Archive for April, 2008
Apr 30, 2008 at 8:08 PM by David Pleasant
Page Gardner, President of Women’s Votes, Women’s Voices and a Hillary Clinton supporter, issued a statement regarding their robocalls in NC and the 16-truckloads of mailers post offices in North Carolina were preparing to deliver.
"In an attempt to prevent further confusion surrounding our voter registration efforts prior to the North Carolina primary, Women’s Voices. Women Vote took the extra step of attempting to stop the remaining mail from being delivered to homes. In total, 20 postal trucks are carrying Women’s Voices. Women Vote registration applications. Four of the trucks have already delivered, but Women’s Voices. Women Vote is making every attempt to delay the delivery of the remaining sixteen trucks.
In regards to the questions from the Facing South blog post regarding robo-calls associated with our mailing, we offer this clarification:
“North Carolina is one of 24 states where we mailed a total of more than 3 million voter registration applications.
“Calls were made to mail recipients for whom we have working phone numbers to alert the household they would be receiving a voter registration form and encouraging them to register to vote. In advance of the mail, a letter was sent to Gary Bartlett in the North Carolina Board of Elections Office. A copy of the letter and a press release sent to North Carolina media announcing the registration effort is attached.
“We understand concerns have been raised about the source of phone calls placed by Women’s Voices, Women Vote. These calls were our sincere attempt to encourage voter registration for those not registered for the general election this fall. We understand North Carolina’s primary registration effort deadline was April 11. We apologize for any confusion our calls may have caused. Our intent and purpose was solely to call attention to the registration applications we hope will be completed and returned to the Board of Elections office making thousands more North Carolinians participants in one of the most important elections of our lifetimes.
Women’s Voices. Women Vote has been in contact with the North Carolina State Board of Elections to work together to resolve any confusion regarding our voter registration efforts.
Read the full statement.
Apr 30, 2008 at 7:22 PM by David Pleasant
North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper says WVWV broke the law making all those “voter registration” robocalls and demanded the group cease and desist.
Attorney General Roy Cooper said Wednesday that the group, Women’s Voices, Women Vote, broke the state law that governs automated phone calls, or “robocalls.” No charges were filed, and Cooper’s office was seeking more information from the group.
Cooper’s statement is here (pdf).
ATTENTION NC VOTERS
To report any calls that you have made received, you can call toll free 1-877-5-NO-SCAM or fill out a complaint form available for downloading at www.ncdoj.gov.
Apr 30, 2008 at 5:16 PM by David Pleasant
Progressive South at Kos has found these associations between the WVWV and the Clintons. WVWV is the group responsible for the robocalls in NC I discussed in my last post.
Some have also questioned the ties between Women’s Voices operatives and Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton. Gardner, for example, contributed $2,500 to Clinton’s HILLPAC on May 4, 2006, and in March 2005 she donated a total of $4,200 to Clinton, according to The Center for Responsive Politics’ OpenSecrets.org. She has not contributed to the Obama campaign, according to the database.
Women’s Voices Executive Director Joe Goode worked for Bill Clinton’s election campaign in 1992 as a pollster; the group’s website says he was intimately involved in "development and implementation of all polling and focus groups done for the presidential primary and general election campaigns" for Clinton.
Women’s Voices board member John Podesta, former Chief of Staff for President Bill Clinton, donated $2,300 to Hillary Clinton on April 19, 2007, according to OpenSecrets.org. Podesta also donated $1,000 to Barack Obama in July 2004, but that was well before Obama announced his candidacy for president.
If nothing else, it certainly doesn’t look good.
Apr 30, 2008 at 4:05 PM by David Pleasant
(Update I and Update II below)
Robocalls organized by the D.C.-based non-profit organization, Women’s Voices Women’s Votes, have targeted African-American voters in North Carolina, and possibly 23 other states, in what has all the appearances of illegal vote suppression.
