Supplemental: On Hardball, we encounter The Code!

SATURDAY, MARCH 14, 2015

The source of our own cluelessness:
We sure are sorry we saw that report about the happiness gap.

For background, see yesterday's post.

Don’t get us wrong! On balance, we think it’s sad that a gang of professors have been chasing that nonsense for all these years.

More strikingly, it’s amazing that the New York Times would regard this small happiness gap—a gap which may not even exist—as a suitable topic for a full-length news report. Our big papers are really dumb, and are dumbing us down, when they make such absurd news judgments.

That said, we’re sorry we mixed that foolishness in with yesterday’s main question. Here’s what that question is:

Why do we liberals remain so clueless about the press corps’ long-running war against both Clintons and Gore?

By now, it’s fairly clear that this 23-year-old war will infest the coverage of Hillary Clinton’s presumptive White House campaign. Two early pieces of evidence:

No one would care about these emails if some other pol were involved. (Case in point: Jeb Bush’s email server.)

No candidate’s speaking fees have ever been flogged in the way the Washington Post flogged Clinton’s speaking fees all last year. (Case in point: Candidate Giuliani’s large speaking fees in the years before Campaign 2008.)

For ourselves, we would have thought this destructive war had ended with Hillary Clinton’s defeat in the 2008 Democratic nomination race. Clearly, that impression was wrong.

Why do we liberals remain so clueless about the basic structure of this ongoing mess? In part, because we’re confronted with a giant code of silence within the mainstream press corps. Consider two representations which were made on the cable show Hardball on Wednesday evening, March 4, as the email flap was taking form.

First, consider something Chris Matthews said about Hillary Clinton’s political history. He spoke to the Washington Post’s Carol Leonnig:
MATTHEWS (3/4/15): I think all of us here at this table do expect Hillary Clinton to make an announcement for president...But here’s the question. Is there—I always look at these stories and I say, “Well, there’s got to be a backstory here. There’s something that suggests a fuel to this story beyond what’s being reported.”

Is it this supposition on the part of her critics, and maybe stand-by critics, just people watching her over the years, that she is very private about her person—not wrongdoing or something like that, she just doesn’t like to be totally exposed in what she does every day? It’s her instinct, based upon perhaps years of being attacked by the right when she was down in Arkansas and since then, a built-in instinct for self-protection, a built-in instinct for privacy which this displays? I just wonder if that is isn’t coloring this story and the news interest in it, Carol.
That passage includes a fascinating remark.

In that passage, Matthews speculates about the “backstory” to Clinton’s handling of her emails—about the reason why she might have wanted to have her own email server. He suggests it may be due to the way she has been attacked “by the right” down through all these years.

Truly, that’s remarkable. In fact, Matthews himself was the press corps’ most virulent Hillary-hater from the late 1990s through the 2008 campaign. He was also the press corps’ most virulent and influential Gore-hater from March 1999 through November 2000.

Today, Matthews pretends that the attacks on Clinton have been launched “by the right” down through all those years. He does this knowing that no guest on his cable program will ever challenge such comments.

Matthews is almost pathologically dishonest. He was pathologically dishonest in his virulent attacks on Candidate Gore. He was pathologically dishonest, and openly misogynistic, in his years of attacks against Hillary Clinton, the vile first lady and Senate/White House candidate.

Within the mainstream press corps, everyone knows this—and no one is going to say it! You see, they want to appear on Matthews’ show. It’s good for their careers!

After 2008, Matthews flipped on Hillary Clinton. He became one of her most fawning devotees, presumably in reaction to changing policy at the cable channel which pays him $5 million per year.

In the past week, he has sometimes seemed to be flipping back toward his old loathing of Clinton. But on the occasion cited above, he was busy misinforming his viewers—encouraging them to think that the wars against the Clintons have been conducted “by the right.”

At best, that’s grossly misleading. Matthews knows that, and so do his guests. But no one will ever inform his viewers. A code of silence forbids this.

Matthews is pathologically dishonest; Carol Leonnig isn’t. But note a second type of misdirection which occurred that same evening’s show.

In the first excerpt posted below, Matthews insists that the New York Times and the Washington post couldn't possibly have an animus against Clinton. In the second except, Leonnig agrees with that claim:
MATTHEWS: Well, let me ask you, why do you think...Why do you think the New York Times is leading with this in its major front page placement here again and again this week? The Washington Post, USA Today—all front-page treatment of this thing. They are not anti-Hillary Clinton. You can’t tell me the New York Times has got a case against Hillary Clinton.

[...]

LEONNIG: You know, really, there’s no partisanship at the New York Times and the Washington Post in our news decisions. It’s really because she’s a presidential candidate and because this, and because it’s a huge deal. It’s a huge deal. And you may remember the missing e-mail case in federal court in D.C. involving Karl Rove’s e-mails and these vanished e-mails, and people thought that was a huge deal because why? Because our government is supposed to be open.
In that passage, Matthews ridicules the idea that the New York Times or the Washington Post could have an animus against Clinton. Leonnig seconds this notion.

We’re not suggesting that Leonnig was being disingenuous. That said, the New York Times and the Washington Post have always lay at the heart of the press corps’ wars against the Clintons and Gore.

This dates back to the Whitewater pseudo-scandal, which got its start through bungled reporting on the front page of the Times. It runs through the 20-month War Against Gore, which sent George Bush to the White House.

At this point in time, do people at the Times and the Post have an animus against Hillary Clinton? We can’t exactly answer that question. But the historical record is blindingly clear.

Quite literally, Gene Lyons wrote the book on the Whitewater matter. It bore this title—Fools for Scandal: How the Media invented Whitewater. “The media” to which Lyons referred were mainly the Post and the Times.

Today, people like Matthews assure the public that liberal orgs like the Times and the Post couldn’t possibly have an animus against Clinton. Matthews know much better than that. But he also understands the press corps’ code of silence.

Twenty-three years into this mess, we liberals remain amazingly clueless about the way this syndrome has worked. It’s amazingly easy to get us to think that it surely must be “the right” which is driving these wars.

We’re amazingly clueless, and some of us aren’t especially honest. Sadly, some of us have been happy to let Democratic candidates get slimed in these ways if there’s some other Democratic candidate we prefer.

In 1999 and 2000, Bradley supporters let Candidate Gore get slimed in remarkable ways. Indeed, by December 1999, the Bradley campaign was playing an active role in creating the mainstream press corps’ bogus claims against Gore. (Al Gore introduced the American people to Willie Horton!)

In 2007 and 2008, some Obama supporters took the same approach to Matthews' misogynistic sliming of Candidate Clinton. On balance, this approach has worked out very poorly for us liberals. Over the course of the next twenty months, it may do so again.

There is one more group which must be cited here. We refer to the “liberal” sycophants who have formed around Matthews.

People like David Corn and Joan Walsh have done great things for their own careers by becoming courtiers to this profoundly dishonest man. For this reason, they will never discuss the actual history of the past twenty years. In such ways, liberal voters are kept barefoot and clueless.

Most horrifically, the press corps’ war against the Clintons and Gore sent Candidate Bush to the White House. In their search for wealth and fame, people like Corn and Walsh could easily do it again.

There’s every chance that it could happen—that they will give us a President Walker, Rubio, Bush or Paul. But make no mistake. Under any circumstance, their code of silence will prevail.

We will be told that it must be “the right” which is driving the attacks. We liberals will swallow this claim. We’ll continue along in our own clueless way, merrily laughing about how dumb the other tribe’s voters are!

We love hating The Others so much that we can’t figure out who The Others are! We got fooled all through the War Against Gore. And yes, it can happen again.

The fellows who wrote the books: In 1995, Gene Lyons wrote the book on the Whitewater pseudo-scandal. For his column about the email hunt, you can just click here.

In 2000, Joe Conason joined Lyons for a second book, The Hunting of the President. For Conason’s column about the emails, you can just click this.

44 comments:

  1. Poor HRC can't catch a break.

    "The vast majority of my work emails went to government employees at their government addresses, which meant they were captured and preserved immediately on the system at the State Department,."
    HRC 3/10/15

    "The State Department said Friday it was unable to automatically archive the emails of most of its senior officials until last month, which could mean potential problems for historical record-keeping amid criticism of former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's use of a private email server while in office."

