Campaign nostalgia
Back in England for a short visit, I receive this and am transported back to New Hampshire and Indiana and the National Building Museum.
Funny how long ago so much of the campaign seems now; a reminder of how distant so many of today's issues will seem by November (Barack Obama's vice-presidential vetting team etc) when the actual votes are cast.
In the meantime will Obama go Virginian? Should he?
This article sets out the reasons why he might not get quite the support in Virginia that LBJ managed but also seems to me to make the perfect case for a Virginian vice-presidential pick - who could easily bag the necessary extra votes.
Warner is out, Kaine is insufficiently schooled in foreign and military affairs: It will be Senator Jim Webb.
Tim Russert cannot be replaced. His position in American politics goes with him. This is the dilemma now for NBC but also for American broadcasting.
As an outsider I would pick David Gregory - he is tough and witty and full of character. Did I seriously see somewhere that Katie Couric was in the running...?
Hello, I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~33~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Yes, Obama should go Virginian, with Senator Webb. Ed has convinced me.
Complain about this comment
You know, every time I write on any blog about how they should place a "none of the above" space on the US presidential ballot, I get blown off and my blogs are never posted. I think it is unfair that as Americans we can't say, we don't want any of the people running, as our President. I have been saying that we need the none of the above for the last two elections, because I truly believe that there is NO ONE running that I want as my President.
Complain about this comment
Gee, I didn't know I had such powers of persuasion!
Webb impresses me, but there are doubts about his (long) past misogynist remarks and some 'racy' bits in his fiction. I did like his questioning technique with Petraeus and his colleague, and his comments elsewhere about the unrealised common interests between the Appalachian whites and the African Americans.
Webb has plenty of military credibility and didn't finish near the bottom of his class at Annapolis. I'd like to see him in a one-to-one with McFootinmouth.
Of course, I'm biased, being a philosophical child of Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, a Great(n times) Nephew of Washington, and a direct descendent of George Mason. "My People" have always considered themselves Virginians, wherever they found themselves. But being biased doesn't make me wrong!
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
Callah,
You can always write-in! The last time I voted was 1968 (I've been in Scotland since 1971/2), and I wrote in Dick Gregory!
Salaam, etc.
ed
Complain about this comment
Zogby on polls and political junkies
Is mathadologic a kind of methadone for political junkies?
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
The only possible reason you could pick some one as biased and offensive as Gregory is your own personal bias toward the liberal end of the political spectrum
Gregory along with Mathews and Obermann has been exposed.
If you have any honesty at all you would acknowledge Chris Wallace as the closest person to Russert.
Complain about this comment
Magic,
Has it ever occurred to you how well one dimensional thinking suits you?
Salaam, etc.
ed
Complain about this comment
#6, of course Ed has a liberal bias. Are you claiming not to have a conservative bias?
I don't know Ed's reasons, but I, too, voted for Dick Gregory in 1968. For the benefit of non-US readers, I will explain the context from my point of view:
The United States was mired in a pointless war in Vietnam. Although President Lyndon Johnson took the heat for escalating the involvement to outright war, President Kennedy had a lot to do with setting it up, and even Eisenhower laid the foundation.
Johnson showed no signs of knowing what to do about Vietnam, and opposition within his own party from Eugene McCarthy and Robert Kennedy caused him not to seek reelection. (I was a McCarthy supporter.) McCarthy did not have enough support to win the nomination, and Kennedy, who might have, was assasinated. Hubert Humphrey, then Vice President, but a former senator with good liberal credentials was nominated by the Democrats; Richard Nixon by the Republicans.
To most Democrats, Nixon was evil incarnate. Antiwar Democrats hoped Humphrey would repudiate Johnson's war policies. He did not, and since a vote for Nixon was unthinkable, many liberal Democrats voted for a third-party (or independent) candidate, or did not vote for president. Ed and I (and a score or so of other people) voted for Dick Gregory. In my case, this was not because I thought he would make a good president; it was merely a way of registering a protest vote against the Vietnam war.
Those of us (antiwar Democrats) who refused to vote for Humphrey were widely blamed for Nixon's election, but I think it's a bum rap. All Humphrey had to do to get these votes was to turn his back on Johnson, then a lame duck, and tell us how he was going to end the war. He did not, and he alone is responsible.
I never understood Humphrey's reluctance to oppose Johnson until I recently read Robert Caro's Master of the Senate (part of his biography of Lyndon Johnson). From his account, it is clear that Humphrey always was Johnson's toady.
That's my liberal former Democrat (now independent) take on the vote for Dick Gregory. The opinions expressed are mine alone.
Complain about this comment
I suppose Jim Webb would be a good choice if your goal is to swing the commonwealth of Virginia, but what undecided or independent voter (outside Virginia) would vote for Obama because he's got Jim Webb as his VP?
