David Axelrove appeared on Fox News Sunday this morning in a soothing lavender shirt to launch what can only be described as an attempt to mend fences with any Clinton supporters who may have hurt feelings about the way things have turned out. I guess he figures he’s going to need our support in the fall, so he’ll probably be on as many talk shows as possible this week to speak tenderly of Hillary. Lucky us. At one point in the show, Chris Wallace asked him to respond to Hillary’s gaffe about Obama having difficulty capturing the votes of “working, hard-working Americans, white Americans”. Summoning up his standard patronizing, gentle voice, he suggested that Hillary simply chose the wrong words and that he didn’t believe she meant to suggest that people of other races aren’t hard-working. Isn’t he precious? He thinks Hillary supporters will suddenly see him as a calm, rational voice of reason; a good guy with a good heart who really means well and, gee, only wants what’s best for the country. Why can’t we all just get along?

I’ve got news for you, Dave, that’s not a fence; it’s a giant stone and concrete wall that you managed to build and a few non-confrontational appearances replete with a kind smile and a few insincere compliments for Hillary will do nothing to chip away at it. Sorry, but Hillary supporters aren’t likely to buy into your bullshit act. We know that a mere 10 days ago you and Team Unity would have salivated over a quote like that and jumped on yet another golden opportunity to pull the glorious race card that will ultimately win your candidate the nomination. Congratulations.

What the Obama campaign and so many of his supporters fail to realize is that the accusations of racism that were tossed around like tin cans during a tornado will not be easily forgiven or forgotten by Hillary supporters. Crying racism may be the great trump card of members of the far-left wing of the party when they run out of logical arguments, but the average human being (read: swing voter) is completely turned off by false charges of racism – whether they’re made in a social setting, in the workplace or in a presidential election. Labeling someone a racist because they do not use politically eloquent words when making a statement diminishes the experiences of those who have truly suffered racism by minimizing the gravity of the offense. It is the equivalent of a false claim of sexual harassment or rape in that it makes people skeptical of those who have legitimate claims. Think about that the next time you decide to play that card because you don’t agree with someone’s point of view and you’re just not well-informed or clever enough to respond to it.

Posted by Dominique in General at 11:54 PM PDT

2 Comments | Gimme some more »

Arianna Huffington has offered a wonderful smackdown on the media’s golden boy John McCain. She’s accusing him, of all things, of being a huge liar who misrepresents his positions on just about every issue he’s confronted with.

It’s time to now ask: Why has the “left-wing media” offered such a stunning pass on this man’s shortcomings?

Posted by Mike Matthews in Political Landscape at 12:11 PM PDT

20 Comments | Gimme some more »

When’s the last time Rep. Mike Castle set forth new ideas for leadership in his representation of Delaware in its sole seat to the US House of Representatives? For that matter, when have Joe Biden or Tom Carper done the same? Recent memory tells me they haven’t. They certainly haven’t walked the walk and they can barely talk the talk.

But US Congressional candidate Karen Hartley-Nagle is talking and walking a lot these days. And what she has to say makes a helluva lot of sense. She’s been up and and down the state these past few weeks seeking support from individuals in all three counties. She’s a filed candidate looking forward to a robust primary season with her two Democratic opponents. She pulled a wonderful move by hiring Mat Marshall as her communications director and the fruits of his labor are already showing themselves. Several weeks ago Karen sent out her first position paper on energy. As well as naming the problems facing the country today, it also offered ACTUAL, DO-ABLE solutions to those problems. When’s the last time Mike Castle posited such ideas? Sure, stem cells, but that shit couldn’t get past the right-wing evangeliturd president currently squatting on public property.

Relying on a plan that seeks the elimination on the reliance of fossil fuels as well as using no nuclear power (Karen rightly says: “What do you do with the waste?”), Hartley-Nagle’s plan is sensible states “our energy future must be centered around:”

• wind, both onshore and offshore
• solar, both “rooftop” units and full-scale utility plants
• energy storage technology to address the intermittent nature of the two aforementioned sources
• near-total elimination of fossil fuel usage
• smart grid technologies and distributed generation
• wider use of electricity and hydrogen for vehicle fuel
• other renewable sources, like tide and geothermal power
• resource conservation through utilization of waste (“zero waste”)
• wider use of mass transit, including electric trains
• designing more energy-efficient communities by making them more pedestrian-friendly and providing easier access to transit.

