Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditSo the battle over Michigan and Florida ends -- not with a bang but with a conciliatory note from Barack Obama.
One of the last formal bones of contention -- if it can be dignified with such a description -- between the Obama camp and that of his chief rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, Hillary Clinton, is being disposed of. And the way for a fully harmonious convention -- where Clinton is not only not nominated but personally encourages wavering supporters to get on board the Obama bandwagon -- is being cleared.
For most of the first half of 2008, Democrats tortured themselves trying to answer the question: What about Michigan and Florida?
The two states had jumped the schedule and held Democratic primaries before they were supposed to do so.
Hillary Clinton won both -- although, in Michigan, she did so at least in part because Obama and the other leading Democratic contenders refused to allow their names to be listed on the ballot, and in Florida she broke a promise by the candidates not to appear in the state before the primary.
On the basis of those dubious victories, Clinton aides scoped out a scenario for seating the Michigan and Florida delegations and securing the Democratic presidential nomination -- even though Obama won most of the votes and delegates from the caucuses and primaries that have been sanctioned by the Democratic National Committee.
When all was said and done, Obama's legitimate wins yielded sufficient delegate strength for him to avert a real fight over Michigan and Florida.
But the party's credentials committee was still called upon in May to address the issue of the disputed delegations.
The solution was an ugly and inefficient compromise that, for all intents and purposes, represented a win for Obama -- and the end of any prospect that Clinton might cobble together the delegate votes needed to be nominated.
The party, which at one point had suggested that Michigan and Florida delegations would not be seated, instead decided to allot each Florida and Michigan delegate a half-vote. That did not satisfy the Clinton campaign, which griped loudly and threatened a credentials fight at this month's convention in Denver.
The Clinton team's goal was to get the Michigan and Florida delegates allotted according to the primary results and to have their votes counted fully at the convention.
Something very close to that is now in the process of being arranged.
But the delegates will not be voting for Clinton, as this is all about putting the pieces in place for Obama's nomination by acclamation. (Clinton is telling bitter-ender supporters in behind-closed-doors meetings: "Look, what we want to have happen is for Senator Obama to be nominated by a unified convention of Democrats...)
On Sunday, the three co-chairs of the credentials committee -- Alexis Herman, James Roosevelt Jr. and Eliseo Roques-Arroyo -- received a note from Obama that read:
Dear Credentials Committee Chairs:In just a few weeks, our Party will convene in Denver for our National Convention. This will be an historic event that will showcase our vision for changing the direction of our country.
The delegates and alternates who gather on Monday, August 25 will reflect the talent, energy and rich diversity of our Democratic Party. The delegates will come from all 56 states and territories. As these delegates go about the important business of the Convention, I believe Party unity calls for the delegates from Florida and Michigan to be able to participate fully alongside the delegates from the other states and territories. Accordingly, I ask that the Credentials Committee, when it meets on August 24 to approve the delegates for the National Convention, pass a resolution that would entitle each delegate from Florida and Michigan to cast a full vote.
As a candidate for the nomination, I supported the DNC's efforts to establish and enforce a schedule for primaries and caucuses that would broaden the opportunity for Democrats from all regions of the country and all backgrounds and walks of life to have a meaningful voice. An unprecedented number of voters participated in our Democratic nominating process. We all owe a debt of gratitude to Governor Dean for his principled leadership during this long and challenging process.
As we prepare to come together in Denver, however, we must be - and will be - united in our determination to change the course of our nation. To that end, Democrats in Florida and Michigan must know that they are full partners and colleagues in our historic mission to reshape Washington and lead our country in a new direction.
With warmest personal regards,
Barack Obama
The committee's co-chairs responded formally -- as is required in a ritual of this sort. "Today we received a letter from Senator Obama requesting that the Convention's Credentials Committee grant each delegate from Florida and Michigan a full vote," wrote Herman, Roosevelt and Roques-Arroyo. "We deeply appreciate and value Senator Obama's perspective on this important issue. This matter will be the top priority for the Credentials Committee when we meet on August 24th. As always our goal is to ensure a fair process and a unified Democratic Party so that we can win in November."
Translation: Your wish is our command.
Far more important than the exchange of notes is the reality that underpins them. Obama and Clinton are tying up loose ends in order to assure a fully stage-managed convention.
The only question that remains, of course, is whether they are doing so in order to improve the chances of an Obama-Clinton ticket in November.
Let's be clear: Sorting out Michigan and Florida was necessary no matter what. There will still be a convention roll-call, and Obama did not want to have all the commentators going on about those "half-votes."
But the fact that Obama is essentially giving Clinton and her supporters what they once demanded -- and giving himself a better chance of prevailing in November in Michigan and Florida -- certainly suggests that he is motivated to work with his former foe.
Forget about Obama's travels and John McCain's ads. The story of how that relationship between the two Democrats who battled so long and hard for the party's presidential nomination develops will remain the most closely watched of the summer.
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
Eh. It's admirable but not at the same time. He already has the nomination. This is just ceremonial.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/03/2008 @ 5:59pm
MARYBRETBRAD:
Wow, that almost sounds like a compliment from you regarding Obama. Did I interpret that improperly?
Posted by jorcheim at 08/03/2008 @ 9:40pm
HAPPY:
Why on earth would Obama a) step down from being the nominee to allow Clinton the spot, or b)add her to the ticket period? He won. Period. And frankly, HRC represents a decided look backwards, instead of a view to the future.
Frankly, I see Richardson as the leading contender for running mate, now that Webb has made it clear he wants none of the presidential race.
Posted by jorcheim at 08/03/2008 @ 9:43pm
A deal with Hillary Clinton and her delegates at this point might not be such a bad thing. It might encourage Barack Obama to become more specific about universal health care.
"Jorcheim," I hope you are right about Bill Richardson. He's a decent guy, and a strategic choice, too.
Posted by JakobFabian at 08/03/2008 @ 10:42pm
Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/03/2008 @ 10:42pm
HRC is out. The real problem is Bill, not Hillary.
Kathleen Sebelius would be a much better choice than Hillary, without all of the Bill baggage.
Posted by Metteyya at 08/03/2008 @ 11:24pm
Anyone to say they will not vote for Obama if he agrees to a compromise on of shore drilling has not been watching what is going on in congress!! The only way to get something done on gas prices at the pump is some kind of compromise. He stated he does not agree on the drilling part of this bill that is being talked about. He does agree with the part that gives incentives for alternative energy. He does agree with the part that makes the oil company s pay the royalties the bush administration is waving right now. He does agree on the part that stop's the tax breaks the oil company's are getting. The part on drilling opens up the gulf just a little more then what they got right now. Also Virginia and that state has been begging for this for a long time now. With this it makes the oil company's drill if they do not and just hold it like they are now they loss the less. So the way I look at this he (we) just give in a little and get a lot of what we have been fighting for for a long time. McCain's Idea is to give the oil company's what ever they want as long as they are righting checks for him and the RNC!!
Dan
Posted by Eaglesnest at 08/04/2008 @ 12:39am
Eh that's being deceptive Happy. Obama went halfway. He capitulated on oil drilling in order to get more alternative fuel sources in the picture. It's called compromising. Giving up something you don't want in order to get something you do. Essentially he gave up on offshore drilling in order to phase out oil.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/04/2008 @ 02:11am
Won't be Hillary. End of story.
BTW, for those who don't know, HAPP...
tell them the REST of the term "Magic _____".
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/04/2008 @ 07:38am
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/04/2008 @ 07:38am
Please explain further. What does HAPP mean by "Magic"?
Posted by k330k at 08/04/2008 @ 07:52am
Posted by k330k at 08/04/2008 @ 07:52am
It's simple...and of course disengenuously slimy.
A LA Times column by David Ehrenstein in March of 2007 labelled the candidacy of Barack Obama (or Obama himself) a "Magic Negro".
This is a postmodern folklore term for blacks used in story lines who "magically appear to help out white people"....think "Bagger Vance" (with Will Smith) or "Mother Abigail" (Stephen King's "The Stand"), etc.
Rush Limbaugh (HAPP's mentor) seized on this use of the term "Negro" in the Mainstream Media to use it for his subtle racism. He had his parodist, Paul Shanklin, develop a tune called "Barack the Magic Negro" (to the tune of "Puff the Magic Dragon") and played it ad nauseum. He also promulgated the SHORTHAND "Magic" as a nickname for Obama.
Any criticism of Limbaugh was brushed aside with "What?!?! It's not me! It was David Ehrenstein at your beloved Los Angles Time, the liberal media who came up with"....totally ignoring that Ehrenstein was MOCKING the term "magic negro".
In short (and HAPP will deny this til he's blue in the face, of course), it's a way to insert the word "Negro" into the conversation....and by attenuation....the OTHER word that sounds a little like that.
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/04/2008 @ 09:19am
Posted by marybretbrad at 08/04/2008 @ 09:54am
Yeah just like new cons response to Katrina's aftermath and New Orleans...
Why is it that new con repubs plame liberals for new con repub misdeeds?
Oh I see-- because everything is inside out, upside down and just plain in reverse in their world, i.e. greed is good, the helpless should pull themselves up by their bootstraps even if they have none, (unless it causes incompetent harm and then it's liberals fault {somehow}).
New con repubs are so tragically funny vermin. But sadly, we've got to remember they're truly god's vermin just the same-- even if they are on the other side...
Posted by hsuBfools at 08/04/2008 @ 11:01am
"It's the same with "Negro". Nothing infuriates the PC left more than people refusing to observe the officially sanctioned nomenclature and continuing to use words that have been declared out of bounds by the self-appointed guardians of acceptable speech."
This is hilarious coming from someone on the side that largely refuses to refer to an "invasion" of Iraq, a "failed occupation", "war of aggression", and on minor stuff, the president as a "liar."
It's really the same thing: either way, they fear words.
Posted by onthehelm at 08/04/2008 @ 11:22am
HAPPY, MARYBRETBRAD, ONTHEHELM:
I can't speak for anyone else here, or for those whom you seek to malign by disdaining their preference for being called that which they prefer, but to me, it seems pretty simple.
When you call someone something they don't like, it's disrespectful. It's a simple as that. For example, I happen to be Irish. I am not really fond of people calling me a Mick, or a potato grubber, or any other negatively referential title. And when someone does, and I specifically ask them to stop, yet they continue to proceed with such behavior, it is disrespectful.
So it comes down to this simple fact. Either call people what they wish to be called, especially when you are talking about a group who was (and is) the target of an inordinate amount of racism and wholesale immorality and disrespect, or don't. But when you don't, expect it to be pointed out... and expect to be branded the asshole that you are.
Posted by jorcheim at 08/04/2008 @ 11:35am
ONTHEHELM:
Sorry, I wasn't including you in that comment to draw attention to you, specifically, but rather it was a response to your prior comment. Hopefully that wasn't too unclear.
Posted by jorcheim at 08/04/2008 @ 11:37am
'So it comes down to this simple fact. Either call people what they wish to be called,..., or don't.' -- Jorcheim
'I prefer DOMESTIC GODDESS.' -- Roseanne Barr
Posted by HonestLiberal at 08/04/2008 @ 11:51am
Posted by marybretbrad at 08/04/2008 @ 11:38am
Does this mean I can walk around calling people kikes, waps, wetbacks, niggers and all the rest? This whole "Oh the world is too PC woe is me thing is such BS." There are just some words that are offensive. Would you want someone to walk to you that you didn't know and call you some racist term? How about if someone called your children something.
I am not one of the most PC people in the world. In fact I am that person who often says things I know I shouldn't. But there are some things that are going to offend. By your argument white people should be walked around called us coloreds or niggers.
