The most super of the duper
What to watch for in the Tuesday political primaries
The most super of the duper
Dick Polman, Inquirer National Political Columnist
The Washington press corps has decreed today to be "Super Duper Tuesday," although I strongly question whether the average American has greeted the dawn with the stirring words, "Hey, honey, guess what - it's Super Super Tuesday!" Most people don't bother to vote in party primaries, assuming they even know that the primaries are being staged. Nevertheless, attention must be paid. Twelve states have primaries today. Briefly, here's where I'm focusing most of my attention:
In Nevada, we've all assumed that Harry Reid will be roadkill in November. But today the Senate Democratic leader may well catch a break - because Nevada's Republicans seem poised to nominate, as his autumn opponent, a fringe right-wing candidate with no money and zero appeal to centrist swing voters.
The likely winner today in the GOP Senate primary is Sharron Angle, a former state legislator who sets tea-party hearts aflutter. Beyond the conservative base, however, she has big problems. Whenever she articulates her positions on issues, the propeller atop her head begins to twirl.
She wants to kill the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Energy (great moves, in the wake of the BP oil spill). She wants to privatize Social Security (great move, in the wake of the ever-fluctuating stock market). She wants to eliminate the federal Department of Education (a GOP stance that died in 1996). She wants to privatize Medicare (a stance that no doubt will go over great with Nevada's growing senior population). She wants the United States to withdraw from the United Nations, and she wants to bring nuclear waste material to Nevada (whereas every successful Nevada politician has fought for years to keep such material out of Nevada). She has roughly $200,000 in the bank for an autumn election (because few people want to give her money), whereas Harry Reid is sitting on $9 million.
All told, a Nevada Republican strategist reportedly admitted yesterday, "the more she talks, the less people will think she is senatorial material." If Angle wins today, the odds are strong that swing-voting Nevadans will look more favorably on Reid as the lesser of two evils.
Meanwhile, today in Arkansas, Democrat Blanche Lincoln may well become the third incumbent senator to be ousted in advance of the autumn elections. The last time that happened, Blondie was a hot band. We're talking 1980 here.
Lincoln may well succumb to a challenge on her left flank from Bill Halter, the state lieutenant governor who has been heavily bankrolled by labor union groups. Labor has long been angered by Lincoln's center-right voting record, and apparently believes (against considerable evidence to the contrary) that a pro-labor liberal Democratic senatorial candidate can win in Arkansas this November. But less than five percent of Arkansas' workers are unionized. You do the math.
And lastly, we have South Carolina. I dearly hope that no candidate in the Republican gubernatorial primary gains 50 percent of the vote today, because that would guarantee a runoff on June 22 between the top two finishers. The race in America's political cesspool is far too entertaining to end now.
Please, let there be two more weeks. There are still lots of Republican strategists and lobbyists who haven't come forward to claim they slept with Nikki Haley, the conservative, married gubernatorial front-runner. There's still time for more of her fellow Republicans to slime her Sikh upbringing in racist terms. (State senator Jake Knotts insists that when he called her a "raghead" last week, he did so only "in jest.")
And there's still time for everybody to strap themselves to lie-detector machines. So far, only rival gubernatorial candidate Andre Bauer has done this. He announced early yesterday that his polygraph proves that he had no role in spreading rumors of people sleeping with Nikki Haley. But wait, we now have some new polygraph results. A local Fox News affiliate persuaded GOP lobbyist Larry Marchant to be tested about his claim that he had a one-night stand with Nikki, and it turns out that the results were..."inconclusive."
Fox's polygraph expert said yesterday that as many as three exams are typically required to ascertain whether somebody is lying. To that I say, great. Let's keep this primary season going for another two weeks, and hook everybody up. Andre Bauer even said yesterday that he would "absolutely" take a polygraph to disprove the persistent rumors that he's gay. Let's hope that Nikki Haley draws less than 50 percent of the vote today in her four-way primary. South Carolinians, it's up to you.
