2008 Elections

So you think George Pataki is Presidential material?- * Ahahahahahahahahahaha. Good one!\n* Of course he 's a hot, throbbing manly man's President\n* Pataki, who?\n* F--k off, where's the coffee?!?\n
Comedy Relief brought to you by *President* Pataki- [via Pataki Will Test '08 Winds in Iowa - New York Times]
If he ran,
Heh. Heh heh.
Mr. Pataki,
SNORT. Heheheheheh.
who supports abortion rights and gun control, would most likely be the most moderate candidate in the Republican field,
Tee hee hee hee.
and would face significant hurdles with a Republican primary electorate that has become increasingly conservative,
Ah HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
particularly in states like Iowa.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
His associates, who said they would discuss Mr. Pataki's plans only anonymously in deference to his wishes,
Aha, aha, aha, ah hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
said that should he seek the presidency, he would not run for re-election as governor,
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA S N O R T HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
in the belief it would be impossible to run for
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA
president
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
while still running New York State.
Ohohoho, snort, hahahahaha snif SIGH!
So why would Giuliani run for President? Because government should be run like a business- Progressives, start your engines : [via USATODAY.com - Giuliani expects decision next year on presidential bid]:
Giuliani, chief executive officer of business consultants Giuliani Partners, said government should be run more like a business. "I think governments should be run much more like business where you set standards, you set goals, you have benchmarks and you evaluate performance," Giuliani told the conference. "That happens more effectively in business than it does in government," he said.
Need me to tell you why this is so wrong? How about if I leave that to Stirling Newberry?
George Pataki - now available as a thong- If you're into hot ass on ass action, perhaps you'll consider this fine new product, available here. Hat tip to The Politicker.
Pataki 2008 - the excitement is building- From NY Metro viaGawker comes this charming image of the Pataki family sitting in rapt attention as George delivers his final State of the State speech. Never mind New Hampshire. Just think about their family dinners. Those poor, poor people.
The Ken Doll speaks!- The Murdoch Post quotes Ken Mehlmann clutching his pearls and throwing a hissy fit.
February 6, 2006 -- WASHINGTON â€” The head of the national Republican Party unloaded a blistering attack on Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton yesterday, calling her an "angry" candidate who cannot be elected president. "I don't think the American people, if you look historically, elect angry candidates," Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman said on ABC's "This Week." "And whether it's the comments about the plantation or the worst administration in history, Hillary Clinton seems to have a lot of anger." Mehlman's personal slam on the former first lady demonstrates that the GOP will not wait for the 2006 elections to go after the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination. Clinton adviser Howard Wolson responded, "If the president and the White House spent half as much time worrying about the runaway deficit and the broken Medicare system as they do about Hillary Clinton, the country would be in much better shape."
Amen, brother.
My kind of Republican- Whenever I travel I almost always end up in deep political conversations with people who identify themselves as conservatives and republicans. I guess people feel like they can open up with me. I did at one point want to be a nun and I guess people get that I am not only willing to listen but I take the conversation seriously to the point of it being sacred. To me communication is communion and those 10, 15, 20 minutes to me are sincerely precious. This is the second time I have been given permission to write about these conversations with pseudonymous attribution. The first conversation I published was the one I had with “The Guy”. I met The Guy during a return trip from Washington DC. I really want to re-publish what he had to say because, honestly, it cannot be repeated enough :
"Michael Moore is right";, he said. I asked him about the coming fight over Roberts and the likes of people like Dobson : "You don't understand, they don't care. These people don't care. This is just entertainment to them. A way to keep the masses fighting with each other. They are out to make billions and billions of dollars, amass incredible wealth and power while we're here, the have-nots of all sorts of incomes, down here duking it out. They don't care about Roberts or homosexuals or dead babies. They only care about power. And that power is money and oil." I sat there quietly, with my eyes wide open. The Guy had told me earlier that he worked in satellite broadcasting media. That means his contracts are in the tens of millions. And this guy looked at Bush as the enemy.
Now it's Mr. D's turn. I met Mr. D on the way over to the airport. Mr. D works in finance and was taking a plane to Las Vegas to take the qualifying exam for their fire department. To my beanie-wearing readers, Mr. D looked like he could be the love child of Clay Shirky and Cam Barrett. Young, white, affluent. Not your typical red stater but certainly of the kind that matters to the GOP (and unfortunately to any political party) : he's a guy with money to spare in the form of campaign contributions. Why was Mr. D. leaving an extremely well paid job with gobs of economic perks for a chance to work as a firefighter? Two words : September 11.
Hillary rolls on- I am mystified by Hillary Clinton. She's not so much a politician as a brand, and not a bad one at that. People know her; know little of her (or can you name one significant policy proposal she has come up with? No? I thought so.); and most importantly, people know what they think of her. She's the best-known politician in America â€“ better known, arguably, than former Texas governor Bush, whom many people still confuse with his father, the President of the same name. She seems to be riding to a re-election that will be not so much an election as an inthronisation. And onward, it seems, to a subsequent coronation as the first female Presidential nominee of a major party in American history. Is Hillary, in fact, invincible? At first glance, it does seem so. Consider: she has been in the headlines for fourteen straight years. That's four years more than The Beatles were a band. She has raised dozens of millions â€“ perhaps over one hundred million â€“ for various Democrats. Her husband is a revered former President. A rock star, she most certainly is; but she's a rock star that has benefited time and time again from the nature of her adversaries. During the Clinton Presidency, she served as a very convenient lightning rod for the extreme right, more attractive for this purpose, at least for a while, than her likable husband. This demographic, smallish but very loud, continues to despise her, and avidly reads whatever it is that Dick Morris fabulates at a given moment. They call her Hitlery â€“ seriously â€“ and thereby help her cause. With enemies like that, can she really be all bad, so goes the thinking. And every anti-Hillary book, avidly consumed by the same folks who bought all predecessor volumes, merely makes her more the victim of the crazies, and thus paradoxically more popular. In the 2000 campaign, the other side first sent out Rudy Giuliani against her; and when he withdrew, they followed up with a political puppy, the hopelessly outmatched Rick Lazio. Not a contest against a sitting first lady. In the current campaign, Hillary is again benefiting from the haplessness of her supposed opponents. There are two republicans in New York who would make credible candidates for the United States Senate â€“ Rudy Giuliani and George Pataki, either of whom would stand a real chance. Running instead are an Upper East Side housewife who inflates her rÃ©sumÃ© and talks publicly about black helicopters, and the former mayor of the most corrupt city in the state. Just to give you an idea of what an abysmal choice the latter is: in the most pro-choice state in the union, that mayor embraces forced pregnancy â€“ in the year that Samuel Alito got confirmed to the Supreme Court and South Dakota took possession of every uterus within its borders. On the primary side, there's a number of pretty good Democrats out there who have the statewide profile to run against Hillary. Problem is, none of them decided to run â€“ the Spitzers and Cuomos of the world are seeking other offices. The actual contender, Jonathan Tasini, is a good enough man in a human sense, with a young and enthusiastic team; but as a candidate, he has zero institutional support, represents no major constituency, has zero name recognition, and is running a single-issue campaign directed more at the Iraq war â€“ and the Democratic Party â€“ than anything else. Whatever else that may be, it's not the way to win a primary against a team working at White House level with millions of dollars to spend. Interestingly, Tasini's support looks broader than the Hudson in spring when compared to the support for the idea of Hillary as the Presidential nominee in 2008. It seems that whenever politically active Democrats come together, the subject comes up; to be inevitably followed by some ashen-faced version of "We're going to get crushed". The problem for all those concerned with the viability (and desirability) of another Clinton winning the White House is two-fold. First, presently, the powers that be â€“ the national republicans and the NYS Democrats â€“ share an interest in Hillary winning her current race. The other side, obviously, stands to benefit from her, especially when her campaign for the nomination begins; that's perhaps the reason why her opposition is so weak. The New York State Dems, meanwhile, are counting on her coat-tails to help in other races across the state. Second, the real problem with Hillary â€“ other than electability â€“ is that our party needs to make a break with Clintonism. Over and over, we hear that Democrats stand for nothing â€“ which is just another way of saying triangulation. Triangulation cost us the Congress in 1994; triangulation cost us the clear message we needed to win it back for the rest of that entire decade. We need to stand for our core values â€“ which might be just a trifle iffy to do convincingly when our nominee has gone on record in support of a flag-burning amendment. Hillary as the nominee would set back, or even reverse, the entire grassroots-driven rebirth of the Democratic Party that is currently happening everywhere. Perhaps, just as 2004 was the year of "Anybody but Bush", 2008 will be the year of "Anybody but Hillary". Which could very well translate into Mark Warner.
