There is a 50-50 chance that our nominee is going to be Hillary Clinton.

the hell with her g.d cleavage!

Just for the record, after 30+ years as a registered Democrat, voter and activist, if Hillary gets the nomination I not only won't support her, I will leave the party.

Among other reasons:

And finally, on another personal note, I come to this decision from the perspective of a Senator from New York who has seen all too closely the consequences of last year's terrible attacks on our nation. In balancing the risks of action versus inaction, I think New Yorkers who have gone through the fires of hell may be more attuned to the risk of not acting. I know that I am.

So it is with conviction that I support this resolution as being in the best interests of our nation. A vote for it is not a vote to rush to war; it is a vote that puts awesome responsibility in the hands of our President and we say to him - use these powers wisely and as a last resort. And it is a vote that says clearly to Saddam Hussein - this is your last chance - disarm or be disarmed.

Any subsequent statements to the contrary or attempts to put the blame soley on Dubya for the debacle that is Iraq are - at best - disengenuous. At worst, and I think more accurately, downright deceitful and dishonest. She said it herself - the Senate laid this power in Bush's hands.

And where the heck has the freaking funding for this war come from?!

She sits on the Armed Services committee for gods sake.

Posted at August 1, 2007 8:21 AM in response to The Hillary Cleavage Issue and What We Can Do About It

O'Reilly

Hannity and Colmes

any number of other over-priveleged bloviators.

Posted at April 13, 2007 6:18 AM in response to I Was A Day Off---Imus FIRED Thursday not Friday

how unfortunate that behavior - to be considered "seriously" reprehensible in the current national framework - has to rise to the level of Abu Ghraib torture.

Words fail me.

Posted at April 13, 2007 6:16 AM in response to I Was A Day Off---Imus FIRED Thursday not Friday

yup. Imus has a constitutionally protected right to be racist slime and he seems to exercise it regularly.

MSNBC is free to hire and fire racist slime.

I hope they will choose to exercise their freedom to fire this racist slime.

I have chosen to exercise my right as a civilized person to tune Imus and other demogogues OUT.

If enough people chose a similar exercise of freedom, Imus would have no audience, no ratings and no job.

Posted at April 10, 2007 2:17 PM in response to Imus Will Be Fired by Friday: Count On It

I don't know about Gwen Ifill and "shiv" sticking on her part - she is one class act. What a great response to Imus' crude insults and low class performance in popular media.

I don't think her point was revenge at all. Its an appeal to holding more civil standards in the hope that others don't suffer what she has in the past. Shit-canning Imus would be one good way to get the point across that insulting language and behavior are simply not acceptable in civilized society. Especially where the behavior is repetetive. What good is an apology when the perpertrator simply goes out to transgress-for-ratings again and again?

I have ALWAYS admired Ifill and am a big fan of "Washington Week." On the other hand, you can't pay me to listen/watch Imus and his ilk.

For those numbnuts that will try to make a "Free Speech" issue out of this, a reminder: 1st Amendment "free speech" is protected from state (e.g. government) action -- MSNBC is a private employer. They can - and should - fire someone for such insulting, degrading and un-civil conduct. Even if it does give ratings a temporary bounce to keep this moron on the air.

Jimmy the Greek said something far less egregious in my book and CBS fired him none-the-less. I think CBS is still on the air...?

Jimmy the Greek said: "During the slave period, the slave owner would breed his big black with his big woman so that he would have a big black kid—that's where it all started."

Remember that "Black" not "African-American" was the more widely used and politically correct term at the time (1988). "African American" was only just coming into use then.

Whatever.... go Gwen go!

Posted at April 10, 2007 1:07 PM in response to Imus Will Be Fired by Friday: Count On It

Since it is Israel that chooses to eat at the trough of the U.S. largesse of economic support, they ELECT to submit -- no one is forcing them.

Likewise, Palestinians submit to the carrot/stick of wealthier arab nations' purse strings and rhetoric.

I don't think its a matter of whether I choose to put either in master/submission positions rather that THEY choose them.

They could both elect to deal with eachother on an equal basis without the interference of their proxies -- or masters using the terminology that you put in my mouth.

In any event, you chose the term "master" --giving the whole thing a negative connotation. I prefer the term "leaders" -- again if they elected to take on that role.

I certainly agree that things were more peaceful while we were "at the table" -- but that was long ago and under CLINTON. And for all his pecadilloes with interns under his leadership the U.S. was more trusted in world affairs, although not entirely. See my original post on the issue of trust.