    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/state-dept-shuts-parts-unclassified-computer-network-29625961

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. NEW YORK (AP) — "Fashion Police" isn't working, isn't funny and isn't condoned (at least, by some) for one simple reason: Joan Rivers isn't there.
      As host, Rivers was resolutely who she was throughout her long career: fearless, unapologetic and hilarious. She dished it out — and she took it. And her panel of "Joan Rangers" followed her lead.

      With her death came the inevitable question: Could "Fashion Police" continue in her absence?
      In January, E! Entertainment brought it back as a series of specials with Kathy Griffin as the new host, joined by the returning Kelly Osbourne and Giuliana Rancic, with Brad Goreski replacing George Kotsiopoulos, and Melissa Rivers, Joan's daughter, remaining its executive producer.
      On Thursday, Griffin took to Twitter to announce she was gone.
      She had stayed for just seven episodes.
      That was two weeks after Osbourne made her own brisk exit following Rancic's red-carpet gibe about biracial singer-actress Zendaya's dreadlocks. Rancic had joked that they suggested the smell of marijuana. Zendaya accused her of racism. Rancic duly apologized. But Osbourne piled on with criticism of her own, then cut and ran.
      On Friday, she was tweeting congratulations to Griffin for likewise bailing out: "I could not be more proud of you."
      Other celebs chimed in.
      And columnist Meghan McCain tweeted that she was "super impressed with the reasoning Kathy Griffin gave for leaving fashion police."
      What was that reasoning?
      In her statement, Griffin said, in part, "I do not want to use my comedy to contribute to a culture of unattainable perfectionism and intolerance towards difference," adding that her goal is "to help women, gay kids, people of color and anyone who feels underrepresented to have a voice and a LAUGH!"
      "My style does not fit with the creative direction of the show," she concluded.
      Maybe not. But this sweeping reappraisal was like explaining that you ditched your bartending job because you suddenly realized they make you sell alcohol.
      Or, to quote Piers Morgan's tweet: "Kathy Griffin's quit 'Fashion Police' because she doesn't like their mean humour? Ironically, one of the few times she's ever made me laugh."
      Indeed, her parting manifesto would suggest she had never seen "Fashion Police" in its glory days, when it was hosted by Rivers, her friend and mentor.
      On one show, Rivers skewered a baggy, dizzyingly hued Alexander McQueen jumpsuit worn by actress Marion Cotillard by saying, "The pattern looks like Precious sat on somebody's butterfly collection."
      Or, as another relatively mild example, a dress worn by Jessica Alba sparked this salvo: "Last thing I saw that was that full and yellow was one of Hugh Hefner's diapers."
      No doubt, Griffin has made a sensible departure from "Fashion Police," a gig this otherwise accomplished comedian clearly wasn't suited for. But her decision to leave has been inexplicably greeted with thundering applause ("Thanks for being WHO YOU ARE," saluted Kristin Chenoweth on Twitter).
      Since when does making a practical career move, especially when you're bombing, warrant canonization? Griffin, like Osbourne, has merely chosen to abandon a sinking ship (a ship, despite their best efforts, they helped run aground). There's no higher moral purpose behind their retreat.
      (Griffin and Melissa Rivers declined to comment for this article.)

      Delete
    2. Any danger of the Brits shipping Piers Morgan back to the colonies? dailymail.co.uk celebrating the hack with a borrowed slogan: "It's Morgan in Britain"

      Delete
  2. Great link, Conason is consistently one of our very finest journalists.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Don't worry, the NSA has copies of everything archived in Utah. Historians will be fine.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ 4:46

      Including the 30,000 emails HRC deleted from her server?

      Delete
    2. Everything everyone has written to anyone on any server everywhere. Big Brother is watching. This is a pro forma fuss about nothing to maintain an empty fiction that there is still privacy in our society. It is gone.

      Delete
    3. Conservatives have always been in favor of a robust policy to insure transparency for the benefit of stakeholders.

      Thank heavens for corporal cicero and all the other footsoldiers who volunteer by standing watch at their keyboards.

