Wah, wah, wah, Mark Silva and his friends in the DNC don't like the rules that the democrats of Indiana decided for their primary. How DARE those little people decide who can and can't vote in their primary!

Just remember boys and girls, this is America, just because you get more votes doesn't mean you win.

Just ask Jeff, (Bush - 2000).

Actually, I really like open primaries. I think they make for the most interesting elections.

I really don't see a problem here. The rules allow for the GOPers to vote in the Dem primary. Just as Howard Dean and Barak Obama claim that the DNC rules say that the primary voters of Michigan and Florida don't count.

I have always said, the Republicans really like Senator Clinton. I don't know what it is, maybe it's her war-mongering, or her fear-mongering!! In any case, the Republicans are voting for Senator Clinton!! I always knew Senator Obama was the true Democrat!!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE. NOW.

Well that should shoot down Hillarys' claim that she is on a roll AND electable.

Sorry, Mr. Silva, but that doesn't jive with the preconceived-in-stone notions which are the lifeblood of Jeff and his ilk. It's very simple: media = liberal. No amount of evidence to the contrary can shake this blissfully simple equation; the reflexive response to the cognitive dissonance produced by any sliver of information that contradicts this worldview is to simply move along to the next example that reinforces rather than contradicts it.

And, on the chance we've got your attention, apparently the FBI has raided the offices (and home) of the head of the Office of Special Counsel (http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/washington/politics-usa-fbi-search.html)

though I suppose that wouldn't be newsworthy to a fiercely liberal paper (cough, cough) like the Trib... : )

Operation Chaos working as it should!! Viva La Limbaugh!!!

O.K., I am liberal in most instances as most regular bloggers know. And I have no use whatsover for windbags like Limbaugth. But, Mark, I don't like the phrase "Marching Orders". That insults the intelligence of readers and is below the standards of objective reporting I hope to expect form all "journalists".

That being said, "cross over" voting in primaries should not be allowed. For eihter side. (and please no, "be careful what you wish for" arguments, I don't care)

Your party affiliation should be listed on your voter ID card and you should not be allowed to participate in the other parties primary.

Rush Limbaugh? Does that drug-addled comedian have any credibility? I hope the voters aren't following him like lemmings....or we're really in trouble.

Rush Limbaugh? Does that drug-addled comedian have any credibility? I hope the voters aren't following him like lemmings....or we're really in trouble.

Dear Superdelegates,
If Limbaugh and the republicans are working so hard to keep Obama from winning, just who do you think they do not want to run against? Don't buy the dogfood from the Clinton spin mongers that an Indiana win says that she is the better for for McCain. On the contrary, running against Billary is McCain's only chance.

No Bush lll. support Obama

"CROSSOVERS SPEAK"

YES, WE CAN "THWART" AN AMERICAN ELECTION. HE'S BLACK!
YES, WE CAN "THWART" THE BORN AND THE UNBORN! SHE'S A WOMAN!
YES, WE ARE "FOLLOWERS" AND "ELITIST" OF THE AMERICA.
YES, WE WILL FOLLOW SATAN TO THE GALLOWS OF PAKISTAN! HE'S BLACK AND SHE'S A WOMAN.
BROTHER PROPHET RUSH SPEAKS AND WE FOLLOW.
YES WE ARE THE FOLLOWERS AND FOLLOWERS ARE "FIXING BROKEN WINDOWS" IN THE WHITE HOUSE, WE ARE THE "THOUGHT POLICE" OF AMERICA. SHE'S A WOMAN, HE'S A BLACK MAN! YES WE WILL "THWART" THE AMERICAN DREAM BECAUSE WE ARE THE "CROSSOVERS"
OUR VOTE WON'T COUNT!

Superdelegates take note. The strategic cross-over voting devalues Clinton's performance.

