Old Town Tac, WA -
My favorite piece of spin so far definitely belongs to John Edwards.
"What is clear is that [voters] are not interested in status quo," Edwards said. "They're interested in change. They want to see a candidate of change, and so they now have two choices in making that decision, and this choice is somebody who will fight for the change that makes America what it's capable of being.
He then went on to steal a line from Bill Richardson. "I am not the candidate of glitz. I am not the candidate of glamour."
TWO choices? I guess that means the top two placers in Iowa, percentages be damned! But hey, its a winner-take-all business!
My least favorite bit of non-spin comes from McCain.
"When Tiffany asked if he intended to keep Americans in Iraq for 50 years, McCain shot back, 'Make it a hundred.'"
This, folks, is why the more I hear John McCain the more I grow to dislike John McCain. He is on the verge of replacing Rudy Giuliani as the most war-clamoring, fear-mongering candidate in the race. And THAT, is what I despise most of all.
Showing posts with label John Edwards. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Edwards. Show all posts
Friday, January 4, 2008
Friday, November 9, 2007
Politics on a Friday????
Plymouth, NH -
What happens when there is a political event on a college campus and no students attend? We found out tonight at Plymouth State University when Cate Edwards, daughter of John, joined up with Kate Michelman, former President of NARAL to talk about Senator Edwards at PSU’s Lamson Library.
Surprisingly, the answer to that question is not an empty room; and what the event lacked in students it made up for with a couple dozen older staunch Dems who were clamoring for some red meat.
In all honesty, there were a few students in attendance. One was a college Dem, one was a conservative Tancredo supporter looking for sound bytes to rail about on his weekly talk radio show, and the other seemed to be his lackey, whose job it was to take down the notes on his questions. But considering the location, and the guests - a 26 year old and an abortion rights champion, I was pretty surprised not to see at least a dozen students. But then again, to expect to see more than three Plymouth Staters anywhere other than a bar after 4PM on a Friday is a tall order.
The two C/Kates showed up a half hour late, claiming to have been lost on the New Hampshire mountain roads between Hanover and Plymouth, but the crowd was still happy to see them. Following a brief introduction, Cate Edwards spent a minute or two explaining why she is supporting her father, aside from the fact that he is, well, her father.
“So much has changed,” she said speaking of the last four years. “Things have gotten a lot worse.” John Edwards, she asserted, “has bold plans to change the way we think of the Presidency, and the way things happen in Washington.”
Just as important, she mentioned, he is both the most progressive candidate and the most electable, and “those two things almost never come together in the same person.”
With this, she turned it over to Kate Michelman. Earlier, the woman who introduced Michelman talked about the surprise with which she greeted the news that the former NARAL president was backing John Edwards over Hillary Clinton, the only female in the race.
This curiosity was addressed at the beginning of her remarks. “John Edwards is the most feminist feminist in the race” because of his outspokenness in tackling financial inequalities in America. Michelman called this “the next journey of the women’s movement.”
She went on to say that Edwards more than any other candidate recognizes that, while there has been a lot of progress in attitudes, law and policy toward women and minorities in the last forty years, “we have a ways to go yet.”
Michelman summed up her support by saying she was “very worried there wouldn’t be another candidate like John Edwards for a very long time if he’s not our candidate this time, who can represent us effectively and morally. If we don’t choose him we’ll send a message that we just don’t care.”
It was an appeal to help the plight of the poor and the disadvantaged everywhere in America, and Michelman followed it with her own personal story. It was a touching tale of a young woman abandoned by her husband with three young daughters, no job and no money. She faced hardship and discrimination when she was told by her local general store that she couldn’t receive a charge account because she was a single mother, and humiliated by onlookers as she sought to terminate a pregnancy spurred on by her own poverty and her husband’s vile actions. Through that experience she developed an appreciation for the leaders who spoke up for the disenfranchised.
To hear it that way helps one realize that there are gross inequalities in our country, even for groups as seemingly equal as women. But then again, given that a major draw for the Edwards campaign is providing a voice for the poor and the working class, and on top of that they tack on the gloomy subject of abortion, maybe it really is no major surprise that a Friday afternoon surrogate visit played second fiddle to power hour. Booze, after all, is often what gets us into the mess, and just as often is what gets us out of it.
What happens when there is a political event on a college campus and no students attend? We found out tonight at Plymouth State University when Cate Edwards, daughter of John, joined up with Kate Michelman, former President of NARAL to talk about Senator Edwards at PSU’s Lamson Library.
Surprisingly, the answer to that question is not an empty room; and what the event lacked in students it made up for with a couple dozen older staunch Dems who were clamoring for some red meat.
In all honesty, there were a few students in attendance. One was a college Dem, one was a conservative Tancredo supporter looking for sound bytes to rail about on his weekly talk radio show, and the other seemed to be his lackey, whose job it was to take down the notes on his questions. But considering the location, and the guests - a 26 year old and an abortion rights champion, I was pretty surprised not to see at least a dozen students. But then again, to expect to see more than three Plymouth Staters anywhere other than a bar after 4PM on a Friday is a tall order.
The two C/Kates showed up a half hour late, claiming to have been lost on the New Hampshire mountain roads between Hanover and Plymouth, but the crowd was still happy to see them. Following a brief introduction, Cate Edwards spent a minute or two explaining why she is supporting her father, aside from the fact that he is, well, her father.
“So much has changed,” she said speaking of the last four years. “Things have gotten a lot worse.” John Edwards, she asserted, “has bold plans to change the way we think of the Presidency, and the way things happen in Washington.”
Just as important, she mentioned, he is both the most progressive candidate and the most electable, and “those two things almost never come together in the same person.”
With this, she turned it over to Kate Michelman. Earlier, the woman who introduced Michelman talked about the surprise with which she greeted the news that the former NARAL president was backing John Edwards over Hillary Clinton, the only female in the race.
This curiosity was addressed at the beginning of her remarks. “John Edwards is the most feminist feminist in the race” because of his outspokenness in tackling financial inequalities in America. Michelman called this “the next journey of the women’s movement.”
She went on to say that Edwards more than any other candidate recognizes that, while there has been a lot of progress in attitudes, law and policy toward women and minorities in the last forty years, “we have a ways to go yet.”
Michelman summed up her support by saying she was “very worried there wouldn’t be another candidate like John Edwards for a very long time if he’s not our candidate this time, who can represent us effectively and morally. If we don’t choose him we’ll send a message that we just don’t care.”
It was an appeal to help the plight of the poor and the disadvantaged everywhere in America, and Michelman followed it with her own personal story. It was a touching tale of a young woman abandoned by her husband with three young daughters, no job and no money. She faced hardship and discrimination when she was told by her local general store that she couldn’t receive a charge account because she was a single mother, and humiliated by onlookers as she sought to terminate a pregnancy spurred on by her own poverty and her husband’s vile actions. Through that experience she developed an appreciation for the leaders who spoke up for the disenfranchised.
To hear it that way helps one realize that there are gross inequalities in our country, even for groups as seemingly equal as women. But then again, given that a major draw for the Edwards campaign is providing a voice for the poor and the working class, and on top of that they tack on the gloomy subject of abortion, maybe it really is no major surprise that a Friday afternoon surrogate visit played second fiddle to power hour. Booze, after all, is often what gets us into the mess, and just as often is what gets us out of it.
