Saturday, May 10, 3:53pm (or so)—Obama Passes Clinton in Superdelegates

FoxNews just reported that the Obama campaign has picked up three superdelegates and now has more superdelegates than the Clinton campaign. The latest tally from Fox: Obama 275, Clinton 272.

ABC News estimated late yesterday that Obama had claimed the superdelegate lead. Some liberal blogs are reporting the same and will be joined by a flurry of similar reporting as various media outlets come to the same conclusion as ABC and Fox.

The fat lady is singing. Does Hillary Clinton have her fingers in her ears?

Newsprism

Hillary’s Last Gasp Dismisses Blacks, Disses Working-Class Whites

What was the intent when Hillary Clinton said this to USA Today on Wednesday:

I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on…Sen. Obama’s support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and whites in both states who (have) not completed college (are) supporting me…There’s a pattern emerging here.

Pundits left and right inferred the obvious: Clinton was questioning the ability of a black candidate to win the White House without the white working-class vote. She presumes much. While most of the growing criticism of Clinton’s comments focuses on her dismissive attitude towards black voters, her presumptuous attitude towards working-class whites is equally damning. Both the dismissing and the dissing come from a deep-seated belief in racial and class-based stereotypes and a longstanding reliance on inherently divisive identity politics.

Peggy Noonan reports what Democratic insiders are saying off the record about Hillary Clinton:

She has unleashed the gates of hell. She’s saying, ‘He’s not one of us.’

And,

It’s not math anymore, it’s psychodrama. If she can’t have it, no one can have it. If she has to tear the party apart, she will.

Joe Conason wears kid gloves and pulls his punches writing for Salon today, but his jab still lands squarely on Clinton’s jaw:

She violated the rhetorical rules, no doubt by mistake. It was her offhand reference to ‘working, hard-working Americans, white Americans’ that raises the specter of old Dixie demagogues like Wallace and Lester Maddox. Was she dog-whistling to the voters of Kentucky and West Virginia?

In The Washington Post today, Eugene Robinson tells the unvarnished truth:

Here’s what she’s really saying to party leaders: There’s no way that white people are going to vote for the black guy. Come November, you’ll be sorry.

And the upshot, according to Robinson:

Assuming that Obama is the eventual nominee, he will have some work to do in reuniting the party. But there’s no reason to think he won’t succeed — unless Clinton drives a wedge between important elements of the party’s historical coalition.

The bottom line is that Hillary Clinton has finally found a formula that can defeat Barack Obama, namely, exploiting deep psychological divisions between races and classes. The problem for Clinton is that, as Charles Krauthammer lucidly explains, she found the formula too late.

Why, then, does she persist in pursuing a strategy that can only divide her party and weaken its nominee?

Isn’t that Rush Limbaugh’s job?

Newsprism

Immediate Election Results Direct from Indiana and North Carolina

Below are the results of the primaries in Indiana and North Carolina as reported by their Secretaries of State.

Indiana usually announces results quickly; North Carolina allows you to follow results county-by-county.

Indiana Presidential Primary Results

North Carolina Presidential Primary Results

Newsprism

Darkened Roots—The Real Meaning of Reverend Wright for Barack Obama

Forget Jeremiah Wright, the man. What does Jeremiah Wright, the icon or persona created in the media based on that man, really, really mean?

The reason the Wright story, or rather, the persona, resonated so loudly in the media is that it taps into two deeply emotional divisions simultaneously, one racial, the other political.

Wright isn’t just black, he identifies himself as black and, more to the point, fundamentally separates himself from the dominant white culture. He’s a black nationalist, a Christian version of Farrakhan who rejects America in favor of a radical racial vision of “nation.”

His nation is not ours—that’s at the root of black nationalism, and it strikes the American people as something utterly alien and antagonistic and irreconcilable, like communism or anarchism, or the Marxist liberation theology that underpins Reverend Wright’s philosophy. It’s a threat to the very center, the very core, of American society, a threat to its moral authority.

But the threat is also a racial one, which is why having the radical, black, and radically black persona of Jeremiah Wright associated with Obama has damaged his candidacy so badly. Wright, the black Marxist, was once described as Obama’s spiritual mentor; people are left to wonder if one’s spirituality can be so glibly divorced from one’s political philosophy, and, once again, why Obama doesn’t wear a neon flag pin.

