Why stoop to scare tactics?

There's no good reason for Hillary Clinton to use Republican scare tactics in her latest ad against Barack Obama. Believe me, we'll be seeing plenty of them from the Republicans this fall. How about we talk about the issues, and try not to appeal to everyone's worst fears?

Here's my special version of the ad. C'mon, you had to know I couldn't leave it alone!

(Apologies in advance to any Hillary fans out there)



UPDATE: Wow! Obama's people are right on top of this thing! (Via DailyKos)

Message to Ralph Nader

A video message by Anonymous, via Jane at FireDogLake.

Fuck Scientology, Ralph Nader is the more immediate threat! This is funny stuff.

(...although, I do still think Tom Cruise is a putz)

John Sidney McCain III

I've had it with this stupid right-wing attempt to use Barack Obama's middle name as some kind of purgative. Yes, his middle name is Hussein. Big deal. Does anyone really think this makes a difference to anyone other than people who already aren't voting for him? Get over it, asses.

Meanwhile, we got John Sidney McCain III as the front runner for the Republican nomination. Yes, that's right - his name is John Sidney McCain III. That's the only way I'm going to refer to him from now on.

What with "the third"? Parents ran out of originality pretty quick in THAT family, if you ask me! Sounds pretentious, too. Too much like royalty.

Let's just take a little look at the rest of that name.

John is his first name. There's been plenty of nasty people with the name of John throughout history.

John Wayne Gacy was a serial killer and a very naughty boy indeed.

John Wilkes Booth took out one of the first Republican presidents. Not a nice guy.

John Ehrlichman was an assistant to President Nixon who took part in plotting the Watergate break-in and ended up in prison.

So, John Sidney McCain III is named after a serial killer, a secessionist, and a felon. Who cares that John Sidney McCain III was born well before two of the three people listed above became notorious? Logic has no place in this discussion! Johns have done bad things, so therefore John Sidney McCain III absolutely MUST be connected with them!

How about McCain?

There was an inmate at Alcatraz named Rufus McCain who attempted to escape and was stabbed to death. I think you had to be a bad person to end up in Alcatraz. I don't know which one he is in the photo. They all look brighter than John Sidney McCain III.

Now, what about Sidney?

I mean, c'mon! Sidney? You gotta be kiddin' me!

How can you expect ANY self-respecting American to vote for a Sidney?

Sidney is a foreign-sounding name; and sure enough, a little research turns up a plethora of Sidneys. There's literally tons of Sidneys out there!

But, after careful consideration and a long process of weeding out the majority of them, I've concluded that this one Sidney is a completely fair and balanced representation for all of them:

Sid(ney) Vicious, (aka John Simon), deceased dope-sucking member of the British punk band The Sex Pistols.

So, by the sheer inane power of name association, a vote for John Sidney McCain III is the same as voting for a serial-killing, president-murdering, Watergate-bugging, Alcatraz-escaping, dope-smoking deceased punk rocker! Why, you'd have to be MAD to ignore the obvious connections here!

Ta-da!

(Afterword: Sheesh. After trying to think like a wingnut for the last half-hour, my brain hurts. Time for a double-dose of NyQuil. I'm sure Vick's appreciates my business.)

Apropos of nothing at all

Today I shot a few seconds of video while driving up to Vermont.

I think the DayQuil is starting to affect my mind.



(and yes, now I'm fully aware that today is the 28th not the 29th. told you I was feeling the affects of the cold meds!)

Why McCain should stay away from radio wingnuts

Introductory remarks by right wing radio hack Bill Cunningham blew up in Sen. John McCain's face yesterday, causing embarrassment and an immediate apology from the senator's campaign.

The Ohio radio talker was interviewed shortly after McCain had stated that he disavowed the remarks and that he had never met Cunningham. To his credit McCain immediately apologized to Barack Obama, whose campaign accepted. Cunningham lashed back at McCain saying that the two had met several times previously and that the senator's campaign specifically requested that Cunningham warm up the crowd. Cunningham blasted McCain and said the he, like Ann Coulter, has decided to throw his support behind Hillary Clinton.

I'm sure Hillary is thrilled with this endorsement. I haven't heard her response yet to this, but I'm sure she'll have an answer ready if asked about it.

I think it's strange how some right wing talk show hosts deride McCain for not being "conservative" enough, yet when they become disillusioned with him they switch not to Mike Huckabee (demonstrably the more conservative candidate in the race) but to Hillary Clinton.

Right off the bat I can think of several possible rationales for this phenomenon, but I don't have the time nor the inclination to explore them right now. Plus, it's too damned early to delve into the cynical and devious state of mind needed to analyze these possible reasons.

The Big Lie

It's difficult to call any ONE lie THE Big Lie because they come out with so many of them, but this one is a doozy. Maybe tomorrow they'll come up with something different, so this can be TODAY'S Big Lie.

In a nutshell, this is what they're saying:

If we don't support Telecom immunity, the terrorists will kill us all!

Right.

So here's my video response to their scare tactics:

Huckabee on SNL

Sadly, it seems that Youtube isn't working right now, but The Raw Story is. If you missed last night's appearance of Mike Huckabee on Saturday Night Live, click on this link to see the video.

I was surprised at how at ease and relaxed he looked. Too often, politicians are stiff and forced when they try to do comedy, but Huckabee really has a great comedic instinct.

If I was going to decide between his career in politics as opposed to one in comedy, I'd like to see him join the cast at SNL after he bows out of the race.

UPDATE: Youtube is working again. Here's the video:

Please think before you vote for him

A somewhat reasonable man is probably going to announce yet another candidacy for President on NBC's Meet The Press on Sunday.

Venerable activist and public figure Ralph Nader is expected to declare an independent run for the Presidency tomorrow. He'll have a snowball's chance in the geographic center of the sun of winning, but that won't stop him from entering the fray and bringing his unique and somewhat refreshing voice to the dialog.

We all remember 2000, where many Democrats saddled Nader with the blame for putting G.W. Bush in office. I don't agree with that, and in fact I think that Gore blew what should have been a slam-dunk election by running a shitty campaign and making stupid mistakes. I've written a little about Nader in a previous post (A Very Reasonable Man).

In that post I looked at a speech he made regarding the gutless actions of our new Democratic majority in Congress, and I fully agreed with his comments. I think Nader will help provide some useful arguments to the discussion, and I look forward to hearing what he has to say.

