Wednesday Open Thread

Filed in National by on June 9, 2010

Welcome to Wednesday. It’s a post Super Tuesday primary day so there’s lots of election results to discuss. Were there any big surprises? I’d have to say my biggest surprise of the night was the win of Alvin Greene in the Democratic primary for South Carolina Senate. He had no money or campaign website and defeated Vic Rawl.

I was a little bit sad to learn that crazy chicken lady Sue Lowden won’t be the GOP nominee for NV-Sen. She was very entertaining. Let’s start talking about the other crazy lady from the NV-Sen race, Sharron Angle. She has the support of the Tea Party and the Club for Growth. She’s also a nutter.

The peculiar ideology of Sharron Angle, the Republican nominee challenging Sen. Harry Reid in Nevada, is perhaps no better illustrated than by her embrace of the patriot group Oath Keepers, whose membership of uniformed soldiers and police take an oath to refuse orders they see as unconstitutional — including enforcement of gun laws, violations of states’ sovereignty, and “any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.”

“We support what the organization stands for,” said Angle’s husband, Ted, told TPMDC in a phone interview Monday. “Sharron does.”

Members of Oath Keepers — whose motto is “Not on our watch!” — take a 10-item oath affirming that they will not, for example, force citizens into detention camps or invade a state “that asserts its sovereignty and declares the national government to be in violation of the compact by which that state entered the Union.”

Why won’t someone think of the children?

Proving that some of the opposition to repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) is rooted in homophobia rather than legitimate concerns about military readiness or unit cohesion, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton (D-MO) told reporters yesterday that the military should keep the policy intact “in part to avoid parents having to talk to their children about homosexuality”:

According to the Associated Press, Skelton told reporters that repeal of the policy could put families in a difficult position because it could prompt children to ask about homosexuality.

“What do mommies and daddies say to their 7-year-old child?” he asked.

Skelton, one of the 26 Democrats who opposed repeal in the House, added that his “biggest concern are the families.”

Skelton also said yesterday that he will continue opposing repeal, even though his constituents don’t care about gays openly serving in the military. “I was everywhere in my district, everywhere. It just wasn’t raised,” Skelton said. “There are other things on people’s minds, like jobs and the economy.”

Ladies and gentlemen, Ike Skelton, dinosaur.

Tags:

About the Author ()

Opinionated chemist, troublemaker, blogger on national and Delaware politics.

Comments (39)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. What do you all think of this. California Prop 14:

    California voters on Tuesday approved Proposition 14, which replaces traditional partisan primaries in state and Congressional races. Starting in 2011, candidates for an office would be on a single ballot, regardless of political affiliation, and the top two vote-getters (even if from the same party) would advance to the general election. In recent years, a similar “top two” primary system was adopted in Washington State.

  2. RSmitty says:

    UI…would that be a runoff election for the general, then?

    Honestly, I am completely for that method in towns, cities, etc. I know some towns claim to be non-partisan elections, but when they campaign as Republican or Democratic, well, they can kiss my arse with the so-called non-partisan election.

    My initial reaction was that I like the idea, but not certain that I am totally sold. Gotta think on it.

  3. Yes, Smitty, top 2 finishers regardless of party affiliation go to the general election. Party affiliations aren’t listed on the ballot.

  4. RSmitty says:

    UI –

    That is interesting. I can already hear some screaming how that would be unfair, yadda yadda yadda, and I am thinking that in terms of people considering Republicans being at a disadvantage, but I don’t see that right now.

    Think of this scenario: one side fields four candidates who completely knock the snot out of each other and no one is a clear favorite. The other side has two that are competitive and draw close to even. Basically, neither side has a clear front-runner. All six run on the primary ballot, but with politics the way they are, they cater to those within their own party. The side with two candidates may very well end up with the top-two vote totals and only one side is left for the general runoff.

    This could happen for any party involved, too. It also makes the Primary a hell of a lot more critical than most turnouts represent. For one thing, I think it will cause a whole hell of a lot more pragmatism and to someone like me, that is a great thing.

  5. The intent is to get more moderate candidates, yes.

    To me it seems like they’re trying to solve a different problem – the ungovernability of California with the 2/3 budget requirement in an indirect way. Why not go after the 2/3 rule instead?

  6. RSmitty says:

    It’s only my opinion, but I think the 2/3 rule is to prevent something so radical (not to be taken as ‘partisan’) or so jarring from being implemented that it results in some kind of economic or social disaster, intended or not. The 2/3 majority forces debate and compromise that, I think, is intended to soften any potential harshness and damage a slanted approach may cause. Then again, now that the atmosphere has become so poisonly-partisan on all fronts, reaching a 2/3 majority has become pretty much an elusive target. That’s the funny thing about good intentions, today’s politics likes to kick the shit out of it until it morphs into something completely different (and self-serving).

    I guess what I am saying is, I don’t think 2/3 is as much of a problem as are those who refuse to strive towards it.

  7. nemski says:

    Twitter is very slow today, MSNBC has this report.

    The interesting paragraph is this as Twitter is regarding the shortening of links. [Shortened links take something like http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37595084/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/ and make them like this, http://bit.ly/bEzeAd ]

    But there have been problems with scammers using the shortened links to send those who click on them to phishing sites in order to obtain personal information or to trigger a computer virus.

    The problem isn’t spammers, the problem is idiots clicking on links from people they don’t know.

  8. RSmitty says:

    Damn it, nemski, I clicked on your link! It was digital porn! A bunch of memory and mother boards out of their boxes! Bastard!

  9. nemski says:

    Can I now say all Republicans are idiots? 😉

  10. RSmitty says:

    Serves us right for trusting liberals! 😉 (back at ya’)

  11. MJ says:

    Louisiana has had the “Open Primary” system of voting for years. The primary is on Election Day in November; if no one gets 50%+1 then a run-off is held in December. Mary Landreu won a runoff for her first term.

    It will be years before the system takes hold in CA. The way Prop 14 was written, minor party candidates (Greens, Libertarians, etc.) will have an extremely hard time making the ballot.

    I’m with Smitty on this – not sold on the idea.

  12. MJ says:

    Oh, and I thought Red Skelton died years ago.

  13. anon says:

    I don’t know about bit.ly, but tinyurl.com offers a preview service so you can see the full address you’re being referred to. You don’t see the page itself, but you can at least tell whether you’re being sent to delawareliberal.net or daveburrisissexy.org.

  14. Yes, I’ve always thought the link shortening was the weakness of Twitter, since you don’t know where you’re going.

  15. dv says:

    how does everyone think the rest of the country views delaware?

  16. anon says:

    Through the window of a moving car.

  17. a.price says:

    WIN!

  18. Ishmael says:

    Surprise SC (Dem, Of Course) Senate Candidate Alvin Greene has (Felony Obscenity))charge pending

    TPM ^ | Jun 9,10 | MEG KINNARD
    South Carolina’s surprise Democratic nominee to challenge U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint is facing a pending felony charge. Court records show 32-year-old Alvin Greene was arrested in November and charged with showing obscene Internet photos to a University of South Carolina student. The felony charge carries up to five years in prison. Greene said he had no comment when asked about the charge Wednesday and hung up on a reporter. The unemployed veteran posted bond after his arrest. He has yet to enter a plea or be indicted. Records indicate Greene showed photos to a woman and talked about going to…

    Isn’t that a resume enhancer for Dems?

  19. anon says:

    Records indicate Greene showed photos to a woman and talked about going to her room at a university dorm.

    Oh s**t… what is the statute of limitations on that?

  20. It could be a plus for Greene in Sex Carolina.

  21. Ishmael says:

    Earlier today, the 32-year-old military veteran (Greene) told ABC News that he has been unemployed and living in his rural hometown 60 miles south of Columbia since August, when he was involuntarily forced out of the Army after a 13 year career because “things just weren’t working… it was hard to say.”

    hmmmm no money, no campaign, no name recognition and beats a 4 term state senator…

  22. shoe throwing instructor says:

    Debate and discuss the election process all you want, who ever you elect will be reshaped and retooled by the K-street lobby anyway. Until that changes all experiments in local election reform are a waste of time and energy.

  23. anonone says:

    Great interview with Daniel Ellsberg, leaker of the “Pentagon Papers” in 1971: “Obama Deceives the Public.” Pretty much summarizes why so many progressives have turned from Obama’s greatest supporters to his most disappointed detractors.

    For example, Ellsberg says, “I think Obama is continuing the worst of the Bush administration in terms of civil liberties, violations of the constitution and the wars in the Middle East.”

    Worth reading whether you agree or not.

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,699677,00.html

  24. cassandra m says:

    I’m at the Italian Festival and Allan Loudell burst into song for abit singing a snippet of Petulant Clark’s “Downtown “. Fun!

  25. Jonathan Chait on Bill Kristol:

    William Kristol does not appear to be writing this ironically:

    [Obama’s] pseudo-macho defense of “talking to experts” is itself professorial: He talks to experts so he’ll “know whose ass to kick.” Real men don’t need experts to tell them whose asses to kick.

    …as the unmitigated success of George W. Bush’s foreign policy demonstrates.

  26. shoe throwing instructor says:

    News from China, a second strike at the Honda plant outside shangi-hi has been successful, workers got a 24% increase in pay, guess the chinese do not belive in the benevolent corporation as much as we do, more info, at bloomberg.com.

  27. Jason330 says:

    Let’s go flyers!

  28. shoe throwing instructor says:

    an unemployed african american won the south carolina primary, Sean Hannity called for increased government regulation because of the gulf oil spill, so why not a flyers stanley cup.

  29. Geezer says:

    “Isn’t that a resume enhancer for Dems?”

    If the student was female, then yes. If the student was male, it would only be an enhancer for a Republican.

  30. Geezer says:

    A1: Thanks for the Ellsburg article link. Notice that he lays out his case without rancor, and without hyperbole.

    Key quote: “I voted for him and I will probably vote for him again, as opposed to the Republicans. But I believe his administration in some key aspects is nothing other than the third term of the Bush administration.”

  31. delacrat says:

    Geezer and A1,

    Ellsburg’s quote struck me as well.

    If Republicrats know that even Ellsburg will vote for them, no matter what. Why would they feel any need to do anything to earn the liberal vote?

  32. Geezer says:

    “Why would they feel any need to do anything to earn the liberal vote?”

    I dunno. A functioning conscience?

  33. SRC says:

    Shoe Throwing Instructor….I’m still w/ole Tip, may God bless his soul, ‘…..all politics are local.’

    The change always starts at the bottom….it’s the peoples’ will and nothing will change until they exercise it. The top picks up on the ground movement and only then can there be a public display of support for any change.

  34. delacrat says:

    ‘Why would they [Republicrats] feel any need to do anything to earn the liberal vote?’

    “I dunno. A functioning conscience?”

    If the Republicrats had functioning consciences, they wouldn’t be Republicrats.

  35. Geezer says:

    I’m speaking specifically of Obama, who seems to lack one.

  36. shoe throwing instructor says:

    I,m rereading Mien Kamph since the whole countries turning towards that form of government, perhaps it will teach me how to fake it a stay out of the box cars with the rest of you liberals, call me a coward if you will, but I,d like to stay alive a while longer.

  37. anon says:

    EllsBERG.

  38. anon says:

    KWS is hiring a director of finance and human resources.

    http://jobaps.com/de/sup/BulPreview.asp?R1=060410&R2=MABB06&R3=120300

    And we have no one in charge of market regulation or company regulation. Those division director positions are still vacant.

    Hey … maybe there’s somebody in the midwest we can hire!

  39. anon says:

    Twitter tightens the noose on user privacy; now plans to require click-tracking in Twitter apps. In other words, any link you click in a tweet will go through a Twitter server first before it opens the link.

    Why, you may ask?

    We are also looking to provide services that make use of this data, an example would be analytics within our eventual commercial accounts service.

    Actually, all Google searches already work this way. Every link you click on in Google search results goes through Google first. If you want to stop Google from doing this, try this Firefox plugin.

    And it goes without saying all iStuff does this too.