it's funny how with all of the family dysfuntion among the republican candidates...mistresses, multiple marriages, guliani's own kids not speaking to him, etc....hillary's supporters just assumed that any talk of family/home life was a reference to her home life w/ bill's philandering...interesting....not everything is about bill & hill's soap opera marriage...
and I think it really reflects more on the insecurities/fears that supposed supporters of the Clinton's have about them than it does about the Obama's. Think about this thing...someone mentions that a person should be abe to keep their home in order and Hilary's biggest supporters, without her name being mentioned, immediately assume it's a swipe at her. That is so facinating, esp. with all the dysfunction and divorce and serial adultery and sex/prostituion scandals and children not talking to/ supporting their own father's candidacy, etc. on the Republican side. It would seem an obvious reference to the supposed lack of family values among the 'family values' Republicans, but Hilary supporters immediately thought of their own candidate when the subject came up...very interesting.
I remember 4 yrs. ago everyone got sick of the debates. By the time they were up to 11 or 12, the candidates and the media were just going thru the motions and and trying not to do any damage. I don't know why they schedule so many? I can't bear the idea of WATCHING all these debates/forums, and I doubt you can find three people in the entire country who will. After a while it is boring and repetitive and like anything else, once it's over saturated, it loses it's impact and effectiveness. If its supposed to be a means of helping voters decide the best candidate(s), less may actually be more. The DNC needs to have maybe 1/2 dozen 3 hr. debates and have the various constituencies combine their efforts and have the candidates answer the ?'s related to that particular groups concerns 1hr for each group. ANYTHING is better than this death by a thousand debates torture that goes on every 4 yrs. Besides, IMO Al Gore and John Kerry clearly won every debate against GW Dumbass and what did it get them?
Hillary has done well at each debate, but I bet if you could be a fly on the wall, she would be more than happy to cut down on some of these things. I fact, I'm sure they all would.
thanks for your comment, but i downrated you becaust it is irrelevant to main thrust of the op which is about the CW of the beltway FP community ...i understand that some may want to distract from it by hijacking the diary and going off on a tangent but it's really beside the point
Of course, there is no way it could have been a slip of the tongue. Clearly the manga cum laude from Harvard is actually too stupid to be let out in public let alone run for POTUS. If you have to choose between a candidate slipping up and saying President instead of Prime Minister or one who helped authorize and promote the worst FP disaster in a generation, clearly, you want to go with the war mongerer.
Rudy Giuliani's daughter is supporting Barack Obama.
By Lucy Morrow Caldwell
Posted Monday, Aug. 6, 2007, at 11:49 AM ET
Click above to view Caroline Giuliani's Facebook profile
There's one vote that Rudy Giuliani definitely can't count on in his 2008 presidential bid: his own daughter's. According to the 17-year-old Caroline Giuliani's Facebook profile, she's supporting Barack Obama.
On her profile, she designates her political views as "liberal" and--until this morning--proclaimed her membership in the Facebook group "Barack Obama (One Million Strong for Barack)." According to her profile, she withdrew from the Obama group at 6 a.m. Monday, after Slate sent her an inquiry about it.
In what may be an effort to avoid public connection to her famous father, the future Harvard freshman and recent graduate of Trinity School in Manhattan uses a slight variation of her name on the Facebook site. But she didn't lock her profile, allowing any Facebook user with access to the Harvard or Trinity School networks (more than 42,000 people) to view her detailed profile. (As a Harvard student, I was able to see it.)
Ahhh, i get it now....more if the 'he's destroying the Democratic brand' BS...I tell ya what, if the CW of the Democratic foreign policy makers you seem to hold in such high regard is what led Hillary, Edwards, Kerry and too many other Democrats to vote for the IWR and in the case of Edwards actually co-sponser the g-d-mn bill, then I would suggest that THEY have done WAY MORE to harm the 'Democratic brand' than Obama EVER has or ever could...I respectfully suggest that your wariness should be reserved for those who actually voted for this war when they f--king knew better!
You sound like you are Susan Rice's agent or something. Is she upset that she's not getting more publicity? Does she want more TV face time or a higher profile in the campaign? What difference does it make who writes which memo? THEY ARE ALL WORKING TOWARD THE SAME OBJECTIVE, which, presumably is to help the guy they are working FOR to get ELECTED... which is ultimately a POLITICAL EXERCISE.
Neither Powers or any of the others on his team, whatever role they play, are there to prop up "the real historic achievements of Post-War Democratic foreign policy" or to add to their own PR. They have been hired to do a job which at the end of the day is supposed to get Barack Obama the nomination and ultimately elected president. If Ms. Rice or Ms. Powers or anyone else working with the campaign has some agenda other than getting their candidate to the White House, they perhaps need to get their ticket punched somewhere else.
At then end of the day, their efforts may not be successful, but none of them and none of us should be confused about the ulitmate goal of ANY of these candidates. THEY ALL want to be POTUS and EVERYTHING any of them do or say during the course of this campaign, is ultimately aimed toward that goal.
The only dishonest thing is the feigned outrage sometimes on display here and elsewhere ....
"If he did, why not draw on the advice of Susan Rice, an African-American woman and an Obama foreign policy advisor who actually has concrete and high level foreign policy experience in the Clinton Administration?"
I don't understand what you are saying here. Susan Rice, is one of several foreign policy experts on his team. He already draws on her advice.
"Besides Lippert, the core Obama group consists of three people who worked in President Bill Clinton's administration: former National Security Adviser Anthony Lake and former senior State Department officials Susan Rice and Gregory Craig. They meet regularly in Washington. Lake was the NSA adviser during Clinton's first term. Rice was the senior adviser on national security affairs for the Kerry-Edwards campaign in 2004, an assistant secretary of state for African affairs and a special assistant to the president at the National Security Council at the Clinton White House." __
The Power memo was a statement meant to reflect Obama's overall 'vision' re: foreign policy in contrast to the Washington CW that led us into Iraq, consequently...
"When it comes to ideas and vision, Obama has on tap Samantha Power. Early on his tenure as senator, Obama reached out to a variety of people in the foreign policy community and one was Power, the Pulitzer Prize winning author of A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide. She is a professor of foreign policy at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government.
After she met with Obama, she decided she wanted to work for him and spent part of 2005-2006 in his Senate office. While Lippert is an expert at nailing down details, Power provides big-picture advice for Obama with her deep background in human rights, failing states and genocide prevention."
Powers issued the memo because of all the FP experts he as advising him including Dr. Susan Rice, her role is to help shape the big picture. This was a big picture memo. You may not like the big picture, but that's what this memo was issued to reflect.