What’s more interesting than this darkening of Obama’s roots is the fact that it was not orchestrated by Clinton or McCain so much as imposed on the nation by a two-week obsession with Wright in the mainstream media, especially the content-starved cable news networks. Nor was it the conservative FoxNews that ran this story into the ground so much as the liberal MSNBC and, to a lesser degree, the liberal CNN.

It was as if the liberal media that anointed Obama were having second thoughts. If even they can have second thoughts about Obama, who can guess the depth of suspicion he evokes among the “less enlightened” white working class voter?

Newsprism

Hillary Clinton and Monty Python’s Black Knight

In Monty Python and the Holy Grail, the Black Knight fights King Arthur to prevent him from crossing a small bridge. After having an arm cut off by the King, the Knight insists, “‘Tis but a scratch” and refuses to concede. After the other arm is cut off, the Black Knight still refuses to concede, insisting it’s “just a flesh wound.” The unarmed knight then loses both legs, at which point he finally agrees to “call it a draw.”

With virtually no chance of catching Barack Obama in either delegates or the popular vote, Hillary Clinton continues to insist on dragging the Democratic Party through a bloody and needless fight to the convention in August. She needs to win around 80% of the remaining popular vote, for example, but is down by 8% in the latest Gallup tracking poll.

Disarmed and without a leg to stand on, Clinton is now asking the question, “Why can’t (Obama) close the deal?“

The answer is simple: because a black knight with no chance of victory is blocking his way.

Newsprism

Bill Clinton Denies Saying What He Said…On Tape

Asked about his comments during the South Carolina primary comparing Barack Obama’s performance there with Jesse Jackson’s—a comment many took as injecting race into the contest between Obama and Hillary Clinton—Bill Clinton told WHYY 91FM’s Susan Phillips (audio),

I think that (the Obama campaign) played the race card on me. We now know, from memos from the campaign that they planned to do it along.

Asked about the comment today, a snippy and defensive Clinton denied saying what he said (video.) The former president also dodged a question about the alleged memos he denied referring to. (Here’s the whole story from ABC News.)

Later in the WHYY interview, Clinton said his South Carolina comments were “used out of context and twisted for political purposes by the Obama campaign.” Then, off mic, using his genuine voice and vocabulary, he adds, “I don’t think I should take any shit from anybody on that, do you?”

This is vintage Bill Clinton—cynically spinning and twisting beneath that slick, golly-gee persona of his, then lying and denying about it.

Is Bill Clinton a serial liar? It depends on where your definition of “lies” lies.

Newsprism

Those Arkansaw Bumkins, or, A Gremlin In His Goober (satire)

 

Presidential Candidates Appear on Professional Wrestling Program

It’s basically theatre disguised as a contest. It highlights confrontation and image at the expense of competition and substance.

Flashy graphics and longwinded speeches are prevalent. Spontaneity is scripted and authenticity is packaged. Nothing is quite what it appears to be.

Few take it seriously, but most follow it to one degree or another. Many get hurt, and a few get rich.

That’s right—it’s presidential politics.

Tonight, all three presidential candidates will appear on the World Wrestling Entertainment’s Raw program beginning at 8pm EST. Watch previews of their taped segments here, and watch an animated Hillary and Barack get ready to rumble here.

Newsprism’s question: is professional wrestling demeaning to the presidential campaign, or vice-versa

Update: All three candidates looked completely out of their element on Raw tonight, competing to see how many lame wrestling puns and catch phrases they could fit into their minute-long segments. It was transparent, condescending, and canned pandering to an audience they don’t understand or respect. Newsprism wonders if any of the three knows that Abraham Lincoln was a professional wrestler and a genuine man of the people, or that they were the butts of the joke tonight?

Newsprism

 

Hillary Clinton Uses Wrong ‘Kitchen’ Metaphor

At a campaign rally in Pennsylvania today, Hillary Clinton responded to Barack Obama’s criticism of the ABC News debate Wednesday night, saying, “If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen (video).” She added, “I’m very comfortable in the kitchen.”

This seems an odd metaphor for a woman who once belittled housewives for “bak(ing) cookies and hav(ing) teas (transcript).“

The apt metaphor for the lingering Mrs. Clinton: too many cooks spoil the broth.

More to the point, Obama’s crticism wasn’t about the “heat” of the questions  the moderators, Charles Gibson and George Stephanopolous, asked him—it was about their shallowness, a criticism Newsprism agrees with 100%.

