. We can't shop in the same healthcare pools that large corporations can so it really sounds like you don't speak from experience but only promote Republican speak about our broken system when you said:

My question is, what makes you/your husband think that government healthcare will be:

1. CHEAPER?

Healthcare run away costs is a REAL issue for this country and worthy of real debate not demagogery or slogans.

Leichtman

CC writes
"Republicans retorted that their candidate, dairy magnate and two-time gubernatorial primary loser Jim Oberweis, was fatally flawed -- so the race could not be used as a barometer for other contests."

Right. That's why Oberweis is slated to run again in the fall. If they let him do that, then the R's deserve to lose that seat.

Just can the race talk. Anyone who has paid any attention here knows I have no intention of ever voting for a colored person. Get over it, already.

My question is, what makes you/your husband think that government healthcare will be:

1. CHEAPER

It could hardly be more expensive than it is now. A great deal of what is spent on healthcare goes to profit for middlemen.

2. AS EFFECTIVE/MORE EFFECTIVE

It could hardly be more fragmented or inefficient or unfair than it is now.A huge amount of resources goes to a very small pool of people, with vast numbers of citizens gettting no care at all.

Studies and anecdotal evidence indicate that recipients of Medicare are far more satisfied with their health care than those receiving it from private insurance companies. My in laws love Medicare... ask your own grandma.

Your grandmother wasn't a racist, Barack. Your grandpa was just a loser. Can we wrap up our national conversation about race now? I think we'd like to move onto questions about your stupid plan to hold talks with Iran.

Posted by: USMC_Mike | April 10, 2008 9:58 AM
-------------------
While I don't disagree with your point Mike, but wasn't this post by Chris about the House race?

By the way, the poor parents of the kid who was killed here got visas to come take him back home. What a nightmare for the family.

"I'm going to respectfully disagree that we can wrap up our national conversation on race."

You may not specifically be advocating this, but I certainly am not going to feel emotionally 'better', nor should the country feel 'purged', for voting for a black guy.

That vote does not absolve our 'sins', nor should it be sold that way.

Regading Benedict - you're right, Italian is a pretty obvious omission on my part!

USMC_Mike:

The Pope probably speaks Italian as well. JPII spoke 7 languages, though his English wasn't as good as Benedict's.

I'm going to respectfully disagree that we can wrap up our national conversation on race. Sweeping it under the rug is not helpful. Whether or not it should occur during the course of the Presidential primaries and/or election is certainly debatable, though given that one candidate is "of color", my opinion is that it's a reasonable point to discuss. That is, for those that will discuss reasonably. Clearly, it is a sore spot, as evidenced by the numerous charges of racism floating around these boards.

I was heartened to see at least one person take up Obama's challenge -- Newt Gingrich. But he's really been the only one brave enough to tackle the issue publically.

Oberweis has run in and lost every single election the state of Illiinois has had in the last five years including a House seat, a Senate seat, a State Senate seat, Treasurer, Sergeant at Arms, Hall Monitor, King of the Sweethearts, Toll Booth Operator and World's Best Dad.

"A senior Hamas official has confirmed that former President Jimmy Carter will meet with Khaled Meshal, the exiled head of the Palestinian terror group Hamas, during a visit to Syria next week, according to the Associated Press."

Jimmy Carter - always willing to talk to America's enemies.

Barrack Obama - his loyal student.

My question is, what makes you/your husband think that government healthcare will be:

1. CHEAPER

2. AS EFFECTIVE/MORE EFFECTIVE

He has owned a business for 20 years. He employs 3 people. He is a Democrat, a lifelong Democrat. He is more concerned about the costs of health insurance than taxes and the enormous cost to taxpayers of a pointless war and what the future will hold for his daughter in a country foundering in debt.
---------------------------------------------------

Well, now we're getting somewhere.

I can agree -- the costs of healthcare, especially for a small business, are outrageous.

I think your husband's work is admirable and productive. I'm sure his 3 employees are thankful for their jobs.

