Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: American Spirit who wrote (368148)	1/24/2008 11:47:54 AM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 1578762

Headless chicken "It was almost poignant, on Monday night, to hear John Edwards make the case for his autumn electability," Dick Polman writes at dickpolman.blogspot.com. "He was the one who first suggested that John McCain would be the GOP nominee; then he said, 'I grew up in the rural South, in small towns all across the rural South, and I think I can go everywhere and compete head-to-head with John McCain.' "Dream on. Forgive my inelegant rural metaphor, but Edwards right now is like the headless chicken who keeps on moving even though it's already dead," Mr. Polman said. "By saying this, I'm not rooting for him to leave the Democratic race. I'm merely offering the factual observation that his time as a first-tier national candidate has expired, probably forever. "Two reasons: He doesn't have the money to compete in the long run. And he's not going to win anything in the short run. "Regarding the latter, here's a handy statistic: 1-36. That's the John Edwards win-loss record since he first became a candidate in 2004. He has won a total of one primary (South Carolina, his native state, four years ago), and he has lost 36. His overall winning percentage (.028) is even lower than Howard Dean's '04 record."

To: American Spirit who wrote (368148)	1/24/2008 11:53:35 AM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 1578762

Party Bristles At Bill's Attacks-Anti-Obama Ad Heightens Unity Fears By Alec MacGillis and Anne E. Kornblut Washington Post Staff Writers January 24, 2008 DILLON, S.C., Jan. 23 -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential campaign aired a new radio ad here Wednesday that repeated a discredited charge against Sen. Barack Obama, in what some Democrats said is part of an increasing pattern of hardball politics by her and former president Bill Clinton. The ad takes one line from an Obama interview -- "The Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time there over the last 10, 15 years" -- and juxtaposes it with GOP policies that Obama has never advocated. The Clinton campaign argued that it was simply quoting Obama. But in the original context, Obama was describing the dominance of Republican ideas in the 1980s and 1990s, without saying he supported them, and asserting that those ideas are of no use today. The ad marked the escalation of a bitter fight between the two Democratic front-runners that has taken on a new dimension because of the involvement of Bill Clinton, the titular leader of the party. While his wife campaigns elsewhere, the former president has been making daily appearances in South Carolina in anticipation of the state's Democratic primary on Saturday, and he has adopted the role of attacking his wife's opponent the way a vice presidential candidate traditionally does in a general election. Responding to the negative ad, Dick Harpootlian, a former chairman of the Democratic Party in South Carolina, accused the Clintons of using the "politics of deception," and he compared the former president to the late Lee Atwater, a Republican operative from South Carolina who was known for his tough tactics. In response, Bill Clinton said Harpootlian's comments were a distraction, and he accused the Obama campaign of funneling smears through the media. In Washington, Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), who endorsed Obama last week, castigated the former president for what he called his "glib cheap shots" at Obama, saying both sides should settle down but placing the blame predominantly on Clinton. "That's beneath the dignity of a former president," Leahy told reporters, adding: "He is not helping anyone, and certainly not helping the Democratic Party." That concern was also voiced by some neutral Democrats, who said that the former president's aggressive role, along with the couple's harsh approach recently, threatens to divide the party in the general election. A few prominent Democrats, including Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (Mass.) and Rep. Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), have spoken to the former president about the force of his Obama critiques. There is some fear within the party that if Obama becomes the nominee, he could emerge personally battered and politically compromised. And there is concern that a Clinton victory could come at a cost -- particularly a loss of black voters, who could blame her for Obama's defeat and stay home in November.

To: American Spirit who wrote (368148)	1/24/2008 12:04:51 PM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 1578762

breitbart.tv

To: American Spirit who wrote (368148)	1/24/2008 12:07:04 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1578762

The smears are all coming from the Bushie far right. The press is playing up the Clinton vs. Obama spat, but the content of that spat is pretty tame. It would be tame if it were coming from the Republicans.....but instead its coming from Democrats. Its ugly and its very unpleasant and its getting worse. I find no major charges contained anywhere within those accusations. Just "you helped Walmart vs you helped a slum lord", or "You were only 90% against the war not 100%", or "Martin Luther King needed LBJ". "Im a manager vs I'm a visionary". "You praised Reagan, no I didn't". If the Clintons had gone after Kerry in the same way in 2004, you would have been all over it. Where are the smears? The only smear was the Muslim lie email which was a Rovian GOP dirty trick from the far right, complete with a false flag trick trying to blame it on Hillary so they'd smear two Dems with one big lie. You want a smear.....Clinton suggested that Obama worked closely with a slum lord in Chicago when in fact, he was a junior partner in the firm and had little contact with the guy. Edwards is gaining in South Carolina, but needs a miracle now. Edwards is a kingmaker; that's it. Its either Obama or Clinton.