As Ali Gallagher, a white female (sorry, this identity-politics labeling is contagious) from Texas, told the Washington Post: "A friend of mine, a black man, said to me, 'My ancestors came to this country in chains; I'm voting for Barack.' I told him, 'Well, my sisters came here in chains and on their periods; I'm voting for Hillary.'"
When everybody's a victim, nobody's a victim. Poor Ms. Gallagher can't appreciate the distinction between purely metaphorical chains and real ones, or even how offensive it might be to assume blithely that there's no difference whatsoever.
On the other hand, Barack's ancestors didn't come here in chains, either: His mother was a white Kansan, so was presumably undergoing menstrual hell with the Gallagher gals, and his dad was a black man a long way away in colonial Kenya. Indeed, Obama would be the first son of a British subject to serve as president since those slaveholding types elected in the early days of the republic. As some aggrieved black activist sniffed snootily on TV, Barack isn't really an "African American" – unless by "African American," you mean somebody whose parentage is half-American and half-African, and let's face it, no one would come up with so cockamamie a definition as that.
Oh, my, Vesuvius wasn't that forceful! Thanks again, New York Times, for taking the fuse out of another supposed bomb.
Let me add here that I covered the whole supposed "McCain for Kerry VP" story back in 2004, especially at Kerry Haters, and I dismissed the possibility right from the start, as did most sensible observers. John McCain was already looking, in the summer of 2004, as the odds-on candidate for the GOP in 2008. Why would he take the job of Kerry's VP, which if the ticket were successful, would have him without a party and terribly unlikely to become president barring illness or other incapacitation of Kerry?
Power's interview Monday was published Friday in a Scottish newspaper, even though she tried to keep it from appearing in print.
"She is a monster, too — that is off the record — she is stooping to anything," The Scotsman quoted her as saying.
Of course, she's got the order all wrong; you don't make the inflammatory statement and then say "that's off the record." You've got to specify that something's off the record beforehand, and you probably won't get agreement if it's a substance-free opinion like that offered by Powers.
Meanwhile Larry David is clearly headed for a top spot in the Obama campaign with suggestions like this one:
Here's an idea for an Obama ad: a montage of Clinton's Sybillish personalities that have surfaced during the campaign with a solemn voiceover at the end saying, "Does anyone want this nut answering the phone?"
New York City police officers and firefighters cordoned off much of Times Square for more than two hours after a small explosion — set off, the authorities said, by an “improvised explosive device” — damaged the front of the Armed Forces Career Center on the traffic island bounded by 43rd and 44th Streets, Seventh Avenue and Broadway at 3:43 a.m., officials said. No one was injured, and after a temporary interruption, subway service was restored.
Not surprisingly, some connected this to the Code Pinko demonstrations at various recruiting stations including Times' Square:
The Times Square recruiting station "has been the site of regular antiwar protests since the start of the Iraq war." Given the increasing virulence of attacks on the military and on military recruiting facilities by antiwar groups like Code Pink, most notably the repeated confrontations in Berkeley, one could speculate that a liberal group is the most likely culprit. So far, however, there are no suspects.
Some jackass threw an incendiary device through the window of a recruiting station in Times Square, so you all know what that means- another 5 weeks of LIEBERALS HATE AMERIKKA from the chest-thumping, cheeto-munching chickenhawk brigade.
Because, you know, there is no way a liberal could have done that. Forget about the Weather Underground fruitcakes from the 1970s (Barack Obama would certainly like you to).
Cole actually used to be a pretty readable guy, but he's gone from moderate conservative to screaching lib in the course of a year or two. And if anything, his commenters are even more nutty:
The Other Steve Says:
I’m curious how Skipper Ed knows that these are not foreign terrorists?
Could he perhaps have some insight into the crime? Maybe a Fire in the Reichstag type insight?
With wins yesterday in Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island, she has clearly managed to avoid the fork yet again. Although the delegate count is not as favorable to her prospects (Kos estimates she may have picked up only one delegate), the effect of winning puts the wind at her back, especially now that the sine wave of media coverage may be turning against Obama.
