We need to get out of this whiney mode where we buy into stupid republican frames and then getting distracted by some silly mock scandal about a singer at a campaign event.

My job is not to represent Washington to you, but to represent you to Washington- Obama
Philly for Obama

"Everybody's a message expert," said one Democratic leadership aide. "The fact of the matter is Democrats are working hard to communicate our accomplishments. There is work to be done and that's why Democrats are working together and mounting an aggressive campaign to discuss the real victories we have won for the American people."

I don't know who this unnamed aide is, but he's not only not listening (as usual) he's actually quite disdainful of the whole effort to turn things around.
I don't understand how the democrats are ignoring their low approval ratings, or how they're rationalizing breaking their most important promises, but this guy's comment certainly provides a clue.  There are none so blind as those that refuse to see.  It's kind of like my old man in this interminable argument we've been having, in which he says the argument is about anything but what it's about.

"We appreciate input from those who have been on the front lines, and we value their opinions," said Nadeam Elshami, spokesman for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.)."

How patronizing can you get?  These are people who are simply NOT LISTENING.  They seem to have told themselves a completely different narrative about what their 06 victory meant, and while I'm also pleased that "Democrats are discussing not sending a supplemental spending bill to the floor until Bush changes course on the war", I'm resigned to the fact that the leadership aides quoted above will probably have the final say in the matter.  Which means Bush will get more money, no strings attached.

Brendan Calling John Mccain

note how he is worried about what others will say as if that speech act was only available to one party and the dems were rendered in impotent silence at all times. tacit acknowlegement that dems have no message control, and the media is a hostile environment for the democratic perspective. you'd think a majority would try to do something about that, but instead today's dems just accept that playing field and always bring their trusty knives to the gunfight. what losers.

"Are we any more prepared to deal with the threats that are going to come about cutting off funds to the troops?" asked the aide.

what kind of threats, from whom? he's not talking about angry bobbleheads on teevee; he's already admitted that's a lost cause. he means threats from those who profit from continued war, those who are currently pouring money into dem coffers, those who once supported the bushies but have felt the popular tide turn. the ones paying for a political rebranding of the war (HRC's "fewer" troops).

Clinton throws glitzy $1M birthday bash

The event doubled as a $1.5 million fundraising haul with the most expensive tickets going for the Federal Election Commission maximum of $2,300. The show's "cheap seats" in the balcony cost $100.

Man oh man........There is going to be some hay made out of this!!!!!!

"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity"

'You elected us to get us out of Iraq and we are going to get us out of Iraq. We gave the president a surge...it hasn't worked. We will appropriate no more money for Iraq except funds to facilitate a total withdrawal of our troops. We will not drop this fiasco on the doorstep of the next president.'

And some of them will. Unfortunately, that idea does [make] many Democrats nervous that Bush will use the tactic to say Democrats aren't supporting the troops.

It's been the same since January 2007. And it will be the same until January 2009. And then, who knows...?


"We're trying to give the illusion of due diligence." --Bennett Holiday to Jimmy Pope in Syriana

Cut off the allowance - they used to call this tough love.

Mukasey's Nomination Runs Into Trouble

Judge Michael Mukasey's nomination for attorney general ran into trouble Thursday when two top Senate Democrats said their votes hinge on whether he will say on the record that an interrogation technique that simulates drowning is torture.

"It's fair to say my vote would depend on him answering that question," Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., told reporters late Thursday.

"This to me is the seminal issue," said Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin of Illinois, another member of Leahy's panel. Asked if his vote depends on whether Mukasey equates waterboarding with torture, Durbin answered: "It does."

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said his support could be in doubt over the same issue.

"I think if he doesn't change his direction in that regard, he could have at least one concern and that's me," Reid told reporters.

Sound like fighting words???

"As he always does, Judge Mukasey will answer all questions from the Judiciary Committee in a clear and forthright manner," said White House spokesman Tony Fratto.

Hmmmmmm..........You mean like this, Tony?

   MUKASEY: If waterboarding is torture, torture is not constitutional. [...]

    WHITEHOUSE: If it's torture. That's a massive hedge. I mean, it either is or it isn't. Do you have an opinion on whether waterboarding...is constitutional?

    MUKASEY: If it amounts to torture, it is not constitutional.

    WHITEHOUSE: I'm very disappointed in that answer. I think it is purely semantic.

    MUKASEY: I'm sorry.

Okay, Democrats.  Once again I'm waiting with bated breath.  Show me the money.


"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity"

Nothing is working in Iraq, it is time to force the Iraqi Military to stand-up while the U.S. pulls out. A kinda of sink or swim mentality for the Iraqi Military.