SO IT'S BIDEN

Well I admit that I'm slightly disappointed that it's not Wes Clark, but I don't think he was ever seriously in the running.

It's been said that the first rule of picking a Vice President is "don't f**k it up" and it's pretty clear that Obama hasn't done that here. He could have done much worse.

Biden's a good choice for many reasons -perhaps the most important being that he can serve as an experienced guide for Obama through the entrenched ways of the beltway without overshadowing him. In this respect he's sort of the Anti-Cheney: an experienced politician and legislator but one for whom (unlike Cheney) there will be no fears of a "shadow presidency".

Biden's also a great surrogate: while he has a pretty fierce attack-dog mode, he's definitely not a loose cannon (to mix matephors). I.e. he can snark it up with the best of them but isn't likely to naively go too far, and will be able to say many of the things that need to be said for the campaign to suceed but which it would be impolitic for Obama himself to say.

In addition, being from Delaware, Biden shores up Obama's cred with businesses (most corporations in the US are incorporated in Delaware -for tax and other business-friendly reasons.) without necessarily being seen as a stooge for corporate america -Biden has perhaps the lowest net worth of any Senator.

And finally, it's pretty clear that Biden's foreign policy experience will strengthen the ticket as well.

Already the grampy mobile has released an "atack ad" showing a quote from Biden saying he "would be honored to run with or against McCain because the country would be better off"

Um... idiots at the Grampy campaign -"honored to run with or against" means that in either case Biden is on the ticket and therefore he's saying that the country would be better off ...with Biden. Just saying. I know you guys are desperate to climb out from under the "I don't know how many houses I own" rock that has crashed down on you all -but you might try actually thinking about quotes before you trot them out?

DEVASTATION

Bush to tour areas of the country destroyed by his presidency:



Sometimes you just have to stand in awe of The Onion

TEAM WHAT?

The Jed Report found this from a Republican blogger -who, understandably, didn't emphasize it (though to be fair he did point it out). A little "unintentional" editorializing from the Mineapolis Star Tribune?

THE HITS KEEP COMING

Newsflash: I was actually ready to cut grampy some slack on one in what has come to be an assembly line of geography gaffes.

I really was because, to be brutally honest, if I'd been given a pop-quiz I would have failed the "Czech Republic/Slovakia question" too. I know, I know "...but a sitting senator who touts his foreign policy cred should have known this!" But really I can't muster much outrage about goofing a reference to a nation not currently in the world spotlight -particularly since it was Czechoslovakia for so long.

However just when I raise my fingers before dropping them on the keys to pen a "y'know what I don't get?" column gramps saves me the trouble by screwing up even worse -and with a set of nations that everyone is watching.

Still reeling from the Maliki smack-down in endorsing Obama's plan to withdraw from Iraq in 16 months the old fart tried desperately to deflect a question about it and came up with this little gem:

Asked by ABC's Diane Sawyer Monday morning whether the "the situation in Afghanistan in precarious and urgent," McCain responded:

"I think it's serious. . . . It's a serious situation, but there's a lot of things we need to do. We have a lot of work to do and I'm afraid it's a very hard struggle, particularly given the situation on the Iraq/Pakistan border," said McCain, R-Ariz., said on "Good Morning America."

Iraq and Pakistan do not share a border. Afghanistan and Pakistan do.

Ok this is getting downright dangerous -he admits he doesn't understand economics, he changes his positions on domestic issues daily has deep ties to an industry that is only now imploding due its having rotted from the inside with corruption and incompetence and now can't understand basic geographic facts about nations in which we're spending hundreds of billions of dollars and stretching our military to the breaking point?

Gee, but he's an affable and avuncular old fellow. Serves great barbecue -just ask the press.

OH THIS IS TOO RICH

I've been too depressed lately to really blog on the FISA disaster. It's just too dark a day for America that the Congress (with the notable help of many Democrats including my own Senator Feinstein) actually passed a law that both allows the executive branch to warrantlessly wiretap American citizens calls abroad whether they're suspected of any wrongdoing of any kind or not, and immunizes a past executive branch spying program that neither the American public nor even many of the senators voting on the damn bill knows anything about. Not the end of the world but certainly royal bitch-slapping of the 4th amendment. Glen Greenwald has the best coverage/take on the subject.

