It's Always Something!

Well, just when I think things are going to settle down and be peaceful, something else happens. My 91-year-old aunt fell and broke her hip a few days ago. Now she's in the hospital and will need to go into rehab. Luckily she made it through the surgery to put the pin in her leg with flying colors - they used a spinal instead of general anesthesia and she did great. She is doing well and they think she will be able to walk fine once she finishes rehabilitation.

Of course that is not my only excuse for not posting for awhile. We actually managed to go up to the cabin in the Adirondacks last weekend for four days. The weather up there has been as unseasonably mild as it has been down in New Jersey. So we figured, why not go up? There was no snow on the ground whatsoever, very unusual for that area in February.

However, our gravel "road" (if you can dignify it with that description) was covered in a sheet of ice. All moisture tends to gather on the road and flow down the hill, whether from melting snow or from rain. However, our Jeep Rubicon lived up to its reputation. We were able to get up that hill by running the Jeep along the side of the road where the leaves were, rather than on the slick ice. We just had to put it in 4-wheel-drive, "low low" (an extra low gear just for this model) AND lock the axles. Not a problem! It was a relaxing weekend and I have to admit I did not get on the computer much at all.

So, in the meantime, the politics of the GOP nomination continue to be volatile! Just when you thought Gingrich had subsided and things might be smoothing out for Romney, Santorum goes and wins in caucuses in Minnesota and Colorado, and in a "non-binding" primary in Missouri. As a result, new money has poured into his campaign. It's like that old whack-a-mole game. You get one of them and another one pops up!

It is obvious that many GOP primary-goers just don't like Mitt. They try but they just can't do it. What scares me is that Santorum represents the most right-wing, theocratic side of the GOP, and any votes that put him anywhere near being a possible nominee for the Republicans is a very scary thought.

Santorum is a man who is so homophobic he talked about gay sex in the context of "man on dog," and he is against birth control for women, although he says he doesn't want to ban birth control. He just thinks it would be good if states were allowed to ban birth control. Even Ireland doesn't ban birth control anymore! What century does this man live in?

Think it can't happen? The "personhood" amendments being pushed by Republicans would do just that, if they ever passed. Many forms of birth control would be considered ending the life of a "person." Even Mississippi voted that idea down. But it keeps popping up again in other states. According to Personhood USA, activists are trying to get personhood measures on the ballot in at least 12 states in November 2012!

"For now, it’s unclear how many of the personhood proposals will actually go before voters later this year. Authorities have given the green light to gather signatures for proposed ballot measures in Colorado, Ohio, Montana and California, while legislators in Kansas, Virginia, Oklahoma, Wisconsin, Alabama and Georgia have been working on bills that could lead to personhood referendums.

In Nevada and Arkansas, personhood campaigns also are in place, but have been slowed by disputes over the wording of proposed ballot measures. In Florida, anti-abortion activists are gearing up to seek a referendum in 2014."

Whatever else you want to say about Election Year 2012, it isn't dull; and it isn't inconsequential. There are HUGE issues at stake in this election, especially if by some chance Romney doesn't get the nomination. Anyone who wonders whether there is that much of a difference between the Republicans and the Democrats, between Romney and Obama, had better look hard at the issues that matter to them.

Maybe President Obama hasn't been the most liberal Democrat ever elected; but he is certainly way more "liberal" than anything the GOP will come up with, even Romney. Keep that in mind when thinking about things like Supreme Court appointments, the environment, reproductive rights, civil rights, and more.

Haiku Saturday

Well, here it is, the day of the South Carolina primary. It is amazing to me that in such a short time, Newt Gringrich has surged to the point he may actually beat Romney despite all his morality-challenged past actions.

And it's not all because Rick Perry dropped out; it seems as if people down there just seem more excited about Newt than about Mitt. As columnist Paul Mulshine says in the linked article, "An excess of emotion trumps a lack of emotion every time in the Deep South. That might explain why Romney’s in so much trouble in a race he was expected to win in a walk."

It probably isn't helping Mitt much that Stephen Colbert is down there campaigning with former candidate Herman Cain, further confusing the voters, some of whom may not even realize he's a satirist.

And of course, in the meantime, Romney is still reeling from finding out he apparently didn't win the Iowa caucuses after all; Santorum apparently beat him by 34 votes.

It will be very interesting to see what happens today. Since I have no real news to talk about until after the vote, I thought it would be a good time for some haiku. And the first one I am going to post is by Jeremy over at Chew the Fat - and I'll send you over to his place to read it. Hint: It's about Newt and it is very good!

Now here are mine...

First snow of winter
Drapes cotton over the cars
And makes my feet slip.

The dogs aren't walking
We drove to get the paper
We are pathetic.

