Good afternoon from where I am.

Please treat the OT kindly this week :)

Hello Keith, aren't you awake?

And where's our Kate hibernating?

Have a fun filled week all
Dara

"Please treat the OT kindly this week :)"

Okay old fart, I am sport!

Hope some of these points help some of the Intentbloggers...

Living Liberally :: How to Win The Iraq War Debate Against Your Dumb Friends

From
Laughing Liberally To Keep From Crying
by Lee Camp
http://laughingliberally.com/

Recently I was arguing with one of my dumber friends about the Iraq war. He loves Bush, and thinks bigger bombs is the answer in Iraq. I wasn't gaining any ground in the argument until I used a simple analogy. I said, "Your solution is like shattering an expensive vase and then saying, 'We need to keep smashing it until it's fixed.'" I stumped him. He was silent. So here's a brief list of other analogies you can use on your dumb friends. And the truth is, I've seen similar ones work on some of the smartest political pundits.

1) The country of Iraq has essentially been demolished. The right-wingers keep saying the answer is continued large-scale military action. That's like if someone got into a car accident, went into a coma, and the doctors believed the patient could be healed by more car accidents. So they just keep putting him into cars and sending him off cliffs.

2) I've heard people say that being against Bush or Petraeus or the war in Iraq is equivalent to being against the troops. That's like if I knew someone who repeatedly sent brave puppies out into traffic. I called that person an asshole for abusing the puppies and abusing their power. Then you accused me of being anti-puppy.

3) The administration talks about the success of the surge because violence has decreased, but we're in fact paying the militias not to kill each other or our soldiers. It's like if you were treading water, two sharks approach and begin biting you, you give each one a small piece of fish to distract them. While they take a moment to eat the fish, you sit there treading water and yelling, "Problem solved!"

4) At the Petraeus hearings, he refused to give any sort of definition for "victory" in Iraq. That's like running a foot race, you've gone 30 miles, you're exhausted, and when you ask your coach driving along next to you how much farther, he just keeps saying "You'll know it when you get there." He keeps saying that until you collapse and die.

5) We claim to be "fighting the terrorists" in Iraq, but in fact our presence is helping to create more terrorists. The disaster in Iraq serves as a great training and recruiting tool for an entire generation of terrorists. It's like trying to kill a gremlin by dousing him in water.

6) KBR, Halliburton, Blackwater and other companies have huge pull in our government (such as the vice presidency). So essentially they decide when the war is over. They also happen to be making millions upon millions of dollars from the war. So asking them to decide when the war is over, is like asking an ugly guy cast in a threesome porn movie to decide when the scene is over. Chances are the scene would go on for months, if not years. The entire crew would be standing around asking, "When will we know when it's time to end it?" And the ugly guy would respond, "Um, it's a bad idea to set timetables. Just trust me on this."

7) Lastly, President Bush is like a colorblind child with a Rubik's Cube.

#2 Hey, John an old fart smells sweeter than a young one....it's riper, more mature?

Hey Simon, old Geordie pal, that joke you told last week....'Jesus lost by drowning' ha ha funny....seemed to go down like a lead balloon here, though. I wonder; did our American cousins grasp it, lol!

Anyway I found Him getting into my bath only yesterday. "Jesus Christ" I said, "you're hot! That boiler must be working overtime."
Have you got boils on your bum, Simon?

You know, a shandy can be handy when you thirst!
Will our cousins get that One? It's not what you think, Simon :0

Dara-Dara: Hello, hello!

Yes! I can now say, "I am awave."

One question, Ed, if you will allow it--

Since -mund left the scene, you seem different.

Whatever happened to brevity? Tell me truthfully, are you he?

Ms. Occupante' is occupied.

.

Mr. Octopus is entangled in a group hug.

.

You all will come to Uncle TREE? Won't-choo?

The barker yells at the top of his voice,

"Come on in! See The Freak Show! The best value for your buck, right here!"

The freaks remain nameless, as many a George walk into the tent.

I only have one third eye. Is that weird, or what?

And awave to you too Keith!

Dara

Old Fart - French wine.

"Old Fart is produced with handpicked grapes from select old vines, which goes to show that most things do improve with age! A birthday - 30th, 40th, 50th or even 21st, Fathers Day, Christmas or any special event can all be made a little more special with a gift of Old Fart Wines." Who wants? :)
http://www.oldfartwine.com/

"Hey, John an old fart smells sweeter than a young one....it's riper, more mature?"

"Old Fart - French wine."-- old fart

Ed,

Seems like the old fart would have been thrilled had been called a fat bastard.

(wiki)

"FAT bastard is a French wine...

The wine is reported to have started off as an experiment, and when Thierry Boudinaud tasted the wine he proclaimed "now that is what you call a fat bastard". The wine label says that it's "named after a British expression describing a particularly rich and full wine"....

FAT bastard is a fast growing brand, recently selling over 400,000 cases per year in the United States alone, shortly after its introduction. BusinessWeek has called FAT Bastard a "marketing phenomenon"...."

goodwednesday all,

Well, here, in upstate ny, it is going to be a bee-u-tee-full day....sunny and warm, but, if, I, were one who didn't like the sun, and, the warmth, instead, liked it cloudy, cold and snowy...it would be a miserable day...such is the life of a human personality...my like ,may be your great dislike...and If we were of the aggressive violent sort we may even take to our guns and settle this matter ONCE and FOR all...my sun over your cloud...Buster!

I gets the feeling that when we step behind the curtain of the physical, that is how absurd all our wars, killings, greeds...amount to, on the scale of importance and revelance, in the scheme of things in our universe. We will look at it and feel a sadness that is beyond our human ego/personality to comprehend as to how we could have ever been so stupid, ignorant, blind, as a human famiy, species. We will look at our genocides, our starving and, our hungry, sick, aged, and our militancy, in all our opinions and ways and know....how lost we were and are and continue to be, century after century....

I write this today becuase the headlines are now about the rising cost of food....and the fact that so many will be affected by this and certainly, by now, 2008, this should not, BE, with all the "great minds," the "great technological advancements" our ability and motivations in regard to feeding the chilren of our universe should have been coverd, done, finished...but, instead, because of the greed of the few, the children of the many will go hungry.....for another century.

Troubling times....

on that note...I best get on with my day....have a good one...ruth

yo...damn! get real!

clinton has no shame...is a disgrace! and that chinless, big-nosed wonder at those campuses saying "It's none of your business." what?

...as if barack made those comments to help her out, to give her something to talk about! yuk!

quotation...

"Lost in the Hillary Rodham Clinton campaign's aggressive attacks on Barack Obama in recent days is a deep and enduring problem that threatens to undercut any inroads Clinton has made in her struggle to overtake him in the Democratic presidential race: She has lost trust among voters, a majority of whom now view her as dishonest."

#7 You just don't understand me K.

"Come up and see me sometime."

They tell me Ed-mund means 'wise man-of the world'

There's yet another clue! You know, K, I can never be sure that you don't already know me, as E.

I've just pinched myself.

#10 Yo John, you guys are catching on, yo....

#11 Why are you troubled, Ruth...God was ruth-less when feeding the 5,000, how much more so when the man na comes down to earth? 4th Jesus? Vacancy not filled yet? C'mon Deepak!

Look Up.

Had a strange thought today.....okay that's nothing unusual!

Ascension? It's a nonsense that comes about by the idea that we are down here. We get so accustomed to it that we start to long for an up there. The real truth is that we are neither up nor down. We are just herenow.
Now this earth is a mixed blessing only when we judge good and bad. With now only there is no past or futur, so again our notions of good and bad should be superimposed just as up and down should.
I think I will leave it at that, not even for the time being.

This morning on my walk about, I watched the famous redtail hawk do wingstands and loop t loops
high above in a clear blue sky..........

.......had his eye on some Fat Pidgeons.

Thanks, Bonnie #17, for the sweet images. It's music to my ears and transports me to green natural spaces. It's so different from the endless chatter of the world.

Trish~~

dear ruth and Crhis

There's another Dowd piece...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/16/opinion/16dowd.html

...that confirms she's developed a grudging admiration for HC. Key words: admiration, grudging. She's still supporting BO -- pulling in some of Michelle's comments to counterbalance BO's mistakes. But there's also admiration for HC -- grudging though it may be, it's pretty clear in this piece.