I dont like politics at all. But once in a lifetime there comes along a candidate that draws you into the fray. If Obama wasn't that good, I wouldnt care. I was through after getting BUSH-whacked. I have republican friends that almost apologize to me for that everytime we talk about it. Even they hate Bush. Republicans are getting to help decide who faces them in the General election and that is WRONG. They haven't said a word about LIARY. But you know what....politics almost always give us what the rich 10 percent wants. Its just too eerie.

leave it ti hillary to rally thr rep vote she s been after that since the start talking about mcshame and her mentor george bush

Thanks for your honest response, Mark. Cynic, I criticize reporters who show their biases in their admittedly opinionated blog posts. That and their grammar. Silva is 100% right that open primaries are the most interesting type of primary. Open primaries are also the most democratic in that they allow all voters to have a choice. When the system is working right, both parties have good candidates and tight races and the effect of crossover voters is mitigated by the more important decision of "who represents me and what I believe is my party" to each voter.

Why should we rail against a system that allows the most possible voter turnout just because the candidates themselves turn out to be nothing to write home about or the race has already been decided before that particular primary?

One should expect all kinds of silliness from people who proudly proudly produce car license plates featuring the slogan "In God We Trust."

Actually, I really like open primaries. I think they make for the most interesting elections.

David, why shouldn't the individual state be allowed to choose for itself whether it wants to allow crossovers or not? I understand your logic and if that's what the state I'm living in decides then I agree to the standard, but isn't running elections a power that's spefically given to the individual states under the constitution? I don't see any need for a single, national standard. I think different states and communities have different populations and those populations should be allowed to choose for themselves what their voting standards should be via their elected representatives and respective party leaders.

I hope Democrats will realize that Rushbo's goal -- very clearly stated -- is to make life uncomfortable for the Democrats, and the best way of doing that is to vote Hillary, the reason being that she is behind, so a win prolongs the Democratic primary, and that her presence in November would make the Republicans very competitive in a bunch of states that Democrats usually count upon. If you want to make life uncomfortable for McCain, you vote for Obama. Pretty simple really; if you disagree with Rush, you should also know that you don't want his choice of Democrat.

Operation Chaos working as it should!! Viva La Limbaugh!!!

Posted by: John D | May 6, 2008 3:03 PM

-----------------------

O.K., I am liberal in most instances as most regular bloggers know. And I have no use whatsover for windbags like Limbaugth. But, Mark, I don't like the phrase "Marching Orders". That insults the intelligence of readers and is below the standards of objective reporting I hope to expect form all "journalists".

Posted by: David J | May 6, 2008 3:04 PM

David J,

I think Mark nails it with his headline, just look at lil' Johnny D'ittoheads post (see above) for proof.

I wonder what the Amreican public would say if this type of tampering were being reported in other countries. Specifically 'third world' nations in Africa or South America?

We are a country of hyprocrites now aren't we.

But I suppose it's ok because America is the defender of Democracy throughout the world.

Fools.

"Your party affiliation should be listed on your voter ID card and you should not be allowed to participate in the other parties primary." Well, I for one don't have a party affiliation, and in non-primaries have been known to vote for some Democrats and for some Republicans as the candidate, not the party, determines who I vote for. Not everyone "belongs" to a political party. I see no problem with Republicans voting for the Democrat of their choice, for what ever reason. It was done in other primaries in other states, you know. It's just nice that our votes mean something outside of our own offices on the ballot.

It is bloggers like Mark Silva who keep the disservice going. The vast majority of Republicans do NOT listen to Rush Limbaiugh and would never have even HEARD about his marching orders until the likes of Silva started yukking it up. This is a democratic republic--I believe Republicans SHOULD be allowed to cross over and vote for another party's candidate---WHEN IT IS A SINCERE, GOOD-FAITH exercise of democracy. When it is, instead, an abuse of the democratic process, then I hope they get what they deserve---for one, a party rule that says you cannot switch back for the general election. That'll bring out the honesty in more people.

Of course Republicans are voting for Senator Clinton. She's the best Republican candidate running.

First of all, the equation "media = liberal" is the most ridiculous fabrication ever conceived by Limbaugh and O'Reilly. Case in point, the New York Times's coverage of the 2000 presidential election was far more stilted in Bush's favor than Gore's.

