It pains me a bit to admit that it?s getting harder and harder to find interesting commentary on The Huffington Post any more.
To begin, we were treated to this angry screed (and I?ll admit that I know a thing or two about angry screeds) by John Ridley aimed at the New York Times over the MoveOn ?ad that will never die.?
As I stated in a prior update, if Ridley wants to accuse the Times of some kind of a double-standard in running the ad?well, I may not agree with him, but I?ll cut him some slack. However, when he starts citing percentage numbers showing a decrease in readership and revenue as a signal that the paper is ready for the bone yard, he starts to sound ridiculous; all newspapers are taking those hits. And to say that the paper stinks now because ?Pinch? Sulzberger has supposedly never had to work for anything is childish.
Next, we have HuffPo blogger Sam Stein trying to manufacture a ?story? out of the fact that ?webisodes? (I hate it when people invent words like this pertaining to the Internet, to be honest with you, and the items in question are video portrayals of John Edwards and the campaign) are apparently no longer available either from the Edwards people or the company that produced the videos (though at least one commenter was able to find the information that Stein claimed no longer existed).
And on top of that, we now have Jeffrey Feldman in a snit at Edwards over his supposed claim that he wants to keep combat troops in Iraq until 2013, which apparently was a date that Tim Russert pulled out of a bodily orifice when questioning the Democratic candidates (with Russert taking a break from serving as self-appointed spokesman on behalf of ?fathers and sons? in this country to moderate the debate).
(And by the way, I should point out that I did not watch the debate. However, HuffPo commenter JoAnnCr did and stated as follows in response to Feldman)?
Replay the tape and John Edwards's statement. All combat troops out at the fastest pace the military recommends. The only troops will be the ones associated with the U.S. Embassy and other U.S. interests which is standard in every country in which we have the same type of presence. Where do you get that he would have combat troops in Iraq in 2013?What indeed?
Those of us in Iowa like John Edwards because we've met him, we study his plans, we like what we see and hear. He doesn't pander. He gives us concrete hope because he has done incredible research, crafted plans that are thorough, comprehensive and workable. He tells us how he's going to pay for them and how he's going to work with everyone else to get them done. He also tells us the Washington establishment will no longer decide everything to the exclusion of the American people and stands by it by meeting with us in small groups with lots of question and answers. His plans are also what we want.
What more can you want?
A modern political fable, as told by reader john of sacramento:I’ve got a story for the Vichy-Dems.The Hat Seller and the MonkeesI heard this tale in India. A hat seller, on waking from a nap under a tree, found that a group of monkeys had taken[...]
Read The Full Article:
Noam Scheiber suggests that "the thinking in the Obama camp seems to rest on two assumptions. The first is that the press will do the work of deciphering his overly-subtle jabs at Clinton. The second is that Edwards, in moving...[...]
Read The Full Article:
John Edwards has just announced that he'll be accepting matching funds for the primary season. This effectively means that he will lose any 'electability' arguments as his spending will be capped, and the DNC will have limited ability to coordinate with his campaign if he was to be the nominee post Early Tuesday, Super Tuesday or Super Duper Tuesday.
Former Sen. John Edwards Thursday said he will accept public financing for his presidential campaign, and challenged his chief rivals for the Democratic nomination, Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, to follow his lead.....In November 2003, when Howard Dean opted out, I saw this as a good strategic move as an electability argument that he could compete monetarily with George W. Bush and the RNC from mid-February to late August when the DNC held its convention and the nominee received the general election check.
In order to qualify for so-called "matching funds," the public funding program for the primary season, the FEC requires candidates to demonstrate nationwide support by raising $5000 in 20 different states with no individual contribution to exceed $250, a task which poses little difficulty for major candidates like Edwards.
Once qualified, the federal government will match the first $250 from new contributors, provided Edwards adheres to a $50 million national spending limit, as well as spending limits in each state. Candidates may not receive more than about $21 million in matching funds.
