ojai news at The Ojai Post :: blog, newspaper, events in Ojai, California

For Clinton to have even the remotest chance of getting the nomination, she need to win Ohio AND Texas by at least 61%. The math just doesn't work any other way. So, it looks like it's all over. There's just no way she can make up the lost delegates. Look for everyone to endorse Obama tomorrow. It's a sad statement that people were too afraid to upset the Clinton's and endorse him before tonight. Really kind of spineless. But the Democrats under the DLC era have made being spineless an art. Hopefully that all comes to an end.

The dems will not allow Obama to win. Hillary is the error apparent.

Hillary is hoping to sway the superdelegates to vote against majority of voters/pledged delegates.

She's in for the long haul and I don't believe we are going to see an increase in Obama endorsements in the near future.

From the Obama campaign - The Math

Our projections show the most likely outcome of yesterday's elections will be that Hillary Clinton gained 187 delegates, and we gained 183.

That's a net gain of 4 delegates out of more than 370 delegates available from all the states that voted.

For comparison, that's less than half our net gain of 9 delegates from the District of Columbia alone. It's also less than our net gain of 8 from Nebraska, or 12 from Washington State. And it's considerably less than our net gain of 33 delegates from Georgia.

The task for the Clinton campaign yesterday was clear. In order to have a plausible path to the nomination, they needed to score huge delegate victories and cut into our lead.

They failed.

It's clear, though, that Senator Clinton wants to continue an increasingly desperate, increasingly negative -- and increasingly expensive -- campaign to tear us down.

That's her decision. But it's not stopping John McCain, who clinched the Republican nomination last night, from going on the offensive. He's already made news attacking Barack, and that will only become more frequent in the coming days.

Right now, it's essential for every single supporter of Barack Obama to step up and help fight this two-front battle. In the face of attacks from Hillary Clinton and John McCain, we need to be ready to take them on.

well, spk,

I haven't seen that huge bunch of endorsements for Barack today

so, I think we have to consider the logic of Hillary

the pledged delegate tally is not going to end up being sufficient for either candidate

so......

the result is going to hinge on the views of the super delegates...... and how they are to exercise their authority is evidently nowhere defined...

isn't it obvious Hillary is going to be our next President?
and a damn good one?
they'll probably even vacation at the Ojai Valley Inn and the valley will be all atwitter with the glow and the paparazzi.

If Billary pulls some political maneuvering and grabs the nomination from Obama, the Democrats are going to lose and disillusion huge numbers of young voters...not to mention a few old ones like me.

There was a much touted poll out about what would happen to the voters if their candidate didn't win in the end. The Clinton camp were the ones touting it. Basically, the poll claims that 25% of Hillary's voters would vote for McSame if she didn't win and only 10% of Obama's would vote for Keating 5 boy. The logic was that she should get it to keep more people from jumping to McBush. There's only one problem with the poll. It didn't talk about the overwhelming turnout that has been happening throughout these primary and caucus races. It may be true that 25% of Clinton's voters would vote Repug, but that only proves they're already Republicans. If Clinton finagles the nomination, then the Obama voters will simply stay home.

Couple of interesting things about the voting in Texas and Ohio. Rush Limbaugh told his audience to vote for Hillary in Texas because McWar already had the nomination. In Texas, you can walk up and vote for either party, so they voted for Clinton. Exit polling is showing that as much as 9% of the Texas votes were Republicans trying to hurt the Democrats. Obama won the caucus by a wide margin where there were no Republican moles. In Ohio, the Canadian NAFTA lie is what hurt Obama the most. But now there's a story out there that the Bush Administration was behind that "leak" from the conservative Canadian government. So Hillary benefited from Rush and the Bush/Rove axis. Interesting. Even with all that heavy Republican muscle behind her, Obama made headway in Ohio where he had been 20 points down in earlier polls and he basically tied in Texas, especially if you look at the hatchet vote from the Repugs.

On the "experience" nonsense: Is Laura Bush now qualified to be the President? I mean from where I sit, they're both Senators. Is it just because she was the first lady that she has more "experience"? She knows where they keep the umbrellas in the White House, or which place setting goes for which political gathering. Perhaps it's the experience in torpedoing the hopes of millions of Americans by failing to create a universal health care program for the last half a generation. Is that the "experience" the Clinton's are harping about?