      Delete
    4. @ 6:12

      Tell your mother to cut back the starch on your Brown Shirt.

      "This is the most transparent administration in history. I can document that this is the case. Every visitor that comes into the White House is now part of the public record. Every law we pass and every rule we implement we put online for everyone to see.”
      POTUS Obama February, 2013 Google Plus “Fireside” Hangout.

      NY Times' Jill Abramson: 'This Is The Most Secretive White House...I Have Ever Dealt With'

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/23/jill-abramson-white-house-secret-ny-times_n_4653014.html

      Delete
    5. NEW YORK (AP) — "Fashion Police" isn't working, isn't funny and isn't condoned (at least, by some) for one simple reason: Joan Rivers isn't there.
      Rivers was the host in whose time-honored image "Fashion Police" was forged. Until her death at age 81 last summer, she made it required viewing for anyone looking to keep up with celebrities' kooky couture while the accompanying potshots took those stars down a peg.
      As host, Rivers was resolutely who she was throughout her long career: fearless, unapologetic and hilarious. She dished it out — and she took it. And her panel of "Joan Rangers" followed her lead.
      With her death came the inevitable question: Could "Fashion Police" continue in her absence?
      In January, E! Entertainment brought it back as a series of specials with Kathy Griffin as the new host, joined by the returning Kelly Osbourne and Giuliana Rancic, with Brad Goreski replacing George Kotsiopoulos, and Melissa Rivers, Joan's daughter, remaining its executive producer.
      On Thursday, Griffin took to Twitter to announce she was gone.
      She had stayed for just seven episodes.
      That was two weeks after Osbourne made her own brisk exit following Rancic's red-carpet gibe about biracial singer-actress Zendaya's dreadlocks. Rancic had joked that they suggested the smell of marijuana. Zendaya accused her of racism. Rancic duly apologized. But Osbourne piled on with criticism of her own, then cut and ran.
      On Friday, she was tweeting congratulations to Griffin for likewise bailing out: "I could not be more proud of you."
      Other celebs chimed in.
      "Proud of u!!!" tweeted Rosie O'Donnell. "Cheers for doing what you think is right," echoed "Parks and Recreation" actress Aubrey Plaza. Jane Lynch hailed her as "my brave and courageous friend."
      And columnist Meghan McCain tweeted that she was "super impressed with the reasoning Kathy Griffin gave for leaving fashion police."
      What was that reasoning?
      In her statement, Griffin said, in part, "I do not want to use my comedy to contribute to a culture of unattainable perfectionism and intolerance towards difference," adding that her goal is "to help women, gay kids, people of color and anyone who feels underrepresented to have a voice and a LAUGH!"
      "My style does not fit with the creative direction of the show," she concluded.
      Maybe not. But this sweeping reappraisal was like explaining that you ditched your bartending job because you suddenly realized they make you sell alcohol.
      Or, to quote Piers Morgan's tweet: "Kathy Griffin's quit 'Fashion Police' because she doesn't like their mean humour? Ironically, one of the few times she's ever made me laugh."
      Indeed, her parting manifesto would suggest she had never seen "Fashion Police" in its glory days, when it was hosted by Rivers, her friend and mentor.

      On one show, Rivers skewered a baggy, dizzyingly hued Alexander McQueen jumpsuit worn by actress Marion Cotillard by saying, "The pattern looks like Precious sat on somebody's butterfly collection."
      Or, as another relatively mild example, a dress worn by Jessica Alba sparked this salvo: "Last thing I saw that was that full and yellow was one of Hugh Hefner's diapers."
      No doubt, Griffin has made a sensible departure from "Fashion Police," a gig this otherwise accomplished comedian clearly wasn't suited for. But her decision to leave has been inexplicably greeted with thundering applause ("Thanks for being WHO YOU ARE," saluted Kristin Chenoweth on Twitter).
      Since when does making a practical career move, especially when you're bombing, warrant canonization? Griffin, like Osbourne, has merely chosen to abandon a sinking ship (a ship, despite their best efforts, they helped run aground). There's no higher moral purpose behind their retreat.
      (Griffin and Melissa Rivers declined to comment for this article.)

