dave

Dave Snider is a No Party Affiliation member from CA, San Francisco
Say hello to dave

dave (140)
Libertarian - No Party Affiliation
posted Array
PM me | Add as Friend

Clinton Goes Hoarse Rooting for Giants

Gotta love what kind of images the AP likes to spit out in their articles. Anything think this is on purpose?

dave (140)
Libertarian - No Party Affiliation
posted Array
PM me | Add as Friend

Clinton Goes Hoarse Rooting for Giants


Hillary Clinton
Democratic presidential hopeful, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., waves as she thanks volunteers at her campaign headquarters in Boston Monday, Feb. 4, 2008, one day before the primary elections on Super Tuesday.wld (AP Photo/Elise Amendola)
Biography Issues Fund Raising Rivals Supporters Affiliations Photos Videos Forums

That rough, husky tone to New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's voice didn't come from the campaign trail.

"Every New Yorker has a sore throat after last night," Clinton told talk-show host David Letterman during her appearance Monday on "The Late Show." She said she had been rooting for the New York Giants while watching the Super Bowl in a Minneapolis sports bar.

Clinton said she was modeling her campaign for the Democratic nomination for president on the Giants' last-minute, 17-14 victory over the undefeated New England Patriots.

"I took a lot of heart from that, Dave," said Clinton, who is neck-and-neck in many polls with rival Barack Obama on the eve of the 22-state nomination contest. "The fourth quarter before Super Tuesday, you've got to keep going."

Clinton and Letterman traded laughs on whether she drank a beer during the game "I did not, only because I am so tired I thought I might still be there if I had" to how she'd control her husband's behavior as president "In my White House, we'll know who wears the pant suits."

Clinton sidestepped a question about whether Obama, an Illinois senator, could be her running mate.

"I've been giving a lot careful consideration to that," she said. "It's really down to you and Regis."

Turning serious, Letterman asked whether all the money the presidential candidates are raising might be better spent feeding the poor and hungry. Clinton agreed that it wasn't a good way to run campaigns.

"That's why we should go to public financing," she said.


dave (140)
Libertarian - No Party Affiliation
posted Array
PM me | Add as Friend

Obama Debuts New Act in Vegas

It's articles like this that make me totally distrust anything coming out of the AP. I just feel depressed reading so much obviously approval.

How do you think print/internet media is doing covering these races? To me, I've seen more interesting stuff coming out of the fan side then anything the reporters have said.

dave (140)
Libertarian - No Party Affiliation
posted Array
PM me | Add as Friend

Obama Debuts New Act in Vegas

            <div class="special-box" style="width:270px;">
        <div style="border:solid 1px #CCC">
            <div class="ta-c p-10" style="background:#FFF;border-bottom:solid 1px #CCC">
                                    <a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/news/obama-debuts-new-act-in-vegas/30854/photos/&imageId=7971">
                    <img src="http://image.politicalbase.com/uploads/people/4000/3221/d4444b7c-a8ee-4a05-9beb-3e0348eff6c6_240.jpg" style="border:solid 3px #CCC;"/>
                </a>                                        <br/>
                    <div class="ta-l p-8" style="border:solid 1px #DDD;">
                        <span class="strong">Barack Obama</span><br/>                           <span class="dgray f-10">Democratic presidential hopeful, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., shakes hands at a town hall meeting in Las Vegas Thursday, Jan. 17, 2008. (AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast)</span>
                    </div>
                                            <table class="list">
                        <tr>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/barack-obama/3221/">Biography</a></td>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/barack-obama/3221/issues/">Issues</a></td>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/barack-obama/3221/money/">Fund Raising</a></td>
                        </tr>
                        <tr>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/barack-obama/3221/rivals/">Rivals</a></td>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/barack-obama/3221/supporters/">Supporters</a></td>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/barack-obama/3221/affiliations/">Affiliations</a></td>
                        </tr>
                        <tr>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/barack-obama/3221/photos/">Photos</a></td>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/barack-obama/3221/videos/">Videos</a></td>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/barack-obama/3221/forums/">Forums</a></td>
                        </tr>
                    </table>
                                                        </div>      
        </div>
    </div>

    <p>The White House campaign has brought a new act to Vegas.</p>

Barack Obama has stepped up his campaign against Hillary Rodham Clinton, and he's trying to use humor to bring her down before this weekend's Democratic presidential caucus.

