• on a comment on Sen. Judd Gregg To Commerce? over 5 years ago

    Thanks for making this point.  To call the Dept. of Commerce "substance free" tells me someone needed to learn what areas are part of Commerce*:

    Patent and Trademark Office
    Census Bureau
    National Institute of Standards & Technology - v. important to scientists
    International Trade Assn.

    ...and more.  As much as I want a 60th Dem. senator I want to be sure every Cabinet secretary is going to have a positive impact on their portfolio.

    *Bureau of Labor Statistics is not part of Commerce, it's part of the Dept. of Labor, btw. I use their stuff all the time.

  • on a comment on Open Thread over 5 years ago

    Really?  I don't consider stripping family planning funding "a minor concession."

  • Sorry, Gelber, not Geller.

  • comment on a post FL-Sen: State Senator Dan Gelber (D) Jumps In over 5 years ago

    How much will Gelber's volunteer work cost the taxpayers?

    I know more about Gelber than I care to:  Gelber was one of the FL Dems out in front whining about how an early primary was forced on them. In reality, he backed it along with other FL Dems, like Jeremy Ring and Steve Geller.

    "I didn't want to get in a game of chicken with the national Democratic Party, but candidly, I don't represent Howard Dean," said Rep. Dan Gelber, D-Miami Beach. "I represent a lot of people who would like to be in the primary journey as more than just potential contributors." (The St. Pete Times, February 9, 2007)

    I hope Geller's run is a fail.

  • comment on a post Open Thread over 5 years ago

    Seriously, if you're smart don't come.  Stay home and watch it on your television.  It'll be the best seat in the house.

    The city is going to be crowded and impossible to navigate easily with all the street and bridge closures.  Metro is expecting things to be so bad they're discouraging riders from making train transfers at Metro Center.

    I was going to try to score an invite to Gov. Dean's farewell party on Saturday night.  As much as I love the guy, I'll send him a card instead.

    None of the locals I know are staying.  As far as they're concerned we have a 4 day weekend.  If you insist on being here read this first:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/graphic/2009/01/07/GR2009010703911. html

  • comment on a post Another View on Kaine at DNC over 5 years ago

    I see the Kaine pick as a fine one and have few quarrels with it.

    As a resident of Virginia, I have a few.  

    The GOP has already hit Kaine for being partisan in accepting the job but more important, a divided General Assembly is convening for a 45 day session that will largely focus on cutting the state budget.  Kaine needs to show that he's not going to drop the ball on this and really, I don't think he can.  

    For example, Kaine announced last month that he would attempt to increase the cigarette tax to help the state address a $3 billion budget shortfall; it only took minutes for House Speaker William Howell (R) to reject the idea.  

    Howell has a 6 seat majority in the House of Delegates that gives him the power to determine what bills get heard, control the floor debate and manipulate the chamber's rules to his advantage.  Which he has done to kill much of Kaine's agenda last year.

    So while you think Kaine will be okay as chairman of the DNC, Virginians ought to be thinking long and hard about how good it is.  After two consecutive Democratic governors, the GOP is going to be looking to recapture the governorship.  Then with Terry McAuliffe deciding to go after the Democratic nomination will muck up the primaries for sure.

    If Kaine is expected to do is some fundraising and be little more than Obama's representative within the party structure, then he'll do well.

  • Then why was the ad above featuring Stevens stumping and vouching for Palin mysteriously scrubbed from Palin's website?

    Given the amount of material scrubbed from Obama's site during the campaign, I wouldn't ask this question if I were you.

  • on a comment on My Thoughts On Biden over 5 years ago

    And she knows Obama far, far better than Todd ever will.

  • comment on a post Ambinder: McCain Has a White Male Problem over 5 years ago

    Actually, McCain doesn't have a male problem.  Steve Lombardo writing over at Pollster.com says

    Given his struggles to woo older voters away from Hillary Clinton, it is somewhat surprising that Obama is in a statistical dead heat with McCain among voters 65 and older (he actually leads among those ages 55 and older). With Obama continuing to carry all voters under 35 by the wide margin that propelled him to his primary victory, it's natural to wonder where McCain's support comes from.

    The answer is middle-aged and older men. The only age/gender categories where McCain leads? Men aged 35-54 (McCain + 10), 55-64 (McCain +7) and 65 and older (McCain +17). Of course in the past these cohorts have been the most likely to make it to the polls on Election Day.

  • comment on a post Obama's VP over 6 years ago

    OMG Jerome, let's hope it's not Tim Kaine.  And I say that as a Virginia voter.  