      Delete
    6. Cicero, seriously:

      The opportunities you'll have working at Koch companies are even greater. Here, we strive to help make better food, clothing, technology and other necessities. We believe out paper toiletries line may be your best fit. So what are you waiting for? Take charge of your career and explore the job fields below.

      Delete
    7. Cicero, seriously:

      The opportunities you'll have working at Koch companies are even greater. Here, we strive to help make better food, clothing, technology and other necessities. We believe out paper toiletries line may be your best fit. So what are you waiting for? Take charge of your career and explore the job fields below.

      Delete
    8. @ Headhunters,

      How long have you had a stuttering problem?

      Delete
  4. Poor Bob. He was once part of the TV revelation that the press room booed and hissed at Gore. Now he's down to cicero.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. cicero®...spotted everywhere through the magic of magnification and relentless repetition.

      Delete
    2. The troll in comments has not mentioned Chris Matthews. The troll does not like to touch the hot potatoes.

      Delete
    3. About one if five Americans experience loneliness, Cacioppo said. And it is a growing problem in modern society in part because the average household size is decreasing. By 2010, 31 million Americans — roughly 10 percent of the population — will live alone, Cacioppo and his colleagues say.

      Previous work has suggested it can be as detrimental to health as smoking, Cacioppo said. In his book, "Loneliness: Human Nature and the Need for Social Connection" (W.W. Norton, 2008), he presented evidence that loneliness is related to less blood flow through the body, poorer immune systems, increased levels of depression and a faster progression of Alzheimer's disease.

      A 2006 study by a different research team, of people age 50 to 68, found that those who scored highest on measures of loneliness also had higher blood pressure, a major risk factor for heart disease. The potentially deadly health effect of loneliness accumulates gradually and faster as you get older, that study found.

      Although loneliness may be influence brain activity, the research also suggests that activity in the ventral striatum may prompt feelings of loneliness, said Cacioppo's colleague Jean Decety, a professor of psychology and psychiatry at the university. "The study raises the intriguing possibility that loneliness may result from reduced reward-related activity in the ventral striatum in response to social rewards," Decety said.

      The results are published in the current issue of the Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. Cacioppo presented the findings today at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, in Chicago.

      Delete
    4. Here are a few things to keep in mind if you feel lonely in your life:

      First: Remember that feeling separate from others is the direct result of focusing on how others are different from us.

      When you look for differences, you will find them. When you look for similarities, you will find them as well. There’s nothing wrong with doing either; however, each has their own set of consequences.

      When we spend your time focusing on the differences, we begin to have thoughts about how “It’s different for him because he’s a man,” “She wouldn’t understand because she’s rich,” “He has kids so he wouldn’t have time,” or “She’s so attractive, she would never ‘get’ my situation.”

      We start to place others into all sorts of categories.

      Most of these categories include all the things that make them different from us. If this sort of thinking continues, eventually, we will find ourselves standing alone against the entire world—us verses everyone else.

      Delete
    5. I remember when it was morning in America.

      "Hot Potato" was a single by American singer La Toya Jackson, the third single from her successful 1984 album Heart Don't Lie. It peaked at #43 on the Billboard Black Singles chart and at #38 on the Billboard Hot Dance Music/Club Play chart. It also enjoyed time on the Billboard Heatseekers chart. It also peaked at #92 in the United Kingdom. The single was released on 7" and 12" formats with the album track "Think Twice" as the B-side. Some singles also include a dub version.

      Jackson performed the song on "Solid Gold" broadcast Saturday September 8, 1984. She also performed it on the U.S. TV show "The Fall Guy" broadcast on February 13, 1984, in the episode "Rock-A-Bye Baby".

      Delete
  5. To avoid a repeat of the Clinton/Gore press wars and another Bush presidency I think liberals should wake up and demand salvation by drafting the best Kennedy we have available.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The source of our own cluelessness: Don’t get us wrong!

    Why do we liberals remain so clueless about the press corps’ long-running war against both Clintons and Gore? For ourselves, we would have thought this destructive war had ended.

    Why do we liberals remain so clueless about the basic structure of this ongoing mess? Truly, that’s remarkable.

