hat Obama wants to have a debate about national security is fast becoming an Obama campaign refrain.

Let us fervently hope it becomes a media refrain - that would be nice. :)

Not that I'm counting on it.

Fathoms: what do you think 9-11 was about?

I don't think anyone - Muslim from the ME or Insane Dictator Wannabe - can pull off another one like that. I really don't. I don't trust these bastards as far as I could throw them. But I think 9-11 was one of those things that cannot be actually brought-off again. Which isn't to say something smaller couldn't be.

I promise I'm the furthest thing from a conspiracy buff there is. I believe Oswald acted alone; but I don't believe anything we've been told about 9-11. Not one fucking word of it.

see my update all. would be interested in hearing your thoughts on this.

God, Greg - I don't know how to answer your question - I don't know what they're thinking. If it were me, I might be thinking that having someone in McLame's campaign who pops off that extravagantly, might not be such a bad thing?

Otherwise, I'm teh stooopid on this -

How is voting for the Bush backed FISA bill and the Bush Iraq war funding turning the page Obama?

black will be gone before the end of the week...his gaffe was unforgiveable... if i were advising obama, i would emphasise that mccain's campaign was basing its success on american deaths

Put a mark in the bad idea column for me.

If Obama is smart, he'll let McCain's party of fools willfully fall on their own swords in order to protect their boss.

Now if the MSM has grown any hair around their kahones and feeling a bit testy, perhaps they'll go after McCain like a pack of stray dogs chasing a bitch in heat on this.

Charlie Black's comments were outrageous and have given the Obama campaign another much needed opportunity to take on the so called "national security strengths" of the Republican nominee.

What's even more outrageous is the fact that Black was a former lobbyist to some of the world's most heinous regimes....

I'd love to see the gloves come off further on the part of the Obama campaign -- I'd love to see them go after Black for his former work as a lobbyist and the inherent hypocrisy and irony in his role as McCain's top advisor.

Black doesn't strike me as a Campaign professional. A Political Professional, yes; but not a Campaign Professional. He's the GOP's version of Maggie Williams. Seems to me, he'll keep saying stupid things like this. Seems to me the best place he can help Obama is by staying on the McCain campaign, and remaining an issue onto himself.

I think Obama is stockpiling ammo for the fall when the real GE campaigning starts.

If McCain fired Black it would take him off the playing field, but if McCain keeps around Black after it has been pointed out his ties to brutal warmongers and dictators, and after he has said a terrorist attack would benefit McCain well then he is fair game and you could question McCain's judgment.

Same thing can be done with Gramm - his ties to lobbying while writing McCain policy has been pointed out, now it's up to McCain what he chooses to do and McCain chose to look the other way. Again that becomes a attack point against McCain and his judgment.

I think this is reason why Obama and Co are not attacking McCain's blatant flip flops right now - why use that cache while only a fraction of the public is paying any attention? Save it and keep stockpiling other McCain contradictions that he might be more prone to making if he isn't being challenged on each and every one now.

McCain is going to have to go negative sooner or later, the person running second always has to eventually. And that is what Obama is waiting for, he wants to counter punch with attacks.

No No No, we want Black on the McCain campaign.
1) He is obviously inept, any one who would let the Cottage-Cheese-in-a-Lime-Jello-Salad-Green-Screen speech go forward should be sued for political malpractice. I suspect the McCain campaign will get better but so far they are off to a rocking start. Remember Marc Penn, when HRC got rid of him their campaign started doing a lot better.

2) There are so many things that Charlie Black brings to the liability table (lobbying, lobbying for unsavory dictators, general stupidity) that getting him fired would negate.

3) Getting a campaign manager fired 4 months before the election isn't a big deal - getting him fired 2 months is another story. I think the Obama campaign is going to start hitting McCain for Black at the end of the summer. Either forcing a more timely disruption or capitalizing on the liabilities at a more opportune time.

