Harry Reid on the Republican Field

I don't talk all that much about the Republican presidential candidates as this is a blog about the Democratic Caucus in Nevada. So, I'll just let Nevada Senator Harry Reid speak for me:

I’ve learned one thing in listening to all the debates and reading about all these people running for office, and the one fact I’ve learned, I can’t get out of my mind, is that Rudy Giuliani has been married more times than Mitt Romney’s been hunting.

So Much for Shelley Berkley's Neutrality

The Las Vegas Gleaner, February 6, 2007:

Asked by The Hill, "Who do you prefer, Barack or Hillary?" Rep. Shelley Berkley said, "I am co-chairman with Sen. Harry Reid of the Nevada caucus, so we have both pledged to be neutral." The Hill's question was mostly just a fun little lark of newspaper filler, and was not intended to be taken seriously or anything. Sort of like Shelley's answer.

Well, it seems her pledge hasn't lasted that long. Shelley Berkley had a really good fundraising quarter - raising $548k, with more than $1 million cash-on-hand. Of her $155k in disbursements, she gave a relatively large sum to federal and local candidates, mostly House colleagues who either are in tough districts or freshmen. However, one candidate really stood out:

Hillary Clinton for President Exploratory Committee received $2,300 on March 21st.

And, yeah, she's the only presidential candidate receiving money from Berkley. Now, as far as I understand neutrality you either give to all candidates or to none. My only conclusion is this:

Shelley Berkley just endorsed Hillary Clinton for President.

Tom Collins Denies Dropping Fox Debate

NV Dem Party Chair Tom Collins this afternoon denied dropping the Fox News Debate, even though Bill Richardson announced this afternoon that he would not participate in the debate after initially saying he would.

Tom Collins to the AP's Kathleen Hennessey:

Discussions continued Friday afternoon, even as MoveOn.org and other Web sites declared the debate dead. Collins said the reports were untrue.

"No, we're not canceling, I am not canceling. We're not dropping Fox," he told The Associated Press.

Fox News spokeswoman Irena Briganti said Friday Fox had not received word from the party about the debate.

Thank goodness, the state party will get to elect a new chair by the end of the month.

UPDATE:

This is the text of the letter to Fox News:

March 9, 2007
Marty Ryan
Executive Producer
Fox News Political Programs
202-824-6425 (fax)
400 N Capitol Street NW, Suite 550
Washington DC 20001
DELIVERED VIA FAX AND EMAIL

Dear Marty,

A month ago, the Nevada Democratic Party entered into a good faith
agreement with FOX News to co-sponsor a presidential debate in
August.

This was done because the Nevada Democratic Party is reaching out to
new voters and we strongly believe that a Democrat will not win
Nevada unless we find new ways to talk to new people.

To say the least, this was not a popular decision. But it is one
that the Democratic Party stood by. However, comments made last
night by FOX News President Roger Ailes in reference to one of our
presidential candidates went too far. We cannot, as good Democrats,
put our party in a position to defend such comments.

In light of his comments, we have concluded that it is not possible
to hold a Presidential debate that will focus on our candidates and
are therefore canceling our August debate. We take no pleasure in
this, but it is the only course of action.

Sincerely

Tom Collins Harry Reid

Chairman, Nevada State Democratic Party U.S. Senator (D-NV)

NV Dems Pull Fox Debate!

Wow, this comes rather unexpected. But sometimes these things always happen on a Friday afternoon in the hope it'll be buried with the weekend papers and not resurface on Monday. However, I just cannot believe that will happen with this story:

"Nevada Dems Nix Fox Debate" writes The Politico. They had no comment yet from either the State Party or Fox News. One can assume though that after all the protests, the distancing done by Harry Reid, and Edwards pulling out this might have sealed the deal:

FOX News Chairman and CEO Roger Ailes gave the progressive activists more ammunition on Thursday when he jokingly compared Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, the junior senator from Illinois, to Osama bin Laden.

This might be hurtful to the State Party in the short run. However with Tom Collins leaving at the end of the month and Jill Derby most likely to take over, the party will get over this.

What do I believe, though, is that Fox News will be deeply hurt by this. "Fair and Balanced" is definitely done with.

UPDATE:

From Kos:

So it's official, though I'm still waiting for an official statement from the Nevada Democratic Party and maybe even Harry Reid.

The Big Winner: the Progressive movement, which came together at all levels -- netroots, grassroots, and even some institutional players.

