go to list of threads
barack obama.. i agree with you both. posted by: simplicissimus 15:18 8.18.10 (a) for the building itself - if the people of nyc don't give a shit, neither do i. and i've found very little about this project that's all that objectionable. so i'm with camdolphin. (b) as for obama - it's become (a bit too) familiar. mesaured, reasonable, but nothing of the "happy warrior" we saw in reagan or clinton. so i'm with hb. he could have said a lot more. we all know there is nothing to be done by the government. advocate for what you think -- one way or the other. wait. does me agreeing with you both make be guilty of exactly what i'm bitching about? the horror. the horror. but why not use the bully pulpit at least a tiny bit? posted by: horsebeater 11:42 8.18.10 why not say "yes, they absolutely have the right to do so and we need to defend that right as americans and the GOP is exploiting this and is being unfair" -- which he said -- but then the essential part is "but it's kind of a jackass move." i think the "let's use zoning laws to keep this out" is chickenshit (especially for laissez faire conservatives) and saying we need to investigate the funding for this mosque is shitty and certainly many have crossed into xenophobia on this one. but that doesn't mean you can't call the people building the center assholes. krauthammer's comparison was building a german pride cultural center at treblinka, which i think is apt. A Mosque at ground zero posted by: camdolphin 10:34 8.18.10 Obama could easily have ducked the question, particularly in August, when any news becomes big news. He took a stance and said the only rational thing a member of government can say - zoning laws aside, the government should play no role in the decision of where to build religious buildings. Props to him for making the right call. It would be easy to say, hey, they have a right to build there but they shouldn't. I mean, if it was a Christian church being built in a similar situation I'd be full of venom toward the churchies. I don't feel that way toward the muslims b/c they're picked on so much in this country, but that doesn't necessarily mean they should get carte blanche to do whatever they want (although I still don't give a crap if they want to build at ground zero; I know, I should dislike most organized religions equally, but I just can't). Yet that's a private debate, not a governmental one. presidential question time posted by: simplicissimus 12:16 1.30.10 about the most interesting thing i've seen in politics since 2008. obama spent 70 minutes, without any advance warning or notice on what he'd be discussing, fielding questions from republican congressmen. i'll let you decide what you think -- and i sure as hell know what i do -- but give the man major props for doing something i'm not sure any modern president has done this. very, very, very much worth watching. http://www.c-span.org/Watch/Media/2010/01/29/HP/R/29045/House+Republican+Retreat+with+Pres+Obama.aspx Finding new ways to jump the shark over and over again... posted by: spacehippie 16:06 10.9.09 Sure, the prize may not have been anything more than a He-Sure-Ain't-Bush award, but is it really a terrible thing that Obama (who has been extremely humble about the whole thing) won it? Talking Points Memo has done a good job of collecting the latest round of right-wing apopleptic douchebaggery: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10/right-wingers-pitch-fits-over-nobel-peace-prize.php My favorite? From Andy McCarthy, who apparently beleives that the Nobel Peace Prize being won by an American proves that the Nobel committee and Obama hate America: "I'm not all for Americans winning international prizes, especially the Nobel Peace Prize. In fact, I'm vigorously against it. The transnational progressives who pass out these accolades believe America is the problem in the world, the main threat to peace, the impediment to 'progress,' etc. The award is a symbolic statement of opposition to American exceptionalism, American might, American capitalism, American self-determinism, and American pursuit of America's interests in the world. That is why Obama could win it based on only ten days in office -- merely by capturing the White House and the levers of power, he stands to do more for the Left's 'knock America off its pedestal' program than any figure in history." i was sitting here and all of the sudden realized... posted by: simplicissimus 12:42 10.9.09 ...if hb hasn't posted something on this i'm going to send a search party out for him. oh, it's silly alright. really silly. and a shocker. but i'm scratching my head about all the talk of how "damaging" it is. it will be a taunt (and only in this world, with this republican party, would winning this be a taunt, but i digress) used by the base who already hate him. the rest of america will forget it happened in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ... though i do love how it's driving the wingers wild, i have to admit. well.... posted by: horsebeater 12:16 10.9.09 .... the nobel can now join the tonies and the daytime emmys and the grammys on my list of "list of dumb ass prizes I don't have to pay attention to anymore." barack obama, nobel peace prize winner posted by: publius 11:27 10.9.09 this certainly came out of left field (at least for me, though i admittedly haven't been following along too closely as of late). i tend to agree that it's actually a negative thing for him and the administration. it certainly does seem a bit...premature. i guess the only real context you can put it in is "bushco essentially would have won the nobel anti-peace prize, so we'll award the peace prize to the guy who's trying right the ship". but still... and of course this is going to nothing to mitigate the comparisons to carter... pretty tone-deaf maneuver by the nobel committee if you ask me (unless the nobel committee is a front for the vast right wing conspiracy) i figure.... posted by: publius 21:41 11.6.08 this thread should be an interesting/amusing/enlightening stroll down tentfort's version of memory lane.... is obama a republican mole? posted by: publius 00:01 10.18.07 http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections08/story/0,,2193317,00.html is obama a republican mole? posted by: publius 23:53 10.17.07 http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections08/story/0,,2193317,00.html you'd think he had pissed on i posted by: publius 12:10 10.5.07 thanks to some jerknut on the fort, i continue to receive emails from something called GOPUSAEagle. they are a predictable group of republican right-wing-nuts. anyway, today the headline is: "obama stops wearing flag pin" here's the article on their web site (though it's just an ap feed) http://www.gopusa.com/news/2007/october/1005_obama_flag.shtml and here's the predictable moronic banter: http://www.gopusa.com/forum/showthread.php?t=42667 why am i posting this? i guess because i find the whole flag pin thing ridiculous. why is it necessary that our (male) elected officials wear a flag pin to demonstrate their patriotism? shouldn't we be able to take that for granted? all this "more american than though" stuff is utterly depressing... The other variable... posted by: isidorus 22:27 6.19.07 is that you've worked at the L&L lounge for a long time, and you given a heckuva lot better than you've gotten. You don't need that gig today, let alone in eight months, whether it exists or not. Plenty of other doors are open to you. Of course, you may have to consider dressing a bit less like a bike messenger at some of them other gigs, so its not a decision without its consequences. too much to address... posted by: simplicissimus 18:17 6.19.07 and too busy to address it. but the one variable here that everyone is pretty much wrong about is that i'd still have a gig here. i'm liked (enough) and respected (enough) and valuable (enough) at the moment, but leaving for a period of months would be considered high treason and would not be welcome back. this is because i would have to be replaced by somebody -- there's no way everyone hear could pick up all that i do (we're already pushing it, and one lawyer is moving while aother is weeks or months from bailing, so this would be the worst time to ask for 8 month sabbatical). however, that somebody would take over all my cases, leaving nothing "open" to return to. i actually don't have a problem with this. there is very little fat in this firm, but that also means everyone gives full effort and productivity pretty much all the time...unlike a larger firm you can't leave and come back without a lot of difficulty. Yeah yeah yeah yeah posted by: rahoohl_dewk 17:45 6.19.07 if you do end up hangin with Louis F, please be sure to intentionally mispronounce his name as many times as possible. If given the opportunity to say his first name, call him Lou, or Louis (with french accent), or Louie. And make as you are leaving, you turn to Sweet Lou and ask: "Do you know what they are saying in Louie Louie?" .....Me gotta go now..... Be the Ball posted by: rahoohl_dewk 17:41 6.19.07 If there's anyone I know who could make the best of (what I believe is) a rural state experience for a mere 8 months, it's a man who has a small Ohio town name block letter tattoed on his upper shoulder. Moreover, the upside career wise could be a huge (not to mention the pride in working on a campaign you believe in; by the way, Simp, what's that quote from the Year of Living Dangerously you always threw out? "We will win we because:...I believe it's fitting here...) Assuming the gig remains intact at home, I think Iowa needs to be done. Prior posts nail it: you are ripe (and I'm not referring to your occasional "musk" that anyone who has lived with you is well aware of) for this experience. Make it happen. As far as Louis F is concerned, he's not a good guy. The experience of meeting someone famous is alluring, however, it's not like you're going to be given the chance to engage the guy in philosophical discourse. You will be there to discuss the issues at hand and will have no choice but to stay within those parameters. Will you be really proud in 30 years to say, "yeah, I met the guy...he was black, powerful and he truly hated jews, but he served a mean Mojito and I read somewhere that his bean pies are delish." And the fact that your post seems implies that the location of the meeting (a roots Chicago experience?) somehow tips the scales in favor of the meeting is somewhat suprising. I only (hardly) endorse this event (or product)if you bring your laptop and surf Tentfort with him. Ask him what he think's of Miss Iowa's leg... see me after class, thrillho i would take the job, on ludwi posted by: horsebeater 12:07 6.19.07 if you knew you had a job to come back to and the job was over the grunt level, i'd do it with little reservation. and i'm even adjusting for the fact that i'd love to live vicariously through you on this one and more inclined to recommend the job. you'll probably be married and have kids in the next 5 years, essentially tying you down for a 20 year span. if you're ever going to do something like this, now's the time. it likely will be miserable for periods of time, exciting for periods of time. at minimum it will cure you of your inside baseball obsession once and for all. and it will help reconnect you to the heartland, something you are sorely in need of. what's the nature of the Iowa posted by: ludwig 10:19 6.19.07 Living in Iowa on little money, at first blush, sounds unappealing. But what will you be doing? If it's carrying signs and acting like a grunt, then no thank you. But if you get involved in the organization on a higher level then it may be worth it. Ask yourself the 30 year question: in 30 years will I be happy that I spent 8 months working on my beat-em-ups or on working on the Obama campaign? After all, i would guess that L&L would want you back after 8 months if the campaign didnt go as you ahd hoped . . . On the Louis F part. I thought he was on the brink of death? I'd meet with him. Why not? You've got nothing to lose unless he wants you to invest in his bean pie operation. Also, let's not forget this brilliant comment: "The Jews don't like Farrakhan, so they call me Hitler. Well, that's a good name. Hitler was a very great man." Or this classic call and response: "Who owns the Federal Reserve?" Audience: "Jews." nothing's wrong with iowa... posted by: isidorus 23:14 