SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: techguerrilla who wrote (97969)2/1/2007 2:50:14 PM
From: Travis_Bickle  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 362605
 
Shrub it is. Let no man speak his name as anything other than "Shrub."



To: techguerrilla who wrote (97969)2/1/2007 3:12:25 PM
From: Patricia Trinchero  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 362605
 
"Sit up, join up, stir it up, get online, get in touch, find out who's raising hell and join them. No use waiting on a bunch of wussy politicians."

That was Molly's advice toward stopping the troop surge in Iraq............let's honor her.

I will miss her!



To: techguerrilla who wrote (97969)2/1/2007 7:45:56 PM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 362605
 
McCain’s Campaign: Major Donors
_____________________________________________________________

By Greg Giroux
Congressional Quarterly
February 1, 2007

Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain formed an “exploratory” committee for his likely 2008 presidential campaign back in mid-November of 2006. That move gave McCain a jump on the bevy of candidates in both parties who, since the first of the year, have entered or started officially exploring White House bids.

And, with McCain’s year-end campaign finance report filed to the Federal Election Commission by the deadline Wednesday, political analysts and potential opponents have a window on how much money McCain is raising — and from whom.

McCain’s presidential campaign reported receipts of $1.7 million in late 2006, according to a CQPolitics.com analysis of the report. Reported expenditures amounted to $1.2 million, leaving the committee with $472,000 cash on hand as the new year began. The committee also reported $335,000 in debts and obligations.

The total receipts reported by McCain’s committee do not mean he has already received that big a surge of fresh cash. In fact, most of the total — $1.05 million — came in the form of transfers from his Senate campaign committee, Friends of John McCain.

Federal campaign finance law allows members who run for the White House to transfer money from their House or Senate campaign committees to their presidential committees. McCain ended up with a sizable surplus following a 2004 campaign in which McCain coasted to a fourth Senate term by an overwhelming margin.

McCain’s presidential campaign did, however, take in about $650,000 from individual donors and $10,000 from political committees.

The following are brief sketches of some notable individuals who donated to McCain’s exploratory campaign late last year. The donors are listed alphabetically by last name.

Unless otherwise noted, the donors gave $2,100 — the maximum then in effect that an individual donor could give to a candidate in a single election (campaign finance law considers a primary election and a general election to be two separate contests). The Federal Election Commission announced last week that the limit has been raised to $2,300 per candidate per election, under provisions of the campaign finance law that allows for inflation-related adjustments.

McCain donors include:

• Jonathan E. Colby, managing director of The Carlyle Group, a global private equity firm.

• Edward F. Cox Jr., a partner at the law firm of Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler. Cox, a son-in-law to the late President Richard M. Nixon, in 2005 launched a challenge to New York Democratic Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in the next year’s election, but withdrew after then-Republican Gov. George E. Pataki stated a preference for another candidate.

Patricia Nixon Cox, Ed Cox’s wife and the former president’s daughter, also donated to McCain’s campaign.

• Arthur B. Culvahouse, attorney and chairman of the firm O’Melveny & Myers. Culvahouse served as White House counsel to President Ronald Reagan from 1987 to 1989.

• Becki Donatelli, president of Campaign Solutions Inc. Donatelli’s biography describes her as the “lead Internet consultant” to McCain’s 2000 campaign for the Republican presidential nomination, and his 2008 exploratory campaign is a Donatelli client.

• Roger J. Enrico, chairman of DreamWorks Animation SKG Inc.

• Carly Fiorina, former CEO and chairman of the board of the Hewlett-Packard technology company.

• Peter G. Fitzgerald, chairman of Chain Bridge Bancorp Inc. and former U.S. senator of Illinois. Fitzgerald was elected in 1998 but retired after just one term, with Democrat Barack Obama winning his open seat in 2004. Like McCain, Fitzgerald developed a reputation as a “maverick” within the ranks of Senate Republicans.

• Phil Gramm, an investment banker at UBS who, as a U.S. senator of Texas from 1985 to 2002, was a longtime McCain colleague. McCain chaired Gramm’s ultimately short-lived campaign for the 1996 Republican presidential nomination. Gramm’s wife Wendy, an economist, also donated to McCain’s exploratory effort.

• Douglas J. Holtz-Eakin, former director of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). Holtz-Eakin is the economic policy chairman for McCain’s bid.

• Henry A. Kissinger, the U.S. secretary of State under Presidents Nixon and Gerald R. Ford, who is president of the consulting firm Kissinger and Associates.

• John F. Lehman, chairman of J.F. Lehman & Company, an investment firm that specializes in defense-related industries. Lehman served as a Navy secretary under President Ronald Reagan and more recently served as a member of the federal commission that investigated the Sept. 11, terrorist attacks.

• Mark McKinnon, vice chairman of Public Strategies Inc. ($500 donation). McKinnon is advising McCain’s presidential campaign and directed advertising for George W. Bush’s successful presidential campaigns in 2000 and 2004.

• Bob Perry, homebuilder ($4,200 donation). A prominent donor to Republican committees and candidates and conservative-leaning “527” political organizations, Perry was a major financial backer of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, the organization that assailed the military credentials of 2004 Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry. Perry’s contribution was included among the $1.05 million that McCain transferred from his Senate campaign committee.

• Theodore Roosevelt IV, a managing director at the investment brokerage Lehman Brothers. McCain has long considered himself as a “Teddy Roosevelt Republican,” so it should come as no surprise that the great-grandson and namesake of the late Republican president is backing McCain.

• Orson Swindle, consultant for Orson Swindle Associates LLC ($1,000 donation). Like McCain, Swindle is a former Vietnam prisoner of war. Swindle ran respectable but losing House campaigns in Hawaii’s 1st Congressional District in 1994 and 1996, falling to Democratic incumbent Neil Abercrombie. He later served as a member of the Federal Trade Commission.

• John W. Timmons, founding partner of The Cormac Group, a consulting and lobbying firm. Timmons is a former legislative director to McCain.

© 2006 Congressional Quarterly



To: techguerrilla who wrote (97969)2/2/2007 5:27:05 PM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 362605
 
Basketball Hall of Famer Kareem Abdul-Jabbar endorses Obama on MSNBC's Hardball today...

en.wikipedia.org



To: techguerrilla who wrote (97969)2/2/2007 6:19:44 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 362605
 
Obama Holds First Political Rally
____________________________________________________________

By Zachary A. Goldfarb
Special to The Washington Post
Friday, February 2, 2007; 5:44 PM

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) today held his first political rally since announcing he would explore a presidential candidacy, appealing for support from young voters in an address to thousands of students who had mobilized and prepared for the event online.