The other Big Winner: John Edwards, whose early leadership dropping out of the debate spurred intense media coverage (hence pressure) and fueled its demise.

Snatched victory from the jaws of defeat: Richardson, who announced he was pulling out just an hour or so before the official demise of the debate. He would've been left isolated, the only candidate to agree to a now-dead debate. Spared by the hair on his chinny chin chin.

Mild loser: The other campaigns, especially Obama, who could've shown some leadership and hit back at the network that has been tormenting them with non-stop smear attacks. Instead, they played it safe.

The Big Loser: Fox News, which will now face a whole new round of stories discussing their "conservative bias" and propaganda function. For a network that wanted this debate to obscure their partisan purpose, this is the worst of all worlds.

Next up: Will the Congressional Black Caucus team up with Fox for its own debate?

UPDATE 2:

Apparently Fox News is such a good news organization that it doesn't respond to journalists, like The Politico's Ryan Grim, but is very quick to give something to the right wing Drudge Report (and, yes, I hate to quote him):

“We have not received official word from the Nevada State Democratic Party disclosing a change in debate plans. Rumors are being circulated and if true, news organizations will want to think twice before getting involved in the Nevada Democratic Caucus which appears to be controlled by radical fringe out-of-state interest groups, not the Nevada Democratic Party. In the past, Moveon.org has said they ‘own’ the Democratic party—while most Democrats don’t agree with that, we’re waiting to see if that’s the case in Nevada.” -- David Rhodes, Vice President, Fox News...

That Fox News is lashing out like this and is doing so this quickly just proves how much this hurts them.

Tom Collins Offers Fox News Debate "Compromise" Including Air America

After Edwards jumped ship, Nevada State Party Chairman Tom Collins is forced to backpaddle:

March 7, 2007

Dear Nevada Democrats:

As you know, the Nevada State Democratic Party has agreed to host a debate with FOX News that has caused some concern among some of our activist allies. Because FOX has such an editorial bias against Democrats, some of our allies believe that we should have chosen another media partner. Senator Reid shares some of these concerns and has asked us to take another look at the parameters of this debate in order to ensure that all Democrats are comfortable as we move forward.

Our objective in hosting the August debate with FOX has not been to endorse the FOX News Channel. Our objective with this debate is the same as our objective in hosting an early Nevada Caucus in general -- to have as many opportunities for Nevada voters and voters throughout the West to hear directly from the candidates for president as possible. That is why our first forum was hosted with ABC News as the broadcaster, our November debate will be hosted by CNN and the final debate in January 2008 will be hosted with another outlet.

In planning the debate, the Nevada Democratic Party has been aware of the intricacies of dealing with FOX and so we secured assurances from them that the details of the debate were mutually agreed upon such as format, panelists, set design, and the assurance of an uninterrupted broadcast without commentary. FOX has also agreed to carry the debate live on KVVU, the affiliate in Las Vegas where most Nevada voters live. Other affiliates may follow. We believe that these details will assure that voters have the opportunity to focus on the candidates and the issues and not the panelists or commentators for an uninterrupted 90 minutes.

Since reaching that agreement with FOX we were heartened to hear from so many people who supported our decision to reach out to voters wherever they may be, including those watching FOX News. The state parties of Arizona, Montana, Colorado and New Mexico joined in support of our decision along with DNC Chairman Howard Dean, many members of the Nevada media and the leaders of the Nevada AFL-CIO, Culinary Union and Professional Firefighters Association. While one of our state party’s Executive Board members has been vocally opposed to the debate, several party leaders have expressed support, including:

* Chris Wicker, Washoe County Chair: http://dullardmush.blogspot.com/2007/02/washoe-dem-chair-responds-to-FOX-debate.html

* Tom Gallagher, 2004 candidate for Congress from NV-03 http://www.nvtoday.com/index.php?option=com_content=view=251=

However we decided to take a step back and make our best effort to address the concerns that have been raised including:

* Many Democrats will want to watch or listen to the debate without supporting the FOX News Channel.

* There was a desire to include a panelist from a more progressive outlet, such as Air America, to ensure balance at the questioners table.

* There was also a desire to bolster a progressive media outlet, such as Air America or Politics TV that could use the opportunity to grow its constituency.