This is the Northeast
Snow is a normal event
But we were so spoiled.

One snowstorm in Fall
Nothing but good weather since
What do you expect?

It's warmer down South
Where things are getting hotter
Newt may beat Romney.

Running neck and neck
Santorum and Paul behind
But they're still trying.

After tomorrow
The race may get more narrow
We will wait and see.

That's all I've got today! Tomorrow is another day and will provide plenty of entertainment, I'm sure. In the meantime I'll post this highly amusing and very pertinent song by the Austin Lounge Lizards, "Gingrich the Newt." The ironic thing is, this song is from Newt's FIRST era in politics and is still true today. I love the reference to orphanages; apparently Newt said back in the 90s that kids would do better in orphanages than in the welfare system. Now he thinks poor kids should be janitors. Really, the more he changes the more he remains the same! (If I've posted it before, apologies for repetition, but it is definitely worth repeating. There isn't really any video to this but do listen to the words!)

A Cat's Eye View - of Ron Paul

Baxter here. Sorry to have been Silent for so Long but I am at the Mercy of the Humans in terms of when I can Blog or not. Luckily my Female Human has taken it into her Head to get back to the Business of Blogging again and is giving me the Access I deserve to expound on My Opinions here. It's not that I can't Type, but I am not Very Good at the management of Software and I don't know HTML so my Human has to help a little when I want to do things like make things bold or whatever. And I have Strong Opinions so I need some bold now and then!

OK, so where was I? Oh yes, Ron Paul. The so-called Libertarian among the GOP field. As a Cat, I am sure you would understand that I like the idea of being a Libertarian. There is no one more Libertarian than Cats. Dogs are certainly NOT Libertarians. They do whatever their Masters want, or at least they try to. Sometimes their Brains are Too Relaxed to understand what is Wanted. But if they figure it out, they'll do it. Well, maybe except That Dog they call Diva. She tends to do what SHE wants. But the New One, Angel, she tries to Please; except for one thing - she still wants to chase Me and Bark. But I digress.

Many Humans who usually think Progressively tend to kind of like the idea of Ron Paul. Not Ron Paul himself, mind you, but their IDEA of Ron Paul. They think of him as Someone who would get Government out of their Hair and Leave them Alone. They also know that, unlike front-runner Romney, he thinks legalization of Marijuana should be left to the states and there should not be a federal law against it, which they think is kind of Cool - and that he was against the War in Iraq, also a Good Thing in many People's Eyes. But they may not have read the Details of his other ideas on the issues. If they did, they would be Much More Concerned about Mr. Paul. For instance:

He is "Pro-Life," saying he believes Life begins at Conception and Roe vs. Wade should be reversed. In addition, he opposes any Government Funding for Things People Don't Believe in - which in this case means:

"Ron Paul will also protect the American people’s freedom of conscience by working to prohibit taxpayer funds from being used for abortions, Planned Parenthood, or any other so-called “family planning” program."

Now, as a Neutered Cat, issues of Contraception have No Interest to Me. But I'm sure there are Many Progressive Female Humans who would find these Ideas Alarming. I also wonder, if Conservatives think the "American People" should not have to have their Taxes go toward Things they Don't Believe In, why does that only apply to Things Conservatives Don't Believe In? Shouldn't Liberals and Progressives have the Right to refuse having their Taxes go toward Things They Don't Believe In either? Like, for instance, My Humans would Choose not to have their Taxes go toward Wars and Military Spending. Why should the Consciences of Conservatives be the Federal Government's only Concern?

Ron Paul has More Ideas. Lots of them. For instance, he wants to Abolish the Income Tax, the "Death" Tax, the Capital Gains Tax, and the Federal Gas Tax. Oh, but he also wants to Balance the Budget. I Wonder how he would Do That? Sounds Confusing to Me; but of course, I am Only a Cat.

As for Energy, Paul is of the Drill, Baby, Drill! mindset. More Oil! More Gas! Nuclear Power! Coal! Oh, and Abolish the EPA - that's just a Lot of Troublemakers Ruining the Economy and keeping our Energy Prices up!
"As President, Ron Paul will lead the fight to:

* Remove restrictions on drilling, so companies can tap into the vast amount of oil we have here at home.

* Repeal the federal tax on gasoline. Eliminating the federal gas tax would result in an 18 cents savings per gallon for American consumers.

* Lift government roadblocks to the use of coal and nuclear power.

* Eliminate the ineffective EPA. Polluters should answer directly to property owners in court for the damages they create – not to Washington."