Marek from Poland, (or is it Holland?)...wrote:

http://www.intentblog.com/archives/2006/06/open_thread_29.html

Heya kids,
How's everybody doing? no hangovers?, no intoxications?, nobody pregnant? good party! ;)
Great card, North, and the picture, but where did
Navin sneek out..last night..and did Ron indeed step on nobodies toes..?
And what about Diablo..and who is the Dark Knight?

But the question was does love conquers all..?
Love for what? thats the question,

of,
Love, Passion!

103. Posted by marek dariusz podsiadlo on June 15, 2006

PS. Apologies for the mistaken double open thread post.

To "Betsy" S.

I'm glad you are a student of the universal laws of creation and of the wisdom of ancient cultures and are interested in the divine cosmos and its breathtaking view of new reality.

Betsy, before you were interested in the New Reality, did you study the old reality? The one that teaches us the basic laws of physics, tells us how and why things work and why we are here. The one that is so neglected by many educational systems all over the world but especially in the United States of America.

Please tell us how much you know about reality. It will help us to have an honest discussion about both, the old reality, which is simply Reality, and your New Reality, which many of us don’t understand. Thanks.

#18 Yo Bonnie, I would not wish harm on their cousins the Doves now resting my Magnanimous Tree, even tho' they might steal the flowers from my primroses. For sure I do not have sole rights on the nectar. They will not really grow fat on that. It's the essence that counts and one wonders how they know that, so hidden to the eye. Perhaps a little bee told them, as a little bird told me ;)

Yo, Bonnie wee lassie x

Hi Heaher,

read both articles....I would agree with your take on Dowd's piece.

havent' listened to the campaign news, today, but I imaginge it is much the same.

I hope the April primary eeks out a clear winner...and we, as members of the wise and knowing Hillary Clinton supporters club, finally, win this ticket or will we have to sit back and watch the impatient...restless....Barak Obama supporters hoot and holler....that is, if they "allow" themselves such a spontaneous display of expression being that they are so....heady and all,:))))))))

oh well, if he wins I'll just throw one back like Hillary....the shot and the beer sounds like a real good end to a hard fought fight....no gutter balls for me thank you.

have a great day everyone, including the you know who supporters....:)))))ruth

ruth, I have a new neighbor, a hot NYC mom, who has a lip stud, and looks as if she drinks 80 gallons of espresso a day, who has a cute 3-year-old with blond bangs and a very loud voice, inherited from his mom. Anyway, each time BO wins a contest, she goes out running at 5:30 AM, and as she runs down the hall to the outside, she whoops and hollers and yells BO's name. The only days she runs is on the days BO wins. She's very loud in all things, but she's particularly loud and cheery on those days. I ran into her this morning down in the mailroom, and asked if it was she who goes running at 5:30 AM sometimes. She nervously denied it. I said I sometimes hear someone cheering for BO in the halls. She said, oh that was probably her, she does that only late at night, and she never goes running. :D Anyway, anything or anyone that can bring that kind of cheer to a hard-working, over-caffeinated, madly-creative NYC mom can't be all bad.

No matter who wins the Dem nomination, the real work will start when that selection has been made, and I'll support that person.

love, h

does loyalty really run that deep? some people will keep supporting a loser...no matter what. they wud even put their on reputation on the line to defend their loser candidate...as we can see here! but why? are these people unreasonable or just nuts? damn!

have you never met anyone really loyal, D? loyalty is usually offered from a deep-seated sense that the other person is worthy of steady support. only people who are capable of being loyal in the first place can do it, and then, only under those circumstances.

Aloha

I don't know if this has been posted already, but you can watch The Mose's Code online for free. Just click my name:

loyalty can be outta irrationality...too! no?

as much as anything, I guess.

#29 Ah, but you are family, Diab? Blood is thicker than you are, no?

Yo Ed!

so who am i
down here below
to inter(pose).....

b

Who is Devil's Advocate loyal to? You'd better answer that one, Irv, your friend Diab will act dumb and accuse me of falling for you.

#32 I think you might be Irv, Bonnie.

#34 Either way, you will have earned your wings ;)

Well, of course, why not? :)))))))

You know Necromancer reminded me of something.

"Nothing is evil in the beginning. Even Sauron was not so."
---Elrond

hobbit2

OO, I do love a spot-on!

Quite honestly, Bonnie, I thought of changing my id to 'Three Wise Monkeys,' where only one would see only one

.........
that's better than three blind mice!!! or is it?

0,0,0

b1

ed

you have now been dubbed "Sir Wise," Edmund
Knight of the Shining Order.

(((((((((ed)))))))))

To the person who calls one of their Selves 'Ed' :> #13

Know! I don't understand you, unless you're not a -a-.

You're not -*-, are you? OMG!!! Are you really?

Now I get it. You're.........ha! That's so funny. Yeah, right!

.

'K' is already taken by ~Kate, 'E', so's don't call me that.

.

Btw, the low-key masochistic mun-knew-ver isn't very attractive.

Ascending, or rising above...hell! To overcome or undergo is the ?

I'm going down for the count on my butt. I don't kneel.

Knotty, knotty knee joints...it's just not allowed, you know.

Follow the Debate live discussion at Daily Kos:

Pre-Debate Open Thread
by MissLaura
Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 04:46:12 PM PDT

Debate at 8:00 on ABC. To add: It's at 8 EDT, though being aired tape-delayed on the west coast at least. Not sure about the time zones in between.

Here's ABC's setting of the stage:

" Each candidate will try to seize the upper hand and move past the campaign controversies that have directed a negative course in the race to the Democratic nomination in recent days.

--snip--

Appearing Wednesday on ABC NewsNow Politics Live, Republican strategist Matthew Dowd warned that the candidates' tone on the debate stage matters more than any specific remark or exchange.

And though it's difficult to predict what tone the candidates will strike this evening, for both candidates, the debate stakes are high: Clinton will look to build on her five point lead in the Keystone State while Obama will try to match his debate performance with the poll numbers that show him surging past Clinton in the areas of trustworthiness and electability."

What's your spin?

Update: I'm not seeing a live stream -- people in the comments have linked some local ABC affiliates but I'm not having any luck with them. I'll keep looking for a link to give you.

# Discuss (505 comments)

_______________________________________________________

Debate Open Thread
by BarbinMD
Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 05:13:02 PM PDT

Charles Gibson spent the first five minutes beating the Vice Presidential horse. And now on to Bittergate...

* Discuss (586 comments)

___________________________________________________

Debate Open Thread 2
by smintheus
Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 05:26:13 PM PDT

Hillary Clinton: Yes, ok, Barack Obama can defeat John McCain. He's not an elistist loser, but his words are. Besides, I'll beat McCain too, only more so.

Barack Obama: Huh?

Update:

Hillary Clinton: You can pick your pastor, you can pick your nose. You just can't pick your family.

Barack Obama: Now hold on, we know there are going to be crazy attacks from the right-wingers during this election no matter what. Look at what she just said.

Hillary: I'm proud of going to a war zone, I'm just not proud of that sniper jazz.

Barack Obama: Flag lapel pins are like those crappy magnetic yellow ribbons you see on the bumpers of gas guzzlers.

* Discuss (607 comments)

___________________________________________________

Debate Open Thread #3
by MissLaura
Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 05:37:32 PM PDT

So far the debate reeks of the moderators' disappointment that Obama dealt with Jeremiah Wright's sermons so successfully. Their deep-seated desire to, as Obama says, "distract" from serious issues would embarrass any reasonable person.

Welcome to American television news.

And Clinton can barely control her glee...there's a little smile playing around the corners of her mouth that she's struggling to suppress.

At this point, the answers the candidates give are so much less interesting than the nakedness of the moderators' desire to keep it a race. Clinton's the presumed front-runner? We'll go after her! Obama's got a near-lock on the delegate math? We'll go after a weeks-old issue that he already answered with historic quality!

(But of course one thing always remains true: John McCain is a maverick and a hero, and his stone ignorance and slimeball dishonesty is simply a matter of "misstatements" about things he does know.)

What strategic end does Clinton's sudden lack of eloquence in answering the sniper question serve? She had to know the question was coming, so what's with all the "you knows" and "uhhhs"?

Via email, Hunter asks

" Bad debate, or worst debate ever?

Sounds like it's a National Enquirer-sponsored debate so far. "Barack Obama, would you consider Bat Boy as Secretary of the Interior? Why or why not?""