Sure, I sound like I’m fawning here, but I’ve known Karen for nearly two years and recognize she’s whip-smart, passionate, and eager to serve the citizens of Delaware. She’s the best person the Democrats could put up against Mike Castle. I can’t cloud the fact that should Karen win the primary that the general will be the fight of a lifetime. I’ve even told her I think it’s impossible for her to beat an entrenched incumbent that people seem to like for some strange reason.

But she will fight. If anyone wins, it will be the people of Delaware for having heard Karen’s passionate ideas. I look forward to her second position paper.

Posted by Mike Matthews in First State Filth at 10:40 PM PDT

31 Comments | Gimme some more »

I’ve been to a few of these brick-oven pizza events in Dover and they’re hella fun! On May 18, Jason from Delaware Liberal is hosting a fundraiser for Jack Markell’s gubernatorial war chest. Though I will be far away and unable to attend, you should definitely go. Sure, it’s $50 per person, but you get TONS of food, hayrides, hot gossip from some of the coolest political folk in the state and you get to know your money is going to a great guy like Jack Markell. Details below. Be there or be a Republican:

Posted by Mike Matthews in First State Filth at 9:55 PM PDT

Talk dirty to me »

I say to you today, my friends, so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.

- MLK, Jr., August 28, 1963

Tonight Barack Obama won the North Carolina primary by a huge margin. I really hope Hillary decides to drop out of the race. It is so painfully clear that there is no way for her to win regardless of what happens going forward. The exclusion of Michigan and Florida leaves Barack Obama with an insurmountable delegate and popular vote lead. Even if she managed to somehow convince superdelegates to throw their support behind her because of her strength as a candidate, she’d be accused of having “stolen” the election.

The Democratic National Convention will take place on the 45th anniversary of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s beautiful “I Have a Dream” speech. During the convention, Barack Obama will be named the nominee to represent the Democratic Party in the general election. Regardless of which candidate you support, which party you belong to, or what happens in the general election, there’s something very fitting about that.

Posted by Dominique in General at 11:01 PM PDT

10 Comments | Gimme some more »

According to the WSJ and NPR, this morning the FBI raided the offices of Special Counsel Scott J. Bloch who oversees protection of federal whistleblowers. The agents seized computers and shut down email service as part of an obstruction of justice probe.

Oddly enough, Bloch was looking at Karl Rove’s involvement in using the federal government to further political prospects of Republicans up for election. He also started the April 2007 investigation into Rove’s missing emails and the charges that the White House was politicizing appointments.

This could get very interesting…

Posted by Dominique in General at 3:47 PM PDT

1 Comment | Gimme some more »

Yesterday Laura Bush made a rare appearance in the White House press room to slam the Myanmar government and military for their miserable handling of the aftermath of a tragic cyclone that has taken an estimated 15,000 lives. Among other things, Mrs. Bush accused the government of having “blood on their hands” and being “very inept”. And she should know.

January 20, 2009, will be a great day for our country and the world. As happy as I am to see George W. Bush leave office and his reign of mayhem come, mercifully, to an end, I am equally happy to be rid of his dear, sweet wife.

For eight years I have listened to the media fawn over that woman. Phrases like “everybody loves Laura Bush” and “Laura Bush’s approval numbers are very high” and “popular First Lady Laura Bush” make me fume. Who loves her? Why are her approval numbers high? Why is she popular? Who are these people that are being surveyed?!?!

I would be interested to see the gender breakdown of each survey taken on Laura Bush. I can’t imagine that her approval numbers among women is as high as it is among men. Ripped from a scene of Leave It to Beaver, she is weak, vapid, and meek. If I close my eyes, I can see her vacuuming the White House carpets in her pumps, pearls and form-fitting wool dress; virtually every man’s dream.

Laura Bush has accomplished next to nothing of substance in her life and her alleged popularity has set the women’s movement back 40 years. She appears to hold no opinion of her own; she’s perfectly happy to nod – eyes firmly focused in headlights – and agree with whatever her husband says. I doubt she’s had an original thought in years. How could anyone – especially any woman – respect that? Her voice is as soft and quavering as her spine and when she speaks in that slow, deliberate manner, I find myself motioning for her to speed it up, cut to the chase – SPIT IT OUT! – not because I’m ever even remotely interested in what she has to say, but because I want her to finish. I just want it to be over. 259 days and counting.