The reason terms like that are considered offensive is because they were used by racist people to single others out. Colored bathrooms for instance. Colored drinking fountains. Maybe instead of crying out "Whoa is me it's so hard because I can't say Negro" you should take a second to step into someone else's shoes and understand WHY they get offended by a term used by racists to single out black people, hispanics, native americans, irish, german, jews or anyone else.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/04/2008 @ 12:01pm
And don't get me wrong. I am not apart of the PC weenies. My belief is that it is not WHAT you say it is HOW you say it. So I personally wouldn't care if you used any of those words around me. My comments are aimed at your complaining about not being able to use the words.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/04/2008 @ 12:05pm
Just what you might expect from Flipper, adding Hitlery Clinton to the ticket. Birds of a feather it would seem. I mean talk about corporate influence, where's the difference with the Republicans? Barak Obama has started to make Mitt Romney look consistent. Progressives need to vote for Nader.
Posted by john lowell at 08/04/2008 @ 12:06pm
MBB-People who refer to Obama as the magic negro or Osama do so because they are immature.Same goes for those who make fun of McCain's name or age.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/04/2008 @ 12:07pm
Posted by marybretbrad at 08/04/2008 @ 11:14am
And of course here comes Darin with his apologia for what his Right-wing brethren are upto....SOP.
OF COURSE, Darin...getting use the term "Negro" for African-American is simple a matter of "not going along with the political correctness crowd!!!"
It has nothing to do with the a subtle (he and they think) attempt by Rush and guys like HAPP to get to use the old term...with the idea in the back of it that an EVEN OLDER "less PC" term is brought to mind.
No, of course, there is no racism on the Right anymore...it's all the "racism of the Left who think blacks are inferior and need Government help...that's the REAL racism!!!"
So Rush and HAPP et al are just using the "standard 'scientific' term for the race that Mr Obama 'half' belongs to"....and if you think it's racism, you're just being "politically correct".
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/04/2008 @ 12:09pm
Being called a Progressive rather than a far left loon on the fringe of the Dem party..Progressive sounds so...middle of the spectrum, when in fact, it is outright socialism, where you have govt to regulate (control) the businesses and the capital..and the money that they allow the workers to keep...until they need it.. Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/04/2008 @ 12:04pm
Or like being a called a fascist conservative. Where you get to keep all your money. But the government can kick down your door and take you to jail whenever they want, they dictate who can and can't get married, what can and can't be done with your body and which country will or will not be bombed this week. Religious right sounds so much more moral doesn't it?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/04/2008 @ 12:09pm
Progressives need to vote for Nader.
Posted by john lowell at 08/04/2008 @ 12:06pm
Progressives should vote for john lowell.
After all, same effect will occur...McCain will get elected.
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/04/2008 @ 12:10pm
MBB also. It's obvious Rush uses that term to single him out as black. In the same way racists use the term to single you out. He is reminding you that this is a "negro" and he doesn't want you to forget it. He is trying to make race a matter without actually being overt about it.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/04/2008 @ 12:12pm
Progressives should vote for john lowell. After all, same effect will occur...McCain will get elected. Posted by Maskdelta at 08/04/2008 @ 12:10pm
Hell I think Mickey Mouse would be a good option or Superman and he can choose Batman as his VP.
This idea that if Nader ever got elected he would change everything is hilarious. There is a reason all these people running on the fringes don't get elected. No one actually wants them to. No one wants to go that far one way or another. If Nader or Barr got elected they would never achieve there goes because Congress would never let them. People want Presidents that are a little left or right of center. They don't want someone in the fringes.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/04/2008 @ 12:15pm
Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/04/2008 @ 12:27pm
I view it differently. How does calling him a "Magic Negro" point out absurdity so much as just remind people "Hey LOOK he's black!"?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/04/2008 @ 12:30pm
jomama-Rush does what he does in order to make money and for no other reason.The fact that he says the most immature things does say much for his fans.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/04/2008 @ 12:31pm
Does not say much for his fans,that is.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/04/2008 @ 12:33pm
Posted by hsuBfools at 08/04/2008 @ 11:01am
You've got a spelling mistake in the first sentence I think instead of "cons" you meant "Gov's" and in Louisiana's Democrat Governor.
Posted by marybretbrad at 08/04/2008 @ 11:17am
There you go again, new con repubs just can't help themselves-- always plaming the victim.
Posted by hsuBfools at 08/04/2008 @ 12:35pm
Doesn't sound like a conservative as I define it...I prefer to be left alone..live and let live... Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/04/2008 @ 12:22pm
Ahh maybe you don't define it that way. But the conservative ideology is just as much in your business as anyone else. Maybe you don't want my money to pay for programs. However your side will dictate everything else in my life according to their "morality." Which is based on their religion. Never realizing that Christian morality is not everyones morality.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/04/2008 @ 12:36pm
Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/04/2008 @ 12:27pm
Oh and also don't get me wrong. I enjoy point out absurdity. For instance that the right can actually find logic in the justification of owning a .50 caliber sniper rifle to say it's for hunting deer even though there would be nothing left of the deer if you hit it. Or the absurdity of a group calling themselves Pro-Life while bombing abortion clinics. Or the absurdity of PETA who puts a higher value on the life of a kangaroo mouse than a human. I love pointing out absurdity. I just don't think this is about absurdity. This is about making sure people pay attention to race in this race.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/04/2008 @ 12:39pm
Don't you ever make the mistake of replying to any other post I make here or I'll work you over regularly in a fashion you won't come to appreciate, count on it.
Posted by john lowell at 07/16/2008 @ 2:13pm
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/04/2008 @ 12:15pm
Now you've done it. You're gonna get "worked over". I know you are trembling with fear at the coming wrath of he who "is enveloped by the love of God."
Posted by Benchrest at 08/04/2008 @ 12:39pm
JOMAMMA:
You said:
You mean like...
Being called a Progressive rather than a far left loon on the fringe of the Dem party..Progressive sounds so...middle of the spectrum, when in fact, it is outright socialism, where you have govt to regulate (control) the businesses and the capital..and the money that they allow the workers to keep...until they need it..
My response:
Well, seeing as I am not a Democrat, nor do I support Obama...