Second of all, it's pathetic that Indiana Republicans have nothing better to do with their time than to cast "sabotage" votes. Do Limbaugh and his soft-headed, gullible listeners think that's their only chance to hold onto the presidency? How about you put your energy towards positive efforts to get McCain elected, or do you think, in a campaign on the issues, that he can't win? Luckily, the Supreme Court is ready and willing to steal another election for the GOP.

Go Obama, and Go Hoosiers!

I wonder how they are doing that. Washington state used to have open primaries, but the Repubs and Dems took the state to court and we lost. The court said the parties have a right to close the primaries. So how does Indiana do it????

I love the way that Obama supporters have deluded themselves into believing that crossover voting helps Clinton when the hardcore evidence, Rush Limbaugh not withstanding, is to the contrary.

It was the Obama campaign that developed the "Democrat for a Day" strategy back in January, before Limbaugh ever mentioned it and suggested that it was Democrats crossing over to vote for McCain that gave him the idea.

Maybe Obamanites just have not added the additional turn to the pretzel and figured out that Limbaugh wants them to think that Repugs are crossing over to vote for HRC so that Obama backers will blame that for her victories and erroneously conclude that their candidate is stronger even though he keeps losing... when in fact, that is EXACTLY what Rush Limbaugh wants them to think, because he would really like to see Obama in the campaign in November.

The problem with Obama supporters is not that they are paranoid. They just aren't paranoid enough!

Looky, I often wonder why Jimmy Carter and the UN aren't monitoring Cook County elections every time the Sequoia Voting Machines "don't transmit vote totals to headquarters" whenever a Stroger is on the ballot. A one-party system that's more interested in perpetuating its own power than respecting one-man-one-vote has been in charge of this city and county for most of our adult lives.

Hee Hee Hee Hee What delight! Especially if Clinton is the DNC Candidate for Pres., and She loses in Indiana against McCain. Hee Hee Hee What Delight!

Hmm ... A couple of one-tooth wonder Republicans are voting for Clinton to cause "havoc" within the Democratic party. I'm really shaking in my boots. Yawn.

I can definitely vouch for the fact that some republicans in Indiana are voting on the Democrat ballot to try to create a longer running split in the Dem party (a few of my republican friends voted for Hillary). But I don't understand why they would sacrifice voting for who they want locally on the republican ticket. They obviously don't want democrats in locally. Probably why we don't ever have qualified enough local politicians because people don't care. Especially considering McCain, Obama nor Hillary are particularly the best suited to be president. People should at least try to get some qualified local politicians??

Tony, you do realize that voters of BOTH parties are allowed to vote for whoever they want in the general election, don't you? Democrats can vote for republicans like they did for Reagan and republicans can vote for democrats like they did for Clinton. What effect would not allowing someone to switch back for the general possibly have?

The GOP is also running attack ads against Obama in North Carolina

The GOP can beat Clinton.

However, they are afraid of Obama.

Anyone willing to do anything at the urging of Rush Limbaugh would have to be a complete moron!!

Jeff

Could it be that the UN and Carter can't count past their fingers????

All the Republicans I know in Indiana have all their teeth. Its properly because their rich unlike the toothless wonders from the Democrat Party. Yeee Haawww

I just hope Rush's listeners will be happy when President Hillary Clinton addresses the nation in January next year. Just remember, it's what you voted for! She'd beat the pants off McCain!

I support McCain but I think Limbaugh is a pig, no matter what color he wears.

Wouldn't be so very ironic that, if Hillary wins the Dem primary with the help pf Rush and the GOP, she should then go on to beat McCain in the general election?

That should be just about enough to send that old dogpile Limbaugh to the retirement home.

Everyone should be able to vote in any primary. Period. The days of saying who and can't vote are over in this country. There's no difference between saying a woman or a person of color cannot vote and saying a Repulican or Democrat can't vote.

