Overnight Open Thread

Here's the final thread tonight, and remember, TalkLeft may be down tomorrow from 9am ET for several hours -- there's a chance a backup will be in place which would mean only 10 minute outages per hour through the morning, but I'm not counting on it. This is a network wide issue, not a TL server issue.

Thanks to all for the congratulations on earlier threads to Nic, the TL kid who was sworn in today as a Colorado lawyer. The ceremony was led by all of the Justices of the Colorado Supreme Court, with a federal judge and others presenting remarks.

When it came time for the oath, they asked all the existing lawyers in the audience who were there with their kids being sworn in to stand with their kids and retake the oath. So the TL kid and I got to take the oath together.

Here's a photo of us right afterwards. [More...]

Here's the oath:

I DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR by the Everliving God (OR AFFIRM) that:

  • I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Colorado;
  • I will maintain the respect due to Courts and judicial officers;
  • I will employ only such means as are consistent with truth and honor;
  • I will treat all persons whom I encounter through my practice of law with fairness, courtesy, respect and honesty;
  • I will use my knowledge of the law for the betterment of society and the improvement of the legal system;
  • I will never reject, from any consideration personal to myself, the cause of the defenseless or oppressed;
  • I will at all times faithfully and diligently adhere to the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct.

As a post-script and making me even happier is that he's chosen criminal defense. He's an associate with one of Denver's best criminal law firms.

Now it's your turn, this is an open thread. And in the words of Hillary tonight, "We will keep going forward until we have a nominee, whoever she may be."

< Who Had the Bigger Win Tonight? | $31 Million Campaign Debt? Never Mind >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Great photograph!! (5.00 / 4) (#1)
    by Stellaaa on Wed May 21, 2008 at 12:53:58 AM EST
    Congratulations.  (what is that behind you, statue or dancer?)

    a statue (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by Jeralyn on Wed May 21, 2008 at 12:59:00 AM EST
    it was held at the Denver Theatre for Performing Arts.

    Oh, good. It looked like (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by Cream City on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:59:19 AM EST
    somebody was having to hang by his thumbs.  I hoped it wasn't because he flunked the bar exam.

    And that is one gorgeous guy next to his mom.  Thumbs up to both of you! :-)


    You made me go back and look again (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by BarnBabe on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:22:34 AM EST
    OK, I see it now, a dancer. BUT, when I originally looked at the picture, I thought that was someone's arm. And it is, except I thought it was a live arm. Let me go for that morning coffee. Now.  

    LOL! Cream City n/t (none / 0) (#86)
    by kempis on Wed May 21, 2008 at 05:31:07 AM EST
    The Other Side (none / 0) (#167)
    by cal1942 on Wed May 21, 2008 at 12:35:49 PM EST
    Beautiful mom, nice looking young man.

    I thought the guy standing behind was changing a light bulb.


    Jeralyn, you're (none / 0) (#157)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed May 21, 2008 at 10:45:55 AM EST
    going to break your face with that smile!  So wonderful!

    You two are splendid looking (5.00 / 3) (#3)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed May 21, 2008 at 12:56:13 AM EST
    in that photo: radiant and joyous. But the background figure is too provocative to go without explanation!

    what a great picture and a very handsome (5.00 / 3) (#4)
    by athyrio on Wed May 21, 2008 at 12:56:26 AM EST
    young man, and you don't look old enough to have a son that age and I can easily see where his good looks came from ....lol....I admire your parenting abilities....Good Job MOM!!! As we mom's know it isn't an easy job...When my daughter became a nurse I was allowed to put her RN pin on her during a ceremony so I have a bit of an understanding what you must be feeling...Way to go!!!!

    Another congrats... (5.00 / 4) (#5)
    by Alec82 on Wed May 21, 2008 at 12:56:53 AM EST
    ...is really in order.  It is quite an achievement.  Criminal defense attorneys are so regularly belittled in the media and everyday life.  I hope he prospers and holds the government accountable.  

     I know that we all disagree on many things.  But a more hopeful and just future is not one of them.    

    Thanks, Alex (5.00 / 7) (#13)
    by Jeralyn on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:13:40 AM EST
    I appreciate that -- and that you have chosen to hang out here the past several months even though you don't agree with most of the other commenters, or with me.

    The pleasure is all mine... (5.00 / 5) (#36)
    by Alec82 on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:09:23 AM EST
    ...my parents told me, long ago, that it is better to surround yourself with people you don't agree with than those you do.  And it helped.  It helped me hone my arguments, learn more about the candidates and understand the concerns of Senator Clinton's supporters.  I think, in the end, we all emerge stronger.



    What an (5.00 / 3) (#6)
    by Jane in CA on Wed May 21, 2008 at 12:58:15 AM EST
    amazing and poignant experience it must have been for you, retaking the oath with your son.  Congratulations to both of you.

    My thoughts, too (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by kempis on Wed May 21, 2008 at 05:34:59 AM EST
    When it came time for the oath, they asked all the existing lawyers in the audience who were there with their kids being sworn in to stand with their kids and retake the oath. So the TL kid and I got to take the oath together.

    I got a bit misty at that point. How wonderful.

    Congratulations to your son--and to you for raising such a fine young man.


    Loved your photo (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by Serene1 on Wed May 21, 2008 at 12:59:40 AM EST
    the provocative background and all. You look very happy.
    Loved your line - Whoever She may be.

    Congrats on the swearing in... (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by kredwyn on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:04:04 AM EST

    Congrats. (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by hillaryboy on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:06:51 AM EST
    Great picture of the two of you. :)

    Jeralyn, my hand to god, (5.00 / 3) (#11)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:08:54 AM EST
    I didn't read the intro closely. So I assumed the "us" in the photo was you and BTD - I've never seen a photo of the guy. Now that I know better, it's still improbable that the fully grown man beside you is your son. I was very moved by the back-story. It makes you both all the more beautiful and, like you, I am sure that he is a credit to the profession.

    Thank you (5.00 / 4) (#25)
    by Jeralyn on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:40:33 AM EST
    for those kind words. And believe it or not, BTD and I have not met in person.

    Which raises the obvious question... (none / 0) (#162)
    by oldpro on Wed May 21, 2008 at 10:56:21 AM EST
    has anyone met BTD in person?

    How do we know he really exists, in the flesh, and isn't just an alter ego...the creation of someone's more assertive persona?

    I think we need a photo for a reality check!


    Or is it (none / 0) (#168)
    by cal1942 on Wed May 21, 2008 at 12:44:15 PM EST
    like Clark Kent and Superman; never seen together.

    Works for me...oh, wait... (none / 0) (#170)
    by oldpro on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:37:03 PM EST
    except that this particular superhero is more likely to rescue Obama and let Hillary drown.

    Nope.  Not good.


    More photos (5.00 / 5) (#12)
    by Jeralyn on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:11:09 AM EST
    Here are some of the judges who were there, which shows a little of the solemnity of it.

    And the TL kid's stepmom and stepsister were there too (his dad was out of town so they videotaped it for him.)

    That's a sculpture in the background, it took place at the  Denver Center for Performing Arts.

    And we were still smiling at dinner, while BTD was keeping you all up to date on the primaries.

    Wonderful photos! (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by otherlisa on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:42:22 AM EST
    Many congratulations! Proof of a parenting job well-done, and a career role model too!

    Both pics of you and our new lawyer ... (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by andrys on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:14:55 AM EST
    Both photos are just great, and it's wonderful to have something solid to celebrate tonight!!   Beautiful, both of you.

     Thanks for sharing them!  


    Sincere congratulations (none / 0) (#134)
    by NotThatStupid on Wed May 21, 2008 at 08:28:58 AM EST
    Well done, both of you.

    nice happy picture (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by wasabi on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:16:52 AM EST
    Congrats on raising a nice Liberal guy.

    Non-insider Q: BO gets to disappear MI-FL why? (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Ellie on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:17:39 AM EST
    Why are the dems allowing one man to decide the fate of millions of voters in MI and FL? I've repeatedly heard references to Obama turning this down and that down -- after making strategic campaign choices.

    Like any campaign, these were choices and strategies any candidate would make based on their own and rivals' strategies.

    Obama has been given every option here and Dems have bowed to his personal whim / veto on this. (Don't know if it's a media portrayal but why hasn't Sen. Clinton been given that apparent right of veto or dismissal?)

    I'm curious about this and friends who aren't voting in the GE were puzzled as well.

    One man? (5.00 / 3) (#23)
    by dws3665 on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:36:02 AM EST
    That's not a nice way to talk about Donna Brazile, Ellie.

    Oh. You mean Obama.

