stock-channel.net - Aktien Links Stocks Rohstoffe Trading Handel Exchange
stock-channel.net - The Art Of Trading Home Analysen IR-Center Finanznews Finanzlinks Mediathek Diskussion Kontakt

Zurück   stock-channel.net - Das Finanzportal > Advanced Traders
Benutzername
Kennwort
FAQ Benutzerliste Kalender Foren als gelesen markieren Reload
Aktuelle Uhrzeit 00:46

Antwort Gehe zum letzten Beitrag
 
Themen-Optionen
Alt 22.02.2008, 21:30   #106
lunar
veränderlich
 
Benutzerbild von lunar
 
Registrierungsdatum: Dec 2005
Beiträge: 39.050
Standard

Posted on Thu, Feb. 21, 2008


Police concerned about order to stop weapons screening at Obama rally


By JACK DOUGLAS Jr.
Star-Telegram Staff Writer



STAR-TELEGRAM/RODGER MALLISON
Barack Obama speaks Wednesday at a Democratic rally in Dallas' Reunion Arena. Police were told to stop screening people for weapons before the rally began.


DALLAS -- Security details at Barack Obama's rally Wednesday stopped screening people for weapons at the front gates more than an hour before the Democratic presidential candidate took the stage at Reunion Arena.

The order to put down the metal detectors and stop checking purses and laptop bags came as a surprise to several Dallas police officers who said they believed it was a lapse in security.

Dallas Deputy Police Chief T.W. Lawrence, head of the Police Department's homeland security and special operations divisions, said the order -- apparently made by the U.S. Secret Service -- was meant to speed up the long lines outside and fill the arena's vacant seats before Obama came on.

"Sure," said Lawrence, when asked if he was concerned by the great number of people who had gotten into the building without being checked. But, he added, the turnout of more than 17,000 people seemed to be a "friendly crowd."

The Secret Service did not return a call from the Star-Telegram seeking comment.

Doors opened to the public at 10 a.m., and for the first hour security officers scanned each person who came in and checked their belongings in a process that kept movement of the long lines at a crawl. Then, about 11 a.m., an order came down to allow the people in without being checked.

Several Dallas police officers said it worried them that the arena was packed with people who got in without even a cursory inspection.

They spoke on condition of anonymity because, they said, the order was made by federal officials who were in charge of security at the event.

"How can you not be concerned in this day and age," said one policeman.

JACK DOUGLAS Jr., 817-390-7700
jld@star-telegram.com

http://www.star-telegram.com/667/story/486413.html
__________________
***************http://www.poodwaddle.com/worldclock.swf ***************
lunar ist offline   Mit Zitat antworten
Für Inhalt und Rechtmäßigkeit dieses Beitrags trägt der Verfasser lunar die alleinige Verantwortung. (s. Haftungshinweis)
Alt 23.02.2008, 08:59   #107
syracus
*****
 
Benutzerbild von syracus
 
Registrierungsdatum: Jan 2002
Beiträge: 31.109
Standard

A Hole in McCain’s Defense?

An apparent contradiction in his response to lobbyist story.


By Michael Isikoff
Newsweek
Updated: 11:33 AM ET Feb 22, 2008

A sworn deposition that Sen. John McCain gave in a lawsuit more than five years ago appears to contradict one part of a sweeping denial that his campaign issued this week to rebut a New York Times story about his ties to a Washington lobbyist.

On Wednesday night the Times published a story suggesting that McCain might have done legislative favors for the clients of the lobbyist, Vicki Iseman, who worked for the firm of Alcalde & Fay. One example it cited were two letters McCain wrote in late 1999 demanding that the Federal Communications Commission act on a long-stalled bid by one of Iseman's clients, Florida-based Paxson Communications, to purchase a Pittsburgh television station.

Just hours after the Times's story was posted, the McCain campaign issued a point-by-point response that depicted the letters as routine correspondence handled by his staff—and insisted that McCain had never even spoken with anybody from Paxson or Alcalde & Fay about the matter. "No representative of Paxson or Alcalde & Fay personally asked Senator McCain to send a letter to the FCC," the campaign said in a statement e-mailed to reporters.

But that flat claim seems to be contradicted by an impeccable source: McCain himself. "I was contacted by Mr. [Lowell] Paxson on this issue," McCain said in the Sept. 25, 2002, deposition obtained by NEWSWEEK. "He wanted their approval very bad for purposes of his business. I believe that Mr. Paxson had a legitimate complaint."

While McCain said "I don't recall" if he ever directly spoke to the firm's lobbyist about the issue—an apparent reference to Iseman, though she is not named—"I'm sure I spoke to [Paxson]." McCain agreed that his letters on behalf of Paxson, a campaign contributor, could "possibly be an appearance of corruption"—even though McCain denied doing anything improper.

McCain's subsequent letters to the FCC—coming around the same time that Paxson's firm was flying the senator to campaign events aboard its corporate jet and contributing $20,000 to his campaign—first surfaced as an issue during his unsuccessful 2000 presidential bid. William Kennard, the FCC chair at the time, described the sharply worded letters from McCain, then chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, as "highly unusual."

The issue erupted again this week when the New York Times reported that McCain's top campaign strategist at the time, John Weaver, was so concerned about what Iseman (who was representing Paxson) was saying about her access to McCain that he personally confronted her at a Washington restaurant and told her to stay away from the senator.

The McCain campaign has denounced the Times story as a "smear campaign" and harshly criticized the paper for publishing a report saying that anonymous aides worried there might have been an improper relationship between Iseman and McCain. McCain, who called the charges "not true," also told reporters Thursday in a news conference that he was unaware of any confrontation Weaver might have had with Iseman.

The deposition that McCain gave came in the course of a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of his landmark campaign finance reform law, known as McCain-Feingold. The suit sheds no new light on the nature of the senator's dealings with Iseman, but it does include a lengthy discussion of his dealings with the company that hired her, including some statements by the senator that could raise additional questions for his campaign.............

http://www.newsweek.com/id/114505/output/print

syracus ist offline   Mit Zitat antworten
Für Inhalt und Rechtmäßigkeit dieses Beitrags trägt der Verfasser syracus die alleinige Verantwortung. (s. Haftungshinweis)
Alt 23.02.2008, 12:25   #108
syracus
*****
 
Benutzerbild von syracus
 
Registrierungsdatum: Jan 2002
Beiträge: 31.109
Standard

AP survey: Superdelegates jump to Obama

AP News
Feb 22, 2008 17:27 EST

The Democratic superdelegates are starting to follow the voters — straight to Barack Obama.

In just the past two weeks, more than two dozen of them have climbed aboard his presidential campaign, according to a survey by The Associated Press. At the same time, Hillary Rodham Clinton's are beginning to jump ship, abandoning her for Obama or deciding they now are undecided.

The result: He's narrowing her once-commanding lead among these "superdelegates," the Democratic office holders and party officials who automatically attend the national convention and can vote for whomever they choose.

As Obama has reeled off 11 straight primary victories, some of the superdelegates are having second — or third — thoughts about their public commitments.

Take John Perez, a Californian who first endorsed John Edwards and then backed Clinton. Now, he says, he is undecided.

"Given where the race is at right now, I think it's very important for us to play a role around bringing the party together around the candidate that people have chosen, as opposed to advocating for our own choice," he said in an interview.

Clinton still leads among superdelegates — 241 to 181, according to the AP survey. But her total is down two in the past two weeks, while Obama's is up 25. Since the primaries started, at least three Clinton superdelegates have switched to Obama, including Rep. David Scott of Georgia, who changed his endorsement after Obama won 80 percent of the primary vote in Scott's district. At least two other Clinton backers have switched to undecided.

None of Obama's have publicly strayed, according to the AP tally.

There are nearly 800 Democratic superdelegates, making them an important force in a nomination race as close as this one. Both campaigns are furiously lobbying them.

"Holy buckets!" exclaimed Audra Ostergard of Nebraska. "Michelle Obama and I are playing phone tag."

Billi Gosh, a Vermont superdelegate who backs Clinton, got a phone call from the candidate herself this week.

"As superdelegates, we have the opportunity to change our mind, so she's just connecting with me," Gosh said. "I couldn't believe she was able to fit in calls like that to her incredibly busy schedule."

In Utah, two Clinton superdelegates said they continue to support the New York senator — for now.

"We'll see what happens," said Karen Hale. Likewise, fellow superdelegate Helen Langan said, "We'll see."

Other supporters are more steadfast.

"She's still in the race, isn't she? So I'm still supporting her," said Belinda Biafore, a superdelegate from West Virginia.
Obama has piled up the most victories in primaries and caucuses, giving him the overall lead in delegates, 1,362 to 1,266.5. Clinton's half delegate came from the global primary sponsored by the Democrats Abroad.

It will take 2,025 delegates to secure the nomination at this summer's national convention in Denver. If Clinton and Obama continue to split delegates in elections, neither will reach the mark without support from the superdelegates.
That has the campaigns fighting over the proper role for superdelegates, who can support any candidate they want. Obama argues it would be unfair for them to go against the outcome of the primaries and caucuses.

"I think it is important, given how hard Senator Clinton and I have been working, that these primaries and caucuses count for something," Obama said during Thursday night's debate in Austin, Texas.

Clinton argues that superdelegates should exercise independent judgment.

"These are the rules that are followed, and you know, I think that it will sort itself out," she said during the debate. "We will have a nominee, and we will have a unified Democratic Party, and we will go on to victory in November."

Behind the scenes, things can get sticky.

David Cicilline, the mayor of Providence, R.I., indicated this week that his support for Clinton might be wavering after — he contended — members of her campaign urged him to cave to the demands of a local firefighters union ahead of her weekend appearance there. The firefighters, in a long-running contract dispute with Cicilline, have said they would disrupt any Clinton event the mayor attends. A Clinton spokeswoman said the campaign would never interfere in the mayor's city decisions.

Obama has been helped by recent endorsements from several labor unions, including the Teamsters on Wednesday.

"He's our guy," said Sonny Nardi, an Ohio superdelegate and the president of Teamsters Local 416 in Cleveland.

The Democratic Party has named about 720 of its 795 superdelegates. The remainder will be chosen at state party conventions in the spring. AP reporters have interviewed 95 percent of the named delegates, with the most recent round of interviews taking place this week.

The superdelegates make up about a fifth of the overall delegates. As Democratic senators, both Clinton and Obama are superdelegates.
So is Cincinnati Mayor Mark Mallory, which is one reason his phone rings often.

He is a black mayor, and Obama has been winning about 90 percent of black votes. His state has a March 4 primary with 141 delegates at stake. The Democratic governor, Ted Strickland, is stumping hard for Clinton — and perhaps a spot on the national ticket.

A phone call from former President Clinton interrupted Mallory's dinner on a recent Saturday.

"I continue to get calls from mayors, congresspeople, governors, urging me one way or another," said Mallory, who is still mulling his decision. "The celebrities will be next. I guess Oprah will call me."

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...EMPLATE=DEFAULT
syracus ist offline   Mit Zitat antworten
Für Inhalt und Rechtmäßigkeit dieses Beitrags trägt der Verfasser syracus die alleinige Verantwortung. (s. Haftungshinweis)
Alt 24.02.2008, 11:19   #109
syracus
*****
 
Benutzerbild von syracus
 
Registrierungsdatum: Jan 2002
Beiträge: 31.109
Standard

February 24, 2008

The Audacity of Hopelessness

By FRANK RICH

WHEN people one day look back at the remarkable implosion of the Hillary Clinton campaign, they may notice that it both began and ended in the long dark shadow of Iraq.

It’s not just that her candidacy’s central premise — the priceless value of “experience” — was fatally poisoned from the start by her still ill-explained vote to authorize the fiasco. Senator Clinton then compounded that 2002 misjudgment by pursuing a 2008 campaign strategy that uncannily mimicked the disastrous Bush Iraq war plan. After promising a cakewalk to the nomination — “It will be me,” Mrs. Clinton told Katie Couric in November — she was routed by an insurgency.

The Clinton camp was certain that its moneyed arsenal of political shock-and-awe would take out Barack Hussein Obama in a flash. The race would “be over by Feb. 5,” Mrs. Clinton assured George Stephanopoulos just before New Year’s. But once the Obama forces outwitted her, leaving her mission unaccomplished on Super Tuesday, there was no contingency plan. She had neither the boots on the ground nor the money to recoup.

That’s why she has been losing battle after battle by double digits in every corner of the country ever since. And no matter how much bad stuff happened, she kept to the Bush playbook, stubbornly clinging to her own Rumsfeld, her chief strategist, Mark Penn. Like his prototype, Mr. Penn is bigger on loyalty and arrogance than strategic brilliance. But he’s actually not even all that loyal. Mr. Penn, whose operation has billed several million dollars in fees to the Clinton campaign so far, has never given up his day job as chief executive of the public relations behemoth Burson-Marsteller. His top client there, Microsoft, is simultaneously engaged in a demanding campaign of its own to acquire Yahoo.

Clinton fans don’t see their standard-bearer’s troubles this way. In their view, their highly substantive candidate was unfairly undone by a lightweight showboat who got a free ride from an often misogynist press and from naïve young people who lap up messianic language as if it were Jim Jones’s Kool-Aid. Or as Mrs. Clinton frames it, Senator Obama is all about empty words while she is all about action and hard work.

But it’s the Clinton strategists, not the Obama voters, who drank the Kool-Aid. The Obama campaign is not a vaporous cult; it’s a lean and mean political machine that gets the job done. The Clinton camp has been the slacker in this race, more words than action, and its candidate’s message, for all its purported high-mindedness, was and is self-immolating.

The gap in hard work between the two campaigns was clear well before Feb. 5. Mrs. Clinton threw as much as $25 million at the Iowa caucuses without ever matching Mr. Obama’s organizational strength. In South Carolina, where last fall she was up 20 percentage points in the polls, she relied on top-down endorsements and the patina of inevitability, while the Obama campaign built a landslide-winning organization from scratch at the grass roots. In Kansas, three paid Obama organizers had the field to themselves for three months; ultimately Obama staff members outnumbered Clinton staff members there 18 to 3.

In the last battleground, Wisconsin, the Clinton campaign was six days behind Mr. Obama in putting up ads and had only four campaign offices to his 11. Even as Mrs. Clinton clings to her latest firewall — the March 4 contests — she is still being outhustled. Last week she told reporters that she “had no idea” that the Texas primary system was “so bizarre” (it’s a primary-caucus hybrid), adding that she had “people trying to understand it as we speak.” Perhaps her people can borrow the road map from Obama’s people. In Vermont, another March 4 contest, The Burlington Free Press reported that there were four Obama offices and no Clinton offices as of five days ago. For what will no doubt be the next firewall after March 4, Pennsylvania on April 22, the Clinton campaign is sufficiently disorganized that it couldn’t file a complete slate of delegates by even an extended ballot deadline.

This is the candidate who keeps telling us she’s so competent that she’ll be ready to govern from Day 1. Mrs. Clinton may be right that Mr. Obama has a thin résumé, but her disheveled campaign keeps reminding us that the biggest item on her thicker résumé is the health care task force that was as botched as her presidential bid.

Given that Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama offer marginally different policy prescriptions — laid out in voluminous detail by both, by the way, on their Web sites — it’s not clear what her added-value message is. The “experience” mantra has been compromised not only by her failure on the signal issue of Iraq but also by the deadening lingua franca of her particular experience, Washingtonese. No matter what the problem, she keeps rolling out another commission to solve it: a commission for infrastructure, a Financial Product Safety Commission, a Corporate Subsidy Commission, a Katrina/Rita Commission and, to deal with drought, a water summit.

As for countering what she sees as the empty Obama brand of hope, she offers only a chilly void: Abandon hope all ye who enter here. This must be the first presidential candidate in history to devote so much energy to preaching against optimism, against inspiring language and — talk about bizarre — against democracy itself. No sooner does Mrs. Clinton lose a state than her campaign belittles its voters as unrepresentative of the country.

Bill Clinton knocked states that hold caucuses instead of primaries because “they disproportionately favor upper-income voters” who “don’t really need a president but feel like they need a change.” After the Potomac primary wipeout, Mr. Penn declared that Mr. Obama hadn’t won in “any of the significant states” outside of his home state of Illinois. This might come as news to Virginia, Maryland, Washington and Iowa, among the other insignificant sites of Obama victories. The blogger Markos Moulitsas Zúniga has hilariously labeled this Penn spin the “insult 40 states” strategy.

The insults continued on Tuesday night when a surrogate preceding Mrs. Clinton onstage at an Ohio rally, Tom Buffenbarger of the machinists’ union, derided Obama supporters as “latte-drinking, Prius-driving, Birkenstock-wearing, trust-fund babies.” Even as he ranted, exit polls in Wisconsin were showing that Mr. Obama had in fact won that day among voters with the least education and the lowest incomes. Less than 24 hours later, Mr. Obama received the endorsement of the latte-drinking Teamsters.

If the press were as prejudiced against Mrs. Clinton as her campaign constantly whines, debate moderators would have pushed for the Clinton tax returns and the full list of Clinton foundation donors to be made public with the same vigor it devoted to Mr. Obama’s “plagiarism.” And it would have showered her with the same ridicule that Rudy Giuliani received in his endgame. With 11 straight losses in nominating contests, Mrs. Clinton has now nearly doubled the Giuliani losing streak (six) by the time he reached his Florida graveyard. But we gamely pay lip service to the illusion that she can erect one more firewall.

The other persistent gripe among some Clinton supporters is that a hard-working older woman has been unjustly usurped by a cool young guy intrinsically favored by a sexist culture. Slate posted a devilish video mash-up of the classic 1999 movie “Election”: Mrs. Clinton is reduced to a stand-in for Tracy Flick, the diligent candidate for high school president played by Reese Witherspoon, and Mr. Obama is implicitly cast as the mindless jock who upsets her by dint of his sheer, unearned popularity.

There is undoubtedly some truth to this, however demeaning it may be to both candidates, but in reality, the more consequential ur-text for the Clinton 2008 campaign may be another Hollywood classic, the Katharine Hepburn-Spencer Tracy “Pat and Mike” of 1952. In that movie, the proto-feminist Hepburn plays a professional athlete who loses a tennis or golf championship every time her self-regarding fiancé turns up in the crowd, pulling her focus and undermining her confidence with his grandstanding presence.

In the 2008 real-life remake of “Pat and Mike,” it’s not the fiancé, of course, but the husband who has sabotaged the heroine. The single biggest factor in Hillary Clinton’s collapse is less sexism in general than one man in particular — the man who began the campaign as her biggest political asset. The moment Bill Clinton started trash-talking about Mr. Obama and raising the specter of a co-presidency, even to the point of giving his own televised speech ahead of his wife’s on the night she lost South Carolina, her candidacy started spiraling downward.

What’s next? Despite Mrs. Clinton’s valedictory tone at Thursday’s debate, there remains the fear in some quarters that whether through sleights of hand involving superdelegates or bogus delegates from Michigan or Florida, the Clintons might yet game or even steal the nomination. I’m starting to wonder. An operation that has waged political war as incompetently as the Bush administration waged war in Iraq is unlikely to suddenly become smart enough to pull off that duplicitous a “victory.” Besides, after spending $1,200 on Dunkin’ Donuts in January alone, this campaign simply may not have the cash on hand to mount a surge.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/24/o...ion&oref=slogin
syracus ist offline   Mit Zitat antworten
Für Inhalt und Rechtmäßigkeit dieses Beitrags trägt der Verfasser syracus die alleinige Verantwortung. (s. Haftungshinweis)
Alt 24.02.2008, 19:19   #110
syracus
*****
 
Benutzerbild von syracus
 
Registrierungsdatum: Jan 2002
Beiträge: 31.109
Standard

Boom Nachschlag ist angesagt

February 23, 2008

Files and McCain Letter Show Effort to Keep Loophole

By STEPHEN LABATON
The New York Times

WASHINGTON — In late 1998, Senator John McCain sent an unusually blunt letter to the head of the Federal Communications Commission, warning that he would try to overhaul the agency if it closed a broadcast ownership loophole.

The letter, and two later ones signed by Mr. McCain, then chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, urged the commission to abandon plans to close a loophole vitally important to Glencairn Ltd., a client of Vicki Iseman, a lobbyist. The provision enabled one of the nation’s largest broadcasting companies, Sinclair, to use a marketing agreement with Glencairn, a far smaller broadcaster, to get around a restriction barring single ownership of two television stations in the same city.

At a news conference on Thursday, Mr. McCain denounced an article in The New York Times that described concerns by top advisers a decade ago about his ties to Ms. Iseman, a partner at the firm Alcalde & Fay. He said he never had any discussions with his advisers about Ms. Iseman and never did any favors for any lobbyist.

One of the McCain campaign’s statements about his dealings with Ms. Iseman was challenged by news accounts on Friday. In discussing letters he wrote regulators about a deal involving another of Ms. Iseman’s clients, Lowell W. Paxson, the campaign had said the senator had never spoken to her or anyone from the company. But Mr. McCain acknowledged in a 2002 deposition that he had sent the letters after meeting with Mr. Paxson.

On Glencairn, the campaign said Mr. McCain’s efforts to retain the loophole were not done at Ms. Iseman’s request. It said Mr. McCain was merely directing the commission to “not act in a manner contradictory to Congressional intent.” Mr. McCain wrote in the letters that a 1996 law, the telecommunications act, required the loophole; a legal opinion by the staff of the commission took the opposite view.

A review of the record, including agency records now at the National Archives and interviews with participants, shows that Mr. McCain, Republican of Arizona, played a significant role in killing the plan to eliminate the loophole. His actions followed requests by Ms. Iseman and lobbyists at other broadcasting companies, according to lobbying records and Congressional aides.

Over the years, Mr. McCain has taken varying positions on broadcast ownership issues. He has supported the relaxation of the ownership rules, but he has also been sharply critical of rules that permit too much concentration of ownership in a single market.

By November 1998, the F.C.C. was planning to strike down broadcasting marketing agreements, a potentially ruinous development for Glencairn. But after receiving Mr. McCain’s Dec. 1 letter, it put off consideration of the issue.

“To the extent the F.C.C. shows itself incapable of following Congressional intent,” the letter said, “these issues will become part of our overall review of the commission’s functions and structure during the next session of Congress.”

The letter, sent from Mr. McCain’s office by his staff at the commerce committee, was also signed by Senator Conrad Burns, Republican of Montana and chairman of a communications subcommittee. It was uncharacteristic of Mr. McCain, according to a review of dozens of letters sent by him to the commission during the same period.

It was the only letter that contained a suggestion that a failure to act would result in the possible overhaul of the agency.

The letter said that “as a leading participant in the passage of the 1996 Act, I have a very clear understanding” of the law’s intent and why it required the ownership loophole to be preserved. Mr. McCain was one of five senators — and the only Republican — to vote against the act. He has also been an outspoken critic of it.

While other companies also complained to Congress about the plan to close the loophole, the issue was particularly important to Sinclair because it had more marketing agreements than any in the nation. For its part, Glencairn appeared to have been getting little support in Congress until it retained Ms. Iseman in 1998.

Edwin Edwards, who was the president of the company at the time, said in a recent interview that after retaining Ms. Iseman, he was able to get heard by Mr. McCain.

“We were pounding the pavement in Washington,” Mr. Edwards said. “We recruited help from as many people as we could. We knocked on every door just trying to get support.”

The campaign said that Mr. McCain never spoke with Ms. Iseman about the issue, but that she did speak to his staff about it. Mr. Edwards and Mr. McCain met on July 20, 1999, according to the campaign.

After the commission postponed consideration of the issue, Mr. McCain signed a second letter to the agency on Dec. 7, 1998, in support of local marketing agreements, and a third one on Feb. 11, 1999. The third letter was signed by four other lawmakers. Ultimately, the F.C.C. loosened the rules to permit a company to own two television stations in some markets.

The letters Mr. McCain wrote to the commission in the Paxson matter were sent in late 1999 and prompted the agency’s chairman to chastise him for interfering in a licensing matter. The incident embarrassed Mr. McCain, then making his first presidential run, because Mr. Paxson was a campaign contributor and fund-raiser.

While the campaign said Thursday that Mr. McCain never spoke to anyone from Paxson or Ms. Iseman’s lobbying firm before sending those letters to the commission, an article posted Friday on Newsweek’s Web site said Mr. McCain had previously acknowledged first speaking to Mr. Paxson. Recounting that conversation, Mr. McCain testified in the deposition, “I said I would be glad to write a letter asking them to act.”

The Washington Post reported Friday on its Web site that Mr. Paxson acknowledged in an interview that he had met with Mr. McCain to discuss the letters before they were sent and that Ms. Iseman was probably at the meeting.

In three interviews with The Times since December, Mr. Paxson has provided varying accounts about the letters. In the first, he said Ms. Iseman was involved in the drafting of them and had lobbied Mr. McCain. He later said he could not recall who had been involved.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/23/u...Fe9huoAfs1EbDWg
syracus ist offline   Mit Zitat antworten
Für Inhalt und Rechtmäßigkeit dieses Beitrags trägt der Verfasser syracus die alleinige Verantwortung. (s. Haftungshinweis)
Alt 24.02.2008, 23:35   #111
lunar
veränderlich
 
Benutzerbild von lunar
 
Registrierungsdatum: Dec 2005
Beiträge: 39.050
Standard

Nader Announces New Bid for White House


Feb 24, 12:35 PM (ET)

By HOPE YEN
(AP) Ralph Nader, seen during a news conference in this July 14, 2007, in Reading, Pa., announced that...

WASHINGTON (AP) - Ralph Nader said Sunday he will run for president as a third-party candidate, criticizing the top White House contenders as too close to big business and pledging to repeat a bid that will "shift the power from the few to the many."

Nader, 73, said most people are disenchanted with the Democratic and Republican parties due to a prolonged Iraq war and a shaky economy. The consumer advocate also blamed tax and other corporate-friendly policies under the Bush administration that he said have left many lower- and middle-class people in debt.

"You take that framework of people feeling locked out, shut out, marginalized and disrespected," he said. "You go from Iraq, to Palestine to Israel, from Enron to Wall Street, from Katrina to the bumbling of the Bush administration, to the complicity of the Democrats in not stopping him on the war, stopping him on the tax cuts."

"In that context, I have decided to run for president," Nader told NBC's "Meet the Press......

...... Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, speaking shortly before Nader's announcement, said Nader's past runs have shown that he usually pulls votes from the Democrat. "So naturally, Republicans would welcome his entry into the race," the former Arkansas governor said on CNN.......

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080224/D8V0QN100.html


muss das wirklich sein - reicht es nicht, dss er das letzte mal Bush auf den Thron geholfen hat

__________________
***************http://www.poodwaddle.com/worldclock.swf ***************
lunar ist offline   Mit Zitat antworten
Für Inhalt und Rechtmäßigkeit dieses Beitrags trägt der Verfasser lunar die alleinige Verantwortung. (s. Haftungshinweis)
Alt 25.02.2008, 16:29   #112
lunar
veränderlich
 
Benutzerbild von lunar
 
Registrierungsdatum: Dec 2005
Beiträge: 39.050
Standard

http://www.drudgereportarchives.com...348_flashoa.htm

wie billig soll's denn noch werden

__________________
***************http://www.poodwaddle.com/worldclock.swf ***************
lunar ist offline   Mit Zitat antworten
Für Inhalt und Rechtmäßigkeit dieses Beitrags trägt der Verfasser lunar die alleinige Verantwortung. (s. Haftungshinweis)
Alt 25.02.2008, 17:15   #113
syracus
*****
 
Benutzerbild von syracus
 
Registrierungsdatum: Jan 2002
Beiträge: 31.109
Standard

Pure Verzweiflung, anders kann man das gar nicht mehr nennen . Mochte ja Bill gut in den 90er-Jahren, leider ist der schöne Lack mittlerweile mehr als ab. Und mit einem etwas besseren Team würde Hillary bemerken dass all die Angriffe unter der Gürtellinie über die letzten paar Wochen einzig einem geschadet haben jeweils in den folgenden Vorwahlen: ihr selbst. Anders hätte sie South Carolina und vorallem Wisconsin nicht bzw. weitaus nicht so deutlich verloren. Und in Texas droht ihr wohl ein weiteres Desaster .
syracus ist offline   Mit Zitat antworten
Für Inhalt und Rechtmäßigkeit dieses Beitrags trägt der Verfasser syracus die alleinige Verantwortung. (s. Haftungshinweis)
Alt 25.02.2008, 18:33   #114
syracus
*****
 
Benutzerbild von syracus
 
Registrierungsdatum: Jan 2002
Beiträge: 31.109
Standard

Obama Camp Hits Hillary Over Drudge Story

By Greg Sargent - February 25, 2008, 9:50AM

Matt Drudge is leading with a story saying that Clinton staffers "circulated" a photo of Obama in a turban and Somali village elder garb over the weekend.

Drudge's story doesn't report who the photo was "circulated" to, who provided it to him, what level of Clinton "staffer" circulated it, or how widely it was circulated.

We've contacted the Hillary campaign and they've not said anything about it yet.

The Obama campaign is already out with a statement from campaign manager David Plouffe condemning the Hillary campaign and saying it's part of a "disturbing pattern" from Camp Hillary:

“On the very day that Senator Clinton is giving a speech about restoring respect for America in the world, her campaign has engaged in the most shameful, offensive fear-mongering we’ve seen from either party in this election. This is part of a disturbing pattern that led her county chairs to resign in Iowa, her campaign chairman to resign in New Hampshire, and it’s exactly the kind of divisive politics that turns away Americans of all parties and diminishes respect for America in the world."

It's unclear whether the Obama camp has any evidence or info as to what happened beyond what appeared on Drudge.

More in a bit.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpo...lary_over_d.php
syracus ist offline   Mit Zitat antworten
Für Inhalt und Rechtmäßigkeit dieses Beitrags trägt der Verfasser syracus die alleinige Verantwortung. (s. Haftungshinweis)
Alt 25.02.2008, 19:36   #115
syracus
*****
 
Benutzerbild von syracus
 
Registrierungsdatum: Jan 2002
Beiträge: 31.109
Standard

Zitat:
last1standing (1000+ posts) Mon Feb-25-08 12:44 PM
Original message

I can't believe I've finally decided between Clinton and Obama.

I supported Edwards and since he dropped out of the race, I've been trying to find something that could get me to support one of the remaining candidates over the other. Both have good qualities and both have bad. For me they're both far too "moderate" and have not really been addressing the most important issues we face as a nation in any substantive way. However, after the non-denial by the Clinton team regarding the picture of Obama in Somali garb and reports that they are smearing Obama with the Jewish community, I have to come down on the side of Obama for the election.

I'm not so very starry eyed that I think that any negative campaigning is evil. Nor do I think that Obama has played a clean game. Personally, I think we need someone who can throw some effective dirt if we're to stand any chance in the general election. My problem with the Clinton team's methods, though, is that they are scorched earth tactics. Clinton is making sure that if she does not win the nomination, Obama will never stand a chance in November. I think too much of Clinton to believe this is for spite, but I do believe its in order to ensure herself another run in 2012 instead of 2016 when she may feel she will be too old. Unfortunately, that will mean another four years under a repub and it will be the fault of Clinton when this happens. I can't support this so my vote goes to Obama. The devastation of our economy under four (or eight) more years of "trickle-down" economics, free-trade policies and deregulation is unacceptable to me. Therefore, I will never support Clinton in any nomination process again. The health of our nation is far more important than the future of her political career.

And when all the flamers come in to practice their own miniature versions of scorched earth tactics I won't respond, only click the "ignore" button.

http://www.democraticunderground.co...mesg_id=4760163

Nur eine von vielen Meinungen dazu da drüben, die Amerikaner nennen den Effekt "Backfire"...
syracus ist offline   Mit Zitat antworten
Für Inhalt und Rechtmäßigkeit dieses Beitrags trägt der Verfasser syracus die alleinige Verantwortung. (s. Haftungshinweis)
Alt 25.02.2008, 20:01   #116
lunar
veränderlich
 
Benutzerbild von lunar
 
Registrierungsdatum: Dec 2005
Beiträge: 39.050
Standard

...was schreiben sie denn zu Nader ich finde es einfach eine Frechheit - man sollte das nicht zulassen
__________________
***************http://www.poodwaddle.com/worldclock.swf ***************
lunar ist offline   Mit Zitat antworten
Für Inhalt und Rechtmäßigkeit dieses Beitrags trägt der Verfasser lunar die alleinige Verantwortung. (s. Haftungshinweis)
Alt 25.02.2008, 20:41   #117
syracus
*****
 
Benutzerbild von syracus
 
Registrierungsdatum: Jan 2002
Beiträge: 31.109
Standard

Nader ist auf DU seit 2000 ein "no go"..... "Blut an den Händen"
syracus ist offline   Mit Zitat antworten
Für Inhalt und Rechtmäßigkeit dieses Beitrags trägt der Verfasser syracus die alleinige Verantwortung. (s. Haftungshinweis)
Alt 25.02.2008, 22:04   #118
syracus
*****
 
Benutzerbild von syracus
 
Registrierungsdatum: Jan 2002
Beiträge: 31.109
Standard

Clinton Blasts Obama's Foreign Policy Readiness

Democratic Contender Implies Obama Is Impulsive, Indecisive Like Bush


By JAKE TAPPER and ELOISE HARPER
Feb. 25, 2008 —

Hoping to regain some momentum from perhaps her strongest political asset, her perceived experience, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., delivered a foreign policy speech in Washington, D.C., this afternoon that assailed rival Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., as unwise, inexperienced, impulsive and indecisive  in short, a risk to the nation.

Clinton said that Obama "wavers from seeming to believe that mediation and meetings without preconditions can solve some of the world's most intractable problems to advocating rash unilateral military action without cooperation among allies in the most sensitive region of the world."

With a half-dozen retired generals standing behind her, Clinton said she was the only candidate who could restore a U.S. foreign policy that had the right combination of diplomacy and military might.

A sign on the podium proclaimed her election "Strengthening America."