"This is a remarkable achievement, a remarkable event that speaks to what young people can do when they put their minds together," Obama said in remarks that were heavy on personal biography but also directly addressed the views of the young people gathered at George Mason University in Fairfax. "No one is more cynical about politics than young people, because they'd throw them out in the midst of a politics that's all bout slash and burn, nastiness and negative ads, and name-calling and gridlock."

The event underscored the potential power of online communities in the burgeoning White House contest. Obama is expected to officially declare his candidacy in Springfield, Ill., on Feb. 10.

The genesis for today's rally was a group created last summer on Facebook.com, a Web site frequented by college students, who post profiles and assemble in virtual groups. "Barack Obama for President in 2008" now has more than 50,000 members, and its founders have created an offline presidential draft committee, "Students for Barack Obama."

"One thing that's been incredibly clear throughout this whole process is his commitment and dedication to students and all the young people of America. He sees our generation as a critical part of his campaign," said Meredith Seagal, a junior at Bowdoin College in Maine and executive director of the draft committee.

Another Facebook group, "Barack Obama (One Million Strong for Barack)," was started fewer than three weeks ago and has already amassed 200,000 members. "When you go on Facebook, as you always do, sign up," Farouk Olu Aregbe, who founded that group, told the crowd yesterday.

Jonathan Hicks, 19, a sophomore at American University, said he learned about the event through the Facebook group. "The majority of people to my knowledge found out through Facebook," he said. "Technology is changing. Politicians need to use it more and more often if they want to reach the youth of America today."

In his 25-minute speech, Obama promised that a better kind of politics -- led by young people -- was possible.

"You guys don't have much of a memory of a possibility of a politics that transcends and brings people together," he said. "[At] each and every juncture of our history, somebody has been audacious enough to say we could do better. . . . And more often than not, it's young people who've done it."

Students at the rally displayed all the signs of youthful political enthusiasm. Thousands of students filled a ground-floor speaking area and watched from two more floors over an open atrium.

"I don't know how many candidates could bring out this many college students," said Lauren McGill, 18, a George Mason freshman who arrived at 7 a.m. to get a good spot.

Some students wore T-shirts that said "Barack and Roll" and "My Next President," with Obama's face in a heart. One student compared the senator to a rock star. Another said a picture of him without a shirt and in swimming shorts that recently appeared in People magazine excited many of her classmates.

"A lot of my friends said, 'He's hot," said Ally Nutter, 18, who attends George Mason and had been waiting four hours to get a front-row perch. "That's not what it's supposed to be about, but that's what some people care about."



To: techguerrilla who wrote (97969)2/6/2007 8:32:41 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 362605
 
Obama’s Schedule Suggests You Can Bank on Him Bidding for President
_____________________________________________________________

By Marie Horrigan
Congressional Quarterly
February 6, 2007

It’s a frequent conundrum of presidential politics: hopefuls who insist on being coy about their plans to officially announce their candidacies, even when it’s perfectly obvious that they will do so.

The latest example comes from Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, who — unless he is pulling one of the great feints in recent American politics — will announce at a rally in his home state’s capital of Springfield, scheduled for 2 p.m. central time Saturday, that he’s definitely joining the crowded field for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination.

A press release issued Tuesday afternoon by Obama’s presidential campaign exploratory committee — established Jan. 16 — states “Obama to make announcement concerning presidential campaign” at the Historic Old State Capitol in Springfield. This phrase has been repeated by the committee since the event was first scheduled Jan. 31.

But Obama’s schedule for subsequent events is kind of a giveaway. Immediately after leaving Springfield, Obama will travel to Iowa — which is scheduled next Jan. 14 to host its first-in-the-nation caucuses that traditionally kick off the presidential nominating process.

After holding a town meeting in Cedar Rapids, scheduled for 4 p.m. local time Saturday, he will move on to the city of Waterloo for a 7:30 p.m. “meet and greet.”

On Sunday at noon, according to the schedule, the scene will shift to the Iowa State University campus in Ames for a “rally with students and community.”

Returning to his hometown for a 5:30 p.m. Sunday rally at the University of Illinois at Chicago, Obama is scheduled Monday to turn his attentions to New Hampshire, where the traditional first-in-the-nation presidential primary is scheduled for Jan. 22.

He is currently scheduled to attend a house party in Nashau at 2 p.m. eastern time Monday, followed by a 6:30 p.m. town hall meeting in Durham.

This will not be the first New Hampshire visit for Obama, a fast-rising star since he moved Democrats with his keynote address to the party’s 2004 national convention. In fact, the wildly enthusiastic greeting received by Obama during his appearances at a meeting of the state Democratic Party and elsewhere around New Hampshire in December played a role in persuading him to enter the presidential contest.

Based on the schedule, CQPolitics.com boldly rates the likelihood that Obama will announce he’s running as Safe.

© 2006 Congressional Quarterly



To: techguerrilla who wrote (97969)2/8/2007 8:00:07 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 362605
 
Pritzker to head fundraising for Obama's bid committee
____________________________________________________________

By Brandon Glenn

Feb. 01, 2007

(Crain’s) — Wealthy and well-connected hotel heiress Penny Pritzker was named chair of the national finance committee for Senator Barack Obama’s presidential exploratory committee.

If Mr. Obama decides to run for the White House, as is expected, Ms. Pritzker looks to be in for a battle.

Mr. Obama will compete for campaign cash with his presumed top rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, Hillary Clinton, and Ms. Clinton’s formidable network of donors.

The Pritzker family is among the wealthiest in the nation and founded the Hyatt hotel chain. Ms. Pritzker is CEO of Classic Residence by Hyatt. She served on Mr. Obama’s finance committee in his 2004 run for the U.S. Senate.

“Penny shares my belief that we can change politics in our country to work toward common interests,” Mr. Obama said in a statement.

Mr. Obama is expected to formally announce his candidacy for the Democratic nomination in the 2008 presidential election on Feb. 10 in Springfield.



To: techguerrilla who wrote (97969)2/8/2007 8:10:48 PM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 362605
 
Obama's HQ to be on North Michigan Ave.
______________________________________________________________

By Greg Hinz and Thomas A. Corfman

Feb. 08, 2007

(Crain’s) — It looks like Barack Obama will run his presidential campaign from a Michigan Avenue high-rise.

A spokesman for the Illinois Democrat confirmed Wednesday that Sen. Obama, who is scheduled to officially announce his candidacy on Saturday in Springfield, expects to open his national campaign headquarters at 233 N. Michigan. Mr. Obama’s exploratory committee already has a small office in the 32-story building.