Only in America can an argument be made by a political candidate that her opponent is too well spoken. Just think about the logic behind this assertion for a moment. It smacks of the very same anti-intellectualism that W rode into the White House. Same goes for the decidedly negative tone of Hillary's campaign. Using all the same levers and tools as Karl Rove? Utterly Disgusting. And look what it's gotten her, a net gain of 4-12 delegates. Obama has the popular vote in all the primaries and caucuses so far, and will continue to have it right up through Puerto Rico in June. If Florida and Michigan re-vote, this time with his name on both ballots, he'll come out with the majority of the popular vote. That's a prediction, but I'll stand by it. Bill Richardson, in consummate diplomat fashion said on Monday that the nominee for the Democratic Party would be whoever came out of yesterdays vote with the pledged delegate lead. Well, that's Obama.

One more thing. Would you wear black to a traditional type wedding? How about white to a funeral. No? Then why did Hillary think that last night of all nights was okay to wear Republican Red? Is she showing her true colors?

spk- you seem to spend a lot of time pondering weighty political issues and scenarios.
Very specifically- what do you believe will be the effect of a Hillary or Obama presidency on YOUR life?
Talk about your pocketbook, your health(care), opportunities for your family, and your moral/spiritual awareness.

Let's get REAL.
Who the hell really cares about the colors Hillary wore except for Fox news commentators at 3AM?
And putting Hillary and Laura in the same basket?
You been attending the Rove Institute of Slime?
As if you could discount her "experience" as a lawyer or a senator.
Stop making a fool of yourself

"One more thing. Would you wear black to a traditional type wedding? How about white to a funeral. No? Then why did Hillary think that last night of all nights was okay to wear Republican Red? Is she showing her true colors?"

and

"On the "experience" nonsense: Is Laura Bush now qualified to be the President?"

and

"Perhaps it's the experience in torpedoing the hopes of millions of Americans by failing to create a universal health care program for the last half a generation."

Are you F-ing kidding me!?!

Does SPK have a problem with a woman as president?

oh come on "curious"
Although I have not been a Hillary supporter (because of her policy and political decisions) I always defend her when I perceive unfair treatment because of her gender. I am a woman and a feminist and believe me, I have encountered my share of sexism in my life. So, my radar is there.
At the same time, to accuse anyone of being a sexist because they are pointing out her problems as a candidate and character flaws as a human being is outrageous. spk has said nothing that could be interpreted as bigoted towards her. In fact, he goes to great lengths to back up his reasoning.
I believe that both she and her husband have character flaws that turn off a huge segment of the population.
Hillary showed her true colors on 60 minutes when asked to say whether Obama is a Muslim. She said "not as far as I KNOW…" when she knows full well that he is not. Again and again in this primary election, Obama has taken the high road and conducted a first class campaign. Hillary has taken the low road again and again.

LTOR made some good points that made me wonder...

LTOR reiterated my questions and then asked if I was fucking kidding. Good points? No. And no, I'm not sexist. Nice try. Please run Barbara Boxer and I'll run to vote for her. I'll work on her campaign. But if you run a corporatist, I'm going to work against them because they are destroying this country. I went off on Clinton because I'm astounded by her RACIST, yes racist, negative campaigning that so far has gotten her a net gain of 4 - 12 delegates. I simply asked if it was worth it. Further, I wonder what type of JUDGEMENT it shows to go on a scorched earth campaign when you only get 4 -12 extra delegates. Now I am curious what she would do if the phone rang at 3am, would she just order up the nukes?

El Anon, I never discounted Clinton's experience as a lawyer. She was a very good CORPORATE lawyer. Obama is also a lawyer, and a Professor of CONSTITUTIONAL law. SInce the only thing the oath of the Presidency mentions as a job for the President is to support and defend the Constitution, Obama wins in the lawyer category. I also didn't compare Clinton to Laura Bush, I merely pointed out that they have the exact same experience with regard to the Presidency. Namely they were both first ladies. So by Hillary's retarded logic, Laura has more of the "experience" than Obama. As to how it will effect my life. All our lives would be much different if Al Gore were in the White House. The towers would still be standing, there would be no wars, we wouldn't have spent 1 trillion dollars on imperialism, the economy would likely be in better shape, etc., etc. Perhaps you are insulated enough not to care about such trivialities but most of us are not.

