tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13558228.post6856532911261554942..comments2008-07-20T12:58:44.878-05:00Comments on The Anonymous Liberal: Quick HitsA.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/13043896060440034468noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13558228.post-19870017279355735692008-07-10T19:44:00.000-05:002008-07-10T19:44:00.000-05:00I happen to think a lot of Joe Biden, but I want h...I happen to think a lot of Joe Biden, but I want him in the Senate. I'm not in favor of pulling ANY Democrat out of the Senate, especially one as well placed as Joe.<BR/><BR/>As to the Underpants Gnome economic plan ... I was howling. Thank you for that!Davenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13558228.post-62021783918556783932008-07-09T14:22:00.000-05:002008-07-09T14:22:00.000-05:00Mccains plan will put America in a Noose!Mccains plan will put America in a Noose!Doughttp://greenupgrader.com/2415/mccains-energy-policy-leaves-america-hanging-ad/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13558228.post-57440755743196317042008-07-08T19:26:00.000-05:002008-07-08T19:26:00.000-05:00Here are my thoughts on Obama's VP. I think he wi...Here are my thoughts on Obama's VP. <BR/><BR/>I think he will pick a VP who amplifies his qualities -- especially change -- rather than one who attempts to make up for supposed weaknesses or tries to appeal to specific states. That's the main reason he won't pick any of the old hacks some idiots in the press keep mentioning, like Ed Rendell or Sam Nunn. Sam Fracking Nunn?!!! WTF? He's older than McCain and is the very incarnation of old time conservative and hawkish Southern politics. Late in life he became good on nuclear non-proliferation, but apart from that, he'd be more compatible as McCain's VP than Obama's. (Only the morons in the US media could seriously float Nunn as a possibility. Have they listened to ANYTHING Obama has been saying for the past year and a half?) Change is also the main reason he won't pick Clinton...in addition to not wanting to be burdened with the Clinton baggage, the circus the media would make out of the Clintons back in the executive branch, Hillary's inevitable attempts to upstage him (and/or the media's attempts to portray Hillary as attempting to upstage him), and having Bill hanging around the edges and breathing down his neck and sucking all the oxygen (among other things). Not to mention the distractions, problems, and controversies Bill would cause -- and enmire Obama in -- every time he shot off his mouth, preened for the press, and acted like the rogue elephant he is.<BR/><BR/>I'd like to see Obama pick someone fresh and appealing, perhaps like Brian Schweitzer, though I admittedly know little about him other than that he has a reputation for cutting through bullshit with clarity and humor, is a fairly liberal (on most issues) and popular populist, and embodies the free-wheeling outdoorsy Western rancher spirit. In fact, he actually IS a free-wheeling outdoorsy Western rancher. He even speaks Arabic! (Before he entered politics, he oversaw the construction of irrigation projects and dairy farms in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere in the middle East.) Or, if he wants a bridge to the Clinton team, I'd be happy -- actually very happy -- with Wes Clark, though the recent brouhaha may have sunk his chances. I'm tempted to predict he'll pick Bill Richardson -- and would be happy with that too -- except that Richardson is a non-stop gaffe machine, a terrible debater, and a pussy hound. <BR/><BR/>I'm even more tempted to predict he'll pick someone completely off the media's radar. Maybe Sherrod Brown, senator from a key battleground state (Ohio) -- who, unlike Ted Strickland (who took himself out of the running anyway), is young, attractive, pro-choice, and a hero to many in the progressive movement. He had enough years as a congressman before becoming a senator two years ago that he is seasoned and knowledgeable, but he has always been a liberal champion so he's not a tie to the stale politics of the past. And he voted AGAINST the authorization for the Iraq war in 2002. Or maybe Robert Wexler, six term congresscritter from another key battleground state (Florida), who is also young, attractive, and liberal. And Jewish. But Wexler voted for the Iraq war authorization, so that weakens Obama's case against McCain and might disqualify him. I would think that both Brown and Wexler are just the sort of people Obama would like to groom to continue his legacy eight years from now. And, while they are both real liberals, they aren't well known nationally so they don't come pre-packaged as scary left wing bugaboos (like Russ Feingold might).<BR/><BR/>I think Obama is smart enough to know he'll need as big a majority in the Senate as possible, so I don't think he'll pick Jim Webb (moot now), Mark Warner (moot now), Claire McCaskill, Chris Dodd, or any other senator whose seat could be taken by a Rethuglican. I don't see the allure of Kathleen Sebelius or Janet Napolitano, either. Sebelius is very middle of the road, as she would have to be as a Democrat from Kansas (so who on earth would she be appealing to?) and Napilitano is strongly rumored to be gay. I really think Obama gains nothing, and risks losing a lot, with either of these women. <BR/><BR/>I'm not too worried, though. Obama has run an extremely smart and savvy campaign so far, and has demonstrated great judgment in strategy and other decisions. So I trust he'll make a good and smart decision on the VP as well. <BR/><BR/>JEPJEPhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05169515488784930797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13558228.post-3898120532663070532008-07-08T11:35:00.000-05:002008-07-08T11:35:00.000-05:00AARP is connected with insurance. They hated Medi...AARP is connected with insurance. They hated Medicaid/Medicare, at first.