WEST VIRGINIA:  MAY 13, 2008

11:37 p.m.  ET:  There is other election news tonight, and it may be more important than the West Virginia primary.  The Democrats have just won their third special House election in a row, this time in a solidly conservative district in Mississippi.  Previously, they picked up former Speaker Dennis Hastert's seat in Illinois, and a seat in a conservative district in Louisiana.  This is not good for the GOP.  If this trend continues, we could be in for Democratic landslides, at least in Congress, in November.  The entire GOP congressional campaign need to be reorganized and reenergized. 

11:09 p.m.  ET:  Clinton, with 71 percent of the vote counted, is now 39 points ahead of Obama in West Virginia.  You know, this gets serious after a time.  I've just been monitoring talk radio, and get a sense that some of the radio people and their regular callers feel Obama has been badly hurt.  As written below, I don't think so.  These results tend to be history in a few days.  But if some reporters now start to dig, and come up with something on Obama, the combination could conceivably lead to a bit of soul searching or, in the case of liberals, soulless searching.

10:02 p.m.  ET:  This is a real blowout.  With 42 percent of the vote in, Hillary Clinton is 37 points ahead of Barack Obama in West Virginia.  If this holds it will show that the Clinton people didn't stay home, anticipating an easy Clinton victory, but went to the polls.  That may well be a strong protest vote.

9:24 p.m. ET:   Hillary Clinton is speaking.  It's a perfectly good, even defiant speech, but you have the sense that the spirit is missing.  She knows how this will eventually turn out, and she wants to end strong.  She also wants to prepare for the future.  Next week she will win in Kentucky and lose in Oregon, so the day will be spun as a draw.  After that, Puerto Rico votes.  It will be too late. 

She has just said what she's said before, that she'll work her "heart out" for the Democratic nominee.  The only thing that will help her decisively now will be an Obama meltdown.  Even this huge win tonight - and she's now 33 percent ahead in the count - cannot turn it around without some jolting event.  Is there another Rev. Wright out there?

8:31 p.m. ET:  The current standing shows Clinton with 56 percent of the counted W. Va. vote, and Obama with 36 percent.  However, only one percent of the vote is in, and Clinton's margin is expected to grow.  I cautioned earlier that her margin might be reduced by the tendency of some voters to stay home if they expect their candidate to win decisively.  We'll see if that plays out. 

8:02 p.m. ET:  I decided to start discussing West Virginia earlier than expected because the cable systems are already calling the race for Clinton.  She apparently has won overwhelmingly, although we have no percentages yet.  The rejection of Senator Obama, though, has been thorough.

How much does this mean?  Probably not much because of the numbers Obama has already put in his column in the race for the nomination.  And with the press firmly in Obama's camp - let's return to the sixties and paint our jeans - tonight will be spun the way the Obama camp wants it spun.  But it is a warning that there are many unhappy Democrats out there.  Unfortunately, they drink classic Coke and eat hamburgers, so the national party doesn't notice them.

EARLY EVENING UPDATE:  MAY 13,  2008

Posted at 6:01 p.m. ET

WHILE WE SLEEP

While we sleep, and worry about the declining ratings for "American Idol," the Mideast is boiling.  Lebanon is being taken apart.  Now the Lebanese Druze, typically ignored by the Christiane Amanpour contingent in the press, are pleading for help:

Druze Lebanese, under fire from Hezbollah fighters, pleaded with the United States for an emergency airlift of weapons over the weekend, illustrating growing fears among Christians, Sunni Arabs and Druze that the hard-line Shi'ite militia was preparing to take over the entire country.

"The government, the prime minister and the democratic forces are in grave danger and being attacked by Hezbollah forces. They've taken Beirut. They've burned the newspaper and closed the television," a Lebanese source close to the biggest party in Lebanon's parliament told The Washington Times.

"If you lose Lebanon, you lose the Middle East. If the U.S. does nothing, this sends a chilling message to the rest of the region."

President Bush goes to Israel tomorrow.  Apparently, the Druze request has not been met.  What would President Obama do?  Wait.  I don't want to think about that.

May 13, 2008.      Permalink          

DISSING HILLARY

Several articles and columns running today continue the theme discussed here this morning that there is real anger among Clinton supporters over the way she's being treated.  Even those of us who'd never vote for Clinton have seen it.  Froma Harrop, whom I love to quote because she's so good, has some particularly sharp warnings for the Democratic Party:

Many in the Obama camp, having outfoxed the apparently not-so-formidable Clinton machine, can't seem to get the hang of winning gracefully. They feel a need to drive a stake in Hillary Clinton's reputation, then dance. If they were smart, they'd heap praise on Clinton and let her finish out the race, however she chooses to do so.

That's sage advice, even though offered by Republican mastermind-turned-pundit Karl Rove. Treat Clinton shabbily, he says, and many of her supporters "will remember it by November."