But if you wanted a full out belly laugh to relieve the depression here's a story (courtesy Americablog) that'll fill the bill: Apparently grampy's a bigamist.

You read that right -he wasn't divorced from his first wife when he married his second.

(PC ALERT!!!!!) I guess that's the power of rich poontang. < /mysogeny>

Do you want an even bigger laugh? Picture what the news cycle for the last year would have been like if this had been done by any democrat!!

iokyar fidelis.

R.I.P. GEORGE CARLIN

I woke up this morning to find out that George Carlin died last night of a heart attack. This hits me harder than I thought it would.

As Jon Stewart once said, listening to Class Clown was a right of passage. Stewart's about my age, and for boys growing up in the 70's Carlin was a god, a grownup who actually said all the things you'd said among your friends but were told never to say by your parents and certainly never heard anywhere else. What's more, he did it with an intelligence and wit that was absent from other current and later comedians who had the cursing without the intelligence. I think that's why my mom didn't mind that I listened to them. I could practically recite verbatim whole routines at 9 or 10, in fact it's not a stretch to say that my early fascination with language was greatly influenced by equal parts of Monty Python's Flying Circus, and Carlin's albums.

I had all of Carlin's early albums and played them till they were scratched and crackly. AM/FM, Occupation Foole, Class Clown, Toledo Window Box, An Evening With Wally Londo, and On the Road. I lost a bit of interest in the 80's partly because financial constraints no longer allowed me to purchase his albums, but also I think in hindsight because his career slipped a bit then. His albums started to seem a bit formulaic -a few rants about "the man", a few drug references, and a few bizarre non-sequiturs, but without the soul or wit that his earlier material had. His television specials also diminished and at times seemed a bit awkward because it appeared that he felt that he had to guild his punchlines with mugging. In later interviews he referred to a period where he "lost himself" as a comedian and one surmises that that's what he meant. I believe that this period was also when the drugs took over his life both physically and financially. This would have been from about the mid to late '80's through the early '90's and included the albums "Playin' With Your Head", and "What Am I Doing In New Jersey"?

He came back with a vengeance in the 90s sparked in part by the Tipper Gore PMRC debacle with the aptly named "Parental Advisory: Explicit Lyrics" and never slipped again (IMO).

In 2000 my Constitutional Law professor played the "Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television" to my class and I have to say that (beside the fact that it seemed so tame after all the years of controversy) it was a sheer delight to watch and hear the reactions of kids (by kids I mean early 20's ;-) ) who had actually never heard the routine before. They couldn't quite grasp what the fuss had been all about. Carlin would have been proud.

I can't begin to explain the profound sadness I feel at his passing -particularly at such a young age. 71 is barely retirement age now. He leaves behind a body of work that is unsurpassed in its scope, prolificness, wit and laughing out loud humor as well as its quintessential example of linguistic balance -in that sense it's no exaggeration to place Carlin as one of the modern Shakespearean torch bearers.

Wonder if he got his "two minute warning"?

"Now, you might be wondering why I would even suggest that someone can affect the manner and style of his death. Well, it's because of a mysterious and little-known stage of dying, the two-minute warning. Most people are not aware of it, but it does exist. Just as in football, two minutes before you die you receive an audible warning: "Two minutes! Get your shit together!" And the reason most people don't know about it is because the only ones who hear it are dead two minutes later. They never get a chance to tell us.

But such a warning does exist, and I suggest that when it comes, you use your two minutes to entertain and go out big. If nothing else, deliver a two-minute speech. Pick a subject you feel passionate about, and just start talking. Begin low-key, but, with mounting passion, build to a rousing climax. Finally, in the last few seconds, scream at those around you, "If these words are not the truth, may God strike me dead!" He will. Then simply slump forward and fall to the floor. Believe me, from that moment on, people will pay more attention to you."

-From "Napalm and Silly Putty" (though orignially featured on "On the Road")

SHOCKING

At last the scandal unfolds and the horrifying Michelle Obama "Whitey" video actually surfaces!



How can Obama possibly survive this shameful display!!!

Actually -hat tip to my college classmate Chris Harcum who sent this -he's an actor, acting teacher, playwright and jack of all theatrical trades in New York.