Obama's stance on the Iraq war has made him appear weak on national security, and his choice of VP won't change that impression.
It's actually a bad idea to choose a VP who to make up for a perceived weakness, because that only highlights the perceived weakness. Instead he needs to re-enforce his strengths in areas that draw the undecided, independents, and isle-crossers.
His appearance as the outsider, above corruption and 'business-as-usual' practices in Washington, DC is one of his strongest traits, he needs to re-enforce this to keep making believers in his message of change.
I have to agree with Callah about the poor choices of candidates on the ballot. I consider a write-in vote the best way to protest against it.
I've often voted for the lesser of two evils, but I've come to realize that 60% of the voters in my home state consistently vote for the greater of two evils; My vote is more a measure of demographics than a means to elect the right person, so this year I'm writing in 'Fred Thompson'.
While Tim Russert's untimely demise is most unfortunate, and lamented by his friends, family, and perhaps his audience, his absence from the campaign is not that much of a loss to the rest of us; he played too much soft-ball with the candidates to have any real effect on the campaign process.
Complain about this comment
I believe that Obama would be wise to pick Hillary Clinton, assuming she would take the second spot. There are enough swing states in play that only someone of Clinton's stature would assure the Democrats of the swing states they must have to win in November.
This is an unusual circumstance: vice presidential candidates usually do not bring much electoral clout to the table, despite the predictable musings every four years from pundits that they do. Clinton does, however.
On the Republican side, McCain's advisers are undoubtedly looking for someone who brings nationwide appeal, and, again if persuasion is possible, the best bet for them is Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana.
Complain about this comment
There is an assumption that we all talk of middle left and right in the same terms.
the "left" of America is like the Tory party in the UK and the same with the journalists.
The liberal media of the US is pretty conservative on the whole.
One reason the UK 's people were against the war was because the media had not stirred them up into a frenzy and had done a better job of informing the people as to reality. They did not go along as wholeheartedly as the press over here, left, right, liberal or conservative.
That goes for ALL the networks though Fox seemed to be sponsoring the war a little.
David Gregory could definitely help in correcting the conservative bias that is so prevalent here in the US.
Complain about this comment
Ed Iglehart wrote:
Magic,
Has it ever occurred to you how well one dimensional thinking suits you?
Salaam, etc.
ed
Actually Ed I consider myself multifacted I can look beyond the D and the R and pick the best person or goal.
for instance if Huckabee had been the r and biden had been the D I be supporting Biden.
But I feel comfortable attacking an hack like Gregory.
Maybe you should walk Fox News to get an honest news cast and a range of views.
Shalom
Complain about this comment
The problem is, Jim Webb has said he wouldn't want the VP spot. And why must it be a military person? Never mind countering McCain's record, surely Obama is aiming away from that message?
Complain about this comment
Sen. Clinton is too polarizing to be VP - her political baggage would remove "purple" states from play. Sen. Obama will need a moderate running mate with a history of working across the aisle. Past military service would also be an asset - there is also no getting around the fact that McCain is a war hero and the U.S. is at war.
As for the U.S. media - they are more focused more on entertaining than on reporting. Results of American Idol vs. being informed that the Bush Administration led the nation into war under false pretenses... which is more news-worthy?
http://intelligence.senate.gov/press/record.cfm?id=298775
Complain about this comment
I'm not sure about Webb. Jim Webb, that is.
As a VP, I think he'd be alright. The so-called misogyny thing is a bit worrying, as is his potential volatility, but, well, you can't have everything, I guess. Besides, most of those stories are set well in the past.
When I try to imagine Webb as president, though, I do get a little bothered. If Obama wins the presidency, his VP will in all likelihood be the Dem's nominee in 2016. And obviously if Obama keels over prematurely, the VP will take over the White House automatically.
Much as I disliked her campaign, I think I might well prefer Clinton to Webb as president. Which makes choosing the VP less easy than I'd like.
Of course, Al Gore might well be the best choice all round, but I'm sure that's not going happen. A pity; he could be Housewife of the United States (HOTUS), and get the country all spick and span. Environmentally speaking, of course.
Complain about this comment
Jim Webb would be a fine choice, but the decision will likely come down who Obama feels comfortable with among those that bring something to the ticket to help him win. Plouff's strategy of not focusing on Florida and Ohio is a smart one. They are approaching the campaign with a fresh set of eyes rather than resting on the game plan of recent elections. It will be refreshing to have other states and energized new voters in play.
Complain about this comment
Justin: I agree that Tim Russert cannot be replaced, but to suggest that David Gregory might be considered as a replacement would be to dishonor the memory of a great journalist who was fair to all he interviewed regardless of their political bent. As for Katie Couric - whoever started that ridiculous rumor?