O.K., spk,

I am with you vis a vis Hillary. But I ask you again to address my point. No matter what happens between now and the convention, even with Florida and Michigan do-overs, neither candidate is going to win sufficient pledged delegates to secure the nomination. Therefore, this thing IS going to be decided by the super-delegates.

Now the main point is, there does not exist any set of rules or guidance or regulations to determine how the super-delegates are supposed to exercise their authority. Everyone is arguing about it, but no rules evidently exist. So Hillary can say, "I won the big states. I won Ohio. No one can beat John McCain without the big states."

And unless there is an effective counter to that argument, she may just still steal this thing.

SPK, I stand by my comment.

A) Even bringing up a candidate’s choice of attire is silly (at best) but using it as some justification for the obvious disgust you feel is desperate, cheap and (I agree with Curious) can easily come across as sexist. If Obama showed up wearing a red tie on one of these evenings, would you even notice (much less take such a juvenile, swipe??) Or what if I showed you a photo of Michelle Obama in a red suit on a primary night - would you question her “loyalty” to the Democratic Party or her husband’s judgment in not getting her to rethink her choice of clothing?!?! Can’t you just admit that maybe you were a bit hasty and that, in this case, a red suit is just a red suit?

B) Your swipe about her efforts at healthcare reform is the probably most offensive of all because if you recall, it was the INSURANCE COMPANIES who came out and ate her alive. THEY torpedoed what could have been a very workable plan. She wrote a package that even her Republican detractors said was damn near brilliant. In this case, one man’s / woman’s First Lady was another’s vision and hope of the future. There was so much more “there” there than just decorating rooms, trimming Christmas trees, wearing the right clothes and “Just Saying No”. You know that as well as I do, and to try to make a false argument otherwise is just…well…cheap and sleazy.

C) I could go on and on about Hilary Clinton’s brilliance and achievements (you know, all the public service that she has been involved with both at a local level when she was a young teen, to the national level that she was involved in even prior to her husband’s Presidency) I have already pointed out how some could look at her years at Walmart and come away thinking that they weren’t as dastardly and evil and “corporatist” as you always chomping at the bit to point out. She was well on her way to being a star in the political spotlight (just ask those in Texas who remember her hard work all those years ago prior to her marriage) - well before she stepped foot in the White House. But sadly, to some (especially those who apparently think their candidate walks on water), talk of her record has and probably will always fall on deaf (and biased) ears.

D) I understand where much of the criticism comes from with regard to Hilary – she is a complicated, highly driven, and at times politically inconsistent candidate. I wish she was as "perfect" as your candidate seems to appear, but unfortunately, she's not. But with all due respect, SPK, your comments have often crossed the line over to the absurd, infuriating and baseless. Your hatred of her even allowed you to provide a link that was biased and based on flawed (“retarted”?) logic. When will you admit that taking cheap and sleazy shots at her is no better than what you are accusing her campaign staff of. And when will you realize that such vitriol and hysteria will only play into the hands of the Republicans come November if she does in fact garner the nomination. A divided and hysterical Democratic party is exactly what the Republicans are hoping for!

LTOR
You're biased and sexist, admit this and you will see where you skew information to be right.
For example, a photo was released last week featuring Obama in traditional African garb. This fact shoots down your talking point (A). The release of this photo was an attempt to push the bigot button. Billary clearly has hired the traitor Karl Rove. Accuse your opponent of what you are actually doing. I am surprised you are falling for it. Thought you were smarter.

spk- I still don't get it, or you.
I'm asking about YOUR life.
You answer as if you live across the street from the former twin towers, as if you or loved ones fight the wars, and I have no idea what the previous or future Clinton presidency has on your personal finances.
You actually sound like someone who doesn't have much of a life except taking pot-shots at someone who actually has a large life and may make a large, hopefully enlightened difference in the world.
What are YOU insulating yourself from?