In answer to these concerns, we have secured an agreement to invite KJFK radio, the local Air America affiliate, to air the event live and C-Span will be able to carry the debate twice in its entirety after the conclusion of FOX’s broadcast. Additionally, the Nevada Democratic Party has an agreement to invite a local progressive voice onto the debate panel.

We will also offer PolitcsTV.com the ability to carry the live FOX News web cast feed on its site for one-time viewing. If PoliticsTV agrees, this will give national viewers who do not wish to watch FOX the ability to watch the debate live while bolstering a progressive leaning organization.

With these additions, we feel that we have addressed the concerns of our activists and our own objectives:

* To keep the debate focused on the candidates and allow unfiltered access for our viewers.

* To keep the debate focused on the issues important to Nevada voters.

* To ensure that the most people possible have access to the debate and the candidates.

With these changes, we believe we have made a good-faith effort to address the concerns laid out to us and look forward to working with the candidates and our local supporters to ensuring the best debate possible.

Sincerely,

Tom Collins
Chairman,
Nevada Democratic Party

This all looks quite preliminary, and in its preliminary state feels like some people are starting to panick. Supposedly, at 11.45 PST a conference call of the Executive Board was supposed to take place. If the time of that call was not changed this, again, was a unilateral decision by Tom Collins. Let's hope it's not.

Asking a local Air America affiliate along at this stage is simply not enough. In this point I can only agree with both Kos and Matt Stoller that it's too little, too late. Before Edwards' announced decision not to take part in the debate this might have done. Now, it just won't.

It also speaks volumes that they want to "invite a local progressive voice onto the debate panel", but are not ready to name names and have probably not contacted anyone yet. And "a local progressive voice". Who is that supposed to be? Myrna the Minx?

And than reread this:

We will also offer PolitcsTV.com the ability to carry the live FOX News web cast feed on its site for one-time viewing. If PoliticsTV agrees, this will give national viewers who do not wish to watch FOX the ability to watch the debate live while bolstering a progressive leaning organization.

Tom Collins dares to mention PoliticsTV in his mail, yet has not received an agreement with PoliticsTV and you have to wonder whether they even asked. This whole statement reeks of pandering and panic. Geez!

Edwards Will NOT Participate in Fox News Debate

Kos has been contacting campaigns on whether or not they intend to participate in the Fox News debate in Reno in August and he initially intended to start posting responses tomorrow. However, the Edwards campaign was so quick and clear, he posted their response tonight:

We will not be participating in the Fox debate. We're going to make lots of appearances in Nevada, including debates. By the end of March, we will have attended three presidential forums in Nevada - and there are already at least three proposed Nevada debates. We're definitely going to debate in Nevada, but we don't see why this needs to be one of them.

Kudos to Edwards. He's quite right about this. There are enought debates and forums in Nevada for candidates to attend, so why not skip the Fox News debate? He might have been encouraged by the Ann Coulter slur against him which she got to defend on, yeah you guessed it, Fox News where she is also a regular contributor.

Let's hope other campaigns will soon follow.

However, something might happen in the meantime as the Executive Board of the Nevada State Democratic Party is apparently having a conference call tomorrow morning. Wonder how much heat outgoing Chair Tom Collins is going to have to take for this skrew up of a decision. Yet, the question remains:

Why is Harry Reid silent?

Fox News Debate: Blogosphere Not Giving Up

Matt Stoller has written another post on the planned presidential debate on Fox News (in Reno in August) on MyDD which is cross-posted on the Daily Kos front-page. While early on the criticism was focused generally on the Nevada State Democratic Party, the attention has now zeroed in on the chief himself - Harry Reid: "Action Item: Senator Reid, Don't Legitimize Fox News"

Through BlogPac, Stoller and the other guys at MyDD have already managed to get 3,500 people to sent e-mails to still-party chairman Tom Collins. Wonder, how much heat Harry Reid is going to feel now:

Senator Reid, the most powerful official in Nevada and a key leader in the national Democratic Party, is either part of these decisions or could substantively accommodate our legitimate concerns. At this point, he's simply being silent and evasive, just like the Nevada Democratic Party (this despite Fox News's constant and baseless attacks on his patriotism and character).

Please call Reid's offices and ask him to not legitimize Fox News as a neutral news outlet. If you are not in Nevada, use this number: 202-224-3542 / Fax: 202-224-7327

If you live in Nevada, use this number, which is restricted to 775 and 702 area codes: 1-866-SEN-REID (736-7343)

It's time to let Senator Reid know that we want him to act like a good Democrat and ensure that the candidate forum in August treats the Democratic Party and our Democratic leaders vying for the Presidency with the respect that they deserve. Treating Fox News as a neutral news outlet by letting them solely host this debate does not do that.