I particularly Love the idea that Property Owners would have to Go to Court to get Polluters to pay for the Damages they create. How would that work, exactly? My Humans would have to sue the owner of the local Gas Station or the nearby Industrial Brownfield for the contamination of the Groundwater? And wouldn't that Clog up the Courts indefinitely? Or better yet, for Mr. Paul, I guess he figures People would get Tired of having to Sue to get anything or wouldn't be able to Afford the Lawyer Fees and Big Polluters would just Get Away With It.

Home-Schooling? He's all for it.

"Ron Paul believes no nation can remain free when the state has greater influence over the knowledge and values transmitted to children than the family does.

And the truth is, no big government spending program can or will solve our nation’s education problems."

Personally, I would rather the Human Children be Taught by Professionals and not a bunch of Evolution-Denying, Anti-Intellectual Parents who will Brainwash the Kids to grow up thinking Just Like Them. And the More People who Homeschool, the fewer People will be paying for Public Education (Mr. Paul, of course, wants these Parents to get a Tax Credit for Homeschooling their Kids) and Public Education will Continue to Go Downhill.

What about Guns and the Second Amendment, you may ask. Well, of course, Ron Paul is all Pro-Second Amendment and Pro-Gun!

"With our gun rights under constant attack from our own government and the anti-gun United Nations, as well as the threat of rising crime due to our country’s economic woes, Congressman Paul believes it has never been more important that our President be 100% committed to defending our God-given right to keep and bear arms."

(Of course we All Know how much God likes us to have Guns; that's why it is our God-Given Right to have them!)

True, some Progressives and Liberals will like some of his Ideas on the Military. After all, who Among Us would argue that there is a lot of Waste in the Military Budget, and that we probably don't need to give Money to "Rich Dictators." And it probably IS a Good Idea to follow the Constitution and have Congress Declare War before actually going to War.

But to Me, as a Liberal Cat, his other Ideas are Just Too Dangerous. I hope my Fellow Liberals and Progressives will read Mr. Paul's positions Very Carefully.

So that's It from Me today. I hope you Enjoy Your Weekend and Have Enough Catnip to Get Through this Election Season. It's only going to Get Worse before it Gets Better!

Haiku Monday

January is
Such a long and dreary month
But so far no snow.

It's global warming
I venture to speculate;
No complaints from me. 

The Republicans
Have converged on New Hampshire
Tomorrow's the vote.

Mitt Romney screwed up;
Said he likes to fire people
Poor choice of wording.

Newt Gingrich cancelled
Because protesters showed up
He can't take the heat.

And Rick Santorum
Isn't faring much better
In the Granite State.

He heard the booing 
Due to views on gay marriage 
Over in Concord.

After tomorrow
The whole circus moves onward
Let's hope it ends soon.

"Santorum? Really?!"

Well, the much-touted Iowa caucuses are over, thankfully, but the Republicans still haven't managed to admit they have to choose Romney. Sure, Romney won Iowa by a whopping 8 votes, but the fact that Rick Santorum nearly tied him should give all sane people pause. When I first heard that Santorum was even running, I couldn't take it seriously. The man was voted out of office in Pennsylvania by 18 percentage points in 2006 for a lot of good reasons (see link for a number of lapses in integrity and episodes of crass hypocrisy) and his history of homophobia was (and still is) so rabid that his opponents, led by Dan Savage, actually made his name a definition for an unsavory type of substance, which shows up pretty close to the top of any Google search you do on his name. (No, I won't link it here, but feel free to Google if you are one of the few who has not already heard about it).

So I may be forgiven if I thought we'd seen the last of him. But strangely, he's baaaack! Santorum is running for President and has managed to promote himself as the sole keeper of family values competing for the Republican nomination, thus siphoning off all of the hardcore right-wing evangelical Republicans in Iowa and managing to nearly topple Romney. You almost have to feel sorry for Romney; he's doing everything right and yet the GOP voters still don't want him.
Just in case anyone has forgotten what a nutjob Santorum really is, let's revisit a few of his positions. This link will take you to a site that lists a number of quotes by Santorum on various subjects. A few choice examples:

• “The reason Social Security is in big trouble is we don’t have enough workers to support the retirees. A third of all the young people in America are not in America today because of abortion, because one in three pregnancies end in abortion.” - Rick Santorum on how abortion is responsible for Social Security’s problems, 3/29/11

• “I find it almost remarkable for a black man to say ‘now we are going to decide who are people and who are not people’.” - Rick Santorum on President Obama’s race and pro-choice beliefs, 1/19/2011 

• “Is anyone saying same-sex couples can’t love each other? I love my children. I love my friends, my brother. Heck, I even love my mother-in-law. Should we call these relationships marriage, too?" - Rick Santorum comparing his love for his mother-in-law to the love that same-sex couples share, 5/22/2008

In case you wonder whether he really believes some of the things he says, you can see his beliefs on his own website, where he states he will do the following things, among others:

• "Repeal Clinton-era Title X family planning regulations, and will direct HHS to restore the separation of Title X family planning from abortion practices and restore a ban on referrals for abortion 
• Reinstitute the Mexico City Policy to stop tax-payer funding or promotion of abortion overseas
• Ban federal funding for embryonic stem cell research 
• Restore conscience clause protections for health care workers 
• Defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court 
• Ban military chaplains from performing same sex marriage ceremonies on military bases or other Federal properties
• Repeal Obamacare mandate for contraceptive services in healthcare plans... 
• Veto any bill or budget that funds abortion or funds any organization that performs abortions including Planned Parenthood 
• Call on Congress to abolish the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals 
• Advocate for a Personhood Amendment to the Constitution... 
• Advocate for a Federal Marriage Amendment to the Constitution 
• Call on Congress to reinstitute Don't Ask/Don't Tell 
• Call on Congress to pass the Workplace Religious Freedom Act 
• Call on Congress to reinstitute 2008-level funding for the Community Based Abstinence Education program 
• Advocate for a federal law permitting schools to allow prayer at graduations, football games and other school functions." 

Anyone who cares about a woman's right to choose - including the choice of using birth control - should be very afraid if Santorum ever got elected. And forget separation of church and state - such as it is - this guy would love to see a theocracy.

On last night's Daily Show, Jon Stewart used a great analogy to point out that in the end, the Republicans just have to pick Romney. I'm just hoping he's right, for the sake of the country. While I do feel that Romney may have the best chance of beating Obama, which is not good from my perspective, on the other hand, the voters in this country are just crazy enough that they might actually elect a Santorum or some other equally unsuitable person as president, and that would be so much worse than having a President Romney that I can't even think about it.  Of course, there are a lot of reasons Romney should not be the next president.  We can get into that next time!

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Indecision 2012 - Romspringa - Rick Santorum's Surge
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

A Cat's Eye View

Baxter here. I have had a Very Bad Week since I last posted. Last Thursday morning I got up in a Good Mood and I was rubbing around my Humans' legs and purring, trying to convince them I needed some Food and Water, which for some reason had been Unavailable since the previous Night; and all of a sudden I was picked up and thrust into that Carrying Box. I knew right away Something was Wrong.

Sure enough, they brought me to that Awful Place they call the Vet's. I went in there feeling Fine and by the time my Female Human picked me up later that day, I felt like Crap. I felt Woozy and my Mouth hurt. My Female Human told me she was Sorry, but when they cleaned my Teeth they had to pull out some of them.

Well, now that a Week has passed I feel pretty good. I guess it wasn't That Bad. But it sure ruined my Weekend.

Now that I'm feeling better, I feel up to Blogging again, so here I am.

Lots has happened since last week. Tuesday was another of those Primaries. And even though the Obama Human is winning this Delegate race, the Clinton Human won big-time in West Virginia. Some People say this means a Big Problem for him in the Fall. Let's hope he figures out how to reach the West Virginians and similar People in other States. There are lots of Theories as to why he isn't winning with these people. Jon Stewart had some ideas last night:



"He's simply not their kind of guy," says one commentator. Jon Stewart questioned, "So she's 'their kind of guy?'"

Whatever the Obscure Reasons the Obama Human lost in West Virginia (and likely will in Kentucky), these setbacks probably won't Bother him much. In the meantime, the other Human that was running for President earlier this Year, John Edwards, endorsed the Obama Human Wednesday evening at a Rally in Michigan. In his Endorsement, he said:

"There’s one who understands the need to create one America, not two Americas, and that man is Barack Obama."

This was Great News for the Obama Human and Not So Great News for the Clinton Human. In fact, she was probably as Mad as a Wet Cat about it. (And no, calling her a Cat is not a Sexist Remark; it is a Common Expression among us Cats, so don't take it Wrong).

Since then, 7 of the Edwards Delegates have now switched to the Obama Human plus 3 more of those Humans they call Superdelegates.

So that is the Big News in Politics since I last Posted.

In other News, the California Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples have the Right to Marry, striking down two State Laws that limited Marriage to being between a Man and a Woman only. I for one am Very Happy that this has happened. Of course, we Cats don't Marry but we can certainly understand why others might want to do it, and why shouldn't Anyone who wanted to be Allowed to? Now of course the Religious and Conservative Groups are having Fits and say they will support an initiative on the November ballot that would amend the California Constitution to ban same-sex marriages and overturn the Decision. Let us hope that it Does Not Pass.

On to less serious Subjects.

