... and without the obnoxious TV commentators!

Via The Left Coaster, this clip of Secretary of State Clinton's welcome at the State Department is refreshing and inspiring and it's all done without a single 'journalistic' moron telling us what to think.

Yesterday's QUOTES ...

Is this a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face? ... Sen. Barack Obama's top fundraisers have asked his campaign donors to refrain from contributing to liberal independent political organizations in hopes of controlling the tone and message of the general-election campaign. [ ... ] The McCain campaign has been less organized than Obama's in its efforts to counter the groups, but the senator from Arizona has made clear his antipathy toward them -- without much effect. ... anyone think McCain seriously cares about the swift-boating of Obama? Does Obama actually believe McCain cares or would do anything substantive to stop it? Will Democratic politicians really ignore the last eight years and get snookered again?

... As I have pleaded with you to understand, they are dishonest and cruel, they are crafty and deceptive, they aren’t stupid. Like all successful con men, they will deceive those they are robbing and destroying quite successfully. They are far from stupid.

I'd just like to say this to Clinton supporters. The spate of endorsements of Sen. Obama will continue. Every victory of Sen. Clinton's will be followed immediately by high profile endorsements to blunt the impact of that victory - it's called politics. ... Politics it may be, but I find it very disappointing that Edwards chose to endorse the least progressive candidate, the one with no real national health plan.

... The oppressor may inflict unimaginable cruelties on innocent victims -- but the victims may only protest in ways which the oppressor deems "acceptable." The profound injustice is obvious, but not in itself remarkable or unexpected: this is how oppression operates. ...

The media deserves a large share of the blame ... All this might be quite funny if one doesn’t consider the consequences for the Republic. When historians try to figure out how the most powerful nation on earth managed to end up under the control of someone as unfit as George W. Bush for eight years, they will have to take note of this media phenomenon. ... and their destructive role has not been accidental.

It’s an example of how American law enforcement tends to marginalize black discontent by attributing it to more organized external forces. This is a tendency rooted in U.S. tradition: black radicals and civil rights activists of past eras were often linked to communists and other “outside agitators” — as if the progeny of enslaved Africans needed Karl Marx to detail their gripes about life in America. Now, apparently, the government claims the link is with Osama bin Laden.

... now that it's clear Hillary's presidential campaign is all but over, the right is proceeding apace with its attempt to Hillary-ize Michelle Obama. ... [...] ... We know what the right did to Hillary, and we can expect them to do a lot of the same things to Michelle. How do we combat this?

Moyers: “ ... We’re not going to have a discourse in this campaign over the fact that the great American wealth machine is benefiting only those at the top. We’re not going to get to the fact that 10% of the people own 60% of the wealth and 70% of the people have no net worth. We’re not going to get to the issues of how do we rebuild the infrastructure, the sewer, the water, the highways, all that. We’re just going to be constantly in this battle of bumper stickers.”

Yesterday's QUOTES ...

... Why is the ACLU seemingly alone in calling for a Special Counsel to investigate clear war crimes by this government?

In cov’rage quite sloppy at best,
The press attacked Hill’ry with zest,
Disputing her facts.
But ’twas they who were lax.
Cuz if Clinton says east they say west.

This is the behavior of a sick child, not one of the most powerful and privileged men in the world, but Glenn and Joan must watch with daily fury as the truth is blatantly ignored, the US propaganda corps has its marching orders and by God they will be enforced, no matter what happens, no matter how many die, no matter how stupid, unlawful, childish or grossly offensive the episode the result is always the same: ignore it, hide it, confuse it, the Republicans are in power, don’t take the country down.

Hiding the truth is in fact the surest way to take the country down, a basic fact of life most five-year-olds learn very well, but one our Republican and “journalism” brethren refuse to learn, no matter the sickening, outrageous scope of their behavior. ...

Pollan claims that in the Western diet, good old food has been replaced by nutrients, mom's good advice by nutritional experts, common sense by confusion, and for most, a relatively good diet by a bad and dangerous one. ...

We have tended to segment health care into periods of life, but are now beginning to wake up to the fact that disease and disability are cumulative, and build over a lifetime.

If this were simply a story of an airline trying to cut corners, and in the process putting passengers at risk, it would be startling enough. But in this case, we’re talking about federal inspectors who were pressured by their superiors to allow an airline to put passengers at risk.