Posted by Dominique in General at 7:33 AM PDT

20 Comments | Gimme some more »

Hot shit. Oh my!

Posted by Mike Matthews in First State Filth at 9:52 PM PDT

38 Comments | Gimme some more »

Wow…got some crazy tips from multiple sources. Apparently, the Delaware GOP is so hard-up for cash that they’ve resorted to brown bag lunches. Sources tell me that yesterday’s lunch in Dewey was a bag lunch consisting of a ham and cheese sandwich, a chocolate chip cookie, and a bottle of water.

I should call Precious Priscilla Rakestraw and ask her if this lovely lunch was catered or if some toothless hick from Sussex slaughtered his own pig for the meat.

I had to ask my source if he had to eat the thing and he said he had to because he was so damn hungry. With gas prices being so high, he said he had no choice.

Posted by Mike Matthews in First State Filth at 9:49 PM PDT

1 Comment | Gimme some more »

When Allan Loudell interviewed GOP Senate candidate Christine O’Donnell last week, he asked her a question about left-leaning bloggers infatuated with her royal conservative beauty-highness. The lovely Lady O’Donnell sends those bloggers a shout-out, but we know she really means she loves Mike Matthews and wants to finally accept his invitation for some prime rib at Walter’s on Union…and soon!!

So turned on was I that I mashed up these two photos. One of the beauty and the other of the hideous beast.

Posted by Mike Matthews in First State Filth at 6:11 PM PDT

14 Comments | Gimme some more »

Upon hearing of my intention to vote for McCain if Obama is the nominee, several people have reminded me of the perils of voting for a republican in terms of Supreme Court appointments. I have a somewhat unorthodox opinion about the issue: I’m willing to take that chance.

Have you ever heard of Sarah Weddington? She is a hero of mine. Sarah Weddington successfully argued Roe vs. Wade before the Supreme Court in 1972. While that may not seem like all that big a deal, it’s important to note that she was only 26 years old. Pretty impressive, right? Well, what if I told you that prior to Roe vs. Wade, Sarah Weddington had never argued a contested case? Let that sink in for a minute. It turns out that back in the late 60’s and early 70’s law firms weren’t in the habit of assigning “real” cases to female attorneys because they didn’t expect them to stick around for long. The logic behind the discrimination was that women would leave their jobs to get married and have children. So, despite graduating from the University of Texas School of Law at the top of her class in 1967, Ms. Weddington had never handled anything beyond wills and divorces prior to Roe vs. Wade. To have accomplished something as monumental winning a landmark Supreme Court case at the tender age of 26 with no real courtroom experience is, well, goosebump-worthy.

Except for a brief period during my freshman year at Padua when I bought into the butchered baby stories, I have always been pro-choice. I have donated money to Planned Parenthood and marched on Washington for reproductive rights several times. I genuinely care about women’s rights, reproductive and otherwise. I understand and respect that women have had to scratch and claw their way to almost being treated as equals in a country that boasts its superiority in terms of, among other things, personal freedom. I stand in awe of the fiercely strong women who fought and struggled so that I can walk through the doors that they opened for me. Sometimes I wonder if the women of Generation Y fully understand that. I wonder if they really appreciate what the generations of women before us endured for the freedoms we enjoy today. That may be why I have virtually stopped caring about the possibility of Roe vs. Wade being overturned.

This election season has taken a toll on all of us. For me, the most disheartening aspect of it has been the venomous personal attacks that have been launched against Hillary Clinton and Geraldine Ferraro. It’s difficult enough to stomach when it’s coming from men, but hearing young women speak so horribly about these two trailblazers is what offends me the most. It’s one thing to disagree with policy, but to attack them personally is quite another. Every time I hear a woman minimize Hillary Clinton’s accomplishments by claiming that she somehow owes everything she has accomplished to her husband, I cringe. When I think about the horrible things that many women said about Geraldine Ferraro, I feel physically ill. Maybe if the next generation of women had to fight for some of their rights, they’d stop taking them for granted and start appreciating them a little bit more; maybe they’d start showing a little bit of respect for the sacrifices that were made on their behalf.