El Anonimo,
You bring fiber to this otherwise dismal blog ...

Zippy-
I think you and I could make some beeyootifull musick together!!

LOTR,

I'm just giving as good as we've been getting. Thanks for pointing out how "cheap and sleazy" Hillary's tactics have become in her quest to overturn the will of the majority of the voters so far.

David - Bottom line, whoever has the majority of the voters after Puerto Rico is the nominee. One caveat, Florida and Michigan either have to do a re-vote or not count. That's the only fair way. The super delegates won't go against the vote.

By the way, Obama only needs 42% of the remaining delegates to lock it up entirely. Clinton voters need to ask themselves this question. "If Hillary Clinton had won 12 states in a row, was more than 120 delegates ahead and had the popular vote, do you really believe Barack Obama would have stayed in the race?"

spk,

So..... you are saying the superdelegates will inevitably vote to support the candidate with the greatest number of pledged delegates?? And the reason they will do so is because that is what is fair??

Give me a break..... Obviously Hillary and her supporters have an entirely different idea of what is "fair."

The fact is, there are no rules regarding how the superdelegates must act. Face it, they are up for grabs.

The only remaining question is, who can grab them with the most appealing arguments. Just asserting that something or other is fair is not going to cut it.

El Al,

I guess I don't really understand your question. If the economy of the US fails, it will adversely effect me and my family and friends. High gas prices effect me, my family and friends. Higher costs of living hurt me, my family and friends. If my country wastes nearly $3 trillion(new stats from a study out today) on mindless wars, it effects me, my family and my friends. When an out of control administration kills upwards of 1 million people, many women and children in a foreign country it effects me, my family and my friends.

Your line of questioning seems to imply that because I care deeply about these things on a personal level, that my life must be empty. It seems as though you are of the opinion that these national and global issues don't really effect us on the Ojai street level and that anyone who worries about such things has nothing better to do. You'll have to pardon me for saying this, but that is a sadly stereotypical, self-absorbed position often attributed to many in the baby boom generation.

I assure you El Al, I am very lucky to have wonderful life. The difference is, I know just how very lucky I am and I consider it my duty to work against the injustices I see. I can't help it.

David,

Not just because it's fair. I wouldn't expect that of them. They'll go with the majority vote holder because it would be suicide for them not to. I don't think the DNC want's to see the party go the way of the Whigs. I'm not sure the same can be said of the DLC and the Clinton's. This is really ugly, so look away if you love Hillary, but I think she's trying to torpedo the party's chances this time around. They can do the math, they know she cannot win. By staying in the race to the bitter end she is deliberately weakening the party and draining resources. Why would they want to do something like that?

If Barack gets the nomination he's likely to win in November. If he wins with the "movement" behind him, he'll be in for eight years. I think Clinton and the DLC have done the calculations and they are willing to hand this one to McCrashedfiveplanes because they know he's old and they think they can come back and beat him in 2012. There's really no other rational explanation for her strategy. The only trouble is, I'm not sure there'll be a country to campaign in if the Clinton's get their way.

SPK, thanks for taking the time to share your belief system and knowledge regarding the current political chicanery.

The typical homo sapien finds it difficult to experience compassion for anything other than 140 or so humans closest to their own heart. This appears to be a function of brain size. As students, we learn that function follows structure. I may be cynical but I find it thaumaturgic the number of people I meet who transcend the typical bipedal primate's limited ability to experience empathy. I'd love to see several different brain scans of El A. My suspicion is we'd find under developed temporal lobes among other neurophysiological challenges - eg. under used white matter. In fact, I applaud El A. for making the most of what he's got. Not many of his generation are able to make themselves so at home at a nonlocal residence such as the Ojaipost - making him somewhat [El] Anomalous.

spk-
you start to sound like a real person and then you come up with "I'm not sure there'll be a country to campaign in if the Clinton's get their way".
I beg of you to stop with the fear-mongering.
It only continues to reinforce my impression of you as a paranoid extremist.
I suspect you're better than that.
Have you read "Boomsday" by Christopher Buckley?

