The Obama ~= McCain/Bush meme is at once both idiotic and untrue, for reasons that those who propound it can't and will probably never grasp. It's not about Obama being pure as the driven snow (which he's not) vs. McCain being a craven and corrupt corporate shill (which he is). It it, rather, about an undeniably intelligent, thoughtful, deliberate and temperate man who, while clearly no raving liberal, leans that way in many important ways and appears to "get it" in terms of where we are today and where we need to go, vs., to not mince words, an out of control idiot who doesn't have a clue about anything that actually matters, who has no self-control, no discipline, is not thoughtful or deliberate, and would likely have made a hush mess of things had he one. That Obama is also increasingly looking like a craven, cold-hearted and calculating Machiavellian who has no concept of loyalty doesn't change the fact that he's still immensely intelligent, thoughtful and talented. The choice was always between better and worse--much better and much worse--and not between perfect and awful.

Anyone who can't understand that just because someone comes with some very serious flaws, they're no better than the alternative, is someone who still thinks like an 8 year old. We didn't get a perfect choice. We never do and we never will. I voted for the clearly better guy, even if I had then and have now serious reservations about him. It was the right bet. Things would have been worse with McCain. Anyone who doubts that needs to explain why. At least with Obama there's the possibility of decent policy, even if it's becoming clear that we're going to have to pull teeth to make it happen because his default position is clearly center-right on most issues and he appears determined to stay there, because he is by nature someone who gravitates towards establishment people and positions--but he can be moved. With McCain, though, we would have had four more years of Bush, more or less. Or four years of deadlock.

This whole "They're all the same!" meme is idiotic beyond compare. Not because it doesn't contain some superficial element of truth to it, since most successful politicians tend to be somewhat dishonest, calculating and disappointing, but because there are undeniably profound differences between politicians, and they're NOT all the same in all ways, and we usually do have a choice between, at least, the lesser of two evils. To dismiss them all as the same is to express one's inanity and immaturity--and irresponsibility--vainly hidden behind a transparent veil of adolescent and thus unearned cynicism. Perhaps they're all devils (although, of course, they're not), but even if so, I firmly believe that I voted for the by far better "devil".

Also, anyone peddling the "They're all the same!" meme needs to explain Jefferson, Lincoln, TR, FDR and LBJ. Yes, I know, Jefferson owned slaves, Lincoln suspended habeas, TR was at heart a corporatist imperialist, FDR sent Japanese-Americans in camps, LBJ and Vietnam, etc. But Jefferson wrote one of the most important documents in US history and along with others put in motion plans that set the course of US growth, Lincoln preserved the union and freed the slaves, TR busted trusts and promoted the progressive income and estate taxes, FDR ended the Great Depression, won WWII and turned the US into a thriving social democracy, and LBJ passed the Civil and Voting rights acts and ended legal segregation. Someone wants to equate them with John Adams, James Polk, Rutherford B. Hayes, Herbert Hoover and Richard Nixon, go right ahead and make a fool of yourself. I'll bring the popcorn.

a rebroadcast of today's Senate Finance Committee hearing on "Investment Fraud and Offshore Tax Evasion", about Madoff, AIG, etc., and which is supposed to be airing right now, and replaced it with a 2 year old lecture on the history of Al Qaida.

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/index.php?main_page=product_video_info&products_id=284675-1

Hmm...

When I searched YouTube for Dire Straits' Money For Nothing, which came to mind regarding AIG, I found this version, as seen in the screenshot in this comment I just posted on DKos:

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2009/3/17/164238/489/153#c153

Eerie, no?

Onoez, we're being ignored! Should we hide the wabbit, or are we the ones who are supposed to boil them in this scenario? One does get confused in this McCain-free world.

Would you like a madeleine with that, Mr. Proust?

Last year rumors came out claiming that he received a sweetheart deal from a company that his Banking committee oversaw, and yet there was no DoJ investigation even though the GOP could have capitalized on it politically, something that it didn't hesitate to do in the past, including Bob Menendez of nearby NJ during the '06 election, with bogus corruption charges.

Then Obama betrayed Dodd over FISA and left him dangling in the wind.

Then the GOP accused Dodd, Frank, Waters, ACORN and the CRA of causing the meltdown.

And now this. Despite Dodd's having been one of the most consistent voices against torture, warrantless wiretaps, the war, detention, etc. Something stinks here, with both sides seeming to be taking shots at him, generally without substance. What's going on here?

And why is the other senator from CT getting all the love from Obama, the GOP and the media, despite his having stabbed Obama and Dems in the back? Again, something stinks here.

We frankly don't give a damn.