Complain about this comment
Seems Obama's faith is appealing to some conservative Christians as well
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080616/pl_politico/11099
Complain about this comment
#11. jacksforge: "the "left" of America is like the Tory party in the UK and the same with the journalists." So Justin, you see that I'm not the only one who thinks that! For those who did not read it, Justin was adamant that I was wrong to equate the American "left" with British Conservatives. While Barack Obama may be in the same age group as Tony Blair, that's where the similarity ends.
Complain about this comment
The best bet is Evan Bayh. The man is intelligent, cautious and appears to be trustworthy. Senator Webb would be a good surrogate, but he is a loose cannon and might not be willing to fall in to line. Besides all that, his senate position would be hard to recover.
I agree that David Gregory would be a good replacement. Tim Russert, however, was more than just a talk show host. He had clout and deserved it.
Complain about this comment
Webb comes off as angry, even bitter. There's something not right about him. Like Huckabee. Something's off, or ready to go off at any moment.
Gregory is a bit of a lightweight. I agree that Wallace is the only one that doesn't falter. He's very solid and a capable interviewer.
Whoever gets the job will have to keep the partisanship under wraps. Wallace does this quite well. He's a registered Democrat.
Complain about this comment
Reuben (9),
"Obama's stance on the Iraq war has made him appear weak on national security,"
That's simply rubbish!
Gary (8), an excellent summary which took me right back...
Magic, a "spectrum" is one-dimensional. So is any analysis in terms of left and right. What do you know of Gregory to term him a "hack"? Very little, I suspect.
Justianus, Hillary would be a disastrous choice as running mate. Anyone else is bound to be better. Gore really doesn't want it, and Webb is older than he looks and probably wouldn't want to follow Obama in 2016 (He'll be 70). This would leave room for a new field of potential Dems to emerge. Maybe Michelle? ;-)
David, Al Poodle (toady Blair) is 55, somewhat older than Obama, and I hope there are relatively few other resemblances.
Peace to all,
ed
Complain about this comment
Obama is most definitely considered weak on defense. Only the anti-war left wouldn't consider this a weakness.
Complain about this comment
"Obama is most definitely considered weak on defense. Only the anti-war left wouldn't consider this a weakness."
Only fools consider him weak on defense. Is the fact that they do a weakness in itself?
Complain about this comment
Jim Webb would be a fine VP Candidate, but didn't he categorically deny this to the late Tim Russert on Meet The Press 2 weeks ago ?
So much so that the betting shop that rhymes with "Bill" doesn't even include Webb among the potential VP candidates.
Has this Virginia/Hawaii native missed something ?
Complain about this comment
I think it's all coming back to me now ....
Complain about this comment
#22. Ed - "Al Poodle (toady Blair) is 55, somewhat older than Obama" - Blair was 44 when he became Prime Minister; ten years difference still puts him in the same age group generationally.
A pity though that your enmity toward Mrs Clinton is still bubbling away - what would you do if, after all the vetting, she does become the VP nominee? As for Webb, this article in The Atlantic may be of interest.
Complain about this comment
#24, Ed,
Well, I'm in good company. Many of us "fools" consider him weak on defense.
And many of us "fools" question his experience level and (gasp!) judgment.
And many of these same "fools" were voting for Hillary. (Not me, of course) :)
Complain about this comment
I'm going to change my name to "Ed Iglehart" so that I can get my postings approved again.
Salaam/etc.
:(
Grrrlie
Complain about this comment
Webb is not a career politician, i.e. he doesn't seek to kiss babies or other anatomical regions that politicians do. He entered the snake-pit in protest to the Iraq invasion. These 2 facets may prove not only refreshing, but in demand this go 'round.
Still he categorically denied any intention or desire to Tim Russert 2 weeks ago.
On the surface, I wouldn't recommend it - he seems like a nice, if head-strong, person.
Complain about this comment
Webb was my choice too until I started reading his published analyses regarding military culture and his statement that the USA's tradition of male-only military-training and combat, taken together, constitute the ONLY arena for celebration of masculinity. His statements about women's disabling influence on that male-only culture are public domain. What surprises me is that Webb has also published historical writings on the contributions of Scots-Irish to the USA's military. Well, I share his Webb surname within my family - but I also know that within that Celtic tradition of military prowess, the long history shows a Celtic culture in which women were EXPECTED to be warriors, LED clan wars and even bigger battles - and WON. Webb's glorification of war as a "man's game" is appalling. He's looking more and more like a "lesser evil" and less and less like an ideal VP.
Complain about this comment
David,
No hatred for Hillary, simply a strong opinion that she wouldn't make an appealing ticket and that to put her on it would destroy Obama's claim to new brooms, changing the old washington ways, etc.
As to the Atlantic article, I posted a link to it a couple of weeks ago.