Update: Every now and then I fall in love with Obama. Rebuking the moderators for the bullshit questions about Bill Ayers and then asking if they're going to ask him to repudiate Tom Coburn's views on abortion was fucking brilliant.

And Clinton sinks lower still again. It's like she's determined to show that however low the moderators go, she'll beat them out.

* Discuss (473 comments)

_________________________________________________

Debate Open Thread #4
by BarbinMD
Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 05:49:07 PM PDT

We're nearly an hour into this debate and so far Gibson and Stephanopoulos are really hitting the burning issues that affect millions of Americans: Do you agree with Mario Cuomo? Bittergate, bittergate, bittergate. Reverand Wright; is he as patriotic as you? What really happened in Bosnia? Why don't you love the flag?

Thank God they aren't getting sidelined by things like Iraq, torture, FISA, health care, the mortgage crisis, gasoline prices, the environment...

* Discuss (283 comments)

_________________________________________________

Debate Open Thread #5
by smintheus
Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 06:00:45 PM PDT

Suddenly, only fifty minutes into this 90 minute debate, a question is posed about an actual thing. Not just a thing, but a big thing. Iraq. Just goes to show that when candidates (here, Obama) smack journalists down for talking nonsense, they get all prickly and start doing real journalism.

Clinton states unequivocally that she would withdraw troops from Iraq, even if the commanders in Iraq pleed for more time. Major props to Hillary for taking a firm stance on an issue that will give Republicans an opening to bash her if she's the candidate. And props to Obama for doing the same, and expanding on the Clinton position. There's not a lot of room between Clinton and Obama on this issue, and that's welcome.

* Discuss (289 comments)

____________________________________________________

Debate Open Thread #6
by MissLaura
Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 06:14:46 PM PDT

It took 52 minutes to get to a question about Iraq. Took 64 minutes to the economy, and then in John McCain's terms.

These are the top two issues cited in poll after poll, but ABC doesn't think they're important enough to ask the presidential candidates on, or will let a Republican frame the debate. It's flat shameful.

And Charlie Gibson is promoting capital gains tax cuts. Not that it would be in his personal interest or anything with what he makes -- but it seems like some sort of obsession with him. Good for Obama not biting on it -- hedge fund managers shouldn't be paying lower tax rates than their secretaries. And he hits McCain on economic issues.

Meanwhile, has Hillary Clinton had a Rudy Giuliani personality transplant? How many times has she mentioned 9/11 now? It's approaching Rudyesque levels.

On the other hand, good for her saying the phrase "union jobs."

* Discuss (8 comments)

___________________________________________________

http://dailykos.com/

Debate Open Thread #7
by BarbinMD
Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 06:29:26 PM PDT

I had chicken for dinner. It was really good. I really need to catch up on some laundry tonight. I'm kind of sad that Pricilla Presley was voted off of Dancing With The Stars last night. My daughter decided on a college today. I love ice cream.

I wonder if ABC will schedule a debate for me to discuss these things on national television.

* Permalink ::
* Discuss

dailykos.com

Why Is The Press At The Debate?
by: Chris Bowers
Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 20:40
Open Left

Right now, in the filing room at the Constitution Center, there are over 500 members of the press, spread out of 28 tables in this room alone, are watching television, eating free snacks, and typing away at their computers. In other words, the press is doing exactly what a few thousand bloggers are doing around the country right now, except they are doing it from the Constitution Center.

Basically, they all could have listened to Charles Gibson mispronounce Constitution Center (it isn't the Constitutional Center), and then, along with George Stephanopolis, proceed to grill Obama about his recent gaffes and when how much his pastor hates America for the first 30 minutes of the debate (and counting) anywhere. It isn't clear to me at all why they all have to do it from here, even if I have no problem with their companies dropping a few hundred thousand dollars on Philadelphia in order to make it happen. Natasha is asking a few members of the press why they are here instead of just watching the debate on TV.

Also, this is the worst debate of the campaign, as the entire first third of the debate is basically just trashing Obama over Wright and bittergate. Literally nothing else was asked, until Clinton was forced to explain why she was so dishonest and untrusthworthy, but immediately after Gibson once again brought up whether or not Obama loves America. I bet Gibson loves America so much he wants it to spank him, and that he also wears a flag pin in the shower. This is truly offensive stuff.

________________________________________

Philadelphia Debate Thread

by: Chris Bowers
Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 19:45
Open Left

Natasha Chart and I have scored credentials for tonight's debate, which is the second debate to take place in my home town. I bet we are the only members of the press taking the subway to get there.

We will be doing some updates from the press room, although it won't be straight live-blogging, which can be done without even attending the debate. Instead, I hope to try and present the flavor of the debate behind the scenes.

This is an open thread for the debate, which starts at 8 p.m. eastern.

Update: Halfway through the debate, not a single question on any policy issue had been asked, it was obvious that this debate was prime-time hit job on Obama. The questions so far have been why he doesn't wear a flag pin, whether or not his pastor loves America, why he can't win, and how many people were offended by his bittergate comments. Except for Clinton being asked about why she wasn't trustworthy, and both of them being asked about their vice-presidential choices, that has been the entire debate.

As Master Jack said in the comments, nothing on Iraq, nothing on the economy, nothing on health care, nothing on housing, nothing on global warming, nothing on torture. This is nothing but a prime-time hit job on Democrats, although mainly a hit job on Obama.

Update 2: As the debate is about to end, and no one asked me any questions, I just want to state for the record that I am so patriotic I wear a flag pin in the shower, I was so offended by Rev. Wright that I joined his church just so I could quit, and tbat I found religion, bought a gun, and moved out to Wilkes-Barre just so I could be offended by Obama's comments. Maybe that will score me an interview in the spin room, at least.

openleft.com

NYT's The Caucus notes:

Mr. Obama turns the tables on Mrs. Clinton, bringing up comments that she made, back in 1992, that seemed to be an insult to stay-at-home moms, "that I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas."

Mr. Obama said he was watching TV at the time, and when she was attacked as an elitist -- as she is attacking him now -- he thought, "that's not who she is." But, he says, "she learned the wrong lesson because she's adopting the same tactics."

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/16/live-blogging-the-democratic-debate-6/

Debate Open Thread #8
by smintheus
Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 06:45:28 PM PDT

Let's tote up the colossal, the major, and also the very, very big issues that ABC's Gibson and Stephanopoulos have not deigned to bring up: Health care; the recession; Afghanistan; the mortgage crisis; deregulation; veterans' care; torture; restoring America's image abroad; the surveillance state; the environment.

The Constitution.

Oooohhh, but there's still one more question to come before they wrap this one up. Maybe that will tie all these questions up in one nice package. You think?

* Discuss (405 comments)

dailykos.com

Post-Debate Open Thread
by MissLaura
Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 06:59:31 PM PDT

In a few minutes DHinMI is expected to post some more substantive analysis, but for now, keep on talking.

Given the historically poor quality of the questions tonight, I'm not going to put up the standard post-debate poll about who won. The answer is that democracy and the American people lost. I suppose if ABC sold some ads, they'll feel like they won.

* Discuss (342 comments)

dailykos.com

Debate Analysis by DHinMI at Kos:

Lee Atwater Lives!!!

I used to think Republican operative and Karl Rove mentor Lee Atwater had died in 1991, after a nasty career of Republican race baiting, culture wars, dirty tricks, and a illness-induced conversion to Catholicism and public repentance for his dirty and divisive politics. I was wrong. Lee Atwater apparently works for ABC News in devising bullshit questions to ask Democratic Presidential candidates.

The questioning in tonight's debate--—mostly straight out of 1988—was an abomination. Gun control. 60's radicalism. Inflammatory black pastors. Respecting or disrespecting the flag. Taxes. Being out of touch with the military. Affirmative Action.

I'll bet if they had more time, ABC anchors Charles Gibson and George Stephanopolus would probably have gotten around to asking Obama and Clinton about Willie Horton and Piss Christ.

