DISQUS

just annoyed? makes me damn angry. also makes me realize that my 5-year-old has a better appreciation of how this country came to be than any of the people making these silly statements

That some pretty wishful (and delusional) thinking.

The public is more cynical on the economy with each passing day. People will see McCain's move for the political ploy it is. Who really thinks that McCain in DC will help matters?

haven't read the book, but am familiar with Lacey's journalism. she's talented but she also clearly uses her looks and personality to promote herself and her book. when you put yourself out there in such a way, it's hard to complain that critics are reviewing you and not your book.

Agreed. We've heard endless stories about great startups going down the Google black hole. Grand Central...Jaiku...etc.

Funny that you've redesigned and put ads on now that you hardly blog any more and your audience here (if not on Twitter, Facebook, Friend Feed, etc.) must surely have dropped.

For blogs, "banned in China" brings the same cachet that books/movies used to get from the "banned in Boston" tag.

nice fish

Wow. I, and everyone I know, use the Firefox extensions. Is the failure to measure a technical hurdle or just a procedural issue?

I smell and FEC audit ;-)

Very astute analysis, Fred. Like the right wing preacher who's just a little too strident in his condemnation of gays and then gets caught with a gay prostitute, it seemd inevitable that Spitzer's hyper-virtuous persona was hiding some demons. I see your point about Obama, but while he and his campaign are surly nurturing the messianic thing, I think it's more a product of what the public is projecting on him and not coming from within him, as is the case with Spitzer. In fairness to Obama, he seems (at times, anyway) to be genuinely uncomfortable with the role that's being cast for him.

Brilliant! Obviously much better incentive than this silhouette/question mark deal disqus uses..

I guess the difference is that the "chosen one" schtick is Obama getting caught up in the moment. I don't think the guy has a messianic character. If I did, I'd steer clear of him. And I guess I think that, in the end, the reality of the Oval Office will knock him back to reality whereas I don't think that will be enough to cure Hillary of what I think ails her. In fact, I think it will only make things worse.

In the end, I will of course support her if she's the nominee. My two biggest problems with her: Iraq and the sense that she's entitled to the nomination. For me, the latter is worse than Obama's willingness to accept the "chosen one" mantle.

I'm supporting Obama, but actually expecting little from him beyond the basics of not actively screwing things up a la Bush. And while it's not Hillary's "fault" that Bill got to the White House first, she can't very well claim those two terms on her resume and then blame me and many like me for having Clinton fatigue. It's not her "fault" she's married to Bill, but it's not mine either.

Tom, I'm a former reporter myself so I know of what you speak. I'm making a conscious effort to be less cynical (quitting the newspaper business certainly helped ;-) You raise some valid points, but I don't think Obama should have to apologize for for some ninny on cable said or even make a point to denounce it. And while he's certainly milking the "cult" thing, you can't blame him for attracting that kind of following in the first place. What I see as unAmerican is the prospect of entering a third decade under the leadership of one of the same two families. Enough.

Sincere question: What examples of sexism from the Obama camp? Not saying there haven't been any, just not aware of them. I am aware, however, of the race politics being played by the Clintons. As for the "cultish" aspects of the campaign, frankly that just strikes me as cynicism on the part of people who are so past believing that a politician could possible inspire hope in people. If that's true than we really are done for and there's no sense paying attention to this whole thing in the first place.

Personally, I've got debate fatigue. Yes, there should be more debates, but 1/week is excessive. And it's clearly a strategic proposal and not one done in the interest of the voters. Not that that's bad or that Obama doesn't/shouldn't make similar moves. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't call it what it is. And I'm trying not to be too cynical this time around (which is why I'm supporting Obama in the first place), but I do fear that it's going to come down to back room dealing at the convention leaving Obama seriously outmatched. BTW, while I'm a big fan of the Times, I think the tin-hat brigade has an issue with their endorsement of Hillary and now with this morning's lame piece http://urltea.com/2nts on how Obama didn't live up to the hype on Tuesday. Check out this snippet: "Mr. Obama more than held his own against Mrs. Clinton: he won more states and may well have won more delegates, once all of them, including those from caucus states, are officially allocated.
But...." Talk about quickly dispensing with the inconvenient facts to make your predetermined point. Disappointing to see this in the Times.

Depends on who paid ;-)

True, there's only so much "change" we can realistically expect of any candidate. The rest is just campaign hype and the electorate's longing. But I think there's a big distinction between having voted for the war and voting to continue funding the troops. As much as I'd like to see Iraq over and done with, I think cutting off funding is the worst way possible to do so.

Who's been doing the siphoning for the past 7 years? Maybe you're among those who enjoy Bush's tax cuts, but it doesn't take a Nobel-winning economist to see that we're just passing the buck to our kids.

watching the lessig video now. the demonstrations of clinton's swiftboat-like tactics affirms for me the fact that I can't support her now.

I agree about the video, but that's always the tricky thing about endorsements. They're premised on the idea of "do what I do" and they often turn off as many people as they turn on.

Good points, all. But as everyone knows, especially New Yorkers, Obama's got nothing on Hillary when it comes to preachy. In the end, I can deal with either being the nominee, but the clinchers for me are: the war and no child left behind, each its own brand of disaster. I know she's got upside, but Hillary's support for these things tells me there's too much of an uncritical willingness to go along with the status quo.

My pleasure. You've turned me on to plenty of great bands through your blog, so I'll let this one slide ;-)