-------
The sole proprietor of this blog is on the road for the month of June. Virtually all June posts will be briefer than the norm, except on those rare occasions when posts won't show up at all. Apologies in advance for this disturbance in the force. The standard verbosity will return on Monday, June 28.
Comments (47)
So the democratic party in Arkansas is going to replace centrist Blanche Lincoln with a left-wing extremist? The Civil War is in the dem party, folks. The dems are moving further left while the country is moving right.— CD75- There is no doubt where your loyalties lie Mr. Polman:) Most of Angle's positions about govt. departments are not ridiculous to most Americans & using these same depts (EPA & Dept. of Energy) that haven't protected anything or anybody in reference to the BP fiasco is out of touch, imho. In Arkansas, Lincoln is being brought down by her left wing just as Spector was in PA. It gives the country a good choice of govt. philosophies & gets some new blood into Wash DC. A win-win. As for SC, keep mocking them Mr. Polman just know that they & the repubs do not have a monopoly on sleeze in politics!— NEPhilly
- The race in Utah really exemplifies the danger to the republican party and the tea party fervor that is voting in the primaries. Leaving aside the actual argument about who is right (libs, cons, libertarians/tea partiers, etc), the libertarian tea partiers are the ones coming out to vote because they are mad and they'll win a fair amount of primaries in the GOP. But when the general electorate, especially the moderate swing voters (and even a fair amount of conservatives) hear their platform and agenda, it comes across as so extreme that a good amount are going to run to back to the Dems, as Dick says, to choose the lesser of two evils. The GOP has a chance here to win back the congress, but they're not going to do it with extreme candidates.— donde
- NEP, come on, man. You really think that dissolving those departments is a good idea? That's ludicrous. I hope she wins, so people can see how out of touch the average voter thinks the libertarian rhetoric is.— HandNik
- hand, what have they done to save the coastline from the oil either before or after the spill. I'm just saying that dismissing other peoples ideas with words dripping w/sarcasm smacks of elitism to me & will be why the dems & incumbants in general will get trounced in November, imho. Americans realize (mostly through personal experience:) you can't keep spending $1.5 Tril more than you take in each year, yeat after year. It is a recipe for disaster. The states have to deal with it now, after being bought a year of free spending by the stimulus package but, they are running out of money now, big time. Time to cut, time to freeze govt. spending to 0% growth for 2 years, etc. Here is the thing, liberals always want to spend other peoples money on helping 'even out' the playing field right? The great irony is, their 'tax and spend' big govt. answers almost always strangle our free market economy, thus cutting tax revenues & keeping them from the ultimate goal of govt. control of everything. Just priceless, thank you God:)— NEPhilly
- Blanche Lincoln is toast. I wonder how all these incumbents who are losing will vote for the Obama/Reid/Pelosi agenda going forward. For example, how will Specter now react when asked to cast votes for liberal agenda items now that he is leaving at the end of 2010? Note to still_independent, your last post to yesterday's blog stated that the stimulus Obama passed was not intended to create private sector jobs. Please note this from the WaPo dated Feb 1, 2009..."The Obama administration says that the vast majority -- as much as 90 percent of the jobs -- would be created in the private sector. The jobs would be heavily weighted to construction and manufacturing, which together would account for almost one-third of the new or saved jobs, according to the administration's analysis. Both of those sectors have been hit hard by the economic downturn, with the construction industry shedding more than 600,000 jobs in 2008 and the nation losing nearly 800,000 manufacturing jobs in the same time period. The administration estimates that more than 600,000 of the jobs saved or created under the stimulus plan would be in retail and 500,000 would be in leisure and hospitality industries. African Americans, Hispanics and workers with lower levels of education, who have suffered most during the downturn, would see the most substantial benefits. The Obama administration estimates that more than 40 percent of the new jobs would go to women." So, Obama's own administration touted the stimulus providing 90% of its jobs in the private sector.— tom - wilmington, de