I found this article about how some Animal Shelters use a Personality Test to match up Cats with prospective Owners. Seems like a Great Idea to me! After all, you don't want a Really Shy Cat being teamed up with someone who wants to be rubbed on and purred at 24/7. And Some People come into a Shelter looking for an exact Replica of their Old Cat in looks, but then find out the New Cat is nothing like the Old Cat in personality.

According to the Article, there are lots of types of Cats. One Cat, Barnaby, who had an outgoing personality, is called the "Leader of the Band" type of personality.

"All of the types have fun, vivid names and descriptions. Barnaby is "leader of the band." His opposite, a cat low on both scales, is called a "private investigator," who stays out of trouble.

A more middle of the road cat is familiar to many people: the "personal assistant." "You're working on the computer? Let me press the keys. Reading the paper? I'll hold the pages down for you... You'll wonder how you ever managed without me," according to program literature."

I guess I kind of fit with that "Personal Assistant" type Cat. Especially when I help my Female Human Blog.

They have this same kind of Test for Dogs. I can only Imagine what That Dog would be called. I wonder if there is a Category just called "Diva"? It would certainly fit!

In News of the Gross,it was announced recently that astronauts living on the International Space Station will be recycling their urine into - get this - Drinking Water. Yep, that's right! They apparently have a $250 million machine that will do the job! According to the article:

"NASA has spent decades perfecting a system to transform urine into water that can be used in space for drinking, food preparation and washing. Agency officials say the water from the system will be cleaner than U.S. tap water."

Of course, That Dog probably would not be Offended by this. She will drink Anything. If my Humans did not close the Toilet Bowl I have no Doubt she would be drinking out of it.

I will end with a Very Appropriate LOLCat. I must say This seems like a Good Idea to Me. If I had realized in time they were going to drag me to the Vet I might have tried something like This:


more cat pictures

What's Her Game?

Last night, Hillary Clinton lost to Barack Obama in North Carolina by a hefty 14 percentage points, and squeaked out a tiny victory by only 2 points in Indiana, which was too close to call until after 1 a.m. She had been hoping to close the gap in North Carolina - indeed, polls going into the primary had shown her doing just that - and to take Indiana decisively. She did neither.

The various pundits have declared the race is basically over. As Tim Russert put it,

"'We now know who the Democratic nominee’s going to be, and no one’s going to dispute it,' he said on MSNBC. 'Those closest to her will give her a hard-headed analysis, and if they lay it all out, they’ll say: ‘What is the rationale? What do we say to the undeclared super delegates tomorrow? Why do we tell them you’re staying in the race?’ And tonight, there’s no good answer for that.'"

Obama and Clinton both made speeches last night that had a certain indication of moving beyond the primaries. Both pledged to support "whoever" got the nomination. This was heartening. Hillary had cancelled her morning television appearances, so it seemed she would be thinking long and hard about whether to continue fighting, especially after having to loan her campaign money in order to keep going.

But no. Today's newspapers declare "Clinton Pledges to Fight On."

"'I’m staying in this race until there is a nominee, and obviously I’m going to work as hard as I can to become that nominee,' Mrs. Clinton said at a news conference in Shepherdstown, W.Va., where she flew in a last-minute change of plans Wednesday."

But her own campaign officials realize that even if all the delegates from disputed primaries in Michigan and Florida were seated at the Democratic convention, Mrs. Clinton would still not have enough delegates to clinch the presidential nomination; she would still be about 100 delegates short.

So what is the point of continuing? Is it so she can go out on a positive note by winning a couple of the smaller states that remain and are likely to go her way? Is it to be able to make a case that she should be Obama's running mate as VP? Or to garner a position in an Obama cabinet? Is she actually delusional and really thinks she can still win?

I am not heartless; I know how disappointing it must feel to her, after all this work and all this effort, to come up short at the end, with a newcomer like Obama stealing her show. But the people are speaking, and they are saying they want something new, a new outlook, a new paradigm. Maybe Obama isn't perfect, as he himself said in his victory speech. But he is trying to do something different. In his own words:

"Yes, we know what's coming. I'm not naive. We've already seen it, the same names and labels they always pin on everyone who doesn't agree with all their ideas, the same efforts to distract us from the issues that affect our lives, by pouncing on every gaffe and association and fake controversy, in the hopes that the media will play along.

The attempts to play on our fears and exploit our differences, to turn us against each other for political gain, to slice and dice this country into red states and blue states, blue collar and white collar, white, black, brown, young, old, rich, poor...

... this is the race we expect, no matter whether it's myself or Senator Clinton who is the nominee. The question then is not what kind of campaign they will run; it's what kind of campaign we will run.

It's what we will do to make this year different. You see, I didn't get into this race thinking that I could avoid this kind of politics, but I am running for president because this is the time to end it.

