0
   

2004 Elections: Democratic Party Contenders

 
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Sep, 2003 11:40 pm
I have no difficulty conceptualizing blatham as a nun gone bad ... particularly if it were a singing role. I think he could nail the part.
0 Replies
 
Ethel2
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Sep, 2003 11:45 pm
Laughing
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Sep, 2003 11:51 pm
From what I hear,. \ Blatham started it, and who cares?
The iimages remain. Pity Hatteras Village.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 12:06 am
Don't mean to make light of the misfortunes of the folks who were impacted ... I've been through hurricanes, as a youth. One memorable among which, way back when Eisenhower was fresh, devastated Hatteras, and other coastal areas. We weren't on Hatteras, but we were on the Central North Carolina Coast. I was a service brat, and I was astounded by the damage that storm did to the military base we lived on, then horrified to get out and see the greater chaos and misery Off-Base. They're nasty storms ... and I have no use or sympathy at all for folks who hinder getting needed aid to the folks who need it.
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 12:12 am
Indeed,timber.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 09:00 am
Way back HERE,
I wrote:
Al Queda recruited, trained, funded, acknowledged, claimed, and lauded the mostly-Saudi hijackers. Al Queda is a stateless entity, the membership of which comprises citizens of a wide variety of countries. Not even The Nine Also-Rans and their most egregiously hysterical followers can negate those facts.

It would not be beyond Al Queda's perfidy specifically to have employed a preponderence of Saudis in the attack by way of calculated effort to exacerbate US/Saudi tensions.

It appears the matter is still In the news:
Quote:
9/11 detainee: Attack scaled back

Just goes ta show how wrong ya can be ... The Saudi's were chosen 'cause it was easier for them to get into the US, and now there are 10 Also-Rans.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 09:17 am
timber

I really am so far away from the persons and facts of this matter to toss up an opinion worth much at all. But I don't say this to suggest some opinion you hold might be worthless, but rather to point to how we have no way of knowing this NBC news item has any credibility at all. It's from a 'senior US official' (is anyone else sick to death of press releases from unnamed government sources?) and it contains information which we have absolutely no way of judging - detainees having no voice at all.
0 Replies
 
jjorge
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 09:24 am
Hi folks,

Mind if I digress back to the topic?
Today's Washington Post has a front page article on the unprecedented grassroots activism that has propelled the Dean campaign.

A lot of people still don't 'get it'. This is something very different in American politics. It has the potential to diminish the advantage of big money contributors, outflank the corporate media, and shrink the influence of the punditocracy.

As I've said in a previous post, someday people will look back at this 2003-04 Dean campaign and tell their grandchildren that they were there ......making history:



"...By day, Jennifer Powers is a grant-writer for a school for the deaf, a Gen X'er who in past elections was like millions of others who vote but don't pay much attention to politics -- and certainly don't lift a finger to help any particular candidate.

That changed for Powers a few months ago, when the 32-year-old Philadelphian, driven by a newfound passion, switched her voter registration from independent to Democrat and became an unpaid operative for Howard Dean's presidential campaign in Pennsylvania. Today, Powers sits on a Philly4Dean (philly4dean.com) steering committee she helped set up, overseeing grass-roots volunteers she helped recruit, and communicates online with a database of 2,000 prospective Dean supporters that she helped build.

She said she does this 30 to 40 hours a week after her day job and with only online direction from the Dean campaign -- and she is not alone..."


Excerpt From:

"Dean, Driven by the Grass Roots
Bottom-Up Strategy May Turn Politics Upside Down "
By Lois Romano
Washington Post September 22, 2003;


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A44798-2003Sep21.html
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 09:37 am
blatham, AP, AFP, UPI, and Reuters all have their own stories on it ... its not just NBC. In fact, the NBC article refers to and derives from the AP coverage. Its all over the broadcast media now. I too am skeptical of "Un-named Government sources" and pronouncements, on condition of anonymity, from "Senior Officials". Credibility I suppose is somewhat an individual assessment. We do choose what we believe. Maybe I'm just gullible, but I see no reason to question the core 9/11-al Queda congruity. As to The Detainees, well, from what I understand, they are suffering to the point of having gained weight and benefitting from dental and optical care evidently unavailable to them in their previous environs. They have a voice ... not a voice in the matter of their immediate freedom, perhaps, but they have a voice. In other circumstances, the most they would have is an unmarked mass grave.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 05:03 pm
timberlandko wrote:
As to The Detainees, well, from what I understand, they are suffering to the point of having gained weight and benefitting from dental and optical care evidently unavailable to them in their previous environs.


Well, and they've also been detained in cages for - what is it, about a year? - without ever having been accused of any crime, without the right to contact a lawyer - or, for that matter, their wives/husbands, children or anyone else outside.

Thanks for the news update, though. If the Saudis were chosen, indeed, "because there were large numbers willing to follow bin Laden" there - no surprise there - one can only wonder (again) why the brunt of attention in the "War on Terror" after 9/11 wasn't focused on that country, rather than, err, other objects of interest in the region, hey?

blatham wrote:
It's from a 'senior US official' (is anyone else sick to death of press releases from unnamed government sources?) and it contains information which we have absolutely no way of judging.


Yes, me - sick of it too. The media practice of launching prominent stories on the basis of only an anonymous DC government source seems to have become endemic. This may be just my impression, but there seems to have been a marked increase in their number.