Knowledgeable real estate sources confirmed that final negotiations are under way on a deal in which the Obama campaign would sublease an entire 33,500-square-foot floor from Accenture Ltd., the big consulting company, for up to two years. That’s a big enough space to handle up to several hundred strategists, pollsters, media experts and other campaign hands.

Sources said the Obama campaign is being represented by J. F. McKinney & Associates, which is donating its services to the senator. The firm also is handling leasing for the Hyatt Center at 71 S. Wacker. It was co-developed by Penny Pritzker, Mr. Obama’s national finance chair. McKinney declined to comment.

The Obama campaign reportedly considered other, more innovative loft-like spaces on the edge of the central business district, but eventually concluded that only a central location would provide both quick public-transit access and a secure space with parking.

The building selected for headquarters formerly was known as 2 Illinois Center and is in the middle portion of that complex. Other major tenants in the building are public relations firm Burson-Marsteller and insurer UnitedHealthcare.

The building, on air rights over South Water Street just east of Michigan Avenue, was built in 1972 and now is owned by Parkway Properties Inc., a Mississippi-based real estate investment trust. It’s a block north of Millennium Park, and just a few steps away from one of the Pritzker family’s inns, the Hyatt Regency Chicago.



To: techguerrilla who wrote (97969)2/9/2007 7:54:32 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 362605
 
N.J. man named to Obama's team: Seton Hall professor tapped to oversee policy development

BY JOHN FARMER
Star-Ledger Staff
Friday, February 09, 2007

As Democratic Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois gets ready to announce his run for president tomorrow, Mark C. Alexander, a 42-year-old Seton Hall University law professor and Montclair resident, is preparing to direct the candidate's issues team.

With the title of "policy director," Alexander said he will work to develop positions and policy options for Obama on such critical topics as Iraq, health care, energy alternatives, the Israel-Palestinian struggle and how to deal with the nuclear ambitions of North Korea and Iran.

Alexander said he served a similar function when he worked on former New Jersey Sen. Bill Bradley's 2000 presidential campaign and Sen. Edward M. Kennedy's 1998 re-election campaign in Massachusetts. "It's basically the same job," Alexander said in an interview at his law school office. "It's public policy."

Alexander said he owes his connection with Obama to his sister Elizabeth, now a professor at Yale Law School. She introduced them "10 or 12 years ago" when she and Obama were teaching law at the University of Chicago.

"She recognized we had a lot in common," Alexander said -- young lawyers, with liberal political leanings, active in community organizing, both African-American.

The two men kept in touch over the years, Alexander said, and in recent months talked about Obama's presidential campaign prospects. "I made it clear I'd be happy to help," Alexander said, and Obama asked him aboard about a month ago.

He'll take a leave of absence from his tenured post at Seton Hall at the end of February to begin recruiting a policy staff and shaping an Obama issues agenda.

Representatives of the not-yet-official campaign did not return phone calls yesterday seeking comment on Alexander's planned role.

In a sense, the policy post is more important for Obama than for most of his rivals in the crowded Democratic field simply because he is so new to national politics. Candidates such as Sens. Hillary Clinton, Christopher Dodd and Joe Biden and former vice presidential candidate John Edwards are recognized commodities with established positions on major issues, such as Iraq and health care. With only two years in the Senate and a brief legislative record in Illinois, Obama brings a clean slate to the campaign -- or an empty one, his rivals might contend.

It will be Alexander's job to fill that slate with positions designed to find favor with Democratic voters, interest groups and activists who will choose the nominee. He won't have much time. The first campaign debate is slated for early April this year, a full 20 months before the November 2008 election.

Alexander said he will spend his first weeks on the job in Washington, D.C., tapping into the Democratic think tanks and consulting with issue specialists on Capitol Hill, before settling into Obama's campaign headquarters in Chicago.

As he described it, his job will be heavily "managerial" -- recruiting staff, soliciting advice from outside experts, and filtering through the many options available on most issues. He'll also seek part-time help -- "say, a professor in Asian studies, (on North Korea's nuclear ambitions.). We'll ask, 'Can you come to Washington for a day? Or do a conference call. Or write a white paper for us?'"

In some cases, Alexander said, he'll recommend a specific position on a key issue; in others his job will be to give Obama options to choose from.

"Iraq is front and center" among the issues Obama faces, he said, along with energy and health care. "We have some ideas we're working on," Alexander said. He said he's not ready to talk about specifics.

Alexander, a tall, lean man with gray-speckled hair and a easy manner, grew up in Washington, D.C., and is married with three children ranging in age from 7 to 13. He graduated from Yale with a degree in architecture, but after working in Kennedy's U.S. Senate office he decided his real love was law and public policy and went back to Yale for a law degree.

The public figure he most admires is Lyndon Johnson, whose civil right reforms ended the Jim Crow era in the South -- and also Democratic Party dominance there.

Asked about race as factor in the Obama campaign, Alexander said "it has an impact on all of us. But it's different than a generation ago or a generation before that," he added. "It's not going away. But it's not 'I'm going to vote against you because you're black or for you because you're black.' This is not a simple-minded monolithic country. I have no doubt he can win the presidency."

© 2007 The Star Ledger



To: techguerrilla who wrote (97969)2/12/2007 3:46:34 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 362605
 
Obama pool report. First big presidential funder...

blogs.suntimes.com



To: techguerrilla who wrote (97969)2/14/2007 5:41:54 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 362605
 
How Obama Versus Clinton Gets Decided by Illinois
_______________________________________________________

By Amity Shlaes

Feb. 14 (Bloomberg) -- The big news for Democrats is that the Daley brothers, Mayor Richard M. of Chicago and Bill, have been so fast to endorse Barack Obama in his bid to be president.

Both former President Bill Clinton and Senator Hillary Clinton are probably still adjusting to this sudden news. Mayor Daley has taken a neutral stance on other presidential elections; he could have done the same for this one. Especially since President Clinton made his brother Bill commerce secretary. Both Daleys have watched both Clintons work hard for years to prepare for Hillary's 2008 run. Besides, unlike Obama, Hillary did spend her childhood in Chicagoland. She grew up in Park Ridge, west of Chicago's city line.

Chicagoans are probably less shocked. And that's not merely because Obama now represents Illinois as senator and Clinton, New York. Windy City citizens understand this race in their own context, that of a specific Illinois version of the political tradition of Old Democrat versus New Democrat.

