A Big Fat Slob

Hillary Wins The Racist Vote

2008-04-23T21:28:00.004-05:00

Earlier this week, Bill Clinton blamed Obama for playing the race card before he denied saying that Obama played the race card.

Well, Bill Clinton may have played the race card before he didn't play the race card. But, his wife trumped the hand by winning the Pennsylvania Racist vote on Tuesday. The CNN exit polls show that 19% of voters on Tuesday admitted that their decision was based on race. Hillary picked up most of those votes.

Hillary: "The Tide is Turning"

2008-04-22T21:23:00.004-05:00

Hope she's got a good boat, because I think the tide has turned:

Pennsylvania Polls

11/5/07 -- Clinton 48% Obama 15%
12/3/07 -- Clinton 43% Obama 15%
01/14/08 -- Clinton 40% Obama 20%
02/18/08 -- Clinton 44% Obama 32%
03/31/08 -- Clinton 47% Obama 42%
04/22/08 -- Clinton 54% Obama 46% (with 76% reporting)

Hillary parlayed a 33-point lead into an 8-point win. Impressive fold. Nationally, among Democrats, in the same period, Obama has moved 33 points, from 23 points down to ten points over She Who Must Be Nominated.

Hillary was handed the nomination on a presumptive platter, and (to mix the metaphor) couldn't close the deal.

I'm not sure what she is celebrating, but I think I see where the tide has indeed turned since November.

What to Watch Today in Pennsylvania

2008-04-22T07:07:00.004-05:00

In a Pennsylvania contest pitting two Democratic powerhouses, one putting together a coalition of blacks and educated white suburbanites, the other counting on the support of white ethnic, union, and blue collar voters, the former can take the state in the right circumstances. How do we know that -- because that is exactly how Fast Eddie Rendell beat Sleepy Bob Junior in the 2002 Pennsylvania Gubernatorial primary. This year, Obama is relying on the same coalition that swept Rendell to victory, while Hillary is courting the Casey coalition. Ironically, but not unexpectedly, Casey is backing Obama and Rendell is stumping for Hillary.

Rendell took only ten counties that year -- but he took them by wide enough margins to offset Casey's middle and northeastern state strength. Philadelphia went to Rendell by a couple hundred thousand votes and he swamped Casey in the elite Philly suburbs, where he won nearly 80% of the vote. He also took the Allentown area of the state by a big margin.

Unfortunately for Obama, he hasn't been able to generate Rendell-like leads in those areas of the state this year. But there are two lurking issues that Rendell and Casey didn't have to deal with which could disrupt expectations -- the invisible seven percent and the disproportionate proportional award of delegates.

The Seven Percent Solution

Three months ago, the Obama forces began a voter registration drive in Pennsylvania. It wasn't as massive as the ones they mounted in other states, but it was significant enough. By the time the deadline to register came in late March, the Democrats in Pennsylvania found themselves with over 300,000 new party affiliates. County voter registration offices were overwhelmed by the response and it is only within the last few weeks that they managed to get the newly-minted voters on the rolls.

All those polls of registered democrats in the state -- you know the ones that have been showing a steady eroding of Hillary's once-20-point-lead down to the margin of error? Well, those polls were taken from a registration list that doesn't include those 300,000+ newly registered democrats.

That group, invisible to the pollsters, could make a significant difference in the results that we see today.

Why?

Well, for one, the new registrants are much more likely to actually turn out and vote, even in this year of the large turnout. Turnout, particularly in Philadelphia and the 'burbs is of particular importance to Obama as he works to cut into Hillary's mid-state strengths. Rendell succeed in '02 by pushing record turnouts in Philadelphia and the surrounding suburbs.

For another, estimates are that the new registrants are breaking Obama at a clip well in excess of 60-40. Add to Obama's numbers 63% of the 38,000 new dems in the union and working class towns in the Lehigh Valley (Allentown/Reading), and you understand why Hillary and Bill have spent so much time there in the last few weeks. There are nearly 30,000 new dems in Pittsburgh, and almost 5,000 more in NEPA (Wilkes-Barre, Scranton) -- Hillary's Western and Eastern presumed strongholds. And in Obama's strength, Philadelphia, they added over 50,000 new Democrats.

The new democratic voters amount to about 7% of the expected turnout today -- keep that in mind when looking at the polls and their MOEs -- seven percent of today's voters were excluded from the polling pool. It might not amount to a new New Hampshire, but it could serve to explain why at the end of the day Hillary's expected ten-point-plus win winnows down substantially.

Disproportionate Delegate Scheme

In putting together the rules for this years delegate selection process, the Pennsylvania Democratic Party opted to award disproportionately more delegates to congressional districts that have gone democratic in the last two elections. This means that winning a reliably-democratic district will net more delegates than winning a similarly-sized republican district.

Not good news for Hillary as her strength comes mainly in the reliably-republican areas of the center and west states. Obama is more likely to win more of the reliably-democratic CDs than Hillary and, even if he does lose the popular vote by six, seven, or even eight points, he could walk away with more delegates -- or shave Clinton's net gain to meaninglessness.

