BrendanLoy.com: Homepage | Photoblog | Weatherblog | Photos | Old blog archives

About me


I'm Brendan Loy, a 26-year-old graduate of USC and Notre Dame now living and working in Knoxville, Tennessee. My wife Becky and I are brand-new parents of a beautiful baby girl, born on New Year's Eve.

I'm a big-time sports fan, a politics, media & law junkie, an astronomy buff, a weather nerd, an Apple aficionado, a Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter fanatic, and an all-around dork. My blog is best-known for its coverage of Hurricane Katrina, but I blog about anything and everything that interests me.

You can contact me at irishtrojan [at] gmail.com, or donate to my "tip jar" by clicking the link below:

June 2008

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30          
Pajamas Media BlogRoll Member

« February 9, 2008 | Main | February 11, 2008 »

February 10, 2008

Darwin saaad....Bridger gone

By David K.

Veteran actor Roy Scheider passed away today at the age of 75. A cause of death was not given, however he has been treated in recent years for multiple myelome, a type of cancer which affects cells in bone marrow.

Scheider is most famous for his role as Police Chief Martin Brody in the first two Jaws films, as well as Captain Nathan Bridger in the television series seaQuest DSV, both projects involving Steven Spielberg as prodcuer or director.

Later in his career, despite earlier success his roles were mostly in lower rated films, often playing military officers or the President (a role he played 3 times).

He is survived by his three children and his wife Brenda.

Huck cries foul after Washington "loss"

By Brendan Loy

Just what Washington state needed: another election controversy.

Obama romps in Maine

By Brendan Loy

The one state this weekend where Hillary Clinton hoped to notch a win, Maine, has instead crushed her evil heart, going big for Obama.

Meanwhile, there is talk of a possible John Edwards endorsement -- though we don't know for whom. More here.

UPDATE: Another win for Obama:

Barack Obama topped a Clinton in another contest on Sunday -- the Grammys.

The presidential candidate beat both former Presidents Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter to win best spoken word album for his audio version of his book "The Audacity Of Hope: Thoughts On Reclaiming The American Dream."

But does he get any delegates for it?

Hillary's plan to steal the nomination

By Brendan Loy

The New Republic doesn't mince words in its criticism of Hillary Clinton's plan to -- and I quote -- "steal the nomination" by giving retroactive significance to the facially meaningless primaries in Michigan and Florida:

[T]heft is the only way to describe the plan [Clinton] has floated for certifying the Florida and Michigan delegations.

The back story is simple: The Florida and Michigan legislatures moved their primaries forward in the calendar to exert greater influence on the nominating process. But, by scheduling their primaries before February 5, they broke rules set by both the Democratic and the Republican parties. The GOP punished these scofflaw states by stripping them of half their delegates to the Republican National Convention. The Democratic National Committee (DNC) took them all away--and, so, the Democratic candidates did not campaign in these states.

Without ads and stump speeches--Obama's name wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan--the actual primary votes in these states were meaningless beauty contests, and perhaps not even that. Knowing that their ballots meant nothing, many voters stayed home. And, as everyone expected, Hillary romped to victory on the basis of her brand name and voters' lack of familiarity with the alternatives.

You can certainly debate the merits of the DNC's move. What is beyond debate, though, is that all the major Democratic campaigns accepted this move without complaint. Clinton, along with her rivals, signed a pledge not to "participate" in the Michigan and Florida primaries.

But as soon as it became clear, in the wake of Iowa and on the eve of South Carolina, that Clinton potentially faced an extended battle for delegates, she began to demand that the rules be changed in the middle of the game. Her campaign has been arguing that the non-contested elections in Michigan and Florida should be made retroactively meaningful--and, therefore, that Clinton should be handed a gift of nearly 200 delegates. The Clinton team has wrapped its case in the logic of voter disenfranchisement. "I hear all the time from people in Florida and Michigan that they want their voices heard in selecting the Democratic nominee," Clinton has said.

There is a perfectly cogent case to be made that Floridians and Michiganders deserve their say. (Some of our best friends and elderly relatives reside in those states.) The way to address this complaint is to schedule new elections so that candidates can advertise, make speeches, organize voters, distribute yard signs--you know, do "democracy," a concept Clinton seems not to understand. The DNC, if it does decide to redress Clinton's complaint, needs to do so immediately.