    Matthews is almost pathologically dishonest. He was pathologically dishonest. He was pathologically dishonest .Matthews is pathologically dishonest. Twenty-three years into this mess, we liberals remain amazingly clueless about the way this syndrome has worked.

    We’re amazingly clueless. We’ll continue along in our own clueless way.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Cicero is like the poor guy that only gets laid once a year.
    TODAY’S THE DAY!

    A letter Cicero wrote in February 43 BC to Trebonius, one of the conspirators, lamented, "How I could wish that you had invited me to that most glorious banquet on the Ides of March"!

    No doubt, you are glued to FOX News to see if some of the 47 Republican Senators will carry out the prophecy against the Man Who Would be Emperor.

    You need a new avatar.

    I hereby dub thee Protagoras, a much more appropriate name.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ 10:59

      Howler libs north & south heads explode all over Quinnipiac Poll.

      "FOX News offers the most trusted network and cable news coverage, 29 percent of American voters say, when asked to compare the major TV news outlets in a Quinnipiac University
      National poll released today."

      http://www.quinnipiac.edu/images/polling/us/us03092015_Umepxt98.pdf

      Delete
    2. Angel Soft® Lavender Scented Toilet Paper Roll offers all the softness you want and strength you need. Get the quality you expect - now with the added touch of Lavender Scent in every roll.

      Delete
    3. When was Angel Soft® bath tissue first introduced into the marketplace?
      Angel Soft® bath tissue was introduced in 1987.
      Where is Angel Soft® bath tissue available?
      You can find Angel Soft® bath tissue at most grocery and mass merchandise retail stores across the United States. Please use our Product Locator to find an online merchant or to locate the closest store near you.
      Is the wrapper on Angel Soft® bath tissue recyclable?
      The plastic wrapper has a resin identification number of four. Please check with your local recycling facility to determine if these materials are recycled in your area.
      Do you make Angel Soft® bath tissue with aloe?
      No, Angel Soft® bath tissue is manufactured from only pulp fiber with no additives.
      Do you make prints?
      Yes! Angel Soft® bath tissue is available at selected retail stores in the "pretty print" design. Use the Product Locator to find an online merchant or to locate the closet store near you.
      Is Angel Soft® bath tissue septic/sewer safe?
      All bath tissue products manufactured by Georgia-Pacific Consumer Products LP are acceptable for use in standard septic and sewer systems.

      Delete
    4. Angel Soft®: The tissue preferred by Brock/Davis/Carville to clean up their majesty's dumps.

      Delete

    5. You who once was Cicero, your name now is Protagoras, Father of Sophistry. Honor thy ancestors.

      Delete
    6. Once named David Brock, your new name to fit your new hairdo is Mrs. Doubtfire.

      Delete
  8. Here's a recent "retraction" of sorts as the Times does their research and fact finding after they print the "allegations." http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/03/13/the-new-york-times-reverses-course-on-clintons/202894

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How do the 3 Hillary Stooges (Brock/Davis/Carville) spin their majesty's hypocrisy?

      "In 2007, Mrs. Clinton, then a senator from New York and candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, accused the George W. Bush administration of using “secret White House email accounts” along with secret wiretaps and military tribunals.".

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYaYTKSqPbU

      Delete
  9. TL;DR

    -The attacks on Clinton are not a thing of the "right wing" but a thing of our mainstream press and even of some of our supposed "liberals."

    On the other hand, Somerby has annoying stylistic tics!!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In 1999 and 2000, Bradley supporters let Candidate Gore get slimed in remarkable ways. Indeed, by December 1999, the Bradley campaign was playing an active role in creating the mainstream press corps’ bogus claims against Gore. (Al Gore introduced the American people to Willie Horton!)

      Delete
  10. Maybe Hillary gets treated unfairly by a couple of Times pundits, but overall her treatment is very nice, in that she's treated as a serious Presidential candidate and a highly qualified one. By comparison, consider the media's treatment of the brilliant and effective Bobby Jindal. He has a list of real achievements exceeding candidates from either party. In particular, he has been an outstanding Governor of LA. Under his leadership, things work. And, he's from an Asian minority that has never been nominated or considered as a Presidential candidate or even VP. Yet, he won't be nominated for President, because he's simply not taken seriously by the media.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When he breaks into whole numbers with the base, maybe he will get treated as seriously as Rick Perry.

