“Mr. Richardson’s endorsement came right around the anniversary of the day when Judas sold out for 30 pieces of silver, so I think the timing is appropriate, if ironic,” Mr. Carville said, referring to Holy Week.
When all else fails, go negative and the Clintons are masters at such dark arts having practically fornicated in the gutter with some of the lowest sleazeballs in American politics, think James Carville and Dick Morris and now of course the grossly overpaid Karl Rove wannabe Mark Penn.
My mistake. I was thiinking of Carville as a Rove wannabe, too. I stand corrected. He's just as evil, but not nearly as intelligent.
Meanwhile, the Clinton campaign can best be described as a “with us or against us” effort. Combine this with HRCs history of closed door meetings, and you get something that looks a lot like a Bush administration.
So, on this Easter day, what do you make of Carville's Judas comment?
Below the fold: an interesting picture of Carville's wife, Bush adviser up to 2003, from Huffington Post.
As an early Richardson supporter, I am very proud that the Governor of New Mexico is now putting his support behind Barack Obama, specifically citing the Senator's speech on race in America.
Here is the meat of his letter to supporters:
Earlier this week, Senator Barack Obama gave an historic speech. that addressed the issue of race with the eloquence, sincerity, and optimism we have come to expect of him. He inspired us by reminding us of the awesome potential residing in our own responsibility. He asked us to rise above our racially divided past, and to seize the opportunity to carry forward the work of many patriots of all races, who struggled and died to bring us together.
As a Hispanic, I was particularly touched by his words. I have been troubled by the demonization of immigrants–specifically Hispanics– by too many in this country. Hate crimes against Hispanics are rising as a direct result and now, in tough economic times, people look for scapegoats and I fear that people will continue to exploit our racial differences–and place blame on others not like them . We all know the real culprit — the disastrous economic policies of the Bush Administration!
Senator Obama has started a discussion in this country long overdue and rejects the politics of pitting race against race. He understands clearly that only by bringing people together, only by bridging our differences can we all succeed together as Americans.
His words are those of a courageous, thoughtful and inspiring leader, who understands that a house divided against itself cannot stand. And, after nearly eight years of George W. Bush, we desperately need such a leader.
I'm sure many of you rec'd the email from Ian Carleton regarding the upcoming Curtis Awards. At the bottom of the email is this note:
P.S. We will be announcing Award recipients in the next couple of weeks, but it is not too late to nominate a deserving individual. Please visit here for the details: http://www.vtdemocrats.org/page/s/nominations
The first people who came to mind were Jon Odum for maintaining this forum and David's son CJCurtis for revitalizing the Northfield Dems. Alas, another year, eh?
I'll have to admit, trying to think of a Vermont Dem whose efforts and accomplishments rose above and beyond in 2007 was something of a head-scratcher. But as Jimmy Neutron would say in a moment requiring an immediate moment of brilliance: Think! Think! …BrainBlast!!!
The awards recognize individuals involved in the political process in Vermont and nationwide. The Awards will also serve as a fundraiser for the Vermont Democratic Party. Awards will be presented to leaders who meet the following criteria: An individual who has demonstrated, throughout his or her public/professional career or participation in the political process, a dedication to the values of the Democratic Party, particularly with regard to upholding the legal, social, economic and political rights of the underrepresented. Nominees can be any of the following: A Vermont elected official (at any level, past or present) A Vermont political activist/volunteer A Vermont political contributor/fundraiser
Now, my nomination.
In my opinion, Howard Dean, a 2002 recipient of the Curtis Awards, should be recognized once again in 2008 for his work in delivering party renewal through his once controversial 50-State Strategy in the presidential campaigns. Howard Dean overcame a culture of insider DC culture to implement his plan with an outcome of success not only in 2006, but in the current primary season. Record numbers of Democrats are coming out to vote in every state. Dean's efforts are a dramatic change from the prior strategy to focus on “key” states, and given this historic primary of 2008, he has provided the funding and organizational infrastructure that will inevitably become a winning strategy for decades to come.
I am proud of our former governor for his accomplishments as DNC Chair, and I respectfully submit my nomination of him for the 2008 David C. Curtis Awards.
…”It may be the first time in history that the person who is running number two would offer the person running number one the number two position,” Daschle told “Meet the Press.”
Sounds like the Clinton plan is to skip third base in a run for home plate.
AP's Lisa Rathke reports today that superdelegate Billi Gosh of Brookfield is standing firm in her support of Hillary Clinton. Her position comes despite the fact that Obama won in every county of Vermont.
“The Obama train was steaming down the track and we have derailed it,” said Billi Gosh, of Brookfield, national committee chairwoman.
Is this a case of a superdelegate going her own way, no matter Vermonters vote? Your thoughts?
(This has been an ongoing conversation between a small group of folks with widely differing ideas, but it continues to be an interesting read. I’m front paging it to encourage more folks to dive in, or just to sit back and enjoy the back and forth. – promoted by odum)
Pop Quz:
What does a magazine, a website, historic preservation, housing, and economic development all have in common?
The answer is below the fold. But before we get there, ask yourself this question:
If you had the responsibility and authority to grow Vermont's economy, what methods would make your Top 5 list? If it was your job to oversee the way Vermont government positions itself to help grow our economy, how would you do it?
Sometimes we need to step back from traditional or even entrenched ways of thinking in order to keep from falling in the same old ruts. So are you ready? Look out for the ruts! Because now you are the Secretary of…
So, hypothetically, if you were asked to replace Kevin Dorn (as a hypothetical, assuming some day we have a new governor), what would you do? Do you think it's still a good idea to put Vermont Life on the same level as the Department of Economic Development? Would there be other Departments or Divisions you might create, merge, or promote/demote? What priorities would you focus on while reorganizing the Agency?
Just to spur the conversation, I'll offer a thought that comes to mind: Separate Commerce from Community Development. In my opinion, the work of Historic Preservation and the Housing Division have enough on its plate that they should be peeled off from Commerce and put under a separate Housing Agency.
It's especially interesting when you break out the ACCD's grant programs. (Source: CFED Presentation — Power Point.)
38% — Housing and Community Affairs
9.5% — Economic Development
1.5% — Tourism
Hmmm…. Is there any wonder that the Commerce side of ACCD — and the general growth of business in Vermont — is, shall we say, weak?
While the folks at the Chamber of Commerce think Vermont is unfriendly to business because of taxes, I would offer that the business climate suffers mostly from a lack of resources devoted to commerce at ACCD. Of course, we're in a tight budget, so it's not like we can dump a lot of resources into Economic Development. But organizationally, it would be nice to see the Agency of Commerce focus on Commerce.
So if you were the Secretary, what would you do?
Open thread time! Ladies and gentlemen, your thoughts, please.
Perhaps one of the most under-reported stories of the decade is the deliberate, illegal destruction of White House and RNC-routed emails for a time period between 473 to over 1000 days. And you thought 17 minutes of missing tape in Nixon's office was a big deal? Of course, the real story isn't about how the National Archives is pressing forward to retrieve documents which should be legally recorded. The story is about the Mother Lode of criminal evidence against the White House regarding Iraq, the Wilson-Plame Leak Gate, and lord knows what else went on in the Rove-Cheney West Wing from January 2003 to August 2005.
Today's WaPo article, GOP Halts Efforts to Retrieve White House Emails, is almost as lost as the emails it reports on, buried somewhere deep in the Politics section under all of the Obama/Clinton drama. It was visible first thing this morning, but by mid-day I had to find it again by searching “White House emails” on the WaPo site.
Last spring when the word IMPEACH began to circulate widely in the grassroots and the press, it was the issue of missing emails that finally broke the camel's back for me. A case for criminality in the Iraq War, in my opinion, could never be made conclusively, no matter how tragic it continues to be.
But missing documents? Documents withheld from legal inspection? An invisibly managed Executive Branch? Here we have clear cut violations of federal law.
And not enough political will or media interest to pursue it.
“Now I could stand up here and say, ‘Let’s just get everybody together. Let’s get unified. The sky will open. The lights will come down. Celestial choirs will be singing and everyone will know we should do the right thing and the world will be perfect.’
Fair enough. If you're elouence-impaired, go ahead and make a joke out of the best orator to come along since, say, Bill Clinton.
In 1975, a 27-year-old Hillary Rodham, acting as a court-appointed attorney, attacked the credibility of a 12-year-old girl in mounting an aggressive defense for an indigent client accused of rape in Arkansas – using her child development background to help the defendant.
Praise the Lord and Pass the Plea Bargain!
