The Beat - All Print Articles

Published on Thursday, January 31, 2008 by The Star Tribune, Minneapolis, Minnesota

Columnist Molly Ivins is greatly missed, but her example can guide us in this campaign.
by Susan Lenfestey

It’s been a year since Molly Ivins died, leaving us to slog through the political landscape without her sanity-saving blend of insight, humor and outrage. Unlike Maureen Dowd, who delights in snippy wordplay, with Molly you felt the words erupting from her soul, ricocheting off her funny bone and then passing through her brain to be arranged in a way that made sense — an enormous challenge when dealing with the non-sense of the president she called “Shrub.”

As Super Tuesday closes in with the fate of — oh, just about everyone — at stake, I keep wishing I could open my paper and find Molly’s take on it all. What fun she would have had with the entire Republican slate, from the moribund-on-arrival Fred Thompson to the 12th-century worldview of affable Mike Huckabee to the transformation of “America’s Mayor” to America’s meltdown.

And she wouldn’t have let John McCain’s resemblance to an ermine — a short-legged weasel who changes color with the seasons — go unnoticed.

On the other side I imagine she’d have taken a few jabs at Dennis Kucinich for toe-tapping with a UFO and at John Edwards for his pricey girly-man haircuts — yet slapped them a high-five for the truths they dare to speak. She encouraged veracity no matter how eccentric the package; she just couldn’t tolerate “clever straddling,” as she put it.

She would have donned a hazmat suit to deal with the hydra-like beast called Billary that clawed its way to defeat in South Carolina. She was clear on where she stood on the Clintons, calling Bill “as weak as bus-station chili” and writing in January 2006, “I’d like to make it clear to the people who run the Democratic Party that I will not support Hillary Clinton for president. Enough. Enough triangulation, calculation and equivocation.”

So as millions of us trudge off to caucuses and primaries next Tuesday, I’m wondering: What Would Molly Do?

Referring to the death of Gene McCarthy in that same 2006 column, she gave a pretty good idea of where she stood.

“There are times a country is so tired of bull that only the truth can provide relief. If no one in conventional-wisdom politics has the courage to speak up and say what needs to be said, then you go out and find some obscure junior senator from Minnesota [or Illinois — my add] with the guts to do it.”

Well, McCarthy didn’t win, but he also wasn’t much of a candidate. I knew and admired Eugene McCarthy, but I think it’s safe to say he was no Barack Obama. But by coalescing the young and the antiwar voters, he forced those who did win to put an end to America’s other mistake of a war.

So Molly would rail at us not to let Bush Co. — and any lily-livered so-called leader who is up for election — tell us that this war is no longer an issue.

With plans for permanent military bases throughout Iraq and likely Republican candidate John McCain’s comfort with 100 years of occupation — not to mention the obscene daily loss of life and treasure — we are a nation that will continue to bleed out until we die.

So do what Molly would do. Go to your precinct caucus on Feb. 5, not because your candidate’s political future depends on it, but because your nation’s future depends on the candidate you choose. Go with Molly’s words ringing in your ears: “We want to find solutions other than killing people. Not in our name, not with our money, not with our children’s blood.”

Susan Lenfestey lives in Minneapolis and writes at the Clotheslineblog.com.

POLITICS

Posted on Fri, Jan. 25, 2008

Edwards rises in S.C. polls

Palmetto State native might be in striking distance for 2nd-place finish

By RODDIE A. BURRIS - rburris@thestate.com

Watch John Edwards.

With only a day left before Saturday’s S.C. Democratic presidential primary, the former U.S. senator from North Carolina and S.C. native is making a move, tracking polls suggest.

While still in third, Edwards’ poll numbers have been rising since Monday’s Myrtle Beach debate.

One new poll says Edwards is threatening U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York for second place in South Carolina. However, no poll finds him threatening the S.C. leader, U.S. Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois.

For instance, a less favorable poll for Edwards — from McClatchy/MSNBC, released Thursday — showed Obama favored by 38 percent of S.C. voters, Clinton at 30 percent and Edwards at 19 percent. An Ebony/Jet magazine poll was similar. It has Obama at 37 percent, Clinton at 27 percent and Edwards at 15 percent.