BritAm,
Webb didn't categorically deny the VP speculation. He changed the subject, saying it wasn't in the front of his mind and hadn't been a matter of discussion between himself and Obama. He then went on to talk about the nature of Appalachian grievances and promote his book.
He's heavy favourite in the political betting I see. Only Clinton is also above 10%, but he's over 20%.
Grrrlie, Sorry, but that name's taken. ;-) What's happening to your posts? Just not appearing? Check immediately after posting and if you don't see the one-liner saying awaiting moderation, hit your browser's "back" button and recover the post. then look for an ampersand (&), which can cause the software to bin the post without notice. There are other characters which offend, but that's the usual one. If you MUST use it, type & (the semicolon is essential)
Good luck. I enjoy your posts.
Salaam, etc.
ed
Complain about this comment
Ed - apparently my "threat" to take your name was sufficient to get 2 postings! haha. (it wasn't a glitch thing; I'd already tried going back/etc. but somethin' else was goin' on [?!?] - oh well.)
Question, folks: are VP-candidate seeking Obama supporters rushing to Jim Webb much like socalled 'liberal' Republicans rushed to McCain in general in the past? "A [military] maverick"/etc.? If so I'd suggest a closer read of what the Webb had put into print.
Lesser evils can end up being great evils, once they've grasped the reins of power.
Complain about this comment
Sen. Webb does seem to have some baggage which would be a problem with the female vote. Also important, I think, is the inadvisability of losing a Democratic seat in the Senate. Taking both of these points into consideration, Sebelius looks like a good alternative again.
As for Meet the Press, I think they should go back to the original format with a panel of journalists, and not to try to replace Russert directly with someone doing what he was doing. I preferred This Week with David Brinkley, but I never watched any of these shows after Brinkley. He was the one irreplaceable political journalist, in my opinion.
Complain about this comment
#32 Ed "No hatred for Hillary, simply a strong opinion that she wouldn't make an appealing ticket" - From what we have seen so far, Mr Obama doesn't seem that much different to what has gone before. Any product can be labeled "New and Improved" but rarely does it live up to its expectations.
Complain about this comment
#34 Gary_A_Hill
"Sen. Webb does seem to have some baggage which would be a problem with the female vote."
Gary: It would be my hope that MEN as well as women would be concerned about Senator Jim Webb's beliefs re: war being THE SINGLE all-important, defining element for masculinity. And appalled at what the implications are of those beliefs, re: women and their place in life.
In addition to his self-servingly censored analysis of Celtic military tradition - leaving women warriors and leaders entirely out of the picture.
Complain about this comment
Grrrlie (#36), you can hope, but the number of potential votes from males who would be turned off by Webb's statements about women not belonging in the armed forces is small. I don't have a problem with women serving in the armed forces, as a general proposition, but I certainly wouldn't refuse to support Obama on that basis, if he chose Webb as his running mate.
Complain about this comment
#37 Gary_A_Hill
Gary: I am NOT a fan of militarism, be it about men or women. What I'm getting at is Jim Webb's particular type of analysis: that MEN are SOLELY definable as men via war-training and combat. That male glory and value are PRIMARILY determined that way.
That love of war goes over and above any solidarity or comradeship or, I would say, any true respect for women - if you take a long, hard look at what Webb is saying in his writings about being in the military.
Again - my point is NOT for women in combat - it is AGAINST glorification of WAR as THE proof of masculinity!!!!!
Complain about this comment
Grrrlie (#38), I am with you on that point. I'm not a vet myself, although I respect them. I have not read Webb's statements which you allude to. When and where were they made?
Complain about this comment
Perhaps Grrrlie is referring to this?
Complain about this comment
Thanks Ed.
All I saw was the end of the interview when Russert said something like, "So we can definitely put your being the VP nominee to rest", to which Webb nodded seriously in agreement; Russert, in turn, appeared to immediately accept this.
I saw Webb on the Coimedy Channel's Daily Show (Jon Stewart) and he didn't dispel the possibility of being VP.
Complain about this comment
Justianus (#40), I think there must be something else. I don't find his main point objectionable; there were many others saying the same thing at the time, for example George Will.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
re #42
Not sure there actually is much more, other than a few alleged comments about "thunder thighs" and "witch hunts".
Of course, there's Webb's fiction. His novels "disturbingly and consistently – indeed, almost uniformly – portray women as servile, subordinate, inept, incompetent, promiscuous, perverted, or some combination of these. In novel after novel, Webb assigns his female characters base, negative characteristics."
That quote, though, is from George Allen, aka the Macaca Man.
Webb remarked upon him here earlier, I seem to recall. Justin Webb, that is :)
In any case, I await Grrrlie's response.
Complain about this comment
Regarding Tim Russert -
I believe that the eulogies are cloyingly overdone.