Thursday, October 4, 2007
Ads and Disguised Attacks
Snow Pond, NH -
The Clinton campaign has unleashed a new ad today, set to air in both New Hampshire and Iowa called Stand By Us. It is potentially controversial because it includes footage of Ground Zero within a general discussion of Clinton's health care record. Hillary's campaign seems to have deftly maneuvered around the 9/11 politicization bullet because of the health care thing. I know I found it pretty distasteful when Bush did the 9/11 ad back in '04, but this time around should be different. You never hear of Clinton trying to over expose that event, so she should get the kind of breathing room that a brow beater like Rudy wouldn't.
Speaking of which, Ben Smith at Politico gives a good analysis on how this message both helps Clinton and hurts Giuliani, who is ripe for criticism over what looks like an iceberg-type problem of relief worker health issues, growing by the day. Though I think he is slightly off the mark when he speaks of the aim toward her Democratic rivals. Here is what Smith says:
Listen to what Edwards said that the debate last week:
Clinton: "Which one do you think will never back down?"
This subtly challenges Edwards on the perception that he has changed his mind too many times. Where was he on health care back in the 90s? Where was he on Iraq in 2002? Clinton wants to be seen as the steadfast Democrat. That may hurt her on Iraq, where Edwards has repeatedly pounded her on not admitting her mistake. But it could be very helpful on issues like health care, where her record is potentially longer and stronger than her main rivals.
In the street it might sound like this.
Edwards: "I'm the man on this now. Ask somebody."
Clinton: "Yo, I don't care where you at, son. Where you been? 'Cuz I been with the 9-11 workers and the children. Now what?"
All I'm saying, until Obama proves that he'll take it to Clinton, she'll be taking it to Edwards and trying to stomp on the sapling before it becomes a tree. Thats how you win in politics. We'll see how spiny Edwards' branches are, and if they are sharp enough to hurt Clinton's tender footsteps. It ain't out of the question, folks.
Since we are talking about commercials, how 'bout this classic. Got Milk?
The Clinton campaign has unleashed a new ad today, set to air in both New Hampshire and Iowa called Stand By Us. It is potentially controversial because it includes footage of Ground Zero within a general discussion of Clinton's health care record. Hillary's campaign seems to have deftly maneuvered around the 9/11 politicization bullet because of the health care thing. I know I found it pretty distasteful when Bush did the 9/11 ad back in '04, but this time around should be different. You never hear of Clinton trying to over expose that event, so she should get the kind of breathing room that a brow beater like Rudy wouldn't.
Speaking of which, Ben Smith at Politico gives a good analysis on how this message both helps Clinton and hurts Giuliani, who is ripe for criticism over what looks like an iceberg-type problem of relief worker health issues, growing by the day. Though I think he is slightly off the mark when he speaks of the aim toward her Democratic rivals. Here is what Smith says:
ALSO: Two digs. Standing by the 9/11 workers is a shot at Rudy, who bears some of the blame for the failure to enforce safety standards at Ground Zero; and when she says that "almost every candidate is standing up for health care for all," that does sound like a dig at Obama.The basis, of course, comes from the argument that Obama's plan is not truly universal. But I think it is more of a swipe at John Edwards, who I believe may be the opponent the Clinton campaign fears the most because of his southern roots and the fact that he is the one taking the most pointed shots at Hillary.
Listen to what Edwards said that the debate last week:
What is clear from this presidential campaign is I was the first presidential candidate -- others have followed me now, and that's a good thing --good thing for America.
But I was the first presidential candidate to lay out a specific, truly universal health care plan. And the one thing I can tell you is anybody who knows me -- anybody who knows me knows I will never give up.
What happened in '93 and '94 is that we didn't get universal health care, but we got NAFTA. And when I'm president of the United States, you have my word, I will never pull the universal health care bill. I will put everything I have behind making sure that it's enacted.
And here is what Hillary's ad says:
Hillary stood up for universal health care when almost no one else would, and kept standing until six million kids had coverage. She stood by Ground Zero workers who sacrificed their health after so many sacrificed their lives, and kept standing until this administration took action. She stood by our National Guard and Reserve and kept standing until they received health care they deserved. So now that almost every candidate is standing up for health care for all, which one do you think will never back down?
Clinton: "Which one do you think will never back down?"
This subtly challenges Edwards on the perception that he has changed his mind too many times. Where was he on health care back in the 90s? Where was he on Iraq in 2002? Clinton wants to be seen as the steadfast Democrat. That may hurt her on Iraq, where Edwards has repeatedly pounded her on not admitting her mistake. But it could be very helpful on issues like health care, where her record is potentially longer and stronger than her main rivals.
In the street it might sound like this.
Edwards: "I'm the man on this now. Ask somebody."
Clinton: "Yo, I don't care where you at, son. Where you been? 'Cuz I been with the 9-11 workers and the children. Now what?"
All I'm saying, until Obama proves that he'll take it to Clinton, she'll be taking it to Edwards and trying to stomp on the sapling before it becomes a tree. Thats how you win in politics. We'll see how spiny Edwards' branches are, and if they are sharp enough to hurt Clinton's tender footsteps. It ain't out of the question, folks.
Since we are talking about commercials, how 'bout this classic. Got Milk?
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Fightin' Words
According to J. Martin, Rudy is putting out a new radio ad wherein he claims to be Liberals' worst nightmare. Sorry, Rudy, that moniker's already been taken (ffwd to 4:15 or so into the clip to see what I mean, or just watch the whole thing):
But if we are really talking about hard hitting, we'll go to this frame. Witness what Joe Trippi wrote in an e-mail to Edwards' supporters today:
But if we are really talking about hard hitting, we'll go to this frame. Witness what Joe Trippi wrote in an e-mail to Edwards' supporters today:
"If you want to know why we need change in Washington – and I mean real change, not just trading corporate Republican insiders with corporate Democratic insiders – then just look at Senator Clinton's schedule for today.
Today at noon, Hillary Clinton will be hosting a fundraiser in Washington, DC for a select group of lobbyists with an interest in homeland security.
Tickets for the Clinton fundraiser are $1,000 a ticket and $25,000 per bundler. And for that money you get more than a meal – you get to attend one-hour breakout sessions in four different areas of homeland security that will include House Committee Chairs and members of Congress who sit on the very committees that will be voting on homeland security legislation.
...
...
Today's Clinton fundraising event is a "poster child" for what is wrong with Washington and what should never happen again with a candidate running for the highest office in the land.
That no one in the Clinton campaign – including the candidate – found anything
wrong with holding this fundraiser is an indication of just how bad things have gotten in Washington – because there isn't an American outside of Washington who would not be sickened by it."
Sickened! Corporate Insiders! It is a lurid page straight out of the Ralph Nader handbook, and I like it.
This move, however fraught with risk, will undoubtedly catch flack from other campaigns and the parts of the soft-bellied media, but I'm glad to see someone taking the gloves off over an issue like money-for-access.
Can't wait for the debates!Monday, August 27, 2007
A Coolidge for a New Generation
John Edwards continues his trend of wordy press releases for Bush cabinet resignations.
"Better late than never."
"Better late than never."
Monday, August 20, 2007
3Q: You Decide. We Report.
3Q Nation,
John Edwards will be back in the Granite State later this week barnstorming around to discuss three major issues, one on each day.
There is a poll in the upper right hand corner of the page. Let me know, how do you want it?
VOTE OR DIE
See you on the Trail,
BTB
John Edwards will be back in the Granite State later this week barnstorming around to discuss three major issues, one on each day.
