Say, Is That Groundswell a Rising Electability Tsunami, or Are You Just Happy to See Me?

Now, remember, boys and girls -- it's all about beating the Bushist fascists to a pulp in November, is it not?


From Corrente, "Clinton Election Juggernaut Accelerates."

From Hominid Views, stats suggest an 89.1% Probability of Clinton Winning Against McCain' 10.9%.

Update: From Hominid Views, Clinton continues strength against McCain: now 89.3%.

And yet more from Hominid Views, here.

From Anglachel, "Fear and Loathing."

From Big Tent Democrat, "Is a Funny Thing Happening On the Way To Obama's Coronation?"

My current personal favorite -- from TPM, an actual Obama supporter reports on Weekend Electability Simulations.

"This week I ran 100,000 trials for both Obama/McCain and Clinton/McCain matchups.

The results:
Obama wins 37.1%, averages 264.7 EV
McCain wins 61.3%, averages 273.3 EV
Electoral tie 1.6%

Clinton wins 99.0%, averages 290.7 EV
McCain wins 0.8%, averages 247.3 EV
Electoral tie 0.2%

This week is both the strongest Clinton has been, and the weakest Obama has been, since I've started running this simulation."

These numbers were run this weekend, May 17, 2008.

Tide? Turned?

In Oregon, Clinton Blasts McCain at Portland Town Hall Meeting That Obama Turned Down


Then, there's WomenCount PAC.

And let's never ever forget, "Go Away, You Horrible Human Being," by fellow Democrat John Aravosis, because that's what intra-party amity is all about, is it not?
.

It's the Sweetie Rebellion, Sweetie!

Uh-oh.

Hell hath no fury like -- damn!

Why won't those uppity bitches just shut up, roll over, and die?

Why?

Why?

Why?

"Women Threaten Obama Boycott," More here.

Obama sends out paid schmooze-trolls to hypnotize them bitches and bring 'em back into line, here.

HillBuzz on the 400 bloggers, here.

Red Queen on "It's Too Late for Flowers and Candy, Blogger Boyz," here.

Sweeties Against Obama, here.

A Pre-Nup for Obama, via" The Confluence.

"We have something the Obama boyz want reaaaal bad. And it’s going to take more than sweet talk to get it. Oh, yeah, baby, baby, baby, we can keep this going for a long time but you’re not getting our votes until we get a weddin’ ring.

You have to marry the old, uneducated, working class, sino-peruvian lesbians or you can just go home with Rosie. And here’s what we want in a pre-nuptual agreement (courtesy of FrenchDoc):

Seat Mi/FL

Now, on to the policy questions, because, as racist, bitter, old, low-info, etc., . . . as we are, we actually care about substance:

- take privatization of SS off the table
- prosecution of the Bush crime clan
- promotion of women’s and LGBT’s rights
- progressive economic policies
- universal health care
- repeal of no child left behind, no merit pay plan
- out of Iraq / no bombing of Pakistan
- reinstate habeas corpus
- commitment to appointing progressive judges on SCOTUS, no waffling
- commitment to repeal the partial birth abortion law, no waffling
- no telco immunity

Have I forgotten anything?

Oh yeah, stop abusing / insulting us . . . incredibly, it does not endear BO to us.

Yeah. What she said.

---------------------------------------

Get well soon, Teddy Kennedy. He's a good and responsive Senator, and imho his heart has always been in the right place.

The Chosen One Fearmongering on Social Security: What's Up With That, Sweetie?

Remember when Senator Obama attacked Senator Clinton about Social Security? Using a Republican frame?

I do.

I'm not the only one who does.

A while back, Matt Stoller pointed out:

One, there is no crisis with Social Security, which is something progressives understand. There are many crises around the world, including fiscal ones in this country. But Social Security is fine.

Two, politically speaking, Social Security was the issue upon which Bush's momentum in 2005 crumbled because of a large progressive organizing effort.

That Obama is using the need to shore up Social Security as an attack on Clinton, well, this makes me want to say that I'm disappointed that Obama is abandoning the politics of hope.

On another level, I just feel bad for progressive Obama supporters. It's simply awful to watch a person that you thought was great and progressive betray and embarrass you for political gain, and move into a more authoritarian direction.