Watch the Turnout

Rendell's victory over Casey in 2002 was based on overwhelming numbers -- huge margins in Philadelphia, 80% of the vote in the Philadelphia suburbs, and big wins in the Lehigh Valley. Polls don't show Obama with Rendell-like numbers in any of those areas.

But, a large turnout in those areas will help Obama threaten the Clinton-expectations. In Philadelphia, a large turnout early will be extremely significant as the African-American population there tends to vote later in the day. If the Philadelphia turnout is high by lunchtime, it could mean that Obama stands to post Rendell-like numbers there.

Obama could win this with high turnouts in key areas of the state. If you start to see numbers like 70% turnout in the Philly suburbs and 60% in the city, and high turnouts in the State College area (home of Penn State's main campus), and in Lancaster in South Central Pennsylvania, which has seen an influx of new residents from Philadelphia, Baltimore and DC, it could mean a surge of Obama supporters showing up to create a rough night for Hillary.

On the other side of the ledger, NE PA (Wilkes Barre, Scranton), Erie County, and Pittsburgh and surrounds, are Clinton counties and strong turnout here could favor her. (Careful here, though. Erie added almost 7,000 new democrats this year and Pittsburgh nearly 30,000.)

Wait for It

The early numbers should show a huge Obama lead -- if they don't, Obama is in for a rough night.

But don't jump to assumptions. The Central and Western counties in Pennsylvania are notoriously slow reporting and that is where Hillary is counting on to win this thing for her (apart from NEPA).

Early Night

This isn't going to be another New Mexico, though -- the results will be known relatively early, 9:30, 10 pm Eastern, at the latest.

Thanks, and Fair Warning

2008-03-25T07:30:00.000-05:00

Thanks -- Many thanks to all who have inquired about the extended absence. It seems that my body just wanted to send me a note that I am not as young as I like to think I feel sometimes, and that perhaps I need to start acting my age. It was quite scary for a few hours, but within a day all seemed nearly normal.

And fair warning -- After a brief hospital stay (including an $18,000 6-hour ER visit -- still wonder why we need universal single payer health care insurance?), and some extended time getting my energy back, I am now approaching 100%. So, I expect to be back here publishing knee-jerk cranky observations with regularity within a week or so. I am very pleased to report that there are no apparent residual effects and my doctors deny that I was even a candidate for this little event.

And the good news -- Baseball is back!

In the meantime -- One of my convalescent readings was a collection of English-language poems. This one, by Sigfried Sassoon struck my fancy around the time that the Despicable Cretin's death toll approached 4,000:

I KNEW a simple soldier boy
Who grinned at life in empty joy,
Slept soundly through the lonesome dark,
And whistled early with the lark.

In winter trenches, cowed and glum,
With crumps and lice and lack of rum,
He put a bullet through his brain.
No one spoke of him again. . . . .

You smug-faced crowds with kindling eye
Who cheer when soldier lads march by,
Sneak home and pray you'll never know
The hell where youth and laughter go.

(More war poems by Sasson here)

Scran'en Hacks Out of Running for Pocono Paper

2008-03-25T07:22:00.004-05:00

It is with a glad heart that I can now give an update to this report that the piece o' crap newspretenda in Scran'en was ogling the Pocono Record.

It appears that the ethically-challenged and journalistically-clueless clowns in the 'lectric city realized that their meager talents were matched by their meager wallets. They fell far behind in the bidding for the Pocono Record and officially "moved on", not doubt to find other newspapers to destroy in their tireless quest to export Scran'en mediocrity.

Yay!

Bush and Economy Sinking Together

2008-02-20T15:02:00.006-05:00

The Fed is expecting slower growth, higher unemployment, and more inflation. The announcement today comes on the heels of two approval polls showing the President with (you pick 'em) 65% or 77% disapproval ratings, driven mainly by extreme displeasure with Bush's handling of the economy.

Well, at least the Repugs have nominated a candidate with strong economic cred . . . oh, wait.

A mere 19% of Americans approve of the way that the Despicable Cretin is handing his job, according to an American Research Group poll released today. (h/t to Spork in the Drawer)

The ARG Poll of 1,100 was conducted by telephone between February 16 and 19. The economy seems to be driving the numbers even lower, as only 14% or respondents approved of Bush's handling of the economy. (And, that was before the Fed said that things are about to get a whole lot worse.)

A Gallup Poll also released today says that 65% of respondents disapproved of the way Bush was handling his job. That poll was conducted by telephone of about 1,000 adults between February 11 and 14.

McCain must be feeling pret-ty good about now . . . .

Superdelegate Anxiety

2008-02-20T07:12:00.005-05:00

Last night, Obama convincingly punctured the coalition of women, blue collars, older voters, and the non-college-educated, which had formed the core support for She Who Must Be Nominated. As Obama threatens the "inevitable" Clinton nomination, attention shifts to the automatic delegates -- the unpledged party regulars who make up about 20% of the convention delegates.

Last evening's results make it certain that the neither Obama nor SWMBN will secure the delegates needed to win the nomination through the primary system. It is also apparent that Obama will march into Denver in August having won more states, ahead in the popular vote, and with more pledged delegates than Hillary. The perceived threat is that the "superdelegates" would support the "designated" candidate of the party establishment and "overturn" the choice of the rank and file.

