QCON: TruthOut

Quick Comment On the News or Question Context:

The following pieces deserve a more careful read, but for me, not yet.[*] TruthOut does a filtering of sorts, and I notice rather heavy reliance on the NY Times. Not that that is a bad thing, just not necessarily a liberal thing. The left, right and the middle can characterize a source as from a different perspective, but that should be the mark of good journalism. Again, not that they have hit the right mark, from our own perspectives.

While Super Delegates are an example of a problem that voters wish they could fix without being a part of the process, so are the choices of primary, or caucus, and financing and electoral college procedures. These are all complicated by the nature of our goverment, its three branches, a bi-cameral legislature, and the individual composition of state governments and their rights in relation to the federal government. And have I thrown in partisanship? This is not a civics lesson, but it would be nice if it were in schools.

For me this is the first time in 24 years I have not come out of my precinct caucus a delegate for some candidate. This year it was by design or rather lack of design. I was for Edwards. I ran the caucus as a PCO and was a decimal point or voter or two shy of ending up an uncommitted delegate. This is more than I intended to say today, but I guess it ties in. Because even if civics were in schools, the media and the voters would still have a very big job to understand what mechanisms are operating in each state. Did I mention partisanship? Not to mention the constitution? I won't go there, but too many feel that there is a conspiracy, and there is, only if you are not part of it.

What is represented in the following articles may very well be best efforts to represent reliable pictures, but that is not to say that other perspectives and sources do so well. [*] While some of the tactics candidates use are not appreciated by many, they are apparently working on some. And it must be remembered that we filter as well or poorly as the media or format we use.

I would like to close this comment with the feeling that it is hard to unite when the leader is still unknown, but it is better than being party to having a leader who will unite without knowing who the enemy is. If there is any obtuseness in this, maybe it is a riddle to solve.

In Two Battlegrounds, Voters Say, Not Yet
By Patrick Healy
The New York Times

Ballot Shortages Plague Ohio Election Amid Unusually Heavy Primary Turnout By Ian Urbina
The New York Times
A Clean, Fair Fight
The New York Times | Editorial

McCain Clinches GOP Presidential Nomination By Michael D. Shear and Peter Slevin
The Washington Post

[Update: Just as I put the finishing links on this post, breaking news on Thom Hartmann Show, about the Texas crossovers that Rush Limbaugh encouraged. (Guest David Sirota) Where in the primary, voters got their ballots, and if they were Republican and wanted to vote for Hillary, found that there were no Rebulicans on their ballot. Hmm. Who needs a civics lesson? Well, of course it seems wrong, but parties should be able to decide their candidate not a talk show host who wants a circus. Republicans were disenfranchised, by trying to vote for Hillary while not intending to support her in the general election. They could not vote for Hillary, and hope to influence their own party on local elections too. This "monkey business" is why the parties and the process is so complicated. It is further complicated by the electoral college process not to mention the winner take all nature of that delivery system. Independents and third parties are so hard to fit into this picture without major changes that themselves are so hard to bring about, but I really don't want to go there.(the link not the idea). Oh and that ploy by Rush Limbaugh may have hurt some local candidates and I won't hurt our heads by figuring that out, but it is a way to sort out some math.]

[*] I have yet to fully digest the four links above, but apparently the press have nibbled on some ribs. (Links, sausage, democracy: get it?) But I did scarf this down and indeed have had my own beach party.

dem Brains

Bush's Brain has left the building...
Well not yet, but make sure he does not leave the country.

Think Progress
U.S. Attorney Iglesias filed complaint in April. TP
Political briefings disclosed the same month. WaPo
Mother Jones / Waxman follow up. MJ
Associated Content reports AC

THIS MONTH
McClatchy/Truth to Power Bush V. Hatch ACT!
Thanks to clipmarks CM
Rove departure GovExec
Thanks ToDay White Collar Crime Prof WCCPB
WaPo Follow Up

OTHER FRONTS
Iraq - Iran Not Pressed "informed speculation - useful for readers to know." (control F, pg.2 pressed ) NYT
More Informed Sources from the front NYT

CONNECTING THE DOTS
"who sent you there..." ?
"the George Bush empire". DigitalJournal DJ

Who got us here? (I ask)
"you forget", so says Former Republican Chair Ken Mehlman DJ
[Note the taken liberty with words.]

[Post continues, wanted to post it before I lost it.]
connecting the dots . . .
Speaking of New Fronts: all from DJ
Rove's (Evil) Twin.
(Note: Evil and Twin are redundant.)
"Rove's Good Twin" would be oxymoronic or is it Bush?
Old Front
New Front

Good News/Bad News - No Front WaPo

More links:
href="http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/search?q=%22open+source%22">Open Source
Earliest Dots
ReP Brains
Bi-Cameral Brain

[Now who's gone too far? 10:18 closing post]
[10:27 AM- Just a hint... of remorse at a poor pun imbedded above.]

{11:30 This pause was to dig deeper and update some archives: In all this cutting and posting, my search was for a meme or talking point or some counter to Rove, the irony is that I may have found it in my own search under "ironic". Something to get the choir on the same page. Note the tent shape and who may not be in it, but the people are the base not just dots.]

Conn Grats!!

No Bracketed Excla(y)mations! But...
NO LABELS (all caps) BREAKING NEWS!

Seriously, there will be time enough to (fill in the blank) later.

But there is news on the Divided Government Front,
as well as the DFA,
or now AFA conn trast.
Bud ump bump.

Speakin of Scale or CAPS n' FONTS[!]
[reference dig or unM-bed of touchstone in today's NPR]
We have Try-furnation of the Bi-Cameral,
or N(for)nation of the Bifurcation.  

Stop that!

But first a comment (of course) on the blame game of post or preemptive briefings and speculations and scepticism of what will be the results of our efforts, change or stimulus... It will be an ongoing effort, of which I have not looked at what the quantity or quality, let alone timing of the current package entails in comparison to what is needed but it is just the begining. In other words this effort such as it is, will need much more, regardless. (aspects: infrastructure and timing)

Today's Press Briefing is probably addressing the nuances of this right now, but it would be scary if it would or could all be put on the table at once. Scary in terms of international finance and relations and domestic security, all of which much is being handled in my opinion, more professionally.(not to mention negotiating in a bi-cameral way) [Hint: Biden interview/rush MSNBC]

Back from my tangent, I pull out two pieces that should get us on the right page, or course.
TO DIGEST!
Jerry Springer: C-Span coverage of speech at the Clinton School of Public Service.
DNC Chair: Governor Tim Kaine (Take our questions)
(embedded here)
To sort:
The Economy
Partisan or Rhetoric
Investigations and Mediums
Inaugural, invocation
(we are one)
MLK and in context

[Bringing this up? WeGotEd at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and more to digest.]

Risky Business

Risking progress?
Update: "the filibuster"
The other guy?
If Democrats can manage any improvements on this plan, go for it. But not at the risk of doing nothing. Even breaking it up for the sake of getting what should not be bargaining chips*, for the sake of "the debt" or sticking to principles or campaign promises, may have adverse impacts to the econonomy, and with it being even more of an up hill, problematic legislature, getting more done may not be on the table. Some have argued for a line item veto...for the president. Not to revive that arguement, but imagine[**] the impact on the political calculus if congress had a line item veto after all the work of crafting legislation, be it this plan or another.

*trading doing the right thing for allowing the wrong thing
[post-post-google tangent hmmm?]
[** post post realization that this sentence is a paradox of sorts; Congress is bi-cameral and does have line item vetos, it just has to go back to the other house and branch. I guess my point rests on one body having a line item veto or final say on another branch's work.]