The inevitability myth- If you want an example of the mainstream media babbling on endlessly on what they believe the story should be, look no further than the endless obsession with New York's junior Senator. Two years before the first primary vote will be cast, Hillary is today portrayed as the all-but-crowned and inevitable Presidential nominee (as is John McCain for the other side, in a striking parallel that only makes the pattern clearer). The verdict of the elite chattering classes is in: Hillary it is, in a face-off against McCain â€“ a nice, solid storyline that plays to all the things the media like to see in their coverage, such as high name recognition, easy clichÃ©s, and nice little cookie-cutter boxes to frame their articles. Just think of all the 'Can a woman be President?' stories already written â€“ pure speculation (not to say useless wankery), but these stories practically write themselves and let you head out to The Hamptons that much earlier. This kind of fixation on simple stories is only one aspect of a kind of decadent political journalism that consists largely of horserace coverage, a fixation on 'gotcha' moments, endless warm and fuzzy 'personality' profiles â€“ "Candidate X feels at home in a Wal-Mart, just like you!" â€“ standing in for discussion of policy, and a broad avoidance of the boring stuff. Politics as presented by People Magazine, in short. It's what our lazy journalists do. Call it poli-tainment, if you will, Brangelina in the White House. Meanwhile, if you talk to just about any politically active Democrat in New York â€“ not a bad idea, considering we are Hillary's home base â€“ any discussion of Hillary's '08 candidacy produces ashen faces and some variation of "God forbid, she can't win. Is there anyone else? Warner? Gore? Anybody?". Dig a little deeper, and you'll find a profound unease with and distaste for the Senator's dexterous triangulation, her hawkishness, and all the other things that Hillary must do as she labors against a remarkably stable negative image created over a decade ago. The historical model that makes the most sense for gaming the Democratic nomination of 2008 is the republican Chicago convention of 1860; there, too, a liberal New York Senator seen as nationally unelectable, Seward, succumbed to a rival, Lincoln, who carefully positioned himself as everyone's second choice â€“ and won spectacularly. The real 2008 race is the one to be the acceptable and nationally viable other choice â€“ and that's without Al Gore getting into the race, in which case he will win by default. Or try talking to just about any politically active republican, especially outside of New York, and mention McCain '08. You'll likely be surprised just how many variations of "liberal sellout" are possible in the English language. The GOP base has a better memory, to its credit, than the media think; in their eyes, McCain is first and foremost the author of McCain-Feingold, a founding member of the treacherous 'Gang of 14', and an advocate of various policies that may make the media love him, but produce outrage amongst the true believers. The simple storyline is that the base will overlook these treacheries (as they see them) as the Bush administration continues its slow-motion collapse. Again, no. Rather, as the efforts to re-brand George Bush as a liberal (and thereby to insulate conservatism from his failure) suggest, the base will look for a dyed in the wool true believer â€“ and that is not going to be the treacherous John McCain. The GOP is now an ideological party, a historical novelty in its own right; but history does not suggest that ideologues choose free-thinkers (even if McCain is merely a shoddy simulacrum of one) to carry their banners. But because the media are what they are â€“ in love with simple stories, to be generous, scandalously myopic and lazy, to be less so â€“ you will continue to read 2008 coverage that tells you that you essentially have no choice, that the race is already over, and that you must live with Hillary. Don't believe the hype.
Rumble in the garden- From Gordon Suber:
Wesley Clark vs. John McCain
Friday, May 19, 2006 On Staten Island in New York City today, retired Army General, Vietnam veteran, former NATO Supreme Allied Commander, and 2004 Presidential candidate Wesley K. Clark delivered the commencement address to graduates of Wagner College. On Manhattan Island in New York City today, retired Navy Captain, Vietnam veteran, United States Senator, and 2000 Presidential candidate John McCain delivered the commencement address to graduates of The New School. Clark is a graduate of The United States Military Academy at West Point, New York. McCain is a graduate of The United States Naval Academy at Annapolis, Maryland. Clark came out of the Vietnam War on a stretcher, having suffered body wounds in four places. McCain came out of Vietnam after five-and-a-half years as a prisoner of war. If they had appeared on the same stage, it would have been a heavyweight fight between two titans of current American political discourse.
Three reasons to go see the movie- After the 2000 election in which Al Gore was even less life-like than -- here we could have a contest: a cigar-store Indian?-- too dated, a wax figure?, the kodiak bear at the Museum of Natural History? But since then, liberated from handlers and campaign aides, he has come to life. His speeches at move-on.org events in opposition to Bush misleadership and opposition to the war in Iraq have been a pleasure. The same is true of this movie as well. An Inconvenient Truth is really good. yes, yes. How entertaining could two hours of slide show/lecture on global warming be; but trust me on this -- it is worth a trip. It's also worth a trip, even for the global-warming converted like me because it is articulate, well organized and fun to watch. Not convinced? Well, it's also worth it to see Al Gore. He's really good; much less wooden, much more authenic. There's really a there, there. Not convinced? Well, perhaps Gore is the viable alternative to Hillary Clinton -- the "non-Hillary" as touted on magazine covers. You were casting about were you not for an alternative? Sold on Feingold. Well I like him. But must to my surprise I also like Gore. For a better-written essay to the same effect, to go David Remick's article in the New Yorker of a month ago: http://www.newyorker.com/talk/content/articles/060424ta_talk_remnick. DFNYC is promoting two trips to the movie, if like me, you hate to go alone. DFNYC Field Trips: "An Inconvenient Truth" featuring Al Gore - May 24 & May 25 -Two Locations: Sunshine (Lower East Side), Lowes Lincoln Square Davis Guggenheim's documentary about global warming entitled "An Inconvenient Truth" featuring Al Gore opens in theaters on May 24. There are now two DFNYC "field trips" - one on Wed. May 24th (downtown) and one on Thursday, May 25th (uptown). The Sunshine Cinema 143 East Houston Street (btwn. 1st & @2nd Aves.) Wednesday, May 24 7:15 Showing Purchase tickets at: http://www.moviefone.com Lowes Lincoln Square 1998 Broadway (@ 68th St..) Thursday, May 25 7:35 Showing Purchase tickets at: http://www.fandango.com
Wesley Clark Street- Our picture shows Wesley Clark, former Supreme Commander of NATO and Democratic Presidential candidate in 2004, at the dedication of a street named after him in the Kosovar capital of Pristina. Clark led the Allied campaign that stopped the Serbian ethnic cleansing of Kosovo in 1999. Notably, the province is at peace today. He joins a long list of Americans similarly honored in Europe, including President Kennedy in Berlin and Frankfurt; President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in Paris and London; President Eisenhower in Brussels; and President Woodrow Wilson, again in Paris, London and Versailles. Any guesses on what the grateful people of Iraq will name after George W. Bush? An abattoir, perhaps? (Hat tip to Gordon Suber, who is currently writing a biography of Clark and was active in his 2004 campaign)
Do people from other states even get to run for President?- Apparently not. The New York Times speculates wildly about a possible run by Michael Bloomberg, perhaps based on the theory that anyone with an opinion on national politics must be running for something. Either that, or it was a slow day for the newspaper of record's new tabloid business. Urban Elephants reports that some people in Iowa are quite taken with George Pataki. Seriously. Note to Iowa: if you want him, you can have him. Just don't inflict him on us â€“ we've suffered enough. There are unconfirmed rumors that our junior Senator â€“ her name escapes me at the moment â€“ may be considering the same lofty goal. Not to be outdone, former mayor Rudy Giuliani is beefing up his PAC. My personal take is that Rudy is smart enough to know that his scrawny in-with-gay-people-moving, mistress-at-Gracie-mansion-shtupping butt would get fried in the primaries, so that his flirtation should be seen as a promotional gimmick for his consulting business, but that's just me. Then, I had a semi-serious conversation the other day gaming out scenarios for a White House run by Eliot Spitzer. Most likely outcome, as determined by us: he runs in 2016, when President Warner retires and Eliot's in the middle of his third term. Alternate scenario: After President Gore's retirement, Eliot battles Vice President Warner for the nomination, winding up with the Veep spot. Of course, Eliot would also have to contend with Chuck Schumer, but that's a whole other can of worms. Heck, even David Yassky is probably pondering a run, given the way he is sucking in developer money. He wouldn't even need a Sister Souljah moment, considering how pissed off the Congressional Black Caucus is at him even today. Did I forget anyone?
A Democratic Hillary backlash- Heh. Interesting. The Empire Zone reports that Jonathan Tasini is causing Dem convention delegates no small measure of discomfort by offering a resolution opposing the war in Iraq; the discomfort stems, obviously, from Miz Clinton's carefully calibrated non-positions on that topic, which seem to be dictated by Iowa focus groups more than anything else. Then, The Daily News reports that several Manhattan clubs have either pulled their endorsement or plan to abstain from the race altogether; and as far as I know, neither of the big Progressive orgs, DFNYC and NDM, plan to endorse for United States Senate this year. In a Daily Kos fantasy straw poll, one that included Al Gore, Hillary registered at 1% of votes; Gore got 68%. The ferocious buzz around the winner of the 2000 popular vote (and election) is arguably caused in part by Hillary panic â€“ which is my term for the stricken look you can see on Democrats when the subject of her ~~in your face all-but-declared~~ possible 2008 candidacy comes up. Hillary, it seems, isn't getting as much love as the polls suggest. Sure, she'll be re-elected in a landslide â€“ with what somebody finally needs to call the open connivance of the other party and its ludicrous New York candidates â€“ but those 2008 plans seem to be creating far more disquiet amongst the rank and file than Team Hillary should be comfortable with. Hillary has lost the Progressive base because of two factors seemingly feeding one another: one is the triangulation compulsion the Senator seems to labor under, the other is the fierce desire of Democrats to retake the White House. New York Mag quotes Steve Jarding, a Warner supporter:
â€œIf there are enough Democratic leaders who fear Hillary Clinton as a candidate, then they better step up to the plate and say, â€˜We love Hillary, we love the Clintons, we just donâ€™t think she can win, and weâ€™ve collectively gotten behind candidate X.â€™ â€
The Anybody-but-Hillary phenomenon is unlikely to play out in this year's race; it seems Democrats are mainly going to hold their noses and vote for her. But for 2008, all bets are off. [Note: Image from New York Magazine] [Update]: An interesting new forecasting tool - via MyDD, here - indicates that Gore would win in a landslide, while Hillary would be crushed.
Duh.- Photo courtesy of BuffaloPundit.
This is so not news : Spitzer is nominated by state Democrats as their 'heir to the gubernatorial throne' : [via Dems choose Spitzer to run for governor]
Buffalo - New York state Democrats overwhelmingly chose Eliot Spitzer as their candidate for governor yesterday in a bid to take back control of state government as Republicans head into their own nominating convention battling for control of their party. Spitzer, the state attorney general who has won national recognition for fighting corporation corruption, laced his acceptance with promises of fixing upstate and Albany's woes. "In cities and suburbs across the state and right here in Erie County, there are families drowning in property taxes so high that with each passing day they see the middle-class lifestyle they fought so hard for slip further and further away," Spitzer said. "Most importantly, day one is when we realize that we're all in this together, and that in this journey, it will not be upstate versus downstate, urban versus rural, business versus labor, Republicans versus Democrats."