Nonsense. The 2008 convention can not be a rerun of 1968.

In 1968, when less than 30% of the public supported an unpopular war, the party bosses handed the nomination to a candidate who supported the war policies and had not only failed to win a single primary, but who had secured less than 5% of the popular vote.

But, back then, candidates didn't need the primaries to win the nomination. In 1968, only about a dozen states held primaries. In the remainder, the party delegates were mostly selected by the state committee and their votes controlled by one, or sometimes a small number of, party bosses.

After the assassination of Bobby Kennedy, the leading anti-war candidate was Gene McCarthy, who had won more primaries than any other candidate and was leading all candidates in the popular vote. But, before the convention, Hubert Humphrey, Johnson's vice-president and a supporter of the war policies of the Johnson administration, had secured enough delegates to obtain the nomination and didn't have to participate in the primaries. At the time of Kennedy's death, Humphrey was leading in the delegate count despite having ignored the primaries.

In 2008, when every state has a pre-convention delegate-selection process, the ability of the party bosses to select a nominee despite the outcome of the primaries is virtually eliminated. The superdelegates become relevant only where, as this year, no candidate comes to the convention controlling a majority of the pledged candidates and at least two are within about 800 votes of majority.

The superdelegates are party regulars, there are hundreds of them. Unlike 1968, when literally a handful of party bosses controlled the majority of the convention delegates, no one of them controls a significant number of votes. Instead, these party regulars and long-time party activists, are relatively free to make their own decisions.

They will, and should, make their decision based on their personal evaluation of which candidate would be best for the party, and the country. Essentially, one can reasonably expect their votes will go to the candidate that they believe is best positioned to lead the party to the overwhelming November victory that is apparently in the grasp of the Democrats.

If the nomination is not decided by the time of the convention (which is unlikely), the superdelegates are going to do the politically expedient thing -- go with the candidate who strides into the convention with the greater momentum, with the greater national support, with the greatest chance of taking back the White House. And that is exactly what they were designed to do -- they were not meant to be a modern-day equivalent of the party bosses who handed the party a disaster in 1968.

So, make yourself easy. It is unlikely that the superdelegates will be called on to decide this thing (in this little corner, we think it can be decided before the Pennsylvania primary). If they are, remember that they are lifetime Democrats and political activists. Their imperative is to put a Democrat in the White House and not one of them is going to vote for a person who they don't believe can do that.

(There's a pretty good list of the current status of the superdelegate endorsements at the 2008 Democratic Convention Watch blog.)

MLB's Glass Ceiling -- Woman Ump Tossed

2008-02-19T10:14:00.005-05:00

Back in March of last year, MLB was all about promoting the fact that they were "permitting" long-time minor league umpire Ria Cortesio to work the final major league spring training game of the year. Dutifully, your inconstant correspondent reported, not without a little sarcasm, the announcement.

As we noted at the time, normal umpire progression would have seen Ria in the bigs by the 2007 season. Her seniority placed her next in line for a AAA position, which is under the jurisdiction of Major League Baseball. But, MLB made sure that wouldn't happen -- to her slight surprise, she was released soon after the World Series.

Her mask made it to the Hall of Fame, but MLB apparently has no interest in seeing women invade their turf -- even as umpires. Wouldn't do for Roger Clemens to get squeezed by a woman, now, would it?

Photo Credit: Ria Cortesio, from her Friendster Photo Album.

Preview of a Hillary Presidency?

2008-02-18T10:15:00.005-05:00

I hope not.

Whilst idling away my life and not contributing here regularly, I've been thinking about Hillary. Now, as anyone left who still regularly checks in with this spot is aware, I have never been a big fan of Bill or of She Who Must be Nominated. That said, over the last couple of months she has caused me to soften my attitude towards her. However, the recent shuffling of her campaign hasn't helped me shed the nagging notion that she remains something of a mirror image of what we've been looking at for the last seven years. It is a theme I've babbled about before.

Think of the history of the Despicable Cretin's Administration and what comes to mind? Well, many things, I admit. But high up on any list is mediocrity at best, incompetency at worst, in nearly every agency and key administrative post. Bush's fear of anyone who doesn't "owe" him, who hasn't proved their loyalty to him, his use of appointments to reward loyalists and friends, has given us a goivernment that prizes ideological consistency, personal loyalty to the Despicable Cretin, over talent, insight, and ablility.

Show me a failure, large or small, from Katrina to the books selected for sale at the National Parks, and I'll show you a friend of George.

Hillary, too, has a penchant for keeping her friends close around her, and rewarding their loyalty with key positions. While it is important that the campaign leadership have a close working relationship with the candidate, the candidate who allows friendship, loyalty, and a desire to reward, blind her to merit, talent and performance, runs a risk of failure.

And, the Hillary has seen its share. They were organizationally unprepared for the caucus states, they failed to budget to the point that, despite enjoying an historic war chest, their funds were so depleted that the candidate had to loan the campaign five million bucks to survive January. Not to mention that the campaign message changes faster than the specials at the diner that Hillary visited the other day when the campaign had no backup plan in case the February weather in Wisconsin interfered with their plans one day.

