Posts Tagged ‘Barack Obama

22
Jan
09

A Disquisition on Damon Weaver.

I’ve been thinking a lot about why our collective sweetheart Damon Weaver, who scored some big interviews at the inauguration but not the biggest one, is so compelling. Sure, he’s adorable. But lots of children are cute, and it normally takes an extra something to warm the icy cage around my heart.

I suspect a lot of it has to do with how perfectly Damon fits into this particular moment. Damon’s a ten-year-old who believes he can interview the president. I’m going to gag on my own cheesiness here, but if there is a spirit of hope and possibility in the air, then surely a kid who asks heartbreakingly guileless and relevant questions of important people who lovingly and respectfully give their time to him and his school captures that spirit well. His triumphs, on a smaller scale, mirror the triumph of Barack Obama’s presidency.

And maybe that’s why it’s ok that Obama hasn’t given him an interview yet. Damon would kind of disappear.

09
Dec
08

Really, What Could a Kid Ask That Would Be So Scary?

There’s apparently one person on this Earth who can actually say no to an interview with our favorite reporter. That person, I’m chagrined to have to tell you, is President-elect Barack Obama.

Damon Weaver, 10, said on NPR’s “All Things Considered” he has been trying to get an interview with Obama for his school’s television station since Sept. 2, when Joe Biden became his homeboy. He’s been making YouTube videos with the request, and held up a sign that said “Can I interview you?” at an Obama event.  Damon said he also tried to enlist the help of Miami Heat star Dwayne Wade, believing a one-on-one basketball game would sweeten the deal for Obama, especially if Wade promised to let Obama win. Wade to Damon: “No can do, kid.”

On a serious note, Damon said the first question he would ask is what Obama would do to keep him safe from gun violence. That may actually be a question Obama’s not ready to tackle.

25
Nov
08

More Obama Firsts (Maybe).

Via Politico:

Preeta Bansal, a Harvard-educated litigation partner at Skadden, is rumored to be President-elect Obama’s choice for solicitor general. That person argues the government’s position at the Supreme Court (which will still be dominated by conservatives). “It’s making the rounds in New York’s legal circles, absolutely,” says a former colleague of Bansal’s. She was New York’s solicitor general under Eliot Spitzer and a counselor to then–assistant attorney general Joel Klein in the Clinton administration; she was an adviser to Obama’s campaign and now serves on the transition team. She’d be the first woman and first Indian-American to hold the job. “It wouldn’t surprise me,” says Klein. “She’s a very talented appellate advocate.”

12
Nov
08

Digging in the Crates: ‘The Candidate.’

obama1

The New Yorker has, I assume for a limited time, put on its website a 2004 profile of a young African-American running to represent Illinois in the United States Senate.*

I can’t imagine it was more fun to read then than now. Among the highlights: the prescient sentiment of all who had met him that he was destined for great things, and his alarmingly remarkable consistency.

To an outsider with only the broadest idea of Chicago politics, Obama’s victory in the Democratic primary actually looked like a victory over cynicism. He had not slimed his opponents. Nor was he the candidate of the fabled local machine. . .

. . . Obama, meanwhile, attracted legions of fervent volunteers. “People call it drinking the juice,” Dan Shoman, the political director of Obama’s campaign, said. “People start drinking the Obama juice. You can’t find enough for them to do.”

And about the Bush tax cuts:

Ryan told me that he will also be watching closely for contradictions between Obama’s statements in the primary campaign and what he is saying now to the general electorate. “Voters, in my view, have a high antenna for inconsistency,” Ryan said. He had already heard about shifts, for instance, in Obama’s position on the Bush tax cuts. Back when Obama was speaking to Democrats alone, he had called for across-the-board repeals—now he was talking about repealing only the tax cuts of the wealthiest five per cent. (The Ryan campaign was unable to document this alleged discrepancy.)

* I, of course, read it from my snazzy Complete New Yorker hard drive.

26
Oct
08

Waiting To Exhale.