And #25 Cimi- I have seen scans of some of the lower parts of your body.
VERY shrunken.
But there is hope.
Anyone who knows "thaumaturgic", can restore turgidity.

As Steely Dan says:
"Any World That I'm Welcome Is Better Than The One I Come From"

#26- of course that was the anonymous El A,
up earlier than usual to save the world

spk- you got me thinkin this AM
(i'm up earlier than usual to edit a home music video and i think and work most clearly during these dark quiet hours)
What is the essential difference between you and me?
Was it you who posted something or linked to something about the possible/imminent fascist takeover in America?
Well my parents were in Europe during the Nazi takeover of Germany (oh yes I can hear those who are mumbling "can't El A stop with this Jewish nonsense").
So perhaps my babyboomish genetic psychology simply doesn't allow me to ponder that another fascist takeover could happen in the country in which I happen to live.
(Oh yes and now I assume it's time for Millenium to chime in with his latest "economic analysis"- something like the Federal Reserve in collusion with all the princes of Europe have now decided to EAT all the money in the world.)

By the way where's D'vorah?
Did her computer crash?

And where has Dennis Leary been these last months?
Did he lose his library card?

And whatever happened to Dana and Alyeska?
Didn't they return to Ojai?

Hi there, Fashion Police: I may be biased (aren't we all, really, at the end of the day?). But sexist? Huh? I guess I don't get what you are implying.

Is your position that being a Clinton supporter I would have applauded the release of the Obama photos?!?! And that now I have just revealed myself as a hypocrite by denouncing SPK's attack on Hilary's wardrobe? (???)

As a person who has been involved in numerous cross-cultural activities around the globe, I found the release of the photos to be a disgraceful tactic and a sad state of affairs that I live in a country where such photos would be seen as anything more than what they were. BUT I didn't automatically assume that Hilary's camp was behind it. Sounds much more like what the other side would do (and gladly let Hilary take the blame.) I may be wrong, but I try not to make it a habit to go around accusing people (especially WITHIN MY OWN PARTY) until I have proof of their guilt. Something I think many Hilary-bashers would be wise (in the grand scheme of things) to think about. That's all.

SPK, I don't condone cheap and sleazy tactics - period. Not Hilary's, and not yours. I haven't had much proof of what Hilary is accused of doing. I had proof of yours in writing, so I called you on it (just as you once or twice understandably did with me).

P.S. I know plenty of non-self-absorbed babyboomers (myself included - if only by one year) who care greatly about the global community in which we live. Many of us might even have been filled with more than our share of the angry, resentful, unbridled-fly-off-the-handle passionate fervor that some of you "young turks" are clearly exhibiting in this race. And God bless you all for this!!! Many of us "old-timers" perhaps just prefer to think more pragmatically, strategically and long-term than we were wont to do in the past.

"...I think she's trying to torpedo the party's chances this time around...I think Clinton and the DLC have done the calculations and they are willing to hand this one to McCrashedfiveplanes because they know he's old and they think they can come back and beat him in 2012."

Wow...

Well SPK, I've gotta hand it to you - you are extremely creative and obviously have a fully developed sense of imagination. :)

This is just what the Republicans want, to have us eat our own just as we have done before so that they can win yet another election.

Obama aid who calls Clinton "monster" quits:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23519392/

I read Boomsday. It was fairly funny. His writing is tight, but a little too on the nose. It lacked heart. The subject would have been better covered by someone who wasn't a baby boomer, though younger people who aren't William F. Buckley's son find it difficult to get published by the big publishers. A tinge of his father's right-wing philosophy permeated the whole thing too.

spk, when/where can we critique your published work(s)????

during Bill's reign, there were some interesting rumors floating the Belt Way concerning Billary's affintiy for bush... wonder when this story will break...

A friend of mine wrote, "I am thinking of voting for Chelsea Clinton, after all she does have six years of experience in the White House."

I laughed out loud.

Whoever the dem's candidate is, I just hope we are all willing to rally around to ensure a victory for the party in November.

No published works, just movies. Anon Comment #26 asked if I'd read Boomsday, so I responded.