We will end it -- we will end it this time not because I'm perfect. I think we know at this phase of the campaign that I am not.

We will end it not by duplicating the same tactics and the same strategies as the other side, because that will lead us down the same path of polarization and of gridlock.

We will end it by telling the truth.

We will end it by telling the truth forcefully, repeatedly, confidently, and by trusting that the American people will embrace the need for change, even if it's coming from an imperfect messenger, because that's how we've always changed this country, not from the top down, but from the bottom up, when you, the American people, decide that the stakes are too high and the challenges are too great."

These are the reasons that Obama continues to bring out new voters, to get them to come to the polls. I'm not saying he and Hillary Clinton don't have similar visions for the improvements they want to see in this country. But how they get there are very different. And people are tired of the old way.

David Brooks had an interesting column in the NY Times the other day, comparing their two world views. He sees Obama and Clinton as having two conflicting views of how to get things done: "Combat vs. Composure."

On Obama:

"Thoughtful and conversational, he doesn’t seem to possess the trait that Clinton has: automatically assuming that critics are always wrong.

Obama still possesses his talent for homeostasis, the ability to return to emotional balance and calm, even amid hysteria. His astounding composure has come across as weakness in the midst of combat with Clinton, but it’s also at the core of his promise to change politics. He vows to calm hatred and heal division.

This contrast between combat and composure defines the Democratic race. The implicit Clinton argument is that politics is an inherently nasty business. Human nature, as she said Sunday, means that progress comes only through conquest. You’d better elect a leader who can intimidate. You’d better elect someone who has given herself permission to be brutal.

Obama’s campaign grows out of the longstanding reform tradition. His implicit argument is that politics doesn’t have to be this way. Dishonesty and brutality aren’t inevitable; they’re what gets in the way. Obama’s friend and supporter Cass Sunstein described the Obama ideal in The New Republic: 'Obama believes that real change usually requires consensus, learning and accommodation.'"

Brooks concludes with:

"...amid the storms of the presidency, their basic worldviews would shape their presidencies. Obama is instinctively a conversationalist and community-mobilizer. Clinton, as she says, will fight and fight. If elected, she’ll have the power to take the Hobbesian struggle she perceives, and turn it into remorseless reality."

This is what the voters are realizing, and that is why, when they go to the polls, many are not giving their votes to Hillary Clinton. It's a pervasive feeling that if she wins, this rancor and fighting will go on and on. People are tired of it. Yes, Obama fought back against Hillary when he was attacked; I'm not saying he didn't play the game a bit himself. But it wouldn't have been necessary if she hadn't gone on the offensive in the first place. It isn't his nature to be that way. But it is hers.

Maureen Dowd also had some comments about Obama and Clinton, questioning whether Hillary has sold her soul for the White House prize.

"It’s hard to believe that this Hillary is the same Wellesley girl who said she yearned for a more 'ecstatic and penetrating mode of living.' What would that young Hillary — who volunteered on Gene McCarthy’s anti-war campaign; who cried the day Martin Luther King Jr. was killed;...who once returned a bottle of perfume after feeling guilty about the poverty around her — think of this shape-shifting, cynical Hillary?

She’s so at odds with who she used to be, even in the Senate, that if she were to get elected, who would voters be electing?

...As she makes a last frenzied and likely futile attempt to crush the butterfly, it’s as though she’s crushing the remnants of her own girlish innocence."

I think even Hillary's ardent supporters would admit that Hillary has run the gamut of methods to try to win the White House, and these have included saying or doing whatever it takes to get there. Dowd asks the same question I had asked not long ago; if she were to be elected, who would she be?

I think it's time for her to realize that, no matter how hard you try, you can't always get what you want. If Hillary truly wants to help the country and prevent John McCain from "serving out Bush's third term," as Barack Obama said, she needs to do the noble thing and stand aside and support Obama. No, it isn't fair. Yes, she had the experience, she had the bona fides, the credentials, the grit and intelligence. But she is not winning. He is.

If she wants to maintain her standing in the Democratic Party, and have a good chance of an important position in the new administration, it is time to unite the party and move forward. If she really wants universal health care, if she really wants to help the American people, now is the time to help Obama rather than continue to fight a useless and divisive fight. Because now the tide is turning against her and she can only cause harm if she continues.

John McCain is waiting in the wings. He has already announced his intention to appoint conservative "strict constructionist" judges to the courts, including up to three possible Supreme Court nominees. The future of our country depends on defeating him. Now is the time for Hillary Clinton to look at the bigger picture. As Humphrey Bogart said in "Casablanca,"

"I'm not good at being noble, but it doesn't take much to see that the problems of three [or two!] little people don’t amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world."

It's time for Hillary to make that speech and gracefully step aside.