- And from the NYT dated Jan 10, 2009..."WASHINGTON — One day after the nation’s unemployment rate was reported to be at a 16-year high, President-elect Barack Obama on Saturday again raised the estimate of how many jobs would result from his economic recovery plan, saying it would create or save three million to four million, nearly 90 percent of them in the private sector...." Where are those jobs?— tom - wilmington, de
tom once we get the windfarms up and going we are going to need people to blow on them to keep the turbines spinning. Also there will be millions of jobs for people at the solar arrays making sure all the moving parts in those collectors stay oiled and moving well. These are good union jobs with benefits too. Maybe if you polished your cronyism skills you could land one of these.- It's Bush's fault.— nellar
- CD75-You constantly repeat the right-wing myth that the country is becoming more conservative. It's blatantly obvious you, and many others, have no comprehension of American political history. The nature of society and politics is that ideas that were once considered 'liberal' or 'progressive' become mainstream policy. Conservatism, at it's essence, is the impulse to hold back the tide of progress. Conserve what already exists, because change is scary. America is always becoming more liberal, because that's called progress. Yes, the GOP may win back a few seats this year, but the Democratic ideas will always win in the end. There's a host of historical examples of conservative's standing in the way of progress; abolition of slavery, women's suffrage, Social Security, civil rights, global warming. And I'm sure you can recite a litany of complaints against most of these issues, but that just further proves my point. It's not as if the GOP has the monopoly on obstructionism, either. There have been many Dems throughout American history who have stubbornly stood against the tide. But, they were wrong too. We have our first non-white president, gays and lesbians will soon be able to openly serve their country, and children will no longer die due to lack of medical coverage. I guess you're just too cynical too see progress for what it is.— Logathis
- Logathis your demonstrable knowledge of history is unparalleled in this comment section.
- I try.— Logathis
- No children died from lack of medical coverage. Please. Gays in the military is okay, but they are only 10% of the population. Being the 1st black President has bought about as much goodwill as that is going to buy. It is time to lead now, time to be in charge & I don't think this President has any idea how to not be the flame thrower from the outside looking in. The community organizer against the banks or govt. The state senator from Chicago (hanging w/Bill Ayers, etc.) , the in-the-minority, junior US Senator from Illinios & the insurgent presidential candidate. What has he ever been in charge of? The Oval Office is no place for on-the-job training, imho.— NEPhilly
- I won't begrudge Woman their Suffrage, but I think that if we took away their driver licenses we could solve a lot of problems. First it would cause a massive reduction on our oil dependence. Second it would ease congestion on the roads which not only make life more pleasurable but would also greatly help with pollution. Of course every solution comes with it's own problems so unfortunately the men (especially the easily persuaded) would be stuck driving the women around a lot of time.
- No children died from lack of medical coverage NE? Do you really believe there has never been a child, in America, who died because their family couldn't afford medical care? Go walk through North Philly, or the hills of West Virginia, and then tell me how many small children look happy and healthy. Even one is too many in a 'civilized' society. I'm sure I'll be assailed as a socialist, but I want to pay more taxes. That's right, I said it. I'm proud to pay my taxes, and especially proud when those taxes go to people who deserve them more than me. People who have never had enough leisure time and income to purchase a computer, form grand political theories, then discuss those ideas with other fortunate souls on an internet forum. You're refuting of my examples proves my point; conservatives can't comprehend their place in the grand scheme of history. Obstruction is the opposite of progress. Look it up. I don't expect you to suddenly renounce all your political beliefs, switch your party registration, and vote for Obama in 2012. Just recognize that conservative's ideas, by definition, become obsolete. You can only hold back the tide of progress for so long, before it sweeps you out of the way. I'd love to stay and debate, but I need to go vote. Maybe another time. Have a good day. number three-your sarcasm is a refreshing break from the ideological wars on this forum. thank you.— Logathis