1) Anyone who takes issue with a reporter's blog posts, with regards to bias, needs to come to terms with the relatively new infotainment phenomenon of "news analysis," in which reporters, generally better-informed about the topics they write about than the average Joe, are given carte blanche to "opine" about those topics. The point of news "blogs" is to facilitate just this type of "off-the-cuff" reportage as opposed to standard, objective news reporting.

2) If anyone finds anything in the above "post" (as opposed to "story/article") that suggests Mr. Silva is bemoaning the results of this situation, as opposed to simply pointing it out, I'd be fascinated to know what he or she thinks that might be.

3) If, related to point 2 above, someone feels that "marching orders," or to a much flimsier extent, "havoc," in some way indicate bias, perhaps one might look to the topic of the post, an effort entitled, a la our exceedingly successful and glorious military efforts, "Operation Chaos," the express goal of which is, as the title indicates, to create chaos within the Democratic primary (though I suppose "havoc," when uttered from the mouth of a member of the media, apparently no longer means what virtually any dictionary on Earth suggests it to mean).

Republicans like Hillary because they are familiar with her. Mr obama is still an unknown

Hardcore liberals do not win national elections. Obama, little do most people know, has the most liberal voting record in the Senate.

Republicans are crossing over just to make this primary drag on longer, not because they care for either candidate. Both Hillary and Obama would be complete disasters. It is humorous how some people degrade the current president then want to vote for one of them.

I really doubt there's much of an effect over here in Indiana from the cross over voting. There are two strong democrats running for governer here, as well, and it wouldn't surprise me to hear that plenty of republicans are voting to try to pick the governer, since the current one is very unpopular.

Of course, its silly for anyone to try to make a case for the democrats out of Indiana. We're a Republican stronghold, which should tilt the favor to Obama, since he's won many red states. Either way, I don't see why we Hoosiers would be such a big deal to the supers...last democrat that got away with Indiana's electoral college votes was FDR. McCain would have to really shoot himself in the foot to lose here.

Few republicans in my area, an area that had only two contests disputed for the democrats, are voting for anyone to keep the race going. Most are voting republican, anyway, since there are a heck of a lot more contests to vote in, and those that do opt for the democrat ballot are voting for who they think is better (with or without good reasoning), not to keep the nomination in the air.

What does this say about their party? They know they can't win fair and square. They can't be honest and tell the truth. They have to lie, they have to spin, they have to cheat. They know it is their only chance to hold onto the power the need to rob us and our childern. Sad, so very sad.

the implication that any of these "operation chaos" idiots would be voting for obama is incorrect.

"operation chaos" is designed to fraudulently prolong the nomination race. the only way to do so is for hillary to win. if obama wins indiana, it's over. so to imply that republican frauds are also voting for obama is wrong.

there may be republicans who vote for obama out of principle, but not because of "operation chaos" because it defeats the purpose of "operation chaos".

and to the poster who took umbrage at the author's referring to limbaugh's "marching orders" - what else are they? going out to vote for someone you have no intention of supporting doesn't happen by itself. anyone who participated in "operation chaos" ought to be deeply, deeply ashamed of themselves, and do not deserve to refer to themselves as patriots under any circumstances, because they have taken a dump on america today.

totally shameful.

I live in Missouri where we have an open primary. I think it is much better than closed primaries since more people will vote. In 2000 I voted for McCain on the Republican ballot because I thought he was much better than any other candidate that year. This year I voted for Obama. While I my preference is for Obama over Clinton, I will probably vote for the Democrat in November. I think the Republican party has lost its way.

I used to be a supporter of open primaries, as we have here in Virginia where the independents helped Obama win by a huge majority. Now I'm not so sure.

If Indiana delegates wanted to be fair, they'd adjust their votes (as is their right) to reflect the Democratic vote of their state, minus the Rush contingent.