6.18.07 I mean, I'd hate not having you around. I'm just saying. to wit: http://www.missiowausa.com/images/Top-5-Miss-Iowa.jpg question: Am I just getting old, or is that a LOT of leg for a Miss Anything pageant? "don't tell me that you unders posted by: publius 20:18 6.18.07 until you hear the man..." condolences on the whole obama gig not playing out as you hoped. maybe they made the tentfort connection and decided you were just too much of a wildcard... funny you should mention... posted by: simplicissimus 20:01 6.18.07 ...had a phone conversation today. looks like the options at this moment are: (a) live in iowa for the next 8 months; or (b) let the dream die. haven't made up my mind, but leaning very hard against. i knew going in this was likely, even though i falsely had my hopes raised last week for a headquarters policy gig. still not definite, but for now -- and probably forever -- it's a no go. and so it goes... on the lighter side: it looks like i'm going to have a meeting with one louis farrakhan -- at his south side house, no less -- this friday. i'm actually pretty ambivalent about the guy. i probably should hate him, and i suppose if i thought about it long enough i would, but the idea of going into his house, shaking his hand, and sitting down at his tabel (with 4 or 5 other clergymen and activists) is obviously just too fucking rich to turn down. like everything in my life, when presented with the chance i asked myself one simple question, "in 30 years, will you be happy or sad you did this?". the answer to this was pretty obvious so it's going down. so it ain't all bad. simpli's new job posted by: horsebeater 19:41 6.18.07 Prevent low level campaigners from going off on ethnic groups in materials distributed to the press: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/O/OBAMA_MEMO?SITE=OHSAN&SECTION=STATE&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT I hear there's an opening. cnn picks up the "crush on oba posted by: publius 17:28 6.15.07 and provides some amusing back story... i think if simplicissimus gets his job in the obama campaign, he may have to show up for work the first day in a "i got a crush on obama" t-shirt...or perhaps a pair of booty shorts...holy disturbing visuals batman... http://www.cnn.com/video/player/player.html?url=/video/moos/2007/06/15/moos.crush.on.obama.affl looks like simplicissimus... posted by: publius 01:00 6.15.07 isn't the only one with a crush on obama... http://youtube.com/watch?v=wKsoXHYICqU just when you thought i was ta posted by: simplicissimus 18:54 6.13.07 phone meeting re: whether i "could be of use" with a pretty big big wig. going down in the next few days or so. more details as events warrant. and one more thing... posted by: publius 23:31 6.5.07 go to the top of this thread and start reading...three years to the day we were talking about whether obama would beat jack "sex club" ryan (yet another proud son of dartmouth). jack who? am i the only one who feels like that happened about 10 years ago? which sort of begs the questio posted by: publius 23:28 6.5.07 if simplicissimus signs on with obama, do you think they'll have him on flickr duty answering all the comments from the masses? he has... posted by: publius 23:27 6.5.07 granite in his muscles and his brain... http://flickr.com/photos/barackobamadotcom/sets/72157600277982095/ if... posted by: simplicissimus 17:22 5.10.07 ...theoretically...i had a stash of vicodin, i would no longer have a stash of vicodin. dig? you guys are going to have to charter a flight to tiajuana, or befriend a doctor, and do it pretty damn quick. i'm counting on you. and, yes, squisshy, you are my second favorite pill-popping irish durnk. ludwig would make the list, but he doesn't fit all of the above categories. Shrine Building posted by: rahoohl_dewk 17:21 5.10.07 Simpli: How about spending the weekend recovering from the **gasp** brief writing, and create Shrine-building kits. I'm sure you know an M.D. somewhere who would back you political aspirations and assist in making sure each kit was "complete as all hell". -Sucka GQ Mofukin Smoov squisshy, posted by: rabble-rouser 17:12 5.10.07 don't think your Ghostbusters reference went unnoticed. simpli, let's make this happen. i like this plan, i'm excited posted by: squisshy 16:56 5.10.07 LET'S DO IT! as soon as you send me one vicodin and one valium, por favor. signed, the other drunken, pill-popping irishman just been told to expect a cal posted by: simplicissimus 16:49 5.10.07 instructions: everyone is required to disolve one valium and one vicodin in a cup of whiskey, lay it on top of a 1974 issue of the chicago sun times, place it next to a lit candle and in front of a leo mcgarry black and white (not color!...i said black and white) promotional photograph. i hesitate to make this process -- which has much more of a chance of failing miserably than ending successfully -- on the fort. but i am inspired by hb's blow-by-blow home-buying account. plus, if i fail, you can all feel like you're failing right there with me. now: commence shrine building in 3...2...1.... funny you should say that... posted by: simplicissimus 14:05 5.10.07 he would be the second drunken, pill-popping irishman as my spiritual guide...i'd say the first one has worked pretty damned well. aw, so cute. i was just wondering what the posted by: publius 13:36 5.10.07 but with a drunken, pill-popping irishman as your spiritual guide, how could you possibly go wrong? leo mcgarry is my co-pilot posted by: simplicissimus 13:10 5.10.07 word came in today, via a cc-email, that my resume has now reached further up the chain with a fairly warm recommendation. is this good? is this bad? i have no fucking idea. but i can only assume leo was involved, and therefore all praise is due unto him and nobody else. good luck posted by: squisshy 18:04 4.11.07 if you got involved in the campaign it would provide me some modicum of comfort that good people still get into politics in some way or another. plus, obama would instantly pick up the support of my army-of-one if you are hired, so if he has any sense ... positive thinking...positive t posted by: simplicissimus 10:10 4.11.07 and -- with a little help from my tentfort bretheren maybe -- some praying to my own personal hero/demi-god/role model.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_McGarry (read his bio...the similarities -- umich, boston parent, labor, chicago, valium -- may me very happy) hold up posted by: rabble-rouser 09:58 4.11.07 nobody ever said anything about not posting the most absurd political screeds on a daily basis. please, maintain your fort anonymity and keep us updated from the inside. we must know the truth and only you can set us free. best of luck... posted by: publius 22:05 4.10.07 you should reveal yourself as simplicissimus of tentfort...errr...fame. that'll get you the job for sure... well, it's official... posted by: simplicissimus 21:13 4.10.07 after spending about four months trying to make contact with somebody in the campaign that matters, contact has been made. my resume is now in the hands of a couple of deputy campaign directors. i'm either going to spend the next 18 months (in financial distress but) in the belly of the beast or bitter that i'm not. i doesn't seem fair that i would go 0-for-obama, but the universe usually works out the way it's supposed to, so... in any event, i made the decision this moring that if something even remotely attractive comes available at hq, i'm all over it without any hesitation whatsoever. which likely could be the end of my civil rights lawyer, if not practicing lawyer altogether, days. much too bold of a prediction, but i get the sinking suspicion that time away from the profession is not going to endear me to it. more importantly, though, what would tentfort do if it didn't have me posting the most absurd political screeds on a daily basis...on second thought, don't answer that, because the word "celebrate" keeps coming to mind. more details as events warrant. if only he could actually turn posted by: isidorus 10:48 4.3.07 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/02/AR2007040201149.html the making of... posted by: publius 20:21 4.1.07 "let obama be obama"... http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/magazine/01axelrod.t.html "Don't tell Mama, I'm for Obam posted by: prankmonkey 10:11 12.8.06 "It's a reference to Clinton's nickname as first lady and an example of the conflicted loyalties of many Democratic political aides." For Now, an Unofficial Rivalry. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/07/AR2006120701755.html?referrer=email Will be an interesting test of character on both sides to see what happens when the kid gloves come off. i would have been friends with posted by: simplicissimus 17:52 10.26.06 ...but the first words ever spoken between me and horsebeater were at the ashtrays by the entryway to hutchins(?) hall from the law quad before our very first class (contracts with j.j. white). and i must say, that innumerable great conversations with he, publius, isidorous, and aol have been extended (by hours) with the words, "just one more smoke." plus, as anyone will tell you, you'll leave a party having made a friend or snagged a lady for the simple reason you were both smoking. so, i feel pretty safe is saying that i, and everyone who has ever been a smoker, only look upon this imperfection with approval. thought this was funny ... posted by: squisshy 17:28 10.26.06 didn't realize obama was a smoker -- and a dabbler in illegal drugs! for shame, obama ... and you'll have my vote, though you would have had it anyway. i just hate all the BS that politicians wade through to get around admitting past mistakes. frankly, way back when (although i didn't despise him then, and had *some* respect for him) i would have respected W a lot more if he'd just owned up to his own snow-shovelling back in the day. from The New Republic: Barack Obama's revelation that he is thinking about a 2008 run for president set off a predictable flurry of prognostications this week. Politics-watchers have speculated about how the electorate would react to everything from his youth to his pigmentation to his acknowledgement that he had messed around with marijuana and "maybe a little blow." But a far more interesting, if less legally dicey, bullet point was buried in a few of the recent stories about the Illinois senator's ambitions: Obama is a cigarette smoker. In a different time, or a different spot on the socioeconomic totem pole, it might seem a lot weirder for an ambitious pol to admit snorting cocaine than to acknowledge struggling with nicotine. But, among the healthy living smart-set types who represent the elite of both the Democratic Party and the American meritocracy, smokers are about as common as guys with mustaches. I'd venture to say youthful coke-dabblers probably outnumber adult smokers among Obama's fellow 1980s Harvard law students. Not that any of this means Obama's tobacco news will hurt him in politics. To the contrary: In an age when too many politicians come off as blow-dried confections whose every decision is based on some calculus of future advancement, a public image can actually be helped by the occasional evidence of vice--at least the variety of it that doesn't involve interns, pages, or choked mistresses. Maureen Dowd wrote on Saturday that the smoking habit was an example of how the senator was "intriguingly imperfect," a description that was never applied to the likes of Al Gore of John Kerry. Actuarially foolish and hopelessly out of fashion, it is a behavior that, at least in an overachiever like Obama, seems to assuage our national discomfort with overt ambition. How much of a striver can he be if he's also a smoker? Of course, vice is a common feature in the narrative of pols less celebrated than Obama. But, in the ordinary story, it exists solely in the past tense: A foolishness of youth that has since been overcome. Though the more successful tellers of this tale--like President Bush--are able to spin it into a story of Godly self-improvement, it more often serves to reinforce the dichotomy between the authentic person and the one that's packaged for the campaign trail. Not to mention raising doubts about the honesty of the packaging. Lighting up in public, as Obama did in front of a reporter last year, is a simple formula for symbolically stripping away the artifice. Obama is not the only