Stoller's post also extensively focuses on what Clark County member of the Nevada State Democratic Party's Executive Board Michael Zahara had to say on this. Zahara is currently the lone voice of discent among top Nevada Democrats and a beacon in a sea of "yeah, Fox News sucks, but..." statements by other Nevada Democrats.

Now, here's my action item of today: Go over to his post on Nevada Today and leave a comment of support for Michael.

Will Edwards Be Doomed in Nevada Because of his Anti-Gambling Vote?

Now, John Edwards was a Senator for only six years. However, these few years are surely enough to dig up a lot of unpleasant votes and statements. In hindsight unpleasant, that is. This time it's not about Iraq, this time it's all about gambling:

Former Sen. John Edwards’s (D-N.C.) strong support of prohibiting gambling on college sports is expected to hamper his chances in the Nevada presidential caucus.

Lawmakers in the Silver State have long criticized the legislation; in 2003, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) called it “anti-Nevada.”

This was a Republican bill. However it did not stop Edwards of co-sponsoring it:

Edwards, a formal cosponsor of the bill, didn’t hold back when lobbying for it. During a March 29, 2000 hearing of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Edwards said, “Instead of rooting for a university because of loyalty, bookies in Nevada … root for a team for one reason, and only one reason: money.”

He later added, “We will hear today from folks in Nevada about how well-regulated the gaming industry is … We will not hear much, though, about the millions of dollars they give annually to politicians. You will not hear them talk about the influence their money has in Washington.”

Edwards said enactment of the bill would prevent Nevada casinos from “raking in close to a billion dollars annually on amateur athletics.”

Ouch. The Hill believes this will hurt Edwards with Nevada voters. Might be. What I'm thinking is how he'll now do on the money side. Think the Casinos are gonna give him much? Will possible labor support outweigh this?

Read the whole thing over at The Hill.

Union Leaders Think Fox News Debate is a Good Idea

The Nevada Scandalmonger over at Vote Gibbons Out has gotten on the Union's e-mailing list and what a gem they send him:

Nevada Labor Leaders Speak Out on Fox Debate:
Labor Leaders Support Reaching Out to Nevada’s Diverse Voters

Las Vegas, Nevada (February 26, 2007) - Today, Nevada labor leaders called on local and national organizations that have been critical of the August Democratic Presidential candidate debate to be aired on Fox News. The labor leaders pointed out that Nevada was awarded an early caucus because of its diverse population and that reaching out to this population will require a wide range of voices and messages.

Danny Thompson, leader of the Nevada State AFL-CIO, noted, “When the DNC approved Nevada’s new position, we were chosen because we would be a state that would highlight populations and issues not given fair representation in the previous nominating calendar. We are excited that issues Nevada and the West face will be highlighted and want as broad an audience as possible to receive this message. We think it will be refreshing to have FOX News have to broadcast a discussion of the characteristics that distinguish Nevada, including a growing labor movement.”

D. Taylor, Secretary–Treasurer of the 60,000-member Culinary Union called on those who have focused on Fox to look at the larger political picture. “Nevada was chosen as an early caucus state because of its diversity. Our members are diverse, the State’s voters are diverse. There is no purity in newscasts. We can all find flaws with each channel. What we know is that FOX is the most-watched newscast and that it will be a positive thing for the people who watch FOX’s newscast to have exposure to the issues and voices that will be participating in the Nevada presidential caucus. When we limit ourselves to only those that we agree with, everybody loses.”

Rusty McAllister, president of the Professional Firefighters of Nevada, noted that, “Many of us who will be participating in the presidential caucus process represent constituencies with a wide range of beliefs. We want all of our members to receive information about the candidates and their platforms. It is a step forward for Nevada if we have all networks, including FOX, addressing the issues that make our State unique.”

What do you say? I mean, what could you? I'll give you the Scandalmonger's response first before I weigh in:

Woah. When Harry calls out the big guns, he really calls them out. And they read the talking points pretty good, don't they? Same ones I've been reading over and over the last few days. Except for this one: No channels are pure. Sure, but some are really much more impure when it comes to bashing progressives and unions. Guys, you better hope that the deal Collins presumably worked out with Fox doesn't turn into a Bash the Democrats muckfest. Otherwise, we'll know who to blame if the Democrats lose another presidential run.