However (and I know this doesn't need to be said, but I'm going to say it anyway), it's an absolute moral imperative for us to place a Democrat in the White House this November. If John McCain (or god forbid, Mike Huckabee) somehow manages to ooze their way into winning a majority of our nation's electoral votes, we'll all be in such deep shit we'll forget what it was like to actually breathe fresh air.

There's no doubt in my mind that Nader will help pull votes from Democrats and left-leaning unaffiliated voters this November. While I don't blame Nader for the loss in 2000, he sure didn't help the Democrats.

But the stakes are SO much higher now.

So any third-party types out there, feel free to support Nader emotionally and spiritually, but use your intellect to decide what this country is going to need to help stop the hemorrhaging and damage, and get back on track. Yes, I know that neither Clinton nor Obama are perfect candidates and will be the solution to all our nation's ills, but either of them will be exponentially better than either McCain or Huckabee.

Right now we're in the midst of a very heated contest between Hillary and Barack. Emotions are running very high. Once this primary process has run it's course, approximately half of the Democrats out there are going to be disappointed at their party's selection for the nomination.

But we all must remember that we'll need to stick together to defeat the Republicans in November. A protest vote for Nader will take a good, useful vote away from the Democratic candidate. He or she will need every single vote available to beat the Republican for whom the current administration is going to do everything they can to give a win. We'll need enough votes to make it obvious if there is voting fraud in some states. A close contest may be decided like Florida was in 2000.

And we all know what that got us.

Separated at birth?

It's been a while since I posted one of these.

Just recently I had the TV on with the audio muted. I do that occasionally so I can concentrate on what I'm reading online, but I can glance at the TV and see if anything important is going on.

They had Mike Huckabee on the screen talking about something or other, but I thought it was Kevin Spacey being interviewed for the upcoming Academy Awards.

So I did a quick image search and found these two photos immediately. I'm sure I could have looked a bit longer and found two images that would be nearly identical, but these will prove my point.



See what I mean? These guys could be brothers.

I want it

Via CNN.Com this morning:

Super-speed Internet satellite blasts off in Japan

(CNN) -- Japan launched a rocket Saturday carrying a satellite that will test new technology that promises to deliver "super high-speed Internet" service to homes and businesses around the world.

[..]

If the technology proves successful, subscribers with small dishes will connect to the Internet at speeds many times faster than what is now available over residential cable or DSL services.

The Associated Press said the satellite would offer speeds of up to 1.2 gigabytes per second. (CT Bob: I'm not going to be able to sleep tonight knowing that I can't hook up to that thing!)

The service initially would focus on the Asia-Pacific region close to Japan, a JAXA news release said.

[..]

The rocket was launched from Japan's Yoshinobu Launch Complex at the Tanegashima Space Center.

Meanwhile, the U.S. is spending it's technology budget on blowing up faulty spy satellites in space because, even though we say it's to save people from a smidgen of hazardous propellent, we actually want to prove to the Chinese that our missiles are bigger than theirs.

The real space race is being lost to nations like Japan.

You know, 'cause they're actually using their technology for useful stuff.

Plagiarize this

Good debate last night. Nothing major happened; overall, it was a safe and mostly cordial discussion. With Obama catching up in the polls and on a major winning streak, Clinton needed to hit one out of the ballpark.

It didn't really happen. One moment that's being discussed today is the "xerox" comment by Hillary.

For those of you who have been under a rock since yesterday, or were struck with hysterical blindness/deafness and have just recovered, here it is:



The booing really made it clear that the audience didn't agree with her statement. I think we all want to see this contest remain courteous and civil, because we'll need both of these candidates to work together in the future.

That being said, if you did see the debate, you were probably wondering just what the heck was Hillary thinking when she was intensely staring at Barack while he was speaking?

Well, I finally figured it out.

She was using the power of her mind to stop Obama's heart!

Yes, it's true! I captured an image from the debate, and ran it though some filters that can detect faint traces of telepathic energy, and printed it below!

Actually, I'm just having a little fun here. I don't really think Hillary would try to kill anyone with her mind.

Although, if she could, I'm sure Monica Lewinsky's head would have exploded years ago.

And maybe Bill's in a fit of pique.

(Plagiarize this!)

There's not much "there" there

Well, I'm starting to get the feeling that God is letting me down.

Again.

The "Vicki-gate" story seems to be running out of steam. Republicans are rallying behind John McCain, including such anti-McCain pundits as Rush Limbaugh. We're now into it's third 24-hour news cycle, and the story is currently residing in the 20-minutes after the hour slot, right in front of entertainment news. Another day or so without additional evidence (other people willing to go on the record; incriminating photos; hotel security camera footage; etc.) and this story will fade away completely.

Thanks for nothing, God.

I think there's a good chance there IS something to this story, but like during the Watergate era, the story needs more evidence to be taken seriously. When Woodward and Bernstein went ahead with their article about Haldeman controlling the secret slush fund without enough proof, they were widely derided by Mitchell and the Nixon administration; and as quoted by "Deep Throat" in the movie, "You've even got people feeling sorry for Haldeman. I didn't think that was possible!"

The fact that Woodward and Bernstein were right didn't really matter; their eagerness to get the story out actually set the investigation back and helped sway public opinion in Haldeman's favor.

For a while, anyway. Back then, we had a Congress that wasn't scared pissless of the President, and they actually did their jobs and actively pursued justice.

But, don't despair.

There IS this, from The Politico:

After The New York Times published a story Thursday suggesting that John McCain had an improper relationship with lobbyist Vicki Iseman, his campaign took to the airwaves to trash the story.

"All these things are implications, two unnamed sources and no facts in the article," campaign manager Rick Davis told CBS’s "Early Show."

But in fact, there was a named source who confirmed facts to both the Times and The Washington Post — and, unexpectedly, he came right out of the McCain camp.

John Weaver (pictured above, with McCain), the Arizona Republican’s former chief strategist and a longtime confidant, confirmed to the two papers that he had met with Iseman in 1999 and told her to stop bragging about her influence with McCain and the Senate Commerce Committee. He also said he had done so after "a discussion among campaign leadership" about her. Weaver’s information formed the underpinnings of stories in both papers about McCain aides being worried that Iseman could become a political liability.

In other words, Weaver, an apparent McCain loyalist, had provided the critical, on-the-record foundation for stories denigrating the senator.

So in other words, there may be some there there after all.

