Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditBased on the mega-hype surrounding tonight's Democratic debate in Cleveland, Hillary Clinton needed a soaring victory to resurrect her ailing candidacy. Barack Obama, after a slew of victories in February, just needed to play for a tie.
Both candidates held their own, but there was no defining moment, breakout line or critical game-changer. So, in that sense, Obama won. Clinton will need more than a debate performance between now and March 4 to change the nature of this race.
Tonight was the night when it became obvious just how long this contests has gone on. These candidates have been out on the road for over a year, preparing to run for even longer, and it shows. At the beginning of the debate, Clinton looked visibly irritated and frustrated, making a lame joke about the media's infatuation with Obama. "Maybe we should ask Barack if he's comfortable and needs another pillow," Clinton cracked. That went over about as well as the "Change you can Xerox" line.
The big loser of the night was undoubtedly Tim Russert, whose inane gotcha questioning of both candidates marked a new low for the veteran broadcaster. Debates, especially what could be the final one between Clinton and Obama, should not become stand-ins for Meet the Press. Most voters don't care that Louis Farrakhan endorsed Obama, or when Clinton releases her tax returns, or whether the candidates know the name of Vladmir Putin's hand-picked "successor" in Russia (for the record, his name's Dmitry Medvedev).
Voters would like to know about universal healthcare, but they don't want the candidates to spend sixteen minutes arguing about the intricacies of healthcare mandates. They care less about what a politician said about NAFTA over a decade ago than what they're going to do about current and future trade deals now. Most Democrats like both Clinton and Obama. It remains a mystery why it's so hard for members of the press to figure that out.
There were a few revealing moments. Clinton said she wished she could take back her vote for the war in Iraq. If she'd have bucked her political strategists and foreign policy advisers and voted against the Senate's resolution, she'd probably be the Democratic nominee right now. Obama said he was wrong to stand silent as the Senate provided life support to a vegetating Terri Schiavo.
Obama gives crisper answers than he did at the outset of this campaign. He's better at speaking in soundbites and slapping away smears. His answers about foreign policy proved that, despite what Senator Clinton has said about him, he's ready to take on John McCain and become Commander-In-Chief.
Clinton is a knowledgeable and able debater, but even in comfortable settings, she seems to be swimming against the tide. Her campaign has begun blaming the media for poisoning the minds of the millions of Democratic voters who have expressed a preference for Obama. But she entered the race as the presumptive nominee and retained the aura of "inevitability" for the better part of the campaign. So if Clinton ran as the frontrunner, why didn't her campaign expect to be treated as one?
These debates increasingly tell us less and less. Perhaps it's a good thing that tonight's may be the last one for quite some time.
Share this article
- Atrios
- Arts and Letters Daily
- The Caucus
- Campus Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- The Daily Gotham
- Daily Kos
- Echidne of the Snakes
- Ezra Klein
- FAIR
- Feministe
- Feministing
- Firedoglake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Gothamist
- In these Times
- Hendrik Hertzberg
- Huffington Post
- Hullabaloo
- Matthew Yglesias
- Media Matters
- Mother Jones
- My DD
- New York Review of Books
- Openleft
- Pam's House Blend
- Pandagon
- Political Wire
- The Progressive
- RaceWire
- Real Clear Politics
- Roberto Lovato
- Romenesko
- Swing State Project
- Talking Points Memo
- Ta-Nehisi Coates
- Tapped
- Tech President
- Tompaine
- The Washington Note
- Utne Reader
- Wonkette
- ZNet
RSS
I thought Clinton's performance was pretty pathetic. From the lame jokes to the quibling over the difference in strength of 'denunciation' and 'rejection' (and Obama is the one all about words?) to the obviously false presentation (back when Edwards was in the game 'fighting' for change was not enough, now it is her slogan. and now that she is one on one with someone who opposed the war from the start she says that she would like to take the vote back) she just made clear, for the 20th time, why she should not be the nominee.
They care less about what a politician said about NAFTA over a decade ago than what they're going to do about current and future trade deals now.
Funny I care about the former because I care about the latter. A candidate's past performance is evidence (though not overwhelming evidence or complete evidence) for what they will do. Knowing that she was for NAFTA at the time, or said she was for NAFTA, is relevant. It is possible she has had a change of heart, but she did not start speaking out against big trade deals until she made it to states where that sold, so I doubt it.