The Democratic Party has rules that are not democratic. In Texas, you have the voter, then you have the delegate, then you have the superdelegate. The Democratic Party does not trust the American voters to elect a suitable person for President of the United States of America. Says a lot about that party, doesn't it??? And the caucases in Texas were a mess; only the unemployed could stay all night as they did.

remember what is going on here. republicans are supporting Hillary not because they think they can more easily beat her over obama in the fall, but rather because republicans and all other decent, freethinking Americans are scared to death of obama. Democrat superdelegates should take notice of the tsunami that is preparing to destoy the democrats in the fall if obama is the nominee. Hillary is the only chance the Democrats have of winning this election! obama has only succeeded in making the democratic party snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. but lucky for all democrats we can see the folly of obamaism. obama must get out of the race now for the good of the party and the country. obama is a loser! hillary is a winner. VIVA HILLARY CLINTON! VIVA OPERATION CHAOS. to quote a great chicagoian that obama disrespected DA COACH "whatever it takes"

"in which reporters, generally better-informed about the topics they write about than the average Joe."

Mr. Cynic, when making value judgements you assume too much.

Honestly, if you have been listening to the 'liberal media' lately, you would know that Republican voters in the Democratic primary favor Obama. And they favor Obama because they know they can beat Obama in November. Where do you people get your news from?

I've been totally surprised by your lack of fact based knowledge.

Republicans are crossing over just to make this primary drag on longer, not because they care for either candidate. Both Hillary and Obama would be complete disasters. It is humorous how some people degrade the current president then want to vote for one of them.

Posted by: Mike | May 6, 2008 4:48 PM

Uh huh...and the remedy for the last 7 years of Bush disasters (Iraq, tanking economy, lack of healthcare for everyone etc) is to elect.....ANOTHER REPUBLICAN?
-
http://www.desertratdemocrat.com/archives/1-mccain_bush_hug.jpg

This is just another example why we need one national day for primary elections instead of the current system. People should be able to vote for their preferred candidate. The people who voted in states that recently had their primaries do not get the benefit of having all the candidates left in the race.

Divide and conquer. It's the oldest strategy in the book. Hillary is happy to accept support from Limbaugh, Murdoch, and Richard Mellon-Scaife. She's shameless.

How's this for fair?

Reported by the AP (this from Yahoo news)
"Indiana nuns lacking ID denied at poll by fellow sister

By DEBORAH HASTINGS, AP

About 12 Indiana nuns were turned away Tuesday from a polling place by a fellow bride of Christ because they didn't have state or federal identification bearing a photograph.

Sister Julie McGuire said she was forced to turn away her fellow sisters at Saint Mary's Convent in South Bend, across the street from the University of Notre Dame, because they had been told earlier that they would need such an ID to vote.

The nuns, all in their 80s or 90s, didn't get one but came to the precinct anyway."

Ain't democracy grand?

It is an abuse of the Democratic system to try and pick the "weaker" candidate for the other party, especially since the other party cannot do the same in return. Crossovers in good faith make sense, crossovers for mischief do not.

You Obamslamers will say anything to discredit Hillary. You are just anticipating her big win in Indiana, and you are starting to make excuses for the Obama loss. What excuse will you make when she takes all the other states that are in the wings waiting to have their voices heard? I know you probably would like to disenfranchise the remaining states like Obama has done to Florida and Michigan.

Elliot at 4:02, I obviously can't speak for all Obama supporters, but the campaign welcomes and encourages crossover voting. Crossover Republicans have overwhelmingly supported Sen. Obama.

What we're talking about here, though, is altogether different. The people at issue here are voting as a bloc according to a specific plan to injure the Democratic Party and to attempt to throw the election to a candidate they feel is weaker in the General. They may have a right to do that, but it does nothing but harm the process.

"Mr. Cynic, when making value judgements you assume too much."

Really? Is it really too large of an assumption, especially with the qualifier of "generally," to assume that a reporter for a major media outlet, paid to cover politics, might have a somewhat more-informed opinion than the "average Joe?" With the inevitable exceptions, a don't think so.

What is quite telling, on the other hand, is that, for all I typed, you chose that one, highly debatable yet virtually impossible to prove, idea with which to take issue. Now I ask, "Why is that?"