smoker to gain authenticity points by copping to this most déclassé of American vices. News that Laura Bush was a smoker--and speculation that the she still puffs away while immersed in the occasional Dostoyevsky tome--is a staple of the glowing press coverage that celebrates the first lady's uncalculated, unpretentious, unpolitical style: Upon being introduced to her future mother-in-law, Laura Bush allegedly showed her non-Washingtonian chops by responding to a question about what she did for a living by saying "I read, I smoke, and I admire." Likewise, some of the few charming anecdotes in the press about House Majority Leader John Boehner recount his chain-smoking parlays with colleagues in the corner of the congressional lobby known as "Smoker's Alley." The vignettes served to contrast the Ohio representative from his imperious predecessor by showing that he openly retained the earthy vice of his past. Smoking is hardly the only unhealthy indulgence that gets employed, intentionally or not, as a humanizing element for pols. Cheesesteak-engorged Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell has long wrung good press out of his appetite for junk food: You know he's not just another focus-grouped pretty boy, the logic goes, because he's so evidently not worried about looking pretty. And reports of late New York Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan's public tippling served only to increase his reputation for being a call 'em as you see 'em intellectual unconcerned with his future ambitions (or his future health). "[H]is eyes are bloodshot for exactly the reason you think they are," The Economist wrote in 1990. "And yet he has more ideas between his first and second drinks than most other senators would have in a decade of total abstinence." For a Democrat who wants to run in 2008, smoking may well be a tactically perfect vice. On the one hand, it sets Obama apart from the likes of Gore and Kerry, who suffered from the public perception that they had been training for the White House--and thus forgoing (or burying) foolish diversions like smoking--since they were teens. And, on the other hand, it may serve to shield him from what could be the major knock on Hillary Clinton--that she is an eat-your-vegetables type who wants to impose her yuppified abstemiousness on the rest of us. (It was Clinton who, during her husband's presidency, first banned smoking from the White House.) Which is why it was sort of disappointing to read a recent interview in which Obama claimed to have quit except for the occasional lapse. Though it was better than hearing him declare that he'd never inhaled, it sounded like the first step toward some eventual mealy-mouthed declaration that he voted for nicotine before be voted against it. "It's an ongoing struggle," Obama said. For the sake of his lungs, it's a struggle he should try to win. For the sake of his electoral ambitions, he might want to keep lighting up. on racial takedowns in GOP TV posted by: isidorus 08:55 10.26.06 I submit to you Tennessee democratic senate candidate Harold Ford, Jr. The story, as I understand it, is: he went to a Super Bowl party hosted by Hugh Hefner. In his own words: "I was there. I like football. I like girls. I have no apologies for that." http://youtube.com/watch?v=fDPVBonzX9E And the GOP TV ad in response, hitting the white-girl-black-guy nerve perfectly. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRmu0RXTpAo a few thoughts on the above posted by: horsebeater 17:15 10.25.06 1. History suggests that in the DEMOCRATIC party, you have to strike immediately to get elected. Carter, Clinton, Kennedy even Truman all pretty much came out of nowhere. LBJ's really the only Democratic politician that didn't (and, really, he arguably was only elected because he was JFK's veep). Sometimes an old hand wins the nomination (Mondale, Gore, Kerry to some extent) but they never seem to win. **** Interestingly, it normally happens the opposite way in the GOP (although W. was the exception to that rule). 2. "You can't be hot for 6 to 8 years." Well... McCain's doing a pretty good job of it. 3. Obama / McCain would be a very special election. We could actually feel good about American politics again. **** the more you look at it... posted by: simplicissimus 14:55 10.23.06 ...the more you realize that his time is now. 1. He's a presumptive front-runner for the nomination. Beyond Hillary, there is nobody, nobody at all -- declared or undeclared -- that could even touch him. 2. He'd compete with -- and perhaps stomp -- Hillary, the only competitor, in all of her areas of "strength" (the hollywood connection, the money connection, and star power). 3. At present he's all things to all people. This can't last (look at Colin Powell...he would have walked to the Presidency in 1996 and is irretrievably damaged now -- although he clearly never wanted the job, the comparison holds true nonetheless). 4. He'd otherwise have to wait 4, perhaps 8, years in the Senate, where he'd have to make all sorts of votes that would eventually allow him to be crucified (a la Dole or Kerry). 5. He'll never be hotter than he is right now. It's not possible. 6. There is no way the national outlook could be more favorable for a Democrat than it is right now. 7. His carefully-crafted positions -- especially on Iraq -- are perfect for the moment. Another 4 or 8 years and some of them may not look so hot. 8. There are a million of completely "unknown unknowns" that could kill him with every passing day. It's simple, really: If he wants to be President, he runs now. If he runs now, he wins the nomination. If he wins the nomination, in 2008 he and McCain give this country something we haven't had in decades: a great, and I mean great, presidential contest. It's that simple. The best thing about this scenario: while everyone knows who I'll vote for, I can honestly say this country will be in pretty damn good hands -- and waaaaaay better hands than the present -- no matter what. And what more could you ask for? the race card is an unfortunat posted by: prankmonkey 14:33 10.23.06 but it could *possibly* work the other way as well, if enough white people can trump their inner racist through the self-congratulatory feeling of proving themselves to be as broad-minded and fair in the privacy of the voting booth as they pretend to be in public. But I did agree wiht what one of the panelists said on Meet the Press last night (can't remeber which one - maybe Bob Novak). Paraphrasing here: "Obama has the hot hand now, and in politics, that's when you strike. No one can hold the hot hand for 6 or 8 years." And now Bob Herbert, who's ful posted by: isidorus 13:50 10.23.06 The last thing obama needs is four or ten more years in the Senate to develop "a formidable record" and "toughness." Dubya (not that he's the gold standard) and Bubba didn't really have either of these, and that didn't stop them. What four more years in the senate gets obama is a voting record and he can be attacked on and a stronger stench of washington insider-ness. What Herbert may unfortunately be right about is the GOP relishing an Obama candidacy because he's black. It may be naive to think that Obama's strengths ould outweigh the inevitable Rovian racial subterfuge. =========================== October 23, 2006 Op-Ed Columnist The Obama Bandwagon By BOB HERBERT Boston The capacity crowd on a rainy night at the John F. Kennedy Library couldn’t have been happier. The guest of honor had been born the same year that J.F.K. was inaugurated, and now he was generating the kind of political delirium we have tended to associate with the Kennedys. I was the interviewer that night, and as I arrived in a cab outside the library, the driver said, “Who’s on the program?” When I said, “Barack Obama,” the driver replied, “Oh, our next president.” It’s a measure of how starved the country is for a sensible, appealing, intelligent, trustworthy leader that a man who until just a couple of years ago was an obscure state senator in Illinois is now suddenly, in the view of an awful lot of voters, the person we should install in the White House. At the Kennedy Library forum on Friday night, Mr. Obama declined to rule out a run for the White House in 2008. In an appearance on “Meet the Press” yesterday, he made it clear that he was considering such a run. With all due respect to Senator Obama, this is disturbing. He may be capable of being a great president. Someday. But one quick look around at the state of the nation and the world tells us that we need to be more careful than we have been in selecting our leaders. There shouldn’t be anything precipitous about the way we pick our presidents. That said, the Barack Obama boom may well have legs. During the forum, every reference to the possibility of him running drew a roar from the audience. He’s thoughtful, funny and charismatic. And there is not the slightest ripple of a doubt that he wants to run for president. The reason he went into politics, he said, was to be able to influence events, to make a difference. “Obviously,” he added, “the president has the most influence.” I asked what thoughts run through his mind when he thinks about himself and the presidency. He said: “That office is so different from any other office on the planet, you have to understand that if you seek that office you have to be prepared to give your life to it. How I think about it is that you don’t make that decision unless you are prepared to make that sacrifice, that trade-off. “What’s difficult and important for somebody like myself, who has a wonderful, forbearing wife and two gorgeous young children, is that they end up having to make some of those sacrifices with you. And that’s a profound decision that we won’t make lightly.” I asked if he could imagine himself, at some point, making the kind of commitment he described. He said that he could, and the crowd erupted. I asked if he might run in 2008. He said he was focused on the coming Congressional elections. “So you have not ruled it out,” I said. “We’ll leave it there,” he said. The giddiness surrounding the Obama phenomenon seems to be an old-fashioned mixture of fun, excitement and a great deal of hope. His smile is electric, and when he laughs people tend to laugh with him. He’s the kind of politician who makes people feel good. But the giddiness is crying out for a reality check. There’s a reason why so many Republicans are saying nice things about Mr. Obama, and urging him to run. They would like nothing more than for the Democrats to nominate a candidate in 2008 who has a very slender résumé, very little experience in national politics, hardly any in foreign policy — and who also happens to be black. The Republicans may be in deep trouble, but they believe they could pretty easily put together a ticket that would chew up Barack Obama in 2008. My feeling is that Senator Obama may well be the real deal. If I were advising him, I would tell him not to move too fast. With a few more years in the Senate, possibly with a powerful committee chairmanship if the Democrats take control, he could build a formidable record and develop the kind of toughness and savvy that are essential in the ugly and brutal combat of a presidential campaign. After the interview at the Kennedy Library, hundreds of people lined up to have copies of Mr. Obama’s book, “The Audacity of Hope,” autographed. He signed as many as he could. Then he shook hands with everyone who remained and assured them that he would have their books delivered to his hotel, where he would sign them later that night. He’s 45. There’s no hurry. He should take all the time he needs. and now Rich posted by: isidorus 13:22 10.23.06 October 22, 2006 Op-Ed Columnist Obama Is Not a Miracle Elixir By FRANK RICH THE Democrats are so brilliant at yanking defeat from the jaws of victory that it still seems unimaginable that they might win on Nov. 7. But even the most congenital skeptic has to face that possibility now. Things have gotten so bad for the Republicans that were President Bush to unveil Osama bin Laden’s corpse in the Rose Garden, some reporter would instantly check to see if his last meal had been on Jack Abramoff’s tab. With an approval rating of 16 percent — 16! — in the new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, Congress has matched the Democrats of 1994 or, for that matter, Michael Jackson during his own version of Foleygate. As for Mr. Bush, he is once more