He might have been somewhat better than most of his contemporaries, but, if one is to judge journalists by their willingness to "comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable (Finley Peter Dunne)", he fell far short of the stature that many before him achieved.
Excellent article on Russert and the state of journalism today (and not ideologically oriented, in spite of the web site):
http://www.lewrockwell.com/shaffer/shaffer175.html
Complain about this comment
Grrrrlie,
I say again I enjoy your posts, and more than that, I appreciate the perspective you bring on Webb. I don't hold a brief for him above all others, and I'm confident of Obama's judgement in the choice of a running mate.
I do have (play money) bets on him and Richardson and have bet heavily against HRC. I'm winning with Webb and HRC, but losing on Richardson, for what it's worth (nada ;-)).
Justianus, Thanks for the link, and Peter, welcome to the moderation club - what did you do to rouse the ire of the Mods?
Webb's obviously been a busy boy of late
Explaining his reported comments
In converstaion
Charm offensive (Daily Show)
All the marks of a 'front-runner'. Riding for a fall?
Time will tell.
xxx
ed
Complain about this comment
It will NEVER be web. I have the highest regard for Justin's accumen but I can't help feeling that he is drunk from the success of picking McCain (whose success was the most almighty fluke).
Try this from Slate on Webb and see if you still think he's viable.
www.slate.com/id/2193217/?GT1=38001
Complain about this comment
Ed Iglehart wrote:
"Obama is most definitely considered weak on defense. Only the anti-war left wouldn't consider this a weakness."
Only fools consider him weak on defense. Is the fact that they do a weakness in itself?
Many of us consider his weak on a whole range of issues. One of the reason I believe Obama will lose is because except for the Obamaphiles, poeple will ask what has this person done?
I am speaking as a person who saw through Obama before Rev Wright, Rezko and Bill Ayers
Complain about this comment
Oh, my heavens, the Hilary photo album...
No outer limit to this woman's ego. And, not too subtly, she seems to be prepping Chelsea for her own run for office(s), to continue the dynasty in one form or another.
I predict the retailer's shelves will be packed with pantsuits at deep discount, with all the corporate buyers having predicted (incorrectly) that she would be the nominee, and that ugly pantsuits would be the rage.
America, we dodged a bullet here, at least temporarily. Let's just hope she doesn't end up on the Supreme Court!
Complain about this comment
peterm99 (#45),
"I believe that the eulogies are cloyingly overdone."
I agree. That's the point made in today's San Francisco Chronicle by Debra Saunders here:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2008/06/17/EDMT11A0S7.DTL
Complain about this comment
It's interesting, Justin, that you received this
e-mail when you're probably on the Clintons'
enemies list.
Just shows that the left electron doesn't know
what the right electron is doing...
Complain about this comment
Who needs Iowa?
James Howard Kunstler notes:
Read it and wonder.
xx
ed
Complain about this comment
Grrrlie: Didn't you notice that despite his being the site's champion blogger, in production that is, Ed has had quite a few submissions dumped in the waste-basket. One has to wonder just what kind of content caused the moderators to inflict this indignity on such a prolific writer and pundit.
McCain for President, warts and all!!!
Complain about this comment
re: #45 peterm
Peter you are spot on about Russert, or anyone in politics.
Can anyone in politics be good ? Of course not, that is not how the game is played. Any good person would be chewed up and spit out. Russert was arguably the most powerful influence in American politics, why would he, and the people who control him, not utilise that power.
He has the perfect persona, a truly nice person in his own life, but when it came to the political snake-pit, he compartmentalised and played the game best of all. Hence my concern about whether his accidental death, was purely accidental or not.
Like him or not, I don't think many would argue that George Bush is not a likeable person on a indiviudal basis - but many/most hate his administration's politics. That is how the game is played.
How to put the gushing of support for Russert - I think America, all people, down inside would like things to be how they should be: nice, friendly and for the good of all. However in reality we know this isn't the case, not even with the very likeable Russert - he was a pitbull down deep inside.
Russert was smoother and more clever than the rest.
-------
Jim Webb is back on the betting firm that rhymes with "Bill" as a close #2 for VP, just behind Clinton. His strong and controversial views about women derive themselve from women in the military. Come on guys and gals, when you are out there fighting for your life and country (which men do because of the male physique) do you really think it is wise to have women around ? My goodness the urge for sex is the only urge greater than that of survival. Wake up !
Complain about this comment
Noble,
The commonest reason cited by the Moderators for removing my posts is that I'm over-fond of quoting other folks' words.
I can live with that.
So often other folk say things far better than I might (without plagiarising them). It's rarely the "kind of content", more often "intellectual property" concerns.
"McCain for President, warts and all!!!"
That's a shed-load of warts! But maybe Sindy has a magic recipe...
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
It will be Senator Jim Webb
Justin, your reasoning wouldn't include the hope of seeing 'Vice President J Webb' in lights, would it?