Newsprism

Obama Attacked for Using the “B” Word

Senator Barack Obama has been condemned by both Hillary Clinton and John McCain for his use of the adjective “bitter” in the following quote from a private fundraiser last Sunday in San Francisco:

You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations

While grammatically correct, the statement appears to condescend to the decisive working class voter in the upcoming Indiana, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia primaries.

Clinton responsed in a campaign appearance yesterday at Drexel University in Philadelphia:

It’s being reported that my opponent said that the people of Pennsylvania who faced hard times are bitter; well, that’s not my experience. Pennsylvanians don’t need a president who looks down on them; they need a president who stands up for them, who fights for them, who works hard for your futures, your jobs, your families

McCain responded through campaign operatives. McCain advisor Steve Schmidt said:

It shows an elitism and condescension toward hard-working Americans that is nothing short of breathtaking. It is hard to imagine someone running for president who is more out of touch with average Americans.

McCain advisor Tucker Bounds said:

Instead of apologizing to small town Americans for dismissing their values, Barack Obama arrogantly tried to spin his way out of his outrageous San Francisco remarks. You can’t be more out of touch than that.

The repetition of “more out of touch” in both statements demonstrates the level of coordination within the McCain camp as it seeks to maximize the damage to Obama.

Newsprism wonders about the repetition of “instead of apologizing (to) small town America” in both the McCain camp’s statement above and this one from Clinton spokesman Phil Singer:

Instead of apologizing for offending small town America, Senator Obama chose to repeat and embrace the comments he made earlier this week … Americans are tired of a President who looks down on them, they want a President who will stand up for them for a change.

The timing of the publication of the audio at Hollywood leftist news and gossip site The Huffington Post is also intriguing. Why was the audio held so long before being released Friday morning?

Who would stand to gain the most from damaging Obama in working-class towns and neighborhoods by painting him as an elitist? The incident is playing out against a backdrop in which Obama has consolidated an eight to ten point lead over Clinton and has inched three points ahead of McCain in the latest Gallup polls.

The audio also highlights the degree to which American elections increasingly take place in the production and manipulation of audio and video recordings, which can be rapidly spread across the country online and on cable news.

Thoughtful reflection on the policies and philosophies of the candidates can best be discerned by reading their words and listening to entire speeches, not by cherrypicking their most exploitable moments caught on tape.

Parsing adjectives has no place in a presidential election, and we need a real democracy based in ideas, not a virtual one based in the most shallow media.

Newsprism

Follow General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker (Virtually) Live

Bloggers and news organizations are following the Petraeus/Crocker hearings today in (almost) real time (see here, here, and here; live video here.)

The Congressional hearings feature all three remaining presidential candidates questioning four-star General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker’s testimony on the situation in Iraq.

Newsprism

Delegate Math Doesn’t Add Up for Clinton

Barack Obama has opened a nine-point national lead over Hillary Clinton in Gallup’s daily tracking poll, 52-43%. Rasmussen has Obama ahead by 11, 51-40%.

In March, Obama raised $40 million to Clinton’s $20 million.

Meanwhile, the Gallup poll shows Obama leads by two over John McCain, who is tied with Clinton. McCain raised $15 million in March.

In North Carolina, Obama leads Clinton by 23 points; in Pennsylvania, some polls show Obama gaining on Clinton—others show a dead heat; in Oregon, Obama leads Clinton by 10 points; In Indiana, Clinton leads Obama by nine.

Considering that Clinton needs to virtually sweep the remaining primaries to defeat Obama, the likelihood of her winning the Democratic nomination has shrunk from slim to none.

Clinton’s only chance now appears to be a broad movement of superdelegates in her direction, but even that seems less and less likely as superdelegates have been swinging to Obama and backpeddling on their endorsements of Clinton.

Math doesn’t lie; Clinton’s insistence on staying in the race just doesn’t add up.

Newsprism

Hillary’s Penn Leaves Black Mark on Campaign

Hillary Clinton’s chief campaign strategist Mark Penn has been forced to resign after meeting with Colombian officials to discuss a bilateral trade agreement opposed by Mrs. Clinton.

Trade agreements that could hurt American workers are a touchy subject in states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, where a declining industrial base is damaging local economies. Pennsylvania holds its primary on April 22.

Penn, sometimes referred to as Clinton’s “Karl Rove,” had clashed with numerous campaign staffers and was blamed by many for the failed electoral strategy that allowed Barack Obama to establish an imposing lead in pledged delegates shortly after Super Tuesday primaries in February.

