debates

John Edwards' explains why he could never endorse Hillary Clinton


John Edwards told us 7 months ago why he would never endorse Hillary Clinton. I had forgotten about this rebuke until I found it looking for a clip of last night's endorsement.

It shows Edwards at the top of his litigation game --brutal yet never a moment emotional lost in the violence of his words. I've watched this now several times and I have to say, it is one of the most breath taking moments in political history.

It is without a doubt what cross many people's minds when the rumor about him getting an Attorney General nod in the Obama administration was floated earlier this year. Rumor or not, I have to say, chalk me in for making it a reality. John Edwards for United States Attorney General would wipe away the tortureful memories of John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales' tenures as USAGs.


liza's picture

| | | | | | |

The Debate : Obama wins but Clinton has the last word ... with class

Photo:AP

First of all, I came in half way into the debates, so I missed Jorge Ramos "espeekeng espanish". What did you all think? I'd so hit that 1000 days to Monday. Oh, and he's a fantastic anchorman and journalist.

I can see he dealt with the issue of immigration. When reading the transcript, I actually think both candidates were really great addressing the immigration issue.

Second, here's the link to the debate's transcript : The CNN Democratic presidential debate in Texas.

Third, moving along ...

Obama knocked it out of the park more times than Hillary, but she definitely had her moment at the end and, I have to give it to her, she closed the debate in a refreshingly classy note.

I think that the best Obama moment dealt with the issue of "silliness" in the recent rash of dirty politics :

OBAMA: Well, look, the -- first of all, it's not a lot of speeches. There are two lines in speeches that I've been giving over the last couple of weeks.

I've been campaigning now for the last two years. Deval is a national co-chairman of my campaign, and suggested an argument that I share, that words are important. Words matter. And the implication that they don't I think diminishes how important it is to speak to the American people directly about making America as good as its promise. Barbara Jordan understood this as well as anybody.


liza's picture

| | | | | | | |

What do you drink during a Republican Presidential Forum on PBS?

coffee
I was thinking of alcohol. Like massive amounts of rum or tequila, but I am afraid I may fall asleep faster than you say Al-Qaeda, so I am actually doing a double espresso with a shot of milk ... un cortado as we say in the isla.

What about you? Come on over to the chat room and tell us all about it.


liza's picture

| | | | | | | | | | | |

Nevada Democrats Reconsider Inviting the Fox Inside

Finally the Nevada Democrats have realized that it is not a good idea to work with a company that routinely lies, advocates bombing American cities and killing Supreme Court justices. Barak Obama has been refusing to deal with Fox Propoganda. John Edwards flatly said he would refuse to participate in a debate hosted by Fox Propoganda. And apparantly the Nevada Democrats got a real earful about how foolish it would be to give Fox the chance to call even some of the shots. According to Daily Kos, the Nevada Democrats have turned down Fox. This is from a letter sent from the Nevada Democrats to Fox:

A month ago, the Nevada Democratic Party entered into a good faith agreement with FOX News to co-sponsor a presidential debate in August. This was done because the Nevada Democratic Party is reaching out to new voters and we strongly believe that a Democrat will not win Nevada unless we find new ways to talk to new people.

To say the least, this was not a popular decision. But it is one that the Democratic Party stood by. However, comments made last night by FOX News President Roger Ailes in reference to one of our presidential candidates went too far. We cannot, as good Democrats, put our party in a position to defend such comments.

In light of his comments, we have concluded that it is not possible to hold a Presidential debate that will focus on our candidates and are therefore canceling our August debate. We take no pleasure in this, but it is the only course of action.


mole333's picture

| | | |
Syndicate content

Visit our sponsors

Fill up our coffee fund

BlogAds

Visit our sponsors

Get our Digestifs du jour

Nibble daily on our brainy goodness with our daily syndication digest. You'll receive an email with a list and links to the previous day's posts.



Powered by FeedBlitz

culturekitchens

The Publisher
Liza Sabater

Daily servings of political dissent
culturekitchen

Grassroots News and
Activism for New Yorkers

Daily Gotham

Feminist Bloggers
Network

BlogSheroes

A new kind of vouyerism
Voogling

Art + Code + Philosophy
Potatoland.blog

Got any dirt, tips, leads or money for us? Then drop us a line or two at editors [at] culturekitchen [dot] com or use our general contact form to reach everybody in the editorial team ASAP.


Member's articles and stories

More stories

Who's online

There are currently 2 users and 1829 guests online.

Online users

Words to live by

"I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the Constitution from intermeddling in religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises...Certainly, no power to prescribe any religious exercise or to assume authority in religious discipline has been delegated to the General Government...

"But it is only proposed that I should recommend, not prescribe a day of fasting and prayer. That is, that I should indirectly assume to the U.S. an authority over religious exercises which the Constitution has directly precluded them from.... I do not believe it is for the interest of religion to invite the civil magistrate to direct it's exercises, it's discipline, or it's doctrines; nor of the religious societies that the general government should be invested with the power of effecting any uniformity of time or matter among them. Fasting and prayer are religious exercises. The enjoining them an act of discipline. Every religious society has a right to determine for itself the times for these exercises, and the objects proper for them, according to their own particular tenets; and this right can never be safer than in their own hands, where the constitution has deposited it...every one must act according to the dictates of his own reason, and mine tells me that civil powers alone have been given to the President of the U.S. and no authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents."


— -- Thomas Jefferson, to Samuel Miller, January 23, 1808


Subscribe Buttons

Feed IconGoogleDeliciousYahoo!BloglinesNewsgatorMSNFeedsterAOLFurlRojoNewsburstPluckFeedFeedsAdd KinjaMultiRSSrMailRSSFwdBlogarithmSimplify