His argument is starkly different from the "Iowa nice" approach he used in recent weeks when campaigning in the first caucus state. Candidates who go negative there have a history of turning off voters, so Obama rarely criticized Clinton directly in Iowa instead he made veiled references to "some of my opponents" and he won the state.

But there's nothing subtle about Las Vegas. With a high-stakes match on the line Saturday, Obama embraced local traditions by debuting a biting political standup routine Thursday night that mocked his rival.

Obama began by recalling a moment in Tuesday night's debate when he and his rivals were asked to name their biggest weakness. Obama answered first, saying he has a messy desk and needs help managing paperwork something his opponents have since used to suggest he's not up to managing the country. Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards said his biggest weakness is that he has a powerful response to seeing pain in others, and Clinton said she gets impatient to bring change to America.

"Because I'm an ordinary person, I thought that they meant, `What's your biggest weakness?'" Obama said to laughter from a packed house at Rancho High School. "If I had gone last I would have known what the game was. And then I could have said, `Well, ya know, I like to help old ladies across the street. Sometimes they don't want to be helped. It's terrible.'"

"Folks, they don't tell you what they mean!" he said. Obama chuckled at his own joke before riffing on another Clinton answer in the debate, when she said that she is happy that the bankruptcy bill she voted for in 2001 never became law.

"She says, 'I voted for it but I was glad to see that it didn't pass.' What does that mean?" he asked, again drawing laughter from the crowd and himself. "No seriously, what does that mean? If you didn't want to see it passed, then you can vote against it! People don't say what they mean.

"You know what I'm saying is true," he said, then addressed his routine directly at audience members who don't know who they will vote for yet. "Undecideds, remember now, remember what I'm saying."

He continued by responding to a new Clinton radio ad that accused him of having financial ties to supporters of the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste site that most Nevadans are loath to come to their state.

"I have said over and over again I'm against Yucca," Obama said. "I'm against Yucca Mountain. I think the science is not there. I've never, I've never been for Yucca. Never been for it. Never said I was for it.

"Suddenly you've got the Clinton camp out there saying, `He's for Yucca.' What part of I'm not for Yucca do you not understand?" he said, then laughed along with his audience.

As the laughter subsided, Obama drove home the broader point he's been trying to make against Clinton the entire campaign.

"Those kinds of tricks, that kind of approach to politics is what has to stop because what happens is then nobody believes anything," Obama said. "The voters don't believe what politicians say. They get cynical. Folks in Congress, they'll tell you they're looking out for you they're looking out for somebody else. We have to change that politics and that's why I'm running for president."

The Clinton campaign did not respond to a request for comment on Obama's new act.

On the Net:

    <br class="clear-both"/>
dave (140)
Libertarian - No Party Affiliation
posted Array
PM me | Add as Friend

Bush to Lay Out Economic Stimulus Ideas

Anyone else find it kind of funny that this is one of the few election cycles where the economy is not the central issue and yet it seems its going to be a huge problem in the next year? You think it would show up a little earlier in the questioning of the debates.

dave (140)
Libertarian - No Party Affiliation
posted Array
PM me | Add as Friend

Bush to Lay Out Economic Stimulus Ideas

            <div class="special-box" style="width:270px;">
        <div style="border:solid 1px #CCC">
            <div class="ta-c p-10" style="background:#FFF;border-bottom:solid 1px #CCC">
                                    <a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/news/bush-to-lay-out-economic-stimulus-ideas/30413/photos/&imageId=7885">
                    <img src="http://image.politicalbase.com/uploads/people/30000/29108/2e1cd272-5a01-4284-a9f0-71dfb2b4dcce_240.jpg" style="border:solid 3px #CCC;"/>
                </a>                                        <br/>
                    <div class="ta-l p-8" style="border:solid 1px #DDD;">
                        <span class="strong">Ben Bernanke</span><br/>                           <span class="dgray f-10">Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke is seen during a meeting with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., on Capitol Hill in Washington Monday, Jan. 14, 2008,  to discuss ways Congress might act to boost the slowing economy. (AP Photo/Dennis Cook)</span>
                    </div>
                                            <table class="list">
                        <tr>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/ben-bernanke/29108/">Biography</a></td>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/ben-bernanke/29108/issues/">Issues</a></td>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/ben-bernanke/29108/money/">Fund Raising</a></td>
                        </tr>
                        <tr>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/ben-bernanke/29108/rivals/">Rivals</a></td>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/ben-bernanke/29108/supporters/">Supporters</a></td>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/ben-bernanke/29108/affiliations/">Affiliations</a></td>
                        </tr>
                        <tr>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/ben-bernanke/29108/photos/">Photos</a></td>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/ben-bernanke/29108/videos/">Videos</a></td>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/ben-bernanke/29108/forums/">Forums</a></td>
                        </tr>
                    </table>
                                                        </div>      
        </div>
    </div>