The Daley family personifies Chicago's Old Democrat tradition. First elected mayor in 1955, Richard J., the current mayor's father, ruled Chicago for decades, building expressways, O'Hare Airport and the Sears Tower. Daley ran a political machine so corrupt and efficient that all Cleveland or Detroit could do was sit back and admire. Daley switched favorites in a minute if he thought someone had a better chance of pulling in votes. When he sent out the plows to clear his snowy city, Daley saw not blocks but blocs -- voting blocs.

Give and Get

Daley could give as good as he got. The late columnist Mike Royko wrote in his biography, ``Boss,' that ``while Daley was mediating between white trade unions and black groups who wanted the unions to accept blacks, a young militant angrily rejected one of his suggestions and concluded 'Up your ass.' Daley leapt to his feet and answered 'Up yours too.'' But the ``boss' also was pragmatic. To Daley, like Hillary, ideology came second to deal-making.

These attitudes left Daley unprepared for the mood of the Democratic National Convention in 1968, and the popularity of the anti-Vietnam War candidate, Eugene McCarthy. And it left him unready for demonstrators throwing garbage, bathroom tiles, even human feces at police. Daley's police reacted strongly, even when the demonstrators weren't violent, and made the additional mistake of attacking newsmen along with students. The brutal photos from the city's lakefront forever marred Daley's proud record. His sons both took note of that.

Illinois has another tradition into which Obama fits. It is that of the newcomer who changes the terms of the debate because of the sheer timeliness of his ideas. This tradition used to inhere in the Republican Party. Abraham Lincoln rose this way, debating Stephen Douglas.

New Prophets

Lately the new prophets have been, mostly, Democrats. Paul Douglas, a U.S. senator of Spencer-Tracy-level integrity, was an obscure labor economist at the University of Chicago when he first made his name in the 1930s fighting for unemployment insurance. Dan Walker, a corporate lawyer, claimed national prominence with a report that condemned Daley's convention-week management as a ``police riot,' -- and won election as governor in 1972. The Walker style was later studied by a would-be governor of Arkansas, Bill Clinton.

Another outsider reformer was Abner Mikva, an anti-Daley Democrat who served in Congress from two different Illinois districts, and then as President Clinton's White House counsel, and as a federal judge.

South Side

In recent decades many of these figures have been associated with Hyde Park, the South Side neighborhood that is home to the University of Chicago. Long before Washington thought about integration, Hyde Park did. Indeed one of the few places in the U.S. that biracial couples like Obama's parents felt at home in the 1960s was this tree-lined spot. This part of Chicago was post-racial decades before the label came to be used to describe Obama.

New Democrats spend relatively little time serving the party -- Paul Douglas came not from the wards but the classroom. They tend to be serious jurists -- Mikva, Obama, once the editor of the Harvard Law Review. They are also true liberals in the sense that they fight more for the individual than the group.

And, finally, they are often pioneers, like Lincoln before them, when it comes to race questions. Obama's refusal to blame the New Orleans flood deaths on racism would have pleased Douglas of Hyde Park, who, half a century ago, fought for integration of staff offices on Capitol Hill.

Building Blocs

All of this history helps explain Hillary's greatest advantage -- her campaign war chest, the result of meticulous Daley-style tending of constituent groups. It explains Hillary's popularity with Terry McAuliffe and other party leaders. She has done the national equivalent of Daley's ward babysitting. It also explains why some blacks hesitate over Obama. Hillary is more likely to work with -- some would say cater to -- official black leadership.

Illinois history also explains the Daleys' endorsement of Obama. The brothers learned not only from their father's victories but also from his mistakes. They don't want to look out of step with their times, as he did in 1968.

When it comes to general elections, Old Democrat often trumps New. If the Daleys are to prove they are as good at picking winners as their father generally was, they have to prove to themselves, Chicago and the nation that Obama isn't another George McGovern. One thing is already sure about Campaign 2008 --whatever political behavior we see this year, much of it was learned in Chicago.

(Amity Shlaes, a visiting senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, is a Bloomberg News columnist. The views expressed here are her own.)

Last Updated: February 14, 2007 00:08 EST



To: techguerrilla who wrote (97969)2/18/2007 2:15:39 AM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 362605
 
Oh What a Malleable War
______________________________________________________________

By Frank Rich
Op-Ed Columnist
The New York Times
February 18, 2007

Maybe the Bush White House can’t conduct a war, but no one has ever impugned its ability to lie about its conduct of a war. Now even that well-earned reputation for flawless fictionalizing is coming undone. Watching the administration try to get its story straight about Iran’s role in Iraq last week was like watching third graders try to sidestep blame for misbehaving while the substitute teacher was on a bathroom break. The team that once sold the country smoking guns in the shape of mushroom clouds has completely lost its mojo.

Surely these guys can do better than this. No sooner did unnamed military officials unveil their melodramatically secretive briefing in Baghdad last Sunday than Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, blew the whole charade. General Pace said he didn’t know about the briefing and couldn’t endorse its contention that the Iranian government’s highest echelons were complicit in anti-American hostilities in Iraq. Public-relations pandemonium ensued as Tony Snow, the State Department and finally the president tried to revise the story line on the fly. Back when Karl Rove ruled, everyone read verbatim from the same script. Last week’s frantic improvisations were vintage Scooter Libby, at best the ur-text for a future perjury trial.

Yet for all the sloppy internal contradictions, the most incriminating indictment of the new White House disinformation campaign is to be found in official assertions made more than a year ago. The press and everyone else seems to have forgotten that the administration has twice sounded the same alarms about Iranian weaponry in Iraq that it did last week.

In August 2005, NBC News, CBS News and The Times cited unnamed military and intelligence officials when reporting, as CBS put it, that “U.S. forces intercepted a shipment from Iran containing professionally made explosive devices specifically designed to penetrate the armor which protects American vehicles.” Then, as now, those devices were the devastating roadside bombs currently called E.F.P.’s (explosively formed penetrators). Then, as now, they were thought to have been brought into Iraq by members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard. Then, as now, there was no evidence that the Iranian government was directly involved. In February 2006, administration officials delivered the same warning yet again, before the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Timing is everything in propaganda, as in all showmanship. So why would the White House pick this particular moment to mount such an extravagant rerun of old news, complete with photos and props reminiscent of Colin Powell’s infamous presentation of prewar intelligence? Yes, the death toll from these bombs is rising, but it has been rising for some time. (Also rising, and more dramatically, is the death toll from attacks on American helicopters.)

After General Pace rendered inoperative the first official rationale for last Sunday’s E.F.P. briefing, President Bush had to find a new explanation for his sudden focus on the Iranian explosives. That’s why he said at Wednesday’s news conference that it no longer mattered whether the Iranian government (as opposed to black marketeers or freelance thugs) had supplied these weapons to Iraqi killers. “What matters is, is that they’re there,” he said. The real point of hyping this inexact intelligence was to justify why he had to take urgent action now, no matter what the E.F.P.’s provenance: “My job is to protect our troops. And when we find devices that are in that country that are hurting our troops, we’re going to do something about it, pure and simple.”

Darn right! But if the administration has warned about these weapons twice in the past 18 months (and had known “that they’re there,” we now know, since 2003), why is Mr. Bush just stepping up to that job at this late date? Embarrassingly enough, The Washington Post reported on its front page last Monday — the same front page with news of the Baghdad E.F.P. briefing — that there is now a shortfall of “thousands of advanced Humvee armor kits designed to reduce U.S. troop deaths from roadside bombs.” Worse, the full armor upgrade “is not scheduled to be completed until this summer.” So Mr. Bush’s idea of doing something about it, “pure and simple” is itself a lie, since he is doing something about it only after he has knowingly sent a new round of underarmored American troops into battle.

To those who are most suspicious of this White House, the “something” that Mr. Bush really wants to do has little to do with armor in any case. His real aim is to provoke war with Iran, no matter how overstretched and ill-equipped our armed forces may be for that added burden. By this line of thinking, the run-up to the war in Iraq is now repeating itself exactly and Mr. Bush will seize any handy casus belli he can to ignite a conflagration in Iran.

Iran is an unquestionable menace with an Israel-hating fanatic as its president. It is also four times the size of Iraq and a far more dangerous adversary than was Saddam’s regime. Perhaps Mr. Bush is as reckless as his harshest critics claim and will double down on catastrophe. But for those who don’t hold quite so pitch-black a view of his intentions, there’s a less apocalyptic motive to be considered as well.

Let’s not forget that the White House’s stunt of repackaging old, fear-inducing news for public consumption has a long track record. Its reason for doing so is always the same: to distract the public from reality that runs counter to the White House’s political interests. When the Democrats were gaining campaign traction in 2004, John Ashcroft held an urgent news conference to display photos of seven suspected terrorists on the loose. He didn’t bother to explain that six of them had been announced previously, one at a news conference he had held 28 months earlier. Mr. Bush played the same trick last February as newly declassified statistics at a Senate hearing revealed a steady three-year growth in insurgent attacks: he breathlessly announced a thwarted Qaeda plot against the U.S. Bank Tower in Los Angeles that had already been revealed by the administration four months before.

We know what Mr. Bush wants to distract us from this time: Congressional votes against his war policy, the Libby trial, the Pentagon inspector general’s report deploring Douglas Feith’s fictional prewar intelligence, and the new and dire National Intelligence Estimate saying that America is sending troops into the cross-fire of a multifaceted sectarian cataclysm.

That same intelligence estimate also says that Iran is “not likely to be a major driver of violence” in Iraq, but no matter. If the president can now whip up a Feith-style smoke screen of innuendo to imply that Iran is the root of all our woes in the war — and give “the enemy” a single recognizable face (Ahmadinejad as the new Saddam) — then, ipso facto, he is not guilty of sending troops into the middle of a shadowy Sunni-Shiite bloodbath after all.

Oh what a malleable war Iraq has been. First it was waged to vanquish Saddam’s (nonexistent) nuclear arsenal and his (nonexistent) collaboration with Al Qaeda. Then it was going to spread (nonexistent) democracy throughout the Middle East. Now it is being rebranded as a fight against Tehran. Mr. Bush keeps saying that his saber rattling about Iran is not “a pretext for war.” Maybe so, but at the very least it’s a pretext for prolonging the disastrous war we already have.

What makes his spin brazen even by his standards is that Iran is in fact steadily extending its influence in Iraq — thanks to its alliance with the very Iraqi politicians that Mr. Bush himself has endorsed. In December the president welcomed a Shiite leader, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, to the White House with great fanfare; just three weeks later American forces had to raid Mr. Hakim’s Iraq compound to arrest Iranian operatives suspected of planning attacks against American military forces, possibly with E.F.P.’s. As if that weren’t bad enough, Nuri al-Maliki’s government promptly overruled the American arrests and ordered the operatives’ release so they could escape to Iran. For all his bluster about doing something about it, Mr. Bush did nothing.

It gets worse. This month we learned that yet another Maliki supporter in the Iraqi Parliament, Jamal Jafaar Mohammed Ali Ebrahimi, was convicted more than two decades ago of planning the murderous 1983 attacks on the American and French Embassies in Kuwait. He’s now in Iran, but before leaving, this terrorist served as a security adviser, no less, to the first Iraqi prime minister after the American invasion, Ibrahim al-Jafaari. Mr. Jafaari, hailed by Mr. Bush as “a strong partner for peace and freedom” during his own White House visit in 2005, could be found last week in Tehran, celebrating the anniversary of the 1979 Iranian revolution and criticizing America’s arrest of Iranian officials in Iraq.

Even if the White House still had its touch for spinning fiction, it’s hard to imagine how it could create new lies brilliant enough to top the sorry truth. When you have a president making a big show of berating Iran while simultaneously empowering it, you’ve got another remake of “The Manchurian Candidate,” this time played for keeps.



To: techguerrilla who wrote (97969)2/25/2007 2:39:29 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 362605
 
Clinton and Obama's Oscar-worthy drama
_____________________________________________________________

By Clarence Page
Columnist
Tribune Media Services
02/23/2007

WASHINGTON--How appropriate that the presidential campaign drama that some already are calling "Geffengate" and "Hilla-Bama," among other nicknames, happened to break during Oscars week.

Nothing puts a smile on the lips or a lift in the footsteps of reporters and pundits like a story brimming with big names, powerful people, Hollywood glitter and some major feuding.

One must call upon the drama critic in one's soul to do justice to the epic reception that Southern California's deep-pockets Democratic donors gave to upstart Sen. Barack Obama. For most of us, it would be enough to have Halle Barry say, as she said exuberantly of Obama, that she would go out and pick up litter in the streets to ease his progress.

Quickly on the heels of the big crowds and big-money fundraisers came a titanic war of words between the Illinois senator's supporters and those of the presidential frontrunner, New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton. Oh, pass the popcorn!

In this corner, we have movie mogul David Geffen, whom you may recall from earlier episodes of Washington life as a big booster and running buddy of President Bill Clinton. That was so last century.

Last week, Geffen co-hosted a $1.3 million star-studded Beverly Hills fund-raiser for Obama, followed by dinner for a few VIP donors with the senator and his wife, Michelle, at Geffen's palatial home. Geffen also slung a few barbs at Sen. Clinton. In an interview with New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd, he called her unelectable and raised questions about both Clintons' ethics and trustworthiness. "Everyone in politics lies, but they do it with such ease, it's troubling," Geffen told Dowd. Ouch.

Round Two: Clinton's chief spokesman, Howard Wolfson, responded with a demand that Obama disavow attacks from Geffen, whom Wolfson incorrectly called Obama's "finance chair," and return Geffen's money -- "If Senator Obama is indeed sincere about his repeated claims to change the tone of our politics," Wolfson said.

In fact, Geffen is only a fundraiser, not a member of Obama's campaign. Obama's chief spokesman, Robert Gibbs, dismissed Wolfson's demands.

"We aren't going to get in the middle of a disagreement between the Clintons and someone who was once one of their biggest supporters," Gibbs said. "It is ironic that the Clintons had no problem with David Geffen when he was raising them $18 million and sleeping at their invitation in the Lincoln bedroom." Ouch again.

With that double-barrelled counterpunch, Gibbs reminded everyone of the mid-1990s Lincoln bedroom campaign finance scandals that the Clintons would rather we forgot.

So, who wins this round? With misgivings about Mrs. Clinton's viability already worrying many in her base, despite her frontrunner status in the polls, I don't see how reminders of the grim side of the Clinton years hurts Obama in any way.

And Wolfson's reaction revealed a curious touchiness for a frontrunner's spokesman. I imagine it must be quite painful for Team Clinton to watch what they see as another free pass for Obama in his mostly favorable media coverage. But, if anyone should know better than to try holding candidates accountable for what each and every one of their supporters say, it is the Clintons.

Meanwhile, Obama was wise to lay low and emerge later at a Houston fundraiser with his halo intact as Senator Peacemaker. He called for an end to the "tit-for-tat" that dominates politics. That was a good move to make before another "tat" could come flying his way from the Clinton camp.

Since the country is waiting with either hope or dread for Obama to stumble in his rapid ascendancy, it says a lot about his instincts and the reflexes of his campaign team that they responded rapidly and passionately to the Hillary aide's jabs. Obama and his people appear to have learned from the mistakes of earlier candidates who let accusations fester for too long in the media boilers until they took on an undeserved appearance of truth.

I often hear from people who complain about news coverage that "focuses on the candidates instead of the issues." But that ignores, in my view, how much the candidates themselves are the issue.



To: techguerrilla who wrote (97969)3/1/2007 6:51:07 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 362605
 
Family Ties: Brown Coach, Barack Obama
______________________________________________________________

By ERIC TUCKER
Associated Press Writer
Thursday, March 1, 2007

(03-01) 14:30 PST Providence, R.I. (AP) --

Craig Robinson believes you can tell a lot about a guy by how he plays basketball, which is why he liked Barack Obama long before the Democrat decided to run for president.

Recalling a pickup game the two played in Chicago some 15 years ago when they were first getting to know each other, Robinson remembers that Obama was confident in his game without being arrogant. He took shots when he was open, but wasn't overly selfish. And he didn't show off his Harvard Law School pedigree.

"He never wore that on his sleeve, and you can tell the camaraderie that he'd have on the court with people who he didn't even know," Robinson said. "You knew that this guy had the ability to win people over."

Basketball and Obama are subjects Robinson knows well.

The first-year coach of the Brown University men's basketball team is also Obama's brother-in-law, a familial tie that's afforded him intimate access as Obama has ascended from a political novice to a U.S. senator waging a high-profile bid for the White House.

The men's relationship has spanned personal conversations about children and politics to casual family gatherings to watching and playing basketball together — the details of daily life that few voters or the media ever witness. The character insights gleaned from those intimate moments have made Robinson an unabashed Obama booster and quick to plug his candidacy.

"I know him as a brother-in-law and friend more than I know him as a politician," said Robinson, whose younger sister, Michelle, married Obama in 1992.

Robinson, 44, and his sister grew up on the south side of Chicago, children of a city laborer and a secretary, in an upbringing he described as disciplined and valuing achievement.

Both went to Princeton, where Robinson starred as a two-time Ivy League player of the year before getting drafted by the NBA and then playing professionally in Europe. He left the sport for a time to work in business, serving as a vice president at Morgan Stanley.

His sister, 16 months his junior, went on to Harvard Law School and met Obama after he was hired as a summer associate at the same Chicago law firm where she worked.

"I think the fact that Barack likes basketball and can play basketball in a basketball family probably earned him some points," Michelle Obama said in a telephone interview.

Obama was always clear that politics inspired him, even more than law, Robinson said. He even hinted at his ambition at a family gathering early in the relationship.

"He said, you know, it'd be great one day if I could run for president. And I made a comment like, yeah, yeah that would be great — come on over here and meet my Aunt Gracie," Robinson said.

The actual decision to run was much tougher. Robinson said his sister, concerned about guaranteeing a normal childhood for the couple's two daughters, had to be won over — as did her mother. But the groundswell of public support that Obama — who gained national attention with his speech at the 2004 Democratic convention — received last fall made the candidacy seem especially feasible, Robinson said.

"This is one of those things that's more important than the individuals involved," Robinson said. "This is the ultimate team assignment. So everybody has to give up something to make this work."

Michelle Obama acknowledged a degree of uncertainty, but said it had more to do with her own personal feelings about whether entering politics was the best way to effect change.

"I'm one of the skeptics that Barack often talks about," she said. "Like most people, my view about politics — and it's evolved, but it had been — that politics is for dirty, nasty people who aren't really trying to do much in the world."

Robinson said he asked himself not whether Obama should run, but rather why he shouldn't.

"You could wait around until another opportunity, but you might not get another opportunity," Robinson said.

He has tried to impart that same confidence to his players. Hired last summer after six years as an assistant at Northwestern, Robinson said he wasn't sure the Brown team, which has struggled to crack the upper echelon of the Ivy League, could even win six games this season.

But heading into their final games of the season against Penn and Princeton this weekend, Robinson's Bears have equaled their win total — 10 — from last year. Players describe him as a demanding and motivational coach who instituted 5:45 a.m. practices last fall and is not afraid to shake up the lineup. He preaches perfection, said sophomore Scott Friske.

"During the games, he's cheering you on as much as the crowd is," Friske said.

But they say he's also deeply interested in their lives away from the game.

"Once you step off the basketball court, he's as down to earth as anybody," said Mark McAndrew, now Brown's leading scorer who averaged barely 10 minutes a game last season. "He has a very open-door policy."

Robinson aspires to win the Ivy League title, something Brown hasn't done since 1986. But he said his ambition pales in significance to Obama's.

"What we're doing is just a game," he said. "What he's doing, it affects so many different people."

sfgate.com



To: techguerrilla who wrote (97969)3/6/2007 11:39:01 PM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 362605
 
It's Obamalot!
______________________________________________________________

Harvard Law Mafia Led by Larry Tribe Resurrects Obama Ties

By: Anna Schneider-Mayerson
Date: 3/12/2007
observer.com

Laurence Tribe, the celebrated liberal Constitutional scholar, was looking at a black plastic “Countdown Clock” that sits on a desk at his home in Cambridge, Mass. “Time until Bush goes,” reads the legend accompanying the digital read-out. The countdown stood at 692 days.

If the number seemed exhausting to the Harvard Law School professor, it may not be George W. Bush that’s to blame.

“Keeping up with Hillary’s machine is not easy,” he said.

Mr. Tribe’s former research assistant, Barack Obama, is now the leading contender against Senator Clinton for the Democratic Presidential nomination in 2008, and Mr. Tribe is working furiously on behalf of his favorite alumnus.

“Although I know and admire Hillary Clinton and John Edwards and have worked with both of them and would be happy to support each of them if they won the nomination,” Mr. Tribe said, “ … I’ve never been as enthusiastic about a politician as I am about Barack.”

And so, on March 20, Mr. Tribe will finally get to co-host a party for more than 150 guests, at the Cambridge home of his law-school colleague David Wilkins, that was originally scheduled for this past weekend—before what the tabloids have dubbed the Battle of Selma.

Several of Mr. Obama’s former professors are expected to welcome their prodigal son back to Cambridge for the event, an intimate, $2,300-a-head affair.

“He was not just another extremely bright student,” Mr. Tribe said. “He made a really major impact when he was here. He was charismatic, he was thoughtful, he was mature.”

Several Harvard Law School faculty members who got to know Mr. Obama before he graduated in 1991 have spent the last 20 years eagerly watching his star rise. The Presidential campaign has become a culmination of the old New England bastion’s affection for a favorite son.

And at this early date in the campaign, their favors are about more than Mr. Obama’s image, as they and their cohort scramble to meet the maximum donations to his war chest before a March 31 deadline, when all agree that the viability of his candidacy will really be determined.

His closest friends are reaching out to prominent alumni to get them to donate money and join the pro-Obama group of Harvard Law School graduates they are forming. Their stated goal is to create a base of fund-raisers, policy advisors, and—should the need arise—sharp-eyed poll-watchers well versed in the law.

“Barack is not the product of any political machine—he’s not a traditional establishment candidate by any means—so he doesn’t necessarily have those networks to draw on,” said Andrew Schapiro, one of the nascent effort’s masterminds. “But Harvard Law School is a pre-existing network that is in many ways an establishment structure, and one that can provide a lot of enthusiasm and assistance for his candidacy.”

Working the Ivy network has become an important part of Presidential campaign politics in recent years. The first time that Bill Clinton ran for office, he was buoyed by support from a similar group of more than 200 alumni of Yale Law School, including the school’s then dean, Guido Calabresi, First Amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams, and dining-guide moguls Tim and Nina Zagat.

Mr. Obama’s fellow graduates, like Mr. Clinton’s, aren’t just at corporate law firms, but big shots in the worlds of business, entertainment, finance, education and, obviously, politics. Still, it’s a tight field to beat Hillary Clinton, who has connections with many deep-pocketed donors, especially along the East Coast. But so far, Mr. Obama seems to be making inroads with the donor class closest to his age bracket: hedge-fund, private-equity and venture-capital investors in their 30’s and 40’s.

Mr. Obama’s closest circle of law-school friends has also produced some of his most committed fund-raisers. Citigroup executive Michael Froman and hedge-fund manager Brian Mathis, both Harvard Law School friends, are chairs of the March 9 gala being held at the Grand Hyatt. A Harvard Law Review colleague, law professor Jonathan Molot, hosted 180 people for a fund-raising event at his home in Washington, D.C., last week. At it, Mr. Obama surveyed the crowd. “Geez, I feel like I’m at a law-school reunion,” he joked.

Last month, classmate Julius Genachowski, a private-equity advisor based in Washington, D.C., arranged a meeting between Mr. Obama and about 50 new-media and technology executives at an office in midtown. It was co-hosted by former AOL chief executive Jonathan Miller and technology venture-capitalist Deven Parekh.

“I’ve gotten e-mails from people I haven’t talked to in 15 years [saying], ‘Hey, I hear you’re still friends with Barack—what can I do?’” said Thomas Perrelli, a Washington lawyer and managing editor of the law review under Mr. Obama.

Several law-school friends have emerged as informal advisors as well. Cassandra Butts, a domestic-policy expert at the Center for American Progress, met Mr. Obama in the financial-aid office in their first days on campus. She helped Mr. Obama establish his Senate office, and she has been advising his campaign on policy and outreach to Harvard Law School alumni. Mr. Genachowski, who worked for the F.C.C. and for IAC/InterActiveCorp, chairs an advisory committee on technology and the Internet.

Many of them talk with or e-mail the Senator and his staff on a weekly basis, and the conversations can range from the personal (car seats) to the practical (advice on where to find a chief technology officer for the Web site). Some spend several hours a day working the phones to garner contributions.

“Candidates tend to get forced into living in a bubble. It’s difficult to receive direct and candid feedback,” said one former classmate and close advisor. “So I and some others have really tried to be that kind of resource to him … to give it to him straight, no chaser—not what Maureen Dowd and other reporters or pundits are saying, but what the people who are really supporting him, be it with their votes or financially, are thinking and saying.”

“Certain of Obama’s classmates from Harvard and Columbia have been important supporters in many ways—not just financially but strategically,” said Bill Burton, a spokesman for the campaign. “They’re important members of the circle of people who are important in the campaign.”

Mr. Schapiro, a lawyer based in New York and Chicago, as well as Mr. Genachowski and two other Harvard Law School friends from Los Angeles, Crystal Nix Hines and Nancy McCullough, all traveled to Springfield, Ill., in February to attend Mr. Obama’s announcement of his Presidential campaign. They huddled in the front row.