More Media Spin

Now a new poll says that Hillary Clinton would be more likely to beat McCain than Barack Obama would.

According to the poll, Clinton would lead McCain 50 to 41, while Obama only leads him 46 to 44.

You know what? These polls are meaningless, because right now there is no ONE candidate for the Democrats. These polls give people the choice of either Democratic candidate. Once the candidate is firmly decided, the polls would change markedly.

My husband says he would rather vote for Barack Obama and lose than win with Hillary Clinton. I'm afraid a lot of people are starting to feel that way.

Just because she may have an edge (which she may not have in reality) is not a reason to support her to be the nominee. Reagan would beat McCain too (probably even dead) but does that mean we Democrats would want him to be President?

Sickly Sunday

For some reason I got up today feeling "off"--not actually sick, but a little achey and shivery. And my stomach felt a little unhappy. Not unhappy enough that I couldn't eat some bacon and pancakes for breakfast with DH and my father-in-law. But enough that I couldn't finish the third pancake, and haven't had anything else to eat all day (a rare occurrence for me, to be sure).

I forced myself to do some laundry so as not to feel completely indolent and to feel as if I have accomplished something on this wasted day.

I am only now getting around to reading the New York Times and just read the Op Ed piece by Maureen Dowd.

She notes something that I had been feeling lately but hadn't put into words - that Hillary Clinton is getting cheerier and bouncier while Obama is doing the opposite. In Maureen's words,

"Hillary grows more and more glowy as Obama grows more and more wan.

Is she draining him of his precious bodily fluids? Leeching his magic? Siphoning off his aura?

It used to be that he was incandescent and she was merely inveterate. Now she’s bristling with life force, and he looks like he wants to run away somewhere for three months by himself and smoke."

Unfortunately, she has a point. There have been reports of Obama pleading to just be able to be left alone to eat his waffles, and it seems as if this truly endless campaign is getting on his nerves.

Hillary, on the other hand, has taken a page from her husband's book, and seems to actually be reveling in the campaign.

Does it mean she wants the job more than Obama? Or is it that the endless campaign is part of the "politics as usual" that he'd like to get rid of? (I know the rest of us would, at this point). I'm not saying all the voters shouldn't have their chance to vote, but this campaign kicked off at the beginning of 2007. That is just too long to expect anyone to keep kissing babies, shaking hands, speaking, and eating regional junk food.

Maureen Dowd says, "The Nixonian Hillary has a ravenous hunger that Obama lacks."

Maybe she does, and maybe her "fire in the belly" might be necessary to win in November. It does make me think.

But then I remember what happened AFTER Nixon won. Do we really want someone who wants the office so badly they'll do anything to win?

In other news, we keep hearing how McCain is all for reform - He sponsored legislation saying that the candidates should pay to fly on corporate jets. The funny thing is, however, that when it came down to his own campaign, he used his wife's company's corporate jet - thus avoiding the cost.

Let's hope these little stories of hypocrisy continue to make the news. We don't want the Democratic campaign to obscure all the dirt that has already started to pop up on McCain.

Finishing with some haiku...

McCain's for reform
But when it comes to himself
He likes to fly free.

Now he loves tax breaks
But once he criticized them
Deficit will soar.

Mainstream media
Focuses on trivia
Issues are buried.

Moratorium

Two bloggers that I read and respect have recently decided not to post about the Democratic primary race until a nominee has been chosen.

You can read what Suzi Riot wrote about it here and Alicia Morgan over at Last Left Turn Before Hooterville here.

I've decided to join them. There are a number of bloggers whose opinions I respect who either don't support either candidate, or who support Hillary, and I don't want my support of Obama to keep them from commenting or coming here. In addition, I am the first to admit I don't know everything about either candidate, and there are things about both of them that are good and about both of them that are not as good. I've said all along that I will support whoever wins the nomination for the Democratic party.

In the beginning of the race when there were so many contenders, I tended to like Kucinich best based on his stands on the issues, but knew he wouldn't win. I didn't really choose between Edwards, Clinton and Obama until after Obama won the Iowa caucuses and I realized I was really happy about it. I've been supporting his candidacy ever since, and I continue to do so.

But if my support for his candidacy makes me too apt to criticize Hillary, or to perpetuate hostility between the two "factions" of the Democratic Party, which is the last thing we need, then it is better to concentrate on the stands John McCain is taking, or on the devastation the Bush administration is leaving for the next President. And that's what I'll be doing in the next few weeks. And of course, Baxter will be posting again now that we've arrived home from vacation!

Another Win for Obama

(Picture credit Tim Johnson/Reuters)

Barack Obama has won the Wisconsin primary with a 57% to 42% margin over Clinton, with over 3/4 of precincts reporting.