    He's not doing it alone, I'm afraid.


    Congrats (5.00 / 2) (#16)
    by MO Blue on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:19:13 AM EST
    A proud moment for you and your son.

    Great photo Jeralyn (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by diplomatic on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:24:48 AM EST
    Although the "Michael Myers from Halloween" look-alike behind you guys was sort of disturbing.

    Anyway I'm signing off.  It was great talking to you all today.

    Looking forward to Puerto Rico!

    Congratulations, TL Kid (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by eleanora on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:30:51 AM EST
    and proud mom! Great pics, and good luck in your work as a criminal defense lawyer. :)

    That's very nice (5.00 / 2) (#21)
    by phat on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:33:57 AM EST
    Sharing the oath is a really nice thing. Whoever thought of that is a very smart person. Seriously, what a good idea.

    It's nice to see young people going into criminal law, too. Whatever people may say, the nuts and bolts of criminal law is essential to what we hold dear as a nation.

    There is no other way.

    And thank you for this blog. I try not to get too excited or hyperbolic about what goes on in these things. Blog? What's a blog?

    But this website has been a godsend. I started reading this blog because of my work on the death penalty. But I have come here more in the context of the election because of the reasonableness here. It can be very hard to find reasonable behavior in the "real world" and "online". It's good to know that somebody is thinking clearly.

    When the history of this election is written, I fully expect this website to be held up as something quite valuable.


    Exactly. (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by andrys on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:19:59 AM EST
    In fact, I was at a friend's house last night with no way to get news of the election (no cable news, no AM radio) but very late I discovered a laptop with Internet and what did I do?

      In order to get at the heart of what was happening?

      I logged into TalkLeft.

      An island of sanity where factual information is valued and plentiful.  

      Thanks again on a night that gave us great results in Kentucky and, on the other side of things, what was to be expected in Oregon and Iowa  :-)


    Caller from FL on CNN w/ (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by oculus on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:38:12 AM EST
    Larry King:  is Hillary Clinton damaging the Dem. Party by staying in the race "so long"?

    Begala:  No.  17 mil. people voted for her.  She won KY by 35 points.  

    Signing off now myself (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by Jeralyn on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:44:31 AM EST
    Thanks again for all your congrats and great comments, and for hanging in with us throughout this long race. I'm staying on it as long as Hillary stays in.

    No blogger knows as much about Puerto Rico as Big Tent Democrat so that coverage will be fun.

    Obama plans general election team (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by nycstray on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:51:29 AM EST
    WASHINGTON - Barack Obama is quietly planning to take over the Democratic National Committee and assemble a multistate team for the general election, the latest sign that he is putting rival Hillary Rodham Clinton and the nomination fight behind him.

    Top Obama organizer Paul Tewes is in discussions to run the party, several Democratic officials said Tuesday.

    Obama spokesman Bill Burton said no final decisions have been made on general election plans and that such decisions would be premature with Obama yet to clinch the nomination.

    So how quietly is it when the AP's reporting it? He's really ticking me off.

    Presumptuous (none / 0) (#143)
    by creeper on Wed May 21, 2008 at 09:10:09 AM EST
    No, beyond presumptuous.  Downright offensive.

    Keep reporting, AP.  


    Let's hope he gets that concession speech (none / 0) (#159)
    by leis on Wed May 21, 2008 at 10:48:04 AM EST
    written too. McCain will appreciate the heartfelt congratulations.

    Mazel tov, Jeralyn! (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by janarchy on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:58:40 AM EST
    What a great photo and a great moment for you and your son!

    Holy election results, Batman! (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by Robot Porter on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:09:57 AM EST
    I turned off the cable morons this evening, and watched a few of episodes the Adam West Batman series.

    The America of the Batman TV series seemed more realistic than the one I was being told about on MSNBC, CNN et al.

    You love this clip (5.00 / 2) (#79)
    by facta non verba on Wed May 21, 2008 at 04:26:56 AM EST
    the first is a Clinton Townhall Meeting, the second a scene for Batman.

    Clinton in Oregon


    The Batman clip is great ... (none / 0) (#105)
    by Robot Porter on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:05:59 AM EST
    and very apropos.

    An evening of Kitchy Camp, eh? ;) (none / 0) (#40)
    by nycstray on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:25:17 AM EST
    Yes, and ... (5.00 / 2) (#47)
    by Robot Porter on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:42:10 AM EST
    then I watched the Batman TV show.



    Oh I love that show! (none / 0) (#45)
    by janarchy on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:39:59 AM EST
    I grew up on it when it was on in prime time and still love it today in all its cheesey glory. Sadly, it's not out on dvd and probably never will be since there seems to be about 1001 copyright issues to work out.

    Yup ... (none / 0) (#50)
    by Robot Porter on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:49:22 AM EST
    Warners owns Batman, and Fox owns the TV show, and they cannot come to an arrangement.

    I got sick of waiting, and picked up a bootleg.

    Not DVD quality.  But they look good, and the episodes are complete, even have the original ABC logo the beginning of each episode.  


    I knew about that (none / 0) (#55)
    by janarchy on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:51:51 AM EST
    and then there's also apparently issues about getting permission from assorted people and/or their estates for the cameos in each episode on top of that. It's a mess.

    I really should look for it on eBay. Someone must have it -- I've gotten a few other series that will probably never see the light of dvd that way. I know the theatrical film from 1966 is available though. I really need to pick that up as well.

    Sadly, I once met Adam West at a science fiction convention and he's not very nice.


    It was on after-school.... (none / 0) (#141)
    by kdog on Wed May 21, 2008 at 09:07:48 AM EST
    on the local Fox affiliate when I was a little kid.  I watched religously...usually in my Batman Underoos with a bath towel cape and homemade utility belt.

    My first crush was Catwoman Julie Newmar...oh the way she purred:)

    "Same Bat-Time, Same Bat-Channel"


    What a great win for Hillary (5.00 / 9) (#49)
    by gandy007 on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:42:47 AM EST
    Just basking in the warm reflected glow of Hillary's great speech and schooling of Obama.

    Speaking of reflecting, it makes me mad to think that the scenario in Indiana would  have been much the same as tonight, if her win in Indiana had also been reported early.  Then I once again get mad at the perfidy of the Gary  mayor.

    But for that act, the headlines would have been different, Hillary would have gotten a big infusion of money in the aftermath of supporter enthusiasm, and an early victory speech would have quelled any uncertainty about whether she would continue.  Her troops would not have been put in disarray, even if temporarily. I hate to cry over spilt milk, but the whole tenor of the campaign would have changed, in my estimation.

    But we are where we are. It's great to see that so many here are re energized and seem ready to go resolutely on to the finish, whatever that might bring. At least we can say that we and Hillary gave it our best shot.

    This is a sturdy group that Obama would do well to have behind him.  No fair weather friends here. Unfortunately, it does not look likely that there will be more than lip service to unity.

    The good thing for me personally is that I'm starting to not be sad about where I'm headed politically, about not voting for Obama, or about Obama more than likely going down in flames if he scrapes out the nomination.

    I may be looking through rose colored glasses, but I no longer see it as the Democratic Party going down.  It is the demise of a single individual who in my estimation never really sincerely espoused or evinced the philosophy of my Democratic Party.  

    I'd beg you to reconsider (none / 0) (#60)
    by Lupin on Wed May 21, 2008 at 03:10:35 AM EST
    I feel compelled to appeal to your knowledge of history.

    In 1980 many southern democrats deserted Carter because Reagan was a more appealing candidate and, let's face it, Carter's record was far from ideal. (As it turned out we now know that the Republicans used dirty tricks against him.)

    I myself supported John Anderson for a while.

    What we got is 8 years of Reagan, and the Bush/Cheney administration which is a direct by-product of the Reagan/Bush cabinet.

    I sincerely believe that another 4 years of Republican governance will destroy this country.

    I would vote for a carrot if it were the Democratic nominee.


    Lupin.. (5.00 / 5) (#73)
    by Rainsong on Wed May 21, 2008 at 03:57:45 AM EST
    I hear you and sympathise. I felt like that every previous election since 1976. But not this year.

    Like gandy007 I will be sitting it out, and the more I watch Hillary, the more I don't feel bad or sad about doing it either.

    The good thing for me personally is that I'm starting to not be sad about where I'm headed politically, about not voting for Obama, or about Obama more than likely going down in flames if he scrapes out the nomination.
    Emphasis mine.

    This is where I differ, Obama might possibly win, but he'll need to do it without my vote. He is a DINO, I think his Presidency would be a disaster, and no better than a McCain one.

    Obama and his enabling Party officials, crossed the line with me somewhere along the way this season.