The New Republic hasn't endorsed any candidate in this race. Our staff is divided, like the Democratic electorate.

But neutral observers can't stand idly by as one campaign openly discusses stealing the nomination at the convention. Democrats need to recognize this potential gambit for what it is: a cynical, selfish hijacking of the democratic process. Clinton would not be laying the groundwork for this ploy unless it was potentially decisive. And the damage to Democrats (and democrats) would be profound. If Clinton is truly willing to trample so many institutions she professes to care about in pursuit of victory, she will have proven her enemies correct.

My blogging on the Michigan and Florida controversies has thus far looked at it from the perspective of a political junkie obsessed with procedure and delighted by chaos, but as a substantive matter, TNR is 100% right; what Hillary is proposing is absolutely outrageous. It's doubly outrageous with regard to Michigan, where the sole reason Clinton "won" is because Obama removed his name from the ballot entirely -- a move that was entirely in keeping with the spirit of the candidates' pledge, but one that Clinton cynically chose not to reciprocate. As a result, Michigan was far, far less than a beauty contest. It was a nullity. If Clinton gains a decisive advantage from her "win" there, her nomination will be grossly illegitimate. And prevailing on the basis of her Florida "win" would only be slightly less illegitimate.

Any intellectually honest Clinton supporter must necessarily admit all of this. There is simply no logical rebuttal to TNR's argument, no principled defense for what Hillary is proposing to do. Unless, that is, we are to declare that the whole process is a sham anyway, so it doesn't matter -- in which case, why are we even bothering with any of it? As blatantly imperfect and at times ridiculous as the primary and caucus system is, surely it is preferable to respect the process rather than subordinating it to one candidate's blatant power-grab.

If Obama were doing the same thing that Clinton is doing, I would certainly condemn it (and would, in fact, quite probably renounce my support for him altogether if he were to go through with it). I assume Clinton's supporters feel the same way, and I urge them to tell her so.

For my part, I can tell you right now that if Clinton wins the nomination through these ridiculous shenanigans, I will become much, much more likely to vote for John McCain in November -- or, if I ultimately conclude that I'm unable to support McCain, then for a third-party candidate as a protest vote. I just don't know if I can see my way clear to voting for someone who would show such blatant disregard for the democratic process as Clinton is proposing to do.

Anyway, this simply cannot be allowed to occur -- for the sake of the country, the Democratic Party, and the Clintons themselves.

(Hat tip: Joe Mama.)

P.S. Now, on the other hand, if either Clinton or Obama wins because of superdelegates -- which isn't really an "if"; one of them will -- that's arguably undemocratic too, but it's undemocratic in a way that is specifically foreseen by the process everybody agreed to. What makes Clinton's Florida/Michigan gambit so outrageous is that it would change the mutually agreed rules of the game midstream for pure self-interest, and would do so in the same of democracy, when in fact it's an entirely undemocratic move. It must not happen.

CNN Breaking News

By CNN

Sen. Hillary Clinton has replaced her presidential campaign manager.

Happy Birthday, Mom!

By Brendan Loy

Today is my mom's birthday -- or perhaps, considering that I'm typing this with a certain half-asleep, half-fussy baby in my lap, I should say Nana Loomer's birthday. :)

Happy Birthday, Mom/Nana!

CNN Breaking News

By CNN

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee will win the Republican primary in Louisiana, CNN projects

Obama's latest speech

By Brendan Loy

Starting around the 11:00 mark, he does a good job making the case for why he's the more electable candidate against John McCain (a point that I've harped on repeatedly, and one with which Frank Rich and Peggy Noonan, among many others, agree). The rhetoric is largely recycled from past speeches, but I think he delivers it particularly well here. (Though I must say, I was somewhat surprised to learn that lobbyists apparently are not "American people.")

P.S. Interesting slip of the tongue, or at least odd phraseology, where he said, "I'm looking forward to being on the ticket with Mark Warner." Ostensibly, he was just referring to being on the same ballot as Warner in Virginia as the latter runs for U.S. Senate this November -- he made a reference to "riding his coattails" -- but... hmm... Obama/Warner '08? :) Presumably not, given the very Senate candidacy in question. But still.

Friends & family