Posted by dentedpat at 02/26/2008 @ 11:25pm
I like Russert. He challenges rhetoric. Hillary said one thing about NAFTA before, changed her mind and accussed Barack of saying she chaged her mind. Do you prefer Wolf who lacks any type of questioning????
and hillary won't release her tax returns...that is relevant.
Posted by Obama123 at 02/26/2008 @ 11:27pm
Let me just say that after viewing this debate, NBC, specifically Tim Russert must return his press pass. You expect a certain bullshit pulling things out of your ass from Fox, but damn. His line of questions were not relevant, or even needed. That do you know who the new Russian stooge is question was nothing more than a thinly veiled quiz.
And the Louis Farrakhan line was the most absurd question that I have heard in any of the recent debates. SO Mr. Russert, 1) are you trying to allude to Obama's religion or race? 2) are you being intellectually dishonest by trying to attribute an endorsement as an acceptance of the person who endorsed you? Seriously, seriously, just because I say that I support barack obama does not mean that he has to agree with every opinion that I hold. If he is interested Ill pay for him to take Basic Logic in any state institute of higher learning.
Russert needs to retire back to Buffalo and watch his precious Bills have another losing season.
Posted by Tzimisce at 02/26/2008 @ 11:43pm
Well I was looking for more from Obama as far as Foreign Policy and national security and I thought he showed tonight he was more than capable. In one question where they ask about if you pull out your troops and find Al queada has resurged in Iraq what would you do. Hillary said something like its a hypothetical situation and she seemed bothered by the question because of that. I didnt get that at all what she was trying to achieve there. But I think Obama's answer sounded more like someone who is ready to take charge. I dont know that I agree with all of his answer but it showed that he is able to think about possible outcomes other than the one that he hoped. I like that he said he reserve the right as President to reassess the situation. I also liked that he said if the Iraqi govermnent asked them to leave that he would leave that they are a soverign country. Too bad Bush didnt realize that.
Carol
Posted by harriscrl3 at 02/26/2008 @ 11:45pm
I care about three issues now and this November: the economy, health care, and Iraq. We don't need a McCain commander-in-chief to get us out of Iraq. On the other two issues, both candidates are on a par, and the real solutions will be complex and take a lot of work all round. But, then I must decide 1) who I trust, 2) who can beat McCain, and 3) who can/will bring change. I choose Obama, because he has been consistent; he's not a major waffler: and he's been able to keep to the high road against a formidable and ruthless opponent. Obama's competence thus far and his history/past words show me he can translate these skills toward being an effective president. This final debate did not shake my confidence in Obama, though I really tried to play Devil's Advocate.
Posted by Staggo Lee at 02/26/2008 @ 11:50pm
BERMAN: ......he's ready to take on John McCain and become Commander-In-Chief.
I was cruising along, reading and agreeing with Ari...until this "Commander-In-Chief" part & a bit of a shudder went up my spine.
I'm sorry, I just can't be comfortable with him as the CIC! I can't help the feeling that Enemies of America are licking their chops over the a foreign policy neophyte that may win the Presidency by being anti-War.....a war that has made a belated major turn for the better.
I imagine Obama, as the Nominee, knows he'll have to sound more credible and, holy shit, may even espouse the view he'll accept possible victory in Iraq......and stick around, say 50 years, until America has mastered renewable energy!
Posted by Happy at 02/26/2008 @ 11:56pm
What is easier to manipulate, a shoot from the hip cowboy (McCain) or someone that weighs the situation and seems unflappable (Obama)? Sure that might not be exactly an honest assessment but if I were a terrorist or even a foreign agitator I would much rather have McCain in office, he is the bull to their mattador. He will swing at any pitch they throw, and will be easily manipulated.
Posted by Tzimisce at 02/27/2008 @ 12:06am
"The big loser of the night was undoubtedly Tim Russert, whose inane gotcha questioning of both candidates marked a new low for the veteran broadcaster."
well, now i know MASK'S true identity.
just teasing, brother.
you'd have done a way better job........
ms. clinton would have cried and mr. obama would have slugged you.
or vice versa...........
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 12:08am
The Clinton campaign is best described as a blunderbuss, which is a primitive shotgun that is loaded with all kinds of shrapnel and fired out into all directions. The mailings that are three weeks old, the making fun of his speeches, the Xerox comment, the picture of Obama in traditional garb (btw he could not have looked more uncomfortable in that picture), etc etc...