In case you were wondering, as well as I can recollect, Gibson and Stephanopolus were too concerned with "bitter" and flag pins and superexcellentness of cutting the capital gains tax to ever get around asking Obama and Clinton questions about any of the following subjects:

The financial crisis
The collapse of housing values in the US and around the world
Afghanistan
Health care
Torture
The declining value of the US Dollar
Education
Trade
Pakistan
Energy
Immigration
The decline of American manufacturing
The Supreme Court
The burgeoning world food crisis.
Global warming
China
The attacks on organized labor and the working class
Terrorism and al Qaeda
Civil liberties and constraints on government surveillance

For those who think it's great that Hillary Clinton won't drop out, even though there's no way she can win the nomination and her only hope is some bizarre destruction of Barack Obama between now and the convention, ponder the effects of tonight's debate. The questions asked were not the kinds of questions Democratic primary voters care about. But they are the "gotcha" kinds of questions Republicans try to spring on Democrats in general elections.

I'm not afraid of those questions. I think Obama did fine tonight. Generally Clinton has performed best in debates, but as we first saw in the Texas debate, Obama appears to perform better one-on-one. I especially liked how he refused to get lured in to Charles Gibson's conservative frames, and I like how he dismissed many of Clinton's attacks on him as avoiding the substantive issues and hypocritical, as when he pointed out that Bill Clinton pardoned members of the Weather Underground.

But I don't want Hillary Clinton on the stage with him while he fends off bullshit like what was tossed at him tonight. I want him to be able to pivot around and use the questions—accusations in most cases—against John McCain. I want John McCain to have to fend off Obama's counterpunches, not a Democratic Senator from New York.

There's more to say about the performance of Obama and Clinton. And I'm sure some will say, "who cares about the delegate count, or the polls that show voters don't trust her, or that she fares worse against McCain, or that there's no way short of coup by superdelegates that she can become the nominee, she should stay in the race."

*Discussion
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/16/221752/394/117/497198

Hi Trish,

Re#19
I saw a peregrin falcon sitting in a tall pine tree on the hill behind my house about a week ago.
A beauty and inspiration he was too!

bonnie

P.S. Trish

Have you planted the corn in your garden yet?

have u noticed how corny, fony Billary tries to look young and act cute? she will neva be prez of this country in this lifetime...maybe in her dreams she will...and will multiple and u...enuff of the clintons!

#41 You Know you Love K*K he/she is eminently lovable. E makes no distinction other than where necessary. You could even be I gor V.. blimey!

I met the seventh messiah
A figure in my dream spoke

The wheel spins in these two worlds
Spokes blend together in a blur

Through the center I thrust myself
Now dizzy in the thick of it

My soul speeds away from chained lightening!

kate, where r u? miss those overnight bon fire...new mexico sleep overs? next time u arrange one...granpa ed and UT will be there...

marek...what happened to u? found ur applepie? what...she has u in knots? now...little wiggle room...at least....u used to always stop by to say hello...

north? what up! missing u...too!

notice the odd man van....never talks about anthing other than politics? how starnge! what an aged drag queen...takes over the place like a bad weed...like a suffocating para....damn...

#53 Thou's Art, brilliant, Keith.
Thou weaveth lightening, (lightning)

I Love you...do you Mind?

Embarrassing
by kos
Wed Apr 16, 2008

Editor and Publisher's Greg Mitchell:

"In perhaps the most embarrassing performance by the media in a major presidential debate this year, ABC News hosts Charles Gibson and George Stephanopolous focused mainly on trivial issues as Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama faced off in Philadelphia."

HuffPo:
[Greg Mitchell: The Debate: A Shameful Night for the U.S. Media]
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-mitchell/the-debate-a-shameful-nig_b_97122.html

We all got that. But here's the part that I don't understand:

"More time was spent on all of this than segments on getting out of Iraq and keeping people from losing their homes and other key issues. Gibson only got excited when he complained about anyone daring to raise taxes on his capital gains. ********Yet neither candidate had the courage to ask the moderators to turn to those far more important issues.*******"

The emphasis(*******) is mine -- I honestly don't understand why Democrats haven't learned to ignore the bullshit substance-less questions and simply say, "Okay, that's a dumb question. Let's talk about something people care about, like the housing crisis."

Just bypass the idiotic questioners and talk about the things that the Democratic primary electorate actually want to talk about.

Trust me, they'll get brownie points, and the idiot questioners will look like idiots in the process.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/16/225155/539/108/497223

THE GOTCHA DEBATE

Jason Linkins: Worst. Debate. Ever.... Questions On Bitterness, Wright, Bosnia, Flag Pins, Weather Underground... Greg Mitchell: "A Shameful Night For The US Media" ... Josh Marshall: "Unmitigated Travesty"... Did Hannity Feed Debate Question To ABC?... ABC Hosts Heckled After Debate...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

Remember when it was just Republicans that used to trash San Francisco? -- kos

Instead of last night's train wreck, ABC should've just re-aired their 9-11 abomination). Then again, Obama went to San Francisco, the city that some Democrats now hate as much as Republicans always have -- kos

***********

The response to the awful ABC debate from various internet blogs and commenters has been overwhelmingly negative. Now, the MSM is getting in on the act.

From Tom Shales at Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/17/AR2008041700013.html

"When Barack Obama met Hillary Clinton for another televised Democratic candidates' debate last night, it was more than a step forward in the 2008 presidential election. It was another step downward for network news -- in particular ABC News, which hosted the debate from Philadelphia and whose usually dependable anchors, Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos, turned in shoddy, despicable performances."

Wow, you can't really go anywhere from there, can you? Oh yes you can.

"For the first 52 minutes of the two-hour, commercial-crammed show, Gibson and Stephanopoulos dwelled entirely on specious and gossipy trivia that already has been hashed and rehashed, in the hope of getting the candidates to claw at one another over disputes that are no longer news. Some were barely news to begin with."

Case in point, Ayers and Rev. Wright.

"The boyish Stephanopoulos, who has done wonders with the network's Sunday morning hour, "This Week" (as, indeed, has Gibson with the nightly "World News"), looked like an overly ambitious intern helping out at a subcommittee hearing, digging through notes for something smart-alecky and slimy. He came up with such tired tripe as a charge that Obama once associated with a nutty bomb-throwing anarchist. That was "40 years ago, when I was 8 years old," Obama said with exasperation.

Obama was right on the money when he complained about the campaign being bogged down in media-driven inanities and obsessiveness over any misstatement a candidate might make along the way, whether in a speech or while being eavesdropped upon by the opposition. The tactic has been to "take one statement and beat it to death," he said.

No sooner was that said than Gibson brought up, yet again, the controversial ravings of the pastor at a church attended by Obama. "Charlie, I've discussed this," he said, and indeed he has, ad infinitum. If he tried to avoid repeating himself when clarifying his position, the networks would accuse him of changing his story, or changing his tune, or some other baloney."

Preach it, Brother Shales! He makes no bones about the bias of the moderators.

"To this observer, ABC's coverage seemed slanted against Obama. The director cut several times to reaction shots of such Clinton supporters as her daughter, Chelsea, who sat in the audience at the Kimmel Theater in Philly's National Constitution Center. Obama supporters did not get equal screen time, giving the impression that there weren't any in the hall. The director also clumsily chose to pan the audience at the very start of the debate, when the candidates made their opening statements, so Obama and Clinton were barely seen before the first commercial break.

At the end, Gibson pompously thanked the candidates -- or was he really patting himself on the back? -- for "what I think has been a fascinating debate." He's entitled to his opinion, but the most fascinating aspect was waiting to see how low he and Stephanopoulos would go, and then being appalled at the answer."

Couldn't have put it any better myself.

****

Will Bunch get in on the action.
http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/attytood/An_open_letter_to_Charlie_Gibson_and_George_Stephanapoulos.html

"With your performance tonight -- your focus on issues that were at best trivial wastes of valuable airtime and at worst restatements of right-wing falsehoods, punctuated by inane "issue" questions that in no way resembled the real world concerns of American voters -- you disgraced my profession of journalism, and, by association, me and a lot of hard-working colleagues who do still try to ferret out the truth, rather than worry about who can give us the best deal on our capital gains taxes. But it's even worse than that. By so badly botching arguably the most critical debate of such an important election, in a time of both war and economic misery, you disgraced the American voters, and in fact even disgraced democracy itself. Indeed, if I were a citizen of one of those nations where America is seeking to "export democracy," and I had watched the debate, I probably would have said, "no thank you." Because that was no way to promote democracy."

Why do you talk to me of tests and bowling pin strikes? Why hack my identity? Truly I'm not all that interesting. Why don't you and your aliases go eat popcorn and watch the Discovery Channel instead?
And, better late than never, NO nothing is resolved. I'v given up on my intellect. It's just a teflon pan in my cupboard. (Well, one can only hope.)

