McCaskill on Obama: He's shooting for the White House

   Giddy at the announcement that Democratic rock star Barrack Obama will raise money for her at an Oct. 7 Kansas City funder, Claire McCaskill told reporters today that there's little doubt in her mind about Obama's plans for 2008.

   "He's running," she said.

   For president, that is.

   One big tipoff: When Obama raises money for himself these days, the money no longer is going into his political action committee fund, but his Senate re-election warchest.

   The distinction: Money that goes into the PAC is doled out to other candidates around the country. Money that goes into the Senate fund can be used for an '08 White House bid, McCaskill said.

   If Obama runs, she predicted, he'll win.

   Oh, she added that money for the $250-$2,100 event already is pouring in.

UPDATE: After this post was published, a McCaskill spokeswoman called to make two points: (1) McCaskill is not endorsing the junior senator from Illinois; and (2) McCaskill has no proof that Obama is running; she was just speculating on what seems to be happening.

Posted by Steve Kraske

Comments

[Chris]

Wow... have to wonder how Obama feels about McCaskill making these claims. It would definitely be bad news for us Republicans in '08 if he does in fact run. He will be a strong candidate for the Dems.

[Dorian]

I wonder how Obama would do with mid to rightwing voters.

[realpolitic]

Referring to a complete political green horn like Obama as a rock star is....well, just as fatuous as the label would infer in the minds of most voters.

[southerngirl]

I agree he would be a tough candidate..I also agree that he is likeable and presentable...but I agree too a rock star?

[Wes]

And a political green horn with the qualities Obama possesses is WAY, waaaay overdo and is, to say the least, what people have been yearning for.

[shecky]

Obama has that magical quality. You just listen to his voice and you're sucked in. Oh, and Chris, Obama did very well appealing to moderates and even many rightwing voters in Illinois when he ran for Senate.

I seem to recall the Republicans electing a relatively underqualified but rhetorically gifted candidate from the date of Illinois about 150 years ago. Seems like he turned out pretty well. Maybe it's time for another.

[Bob]

SouthernGirl,

He is a rockstar to Dems.
His '04 convention speech rocked the convention.

I am not sure of his counter on the Republican side? Gulliani?

But his speeches are lyrical and magical & full of wisdom and hope.

Peace.

[FarRight]

I'll say this- I saw him speak in Iowa at Tom Harkin's deal on C-span. He was really good. He is enjoying his honeymoon with the Washington Press Corps, but believe me the worm will turn. I'm just not sure 4 years in the Senate is going to be enough. BTW, if Hillary runs-- none of this matters as its all over but the shouting.

[BeProudAmerica]

I think '08 maybe a little too early for him to make a run. He does appeal to moderates and even those that lean to the right.

If you listen to the content of what he has to say, he sounds more Republican than Democrat in advocating personal responsibility and stating that the Democrats overreact to people with strong christian beliefs among other statements.

[southerngirl]

Bob I would say Guiliani would be most galvanizing...but gonna be a tough one and probably next few months will tell...I certainly like Guiliani best...but who knows..I heard it wold be hillary/obama not obama on main ticket,but who knows there either..going to at least keep the political debate going smile

[southerngirl]

oops just saw the update..not endorsing? doesn't know....oops Claire needs to be careful then about what she says...who is she endorsing then? I bet...Hillary/Obama

[southerngirl]

and he is good enough to take the old fundraising money from....

[Truth]

Psalm 55:21

[Thomas]

Obama is very talented, but he isn't liberal--he's a leftist. There's no way he'll ever be elected president.

Claire, on the other hand, demonstrated yet again that she is too undisciplined to be in public life. How would you feel if you were Obama and this is the kind of thing you get for helping someone out?

[HaHa]

Read the update to this piece where Claire had to retract/modify/qualify her earlier statements. Does a single day go by where this woman doesn't put her foot in her mouth somehow??

[Obama's Bubble Buster]

Obama is a Leftist, this is true. America stopped leaning left in 1996. The problem is the leftists have not figured out what the party is about, where it is going, and why Christians, Conservitives and Libetarians all are totally disgusted. Obama thinks he knows, but he is not a LaGuardia, which is what the Democrats need.

