The Contrarian

Did I Just Call The Entire State of West Virginia Racist?

If not, then I strongly implied it. How 'bout this: West Virginia has racists in her midst. So do other states. But maybe not as many.

Is that a fair assessment?

UPDATE:

Stats from HuffPost:

According to the exit polls, West Virginia’s voters revealed that they are the most racist in the country so far in the Democratic primaries. Fully 20% of the voters consisted of whites who reported that race was a factor, and they voted for Clinton 84-10 over Obama. That’s a total racist vote of 17%, exceeding the racist vote in all of the previous primaries where exit polls were taken, and going far above the 13.7% in Arkansas, the most racist state before now in this election.

So I dunno. You hear all this shit about black women being tortured, and newspaper quotes from people saying things like "‘Hang that darky from a tree!’" and you start to form some opinions.

UPDATE TO THE UPDATE:

Maybe we can just blame the media.

(West) Virginia Is For. . . Losers?

Well, Barry got trounced last night. No surprise there, really — West Virginia is Clinton country. Most people were predicting a 10 to 20 point victory margin, but it ended up being more like 40. What does this say about Clinton's campaign? What does it say about Obama's? What does it say about West Virginia?

Clinton is done. There's nothing she can do about it. West Virginia is a nice score, but doesn't net her many delegates, and certainly not enough to stop Obama. Plus she's 20 million in the hole, and owes tons of money to the small mom & pop vendors who make her signs and pamphlets. (Yet she's good about paying the giant cable companies for her slick ads.) Dana Milbank of the Washington Post compares Hillary's campaign to the Monty Python's infamous dead parrot sketch. Funny. And true.

Obama soldiers on, flag lapel pin and all. It's clear he's gearing up for the general election against John McBush, and he's not gonna let the big defeat in WV distract him. Hillary trumpets the fact that no President since 1916 has been elected without carrying the state. “John Kennedy didn't have the number of delegates he needed when he went to the convention in 1960," she told supporters, "but he had sumpthin' equally as important — he had West Virginia behind him." [My emphasis; her opportunistic adoption of the local parlance.]

The New York Times' Maureen Dowd suggests Obama will have real trouble turning West Virginians his way come the general. That's why his campaign is redrawing the electoral map to concentrate on states previously considered unwinnable by Dems. It' a calculated risk, but it could pay off.

There's really no way to look at the situation in West Virginia without stating the obvious. In a state whose white population tops 95 percent, only one conclusion can be drawn. WV is chock full of racists. This is something the news networks are reluctant to come out and say; instead, they offer anodyne statements like "West Virginian voters are white and socially conservative." Translation: they call black men "boy," and talk gleefully about lynching on call-in radio shows.

An entire state that indulges in open bigotry and willful ignorance. And this is Hillary's base! Maybe the question souldn't be why Obama can't win the undereducated, white and old people vote, but rather why Clinton can't win the educated, young and BLACK vote?

We should just put West Virginia behind us. If they want to wallow in pre-Civil War fantasies about white superiority while the rest of America looks to a post-racial future, I say let 'em. Better yet, let's annex the state and set up reeducation camps like they did in China during the Cultural Revolution. Okay, that's going way too far.

America's racist past is its racist present, at least in pockets of the country. I find this heartbreaking, as I do Clinton's willingness to embrace this sad fact for the sake of political expediency. That's why the so-called "dream ticket" is a joke.

I'd love to see Chuck Hagel as Barry's veep. Anti-war Republican, Vietnam vet, good guy. Who do you think should be on the ticket?

Wesley Crusher Gets Political.

Remember Wil Wheaton from Stand By Me and "Star Trek: The Next Generation?" Of course you do.

Well, Wil is all growed up and is now something of a wonk. And of course he's got a blog. I bring this up because he recently posted an excellent summary of our current Hillary Clinton problem. It's a lot like what I've been writing, but the white-knuckle rage is a bit more subdued. Check it out.

And here's the Madatoms post that got Wil all worked up: "Hillary Clinton: The Psycho Ex-Girlfriend of the Democratic Party."

Good stuff, ja?

Too Many Choices.

I have a lot I want to write about — the efficacy of Jungian dream symbols in regards to speculative neuroscience and unconscious revelation; how the suspension of disbelief in comic book movie narratives is directly proportional to the technological nature of the hero's abilities; why I like faux-chicken nuggets.

