The leadership in the House and Senate are playing a dangerous game of chicken that just might result in the crashing and burning of Democratic majorities in both houses. Chickenshit blue dogs are preventing either from blinking first on the tax debate, as Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O'Donnell explained last night. Clip and more "after the fold," as the kids say.
Quick introduction [proofreading note: okay, yes, three paragraphs is not "quick," sorry :-] -- my wife and I will be celebrating our fourth wedding anniversary on Monday. Forgoing a large wedding ceremony (which we hope to be able to afford next year), we were married at the Justice of the Peace with my wife's Republican sister and gay best friend as witnesses. We then went our separate ways for the day -- I had to work and she had nursing classes to attend. We both noted that nothing seemed to change in how much we loved each other. We were attending the church she grew up in at the time and to their eyes we were living "in sin" by living together before that day, and somehow God viewed us differently due to a piece of paper? My love for my wife grows every day, but its rate of growth did not increase that day solely because she took my last name.
Barack Obama is playing a game of chess while John McCain is playing checkers. I'm not the first one to use that metaphor. The Obama campaign has been constantly several steps ahead of the Republicans throughout this election season. Is it possible that the "Lipstick on a Pig" controversy is another example of this? It would appear that the McCain campaign is taking some serious lumps for this "manufactured outrage." Once again, their lack of policy depth and substance is displayed for all of America -- they'd rather talk about nonsense they discuss the real issues. Even Chris Matthews and Bill ORLY, bastions of feminism that they are, came to Obama's defense and patently dismissed claims that Obama's was referring to Gov. Palin. Should the Obama campaign really be surprised when they come out looking like the mature ones?
Last night my wife inspired me (this is not an uncommon occurrence). On her way home from work, she heard the cheesy Darryl Worley song, "Have You Forgotten?" on the radio. She's a country music fan and was initially moved quite a bit to that genre's response to 9/11. But the world has changed in the last seven years; she and other disaffected Bush supporters are not as easily swayed by propaganda as they were back when Bush's approval ratings were
in the positive digits upwards of 80-90% in the days after than horrible tragedy.
Days before John Edwards suspended his campaign, I donated $50. It took a couple weeks, but I got over the fact that I "donated to a loser," as a colleague told me. It was only money; besides, I supported his policies and I supported him personally as a representative of those who aren't always fortunate enough to have their voices heard.
See article here regarding the fundraising "edge" that the RNC/McSame have over the DNC/Obama. A few things in there confused me, I was hoping fellow Kossacks could help. Most of my befuddlement comes from the whole "primary election" funds vs. "general election" funds distinction, though media bias in general also had me scratching my head.
I may be a political junkie, but I have other interests as well. I'm a huge hockey fan, and even though I live in the Detroit metro area, my favorite team is the Dallas Stars. I grew up in Kalamazoo, and for thirteen years, we were the home of the primary minor-league affiliate for the Minnesota / Dallas franchise. I also think it's fun to make fun of Red Wings fans. :) I never figured these two main interests of mine would ever converge.
I can't vote for a Repub. I'm sorry, Kos, I just can't do it. I understand the logic; yes, it would help us out if the GOP race lingered on and stayed a 3-man race. Winning MI would certainly help Romney's campaign. But he doesn't need our help and dismissing tomorrow's Michigan Democratic primary as a "straw poll" is bad strategy for Democrats.
Update: Oops, looks like I type too slow - none other than the Bob Alexander mentioned in the story scooped me.
Update #2: Forgot to mention, CNN had this AP article as front-page news on the politics section of their website. MSNBC now does as well. I'm no fan of the MSM, but this would indicate to me a pattern; perhaps we'll see some coverage by the talking heads later today?
There may be a possible chink in Hillary Clinton's expected landslide victory in Michigan's otherwise irrelevant Jan. 15th primary. Although she's the only candidate currently polling nationally in double-digits who will actually be listed on the ballot, Obama and Edwards (and Richardson and Biden) supporters now appear to have another option. As a CNN/AP story reports ("Clinton faces unusual opponent in Michigan"), Michigan votes will have the option to vote for "Uncommitted." If enough people vote this way, these "Uncommitted" delegates could later go to another candidate. Even possibly Al Gore, Democratic activist Bob Alexander hopes.
The Democratic National Committee's decision to bar Florida's delegates (and possibly Michigan's) from participating in next August's convention needs to be reversed. Immediately. Not only does it effectively disenfranchise primary voters from these two very important swing states, it allows the GOP to gain exposure in otherwise blue-leaning states.
While the leading (and some 2nd-tier) Democratic candidates have signed a "Four State Pledge," caving in to IA, NH, NV, and SC (great diary, BTW, okamichan13), the GOP has planned a primary right here in Dearborn on October 9th, according to WDIV's "Click on Detroit" website.
Let me preface this diary (my first one, I might add :) by stating that I will vote for the Democratic nominee next November, no matter what. This diary should not be read as just another anti-Hillary diary, as I personally have nothing against Senator Clinton, nor do I think she would make a "weak" candidate, as many pundits on both sides of the aisle have stated repeatedly (though I have to admit, I do think she'd hurt us downticket). I simply do not want to see the level of corruption, cronyism, and deception that is present in the Republican Party seep into our party.
It has been nearly 32 years since a Republican-controlled Executive Branch has not contained a fellow named Bush as either the first- or second-in-command. We have to go all the way back to the Ford/Rockefeller administration--even then, a Bush influence still appears. While looking up the name of Ford's VP on Wikipedia (forgive me, I'm only 24), I learned that when Ford nominated Rockefeller as VP, "Rockefeller's top competitor [for the nomination] had been George H.W. Bush."
Recommended by Simply Agrestic
- Down in Rick Perry's Red Texas, there are still a few Democrats willing to throw a punch and not take any shit from right wing Republicans. Exhibit A: State Senator Rodney Ellis of Houston. Wow: ...210 comments 993 Recs
- Just when you thought the Republicans in Michigan had completely lost their minds, this week we find they had just a bit more of their minds to lose. On July 7, both the state House and ...389 comments 87 Recs
- By now, you probably know about Autumn Summer and her effort to get the recall of Michigan House Speaker Bolger on the 2012 February 2012 ballot. I have written about how he is using every ...35 comments 170 Recs
- For once, Matt Taibbi left some space for others in his Michele Bachmann smackdown. ...280 comments 299 Recs
- It was with much excitement and anticipation that I watched the first two nights of Countdown with Keith Olbermann on Current TV. A glorious moment for me because after he was booted off MSNBC for ...9 comments 14 Recs
- UPDATE 2x: MI GOP House Spkr Bolger running scared from recall, lawyers harass disabled recall filerHow do you know when you have ...103 comments 465 Recs
- We made it through a long winter and spring of peaceful Wisconsin protest. Our protests were sometimes massive, sometimes small and consistent, but always (ALWAYS!) non-violent. Even when we were ...261 comments 529 Recs
- So PolitiFact went and rated Jon Stewart's statement about "every poll" showing Fox News viewers to be the most misinformed as false, because that wasn't the case in EVERY poll. Obviously,55 comments 195 Recs
- I have a piece up at A2Politico.com that reveals the breaking news that 28 Michigan residents along with the Sugar ...105 comments 328 Recs
- Seriously. I've been waiting for somebody else to diary this, but it appears that nobody's taking the reins, so I'll get my rantalicious ass in the saddle then. Remember a few months back when ...358 comments 289 Recs
Simply Agrestic's Tags
- No current results.