THE CANCER KILLING PDCOM - Blow-by-Blow Coverage of Democratic Primary Race

[tyrannosaurus vex]

Rumours are being floated of a super-delegate coup in favour of Hillary, in which case the dems may as well kill themselves and get it over and done with.

Also, interestingly, the battered and weary remains of the Neo-Cons have managed to somehow creep into the McCain camp http://www.ips.org/blog/jimlobe/?%20p=102

I'm noticing a lot of the Independents that went with the Neo-Con's over the past 7 years are running straight into McCain's camp for the most part, as are most moderate Republicans and now the least crazy of the neo-cons. Wouldn't it be interesting to actually see a moderate President elected by the independents? I can't even imagine what that might do for future elections. Money no longer seems to matter, party BASE no longer seems to matter, could it be that people just want answers and solutions rather than Dogma? If so, then US politics may get much more interesting soon.

No, that isn't it. People forming unpredictable opinions is just a side-effect of the TV Writers' strike. It'll pass soon and everything will go back to normal.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Rumours are being floated of a super-delegate coup in favour of Hillary, in which case the dems may as well kill themselves and get it over and done with.

Also, interestingly, the battered and weary remains of the Neo-Cons have managed to somehow creep into the McCain camp http://www.ips.org/blog/jimlobe/?%20p=102

I'm noticing a lot of the Independents that went with the Neo-Con's over the past 7 years are running straight into McCain's camp for the most part, as are most moderate Republicans and now the least crazy of the neo-cons. Wouldn't it be interesting to actually see a moderate President elected by the independents? I can't even imagine what that might do for future elections. Money no longer seems to matter, party BASE no longer seems to matter, could it be that people just want answers and solutions rather than Dogma? If so, then US politics may get much more interesting soon.

No, that isn't it. People forming unpredictable opinions is just a side-effect of the TV Writers' strike. It'll pass soon and everything will go back to normal.

Really? I don't think the writers strike has really impacted pundits etc has it? I was under the impression that guys like Rush and Coulter wrote their own bullshit...

[Cain]

McCain's a war mongerer in the mold of Bush et al.  He's more moderate on social issues and torture, but that's not especially hard.

Also, Romney's out.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

McCain's a war mongerer in the mold of Bush et al.  He's more moderate on social issues and torture, but that's not especially hard.

Also, Romney's out.

Well, personally I don't mind the war mongering. If there are international threats then war may be a fine option. I'm mostly against poorly planned war mongering which is what Bush excelled at. I think McCain, if he were to go to war, would probably do it under heavy advisement from his Generals and make the right choices. Had we done Iraq correctly (and that means not lying to the Americans about how easy, cheap and quick it would be), then I think we'd be in a much better position now. Whoever the next President is, they will likely be a War President. Leaving Afghanistan and Iraq right now would be a really bad idea in my opinion. From my study of insurgent tactics, it would simply open the whole country up for war again, leaving Iran and Saudi to play puppet masters. As much as I'm no fan of War, I'm not about to support a withdraw that would probably endanger many, many lives.

And, if the Mossad is right and Iran is three years away from a bomb (and maybe Mossad is Full of Shit), then I would guess that Obama, Hillary and McCain will have to deal with it via military means.

For me, I like McCain for two reasons:

1) Most people in the country seem to like him except for pieces of shit like Coulter and Rush. After half of the country hating the Gipper, Bush I, Clinton and Bush II... I would like to have a president that was liked by more than 40some percent of the population.

2) McCain has a great history of pragmatic compromise, rather than the Gingrich style "My Way or I'll break the government and no one can use it". He's worked across the aisle on Finance reform, even though it lost him huge points in his own party, he's worked across the aisle on Immigration, even though its cost him in support. He's never been afraid to tell his party where to shove it, if he thinks they're putting the nation in danger and he's proven to my satisfaction that he cares more about the US than the GOP.

Currently, he appears to be the only person in the race that meets those two key points.

Hillary would be another hellish nightmare of pundits and hateful screeds.
Obama, I'm not at all sure, will be able to handle the next four years with such little experience... and I'm pretty sure half of the country will hate him as well.

So that's my current thinking

[Cain]

McCain supporst the war in Iraq forever, threatening Iran with military action and antagonizing Russia at a time of great political uncertainty.

None of these could in any way be described as "sensible" options.  In any combination, or by themselves.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

McCain supporst the war in Iraq forever, threatening Iran with military action and antagonizing Russia at a time of great political uncertainty.

None of these could in any way be described as "sensible" options.  In any combination, or by themselves.