And your understanding of socialism is pretty darned flawed. last I checked, France, Sweden, Germany, Switzerland (and many more) are what you would consider "socialist", yet their people are happier, richer, and *gasp* more productive than US workers on a per capita basis.
As Michael Moore has pointed out, whether you pay money to the government for health care or to an insurance company for health insurance, it's still a tax. At least with the government taking your money, you know your claim won't be denied.
And frankly, it was precisely the fact that wealth was distributed more evenly through government redistribution and public works and social security that the US had the greatest expansion of the middle class in any country in the history of the world. Then once the Rethuglican pro-business anti-labor wingnuts got into power, all of that was reversed... hence the current economic malaise in which this nation finds itself.
Perhaps you should do a little less dogma-spewing and a little more research, both historical and economic. It might just help you come to grips with the fact that you've been wrong on practically every issue we've discussed so far on this blog.
Posted by jorcheim at 08/04/2008 @ 12:48pm
CCCOMFO1:
Actually, "conservatives" want everyones' money moreso than anyone else... but they want it in the form of redistributed corporate welfare to support wars of choice and the propping up of failing companies that are deemed "too big to fail" all because they own stock in them, and their friends are the ones running them into the ground and need a bailout.
JOMAMMA and the rest of his ilk are just as socialist as what they claim to hate... they just prefer the redistribution to flow upwards to those who already own most of everything, instead of downward so that we have a fairer and more democratic economic polity.
Posted by jorcheim at 08/04/2008 @ 12:52pm
Now you've done it. You're gonna get "worked over". I know you are trembling with fear at the coming wrath of he who "is enveloped by the love of God." Posted by Benchrest at 08/04/2008 @ 12:39pm
Trembling in my boots I am.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/04/2008 @ 1:04pm
Posted by jorcheim at 08/04/2008 @ 11:35am
I couldn't have said it better myself.
Posted by marybretbrad at 08/04/2008 @ 11:54am
What obvious truths? Okay, I'll give you one. Limbaugh is an asshole. Now I'll give you an opinion. Anyone who thinks Limbaugh is funny is a dickhead.
Posted by k330k at 08/04/2008 @ 1:06pm
Posted by Benchrest at 08/04/2008 @
I have never made the claim that I am "enveloped by the love of God", Benchcrust. You distort what I'd said. I have objected to your misquoting me on this blog before. Just so you know, when someone willfully misquotes another its deemed to be malicious and then another name gets assigned to it. Capicsi.
Posted by john lowell at 08/04/2008 @ 1:31pm
It has nothing to do with race..Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/04/2008 @ 12:27pm
Of course, MAASCH...as I said, there are NO more racists on the Right...none...zero...nada. And certainly none who listen to the fair-minded and honest Rush Limbaugh!
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/04/2008 @ 1:44pm
" America is the greatest country on the Earth..help me change it.."
Paraphrasing, of course, but the absurdity of the statement is there..
Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/04/2008 @ 12:27pm
Which assumes that the limpaw that the USA is like God--
perfect and infallible,
er,
alrighty
then.
Posted by hsuBfools at 08/04/2008 @ 1:54pm
Posted by jorcheim at 08/04/2008 @ 12:48pm
Of course, all of this nonsense falls apart when you consider that the greatest economic expansion in US history happened under Ronald Reagan, aka The Devil in leftist kool-aid klatches.
Posted by pontificus at 08/04/2008 @ 1:54pm
er, Which assumes that limpaw also assumes that the USA is like God--
perfect and infallible,
...
Posted by hsuBfools at 08/04/2008 @ 1:56pm
"On Sunday, longtime Washington hand David Gergen took umbrage with John McCain's recent attack ads, charging that the Senator was using coded messaging to paint Barack Obama as "outside the mainstream" and "uppity."
"There has been a very intentional effort to paint him as somebody outside the mainstream, other, 'he's not one of us,'" said Gergen, who has worked with White Houses, both Republican and Democrat, from Nixon to Clinton. "I think the McCain campaign has been scrupulous about not directly saying it, but it's the subtext of this campaign. Everybody knows that. There are certain kinds of signals. As a native of the south, I can tell you, when you see this Charlton Heston ad, 'The One,' that's code for, 'he's uppity, he ought to stay in his place.' Everybody gets that who is from a southern background. We all understand that. When McCain comes out and starts talking about affirmative action, 'I'm against quotas,' we get what that's about."
Yeah, one does not have to be a dumbass new con repub follower to 'not' get it.
Posted by hsuBfools at 08/04/2008 @ 2:01pm
Posted by jorcheim at 08/04/2008 @ 12:52pm
"Actually, "conservatives" want everyones' money moreso than anyone else... but they want it in the form of redistributed corporate welfare to support wars of choice and the propping up of failing companies that are deemed "too big to fail" all because they own stock in them, and their friends are the ones running them into the ground and need a bailout."
Pheewwwwww....where to begin with this virtual geyser of kool-aid? So typically divorced from reality, and yet, it all makes a kind of sense, in the same way that the logic of many cults is self-consistent, but only if you throw out all reference to conventional reality.
Jorcheim, on this Earth there are entities that are called corporations, which PRODUCE wealth. On the other hand, there are other entities, like Democratic constituencies, that CONSUME it. Wealth CONSUMERS get welfare. Wealth producers get tax breaks. The terms are not interchangeable.
Posted by pontificus at 08/04/2008 @ 2:05pm
How come there's only one price for oil? Like isn't a monopoly?
Like Dell can compete with Apple or car manufacturers can compete via the type of cars they produce, and one can take bids for construction on one's home or business, but it's ok with new con repubs that oil is a monopoly and that the hsuB/cHeney admin took no bid contracts.
Kinda makes new con repubs hype-critters to me.
Posted by hsuBfools at 08/04/2008 @ 2:13pm
Posted by pontificus at 08/04/2008 @ 1:54pm
PONTI, the longest peacetime expansion of the US economy was in the 1990s.
Look it up.
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/04/2008 @ 2:15pm
There is more to life than ideology, Benchcrust, there is the love of God in Jesus Christ. It is the only thing in life that is real, that has meaning and is worth pursuing, actually. Enveloped in it, I won't need any luck, be sure. Best to you.
