Obama's Anger and McCain's

post from Connecting.the.Dots on 04 May 2008 12:48:00 PM. © Connecting.the.Dots

Michelle Obama is telling voters about her husband's feelings during this long, hard battle for the nomination, his thinking that "I can't let my ego, my anger, my frustration get in the way of the ultimate goal."

Among the sad aspects of the past week has been Jeremiah Wright's usurping of any anger that Obama's might express. On Meet the Press today, the candidate responded to Tim Russert's grilling with unfailing calm and sadness in a situation where annoyance at being betrayed might be expected. But Obama has to distance himself from Wright's operatic anger.

Against the tactics of the Clinton and McCain campaigns, he has wryness and humor as an outlet, but there has been nothing funny about his former minister's antics.

By today's political rules, overt anger is unacceptable. "Give 'em hell, Harry" Truman would be an anachronism in a 21st century campaign.

In the post-nomination period, that will be a problem for John McCain as well. He will have to live down his reputation for a "quick temper and whether it might hinder him as president" that dates back to the 2000 campaign.

?He is passionate about the future of this country,? Cindy McCain recently told daytime TV viewers. ?Some people mistake that for temper.?

McCain's anger-management technique was seen during the primaries in his addressing of Mitt Romney as "My friend" as he answered his slurs with gritted teeth.

In a matchup between Obama and McCain, temperament is sure to be an issue. An underlying question will be whether Obama has enough fire in him to be president and whether McCain has too much.

Read The Full Article:
http://ajliebling.blogspot.com/2008/05/obamas-anger-and-mccains.html

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Fearguth’s Great Snark Hunt

post from American Street on 04 May 2008 12:48:00 PM. © American Street

“Whaddya mean, ‘Take it slower, Dear’? If I take it anyslower, I’ll get a ticket for double-parking!”

Read The Full Article:
http://www.reachm.com/amstreet/archives/2008/05/04/fearguths-great-snark-hunt-144
/

Digg this

Of course nothing is more important
presidentially than keeping McCranky out of the White House. But isn't it clear who the better candidate is

post from DownWithTyranny! on 04 May 2008 12:30:00 PM. © DownWithTyranny!

The other day I brought up the "gas-tax holiday" business, not for the issue's sake--since it seemed to me that Howie had been covering that perfectly well, and the bad things it told us about both holiday proponents "Crazy" McCranky and our Hillary--but because of what was suggested to me by the way the Crankyman was making, or rather, failing to make his case, what it told us about the quality and condition of his "mind"--for want of a more descriptive word. (I did come up with a possibly more descriptive word: miasma.)

Which was not to dispute the dangerous foolishness of the proposals of the Tax Holiday Twins, Senators McCranky and Clinton. I have yet to hear a hint of disagreement on this point from anyone familiar with either the economics or energy impact of the subject. The only dissenters appear to be the aficionados of pandering to public ignorance.

I'm just catching up on yesterday's news, and in the pile I find breaking news (well, I guess it's broken by now, but still alarmingly pertinent) from A Siegel. In the way that Pastor Dan of Street Prophets is my go-to webguy on matters religious, A Siegel (of Energy Smart) is my go-to webguy on energy and environmental matters. (Please, no complaints about sexism. I have go-to webgals too--like Firedoglake's Christy Hardin-Smith and Marcy Wheeler on legal and governmental matters. I suppose we could make them all "go-to webgurus," but that seems somehow wrong as well as unnecessary.) And yesterday he was excited to report that Friends of the Earth has endorsed Barack Obama:

Until quite recently, those who focused primarily on energy and global warming issues could see reasons to be supporting Hillary Clinton and/or Barack Obama. In this arena, both have plans and records with strengths ? and weaknesses. Both could learn from each other and strengthen their own programs. Thus, with real legitimacy, an ?environmentalist?, those concerned about Peak Oil or Global Warming or related issues, could easily defend their position supporting either (or neither) of the candidates. And, again, their platforms/records are certainly light years ahead of this Administration?s and of McSame McCain?s, but have weaknesses and are ?reasonably good? but not the best that they could be. Thus, many of us were ?sitting on the sidelines? when it came to the Presidential campaign.

Well, this has changed.

The precipitating event: Hillary Clinton?s determined foray into the Energy Dumb ranks with her vociferous and highly counter-productive calls for a gas tax moratorium.

Well, this morning, Friends of the Earth jumped off the fence and endorsed Barack Obama for President.

And, for FOE, the defining event, the precipating development: the gas tax holiday. . . .

A (if I may be so familiar) made clear: "[I]t was not just the gas tax holiday proposals from Clinton and McSame McCain, but Barack Obama?s forceful rejection of the idea as wrong-headed and counter-productive. -1 Hillary, +1 Barack. As far as FOE is concerned: Game, Set, Match for its endorsement."

And he concluded: "Again, let us not do things that dig our hole deeper, ?sham solutions,? but look forward to actually changing our path for the better."