BTW, I actually like Spitzer. A lot. But given my job is to not to bend over and give in to party politics, I have to note that Spitzer's speech took more than a note, nay! dare I say a whole chapter, from the Suozzi campaign :
Spitzer, in his speech, referenced Pataki's 12 years in power without using his name. He is looking to gain from voters' growing discontent with state government. "No more pay-to-play politics, where you do business with a politician one day and make a campaign contribution the next," Spitzer said. "No more lifetime appointments to the state Legislature." "And in the years to come, the only distinction they'll be remembered for is the fact that nobody has ever done so much for so few who need so little."
Tsk. Tsk. Given his vast knowledge of net neutrality, Mr. Spitzer should have treated those words as having a Creative Commons, Share-Alike license. Heh.
It has not escaped me we were not invited to attend the New York State Democrats convention- I am worried about 2008. I am worried that people are deluding themselves about Hillary Clinton's electability as president. I am worried that Democrats will not win this year more seats in Congress or the Senate. But what I am worried most of all is that progressive Democrats, those people who believe government ought to have a good does of "by the people for the people" decision making, socially responsible policies and libertarian values, are being swept aside in favor of the corporational-style of politics the Bushites have unleash on this country. It is not that I don't like money. I do. I wish I had truck load of it to give it to the groups and people and organizations I believe are making a difference. So yes, I like money. It' just that I believe you cannot favor one part of the equation for another. The New York contingency of the Democratic party has made the very deliberate decision to not have a grassroots media strategy. Incompetence aside, the Ferrer mayoral campaign shot themselves in the foot because they kept heeding the NY Capitol Hill's advice to stay away from bloggers. I personally had set up 3 conference calls with bloggers from all around the country for Ferrer. I had worked up the troops and personally asked Markos, Armando and DavidNYC of DailyKos to lead the charge and put a good word for the candidate. I even was able to speak directly to Fernando Ferrer and ask him "do you want the bloggers behind you". He screamed, YES! Calls in the morning, I'm ready. And every single time Fernando Ferrer's communications people sabotaged the effort. Ferrer, of course, lost. Yes, yes, I know : --Clinton will win her Senate seat. --Spitzer will be the next governor of New York. Come time to campaign for 2008, though, the seeds of discontent will have had time to bloom and flourish. Come time for the Democrats to call on the people who actually do the work of democracy on the streets of each county, each city and each neighborhood; they will find themselves scorned and outside of the loop of growing social networks blogs like this are building throughout the state. That's why I am worried. Democrats will not be able to win 2008 without the networks of social progressives and moderate Republicans that are popping out all over the political landscape via blogs. Democrats will not be able to win 2008 without showing they can take dissent and dish it out as well. A certain congressman once told me : "We don't want to deal with the nastiness of blogs". My reaction has always been : Dude, these are the people that want you to win. Which is why I cannnot stress this enough to the people partying in Buffalo : Activists who take to blogs are not nasty because they hate you. They are pissed off because they think you're not listening. They are people like me who have no significant anmount of money to give but have words, have wit, have wisdom to spare; but more importantly, have influence over their own networks of voters. Which is why you have to understand why we are tired of knocking on neighbors doors for candidates we do not feel passionate about. Rage comes not of emotion. It comes from the personal understanding that the country is going to hell in a handbasket. Whenever I hear of politicos talking about the scourge of bloggers, it makes me wonder about their definition of courage. I mean, wouldn't you rather deal with the wrath of the people who want you elected? Why would you want to shun them and instead go to bed with the people who want you dead? Because, honestly that is what the extremiststs that have taken hold of the Republican party want : they want us all to go to hell. Literally. That Hillary Clinton, Eliot Spitzer, Chuck Schumer and others in the New York State Democratic Party cannot trust contentious bloggers like the people of The Daily Gotham tells a lot about where we are headed to for 2008. That's why I am worried. The Democrats are starting to pave their road to failure in Buffalo, New York. If things stay the course, they're going to loose the 2008 elections to a pet rock.
Presidential 'ping' poll- * Wesley Clark\n* Hillary Clinton\n* Howard Dean\n* John Edwards\n* Russ Feingold\n* Al Gore\n* John Kerry\n* Barak Obama\n* Other (please specificy in comments)\n* Pet rock\n* Antonio Villarraigosa\n* Mark Warner\n
Buffalo News - Bloggers take Clinton to task over her stand on Iraq War-
[via Buffalo News - Bloggers take Clinton to task over her stand on Iraq War]:
Political observers still say Clinton is the overwhelming favorite for the nomination, thanks to her name recognition and the huge network of fund-raising and grass-roots support she has built on top of the network left behind by her husband, former President Bill Clinton. But you didn't hear much of that conventional wisdom at the Take Back America conference. Instead, you heard criticism of Clinton's recent consensus-seeking comments on abortion and her support of a bill banning flag burning. "She's alienated a lot of feminist and progressive bloggers," said Liza Sabater, who blogs at Culturekitchen.com.
BTW, there was a bit of a kerfuffle over her appearance. Representatives of CodePink were under the impression they would be able to bring in banners and posters and also interrogate Hillary during a Q&A. Toby Chadhouri, the CAF's Communications Director spinned it as a misunderstanding on the part of CodePink since they had stressed to them they 're goal was to make possible "healthy discussions" of the issues during the conferences. So members of CodePink booed Hillary but one of Michelle Malkin's indetured servants spinned it as "We've captured and posted the video of Hillary getting booed as she asks progressives to support the troops." Heh. Fucking liars. Mahablog, Suburban Guerrilla and Taylor Marsh have the 411. Go read them.
It's official : Hillary Clinton is running for president-
Liberal Blogosphere R.I.P 2003-2006
Hillary Clinton has hired Peter Daou, editor of Salon.com's Daou Report and one of the most prominent bloggers in the United States. With this moves, she signals that indeed she is running for the Presidency in 2008. Why? Liberal bloggers large and small disagree on many things but one : That Hillary Clinton cannot win in 2008. So what does she do? She hires the most prominent centrist blogger in the United States in order to triangulate the oxygen out of the blogs. I think it was Duncan osaid recently the days of the unified liberal blogosphere were coming to an end. Well, the party is over people. This is Hillary's preemptive strike on the liberal blogosphere : She needs to kill it to run. Long live the liberal blogosphere. It was good while it lasted. From A Well-Known Political Blogger Is Hired by the Clinton Campaign - New York Times:

WASHINGTON, June 26 -- Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign has hired Peter Daou, one of the most prominent political bloggers in the nation, to help disseminate her message in a forum that has not always been that hospitable to her. The move underscores the degree to which bloggers --the authors of Web logs, or blogs-- have begun to transform American politics. In many cases, candidates have even set up their own blogs, with staffers answering questions, presenting policy proposals and posting campaign literature and videos. Mrs. Clinton, who is up for re-election this year and is a possible presidential candidate for 2008, has been a frequent target of bloggers, particularly liberals who are angry over her refusal to disavow her vote in 2002 to authorize President Bush to use force in Iraq.
Link With Peter, "I'm down with triangulation" Daou, we have proof positive that the so-called blog revolution as witnessed in the Liberal Blogosphere was a manufactured by lower level political consultants with access to big media yet shut out by consulting turf wars on The Hill, and after the groundbreaking Howard Dean and Wesley Clark campaign. Yeah, I'm counting the Clarkites because unfortunately a lot of people don't give credit to the technological and networking innovations of the Clark campaign. I mean, c'mon. Daou worked for John Kerry in 2004. Markos and Jerome with Dean. There are many more prominent bloggers who came out of the various 2004 campaigns but I'm being lazy at the moment to name them all. The point being : It does not matter if you are a good or bad political consultant. The point is these people are not really "the grassroots". We are not yet the grassroots.
Can Hillary Clinton beat any republican and get elected president in 2008?- * Yes\n* No\n* Not sure\n* Who's Hillary Clinton?\n* \n
No, she's not electable, Mr. Carville- How do you know that Team Hillary is definitely planning a run for 2008? When James Carville starts writing Op-Eds that make the threadbare case that she can be elected. Carville's case is essentially this: Hillary got elected in 2000 to the Senate despite objections from the naysayers; some of her polling numbers are not catastrophic; she has a net positive rating of 54%-42%; having been through the right-wing slime treatment for over a decade, nothing they can say, supposedly, will stick; and besides, those people who like her really, really like her. Wake up, James (if I may call you that). It ain't so. Hillary got elected in 2000 because of four factors: her willingness to work very hard for it, her own glamour as First Lady, her luck in having a weak opponent, and because New York is a blue state, at the time a blue state still angry over impeachment. For a sitting First Lady, especially this one, to get elected against a completely unknown junior Congressman in this state is not illustrative of anything. Whatever naysayers there were, not that I can really recall any, were at best marginal; after all, Rangel and Moynihan recruited her. With regard to her polling numbers, show me one poll that shows a majority of the electorate willing to vote for her. Just one. No, polls from your own outfit, Democracy Corps, don't count. Then, I'll show you a whole series of polls that show a majority saying they wouldn't vote for her if her opponent was Satan incarnate.
The third world comes to America - first stop, New York City- In 2003, the East Coast endured a massive blackout brought on by an equally massive grid failure. After the blackout, republicans promised to take steps to prevent future outages. From Wikipedia:
In the United States, the effects may be even more profound, as the George W. Bush administration has emphasized the need for changes to the U.S. national energy policy, Critical Infrastructure Protection, and Homeland Security. During the blackout, most systems that would detect unauthorized border crossings, port landings, or detect unauthorized access to many vulnerable sites, failed. There was considerable fear that future blackouts would be exploited for terrorism. In addition, the failure highlighted the ease with which the power grid could be taken down.
