Heh. This is funny. From Laura at Blue Hampshire:

…the McCain campaign revealed the stagecraft of campaign events more blatantly than I have ever seen, revealing in the process that they wanted the crowd to be uncomfortable if it would look good for the cameras. So people were forced to stand in a room that could have accommodated them in chairs, and harangued to crowd together long before the candidate arrived, and forced to listen to some of the same godawful songs more than once due to McCain’s lateness. One man even took a break from urging people toward the stage and tried to lead them in call-and-response cheers. (“Who do we want for straight talk? McCain!” etc – he gave up pretty quickly.)

Despite the view of the McCain supporters standing next to me that, being a military man, he would surely be on time, McCain, wife Cindy, and the governor of Vermont were nearly 40 minutes later than his planned arrival time (as opposed to the posted start time, 15 minutes before that). Delivery of the line “without a doubt, Mac is back” fell to Governor Douglas, who then had to encourage the crowd to applaud policy items such as middle-class tax relief but found applause came easier for the hoary old “straight talker” line. Cindy McCain did the feminized relational work of apologizing for their lateness, and then McCain took the microphone. For like fifteen minutes.

Does this sound lame. Too bad for them Caoimhin wasn’t on hand to shape things up.

(Here’s my last candidate pitch… surprised more people aren’t posting. Maybe y’all are already sick of it all?)

“It has to be part of our energy mix.”

The speaker is presidential candidate Barack Obama, and the “it” he refers to is nuclear power – an issue of some importance to Vermonters and New Hampshire residents. If you need a memory jog as to why, here ya go:

Obama is, sadly, not unique in this rhetoric.

“I think nuclear power has to be part of our energy solution.” – Hillary Clinton

Asked in early August what technologies would be included in his (Bill Richardson’s) renewable portfolio standard, he said he would promote new technologies. “We need to shift away from fossil fuels,” he said. When pressed, however, he acknowledged that nuclear power would be a part of the mix. – from The Progressive

But as the Daily Green reports, there is one candidate who sees it differently: “But the lone hard-line opponent of nuclear power is John Edwards, according to a Los Angeles Times analysis.“

Edwards reasoning is straightforward: until concerns over safety and waste management are resolved, we are simply trading one environmental problem for another. Desperate for a “magic pill” that will enable us to keep consuming as we have, make no sacrifices, and still bring down carbon emissions, many are turning to nuclear power. It’s not gonna work that way, and Edwards states that pretty clearly. This is one reason he has been endorsed by Friends of the Earth, and multiple other environmentalists and local environmental groups.

Now I’m gonna get a little more hardcore into the contrasts here, just because SPS claimed these differences were minor, but as an environmentalist, I don’t think they are. And of particular concern is Senator Obama. Whoever is in the White House could play a major role in the decommissioning of Vermont Yankee, as his or her NRC will have a large role in managing the show

What makes Obama’s rhetoric harder to dismiss as a casual turn of phrase is the fact that his contributions and accolades from the nuclear industry are not insignificant. As Jeffry St. Clair reported, “Nuclear Notes, the industry’s top trade publication, praised the senator. ‘Back during his campaign for the U.S. Senate in 2004, [Obama] said that he rejected both liberal and conservative labels in favor of ‘common sense solutions.’ And when it comes to nuclear energy, it seems like the Senator is keeping an open mind.'”

Doing what they can to keep that mind open, Exelon Corporation, which runs the largest nuclear power fleet in the country, as given Obama nearly $200,000 to run for president, and also supported his run for Senate generously.

If this wasn’t disturbing enough, when faced with scenarios whereby big energy companies have tried to muscle their way into environmentally compromising ventures to the objection of citizens groups, Obama has gone a bit limp. From HuffPo:

In July 2007, it came as a shock to those who call the shores of Lake Michigan home to learn that British Petroleum (BP) had won approval from Indiana’s Department of Environment Management — with no opposition from the U.S. EPA — to increase discharges of ammonia and toxin-containing solids by 54% and 35% respectively, directly into Lake Michigan from its Whiting, Indiana, refinery.

This particular corner of Lake Michigan, at the border of Illinois and Indiana, had been a cesspool of pollution from electric plants and steel mills for decades. Only the persistent application of environmental protections in recent years has succeeded in reducing pollution and returning these waters — and all of Lake Michigan — to higher levels of safety and cleanliness. The BP proposal could reverse years of hard work and create a huge environmental risk to the Lake’s fishery, as well as a health risk to the drinking supply of more than 35 million people.

Many environmental groups, as well as state, local, and national leaders, moved into action to try to prevent BP from going ahead with its plans. H. Con. Res. 187 condemned BP for its plan and passed the U.S. Congress by a bipartisan vote of 386-26. Congressman Peter J. Roskam (R-IL) came out against the action. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) also condemned the plan.

So where was Senator/Candidate Obama? Like most of the invited legislators, he sent staff to attend an EPA Region 5 meeting on August 14 to discuss the issue. On August 15, he sent a letter to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chair Barbara Boxer — a committee on which he sits — asking that the committee “hold a hearing to examine the recent agreement between the State of Indiana and the BP Whiting Refinery.” The letter identifies “the challenges faced by the United States as we pursue the dual goals of improved energy security and environmental restoration.”

With this tepid response, Senator Obama failed to take a stand with many of his constituents (12,000 signatures on petitions as of July 26), or with his fellow senator from Illinois and a vast majority of lawmakers in the U.S. Congress to halt this action.

This is more than a little potentially worrisome.

This is not to say that Obama has been a “black hat.” He’s pushed forward legislation to make nuclear power plants more accountable, and kudos to him for that.

But anybody who doesn’t have a pre-existing narrative of Obama as wholly virtuous and without blemish has got to look at this and be a little uncomfortable.

(This one really needs to stay on the radar. – promoted by JulieWaters)

The Valley News has an editorial  alerting its readers to the issues of Vermont police going fishing for wholesale pharmacological records without a warrant.

The NH primary is exciting, but let’s not forget the legislature and the local warrantless searches and seizures that we might actually be able to do something about.

NanuqFC

In a Time of Universal Deceit, Telling the TRUTH Is a Revolutionary Act. — George Orwell  

( – promoted by Jack McCullough)

As I read various entries sniping at one another, I think of Susan Powter and Rodney King. “Stop the insanity” and “Can’t we all get along?”

Frankly, I’m not very interested in the minutiae of who’s senior foreign policy expert recommended one slightly different strategy than another. The fact of the matter is that all of these candidates, should they become president will be presented with some very ugly realities upon taking office. After that, most of the campaign rhetoric is out the window. Hopefully, whoever is the eventual nominee can hew to the basic Democratic party line (which they all profess to do) on the big ticket items: budget (which is where most of these fights will be anyway), war, health care, and energy. All four of the remaining candidates are on the same page as to 90% of their goals. I agree that it’s worth haggling over the remaining 10%… the details, and I’m an Edwards man myself, but I’m not interested in trashing any of the others, and I certainly am impressed with, and supportive of ANY of the remaining four candidates. I trust everyone else here is, too, but sometimes the tone of the entries strikes me as a little over the top given the (mostly) shared agenda of Obama, Hill, Edwards, and Richardson.

Bottom line for me after watching the debates on WMUR the other night is this: We Can’t Lose!

That’s both a prediction and an exhortation (i.e., we can’t afford to lose!).

The Republicans spent the evening fixed on fear, terrorism, war, immigration and living in the past on 9/11.

By contrast, the Democrats focused on the pressing issues facing America: health care, education, jobs and the economy, getting our troops out of Iraq, and looking ahead with optimism, strength and hope for the future.

Which platform sounds more appealing to you?

