Cross-posted from Rational Resistance

It's only a certain category of people who will know the name Gary Gygax, but if you're in that category, he's probably important to you. Gary Gygax was one of two people who invented Dungeons and Dragons, the role-playing game (RPG) that's been popular among those who proudly call themselves nerds and social outcasts since 1974.

Gygax died today at the age of 69.

I've never played D&D, but my two sons play D&D and many other RPG's, so I've been in the vicinity of many a game. People are inclined to look down on the game and those who play it, but I think they're really missing something.

Think a little bit about what we want our kids to do as they grow up. Among other things, we want them to be creative, we want them to learn to understand how to deal with people who are different from themselves, we want them to learn how to meet a challenge, come up with an inventive way to solve it, and to work cooperatively to achieve their goals, and D&D teaches all those things. Sure, they're battling with orcs, trolls, paladins, dwarves, and other fictional creatures, but the game isn't sitting around and wishing you were a knight, and it's not slashing and killing, it's playing roles, thinking about your character traits, and developing and pursuing a strategy.

There are kids who are going to sit in their rooms and write poetry and short stories, but a lot of kids won't do that. Still, when you're writing an adventure, you're writing fiction, and if it doesn't hold together it won't be any good. I don't want to overplay it, but I do want to suggest that you take another look at D&D and the people who play it and the other RPG's

Petty much every news source there is has now projected the state for Obama from virtually the moment the polls closed, as exit polls are showing 2-1 Obama blowouts that may leave my 60-40 prediction in the dust if they hold true. The exits will be Chittenden (and particularly Burlington) heavy, though, so it may not be quite the mind-numbing nuclear smackdown that it’s looking like – but it’ll be close enough.

On the Dem side elsewhere, Rhode Island, Ohio and Texas are still voting … all are exit polling at almost even (and that includes Rhode Island, which aint good news for Clinton) (never trust the exit polls, I guess).

In 2004 83,000 Vermont voters picked up Democratic ballots. I’m gonna make some finger-to-the-wind magic guesses here, and say roughly 55% of that usual suspect voter pool is going to be voting for Obama today, with about 45% going towards Clinton.

The big Obama wave is going to kick in in the vote tallies above and beyond that number. I’ll go as far as to guess that 75% of the votes above and beyond that 83,000 base will be Obama’s. The Secretary of State’s office printed an additional ballot run of 25%, and I’m guessing that they’re gonna get used up. If we add that 25% in and use this formula which is based on absolutely nothing, that means that Obama will have roughly 62,000 votes to Clinton’s 43,000 (give or take a few hundred), or a split of roughly 60% to 40% for Obama.

Delegates are a lot easier to predict, especially after chatting it up with some smarter people than I. The process is a bit… odd. There are categories passed down from the DNC that can be allotted in different ways. Why not just make it simple? Well, because it’s about affording as many opportunities as possible for high-profile Dems and officeholders to get those delegate slots and go on the big trip to Denver. That means that most of the delegates are “district level,” are allotted proportionately, and are selected at the State Convention. The remaining are (mostly) also allotted proportionately, but are selected later by a meeting of the convention-elected district-level delegates at a meeting in early June.

In any event, this is how they’ll split. The district level delegates will split 6-4 for Obama. The “at-large” delegates will go 2-1 for Obama, and the 2 “pledged party leader” delegates, will be divided evenly.

So the ultimate delegate count decided tonight should be 9 for Obama and 6 for Clinton. If my prediction is off, and Obama wins crazy big, breaking 65% of the vote, that split will be 10 to 5.

Currently, the unpledged, so-called “super” delegates in the state are divided 5 to 1 for Obama. This means, that when the dust settles, Vermont should be sending 14 delegates to the convention to vote for Obama and 7 to vote for Clinton, with an additional unpledged “add on” delegate to be decided at the early June meeting (again, that would be 15-6 if Obama breaks 65%).

So… what’s your best guess?

It’s a bit discouraging but I guess not surprising that those who disagree with our indictment initiative should resort to character assasination to make their case. It works for Rush Limbaugh, so why not the loyal opposition?

The indictment idea was born out of an acknowledgement that our government is no longer operating under the constitutional structure that is its foundation. The executive branch has placed itself above the law, and the Congress refuses to hold it accountable. As our founders were forced to take the drastic action of declaring independence when Britain acted so egregiously upon the colonies, we thought, why can’t we as well make the declaration that if Congress will not act to defend the Constitution and the rule of law, then we as citizens and towns can at least put on the record that we recognize lawlessness when we see it and call them out for these actions?

As news of the initiative spread, we received opinions from legal minds that told us that, beyond being a symbolic act, there is some legal justification for this action as well. Francis Boyle, a human rights lawyer and law professor at the University of Illinois worked with John Conyers to draw up the impeachment indictments against Bush (before Conyers got the news that impeachment was off of the table). But Mr. Rouser craftily outed him as a wack-job because he holds the view that at some time American intelligence (sic) agencies infiltrated Amnesty International. Do you really find that so impossible to believe? You might ask some of the Vermont Quakers who discovered that they also were the unknowing targets of similar actions by the same agencies. And is it really reason to dismiss someone because he has the temerity to question the coincidence theory about 9/11 that the government hastily presented to the American people as the truth about the events of that day?

And in Mr. Burbank’s case, I wonder if being a Green today is somewhat like being a Progressive in Vermont back in the day, before they started winning mayoral races and seats in the legislature?

The indictment does not claim to be supported by federal statute. Its force is derived from the Common Law, which underlies our nation’s jurisprudence, and internationally acknowledged standards of what constitute war crimes. Someone should tell the judge in Spain, who indicted General Pinochet for crimes committed in Chile, and who managed to get him apprehended in England (escaping trial only because of failing health) about the pronouncements of the blogger on daily Kos telling us what a load of hooey this concept is.

The most cursory reading shows that the referendum is not an indictment. The referendum calls for the selectboard to issue an indictment. A selectboard is at once an executive body, a legislative body, and at times a quasi-judicial body. If it decides to call for an indictment it is free to do so. The city council of Dublin Ireland did just that in fact, in February of 2005, calling for either the International Criminal Court of the World Court (I’m sorry that I forget which) to indict Bush and others in his administration for torture. In fact over 200 similar indictments are waiting to be opened on the day after Bush/Cheney leave office. If Brattleboro’s town attorney cannot figure out how to frame the indictment, or under which statute he has the authority to write it, that is a separate if related question to solve as the process moves along (or not).

How is this supposed to stimulate dialogue? Why don’t you ask the New York Times which gave the story a prominent placement and referred to it asking a “provocative question” in the headline? I would say that over 8000 emails to the town of Brattleboro (running 60/40 pro-indictment) is some indication of dialogue as well. Retired Federal prosecutor Elizabeth de la Vega sees this initiative as an important and powerful idea. Please advise me of her looney tendencies ASAP.

If we thought that our ideas were the only right ones, we would have rested our laurels on the Town Meeting impeachment votes and called it a day. It is precisely because we are continually working to find an approach that can convince a critical mass of Americans that all is not well and action must be taken that we are now trying the indictment path as well.

I’m not sure what makes us such an ugly, yahooish, egotistical, ignorant bunch of spotlight hounds with a tenuous grasp on reality. As hard as I try, I can’t seem to get in touch with my inner rage, but I see now that its in there and I’ll try harder.

Obviously, this indictment idea has touched a raw nerve. I’m not exactly sure why, but it may be a good thing in the long run.

Bill Simmon & company are again looking to capture Town Meeting stories via the blogesque Exit Voices site. Here’s the blerb:

Exit Voices is a Vermont blogging experiment. It’s a forum for Vermont voters to come together and discuss the issues and candidates on the ballot.

In the comments section of the Exit Voices posts, answer these two questions:

1. What motivates you to go to your town meeting or polling station and vote?

2. If you could add a comment on your Ballot for your elected officials to read, what would you say?

Alternately, tell us what you said at your Town Meeting, why you refused to vote, or what makes you crazy about our system of democracy.

SO, if you can, log on after meeting or voting or during a break and share your stories. It’s a cool thing, and worth participating in.

cross-posted @ This Week With Barack Obama & One Million Strong

                             

                                                                                     obama in austin, texas

                           

                                                  michelle in cleveland, ohio

Endorsements

Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-SD) Endorses Obama; Cincinnati Enquirer Endorses Obama; Former Governor Mark White (D-TX) Endorses Obama; Congressman John Lewis (D-GA) OFFICIALLY Endorses Obama; Toledo Blade Endorses Obama; State Representative Senfronia Thompson (D-TX) Moves from Clinton to Obama; DC “Shadow Senators” Paul Strauss & Micheal Brown Move to Obama; Congressman John Barrow (GA-12) Backs Obama; DFL Chairman Brian Melendez and Associate Chair Donna Cassutt of Minnesota Superdelegates Back Obama; Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) Endorses Obama; Ohio State “The Lantern” Endorses Obama; Houston GLBT Caucus Endorses Obama; Dallas County District Attorney Craig Watkins Endorses Obama; Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) Endorses Obama; Dallas Morning News Endorses Obama

Reclaiming the American Dream by Barack Obama

Texas Early voting Shatters Records, Republicans Scared by FishOutofWater

Obama’s Support Grows Broader

Obama Gets His Green On by kath25

Clinton, Obama have final say on Georgia delegates

Gay Clinton backers defect to Obama, eroding another bastion

                           

                                                                obama and security

Video/Audio

Andy Stern, SEIU President & Governor Deval Patrick (D-MA) Video; Obama in Rhode Island; NPR: Obama Volunteers Trained in Organizing; Are you Puro Obama?; Lisa Ling for Obama; Response to the Clinton “Red Phone” Ad, Here; NPR: Obama Seeks to Continue Streak in Ohio; NPR: Texas Women Reflect Shift in Political Sentiments

Samuel L. Jackson Skips Oscars to Campaign for Obama

Brisk Urban Turnout Seen Key for Obama in Texas

Obama Aces the Farrakhan Test

Obama Pounces on McCain Criticism

                       

                                           we are the ones, new video by will.i.am

Obama’s Fate in Texas Hinges on Volunteers

Sen. Barack Obama’s pivotal victories last month in Iowa and South Carolina over Sen. Hillary Clinton were engineered by professional staffers who worked those states for nearly a year. In Texas, the story has been a lot different.

His organization in the Lone Star State, which holds its potentially decisive presidential primary on Tuesday, has been “more like a baling wire and duct tape thing,” says Mitch Stewart, who is running the campaign here. Mr. Stewart and the first dozen paid Obama staffers touched down in this capital city less than three weeks ago.

The uncharacteristic late start has left the Illinois senator relying to an unusual degree on the groundwork of volunteers such as Ian Davis. The 29-year-old Austin community organizer has been laboring for months with no guidance at all from Obama headquarters. When Sen. Obama’s team finally arrived, Mr. Davis handed over laundry baskets stuffed with 20,000 handwritten names of potential volunteers, which Mr. Davis had gathered on his own. WSJ, continue

Obama: The $50 Million Man

Black Delegates Under Pressure to Switch to Obama

Day of Rekoning for Clinton- Signs of Serious Trouble at Clinton HQ

GOP Frets over Democratic Fundraising

                           

                       democratic debate, cleveland, ohio, feb 26th.  video and transcript here

GOTX for Obama! by Kath25

OH–IO, O-BAMA by Albatross

Obama Shoves Iraq down McCain’s throat by Paleo

                             

                                     senator chris dodd endorses obama in cleveland, ohio

Pressure Building for Clinton to “OPT-OUT”

And I am being kind here.  The reality is this, even if Clinton wins Ohio and Texas, the margin of win will not be large enough to move the real count, the delegate count.

Clinton must beat Obama by upwards of 65% from all contests out.  That is not going to happen.  From the latest polling Texas and Ohio is a tossup, with Texas favoring Obama and Ohio favoring Clinton.

It is reality check time.  And the establishment is talking out in the open now.

Mr. Richardson, saying that it was vital to Democrats’ hopes in the general election in November to mount a positive, unifying campaign, said on the CBS News program “Face the Nation” that “whoever has the most delegates after Tuesday, a clear lead, should be, in my judgment, the nominee.”

What Governor Richardson is stating is nothing new.  Since Clinton just conceded 11 elections in a row to Obama, what else can you conclude?  We know obviously it was a money problem that she did not even have the resources to combat on the ground.  She allowed Obama to run the numbers up so great, that it is mathematically impossible for her to catch up.  And finally, if Obama lost 3 to 5 in a row, he would have been OUT.  The case would have been closed.  Yes, she should have been gone after the Potomac Primaries.

Beating Barack Obama at this stage by 5-8 points is not good enough, because the delegate count will be split.  She must win convincingly by more than 30 points, and in these contests it is not going to happen.

Younger members of her campaign team fear she will damage the Democratic Party, as well as her own reputation, if she fights on in vain to deny Barack Obama the presidential nomination.

Wednesday, March 5, 2008, Clinton should get out of the race if she does not perform well.  Take the money raised, pay your debt off, and stand with the party.  If not, you will watch your superdelegates publicly humiliate you by backing Obama, from here on out.  Meaning, no possible way she can win the nomination.

Clinton, the choice is yours.

                               

                                             obama in flight to ohio, march 1, 2008

shoutouts:  Elise; bonddad; jhutson; poblano; Geekesque; Delaware Dem; VirginiaDem; slinkerwink; turneresq

General Election Projections, Beta Version by poblano

this is about all of us by kid oakland

Obama’s National Lead

The Secret to Obama’s Success

                       

                                     students walk seven miles to the polls in texas

Finger-pointing, frustration in Clinton Camp

Obama Seen as Better Democrat to Face McCain, NTY/CBS Poll Says

Debate Unlikely to Change Race

Obama Sets Another 1 Million Goal

                          obama in providence, rhode island, march 1, 2008

icebergslim’s last word:  march 4th

It is extremely important that we continue to use the undeniable tools, at our touch, to reach out to Texas, Rhode Island, Ohio, and Vermont voters.

Yes, it looks good, but nothing is over until the fat lady sings and she is warming up now.

This means that we continue to volunteer, phone bank, donate, and get the good people of these states to the polls and caucus on March 4th, 2008.

Everything you need is provided by clicking on the image below.  Now is not the time to relax and think it is in the bag.  Nothing is in the bag until the votes are counted.  As much as I have on my plate, personally, I picked the phone up today and called Ohio voters.  This is not over, until we KNOW Barack is the Democratic Nominee.

1.5 Million calls need to be made.  Let’s do this, together.

as in all we do, this one is for you.  keep working hard, this won’t be easy, but it will test the sheer will of all of us.  and remember to focus on obama, and not the drama….

::

icebergslim1047 (at) hotmail (dot) com

I have to share this, because it’s cathartic…

I’ll be entirely out of the loop for the week. My husband’s car died on Friday, so he needs a ride tomorrow.

Tuesday is medical fun day, getting my evil shoulder from hell injected – which of course will take longer than for most people, because I seem to have a knack for weird anatomy.

The rest of the week is going to involve becoming nomadic – because the septic intake and outflow pipes at the house we’re renting have frozen, so water can no longer leave the house or the septic tank.

But wait! There’s more! The best part is below the fold…

Unfortunately, since the water can’t flow out, it flows down … into the one drain below all the others: the one that ordinarily drains the washing machine.

The washing machine is now full of raw sewage.

This, of course, is the washing machine we had to buy last week because the one that came with the house died, flooding the basement.

The owners of the house will have to get someone to locate, dig up, and drain the septic tank and clear the ice out of the pipes to the house and the leach field, but we’re not hanging around in a waterless house full of stinking sewage for that to happen.

So we’re scrambling for someplace to stay tomorrow night (it has to be local due to Tuesday’s fun). We’ll stay at a hotel with a pool on Tuesday (‘cuz my shoulder will want to float – unless I’m curled up in a ball wishing I didn’t exist), then spend the rest of the week at my dad’s house, driving hubby home on Saturday, hopefully moving back into our own teeny cabin over the weekend (yes, the one we didn’t want to be in for the winter, because its pipes like to freeze – talk about irony).

This assumes we can get our dead plow truck plowed out by a neighbor and towed away to some lovely little dead-plow retirement farm. Otherwise we can’t really get to our cabin. Though, maybe if we buy snowshoes…

Oh, did I mention my new (to me) car got stuck in the driveway this week, needing to be winched out, breaking the front air dam in the process?

You know, if I weren’t living my life, I’d think it was fiction…

The Obama campaign gives Sen. Obama credit for every bill he introduced or signed on as a co-sponsor, whether or not they became law.

In her time in the Senate, Hillary has sponsored 21 bills that have become law including:

– a bill that extended the availability of unemployment assistance.

– a bill which established a program to assist family caregivers.

– a bill that provided benefits to public safety officers who were killed or injured during the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

But Hillary’s accomplishments in the Senate are not limited to bill sponsorships. Among her many other legislative accomplishments:

– Hillary worked with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) to expand access to health care for the National Guard and Reserve.

– Hillary passed an amendment that created a national program for teacher and principal training and recruitment.

– Hillary used Senate rules to force the Bush administration to make emergency contraception, also known as Plan B, available

The reality is, since Sen. Obama joined the Senate (applying the same standard the Obama campaign applies to Hillary) he has sponsored two bills that have become law:

– a bill that sought to promote democracy in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

– a bill that named a post office.

~~~~~~

Sen. Obama and Hillary have almost identical voting records on Iraq:

In fact, Obama’s Senate voting record on Iraq is nearly identical to Clinton’s. Over the two years Obama has been in the Senate, the only Iraq-related vote on which they differed was the confirmation earlier this year of General George Casey to be Chief of Staff of the Army, which Obama voted for and Clinton voted against. [ABC News, 5/17/07]

As a Senate candidate in November 2003, Sen. Obama said he would have ‘unequivocally’ voted against war funding because it was the only way to oppose Bush on Iraq:

“Just this week, when I was asked, would I have voted for the $87 billion dollars, I said ‘no.’ I said no unequivocally because, at a certain point, we have to say no to George Bush. If we keep on getting steamrolled, we are not going to stand a chance.” [Obama remarks, New Trier Democratic Organization forum, 11/16/03; Video]

But until he ran for president, Sen. Obama supported every funding bill for Iraq. [2005 Vote # 117, HR1268, 5/10/05; 2005 Vote # 326, S1042, 11/15/05; 2006 Vote # 112, HR4939, 5/4/06; 2006 Vote # 239; 2006 Vote # 186, S2766, 6/22/06, HR5631, 9/7/06]

Obama campaign advisor Susan Rice falsely claimed that Sen. Obama and Hillary have voted differently on Iraq since joining the Senate. Rice claimed these vote differences reflected Sen. Obama’s “different position” on the war:

JANSING: Bill Clinton made the point that in the senate Barack Obama voted exactly the same way that senator Hillary Clinton has on Iraq, and is there a vote where they took different positions?

RICE: Yes, they have taken different positions from the beginning…Since coming to the senate, he has been very clear in pushing every year 2005, 2006, and 2007 for a withdrawal of our forces. Senator Clinton took the view for a good part of that period that it would be premature and unwise to signal that the U.S. was prepared to withdraw, to set a timeline or a deadline.

Actually, with the exception of Sen. Obama’s vote to promote Gen. Casey, one of the chief architects of the war, his voting record is exactly the same as Hillary. Hillary and Sen. Obama have never voted differently on troop withdrawals, timelines or deadlines.

Full list of votes available here.  http://www.hillaryclinton.com/…

~~~~~~

Sen. Obama blasted the energy policy developed in secret by Vice President Cheney:

Washington’s failure is the failure of a president who spent most of his time in office denying the very existence of global warming – of a Vice President who developed America’s energy policy with a secret task force that opened the door to oil lobbyists and then shut it to every other point of view.

Sen. Obama failed to mention that he voted for Dick Cheney’s energy policy, the 2005 Energy Bill.

~~~~~~

Sen. Obama claimed he voted against the amendment on the 2005 Bankruptcy bill because he thought that a ceiling of 30 percent interest for loans on credit cards was too high:

Absolutely. It is a fact because I thought 30% potentially was too high of a ceiling. So we had no hearings on that bill, it had not gone through the banking committee.

The Chicago Tribune reported that Sen. Obama was planning on voting for the measure until a colleague noted, ‘thirty percent is sort of a random number’:

To some liberals, the proposal was a no-brainer: a ceiling of 30 percent on interest rates for credit cards and other consumer debt. And as he left his office to vote on it, Obama planned to support the measure, which was being considered as an amendment to a major overhaul of the nation’s bankruptcy laws. But when the amendment came up for a vote, Obama was standing next to Sen. Paul Sarbanes (D-Md.), the senior Democrat on the banking committee and the leader of those opposing the landmark bill, which would make it harder for Americans to get rid of debt. ‘You know, this is probably not a smart amendment for us to vote for,’ Obama recalled Sarbanes telling him. ‘Thirty percent is sort of a random number.’ Obama joined Sarbanes in voting against the amendment, but they lost the larger battle when the new bankruptcy law passed by a lopsided 74-25. There remains no federal ceiling on credit card interest rates. Obama’s deferral to Sarbanes was just one example of the freshman senator learning to navigate a chamber famous for its egos. [Chicago Tribune, 6/12/07]

Sen. Obama did end up voting against a ceiling of 30 percent interest for loans or credit cards:

Obama voted against and Hillary voted for a Dayton, D-Minn., amendment that would set a 30 percent ceiling on interest rates for loans or credit cards. [Vote 20, S.Amdt. 31 to S. 256, Rejected 24-74: R 0-55; D 23-19 (ND 22-16, SD 1-3); I 1-0. CQ, 3/3/05]

~~~~~~

In 2003, Sen. Obama said that he would support a repeal of the U.S. PATRIOT Act:

Q4. Would you vote to repeal the U.S. Patriot Act?” A. “Yes, I would vote to repeal the U.S. Patriot Act, although I would consider replacing that shoddy and dangerous law with a new, carefully crafted proposal… [Illinois NOW questionnaire, 9/10/03]

In 2006, Sen. Obama to extend the PATRIOT Act:

The Washington Post said of the reauthorization, “[T]he Patriot Act fight started with promises of major changes and ended largely with the status quo.” Obama himself said the bill only “modestly” improved the PATRIOT Act and failed to do enough to protect civil liberties. [HR 3199, Vote #29, 3/2/06; Washington Post, 3/7/06; Obama Floor Statement, 2/16/06]

~~~~~~

Sen. Obama suggested he made his opposition to Kyl-Lieberman clear ‘at the time of the vote.’ From the debate:

Blitzer : This was an important vote you missed the, you weren’t present in the senate when that vote occurred.

Obama: This is true and it was a mistake – one of the hazards of running for president. What I have consistently said and what I said at the time of the vote was that we should not take steps that would increase two presences inside Iraq with an eye towards blunting the impact of Iran. I always think that’s a mistake.

Sen. Obama missed the vote and said nothing at the time the vote occurred. His campaign didn’t release a statement until 9 hours after the vote. The vote occurred at 12:44PM. Sen. Obama didn’t issue a statement until after 10PM.

The issue also came up at a presidential debate that night, and Sen. Obama didn’t mention it.

Sen. Obama voted present 129 times on a wide array of issues, including choice, privacy for victims of sexual assault, and school violence. In fact, the Obama campaign claimed that Sen. Obama’s present votes were part of a legislative strategy but failed to mention that Sen. Obama was the lone present vote on a number of key issues.