... To me, the 2008 Democratic primary campaign is a watershed event in the history of the progressive blogosphere. It has revealed that some of the alleged "progressive" bloggers are fundamentally no different than the media and the deranged right-wing bloggers they have long claimed to detest. The Trina Bechtel incident is the "crowning" event on a sickening trend in this election campaign - where Gore was replaced by Clinton and the "media" was supplemented by an influential portion of the allegedly "progressive" blogosphere. I can easily see an entire book being written on the work of these jokers who have turned the credibility of the blogosphere to dust because of their Clinton-hatred. There used to be a time when bloggers like Glenn Greenwald and Atrios used to write again and again about how the right-wing blogosphere was almost always wrong, especially in their attacks on Democrats. Today, it is clear that such blog posts could equally well be written about a prominent section of the formerly "progressive" blogosphere.

Worry Wort explains why he thinks Obama has a better chance against McCain ...

Finally, an Obama 'argument' I can understand.

Of Events, Issues, and Principles

They tell me ...

Bush was likable too

... but I never really saw it. Beer-buddyship has never been a big selling point for me. Some people do seem to be instantly and superficially likable but don't necessarily stay that way on further acquaintance.

The 'liking' that I trust is the one that develops as knowledge of the person increases. I like Al Gore. I like John Edwards (almost as much as I like his wife). And I'm liking Hillary Clinton more and more as the campaign progresses.

I do not yet 'like' Barack Obama. Just as I didn't (and still don't) like George Bush. My very definite dislike of Bush is based on a mountain load of data. My lack of 'liking' of Barack Obama is due my inability to discern any substance behind the hype. This lack of concreteness appears to be the policy of his campaign emanating from his own style, I assume. It's rubbed of on his supporters or possibly he's attracted quite a crew that prefers to glom on to a Pied Piper rather that discuss issues, causes, policies, structure and philosophy. Additionally what I have been able to gather from Obama's speeches and interviews is that he's not very progressive. It amazes me that his supporters think that in Obama they would get a more liberal person than in Clinton, or do they really think so, or do they even care? Obama certainly isn't responsible for his campaign followers but he does seem to have a lot of bullies in his campaign, he appears to attract them and keep them happy. Another Bush characteristic?

It's possible, if Obama is nominated and then if Obama is elected and then if President Obama should govern rather than continue his Pied Pipership that I will begin to like his also. Hope so, anyway ...

A pattern developing?

This post by Krugman is particularly interesting, not so much for the purported subject, but for what it demonstrates about the two very different 'styles' of the two remaining Democratic candidates for President.

One reminds me of Bush and the other seems like someone I would like to work for OR have work for me.

Can you guess which is which?

Yesterday's QUOTES ...

Very troubling indeed. Sen. Clinton has this ugly and detestable habit of impressing people who get to know her well - especially independents and Republicans! The result? A powerful Republican and media magnate who hated the Clintons came dangerously close to endorsing her! We certainly can't have that! After all, according to The Clinton Rules and The Obama Rules it is only acceptable if Republicans endorse Sen. Obama - he who has courted them aggressively - in support of his campaign of hope, unity and change. ... how unfair can it get.

A new world order emerged when Mr. Gorbachev brought down the Berlin Wall. The next world order began when U.S. psyop forces staged the toppling of Saddam Hussein’s statue. From that point, it became apparent that America’s military might meant little without a peer force to compete against.

While the Bush Administration has demonized al-Sadr and the Mahdi Army since the invasion, it has never acknowledged one simple fact: between the two main Shiite factions in the country, Bush backs the one directly tied to Iran. Al-Sadr on the other hand is a nationalist, who will accept support from Iran but will never be an Iranian puppet.

... Yet after all this, our governing class and the foreign policy establishment have learned absolutely nothing -- except to commit their future crimes more "efficiently" and "competently." ...

[...] Be sure to appreciate the magnitude of the destruction involved: not only has the United States destroyed a nation and over a million human beings. As was true from the beginning, the U.S. is determined to destroy logic, morality, and your capacity to understand or make sense of anything at all: "The charges...were dismissed 'in order to continue to pursue the truth seeking process into the Haditha incident.'" ...

Black Super Delegates being threatened by Obama Supporters ...