Particularly problematic was Penn’s dual role as chief campaign strategist and president of PR firm Bursten-Marsteller, which brought up questions of propriety and conflicts of interest. Colombian officials have suggested that they weren’t sure whether their meeting with Penn involved just one or both of his roles.

Penn’s resignation is just the latest in a string of black marks on a campaign that a year ago was seen as virtually unstoppable.

Newsprism

Dueling Victims—Identity Politics Taken to Its (Il)logical Conclusion

In America today, is it worse to be black, or female? That’s the absurd question many in the Democratic Party and in the mainstream media are pondering.

The victim mentality that has sustained so much of liberal ideology over the last four decades has been starkly displayed of late after pack journalists swarmed around two ill-conceived and incendiary statements by Geraldine Ferraro and George McGovern, both of whom are Hillary Clinton supporters.

According to Ferraro,

If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is.

And according to McGovern,

I have a feeling that in this country where we’re at today in our thinking, it’s going to be harder to elect a woman than to elect a black man.

To (white) Clinton supporters, it’s better to be black than female. This is a question without an answer, of course, though we know two things for sure: 1.) discrimination of any kind is damaging to the health of both individual bodies and the body politic, and 2.) the roots of racism and sexism, while both run deep, are comparable at only the most shallow levels.

If only the media weren’t, like the academy and liberalism in general, still dominated by people with a stake in keeping racism and sexism alive in the national psyche, maybe more healing could be taking place. For Hillary Clinton and her operatives to be trotting out the ugly side of identity politics is shameful and damaging to their party and our nation. The only beneficiaries of this infighting are John McCain and the Republicans.

No matter how hard he tries, Barack Obama can’t rise above the issue of his blackness, which his blue-state Democratic rival has turned into red meat for yellow journalists.

Newsprism

Judas, Jesus, the Devil and a Blue Dress

Clinton operative James Carville reacted to former Clinton cabinet member Bill Richardson’s endorsement of Barack Obama with this Easter-season attack: on Good Friday, Carville called Richardson a “Judas.”

The comparison strikes many as both impolitic and sacriligious … but Carville not only refuses to back down, he’s reiterating the attack to every journalist he can find.

If Richardson is Judas, that would make the Clintons Jesus Christ. It would also mean that no Democrat can endorse Barack Obama without being profoundly disloyal and immoral. It would also mean that the race for the Democratic nomination—a race that Obama had locked up weeks ago—has descended well past the gutter and into a much lower, more fiery realm.

Is it coincidence that Carville looks so demonic? Or that the Clintons make up their morals to fit their ambitions?

And wasn’t there a song (here’s the Springsteen version) about the devil and a blue dress?

Newsprism

Hillary Clinton Ducks (the Truth)

Hillary Clinton has been hyping her foreign policy experience lately, for instance, by claiming to have landed Bosnia in March, 1996, under sniper fire from the enemy.

Mrs. Clinton has recently said that her flight into Bosnia came “under sniper fire” that required her and her party to “run to our cars,” and that due to the danger, there was “no greeting ceremony.”

The Washington Post checked the facts of the 1996 Bosnia visit and had this to say:

Clinton’s tale of landing at the Tuzla airport “under sniper fire” and then running for cover is simply not credible. Photographs and video of the arrival ceremony, combined with contemporaneous news reports, tell a very different story. Four Pinocchios.

“Four Pinnochios” is the Post’s way of judging the truthfulness of a statement, which ranges from “The Gepetto Check Mark,” which means a statement is entirely valid, to a scale from one (”some shading of the facts”) to four (”a whopper”) Pinnochios.

In two telling video clips, CBS News contrasts a recent speech in which Mrs. Clinton mentions her harrowing trip with a March 1996 video clip in which Clinton and daughter Chelsea are seen smiling as they leave a military aircraft, where they’re greeted by Bosnia’s acting president and an eight-year-old Muslim girl.

Sharyl Atkisson, a reporter who accompanied Hillary and Chelsea Clinton on the Bosnia trip, writes,

… the mood upon first landing at the Tuzla airport was light. Children were there on the tarmac to greet the first lady, Chelsea was by her side, Bosnian dignitaries had gathered: It felt safe.

Even the comedian Sinbad, who also accompanied the Clintons, has weighed in on the matter. The prescient Sinbad notes, “I think the only ‘red-phone’ moment was: ‘Do we eat here or at the next place?’”

