Obama in 30 seconds

MoveOn's having a contest. Kind of cool. Check it out. Read More......

The Republican business model strikes again

Pathetic. This is really supposed to be news...for the better? If you listened to Republicans talk you would think they actually liked the free market but if you believed them, you would be sadly mistaken.

Qwest Communications International Inc. on Thursday introduced DSL plans with faster download speeds, including one that is the fastest DSL service from a major U.S. phone company.

Qwest is charging $104.99 per month for a download speed of 20 megabits per second. For 12 mbps, it is charging $51.99 per month. The prices are $5 lower when combined with local phone service.

Compare this "great" offer to what I just signed in France, which we all know hates choice and hates the free market, according to the GOP. For €53 per month I receive a 100 mbps internet connection plus phone calls throughout Europe and North America plus TV channels. In local terms for local buyers one euro is one dollar but even with the terrible exchange rate this is a steal compared to the business friendly market in the US. The Republicans only care about giving business everything they want, always at the expense of consumers. It's hard to believe the GOP could do so much damage to the previously competitive US market. Read More......

Looking ahead: Tickets, please

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told Larry King last night that she was not in favor of a Democratic ticket pairing Obama and Clinton:

"I think first of all the candidate, whoever he or she may be, should choose his or her own vice presidential candidate," said Pelosi, who will chair the Democratic National Convention in Denver in August. "I think that's appropriate. That's where you would see the comfort level on not only how to run, but how to govern the country.

"And there's plenty of talent to go around to draw upon for a good, strong ticket.

In that vein, Al Giordano's got his Democratic VP predictions up over at The Field:

1. Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius
2. Virginia Governor Tim Kaine
3. New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson
4. Delaware Senator Joe Biden
5. Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer
6. Massachusetts Senator John Kerry

While the last name made me laugh out loud, Giordano offers up the pros and cons of each, and I did find contemplating his picks a nice little afternoon distraction. It kept me focused on the primary but in a pleasant, there will be a next step soon, kind of way. Read More......

Good question: Why hasn't John McCain denounced Tony Zirkle's appearance before the Nazis?

Given all the crazies in the GOP, John McCain could spend the next six months denouncing most of his supporters. Instead, McCain is trying to exploit the tenuous link Obama has to William Ayers. (Thanks to team Clinton for getting that one out there.)

Okay, if McCain wants to play that way, we can play. As the new leader of the GOP, McCain is now responsible for everyone in the GOP. All of them. We already saw that McCain can't control (or doesn't want to control) the North Carolina GOP.

Fired Up Missouri asks the question about McCain and Tony Zirkle.

Normally, no one would ever try to tie a candidate to the Nazis. But Republican Zirkle did it himself. Yes, he did. It happened earlier this week and in the news about the PA primary, we almost missed it. You see, Zirkle is the Republican candidate for Congress from Indiana who showed up to celebrate Hitler's birthday with a bunch of Neo-Nazis. Not kidding.

So, using McCain's own standards, it's fair game to ask what he thinks of Tony Zirkle. This didn't happen forty years ago, it happened this week. Do the neo-Nazi/White supremacists have a place in the McCain/Zirkle GOP? It's a serious question. No outrage from McCain has surfaced yet. Now, the hard part is getting any of McCain's BFFs in the media to ask him the question. Remember, the reporters who travel with McCain all know he's got a fierce, volatile temper so they don't want to piss him off. Read More......

In 2000, Clinton's mantra was "play by the rules." In 2008, it's "change, break and ignore the rules."

Back in the day, Bill Clinton thought if you played by the rules, you could get ahead:

"The main idea here is still the old idea of the American dream ... that if you work hard and play by the rules, you ought to have a decent life and a chance for your children to have a better one, " he said.

Leave it to Team Clinton to make playing by the rules an out-of-date concept. The new main idea behind his wife's campaign is that you change, ignore or break the rules when you're losing and screw over the candidate who has played by the rules. (Then, you do the easy part of convincing the gullible pundits that the rules didn't really matter.) Read More......

Why can't Hillary close the deal?

John Cole via Dkos:

If Barack is such a bad candidate, and he is so unelectable, and it is such a bad idea to have him as the Democratic nominee, why can’t Hillary beat him?