Posted by Tzimisce at 02/27/2008 @ 12:11am
"These debates increasingly tell us less and less. Perhaps it's a good thing that tonight's may be the last one for quite some time."
i say throw 'em in here.
we'll get 'em to talk!
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 12:12am
Posted by TZIMISCE 02/26/2008 @ 11:43pm
you got that right.
russert sounded like he's been studying e-mail talking points.
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 12:16am
Eh if I hear the go around on health care one more time Ill scream. There is no way on God's green Earth that either of their plans will survive intact through the legislative process. Simple line of questions here 1) Prevent or Treat 2) Price caps or no 3) Tort reform or no 4) Cover everyone by mandate, if so how? 5) How much do you expect the cost to be? 6) How will you pay? Damn thats simple. Does anyone care about the tiny minutia regarding either plan? I don't.
I want to hear a real debate on the economy, on taxes, on education, or infrastructure. I know Hillary wants to hang her hat on healthcare, but there is not a lot of daylight between them.
Posted by Tzimisce at 02/27/2008 @ 12:16am
JOMA,
The Obama supporters here are SHOCKED, SHOCKED i tell you, that you failed to understand the potential of his plans for america, and why their costs don't matter.........
So, lets all do the Obama Chant!
Hope for change, hope for change, change, change, hope, hope!
Do you understand now?
Posted by TransitDave at 02/27/2008 @ 12:19am
I can't help the feeling that Enemies of America are licking their chops
Posted by HAPPY 02/26/2008 @ 11:56pm
you mean the federal reserve bank, exxon et al., the demopublican party, wal-mart, citigroup et al., bon jovi?
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 12:20am
and stick around, say 50 years, until America has mastered renewable energy!
Posted by HAPPY 02/26/2008 @ 11:56pm
after all, that's america's oil.
NEWSFLASH!!!!!!!!
WMDS FOUND IN MEXICO, CANADA AND VENEZUELA.
AMERICA MUST SAVE ITS OIL.
oops.
AMERICA MUST SAVE THESE OPPRESSED PEOPLE!!!!!!!
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 12:22am
Posted by TZIMISCE 02/27/2008 @ 12:06am
they DO LOVE bush..................
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 12:23am
His "vision" is going to be extremely expensive..
Posted by JOMAMMA 02/27/2008 @ 12:13am
still smoking those reagan talking points?
don't worry, he has no plans of reducing trade with the freedom-loving chinese government.
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 12:25am
.....someone that weighs the situation and seems unflappable (Obama)?......McCain in office, he is the bull to their mattador. He will swing at any pitch they throw.....
Posted by TZIMISCE 02/27/2008 @ 12:06am
Like saying he'd bomb Pakistan?
McCain, if riled up, could well "swing"
Posted by Happy at 02/27/2008 @ 12:29am
Hang onto your wallets boys...
Posted by JOMAMMA 02/27/2008 @ 12:25am
actually,
currency devaluation brought on by an ever-expanding trade imbalance, lower fed rates, and a 22 trillion dollar debt will do a much better job of taking money away.
oil hasn't gone up nearly as much when compared to the euro.
for example.
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 12:30am
Mis-Stroke.....Heheheh!
McCain, if riled up, could well "swing" but he won't go the `light' approach of a Rumsfeld.....there may not be any "mattador" left when the "bull" is through! Obama will be pushed around, bank on it!
Posted by Happy at 02/27/2008 @ 12:32am
Hell, yah! Lets all do the Obama Chant! Especially on signing off!
(cue the national anthem)
Hope for change, hope for change, change, change, hope, hope!
Posted by Happy at 02/27/2008 @ 12:36am
Posted by JOMAMMA 02/27/2008 @ 12:13am
Gah people keep using this and he has already proven that his plans have substance. When he delivers speech's he is not reading from his guide. Speech's are for ideas. The I have a dream speech is about ideas of what he wants not a plan on how to achieve it.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/27/2008 @ 12:40am
I can't think of any country in the world who won't welcome them.