hiding behind children in an elementary school, as he did last week when the monthly death toll for Americans in Iraq approached a nearly two-year high. And where else could he go? Some top Republican Congressional candidates in the red state he was visiting, North Carolina, would not appear with him. When the president did find a grateful campaign mate at his next stop, Pennsylvania, it was the married congressman who paid $5.5 million to settle a lawsuit by a mistress who accused him of throttling her. Maybe the Democrats can blow 2006 as they did 2004, but not without herculean effort. As George Will memorably wrote, if they can’t at least win back the House under these conditions, “they should go into another line of work.” The tough question is not whether the Democrats can win, but what will happen if they do win. The party’s message in this campaign has offered no vision beyond bashing Mr. Bush and pledging to revisit the scandals and the disastrous legislation that went down on his watch. Last spring Nancy Pelosi did promote a “New Direction for America” full of golden oldies — raising the minimum wage, enacting lobbying reform, cutting Medicare drug costs, etc. She promised that Democrats would “own August” by staging 250 campaign events to publicize it. But this rollout caused so few ripples that its participants might as well have been in the witness protection program. Meanwhile, it was up to John Murtha, a congressman with no presidential ambitions, to goad his peers to start focusing on a specific Iraq exit strategy. Enter Barack Obama. To understand the hysteria about a Democratic senator who has not yet served two years and is mainly known for a single speech at the 2004 convention, you have to appreciate just how desperate the Democrats are for a panacea for all their ills. In the many glossy cover articles about Obamamania, the only real suspense is whether a Jack or Bobby Kennedy analogy will be made in the second paragraph or the fifth. Men’s Vogue (cover by Annie Leibovitz) went so far as to say that the Illinois senator “alone has the potential to one day be mentioned in the same breath” as Richard Wright, Ralph Ellison, Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King. Why not throw in Mark Twain and Sammy Davis Jr.? This is a lot to put on the shoulders of anyone, even someone as impressive as Mr. Obama. Though he remains a modest and self-effacing guy from all appearances, he is encouraging the speculation about seeking higher office — and not as a coy Colin Powell-style maneuver to sell his new book, “The Audacity of Hope.” Mr. Obama hasn’t been turning up in Iowa for the corn dogs. He consistently concedes he’s entertaining the prospect of a presidential run. There’s no reason to rush that decision now, but it’s a no-brainer. Of course he should run, assuming his family is on the same page. He’s 45, not 30, and his slender résumé in public office (which also includes seven years as a state senator) should be no more of an impediment to him than it was to the White House’s current occupant. As his Illinois colleague Dick Durbin told The Chicago Tribune last week, “I said to him, ‘Do you really think sticking around the Senate for four more years and casting a thousand more votes will make you more qualified for president?’ ” Instead, such added experience is more likely to transform an unusually eloquent writer, speaker and public servant into another windbag like Joe Biden. The more important issue is not whether Mr. Obama will seek the presidency, but what kind of candidate he would be. If the Democratic Party is to be more than a throw-out-Bush party, it can’t settle for yet again repackaging its well-worn ideas, however worthy, with a new slogan containing the word “New.” It needs a major infusion of steadfast leadership. That’s the one lesson it should learn from George Bush. Call him arrogant or misguided or foolish, this president has been a leader. He had a controversial agenda — enacting big tax cuts, privatizing Social Security, waging “pre-emptive” war, packing the courts with judges who support his elisions of constitutional rights — and he didn’t fudge it. He didn’t care if half the country despised him along the way. The interminable Iraq fiasco has branded the Democrats as the party of fecklessness. The failure of its leaders to challenge the administration’s blatant propaganda to gin up the war is a failure of historic proportions (as it was for much of the press and liberal punditry). When Tom Daschle, then the Senate leader, presided over the rushed passing of the war resolution before the 2002 midterms, he explained that the “bottom line” was for Democrats “to move on”; they couldn’t wait to campaign on the economy. The party’s subsequent loss of the Senate did not prevent it two years later from nominating a candidate who voted for the war’s funding before he voted against it. What makes the liberal establishment’s crush on Mr. Obama disconcerting is that it too often sees him as a love child of a pollster’s focus group: a one-man Benetton ad who can be all things to all people. He’s black and he’s white. He’s both of immigrant stock (Kenya) and the American heartland (Kansas, yet). He speaks openly about his faith without disowning evolution. He has both gravitas and unpretentious humor. He was the editor of The Harvard Law Review and also won a Grammy (for the audiobook of his touching memoir, “Dreams From My Father”). He exudes perfection but has owned up to youthful indiscretions with drugs. He is post-boomer and post-civil-rights-movement. He is Bill Clinton without the baggage, a fail-safe 21st-century bridge from “A Place Called Hope” to “The Audacity of Hope.” Mr. Obama has offended no one (a silly tiff with John McCain excepted). Search right-wing blogs and you’ll find none of the invective showered on other liberal Democrats in general and black liberal leaders in particular. What little criticism Mr. Obama has received is from those in his own camp who find him cautious to a fault, especially on issues that might cause controversy. The sum of all his terrific parts, this theory goes, may be less than the whole: another Democrat who won’t tell you what day it is before calling a consultant, another human weather vane who waits to see which way the wind is blowing before taking a stand. That has been the Democrats’ fatal malady, but it’s way too early and there’s too little evidence to say Mr. Obama has been infected by it. If he is conciliatory by nature and eager to entertain adversaries’ views in good faith, that’s not necessarily a fault, particularly in these poisonous times. The question is whether Mr. Obama will stick up for core principles when tested and get others to follow him. That’s why it’s important to remember that on one true test for his party, Iraq, he was consistent from the start. On the long trail to a hotly competitive senatorial primary in Illinois, he repeatedly questioned the rationale for the war before it began, finally to protest it at a large rally in Chicago on the eve of the invasion. He judged Saddam to pose no immediate threat to America and argued for containment over a war he would soon label “dumb” and “political-driven.” He hasn’t changed. In his new book, he gives a specific date (the end of this year) for beginning “a phased withdrawal of U.S. troops” and doesn’t seem to care who calls it “cut and run.” Contrast this with Hillary Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate, who last week said that failed American policy in Iraq should be revisited if there’s no improvement in “maybe 60 to 90 days.” This might qualify as leadership, even at this late date, if only John Warner, the Republican chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, hadn’t proposed exactly the same time frame for a re-evaluation of the war almost a week before she did. The Democrats may well win on Election Day this year. But one of their best hopes for long-term viability in the post-Bush era is that Barack Obama steps up and changes the party before the party of terminal timidity and equivocation changes him. O'Dowd's (crabby) two cents posted by: isidorus 13:06 10.23.06 October 21, 2006 Op-Ed Columnist Obama’s Project Runway By MAUREEN DOWD WASHINGTON So the question before us is, should Barack Obama stop lounging around in fashion magazines and do some honest work, like running for president? How will we ever persuade him to give up his modeling gigs in Men’s Vogue, Marie Claire, Vanity Fair and Washington Life? How can we lure the lanky young senator from Illinois out of the glossy celebrity pages and back to gritty substance, away from Annie Leibovitz’s camera and back to Abraham Lincoln’s tradition? He may not want to come back, now that he has mastered that J.F.K. casual glamour pose in shirt sleeves and tie, suit jacket slung over his shoulder, elegant wife and pretty children accessorizing. The Washington Post’s fashion reporter, Robin Givhan, analyzed the Men’s Vogue spread, with its “touch football” aura: “Obama is pictured in warm light or soft focus. He is pondering, nurturing, working. But never glad-handing, pontificating or fund-raising. The pictures celebrate the idea of Obama rather than the reality of politics.” Why should the 45-year-old senator tackle reality in a city that has forsworn it altogether? And why not join the catwalk of Democratic hotties? The Washington Post reported that the Democrats were “fielding an uncommonly high number of uncommonly good-looking candidates.” Young and cute, as the party campaign honcho Rahm Emanuel wryly told me, could be a refreshing change from “Hastert, Rumsfeld and Cheney, who look like the retirees from ‘Goodfellas.’ ” Mr. Obama’s main accomplishment so far is sending a chill through Hillary Clinton, the Democrats’ dreaded eventuality. It must certainly be more fun cavorting on a cover with Eva Longoria than caucusing in the Capitol with Harry Reid. Working on legislation can be so tedious, compared with a 13-city book tour in which you are feted as the liberal hunk of the 21st century, generating buzz about your future instead of the country’s. Mr. Obama, who fears being seen as fluffy and who has been known to mock pretty boys in his party, never seems to take off his makeup these days, as he pads from one soft perch to the next, from Oprah to Meredith to Larry. The first black president of the Harvard Law Review is spending too much time in green rooms. He also logs a lot of time at the gym. (You never know when Anna Wintour will call.) It is the only thing this intellectually nimble, preternaturally articulate smarty-pants has in common with W. “Politics sometimes blends in with celebrity,” he told Oprah this week. “And it gobbles you up because the tendency is for people to want to see you perform and say what they want to hear, as opposed to you trying to stay in touch with, you know, that deepest part of you, that kernel of truth inside.” Doesn’t he see that when you express this skepticism on Oprah it is not skepticism at all? Haven’t we seen this tease before? Before the 1996 campaign, Colin Powell scared the bejesus out of Hillary’s husband by showing a fair amount of leg on his book tour. He sold 2.6 million books and was hugely popular, but caution crimped him. He never ran for president, and when he went to the State Department he never stood up to the forces of darkness. Senator Obama’s caution, too, may cause him to miss the moment. Like Alma Powell, Michelle Obama is afraid for her husband to run. After 16 years of polarizing presidents driving them crazy, Americans will be yearning for someone as soothing as Obama. (“No one is exempt,” he writes in one of many platitudes in his new book, “from the call to find common ground.”) He is so hot now that tickets to his political events are being sought, at scalpers’ prices, on Craig’s List. His appeal combines the political ability — alien to the Bush administration — to see something from your opponent’s point of view with the cool detachment of a J.F.K. He’s intriguingly imperfect: His ears stick out, he smokes, and he’s written about wrestling with pot, booze and “maybe a little blow” as a young man. He has been told by Democratic leaders to think about whether he really wants to be president, or whether he’s just getting swept away by people who want him to do it. (That’s a distinction that entitled and unqualified Republican WASPs like W. and Dan Quayle never bother to