Or maybe this is the plan, that they have determined that nationalization is the best course to save the financial sector, and don't care if they weaken these institutions further with their statements.
I don't see how Bredesen can even get through Congress, politically. Blue Cross Blue Shield paid $150k to decorate his house! Democrats on the left and Republicans on the right would go ballistic (for different reasons). It would be another Daschle-like embarassment for Obama, not what he needs.
Well, I am not too thrilled with David Gregory, but let's face facts.
1) Who else were they gonna pick? Choosing a partisan host would have completely changed the tenor of the show, and that rules out Matthews, Olbermann and Maddow. Which quite frankly doesn't leave you with a heck of a lot of options. Pretty much just Brokaw, Gregory, maybe Andrea Mitchell.
2) Most of the people ripping on Gregory here for being captive to the conventional wisdom would have done the same for Russert before his death.
I think a lot also depends on who the Rs nominate in 2012, and who in the meantime emerges as the de facto leader or leaders. Fortunately for us there doesn't seem to be a candidate for them in the near term who can provide a credible voice of the opposition.
How 'bout a "Bill Kristol" award for the blogger/ pundit who was most consistently wrong about everything during the campaign?
Not sure why you feel a need to pick a fight with Kos when you were wrong about so many things during the campaign. I don't really have a dog in this fight but didn't Markos pretty much say "If Obama runs, he wins" before the guy had even declared his candidacy? Even if you're more concerned with polls than punditry, didn't you keep telling us the Battleground poll was the one we should trust most re: turnout model etc?
I actually think what TexasD stated above, making an affirmative effort to hire equal numbers of men and women, is a worthy goal.
But if, after his selections are made, we use it as an excuse to criticize him if the ratio is less than 50-50, I think it's a waste of time.
I'm actually pretty confident that women will have a good deal of sway in his cabinet. For one thing, Valerie Jarret, who has been a major force behind the campaign and is helping oversee the transition, is almost certain to be one of the main people Barack turns to for advice, along with Rahm and Axelrod.
Does gender equality mean hiring exactly equal numbers of men and women, or hiring the best qualified people for the job regardless of whether they are male or female? For the sake of the country, I would hope the second one, and I believe that's what President Obama will do.
You know guys, not everyone thinks Palin is a joke, Jerome Armstrong is (or was) in awe of her.;)
For the GOP, I watched the TV speeches tonight in full, and have just one word.
We have met someone that we will be doing battle against for a decade or more. Seriously. I've never seen a woman, or a man for that matter, speak that way, prime time, national, convention, live, ever. She blows away Hillary Clinton. Sorry, but that's what it is. Palin's deft speaking style is like watching visceral connective tissue being torn-- with a child in arms.
Good point. To some degree the libertarians have already bolted, beginning with the Ron Paul candidacy. It is also kind of surreal to watch some of the "plutocrats" as you call them, jump on board the Obama train. Was watching Larry King last night and he had Scott McClellan and Christopher Hitchens on as OBAMA surrogates.
One reason I am optimistic that turnout won't dampen even if Obama stays ahead in the polls...this is a historic election. People want to vote for Obama even if they knows he's going to win, so they can tell their kids and their grandkids that they did. I know I do.
Go back to the polling before the primary and look at the numbers. McCain was always going to be by far the toughest Repub to beat, and guess what - Obama consistently was running even or ahead of him, while Clinton was consistently running even or behind.
How on earth do you account for that if race is the main factor here?
Again, I'd argue it's not Obama - it's the kind of race the GOP runs. And there was a reason they were salivating to run against Clinton, too - there was no lack of material to draw from there.
If you are thinking a Clinton run this year or in 2012 would be a cake walk, keep dreaming. In the meantime, it would be great if those who have the platform to do so would use your unique position to write things that HELP the Dem ticket, rather than create doubts. Of course, it's your right and your responsibility to call it like you see it. But just as every phone call and every donation helps, every column that focuses on new ways to defeat the Repub agenda gets us one step closer to that goal.