"Why are we talking about this in the White House? [The CIA, and our other defense agencies, ought to have the authority to do whatever it takes to keep us safe; despite what stretch-face Pelosi or dimwit dirty Harry tell you.]"

'Look, I just wanted to have a conversation about your husband.'

Fine. My husband owns a business. He designs websites for global non-profits.

He has owned a business for 20 years. He employs 3 people. He is a Democrat, a lifelong Democrat. He is more concerned about the costs of health insurance than taxes and the enormous cost to taxpayers of a pointless war and what the future will hold for his daughter in a country foundering in debt.

Your equating people who've been ripped off by fraudulent mortgages with drug addicts would be hilarious if it wasn't typical republican cliche, like everything else you think and say.

"Re:Jenkins is also quite conservative and more than a little controversial. The best known -- and most troubling -- controversy surrounding Jenkins is the fine levied against him by the Federal Election Commission in 2002 for concealing the purchase a telephone list from former Ku Klux Klansman David Duke during Jenkins' 1996 Senate race."

James Dobson flack Focus on the Familiy spokesperson Tony Perkins and was also involved in this yet he is never called out and always seems to show up on Hannity, Hardball etc...to defend the so-called pro family values position.

Apparently, the folks in the WH spend a lot of time just sitting around, chatting about the specific details of torturing people...

"Then national security adviser Condoleezza Rice chaired the meetings, which took place in the White House Situation Room and were typically attended by a select group of senior officials or their deputies, ABC said.

"This is your baby. Go do it," Condoleezza Rice told the CIA, according to ABC News.

Highly placed sources said a handful of top advisers signed off on how the CIA would interrogate suspects -- whether they would be slapped, deprived of sleep or subjected to waterboarding," ABC reported.

In addition to Rice, the principals at the time included Vice President Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Colin Powell, CIA Director George Tenet and Attorney General John Ashcroft, the report said.

Ashcroft argued that senior White House advisers should not be involved in the grim details of interrogations, sources were cited as saying.

ABC cited a top official as saying that Ashcroft asked aloud after one meeting: "Why are we talking about this in the White House? History will not judge this kindly."

Who could have imagined you could actually miss John Ashcroft?

So don't forget that there are a lot of
fed up with Speaker Nancy Pelosi Taking
Impeachment of War Criminals George W Bush
and Draft Dodger Cheney OFF The Table,and
who going to vote to throw out every current Incumbent,both Democrat and Republican over it as well. So the GOP can
still retain control of Congress again after all the Pelosi Democrats are voted
out of office along with the Obama Supporters in Congress. Its Called Backlash
people and it happens in politics when
you get losers like Nancy Pelosi,Barack
Obama,John Windsurfer Kerry,Old Lush Teddy
Kennedy,Steny Hoyer and Harry Reid in charge.

Look, I just wanted to have a conversation about your husband.

But, since you said he "ran", rather than "owned", a business, I assume he's not a R.

Because those who "own" things, who "create" wealth, jobs, and opportunity, don't rely on the nanny state to bail them out of their drug habits or bad mortgages.

Your husband probably works for a R.

I can see why that would be frustrating.

For the Line...

"A new Rasmussen poll of New Mexico, where GOP Senator Pete Domenici is retiring, shows Rep. Tom Udall (D) with significant leads over both potential Republican nominees, Reps. Steve Pearce and Heather Wilson:

Udall (D) 54%, Pearce (R) 40%
Udall (D) 56%, Wilson (R) 36%
Among independent voters, Udall leads Pearce by 12 points, and beats Wilson by 19 points -- perhaps owing to Wilson's involvement in the U.S. Attorney scandal damaging her credibility."

"general idiot -- useless and ignorant as ever."

you folks are better at projection than anything else. in fact, that's about all you're good at. except hating.

I'm racist?

Is that because I'm a "typical white person", or what?

(That's kind of hard since I'm 3/4 Hispanic, don't you think?)

general idiot -- useless and ignorant as ever.