Clinton Links Obama & Bush Experience

To a packed auditorium at George Washington University, Clinton seemed to imply Obama's lack of foreign policy credentials might mean he'd be a Democratic version of President Bush.

"We've seen the tragic result of having a president who had neither the experience nor the wisdom to manage our foreign policy and safeguard our national security," she said. "We can't let that happen again."

Clinton also mocked Obama by implication suggesting he would need a manual to understand the complexities of foreign diplomacy.

"The American people don't have to guess whether I understand the issues or whether I would need a foreign policy instruction manual to guide me through a crisis, or whether I'd have to rely on advisers to introduce me to global affairs," she said.

Mocking Obama

She directly criticized two facets of Obama's foreign policy proposals from the last year.

On Obama's suggestion he would meet with the leaders of nations hostile to the United States, she said, "We simply cannot legitimize rogue regimes or weaken American prestige by impulsively agreeing to presidential level talks that have no preconditions. It may sound good & but it doesn't meet the real world test of foreign policy."

She also went after Obama as a reckless poseur for a speech he made last year where he said that with actionable intelligence he would be willing to send U.S. troops into Pakistan to take out high-level al Qaeda targets, with or without permission of the government of Pakistan.

"One thing the American people can be sure of," she said, "I will not broadcast threats of unilateral military action against a country like Pakistan just to demonstrate that I'm tough enough for the job. We have to change our tone and change our course."

With eight days until the critical March 4 primaries in Texas and Ohio, Clinton's tone today was measured and somber, even presidential  a contrast to the inconsistent tones marking her campaign appearances as of late.

At a debate Thursday she was effusive and warm toward Obama.

On Saturday, upset about two misleading Obama mailers she said, "Shame on you, Barack Obama!" On Sunday in Rhode Island she mocked Obama's lofty rhetoric with dismissive sarcasm.

After being criticized this morning as "divisive" by the Obama campaign for allegations that her staffers were circulating a photograph of Obama dressed in African garb during a trip to that continent in 2006, Clinton announced plans to meet this afternoon with a convention of members of a predominantly black sorority in Washington, D.C.

She will head to Ohio, Tuesday morning.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote...=4340399&page=1
syracus ist offline   Mit Zitat antworten
Für Inhalt und Rechtmäßigkeit dieses Beitrags trägt der Verfasser syracus die alleinige Verantwortung. (s. Haftungshinweis)
Alt 25.02.2008, 22:12   #119
syracus
*****
 
Benutzerbild von syracus
 
Registrierungsdatum: Jan 2002
Beiträge: 31.109
Lachen Fotos auf DU

syracus ist offline   Mit Zitat antworten
Für Inhalt und Rechtmäßigkeit dieses Beitrags trägt der Verfasser syracus die alleinige Verantwortung. (s. Haftungshinweis)
Alt 26.02.2008, 17:01   #120
syracus
*****
 
Benutzerbild von syracus
 
Registrierungsdatum: Jan 2002
Beiträge: 31.109
Standard

In den 5 aktuellsten Umfragen hat Obama Clinton in Texas überholt, in den neusten 2 Umfragen hat er einen zweistelligen Vorsprung. Vordergründig kämpft man noch um die letzte kleine Chance, im Hintergrund laufen wohl die Vorbereitungen für was ganz anderes........

February 24, 2008

Somber Clinton Soldiers On as the Horizon Darkens

By PATRICK HEALY
To her longtime friends, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton sounds unusually philosophical on the phone these days. She rarely uses phrases like “when I’m president” anymore. Somber at times, determined at others, she talks to aides and confidants about the importance of focusing on a good day’s work. No drapes are being measured in her mind’s eye, they say.

And Mrs. Clinton has begun thanking some of her major supporters for helping her run for the Democratic presidential nomination.

“When this is all over, I’m really looking forward to seeing you,” she told one of those supporters by phone the other day.

Mrs. Clinton has not given up, in her head or her heart, her quest to return to the White House, advisers say. But as resolute as she is, she no longer exudes the supreme confidence that was her trademark before the first defeat, in Iowa in January. And then there were more humbling blows, aides say: replacing her campaign manager on Feb. 10, then losing the Wisconsin primary and her hold on the women’s vote there last Tuesday.

If she is not temperamentally suited to reckon with the possibility of losing quite yet, advisers say, she is also a cold, hard realist about politics — at some point, she is known to say, someone will win and someone will not.

“She has a real military discipline that, now that times are tough, has really kicked into gear,” said Judith Hope, a friend and informal adviser to Mrs. Clinton, and a former chairwoman of the New York State Democratic Party. “When she’s on the road and someone has a negative news story, she says, ‘I don’t want to hear it; I don’t need to hear it.’ I think she wants to protect herself from that and stay focused.

“That said, she knows that there will be an end,” Ms. Hope said. “She is a very smart woman.”

Over take-out meals and late-night drinks, some regrets and recriminations have set in, and top aides have begun to face up to the campaign’s possible end after the Texas and Ohio primaries on March 4. Engaging in hindsight, several advisers have now concluded that they were not smart to use former President Bill Clinton as much as they did, that “his presence, aura and legacy caused national fatigue with the Clintons,” in the words of one senior adviser who spoke on condition of anonymity to assess the campaign candidly.

The campaign’s chief strategist, Mark Penn, and its communications director, Howard Wolfson, have expressed frustration with the difficulty of “running against a phenomenon” in Senator Barack Obama; their attacks have not stopped Mr. Obama from winning the last 11 contests. Some aides said Mr. Penn and the former campaign manager, Patti Solis Doyle, had conceived and executed a terribly flawed campaign, something Ms. Solis Doyle disputes. Both she and Mr. Penn have been especially criticized as not planning a political strategy to compete in the primaries after Feb. 5.

“I do believe we built a good organization — 700 people, $100 million, nationwide offices, and a strong base of support and endorsements that helped us win big states like California and New Jersey,” Ms. Solis Doyle said in an interview. “Every time people have written us off, like after Iowa, we’ve come back.”