Clinton's license to do harm

From John's Debate Open Thread discussion threads last night, a daily kos commenter made a good observation:

"At some point the concept of "Republicans will do X" has turned into a license for Hillary to do all the same things. It's bizarre, but I don't really consider her a Dem any more."

Yup.

The Hillary Game: Who Said It?

To anyone with a functioning brain, the performance by ABC's Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos at last night's Democratic debate was nothing less than an embarrassment. Gibson and Stephanopoulos spent more than half of their time playing "gotcha" on subjects that only the idiot pundit class obsess over. But Gibson and Stephanopoulos weren't the only two participants playing the game, because Hillary Clinton was right down in the mud with them. So let's spend a few minutes playing another kind of game based on some of last night's questions.

On the question of Bittergate, which was Clinton's answer and which was a response from John McCain?

>>>>"I think anybody who disparages people who are hardworking honest dedicated people who have cherished the Second Amendment and the right to hunt and their culture that they value and they’ve grown up with sometimes in the case of generations and saying that’s because they are unhappy with their economic conditions. I think his remarks may be defining, because it shows a fundamental attitude about the heartland of America, that basically says that it's economic conditions that shape their values."

>>>> "I think that is a fundamental sort of misunderstanding of the role of religion and faith in times that are good and times that are bad. And I similarly don't think that people cling to their traditions, like hunting and guns, either, when they are frustrated with the government. I just don't believe that's how people live their lives."

On Jeremiah Wright, which was Clinton's answer and which was from an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal by the chief Washington correspondent of Newsmax?

>>>>"Obviously, one's choice of church and pastor is rooted in what one believes is what you're seeking in church and what kind of, you know, fellowship you find in church. But I have to say that, you know, for Pastor Wright to have given his first sermon after 9/11 and to have blamed the United States for the attack, which happened in my city of New York, would have been just intolerable for me. And, therefore, I would have not been able to stay in the church...It is clear that, as leaders, we have a choice who we associate with and who we apparently give some kind of seal of approval to...the relationships with Reverend Farrakhan, with giving the church bulletin over to the leader of Hamas, to put a message in. You know, these are problems. And they raise questions in people's minds. And, so, this is a legitimate area, as everything is, when we run for office, for people to be exploring and trying to find answers."

>>>>"Considering this view of America, it's not surprising that in December Mr. Wright's church gave an award to Louis Farrakhan for lifetime achievement....Hearing Mr. Wright's venomous and paranoid denunciations of this country, the vast majority of Americans would walk out...Mr. Obama obviously would not choose to belong to Mr. Wright's church and seek his advice unless he agreed with at least some of his views...This raises legitimate questions about Mr. Obama's fundamental beliefs about his country. Those questions deserve a clearer answer than Mr. Obama has provided so far."

And on William Ayers, which was Clinton's answer and which was the musings of Sean Hannity?

>>>>"But Ayers' controversial past calls into question just how close they really are. Sen. Barack Obama served as a director for the non-profit Woods Fund of Chicago from 1999 to 2002 alongside William Ayers. In addition, both Ayers and Obama have served together at various public speaking engagements. In an article that was published in "The New York Times" on September 11, 2001, the same day we were attacked on American soil by Al-Qaeda, Ayers is quoted as saying in "The Times," quote, "I don't regret sending bombs. I don't feel we did enough." It seems William Ayers just wants his past to go away, but the admitted terrorist still refuses to apologize, and the fact that he's an associate with Barack Obama demands that he be scrutinized and questioned by the American people."

>>>>"I also believe that Senator Obama served on a board with Mr. Ayers for a period of time, the Woods Foundation, which was a paid directorship position. And, if I'm not mistaken, that relationship with Mr. Ayers on this board continued after 9/11 and after his reported comments, which were deeply hurtful to people in New York and, I would hope, to every American, because they were published on 9/11, and he said that he was just sorry they hadn't done more. And what they did was set bombs. And in some instances, people died. So it is -- I think it is, again, an issue that people will be asking about."

Don't worry about your score because the answers are all the same: What's the difference?

Who Loves America?
by Devilstower at Kos

STEPHANOPOULOS: Senator, two questions. Number one, do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?

Not only is this a prime example of the facile, despicable questions asked at last night's assault on the whole idea of a presidential debate, it's really not fair.

Here's Daniel Schorr on NPR a couple of days ago.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89598542

"Who is the real patriot, willing to service his country? One such man in 1963 served two years in the Marines, then volunteered to become a Navy medical corpsman. In that capacity, he helped to care for President Johnson after his surgery in 1966. ... And who was that patriot? A young, African-American man who went on to become the pastor of a church in Chicago. That's right, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright.

Who loves America? Jeremiah Wright loved it enough that while Dick Cheney was getting his string of five deferments, Wright voluntarily gave up his student deferment, left college and joined the United States Marine Corps. Wright was valedictorian of his class in Corpsman School. When asked about the sacrifices he'd made, Wright said he was inspired by the words of John Kennedy that he should "ask what he could do for his country."

And he did that at a time where there were many restaurants in this country that wouldn't serve him food, hotels where he could not get a room, neighborhoods where he could not hope to live, and whole states where he could not obtain justice. That, damn it, is how much Jeremiah Wright loves this country. What Stephanopoulos asked isn't fair, because there are very few people who have expressed their love for America as clearly as Reverend Wright, especially when America -- then and now -- rarely seems to appreciate their dedication.

How about you, Stephanopolus? Does Jeremiah Wright love America more than you? How about you, Charlie Gibson? It happens that you started college at the same time as Wright, and graduated while Wright was attending President Johnson. From what I can see, the two of you love your country so much, that you're willing to go to any lengths to demean both the candidates and your own profession.

“To anyone with a functioning brain, the performance by ABC's Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos at last night's Democratic debate was nothing less than an embarrassment. Gibson and Stephanopoulos spent more than half of their time playing "gotcha" on subjects that only the idiot pundit class obsess over.”

As a neutral observer one can only say, well said, Indy!

“The media no longer ask those who know something ... to share that knowledge with the public. Instead they ask those who know nothing to represent the ignorance of the public and, in so doing, to legitimate it”.
Serge Daney

Today's Endorsement updates:

Philly Daily News Endorses Obama. Daily News speaks to the worker and lower middle-class people in Philly area than say the Inquirer. (The endorsement was written before the last night's debate)

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Bucks County Courier Times and the Patriot News made their endorsements of Obama yesterday.

Oklahoma Superdelegate Reggie Whitten endorses Obama.

Yesterday:

Bruce Springsteen, the poetic rocker whose lyrics have chronicled the hardships of working-class Americans in struggling factory towns, on Wednesday endorsed Barack Obama for president.

Obama received the endorsement Wednesday of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, the largest newspaper in western Pennsylvania.

... In Indiana, Mr. Obama won the support of superdelagte Representative Andre Carson of Indianapolis.

Superdelegates and North Carolina Representatives Mel Watt of Charlotte and David Price of Chapel Hill announced their support for Mr. Obama

******

Twenty-five of South Dakota's 35 Democratic state lawmakers have endorsed the candidacy of presidential hopeful Barack Obama ...

Six tribal Leaders from South Dakota also have endorsed Obama.

Hey John, do you think Hillary deserves some credit for this?

By winning back unhappy GOP voters, McCain makes it a race.

By ALAN FRAM and TREVOR TOMPSON, Associated Press Writers
WASHINGTON (AP)

Republicans are no longer underdogs in the race for the White House. To pull that off, John McCain has attracted disgruntled GOP voters, independents and even some moderate Democrats who shunned his party last fall.

http://news.yahoo.com/page/election-2008-political-pulse-swing-voters

Stage set for IPL opening

Cricinfo.com
April 17, 2008

Even the official communication from the organisers speaks of April 18 as D-Day, and you can rest assured that it has nothing to do with the Normandy beaches and the heroes of June 6, 1944. After months of hype, auctions, billion-dollar TV-rights deals and the threat of a media boycott, the Indian Premier League (IPL) is poised to emerge from the chrysalis.

...More than a decade after Billy Corgan and the Smashing Pumpkins sang to us of a Bullet with Butterfly Wings, the IPL's first venue will witness stilt-walkers striding round the ground flapping flowing capes that feature the home team colours, red and yellow. Under lights, they're likely to look like gigantic butterflies straight out of a scene from Pan's Labyrinth.