And what have they done? Well, take a look at Queens, Los Angeles, Saint Louis, and now, Staten Island. That's right, more blackouts. So republicans, who last I checked govern this country, this state and this city, and who had time for Terri Schiavo and the insidious menace that is flag-burning, didn't get around to the unsexy nuts-and-bolts infrastructure maintenance stuff. Kind of like they handled Katrina, in fact - or Iraq. So yes, it's time to cast some blame.
No, we don't need more conservatives on TV- From EmpireZone via NDM:
The Empire Zone, the new blog of the New York Times, has a throwaway item just made for Progressive activism. Bravo, the cable network, is developing a new show with Joan Rivers. To find a co-anchor, the network has reached out to the New York City chapter of the Log Cabin republicans, the right-wing gay group. This because, presumably, there aren't enough right-wingers on the air in this country. Please email cstngcall@yahoo.com and tell them you don't want any more conservatives, gay or otherwise, on the air.
Love ya, Joan Rivers. Self-hating traitor gays, not so much. So go ahead and write those emails, people, to stop this nonsense; and let the right-wing chorus of "Oooh, you're so intolerant of our viewpoints, oooh, liberal thought police, ooh waaah" commence. For the record, yes, I am intolerant of your "views", Log Cabiners; perhaps because your "views" would benefit significantly from taking your heads out of your ass.
Thinking of Hillary on the left- On the road to President: Ezra Klein suggest the title of "Senate Majority Leader" instead. [via American Prospect Online - The Offer Hillary Shouldn't Refuse]:
So whatever the hype, Clinton's path to the presidency isn't an easy one. But the road to Senate leadership may be. Clinton possesses qualities that could turn the thankless, grueling realities of congressional preeminence into something glamorous and powerful. She's a human megaphone, for one, able to focus the press corps on whatever it is she wishes to say that morning. Such a skill would prove invaluable to a legislative leader, allowing her to set the agenda and advance her priorities even from the minority.
On a Clinton vs. Giuliani match: A somewhat cautionary yet idiotic view at 2008. Why would she have to win her Senate seat by a wide margin? NY went to Kerry by a wide margin and he still lost. Still, the prospect of having a "President Rudy" is scary. [via Poll: Giuliani Tops Sen. Clinton for '08]:
Bloomie for Prez buzz continues- Has this been overlooked by the local newsblogs? I can't seem to find it elsewhere, so here goes (from CBS):
(CBS) NEW YORK New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has always denied it, but CBS 2 has learned the details of a secret meeting, involving the mayor, to discuss a possible run for the White House. "I am not running for president, for the record," Bloomberg has consistently said publicly. But behind the scenes, it's a different story. CBS 2 has learned the details of a private dinner for the mayor that was held at an apartment building on Manhattan's Upper East Side last month. There, he spent the evening in serious discussions about the viability of a White House run. Sources told CBS 2 Bloomberg brought three deputy mayors with him, and proceeded to talk through every angle of a presidential run. By the end, the group had zeroed in on his running as an independent in 2008. And, the sources said, he seemed intrigued.
Aspersions and Lies- Like everyone else, I've been following George Allen's spectacular unraveling for a while; when a sitting Senator throws a racial epithet at someone who is pointing a video camera at his face, you know that there will be further entertainment at that Senator's expense. This is the stuff of which meltdowns are made. Well, the meltdown is in progress, not least because a lot more cameras are now pointed daily on George Felix Allen. The details are widely known: a reporter at a public forum asked him about his supposed Jewish roots, and whether or why these were being hidden; and entirely true to the form revealed by the Macaca incident, Felix demanded that said reporter not "cast aspersions" on him. Once more, just to savor this guy's cluelessness: asking whether he has a Jewish background amounts to "casting aspersions". Felix went on to first non-deny that he has a Jewsih background; then to say that he had just learned about it. And here it gets, well, just plain icky.
"Giuliani for President" - the South Carolina preview- There's quite a bit of chatter, especially on the right, about the possibility of a Presidential run by former mayor Rudy Giuliani in 2008; supposedly, hizzoner might be just the man to refloat the Titanic, to restore a semblance of credibility (if not respectability) to the party of Katrina, Bush, Iraq, and now, Mark Foley. I don't really see that happening, nor does Maurice Gumbs over on Room Eight. Why? Because this video, and others like it, are going to go into heavy rotation in South Carolina starting in about, oh, three months, generously paid for by other contenders. Enjoy.
Jeanine's newest page 10- This is too funny. Jeanine Pirro, the embattled republican standard-bearer in the Attorney General race, has a new ad out. The punch line is: "Andrew, attorney generals can't hide". Problem is, that would be "attorneys general". Apparently, nobody on the Pirro campaign speaks English well enough to have caught that little malapropism in their newest statewide ad. Someone please put this woman out of her misery. Make her go away. I can't take it anymore.
A portrait of democratic myopia- There are so many ways I could hit this photograph with my final thoughts on this photograph. Yet, I keep coming back to two quotes that resonated with me during the whole [http://www.culturekitchen.com/liza/blog/to_peter_daou_and_the_dailykos_crown_there_are_no_|Lunch with Clinton mess]. The first quote comes from [http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/16/pull-up-a-chair-14/|FireDogLake's Hardin-Smith]:
liberal bloggers were invited to meet with the former President of the United States to talk about policy initiatives and the Democratic party and politics going into the November elections.
These words resonated because it made no sense to me for any of the bloggers in that meeting to rationalize the omission of the top bloggers of color in the left; especially if these discussions were meant to hammer on what Democrats could do to win the midterms and, down the road, the presidency. Why would these bloggers be silent accomplices to this big tactical mistake? Why in the world would they want to keep the influencers of thousands of connectors within the colored grassroots? Then I read this quote from [http://talkleft.com/new_archives/015747.html |Jeralynn Merrit]: I enjoyed being with Liza one night in Amsterdam, but FDL is family. I was so blown by how not just simple, but simplistic and pedestrian the explanation was. The photograh is about "family". Not just in the physical sense of the word, mind you. Look again at the photograph? Have you read at least 5 of these bloggers? Take any --MyDD, FireDogLake, DailyKos, Americablog, Mahablog, TalkLeft, Eschaton, The blogging of the President. Tell me, how really different are these bloggers' styles of writing, topics of discussion and brand of ranting? Armstrong Williams (of all people!) wrote the following in an article called, [http://www.townhall.com/columnists/ArmstrongWilliams/2006/05/15/diversity|Diversity], which is about the absence of people of color in the technology fields :
For example, when hiring, bosses may look for those personal traits they associate with their own success. Consequently, they may end up hiring people who look, think and act in a manner similar to themselves. If confronted with a minority applicant who looks, sounds or communicates differently, they may turn these differences into perceived soft skill deficits. [...] Unfortunately, this sort of latent discrimination is virtually impossible to prove. Partly because there exists a strong tendency among judges (and sometimes even juries) to favor an employer's interpretation of events. But more to the point, because people in management simply tend to mentor people who look and act and sound like their sons. What that means is that young, white Americans have traditionally benefited from the availability of mentors to help hone their talents, while minorities, even to this day, suffer from a lack of mentors to identify with and learn from. There is a logical progression: a lack of mentors equals a lack of learning opportunities, equals a lack of advancement, and equals a lack of certain high level positions being filled by minorities. With time, this sort of arbitrary sorting of high and low level employees comes to be regarded by many as the natural way of things
Most of the people, and I would argue for the exception of Jessica Valenti, have had through the last 2 years what amounts to the kind of working relationships Armstrong describes in his essay. They refer to each other's work regularly, refer each other to grants, workshops, conferences and mainstream media opportunities. And they all as a block make decisions on which candidates they are going to be fundraising. As a block, they all work together as one seamless narrative called "the blogs". That's the problem I see with that photograph. We have here a picture of suppression. There are experiences taken out of the picture. There are political interpretations and strategizing taken out of the picture. There are whole swaths of voters and electoral percentage points taken out of the picture. There is a whole history and present of political activism within the Democratic Party that has been taken out of that picture. It is not lost on me that the top black and latino bloggers of the "liberal blogosphere" are not too keen on Hillary Clinton running for president. It is not lost on me either that we describe ourselves as progressives and not as liberals. As you can see, not one of us is in that photo. Which is why, when I asked the fateful 3 questions,
What does it mean though that there are 20 bloggers invited to this lunch and not one is black or latino? What does it mean for this group of bloggers to be patting themselves on the backs for being with Clinton when they are all in Harlem and not one of them is a person of color? What does it mean for these people to be there and have not one of them raise this issue in their blogs?
I was not just referring to race. When I asked those questions I was thinking : Why is diversity such a dirty word when it should be considered an integral part of any political practice?
Hello, President Edwards- It's official; Mark Warner will not run for President in 2008. Here's the statement:
Dear Michael, Nine months ago, I left the office of Governor in Virginia. I was immensely proud of what we had accomplished. We faced historic challenges and got real results. Upon leaving office, I committed all my time and energy to Forward Together because we need a new direction in America. Everywhere Iâ€™ve traveled, I found hope that we could turn this country around. That Americans are looking for leaders who at this moment of enormous challenge for our country can actually bring us together and get things done. Iâ€™ve heard that regardless of the depth of dismay at the direction President Bush has taken our country, rank and file Democrats are energized, and want ours to be a party of hope, not of anger. I am especially proud of the work weâ€™ve done in supporting those kinds of candidates throughout America. We got a lot done. Forward Together has contributed more money this year to Democratic candidates and party organizations than any other federal leadership PAC. Our effort raised over $9 million.
Breaking: Baker Commission draft report leaked to NY Sun- Isn't it odd how otherwise entirely futile journalistic enterprises sometimes get the juiciest scoops? That's what I'm thinking this morning, considering that the explosive draft report of the Iraq commission chaired by Howard Baker was leaked to the New York Sun. And yes, it is explosive, ruling out victory and democracy both:
WASHINGTON â€” A commission formed to assess the Iraq war and recommend a new course has ruled out the prospect of victory for America, according to draft policy options shared with The New York Sun by commission officials. Currently, the 10-member commission â€” headed by a secretary of state for President George H.W. Bush, James Baker â€” is considering two option papers, "Stability First" and "Redeploy and Contain," both of which rule out any prospect of making Iraq a stable democracy in the near term.