The campaign has been unable to solve Obama; has let Bill Clinton marginalize himself because they had no clear strategy for using him -- suddenly pressing him into service only after the Iowa loss. They seeming had no strategy in place after February 5th, when (as they have been telling everyone for over a year) they expected to have this thing wrapped up. As a result, they've backed themselves into a Guiliani-like corner by making Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania must-win-bigs.

The vaunted (and over-rated) Clinton political machine has had a seat in the center ring as the "neophyte" Obama organizations has run its rings about her.

One hopes that Hillary, if she is the eventual nominee (and it still looks like hers to lose from this little corner), takes a lesson from the failures of the campaign and concentrates on quality, experience, demonstrated talent, when it comes time to fill all those appointed slots in 2009.

Louis "Alleged" DeNaples Indicted; Slots License Pulled

2008-01-30T17:05:00.000-05:00

Louis "Alleged" DeNaples, owner of the Poconos Mount Airy casino, was indicted today for lying about his ties to organized crime. (And, even that piece of crap wannabe paper in Scran'en had to take notice.) The Gaming Board has already suspended his license but is permitting the Casino he owns to continue to operate.

PA House Republicans Looking to Increase Taxes on Individuals

2008-01-18T14:29:00.000-05:00

The Pennsylvania House of Representatives has once again taken up the issue of school real estate taxes. Debate will resume when House members return to session on Monday, January 28.

The central bill under consideration is House Bill 1600, sponsored by Representative David Levdansky (D-Allegheny). This legislation is intended to reduce school property taxes substantially without broadening the sales tax base; however, Representative Sam Rohrer (R-Berks) will offer an amendment to that bill which will expand the sales tax to professional services.

But, somewhat ironically in a bill intended to reduce the tax burden on individuals, Rohrer's bill will exempt businesses from the new tax on professional services. So, businesses that need to hire a lawyer, for example, will not have to pay the sales tax. But, everyone else, that is to say, you and me, who might need, say, a lawyer for criminal, divorce, custody, estate, personal real estate issues, etc., will be subject to payment of the sales tax. (Representative Rohrer's original piece of property tax reform legislation, upon which the amendments are based, is HB 1275.) (Oh, yeah, contingent fee (personal injury) cases are also excluded.

Taxpayer groups (umm, real-estate-tax-payers groups), are putting much pressure on House members to accept the Rohrer amendment. To contact your rep and voice a concern over this latest attempt to impose a penal regressive tax on the middle and lower classes, you can use the House email list.

Having Fun Yet?

2008-01-09T15:48:00.001-05:00

Your erratic correspondent may have been away from the keyboard, but he has been keeping an eye on the goings. This aging body hasn't seen the likes of this season since possibly, and briefly, the tragic 1968 campaign. Even then, many fewer eyes were focused on the contest, and even they had not bothered to turn their gaze until much, much later.

It's probably fair to say that more people have cared longer about the 2008 contest than any ever before. While a large part of the interest is issue-driven, I am crediting something else entirely -- if not the re-bloom of democracy, at least the whiff of its flower. The popular interest has been there through polls suggesting the leading issue to be Iraq, and then Health Care, and then Iraq, then Health Care, and now (and likely through November) the economy (it's always the economy). These critical issues, addressed with some certain measure of difference by the two parties, has no doubt contributed to the unprecedented long attention span. But there is more needed to explain the continuing attention.

With no heir apparent on either side, the field was wide open for the likely (Hillary and Rudy) and the unlikely (Huckabee and Obama). The result has been an engaged and engaging debate over policy and procedure in both parties. Sure, each side has an ideological touchstone, but creative and new solutions have been served up by those who have come and gone over the last two+ years.

Both parties offer something approaching real dialogue about ideas, and actual debate over world-views. The overall quality of the campaigns are higher than we generally recall, and the depth of the respective fields is surprising. Paul, Kucinich, Huckabee, Biden, Richardson, Hunter, are all articulate advocates on the issues they have made their own and they have all moved and lifted the debate, in sometimes small and in sometimes larger ways, over the last year. The lower tier candidates have excited significant portions of the populace (including many new to the process, young and old), challenged the "designated" candidates, and expanded the scope of the discussion. (Except for Gravel), it has therefore been unfortunate that some of them they have been sliced off the debate stages.

Personally, I'd rather see Obama or Edwards on the Democratic ticket in November. But there was something exciting about the results in New Hampshire. You can count me among the doubters of Omentum. I fully expected Hillary's superior, more experienced organization, to pull out of the apparent nosedive of the last two weeks. I have, reluctantly, suggested that the calendar may well be too short for She Who Must Be Nominated to be stopped.

How and why did New Hampshire happen? I dunno. (But I find it interesting that, among all the explanations that are being thrown around out there, no one is looking into the possibility that the polls were fubar.)

That said, I'll direct you to her GOTV machine. Her performance in NH shows what a highly-experienced team can do in a close contest -- and make no mistake, Hillary's team has been doing this, mostly for a Clinton, for a few decades now. Hillary and Bill know the routine, and know NH, in ways to which the most savvy of the Obama team can only aspire.

Hillary knew where her strength lay. That's why we saw women and middle-class labor voters driven out to the polls in huge numbers by the Hillary GOTV team.

