| Page 3 of 5 < > |
Warming Trend
|
Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
"This shows that the future of American politics rests in the hands of ordinary citizens.
"The campaigns had no idea who made it--not the Obama campaign, not the Clinton campaign, nor any other campaign. I made the ad on a Sunday afternoon in my apartment using my personal equipment (a Mac and some software), uploaded it to YouTube, and sent links around to blogs.
"The specific point of the ad was that Obama represents a new kind of politics, and that Senator Clinton's 'conversation' is disingenuous. And the underlying point was that the old political machine no longer holds all the power.
"Let me be clear: I am a proud Democrat, and I always have been. I support Senator Obama. I hope he wins the primary. (I recognize that this ad is not his style of politics.) I also believe that Senator Clinton is a great public servant, and if she should win the nomination, I would support her and wish her all the best."
Right. That's why I depicted her as the droning voice of the establishment and had her blown up.
"I've resigned from my employer, Blue State Digital, an internet company that provides technology to several presidential campaigns, including Richardson's, Vilsack's, and -- full disclosure -- Obama's. The company had no idea that I'd created the ad, and neither did any of our clients. But I've decided to resign anyway so as not to harm them, even by implication."
How long before he hits the talk shows?
On to the big constitutional confrontation.
"The brinksmanship between the White House and Congress over the firing of several U.S. attorneys heightened yesterday," says the Boston Globe, "with a House committee authorizing the use of subpoenas to compel the testimony of President Bush's advisers, including top aide Karl Rove, and the White House vowing to fight such demands as long as necessary.
"The House Judiciary Committee, hoping to prod the White House into allowing the advisers to testify under oath, stopped short of issuing the subpoenas. But Democrats warned they would be issued if the White House refuses to budge -- a move that could lead to a constitutional deadlock that the federal courts would settle. The Senate Judiciary Committee is slated to authorize use of subpoenas today.
"But the White House showed no sign of retreat, threatening to withdraw Bush's offer to allow interviews of Rove and others behind closed doors, off the record and with no sworn testimony."
Josh Marshall scoffs at the White House rationale:


