Barack, Hillary, supermajorities, and keeping up with the primaries
posted 2-21-2008
amended 2-28-2008

 
My, but things move quickly in primary politics these days; blame it on SuperTuesday. Unless Hillary pulls off a miracle in Texas and Ohio (I'm not betting on that), she likely won't be a significant factor anymore, even with that many delegates. Not even the most faithful of superdelegates wants to be associated with a perceived loser. So it may be moot for her by next week. We'll see.

There are those who say that Sen. Barack Obama is at least not promising much of anything, compared to other candidates, and therefore he’s somehow more realistic. It may also mean he has a dearth of ideas other than some vague notion of change. But these same partisans point out that he’s had less experience and less clout than Sen. Hillary Clinton and imply that he must be somehow more clever than she for him to be so much more ‘realistic’ in not making promises. Nonsense.

Getting the health care discussion wrong
posted 2-8-2008 10:14 a.m.

 
Have you noticed that ever since the media — mainstream and new media alike — began marginalizing Dennis Kucinich during the presidential primary campaign, the conversation about health care reform began drifting away from any real reform?

What was a public dialog about national health insurance and universal coverage suddenly began to slide into one about whose plan would cover more people. That was a real change in conversation, and it amounts to an unchallenged bait and switch.

Now, nobody seems to have noticed that the discussion is no longer about universal coverage — because, of course, universal literally means everyone would be covered. And neither Sen. Clinton’s proposal, nor the less ambitious (read: superficial) plans proffered by Sen. Obama and Sen. McCain, let alone Gov. Huckabee, was ever intended to cover everyone. And though much has been made of Tom Daschle's book on health reform, there really isn't anything in there that will truly cover everyone, either. If voters think that any of these proposals would cover everyone, or almost everyone, they’re sadly mistaken. Remarkably, the press hasn’t pointed this out yet, probably because it didn't notice, either.

Things I noticed over a long weekend …
posted 2-4-2008 8:14 p.m.
amended 2-7-2008 5:55 p.m.

 
… while down with a cold and ignoring the Super Bowl:

• George W. Bush is still stubbornly hallucinating about what’s going on in the world.

The country is finally restless with the current regime (at last! How long did they have to wait?), that's clear enough. How many ways can you take a 71 percent disapproval rating other than to admit that 71 percent of the populace hates you? Thus the sullen monotone delivery of the State of the Union address. And yet, beneath that depressed and depressing delivery was still the old, blindly stubborn pugnaciousness that is the flip side of the thin, shallow nice-guy routine that got W. Bush close enough to a win the second time around to steal it (the first time, he had to rely on The Supremes to steal it for him and on Gore's sense of honor not to pursue the matter further; what a waste *that* was).

Read the text of last Monday's State of the Union address, or even listen carefully to the words, and you hear that determined, knee-jerk rewriting of history in light of his own fantasy that is Shrub's trademark. He thinks if he tells a lie often enough, most people will believe it. More to the point, if he lies to himself often enough that he believes it, he expects us to believe it, too. Some will, sure — but the evidence of his incompetence is simply too great, the economy too badgered and the needless deaths too many to allow that now.