It's just that getting there ain't gonna be a picnic!

My prayer

(Vicki "Lewinsky"?)Hello God. It's me.

You know I haven't asked you for anything lately. Not even the Giants victory in the Super Bowl (but I suspect those guys did it all by themselves anyway). I've been trying not to bother you with the small stuff.

But yesterday a big story broke, and if you wouldn't mind, would you do me a solid?

Please let this story be true.

Look, that's an easy one. I'm not asking for a frickin' miracle here. Somebody else can win the lottery for all I care. You can cure all the cancer you want or make the lame walk or whatever it is you do for miracles these days.

But just give me this one.

If you do, I promise not to bother you again.

...at least until November.

(FireDogLake looks at this story in this post, along with a bunch more following.)

UPDATE: I just realized that if it turns out McCain was indeed boning this woman, we'll possibly be treated with the spectacle of Joe Lieberman wagging his finger at him from the Senate floor! Holy fucking shit!

(And yes, I'm aware of the irony of asking God for a favor and then lapsing into my usual foulmouthedness in the same post, but anything less and you wouldn't believe that I wrote it.)

Not a very "super" majority

Christine Stuart examines the lack of consensus among our Democratic leadership up in Hartford in CT News Junkie:

Under Speaker James Amann’s leadership, House Democrats were hesitant - like Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell - to support refunds for taxpayers. Meanwhile, Senate Democrats under the leadership of Senate President Donald Williams wanted to help Connecticut’s families by giving back an estimated $160 million surplus.

Did someone get the wrong memo? The session hadn’t even started yet, and two of the state’s top Democrats couldn’t even agree to publicly acknowledge that giving money back to taxpayers is a good idea.

Read the entire article via the link above.

Jeez, it's been a busy day today!

Nine in a row

Barack Obama wins in Wisconsin.

Hawaii results won't start coming in until after 1AM ET, so don't look here for them. I gotta go to work early tomorrow.

(UPDATE: Ten in a row! Hawaii goes for Barack by a huge margin.)

But really, is there ANY way that Barack WON'T win the state where he was born?

UPDATE: My prediction from yesterday is Obama 57% Clinton 42%. Check that against the final numbers tomorrow. I'm gonna be real close.

UPPERDATE: 5:50AM - Obama 58% Clinton 41%. I'm good! Plus, Obama easily took Hawaii by a 3 to 1 margin. Obama's net gain of delegates will be roughly 20 for the day. Big debate Thursday night in Texas, look for Mrs. Clinton to kick out the stops trying to trip up Obama.

Rep. Jason Bartlett out and proud

From Drinking Liberally in New Milford:

Via the Danbury NewsTimes:

State Rep. Jason Bartlett put rumors to rest Tuesday when he announced publicly that he's gay.

Bartlett, a Democrat who represents portions of Bethel, Redding and Danbury, said he has been open about his sexual orientation with relatives and decided now was the time to speak publicly.

Video: Click here to watch Bartlett talk about his decision.

"For me the decision came down to why not now," said Bartlett, 41, during a meeting with The News-Times Tuesday. "To me this is about having a conversation with my larger family - the people of Greater Danbury who voted for me."

Via GayPolitics.com:

The announcement makes Bartlett the nation’s first and only openly LGBT African American state legislator.

I am glad for him that he feels comfortable enough to come out. This should be a non-issue but some close minded individuals may try to make it one. It is not likely that he has the hypocrisy baggage of your typical republican on this issue.

At last year's JJB Dinner, I spoke with Jason about the important issues. Here's the video of our discussion:

I finally broke down and got a GPS

I've had one for the boat for two years already, a GPS/chart plotter, which is totally awesome and tells you exactly where you are in fog and at night, but for some stupid reason I've been reluctant to get one for my car.

Maybe it's that "guy thing", where (generalization alert!) us males don't like anyone to tell us how to read a map! Or maybe it's just plain stubborness/cheapness on my part.

I dunno, but last week's disastrous foray into that atrocious monument to poor urban planning known as Boston convinced me to take the plunge and update my navigation tools from pre-15th century cartography to 21st century satellite-ography.

So when CT Joyce found an ad for a very inexpensive GPS at K-Mart, I finally broke down and bought it. It's a Nextar X3-03, and for $159 it seemed pretty reasonable to me. I used it for the first time yesterday.

Holy shit is it awesome! It's super easy to use, and it works amazingly well. It doubles as an mp3 player too! Wow, I can't believe I waited so frickin' long to get one! I even dig the female voice in the machine; I've named her Melinda, and I talk about her so much that my wife is starting to wonder if I have a girlfriend now!

Boy oh boy, I can't WAIT to tackle the jumbled streets of Boston again!

Last dance before March 4th

Tomorrow brings the final February primaries.

First, both Republicans and Democrats are battling it out in the "Cheesehead state".

I predict a huge victory for Barack Obama in Wisconsin, based solely on the fact that Hillary Clinton's football team (the NY Giants) knocked out the Green Bay Packers in the NFC Championship game just about a month ago, thereby preventing their native sons from competing in the Super Bowl two weeks ago.

Those cheese-eating knuckleheads are still hurting from that devastating loss, and they'll take it out on the nearest target tomorrow. Hillary Clinton.

Hey, I never claimed that my uncanny prediction successes are the result of anything other than dumb, uninformed luck!

Obama 57% Clinton 42%

As far as the Republican race goes...really, does anyone still give a shit? Take McCain and give up to 24 points. Bet heavily.

Hawaii also holds their Democratic caucuses tomorrow. Obama does pretty well in caucuses. I see him getting at least 60% of the vote in the Pineapple State. I'm assuming it's called the "Pineapple State" because they got a lot of pineapples. It might also be called the "Aloha State", because that's where "Hawaii Five-0" was supposed to take place, and NOBODY messes with Jack Lord.

After tomorrow's contest, we have the big March 4th contests, with Texas and Ohio, along with Vermont and Rhode Island in play. It will be a huge battle, with two full weeks for our Democratic candidates to try to murder each other.

Aloha.

State Dems seek Senate vacancy law

Nothing seems to bring out partisan feelings here in the Nutmeg state as much as the debate over the Senate vacancy law.

Currently the law reads that any U.S. senator who leaves office before their term is up will be replaced by a senator appointed by the governor until the following statewide election, which occurs in even-numbered years.

Let me give you an example here.