Mrs. Clinton has been quoted as saying, “We used to say in the White House that if a place is too dangerous, too small, or too poor, send the First Lady.” What could Bill have been thinking? (Oh, yeah.)

Senator Clinton may not have been ducking incoming fire in Bosnia in March of 1996; she sure is ducking the truth, and the flak that comes from lying, in March of 2008.

Newsprism

The Best and Worst of Fox News

It’s rare that the shallow political posturing of Fox News’ morning personalities warrants a mention; morning happy-talk just isn’t taken that seriously. But this morning, Fox and Friends hosts Steve Doocy, Gretchen Carlson, and Brian Kilmeade were bluntly shamed and scolded on air after repeatedly criticizing Barack Obama for saying this:

The point I was making was not that my grandmother harbors any racial animosity, but that she is a typical white person. If she sees somebody on the street that she doesn’t know (pause) there’s a reaction in her that doesn’t go away and it comes out in the wrong way.

The upshot of the Friends’ commentary was an oft-repeated canard that calling his own grandmother “a typical white person” was racist. Obama made the admittedly impolitic statement while defending himself against prior charges that another statement concerning his grandmother was racist:

I can no more disown (Reverand Jeremiah Wright) than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother – a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.

Even Jesse Jackson once acknowledged that he felt fearful enough of being followed down the street by young black males that realizing he was being followed by whites instead was a relief. And who among us has never let slip a racial slur?

The sad fact is that many conservatives, including Pat Buchanan and some at National Review Online, are trying to dirty Obama through the mud of their own racism. No one should be deluded into thinking that America has transcended her racial divide, nor that that racial divide can be laid at the feet of a unifying figure like Obama.

The problem with Fox News isn’t its conservative bias. Diverse perspectives in American media should be welcomed, especially after many decades during which the liberal bias of the vast majority of news organizations put conservatism at a distinct disadvantage.

The problem with Fox News is its predominating superficiality, its reliance on beautiful women wearing heavy make-up and revealing clothing, or its reliance on contrived infotainment personas like Bill O’Reilly’s and Sean Hannity’s. No other network exploits the sex appeal of its female personalities quite like Fox News; it’s telling, for example, that Gretchen Carlson is a former Miss America. (To be fair, Carlson is a classical musician and scholar who attended Oxford and Stanford Universities. Fox and Friends is beneath her.)

But the most important angle on this story has nothing to do with sexploitation or disingenuous charges of racism. What was astounding about the comeuppance dealt out so forcefully to Doocy, Carlson and Kilmeade was that it came not from some liberal academic or condescending media critic, but from Fox News’ Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace.

This was a brave gesture by one of the best broadcast journalists working today to curb the adolescent vapidity of 24-hour news.

Kudos to Chris Wallace and to Fox News Sunday, two class acts.

Newsprism

Operation Chaos vs. “Shoot Those Leftist Bastards Dead”

Not all political machinations of and by the media deserve the same censure. 

Rush Limbaugh has been touting the success of his “Operation Chaos” campaign designed to sow dissent and chaos within the Democratic Party. Statistical data support the possibility that significant numbers of Limbaugh-led Republicans have been voting for Hillary Clinton in Democratic primaries, the goal being to extend the Democratic nomination process as long as possible.

The beneficiary: John McCain (and, of course, Rush Limbaugh.)

Democrats have criticized Limbaugh for inserting himself into the Democratic race, claiming that he’s undermining the democratic process. That’s an odd accusation coming from a party that uses elitist superdelegates and can’t find a way to make the votes cast in Florida and Michigan count.

If states want to restrict party primaries to voters registered in that party and registered independents, that’s their right. Until then, Limbaugh’s tactics are no more or less unethical than those routinely practiced by his critics.

Limbaugh is participating in the democratic process, even if it’s in a pretty sarcastic and mischievous way. The only thing he’s undermining is his opposition.

Meanwhile, last Friday, during the noon hour of the Neal Boortz Show, Boortz spoke about the Pittsburgh Organizing Group, or POG, a radical leftist anti-war group that pickets military recruitment offices.

Boortz’s admonition to any military personnel present for a protest scheduled that evening: “Shoot those leftist bastards dead.” That could easily be interpreted as an incitement to violence at a particular place and time against a specific group of citizens … a reasonable and widely accepted exception to free speech that might interest the FCC.