The NC State Board of Elections is investigating calls that African-American voters have received where the caller tells the voter they must complete and return a voter registration packet before the voter will be allowed to vote. This is a transcript of one version of the robocalls being made in the state (audio here):
"Hello, this is Lamont Williams. In the next few days, you will receive a voter registration packet in the mail. All you need to do is sign it, date it and return your application. Then you will be able to vote and make your voice heard. Please return the voter registration form when it arrives. Thank you."
It is worth noting that under North Carolina law, G.S § 163?275(17), it is a Class I felony to “…directly or indirectly, to misrepresent the law to the public through mass mailing or any other means of communication where the intent and the effect is to intimidate or discourage potential voters from exercising their lawful right to vote.”
Facing South has confirmed the non-profit is responsible for the robocalls made in North Carolina, and it may be part of a substantially larger operation spanning numerous states. (Emphasis added).
The D.C.-based nonprofit, led by well-connected Washington operatives, claims in a press release they sent to Facing South…that the North Carolina calls are part of a 24-state effort targeted at a list of 3 million voters, especially unmarried women. The robo-calls, which never mention Women’s Voices, are followed by mailings that include information on how to register to vote. They plan to mail some 276,000 packets in North Carolina alone.
But since last November, in at least 11 states nationwide, Women’s Voices — sometimes working through its Voter Participation Center project — has developed a checkered reputation, drawing rebukes from leading election officials and complaints from thousands of would-be voters as a result of their secretive tactics, deceptive mailings and calls, and penchant for skirting or violating the law.
With respect to Virginia and Ohio, Facing South reported (emphases in original):
[…] Voters in Virginia received calls with the same message before that state’s Feb. 12 primaries. . .
On February 8, WAMU reported:
"[...] The state board of elections says at least a dozen people in central and southern Virginia have received automated phone calls this week telling them to expect a voter registration packet in the mail. The residents say they were instructed by the caller to fill out the packets and mail them in."
Facing South has also learned that, last year, voters in Ohio received almost the exact same calls, using the same name of the supposed caller in North Carolina. In November 2007, a voter in Columbus, Ohio wrote in to the Buckeye State Blog with this eerily familiar story:
"I just got a weird robo-call that I suspect may be a form of voter suppression, albeit kinda braindead. From memory, a stentorian voice reminiscent of James Earl Jones says: ‘Hello. This is Lamont Williams. In a few days you should be getting a voter registration form in the mail. Please fill it out and return promptly and you will be able to vote. Thank you.’
"Since the election is Tuesday, the message is nonsensical. Also, I can’t find any information on this Lamont Williams. The caller ID was blocked (’unknown caller’)."
It would be extremely hard to argue that the calls in NC, VA, and OH are coincidental.
It is amazing that the non-profit confirmed they actually made the calls in North Carolina. And considering all the research Facing South has done that suspiciously parallels similar activities in Ohio, Virginia, Arizona, Colorado, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Florida, this could be a very big deal. Read more here.
Update: Sarah Johnson, a spokeswoman for Women’s Voices, Women’s Votes (WVWV), has also confirmed to TPM that the non-profit was responsible for the calls in North Carolina. Johnson said the calls were an "unfortunate mistake."
Update II 4:56 PM: The Virginia State Police investigated the robocalls in Virginia and found that WVWV was behind the calls there as well.
Apr 29, 2008 at 8:01 PM by David Pleasant
The chattering heads on David Gregory’s show on MSNBC this evening said "something is up" in the Hillary campaign for mid-June. I know that can’t possibly be any more vague, so here’s the gist of what they said.
David Shuster, substituting for Gregory tonight, reported Hillary campaign manager Terry McAuliffe has set June 15 as the end date for the campaign. According to Shuster, the following exchange took place in an interview McAuliffe had with CQ’s David Corn:
MCAULIFFE: The primaries finish on June 3, and after that there will be pressure on the uncommitted superdelegates to commit.
CORN: So all done by June 15? You won’t contend the nomination contest beyond then?
MCAULIFFE: (Smiling) Oh, I’m confident we’ll be the nominee.