Complain about this comment
Actually, I have to correct my earlier post...
It seems that the Clintons no longer maintain
an enemies list. They have simplified their
record-keeping by merely maintaining a
"friends list."
Complain about this comment
Floods Leave Iowa Swimming In Toxic Brew
Sewage, Farm Chemicals, Animal Waste Infest Water; Potential Levee Breaks Loom
Spare a thought for Iowans.
xx
ed
Complain about this comment
nobleFloridian (#53), it's not only direct content that gets posts blocked, it's links to other sites which do not meet the BBC's august standards. Ed likes to post links to lots of junk, and that's what gets blocked. I am sure he's a perfect gentleman in his own writings.
Complain about this comment
Thank you for the link Justianus (#40) - I am going to have to disagree with Gary_A_Hill's belief that there must be more for Sen. Webb to be ruled out as a candidate (#42). Sen. Webb's remarks will alienate women - a large voting block for the Democratic Party.
While his main point, that women in the service academies (as they are now) inhibit the training of troops and the creation of leaders, may have some basis - the presentation of his argument reveals much personal bias and shows him as a man I would rather not have as VPOTUS.
Complain about this comment
Thanks Gary, but "lots of junk"? I'm deeply hurt. ;-)
Actually, the second-most cause given has been "broken links", e.g. links which lead to pdf files or links which I've mis-copied. Only on one or two occasions have I been told it was an "unsuitable" website. The one which comes readily to mind was a section of soundtrack from "Blazing Saddles" regarding being "gifted" ;-) and then they said it wasn't OK because it linked to a soundfile....(never mind the rude content)
On one or two occasions, I've been less careful of 'offensive' language than I might have, but believe it or not, I do strive to be 'gentlemanly' because I believe that's best and more effective in the long run (and my Mother (R.I.P.) wouldn't like it otherwise).
Peace to all,
ed
Complain about this comment
Ed
Thanks so much for your information about the use of an ampersand. I used a lot of them and now know why my posts were not going through or had missing parts.
Russet can never be replaced and certainly not by Katie Couric!
The whole VP thing would be a real hoot if Obama picked someone on no one's short list. We do live in interesting times.
Complain about this comment
mmmm bet you get good beer from the midwest now. all that good water.
Every flood releases all that crap and the unsecured paints acetone bleach ammonia etc. the average sink in the US should be given superfund status.
sorry for those farmers but monoculture and stupidity have led to the chemical slug now heading down stream.
But who but a hippie would have though?
38 Grrrrlie As a man I agree. some posters of past seem to think there is some validity to WAR ,,, MEN..
As a smith who wields a big hammer all day, by a scorching hot fire I have noticed that some of the girls are way better smiths than most.
Some men here think that merely suggesting others fight some how make them men. all of which is bull.
the macho WAR war bore is what leads many young guys to fight.and regret it.
Here is the view of one guy (a vet) i know on women in combat.
The Israelis tried, what they found was is a female was shot All the guys would rush to be a "hero" they all exposed themselves to enemy fire without anyone providing covering fire.
Point being men can fight Women can fight but modern man cannot (because of sexism) resist trying to help the wounded female .
so the long short of it women can't be in the military until we get rid of the men.
Interesting is McClaim and the war mongerers hope to sort of not have a war with Iran.
If another" war " starts will they draft women to combat roles.
This (a draft) is something no one wants and will be avoided at all costs because of this issue. will american DADS send their daughters to fight.
Webb may be sexist I have not heard his words but if his statement said women should not be frontline combat troops .I agree ,not in principle but in the reality . not because I'm sexist but because I do not want soldiers to die because they are distracted by their balls when in battle.
as for Obama being weak on defence.
yea I bet a better defence would be to rush around the world and piss everyone off.
Tell them what to do ,when , and how,
Invade other countries,ignore international opinion and law . tell. them we don't care how much they want to clean up "Were not"
we don't care about anyone but ourselves.
Thats a great message ,bound to be better for security.
I remember in the run up to this "war" when a muslim priest said"we will kill them if they come to our land"
American tv network CBN (which is aired on all main channels everyday at some time) had a piece with the picture of the priest and they had the audacity to say
There look we must fight these people they are a threat. WHAT TRASH you come to my hose looking for trouble you will get it.tahst all they said but so many americans lapped it up. wow we need to go get rid of them.
can you imagine americans in a little country with no big army to back them.
And you will still not get it.
Complain about this comment
And now for something completely different:
Obamanophobia!
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
Ed the moderators work in mysterious ways.
Complain about this comment
#49. OldSouth: "not too subtly, she (HRC) seems to be prepping Chelsea for her own run for office(s), to continue the dynasty in one form or another."
How can two terms in office for President Clinton qualify as a 'dynasty'? If a career in politics is what is meant, how can that be a bad thing? Public service in itself is an honorable calling.