    Kaine was elected largely because of Mark Warner's incredible coattails. And standing next to Jerry Kilgore, he could do no wrong.

    Kaine's a war hawk, he's anti-gay rights, and his views on choice are closer to George Bush's.  And the only thing I remember about his response to the 2006 SOTU was how boring it was compared to Jim Webb's the following year.

    Also, he has zero foreign policy experience (unless Obama is relying on Kaine's Peace Corp experience and Spanish language skills).  As if the Democrats aren't already tagged as being weak in that area.

    The only reason Obama would pick Tim Kaine is Kaine won't, heaven forbid, potentially overshadow him.

  • comment on a post Barack Obama Responds over 6 years ago

    Obama just insulted your intelligence and you're so happy he "listened" to you and took your concerns "seriously."  He backtracked on his promise to filibuster any bill that contained retroactive immunity and the best some of you can do is "Well I can't expect to agree with him all the time."  

    But I do promise to listen to your concerns, take them seriously, and seek to earn your ongoing support to change the country.

    How exquisitely patronizing. I'm so sure he does.

    I do so with the firm intention -- once I'm sworn in as President -- to have my Attorney General conduct a comprehensive review of all our surveillance programs, and to make further recommendations on any steps needed to preserve civil liberties and to prevent executive branch abuse in the future.

    Any politician who won't listen to you when he needs your vote is definitely not going to listen to you after he obtains the office he is seeking. What happens if he's not sworn in as president? Do you think McCain is going to do anything? We're stuck with this bill because Obama didn't have the balls to do something about it now.

    A secret hold is a parliamentary procedure within the Standing Rules of the Senate within the United States Senate that allows one or more Senators to prevent a motion from reaching a vote on the Senate floor. Current Senate rules allow the hold to be only temporarily anonymous.

    What is this? A senator can put a hold on a bill?  You mean his buddy Tom Coburn didn't clue him in?

    It would have been better if he had said nothing.

  • The only time I'm giving money to the DNC is if I get a mailer/message that says "This is the ad about John McCain we want to put on the air" then I'll send some money.  Obama doesn't need my financial help.

  • I'd like to know who the "you" in this "movement" is and what it's a movement for.

    It's not you.  It's probably not me either, for that matter.  And iirc, it's a movement for Change and Hope.  Weren't you listening? /snark

    Pouffy has been doing this so long he can phone it in and try to sound genuine.

    It's not a movement.  No campaign with such a rigid top-down structure can ever be called a movement IMO.

  • comment on a post On Dobson from the Matthew 25 Network. over 6 years ago

    Perhaps you haven't seen it diaried here because no one takes Dobson seriously enough to do it.  The guy distorts the Bible to support his twisted version of reality.  

    Nor do I care enough about Obama to work up the energy to refute Dobson because to do so would only give Dobson credibility he hasn't earned and doesn't deserve.

    "I think he's deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own worldview, his own confused theology," Dobson said.

    Insert something about goose & gander here.

  • comment on a post Obama Hits Back over 6 years ago

    Here's an excerpt you conveniently omitted from your write-up:

    As we discussed in the meeting, we face serious challenges to our security. Our nation is fighting two wars. There are terrorists who are determined to kill as many Americans as they can. The world's most dangerous weapons risk falling into the wrong hands. And that is why the single greatest priority of my presidency will be doing anything and everything that I can to keep the American people safe.

    So this is his greatest priority.  Not universal health care.  Not job creation.  Not helping people who are losing their homes through foreclosure. Not renewable energy. Does his definition of "greatest single priority" change depending on the audience?

    Over the past year, Senator Obama has often said that he welcomes a debate on national security with Republicans because "that's a debate I'll win."

    I doubt it:

    We need more resources in Afghanistan. I have been arguing for this since 2002, when I said that we should finish the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban instead of going into Iraq. I have called for at least two additional combat brigades to support our efforts there. I have also called for at least $1 billion in non-military assistance each year.

    Would that $1 bn be going toward a Contractor Full Employment Act?

    More war, different country.  I thought he was all about change.  How does this qualify as change?  And "since 2002"?  When he was in the IL Senate and had no responsibility or impact? If he's so damned concerned about Afghanistan, why didn't he call a single oversight hearing of his subcommittee, where he can have input and achieve change, but where he has been noted only for his complete absence.  

    Why must we wait for leadership from this person only when he becomes president?  I just don't trust him.


Advertise Blogads