- Thursday, August 23rd: Achieving Energy Independence and Halting Global Warming Through a New Energy Economy
- Friday, August 24th: Making Health Care Affordable and Universal
- Saturday, August 25th: Rewarding Work and Strengthening the Middle Class
There is a poll in the upper right hand corner of the page. Let me know, how do you want it?
VOTE OR DIE
See you on the Trail,
BTB
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Tentative 3Q Schedule
Because I know you lovvvve to keep tabs on me.
Thursday, August 16 - Dennis Kucinich, Dover, NH 2pm
Friday, August 17 - Rudy Giuliani, Merrimack, NH 9am
Saturday, August 18 - Londonderry Old Home Days 10am
Sunday, August 19 - Mike Huckabee, Concord, NH 11am
Sunday, August 19 - Ron Paul, Hollis, NH ?
Tuesday, August 21-Saturday, August 25 - Men's Retreat, Pemi River, New Hampshire, a lot of beer a lot of girls and a lot of cursin'. Plus swimming in the healing waters of the Pemi river and maybe even a visit from John Edwards. I guarantee this, if he dares come to
Lincoln, Campton or North Woodstock I will invite him out for a run on the trails behind Sam's Tire Barn, a swim at the town beach and a Pemi Pale Ale afterward. That's the One America I'm talkin' about. This doesn't just go for Edwards, who will be doing a biodiesel bus tour that week. Nay, I will submit the same challenge to any candidate who has the sound judgment and vivacity to come to the North Country and potentially dip in the Pemi.
Honestly, I might not make it up to Giuliani. 9am? What a d-bag.
Same goes for Ron Paul whose event, in concert with the Hillsborough Country Republicans annual picnic, requires an $18 dollar donation to the party. F that. We'll see about some guerrilla tactics. Now as Ali G would say, bring on the "loose hippie bitches" and the GOP. But either way, "dis is da earliest I's ever been up!" Get EXCITED. Get PUMPED. Tell ya' friends. Get your Read on!
Bold initiatives. Bold leadership. Bold blogging. Welcome to Flava Qountry.
Ahoy,
BTB
P.S. as schedules become updated, my schedule changes. Looks like I won't have to wake up at 7 to see Giuli on Saturday, but I don't want to change it so that I can keep my Ali G joke in here. Booyakasha!
Thursday, August 16 - Dennis Kucinich, Dover, NH 2pm
Friday, August 17 - Rudy Giuliani, Merrimack, NH 9am
Saturday, August 18 - Londonderry Old Home Days 10am
Sunday, August 19 - Mike Huckabee, Concord, NH 11am
Sunday, August 19 - Ron Paul, Hollis, NH ?
Tuesday, August 21-Saturday, August 25 - Men's Retreat, Pemi River, New Hampshire, a lot of beer a lot of girls and a lot of cursin'. Plus swimming in the healing waters of the Pemi river and maybe even a visit from John Edwards. I guarantee this, if he dares come to
Lincoln, Campton or North Woodstock I will invite him out for a run on the trails behind Sam's Tire Barn, a swim at the town beach and a Pemi Pale Ale afterward. That's the One America I'm talkin' about. This doesn't just go for Edwards, who will be doing a biodiesel bus tour that week. Nay, I will submit the same challenge to any candidate who has the sound judgment and vivacity to come to the North Country and potentially dip in the Pemi.Honestly, I might not make it up to Giuliani. 9am? What a d-bag.
Same goes for Ron Paul whose event, in concert with the Hillsborough Country Republicans annual picnic, requires an $18 dollar donation to the party. F that. We'll see about some guerrilla tactics. Now as Ali G would say, bring on the "loose hippie bitches" and the GOP. But either way, "dis is da earliest I's ever been up!" Get EXCITED. Get PUMPED. Tell ya' friends. Get your Read on!
Bold initiatives. Bold leadership. Bold blogging. Welcome to Flava Qountry.
Ahoy,
BTB
P.S. as schedules become updated, my schedule changes. Looks like I won't have to wake up at 7 to see Giuli on Saturday, but I don't want to change it so that I can keep my Ali G joke in here. Booyakasha!
Edwards on Rove
Please take a moment to read John Edwards' statement on the resignation of Karl Rove, text can be found here.
Really, it should only take a second.
Really, it should only take a second.
Saturday, August 11, 2007
Over-Rated!
Cotuit, MA -
Clap! Clap! Clap-clap-clap!
One of my favorite underdog cheers is now a political article! Check it out on the Political Wire!
But then again, who cares what the insiders say? In the immortal words of Dee Dee Ramone,
"I'm an outsider/Outside of everything/Everything you know/Everything you know/It disturbs me so"
But then again again, I agree with them!
Clap! Clap! Clap-clap-clap!
One of my favorite underdog cheers is now a political article! Check it out on the Political Wire!
- Most overrated - Fred Thompson and John Edwards
- Most underrated - Mike Huckabee and Bill Richardson
But then again, who cares what the insiders say? In the immortal words of Dee Dee Ramone,
"I'm an outsider/Outside of everything/Everything you know/Everything you know/It disturbs me so"
But then again again, I agree with them!
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
John Edwards: The Angry American
Windham, NH -
The address for today's house party, the last of four campaign stops for John Edwards, was 2 Camelot Road. Fitting for a young candidate with a loving wife and a couple of cute youngsters in tow. Sitting down in one of the many folded chairs laid out in concentric circles in the backyard of our host, I saw to the left of me a well-manicured lawn befitting the country club a half mile away and to the right of me a brush pile below an oak tree and a big old red wooden barn. Welcome to Southern New Hampshire, where old New England meets New Suburbia. It was also an interesting placement for the man who has touted the occurrence of Two Americas. I'll tell you about my two Americas - the barn and woods America that Washington has long since forgotten about, and the cul-de-sac and new car American that prevails throughout. I digress.
The yard sat at the bottom of a steep, landscaped hill marked with a feeble brick path cutting through the bark dust. As per the usual campaign stop fanfare, I expected Senator Edwards to come hopping through the screen door at the back of the house. Instead he casually stepped down the path and walked directly into the center of the seating arrangement. This was the Democratic party's latest Vice Presidential candidate, but there was no booming theme song blasting through stand-up speakers. Shocking, in fact, considering the inseparable bond created between John Edwards and John Mellencamp just three short years ago. No, this time it was just a man in blue jeans (Levi's, size 34-32), a blue button up shirt, a Livestrong band and running watch on his left wrist, and brown shoes squinting into the distance while the party host read some brief biographical remarks about Edwards.
As soon as John took over the microphone he touted the four things that were most important to him as a Presidential candidate. First was to fix what's wrong with Washington. "It is rigged," he said, against the people. Populists, perk up your ears. He claimed that the insurance, drug and oil industries are embedded in the system to keep people from getting what they need in favor of the powerful and money hungry lobbies. Much like terrorists (my metaphor, not his), he went on to say, there is no negotiating with these guys. They only understand bullying, which is what they have been doing to the people for years. Meanwhile, he made the point that "we need universal health care. It is the only answer." The two points he touted from his plan were the need to give mental health as much importance as physical health, and the ability to take health care with you if you move or leave your job. In a jab against Hillary, he insisted that changing one insider for another is not going to change the way things have been done for years. Edwards, though, will fight. Edwards the everyman. Edwards the heavy hitter.
After softening up the big bullies Edwards moved on to his second priority, the climate crisis. He restated the party line that we have to dramatically cut our carbon emissions, and glossed over the workings of the cap-and-trade mechanism with which to do so. Similar to Chris Dodd, he emphasized that the proceeds from a carbon auction would go to help transform the rest of the America into a more sustainable place. He, almost reluctantly, closed with his new tagline that America needs to be patriotic about something other than war.