Sounds an awful lot like cut and run to me, but what would I know? After all, I'm a lefto America-hating hippie who only said from late 2002 that this was going to be a disaster.
More telling, however, is the ruling out of two options last month. One advocated minor fixes to the current war plan but kept intact the long-term vision of democracy in Iraq with regular elections. The second proposed that coalition forces focus their attacks only on Al Qaeda and not the wider insurgency. Instead, the commission is headed toward presenting [..] Bush with two clear policy choices that contradict his rhetoric of establishing democracy in Iraq. The more palatable of the two choices for the White House, "Stability First," argues that the military should focus on stabilizing Baghdad while the American Embassy should work toward political accommodation with insurgents. The goal of nurturing a democracy in Iraq is dropped.
Times endorses Hillary - for Senate- Bet you didn't see that one coming: The New York Times handed its 2006 Senate endorsement to the incumbent, Hillary Clinton. The endorsement is notable for two reasons: one, the unleavened scorn heaped on republican candidate whatshisname, and for the emphasis on the fact that the editorial board really, really would like to see her in the Senate for a full six years. First, on the other guy:
Hillary Clinton is running in a phantom race for the Senate, pitted against an unknown, unqualified opponent. In the unlikely event that New Yorkers ever learn what John Spencerâ€™s views are, most would find them far too conservative. Itâ€™s a measure of the haplessness of Mr. Spencerâ€™s campaign that the Republican nominee has been dogged by rumors that his real aim is to prepare the ground for an attempt to regain his old job as mayor of Yonkers. It would be easy to endorse Hillary Clinton for a second term even if she had a far more credible opponent.
Ouch! Next, on 2008:
Hillary, Drudged- Ben Smith recently had a post that was linked on Drudge. The subject of the post was a picture of New York's junior Senator wearing a cross; it engendered 863 comments as of this writing. I had an email exchange with EnWhySeaWonk on the subject, which he blogs about here. The argument, which I think deserves consideration, is that Hillary is so hated by the right that a possible run by her for the Presidency is essentially stillborn. He goes further than I would, speaking of the risk of assassination, but the hatred is there. So what does it look like? On the assumption that the universe of Drudge Report readers can be considered indicative of the opinions of the extreme right, I just spent two miserable hours taking a look at how they hate Hillary. It's ugly.
Barack Obama weighs 2008- Barack Obama is considering a run in 2008, reports The Washington Post. The Senator made the statement on this morning's Meet The Press. :-) That sound you hear is a collective shout across the country: "Where do I sign up"? It seems to me that the country as a whole is ready for a fresh start; certainly, that's what the death spiral of the extreme right seems to be indicating. Senator Obama just might provide that fresh start for the White House. The Senator does seem a bit more appealing than the tired retread that is John McCain, or the manifest extremist failures represented by Mitt Romney, Sam Brownback or, God forbid, George Felix Macaca Allen.
Kerry in the cross-hairs- Every once in a while, the netroots take positions that are just inexplicable; presently, for example, Kos is going after John Kerry to give more money to candidates and committees across the country. Kerry, fairly or not, makes a satisfying target for many Democrats still bitter over various aspects of the 2004 campaign. For the record, I still think he would have made potentially one of our greatest Presidents ever, and not just in comparison with the appalling spectacle of decadence, criminality and decline that is the present administration. What irks me is this criticism of Kerry, because he has been front and center for our candidates, raising somewhere in the neighborhood of eleven million dollars for worthwhile races, including Jim Webb's in Virginia, Joe Sestak's in Pennsylvania, and so on. One suggestion I'd make to campaigns across the country trying to raise money is this simple: call John Kerry. Odds are that he'll help. I'm all for calling out lazy Dems, but Kerry isn't one of them.
Make that Hillary "Rodham" Clinton, please- I really am starting to love Hillary again; a few days ago, a story came out that indicated that Hillary Rodham Clinton polls better for 2008 than just plain old Hillary Clinton, sans Rodham. And today, I get an email from Hillary Rodham Clinton at HillPAC, with this header image: You have to hand it to her: she will do what it takes. [Update]: Heh, oops. I just went back into my old email, and she's always used that moniker. To be precise, her Friends of Hillary mailing list uses just "Hillary", without any surname, while HillPAC (and things she's done for the DSCC) always refer to her as Hillary Rodham Clinton. Hence the confusion: I'm on several Hillary mailing lists. Nothing to see here folks, move on.
Like republicans? Then vote green for governor.- The green party is pushing hard this year to get votes for its gubernatorial candidate, whom I usually refer to as Affable Green Irish Guy (with no disrespect intended to the Irish, who are blameless in this). The reason for this is not a desire to aid and abet the republican candidate, as is their habitual practice - in the current cycle, see Maryland, Virginia, Pennsylvania and Washington State - perhaps because republican gubernatorial candidate whatshisname is so feeble that he is unable to benefit from green assistance. Rather, the goal is to secure automatic ballot access for future races, which under state law is conditional on receiving 50,000 votes in the gubernatorial race. On one of their own web sites, which I won't link to out of principle, they acknowledge this:
The Green Party of New York State needs to get 50,000 votes for Governor in order to regain automatic ballot status. Being a ballot status party allows us to run many more candidates. With ballot status in 2001, we ran over 200 candidates. Without ballot status in 2005, we ran only 20 candidates.
An automatic ballot line for the green party in this state will have strongly negative implications for the present and future electoral goals of the New York State Progressive movement.
The morning papers, November 10- The New York Times skewers George Bush's version of bipartisanship. Here's a hint to the White House: it's not going to conjure up amity if you re-nominate a guy to a post whom we previously filibustered. Or when you try to get your wiretapping legalized via a lame duck Congressional approval. That didn't take long: Tom Vilsack throws his hat in the 2008 ring. Let the merriness begin. The Albany Times-Union informs that police are starting an internal investigation into the leak of a police report about the wife-beating incident involving defeated Rep. John Sweeney. The latter had claimed the report was a fabrication, which the fact of the investigation seems to countermand. The Rochester Democrat and Chronicle demands that Alan Hevesi step down. He's unwilling to do so, but here's the thing: a lot of people did vote for him to keep out the republican, and fully expect him to resign. There's not a lot of vindication in that vote. The Amsterdam News is downright giddy over the clout soon to be enjoyed by hometown hero Charlie Rangel, incoming chairman of Ways and Means. Democrats took seats in at least fifteen districts that should remain solidly Democratic, making for a nicely durable majority, analyzes MyDD. Sweet.
And the race for 2008 is on- Political pollsters need to justify their existence. Chief among them is Rassmusen Reports. The company has turned its efforts at handicapping the 2008 Presidential race. [http://news.yahoo.com/s/rasmussen/20061108/pl_rasmussen/demprimary20061108|For the Democrats] :
Following Election 2006, the nation can look forward to our first female Speaker of the House. Another woman, Senator Hillary Clinton, is the initial frontrunner for the 2008 Democratic Presidential nomination. However, another freshman Senator, Barack Obama, is close on her heels. The first release of the Rasmussen Reports 2008 Presidential Tracking Poll finds Clinton the choice of 29% while Obama has 22%. Former Vice President Al Gore is number three with 13% and the 2004 Vice Presidential nominee John Edwards is also in double digits at 10%. The Democrats' 2004 standard bearer, John Kerry, is the choice of just 4%.
Not only do I find it risible people are thinking seriously about Obama for president; but am actually relieved that only 4% wants Kerry back. John needs a looooong vacation away from the political spotlight. He ought to focus on becoming the next Chuck Schumer.
Taking stock: the 2008 contenders- The dust is clearing over the battlefield of the midterms, with a brand-spanking new Democratic majority ready and willing to govern the country, and whole host of new Dems all over stepping up to do the same, including our very own Eliot. Exciting times; but any political breather is likely to be short, because 2008 is upon us. So how did the contenders emerge from this election? The most obvious loser is George Felix Macaca Allen, the beneficiary of a simple lesson: don't throw a racial insult at someone when they're pointing a video camera at your face. One would think that this didn't need to be explained. Another fresh piece of toast is John Kerry. The lesson here: if you're not funny, don't make jokes that call other people stupid. Just don't. George Pataki leaves behind a heap of dust and ashes in his party and at Ground Zero. The circle of believers in a Pataki candidacy never extended far beyond that of blood relatives, at least in this state; I expect that this constituency of supporters has narrrowed somewhat after Tuesday's rout. The same logic, without the stench of policy failure attached to the merely political, applies to Mitt Romney. Hillary of course did supremely well, as was to be expected; but there's reason to doubt that her win will erase Democratic misgivings about her viability, or the primal, beyond-all-sense hatred she engenders on the now-chastened right.
Hillaryland attacks- Well, that didn't take long: The Plank, the blog of the right-leaning DLC organ The New Republic, has an item titled "Putsch at the DNC".
Some big name Democrats want to oust DNC Chairman Howard Dean, arguing that his stubborn commitment to the 50-state strategy and his stinginess with funds for House races cost the Democrats several pickup opportunities. The candidate being floated to replace Dean? Harold Ford. Says James Carville, one of the anti-Deaniacs, "Suppose Harold Ford became chairman of the DNC? How much more money do you think we could raise? Just think of the difference it could make in one day. Now probably Harold Ford wants to stay in Tennessee. I just appointed myself his campaign manager."