Let's say that the somehow Diebold manages to award the upcoming presidential election to John McCain, and he appoints Joe Lieberman to a new cabinet position, likely to be called the Secretary of Torture. Jodi Rell could then assign anyone she chooses, perhaps John Rowland, to be the GOP Senator from Connecticut until the 2010 election rolls around.

Something tells me that wouldn't be serving the will of the voters at all.

The Hartford Courant ran a story today about the Democrats' attempt to introduce a bill this session to revise the law.

Of course, had they been better organized LAST YEAR (and this demonstrates one of my gripes with Jim Amann from the previous article), they might have gotten the bill passed with a veto-proof majority. But they waited until this year, and Sen. Bill Finch's vacancy to be Mayor of Bridgeport leaves the Democrats a vote short.

Rell is almost certain to veto any bill that restricts her executive powers.

The reader comments about any story on the Courant.com website are mostly boneheaded partisan rants, but Paz's story generated even more rabid responses than usual. It seems that the Democrats think a new law is totally justified, while the Republicans think the Democrats are insane partisan nutjobs.

In my opinion, it boils down to this: we will ALWAYS be better served by letting the people decide which leaders they want, rather than having someone APPOINT a leader for them.

When it comes to the topic of "democracy", I think that it's a darn good system which we should allow to be used as often as possible.

New York Times on Jim Amann

Local Times reporter Cindy Boynton wrote this article for tomorrow's Regional edition, titled "A Run for Governor, Rough Edges Included":

Followers of Connecticut politics may have already noticed some similarities between James A. Amann, the House speaker, and former Gov. William A. O’Neill.

Like Mr. O’Neill, governor from 1980 to 1991, Mr. Amann (pronounced AIM-en) is a conservative Democrat. Both served as House majority leader. Both owned taverns and attended, but never graduated from, college. Mr. O’Neill sold life insurance; Mr. Amann made a living selling cars and cellphones.

Mr. O’Neill, who died in November, was the state’s last Democratic governor. Mr. Amann, 51, hopes to be the next.

Representing Milford’s 118th District since 1991, Mr. Amann recently announced the formation of an exploratory committee for the 2010 race for governor.

The reporter called and interviewed me about Jim:

Working against him, however, are a handful of bloggers who are critical of his personality and politics. Several of them stood outside Mr. Amann’s announcement for governor with a rented hearse and signs that read “Amann D.O.A.”

Their main gripe is Mr. Amann’s decision to back Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, an independent, rather than the Connecticut Democratic primary winner, Ned Lamott, in 2006, said 49-year-old Bob Adams of Milford. Mr. Adams, a network engineer who runs connecticutbob.com, was also part of the protest group at Mr. Amann’s announcement. (emphasis mine)

Mr. Adams said he believes that “Jim Amann is not as decisive a leader as we deserve.” He added, “I see him as a political machine-type who can have some pretty raw moments.”

While Mr. Amann said he sometimes, and “regrettably,” has a short temper, he wished people like Mr. Adams would take the time to get to know him.

“They’d see that underneath everything, I’m really a big softie,” Mr. Amann said. “And I think I’m good at what I do. If I wasn’t, I wouldn’t be still in Hartford.”

I think it's awesome that they put up the link to my blog in the article, but I thought I'd made it clear to the reporter that I was there as a member of the Milford DTC; and while I knew the bloggers outside, I wasn't a part of their protest.

The quotes in the article are accurate, however. It still rankles me that Amann betrayed his party and worked his ass off to help Lieberman remain in the Senate. I don't care how big a "softie" he purports to be, what he did was wrong, plain and simple.

For a guy who owes his entire political career to the Democratic party, he sure didn't hesitate to work against it.

Since then, Joe Lieberman has gone on to vote FOR domestic spying, FOR keeping our troops in Iraq, FOR allowing torture, and he's endorsed and is actively campaigning FOR Republican John McCain for president.

Yup. That worked out really well, didn't it Jim?

Why Telecom Immunity is a bad thing

(Room 641A is an alleged intercept facility operated by AT&T for the U.S. National Security Agency, beginning in 2003.)

President Bush threw quite the hissy fit this week, when the House debated a FISA bill that didn't include telecom immunity. He stamped his little feet and wailed, "I am prepared to delay my departure and stay in Washington with them if it will help..."

Bush apparently thinks we're a nation of dummies, and says it'll be Congress's fault if FISA expires and the terrorists win. The MSM has finally gotten on board and is pointing out that Bush is refusing to sign any bill that doesn't include immunity.

Fortunately, Congress responded by shelving discussion for the week or so February recess, allowing Bush to go to Africa and spread his rare form of hypocrisy there. I'm sure various leaders there are dancing with joy at the prospect of being lied to by Bush in person.

Why is Bush so adamant about immunity from any potential criminal or civil charges against the giant telecommunications corporations that may have illegally spied on Americans? Is protecting these ginormous entities more important than the Constitutional rights of our nation's citizens?

Well, according to Bush, of COURSE it is! The Constitution is simply a pesky obstacle that needs to be circumvented so Bush can do anything he wants.

Some people are saying, "Well, what's the big deal? I don't care about telecom immunity. I haven't done anything criminal, so why would I care if they spy on me? Only the guilty should be worried about that!"

They don't understand that once you give up your rights, it's very difficult to get them back. And also, it makes it much easier for the government to take away ADDITIONAL rights. Doesn't the phrase "slippery slope" hold any meaning to these people?

Suppose we allow the government to pass immunity. Right there we'll give away the right to sue the telecoms for illegal wiretapping. Not only that, but we'll also prevent any useful oversight of their actions.

Suppose in the course of their wiretapping/nettapping (yes, I just invented that word) someone at a telecom grabs your personal info and accesses your credit? You've given away the right to investigate them because of the immunity law. You'd have a much tougher time getting justice, because you gave away some of your rights.

Once you give up a certain amount of privacy, where can you stop them? How about your mail? Would you mind if the government opened and copied every single piece of mail that's delivered to your house? I mean, if you're not guilty, why would it bother you?

Terrorists might use the bathrooms on an airplane to prepare a weapon for use. Maybe they should put video cameras in the heads. Would you object to them watching you pee, just to keep everyone safe? How about strip searches before getting on a plane? We already take off our shoes and remove our belts, jewelry, eyeglasses, etc. Why not take it to the logical conclusion and march everyone naked through the metal detectors?

Yes, these are extreme examples.