I suspect that Obama is keeping his cards pretty close to the vest at this point and is biding his time for maximum impact. IMO he played possum a bit in the primaries and is continuing to do so. We will see more of the real Obama beginning in August and I think it will be quite impressive.

That said, I don't think McCain has shown his full hand either and we just have to hope that Obama is holding a better hand.

FIRE him?????

Are you joking??????

I WANT his loose-cannon mouth and inept political acumen to continue to dog his chosen candidate for the next 4 months!!

Instead of firing him, I would hope the Obama campaign would want to do everything possible to KEEP HIM IN HIS CURRENT POSITION - where he can inflict more harm on McCain.

Obama had his chance to "have a debate" (and win it) on national security with the execrable "FISA Amendments" bill passed by the House last week, headed for the Senate this week, and which Obama says he supports.

Oh, but don't worry. Leader Obama will "carefully monitor" those new powers he will have, and make sure they are not used (cough, cough) inappropriately, and "take any additional steps I deem necessary to protect the lives -- and the liberty -- of the American people." How.... comforting.

That's not how the Constitution is supposed to work, boys and girls. "Trust the Leader" isn't in there.

Even if Obama's barber made the comments Charlie Black did, Obama would no sooner be voted president than dog catcher. The media is treating McBush with a complete double standard from McBush's own words saying I did not love America until I was deprived of her company comment to his flip flops on over a dozen main issues. While we have Obama being taken to task for not wearing a made in China US flag lapel pin. Now we have the ever sperm is sacred party wishing for an attack on America only so a Rethuglicans can get elected when B ush nearly destroyed this country after only 8 years.

It's already off the Yahoo front page, though Obama's "altered Presidential seal" is newsworthy.

Good idea greg. Remember when Mark Penn ostensibly left the HRC campaign things seemed to start picking up for her. So, heck no-keep this guy and he will continue to say egregious things and then implode on its own self. A bit like the clinton campaign itself. So, no don't ask him to quit. At least not just yet.

I see bluebell has reared his head (or her) and may have brought with him/her additional reinforcements.

Besides not firing Black, can we also get McCain to hire Mark Penn? Please?

People who are still bagging Obama over FISA are missing the forest for the trees. Yeah, it sucks. Yeah, I wish Obama had done more. But the notion that he is no different than anyone else or that the Dems are just like the Repugs is silly. 105 Dems voted against the bill in the House. One lone Repug voted against it. Obama at least voiced his opposition to amnesty, something I'm not sure Clinton would have done at all.

The larger point being, yes, Obama is not as far left as many would like. Yes, he isn't Chez and he isn't going to nationalize industries and right all the wrongs of nearly three decades with a single stroke of a pen. But he is the best of what is at offer right now. Of the initial candidates, I imagine the honorable Dennis Kucinich would have strongly fought this bill, but most people just made fun of his campaign. Sen. Dodd too would have fought agaisnt(and he still is) but his campaign didn't go far either. So, Obama is the winner. He isn't the most left by far, but he is far, far, far better than what the other side of the aisle offers.

And moving foward, for those who want the country to move further left, and I do, one has to admit that it will be much easier to move left from an Obama Whitehouse than from a McCain one. So, let's get Obama in the Whitehouse. Let's make that job one. After he is in there, then let's pound him and push him as far left as we can. But now just isn't the time.

And if you see no value in the political process as it is, then you have only two choices. One you can just bag it and take what comes. It which case any comments made anywhere are little more than whining and serve no other purpose but to annoy. The other choice is revolution and resistance, and history and recent events show where that leads. Better to get Obama elected and then work on pushing him and getting more and better Dems into office.

I wouldn't put it past Bush to "accidentally" let one slip (again) in order to bail out McCain's poll numbers:

http://www.thepersonalispolitical.com/2008/06/terrorist-attack-mccains-miracle.html

Seems like if I'm Obama, I'd want Charlie Black around. He seems to keep slipping up, and on this specific point, too. He's a godsend.