~~~~~~

THE ABUNDANCE OF NON-VOTES:

Sen. Obama’s Present Votes By The Numbers

Sen. Obama voted ‘present’ 129 times while in the State Senate. [New York Times, 12/20/07]

In 1999, Sen. Obama voted ‘present’ more often than he voted ‘no’: According to state records, Obama voted ‘present’ 43 times in 1999, while voting ‘no’ just 29 times. [ilga.gov]

At least 36 times, Sen. Obama was either the only State Senator to vote present or was part of a group of six or fewer to vote that way. [New York Times, 12/20/07]

Other Present Votes of Interest:

Sen. Obama was the only State Senator to vote ‘present’ on a bill that sought to protect the privacy of sex-abuse victims, and the only state senator to not support the bill. [HB854, Passed 58-0-1, 05/11/99]

Sen. Obama was the only State Senator to vote ‘present’ on an adoption bill that imposed stricter requirements for parental fitness, and the only State Senator to not support the bill. [HB1298, Passed 57-0-1, 5/6/1999]

Sen. Obama voted ‘present’ on a bill that would increase penalties for the use of a firearm within 1,000 feet of a school. The bill called for the mandatory adult persecution of a minor at least 15 years of age being tried for using a firearm within 1,000 feet of a school. [SB759, Passed 52-1-5, 3/25/1999]

Sen. Obama voted ‘present’ on a bill to prohibit the presence of adult sex shops near schools, places of worship, and day care facilities; bill allows local governments to regulate the presence of adult sex shops. [SB609, Required 3/5 majority, Failed 33-15-5, 3/29/2001]

This was our middle of the road Governor not too long ago .What a scream .

As the Republican Party becomes increasingly a regional party, locked out of entire swaths of the nation, the Democrats are headed in the opposite direction. We have a likely nominee that has a demonstrated commitment to furthering the pioneering work by Howard Dean in 2004 and beyond.

There was a battle over the soul of this party — between those who would hoard power in DC, and those who would spread it around the entire country, empowering individuals to work toward a progressive national majority.

The good guys won, in no small part because of Dean.

form Daily kos

 

Much to my surprise, I discovered that it is legal to put political signs (temporarily) on public property in Vermont.  It is not, however, legal to just leave them on the road.  Per the Vermont Secretary of State Office:

• Signs should be removed immediately after the election.
  
  Signs may not be attached to trees.
• Signs may not interfere with, imitate or resemble any official traffic control sign, signal or device or appear to attempt to direct the movement of traffic.
• Signs may not be located in a way that prevents drivers from having a clear and unobstructed view of official traffic control signs and approaching or merging traffic.
• Signs may not be positioned so that they are readable primarily from a limited access facility (which includes the interstates and ramps and some other highways-such as US 7 between Bennington and Dorset).
• Signs must be in good repair and securely affixed to a substantial structure.

That last one is very relevant.  I’m not trying to pick on Clinton’s campaign here, because I’m sure Obama’s campaign is doing this as well; today we spotted a group of Clinton supporters waving signs in a traffic median.  When we returned home, they had left, but they left a bunch of signs just sticking into the snow.  According to this, that’s illegal.  I would be shocked to find that they’d come back to remove the signs the day after the election, too.  That almost never happens.

So, just a word to the campaigns: play nice, don’t leave your signs just sitting all over the damned place, and don’t (as I saw today) stand in the road while you hold up your sign.