It starts with Lanny Davis on fire. As someone who cringed every time he talked about Lieberman during the Lamont race, I’ve got to say Lanny’s been flawless in making the case for Clinton.
… .. To all Super Delegates: you decide who is riskier as a general election candidate. The candidate whose negatives, driven by the right-wing hate machine in the 1990s in particular, are all out there and already taken into account. Or a candidate who is still virtually unknown to most of the electorate, with Republicans clearly looking forward to filling in the blanks with the facts about his record of which many general election voters still are not aware.
Senators blocking a cloture vote on the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. Harry Reid
got this one right: “There is no reason for the Fair Pay Act to be
a partisan issue….” John McCain’s response was priceless, as in
This callous disregard for human injustice is only further butressed (sic)
by McCain’s assumptionsÃ¢â‚¬”rife with both sexist undertones and extreme
misinformationÃ¢â‚¬”about what the “real” problem is with unequal
pay: women are just not as qualified as men. He says:
“They need the education and training, particularly since more and
more women are heads of their households, as much or more than anybody else,”
McCain said. “And it’s hard for them to leave their families when they
don’t have somebody to take care of them.”
Remind me again what century we’re in.
Also, a post
by Paul Lukasiak over at Lambert’s place:
Barack Obama is hemmorhaging (sic) support against John McCain in states
where Democrats can/should win in November.
In the last six weeks, Barack Obama has been losing support, while Hillary
Clinton has gained support, when matched against McCain. Much of Clinton’s
additional support is from voters who were undecided in late February, and
Clinton essentially “split” the “recent deciders”
with McCain; as a result there is little change in her margins against McCain.
But people who were undecided whether they preferred Obama or McCain are also
making up their minds Ã¢â‚¬“ and choosing McCain. As a result, Obama’s
margins against McCain are looking much worse. … ..
As for the dishier items, this is yummy in terms of gossip, but ridiculous
that a grown man would write such nonsense thinking anyone cares. Oh, other
than The Nation magazine. Tom Hayden’s alarmed because Hillary
makes his wife scream. Mr. Hayden first posted on Huffington Post about
this earth shattering event. After all, everyone must be exposed to this important
tale of domestic nuttery: For Barbara, Hillary has become the screech on
the blackboard. Oh, for God’s sake! Is it too much to ask that he at least
be original? Screech on a blackboard? It’s just so 1990s.
But to put it all in context, maybe Hayden has a little bit to do with his
wife’s acting out, though it’s hard to be sure. Jane Fonda writes in her memoir
about husband Hayden:
I don’t think Tom expected it to be the end. I think he believed, as did
others, that I had known all along of his infidelities and didn’t really mind.
Maybe some part of me did know. Maybe that’s why anger would well up when
we made love.
My Life So Far, by Jane Fonda page 463
So let’s just say Tom Hayden bringing up his wife screaming in order to get
a dig in at Hillary isn’t all that impressive given his track record with women.
That he’s willing to use his wife’s emotional acting out to get at the first
viable female candidate running for the presidency, considering Hayden’s alleged
philandering past, fits the storyline perfectly. Another “progressive”
icon revealed as a heel. Alert the media.
But when it comes to “progressive” men doing whatever they can to
nail Hillary, nothing should surprise anyone anymore.
Overnight open thread. See you in the morning.