    The irony for me is, if he hadn't done all the deal-breakers (starting with deliberately playing the race-card), I might never have found out what a great candidate Hillary really was.

    ...re energized and seem ready to go resolutely on to the finish, whatever that might bring. At least we can say that we and Hillary gave it our best shot.

    Indeed :)


    I agree on Hillary (5.00 / 3) (#125)
    by BarnBabe on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:54:07 AM EST
    I started out with Edwards. It is interesting how I prefer a shorter campaign season and yet without this lengthly one, I would have never discovered a few things.

    1.Hillary is a great candidate, is knowlegeable about every issue, stands tall among the male giants, and would make a wonderful President.

    2. Edwards is passionate about helping all the people and should be involved in some government position. He still would have been a good President.

    3. And Obama is not the man I originally believed he was. Where I saw stature, I now see weakness and laziness. You can only smooze people for so long before your outer layer starts pealing off. He would make a so so President with many 'gates'happening. He is not ready for Prime Time quite yet.

    So this time, I think the long haul has been enlightening and I thank Hillary for not giving up.


    i have a yahoo page on my (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by hellothere on Wed May 21, 2008 at 09:12:52 AM EST
    computer. every morning when i get up there is some slanted little bit of news about obama. it slants in such a way as he is winning just everything. the reality is so different. this morning it was a zogby poll while all the other polls showing obama behind were ignored.

    i become my cynical everyday.


    The way (5.00 / 3) (#89)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed May 21, 2008 at 05:47:21 AM EST
    I see it is that Obama is another Carter. Someone who won't do much good and could even be worse for the country than McCain.

    As a patriot, I don't vote for carrots (5.00 / 9) (#127)
    by Lisa on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:54:49 AM EST
    OK, so we have these lovely tactics to get us to vote for Obama:

    1. call us bad Democrats (oops, too late, that bus just left for a lot of us, we are now Independents - I guess the Obama backers were too busy calling us racists to notice)
    2. try to drive us out of the blogosphere with abuse
    3. play the Roe card
    4. dismiss the qualities we are looking for in a president
    5. in general, scare us, insult our intelligence, call us names, intimidate us

    None of this, of course, addresses the core reasons we are not voting for Obama (you might just look for some clues above).

    I would (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed May 21, 2008 at 08:49:00 AM EST
    also vote for a carrot if it had a D next to its name.  A carrot would be harmless.

    To me, Obama isn't harmless.


    i have been in a black mood lately. (none / 0) (#148)
    by hellothere on Wed May 21, 2008 at 09:22:28 AM EST
    i was wondering exactly what it was that bothered me so much. part of it is the underlying negative tone of the obama campaign. for example the title of his book, THE AUDACITY OF HOPE. hope? the reverend wright is a hater par excellence. he doesn't like whites and blames them for every wrong in his life. i would guess a lot of the wrongs in his life are a result of his own choices. but obama writes a book about hope with a title from a miniser who has anything but that. it is the negativity, the drumbeat of meaness, the exclusion of others all the while telling us it is our fault. obama seems to think americans eat too much, drive too much and love turning their heat up too much. whereas there is truth in that there is also something very wrong with it too. who is he to critize anyone? who does he think he is? and where do he and his wife, the good reverend and bill ayers get off criticizing me or anyone else. this man actually think we are supposed to vote for him. what has happened to this country? at least reagan had the image you know of the shining city whereas this man calls us bitter. think about it. there is no there there. this is the most negative candidate i have seen to run for president of the united states.

    We aren't being offered the carrot (none / 0) (#165)
    by Nadai on Wed May 21, 2008 at 11:56:19 AM EST
    All we're getting is the stick.  So no.

    obama supporters (5.00 / 2) (#75)
    by DefenderOfPants on Wed May 21, 2008 at 04:07:31 AM EST
    so my girlfriend lives in South Dakota where she teaches high school English, but she's a resident of Oregon. like me, she is a Clinton supporter. her mother, on the other hand is an Obama supporter, and get this: she purposely didn't send my girlfriend her ballot.

    true story.

    This must be their New way (none / 0) (#80)
    by Serene1 on Wed May 21, 2008 at 04:28:03 AM EST
    of doing politics.

    Yes, Unification via Omission of the other side (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by andrys on Wed May 21, 2008 at 06:59:32 AM EST
    Congratulations Jeralyn and TL Kid (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by ruffian on Wed May 21, 2008 at 05:44:38 AM EST
    That photo was such a nice way to start the day that I think I am not going to read anymore news for a while.  Hope your son enjoys his first day as a lawyer!

    We knew this but.... (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by Fabian on Wed May 21, 2008 at 05:48:33 AM EST
    Addison, brave soul, posted a daily kos diary asserting that Hillary Clinton is a Democrat.

    With predictable results.  Well, if Hillary isn't a Dem, maybe I'm not either.

    Hillary a Democrat? (5.00 / 3) (#99)
    by stillife on Wed May 21, 2008 at 06:37:13 AM EST
    What a revolutionary concept!  

    That reminds me - I had a dream last night where I was going around explaining to people that I'm no longer a Democrat.  I think I spend too much time on blogs.  Sometimes I actually dream about posting on TL and other blogs.


    Congratulations TL Kid and Jeralyn (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by BGP on Wed May 21, 2008 at 05:51:54 AM EST
    And thanks to both of you for being defenders. In a nation that seems determined to use the law as an instrument of revenge, you and your son are invaluable (and undervalued).

    Thanks, too, for this forum. I join the chorus saying it's been a sanity-saver this election season.

    Congratulations, Jeralyn and Nic! (5.00 / 2) (#100)
    by stillife on Wed May 21, 2008 at 06:37:58 AM EST
    You must both be very proud.  You both look great.

    Congratulations! (5.00 / 1) (#119)
    by kenoshaMarge on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:47:36 AM EST
    Jeralyn and Nic. Nice pictures. Looks like one very proud Mom to me. :)

    After (5.00 / 3) (#123)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:53:29 AM EST
    last night I think Hillary's chances of taking the nomination are much greater. If Obama couldn't alter his demographic problems in OR then they are unsolvable. (I've always thought they are unsolvable anyway).

    It has to be obvious that Obama will probably lose 75% of the east coast if he's the nominee and there aren't enough latte drinkers outside of OR and WA to help him out west. McCain is going to seriously contest CA. Who can blame him? If he wins the white vote and then splits the Hispanic vote and takes the majority of the aisan vote there won't be a way for Obama to carry that state. Arnie could pull a jeb if the state is close enough.

    I am not advocating that (none / 0) (#149)
    by zfran on Wed May 21, 2008 at 10:23:42 AM EST
    Hillary go after the VP, I personally would like to see her run as an independent, however, doesn't the constitition say that the person who comes in second shall be the vice president, or something like that? I mentioned yesterday that Geraldine Ferraro's comment how she might not vote for Obama, should he be the nominee, was a signal for dem voters to vote their conscience.

    Thankfully (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:54:30 AM EST
    the voters aren't being affected by this stuff.

    I Wonder (none / 0) (#137)
    by creeper on Wed May 21, 2008 at 08:35:37 AM EST
    if they're not being affected in more subtle ways.  CBS news says more than half the voters in an exit poll in Kentucky said that Hillary had attacked Obama unfairly.

    She must have questioned his experience and qualifications.


    Good God.... (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by kdog on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:55:06 AM EST
    Chinese and American govt's in cahoots to apply Orwell's jackboot to the human face, the picture of the 21st century.


    Tyranny paid for by you and me.

    Stunning (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by creeper on Wed May 21, 2008 at 08:47:37 AM EST
    Whythehell are we holding ethnic Chinese at Gitmo in the first place?  

    This is unbelievable.  We have become the torture experts of the world.

    You know, in the early years of the war in Viet Nam I thought we were a civilized society.  There seemed to be proof of that in the actions of the NVA and Viet Cong.  Why, our Iowa State Fair even had an exhibit one year that was a "Vietnamese village" with all sorts of booby traps and torture imlpements.  We studied them all intently, aghast at the brutality they represented.  "See what savages these people are?" we said.

    Then Lt. Calley went to My Lai.


    Woo hoo!! Congratulations! Wow, what a day. (n/t) (none / 0) (#2)
    by DandyTIger on Wed May 21, 2008 at 12:55:51 AM EST

    10 million? (none / 0) (#17)
    by BethanyAnne on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:24:03 AM EST
    After the April 22nd primary, Hillary's folk were on TV bragging about the 10 million in 24 hours.

    Here is her filing for April.

    Do you see that 10 mil?  What happened?


