Thanks!!!!

It's alien as well as antithetical to most Americans, who are not “progressive” to radical in their beliefs (characterizing anything right of Brookings as “far right,” for example; we even hear members of Congress at the Dem convention talking about the “far right” that does not exist in Congress and has almost no presence, much less power, in Washington).

It turns most people off, badly. The 1994 elections should have instructed you accordingly.

Second, I cracked up when the first reason he gave for the Dems leaving him was over license plate fees in Colorado. There's nothing you can do if that's his primary voting issue.

Next up for your magic bag of tricks, please inform us who exactly I am a partisan for. Please…. seriously. Pick a party or a person or an ideology, a set of issues… free reign for you to identify me as a “partisan” with an “agenda” in my writing here. Not only are you bound to be dead wrong (from my own personal perspective), we'll invest the time to go over some of my posting history to see if perhaps you are correct and can teach me something about myself.

When cutting and pasting EVERYONE (you / me / they) select comments that go along with the argument we're making.

Your “END INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT” implies a 'just the facts ma'am' Joe Friday article when it is nothing of the kind.

The problem I have with your article(s) is your subtle implication of 'fair and balanced' when all I've seen from you is partisan spin.

There's nothing wrong with partisan… I'm a partisan, too. But I don't try to disguise partisan under “reporting a transcribed interview” and when I manipulate someone's words to validate my opinion I present it as OPINION.

An article by you about “Republicans for Obama” would be an interesting indeed.

Then you go to your grave misinformed,sadly and while I can appreciate your faith in government to do the right thing, that is predicated on the notion that the Chief Executive does not seek to expand his powers beyond the checks and balances system. – In my few decades on this planet I have not seen a more slanted SCOTUS. A judge that won't recuse himself (Scalia), and instead goes on a duck hunt with a named party on a case that he is judging? Public proslytizing from the bench on hot button issues? Save it for the actual cases, and not the sound bytes, I say. Maybe there are more incidences of pandering and partisanship, but off the top of my head I have not seen a President try to Politicise all branches of the government in his attempt to become a “Unitary Executive” ( read:parliamentary dictatorship).

PS–I've gotten a 500 Server Error while trying to post comments. I hope there's nothing wrong going on.

One of those people at Republicans for Obama is from Colorado. I mention this in case Colorado is convenient for you. His name is Kenneth Wehking:

A lifelong Republican, Ken feels that many politicians have forgotten about the people they were elected to represent. In the spirit of Teddy Roosevelt, America needs a statesman that can set a new course and change this culture of division to one of cooperation and solutions to our most pressing problems. Including, budget deficits, healthcare reform, energy independence, social security/medicaid reform and protecting our natural resources, among a few.

I also just noticed at the bottom of their page that Tony Campbell, a TMV co-blogger, used to work there. Maybe he can get you on the inside track?

Good luck!

Also, as far as the complaints here go, I had the sense that you were just letting the guy say his peace–not being too confrontational.

The “progressive left wing” of the Dems is too far left for most Americans

How so?

The “progressive left wing” of the Dems is too far left for most Americans and the party leadership will put the brakes on those kids — unless the party leadership itself gets stupidly overconfident. Note that Obama chose a conventional member of the establishment (among the majority that voted for war in Iraq like nearly everybody else, not an anti-war-from-before-the-beginning kook, and someone who helps allay concerns about an Obama foreign policy).

For the area in question, there were a number of back and forth things about previous flip-flops which, again, didn't really add to the whole “why I'm voting for McCain subject” and after he mentioned media reports of a number of them (you have to admit there are tons of stories out there on it) I *did* ask him if there wasn't a perception of Obama like that today. That led to his response, which would have looked out of place if I didn't include *something* in front of it.

The fact remains, though, that it's exactly what he said and reflected his running them of his opinion that Obama was not ready to lead, that Biden *was* ready to lead, and that (no doubt jokingly) he thought the two should switch positions on the ticket. If you want to read that as being getting MY point across, you're off base but welcome to your opinion. I didn't even think Biden was a good pick for Obama. As to “cut and paste” there isn't much of that until a lot of cleanup work gets done right after the call.

AND

Jazz said: As to the rest of his comments, please note that I'm neither defending them nor attacking them. Just reporting what he had to say.

Jazz,

Which is it? Did you: A) cut and paste to get YOUR point across or B) “just report what he had to say”? It doesn't seem like it can be both.

As to the rest of his comments, please note that I'm neither defending them nor attacking them. Just reporting what he had to say.

I will definitely send in a request to the RFO site to see if I can get an interview with one of them. Good suggestion.

For example: Republicans for Obama.

I look forward to the parallel interview.