He beat Clinton among white male voters, split women voters in a near-tie, won among Independents, and gained among white, working-class voters, according to MSNBC. He also led on electability (63% to 37% for Hillary).

According to the New York Times,

"Almost two-thirds said Mr. Obama would be more likely to unite the country and about 55 percent considered him more likely to improve foreign relations."

Although the Clintons can never be counted out, and there are some big states yet to vote, the momentum is continuing to propel Obama forward. The Associated Press characterized the win in a way that does not bode well for Hillary Clinton's chances:

"Barack Obama cruised past a fading Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Wisconsin primary Tuesday night, gaining the upper hand in a Democratic presidential race for the ages. It was Obama's ninth straight victory over the past three weeks, and left the former first lady in desperate need of a comeback in a race she long commanded as front-runner."

The win came after controversy generated by the Clinton campaign regarding his using certain phrases that had previously been used by Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick. The two men are friends and Obama had credited him with one of the phrases in a previous speech. According to the CNN Political Ticker, the whole thing was old news:

"A Boston Globe article in the spring of 2007 titled 'Patrick, Obama campaigns share language of "hope"' noted many similarities between their stump speeches, and said that the two men shared a 'symbiotic friendship.'"

Another controversy arose when Michelle Obama was quoted as having said that for the first time in her adult life, she was proud of her country.

The statement was taken somewhat out of context, as Ms. Obama added, "Not just because Barack is doing well, but I think people are hungry for change." She went on to say:

"'I have seen people who are hungry to be unified around some basic common issues and it has made me proud,' she told supporters."

The statement immediately generated all kinds of commentary in the media, and no doubt will be used against Obama by his opponents. But when you take into consideration the fact that Michelle Obama, at 44, has had an adult life that really only began in the middle of Reagan's presidency, she may have a point there.

Let's see...we've had policies that made the rich richer and the poor, poorer. We've had a president who was impeached for having sex in the Oval Office and lying about it. We've had a president who invaded another country without provocation, killing perhaps as many as a million of its citizens, including women and children, with no end in sight. We've seen our country's image tarnished throughout the world as a result. We've seen political partisanship poison our government to the point that nothing can be accomplished.

I'm not saying that there aren't plenty of reasons to be proud of our country despite all this. But I am saying that Michelle could have her reasons for feeling more positive toward this country than ever before.

Obviously neither controversy bothered the voters in Wisconsin, since Obama's margin of victory was decisive.

Maybe There is Hope After All

The results in Iowa knocked me for a loop. I did not expect Obama to win, especially not by the amount he won. I definitely did not expect Hillary to come in third. These amazing results have made me realize something: I am rooting for Obama.

I thought I was on the fence. I thought what really mattered to me was whether the person who becomes our nominee is "electable." And I was nervous about both Hillary and Obama in that regard. Hillary because of all her baggage and the fact that so many Republicans hate her guts; she would mobilize their base like no one else. And many Democrats, including myself, have trouble feeling all warm and fuzzy over her.

I was nervous about Obama for two reasons - his "inexperience" - and let's face it, his race. I was afraid too many people in those Red states would consciously or subconsciously not vote for him.

So that left Edwards. I like his message, admire his dedication; I do think he is sincere in his populism, and I am impressed by the strength of his marriage and the way he and Elizabeth have gotten through hard times together.

But something was holding me back. Maybe I wanted this year to be different, a year when we got someone other than a white, Anglo-Saxon male from a southern state into the White House. Nothing against them, but it's been done to death.

So I was on the fence.

But these results have given me hope - the audacity of hope, to coin Obama's own phrase - that perhaps this country really is ready for an African-American president. That perhaps his so-called inexperience equals an idealism and ability to inspire that have not been seen since Bobby Kennedy. That perhaps it's more important to have ideals and principles than understand how to get bills through the Senate. That perhaps it's more helpful to have lived in other parts of the world and understand other cultures outside of our country than to have years of experience wheeling and dealing in the insular world of Washington or being governor of a state that hardly represents the world at large.

Obama gave a great speech at the end of the evening - you can see it here if you haven't already seen it posted on someone else's blog. He sounded presidential. He sounded inspirational. He sounded as if he could go the distance.

I realize it is a long slog ahead and anything can happen. But I think I've found my candidate. No one is perfect. But if we want change, I think Obama will give it to us.

I know not everyone will agree with this - some feel he is going to be as beholden as Hillary to those who support him. But I just have this feeling about him that I don't have about Hillary. I think he'll try to stick to his principles.

I may be wrong. But we never really know how a person will act until they are in the White House. As Bill Clinton said, it could be a roll of the dice. But sometimes we have to roll the dice in order to win.