Sure do. Should this debate really take place and it will actually turn out like the last time in 2004 there are quite a few people who seem to be willing to share the blame.

But let's take a little closer look at this piece of work:

Nevada Labor Leaders Speak Out on Fox Debate:
Labor Leaders Support Reaching Out to Nevada’s Diverse Voters

Yeah, you do have to read that several times. It's that incredulous. There are several ways to actually take this "reasoning" apart:

1. "Diverse Voters" - What exactly constitutes diverse voters? When Sen. Reid argued for adding the Nevada Caucus to the early primary states he did so on the basis that Nevada is not an all white state without much union representation like say New Hampshire or Iowa. He was pretty adament about the fact that Nevada had a large number of minorities, including roughly 20% Hispanics, 6% African American and 5% Asian American. Also, Nevada has a significant union representation, largely due to the Casino and tourism sectors. He argued this himself in an interview with Jonathan Singer on MyDD and this is what you could read from coast to coast in newspaper reports (LVRJ, Chicago Tribune).
2. Diversity and Fox News - Could any channel be less diverse than Fox News? All the shows that Fox News is famous for are done by white guys (and a few women) and, no, Michelle Malkin does not make Fox News more diverse.
3. Diversity on Fox News - Now, honest to God, since when do any of the talking heads on Fox News represent diverse views, diverse values or diverse voters for that matter? Tell me, please! I'd like to figure this one out.
4. Fox News and the West - From all of the statements defending the Fox News debate I come away with a feeling that their is some idiotic bias at work. Westerners like their guns, many westerners live in the rurals, so westerners watch Fox News. If we want to reach those voters then we need to go on Fox News. Now, I've lived in the West and I know quite a few of those westerers. Thing is, it's not like they all watch Fox News. However, if they do, it's likely that they label Hillary a communist and will soon do the same with Obama if the framing taking place on Fox News (and the right wing radio talk shows) continues. What I absolutely do not get is why it is impossible to reach out to the local ABC, NBC or CBS affiliates in Reno and Las Vegas and let them host a debate? Cause after all most people still get their news from watching local stations. Reaching a new audience by going on Fox News is not the answer.
5. Mr. Thompson, Mr. Taylor, Mr. McAllister: what good has been said on Fox News about unions and union interests? How many instances have there been when the unions have been shown in a good light on Fox News? Just wondering.
   

DKos Massacre: Tom Collins Goes Out with a Bang!

One could say it was gutsy by Tom Collins to go on Daily Kos on Friday night. One could but then again one only has to look at the reaction and is only left to say: Ouch!

In his Daily Kos diary entitled Message from Nevada Party Chairman regarding Fox debate Collins defended the decision to have a presidential debate in August aired by Fox News. His diary received more than 500 comments and let's just say it wasn't a pretty picture though some were sympathetic to him. To get a sense of it all take a look at the six comments Tom Collins left on his diary and the reactions to them (one, two, three, four, five, six).

His diary also wasn't well received by the front page bloggers at MyDD and Daily Kos. Chris Bowers in an open letter to the leading Nevada Democrats:

We are not a bunch of idiots who can be placated simply by repeatedly stating the same talking point no matter what question we are asking you. How did that work out for you in your Dailykos diary yesterday, anyway? You may think we act like a bunch of snotty know-it-alls, but believe me when I write that during an episode like this, that feeling is absolutely mutual.

Kagro X over at Daily Kos meanwhile quoted Tom Collins and wondered whether Nevada might need a new party chairman come August being unaware of the fact that Collins has decided (prior to this whole debate) to not run again in March. Meanwhile former congressional candidate Jill Derby has decided to run to replace Collins.

If you think this has already gotten a little out of hand. Well, you haven't heard from the grand old Jon Ralston, yet, have you? Well, he has gotten with the spirit and has just called me a terrorist. Thanks for the honors!

I have a feeling this story won't go away all that soon. BTW, where's the almighty Harry? All silent on the Searchlight front?

Bloggers vs. Nevada Democratic Party

The Nevada Democratic Party together with the new Western Majority Project PAC has decided to host a presidential candidate debate in Reno on August 14. So far, so good.

The problem?

They decided to let Fox News host it. Now all hell has broken lose.