Posted by JOMAMMA 02/27/2008 @ 12:29am
France.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/27/2008 @ 12:43am
and take their products,manufacturing,jobs, taxes and profits with them.
posted by mr. clichι.
products -- what products? sub-prime scams? sinopec will be happy to sell gas to the few rich people left with money for it.
manufacturing jobs -- ha ha ha
taxes -- ha ha ha
Wal-Mart pays itself rent, gets large tax breaks
Michael Roston
Published: Thursday February 1, 2007
Print This Email This
Wal-Mart, the nation's largest employer and the world's biggest retailer, is regularly paying itself rent and using the transaction to decrease the taxes it pays to state governments, according to a report in this morning's Wall Street Journal.
The article by Jesse Drucker shows that Wal-Mart has saved hundreds of millions of dollars in taxes in 25 states, and may not be the only company using the practice. Drucker shows that state governments are finally getting wise and working to close a complicated tax loophole that the federal government discontinued years ago.
Wal-Mart is using a tax loophole involving "real-estate investment trusts" to call "rent" it pays to itself a tax-deductible business expense, Drucker explains. A Wal-Mart subsidary will pay rent to a real-estate investment trust, which is owned by another Wal-Mart subsidiary. The trust hands the rent to the second subsidiary in the form of a dividend, which cannot be taxed. Additionally, Wal-Mart counts the initial rental payment as a business expense, which is deducted from taxes in the state where the store is located. In one four-year period, Wal-Mart avoided $350 million in taxes using this strategy, which was developed by the accounting firm Ernst & Young LLP.
Wal-Mart family lobbies for tax cuts
By Jim Hopkins, USA TODAY
Wal-Mart (WMT) drew broad scrutiny last year as its political spending soared in nationwide battles over health care, labor and other hot-button issues threatening the giant retailer's growth.
Now, in a little-noticed move, the company's founding family has plunged into a fight to pass income tax changes and other legislation that could preserve its grip on the USA's biggest business and the family's $84 billion fortune.
Led by Sam Walton's only daughter, Alice, the family spent $3.2 million on lobbying, conservative causes and candidates for last year's federal elections. That's more than double what it spent in the previous two elections combined, public documents show.
etc.,
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 12:44am
Tzimisce (suspiciously Byzantine nickname), what you call a stooge is in fact the next leader of a nuclear power. I am sure we all remember Democrats mocking Bush on the question about the "general" in Pakistan back in 2000. Medvedev is much more important that Musharaf. It was a set-up question but he had every right to ask her. She answered like a student BSing an unexpected question at an oral exam. I am not sure Obama would have known either but let us face it, she is the one who is supposedly an expert, and if I know about it as a lay person, she should know as well.
Posted by dimik72 at 02/27/2008 @ 12:44am
Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 02/27/2008 @ 12:30am
no comment, JM?
or don't you understand?
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 12:46am
Posted by JOMAMMA 02/27/2008 @ 12:38am
I pay my own healthcare and I still wouldn't mind universal. I believe if my money is going to help other then I am fine with it. I believe as a country if you want to benefit from living there you have to help to support the country, you gain from the people who live there so why shouldn't you contribute. As much as you like to postulate Jom that all of us who want universal healthcare can't afford regular healthcare you're wrong. I make enough money to pay for all of my expenses and only have more money to make as I get older. I have no qualms with giving money back to my country.
Also about McCain and foreign policy. I don't like anyone who shoots from the hip. I don't like people who make brash decisions as my leaders. People who don't consider the repercussions of their actions. Just acting is not something a PRESIDENT should do. They should always stop to consider the repercussions of their actions. Maybe if the coalition of governments hadn't put such heavy sanctions on the Germans after WWI the German people wouldn't have been in a bad enough state for there to be a WWII. I like someone who THINKS before they act.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/27/2008 @ 12:57am
"I can't help the feeling that Enemies of America are licking their chops over the a foreign policy neophyte that may win the Presidency by being anti-War.....a war that has made a belated major turn for the better." -Happy
...A war that has made a belated major turn for the better? What? Please, explain this line logic. How are any of the major presidential candidates particularly anti-war? Even Barack Obama, the 'most liberal senator" (lol) is not particularly anti-war, in fact he's been accused of "wanting to bomb Pakistan." (lol) Please explain your statement.
Posted by lmelendez at 02/27/2008 @ 12:59am
You are all in for a very rough ride...
