by TarHeel, Sat Jan 27, 2007 at 12:01:33 PM EST
the Hillary Iowa event was okay... According to a post on DailyKos she had a lot of trouble with the national anthem (her mic was on by mistake)..
I digress, through the Town Hall question session there were no questions on 1. Iraq 2. Iran 3. Gay Marriage 4. Immigration and 5. the israel/palestinian conflict.
These were questions Edwards got at his town hall events. One can only imagine the questions were prescreened in advance. Will the MSM notice or care? For that matter will the people in Iowa?Update:
DES MOINES - - In her first face-to-face meeting with voters since announcing for president, Hillary Clinton was asked about Iraq and ducked the question.
A man, who identified himself as a Gulf War vet, asked the New York senator at a town meeting in a high school gym here Saturday if the surge of new troops to Iraq was going to be enough?
Instead of answering, Hillary (as she is officially called by her campaign) said, Thanks so much for your service and then talked about how she visits military hospitals and believes America needs to provide good medical care for its veterans.
In the one-hour town meeting, Hillary did not mention Iraq a single time. She mentioned ethanol twice....
Iraq is far less popular here. In an interview with Gov. Chet Culver Friday, he told me, We have lost 50 heroes, 50 Iowans in Iraq and Afghanistan. Every day it is becoming more of an issue.
Hillarys refusal to apologize for her vote to authorize the Iraq war rankles some Democrats here. Bruce Stone from Grimes, Iowa, said: My problems with Hillary is she voted for the Iraq war and, until a few months ago, she supported it. I am a Vietnam-era vet and I take war very seriously. Her husband? He walks on water.
But it is Hillarys turn to slog through the presidential waters now. Before her town meeting, she went to Democratic state headquarters to meet with party activists. When asked about the war there, she said: There are no do-overs in life." According to the Associated Press, she said Congress received bad information going into the vote and that she would have voted differently given what she knows now.
It is possible Hillary did not mean to duck the Iraq question from the Gulf War vet. Perhaps she was a little rattled when the vet, who identified himself as John Barry, ended his question to her by saying, I think you look very nice.
by TarHeel, Fri Jan 26, 2007 at 05:26:03 PM EST
Seriously, Hillary has had her "blog" up for a week now and there is not a single post. Are they really getting that many posts to filter out?
At least Joe Lieberman had a "live" blog for a day or two until the flames were too great. (I do not think Lieberman's internet director had any real intention of keeping it up, but at least they tried.)
What lengths will Hillary go to, to filter out unflattering posts? Will her "blog" be as sterile as an operating room?
Seriously, how will her "blog' be spun by the corporate media? Are there any other "blogs" that require such a high level of scrutiny to have a single post?
Is it a foregone conclusion that the major media outlets will be duped?
Hillary has not raised a single penny on ActBlue - Dennis is kicking her @ss. You would think this would be a clue to the WSJ and the like about how weak Hillary's netroots support is.
by TarHeel, Fri Jan 26, 2007 at 03:17:55 AM EST
Just in case you wanted any evidence that the GOP is not that excited about their crop of 08 contenders. All you need to do is make a quick visit to freeperville, and remember to shower afterwards.
They all suck. Let's just admit it. Every one of the thus far announced Republican candidates for President sucks. From the lecherous adulterer to the egomaniacal nut job to the flip-flopping opportunist with the perfect hair to the guy who hates brown people to the guy we've never heard of to the guy who has a better chance of getting hit by a meteor while being consumed by a blue whale being struck by lightening.
They all suck. (Well, okay, Brownback doesn't suck at all, but I perceive no viability for his candidacy.)
As I mentioned here: (sorry for the electability meme)
I fear we will only discover that Hilary is the least electable candidate AFTER she has already been coronated. Hillary is the least electable Democrat in the general election and motivates right-wing voters more than the their own Republican candidates, thus insuring the downticket destruction of Democrats in local races. Hillary is doing a great job in the Senate please stay there.
Redstate seems to confirm this.
by TarHeel, Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 07:09:55 AM EST
If you support this idea go visit and throw in a few bones:
I believe the mainstream media and big money corporate donors are a threat to our democracy. Particularly by skewing the media coverage and spin to create an air of inevitability for Hillary without having any substantial debate on the issues. I believe there are bigger problems in the world than (already-rated) violent video games and flag burning - Hillary's signature issues. Issues like universal health care, investing in education and science and technology, and getting out of Iraq are much bigger problems.
Further, I strongly believe that the idealistic concept of American Democracy is in jeopardy by having two families, the Bushes and Clintons in the White House for 28 years in a row, with the potential for another 32 or 36 years (or more depending on which Bush runs in the future). This is unhealthy. Bush-Clinton fatigue as described by some.
Chris Matthews (MSNBC) has asked one of his TV panels if Hillary is "Dukakis in a dress?". I fear we will only discover that Hilary is the least electable candidate AFTER she has already been coronated. Hillary is the least electable Democrat in the general election and motivates right-wing voters more than the their own Republican candidates, thus insuring the downticket destruction of Democrats in local races. Hillary is doing a great job in the Senate please stay there.