His third point was to touch on the economic disparity here in America. As Edwards put it, we have 2 Americas - the super wealthy who have tax breaks and offshore accounts, and then everyone else. This time his Two Americas notion seemed to try to distance himself from the role of a class warrior. He wasn't saying rich and poor, instead talking about super rich. Maybe that is what you have to do to differentiate between his $30 million and the $31 that presumably marks the boundaries between Two Americas. He said he would push for a $9.50 Federal minimum wage, and talked about bolstering the strength of unions in America that have been weakened lately, and of a Federal program to match the savings of middle class Americans to create incentive for them to earn capital and bootstrap themselves into a less anxious financial state.
That's when the going got weird. Edwards' fourth priority was to end the damage done by the Bush Presidency and do some good in the world. 1st day - close Guantanamo, putting him at direct odds with Mitt Romney. He said the same thing about stopping torture before pausing, placing his hand on his forehead and saying, "what a sad sate of affairs" we have that we "even need to talk about torture" when running for President. He spoke briefly of AIDS and Darfur genocide before telling us that the only way change will happen is if we all do it together. The civil rights movement started, he said, in communities just like this. So did the movement to end Vietnam, and to end the war in Iraq. He tried to incense the crowd to move and shake, but it was clear he had other things on his mind. Earlier, he had mentioned that he wanted to tell a story that would tie a lot of these things together, and in a lot of ways it seemed like he was just trying to get through the stump speech (which, admittedly, was relatively short) in order to call forth the anecdote.
At that point Edwards moved forcefully into his clear strength. He rhetorically asked the audience if he could tell a story about a man he met on his recent poverty tour. This fellow, he told us, was born with a cleft palate. Due to the severity of the condition and a lack of insurance to pay for an operation to fix it, the guy was unable to speak for much of his life. Edwards continued to gain more and more passion as the story went on. Although the man was unable to speak for much of his life, he was very proud of his new found ability to talk. And then, the clincher. Edwards told us that the man was 51 years old. Yet he had just gained the ability to speak one year ago, at age 50. "Outrageous!" Edwards claimed, that we can live in a country where a man can go fifty years without the ability to talk strictly due to his poverty and lack of available health care. Truly. Stories like this are so visceral, so shocking, so harmonious to the heart strings that even my callous, grizzled mug was pushed to the brink of tears.
But sympathy was not the only emotion on stage. In fact, as Edwards passionate oratory roared in scorn toward the system it became clear that anger and outrage were the stars. Bleeding heart liberal may be a derogatory term among the right, but the blood here was fiery red. Everything started to swirl in my head: the squinting, almost impatient look on the former Senator's face during introductions; the impatient stump speech; the incredulity toward the current administration. What we had here was no ordinary man. It was a man on a mission.
Here Edwards moved to the crowd for some Q&A. No doubt he counted on some questions about health care, education and immigration. What he didn't count on was the twisted vibe that had no overtaken the entire crowd. After a question about labor protection, John was asked about immigration. He more or less gave a standard answer until the final part where he demanded that illegal immigrants looking for citizenship learn English. Classic New Hampshire, the crowd roared in approval in one of the few applause-inducing lines of the night. Edwards then spoke to school choice within a public system, touting magnet and charter schools for poor cities. But to close it off, he mentioned that under performing schools should have an "education SWAT team" sent to them in order to fix it. What the hell is that supposed to mean? Without the specifics I'll keep my questions to a minimum, but the line gave me a verrrry NCLB feeling and I didn't like it.
But right as I was trying to get over the SWAT team, Edwards called on a fat Hispanic man sitting about five seats away from me wearing a makeshift Kerry/Edwards shirt. The man stood up, told of his allegiance to the 2004 ticket, his 40-year citizenship, and his desire to ask two questions at once. After about 90 seconds of rambling - first about predatory lenders and then about a Bush/Cheney 2004 conspiracy - it became abundantly clear that this guy was nuts Edwards realized this, and implored the man to get around to asking the question. It didn't work. Edwards cut in again, but to no avail. Finally, John Edwards drew forth his wrath and told the man, "why don't you sit down and listen to me!" to which the man replied, sounding an awful lot like Milton Waddams, "don't tell me what to do John." Halfway through this exchange, a few trickles of rain began to fall.
It was surreal. Everyone in the crowd wanted this guy to shut up, and simultaneously sat at the edge of our seats wondering what was going to happen next. Would this fat man rush John Edwards? Would Edwards eat this poor crazy man's lunch? Would the question ever end? After some terse words, the supporter finally ceased his babble. Edwards acknowledged (much to my surprise) his questions, stating that he wanted a full investigation into Ohio back in 2004, then approached the man and shook his hand, thanking him for his concern.
The next question came about Edwards' housing policy for the homeless and poor, to give federal housing grants that they might move to better places. But it wasn't so simple. The questioner prefaced her question with a long story about a specific homeless shelter for women in Washington, DC, continuing on and on about it's successes. Emboldened and fired up by Edwards actions, the crowd began to heckle her. "Hurry up, we all have questions, too!" one woman shouted. "Use the microphone! It's not an ice cream cone!" suggested the pro-union man standing next to her. The hyenas were unleashed!
To follow that up was a question from a woman who sounded very scared and confused, wondering if the conspiracy theories were true, that the government knew the true cause of autism. John Edwards could only politely say that he doubted such claims. Now the rain was really threatening.
Fortunately, a staffer chimed in from the back that Edwards could only take one more question. It was a softball, allowing him to toss out a few red meat Cheney jokes. At that point he asked us for our vote and thanked us for coming. As is customary a few people approached for a handshake, but what I hadn't seen before was the matinee pin-up factor. Handfuls of middle aged women rushed the stage, awkwardly clutching their digital cameras and hollering at young John Edwards for a photo with his arm around them. He consistently obliged, creating an almost circus-like scene. These women continued to ask for pictures, all the while blurting out their indiscreet romantic desires. Meanwhile, everyone started barking out questions, and Edwards acknowledged them all, often scolding them to wait their turn. Realizing the cranky mood, I merely jammed my hand into the fray, thanked him for coming with only a handshake and no words in return. His handshake was firm. The firmest, in fact, of all the candidates to date. But it was not as firm as his glare.
It was his glare that stuck in my mind, the way he looked around shooting down questions and the way he looked when he was talking about the 50 year old man without speech. It was the look of a man who had just spent four days in some of the poorest cities in America. It was the look of a man who announced his candidacy from the Eighth Ward in New Orleans. It was the look of a man who was mad as hell, and wasn't gonna take it anymore. Will America?
As my boy Toby Keith, a fellow angry American once said:
Ohhh Justice will be served /And the battle will rage / This big dog will fight / When you rattle his cage / And you'll be sorry that you messed with The U.S. of A. / 'Cause we'll put a boot in your ass / It's the American way
Ohhh Justice will be served /And the battle will rage / This big dog will fight / When you rattle his cage / And you'll be sorry that you messed with The U.S. of A. / 'Cause we'll put a boot in your ass / It's the American way
Sure, they're different battles, but I still think that "they" had better watch out for a focused boot one of these days. Sooner rather than later.
.....
But I must conclude with Happy 30th Anniversary wishes for John and Elizabeth. Here's to 30 more! Now, is it ironic that they dine each year at Wendy's restaurant, known to be the most conservative, environmentally unsound, anti-choice of all fast food eateries? Hell no. They make a damn good Spicy Chicken Sandwich. Mmmmm, delicious.
