I was on the computer reading blogs while listening to MSNBC dissect the South Carolina Democratic Presidential Primary. While most would see it as an Obama victory, Tim Russert and others of his ilk are practically triumphant in their characterizing it as a Clinton loss.
I like Barack. He's not my favorite, but he'll do. Same goes for Hillary. She'll do. I'm a marginalized voter. I have only one issue: the Supreme Court. Because of that, I have to vote for whomever the Democratic Party's nominee for President is. I am willing to compromise all of my other issues to this one. The Republicans all are idiots when it comes to the Supreme Court. Dangerous idiots.
This will be the first time in all of my voting life when my vote in the California primary actually has a value. In the past, by the time we got to choose, the race was over. The time previous to this when it mattered was 1968 when Bobby Kennedy won the primary, only to lose it to an assassin.
I've already voted, by the way. I'm just happy that it might mean something. Go John Edwards.
This morning on Meet the Press, Maureen Dowd referred to Sen. Obama's victory speech in South Carolina as being "angry in tone." I just watched it. Didn't sound angry to me. Except maybe ... hey, maybe it's just me, but some of the anger tone of Obama's Big Speech is deliberate. A prophet heralding a new age has to have a touch of anger at the old age. Otherwise, why is there a need for a new age? Oh, and Maureen Dowd is a bloviating idiot blinded by her hatred of the Clintons. She farts constantly and believes that she's singing.
I'm slowly being convinced that Sen. Obama will make a good candidate. I mean no disrespect to Sen. Obama with this analogized question, but "what does the dog do when he catches the car it's been chasing?" Seems to me that we need something more than just the dog pissing on the wheel. I'm just saying, that's all.