In an ideal world, he[Dean] probably would like to be able to do that [opt-in]as fundraising is expensive and time consuming with the opportunity cost that when he is looking for money, he is not campaigning. However Bush is planning to have $150 million dollars available to spend between next March and next August. Bush's plan is to drop that entire load on a bloodied and broke Democratic nominee after Super Tuesday in order to define our candidate negatively.John Kerry provided himself with a bridge loan in late 2003 and also decided to opt out of matching funds, and once he rode Iowa to victory, he was able to go toe to toe with the Bush financial machine. Every other Democratic candidate opted-into public financing of the primary cycle and would have been vulnerable to five months of minimal campaign activity as they would have been effectively out of spendable cash.
If the Democrats want to win, they have to counter that ability of Bush to go negative early and often. Dean forgoing the spending caps in the primary is an attempt to do this as he is betting that between now and the convention that he can raise $40-$50 million dollars to counterattack against Bush. [minor edits for readability]
Moments ago, the Senate voted to expand hate crime law to include crimes motivated by gender, sexual orientation, or disability of the victims. The vote retained the 60 votes necessary to prevent a filibuster, and it will pass as an attachment to the defense authorization bill.
Opponents of the measure immediately predicted it “ultimately would fail either in negotiations with the House or by presidential veto. ‘The president is not going to agree to this social legislation on the defense authorization bill” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. ‘This bill will get vetoed.’” For a backgrounder on the hate crimes bill, click here.
Download (0) | Play (0) Download (0) | Play (0)And we have lots to celebrate because a federal judge cited a provision of a little-used document known as “The Bill of Rights.”Wapo: A federal judge in Oregon ruled Wednesday that two provisions of the USA Patriot Act are unconstitutional, marking the second time in as many weeks [...]
Read The Full Article:
I agree with Matt that Obama is too subtle. Like Matt, I think I can read between the lines, but it also isn't exactly crystal clear to me. Certainly not so crystal clear that he can expect members of the press to clarify them for people.
As expected, the House of Representatives' general counsel filed a motion yesterday arguing that none of the 12 lawmakers subpoenaed by Brent Wilkes should have to show. Wilkes, remember, is on the...
Christmas is coming. Oh, boy?
I think I must be the first person in my whacked culture to register the Most American of Holidays every year. I don?t have to see the sales clerks opening bags of festive decorations. I just feel it, in September: underwater, swelling, rolling inevitably, like a tsunami.
Some of the children in my family love Christmas. Bless their hearts. They are cursed with a writer aunt. I send them a science book when I have the income, and nothing when I don?t. For, here is where I part company with my tribe: I will not buy on credit, even if all my friends and family harbor a suspicion that I am cruel?and cheap. So be it. Better to be deemed a miser, than to be in debt.
When I was a child, my father (who worked in a textile mill) and mother (who took care of neighborhood kids for extra money) paid a visit to the bank every November. They borrowed enough money to buy a Thanksgiving and Christmas dinner and presents for everyone in the family. Because they came from poor families, they were embarrassed to give anything handmade, like the clothes and crafts of their youth. The only real gift was a shiny, new thingie from a store everyone knew. To give anything created by your own hand would mark you as a miser and a hick.
Each year, my parents worked overtime from November to March, to pay off that loan. I respect them for it, and I respect their hard work. But if I could, I would give them back the youth and strength and heart they lost in the drudgery of repaying the bank every year for the all-American privilege of Christmas.
New friends refuse to believe I don?t give presents unless I have cash on hand. They think what a third wife thinks: ?Oh, I?ll be the one to change all that!?
Then they get nothing. After all, they?re grownups. What did they think?
Suddenly the hurt, the denial, the everlasting grudge? You really don?t give presents?
Only one person ever voiced her disappointment out loud, without reservation. My friend Inga Muscio stomped the ground with both feet and yelled: ?What do you mean, you don?t give presents? You?re gonna screw up my gift quota!? Consequently, she was over it and laughing in ten seconds. As it turned out, she wanted a handmade gift.
But I didn?t make a present for her, because I didn?t want her to think I was a hick.
Read The Full Article:
My favorite part of the debate last night between the democratic presidential primary debate was "which is your favorite bible verse". Even more fun was how it was reported. Here is NBC Reporter Chris Matthews on Bill Richardson's response: "And what[...]
Read The Full Article: