am I correct in assuming that you found videocafeblog@youtube the same way I did - they're always the 1st to have 'Real Time with Bill Maher' up?

Posted at May 7, 2008 4:17 AM in response to Keith Olbermann - nobody does it better!

gotalife, we all know you're a troll

Posted at May 6, 2008 3:38 AM in response to It's Official: John And Elizabeth Edwards Will Not Endorse In Prez Race

that's funny

Posted at May 6, 2008 3:30 AM in response to It's Official: John And Elizabeth Edwards Will Not Endorse In Prez Race

Edwards is well to Obama's political right, in terms of his record. that's why I call Edwards out, for calling others out. his record is much less of a match to his rhetoric than is Obama to his, for example.

Posted at May 6, 2008 3:19 AM in response to It's Official: John And Elizabeth Edwards Will Not Endorse In Prez Race

plus, let's face it. legislatively, John Edwards is no Al Gore. Gore did some things I found annoying, like campaigning against "dirty" words in rock & rap songs, but his work on the world wide web and new technology, environmentalism, increased work safety standards, his denouncement of the Iraq war, his Nobel prize, give him a kind of sway no other American politician on the left has. Edwards' accomplishments are few indeed. he voted wrong on many key issues, and rhetorically attacked fellow Dems using right wing frames numerous times. on the Iraq war, he was even worse than Clinton, trumpeting bogus propaganda from the high hills, co-sponsoring the force authorization, etc. there's no way he was going to end up the nominee, just about any time the talk comes down to actual issues, Edwards first has to go through a litany of apologies for his past mistakes before he even got to talking about his plans going forward. which made him suspect, of course, to many.

Posted at May 5, 2008 7:48 PM in response to It's Official: John And Elizabeth Edwards Will Not Endorse In Prez Race

quite agree. Edwards gets way too much credit for "talking about poverty", cause all he really did was say his daddy worked in a mill, say how much it sucks to be poor. he had not much in the way of specific proposals to fix the plight of the poor, but he did occasionally mention them, sure. but, when I listen to Obama's speeches, there is plenty about poverty and people who are struggling. the idea that poverty "disappeared" from the campaign is just a commonly agreed-upon fallacy. I think the media, bloggers inculded, have simply bought into this narrative without really checking to see if its true or not.

Posted at May 5, 2008 7:41 PM in response to It's Official: John And Elizabeth Edwards Will Not Endorse In Prez Race

pffft, in answer to your question, an emphatic 'no'. I just don't see them as being any more principled than any other politicians. I think their concerns are somewhat superficial, based on easily refuted beliefs. Obama needs more 'substance' beyond the rhetoric? this coming from John Edwards! a "populist" who was a DLC Dem until he suddenly became the great champion of the poor for this particular campaign? who Russ Feingold said he could never support because his very conservative voting record didn't come close to matching his progressive rhetoric? that's a bit rich. I still see Obama as by far the most principled of the 'top 3' of the Dem candidates, and there is plenty of substance there, if you bother to look. Obama has had, for over a year now, publicly available, highly detailed plans regarding every major issue. do the Edwards know what these are, or not? if they haven't bothered to read about all of this, then shame on them. if they have and are just pretending to not know, then even worse! I know Elizabeth strongly favors Clinton's plan to mandate that people purchase insurance from the big insurance companies. not sure why she prefers it, but I know she has made that no secret. but even though its her main issue, and she supports Clinton, and finds her divisive battle against Obama built partly on race baiting and the worst kind of pandering, to be a sign of 'strength'.

I've said it before and I'll keep saying it, the Edwards' are not paragons of progressivism in America, far from it. they are a politician and his wife, wanting to have their ring kissed. no more, no less.

Posted at May 5, 2008 7:30 PM in response to It's Official: John And Elizabeth Edwards Will Not Endorse In Prez Race

only if you give Obama zero votes in MI, which would, of course, be fraudulent. including either MI or FL is fraud at its most basic level, though, so it doesn't really matter.

Posted at April 23, 2008 10:20 PM in response to More People Have Now Voted For Me Than For My Opponent...

hm, what do you mean, "who knows?"

it is absolutely, unquestionable not true that more people have voted for Hillary than for Barack. by no measure is that an accurate statement.

Posted at April 23, 2008 10:18 PM in response to More People Have Now Voted For Me Than For My Opponent...

why does anyone listen to Kevin Drum on national security matters at all? how did he get the position of prominence that he's in? I don't understand. I don't think I've ever seen him get one single matter of national security right yet. he just doesn't seem to know very much on the topic.

Posted at April 23, 2008 10:17 PM in response to Conceding a Bit Less