As insignificant as 107,000 people living on just over 100 square miles in the Caribbean Sea may be, St. Vincent and the Grenadines has Obama’s back. In this week’s Searchlight Newspaper:

 

PRIME MINISTER Dr. Ralph Gonsalves is endorsing Barack Obama for the President of the United States.

“I will say this to our American brothers who are here. I don’t mind being undiplomatic and saying Ralph Gonsalves supports Barack Obama,” said Gonsalves on Wednesday at the official opening of the National Insurance Services building.

Dr. Gonsalves said that he has friends and relatives living in the United States and he has explained to them why they should support Obama.

“He has a remarkable quality. He doesn’t simply inspire people…He draws out of people that which is good and noble in them, that which people may not yet know they possess. That is why he has been able to get persons who normally would not want to vote for an African American. He has gotten into their minds and souls and he has looked at them and they themselves. He has touched their goodness and even the contradictions which exist in them, and shown them they must allow their goodness to triumph and that is why I support him.”

 

He’s not the only one. We’re all watching. Waiting. Impatient.

In market squares and street stalls amid breadfruit, mangoes and plantains there are Obama tee-shirts and key rings on sale. His name featured in dozens of songs this Carnival. We gather around the television to watch the debates and rail at the lies and mudslinging tactics of his opponents. To say we’re invested in this election would be an understatement.

I was in Barbados this weekend and of the 3 televisions in the house there was at least one turned to news coverage of the election at all times. The family friend I was staying with spoke of “holding her breath” in anticipation of November 4th and the anxiety she feels waiting for the outcome. She likened the American public in the 2004 election to woman with battered wife syndrome, wooed by promises and ignorance into going back to the man who has treated her so badly. As a region we are waiting, hoping that the people have the good sense to finally throw the bastard out.

We want to believe. Show us.

21
Sep
08

Raw Power.

This post is cross-posted over at my place.

Over at Slate, Emily Bazelon has a good overview of Obama and McCain’s respective positions on executive power.  The short story is that although both senators have promised to step back from the executive overreaches of Bush’s presidency, neither has been completely willing to completely go back to the pre-Bush status quo.  Senator McCain has promised to refrain from using signing statements if elected president, but has neglected to outline any aspect of Bush’s “approach” that he actually disagrees with.  Senator Obama, on the other hand, has been “consistently strong in saying the president can’t hold detainees he decides are enemy combatants without charges, and on preserving the right to habeas corpus,” but has voted for greater executive power when the opportunity to act has arisen (most notably the FISA bill passed earlier this year).  Now – with the bill to reauthorize the 2002 AUMF (Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq) – Obama has another opportunity to show his willingness to challenge the Bush administration’s unacceptably broad view of executive power.  But, as Bazelon notes, for whatever reason, Obama won’t even touch it:

But I’m puzzled about Obama’s unwillingness to take a stand against the Bush administration’s latest bid to exit with one last burst of executive prerogative-taking: the bill to renew the Authorization of Military Force. As Neal Katyal and Justin Florencepointed out in Slate this week, the AUMF of 2001 has been the main underpinning of the worst Bush excesses. And the new law doesn’t just restate congressional support for fighting a war against al-Qaida and Co. It also “reaffirms” what would really be a new power: that “the President is authorized to detain enemy combatants in connection with the continuing armed conflict with al Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated forces, regardless of the place of capture, until the termination of hostilities.”

Katyal and Florence explained why this expands the scope of the 2001 AUMF, allowing the president to do what no court has ruled he can: capture an alleged enemy combatant on American soil and whisk him away, without charges, until the end of a war that has no clear end. Opposing this should be a no-brainer for Obama, but when I called his advisers, I got only a hands-off, “we don’t want to get into it” response.

