This will be a quick diary because I just want to hear what people think about this.  I was just taking a look at one of the websites that I haven't visited for awhile, Electoral-Vote.Com, and I realized that the maps show me something that I (an Obama supporter) don't want to believe.

Obama's map has the following as the final result:  Obama 243     McCain 269     Ties 26

Clinton's map has the following as the final result:  Clinton 291     McCain 237     Ties 10

.
.
.

When I saw that, my first thought was...   what?!!

Like many of you, I'm a little disappointed that Obama did not wrap up the nomination tonight.  A win in both Ohio and Texas surely would have done it.  A convincing win in Texas alone may have done it.  Oh well, it's water under the bridge now.

But I have a simple proposition for all you Obama supporters:  Let's give some money to the campaign TONIGHT to show Barack that we've got his back.  I think we should call it the...

"You're Going to Need It!" Donation Drive.

(He's definitely going to need every last ounce of support from us now)

It starts now, 11:00 p.m. PT.  It lasts for 24 hours.  It's grassroots driven, just like his campaign.

More below.

I haven't written a diary for quite awhile.  Usually I am content to just absorb as much of what is here as I can in a short amount of time.  But seeing the front page post by Devilstower, in which he quoted this

More than the war on terror, more than tax cuts and traditional values, stopping Hillary is the most effective means of energizing the GOP right now. Not even the evils of abortion, gay marriage and illegal immigration can whip up the same frenzy as a mention of the woman who was once first lady.

compelled me to ask you this question:  Am I alone in thinking we can only lose this election by nominating Hillary?

Republicanism is forlorn and defeated right now.  At least, it sure feels like it.  They've found out how far their hate agenda could take them, and it didn't even take them through six years.  Their talking points are so worn out that that the goodwill store couldn't even accept them now.

This is probably overkill on this topic, but I had to write it anyway.  If it is overkill, just ignore...

Words are funny.  We tend to think of each word as having a distinct and concrete meaning, but so often the sentences we utter cannot be deciphered simply by looking at the words within them.

For example, the follow sentence can be interpreted two (or more) ways:

Thanks a lot, jerk!

If I directed this sentence toward a stranger who had just bumped into me and caused me to spill my drink, it would likely carry a tone of anger and aggression.  However, if I said it to a good friend who had just caused me to spill my drink, it might carry a humorous tone and imply don't worry about it, we're good enough friends that I can tease you about it and then move on.

I don't know about you, but one of the things that drives me up the wall like none other is the seeming GOLDEN RULE of journalism lately - that one must always, under all circumstances, be neutral (or in the parlance of the times, fair and balanced.

This rule leads to headlines like Abramoff Convicted:  Both Parties Accepted His Money

I just saw a great clip on crooksandliars that shows how some journalists are mortally afraid of actually criticizing a politician or a particular party (especially Bush):  

An interview of Lou Dobbs by Lesley Stahl.

Seriously, take a look.  It really shows the mindset of the "neutrality above truth" crowd.

Quasi-Transcript below...

I've been reading the comments on mcjoan's post about the Obama staffer who "stepped in it" and I have been noticing that people are getting downright vicious.

I can understand that if you really love your guy (or gal), it can be frustrating and even painful to see someone criticize them - especially if their critique is false or inane or just downright stupid.  You want to cyber-slap them and say "DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND?? ___ is our best hope for taking the presidency and helping progressives win and getting this country back on the right track and saving the world from global warming..."

Believe me, I understand this passion and this urgency.  These times and this election call for passion and urgency.  No doubt.  But it makes me a little sad, because I would like to see us here at dkos use 99.99% of our energy to forward our progressive values, not fight amongst ourselves.

This will be a short diary, but I just think that this scandal needs a name.

Personally, I like E-mailGate.

It's clear, and it's catchy.

Once a scandal has a catchy name then people can't help but talk about it.  The news pundits will have to mention it... E-mailGate.

Then all the viewers out there will perk up their ears... "what the heck is that?"  Which is exactly what we want - more people paying attention to this scandal.