But it's Super Tuesday! Again!

My dear Hillary, what hath you wrought? A fractured party with little chance of healing before what is sure to be a grueling general election. But we all have our bright and shiny dreams to ruthlessly cling to past the point of logic, common sense and decency. Besides, sacrificing your principles upon the altar of political expediency is par for the course if you're an elected official gunning for the highest office in the land.

That's the conventional wisdom, anyway. Yet you don't see Barack Obama taking this tack. Which is why he could fail to lock down the nomination.

Hillary, on the other hand, is willing to talk about "obliterating Iran," making nail-biting defense policy in a lopsided debate on ABC. Save it for the Presidency, please. Or better yet, keep it in the right wing think tank where it belongs. (I'm still trying to find support for this ludicrous statement among any of the prominent defense think tanks who actually publish their findings. No go so far, but I did stumble upon this piece about how Israel's sophisticated missile defense shield and nuclear retaliatory capabilities would be sufficient to ensure its survival in the case of Iranian attack. The Iranians, however, do not fare so well in this scenario.)

Hooray for Hillary's Gas Tax Holiday, or whatever they're calling it today.  “I’m not going to put my lot in with economists," she says, when pressed that her plan gimmick won't result in actual savings at the pump. Better yet, she has zero hope of getting this kind of legislation passed this season, and, even if it managed to move out of Congress, our oil baron President would surely veto it with extreme prejudice.

Obama, as usual, sees through the bullshit and refuses to jump on the political bandwagon. But Bill Clinton's ongoing dog & pony show across rural America trumps any pretense to economic sense. "Bubba dun come to our town! He's one of us, gaw-gaw-gaw!"  Right. I'm sure you yokels get paid millions of dollars to speak on behalf of foreign trade organizations, too.

At this point I'm having trusting anything Hillary says. Do I believe her "green collar jobs" initiative, or will she further inflate the national defense budget while pursuing an incoherent foreign policy?  Who cares? All we really need to know is she's a fighter.

Maybe later I'll articulate my three-prong solution to America's energy and economic woes. Or perhaps I'll talk about Iron Man and the aforementioned suspension of disbelief in comic book films. . .  or faux-chicken nuggets. . . I guess you'll just have to wait and see.

THIS JUST IN: Obama brings peace to Niger 's Delta region. Could this be the key to lower oil prices?

Slate Does the Delegate Math.

A somewhat more encouraging take than The Contrarian's Doomsday Scenario. But I'm still sticking with my prediction that Clinton finds a way to steal the nomination.

Of course, some have put forth the "scorched-earth" theory — that she's trying to destroy Obama in hopes she can run again in 2012. But I'll be boarding the Mayan mothership at that time, so what does it even matter?

Predictions.

It occurs to me that endorsing Barack Obama is hardly a Contrarian position, given O's level of support. But I'm about to make a call that should preserve the sanctity of our title.

Back when I threw my lot in for Obama, I made a stern prediction (preserved in this thread at Candleblog) that the junior Senator from Illinois would fail to achieve the nomination of his party. Yet I was still supporting him. Why?

Because Obama is the zeitgeist candidate, who carries with him the germ of possibility that America can, for the first time in recent history, live up to at least some of the "truths" we purport to hold as "self-evident." His candidacy truly represents change, and not just from the cynicism of the last eight years, but also from historic domestic and international policy miscalculations. In other words, it's history calling on that phone at 3 AM. Who's picking up?

Not the Democratic party.

Because the Cintons are the party. Part of its DNA. This is something they've been working towards since Bill left the White House, if not when they were sweeties in college. It's clear that Hillary prizes winning over all. Why else put Osama Bin Laden in her campaign ads, after having publicly condemned the Bushies for employing "the politics of fear?" Or talk about "obliterating" Iran, having previously endorsed "robust diplomacy" in dealings with the country? I guess "robust" is code for "blow your asses off the map."

She clearly believes that aping Republicans on national security is the only way to win in the general election. Has she not seen the public polling on the war in Iraq?

