“when the votes are counted.”
one word: diebold
this may be a “diebold 3; steal harder” sort of sequel

Posted by: ran | Jun 4 2008 7:36 utc | 4

@ ran 3
Whether BHO is “just another thug who at least has mastered the english language”, will surely be debated here, but his election would at least provide new luster to exceptionalist rhetoric. Outside the U.S., and within the narrow confines of non-exceptionalist minority there, some of the commonplaces of that rhetoric are offensive if not downright infuriating. Nevertheless, I suspect that they will provide excellent grist for Obama’s electoral mill. Political discourse in the U.S. (and,
mutatis mutandis here at MOA) is typically tightly interwoven with religious or ethical themes. Obama may well be the most able American rhetorician and orator since Abraham Lincoln, whom he consciously evoked last night. That may not be much when weighed against the fate of the victims of continuing misuse of American military power, but one may hope that Obama’s noble words will be father to noble deeds. Meanwhile, with that faint vision as viaticum, we can at least enjoy the forgotten pleasure of artful oratory.

Posted by: Hannah K. O’Luthon | Jun 4 2008 8:28 utc | 6

Just a random thought, but has anyone besides me noticed that both mcshame and Obomba are lefties?

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jun 4 2008 10:04 utc | 8

With an eye to a momentary restoration of the late lamented “fairness doctrine”, and in the hope of penetrating the clouds of glory currently surrounding BHO, the following two links might be of interest. The first is of interest, to me at least, because it sheds some light on the social and intellectual milieu of Obama’s circle of advisers.

The following excerpt (with minor editing for “political correctness”) from the second link is, perhaps, its least overtly offensive passage:

Until he faced Hillary, Obama had never encountered any serious opposition in an election, had never been forced to take a real political punch because his hired guns and lickspittle admirers in the press had always done the dirty work for him.
When Saint Barack decided to run for the U.S. Senate, he was challenged in the 2004 Democratic primary by wealthy former securities trader M. Blair Hull, who led the upstart … in the early polls. One of Obama’s political hitmen was (and still is today) David Axelrod, who had been a columnist for the Chicago Tribune and an advisor to the political scum of the Earth, Bill and Hillary Clinton, current Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, New York Attorney General (and, briefly, Governor) Elliot Spitzer, … two-time presidential-nomination loser John Edwards (D-N.C.), and Rep. Rahm Emmanuel (D-Ill.), who was an Israeli citizen until he came to work for the Clinton White House in the 1990s.
The Chicago Tribune and WLS-TV sued to open Hull’s sealed divorce records, and got a local judge to obligingly give them a look as if it were any of their or the public’s business. After it was revealed that Mrs. Hull had sought a restraining order against her husband, and Hull “essentially admitted to having abused her,” his 10-point lead disappeared and he quickly
dropped out of the race.
As if the connection is not already obvious enough, Chicago-based blogger “Cao” wrote on February 4, 2007:

The Tribune finally admitted that it was Axelrod and the Obama campaign that brought pressure on the press to demand the unsealing of M. Blair Hull’s divorce records, which had their contents leaked to media outlets by the Obama campaign even earlier. The Obama campaign also helped orchestrate a demonstration by women’s groups demanding Hull’s withdrawal from
the race. Coincidentally, this was the same weekend Obama’s first commercials hit the airwaves…. (“Axelrod paved the way for Obama,” Cao’s Blog).

After Jack Ryan, a multimillionaire former Goldman Sachs partner, entered the GOP race to oppose [Obama], he and his ex-wife, actress Jeri Ryan, agreed to make their divorce records public. But the same Obama-enthralled media hit team of the Tribune and WLS-TV convinced California Judge Robert Schnider to also pry open the
couple’s child-custody files, which another court had sealed in the best interest of their son. (Remember that the next time Obama pontificates about how much he cares for “the children.”)
The “smoking gun” in that record was Jeri Ryan’s charge that Jack Ryan had taken her to a sex club in Paris and tried to get her, his trophy wife, to have sex with him in front of other people there. She refused. Although the charge was never substantiated — in fact, the judge demonstrated his apparent disbelief of her claim by awarding Jack additional custody rights after hearing Jeri’s testimony the media used it to successfully manufacture a “scandal” about a GOP candidate’s not having sex with his own wife!
As usual, sanctimonious blue-nosed Republicans such as Rep. Ray LaHood (R-Ill.) stood ready and eager to eat their own, and immediately demanded that Ryan quit the race. He dropped out barely a week after winning the GOP primary, leaving Obama unopposed except for the … clown Alan Keyes, who had to be imported from Maryland after all other Illinois Republicans chickened out.

