Again, still, whatever...

Susan Estrich is at it again, still, there are some things that aren't ever going to change. She goes into a list of Bill Clinton's good works, such as personally carrying medicine to people who would die without it. (We're apparently supposed to believe that there is no mail system or delivery system of any kind in Africa.)

All this is guise to proclaim Hillary Clinton, the most victimized person in history. Who'd want that mantel? Normal people don't want that. Being victimized is certainly something, including time consuming, but I don't think it belongs in the accomplishment column. HRC is supposed to be strong, deserving and independent from her husband. Huh? We don't give important jobs to people because they deserve them, we do it because they'll do the job we need done. As for her independence from her husband, what job has Hillary Clinton ever held that he didn't arrange for her?

Estrich uses words borrowed from bubble-bodied baby broads, who in spite of limited resources, wear their hair big, and their fingernails in the style of bank tellers. Educated people don't tend to call people haters. Intelligent people tend to have a better argument than to say others don't have much respect. Proving that you heard what was said, although very cute, isn't the same thing as actually getting it.

Bill and Hillary Clinton have amassed a personally fortune in excess of $100 million, so let's not pretend they're poor.

Minnie Pearl's hats had a more discreet price tag, than the many on the Clintons. I say that it doesn't look right, for a man's charitable organization to buy, or rent an email list from his wife. If Bill Clinton would like to pay off his wife's campaign debt, let him reach into his own pocket, and not the money marked for malaria medicine.

Susan Estrich does concede that it would be very bad if children had to die because Bill Clinton's efforts to prevent and treat malaria in the third world were blocked. That tragedy would be second only in severity to her friend, Hillary Clinton, not becoming Secretary of State. That would be truly be too bad.

We all have our interests, and that was just a column. Written by a person who has been refusing to use her head, and instead, mainlining the Clinton Kool Aid for decades. (And why not? They are her cash, and cachet. Why would she try to imagine, even flirt with a future without them?) I'm sure it wasn't taken personally, and that it's done no harm.

2008

It’s that time again. The time of year where so many of us ponder those (mostly famous) people who have left our ranks, to join the newly dead. We tally up what they took from this world, and what they gave it, so let’s go over a few…

Mary Meader, an early pioneer in aerial photography, forever expanding our knowledge of geography. Dith Pran, who told us his story in “The Killing Fields”

The actors, Suzanne Pleshette , Richard Widmark, Charlton Heston, Roy Scheider, Sydney Pollack, Bernie Mac, George Carlin.

Albert Hofmann, who gave the world LSD, and all of its accoutrements.

Those who died stupid deaths, Brad Renfro, Heath Ledger, and LeRoi Moore, saxophonist, taken via an ATV accident.

Paul Newman, where do we put him? An actor, an icon an activist. Brilliant businessman, by the time he died, he’d raised a quarter of a billion dollars, to benefit a bunch of strangers. He arranged for his fundraising and charity work to go on without him.

Dr. Michael E. DeBakey, he gave us bypass surgery, and a bunch of other trinkets to keep us alive and healthy. Judah Folkman, who believed and proved that if you kept the blood flow away from a tumor, the cancer couldn’t spread.

For their politics, Jesse Helms, William F. Buckley Jr., Richard Darman, Tony Snow, And former Indonesian president, Suharto.

The musicians, Bo Diddley, whose innovative style helped define rock and roll. Cachao. Isaac Hayes. Levi Stubbs, of The Four Topps. Richard Wright, of Pink Floyd. Dave McKenna, considered to be the best pianist alive, he was 78.

Cyd Charisse, and Eartha Kitt, each admired and desired to the very end.

Sunny von Bulow, and Betty Paige, both widely believed to be dead for decades, now actually are.

Reporters, Alan Lupo Tim Russert Studs Terkel, Don Gillis, Jim McKay and Jerry Wexler, of Billboard Magazine, he coined the phrase rhythm and blues.

Marie Smith Jones was the last of the Eyaks. She left with us dictionary, just in case anybody ever wants to learn the language that died with her.

This isn’t anywhere near everybody. There have been many more quietly contributing, teaching, mentoring, loving and being loved, none easy feats. People have been doing the things worth doing. Things that make the difference, although they may have been overlooked, they haven’t gone unnoticed.

Adieu.

Still?

Why are people still vilifying Caroline Kennedy, for applying for a job? What is up with that? She’s perfectly qualified, knows the industry, all the right people, and with the glaring exception of Hillary Clinton, pretty much everybody returns her phone calls.

Although it has been reported that HRC "told her supporters not to involve her in their efforts to stop Caroline Kennedy's path to the U.S. Senate" it doesn’t really seem that they’re exactly backing off. More like they’re trying not to leave HRC’s fingerprints on the matter. I happen to think that's a bit slippery. But what do I know. (I have the same opinion of James Carville using HRC's email list to solicit money for Media Matters, which was founded by Hillary Clinton, for Hillary Clinton.)

By the by, where is Howard Wolfson? Isn’t he supposed to be charging in, his spinning flail at the ready to fell all those who dare denigrate a fellow democrat? Why is he waiting?

It seems to me that some people do not want Gov. Patterson to appoint anybody to the soon to be vacated seat. It seems that they’re offended that anybody would try to get the gig. Well then, maybe Hillary Clinton should serve out her term, and just hope that the Secretary of State position remains unfilled for the next two years. Either that, or just act like a grown up.

Empty seat...

Why is every opportunity afforded to a woman, who isn't Hillary Clinton, a slap in the face of Hillary Clinton? Seriously, this has been old for a while. Caroline Kennedy may be up the HRC's vacated Senate seat, why is this an insult to Hillary Clinton? Just because she endorsed Barrack Obama? The guy who gave Hillary Clinton the job she wanted almost as much as she wanted to be president? Is this for real? Clinton surrogates running around avenging the Kennedy endorsement of Obama, to what end? Are they trying to alienate the incoming democratic president?

Hillary Clinton has said that she is respecting Governor Paterson by keeping silent, she also claims that nobody speaks for her. Ummm, why is that considered good enough?

The Kennedys have done a lot for the Clintons, they opened many doors for them. Yes, back in the days before Bill Clinton became president, but also more recently. Ted Kennedy called HRC's appointment "outstanding" thus smoothing some of the ruffled feathers in Obama's circle. HRC should have reciprocated the gesture. She could have shown respect for everybody who ever suggested that she had class.

She should denounce the comments made by Hank Sheinkopf and Gary Ackerman as sexist. In doing so, she could show the Obama people that she is in fact an Obama team player, and not just out for what she can get for herself.

Gay Out Day

So it's December 10, aka, "call in gay to work" day. It's foolish, but I don't mind somebody having a day off. It's the sort of thing that grabs a few people some headlines, a few minutes of air time on TV, but accomplishes nothing much. I would advise against it. In some areas, people who participate in this action will lose their jobs, and they won't have much, if any, recourse. They're putting themselves, their jobs at risk, for somebody else's name to be in the paper. Big deal.

Those of you, who work for companies sympathetic to your cause, are punishing the wrong people. Those who are working for companies unsympathetic, will be punished. Can anybody honestly say that there is no positioning in their workplace? Of course not. This action will be used against you. Not necessarily because there's any malice at all, but because you handed a professional rival a weapon, and naively expected them not to use it.

Best thing is to protect your own interest, do the work. Put your partner's name on documents, see a lawyer, sign the power of attorney, etc. Yes it's a hassle, but it isn't much different than heterosexual couples.

Of course, do what you want. I think it's a silly idea to try to intimidate people into changing their minds. They'll come around on their own. Worst case, people get upset, push back, and what's already on it's way, gets slowed down. Best case, you get to hang and dine with converts. Eventually, those converts will expect to say the meal's blessing, and let's be honest, the concert version of Freebird takes less time then a convert saying grace. Sometimes all you can do is pick your poison. Just so everybody knows, it's okay to eat your food at the correct temperature. It's fine, really. Just saying.

Ed Rendell

So Ed Rendell, a man of a certain age, got caught on a hot mic. I don't agree that he said anything wrong. He didn't say that Janet Napolitano should "get a life" he spoke as somebody who has actually run something.

Anybody who has ever run a business, or a town, or a state, knows that it is hard. You want to be "fair" but when you hire somebody to do a job, that person is expected to do that job. The only reason to hire somebody to do a job, is so that the job will get done. It isn't about whether the person is a dutiful child to aging parents, or a good parent to growing children, or pretty enough to be popular,it's about getting the job done. That's it, that's all. If you pay people to do a job, that doesn't get done, when you need it done, you don't stay in business long, which puts you and all of your other employees out of work, which is bad for the economy.

Janet Napolitano is an accomplished woman. If she sees fit to call Ed Rendell on his comments, she'll do that. If it were me, I'd call him up, and laugh.

This is just another ginned up controversy, created by those who have never run a business, a town or a state. Cambell Brown is not old enough to be of a certain age, but she is of a certain mentality. Why is she perpetuating this we women are all victims nonsense? What is she trying to accomplish? Why aren't women of accomplishments teaching the younger ones how to navigate their lives, how to negotiate better deals? It might be less fun than wallowing in your own status as victum, but certainly more fruitful.

Wash v Hitchens

Anybody see that exchange between Joan Walsh and Christopher Hitchens? How embarrassing. Walsh did not smack-down Hitchens, in my opinion, she embarrassed herself, and women in general.

What is it about women of a certain age, acting as if all they are obligated to do is declare some man in the wrong? Was Hitchens trying to get her back a little bit for her "that's your opinion" remark? Certainly. So what? Why couldn't she return the return push? Why limit your response to crying foul? What kind of bone fides come from having a drink with Christopher Hitchens? Going to his house? Really, I do feel like that's too much information. At least she didn't complain about him not calling the next day.

TBA HRC?

Why did nobody tell me, that the reason HRC refused to end her presidential campaign even after she had lost, was so that she could get cute with the FEC rules? Yes, of course it's smarmy and underhanded, but at least it makes sense.