Posted by john lowell at 07/09/2008 @ 11:40pm
I have never made the claim that I am "enveloped by the love of God", Benchcrust. You distort what I'd said. I have objected to your misquoting me on this blog before. Just so you know, when someone willfully misquotes another its deemed to be malicious and then another name gets assigned to it. Capicsi.
Posted by john lowell at 08/04/2008 @ 1:31pm
I beg to differ.
Posted by Benchrest at 08/04/2008 @ 2:22pm
Posted by Benchrest at 08/04/2008 @ 2:22pm
Hmmm? Why it appears as if john lowell, our "only honest broker" who wants all progressives to vote for Nader, but claims it's not about helping the Republicans and that he's "doing the same thing on conservative blogs trying to get them to vote for Chuck Baldwin"....
told a fib.
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/04/2008 @ 2:37pm
PONTIFICUS:
I don't have enough time to respond to all of your idiocy, but I'll hit the most egregious of your claims.
You said:
Jorcheim, on this Earth there are entities that are called corporations, which PRODUCE wealth.
My response:
Actually, wrong. Corporations don't do anything but provide a veil of legal protection from the individual investors from personal responsibility when the corporations' minders infringe upon the rights and lives of those who are not protected by the corporate veil.
You lose.
Wealth is produced by people. Period. Hence my problem with corporate capitalism. The wealth that people create is siphoned off due to the massive commoditization of labor, thereby cheapening both the value of individual work and humanity in the process.
You said:
Wealth CONSUMERS get welfare. Wealth producers get tax breaks. The terms are not interchangeable.
My response:
Actually, tax breaks are given to whomever can lobby hardest on Capitol Hill. Even 4th grade social studies students understand that fact.
Posted by jorcheim at 08/04/2008 @ 2:41pm
PONTIFICUS:
Actually, with regard to Reagan, you're wrong. While the economy at large may have grown to a larger size in toto under Reagan, the democratization of wealth experienced a reversal under Reagan. Take a look at real wages, and the distribution of both wages and wealth both pre- and post-Reagan.
Educate yourself, heathen, for it is the only path to civilization.
Posted by jorcheim at 08/04/2008 @ 2:43pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/04/2008 @ 2:37pm
It is a mystery.
I believe the label you gave him a few weeks earlier is extremely accurate, as usual.
Posted by Benchrest at 08/04/2008 @ 2:45pm
Posted by pontificus at 08/04/2008 @ 2:05pm
Funny hearing you talk about kool-aid while you spout off stereotypes that are essentially talking points of the right. You prescribe to a pre-determined mind-set and can never even see through the veil of your own BS and hypocrisy to see that you are everything you claim those on the left are. You have drank the kool-aid of the right which is what causes you to believe more than 36% of the population is "divorced from reality" because they are apart of the left. You buy into the BS of pundits and satirical right wing commentary and then scoff at people for doing what you do every day. It's quite funny to see someone that is so ignorant to their own attributes as to display such a level of hypocrisy.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/04/2008 @ 3:51pm
Posted by jorcheim at 08/04/2008 @ 2:41pm
"Actually, tax breaks are given to whomever can lobby hardest on Capitol Hill. Even 4th grade social studies students understand that fact."
Yes, Jorcheim, that is so true. But if the government had not created this vast tax monster to begin with, the crooked politicians (i.e., all of them, more or less) would not have tax breaks and earmarks to sell to the highest bidder. The more powerful a government you have, the more corrupt that government will be. That's why, as Jefferson said, that government that governs least governs best. And since you lefties are ALWAYS pushing for a bigger, more powerful government, you're the biggest promoters of such unfortunate practices.
By the way, your understanding of the role of corporations is wholly incomplete. Yes, laws governing corporations do provide for a limit on individual investor risk. But corps do much, much more than that that individuals simply cannot do. Your ignorance of this I can only presume is purposeful, and your mindset appears to be anchored somewhere in the 18th century, in some kind of pastoral world where we're all peasants and nobles with no need for corporate structures to organize the vast and complex human efforts needed research and develop new technologies for the benefit of mankind.
And yes, only those companies that make profits and pay taxes get tax breaks. Most taxes are paid by people you would call 'rich', i.e., generators of what your ilk deems to be the evil 'profit', AKA 'wealth', which is the measure of their net benefit to society. Understand that, and you will gain a better understanding of the way the world works. Education without understanding is, after all, of no benefit to anyone, as educated leftists prove here every day.
Posted by pontificus at 08/04/2008 @ 4:01pm
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/04/2008 @ 3:51pm
I don't agree that 36 percent of the population is hard left. 36 population is hard core Democratic, for sure, but that's an amalgamation of groups: government supplicants (people who are on the bottom of society looking for something for nothing), people with little experience in the way the economy works and who are thus vulnerable to plausible fairy tales and fairy tale spinners (students, academics, housewives, and such), elitist professionals with an interest in a bigger government, blacks who automatically vote Democratic (16 percent), and yes, leftists. There is considerable overlap among these groups, but the number of hard-cor leftists I would say is no more than 16 percent.
Posted by pontificus at 08/04/2008 @ 4:11pm
'Considerable overlap' - LOL! I crack myself up sometimes.
Posted by pontificus at 08/04/2008 @ 4:18pm
Posted by marybretbrad at 08/04/2008 @ 4:18pm
That's a fascinating analysis, MBB. I think you've got something there. They really do believe that if we just had Obama out there in the 'world community' apologizing for us, and having tea with terrorists, that all would be right with the world, and all of these 'misunderstandings' would just go away. Yes, I see, that does appear to explain a lot.
Posted by pontificus at 08/04/2008 @ 4:22pm
Posted by marybretbrad at 08/04/2008 @ 4:18pm
Darin, I noted those examples...AND it was David Ehrenstein who noted the SILLINESS of the "Magic Negro" term from the folklorists.