HERE'S A WIERD THEORY

Steve Rosenbaum forcasts in the Huffington Post :

"At some point in mid August, John McCain will announce that he has decided that he can not accept his party's nomination for president. The reason will be health-related, and that may turn out to be the truth. Anyone who's seen him on stage these days knows he looks like he's about to keel over. And anyone who's been on a presidential campaign knows the physical demands are grueling and can be a challenge for a young man.

But excuses or facts hardly matters. He won't be accepting his party's nomination.

The reasons are simple. He can't win. Now that Obama is the presumptive Democratic nominee -- the polls all show that McCain's pro-war stance and Bush endorsement make him a lost cause in November. That combined with soft stand on litmus test conservative issues make him an unpopular candidate among the base. I know some Democrats that think the Republicans are planning to let McCain lose and 'sit this one out' so that they can hang the democrats with a bad economy and a war that is a morass. But that just isn't how they play. They play to win every hand"

This is ridiculous in the extreme and Rosenbaum needs to put down the crack-pipe. he's forgetting one very important thing: There's no way McCain's going to step aside after carrying all that neocon water in both 2000 and 2004. This is McCain's third presidential run and he's finally gotten the nomination and now the Republicans will ask him to stand down? If you believe that I have a lovely piece of real estate that connects Brooklyn and Manhattan that I'd like to showcase for you.

I can't cite any evidence other than conjecture, but I'd bet that there were promises exchanged and deals made for his not tearing Bush a new orifice when Bush attacked his wife and kids in 2000 with the push-polls, etc. in SC. McCain was probably intimidated and browbeaten into submission by the VRWC tanks, who had just come off an enormous victory with the impeachment and subsequent (and previous) sliming of the Clintons, and had the money and boots on the ground to hammer McCain mercilessly.

Moreover they probably threatened to withold any $upport so that even if he kept on he'd be left on his own twi$ting in the wind.

The republicans have settled on McCain and are now suffering from buyer's remorse, but swapping McCain with a newer model will only weaken them further and infuriate the voters who supported McCain.

I mean -who will disguntled Hillaroids vote for? ;-)

It would be sad if McCain weren't such an asshole. Just when he's finally ready to take his turn, he's too old and feeble to be able to make a decent run at it? Sad. Well, not really. But wait there's more:

"There are a whole list of Republicans who in many ways are more likely to energize the Republican base. One thing is certain -- there are candidates that will play to the core issues in ways that McCain simply can't.

Here's a list of names. Some you know, some you don't. But each of them knows their name is in play. Among them --

Condoleezza Rice (Secretary of State)
Colin Powell (fmr Sec. of State)
Marilyn Musgrave (Colorado Congresswoman)
Mitt Romney (fmr Massachusetts Governor)
Mike Huckabee (fmr Governor of Arkansas)
Charlie Crist (Florida Governor)
Tim Pawlenty (Minnesota Governor)
Bobby Jindal (Louisiana Governor)
Mark Sanford: (Governor of South Carolina)
John Thune (Senator from South Dakota)
Dick Lugar (Senator from Indiana)
Chuck Hagel (Senator from Nebraska)
Michael Bloomberg (NYC Mayor)

Ok, go ahead knock them down. One by one. See if you can really remove ALL these names from a list of candidates that are more likely to give Obama a run for his money."

Oh please give me a slightly challenging task. Lets start with the simplest ones:

Marilyn Musgrave (Colorado Congresswoman)
Mark Sanford: (Governor of South Carolina)
John Thune (Senator from South Dakota)
Tim Pawlenty (Minnesota Governor)

Say it with me now :1, 2, 3 -WHO???

Dude, this is a national election and probably the only one that 90% of the electorate ever pay attention to. What's the number one problem that people cite when questioning Obama's "electability"? No not his race -it's that he's too unknown and needs to introduce himself to the American people more. He's already been doing that for 18 months and his hard work has paid off with the nomination of his party over the toughest democratic political machine in decades. Does anyone honestly think that a republican party in shambles can introduce an unknown candidate with slightly over 4 months to go and beat the brightest and most quickly ascending political star from either party in over 30 years and stand a scintilla of a chance? There simply isn't time. Political junkies might know these folks names but the rest of America doesn't know them from anyone else at the mall and they're not going to vote for a stranger.