But really, did you ever think just ten years ago that Congress would be seriously considering laws that give the Executive Branch such widespread powers to suspend our rights and give giant corporations legal protection to do anything they want?

"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security"
- Ben Franklin

The Super Delegates may kill us

There's a lot of confusion over exactly how many delegates the two Democratic candidates possess. Of course, everyone is saying that Barack Obama has more delegates than Hillary Clinton. Adding up the numbers make that clear.

But the question is, how many more delegates, super or otherwise, does Obama currently have?

This morning I surveyed a number of news sources for the current delegate count. Before I even started I knew the super delegates were subject to interpretation, because they are usually counted only if they publicly committed to one candidate. About half of the 796 supers have done so depending on whose count you see.

The problem is, super delegates can say whatever the hell they want, but they don't have to commit until the convention. That means that nearly 20% of the total delegates are technically in play right up until the first ballot. So any delegate count that includes the supers has to be taken with a large grain of salt. A grain that may be bullied, coerced, bribed, or simply intimidated into changing it's preference at the very last moment.

Even so, I was quite frankly surprised at how variable the numbers are between competing news agencies. Here's what I found online this morning:

CNN
Obama 1253 (1096 + 157) (voter selected and committed supers)
Clinton 1211 (977 + 234)

NY Times (only pledged delegates won so far)
Obama 916
Clinton 885

AP
Obama 1275
Clinton 1220

(FoxNews uses AP as source)

MSNBC
Obama 1116
Clinton 985

ABC News
Obama 1293
Clinton 1226

CBS News
Obama 1281
Clinton 1198

As you can see, Obama is definitely ahead, but by how much? Various counts give him 916, 1116, 1226, 1253, 1281 or 1293 delegates! Is it any wonder WHY people are confused about the process?

The New York Times election page has a concise explanation of the delegate situation.

There are late reports of the candidates making huge contributions to the reelection campaigns of some uncommitted delegates. The implications of this situation are too depressing for me to even discuss right now. And then, of course, there's the ugly specter of Florida and Michigan which will arise probably later rather than sooner, and have to be dealt with. We may be in for a hideous convention that makes the 1968 Democratic convention disaster look like a love-fest by comparison.

The fact is, unless one or the other candidate breaks out big in the next few weeks, we're likely to see months of back-room wheeling and dealing with the supers, which may leave us with an appointed nominee rather than one who is elected!

We will then see a new level of viciousness that will effectively destroy the Democratic party, and put John McCain in the White House for the next 8 years.

Boston blogging

I just got home from four days in Waltham, a suburb of Boston, where I was working to install WiFi in a very swanky hotel. It kind of sucked being away from CT Joyce all week, but the hotel (which was quite swanky) was nice.

While in the Boston area, I arranged to meet up with my favorite ex-pat blogger, Caffeinated Geek Girl, for dinner. She currently works for ActBlue as an online coordinator and general rabble-rouser. Her office is in Cambridge (photo above), a stone's throw from Harvard.

At least, I think it's a stone's throw from there. I didn't actually throw a stone, although after trying to find parking for my full-sized van in that maze of 17th century one-way streets, permit-only parking, and smug pedestrians who blatantly disregard the fact that a two-ton van would easily mash them into guacamole if the driver of said vehicle was sufficiently crazed from urban-driving stress, I was READY to throw one!

Plus, they got these weird buses that run on wires. It's good to avoid them if possible. I don't think the brakes work on those things.

Finally, I found the little one-way street where CGG's office was located, so I lurched the van over into a no-parking zone, and phoned her to meet me down on the street. A few minutes later she appeared way back up the block, with a few 20-something co-workers. She was looking back towards traffic for me, so finally I jumped out of the van and yelled her name.

Her co-workers apparently thought I was there to kidnap her, because when they saw me leap out onto the sidewalk and scream her name, they advised her to run for her life.

We had a fun dinner at a local Mexican restaurant, where CGG drank an entire large purple margarita. Driving her home was an adventure. Because, as she only takes the train everywhere, she doesn't know the lay of the land yet. And it was night; I only had my crummy Microsoft Streets & Trips program for a map; and it was starting to snow. So that made it quite challenging to find Southie from Cambridge.

It took us about an hour to navigate the roughly 5 miles. Yeah, I think it's time to get a GPS for the van. It was good to see Melissa.

Anyway, I've been blogging all week from the road. I just got home in time to spend Feb. 14th with CT Joyce.

It's nice to be home.

Shays acting silly again

By CT Blogger via My Left Nutmeg:

Once again, Chris Shays embarrasses the state of Connecticut with one of the most embarrassing tirades to date. Our congressman from the fourth district took grandstanding to a whole new level with his browbeating of Roger Clemens trainer Brian McNamee during today's House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on steriods in baseball.

Shays struck out swinging with his ridiculous tirade. His wild pitch embarrassed everyone in the 4th District. Help Jim Himes hit a grand slam by contributing to Jim's ActBlue fund.

If you do, I promise I'll stop with the stupid baseball references.

McCain stands FOR torture

Soldiers in Vietnam use the waterboarding technique on an uncooperative enemy suspect near Da Nang in 1968 to try to obtain information from him. (United Press International)

Absolute raw ambition.

There's no other conceivable explanation.

From Think Progress:

Today, the Senate brought the Intelligence Authorization Bill to the floor, containing a provision from Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) that establishes one interrogation standard, requiring the intelligence community to abide by the same standards as articulated in the Army Field Manual and banning waterboarding.

Just hours ago, the Senate voted in favor of the bill, 51-45.

[..]

Mr. McCain, a former prisoner of war, has consistently voiced opposition to waterboarding and other methods that critics say is a form of torture. But the Republicans, confident of a White House veto, did not mount the challenge. Mr. McCain voted “no” on Wednesday afternoon.

It would have been perfectly safe for McCain to vote in favor of the bill, since it's certain to be vetoed by our compassionate commander in chief.

But Mac is so desperate for presidential approval, he voted FOR our government's right to torture anyone they want.

What a dick.

McCain, please stop saying "Warshington"

It's WASHington, stupid!

Please vote for the Democrat in November. I don't know if I'll be able to survive a presidency with that marble-mouthed idiot in the Oval Office for four years.

This has been a public service announcement from Connecticut Bob.