It took a while after she'd utterly and completely lost the nomination for her to publicly suspend her campaign. She used the word suspend, because it has no legal meaning, much like the word, is, while throwing her support behind Obama, so that she could bargain with the nominee. She forced Ed Rendell, and Charlie Rangel to bark her back, inviting the umbrage of women of a certain age. According to Mark Penn's polling firm, those women are angry.

I don't get why Bill Clinton should be lauded for straighten up and flying right. Should he not have been acting ethically all this time? Why exactly is he to be believed?

If she is appointed SOS, does that mean she'll have to return all those campaign contributions that she hasn't already spent? Does it mean that she will be unable to reach into her husband's pocket to pay back her debts? In this economy, why shouldn't the rich pay their vendors?

Prop 8

So Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has asked that the court to deem Prop 8 unconstitutional. That’s kinda nice, isn’t it? He’s of course, correct. Prop 8 should not have been put on the ballot. We Americans do not do as we please because somebody says we can, but because we are Americans. That’s it.

The question of, “why do you care?” is the wrong question. Everybody feels strongly about some things, but it usually isn’t the same things. It was wrong to put that on the ballot, because by putting it on the ballot, people were forced to express an opinion. Most people don’t want to be in other people’s private business. They pretty much know what’s going on, but if they’re not forced to acknowledge it, they’d rather go about their business, without making a fuss. Which really ought to suit everybody. But by putting it on the ballot, voting against Prop 8 would have made them complicit in something they, and those who have always loved them, have always believed to be a sin. Something just not right. It is at their base, and they cannot change it any more than the gays, can change what is at their base.

The real reason this fight is happening is because everybody seems to want to use the issue. The gays because they want some sort of external validation, and the Mormons want it so that they can counter balance the impression given the nation and the world via the success of HBO’s Big Love.

We know how this is going to end, the only choice to make is whether we get there acting like a bunch of damn fools, protesting and counter protesting, going out of our respective ways in order to make things more uncomfortable than they need to be, or are things going to get done properly? That means, doing the work. The work that's already done, a hundred thousand times, even though it seems nothing has ever been accomplished. It means knowing that there will always be those (with their own self esteem problems) saying despicable things to and about you, duping others into repeating and re-repeating the party line, and it isn’t your option to publicly snivel about it. Public sniveling is obnoxious, and it emboldens those who would strike out at you. Better to lick your wounds (if you have any) in private, allowing anyone who wants to, to consider you arrogant. Why not? Aside from rocks under your wheels, the Evil Eye, and a bad reputation, what have such people ever giving you?

Truth is, none of this could matter less. Really. The thing to do is to look out for yourself. When you know you’re in trouble, try to spy the incoming haymaker. Just do what you need to do.

This isn’t going to end through some magnificent moment, it’ll come quietly, nearly unnoticed. Live your life the way you need. If that means signing a power of attorney, so that your partner can make medical decisions, or whatever, then that is what you do. It’s a form, just paperwork, and if it has any bearing on how you feel about yourself, you really do have bigger problems.

Hillary as Secretary of State?

So the Clintons have put fourth a rumor that Hillary Clinton has been offered the post as Secretary of State, and is now thinking over the appointment. I'm sorry. If you believe this, there is something wrong with you. It simply doesn't make sense, at least not on its own.

If you put it in the context of Hillary Clinton's peers still talking her both up and (albeit unintentionally) down. Susan Estrich recently promoted HRC's electability by saying any democrat would have won the White House this year. Which is possibly true, but completely erroneous, as only one democrat had the nomination. It's also dangerous to make that point, as it reminds us all that there is nothing special about Hillary Clinton. Couple that with Bonnie Erbe's recent piece about how the Clintons "are being taken to the cleaners" and we've entered into a world of the ridiculous.

Erbe complains that Obama's disinterest in paying off the Clinton debt is somehow an act of misogyny. She criticises Michelle Obama's plan to raise and protect her daughters, as if such a plan were somehow retro, while complimenting the way Hillary Clinton raised Chelsea. Odd, apparently in Erbe's mind neither Bill nor Barrack merit any mention on the matter.

This is just being used as leverage for the Clintons to strong arm the new president. Barrack Obama is not Hillary Clinton's father. Barrack Obama is not Hillary Clinton's husband. Barrack Obama is not Hillary Clinton. Her debt is her responsibility. It's part of the package known as equality. If she so chooses to reach into her husband's pocket and pay off all of those small vendors, it would be a really good idea. The people she owes work for a living. They extended her credit because of her husband's name, and they should be paid.

Potty Joe

Somebody said something that was wrong. Wait seven seconds for it, now. Hahahahaha!

Outfits

So the Palin family spent $150k on clothes, so what? I really mean that. They had to buy things on the fly, they didn't feel they had the time to wait for a sale, or even comparison shop. Alaskan fashion has got to be a little different, and of course the campaign wanted them to make a good impression. As clothes do make the man, by extension, they should also make the woman. Plus, let's face it, Sarah Palin has had to be on stage with Cindy McCain. I imagine that it was easier to dress up Sarah Palin and her family, than it would have been to dress down Cindy McCain.

Lighten up folks. I don't mind her keeping the clothes. Think it through, $150k worth of clothes isn't much compensation for being publicly outed as a gimmick. In the grand scheme of things, this really is a small matter.

Colin Powell

Colin Powell has made a career out of being in the military; he’s a retired General. A National Security Advisor, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Secretary of State. He knows that wars are won and lost, based not primarily on the hearts or minds of the combatants, who’s right, or who’s wrong, or on whose side God is on, but mostly on technology. The side with the better weapons, the better supplies, better transportation, communication, organization, enthusiasm, wins. I think he wants wins for this country, and I think he sees the best likelihood for those wins in Barrack Obama.

Obama’s use of the Internet is a true sea change. It is the new technology that is helping him win the election, yes, but it is so much more than that.

What is the Internet to you? To me, it’s my TV. My recipe box. A self-updating Rolodex. It’s a telephone, (I’ll go days and days without making a call, nearly never does a day go by, when I’m not online.) It’s my personal research library. My dictionary. A classroom. A community center, where the community is the whole wide world and nobody minds what I’m wearing. If I’m wearing. It’s my weather bug, my first aid consultant, my travel agent, my shopping mall, flea market. But of course, that’s just me, I’m sure you have your own uses.

It’s Obama’s use of this medium that has so Powell impressed. He sees the corner being turned, it’s a specialty among leaders, seeing around the corners. Powell and Obama seem to see that in each other. Leadership.

I wasn’t surprised by Powell endorsement of Obama. I’m not surprised that he’s taking heat for it, but Powell probably isn’t about that surprised either.

I do wonder if Colin Powell is surprised to learn that Jamaica is related to Kenya, or is even a part of Africa. Hello Rush Limbaugh. He thinks this endorsement is all about race, and although he’s totally wrong, he’s also right, in a twisted sort of way. Colin Powell has been respected (among white folks) for decades. Most didn’t know the difference between Jamaica and Africa, so the assumption holds. But it isn’t race loyalty. Powell, who has been long trusted universally, by his endorsement, is helping to ease the transition. Most of these (white) people have never cheated anybody in business, worn a white hood, or even used the dreaded N-word, but they’re still a bit nervous. They think, or like to think, if what has happened to others had happened to them, they’d jump at the chance to get some of their own back. Sure, it seems racial, but it’s really not.

Colin Powell is doing this for American Unity. He’s helping to put people at ease, just as Barrack Obama made that same statement in choosing Joe Biden as a running mate. The message being, you don’t have to be impeccable, to be on the right side of things.

This is going to work out. Remember to vote. Remember that you are alone in that voting booth, whether or not your hand shakes as you vote, is nobody’s business, but your own. Be gentle with yourself, you'll know what to do.

Bubba in VA

So Bill Clinton is  going to stump for Obama in Virginia... I guess that means that Virginia is in the tank for Obama, and Bill Clinton wants people to think that he helped.  The Clintons are in an interesting position, because of their relationship with Terry McAuliffe, they have a network of people who could and should want to elect a democrat as president, but the Clintons have made it known that these people are more like the Clintons' personal pets, which totally busted them.  The Clintons have no other option than to stump for Obama, lest they bust themselves further.

My theory is that Terry McAuliffe arranged for Bill Clinton to come to Virginia, and try to trick the public into thinking that he will have something to do with the state going to Obama.  The state has been turning blue for a number of years, particularly in Northern Virginia, where people actually live.  Terry McAuliffe is now he eyeing the Virginia governor's mansion,  and finding it attractive.  I guess he's just a little bored and he sees that the future is with Obama.  He probably figures, that arranging for Bill and Hillary Clinton to behave themselves is likely a good way to endear himself... 

The Palin/Couric Conspiracy?

Anybody else smell a set up here? Palin does an interview with Couric, Couric comes off as tough, mostly because she wants to know what kind of newspapers and magazines Palin reads, but Palin, sounding like a child who gotten caught not doing her homework, doesn't answer. This lowers expectations for the debate for Palin, while at the same time, it brandishes Couric's reputation. She comes off as tough, smart and much less perky... everybody's happy.

What of the debate... men are starting to resent Palin. They don't see her as respectful, to the office, or to them. She didn't answer the questions posed.  She used nonsensical sentences and the winking is beginning to pass as a tic. Nobody wants a vice president who wiggles to any phrase, not even,  drill, baby, drill. 

It's using the main stream media, to complain about the main stream media. If she's annoyed that the main stream media exists, then she can go around them. She can set up a web-cam in her house, and while she's looking at Russia, she can say anything she wants, dog-whistle anybody she wants, all in the comfort of her own home.  While still enjoying her per diem, she can bypass all those pesky reporters, doing their jobs.  

Honestly, I don't know if they staged all of this or not, but if it isn't staged, Rove's losing his touch.

Talky talky talky...

So Congress is still talking about a plan to bail out, or rescue the economy. That's nice. But talking about a solution, isn't the same this as having the solution. Jerking everybody around, is the same as adding to the problem. Come on, folks, pick something. A controlled stream of money, with full transparency, is a perfectly viable way to go. But a decision has to be made.

