Shakesville

Superduperpooper Tuesday Open Thread

Instead of a QotD tonight, I'm just going to open up a thread for all things primary. I'll update the post with news about various primaries as results become available, and I'll keep this post on top until at least midnight CST; new posts below. Please feel free to post any news, chat about your votes, have a virtual drink, wev!

This just in: Barack Obama has won in Georgia!

Update One: Keith Olbermann in a pretty pink tie has just informed me that Obama has won in his home state of Illinois, and Hillary is projected to win in Oklahoma.

McCain has won in CT, New Jersey, and Illinois, and Willard wins in his home state of Massachusetts.

Update Two: Hillary is the projected winner in Tennessee, according to Keith.

Update Three: Hillary has won Arkansas. As has Mike Huckabee.

Lester Holt did a segment earlier about Latino voters, who are about 15% of the total Democratic primary voters and are breaking 61% in Hillary's favor. I have no brilliant commentary on that; just passing it along because I thought it was interesting, since we hear very little about Latino voters, despite their being a voting bloc approximately the same size as black voters.

Update Four: Hillary is the projected winner in her home state of New York and the projected winner in Massachusetts. (Looks like Teddy Kennedy's endorsement didn't help Obama, nor did John Kerry's.) Huckabee the projected winner in Alabama. Bill Richardson has grown a beard!

Bill the Bear
Update Five: Obama is the projected winner in Delaware.

Update Six: Clinton is the projected winner in New Jersey. Obama projected to win Alabama.

Update Seven: Obama is the projected winner in Utah and North Dakota.

Update Eight: Obama is the projected winner in Kansas.

Update Nine: Clinton is the projected winner in California, New Mexico, and Arizona. Obama is the projected winner in Minnesota, Idaho, Colorado, and Missouri.

Update Ten: Final Scores appear to be:

Clinton took Arizona, Arkansas, California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, and Tennessee, bringing her to an estimated 534 delegates.

Obama took Alabama, Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota, and Utah, bringing him to an estimated 425 delegates.

I'm not sure what's going on with New Mexico. It's being called for both of them in different places. I would guess it goes to Clinton, although Chris Cillizza is calling it for Obama. Shrug.

In any case, it remains anyone's game, Shakers.

Willard Screwed in West Virginnie

As Petulant mentioned earlier, Huckabee won in West Virginia—but it was thanks to some zany McCain-Huckabee collusive shenanigans that has left Willard decidedly unhappy: "Unfortunately, this is what Senator McCain's inside Washington ways look like: he cut a backroom deal with the tax-and-spend candidate he thought could best stop Governor Romney's campaign of conservative change." He then announced he was going to poop his pants.

Wah wah wah. Grousing from disgruntled Willardistas and more on how Willard got screwed at Comment is Free.

Quote of the Day

"If women can't make it in the 'crapshoot of electoral politics' because of their sad lack of testosterone, why would one Andrew Sullivan need to write an anti-Hillary treatise? Nature should take care of her pitiful attempt at grabbing power without the necessary testosterone."—Echidne, in a must-read post.

[Aside to Sully and others who advance the old "Hillary cries to evoke sympathy" canard: There is not a woman in America who is laboring under the enormous misapprehension that crying evokes sympathy. Even our most intimate partners are taught to be suspicious of our tears, to regard them as mere markers of our intent to manipulate. We know quite well that crying evokes contempt, especially from those disinclined from extending us sympathy irrespective of our expression of its need. If you believe that Hillary is a sentient woman, no less the savvy sort of politician who would counterfeit emotion if she calculated it would win her support, then trust me when I tell you she does not cry to evoke sympathy.]

Ha

Blogenfreude: Wingnuttia Flies Apart

How sweet it is:

• James Dobson: I will never support McCain.

• Rush Limbaugh lays a beating on McCain.

• Ron Paul outraises McCain and Romney during last quarter.

• Troops donate more to anti-war candidates.

• Ann Coulter would vote for Hillary over McCain.

Stay tuned.

Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

Last-Minute SuperTues Helpful Hints for Hils

Care of Meta Wagner (via lyzurgyk):

• It's okay to appear ambitious. Ambitiousness shows that you're confident and secure—a leader.

• Don't appear too ambitious; it freaks men out and offends less accomplished women.

• Don't cry, or it will expose you as too weak to lead our fine nation. And, remember, if you cry, then Jesse Jackson, Jr. will accuse you of crying out of self-pity, rather than for Hurricane Katrina victims.

• Do cry, because you don't want to appear unfeeling and robotic; crying humanizes you! And even if you simply well up a bit, they'll call it crying, anyway, so you may as well let the waterworks flow.

• For God's sake, don't laugh. Your laugh is a crazy cackle, and whenever you let loose, you'll be accused of deflecting attention away from an issue you don't want to confront.

• Do laugh, or else people will think you have no sense of humor, and the last president to lack a sense of humor was Nixon—you certainly don't need that comparison.

• Don't allow fine lines to appear on your face, or Rush Limbaugh, that paragon of GQ handsomeness, will question whether the nation is ready to witness a woman age in office.

• Do age naturally, because if you go for cosmetic surgery or even Botox, it will reinforce the perception among some voters that you are not genuine.

• Flash some cleavage to remind us you're a woman.

• Cover it up because it's unseemly for a woman "of a certain age" to dress like a slut.

• Wear pantsuits because they make you look both fashionable and authoritative.

• Don't wear pantsuits, because Anna Wintour says not to, and you don't want to mess with the devil.

• Use Bill Clinton to campaign on your behalf because he's the best there is (or at least he used to be) and people still like the two-for-one deal.

• Don't use Bill Clinton because you ought to run on your own record and, besides, he's really annoying the crap out of a lot of party leaders.

• Refer to yourself as 'Hillary' because it makes you seem accessible.

• No, refer to yourself as Senator Clinton because it reminds people of your experience.

• No, call yourself Hillary Rodham Clinton to show you maintain an identity separate from your husband's.

• No, call yourself Hillary Clinton (without the Rodham) to show you are committed to your marriage despite all the whispered rumors.

• Oh, hell with it, call yourself 'Hill'. It's a win-win-win: it makes you one of the gals and it reminds people that you work on Capitol "Hill" and it lets you avoid the whole 'Clinton' imbroglio.

• And of course no list of advice for Hillary Clinton would be complete without the following: Above all else, be yourself.

I totally agree, Hils.

I Have Questions

1. How the hell did these two Superbowl ads manage to get aired?

2. Why are these commercials not at the tippy top of everyone's "worst ads" lists? There are those out there that were rightfully angered by the racist "humor" in these advertisements, but there are others that seem to feel that gross-out humor and fuel efficiency of all things are worse than ethnic stereotypes that were old when Jerry Lewis was wearing big fake buck teeth and hollering "Me so solly!"

Worst

GMC mountaintop

A painting pushes a ball up a hill, “Never saying never.” The GMC Yukon Hybrid is revealed touting better fuel mileage.

“You would think General Motors would have better taste in what they put in the Super Bowl,” Kolt said.

Yeah, showing responsibility when you buy an SUV is in such poor taste.

3. Is there really an ad agency out there that employs people that are so out of touch and so goddamned dumb that they didn't realize what they were doing with these things? I mean, come on! The seven kids gag? The cartoony "Asian writing" and music? (I'm amazed they resisted using a gong sound effect!) Why do the buffoonish pandas have stereotypical voices, but the clever SalesGenie panda doesn't? Even the usual gang of idiots that make up the YouTube comments threads are able to recognize racism when they see it. Or does this company:

4. Just not care?

Something tells me it's number four.

Oh, and it just wouldn't be perfect without a FOX cliché:

The panel had significant concerns about the advertising efforts for the lowest ranked advertisers: SalesGenie.com, CareerBuilder.com and GM's Yukon brand. Panel members said SalesGenie.com's ads were "offensive to some," and lacked a clear description of the site. CareerBuilder.com's "I Quit" spot received mixed reactions; members of the panel were "turned off" and found the spot "disturbing."

"Offensive to some." I do believe I have bingo.

The people they used to be

I don't usually spend much...well, actually, any time at the American Apparel website. I've seen their ads litter Gawker Media sites and think most of their offerings are user-hostile. Still, I followed a trail there today and found myself looking at a grainy, grayscale image of a young Barack Obama, smiling, leaning against an exterior wall in a smart leather jacket. The picture was followed by an image of a young John McCain, sitting, pensive, holding a cigarette in one hand. These pictures were part of the American Apparel endorsement, its Super Tuesday advisory. The theme, which extends beyond the presidential campaign: Legalize L.A. The company has made its appeal for each of these presidential candidates based on their stances on immigration.

The company goes on to explain why Hillary Clinton did not garner its endorsement, and this explanation was accompanied by an outdoor photo of a younger and smiling Hillary, accompanied by a scruffy, younger Bill.

Good for American Apparel. Companies are also citizens, odd that that may sound, and they should be judged not for having spoken so much as for what they actually say - same as for individuals. But, uh, that's not what struck me about the advisory.

What caught my eye was this glance back, this glimpse of three contenders for the highest public office we have at a time when each of them was light years from power and notoriety. We know all about Obama and McCain and Clinton now, of course, or at least we assume that we do and so act accordingly. Once upon a time, however, they were not yet so defined, not yet set in stone. Relatively unshaped, each of them, and yet already moving with faltering steps along paths which none of them could have clearly seen.

A community organizer. A soldier and former prisoner of war. A law student. Each of them separated from today by time and chance. And, of course, will.

I can't help wondering what those three people would have thought about today.

(Cross-posted.)

I Write Letters

To: Michael "Michael Savage" Weiner, Professional Retrofuck Jackhole
From: Melissa McEwan, American Citizen
Re: Shutting the Fuck Up

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

Dear Mr. Weiner:

I am writing to you on behalf of your usual correspondent, Paul the Spud, and bored American citizens everywhere. Your latest insane bloviation is not only heavy with the weight of the intolerable bigotry which typifies the daily vomfest you call a show, but reveals that your dreary shtick has reached its grim nadir, failing utterly to generate within me even the merest hint of outrage. Instead, your sad, tedious, yawn-inducing references to an "affirmative action presidency" are pitiable at best. You've become little more than a mildly irritating fly whom one must keep brushing away at an otherwise enjoyable picnic—buzzing, buzzing, buzzing and pretending it's thunder.

So why don't you just do us all a huge favor and STFU?

Thanks!

Love,
Liss

More Super Tuesday

I'm getting excited emails from Clintonistas and Obamites who have happily cast their votes this morning, which is making me all kinds of giddy. And Shaker Heather B. has a great post on voting today:

I took my ballot and off I went to the little cardboard booth. I filled in my ballot and plopped it in the machine, learned I was the 53rd person to vote today, got my little sticker and a pamphlet about pandemic flu, and headed out.

And what happened next is why it is so important to vote, and why polling places should be in spaces where children can observe.

As I walked out the door, all the little kids were in lines waiting to filter into the building. A little Latino boy sees me come out the door and called out, "Hey lady! Whatcha doing here?" I smiled and said, "I voted today." Upon which all the little kids burst into cheers and yells. I walked away to the sound of applause.

Hot damn. I love the smell of Democracy in the morning!

Meanwhile, speaking of wildly inaccurate political polling, Josh Marshall takes a comparative look and notes:

There's one guarantee I can make right now about tonight's results. They are going take make either Zogby or SurveyUSA look like complete fools. Which one I'm not completely sure, but definitely one of them.

Consider this spread. Zogby has his final California number as Obama 49%, Clinton 36%. SurveyUSA has Obama 42%, Clinton 52%.

Zoinks. That's quite a spread!

It's going to be a wild day, Shakers.

A Good Day for America

Supercalifragelisticexpealidocious Tuesday is finally here.