How can we stop this disaster for the Democratic Party? The only way to stop the mainstream media coronation is to combine the two most talented, likeable and charismatic speakers in the Democratic pool to take on the least electable general election candidate, Hillary Clinton. Edwards/Obama is a true Unity ticket, with a white-southerner and a midwestern person of color and would be an unbeatable ticket. Both are smart, attractive and youthful candidates that would cream any GOP ticket, even one with Lieberman.
by TarHeel, Wed Jan 24, 2007 at 03:45:33 AM EST
There has been some discussion about whether or not Hillary has ever said her vote for the war was "wrong". I'll I've seen is that if we knew than what we know now, there would not have been a vote. Which to me and the MSM hardly seems like a repudiation of the vote.
Apparently, Hillary's strategy is to avoid making a full-throated apology to avoid being labeled a flip-flopper ala John Kerry. Given the way the Clintonistas publicly trashed Kerry's campaign (with good reason) they probably don't want to be compared to another "Northeastern Liberal."
Anyway at least a couple people in the MSM have picked up on Hillary's predicament. Much like a spider monkey, in a monkey trap
she just can't let go of it.
Anyway, check out this YouTube of Scarborough's State of the union Show ... Look at the 2:59 second segment...with the MSM asking Hillary about her Iraq War Vote.
She gets a little miffed when the morning show person confronts her on her war vote with this - "Edwards has repudiated his vote, senator, why can't you say your vote was a mistake?"
I'm sure the last thing she wants to remind people of is someone who can't admit a mistake ala our current leader.
by TarHeel, Tue Jan 23, 2007 at 06:04:47 AM EST
It only took 3 days for a MSM outlet to mention this newsweek/MSNBC poll.
Never Too Early for Pollsters
By JOHN M. BRODER
Published: January 23, 2007
A Newsweek poll indicates that former Senator John Edwards is the only one to beat the top two potential Republican candidates in head-to-head matchups.
There still appears to be an "Edwards black-out" on newscoverage. As I mentioned MSNBC, still isn't talking about their own poll, except for the data on Hillary.
Do you think MSM "pundits" or "writers" actually get ideas from the blogs?
Is it best to let everyone burn-out on Hillobama media hype and for a candidate to sit tight?
Will the media fascination on HIllobama prevent people like Clark and others from entering the race? Does the MSM care or notice how much they shape our presidential possibilities?
by TarHeel, Mon Jan 22, 2007 at 05:54:27 AM EST
Hillary's roll out and media fawning have reminded me of what a political machine she has. It certainly doesn't hurt to be rolling in money from special interests, and be able to blow 30 million dollars on a cake-walk senate campaign. (Anyone seen Carville talking about howard dean not spending enough to help other democrats in 06? where'd he go?).
Anyhow I digress. Hillary's roll out was amazingly effective - it was almost Obama who? I'm curious to see if Obama will roll out any ambitious agenda to clearly define and distinguish his policy as different from HIllarys'. (clearly he's got the charm that she doesn't.) Will the media stay as enamored of Obama for the next 6 months or will they create a new narrative? With the effective Clinton machine can it be stopped or should we just swallow our soilent green and say "yum"? What narratives do you think the MSM is waiting for?
I noticed (depending on the refresh) that Hillary's new web ad even has bumped Obama's on MyDD where I'd guess her support is below 10%. It must be nice to have unlimited money supplies... Hillary is like Shaq - you can't stop her "only hope to contain her".
I'm not looking forward to the prospect of 32 or 36 years straight of a Bush-Clinton in the white house. By that time Jeb may be ready for his era. Maybe we can officially become a plutocracy. I know I'm Clinton-Bush fatigued.
by TarHeel, Sat Jan 20, 2007 at 11:31:46 AM EST
while the latest Newsweek poll is clearly very favorable towards democrats with a 21 point advantage on the "generic" presidential ballot, John Edwards is the only democrat of the big three leading both McCain and Giuliani
Polled Jan. 17-18th for Newsweek. 1,003 adults
any chance MSNBC will talk about their own poll on TV? Hattip to clarkkent for noting this poll in a comment.
by TarHeel, Wed Jan 17, 2007 at 09:07:52 AM EST
So I write a diary about why it is that in my ears so far Obama resonates with the language/lexicon/phraseology of Lieberman. Can profound differences on things like health care and environmental protections and pro-choice be achieved by trying to compromise or find unity or is a shift in the electorate needed with carefully crafted messaging. Or maybe these are just common phrases used at one time or another by all politicians.
Anyhow that diary was hijacked literally by Jerome who probably spent a long time digging up something from 2003 about John Edwards and "a different kind of politics" commonly used in 2006 by Joe Lieberman and now Obama. It's now 2007 and I asure you no one will confuse John Edwards of 2007 with Joe Lieberman of 2006.
Everything I heard today only reinforced my opinion that to some extent Obama is following the Lieberman "new kind of democrat""bipartisan" schtick that Joementum loved. "partisan""polarizing" etc... you get the point. As if most of the partisan politics and wedge issues were not almost exclusively propogated by Karl Rove and the GOP (need I say Guns, God and gays?).
by TarHeel, Wed Jan 17, 2007 at 01:21:08 AM EST
From the diaries. Maybe the title should be edited [by this Edwards supporter, given the text of the photo below]...
At the risk of inflaming half the audience here and seeing whether I am imagining things, am I the only one who thinks some of the word choice and framing has similarity between Obama and Lieberman? NOT the message or ideology, just the buzz words. Are generic buzz words used so often in politics that everyone uses them? Hear me out.. I'm not saying the content or mission is the same just a small part of the campaign messaging.
For instance "a different kind of politics" is a short phrase used extensively by Lieberman in his re-election and is used in Obama's announcement release today.