Now it is off the the South and West. Much different voter profiles in both and different mixes of candidate appeals. Out West, will Bill Richardson be a factor? He may well and, if does make an impact, I'd have to guess that his support will be drawn from Hillary.

Keep in mind, also, that Obama lost among registered Democrats in both Iowa and NH -- his support came from cross-overs and independents. Between now and February 5, there are far fewer states which allow crossing-over or who give independents a voice.

In the South, what can Edwards do? The only rationale for Edwards remaining in the race is not to win it -- but to show enough strength in the South to allow him to insist on a role at the convention. I haven't studied the cross-tabs on this, but I would speculate that Edwards will draw from Obama more than Hillary.

The interplay and possibilities are endless, and that's what makes it fun (and I haven't even gotten to talk about the complications on the other side). Having a two and a half-headed contest, for at least another three and a half weeks, can only serve to continue to refine the Democratic message, upgrading the discussion, pulling in more first-time participants in the process.

So, if you're not having fun, well, hope you're enjoying Skating With the Stars . . . the rest of us will let you know how it plays out.

Of Heroes and Kings . . . .

2008-01-05T07:26:00.000-05:00

Smoke, Meet Fire: State Charges DeNaples Priest with Perjury

2008-01-02T15:02:00.000-05:00

The Scranton Catholic Priest who testified on behalf of Louis "Alleged" DeNaples was arrested today on charges of lying to the Grand Jury investigating DeNaples. According to AP reports, Joseph Sica, the priest, was charged with lying to the grand jury when he testified that he didn't have a relationship with mob boss Russell Bufalino.

Photo Credit: "Alleged" DeNaples and Sica, Pocono Record file photo

Re-Running With Hillary

2007-12-12T11:24:00.000-05:00

During my period of inattention, voters in the near primary states have been paying more attention. And, while Hillary still leads on national polls -- in places where serious attention is finally being paid, She Who Must Be Nominated is having a bit of a stumble.

One reason for this, I humbly posit, is not Hillary trying to beat up on a 5-year old Obama, or planting interrogators, or any of the other stuff and nonsense. But a real reason for her slide may have something to do with her being insufficiently the anti-Bush. A topic we suggested back in March, when NO one was paying attention, and which we respectfully serve up again below the fold.

From March 19, 2007: Some thoughts which have been rattling around in my aged head for several weeks and probably not ready for prime time . . . .

If History is any indication, 2008 should be a banner year for the Democrats on the National level. Granting that History may be as irrelevant to the outcome of Presidential elections as to Baseball's All-Star game, the same History which bodes well for the Democrats might have an asterisk named Hillary.

When public opinion of a sitting President falls to the miserable failure level, one often sees a switch of the political Party in residence at 1600 Pennsylvania. Some examples include when FDR (D) wasted Hoover (R), in the early 30s; twenty years later when Ike (R) spanked Stevenson following Truman's second term (when, as the Dubya gang likes to point out, Truman's job-approval were Bushian low-20s); in the 70s it happened twice, first when Carter (D) took over from Ford/Nixon and then four years later, when Reagan sent Carter to early retirement.

But, looking at the men who occupied the White House on Election Day and the men who replaced them on Inauguration Day suggests that the electorate might have been looking for more than a change of Party.

By '32, Hoover was seen as weak-minded and incompetent, FDR as strong, capable, dependable. Truman was perceived as stubborn and irascible, hard to get along with -- taking over the steel mills, recalling MacArthur. Ike, well, EVERYone Liked Ike. Carter was the nuclear-engineer-smart, calm, trustworthy gentleman from the South, taking over from the decidedly untrustworthy, ungentlemanly, Nixon regime, with his unelected Veep, Ford, viewed as less than smart and perhaps a little untrustworthy himself. And, finally, the in-control, clear-eyed Reagan taking over for a Carter Administration adept at fumbling domestic policy and international relations.

These caricatures of the day suggest that, in response to what is largely perceived as a "failure presidency", the voters may have been looking as much for someone perceived as offering an opposite set of characteristics, as for an opposite party.

There need be little breath spent on arguing that the Bush Administration is widely-perceived as a decidedly failed Presidency. While the ultimate historical judgment might, as it did with Truman, change given time and distance (yeah, right), today Bush struggles to avoid setting new lows in approval and performance.

So, looking to 2008, what are the popular-perceptions about why Bush is such a miserable failure?

Seems too easy, but a list of some of the problems that most would probably say contribute to the failure of this Administration would have to include the Iraq Invasion, Bush's seemingly endless ability to create divisions and generate impassioned detractors, and his, if not dishonesty, then at least the lack of candor, or political posturing, informing all he does or says.

Recognizing that the deck becomes stacked by which elements one lists, but the Hillary Problem, and the problem WITH Hillary, is that she might not be stacking up very well on the electorate's unconscious lists of the "problems with George" -- she might not offer the great unwashed enough of a change in character to lead to a change in Party in the White House. She was a supporter of the war then, and is insufficiently repentant. Is she divisive? If you have to ask, you haven't been paying attention. Is she perceived to lack candor, as being political and calculating? Did you see her in Selma? Does she root for the Mets or the Yankees?