Palestinians, rightly or wrongly (rightly in my view) distrust the United States and percieve the U.S. to be entirely biased toward Israel. The U.S.'s perceived bias against arabs/moslems increases with every second we remain in Iraq and worse, escalates tenfold with the saber rattling vis a vis Iran. Escapades like last summer's invasion of Lebanon -- unimpeded by words of U.S. or deeds by the Security Council - do nothing to alleviate this perception.

The U.S. cannot come to the table with all that baggage. They cannot.

Posted at February 9, 2007 9:46 AM in response to Israel and Palestine: The Prez Candidates Can No Longer Pander Thanks to Us

but is essentially what (according to the polls) the majority of Israelis and the vast majority of Palestinians want. It is essentially the position of Israel Policy Forum, American Task Force on Palestine, Brit Zedek, Americans for Peace Now, the Arab-American Institute and MOST Americans.

Cite source for any of those assertions please.

And for the record, I respectfully disagree that any AMERICAN policy should be established by what either Israelis or Palestinians want except insofar as it coincides with what is best for Americans.

I happen to strongly agree with the poster above that the U.S. is not, and has not been, an "honest" broker since that now-anti-semite of a president, Jimmy Carter, brokered the Camp David Accords. (heavy snark-asm)

The U.S. government is not trusted and cannot be trusted by most muslims. One cannot broker anything -- or sit at the negotiating table even -- if trust is absent.

Moreover, no true diplomacy can take place as long as there is a such a huge power differential between Palestinians and Israelis. Israel is a behemoth occupying military power all my itself, but when combined with the U.S. on its side so outweighs any other party in the region as to make "negotiating" a joke.

1947 was a long time ago. Poor little Israel doesn't need us to hold their hand.

That is not to say that the U.S. does not have a real interest in a resolution to Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Certainly, as MJ points out, the U.S. has a real interest in reducing the tension there - one of the sorest points among Arab/Muslims and the "West."

It is the means I differ with, not the ends.

The U.S. does not belong at the table. In my view the U.S. belongs at the end of a carrot/stick mechanism. Only the U.S. has the means to "encourage" both Israel AND Palestine to negotiate through offering or withholding economic aid.

Moreover, in my view, attempting to put a suggested policy statement in the mouths of candidates is counterproductive. Let them come up with their own policy statements. And may the best man or woman win.

Posted at February 9, 2007 6:35 AM in response to Israel and Palestine: The Prez Candidates Can No Longer Pander Thanks to Us

Open minded non-Jews who want to criticize Israel should read Israeli newspapers. Israel is as self-critical society as they come and honest criticism can only help. Non-Jews should be advised that honest criticism, as opposed to name calling or racial comparisons (Zionism is racism, Carter's apartheid, etc.), is encouraged. Surely, Israelis don't shy away from even the most nasty, but not racist, criticism.

sigh. don't you think that most Israeli papers are read -- and discussed -- mostly by Jews? Who else is interested?

Of course they can be self-critical. And even many of the non-jews residing in Israel, who might read and respond through letters to the editor, are evangelical Christians. They are busy praying for Zionism to work as the fulfillment of the Messianic prophecies so the Second Coming can go forward they can all go to heaven and all un-redeemed ("saved") Jews can go burn hell.

The point is that it is well nigh impossible for American non-jews
to be critical of Israel no matter how open minded they are, and no matter what they read.

MJ: can you be more specific about where you differ with Carter's thesis?

I just finished a few nights ago and I think he hits the nail right on the head.

Posted at January 26, 2007 1:43 PM in response to Israel's Isolation

"overreached with their healthcare reform package of 1994."

And who was that? Yup Her Royal Clinton -HRC.

It's not Bill running, its Hillary. And now that she's gotten to where she wants to be, how much does she need him? Not much. He'll be kicked to the curb (if he hasn't already) except for fund raising duties.

If you were Hillary, would YOU ever truly let him forget the public shaming she got from him?

Will the Republicans?

Let us let sleeping dogs lie and move on to the next generation of candidates (not agewise, but electorally).

It's 2008, not 1992.

Posted at January 22, 2007 7:19 AM in response to An American Dream Team

Hagel will get MY vote if he's running against HRC... how ironic is THAT?

Posted at January 22, 2007 6:56 AM in response to An American Dream Team