Charlie Crist (Florida Governor)

The guy who took over from Jeb? Nah. Plus -see above (and below).

Condoleezza Rice (Secretary of State)
Colin Powell (fmr Sec. of State)

Both of these folks have hitched their wagons to the Bush train and have derailed themselves in the process. True, in a vacuum both are intelligent and capable leaders, but they're even more tainted by the Iraq War than McCain is because they were members of the team that constructed it from thin air. McCain even knows he has to distance himself from their like or he'll lose -what makes anyone think they'll stand any more of a chance than him? Powell completely shot his credibility after he took the plunge and lied to the UN saying that some trailers really mobile WMD plants. It's too easy to shoot him down (figuratively speaking. NEXT!

Mitt Romney (fmr Massachusetts Governor)
Mike Huckabee (fmr Governor of Arkansas)

Once again say it with me: 1,2,3 LUH-HOO-SUH-HERS!! These jokers couldn't even beat MCCAIN!! And guess what guys -there are no do-overs in politics. NEXT!


Bobby Jindal (Louisiana Governor)

Often cited as a possible McCain running-mate, and I REEEEEEELY hope he is because he's a loon. A Catholic whose gone to the dark side, he actually claims that he's performed an exorcism (somehow forgetting something all catholics know -you have to be an ordained priest to perform an exorcism). Moreover (and sorry folks hate to get dirty) but while finally after years of hard struggle we've managed to nominate a black candidate, do you really think we're ready to elect a former hindu of East Indian descent? I could be wrong, but guess what I'm thinking? Also see above. (who?)

Dick Lugar (Senator from Indiana)
Chuck Hagel (Senator from Nebraska)

Both these guys are even more moderate than McCain -and they're TRUE moderates. So much so that they're often pariahs in their own party. These guys are just to the left of Joe Lieberman who still has the balls to call himself a democrat though technically he's a CFL (Connecticut For Lieberman) party senator who openly rejected his former party's nominee. But I digress. These guys won't be any more palatable to the guppy base -and certainly not to the fundies. Lugar even has co sponsored legislation with Obama and is unlikely to want to contest against him. Hagel's not much different.

Which leaves us with Mikey-boy.

Michael Bloomberg (NYC Mayor)

Another true moderate, and an interresting choice if he decided to take it on -but that's the rub. He's not stupid -why crucify yourself on the alter of "also-ran" for a party that is imploding? You'd have to be nuts like Jindal. And oh one other small thing HE'S NO LONGER A REPUBLICAN.

So there it is -another theory laid to waste. Grampy's their old man like it or not, (and I LOVE it) and Rosenbaum's daydream is simply Republican porn.

BACK TO BUSINESS

And now that the primaries are over here's a reminder of what it's all really about:



Sweet dreams.

HIGHLIGHT REEL

Kieth Olberman has put together a great collection of highlights from the primary season:

IT'S DONE/ MCSAME GAMES

I'm a little late on this but here's (courtesy TPM) the video of Hillary's concession speech:



The blogosphere is on fire with reactions ranging from brilliant to "why was it AGAIN all about her?"

I think it was a fine speech and she hit all the right marks - Oh sure, she went a little dead-eyed when she was talking-up Obama, but I'll give the woman a break, she is human after all and it can't have been an easy speech to give.

In other news:

I've discovered (although I can't have been the first) a new drinking game! The first requirement is the toughest -you actually have to watch one of Grampy's speeches. But assuming you can do that without doing an Elvis on your TV -take a drink every time McSame says "my Friends" or some variant. Don't plan on driving afterward.

BTW if you really want some positive therapy when you get too down in the dumps re the state of the fall election and the ramifications for the country -watch McSame's town hall meetings with the sound muted. What you'll see is a wandering, shuffling almost limping, hunchbacked, very old white guy, who somehow thinks he actually stands a chance to be elected president. And it only makes you feel more warm and fuzzy knowing that this idiot actually wants to stand on the same stage as Obama and do this 10 TIMES!