Nearly half of these United States are holding primaries today. Over 1,000 delegates are up for grabs on both sides of the aisle today alone, and, on the Democratic side, polling indicates that the two contenders vying for those delegates could emerge from S00p3r Tuesday!!!11! with total delegate counts within 10% of each other. Of course, political polling is nothing if not wildly inaccurate, so who bloody knows what will happen today?! Wheeeeeee!

Well, we do know one thing. We know that no matter for whom Democratic primary voters cast their votes, they will be voting for change. Not the highly-touted and over-stated change from Beltway Business As Usual, which is a dubious proposition at best, given the realities of our lumbering, revolution-averse bureaucracy, but a change of historical significance—we have budged from myth toward truth the idea that any American-born citizen can be president. Today, nearly every Democratic primary vote will be cast for a woman or a man of color.

And every. single. vote. will be a vote for change in its repudiation of the current administration. After seven long years of conservative rule, progress will be getting lots of votes today.

Meanwhile, as Democratic voters are thumbing their noses at convention and starting new American traditions, the Republican primary voters wonder which of their candidates is most conservative, which will best protect them from this onslaught of progress—and their candidates assure the fearful daydreamers of a golden American age that never really existed, I will conserve; I will preserve our traditions.

These are gossamer promises. The march of progress may be slowed, but it cannot be stopped and it cannot be turned, not by any Republican candidate. Even their iconic golden boy Bush, a conservative cult leader with no checks and balances, left to pursue every conservative wet dream with abandon, could not stem the tide that sweeps us ever forward. At the twilight of his rule—during which radical feminists, kissing boys, and anyone swarthier than Ron Marsh's imagined Jesus in Head of Christ were routinely demonized when politically expedient—Bush nonetheless finds himself leading a country that supports same-sex marriage in greater numbers than when he entered office and leading a party whose opposition have narrowed their field to a black man and a feminist woman.

Onward we march… Did I mention that progress will be getting lots of votes today?

America's greatest strength has always been its progressiveness—our existence as a melting pot and our awkward struggle toward a true egalitarianism, where all people are free and equal, where every individual can live up to her or his potential. Progressives love America for what it can be; they look always forward. Today, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama will be talking to people about the future, about doing things for this nation that have never been done before, drawing roadmaps in new directions, while John McCain and Mitt Romney tread the same marshy, fetid ground in which better and worse men than they will ever be have already left layers of footprints. Today, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton transcend tradition, while John McCain and Mitt Romney desperately squabble, each trying to convince the Republican base that he is the Great White Knight who will defend it.

This is a good day for progressives. And a good day for progress. That makes it a good day for America.

Rock on, Super Tuesday.

Two-Minute Nostalgia Sublime

Emergency!

Spot the Lostie!

Says You

Jack Nicholson endorses Hillary Clinton. Robert DeNiro endorses Barack Obama. Chuck Norris endorses Mike Huckabee. Jon Voight endorsed Rudy Giuliani. And four out of five doctors who tried Camels prefer sheep instead.

Who really cares if a celebrity endorses a particular candidate? It's great for the headlines, but does it make a difference to the average voter? How much more likely are you to vote for someone because a star or talk show host -- or blogger, for that matter -- endorses a candidate?

Frankly, I don't think it means anything, and I can't think of a time where I've been persuaded to vote for -- or against -- someone because of an endorsement from a celebrity. I may know their work and admire their talent, but I'm not sure how that has a bearing on whether or not I go along with their recommendation to vote for this or that candidate. I'm much more likely to listen to someone I know personally and know their positions on issues that I care about -- equal rights, education, peace -- rather than take my electoral guidance from someone who made the cover of People magazine.