Rachel Maddow then said:
"The real surprise is that we don’t hear [from] undecided superdelegates that they’re getting pressure from either the Democratic superpowers that be like Howard Dean or from Barack Obama. We’re only hearing about direct pressure on undecided superdelegates from Hillary Clinton."
Rachel’s point being that committed superdelegates aren’t being challenged to jump ship.
Joe Scarborough added:
"There’s something going on in the Clinton campaign because McAuliffe said that today. Last night, somebody very close to the Clinton campaign — very high up in the Clinton campaign — also told me something was going to happen in June. That this was not going to go to Denver. I’ve got no more details than that, but I find it very instructive that Terry McAuliffe said the same thing today."
Jay Carney (TIME) said he "was hearing the same thing" and that "it must arise out of some concern for the state of the party."
Carney went on to posit, summarizing, Clinton would continue if she won decisively in any of the upcoming primaries, but if she "lost" Indiana next week, she would "fold her tent up next week."
Eugene Robinson (WaPo) acknowledged he was hearing the same thing.
Scarborough then strongly reemphasized, "Something’s up."
They ended the segment collectively nodding and agreeing on "something’s up."
No one knows, or at least I don’t, what that "something" may be, but there was a different air in the conversation than the typical punditry and speculation — more conviction. And, it leaned toward Clinton acquiescing if she doesn’t hit a grand slam next week.
It could all be a Clinton tactic to indirectly interject a premature or false expectation of victory in the Obama camp, hoping they relax rather than push the next few days. I don’t believe the Obama camp would be that stupid, but they’ve had several tough weeks.
So. . .
Apr 29, 2008 at 3:31 PM by Political Chase
(Updated below)
Barack Obama repudiated Jeremiah Wright this afternoon in a press conference in Winston-Salem, NC.
This video was just released. More to follow soon.
Update: This is the transcript.
I have spent my entire adult life trying to bridge the gap between different kinds of people. That’s in my DNA. Trying to promote mutual understanding; to insist that we all share common hopes; and common dreams as Americans and as human beings. That’s who I am. That’s what I believe. And that’s what this campaign has been about.
Yesterday we saw a very different vision of America. I am outraged by the comments that were made, and saddened over the spectacle that we saw yesterday.
I have been a member of Trinity United Church of Christ since 1992, and I’ve known Rev. Wright for almost 20 years. The person I saw yesterday was not the person I met 20 years ago.
His comments were not only divisive and destructive, but I believe that they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate, and I believe that they do not portray accurately the perspective of the black church. They certainly don’t portray accurately my values and beliefs. And if Rev. Wright thinks that’s political posturing, as he put it, then he doesn’t know me very well. Based on his remarks yesterday, well, I may not know him as well as I thought either.
Continue reading ‘Obama repudiates Wright’
Apr 29, 2008 at 2:26 PM by David Pleasant
George Bush held a press conference this morning that was staged as focusing on the economy, but it was a lame ploy to pound Democrats during the election season. The most unpopular president in history fired off criticism after criticism at Congress (viz. Democrats), and displayed anger several times.
When asked about how successful the war in Afghanistan was, Bush pounded the podium and vehemently declared, “We’re making progress.” No one asked the scornful president to define “progress.”
Without exception, according to Bush, all problems the country faces are directly attributable to Democrats Congress. And of course, everything Bush has demanded is and has always been perfect in every way, as evidenced by his 28 percent approval rating.
The presser was a veiled attempt at election season politics (viz. campaigning) but mitigating the risks of Bush associating himself with a specific GOP incumbent or candidate, although he hesitantly put a plug in for John McSame.
Bush accused Congress of blocking his proposals to deal with everything from high gas prices to tuition bills.
“It’s a tough time for our economy,” Bush said at a Rose Garden news conference. “Across our country, many Americans are understandably anxious about issues affecting their pocketbook, from gas and food prices to mortgage and tuition bills. They’re looking to their elected leaders in Congress for action.”
“Unfortunately, on many of these issues, all they’re getting is delay,” he said.