- tom: I guess I was making a semantical distinction w/ swedesboromike. I was responding to his statement "The private sector jobs are the ones that pay the bills and the jobs that really count. " (which I agree with, btw). Private sector jobs that exist only through government spending aren't the "good type" of jobs that he was talking about. To put it more directly, if you are hired to work on resurfacing highway XYZ, you job is over when highway XYZ is completed. Now hopefully you are then hired to work the next construction job. The purpose of a stimulus is just that - to stimulate, not sustain. That's the distinction I was trying to make. Obviously, people hired by a private company are technically in "private sector" jobs. If the government were to sub out the census work to private companies, then the 400,000 jobs created last nmonth would technically be called "private sector" jobs - but it would be extremely disingenuous to do so.— still_independent
- log, show me the newspaper article or story link where a child died from lack of health insurance? Come on. I live in Philly and do the little kids look happy in N. Philly, no. Is it from lack of medical insurance, I doubt it. It's more from a lack of good schools & housing than anything else & who has been running the cities for 50 years? Progressives. I am glad to pay my fair share of taxes, but when the govt. is the only one hiring, when govt. workers make more in the same job as private workers & when the budget deficit yearly is $1.5 Tril under this President then something has to change as it is unsustainable. Why can't the govt. cut other things to pay for the changes? You see the states now buckling under as they can't deficit spend & the stimulus bill did nothing but extend the inevitible cuts needed to be made on the local level. As Europe is moving in the direction of less govt. spending & power, we in the US still are having the discussion but rest assured you can never tax & spend your way into prosperity. It is great to move into the future, but you don't throw away the good things about the past without careful consideration. We will discuss it at all at another time then:)— NEPhilly
- NEP, start with this: http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/17/harvard-medical-study-links-lack-of-insurance-to-45000-us-deaths-a-year/— PA_Dutch
- I guess the part that Polman doesn't want to tell you is that Nikki Haley is up by 20 points. And even if there is a run-off she will win that. Then the democrats will be the ones start bashing her. Perhaps Joe Biden as an Indian joke he wants to re-tell.
- NEPhilly- http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/163856/child_dies_for_lack_of_dental_care.html?singlepage=true&cat=5 Man was this easy to find. I googled 'child dies, lack of insurance'. Granted, this isn't in Philly or West Virginia. This should never, ever happen in a 'civilized' society. This may happen again, but there's much less chance thanks to Democrats in Congress. It's a little thing called CHIP, and it literally saves lives. Thank you progress for saving the lives of future cops, teachers and maybe even presidents.— Logathis
- pa, 45,000 death a year? Not even the strongest backer of healthcare reform really believes that. log, that is a pretty big stretch & it was for lack of dental insurance not health insurance? I figured there would be 45,000 stories a year for the last say 8 years or so:)— NEPhilly
- ***Another recent report, written by former Congressional Budget Office Director June O’Neill and her husband, economist Dave O’Neill, said "that lack of health insurance is not likely to be the major factor causing higher mortality rates among the uninsured. The uninsured — particularly the involuntarily uninsured — have multiple disadvantages that in themselves are associated with poor health." Those disadvantages include education level and income.*** http://www.factcheck.org/2009/09/dying-from-lack-of-insurance/— NEPhilly
- You poor saps assume that the coverage before the health care takeover will be of the exact same quality as after the takeover. If you have a system that covers everyone but is worse than before have you really accomplished anything? Oh yeah we "progressed". The progression really is more important than anything else as so aptly demonstrated today. I for one want the government who brought us Katrina, Vietnam, Iraq, WTC, Oil spill etc etc etc in charge of my health care.