That said, there's no denying that we are in a celebrity-driven culture. Billions of dollars are spent and barrels of ink are wasted following the antics of people like Britney Spears or Paris Hilton, and when Elvis Presley died in August 1977, it led the evening news. (Had CNN been around at the time, it would have been wall-to-wall coverage with live reporting from Graceland and the funeral would have been a national event unseen since that grey day in November 1963.) It's part of human nature to care about people whom we don't know but have elevated to some kind of cultural status as icons or even idols. But when it comes to making a choice about a political leader, which is one of the more personal choices that we make, doing it only because Jack Nicholson or Chuck Norris says so is a sorry statement about our electoral process. We could end up with a vacant and vapid leader who had a lot of connections but no depth and certainly no business carrying the nuclear launch codes in his back pocket. Oh, wait...

This isn't to say that celebrities aren't entitled to their opinions and aren't entitled to endorse whomever they believe in and to share that with the rest of the world using whatever means they have at their disposal. But it would be far more useful if they did it in such a way that makes it clear that they are doing it not because of who they are but because of what they believe in. More importantly, they should make it clear to the voters that they shouldn't vote for someone just because someone else says they should.

(Cross-posted.)

Oh Noeees!! Not A President With An Emotional Body!!!!!

'Cuz that would be, like -- you know -- a disaster.

The asshat, misogynist press is at it again -- trying to get me to vote for Hillary just to spite them for making issues of things that would never be considered problematic in a male candidate:

Yep, it's official. Hillary Clinton is running to be Crybaby-in-Chief. According to the Tribune Co.'s politics blog, the Swamp, Clinton teared up after a heartfelt introduction by a former colleague at the Yale Child Study Center in New Haven, where she worked in college. The emotional speech led "Clinton's eyes to fill with tears, which she wiped out of her left eye," reads the report (so clinical). "Well, I said I would not tear up; already we're not exactly on the path," Clinton said immediately after. AHEM.

Now, to be fair to Clinton, who after all is human no matter what people say, hearing a tearful tribute to you from a former mentor is exactly the kind of thing that would choke up nearly anybody. ~ Daily Intelligencer

"To be fair to Clinton" . . . . yes -- let's do that, shall we? Shall we be fair to her?

Fairness Point A: In the mind-boggling, humongous number of times (two) that Hillary has "teared up" on camera -- in both cases, she was obviously moved -- not sad, not scared, not being a "cry-baby" -- moved -- in the first case, because she was speaking about her personal passion for the welfare of our nation, and the critical importance of this particular election.

And in the second case (video here -- can't embed), she gets choked up -- after the man who is introducing her gets choked up -- and she admits getting choked up, and then goes on with complete composure.

Such a cry-baby.

Of course, the man who is introducing her is not a cry-baby. No way -- he's a man who has enough maturity, self-confidence, and inner strength to show his emotions without worrying that it will erode his virility-- just like Pappy Bush:

When Hillary wipes a single tear from the corner of her eye, she's a cry-baby -- when Bush Sr. sobs like a baby, it's "A Father's Pride". See how that works?

(Hmmm- if Bush Senior could have rustled up as much emotion for the people he killed during "Desert Storm" as he did for his son's lost election, who knows where we'd be right now?)

Point B: Of all the things I dislike about Hillary Clinton, her ownership of an emotional body is not one of them. Personally, I find her ability to be moved, and her willingness to show it, refreshing.

In both cases, her external expression of emotion stemmed, as far as I can see, from her ability to connect with other humans, or the concept of a great nation, or her own passionate desire to change things.

I find that a rather appealing quality in a potential president, after years and years and years and years of presidential administrations who demonstrated an emotional range with only two settings: Cool, Calm, Collected Ass-Reaming -- or -- Frothing, Raging, Bullying War-Making.

So, to all those who think that Hillary is NOT being targeted -- as a woman -- in ways that are specifically effective because of institutionalized misogyny in our culture -- I'll say this: Maybe we need to retroactively impeach Pappy Bush -- he's obviously not emotionally stable enough to be President.

(And the first person who suggests that she was faking her tears gets a special Portly-Dyke virtual dope-slap in comments.)

Congratulations…

…to three of my favorite bloggrrls!

To Kate Harding and The Rotund on getting an agent for their proposed book!

And to Pam Spaulding for being recognized by the National Black Justice Coalition in its NBJC Black History LGBT Profiles!

