Monday, March 26, 2007
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
This week, the Democratic operatives showed up and it turned un-fun pretty quickly.
During a question-and-answer session, a student got up and directed a question to Mark Penn, a top strategist for Hillary Clinton.
"Hillary Clinton voted for the war," the student said. "How do you convince those of us who are inclined to support her that she isn't inclined to get us involved in another war?"
Penn replied that Hillary Clinton is not the kind of person who would have started the Iraq war. He said that had she been president, she would have found out the truth about the weapons of mass destruction and there would have been no war.
But Penn didn't stop there. Even though he had been asked nothing about Barack Obama, Penn said that Obama's record on opposition to the war was "complex" and that Obama had made statements in the past that appear to support the Iraq war.
Obama's top strategist, David Axelrod, was sitting about six feet away from Penn and he was not going to take that.
Axelrod, who is normally soft-spoken and mild-mannered, replied: "I really think it is important, if we're going to run the kind of campaign that will unify our party and move this country forward, that we do it in an honest way, and that was not an honest way."
What's the big deal with that? Don't people on opposing campaigns accuse each other of being dishonest all the time?
No. Not in public, anyway. It is considered pushing the boundaries of what is done and not done.
Axelrod continued, "Are we going to spend 10 months savaging each other or lift this country up?"
"I think that is a false choice," Penn replied. "Are we going to look at everybody's record and everybody's votes and tell people the truth?"
Un-fun. But very interesting.
I have two thoughts about the exchange between Penn and Axelrod:
First, it is a sign that no campaign is going to risk getting "Swift-Boated." Any campaign that is attacked or thinks it is being attacked is going to respond quickly and vigorously.
Second, the Iraq war is not going to go away as an issue within the Democratic Party.
When it comes to the war, who said what when, how they said it and what they say about it now is going to continue to be a very big deal.
After the question-and-answer session, the campaign staffs, some reporters and some students retired to a large, off-the-record dinner.
And I figured Axelrod might use the opportunity to bury the hatchet.
"I want to go on the record to say that Mark is a longtime friend of mine, whom I respect deeply," Axelrod said. "But let's not throw out half-quotes that are aimed at misleading. I did not say a word about Sen. Clinton's choice to vote for the war in 2002."
That's burying the hatchet, all right. Right in Mark Penn's head.
Monday, March 19, 2007
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
*In Regards to General Pace's comments that homosexuality is immoral*
But is it immoral?
"Well I'm going to leave that to others to conclude,"she said. "I'm very proud of the gays and lesbians I know who perform work that is essential to our country, who want to serve their country and I want make sure they can."
Now, personally, I think this should be a real cut and dry issue for the Democratic candidates. In my liberal opinion, no, homosexuality is neither immoral nor sinful - it's a natural evolutionary phenomenon. You can feel how you feel about gay marriages/civil unions/etc, but this should be simple. Sidestepping a question that demands an answer to the condemnation of millions of Americans is political postering and irresponsible.
Don't get me wrong, I respect Hillary for her expertise, but this really bothers me. Other candidates have come out and said being gay is not a sin (Edwards did it on Meet the Press not too long ago, Kerry did it in the last election. Hell, even REPUBLICAN Senator John Warner condemned the immoral comment). Is it that she thinks it is NOT a sin, but doesn't want to piss of moderates? Or maybe - she thinks being gay IS sinful and immoral, in which case she'd never be able to say it because she'd lose even more of the Democratic left flank (including my vote in a heartbeat). There's really no way to know at this point, and that's sad really.
Feel free to defend her. :-)
Full Linky to Kos here: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/3/14/17176/7130
By the way, this is the Bruin Democrats 100th blog post. GO BDS!
Monday, March 12, 2007
Wednesday, March 07, 2007
This is pretty hilarious, as I do the exact same thing. I'm just impressed with how he got away with it for so long - Hell, it makes me want to vote for him more. ;-)
Obama attended Harvard Law School from 1988 to 1991. During his time at Harvard, Obama lived at 365 Broadway in Somerville, according to his parking tickets. Records from the Cambridge Traffic, Parking and Transportation office show that between Oct. 5, 1988 and Jan. 12, 1990 Obama was cited for 17 traffic violations, sometimes committing two in the same day. The abuses included parking in a resident permit area, parking in a bus stop and failing to pay the meter. Twelve of Obama’s 17 tickets were given to him on Massachusetts Avenue.
In one eight day stretch in 1988, Obama was cited seven times for parking violations and was fined $45. Thirteen of the 17 violations occurred within one month in 1988.
Obama’s disobedience of the rules of the road earned him $140 in fines from the City of Cambridge. The tickets went unpaid for over 17 years and $260 in late fees were added to the tab. On Jan. 26, the fines and late fees were paid in full. The final tally for Obama’s parking breaches was $400, according to Cambridge Traffic, Parking and Transportation.
Fight the Parking Power, Barack!
Linky Here: http://somervillenews.typepad.com/the_somerville_news/2007/03/obama_finally_p.html#more
Friday, March 02, 2007
Yes, that's right. She said the following:
"I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate, John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word ‘faggot' – so... Kind of at an impasse. Can't really talk about Edwards, so I think I'll just conclude here and take your questions."
The kicker? Ann Coulter was introduced by GOP Presidential candidate Mitt Romney. I suppose you need to condone the use anti-gay slurs to get the GOP vote nowadays...though that's not news I suppose.
By the way, John Edwards will be on the UCLA Campus this Monday, at 5 PM at the Kerkhoff Patio. Come tell him what a heinous sea hag Ann Coulter is!!
Thursday, March 01, 2007
What has happened to News as a medium? I get that the average person may not want to hear about important national and world events such as genocides in Africa everyday, but when did the news companies completely give up on at least trying to give us decent information at least fifty percent of the time?
I think that news should hold itself to some sort of standards; standards dictating that they should try to give the public information that really matters, not stuff that merely exists to garner ratings.
In lue of John Edwards joining us here at UCLA on Friday, an interesting article was written up over at politico talking about how Sen. Edwards may actually suprise everyone, just as he did in 2004 at the first quarter FEC deadline.
Isn't he dreammmmmmmmmmmy?