- swedesboromike: why wouldn't Polman want to tell us that? He was just hoping that a runoff is forced - thus continuing the SC soap opera for a few more weeks. At no point did Polman say that she was a bad candidate or that she couldn't win in a general election. Btw, her 20% lead still had her at 43%, which would force a runoff.— still_independent
- NEPhilly : that was a very "tom-ish" quote you selected :) Keep reading the next few sentences. Even according the the single study you're quoting from, it DID lead to a higher mortality rate. Earlier in the factcheck article it also cites many, many other studies showing the same thing (albeit with different numbers of deaths)... Instead of quibbling over the specific numbers, which are impossible to prove anyway, doesn't common sense dictate that if someone does not have regular access to medical care, prescriptions, etc. and only gets their "free" medical care at the ER when it may be too late, that some percentage of fatalities will occur that wouldn't have otherwise? Now maybe that doesn't justiify the health care bill that was passed (which I opposed), but that doesn't mean that it doesn't happen.— still_independent
- still, I'll take that as a compliment:) Imo the percentage is small of people who die of such diseases anyway & the percentage is very small of folks who didn't have regular access to medical insurance & died because they didn't go to the doctor early enough. You do know that 45,000 number is hogwash & was used to scare folks into passing healthcare reform, don't you?— NEPhilly
- More evidence of the democrats' civil war from today's NYT: "But if things in the capital were not going as the activists wanted, they held out hope for change should Senator Blanche Lincoln, a Democrat they deem too conservative, lose in a runoff on Tuesday night for her party’s nomination. Liberal groups had mobilized behind her rival, Bill Halter, in what they called “a shot across the bow” to other centrists who obstruct or weaken the Democratic agenda. As dismayed as the left-leaning groups are by Congress’s Democratic leadership, which they see as too conciliatory to party conservatives, many of them ultimately blame Mr. Obama for not standing up more forcefully to Republicans."— CD75
- So if I pulled a death certificate, in the cause of death line, I would be able to see "no insurance" written there?— Ramon
- Still Independent- eh, ok if you say so. Seems to me that Polman is trying to score political points over the bigoted comments of a primary candidate with zero chance of winning. And once the Indian-American candidate wins we'll be watching the liberals bash her with reckless abandon.
- swedesboromike : if liberals disagree with the "Indian-American" candidate, why shouldn't thay bash her? Are they supposed to mindlessly support her simply because she isn't a white male? You continually claim that racism doesn't really exist any more, and that a person's skin color doesn't matter, but then attack liberals who go after a minority candidate or politician. Aren't they supposed to be color blind?— still_independent
- Ramon : wow. stupendous point, man. And I guess then that no one EVER died from smoking, either. After all, their death certificate says "cancer" or "heart attack" or "stroke". Won't find "smoking" on a death certificate, either. Now that I'm thinking about it, I guess obesity isn't a problem, either. That's not on anyone's death certificate.— still_independent
- NEPhilly, no offense, but your opinion or my opinion do not mean squat in determining the number of people dying. I have no idea what the number is. Fine, cut it in half. Is 22,500 acceptable? Cut it by 75%. Is 11,500 OK? In the grand scheme of things, and this will sound harsh, 45,000 people is not that large a number. Even if the 45,000 number is accurate, that'd put it below the number of flu deaths each year. About the same number of people die in auto accidents each year. I'm not going to propose banning automobiles, and I was against the health bill that was passed. But our opposition to the health bill does not mean that some people do not die as a result of not having health insurance. I can accept that. However, if it helps you sleep at night, then fine, no one dies from not having health insurance. And your pet dog as a kid really did move out to the country.— still_independent
- wow ne philly, you go from no one ever died for lack of health coverage, to lack of coverage isn't the main reason people succumb to disease, to quibbling over the numbers of people who have died from lack of coverage in a matter of minutes. your argument has turned to dust but you'll never admit such— nj2az
- Firstly, people do not die for lack of health insurance. People die for lack of medical care. The reasons for that lack of medical care could be numerous and probably include lack of health insurance. The problem in trying to perform studies to determine such causes are numerous, such as "is the person voluntarily uninsured", "would the person have sought medical care in time if he/she had health insurance" (how many people with insurance put off physicals, tests, etc.), "are there other factors that would have made having health insurance irrelevant" (was the person an alcoholic, drug abuser, homeless, etc.), "was medical care available even though the person did not have health insurance" (free clinics, free prescription drugs from one of the firms, charity care, etc.). These are all ignored or exacerbated by studies depending on the desired outcomes based on ideology. But they need to be taken into account. It is easy to say "45,000 people die each year for lack of health insurance", but it is misleading at best, and an outright fabrication at worse.— tom - wilmington, de