No Bailout?

I am a little perturbed that the House failed to pass the bailout bill. I'll be fine, although, I will have to get my symphony and opera tickets one show at a time, like a heathen. I've played poor before, and enjoyed it. A long time ago, I had a studio apartment, in Phoenix, where a lot of students and laborers lived. It was horribly unfashionable, but completely safe, near a number of car dealerships. My neighbors and I had a pot luck supper, a good three or four times a week, and they were wonderful! In this context, a pot luck is really whatever. That is to say, a part of a meal, a bag of chips, some dip, or even two or three dollars that we could pool into a case of really bad beer. If you were too broke for that, it was cool. Just come, you'll make it up next time. Pretty much, everybody did. When I got promoted, I moved into a nicer place. It was nicer, but much less fun. Although in hindsight, I'm sure I would've gotten bored with our little dinners, I certainly didn't think so, nor would I have said so, at the time.

What surprised me more then the House failing to protect the American economy, was a reason why... Barney Frank is saying that republicans had been offended by Nancy Pelosi's remarks. I didn't see her remarks, and I have no difficulty in believing that she used some hyperbole, but for republicans to vote against a measure, that is this important, because a democrat said something snotty, is a little ridiculous. It sounds like something a Hillary-Head would say, to justify the switch from a liberal position to a conservative one. A very high toned pretense of spite. What is that about? So what if one of your co-workers happened to tick you off, what does that have to do with your job? Nobody cares that this bill was put fourth by an unpopular president, whether or not he's liked, we expect him to do his job, and he did do it. It was the House that didn't.

To Bail, or Not To Bail...

So, last week, Congress had a deal to fix the economy, but then John McCain felt a little left out of the picture, so he came swooping into Washington, and stopped the deal. Well why not? He's not a guy who has to worry about his rent... It's not that I mind bipartisanship on such an important matter, but this crisis has been brewing for a long while, and we shouldn't have to make accommodations for those who show up tardy to the party. Congress had no business being taken by surprise. Now it's stalled again. The House may vote on it today, but the Senate won't until Wednesday, there's a religious holiday.

It just seems to me that somebody's deliberately stalling, allowing somebody's conception of perfection get in the way of good. The truth is, the fix doesn't need to be perfect, it just needs to make sense. The market's going crazy not so much because conditions, as much as it knows new rules are on the way, and it doesn't know what those new rules are. Once the decision is made, the market will adjust. The market has an inherent gyroscope, that will provide direction, to those who know how to read its signs. At the moment, you've got billionaires bargain shopping, that's a good sign, but it often comes with a scary result. Too few people, owning too great a proportion of everything...

Congress, make a deal. Make it good, solid, quick, and make it make sense. We understand that somebody's going to lose. But the sooner that's decided, the sooner those folks get to start again. We are paying attention, and we know who is saying what, so don't let us down.

Debate, or no debate...

So John McCain wants to weasel out on the debate for tonight. He seems to do a lot of canceling. I'm of course thinking of the convention that he shortened due to the weather elsewhere in the country. This time he wants to reschedule due to economic conditions...huh? Congress is considering what to do, and John McCain wants to concentrate on the crisis. Shouldn't he have already been briefed? Wouldn't this debate be a good opportunity to explain to us taxpayers just what is going on? How did we get in this mess, and how much it's going to cost us to get us out. What's the plan? Personally, I'd like something a little more comprehensive than a public impression of Salome. To my mind, when you're in a crisis, might be best not to fire the person most likely to be able to do something about it. I'm not an economist, or a politician, and who can really say, what a good idea is or isn't. But why not have a public conversation about it? It's possible that some of us, just may learn something.

The View with Bill Clinton

How disturbing was that? Did he make it a condition that all the women wear dresses? It was just so wrong. Even Whoopi? Please don't misunderstand me, I like dresses. I like the shoes. Open toe sandals, go-go boots, and pumps that can hold a shine...I like the way I feel when I'm wearing a dress. Few things so nice as a pencil skirt, or a proper A-line, with just a little bit of play, to take over my attitude, and make my hips sway... but nobody makes me wear one! The ladies of the View are not, as a whole, a dress wearing bunch, they looked so uncomfortable. For that sofa, that angle, and that company, most of their skirts were too short. Although I will give a hat tip to whoever decided to put Hasselbeck so far away from him, good decision.

Bad decision to talk about sexism. Bill Clinton got himself impeached because he perjured himself about a sexual harassment suit. Don't give him an opportunity to excuse his conduct. Men know when they're out of line. Using a sports analogy is not sexist. It's just not. If by some random chance you use an analogy that I don't understand, I will either ask for an explanation, or I will conduct myself as an adult, and google the phrase myself. Let's not act like namby-pamby nit wits.

Men, relax, be who you are. You're probably a pretty decent guy. Course if you're not, if you truly are an SOB, the sooner I have that piece of information, the better.

This is the third presidential election since Bill Clinton left office. He hasn't put out real effort for any democratic presidential candidate. Nobody should be surprised that he isn't putting out much effort now.

Get a Grip

The question isn't whether or not John McCain was injured ENOUGH while he was a POW. We just don't want to be insulted. It was not John McCain, claiming his injuries kept him off-line, that was Karl Rove. John McCain said that he was learning to get online. Because as we all know, pointing at an icon and clicking it, is very complicated.

Anybody who wants to get online, gets online.

Susan Estrich has no business raising her voice to anybody. For the past 35 years, she's built an enviable professional resume, promoting causes that made her feel as if the high road was hers. Even through all of her inconsistencies, people did believe that she meant well. It's becoming harder to believe that now. She is still a matron of a very elite professional and social circle, she should remember herself in that.

So What?

So, Lynn Forrester de Rothschild is formally coming out on behalf of John McCain. What a burn! As Hillary Clinton couldn't speak to her own personal and rich friend and get her to act like a democrat, what exactly is she good for? Hillary Clinton has not spoken against de Rothschild's public silly rants, she hasn't spoken against the Hillaryis44 website, it's almost as if she doesn't want to see a democrat in the White House. Hmmm.

Nice try...

So Karl Rove is telling us that the reason John McCain isn't online is because he's a war hero, who gladly gave up his ability to type, so that we could remain free. Huh? His hands don't work properly, due to the torture he suffered while a POW, in the 1970's. According to Rove, McCain can't tie his shoes, I'm not sure if he can button his shirt, or if he needs assistance when nature calls.

I am sure, however, if I were a beer heiress, it isn't likely that I would be going online for my husband, the partially crippled war hero. I'd have a staff. If I were to marry a partially crippled war hero, he'd have a valet, to help him dress. He'd have a personal secretary to go online for him, I wouldn't be the one doing it.

Props to Karl Rove for taking the shot, but if there is a medical reason for John McCain not being online, it would be mentioned in his medical records. Nice try, big boy...

No Catfight?

So according to Howard Wolfson, there will be no cat-fight between Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin. Who the hell does he think he is, using sexist words like cat-fight? Exactly who is he trying to fool, and why?

I know Hillary Clinton billed herself as a fighter, but she's really much more of a sucker-puncher. She only fights those who can't, or won't defend themselves. Do we all remember how tough she was, as she cowered away from Steven Kluger's Vassar housemate, aka, Rick "look at my butt" Lazio? At this point in time, it is very awkward for a man and woman to go toe to toe, a point that Hillary Clinton used to her advantage, and it's the same point that Sarah Palin will be using to her advantage, if she's allowed...

I also know that there are those who say that the Clintons don't owe the Obamas anything. I say that the Democratic Party has been very, very good to the Clintons, to the detriment of itself, and the Clintons owe the Democratic Party a little something, something. Let's remember, it was democrats that prevented Bill Clinton from going to prison. He did commit perjury, people do go to jail for that. Bill Clinton, because of the democrats, was allowed to pay a fine. A fine he paid, by using money donated by a third party. Some of those democrats, lost their seats. The Democratic Party, lost control of the House and the Senate, all in an effort to protect and elevate the Clintons.

Now the Democratic Party wants to go to the White House, and the Clintons are being cutesy-wootsey. In a vulgar display of ingratitude, they are negotiating their roles. Using Howard Wolfson to plant sexist expressions, so that sexist expressions can be denounced!

You-who, Outrage, where are you?

Sarah Palin

So this past Friday, everybody's favorite, Susan Estrich, who is not shy about letting folks know that she and Hillary Clinton, then Hillary Rodham went to school together, used the bold type to state that women are not fungible. For all the non-lawyers out there, fungible is an expensive, albeit grungy sounding word that basically means interchangeable. Because of her long-standing relationship with the Clintons, she naturally took offense that John McCain would choose a woman, who isn't Hillary Clinton, as his running mate. She makes clear that Sarah Palin is not a stand-in for Hillary Clinton.

I've been having a hard time figuring out whether Hillary Clinton is upset at John McCain, or not. Is John McCain doing Hillary Clinton a favor, possibly creating a larger role for her in Barrack Obama's campaign? Is she taking it personally? Why would she? Isn't this what she worked towards all her life, or at least 35 years of experience? She and McCain have been friends for decades, would he deliberately snub her? Or is it just strategy? Did anybody think Sarah was supposed to be a stand in, for anybody? She is a republican. Maybe John McCain thinks that there are some lady republicans who might enjoy voting for a woman, who agrees with them? Just saying, why shouldn't people of all ideologies get a shot? Why should every woman politician be only valid as a reflection of Hillary Clinton? Why should the nation behave as if she somehow has dibs, and no other woman should ever aspire? Why should we assume that every voting woman, only wanted to vote for Hillary Clinton? People disagree all the time, why not women?

At least Susan Estrich was a little less venomous in today's opinion piece. She's still playing the victim card, and still over-playing the sexism. People are allowed to ask Sarah Palin questions about motherhood. Having a child with Down syndrome is a thing. I don't much care myself, I'm sure she has a nanny, or a nurse or the husband and other children to help, but I can see why folks would want to know. (Please be much more gentle with the children, even the ones having children, none of that was necessary.) Of course it's only been a couple of days, and a holiday weekend, I think everything will find it's own level. I just hope we don't have to use that fungible word again. ICK.