make, simply learning — or not learning — on the job.) Does Barack Obama want to be a celebrity or a man of history — or is there no longer any difference? ruh row! posted by: simplicissimus 11:35 10.22.06 we could have a race in 2008 after all: http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2006/10/22/obama_acknowledges_hes_considering_run_for_president_in_2008/ obama! obama! obama! and now, david brooks is pimpi posted by: simplicissimus 15:56 10.19.06 (cribbed from NYT "select"): Barack Obama should run for president. He should run first for the good of his party. It would demoralize the Democrats to go through a long primary season with the most exciting figure in the party looming off in the distance like some unapproachable dream. The next Democratic nominee should either be Barack Obama or should have the stature that would come from defeating Barack Obama. Second, he should run because of his age. Obama’s inexperience is his most obvious shortcoming. Over the next four years, the world could face a genocidal civil war in Iraq, a wave of nuclear proliferation, more Islamic extremism and a demagogues’ revolt against globalization. Do we really want a forty-something in the White House? And yet in his new book, “The Audacity of Hope,” Obama makes a strong counterargument. He notes that it’s time to move beyond the political style of the baby boom generation. This is a style, he said in an interview late Tuesday, that is highly moralistic and personal, dividing people between who is good and who is bad. Obama himself has a mentality formed by globalization, not the S.D.S. With his multiethnic family and his globe-spanning childhood, there is a little piece of everything in Obama. He is perpetually engaged in an internal discussion between different pieces of his hybrid self — Kenya with Harvard, Kansas with the South Side of Chicago — and he takes that conversation outward into the world. “Politics, like science, depends on our ability to persuade each other of common aims based on a common reality,” he writes in his book. He distrusts righteous anger and zeal. He does not demonize his opponents and tells audiences that he does not think George Bush is a bad man. He has a compulsive tendency to see both sides of any issue. Joe Klein of Time counted 50 instances of extremely judicious on-the-one-hand-on the-other-hand formulations in the book. He seems like the guy who spends his first 15 minutes at a restaurant debating the relative merits of fish versus meat. And yet this style is surely the antidote to the politics of the past several years. It is surely true that a president who brings a deliberative style to the White House will multiply his knowledge, not divide it. During our talk, I reminded Obama that at some level politics is about power, not conversation. He pointed out that he’d risen from nothing to national prominence in a few years so he knew something about acquiring power, but he kept returning to his mode, which is conversation, deliberation and reconciliation. The third reason Obama should run for president is his worldview. At least in the way he conceptualizes the world, he is not an orthodox liberal. In the book, he harks back to a Hamiltonian tradition that calls not for big government, but for limited yet energetic government to enhance social mobility. The contemporary guru he cites most is Warren Buffett. He has interesting things to say about the way culture and economics intertwine to create urban poverty. He, conceptually, welcomes free trade and thinks the U.S. may have no choice but to improvise and slog it out in Iraq. The chief problem in his book is that after launching off on some interesting description of a problem, he will settle back, when it comes time to make a policy suggestion, into a familiar and small-bore Democratic proposal. I’d give him an A for conception but a B-minus for policy creativity. Obama, who is nothing if not honest about himself, is aware of the problem, and has various explanations for it. And what matters at this point is not his platform, but the play of his mind. He is one of those progressives, like Gordon Brown in Britain, who is thinking about the challenges of globalization outside the normal clichés. Coming from my own perspective, I should note that I disagree with many of Obama’s notions and could well end up agreeing more with one of his opponents. But anyone who’s observed him closely can see that Obama is a new kind of politician. As Klein once observed, he’s that rarest of creatures: a megahyped phenomenon that lives up to the hype. It may not be personally convenient for him, but the times will never again so completely require the gifts that he possesses. Whether you’re liberal or conservative, you should hope Barack Obama runs for president. and in time magazine posted by: isidorus 20:26 10.18.06 http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1546362,00.html nyt review of "the audacity of posted by: publius 20:22 10.17.06 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/17/books/17kaku.html?pagewanted=print louder still... posted by: isidorus 09:00 9.18.06 note tom vilsack's sour grapes ================= http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/18/us/politics/18obama.html?ex=1316232000&en=19350d3f6b3e58e0&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss September 18, 2006 Political Memo For This Red Meat Crowd, Obama’s ’08 Choice Is Clear By ANNE E. KORNBLUT INDIANOLA, Iowa, Sept. 17 — Senator Barack Obama insists, as always, that he is not running for president. But there are compelling clues that he is not exactly not running, either. The most obvious was his keynote appearance here on Sunday at Senator Tom Harkin’s legendary steak fry, a popular Democratic ritual in Iowa — and a prominent staging ground in this first presidential caucus state. The crowd rushed Mr. Obama when he arrived, then mobbed him for hours as other politicians wandered the fairgrounds introducing themselves and shaking hands. But beyond his first trip to Iowa — a visit that was guaranteed to set off new speculation about his presidential ambitions — Mr. Obama is in the midst of an unconventional publicity tour of sorts. Fresh off a closely watched journey through Africa, including a stop at the home of his Kenyan-born father, Mr. Obama is about to publish a second book that supporters believe will outpace his best-seller from 1995. With the book, titled “The Audacity of Hope,” will come an October appearance on “The Oprah Winfrey Show,” magazine profiles and a national speaking tour. Throughout, Mr. Obama is keeping up a full schedule of political speeches on behalf of Democrats nationwide; his fame has made him one of the most requested fund-raising guests in the party. All of which means that, despite his efforts to coolly play down expectations for his future, Mr. Obama has allowed his already stratospheric profile to grow a little higher of late and has done less to tamp down the celebrity buzz than he did when he first arrived in the Senate last year. “What a wonderful reception; I’m going to have to come to Iowa again,” Mr. Obama said as he took the podium under a sunny sky here on Sunday afternoon in front of an estimated 3,500 people. In response, someone in the audience shouted, “Obama ’08,” a sentiment reflected in T-shirts and buttons featuring his name throughout the crowd in defiance of his repeated claim that he is focused on his duties as a first-term senator. His 40-minute speech was punctuated by applause and standing ovations but also, at its most serious moments, brought the audience to a silence hushed enough for rustling trees to be heard. It focused on the importance of a Democratic victory in the 2006 midterm elections. Characteristically, he spoke in mostly moderate language. “I don’t think that George Bush is a bad man,” he said. Referring to Republicans, he said, “They believe in different things.” But he touched on core Democratic themes, praising labor unions, defending the role of government and excoriating the Bush administration over the war in Iraq, the politicization of the threat of terrorism and the so-called ownership society. If it was not a presidential stump speech, it certainly had the underpinnings of one. “Our parents and our grandparents faced greater challenges than we face, and yet somehow they were able to overcome it,” Mr. Obama said. “That’s the essence of America.” The trip, which had been hyped for weeks, took on greater significance when news leaked that Mr. Obama had invited along Steve Hildebrand, a political strategist who ran Vice President Al Gore’s campaign in Iowa in 2000. (Advisers to Mr. Obama insisted he merely wanted an old Iowa hand at his side.) In a frenetic question-and-answer session in front of dozens of camera crews before his speech, Mr. Obama got nearly a dozen questions about the presidential campaign and only one about national security. Tom Vilsack, the governor of Iowa, chatted easily with constituents, watching the news media crush from afar. Mr. Vilsack, who is also considering a presidential bid and recently came in fourth place in a poll of Iowa caucusgoers, played down the response to Mr. Obama, describing it as “certainly predictable.” Asked whether the senator should run, Mr. Vilsack replied, “That’s a question you’re going to have to ask the voters,” and walked away. Mark Warner, the former Virginia governor, who is also testing the waters for a presidential campaign, made brief remarks at the start of the event, although he was barely audible from the back of the crowd amid the frenzy over Mr. Obama. Mr. Harkin, a legendary political figure and the sponsor of the event, seemed amused by the Obama phenomenon. “Honestly, tell you the truth — I really tried to get Bono this weekend,” Mr. Harkin said in his introduction. “I couldn’t get him, so I settled for the second biggest rock star in America today.” For all of Mr. Obama’s star appeal — a recent Newsweek article compared his arrival in Kenya to the second coming of the Messiah — he has earned a reputation for persuasive rhetoric about the role of religion in politics, which is one strand of his new book, due out Oct. 17. Unlike his original memoir, “Dreams From My Father,” an autobiographical reflection on his African father and his Kansas-born mother, the new book is a series of meditations on matters like race and family. Books have generated speculation about a presidential race in the past. In 1995, when Colin L. Powell published “My American Journey,” it spurred months of urging for him to run for higher office. He ultimately declined. Whether Mr. Obama decides to take his own shot at becoming the first black president, the paraphernalia, and the popular movement, designed to persuade him to do so is already in full development. His fellow senator from Illinois, Richard J. Durbin, has urged him to consider running; so has the state comptroller, Dan Hynes, who in recent weeks said that Mr. Obama “alone can restore the hope and optimism that has made this country great.” Several people in the crowd on Sunday expressed a similar sentiment. Matt Hawkins, a 38-year-old wearing a blue “Illinois for Obama in 2008” T-shirt, pushed his way through the mass of people to meet the senator. Mr. Obama’s response left him undaunted. “He’s telling us he’s got to pay his dues,” Mr. Hawkins said, “and we’re telling him, ‘Learn as you go.’ ” the drumbeat gets louder posted by: isidorus 11:42 3.15.06 or should I say, dowd-er. (rim shot) ============================ What's Better? His Empty Suit or Her Baggage? By MAUREEN DOWD Published: March 15, 2006 WASHINGTON There's only one reason I continue to brave Washington's dreary formal press dinners, which are so calcified they're a bad cross between a zombie movie and those little Mexican Day of the Dead sculptures. I find it highly instructive to hear politicians make humor speeches. It's difficult, and few pols do it well. It took Bill Clinton almost two terms to make a funny speech. He kept letting a petulant tone creep in. Even though W. would probably rather spend the night in Baghdad than go to a banquet, way past his bedtime, where he's getting lampooned by reporters still able to drink, he was a master right from the start. Lynne Cheney is a practiced speaker, but a bit tone-deaf on humor. At the Gridiron dinner here on Saturday, she said of her husband: "He has a great sense of humor. Just the other day I asked him, 'Do you know how many terrorists it takes to paint a wall?' And he answered right back, 'It depends on how hard you throw them.' " People laughed, but it felt creepy, the kind of humor that makes more terrorists. Everyone was curious to hear Barack Obama, the Democratic speaker. He arrived last year as a star, then lapsed into a cipher, even getting punk'd by John McCain last month. In the capital's version of "Dancing With the Stars," Senator Obama won, turning in a smooth, funny performance that lifted him from his tyro track. He tweaked fellow Democrats, telling the white-tie crowd: "Men in tails. Women in gowns. An orchestra playing, as folks reminisce about the good old days. Kind of like dinner at the Kerrys." He mocked the president's unauthorized snooping, saying he'd "asked my staff to conduct all phone conversations in the Kenyan dialect of Luo." He advised W. to "spy on the Weather Channel, and find out when big storms are coming." After saying he'd enjoyed the Olympic biathlon of shooting and skiing, he, deadpan, turned to Dick Cheney: "Probably not your sport, Mr. Vice President." It may be true that Americans, as one Democrat told me, "will never elect a guy as president who has a name like a Middle East terrorist." And it may be true that Democrats are racing like lemmings toward a race where, as one moaned, "John McCain will dribble Hillary Clinton's head down the court like a basketball." But the clever, elegant performance by Mr. Obama — who is intent on keeping his head down in the Senate until he, too, can be a tedious insider — underscored the Democratic vacuum. Not only do the Democrats "stand for anything," as Mr. Obama semijoked, but they have no champion at a time when people are hungry for an exciting leader, when the party should be roaring and soaring against the Bushies' power-mad stumbles. They should groom an '08 star who can run on the pledge of doing what's right instead of only what's far right. The Republicans won with Ronald Reagan and W. by taking guys with more likeability and sizzle than experience. They figure they'll win in a McCain-Hillary duel by running a conservative beloved by the media and many Democrats against a polarizing Northerner who can't win any red states despite pandering to conservatives. The weak and pathetic Democrats seem to move inexorably toward candidates who turn a lot of people off. They should find someone captivating with an intensely American success story — someone like Senator Obama, Tom Brokaw or some innovative business mogul who's less crazy than Ross Perot — and shape the campaign around that leader. Barack Obama is 44. J.F.K., who had a reputation as a callow playboy and lawmaker who barely knew his way around the Hill, was 43 when he became president. With seniority comes dullness. And unless you can draw on it in desperate times, promise is merely a curse. Democrats think Senator Potential's experience does not match Senator Pothole's. Much of hers is as a first lady who bollixed up chunks of domestic policy. They also suspect she may be more macho than he is. They fret that the freshman Illinois senator would wilt against the Arizona senator's foreign policy experience — and he probably would. But Mr. McCain, a big hawk on Iraq, has talked of sending more troops, and his mentor was Henry Kissinger. These are not recommendations. W. had the foreign policy "dream team," and it shattered our foreign policy, ideals and self-image. Despite hundreds of years of combined experience, the Bushies rammed through cronies and schemes that were so destructive, it will take hundreds of years to straighten out the mistakes. The Democrats should not dismiss a politically less experienced but personally more charismatic prospect as "an empty vessel." Maybe an empty vessel can fill the room. ` somehow I missed these... posted by: isidorus 23:24 3.13.06 from the same dinner Lynne Cheney, wife of the Vice President, represented the Republicans and she offered this daring riff on her supposed humorless spouse: ``I know he has a great sense of humor. Just the other day I asked him, `Do you know how many terrorists it takes to paint a wall?' and he answered right back, ``It depends on how hard you throw them.'' Bush, pitch-perfect, also hit on his vice president. ``By the way, when Dick first heard my approval rating was 38 percent, he said, ``What's your secret?'' you slay me, brother! posted by: isidorus 23:18 3.13.06 http://www.suntimes.com/output/elect/cst-nws-sweet13.html obama is funny but despite how it pains me to say this, so is the president. read all the way down to the end. I like bush's jokes. ================================================= SEN. BARACK OBAMA'S GRIDIRON SPEECH Thank you very much: It's great to be at the Gridiron dinner. Wow, What an extravaganza! Men in tails. Women in gowns. An orchestra playing, as folks reminisce about the good old days. Kind of like dinner at the Kerrys. Nice to see you Mr. President and Mrs. Bush. I think it takes a great spirit for the President, who we all know is an early riser, to sit here until midnight and hear himself lampooned, when he could be back at the White House enjoying a quiet, peaceful night, watching TV and approving secret wiretaps. I don't see the Secretary of State is here tonight. You know, the President promised a muscular foreign policy. And anyone who's seen the Condi Rice workout tapes knows he means business. The truth is, I'm terrified to be here. Not because you're such a tough audience, but because they're serving drinks, I'm standing about 30 yards from the Vice President, and…Mr. Vice President this is too easy! Mr. Vice President, I know you came here expecting to be a target, which, it turns out, may prove easier for you than shooting at one. But I do want to thank you: for years, we Democrats have succeeded in doing little more than shooting ourselves in the foot. You've taught us a valuable lesson: aim higher. There's probably only one person more sick of these jokes than you… and that's your wife. It's an honor to share this stage with Lynne Cheney -- a great personage in her own right. Scholar. Author. A few years ago she wrote a book called, “Telling the Truth,” or as they call it in the Vice President's office, “Telling the Truth-24 hours later.” The Vice President and I do have one thing in common, we both married up. I want to acknowledge my wife, Michelle, who is here tonight. This is a true story: a friend sent me a clip about a new study by a psychologist at the University of Scotland, who says sex before a public speaking engagement actually enhances your oratorical powers. I showed this clip to Michelle, before we arrived here tonight. She looked it over, handed it back and said, “Do the best you can!” This appearance is really the capstone of an incredible 18 months. I've been very blessed. Keynote speaker at the Democratic Convention. The cover of Newsweek. My book made the best-seller list. I just won a Grammy for reading it on tape. And I've had the chance to speak not once but twice before the Gridiron Club. Really what else is there to do? Well, I guess…. I could pass a law, or something… About that book, some folks thought it was a little presumptuous to write an autobiography at the age of 33, but people seemed to like it. So now I'm working on volume two-the Senate Months. My Remarkable Journey from 99th in Seniority to 98th. (With an introduction by Nelson Mandela.) Believe me, when you're the last guy to ask questions at every committee hearing, you have plenty of time to collect your thoughts. Especially when Joe Biden's on the committee. I'll tell you, that Grammy was a big surprise. I thought, for sure, Jack Abramoff would win for his rendition of “It's Hard Out Here for a Pimp.” As I said, it's great to be here speaking opposite Lynne Cheney. As you may know, Mrs. Cheney was a late substitution for Senator John McCain. And speaking of Senator McCain. This whole ethics thing has been an adventure. I was really excited when they asked me to be the lead Democratic spokesman. But I don't know. Turns out, it's a little like being given the Kryptonite concession at a Superman convention. I mean, how did I know it was a freshman hazing? It gets a little depressing. So as I sometimes do when I get a little down, I wrote a song. Maestro? (To the tune of “If I Only Had a Brain”) I'm aspiring to greatness, but somehow I feel weightless A freshman's sad refrain I could be a great uniter, making ethics rules much tighter If I only had McCain I could bring us all together, no storm we couldn't weather, We'd feel each other's pain Red and blue wouldn't matter, party differences would shatter If I only had McCain Oh why is it so hard, for honest men of good will to agree, If we ever found a way to strike a deal, would we survive… politically? When a wide-eyed young idealist, confronts a seasoned realist There's bound to be some strain With the game barely started, I'd be feeling less downhearted If I only had McCain Still I hope for the better, though I may rewrite my letter Cause I gotta have McCain Needless to say, my Grammy was in the spoken word category! I should say that I really do get along well with Senator McCain. But as you know, not everyone in politics does. Because of his superstar status, his virtuous image, the kind of hero worship treatment he gets from all of you, some of my colleagues call John a prima donna. Me? I call him a role model. (Think of it as affirmative action. Why should the white guys be the only ones who are overhyped?) By the way, before I forget, raise your hand if Karl Rove didn't tell you about Valerie Plame? You know, The Gridiron Club is an aging institution with a long, proud history, known today primarily for providing a forum for jokes. To some, that may sound like the Democratic Party. You hear this constant refrain from our critics that Democrats don't stand for anything. That's really unfair. We DO stand for anything. Some folks say the answer for the Democratic Party is to stop being so calculating, and start standing up for principle. In fact, Harry Reid's appointed a task force to study this option. But really, they say our party doesn't have ideas? We have ideas. Take John Edwards. He's leading a new war on poverty… from his Chapel Hill estate. And he's educating us. I had no idea there was so much poverty in New Hampshire! Speaking of New Hampshire, a lot of speculation that that 2008 campaign could come down to Senator McCain and Hillary Clinton. The thing I don't think people realize is how much John and Hillary have in common: They're both very smart. Both very hardworking. And they're both hated by the Republicans! A lot of folks want to be President, but, I mean, wow, it really has been a rough period for you, Mr. President. I missed the Oscars, so when I picked up the paper the next morning and saw “Crash” in the headlines, I just assumed it was another Bush poll story. And how about that ports deal? I feel for you, sir. It's tough getting trapped in a storm, when no one comes up to help! And then there's the flap about global warming. You know, the Bush Administration's been a little skeptical about the whole concept of global warming. It's actually not the warming part they question. It's the globe. The President was so excited about Tom Friedman's book, The World is Flat. As soon as he saw the title, he said, “You see, I was right!” But when people say the administration is hostile to science, that's really a bad rap. Just last week they asked for a hundred million dollars for the NIH to fund new research into leech therapy. I was told that this dinner is off-the record… no taping or recording of this event, unless, of course, secretly authorized by the President. I completely trust the President with that authority, by the way. But just out of an abundance of caution, and not implying anything, I've asked my staff to conduct all phone conversations in the Kenyan dialect of Luo. Truth is, this domestic spying has all kinds of useful applications for Homeland Security. And I have a suggestion, in this regard, Mr. President: You can spy on the Weatherchannel, and find out when big storms are coming. You all watch the winter Olympics? Mrs. Bush was there, representing our country, and that was great. I'm sure a lot of us in politics were following that figure skating, because we can identify with performers who spin wildly and sometimes fall on their butts. And the curling. Wasn't that