Something light to get back in the swing of things:
And as MissLaura at Daily Kos so accurately remarked: “Shoot, at least I bought my own damn pajamas and didn’t get the RNC to buy not just clothes for me but underwear for my kids.”
Of course we should be writing about all the transitionin’ going on, but there are so many trial balloons up in the air right now that it’s more fun to follow Alaska’s Imelda Marcos governor around a little more.
In his latest book A Bold Fresh Piece of Humanity (nope, not making that up), renowned ontologist Bill O’Reilly singlehandedly solves the one big problem that, for centuries, has kept great thinkers like Anselm of Canterbury, Thomas Aquinas, René Descartes, and Immanuel Kant awake at night in their poorly lit chambers: the proof of the existence of God.
And here it is in all its glorious simplicity:
“Next time you meet an atheist, tell him or her that you know a bold, fresh guy, a barbarian who was raised in a working-class home and retains the lessons he learned there.
Then mention to that atheist that this guy is now watched and listened to, on a daily basis, by millions of people all over the world and, to boot, sells millions of books.
Then, while the non-believer is digesting all that, ask him or her if they still don’t believe there’s a God!”
This is a contest. It’s sort of like Where’s Waldo? Can you find a complete sentence? Ok, that might be too hard. Let’s start with a coherent thought. Anyone who can find a complete thought in the following video wins, in the honor of Caribou Barbie’s home state, my treasured soapstone bear purchased in Alaska. I shit you not. If you can find it, the bear is yours*.
* thoughts or sentences completed by Ms. Couric are not valid entries and will not be considered for the main prize.
Seriously, Letterman says it all.
As an aside: One of these days I will do a substantive post, one that doesn’t involve the YouTube du jour . Until then, this little gem of technology makes it so easy to take potshots at the opposition.
Thanks to some journalism groups, I have been able to find names of some of the other journalists that I was detained on the Marion Street bridge with.
This one is from John P. Wise. He was from a Fox News group. He was there with another Fox News person. His co-worker was released at the scene but he got the free trip down town and a PB & J sandwich. MyFox News wrote another story about it here. Not even Fox News was immune to having their freedom of press infringed.
Here is a story done by an outfit from Canada. If I recall correctly, the reporter told me she was from Australia and the photographer was from Russia. They had to come to America to get arrested covering a political event. Go figure. Full story on their website here.
The City of St. Paul announced today that they will not prosecute journalists arrested in connection with the RNC protests on Thursday night of the Republican convention. Here is MPR’s story.
Good. I’m off the hook for that misdemeanor they charged me with. I can tell Ron Kuby to stand down.
But I am still curious why it was necessary to arrest credentialed (some credentialed by the RNC themselves) journalists at all? And why some were placed under arrest and taken down town to Ramsey County Jail; while some others were processed and released at the scene?
I was astounded to see the next day on the internet that KARE 11’s arrested photog had made their live shot for the 10 o’clock news still wearing his credentials and with his citation (ticket) in hand. Are some journalists more equal than others?
I, on the other hand, was taken downtown and had my RNC credentials taken from me. I got them back in a “Blues Brothers” type of inventorying. They listed them as “other paper.” Then, I got my citation and was dropped off in a paddy wagon at 3 AM in a desolate spot of St. Paul.
But seriously if you were going to look at this picture and guess which one was a protester and which one was a journalist which one would you pick?
I helped you out by highlighting the green RNC credential and the notepad in the white circle…. things the guys wearing bandannas on their faces don’t have.
It still didn’t stop the riot police from shooting flash bombs seemingly right at me and corraling me in a scrum of photographers, journalists and protesters. After that maneuver, they held me and almost 400 others on the bridge for 3 hours. Then, they took me downtown for another 3 hours. They finally released me at 7th and Layfette (I still don’t know where that is).
At the same time I was released into the wild with the protesters I had bonded with -we were in the joint together ya’ know- I suspect the photog from KARE 11 and several other journalists through some unknown selection process were cozily in bed.