    Also Notable (5.00 / 3) (#38)
    by The Maven on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:12:01 AM EST
    that Clinton's total for the month was only $5 million behind Obama, $26.91 million to his $31.92 million, which is not too shabby since the media had long since declared Obama to be the all-but-certain nominee.  So either Clinton's backers are really, really dedicated, or they simply enjoy the idea of sending it off to a "hopeless" cause.  My hunch is that it's more the former.

    She raised more than McCain, lol!~ (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by nycstray on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:31:43 AM EST
    damn she's good!  :)

    The 26 million includes the $5million loan (none / 0) (#83)
    by JoeA on Wed May 21, 2008 at 04:49:17 AM EST
    from the candidate.

    Hillary actually raised $21 million according to that filing, and $22 million according to the Clinton campaigns press release. link


    hmm (none / 0) (#30)
    by BethanyAnne on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:45:05 AM EST
    I could see that working out that way.

    That would make sense. (none / 0) (#32)
    by nycstray on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:54:27 AM EST
    Since a majority of the donations were online, they would have the numbers right away, but the bank transfers would take a bit. I never really checked to see how long it took.

    Anyone who's worked in ... (none / 0) (#35)
    by Robot Porter on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:59:09 AM EST
    fundraising of any kind knows there's always a gap between "raising" and "reporting."

    You can see similar "discrepancies" in Obama's numbers.


    I'm always on the creative end :) (none / 0) (#41)
    by nycstray on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:27:58 AM EST
    Those pictures look great (none / 0) (#22)
    by andgarden on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:35:49 AM EST
    Congrats again!

    Very cool. John King (none / 0) (#28)
    by oculus on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:42:53 AM EST
    responds to Larry King's question:  but what if you count FL and MI.  King pushes something on his big map, lengthening the path to the finish line.  

    heh (none / 0) (#33)
    by Turkana on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:54:53 AM EST
    big congrats- proud mom, and proud son!

    a lovely and inspiring photo (none / 0) (#39)
    by Lupin on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:16:01 AM EST
    That is a lovely and inspiring photo.

    I think Clinton's results in both KY and OR were very impressive. I had her wining 33 delegates in KY when in actuality she got 37, which shows how bad of a predictor I am.

    However, DemConWatch calls it right: "Obama clinches non-MI/FL pledged delegate majority (and most MI/FL scenarios also)" -- there is only one scenario out of five, if the FL & MI delegations are seated based on the elections that have taken place, in which the nomination isn't clinched, and we all know that it isn't going to happen.

    Both Clinton's and Obama's platforms are substantially similar (I'm not crazy about either but that's another discussion); however, this drawn out primary has shown that there is a serious rift (for lack of a better word) between their respective supporters. It is not altogether just sexism or racism; there are different worldviews too.

    (Need I remind folks here that neither Obama nor Clinton were my #1 or #2 choice initially.)

    The reason why it is important that we close that rift is that, someday, there will be an Iraq War memorial just as there is a Viet-Nam War memorial, and if McCain is elected President -- and after 2004 nothing strikes me as impossible anymore -- that Memorial will have many more names inscribed on it.

    Many more young Americans will die if McCain is elected than if a Democrat, any Democrat, is. It's that simple.

    It is criminal, yes, criminal to risk the election  because there is justifiable anger towards the other candidate, his surrogates, the DNC and the media. There are lives at stake.

    Senator Clinton has gathered a large and dedicated and real support for her and I would like to see her continue to play a major role in this campaign and in national politics beyond -- and I have no doubt that she will, because she always struck me as a dedicated and pragmatic woman.

    Jeralyn's photo is one of hope for a better future which reflects our values; I appeal to the sensible posters here to continue to support Sen. Clinton (just as I will always support Gov. Dean, Al Gore or John Edwards)  but to not reject the promise of that future out of bitterness.

    I would hope that Jeralyn will eventually post an editorial in which she states that one can continue to support Sen. Clinton and her goals without rejecting Sen. Obama.

    Iraq war memorial doesn't fly (5.00 / 7) (#43)
    by hookfan on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:35:52 AM EST
    What funding request for Bush's war has Obama turned down? He's owned the war as well as the rest of the Democratic Congress that voted repeatedly to keep it going. One speech does not a savior make. Besides remember powers statements, i.e., only in the best case scenario would troops be fully withdrawn by team Obama. Yup, sad but Old John and Obama are not that far apart on troops in Iraq at least as far as funding goes.

    You're not looking at the big picture (none / 0) (#46)
    by Lupin on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:41:12 AM EST
    I haven't been happy with either Clinton or Obama's stance about the war, let's be clear about that.

    But a Democratic President and a Democratic Congress (which we stand a very good chance of getting) are absolutely necessary to put an end to this nightmare.

    A McCain Presidency/Democratic Congress would

    This is why we must vote Democrat, no matter what.


    IMO you are ignoring facts (5.00 / 4) (#54)
    by hookfan on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:51:15 AM EST
    There is sparse evidence that the Democratic Congress or Obama would end it. Look at their not so stellar voting record. Heck, they even rewarded Lieberman. that action too does not bespeak a burning desire to end Iraq war. The "big picture" can be nothing more than a delusion if it is not grounded in fact. Also, look at the money and all the Dem ties to war contractors (Feinstein is a good example). Sorry, if they are going to lose money and face Republican smears about losing I just don't see it happening. When has this congress ever voted with spine on the war?

    You may well be right... (none / 0) (#58)
    by Lupin on Wed May 21, 2008 at 03:03:06 AM EST
    ...And I will be massively upset if that is the case, but then what is the solution?

    What you're describing is no longer a Clinton/Obama issue, but the massive failure of our allegedly representative democracy and media.

    I totally agree with you there.

    In my perfect world, Dennis Kucinich would be President. Some, on the other side, might wish for Ron Paul, no doubt.

    Meanwhile, we're stuck with probabilities, and a Democratic victory (WH + Congress) carries better odds than a divided victory (Rep WH + Dem Congress).

    I'm trying to appeal to pragmaticism here. As I'm sure Sen. Clinton will eventually.


    The solution (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by hookfan on Wed May 21, 2008 at 03:16:18 AM EST
    I suspect can only be long term. We clearly need more Democratic Reps and Senators that reflect Democratic values. Obama's fuzziness on social security, women's issues, gay rights, Hispanic values, and lack of clear support for working class issues leaves me clearly non-plussed. By the way Hillary has pledged to end the war. But what end it means is subject to interpretation and I bet fluctuation depending on international circumstances. I guess down ticket issues and building the base may be a beginning to pressure "leadership" to actually represent us.

    Health care and the economy . . . (5.00 / 3) (#62)
    by nycstray on Wed May 21, 2008 at 03:20:57 AM EST
    lot's of fuzz . . .

    They really aren't close on issues when it comes right down to it. There's a reason we haven't given up yet.


    Absolutely! (none / 0) (#64)
    by Lupin on Wed May 21, 2008 at 03:26:38 AM EST
    To clarify: I'm 100% OK with not giving up if only to carry forward the values of the rejected candidate into the new administration, as long as in November we punch the right hole.

    I don't trust Obama to do that. (5.00 / 9) (#72)
    by nycstray on Wed May 21, 2008 at 03:56:07 AM EST
    He hasn't given any sign that he will stand strong for any Dem values. The H&L health care smear didn't help either . . . Hillary was actually campaigning with a "hold me accountable" stump at one point. I've always kinda felt that if she got to the WH, she would be a bit more liberal than her norm. When you look at her past history and what's she's concentrated on compared to Obama, well, there is no comparison (imo).

    When this first started, I thought I would be fine with any of the three Ds and I was only wishing Obama had more experience. That's no longer the case.


    I completely agree with you (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by Lupin on Wed May 21, 2008 at 03:25:03 AM EST
    We did have Kucinich, but I suppose he is our Ron Paul, totally unelectable. (But why?)

    A more real question is -- what did Edwards fail so miserably? Leaving Dennis aside he was my #1 "real politik" choice.

    I think -- I could be mistaken -- that Edwards failed because he was too "brutal" with the American public unlike Clinton and Obama who have adopted a soft-pedal centrist platform.

    The question is -- are we ready to hear the truth? The simple answer may be: no. Not yet.

    Personally, I think America is going to face some tectonic changes in the next 4 years and neither Obama nor Clinton are likely to be the future "leader" who, like FDR, will thoroughly reform the country. That man or woman will be their successor.

    (Sort of like Earth was to Deep Thought :-))

    I think of them, if you will, as placeholders, a little like the Premiers who followed Brezhnev before Gorbachev took over.

    That may be why I don't feel sanguine about either.