Just looking at it this way, if it is even close to something real, doesn't it help explain Obama's popularity? Hillary may not be enough the un-Bush to give the Democrats what History suggests may be theirs in 2008 as long as they don't screw it up.

Stumble Out

2007-11-25T16:52:00.000-05:00

Some recent links from my Stumble folder for your amusement and distraction, after the break.

News N Shit .com / News the Magazine: Hybrid Car Hackers Get 230 mpg

WhosYourPrez.com - The supreme leader of all campaign sites!

15 Amazing little known body tricks - WhatsTheCrack.net

Poke your eyes out, break bricks, stop your pulse and more!

Death and Taxes 2008 Poster - $24.95 : ..., The Entire Federal Government... in 6 Square Feet

... Death and Taxes 2008 Poster - “Death and Taxes” is a representational poster of the federal discretionary budget; the amount of money that is spent at the discretion of your elected representatives in Congress. Basically, your federal income taxes. The data is from the President's budget request for 2008. It will be debated, amended, and approved

YouTube - Big Brother is watching you!!

Your email and conversation is monitored.

EFF: Class-Action Lawsuit Against AT&T

Electronic Frontier Foundation is a nonprofit group working to protect your digital rights.

Mariah Power - Wind & Siting

Mariah Power Wind Power generators for home or business

Santa Billboard Glasgow

Activist silenced for fear of surveillance -- Newsday.com

Jennifer Flynn is not a rabble-rouser. She's not an
aspiring suicide bomber. She doesn't advocate the overthrow of the government. Instead, she pushes for funding and better treatment for people with HIV and AIDS.

US Newspapers - US Newspaper List

Links to newspapers and TV stations in the United States. Looking for a newspaper? Start here!

NOVA | The Elegant Universe | Watch the Program | PBS

Following the broadcast of the NOVA mini-series The Elegant Universe, watch all three episodes here, divided into chapters, available in the QuickTime or RealPlayer plug-ins.

news n shit .com - big money chart

Very Short List / Great discoveries + Short, sweet e-mail + 5 Days a Week

Very Short List is the very short, very free daily e-mail that uncovers excellent, under-hyped things to see, read, and hear five days a week.

Video: The Best Compilation of Bush Administration Lies About Iraq I’ve Ever Seen - YouMob

For Anyone Still Confused About Global Politics // Skilluminati Research

Global Dimming

San Francisco After 1906 Earthquake

FWWeekly: Feature: Wednesday, October 10, 2007

INFORMATION CLEARING HOUSE. NEWS, COMMENTARY & INSIGHT

The universe as a hologram

The Universe as a hologram - Does Objective Reality Exist, or is the Universe a Phantasm?

MotherEarthSearch - Saving Energy & the Earth One Search at a Time

Must Watch - Sprword.com

The Lovenstein Institute of Scranton Pennsylvania is a HOAX

Google Maps + Google Video + Mashup - Claude Lelouch's Rendezvous

EVO: eco-friendly products, services, and information

EVO - your marketplace for natural, clean & green products. Make greener choices every day.

Death Trivia

Strange, gross, incredible, creepy, weird and hilarious things about death - photos, trivia and even a quiz to see if you'll go postal!

PCRM >> Good Medicine Magazine >> Health vs. Pork: Congress Debates the Farm Bill >> Autumn 2007

Dead City Library - The Corridor

Victims Of Government Violence

Cost of Iraq War

googleTitle

Confessions of a College Callgirl

Married In Ohio

Greta Christina's Blog: Atheists and Anger

Sex, atheism, politics, dreams, and whatever. Thinking out loud since 2005.

YouTube - Plato - The Cave

Plato among the Greeks was the first who conceived a method of knowledge, although neither of them always distinguished the bare outline or form from the sub...

Education and Learning Discussion // View topic - John Taylor Gatto's 1990 Speach

The Greatest Posturing of All Time | Featured Articles | The Attorney Store

After over 3 years of telling the world that it did nothing wrong and that it will defend itself case-by-case - every case - ''over whatever period of years'' it will take, Merck did a 180 degree turn when it announced Friday, November 9, 2007, that it had settled the litigation only after a dozen or so jury trials.

Ron Paul doesn't deserve your support - EMPTV

Ron Paul, a Republican Congressman from Texas, is an unconventional contender in...

Friedrich Nietzsche

Friedrich Nietzsche's Complete Writings Online, including his letters from 1865-1889.

philosophy pages

Work : Essays // George Orwell // www.k-1.com/Orwell

This site is dedicated to the life and work of the British author George Orwell who achieved prominence in the late 1940's as the author of two brilliant satires attacking totalitarianism.

Discussion:Persuade an Atheist to Become Christian - wikiHow

VDARE.com: 05/17/07 - But Who Was Right—Rudy or Ron?

American Journalism Review

NASA World Wind

YouTube - Search for meaning

Conference in Toronto with students for search for meaning.

1984comic.com | War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength.