Clinton gambles on TX and OH

After three more primary losses tonight (VA, MD and DC), Sen. Clinton seems to be forfeiting next week's Wisconsin primary and Hawaii's caucus to bet heavily on Texas and Ohio in three weeks. RI and VT are also scheduled for March 4th.

Tonight Clinton is already campaigning in Texas, trying to cement the lead that at one time looked insurmountable, but is now in play. Sen. Obama spoke tonight from Madison Wisconsin; and from all indications, he's continuing to take nothing for granted and is appearing in as many states as possible.

The strategy of ignoring the smaller states for a later, larger potential windfall is shaky at best. Rudy Giuliani took himself out of the running by waiting for Florida, and by doing so he had no momentum to carry into the state and he lost miserably.

Next week's Wisconsin and Hawaii contests will probably add to Obama's momentum. The only thing going for Hillary after next Tuesday is a two-week layoff before the TX and OH primaries. If she gels her base in those states and wins both of them decisively, there's a good possibility that she'll take the lead back. And more importantly, squelch Obama's momentum.

But giving up states is never a good idea, and by this time next week Obama might have ten states in a row he's won. And that might get enough of Hillary's base to switch to the "winner" that he'll prevail in those states.

One thing is sure; if Obama wins next week, and then defeats Clinton in TX and OH, there's no doubt that he'll be our nominee for president.

Can we finally drop the race issue?

So far during this primary season, nearly every news story about the elections mentions the race issue in regard to Barack Obama.

Here's an example from CNN.com:

"Maryland, Virginia and especially the District of Columbia have a large percentage of African-American voters, as well as affluent and highly educated white voters -- two demographics exit polls show Obama has done well with before."

Every time race is mentioned in a news story, it helps strengthen the meme that race is the overriding factor in Obama's victories.

Yet, how does that even come close to explaining his substantial margins in many traditionally "white bread" states?

Maine, which has a white population of 97.81% (http://www.census.gov) chose Barack over Hillary by a margin of 19% in their caucuses.

Iowa, another hotbed of Black Panther recruitment, has a black population of only 2.5%, gave Obama 38% to Edwards' 30% and Clinton's 29%.

Utah, which goes by the unofficial nickname of "the Chocolate State", has a booming black population of 1.32% Yet, Obama won their primary by nearly 20% over Clinton.

I think the time is upon us to finally drop this "race issue" as a major component to nearly every news story written by the MSM. It's obvious that Barack Obama appeals to a wide variety of voters, not just those of us who aren't melaninally challenged.

Ah, who am I kidding? Race will continue to be prominently mentioned in the MSM reportage until probably well into Obama's second term. We had all better come to grips with that fact.

Oh, the humanity!

The Oscar Meyer "Wienermobile" spun out and crashed on a frozen Pennsylvanian road, according to Star-Gazette news. Click the link and see how many hot dog related puns are mentioned.

I'm posting this because it's important for all of us to remember that there's other news in the world besides the primaries. And because I'm very busy and don't have time for anything that takes more than a minute to write.

Olympic athletes must sign gag order

Because the entire rest of the world is picking on them about their alleged instances of human-rights abuses, invasions of other countries like Tibet, and torturing people, the Chinese government is entirely justified in making British Olympic athletes sign a contract which prohibits them from dissing that wonderful haven of human kindness, China.

And can you blame them?

I mean, what if we held a big sporting event in the United States, and all these loud-mouthed foreign athletes started complaining about how we start wars under false pretenses, suspend civil liberties, and torture captured enemy combatants?

Uhhh...

...never mind.

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

UPDATE: an even more in-depth article is from the London Daily Mail, and includes a shocking photo of British athletes who were compelled to salute Hitler at the 1938 Munich games.

O-mentum

Barack Obama won all the Democratic contests this weekend, making for a clean sweep. With the delegate total very close or nearly tied (depending on whose tally you see), it looks like the upcoming contests in MD, VA and DC on Tuesday may open things up a bit. Followed by Wisconsin and Hawaii a week later, and then the March 4th primaries in Texas and Ohio.

Looking at the results from this weekend, it's important to keep in mind that Obama won four caucuses and only a single primary (Louisiana). Before Super Tuesday, he didn't do very well in primaries. Since then, he's won primaries, but he crushes in the caucuses! Tuesday's three "Potomac Primaries" will be an opportunity for Obama to put the "can he win big primaries?" question to rest.

Also, today Hillary Clinton's campaign manager announced she was stepping down, apparently because she wants to spend more time with her family. I don't buy it. This is an old political saw to cover what the real reason is for a person's departure. Nobody, but NOBODY signs on to be the campaign manager for someone like Clinton and isn't fully committed to go the entire distance! It simply doesn't happen at that level.

So there's something going on here that isn't being revealed. Maybe Patti Solis Doyle had significant differences with Hillary about how the campaign was being run, or maybe she wasn't performing up to Hillary's standards. But when you reassign your campaign director to a "senior advisor's" role, it's basically the same thing as someone like you or me getting fired. Sure, you might leave on good terms, and you might even stay on the company's bowling team, but you are most definitely history as far as your job goes.

This has been a brutal week for Hillary. She won not a single thing since last Tuesday; she was forced to open her pocketbook and loan herself five million smackers; and now she and her longtime campaign manager are in splitsville. (Jesus, I'm starting to sound like Perez Hilton)

I won't predict that the wheels are falling off the campaign just yet. However, if Obama wins the VA, MD, and DC primaries on Tuesday, we'll be seeing a few lug nuts on the highway behind Hillary's campaign bus. And the road will get bumpier still in Wisconsin and Hawaii the following week if she doesn't score a decisive win somewhere.

With Obama getting all the good press lately, and Clinton's problems becoming more and more public, it looks like the momentum is definitely shifting in Barack's favor.

I'd even say he has "O-mentum"!

If you need any more convincing that Obama is drumming up some real excitement here, just look at that photo up top again.

That's the line for the Obama rally in Hartford last week (Photo from the Hartford Courant)

(BTW, you do NOT want to search Google images for "omentum". Just trust me on this.)

Maine Democratic Caucus Today

(It's a blue lobster, get it?)
There's no recent polling data available. The caucuses will run until about 5PM or so, then we'll get some results. 24 delegates are at stake today. So far, Connecticut is the only New England state that hasn't gone for Clinton. It'll be interesting to see if the Obama surge has an effect on the public caucuses.

Check back periodically for updates.

UPDATES:

6:49PM: CNN calls it for Obama! 58%-41%, with over 70% reporting.

