"It's missing in your whole category
of goals for his last year in office,
-which is peace in Iraq."
-- Helen Thomas, after Dana Purina listed
Bush's 2008 "to do" list with no mention
of his bloody Iraq debacle. Link
"You know what? Deep in my psyche, in the place that kind of misses the toothache
I've been prodding at with my tongue, I am having a tiny little pang of missing Hillary.
Not her, but hating her. Hating Hillary has been such a central political impulse for
so long now — 15 years — and I have had to work so hard to keep it up as she became
more appealling looking, less shrill, more human — I don't really know what I will do
with that newly freed strand of energy." -- Lisa Schiffren, speaking for more than just Republicans,Link
The Iowa caucuses on Jan. 3 dealt a stunning blow to the Bush-Clinton duopoly,
with Obama thrashing Hillary and Huckabee trouncing Romney, who had the
backing of some elements of the Bush Family.
Though the presidential selection process has a long way to go, the inevitability of
another election between representatives of the Democratic/Republican establishments
was thrown into severe doubt by the victories of Obama and Huckabee.
On the Democratic side, the contrast was visible during the post-caucus speeches by
Clinton and Obama. Clinton was surrounded by old faces from Washington’s Democratic
hierarchy, which has compromised its way through Republican political dominance.
There was Terry McAuliffe, Madeleine Albright, Wesley Clark and Bill Clinton,
looking especially weary as he maintained a smile throughout his wife’s speech.
When Obama spoke to his supporters, the tableau was entirely different. He stood
a platform with his wife and two young daughters, with mostly young supporters
behind him, not a single nationally recognized face among them.
Is that a good thing?
We're sending Obama into the lion's den with his young daughters and fresh faces?
No wonder Parry hates the Clintons - he sees them as Bushes.
As sophisticated as
Parry is, he sees Hillary and the best president we've had since FDR as Bush teammates.
A question for Parry:
Since you've brought it up 4-5 times, we must assume it's your main complaint,
that Clinton failed to go after Bush when he won the White House in 1993.
They repaid his nice-guy gesture with impeachment for no damn reason.
So what makes you think Obama will spend his 'honeymoon' political capital
go after Bush's crimes? I predict President Obama will ignore the past just as
Bill did because the first days of your presidency shouldn't be about "gotcha!"
I have cash money that says President Obama will ignore Bush's BIG crimes
the way Clinton ignored Bush 41's smaller crimes, and this is after impeachment.
You wanted Clinton to see 5 years into the future and act on it, but I think you'll
give Obama a pass on not going after Bush 43's greater crimes after the fact.
So much for the inevitability of Hillary as the Democratic presidential nominee.
The biggest story in the world today is the defeat of Clinton in the Iowa caucuses.
Iowa has the first contest in the 2008 presidential race, but it's not always a critically
important event. This year it was.
The second biggest story is the Iowa victory of Barack Obama, a senator from Illinois
who has just finished his third year in office. He is an African-American with remarkable
appeal across racial and cultural lines. Obama is now not only the favorite to win the
Democratic presidential nomination, he's got the best chance of becoming the next president.
I guess I'm the only one to notice how happy Republicans are today?
They are giddy at the thought of running against Obama.
Yep, you heard that right. This is the one day of the year that it is better to be a Republican.
If you live in Iowa, that is.
The Republicans have this caucus thing exactly right. You show up, write the name of the
candidate you want on a slip of paper, drop it in a box, and then race home in time for Ugly Betty.
There's no talking to anyone. No cajoling other people in the room to vote the same way as you.
No begging. Just in and out. Civilized.
The Democrats? More like a 7th grade gym class choosing dodge ball teams. There is a lot
of arguing, hurt feelings and wild promises made in a desperate bid to not be picked last.
Does it bother you that the mainstream press and the GOP are heaping praise on Obama?
I've been searching for an exact vote total, but they seem to have buried that.
The only thing they want you to know is that the She-Devil came in third.