It was Mr Limbaugh (and his sychophantic followers...aka "ditto-heads) who found their EXCUSE to leap on the use of it and lay all blame on "The MS Media did it first...they said it was 'okay' for us to use it"...when nothing of the sort was done.
The use of "Magic" (like HAPP does)..for "Magic Negro"...is shorthand for the ability of whites of a certain persuasion politically (as well as prejudicially) to "get to use the world 'Negro' again...haha...and we all know what we REALLY mean by that, don't we, boys?"
Or as Mr Taggert from "Blazing Saddles" might say...
"Horses! We can't afford to lose no horses, you dummy! Send a couple-a Magic Negroes!"
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/04/2008 @ 4:55pm
MBB-Ponti-What you both have there is juvenile nonsense.Can we,please,stop the very immature magic negro,osama idiocy and the making fun of McCain's name and age idiocy and engage in mature dialog.The only people who see Obama as you are describing is you people and only you so lets,again,please,try to engage in mature dialog instead of coming on here and posting such childish drivel.Do that on Rush limbaugh and other such sites where you kids play.The left has huffpo as a place for it's kids to play and you have your sites.Try and keep this site more adult.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/04/2008 @ 5:00pm
Try and keep this site more adult.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/04/2008 @ 5:00pm
"Scuse me while I whip this out." new sheriff of Rock ridge
Posted by Benchrest at 08/04/2008 @ 5:16pm
Posted by marybretbrad at 08/04/2008 @ 4:18pm
What's funny is, I can't believe anyone has actually bought into this. That people actually believe he is going to save the world. Most "progressives" never thought he was progressive enough. Most blacks didn't trust him from the beginning and didn't start truly voting for him until Hillary and her followers insulted the entirety of the black community. The youth were voting for Ron Paul as well as Obama. No one ACTUALLY believes he is going to save the world it's just you all have bought into the BS Republican/Hillary line about "cultists." No one has said Obama will solve all of our problems most people are saying that a lack of Bush is what will solve our problems. You aren't thinking for yourselves you are just repeating the tired line about cultists. Anyone who has actually fallen for this is the most gullible of people willing to believe anything the Republicans tell them to say.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/04/2008 @ 5:21pm
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/04/2008 @ 5:00pm
That's not possible. Anytime anyone gets into the adult conversations of politics they become as immature as a 4th grader. Resulting in them name calling like a child, something that we discipline our children for.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/04/2008 @ 5:24pm
PONTIFICUS:
Let's deconstruct this... wow, where should I start?
You said:
Yes, Jorcheim, that is so true. But if the government had not created this vast tax monster to begin with, the crooked politicians (i.e., all of them, more or less) would not have tax breaks and earmarks to sell to the highest bidder.
My response:
The problem is not government, per se. The problem is rampant, unchecked cronyism owing itself to the corporate fascism that has been fostered by conservatives in this country under the rubric of "national interest". Funny, you talk about making the government smaller, but only as it relates to social government. Not once do I ever hear you or your friends on the right decrying the military-industrial complex. Methinks I smell a hypocrite.
You said:
The more powerful a government you have, the more corrupt that government will be. That's why, as Jefferson said, that government that governs least governs best. And since you lefties are ALWAYS pushing for a bigger, more powerful government, you're the biggest promoters of such unfortunate practices.
My response:
Yes, yes and Jefferson also said that government is a necessary evil meaning it is still a worthwhile endeavour.
And no, I am not pushing for a bigger government. Actually, I am pushing for a smaller government, just not smaller in the way you would like. I prefer a government which doesn't spend all of its treasure on military boondoggles and endless occupations all over the planet. I prefer a government which does not reward corporations for submarining the interests of the nation at large for a fatter bottom line. So you really should get your facts straight. Your feeble attempts to paint me as something I'm not don't fly round here.
Posted by jorcheim at 08/04/2008 @ 5:51pm
You said:
By the way, your understanding of the role of corporations is wholly incomplete. Yes, laws governing corporations do provide for a limit on individual investor risk. But corps do much, much more than that that individuals simply cannot do. Your ignorance of this I can only presume is purposeful, and your mindset appears to be anchored somewhere in the 18th century, in some kind of pastoral world where we're all peasants and nobles with no need for corporate structures to organize the vast and complex human efforts needed research and develop new technologies for the benefit of mankind.
My response:
Actually, wrong again, slappy. Corporations are fictitious legal entities. Period. They exist ONLY on paper. That is modern fact, and I'm sorry if your ignorance blinds you to reality. Last I checked, corporations are, in the era of American corporate fascism, means for raising capital and limiting individual investor risk, both legal and financial. People organize. People do. Corporations do nothing. Period. When's the last time you saw a corporation walking down the street wearing a 3-piece double-breasted suit? That's right, never. So shut up about what corporations do. They DON'T. DO. SHIT.
You said:
And yes, only those companies that make profits and pay taxes get tax breaks. Most taxes are paid by people you would call 'rich', i.e., generators of what your ilk deems to be the evil 'profit', AKA 'wealth', which is the measure of their net benefit to society. Understand that, and you will gain a better understanding of the way the world works. Education without understanding is, after all, of no benefit to anyone, as educated leftists prove here every day.
My response:
Here you go again misrepresenting my views. Typically disingenuous. I n
Posted by jorcheim at 08/04/2008 @ 5:51pm
Putting a half-black and half-Hispanic together now, will backfire on the Demos! The MSM will go into hyper drive to cram that ticket even harder down our throat...........result will be like the past two weeks!
You heard it first from HAPPY :)))))
Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/03/2008 @ 10:46pm | ignore this person | warn this person
well...between the two...
ther WOULD still be a white guy on the ticket...
lol...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 08/04/2008 @ 6:15pm
I never said profit or wealth are evil. NEVER. Trust me, even MASK will back me up on this. And we all know how much MASK and I have disagreed in the past.
What I said was that profit and wealth at the demonstrable loss to someone else is a societal evil. What I mean by that is simple. If you are causing someone else harm in order to make a profit, then that profit should not be allowed.