Another example of why Black should be kept around. A new McCain 'energy' ad. Like the McCain campaign, it doesn't have a coherent message. Should we drill more or wean our selves off of petroleum?? I can't figure it out from this ad. I guess that is the downside to trying to be all things to all people and not really believing what you are saying.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0n49qkoXoY0

The political dialogue in this country is infested with a great cancer.

Yeah, the infestation usually starts about this time in every campaign.

You got that right.

$100 says that y'all have no idea what you're talking about with regard to the telecoms and if you begin by saying anything at all about "constitutional rights," you owe me $100.

Does anyone think Charlie Black is WRONG in his belief that another attack would benefit McCain? If so, why?

I think it's better not to call for Black's resignation. Better instead to beat the McCain campaign like a rented mule, about these comments, until they'll be happy to jettison Black just to stop the bleeding.

PS Jettison Black was a discarded character for the Harry Potter novels--Harry's bland uncle, a Muggle pollster I believe.

All I know is if the roles were somehow reversed Obama would be getting POUNDED by the MSM for such a comment. Honest assessment from Black or not, the feeding frenzy should go both ways.

Can the Obama campaign "bank" this non-response and trade it in for similar coverage for when the swiftboating begins in earnest?

Ahhh..Russ takes a poo..

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080623/GPG0101/80623141/1978/GPGnews

Its over people, we got nobody.

Stillbama, but depressed.

I'm still trying to figure out beyond the bastardized autocratic-Pavlovian Effect how a second terrorist attack while W. is still president will make folks seriously throw support behind the brand of government that allowed it to happen in the first place.

They sure were Johnny-on-the-spot with this one, huh? They release a statement AFTER McCain had already denounced it.

Is it just me or have we started to see some sloppiness from the Obama campaign?

John McCain will be a FOOL not to get rid of Charles "9/11" Black!

It is difficult at this point to envision a scenario that is more revealing of the thoroughness of moral corruption of the republican party.

The notion that a political entity needs violence to be visited upon others to sustain itself is an expression of mental dysfunction that completely disqualifies the group from exercising any authority over others. The premise that a leader has his or her authority validated by the commission of an act of violence is insane. Violence never resolves to peace.

The proposal by Charlie Black states that violence, not peace, is the goal being sought. We have indisputable evidence that Bush wanted war. That evidence remains in the person of John McCain. The consistent push to the right that is the centerpiece of the conservative agenda is the progenitor of Islamic terrorism. It is driven by religious zealots intolerant of other cultures and nations that occupy our world. Our present circumstance is a wholly manufactured devisement of that intolerance. You cannot dismiss the emergence of the ideological right shift in this country nor close your eyes to the outcomes it has produced. The fear of Islamic terrorism are the fears of those expressing them and not those of the general populace.

The ethnic, religious, gender, economic and social diversity of this country decries this notion of intolerance. Choosing leaders who choose war means we also choose intolerance. And that intolerance is expressed in all ways. The republican agenda is one of intolerance without limit. The choice is simple. Limitless war or limitless peace. Which you choose specifies our individual ability to escape our own fear. Bush has traded on our fears very much like the commodity traders have traded in oil futures and McCain is doing the same. Just as oil prices are inflated so are our fears. And both are fundamentally derived of a lie.

You mean that cryogenically frozen head of Nixon?
I think Karl Rove already ate it.

Leave Charlie Black in place to give John McCain more bad advice. All these guys know how to do is smear and say 9/11. Smears will just anger the Dem base and 9/11 will engender a debate the Republicans will lose.

Why didn't the Obama campaign call on McCain to fire Black? Wouldn't that have kept the story going and forced the McCain team to prove it's serious about not indulging in the Rovian fearmongering that McCain claims to be above?

I think calls to fire people looks kind of petty, plus, Charley Black is an easy thing to attack McCain for, but not if he gets fired.

Jonz earlier posted something that made perfect sense -- Obama's campaign would do well to have Charlie Black and Phil Graham remain on the campaign as inevitable targets.

