From the New York Times staff itself, so you all you liberals out there can't discount it as being some conservative hogwash, unless you denounce the New York Times as a whole, and thus resend any and all smear campaigns they've pulled out of their butts against the Republicans. Basically... If you don't believe this, you don't believe anyone, or... You close your eyes and ears to the things you don't want to hear, which is also a very strong possibility. (Yes, I'm grumpy, I have a headache, I think I'm getting sick, and I feel generally crappy, and then I read this on top of everything else, so of course I'm going to be snarky. Deal.)
Superdelegates for Sale?
For those of you who don't know what a superdelegate is, they're a sort of... Party appointed person who has more of a say in who wins the party primaries than the regular citizen does. You don't get to vote for them, but they very much affect the outcome of the elections. Anyway, apparently, the NYT even noticed that following the money flows usually turned up some interesting information about who the superdelegates were supporting. Is this any surprise? Face it. It's going to come down to who gives these superdelegates the most money or otherwise sways their decision as to who wins the Democratic nomination. The news is completely filled with Obama and Clinton chasing after these high and mighty superdelegates, so you can't at all deny the fact that they're there.
But yeah... I thought that was interesting. Not at all surprising, though. I mean, this perfectly fits with the liberal left way of doing things. Cram your own wishes down the throats of your people, because you know best. Just interesting that someone at the NYT picked up on it. You know, that in Indiana, we're trying to amend our Constitution to ban gay marriage. Yep, you better believe it. The federal government is going to drag their feet and cave to the minority, so the states are starting to deal with it, much in the same way they're dealing with illegal immigrants. Well, repeated polls and discussions show that a massive amount of Hoosier citizens WANT our Constitution amended, and that if it ever came up for a vote? It'd pass with flying colors, because, face it. It's what the majority of people want. Unfortunately, and very typical, the good ol' Democrats are refusing to let it come up in their little meetings, thereby refusing it the chance to get on a ballot and circulate for people to vote on. (In which case it would pass.) So they're letting it sit and mold so it doesn't even come up for a vote. How is that catering to the wishes of the people? In one breath, they proclaim that the majority thinks that Iraq is such a horrible thing, and that we need to work with the people and do what needs to be done, but, in the next breath, they don't let the people vote on something like a marriage amendment because... Why? Look:
The amendment died last year after encountering resistance from representatives of Indiana businesses who were concerned it would jeopardize their ability to recruit employees and offer domestic partner benefits. Since then, the Senate had been reluctant to take the lead.
Money. It all comes down to money. I honestly can not believe how someone could support a party like this. Anyone in their right mind would realize by now that the Democrats are doing things for themselves, and not for what everyone else wants. All they do is promise stuff to get the power, and then they sit there and do nothing, as is quite evidenced by their presence in Congress. Oh, I'm sorry, they do ban lightbulbs. Hahaha... That'll never get old. They get elected because they promise things about the war, and they ban lightbulbs instead. Boy, that sure is fulfilling the will of the people, isn't it. You know those florescent bulbs contain mercury, right? Oh yeah. We're preventing this fallacy of global warming, while poisoning ourselves in the meantime. How many bulbs have you broken in your lifetime? I can bet it's more than zero. Just imagine a biohazard every time you break a lightbulb, and your precious Democrats just forced you to live with that. Shouldn't they be worried about more important things? Oh wait. I'm sorry. They used all those issues to manipulate you and get into power. They didn't actually mean they would really resolve those issues... They merely brought them up. They had no intention of working on them.
So I kind of went off on a tangent. Oh well. Doesn't make it any less important.