“African-American superdelegates are being targeted, harassed and threatened,” said Rep. Emanuel Cleaver II (D-Mo.), a superdelegate who has supported Clinton since August. Cleaver said black superdelegates are receiving “nasty letters, phone calls, threats they’ll get an opponent, being called an Uncle Tom. (via The Left Coaster)

Obama needs to come out against this behavior NOW. Or we will have to assume that he is behind it and will do ANYthing to win; even act like a creepy, incompetent, bullying Republican attempting to destroy the Democratic Party.

This is like proposing that Obama should win the nomination BECAUSE he's black. Even I, who strongly believe in quotas to ensure the inclusion of individuals from groups that have been discriminated against into industry, schools and universities, find this repulsive and destructive. Obama needs to address this and stop his followers from using these tactics. This is BushCo/Rove tactics.

Read eriposte's full post. It's very disturbing.

I don't think Hillary Clinton has a RIGHT to the nomination. And if I didn't think she was qualified I wouldn't want her to get the nomination and even though she was not my first choice I DO think she is extremely qualified and would like to see her get elected President.

Neither does Obama have a RIGHT to the nomination. Being black is not a qualification. I don't know if he's qualified. His noise machine is always drowning out any substance before I ever get a chance to make up my mind about him.

Why I hate politics ...

Mary at Pacific Views writes about Why I hate this primary campaign.

My disquiet --I don't really hate politics, after all life is politics-- is more all encompassing. A call from the Clinton campaign allowed me to vent my frustration about both campaigns --not that I expect my words to make any difference-- and I gave them some money. When a call came in from the Obama campaign I wanted to talk about the same thing. The Obama person on the phone didn't listen and, in fact, tried to talk over me with her prepared talking points. I hung up. And when the DNC calls I just tell them that I no longer give money to any organizations other than individual candidates campaigns.

Until the DNC even tries to fix this screwed up and undemocratic primary mishmash I will not give them any money. I resent the fact that all the candidates campaigning in the primary do not get voted on by all Democrats (and only Democrats). Keep all non-Democrats away from Democratic primaries.

There, I feel better.

Added: On second thought, I do hate that sleazy organized politics is part of life.

Yesterday's QUOTES ...

I’m getting seriously impatient with the execrable excuses for this appallingly weenie political behavior. One could guess—one has to, you know, since neither candidate can lead on it—that Clinton doesn’t want to offend New York money and that Obama won’t take on the fight, calling out these crooks and defining elements that must be combated for societal success just doesn’t fit in with an optimistic campaign.


US Guest Worker program in action? ... ... Nearly 100 Indian workers say they were enticed to come to work at the company’s shipyard in Pascagoula, Miss., where they say they were held in modern-day slavery.



A most unpleasant reading of current events ... However, even if Bush does hold off for some reason, the processes that Polk describes will almost certainly lead the next president into war with Iran, especially as the three remaining major candidates have forcefully pledged to keep "all options, and I mean, all options on the table"


... The vast majority of remote-sensing algorithms are based on vision, he says, so if the sonar algorithm can be perfected, one of its advantages will be the ability to function in low light or darkness. ... Bat-like!


Shifting sands ... Unfortunately for our candidates their macro strategy was hatched 18-24 months ago, while present political and environment reality has drastically altered underneath their feet in two critical facets since then: current economic problems are demanding far more change than their current careful approaches, and the nomination process didn’t produce a winner.

Sorry, but this is sounding a lot more like Bush & Gore ...

What the DNC and the Obama campaign are trying to do is disenfranchise Florida and Michigan primary voters.

I do not assume that Clinton wouldn't try the same. However it is NOT Clinton but Obama and the DNC, this time, who are pushing a corrupt deal.

Just explain to me how all this is not just what those Supreme Court Jesters did when they selected Bush as President ignoring the votes of the citizens of the Unites States.

Yesterday's QUOTES ...

This particular Times article (which only gets worse) underscores the disingenuous depths to which our paper of record is willing to sink. President Bush vetoes a bill intended to stop the CIA from using torture techniques, including waterboarding - which dates back to the Spanish Inquisition, was a favorite practice of the Gestapo, and for which the US tried and hanged Japanese soldiers after WWII - and The Times boils down the entire veto to politics and a factually inaccurate, Bush-approved narrative of his legacy. ... does anyone really consider the NY Times 'our paper of record' anymore? Or is it the irony that keeps them bringing up the distant past?