    <p><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/george-w-bush/15308/">President Bush</a> is putting together his first public call for an emergency fiscal stimulus bill while negotiations on Capitol Hill focus on rebates for taxpayers and other steps to jump-start the sagging economy.</p>

Bush planned to lay out his position Friday, but he wasn't expected to go into specifics. Press secretary Dana Perino said Bush would demand that any package be effective, simple and temporary mirroring calls by Democratic lawmakers for a "timely, targeted and temporary" stimulus measure.

Taxpayers could receive rebates of up to $800 for individuals and $1,600 for married couples under a White House plan. Although lawmakers were considering smaller rebate checks and more money for food stamp recipients and the unemployed, Bush told congressional leaders that he favors income tax rebates for people and tax breaks for business investment.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke entered the stimulus debate Thursday, endorsing the idea of putting money into the hands of those who would spend it quickly and boost the flagging economy.

The scramble to take action came as fears mounted that a severe housing slump and a painful credit crisis could cause people to clamp down on their spending and businesses to put a lid on hiring, throwing the country into its first recession since 2001.

Aides to lawmakers involved in the talks said the White House also wants to eliminate the 10 percent income tax bracket for one year and issue a rebate within months. Advocates for the poor said that tens of millions of people in lower income ranges would be left out or not fully feel the benefit of the White House plan.

Lawmakers were instead discussing a $500 rebate for individuals, the aides said, with details for couples and people with children still being negotiated.

The rebates would likely be limited to individuals with incomes of $85,000 or less and couples with incomes of $110,000 or less, the aides said, speaking on condition of anonymity because no final decisions had been made.

The president did not push for a permanent extension of his 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, many of which are due to expire in 2010, officials said. That would eliminate a potential stumbling block to swift action by Congress, since most Democrats oppose making the tax cuts permanent.

Bernanke voiced his support for a stimulus package in an appearance before the House Budget Committee. He stressed that it must be temporary and must be implemented quickly so that its economic effects could be felt as much as possible within the next 12 months.

"Putting money into the hands of households and firms that would spend it in the near term" is a priority, he said.

Especially important is making sure a plan can put cash into the hands of poor people and the middle class, who are most likely to spend it right away, he said, though he added that research shows affluent people also spend some of their rebates.

Bernanke declined to endorse any particular approach, but he did say he preferred one that would not have a long-term adverse impact on the government's budget deficit.

Senior aides to House Democrats and Republicans said in addition to included tax rebates for individuals, the emerging measure would contain tax breaks for businesses investing in new equipment, increases in food stamps, and higher unemployment benefits. They spoke on condition of anonymity, since the talks are ongoing and lawmakers have promised not to reveal details.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she wanted legislation enacted within a month and said the government must "spend the money, invest the resources, give the tax relief in a way that again injects demand into the economy, puts it in the hands of those who need it most and into the middle class ... so that we can create jobs."

For now, Bernanke was hopeful the country could skirt a dangerous downturn.

"We're not forecasting recession but, rather, at this point, slow growth," he told lawmakers. Still, the toll of the housing and credit debacles will be felt into early next year, he added.