He repeatedly called for drilling in ANWR (Arctic national wildlife refuge), and to begin construction of oil refineries to help meet the global demand for oil, which would, according to Bush, reduce the overall price of oil and other energy related costs.
Bush also called on Congress to drop emission restrictions on coal plants, which at its current level, is, I believe, the single greatest source of carbon emissions in the country. If I recall correctly, emissions from coal plants are responsible for approximately 50 percent of our carbon-based pollution.
Bush slammed Congress so hard, the less informed viewer would have easily believed the only thing Democrats did was develop ways to purposefully ruin the economy, ran the major oil companies, force homes into foreclosure, thwart higher education pursuits, and logarithmically raise food prices.
President Bush then pinned the problem of rising food prices largely on Congress, saying it was considering a “massive, bloated” farm bill that would fail to eliminate subsidy payments to “multimillionaire” farmers. With the nation’s farm economy thriving, the president argued, it is time for Congress to reduce lavish farm subsidies that translate to higher taxes for average Americans.
Mr. Bush said he had also urged Congress to pass legislation that would help address problems in the housing market by modernizing the Federal Housing Administration, reforming the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac loan agencies, and allowing state housing agencies to issue tax free bonds to refinance subprime loans.
“Yet they failed to send a single one of these proposals to my desk,” he said. “Americans should not have to wait any longer for their elected officials to help more families stay in their homes.”
Read the transcript.
Apr 29, 2008 at 9:52 AM by David Pleasant
Speaks for itself.
Hillary, too, was asked about Wright today by reporters. While she took the opportunity to remind all of us of her earlier declaration that she would not have kept Wright as her pastor, she called on John McCain to get the North Carolina GOP not to run the ad hitting Obama over this:
"I have said that that that was a personal decision of his. I answered one question about it that made it clear I would not have stayed in that church under those circumstances," Clinton told reporters in Graham, NC.
"But, I regret the efforts by the Republicans to politicize this matter and I believe that if Senator McCain were serious he would do more than just send a letter he is the putative nominee I think he could very clearly tell the North Carolina party tell the Mississippi party that he would not tolerate those kinds of advertisements and I’m waiting to see if he does that."
Apr 29, 2008 at 8:48 AM by David Pleasant
John McCain is scheduled to deliver a speech on health care today. Following are excerpts from his prepared remarks. As you can see, McCain makes no provision for the 47 million Americans that currently do not have health insurance. Instead, he says he will “work tirelessly to address the problem.” Has he already started? Does Quick Draw McGraw already have a bill pending?
Well, I suppose I overstated that a bit. If any of the 47 million uninsured have sufficient income to yield a $5,000 tax liability, they can get a $5,000 tax credit. Assuming they are fully employed, That will only put them about 18 months behind in the payment cycle, assuming they have the means to get started and an insurer that will accept them. And, if their premiums will be as expensive as mine are ($900+ per month w/high deductible for just me and that’s with only one family-physician visit in seven years), the $5,000 might be as useful as $0.05. The point is, $5,000 tax credits are realistically only applicable to middle- or higher-income brackets.
Moreover, he intends to have the A-Team (”insurers, businesses, state legislators”) and “patients” to hammer out a plan to “reach out” to “at risk people” and will ultimately be managed by the states, that is, if the “states consent.” That smells, at best, like No Child Left Behind, but with an option to say no and consequently block benefits from whatever special-interest-centric plan the A-Team and “patients” will develop.
I would also like to know how “patients” working on the A-Team will be determined. Will Ronald A. Williams of Aetna be an A-Team patient? Will any of the homeless veterans sleeping under bridges be included in the “patient” group? Will Donnie Ingram, who lost his job in January when his Lancaster County, SC textile mill employer outsourced its operations to Brazil, be an A-Team patient? And, of course, there is always the option of yanking that myocardial infarction patient out of Trauma Room No. 1 for a four-hour video conference.
Maybe Mr. Bush Mr. McCain will address it in his speech, but there is nothing in the advance excerpts about S-CHIP, which George Bush refused to sign. (If he has signed it over the past few months, I’m not aware of it.)