I think part of the problem with these feminist from the '60's is that they expect everybody to be the ideal that they dreamed up in the dorm rooms. Not everybody has the same level of education, same kind of childhood, same this, that or the other thing. We Americans, are not a monolithic group. Instead of being angry and asking, "would that question be asked of a man?" why not also ask that question of a man? Sometimes, answers do come, and occasionally the answer is different than we expect. Let's have the conversations, give each other ideas, and just see what happens.

I can certainly understand why Sarah Palin's nomination would be tough for the likes of Susan Estrich. They are completely opposed on issues, and Susan Estrich had something to do with Geraldine Ferro's nod and felt like she had a stake in Hillary Clinton's run too. Sarah Palin is the first woman to be in this position without Susan Estrich's hand in the mix. No wonder she's mad.

Kennedy's Appearance

Senator Kennedy does another great speech. He spoke of the past, as he leaned into the future. He used his stature to herald the nominee, and he did it with style, gravitas and gorgeous hair.

Senator Kennedy, and Senator Obama have a fluidity. Most of the Kennedys endorsed Barrack Obama early, and often. They've always shared the same dream that Dr. King brought into the populous with his famous speech. These are people willing to work and sweat for the ideals that others have only talked about.

Ted kennedy, an imperfect and mortal man, is deliberately using his final time on this earth not to aggrandize himself, but to ensure that the rest of us, whom he leaves behind, will have security, the drive and the vehicle to build for ourselves the very best future. Senator Edward Kennedy could have passed the torch to anybody. He chose Barrack Obama, because in his judgement, Barrack Obama is ready carry it high, and let it light the way for others. I think that's pretty cool. I'm confident that it's the stuff from which true immortality comes.

Kill Joy!

Susan Estrich is at it again. Still. Whatever. She's upset because she's only in with the old crowd. She's undermining the nominee, calling him juvenile. Rebukes by Rep. Clyburn be damned!

She's also excusing John McCain's senior moment, I guess maybe because she gets them too.

We get it. You're angry and hurt that your friend didn't win, and you want to make sure that since you're not enjoying this, that nobody else is either. Now who's being childish?

Liar, liar...

Susan Estrich needs to stop lying to people about her friends, the Clintons. She's continuing to tell people that all Barrack Obama had to do, was pay off her debts. 20-25 million dollars was all he had to raise, and he would have had his convention all to himself. That Terry McAuliffe would have been dispatched (you remember Terry McAuliffe, he was a pretty big deal, and then Bill Clinton brought him to Africa, on a borrowed plane, which broke. They must have left him to weasel out wampum from the indigenous people there, as nobody seems to have heard from him since) to pay the debts and unite the party. What a lie. She knows why Hillary Clinton's campaign debt went unpaid. Everybody who was even a little bit aware of the the negotiations of the Michigan delegates knows why Obama hasn't paid Hillary Clinton's many bills. You remember the argument, Clinton was to get all of her delegates, and because Obama kept his agreement not to be on the ballot, even though 40% of the people who showed up to vote, followed Obama's instructions to check the uncommitted box, Obama was to receive zero delegates. That is the Clinton sense of proportion. The Clintons would have happily, although not graciously accepted them money. Bill Richardson recently had a fundraiser in New Mexico, where he's the governor, to help pay down HRC's debt. She dissed him on the stage.

The Clintons would not have behaved themselves. Obama got the best deal anybody could have gotten. Think it through, 20 million dollars is a lot of money, to me and you, but to the Clintons? They have a hundred million dollars, "his" and "hers" mansions, and a lifetime of getting free money each and every time they asked. Think it through, how much money have the Clinton collected of the past 35 years? Bill's atty. general runs? AR governors races, his two presidential terms, the money he raised to protect himself from the sexual harassment charges, the perjury and so fourth. Hillary Clinton's two (cough) senate runs, and what about the Clinton Library, or the foundation? No, the Clintons are used to collecting free money, as greedy as they are, it just isn't a thing.

What they want, need is attention. Their star has faded, and they want it resurrected. Failing a resurrection, they want the appearance of a resurrection, the illusion that they somehow remain relevant, which of course, they're not. The reason they can't stand Barrack Obama, isn't just because they're petty people who can't stand being beat, but because he personifies what the Clintons could only talk about. The best they can do is sabotage other democrats, while reminding everybody of the Clinton success. Bill Clinton was inclined to pass a cigar to somebody of the next generation, but when it came to passing the torch, he didn't. Who has been mentored by either Clinton?

People like Susan Estrich, protect and promote the Clintons, not because they're friends, because they have a relationship of mutuality. In elevating the Clintons, however falsely, she gets to maintain her place with the cool kids, showing her mother that she is pretty enough to be popular. Also, she gets to get paid. For a long time, she's been on Fox as the Clintons' champion, which made sense, but now that Fox is Clinton surrogate heavy, it just doesn't anymore.

Logic

When everybody laughed at Lady de Rothschild, for calling Barrack Obama the E-Word, she kind of dropped from sight, leaving her partner, Amy Siskind, to take a turn as HRC's hit-woman. Well, she did go back to London, England, where she proceeded to call Obama the E-word again, this time from out of the country.

Course you've got Susan Estrich comparing John Edwards' conduct to Russia's invasion of Georgia, while pretending that the stain Bill Clinton left on Monica Lewinsky's dress was his one and only assignation. She also lists the reasons why Bill Clinton was entitled.

I think that it was terribly unkind for Clinton's people to intimidate the Edwards family as they have. Elizabeth Edwards is dying, if she wants to live out the last year or so of her life with her eyes glued shut, and her thumbs in her ears, well then that shouldn't be any less her prerogative as it remains Hillary Clinton's. The Edwards family have things to get in order. Plans for their children's futures, and precious little time to waste watching high-toned hypocrites showcase their schadenfreude. Elizabeth Edwards might have had something interesting to say at the convention, but we won't hear her voice, as she's unlikely to go. Her children will soon have only their father, they're going to need him.

It's hardly the first time a family dealing with a big, scary, crisis came together, and when the crisis began to ebb, somebody went and did the wrong thing. Is he getting a little cute with the details? Probably. But I'm guessing. I have my own problems, and no dog in that fight.

I don't think that it's too much to ask, when playing the hypocrisy card, that a little logic be included.

Hillary's got a new hit squad.

The Hillary Heads are at it again, still, whatever. They took members of the old groups, that support Hillary Clinton, and formed another one, they're calling it a family. Ahhhh.

In their press release, they state that they want to help women, discourage domestic violence, give 20% more of party (not their own money, party money) money to women running office, then their male counter-parts. They want to help women establish and run small business, (why they don't want to help women establish and run big businesses, is not something they mention) They want equal pay, mandatory maternity leave, and to win all the dorm room debates of the 1970's. But most of all, they want Chris Matthews fired. According to Rachel Maddow, he is solely responsible for HRC's victory in New Hampshire. They wanted him (and unnamed others) fired so much, that they stated it in their press release. They've since scrubbed it from later versions, but click the link, over on your right, and you can see it in original form.

Anybody else mind that these people are trying to get somebody fired, because he didn't show proper respect for their favorite politician?

John Edwards

I know that my progressive friends blame the evil republicans for the National Enquirer story, they're wrong. (I've seen the pictures, they don't tell me enough. I don't know if the story is true or not.) The evil republicans are not behind it. It doesn't do the evil republicans any good to break such a story now. They would much rather sit on a story like this, and break it on their time-table. So whose good does it do to break the story now? John Edwards was probably going to get a pretty good speaking spot at the democratic national convention. Let's think, who is currently negotiating for speaking times at the democratic national convention? If only somebody would come to mind...

Decisions?

So last night, Barrack Obama reached the magic number to become the party's nominee. HRC on the other hand, held her speech in a basement. Her audience sequestered, they had no elitist cell phone service to get the news that HRC did not win. HRC made no mention of the fact that she did not win.

John McCain even read a few words off of HRC's script, calling the former first lady his friend, and implying that it wasn't the people who refused HRC, but TV's talking heads and the DNC's establishment. After all, the DNC refusing to tailor their rules for the Clintons is a no-no.

Both McCain and Obama said glowing, if not entirely true things about HRC. Would they have done that to a man? HRC started this contest with every advantage. She relied early and often on the former president, with mixed results to be sure. She had her husband's established political machine, contacts and name. She voted to go to war, without reading the report and never apologized for it. She made up a story about being under enemy attack, and told it often. She cried foul constantly. Her every move was a mulligan. Would a man have done that? Would he have been allowed to do that? Would he have been praised for it?

Now most of realized that HRC was born onto second base, and married onto third. We cringed as she tried to steal home. I say that with some snark of course, but also a greater measure of pity. I admit to some envy of the trappings and opportunities that she takes for granted. That said, there is something very wrong about everything being handed to you. Don't misunderstand me, I have also gotten an occasional break, here and there. Some I'd deserved, others, not at all. I've also gotten a few jobs from family members, or their friends, and I was glad to have the work. But it wasn't from only one source, it was a variety. Although it hasn't always made sense, and the tit for tat was nearly never in balance, I always felt flattered by it. But I've also gotten gigs cold, with little more than a resumé and personal wit to pave my way. Having to get things on your own does something else too, it lets you know that you can. After all, once you already have done what you thought you couldn't do, you truly own something in yourself. It's a thing no entitlement program can ever provide.

She really does seem to feel a spot on the ticket is an entitlement. Bill's angry about it, and I'm waiting for the "deeply offended/ troublesome" line from Hillary. Her husband, the source of all of her professional endeavors is publicly saying that she is entitled to the veep spot. Do you suppose the other veeps in history felt their position was a consolation prize? Is that how we want other countries to see it, some sort of certificate of participation? An affirmation of her status as a plus one? The only decision the Clintons have to make is whether to exit stage right, or left. They have no standing to demand anything from anyone. The Clintons waited until their defeat to negotiate their surrender, not a smart move. (It might have been their only move?) Sure, they can be a nuisance, they're really very good at that, but even with the Clintons on your team, they are never on anybody's team but their own.