Complain about this comment
re #62
Aquarizonagal,
Yep, it would be a hoot. And I think the chances of that happening are actually quite good.
Russ Feingold, anyone?
I know he's been mentioned once or twice, but he rarely makes the media's lists of favourites.
I think I'll borrow some money from Ed and put it on dear old Dana :)
Complain about this comment
aquarizonagal wrote:
Russet can never be replaced and certainly not by Katie Couric!
The whole VP thing would be a real hoot if Obama picked someone on no one's short list. We do live in interesting times.
I agree about Couric (definition of a dumb blond) that NBC is even considering Gergory, Mathews or Obermann shows how far down NBC is going.
Chris Wallace now is number1 for Sunday morning.
As far as VP, the only thing I am confident is that it won't be Clinton
Complain about this comment
Hmm, Obama is weak on defense...
And that after we have had 8 years of the "War President"... G.W. "Talk Loudly and wildly wave an expensive, ineffective stick" Bush.
After 8 years of "mission accomplished", orange alerts, "bring 'em on", "dead or alive", homeland stupidity duct tape and FEMA trailers... Does anyone feel any safer?
Maybe it is time to try somebody elses approach.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Salemdesign
I do enjoy your posts.
I ask why is it necessary to have a warmonger for a president?
What does 'weak on defense' really mean? Must we rattle our sabers every time we don't like what another country is doing? Sure we have protect ourselves but what happened to the art of diplomacy? I am not talking appeasement but maybe actually listening to what the other guy has to say.
Complain about this comment
Out of the mouths of babes....
Assalaam 'alaikum wa rahmatullaahi wa barakaatuhu
Peace, God's mercy and blessings be upon you
Complain about this comment
McShame to be investigated for dodgy election law behaviour.
Sounds like they've been studying at the same schools as the present Regime, and believe the rules are whatever theyn say they are....familiar?
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
Gore's endorsement
And who's got a patriotism problem?
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
One of my favorite presidents had a great take on international diplomacy:
"Walk softly, but carry a big stick"
The US has not been walking softly lately, and it's only our lone super-power status that lets us get away with it.
Obama is weak on defense, not because he wants an end to the war in Iraq (we all want that to happen), what makes him weak on defense is that his anti military attitude (common in the anti-war left) and poorly devised economic theory, would lobotomize and cripple our military in the process, send our economy plunging from the brink of recession into a full blown depression.
If the Anointed One becomes president, we would not have a big stick; Too many years of anti-military administrations will leave the US vulnerable to the fastest growing power in the world.
No, I'm not talking about militant Islamist terrorists; we have them on the run, for now.
When the Hillary's husband was president they foolishly treated the terrorists as common criminals, the Chinese don't play games with criminals, they execute them.
As much as the global war on terror has been miss-managed by Dubya, I'd rather the US continue to lead that fight than eventually have to give up our sovereignty to a committee in Beijing.
The question you have to ask yourself is: do you want your grandchildren speaking English and able to vote for their government, or speaking mandarin and have absolutely no choice in their government?
Complain about this comment
#72
Ed, once again you you are so right on. We do need to be reminded about why we are here!
Complain about this comment
Something weird seems to be happening to my posts again! :P [bleh!]
Complain about this comment
#75 reuben34g
I'm sorry I don't understand where you are coming from. While we need to heed those who have gone before us we also have to understand that we now live in a very different world. If my children want to speak Mandarin they can can take a class at their local community college. My grandchildren only speak something called 'wee' or is it 'wii?' My 'greats' mostly drool.
If you are worried about the future, consider this:
I think we are already well on our way to being sold to the highest bidder.
Complain about this comment
#74: can you tell us which anthem was being played , please?
Complain about this comment
A report in the G'n suggests that Obama might also be visiting these shores at some point in the not-too-distant future. Any light you can shed, Justin? (Not that I would be at all excited about such an occurrence)
Complain about this comment
Reuben (75),
"Obama is weak on defense, not because he wants an end to the war in Iraq (we all want that to happen), what makes him weak on defense is that his anti military attitude (common in the anti-war left) and poorly devised economic theory"
Chapter and verse, please on Obama's supposed "anti militery attitude"
As to his "poorly devised economic theory", his economic competence has been endorsed by no less than Paul Volcker and several other extremely well-qualified economic operators, but I suppose you know better and prefer the management techniques and theories which have created the present situation.
Salaaam, etc.
ed
Complain about this comment
Ed (81):
You are making the same mistake that Obama campaign has of dismissing McCain as simply a continuation of Dubya. Do you work for the Obama Campaign?
Judging from the differences he has had with Dubya he is not just a continuation of Bush policy, but a measured improvement over the steady arrogance displayed by the neo-cons who have high-jacked the GOP away from the Goldwater/Reagan conservative movement.