Here -give it a try:



-remember to mute the sound unless you have a bottle of Jameson's (none of that protestant Bushmills shite) close by. Slainte!

AND NOW THE REAL NEWS

John Stewart delivers the best post contest wrap up. (of course he does -he's the only pundit with more than space between his ears -well if you don't count Olberman )

SAVOR IT

BTW -in case anyone's wondering: I'm open to playing starting QB for the 49ers next fall.

OH AND BTW

NO. I don't want her as VP. Too much baggage, and after the campaign she's run why throw her a bone? She doesn't guarantee victory any more than anyone else because any democrats who won't vote for the democratic candidate after 8 years of hell are undependable anyway. She brings more damage than help after this campaign and already the republicans are using her lines against Obama.

Here's a question for all those (and that includes you Senator Feinstein) who insist that Hillary should be on the ticket: shouldn't she endorse him first?

HOPE SPRINGS ETERNAL

Will tonight be the night? Will she finally concede?

The news is all over the map from claims that she'll make a concession speech from New York tonight to the Clinton campaign itself still saying that they're in it to win it. She's got a tough decision to make as I think this really is her last best chance to exit gracefully and with any chance of preserving her career and her husband's legacy -both of which have been bruised if not broken by her incompetent campaign.

She can choose to stay and fight it out destroying herself and the party in the process and all but ensuring a president John Sidney McCain III, or she can show courage and stand down and put the country before her ambitions. I'm not optimistic.

In other news: you want to talk about a real dream ticket?

I was a Clark man from way back as I've said before and I was really bummed that he came out for Clinton though I understood why, but the case gets stronger and stronger for him on the ticket with Obama.

"Clark opposed the war, is unambiguous in his support for progressive values, has credibility and relationships with foreign leaders, and has “won a war using multi-lateral strategies with zero American casualties.” (I’d certainly like to hear some exploration this fall of the differences in the military’s planning and execution in Kosovo vs. Iraq.)

I’d just add that Clark does not have any obvious personal baggage — folks went looking for dirt in ‘04 and didn’t come up with anything. And, obviously, he comes with the kind of national security bona fides that are unrivaled by any political figure in the country.

As for the “unifying” factor, I think it’s also fair to say that Clark is definitely considered a Clinton loyalist. If the Obama campaign wanted to send a signal about bringing the camps together, Clark would appear to largely fit the bill."

With Clark on the ticket there'd be next to no argument that Obama couldn't be Commander In Chief. Now I'm not naive -I know there are down sides. For starters, he's another white male and therefore offers little to women other than his progressive values. Also he's been in Washington for a long time and so might detract from Obama's message of change. Also he's been publicly critical of Obama in the past, but I think that could be easily spun as his having been loyal to Clinton "in the trenches" as it were.

Still I think his positives outweigh the negatives and hope he's seriously being considered -and seriously considering- the VP spot.

IT'S OFFICIAL -THE PATRIOTS WON THE SUPERBOWL!

The Jed Report has a good analysis of all of this

"The Obama campaign is going to need be ready to push back against the Clinton popular vote nonsense even harder. I keep on saying this, but the key reason why the popular vote isn't meaningful is simply that every state has a different mechanism for selecting delegates. You can't just total up all these different contests with different rules and call it democratic."

but I'd like to add an analogy: The Patriots apparently won the Superbowl

If you add up the scores from the World Series (which the Red socks won BTW) the last Celtics game and the Superbowl -the New England team clearly had more points than the Giants and therefore were the Superbowl winner.


In other news:

Pelosi says that the superdelegates need to declare by next week or she Dean and Reid will step in.

Don't know what they'll do exactly but it's encouraging. I have to go back on my previous post and say that Clinton's now clearly insane.

Taking this to the convention will ensure the democrats lose in the fall. It's never worked before -the party undecided by their convention inevitably loses. '64, '68, '80. Every time the party that was undecided by the convention lost.

Hillary has obviously decided (rightly or wrongly) that it's now or never -the irony is that the more she presses on the more she ensures it'll be never.

MOVE ON'S LATEST

Pretty funny.