My white grandmother hated latinos, and it was like a dagger in my heart. I nearly slumped over when I once heard her refer to them as churros (wetbacks). I felt so badly about it, I wrote a book, and ran for President - except not on the basis of race.

"Last week, Sens. Carl Levin, a Democrat, and John Warner, a Republican, asked GAO to investigate what Iraq is doing with its oil revenue. The senators estimated that Iraq will realize "at least $100 billion in oil revenues in 2007 and 2008."

And yet, US taxpayers are still paying through the nose for Iraq 'reconstruction.' And Iraq is paying nothing. Kinda makes you wonder why, doesn't it? Are Americans the biggest suckers in the world? New Orleans didn't get rebuilt. OUr infrastructure here is falling apart and 50 million Americans don't get health care -- but we are told we can't afford it. Yet somehow we can afford to spend $50 billion in alleged 'reconstruction' for a foreign country with oil riches.

Hey maybe the 'reconstruction contracts' are just a funnel to transfer US taxpayer money to well-connected republican contractors, hmm?

Ya think?

Racist Mike just can't get over it. Such an angry white man. A typical angry white male, as a matter of fact. What a long long rant, guy. You must be VERY angry.

My husband is not a republican, nor will he ever be, that's for sure.

It informed me that my husband, who runs a small business, had been selected to receive their 'highest honor' -- the 'Congressional Order of Merit.'

-----------------------------------------------

Drindl,

What kind of business is he in?

I ask because, I'm betting he has to do more work for the government than he does for himself/his employees.

Obama's Grandmother was not a racist; his Grandfather was just a bum.

Can we conclude our conversation about race already??

------------------------------------

Since a Chinese graduate student at Columbia University, Minghui Yu, was killed last Friday when black youths violently set upon him, sending him running into traffic to escape, I think B. Hussein Obama ought to start referring to the mind-set of the "typical Asian person."

As of Wednesday, police had no motive for the attack, and witnesses said they heard no demand for money or anything else. The Associated Press reports that the assailant simply said to his friend, "Watch what I do to this guy" before punching Yu.

Meanwhile, let's revisit the story about Obama's grandmother being guilty of thinking like a "typical white person." As recounted in Obama's autobiography, the only evidence that his grandmother feared black men comes from Obama's good-for-nothing, chronically unemployed white grandfather, who accuses Grandma of racism as his third excuse not to get dressed and drive her to work.

His grandmother wanted a ride to work at 6:30 in the morning because, the day before, she had been aggressively solicited by a homeless man at the bus stop. On her account, the panhandler "was very aggressive, Barry. Very aggressive. I gave him a dollar and he kept asking. If the bus hadn't come, I think he might have hit me over the head."

Even Obama's shiftless grandfather didn't play the race card until pretty far into the argument over whether he would drive Grandma to work. First, the good-for-nothing grandfather told Obama that Grandma was just trying to guilt him into driving her, saying, "(S)he just wants me to feel bad."

Next, he complained about his non-work routine being disrupted, saying: "She's been catching the bus ever since she started at the bank. ... And now, just because she gets pestered a little, she wants to change everything!"

Only after Obama had offered to drive his grandmother to work himself and it was becoming increasingly clear what a selfish lout the grandfather was, did Grandpa produce his trump card. The reason he wouldn't get his lazy butt dressed and drive Grandma to work was ... she was a racist!

As Obama recounts it, on Grandpa's third try at an excuse, he told Obama: "You know why she's so scared this time? I'll tell you why. Before you came in, she told me the fella was black. That's the real reason she's bothered. And I just don't think that's right." So I guess I'll be heading back to the sack now!

That makes sense. It certainly never bothers me when crazy white people harass and threaten me.

This is Obama's own account of what happened, which -- as anyone can see -- consisted of his slacker grandfather making a series of excuses to avoid having to drive the sole bread-earner in the family to work. continued...