No matter. Again, the Clintons are the party, and what they say goes. So here's the official Contrarian call:

Hillary takes the nomination. She strongarms, bribes and otherwise coerces the superdelegates into going against the majority of pledged delegates and the popular vote. She successfully paints Obama as unelectable. She continues to exploit unfounded (and geopolitically inaccurate) fears about national security.  She tacitly sanctions soft bigotry while loudly accusing the media of sexism. . . on and on, South of Heaven, as Slayer once sang.

And here's the rub: with her impossibly high negatives, Hillary helps to coalesce the conservative vote around the weakest GOP candidate since Bob Dole. Then it's four years with an ill-tempered, ethically-compromised, mentally-addled oldster with zero sense of where his country is at and where it needs to go.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: establishment always wins. America, meet the new boss — same as the old boss.

Why The Fu*k Was George Stephanopoulos Allowed As A Moderator Of Last Night's Democratic "Debate?"

In case you don't recall, this handsome ex-Boy Genius was one of the chief architects of Bill Clinton's 1992 Presidential victory, and later went on to become Clinton's Communications Director.

As a journalist (and current Communications Director), I'm outraged by this flagrant conflict of interest. By allowing Stephanopoulos to question the candidates, ABC completely abandoned any pretense to the principles of ethical reporting. I'd expect this shit out of Fox News, but not the network that gave us the venerable Ted Koppel.

What a joke this debate was. They even brought up Barack's supposed refusal to wear a flag pin. This was a non-issue six months ago, when it was first put forth by an opportunistic media looking to fill airtime. I don't even want to get into the rest of the ludicrous questions. Isn't there a war on? Isn't the economy in the shitter? Isn't our education system a shambles? Say, maybe we should talk about Rev. Wright some more!

I wonder what Hillary promised Stephanopoulos in exchange for these tabloid-worthy attacks on Obama. Given that he quit Bill Clinton's White House due to stress and depression, I doubt it was a position in a new Clinton administration. My guess is that an old favor was repaid on this shameful evening.

In other news, the Pope is in DC. I'm sure it'll make Holy Hell out of my morning commute.

In Defense of Elitism.

Looks great on my mudflaps!

While the gun-totin,' beer slammin,' sniper fire dodgin' free trade lovin' hatin' lovin' Hillary Clinton worms her way into the bitter Christian hearts of rural Pennsylvanian voters, Barack Obama continues to struggle with accusation of elitism. As a dyed-in-the-wool elitist who rests strong in his convictions that half of this country is indeed stupid and/or backwards, I feel Barack's pain, to borrow a phrase from our philandering ex-president (and Hillary Achilles heel), Big Billy C.

So this thing is gonna go to the convention, eh? I'd love a glimpse at the behind-the-scenes skullduggery. And now I've got one! Well, sort of.

Former "West Wing" writer-producer Lawrence O’Donnell Jr gives us an idea of what a four-day Denver deadlock might look like, with all of the garrulous pedantry you'd expect from an Aaron Sorkin attaché.

Via New York Magazine, who clearly know from elitism.

PS: the "West Wing" link originally came from my coworker Chhaya (proprietress of Liquid Sunshine), who in turn got it from Sampo: The Journal of Abundant Media.

The Audacity of Hillary.

No time to write anything of relevance today, so I'll let this YouTube dis of the Clintons do the talking:

Follow-Up.

Two more worthy New York Times Op-Eds this morning:

"Imagined Snipers, Real Challenges," by Roger Cohen. Money quote:

Barack Obama, his speech on race, did important things. He confronted reality, thought big, probed division, sketched convergence. He took Americans and many people beyond U.S. shores to a different mental place. Imagine that capacity applied to GWOT, Iran, Russia, China and Israel-Palestine.

"Obama, Clinton — and Echoes of Nader?" by Nichoas D. Kristof. Money quote(s):

The battle is getting bloodier. Mrs. Clinton spoke this week about the contest continuing for “the next three months” — and those would surely be a toxic three months. There’s already grumbling that Mrs. Clinton’s real strategy is to destroy Obama’s chances of winning the general election so that she can compete in 2012. . .

. . .if the brawl continues, then [Hillary] and her husband may be remembered by many people who long admired them as having the same effect on Mr. Obama this November that Ralph Nader had on Al Gore in 2000.

What does it matter? We're all gonna die, anyway.

Gotta run — Matt Taibbi is on Joe Scarborough . . .