      CPAC Straw Poll

      By Washington Times Staff - The Washington Times - Saturday, February 28, 2015
      Percent Candidate

      25.7 Sen. Rand Paul
      21.4 Gov. Scott Walker
      11.5 Sen. Ted Cruz
      11.4 Dr. Ben Carson
      8.3 Former Gov. Jeb Bush
      4.3 Former Sen. Rick Santorum
      3.7 Sen. Marco Rubio
      3.5 Donald Trump
      3.0 Carly Fiorina
      2.8 Gov. Chris Christie
      1.1 Former Gov. Rick Perry
      0.9 Gov. Bobby Jindal
      0.8 Former Gov. Sarah Palin
      0.3 Former Gov. Mike Huckabee
      0.3 Former Ambassador John Bolton
      0.1 Sen. Lindsey Graham
      0.1 Former Gov. George Pataki

      1.0 Undecided

      Delete
    2. The Republican base takes it's cues from the lamestream media?!

      Delete
  11. Your blogs about Maureen Dowd are more than a month old, so I'm writing here to tell you that my comments to her columns are now being posted to the online Times. For over five years, any time I responded to what she wrote on the the comments page, it would not be posted by the Times on line.

    On nearly all the right wing sites, if I link to this blogspot, I am permanently banned. Apparently, you've hurt their feelings. Boo hoo.

    ReplyDelete
  12. J. Christian Adams, a conservative former United States Department of Justice official, explains that Hillary's treatment of her e-mails included conduct that is
    defined as criminal by various federal statutes . What I find worrisome is the attitude that nobody cares if she committed crimes. Furthermore, we all take it for granted that the Justice Dept. will not investigate or prosecute her possible criminal activity, because she's a leading Democrat. We have a corrupt government and, even worse, we expect nothing better.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is nonsense.

      Delete
    2. Nah...

      http://www.talkleft.com/story/2015/3/14/18325/9525/elections/The-Plot-Thins-State-Dept-regs-require-employees-to-decide-what-e-mails-are-preserved

      Delete
  13. I find I like David Corn far better if I just read him rather than see and hear him on television---he's got to be one of the most insufferably smug talking heads out there.

    ReplyDelete
  14. An amazing testimony on a spell caster who brought my husband back to me.. My name is Natasha Johnson,i live in Florida,USA,and I'm happily married to a lovely and caring husband ,with three kids. A very big problem occurred in my family seven months ago,between me and my husband .so terrible that he took the case to court for a divorce.he said that he never wanted to stay with me again,and that he didn't love me anymore.So he packed out of the house and made me and my children passed through severe pain. I tried all my possible means to get him back,after much begging,but all to no avail.and he confirmed it that he has made his decision,and he never wanted to see me again. So on one evening,as i was coming back from work,i met an old friend of mine who asked of my husband .So i explained every thing to him,so he told me that the only way i can get my husband back,is to visit a spell caster,because it has really worked for him too.So i never believed in spell,but i had no other choice,than to follow his advice. Then he gave me the email address of the spell caster whom he visited.{bravespellcaster@gmail.com}. So the next morning,i sent a mail to the address he gave to me,and the spell caster assured me that i will get my husband back the next day.What an amazing statement!! I never believed,so he spoke with me,and told me everything that i need to do. Then the next morning, So surprisingly, my husband who didn't call me for the past seven {7}months,gave me a call to inform me that he was coming back.So Amazing!! So that was how he came back that same day,with lots of love and joy,and he apologized for his mistake,and for the pain he caused me and my children. Then from that day,our relationship was now stronger than how it were before,by the help of a spell caster. So, i will advice you out there to kindly visit the same website { http://enchantedscents.tripod.com/lovespell/},if you are in any condition like this,or you have any problem related to "bringing your ex back. So thanks to the Dr Brave for bringing back my husband ,and brought great joy to my family once again. { bravespellcaster@gmail.com }, Thanks..

    ReplyDelete