There is a widespread feeling among donors and some advisers, though, that a comeback this time may be improbable. Her advisers said internal polls showed a very tough race to win the Texas primary — a contest that no less than Mr. Clinton has said is a “must win.” And while advisers are drawing some hope from Mrs. Clinton’s indefatigable nature, some are burning out.

Morale is low. After 13 months of dawn-to-dark seven-day weeks, the staff is exhausted. Some have taken to going home early — 9 p.m. — turning off their BlackBerrys, and polishing off bottles of wine, several senior staff members said.

Some advisers have been heard yelling at close friends and colleagues. In a much-reported incident, Mr. Penn and the campaign advertising chief, Mandy Grunwald, had a screaming match over strategy recently that prompted another senior aide, Guy Cecil, to leave the room. “I have work to do — you’re acting like kids,” Mr. Cecil said, according to three people in the room.

Others have taken several days off, despite it being crunch time. Some have grown depressed, be it over Mr. Obama’s momentum, the attacks on the campaign’s management from outside critics or their view that the news media has been much rougher on Mrs. Clinton than on Mr. Obama.

And some of her major fund-raisers have begun playing down their roles, asking reporters to refer to them simply as “donors,” to try to rein in their image as unfailingly loyal to the Clintons.

And yet, advisers say, the mood was even grimmer in early February, when the campaign was running out of money and the possibility of losing some major Feb. 5 primaries, like California and New Jersey, was unsettling Mrs. Clinton, of New York, and her aides. (She ended up winning those states.) The turbulence this time, some advisers say, has turned into greater focus and determination toward clear targets: the Ohio and Texas primaries.

In interviews with 15 aides and advisers to Mrs. Clinton, not a single one expressed any regrets that they were not working for Mr. Obama. Indeed, some aides said they were baffled that a candidate who had been in the United States Senate for only three years and was a state lawmaker in Illinois before that was now outpacing a seasoned figure like Mrs. Clinton. And to a person, these aides and advisers praised Mrs. Clinton and said that she had been a better candidate than her campaign strategy and operation reflected.

“Whatever frustrations she may have, or that exist with the campaign and the missteps, her commitment to our country and her reasons for running are her guiding force now,” said Robert Zimmerman, a Democratic national committeeman from New York and a major fund-raiser for the campaign.

“That doesn’t mean she’s too disciplined or without feeling — it means just the opposite,” Mr. Zimmerman said. “It means her beliefs speak to real faith and dedication.”

As part of that focus, Mrs. Clinton has avoided giving pep talks to her aides, because a pep talk might suggest that the campaign is heading in an irretrievable direction. Instead, as she always has, she talks to her aides on the trail and at headquarters about the tasks at hand, pursuing them in checklist fashion —impressing some with her hardiness, while suggesting a joyless or workmanlike feel to others.

“We talked recently and she sounded totally resolute, totally in it until the end, and in typical style she just isn’t getting into regrets,” said Susan Thomases, an old friend of Mrs. Clinton and a former aide to Mr. Clinton. “Hillary is not a fatalistic person — this is no woe-is-me woman.”

Mrs. Clinton has, though, increasingly sought to keep her fate in perspective. In her debate in Texas on Thursday with Mr. Obama, she delivered what some viewers saw as a valedictory — but what she said was a simple expression from the heart — when she spoke warmly about the race and her rival.

“I am honored to be here with Barack Obama. I am absolutely honored,” she said. “And you know, whatever happens, we’re going to be fine.”

She found herself explaining on Friday that the remark was not meant as some sort of farewell. Yet to some friends, she is in fact acting differently; to others, the situation has become simply heartbreaking. When Mr. Clinton said last week that his wife had to win in Texas and Ohio, it was not only the first public admission by a senior member of her circle that her candidacy was on the line, it was also a moment that deepened the feeling of shock felt by some of her supporters.

“A lot of her friends are just feeling, ‘How could this be happening to her?’ ” said James Carville, a friend of the Clintons and a former strategist to Mr. Clinton. “It’s just hard to understand. She is a very sympathetic person. I hope it turns around for her.”

Through it all, Mrs. Clinton has not retreated into a shell. She asks her aides about their children, spouses and partners. She tries to keep the mood upbeat on the campaign plane, such as recently joking about how Ohio is so diverse that it sometimes feels like five different states. She looks and seems at her happiest after working rope lines and talking to people after round tables, hearing their stories and receiving hugs.

On occasion she has looked backward. The strategy hatched by her advisers, her husband and herself — to run as an incumbent on a strength-and-experience message — was clearly not enough to carry her for 13 months. (It did work well for a time, if polls were any measure.) But mostly she has tried to look forward, and has pointedly not talked to her staff about the notion that she might drop out someday.

“Hillary is incredibly tough — she grew up with two brothers and a strong father in the Midwest, so she knows a challenge,” said Ms. Solis Doyle, the former campaign manager, who has worked for her on and off since 1991 until she was replaced this month. “She has gone through so much, where someone like me would hide under the covers. But she gets up. She works. She tries.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/24/u...agewanted=print


http://www.pollster.com/08-TX-Dem-Pres-Primary.php

In Ohio sieht es für Clinton noch nach einem Sieg aus, allerdings einem knappen Ausgang. Was ihr wenig helfen würde. Wobei, wenn sie Texas verliert, nützt ihr auch ein überragender Sieg in Ohio nix mehr
syracus ist offline   Mit Zitat antworten
Für Inhalt und Rechtmäßigkeit dieses Beitrags trägt der Verfasser syracus die alleinige Verantwortung. (s. Haftungshinweis)
Antwort Gehe zum letzten Beitrag



Themen-Optionen

Gehe zu



Aktuelle Uhrzeit 00:46
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © stock-channel.net