A lot of Obama supporters at this point will become much quieter since there's little that is positive to say, which will allow the more ardent types to occupy more of the conversation. That's really unfortunate, but it's just a reality that Obama has given up his role as a participant in the progressive conversation.

He'll be back as he's too giant a figure to leave permanently. But his campaign at this point is leaving him not just scarred as a Presidential figure, but as a political figure in general. He has just shrunk dramatically in stature.

Okay, that was last fall.

Josh Marshall, before his transformation, thought that Obama was wrong about Social Security.

Obama was (and is) wrong about using Republican frames to attack Hillary Clinton.

How did The Chosen One get away with it? With passing himself off as a progressive, without actually being progressive?

Why is he still getting away with it?

Oh, right. Because that's what being The Chosen One is all about?

Way too Kwisatz Haderach for me, sweetie.

(Or should I say, "cutie"?)




PS: Interesting stats via Hominid Views, here.


.

Wonderings About The Chosen One: Clean Up Your Act, Sweetie?

Isn't it ironic.

This ironic picture of Barack Obama mystically rising from the Willamette River appeared in Willamette Week, accompanying an article which endorsed him for President of the United States, in a non-ironic (I am led to believe) endorsing kinda way.

And yet -- somehow -- there seems to me to be a certain aura of, well, unicorns, sparkles, and strewn roses that pervades (perhaps perfumes?) the non-ironic portion of the socio-political air.

But anyway, last night I (or rather my Pariah Clintonista av) listened to WA-08 Congressional candidate Darcy Burner at SL's Virtually Speaking; she impressed me with her intelligence, insight, and her energy for --well, change. Non-ironically speaking.

She also impressed me with her enthusiasm for Barack Obama. Which was almost infectious.

So this morning, I read my morning newspaper.

In it was an article about Bush's appeasement slam of Obama. I read about Hillary Clinton defending him against Bush, saying, "President Bush's comparison of any Democrat to Nazi appeasers if offensive and outrageous, especially in the light of his failures in foreign policy. This is the kind of statement that has no place in any presidential address."

So far, so good.

But at the article's end was this:

Mr. Obama has likened his foreign policy approach to that of the so-called pragmatists in the administration of the first President George Bush, which carried out the first American invasion of Iraq, in 1991, and he has shared those sentiments recently as he has sought to woo independent voters in swing states. “I have enormous sympathy for the foreign policy of George H. W. Bush,” he said. “I don’t have a lot of complaints about their handling of Desert Storm. I don’t have a lot of complaints with their handling of the fall of the Berlin Wall.”

Oh good.

Obama's down with a Ronald Reagan who singlehandedly huffed and puffed and blew down the Berlin wall?

Obama has enormous sympathy for the foreign policy of Bubble Boy's father?

A rose by any other name, would smell as sweet as a Republican foreign policy can smell.

How sweet is that, really, sweetie?

On Wearing The Scarlet 'Hillary' [from 5.2008]

So much anti-Hillary hysteria.  Intra-party rancor. It makes me want to throw up. (Not to mention that I don't deal well with rancor in general, which I won't mention.)

All this name-calling and intra-party partisan hysteria, in addition to making me want to throw up, makes me want to call up Tony Benn, my social democrat hero, and ask if I may please, please throw myself onto his lap, sobbing, while he pats my hair paternally and reassures me that, sooner or later, everything's going to be alright.

Which may or may not be the case. And may or may not be what he would say. It's, you know, a fantasy.

Meanwhile, besides work, I try to amuse myself making green curry of duck, endless steaming pots of chicken soup, and digging in the garden, and indulge in aimless streams of thought: "Windy today, by the way. I like that poem by Czeslaw Milosz. I don't think anybody read it. People don't like poetry. Well, Americans don't like poetry much, certainly. South Americans do. In my experience, everrrybody in South America can quote Neruda. Here it's such an egghead thing. Why do Americans hate eggheads? Why do they hate intelligence? Why did they elect Bush? Why do they hate Hillary?"

My political head hurts.

Using Cheney's adjective: "Big-time."

