This afternoon I received a text message from one of my good friends in Nebraska. He is a progressive Democrat that I often talk shop with, and I have been recently bullying him because he acted as a volunteer observer for the Obama camp in Iowa a few weeks back. Here is the text message:

"Do or die in NV and SC for John. If no wins, he must clear the way!"

Pretty simple and to the point, eh? Well, let me tell you that this really set me off. Ever since late December, I have listened from the Obamanians and Clintonites and their push-from-the-top message that has hinted to a speedy exit from Senator John Edwards in order to clear the way for progress. Most of these comments come from people that are merely drinking the Kool-Aid of the respective camps, and haven't actually worked for a campaign (or even phone-banked or canvassed for a cause in the past.) Aside from the casual idealists, I have also heard from seasoned veterans that have urged me to pass up my support for Edwards for a more level-headed approach. A more level-headed approach, in their opinion, would be to allow Obama and Clinton to slug it out in celebrity fashion with little damage to their messages--on a clear path toward a united front by the end of the spring going into the summer/fall convention cycle. Their voices of reason echo sentiment based upon an ideal opportunity to look united in the face of a weakened Bush Administration and a scattered Republican presence on the road to the White House.

Here are my thoughts:

Why should I, or anyone else, roll over for the Obama and Clinton machines? What is so special about their messages or their candidacy that takes away from a distinguished and still quite eligible candidate in Senator John Edwards? Do the thousands of votes, countless endorsements, and declared delegates---in the face of NO media coverage by the national outlets---mean anything to Democratic leadership and traditional campaign veterans?

Over the past 2.5 years, when these candidates were "honing" their message at the pulpits of the U.S. Senate, John Edwards was carrying his message of hope, hard work, and change to Americans in their communities. John was standing with striking and locked-out workers on picket lines across the country, helping raise funds for local poverty shelters, and establishing a national center for poverty research in North Carolina. Where were Senators Obama and Clinton? Aside from wining and dining with celebrities that lined their velvet pockets with future campaign funds, they were in the U.S. Senate (where they had pledged to the American people to stand up to the Bush White House and turn things around for the country.) Now, I do not want you to think I devalue the candidacy of Obama and Clinton because of their service as legislators, but I do seem to remember the Democratic-controlled House and Senate rolling over like weak puppies on the issue of continued funding to the Iraq blunder. I do not remember Obama and Clinton doing anything but give a strongly-worded speech against the process in the Senate chambers. No, they wouldn't dare stick their necks out too far right before the electoral process began. They went on record as being opposed to Bush recommendations, and then hurried to the airport to go raise money and give interviews to Rolling Stone, Vibe, People, etc.

I have heard Obama and Clinton both claim that they will be able to provide consistently strong leadership for the American people if they were President of the United States of America, but they ducked for cover when the opportunity arose in the U.S. Senate.

So, what do I suggest? I suggest that Senator John Edwards continues his fight to the White House. There have only been two Democratic processes so far, and John is still in this conversation of change. I want him to have the opportunity to force real conversation at the Democratic convention this fall, and hopefully force delegates to carefully consider their voting choices when the ballots circulate for roll call. A process like that is good for America, and the Democratic Party.

I want a President of the United States of America that truly understands the benefits of progressive social work in our local communities, wants to help the middle class family at tough times (not just when it is politically convenient), and has enough respect for global relations to stay involved in conversations abroad (even after he left the U.S. Senate to run for president in 2003-2004.) John Edwards is moderate voice for progressive change in the United States, and I will not waiver in my support for him. I only wish I had the time and money to work every single day for him on the trail.

Not very often do I get a decent, hearty chuckle out of a near-disaster story online. Upon returning from one of my classes this afternoon, I decided to check out the top stories on www.cleveland.com and I came upon an absolute gem...

Crack found in Davis-Besse pipe
Posted by John Funk January 07, 2008 14:37PM

I will not lie to you... it seems harmless enough when you consider that Davis-Besse is a nuclear reactor in the Greater Cleveland area (east of downtown near Perry.) However, at a quick glance, it is an amazing headline. Here is the link to the rest of the story if you actually do care about serious potential environmental disasters: http://blog.cleveland.com/plaindealer/2008/01/crack_found_in_davisbesse_pipe.html . I guess we can only hope for the best.

Next topic: Ohio State Buckeyes follow BGSU performance to round out a poor bowl season for teams I like (And the Cleveland Browns are on vacation already.) I'm calling it an evening around 10:45 p.m. with the Buckeyes down 31-10 in the 3rd quarter. Is it MLB spring training yet?

Good night all.... Don't forget to encourage some good-spirited, partisan bickering tomorrow on behalf of the New Hampshire primary!

Bowling Green State University Football.... A Season of Firsts!