Yes these are labeled as "marching orders". Limbaugh is calling this effort 'Operation Chaos'. He even has shirts and hats for this project. His website is completely saturated in this. Its pretty gross.

Here it is if you're curious: http://www.rushlimbaugh.com

So let me get this straight, the story quotes not a single Republican voter who mentions Rush Limbaugh and in fact cites more Republican voters voting for Obama (just a single Rebublican voting for Clinton) but this is somehow a Limbaugh/Clinton conspiracy to get McCain elected?! And then the idiots who reflexively start spitting their anti-Clinton venom. Gotta love the electoral process.

to all the obama whiners, grow up. Not everyone thinks he's the messiah. I never hear any of you griping when George Soros spends millions to try to influence elections, yet you seem to be crying now because someone
else is doing the same thing without spending the money. Not everyone likes far left wing politicians. too close to communism for me. Obama is a far left liberal, enough said.

Oh my the liberally biased lame censors at the Swamp strike again!!

We'll try this one more time. Can you ridiculous censors get your heads out of your butts for a change??? Just because you may not agree with something doesn't mean you censor it. Got it??

Anyway, John E., as I suspected you and your ilk did not get the point of my post. I am celebrating Limbaugh's campaign to continue chaos in the Democratic campaign because it is brilliant and fun, and causing problems for the Democratic party.

In regard to Limbaugh, while I am a fan (what a surprise!) I also do not always agree with him. Unlike you folks on the Left, most Limbaugh followers are not mind-numbed robots. In fact, surveys of Limbaugh listeners actually show them to be more informed about current affairs and the issues than most folks.

And, then those on the Left who think Republicans actually like Sen. Clinton. Are you kidding me? The idea of the Clintons back in the White House makes my skin crawl. If it ever came to choice of whom I would rather see in the White House: Clinton or Obama, I would have to go with Obama even though I believe he is not qualified and way to the left, as is Hillary. But the Clintoons are the Bonnie and Clyde of U.S. politics and in this only for themselves only for their own gain in power and financial gain. While I believe Obama is nothing but a media-created Chicago Democratic machine political hack, at least he is human, which is more than I can say for the Clintons.

I took issue with it BECAUSE it's not proveable. You could say that Chris Matthews knows more about politics than the average person, and you'd be right, but that doesn't prove he's not biased and doesn't twist his reports to misinform his viewers. All Matthews' supposed knowledge boils down to is "please vote for Obama" and if you say that message doesn't come through in all of his reports then you're just not paying attention. Even his fellow political journalists have called him on his Obama worship, yet he still ridiculously claims that he "hasn't endorsed" anyone. It's that kind of hypocrisy that makes a mockery of journalism.

The same goes for local level hacks like Dick Kay. They say they're the end-all, be-all of political knowledge yet everything that comes out of their mouths has a hidden message (vote democrat) attached to it. If Kay can overlook the corruption of a Todd Stroger then what is his supposed learned opinion really worth?

More excuses for why the weakling Obama can't close the deal. Poor Obama. Always the victim. Not a great quality in a presidential candidate.

Operation Chaos success. Republican victory in November!

Kevin, Republicans "are scared to death of obama"? That makes sense in a way since Barack will drub McBush in the fall, but I'm surprised the tough-talking, flag pin wearing, torture defending, car magnet buying, champions of government spying and corporate profits are willing to admit they are petrified with fright. What's that going to do to your image?

"I took issue with it BECAUSE it's not proveable. You could say that Chris Matthews knows more about politics than the average person, and you'd be right,..."