...the ceremony will be a "slick" blend of fireworks, the stilt walkers, aerial gymnasts, performers in the bubble suspended over the ground and some Bollywood glitter with the presence of Shah Rukh Khan, also the co-owner of the Kolkata team, and Preity Zinta, co-owner of the Mohali franchise. "Shankar-Ehsan-Loy (the Bollywood music directors) will be the central performers who will keep the crowd enthralled throughout the ceremony even as the other performers go through their acts,"

...Bangalore is also banking on 12 cheerleaders from the Washington Redksins, the 'First Ladies of American Football', to draw more fans to the stadium. "The entire exercise is to have the right balance of glamour and cricket," said Sharma. "Usually, cricket is not associated with such ceremonies, and this will be a novelty. At the same time, we would not want the genuine cricket fan to get frustrated waiting for the game to start. Our aim is to present a spectacle that's short, sharp and sweet, which reflects the spirit of the IPL."

...Even Kolkata have made their presence felt, a couple of thousand kilometres away from their Eden Gardens stomping ground. "Be scared, be sh*t scared," says a poster on nearby MG Road. Ganguly and Ishant Sharma stare at you, sporting Reservoir Dogs faces.

The last time one saw a similar spectacle unfold before a sporting event was in the build-up to one of sport's greatest events, the UEFA Champions League final. For most of the fans that congregated at the Ataturk Stadium that night though, the music, lights and dance were a mere distraction from the waves of nausea and anticipation that assail you before the main event. Having won Test matches against Australia and played in a World Cup final, it seems unlikely that Dravid and Ganguly will walk out thinking of it as the game of their lives...blackout or not.

It probably doesn't matter though. Come Cinderella Hour [8pm in this case], the game of cricket will change forever.

OK. I know who you are. I saw what you did.
I'm ready to don my war heasdress and dance the Iroquois War Dance...for the raising up of the sachem and for the Honored Guest. Stay tuned.
Nebraska isn't that far away.

#65

JW,

The numbers will change after the Clinton Obama race is settled, when the focus shifts to McCain and defining him for who he is. He has embraced Bush's polices and running for the third term. Many independents and democrats think he is a GOP maverick and a moderate which he is not. There's a lot of soft support for McCain especially from independents and some dems(and disgruntled Obama and Hillary supporters if their candidate won't be the nominee), that will vanish by Nov. when we have a dem nominee, the sooner the better, or at scorched earth campaigning should avoided. While Hillary is busy going negative, dems are missing a valuable opportunity to go after McCain on important issues. McCain has a huge problem with the Conservative block of GOP and there is an enthusiasm problem which can be seen in his continued miserable fund raising which is pennies compared to astronomical figures Obama is raising (with over 1.3 million donotrs to date.) Moreover, Dems have a huge advantage going after Bush's successor in the general. The National polls show both Hillary and Obama beat McCain consistently, although the margin has narrowed for Obama compared to a couple of months ago, and a more larger gap before McCain had become the nominee.

#67 Rachie? Twas Diab raised the bowling pin strikes in his comment to me before yours. I tend to hang on to things just in case I need them. I'm growing some lettuce in my old teflon-worn frying-pan, would you believe? Nah, my reference to you getting all ten pins in One was my way of saying your post had been comprehensively correct.

Make Peace not war-paint.

Hugs,
Edmund.

Unh huh.

Threat and opportunity
by Sambit Bal
Cricinfo Magazine

The IPL, if it is a success, will change cricket irrevocably. Whether for better or worse remains to be seen

April 17, 2008

Cricket is about to plunge deep into the unknown with the Indian Premier League. On the face of it, it is merely a domestic tournament, but few developments have shaken the game up the way the IPL, variously described as audacious, crass, visionary and brazen, has. Few cricket tournaments have been as eagerly awaited; there is a mixture of fear, excitement, anxiety, and a sense of anticipation.

It is such an outrageously grandiose design that only a man of Lalit Modi's ambition and audacity would have had the nerve to propose and execute it....

...Not since the Packer revolution, which fast-tracked cricket into the professional age, has an event challenged the status quo as much the IPL has, and that too to gain sanction, however grudging, from all those who matter in world cricket. If the IPL succeeds, its effects on cricket could be profound. Whether they will be for the better or the worse can only be left to speculation.

...Worst of all, riding on the IPL's success, Indian cricket could conceivably become a world by itself, and like in American baseball, run its own World Series. It has 80% of the world's cricket audience, and as has already been demonstrated, it will have no problems in attracting the world's top talents. If enough money can be churned out of the IPL, why bother with the rest of the game? Twenty20 could become the premier version of the game. And that would be the death of cricket as we know it.

....However, little will be gained by moaning. The IPL cannot be wished away. Indeed, nudged in the right direction, it has the potential of doing much good.

...The creation of a new layer in cricket is exciting. And in a sense, it could only have been achieved through Twenty20, which offers cricket the best chance of succeeding as pure entertainment. If it does succeed, the IPL is likely to expand the reach of cricket. Test cricket may or may not benefit from the trickle-down effect, but that's not the point.

In an Indian context, the introduction of private enterprise via the IPL might finally unshackle cricket ...team owners are likely to increasingly gain control over the business of cricket and professionalism is bound to follow.

...Despite being the single biggest factor in India's growing influence in world cricket, the Indian spectator has been the most neglected soul in the country's cricket. That he can now demand a better deal is a welcome change.

In the end the spectator is the one who holds the key to the future of the IPL. All the planning, all the spending, all the forecasts have gambled heavily on the Indian cricket fan buying into the concept.

...Nationalism has been the core of cricket since its inception and the IPL seeks to challenge that with a combination of an exciting format, star power and razzmatazz. Will the fans be shaken and stirred without the bond and passion of national colours?

The future of cricket is now in the hands of the fans. Which is not such a bad thing.

Sambit Bal is the editor of Cricinfo

A married man asking for trouble.

A married man left work early one Friday, but instead of going home, he
spent the weekend partying with the boys. When he finally returned home
on Sunday night, his wife really got on his case and stayed on it.
After a few of hours of swearing and screaming, his wife paused and
pointed at him and made him an offer. "How would you like it if you
didn't see me for a couple of days?".....
The husband couldn't believe his luck, so he looked up, smiled and said,
"That would suit me just fine!!"
Monday went by, and the man didn't see his wife.
Tuesday and Wednesday went by and he still didn't see her.
Come Thursday, the swelling went down a bit and he could see her a
little out of the corner of his left eye.

#67 correction. Make that "for the pleasure of the Honored Guest". (I had to research it for my next book: Dancing Redstone.)

Hey Deepak and all you bloggers, wishes for goodness and an extra dose of fun!

Thought for the day:

What is behind you..
Litarally

Love ya dearly

# 68. Thanks John, as always well researched and to the point.

Let’s try to switch gears; we can always go back to politics later.

Post # 22 was never answered.

Many of you would probably say something like this: “We don’t need to know anything about reality in order to study New Reality”. Some may even go as far as, “we create our own reality”.

But did you know that you do not have to abandon your spirituality in order to accept the theory of evolution?

This came up in a delightful conversation between a physicist and a biologist about the (American) educational system.

Education should not confirm ignorance it should eliminate it. A basic understanding of physics would help us all. We would start out with some knowledge of the real world and all its wonders. We would look up into the stars regularly on a clear night and savour that wonderful feeling of Awe that reality can give us. We wouldn’t need the supernatural and paranormal because reality is much more miraculous.

We would know that the world is not 6000 years old and that our planet does revolve around the sun once a year. We would know that the tilted axes of our planet gives us our seasons. It gives us summer “up over” in Canada while it is winter “down under” in Australia.

We would know what the laws of physics allow us to do. We would know that telekinesis, the power to move something by thinking about it without the application of physical force, may happen somewhere in another multiverse, but not in ours.

These two witty and down to earth guys, Lawrence and Richard, do agree that science has not done a very good job promoting itself, especially in the United States of America.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=cVprU7djxo0

#73 'Dancing Redstone' ooh, how's about that for my next id ;)
Nah, I got two left feet! The toes, the toes, or:- I've a hunch it was, "the bells, the bells"

Deep joy with the book, any old how.