Please also see my initial John Edwards post, one of the first ever on 3Q.
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Out-FOXed
There is an interesting article in the HuffPost today by Thomas Edsall about the amount of money the top three Democratic candidates took from FOX executives despite refusing to debate on that channel because of it's right wing views. While hardly the world's biggest jolt of hypocrisy, it certainly provides easy hate fodder if you are looking to pile on. Then again, I guess that $30+ Mil from Q2 doesn't grow on trees!
Sunday, June 3, 2007
Live from Goffstown
Rather, the television is live from Goffstown, NH but here in Quabbin Qountry we are just plain alive. Wolf Blitzer looks like he is in a screening room compared to the candidates behind, but I'll believe CNN. I hate to do the same ol'-same ol, but alas here we go with some live blogging.
"I am the Senator from New York. I have seen firsthand the terrible damage" - Clinton echoes Giuliani. Not surprised.
"I opposed this war from the start. I think you're about 4 and a half years too late." - Obama in response to Edwards' barbs. Meanwhile, Hillary is trying to stay as neutral as possible, likely because she knows she doesn't have any capital. She strives to tell people that the real differences are not between the Democratic candidates, but rather between the Dems and the GOP.
Oooohhhh, Wolf just zinged Hillary by asking her whether she regrets her vote having not read the intelligence report. How can you answer that? You can't. Hence, she failed to say "yes" or "no". He comes back and gives the same question to Edwards. Damn, how you gonna not read that? That said, Edwards admits his mistake. He got the first applause of the night of anyone for giving props to Obama for being right from the beginning, followed by a brief speech on the need of honesty after Bush.
I don't know if I mentioned it last time, but Obama really needs to improve upon his stage presence. Granted, he does have the least experience of any candidate, but he really shows it. He pauses too much in his speech, carries on words, stuff like that.
Hillary once again stops short of answering Wolf's question. She ends with a quotation from Barry Goldwater.
"Who's most likely to end the war in Iraq? Who's most likely to lead the way in health care?" - Edwards telling how the main role of President is not to be a legislator, but to be a leader.
As the night went on, I became distracted by other things around the house and my bloggings became less and less common. I hope to recap my efforts later on, but now its push-ups and dessert.
Ahoy,
BTB
"I am the Senator from New York. I have seen firsthand the terrible damage" - Clinton echoes Giuliani. Not surprised.
"I opposed this war from the start. I think you're about 4 and a half years too late." - Obama in response to Edwards' barbs. Meanwhile, Hillary is trying to stay as neutral as possible, likely because she knows she doesn't have any capital. She strives to tell people that the real differences are not between the Democratic candidates, but rather between the Dems and the GOP.
Oooohhhh, Wolf just zinged Hillary by asking her whether she regrets her vote having not read the intelligence report. How can you answer that? You can't. Hence, she failed to say "yes" or "no". He comes back and gives the same question to Edwards. Damn, how you gonna not read that? That said, Edwards admits his mistake. He got the first applause of the night of anyone for giving props to Obama for being right from the beginning, followed by a brief speech on the need of honesty after Bush.
I don't know if I mentioned it last time, but Obama really needs to improve upon his stage presence. Granted, he does have the least experience of any candidate, but he really shows it. He pauses too much in his speech, carries on words, stuff like that.
Hillary once again stops short of answering Wolf's question. She ends with a quotation from Barry Goldwater.
"Who's most likely to end the war in Iraq? Who's most likely to lead the way in health care?" - Edwards telling how the main role of President is not to be a legislator, but to be a leader.
As the night went on, I became distracted by other things around the house and my bloggings became less and less common. I hope to recap my efforts later on, but now its push-ups and dessert.
Ahoy,
BTB
Sunday, May 20, 2007
Back on the Trail
Welcome back to Quabbin Qountry. Before we begin, I would like to thank the Toshiba Corporation. They sent me an AC adapter, still under warranty, to replace my broken one in under 24 hours. Literally, I placed the call Wednesday at 3pm and had a box on my porch, even way the hell out at the qabin, when I arrived home from track practice on Thursday. My joy was immeasurable. I missed the internet, and I missed the blog. Without further ado, back to the show.
Paul Krugman made a good point in yesterday's Times that maybe Bush isn't so bad relative to the rest of his party-goers. The scene from last week's debate where almost all of the gang of ten would-be nominees were falling all over themselves to be the one to say that they would inflict the most torture on terrorist bad guys was chilling, indeed. It wasn't just what the candidates had to say that was disturbing, it was the audience's reaction. It was the kind of feeding frenzy where the more blood the speaker could invoke, the hungrier the audience grew as they loudly growled with lusty approval over lines like the following
Giuliani: "And I would -- well, I'd say every method they could think of"
Romney: "Some people have said, we ought to close Guantanamo. My view is, we ought to double Guantanamo."
Hunter: "One sentence: Get the information. Have it back within an hour, and let's act on it."
At least Duncan had the respect to close his statement by saying "and I will take full responsibility" for the backlash of any torturous activity. Does that mean he would do a retaliatory self-waterboarding? Probably not, but if we take him at his word he would at least admit to it and say that he believed in it, and let history judge him as such.
There was one bright spot to the whole torture exchange, when Brit Hume gave John McCain the last word, having been the only one to go against the hard party line. He responded with this: "Yes, and the interesting thing about that aspect is that during the debate, when we had the detainee treatment act, there was a sharp division between those who had served in the military and those who hadn't." Virtually every senior officer, retired or active- duty, starting with Colin Powell, General Vessey and everyone else, agreed with my position that we should not torture people. . .So yes, literally every retired military person and active duty military person who has actually been in battle and served for extended times in the military supported my position, and I'm glad of it." I am glad, too.
Here are a few thoughts on some of the candidates. The Fix gave it's grades, but here we go from the 3Q perspective.
Tommy Thompson: Let's start with the former Wisconsin governor by treating like a cube of sharp, yellow cheddar - Stick a fork in him. This man was frightening to watch, purely from a physical standpoint. He has no discernible neck. It didn't help that he sounded vague and desperate every time he opened his mouth.
Sam Brownback: The highlight of his day for me was watching him pretend to be compassionate when asked about a rape victim being forced to carry the child of the ruthless criminal who violated her. He gives a half grimace and a reassuring nod as he begins by saying, "hat would be a very difficult situation, and it is a very difficult situation," before proceeding to completely ignore the situation and saying "will that (abortion) make the woman in a better situation if that's what takes place? And I don't think so." Of course not. Of course this woman's life will be better if she gives birth to God's rape child. I'm sorry, Sam, but your so-called "pro-life, whole-life" motto is thoroughly de-bunked every time you say "I will do it. I'll move aggressively forward on it" in reference to "deliberately and methodically" attacking other countries. Aren't confused, poor Africans God's children just as much as the rapist's bastard child? What a crock.
Mike Huckabee: Huckabee scored the most points of any of the middle-tier candidates, if only because he appears articulate and can handle the conservative banner better than any of the front-runners. There have been numerous articles saying the same thing and wondering why he hasn't taken off, and why he has raised so little money. So it seems likely that he will be the candidate that could have been, but at least he got off the most memorable zinger of the night when he said, "We've had Congress that's spent money like Edwards at a beauty shop." Hey-o! Even better, he mentioned it in reference to incurring a "fair tax" that would potentially get a lot of the IRS BS out of the way. He also seemed very even-keeled when he stood up for his tax increases to build roads and protect schools. Let's hope for the Red-State-blooded Americans out there that he will pick up some momentum. Plus, he lost a hundred pounds and ran a marathon. Props to that.