Your Eyes Don’t Lie - Reading Thoughts By Eye Movements | Mind Control Techniques, Covert Hypnosis, and Persuasion

The eyes have this habit of positioning themselves according to the thoughts that are in your head, and other people can often understand what you are thinking

Court Decisions (by Chapter)

Unsubscribe Me

2007-11-24T07:23:00.000-05:00

This is a portion of a film created by Amnesty International for their Unsubscribe Me campaign. It shows a performance artist actually subjected to the "interrogation" techniques which Amnesty says are authorized in the CIA handbook. In this scene, the artist playing the prisoner has been placed in authorized "stress positions" for six hours.

Amnesty is asking people around the world to sign a petition opposing the abuse of human rights in the name of the war on terror. For more information, check out the Amnesty Unsubscribe website. If you are ready to sign the petition, you can Unsubscribe Here.

Ron Paul, Representing the Lunatic Fringe

2007-11-19T06:48:00.000-05:00

Ron Paul has become the latest darling of the pajama media and generated what appears to be a true grassroots following. Accounting for this are some of his atypical-for-a-Republican positions on front-line issues. The popularity of his opposition to the war policies of the Despicable Cretin, his activist support for personal privacy (including opposition to the Patriot Act and the national ID card), his supposedly "principled" defense of Constitutional limits, and his in-your-face attacks on the intellectual inconsistency of his fellow Republican candidates, have given him the 2008 "straight-talk" mantle.

But Ron Paul's attractiveness is only skin-deep. Unfortunately, for a significant portion of voters, skin-deep is as far as they go. A closer look at some of his other positions, especially on social issues, reveals a different and, frankly, disturbing picture of the candidate.

Ron Paul not only opposes the right to choose, but he opposes any federal support for family planning, including counseling, sex education, and contraceptive advice or support.

And, of course, Paul wants Roe v Wade overturned. While Paul likes to promote himself as a defender of personal privacy and liberty, he ignores the privacy and liberty issues at the heart of the abortion issue and the Roe v. Wade decision -- his support for personal liberty and privacy only extends to liberty and privacy invoked in favor of those portions of the christian mythology he has adopted. In other words -- In Ron Paul's America, your personal privacy and liberty choices are protectible to the extent that they happen to coincide with Paul's personal choices.

As with a women's right to control her own body, Paul's concept of personal liberty also requires that your civil liberties stop at his personal gag factor. Ron Paul opposes equal rights for gays. And, of course, if Ron Paul is personally opposed to queers getting married, his so-called "principled" defense of the Constitution becomes irrelevant. Thus, despite his precious Constitution clearly requiring all States to honor give "full faith and credit" to the laws of their sister States, Paul favors abandoning that provision when he and his personal mythology doesn't like what they have done.

The full faith and credit clause is what allows you to drive in New Jersey with your Pennsylvania license; it is what permits you to live as husband and wife in New York, although you got married in Florida; it is what allows you to collect a judgment against a company in Iowa issued by a Delaware court. But that same clause, Paul insists, can't be used to "force" bigots like him to recognize gay marriages because, well, because he doesn't want to. Paul supports the Defense of Marriage Act and wants to strip the federal courts of their power to apply the federal Constitution to state laws on such matters. Indeed, Paul wants to deny the federal courts the power to decide all First Amendment controversies.

Paul opposes stem-cell research because, he says, that taxpayers shouldn't have to fund projects that they find "ethically abhorrent". I haven't found "ethically abhorrent" in my copy of the Constitution. But, if that were the test, well, then, I find faith-based government programs "ethically abhorrent", I find prayer "ethically abhorrent", as well as tax-relief for churches. I know, I am in the minority. But, so are the people that find stem-cell research "ethically abhorrent". Paul's argument is just cover for his desire to impose his personal set of values, his christian mythology, on the rest of us.

Paul wants to drill for oil in ANWR and everywhere else he can. His excuse -- to reduce our dependence on Middle-Eastern oil. But, that important "principle" stops at the economic interests of corporate America, as Paul opposes strict fuel economy standards.

Ron Paul wants a christian nation, and he is willing to lie about the Constitution to convince you. Among the false statements in his little tome on christianity is that the United States Constitution is "replete with references to God". Umm, no it isn't. In fact, the word "god" appears no where in the text. Either Ron Paul doesn't know that -- which puts the lie to his pretense of advocacy for the Constitution -- or he does -- which puts the lie to him. Either way . . . .

But what would you expect from someone who says that "a separation of church and state has no historical or constitutional basis", or a guy who wants to teach creationism in public schools?

Ron Paul comes from the lunatic fringe of American society. When he speaks of his "principles", he means his dogma. When he advocates for freedom and personal liberty -- he means just as long as it is consistent with his brand of christian mythology.

Paul also has a questionable history on race issues (and much has been made of the level of support which he enjoys from the white supremacy crowd). In 1996, the Houston Chronicle questioned him and his staff about comments Paul made in his newsletters in 1988 and 1992. At the time, neither Paul nor his staff disowned the comments. Instead, according to the article, Paul tried to explain some of them away, "saying his written commentaries about blacks came in the context of 'current events and statistical reports of the time.'"

Here, according to the Chronicle, are some of Paul's written statements based on those "current events and statistical reports":

“[O]nly about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions"

"Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."

"If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."

[W]e are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers."

And they called Mike Gravel loony?

