As the dust slowly settles from last week’s tornado of political happenings, it seems that Richardson’s endorsement of Senator Obama last Friday might tell us more about the Clintons than it does about either Richardson or Obama.

Or, at least, that’s what political experts would like us to believe.

While Richardson’s show of support was well-worded and probably helped score some points for Obama by itself, it probably also provided a boost simply because of the discussion that followed.

What?!, the news slyly gasped. Richardson, a loyal Clinton ally who appeared at times to be begging for a VP or cabinet spot, was jumping ship?

This is media gold, folks. In a year where the pundits have made erroneous prediction after prediction, and where the nomination SNAFU is likely to drag on at least another two months, these characters have got to be thrilled about the story It has all the hallmarks of a ratings giant: a redemption story, a betrayal, and a snide villain.

The Redemption:

Last week was a bit of a rough one for the Obama campaign. The Wright comments, the speech, and the aftermath were discussed, picked apart, and speculated about for days - indeed, it’s still going on.

But one thing the Clinton campaign has correctly (in my opinion) pointed out is that the media seem to have a huge crush on Obama. So, it was a double treat for these people: a huge ratings bonanza when there was a “scandal” and then a sigh of relief that Obama has seemingly managed to weather the storm. A good time was had by (almost) all.

Finally, at the end of a very long week, Bill Richardson swooped in to help revive lagging morale and to give Obama a boost both in the general polls and, ostensibly, with the so-called Latino vote. Richardson praised Obama as a “once-in-a-lifetime leader” and cited The Speech as what finally put him in the Obama camp. Whether this is true or simply conveniently timed politics doesn’t matter since the sound bites are so great.

The Betrayal

Immediately after Richardson’s endorsement, the conversation naturally turned to talk of betrayal. Oh my, gasped the talking heads. Can you believe he turned on the Clintons like that? followed quickly by Godfatheresque implications that doing so isn’t a smart idea.

Somehow the fact that Richardson had spent Superbowl weekend with former President Clinton, his old boss, was especially noteworthy to the gleefully mock-horrified media.

Richardson himself helped feed the frenzy; when asked whether he’d told Senator Clinton personally about his decision, Richardson said that he had and that “Let me tell you…we’ve had better conversations.”

If you look carefully have eyes, you can almost see the BOOYAH in Chris Matthews’ eyes.

The Villain

As you might imagine, the Clintons haven’t said much publicly about Richardson’s endorsement of Obama. Certainly it wouldn’t help them to discuss it, and I’d guess there’s a certain amount of hurt feelings going on as well.

But plenty of other people involved in the campaigns have jumped into the fray. Loony Cajun James Carville had perhaps the most shocking denouncement of Richardson’s Good Friday proclamation: “An act of betrayal. Mr. Richardson’s endorsement came right around the anniversary of the day when Judas sold out for 30 pieces of silver, so I think the timing is appropriate, if ironic.”

I’ve seen Mr. Carville in action for long enough to guess that he’s probably chuckling to himself about the great line he got off and high-fiving his shiny reflection in the mirror. It’s probable that he doesn’t really have this level of vitriol for Mr. Richardson; Carville’s a political animal through and through, and I’m thinking it’s probably all about the game to him. Normally, I find him a bit funny and more than a bit brilliant, but this comment is pretty disgraceful.

And, speaking of irony, Mr. Carville, I have a few things to say:

The type of irony Mr. Carville is referring to is usually known as situational irony, where something happens that’s the opposite from what the audience expects.

But in this scenario, nobody was really surprised by the Richardson nomination except perhaps the Clinton camp itself(and Mr. Carville, if he is to be believed). So perhaps Mr. Carville was instead appealing to the notion of tragic irony, defined by Merriam-Webster as:

incongruity between a situation developed in a drama and the accompanying words or actions that is understood by the audience but not by the characters in the play.

One thing I find a little hypocritical (and, all right, a little amusing) about the whole thing is that many of Senator Clinton’s more intense supporters have decried the Obama supporters as a cult who is all but ready to declare him some sort of messiah. But if you follow Carville’s statement to its logical terminus….

I think you know what I’m saying.

It’s probably a bit early to gauge whether or not Richardson’s support will give Obama a boost against Senator Clinton.

But if does, I hope it’s because the American public respects Bill Richardson and his endorsement of Obama’s message, not because the gossips have worked us into a lather over the back story.

Ohio paper gets exclusive interview with Hillary, but the wrong one

Well, today’s another day after a forgettable Tuesday for the Tribune Chronicle in Warren, Ohio. The paper published an exclusive interview with Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton discussing a variety of issues of interest to Midwestern voters.

The eager reporter, who may be changing his name now, called the local office of Rep. Charlie Wilson, who was having one of his regular public meetings with his eastern Ohio constituents. “This is Hillary,” came the answer.

So, knowing the New York senator had visited the area previously, the reporter proceeded with the interview and Hillary, who’s very accustomed to answering questions from the news media, kindly gave him helpful and quotable responses.

Obviously, he didn’t ask how to spell her last name; he knew that already. So the reporter wrote his story on the candidate’s latest visit with voters in the Mahoning Valley, which the Tribune Chronicle printed.

Alas, the reporter had actually interviewed Hillary Wicai Viers, the congressman’s communications director. Another Hillary, last name Clinton was in Washington, D.C., that day. Under the headline “Information attributed to Clinton was incorrect,” the paper published a correction today with the editor saying the situation is being reviewed.
Let me get this straight:

1. This guy calls his representative’s local office to interview said representative.
2. Woman named “Hillary” answers the phone.
3. The assumption made by the reporter is that, since Senator Clinton was recently in the area campaigning, this was clearly her on the phone. What luck!
4. Guy conducts interview with Hillary.
5. Newspaper prints interview.
6. Hilarity ensues.

I have to admit that, as irritated as I was by how the Wright story has blown up, I was pretty nervous about the way Obama seemed to be handling it.

But the speech he just gave blew me away. He calmly, boldly, sincerely covered ground which most fear to tread. Regardless of the political fallout, I’m proud that we have such a person running for the highest office in the nation.

A few things in specific stood out to me.

In the wake of the comments by Wright, Obama was first criticized for not distancing himself enough from the pastor, and then later for “playing it safe” by throwing Wright under the bus, proving that he wasn’t really different from any other cynical politician.

This speech put to rest any notion that he was going to play it safe.

With a calm, measured, confident but humble tone, Obama discussed Wright’s comments and his condemnation of the comments while embracing Wright as a friend and a man, even saying that Wright was “like family” to him. He expressed an understanding of the roots of Wright’s bitterness, but stated that Wright’s “profound mistake” was the claim that racism is endemic and that all hope is lost - that the American racial divide cannot be bridged.

But Obama went further into the issue than simply discussing the Wright problem. He also acknowledged the racial bitterness of the American experience - both black and white. He acknowledged it, understood it, and expressed that America must move past the “racial stalemate” of the past decades, or else at the end of the election, “nothing will have changed”.

I thought that one of the best parts of the speech was at this point, when he urged Americans to take him at his word, to stop being distracted by these issues, and to address the things that affect all Americans: health care, education, the war, and the economy. If we don’t do it right now, at this moment, in this election, we run the risk of being ever focused on distractions rather than the real issues.

Obama’s speech brings to the national discussion topics that are often discussed, as he says, in the barber shop and around the dinner table, but not in public. While I acknowledge that he’s probably the only candidate who safely can bring up these things, I’m still pretty proud that he did.

Not sure what will happen next, but I’m very pleased with the way Obama handled himself today.

The cutting-edge technology used to tally the caucus votes

On Tuesday I attended my first Democratic caucus. I live in a conservative neighborhood at the north end of a liberal city, and as I was driving to the caucus I imagined that it would be me, three old ladies, and the sound of crickets.

Wrong.

As I approached the crowd, I asked someone on the outer edges which caucus it was and was gratified to see her smile and say, “The Republicans don’t caucus ’til 8. These are all Dems.”

What? In my neighborhood?!

I wasn’t the only one who was surprised. A local somewhat well-known (to our group) Republican character running for some office or another looked downright appalled as he walked past the group. I wish I’d had the reaction time required to snap a picture of the expression on his face.

The shell-shocked caucus chairwoman managed to keep it together with grace, and the general mood was lighthearted and happy. After we’d all shown our voter registration cards or IDs and proof that we’d voted in the primary, we were directed to write down all of our information, including which candidate we supported.

After about 30 minutes, we were seated comfortably in a cafeteria chatting excitedly about democracy and the election. We looked around, trying to guess who among us might be Republicans in Hillary clothing while waiting for the people in charge to tally the votes.

We were informed that 235 of us had shown up, and that in 2004, 13 people had. Everyone looked around, feeling pretty impressed with themselves until the caucus chairwoman casually, smilingly tossed out, “Where have you all been hiding? It would have been nice to hear from you before now!”

They then announced our precinct’s results:

80 votes for Hillary Clinton
155 votes for Barack Obama

After that, they split us up into groups by candidate and asked us to elect our delegates, who will move on to the county caucus at the end of March.

And that was it. It was orderly - as orderly as 235 Democrats in one place can be - and it was friendly, and everyone left with a good feeling. Of course, 155 of those people left with a slightly better feeling, but overall, it was a good experience for all involved.

No questionable or illegal proceedings. No voter disenfranchisement. No shouting, crying, or police. Just 235 people, excited about a Presidential election, enthusiastically spending a couple of hours to help determine its course.

Remember 1992, when young upstart Bill Clinton was trailing in the polls during the campaign season? And then he went on the then-hot Arsenio Hall show and played his saxophone?

Many people point to this as a major turning point in Clinton’s campaign. He connected with young people and showed he was culturally relevant and a pretty cool guy - or so we thought at the time.

Was Hillary Clinton’s appearance on Saturday Night Live this weekend her “Arsenio moment”?

Well, it was pretty funny. Clinton showed us a side we’ve yet to see on the campaign trail: she was funny and even humorously self-deprecating, as this exhange shows:

Amy Poehler: How is the campaign going?
Hillary Cinton: Great, it’s going really, really, really well…Why, what have you heard?

I enjoyed the clip and the warm fuzzy it gave me, and I think it was a pretty smart move on Clinton’s part.

I’m just not sure that three days before Apocalypse Tuesday is the best time for the appearance. Perhaps just before or after Super Tuesday would’ve been better; an appearance then might’ve helped mitigate some of her less dazzling displays of personality from the past few weeks.

What do you think?