Tom Tancredo, Jim Gilmore: Meh. Not really worth a recap.
Ron Paul: Paul certainly did himself a disservice to goal of achieving the Republican nomination down at USC, but at least he went down guns blazin'. Even though he is a Libertarian, he didn't flout the notion that tax cuts alone will save our economy. He continually referred to fiscal discipline being a two-way street of reducing spending before we reduce our income. Certainly not cutting taxes while starting a war. He called out 9/11 a few times, initially saying, "we were spending $40 billion on security prior to 9/11, and they had all the information they needed there to deal with the threat." Damn. He proceeded to get himself into some trouble when he took the path of honesty and humility, admitting that American foreign policy necessarily impacts the views of hostile forces in the Middle East, a bad idea in the face of 9/11 bulldog/opportunist Rudy Giuliani, who then called him out by saying "I don't think I've heard that before." Really, Rudy? You've never heard that explanation before? What a sham. Don't bring that false exasperation to Quabbin Qountry any time soon. It belongs in one place and one place only - the Vlad Squad bench. Keep it real. I digress.
At any rate, Mr. Paul stood up to Rudy, but the damage was done. The crusty old Southerners in the audience were eating up Giuli's rabid terrorist-bating, and Ronnie was done. But not for me, as his best line was yet to come. After the debate's torture debacle (Paul was not questioned) he went out of his way to say, "but you know, I think it's interesting talking about torture here in that it's become enhanced interrogation technique. It sounds like Newspeak." Word. Second only to my horror at the crowd's reaction was my incredulous wonder at why the candidates were pussyfooting around the word torture in their defenses of it, calling it enhanced techniques and never readily admit to the direct question about waterboarding. Paul knew, though, and he dropped it like it was hot.
After that I couldn't really go on, and I ended up flipping more and more frequently to AMC where they were showing The Karate Kid. In other words, I got tired of watching the real Cobra Kai, and opted instead for the fictionalized version, where at the end even Johnny shows some mercy. Much the same today, I lack the strength to summarize the Big 3 other than to say that they were seemingly the strongest candidates. McCain kicked Romney's ass in the tete-a-tete and was honorable on torture, but was far from a sure winner. Giuli creeped me out with the red meat routine, and Romney is articulate but too easily damaged with the flip-flop attack. But hey, only EIGHT MORE MONTHS 'til New Hampshire!!! Time is a-wastin'!
. . .
The Sunshine Boy, unfazed by Huckabee's zinger, wrote a pre-emptive op-ed in the Huffington Post today, calling on Americans to take seriously their task on Memorial Day to remember the great sacrifices of American soldiers not by slapping a "Support Our Troops" magnet on their car, but by making a real effort to get the troops sent home from the current debacle in Iraq. I applaud him for the gesture. It is my belief that too often these days, in a world of instant leisure and long work days for so many, we have forgotten the purpose of national holidays. We see them as a free day to go to the beach or to be able to drink three nights in a row instead of actually pondering the meaning of the event. I think it is important for politicians to sincerely advocate their true celebration, and better yet to lead by example. Full disclosure: I will probably use it as an opportunity to drink three days in a row, but will accept any and all thoughts of good will to do the right thing. We're in this together, after all.
Sipping a Smuttynose from the banks of the Sawmill River,
BTB
Paul Krugman made a good point in yesterday's Times that maybe Bush isn't so bad relative to the rest of his party-goers. The scene from last week's debate where almost all of the gang of ten would-be nominees were falling all over themselves to be the one to say that they would inflict the most torture on terrorist bad guys was chilling, indeed. It wasn't just what the candidates had to say that was disturbing, it was the audience's reaction. It was the kind of feeding frenzy where the more blood the speaker could invoke, the hungrier the audience grew as they loudly growled with lusty approval over lines like the following
Giuliani: "And I would -- well, I'd say every method they could think of"
Romney: "Some people have said, we ought to close Guantanamo. My view is, we ought to double Guantanamo."
Hunter: "One sentence: Get the information. Have it back within an hour, and let's act on it."
At least Duncan had the respect to close his statement by saying "and I will take full responsibility" for the backlash of any torturous activity. Does that mean he would do a retaliatory self-waterboarding? Probably not, but if we take him at his word he would at least admit to it and say that he believed in it, and let history judge him as such.
There was one bright spot to the whole torture exchange, when Brit Hume gave John McCain the last word, having been the only one to go against the hard party line. He responded with this: "Yes, and the interesting thing about that aspect is that during the debate, when we had the detainee treatment act, there was a sharp division between those who had served in the military and those who hadn't." Virtually every senior officer, retired or active- duty, starting with Colin Powell, General Vessey and everyone else, agreed with my position that we should not torture people. . .So yes, literally every retired military person and active duty military person who has actually been in battle and served for extended times in the military supported my position, and I'm glad of it." I am glad, too.
Here are a few thoughts on some of the candidates. The Fix gave it's grades, but here we go from the 3Q perspective.
Tommy Thompson: Let's start with the former Wisconsin governor by treating like a cube of sharp, yellow cheddar - Stick a fork in him. This man was frightening to watch, purely from a physical standpoint. He has no discernible neck. It didn't help that he sounded vague and desperate every time he opened his mouth.
Sam Brownback: The highlight of his day for me was watching him pretend to be compassionate when asked about a rape victim being forced to carry the child of the ruthless criminal who violated her. He gives a half grimace and a reassuring nod as he begins by saying, "hat would be a very difficult situation, and it is a very difficult situation," before proceeding to completely ignore the situation and saying "will that (abortion) make the woman in a better situation if that's what takes place? And I don't think so." Of course not. Of course this woman's life will be better if she gives birth to God's rape child. I'm sorry, Sam, but your so-called "pro-life, whole-life" motto is thoroughly de-bunked every time you say "I will do it. I'll move aggressively forward on it" in reference to "deliberately and methodically" attacking other countries. Aren't confused, poor Africans God's children just as much as the rapist's bastard child? What a crock.
Mike Huckabee: Huckabee scored the most points of any of the middle-tier candidates, if only because he appears articulate and can handle the conservative banner better than any of the front-runners. There have been numerous articles saying the same thing and wondering why he hasn't taken off, and why he has raised so little money. So it seems likely that he will be the candidate that could have been, but at least he got off the most memorable zinger of the night when he said, "We've had Congress that's spent money like Edwards at a beauty shop." Hey-o! Even better, he mentioned it in reference to incurring a "fair tax" that would potentially get a lot of the IRS BS out of the way. He also seemed very even-keeled when he stood up for his tax increases to build roads and protect schools. Let's hope for the Red-State-blooded Americans out there that he will pick up some momentum. Plus, he lost a hundred pounds and ran a marathon. Props to that.
Tom Tancredo, Jim Gilmore: Meh. Not really worth a recap.