6:46PM - 70% reporting: Obama 58%, Clinton 41%

Obama puns from Maine:
"Ayuh. We. Can."
"Barack Lobster!"

5:53PM - 59% reporting: Obama 57%, Clinton 42%. Obama's going to take this one, too. The delegate split will probably be around 14-11 if these percentages hold.

(Caucusers in Maine, via "Turn Maine Blue")
5:34PM - 44% reporting: Obama 57%, Clinton 42%. Wow, I think I may have been wrong about this being a close contest. Obama's putting up numbers like yesterday.

5:10PM - I just learned that Maine is known as "The Pine Tree State". I didn't know that.

5:02PM - Early returns. 11% reporting: Obama 51%, Clinton 48%. It's still VERY early, lots can happen.

4:52PM - Turn Maine Blue has a good caucus thread going; thanks Kossacks! Early unofficial returns are showing a tighter race than any of yesterday's caucuses.

Obama prevails in WA and NE

Barack Obama easily defeated Hillary Clinton in both the Washington state and Nebraska caucuses. According to CNN early exit polls show Obama leading slightly in the Louisiana primary.

(Washington caucus tally)
10:10PM UPDATE: CNN just called Louisiana for Obama. He's leading Clinton 54-38% with about a third of the parishes reporting.

10:46PM UPDATE: AP reports that Obama won the US Virgin Islands caucus today. That makes it a CLEAN SWEEP for Barack today. On to Maine tomorrow!

10:58PM UPDATE: It looks like Mike Huckabee, the winner in Kansas, has small leads and may also take Nebraska and Louisiana. This would be bad news for McCain, because after Super Tuesday he was almost conceded the nomination. But with Romney dropped out, it gives the "Anyone But McCain" conservatives a single candidate to focus upon. The Romney withdrawal may be the worst thing that could have happened to McCain at this time.

11:33PM UPDATE: McCain has a scant 2% lead in Washington with 78% of the precincts reporting. So there's a reasonable chance that Huckster won't pull that one out. Which is a shame. I really want to see a knock-down drag-em-out battle for the Republican nomination.

Other news: There are widespread reports from Louisiana of Democratic voters being disenfranchised. When showing up to vote, they are incorrectly listed as "independent" or unregistered. Under state law, each voter may request a provisional ballot so they can vote, then later their case will be reviewed and if it has merit, their vote will be counted. But many voters are unaware of the option and are simply turning away.

The good thing about the tremendous interest in the primaries this election cycle is the opportunity for many voters to find out the status of their registration and correct it in time for the national election. It also allows time for states to address their policies and systems and see if there are ways to better serve the voters.

Huckabee wins Kansas

No surprise there.

In other news, we went skiing today. Here's a little video I shot on my cheapo digital camera and edited together with a classic '80s song. Enjoy!

And I once again proved Newton's First Law. The one where "a body in motion tends to remain in motion"...

...especially when said body catches an inside edge while traveling at a high rate of speed!

Gone skiing!

CT Joyce and I are heading up to the slopes of north-western Connecticut for a morning of downhill action.

For the first time in two years.

This is gonna be fun, but I expect to be in pain by the time I get home.

I'll be back later today, both to discuss the Washington and Louisiana primaries and to consume liberal amounts of scotch and Vicodin to soothe my aching muscles. (j/k)

So, where are we getting it from?

I'm just like you.

I'm always thrilled to get $600 unexpectedly.

Trust me, I'm not an idiot.

At least, I don't think I am. But I've been wrong about these things before.

This tax rebate, this "stimulus package", is going to reduce our federal gov't's bank balance by something like $170 BILLION.

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there a war still going on? Aren't we, as a nation, still incurring a debt of about $2.5 BILLION a frickin' WEEK to indulge in our failed experiment in nation building?

How can we possibly justify spending about a YEAR'S worth of Iraq war-foolery on a rebate, when nobody has figured out how we're going to pay for the nearly TRILLION dollars of additional debt we've incurred for this war?

Do we really have all the money we need to blow up an entire region AND give ourselves a nice little bonus, so we forget how badly our fucking leaders have totally failed us?

Somebody, please, do the math here. I can't be the only moron who adds up the numbers and figures we'll be paying for this also, as well as the Bush/Cheney debt, somewhere down the road.

Unless I'm missing something here, we'll only be adding to our nation's debt. And with it, we'll be increasing the amount of debt service (interest) that we're paying to maintain the debt. It's a huge chunk of our GNP that goes to pay the interest.

Somebody's making money off of us, and it ain't US!

I dunno, maybe I AM just an idiot.

Because any way I look at it, I can't make sense of it.

How about we stop with these stupid bribes and come up with some fiscal responsibility instead? Starting with getting the fuck out of Iraq and going from there. Because THAT would impress the voters.

At least, the ones who aren't idiots.

(PS - I'd love to have a $500 bill, just to freak out my friends at parties!)

Looking ahead to the next primaries

(Pictured: a typical caucus)
After the frenzy of Super Tuesday, it's important to remember that we have a number of Democratic primaries/caucuses coming up in rapid succession. As far as the Republicans go, they seem to have pretty much anointed John McCain as their nominee. But if anything develops, I'll address it here.

Saturday the 9th will see the following events:
Louisiana - Primary - 67 delegates
Nebraska - Caucus - 31 delegates
Washington - Caucus - 97 delegates
Virgin Islands - Other - 9 delegates

So even though it's NOT "Super Saturday", there's a total of 204 delegates at stake; with another 34 delegates decided from the Maine caucus on Sunday. There's not a lot of current polling data available for these states.

Both candidates have been campaigning in Washington. A SurveyUSA poll shows Obama leading 57-40% and I predict that Obama will prevail because he generally seems to do well in caucuses. He should win in Louisiana, too. And the USVI to boot.

Tomorrow both candidates will campaign in Maine. I think Clinton will take Maine and possibly Nebraska. But because the delegates are split based on percentages of districts won, I don't expect either candidate to garner more than 60% of the total delegates, or about 140 delegates.

Then coming on Tuesday are the D.C. area primaries:

District of Columbia - Primary - 37 delegates
Maryland - Primary - 99 delegates
Virginia - Primary - 101 delegates

I'll post about these primaries later as more current polling data becomes available. So, we'll see 475 delegates decided over the next five days. There could be some surprises, but most likely we'll continue to see a very close race.