Why is she behind him in every conceivable metric? Why is she behind in pledged delegates? Why is she behind in the popular vote (and don’t insult my intelligence by trying to pass that sheer nonsense the morons at certain pro-Clinton blogs are lapping up)? Why are super delegates flocking to Obama, while Hillary has picked up only a handful in the past few months. Why has she won fewer states? Why is she trumpeting her narrow delegate pickup in PA, when it is less than the number of net delegates Obama picked up in a variety of other states? Why is she behind in fund raising? Why was she unable to turn her double digit lead a year ago into any actual primary wins? Why, with her starting financial advantage and name recognition, was she held to a tie on Super Tuesday?

Why to those questions and a hundred more like them. If your candidate is so much better, why is Obama kicking her ass? Why?

So, let's just do a quick review of some reasons why Hillary can't -- and won't -- close the deal. Today alone we found out from Rep. James Clyburn, the top ranking African American in the U.S. House that:

there appeared to be an almost "unanimous” view among African-Americans that Mr. and Mrs. Clinton were “committed to doing everything they possibly can to damage Obama to a point that he could never win.”

And, we found out that Hillary lost a top fundraiser, Gabriel Guerra-Mondragon, who was appointed U.S. Ambassador to Chile by Bill Clinton:

Among the reasons for Guerra-Mondragon to defect, according to one informed source, was he was uneasy with the tone of the Clinton campaign and was beginning to worry about what this would mean for the general election.

It's unclear if this defection will lead to others; the Clinton camp has been particularly effective at getting folks to keep their powder dry. For Obama, this comes at a time when his campaign is trying to re-convince insiders that the math indicates he has the nomination virtually wrapped up. In addition, Guerra-Mondragon's defection could serve as a tipping point with some key Hispanic Democratic leaders that Obama is ready to start making a bigger effort to court Hispanics.

And we can also add in the fact that Clinton is "polarizing" candidate who has "the highest unfavorable rating for any presidential nominee in recent history."

No wonder she can't close the deal. She never will be able to close the deal. It's over. Read More......

When allies don't act like it

Being able to access a vast wealth of opinions, knowledge, and analysis by all kinds of people from all kinds of backgrounds and perspectives is an astonishing benefit of being engaged with blogs. Bloggers, commenters, and even lurkers all help create vibrant communities around all kinds of issues and events, and that's been an especially significant boon to progressives. In particular, the sense of camaraderie, of shared perspectives and aims, forges connections for people who might otherwise feel isolated or silenced, and helps us work together to discuss and act on important things.

There can be, though, a darker side to this, an ugly side. A part of the conversation where putative allies turn on each other, where people think the anonymity -- or even just the physical separation -- of this medium makes it okay to treat people with contempt and with sneering disrespect. I'm not even talking about ideological opponents, though with few exceptions they deserved to be engaged as human beings too -- I'm talking about friends, allies, colleagues. Part of it is the primary, which has raised long-simmering issues around race and gender, not to mention the inevitable choosing of sides involved in any intra-party contest, but I have to admit I've been shocked, especially in recent weeks, at how personal people make some of this -- not just for themselves, but in attacking others. This isn't some endorsement Broderism "civility" that boils down to no cursing and no challenging the status quo, because the status quo could use some shaking up and if you want to curse people out, that's your business. But I hope it will be a wakeup call to a person or two who might take a second to realize that nobody's opinion or experience, no matter how strongly held or deeply felt, grants the right to be a jerk. Tactics matter.

I understand emotions run high, and that's not only understandable, it's warranted and often beneficial. How those emotions are directed, though, can be the difference between engagement and some combination of dismissal and hurt. Within the progressive community -- and within our many sub-communities -- it seems like we're alienating each other at an alarming rate. And I should say, this isn't about me personally -- sure, I get my share of hate mail; you don't get to write a book talking about government failures in war and intelligence without being called an asshole, a liar, a terrorist sympathizer, and -- the one that, I admit, stings no matter whom it comes from -- a traitor. But at least I have the small comfort of knowing that this bile comes from people who consider me an enemy, rather than from within a community I consider myself a part of.