Oddly enough, a great many of them seem to play on suspicions and assumptions that play into the hands of the government's policy thrust of the day, but that it wouldnt want to be heard expressing itself. It's almost like the administration is prolifically using them as a public opinion-impacting strategy. All governments have done that, of course - it just seems to have become particularly blatant now. Well, see the discussion in this thread about the news story that claimed that France helped Iraqi officials escape. Was one of the most blatant (and enfuriating) examples I've seen.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 05:43 pm
What bothers me the most are those regularly scheduled terrorist alerts. We all know we must all be aware of our surroundings, but that hasn't changed since I was a little kid, and I'm no longer a green pea.
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 05:47 pm
I, for one, choose to believe what timber chose to report on above. Makes sense to me.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 06:18 pm
Sumac, yeh sure - me too. <nods>

The details about the original plan versus what was eventually done and so on were new to me, and sound logical enough.

As for the background of the prospective hijackers ... i.e., that they were to be Yemenis and Saudis (and not, say, Iraqis); and that that was a question of where the concentration of Al-Qaeda human resources was at (i.e., not in Iraq), rather than of some intricate plot to discredit Saudi Arabia, the US ally -

all that sounds wholly logical, too. Cant help feeling a hint of exasperation about seeing them "discover" that now ... but so be it.

Meanwhile, I think Blatham's point was still a very good one - so thats what my reply on that came from. S been annoying - even alarming - me to no end. Just look at that linked example to see what kind of thing we're talking about and whether you agree.
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 06:50 pm
I agree, nimh.
0 Replies
 
Ethel2
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 07:19 pm
This may have been posted elsewhere, but I thought it interesting, from CNN, Wolfe Blitzer report:

Quote:
In the latest CNN/USA-Today/Gallup Poll, registered voters were presented with a hypothetical head-to-head match-up and asked their choice for president. Wesley Clark led President Bush 49% to 46%, within the 3.5% margin of error.

CNN Polling Director Keating Holland says a number of factors contribute to Clark's popularity. "Part of it is his resume, part of it is his announcement bounce, part of it may simply be that he's a fresh face. He is, after all, the flavor of the month."

This from a candidate without huge name recognition. Nearly half the general public surveyed is not familiar with Gen. Clark.

Still, political experts say Clark's catapult is not the most surprising thing about this poll. "Bush is sinking, Clark is surging," says Bill Schneider, a CNN senior political analyst. "Clark picked exactly the right moment to make his announcement."

Indeed, the same CNN/USA-Today/Gallup Poll shows President Bush falling fast. According to this poll, the president has a 50% approval rating, the lowest of his presidency and a 10% drop from last month.


and this:

Quote:
Timing aside, is there an "Ike Factor" with Wes Clark? A parallel exists between Clark and another former supreme allied commander in Europe, who rode in on a white horse in 1952 and captured the White House.

According to CNN's Keating Holland, that theory may hold some water. "He does particularly well with those over 65, for example. And that's the crowd that remembers Gen. Eisenhower. That's the 'Greatest Generation' that sort of stands up and salutes when they hear the world 'general'," says Keating.


And 65s are still plenty young enough to get themselves to the polls to vote. Dean isn't mentioned in this short article.

http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/wolf.blitzer.reports/
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 07:08 am
About the same CNN/USA Today/Gallup (Italgato! Gallup!) poll:

Quote:
49 percent said they would vote for Clark, compared with 46 percent for Bush. Each of the four other major Democratic candidates came within three points of Clark's showing in a hypothetical head-to-head race with the president, the poll found.

Kerry narrowly outpaced the president, 48-percent to 47-percent. Bush held a slim lead over Dean (49 to 46 percent), Gephardt (48 to 46 percent) and Lieberman (48 to 47 percent).


link
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 07:10 am
Nimh, that's obviously a lefty, commahnist anti-american, unkrischun poll! Smile
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 07:59 am
hobitbob wrote:
Nimh, that's obviously a lefty, commahnist anti-american, unkrischun poll! Smile


Nah, yeh, that was a bit childish of me to refer to Italgato. I just did because last month (or earlier this month), when other polls were showing such dropping approval rates for Bush and such narrowing margins between him and a Democratic challenger, he brusquely sweeped those polls aside (remember about Zogby's ethnic background?) and referred, time and again, to the last Gallup poll (which had still showed large majorities in approval of Bush's Iraq policy). The one really reliable poll, according to him. Well, here we are with the new Gallup poll, showing some of the very worst numbers for Bush thus far.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 08:16 am
timber

nimh has it. I wasn't contesting content above. I was pointing to how a lazy or obsequious press does us all a profound disservice when it becomes merely a mouthpiece for manipulative 'leaks'.

nimh's linked example (french passports provided to Iraq biggies) shows how it has been used for Black Propaganda smears, but that's not the only manner in which this trick is employed.

We ought not to play along.
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 04:09 pm
Democratic debates being held soon...

Date: Thursday, September 25, 2003
Location: New York, NY
Hosted by: CNBC & the Wall Street Journal
Broadcast on: CNBC/MSNBC
Time: TBD

Date: October 9, 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Hosted by: Gov. Janet Napolitano & the AZ Democratic Party
Broadcast on: CNN
Time: TBD

Date: October 26, 2003
Location: Detroit, MI
Hosted by: The Congressional Black Caucus
Broadcast on: TBD
Time: TBD
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 02/03/2025 at 04:57:33