One thing I’ve noticed is that the various camps are digging hard into their positions, which is only natural and perfectly understandable given the heated battle for the primary elections. After the primaries, however, we all have to forgive and forget and get behind whoever the eventual nominee. The debate last night reinforced for me the sense that whoever gets the nomination is going to be a VAST improvement over the current Administration and any of the candidates the GOP has to offer.

Here’s my quick take on the Democratic debate:

Obama was once again impressive: thoughtful, mature… presidential. His message of change may well be the most positive and inspiring of all the candidates. He makes a good frontrunner.

Hillary’s performance came off as very human, funny, and smart. It showed she is well-positioned to lead. Despite what some folks say (they worry about her high personal “negatives”), she would make a great president and I firmly believe she can win if she gets the nomination.

John Edwards is the most fired up of the bunch. He has a point: no matter how good your plans, if the big corporations are calling the shots in Washington then not much is going to get done. Not sure if that message is enough to bring him the nomination, but it is making a difference on the trail and it resonates with voters who know that despite our best efforts health care reform has been stymied in this country by those interests since Hillary tried to get universal care way back in 1993.

Bill Richardson probably has the best resume of them all. He’s smart and likeable but lacks the charisma of the other three; also he’s clearly frustrated that “experience” may not mean as much to voters given his polling numbers.

Best lines of the night:

Hillary, after being asked by moderator Charlie Gibson on why her personal negatives are so high… why is it that people don’t seem to like you? She replied: “Now you’ve hurt my feelings.” Which got a big laugh. “But I’ll try to carry on.” More laughs. Then Obama chimed in: “You’re likeable enough, Hillary.”

Richardson on mistakes made during the debates and if he would correct any of them. He immediately said: “In the first debate I was asked who my favorite Supreme Court Justice was… I asked ‘dead or alive’ (big laugh). So, I ended up saying Whizzer White because I figured he must be good if he was appointed by Kennedy. Of course, later I learned that he was against Roe v. Wade, against civil rights… so, yeah, in hindsight that wasn’t a very good answer.” The place broke up. Points for honesty and humility.

Edwards on the same question: “Well, I’ve already got this one figured out… in an earlier debate I teased Hillary about the jacket she wore to the debate. I’ll never do that again… by the way, Hillary, you look very nice tonight.” Again, the place broke up, and points to Edwards for making fun of his earlier gaffe.

( – promoted by odum)

As regular readers of GMD are aware, I am a solid, money-contributing supporter for the Bill Richardson campaign.  

Richardson’s star has yet to rise.  More below the fold.

My reasons why I like him, and a thought about Super Tuesday below the fold.

I consider his experience in foreign policy to be paramount to America’s success in recovering our lost international relations.

I consider his goal for a 90% reduction in carbon emissions by 2050 to be realistic.  I also look to his work in creating a green energy economy in New Mexico during his tenure as governor.

I consider his ability to revitalize our economy for middle class workers to be the most progressive and forward thinking of any candidate.

Richardson is 4-time Nobel Prize nominee.  He is a natural leader and offers a humanitarian views on social issues — including gay and lesbian rights, despite his misuse of the word “choice” in August.

The only negative responses offered on this blog are in respect to his gaffes, which have frankly been reported in a disproportional manner compared to the gaffes of the top tier candidates.

On the street in the Northeast people still don’t know a lot about Richardson.  

But in Southern and Western states, he is known quite well.

On Super Tuesday the diverse states of the South and West will vote.  Bill Richardson appeals to moderate independents as well as Democrats.  In the  West and South, we should wait and watch before we rule out the creative, economically inclined, and internationally savvy candidate in Bill Richardson.

Nate Freeman

Northfield, VT

Since tomorrow’s the big New Hampshire primary (and we have readers in New Hampshire, so this is the closest any of us are going to get to actually having an effect on the vote, short of pounding the pavement or working a phone bank), I’d like to extend an invitation.

