progressive cyberdadaism from our nation’s capital
One of the most disappointing (even occasionally depressing) aspects of the Great Blog War of 2008 is watching blog authors who I used to read, go the way of spin over substance. I liked the idea of the left being more rational in approaching politics. I frankly think that the left’s claim to be the “reality-based” community has been mortally injured by the primary fight.
This CorrenteWire blog is an example of spin over substance. The notion that’s being posited is that TPM is applying a “new rule” to the contest: that leadership in the delegate count must decide the super delegate vote. As the blog accuses TPM: (emphasis mine)
What Josh is doing there is kind of like the poker game he describes, only the guy with four of a kind says, before everyone lays their cards down, that four of a kind beats a straight flush. If the guy with the straight flush folds, four of a kind wins even though it could have lost according to the rules. The Clinton Campaign is calling that bluff, and demanding that Obama (and his supporters) follow the rules as they are, which includes letting the superdelegates decide what they think is best for the party. Josh is certainly free to keep trying to bully the superdelegates into voting in lock-step the pledged delegates (but it is kind of funny that he never seems to ask superdelegates like Kennedy or Kerry to follow the will of the voters in their state).
Having followed Corrente for a number of years, I find it difficult to believe that any of the regular authors are inclined to believe that super delegates would have a clue what “is best for the party.” A suspicion that a DNC type might act to protect Democratic party insiders over the welfare of the country, sure, but that’s not the sense that I understood the blog author to mean by what “is best for the party.” I would say that the flavor of the blog over the years has been distrust of the elected in so far as they come to see themselves as elect.
And, of course, neither Josh Marshall nor Kos nor anyone else is proposing that there is an unwritten rule that the super delegates must follow the tally of the primaries. What they are saying is that the forseeable consequence of a super delegate selection differing from the delegate favorite is that many people would regard the result as the elect imposing their will upon the people. The People would be rightly pissed off. I think it would be fair to say that the prospect of dancing in the streets during the Democratic convention would be slim to none. Unless of course it’s the right-wing freak show doing the dancing- the NRO’s, Powerlines, and Malkins of the world.
MyDD has a cunning plan to refute the delegate lead: (emphasis mine)
A far more compelling argument to superdelegates, I would think, is to constantly remind them about Michigan and Florida. Not because they’re “two of the big four” necessarily but rather because had they moved to legal dates they would have represented two additional early Clinton wins, likely big ones, and the mere fact that Obama would have had to compete there would have meant fewer resources for him to expend in other states. In other words, Obama’s pledged delegate and popular vote leads, such as they are, have an unavoidable asterisk next to them, one that may not pay dividends for Clinton in the official tally, but one that absolutely would factor into my decision if I were a superdelegate.
But the DNC decision on Florida and Michigan was well known in advance. The two states were just as disenfranchised in January as they are now in March. But no one was claiming back in January that the outcome of the Democratic primaries would have an asterisk next to it. Or that the more legitimate claim to deciding the primary outcome should be in the hands of super delegates.
I hope you will forgive my snark when I say that I intend to support candidate Asterisk in the primaries. And all the little asterisks. And, in January 2009 I fully expect to see President Asterisk being sworn in.
[powered by WordPress.]
hip·po·pot·a·mus n. A notion, perhaps distinct from conventional wisdom, that needs to be verified by reality-based scrutiny.
95. Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum (I think that I think, therefore I think that I am.)
— Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary
We're asking you to put some of the money you plan to give Obama "in escrow" until he demonstrates progressive leadership on the issues we care about, like warrantless wiretapping. [Link]
The report notes that the administration has gone to “unprecedented lengths to control and suppress information about the human cost” of the wars. [Link]
"We see a tipping point occurring right before our eyes," Hansen said during his appearance at the National Press Club. "The Arctic is the first tipping point and it's occurring exactly the way we said it would." [Link]
It appeared to confirm for the first time in an official examination many of the allegations from critics who charged that the Justice Department had become overly politicized during the Bush administration. [Link]
"After years of disclosures by government investigations, media accounts, and reports from human rights organizations, there is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes. The only question that remains to be ans [Link]
It gives me a terrible mental image of the whole country linking arms and goose-stepping in unison, with the politicians out in front doing a straight-armed salute. [Link]
BOULTON: There are those who would say look, lets take Guantanamo Bay, and Abu Ghraib, and rendition and all those things and to them that is the complete opposite of freedom. BUSH: Of course, if you want to slander America. [Link]
In a subsequent e-mail to the employee, Cargol described himself as “a rub-your-belly, grab-your-balls, give-you-a-hug, slap-your-back, pull-your-dick, squeeze-your-hand, cheek-your-face, and pat-your-thigh kind of guy.” [Link]
Democracy Now! Radio and TV News [Link]
Let's take a look at how the Los Angeles Times covered the new Senate Intelligence Committee report on the claims made as part of selling the Iraq war, and compare it to how the editorial page of the Washington Post, by which I mean Fred Hiatt, sees the e [Link]
Former White House press secretary Scott McClellan writes in a new memoir that the Iraq war was sold to the American people with a sophisticated "political propaganda campaign" led by President Bush and aimed at "manipulating sources of public opinion" an [Link]
Hertzberg's analysis is noteworthy because he appears to be able to allow several ideas to coexist in his head simultaneously, which quite an achievement these days. [Link]
That night, George Stephanopoulos, who was then a top aide to Mr. Clinton, declared that it was “mathematically impossible for Brown to get the nomination” — the start of a campaign to declare Mr. Clinton the presumed nominee, even as several other [Link]
If Obama is the nominee, Tonay said, McCain will be just fine with her. "In the end, I won't vote for Obama because I don't know who he is, and I don't trust him," she said. [Link]
Robert Reich, who went to Yale Law School with Hillary Rodham and Bill Clinton and later served in the Clinton administration, called Hillary Clinton's attack on Obama "absurd,&q~ adding: "That carries guilt by association to a new level of absurdity. [Link]
Some speculate the Senator Clinton would want the spirit-killing Vice Presidency because she would be willing to wait for two terms so as to be the likely nominee in 2012. I believe that she could well contemplate this scenario. [Link]
A subsequent study by the National Bureau of Economic Research showed that gas prices fell by 3 percent, meaning that only three fifths of the savings from reduced taxes was passed on to consumers. [Link]
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is filing a complaint with the IRS today challenging the conservative group Freedom's Watch status as a non-profit. [Link]
For Barbara, Hillary has become the screech on the blackboard. From First Lady to Lady Macbeth. [Link]
So what's changed? I asked Reich. "I saw the ads" — the negative man-on-street commercials that the Clinton campaign put up in Pennsylvania in the wake of Obama's bitter/cling comments a week ago — "and I was appalled, frankly. [Link]
27 queries. 0.456 seconds