And just to clarify, wealth is NOT a measure of someone's net benefit to society. This attachment of morality of ethics to money is typical of Calvinism, which was, is, and always will be heretical in Christian canonical law.
And regarding either education OR understanding, I would be happy to compare mine to yours any day of the week.
Posted by jorcheim at 08/04/2008 @ 6:27pm
MARYBRETBRAD:
26 months, eh? I want to see documentation if you are going to make such outrageous claims.
And while we're talking about it, let's discuss health insurance companies denying payment for procedures and care that are clearly covered under their respective plans. This happened to my father a number of times, and to me once already.
The long wait time of which you speak, especially if you are discussing Canada, for example, is for elective surgery. And even then, it's not 26 months.
Get your facts straight, or stop posting. Your choice.
Posted by jorcheim at 08/04/2008 @ 6:51pm
Posted by Benchrest at 08/04/2008 @ 2:22pm
Oh, my, you make this whole thing rather easy for me you squalid little snake. Yes, indeed, here's what I wrote:
"There is more to life than ideology, Benchcrust, there is the love of God in Jesus Christ. It is the only thing in life that is real, that has meaning and is worth pursuing, actually. Enveloped in it, I won't need any luck, be sure. Best to you."
This statement makes absolutely no assertion that I see myself as actually enveloped in the love of God. It simply asserts that enveloped in it, I wouldn't require any luck. Truth be known, my faith precludes ones making statements about the certainty of one's present relation to God. Yet on two occasions you have quoted me as claiming to be currently so situated. Your latest distortion:
"I know you are trembling with fear at the coming wrath of he who "is enveloped by the love of God."
If yours were simply a misreading, that would be one thing. But I'd raised an objection to the misquote once before in another thread yet you persist and that makes your claim malicious. There's a name and an appropriate environment for such malicious assertions. In those precincts it might not be all that convincing to say that you "differ".
Posted by john lowell at 08/04/2008 @ 7:06pm
(Remember when Cynthia McKinny accused Gore of having a low "Negro tolerance"?)
Posted by marybretbrad at 08/04/2008 @ 6:35pm
I guess it would then be rather ironic if Obama were to pick Al for the VP spot...
Posted by hsuBfools at 08/04/2008 @ 7:20pm
"in order to assure a fully stage-managed convention."
i doubt it will end at the convention.
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/04/2008 @ 7:23pm
Why don't all of you "good government" liberals stick that in your pipe and smoke it.
Posted by marybretbrad at 08/04/2008 @ 09:54am
yeah,
we should banish the fire department, too!
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/04/2008 @ 7:27pm
Posted by john lowell at 08/04/2008 @ 7:06pm
no no no....
spinneth not
fibber
Posted by Benchrest at 08/04/2008 @ 7:30pm
It's the same with "Negro". Nothing infuriates the PC left more than people refusing to observe the officially sanctioned nomenclature and continuing to use words that have been declared out of bounds by the self-appointed guardians of acceptable speech.
Posted by marybretbrad at 08/04/2008
well said, you pasty ass honky redneck gringo.
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/04/2008 @ 7:33pm
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/04/2008 @ 7:27pm
"we should banish the fire department, too!"
Uh huh. So in your 'judgment', cooked-up nonsense like the 'Canadian Human Rights Commission' has attained the same status as the Fire Department in terms of need and status? Reason enough not to put you folks and your representatives in charge of anything higher than the dog pound, I would sayh.
Posted by pontificus at 08/04/2008 @ 7:38pm
As many screw-up as McC has had in the last few weeks and months, to have new con repubs totally ignore them and still be blindly devoted to McC for no reason other than blind idolation of ideology,only calls even mmore attention to the fact the the far right new con repubs are in matter of fact and their actions-- a cult.
Posted by hsuBfools at 08/04/2008 @ 8:03pm
Reason enough not to put you folks and your representatives in charge of anything higher than the dog pound, I would sayh.
Posted by pontificus at 08/04/2008 @ 7:38pm
federal debt per capita:
u.s. $33,466.66
cdn. $21,396.87
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/04/2008 @ 8:24pm
Posted by Benchrest at 08/04/2008 @ 7:30pm
Here was the context you set for the reply I gave initially:
"Then you live your life in vain and wish for that which will not be. Out of politeness I would wish you luck, but it would be meaningless."
And, again, my reply:
"There is more to life than ideology, Benchcrust, there is the love of God in Jesus Christ. It is the only thing in life that is real, that has meaning and is worth pursuing, actually. Enveloped in it, I won't need any luck, be sure. Best to you."
I repeat, this statement makes absolutely no assertion that I see myself as actually enveloped in the love of God. It simply asserts that enveloped in it, I wouldn't require any luck.
No spin, no fib, slime. And if you think not, just keep posting your malicious distortions here and see if I sit still for it.
Posted by john lowell at 08/04/2008 @ 8:36pm
Posted by john lowell at 08/04/2008 @ 8:36pm
Well, I thought you were spinning, but now I can see that you were not.
Would you like some cheese with that whine?
Posted by Benchrest at 08/04/2008 @ 8:46pm
"There is more to life than ideology,
how true. ice-cream, for example.
Benchcrust,
sticks and stones....
there is the love of God in Jesus Christ.
and god in me, too. and god in the dragonflies, as well.
It is the only thing in life that is real,
whew! i won't worry about these mosquito bites then.
that has meaning
what about playing scrabble?
and is worth pursuing,
you mean like blogging?
actually.
as a matter of fact.
Enveloped in it, I won't need any luck, be sure. Best to you."
god plays dice.
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/04/2008 @ 9:04pm
Bad Obama or good Obama?
Now it turns he's darn good for biz and bad for environment. Yes, he wasn't but now he is. Good politico, as good as any.
---------
Obama Urges Opening Up Oil Reserves Policy Shift Is His Second in a Week on Energy Issue; McCain Urges Immediate Drilling
By Perry Bacon Jr. and Michael D. Shear Washington Post Staff Writers Tuesday, August 5, 2008; Page A04
LANSING, Mich., Aug. 4 -- Sen. Barack Obama called Monday for using oil from the nation's strategic reserves to lower gasoline prices, the second time in less than a week that he has modified a position on energy issues, as he and Sen. John McCain seek to find solutions to a topic that is increasingly dominating the presidential race.