- The link posted about the child who died for lack of dental insurance is a case in point. That child died for lack of care. The fact the mother canceled appointments and did not seem to contact any agenies that may have been able to assist shows the problems. The extraction would have cost $80, as posted in the story. Would no dentist have taken a reduced fee? Would no dentist have done it for free? Could it have been done at a clinic or hospital? Since the other child also had six infected teeth, were they not taught proper dental hygiene? What else could have been done other than just canceling appointments?— tom - wilmington, de
- Meanwhile, back at the Obama/Democrat Party fiscal responsibility ranch...from Reuters "The U.S. debt will top $13.6 trillion this year and climb to an estimated $19.6 trillion by 2015, according to a Treasury Department report to Congress. The report that was sent to lawmakers Friday night with no fanfare said the ratio of debt to the gross domestic product would rise to 102 percent by 2015 from 93 percent this year. "The president's economic experts say a 1 percent increase in GDP can create almost 1 million jobs, and that 1 percent is what experts think we are losing because of the debt's massive drag on our economy," said Republican Representative Dave Camp, who publicized the report. He was referring to recent testimony by University of Maryland Professor Carmen Reinhart to the bipartisan fiscal commission, which was created by President Barack Obama to recommend ways to reduce the deficit, which said debt topping 90 percent of GDP could slow economic growth." Of course Obama and the Dems HAVE to spend all this money because it is Bush's fault.— tom - wilmington, de
- Still Independent- criticism on policy in a campaign is fine. I just remember some of the liberal left calling Condi Rice a slave in the master's house( Harry Bellefonte) and supposed women's rights supporters on the talk shows criticizing Sarah Palin's run with McCain as questionable since she had a baby. So we will see how the left plays it. Nikki Haley almost won the race outright last night but came up a smidge short. So she will face a run off. She will likely be the next governor of the state of South Carolina. I know that disappoints the left as it runs counter inttuitive to the narrative that everyone in the south who is white is bigoted.
- So, Obama would speak with Ahmadinejad without pre-conditions, he will meet with Syria, Venezuela, and North Korea. Yet, he said on the TODAY show he would not speak with the CEO of BP because he would just get the run-around, it would be just words. What happened to the importance of open dialogue?— tom - wilmington, de
- Tom, good point. I was going to bring that up too. Regardless of what he thinks the BP CEO would say, it should be worth a conversation to say the least. And to a large part the media is letting Obama get away with this non chalant attitude regarding the spill. What he should be doing is mobilizing and coordinating clean up plans with the help of the governors of the Gulf States.
- In the study that show 45,000 died due to lack of health insurance. Over a 12 year period there was a total of 351 people that died in the study. Of that supposedly 60 died without health insurance(when the subject died they did not check if they had insurance at the time). From that they extrapolated 45,000 died due to lack of health insurance. That left 291 that supposedly died with health insurance (again they did not check if they had insurance). Would that mean over 300,000 died because they had health insurance? That does sound about right. It is estimated that 200,000 die to mistakes in hospitals, another 100,000 because of secondary infections acquired in hospitals, and another 100,000 dies due to prescription errors. That would mean about 20% of every death in the U.S. is due to the medical attention they receive. Might be better to not have health insurance and to stay away from doctor and hospitals.— Mike Welbourn
- still, I never take offense:) More people in the future will die because of our new healthcare reform plan than would have died under the old plan, imho:) Canada is moving away from just the sort of scheme we just enacted. Also, we are all going to die eventually so we have to die of something:) My dad used to say, 'no one gets out alive'. mike, you are too funny:) Our national debt is going to bankrupt our cities & states first as the stimulus just bought a year of not dealing with the problem of too much govt. spending & the healthcare reform bill is just another brick we all have to carry.— NEPhilly
- nj, I don't see how my argument has been refuted. One Harvard study does not the truth make. I still have seen no articles or links where a specific person died because of lack of health insurance. People could always get treated & still can. Will they go bankrupt if they can't pay, probably, but they are still alive God willing. I'm just sayin', if there are 45,000 deaths a year from lack of health insurance you would think it would be easy to find thousands of links documenting that?— NEPhilly
- Mike that is why Obama said that Doctors are just money grubbing no good louses. They just rip tonsils out and such for a quick buck so they can continue their fat cat lifestyles. And we all know how smart and godlike Obama is. Just ask any of the niks or independents on here.