I do hope we continue to find some kindness for their supporters. They're basically very good people busy with their own families, jobs and so fourth, who happened to get swept away, sucked in, lead astray, by professionals. The Clintons, in their day, were something. Of course that day was yesterday, the Clintons are the past. The Obamas are the future.

Hillary goes to Church?

Yep Hillary Clinton went to church, and the sermon was about adultery. Does anybody NOT think she or her campaign requested that sermon? She is at her most popular when people are thinking about her husband's girlfriends, even if they've all been morphed into the composite character collectively known as Monica.

Seriously, I think that it is mean to vote for her at this point. I hear that when she gets off her plane, she stops, smiles and waves. Which would be okay, if there were any crowds or cameras there to greet her. What's going on now is just too sad for me to find anything funny about. So I outsource...

Hillary Clinton's Sunset Blvd

Mean to HRC?

Who's being mean to Hillary Clinton? I don't think anybody is being mean to Hillary Clinton. I know Barrack Obama hasn't asked her to drop out. His supporters haven't asked her to drop out. Some late night comics are making fun of her, but that's their bread and butter, it should be expected. By the way, whoever becomes the next president, will be mocked.

To my mind, the Obama people have been very polite to, and about HRC, almost to a fault. They didn't campaign at all in West Virginia. It gave the nation the opportunity to see how impressive HRC can be. We watched her loose her husband, Elmer Gantry, in all those tiny towns and he really wowed them. They have a story to tell the next generation, no matter what happens. The people of West Virginia enjoyed the show, and good for them. Maybe this will spark something in them, prompt them to join the rest of us in the 21st century. I'm sure they mean well, but they've been stagnant for a long time. Access to cable tv and the internet really ought to be improved. Maybe more colleges in the area, I don't know, they need something. The truth is, when Hillary Clinton tries really, really hard, and has absolutely no competition, she and her surrogates can make a great splash.

We're getting near the end. Nobody's picking on her, nobody's pushing anybody around. Well of course, the math is against her, but there isn't much to be done about that.

Reinvented

Who reinvented herself better and more often, Hillary Clinton or Madonna? Discuss.

The 2008 Democratic Race in 7 Minutes

This is helpful.

Don't be mad...

How long are you going to be angry with me Wolfie? It's not like I made some snarky remark about HRC letting a teenage Chelsea go out in a really really short skirt, only to pimp her in adulthood, or something.

Come on Wolfie, use your coconut.

Coconuts, or just nuts?

Something about Hillary Clinton's story regarding Chelsea and the coconut seemed familar...I think it was the rhythm, the cadence of the story as HRC told it. It was the same rhythm and cadence as the story that had her and Chelsea running for cover from snipers.

As HRC tells the story, it was the Clintons' habit to do a group activity, (hitting tennis balls, going to a movie) every Wednesday night. Chelsea had said she'd heard about coconuts but hadn't seen one. So on one of these Wednesday evenings, they went to a store, bought a coconut used a hammer and threw it on the driveway, unable to get it open.

This didn't seem normal. Chelsea Clinton was born in 1980. Bill Clinton retook the governorship in 1982. He remained the governor until he became president. Does any governor, or governor's spouse do any of the grocery shopping? Is there no cook, or other servant in the Governor's Mansion?

I think this is a lie. I think it's a stupid lie. By a stupid woman, who really believes she's smarter than she ever bothered to be. It's a shame.

Obama And Your Mama

I'm CitizenChick, and I approve of this message...

Mickey Kantor Racism Towards Indiana

Tell us, how do you really feel?

Hillary Clinton:

Poor Wolfie...

God Bless Us

"Rich people, God bless us. We deserve all the opportunities to make sure our country and our blessings continue until the next generation."

Hillary Clinton said that. On tape. Poor Wolfie.

Cleaning up

So Hillary is going to remedy NAFTA, mandatory drug sentences, and Magnequench’s factory closing because George Bush didn’t stop it.

Weren’t those all Bill Clinton’s doings?

Party

The White House Corespondents dinner was this past weekend, and it seems that a good time was had by all. The presidential hopefuls were absent, not to worry, the sitting (or standing on a chair) president looked like he had enough fun for all of them. He told jokes, lead the band and stayed up well past his bedtime. How long has he been fun?

Don't forget the margins...

I'm reading that HRC took PA by a 9.2 margin. A comfortable margin to be sure, but not double digits. How many more home states does she have anyway?

HRC takes Penn...

So HRC wins PA, that's nice. We of course don't know by how much, but her spokespeople are saying the size of the margin doesn't matter. Hey Wolfie, trust me, size matters.

Nothing.

I really thought the Clintons would have come up with something this weekend, but no. Nothing. Not unless you count Chelsea Clinton being groped by lesbians in the bars of Philadelphia.

Way to show up David Shuster, the patron saint of hip and cool.

Quick Question

Did the Candidates know the questions before the debate? The reason I ask, how did Wolfie know to have that specific ten year old questionnaire in his hand so quick? Did he know that question was coming, know Obama's answer, and have the questionaire at the ready?

GAY

Mike Piazza' gay. I realize that everybody already knows this, I realize that nobody cares, but I'm saying it anyway in the hope that he will stop harassing me. He's being blackmailed into screwing with me each and every moment of my life. Yes, it is stupid.

Mike, everybody knows you're gay, nobody cares. There isn't any reason to pay extortion. NONE.

Chelsea Clinton Confused About Bosnia Visit

Is anybody else disgusted?

Hillary WASN'T LYING! Bosnia gunfire footage discovered...

Candidate in the Wind

I think you'll like this...I sure did!

Elton in NY

Was it okay for Elton John, a non-US citizen to give that concert? I know that HRC says that it's fine for anyone to volunteer their time in support of her, but I'm wondering. It wasn't as if the man was stuffing envelopes, he's on Rolling Stone Magazine's list of immortals. His music is a product. His band was surely paid (I hope, though I won't guess by whom) was this really legal? Two million dollars raised is a healthy amount of money, but it won't pay back HRC's loan.

It was bad form to slam Ronald Reagan. The man's been out of office for nearly twenty years. He's also been on the brown side of the grass for a few. It made the papers, odd that he didn't hear.

It was certainly bad form of him to criticize this nation, calling us misogynist, just because few of us support her. I wouldn't support anybody who got caught doing and saying the things she got caught doing and saying. I don't appreciate being called a bad person over it. There is an entire nation at stake, not to mention our effect on the rest of the world, this should be more important than a bitter woman's opportunity to save a little face.

This country has been very good to Elton John, and I've enjoyed his music for years. I won't be boycotting him, but he's not likely to come out with much more anyway. He does have plenty of laurels on which to rest. I just can't help but feel a little sad, he's gotten so very cranky in his old age, but I guess that's HRC's demographic.

Penn's Place

I'm a little confused...is Mark Penn still with the Clinton campaign, or not? Was he fired, did he quit, or was he simply demoted?

Name calling...

Odd, how Bill Clinton doesn’t give a rip about the name-calling that’s going on, when it was his wife whining about it. These resignations only started happening when the Clinton camp took on that high tone in an effort to make Chelsea appear more precious than everybody else’s adult daughter. The Obama camp was supposed to have more reverence for Hillary Clinton. Bubba is tacking this way now because his wife’s camp has had to sacrifice a few outspoken supporters, because the Obama camp did it back.

Let’s think about 1992, BILL Clinton was running for president, against, (let’s just call him) HW. Now HW was vice president for the eight years that Ronald Reagan a very popular albeit republican president. At the time, HW was the incumbent, a 12-year run for the republicans in the White House. Americans were a bit bored with this, enter Bill Clinton. Who gave the impression that he was interesting? It was a false impression, but it fooled us for a while. He had a colorful staff, most noted, James Carville a loud-mouthed mumbler, who not only worked out an arrangement with the ghost-writer of “Wedding Crashers” but also, ugly as he is, managed to cast himself in the part of lothario, playing opposite of HW’s campaign manager Mary Matalin. Really, that’s what happened. Each camp needed the hyperbole. They needed it to distract everyone else from the visual of Carville and Matalin getting it on, with each other… Now, you understand why nobody got fired for talking about the bimbo eruptions?

Carville is using Richardson to open the door for “Jesus” Clinton to deride Reverend Wright, who may not be to your palette, he is also, not a Muslim. I’m just saying…

This begs the question, what use would Obama have for Corporal Cue Ball?

None of our business?

So according to Chelsea Clinton, it is not the voters' business whether her mother's credibility was damaged during her father's affairs and impeachment. She did not say what the voters are permitted to consider our business. Hey Clintons, you are not the only tacky people in this nation. You put us through that, why should we put you in a position to put us through that again?

ERRRRR....

Why is Bill Clinton's impeachment off limits? Seriously. The character of all the other surrogates is fair game, why not Bill Clinton's? Truth is, the Clintons only had to settle a law suit, a suit they did settle, and we would not have known about the blue dress. The stain on the blue dress would have not been anybody's business. The Clintons wanted us to know about the stain on the blue dress. They also wanted us to know how it got there. Now they are saying that even though they insisted on putting such information in the public eye, we the public are somehow the tacky ones? What's up with that?

That said, you gotta still feel bad for poor Wolfie. Today he's stuck not only pretending to be outraged about comments (clever one) about the blue dress while also saying that Hillary Clinton didn't lie about the sniper fire, that she, a self-proclaimed good mother, brought her daughter and a comic and a rock singer into harms way. In spite of the video showing a reception with HRC kissing a little girl.

By the way Wolfie, that was a lie. I understand you're in a sticky wicket, but certain things really are expected...

No Sorry?

Anybody see Susan Estrich subbing on Fox last night? Why is it okay for her to say that? Is that really what's in her heart? I don't know anybody know has conversations like that. Shouldn't somebody demand an apology or something? I realize it was on Fox, but still...