Ok, then, why do they hate Hillary Clinton so? In particular, why does the so-called left wing of the Democratic party hate Hillary Clinton? Why are they aligned with Karl Rove? Beats the crap out of me.

Not in RL, but in blogtopia and SL, I belong to a shockingly despised minority because of this.

It's been very unsettling. I am one of the many commenters at Kos who fled after the Great Anti-Hillaryist First Purge.

Seeing my dendrobium send out a pre-bloom shoot this morning, I was reminded of John Aravosis, fellow orchid-fancier, whose blog I regularly visited, commented at, and really enjoyed until his Great Anti-Hillaryist First Purge. (Now John's written a charming post entitled "Go Away You Horrible Human Being," and he's NOT talking about Dick Cheney.)

Ditto Democratic Underground and BuzzFlash and HuffPo and on and on. Oh, and now we have John Edwards and NARAL throwing Hillary under the bus. Way to offend people you really don't want to keep on offending, people. (Or should I say, "sweetie"?)

In SL, though friend avs remain friendly (I think), once I'm in a larger political social grouping, the slightest show of Hillarysupport from me results in an automatic "INCOMING!"

I've toyed with the notion of making a little sign above my avatar saying "Pariah Clintonista," just to get it over with.

I think it's important to be supportive of whoever one's supporting, but there's an edge of virulent hysteria here with which I'm both suspicious and uncomfortable. Now it's starting to spread over into virulent anti-Obamania, and I just can't go there, either. Not at all.

So, Tony, dear -- you once called yourself a "biological Buddhist."

Where is the Middle Way?



---

Arthur Silber needs money. Send him some if you have some.

How Is This Poem by Nobel Laureate in Literature Czeslaw Milosz Relevant to The Democratic Party As It Currently Exists?

A Task


In fear and trembling, I think I would fulfill my life

Only if I brought myself to make a public confession

Revealing a sham, my own and of my epoch:


We were permitted to shriek in the tongue of dwarfs and demons

But pure and generous words were forbidden


Under so stiff a penalty that whoever dared to pronounce one


Considered himself as a lost man.


.

Play Nice, Dem Boyz 'N Girlz -- Or We'll Rip Off the Head Of Dem Party Intra-Party Unity Pony & Stuff It Down Its Day-Glo Neck

Yes, boys and girls, it's time for another butterlamp offering being offered here to save an endangered species -- poor poor pitiful Party Unity Pony, who lies on her deathbed with her tongue hanging out, gasping for breath, with her big round sad eyes looking really, well, sad.

She's the last of her lineage; her very existence is hanging by a thread.

Please consider taking this time to save the endangered life of Dem Party Unity Pony of Intra-Party Civility and Working-Togetherness.

Our butterlamp offering involves advocating a simple alteration in technique.

Sure, it's easy to make vitriolic political remarks, and doing so can seem oddly pleasurable.

We're asking that every Dem boy or girl, before they write, say or do something shriekily disparaging, to stop and apply the Miss Piggy Test -- asking themselves, hey, if I write or say X, Y, or Z -- will this give Karl Rove a hard-on?

I could give examples, but you know just what I mean.

"Hillary is X! Barack is so X! Bill is even X-er! Michelle = even more X than Hillary! Isn't it awful! How could she/he! How could they? Rrrawk! Rrrawk! Rrrawk!"

Save Dem Unity Pony. Do your part. It's okay to be angry, it's even ok to be furious with one another. (I feel these feelings all too frequently myself, these days.)

But -- set a boundary. Take a breath. Take a breath and apply the Miss Piggy test.

Will reading this/hearing this actually give Karl Rove a hard-on?

Because, you know, lately he's having waaaay too many.

.

.

Department of Breath of Fresh Air

Comment at The Agonist by ww, in reply to withering anti-hillary screed du jour. Wish I'd said that. Wish I'd linked to it. Oh wait, I just did. Whew.

Then there's Winners Never Quit, Quitters Never Win, at WaPo.

Oh, and I read in the paper this morning that Republican pundit George Will really really wants Hillary to drop out.

Apparently, he thinks it's crucial that she drop out for the good of his party.

.

Shakesville: Hillary Sexism Watch Number NINETY

Come on, people.

You can't be progressive and do shit like this.

You just can't.