I’m pretty certain that when the reauthorization bill comes up for a vote, Senator Obama will vote to reauthorize it, even with the “president can torture whoever the hell s/he wants to” language included.  Which frankly – if it does happen – shouldn’t really come as a surprise to anyone.  Even the most reform-minded presidential candidate (much less president) would be hesistant to relinquish any authority to Congress, not out of any particularly nefarious motives, but simply because as a general rule, actors within an institution are reluctant to give up any powers or advantages they’ve gained within said institution – this goes as much for presidents as it does anyone else.  And Barack Obama, as someone who is fairly invested in the status quo, probably isn’t going to be too keen on giving up too many presidential powers, regardless of what he has said on the stump.  As I wrote this summer:

It’s terribly unrealistic to expect any executive to willingly relinquish new powers; and that’s precisely the reason why we have a legislative branch.  It’s supposed to act as a check on the executive’s inevitable attempts to accumulate power.

Almost every single president since Washington has taken steps to increase his power as an executive, and it’s Congress’ job to act as a check to that expansionary impulse.  The problem, of course, is that Congress hasn’t been doing it’s fucking job, and as such, President Bush (and President Clinton before him) has been able to get away with these egregious expansions of executive authority.  It’s deeply disappointing to know that a President Obama would probably – at the very least – support the status quo, but we should take that as a given.  For those of us interested in curbing executive power, we ought to focus our attention on helping Congress (regardless of the party affiliation) grow a spine, a large set of non-gendered genital organs of fortitude, and a sense of institutional parochialism.

- Jamelle

03
Sep
08

I Just Can’t Get You (the Bradley Effect) Out of My Head.

Hey PostBourgie folks, just a heads up: this is also posted at my blog and Feministe.

Andrew Hacker’s essay in the latest issue of the New York Review of Books is something of a mixed bag. The piece is an attempt to measure the possible impact of race – specifically voter registration laws, and the “Bradley Effect” – on the election. And to some extent, Hacker is successful; he does an excellent job at giving an overview of the current state of voter rights in the country. Specifically, he looks at the Supreme Court’s ruling in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, and the 2002 Help America Vote Act, and shows how the impact of both – whether intentionally or not – has been to suppress voter registration and turn out among African-Americans and other minorities. (This is kind of long, so the rest is after the jump.) More…

28
Aug
08

Don’t Let It Get You Down.

Bob Herbert thinks Democrats should be a little anxious about November:

Not only do the polls show this to be a close race, but the polls, when it comes to Senator Obama, cannot be trusted. It is frequently the case that a statistically significant percentage of white voters will lie to pollsters — or decline to state their preference — in races in which one candidate is black and the other white.

After many years of watching black candidates run for public office, and paying especially close attention to this year’s Democratic primary race, I’ve developed my own (very arbitrary) rule of thumb regarding the polls in this election:

Take at least two to three points off of Senator Obama’s poll numbers, and assume a substantial edge for Senator McCain in the breakdown of the undecided vote.

Using that formula, Barack Obama is behind in the national election right now.

It seems like quite a few Democrats are very worried about Obama’s chances in the fall.  I’m not particularly sanguine about the election, but neither am I convinced that John McCain actually stands a fighting chance.  Like I’ve said before, at this point, national polls are almost meaningless.  At best, they give us a rough idea of the national mood, and the mood is right where we should expect it to be: at parity.  Equal numbers of Americans like John McCain and Barack Obama.  Remember, the last two presidential elections were decided with very small margins, and even though George W. Bush is extremely unpopular, there’s no real indication that the underlying structural realities of contemporary politics (that we’re basically an evenly divided nation) have changed.  Furthermore, campaign’s aren’t decided by national air wars, no, campaign’s are fought and won in the trenches.  And on a state-by-state level, Obama is doing very well; the campaign is contesting every contestable state, and forcing McCain to fight for his support.  In fact, a recent poll shows Obama with considerable leads in several key states: Nevada, New Mexico, and Pennsylvania, and within striking distance in Colorado.