Everybody has a right to express their opinion, but there's no right to be listened to. That has to be earned. Nobody is born with it, and no matter how oppressed or marginalized or upset anybody is, the moral high ground isn't conferred by identity but by thought and argument and reason. And if you feel like nobody listens to you, the fastest way to make that a self-fulfilling prophecy is to lash out. Again, tactics matter, and bullying and intimidation are unacceptable means even for justifiable ends -- especially within communities. People are going to screw up, and people are going to disagree, and it would be nice if progressives of all kinds gave each other a little bit of leeway, a little bit of the benefit of the doubt. Working through those moments sure as hell is better than destroying each other over issues, even -- and perhaps particularly -- those that engender passion. At the end of the day, after all, we're all we have. Read More......

If a "polarizing" candidate has "the highest unfavorable rating for any presidential nominee in recent history," how does that enhance electability?

In all the media frenzy about the Pennsylvania primary, the Clinton campaign keeps raising the issue of "electability" for the general election. That is forcing an examination of her own electablity issues. And, there are plenty. Elizabeth Drew put it quite succinctly:

Hillary Rodham Clinton is such a polarizing figure that everyone who ever considered voting Republican in November, and even many who never did, will go to the polls to vote against her, thus jeopardizing Democrats down the ticket – i.e., themselves, or, for party leaders, the sizeable majorities they hope to gain in the House and the Senate in November.

Hard to argue with that.

David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager, did an interview with National Journal that pretty much blows away Clinton's electability argument.

Q: Well, you've talked here about why he is electable. Obviously, the Clinton campaign and Clinton herself are making strong arguments about why he is not electable, pointing to this base question that I just asked you, pointing to the fact that she's done better in the big states. What kinds of arguments are you going to be making to superdelegates about her electability?

Plouffe: Well, let me just on the big state question -- you know, they point to California, New York, Massachusetts. We are going to carry those states comfortably. Yes, she did win Ohio and Pennsylvania in the primary. If you look at polling matchups of McCain versus Obama and Clinton in Pennsylvania, we perform roughly equal. We've won a lot of big battleground states -- Colorado, Wisconsin, Washington state, Iowa, Virginia. North Carolina, by the way, is going to be a big battleground state in 12 days, so I guess by their definition they need to win there. So this is kind of a ridiculous argument that, you know, they are trying to latch on to.

I mean, I think her electability issues are the following: she's got a high unfavorable rating. It would be the highest unfavorable rating for any presidential nominee in recent history. Fairly or not, the majority of voters don't trust Senator Clinton. Those two points are related, obviously: her unfavorable rating, and the sense that voters do not find her honest or trustworthy. And I do think she has limited appeal with independent voters. A Democratic nominee has to be competitive with independent voters. Ideally you'd win them. John McCain has unique appeal with independent voters. Senator Clinton has difficulty matching up with him with independent voters. She's got less appeal to Republicans, and I also think she's not going to create the kind of turnout that we will in the African-American community and with all voters under 40.

So I think she's got real limited range here, and we think that we will be just as strong as she will be in the core battleground states like Pennsylvania, like Ohio. But the question is, in Iowa, in Wisconsin, in New Mexico, in Nevada -- these are states that have always been very close, that a Democratic nominee has to carry. And we're doing much better than she is against John McCain.

Those are some pretty intense electability issues to overcome. So, all the pundits who are drooling over Hillary's win in Pennsylvania should take a deep breath. Most superdelegates know what they'll be getting from a Clinton candidacy. That's why many superdelegates didn't jump on the Clinton bandwagon despite the enormous pressure. Read More......

Cliff's Corner

The Week That Was 4/25/08

Another week more preposterousness to report,

I was heartened when George Stephanopoulos--for all the heat he has taken over the ABC debate--asked John McCain a question on This Week this past Sunday that I have been waiting to hear the media ask the "straight-talking," mavericking, reforming, BBQ-providing, demi-God for a long time now. To paraphrase, Stephanopoulos wondered why if government health care has been good enough to talcum the two cheeks where Mark Salter's lips lie permanently wedged his entire life, it is not good enough for the rest of us peasants.