Help for the People of Burma

Link through to Normblog for live links, and full article.

"Both the Burmese government restrictions and US economic sanctions make it very difficult to give money to local NGOs directly, but it is possible to support their work by donating to the international groups that have longstanding partnerships with local NGOs and community-based organizations (including churches and monasteries).

The following international organizations are already in the Delta and have launched fundraising campaigns to support broader efforts. All of them have proven track records in Burma, and especially in the Delta."

ADRA International
Myanmar Cyclone Fund
12501 Old Columbia Pike
Silver Spring, MD 20904
(800) 424-ADRA ext. 2372
http://www.adra.org


http://www.worldvision.org (More via Normblog)

Duggar Quiver Really Really Really Full

Full-quiver Family Mom Michelle Duggar just announced that she is expecting her 18th child.

A Poem Tinkerbell-ianly to Resurrect the Magical Unity Pony Of Democratic Intra-Party Civility & Working-Togetherness To Defeat Bushist Fascism

(Yes, I know I've posted this poem so often that to post it again is really like beating a dead horse. Pony. Whatever. But I'm doing it again, so sue me.)

Think of this poem as a virtual butterlamp being offered in order to raise the spirit of community and magically resurrect the Magical Unity Pony Of Democratic Intra-Party Civility & Working-Togetherness, a pony who currently lies pitifully abed, with her big round sad eyes looking really, well, sad.



ON ANGELS

All was taken away from you: white dresses,
wings, even existence.
Yet I believe you,
messengers.


There, where the world is turned inside out,
a heavy fabric embroidered with stars and beasts,
you stroll, inspecting the trustworthy seams.


Short is your stay here:
now and then at a matinal hour, if the sky is clear,
in a melody repeated by a bird,
or in the smell of apples at the close of day
when the light makes the orchards magic.


They say somebody has invented you
but to me this does not sound convincing
for humans invented themselves as well.


The voice--no doubt it is a valid proof,
as it can belong only to radiant creatures,
weightless and winged (after all, why not?),
girdled with lightning.


I have heard that voice many a time when asleep
and, what is strange, I understood more or less
an order or an appeal in an unearthly tongue:


day draws near
another one
do what you can.




--Czeslaw Milosz

Is It Time to Euthanize the Democratic Party's Magical Unity Pony? By Which I Mean The Magic Pony Of Intra-party Civility!

I dunno yet.

I have my doubts. I have written about them at length. Well, part of me has doubts. Serious ones.

(Please note that I am using "Magical Unity Pony" not as a reference to a single campaign, but to highlight the magical possibility that Democrat versus Democrat conflict will not result in a continuing shrieking bloodbath, as it so far is doing. I am sorry that there are, and have been other interpretations of the the Pony Thing, my bad, but the Pony here under discussion of being put down is now and only the Magic Pony of Intra-Party Unity & Civility.)

And yet -- this morning another part of me awoke and came to the keyboard.

I found that today I cling to hope that, horribly broken at both ankles as poor Magical Party Unity Pony is, we might find a way still to save her.

With the thought of her foremost in my mind, today I Googled "The Southern Strategy," in search of a cure for our poor ailing Magical Party Unity Pony.

I found quotes about Nixon, and that part I knew about, but at the bottom of the Wiki article was a section that was all about "The Southern Strategy in the 2008 Democratic Primary."

Aha. That is what I was looking for. Because, at first glance, I couldn't figure out what Nixon's Southern Strategy had to do with the 2008 Democratic Primary.

It read:

"Pundits such as Rush Limbaugh and Roland Martin have suggested that the campaign of Senator Hillary Clinton would use a "Southern strategy" to suggest that African-American support in South Carolina for rival Barack Obama was related to his race and not his individual appeal to voters.

Limbaugh said they will be "[g]iving nothing to Obama, blaming it all on racial identity politics, or crediting it for that. You watch. They'll do something." In [Limbaugh's] view, subsequent primaries would be affected by the introduction of race and follow the pattern of the Southern strategy."

Now, gentle readers, I don't know where you come from, but where I come from, Magical Party Unity Pony definitely dies when Democrats hear and believe in frames cooked up by Rush Limbaugh, the man who created the great American concept, "feminazi."

