Richard Lugar's ho-hum speech on the Senate floor - He supposedly worked on it for months and polished it for weeks - But it actually contained this line: “As David Brooks recently observed in the NY Times ...”

Can you see why they have such contempt for the Republic? For democratic principles? For the Senate?

Precisely so.

You would think “elder statesmen” (LOL) Lugar would have thougt twice about quoting David Brooks about Iraq - Brooks has never been to Iraq - He knows nothing about what is going on there - What he does know, he obscures or twists or spins or hides. The fact that Lugar does not know that tells you that Lugar is just someone who reads what is put in front of him.
What aide of his leaked the embarassing fact that he worked on such an unimpressive speech for months? Lugar and Biden are both so malleable and spinable -
Doc - is Fred Hiatt an admitted neocon?

Lugar is like those members of the Board audit committe at Hollinger Int - Those who signed off on the weird non-compete fees without bothering to read the fine print or details - just trusting in the fact that a fellow member of the worthy crowd told them it was cool.
There is so much of this kind of bogus leadership in our country in gov and business. It is truly possible that Conrad will be convicted for removing the boxes and IMO that may be the actual charge he is really innocent of because intent was a bit murky there if you squint in his favor.
Anyway - when Lugar leaves the Senate - he is the perfect gentleman for a future Radler or Conrad to recruit for amiable Board work

http://apnews.myway.com/art...

Maybe, just maybe, she might have the smarts, will and toughness to at least start it. But no one else in the Dem field comes to mind as remotely plausible.

“Somebody said to me the other day if there was ever a time for a woman president it's now because we're going to have to do a lot of cleaning.” (HRC)

That's actually a pretty funny line - One could imagine Buchanan saying pretty much the same thing.

HRC's big weakness on the stump has been her relative inability to convey this kind of humor. There is no doubt in our mind that she has dominated the debates - Though we wer rooting for Barack, he just did not win these - But he does seem to win the post debate polls because people pretend they saw him win.

Barack - imo - may have some weaknesses appealing to Dem power elite if he gets the nomination. They would never attack him - just sit on their hands or offer secret support to an astute Republican. Barck needs some executive experience maybe - but the Governership of Illinois inevitably drags people into the muck.

Any Dem that gets into office will inherit a colossal mess and all sorts of traps. HRC may have guile and experience to navigate that - She knows that neocons are trying to trap the US into a a war with Iran and she definately knows that there is some secret and not so secret support for that among so-called libs in her own party - So she would have to figure out a way to string them all along and divide them.

Can you imagine Tweety having a breakdown in that room of 1000 women at that HRC fundraiser? He was so threatned by that WaPo picture. LOL.

re HRC, I understand the Netroots' skepticism. The Clinton machine does understand Power and ideology and its manipulation, so would be poised to perhaps at least make an effort to clean house. Of course, darker (more realistic?) minds might also see a tendancy towards “triangulation” and accomodation should it suit their tactical political needs.

Edwards? Not a chance. Folds to a Catholic TV blowhard re Amanda on day one?

Richardson? Proccess-oriented. Wouldn't see a shadow for a void.

Obama? He says he's got game like LeBron (which is not so good after the Finals) and he does inspire hope. But hope turns to dust fast in the knife work needed. He would get chewed up in the buzzsaw and it would not be pretty. Needs more time in the trenches.

Biden? Please. There would be a bi-partisan coup after the first SOTU address after the 4th hour.

Gore? Intellectually he may get it in part, as his last book indicates, but he has no real understanding of cadre work and knife fights needed on such a massive scale. (Interestingly, the netroots do, which is why the Stiftung admires them so much).

Call it as we see it.

re aesthetic of the Age of Bush

Maybe this is it: David Report says it we are in the “Age of Vulgarism”.

http://davidreport.com/the-...

People actually get paid to state the obvious to any Stiftung Reader. Good on them, one supposes.

“When you watch a baby being born, after a difficult pregnancy, it is so painful for the mother it is always hard to tell the truth and say, 'Gosh, that baby is really ugly.' ”
~Tom Friedman
NY Times 6-26-07