Right now the public isn't paying as much attention but if Black and Graham remain in McCain's camps than surely they will become liabilities as the November election date approaches --

so I hope that Black and Graham don't resign and I hope that Obama's strategy is indeed to hold fire until later in the run up to the election.....

From "Head of State"

http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/06/what-republicans-have-already-figured.html

Tuesday, June 24, 2008

What the Republicans Have Already Figured Out: "Arrogance" Equals Allowable Racism

What you will be seeing in the coming days:

The Republicans have already figured it out.

They know that precisely because Obama's greatest strength is in the fact that he offers something new, a change from long-held traditions of the past--that it is also his greatest weakness.

They know that the fervent bubbly enthusiasm is a concern--deeply buried ambiguities about race, deeply held racism, especially among older voters.

For a time, they were caught by the dilemma that Obama seemed invulnerable--that any attack, particularly the attacks that they have honed and used for so long, steeped in insinuation and vicious invention, would be regarded as racist.

Hence, the dilemma for the usual swift boat strategy.

Now they have found it. They have realized that:

1) Americans want to be free of the burdens and division of racism;

2) Many of them--including many of those who wish to be free--are not;

3) Republicans cannot raise racist issues frontally, because many people hold such views at the same time that they do not wish to see themselves as holding them;

4) They need a substitute--distanced enough from overt racism to be acceptable to those who wish to see themselves as egalitarian but still hold deeply seated racial prejudices, and fears, yet close enough to evoke those very doubts and fears--yet one that they can claim is *not* racist--with the traditional smug pose of Republican innocence, hands up, pleased at their cleverness at providing one message while claiming another, the tradition of attack over thought and truth that carried us all the way to Iraq--and beyond.

The substitute is "arrogance".

As the 527's gear up, look to see "arrogance" and "elitist" used again and again as this cycle's dark touchstone to evoke the deepest and unspoken doubts and fears, as they work in the mental demilitarized grey zone between racism and rationalization, calling up the vitriol with that classic combination of the pose of "clean hands" inevitably broken though by the barely contained, smug, blunt, adolescent glee of insinuated attack.

Elitist. He who grew up with a single mother. Who earned his academic progress through scholarships. Who turned down top law firms for the streets of Chicago.

No matter--the term itself will be enough to unleash the self-satisfied vitriolic scrawl--just enough of a peg to hang itself on to loose the traditional and safest prejudices, as always, so boldly feeling their unloosed anger as they ironically turn to the most familiar and comfortable shibboleths.

"Arrogance" equals acceptable racism here. One that can always be disclaimed. In other words, hiding truth behind a known facade, in the most common and seemingly pleasurable Republican tactic--fear inducing insinuation behind a known facade--and pleasure and pride in the manufacture of the known guise.

Wise up. Don't buy it. Turn such insinuated doubts away. If they need to manipulate you to stimulate your belief, question their motives.

If you didn't do it for Iraq--if you fell for the directed manipulation of fear, of the use of innuendo to stir undemonstrated and unrelated fears--you now have a second chance.

Do it now.

Cite:

Head of State


http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/06/what-republicans-have-already-figured.html

Everything "our" government says is a lie!!

It’s that simple.

But do not expect Americans to believe it, not most anyways.

They would rather be led than to lead.

Those who do follow it are patriots, the rest of us and the world call it "acting like cows going to slaughter" because that is exactly what the USA government expects Americans to do, and that is exactly what the USA government does.

They really do not care much about what others around the world say about us, as long as they get enough sh&t heads in America to believe them, they can act like Imperialists and bullies of the world.

As long as they keep the balance of "us" and "them" mind-set, most Americans will actually be happy to die for the USA government.

I wonder if the USA were to be bombed, would that help McCain, or would that get rid of enough American "cows" that the rest of us could take over and create a new Declaration of Independence....a new country, where We the People, really do govern and make the rules?

Maybe this attack that the McCain fool talks about would actually hurt McCain.

Is this the games they are playing with Americans?

Corey Mondello
Boston, Massachusetts
www.CoreyMondello.com
6-25-08