"Zell" Lieberman loses Super Delegate status

In a move that helped restore some of my faith in the Democratic Party, Sen. Joe Lieberman has been stripped of his "super delegate" status. A super delegate is typically an elected member of Congress or an important DNC member who will be at the national nominating convention, a free agent who can vote for any candidate he or she chooses. By virtue of his previous experience as a Democrat, Joe Lieberman was a super delegate.

However, after the 2004 defection from the party by redneck nutjob senator Zell Miller from Georgia, who proceeded to go on to make an embarrassing rant against his former party and John Kerry at the Republican National Convention, the DNC came up with a new rule.

Informally called the "Zell Miller rule", it disqualifies any Democrat who crosses the aisle to endorse a candidate from a different party from being a super delegate. Joe Lieberman qualifies for this rule due to his endorsement and sycophantic fawning over Republican presidential candidate John McCain.

I wonder if this rule can be extended to include other races. For instance, remember that useless quack from Louisiana, Sen. Mary Landrieu, who endorsed Lieberman even AFTER Ned Lamont won the senate primary? She crossed party lines to endorse the Connecticut For Lieberman candidate against the lawfully legitimately elected Democratic nominee.

BTW, it's so nice that she stuck with the DHS Chairman after all those wonderful things that Homeland Security did for New Orleans right after Katrina.

Oh wait a moment...it DIDN'T!

So, how about getting HER barred from the convention as a super-delegate? Anyone have Howard Dean's phone number? Because I'd love to hear what he has to say at that.

Connecticut Bob loans his blog $5

PRESS RELEASE: The progressive blog "Connecticut Bob" loaned itself five dollars today, an official spokesman revealed.

"I'm short on funds for much needed video supplies, so I'm loaning myself the money," said Connecticut Bob at a press conference this afternoon. He claimed that other local blogs are having more success at fund raising, and in order to remain competitive he needed to make the loan to himself.

When asked about the terms, Connecticut Bob gave the details.

"I'll give myself four weeks to pay it back, with a vig of $1.25 a week. And I better come up with the money on time, or else I may be forced to break my legs."

Obama scores upset in Connecticut

A late surge in popularity helped Barack Obama win over a previously heavily favored Hillary Clinton yesterday.

Obama scored in six of the eight counties, with Clinton winning only in the 2nd District. Joe Courtney was the one Democratic Representative who wasn't actively supporting Obama, and he either helped Clinton to win in his district, or he accurately predicted what his electorate would do.

Voter gender wasn't an issue, as Obama won even though nearly 60% of the Democratic voters were women. He won most notably with younger Democrats, and I think the "youth vote" (under 35) may be a deciding factor in November. GOTV among that demographic might make the difference. Something to plan for.

At this point Obama has an opportunity to capitalize on his momentum. Large rallies like his Hartford appearance seem to energize the Democrats, and nothing looks more thrilling than an arena packed with 17,000 supporters cheering for their candidate. Somehow, I don't see Clinton being able to generate that kind of excitement.

The pundits will be scrutinizing the results of these contests for at least the next 72 hours, then this Saturday we'll see additional Democratic contests in Louisiana, Washington and Nebraska. It'll be interesting to see how things develop from here.

Connecticut returns thread (live blog)

Well, sort of live. Anyway, I'll update this as results come in. Updates every few minutes until it's over.

-----------------------------------------------------
11:10 - Well, I'm gonna call it a night. I was up at 4:30 this morning because I was too excited to sleep, then I had to go to Manhattan today for work, and got home just in time to watch the results coming in. With nearly 90% of the vote counted, Barack Obama will win the state by a margin of 51-47%. I'll wake up early again tomorrow so I can find out how California goes. But I'm exhausted and going to bed now. G'night!

11:04 - Looking at some of the town-by-town results, I'm seeing some surprises. The big cities pretty much are Obama territory. I expected that. But to see Obama win decisively in such ethnically non-diverse towns like Easton (54-44%), Farmington (52-48%), Litchfield (58-40%), and Ridgefield (56-43%) shows that Barack appeals to a large spectrum of voters.
85% reporting
Obama - 151,181 51%
Clinton - 140,142 47%

10:48 - Ah, results for Milford just came in. My stupid Liebercratic town voted 57-41% Clinton. I should have known. Nancy DiNardo loves this town. So does Lieberman, for that matter. Enough to endorse the Republican mayor last year. Dipshit. Just once I'd like to see our town vote for something other than the safe, predictable, party-machine candidate. What a bunch a sissies.
82% reporting
Obama - 144,572 51%
Clinton - 135,547 47%

10:41 - It's gonna be interesting to see the delegate counts tomorrow. I'm too tired to watch all night to find out.
81% reporting
Obama - 142,609 50%
Clinton - 134,086 47%

10:35 - Still waiting on Milford.
76% reporting
Obama - 134,967 50%
Clinton - 127,229 48%

10:29 - Interesting trend in Democratic voting. Women voted roughly 60-40% over men, and they obviously were the difference in choosing Obama. Wow.
73% reporting
Obama - 129,668 50%
Clinton - 122,691 48%

10:22 - CNN just called it for Obama in Connecticut. Ha! Beat 'em!

10:17 - OK, I'm officially calling this race for Barack Obama. Sorry, but I just can't wait anymore. Plus, this means I've scooped CNN. Those hacks.

69% reporting
Obama - 122,691 50%
Clinton - 115,545 47%

10:12 - If this trend continues, I'll bet we'll see CNN call it for Obama. But right now it's still too close.
66% reporting
Obama - 116,135 50%
Clinton - 109,135 47%

10:05 - Towns are starting to fill in. Obama's lead in CT is increasing.
61% reporting
Obama - 108,568 51%
Clinton - 101,467 47%

10:01 - It's very close still. Milford hasn't reported yet. I'd love to see us carry this for Obama
57 % reporting
Obama - 100,118 50%
Clinton - 94,279 47%

9:52 - Keep in mind that Democratic Primary states aren't "All or Nothing" like the Republican primaries. Dems award delegates based on counties won. So a close primary will basically split the delegates. But bragging rights and fund raising are determined by the winner. So I'd like to see Barack prevail here in the Nutmeg State.
52% reporting
Obama - 93,786
Clinton - 87,854

9:45 - McCain declared the winner 2 seconds after the polls closed. Good, that was easy.
48% reported
Obama - 83,658
Clinton - 79,087

Clinton won Massachusetts