Jonathan Alter wrote a column yesterday on the delegate math, claiming that even if Hillary won the remaining 16 states, (she lost Vermont last night), she could not catch up in the pledged delegate total and therefore she's doomed. Of course, what this ignores is that if she did get on a winning streak there would be a reason. Either her arguments would be resonating with the people, or Obama would have hit the iceberg, and the superdelegates would probably be jumping into her corner. Essentially Alter assumed that the superdelegates will stick with the pledged delegate winner, which is silly.
Meanwhile, Senator John McCain nailed down the victory last night and Mike Huckabee has dropped out of the race. While there is some speculation that this may benefit the Democrats by keeping the attention of the nation on their contest, if the headlines are "Hillary Accuses Obama of X" and "Obama Assails Hillary's Proposal on Y", it's hard to see how that helps the Donks. Indeed, if we look at recent history, nailing down the nomination and watching the other party battle it out works pretty well. In 1968 Nixon nailed down the GOP nomination early and watched as the Democrats had their unpleasantness in Chicago. In 1976 Jimmuh Carter sealed the deal and had a ringside seat for the Ford/Reagan imbroglio. And in 1980 Reagan benefited from an early win and a Carter/Kennedy dustup.
I haven't been paying much attention to this issue but it looks like the notion that Barack's a different kind of politician is wishful thinking:
The meeting was first reported last week by Canadian television network CTV, which cited unnamed sources as saying that Goolsbee assured the Canadians that Obama's tough talk on the North American Free Trade Agreement is just campaign rhetoric not to be taken seriously.
That's not supposed to be surprising news. But when dog=press corps and man=Barack Obama, it can be.
Reporters from the Associated Press and Reuters went after him for his false denial that a campaign aide had held a secret meeting with Canadian officials over Obama's trade policy. A trio of Chicago reporters pummeled him with questions about the corruption trial this week of a friend and supporter. The New York Post piled on with a question about him losing the Jewish vote.
Obama responded with the classic phrases of a politician in trouble. "That was the information that I had at the time. . . . Those charges are completely unrelated to me. . . . I have said that that was a mistake. . . . The fact pattern remains unchanged."
When those failed, Obama tried another approach. "We're running late," the candidate said, and then he disappeared behind a curtain.
Before he beat his hasty retreat, however, Obama found time to assign blame for the tough questions suddenly coming his way. "The Clinton campaign has been true to its word in employing a 'kitchen sink' strategy," he protested. "There are, what, three or four things a day?"
"We have a sick political culture, and that's the environment Barack Obama came from," Jay Stewart, the executive director of the Chicago Better Government Association, told ABC News. He notes that, while Mr. Obama supported ethics reforms as a state senator, he has "been noticeably silent on the issue of corruption here in his home state, including at this point, mostly Democratic politicians."
Meanwhile, ABC News is pointing out that Rezko's lawyers may subpoena Obama as a witness (please!):
But former prosecutor Fardon, now with the Chicago office of Latham & Watkins, says Rezko's defense lawyer could use Obama "to show that Mr. Rezko is somebody active in politics and political fundraising and there's nothing unto itself nefarious about that fact."
Translation: That's the way things get done in Chicago.
Prosecutors allege that Rezko misused the power he gained from his prowess as a fundraiser for Gov. Rod Blagojevich, scheming to extort kickbacks from firms seeking state business or regulatory approval. But Rezko's lawyers will attack the credibility of Stuart Levine, the government's key witness, questioning his memory of events because of his alleged heavy use of cocaine, crystal meth and other illegal drugs.
The article notes that Levine had a $25,000 a month (!) drug habit.
In New Jersey, Hillary Clinton holds a double-digit advantage over John McCain in an early look at the race for the Garden State’s 15 Electoral College votes. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in the state found Clinton earning 50% of the vote while McCain attracts 39%. Clinton leads by twenty-one points among women but trails by two among men.
However, if Barack Obama is the Democratic nominee, the race in New Jersey will begin as a toss-up. The Rasmussen Reports election poll finds McCain with 45% support and Obama with 43%. McCain leads by twelve among men while Obama has a five point edge among women. This is one of the few states where Clinton outperforms Obama in general election match-ups against McCain (Florida is another).
The Garden State is worth 15 electoral college votes and if McCain can pull it away from the Democrats, then Obama's path to the White House will get much trickier. This is, of course, a poll that Clinton should be shouting from the rooftops about.