Is that true for you as well, fellow Democratic Party Magical Unity Pony of Intra-Party Civility And Working-Togetherness enthusiasts?

.

-----------------------------------
There's this.

Then, there's this.

And especially, there's Hillary vs. The Haka, an exercise in bluffing and intimidation.

It's Not My Party & I'll Cry If I Want To

O-kay. Here goes:

.1. My support for Hillary Clinton has zero to do with her gender, and everything to do with her policies. Her policies are significantly more liberal than her primary opponent's weak centrist positions are, and thus are closer to my own. (She's still to the right of me, but is well to the left of her opponent).

2. My unhappiness with Senator Obama's campaign is of relatively recent vintage. In December, I felt pretty much that any Democratic candidate would do. I no longer think that.

3. My unhappiness with the unbelievably sexist attitude of members of my own (or so I thought) party is what is driving me to get away from it just as far and as fast as I can. (There are some other factors in play as well -- for example, the Faux-Left Manichaean Naderite demonization of All Things Clinton. Hunh? Peace and prosperity for 8 years was so bad, Mickey Moore?)

Which brings us to our Leftist Sexist Du Jour.

This morning's insulting, sniggering, disparaging delectation is from Nicholas D. Kristof, writing his most recent version of "Why Don't You Just Shut Up And Die, Bitch," as part of the ongoing Hillary DeathWatch.

In this charming column, "The Too-Long Good-bye," Kristof tries to Swiftboat Senator Clinton by comparing her to Katie Couric.

Yes, yes, you heard it right.

He really says that. No, really, he does.

Hillary = Katie. Katie = Loser = Hillary = Loser = Wanting a "man's job" = Loser = Just Shut Up & Die, Bitch

What, you think I'm making all this up? You think this is just me, getting, oh I dunno, all periodically emotional, as The Man Who Would Be [Prom] King once said?

No, no. Let me find the link. Ah. Here.

"One of the reasons that Mrs. Clinton is resolved to keep fighting is, I think, a resentment that she and many of her followers feel over sexism in the campaign. On that issue, she has a point. One of the political lessons of this year — backed by psychological research and polling data — is that the bar is probably higher for a woman candidate for president than for a black candidate.

It’s interesting that two strong women — Katie Couric as well as Mrs. Clinton — have foundered this year in roles that are stereotypically male. Granted, the presidency is very different from the job of an evening news anchor, but some psychology experiments suggests that one factor in each case may be public resistance to a woman in a position in which we are accustomed to seeing a man. . . . . So Mrs. Clinton’s frustration is understandable." (Then he tells her to shut up and drop out so that The Man Who Would Be [Prom] King can get on with his important work.

So, boys, and girls, let's deconstruct.

Nicky Kristof imputes an attitude to Senator Clinton that is fact-free -- that she feels "resentment" over sexism in the campaign. He later baselessly asserts that Senator Clinton feels "frustration". (Playing so nicely into the gender stereotype, is he not? It fairly puts my panties in a twist!)

M. Kristof briefly admits to campaign sexism, but then spins it that the real problem is that the "bar" is set "higher" for a woman candidate than a black candidate (wrongly interpreting the data by implying that females inherently aren't "up" to the task, rather than seeing sexist attitudes as being more pervasive than racist attitudes).

He then spins vapid perkmeister Katie Couric as a "strong woman," and that Senator Clinton is a strong woman, too. What a nice compliment, Nicky. (Kristof here cleverly refers to Senator Clinton not as Senator Clinton but as "Mrs. Clinton." You know, Bill's wife. He then "Mrs. Clinton"s her all the way to the article's end.)

Nicky asserts that vapid Katie has foundered this year -- which is true.

Then he says she foundered because she, Katie, is female, not because she, Katie, is a vapid perkmeister unsuited to the job in which she was placed by network execs looking to make evening news even stupider than it has been.

Kristof asserts that, just as Katie Couric has foundered in a role that is stereotypically male, Senator Clinton has foundered in a role that is stereotypically male.

Hel-lo?

She's the last woman standing in the contest for the Democratic Party nomination for President of the United States, and that's "foundering"?

Well, of course it is!