Ron Paul: Paul certainly did himself a disservice to goal of achieving the Republican nomination down at USC, but at least he went down guns blazin'. Even though he is a Libertarian, he didn't flout the notion that tax cuts alone will save our economy. He continually referred to fiscal discipline being a two-way street of reducing spending before we reduce our income. Certainly not cutting taxes while starting a war. He called out 9/11 a few times, initially saying, "we were spending $40 billion on security prior to 9/11, and they had all the information they needed there to deal with the threat." Damn. He proceeded to get himself into some trouble when he took the path of honesty and humility, admitting that American foreign policy necessarily impacts the views of hostile forces in the Middle East, a bad idea in the face of 9/11 bulldog/opportunist Rudy Giuliani, who then called him out by saying "I don't think I've heard that before." Really, Rudy? You've never heard that explanation before? What a sham. Don't bring that false exasperation to Quabbin Qountry any time soon. It belongs in one place and one place only - the Vlad Squad bench. Keep it real. I digress.
At any rate, Mr. Paul stood up to Rudy, but the damage was done. The crusty old Southerners in the audience were eating up Giuli's rabid terrorist-bating, and Ronnie was done. But not for me, as his best line was yet to come. After the debate's torture debacle (Paul was not questioned) he went out of his way to say, "but you know, I think it's interesting talking about torture here in that it's become enhanced interrogation technique. It sounds like Newspeak." Word. Second only to my horror at the crowd's reaction was my incredulous wonder at why the candidates were pussyfooting around the word torture in their defenses of it, calling it enhanced techniques and never readily admit to the direct question about waterboarding. Paul knew, though, and he dropped it like it was hot.
After that I couldn't really go on, and I ended up flipping more and more frequently to AMC where they were showing The Karate Kid. In other words, I got tired of watching the real Cobra Kai, and opted instead for the fictionalized version, where at the end even Johnny shows some mercy. Much the same today, I lack the strength to summarize the Big 3 other than to say that they were seemingly the strongest candidates. McCain kicked Romney's ass in the tete-a-tete and was honorable on torture, but was far from a sure winner. Giuli creeped me out with the red meat routine, and Romney is articulate but too easily damaged with the flip-flop attack. But hey, only EIGHT MORE MONTHS 'til New Hampshire!!! Time is a-wastin'!
. . .
The Sunshine Boy, unfazed by Huckabee's zinger, wrote a pre-emptive op-ed in the Huffington Post today, calling on Americans to take seriously their task on Memorial Day to remember the great sacrifices of American soldiers not by slapping a "Support Our Troops" magnet on their car, but by making a real effort to get the troops sent home from the current debacle in Iraq. I applaud him for the gesture. It is my belief that too often these days, in a world of instant leisure and long work days for so many, we have forgotten the purpose of national holidays. We see them as a free day to go to the beach or to be able to drink three nights in a row instead of actually pondering the meaning of the event. I think it is important for politicians to sincerely advocate their true celebration, and better yet to lead by example. Full disclosure: I will probably use it as an opportunity to drink three days in a row, but will accept any and all thoughts of good will to do the right thing. We're in this together, after all.
Sipping a Smuttynose from the banks of the Sawmill River,
BTB
Friday, April 27, 2007
DE(bat)ES Nuts!!
All eight of our Democratic presidential hopefuls squared off last night in the first of who knows how many debates down at South Carolina State. Today the press corps came out with a number of "winners" and "losers", so I figured that we should do the same here at 3QHQ. Everyone from The Fix to Slate to Joe Scarboro had their say on the winners and losers. Not that we give a shit. Here is our take.
Obama received mix messages. Many found him reluctant and milquetoast, trying too hard to maintain his status quo as the up-and-comer and drastically afraid to say something stupid when his already-strong momentum is crucial in catching Hillary Rodham in the first two weeks of February 2008. Yet there were plenty of others, like Chris Matthews, who found him sophisticated and deep. Then there was John Edwards who found him "high falutin'" or some such. HRC seemed to get positive reviews across the board, and that comes as no surprise. If you are looking for a careful, intelligent, centrist candidate she is your person. As a result, she will do well in every debate. This one was no different. Edwards was also mixed. He is hard to dislike with his old southern charm and $400 good looks. He also took it to the rest of the big 3 more than any of his compatriots (Barack and HRC, that is), but that awkward pause in the moral leader question certainly didn't help him. While we are on it, I reallllly felt that Obama looked around before raising his hand on the "global war on terror" question. Bush league. That was certainly my biggest critique.
Of the second tier, Billy Rich was the clear loser. He couldn't keep his words under control and he was gesticulating like a Valley Girl. Plus he appeared to be sweating profusely. Dodd was uneventful. Biden did well, but that is no surprise. Biden is a tight dude. Everyone loved his "Yes" answer, and his silver-haired patrician looks, and he certainly has good things to say. He is a longshot to win the nomination, but I presume he will come out of this fray with goodwill from a large faction of Americans. Meanwhile, someone in the blogosphere finally picked up on our friend at BHC's mantra that Kucinich deserves respect on account of his wife. She certainly towered over him on the stage last night. But seriously, Kucinich was arguably the biggest winner of the night from our vantage. He really brought the Quabbin Qabin down with his story about living in the same $22.5K Cleveland house that he bought in the early 90s. Take that, Edwards and Clinton! Imagine if Kerry was in the house. He spoke forcefully about the war, and his pocket Constitution gimmick was endearing, if a little contrived. Lastly, Gravel is a kook and need not be included in any more debates. In other words, bring out the hook!
Speaking abruptly from the Haymarket before it closes, we look forward to more debate. Stay legit.
Obama received mix messages. Many found him reluctant and milquetoast, trying too hard to maintain his status quo as the up-and-comer and drastically afraid to say something stupid when his already-strong momentum is crucial in catching Hillary Rodham in the first two weeks of February 2008. Yet there were plenty of others, like Chris Matthews, who found him sophisticated and deep. Then there was John Edwards who found him "high falutin'" or some such. HRC seemed to get positive reviews across the board, and that comes as no surprise. If you are looking for a careful, intelligent, centrist candidate she is your person. As a result, she will do well in every debate. This one was no different. Edwards was also mixed. He is hard to dislike with his old southern charm and $400 good looks. He also took it to the rest of the big 3 more than any of his compatriots (Barack and HRC, that is), but that awkward pause in the moral leader question certainly didn't help him. While we are on it, I reallllly felt that Obama looked around before raising his hand on the "global war on terror" question. Bush league. That was certainly my biggest critique.
Of the second tier, Billy Rich was the clear loser. He couldn't keep his words under control and he was gesticulating like a Valley Girl. Plus he appeared to be sweating profusely. Dodd was uneventful. Biden did well, but that is no surprise. Biden is a tight dude. Everyone loved his "Yes" answer, and his silver-haired patrician looks, and he certainly has good things to say. He is a longshot to win the nomination, but I presume he will come out of this fray with goodwill from a large faction of Americans. Meanwhile, someone in the blogosphere finally picked up on our friend at BHC's mantra that Kucinich deserves respect on account of his wife. She certainly towered over him on the stage last night. But seriously, Kucinich was arguably the biggest winner of the night from our vantage. He really brought the Quabbin Qabin down with his story about living in the same $22.5K Cleveland house that he bought in the early 90s. Take that, Edwards and Clinton! Imagine if Kerry was in the house. He spoke forcefully about the war, and his pocket Constitution gimmick was endearing, if a little contrived. Lastly, Gravel is a kook and need not be included in any more debates. In other words, bring out the hook!
Speaking abruptly from the Haymarket before it closes, we look forward to more debate. Stay legit.