As the liberal democrat you seem to be, you probably can't tell the difference between republicans; they all look the same to you.
Complain about this comment
Hmm, so Obama is "anti-military."
One, I have not heard him say anything that is anti-military...
Two, I really cannot imagine anyone who has betrayed our military more than George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld.
Our military is subject to our elected and appointed civilian leadership. In my view, it is the responsibility of the civilian leadership to put our troops in harms way only when it is necessary to defend our national security. It is also their responsibility to provide sound strategy, planning, and the necessary equipment and logistics needed for our troops to accomplish their mission.
In George, Dick, and Donald we have three men who "had other priorities" when it was their turn to serve in the military and who have showed themselves to be incompetent, irresponsible, and callous in their leadership of the men and women that they have sent to war.
I think virtually everyone realizes at this point that the Iraq war was unnecessary. Saddam was a horrible despot but he represented no significant threat to the US, there were no WMDs, and there was absolutely no connection to 9/11. And I think most people now recognize that George, Dick, and Donald new all this in 2003 and embarked on the Iraq war anyway.
Even if you want to give them the benefit of the doubt and choose to believe that they did see some real threat to the US from Saddam...
Then surely you have to fault them for the absolute fiasco that resulted from their lack of any plan for the occupation and rebuilding of Iraq.
Having a Commander and Chief who is a blustering buffoon does not make us any safer... And having a pair of corrupt, arrogant, military dilettantes like Dick and Donald in charge does our soldier and marines no favors either.
We *were* attacked on 9/11... But not by Saddam.
If we had stayed focused on Afghanistan, we might have nailed Osama by now... At the very least 4,000 of our military personnel would alive today and tens of thousands would still have their arms and legs.
FDR was a bit of a lefty and certainly was weak on military experience but he was a capable and responsible civilian leader who did everything he could to make sure our military was used wisely and that they had the leadership and resources they needed to accomplish their mission.
Complain about this comment
Reuben (82),
Thanks for a complete non-answer.
Salem, (83),
Thanks for an excellent answer to Reuben.
Now, Reuben, have you got an answer as to why you think Obama is "anti military"?
Or why you consider his economic plans "poorly devised"?
Or even what about McCain's economic plans (if you can find any) you find preferable?
I thought not.
Slainte
ed
Complain about this comment
Salem design I would like to add to your list of the bush gang the name of ex-attorney general Alberto Gonzales.
the man that made the decision to make it all legal
.Well not legal, but at least stand up and tell everyone
"I say it is legal so until you can take this through the supreme court and after I have appealed that(which will be too late HA HA) it may prove otherwise but for now it is MY decision to say I like GW and I'm going to let him do what he wants.SO THERE. nah nah I'm the AG not you.""
and
Mc Croney's oil drilling plan is as bad as his economic plan and a sure sign that he does NOT understand the environmental crisis unfolding.
To think of sticking off shore oil platforms off a quake zone like California (oh and GW wants ANWAR) is irresponsible in the highest order.
I assume the fail safe connections for the platforms and pipelines that are at some stage going to probably get hit by some big unstoppable forces will probably not prove so safe.
They'll leak at the best of times .
He's a crazy short term thinker at a time when that is the last thing we need.
Most of the solutions to the world problems have been worked out by some one, but not by industry.
Strange they mostly get called Hippy , lefties etc.
Fish on righties.
Complain about this comment
the problem with drillling for oil in alaska, off the coast of Cqaliforniyay, ANYWHERE, is that it only postpones the consequences of the problem, rather than solve it. for the problem is the fact that the US - economy, culture, society - is built on cheap(ish), plentiful supplies of oil.
Which, given that you've known that this resource is a) finite and b) non-renewable, should have been a problem addressed a long, long time ago.
Complain about this comment
Please reconcile the anti-military label for Obama with his track record of support for many veterans issues.
He has supported veterans.
That support is a key ingredient to sustain a strong, professional military, and one that has been cruelly shortchanged over the last 8 years.
Complain about this comment
"During the interview, Mrs Obama also vowed to emulate first lady Laura Bush and be a model White House wife.
The 44-year-old mother-of-two said she was now "taking cues" from Mrs Bush, who is renowned for taking a back seat on political issues, correspondents say. " [BBC World]
Boy, this is getting really scarry.
At the rate Mrs. Obama's going she may even become proud to be an American for the first time in her life.
[Unless she doesn't become a First Lady]
Complain about this comment
Maybe McShame's Big Oil buddies have figured out a way to combine worldwide offshore drilling with a worldwide Star Wars Defense system.
What would that be called? BIG BROTHER OIL?!!!!!!!!!!!
Complain about this comment
Very well written and some very good points brought up for sure.
JT
http://www.FireMe.To/udi
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS