Congressman Pallone joins us LIVE Today on Blue Jersey Radio

how about some balance? (0.00 / 0)

Any chance that you can get Steve Rothman to call in as well?

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 03:58:44 AM UTC

are you kidding? (0.00 / 0)

I think from the front page it's evident that there is more than enough balance. There is no lack of pro-Obama content here.

---

by: Juan Melli @ Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 04:08:07 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

asking for balance on the radio show (0.00 / 0)

It is their last program before February 5 and if they are going to have Pallone on the show, stumping for Hillary Clinton, it would be good to hear from Rothman or another surrogate so that the listeners can hear some advocacy for Barack Obama as well.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 04:13:04 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

call in (0.00 / 0)

The show is open to callers. Feel free to call in and counter Rep. Pallone or argue for who you think should be the next president.

---

by: Juan Melli @ Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 04:21:58 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Here's Rothman (0.00 / 0)

Stumping for Obama on Blue Jersey Radio.

Since all our shows become podcasts, you can listen to them anytime on our blogtalkradio home page.

---

by: Jeff Gardner @ Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 04:48:11 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Can you ask him about HR 676? (0.00 / 0)

Legislation that would create a single payer universal health care plan is stuck in the Health Subcommittee that Congressman Pallone chairs.

It would be great if you could get him to commit to co-sposoring this bill and helping to get it passed through his committee or explain why he won't.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 04:08:38 AM UTC

call and ask nt (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Juan Melli @ Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 04:22:23 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

torn? take the muzzle off, Jay (0.00 / 1)

Jeff... what is there to be torn about?

What about Ricky Ray Rector?  What about DOMA?  How about an apology or at least some remorse?

Jay... feel free to be as negative about Hillary as you want to be.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 15:55:55 PM UTC

Oh, I don't know (0.00 / 0)

What about Donnie McClurkin? What about Universal Health Care? How about acknowledging that the reason republicans want to "move beyond partisanship" is because they're losing?

I'm just saying there are pros and cons to both candidates. And, bashing Hillary doesn't elevate Obama or us.

---

by: Jeff Gardner @ Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 16:21:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

pros and cons (0.00 / 0)

Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't believe that Donnie McClurkin did anything but sing when traveling with Obama's gospel troupe, and I am pretty sure that they were not singing overtly homophobic songs.

Linking Obama with McClurkin ideologically is as patently offensive as Richard Cohen linking Obama to his pastor, who happened to have a few nice things to say about Louis Farrakhan.  Obama made it clear that he does not share McClurkin's opinions regarding the LGBT community nor does he share his pastor's opinion of Farrakhan.

And as far as universal health care goes, it is intellectually dishonest to claim that the mandates that the Clinton/Edwards health care plan contains make it any more universal than the Obama plan, which does not contain mandates.

Hillary can talk about making health care affordable through tax credits all that she wants to, but the 15 million people who earn slightly too much to qualify for Medicaid and do not receive health care through their employer or any other source are not going to be able to afford to buy it themselves whether it is mandated or not.

The only path to truly universal health care is the single payer path and while neither Clinton nor Obama are advocating for that option, if this is such a key issue for you, why didn't you ask Frank Pallone, someone who at this moment has the power as Health Subcommittee Chair to pass HR 676 through his committee to the floor of the House of Representatives for debate, why he has not done this to date.

Saying that Clinton and Obama both have their pros and cons ignores every dishonest thing that the Clinton campaign has said or done to win the Democratic nomination.

Show me one thing that the Obama campaign has said or done that comes even close to what Bill Shaheen, Bob Kerrey, and Bill Clinton has said and what the NJDSC, the Nevada Teachers Union, and who knows what other pro-Clinton groups have done to try to rig elections on Hillary's behalf.

Ideologically, there is little to no difference between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, but the kinds of politics that they both represent is starkly different.  Clinton represents the kinds of political game-playing that progressives in NJ and throughout the country have been fighting against, while Obama represents the kind of honest government that we have all been advocating for.

I don't understand how you can't see this.  Is it possible that you don't want to?

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 22:25:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

For the record (0.00 / 0)

It was the Nevada Education Association (the NEA affiliate)--not the American Federation of Teachers (which has endorsed Hillary) that created the ruckus in Nevada.

I'm glad you're referring to the "Clinton/Edwards" health care plan.  It was Edwards' at first, Clinton adopted it.  I wish Obama would sign on to it, too.

McClurkin may not have done any gay-bashing while traveling with Obama, but you're using a double standard here: criticizing Clinton for what her associates have said/done but exempting Obama from the missteps of his associates.

There's an interesting piece on the front page of today's Times about Obama's relationship with Exelon and his false claim to have passed Federal regulatory legislation to deal with radioactive leaks from nuclear plants.  Alas, the legislation was drastically watered down in committee and ultimately didn't go anywhere.  (I'm sure someone can post a link to the piece.)

My point is that there are neither angels nor devils in politics--and we gain nothing by trying to paint a halo over one politician's head while trying to demonize another.  We're all going to have to support one or the other of them--unless of course we want the Repugs to keep control.  And it doesn't help your cause to keep calling those who disagree with you "dishonest."

"Do what you can, with what you have, where you are."  (Teddy Roosevelt)

---

by: DottieG @ Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 23:02:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

the record revisited (0.00 / 0)

Do you really believe that Barack Obama  went out of his way to select Donnie McClurkin to be part of that singing troupe, because he thought that McClurkin's homophobia would help him with the homophobe vote or some other constituency?

That is the only way that you can somehow draw parallels between the role that McClurkin played in the Obama campaign and the role that people like Shaheen, Kerrey, and Clinton have played in Hillary's campaign.

Imagine if you will that the Solidarity Singers were asked to sing at a series of events for Linda Stender, but it was discovered that one of the members is hostile to the State of Israel and the way that it deals with the Palestinians.

Should the Jewish community take a stand against Linda, because one of the members of a singing group whose only role in her campaign is as warm-up entertainment?  Some reactionary members might, but as one of the staunchest Zionists amongst us, I can say that they would be wrong to do so.

I call the Clintons dishonest, because they are dishonest.  Of course, Barack Obama is no angel, but just because someone is not an angel does not make them a devil or at least equivalently devilish as the Clintons whose approach to politics in the 90s nearly destroyed our party and enabled someone like Ralph Nader to make ridiculous assertions about there being no difference between Al Gore and Dubya.

Of course, it requires a willing suspension of disbelieft or a serious lack of imagination for someone who was as disenchanted with the Clinton years as I and so many progressives were to not be able to see how much worse a Bush Administration could be.

And because I am unwilling to suspend belief nor lack the imagination to recognize that as bad as Hillary Clinton might be, John McCain would be far worse, I will vote for Hillary if she is the Democratic nominee, but that's it.

As far as health care plans go, I have already said everything that I need to say about them above.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 13:34:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]