As someone pointed out here in an earlier thread, Obama is a politician, not a saint. Nevertheless, the modern versions of hagiography and anathema retain their appeal and social utility.

Posted by: Hannah K. O’Luthon | Jun 4 2008 10:18 utc | 10

Those wishing taste of things to come in the upcoming McCain-Obama race might wish to see what Hillary’s friends are already merchandising. I think the link to Larry Johnson’s noquarterusa.net site is OK, but “overflow” seems to make it difficult to access. Suffice it to say that Michelle Obama has allegedly been captured on a DVD in which she (gasp!) participated at a conference attended by L. Farrahkhan’s wife, and (double gasp!) got carried away with her own rhetoric. We may safely assume that the DVD will soon re-enter the public domain, or perhaps even better, will circulate surreptitiously where it will do the most “good” for Obama’s opponents. Cynics will think they now understand Obama’s appeal to his opponents to lay off on attacks on his wife. Whether or not the “outraged husband” defense (or any other defense rather than a calculated counter-attack) will be effective is an still an open question.

Posted by: Hannah K. O’Luthon | Jun 4 2008 13:33 utc | 12

My local dead tree paper says that one thing Hillary is dealing on is getting someone else (Obama, the party, anyone) to pick up the tab for her campaign. That would explain her stubborness in face of pretty certain defeat.

Posted by: a swedish kind of death | Jun 4 2008 14:42 utc | 14

i love the state where i live, but not because we helped in our little way add to this historic moment for the Demoshats. no, what really got me laughing this morning was the rethug turnout: Montana republicans gave their majority of votes to Mitt Romney. Ron Paul came in second. and, yes, McPain came in a resoundingly unimpressive third. HA!

Posted by: Lizard | Jun 4 2008 16:20 utc | 16

Where does he make his first speech as nominee? AIPAC.
That was likely booked a year ago when nobody knew how the race would go.

Posted by: b | Jun 4 2008 16:54 utc | 18

Thanks for the reviving slap, barkeep. Looks like I spilled my drink, though – keep ’em coming, wouldja? Looks like we’ll all be here for a while…

Posted by: Tantalus | Jun 4 2008 17:00 utc | 20

I wonder how much AIPAC money was squandered on Billary, and how much was invested in Obama, so far?

Posted by: Anonymous | Jun 4 2008 19:07 utc | 22

Whether groups such as aipac, merrill lynch, etc get value for the money they spent on hillary will be the subject of the negotiations right now. Hillary can’t possibly be hanging out for veep – even she can’t be that blind.
The big backers who poured so much cash into hillary’s campaign don’t want to lose their quid pro quo, that is what the talks between the two dem gangs are about.
By hillary’s own admission the negotiations are about making sure Obama picks up her major promises.
Only it will be the real promises, those made to the elites, not the bullshit half-hearted healthcare stuff she pretends to care about.
I realise I’m pissing in the wind here, but whether or not Obama is going to tell israel to sharpen up or clear off, he’s still gonna have to go to aipac fundraisers before the election.
Yes it would be nice if amerikans understood what a blight on the asshole of humanity apartheid israel is, but they don’t, and are unlikely to listen to arguments on that in mid campaign. People like to have their prejudices reinforced , not challenged during an election.
Yeah. There isn’t much chance of Obama being different on Israel but with mccain and clintoninc there’s no chance.
There is no political reason for obama to challenge the aipac monolith unless he perceives it isn’t the strength it once was.
All those years of kissing the fat asses of the murderers, crooks and racists that make up the leadership of israel can’t have created any love for israel amongst politicians on either side of the divide, so once the aipac thing looks like it is on the way down, its demise could be faster than anyone could hope for.
But the initial grunt work will have to be done by citizens exposing the israel lobby for what it is. The ‘last straw’ which opens the festering corruptness up for all to see could come from anywhere, but if I was betting on it I would favour Iraq.
israel’s bands of corrupt assassins have been heavily involved in the misery of iraq’s illegal invasion and occupation. Their fingerprints are all over policy, and all over some of the worst excesses of murder and rape. I’m sure there have been occasions when amerikan troops were sacrificed for the furtherance of some israeli gambit or another and eventually one of these examples will surface to bring home to amerikans the reality of loyalty to two nations in a much more visceral way than any number of senior bureaucrats caught with national secrets could.
As for what HKOL says about the Obama team, well most MoA-ites saw him for what he was back in 03-04 before the convention speech when he was sounding out his senate gig. The irony was that Hillary couldn’t exploit those issues since when it comes to political jobbery the clinton’s are the masters.
They daren’t try and undo someone else on that issue, anything obama has done clintons have done better more often for longer. That is why they made the mistake of concentrating on race.
Pretty much the same goes for mccain, he can try and go after michelle but unlike mccain I’m unaware obama has shouted at his wife in public, telling her “you look like a whore, you cunt” but mccain has, screaming at his wife and biggest financial supporter in public, just as he has lost it with lots of people that have made the mistake of getting close to him.
In a way obama didn’t win in spite of his race, he won because of it, hillary and bill saw race as a way to get obama with something that didn’t have a ‘you too’ element, but this was a fatal error because the easy ploys rarely work in politics. If they are easy a substantial part of the voters are likely to see through them.
Obama won in the primary without getting down in the dirt, well publicly anyhow, how much obama’s crew were behind the sniper fire stuff we’ll prolly never know.
On the other side, time and time again hillary’s closest advisors were found connected to ugly insinuations against obama. The thing about racism is, for every proud racist, there are two or three closet racists who try to keep their dirty little secret well hidden. Turning on hillary was kind of the reverse of the white trash thing where some of the worst southern racists were amongst the poor whites.
By being sickened at the clinton campaign’s tricks, those closet racists could feel better about themselves. Some of that will likely play in the election. obama just doesn’t conform to the images of a dangerous black man.
Other voters saw the clinton tactics as arrogant, and even racists have that “favour the underdog” human trait, which is why hillary did best when she did the helpless sobbing woman routine after Iowa. That routine had to have really pissed off her feminist supporters since it played to the ‘women get emotional in a crisis cliche’, she couldn’t keep playing that tape very time she got outvoted.
In fact since hill and bill avoided debate on substantive policy as much as they could, there was very little ammo to fight obama with.
the same goes for mccain. mccain is an economic illiterate running on the rethug ticket in a recession, a time when voters traditionally look to the dems (credulous suckers that they are).
mccain can’t talk neoliberal trickledown bullshit even if he had the skill to, voters have heard it all before.
The “hundred years in iraq” sound bite will haunt him right through the election, barring a major terrorist attack on continental amerika, national security issues just won’t play.
I doubt the republican linkage to the military industrial welfare system has enough trust in it for anyone capable of putting together a scam of a terror attack, eg the sort of close co-operation that was required for Iran/Contra, to agree to do it.
If a stunt like that were attempted it would have a high probability of scoring an own goal.
Political movements are at their most together and purposeful right before they win power. By november 08 the amerikan left will be at it’s peak of capability (that should scare the shit out of any amerikan lefty since it will be a slow segue to the right as soon as Obama is elected) but I digress.
Eight years of entrenched republican power has left the reublicans and their best friends, the warmongers, at each others throats.
They couldn’t organise a decent graffitti attack at the moment, let alone a 100% secure major terror outrage.
That was the double bind hillary put herself in with the race play, everytime a clintonite went with race there was an eloquent silence when obama’s mob didn’t retaliate. obama didn’t have to say anything to be the underdog, whereas to put herself in that role, hillary had to do things which alienated her base.
These are issues which mccain will have to confront when he takes on obama. Every time mccain plays the experience card it leaves him open to the insinuation that he is experienced all right, too experienced, just another washington insider.
The race thing which was once such a safe play is now a ticking bomb which can explode in the candidate’s hands before it is placed under the opponent.
That is why I’m happy at the result. One of the most insidious pieces of dog whistle politics may have been negated for an election cycle or two. Pity it is for Obama than for a really capable and honest african amerikan like Jeremiah Wright, but there you go.
Back to mccain, I suppose that he may get all the rethug party heavy hitters who loathe him with a passion to ‘get behind him’- tho if hillary’s people talking to obama’s people does make headway. Say obama agrees to take on the promises hillary made her big contributors for ten cents on the dollar or whatever, then the rethugs will really struggle to get funding and support.
obama isn’t likely to honour any deals made on the cheap with someone/corporation who/which then turns around and gives money to mccain.
Historically corporations have shed racist attitudes faster than the people who work for them, particularly if being racist interferes with the bottom line.
mccain’s only guaranteed way of getting the big bucks is to hang out with shrub who has already intimated that fundraising for ‘honest john’ while being smuggled in and out of rubber chicken lunches in the trunk of the limo so no one vids mccain and shrub together ‘isn’t on’.
When no one wants to be seen with the prez so close to an election, it means the writing is on the wall for rethugs. most of the uncertainty about this election will be media beat up. Unless mccain has the sort of family connections to the sort of loonies that the bush family has there will be no major upset and obama will be prez.
Of course that won’t mean a damned thing to the hundreds of millions of oppressed unless he is more than he seems to be, and sadly that isn’t likely. The big backers must know obama is a safe member of liars Inc or he wouldn’t have got this far.
ps sorry the punctuation/spelling is even worse than usual.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Jun 4 2008 22:00 utc | 24

“It’s the economy, stupid”
I thought it was supposed to be the attrition of horrors in Iraq, in which the US “line of supply” would be severed by angry shia and the US military surrounded and destroyed?
But one can only hope the economy is the precipice the “US’ falls into so you can “take your pictures.” Eh, b?

Posted by: slothrop | Jun 4 2008 22:35 utc | 26

friend slothrop
the attritions of the decimated armies of the empire are taking their toll. the carpetbaggers are being rolled up in a carpet of their own design. the “quiet” that the western world wants to perceive is simply not there – read any of the arab press – whether in the middle east or in exile – & they see clearloy what is happening – the transmutations of resistance. & if the empire was stupid enough to attack iran – you would see the supply lines liquidated in a breath
but you’re right – in parliamentary politics – self interest always takes the drivers seat – but in this case the middle class have finally tasted a little of their own fallujahisation

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jun 4 2008 23:17 utc | 28

Like I said a hundred times, in order for the left to avoid permanent obsolescence it will have to do something other than take pleasure in the failure of the “US.” The only reality comporting with this version of leftist utopia is more dead arabs. Like I also said a hundred times, it’s a mistake to underestimate the power of western militarism and the solidarity of diasporic “Islam.”
So now, it’s “the economy” which through the alchemy of leftist belief in “decoupling” will finally destroy the “US.”
Dream on, b.

Posted by: slothrop | Jun 4 2008 23:40 utc | 30

If diesbold came into play that would mean the race for prez 08 could be reduced to goodies and baddies, but I doubt it will, firstly because diebold corp want to be in this game for the long haul and rigging this election when everyone is sensitive about electronic polling and shrub, would be risky at the best of times, but when there is so little substantial difference between the candidates it would be pointless suicide for diebold.
That and the fact that by november the stink against the bush clone that mccain is and can’t shake, will be so strong, organising a diebold win would mean causing a massive swing in a number of states, not just manipulating the margins in florida and ohio.
This is diebold corp’s opportunity to cement the acceptance by dem heavy hitters which they got after the 06 mid-terms.
As a corporation diebold are always going to prefer rethugs to dems, but just like the other corporations they will use the dems when a rethug victory is too hard to engineer.
mccain hasn’t been able to get anything like the level of corporate sponsorship that either clinton or obama have had thus far. The scores so far “Obama $265 million total by the end of April, compared to nearly $97 million for McCain. Hillary Clinton has raised about $215 million”
there has been no indication anything has changed mccain is really struggling to attract support which is why he takes the risk of getting shrub to raise money for him.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Jun 5 2008 0:23 utc | 32

In re: Diebold. link
Anyone here interested?

Posted by: beq | Jun 5 2008 13:53 utc | 34

d @23
Thanks

Posted by: jony_b_cool | Jun 6 2008 0:32 utc | 36

welcome back slothrop@26.

Posted by: jony_b_cool | Jun 6 2008 0:44 utc | 38