... And the only way journalists could make the Clinton response to the Muslim question newsworthy was to pretend that when Kroft pressed her, she essentially refused to answer the question and then when she finally did, qualified it with "as far as I know." Journalists had to hide the most pertinent parts of the answer -- the context -- in order to make the exchange newsworthy. And lots of reporters and pundits did just that.

[...] What's disturbing is that either all these journalists failed to read the entire transcript or watch the relevant video from the 60 Minutes interview and therefore were not informed about Clinton's response. Or worse, they knew about her entire response and purposefully left out key phrases in order to portray the candidate in the worst possible light. ... I know by now that most journalists are deceitful, corrupt, incompetent and/or lazy, but I really didn't think Bob Herbert was one of them. Another disappointment.

It's quite obvious that elected Democrats are the targets of the wholesale illegal wire tapping undertaken by BushCo's mafia ... And I am certainly not comfortable with the hysteria over two consenting adults having sex, while no one cares that the Bush administration lied us into an illegal war in which nearly a million Iraqis have been killed and tens of thousands of Americans have either been destroyed or killed. I am also not happy that the illegal domestic spying this administration has engaged in appears to have nothing to do with terrorism. I am not surprised by this, of course. What I am surprised by is that no one else seems to care that the White House is more interested in sex between consenting adults than in catching a terrorist.

The difference between the girls working at the Emperor's Club and the Washington press corps is that the Emperor's Club girls know exactly what kind of transaction they're making. That, plus the fact that the result of a prostitute's transaction has no victim, and the result of the press corps' has thousands upon thousands.

Yesterday's QUOTES ...

Noting this, Matt Yglesias added, “Few people seem to appreciate it, but it’s quite literally true that al-Qaeda’s strategy is to cripple the U.S. economy by dragging us into quagmires abroad. Osama bin Laden himself has said this, and it’s the only strategy that makes sense. A smallish number of people with no base of resources can’t possibly defeat us unless we shoot ourselves in the foot repeatedly as Bush and McCain propose.”

Wait, let me see if I get this. The FBI broke the law on orders from the White House and with the help of private corporations who were big donors to the Bush-Cheney campaigns. The private companies charged us - the consumer - on contract, which they then broke to get more of our money from the federal government. The White House and DOJ lied to Congress when caught, claiming that this illegal spying was only against "terrorists," and claimed that everything they had done was legal. Yet it is the White House who is demanding immunity for companies that they claim broke no laws. In the meantime, even though the FBI lied and misled Congress a number of times now, they claim that new reforms will keep the public safe from illegal domestic spying.

Hillary Clinton's supporters have gotten incredibly annoying, with their chants of "Yes She Can," and charges of cultism and their desperate yelps of schadenfreude every time Clinton looks like she might actually be "recapturing the lead" that she never had.

And Obama's supporters, yes, you too are incredibly annoying, with your accusations of Clintonian Republicanism and your whiny little cries about how you're going to take your ball and run home if your candidate doesn't win the primary.

You found "them" in Pakistan. So why are you not "there?" You found "them" in Afghanistan, so why did you leave "there" to go to Iraq? And "they" are certainly in and funded by Saudi Arabia, but you did not go "there" either. So what makes Somalia so special as to rouse the attention of our military industrial complex?

Greg Sargent covers all bases ...

... with anemic and archaic logic and concludes with something that translates to don't complain or fight because it will only hurt worse and boys will be boys (or was that the press will be the press).

But it's also possible that, given the unfortunate reality of how our political press and the freak show function, the new, even more aggrieved tone the Hillary camp is striking might only exacerbate matters for her. And paradoxically, if this happens, this will further confirm that Hillaryland's critique of the media is right -- while also serving as yet another measure of just how bleak things are looking for Hillary right now.

What's this 'things are bleak' for Hillary. She's a US Senator for god's sake and a good one as far as I can tell.

I really resent that ALL DEMOCRATS (AND ONLY DEMOCRATS) do NOT get to choose their nominee for President but whether Clinton is the nominee or not there is ABSOLUTELY nothing bleak about her or how things look for her.

Greg Sargent is certainly part of the boys-will-be-boys press.

ADDED: Cutting Women Out --The media’s bias against female presidential candidates by Erika Falk

Despite striking advances over the last century in women’s social and political rights, and in attitudes about women in politics, press coverage of women candidates is not much better today than it was in 1872. The most significant consequence of this is not that, should a woman run, the press would make it less likely for her to win. Rather, the real problem is that such press coverage may make women less likely to run.