That said, it is important to note that a majority of Supreme Court justices appointed by republicans does not necessarily guarantee that Roe vs. Wade will be overturned. Here’s an interesting little tidbit – Roe vs. Wade was a 7-2 decision. Of the seven justices in the majority, only two were appointed by democrats. Of the two dissenting justices, only one was appointed by a republican.

PS – This month HBO will be running Iron Jawed Angels - available On Demand from May 12–June 8. It’s a riveting movie about the suffragists who fought for passage of the 19th Amendment. Please don’t miss it and, if possible, watch it with your wife/girlfriend, daughter, sister, mother, grandmother, and/or aunt.

Posted by Dominique in General at 11:04 PM PDT

30 Comments | Gimme some more »

Cassandra over at Delaware Liberal mentioned something about the State GOP and sockpuppets, and I had a brain-flash.

Instead of known, identifiable State Legislators spending our tax money and/or funding their retirements in private, smoke-filled back rooms, and not letting us know what they’re doing, why don’t we have anonymous legislators who must conduct all State business on the internet for all to see? That way, all the ego is removed, and we get to see how our tax money is being spent and how the state is managed. And this is great for the Legislators. They don’t have to face personal criticism because we don’t know who they are. And its great for the tax payers because the lobbyists of special interests don’t know who to bribe.

Brilliant.

Posted by Intercourse in General at 9:35 AM PDT

4 Comments | Gimme some more »

Hillary’s at it again. This sneaky “sample ballot” that’s reportedly being handed out in early polling places in North Carolina has her fingerprints all over it. She’s clearly trying to frame Barack. It’s sickening to think that anyone would stoop to this level, but what else can we expect from an underhanded liar like Hellary/Billary/HillBillary? She’ll do ANYTHING to win.

Posted by Dominique in General at 9:09 PM PDT

7 Comments | Gimme some more »

Hillary Clinton went head to head with the Democrats’ arch-nemesis Bill O’Reilly last night and had her way with him (watch it here and here). She was comfortable, confident, and well-informed. She was fiercely strong, but good-natured and charming. There wasn’t an ounce of hesitation on any issue. She proved, once again, that she is the most stalwart, fearless candidate in the field. Unlike the stammering, hesitation, uuuhhhh-ing and uuuummm-ing we’ve come to expect from Obama, her answers were crisp and clear. I defy even the most ardent Obama supporters to find reasons to criticize her performance. In fact, after the initial interview (part two will air tonight), Bill interviewed two Obama supporters who begrudgingly admitted that it was a “remarkable” performance. One of them even had to drag out the tired old “she voted for the war” line in an attempt to divert attention away from her superior ability to confront the issues head on. It really surprises me, btw, that they still cling to “he’s got better judgment” as being the core reason for supporting him in light of all of the examples of his poor judgment that have come to the forefront of late. But I digress…

By every measure, Hillary Clinton is behind in the race with virtually no chance to win the nomination. Yet, after months of harsh criticism from both the media and her own party, personal betrayals and key defections, she marches on. With the odds stacked against her, she remains completely energized and full of vigor. At 60 years of age, she is proving that she has super-human strength and determination; qualities that anyone would want in a president. She is an inspiration. Obama, on the other hand, after just a few weeks of tepid criticism from the media with which he had enjoyed a months-long love-in, looks completely beaten down and exhausted. He’s 46 years old and in peak physical condition, but he looks like he could use a three-day nap. Yeah, he’s ready for the rigorous job of leader of the free world.

Barring some Red Bull miracle that causes voters in the remaining primary states to wake up from their Sominex haze, Obama will win the nomination. Thinking about it leaves me at the intersection of Queasy and Enraged, desperately seeking directions back to my home on Sanity Lane, but every day I grow a little closer to accepting it. Everything happens for a reason and maybe some greater good will come of turning yet another election into an American Idol-style, media-driven popularity contest with more emphasis on appearance and fluff than on substance. Maybe electing a black president will allow our country to finally turn the corner and begin to improve race relations. Then, and only then, will it have been worth choosing nice over strong, pretty over competent, meek over determined and aloof over focused.

Posted by Dominique in General at 8:33 AM PDT

61 Comments | Gimme some more »