- tom: I agree with you about Obama's stance on not talking to Heyward being either dumb or just immature. Very shortsighted as well. You ALWAYS talk to the guy, even if you believe you'll get the runaround. Then, its easy to figure out who's rear to kick when he hangs himself with his own words.— yobill626
- It does appear that with Lincoln's victory, the Dems can claim a bit more discipline within its party than what we're seeing from the 'Pubs. The Moderate won out over the Liberal, while in more than one GOP race, the Extremist won out over the Moderate. If the Swing Independents typically win the GE's, that is not a good sign for the GOP.— yobill626
- Where are the camps that we're supposed to use to hold all of the Republicans we round up? When do we start rounding them up? A bunch of whackos that seem to be proud of being ignorant. Republican: "You think you're ignorant???? You haven't seen anything. I'll show you what ignorant is!!!!"— MikeP
- excellent post - from on the road. Here is comment relating in part to Haley: The Semantics of Affairs It's annoying that the media keep referring to the extramarital activities of people like Tiger Woods as "affairs". An example might be an actress who had "affairs" with 3 of her last 4 leading men. Or a husband who picked up a woman on a business trip. In my view, an affair is " a romantic or passionate attachment" of some duration. Not a just a f___, or "quickie". Here's a recent example: "Nikki Haley Denies Second Rumored Affair" responding to - "South Carolina lobbyist Larry Marchant said Wednesday that he had a one-night stand with Haley during a 2008 trip to Salt Lake City for a conference on school choice." Media: Even though a bit tricky, call it what it is! Related is misuse of the word "mistress" A common definition is :"a woman other than his wife with whom a married man has a continuing sexual relationship, often with continuing financial support" A night with a cocktail waitress does not make her a mistress. homer www.altara.blogspot.com— homerh
1
Popular Posts
About this blog
Cited by the Columbia Journalism Review as one of the nation's top political reporters, and lauded by the ABC News political website as "one of the finest political journalists of his generation," Dick Polman is a national political columnist at the Philadelphia Inquirer. He is on the full-time faculty at the University of Pennsylvania, as "writer in residence." Dick has been a frequent guest on C-Span, MSNBC, CNN, NPR and the BBC. He covered the 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004 presidential campaigns.
ARCHIVES
All commentaries posted before April 18, 2008, can be accessed at www.dickpolman.blogspot.com.
Search this blog:
Blog Roll
- American Spectator
- David Limbaugh
- Free Republic
- Glenn Reynolds
- Hugh Hewitt
- Human Events
- John Hawkins
- Matt Lewis
- Michelle Malkin
- National Review
- Opinion Journal
- Power Line
- Red State
- The Brody File
- The Daily Caller
- Town Hall
- Weekly Standard
- Center for American Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- Daily Kos
- David Corn
- Huffington Post
- Media Matters
- Mojoblog (Mother Jones)
- Open Left
- Political Animal
- Salon's War Room
- Talking Points Memo
- Tapped
- The Democratic Strategist
- The Grey Matter
- Unclaimed Territory
- Andrew Sullivan
- Attytood
- Chi Tribune's The Swamp
- CJR's Campaign Desk
- CNN's Political Ticker
- CQ Politics
- FactCheck.org
- Gail Collins
- Howard Kurtz
- Mickey Kaus
- NBC's First Read
- Obit
- Political Wire
- Politico
- Politics Daily
- Pollster.com
- Real Clear Politics
- The Atlantic Wire
- The Fix
- The Moderate Voice
- The Plank
- USA Today On Politics
- Wonkette
Classifieds:
Site Services:
Partners: