US News Piece on Who Won Where...

US News had an article about the geographical breakdown of those who support CLinton, and those who support Obama. In many states, Obama actually won very few counties, but won in areas with big cities or universities. (Here is the link to the article, which has an EXCELLENT breakdown of who won where: http://www.usnews.com/blogs/barone/2008/4/2/reviewing-the-primary-results-academics-versus-jacksonians.html).

This is interesting to me because I know many PhDs who support Clinton (I have an M.Div. with additional post-grad work myself), and I have often wondered abt this whole concept that the EDUCATED people go for Obama, and the working class people go for Clinton. First of all, it seems to me that an EDUCATED person would be capable of making the distinction between someone making a speech against the war and then voting to fund it from thereon after, or the problem of supporting Cheney's energy bill, or only being capable of parroting Clinton's policies without being capable of speaking extemporaneously, to name JUST a few (and there are LOTS more issues of concern for me with him - like his arrogance, homophobia, and sexism), and not get caught up in the rhetoric. I mean, really - how is it that all of these so-called educated people are incapable of the simplest of logical deductions?? It makes NO sense to me.

Then there is Clinton, who can speak on substantive issues extemporaneously for lengthy periods - did you see her on Jim Cramer's Mad Money?? (Here is the link: http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232/site/14081545/?video=700530203&play=1) The woman answered EVERY question thrown at her for 16 1/2 minutes WITHOUT NOTES. Her mastery of policy and her intellect are amazing. Then there are her very real people skills - her compassion, her sense of humor, and her passion for public service. She is, in short, impressive.

So what does all of that say? That there is a class issue being pushed here - that in some way, Clinton's followers are being "denigrated" by the media AND Obama as working-class people while all of Obama's supporters are the "smart" people? Seems to me that the ones who pick the experienced, knowledgeable candidate ARE the smart people, no matter HOW the Obama camp wishes to frame it. And I HASTEN to add, there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with being a blue-collar, or lunch bucket worker - nothing at ALL - though there is certainly the IMPLICATION that there is by the Obama MSM. And PLENTY of working class people are smart people. It is just yet another tool to DIVIDE us that is being pushed in this campaign: the elite vs. the common people. Well, if that IS the case, I know with whom I stand, that's for sure!

I think it is incredibly indicative that Clinton's support is wide-spread. And incredibly indicative that she continues to do so well given the acknowledged media bias against her, the vicious attacks, and the distortions about her. It says a whole lot about HER, and her positions on the issues.

Now it is time for the superdelegates to PAY ATTENTION to these very clear differences between substance and appearance; ability and rhetoric; hard work and entitlement. Seems like a clear choice to ME!!!