Yuck, I see that the Clinton minions have infested Marty's previous post, quick get the Raid before they pollute this one as well.  

Can you hear their voices receding into the past, even as they scream to be heard, I imagine that's how the Clintons are going to end up, trapped in some house together screaming at one another about who was responsible for it all going so terribly wrong.

Hillary -- "Just remember Willie boy, you needed me, you never would've even made governor without me."

Bill -- "Yeah yeah screw you bitch."

The quintessential dysfunctional relationship, which unfortunately got to play itself out in our government.

Why don't all you paid Clinton hacks crawl back under your rock, because we certainly don't need you, and the truth is we never did. You and your kind are a blight on the Democratic Party, and the sooner you're gone the better it will be for the party and the country.

"Yuck, I see that the Clinton minions have infested Marty's previous post, quick get the Raid before they pollute this one as well. "

Too fucking  late; we are here, and we shall not be moved.

We can be deleted, though.

Well Marty, would you expect anything less than that type of behavior from the dynamic mud-slinging duo?  With the Atlantic Monthly about to publish the internal Clinton campaign memos detailing how they planned on attacking Obama as being "foreign", I'm sure the Clintons have to try and bully Obama into cutting a deal soon before that dirt hits the public and they look even more self-centered.  Maybe Penn figured he'd wind up like so many of those vendors that provided staging and lighting displays at Clinton campaign events only to get stiffed on the bill once payment was due, so he peddled some of the highlights(or lowlights) to The Atlantic to make up for what Clinton still owes him for helping drive her campaign into the mud.

I'm sure a phone call to Mark Rich might possibly be in there as well discussing a VP position in exchange for taking care of all that campaign debt still remaining as a living testament to the Clintons' inability to realize a lost cause when they created one.  There was a letter sent to me awhile back from the Clinton campaign begging for a donation.  I stuffed it full of a stack of those $100 bills from one of our old MONOPOLY board games that we never use any more and sent it back.  Not that I think the Clintons even deserve that much.

"Clinton's majestic entrance could have been designed by Albert Speer and Leni Riefenstal."

Marty, regardless of what you think of the Clintons, the implications in this line are just too vile to even contemplate.  I think we need a moratorium on Hitler or Nazi analogies, especially when it comes to film-making.  In any event, in filming her two oeuvres, Riefenstal actually invented cameras, camera angles, and filming technology and techniques, and created a whole new genre of mythmaking.  Again, whatever one thinks of whoever it was who designed Clinton's entrance, Riefenstal s/he was not.  For God's sake, they used the theme to Rocky, if I am not mistaken; this is the height of hokidom, not some sort of Nordic mythology.

Please, go back to writing about Palestinians - at least the Nazi analogies are apter there ....

Oh please, Marty, Barrack needs every Clinton vote and  undivided Democrats. These jabs at the Clintons do nothing but rip at the scabs from the primary wounds and infuriate her supporters. Really. It's a very delicate tightrope that Barrack is walking -- placate the Clintons without appearing weak.

Your name with others are pointed to by some of her still angry supporters looking for reasons to justify their continued anger. Just go to some of the websites and you'll see. Lay off a little, Marty. PLEASE.

The smartest thing Obama could do would be to make peace with the Clintons and put HRC on the ticket. He's from Chicago; I'm sure he and they can figure out a deal that keeps them in line.

Alternatively, if this is beyond his ken, how the hell would he be able to deal with Hu, Ajad, PutinMobutu et al?

Obama's choice of running mate will have as much to do with his capacity to deal with Achmadinnerjacket, Putin, et al, as his basketball prowess translates focus and energy into economic policy.  That is, not very much.

That said, however, Iraq haunts Obama and the economy haunts McCain, both major strategic problems.  But VP candidates are chosen tactically -- and not only for functional reasons -- rather than strategically.  They need to look ok, win a state, and the candidate needs to trust them to take over, if the unthinkable happens.

Tep: what irony said.  Also, dealing with an enemy is a lot easier than dealing with your "friends".  Trust me, in litigation after litigation and in international negotiations, I got more hits from team members than any of my opponents could land on me.

"Are these feminists mad?"

As mad as those feminists who supported Obama but swore they would vote for more Anton Scalias if Clinton was nominated -- something as I recall you quite approved of.  Because Ginsberg and Breyer have been such closet conservatives, no doubt.  

icarusr said: “Also, dealing with an enemy is a lot easier than dealing with your "friends".  Trust me, in litigation after litigation and in international negotiations, I got more hits from team members than any of my opponents could land on me.”

There he goes again injecting “personal experience” into a discussion about the fitness to be President.

In any case, having difficulties dealing with enemies is a common human problem; not being able to deal with friends is a psychiatric one.

Ironically, it may be a problem that Obama has as his associations with the Reverend Wright and others have shown. This is one more reason to think twice before voting for him.

Comparing Clinton's entrance to Speer and Riefenstal????

Foer, I think someone needs to quietly take the Old Crazy Dude away from the computer, give him a nice comfortable bench with easy access to a bathroom and chain his swollen ankle to the bench and make sure he has lots of puree vegetables to slurp...

Crazy.....

thejauntyboulevardier said:  "Comparing Clinton's entrance to Speer and Riefenstal????"

Of course, it's crazy. But as you know the Clintons are to Peretz what books of chivalry were to good old Don Quijote: they drove him crazy.

However, on most other issues the old Don was pretty sane. Same with Don Peretz.

I'm with those who think that Obama would be well served by making Hillary his V.P.

Somebody once said Peretz isn't serious whe he makes his lunatic posts, that he's just engaged in chain pulling and wanting to get a rise. and doesn't give a shit what people say. I think that's right and he should be read with grains of salt. But his practice of that, if it's so, is blogging in bad faith.

And that's a really bad knock on him.

 basman said: "But his practice of that, if it's so, is blogging in bad faith."

Not when it comes to Hillary, Itzig.  He really does hate her. His over the top comments have been pretty consistently negative and have become more strident over time.

I expect that if Obama looses the election Peretz will go to his maker blaming the Clinton’s for the loss.  

..I expect that if Obama looses the election Peretz will go to his maker blaming the Clinton’s for the loss..

A paradox here is that Hillary, whom Peretz reviles, may be a very good bet to help Obama win the general. The choice would thrill her constituency, electrify the base, totally over shadow any safe choice McCain makes, and add experience, heft and substance to the ticket: something sorely needed by Obama.

Jack how would you vote if Hillary was V.P.?

...Also, dealing with an enemy is a lot easier than dealing with your "friends".  Trust me, in litigation after litigation and in international negotiations, I got more hits from team members than any of my opponents could land on me...

What nest of vipers do you practice in? That has not been my experience nor the experience of any litigator I know. Translated to international relations the implication in these remarks is absurd, respectfully.

It is becoming clearer to me that Mart never wanted Obama to win. He only wanted Clinton to lose because of what he allegedly did to Gore. But, Gore would be totally obbscure if it weren't for Clinton putting him on the ticket in 1992. Gore has zero electability potential. Even with all his 2000 advantages he blew it. It's true that florida may have been stolen, but Gore should have won in a landslide. Sure, he had Nader to contend with. But Bush had Buchanan to contend with.

I would have no problem with Hillary getting the nod either, but it looks like it is off the table since Hillary will be given a speech on the night different than the VP speech. If she would help Obama win, then she should be on the ticket.

"Jack how would you vote if Hillary was V.P.?"

I am not a 100 percent sure yet, wil wait to see whom McCain picks. If McCain picks Romney I am not going to vote for him.

The real question, though, is for whom will Peretz vote if Obama picks Hillary.

That ought to be a lot of fun.

Maybe I'm missing something but doesn't the fact that Bill's speaking just before the VP speaks suggest that the odds of BHO selecting HRC have increased substantially?

If Obama doesn't win over at least 95% of the 18m Hillary voters-- and get them excited enough to vote for him-- he'll be in serious danger of losing. Why isn't the default assumption that he would _choose_ Hillary?

itz and tep,

As you may know, I have been calling for HC to be the VP. Right now, I see this scenario as the only way to avoid a very close - and nerve wracking - November.

Speaking schedules at conventions are not etched in stone.

Jaunty - you've bIeen way ahead of the pack. Yet another way that the newly obsessive TNR.com is not serving its readers well. Then again, there must be a way to make a lot of money on this. Wish I'd put my money where my mouth was last fall, when I said McC would win the GOP nomination.

Actually, here's a good straddle bet: put equal amounts of $ on a) HRC getting the VP nod, in which case Obama wins in the fall, and b) McCain winning in the fall, which is a good bet if HRC does not get the nod.

tep - yeah, you might have been able to recoup similar big bets on Giuliani and  HRC getting the nominations.

Actually, I have a bet down (dinner for 4 at the restaurant of the winner's choice) that HRC will NOT get the veep nod.  tep, would you like to place a similar wager (cash rather than dinner)?

Jack, I'm focused on the straddle. btw, it works only if the odds are long for both of these bets. If my logic's right, that choosing HRC vastly improves Obama's chances, then I'll lose a little on one longshot bet while winning a huge payout on the other longshot.

tep-- why should Hillary be on the ticket? If Obama wins the presidency, why would he want to spend 60% of his time and energy --time that is better spent worrying about the economy and the wars we're in -- stroking the egos of Hillary and Bill CLinton, and trying to keep them in line.

And while you make like them, I'm willing to be that at least 70% of the country is sick to death of them.

General Question: Why is the media giving such weight to Bill Clinton's problems with Obama and warning Obama that he better kiss Bill's ass because he needs him? Why does he need him? What power, exactly, does Bill really have any longer? Isn't the superdelegate swing to Obama during the primaries enough evidence that the Clintons no longer wield the power they once did in the Democratic Party?

I think it's quite clear that Obama has taken complete leadership, proactively and with assertiveness, of the Democratic Party.

scire - I don't see Obama winning without the 18m Hillary votes.

He's in real danger in Michigan, where a Democratic-dominated Detroit city gov't helps make the case for ticket-splitting to Detroit suburbanites.

He'll be in trouble in Colorado, where a ballot initiative targeting  race-based aff action will create an opening with independents (and Dems) who, as in CA and MI, are likely to overwhelmingly favor striking down race-based aff action.

He's going to have trouble in South FL with nat-security Dems who voted against Kerry in 2004, now that Putin has elevated yet another f-p crisis to the fore. (Putin's gambit also gives McCain an opportunity with Americans of East European descent in Cleveland, Milwaukee, Detroit, also central Florida. )

And then there are the untold numbers of Dem and indy voters who will never express publicly their reservations about The One but will split their tickets in november. Obama will need every Hillary voter he can find in FL MI OH WI and CO.

I also heard on fairly reliable information that Exxon is about ready to announce that it intends to develop oil shale deposits in Rifle, CO. This would be a big coup for Mccain in Colorado and take the luster out of Obama as the guy who can best fix the economy. It will become clearer as the campaign goes ahead that Obama's anti-business rhetoric cannot heal our economy.

r-ennis: that's great news.  Now the Rockies will look like the Appalachians in WV, and Joe Sixpack can continue to ride his SUV to the corner store.  Dig up, pollute and burn: the best energy policy since Rockefeller.

Any way, if they already have a lease in Rifle Colorado, then this is not "new offshore drilling", which is what McCain is advocating; it is exploitation of existing leases, which is what the Democrats have been talking about.  So what's your point exactly?

I stand to be corrected on this but, as far as I recall, Obama hasn't been an advocate of race-based aff action.

tep, First of all, she never had "18 million" votes. That was an exaggeration she threw out there and the media began to quote verbatim even after initially refuting it. Secondly, do you seriously believe that 18 million democratic votes are still being withheld from Obama? Most of her supporters are going to vote for Obama anyway. Let's be real here.

Secondly, stop insulting Obama supporters by calling him "The One." His supporters who think that way are either the really really young  idealistic ones, who'd want any candidate they support to have that mystical quality, or the fringe kooks on par with the kooky feminist Hillary supporters who will vote for McCain over Obama even though from a feminist perspective it is simply absurd to do so, just because their feelings are hurt.

I'm voting for Obama because I think he would be the best president. I am not voting for him because I think he's my savior. I'm an athiest: I cringe at such notions. And I'd venture to say a lot of his other supporters do as well.

...Actually, I have a bet down (dinner for 4 at the restaurant of the winner's choice) that HRC will NOT get the veep nod.  tep, would you like to place a similar wager (cash rather than dinner)...

Is this on line wagering: 1. legal; 2. a sure fire way to damnation?

There he goes again:

icarusr said: "Now the Rockies will look like the Appalachians in WV, and Joe Sixpack can continue to ride his SUV to the corner store.  Dig up, pollute and burn: the best energy policy since Rockefeller"

And with which part of West Virginia are you familiar?

And he is full of cliché’s too:  "Joe Sixpack continue to ride his SUV to the corner store."

Golden words of wisdom from an "international litigator,” who has the chutzpah to accuse others of “racism.”

Perhaps Obama could ask Bill Clinton to clear up his affairs before coming to the convention.

Word on the Street has him tied to Belinda Stronach the Canadian Heiress who has had multiple affairs and was close to Clinton in the last few years.

Very similar relationship to John Edwards fling, except she gave money to Bill.

And another Oh By The Way, Belinda Stronach came to the United States for her Breast Cancer Surgery.  Another point missed in Michael Moore's Sicko.

Deal with the Clintons the way they would deal with you.

HC should be on the ticket for the simplest and oldest reason: She will help the top of the ticket win. Nothing more, nothing less. As Vito said, this is business, not personal.

If Obama - or any nominee - uses a different yardstick for VP, then woe to him...

More shining common sense from jaunty b. Well said.

scire - 1) ok, how many votes are we talking about? Enlighten me, seriously. 2) sorry, didn't mean to offend. I'm an atheist too. When Obama goes gushy on religion, I tune out. I think he bears some blame on this, but I see your point and respect your sensitivity on it.

"HC should be on the ticket for the simplest and oldest reason: She will help the top of the ticket win. Nothing more, nothing less. As Vito said, this is business, not personal."

This misses an important point about many Obama supporters. Their support wasn't so much for Obama as it was against Hillary. I am afraid that Marty isn't the only Hillary hater out there who supports Obama.

...Joe Sixpack...

Elitist bullshit trope.

ok basman, "hardworking white Americans" - is that better?

jackson - you really think all those screaming fans in stadiums are there because they hate Hillary? Ok, maybe the ones in Michigan...

jaunty - 1. that's fine if you actually agree that it would help him win. I'm not so sure. I guess that's what jackson is saying. 2. It's not worth it if she gets him offed, or tries to Dick Cheney him, or if Bill does. Even if you think she can help him win, do you think he can't win with anybody else? I don't.

"r-ennis: that's great news.  Now the Rockies will look like the Appalachians in WV, and Joe Sixpack can continue to ride his SUV to the corner store.  Dig up, pollute and burn: the best energy policy since Rockefeller."

Some people have to do more for a living than just bullshit. To you "Joe Sixpack" is a concept, not a reality. No wonder the working man has no confidence in Democrats anymore. They simply do not reflect his interests, so he is easy prey for pro-gun, pro-life, pro-religion rhetoric.

...ok basman, "hardworking white Americans" - is that better?...

You're question, snide and dismissive, betrays the same problem. Where is any respect in the tendency to write swathes of people off insultingly by lumping them together under stereotyping metaphors and rejecting them as though the metaphors were reality? I know plenty of hardworking white Canadians: some like to drink beer and watch sports in bars and don't speak in three syllable words. They are no less intelligent, kind , lawful, creative or moral as a group than anyone else, or any other groups of people,  I know. Don't look down, I suggest, look straight at, and be open to experience. And the last thing you should do is assume any superiority to anybody.

r-ennis: "so he is easy prey for pro-gun, pro-life, pro-religion rhetoric."

Which of us is now patronizing?  

basman: chill. "Joe Sixpack can continue to ride his SUV to the corner store" is obviously an exaggeration and, in any event, makes no comment whatever on Joe's intelligence or political attitude.  I could easily have said John Q Public, both of which, along with a list of other monickers, represent "the average Joe", or "the average man".  I specifically did not use "pick-up truck" or "K car" so as not to be accused of being an elitist - much good that did - and the short hop drive, "to the corner store", is from LA Story (a funny scene where Steve Martin drives to his next door neighbour's house).  No one is assuming any superiority to anyone.

As for the point I was making, empirically, the rise in the price of oil and gas has resulted in a drop in the sales of SUVs - which are a health and not just an environmental menace on the roads - and empirically, this drop in demand for gas-guzzlers is excellent for reducing demand for gas in the US.  If I am not mistaken, there has been a 500 million barrel drop in consumption of oil this year in the US; and if this holds or continues, it will do wonders for the long-term price of oil and gas.  

Any way, it is a truism that you cannot have an energy policy that does not address the demand side - you remember the insulation drive in Canada in the 70s? - and if there is one positive in the increase in the price of crude, it is the recognition that you need to reduce consumption as much as you should be looking to secure new sources of energy - and not just oil - all over the US and Canada.

As to the environmental harm caused by oil shale and oilsands exploitation, please check aerial photos of Fort McMurray; Bladerunner looks like Emerald City by comparison.  This is because anything other than liquid oil has to be mined out through open pit mines; the water consumption to do so is enormous and I am not even if the Colorado river basin would be enough for that.  

r-ennis: "so he is easy prey for pro-gun, pro-life, pro-religion rhetoric."

Which of us is now patronizing?  

That is not patronizing. It is fact. My company, an independent industrial facility in the heartland, employs about 300 blue collar workers. The Dems do not even run a candidate for Congress here.

"As to the environmental harm caused by oil shale and oilsands exploitation, please check aerial photos of Fort McMurray".

Canada owes much of its prosperity to its Fort McMurrays. Aerial photos of wind operaions do not look so great either. Nor do the photos of mining operations required to extract the raw materials to build them. But, that doesn't make me an opponent of wind for power.  

r-ennis: I don't think they are "prey to rhetoric"; that's the patronizing part.  They *are* pro-gun, pro-life and pro-religion (whatever this might mean).  It's a democracy; people are entitled to their views.  If that is what they believe, then that is what they should vote for, and there is no reason Democrats should change their entire political philosophy to appeal to this segment of the population, other than to win power for the sake of winning power, which is cynical in the extreme.

Alberta owes some of their prosperity to Fort McMurray; and the environmental degradation caused by oil-shale and oilsands mining - I mean, long-term degradation - is nothing compared to the visual pollution of wind operations.  Take a drive through the moonscapes of West Virginia (and ask about health statitics) and you'll see what I mean.

basman I was just joking because that was Hillary's phrase and you like her.

I'm sick of the patronizing divisions too, because I love arugala.

ok phoebe: just because you misoverestimate Diana Ross, you're not all bad. I do volunteer poverty gardening: this week we're planting arugala, which I used to think was a variant of a Yiddish cookie.

Arugala can unite us all, as did latte before it. And that Yiddish cookie - is it rug-latch? Those are good too!

I think actually it's  ruggelach. (It goes great with a latte, or even an ice wine, after say an arugala salad or whatever.

Here's one definition I found:  "pastry made with a cream cheese dough and different fillings (as raisins and walnuts and cinnamon or chocolate and walnut and apricot preserves)"

Me, actually, I usually go Pasadena on them--especially the ones laced with chocolate. They move  at the speed of light to what I deceptively refer to as my kind of 32" waist. For example:

These cookies are based on a Mollie Katzen recipe that originally, she called simply "Crescents". They are a version of a traditional Jewish cookie called Ruggelach, usually made with a cream cheese pastry filled with nuts and raisons or jam (Mollie's idea to make them with cottage cheese). When I started making them, I filled them with brown sugar and ground walnuts, and called them nut horns. My younger son, at the age of about one and a half with his mouth full of them, called them nukhorns, and we thought it was cute, and so called them that for a few years. My Dad (and just about every other nominally Jewish person who has ever been handed one) called them Ruggelach, and now in his honor, I have reverted to the Jewish name, too. And in her rewrite of Enchanted Broccoli Forest, Mollie calls them ruggelach, too.)

About half of a 2 lb. bag of brown sugar

1 cup walnuts

2 tsp. cinnamon

1/2 tsp. nutmeg

4 sticks of butter, softened (OK to use the 65/35 margarine butter blend)

1/3 cup of sugar

4 cups of flour

2 cups cottage cheese

Grind the nuts in a food processor until you have a coarse powder with no bits bigger than a match head, stopping before you get to paste. Combine with the sugar and spices and set aside.

Place the butter and sugar in the bowl of an electric mixer, and blend. Add flour, mix, and add cottage cheese, and mix until you have a soft dough. Turn out onto a floured surface, divide into two parts, flatten into disks, and refrigerate for several hours or up to three days.

Preheat oven to 350 degrees. Working with 1/4 the dough (half of a disk), roll out on a floured surface into a large rectangle, about 16 x 18 inches. Spread filling liberally over the dough. Cut it in thirds with a paring knife, making three rectangles, and then cut these into triangles in a zigzag pattern. Roll up like a croissant, and place on an ungreased baking sheet. Bake for about 15 minutes until browned. Remove from sheet quickly (be careful of melting sugar drips) -- it's OK to dump the cookies untidily on a rack, then neaten them later. Makes about 10 dozen small cookies"

yaaaaaay! yay! thanks! I knew it wasn't rug-latch, but that's how it had lodged into the esperanto of my memory. I haven't seen those things in a long time. nuts and cinnamon, yes. I will try these, even though I don't like cottage cheese [it was practically funneled down my throat as a child] and will probably substitute ricotta. Thanks, basman!

No problem.

I'm your go to for Jewish pastries and R and B.