    But they are as necessary step forward; (re)electing a Republican at this stage would only plunge us deeper into chaos.


    Okay a problem for me (5.00 / 7) (#69)
    by hookfan on Wed May 21, 2008 at 03:41:45 AM EST
    is that Obama might also plunge us into chaos. His lack of clarity by not campaigning on clearly Democratic values and issues does not give reassurance about that. His clear inexperience in foreign policy coupled with his thinned skin petulance does not give reassurance on that. Saying that several years as a child in indonesia qualifies him as experienced in foreign affairs is like saying a child who sold lemon-aide qualifies her to be a CEO of an international corporation. That does not lessen fear that Obama would be the catalyst for chaos.

    Foreign policy (none / 0) (#145)
    by Lupin on Wed May 21, 2008 at 09:18:07 AM EST
    I particularly dislike Obama's foreign policy as stated on his website; I've just argued about it with an Obamaton on Dkos that it is well-meaning but wrong-headed in its emphasis on the "America must lead" notion which I think is both wrong and dangerous.

    (here is the link if you think I'm lying.)

    That said, I think Senator McCain's foreign policy is far, far worse, so it's no contest.

    Some of you appear to feel that there is no or little difference between McCain and Obama; this reminds me of the Naderites who thought in 2000 that there were no substantial differences between Gore and Bush.

    Gore was not perfect and I never liked Lieberman from day 1, but voting for him was easy because of the alternative.

    History has proven the Naderites wrong, just as history will prove you wrong too; I just wish I didn't have to risk paying for it again.


    Well, Lieberman (none / 0) (#171)
    by hookfan on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:47:35 PM EST
    does not help your case by him being a Bush warbot. How much influence in a Gore admin would he have had? Guess we'll never know.
      Second no way are McCain and Obama the same. Obama has no, nada, zilch experience when it comes to military issues or understanding. Heck, even GW had more experience. That leads me to suspect (since you pretend to know the future I can too!) Obama will morph into another hot dog cowboy to prove his creds. His arrogance fits well with this, as does his tactic of appeasement toward Repubs. He won't take the heat, and the Dem congress as historically will fall into line (as per above posts think money ties to contractors, and avoiding Repub smears of "losers"). I really suspect the Repubs will again control war policy and funding by yelling the loudest toward a spineless congress and an inexperienced Obama.
      It all comes down to congress stopping McCain or controlling Obama through the purse strings. This congress has refused to do that, even with huge public support. That won't change until new leadership and new faces are in congress.

    Have a 5 for the reference to Hitchhiker (none / 0) (#66)
    by splashy on Wed May 21, 2008 at 03:37:29 AM EST
    Love it!

    Marvin the depressed robot is my favorite.

    I liked Kuchinich too, and agree that it looks like we are going to go through some major changes.


    Here's another Hitchiker's reference: (5.00 / 3) (#76)
    by Robot Porter on Wed May 21, 2008 at 04:07:43 AM EST

    It's also the percent of the vote Obama is likely to get in the general election.


    The media failed Edwards (none / 0) (#96)
    by Munibond on Wed May 21, 2008 at 06:32:16 AM EST
    I don't think you can blame Edwards for "failure" or give Obama credit for "success".  The entire process has been manipulated by cable news and the print media, particularly back in the early days when it was more difficult for a campaign to get the average voter's attention.  Those news outlets, particularly television news, have their own agendas, and it remains to be seen how their interests will have been served by an Obama candidacy.
    Kucinich has played an important role as a change agent in this and prior primary seasons, but he does not have executive/leadership skills.

    I dunno... (none / 0) (#102)
    by Alec82 on Wed May 21, 2008 at 06:58:25 AM EST
    ...Edwards' platform seemed awfully centrist in the end.  Maybe I am too far left on issues.  I doubt it, though.  I assume one of the reasons I was so undecided leading up to the CA primary was that they're all virtually indistinguishable apart from physical appearance and tone.  

     Unfortunately for Edwards, he wasn't quite exotic enough.  Not just in terms of race or gender, but he was running on the economy...something that wouldn't take off until much later (in primary timespeak).  That, and he ran with a loser in '04.  

     All the frontrunner Democrats appear to be centrists.  My hope with Senator Obama is that his foreign policy team will be radically different from what we've seen in recent years.  That is probably a pipe dream, but alas, there it is.  



    Edwards (none / 0) (#114)
    by Molly Pitcher on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:32:13 AM EST
    I sort of liked him, especially last time.  Might have been fun having a real bigwig coming back to his roots here once in a while.  )OTH, having shared the Pacific Coast Highway with JFK, I can see some cons.  But I do not think JE was too brutal.  Indeed, I think much of the public looked at him and saw the Prom King candidate--you know, masculine version of the dumb blonde.

    The Democratic Party should bear (5.00 / 6) (#70)
    by felizarte on Wed May 21, 2008 at 03:43:46 AM EST
    a significant part of the blame and the consequences of their actions.  There is no way the party or its members can make me feel guilty about not voting for Obama if he is the nominee.  I want Michigan and Florida counted in a fair manner; I want the party to demand fair treatment of one of its candidates in the media; and I want the party to be defiinitive and transparent as to the method and considerations for implementing rules.

    As a party member, it is not my responsibility to uphold the party if the party is not willing to uphold me and others.


    In the way that Nixon opened up China (none / 0) (#113)
    by andrys on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:26:05 AM EST
    -- he was such a conservative Republican that when he did this, there was no question it was okay while it would have been suspect if a Democrat had done it -- McCain would likely end the war in Iraq earlier than our Clinton or Obama could.

       Again, I am voting for the Dem lower ticket and hoping we get a firm majority.


    the bigger problem is - (5.00 / 3) (#132)
    by Josey on Wed May 21, 2008 at 08:25:12 AM EST
    Obama created his own "white" problem by making Race a central part of his campaign, rather than issues and solutions.

    When Obama rolled our Oprahpalooza it was obvious his "unity" meme was a scam.
    Then along came Wright's racist rants that Obama listened to for 20 years - clearly reflected in Obama's ideology and personality such as "brushing Hillary off" the bottom of his shoe.
    Followed by Obama's "bitter" remarks calling Democrats "racists" because they weren't voting for him.

    Obama has created much hate and divisiveness - and he'll be expecting the Clintons and other white people to clean up his mess.
    That's a BIG problem.


    My dad who absolutely despises HRC... (5.00 / 2) (#160)
    by madamab on Wed May 21, 2008 at 10:48:36 AM EST
    told me that the solution to Obama's working-class voter problem was for Bill and HRC to "give a sh*t about something other than themselves for once" and campaign their hearts out for Obama.

    Otherwise all those white, dentally-challenged, banjo-twanging racists won't vote for him.

    That is the planned strategy for Obama.

    OR....we could just nominate the candidate who could, you know, WIN.

    [bangs head on wall]


    Lupin, thanks for all your concern. (5.00 / 3) (#44)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:37:29 AM EST
    I 'predicted' the trajectory of your comment in the 3rd sentence. It must have taken quite a while to write a post of that length.

    Moving forward (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by Lupin on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:50:36 AM EST
    If you doubt my earlier opposition to Sen. Obama, do a search for my Diaries on DKos in February.

    There is one diary in particular where I expressed my fears that Obama's Presidency might turn to be like Carter's in some respects, which got me a lot of flak. I still fear this.

    At this stage, nothing matters more to me than reinstating a Democrat in the WH, with a Democratic Congress. The alternative is too awful to contemplate.


    Have got to admire your perseverance (5.00 / 12) (#51)
    by Serene1 on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:50:02 AM EST
    Speaking for myself unfortunately I am as much Pro Hillary as I am anti Obama. I don't know when it became so but after his supporters behaviour I decided to read up more on Obama and the information I gathered about him was not very nice.

    I honestly believe that McCain is a better bet than Obama come GE if Obama wins the nomination and I can list a lot of reasons for the same.

    This campaign has made me reexamine a lot of things including why I was a democrat. And this revaluation has made me realize that just like not all republicans are not bad similarly all democrats are not good. And that as an individual it is more important to do things based on principle rather than toe a party's line.


    Fair enough... (none / 0) (#56)
    by Lupin on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:58:16 AM EST
    I'm old enough to remember when Southern Democrats starting voting Republican, especially under Reagan who was obviously more to their liking.

    I can respect a sincere conviction, but the system is what it is. In my lifetime I've never voted for the Democrat candidate I really wanted, except in the second Clinton run. Hell, I remember supporting John Anderson in 1980.

    You should then call yourself a Republican and should this reflect a trend here, Jeralyn should change her site's name to "TalkRight".