    <br class="clear-both"/>
dave (140)
Libertarian - No Party Affiliation
posted Array
PM me | Add as Friend

Judge Dismisses Nevada Caucus Challenge


Can I get an Amen
sorry, couldn't resist!
dave (140)
Libertarian - No Party Affiliation
posted Array
PM me | Add as Friend

FCC Changes Broadcast-Newspaper Owner Ban

Ah, the joys of media consolidation.

dave (140)
Libertarian - No Party Affiliation
posted Array
PM me | Add as Friend

FCC Changes Broadcast-Newspaper Owner Ban

    <p>The Federal Communications Commission in a party-line, 3-2 vote, agreed Tuesday to overturn a 32-year-old ban and allow broadcasters in the nation's 20 largest media markets to also own a newspaper.</p>

FCC Chairman Kevin Martin was joined by his two Republican colleagues in favor of the proposal, while the commission's two Democrats voted against it.

Martin pushed the vote through despite intense pressure from House and Senate members on Capitol Hill to delay it. The chairman, however, has the support of the White House, which has pledged to turn back any congressional action that seeks to undo the agency vote.

On Monday, 25 senators, including four Republicans, sent him a letter threatening that if he goes ahead with the vote, they will move legislation to revoke the rule and nullify the commission's action.

But according to a letter that surfaced late Monday, it is clear the chairman has the full support of the White House. Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez wrote Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on Dec. 4 expressing the administration's opposition to legislation approved by the Senate Commerce Committee that would have delayed a vote.

The secretary wrote that the "the current ownership rules are significantly outdated in the modern media marketplace" and that the FCC has "crafted changes that appropriately take into account the myriad of news and information outlets that exist today."

Gutierrez wrote that the administration opposes the Senate bill "or any other attempt to delay or overturn these revised rules by legislative means."

The cross-ownership ban was approved by the FCC in 1975 to serve "the twin goals of diversity of viewpoints and economic competition." The FCC at the time noted that "it is unrealistic to expect true diversity from a commonly owned station-newspaper combination."

Opponents of the ban say in the past decade there has been an explosion of news outlets thanks to cable television and the Internet and that such restrictions are no longer necessary. Ban supporters say there may be new outlets, but there has been no corresponding increase in news gatherers and producers, especially at the local level.

The agency first tried to loosen the ban in 2003, but the move was rejected by a federal appeals court. Since then, the commissioners have been trying to craft a new set of rules that will survive judicial scrutiny.

Under Martin's proposal, one entity would be permitted to own a newspaper and one broadcast station in the same market. But it must be among the 20 largest in the nation and following the transaction, at least eight independently owned-and-operated media voices must remain. In addition, the television station may not be among the top four in the market.

Martin's proposal is opposed by Democratic commissioners Michael Copps and Jonathan Adelstein, who also voted against loosening media ownership rules in 2003. The commission's other two Republicans, Robert McDowell and Deborah Taylor Tate, have been more receptive to broadcast media deregulation.

    <br class="clear-both"/>
dave (140)
Libertarian - No Party Affiliation
posted Array
PM me | Add as Friend

Romney: No Religious Test for President

Hmm... Huckabee is moving up in the polls. Maybe it's time for me to bring out the coolness that is Mormonism to the people.

Sorry, yes, I'm a complete Athiest, but I hate the religion card in speeches.

dave (140)
Libertarian - No Party Affiliation
posted Array
PM me | Add as Friend

Romney: No Religious Test for President

            <div class="special-box" style="width:270px;">
        <div style="border:solid 1px #CCC">
            <div class="ta-c p-10" style="background:#FFF;border-bottom:solid 1px #CCC">
                                    <a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/news/romney-no-religious-test-for-president/13494/photos/&imageId=4506">
                    <img src="http://image.politicalbase.com/uploads/people/15000/14237/65190384-bf65-4e93-9865-1fbdff9c67a2_240.jpg" style="border:solid 3px #CCC;"/>
                </a>                                        <br/>
                    <div class="ta-l p-8" style="border:solid 1px #DDD;">
                        <span class="strong">Mitt Romney</span><br/>                            <span class="dgray f-10">Republican presidential nominee hopefull Mitt Romney, center, greets Utah state legislatures at a fund-raiser gala in this Feb. 20, 2007, file photo in Salt Lake City. Despite 170 years of history, much about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the church Romney belongs to, remains a mystery to most.  (AP Photo/Douglas C. Pizac, file)</span>
                    </div>
                                            <table class="list">
                        <tr>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/mitt-romney/14237/">Biography</a></td>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/mitt-romney/14237/issues/">Issues</a></td>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/mitt-romney/14237/money/">Fund Raising</a></td>
                        </tr>
                        <tr>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/mitt-romney/14237/rivals/">Rivals</a></td>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/mitt-romney/14237/supporters/">Supporters</a></td>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/mitt-romney/14237/affiliations/">Affiliations</a></td>
                        </tr>
                        <tr>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/mitt-romney/14237/photos/">Photos</a></td>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/mitt-romney/14237/videos/">Videos</a></td>
                            <td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/mitt-romney/14237/forums/">Forums</a></td>
                        </tr>
                    </table>
                                                        </div>      
        </div>
    </div>