That's right, John McCain, the son of an Admiral, has has his healthcare taken care of by the government for the last seven decades at taxpayer expense. Yet, when asked this question he was only able to muster a lame joke in response recounting the years he was being taken care of in a different country (where else but the Hanoi Hilton--which McCain wields like Giuliani did 9/11). Let's face it, McCain can even be more annoying to listen to when talking about himself than serial-hack Lanny Davis after inhaling a weather-balloon of helium.

Especially when King McCain doesn't even feel compelled to explain why he voted against the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), so that countless children would lose the very government health care on which he has relied upon long enough that diapers have become bookends.

This wasn't the first time I heard this question, mind you. It was brought up to me when I was speaking to a real straight-talking vet, Paul Hackett, for my book The Real McCain. But it was the first time the media brought it up, that I am aware of. And it shouldn't be the last.

As for the rest of us, just remember this the next time McCain burps up some silly charge of elitism and spews it towards a Democrat, while lounging at one of the 8 homes he inherited by treating his first wife like a old Buick while cruising off with that hot, new, rich young thing named Cindy. Or, perhaps, when the old codger goes on another fun-filled Barneys bender.

Cliff Schecter is the author of The Real McCain: Why Conservatives Don't Trust Him And Why Independent's Shouldn't. It is only $10, and for that low-low price you can help defeat McCain and keep Cliff's kid in diapers--a pretty good deal for all. Read More......

Consumer confidence hits 26 year low

Each day I wonder how things could possibly get worse, but they do. The complete mismanagement by Bush and the GOP is all catching up with the US. Why would anyone think that a third Bush term (with McCain) would be a good idea?

"More consumers reported that their personal financial situation had worsened than any time since 1982 due to high fuel and food prices as well as shrinking income gains and widespread reports of declines in home values," The Reuters/University of Michigan Surveys of Consumers said in a statement.

The report showed its reading on one-year inflation expectations climbed to 4.8 percent -- the highest since a similar reading in October 1990 -- from 4.3 percent in March.

Read More......

Senator Evan Bayh: Do as I say, not as I do

Senator Evan Bayh from Indiana advised several Indiana congressman not to endorse in the presidential race. According to Bayh, they should wait for the results of the primary. Yet, Bayh didn't abide by his own standard. He endorsed Clinton months ago:

With his state's critical primary in two short weeks, Democratic Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh -- a strong supporter of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton -- has been leaning on the Hoosier State's freshman House members to stay on the sidelines rather than endorse Sen. Barack Obama.

Obama is hoping to win the outspoken support of Reps. Brad Ellsworth, Baron Hill and Joe Donnolly. He campaigned for them ahead of their 2006 Democratic sweep, and their districts sprawl across the southern half and central heartland of Indiana -- white, working class areas that favor Clinton. Even a good showing in those districts could be enough for Obama to take the state, given his strength in Indianapolis and the largely African American north near Chicago.

In an interview today, Bayh said he has appealed to Ellsworth, Hill and Donnolly to stay out of the race until their voters have spoken. Clinton will take all three of their districts, he said.

"Why should they get crosswise with some of their friends if they really don't need to?" asked Bayh, perhaps the most powerful elected Democrat in the state.

Reps. Ellsworth, Hill and Donnolly should consider the source. Bayh didn't take his own advice, why should they?

This is such a Clintonian move by Bayh. Clearly, he's been around them for a long time. In fact, they've all had leadership roles in the Democratic Leadership Council -- and Hillary still does. Read More......

Oil does it again, goes to $119.37

Hillary's saber rattling with Iran has helped push oil prices up along with the normal daily issues. How much more misery does she think average Americans can withstand? With a $100 million in the bank, she might not notice the price of oil but everyone else does. Do we really need this kind of aggravation? Read More......

What's 740 pounds of dynamite and a submachine gun between friends?

I can see the ads now:

Hillary's husband pardoned a pair of cop-killer terrorists.

Sure, it was never proven that the people Bill Clinton pardoned were actually cop killers (they were "only" terrorists). I mean, yeah, they were found unloading 740 pounds of dynamite and a submachine gun from their car, and they were members of a domestic terrorist group that bombed the US Congress, the Pentagon, and the State Department, and also killed two cops and a security guard - but it was never really PROVEN that they DIRECTLY killed the two cops and the security guard, so no harm no foul, right? Boy, when Hillary said she embraces America's gun culture, she wasn't kidding.

