DISQUS

this is one of the best threads ever. wow. yall have jacked up my productivity today!


keep on pushing. i love the debate



D, good luck here bro :)

@karmi i have heard so many people say michelle is actually the better obama. in some ways this couple is similar to the clintons. remember how many folks were impressed with hillary, saying she was actually the smarter, better one?


anyway, thanks for the reporting yall.



i'll try to post the video this afternoon in this same entry

thanks craig. i've been on the road so much for the past two weeks i haven't been posting as regularly. i'm getting back into the groove though. 'preciate it

i second the cornbread shoutout. yall are wrong.

@Webb as far as I know we've never deleted a comment or post other than for tech reasons (that is, duplication).


I know it's our unstated policy not to delete things. Can you remember when this happened?

nice catch jill. you beat me to it!

the very same. if you click the links to each event you can see the bios of each of the folks listed as speakers.

ha val.


that says a lot that you forgot to mention her name. i think many of us will be doing the same over the coming months and years

thanks for these incredible comments yall.


i'll try to dip in and out throughout the day with some followups.



i definitely couldn't list ALL the offenses of the clinton camp, so don't take anything from me not listing MLK, assassination and other wrong statements and decisions.



I fully agree with Ms. Martin who wrote









Jack, it could very well be that Hillary Clinton & Co. took us (at least me) to a place we cannot come back from.





God I know that feeling, and many more of you have expressed something similar.



A lot of people never trusted, liked or respected The Clintons. I'm not one of those people. Watching them descend into ugliness has been painful and infuriating, especially as our own witness was called into question.



FOr Michelle, I really need to clarify.



I'm not trying to say I believe that all attacks on Hillary are sexist or attacks on you. I'm trying to see and express the frustration of a category of her own supporters.



I talked to a Hillary supporter who told me point blank that she only began to support Hillary as a defense mechanism against sexist media coverage. This person never bothered to understand our rage and sadness, and I never really bothered to understand hers.



I'll update the post to clarify that.



keep it coming fam!

this is a hard pill to swallow, and i'll look into the mechanics of how exactly the money flows.


i do know that none of the money you've given already can go to her, and I think it would have to be a separate fundraising effort to pay off her debt.



hillary was mad irresponsible and nasty in her use of funds. she hired overpriced consultants who ultimately failed her. she ran divisive direct mail campaigns. she really used this money in ways that were not at all good for the party or the country.



that said, this isn't about her. it's about reaching those supporters of hers who have been polarized by this campaign. it's about demonstrating a lot of what Obama talks about, which is being willing to negotiate with the enemy. it's about getting superdelegates not just to vote for obama but actively campaign for him.



so with all that said, i'm cool with him continuing to take the high road

bigassbelle,


someone still has to actually run the place after all the bullets have flown. we've had an armed revolution in this country. armed revolution itself doesn't solve the problems. it just changes the guard.

@anonymous


precisely the right thinking.



we've set up an insane housing and planning system in this country that assumed cheap gas and ready access to cars. when gas is not $5 but $10 or $15 a gallon our society actually breaks.



hotlanta is a hot mess when it comes to this. No planning whatsoever. sprawl and 15 lanes of highway and no mass transit. that's a bad mix.



there are things we can do on an individual level, but we need national and even international level planning to deal with the most severe impacts.



pricing will change our behavior where goodwill and news reports could not. it's always been that way.



if you're in the market for a car, maximize that fuel efficiency or avoid the purchase altogether.



living anywhere that depends on a drive is a no-go.



expanding roadways and airport runways is a complete waste.

@hawa excellent question about record oil company profits.


here's a 2005 story responding to claims of price gouging by oil companies



the shorter answer is that the oil companies don't set the price, for one.



and their major use of funds is not in operating costs but in exploration and development.



the big outlays for this exploration and development was made years and years ago in most cases, and high demand has driven oil prices MUCH higher than anticipated. they made their investments with a much lower return built in, and now they are reaping the benefits.



they have a duty to shareholders to allow this to continue. so they could make significant and costly investments in other areas, but that would cut into the profits.



they are operating exactly as they were designed to and exactly as any rational company would.

Jill, you called upon the Clinton campaign to clarify and apoligize.


You are too kind. The time for "clarification and apologies has long since passed.



She needs to go away. Make money giving speeches. Run a hedge fund. Anything else.



what a horrible person.

pamela and craig, thanks for schooling me on the art of strategic timing.


i'm thinking edwards passed a certain window of endorsement after a few months. having waited so long (for whatever reason), BHO may have said, hold off till W VA.



yall are right about this jamming up Hillbot's news cycle. whatever screws with her is good.



thanks for the added perspective

I hear you craig. and I'm not mad. just not that impressed. but it IS a good thing


anything that helps kill this white vote narrative is a good thing.

tiffany thanks for dropping by. let me take these on one at a time


(a) arguing with an old lady is kind of pointless and not a good look;



I disagree because I think you and I assume a different goal for the interaction. If the reporter's goal is to actually change the voter's mind, then yes, arguing with a racist old white lady is pointless. However, that's not the purpose of ABC News. Their job is to inform millions of OTHER citizens and by letting this false statement hang out there, she's not doing her job as a journalist.