But Obama says, "The words were like a fist in my stomach, and I wobbled to regain my composure." (It was as if he had been punched by an aggressive panhandler at a bus stop!) And not because his grandfather's sorry excuse reminded him that he came from a long line of callow, worthless men, both black and white.

No, Obama swallowed his grandfather's pathetic excuse hook, line and sinker, leading Obama to a reverie about his grandparents: "I knew that men who might easily have been my brothers could still inspire their rawest fears." That's true -- assuming his brothers and sisters were menacing people at bus stops.

How deranged would you have to be to cite this incident as evidence that your grandmother thought like a "typical white person" -- as opposed to your grandfather being worthless and lazy? For those keeping score, Obama is aghast at his grandmother's alleged racism, but had no problem with Jeremiah Wright's manifest racism.

If Obama is sent reeling by the mere words of an elderly white woman, how is he going to negotiate with a guy like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? What if Ahmadinejad calls him "booger-face"? Will he run crying from the table?

Your grandmother wasn't a racist, Barack. Your grandpa was just a loser. Can we wrap up our national conversation about race now? I think we'd like to move onto questions about your stupid plan to hold talks with Iran.

My My general,

you're awfully angry this morning.

Mark -- what's happening to lyle today?

Did y'all hear the Pope is making a visit to the US and speaking to the UN in a few days?

I didn't know he spoke english and spanish beautifully (and, I assume German and Latin, at a minimum).

One post and out:

Novamatt at 9:21A is so correct on the demographics. Metro BR took in almost as much of NO as Metro Houston and is now permanently the largest city in LA.

My recollection is that a higher proportion of anglos stayed in BR than came to TX - but it should make previous election demographics in BR useless as predictors. BR was competitive for Ds anyway, partly because of the two universities and the dockworkers. It should be leaning D now.

Also, aleks is correct. The R's assumed that they could get away with a candidate as nutty as Oberweis in IL-14. They found out otherwise, and the only real question is whether that was because of the nature of the special election, or because of real partisan shifts in the district.

NPR's Ira Flatlow's account:

"I almost won the Congressional Order of Merit, called by some winners of the award as the "most coveted civilian honor." For weeks, via repeated phone calls I had been courted by the office of Congressman Tom Cole, (R) Oklahoma, chairman of National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) . The slogan of the NRCC is "Building A Lasting Majority" (Wikipedia) and its job is to get Republicans elected to Congress.

The phone message on my machine from the NRCC office said that the Congressman wanted to "recognize me with their highest honor, the Congressional Order of Merit." It was given to those few select people "in recognition of their undying commitment, patriotic loyalty, and dedication to service to ... the United States of America."

Who could resist? Pictures of a great award ceremony danced in my head.

So I called back and talked to a staffer. She said the Congressman wanted me to represent small businessman in my state. She had me listen to a pre-recorded message, in which Cong. Cole sought my help to stop Nancy Pelosi from ruining small businesses like mine. And he wanted to add my name to an advisory committee. Nothing else more would be needed. Just my name, and the Award of Merit would be mine. And I'd get to attend a coveted, big time Congressional banquet.

I informed the staffer that as a journalist who covered congress, that joining a political committee would be a conflict of interest. So I couldn't do it. She thanked me for my consideration and prepared to say good-bye. I interrupted to ask: "Does that mean I don't get the Order of Merit?"

"You don't," she said. "Only those who join our committee."

Just wanted to make you all aware of a fundraising scam by the NRCC. This is how sleazy they are. I received a phone call for my husband this morning, from the office of Tom Cole, R, Okla, chairman of NRCC.

It informed me that my husband, who runs a small business, had been selected to receive their 'highest honor' -- the 'Congressional Order of Merit.'

And what did he have to do to receive it? Why, just 'join' the committee for a 'small fee.'