Posted by JOMAMMA 02/27/2008 @ 01:01am
you have commented on nothing i posted
here, please try again (or don't you understand):
actually,
currency devaluation brought on by an ever-expanding trade imbalance, lower fed rates, and a 22 trillion dollar debt will do a much better job of taking money away.
oil hasn't gone up nearly as much when compared to the euro.
for example.
Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 02/27/2008 @ 12:30am
c'mon jm, you can do it..........
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 01:14am
I agree that Tim Russert's performance was ghastly. He was an embarassment to everyone involved in staging this debate.
Posted by Robert Solis at 02/27/2008 @ 01:26am
Hey Koolaid drinkers. My mom who voted for Obama and is 68 years told me tonight that she felt shame that she voted for a man who needs a woman to respond to a question and then uses her answer to reply to his question. She also said that she felt like she WOKE UP and she hoped that others would too. Watch the polls
Posted by periquita at 02/27/2008 @ 01:26am
Posted by JOMAMMA 02/27/2008 @ 01:13am
My problem is Jom that nothing in this country starts equal. There are plenty of people who work their asses off but can never get ahead. I understand life isn't fair but you are grouping everyone who isn't rich into the category of those who haven't tried. My grandparents were never rich but they busted their asses to take care four kids. Why should they be looked down on because they aren't rich? In most case unless you are a sports guru or have some talent in music of acting you are destined to stay in the same station you started in. Anyone who doesn't believe this has been deceived by the Horatio Alger myth. Notice I said most not all of the time. Some people get lucky and find a way out. However most people who are poor can't get out of poverty. Can't come up. How can you ever come up if the schools you go to are not good enough to get you into a college. If A's at a school in an urban neighborhood are equivalent to C's in a suburban neighborhood. If you can't afford to go to college. I see so many conservatives on here saying we need to send more people to school but they also don't want to spend more money on schooling. I support helping those who haven't been given any opportunities' which I think is the vast majority of people. Call me optimistic but I like to believe in the general positive nature of people and that most people WANT to help themselves but have no way to.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/27/2008 @ 01:30am
Sorry that was really longwinded and rambly hopefully you can pull something out of that.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/27/2008 @ 01:31am
man who needs a woman to respond to a question and then uses her answer to reply to his question.
Weakest talking point ever. And sexist too.
Posted by dentedpat at 02/27/2008 @ 01:40am
Also about all these conservs on here talking about taxing corporations sooo much. They are going to be offering tax breaks to corporations who keep jobs in the US instead of giving them tax breaks for shipping jobs elsewhere. I think it makes a lot more sense to give them tax breaks for staying here. I support tax breaks on coporations that use American labor but your argument that jobs will go away if we don't stop taxing corporations is untrue. American jobs will continue to go away as log as Americans ask for a higher standard of living than third world countries. Corporations will continue to go away as long as we ask that they pay enough to afford food, unlike some other countries that we use for labor. So unless you want people to start starving to death and dying of disease you better accept the fact that as long as we give corporations the easy option to leave they will leave.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/27/2008 @ 01:41am
Watch the polls
Posted by PERIQUITA 02/27/2008 @ 01:26am
oye,
Ώcomo es posible que tienes confianza en ms. clinton? despues del SHAFTA y todo las polνticas neo-liberales que impusieron en amιrica latina.
los e.e.u.u. estan llenos de granjeritos mexicanos gracias al TLC.
ella siempre dice que tiene experiencia.
claro. tiene mucha experiencia fregando a los pobres del sur.................
aqui tomamos pura agua fresca. el kool-aid es veneno.
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 01:43am
less English/history/ethnic studies grads..
by jm
oh, once again the irony.......
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 01:45am
Posted by JOMAMMA 02/27/2008 @ 01:40am
I am not talking about making everything needs to be fair. Like I said I understand life is not fair. However how can you expect a child living in Harlem who has never known what a good school is and who's single mother has to work two jobs to support him/her to have the same opportunity as a child who grew up in the suburbs and went to private school all their life. Or even public schools in the suburbs where they can afford books for every student. How can you even argue that we are spending enough money on schools when most inner city schools can't afford textbooks.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/27/2008 @ 01:45am
Posted by JOMAMMA 02/27/2008 @ 01:31am
Sorry that was really longwinded and rambly hopefully you can pull something out of that.
Posted by CCCOMFO1 02/27/2008 @ 01:31am
no need to apologize for mr. maasch......
lol.......