I see that Julie has posted a candidate diary, and I’d like to as well, but I want to be fair, given that the GMD front page crowd seems to overwhelmingly lean (if not outright favor) John Edwards. For today, if you write a candidate diary for the sidebar, I’ll front page it as soon as I can (lunchtime, or during breaks if I’m not onsite at work).

This is not a wide open invitation – they need to be actual diaries, for one. Not just two sentences of “I want Hillary! Yea, Hillary!” I wanna see some prose, goldurnit.

Also – and I don’t see this happening, but just in case – this aint the time to contact HQ and get 40 new readers signed up to put a whole string of redundant diaries up and filibuster the site for others (“But odum said he’d post ’em! What a lying phony!”), but I think it’d be great to see what people have to say. Between now and when the polls close, I expect 1000 unique visitors to stop by GMD, and a couple hundred of those could well have voting rights tomorrow. It’s not enough to throw an election one way or the other, but it’s certainly a way to support your favorite pick.

Let ’em rip.

We took time to get over to Keene, NH, today to see John speak again.  We got there over an hour early and a crowd had already formed outside the venue.  By the time the event had started, the room was in overflow and the upper balcony had been opened.  I had a good seat, so I got to catch a lot of what was going on, for both discussion and photographs.  

You can see the full image set of the event here, and after the fold, I’ll give a brief summary, including some photos.

So here’s the thing:

For those of you who don’t know, Granny D. is the woman who, in her 90’s, walked across the country to support campaign finance reform.  She’s from New Hampshire and well-loved here.

Let me be perfectly clear about this: Granny D. is a big deal in New Hampshire, at least among progressives.  She ran a $20,000 campaign against Judd Greg a few years back and managed to get 37% of the vote with virtually no money.  She’s a hero in Southern NH especially.  When she entered the room, the room erupted with applause.  Then, when she endorsed John later in the event, she got a standing ovation.  Here she is doing her endorsement:

Senator Edwards explained how the endorsement came to be.  He was at an event and she just walked up to him and said “I’m going to endorse you.”

I love New England.

Edwards gave a great speech and interspersed it with special guests.  The best of those guests, aside from Granny D., was the mother of Nataline Sarkisyan.  Nataline, as you may know, died recently due to neglect, brought on in large part by her insurance company.  

Here’s her, speaking on behalf of Edwards:

There’s more about this specific woman’s history over at this excellent diary, outlining some of Clinton’s attacks on Edwards over this, so I won’t focus on them here.  I’m just going to say this: if you get the chance to see Edwards in person, especially from up close, do it.

This is a man who’s very committed to what he believes and you can see it in his eyes and in how he talks about it.  He doesn’t just give simplistic or simple answers to the people who question him.  His answers are in depth and complicated, without being inaccessible:

Now, the thing is, there’s no reason for you to believe me on this.  My impressions aren’t yours and my interpretation of human expressions are meaningless, as they should be.  Vague “you can see it in his eyes” statements don’t, and shouldn’t mean anything to you, especially not coming from me.

But here’s the deal: this man is incredible to see talking and interacting with these families.  He brought in people who had suffered tragic circumstances who talked about their experience with him and how much help he’d been.  He brought in his won experiences as well.  He’s an incredible speaker, and he’s bristling with energy, even after the incredible schedule he’s been on as of late.

I don’t know what’s going to happen on Tuesday.  I think Obama’s wowed a lot of people and is a strong candidate.  But there’s something about his energy post-debate that makes me think that he’s going to do better than people expect.  It’s hard to tell where it will all go.  Obama’s clearly got a strong advantage at this point but Edwards beat Clinton in Iowa and I am convinced he’ll do so again two nights from now.  If this turns into a two-person race, it’s anyone’s guess as to what will happen with it.

In the meantime, I’m really glad I saw this speech today, and amazed that he managed to get an endorsement from Granny D., even if he didn’t actively go seeking it out.