Cheers, grrls!

On the Pulse

CNN Political Ticker brings us the hottest headlines in politics: In letter to Limbaugh, Bob Dole defends McCain.

Yes, that's right. Because the information Americans really need to have to make an informed decision in the upcoming election is what Bob Dole said to Rush Limbaugh.

Luckily, Political Ticker has the entire text of the letter, so we can all be edified by reading the searing missive from a totally irrelevant Republican hack to a bloviating pot of shit who shouldn't be considered credible enough to be acknowledged even by addle-brained former senators with nothing better to do to.

Caption This Photo

"Oh hi! We just upgraded your satellite dish!"

Via CuteOverload

Digital Pamphleteer

Following is a short film by filmmaker Bill Simmon about my friend (and virulent potty-mouth) Steve Benen, aka the Hardest Working Blogger in the Blog Business, who pens The Carpetbagger Report and the Blog Report, and, in his spare time, contributes to Crooks and Liars, the TPM empire, the Huffington Post, and Washington Monthly. Steve, typically modest, says: "I've never been entirely comfortable in front of a camera—I'm more of a behind-the-keyboard kind of guy—but Bill is practically family to me, so I couldn't turn him down. Besides, I thought, a short film about me would be a) good publicity for The Carpetbagger Report; and b) exciting for my Mom."

It's pretty exciting for those of us who admire his work, too. Digital Pamphleteer is a great piece; in fact, it won the Vermont Film Commission's James Goldstone award at last year's Vermont International Film Festival. Congrats to Bill Simmon, and to his inimitable subject.

The Muck and Mire

From Congressman Conyers' letter of questions to Mukasey comes the following excerpt that is just all kinds of awesome:

The website TPMMuckraker, which played an important role in providing information to the public concerning the U.S. Attorney scandal, revealed that it has recently been removed from DOJ’s press release email distribution list. Who made this decision and why, and was there a change in policy in press release distribution after you became Attorney General?

We've now entered the age where blogs have become more reliable and truly investigative than the traditional ~~entertainment~~ news media. I'm particularly psyched over how the impressive work of the TPM team has actually gotten under the DoJ's skin.

The playing field certainly doesn't look the same as it used to, and I'm all giddy that certain folks are crapping their pants over the change.

An Edwardian Puzzle

I've got a new piece up at The Guardian's Comment is Free about what happens to Edwards supporters who were drawn by his brand of anti-corporate populism.

[F]or those of his supporters who regard the increasing lack of corporate regulation and virtual fire sale of our government to corporate interests as one of the most pressing issues the nation faces, there is no evident moor for their ships set adrift by his departure.

What we can be sure of is that either Clinton or Obama will be indubitably better on this score than anyone the Republican party nominates. In fact, the GOP looks almost certain to nominate John McCain, who, in spite of his continual bragging about his efforts to prevent lobbyist money from corrupting Beltway politics, is, hilariously, the most lobbied-up candidate in the race, with 32 "lobbyist bundlers" passing him donations, almost twice as many as Clinton. And McCain, by his own admission no economic expert, also supports making the egregiously top-heavy Bush tax cuts permanent. Compared to his apparent vision of a new Gilded Age, Clinton and Obama look like regular Robin Hoods.

The whole thing is here.

"I am doomed to remember a boy with a wrecked voice..."

You're A Prayer for Owen Meany!
by John Irving

Despite humble and perhaps literally small beginnings, you inspire faith
in almost everyone you know. You are an agent of higher powers, and you
manifest this fact in mysterious and loud ways. A sense of destiny pervades
your every waking moment, and you prepare with great detail for destiny fulfilled.
When you speak, IT SOUNDS LIKE THIS!

Take the Book Quiz
at the Blue Pyramid.
A Prayer for Owen Meany is one of my favorite books, so I like that I got this result. Although, to be honet, a sense of destiny does not, in fact, pervade my every waking moment, or any of my waking moments at all. Still, I'll take it. I am deeply fond of Owen, and I adore Johnny.

[Via BAC.]