• on a comment on Clarity Clinton on Iraq over 5 years ago

    I appreciate your clarification.  Unfortunately, in the short term it seems everything except locking bush in a windowless room will have no impact on the war in Iraq.

    I'm no Hillary hater, but she does seem terribly cautious about getting ahead of her perception of public opinion, and that is certainly not leadership.

    Frankly I think it would be terrific if she co-sponsered the bill.  That of course is not going to happen because of her own political needs.  

  • on a comment on Clarity Clinton on Iraq over 5 years ago

    The so called "Dead-on Departure" bill happens to be the Iraq Study Group plan, largely.  So that's pretty bipartisan.  Do you have some alternative suggestion that you'd like introduced as legislation?  Or are you just intent on slamming Obama, irrespective of what position he takes?

    To say its not a substantive Iraq policy is just absurd.  Is the Senate ready for it?  Maybe not. Does that mean any candidate for President should be criticized for trying to provide leadership on Iraq?  On the contrary, they should be praised for it.

  • on a comment on Al Gore's Ex-Politician Behavior over 5 years ago

    He did not have to chair the committee that blessed Jobs' behavior.  He did'nt even have to sit on it.  But maybe you're right.. maybe he's on the board as a human Purell sanitizer.

    Any which way, anybody who thinks being attached to massive giveaways to CEOs is not a major political liability in 2008 is living on the wrong planet.  Apple is clearly not an Enron, but that's not the issue here.

    I actually love what Gore is doing on climate change.  I've also met him personally, and he has next to zero natural charm.

  • on a comment on Al Gore's Ex-Politician Behavior over 5 years ago

    You think Jobs just agreed to cancel them?  Out of the goodness of his altruistic heart?  He agreed to cancel them in exchange for the stock grant.  Functionally that's the same thing as converting them.  And the board would have negotiated the terms of the grant using the terms on the options.  That's the way boards work.

  • comment on a post Jack Murtha has the votes over 5 years ago

    The strategic brilliance of Murtha being leader is that if he gets hit on Abscam, the Dems have a giant opening to go after McCain on Keating 5.  Two years talking about Saint John's sins is a nice head start.  The next round is all about McCain, who's going to be anointed Bush's successor.  The more you can piss on his coattails, the more likely we are to retain Congress.  And then you have the obvious veteran leader in time of war issue.  Never underestimate Mrs. Pelosi.

  • on a comment on Roll Call: Pelosi to Back Murtha over 5 years ago

    Nancy raised $50 million for the new Dems.  How much exactly did Hoyer raise?  He says he has 21 of the 41 new elects.  How many does he have when they realize they're bucking Nancy (and Emanuel)

  • on a comment on Roll Call: Pelosi to Back Murtha over 5 years ago

    And because Rahm did not fight Clyburn for Whip, the CBC vote is for Murtha.

  • on a comment on Roll Call: Pelosi to Back Murtha over 5 years ago

    The posters below seem to forget that Nancy learned to count as a kid by counting votes.  And Rahm Emanuel is certainly signed off too.  Its over: Murtha has it in the bag and Nancy is clearly the boss.

  • comment on a post IL-05: Pin Down Rahm Emanuel with '08 Primary over 5 years ago

    Looks like blogswarm is the only one for the Leninist purge here.  Both in the story and comments so far.

  • comment on a post On John Kerry over 5 years ago

  • comment on a post On John Kerry over 5 years ago

    John Kerry is an idiot.

  • Matt, I'm afraid you sound a bit Leninist.  Slow down a bit.

  • comment on a post NRCC to go into Debt; Will DCCC Follow Suit? over 5 years ago

    My sources tell me that decision's been made.  And it will be a pleasing number.

  • Nancy and Rahm Emanuel been speaking about the hundred hours program for months now.  Dumbass media just hasn't paid attention.

  • comment on a post Habeas Amendment over 5 years ago

    Matt, I'm not sure you need 50 here.  The other side needs a strong 60.   Thats a harder challenge- I think there was a story in the WP that Lindsey is working on some secret amendment because he is worried he does not have the 60. This is a historic bill for all the Senators.  If the perception is that the media are going to wake up and point out the historical significance, 60 is going to dissapear rapidly in the distance. On the Specter haebeas amendment, De Wine now has a political opportunity to stand up for haebeas and castigate Brown for his house vote.  Self interest starts to play in the decision.  Jackass that he is, Santorum is unemployed come November without a hail mary pass.  If this thing can be kept alive for another 24 hours , I think the bill will collapse.  Once habeas becomes about every US Citizen, and not about terrorists, this thing is DOA.

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------