(b) attribution is a way of maintaining at least the appearance of objectivity (which is why you hear "some say..");



I don't see the relevance of this point here AND I disagree with it. Inserting "some say" is a way to stir up UNATTRIBUTED controversy for lazy reporters and speakers who are addicted to rhetorical techniques that lack substance. In this specific case, though, that's not what happened, so I'm confused as to why you've mentioned it



(c) we don't know whether she more vehemently corrected the woman off-camera;



Again this doesn't matter. The only part of her reporting that matters to the millions of viewers is what is ON camera. She could have kicked the woman in the face and called her whole family racist. If you don't do it in the light of day, you didn't do it. If it's not in the story, it doesn't exist.





(d) *right* after the segment, diane sawyer said that it was erroneous.



I haven't been able to watch the rest of the segment because of some tech problems. I'll keep trying, but it's not in the clip I posted, and I let the full report play out. Sawyer then moved on to talk about how Obama and Clinton were both in NYC and might have a meeting. I heard no correction within the first few seconds.

hey yall. can you be more specific about the tubbs jones interview


what always helps in pulling clips:



+ network

+ time aired

+ specific phrase said or guests.



so far i have the last piece but not enough to narrow it down.



thanks

CPL. Welcome to the fam. I am so excited to have you on board, especially with your CBC experience. Welcome, welcome welcome!


I did a fundraiser for Rep Robert Wexler (D-FL) tonight, and he's one of the few in Congress with heart and balls enough to demand impeachment hearings for on the Constitution-violating activities of the Bush administration.



He's on the Judiciary Committee, and it seems Conyers, Sheila Jackson Lee and Maxine Waters are not down with looking into this.



If you have any insight, please share.



And thanks in advance for all your contributions to come.



Let's bring the ruckus!

@kid, you said "Rassmussen is quoting you as a source. You know they can't be trusted."


what are you referring to?

@s, it's not $20 per month. it's an esimated $25 in savings for the ENTIRE summer. That's not nearly worth the savings.


@anonymous. You are right, Obama supported a similar tax relief EIGHT YEARS AGO.



I'd like to think he's gotten smarter since then. I know our energy situation has gotten much more desperate since then.



From a supply perspective, we are in trouble. Formerly exporting nations like Mexico are trimming exports and reserving more oil for domestic use.



The climate situation is much more perilous today. And as our GOP friends are fond of telling us, the security situation is "different" after 9/11.



We cannot afford the same old tricks. We cannot afford delay.



The American people don't need $25 credits. And even Obama is wrong if he thinks the American people need lower gas prices AT ALL.



Our addiction is subsidized by a vast military presence and by the imposition of our will on billions of people around the world. For what? So we can drive cars that get the same gas mileage today that they got THIRTY YEARS AGO.



We don't DESERVE lower gas prices. Our stuff needs to be costing $10/gallon, then maybe we'll be paying a "fair" price for this finite resource we seem to think we're entitled to.

this is ridiculous. first of all, no one EVER EVER gives the democratic candidate the luxury of going into the detail and full possible meaning of what he REALLY MEANT.


McCain has to answer for this.



He said he's fine with us staying in Iraq for 100 years or longer as we've stayed in Korea. He also said he doesn't believe we can stay in Iraq like Korea. I posted BOTH videos because the man is now arguing with himself.



Second, he's foolish if he thinks we can peacefully remain in the holy land with our military for 100 years with no conflict.



Third, when does the clock start? We're at war now. Americans are dying now. How many years does it take for us to get to the steady state fantasy of his? 5 years? 10 years? 50 years?



He makes no sense.



He lashed himself to this war. He sings fun little songs about Bombinb Iran. He's the most irresponsible commander in chief of the three remaining candidates. WHO JOKES ABOUT BOMBING A COUNTY AND SINGS A SONG ABOUT IT.



No, McCain gets to quarter here, nor do his insane ideas nor his shady associations.



And for the record, I don't care if we are "at peace" in Iraq. *I* want our troops out. You think the people of Okinawa are thrilled with our presence and rape of their women?



Regardless of whether or not peace is possible *I* am against installing a base of operations for the military industrial complex in ANY MORE COUNTRIES.



So John McCain gets no slack from me on this.



none.



Let's send his ass over for the next 100 years.

D, I'm sorry. Were you trying to say that the fact that McCain distanced himself from these comments was somehow relevant? I'm sorry you're living in a word where facts and information matter. But in THIS world, NONE OF THAT MATTERS.


See, I'm in the media now, so I'll be back tomorrow hounding McCain on whether he thinks it's the job of American foreign policy to bring on the Rapture.



Good luck with your facts. They didn't do a damn thing for Obama.



Mr. Straight Talk has a lot of explaining to do. A lot more at least. Maybe when he's denounced the comments 1,000 times, maybe then I should let up. Probably not though.



I'm starting to QUESTION HIS JUDGMENT AND ABILITY TO DEFEND THIS NATION'S BABIES FROM EVIL BROWN TERRORISTS.



In fact, I don't think McCain shares the values this great nation. I may ask him about that as well.



Put on your seatbelts.

@truthseeker,


real quick point: nothing will shut the racists up. they are racists. the will retrofit any rationale over their preexisting reasoning.



i'm not weighing in on craig's suggestion, but i think this is a point we often miss in our political tactics. do something if you believe it will make a difference or simply because you believe it to be right. doing something so your most die hard opponent thinks favorably of you is futile. they'll still hate your ass but will make up a new reason :)

Ms Martin,


we have posted about The Family, including linking to that very piece in the post prior to this one asking if Hillary will now be dragged forward for her connection to this strange religious group.



thanks for being such an active member here.



peace