Don’t get me wrong. I am happy they are dropping the charges. It was a pretty weird situation that could have been worse.
But as one of the cops at the St. Anthony Ave. mugshot center at the foot of the Marion St. Bridge told me, “We got $5.5 million worth of riot gear for [the RNC]. When is the next time we are going to use it?”
And from the looks of it they still had a lot left over. They did have a very orderly, although slow, system for handling protesters and “out-law” journalists. I was even offered a brown paper bag with two slices of bread, PB&J and fruit. I turned it down though and went on an immediate hunger strike in my own protest.
So, assuming the charges stay dropped, I got an involuntary display of St. Paul riot police readiness, a tour of the Ramsey County Jail and an official looking citation.
But, I think there is a lot more to this story and I still have questions.
So yesterday it came out that Palin’s email was hacked by the group that goes after Scientologists called “Anonymous.” However rude and lowdown it is to hack into one’s email and spread it around is of little consequence now. I think it speaks more to a potential VP nominee that might have kept information in the Fort Knox that is Yahoo. 8 year-olds are probably a little more tech savvy then that.
The hackers also released a list of email subject lines.
These are the three I’m most interested in:
Talis Colberg is her Attorney General. Fek9wner is Mr. Palin. And Michael Nizich is her Chief of Staff.
It would be interesting to see what a good fiction writer or maybe the Coens could come up with with this cast of characters and the subjects of Confidential Ethics Matter, $$$ and Follow Up. I would bet it wouldn’t be too far from the truth.
As much as I loathe Palin and her politics and try to gobble up every juicy tidbit hoping for the “a-ha” moment that would prove to be the tipping point for Palin, it makes me wonder if McCain is saying: “Hey what about me?” Well, he should be.
Let’s take a look at how the conservatives are covering McCain’s nomination to the top of the GOP ticket and his run for the White House:
See a common theme? Right, no McCain. I like the National Review cover the best. The One? She’s not going to be President unless McCain….Hey! What do conservatives really want here?
Seriously, I think it goes to prove that the way to win this thing is to keep the story about McCain. It’s obviously what they don’t want to talk about. Look especially at the Weekly Standard. They are still pining over the pick of Dick Cheney.
Interesting fact: Obama has made the cover of National Review 4 out the last 7 issues going back to June. So does that make Obama a media darling of the right? Why do conservatives complain about how much coverage Obama gets when they are just as guilty of giving him ink as anyone.
And while it’s not the cover of a magazine, ultra-conservative Human Events magazine has this at the top over their online coverage:
Crazy or what?
It’s interesting that it’s just become conventional wisdom that the surge worked in Iraq. If you are paying attention, you may realize that it’s a bit early to draw a quid pro quo assumption.
The McCain Campaign would like to make you think that the surge was the foremost thing that stopped violence (for the most part) in Iraq and was completely John McCain’s idea. They would also like you to think that because Barack Obama opposed the surge that he is on the side of violent chaos.
In Bob Woodward’s latest book, he covers the policy formation around the surge idea. Let’s take a look at who else in Woodward’s book reportedly thought the surge might not be so great:
“Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice opposed the surge, as did (Donald) Rumsfeld. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki also needed to be convinced.”
So Obama looks to be in interesting company there.
In short, McCain took a stance to support the President and the surge and since things are more peaceful there now he is taking credit.
So by extension, every decision McCain and Obama have made as elected officials or policies advocated in a stump speech is a reflection of how fit they are to guide America, right?
OK. So why isn’t the media discussing the “Gas Tax Holiday” in the same way? If McCain had his way the tax would have been suspended for a temporary alleviation of the soaring prices. Obama opposed this because he doesn’t give in to hysterical, gimmicky politics.
What happened since then? The price of gas has fallen because as the International Energy Agency said:
“The data suggest that the demand impact of weaker economic conditions and high prices during the summer — when oil prices reached an all-time peak — was more marked than expected, notably in the United States,” the IEA said in its report.
The “demand impact” they are talking about is people using less gas and oil. As Adam Smith will remind the Republicans, the price of oil got too high so the demand went down and now prices must go down to meet demand.
So who didn’t go the gimmick route and artificially deflate the price of gas so the price of oil would stay high?
OBAMA.
Good thing too. We apparently need to collect more tax revenue to bail out the common banking man.
I would love, love, love anyone in the media to admit that a liberal understood simple economics better than the conservative
Now what other stances can we take a look at McCain historically on?
I’ll leave it to you to Google: “McCain Martin Luther King Day”
Rep. Ron Paul, the most vocal Republican opponent to the war in Iraq, rejected an overture from former “Americans are whiners” Senator Phil Gramm to endorse McCain/Palin.
Good.
Now while the main reason I root for Paul is because he splinters the GOP, I still think the Libertarian Party’s idea of government is a fantasy. Although their idea of privatizing everything, including national defense, may be closer to reality (see Blackwater) than it was 8 years ago, I think we are still a long way from selling their idea of plutocratic “utopia” to the masses.
I know the media likes to cover him as a novelty and they seem to think that his fervent supporters are cute, but how they were treated at the Republican National Convention would bring howls of protest if the same thing had happened at the Democratic Convention.
Here’s what happened:
While I was at the RNC, I overheard a prominent Minnesota delegate, we’ll call him “Bill Twinkie”, telling one of the RNC’s volunteers, who happens to work high up in Republican politics, that there were six people in the Minnesota Delegation that were voting for Ron Paul and not McCain. He said that they were trying to figure out who they were so they would switch their votes so as not to mess up McCain’s big nomination vote.
So how did the Minnesota Republican Party rectify their little dissent issue?
Unlike other states that just bit the bullet and announced Paul’s votes- to a chorus of boos- Gov. Tim Pawlenty apparently took matters into his own hands.
When the roll was called for Minnesota’s 41 delegate votes, Pawlenty announced 35 for McCain and then……Shut up.
The six votes for Paul were never announced or counted.
So that’s how they roll in the MN GOP. You vote the opposite of what Pawlenty wants; he’ll just not count them.
Imagine if a Democratic delegation had not counted a batch of votes for Clinton in Denver. What would the lead story look like on Fox News then?
This is what the final tally looks like if you disagree with the GOP bosses here.
For some time, I’ve held that it’s not Hillary that I object to, it’s the people around her. And A #1 slimebag on that list is Terry McAuliffe. I hold him personally responsible for the curb-stompings of the Democratic Party throughout the late 90’s and early parts of this century. (He was DNC chair, you know, the guy running the damn party). I am so glad he got the boot and Howard Dean is not filling his old post. And amazingly, Democrats are winning.
In recent weeks and months (since about South Carolina) Hillary has done much to erode whatever favorable picture of her I had. But it was the likes of Terry McAlbatross that initially turned me off to her. And I love it when my skepticism is validated.
Oh, and just as I was about to post, it is shit like this following video that fucking kills me.
A democrat should NEVER fellate a republican to slam a democrat. NEVER. PERIOD.
psssst. Hill, darling, remember what we learned in 2004? Voters won’t buy the imitation Republican, when they can get the real thing for free.
Um… I have a lot of mixed feelings about all the will.i.am Obama YouTube videos. I do.
But then I see something like what Jack Nicholson just did to support Hillary Clinton’s campaign, and I can’t help but think that—even when the support is at its most hamfisted, simplistic, twee and cloying—an Obama campaign at least does something Democrats haven’t been able to do for a long time: Actually harness the power of the creative class for political good.
In the meantime… Yuck. Just yuck:
I really wonder what else Barack Obama has to win and by how big of a margin in order to get that badge of fake Democratic street cred called electability that the pundits are invoking non-stop like they are stuck in the 2004 election cycle. We are talking about the same people who deemed John Kerry electable, and we all know how well that went.