Though the mainstream media tend to frame women who run for president as novelties, they are not. Women have led nations such as Canada, France and the United Kingdom, not to mention Turkey, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and many others. In fact, there have been so many historical and contemporary women heads of state that one has to scroll through pages to get a complete list.

This would imply that the US (along with the US press) are the backward ones. And instead of advancing in science, humanity, democracy the US has taken numerous steps backwards, not all of it the personal fault of George W. Bush. He had lots of help and continuous support and cheerleading from the press and the media. One could almost say that the corporate media set the stage for Bush long before he arrived on the scene ...

Yesterday's QUOTES ...

Chameleons aren't hiding, they're advertising?
The study provides strong evidence that the chameleon's color change evolved mainly for communication, says behavioral ecologist Roger Hanlon of the Marine Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole, Massachusetts. No one has ever shown that the chameleon's special ability provides camouflage, says Hanlon, who reviewed 100 years of scientific literature on the subject. That, combined with the results of this research, he says, should definitively debunk the popular myth--until someone else finds a new species that justifies the belief.
"It's like a wristwatch: If it runs slow, you're late for everything; if it's too fast, you're early for everything," ...
A cluster of brain cells called the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN) runs the clock in humans, and the body's other cells have their own "slave clocks" that are synchronized to the SCN. With timekeeping outposts throughout the body, the main clock helps regulate everything from sleepiness to concentration.
Our own worst enemy ... Also worrying is a flash point created by drying soil and dying vegetation. Fires are a natural feature here, as shown by periodic dark bands in tree rings. But fires are growing more frequent and fierce, says Boldgiv. The worst-case scenario is that drought and wildfires converge in a regional conflagration. Huge swaths of taiga forest and steppe grasslands could be lost in a single summer, he says. There is no fire brigade out here.

Just what ecosystem might emerge from that apocalyptic scenario is a central question of the Hovsgol project. After a decade of research, ecologists have bad news and worse news. The bad news is that receding taiga and overgrazed steppe tend to leave shrubby wasteland in their wake. Islands of this "semidesert" of sparse plants and few grasses are expanding. Goulden is worried that this may warn of a wholesale transition to semidesert, which would be "disastrous," he says, because it supports a fraction of the animal density that grassland supports. And it could ruin the country's best source of drinking water if topsoil eroding into Hovsgol's tributaries spurs algal growth in the lake.

As was to be expected, the media was quick to ask the superficial question immediately after the first two-candidate Democratic debate of this campaign: “Who won?”

They totally missed the obvious point: The Democratic Party won tonight.

Body language, everything was different ... so refreshing.
The worst is yet to come ...
What's breaking is not necessarily revealed in Iraq but when these psychologically scarred men and women return home, without adequate medical care or mental health treatment at their service. It's as big a landmine as the next President will have to face; being handed an Army that is withered to the core, and then if he or she attempts to pull out of Iraq to save the military, being chastised by the neocon faction about hating the country and loving to lose, etc., etc.
... and a tragedy that the GOP will use with glee to the detriment of us all.
Another Uniter? ...
The reality is that the person who is being divisive in this campaign is not Sen. Clinton - it is Sen. Obama. Rather than behave as the UniterTM that he claims to be, he can't stop dividing the Democratic party with the use of false Republican attacks against his main opponent. If he really wants to be a uniter, rather than a divider, and set an example to his followers, he can run a campaign on the issues, criticize his opponent on the merits of her positions (but not by making stuff up about her repeatedly), and not write and deliver divisive speeches using faxed talking points from the Republican National Committee. Now, that would be a simple and easy way to unite the Democratic party and the country. We'll see if Sen. Obama is up to the task.

How Republicans think, if one can call it that ...

To paraphrase:Per United States Attorney General Michael Mukasey, torturing Mukasey would be torture (to Mukasey) but not necessarily torture if Mukasey weren't Mukasey. Got that?

Kos wants a war? ...

... political war, ala Republican, that is.

On the substance of the debate, Obama might've squeezed out a narrow "victory". Hillary owned him on health care, but he owned her on Iraq, and Iraq was toward the tail end of the debate.

But on the politics, Hillary won.

Here's the bottom line: Hillary has the lead in most February 5th states. Despite the frothings of the anti-Hillary crowd, most Democrats like her and are comfortable with her. Therefore, Obama has to give them a reason NOT to vote for her, but for him instead.

