As between Ohio and Texas, it seems to me the media is concentrating too much on Texas, which is all but certain to go Republican in November.

By contrast, as I've written several times this week, and as at least the Minneapolis Star Tribune is now reporting, Ohio could go either way in November.

[Texas] will likely be largely ignored by the eventual nominees this fall even as Ohio is avidly courted. It has become so completely Republican that no Democrat has been elected to a statewide office in the past 14 years.

No Republican has been elected President without winning Ohio since Abe Lincoln. The only Democrats in the past century to become President without winning Ohio were FDR and JFK.

Which Democratic nominee in recent history won Ohio? Bill Clinton -- twice. Why? Because unlike Al Gore and John Kerry, he won southeastern Ohio. Gore and Kerry won big in Northern Ohio but lost the state to Bush.

CNN tongiht said there is a huge ice storm and flood warnings in the state and the hyperactive weatherman said it's so bad polling places may be closed in that area. [Corrected to reflect that the ice storms are not expected in the southeastern portion of the state.]

As for what to watch for in Ohio, this should get you started.

Larry King Live tonight did a few segments on Rock the Vote and the effort to get out the youth vote.

While it appears the young favor Obama so far in this election, it should be remembered that Rock the Vote and young voters were instrumental in electing Bill Clinton President. You can watch him here, crediting them.

This is from my personal collection of old VCR tapes -- I converted it and got it on You Tube last night. It's from a certain 1993 Inaugural Ball. Check out Hillary and Chelsea too.

Big Tent Democrat

Scott Lemieux replies to my post on his post about Jeffrey Rosen on Obama on civil liberties. Did you follow that? Hope so. Anyway, Scott writes:

Armando, like several commenters, isolates this passage in the Jeffrey Rosen op-ed I blogged about yesterday and uses it to reject the entire analysis:

Mr. Obama . . . is not a knee-jerk believer in the old-fashioned liberal view that courts should unilaterally impose civil liberties protections on unwilling majorities. [. . .]

The first sentence is, indeed, normatively problematic, and I don't think I can be criticized for being unwilling to criticize Rosen's criticisms of liberal "judicial activism."

Correct. Scott has, like me, been a severe critic of Rosen on this score. That is why his overlooking this critical passage surprised. In this followup, Lemieux rejects Rosen's view of Obama on this point. For the record I did not reject the entire analysis, I merely isolated this passage as the most critical and problematic part of Rosen's piece. I also must quibble with the rest of Lemieux's analysis:

TalkLeft, Taylor Marsh, No Quarter, Corrente Wire and Left Coaster are not the only progressive blogs where some of the authors and/or most of the commenters prefer Hillary Clinton to Barack Obama for President. Some blogs have explicitly endorsed her. At others, individual authors express their personal beliefs. Some even strive to provide fair coverage.

Here are some to check out:

• Confluence by River's Daughter
• Anglachel's Journal
• No More Apples
• Donna Darko
• Democratic Daily

Recommended post of the day: Factory Workers at Sunrise. (Hat tip to Katie Bird.)

Update: Reporters quizzed Obama about Rezko today in Texas.

****

Chicago Sun Times reporter Lynne Sweet disagrees with Obama advisor David Axelrod that Obama answered the media's questions about Tony Rezko. In addition to her own experiences, she points to this April 27, 2007 news clip.

Sweet writes today:

For more than a year, that has been a pretty small group of investigative journalists—from the Chicago Sun-Times and the Chicago Tribune. I checked with the Sun-Times reporters before I wrote my column and rechecked again. They all said they have never had a chance to discuss Rezko with Obama.

More...

By Big Tent Democrat

Note, see also Digby, we are no longer alone folks. Greg Sargent writes:

Both Glenn Greenwald and Digby today weighed in on the question of whether the media's been harsher on Hillary than on Obama -- and they both answered with a resounding Yes.

Digby, in an email to Greenwald, writes: "It's a fact that Clinton has received much harsher treatment than Obama." She suggests that media people will reach exactly the wrong conclusion about their own failings: "Instead of reevaluating their bias against Clinton and examining their sexism in general, they are now going to rectify matters by going after Obama on a bunch of irrelevant, superficial stuff to `make up' for their transgressions."

MORE . . .

U.S. District Court Judge Mark Filip has been confirmed as Deputy Attorney General, the #2 spot.

A conversation earlier in the day between White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., led to Filip's confirmation, according to a Senate Democratic aide. The two pledged to make progress on stalled nominations, said the official, who requested anonymity because the details were private.

I find it curious that a federal judge would give up a lifetime appointment for a position that lasts until the new President, whoever it is, names a new Attorney General. That's a year from now.

It makes me think he was planning on leaving the bench anyway. He's only 41.

One more thing: Why would the Dems confirm any more of Bush's appointments now? And same question as to his nominees for U.S. Attorney. Who would take a U.S. Attorney position for a year? The new President will name his or her own U.S. Attorneys.

By Big Tent Democrat

Open Thread. No scurrilous rumormongering please.

Obama on the campaign trail today, explaining why he is experienced to be President:

"Look, I've lived overseas," said Obama. "I have family overseas. I have served on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee."

I can't let that one pass. When did he live overseas? From the ages of 6 to 10 in Indonesia.

As to his service on the Foreign Relations Committee, do we need to mention again that the subcommittee on European Affairs that he chaired didn't hold a single hearing last year on NATO and Afghanistan, because he was too busy running for President?

Update: As Big Tent wrote earlier, there's good news for Hillary from the latest Texas and Ohio polls completed yesterday (More...):

By Big Tent Democrat

mcjoan has the details here, here and here:

It's developed from speculation to obliquely sourced possibility to pretty likely that the House is going to cave and give Bush his Protect AT&T Act. For no good reason at all.

Oh they have a reason - they are Democrats. And capitulating to the Republicans for the sake of High Broderist "post partisan unity" is what Democrats do. Anyone think Obama will change that? Me neither.

By Big Tent Democrat

Via Marc Ambinder, this is funny:

The Canadian Embassy and our Consulates General regularly contact those involved in all of the Presidential campaigns and, periodically, report on these contacts to interested officials. In the recent report produced by the Consulate General in Chicago, there was no intention to convey, in any way, that Senator Obama and his campaign team were taking a different position in public from views expressed in private, including about NAFTA. We deeply regret any inference that may have been drawn to that effect.

Um, Canada? There was no inference. It is what your memo says happened. And let's not be idiots, of course it happened. And of course it is true. Politics is politics people.

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only.

What is John Aravosis threatening?

So, what will the Republicans throw at Hillary in the fall? Lots. But I'm not going to detail those things today because I'm, surprisingly, still pulling punches with regards to what I write about Hillary. I don't want to damage Hillary should she become our nominee, as increasingly unlikely as that appears. I don't want to write about very real scandals in Hillary's past, scandals that we will be forced to revisit for the next 8 months, and 8 years. I don't want to write about the rumors about Bill that no one has written about to date, even though the rumors include lots of details which are at least just as true as Obama being a Muslim.

(Emphasis supplied.) I really liked the "at least as true as Obama being a Muslim" part. Obama is not a Muslim. So is Aravosis threatening to print lies? And what is his purpose in doing so? BTW, does Aravosis REALLY think he has something that has not been printed by the Right Wing Noise Machine? But I urge John to print his charges, if he has evidence of them. We can read the lies about Hillary anywhere. But real issues should ALL be aired. Don't pull your punches John. Let it hang out.

Note, comments closed.