The Glenn Thrush article, “An Early Look at how Clinton Deals with Crisis” is a must read, so here's the link again:
Now it's no surprise that Hillary Clinton will do just about anything to win, win, win. Except, apparently, the winning itself. But what is truly amazing is her pitbull tenacity against a 12 year-old rape victim.
In her 2003 autobiography “Living History,” Clinton writes that she initially balked at the assignment, but eventually secured a lenient plea deal for Taylor after a New York-based forensics expert she hired “cast doubt on the evidentiary value of semen and blood samples collected by the sheriff's office.”
However, that account leaves out a significant aspect of her defense strategy – attempting to impugn the credibility of the victim, according to a Newsday examination of court and investigative files and interviews with witnesses, law enforcement officials and the victim.
Rodham, records show, questioned the sixth grader's honesty and claimed she had made false accusations in the past. She implied that the girl often fantasized and sought out “older men” like Taylor, according to a July 1975 affidavit signed “Hillary D. Rodham” in compact cursive.
Ok, she didn't ask to represent a rapist. She even told the judge she would be uncomfortable doing so. And of course, it was her job to provide the best legal defense for her client.
But, come on, Hillary.
'She was just a real bulldog'
Rodham immersed herself in the work, people involved in the case say, mounting a ferocious and exhaustively researched defense that made a strong impression on some in the male-dominated legal community in northern Arkansas.
“She was just a real bulldog – a real bulldog,” said former Washington County prosecutor Mahlon Gibson, her opponent in the case.
Susan Carroll, senior scholar at the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University, says Clinton's attitude toward her work in Arkansas foreshadowed the workaholic approach she's adopted today in her uphill battle against Barack Obama.
Really. Now this we can believe. As a matter of fact, we can see a young Hillary Rodham going after a 12 year-old in 1975 just like we see her going after Obama in the last few days, capped off with her deragatory “celestial choir” reference to Obama supporters. Do whatever it takes. Don't concern yourself with the fallout.
So it was Hillary Rodham's job to defend a hard-drinking 41 year-old Thomas Alfred Taylor in a rape trial. The story, as best described by Newsday, went like this:
Around midnight, Taylor and his 20 year-old cousin found a 12 year-old girl willing to go for a ride with them. Taylor then picked up a 15 year-old boy and proceeded to a liquor store. He then poured some Old Grandad in the girl''s Coca-Cola.
Then some bowling; then a trip to a place off the highway. The two older men went for a walk; the girl and boy had sex; then the 41 year-old guy came back to take a turn.
What kind of argument did Rodham make?
…the record shows that Rodham was also intent on questioning the girl's credibility. That line of defense crystallized in a July 28, 1975, affidavit requesting the girl undergo a psychiatric examination at the university's clinic.
“I have been informed that the complainant is emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men and to engage in fantasizing,” wrote Rodham, without referring to the source of that allegation.
Given the fact that Hillary Rodham was a young attorney put on a case she did not desire, there should be no complaint against her for representing Taylor. But that's not the point. There's an old adage I find to be useful in cases like this: “It's not what you say; it's how you say it.”
Listen one more time to the video clip from the Rhode Island speech today. Imagine HRC being one of the kids in your childhood schoolyard. Imagine being a 12 year-old girl being questioned by 27 year-old Hillary Rodham. Consider yourself part of the growing “choir” raising it's voice through the Obama campaign.
Maybe it's not irony I'm seeing in today's news offerings. Maybe it's a definitive pattern of behavior.
Just a quick note that my GMD coffee mug and bumper sticker came in the mail today from Cafe Press!!!
Ok, so my daughter Lydia convinced me that the mug should be hers for hot chocolate, but the bumper sticker — I’ll be proud to put that on the back of the Volvo! It will be my first, and only, bumper sticker since I slapped Dean for America on the now departed minivan.
Get yours today! The mug and sticker total was under $23 including shipping. Just the sticker is like $3 I believe.
Show your pride in GMD! Click on the mug icon today!
I for one appreciate reading and participating in the discussion continuing in the diary, Taming the Tiger 1.
Hierc, would you like to put some teeth into the assertion of “tax flight” please?
Doug, can you split out the numbers for wage earners over $300K; their total tax burden; and the percentage of total tax collected by the state of Vermont, please?
Cairn, can you help split the difference between the Progressive and Republican points of view, please?
Nothing below the fold, except continued discussion, if you will.