My husband tells me he's been receiving these calls for years, only they used to come from the office of Tom DeLay. Here's the wiki for it:

'Another of those continuing controversial techniques has been approaching small business leaders to inform them that they are to be recognized with a "National Leadership" Award, in return for a financial gift and the use of their names in a list of supporters. [4] [5][6] Science Friday host Ira Flatow and others report being approached in 2007 by the NRCC offering them such awards as "Congressional Order of Merit" (in exchange for adding their name to a list of NRCC members) [7] or "Honorary Chairman of the Business Advisory Council" for a fee between $200 and $500. "

Not only are republicans increasingly lowdown, sleazy liars, now they're laughable beggars as well.

Seems like a lot of former New Orleanians have settled in Baton Rouge, and I would imagine LA-6 is significantly more D than it was in '04, even if LA as a whole is now significantly more R, so PVI numbers might not be as reliable as, say, MS-1 or IL-14. The '10 Census numbers should be interesting.

McCain and his ardent neocon supporters continue to mischaracterize and distort events on the ground in Iraq:

"In recent weeks, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has repeatedly bumbled the details of the outcome of intra-Shiite violence in Basra, falsely claiming Muqtada al-Sadr was defeated by Prime Minister Maliki's forces. "Very rarely do I see the winning side declare a ceasefire," he said on March 31. "I don't think Sadr would have declared the ceasefire if he thought he was winning," he again said this Sunday.

The phrase has become a frequent claim from the right wing. Now, surge architect Fred Kagan is jumping to McCain's defense. Yesterday, on the PBS News Hour, Kagan claimed Sadr simply "stood his forces down, adding that "McCain rightly said" that Maliki did not declare the cease-fire:

KAGAN: And it's not the way -- as Senator McCain rightly said, the side that's winning a conflict like this doesn't generally call a timeout and say, "Hey, you know, we've had enough. Thank you very much." And it's not the way it's playing on the Iraqi street.

Armchair general Kagan's "street" analysis is grossly oversimplified. Maliki's government in fact traveled to Iran to "win the support of the commander of Iran's Qods brigades" for a cease-fire (revealing his dependence on Iran), to which Sadr agreed. Maliki's government then issued a statement praising Sadr, after the PM insisted days earlier there would be "no negotiation."

Earlier in the segment, Lt. Gen. William Odom (ret.) of Yale University explained the possible outcome of the fighting -- that the future government in Iraq will not be "one of our allies":

ODOM: It showed how impossible it is to expect anything productive out of the Maliki government. Let me make a key point about this government: When this is all over, the people in the Green Zone now and the Maliki government will not be in charge. The future successful government in Iraq is not one of our allies. It will be somebody who wins the civil war. And we're trying to ally with all sides to prevent it."

Got that?

"The future successful government in Iraq is not one of our allies"

Kinda makes you wonder why we're there, doesn't it?

"Republicans retorted that their candidate, dairy magnate and two-time gubernatorial primary loser Jim Oberweis, was fatally flawed -- so the race could not be used as a barometer for other contests."

I never understood the "It doesn't count because we ran a loser" defense. If the argument is that the Republican brand isn't damaged, pointing out that they couldn't get someone better as their nominee in Hastert's district seems like a weird way to make it.

"Jenkins is unlikely to have much appeal to black voters. "

Yes, a guy who buys his contact list from the KKK probably wouldn't, CC -- quite an understatement.

Good piece on the failure of american trade policy for americans my Myerson today:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/09/AR2008040903401.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

"What's been missing in America's trade policy is a preference for Americans. The object of trade in China is to help the Chinese nation. German trade is designed to help Germany; Scandinavian, to help the Scandinavian nations. This is not the case here. General Electric goes abroad to lower costs and boost profits. Goldman Sachs invests abroad in the same kind of low-wage, high-profit enterprises. That's the mission of such businesses. But the U.S. government has never taken on the mission of defending the American economy, or the American people, in the global economy. That is not the only reason the broadly shared prosperity of the three decades following World War II is now a distant memory, but it is a certainly a major reason."

Lyle -

Good luck today. Please post as soon as you are able so we know you are OK.

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.