Limbaugh’s strategery has generated ample press coverage and the deeply satisfying scorn of the left; Boortz’s stunt just confirms that he’s an amoral, artless self-promoter.

Newsprism

A wise man cannot be harmed by criticism; for if the criticism is false, it means nothing to him, and if it is true, he’s grateful for the opportunity to improve himself

Obama Emerges from Briar Patch Wearing Crown of Thorns

When the inflammatory sermons of Reverend Jeremiah Wright first exploded onto the political landscape, probably due to machinations by the Clinton campaign, Barack Obama was leading Hillary Clinton in the national polls. Within 24 hours, however, Clinton had regained the lead in some polls and had temporarily gained ground in others.

After yesterday’s speech on race in America (video, text,) Obama is now being compared to Martin Luther King, Jr., and his speech to King’s “I Have a Dream” speech. That’s high praise indeed; experts in the field of rhetoric consistently judge “I Have a Dream” as the greatest speech in American history.

While Obama has clearly been damaged among many Republicans and conservatives—both Pat Buchanan and Thomas Sowell consider his association with Reverend Wright to disqualify him for the presidency—the real question is, has this controversy hurt him among independents and Reagan Democrats?

It’s too early to tell, of course, but the media seem to have reached a consensus: Obama just raised his profile considerably and may now go down in history as an icon of racial reconciliation (see here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.) If he wins the Democratic nomination, his acceptance speech will be made on August 28, 2009—the 45th anniversary of King’s “I Have a Dream” speech.

Whoever is responsible for the Jeremiah Wright tapes bubbling to the surface intended to cut him to the quick with the dagger of race. Instead, they seem to have handed him the mantle of Martin Luther King.

His enemies just threw Brer Rabbit into the briar patch, and he emerged wearing a crown of thorns.

Newsprism

Attack Ad Depicts Obama Singing “Zippity Doo Dah”

No, no one has stooped that low. Yet.

But “someone” is heading in that direction. Bill Clinton’s invoking of Jesse Jackson after Obama won the South Carolina primary was a brazen and blatant attempt to drag race into the Democratic nomination process. The release of a photo of Senator Obama wearing African garb, which Clinton campaign manager Maggie Williams failed to deny involvement in, was transparent. Unsubstantiated allegations that photos of Obama have been “darkened” in order to “highlight” his race mirror the infamous Time cover in which the same was done with a photo of OJ Simpson.

Now, video clips of Jeremiah Wright, the former pastor at Obama’s place of worship, Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, have surfaced on YouTube. Reverand Wright married Barack and Michelle Obama, baptized their children, and is a confidante to the Senator and an advisor to the Obama campaign.

Before Wright retired from the Church in February, he gave a lifetime achievement award to Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, blamed the US government for the AIDS virus, and said the US “deserved” the 9/11 attacks based on a history of racism, colonialism, and oppression.

The Obama campaign has distanced itself somewhat from Wright and his statements. In an interview this morning, the Senator said, “This is a pastor who is on the brink of retirement who in the past has made some controversial statements. I profoundly disagree with some of these statements.“

Demands are increasing for an explanation of the close ties between the Senator and the Reverand; many are also demanding an outright denunciation, putting Obama in the untenable situation of choosing between political expediency and loyalty to a long-time friend.

Setting such demands aside—and it seems clear that the demands are justified by the extreme nature of Wright’s statements—the question remains, exactly who is responsible for the sudden ”surfacing” of these tapes? The fact that every news organization in the country is discussing them now isn’t coincidence.

The two primary suspects, of course, are Obama rivals Hillary Clinton and John McCain. Muddying the waters considerably is the possibility that either Democratic or Republican operatives may have released the tapes with or without the knowledge or permission of the Clinton and McCain campaigns.

A simple calculation might settle the issue. Bringing the tapes into the spotlight at this time favors Senator Clinton; to help Senator McCain, the tapes would have been held for many months. In addition, the Clintons are well known for such tactics, have no compunction about using them, and are increasingly desperate. McCain, on the other hand, isn’t closely associated with dirty politics; in fact, he suffered from similar tactics in 2000, when Bush operatives started a smear campaign claiming that the Arizona Senator had a mixed-race child, and he refused to respond in kind.

Whoever is responsible for these tapes, the news industry is awash in a tacit understanding: don’t allow journalistic standards to interfere with the exploitation of any story. That’s the mentality that gave us Jon Benet and Nathalee, and Paris and Anna; Swaggart and Spitzer, and Haggard and Craig; Power and Ferraro, Bill and Michelle; Reverend Hagee and Reverend Wright.

