And Another Campaigner Resigns

The AP's political quote of the day reads,

QUOTE OF THE DAY:

'"It's not going to be the Barack and Hillary people who bring the factions together. It's going to be those of us who are still seen as neutral and have some standing in the party."

— Rep. Mike Doyle, a Democrat who represents Pittsburgh and has not endorsed either of his party's presidential candidates, Barack Obama or Hillary Rodham Clinton.'

As an ordinary citizen who is neutral, I feel the same kind of responsibility to guide my fellow Democrats (and the two campaigns) to come together or risk losing not only the Presidential race, but the integrity of the party. On this blog I keep telling the campaigns that, if the candidates care more for party and country than they care for their own ego and ambition, then we'll need to see two adults seeking fairness and urging supporters to stay positive and patient while they both (rightly) remain in this primary race. Heaven knows where the support they'd normally see from party luminaries to keep the party peaceful has gone! It almost seems that they've been left alone..perhaps purposely... to show their eventual capacity for unity when neither, after the voting's over and done, winds up with the number of delegates it'll take to snag the nomination.

Why does it seem that some newspaper editorials are setting wiser guidlines and promoting better ideas than some of the party elders? [See this one from today's Oakland Press].

I don't know where the party's wise elders and cooler heads are. I'm not the only one who's wondering. I think of Sen Ted Kennedy who admitted he made the endorsement that he made [for Obama] when he did because, in good part, he was angry with Bill Clinton's comments in South Carolina.

The exploitation of anger bleeds over on to almost every Democratic issue in the MSM coverage of the primary race now. I honestly think, with a woman and an African-American running so close a race, that the "party bosses" are afraid to side with either candidate for the fear of looking politically incorrect. They know they run the risk of being reviled by half the total number of Democratic voters if they make what they think might be the "wrong decision"...or ANY decision at all.

It's pitiful to even begin to suspect that should-be-leaders in the Democratic party who had a preference for one candidate or the other could've been responsible and guiding...but decided instead to hold back in a state of fear and/or muddled confusion.

The emotion and anger of yet another Democratic campaigner (this time Maxim Thorne, a well-educated and dedicated supporter of Obama) has gotten the better of him. Mr. Thorne's out of the campaign for sending out an email that looked more like something from the Ken Starr-inquisition era than a 2008 campaign commentary. I consider him, like others who've had to resign from these two campaigns recently, to be another all-too-human victim of a Democratic primary campaign with an all-too easy fallback on race/gender/personal issues; improper, slow, missing, and/or uncertain leadership from the party; unnecessary rage; and high emotion.

Until this thing works itself out [or until a Democratic Yoda appears], here's a recommendation from a fellow blogger with the screen-name wmthetriallawyer that says,

"Don't let the main stream media or the whackjobs out there distract you from certain realities. [..]..the host of people who have lined up to support or otherwise be media-defined surrogates of the Obama and Clinton campaigns. [..] People say really stupid stuff sometimes. And it is dissected ad nauseum [..] But I only really care about what the two candidates themselves say"

Failure on Iraq: Why the Hell Did We Vote Democratic in 2006?

Knowing how badly the American public wants us out of Iraq and knowing, at the same time, that the Democratic majority in the Senate could not even summon the influence to effect the passing of a toothless Resolution to set the the tone for getting our troops out of Iraq by 2008 is proof that our democracy is not working. By all that has brought us to this doorstep of failure on the Iraq situation today, the People obviously play no part in decisions being made by their elected Representatives. It is dismaying, after all we've been through for the last five years, to know that the vote on this Resolution was a totally partisan activity. (I do not depend on Senator Lieberman to vote as a Democrat anymore. He's an alien to the party - oddly clinging to it by an 'Independent' name.) For all their lip service, the Republicans, with their new comrade Joe Lieberman, are still acting as a rubber-stamp on this disaster of a war - obviously for political purposes. Why did we vote for Democrats in 2006? Our men and women are still moving targets in a useless and unjust war that was lost before it was so mistakenly and wantonly begun. Republicans are forgetting the constituents they serve in their race to politically manipulate their 'enemies' - the Democrats - into utilizing their funding clout to force redeployment and stop the insanity of a President who has made a string of so many dreadful errors. This is unacceptable - unforgiveable.

It's a given that I'm disgusted by the Republicans hating Democrats more than they love our troops and our nation.

Moreover, I'm saddened by and furious with our Democratic leadership in Congress.

They do not have the spirit nor do they possess the fortitude of conviction to stop what we all can see as utter insanity. What are they waiting for? Another draft? Another Vietnam?

Lieberman's New Communications Man Hates Bloggers

From Raw Story:

At his blog, Bull Moose, Wittmann has accused liberal and Democratic critics in the blogosphere of comprising "a left wing Cult of Bush Hatred."

"Because in the left wing universe, one must oppose everything the President supports," Wittmann wrote in February.

If a 31% presidential approval rating means anything, I guess that (fake Democrat) Senator Joe Lieberman's new communications director Marshall Wittmann must believe that today's booming majority of Americans is nothing more than a "big old left wing cult of Bush hatred." Wouldn't that make sense to you?

I don't hate President Bush. But I do hate hypocrisy. There's just no room for hypocrisy in today's politics. Worse, a communications director for any modern politician who starts out taking jabs at today's political bloggers at a time when most politicians are courting their favor has to be certifiably insane if they think they're doing their boss any favors.