#75 Yes, I would go as far as to say, not just wondering, that My will be done. That should lift a few eyebrows ;)

pass the spoons JW. I'm hell-bent for some quantum soup!

Love your question " Betsy S"! When I think about these things, I am reminded by something in my heart and head.. the truth is a creation just like anything else, who says the world is 6000 years old?
and who says that the eath sits at such and such and axis? WHO?, a human, then others agreed. I find the more I question the " truth " the more space there is to create my own truth.

Thinking about cutting my hair into a fun new hair do

This is what brock and I are sing to, today at the lab. enjoy

Race updates...

Replay: ABC shows closeup of Chelsea 8 times during debate...

PA Governor: 'I Was Very Disappointed in ABC'...

Outrage as ex-Clinton staffer runs debate...

Tom Shales (WaPo): In Pa. Debate, The Clear Loser Is ABC

100% Of Clinton's Current Pennsylvania Ads Are Negative

John Eskow (HuffPo)The Springsteen Effect: Why This Bitter Thing Is Boomeranging on Clinton, From One Who Grew Up in the White Working Class

Zogby Poll: PA race tied.

Since Sunday, Obama has picked up five supers to Clinton’s zero. With his three elected superdelegate pick-ups yesterday, Obama has moved past Clinton among the group (U.S. Senators, Reps and governors): 96-94. In the overall count now, Obama leads by 142 (1,651-1,509). He has a 164 pledged-delegate lead (1,416-1,252).

A D.C superdelegate switches support from Clinton to Obama.

..That's a net gain of seven, so update NBC's super delegate lead to 256-237. That's just 19.

Some debate reactions:

Michael Grunwald, Time:

"Obama's memoir dripped with contempt for modern gotcha politics, for a campaign culture obsessed with substantively irrelevant but supposedly symbolic gaffes like John Kerry ordering Swiss cheese or Al Gore sighing or George H.W. Bush checking his watch or Michael Dukakis looking dorky in a tank. "What's troubling is the gap between the magnitude of our challenges and the smallness of our politics—the ease with which we are distracted by the petty and trivial," he wrote.

Last night at the National Constitution Center, at a Democratic debate that was hyped by ABC as a discussion of serious constitutional issues, America got to see exactly what Obama was complaining about. At a time of foreign wars, economic collapse and environmental peril, the cringe-worthy first half of the debate focused on such crucial matters as Senator Obama's comments about rural bitterness, his former pastor, an obscure sixties radical with whom he was allegedly "friendly," and the burning constitutional question of why he doesn't wear an American flag pin on his lapel — with a single detour into Senator Hillary Clinton's yarn about sniper fire in Tuzla. Apparently, Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos ran out of time before they could ask Obama why he's such a lousy bowler."

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1731655,00.html

***

Brad DeLong:

"I propose that everybody associated with the debate at ABC leave journalism and find another job where they can be socially productive--replacing bunnies as animal testing subjects for cosmetics comes to mind as perhaps the best use..."

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2008/04/why-oh-why-cant.html

***

Tom Shales, Washington Post:

"When Barack Obama met Hillary Clinton for another televised Democratic candidates' debate last night, it was more than a step forward in the 2008 presidential election. It was another step downward for network news -- in particular ABC News, which hosted the debate from Philadelphia and whose usually dependable anchors, Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos, turned in shoddy, despicable performances."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/17/AR2008041700013.html

***

Reed Hundt, TPM:

"Whew! What a miserable night for Citizen Charles and Citizen George. These are not dumb fellows, and they didn't fail to prepare for the debate. Obviously, they worked hard to develop such intensively emotional, biased, hostile questions, and they were very focussed on avoiding the important issues that will shape the future of the republic for the next generation."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/189521.php

***

# But David Brooks loved it.

"First, Democrats, and especially Obama supporters, are going to jump all over ABC for the choice of topics: too many gaffe questions, not enough policy questions.

I understand the complaints, but I thought the questions were excellent. The journalist’s job is to make politicians uncomfortable, to explore evasions, contradictions and vulnerabilities. Almost every question tonight did that. The candidates each looked foolish at times, but that’s their own fault."

http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/16/no-whining-about-the-media/index.html?hp

***

# And a funny, from Chris Bowers(OpenLeft):

" Why Is The Press At The Debate?

Right now, in the filing room at the Constitution Center, there are over 500 members of the press, spread out of 28 tables in this room alone, are watching television, eating free snacks, and typing away at their computers. In other words, the press is doing exactly what a few thousand bloggers are doing around the country right now, except they are doing it from the Constitution Center."

http://openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=5196

Kind sir,

The encouragement--freely given and warmly bestowed

upon *thou* is appreciated to the nth degree!

Do I Mind? With a big M, eh? Are you just wondering if it Bugs me?

My, my, my! I cannot tell a white lie at a time like this!

Thank you, my friend, for hangin' out and about to the bitterestest end!

E-harmony! You always and forever nowhere to find this wee-wee!

Peace and love, Keith

Kind lady,

Lavishing attention is like "...parsley, sage, rosemary and thyme".

My altruistic nose knows wild affairs are motor-bound to happen.

.

Discrimination! R you who U say you are, or are you a D?

If I knew you, REALLY...I wouldn't be asking, now.

Wood-eye

Best debate by far!!!

Get used to it

choice for Dems:

1. Bitter
2. Angry

Cheers,

Steve

and yes, my mistake it was only one poll Irvine, I stand corrected.

Steve

The questions America wanted answered
dkos

Just how badly did ABC trivialize the presidential debate in Philadelphia yesterday? Here is a thumbnail sketch of the questions that Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos believed the American public urgently needed to have answered before Pennsylvanians cast their votes. Here is what the elitists at ABC imagine Americans care about.

1. Process (VP running mate)

2. Bitter

3. Bitter/Process (can Obama win?)

4. Process (can Obama win?)

5. Process (can Clinton win?)

6. Wright

7. Wright

8. Wright/patriotism

9. Wright

10. Wright/patriotism

11. Bosnia/Clinton's honesty

12. Clinton’s honesty

13. Flag pin/patriotism

14. Ayers/patriotism

15. Iraq (would you ignore commanders?)

16. Iraq (do you know better than commanders?)

17. Iraq (would you ignore commanders?)

18. Iran/Israel (Iran will threaten to use nukes)

19. Pledge no tax increases (with McCain attack)

20. Capital gains tax rates

21. Gun registration

22. Guns/ D.C. law

23. Affirmative action

24. Gas prices

25. Foreign oil

26. Process (how would you use GWB?)

27. Process (superdelegates)

There you are, America. Those are the "issues" you ought to be paying attention to, according to the serious people at ABC. Those are "tough but appropriate questions", according to Stephanopoulos - adopted just as they've been framed by Republicans. [http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/17/steph-hannity-audio/]

Six questions about process; five questions about Pastor Wright; four questions about patriotism; three questions about whether Gen. Petraeus should get to decide US policy on Iraq; two questions about a poorly worded comment that few voters realize they ought to care about.[http://www.gallup.com/poll/106561/Obama-Support-Among-Bitter-Voters-Unchanged.aspx]

What is missing from this list is virtually everything that voters in Pennsylvania (PDF)[http://edisk.fandm.edu/FLI/keystone/pdf/keyapr08_1.pdf] and throughout the country say actually matter to them.[http://www.gallup.com/poll/103534/What-Voters-Want.aspx]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/17/133440/937/647/497685

Irv, the candidates aren't far apart on the issues. The fight is one of character and experience. The debate addressed both candidates on those fronts. The questions were fair and challenging. What's BO going to do if he can't take this kind of intra-Dem debate? This is the whole point of experience. Note BO doesn't speak as well in debate situations, because he can't get that oratory style rolling. HC is strong in debates. Except for her annoying laughter when she's in a situation that she can't defend, she's a very strong candidate. Essentially, she trounced BO. She came across as knowledgeable and capable of leading the country.

Here's a really great editorial on the BO / HC stuff, since BO's bitter, clinging remarks...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/16/opinion/16wed1.html

82. Posted by hgquinn [TypeKey Profile Page] on April 16, 2008 10:18 AM

(NY TIMES Editorial) Conclusion:

"The reason this campaign started out as the Democrats’ big chance to take back Washington is that Americans face huge challenges on which the Republicans have an abysmal record: Iraq and Afghanistan, the trashing of America’s global image, inequitable taxes, a flagging economy, epidemic home foreclosures, lost jobs, soaring health care costs and struggling schools.