Notably, Dean is closely identified with the netroots and the fifty-state strategy; both are intent on devolving power away from the Beltway aristocracy, of which Carville is a starring member, besides being a loyal retainer to the Clintons. It's also worth pondering that present conventional wisdom has it that the main obstacle to a Hillary candidacy will be, you guessed it, the netroots and those newly energized state parties. Carville has been a useful surrogate for the Clintons before, as when he wrote an article for WaPo laying out a rather threadbare case for her electability. It seems reasonable to see the same dynamic at work in this case. What's truly disgusting about this is this: we lost the Congress in 1994, when you-know-who was President. For the rest of his tenure, no serious effort was made to reverse that defeat; this in part because the Democratic Party was fully focused on saving Bill Clinton's posterior from the republican jihad. In part as a result, the party out there in the country withered, a process that has not been undone until just now. Not to be unkind - or hell, why not - but James Carville's fingerprints were all over that withering. I'm going to hazard a guess that the rank and file aren't going to be too friendly to this newest Beltway power grab. We've seen what it's like when D.C. runs things, and we don't like it, Mr. Carville. Back off.
The morning papers, November 12- No, you're not going to be eating your turkey in peace, because the 2008 campaign season is upon us. Check out the contender rankings by Joe Trippi in The Washington Post and on Left Behinds. Via Blue Spot Blog, here's an antidote, just in case you're feeling guilty about gloating. Having just seen that video, have fun with this list of things named after Ronald Reagan. Is it time, maybe, to start naming things after men and women who actually deserve to be remembered? Not to be spiteful or anything like that, of course. Just defeated in large part because they moved too far to the right, what do republicans plan to do? Move further to the right, that's what. It appears we're looking at a permanent cession of the political center to us, and there's no reason to argue with that. There's an office called the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, notable for the serial embarrassments and convictions it has heaped on the usual suspects, such as Halliburton and corrupt wingnut/administration operatives inexplicably charged with rebuilding Iraq. Now, republicans are trying to kill it. They have learned nothing. Speaking of which, check out Nicholas Confessore in The New York Times on the racial dynamics of the Atlantic Yards debate. Russ Feingold declines a run for the Presidency, agonizes Kos. And finally, also in the Times, some advice, sure not to be taken, for the New York GOP.
The morning papers, November 13- Expect fairly light blogging as we continue to recover from the sweet joy of victory. Speaking of which, here's Colbert's tribute video to the departing republican majority. Ben Smith in The Daily News has some background on contributing factors behind John Hall's victory in the 19th. The New York Times profiles Jon Tester, possibly the most exciting Democrat elected to the Senate in a generation. Nancy Pelosi is backing John Murtha for Majority Leader, reports The Washington Post. A superficial reading of the tea leaves suggests that this will produce a strong emphasis on Iraq, veterans affairs and other legislative interests associated with Murtha (D-PA), but that the liberal base might not be too pleased with this choice. Murtha has a 0% rating from Naral, among others. Also in WaPo: 2006 was a wipeout election, but it doesn't really mean anything. Liberal media bias, anyone? Dead, or comatose, asks The New York Times of the state of the New York GOP. Simpering Sebastian Mallaby sings the praises of 'free trade'. The Washington DLC consensus at least is alive and well, elections and agendas be damned. And lastly, the Times profiles Howard Wolfson, the man behind Hillary's message machine.
Giuliani Takes the Plunge?- Former Mayor Giuliani has taken the plunge...or at least is "testing the waters" for a 2008 Presidential bid. From Salon.com:
Former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, a moderate Republican best known for his stewardship of the city after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, has taken the first step in a 2008 presidential bid, GOP officials said Monday. The former mayor filed papers to create the Rudy Giuliani Presidential Exploratory Committee, Inc., establishing a panel that would allow him to raise money for a White House run and travel the country. The four-page filing, obtained by The Associated Press, lists the purpose of the non-profit corporation "to conduct federal 'testing the waters' activity under the Federal Election Campaign Act for Rudy Giuliani." The paperwork is signed by Bobby Burchfield, a partner at the DC-based law firm of McDermott Will & Emery, a firm that handles political work.
I am of mixed feelings here. First off, Giuliani was not a great mayor. He raised racial tensions, suppressed civil rights and generally ruled like a dictator. We don't need more of THAT!
The morning papers, November 14- In The New York Times: Several dozen employees of a government research institute were kidnapped in broad daylight in Baghdad. This must be what victory looks like. The Washington Post: Pelosi draws fire from CREW for her support of John Murtha; turns out he has some significant ethics issues. John Podhoretz claims that America's most futile columnist, John Tierney of the Times, is hanging up his quill. Maybe the paper noticed that nobody actually reads the guy? Adam Clymer â€“ yes, that one - in the Times takes on one of the oldest, most tedious phenomena of American governance: the stubborn belief of U.S. Senators, apparently universally held, that they and they alone are uniquely qualified for the Presidency. Patrick Healy profiles Eliot's ad man, Jimmy Siegel, who seems to be auditioning for a similar role, should another notable New Yorker throw her hat in the ring. It's strong stuff and not for the faint of heart, but take a look at the Giuliani announcement thread on Free Republic. Feel the hate. Lastly, Gallup presents some fun numbers. By 61% to 31%, Americans want Democrats rather than Bush to set the agenda; the Democratic Party has a favorability rating of 57%, to 33% unfavorable; for the other side, it's 35% favorable to 58% can't-stand-the-bastards; Bush's job approval stands at 33% approve, 62% disapprove; and by a 48% to 16% margin, Americans think the country will be better off with Democratic control of Congress. ...and no, that's not gloating, just data. Hehe. After the break, video of Giuliani in drag.
The morning papers, November 15- U.S. Airways has made an offer to buy Delta Airways. This is huge. Betsy Gotbaum has finally found an issue worthy of her attention as Public Advocate: The cell phone ban in public schools. As a reminder, a blackout in Queens that left 100,000 without power for nine elicited not a peep from her office; she has yet to make a public statement about any development, from Atlantic Yards on down; she heard about Gitmo on the Hudson, the lockup during the RNC, from newspaper reports; the list goes on. Here's a thought: email her at schoolcellphoneban@pubadvocate.nyc.gov ; that's an address that is apparently taken seriously. Tell her what else she's missing. In The New York Times freshly re-elected Joe Lieberman, "Independent Democrat" of Connecticut, is being welcomed back with hugs, perhaps because he has the Senate Democratic majority by the balls. The Village Voice continues the drip, drip, drip of coverage of the State Senate Democrats' self-inflicted debacle in this election cycle:
A tribute to the genius of computerized reapportionment, the GOP senate victory was also a commentary on the calamity of Democratic strategy and resolve, even in a year of historic opportunity. Little of the multimillions spent by the statewide Democratic players trickled down to the troops in the senate trenches, and the compromises that local party leaders have made with their GOP counterparts over the years came back at prime time to haunt the senate effort.
The Washington Post: spending bills and a free-trade deal with Vietnam stall in the Congress. Even in defeat, republicans just can't do their jobs. Pondering John Murtha: Taegan Goddard says it's all sewn up; Ruth Marcus in The Washington Post says he's 'unfit to be Majority Leader'. Let's be honest, no matter which way it goes, this is not an auspicious start; better get ironclad ethics reform passed pronto. Lastly, The Daily News has a Rudy-gasm - here and here and here.
Edwards to announce?- Political Wire announces the blessed news that John Edwards may be making a certain announcement shortly.
While John Edwards didn't announce he's making a presidential bid on The Daily Show last night, he did say this: "I actually do have an announcement, just between us. If people go to my website, johnedwards.com, in the next few weeks, they may see something new and exciting."
The Anybody-But-Hillary caucus is presumably overjoyed, as Edwards seems to be the man to beat for the role of Not-Hillary. And while I normally don't grovel, take it for what it's worth: Please Please Please Please Do it just do it Please.
The morning papers, November 16th- It's official: Democrats did not lose a single House or Senate seat in this election. This is what mandates look like. Some moves forward in the Imperial City: Eero Saarinen's TWA terminal is to be redeveloped in some form, and construction begins on the Freedom Tower. The New York Times: the City Council votes itself, and other servants of the public, a pay raise, without asking the public. The Albany Times-Union: the officer who investigated the assault case against John Sweeney's son in 2004 has been demoted in a claimed connection with the leak of the wifebeating 911 report that was leaked a week before the election. The controversy over the poor showing by state Senate Democrats in this election continues: Ben Smith weighs the scenarios, and Gatemouth has some more options to analyze. Long story short, I'd add, is this: an opportunity was wasted, and we'll see whether it comes again. The baselines â€“ registration advantages, trends, the record over the preceding cycles â€“ indicate that there is some validity to the 2008 argument; but still. Political Wire, quoting Hotline: John McCain is set to announce his exploratory committee today. He has a web site, of course. Oddly enough, the color scheme is shades of gray. Members of the media still enthralled by this candidacy should take a look at the relevant Free Republic thread and perhaps revisit their estimation of his chances; I say there is no way he gets the nomination.
Fox cashes in on O.J.'s new book, edited by Bernie Kerik's WTC fuckbuddy- Some of these things are just so brazen that you initially suspect they're just a hoax; surely, Judith Regan, the woman porked by Bernie Kerik in an apartment secured for that purpose by throwing out WTC rescue workers, couldn't be the editor behind O.J. Simpson's new book, the one that examines how he theoretically could have killed his wife and her boyfriend back in the day. Which, of course, he didn't in fact do; he's just writing a book about theories and possibilities. Simpson's book, "If I did it", is being published by Judith Regan's venture, Regan Books, an imprint of Harper-Collins, which in turn is a part of the Murdoch media empire. Said far-flung fiefdom also includes Fox "News", The Weekly Standard, Fox Television, and other properties identified with the right. The Los Angeles Times notes:
"If I Did It" is the product of the former football star's collaboration with an unnamed ghost writer and will be published at the end of this month by ReganBooks, the euphonious shock-and-schlock imprint Judith Regan runs for the HarperCollins publishing house. Fox, ReganBooks and HarperCollins all have something important in common: They're owned by the predatory Australian-born media tycoon Rupert Murdoch, who has devoted his life to making money by making sure that news and entertainment are as coarse and vulgar as can be imagined in as many places as possible.