I'm sure nobody's noticed that I haven't been writing much about the Obama vs. Clinton contest. I actually said pretty much everything I've (still) got to say on the subject in perhaps the less-noticed (which is saying quite a lot) piece I've written here: "Sure, I'll vote for the monster, almost surely, if she's the Dem nominee--even though I don't think she and Bill will support the nominee if she isn't" early last month.

I know I'm far from alone in feeling that where the "major" contenders in the 2008 Democratic presidential field were concerned, it was a field of quite acceptable candidates--especially set alongside whatever life form the Republicans were likely to extract from their candidate freak show--but with no one to gladden a progressive's heart. (I made, and make, a slight exception for John Edwards, but even there, I remain unconvinced of what he would actually advance and fight for as president.)

And I know I'm far from alone in feeling that, since the Democratic field narrowed to the present two-horse race, the two candidates have been separating themselves to a near-astonishing degree--that Obama has emerged as steadily more sensible (as in the case of the gas-tax holiday) and committed to bringing people to his agenda, while Clinton has turned into a pandering horror show, trying desperately (and I don't think "desperately" is an exaggeration--just look at her, for goodness' sake) to be the centrist or even right-wing "strongman" that her low-life advisers (and again, her political advisers seem to me truly among the vilest people on the planet--and I don't see how we can ignore the implications of this for the kind of people she would surround herself with in the White House) tell her some deeply muddled and deeply moronic band of "centrist" voters want her to be.

Let me say again that I truly don't believe that this is what Clinton has always been, though of course in some form the potential must always have been part of her. No, I like my friend Peter's explanation: that she has turned into the monster the sociopathic Clinton-haters of the '80s and '90s portrayed her as.

Which is why I've written so little about the race. I think any prospective voter to the left of, say, Richard Mellon Scaife needs to be prepared to support either Obama or Clinton unambiguously in November. (Oh wait, is Senator Clinton really to the left of her new booster RMS, one of the principal bankrollers of what someone once described as "a vast right-wing conspiracy" aimed at Bill Clinton and, er, someone else?)

A McCranky victory would be a horror of almost unimaginable proportions. After eight years of the Hurricane Katrina of presidential administrations, the next president has to deal with an executive branch in which nearly everything that hasn't been simply decimated is in an advanced state of rampant corrosion.

In addition, the next president has a backlog of judicial appointments to make. And while they will now have to be made over the veto power of the Senate's Right-Wing Obstruction Machine, would we rather that those appointments be made by a President Obama or Clinton or by Crazy McCranky? (Let me say again that in a sane world, all that would be necessary to make the point would be a big picture of Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, whose replacement will all but certainly named by the next president.)

It's clear already that whoever emerges with the Democratic nomination will have to deal with a large bloc of voters who think that not voting or even voting for McCranky is an acceptable or even somehow morally superior option. Well, that's a summer-and-fall discussion, though one that scares the daylights out of me.

If I may venture one further observation. In 2000, there were people who persuaded themselves they were taking the moral high ground by voting for Ralph Nader over either Al Gore or, um, the other guy (please don't make me say his name) and, when it was pointed out to them that they were effectively voting for, um, the other guy, they didn't care! They said something like: "Well, maybe that's for the best. Maybe what the system needs is to be thoroughly broken in order to build something better."

Well, I ask, how'd that work out?
#

Read The Full Article:
http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2008/05/of-course-nothing-is-more-important.h
tml

Digg this

Robo

post from Talking Points Memo on 04 May 2008 12:26:00 PM. © Talking Points Memo

Funny-business in last night's election in Baton Rouge ...On election day, a number of homes in Baton Rouge's predominantly black neighborhoods were phoned with a tape-recorded message asking black voters to teach white Democrats a lesson by staying home[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Talking-Points-Memo/~3/283379072/192986.php

Digg this

Renewable Energy Hypocrisy

post from Everyday Citizen on 04 May 2008 12:24:40 PM. © Everyday Citizen

It seems that politicians of every stripe have a new buzzword to abuse. Preface any project or[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://www.everydaycitizen.com/2008/05/renewable_energy_hypocrisy.html

Digg this

ASZ’s First “Exxon-a-thon”
Fundraiser

post from All Spin Zone on 04 May 2008 12:24:00 PM. © All Spin Zone

Lee Raymond The next time you’re looking for a gas station to fill up the tank (and pay nearly $4 / gallon for the privilege) , consider that Exxon Mobil is in rough times, and needs your support. In the first quarter of 2008, the company only made an $11 billion profit, which was apparently below expectations. In an age of $120/barrel oil, a 17% increase in net corporate income apparently just isn’t enough, particularly when the competitors are seeing bumps to the corporate bottom line on the the order of 25%.

We at ASZ feel Lee Raymond’s pain (or actually, more correctly, the pain of Lee Raymond), and that’s why we’ve decided to kick off an Exxon-a-thon beginning today and running through next Friday (5/9/08).

Now, please - don’t misunderstand - we’re not actually asking you to support Exxon Mobil. We’re asking ASZ’s loyal readers to step up to the plate and support ASZ by kicking a few bucks into the kitty. Exxon-a-thon just had a nice ring to it, particularly since they made $11 billion last quarter and ASZ didn’t really even make a quarter.