It’s certainly possible, and I think quite likely, that two things are in play here: first, the Clinton campaign is circulating stories intended to undermine Obama’s candidacy, and second, the media is acting as a willing accomplice, not out of loyalty to Clinton but rather out of the desire to maximize ratings and circulation.

This election should be about policies and the philosophies they reflect, about character and judgment, not about the minutae and innuendo that transfix our easily manipulated media.

Each time a race-baiting photo or tape or rumor or leak surfaces, somebody is operating under cover of darkness to exploit Barack Obama’s skin color, and somebody else is cynically exploiting the subterfuge. I’ll leave it to you to decide who those somebodies are.

Newsprism

Update: Here’s Obama’s response to this controversy at Huffington Post. And now, Rev. Wright is no longer associated with the Obama campaign, though it hasn’t been made clear whether he resigned or was forced out. It should also be noted that while Disney’s “Song of the South” (which featured Uncle Remus singing “Zippity Doo Dah”) has been roundly criticized as racist, many see it as a valuable piece of Southern folklore.

Obama Wins Mississippi, Texas (That’s Right—Texas)

The mainstream media’s “horse race” angle on the Democratic race has gotten a bit ridiculous. For example, Hillary Clinton’s widely touted comeback on March 4 turns out to have been more or less a draw.

Why? After Texas tallied up the results if its caucuses—Texas uses a combination of a primary and caucuses to allocate its delegates—Barack Obama actually won that not-so-small state. Outside a few web sites, his victory has barely been covered. (How many of you political junkies who read my drivel were aware of it?)

It’s more than a little disingenuous to continue playing up a comeback that never was. And now that Obama’s also won Wyoming and Mississippi, Clinton’s victories in Ohio and Rhode Island seem pretty insignificant.

Take, for example, this headline at ABCNews.com—“Time on Her Side: Obama Maintains Lead, but Clinton Might Have the Edge.” Never let it be said that the mainstream media let facts get in their way.

The delegate math makes it nearly impossible for Clinton to win. Regardless of whose data you use (CBS News and CNN are reporting slightly different figures,) Obama needs to win about 45% of the remaining delegates to prevail, and Clinton, about 60%.

The superdelegates are breaking Obama’s way already, and the math favors a continuation, and probably a deepening, of that trend.

I wrote four weeks ago today that the media were pretending the race was neck and neck, when in fact, Obama was pulling away in the home turn. Now, Obama’s still pulling away, and the race is well into the home stretch—yet the mainstream media continue their charade.

The reason is simple: a tight race attracts viewers and readers.

It’s a matter of maximizing ratings and circulation, nothing more, nothing less. They want a photo finish, and if reality doesn’t give them one, they’ll make one up.

As always, follow the money.

Newsprism

How King Solomon Might Solve the Democrats’ Dilemma

The Democratic Party leadership faces three major obstacles to resolving the problem of seating delegates from Florida and Michigan:

1. Both states broke rules they themselves had agreed to, leading to the current squabble;

2. To “re-do” the primaries in both states would cost tens of millions of dollars; and

3. Hillary Clinton has said she won’t accept a caucus in either state.

King Solomon (who was not a democrat) might settle the problem like this:

Allow the results of the Florida primary, in which both Clinton and Obama were on the ballot, to stand as is; allow Michigan, in which only Clinton was on the ballot, to hold caucuses as soon as possible; and tell both states’ party leaders that either they both accept this compromise, or neither states’ delegates will be seated at the Democratic National Convention in August.

This way, both Obama, who leads in Michigan and has won 13 of 16 states that held caucuses, and Clinton, who already won the Florida primary, would likely win the majority of delegates in just one state, ultimately splitting the delegates more or less evenly. Plus, the cost of a do-over in Florida would be avoided, while the cost of holding a primary in Michigan would be cut significantly by using caucuses, which are far less expensive.

Both states’ leaders would have to accept the compromise or risk screwing the other state, and the Party, and the people.

DNC Chairman Howard Dean should set a deadline for Florida and Michigan to accept this compromise—or watch their delegations die.

Newsprism

Here’s the current delegate count after the Wyoming and Texas caucuses.

