Deval Patrick won two-thirds of the state caucuses this past week in a stunning upset of A.G. Tom Reilly's lock on the party machinery and delegate apparatus.  John Walsh, Deval Patrick's campaign manager has done a spectacular job organizing the grassroots and putting the campaign in the hands of local organizers.  As Michael Dukakis has said over and over, you can't win elections if you don't knock on every door, and the Patrick campaign has signed on to that philosophy with conviction.

Even the conservative Boston Herald politico Wayne Woodlief gives the odds to Patrick at the moment, with all things being equal:

I responded just the other day to a Planned Parenthood online petition that urged people to let Target know that we will not accept the notion that a pharmacist has the right to refuse a legally written prescription from a licensed physician based on the pharmacist's personal views.  

Well, I received this email in response just now:

As my diary fades into the sunset, I wish to extend a heartfelt thanks to those who participated in the discussion in good faith.  I'm not much of a diary person as this was my first diary in months, not days and not hours, so the sheer volume of comments seemed rather tsunami-like in its effect.  That's not to say, however, that I didn't see rough seas coming.

Hmmm....where to start.  Let's start with the little old lady.  Travel back in time to 2000.

Sr. Jeannette Normandin was a prison chaplain in a Massachusetts women's prison for years and dedicated her life to working in the community helping needy women make something of their lives.  She also worked extensively with the AIDS community in trying to alleviate suffering through real works based on real solutions.  She touched the lives of many.  Jeannette Normandin made the mistake, one day, however, of sprinkling water during a baptism and was summarily fired--as well as evicted from the home she shared with members of her order.  

I have just posted a comment on a diary considering the increased danger to which pregnant women are susceptible in light of one of the most horrific murders we've seen in ages.  I was the 9th poster, 10th if you count my comment on the hair-growing silence of this community. Also, does it say something that the Size 6 thread, which arguably in its extremity invites discussion on the sexual attractiveness of women, gets so much attention?    

I've just returned from a Meetup with our Congressman Jim McGovern (MA-3).  Over pizza and some drinks, McGovern gave us his take on the future.  For those of you who don't know, McGovern is one of the most progressive liberal Dems in the House.  He voted both against the war and against the Patriot Act I.  He has a 100% rating from the League of Conservation voters.  He fully supports gay marriage, abortion rights, and social services for the needy.  He is something of an icon in this district despite his rather young age, especially after having beaten back a formidable and well-financed Republican opponent in holy-roller gay-bashing Ron Crews 71-29%.

I'm scanning the front page of the New York Times and lo and behold, after days, weeks, months of reporting the political machinations grinding away in the Ukraine, they finally publish a prominent piece (generated by the International Herald Tribune) on the alleged poisoning of Viktor Yushchenko--complete with side-by-side photos.  

The detail of the piece is much more informative than any I've seen and lays out in fairly clear fashion the symptomology, treatment, and diagnostic decision-making:  

Well, it appears that colossal nitwit Rod Paige is calling it quits (or has been asked to call it quits) as the Secretary of Education.   Paige, the mastermind of the deceptive manipulation of dropout data in Houston schools, the self-loathing "educator" who wishes to eviscerate public education in this nation, the voice of measure and reason who called the National Education Assocation (hence its members) a terrorist organization is riding, one can only hope, back to wherever it is he wishes to call home to live out his life in benign obscurity.  The man was dangerous, and his policies have caused problems that are orders of magnitude worse than the ones he was supposedly trying to solve.

As we ponder the realities of the recent election and attempt to make sense of all the implications of the results, one can't help but wonder about the true goals and objectives of those who drive the Bush Administration's agenda.  Candidly, I'm worried and have been struggling with trying to reconcile everything that has happened.   I'd like to offer the following for   consideration as I believe we've reached a point in our political evolution, both as a nation and as an international neighbor, that demands real clinical scrutiny.

A friend of mine received a call from her cousin who is an unenrolled voter (that's what we call independents here).  He is a single guy, no civic/church connections, etc., and has received no calls prior to this point  He has received seven--count 'em--seven robocalls in the last 60 minutes.  All of the calls have a voice with a Southern accent--big surprise.  One told him that if he's Christian, it is his duty to vote for George Bush.  Another call told him that despite what Democrats are telling people (!!??), our polls don't close at 6 PM.  Our polls, of course, close at 8 PM.  Very clever, eh?  

As a former Guardsman (whose IRR [Inactive Ready Reserve] status has thankfully lapsed), I still worry about a future draft given the intractable nature of the war in Iraq.  Since combat casualties have fallen off the national radar only to be replaced with demented saliva-spitting pols like Zell Miller, the projected troop strength realities are getting no coverage at all.

I've only been checking David Brock's new page for two days, but I'm already hooked.  Today's side-by-side comparison of Dick Morris's neurotic contradictions is great reading.  Also, the Chavez transcript from Franken's interview today is priceless, especially for those who cannot listen to the show on any regular basis.

Personally, I'm thrilled David Brock has piled on with the good guys.  There can never be too many watchdogs when it comes to the pathological liars of the right-wing.  As long as Brock, et al, keep doing what they're doing, I'm hopeful that those who have been skeptical of Brock's restored "sight" will grow more comfortable.  I'm thankful that rehabilitated conservatives [read:  Huffington, Brock]  are coming our way.  

Now if we can Brock and his crew to do something with the egregiously offensive Barbara Bradley Hagerty, we'll really be off and running.

Terry McAuliffe apparently feels "one four-year term is enough."  You can read about it here.

Clearly, McAuliffe has received both the ire and admiration of many party faithful.  His performance has been the focus (or inspiration) of many posts on this site, but I don't suspect that there are all that many who will be unhappy to see him go.

I, as an ardent Dean supporter, can candidly say this news made my day.    

I used to believe ABB was legitimate, but I no longer believe that.  

As a Dean watcher turned supporter going all the way back to Dean's Fund for a Healthy America gig, I was confident that a good candidate like Howard Dean with  solid vision, intelligence, common sense, and a proven record could get a fair shot in this nation.   When his candidacy started to take off, all of my hopes were validated as thousands responded to his no-nonsense straight talk.  What I really didn't anticipate and consider fully at the time was how viscerally the media and the Democratic Party would react and how savage they would become in their response.

Here's what I now believe:  I now believe that the quality of a candidate's views and record are completely irrelevant in the big picture, and that if by some quirk of fate such a candidate gets by the initial media and Party filters--like Howard Dean did--they'll simply just regroup like a pack of wolves and chase that candidate down until he drops.  Agents for change will not be tolerated.  

I also believe that the American  electorate has ceded the selection of a presidential candidate to the media and the Party structure because they are too lazy and ill-informed to think for themselves.  They are   too busy seeking instant gratification to bother with a thoughtful and principled approach to something as important as a Presidential election.  While it is politically incorrect to say so aloud, I've always believed the intelligence of people is greatly taxed under even the most benign conditions, so adding the burden of a considered approach and response to the media and its election coverage merely overloads their circuits.  Enter the breezy candidate with an appropriate mixture of gravitas and windy rhetoric, and they're sold--and relieved.  No matter who is elected, they'll get by.

I conclude, therefore, that it doesn't matter one iota who is president anymore.  When fifty percent of the American people view George Bush favorably, just who is unacceptable as President?   I don't know--let's ask the media.  That said, even if a Democrat were elected, I have absolutely no faith in the integrity of any of the other candidates, no faith in their co-opted visions, and no respect for their derivative and expedient stands on the issues.   They are a worthless lot and would accomplish nothing meaningful.

The Democratic Party leadership ought to be strung up collectively and hung out to dry.   Since that is unlikely to happen, I will content myself with agitating at the local level for change within the town committee structure.  

The change that I thought was possible through Howard Dean's candidacy is not possible, and while I will continue to support his goals individually, I see no possibility of any meaningful change in this nation even if George Bush is beaten by John Kerry in November.

I've always suspected that people get the government they deserve, but now I believe it with all my heart.  

Well, well, well. Seems if we look rather closely at the Sharpton campaign, we find some rather "strange bedfellows."

Check out the Columbia Journalism Review's Campaign Desk writeup and links to the investigative pieces about Sharpton's relationship with Roger Stone, GOP operative extraordinaire.

Ever wonder where that bit about the Vermont Cabinet came from? You betcha:

-------------------------------------------

Tip of the Hat
Who's Is That Guy Behind Al Sharpton?

While others have been busy reheating the leftover "Bush AWOL" story or rustling through archived articles about John Kerry's voting record, The Village Voice this week delivers a first-rate investigative report on Democratic hopeful Al Sharpton's strange bedfellow, GOP operative Roger Stone.

Wayne Barrett (with reporting help from Adam Hutton and Christine Lagorio) documents that Stone, one of the Watergate dirty tricksters and a long-time Bush family ally, is serving as Sharpton's strategist and financier. By orchestrating a last-minute (and legally questionable) campaign check-writing blitz, Stone helped Sharpton qualify for federal matching funds. Stone also has helped underwrite Sharpton's National Action Network, Barrett writes. Funds from the nonprofit and the campaign have been co-mingled in possible violation of election laws.

As Salon's Joe Conason says today, Stone's interest in Sharpton is rooted in the GOP's desire to undermine Democratic efforts to unseat George Bush. The combative Sharpton has promised he will continue to "slap the donkey" until the Democratic convention. Backed with taxpayer funds (thanks to Stone's efforts), Sharpton remains a player whose motives for staying in the race seem, well, suspect.

Readers of The New York Times learned of the Stone-Sharpton link January 25. Too bad for them, though. They only got part of the story. Voice readers got the whole deal.

Okay, I have to vent.

I've been a supporter of MoveOn since the Clinton Impeachment debacle.  In the intervening years, I've grown to respect and admire what a small cadre of individuals can accomplish who have vision, drive, and technical savvy.  The organization has grown into an influential force in politics today.  Their on-line primary garnered much publicity with media pundits and 'heads talking about the weighty benefits to the Democratic candidate who could secure the support of fifty percent of MoveOn members.  When no candidate emerged with the required fifty percent, the primary was to be reheld at a future date when members had a clearer vision of the field.   Hold that thought.........

In recent weeks, MoveOn members have been participating in an ad selection process by viewing and voting on submitted 30-second anti-Bush spots.  The winner will be announced on January 12th.  Now, after multiple ads run by such groups as the Club for Growth and the highly questionable Americans for Jobs, Healthcare and Progressive Values, MoveOn appears ready to respond--soon.  

MoveOn does a nice job in communication with its core constituency and in engaging these supporters in achieving the organization's goals and objectives.  Here it comes, though; the big however....

It's not the membership they should be communicating so conscientiously and meticulously with; it's the voters.  I was frustrated they did not become involved with the upcoming 2004 election back when the Democratic candidates declared and began campaigning last spring.  I wrote to them, articulating my concerns about waiting and urged them to become more visible in the anti-Bush process, to act as if they were actually paying attention.  After a flurry with the on-line primary, months of silence have ensued.  

Why is MoveOn so lumbering?  Why is this organization not more agile?  There are times when decisive, top-down management action is appropriate.  Is timely response to right-wing media blitzes one of them?  Maybe they should try to be less democratic in every single move they make and more timely--thus, more relevant--in their responses?  I'm frustrated with them and will write them again.  Purity of vision, mission, and philosophy is only as valuable as the effect it has upon those who do not share the same vision, mission, and philosophy.  Thinking big thoughts and taking ages to act on them is a recipe for self-inflicted obsolescence.  MoveOn needs to heed my mother's admonition when people were taking way too long to get their butts in gear, "C'mon, people, get a move on!!"