These are the issues Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton should be addressing. We hope they get back to them, starting tonight at their debate in Pennsylvania."

****

"Irv, the candidates aren't far apart on the issues. The fight is one of character and experience."

Their stand on issues and their experience(claims and reality) are well known to the informed voter.

How they answer the issues that crop up with time shows their experience, how they handle attacks and how they run a good campaign shows their character too, their "experince" is not just in how they have learned to attack and defend republican style attacks.

Run a honorable campaign, that shows your experience and character.

The community blog Daily Kos organized a debate for Democratic candidates in 2007:

The YearlyKos questions
by kos

Remember when no one wanted to take a debate sponsored by some silly bloggers seriously? Take a look at the questions prepared for the Democratic presidential debate at YearlyKos in Chicago last summer. Not all of them were asked because of time or because new questions were improvised, but still compare with the crap last night:

I. DOMESTIC SEGMENT

1. Joan Q to Obama:
What will your Supreme Court look like, and what test will you apply?

(folo: to Richardson, why Whizzer White and what does that say about your court? Kucinich: Did Dems do enough to scuttle Alito?)

2. Joan Q to Clinton:
What lessons did you learn, exactly, from the 1993 health care debacle?

(folo: Obama and Edwards bickering over mandates...is Obama’s plan going to leave too many uninsured?)

3. Matt Q to Richardson:
Do deficits really matter?

(folo: how much of a deficit is acceptable? Once you open that door, how do you keep Congress from spending more and more?)

4. Jeffrey Q to Dodd (from Jason Rosenbaum in audience):
How do you plan to support equal access to broadcast media?

5. Matt Q to Kucinich:
Is there just one government program or agency that you think should be shut down?

(folo: Can anyone else? A lot of government programs are already in place to fight poverty, with mixed results. What have we learned from 40 years of these programs?)

6. Jeffrey Q to Edwards:
How do you propose to restore balance among the three branches?

7. Joan Q to Edwards:
You all talk about lowering gas prices AND energy independence, but isn’t it possible that we actually need a gas tax to make that goal achievable?

(folo: to Gravel, isn’t a national sales tax regressive?

8. Jeffrey Q to Obama:
How will you address the coming crisis of health care for those with disabilities?

II. FOREIGN SEGMENT

1. Joan Q to Edwards:
All these calls for withdrawal from Iraq are fine, but how do you propose to force the president to withdraw troops if he refuses?

(folo from Matt to Edwards: How do we withdraw from Iraq in a way that minimizes the risk of genocide and harm to our soldiers?)

2. Matt Q to Richardson:
Giuliani and Paul had a sharp debate over whether Amerian policy was to blame for the rise of terrorism. Are we in some part to blame?

3. Matt Q to Clinton:
If you all agree that the war on terror is a flawed construct, can you please describe, in a phrase or two, the right way to think about the rise of Islamic terrorism?

4. Jeffrey Q to Obama (from R. Harman in audience):
How do we reconcile the two views of China as menace and trading partner?

5. Joan Q to Gravel:
What’s the first thing you would do to change our policy with regard to Paskistan and Musharraf?

(folo: if you don’t agree with Clinton and Obama on the threat of unilateral force, how do you pressure Musharraf?)

6. Jeffrey Q to Kucinich:
Using Darfur as a real time example, please outline how you would decide when to intervene in another country’s conflict?

7. Joan Q to Dodd:
What should our agenda be in Latin America?

8. Jeffrey Q to Clinton:
Given the administration’s voiding of the ABM treaty and proposal for new weapons systems, would you propose to control nuclear wepons by reinstating old treaties or by doing something new?

III. PHILOSOPHY AND EXPERIENCE SEGMENT

1. Joan Q to all:
Will candidates please commit to visiting all 50 states?

(folo, probably to Clinton or Obama: if not, why not?)

2. Joan Q to Kucinich:
What are we to make of your commitment to the party, given your problem paying dues to the DCCC?

3. Jeffrey Q to all (from John Pontificator):
If elected, will you hire a White House blogger?

4. Matt Q to Senators:
Why do senators lose, and why should you be any different?

5. Jeffrey Q to Edwards:
Was it right to change the structure of government, and did it hurt our civil liberties?

6. Matt Q to Dodd:
Would you nominate a member of the other party to serve in your cabinet, as the last two presidents have?

7. Joan Q to Obama:
Do your comments about it not being a question of one party or the other mean that you intend to chart a middle course rather than a Democratic one?

8. Jeffrey Q to Richardson:
Beyond healthcare and Iraq, please name one bold change you would enact that would reflect your progressive values?

Dear Irv

Would you share a little more about the IPL? Why was it started, etc.? Something about the teams & owners, if you have any opinions on them?

love, h

In the YearlyKos debate, Hillary Clinton when asked about her deep connections with federal lobbyists , under pressure famously said, (paraphrasing)"a lot of these (oil, drug, corporate) lobbyists are real Americans who represents real people."

Your opinions on such important issues give an insight about what you stand for.

Your stand on certain issues and your record reflects the strength of your chareter.

"Would you share a little more about the IPL? Why was it started, etc.? Something about the teams & owners, if you have any opinions on them?"

I don't have much knowledge, info and opinion about IPL but I shall see if I can find good articles to learn from.

Cricinfo.com is the best place for good cricket articles.

Cricketnext.com has nice updates too.

The IPL opens today ceremony and the first match. I guess there should be a lot of coverage in the Indian media. There's going to be a lot of Bollywood entertainment and as I posted earlier, Washington Redskins' cheerleaders are going to perform as well.

#54--tnx Diablo--missing you too; I just got so darn busy, had no time to yak-a-bout here at IB! I'm packing like a packing-demon; and am 2/3rds packed to move! I don't have an apartment yet, nor know for sure when I'm moving? June? July? lol Maybe I'll turn Gypsy, and head for the forest...find me a cave to live in? lol

I've just uploaded lotsa new pics to my albums at my myspace..grabbajava and peep'm out at your leisure..

Love,
North

"...Sonny Ibrahim, Eyeslice and Hairoil Sabaramati, Cyrus Dubash, the Monkey and I were playing French cricket in the circus-ring between Methwold's four palaces. A New Year's Day game: Toxy clapping at her barred window; even Bi-Appah was in a good humor and not, for once, abusing us. Cricket--even French cricket, and even when played by children--is a quiet game: peace anointed in linseed oil, The kissing of leather and willow; sprinkled applause; the occasional cry--"Shot! Shot, sir!"--"Owzatt??" ..."

-- from Midnight's Children, the chapter entitled Love in Bombay, by Salman Rushdie

"French cricket is most commonly played by children, or mixed groups of children and adults, although adults sometimes play it as a diversion during outdoor parties or on picnics.

Interestingly, it is not played by the French, and the origin of the name remains to be explained. Suggested possibilities include juxtaposition with the English origin of regular cricket. It seems likely that as the game is a lesser version on regular cricket that the name is intended to mock both the game and the French."

(from wiki)

There are many different types and grades of cricket; those played professionally at an international level are Test cricket, One Day International cricket and Twenty20 cricket.

IPL is a Twenty20, a shorter format (with about 3hrs game time), is the most recent form of cricket. There were several other attempts to shorten the playing time from 8 hrs(of One Day format) to 2-3 hrs but only Twenty20 was successful in doing so.

(Test and One-Day are played regularly by international teams. Twenty20 is seen as entertainment and not a serious form of cricket yet by traditional cricket lovers and the world governing body. With big money, shorter time and entertainment factor (i.e fast paced game) this is a huge challenge to the quality of cricket, true cricket lovers believe test Cricket(5 day format) is the only real and the highest form of cricket that tests the skills, talents, tactics and yes, the "character" of the players and the team. The only drawback is the time(attention span) and the mass appeal in the marketing age and the fast paced lives.)

***

From wiki:

Test cricket

Test cricket is a form of international cricket started during the 1876/77 English cricket team's tour of Australia. The very first Test match began on 15 March 1877; Australia won by 45 runs. The Test cricket series between England and Australia is now called The Ashes. Since then, over 1,800 Test matches have been played and the number of Test playing nations has increased to ten with Bangladesh, the most recent nation elevated to Test status, making its debut in 2000. Test matches are two innings per side, and are nowadays restricted to a maximum of five days. In the past, Tests have been played over three, four, or