That girlie-bar is just set so high!

Then he tells her to get out of the race, and that it will be all her fault if Obama loses to McCain.


Well, no, dear. It's not really like that.

If Obama loses to McCain, that's Obama losing.

If people like you are alienating people like me, that's your bad, Nicky-boy.

And the bad of Faux-Lefties, people like Keith Olbermann, Mickey Moore, Mickey Kaus, Kos, Frank Rich, HuffPo, all those sniggering fratboys and fratgirls who ride wild with the Hillary DeathWatch Posse.


Is there any difference between their sexism and John McCain's?

I can't see any. Can you?

.

It's Your Party & I'll Cry If I Want To.

.




I attended a SL Democratic Primary social event last night where there was so much mud being slung at Hillary Clinton you'd have thought I'd infiltrated SL Republican Party Headquarters by mistake.

But no-o-o, it wasn't coming from "them," it was coming from "us."

Well, no, the slung-mud was not from the part of "us" that includes "me."

That was not my party. That's your party, maybe, dudes, maybe it's Keith Olbermann's party and his ilk's, but it sure ain't mine.

I don't seem to have one anymore.

It was no mistake, last night, this is how things are now: one must assume that Karl "Miss Piggy" Rove is laughing his chubby pink butt off.

--------------------

Quitters Never Win, WaPo.

Who Will Rid Me of These Booger-Chomping, Testosterone-Deprived Sniggering Fratboy Dickheads?

The Sniggering Fratboy Posse is hanging out at Slate these days, big-time. Like "Little Mickey" Kaus, and his homies. Timothy Noah. Chadwick Matlin. All the Hillary Deathwatch Boyz.

They're sniggering and hanging loose elsewhere, too.

MSNBC. CNN. Faux. NYT. Evv-rywhere.

Grabbing their metaphoric public crotches, which are either openly empty or stuffed with smelly socks.

Want another gender-slur from Keith "Ladies First" Olberman?

Earth to Keith -- if you want to disparage Clinton, disparage her policies, not her gender. Would you tell Obama he should "go to the back of the bus"? Of course not. But "Ladies First"? That's okay.

Then there's yesterday's New York Times coverage of Clinton, which manages to name-call her repeatedly while leaving out any evidence that would suggest the gender-slur name-calling is in any way merited by facts: two headline featuring the attribute "Ruthlessness," and flinging this unsourced mud from "critics": "divisive," "a dirty fighter," "willing to do anything to win." It criticized her for having "baggage that makes Mrs. Clinton [not Senator Clinton] such a provocative political figure" while continuing to create that baggage right on the front page.

(The next day's Times featured an article that prominently feautured descriptions of her coiffure and makeup. I looked over the rest of the paper, and you know, I just couldn't find any other person whose hair and makeup was mentioned. Oh my. Hmm.)

Like an intentional fart in a closed car, the sniggering sexist fratboy fetor pervades the whole US media whore media, contaminating the culture at large.

Some of them sexist niggerers claim to be female. Most of them claim to be male.

But they're all all wet. They're all limp and pathetic.


They're all, you know -- dickheads. Inexcusable dickheads.



(& by this this metaphor I mean no insult to dicks.)

Hat tip to Tennessee Guerilla Women.

The Fog of Hope

Compare and contrast: fog versus facts, here.


(B-b-but -- new! Shiny! NewNew!

Change! Hope! Change!)

Joe Wilson Nails It: The Story of O

Legitimate Questions of Judgment, Experience.

Read it all. Then wonder why our media whore media is so brain-dead that they yap about flag pins and tears while ignoring issues.

" . . .Obama repeats the incorrect and politically irresponsible mantra that Sen. Hillary Clinton voted for the war and that therefore he is more qualified to be president. Unlike Obama, as the last acting U.S. ambassador to Iraq during the first Gulf War, I was deeply involved in that debate from the beginning.

President Bush and Secretary of State Colin Powell made it clear publicly and in their representations to Congress that the authorization was not to go to war but rather to give the president the leverage he needed to go to the United Nations to reinvigorate international will to contain and disarm Saddam Hussein, consistent with the resolutions passed at the time of the first Gulf War.