Aside from the fact that the quote above (from your comment) contradicts itself, you've yet to address any of my ideas, and meanwhile managed to tear down many a "straw man," none of which I addressed in the slightest. I'll summarize:
1) Blog posts, regardless of their authors, make no claim to objectivity, particularly when explicitly billed as "news analysis"
2) Mr. Silva's post, even in spite of point 1 (above), has nothing I would see as bias, in any particular direction, nor contains anything that might merit a comment along the likes of "wah wah wah Silva/DNC," etc.
3) If one found "marching orders/havoc" to indicate a preference, one might reasonably suggest the "Operation's" creator/it's title might be justification for the use of such terms.
4)You did, on the other hand, using the Matthews example, suggest that my earlier "value judgement" was, in essence, or at least potentially, correct.
You're welcome to make whatever points you like on this public board, but simply making them does not mean they address any of the points I'm making. If you'd like to re-read any of my comments, and take issue with them, I'd be happy to discuss them, though I'm not really interested in defending points I've never made.

"...the Supreme Court is ready and willing to steal another election for the GOP." By seeking to cherrypick districts to be recounted, instead of in fairness seeking a complete recount, the Dems rightly lost in a court system, all the way to the top, that did not "steal" or take sides. We should be proud that our system of government kept our country united. As for our candidate selection and election system, 'party registration rules' and 'primary voting rules' are the business of the parties whereas 'election voting rules' are the business of the state and nation. Neither the government nor any party has any business telling any citizen where, when, with whom, how or how often he or she may participate in any or all democratic processes. Thus, "crossover" voting must always be possible and without any required explanation as to why and how anyone voted.

Oh, and none of my criticism of the above-mentioned extends to Mark Silva. I actually quite like Mr. Silva's reporting and I don't think he is biased one way or the other. My comment that started this whole thread was a criticism of why this story received a post in the first place, since the people of Indiana decided their election rules and now the DNC and the journalists who wrote the original article (without finding any connection to Rush) are bellyaching about it. You can comment that something is a non-story or a whiny story without impugning the integrity of the writer.

I have lots of criticism for Frank James and Mr. Spell-check, himself, James Oliphant, but I certainly don't extend it to Mark Silva.

Operation Chaos working as it should!! Viva La Limbaugh!!!

This has to be the most desperate tactic ever by conservatives to get a republican in the White House.

You nominated a candidate that most republicans don't care for & conservatives can't stand. McCain also has no chance no matter who is nominated for the Democrats. This operation is nothing more then a lame distraction from that fact. You've gone so far as to promote republicans to vote for Democrats instead of stedfastly standing by McCain. At least many republicans will know what it's like to vote for a real presidential candidate.

And having a primary fight this late in an election year is nothing more then a republican wet dream. Would rush on his show say it would be bad for republicans to have thompson & romney still campaigning in May, like he says it is for Democrats? Your going to blame the "liberal media" for your failure to muster enough votes to have them still as contenders, even though conservatives like to yammer about the size of their "moral majority"? And why is there more talk among conservatives about what Democrats are up to vs promoting your brilliant ideas?

Is this all that's left for you to offer?

Cynic, this isn't philosophy 101. No one here is interested in listening to you wax on and on about straw men and undistributed middles. I don't make specific responses for you. I post what I like when I like. For instance, you have beaten the dead horse that I was criticizing Silva for bias all day. I'm not going to stop you. Have fun fighting that non-existent battle. You are still under the impression that I have EVER posted anything about "havoc" or some "marching orders." Look at my posts. I haven't.

When did I EVER say that I thought Silva was biased? I didn't. I said the DNC is whining because the rules the Indiana democrats decided for THEIR primary are allowing people the DNC considers undesirable to vote.

Complaining about their whining is not necessarily accusing anyone of bias. It's saying that this is a non-story and their meritless argument doesn't deserve a post. I don't think it does. The rules are Indianans to decide, not outside critics like you, me, or the DNC.

In conclusion, as you've pointed out, blog posts, regardless of their authors, make no claim to objectivity. Neither do comments in them. So it's really not for you to decide whether or not my comment that essentially said this post that helps the DNC disseminate its fine whine has "merit," as you say, or not. Or that it might "merit a comment along the likes of wah wah wah Silva/DNC," etc. The merit of my post is up to the individual, not you. Don't you hate it when people call you on your power trips?