I also think we should start this meme:  "The missing e-mails lead to corruption in the White House."

That way, when people talk about this scandal, they have to talk about corruption in the white house.  (i.e.  Wolf Blitzer:  "Some on the left are saying these supposedly missing e-mails would provide a trail to corruption in the White House")

What do you think?  Other suggestions?

I think that when Bush vetoes the war funding bill, we should just introduce an almost identical bill but with a May 31st deadline for withdrawal instead of March 31st.

This might not sound good at first, but I think it would be the worst outcome for Bush.  My rationale below...

Who could have guessed?  We're on the brink of Watergate II.

After so many scandals, it's hard to imagine any one scandal bringing down this administration.  But I think Bush and his buddies have to worry when many disparate dots start getting connected... and that's exactly what is happening with the US Attorney/CIA/Cunningham/Hookergate scandal.

And how shocking that it involves the infamous Watergate Hotel.

Let me outline the three major phases of the Watergate II scandal:

1.  The (Illegal?) Poker Parties

From MSNBC:

FBI probes Watergate prostitution allegations
Infamous hotel used by defense contractor to entertain lawmakers?

By Lisa Myers & the NBC Investigative Unit

...
FBI agents are investigating what happened in the hotel's posh suites, which defense contractor Brent Wilkes turned into party suites for politicians and CIA officers. There was poker and cigars, and the FBI wants to know if there were prostitutes, too.

Update:  BlogPac has a petition you can sign here.  (and another here)

If you haven't read this recommended diary, you might want to do so before continuing.

In that diary, Tom Collins, the head of the Nevada State Democratic Party makes his case for why they've decided to grant a Democratic primary debate to Fox News.  Now, I'm glad that Tom came to dkos and shared his views.  I respect that.  But after reading the comments in that diary I still think he's completely wrong on this.

Some people in the comments had the idea that we should create a BlogAction to demand that our Democratic presidential candidates boycott the Fox News debate.

I think that's a great idea.

Hopefully, if we put the pressure on now, we can get commitments from the Dem candidates quickly and stop this train-wreck from happening.

Local College Republican forced to give up dreams involving unprecedented incompetence and moral depravity

--Benjaminwise, for the Uh-nion

Steve Ickworth, local college student and College Republican, realized today that his dreams of one day running the U.S. government into the ground through never-before-seen incompetence and corruption were finished, once and for all.

"I had to give them up.  The whole point was to do something that no one had done before, but obviously our current president and congressional Republicans have set the bar so low that I have no choice but to completely give up," Ickworth explained.

"Of course, I voted for Bush-Cheney in 2000, but I had no idea they were going to be so feindishly ineffecient and ineffectual.  What they've achieved is, by all accounts, unparalled in history."

Hello, my name is David Broder.

As you surely know, I am a Very Serious Person.

And as such, you should probably listen to what I have to say.  Today I'm going to tell you about President Bush, and you should probably listen closely - because after all, I'm a Very Serious Person.

It may seem perverse to suggest that, at the very moment the House of Representatives is repudiating his policy in Iraq, President Bush is poised for a political comeback. But don't be astonished if that is the case.

That's right.  What you think is obvious is actually completely wrong.  That's why you need a Very Serious Person like me to explain the truth to you.

And today I'm telling you that President Bush will make a political comeback.

We warned them.

We knew how powerful we, the netroots, had become.

We said, "Don't make us open this!"

But did they listen?  Of course not.

So we had only one choice...

...we opened up that sucker and let 'em have it!

..
..

And you know what I just realized?  I'm not done gloating.

It's Sunday.  A day of rest.  Instead of all the meta and talk of 2008, why don't we allow ourselves a moment to go back and relive our dramatic victory of just three months ago (because we earned it)...

The anticipation

Close your eyes for a minute and think back to the day before the election.  I don't know about you, but I was worried.  Don't get me wrong, I was proud of what we had done and was confident about our chances of winning.  But dang it if after 2000, 2002, and 2004, I wasn't still nervous as heck.  I knew this was our big chance, and our last chance to reject President Bush and all he stood for.  

