Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

This has so much WTF written all over it that it is hard to comprehend.

Welcome to day five of every-bit-as-bad-as-you-thought-it-would-be.

White supremacy is terrorism.

Cancel the cowardly Times and Post and set up an equivalent monthly donation to ProPublica.

We will not go quietly into the night; we will not vanish without a fight.

Innocent people do not delay justice.

They love authoritarianism, but only when they get to be the authoritarians.

Putting aside our relentless self-interest because the moral imperative is crystal clear.

Take hopelessness and turn it into resilience.

These are not very smart people, and things got out of hand.

But frankly mr. cole, I’ll be happier when you get back to telling us to go fuck ourselves.

Text STOP to opt out of updates on war plans.

Michigan is a great lesson for Dems everywhere: when you have power…use it!

New McCarthy, same old McCarthyism.

Consistently wrong since 2002

Never give a known liar the benefit of the doubt.

Motto for the House: Flip 5 and lose none.

Fight for a just cause, love your fellow man, live a good life.

Relentless negativity is not a sign that you are more realistic.

This fight is for everything.

When someone says they “love freedom”, rest assured they don’t mean yours.

Peak wingnut was a lie.

You are either for trump or for democracy. Pick one.

Every decision we make has lots of baggage with it, known or unknown.

You are here: Home / Archives for 2008

Archives for 2008

I Remember the Good Old Days

by | 134 Comments

This post is in: ,

When it was just called disfranchised:

In light of the ongoing controversy surrounding Florida and Michigan, their non-binding primaries, and their convention delegates, the word “disenfranchise” has been thrown around quite a bit. Probably, a little too much.

***

But there is a way to take this disenfranchisement talk a little too far. Consider this message, distributed by the Clinton campaign yesterday, describing the Obama campaign’s pre-convention strategy:

First, disenfranchise voters — Prevent new votes in Florida and Michigan. Stop voting in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Oregon, West Virginia, Puerto Rico, Kentucky, South Dakota, Montana, West Virginia and Indiana.

The meaning of “disenfranchise” has grown a little fluid of late, but this isn’t it. As Inigo Montoya told us years ago, “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

This Wiki definition seems as good as any: “Disenfranchisement or disfranchisement is the revocation of the right of suffrage (the right to vote) to a person or group of people, or rendering a person’s vote less effective, or ineffective, through processes such as gerrymandering.”

Now, how this applies to Florida and Michigan is open to plenty of debate, but for the Clinton campaign to argue that Obama want to “disenfranchise voters” in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Oregon, West Virginia, Puerto Rico, Kentucky, South Dakota, Montana, West Virginia, and Indiana is pretty ridiculous. Obama wants the nomination fight to end, Clinton doesn’t. But that doesn’t mean he wants to “disenfranchise” voters in the remaining states. That’s just how things go for states at the end of the nominating calendar. Indeed, the states know that, and have a choice about moving their contests up.

Steve, of course, is right, and this is just more silly and insidious dribble from the Clinton camp designed to propel Hillary from her large deficits to the nomination, but instead pissing off voters so they are less inclined to vote for Obama, the person who will actually win the nomination.

But more importantly, when did it become disenfranchise? I always thought it was disfranchise? Or did this become acceptable around the same time that “snuck” and “dove” became acceptable replacements for sneaked and dived? Or am I just confused?

I Remember the Good Old DaysPost + Comments (134)

The Speech Aftermath

by | 60 Comments

This post is in: 

Only 77% of Americans say that Obama did a fair or excellent job with his speech the other day:

Eighty-four percent (84%) of America’s Likely Voters say they have seen or heard at least some portion of Barack Obama’s Tuesday morning speech on race and national unity (see Speech). The speech has become one of the most watched YouTube videos and 82% say they are following news about it somewhat or very closely.

Among those who have seen or heard some of the speech, 51% said it was good or excellent, 26% said fair, and 21% gave the Senator’s remarks a grade of poor.

I predict that this is bad for Democrats. I mean, Obama clearly did not persuade the Corner, Charles Krauthammer, and Red State. Epic fail on his part.

Consider this an open thread.

The Speech AftermathPost + Comments (60)

Confidence Men

by | 23 Comments

This post is in: 

The fix is in:

Older White House computer hard drives have been destroyed, the White House disclosed to a federal court Friday in a controversy over millions of possibly missing e-mails from 2003 to 2005.

The White House revealed new information about how it handles its computers in an effort to persuade a federal magistrate it would be fruitless to undertake an e-mail recovery plan that the court proposed.

“When workstations are at the end of their lifecycle and retired … the hard drives are generally sent offsite to another government entity for physical destruction,” the White House said in a sworn declaration filed with U.S. Magistrate Judge John Facciola.

It has been the goal of a White House Office of Administration “refresh program” to replace one-third of its workstations every year in the Executive Office of the President, according to the declaration.

Some, but not necessarily all, of the data on old hard drives is moved to new computer hard drives, the declaration added.

I am sure they will work hard to make sure a better system is in place for their Democratic successors. And sorry about all those e-mails you wanted. Accidents happen, you know.

Confidence MenPost + Comments (23)

My Iraq War Retrospective

by | 295 Comments

This post is in: ,

I see that Andrew Sullivan was asked to list what he got wrong about Iraq for the five year anniversary of the invasion, and since I was as big a war booster as anyone, I thought I would list what I got wrong:

Everything.