Florida, Michigan and the Jackass That Overreached

The Florida and Michigan Democratic Parties tried to improve their positions in the presidential primaries knowing full well the consequences. Now they’re scrambling to get their delegates reinstated with “do-over” primaries that would give both states an unfair advantage.

Maybe both state parties should pay a price for setting in motion this scramble to be among the first states to vote. Violating rules that you agreed to in order to go early shouldn’t be rewarded with the privilege of going last.

The irony is that going early wouldn’t necessarily have helped either state influence the nomination; look at the influence voters in Ohio and Texas have had, while many Iowans and New Hampshirites voted for candidates who are no longer even in the race.

The voters in Florida and Michigan have been screwed, but not by the DNC. They were screwed by their shortsighted state party leaders.

With apologies to Aesop:

A donkey with an apple in its mouth once walked across a bridge. In the pond below, it thought it saw another donkey with a bigger, redder apple. The donkey reached down for the reflection of its apple, and dropped the real apple instead.

Moral: that’s what happens when jackasses overreach.

Newsprism

McCain—Second Coming of the Comeback Kid

One Clinton was “The Comeback Kid” sixteen years ago, the other hopes to be the same in 2008.

While Hillary Clinton won three out of four primaries and the popular vote last night, she still trails Obama in both delegates and votes. Today, Obama has picked up several delegates in the consequential-yet-ignored Texas caucuses, which choose about a third of the state’s delegates.

The caucus votes are still being counted, but it looks like Hillary picked up just 7-9 delegates last night.

The real Comeback Kid of 2008 is John McCain. Still, all of the major broadcast and cable networks except FoxNews tilted their coverage towards the Democratic race.

Six weeks ago in the Resmussen survey, McCain was at 31%. Obama was also at 31%. Clinton was at 47%.

Coming out of the primaries and caucus, Rasmusson now has McCain at 62%. Obama is at 44%. Clinton is at 48%.

McCain gained 31%, Obama 13%, and Clinton 1%.

While the intrigues between Hillary and Barack fit perfectly into the television news template, the real story last night was a resurgent Republican Party led by a triumphant John McCain. The real story was the contrast between a gracious Mike Huckabee bowing out, and an Algore-like Hillary Clinton staying in.

If there’s a media bias these days, it still favors the Democrats.

Newsprism

McCain Wins 7 Out of 4 States

You read that right—John McCain won seven out of four primaries last night. He won all four Republican races, and he won three out of four Democratic races.

On the Republican side, McCain swept Texas, Ohio, Vermont and New Hampshire to wrap up the 1191+ delegates needed to secure the nomination. Mike Huckabee belatedly joined Mitt Romney in dropping out of the race, clearing the way for the Arizona Senator’s run to November.

On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton won in Texas, Ohio and New Hampshire, which means the Democratic nomination won’t be secured for at least another seven weeks. Rival Barack Obama still holds a lead of 1307-1175 pledged delegates, while the superdelegate count remains in flux with Mrs. Clinton holding a lead of about 40.

Two consequences of last night’s results seem clear.

First, Republicans now have an edge in the general election campaign. The two Democratic frontrunners will be stuck in a tough contest that may well continue until the Democratic Convention in Denver in late August; that would give the Republicans nearly six free months to raise funds and energize their base.

Second, while Barack Obama’s pledged-delegate lead appears unassailable, the Democratic nomination may now rest on the shoulders of the so-called superdelegates … a decidedly undemocratic process, as I pointed out earlier this week.

Republicans are hoping for a repeat of 1968, when a chaotic Democratic National Convention split the party along a jagged and (literally) bloody schism, clearing the way for Richard Nixon’s victory that year and setting up his landslide victory in 1972.

The old saw says, “Democrats fall in love; Republicans fall in line.”

The problem for Democrats, and the opportunity for Republicans, is that the Democrats are torn between two lovers.

Newsprism

Follow Election Results by State, County

CNN has the most timely and accurate results available online. You can follow both parties in all four states right here, including crucial county-by-county results in urban Ohio and Texas:

OHIO

TEXAS

VERMONT

RHODE ISLAND

Fox News has state-by-state, real time results, but no county-by-county results. Speed is okay.

MSNBC has results from Texas, Ohio and Vermont, but no county-by-county results, and no Rhode Island. And, it’s moving pretty slowly.

ABC has results from all four states, but no county-by-county resulst, and you have to toggle back and forth between Democrats and Republicans.

CBS has results from all four states, but not county-by-county, and it’s moving kind of slowly.

Newsprism