The morning papers, November 21- The New York Times takes a look at how Hillary managed to spend $30 million on her re-election campaign over token opposition. Also in the Times, the headline speaks for itself: "Intrepid Has Not Moved, but the Bill Has Risen to $60 Million". Aren't we lucky that money grows on trees? The Washington Post: NewsCorp, parent company of Fox "News" and other right-wing propaganda outfits, pulls the plug on O.J. Simpson's book deal and TV special. This is probably the first time that Rupert Murdoch has shown acquaintance with the concept of shame, and it only took a double murderer cashing in on his crime to make it happen. Yeah, yeah, "alleged double murderer", right. The Daily News has a field day - here and here and here. That didn't take long: the Democratic leadership shoots down that draft idea. Republicans everywhere are probably breathing more easily today as they rant about 'Islamofascism' from the comfort of their parents' garages. That didn't take long, Part II: new state Senate Democratic leader Malcolm Smith calls for reform, oh, and a pay raise. Interesting tidbit from the article: Tom Duane "will likely become one of Smith's top deputies". And lastly, via Political Wire, Newt bows out, sorta kinda with fingers crossed.
The case for Denver 2008- The competition for host city of the 2008 Democratic Convention is down to two contenders: New York City and Denver, Colorado. In the opinion of this New Yorker, Denver is the better choice. There are several factors that will be taken into account in making the selection of the host city, a decision on which is expected in December. At the risk of generalization, these factors are respectively money, logistics â€“ hotels, convention sites, traffic connections â€“ and politics. New York City is of course the financial motherlode of both parties â€“ the top ZIP code for fundraising remains 10021 â€“ with a convention-friendly infrastructure probably unmatched anywhere in the world, including 75,000 hotel rooms. A quick glance at the web site of the Denver Metro Convention Bureau suggests that, while the Mile High City can't match Gotham's offerings â€“ and what city can? â€“ it certainly has the facilities needed to accommodate the 2008 convention. In terms of funding, as the Denver-friendly blog Democratic Convention Watch notes, a possible Democratic convention on the Hudson would need to compete with other local fundraising goals, including the 9/11 Memorial. I'd also assume that a Denver convention would be cheaper to hold, as that city probably has not yet witnessed foie-gras-stuffed cheeseburgers that retail for $45, just to name one example.
The morning papers, November 22- With half of America trapped on freeways or grumbling intemperately in airports, and the other half slaving over stoves, there's not that much news to report. DailyKos ponders the turkey. Taking a step away from the 2008 glamour contest for the Presidency, Hotline takes a look at the Senate races. It's worth noting that in 2008, 21 republicans are up for re-election, as opposed to only 12 Democrats. This stark fact prompts nervousness over at Redstate.com. The New York Times: Senator LieberAss, psychopath of Connecticut, hires John McCain's former press flack, one Marshall Wittman.
Mr. Wittmann, meanwhile, is a Trotskyite turned Zionist turned Reaganite turned bipartisan irritant turned pretty much everything in between â€” including chief lobbyist for the Christian Coalition, the only Jew who has ever held that position.
Also in the Times: New York's system of village and town courts, three centuries old, gets an overhaul. Here's hoping that the legal system's gears grind more quickly when it comes to marriage equality for gays and lesbians. Lastly, The Daily Politics recalls JFK; today is the anniversary of his assassination. Happy Day before Thanksgiving, y'all.
Seriously, Giuliani is kidding himself- There's an unreal quality to this whole Rudy '08 business, but now that the former mayor has filed an exploratory committee for real, it seems it should be taken just a mite more seriously than it deserves. To be clear, the idea that anyone, let alone Giuliani himself, considers him Presidential timber is thigh-slappingly hilarious, but seriousness is the order of the day, I guess. So let's take a look. Ed Koch, back in the day when he too was taken seriously, was a columnist for the Daily News; as such, he wrote a series of articles about His Rudyness; they were later serialized in a volume titled Giuliani: Nasty Man. The book appeared in 1999, before Rudy was sainted, and it's juicy. July 10th, 1998 (p. 119f): 40,000 construction workers demonstrate - the word used is 'riot' - in Midtown, leading to twenty injuries; Giuliani goes campaigning in Nassau County with the republican AG candidate, Dennis Vacco.
Hillary's fashions- Via CafÃ©Press comes this exciting collection of Hillary '08 merchandise; love her, hate her, don't care, there's an item for you. Here are some samples:
The morning papers, November 29- The New York Times: Alcee Hastings, a lawmaker who in a previous life had been one of only a handful of judges to be impeached and removed by the Congress, will not chair the House Intelligence Committee. Nor, it seems, will AIPAC tool Jane Harman. We shall see. Also in the Times, a strange story about a leaked White House memo expressing doubts about the Iraqi premier; the chimp, of course, is meeting the Prime Minister in Jordan today. One wonders why and by whom that memo was leaked today; not very artful. Get ready for hospital closings. Larry Littlefield on Room Eight discusses possible consequences. The civil war in Iraq is not a civil war, says the White House. Just put your fingers in your ears, close your eyes, and sing La La La loudly; you'll be fine. Speaking of which, Saudi Arabia may be preparing to intervene in Iraq, says DailyKos. The Albany Times-Union goes into the details of Bruno and Silver's obfuscation on member item disclosure. The records were provided as a 3,000 page image PDF, rendering them largely unusable; the Assembly has now provided the earmark data in searchable format, which the Senate continues to refuse to do. See what a difference a republican Senate majority makes? Huh? Lastly, The Washington Monthly has a portrait of incoming Majority Leader Steny Hoyer.
Pondering impeachment- The constitution provides for the removal from office of the President and Vice-President for what it terms 'treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors'. As does so much else in our constitutional system, the idea of impeachment derives from English law. Despite their illegitimacy, impeachment and removal are therefore the legal avenue (of several available) that seems most apt for dealing with George Bush and Dick Cheney. In judicial terms, impeachment is comparable to an indictment; at the Federal level, a simple majority of the House of Representatives is required to vote out Articles of Impeachment. These are then presented to the United States Senate, presided over by the Chief Justice, where a super-majority of two thirds is required for conviction and removal. Notably, The Federalist Papers make clear that impeachment is a political, as opposed to a judicial, process.
A well-constituted court for the trial of impeachments is an object not more to be desired than difficult to be obtained in a government wholly elective. The subjects of its jurisdiction are those offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated POLITICAL, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.
Bill Frist out of 2008 race- Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha! Must...Stop...Laughing...Hysterically... Oh, why the hell not. The good doctor declines a run for the Presidency, and Terri Schiavo can rest in peace; who says there's no such thing as justice?
The morning papers, November 30- George Will is shocked, shocked I say, by the gross incivility of Jim Webb to George Bush. He was not previously shocked by the incivility of calling Democrats terrorist enablers, traitors, cowards, by references to the 'Democrat Party', the Smear Boat veterans, the Plame outing, Terri Schiavo, 'Man on Dog', or other such pleasantries. A suggestion for George Will: instead of decrying Washington incivility, try fixing Washington hypocrisy, and start with yourself. The New York Times: The Iraq Study Group is expected to recommend a 'gradual pullback' of U.S. troops in that country, without making clear to where and how fast they will 'pull back'. Also in the Times: Alan Hevesi in an audit report chides a Long Island school district for being slow to enact safeguards against embezzlement of public funds. This leads inescapably to the question of whether brazen, in-your-face, statewide-jawdrop-inducing hypocrisy is impeachable. The Tree is lit! Hooray! The Nation can't resist gloating over Bill Frist's "retiring to the obscurity he so richly deserves". Political Animal regrets the political death of one so "entertainingly craven". Senator Serrano of the Bronx educates environmental groups about political usefulness. And lastly, an exhibit of refreshingly stupid. Wait, here's another one.
Department of perhaps unfortunate metaphors- The most exciting part of the 2006 elections - other than the sweet victory that capped them - was the emergence of new Democratic organizations, groups, candidates, in a word, infrastructure, across the country. This happened in Montana, Idaho, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Indiana, even here in New York, and the process is if anything accelerating. Howard Dean, God bless him, possibly kick-started this momentum with his Fifty State strategy, but the broader Progressive movement is growing above and beyond his efforts. Case in point: The Blue Tiger Democrats, whose mission is to essentially return the party to voters' neighborhoods and engage directly in the life of We The People. Fantastic idea, great plan, sign me up. There's just one problem: one of the models they use is historic Tammany Hall. The tiger is, in point of fact, the historic symbol of Tammany in the same way that the elephant stands for the republican party and the donkey is that of the Democratic Party, created by (republican) cartoonist Thomas Nast for Harpers.
Pollak for State Chair- Via The Daily Politics:
I'd been hearing whispers of this for a little while: that the chieftan [sic] of New York's yuppie politics, Dave Pollak, was a dark horse contender for State Democratic Chairman. Now the Times Union reports that he's Spitzer's candidate for a job that'll be divided at least two ways, with June O'Neill of St. Lawrence County (way up north) as chairwoman and Pollak as co-chair. Pollak's group, DL21C, has been a real, unconventional success in a town where Democrats are usually pretty unorganized; this would bring some of that energy under the Spitzer aegis.
Absolutely inspired choice. I don't know Dave all that well, but what I do know is that he's young, smart as a whip, and will be a fountain of innovation for the party. For example, the state party's text-messaging initiative came, I believe, from Dave. With DL21C and at the NYSDC, he's gone out of his way to engage the grassroots and to do some really exciting things. This is very exciting. I'm loving it.