Did he do that last night? Not that I saw. I noticed him agreeing with her a lot. And even when there were points of distinction, like drivers licenses for undocumented immigrants, he let Clinton off the hook instead of pressing the advantage. The two candidates seemed to be going out of their way to find common ground. That's great if people already like you and plan on voting for you (Hillary), not so great if you're trying to make up ground (Barack).

In fact, as many people commented, the two looked like a ticket. And it's hard for Obama to win many crossover votes if people think Obama is part of the package if they vote for Clinton.

Obama won big in South Carolina after establishing clear distinctions between himself and Clinton in their South Carolina debate. Obama may be be gaining ground nationwide, but he lost an opportunity to bolster those efforts last night.

The only time I see Obama really differentiate himself (in the manner I take Kos to mean) is when he acts like a Republican. IF he wins that way then I don't know how I will be able to vote for him. If, however, he is able to win while still being human, then I will not have to overcome the gag reflex to vote for him.

Clinton and Obama's voting records may be similar but their approaches to governing are very different. They are differentiated in many obvious ways. If Obama can't win at this stage just because he is different than Clinton, then what Kos must want is a Republican type war with scary ads about what 'the other' is going to do to you. That is the other way, after all. The Republican way.

I don't think Obama lost the debate. I think he made himself acceptable to a much bigger group of people. I would have voted for Edwards. I will vote for Clinton. But I will accept Obama as the Democratic nominee, which I half-way expect to be the case.

Yesterday's QUOTES ...

Researchers are reporting that the ocean's biological deserts have been expanding, and they are growing much faster than global warming models predict.
... But [the top two quintiles] get 58% of the money. The bottom two quintiles, which are the place you’d most expect to have an impact, get only 21% of the money. ...

And I suppose that it may be true that this was the best Nancy Pelosi could get. But I just can’t bring myself to celebrate.
... I think the best line of the day had to be John Edwards saying that Clinton and Obama had brought their "New York and Chicago style of politics" to South Carolina."...
For a person running as a "clean" politician, on a campaign of Hope, Change and OptimismTM, [Obama's] brand of politics is fundamentally ugly (something that has been evident for many months). Given that dynamic, he feels quite comfortable routinely distorting the positions or words of Sen. Clinton with impunity in order to mislead voters, because he knows that the traditional media will more often than not parrot his talking points and trash the Clintons rather than call him on his egregious behavior.

Yesterday's QUOTES ...

... as we saw over the last few weeks, the Pentagon correspondents laundered propaganda, which was then used by the White House to launder rhetoric through the White House press corps.
And the beat goes on ...
EMINENT DOMAIN LAWSUITS, WASTE OF TIME? ... Republican governing at it's best!
FEDS BEGIN SEIZING BORDER LAND IN ARIZONA ...
This sentencing was particularly interesting:

” …. and to access adjacent lands; including the right to trim or remove any vegetative or structural obstacles that interfere with said work; … “

For you people out east and west of Nogales, you had better hope your home is not interfering with the government’s project.
...it demonstrated that, at least regarding Clinton, [Obama's] knee-jerk reaction was not to work with her and "transcend differences."
I'm starting to worry about the danger of McCain, who many people who ought to know better still don't realize is just a war-mongering right-wing crackpot. (whose "objections" to torture don't extend to actually voting against it.)
Blindly protecting the border ... But this situation really goes a long way to demonstrating my strongest criticism of border enforcement. You can hire all the U.S. Border Patrol agents you want but if you don’t have the intelligence agencies to bring in valid information, it’s a complete waste of taxpayer dollars.

The DEA, the FBI and ATF are all in the middle of a hiring freeze. ...

[...] The result is something like a blind giant – heavy on the muscle, manpower, and weapons, but little idea what’s happening south of the line, and sometimes little idea what’s happening to the north.
The meanings of 'change' ... Democrats are being asked whether they believe in party, in which case they should be for Hillary, if they believe in power they should be for Edwards and if they believe in personality, they should vote for Obama.
As Bill Buckley admits, it's not just the "stupid" buyer that regulations are supposed to watch out for -- it's all the rest of us since we live in the town where the kids are playing with matches. ... The Robber Barons made their money and increased their power. The rest, including the giant globe we live on, is expendable.
Media Mess ... It's as if a pack of hyenas were crossbred with the characters in Mean Girls and then sent out to play at journalism.