Hillaryland bummers

Bad times for Hillaryland. Texas denies her camp's request that they take special steps to disqualify the caucuses that she didn't win. Florida denies her camp's request that they hold a special election for her, so she could get those delegates. Michigan doesn't want to do a re vote for her. The one shining moment of the day, when Governor Paterson was sworn into office, somebody shouted Barack Obama's name. Of course, that wasn't bad enough, within hours of taking office confirms with NY's Daily News, that he and his wife have each had extra martial affairs. The bitter McGreevey divorce/ child custody battle spills into the press. This surprisingly enough, begs the question, is having extra martial affairs a prerequisite to having an association with Hillary Clinton?

Good Move

So the pro-Clinton bloggers are leaving dailykos, and they're doing it in a tiff. I'm glad, not about them leaving angry, but about them leaving. It shows the Internet is growing, and TV as we know it, will soon be gone. Well, maybe not soon, but it's going.

Just as we have specialty stations, Food Network, Animal Planet, etc., we should have labeled specialties on the Internet too.

Now we will have the liberal blog sphere, and the Clinton blog sphere. Just like the DNC, we have the Democratic Party, and the Clinton Party.

Now the tantrum does show a lack of sophistication, but what the heck, you still showed more maturity than the typical Wellesley woman, trailblazing feminist, who interrupts a man's weekend to whine about some blogger chick hurting her whittle feelings.

All in all, it's a good move. You do it any way you need. Good bye, and good luck. I mean that. I do.

Chill Out!

Bill Clinton's telling everybody to "Chill Out" Which is an interesting choice of expression. He was told to do the same thing, with regard to his use of racial insinuations.

Poor Wolfie...

There isn't much else to say. Poor Wolfie.

They're nuts...

So Bill and Hillary Clinton make public their consideration to have a Clinton-Obama ticket, and then the campaign publicly scorns the idea. That's not diabolical, it's bi-polar.

A Word...

Somebody needs to say another word to the Clintons. They're down in Mississippi, and Hillary's claiming that Barack is attacking her. I know it's just demagoguery, but it's dangerous, and stupid. Rancor between the campaigns is to be expected, but I for one don't think Hillary Clinton imitating Mayella Ewell is any way to win the White House.

Samatha Power

Was right to call HRC a monster. The Obama camp is wrong for accepting her resignation, without also requiring the Clintons to accept the resignation of Howard Wolfsen for his stint in name calling. Wolfie would probably appreciate it, the way he pines for unemployment...poor Wolfie.

I am really ticked about the Clintons being permitted to decide who does and does not work in this country.

Small Favors

I must take this occasion to send my regrets to the good people of NY, who were subjected to that sweet Bill and Hill pic, on the front page of NY Post. If I hadn't mentioned Bubba's relationship with Belinda Stronach, they would not have staged the photo. Oh well, at least it's not summer, and I didn't mention his relations with Monica, or Paula, or Kathleen, or Gennifer, or the any of the many others...that would have subjected all of us to another staged dancing on the beach wearing bathing suits moment. Small, but appreciated, favors...

Way to go Wolfie!

So Wolfie is accusing Obama of being like Ken Starr...way to invite questions about Bill Clinton's Impeachment, and Hillary Clinton's participation...It's fair game. Which of course now that they have invited the questions, they will of course whine about it later. Much like they did when they circulated bumper stickers and signs that read "Hillary for President" and then complained about people being too familiar, by saying Hillary...

By the by, Hillary took Texas because it boarders on a state where her husband was governor for many years. Nobody else should have had a shot there...

Too Neat...

It could just be my suspicious nature, but does anybody else wonder if Belinda Stronach, member of Canada's Parliament, and widely considered, Bubba gal pal, had something to do with that memo the Clinton camp is crediting with Tuesday's win...

The Canadians may investigate...

Ohio, Rhode Island

Hillary Clinton breaks losing streak! She's already gone 0/12 now she's 2/14 She's expecting the pennant now. Well why not? After all this time, a hundred million dollars spent, she's getting warmed up. Now. She's getting warmed up...

ugg

Of course Chelsea Clinton has every right to campaign for her mother, in whatever way she likes. Just as every other American has a right to an opinion, about that or any other thing a public person does in public. An opinion of their own, not something that the campaign put out, and expected everyone to echo, like were all drones. She put herself out there. Or her mother’s campaign pimped Chelsea out there.

Of course we’re all going to say that now. Again and again. Why, because we can, and because it’s true. Besides, it reminds us all how old and out of touch the Clintons really are. How desperate the campaign was to have some sort of win, even at the cost of Hillary and Chelsea Clinton’s names being eternally linked with the words “pimped out” forever made immortal by Mrs. Shuster’s baby boy. Why should we assume that he doesn’t have a mother too?

Hillary Rodham Clinton (yes, that is how she signed that nasty letter to MSNBC) reacted to David Shuster’s comments and observations not as a mother, but as a flailing candidate who thought she could get some mileage out of it. She simply misjudged the tenor of the times. Again. Go figure.

I think she signed her name that way because as a faux feminist, she needed to dog whistle the actual feminists of the country, to come riding to her rescue, and a few of them bless their poor aching, betrayed, hearts, did.

I was most struck by an opinion penned by Susan Estrich, comparing the Chelsea Clinton of today to her own son, back in the day when he was a small child, and a pro-lifer went a bit nuts on her in front of said small child. Apple seed, meet orange tree.

Susan Estrich, whether or not you agree with her positions, her attitude or her personal air of superiority, has in fact spent her adult life promoting a cause she regarded as very important, not a small point. Yet she decided to undermine all that effort, cave to peer pressure in support of the good ol’ girl network. She tried to justify an irrational public tantrum by Hillary Clinton. Stunning heartbreak. Ouch! I’m angry about it. Estrich is likely smarting over a self-inflicted wound. She has her reasons, to be sure, but what if a man; any man had penned Susan Estrich’s opinion?

Shuster did not attack Chelsea Clinton. Chelsea was the object of the sentence, not the subject; that was the campaign.

Chelsea Clinton is in her late twenties. She works for Clinton benefactors, making six-figures a year. She entered the workforce fewer than five years ago, and has always made six figures a year. Now she has the temerity to talk publicly about a glass ceiling? Disgusting.

I don’t fault Chelsea Clinton for banking money while she can. I don’t fault her for working on the campaign, but I do think the press has shown too much deference to Chelsea. Not that the space that she was given as a child bothers me at all, but now she and her parents feel entitled to keep everything a one way kind of relationship. The Clintons are entitled to try, but nobody owes them anything. When you show open contempt to an entire industry, often times you get back what you give. It is not unethical to buddy up to super-delegates and snub the very reporters even a nine year- old child. But to expect those whom you snub to say only nice, reverent words about you is not realistic.

Poor Wolfie. I mean that, really, I really do.

Chelsea Clinton isn’t any more or less precious than anybody else’s adult offspring. She does not merit special reverence. Mrs. Lewinsky’s little girl didn’t seek the spot light either. Pity neither she nor her mother, had the foresight to attend Wellesley.

If Chelsea Clinton were any kind of a person, she would have put a stop to this before her mother sent that nasty letter. Before that nasty letter was signed, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Now we hear that she prefers to be called Senator Clinton. Fine, so perhaps somebody in the campaign could mention that to their printer, put that on the signs and bumper stickers. Consistency would create less confusion.

What you can’t do, is brag about breaking the highest, hardest glass ceiling in this nation and expect to do it unscathed. Doing something for the very first time is hard, whatever the thing is. Ask the first girl who went to military school, was it hard? Was everybody kind and fair? Did she have to be better, smarter than the boys? To be a pioneer is to take the arrows. Also it’s best to keep the whining private.

Funny

That line, “I think everybody knows that I’ve live through some challenging moments in my life” I think is derisive. I think it’s dismissive of anybody whose parents controlled the family television set during the days of her husband’s impeachment. It wasn’t about one singular affair. It was about a habit of the Clintons to use women as Kleenex. To lie about it under oath, only to later settle after the country took the hit. First Bill gets to have his way, and then Hillary gets to punish the women, somehow vindicating her faux feminist self. That said, it’s a funny line. She has so few. I disagree with the pundits who say that she can’t say it with Bill in the room. These are the Clintons; they have 35 years of experience in out-shaming the nation. Bill just has get caught laughing first, looking down with a sheepish, “gosh, I’m a bad boy” look on his face, and it’s still funny. For anybody old enough to get the joke.

I find it deeply offensive when strange men whistle at me. I also find it deeply offensive when strange women do it. As far as I can tell, it's a threat, a form of intimidation. So you know where I am. So what? You are not funny. You are not helping me. I've asked you to stop...I'm all finished asking.

Peter Paul

Does anybody know anything about the Peter Paul suit? Apparently, Hillary Clinton has to testify, even though she's no longer a defendant. But here's the rub, she has three lawyers who refuse to accept the subpoena on her behalf. She's requiring that she be served in person, on the campaign trail. Past the Secret Service...
Is this really happening?

Castro out, Castro in,

Castro steps down, leaving the government to be run by his 76 year old brother...and you thought picking an eighty year old pope was silly...

To do...

Any report that suggests that Chelsea Clinton is a lovely girl can only be considered pandering.

If that story about Tim Russert preventing David Shuster from being fired is true, Russert did his colleague a terrible disservice. As it stands, Russert is neither working or available to look for work. He’s ineligible for unemployment; he’s just twisting in the wind, awaiting grace from a Clinton.

How’d you like to be him? Russert should have stayed out of it. Shuster could have then hired an attorney and sued for wrongful termination. As it stands, the guy is languishing, neither in nor out. The Clinton plans seems to be delay, until people forget, and Shuster disappears.