The only reason why there’s the perception that McCain might win this election is because we’re the people who focus obsessively on the minutiae of campaigns.  For the past few months, we’ve been following polls, reading blogs, and generally immersing ourselves in the election season.  For a solid majority of Americans though, the election has just begun, and they are just now tuning in to what the candidates have to say.  That’s the reason why the(much criticized) first half of the convention was dedicated to the normalcy of the Obama family; they were reintroducing themselves to an American public which was still a little unfamiliar with them. 

Liberals really shouldn’t waste their time hand-wringing over the election; it’s terribly counterproductive and does absolutely nothing to help the Democratic Party win.  In fact, at this point, we should approach the election with a fair amount of confidence; we have a party unified in purpose and mission, an inspiring and gifted politician as our nominee, a public ready for a change of course, and an opponent lacking in everything (money, volunteers, the whole shabangabang) but incompetence.  We certainly shouldn’t be complacent, but neither should we drive ourselves insane with concern.

(photo from www.demconvention.com)

cross-posted at The United States of Jamerica

04
Jun
08

The Language of Dap.

My friend Ashley wrote that Times story on Reggie Love last week, which included the line “closed-fisted high-five.”

(To paraphrase Snoop, she meant ‘pound’, but she ain’t know it.)

Chris Beam over at Slate chronicled some of the ways various news media outlets tried to describe the pound the Obamas gave to each other at last night before his speech.

More…

04
Jun
08

He Could Actually Do This.

A couple months back, sometime before Jeremiah Wright, before Richardson bowed out, before Richardson endorsed Obama, before 11 straight primary victories, before “working class” became conflated with “white,” before YouTube stole Bill Clinton’s mojo, before “bitter”, before i’d-rather-vote-for-McCain, before the Rules and Bylaws Committee, before Edwards bowed out, before Edwards endorsed Obama, before gas tax holidays, before the goalposts moved, before every American had their say…

Stacia, my friend and co-blogger, asked me a question.

“Gene, he could actually do this, huh?”

It was a question that seemed steeped in caution. I felt the same way. If we were cynics, ours was a hard-earned cynicism. But every cynic was once a wounded optimist who still secretly longs that she will be proven wrong.

dNa:

Malcolm said we weren’t Americans. He said we had never been Americans. But I think even Malcolm would sit back tonight and smile, and realize that wasn’t the whole story. America can only love itself as much as it loves us, and as much as we love it back. And we love it the way only we can, because we know intimately its ugly contradictions, its furious hypocrisy, its shining promise.

A Sully reader:

My grandfather, 86 years old and a veteran of WWII, just gave me a call. He was calling all of his grandchildren to let them know what an important night this was in the history of our country.

Grandpa drove a truck for over 50 years, and he told the story of how he drove with a team of drivers, 2 white (including him), and 4 black. When they stopped at the truck stops, the black drivers had to use seperate restrooms and showers, and had to eat in a small room in the back of the kitchen. Grandpa and his co-driver would eat in the back with the rest of the team, and while they didn’t speak of it at the time, they knew it was wrong yet felt powerless to change it, and believed that it would never change.

Tonight, he told me, we have come full-circle. Many people, especially the younger generation who supported Obama, will never fully realize the historical import of what happened tonight. But he wanted his grandchildren to know this story that he had never told us, and it was the second time in my 33 years that I have heard my grandpa cry.

The speech in which he will accept the Democratic nomination for president will be 45 years to the day after MLK’s ‘I Have a Dream’ speech. History always vindicates the dreamers.

I am, I think, constitutionally inclined to play the devil’s advocate. But any nods to that would only diminish this singular moment which, frankly, I never knew I always wanted.

02
Jun
08

Ferraro and Race.

by hilzoy at Obsidian Wings. Cross-posted with permission.

