What the hell is Lawler thinking?

For those of us who aren't in love with Hillary Clinton, and there are many of us (Democrats), this piece by Peter Lawler of the National Review commands attention. It's not that I don't like Hillary Clinton - I love her policy. I just think, at this time, her being associated with a national race is bad for the party. In the future, perhaps in 2008 or 2012, Hillary will be a viable candidate. But right now, she's toxic, and should stay away from the race. She would be a huge disaster. Can anyone really see the nation's electorate voting for another scandal mongerer at this point?

Clark SHOULD NOT consider her as his VP (if he gets the nomination). He needs someone like Bill Richardson, who, as I've said, locks up the latino vote for Democrats for about two decades.

What's to be feared about a Dean candidacy?

The Republicans are going to be NASTY in this next campaign. They will run ads with Dean's face morphing into Saddam Hussein or Osama. They will send direct mail to elderly voters with Dean's name and two men kissing. I can't even begin to imagine the nastiness that will occur. Can Dean stand up to these attacks? I'm not so sure. Let's face it - gays scare moderate white men. Bush's cronies on the right will relentlessly attack Dean for his support of gays. They will compare him to Osama bin Laden. And the public will eat it up - they have already demostrated their ability to understand complex issues (2/3 think Saddam was involved in 9-11) and I doubt it would take much nastiness to send them into the Bush camp.

That's why, for now, I'm supporting Wesley Clark. He wears a teflon military uniform and has the ability to be courageous on the issue of gay rights without having ever signed any major legislation.
Listen - I'm all for gay marriage being legalized. But I think the political climate right now is not going to be favorable for a presidential candidate who is advocating is seriously.

Go to the UN?

As much as I don't want to see the post-war effort in Iraq in the hands of the UN, I don't see a choice at this point. We need more troops and more money. And without ceding most of the control over to the UN I don't see how we can get it. I'd rather see the US in control of a post-war situation that we created, but it's not looking like that's a viable option.

Kennedy shoots, Kennedy scores!!

Here's a quote from Kennedy to the AP Thursday:

"There was no imminent threat. This was made up in Texas, announced in January to the Republican leadership that war was going to take place and was going to be good politically. This whole thing was a fraud."

He said Bush officials employed "distortion, misrepresentation, a selection of intelligence" to justify the war.

As for the administration's current policy in Iraq, Kennedy called it "adrift."

He said Bush officials had failed to account for $1.5 billion of the $4 billion the war costs each month, citing a recent report by the Congressional Budget Office.

"My belief is this money is being shuffled all around to these political leaders in all parts of the world, bribing them to send in troops," he told the AP.

Wow - that's an impressive group of quotes. Kennedy's still got it.

Bill Richardson for VP

We've seen lovingly crafted Washington Post articles promoting rising stars in the Democratic Party before. John Edwards and Harold Ford Jr. come to mind. This cushy piece aside (although it makes alot of good points), Bill Richardson is at the top of everyone's Vice Presidential list these days. Forget Wesley Clark - his aides have recently said he doesn't want the vice presidency, and if he gets the nomination I see him as a potential Defense Secretary. No, Governor Bill Richardson. He's immensely popular in New Mexico. He is Latino. He has experience in Washington, including a stint as UN ambassador and Energy Secretary (he was seen on TV alot recently during the energy crisis and is a credible critic of Bush's policies in that arena). But most of all, he says shit and fuck alot around reporters. What's more refreshing than that?

Wesley Clark for President

I'm right now throwing my support behind Wesley Clark for president. He's the strongest candidate. Dean is too risky - his anger might turn off the electorate if the situation in Iraq turns around or the economy rebounds significantly. It will be interesting to see how Wesley Clark does in the polls, especially after his appearance in the September 25 debate. (assuming he runs).

Just as I predicted, the right-wing radio hosts in California and elsewhere are attacking the 9th court of appeals. Right-wingers will be right-wingers.

California Recall Delayed
Well, the California recall has been delayed, at least for 7 days while the parties involved seek a ruling from the Supreme Court. The basic argument here is that there are 6 heavily populated and mostly minority counties that are using outdated punchcard ballots. The states had promised to change these ballots by the next election (originally the next election was scheduled for next March). The court's arguments make sense. I'm not usually one to worry much about voter errors in punch card balloting, but when there are 5 separate punch card ballots with 123 candidates on them, I worry that some voters will be disinfranchised.

Expect the Republican rhetoric to be as follows:

1. This is the same court (9th circuit) that said that the pledge of allegiance was illegal.
2. This is an example of an activist court subverting Democracy.

That first argument may resonate well with right-wingers, but is quite irrelevant. The fact is, the 9th circuit cited the arguments used by the conservatives in the US Supreme Court during the Florida recount to make their decision.

The second argument is just typical whining from the right-wing. Whenever a court decision goes against what they believe, it means that the courts are "liberal activist courts". Whenever the right agrees with a court decision, the courts are "upholding the law".

Release of Kay Report on Iraqi WMD delayed

Here is a nice paragraph from London Sunday Times (a conservative paper) about the Kay report:

"Britain and America have decided to delay indefinitely the publication of a full report on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction after inspectors found no evidence that any such weapons exist."

Lies, lies, lies.

Rumsfeld was on Meet the Press today. He pushed alot of the Iraq-911 connection innuendo of which he is so fond.

More lies.

Are Democratic Presidential candidates giving aid and comfort to the enemy?

No.

That's all I have to say about that.