"Rush" republicans are disgusting....they deserve a kick in the mouth.......

Republicans are sad; an angry tragedian…the worst America has to offer….

We have yet to endure the tactical and strategic blunder that the war in Iraq really is.
I know! Why don't we bomb other countries that have schools, water, power, and police for their people? We can quickly lower the population, while creating enemies for our industrial military complex?

How's that sound Republicans?

Bush Sees "Defining Moment" In Iraq? He saw WMD, Al Qaeda; mobile weapons labs, terrorist training facilities, missiles that could reach New York, 45-minute ready chemical weapons, none of which were there.

What he will see is his legacy and his Parties demise, but at least I got my $600 “economic stimulus” check from China!!

You wanna get some Republicans?....lets go.........other wise go sit in the corner with your talking point spewing fallacy of a constituency.....

The great Rousseau said it:
"...Conservatives have learned nothing and forgotten nothing"

HA!! Even with you Rush Dittoheads out there voting with all your might, Obama wins! GOOD prevails, not your braindead "Commando"!

Anyway, John E., as I suspected you and your ilk did not get the point of my post. I am celebrating Limbaugh's campaign to continue chaos in the Democratic campaign because it is brilliant and fun, and causing problems for the Democratic party.

In regard to Limbaugh, while I am a fan (what a surprise!) I also do not always agree with him. Unlike you folks on the Left, most Limbaugh followers are not mind-numbed robots. In fact, surveys of Limbaugh listeners actually show them to be more informed about current affairs and the issues than most folks.

And, then those on the Left who think Republicans actually like Sen. Clinton. Are you kidding me? The idea of the Clintons back in the White House makes my skin crawl. If it ever came to choice of whom I would rather see in the White House: Clinton or Obama, I would have to go with Obama even though I believe he is not qualified and way to the left, as is Hillary. But the Clintoons are the Bonnie and Clyde of U.S. politics and in this only for themselves only for their own gain in power and financial gain. While I believe Obama is nothing but a media-created Chicago Democratic machine political hack, at least he is human, which is more than I can say for the Clintons.

"Wah, wah, wah, Mark Silva and his friends in the DNC don't like the rules that the democrats of Indiana decided for their primary."
Jeff, if you can explain how anyone can take this to mean that Mr. Silva wrote this post, or chose to post it (as he is after all, the author of the post), out of some sort of "friendship" with the DNC, which to the average rational being would suggest a "bias," by all means, do tell.
If you address me (as you did, several times) in the course of a comment, again, any rational being would fairly assume you were, you know, addressing me, though if this is too difficult for you to comprehend, well I'm sorry. I'll type slower...
Words mean things, but not whatever we want them to mean. It's been...real.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out, cynic. Silva didn't write the article. He's just passing along what the Indy Star reporters, who didn't find anyone that said they were changing parties because Limbaugh told them to, wrote it. Like I said, I think it's dumb that he posted it but I don't think it says anything about him other than it's a primary day and he felt like posting it. Was my typing slow enough for you?
"Don't tell me words don't matter."

Anyone, thank you for confirming that you're not a rational human being. Keep on keepin' it real.

I look forward to Inauguaration Day when Bush is forced to shake hands with President Obama. What better way to flip Bush and his party the bird than to elect his polar opposite, especially in race. This could be viewed as deeply racist analysis. We are a curretly a racist nation. How odd that Bush doing such a rotten self centered job is what fnally convinces America to cure itself of this bleak disease,
What are these references to Rush? Who is this Rush person? Wasn't he on something called "radio" a few years ago?

"I really don't see a problem here. The rules allow for the GOPers to vote in the Dem primary. Just as Howard Dean and Barak Obama claim that the DNC rules say that the primary voters of Michigan and Florida don't count.

Posted by: Perch Rapala | May 6, 2008 2:51 PM"

You forgot Hillary Clinton, she was in on it too. But that was then -- now she wants to change the rules because she's getting her ass kicked.

I can't imagine how any human could vote for a lying reptile, like Clinton.