A great headline if I might say so myself, but too bad it translates into a historical negative for the local recordbooks. ESPN.com claims that last night's 63-7 thumping by Tulsa over BGSU officially became the largest margin of victory by any Division-1A opponent in Bowl Game History. That's a factoid worth singing "Go Big Flag Guy" too! I should assume that Freddie and Frieda probably didn't get down to the Chicken Dance the entire 12-13 hour bus ride home from Mobile, Alabama last evening.

In other news.... Barack Obama reportedly opened up a 10 point lead in a recent CNN-USA Today New Hampshire poll. All of this since being neck-in-neck in a 33% standoff with H.R. Clinton mere days ago. This could be the first stages of an independent surge toward Obama in the Granite State, or merely another example of a shaky poll.... one destined to give tv commentators something to bloviate about for another 24 hours on cable television. The same poll showed the new gap being gently carved (if that's possible) out of H.R. Clinton and Johnny Boy's supporters. Let's hope this is just a bullshit sampling... Edwards needs a 1st or 2nd finish for my ramblings to actually offer a tangible hope for continued success.

Final note...For a candidate that stands 0% chance at becoming president in 2008, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson looked pretty sharpe at the most recent ABC News/Facebook (yeah, Facebook) New Hampshire debate. I really enjoyed his comments regarding the economy and education. While he wasn't the first to interject the specific comments regarding the issues, and his stances may be quite similar to those of Johnny Boy and others; he was the first to bring the issues up in the debate---which, to that point, had been a long and winding road of issues that I didn't want to spend a great deal of time upon.

Welcome Back to Reality... Classes and Work resume this morning. Ohio State vs. LSU tonight after night class.... the heart says "Go Buckeyes" but the statisticians don't exactly agree with me. We'll see... maybe the point disparity will wipe the Falcons out of the recordbooks after a one-day title position?

Well.. that's why they leave storybook endings for storybooks. My dream of watching John Edwards board a plane from Des Moines to New Hampshire with a 5 point victory and a full head of steam might just live in one of those storybooks, BUT I can be rather satisfied with the results.

What does 2nd place in Iowa mean? Well, with regard to raw delegates and numbers, not much. There really isn't much difference between 1st, 2nd, or 3rd place ---about a one delegate differential in each dropping tier. But Edwards victory over the Clinton machine and his ability to compete with Obama mean that the little guy, the people's candidate, the man on a mission can still swing punches even if large corporate interests, individual donors with padded overseas bank accounts, and megastar talk show hosts don't keep his campaign fodder afloat.

Edwards should be able to convince a few more unions to come to his rescue--unions that were most definitely holding out to see if he was still legitimate from their past endorsement in 2003-2004. Additionally, Edwards will be able to recruit more volunteers, activists, small to medium level donations, and indirect surrogates because of this forced/gained respect in Iowa. That translates into more media coverage with a better spin. Instead of the down-and-out boy, Edwards is becoming the giant killer in much the same way that Huckabee is enjoying his new sound bytes. If Edwards can stay in the top 3 in New Hampshire and do well in Nevada and hold ground in South Carolina, then he still has a good chance of remaining a legitimate candidate going into the new "super dooper tuesday" in the first week of February.

Break out your bumper stickers, baby.... it's show time!
Sadly, Ohio has to wait until March to be a player in the primaries... but don't you worry, we'll make the difference again in November.

On a snowy day such as this, I have two main topics to discuss:

1. The Iowa Caucaus this evening.
2. The continuing writers' strike.

Kick off your socks, kiddies... it's about to get wet.

1. Iowa -- The Hawkeye State. America's Almost Bread-Basket. Ethanol's Best Friend. Home of the first dramatic moves in any Democratic or Republican Presidential primary season. Usually Iowa doesn't get hot until 5-6 months before the initial caucaus, but in this case there have been political operatives on the ground working for candidates since 2004-2005. Until recently, I really never had a major problem with Iowa... I tended to take out my bigotry against homogenous, all-white populations picking the presidential candidates on the citizens of New Hampshire, BUT this year turned me around somewhat.

Typically, I have written Iowa off as a smaller jewel of the Midwest.... a political battleground that allowed real debate and discussion to translate into legitimate results. This year; however, proved to change my mind.

Around a week ago, Governor Ted Strickland (D-OH) criticized the Iowa caucaus as an inappropriate and inefficienct electoral process for beginning the primary process for both parties' presidential selections. These comments were given to the Columbus Dispatch in an interview, but soon were recopied and analyzed in papers across the country. Senator Clinton's staff was quick to point out that they disagreed with Governor Strickland's comments--most notably because Strickland serves as one of her endorsers and a campaign surrogate in and outside of Ohio. This quick band-aid action by Clinton goes a long way in proving the point that candidates will do just about anything to keep their image sparkling clean in Iowa before the caucauses.