Sunday, April 1, 2007
48 Million Reasons to Be Afraid
Today's Fix posted HRC's modest first quarter earnings at $26,000,000. Yeah, that's in millions, and yeah, that is only since January 20, 2007. The official HRC website reminds us that "in March of 2003, the highest total reported by a Democratic campaign in its first-quarter fundraising report was $7.4 million and the top four candidates combined raised just over $23 million." In other words, we can and will whore like never before! On the same day, Clinton finance chairman Terry "the snake" McAulliffe sets the artificial standards of competition high saying, "I would expect Senator Obama is going to have a comparable amount of money to what we have." Let's hope not.
...
breaking news
...
Even as we speak here at 3Q, rumours have it that Obamamania may have contributed a nearly-identical $21-22M. All this is very disheartening, especially in light of the news that so many states are frontloading primaries on their own terms. Has year-and-a-half-in-advance pocketbook voting replaced the polls in primaries? Poor John Edwards ($14M), and poorer Chris Dodd ($4M)! I guess it shows something that tens of thousands of people are willing to part ways with his money so soon, I just don't know if it is more to do with candidate support or Thomas Tusser. Let's face it, I'd rather spend my money on supporting my local barkeep, or at least buying up conservation land. I am very fearful of this cycle of doom where campaign cash gets tossed around like $100 bills at a Pacman Jones stripper party. Let's make it rain with handshakes and not phone banks.
Instead I will have to stay refreshed with Chuck Klosterman's Final Four bloggings, where the topic of the day is a rant about the McLaughlin Group. More on refreshiness later.
Signing off with a Sam Smith Oatmeal Stout,
BTB
...
breaking news
...
Even as we speak here at 3Q, rumours have it that Obamamania may have contributed a nearly-identical $21-22M. All this is very disheartening, especially in light of the news that so many states are frontloading primaries on their own terms. Has year-and-a-half-in-advance pocketbook voting replaced the polls in primaries? Poor John Edwards ($14M), and poorer Chris Dodd ($4M)! I guess it shows something that tens of thousands of people are willing to part ways with his money so soon, I just don't know if it is more to do with candidate support or Thomas Tusser. Let's face it, I'd rather spend my money on supporting my local barkeep, or at least buying up conservation land. I am very fearful of this cycle of doom where campaign cash gets tossed around like $100 bills at a Pacman Jones stripper party. Let's make it rain with handshakes and not phone banks.
Instead I will have to stay refreshed with Chuck Klosterman's Final Four bloggings, where the topic of the day is a rant about the McLaughlin Group. More on refreshiness later.
Signing off with a Sam Smith Oatmeal Stout,
BTB
Thursday, December 28, 2006
Two Americas
Or, as Kraus would say, Two Uh-Mare-I-Kuhs. Such is the theme that John Edwards says he will continue to
uting in his now-official run for the 2008 Democratic nomination for the Presidency. The Sunshine Boy threw his hat in a few days ago now, giving me time in my blograstination to think a little bit more on the subject. My initial reaction was that Edwards appeared to be a little too much of an everyman in his announcement speech from the still devastated 9th Ward of New Orleans. He was either clearly or deliberately unscripted as he talked about the things he felt were necessary for a better America, casually gesturing to the neighborhood around him with a well-casted crew of young black children in the background who have helped him do clean-up work.
My initial reaction was, No, not Presidential. But over a couple of days I came to realize that it is December of 2006, not July of '08. Maybe you don't want to come on too strong, too soon. But what really got to me was the heart of the announcement. The former Senator felt it was important “to show what’s possible when we as Americans, instead of staying home and complaining, actually take action and take responsibility.” It was a bit of a shock for a Quabbiner, living some thousand miles away, to see just a glimpse of the massive amount of work that still is left down in Cajun Country, and kudos to Edwards for pointing that out to people.
You certainly don't see Dubya reminding people of their civic duty to look out for their countrymen. In fact, as an aside, our President seemed to feel that Saddam's execution was a matter of little importance to him as he slept and sent one of his employees to comment. To quote Wayne Campbell, "As if!" As if Bush didn't give a damn! The sensibility of death penalty aside, it irked me to see Bush once again display a nonchalant attitude toward a major event that, in this case, he created. The haughty and presumptuous air of expectation is verrrry un-Quabbin.
Back to Edwards. The experience thing and the looks-like-he-is-40 thing will be hurdles, but I am starting to think that there could be a turning tide for 2008, which I will discuss in more detail in some future query. A tide that is more hospitable to larvae and less so to barnacles. Plus, his facebook profile lists his two favorite activities as basketball and running, just like we do here in Quabbin Qountry.
I think it is appropriate to close with some quotations about Gerald Ford, our 38th President:
"Gerald Ford was almost alone in his understanding that there can be no healing without pardon." - Dick Cheney, Nixon apologist.
"In 1974 America didn't need a philosopher-king or a warrior-prince. We needed a healer, we needed a rock, we needed honesty and candor and courage. We needed Gerald Ford." - Dennis Hastert, backhanded complimenter.
And now we go to a time of Three living ex-presidents, which might be the fewest in our modern history. I would be interested to find out.
Rest in Peace, Gerald Ford. A football player, a sailor, a civil servant, a President. Certainly not an Arrogant Bastard, which sits in my mug as we speak.
Ahoy,
BTB
uting in his now-official run for the 2008 Democratic nomination for the Presidency. The Sunshine Boy threw his hat in a few days ago now, giving me time in my blograstination to think a little bit more on the subject. My initial reaction was that Edwards appeared to be a little too much of an everyman in his announcement speech from the still devastated 9th Ward of New Orleans. He was either clearly or deliberately unscripted as he talked about the things he felt were necessary for a better America, casually gesturing to the neighborhood around him with a well-casted crew of young black children in the background who have helped him do clean-up work.My initial reaction was, No, not Presidential. But over a couple of days I came to realize that it is December of 2006, not July of '08. Maybe you don't want to come on too strong, too soon. But what really got to me was the heart of the announcement. The former Senator felt it was important “to show what’s possible when we as Americans, instead of staying home and complaining, actually take action and take responsibility.” It was a bit of a shock for a Quabbiner, living some thousand miles away, to see just a glimpse of the massive amount of work that still is left down in Cajun Country, and kudos to Edwards for pointing that out to people.
You certainly don't see Dubya reminding people of their civic duty to look out for their countrymen. In fact, as an aside, our President seemed to feel that Saddam's execution was a matter of little importance to him as he slept and sent one of his employees to comment. To quote Wayne Campbell, "As if!" As if Bush didn't give a damn! The sensibility of death penalty aside, it irked me to see Bush once again display a nonchalant attitude toward a major event that, in this case, he created. The haughty and presumptuous air of expectation is verrrry un-Quabbin.
Back to Edwards. The experience thing and the looks-like-he-is-40 thing will be hurdles, but I am starting to think that there could be a turning tide for 2008, which I will discuss in more detail in some future query. A tide that is more hospitable to larvae and less so to barnacles. Plus, his facebook profile lists his two favorite activities as basketball and running, just like we do here in Quabbin Qountry.
I think it is appropriate to close with some quotations about Gerald Ford, our 38th President:
"Gerald Ford was almost alone in his understanding that there can be no healing without pardon." - Dick Cheney, Nixon apologist.
"In 1974 America didn't need a philosopher-king or a warrior-prince. We needed a healer, we needed a rock, we needed honesty and candor and courage. We needed Gerald Ford." - Dennis Hastert, backhanded complimenter.
And now we go to a time of Three living ex-presidents, which might be the fewest in our modern history. I would be interested to find out.
Rest in Peace, Gerald Ford. A football player, a sailor, a civil servant, a President. Certainly not an Arrogant Bastard, which sits in my mug as we speak.
Ahoy,
BTB
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