With passage of the resolution, the president did in fact achieve a U.N. consensus, and inspectors returned to Iraq. Hans Blix, the chief U.N. inspector, has said repeatedly that without American leadership there would have been no new inspection regime."

. . .The approach of tough diplomacy backed by the threat of military action was the correct one and it yielded exactly the desired results, a unanimously passed U.N. resolution and the capitulation of Saddam when he readmitted the inspectors.

The betrayal occurred not when the president was given the tools he needed to secure international support for inspections, but rather when Bush refused to allow the inspectors to complete their work and decided preemptively to invade, conquer and occupy Iraq.

That decision and power was his alone -- not the Congress' and certainly not Hillary Clinton's. Obama is wrong to turn Bush's war into Clinton's responsibility. And Obama is dangerously naive in failing to understand the need in international crises to blend tough diplomacy with the other foreign policy tools at our disposal to achieve a strong national security posture.

Last-Minute Hillary-Surge in Guam! Not Enough 4 Victory -- Obama Crushes Uppity Hillary Clinton by 7 Votes.

.Not that there's anything wrong with that.

A surprise surge, that is.

Having heard the media whore media pundits, one thought that The Man Who Would Be [Prom] King had Guam all sewn up!

"Even the Kentucky Derby wasn't this close.

In the strangest of circumstances that could only bring about the closest of races, Hillary Rodham Clinton finished with 49.9% of the vote of the Guam Democratic Caucus, just 7 votes shy of Barack Obama's total of 50.1%.

While Obama led for the vast majority of the night's tallying, Clinton needed a strong finish in the municipality of Dededo, Guam's most populous village. And she did - gaining 61% of the 822 votes counted by the Democratic Party of Guam.

Note: these are unofficial, uncertified results as tabulated by the Democratic Party of Guam. The DPG also noted a high number of spoiled ballots in Dededo."

Who'd a thunk it?

Hell Freezeth Over

And really, isn't it about time?

Via The Confluence, a great piece from garychapelhill, "It's 32.1 Degrees In Hell."



Meanwhile, we're drifting, we're drifting, here.

Update: The turkey soup has turned the corner, abruptly, is now curried turkey soup with coriander. (One just knew you'd want to know). Plus, Mr. NBFH and I are off to be very very French whilst viewing intrigue in a Spanish Court in 1519. So there. Feliz Dos De Mayo a todos!

No Blood for Hubris Official Mental Health Interlude No.624b

Hey. It's Uno de Mayo.

Happy Beltane.


(Thanks to the legendary white witch of New York, Marion Weinstein.)

Official No Blood for Hubris Mental Health Interlude (No. 342)

So, when the Clinton/Obama drama palls, and one's personal samsaric trauma drama morphs into mere annoying mosquito-esque repetitiveness, what is there to lift one's spirits that does not involve staying up till all hours in virtual frolic with west-coast avs and their naughty boundaryless east-coast enablers?

(RL avatar yawns appreciatively.)

Well, there's this guy.

Seat-Sniffing Leader Breaks Down.

New Poll: Senator Hillary Clinton Would Beat "Same Old Same Old" John McCain by Nine Points

This just in.

WASHINGTON - Hillary Rodham Clinton has a better chance than Barack Obama of beating Republican John McCain, according to a new Associated Press-Ipsos poll that bolsters her argument that she is more electable in the fall than her rival for the Democratic nomination.

The survey released Monday gives Clinton a fresh talking point as she works to convince pivotal undecided superdelegates to side with her in the drawn-out Democratic primary fight.

Clinton, who won the Pennsylvania primary last week, has gained ground this month in a hypothetical head-to-head match up with the GOP nominee-in-waiting; she now leads McCain, 50 percent to 41 percent, while Obama remains virtually tied with McCain, 46 percent to 44 percent.

Hat tip to No Quarter.

Turkey Soup, Or, Why Sexism Should Matter to Dem Men More Than It Does At Present

I'm not windsurfing.

No, really, I'm not windsurfing.

No, I tell you, I'm just NOT windsurfing.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Windsurfing, I mean.

You know, it takes a lot of smarts and strength? It's kinda macho?

Unless and until it's spun completely otherwise? As one might completely otherwise spin an actual meritorious martial experience? Well, I'm just a broad so nevermind.