Nonetheless, Obamacans are throwing victory parties over the impending defeat of a fellow Democrat who has thus far pulled in over 47 percent of their party's primary and caucus participants. Some take a more direct approach. In anticipation of the West Virginia primary, college students for Obama were hurling insults at farmers and truck drivers holding signs for Clinton.

The Washington Post has a long piece today detailing examples of racism directed at Senator Obama.  I have no doubt there have been some incidents, phone calls and ugly comments from racist morons.  But there is another side.  A friend told me how she was roughed up verbally, and insulted, by Obama volunteers when she tried to debate them.  Now Harrop reports on the Obama students in West Virginia.  We've seen what the left can do to anyone who opposes them.  Ask Joe Lieberman.  Then ask The Post to do a story on that.  Don't count the hours waiting for it.  Harrop goes on:

We now hear pained remarks from the Obama camp that many white men won't vote for any black. Oh really? No one was complaining during the early races in Iowa, Maryland, Virginia and Wisconsin, when most of the white male participants backed Obama. That was before the Rev. Jeremiah Wright ugliness became public.

Finally...

Obama can't beat John McCain without large chunks of Clinton's core constituency: women, Hispanics and the white working class. Dumping on their candidate is one step removed from dumping on them -- and some of the Obama people don't even bother with that step. Rove must be enjoying the show.

Good advice that probably won't be taken.  After all, the Obama people are the ones they've been waiting for.

May 13, 2008.      Permalink          

AFTERNOON POSTING:  MAY 13,  2008

Posted at 2:25 p.m. ET

LATE POLLS

New trackers are out.  For the Democratic nomination, Rasmussen has Obama up nine over Clinton, but Gallup has him up only six.  A Washington Post/ABC poll published yesterday had Obama up 12.  If you average these polls, they show Obama with a solid lead, but not a spectacular one, given that the Democratic Party has essentially held the funeral for Clinton's campaign, even though the body hasn't arrived.

In the nationals, Rasmussen has Obama up one over McCain, Gallup has him up three.  The Wash Post/ABC poll had Obama up seven.

Ras has Clinton up two over McCain, Gallup has her up five.  Wash Post/ABC had it at three.  (I get the feeling that the Wash Post/ABC poll overpolled the Obama people.)

Once again Clinton shows remarkable strength.  I have no idea whether this is pro-Clinton or anti-Obama, but it can't be ignored. 

McCain clearly is polling much better than his party, and has a real shot to win.  However, if we look at the journalism of the past week, including the now-infamous Newsweek story on the campaign - which was an ad for Obama - we realize that the press can possibly dictate the result just by its slanted coverage.  The slant is worse than any I've ever seen.

West Virginia is voting now.  I'd be curious to see if there's any psychological change in the reporting if it's a Clinton blowout.  I doubt it.

May 13, 2008.      Permalink          

TUESDAY:  MAY 13,  2008

Posted at 6:58 a.m. ET

INVISIBLE VOTES

West Virginia votes today.  Senator Clinton will win, probably in a landslide.  But the votes for her will be invisible inside her own party.  The decision has already been made.  Senator Obama will be the nominee.  Senator Clinton may well romp again next week in Kentucky, and a bit later in the only Hispanic primary, in Puerto Rico.  None of it will matter, except perhaps to remind the vitamins-and-tofu crowd within the Democratic Party that there are quite a few dissenters out there, the children and grandchildren of the people who built the party and stayed loyal as it led America through the Depression and World War II.  There's no doubt that Clinton's courting of these voters has its cynical side - she wouldn't have them as friends - but their votes send a signal that they don't intend to be pushed aside by those who think a Marine Corps recruiting station is a front office for fascism.

It's not surprising that the Democratic Party has gone nuts over Obama.  On the political left, which controls the party, race trumps gender every time.  But I do wish, before the deal is sealed, that someone asks Mr. Obama five questions, so that some of us, who've watched as the mainstream media has joined his campaign, might be a bit better informed:

1.  Senator Obama, the presidency is a leadership position.  What successful campaign, except on your own behalf, have you ever led?

2.  Senator Obama, you say you want to unify the country.  Why then, have you allowed yourself to become the most liberal senator in the Senate, with no record of real bipartisanship, and why are your political associates and backers so far to the left?

3.  Senator Obama, you say you will negotiate unconditionally with foreign leaders.  What will you offer them that will make your efforts any more successful than President Bush's?

4.  Senator Obama, you say you stand for change.  Yet, you are a product of the Daley machine in Chicago, and not one of the ideas you've proposed strikes anyone as especially new or unique.  Do you have any innovative ideas, and how precisely - repeat precisely - do you intend to put them into effect?

5.  Senator Obama, your wife said that this - apparently meaning your candidacy - is the first time she's ever been proud of her country.  Do you agree with her view, and why?

Those are the first five.  There are more coming.

May 13, 2008.      Permalink          

CLINTON'S PLIGHT

The seriousness of Senator Clinton's condition is well reported by Russell Berman in The New York Sun:

WASHINGTON — In West Virginia today, Senator Clinton is poised for one of her most lopsided victories, but it comes at a time when the voice of Democratic primary voters arguably matters the least to her chances of overtaking Senator Obama.