And I don’t say that to provide people with an easy way to beat up on me, but I do sort of have to face facts. I was wrong about everything.

I was wrong about the Doctrine of Pre-emptive warfare.
I was wrong about Iraq possessing WMD.
I was wrong about Scott Ritter and the inspections.
I was wrong about the UN involvement in weapons inspections.
I was wrong about the containment sanctions.
I was wrong about the broader impact of the war on the Middle East.
I was wrong about this making us more safe.
I was wrong about the number of troops needed to stabilize Iraq.
I was wrong when I stated this administration had a clear plan for the aftermath.
I was wrong about securing the ammunition dumps.
I was wrong about the ease of bringing democracy to the Middle East.
I was wrong about dissolving the Iraqi army.
I was wrong about the looting being unimportant.
I was wrong that Bush/Cheney were competent.
I was wrong that we would be greeted as liberators.
I was wrong to make fun of the anti-war protestors.
I was wrong not to trust the dirty smelly hippies.

I mean, I could go down the list and continue on, but you get the point. I was wrong about EVERY. GOD. DAMNED. THING. It is amazing I could tie my shoes in 2001-2004. If you took all the wrongness I generated, put it together and compacted it and processed it, there would be enough concentrated stupid to fuel three hundred years of Weekly Standard journals. I am not sure how I snapped out of it, but I think Abu Ghraib and the negative impact of the insurgency did sober me up a bit.

War should always be an absolute last resort, not just another option. I will never make the same mistakes again.

*** Update ***

Here is someone who got it right.

My Iraq War RetrospectivePost + Comments (295)

Why Do They Let Him Out of His Cage?

by | 59 Comments

This post is in: ,

Mark Penn, once again displaying his deft touch:

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson finally made up his mind and endorsed Sen. Barack Obama today, but a senior adviser to Sen. Hillary Clinton’s campaign — which likewise spent months courting the former Democratic presidential candidate’s nod — dismissed its significance.

“Look, I think that everyone has their endorsers,” said senior Clinton strategist Mark Penn, adding — with a little huff — “I think New Mexico is a state that, actually, we won.”

“The time that he could have been effective has long since passed,” he continued. “I don’t think it is a significant endorsement in this environment.”

Perhaps sensing that it may not be effective to dismiss out of hand a popular Hispanic governor’s political clout, campaign spokesman Phil Singer chimed in. “We respect Gov. Richardson,” he clarified. “But at the end of the day this campaign is about Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama.”

Seriously. He should be locked in a back room with a computer, a one-way radio, and raw polling data. He should not be near the press, he should not be allowed to speak for the campaign, and he should not be allowed near anything that resembles a microphone. It is almost as if some evil genius took 250 lbs of fat, some oil and acne, and two tin ears and came up with Mark Penn.

If the superdelegates want to think about electability, they should think about the great successes he can bring to the Democratic party in the general election.

Why Do They Let Him Out of His Cage?Post + Comments (59)

Beautiful Friend, The End

by | 386 Comments

This post is in: 

Mark Halperin details what we have all known for a long time, but for some reason or another, no one is saying:

1. She can’t win the nomination without overturning the will of the elected delegates, which will alienate many Democrats.

2. She can’t win the nomination without a bloody convention battle — after which, even if she won, history and many Democrats would cast her as a villain.

3. Catching up in the popular vote is not out of the question — but without re-votes in Florida and Michigan it will be almost as impossible as catching up in elected delegates.

Now, however, Richardson is saying it:

My great affection and admiration for Hillary Clinton and President Bill Clinton will never waver.

It is time, however, for Democrats to stop fighting amongst ourselves and to prepare for the tough fight we will face against John McCain in the Fall.

The 1990’s were a decade of peace and prosperity because of the competent and enlightened leadership of the Clinton administration, but it is now time for a new generation of leadership to lead America forward.

Stop ripping the party apart, Hillary. It is time for Mark Penn to stop penning the McCain commercials.

Even the media is signaling that they are unwilling to continue to play along with this fantasy:

One big fact has largely been lost in the recent coverage of the Democratic presidential race: Hillary Rodham Clinton has virtually no chance of winning.

Her own campaign acknowledges there is no way that she will finish ahead in pledged delegates. That means the only way she wins is if Democratic superdelegates are ready to risk a backlash of historic proportions from the party’s most reliable constituency.

Unless Clinton is able to at least win the primary popular vote — which also would take nothing less than an electoral miracle — and use that achievement to pressure superdelegates, she has only one scenario for victory. An African-American opponent and his backers would be told that, even though he won the contest with voters, the prize is going to someone else.

People who think that scenario is even remotely likely are living on another planet.

As it happens, many people inside Clinton’s campaign live right here on Earth. One important Clinton adviser estimated to Politico privately that she has no more than a 10 percent chance of winning her race against Barack Obama, an appraisal that was echoed by other operatives.

In other words: The notion of the Democratic contest being a dramatic cliffhanger is a game of make-believe.

This really is over, as far as the election is concerned. The only remaining questions are how many last gasps the Clinton campaign has left, and how much damage they will do to the Democratic party as a whole over the next few months.

Beautiful Friend, The EndPost + Comments (386)