    Lupin (5.00 / 11) (#65)
    by felizarte on Wed May 21, 2008 at 03:35:19 AM EST
    Where is it written that a republican or a democrat can only vote for the party's nominee in the general election?  Comments like this:

    you should then call yourself a Republican and should this reflect a trend here, Jeralyn should change her site's name to "TalkRight".

    from supporters of Obama, which he never tries to discourage, are the ones that make Hillary supporters adamant about voting only for Hillary and never for Obama.  

    But it is not great effort for me to change my registration to independent.


    You are a particularly obdurate person (none / 0) (#142)
    by Lupin on Wed May 21, 2008 at 09:08:57 AM EST
    I have repeatedly stated that I  have attacked Obama long before you started having your hissy fit -- last February, on DKos, yet you keep calling me an Obama supporter.

    Obama: Jimmy Carter from the North posted on 7 February.

    I was not an Obama supporter. I am, however, a proud Democrat eager and willing to stand by our nominee, whovever (s)he is.

    And you... I guess, you're like the Naderites in 2000 who got us 8 years of Bush.


    Thanks for the compliment! (5.00 / 1) (#156)
    by felizarte on Wed May 21, 2008 at 10:45:18 AM EST
    I am OBDURATE: It's my middle name. I.E.
    (stubborn, obstinate, intransigent, inflexible, unyielding, unbending, pigheaded, bullheaded, mulish, stiff-necked; headstrong, unshakable, intractable, unpersuadable, immovable, inexorable, uncompromising, iron-willed, adamant, firm, determined.


    BUT YOU'RE WRONG when you say I posted at DKos. I've never posted at Dkos.  I don't go there.  I could have peeked once, but never left a trail.   I don't like their page layout and their posters.

    And another:  I would never call Barack a Jimmy Carter.  That would be an insult to Jimmy Carter who is a sincere humanitarian; and had some real accomplishments in International Relations.  And he won the presidency even if he did not get reelected.


    If only Al Gore.... (none / 0) (#146)
    by kdog on Wed May 21, 2008 at 09:19:43 AM EST
    hadn't stolen all of Nader's votes, oh what could have been!

    As of now I am neither a Democrat nor a (5.00 / 10) (#71)
    by Serene1 on Wed May 21, 2008 at 03:48:35 AM EST
    Republican. I am a human being and a woman who believes in certain values and principles. I alligned myself with Democrats thinking they best represented those values.

    This campaign season has been an eye opener. The way Hillary was trashed by the Obama team using republican talking points was appaling.Bill C was also not spared and the most disheartening moment was when everything that came out of clinton campa was twisted to connote racisim. The Dem elites stood by silently as Obama supporters and MSM played havoc with the racisim charge.I have read the memo that was given by Obama campaign to propogate the racisim charge against Clintons.  
    Dem elites were also deafeningly silent when Obama went about trashing Bill C's presidency and kept praising Reagan's tenure.
    Michelle O early on made a comment like if you can't put your own house in order then you should not run.
    Slate had an article on how Team Obama were pestering reporters to cover Bill C's extra marital affairs more.
    A revote in Fl & Mi would have been possible if Obama had agreed. While Hillary agreed and was o.k. about shouldering half the expenses Obama disagreed and instead wanted the state delegates to be split 50 50.

    This is not way I thought Democrats behave or maybe I missed the memo which said Democrats are no better than Republicans when it comes to campaign tactics and others.

    And if you want to accuse me of being republican or whatever you are most welcome because I definitely do not value a party which condones sexisim and doesn't raise a finger when an eminent party member is accused of racisim for the flimsiest of reason.


    I WILL vote the Dem lower ticket (5.00 / 5) (#106)
    by andrys on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:10:16 AM EST
    to clamp down McCain's worse impulses.  

      I expect his inability to do much that's helpful (because that's more a Dem impulse normally but the jury's out on McCain who will not have to bow to conservative pressures once elected and set for one term) -- in that case, midterm, the opposition party (to the president) tends to get more elected, so it's better in that way that a Repub president is in two years from now because NO president will be able to do much by then.  That may seem convoluted but it's also likely.

      I must always vote FOR someone, and I can never vote for Obama from all that I've learned about him.  I suppose if he actually chose Clinton for VP against his most rabid supporters' wishes AND if she wanted that in order to work on programs she cares about, then I could vote for the ticket.  But there's no other reason I would.

      It's not about Clinton, though she's given me a LOT to vote FOR.  It's about Obama and also about Obama's supporters and their behavior before and even now.  It's not about Unity, it's about thugism with a pretend-halo.


    Ditto (none / 0) (#173)
    by gandy007 on Wed May 21, 2008 at 08:19:48 PM EST
    Down ballot they can run a yellow dog or even The Donkey and I will vote for it, but at the top, good luck.

    And good night!


    Nope Earlier In The Primary, Obama Himself (5.00 / 5) (#107)
    by MO Blue on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:14:33 AM EST
    indicated that party unity was not required. At least twice, he stated that Clinton's supporters would vote for him but his supporters wouldn't vote for her. IMO by that statement he gave approval for his supporters to vote outside the party. Well that has backfired on him.

    There is a choice between being a Democrat or a Republican. We can be Independent voters. That is the choice that I have chosen. Obama has done nothing to win my vote. In fact, quite the opposite. He has until November to change my mind about not voting for him. It is up to him to do it. Between you and me, he won't accomplish that task by saying he will adopt a foreign policy like Reagan or by indicating he will put Republicans in the positions of Sec. of Defense and State. I'm old enough to have lived through the Reagan years and I would not having a Dem add to the myth of his legacy or adopt his policies.


    Oh please... (none / 0) (#121)
    by Alec82 on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:52:20 AM EST
    ...the vast majority of Obama supporters were planning on voting for Senator Clinton if she was nominated.  And vice versa.  Even those of us who were Iraq war voters were going to vote for her.  I honestly doubt that anything apart from a small minority of dedicated Clinton supporters will vote for McCain, either.  

     President Clinton did put Republicans in charge of certain posts.  I don't even think that is a bad idea.  Hell, if it would secure a massive victory right now I'd support a Republicanesque VP (I'm on record as suggesting Hagel, for pete's sakes).  Somehow I think everyone on this site would have lined up behind Kerry if he had pulled the coup of securing McCain as a running mate in '04.  

     Senator Clinton is running her campaign, Senator Obama his.  They're both center-left candidates.  They're both imperfect.  They'll both be good presidents, and compared to Emperor Palpatine, er, McCain, great presidents.

     The perfect is the enemy of the good.  Neither of them is perfect.  I think Senator Obama is better, you think Senator Clinton is better.  Either one is a vast change of pace from McCain.  


    Oh Please (5.00 / 2) (#130)
    by MO Blue on Wed May 21, 2008 at 08:15:51 AM EST
    As Obama has said words matter. He publicly stated that his voters would not vote for Clinton. So party unity is not required.

    Anyone who would support Hagel or any Republican for VP might just not want to tell me oh please. That would be such a wonderful plan.  First if anything happened to Obama, the country would have a very, very conservative Republican president. In fact, on social issues Hagel is more conservative than McCain. It would also be setting up a Republican for the next presidential cycle rather than a Democrat. This is the kind of thinking that completely turns me off on the Obama party AKA the Unity08 party by your description.

    I don't think this is the case of the "The perfect is the enemy of the good." If I did, I would once again hold my nose and pull the lever for the D. You haven't convinced me and you won't be able to. Obama might be able to change my mind but he is the only one who has that possibility and so far, he and his supporters are not doing a very good job.


    You won't be changing minds in a positive way (5.00 / 8) (#116)
    by andrys on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:33:47 AM EST
    here, if you insist on denigrating others' party affiliation because they won't vote the way you want them to.

      I've been a Democrat for 48 years, and I am NOT voting for Obama.  That's my right and I've too many reasons for that decision, none of which I care to repeat yet again, tonight.   And I don't want to be overly negative as far as listing all the horrible things.  

      The Dems are of course free to run the one they can most easily control and get money from, but for me it's virtually certain they will lose the presidency big-time because of this twisted route they've chosen, starting with penalizing a state that tried to change its date (their attempts to get the date in compliance but thwarted by the Republicans were not accepted within THE RULES given for modifying any penalties, while 3 states were not given ANY penalties) and then DOUBLING the penalty even in that case, in order to get ZERO votes counted from them in a year we will NEED that state's votes.  

      The Dems apparently WANT to lose this election.  It's the leaders' choice but they and we will suffer for that.  If you really care about no Republican president in 2009 then you and others who feel the same way might want to re-focus a bit.  Until then, you're gambling and the gamble is worth it to you, all the electoral polls notwithstanding.