something? I hear Andy Stern from the SEIU loved the curling so much he's trying to organize the sweepers. I also enjoyed that biathlon, where they ski and shoot at the same time. Probably not your sport, Mr. Vice President. Hey, it's been great fun to be a part of this tonight. But before I go, I want to say a few words about the work you do. For a democracy to succeed and flourish, people must have full and free access to information about what's going on in their world and, yes, in their government. The framers of the Constitution understood that, which is why the very first amendment deals with the indispensable freedoms of speech and press. Those rights, those freedoms, the access to information citizens absolutely require in a democratic society are no less important today. Pursuing that information is not always easy. Sometimes you meet resistance from powerful institutions that would sooner operate in secrecy. And sometimes, as in Iraq, you literally risk your lives to keep the American people informed. Tonight, even as we laugh together, I want to thank you for that important and often courageous work and extend my prayers to those journalists and their families who have made and continue to make great sacrifices to fulfill this essential mission. And most of all, I want to thank you for all the generous advance coverage you've given me in anticipation of a successful career. When I actually do something, we'll let you know. Thanks for having me! EXCERPTS FROM PRESIDENT BUSH ``Senator Obama, I wanted to do a joke on you,'' Bush said, ``but it's like doing a joke on the Pope.'' Complained Bush, ``..Give me some material to work with here. You know, mispronounce something.'' ``I really chewed Dick out for the way he handled the whole thing. I said, ``Dick, I've got an approval rating of 38 percent and you shoot the only trial lawyer in the country who likes me.'' ``You know, there are all these conspiracy theories that Dick runs the country...or Karl runs the country. Why aren't there any conspiracy theories that I run the country? Really ticks me off. The truth is I do run the country....by Dick runs me and Lynne runs Dick. So actually Lynne runs the country. And Lynne, I think you're doing a heckuva job. Although I have to say you dropped the ball big time on that Dubai deal.'' ``And I'm proud that from across the political spectrum Republicans and Democrats, liberals and conservatives, came out in opposition to the port deal. I've always said I'm a uniter not a divider.'' ### word posted by: publius 21:34 7.5.05 http://obama.senate.gov/speech/050627-us_senator_barack_obama_addresses_the_american_library_association/index.html let's not turn into an asshole posted by: horsebeater 18:04 6.29.05 "In Lincoln's rise from poverty, his ultimate mastery of language and law, his capacity to overcome personal loss and remain determined in the face of repeated defeat - in all this, he reminded me not just of my own struggles ..." http://www.belleville.com/mld/belleville/news/local/11992619.htm guilty as charged... posted by: publius 00:00 6.23.05 i actually did read your whole post (two weeks ago...)...just never clicked on the link (which is actually unusual, though not unheard of). oh, the horror....i blame buzzflash... oh, publius... posted by: simplicissimus 23:57 6.22.05 i knew you would eventually slip up! look two posts above your last one....only your link to the video saved you from utter ruin and shame. it may not be the world's best posted by: publius 23:18 6.22.05 but it at least deserves a link here. obama's commencement speech at knox college... http://xpower.knox.edu/obamaaddress.xml i haven't watched the video (and lord knows obama should be heard and seen, not only read) but you can find that here... http://xpower.knox.edu/x9683.xml another happy user.... posted by: publius 21:05 6.6.05 of the search page Obama posted by: simplicissimus 20:12 6.6.05 I am convinced (for those of you that remember the story) that I will tell my grandchildren that I was "this close" to being next to obama on every step of the road he is going to travel. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: this guy is something awful special.... http://www.knox.edu/x9803.xml Yeah, anybody can read a good speech and an awful lot of people can write them....but there's more to it. I recently read that Obama is the first national black politician who does not trade in the currency of our national guilty over slavery. true, but that's only half the story. the only half? he's also the first national politician who without question would, without any doubt, still be a national politician even if he wasn't black. the combination of the two is what makes him so promising. i like the looks of warner/schweitzer/clark type guy on the top with obama on the undercard.....but, regardless, he will be the nominee within the next 11 years. there is just nop doubt about it. Obama's been a busy guy posted by: isidorus 09:44 10.12.04 http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4081283 best thing about this piece is how blunt npr is about how in one month he'll be the only black senator. Justifiably treats keyes as a silly sideshow act. We all know it's true, but it's nice to see npr coming right out and saying it, rather than pandering to the right's unending howls of partisanship. Anyway. on "this party's f- - - ed" posted by: armyoflebron 12:24 9.30.04 maybe until the next election cycle. after all, isn't that the same thing the pundits said: ...about the democrats (nationally) after the '88 election and post-desert swarm/storm/shield in '91... ...about the republicans (again, nationally) after the '92 election? granted, those were national party eulogies, and may not be predictive of a state party's (and i hear you typing about the ohio democratic party already) trajectory, but nearly as many obituaries have been rescinded as written in history of politics. just a thought (and trying to keep up with isidorus, who's gotten near prolific of late, on the stats sheet). I saw this two nights ago... posted by: simplicissimus 19:50 9.29.04 dailykos.com......check it out. i must admit, the man who posted it was chided by some as it was "really nobody's business." i was all ready to send the link and then i thought, you know what, it really is nobody's business, especially because this girl is like 18 or something. though this doesn't mean i don't think it is: sad/funny/alarming/frightening/pathetic/unfortunate/amazing/incredible.....for so many reasons. but kicking keyes at this point is not even fun. anyone of us could replace him on the ballot and double what he'll get. then again i can't be too generous: he may be the final nail in the illinois republican coffin for the next generation. those of you who live in the land of lincoln know this is no exageration. ryan indicted. hastert sick. no control of ANY level/branch of state govt (judicial, legislative, or executive). collar-counties turning from red to a very light pink. durbin (who is moving left)/obama (alas, who will most certainly move to the center) are gonna have lifetime tenures if they want. yeah, this party is fucked. Keyes' own daughter is a lesbi posted by: isidorus 18:43 9.29.04 And apparently this has been on the political blogs for nearly two days. Damn, publius, grad school must be keeping you busy. I expect a more rapid response from you on issues such as these. http://www.politics1.com/ you'll have to scroll down a ways because the story is getting old now. triumphant return... posted by: armyoflebron 12:55 9.24.04 ...and save your column inches on the cracks, because i probably won't read them for a month - by which time this thread will be relegated to the second or third page, i'm sure - anyway. my understanding, and though i don't know anyone at obama hq, i do listen to phil ponce intently, is that the only thing the gop is doing is setting back the party by a decade or so in this election. i heard obama is indeed campaigning nationally for ke04 (though if he was avoiding the poisoned well that is kerry, could you blame him). it may not make the front page of the trib or s-t, but they've got bigger problems (i.e., daley-skewering and getting fresh info for susanna's night out, respectively). the illinois senate race is won. obama is campaigning on a national scale, though we're not hearing about it, given 1) the gop's mastery of the agenda thus far in the campaign, and 2) the fact that constant updates probably wouldn't sell papers in chicago anyway. The GOP is winning this race posted by: isidorus 11:48 9.24.04 Update on the Illinois senatorial race: the GOP is winning. They've succeeded in their mission: get Obama out of the headlines. In the past month and a half, we've heard next to nothing from barack, as he's been overshadowed in the media by all of the ridiculous claims Keyes has been making. Sure, Obama is ahead by forty points in the polls, but no one is talking about him anymore. The significance of this isn't really relevant to Illinois, but it's relevant to the national parties - the GOP took Obama, who I think we all can agree is becoming a positive figure for the dems nationally, and has removed him (temporarily, perhaps) from the spotlight almost entirely. NOTE: by spotlight i mean npr and wgn news and newspapers/magazines, but I think that's a fair sample for now. So, and I hope simpli chimes in on this, what's the mindset at the Obama HQ? Is the only goal to win the Illinois race, in which case Obama doesn't have to do much? Just let let Keyes be himself and barack will waltz to victory? Why isn't he stumping harder/raising his profile for KE04? sorry, wrong thread on that la posted by: publius 09:19 9.1.04 meant to put it in the convention thread... and don't climb aboard air for posted by: publius 09:19 9.1.04 the funny thing about this story is that the judge has ordered this 21 year-old guy to stay at least 100 feet away from bush and cheney. granted, his not-so-clever ruse got him closer to cheney than that once, but come on...what do you think the possibility of anybody whose last name is not bush or whose first name isn't condi, donald, dick, or karl even being allowed to fool around with the retina scanner which provides access to the secret map room which discloses bush's temporary location? http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040831/D84QDEGO0.html And, as an after dinner mint, posted by: simplicissimus 01:00 9.1.04 When informed of Keyes' comments about Mary Cheney, Bush/Cheney campaign spokesman Steve Schmidt offered a terse reply Tuesday. "It was inappropriate," he said. Campaigning in North Middleton Township, Pa., with President Bush, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) spoke to reporters about Republican chances to hold the Senate and said, "I think it's clear we lose Illinois." Informed about Keyes' comments about Mary Cheney, McCain said, "I don't think that's appropriate, but it's not the first inappropriate remark Mr. Keyes has made. He made a remark the other day that people who perform abortions are the same as terrorists. That's a very unique take on that issue and one that's very seldom espoused." ***************************************************** "Selfish hedonism? Has anyone seen Dr. Keyes look at a microphone or a television camera? That's hedonism," Garcia said. "The mainstream of the Illinois Republican Party is not behind Dr. Keyes." ****************************************************** Keyes attempted to build bridges Tuesday with the Illinois delegation. But a breakfast gathering ended messily for Keyes as he chastised reporters for not giving his candidacy a fair shake and left early. Topinka had welcomed Keyes to a Times Square hotel for his first delegate breakfast. She said there was room under the Republican Party's tent for different beliefs, but added that a far-right candidate would not win in Illinois. "Without social moderates this party cannot win," Topinka told a few reporters before she and Keyes shook hands for the cameras. "It has to be center-right, it can't be right-right." When Topinka and Keyes greeted each other, the exchange was brief and awkward. It ended strangely, as Topinka ducked out, dashing behind a ficus plant. "There you go," she said to Keyes. "You're on." Though her views differ with Keyes' on several social issues, Topinka said Tuesday morning she would support him. "The ticket is Republican. I am the Republican