The morning papers, December 1st- It's World Aids Day. Though new treatments have reduced the visibility of the disease and made it perhaps a chronic, manageable condition, nobody has yet been cured, people are still dying, and infection rates are rising. Aids isn't over. Mexed missages on Iraq: The New York Times speaks of a ' brisk stroll' to the exit, while The Washington Post speaks of a withdrawal of all combat troops by 2008. What's going to happen to the troops left behind, you have to wonder. How much longer do our people need to die to assuage Washington egos? Day One comes early: Governor-elect Spitzer voluntarily foregoes donations over $10,000 and corporate pass-through donations, under which companies and their subsidiaries each give money to a given candidate. He's also going to ditch those irritating commercials that star Pataki telling us how he's spending our money, which should cause a sigh of relief across the state. That's a good start â€“ now, let's see the legislature act. The Washington Post: The National Institute of Standards and Technology says that paperless voting machines "cannot be made secure". The practical impact of this assessment, should the government adopt it, won't be felt until 2010, giving conspiracy theorists ample warning to develop new theories. Oink, oink: The Albany Times-Union puts Bruno's earmarks at $12,000,000; Shelly Silver, meanwhile, "directed $23.6 million in member items to an assortment of pet projects during a two-year period, personally sponsoring $15.2 million for groups, including several represented by a close friend who is a lobbyist." Mind you, these earmarks aren't part of the normal budget process, but miraculously appear; the dollars are quite real, though. Lastly â€“ and there will be more on this subject - National Journal analyzes the factors underlying Hillary's supposed march to a coronation, and why this storyline should be considered the fruit of lazy reporters, lame-ass old media, and has-been Beltway/Manhattan elitists chattering amongst themselves.
Independent Neighborhood Democrats: It's Still the Economy, Stupid!- It's STILL the Economy, Stupid! That was the T-shirt I wore last night to a meeting of my local Democratic club, the Independent Neighborhood Democrats (IND). It proved to be a very appropriate shirt. Last night, IND had a guest speaker, Hank Sheinkopf, political consultant, formerly a member of President Clintonâ€™s re-election media team, and panelist on a NY-1 roundtable discussion. Sheinkopf is the ultimate Democratic insider and he came to discuss the 2006 election victory with us. But first the warmup acts. There were two stand up routines and a farcical play. Well, not really. There were two good speechs by unexpected guests, Steve Harrison and David Yassky, and some club business. Steve Harrison, whose followers were present last night in impressive numbers, showing that if he wants to run again, he may have an organization in place ready to go, spoke about finally winning NY-13. He pointed out that the district, contrary to popular "wisdom," is majority Democratic and that the fact that he did better with only $100,000 than Barbaro did two years ago with $300,000 shows that we are making progress. He did not say whether he would run in 2 years, but it sure seemed like he was trying to plant that seed. Good for him. Let's start now and I bet 2 years from now will be the year for us in NY-13.
Some thoughts on Dave Pollak, party co-chair to be- The Democratic Party is an odd creature these days in New York. On the one hand, you have clubs (of which more later), party machines (especially in the outer boroughs), and traditional allied organizations such as labor unions, interest groups, and so on. On the other, there is a vast, independent and expanding universe of insurgent organizations and individuals, mainly web-based, some local, some statewide, some national, some a year old, some a decade. There are blogs (such as this one), think tanks, MeetUps. When you add all of them up, you're looking at a colossus, a force that has dominion in the third-largest state in the Union, capable of moving hundreds of millions of dollars, millions of voters, and tens of thousands of volunteers. As we've seen over the last few election cycles, the leverage of New York Democrats extends far beyond the state, with money, ideas and bodies flowing outward into adjoining states and far, far beyond. Starting in January, the organization at the center of this multi-nodal universe, the NYSDC, will have two new heads: June O'Neill and Dave Pollak. I hear good things about the former and can attest to the latter being, from where I'm standing, a commendable choice. The contrast with republicans, who have also chosen a new state chair, is stark. Their new old man, Joseph Mondello, is an exponent of old-line machine politics, having previously led the once-famed Nassau machine to wrack and ruin. As the recent election showed, republicans are in a death spiral in suburbs generally; but the question left unanswered in the Mondello appointment is whether the decline in Nassau had to be so far, so fast, and whether the gentleman who presided over it is really the right choice to lead the heap of ashes that is the New York State GOP. It seems to me that he's being given an opportunity to cast wider the nets of his failure. Mind you, I'd welcome that result â€“ pass the popcorn.
The morning papers, December 4- Simpering Sebastian Mallaby provides today's example of elite punditocracy wankery in discussing this essay in The New Republic. Long story short, he makes the case that liberals and libertarians can unite, but only if liberals give up that pesky, un-chic economic security agenda that got them elected in the first place. The New York Times tells the tale of Hillary's first gropings towards the Presidency, by reaching out to New York party leaders. But can she win in Ohio? New York Magazine, meanwhile, keeps the Bloomberg '08 chatter alive. But can he win in Ohio? Also in the Times, from yesterday's City section, an uncritical paean to robber-baron excess, in the form of a 3,000 word tribute to the newly-on-the-market penthouse of The Pierre. The excellent new blog, The Albany Project, presents the Brennan Center's withering evaluation of the state legislature, here. Capitol Confidential somewhat incredulously notes that Pataki has hired someone new for his, um, "presidential campaign". Once again, the civilized world is left to wonder just what is in the water supply of Pataki's house, and how to get some. Lastly, Gatemouth writes The Daily Gotham a love letter.
The new narrative: Anybody but Hillary- It seems we've been here before. Much as the narrative of 2004 was 'Anybody but Bush', the emerging storyline for 2008, on the Democratic side, seems to be 'Anybody but Hillary'. With The New York Times reporting on the junior Senator's efforts at shoring up her New York base for a Presidential run â€“ side note: the rumor is that an announcement is expected on or about January 15th â€“ maybe it's time to look at the opposition and its motivations. The strength of this sentiment can be determined, interestingly, by the sudden interest in a Presidential run by Barack Obama. On the face of it, the idea that a freshman Senator with two years of experience would run for office is ludicrous. However, with the central dynamic of the 2008 primary, helped along by the lamestream media and their offshoots in blogdom, being the inevitability of Hillary, Democrats seem to be casting about for some, any, alternative. As National Journal said,
Too many of us have awarded Clinton the '08 nod too soon and too easily. The conventional-wisdom crowd is easily impressed by two things about her candidacy: money and her last name. There's also a dirty little secret that those of us in the media are leery to admit: She's good for business (particularly expense reports).
Obama in New York- The New York Times reports on Barack Obama's visit to New York donors, a preview of the protocol dance that will ensue over the course of the Presidential primary.
Senator Barack Obama treaded onto Senator Hillary Rodham Clintonâ€™s home turf last night to meet with prominent Democratic donors and feel out those who might prefer the sound of President Obama to President Clinton (as in Hillary, not Bill). Amid intensifying presidential musings by Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Obama met with George Soros, the liberal billionaire philanthropist, and then some other donors last night at Mr. Sorosâ€™s offices. One of the donors who met with Mr. Obama, and who spoke on condition of anonymity because he did not want to offend Mrs. Clinton, said that he and several others had supported Mrs. Clintonâ€™s Senate campaigns but were not committed to her as a presidential candidate. â€œI like Hillary a lot, but Iâ€™m also impressed with Obama â€” his message, the way he connects to people,â€ said the donor, a prominent New York business person. â€œItâ€™s a little too early for Democrats to be certain that Hillary is the strongest bet for 2008. There are a lot of good people interested in running.â€
The morning papers, December 8- 65 years ago today, President Roosevelt gave his 'Day of Infamy' speech and asked the Congress for a declaration of war against Japan. The speech text and audio are here. I'm still somewhat incredulous that we haven't seated the 110th Congress yet, but find ourselves in the middle of the Presidential contest already. The Fix has its current contender rankings, as follows:
Republicans: McCain, Romney, Gingrich, Giuliani, Brownback
Democrats: Clinton, Edwards, Obama, Bayh, Richardson Arianna slaps down Hillary, hard, here and here. Joe Bruno is a liar. Steve Gilliard isn't buying the NYPD's story. Lastly, Urban Elephants has some downright disturbing video of Charles Barron at the Sean Bell rally. I'm just going to go out on a limb here and say that the term 'house negroes' is offensive when applied to members of the NYPD. Two words: Eric Adams.
Draft Obama movement launched- Hmmm. I haven't really made up my mind yet on the entire Barack Obama phenomenon, and I'm extremely skeptical of handicapping the 2008 race at this point. Fact is that the first ballots - you know, those pesky things that actually decide elections, no matter what the kommentariat might think - aren't going to be cast for well over a year. Only two Democrats, Vilsack and Biden, have even declared. So there's reason to be skeptical about chit-chat extoling one person or another as the all-but-crowned frontrunner, an argument I tend to make about our junior Senator. That said, there is obviously quite a bit of maneuvering going on. A new piece of that is a web site, draftobama.org, the intent of which seems clear enough by its name. The idea, I suppose, is to gauge grassroots interest in a candidacy by the freshman Illinois Senator. It gets really interesting when you consider that Zephyr Teachout, late of Howard Dean's Presidential campaign, has signed on to that effort. Teachout has enormous credibility at the Progressive grassroots, so there's every reason to take that effort seriously; in especially as the lists generated by the draft site will likely be handed over in toto to the Obama campaign when it gets going. Stay tuned.
The morning papers, December 11- The New York Times captures the drip, drip, drip of debacle: The Taliban establish a mini-state in Afghanistan, here, the U.S. still doesn't quite know who it's fighting in Iraq, here, the President of Iraq denounces the American security efforts, here, and Iraq isn't spending what money it has, here. The Washington Post: Hamas targets a Fatah leader, and kills his three children instead. Sizzling pork over at the Albany Project. Bob Geiger checks his Osama clock; it's been exactly 1,911 days since The Decider decided that he wanted him 'dead or alive'. Political Wire: Hillary re-releases her children's book, "It takes a Village", this time, with a shot of herself on the cover. Hotline: Mitt Romney isn't enough of a gay-hater for some on the right; watch as he now tries to prove them wrong. He can hate just as much or more as the next reactionary freak show, just you wait and see. And lastly, Political Insider has a remarkable document: a memo sent by John Boehner, the republican House chief, to his caucus as they head into the minority.
Kucinich Throws His Hat in the Ring-

The Daily Gotham

2008 Elections

2008 Elections

Wesley Clark vs. John McCain