Had Clinton ignored Strickland's comments or actually embraced them, she would have witnessed one of the greatest tailspins in political history; going from tied in first to dead last (yes, Dennis Kucinich would be more popular today in Iowa.) Iowans and New Hampshirites have become spoiled with their role of "initial deciders." Instead of using their processes to truly sort through the campaign messages to offer up to the rest of America the most credible and qualified candidates to choose from on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November every four years; these states have turned an American process into a localized, heavily-benefitting game show. At this point in Iowa, there is more out-of-state money and people flowing through the state's veins than actual corn oil on the local grocery shelves. Most Americans will never step foot in either Iowa or New Hampshire in their lifetimes, but will live every second of every day with a reality that is crafted in those small states every electoral cycle.

So today I leave New Hampshire out of the mix... we'll discuss her next week. Today, Iowa becomes my body of criticism. The Iowa caucauses take place this evening in scattered school buildings, town halls, and community centers across the state. Registered voters are courted by the political campaigns and parties themselves to show up and announce their reasons for support in front of their neighbors, co-workers, and friends. These voters are allowed to sway their support across party lines and change their mind right up to the moment that they declare their true support for a candidate. Both parties and all of the candidates explain to the media that they feel this is a true example of American politics because it allows a real discussion among voters in their local communities. It actually turns into a shouting match with quips from attack ads and memorized speaking points as cannon fodder. Supporters are courted by out-of-state campaign workers and all-but-bribed to show up and stand their ground for their candidate. Television interviews show that some of these voters will refuse to support a candidate if they haven't had a chance to shake his or her hand, or ask them a question directly before the caucaus begins. At the end of the night, the votes are tallied and the floors are swept and the candidates leave for New Hampshire----and Iowa goes back to not mattering much for another few years.

Why do I think that Iowa is truly uneffective? For the simple fact that SO much depends on this initial process and SO few Iowans actually get to participate. Since the caucaus process usually involves a one-to-two hour physical committment at a pre-determined meeting site, it makes it quite difficult for those that are sick, disabled, working an evening shift or second job, taking night classes, without transportation in poor weather, or at home taking care of children to participate in the process. Thousands of would-be caucaus goers are left out of the process because they can not show up and stay for its full length. That analysis is fully consumed in the true spirit of American political democracy isn't it? All Iowans are important to the parties and the candidates... BUT only the ones that can afford to show up and yell are the real power brokers in the process. Going back to Governor Strickland's comments, I believe that he was making a reference to these points.... that until every eligible Iowa voter has a real opportunity to participate in the electoral process (whether it be through mail-in ballot or a polling site with more flexible hours), the results will be skewed dramatically and the rest of the country will have to deal with its effects in a very dramatic and immediate fashion. So wave your flags tonight, Iowa... but make sure to remember who you are disenfranchising every single time you repeat this horridly inefficient and inappropriate process.

2. Most Americans probably cannot give you a full explanation to the writers' guild strike that is most definitely affecting the entertainment industry over the past two months, but I would assume that most comments that you will hear will point out a selfish tendency by the guild members.... leading to our inability to watch new episodes of our favorite tv shows when we get home from work at night. In fact, most reponses that I have heard from individuals under the age of 30 have said just that. Very rarely are we affected directly by striking workers that are banding together to collectively bargain for their wages and benefits. Sure we see 2 minute news stories about UAW workers that are outside auto manufacturing centers but we rarely see or feel those impacts like we do now. Spoiled, spoon-fed Americans are cranky because they can not see a full season of Grey's Anatomy or hear the cackle of Jay Leno's voice each and every night as they fall asleep in their recliners after dining on tv dinners.

But now, after the dawn of the New Year 2008.... there is much rejoicing because many major networks are sending their shows back on air without the union writers. Scabs or the lack of writers are putting these shows back into circulation.... AND I refuse to support these specific networks or shows.

I applaud David Letterman however because he went out of his way to make sure that a deal was struck between his production company and the writers' guild to allow his usual writers to return to the show with an approved contract renewal. Letterman knew that it was appropriate to take sincere steps to returning his show to broadcast. Earlier in his career he had done the opposite and it seems as though he learned from his mistakes. What I can not accept or tolerate are the other networks and/or shows that are moving forward with production without their guild writers. I refuse to watch any program that blatantly violates the picket line, and I encourage you to do the same. Before watching your favorite show, please check online to see if the guild writers have received a new contract (such in the Letterman case.)

Would you want someone to walk past you on the picket line, and not respect you enough as a person to look you in the eye and offer you respect as a person at the bargaining table? Hopefully we respect one another enough to do better than that.

Happy New Year 2008!
Today is the day that John Edwards makes history!