    I have been a Democrat longer than (5.00 / 5) (#129)
    by Lisa on Wed May 21, 2008 at 08:14:02 AM EST
    many Obama supporters have been alive.

    I joined a party that espoused equal rights for all.

    I don't see a party representing that position right now, so I became an Independent.


    Why I think that this time. . . (5.00 / 6) (#136)
    by NotThatStupid on Wed May 21, 2008 at 08:34:14 AM EST
    ... will be different.

    After every primary, we've gotten used to the talking heads discussing what percentage of either candidate's supporters say that they will vote against their opponent - or abstain from voting - in the general election should that opponent be the nominee. And they always add something about how those figures are really meaningless - that supporters always say that very same thing after every hard-fought campaign, and that the party always comes together behind its candidate in the Fall. One example they've been citing is John McCain's support for George W. Bush in the 2000 GE.

    I don't think any great coming-together - for the Democrats - is going to happen, this time. My reasons:

    First, you cannot compare Republicans to Democrats on this issue. Republicans are a much more homogeneous group, while Democrats more closely resemble a loose coalition of ever-shifting interest groups. It is easier to alienate a significant part or parts of the Democratic party than it is to do the same to the Republicans.

    Next, this campaign has been unique, among the twelve or so that I have witnessed, for the type of rhetoric and conduct that Senator Obama and his supporters have directed towards Senator Clinton. Being told repeatedly that the candidate you prefer is a racist, and that you are a racist for supporting her, has made it exponentially more difficult for the party to unite behind him if he secures the nomination.

    Likewise the sexism that has been rampant in the Obama camp, and the lack of censure regarding it from the party hierarchy. To be shown so conclusively that the party you believed shared your hopes and aspirations for equality - and especially equality of dignity - between the sexes, has caused many Clinton supporters to feel that the Democrats have abandoned them.

    Then, there is the blatant media bias in favor of Senator Obama. That bias has increased the feeling among Senator Clinton's supporters that the nomination is being improperly manipulated by powerful forces. It's easier to vote against someone if you sincerely believe that his nomination is illegitimate.

    The same feeling of illegitimacy is exacerbated by the Democratic primary process, particularly the caucuses, which are - rightly in my opinion - felt to be unrepresentative of actual candidate strength. That Senator Obama has very smartly worked the caucus system to his advantage will not lessen the feeling that he has - to use his own words - "gamed the system."

    Finally, this really is a historic nomination, in that a woman or an African-American will be a major party's nominee for President for the first time. Either group, women or African-Americans, will feel greater alienation this year, should their candidate not win.

    These are the reasons I believe that, this time, the voters who say they will vote for the opposition, or abstain, if their candidate is not nominated are much more serious about that than those who made similar pronouncements in past primaries.

    As for me, I won't vote for Senator Obama because I do not believe he is qualified for the job.


    Talking heads last night were (5.00 / 2) (#140)
    by zfran on Wed May 21, 2008 at 09:01:35 AM EST
    mostly saying the same as you as far as why we "all come together" after a great primary fight. I'm with you...not this year!!!

    I originally leaned toward Edwards (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by Raven15 on Wed May 21, 2008 at 10:46:51 AM EST
    ...or Kucinich.

    There is 0% chance I will vote for Obama. It would violate too many of my principles.

    Hillary has been the star of this campaign.

    I still think she may be the nominee, but if not my decision is whether to write her in or vote McCain as a protest vote against the Stalin-meets-Madison-Avenue Obama "movement."


    Support (5.00 / 2) (#147)
    by creeper on Wed May 21, 2008 at 09:21:03 AM EST
    Senator Clinton has gathered a large and dedicated and real support

    I believe you're correct about the depth of Clinton's support.  Obama's support may be a mile wide but it may be only an inch deep.

    STUBBORN, Committed, determined, (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by felizarte on Wed May 21, 2008 at 11:02:14 AM EST
    and describes me to a T.  But I credit the Obama supporters with persistence in this blog.  But none of them seem to realize or accept the fact that Sen. Obama long ago set the tone with his own words.  My parents always warned me about saying things carelessly because "you can't take back words, once spoken."

    And it does not help Obama either, when he puts the crown on his head undeservedly, and prematurely.  It  is foolish at the very least. And downright insulting.  He simply confirms the negatives he has already piled up for himself.


    Honestly (none / 0) (#166)
    by Nadai on Wed May 21, 2008 at 12:35:06 PM EST
    this post just makes me want to bang my head against a wall.

    Many more young Americans will die if McCain is elected than if a Democrat, any Democrat, is. It's that simple.

    You say this.  It might even be true.  But it's not enough.

    The US - the world, really - is headed for an economic meltdown.  We desperately need an FDR, someone strong enough and smart enough to do what has to be done to manage the situation as best it can be managed.  I don't frankly see any of them as rising to the FDR level, though I certainly think Clinton is far more likely than either Obama or McCain.

    But if Clinton is not to be and we're stuck with one of the others, I simply do not see Obama as a reasonable choice.  He might be a better President than McCain, though I am far from convinced of that.  But you are assuming there is no downside to electing Obama even in that case.

    What I see happening with a President Obama is the complete gutting of the Democratic Party.  I don't think he's prepared for the job, and I don't think he's temperamentally suited for it, which is a problem that cannot be fixed.  He will not only never win a second term, he will damage the Democratic Party's prospects for years.  And while I'm thoroughly ticked off at the Dems right now, the country cannot afford to lose them outright.

    Without Clinton, the choice isn't simply Obama or McCain.  The choice is Obama for 4 years and wrecking the Democratic brand for who knows how long, or McCain for 4 years and then the Democrats having another shot with a decent candidate.  For me, choosing a not-so-hot short-term gain with a god awful long-term loss is idiotic.


    Does anyone here watch "House"? (none / 0) (#48)
    by janarchy on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:42:45 AM EST
    I was just wondering if anyone but me caught the "Vote for Change 08" bumper sticker prominently displayed on the wall in one scene of the season finale. Both Olivia Wilde (13) and Kal Penn (Cuttner) are vocal Obama supporters which is their right but seeing how the show is a medical drama and not about their own personal politics, it seemed pretty tacky to me.

    I saw that (5.00 / 2) (#68)
    by joejoejoe on Wed May 21, 2008 at 03:40:44 AM EST
    Seeing how the bumper sticker was in a toilet stall I'm not sure it wasn't a bit tongue in cheek.

    I dunno (none / 0) (#74)
    by janarchy on Wed May 21, 2008 at 04:02:19 AM EST
    It might have been. I just know that Wilde and Penn have been extremely vocal about Change and Hope so it was kind of jarring to see such an obvious endorsement there. Of course, I guess it could be a visual pun showing that Wilde is in the tank for Obama!

    I really don't see the problem. [nt] (none / 0) (#84)
    by JoeA on Wed May 21, 2008 at 04:51:59 AM EST
    I saw the sticker, too, (none / 0) (#92)
    by BGP on Wed May 21, 2008 at 05:58:30 AM EST
    and I'll admit to being mildly offended. but then I thought the whole episode was sub-par.

    I admire Hugh Laurie's talents, and think the ensemble has been great, but this season hasn't been as much fun as in years past.


    I haven't watched yet (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by stillife on Wed May 21, 2008 at 06:40:10 AM EST
    but my daughter dvr'd the episode - she thought it was great.  While I still enjoy the show, I think it's gone downhill from the first couple of seasons.  It's so formulaic and predictable.  

    Congrats (none / 0) (#53)
    by Cal on Wed May 21, 2008 at 02:51:00 AM EST
    To both of you.

    Yup, congrats to you both. (none / 0) (#85)
    by JoeA on Wed May 21, 2008 at 04:52:46 AM EST
    Nice photo!

    There's a TL book club, too? (none / 0) (#59)
    by Cream City on Wed May 21, 2008 at 03:10:04 AM EST
    So cool.  Hmmmm, once past primaries, maybe we could have a summer reading thread -- I get in a rut with my histories and mysteries, so I could use a bit of a boot in a new and adventurous direction for me.  

    I'm writing down this one in your post.  Oh, and thanks to all of the discussion about racialized regions and areas, I wandered down some online path through  one click to another that night . . . and now have on the way to my library James Loewen's book Sundown Towns, said to be an extraordinary amount of research about municipalities that by law and/or custom maintained lily-white status.  Found a website from the book, too, with lists by state of such towns.  Startling numbers.  I knew of some in my state -- but hundreds?  Hardly enough AAs here in most of that era to populate so many towns.  Such is the power of fear of the unknown.