With 97% of the vote in, she was behind by 11 caucus votes.
Actually, it was kinda funny how the reporting went, mostly on CNN.
When She was a solid third, they were squawking about how lame a candidate
would have to be to come in third, but then Hillary started cathing up so the
CNN whores had to change their tune and talk about how "noble" it was to
be in third place in case Edwards showed up there.
Also on CNN, some guy (who we can't trust) said if you take away all the caucasing
and just count the votes, Obama beat Hillary 32% to 31%, but when the press hates you,
they find a way to turn that one percent victory into a "landslide" for the guy they like.
Bart, you asked "Can anyone tell me anything Nadar did after Unsafe an Any Speed?
Here are a few things he did:
Ralph Nader was responsible for the creation of OSHA (the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration), the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), and the Consumer
Product Safety Administration.
Nader was instrumental in the adoption of the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Freedom of
Information Act, the Wholesome Meat Act, and the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act.
It was Ralph Nader who maneuvered the auto industry into making airbags available on
American cars. However, more than anything else, Nader is responsible for a wholesale
shift in contemporary attitudes toward consumer rights, public safety, humane business
practices, and open government.
Nadar may be in the doghouse now because his strange desire to run for president
and get beat up, but he is a damn good guy and has done a lot of good.
I'm surprised to hear that Ralph could do all that with no power,
but I'll believe you until I see evidence that I shouldn't :)
With nearly all Iowa precincts now reporting, Hillary comes in third behind Obama and Edwards.
Electability is what matters above all to Iowa Democrats, even before ideological purity.
This is a replay of '04, where the front runner (Dean) stumbled then fell when the prospect
of that guy running against the Republicans frightened Iowans into picking someone,
anyone, who could possibly beat George Bush.
Hillary, with her sky-high negatives, was the opponent of choice for Republicans in '08,
and Iowa Dems who want to win know that.
I don't get it.
Why is it a good thing that the people who chose Kerry and Huckabee
are picking this year's nominee to face the GOP Slime Machine?
Somebody has it wrong.
Bush the smarter has been defensive and supportive
where Barbara's dick is concerned.
It seems highly unlikely that Poppy would participate in an endeavor that appears to be
founded on the idea that his son has been bad for the nation. Is Bill wrong?
Bill said, “The first thing she intends to do is..." but Hillary can't "send" Poppy
anywhere without his permission unless he's kidnapped and rendered somewhere.
It reads like a Bill mistake to me, but Parry can read minds where I can't.
Did the media report this incorrectly?
Can you remember the last time they got one right?
Did Hillary simply have an incredibly bad idea?
Hillary's 'fingerprints' are nowhere to be found on this idea.
Is Bush the smarter ready to admit to his son's transgressions?
Never, even if his 1991 words prove he thinks his son is an idiot.
I don't know what the answer is, if I was psychic I'd be busy spending
all of my lottery earnings but, somebody is terribly wrong.
steve in knoxville
Not sure why, but I got an e-mail from Howard Dean titled "Four More Years."
Dean's still on our side, right?
"I think the manner of Obama's win is pretty impressive. I can't be the only one
was a bit inclined toward a cynical roll of the eyes at the idea of winning on
the back of
unprecedented turnout, mobilizing new voters, brining in young people, etc.
That sounds like what people say they're going to do but never deliver on.
But he did deliver. That's impressive." -- Matthew Yglesias, fired US Attorney, Link
I agree, it was an impressive win.
But can he win against the GOP Slime machine with a smile and a cheery message?
Excerpt: Obama has put to rest the question of whether a black can win in white America.
His victory in 95 percent white Iowa proved that he could appeal across racial lines
and even draw women away from Hillary despite her push for them
to make her the
first female president. Next he'll try to build on his record in New Hampshire, which
is 96 percent white."
I agree it was amazing to see him pull women votes from Hillary.
I would've bet that he couldn't pull that off.
I miss the old Robert Parry, and because of these comments
and others, I will stop supporting his site.
