As you are all certainly aware, Wesley Clark recently made a point that should have gone without saying.

"Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president," Clark replied.

Of course it doesn't. But that's not the argument that McCain's people are making, and by getting into it on these terms, Clark is merely assisting the McCain campaign with their messaging.

::more over the fold::

Well, this isn't strictly in the realm of the usual site content, but anytime I've had questions about this candidate, or that ballot measure, I've always been able to turn to DKos, and get substantive answers, often from several different perspectives. And it's also no secret that there's no shortage of legal eagles in this community, so... here's my question ...

I am getting ready to launch a small operation selling foreign language flash cards to students at my college. The flash cards will be custom made based on the chapters in the actual book used in the classes and organized as such (as in, all the material covered in chapter one will be grouped together, etc).

The publishers don't offer a comparable product, but I can't help but wonder if I am flirting with any kind of copyright law violation. Is there a problem with basing a study aide on a textbook (wouldn't it be similar to publishing a guide to a particular video game)?  And if that's no problem, which I'm assuming, then could I run into trouble referencing the book in advertising (as in a flyer posted in the commons describing the flash cards as "Based on [book title]"?

During this latest dust-up over the recent FISA developments, let us not forget that we still have to be vigilent about identifying and responding to media deception.

In an "analysis" of John McCain's recent campaign missteps (which, of course, fails to take into account his biggest missteps might be his actual, ya know, policy positions), David Espo treats us to a reminder why we shouldn't really care whether we can quote the AP or not. It covers several minor blunders, such as McSame criticizing Obama for his position on windfall profits... a position that the Great and Honorable Maverick himself has repeatedly said he would consider.

But if you read through the entirety of the article, you get treated to this gem:

Republican President Gerald Ford's declaration in 1976, at the height of the Cold War, that there was "no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe" was a memorable one.

Or more recently Democratic Sen. John Kerry's decision to go windsurfing in 2004, an event that Republicans turned into a metaphor for a politician who shifts with the wind.

Thas' right, folks... Ignorance about geopolitical realities is the same as ...  windsurfing...  

(h/t to HuffPo),

Via ABC News(and the frackin Washington fergawdsake Times!) we find out, to no real surprise, that:

Mentally distressed veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan are being recruited for government tests on pharmaceutical drugs linked to suicide and other violent side effects.

And the article focuses one one lab rat veteran, former Army Sniper James Elliot.

::more over the fold::

"He's an in-house terrorist"

This was the comment I was just forced to endure without response. See, I work at a hotel front desk, and as I've been celebrating Obama's victory in my home state tonight, I've had to reign my enthusiasm in when certain guests walked through the lobby.

The 'gentleman' making said comment did so without any sense of irony, in such a way as to make it clear he truly believed such utter nonsense.

At first I was pissed...

I was a little concerned about whether I would be able to successfully cast a ballot, given my recent move to a new county (and my procrastination in obtaining an absentee ballot). Sure enough, having stood in line for slightly over an hour - no complaints! - I found my opportunity obstructed to do the single most important thing I can do to elect Obama. It turns out that one-stop voting/registration only works with a proof of address, and my driver's license, sadly, still proclaimed me a resident of my old county.

The election worker's expression was sympathetic, but non-negotiable...

No proof of address, no vote today.

::follow the cliffhanger over the fold to find out the thrilling conclusion::

Well folks, it's tax return time, and for my service-wage self, that usually means I get a decent (for me) chunk of change in the form of a rebate.

Not this year...

~my story in theresmoresville~

I am, and have been, enthusiastically in favor of universal health care. I've thought the best thing said about it in the past decade was the line from the west wing about deleting the words '65 and over' from the Medicare act (more on that later).

But Hillary Clinton's plan is not Universal Health Care. Neither is Obama's, and neither was Edwards', for that matter. Those plans are all variations of (semi)Universal Health Insurance plans, which are entirely different animals.

In this diary, I want to talk for a bit about the debate, and how, despite certain attacks seen here on Dkos and in the editorial pages of the New York Times, I believe the small, but substantial, difference between the two candidates is a strong demonstration of Obama's superior leadership abilities, as well as showing that Obama, not Clinton, will get us closer to the Holy Grail of single-payer health care.

::more over the flip::

Tell me why Obama supporters were told to quit whining when we objected to certain campaign tactics, but the world must grind to a halt because you don't like the composition of a flier...

Tell me why so many HRC supporters threw massive fits (rightfully so) at the idea that any true progressive would support McCain if Obama didn't get the nomination, but the same argument coming from the other side spends a day on the rec list...

Tell me why all Obama supporters are subject to guilt-by-association for the inappropriate rudeness of a few...

Tell me why HRC supporters (rightfully) get so angry when her and Bill's comments are taken out of context, but have no problem with continued mischaracterizations of Obama's...

Tell me why certain states are 'irrelevant' because Hillary didn't campaign in them, but a state which didn't even have the other candidates on the ballot should count...

and to be fair...

Tell me why certain Obama supporters are so adamant that he should be the leader of the free world, but don't seem willing to follow his leadership in how they approach politics (hint: it's the tone, stupid)...

Tell me why, after New Hampshire, people still go gaga over polls...

Tell me why we don't police our own ranks better...

So many people on this site claim to be Obama supporters, but I really have to wonder.

I mean, the President of the United States is often referred to as the leader of the free world, yet, by your behavior, you do not seem to place much respect in Senator Obama's leadership abilities.

The Senator speaks of a new politics, of changing the tone of our politics, before it poisons us all. Yet I see so many of my fellow Obama supporters engaging in rude, insulting behavior, and I have to question.

If you truly believe in the Senator, why do you not attempt to follow his lead?

::more on the flipside::

I've been trying not to write Hillary-bashing diaries (I gave up the habit in 2005). Sure, I'll get heated with some of y'all in a comment thread, but I figure that's what they're there for. But I'd much rather write about why I'm for my candidate (Obama), rather than why I'm against another candidate. Hell, two diaries ago, I wrote about why I like John Edwards.

But there have been several trends noticeable to me lately, on here among HRC's supporters, and in the Clinton campaign overall, that has me worried that Roger Daultry Pete Townsend might have proved prophetic when he wrote:

'Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss'.

More over the flip...

This diary is in response to Countdown last night, where Keith offered up a shoddy bit of reporting, much like the Lawrence O'Donnell incident, and a response is needed.  

Keith, of whom I'm a big fan normally, btw, made quite a big deal about Obama's comment questioning whether those who would vote for him will vote for Hillary.  Keith seemed aghast that he would suggest that the Democratic party will be anything but united come November, regardless of who is the nominee.

And, if as by clockwork, the troll diaries have been coming in ever since.

So what was wrong with what Keith said?

Follow me over the flip...

This will be a short diary, but I felt the need to weigh in on all the back and forth about the primary, and the relationship between my guy, Obama, and the other great candidate, Edwards.

For some background, I was an Edwards supporter in 2004, and was torn between him and Obama up until I saw Obama speak in person.  Cliche, I know, but that's how it went down.  But being convinced that Barack Obama is the best thing for this nation did not diminish my admiration for Senator Edwards, nor my appreciation for the important issues which he brings to the forefront in this campaign.

And as far as Hillary goes, I wrote about my feelings on the subject over two years ago).  During this campaign, my opposition has only solidified.

So why am I not screaming 'ZOMG, Edwards needs to drop out now and endorse Obama!!!!'?

The answer over the flip...

One of the precious few bright spots of the congressional conduct since the 2006 elections has undoubtedly been Senator Dodd's successful effort to stand in the way of the Bush Administration's (with Harry Reid's help) efforts to take us even further from a society based on liberty and due process by granting immunity to the telecom companies who sold us out after before 9/11.  

Many have said that Senator Dodd was merely grandstanding for the purposes of presidential campaigning, and once things had quieted down on that front, he would fall in line with the rest of the wet noodles.  I have no doubt that has been part of the "put it off till later" strategy that Harry Reid has pursued thus far.  

::More over the flipside::

In response to this diary, I said:

I hate to even defend Trent Lott, of all people, but I think you've got it wrong.  If he had said "these people" instead of the more general "people" then it would be racist.  

Actually, his statement causes people to identify with the immigrants by saying people are smart, implying commonalities(sp?) with the immigrants.  Everyone wants to think they themselves are smart, after all.  So I don't think this was racist.

{...}

(NOTE: The rest of this diary includes unapologetic use of the N-Word, and I mean disrespect to no one.  If you believe that a white person should not say that word, as it cannot be separated from historical use... or that no one should say it, regardless, as it can't be separated from history at all...  then please do not read my diary.  

Some see it as a hateful thing.

I see it as a blade to cut through the bullshit...)

::Real shit below the flip::

I've been thinking lately about the whole construction of conservative and liberal, and what it means to us today.  The apparent tension between the two seems to motivate much of the political energy in this country of ours, making both concepts important to understand.  So I've learned about economics, history, and anything else in which I could interest myself, hoping to understand where these dominant philosophies stand on the Important Issues(tm).  And I could tell you about Goldwater-style conservatism, and New Deal liberalism, but neither of those really apply today, do they?  Or I could talk about neoliberalism, and it's bastard child, neoconservatism, and I'd be getting close, at least relevant, but still, how do you define those terms, and do I actually know one solitary person in my every day life that could be described by one of them?  

Those and the bazillion other questions that could be asked simply just to make sure that everyone is on the same page before starting to have an insightful, relevant political conversation have all led me to one thing.  It's all utter horseshit.

Over the flip and far away...

It's been a long time since I've diaried, but the recent dustup over Barack Obama's supposed ties to Islam has got me really thinking.  At first, I was worried about the whole Obama=Osama+Hussein meme, and how it would affect the less informed voters out there.  Wouldn't it be better to deny the right wing that kind of ammo to use against our candidate?  Wouldn't it be better to nominate someone who was more...  (ahem) electable?  Do we really want this to be an issue in such an important campaign?

The answer?

HELL FUCKING YES!!!

...more in flipsville...

I've been sick the past couple of days, so I haven't gone out much, which means killing lots of time. Been going back through my old songs, and I found something really cool. My grandpa used to listen to Tom T. Hall all the time. He would take me fishing and play Tom T. Hall in the truck there and back. I pirated obtained some of his songs. Thanksgiving is a good time for nostalgia.

Tom T. Hall wrote a song called 'Everything From Jesus to Jack Daniels'.

Check out the lyrics over the fold...