The key to real reform is to restore control over our health-care system to the patients themselves. Right now, even those with access to health care often have no assurance that it is appropriate care. Too much of the system is built on getting paid just for providing services, regardless of whether those services are necessary or produce quality care and outcomes. American families should only pay for getting the right care: care that is intended to improve and safeguard their health.
When families are informed about medical choices, they are more capable of making their own decisions, less likely to choose the most expensive and often unnecessary options, and are more satisfied with their choices. We took an important step in this direction with the creation of Health Savings Accounts, tax-preferred accounts that are used to pay insurance premiums and other health costs. These accounts put the family in charge of what they pay for. And, as president, I would seek to encourage and expand the benefits of these accounts to more American families.
Even so, those without prior group coverage and those with pre-existing conditions do have the most difficulty on the individual market, and we need to make sure they get the high-quality coverage they need. I will work tirelessly to address the problem. But I won’t create another entitlement program that Washington will let get out of control. Nor will I saddle states with another unfunded mandate. The states have been very active in experimenting with ways to cover the “uninsurables.” The State of North Carolina, for example, has an agreement with Blue Cross to act as insurer of “last resort.” Over thirty states have some form of “high-risk” pool, and over twenty states have plans that limit premiums charged to people suffering an illness and who have been denied insurance.
As President, I will meet with the governors to solicit their ideas about a best practice model that states can follow – a Guaranteed Access Plan or GAP that would reflect the best experience of the states. I will work with Congress, the governors, and industry to make sure that it is funded adequately and has the right incentives to reduce costs such as disease management, individual case management, and health and wellness programs. These programs reach out to people who are at risk for different diseases and chronic conditions and provide them with nurse care managers to make sure they receive the proper care and avoid unnecessary treatments and emergency room visits. The details of a Guaranteed Access Plan will be worked out with the collaboration and consent of the states. But, conceptually, federal assistance could be provided to a nonprofit GAP that operated under the direction of a board that included all stakeholders groups – legislators, insurers, business and medical community representatives, and, most importantly, patients. The board would contract with insurers to cover patients who have been denied insurance and could join with other state plans to enlarge pools and lower overhead costs. There would be reasonable limits on premiums, and assistance would be available for Americans below a certain income level.
Apr 29, 2008 at 6:44 AM by David Pleasant
I repeatedly find instances of Hillary Clinton pandering some voter-catching two-bit policy, which is contradictory to policies Clinton has proposed in the past or runs afoul with her legislative record.
For example, Clinton has joined the McCain Pandering Express in a proposal to eliminate the federal highway tax during the summer months, and as usual, rapidly slams Obama for being against it.
Clinton Monday on highway taxes:
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton lined up with Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee for president, in endorsing a plan to suspend the federal excise tax on gasoline, 18.4 cents a gallon, for the summer travel season. But Senator Barack Obama, Mrs. Clinton’s Democratic rival, spoke out firmly against the proposal, saying it would save consumers little and do nothing to curtail oil consumption and imports. . . .
Mrs. Clinton said at a rally on Monday morning in Graham, N.C., that she would introduce legislation to impose a windfall-profits tax on oil companies and use the revenue to suspend the gasoline tax temporarily.
Mr. Obama derided the McCain-Clinton idea of a federal tax holiday as a “short-term, quick-fix” proposal that would do more harm than good, and said the money, which is earmarked for the federal highway trust fund, is badly needed to maintain the nation’s roads and bridges.”
Rewind. Clinton in 2000 on highway taxes: (h/t kos).
Campaigning in the Hudson Valley, Lazio continued a two-day assault on Clinton’s support of maintaining the 18-cent federal gas tax and then used tough rhetoric to declare that "trust" and "character" were campaign issues during an evening fundraiser in Manhattan that raised more that $1 million.
Clinton, meanwhile, lashed out at Lazio’s plan to repeal 4.3 cents of the gas tax, calling it "a bad deal for New York and a potential bonanza for the oil companies."