[John Evans]

There will be no election in 2008. Only the illusion just like in 2000, 2002, 2004, and 2006. We are in a Republican dictatorship. Put in place by machines. The Republicans that are in office could not win if not for this. We must rise up and take back control of our country by all means necessary. Today The Republicans voted to obolish writ of habeas corpus. This is no longer a free nation. We are in a Dictatorship.

[Tommy]

John--
I thought it was an authoritarian leadership you were barking about the other night.
(BTW...good to see you've taken a trip back to m-w.com...I liked the bit on 'writ of habeas corpus')

tommy What do You think Authoritarian Rule is? Duh
Oh you don't think that they have suspended habeas corpus. You are not as bright as I thought. Not!
We went back 900 years. The king did'nt even have this power. It is uninformed fools who unwittingly give up their freedoms gladly to obey those who despise and take advantage of their ignorance that has brought us to this mess. You do not understand what is all over the news tonight. I listened to the house debate this bill all afternoon yesterday and I can tell you it is an abomination of our principles and freedoms. These are the facts and they are not open for debate.

Larry Sakin: In the first chapter of your book, Was the 2004 Presidential Election Stolen? President Bush seems very worried about the election outcome. If the Republicans stole the election, why would Bush be so concerned?

Steven Freeman: Good question. Actually, I did not want to include that story in the book. It was there at the behest of my publisher and co-author, who felt it made a compelling narrative. I agreed to include it because it happened on Election Day, involved exit polls, President Bush, was well sourced, and consistent with other evidence (e.g., the cancelled Election Day broadcasts in the critical battleground state of Florida).

It could be argued that it suggests that the Bush/Cheney campaign did not steal the election or that if they did, George Bush did not know about it. On the other hand, it also indicates that the president, who is after all a highly seasoned politician, was concerned about the exit polls. On face value it suggests that, of course the exit polls and corollary indicators (high turnout, low approval ratings) were right. All knowledgeable observers understood it; Tony Blair went to bed believing that Kerry had won. Even George Bush understood it. Our source indicates he was furious because he had been assured that he would win; he may have not understood, or forgotten, or been temporarily confused that he was going to win*despite* the exit polls and corollary indicators, indeed despite how people cast their ballots.

The source was equally clear that his political operative Karl Rove calmly assured him everything would be okay. And this is consistent with other reports. Despite widespread Election Day predictions that Kerry had won, the Bush/Cheney campaign team remained highly confident. Political scientists and journalists reported that confidence was based on their “on-the-ground intelligence,” the details of which has never been explicated.

Sakin: You write extensively about the long poll lines and lack of voting machines in heavily Democratic areas in various places across the country. What measures can voter integrity activists take to counteract these problems?

Freeman: There is clear evidence that Ken Blackwell, Ohio’s Secretary of State, held voting machines in warehouses to create long lines in Democratic strongholds. Blackwell is now running for Governor, while continuing to serve as Secretary of State; in other words, he’s overseeing the counting of votes in his own election
http://www.mytown.ca/e101/freeman/

http://www.americanblackout.com/

[BeProudAmerica]

Okay I read the story about the polling and the voting machines.

How dumb is this guy? He stated that he doesn't understand why the people that have programmed the voting machines make their programming code public. Ther reason is then that would make it that much more easy for anybody with a programming background to write code to hack it. He then goes on to talk about how there is open source (public) code avaliable for use and can't understand why the election boards won't use it and again the answer is because the code can be hacked easily.

My point is that if this guy is an 'expert' in the field and can't figure that out, then there is a problem.

[John Evans]

"A bill of rights [should provide] clearly and without the aid of sophisms for... the eternal and unremitting force of the habeas corpus laws, and trials by jury in all matters of fact triable by the laws of the land and not by the law of nations." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1787. ME 6:387
http://etext.virginia.edu/jefferson/quotations/jeff1520.htm

[big apple writer]

Yea Barack is such a leftist he voted to approve the appointment of that super liberal,presque Communist, Sec of State we have, Condi Rice.

[Gary]

I was enjoying reading these posts - but - I am going to watch Dan Rather on TV. He has found Abe Lincoln's laptop & in it is information all about the UFOs that will be landing in Rosewell to vote for Democrats. While we are at it there is a Save the baby pastramis from being turned into sandwich meat followed by These people will believe anything.

[Engawyer]

WHAT IS A "LEFTIST"?

WHAT IS A "LIBERAL?"

ANYBODY??

[Engawyer]

WHITE PEOPLE AND THEIR LABELS,...I TELL YA.

[Ward]

"held voting machines in warehouses to create long lines in Democratic strongholds."

But, I thought voting machines were evil things that were easily hackable and unreliable....

[B]

America will not elect someone whose name rhymes with Osama. Interesting the Dems champion him. Look how open minded we are. Where does left and right come from....anyone??? Left-wing, Right-wing. False paradigm. We eat our own in this country.

[Dickeylee]

So now Obama is equated with Osama? Wow, what will you racist republicans stoop to next? Bush calls democrats cut and run, yet he's sent 2,500 more young Americans to thier deaths since mission accomplished. The republicans are now proudly losing TWO wars at once. Amazing, simply amazing. What civil war? So we simply stay and pray?

Dickylee - Who missed the point? There are many Americans (who vote) who can't even name our Vice President and never watch the news. They show up to vote and see a guy with the name Osama and with very limited knowledge of world events will then not vote for him just out of stupidity. Even if it is a small percentage it is enough to make a difference.

Engawyer: Who said white people were saying anything, you assumed that, which makes you more racist than anyone else on this blog. You need to get over it and have discussions as Americans, you are the one that is trying to divide people into groups and put them in classes.

[BeProudAmerica]

That last post was mine.

I think Osama has a better chance of winning the general election than winning the Democratic nomination. He has too many values that cross over which would be against the Democratic base. I see a situation very similar to Lieberman in Connecticut where he probably will win the election but not the Democratic primary.

I think Osama has much in common with Bush, but that's not really relevant to this conversation, is it?

[BeProudAmerica]

Not enough caffiene yet this morning, I apologize for typing Osama instead of Obama.

[John]

Obama is the best candidate the Democrats have by far.

[big apple writer]

The terms, Left and Right, are from post-revolutionary France - where the more liberal wing sat on the left side of the house; and the right - well you get it.

I'm not sure where the person lives that think Lieberman is going to win the election but I beg to differ.

As for Barack, the PEOPLE are championing him - and the Dems are jumping on the bandwagon. If we left it to the Democrats to champion anyone, we'd have someone like John Kerry. Don't hate Kerry but was never the right person to run.

I want a Republican to win -if a Dem wins they'll have to clean up the crap left by 8 years of the BUsh junta. Just like Bill clinton is not given credit for the economic boon ("That was because of Reagan!") and blamed for 9/11 ("it's his fault caues he didn't catch Bin Laden!") -whoever gets elected will take the blame for this abyss of war and terrorism and hatred - set in motion - once again by the most famous war criminal in American history - Henry Kissinger. Henry, the Chileans salute you!
T

[BeProudAmerica]

Actually the economic boom of the 90s should be credited to Microsoft and Bill Gates.

Yes, Obama is being championed by Democrats right now. But if he does run, there are some things that he stands for that the Democratic base won't like.

For instance [from Barack]: It is doubtful that children reciting the Pledge of Allegiance feel oppressed or brainwashed as a consequence of muttering the phrase 'under God'... Having voluntary student prayer groups using school property to meet should not be a threat, any more than its use by the High School Republicans should threaten Democrats."

[Engawyer]

NO, ANONYMOUS. I LOVE EVERY ONE EQUALLY. I JUST CALL IT LIKE I SEE IT.

RIGHT NOW: WHITE PEOPLE (I.E., HANNITY, COULTER, LIMBAUGH, BECK, O'RIELLY, AND PROGENY) ARE THE ONLY ONES USING LABELS TO STIGMATIZE AND DIVIDE.

WE SEEM TO HAVE A BATTLE ROYAL BETWEEN A 90% HOMOGENOUS PARTY VERSUS A RAINBOW COALITION GOING ON IN THIS COUNTRY RIGHT NOW, AND NO ONE SEEMS TO WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE LARGE WHITE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM.

ARE WHITE PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY TRYING TO RETAIN POWER THROUGH THE GOP PARTY?

I ONLY USE SUCH STURING AND EMOTIONAL LANGUAGE TO DRAW ATTENTION TO THE DEMOGRAPHICS OF THE PARTIES. I USE THE WORDS THAT I USE TO EFFECT MAXIMUM IMPACT ON THIS ISSUE. I TRULY CARE ABOUT EVERY HUMAN BEING ON EARTH.

AM I WORRIED ABOUT NOTHING? IS ANYONE SUSPICIOUS OR CONCERNED ABOUT THE EMPIRICAL DATA WITH RESPECT TO PARTY RACE AFFILIATION.

ALL OPINIONS WELCOMED ON THIS DEEPLY TROUBLING ISSUE.

I LOOK FORWARD TO A DAY WHEN WE HAVE TWO DIVERSE AND INCLUSIVE PARTIES TO CHOOSE FROM.

ONE LOVE. INDEPENDENT AND PROUD!

[big apple writer]

Engawyer -

Demographics of both parties have changed in the last 40 years. In my parents' generation, Democrats had a handle on immigrants, minorities, women, Catholics, blacks, the poor, the artists (writers, painters, actors) the unions, the NE, the South, the big cities of the Midwest, California.

The GOP has traditionally been a party of the WASPs (White, Anglo-Saxon, Protestants), the wealthy, etc.

since the Reagan Revolution - a lot of that changed.

Now the GOP includes fundamentalists-black and white, second-generation immigrants, conservative Catholics, etc.

As far as it being a deeply troubling issue, that's one opinion. What's more deeply troubling is that we live in a country in which only 35% of the ENTIRE eligible population votes. If the GOP is only for white people - why did it win the election?

I live in a city of 8 million people. I know gays and blacks and first generation immigrants who think Bush is great. I also know conservative Catholics, WASPs,and fundamentalists who think Bush is an abomination.

I look forward to a day when we have leaders instead of politicians. Where elections are not simply a process - but truly a dialogue of how to create a better world.

[Engawyer]

"What's more deeply troubling is that we live in a country in which only 35% of the ENTIRE eligible population votes. If the GOP is only for white people - why did it win the election?" I DON'T FOLLOW BIG APPLE YOU HERE BIG APPLE. WHY DO YOU THINK A LOW TURN-OUT DOES NOT SUPPORT MY PERCEPTION. DO YOU THINK THE MAJORITY WHITE COMMUNITY TURNS OUT IN PROPORTION TO THE BLACK, ASIAN, AND HISPANIC COMMUNITIES? I BELIEVE IT TURNS OUT MORE, AND SO DISPROPORTIONATELY INFLUENCES ELECTIONS (AND RIGHTFULLY SO IF YOU ASK ME. WE ALL SHOULD GET OUT AND VOTE).

BUT I HEAR YOUR OVERALL TONE, BIG APPLE.

LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION: FOR EVERY TEN REPUBLICAN VOTES ARE YOU SAYING THAT 8 OR 9 IS STILL NOT BE WHITE?

IF WE HUMANS ARE ALL EQUAL AND THE PARTIES DIFFER ONLY UPON COLOR-BLIND BELIEFS RE: GOVERNANCE, ABORTION, ETC. THEN WHY THE INEQUITIES IN DEMOGRAPHICS?

DOES THE CONSTITUENCIES OF THE PARTIES SAY THAT THIER IS A COVERT AGENDA (I.E. KEEPING THE STATUS QUO OR RETURNING TO THE 1950'S IN SOME WAYS) AT LEAST WITH RESPECT TO THE GOP?

I MEAN SHOULDN'T DEMOGRAPHICS BE ESSENTIALLY THE SAME?

MANY ON THESE BOARDS DON'T LIKE MY MERE MENTION OF RACE. BUT IT IS THE ONLY WAY I KNOW HOW TO GET PEOPLE TO TALK ABOUT THE LARGE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM.

[Engawyer]

PS. YOU CAN IMAGINE THAT I LOVE YOUR CITY.

[bigapplewriter]

Hey Engawyer - love the chat but caps equal yelling on-line! No need to yell I can hear you:)

My city is awesome in a lot of ways but don't let the demographics fool you - not too much diversity in the borough of Manhattan. Mostly rich white people. I had more black friends when I lived in KC! We all may sit next to each other on the train but we all get off on at our own stops. When you're looking for a seat to free up you know exactly which ethnicity to sit by - cause you know the neighorhoods.

anyway- i dn't have an issue discussing race but i'm not sure i understand what you are trying to say?

Republican is the party for white peple? I say it's the party for rich people, regardless of color. Lots of white men running the Dems, too.

I don't know the demographcis of the last election. But I do know that not enough women or young people vote. Demographics are not just about race they are about all categories.

Because demographics is about marketing and guess what - our political system is MARKETING and making jack! not about freedom fighters or spreading democracy!

how can i sell my candidate to this group that group? what is imprtant to this grup and that group?

being a single white mother in a small town in Kansas is a very different lifeexperience than being a Puerto Rican single mother in the South Bronx. So how does my candidate appeal to both of them? Change the ads to focus on their specific issues. that's what demographics are about - selling the product.

[samuel smith]

There is no way that Obama can beat Mitt Romney in a general election. Any wagers?

[bigapplewriter]

Samuel,

Obama would beat him in Mass.

You gotta come up with better than that. Mitt isn't in the same league.

[samuel smith]

George McGovern won Massachusetts in 1972, but look what happened to the rest of the electoral map. Romney is intelligent, very telegenic, has a beautiful family, is a concise and spirited orator who stays on mark, and is more in pulse with the rest of America's values than Obama. As a member of the GOP at this moment I cannot support either McCain or Giuliani. Mitt is it for me.

[bigapplwriter]

There is no comparison between Barack Obama and George McGovern. That is like comparing Harry Truman and JFK.

Not sure from where you get the authority to name who is more in pulse with America's values and from whom you have the authority to define America's values.

I remind you that Mr. Bush did not have a mandate with the 2002 nor the 2004 election - it was merely a 2-4 % victory - hardly nubmers to define the values of 300 million people.

From the lectures, interviews, policy positions, and books I've read from Obama, his values are the values of most human beings - he transcends party lines.

I have lived in the NE for 10 years and I had to think "Mitt Romney?" I even lived in Massachusetts and his name doesn't spark much interest or enthusiasm on this side of the coast. I polled the Republicans with whom I work (who make up the the majority in Lower Manhattan where my office is located) and Mitt raised neither much recognition or even less enthusiasm.

Barack is equally telegenic and also has a beautiful family. He has kept to his message. He is beyond being a concise and spirited orator -he has the ability to touch his audience regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, religion, or social status. In this, we find his similarity with Bobby Kennedy - the last great and best liberal of the 20th century.

With all due respect, Mr. Romney is not even close to being in the same league.

[samuel smith]

With all due respect, the region of the country in which I reside, namely the southern Illinois, southern Indiana, and western Kentucky area, doesn't march lock step with whom the New York Times, the Washington Post, or even Oprah Winfrey endorses. If you want to know where I get the authority to decide who is more within the pulse or even "heart" of the American people, I would suggest that you read more Locke, Bentham, or Burke for a definition of classic "liberalism." The name Bobby Kennedy is anathema to most people I know (or have polled), and by the way, he was not the last great liberal of the twentieth century. That label goes to Sen. Henry "Scoop" Jackson of Washington. In order to feel the true pulse you need to get out of New York City and travel to the hinterland. If either McCain or Giuliani is the GOP nominee, I will stay home. They are old men and the party needs new blood.

[bigapplewriter]

I know the hinterland well my friend as I spent most of my life there and have been immersed in Midwestern politics since I was 11. "The pulse" you describe doesn't match that of my many friends, family, and co-workers who reside in the Midwest, the Southwest, the West, and the East. I travel back at least twice a year and as you can see,I keep abreast of the local news as I can. The truth is there is not one pulse in America as was evidenced by the 2004 election results.

As the product of a Jesuit education, I am well acquainted with the works of Bentham, Locke, and Burke. I also know from my liberal arts education that political philosophy evolves and even revolts as the times demand. What may well have been liberal in the 18th century would be defined differently now.

This is the first time in my life I have seen the word anathema used in the same sentence as Bobby Kennedy - an interesting perspective. I find his political and personal evolution as well as his compassion and empathy inspiring and unlike any politician since - although Bill Clinton certainly hit some of those notes.

What I find so appealing about Obama is that he is working to find a common ground in which people of all races, ethnicities, gender, sexual orientation, socio-economic status religious beliefs can meet and agree to help our country put forth its best. His voice stands out from the politics of destruction, polarization, and hatred birthed by Mr. Atwater and carried on by Mr. Rove. His message speaks of possibility and I will elevate it when I can.

For the record, neither the NYTimes or the Post are consistent with my views -they are much too mainstream and conservative for my beliefs. Nor do I - or anyone I know - seek Oprah Winfrey or any other entertainer for my political views. I do my own research and investigation using a variety of sources as the good Jesuits taught me.

As for Guiliani, he is way too ethnic, his accent too thick, his lisp too pronounced to ever be a GOP nominee. The exploitation of 9/11 has lost its fervor and Rudy has an explosive and unyielding temperament. His views are way too liberal and his call for bipartisanship at the RNC in 2004 was met with tepid applause.

[samuel smith]

The times we live in don't always demand evolvement, but very often hypocritical politicians do. For instance, those who run for office extolling the minimum wage but constantly exploit underprivileged or uneducated masses with their hyperbole. Meanwhile they are attempting to line their pockets with the $150,000.00 plus salary supplemented with the ideal health care plan. The latter issue is one in which Romney, not Obama, especially articulates well without any hidden fools gold. He uses market statistics, which denotes that he has used his Harvard business degree to good advantage. Again I maintain that Obama has accomplished very little in his two years in the Senate, while Romney has run circles around him, both with ideas and legislation. As an aside, and to give you a little pause to think, I work with several young people. One day the song "He ain't heavy, he's my brother" played over the intercom. More than one asked me what that song meant. I have a very good idea what the song was trying to say but they didn't.

We don't elect Presidents based on qualifications. If that were the case, Ronald Reagan would have never been elected, neither would George Bush or Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton.

Winston Churchill had only proved failure in his life -until his moment arrived. And in response to Mr. Romney's talent with statistics, Benjamin Disraeli put it best, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

I work in the financial world - statistics can tell you whatever you want to say, when you what to say it, and how you want to say it. I can't speak to Mr. Romney's ideas in comparison to Obama's which are rich and powerful and inclusive. Obama has however, accomplished quite a bit in his life. That in itself speaks to his potential as a leader.

I'm not sure what you want me to think about the song "he ain't heavy he's my brother." I don't need an explanation of what the song meant, it's how I live my life.

[samuel smith]

The final word from me is that Obama is just another in the line of utopian, federalistic type politicians who took their cue from John Stuart Mill and later, John Dewey. In other words, secularism and share the wealth are nothing new. You continue to ignore my question: just what has Obama accomplished? Mitt Romney is a conservative(just compare him to Bill Weld) who won the governorship of Massachusetts. It is no wonder the liberal media cannot stand him.

[bigapplewriter]

Mr. Smith,

You are quite adamant about me responding to certain parts of your e-mail without addressing any of the questions I posed in response to yours! I suspect you are not interested in dialogue? That's quite alright - but it's better to position yourself in that manner upfront - as I would choose to respond to other posters who are interesed in discussion.

I read quite a bit of the "liberal media" and as yet have been unable to discover a dislike and more important, a mention, of Mr. Romney.

However, there is Michael Bloomberg,a Republican who has twice, in the bluest of blue cities, New York, been elected Mayor. I think with some googling you'll find a quite complimentary and recent profile of him in the Times, the media you classify as "liberal."

Your demand for me to identify what Obama has accomplished is curious particularly as you do so without providing a single fact about Mr. Romney's accomplishments beyond his degree from Harvard. I'm surrounded by Harvard and other Ivy League graduates so that qualification, though impressive, is not a credential that I equate with accomplishment.

I've read about his career as a consultant. As a former consulant in a Big Four firm, I am well acquainted with the "accomplishments" of partners. Nothing to write home about - consultants are about one thing and one thing only - making jack.

Mr. Obama has accomplished what any Senator can hope to accomplish in two years - representing the interests and desires of his constituents. I believe they would agree he has served them well.

and finally, still not sure what you were trying to say with the "he ain't heavy" comment. i find it quite intriguing!

[samuel smith]

To borrow a phrase from Thoreau: "simplify, simplify, simplify!" If no one knows who Romney is, how, pray tell, did he win Massachusetts? This is my last entry in this so called "dialogue", since I don't want to be an upstage ham. Let's give someone else the opportunity to expose demagoguery and interpret what I've been trying in vain, to say about utopianism. It is utterly hopeless for me to engage in dialogue with anyone who thinks The New York Times and Michael Bloomberg are conservative Republican in nature.