I'm just here making soup, as personal therapy. It might have been chicken soup, and frequently is, but today it's turkey. With vegetables and barley. As I chop, and saute, make things simmer, and str, while continuing not to windsurf, I have time to reflect.

I reflect on having been regaled in blogtopia recently with reminders of how poorly the Dems have done in general elections. I'm not sure why people are reminding me of this, since I need no actual reminders on this subject. (People remind me of a lot of things on the internets tubeses of which I am perfectly well aware, thanks so very much.)

How poorly the Dems have done . . . why would that be, one wonders?

This segues into my sexism theme since it is the Karl "Miss Piggy" Rove Bushist Fascist Propaganda Cadre that has done so well for so long by successfully branding male Democrats as -- well, pussies.

Pussies.

As in gurrrls. Wimps. Cry-babies. Losers. Effetes. Elites. Girlie-men. Smartypant sissies. Weaklings. Hysterics. Whackjobs. Nutbags.

Really, it goes back to the rat-f*ckers, the Canuck letters that turned Ed Muskie suddenly into a snivelling wimp.

Later, it was Mike Dukakis in-a-tank, looking like a Charles Schultz creation. Add soft-on-crime Willie Horton. Dukakis = wimp. Girly-man. Heavens!

Scandal over the insane price of Bill Clinton's haircuts, which proves he's a gurrl.

Hysterics over hysterical-Dean-scream Howard Dean.

Hysterics over the horrid girly price of John Edwards' haircuts, not to mention calling him "The Breck Girl."

Hysterics over patrician smartypants wussy effete ee-leete John "windsurfer" Kerry.

"Autumn Colors" smartypants wussy Al Gore.

You can't disparage someone in the US, at least overtly, for being of color. (You can do a miscegenation tap-dance, a la Harold Ford, certainly.)

But it's a-okay to disparage a man by labelling him as possessing the inherently inferior characteristics of the inherently inferior female class.

It's a-okay, because the belief of female inferiority is widely shared.

Not universally, but widely.

This is why all the sniggering fratboys (and their fratgirl enablers) of our media whore media continue to get away with it.

Why do we allow this to go on?

It is not unreasonable to try to portray one's opponent as weak, or stupid, or ill-informed.

It is wrong to attach a gender label to one's opponent for the sole purpose of disparaging their person.

It is sexist to do as Imus did recently, and call Obama "almost a bigger pussy than she is [referring to Hillary Clinton]."


Have we all had enough of this, one hopes? And if not -- why not?




The G Spot, here.

Thomas a Beckett's Ghost Asks: "Who Will Rid Me of This Meddlesome Female Candidate for U.S. President?"

Someone really really needs to get rid of Hillary Clinton.

Democrats really need someone who'll get rid of her, according to MSNBC's Howard Fineman, someone who'll "stop this thing."

Faux-Left Manichaean media darling Keith Olbermann agrees: "Right. Somebody who can take her into a room and only he comes out."

(Thoughtful pause.)


"Somebody who can take her into a room and only he comes out."

O-kay.


Let's compare:

"We need someone to stop Barack Obama's campaign in its tracks."

"Right. Somebody who can throw him in the back of a pick-up, and string him up."



Raise your hands, boys and girls, if that metaphor works for you?

No? It doesn't work for you?

Well, it shouldn't.

Nor should the first one.

Sexism and racism are completely unacceptable.

Sexism is tolerated in the United States today in a way that racism is no longer tolerated.

Recognition of the pervasiveness of gender bias in the USA is not a reason to vote for Hillary Clinton; however, rampant sexism, particularly in the media, has adversely affected and continues to adversely affect her ability to communicate information on her actual plans and actual policy proposals.

Thus, the citizenry continues to be bombarded by sniggering fratboy vitriol that disparages Senator Clinton merely as a female, rather than engaging in an honorable war over her ideas, plans, and policies versus the ideas, plans, and policies of her opponents.

That's why the pervasive "just shut the fuck up, bitch" theme of her opponents is so very vile.

And that's why so many of us have our frickin' panties in a twist.

Just in case you'd been wondering.


.
Alegre, at No Quarter, here.