First the Gleaner ("Nevada Dems getting outfoxed?") discovered it, than Matt Stoller on MyDD ("WTF?"), followed by Kos himself at Daily Kos ("Dimwit Nevada Democrats").

So, the Nevada Democratic Party had to defend itself. Myrna at Reno and its Discontent got a statement from party spokesperson Kirsten Searer:

“FOX News’ viewership in Western states and across the country does not always get to hear directly from Democrats in an unedited and uninterrupted fashion. The August debate in Reno will allow the Democratic Presidential candidates to speak to the Fox audience who may be hearing from them for the first time for ninety minutes unfiltered and directly.”

“The Nevada Democratic Party and the Western Majority Project believe it is critical for Democrats to engage people, especially those who have heard too little from Democrats in the past. We believe the more people hear from Democrats, the better chance a Democrat will win the White House in 2008.”

Apparently, this reaction didn't go over well with the big shot bloggers. The reaction ranged from calling it "lame" (Kos) to Chris Bowers at MyDD now going into "Action" mode and set up an email form at BlogPac. This follows an announcement by MoveOn.org to take action against the debate. Myrna has the lowdown on that:

I just spoke to Adam Green of Moveon.org which is planning a campaign against Fox News’s pose as a legitimate news agency. They see the upcoming Democratic debate sponsored by the Western Majority Project and the Nevada State Democratic Party is an opportunity to put pressure on the state party and other new organizations and are going to time it with a YouTube video by Robert Greenwald called “Fox Attacks Obama.”

In a rather shocking move, Green wants to include Nevada liberal bloggers in this campaign, or at least let us know what the plans are so that we can help as we see fit. I sure hope someone tfrom the state party is reading this…..you might want to brace yourself.

Well, that oughta be fun. So far I haven't heard anything, yet.

Interestingly, none of the big shots at Daily Kos and MyDD have called Harry Reid a "dimwit" or called on him to cancel the Fox News debate. They don't even seem to be able to find this prominent quote by Sen. Reid - who basically runs the Nevada Democratic Party - in the debate announcement press release:

In making the announcement, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said, “This is more great news for Nevada. I'm happy FOX News will be a partner for the August presidential debate. Western issues will be a major focus of this debate in particular. With FOX News as our partner, candidates will have an opportunity to not only speak to Nevada voters, but voters across the West who will be instrumental to electing a Democratic president in 2008.”

This is the SECOND paragraph for crying out loud. Naturally, I have to agree with the Gleaner and Myrna that the person to go to is Harry Reid. So far, Kos and the guys at MyDD seem to be afraid of that.

UPDATE:

The action email by BlogPac does include the following paragraph at the end of the page:

By clicking submit for this campaign your message will be sent to Nevada Democratic Party Chair Todd Collins, Nevada Speaker of the Assembly Barbara Buckley, Nevada State Senate Minority Leader Dina Titus, U.S. Representative Shelley Berkley, and U.S. Senator Harry Reid. Your name will also be added to the BlogPac email list. You can unsubscribe at any time.

So, there actually is a mention of Harry Reid and they are targeting him, though only as part of a group. And how the Representative from Las Vegas has more to say about a debate in Reno than the Senate Majority Leader who announced this deal just escapes me.

UPDATE 2:

Well, there seems to be a sudden turnaround in the non focus on Harry Reid. Kos just published a post headlined "Hey Harry, look at what Fox did the last time they hosted a debate":

MoveOn is joining the effort, while local blogger Myrna thinks Harry Reid should get pressure, as Nevada Dems won't do anything without his approval.

...

Good point. I'm on it.

Cheers to him!

According to UPI the Forum is Already Over

God, these people! Where do they get the nerve? Published by UPI today at 7.38am ET, more than seven hours before the forum is even set to begin:

CARSON CITY, Nev., Feb. 21 (UPI) -- Nevada's capital was bustling Wednesday as eight Democrats with U.S. presidential aspirations participated in a pre-caucus forum.

"If they want to be elected president ... they have to win the West now," U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., told USA Today. "That's why the caucuses are here and the (Democratic Party) convention will be in Denver."

Nevada gained some clout by being slotted as the second Democratic caucus site next year on Jan. 19, after Iowa on Jan 14. The first primary is Jan. 22 in New Hampshire.

All of the Democratic prospects attended the forum with the exception of U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., who had a scheduling conflict but he had made time to campaign in the state last weekend, the newspaper said.

It's highly unlikely that UPI even has a reporter in Carson City as they seem to claim as UPI today has fewer than 50 employees. But what do you expect from a declining organization which is part of News World Communications owned by the Unification Church sect of Sun Myung Moon. Said company also owns the Washington Times. Nuff said.

Yucca Mountain and the Nevada Caucus

Apparently, it is possible to write a story about Nevada for a national audience which actually involves an important issue and totally ignores the usual stereotypes. Of course, that is not the story Kathleen Hennessey wrote yesterday.

Fortunately, there are reporters like Jean Chemnick of The Politico. In a story headlined "Nevada's New Political Wattage Alters Balance in Yucca Nuclear Fight" she actually manages to take an in depth look at an issue of importance to voters in Nevada and makes the connection as to how the Nevada Caucus will have an impact on this issue.

An excerpt:

Changes in Nevada's political clout and its congressional delegation's commitment to the issue have helped block Yucca over the years, Bryan said. In 1987, when Yucca was singled out as the sole site to be studied for a high-level nuclear repository, the state had a congressional delegation of four. In contrast, Washington and Texas, which also had sites on the final list, had big delegations and even bigger players: Tom Foley, D-Wash., the House majority leader at the time, and Jim Wright, D-Texas, the House speaker.

Times have changed. Nevada has three House members and stands to gain one other seat after 2010. More important, it has Harry Reid, the new Senate majority leader. He has said he will block any pro-Yucca legislation.

The state's new early Democratic presidential caucus also doesn't hurt its cause. Candidates -- especially Democrats -- who have campaigned in Nevada have always had to pass the Yucca test. Now with the state's new role in choosing the Democratic nominee, no Democrat can afford to be pro-Yucca. Former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack have stated their total or conditional opposition to the project. Their Democratic rivals, all of whom are slated to visit Carson City this month, for Wednesday's Democratic candidate forum or individually, will find it difficult to do well in the state without taking a similar position.

I recommend you read the whole story here.

When Journalists Are Asked About Nevada Stupidity Abounds

One of the first of surely numerous, inevitable "why bother about Nevada" stories has today been thrown to the hungry masses outside of the state ahead of the first nation-wide forum of Democratic presidential contenders to be held in Carson City this week.

"Nevada Dems working to lure candidates" is the headline of the AP's Kathleen Hennessey's story. And what do you think of reading that headline? Slot machines and hookers? Well, the media is sure doing its best to cultivate this image.

Ms. Hennessey hardly makes an effort to veil her disappointment about the Nevada Democratic Party's welcome package for candidates:

The 44-page document includes notes on the practical and historical: a list of union hotels in Las Vegas (42) and the drive time from the airport to downtown Reno (eight minutes), for example.

There's no mention of Bugsy Siegel or legalized prostitution in rural counties. The state's storied gambling history is dismissed in a single sentence.

And further down:

Reid argues that winning the state's caucus will be key to winning a handful of swing states in the region. He's repeatedly hailed the move as a victory for working families.

That is relatively new territory for a state whose working girls get far more media attention.

Nevada, particularly the southern part of the state, has made a killing by billing itself as risque, not representative. The state tolerates legalized prostitution in 10 counties, and embraces gambling in nearly every corner of all 17. Slot machines can be found in supermarkets and gas stations.

After reading this story would you know what Ms. Hennessey routinely writes about? Well, she is an AP staff writer who spends most (if not all) of her time focusing on Nevada issues. So, she could have chosen to write about issues of special importance to Nevada. Urban sprawl, water problems, heck, she could at least have mentioned Yucca Mountain (even Russert recently managed to ask John Edwards about that one). After all, this report will probably be published in numerous papers across the nation this week.

But, no, she manages to conclude this piece of work with a quote by a colleague of hers that clearly shows what's wrong with mainstream journalism:

"The television crews will say, 'How do we say in visual shorthand, I'm in Nevada?'" said Dayton Duncan, a New Hampshire writer who's written about that state's primary and the West.

"They show cornfields in Iowa because that's what people expect to see. ... My bet is when they want to say we're in Nevada ... you're going to see a lot of neon signs."

To think that these people actually get paid...

PS: Leslie W. Blitzer and his Late Edition crew actually managed to find another backdrop: a golf course in Henderson. Unwittingly, they actually got close to one of the top issues in Nevada: water.