During a visit to a shopping mall in the Buffalo suburbs, Clinton said that "the gas tax is one of the few exceptions where we actually get more money back than we send to Washington."
Moreover, consider how Paul Krugman characterized McCain’s tax policies, which Clinton also seeks to implement.
[A] look at what Mr. McCain says about taxes shows the same combination of irresponsibility and double-talk that, back in 2000, foreshadowed the character of the Bush administration.
Krugman continues:
If truth be told, the McCain tax plan doesn’t seem to embody any coherent policy agenda. Instead, it looks like a giant exercise in pandering — an attempt to mollify the G.O.P.’s right wing, and never mind if it makes any sense.
The impression that Mr. McCain’s tax talk is all about pandering is reinforced by his proposal for a summer gas tax holiday — a measure that would, in fact, do little to help consumers, although it would boost oil industry profits.
More and more, Mr. McCain sounds like a man who will say anything to become president.
There you have it. Straight from one of Hillary’s most ardent supporters.
Apr 28, 2008 at 9:20 PM by David Pleasant
Blogs are all abuzz with Rev. Jeremiah Wright today. I looked around to see what some of the reactions are and what those reactions may be based upon. This could change rapidly, but by far the majority of those blogging about Wright were conservatives and avid Hillary Clinton supporters. Neocons, for the most part, furthered the race debate by focusing on "black brains vs. white brains" and Hillary Clinton zealots were gleefully preparing for a requiem - justified or not.
I did not read a single blog that commented on, much less explored, whether Wright’s remarks were theologically sound (or not), which, like it or not, is the foundation for the controversy. But that’s what is so incredibly hypocritical about Wright’s critics and the Hillary zealots seeking to destroy Obama at any price.
They started in March by demanding Obama submit to a religious test, which was unconstitutional to begin with, and once they had enough political rhetoric for the controversy to be self-sustaining, they no longer needed and conveniently dismissed the basis of the initial dust-up. Now it’s all about how much damage has been or will be created, or dissembling on a tangential, neurological debate that is so far removed from the center of the original controversy it is pathetic.
It’s just more evidence of clinging to anything possible, justified or not, to demonize or minimize Obama directly or indirectly.
I’m not going to dig into the theological aspect of this debate, at least for today, because I think Wright did an excellent job presenting it himself on Bill Moyer’s Journal Friday. The video of the entire show is at the end of this post. If you did not watch the show last week, I urge you to watch the two videos.
Countless neocons and incredibly avid Hillary supporters cite Jake Tapper’s opinionated and biased reporting as if he had just authored one of the Synoptic Gospels or come down from The Mount with the Tablets. Tapper writes:
He clearly was not doing Obama any favors, not only by reappearing before a ravenous media thus distracting from Obama’s attempt to relate better to white working class voters in Indiana and North Carolina, but by implying Obama’s condemnation of some of his sermons was not sincere.
Citing the above passage and other excerpts from His Holiness Tapper, Jeralyn at TalkLeft, and a defense attorney to boot, concludes:
At this point, I’d say the question is not whether, but how much, Wright is hurting Obama’s campaign.
It is so ordered.
Christopher Beam at Slate takes a more analytical approach and reflects on how Wright’s tour de tee-vee might have even helped.
The YouTube ratio. Right now, Wright is defined as that guy you saw in that YouTube clip or looped on MSNBC. Naturally, it’s always his most heated remarks that get repeated. The more people see Wright in other contexts—on Bill Moyers, at the NAACP, at a conference of ministers—the less they’ll associate him with those initial images. It doesn’t hurt that when he tries, Wright can be charm itself.
The comeback kid. Wright may not be a politician, but he has a politician’s quickness—a quality that makes him remarkably entertaining to watch. When he was asked at today’s event how he feels about being an American, he diffused notions that he’s unpatriotic: “I served six years in the military,” he said. “How many years did Cheney serve?” When the moderator asked him to respond to Chris Rock’s joke that Wright is a “75-year-old black man who doesn’t like white people—is there any other kind of 75-year-old black man?” Wright had the perfect retort: “That’s just like the media. I’m not 75.” (He’s 66.)
