January 29, 2008

Traveling around the blogs



Hillary won big tonight in Florida, and please spare me the argument that Florida's delegates won't be seated. We all know they will. If the Democratic Party really wants to win in November, its members will not disenfranchise 1.6 million Democratic voters.

So, I took a trip around the liberal blogosphere to see what the reaction might be to such a huge victory by the first viable woman candidate AND in a state where no candidates campaigned. Unless, of course, if you consider Obama's cable ad buy that played in Florida over the last two weeks in Florida a violation of the pledge the candidates all agreed to, then certainly this contest is telling, no matter how much the Obama campaign tries to laugh it off.

And believe me, there were grassroots groups organizing in Florida for their candidates. Shouldn't this be a huge victory for progressives? A pure test of the strength of grassroots organizing! No overlord campaign staff, no directions from on high! To echo Dr. Dean: Yeargh!

Except for one, eensy, fly in the ointment. The favored candidates of the blogosphere got trounced. That wasn't supposed to happen! So rather than cheer the result, here's what I found out there:

DailyKos lists the Republican results ahead of the Dems.


Over at The Huffington Post, it looks like Republicanland. Oh wait, there's a brief mention of the "beauty contest" in Florida.


Talking Points Memo has one post about how the Clinton campaign will not be able to spin their "win." The rest of the posts deal with the Republicans in the race.

And we are having a big fight at DailyKos trying to get DHinMI to correct the front page post claiming that Hillary campaigned or did events in Florida. No. She honored the pledge. She did no public campaigning, ran no ads and only did a few private fundraisers, as did Obama.

The Democratic Response?

Regarding Sebelius' speech last night:

Her words "new American majority" jumped out at me. Hmm, where have I heard that before? Oh yeah, Obama's NH speech.

Hmm, given that it was well known that she was going to be endorsing Barack Obama the next day, I would have hoped the DNC would have picked a neutral Democrat to deliver the Democratic answer to Bush's SOTU.

And dear gawd, after one disclaimer that she was a Democrat, I heard nothing more about Democratic values, but the same old mush about bi-partisanship, working together, ad nauseum. It really was Obama's stump speech revisited.

Hey Kathleen, when the Republicans start playing nice, give me a call.

January 27, 2008

A former Obama supporter speaks

Related to my previous post Teh Nutroots says it well at Buck Naked Politics:

But it seems that no one must be permitted to criticize our new Democratic conquering hero.

All of which is making me---previously an Obama supporter myself---like Obama less, whereas I was previously planning to vote for him.

I don't want an untouchable idol running for president. So often they turn out to have feet of clay. I want the issues, and the criticisms, thoroughly threshed out in public forum so I have an idea what I'm dealing with here. I don't want any nasty surprises AFTER the nomination, when they will find out the meaning of dirty campaign tactics and "smears."

But the Obama's position just seems to be that the Clintons should just roll over and hand Obama the nomination now on the strength of the light corruscating from his glittering halo. What abject nonsense.

"...bias against the Clintons in the media borders on mental illness"

Craig Crawford:

You know, I have sat down here in Florida for the last month. And I have watched the coverage, and I really think the evidence-free bias against the Clintons in the media borders on mental illness. I mean, I think when Dr. Phil gets done with Britney [Spears], he ought to go to Washington and stage an intervention at the National Press Club. I mean, we've gotten into a situation where if you try to be fair to the Clintons, if you try to be objective, if you try to say, "Well, where's the evidence of racism in the Clinton campaign?" you're accused of being a naïve shill for the Clintons. I mean, I think if somebody came out today and said that Bill Clinton -- if the town drunk in Columbia [South Carolina] came out and said, "Bill Clinton last night was poisoning the drinking water in Obama precincts," the media would say, "Ah, there goes Clinton again. You can't trust him." I really think it's a problem. ...
Video at link (MediaMatters for America)

Reality Check

For those of you out there who are operating under the delusion that an Obama candidacy / presidency will bring the kind of "change" to Washington that he promises, let me direct you to this statement by RNC chair, Robert Duncan.

“Voters in South Carolina have soundly rejected the Democrats’ liberal rhetoric during every presidential contest for over 30 years, and if Barack Obama makes it to the general election, 2008 will be no different. Most South Carolina voters want a different kind of ‘change’ than Barack Obama is advocating with his proposals to choke off funding for our troops and eliminate tax relief that he claims hard-working families ‘didn’t need.’ Under his high-flying rhetoric and his thin record of experience, it’s clear Barack Obama isn’t ready to be America’s Commander-in-Chief.”
The fact of the matter is Barack Obama has never had to fight a tough race against the Republican slime machine. He coasted into the U.S. Senate running against late-entry / carpetbagger / right-wing whack job Alan Keyes. If you don't thing the long knives of the Republican noise machine will come out against Barack Obama in the general election, I've got some land in Florida to sell you.

On the other hand, Hillary Clinton has taken the hits (from the right, the left and the MSM) and just keeps on getting up and soldiering on. Furthermore, she is gracious in defeat, always congratulating Obama on his victories, unlike his skulking out of Nevada last Saturday with nary a word to her OR his supporters, and disingenuously insisting that he had won the national delegate count in Nevada when, in fact, no national delegates were awarded and won't be until the state convention in a couple of months.

Any criticism of Barack is decried as racism, but no lie is too outrageous to believe about Hillary and Bill. Their words are twisted, as are their supporters' words. Hell, if one of her supporters pays a compliment to Barack it's called racist. What a shell game that is! In the MSM Hillary's every word is gone over with a fine tooth comb, mined for its hidden underlying venom, while Barack is purity defined and "above it all."

She doesn't whine, she just keeps on fighting. And I trust that she will continue to do so, for me, for my family, for my community and for my country.

So, if you like, you can choose the dreamer who will be rudely awakened from his dreaming by the roar of the right-wing noise machine.

I'll take the fighter.

On Edit: All bets are off if these rules posted by Big Tent Democrat are followed in the General Election.

Here are some of the rules that Obama and progressives should look to enforce through to the General Election:

1. Rezko is a nonissue and bringing it up is a slimy personal attack on Obama. This one has the virtue of being true. Let's get that enforceable against John McCain and the other Republicans.

2. Discussions of experience and youth are, at the least, vaguely racist, and a personal attack. When a candidate touts experience or points to Obama's lack of it, they are expressly arguing for a return to the past as opposed to looking to the future. It means they are opposed to change. Indeed, it expressly means for Republicans that they want to continue the policies of the Bush Administration. For Republicans, this also has the virtue of largely being true. The GOP field is indeed basically arguing for a continuation of Bush policies in most areas - tax cuts permanent, continuatio of the Iraq Debacle, less government regulation, etc.

3. What Obama Meant. Any review of Obama statements or past votes is subject to an explanation by Obama of what he REALLY meant. Any criticism of Obama's statements which do not take into account Obama's clarifications and explanations of what he REALLY meant are unfair personal attacks and the attacker is a "liar" who will say and do anything to get elected.

4. Obama's attacks are always fair and merited. Any suggestion otherwise is, at the least, vaguely racist.

Can we get these rules enforced in the Media in a General Election? Let's hope so if Obama is the nominee.

January 24, 2008

Lyon County Caucus Results by Precinct

Precinct

Clinton

Edwards

Kucinich

Obama

Lyon 1

2

40%

1

20%

0

0%

2

40%

Lyon 2

1

20%

1

20%

0

0%

3

60%

Lyon 3

2

40%

0

0%

0

0%

3

60%

Lyon 4

1

25%

1

25%

0

0%

2

50%

Lyon 5

2

50%

0

0%

0

0%

2

50%

Lyon 6

1

25%

0

0%

0

0%

3

75%

Lyon 7

1

33.33%

0

0%

0

0%

2

66.67%

Lyon 8

0

0%

0

0%

0

0%

1

100%

Lyon 9

1

25%

1

25%

0

0%

2

50%

Lyon 10

1

50%

0

0%

0

0%

1

50%

Lyon 11

2

40%

1

20%

0

0%

2

40%

Lyon 12

1

33.33%

1

33.33%

0

0%

1

33.33%

Lyon 13

1

50%

0

0%

0

0%

1

50%

Lyon 14

4

66.67%

0

0%

0

0%

2

33.33%

Lyon 15

3

50%

0

0%

0

0%

3

50%

Lyon 16

3

50%

1

16.67%

0

0%

2

33.33%

Lyon 17

2

40%

1

20%

0

0%

2

40%

Lyon 18

2

66.67%

0

0%

0

0%

1

33.33%

Lyon 19

1

33.33%

1

33.33%

0

0%

1

33.33%

Lyon 20

0

0%

0

0%

1

50%

1

50%

Lyon 21

4

57.14%

0

0%

0

0%

3

42.86%

Lyon 22

1

50%

0

0%

0

0%

1

50%

Lyon 23

3

50%

1

16.67%

0

0%

2

33.33%

Lyon 24

2

40%

2

40%

0

0%

1

20%

Lyon 25

2

40%

1

20%

0

0%

2

40%

Lyon 26

2

66.67%

0

0%

0

0%

1

33.33%

Lyon 27

2

50%

1

25%

0

0%

1

25%

Lyon 28

1

50%

0

0%

0

0%

1

50%

Lyon 29

1

33.33%

1

33.33%

0

0%

1

33.33%

Lyon 30

2

66.67%

0

0%

0

0%

1

33.33%

Lyon 31

1

25%

1

25%

0

0%

2

50%

Lyon 32

3

60%

0

0%

0

0%

2

40%

Lyon 33

4

66.67%

0

0%

0

0%

2

33.33%

Lyon 34

2

50%

1

25%

0

0%

1

25%

Lyon 35

1

50%

0

0%

0

0%

1

50%

Lyon 36

1

100%

0

0%

0

0%

0

0%

Lyon 37

2

50%

0

0%

0

0%

2

50%

Lyon 38

2

50%

0

0%

0

0%

2

50%

Lyon 39

4

66.67%

0

0%

0

0%

2

33.33%

Lyon 40

3

60%

0

0%

0

0%

2

40%

Total

74

46.54%

17

10.69%

1

0.63%

67

42.14%