http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/21/185328/361 Obama's campaign purchased national television airtime on CNN and MSNBC in preparation for South Carolina primary. Hillary Clinton's advisers call this <a href="http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/01/21/team-clinton-says-obama-broke-the-rules/">"a clear and blatant violation"</a> of agreements between Democratic candidates not to campaign in Florida. No, Obama was not stumping in Florida, nor had he bought any local television advertisements, but Clinton claims that since 92% of Florida households get CNN, en-us Wed, 23 Jan 2008 11:13:58 EST Mon, 28 Jan 2008 12:22:25 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/21/185328/361#19 I admit right-wingers persistently play fast and loose with facts, and have been well rewarded for their lies, so I see your point. News from 1990s mostly doesn't show up on internet, so I couldn't find corroboration for Clinton story other than in WSJ and Mon, 28 Jan 2008 12:22:25 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/21/185328/361#18 <i>but let's be fair</i><p> Why try at fair play?  The conservatives will just take you for a ride if you trust them.  Play fair with the right?  <i>на хуя?</i>  <p> If it's the Wall Street Journal's opinio Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:57:42 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/21/185328/361#17 Would you count Wall Street Journal when it was owned by Dow Jones as "Scaife funded source"?<p> Alternately, if large number of conservative organisations reported IRS investigations during Clinton years but no one could conclusively prove that Clinton ac Mon, 28 Jan 2008 08:53:22 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/21/185328/361#16 <i>So Clinton wouldn't be as bad as Giuliani. Talk about damning with faint praise. Meanwhile, during Clinton Administration, Bill Clinton kept enemies list just as Richard Nixon did and tried to use IRS against them just as Nixon did.</i><p> Do you have a Mon, 28 Jan 2008 00:44:31 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/21/185328/361#15 My objection to your definition has been based on its incompleteness. In Europe, "strong parties" mean that multiple new parties form and many of those new parties gain traction because that becomes only way to effect change. In many of those countries wit Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:28:16 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/21/185328/361#14 Maybe we could find agreement this way - I think what you are describing as powerful is the overall two party system (which, I agree, everyone has a vested interest in maintaining, and I feel it is certainly very "strong" and resistant to change). That I Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:16:26 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/21/185328/361#13 <i>Does that make them "weak"? Yes, by your definition. No, by any appeal to reality.</i> <p> It's not just my definition, it's pretty much accepted among academic political scientists. It's important because it tells you how power is arranged in the pa Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:13:36 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/21/185328/361#12 In other words, your definition of "strong party" revolves around ideologically-cohesive parties on European model, and so you win argument by definition. Liberal-Democratic Party in Japan has run that country almost non-stop since US allowed elections aft Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:05:02 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/21/185328/361#11 It is a partisan theory, but it doesn't argue for the strength of the parties in the same sense that you do. Cox and McCubbins are more interested in parties than many political scientists, but they still accept that the reelection process is essentially Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:59:34 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/21/185328/361#10 As you probably assumed, I will not be reading four books so that I can talk with you. However, I noticed with amusement what was said about second book you referenced: <blockquote>"Scholars of the U.S. House disagree over the importance of political parti Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:36:29 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/21/185328/361#9 <i>US political parties don't have ideological coherence of European or Asian parties not because of their weakness but because they represent coalitions of interests in different states.</i> <p> Dude, I respectfully disagree. The interests of the diffe Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:26:44 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/21/185328/361#8 So Clinton wouldn't be as bad as Giuliani. Talk about damning with faint praise. Meanwhile, during Clinton Administration, Bill Clinton kept enemies list just as Richard Nixon did and tried to use IRS against them just as Nixon did.<p> Obama certainly hasn Thu, 24 Jan 2008 09:33:29 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/21/185328/361#7 US political parties don't have ideological coherence of European or Asian parties not because of their weakness but because they represent coalitions of interests in different states. Republicans in New England don't have much in common with Republicans i Thu, 24 Jan 2008 09:08:30 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/21/185328/361#6 Clinton isn't the one campaigning to reinstate <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/22/us/politics/22giuliani.html?_r=1&incamp=article_popular_2&oref=slogin">the enemies list</a>.<p> I'm sure some people like him or hate him for <a href="http:// Thu, 24 Jan 2008 02:11:16 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/21/185328/361#5 <i>Maybe US would be better off electing some third party guy like Perot or Bloomberg, just to weaken parties. </i> <p> I agree, and I disagree. American parties are actually relatively weak, compared to parties in parliamentary systems. While they hav Wed, 23 Jan 2008 20:11:59 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/21/185328/361#4 Clinton: I think it's obvious that my opponent is pandering to a press that is afraid to call a spade a spade.<p> Obama: Oh bitch, please! Wed, 23 Jan 2008 19:34:27 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/21/185328/361#3 Power of parties thwarts any meaningful change. Their desire to hold on to reins in all respects shapes primary/caucus process. Why does Iowa or New Hampshire always come first? Because they feel like it. Why don't they set up four or five bunches of prima Wed, 23 Jan 2008 15:39:36 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/21/185328/361#2 <i>No matter how you cut it, Clintons' claim that they can get down in mud and rassle with Republicans on their own terms seems repellingly true, as they chose to get down in mud and rassle with Obama (or anyone else who would have challenged them). Why mu Wed, 23 Jan 2008 15:01:34 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/21/185328/361#1 Almost everything about Clinton-Obama race begins to look ugly and contemptible. <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Vote2008/story?id=4176367&page=1">Debate in South Carolina</a> was full of lies, more from Clinton than from Obama but enough from Obama Wed, 23 Jan 2008 13:07:47 EST string http://www.treesandthings.com/search/