chairman," she said. "He is on the ticket. We will support the ticket." I am supposed to be working, b posted by: simplicissimus 23:29 8.31.04 I couldn't help but add to this thread. This man has literally (no hyperbole) lost his mind. Appetizer: http://www.alternet.org/election04/19552/ Main Course: He went crazy, literally ballistic, on Walter Jacobson (those in the know, know) Sunday morning on a satellite feed interview from Alabama - he was strangely evasive about why he was there - because Jacobson informed him that Illinois citizens do not have a right to carry assault weapons, as he was stating. The guy looked fucking nuts, Nelson was terrified. Dessert: Today he "crashed" an Illinois delegate breakfast and was on tape pushing aside reporters to stand next to the state chairwoman (was being interviewed on camera). she looked petrified as, appropos of nothing, he attempted to make small talk with her -- in the middle of a tv interview - about having trouble waking up this morning. I thought he was crazy, as in "crazy mad and fighting for his beliefs that i don't share." I didn't know it meant actually, certifiably, truly, honestly, not-just-saying-this-because-i'm-a-democart, unstable, bizarre, frightening, and in. fucking. sane. And then he gets just sort of sad and pethetic as he rants and raves that Obama will never be elected and Bush is guaranteed to win Illinois. alan keyes never stops being a posted by: publius 23:10 8.31.04 http://www.drudgereport.com/flash6.htm somehow i can't believe that calling the vice-president's daughter a "selfish hedonist" because she is a lesbian is kosher with the party. then again, maybe this is just alan's way to get some press while the convention is going on. Actually... it's quite impress posted by: horsebeater 11:06 8.11.04 ... certainly Rove-worthy. I mean, the GOP *knows* it's going to lose in Illinois. Why not get one of the 4 bigtime black GOP guys a little face time (the other three are Clarence Thomas, JC Watts and Colin Powell... am I missing somebody?) This is clearly a false post b posted by: horsebeater 10:59 8.11.04 ... Female GOP chairpersons do not have hyphenated last names. It is culterally impossible. Clearly Simpli read this on some conspiracy minded webblog, the URL of which he found scrawled on a laundromat wall somewhere, which begs the real question: Why is Simpli still going to laundromats? Doesn't he have a washer and dryer in his house? Please, Simpli... we're dying to hear the explanation. Contacts in Obama's campaign ( posted by: simplicissimus 15:16 8.9.04 That this decision came straight from the White House, or more properly Rove. Oberweis (and who among us current and former Illinois denizens doesn't smile at his name and the memory of the helicopter/soldier field add and the attempt to soften up with a smiling mountie ad later on?) was second in the primary and didn't get the call. Why? Oberweis comes off as a fascist and GW doesn't like the idea of Chicago/Quad City/East St. Louis media (well, the surronding area, at least) "infecting" Missourah, Iowa, and Wisconsin with a candidate who will do nothing but hurt Repubs/Bush come November. On the flip side, the same Media will have a conservative black man blaring away in Illinois - which could help Bush. Also, Keyes has the star-power to keep Obama in Illinois AND AWAY FROM DETROIT, CLEVELAND, PITTSBURGH, MILWAUKEE, and ST. LOUIS where his message would be very well received this fall. The guy is a fucking rock star. Proof that the word is from up on high? Judy Barr-Topinka, the Chairwoman of the State Republican machine here in Illinois (and yes, it scares me that I now know her name and title) stated the day before Keyes was announced that him running here was a "pipe dream" that she was "100% opposed to" and it would "would never happen" most lopsided senate win in hi posted by: publius 11:39 8.9.04 ladies and gentlemen....alan keyes... "I might not know the streets yet, and the neighborhoods and all the things that go to make up the everyday life of the people of Illinois," Keyes said. "But if, in fact, the people of Illinois still stand together on the American creed, still assert their right of self-government, still have the sense of responsible citizenship, then I believe I know their spirit and their conscience and their heart." yeah, whatever... hypocracy and pot posted by: horsebeater 16:23 7.28.04 2 quick things... (1) Historically, the Political "drug barrier" was broken in 1988 with Gore et al. disclosing that they smoked pot. One guy did it during the Dems primaries and most of the other dems had press conferences (Biden, Gore, Gephardt) in the next 24 hours saying "I smoked pot in college." It was like a 48 hour "drug admission zone." Bruce Babbit (or maybe it was Paul Simon) held a press conference to say that, regretfully, he hadn't done drugs in his lifetime. (2) Publius is right that the gotcha game is tough. I find it surprising that he's pushing this, as finding examples of him playing it to the hilt and using technicalities to skewer Bush for supposed hypocracy in these pages wouldn't be difficult. But ignoring the hypocracy of his complaints about hypocracy hunting (hehe), he's right to some extent. The tough thing in "judging a man (or woman)" in an election is that most people would say that some form of character matters. We could debate whether that just means the guy shouldn't be patently dishonest in what's allegedly in legislation he's offering, or shouldn't lie to the faces of world leaders (and whether cheating on your wife is relevant to the other "character"-type tests that are important for a president). I hope we could agree that on some level it matters. And the problem I find is that you have about 3 ways to judge a candidates' character: you can listen to him tell you about it; you can listen to people vouch for him; or you can see if he's been a public hypocrite. After repeated exposure, you ultimately might figure out that George H.W. Bush is truly a stand-up guy or that Daniel Patrick Moynihan really is pretty cool, but you don't figure that out in time for most elections. So hypocracy is about all we have to judge these guys, so it gets a ton of play. obama kicked some ass with his posted by: publius 02:44 7.28.04 and true to form, my mother's first comment was "he's so well-spoken!" i think obama did the right th posted by: publius 19:32 7.20.04 by just coming out and admitting what his past "indiscretions" were. it seems that there is nothing the american electorate jumps on more fiercely than hypocrisy, either real or imagined. i'm undecided as to how i feel about the effects of this "gotcha" methodology of political discourse. actually, that's not true. i'm decided as to how i feel about it - i think it's cheap, trite usually fairly meaningless. yet at the same time i realize it's part of the political process and always has been. if anything it's toned down a bit in the last 200 years. check out some of the screeds the founding fathers wrote about each other behind noms de plume - truly vicious stuff. i'm the first one to admit i'm guilty of playing "gotcha" with bush and the other shitsuckers in his administration. lord knows it's easy with that lot. and the "gotchas" there are matters of national importance like mobilizing the armed forces for an unnecessary war under (let's use kerry's term here) "misleading" circumstances - not what someone stuck up their nose or what they didn't stick in their wife at a sex club. but the concept of waiting for someone to do something "wrong", or "hypocritical", or "flip-flopping" and then jumping on them for it isn't overly productive except as a short term means to an end. it's shrill. the only thing that's going to get anything accomplished long term is proposing new ideas and genuinely coming up with that most of hackneyed of all political terms, "a vision", for the country and pursuing it because you believe in it. and if you lose you lose. but politics in this country is so infrequently about anything more than crass electioneering that it gets very depressing very quickly. so to speak directly to isidorus' point: yes, i think it's certainly true that people respect honest disclosure, as well they should. the question is where and when that disclosure becomes relevant. i think it is utterly irrelevant if obama was blowing lines while he was at harvard law or if jack ryan tried to have sex with his wife in front of 30 midgets. the root of the problem is that there is no line between public and private life. and whose fault is that? well bob, i believe that would be a combination of a shameless media and a maliciously voyeurisic public. cocaine posted by: isidorus 15:56 7.18.04 Jack Ryan tried to get his wife to do kinky stuff. He had to withdraw from the race. Blair Hull admitted to doing cocaine, and there was a bit of an uproar. Then we found out his ex wife took out a restraining on him, and his candidacy was torpedoed. Obama admitted to smoking pot and snorting coke as a teenager, and practically nothing happened. This tells me a couple of encouraging things: one, the hysteria over past drug use in a political campaign may be waning, and that people respect honest disclosure more than evasion and denials. I like Barack Obama. The lack of attention to his cocaine admission seems proof of his own political savvy. talk about a rising star... posted by: rabelais 14:26 7.14.04 http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040714/ap_on_el_pr/democrats_keynote_speaker now, he's just got to beat that ditka guy... now obama's really scared.... posted by: publius 15:56 7.13.04 http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=5659071&src=rss/ElectionCoverage%A7ion=news in general, i think it was rig posted by: ludwig 13:19 6.28.04 if you avail yourself of the courts, you should expect that what you file will be made public. Thre is too much sealing and secrecy in government and the administration of the courts. Once you start sealing things, such as whern Jack Ryan has his desires revealed, it's bad. But then you look at what can happen when secrecy gets out of hand, as in the secret dockets in Connecticut, New Hampshire and Rhode Island and you see that a lot can be hidden in order to prevent people from suffering undue embaressment. Jack should have sought private mediation/arbitration or settled completely out of court. predictably enough... posted by: publius 21:08 6.25.04 ryan has dropped out of the race. i feel sorry for the guy. i disagree with most of what he stands for as a politician, but he didn't really do anything wrong, except perhaps engaging in slightly boorish behavior once his wife told him the first time she wasn't down with having sex in front of others. i also don't see why his divorce papers were unsealed in the first place. why is that the public's business? i suppose you could make a case that he misled his supporters and party sponsors by saying there was nothing damaging in his divorce papers, but that's a somewhat circular argument. we should be big enough people to understand that everyone out there has an odd sexual proclivity or two and that what happens between two consenting adults is and should remain personal. i realize that that's a bit idealistic, and i'm sure that ryan simply made a losing bet that the papers would be kept sealed, but the whole media spectacle makes me a bit ill. he didn't have much of a chance of beating obama anyway, but to have his public career ruined over something like this is just cheap. too bad the D title didn;t rea posted by: ludwig 15:44 6.23.04 "Sex clubs, not fire, found at Phi Delt" jack ryan... posted by: publius 11:34 6.23.04 another one dartmouth's favorite sons... Here's the declaration from Ry posted by: ludwig 10:07 6.23.04 thank heavens for the Smmoking Gun: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0622041ryans1.html well, it looks line ryan... posted by: publius 23:38 6.21.04 has the exhibitionist vote locked up... http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/06/21/ryan.divorce.ap/index.html hitting the big time... posted by: publius 16:38 6.4.04 here's a bob herbert op-ed piecee from today's ny times: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/04/opinion/04HERB.html?pagewanted=print&position= and another from last week's new yorker: http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040531fa_fact1 what odds do we think jack ryan has in november?