Geraldine Ferraro wrote a horrible op-ed in the Boston Globe. She says a number of things about the effects of sexism on the Clinton campaign, which I do not propose to consider here. But she also claims that the concerns of Reagan Democrats have not been heard:

“As for Reagan Democrats, how Clinton was treated is not their issue. They are more concerned with how they have been treated. Since March, when I was accused of being racist for a statement I made about the influence of blacks on Obama’s historic campaign, people have been stopping me to express a common sentiment: If you’re white you can’t open your mouth without being accused of being racist. They see Obama’s playing the race card throughout the campaign and no one calling him for it as frightening. They’re not upset with Obama because he’s black; they’re upset because they don’t expect to be treated fairly because they’re white. It’s not racism that is driving them, it’s racial resentment. And that is enforced because they don’t believe he understands them and their problems. That when he said in South Carolina after his victory “Our Time Has Come” they believe he is telling them that their time has passed.Whom he chooses for his vice president makes no difference to them. That he is pro-choice means little. Learning more about his bio doesn’t do it. They don’t identify with someone who has gone to Columbia and Harvard Law School and is married to a Princeton-Harvard Law graduate. His experience with an educated single mother and being raised by middle class grandparents is not something they can empathize with. They may lack a formal higher education, but they’re not stupid. What they’re waiting for is assurance that an Obama administration won’t leave them behind.”

I’m going to accept Ferraro’s claims about Reagan Democrats for the purposes of this post, not because I believe them to be true, but because I’m interested in the state of mind that would lead her to write this. I’m sure that some such people exist — when Ferraro says that they have stopped her on the street, I have no reason to doubt her. I am also sure that her all Reagan Democrats are not as she describes them, both because no such simple picture could cover such a diverse group of people, and because hers seems to me slanted in some specific ways. But leaving aside the accuracy of her sociology, and focussing on Reagan Democrats as she imagines them:

Reagan Democrats, Ferraro assures us, do not expect to be treated fairly by Obama. Why, exactly, is that? “Because they’re white” isn’t enough of an answer; they have to have some reason to expect that Obama, in particular, will treat whites unfairly. Why might they think this? Ferraro says it’s because they don’t think he understands them or their problems. His positions won’t help here, she says, which is a pity: one of the first places I’d look for reassurance is at a candidate’s positions, and the issues he has made a priority. Neither will his biography: also a pity, since a lot of it consists of sticking up for working men and women. They can’t empathize with his upbringing by middle-class whites, though Ferraro doesn’t tell us why not. More…

02
Jun
08

Buggin’ Out Over the ‘Inadequate Black Male.’

To be fair, every Clinton supporter isn’t getting their Ferraro on right now. But this is the narrative that seems to have become the dominant one among Hillary Clinton supporters in the blogosphere: that she is being denied the nomination by elites in the Democratic party.

Those murmurs became all-out hysterical hollering (see above) after the Rules and Bylaws Committee decision on Sunday. They scream that Clinton should be the party nominee because she has the popular vote. Let us count the holes in this logic, shall we? More…

02
Jun
08

The Cynic and Barack Obama.

I’ve been meaning to shout-out last month’s Esquire for the cover story that perfectly encapsulates my feelings about the Obama campaign (cynicism via wounded idealism).

But also, check out the riveting and troubling profile of John Yoo by John H. Richardson. Yoo notoriously wrote the Bush administration’s torture memos, which put in play any interrogation techniques but those that “were equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death.” That Yoo is a war criminal is taken as a given by a lot of people, especially progressives. But in the piece, he proves himself to be smart, funny and very, very sharp. And some of the points he makes aren’t easily dismissed. More…

19
May
08

Late Pass: Do Better, Barack.

15
May
08

The Nuclear Option.

Don’t let Hillary Clinton’s optimism following her West Virginia win fool you: she knows it’s over.

But do her supporters? If you’re riding for HRC, what you’re essentially hoping for is that the Democratic party elite install her as the nominee even though she trails by every conceivable metric. It’s a move that would be so unpopular — even among fair-minded Clinton supporters — that it would fracture the party and guarantee she gets molly-whopped come November.

Is this what those folks are after?

06
May
08

Jay Smooth’s Election Fatigue.

Say word.