Posted by HelenDAO at 08/04/2008 @ 11:21pm
Say thank you to Dubya.
Well, the Europeans would welcome anyone, save this Texas crowd.
-----------
Obama's Sober Mood
Richard Wolffe NEWSWEEK
Greeted by thousands of Europeans, Obama's world tour went smashingly well. But the candidate says he's not letting any of it go to his head.
Posted by HelenDAO at 08/04/2008 @ 11:32pm
as he and Sen. John McCain seek to find solutions to a topic that is increasingly dominating the presidential race.
bicycle.
ta da!
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/04/2008 @ 11:50pm
Clinton to Rubin: Let's Let Michigan Be Gone.
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/04/2008 @ 11:52pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 08/04/2008 @ 11:03pm
Wow....LVLIB thinks I"m a Democratic Party operative...
FRANK thinks I'm a "Nation" employee...
and some on the Left once accused me of being a "Republican operative"...
Guess I'm doing something right, huh?
BTW, HAPP, you don't say "Obama has a certain 'magic'" or "the 'magic' of Obama eludes me"...you CALL him "Magic" which is short for "Magic Negro" and you know it (so does Rush).
And the further conclusion from THAT is easy to derive.
Of course it involves the totally WILD...completely IMPROBABLE....utterly RIDICULOUS idea that...
there might be some racists in the Rush Limbaugh audience.
Crazy, huh?
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/05/2008 @ 08:57am
Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/04/2008 @ 9:01pm
Once you again your prove your inability to understand anything beyond your narrow vision. I am not voting for Obama because I think he is going to fix everything. I am voting for him because I think McCain will break everything else. If that is "cultism" then I don't care. However I repeat my points. Anyone who actually believes this BS about "cultism" is an idiot. You have bought the BS Hillary and Republican line and I can only hope you pull your head out of the toilet long enough to realize that the reason MOST people are voting for Obama is because they don't want to see four more years of Bush.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/05/2008 @ 12:10pm
Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/05/2008 @ 11:01am
Yes, yes. We've been through Rush's (and yours) EXCUSE that "It wasn't us...it was the LA Times...your beloved liberal Media...who started 'Magic Negro'"....
and the falsity of that claim since David Ehrenstein MOCKED the term.
Rush leaped on it because it provides red meat (in the form of "getting away with" using "Negro") for his audience.
And a cheap, "subtle" shorthand for what they REALLY want to call Obama.
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/05/2008 @ 12:23pm
Now, second point, if McCain = Bush, then Obama = Carter = Kerry = Dukakis = Gore = Clinton.....maybe there isn't much `change' on either side and if anything, Magic is trying desperately to = McCain! Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/05/2008 @ 12:22pm
Maybe he does equal them. But McCain = Bush. That is all that matters to me. Obama won't = Bush. And he isn't trying. Again it's a misconsrtueing of what's going on. In compromising on offshore drilling he got through a huge increase in the rate of achieving alternative fuels. In compromising on FISA, when he becomes President he can roll it back. It's called being a half way intelligent politician and knowing that if you want to get something big you have to also give up something. He gave up offshore drilling in order to attain more fuel efficiency.
""If, in order to get that passed, we have to compromise in terms of a careful, well thought-out drilling strategy that was carefully circumscribed to avoid significant environmental damage -- I don't want to be so rigid that we can't get something done.""
That's his quote. Any smart politician and smart person would notice there is a compromise to get something done. it will take them 10 years to get those platforms online. With the demands of the compromise in 10 years a good portion of cars should be getting over 30 miles to the gallon. He wants to be a President of "unity" what ever that means. The only way to unify Republicans and Democrats on issues is to compromise. Give something up in order to gain something else.
He's not flip flopping he's being smart because he would have never gotten Republicans to agree to what he did about alternative fuels UNLESS he gave something up.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/05/2008 @ 12:38pm
He essentially gave Republicans what they want in order to more quickly phase out oil. So we will start drilling offshore and by the time that the pumps are fully online and pumping out maximum we will have a hugely lowered need for oil all together because if the technology rate continues in 15 years we will all be driving 30 mile per gallon cars. Look at technology and look at the policy he is trying to enact. You will see that he barely gave up anything in the compromise.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/05/2008 @ 12:40pm
I believe those who vote for Magic, do so because he looks black and don't talk like Jesse or Al.----Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/05/2008 @ 12:22pm
If true, HAPP, then those voting AGAINST "Magic"...would be doing so for the OPPOSITE reason, right?
What IS the opposite of that?
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/05/2008 @ 12:41pm
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/05/2008 @ 12:38pm
What's funny is, McCain immediately attacked Obama for "flip-flopping" on drilling...
then THE NEXT DAY, came out in favor of the compromise.
Thus (since he gave NO time for a new news-cycle) implying hypocrisy on HIS part...instead of waiting a while.
Even if you ignore the dishonesty of it, objectively it provides more proof of the incompetence of the McCain campaign.
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/05/2008 @ 12:44pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/05/2008 @ 12:44pm
I think the McCain campaign is at odds with itself. I think his campaign is telling him to do the opposite of what he may WANT to do. They are telling him to do things to galvanize the Republican base which we all know he is lacking in and he wants to go in another direction.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/05/2008 @ 1:22pm
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/05/2008 @ 1:22pm
It's more than "at odds"...it's a internecine war.
McCain's "old staff" wants the "clean, Maverick John, run on the issues" campaign....his "new people" (Rove's gang) want to run dirty and run Hard Right on the issues, even if that means flip-flopping on "Maverick" positions.
His lackluster polls (until this week) gave the power to the Rove contingent...and since it SEEMS like it's working, they'll probably get to hold onto it.
Meanwhile, though from folks like John Weaver, "old McCain" folks, you're seeing a lot of disenchantment with "Maverick John".
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/05/2008 @ 1:26pm