How can you help? We’re glad you asked, because there’s swag in it for you (more on that below)! Just hit the PayPal button in the right hand column, or clicking on this link. You can also initiate a monthly subscription for just $5 / mo. A pledge to ASZ’s Exxon-a-thon ensures that we’ll be able to continue to bring you cutting edge online commentary, rather than having to use our spare time singing for nickels on street corners.

In turn, we promise to take bicycles or mass transit or walk whenever possible, and continue to avoid Exxon Mobil gas stations at all costs.

We’re also offering some nice premiums for your generosity, at least for as long as they last: for a one time $50 pledge or $5 recurring monthly subscription via the PayPal links during ASZ’s Exxon-a-thon, we’ll email you a list of fine books (political and non-political) that we’ve accumulated, and let you choose a great summer read. Trust me, the library is chock full of wonderful titles, such as The Brotherhood of the Disappearing Pants, among others. And for a small pledge, we’ll drop the book of your choice in the mail to you almost immediately. It’s first come, first served, so we expect the popular titles to disappear quickly, and there are some real gems on the list. However, if $50 is a bit too rich for your blood in this wonderful economy - please don’t feel bad! We’ll try to put together a progressive swag package for any level of support that you can offer.

In all seriousness, maintaining ASZ is like a second full time job, with a lot of hard and soft costs involved. It’s been a long time since we’ve run a fundraiser, and we’d sincerely appreciate your support.

Make Lee Raymond cry.

Read The Full Article:
http://allspinzone.com/wp/2008/05/04/aszs-first-exxon-a-thon-fundraiser/

Digg this

Another Iraq Contractor Avoiding Millions In
Taxes Through Off-Shore Havens

post from Think Progress on 04 May 2008 12:19:00 PM. © Think Progress

Last March, the Boston Globe reported that KBR — one of the top profiteers of the Iraq war — has avoided paying more than $500 million “in federal Medicare and Social Security taxes by hiring its workers through shell companies” based in the Caymen Islands.

Today, the Globe reports that another Pentagon contractor, Virginia-based MPRI, has also established offshore havens that have the appearance of avoiding payment of millions of dollars in Medicare and Social Security taxes and also evading scrutiny from the IRS:

In March 2005, one of the Pentagon’s most trusted contractors - Virginia-based MPRI, founded by retired senior military leaders - won a $400 million contract to train police in Iraq and other hotspots. Two months later, MPRI set up a company in Bermuda to which it subcontracted much of the work. […]
A year earlier, MPRI headed a joint venture that won a $1.6 billion contract to provide US peacekeeping forces in Kosovo and elsewhere. Three months later, MPRI set up a company in the Cayman Islands to do the work.
But tax lawyers say that MPRI appears to be avoiding the payment of roughly $4 million dollars a year in Social Security and Medicare taxes for the police-training contract alone and is sidestepping scrutiny by hiring workers through offshore entities based outside the jurisdiction of the Internal Revenue Service.

MPRI has hired “roughly” 400 employees through the Bermuda shell company, but the company also avoids taxes by hiring its workers as “independent contractors.” But experts, and even MPRI employees themselves, say their work would unlikely “pass the IRS test for self-employment.”

Georgetown professor Albert Lauber said […] that genuine independent contractors come into a job with their own equipment, require little training and oversight, and generally get the job done on their own schedule.
MPRI’s police trainers, who asked not to be identified, said they do not work that way. One former trainer working for MPRI in Iraq said that police trainers in Baghdad received letters at the end of 2005 saying that they might experience a brief disruption in their payments because “payroll was being moved to Bermuda to satisfy US tax code.”
The letters became a running joke among the trainers. “We said, ‘What do you mean, to avoid tax codes?‘” the former trainer recalled.

The Globe notes that as a result of MPRI’s practices, “workers cannot receive unemployment compensation when their jobs end and may be deprived of other protections under US law.”

Read The Full Article:
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/05/04/mpri-iraq-taxes/

Digg this

Barack Obama on Meet The Press

Here's a thread to discuss Barack on Meet The Press. Anyone watching?Tags: 2008 presidential election, democratic nomination, barack obama (all tags) [...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/mydd/~3/283361270/7211

Digg this

Chris Matthews Show: Doesnt Matter What You Do,
The GOP (And The Media) Will Make Wright An Issue

Reality clearly has no place in politics. Because no matter how many times Barack Obama disavows Rev. Wright’s words, the GOP and by extension, their complicit allies in the media (that’s right, Russert, I’m talking about you) will not let it go and will continue to measure Obama by Rev. Wright’s words. The crazy part [...]

Read The Full Article:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/05/04/chris-matthews-show-doesnt-matter-what-y
ou-do-the-gop-and-the-media-will-make-wright-an-issue/

Digg this

Hillary Clinton On This Week

This Week and Meet The Press are on up against each other here in L.A. Watching This Week now, will watch MTP later. Did you watch/are you watching now?Tags: 2008 presidential election, hillary clinton, this week (all tags) [...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/mydd/~3/283361271/90417

Digg this