It is not about the Clintons need to pick fights with those who can’t or won’t defend themselves. The hypocrisy of any Clinton to not accept an apology is not at issue. The refusal of Clinton to state what she thinks would be sufficient is not at issue. The implication that Hillary Clinton will use her position as president to quietly avenge everybody that was mean to her husband is not at issue. Shuster’s comment is not at issue. Russert’s intentions are not at issue. Our expectations of grown up millionaires are not at issue. Whether or not Chelsea Clinton can be considered a “woman with needs” is not at issue. Whether or not she is a lovely girl, or an arrogant piece of dirt, is not at issue. Whether or nor Chelsea cried about it, not at issue. Whether or not allowing this to go this far shows class is not at issue. Whether or not a mother has a right to be deeply offended is not at issue. It is not at issue whether or not rearranging the desks in your campaign office is actual change. It is not about situation comedies, which paint every male character as a buffoon. It is not about Bill Clinton’s habits. This is not about sexism, how far we’ve come, or how far we need to go.

What is at issue, does anybody, elected official or private citizen, have the right to control the media?

That’s the reason this fight must be fought. Shuster needs to lawyer up, and have his attorney send a letter demanding he be reinstated immediately or fired. If he’s reinstated, that should be the end of it. If he’s fired, which is the best move for everybody, he needs to file suit. Against not only his company, but also those who called for his firing, the Clintons, and a random number of John Does. Citing that the expression used was a commonly accepted figure of speech, a figure used in the past by members of the same network to express the same point. The lawsuit will provide some cover for all those involved. All should lawyer up, batten down the hatches, and find a soft place to land.

I suggest that people simply refuse to comment on Chelsea. If you can’t say anything that could possibly be perceived as remotely negative, or off color, then anything complimentary must be suspect. Just mention a fear of the wrath of mom and if you need your job. I see that’s already happening.

Other option, bide your time and hope for the best.

Hillary Clinton, in her cowardly passive aggressive way is simply bullying the media. She expects considerations that she herself is unwilling to extend. It’s part of a large troubling pattern.

If she or her daughter felt that Shuster had defamed either one of them, the remedy is not threats of government contracts being renegotiated, but a civil suit instead. Perhaps Paula Jones would be so kind as to recommend a qualified attorney.

Do we all have to have Ivy League degrees and sensibilities to be Americans? Are we allowed to be each of us our own person? Complete with our own interests, opinions and micro-trends? If we’re a little unpolished, or even disrespectful at times, this is the time and the place.

The only good way out of this contrived mess is for Chelsea or the Hillary Clinton camp to come out publicly quoting Voltaire, and apologize that this has gone this far. Course, she’s put herself into a corner. Does she boycott the debate, or use that forum to be magnanimous? Hold herself up as a pioneer who got the nation talking about sexism. She often sounds Christ-like, in her willingness to go anywhere where two or more are gathered in her name. Also by saying that anything we do to or for her, we in fact do to and for all women.

She’s requested debates, and now might not participate?

I understand MSNBC’s position. I just don’t see why HRC thinks she’s in a position to decline any airtime.

Awkward...

Hey Clinton sycophants, I don't know what else to call you. I wouldn't want to be called a Kool Aid drinker, and supporter isn't near as specific enough. I think you know who you are...I need to ask, do you realize that many of the words, phrasing expressions that are being used against Shuster, coming from the Senator, is an exact parroting of the complaints I've made of the Clinton's conduct? I just mean the stuff they directed toward me.

I'm not speaking just of the blog. I mean things I've said in private conversation. Try to think how intimidating that is, the most powerful people in the world, talking trash about you personally.

If that information wasn't disclosed to you, you're probably considered what's call a cat's paw.

I did say it was awkward...

Pimp

Who would vote for a person that has journalists fired because of their vocabulary? They threatened to boycott a debate on NBC, unless Schuster was fired. I happened to have seen the show; there was no implication of sex. Yes, it’s a strong word, but it was used appropriately.

There’s a show called “Pimp my Ride” have you seen it? It’s been on in the US for years. It’s also on in the UK. The premise taking on old, run down vehicle and making it cool.

How different is that from what Chelsea is doing? Hillary Clinton is old, run down, just like the cars made pretty by the show. For the Clintons to pretend not to understand that acceptable definition of the word, suggests they’re out of touch, disinterested in keeping up with the common vernacular.

This nation has given a lot to Chelsea Clinton. She’s 27 years old, single, and rich. She has access to movie stars, fashion designers, and world leaders. She’s kept safe, via her Secret Service protection, she knows that nobody’s going to slip a mickey into her food or beverage. We should all be so fortunate.

What reason does anybody have to be proud of Chelsea Clinton? Who has she inspired? What cause has she made her own? What has she done for anybody, ever? Has she ever battled any dragon? Why should we as a people love her? We know nothing of her personality. We have no basis to say that she is a lovely girl. She seems vacuous. Of course some people like that, and that’s fine. But the only thing we know about her personality is that she believes she’s too special to interact with the little people. She’ll call famous people, and super delegates, but shuns reporters. There are lots of conceded people on the planet; I don’t hold that against her. It’s flat out bad form to make a point of not interacting with people who are only doing their jobs. To put her in the public eye, using the media when it suits her, and not participating in any other way, fosters distain.


I can understand why the Clintons would be concerned about their daughter’s reputation. Think about it, think of the many people, most of them daughters somebody, that the Clintons have deliberately and errously called prositute. The Clintons know how easy it is to ruin women. They’ve had a lot of practice, and on this issue, they don’t need the learning curve for that. For that they don’t need to find their voice.

Leave it to the Clinton camp to vie for debates, and then threaten a boycott. I don’t believe for a second that Hillary Clinton would actually boycott a debate, that her campaign needs this much. It’s just so much saber rattling, demagoguery, again.

I know that Steven Kluger (Rick Lazio’s college roommate) is a big wig at GE.

When Keith Olberman, also of MSNBC, busted George Bush’s chops for pimping out David Petreaus, there was no outrage. No public calls for termination of his employment, on which his health insurance is dependant. Not a whimper, a tantrum, or a snivel. Of course not. Nobody thought an apology necessary.

For Schuster to apologize for using language too hip for the Clintons, that’s fine, but use of that term does not rise to the level of anything more.

MSNBC- bring Schuster back! Do it quickly, before the debate. Let politicians know that in America, we don’t allow our elected officials be dictators. We do have a Constitution for the purpose of discouraging that sort of thing. If it puts you in a preferable position to remind the Clintons that Schuster bought Bubba’s defense of Hillary, fine. I don’t believe that Hillary Clinton would boycott a debate that her campaign needs so badly. If she does, let Obama have the time, and say whatever he wants. Plus, you’ll have that story to report.

Anybody else offended at Emily’s List, and NY chapter of NOW? They’re undermining feminism. Saying that a long time ally of the feminist movement committed the ultimate betrayal was outrageous. Ted Kennedy has been championing women’s causes for longer that Hillary Clinton has been taking credit for the accomplishments of others. You need to stop wigging out every time somebody disagrees with you, or says an unpolished word. It’s a big world; there are lots of people here. Many who are decent people. In spite of the fact they lack your advantages. Besides, acting out irrationally reflects badly on all of us, and the Clintons are not the only people in the world. There are plenty of women, with real problems, who are in real need of your protection. Unless the Clintons are extorting your devotion…it’s a fair assumption…PUT THE KOOL AID DOWN.

Bye bye

So Mitt Romney is bowing out, good for him. And now there are four. And a half?

Money

So Chelsea Clinton is able to call super delegates on behalf of her mother. By the way super delegates, those of you who accept daughter Chelsea’s calls, Obama’s daughters just might have you on speed dial too. She can’t talk to kid reporters but she can call super delegates. She also called most of the women of The View, or so they said. The reason I hesitate, each of the women who had received phone calls, repeated the conversations on the air. As Chelsea Clinton doesn’t talk to the little people, I don’t know what she sounds like, Mike Tyson’s voice is recognizable. To me that’s the voice the women were imitating.

Hillary Clinton loaned her campaign $5 million dollars of her own money. What's the interest rate? Has she paid it back already? Why would she do that? Why would she use those words? Didn’t Bubba want her to use her own money? Did he want the family money used instead? What’s this about paid members of the campaign agreeing not to be paid? What’s that about? Are Obama’s workers going without paychecks?

By the by, the Clintons and the Obamas are all of the baby boom generation, albeit on opposite sides.

Yes, Bubba is said to be in a box as of late. But think about it, is he in the box, or is the media? Is it because Hillary said, “Get in the box.” or because the old guard said it? Could it be because of the recent money scandals? Perhaps it’s because the National Archives have sent Bill Clinton documents that it has cleared for release, and are only awaiting his approval. I suppose somebody could ask…Oh, but you’d need to have access for that, and somebody’s in a box. Bad luck.

Super Tuesday

Super Tuesday has come and gone. What was the point? So the Republicans are leaning into nominating somebody, but the Democrates, well...what was the point? Four delegates? All that trouble, four delegates?

Them Dems

Good for The Edwards family! You just have to respect the way he dropped out. He’s got a family to think of, children who need their mother, for however long they can have her. I do not suggest that I have any information on Mrs. Edwards’s health, but campaigns have to take a lot out of a fit person, this can only benefit her. The Edwards have shown their children some serious life enabling lessons, with both the run, bringing attention to those who don’t have the time or contacts or the energy to grab the spotlight for their plights, and the suspension of the campaign, for the good of the nation, giving us a chance to see Obama and Hillary one on one, an appreciation of the process and an appreciation for themselves. Good call.

A few days ago, I saw on TV a body language expert. Everything she demonstrated, Hillary did, in almost a cartoon-like fashion. It was distracting. Funny, but distracting. She’s so awkward! Lucky for her that CNN had the candidates seated. The height difference is also a distraction, but in a painful way.

Hillary knew or should have know that voting to go to war, is a vote to go to war. She should speak to her husband for a definition of the word is. She didn’t read the report; she didn’t do her homework. To send a nation to war, without reading the report, is a problem. Sidling up with others who also did not read the report, but aren’t trying to be president, doesn’t impress people. I don’t care that you say you were misled, her marriage is her business, and the running of the government is the American people’s concern.