Hillary now says that she knows nothing of her husband's pardon. That's a lie, and one of the more egregious ones coming from Hillary of late, and that's saying something. The case of the two terrorists Bill pardoned is from New York. It was a huge controversy right when Hillary was running to be the Senator from NY. We're to believe that the Clinton political people didn't bother telling Hillary that they were thinking of pardoning a pair of terrorists from the state she was trying to represent as a Senator? Right. She's lying, again.

Putting Hillary's serial lies aside for a moment, what's most troubling about this story is that Hillary now knows that her top surrogate, the man who will be her co-president, is soft on terrorists, and Hillary doesn't seem to care. I mean, when a top Obama surrogate called Hillary a "monster," Hillary went crazy and the Obama surrogate was forced to resign. But now Hillary's top surrogate embraces actual monsters, and sets them free while America is at war against terrorists, and Hillary shrugs and confesses ignorance (not exactly the answer of someone who's "fully vetted"). She's not ignorant now. Now she knows the story. So why hasn't she done anything about it? Imagine had Obama kept his top surrogate after it was revealed that the surrogate freed two cop-killing terrorists - oh I'm sorry, two terrorists who were members of an organization that killed two cops and bombed numerous federal buildings. Oh the fun Hillary (and the media) would have with that story. And just imagine the fun the Republicans will have in the fall, branding us as the party that has more sympathy with cop-killing terrorists than with the widows of the cops they killed (you know the GOP will get those women in TV ads that will be the war on terror version of Willy Horton). It's time that Hillary showed Democrats, and all of America, that she isn't soft on crime, soft on terrorism, soft on cop-killers. Because as it stands, her indifference to the death of two police officers, and the bombing of US federal buildings, while America is at war is writing the Republicans' own script for their attack ads in the fall.

What's worse, Hillary had no problem criticizing Bill's offer to pardon even more terrorists in 1999 (what is it with him?), but now when it comes to people who kill cops and bomb federal buildings, Hillary is mum about pardoning their members:

Although Hillary Clinton publicly disputed her husband's offer of clemency to Puerto Rican nationalists in 1999 because they had not sufficiently renounced violence, she is not known to have objected to his freeing of Rosenberg and Evans in 2001.

Doesn't look good. And not sounding awfully vetted. Read More......

Limbaugh calls for riots in Denver at Dem Convention

Hey SuperDelegates, having fun yet? This is the kind of talk you're going to increasingly get if you let Hillary continue this charade in her effort to destroy our party. We've now got Rush Limbaugh calling for riots in the streets of Denver (something that should get him investigated by the police, the FBI and the Secret Service, and I also have a suspicion there must be an FCC rule or two about this as well - tell me his stations can't be fined millions for inciting violence - who's going to file the complaint?) In any case, expect more of the same, the longer the SuperDelegates let this ridiculous farce drag out. Had they nipped this in the bud weeks ago, we wouldn't now be talking about riots in Denver. It's only going to get worse and worse the longer they let this continue. Cowardice comes with a price. Read More......

Republicans fight against food safety

Democrats are taking action and demanding basics such as mandatory food recalls by government and not food producers but the GOP remains happy with the old system despite countless food issues, sickness and even death. Of course food safety is going to cost money but so do hospital charges when people are sick.

The GOP and their do-nothing allies in business will always complain about costs but if they can't afford $2000 per site, there's a serious problem with their business model. Are they suggesting then that it's OK for thousands of American individuals to spend this kind of money at the hospital when they are rushed for salmonella or e.coli sickness? This is what they are suggesting and with the recession plus skyrocketing health care costs, the GOP is simply asking for too much out of average Americans.

In addition to the mandatory FDA recall powers, Congresswoman DeGette continues to push for traceability so that instead of shutting down all producers (such as spinach farmers) consumers and business alike will know where there are problems. Again, this seems like practical, common sense policy which is good news for everyone.

Shouldn't consumers be able to trust the food they are buying and shouldn't business want to avoid being dragged down because of the failure of other businesses? The only concern as the linked headline suggests, is whether business and the GOP will help consumers or ignore them, yet again. Read More......