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 01:47am
just the promise to be able to make his own way on a level playing field
Directly from that article. If the odds are stacked against you from birth the playing field is not level. If you can't afford to go to a school where you can actually study textbooks that aren't 30 years old the playing field is far from level.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/27/2008 @ 01:48am
He believes the Constitution is to be interpreted literally, not as a "living document" open to the whims and vagaries of a panel of judges who have never worked an honest day in their lives.
Again another funny quote considering so many of those angry white men support bush who has basically set fire to the constitution.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/27/2008 @ 01:49am
Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 02/27/2008 @ 01:43am | ignore this person
she won't answer...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/27/2008 @ 01:49am
Also, did you guys notice? She's botoxing.
Posted by ZERO 02/27/2008 @ 01:40am
c'mon dude,
This kind of creepy obnoxious commentary is completely unwarranted. You oppose the guy politically, so you insult in demean his wife - incidentally showing your own personal issues on your sleeve while doing so?
Why does Katha Pollitt hate thin women?
Posted by ZERO 02/25/2008 @ 12:59am
if it's impolite for katha................
btw barack was wearing make-up..........
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 01:50am
The Angry White Man is not a metrosexual, a homosexual or a victim. Nobody like him drowned in Hurricane Katrina -- he got his people together and got the hell out, then went back in to rescue those too helpless and stupid to help themselves, often as a police officer, a National Guard soldier or a volunteer firefighter.
That's awesome blame people for the fact that they couldn't get out. Kinda like all those stupid jews who didn't get out before the nazis took over. Or all those dumb asses in those recent tornados. Or how about all the stupid kids who couldn't get out of the way of the bullets of all those shootings.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/27/2008 @ 01:51am
Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 02/27/2008 @ 01:45am
,
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 01:52am
she won't answer...
Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 02/27/2008 @ 01:49am
no sabe leer, solo "rantear".
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 01:52am
This is the most inane drivel I have ever read. That is not what defines a man as the article so totes. The insulting of people who died because they got caught in the grips of a natural disaster is disgusting and I spit on anyone who does it considering I lost family down there. I guess they were apart of the morons who couldn't get out.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/27/2008 @ 01:54am
Posted by JOMAMMA 02/27/2008 @ 01:51am
you should read this.
perhaps you'll understand:
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2008/01/the-last-empire.html
those chinese dust storms are gonna be knocking on your door soon................
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 01:57am
Katrina was the only one mentioned in the article...and that is for one reason...
..3 days warning and buses under water....surly after you saw all those buses in the picture you had SOME reaction...
Posted by JOMAMMA 02/27/2008 @ 01:56am
Yeah funny, considering even with three days warning the GOVERNMENT didn't know about it for 2 days after.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/27/2008 @ 01:58am
Posted by JOMAMMA 02/27/2008 @ 01:56am
keep going jm.
you're digging a hole all the way to china............
hey, that sounds like a good place to hide inflation....
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 01:59am
Posted by JOMAMMA 02/27/2008 @ 02:02am
whoa,
getting out the backhoe!
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 02:03am
Its sort of ironic that if Hillary was suppose to show distinctions between her and Obama I think Obama jumped on the chance to hightlight the RIGHT distinctions. Particularly when he pointed out to the right audience the people of Ohio that Hillary has always supported Nafta but he has been against it. I was like finally a distinction because frankly I was getting tired of the healthcare nonsense. Obama did a good job of microtargeting his audience by saying she supported Nafta voted for the war in Iraq and he was clever to point out that spending billions of dollars on the war was hampering our ability to fix the economy. I think he won this debate he did what Hillary was SUPPOSE to do. Point to distinctions between them. He didnt need to do that she did and he did it in such a way that it would help him so it made him the stronger candidate coming out of the debate.
Carol
Posted by harriscrl3 at 02/27/2008 @ 02:04am
Posted by JOMAMMA 02/27/2008 @ 02:00am
Some of them did and yes some of them have returned.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/27/2008 @ 02:05am
Look Jom, I am all about pulling yourself up. I was raised to be extremely independent. I was told from the day I was born that since I was born with the unfortunate handicap of being a minority that is in the middle class I would never be handed anything. I have never asked for anything from anyone. The second I could make my own living which was 3 months before I got out of school I have paid for my life since. My parents busted their ass to give me a Catholic private education for almost all of my life. I never ask for anything from the system. I pay my taxes and I never complain because I was given the opportunities so many people lack. I don't mind giving to help others gain some of the opportunities I had growing up.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/27/2008 @ 02:11am
I find my disagreement with you is on method rather than principle...
