Clinton versus Obama cage match in Cleveland

Between watching Barney A-B-C and playing PS2's Total Rampage with the boys, I only caught about 15 minutes of the Democratic debate earlier tonight. However, I managed to tune in during one of the questions that has gotten most of the post-debate blog attention that I've read. Namely, the question regarding Farrakhan's support for Obama. Look, I'll be the first to admit that I don't know much about Farrakhan, other than the fact that some people denounce him as a lunatic and that he spoke at the Million Man March. From secondary sources that I've read, his rhetoric seems to be extremely divisive and, I gather from tonight, anti-Semitic. If so, he should be denounced, as he was by Obama. However, I thought Russert was really baiting him on the issue, and I believed the premise of the question to be weak. Then, incredibly, after Obama had said that he deplores Farrakhan's hateful rhetoric, Russert asks him if he rejects his support, and begins to read some of Farrakhan's quotes. Thankfully, Obama cut him off, and gave what I thought was a good answer. I just thought the whole question was ridiculous. I mean, are we going to go around asking the candidates whether they accept or reject all of the folks that give them endorsements? It would be a different story if Obama had sought out his support, or had been going around the country campaigning with him. But, this was clearly an attempt to smear Obama through guilt by association. It was little better than yesterday's distribution of Obama in African clothes.

From what I've been reading, most people seem to think Obama clearly won the debate. If that is the case, I think Hillary is DONE! Of course, folks have counted the Clinton's out before....

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The agony of victory....a.k.a. picking my jaw up off the floor

Allright. I've now had nearly 24 hours (although its taken me a couple of days to complete this post) to calm down, reflect upon and digest the improbable gut wrenching game yesterday in which the heavily favored Colts lost to the Steelers 21-18. I wrote last year of not being as emotionally attached to the Steelers as I have been in the past. I wrote last week of how I thought that I might be spending too much valuable time following the Steelers, especially since I have absolutely no control over the outcome of their games. Let me just say this: yesterday's game was probably in the top five emotionally draining, and ultimately gratifying, experiences of my life. Ouside of my wedding and the birth of my two sons, I can't remember being as nervous, deflated, joyful, stunned and exhilirated as I was yesterday----all withing about a ten minute stretch of seemingly neverending time! What could have been a devestating loss to live with in the offseason (and, forever, for Jerome...
Read more

"The Axis of Evil and the Doctrine of Preemption Three Years On"

Jerod and I attended a lecture by Brookings Institution fellow Michael O'Hanlon last night at Park University in Parkville, MO. The lecture was part of the Jerzy Hauptmann Distinguished Guest Lecture series. As a Park University M.B.A. alum, I received an invitation to the 13th annual lecture in the series. I like going to events like this, especially since I was interested in the content of this particular lecture, of which the title was the title of this post. Dr. O'Hanlon described himself as a Sam Nunn Democrat at the beginning of the lecture. It's always difficult to prevent political feeling from entering into objective analysis, and I don't know how you measure the "objectiveness" of analysis, but I feel that most Brookings scholars are at least "fair", and Dr. O'Hanlon was no exception. His analysis of the doctrine of preemption was focused on the effectiveness of the doctrine, as opposed to any moral righteousness or implications of the...
Read more

Removing a password that was created in a previous version from an Access 2007 database

Earlier this week I was banging my head against the wall trying to figure out how to remove a password from an Access 2007 database (file extension .accdb). The database was created in a previous version of access and subsequently "upgraded" to the Access 2007 format. I believe some type of a wizard was used to perform the "upgrade." The security model is evidently different in Access 2007 than in previous versions. It doesn't appear that you can set/unset database passwords. Instead, in Access 2007, there is an option to Encrypt with Password. I'm not sure if this is supposed to be logically similar to the earlier version password architecture, but there was no way that I could find to easily remove the password that had been created in the earlier version when using the Access 2007 interface. Access security has always been confusing to me, and I need to take the time someday to understand how the security model is supposed to work in Access 2007. An...
Read more