A poll released yesterday showed the New York senator 36 points ahead of Mr. Obama in the Mountain State, an edge that would represent her widest margin of victory in any state but Arkansas, where she served as first lady for more than a decade.

The expected rout is likely too late for Mrs. Clinton, however, as party leaders flock to Mr. Obama and declare the race for the Democratic nomination all but finished.

Why wait for the voters to vote?  This is the change we've been waiting for!  More:

The candidates’ schedules for this week offer another indication of their divergent paths. While Mrs. Clinton is holding an election night party in West Virginia and will then likely travel to Kentucky and Oregon, which vote next week, Mr. Obama will campaign today in Missouri, a general election swing state.

And...

Party leaders, meanwhile, have begun rallying around Mr. Obama. He has picked up more than a dozen superdelegates in recent days, including four yesterday, and for the first time he has overtaken Mrs. Clinton’s long-standing lead among those officials who have an automatic vote at the convention in August.

You know, I'm not so sure some of the leading Democrats are acting wisely.  Couldn't they have waited a few weeks before declaring the race over?  People in places like Kentucky and West Virginia are often derided by the party coastal elites as "the flyover people," and the behavior of the party leaders toward those states simply reinforces the image.  The fact that Senator Obama is only expected to win in Oregon in the coming weeks - a state that symbolizes coastalism - makes matters worse.  The Democrats have always underestimated the power of resentment.  They may be doing it again, although the overwhelming bias of the mainstream media may soften the blow.

May 13, 2008.      Permalink          

SPEAKING OF RESENTMENT

Oh boy, is Marie Cocco resentful. And I have to admit, I think she makes some good points about the way Senator Clinton has been treated in this campaign.  This is not, as you know, a Clinton-loving website, but I try to be fair.  Cocco, a veteran columnist, says things that may reflect a certain seething in part of the electorate, and it is a danger to the Democratic Party:

WASHINGTON -- As the Democratic nomination contest slouches toward a close, it's time to take stock of what I will not miss.

I will not miss seeing advertisements for T-shirts that bear the slogan "Bros before Hos." The shirts depict Barack Obama (the Bro) and Hillary Clinton (the Ho) and they are widely sold on the Internet.

I will not miss walking past airport concessions selling the Hillary Nutcracker, a device in which a pantsuit-clad Clinton doll opens her legs to reveal stainless steel thighs that, well, bust nuts. I won't miss television and newspaper stories that make light of the novelty item.

I won't miss episodes like the one in which the liberal radio personality Randi Rhodes called Clinton a "big f---in' whore" and said the same about former vice presidential nominee Geraldine Ferraro. Rhodes was appearing at an event sponsored by a San Francisco radio station, before an audience of appreciative Obama supporters -- one of whom had promoted the evening on the presumptive Democratic nominee's official campaign Web site.

Rather blunt, I'd say.  And there's more:

I won't miss reading another treatise by a man or woman, of the left or right, who says that sexism has had not even a teeny-weeny bit of influence on the course of the Democratic campaign. To hint that sexism might possibly have had a minimal role is to play that risible "gender card."

Most of all, I will not miss the silence.

I will not miss the deafening, depressing silence of Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean or other leading Democrats, who to my knowledge (with the exception of Sen. Barbara Mikulski of Maryland) haven't uttered a word of public outrage at the unrelenting, sex-based hate that has been hurled at a former first lady and two-term senator from New York. Among those holding their tongues are hundreds of Democrats for whom Clinton has campaigned and raised millions of dollars. Don Imus endured more public ire from the political class when he insulted the Rutgers University women's basketball team.

A bit strident, perhaps, but I can't deny the truthfulness of some of this.  Had similar language been used about Obama, the press would have been in an uproar.

The question is, of course, how many women feel this way.  If enough do, Senator Obama might have a problem.  His own silence has been telling.

May 13, 2008.      Permalink          

RELIEF, AT LAST

It's always a pleasure to bring you a breakthrough in modern medicine.  This is one of those momentous days. The miracle of science has brought forth a new wonder drug.

You know that sensation you have when you leave the dentist's office after they sting you with a pain killer?  Numbness.  Nothingness.  The world now changes:

For those who don’t like to drool, slur their speech or unknowingly bite their tongue after a visit to the dentist, help might be at hand.

A small drug company said it won approval Friday from the Food and Drug Administration to market the first drug meant to undo the effects of local dental anesthesia.

In clinical trials, the drug cut the median time it took for full sensation to return to the lips by about 75 to 85 minutes, or by more than half.

The drug, called OraVerse, was developed by Novalar Pharmaceuticals, a privately held company in San Diego. The company said it would begin selling the drug to dentists late this year for $12.50 an injection.

Not bad.  That's three gallons of gas.  And for that you can taste chocolate again.

Now you can live a full life.

Back later.

May 13, 2008.      Permalink