I apologize for the short and rushed essay, but I just wanted to get this story up as it’s breaking. It might turn into some kind of bigger scandal for McAuliffe because people were convicted, in part, because of the things he apparently ordered them to do.
May 29 2009
Apr 25 2008
Did I fall asleep and miss something? The media keeps saying that Clinton won Pennsylvania and will be a boost to her nomination attempt. OK, she won and won pretty darn good, but she only get a bit more finds, not an automatic nomination,–the math does not favor her–well real math not that new math that the Clinton camp uses.
Just looks like the media is determined to keep her in the race, of course she will not bitch about it. And the media gives her every avenue to use her “new” math and make her appear to have a fighting chance–she does not, unless Obama has a complete meltdown. I realize that she is hoping that will be handed to her on a silver platter.
My problem with the reporting is that all I saw and read was telling me she should win Pennsylvania by 7-12 points. She won by 10, but all the reporting seem to indicate that she won by a landslide or that she somehow had pulled off another upset.
Look at MSNBC, they use Harold Ford, Jr as a panel person, he is a Clinton supporter but also beyond that he is the chairman of the DLC a group that is strongly behind Clinton. I just thought that Obama had gained the lead and somehow lost it. But all reports of the primary were as predicted, so where was the excitement?
Ok, I have a problem with the media reporting on this election cycle. IMO, they are in the tank for Clinton. To use Clinton supporters as neutral analysis is not giving the voter a good overall view of the campaign.
Feb 24 2008
Just a note of encouragement for everybody. Well, I found it encouraging: Finally checked my in-box today and there’s an email from Sen. Bob Casey–apparently a bunch of his constituents contacted him regarding FISA and telecom immunity, and our actions worked:
After careful deliberation, I voted in favor of legislation to revise and update the Foreign Intelligence and Surveillance (FISA) Act of 1978 to provide our intelligence community with the tools they need to target terrorists. This bill is not perfect, but it does improve on the legislation hurried into law last summer by the White House when it comes to strengthening civil liberties protections for Americans and enhancing judicial oversight.
In updating the FISA legislation, however, we did not need to extend retroactive immunity for those telecommunications firms that may have cooperated with the administration in warrantless surveillance programs. I proudly voted for the Dodd-Feingold amendment that would strip immunity from the bill, and I am disappointed the Senate did not agree to this important change. I believe that the retroactive immunity provision is inconsistent with the protections afforded every American by our Constitution. It is my hope that, when the House and Senate conference meet to reconcile the two different bills, they will agree to narrow and limit the immunity provisions for telecommunications firms.
I have been gratified to hear from so many of my constituents on this issue. Please be assured that I kept your concerns in mind as I deliberated and casted my vote.