    <p>Republican <a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/mitt-romney/14237/">Mitt Romney</a>, confronting voters' skepticism about his Mormon faith, declared Thursday that as president he would "serve no one religion, no one group, no one cause," and said calls for him to explain and justify his religious beliefs go against the profound wishes of the nation's founders.</p>

At the same time, he decried those who would remove from public life "any acknowledgment of God," and he said that "during the holiday season, nativity scenes and menorahs should be welcome in our public places."

In a speech less than a month before the first nomination contests, Romney said he shares "moral convictions" with Americans of all faiths, though surveys suggest up to half of likely voters have qualms about electing the first Mormon president.

"I believe in my Mormon faith and I endeavor to live by it," Romney said. "My faith is the faith of my fathers. I will be true to them and to my beliefs."

Nonetheless, he strove to clarify his personal line between church and state, recalling a similar speech delivered by John F. Kennedy in 1960 as Kennedy sought to become the first Catholic elected president.

"Let me assure you that no authorities of my church, or of any other church for that matter, will ever exert influence on presidential decisions," Romney said at the George Bush Presidential Library and Museum, 90 miles from Kennedy's speaking site in Houston. "Their authority is theirs, within the province of church affairs, and it ends where the affairs of the nation begin."

He added: "If I am fortunate to become your president, I will serve no one religion, no one group, no one cause and no one interest. A president must serve only the common cause of the people of the United States."

Romney's speech lasted about 20 minutes and was interrupted a dozen times by applause from the invited audience. He said the word "Mormon" only once, otherwise referring to "my religion," "my faith" and "my church."

He hoped the speech would allay concerns of Christian conservatives, some of whom have propelled former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee to join him atop the polls in Iowa. Its caucuses kick off presidential voting next month.

Romney stated he is often asked on the trail whether he believes in Jesus Christ.

"I believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God and the savior of mankind," he said. While conceding Mormons have different beliefs about the earthly presence of Jesus Christ, "each religion has its own unique doctrines and history. ... Religious tolerance would be a shallow principle indeed if it were reserved only for faiths with which we agree."

Illustrating Romney's challenge, one of his own invited guests said he believes Mormons are not Christians.

"I don't think his Mormonism is a deal breaker for most Americans, but only Mitt Romney can close the deal," Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, told ABC's "Good Morning America." Asked directly if he thought Mormons were Christians, Land said, "No, I do not."

Huckabee, who was a Southern Baptist preacher before entering politics, said that Romney's religion has no bearing on whether he would make a good president.

"It has nothing to do with what faith a person has it's whether or not that person's life is consistent with how he lives it," Huckabee said Thursday on NBC's "Today." "If I had actions that were completely opposite of my Christian faith, then I would think people would have reason to doubt if this part of my life, which is supposed to be so important, doesn't influence me."

Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, also used the occasion to sound a call for greater religious thought in daily civic life, providing a near-history lesson as he recalled religion in American political life since the country's founding.

"The founders proscribed the establishment of a state religion, but they did not countenance the elimination of religion from the public square," he said.

In an appeal to social conservatives, he also invited James Bopp Jr., an anti-abortion activist who is Romney's special adviser on life issues.

Political foes have accused Romney of switching his positions on some social issues, like abortion, when it became expedient.

Romney addressed those concerns in the context of standing by his faith, saying, "Americans do not respect believers of convenience. Americans tire of those who would jettison their beliefs, even to gain the world."

Former President Bush introduced Romney, heightening public attention to the speech. Romney's backdrop on stage was 10 American flags and a replica of the presidential seal.

Serving as host at his presidential library, the elder Bush introduced Romney, pointed out members of the candidate's family in the audience and described Romney's father, former Michigan Gov. George Romney, as the father of volunteerism.

"He's certainly one of my mentors when it comes to points of light," said Bush, who enacted a volunteer initiative while president, called "Thousand Points of Light." Bush said he had no intention of endorsing a candidate. "I simply have too much respect for all of the candidates," he said. He called Romney a "good man" and said he considered him and his wife "good friends."

Beyond speaking about faith, Romney sought to use the publicity his speech generated to relaunch his campaign as the broader electorate begins to tune into his nomination fight against a field that includes former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Arizona Sen. John McCain.

Striking a family chord, Romney's wife of 38 years, Ann, and four of the couple's five sons sat in the front row for the speech two with their own children.

"We are a long way from perfect and we have surely stumbled along the way, but our aspirations, our values, are the self-same as those from the other faiths that stand upon this common foundation," Romney said. "And these convictions will indeed inform my presidency."

While Romney has been subject to some leafletting and phone calling pointing to religious differences between his faith and others, he has faced little religious bigotry or questions on the campaign trail. Instead, political realities played a role in his decision to make the speech.

In an AP-Yahoo poll last month, half said they had some problems supporting a Mormon presidential candidate, including one-fifth who said it would make them very uncomfortable.

Fifty-six percent of white evangelical Christians a major portion of likely participants in the early GOP presidential contests in Iowa and South Carolina expressed reservations about a Mormon candidate. Among non-evangelicals, 48 percent said it troubled them. Almost a quarter 23 percent of evangelicals said they were very uncomfortable with the idea.

Associated Press Writer Alan Fram contributed to this report from Washington.

    <br class="clear-both"/>
dave (140)
Libertarian - No Party Affiliation
posted Array
PM me | Add as Friend

Senate Aide Arrested in Sex Sting

Seriously, is anyone getting tired of seeing sex scandals yet? Seems like a new one every week.

dave (140)
Libertarian - No Party Affiliation
posted Array
PM me | Add as Friend

Senate Aide Arrested in Sex Sting

    <p>A former aide to Sen. <a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/maria-cantwell/2214/">Maria Cantwell</a> is in federal custody after being arrested on a charge of attempting to sexually exploit a minor.</p>

James Michael McHaney was fired Friday from his job as a scheduler for Cantwell, D-Wash., hours after he was arrested by FBI agents. The FBI said in a charging document that McHaney allegedly tried to set up a meeting with an undercover witness posing online as a teenage boy.

McHaney, who appeared in federal court Saturday, was being held without bond pending a court hearing Wednesday, said Channing Phillips, a spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office for the District of Columbia.

According to court papers, McHaney, known as Mike, tried to arrange a lunchtime meeting with an unidentified person posing as a 13-year-old boy. When the witness asked whether McHaney was interested in sex with a 13-year-old, McHaney allegedly replied, "I'll be there," the court papers said. He later asked for a photo of the child.

News of the arrest was first reported on The Smoking Gun Web site, .

Congressional records show McHaney had worked as a scheduler in Cantwell's Washington, D.C., office since at least July 2006.

Cantwell's chief of staff, Michael Meehan, issued a statement Monday night saying McHaney had been fired.

"Late Friday afternoon the FBI informed our office that a Senate employee was arrested. The employee was immediately fired. Our office has and will continue to fully cooperate with the ongoing federal criminal investigation. Senator Cantwell has zero tolerance for crimes against children," Meehan said.

    <br class="clear-both"/>
dave (140)
Libertarian - No Party Affiliation
posted Array
PM me | Add as Friend

Best Political TV Show

jdubb -

Jericho is a good, but not great show. It's definitely worth seeing the rest of season 1 and 2.

dave (140)
Libertarian - No Party Affiliation
posted Array
PM me | Add as Friend

Best Political TV Show

Ugh, spin city was horrible. Couldn't stand West Wing either. There really hasn't been a great political drama show done on TV.

Not really applicable, but I loved the small town mayor stuff that went on in Jericho.

dave (140)
Libertarian - No Party Affiliation
posted Array
PM me | Add as Friend

A little Roll call: Were you convinced by Bush Co. in ~2003?