Posted by JOMAMMA 02/27/2008 @ 02:10am
I do agree with you on this. We butt heads but I think you like many on here are a good person. Trying to achieve positive affects through the way you see as best. We are all butting heads on the means not the ends.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/27/2008 @ 02:13am
And for Rio who has argued many times that my giving should be my choice I have made the choice it is not forced on me. From me it IS true charity because I am the one who chooses to vote in order to levy taxes in order to give to others. I choose to offer my support to certain taxes therefore I choose to support the giving of my money.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/27/2008 @ 02:15am
No comment FZ?
I am going to bed...
Posted by JOMAMMA 02/27/2008 @ 02:04am
you seem to care little for your compatriots.
nightie night.
o.k.
The debt will never be paid back any more than the world paid back the World Bank,the US,or the fact that the 3rd world debts are forever being written off...
mexico did.
the trade deficit will over time switch..as China and India grow into the worlds 2 largest consumer countrys as they develop,
a greenland will be fully melted, and the last trees turned into particle board tv stands and french fry wrappers.......
the US will be able to grow into a major exporting country again, IF we fix our schools, procduce more engineers and less English/history/ethnic studies grads..
fewer, not less. only if the u.s. can stop living in mallalalaland.
Our currency is being devalued as it reduces the valued of those countrys who own our dollars(CHINA, Arab States)..over all not a good thing, but it does make our exports cheaper and our exports are soaring(trade deficit is falling)
by such a teensy amount. but most of that is because people are to broke to buy anything more and the credit teat has run dry.
...helps my exporting
until they steal your product and start making bootleg versions.
...I am exporting TO China..going there May 5th
have a safe trip.
...China et al have to spend those dollars somewhere
in canada buying "your" oil.
...Japan 15 years ago had most of our debt
these are different times...........
...and bought up America to the panic of the libs...we bought it all back at 10 cents on the dollar..China will have its own economic problems in the futre as well.
yep. when 1/2 the country is desert.......
We will have more debt as we spend more
and more inflation....
...your concern with $22 trillion dollar debt is noted
opec desperately wants the euro.....
...think universal health care
you're kidding, right?
and OB or Hillarys plans will shrink that debt?
actually, consumers and businesses have more than double the government.
...We are a $ 15 trillion economy
measure in today's, yesterday's or tomorrow's dollars?
..with the government spending $3+ trillion(and they still face "draconian cuts")...the ratios are better today that 30 years ago.
it's too late for me to check. tomorrow.
these are macro levels....
on a more at home level...tax the guy down the street who hires the neigbors enough and you will have no job to go to...this is my point..
huh?
do you understand?
not the last part.
As a Candian, you are not just competing or working with/against the US....you are now going against the rest of the world....and the US is not the problem...
part of it, that's for sure. don't forget the dictators in china.
Posted by JOMAMMA 02/27/2008 @ 01:31am
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 02:21am
Posted by CCCOMFO1 02/27/2008 @ 02:13am
yep.
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 02:22am
Posted by ZERO 02/27/2008 @ 02:28am
tranquilo,
nada mas queria decirte que hay cosas mucho mas importantes de que hablar.
la facha de ms. clinton tiene poca importancia, imho.
despues de todo, podemos estar seguros de que mr. obama tiene su camisa bien planchadito y sale bien rasurado.
todo candidato tiene algo de plαstico y como mujer, ms. clinton (y su aparencia) esta expuesta a mas crνtica todavia.
es lo de menos.....
just thinking.....
paz
fz.
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 02:37am
90% of it is just the entertainment industry at work anyway
Posted by ZERO 02/27/2008 @ 02:33am
como te digo...........
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 02:38am
The real game is getting just the right beachfront property somewhere.
Posted by ZERO 02/27/2008 @ 02:33am
i wouldn't buy anything too close........
well, maybe on a mountain.
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 02:39am
Oh look, blaming it on Russert again. Russert was the first questioner who knocked Clinton off her smug perch back when she was being stroked as the apparent heir and lobbed softballs. The problem is not Russert, although he is also guilty of framing the debate within the trumped-up conventional wisdom despite it's undeniable failure,but that anyone paying attention has heard it all before over and over again.