Fortunately, ideologues like this guy don't go away and he'll be around to siphon scarce Republican money, likely through the convention. Hopefully, he'll then run third-party and continue to help the Democrats.

Lessons From The Past

2007-11-12T06:50:00.001-05:00

With nothing better to do, I spent some time yesterday re-reading the convention acceptance speeches of some Presidential nominees. I'll match the snippets to the candidates below the fold . . . .

Candidate One:

"To Americans of every party I pledge that on Jan. 20 next year our government will again have a cabinet of the ablest men and women to be found in America. The members of that Cabinet will expect and will receive full delegation of the powers of their office. They will be capable of administering those powers. They will each be experienced in the task to be done and young enough to do it. This election will bring an end to one-man government in America. . . .

"The present administration in Washington . . . is at war with Congress, and at war with itself. Squabbles between Cabinet members, feuds between rival bureaucrats and bitterness between the President and his own party members, in and out of Congress, have become the order of the day. In ... vital matters ..., we have become familiar with the spectacle of wrangling, bungling and confusion.

"Does anyone suggest that the present national administration is giving either efficient or competent government? We have not heard that claim made, even by its most fanatical supporters. No, all they tell us is that in its young days it did some good things. That we freely grant. But now it has grown old in office. It has become tired and quarrelsome."

Candidate Two:

"Now, we Americans understand freedom. We have earned it, we have lived for it, and we have died for it. This Nation and its people are freedom's model in a searching world. We can be freedom's missionaries in a doubting world. But, ladies and gentlemen, first we must renew freedom's mission in our own hearts and in our own homes.

"[T]he administration which we shall replace has distorted and lost that faith. It has talked and talked and talked and talked the words of freedom. Now, failures . . . . haunt the houses of our once great alliances and undermine the greatest bulwark ever erected by free nations - the NATO community. Failures proclaim lost leadership, obscure purpose, weakening wills, and the risk of inciting our sworn enemies to new aggressions and to new excesses. Because of this administration we are tonight a world divided - we are a Nation becalmed. We have lost the brisk pace of diversity and the genius of individual creativity. We are plodding at a pace set by centralized planning, red tape, rules without responsibility, and regimentation without recourse....

"Rather than moral leadership, [we] have been given bread and circuses, spectacles, and, yes, they have even been given scandals. Tonight there is . . . corruption in our highest offices, aimlessness among our youth, anxiety among our elders and there is a virtual despair among the many who look beyond material success for the inner meaning of their lives. Where examples of morality should be set, the opposite is seen. Small men, seeking great wealth or power, have too often and too long turned even the highest levels of public service into mere personal opportunity.

"Now, certainly, simple honesty is not too much to demand of men in government."

Candidate Three:

"America cries out for the unity that this Administration has destroyed. . . . America is in trouble today not because her people have failed but because her leaders have failed. And what America needs are leaders to match the greatness of her people. . . .

"When the strongest nation in the world can be tied down for four years in a war . . . with no end in sight; When the richest nation in the world can't manage its own economy; When the nation with the greatest tradition of the rule of law is plagued by unprecedented lawlessness; . . .

"And when the President of the United States cannot travel abroad or to any major city at home without fear of a hostile demonstration -- then it's time for new leadership for the United States of America."

As you might have surmised, they are all Republicans.

Candidate One: Thomas Dewey, railing against Roosevelt and his three terms in office, at the Republican Convention in Chicago, on June 28, 1944.

Candidate Two: Barry Goldwater at the 1964 Republican Convention in San Fransisco (of all places).

Candidate Three: Richard Nixon, accepting the 1968 nomination in Miami.

Hillary, meet Hillary

2007-11-11T15:49:00.000-05:00

Continuing our lazy-ass ways, here's another video.

(A bite 'o the hoagie to Media Lizzy)

How Lucky Do You Feel?

2007-11-11T13:20:00.001-05:00

You Got Owners

2007-11-10T06:50:00.000-05:00

Barletta's Victory in Hazleton

2007-11-07T09:37:00.000-05:00

Barletta essentially ran unopposed and picked up sizable percentages in an extremely low turnout. With well-over 18,000 voting-aged residents, about 2,900 bothered to stumble into the polls and vote in the Mayoral "contest".

The best report we've seen on this is in John Micek's Capital Ideas (scroll down -- it is the very last item in the column). A perfect tribute to Hazleton's "source of all truth".

Election Day, and I am Pissed

2007-11-06T19:56:00.000-05:00

Voters are staying away from the polls in droves.

In my little hamlet, control of the local supervisor board, the tax collector, and school board is up for grabs, not to mention the county commissioners -- you know, all the folk who set your property taxes, regulate your zoning, hire the police (or not), and basically affect your lives practically every day.

We've got about 1800 eligible voters in our 10 square. I was the fifteenth voter about ten minutes after the polls opened and my son, about ten minutes before they closed, was number 164.

Less than one out of ten eligible voters bothered to make it to the polls here. This gave about 83 people -- out of 1800 -- the power to decide the makeup of the board of supervisors for the next six years.

Hey neighbor, thanks for nothing.

Top Voter Issue for 2008

2007-11-06T19:52:00.000-05:00

Poll: Most Important Issue For 2008 Voters