Blacks think Hillary trying to destroy Obama in 2008 so she can run in 2012

Welcome to the end of African-American support for the Democratic party. From the NYT:

Mr. Clyburn added that there appeared to be an almost “unanimous” view among African-Americans that Mr. and Mrs. Clinton were “committed to doing everything they possibly can to damage Obama to a point that he could never win.”

Clyburn is the 3rd ranked Democrat in the US House. He says a lot of blacks think Hillary is trying to destroy Obama's chances in 2008, she's trying to make him lose this year in the general election, so that she can run again in 2012.

I've been wondering for a while if the SuperDelegates' fear of taking a stand is greater than their fear of Hillary forcing blacks to leave the Democratic party. This article is scary as hell. It means the black community is starting to see something larger, more nefarious, in what Hillary is doing. As well it should. Hillary has demonized the black church and black pastors, and her surrogates never miss a chance to remind people that Obama is b-l-a-c-k. And now we're seeing that her race-baiting isn't going unnoticed among African-Americans. Again from the NYT:

In an interview with The New York Times late Thursday, Mr. Clyburn said Mr. Clinton’s conduct in this campaign had caused what might be an irreparable breach between Mr. Clinton and an African-American constituency that once revered him. “When he was going through his impeachment problems, it was the black community that bellied up to the bar,” Mr. Clyburn said. “I think black folks feel strongly that that this is a strange way for President Clinton to show his appreciation.”

And let's not fool ourselves. This is only a smattering of the (rightful) anger we're going to see if the SuperDelegates decide to join leagues with the Clintons, overrule the people, and steal the nomination from Obama, the candidate who just so happens to be black. Kiss the black vote goodbye for a very long time.

It's funny, you know. The GOP has been trying to steal the black vote away from the Democrats for years. And Hillary and Bill are on the verge of accomplishing it in - what? - only four months? They really are good. Read More......

Friday Morning Open Thread

Good morning.

Almost the weekend. Some week, huh?

Seems to me that the post-Pennsylvania euphoria started to wear off yesterday -- and the basic facts started to take hold again. Taegan Goddard summed it up:

Therefore, despite her win in the Keystone State, the results have in fact made it less likely Clinton can win.

Considering that most polls predict Obama should win North Carolina by a healthy margin and both campaigns think Indiana will be close, the chances of a Clinton victory are actually lower than ever.

Back to reality.

Start threading the news.... Read More......

Massachusetts foreclosures up 140% since March '07

If only Massachusetts was the only state to see such figures. Ignoring pesky oversight issues was definitely the way to go. In fact, the financial industry is still thankful that Congress is letting them slide and not questioning the bailout for Wall Street. See how well industry can self-regulate? Charles Prince, Stanley O'Neal and Angelo Mozilo really appreciate the lack of serious action. Democrats are completely missing the issue if they continue their inaction. Enough of the talk, time to take some action.

Almost 1,200 Massachusetts properties were seized by mortgage companies in March, an increase of more than 140 percent from the number of foreclosures in March 2007, according to data from Warren Group.

Foreclosures during the first three months of the year topped 2,800, also up about 140 percent over the same period last year. Massachusetts is on pace to shatter the previous record for the most foreclosures in a year, set in 1992.

Read More......

Chinese weapons ship heading back to China

Great news. Gambling on the long term future of Robert Mugabe is a losing bet. China already is unpopular in Zimbabwe due to previous arms shipments so if they want anything to do with the new government, this was a smart move.

"The Chinese company has already decided to send the military goods back to China in the same vessel, the An Yue Jiang," said the spokeswoman, Jiang Yu.

China's decision will be welcomed as a victory by the dockworkers, trade unionists, religious leaders, western diplomats and human rights workers who have been campaigning since last week to block delivery of the weaponry to Zimbabwe – weaponry they said could be used to carry out an even more lethal crackdown on Zimbabwe's political opposition, which is allied with that country's unionized workers.

China's strategic retreat in delivering the weapons also allows it to avoid further inflaming yet another protest over its human rights record before it hosts the Olympic Games this summer.

Read More......