The three new polls, released Thursday, found a high number of voters are undecided.

According to the latest Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll, Edwards has gained 4 percentage points since Wednesday and is the choice of 19 percent of likely voters. Obama maintains the S.C. lead at 39 percent but his lead is down 4 percentage points over Clinton from a day earlier.

Clinton logged in at 24 percent. That puts Edwards, who desperately needs a victory Saturday, in a statistical tie with Clinton for second place.

Edwards has overtaken Clinton among male voters in the poll, registering 23 percent support to Clinton’s 19 percent, a rise of 8 percentage points for Edwards.

The results were based on telephone surveys of 811 likely S.C. Democratic voters, called Monday through Wednesday. The poll’s margin of error was plus or minus 3.4 percentage points.

The Zogby poll also found Obama’s support among black voters has slipped by 9 points, to 56 percent. Edwards’ support among African-Americans, previously negligible, had risen to 5 percent.

Nineteen percent of black voters told Zogby they were undecided.

“There’s something happening here,” pollster John Zogby said of the S.C. race in a press release. “What it is ain’t exactly clear.”

A new Clemson University Palmetto Poll found Edwards in a statistical tie with Clinton for second place among past S.C. Democratic primary voters.

Obama leads with 27 percent. Clinton was at 20 percent and Edwards at 17 percent. The poll’s margin of error was plus or minus 4.6 percentage points.

However, 40 percent of those polled by Clemson were undecided — or unwilling to disclose — for whom they plan to vote.

Edwards also is up in a SurveyUSA Election Poll taken Tuesday and Wednesday.

He claimed 22 percent of the vote, up 7 percentage points from a week ago. Obama continued to lead at 45 percent, unchanged from last week, and Clinton tallied 29 percent, down 7 percentage points.

“At the very least, Edwards may do better than predicted,” said Todd Shaw, a USC assistant professor of political science.

To win, however, Edwards would have to pull votes from Clinton and Obama and capture virtually all of the undecideds.

“A little implausible,” Shaw said.

POLITICS

01/23/2008 @ 11:35am

Slick Willie Rides Again
William Greider

The Clintons play dirty when they feel threatened. But we knew that, didn't we?

The recent roughing-up of Barack Obama was in the trademark style of the Clinton years in the White House. High-minded and self-important on the surface, smarmily duplicitous underneath, meanwhile jabbing hard to the groin area. They are a slippery pair and come as a package. The nation is at fair risk of getting them back in the White House for four more years. The thought makes me queasy.

The problem is not Hillary Clinton per se or the sharp exchanges and personal accusations that squeamish political reporters deplore. That's what politics is always about. Tough, even nasty conflict is educational, also entertaining. Politics ain't beanbag, as Mark Shields likes to say.

The one-two style of Clintons, however, is as informative as low-life street fighters. Mr. Bill punches Obama in the kidney and from the rear. When Obama whirls around to strike back, there stands Mrs. Clinton, looking like a prim Sunday School teacher and citing goody-goody lessons she learned from her 135 years in government.

I thought Obama did quite well in response, looked strong and stayed in character. But we shall see. He was compelled to play defense and to hope the audience recognized foul play. It's possible the Clintons won on points, simply by making Obama look like a confused young man who had to keep repeating what he had actually said.

The style is very familiar to official Washington, not just among the Clintons' partisan adversaries, but among their supporters. The man lied to his friends. All the time. They got used to it. They came expect it. I observe a good many old hands among the Senate Democrats are getting behind Obama. It would be good to know more about why they declined to make the more obvious choice of endorsing the power couple.

We are sure to see more of Mr. Bill's intrusions because the former president is pathological about preserving his own place in the spotlight. He can't stand it when he is not the story and, one way or another, he will make himself the story. I used to be sympathetic toward Mrs. Clinton on this point. No longer.

She is using her egocentric husband to do the low-road hits for her campaign. He is good at it--a real charmer if you've never seen his act before. Or is Mrs. Clinton's husband using her? People can ask that question without disturbing the principles of feminism. Evidently, many of the mainstream party faithful want the Clinton team as their presidential nominee. It's their choice, of course. But does the rest of the country really deserve this?

Posted on Thursday, January 24, 2008 by

The Beat in News Shorts |

1 Comment |