    Anyway, at least my summer reading list will have me breaking out beyond history to get into law somewhat. :-)

    Congrats to the TL kid (none / 0) (#67)
    by joejoejoe on Wed May 21, 2008 at 03:39:18 AM EST
    That's a nice thing you got to do taking the oath with your son.

    Congrats to you both!

    Congratulations (none / 0) (#77)
    by facta non verba on Wed May 21, 2008 at 04:21:10 AM EST
    to both Jeralyn and the TL Kid.

    Congratulations to Nic and his mom! (none / 0) (#78)
    by barryluda on Wed May 21, 2008 at 04:23:15 AM EST
    And thanks for the photo and for setting out the oath.  You are both understandably proud.

    Didn't make the focus group! Wah! (none / 0) (#81)
    by Fabian on Wed May 21, 2008 at 04:45:42 AM EST
    My demo was over the quota for the health care & election focus group.

    Perhaps if I had been a new voter, or younger, or poorer, or less liberal, or not a (D), or less informed then I might have made it.  Can't change most of that - but I did answer the political affiliation question with "(D) - Currently".

    The one question they didn't ask me:
    "Which ethnic group do you consider yourself?"


    The beaming smiles on the photo! (none / 0) (#82)
    by dutchfox on Wed May 21, 2008 at 04:49:14 AM EST
    O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay! Congratulations to your son and you...on this momentous occasion. Lovely photograph.  

    Congratulations! (none / 0) (#93)
    by pantsuit chic on Wed May 21, 2008 at 06:16:03 AM EST

    Hillary gained 60 SDs overnight, Obama 46 (none / 0) (#94)
    by Josey on Wed May 21, 2008 at 06:23:50 AM EST
    Total delegates needed O 64 - C 246

    ugh! not enough coffee (none / 0) (#95)
    by Josey on Wed May 21, 2008 at 06:31:08 AM EST
    obviously the gain was from delegates, not SDs.

    that is excluding Florida right? (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by diplomatic on Wed May 21, 2008 at 06:36:37 AM EST
    Howard Dean already went on record and said both Florida and Michigan will be seated at the convention and that the popular vote totals count.

    Therefore Obama does not just need 64 delegates because the actual number needed including Florida and Michigan is over 2200.

    Just clarifying this for people who haven't had their coffee yet :)


    All I read was that he said this but ... (5.00 / 3) (#117)
    by andrys on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:41:45 AM EST
    ...but also said that this would all take effect AFTER they had decided on the nominee with the other information.

    Oh the other hand, as I've mentioned before, he also told the Financial Times on April 25 this:

    "I think the race is going to come down to the perception in the last six or eight races of who the best opponent for McCain will be. I do not think in the long run it will come down to the popular vote or anything else."

    Do you have a link for the one you saw?  Would like to read that.


    Do not believe anything Dean says... (none / 0) (#152)
    by Shainzona on Wed May 21, 2008 at 10:35:01 AM EST
    if you think that he will "seat" FLA and MI...he will seat them - as Andrys says - only after they have given the nomination to Obama.  OR, they will seat them but not allow them to vote for the nominee...the issue is will they be allowed to vote - not just for rulz but for the nominee, too.

    He was quoted at one time as saying they would be seated so they could come and be a part of the convention...as in, come and eat and drink, but don't vote.

    Put your listening ears on anytime you hear anyone from the DNC talk on this subject.


    Congrats! (none / 0) (#97)
    by chrisvee on Wed May 21, 2008 at 06:35:37 AM EST
    Lovely photo of a lovely moment.

    Lovely photo, lovely moment (none / 0) (#104)
    by A little night musing on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:01:07 AM EST
    Big congratulations to both of you, Jeralyn and Nic!

    He sure looks like you (none / 0) (#111)
    by MichaelGale on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:23:15 AM EST

    and congratulations! (none / 0) (#112)
    by MichaelGale on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:23:47 AM EST
    Congratulations, (none / 0) (#115)
    by pie on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:32:13 AM EST
    Jeralyn and Nic!

    How exciting for all of you. Wonderful pictures, too.  Good luck to Nic in your career.  You certainly have a fabulous role model.

    Congratulations! (none / 0) (#118)
    by DJ on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:46:47 AM EST
    You both look so happy.

    Long-shot suggestion about Chicago ordinnce (none / 0) (#122)
    by Molly Pitcher on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:52:24 AM EST
    Got info today on another draconian ordinance on animal ownership in Chicago.  Apparently statistics have once again been used to lie (how unusual).

    Briefly for pet lovers--a big fee for not neutering your pets.  Ok with me on that one.  Reason for the new ordinance: over-population of pets.  Except Chicago happens to be trucking in animals from the south to have enough adoptable ones.

    BUT--the kicker for me is that all 'pit bull types' must be surrendered to the city and subsequently killed within 10 days.  No exception for well-mannered family pets.  The reason for this appears to be racial: quoting the info I rec'd: someone sees a 'gang banger' (that used to mean something else) walking in the  street with p-b type dog.  Conclusion: gangster on the loose.  Kill the dogs.  (BTW, the ones like Vick owned would never be walked on the street as pets.)

    I suggested the protesters contact the candidates after the primaries.  Anyone think Chicagoan O. would respond?  Just maybe, HRC moght see it as a useful friend-maker--and also as a rights issue.  We are getting low on 'rights' now.

    Oh, and congrats to (none / 0) (#124)
    by Molly Pitcher on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:53:50 AM EST
    mother and son.  You both done good.

    ps--will we be getting inside dope from the convention?


    Congratulations Jeralyn (none / 0) (#131)
    by samsguy18 on Wed May 21, 2008 at 08:23:52 AM EST
    Such a proud and special moment.Jeralyn and BTD I truly appreciate this site. I visit daily.  

    Congrats Jeralyn and TL kid! (none / 0) (#133)
    by Josey on Wed May 21, 2008 at 08:28:10 AM EST

    What a Night (none / 0) (#135)
    by creeper on Wed May 21, 2008 at 08:33:26 AM EST
    that must have been for both of you.  Reading about taking the oath together gave me chills.

    My own kid is now twenty-five and still finding himself.  These days he finds himself a deckhand on a Mississippi River barge.  He'd love to be a lawyer.  Maybe some day...

    Heartiest congratulations to you and the TL kid, Jeralyn. Ya' done good.

    the sad sick world we live in (none / 0) (#150)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed May 21, 2008 at 10:25:54 AM EST
    is it any wonder what we have seen in this campaign when this is what is acceptable in our world:

        On the day it was announced that Sen. Ted Kennedy had been diagnosed with a malignant brain tumor, nationally syndicated radio host Michael Savage opened his show by interspersing audio of Kennedy singing "Ay Jalisco No Te Rajes" with clips of news reporters discussing Kennedy's diagnosis and audio from Kindergarten Cop in which Arnold Schwarzenegger's character says, "It's not a tumor." Later, Savage played the Dead Kennedys song "California Über Alles" after stating: "The poor guy's been suffering for years, you know? Unfairly he's been accused of alcoholism, but we see now that it was something much more deep-seated. And so, to cut this out in some respect for Ted Kennedy, here's a tune coming at you from the Dead Kennedys. Go ahead and play it, please."

    It's sad isn't it? (5.00 / 2) (#151)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed May 21, 2008 at 10:34:56 AM EST
    The GOP is sick. The Dem party is sick. The whole country is sick. We are in a bad, bad way.

    Today the Net Is Sick, Too (none / 0) (#153)
    by creeper on Wed May 21, 2008 at 10:37:20 AM EST
    Almost all the blogs are down at some point, plus most other website.  

    Oh, except for MSNBC.  For some reason it always loads.  I can't imagine why.


    Because MSNBC (none / 0) (#154)
    by stillife on Wed May 21, 2008 at 10:39:24 AM EST
    is the devil!

    the fact that someone like Savage (none / 0) (#155)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed May 21, 2008 at 10:44:42 AM EST
    has a national platform is all the evidence of that anyone should need.

    Heh (none / 0) (#169)
    by Steve M on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:31:41 PM EST
    Maybe CNN will put him on right after Glenn Beck.  Sounds like their cup of tea.

    Congratulations, Jeralyn and son! (none / 0) (#161)
    by NWHiker on Wed May 21, 2008 at 10:52:15 AM EST
    What a wonderful moment that must have been! And the photo is great.

    yes, congratulations (none / 0) (#163)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed May 21, 2008 at 11:01:21 AM EST
    great pic

    Congratulations (none / 0) (#172)
    by democrat1 on Wed May 21, 2008 at 07:18:19 PM EST
    to both of you