Better now than in October. The furor over Wright so far is nothing compared with what Republicans will drum up in the fall. John McCain announced yesterday that despite hinting that he’d leave the Wright issue alone—he asked the North Carolina GOP not to air an ad denouncing Obama and Wright—he now thinks Wright is fair game. So much for the civility race. Given that, it’s better for Wright to fight back and soften his image now than to allow his current image to calcify over the next six months. If he can go from Obama’s crazy minister to Obama’s controversial but thoughtful and witty minister, that will be a huge step in pre-empting the GOP onslaught.
That’s an optimistic view point, but unfortunately one that can only be determined at a later time. However, I believe Steve Benen at Carpetbagger is on the right track, at least logically.
Ultimately, though, I’m still not entirely sure why Wright is the dominant story of the presidential campaign. No serious person believes that Obama agrees with Wright’s most inflammatory remarks. Over a month ago, even John McCain was saying the right things — when Sean Hannity noted the questions about Obama’s former pastor, he asked, “Would you go to a church like that?” McCain responded, “Obviously, that would not be my choice. But I do know Sen. Obama. He does not share those views.”
Unfortunately, many people do not think like Steve does. Instead, they would rather determine guilt by association, even if it isn’t justified, or capitalize on and propagate the musings of a biased and excited media in order to promote their personal agenda.
The two videos below are the entire Bill Moyers’ Journal show with Jeremiah Wright.
The first video is blank for the first 20 seconds (show’s intro). Audio plays, but no images are displayed during that brief period.
Rev. Jeremiah Wright on Bill Moyers’ Journal - Part I
Rev. Jeremiah Wright on Bill Moyers’ Journal - Part II
Apr 28, 2008 at 1:41 PM by David Pleasant
I have some personal business that I must take care of and will not be be able to post any today and possibly tomorrow. If I finish early, you’ll be the first to know.
Apr 28, 2008 at 2:05 AM by Political Chase
Meet the new Democratic nominee — Sweeney Todd.
Or maybe this is a Republican attack ad?
Apr 26, 2008 at 8:33 PM by David Pleasant
Hillary Clinton’s call today in South Bend, Indiana for another debate with Obama is a farce. If she was not able to articulate her message and differentiate herself in 21 debates over the past year, then she doesn’t deserve another opportunity to debate, much less to be President of the United States. Furthermore, Clinton’s incivility is well established. Her call for a debate without a moderator is on par with the high school bully that picks a fight for no reason, or better still, any reason.
Why doesn’t she just say what she really wants — nationally televised mudslinging.
“What I think the people of Indiana deserve is a real one on one debate,” she said. “After the last debate, Sen. Obama’s supporters complained a little about the tough questions,” she said, drawing a sarcastic “awwwwww” from the crowd.
“I’m offering Senator Obama a chance to debate me, one-on-one, no moderators,” she said. At the same time, her campaign released a letter from Maggie Williams, its manager, sent to David Plouffe, her counterpart at the Obama campaign, outlining its proposed terms.
“Senator Clinton and Senator Obama will participate in a 90-minute debate in an open public forum,” Mrs. Williams wrote. “Just the two of them — no questioners, no panelists, no video clips. One candidate would speak for two minutes, then the other, alternating back and forth all the way through the debate. Their discussion – not any pre-set rules – would determine how long they spend on one subject before moving on to another.”
Apr 25, 2008 at 3:36 PM by Political Chase
Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mullen announcing the Pentagon is planning "potential" military action against Iran is just cause for Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to send a stern warning to President Bush that only Congress has the authority to declare war.
It is prudent for the Pentagon to be proactive in its defensive planning against our enemies. But the important issues here are: determining who our enemies are, what realistic level of threat they pose, and to what extent the American people deem acts of war and appropriate response.
George Bush has abused his executive authority in the past and there is no evidence to suggest he will not continue to do so in the future. Pelosi and Reid should make it clear, well in advance, that any unilateral decision to attack Iran will be a gross violation of the Constitution.