Posted by Lil at 02/27/2008 @ 07:24am
Clintons plan is for the government to enforce that everyone has to buy health insurance from the insurance companies.----Posted by LIBSWARNEDU 02/27/2008 @ 08:52am
CONSHAME.....what's Obama's plan?
Posted by Mask at 02/27/2008 @ 09:00am
There are a couple of things I dont understand. Why was Hillary bothered being ask the first question? She was the one that issued the guantlet to Obama saying meet me in Ohio and we'll discuss your tactics I thought after a comment like that she would welcome the first question because she could set the tone for the debate but she complained about. She complained about the media showing favoritism and use that SNL parody. I love when Obama said that she is sending out mailers attacking his healthcare plan but that he isnt whining about it like her. Amen to that because she was whining about tactics all of which she used on him and much worse.
Something else that was odd. This debate seemed like a negotiation session to me. Hillary seemed agitated and it was almost as if Obama was negotiating certain things to bring her down. He pointed out their healthcare plan was 95% identical something to show that they have much in common. He gave in on the reject/renounce argument to show that hey I can give too. He remained forceful by insisting that she supported Nafta while he didnt. He wasnt going to let her get away with that one. It was a interesting how you can get a feel for what he will be like. He is calm almost unflappable he is confident and he is funny. I thought he was going to use Hillary's parady of him at her stump speech buy pointing out she was insulting his supporters but instead you took it as humor and laughed about it.
I was also bothered by the Farrakan question I didnt see what the purpose of that question was. Obama has renounced Anti Semitism why did Tim Russert feel that he had to grill him so that he can reject him too. I didnt see the purpose of that at the debate. I felt bad for Obama with that question he handled it well yes they are things about Farrakan that he rejects but why do they feel the need to push him to reject him completely. I thought that was in poor taste and quite frankly after situations like that I dont know how Hillary and others can claim that Obama gets a free ride. Do they ask McCain to reject some of their supporters who are racist? I thought that was bad.
Carol
Posted by harriscrl3 at 02/27/2008 @ 09:06am
There are a couple of things I dont understand. Why was Hillary bothered being ask the first question?----Posted by HARRISCRL3 02/27/2008 @ 09:06am
She wasn't....it was her ham-fisted way of working in her little "Saturday Night Live skit" dig. If Obama had been asked the first question, she would have said "Why does HE get the first question...did anybody see that 'Saturday Night Live' skit?....well..."
Posted by Mask at 02/27/2008 @ 09:50am
Having experience in foreign policy or much of anything else wasn't important to Clinton people or Republicans until Obama showed up and then,all of a sudden, it became important.It was not important when Bill Clinton ran nor was it important when Dubya ran.The GOP rejected the experienced McCain in favor of the screw up rich kid with no experience, in 2000.Hypocrisy rules during election years.Non election years,too.
Posted by i'm nobody at 02/27/2008 @ 10:10am
Posted by JOMAMMA 02/27/2008 @ 01:51am
Ah yes. Jomamma and his fantasy that the "Race to the Bottom" or prisoner's dilemma - if you prefer - is just what the world needs. By all means John, go live in China, maybe your grandchildren will get the opportunity to work on the line in one of the factories there, after all the safety regulations, pollution controls and other fetters on capitalism have been removed. In the meantime, keep cashing in - CA-CHING!
Posted by srjenkins at 02/27/2008 @ 1:11pm
Posted by ZERO 02/27/2008 @ 12:39pm
chido.
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 3:31pm
Posted by ZERO 02/27/2008 @ 12:39pm
chido.
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 3:31pm
CA-CHING!
Posted by SRJENKINS 02/27/2008 @ 1:11pm
maasch's version of "I-Ching"
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/27/2008 @ 3:33pm
The Neo-con supporters here are SHOCKED, SHOCKED i tell you, that you failed to understand the potential of their plans for america, and why their costs don't matter.........
So, lets all do the Bush/McCain Chant!
Hope for regime change, hope for regime change, regime change, regime change, hope, hope!
Do you understand now?
Posted by TRANSITDAVE 02/27/2008 @ 12:19am
Posted by Malcontent at 02/28/2008 @ 10:18pm