New NY State License Plate Revealed—And Required On All Cars
Access-A-Ride Renders Bike Lane Inaccessible
Cops: Fort Greene Violence Sparked By Chicken Wing Promotion
The UWS Gets Its Very Own Apple Store
64 Things Restaurant Patrons Must NEVER Do
Jonathan Tasini, the Democratic longshot challenger to Senator Hillary Clinton, aiming to make a splash at the primary on September 12, seems to be gaining a bit of media momentum. There are big stories about him in the Observer and NY Times today. The Observer details how Tasini met with the NY Times editorial board - resulting in a Monday editorial urging Clinton to pay attention to Tasini and an earlier NY Post editorial urging a debate between Tasini and Clinton:
But The Times wasn’t advocating for Mr. Tasini in a vacuum. A week earlier, on Aug. 15, Mr. Tasini’s cause was adopted by the conservative Post—which has barely acknowledged the existence of the Tasini campaign in its news pages, but which argued nonetheless that the unapologetically left-wing activist deserved a chance to debate Mrs. Clinton on television.And all articles point to the fact that like Senator Joe Lieberman, Clinton has been pro-war whereas Tasini is anti-war. (Of course, Clinton has tons of money to spend on a campaign.) The NY Times has a quote from Marko Moulitsas that explains the lack of online enthusiasm for Tasini: “I fed off the excitement and energy [Ned] Lamont created amongst Connecticut activists and bloggers. I see none of that energy or excitement for Tasini.” Well, Clinton is married to Bill Clinton, while Tasini is no millionaire - he's only raised $200,000, which left him short of the $500,000 mark that NY1 requires for candidates to debate.
“Her stance on Iraq—always adaptable to changing circumstances—could stand a little clarification,” the editorial read.
Tom Elliott, a member of the Post’s board involved in writing the editorial, said the purpose behind the Tasini article was in part to try and force Mrs. Clinton to better define her position on the war.
“Her position on Iraq is largely dependent on current circumstances and whatever audience she happens to be speaking before,” said Mr. Elliott. “Just by having that side, that kind of argument, put in contrast with whatever Hillary believes, she would just be forced to contend with an unequivocal position. She has for the most part been hedging her stance.”
The Republican Senate primary is an exercise in going through the motions, it seems - is that what the Democratic primary is, or are you voting?
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
yes, voting in the Dem primary. turning out for spitzer, not that he nor hillary need my help!
I'm voting, and voting for Tasini. This is not going through the motions - it's the only opportunity for Democrats to express their opposition to the war, since there will only be pro-war candidates for Senate in the general election.
The blogger quoted in this post is actually named
Markos Moulitsas. I'm sure it's just a typo.
Democrats are taking out their anger with Bush and the GOP on the people in congress who are on our side, this is stupid. Joe Lieberman was one thing, but Hillary Clinton is no Joe Lieberman. If you want to change course in Iraq, the thing to do is to support the strong dems we have and to support the Democrats who are challenging Republican Incumbents.
I'm voting for Hillary Clinton, our state could not have a better advocate. Having a former first lady who is on our side is the best thing for NY.
Hillary Clinton has been fighting Bush on the war and trying to take us in a new direction for well over a year.
While many in the country are unhappy with the war, around 2/3rds of the people think that just pulling out and leaving the nation in a civil war is not the right thing to do. We have to leave in a timely manner. I don't think Bush is right, and I don't think Tasini is right either.
Hillary Clinton has earned my trust. Maybe if we send her back to congress with a Democratic Majority in 06, she can do something about this war, this idiot president and our national health care crisis.
timbnyc,
great! vote for someone you know nothing about (except that he didn't have to make the decision to support or not support the war until he decided to run for senate) and let's lose the seat to a republican and then we'll really "show" them how we feel about the war in iraq. i bet you voted for nader, too.
Thanks, land! I know plenty about Tasini - including his views on healthcare, gay marriage, free trade, Israel-Lebanon, etc. On each of these issues, Clinton's position is the same as or only finely distinguishable from Bush's. So, I agree with you - no Republicans!
I bet none of you can explain how the Democrats would improve healthcare.
From my understanding the reason why there hasn't been much momentum for Tasini is because he's a bit of a dick, and had some shady connection to the insurance fraud that hit the national writer's union , when he was its president.
Anyone But Hillary, the unprincipled invertebrate.
tasini didnt vote in 9 elections in the past 14 years.
so he's a candidate who latches on to one issue when he feels like caring about the government? what happened to the 9 years where he didnt feel it was worth his time to go to the voting booth?
http://www.ny1.com/ny1/content/index.jsp?stid=1&aid=62044