If she is in fact in control of her husband, why did she wait for the old guard of the Democratic Party to chastise him first? Also does she take responsibility for his comments? This business about him protecting his picked on wife doesn’t really wash. Because people have been picking on Hillary for as long as her husband has been publicly identified as an infidel. Bill Clinton needed people not to like you, needed people to have an excuse to gloss over his conduct. They needed to play both sides of the street for political gain. Now his public eruptions, at least one aimed at a woman reporter, who was only doing her job, (where’s the NY Chapter of NOW, now?) plus the race baiting is despicable. Although Hillary Clinton herself suggests that she’s fine with Latinos declining to vote for a black man, despite the lack of historic evidence that that’s actually how they vote.

Members of the media, as an American, I can recognize the distinctions between a black man, and a white woman, Hillary’s upper lip not-with-standing. I think we can all refrain from bringing it up any further. It gives the impression that we as a nation, are overly impressed with ourselves for having the choices we do. Let’s just acknowledge that we’ve acknowledged both race and gender, and let it go. In my opinion, it’s all been said too much already. The international media is also tired of hearing it.

Bringing up Chelsea’s attendance was low. She’s older now than Monica was, and as Americans, we don’t owe her anything. She’s too precious to give interviews. She wants her privacy, fine. Enjoy the ballet, and stop being a prop. Besides it’s really bad form to remind working people that Chelsea only has to go to work when it suits her. Enough already. Where was Bill Clinton? Was he having a low-key fund-raiser, with a bunch of people who rally all on their own, with all those lovely home made signs, in a state where the candidates agreed not to participate? Perhaps he was having a discrete dinner somewhere.

What about this health records being online? Wasn’t that a bad idea in the ‘90’s? It’s still a bad idea. More of the same bad idea, remains a bad idea.

Speaking of bad ideas, Hillary Clinton recently said that she would be president and her husband, Bill, would not. She stated that there would be no co presidency, as she learned back in the ‘90’s, it wouldn’t be a good idea. The American people didn’t like it, as nobody had voted for her. Things are not the same now. Anybody who votes for her now, really is voting to put Bill Clinton back in the White House. Hillary claims her time in the White House, as first spouse is legitimate experience, therefore, putting her husband in that role would put him in charge, as she was in charge then. Her lack of a security clearance notwithstanding. When Senator Kennedy decided to endorse Obama, which Clinton did he call?

Rally

Only Bill Clinton could play the racial aspects of this or any campaign. I know it’s widely understood that his intentions with the black community have always been altruistic, but I didn’t believe it. I’ve always thought him a cad. Even before the Clintons misogyny was undeniable exposed. Every woman has had experience with cads, at one time or another, and I think all of can agree that cads are more easily spotted when they’re romancing somebody else. He’s been romancing the Soul Patrol (not my expression, but I like it) forever, and exactly what has he actually done for them? Sure, he’s got at table at Silvia’s, and knows to grab a hymn book, and sway with the music, but so what? Who did he hire?

If anybody else had tried these underhanded tactics, they would have been, quite rightly, stopped at the gate. But Bill Clinton gets a pass. Or rather thinks he does. But it’s become too obvious. People, who actually believed the things that Clinton used to promote himself, are now feeling a little bit betrayed. That’s a reference to liberal white people. People with a long history of public service, not the sort to be dismissed with a well placed anonymous rumor. These are people who have worked Clinton campaigns before, and they know the nuts and bolts. Now, they feel dirty.

What about the people of color who were around for the protest marches? I mean back in the day when protest marches were interesting, and dangerous. Leaders in the black community are hesitating to join Obama, what’s that about? Al Sharpton says that just because Obama looks like him, doesn’t mean he’s his kind of people. HUH? We’re talking about Al Sharpton; a guy who came running anytime somebody said a naughty word. As much as we’d all like such hypocrites get their comeuppance, the fight for civil rights has been an industry. The soul patrol (yes, it tickles me to say that) they worry about their mortgages, the children who have come to expect a higher education. Many of these people have made a living, yes, but also a life. Their business associates, friends, wives, all came from the movement. Now what? Where are they going to go every day? What are they going to talk about? Try to imagine the heartbreak that happens, when you’ve spent forty years working towards a goal, and the realization that once that goal is reached, you become instantly redundant. Instantly, you’ve got nothing to do.

I hate rallies. The people who go tend to go to praise themselves, for nothing more than disagreeing with the government. Big whoop. I went to American University, more on principle than interest, to watch the Kennedys endorse Obama. I was only there for a few minutes, as Obama was being introduced, and a bit after, but in that short time it was obvious that this was a completely different deal. The crowd didn’t energize the speakers so much as it was the other way around.

We don’t know what it is to hear people speak anymore. We are so accustomed to the sound bite, the bumper sticker, the rolling slogans, tailored to the latest polls, that to see a proper speaker, hold a crowd in his hand, is breathtaking. When the Obama crowd started to boo Hillary Clinton’s name, and Ted Kennedy quieted them. It wasn’t aggressive just masterful.

What the Kennedys did was more than an endorsement. It was permission. Just as the Clinton campaign gave people permission to vote against somebody for the color of his skin, the Kennedys gave the voters permission to not. In doing so, they may have just rescued the Democratic Party.

The Clinton campaign has been busted for exploiting the growing pains of the people of this nation. That’s why their words are being scrutinized.

I’m the kind who watches the crowd, and watch the crowd I did. As Senator Kennedy passed the torch, people were simultaneously cheering and crying. As cynical as I am, a new day may really be dawning.

I went to lunch afterwards, in the same place patronized by supporters, some of whom didn’t make it in the room; they were outside listening on speakers. I eavesdropped as the friends mimicked each of the attending Kennedys, their words, their pitch, and their tone. With great bravado, they their eyes the size of serving platters, they regaled one another with stories of how the candidate shook their hands. Too excited to eat, they ignored their food, stomped their feet, completely unaware of their naked grins stretching from ear to buzzing ear. Those students will tell those stories, will remember that day and how they felt for years.

When was the last time anybody said that about anyone at all?

Romney

Why didn't Mitt Romney whine when he was told that people don't like him? Didn't it hurt his feelings?

Bubba and the Little Girl

I'm of course referencing the question asked by a little girl, to the former president. Do we think he handled that better than Chelsea did? Just asking...

MMFA

I was going to stay out of this one, I’m not a morning person, and by the time I noticed, it appeared to be over. I’ve reconsidered.

Media Matters for America enjoys a 503 nonprofit federal tax exemption. This is supposed to be reserved for organizations that do work for the greater good. Charity work, promoting sports programs, educational activities etc. Instead, MMFA has been acting as professional muscle, shutting down anybody unfriendly to its co-founder, Hillary Clinton, and her ambitions for the presidency.

Part of the reason MMFA has thus far gotten away with it is that they snuck up on people. I’ve heard it said that Imus was left out in the cold, was because nobody likes him, that he had a history of making insensitive remarks, I don’t agree. Of course his remarks are often insensitive, that’s been his trademark for many years. Of course powerful people liked his show, he had a loyal if not large audience, of mostly media professionals. I think it was the mulit-teir punch, of MMFA, Al Sharpton and some discrete upper management people who have an interest in promoting and protecting Hillary Clinton. Punishing those who don’t share their rabid devotion.

Here’s how they do it, using the recent Matthews brouhaha. MMFA writes an open letter to the big wig at NBC, Steve Capus. This is for show, public consumption. Capus also gets a quiet call from GE executive Steven Kluger demanding that Matthews be fired. Capus would rather not fire Matthews because his show has an audience, which pleases the advertisers, which generates money for NBC. Capus is between a rock and a hard place. Capus is a big deal at NBC, but GE is NBC ‘s parent company. To placate Steven Kluger, as a courtesy to Capus, and he wants Hillary Clinton to appear as his guest, Matthews agrees to an on air mea culpa. You’ll remember that Steven Kluger shared a house while at Vassar, with Rick Lazio, the guy who walked against Hillary Clinton in her bid for a seat in the Senate.

I know it’s commonly proclaimed that since Hillary Clinton was married to a sitting president that she is, by osmosis, qualified. I ask all feminists one question, is your husband qualified enough, competent enough, to do what you do every day?

Nobody begrudged your little protest march down memory lane. Nobody minds your designer duds, your over-priced lattes, your Ivy League diplomas, but you really did choose an undeserving cause. Did you even consider the harm you do to women in this country just to promote somebody in your cliché? A faux feminist, who deliberately mislead women in their quests for legal council to protect themselves from a hostile work environment, only to learn too late that the attorney they’d hired, was married the guy creating said hostile work environment.

MMFA has told CNN not to use Ralph Reed. This is by my count the third time inside of one year that MMFA has tried to have professionals blacklisted. Don Imus, Chris Matthews, Ralph Reed, big boys all, nobody’s worried about them. But not everybody has their assets. There are a lot of journalists, who don’t have the prestige to weather this modern day McCarthyism.

The Clintons along with MMFA are trying to end the careers of people, because they won’t drink the Kool Aid. MMFA is enjoying prestige and financial benefits from our tax dollars to shut down free speech, in concert with the Clintons.

They’re trying to control the airwaves, making sure that everything broadcast is to their taste, and suits their chosen politicians. A democracy requires discourse, discussion, and yes, disagreement too. Public money should not be used to suppress any American’s Freedom of Expression, tacky or not, it’s an offense against the Constitution.

MMFA has a pattern of trying to jettison working people from the civilized world; it shouldn’t be a one directional thing. Nobody should be able to do this with impunity. Broadcasters, it’s time to find a way to get their 503 status reviewed. Perhaps even revoked. Let the Clinton campaign pay its campaign workers.

It’s fraud.

It’s time for the media to stop airing the unwarranted attacks that Bill Clinton makes against itself. Do not air his unfounded accusations unless you have a proper rebuttal. I mean a pre-taped statement from a station owner, or manager, or president. Do try not to become the story.

If the Clintons don’t like it, let them sue. You have no obligation to report on things that you don’t find credible. No matter how silly his whiney, little tantrums make him look.

Changing the channel because you don’t like a show or a person on it is legitimate. Being an arbiter of the nation’s taste is not.