I certainly don't mind Parry having his own opinions, but when see sees "signals"
and "inferences" and then explains to us
the "significance" of the "signals" he perceives,
one must wonder how long he's been injecting his personalizations into the mix.
I hear your criticism of Robert Parry, and maybe he is taking his attacks on
Hillary a bit far, but you left out the meat of his argument; that Bill let the Bush/Reagan
administrations slide regarding Iran/Contra and the ongoing investigations that Clinton
halted in the spirit of bi-partisanship.
Major legal, ethical, and Constitutional violations went uninvestigated and un-prosecuted,
including drug dealing, providing arms to terrorists, and others which we may never know of,
but hinted at in testimony by Ollie North and others.
The reason this is so important now, is that many of the crony neo con sleaze merchants
from Iran Contra found a warm reception in G.W. Bush's admoinistration. And a job.
They should still be in prison.
You seem to think Hillary is the one to take on this fight. That may be true, but Parry,
rightly so in my opinion, sees that after winning the election Hillary may be, like Bill was,
quite willing to let bygones be bygones, for the sake of unity, bi-partisanship, and....
Keep doing what you do.
Funky P in
If Obama wins, I give you my money-backed, 100% Nancy Grace Guarantee that he WILL NOT go after Bush crimes - and I'll bet my winnings that he'll be
that because everyone will then agree that it's a "new day" in America and all that crapola.
My biggest worry about Obama is he won't join the fight in the present,
so why should we expect him to look for past battles to re-visit?
If he wins, he's going to do exactly what Bill did - look forward - and get praised for it.
All I saw on your website, FOR YEARS, was how consortium.com was the
greatest website on the internet and that Robert Parry could write no wrong.
But, suddenly, when he's criticizing the candidate you're shilling for, he knows
absolutely nothing. Tell me, Bart, before I give up on you completely,
how can you see to type with your head buried so far up Hillary's ass?
Keith, who's already made up his mind.
For years, I said consortiumnews.com was "the most important site" on the Internet,
but that was before Bob Parry acquired his mind-reading abilities.
If time was a luxury, I could go back and try to pinpoint the column where
went from reporting the facts to this new, Arianna/Dowd
style of journalism.
Over all these years, if I had a complaint about writers such as Parry, Conason
and Lyons it was that they bent over backwards to be fair to Bush and his thugs,
saying things like, "Perhaps Bush doesn't remember making this statement..."
instead of calling him "a lying bastard" as I do regularly.
But now, Parry has rejected that gentlemanly language for his mind reading schtick.
Maybe if Hillary drops out of the race, we'll get the old Parry back?
And, now, since Robert Parry is criticizing your girl, Hillary, his usual commentary
gets moved to the bottom of the page, without your usual "most important website
on the internet" endorsement?
The mistakes are all yours.
I stopped running the "most important" endorsement a while back and there were
two consortiumnews columns on yesterday's page,
one at the top and one at the bottom.
What will you do if Hillary doesn't get the nomination, Bart?
For the 700th time, I will vigorously support the Democrat. Can you name
another "democratic" site that has stated that again and again before yesterday? Hint: Look for "howl" in their name.
Will you support the nominee, or continue to criticize him?
If you do criticize, can I say you're for the Republicans to win?
Keith, good thing you're not a gambler because I'd take your moeny.
List the worst thing *I* have ever said about Obama - go ahead - I'll wait.
I think you'll find "newbie" is the roughest I've been on him.
Poor Britney - she's in a padded cell in Los Angeles.
Her suicide is another prediction I hope I get wrong.
otohhhhh time to refute parry, for dishing truth on bart`s.. beloved hillary .
...how dare, he?.....better find another dog for this fight, brother..
she can`t even get a majority of dems to back her in Iowa for christ`s sake
Best wishes to you and yours
Don, what if you were a public figure and your wife said something
that caused Bob Parry to write four or five articles (and a book)
what you were thinking and the "signals" you were sending?