And not that it really matters anyway:
Obama is ahead with 18 to Clinton’s 13 won states in the overall count of states after the talking heads told us it would be over on Super Tuesday. Clinton only won 11 if you don’t count the states where Obama wasn’t even on the ballot (Michigan) or not competing (Florida).
Obama is also leading the popular vote right now with 931 against Clinton’s 882 - not counting the superdelegates, of course. He won these votes from black, Latino and white voters after the experts first told us that he was not black enough to be electable and then too black after the South Carolina primary. And he won after they told us about Clinton and her Latino “firewall” and notwithstanding the room for improvement for Obama on the issue of immigration. He got votes from the old after they told us that his is a campaign driven solely by the young, and he got votes from rural America after they told us his voters are all urban hipsters. He won from Alaska to the Virgin Islands.
He won Missouri after they told us that he can’t win in states that have primaries rather than caucuses because that’s his only strong suit. At times it almost sounded like it’s somehow a lesser accomplishment to win a caucus with strong grassroots support, and only a true victory if it’s a primary.
They said once the contest moves to the national level it would favor Hillary and he came out of Super Tuesday unscathed and won Washington, Nebraska, Louisiana and the Virgin Islands with record turnouts.
He is outfundraising all of his opponents getting money from thousands of small donors after they told us that Clinton with all her connections to big business, Hollywood and the unions had more money than she needed to win the nomination.
They said the demographics of Maine strongly favor Clinton. Yeah well, guess what…
It appears that the race for the Democratic nomination has moved beyond the question of the lesser evil, pardon, electability. The Democrats have a candidate that can do both, motivate the own party base beyond anything people have seen in decades and appeal to enough voters across party lines, beating the current Republican front runner McCain by 3% in the polls.
Junk. And yes I am talking about the new MPR/Humphrey institute poll. Absolute Junk.
Now I’m no statistician, but as a political junkie, I look at a lot of polls. And I’ve found two things matter. Trendlines and crosstabs. Now the trendline in this poll is fantastic. Over the last poll from late september, Obama picked up 11 points and Hillary lost seven. Fantastic!
Unfortunately for us Obama partisans that still puts him back 7% in the state.
Enter crosstabs.
First off, the poll was taken before South Carolina, before the Kennedy endorsements, and before John Edwards stepped aside to let history be made. Given what the national polls have done since then, these numbers could be questionable. However, I have a bigger beef.
Now, I’m just going to state the CW on this and not post any kind of links or back up. I assume it is safe to say that Hillary has the middle-aged white woman vote locked up. Also safe to say that Obama has the critical beat down on the Under 30 vote.
Now, what would you say about the validity of a poll in this race that didn’t sample middle aged white women? Of course the numbers would be a little weird. How about a poll that doesn’t have a sample of voters younger than 30?
If you follow where I’m going, apparently the pollsters down at the Humphrey Institute didn’t think us kids were that important to talk to. I guess we don’t vote, or we we have those new-fangled cellumalar phones that pollsters haven’t been able to figure out yet, or something. Not like we’re turning out in record numbers across the country or anything.
Age Gap: Clinton enjoys strong support among Democrats 45 and older (especially among
those 60 and over). Younger voters (30 to 44 years old) flock to Obama. (Not enough
Democrats 18 to 29 were interviewed to draw reliable generalizations.)
While I don’t know if my peers and I are worth 7%( I think we are, and more). All I’m saying is an outdated poll that leaves out an entire voting bloc isn’t worth the phone bill it took to conduct it.
Ok, let’s play a game. Word Association. (Ok more like phrase association, but humor me)
“testy exchange”
“shot back”
“fired back angrily”
“confronted”
Still with me?
Ok now watch a short video.
Now, do any of the phrases above describe what occurred in the video?
Of course not.
Unfortunately, our valiant press corps, and most notably in this instance, ABC news’ Sunlan Miller, spent too much time in the creative writing department, instead of, well, journalism classes.