I didn't believe it, but I think I was overall a little more supportive then I am now. Mostly because I think the economics of the oil issue made it a viable reason to head over even if it was under the veil of a cause.

I don't think politicians then were fooled either. I just think that no one wanted to say no to anything anti-terrorism just a couple years after 9/11. Looking back on that time, it's almost understandable. What isn't, is that everyone acts like they were duped by this marvolous magician. If Bush is as dumb as most would have you believe, everyone else must be idiots for going along with him. As Obi-Wan said... "Who's the more fool, the fool, or the fool who follows him?"

I'm actually more surprised by how quickly public opinion got back to normal since a crisis like 9-11. Say what you want about the modern "always on" world, at least fads last much shorter and messages can spread quicker. The only downside is that everything is so super-chaotic. It's hard to sift through the flak.

dave (140)
Libertarian - No Party Affiliation
posted Array
PM me | Add as Friend

dave agrees with the original post

Confusing semantics

I agree that the way polls are being presented can be confusing. I see a big difference between opposing the war and opposing the troop surge. As you mentioned they are related, but not necessarily similar issues.

I'm pretty torn on the issue. My realist side says... ok, we all know that this is about oil and general stability for the region. Whatever reasoning we used to get in there, that's pretty much the only benefitial reason to stay. When I mean stability, I'm not necessarily talking about Iraq and building a government there, I'm just saying... hey, this is a traditionally chaotic area of the world, and since our country is totally dependent on an export from there, maybe it's not a horrible idea to have some sense of control of it getting over here. I'm saying that from a completely selfish viewpoint. Meaning, man... this all sucks, but what the hell would happen if gas was $10 a gallon here? Seriously.

The big problem I guess I have is that it is much easier for Industrial nations to deal with 3rd world dictators then dealing with full fledged economies and multi-national companies. It's likely financially in our best interest to keep these countries poor and the dictators rich so that we have a fewer amount of people to work with and can more easily define rates. After all, who cares what the people in those countries actually have to live with.

After saying all that, in the end I'm definitely against the war and against these policies. I think whatever gains we get financially from controlling the region are offset by the costs of keeping a large army there. A better solution would be to sidestep oil all-together and spend what little resources we have left into new technologies that can jump the gap. I don't know enough about the issue to know if that would have been feasible in such a short time. Points can be made that controlling the region at least for the short term, buys us some time so that we can make those eventually moves.

I generally think the issue is more complex then just saying well, we've got a crazy Texan in the office on a crusade. I just wish our government would be a little more clear about its reasoning. If they said... "hey, look, we're over there because if oil exports aren't stable, we're gonna be in a lot of trouble. We need to do this to survive." I'd at least understand that. Morally I'd have to make a decision on it, but at least I'd understand what's going on.

dave (140)
Libertarian - No Party Affiliation
posted Array
PM me | Add as Friend

dave agrees with the original post

Still running on name recognition?

I think that's for the most part true. Name recognition plays a big part of it and the nomination is hers to lose. I don't think anything short of a scandal will slow her down though. I do think her nod would make for a closer race against the GOP though. Remember, name recognition can go both ways. I wouldn't be surprised to see Republicans show ing up en masse to knock her down.

dave (140)
Libertarian - No Party Affiliation
posted Array
PM me | Add as Friend

dave agrees with the original post

Is Ron Paul our best candidate?

I don't think he's "figured out" anything. His website isn't as well done as the other candidates and it's not like he's actually using the internet himself. He seems like a pretty kooky old man to me and I doubt he knows a hell of a lot about technology.

His success on the net is that his policy appeals to nerdy individualists (the stereotypical tech dude) who for the most part have avoided politics in general as groupist coercion. Remember that the tech sector is the only major skilled industry in America not plagued with unionized labor or association groups. Internet workers for the most part work in fairly risky endevours where an expectation of reward/regret to risk is common. It's not like Ron Paul is spouting any new ideas to them.

dave (140)
Libertarian - No Party Affiliation
posted Array
PM me | Add as Friend

dave agrees with the original post

why 18?

Agree with jdubb here. It's not really the age of the person that we should be judging, but their responsibility. At least in the driving age scenario.