<BR/><BR/>John and his ilk live in daily fear of the Europeanisation of the US. Health care, social services, and more equality (excepting gastarbeiter). <BR/><BR/>MoldAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13558228.post-87334293078291119442008-07-08T11:32:00.000-05:002008-07-08T11:32:00.000-05:00Obama should choose an AfAm for Veep. One that is...Obama should choose an AfAm for Veep. One that is young enough to weed out the KKKristians. <BR/><BR/>How exactly is Scalia intelligent? I have yet to see anyone say that except homeskoolers.<BR/><BR/>MoldAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13558228.post-73190125092833477502008-07-08T07:38:00.000-05:002008-07-08T07:38:00.000-05:00AL, I rarely disagree with you but I think Obama's...AL, I rarely disagree with you but I think Obama's Veep selection should not be Biden. Evan Bayh brings everything: looks (but not cheesy handsome like Romney), youth (but not too young at 52), foreign policy and governing experience (but only 10 years in Washington), moderate (e.g., voted for the p.b. abortion ban) and party unity (he was a big Clinton supporter). Indiana is already in play this year—I think he clinches the state for Obama and maybe helps in western Ohio. (Bayh got above 60% of the vote in the last 3 elections.) Finally, unlike Biden, you don't have to worry about Bayh embarrassing you by saying something idiotic.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13558228.post-12143951606589948262008-07-08T06:45:00.000-05:002008-07-08T06:45:00.000-05:00I rely heavily on you & Greenwald for legal analys...I rely heavily on you & Greenwald for legal analysis but you should leave political analysis to others. Biden is an endless geyser of verbal incoherence who, if allowed to speak long enough, will and often does repeatedly contradict himself. His monomaniacal preening as chairman of the Judiciary Committee turned the confirmation hearing of Clarence Thomas into a chaotic, directionless circus without purpose, other than grandstanding inanity. <BR/><BR/>Verbosity is not substance. There is no "there" there.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13558228.post-68332544121434713622008-07-08T00:18:00.000-05:002008-07-08T00:18:00.000-05:00"THE PROSECUTION OF GEORGE W. BUSH FOR MURDER" is ..."THE PROSECUTION OF GEORGE W. BUSH FOR MURDER" is a new book in which Vincent Bugliosi lays out his meticulously-researched case that Bush (and Cheney, and others) have murdered more than 4,000 American soldiers, and can be tried and convicted, in an American court, as soon as their terms in office are over.<BR/><BR/>Bugliosi is the famed former prosecutor who won convictions in 105 of 106 felony trials before juries, including 21 out of 21 cases of murder. He is absolutely determined to see that Bush does not get away with murder forever. <BR/><BR/>The quickest way to familiarize yourself with Bugliosi's case against Bush is to go to the website of The Public Record -- pubrecordDOTorg -- and click on the "Multimedia" heading.<BR/><BR/>There you will find a three-part video of Mr. Bugliosi's recent presentation to a standing-room-only audience. The video runs for about 50 minutes, total.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for taking an interest.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13558228.post-10145356162832014002008-07-07T23:19:00.000-05:002008-07-07T23:19:00.000-05:00Joe Biden, yeah that's the ticket!Biden, the one w...Joe Biden, yeah that's the ticket!<BR/><BR/>Biden, the one who <A HREF="http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/31/biden.obama/" REL="nofollow">said</A>: <I>"I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy," Biden said. "I mean, that's a storybook, man."</I><BR/><BR/>And <A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM19YOqs7hU" REL="nofollow">this</A>:<BR/><BR/><I>"You cannot go to a 7-11 or Dunkin Donuts unless you have a slight Indian Accent."</I><BR/><BR/>Joe Biden (Delaware - Narcissist) and Obama, two individuals who have so much <A HREF="http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0707/Stoller_on_Obama_A_narcissistic_festival_of_selflove.html" REL="nofollow">self-love</A>, individually and for each other, Obama wouldn't need an Intern.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13558228.post-66665961404413446762008-07-07T23:12:00.000-05:002008-07-07T23:12:00.000-05:003. The AARP is in someone's corporate pocket, no d...3. The AARP is in someone's corporate pocket, no doubt about it, at least since they came out in support of the prescription drug plan in its current form. They got my membership for one and only one year. They're not getting it again.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com