Here’s some snippets of that yellow press that is just hacktastic. For starters the question asked was something to the effect of “Is Bill Clinton getting into your head?”
“I am trying to make sure that his statements by him are answered. Don’t you think that’s important?” Obama shot back, while walking away.
When Zeleny yelled a follow up question suggesting the Illinois senator had not answered the question, Obama fired back angrily, “Don’t try cheap stunts like that.”
Obama then walked away and shook hands with the mass of voters that surrounded him.
A few minutes later, Obama came back and confronted Zeleny again.
“I will answer your question though off the record, would you like to talk off the record?” Obama asked. Zeleny refused to go off the record and then motioned toward the gaggle of TV cameras gathered around him. (emphasis added)
Really guys? I mean, are you so desperate to start the Obama Can’t Handle Clinton meme that you have to basically make it up? Or are you just angry that he called you guys on trying a cheap stunt. Either way, please, cut it out.
If this man’s hands contained any more ham, my grandmother would glaze them in honey and serve them for Easter dinner. I mean I’ve heard of hatchet jobs but this is just laughable.
I guess Senator Obama was just too busy working for the poor and homeless in Chicago to take time to watch the Tom Cruise movie, The Firm. Because if he had the Tony Rezko case would not be biting him in the ass. In case you forgot, Cruise played a white version of Barack Obama–a charming, up-and-comer fresh out of law school idealist who fell in with a crowd of scalawags who were tied to the mob.
This isn’t even a hatchet job. It’s a herring job. Just let the boys from Monty Python elaborate:
Do you like how I tied together the concept of a nonsense hatchet job, with a (red) herring around a scene from a movie that is that is itself sheer nonsense? See how I did that? It’s because I’m smart.
mmmm. ham.
So, shrill Ma Clinton managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of the Messiah and, despite the fact she was 20 points ahead a week or so ago and only won by a few percentage points and blah blah blah, she’s the Comeback Kid 3.0 (the first being Pa Clinton and John McCain or possibly Britney Spears for five minutes last October).
And now the Messiah is going to lose, apparently, and Ma Clinton really does have a heart after all, and women are angry because Chris Matthews was being mean, so it’s time to circle the vagina wagons and give Ma Clinton what she’s due because, really, if you’ve worked real, real hard for a real, real long time, you should be president of the whole country, absolutely. And maybe especially if you’re a woman, because that would sure show them! Thanks, Baby Boomers, for putting up a fight—another useless and highly reactionary one, certainly, but you’re just going with what you know.
The press response to any move is trite and predictable. Several bloggers were actually able to predict headlines down to the letter. So why do we all believe it? Why do we get swayed by these invented story lines created nearly out of whole cloth by lazy but pretty men and women who are more supermodel than journalist? Why does our entire national press corps start barking when one starts barking?
How can we make it stop?
I mean, legally.
So, Gov. Body is out with a new book that he “wrote,” and that’s very exciting, because why shouldn’t he have piles of cash? At least he didn’t become a lobbyist or a pundit for KMSP. We can all be thankful for that. Anyway, PiPress has some excerpts and you should totally read them because they are awesome. Also, the Strib doesn’t have excerpts. Could PiPress have scooped!?! Or at least the Web site? I DON’T KNOW! But at least they’re not suing one another and fuck Par Ridder and his Timmy Martin hair! So gross, God!
Anyway, the best part is about how Jesse told then-President Bill Clinton that he should say some computers malfunctioned and blow up parts of the Middle East so the Israelis and Palestinians would stop fighting over it.
That’s our Jesse! He may be crazy, but at least the internal logic holds up (no one wants something that’s been blown up, right?!?). Tim Pawlenty would probably just want to challenge the PLO and Likud to a pick-up hockey game and then waterboard the losers and slash the winners’ taxes. Or something. I don’t know. I haven’t read Katherine Kersten in a spell, so I have no idea what’s going on at the Center for the Taxpayers’ Experiment mothership.