In the early, inchoate stages of PostBourgie’s existence, we used to do a lot more updating of the day-to-day goings-on in the presidential race. But, on the Democratic side, it’s been almost 16 months since Hillary Clinton formally began the presidential bid everyone expected since 1999 her conversation with America and just 15 months since Barack Obama started fanning the naiveté of young voters with silly slogans announced he was running. But keeping up at with the incremental developments in a race from more or less ideologically identical candidates for a year is mind-numbing, even for us political junkies and look forward to our weekly political round-ups on podcast every Friday. More…

01
May
08

TooSense on Obama/Wright.

dNa weighs in:

What people want is not for Obama to denounce Wright, but to denounce black people everywhere who have the gall to be angry at America for how they are and have been treated. What they wanted Obama to say was that racism is uneqivocally a black problem, that white people have moved past it but that black people cling to greivances as an excuse for out of wedlock births, unemployment, or incarceration.

It doesn’t matter that rhetorically and policy-wise, Obama has struck the right balance between personal and governmental responsibility. It doesn’t matter that he’s confronted black anti-Semitism, black homophobia, black apathy. When Obama dared to mention that white people might harbor irrational prejudices of their own–he was pilloried by conservatives and liberals everywhere who don’t want to feel guilty suspecting every black teenager of being a drug dealer for “throwing his grandmother under the bus.”

They didn’t want him to condemn Wright, they wanted him to condemn black people. So of course they’re not satisfied. For all the talk of how white people are attracted to Obama and the alleged “absolution” he could offer them, what they really want is for him to publicly shift the blame for the racial divide squarely on the shoulders of the black community, so white people can stop thinking about it.

And he didn’t do that, so they’re not happy.

Say word.

30
Apr
08

Where Wright May Be Right

Okay, so the AIDS thing is a little off the deep end (though I understand where the fear comes from), but I will say this: Rev. Jeremiah Wright is right about a lot of things.

Among them is that recent attacks on him are really attacks on the black church as an institution. That’s no so crazy, and I said as much to G.D. a couple of weeks ago. White Americans are partly disturbed by the YouTube replays of his sermons damning America because they don’t like to be reminded that there are places in which black people gather and to which white people are not invited (not that individuals are never invited, but you know what I mean).

I don’t just mean that the clips and the speeches played on racist fears of “minority” populations outnumbering white Americans (though obviously that’s going to happen soon, by most projections) but I’m sure that’s part of it.

Obviously, I can’t speak for all white people, and I’ll admit up front that I’ve done absolutely no research on this. But white, middle class Americans — those who live outside urban areas and among the huge swaths of mostly white faces in the middle of the country — don’t think of themselves as being a culture. They don’t think of the things they do every day as reinforcing cultural norms or the mundane places to which they go as cultural institutions. They just think that’s the way things are, and that’s the way you do things. They think of it as a natural way of being. As the natural way of being. And those places reinforce the natural way of thinking. More…

30
Apr
08

Ta-Nehisi on Wright.

Barack Obama’s angry denunciation of Rev. Jeremiah Wright yesterday caught a lot of people by surprise. But it hasn’t been as surprising as Wright’s Magical Media Tour (as Shani called it), which seemed to defy any sort of logic.

I asked someone who works for the Obama campaign what they thought Wright was trying to accomplish. “Clear his name?” she said. Uh, he’s taken a pretty interesting tack to that end.

The press is usually very slow to self-correct, so the idea that Wright is not an anti-white, anti-American nutjob — the popular narrative, even though there’s little evidence to support it and there’s plenty of evidence to the contrary — is gonna be one that’s hard for him to shake.

Ta-Nehisi:

That said, I want to be clear that I thought Wright acted a fool on Monday. There’s a lot of chatter out there claiming that Wright was trying to sabotage Obama. I don’t buy it. Like I said yesterday, I think Wright just wanted to say whatever he felt. But he made a few mistakes. Chief among them, as my friend Jelani Cobb has said, was not recognizing the difference between his pulpit and the lion’s den. This press lives to expose these sort of performances, and Wright just gave them low-hanging fruit.