It's Saturday.

Besides all the Meta, I thought maybe we could use a fun threat.

I always enjoy seeing some of the song lyrics people post on dkos, and I thought that might be a fun Saturday night thread... so go ahead and post your faves!  I can update the diary as I see other people's contributions.

And of course, lyrics that speak to why we hold progressive values and/or why we are activists are always good!

I'll show you mine, you show me yours...

I'm talking about Rocky Anderson, the Mayor of Salt Lake City.

From Wikipedia:

Mayor Anderson has gained international renown for his Salt Lake City Green Program,[5] a comprehensive effort to improve the sustainability and reduce the environmental footprint of Salt Lake City’s municipal operations. Elements of the program, which is said to "cover everything from dog waste to nuclear waste," include initiatives to improve the efficiency of the City’s fleet and use of electricity, measures to make Salt Lake City more bicycle-friendly and pedestrian-friendly, and cogeneration plants at the City’s landfill and wastewater treatment facility that recapture methane to generate electricity.

Sounds like an amazing guy.

And he decided to protest the war when President Bush came to Salt Lake City - a courageous move, I think.

What really caught my attention was this video on YouTube.

He is so civil with those dittoheads, yet so powerful in articulating why his actions are indeed extremely patriotic.

Reading about the war day after day, one sometimes becomes almost immune to the reality of what is happening.  The "outrage fatigue" sets in, and it all starts to seem the same after awhile.

And I think this is made even worse by the fact that we seem to rarely hear the voices of our soldiers or their families, to jolt us awake with a reminder of the anguish they feel on a daily basis, living in uncertainty while sacrificing for this beautiful, if sometimes flawed nation.

Here's an article about a woman who's husband is in Iraq.  I think it speaks for itself.  It details her response to the news that her husband's return from Iraq had been postponed.

Media outlets, knowing Bush would be talking about the "surge," began speculating how that would affect the 5,000 National Guard soldiers from 22 states sent to Iraq last April. Of those soldiers, 2,600 are from Minnesota, according to Minnesota National Guard spokesperson Lt. Col. Kevin Olson.

It was a cold night, and the wind only made the night watchman more chilly as he sat at his perch atop the watchtower.  It was nights like these when it was a challenge to stay alert, but he knew it was also nights like these when it was most important to be alert.  The night watchman, a young man by the name of Mr. DK, took his job very seriously, and with good reason – the safety of this small town, known simply as A, depended upon his vigilance.

Mr. DK shivered, and turned slightly to his left.  Suddenly, out of the corner of his eye, he saw a movement in the shadows.  It appeared that a figure had just gone into the City Hall, about 100 yards away from the watchtower.  Mr. DK jumped toward the stairs and raced down them, then quickly headed toward the City Hall, trying to be as quiet as possible.  He tiptoed up near the front entrance, and hid behind a large marble pillar.

The two posts by mcjoan on the front page got me thinking again about Joe Lieberman and that darn CT-Sen race.  And the more I think about it the more I think that should Lieberman face Ned Lamont again he would not prevail.  That is, I think Joe will lose Round Two.

Of course, at this point I don't know if Lamont has any plans to run again... (more on that later)

From what I remember about the race and what Tim Tagaris wrote afterward, Lieberman was able to win despite widespread dissatisfaction in Connecticut with many of his views (particularly regarding Iraq) because of several factors:

1.  Lieberman was able to hold onto many Democratic voters despite not running as a Democrat.

2.  (Related to #1...) Lieberman was able to convince voters that he shared their concern with the situation in Iraq and would support ending the war soon.

In recent weeks [once he got desperate], Mr. Lieberman has called for different tactics in Iraq.
--NYTimes on October 25th, 2006

3.  The Lamont campaign expended so much energy (not wasted, obviously) in the run up to the primary that it was running on fumes as November 7th approached.

More.