THE REAL GRAMPS

Here's a short film by Robert Greenwald to give you a picture just who we're up against. Remember that at this time in 2000 W was a blithering idiot -but one that everyone (but me) wanted to have a beer with. Not like that "wooden elitest lying snob" Al Gore. And remember too that McCain back then was the Manchurian Candidate who's wife had a drug problem and who allegedly had an illigitimate black child (according to the South Carolina "push-polls") 4 years later he was campaigning for the man whose campaign had made those allegations against him. Now he wants to be president. ROTFLMAOPMP.

Here's gramps in all his twistedness:


But Hillary thinks he's "passed the Commander in Chief threshold".

And speaking of Hillary -here's Olberman with a classic "Special Comment":


Bye Hills, wish it was fun.

...AND NOW THE PLUGS.

A friend I worked with about 15+ years ago has blossomed into an incredible singer/songwriter!

She's currently (among other things) working on a project called "52 songs in 52 weeks" where she composes a new song each week and then puts the video up on YouTube. At the end of the year she'll pick the best 12 or so and record an album.

Now, "how" you ask "does this fit into the scope of your blog?" Watch her latest "Rooftops of Babylon" (week 14):





Most of her songs aren't overtly political -but this one seemed like a great match.

You can find out more here, and here, and you can buy her album here or here

She's pretty amazing so help support her!

DEBUNKING MORE CANARDS

Let's debunk the barrage of lies, starting with the latest:

1. Obama's "white" problem

This is one of the most insidious and nasty dog-whistle attacks to come down the pike. Let's be honest "white, working class", "white rural" and "hard-working white" are all synonyms for the same thing -uneducated white redneck bigots. This is the narrow demographic who won't vote for Obama. What the media and the Clinton campaign want you to believe however is that they are representative of the larger demographic of white non college educated voters across the country, and this just hasn't played out in the numbers.

Where has it played out? Appalachia.

All of the states where Obama has had a "problem" are in that area of the country. north western PA, Southeastern OH, all of WV -in fact it stretches from northern AL to southwestern NY. Josh Marshall has more about who has settled in that area of the country as does Jonathan Tilove.

Moreover this whole area of discussion has focused on the false idea that ALL of the people who voted for Clinton in the primaries in those states will not vote for Obama in the general election which is unlikely -particularly if Clinton makes good on her promise and stands behind him once he's the nominee.

Obama has won "white" majorities in Wisconsin, Iowa, and Virginia -and in the second whitest state in the union- Vermont, he won 60% of the "white working class" vote. He doesn't have a "white" problem -he has an Appalachia problem -minuscule in comparison to the insinuation Clinton, the MSM and the Republicans are making.

That the media is fueling this story is predictable as they thrive on controversy real or manufactured ("You provide the prose poems, I'll provide the war") and I don't even begrudge the republicans for using this line of attack (ignorant whites are after all their base) but for the Clinton campaign to advance this argument is not only desperate but despicable.



2. Obama is "elitist"

An "ist" is one who subscribes to an "ism". Elitism means one who believes in the elevation of the elite and in this context is generally taken to mean that one believes in the superiority and or advancement of the rights and privileges of that elite.

For Obama to be "elitist" then, he would have to espouse the belief that the wealthy, privileged and educated deserve to be placed above everyone else. I defy anyone to cite any quote from Obama where he advances this view. Even if we twist his "bitter-gate" words to mean what his opponents want them to mean -they can't be made to mean that he believes the above.

Is Obama "elite"? That's another question. Harvard Law School, editor of the Harvard Law Review, Law Professor, Illinois State Senator, United States Senator, Keynote speaker at the 2004 Democratic Convention. Yes. The man is elite. But one can be elite without being "elitist"



3. Obama's "Wright" problem will hurt him in the fall.

Perhaps, but while the results of the fall remain to be seen, here's the latest poll saying that Bush is a bigger problem for Gramps than Wright is for Obama.

Additionally, Grampy doesn't want to go down the controversial pastor road what with calling Rod Parsley his "Spiritual guide" and with his courting John "the Catholic Church is the Great Whore of revelation" Hagee, and all. Just sayin'.

Although I note with amusement that Hagee has now attempted to apologise -not in any meaningful way like to the Pope, but to Bill Donohue of the Catholic league. That's kinda' like Usameh Bin Laden apologising to the American Nazi Party for calling America the "Great Satan".