Well, I think he supports the war in Iraq until we're done... which (in hyperbole) could be forever. Iran may or may not deserve the threats... I'm not at all comfortable with a state that sponsors terrorism working on nuclear technology. As for Russia, what are we supposed to do, sit quiet while Putin plays fast and loose with what democracy means, while assassinating dissenters, booting out election monitors and helping Iran with its research?

I'm no fan of war, but I understand its occasionally necessary. In the three areas listed (as well as Afghanistan) I see no other options that currently appear at all useful.

[Suu]

BREAKING:

ROMNEY PULLS OUT OF RACE...EJACULATES IN MCCAIN'S ASS.


fucking war-mongers.

[Suu]

Meanwhile: The State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations overhears the entire Commonwealth of Massachusetts utter an audible, "YES!" and follows suit.

[Cain]

McCain supporst the war in Iraq forever, threatening Iran with military action and antagonizing Russia at a time of great political uncertainty.

None of these could in any way be described as "sensible" options.  In any combination, or by themselves.

Well, I think he supports the war in Iraq until we're done... which (in hyperbole) could be forever. Iran may or may not deserve the threats... I'm not at all comfortable with a state that sponsors terrorism working on nuclear technology. As for Russia, what are we supposed to do, sit quiet while Putin plays fast and loose with what democracy means, while assassinating dissenters, booting out election monitors and helping Iran with its research?

I'm no fan of war, but I understand its occasionally necessary. In the three areas listed (as well as Afghanistan) I see no other options that currently appear at all useful.

Putin's done nothing worse than Bush has....often with McCain's support, so McCain has no grounds on which to try and lecture Russia.  Besides, since when has the US given a fuck what a regime has done internally, so long as it was on side?  Their dispute with Russia is illegitimate, because it is based on stopping the emergence of potentially powerful countries and gaining access to their resources, not whatever Putin is doing internally.  They didn't care when Yeltsin did it, and he was far worse than Putin could ever hope to be...they care because Putin blocked their attempts to gain control of Russian oil via Yukos and is intent on having his own foreign policy, nothing more or less.

If I thought anyone in a present or future administration actually cared about the Russian people, I might agree with you.  But when you have Cold Warriors shacking up with the likes of Kasparov and the National Bolsheviks, I very much doubt they have any Russian's best interest at heart.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

McCain supporst the war in Iraq forever, threatening Iran with military action and antagonizing Russia at a time of great political uncertainty.

None of these could in any way be described as "sensible" options.  In any combination, or by themselves.

Well, I think he supports the war in Iraq until we're done... which (in hyperbole) could be forever. Iran may or may not deserve the threats... I'm not at all comfortable with a state that sponsors terrorism working on nuclear technology. As for Russia, what are we supposed to do, sit quiet while Putin plays fast and loose with what democracy means, while assassinating dissenters, booting out election monitors and helping Iran with its research?

I'm no fan of war, but I understand its occasionally necessary. In the three areas listed (as well as Afghanistan) I see no other options that currently appear at all useful.

Putin's done nothing worse than Bush has....often with McCain's support, so McCain has no grounds on which to try and lecture Russia.  Besides, since when has the US given a fuck what a regime has done internally, so long as it was on side?  Their dispute with Russia is illegitimate, because it is based on stopping the emergence of potentially powerful countries and gaining access to their resources, not whatever Putin is doing internally.  They didn't care when Yeltsin did it, and he was far worse than Putin could ever hope to be...they care because Putin blocked their attempts to gain control of Russian oil via Yukos and is intent on having his own foreign policy, nothing more or less.

If I thought anyone in a present or future administration actually cared about the Russian people, I might agree with you.  But when you have Cold Warriors shacking up with the likes of Kasparov and the National Bolsheviks, I very much doubt they have any Russian's best interest at heart.

Well, I for one don't trust Yeltsin or Putin. They both seem to act like jackbooted thugs. If they're actively working with Iran on a nuclear plant, which is what intel now claims... then I would say they're a problem. I also disagree that Bush was anything close to Putin. He was an idiot, he had scheming experts to help him and he was surely more interested in his agenda rather than the US, but I really think that he wasn't evil... policy arguments, arguments over water boarding being torture or not... but at the end of the day, he wasn't actively supressing votes (though I'm sure the left would love to believe it). I really think that the past 16 years have been a combination of incompetent Presidents and assholes on the other side with tinfoil hats. I seriously doubt the Clintons killed Vince Foster and I seriously doubt that Bush actually stole the election.

Now, I will agree with you that there probably are much better ways to deal with Russia, but I'm willing to give him a pass on that if it means potentially uniting the nation and letting moderates get control of the GOP after Pat Buchanan and Newt Gingrich hijacked it. The GOP base isn't a bunch of crazy evil bastards, they're Rockafeller Republicans that traditionally worked with the Democrats as partners with different perspectives.

If we have to bomb Iran and piss off Putin to get back to that... I'm ok with it.

[Suu]

Because dropping bombs solves everything.

[Cramulus]

I decided I liked McCain after his appearance on the Daily Show. Jon Stewart used typical liberal claptrap and a cheering strong-left audience to railroad him into a corner. But despite all this, he still managed to make his point:

McCain thinks the war has been handled poorly and is somewhat miserable right now. He wish it were over. He also feels that the people who decry it have very good points. But withdrawing support now from the fragile situation in the mideast would be irresponsible and lead to far more long-term problems.

I also admire his ability to disagree with his party regarding torture, stem cell research, and a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. So far, I think John McCain is a good choice for moderates. At the very least, he's a much better choice than the other repub candidates.


hey, When did Romney drop out? Are you guys saying he's definitely out, or are you saying he's out because he doesn't have a chance?

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Because dropping bombs solves everything.

No, but I'm willing to let McCain drop bombs if it means relegating the crazies on the right to the corner where they belong. What are our other choices at this point? Hillary will make a bad situation worse (and she's pretty damned hawkish herself), Obama seems like a nice guy, but I'm not at all sure he has nearly enough experience to actually run the country (and he's done some pretty serious warmongering over Pakistan if you recall).

So we get to pick between three candidates, all of whom seem to accept military options... one of whom has some real experience... and most of the country seems to like him... and he tries to work with parties rather than hold Congress hostage.

Seems like a sensible option to me... though I can see Obama being a sensible option as well. He seems to want to work across aisles, he has some really good ideas, though I'm not sure how workable they are.

Currently though, the people voting for Hill must have rocks in their head as far as I can tell....

And Prof, Mitt announced he was out today.

[Cain]

Russia just issued Iran warnings over its missile tests and told it if its thinking about a nuclear weapons program, it better stop right now.  Russians don't care for proliferation any more than the American government.  Russians remember their history well, too well in fact, and they remember how their embassy got stormed way back in the 19th century, and how the Marxists they backed in the country got slaughtered by the Ayatollahs.  As far as they are concerned, Iran is a business investment, not a military ally.  Its too untrustworthy, and missiles that can reach Europe can reach them.

Political violence has been reduced under Putin's leadership.  Putin never bombarded his own Parliament to get them to sign a constituional change he wanted, and neither did he let millions sink into poverty while he lived it up with oligarchs, not giving a shit about the state of the economy so long as his buddies were rich and doing well.  Putin may have had a hand in helping re-ignite the Chechen conflict, but the evidence mostly points to Boris Berevosky, the billionaire exile who hates Putin's guts for not pandering to him in the way Yeltsin did.

The Pentagon has covered up assassinations of journalists done by US troops and contractors in Iraq.  How is that any different to the journalists who died during Putin's leadership?  Incidentally, the evidence in the case of Anna Politsyanna points to Igor Setchin, a political backer of Putin and not Putin himself, but if we are indicting on the basis of relationships, we must equally consider the suspicious deaths of journalists in Iraq as well as those in Moscow.  Also the bigger picture suggests a group of exiled oligarchs who are attempting to blacken Putin's name abroad, in order to discredit him internationally.  Because of how politics are in Russia, if Putin were to leave the political scene, he'd end up dead rather quickly.  He can't go abroad, because he's viewed as some sort of next coming of Stalin (which is ridiculous) and he can't let go of power, because he'll wind up dead.  He discredits himself, the oligarch backed 'Liberal' opposition take power.  Oh, and the OSCE, who observe votes within the former USSR, have admitted they ignore illegitimate practices when the party in question is favoured by the USA, and play them up when they are not, so its actually very hard to know how legitimate Russian elections are.  Most people agree Putin has a 60% or so approval rate though, which probably means it is closer to 70%, given the "accuracy" of many polls taken by the Western media in Russia.

As for McCain, if he's hanging around with and attracting the sort of people who Bush attracted, it doesn't say much for his bi-partisanship.  Many of the NeoCons, such as Bill Kristol, actually backed him in 2000, and he's exactly the sort of person who would play party politics from a position of strength.  Remember his statements on Chelsea Clinton?  "Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?  Because Janet Reno is her father."  Yeah, a nice guy he's not.  And how are another 2 useless wars with a bankrupt economy ever going to help the USA? 

[Chairman Risus]

Because dropping bombs solves everything.

There's always the alternative.
We could nuke it and give it to the jews.