Reid Jr. Signs Up With Hillary

While Sen. Harry Reid doesn't intend to endorse anyone, one of his sons has gone a step further:

With Reid not committing, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) found the next-best thing -- signing his eldest son, Rory, as both the chair of her campaign in the Silver State and an adviser on Western issues.

Rory Reid currently serves as the chairman of the Clark County Commission -- that's Las Vegas's county -- and is a past chairman of the Nevada state party. He is the only one of Reid's four sons in elected office.

In landing him, Clinton strikes the first major blow of the Nevada caucus contest, newly added to the party's early nominating calendar by the Democratic National Committee last year. The caucus is set for Jan. 19, sandwiched between Iowa's Jan. 14 caucuses and New Hampshire's Jan. 22 primary.

Up until now, it seems like the establishment sticks to the establishment. Wonder when someone will deviate from this pattern.

"Dina-Might"

Wow! I must say, I'm really baffled that neither friend nor foe of last year's Democratic gubernatorial nominee Dina Titus came up with this one. Thanks for the folks at the Politico!

As most Democratic officials in Nevada have declared not to endorse anyone for the Nevada Caucus for the greater good of Nevada (?), the Politico's Michael Squires thinks Senate Minority Leader Dina Titus's endorsement will be one of the big prizes in Nevada:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is Nevada's highest-ranking politician -- ever. But the veteran Democratic politician has vowed to remain neutral.

That has some believing the big endorsement "get" will be state Sen. Dina Titus, who narrowly lost a bid for governor last year. But her Team Titus grass-roots operation was impressive and continues to demonstrate its ability to put butts in the seats.

A recent appearance by former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack in southern Nevada drew 100 people, about half of whom were furnished by Titus operatives, the types of Democratic activists expected to turn out in droves and decide the outcome of the caucuses.

I wonder who's gonna get her endorsement. Is it gonna go to Vilsack or one of the other candidates who helped in her gubernatorial campaign. Two people who did not show up for Dina were Hillary Clinton (she had to cancel her rally due to some emergency business in New York) and Barack Obama who hasn't been to Nevada at all in the last election cycle. So, maybe Richardson and Edwards have a shot at getting it as well.

For more thoughts on the Nevada Caucus read Michael Squires's article.

Harry Reid: You Better Come to Nevada

John Singer of MyDD interviewed Nevada's senior Senator Harry Reid about current issues and most importantly about the Nevada Caucus. Here's what he had to say:

Jonathan Singer: Thanks for taking the time. Can you tell us a little bit about what it's going to take for someone to win the Nevada caucuses? It's kind of a new thing for us political watchers.

Harry Reid: Well it's a new thing for we Nevadans. It's a real challenge to make sure we organize well. I think it's so important to our country that we change the system. Iowa, a state with a nice population, but very little diversity. Wonderful people. They've done a good job with their caucuses. New Hampshire has no diversity and a very small population. It really seems unfair to me and most people, and that's why the DNC changed it - [that] those two states should determine who's President.

Why did they choose Nevada and South Carolina? They chose Nevada because of its diversity - 20 percent Hispanic, large African-American population, Asian-American population is 6-7 percent. That's big. We have 22 different tribal organizations. The state of Nevada has large union representation, 14 percent and going up rather than down, like a lot of other places in the country.

We have population centers. We have Las Vegas and Reno, two large centers, Las Vegas really big. We have all of the problems of any major metropolitan area. We have rural Nevada, which is representative certainly of rural America. Nevada is representative of the rest of the country.

And people who come there are going to have to be able to respond to Western questions. Water. In the East, we used to have too much. In the West, it's always not enough. We have problems in the West that are unique to the West. The military is different in the West than the East because it's spread out. For example, Las Vegas has the largest Air Force fighter training school in the world. Great ranges. Before you came here we had a map of all that. I wish I could have shown it to you. It's just huge.

Forty percent of the state of Nevada is restricted airspace, military. Eighty-seven percent of the state of Nevada is owned by the federal government. Only 13 percent is privately owned. So we have a lot of federal land issues in Nevada that you don't have in any other place, except you got some in Utah, Montana. But ours is exaggerated compared to them.

People are going to have to be aware of all of these Nevada issues, not the least of which is Yucca Mountain, storage of nuclear waste.

Singer: Do you have any recommendations for a candidate?

Reid: Come to Nevada. That's my first recommendation. You're not going to win running 30-second TV spots somewhere else.

Read the rest of the interview at MyDD.