Here’s a roundup of negative reactions to Hillary Clinton’s assassination remark

3 comments May 24th, 2008

John Aravosis has a COLLECTION of seven opinions for the price of one.

THIS ANALYSIS from the Associated Press says Clinton suffers from “political tone-deafness.”

It says HERE that Hillary’s chances of becoming Barack Obama’s running mate are now pretty much nil.

And here’s a video of Keith Olbermann’s scalding commentary (which is a little over the top, in my opinion) on MSNBC:

Hillary’s staying around because of RFK??

8 comments May 23rd, 2008

THIS is pretty tasteless, as if Clinton is waiting for somebody to shoot Barack Obama.

UPDATE: The more I think about this episode, the more I’m inclined to cut Hillary a little, but only a little, slack. (See Nos. 3 and 4 in the comments section.) I’m even willing to attribute her gaffe in part to exhaustion. But it was a terribly insensitive thing to say — not something that recommends her for handling that 3 a.m. phone call for which she claims to be ready.

POSTSCRIPT: Here are videos of Clinton’s potentially offensive remarks and her subsequent apology:

Obama fathers two-headed gay terrorist baby

Add comment May 23rd, 2008

It’s been a couple of months since I last used that delicious headline (which I boosted from the Huffington Post), but it’s especially appropriate in this case.

The subject here is the LATEST ROUND of e-mails aimed at convincing gullible semi-literates that Barack Obama is an evil foreigner at best and the antichrist at worst.

Who would actually believe such crap?  Hey, c’mon. Millions of people also think that theories of evolution and global warming are the work of Satan. To paraphrase H.L. Mencken, it’s not easy to underestimate the intelligence of the American people.

UPDATE: Dana Milbank has a PIECE in today’s Washington  Post about anti-Obama weirdos.

Report: Obama says no to Hillary for veep

1 comment May 23rd, 2008

THIS GUY says he has it on good authority that Barack Obama has “straightforwardly and irrevocably” said no to Hillary Clinton’s direct request that she be his running mate.

But then, Obama would be a fool not to reject the idea.  There’s nothing to recommend Hillary for the veep slot and lots of reasons not to choose her.

Methinks the biggest obstacle in this regard is Bill Clinton. But there are many others.

UPDATE: CNN is reporting this morning that the veep slot is still a possibility in talks between the Clinton and Obama camps about Hillary getting out of the race:

Rule of thumb: If you’re seated behind the presidential candidate, you’re likely on TV

Add comment May 23rd, 2008

This is pretty funny:

McCain gags on Hagee’s Hitler theory

13 comments May 22nd, 2008

John McCain has finally REJECTED the endorsement he so avidly sought from the Rev. John Hagee, but only after learning of the preacher’s theory that Adolf Hitler was God’s chosen instrument in forcing the Jews to move back to Israel.

POSTSCRIPT: Hey, it just occurred to me.  Hagee’s endorsement is now available.  Maybe Hillary Clinton could…Nah! Even she wouldn’t go that far. Would she?

POSTSCRIPT II: Today’s news about Hagee triggered a memory of something I posted last summer on my previous (now-defunct) blog. It was a video by Max Blumenthal of a conference of Hagee’s Christians United for Israel.  I had completely forgotten that Joe Lieberman appears in the video as the featured speaker at Hagee’s big doings. Here it is:

I thought the GOP was supposed to be part of the managerial class

5 comments May 22nd, 2008

All my life I’ve heard it said that Republicans are the people who know how to organize and run things, the manager types, competent folks who know about dollars and cents and goal-oriented strategies — you know, the respectable grown-ups.

Democrats, on the other hand, are the dreamers, the class-warmongers, the welfare-statists, the hopelessly idealistic social engineers, the incompetents who couldn’t effectively and economically organize a two-car funeral — you know, the dirty hippies.

So, what can we make of reports like THIS suggesting that Democrat Barack Obama’s campaign organization is a model of smoothness and efficiency while Republican John McCain’s operation is relatively pathetic by almost every measure?

Every picture tells a story

Add comment May 22nd, 2008

(Hat/tip to Booman Tribune)

POSTSCRIPT: HERE’s another post-morten on the Clinton campaign

Have you ever heard of The Decemberists?

24 comments May 21st, 2008

No, I hadn’t heard of them either — until today, when the right-wing blogosphere fairly exploded with its latest anti-Obama fantasy.

Here’s the way story goes, according to the mouth-breathers:

All the fuss the other day about Barack Obama having drawn a crowd of 75,000 at a rally in Portland, Ore., was a bunch of liberal hooey.  What the mainstream media didn’t tell you is that the crowd was attracted not by Obama, but by a free concert by the local rock band The Decemberists.

This fiction was hatched in a PIECE written by some conspiratorialist on the right-wing site called NewsBusters. Within  hours, Obama bashers all across the fruited plain were peddling the theory that most of the big crowd was there to hear the band.

One especially rabid fellow I heard on the radio seemed to think that Obama just piggybacked onto this concert like some kind of interloper. Never mind that the event was advertised as an Obama rally, with The Decemberists billed as the warmup act.

The problems with this whole theory that the media deceived us in this matter are as follows:

1) The Decemberists, while popular in Portland, are NOT EXACTLY big stars who can draw huge crowds; ordinarily they play gigs in venues that will hold maybe a few thousand people.

On a recent tour that included 18 shows, the band drew an average audience of less than 1,800. But we’re supposed to believe they drew 42 times as many for the Portland performance, which lasted less than an hour. Please.

On the other hand, it’s not uncommon for Obama to draw tens of thousands of people at his rallies. He routinely fills football stadiums, big indoor arenas and large open spaces.

2) Local news coverage of the Portland rally made MENTION of the band only in passing and concentrated on the excitement over Obama’s appearance.

3) Virtually nobody in the crowd at the rally site or in the adjacent overflow of 15,000 people left when the band concluded its performance (as the photo above will attest). They stayed for what they came to see and hear, Barack Obama making a speech.

If these were mostly just apolitical music fans, you’d think there would have been a rush to avoid traffic jams when the band stopped playing. Didn’t happen.

4) The suggestion that Obama’s popularity in Oregon was overstated by dishonest media coverage of the rally was not borne out by the results of Tuesday’s election, which Obama won by a wide margin.

So, back to the drawing board, Obama haters.  Certainly you can do better than this latest feeble effort. Although this one is pretty funny, I’ll admit, as a curious combination of ignorance of politics and ignorance of popular music.

POSTSCRIPT: Here’s an ITEM about how the Portland rally grew from an event planned for indoors to a big outdoor gathering. The Decemberists are mentioned in passing, but the right-wing conspiratorialism is not.

POSTSCRIPT II: This video more than puts the lie to the wacky theory that the Portland throng was a concert crowd and not a political crowd:

Lobbyists adrift in McCain-Obama race?

Add comment May 21st, 2008

What do lobbyists do when both presidential candidates are self-styled political reformers?

Well, some of them COMPLAIN.

UPDATE: And then there’s THIS.

UPDATE II: Coincidentally, Obama BLASTED McCain today on the subject of lobbyists.