Wouldn't you ask where he took his mind-reading lessons?
They may be anticipating a Republican victory, with endless deficits, a "fair tax"
that won't begin to pay down Bush's $10T debt and voodoo economics that says
the deficit can get higher as long as we give the super-rich another tax break.
I am very upset about the way the Iowa women voted yesterday (not necessarily
the Obama win, although I am disappointed). Instead of giving the Iowa women
of Chinaco, how about we give them a knife and fork so they can continue to “eat their own.
Maybe you should put a pink tutu on the Women of Iowa.
The Republicans know the mantra that “Hate is much louder than truth.”
It’s just too bad that the women of Iowa had to buy into it.
Hence, the following speculative morsel I picked up on the phone in a conversation
with one Democratic candidate’s (obviously not Hillary Clinton) deputy in Iowa:
his particular anti-Hillary camp’s expectation - or hope - that many caucus goers may
be downright reluctant to be visibly observed by friends and neighbors as favoring Clinton.
This reasoning (or wishful thinking) runs particularly strong regarding caucus goers who
have initially favored a candidate who fails to reach the required 15 percent threshold.
The supporters of such a failing candidate, under the theory explained to me, would be
under especially heavy peer pressure, given the importance of their second-choice, and the
high stakes generally of what is involved in this evening’s event. Thus (under the theory
put forward) these individuals under intense observation in the caucus pen would rather
not spend the rest of the political season being identified in their neighborhoods and
community as the ones who threw their votes to Hillary Clinton...
CNN echoed this last night, talking about a Biden group who, once released by Joe,
decided they'd go "anywhere but to Hillary," which explains how she could lose by
one percentage point, yet come in third in caucus votes.
Shillary is unelectable. I've been telling you this for a year.
Nobody on the right will vote for her and half on the left,
including myself, won't vote for her.
She can't win, she is the right's best chance to steal the election in 2008.
You are completely wrong about her being electable. Is that clear enough?
But what if you allow facts into the argument?
Republicans have NO elected blacks at the federal level.
The only black person they elected in recent memory is Uncle OJ Watts
and he won because he gave Oklahoma a national football title and here,
football trumps racism every day of the week and twice on Sundays.
If you win a football title for Oklahoma, Republicans wouldn't mind
if you sodomize the governor's white,
underage daughter at high noon
on the front lawn of the Governor's Mansion.
We've apparently turned our backs on the only team to beat them twice
in favor of a young, untested but idealistic man they'll call "Hussein."
Anybody else notice that Rush LOVES Obama?
Anybody else notice that FOX News LOVES Obama?
Anybody else notice that Hannity and O'Reilly LOVE Obama?
Anybody else notice that the American whore media LOVES Obama?
Anybody else worried about their motives besides me?
When the racist sons-of-dogs talk nice about a black man
it means they have a hidden agenda - I wonder what that is?
Jan. 3 in Iowa will be the Lexington and Concord of our times, and in this year of
the political independent the issue will be decided by the most disenfranchised,
disrespected and disempowered groups in American politics, who are:
Progressive Democrats who hunger for a leadership of principle and courage in the
battle against the worst president in our times, and any times, and political independents,
who are fed up with the demeaning negativity corruptions and gridlock of our age,
and who are 70 percent united with progressives against the hallmarks of the Bush years.
To young people especially, do not let the “grown-ups” disenfranchise you by deliberately
scheduling the caucus on a date they think you're on college break.
Shame on them, power to you.
Rock the vote: Come back by plane, train, bus or foot.
It is your country and your future;
you can change the world.
You will have a story to tell for a lifetime and historians will write about what you do.
Our motto for this year is - "No Anti-Bush Site Left Behind". So - if you have an anti-bush site and you are choking on hosting fees or dealing with threats - let us know and we'll help keep you online.
We also have that strongest server side spam filtering on the planet.
Check out Marx Mail for info on how you can have a Spam Free Email Account.