“One of the great things about this campaign is that it’s allowed a bunch of us to reconnect,” said Ms. Nix Hines, a television writer who will be organizing a fund-raiser for Mr. Obama in the spring.

He’s Not Haughty, He’s My Brother!

Because so many of the law school’s graduates enter politics, it’s not uncommon to hear alumni talk about the classmate they knew would be governor of South Carolina, or professors reminisce about the student they expected would be President.

In fact, however, the White House has been attained only once by a graduate of Harvard Law School, with the election of Rutherford B. Hayes in 1877.

And while the political careers of Harvard Law graduates are always a going concern in Cambridge, Mr. Obama’s Presidential race presents its own enticements.

Many of Clinton’s Ivy supporters some were appointed to important positions in the administration, including Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin. (Mr. Clinton withdrew the nomination of his law-school friend Lani Guinier after an uproar over some of her articles on voting rights.)

Mr. Wilkins, the co-host of the March 20 fund-raiser, said that he always sends a small check to every student of his running for office, but that only with Mr. Obama and Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick has he felt inspired to assume more responsibility.

Of course, Mr. Obama isn’t the only Harvard Law School alum to announce his candidacy this year. Republican candidate Mitt Romney graduated in 1975 (half a dozen students in the law school are working in his Boston campaign office), and now-withdrawn Democratic candidate Mark Warner, who sought advice from professors at the law school in the spring of last year, graduated in 1980.

But Mr. Obama’s supporters say that it’s not just the arguably liberal politics of the school that make the Illinois Senator the focus of their efforts instead of Mr. Romney. Mr. Obama’s connection to the school today is deeper.

“It’s a testament to the kind of people that we admit to law school,” said Mr. Wilkins, the professor hosting the March 20 fund-raiser. “There is something special about Barack and his connection to the law school …. It’s a lot easier for our students to imagine themselves as Barack, because, not so long ago, he was like them.”

“There’s a mystique about him,” said Michael Negron, a third-year student who is on the steering committee of a just-formed group of Harvard Law students supporting Mr. Obama.

On its newly launched Web site, the students often refer to the Senator in reverential terms. “Harvard Law School was an important part of Barack Obama’s life, so we’re going to make sure it’s an important part of his campaign for President,” reads one section. Another adds: “He may be a Harvard lawyer, but Barack does not have a haughty New England background.”

That very defensiveness, however, seems to point up something about how Mr. Obama’s Harvard pedigree is being integrated into his life story. After a weekend in Selma, Ala., in which he had to compete with a white woman with a degree from Yale Law School for credibility among black voters, it’s worth asking whether Mr. Obama, the first black candidate for President not to have started his political career in the civil-rights movement, gains from his attachment to an establishment bastion like Harvard. Does Harvard do as much for Mr. Obama’s candidacy as his candidacy does for Harvard?

Arguably, Mr. Obama settled that question quite nicely in Selma.

“It’s because they marched that we elected councilmen, Congressmen,” he told the crowd gathered at the Brown Chapel A.M.E. Church during his trip to Selma. “It is because they marched that we have Artur Davis and Keith Ellison. It is because they marched that I got the kind of education I got, a law degree, a seat in the Illinois Senate and ultimately in the United States Senate.”

(Incidentally, it was Mr. Davis, a friend of Mr. Obama’s from Harvard Law, who invited him to Selma.)

In fact, the dazzling scholastic careers of candidates like Mr. Obama are becoming a big part of their personal narratives. Early newspaper reports breathlessly chronicled his rise to the presidency of Harvard’s über-prestigious law review, dissecting his leadership style for signs of the kind of chief executive he might be. Professors have talked admiringly of his willingness to turn down federal clerkships and corporate law jobs in order to return to Chicago and work for community organizations—indications of how he resisted allowing the law school to corrupt his personal ideals. His election as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review landed him coverage in The New York Times and his first book deal.

While working on the law review provides a student with plenty of opportunities to make enemies, Mr. Obama seems to have made some very good friends. That credibility is what they offer when they call prospective donors. They talk about meeting him on the basketball court, as well as the assistance he offered them with law-review articles.

“You’re taking about people who have known him for 18, 19 years. There’s a history there,” said Ms. Nix Hines, who spends “a couple hours a day” talking with people who are on the fence, telling them “what I know about Barack.”


copyright © 2006 the new york observer



To: techguerrilla who wrote (97969)3/21/2007 11:43:50 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 362605
 
John Edwards to Discuss Wife's Health

guardian.co.uk

Thursday March 22, 2007 3:01 AM
By NEDRA PICKLER
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards on Wednesday visited the doctor with his wife, Elizabeth, who is recovering from breast cancer. He announced they would hold a news conference in their hometown on Thursday to discuss her health.

The campaign refused to answer any questions about what the Edwardses learned at the doctor's appointment or how it might affect his candidacy. Edwards had cut short a trip to Iowa Tuesday night to be with his wife Wednesday but still attended a barbecue fundraiser later in the evening in their hometown of Chapel Hill, N.C.

The campaign had said that Mrs. Edwards had a follow-up appointment to a routine test she had Monday. The campaign explained that she had similar follow-ups in the past but they always resulted in a clean bill of health.

The campaign refused to elaborate Wednesday. Family friends said Wednesday night that they didn't know of any new complications to her health.

``Her health has been so good for so long,' said Kate Michelman, an Edwards adviser who was planning to work closely with Elizabeth Edwards to appeal to female voters around the country.

Mrs. Edwards was diagnosed with breast cancer in the final days of the 2004 campaign, when her husband was the Democratic vice presidential nominee. He announced the diagnosis the day after he and presidential nominee John Kerry lost the election.

Mrs. Edwards wrote about her life, including her breast cancer treatment that included chemotherapy, surgery and radiation, in a book published last year called ``Saving Graces.'

The Edwardses have been married nearly 30 years and had four children. Their oldest, Wade, died in a car accident in 1996.

Mrs. Edwards spoke about the death of her son and her cancer in an Associated Press interview last year.

``During the (2004) campaign, people who knew we had lost a son said, 'You are so strong,' and when I had breast cancer people would say, 'You are so strong,' and I thought, 'They don't know that there's a trick to being strong, and the trick is that nobody does it alone,'' she said. ``I wanted, from the perspective of someone going through it, not tell them what to do, but show them what great support I got.'

Mrs. Edwards is a former attorney who has been actively involved in her husband's campaign.

---



To: techguerrilla who wrote (97969)8/14/2007 8:12:09 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 362605
 
Dubya loses his 'brain'

nydailynews.com