Why he would do that, given what he’s been through the past few months, just boggles the mind. You can’t, on the one hand, attack the press for distorting you, and then go right to the press to communicate who you are to the American people. The saddest part of this to me, is that I don’t think Wright understood what was going on. There’s a lot of reporting now suggesting that Bill Clinton’s biggest problem is that he simply doesn’t understand how much media has changed since his White House days. His gaffes are not the product of a decline in skills, as I’ve written before, but the result of a fundamental misunderstanding of what the press has become–a gaggle of cynics who sit around waiting for people say something stupid. Gotcha journalism rules the day. Wright’s mistake was much the same–he simply had no understanding of the press.

28
Apr
08

Get Obama on the Court and He Trouble…

(Last week he fucked around and got a triple-double.)

Also, as other people who play ball may have peeped, he isn’t completely relying on the OldHead Game (which mainly consists of hitting cutters and draining long jumpers). He actually moves pretty well for a smoker in his 40’s.

14
Apr
08

Judas Speaks.

Bill Richardson tells GQ why he broke with the Clintons to endorse Obama. More…

25
Mar
08

Like Joni Mitchell, Sinbad Never Lied.

Look what Sinbad started. That jolly spinner of irreverent yarns attended a trip overseas to Bosnia with then-First Lady Hillary Clinton (and Sheryl Crow) and challenged Clinton’s assertion that the trip was fraught with danger.  This led to a surreal moment where a Clinton spokesperson went hard after Sinbad. We’re still reeling.

But well, it turns out…Walter Oakes was in the right.

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton said Monday that she “misspoke” when she said last week that she ran from sniper fire when she landed in Bosnia in 1996.

Her comments, made to the Philadelphia Daily News, are her first since news organizations and others began questioning the degree of danger she faced on her trip, made when she was first lady.

In an effort to build up her foreign policy credentials as a presidential candidate, Mrs. Clinton had said last week, and earlier, that when she landed in Tuzla, she and others, including her daughter, “ran with our heads down” to avoid sniper fire. News organizations and others cast doubt on Mrs. Clinton’s description and raised questions about her credibility.

Your move, Chris Spencer!

25
Mar
08

The Pod People Have Stolen Chris Matthews.

Although, to be fair, this is consistent with his weird obsession with Hillary Clinton that compels him to knock her whenever he gets a chance. Also, bellowing.

25
Mar
08

Take it Away, Folks.

The above is from an e-mail making its way around the innanets.

(We just got back from the gym and can’t muster the energy for even perfunctory indignation.)

21
Mar
08

Well, We Didn’t See That One Coming.

This morning Bill Richardson, a longtime friend of Bill Clinton who rushed to defend Hillary Clinton when she was attacked in the early Democratic debates, threw his endorsement behind Barack Obama. Richardson (or as MSNBC oddly referred to him in their subhead, “Hispanic Governor”) was being courted aggressively by both campaigns, though he told the NYT that while he felt “a great deal of personal loyalty to the Clintons,” he was “genuinely torn.”

What we wouldn’t have given to listen to those phone calls.

Update: Those phone calls apparently got pretty testy.

“I talked to Senator Clinton last night,” Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico said on Friday, describing the tense telephone call in which he informed Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton that, despite two months of personal entreaties by her and her husband, he would be endorsing Senator Barack Obama for president.

“Let me tell you: we’ve had better conversations,” Mr. Richardson said. …

Mr. Richardson said he called Mrs. Clinton late on Thursday to inform her that he would be appearing with Mr. Obama on Friday to lend his support.

“It was cordial, but a little heated,” Mr. Richardson said in an interview.




The PostBourgie book club selection for this month is Whatever It Takes by Paul Tough. Tough looks at the founding of the Harlem Children's Zone, an ambitious education initiative for poor children.

Twitter.

website stat

 

July 2009
M T W T F S S
« Jun    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031