• on a comment on Netroots: Do they Matter? over 5 years ago

    In politics money is power and we have money and are willing to donate to worthy candidates.

    Before liberal blogsites, how often did you donate to a congressional or senatorial candidate that wasn't in your own state?  If you are like me, you didn't know which races were tight or which candidates could use a little boost.

    As long as we are able to raise millions to help candidates get elected we will have power.

  • comment on a post Yes, Obama is a centrist on foreign affairs over 5 years ago

    I hear more from the talking heads and the rightwing media about how upset the progressives are about Obama's cabinet choices than I ever hear from actual progressives.  Most of us have learned that when we second guess him we end up realizing he was right all along.  So now we just assume he knows what he is doing.

  • You are just posting here to avoid working on your taxes?

    I know we've given you a pretty hard time this year but still we're all under the same big tent, right?  

    BTW:  From the get go you and I had a fundamental disagreement.  I supported Obama partly because I didn't think Hillary had a chance to win the general election.  Of course, there's no way of knowing if I was right about Hillary but we know for sure you were wrong about Obama.

  • A la Jimmy Carter?  Obama is not postering, he's picking the best team he can find.  He will set the policy/strategy and they will implement it.

    Unless Obama were to leave gaping holes in the Democratic Senate and House, if he wants people who have some political clout as well as the ability to hit the ground running, the Clinton folks are his best bet.  Hillary would have been drawing from the same bunch so no difference there.

    Contrary to what you keep repeating, Obama supporters do not dislike Hillary Clinton and most of us were Bill Clinton supporters in the 90's.  So we have no trouble with Obama using Clinton people.

  • comment on a post Yes, Obama is a centrist on foreign affairs over 5 years ago

    Obama is not an ideologue, he's a pragmatist.  I've been saying that all along.  His policies will be workable and be based on the best interests of the country.

    He is choosing a cabinet of experts in their respective fields.  Just as his campaign advisors were experts.  

    In my mind what defines a progressive is someone who is not an ideologue but who will get the job done.  To me Obama is good example of a  progressive.

  • comment on a post Franken vs Coleman recount notes over 5 years ago

    Does anyone know what happens if Franken (or the other guy) wins in the end by like 5 votes or even 1 vote?  Is the recount considered final anyway or will there be a runoff election?

  • comment on a post Open Thread over 5 years ago

    Obama is not the President.  He's not even a Senator anymore.  So he can't bail anybody out even if he wanted to.

    He will have something ready when he gets into office so he can take quick action.  He's one who takes measured action, a planner.

  • I loved the image of the guy hitting Bush's picture with a shoe.  I've always found the Iraqi's insult of hitting with a shoe amusing anyway.

  • comment on a post A DFH's Map of DC over 5 years ago

    I shall bookmark this one for future reference.  

    It is the government's job to regulate industries for the common good, particularly over the long term, against the companies' shareholders who will always insist on short term profits. (I learned that in PoliSci class in college.)  It's seems so obvious yet we have an entire political party that sides with the shareholders every time.

  • comment on a post AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State over 5 years ago

    I agree.  Obama has completely ignored all the wailing and gnashing of teeth from both sides throughout his campaign and transition.  He will do what he thinks is right for the country.

  • Hillary was upstaged by Bill on the political scene but she has plenty of her own abilities.  

  • It's not that but she could have either a conflict of interest or a weakened negotiating position depending on who her husband has been making deals with for his foundation.  Assuming they work all that out she will be fine.

  • SoS is way better for her.  Ted Kennedy can handle healthcare without her but we need her on the international scene.

  • Thanks CG.  I had seen it but didn't read it because the headline told me all I needed to know.

    I concede the point.  There are Hillary haters who write articles about how horrible she is.  Guess they didn't stick in my mind because I don't read the articles.

    Personally, I think she would be excellent as SoS.  She's smart and savvy and would be a tough negotiator.  Exactly what we need right now.  It's an opportunity for her to really shine.

  • on a comment on Backing Waxman over Dingell over 5 years ago

    Personally, I loathe Lieberman.  And if I were in the caucus, I would have voted him out of the Chair.  But someone once said to me that you can't fight every fight, you have to pick your battles.  I think Obama has chosen to fight the policy battles for now.

    Lieberman can use his final term in the Senate to try to repair his reputation or he can go down in flames.  We'll see which happens but in any case, the slimy, scheming liar won't be re-elected.


Advertise Blogads