Will Jerry McNerney throw his superdelegate support to Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama while the race is still on, or will he stay mum?

Sure, I’m picking on him a bit. He’s not the only East Bay Congressman who has not yet made the choice – Pete Stark hasn’t, either – but McNerney’s the one with the most to lose.

Stark, D-Fremont, was elected to the House in 1972 and has been there ever since; he now chairs the powerful Ways and Means Health Subcommittee. His 13th Congressional District is registered 53.6 percent Democrat, 18.5 percent Republican. In his past four re-elections, he won with 70.5 percent in 2000, 71.1 percent in 2002, 71.7 percent in 2004 and 74.9 percent in 2006 – stronger each time.

In February’s presidential primary, Democrats in Stark’s district went 57.3 percent for Clinton, 38.3 percent for Obama. But although Stark’s temper and (ahem) plain speech sometimes get him into hot water, he clearly has little to lose in endorsing either candidate.

On the other hand, McNerney, D-Pleasanton, is a freshman who’s among the National Republican Congressional Committee’s top targets for unseating this year.

In 2006 he toppled House Resources Committee Chairman Richard Pombo, R-Tracy, in a 53.3 percent to 46.7 percent race. Pombo was beset with accusations of ethics problems, and McNerney was buoyed by a flood of grassroots activists who came in from outside the district to knock doors, work the phones, etc.

Today, McNerney’s 11th Congressional District – mostly in San Joaquin County, but with swaths of Alameda, Contra Costa and San Joaquin counties – is registered 41.3 percent Republican; 38.5 percent Democrat; and 16.6 percent decline-to-state. As of March 31, he had more campaign money in the bank – $1,153,586 – than his Republican challenger, Dean Andal – $531,817 – but the race is young and nobody expects a Stark-style cakewalk in McNerney’s district.

Democrats in McNerney’s district in February voted 54.1 percent for Clinton, 39.9 percent for Obama. McNerney in early March told the San Francisco Chronicle he would “make a decision when I have to… I’m going to let the voters decide for themselves.

Surely he has formed his own opinion by now, right? It’s hard to believe that any member of Congress hasn’t by now, after all that’s been said and done. It’s easy to believe, however, that McNerney doesn’t want to make a choice now which could put him at odds either with a majority of his district’s voters, or with the activists who helped him win that seat, or with the eventual nominee; it’s easy to believe he doesn’t want his words now to show up in Andal’s ads this fall.

But the time may be drawing nigh.

The latest Associated Press figures show Clinton still leads Obama in superdelegate endorsements (268 to 248) but Obama leads in overall delegates (pledged and the officially unpledged superdelegates), 1,736 to 1,602; a candidate needs 2,025 delegates to clinch the nomination. The superdelegate contest has gotten hot in recent days; much is being made of former Democratic National Committee Chairman Joe Andrew’s superdelegate defection from Clinton to Obama, yet poll numbers show Clinton resurgent.

So, Congressman McNerney – will you play it safe and wait until the nomination is a fait accompli, or will you speak out about who you believe should be the Democratic nominee for President of the United States?

I don’t usually use comments on past posts as the seeds of new ones, but this one’s bugging me. This comment from “Jh” came in on the post I did yesterday listing Nancy Pelosi’s and others’ comments on the U.S. Supreme Court ruling upholding Indiana’s voter identification law:

“The right to vote is a foundation of our democracy. American citizens who wish to vote must be able to do so.”…Nancy…tell that to the people in the states where YOUR party decided not to count their votes in YOUR primary

No. No, no, no. This meme of “Oh, how awful — look at the nasty Democrats disenfranchising their own voters!” is just too superficial, and can’t be allowed to pass without some dissection.

If Michigan and Florida Democrats want to blame someone for their delegates not being seated at the Democratic National Convention in Denver this summer, they need look no further than their own state capitols. National Democratic Party leaders warned both states repeatedly, for years, that bucking the party’s rules and setting primaries in January before some of the states the party chosen as bellwethers — first Iowa and New Hampshire, and now Nevada and South Carolina — meant their delegates would not be seated.

They were told plain and simple: If you break the rules, you will suffer the consequences. And they did it anyway.

In Florida, the Legislature passed a bill setting the early primary date with wide, bi-partisan margins; the same thing happened with Michigan’s bill in that state’s House, although the state Senate vote was split along party lines with the Republican majority prevailing.

And guess what? The Democratic National Committee did exactly what it warned it would do, refusing to seat the delegates.

If Michigan and Florida wanted to foment a national discussion on how the nation’s presidential primaries are run, they probably shouldn’t have mounted a kamikaze attack in an election year. A party sets rules for its own convention; you break ‘em, you lose. And if a party would buckle and not deliver the consequences it promised for a violation of the rules, every other state in the nation would look to move its own primary earlier and earlier to reap the economic benefit, political sway and media spotlight that comes with being among the earliest. It would be a free-for-all.

In fact, y’know who threatened U.S. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich. — a driving force behind Michigan’s move to an early primary — against doing exactly this in 2004? Why, it was then-DNC chairman Terry McAuliffe, who detailed the heated encounter in his 2007 memoir. (There’s a slightly longer exerpt here.) Now McAuliffe is Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman — and wants Michigan’s and Florida’s delegates seated despite their transgression of the same party rules for which he fought so heatedly a few years ago.

So — without opining on the motivations behind and effects of Indiana’s voter-identification law, and the Supreme Court ruling that has affirmed it — I don’t see how that situation is akin to this. Florida and Michigan lawmakers of both parties played chicken with the DNC and lost, at their own voters’ expense. The blame lies with them, and with them alone.

The blogosphere is abuzz with criticism of last night’s ABC Democratic debate, moderated by Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos. Many are calling it a superficial poke-fest which failed to address substantive issues facing the American electorate.

And I suspect that’s not far from what Barack Obama was trying to communicate at that now-fateful April 6 fundraiser in San Francisco. There, he said working-class Americans are feeling “bitter” about the economic neglect they’ve experienced in the past few decades: “It’s not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

Why? Because it’s those things on which politicians and campaign strategists harp in order to raise blood pressure, poll numbers and voter turnout, and on which the media — yes, I’ll say it: ESPECIALLY TELEVISION — harp in order to raise ratings.

Look at what the candidates were being asked last night: Wearing a U.S. flag pin? Gun control? To Obama, “Do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?”

Really? This is our national discourse? How about the issues that really affect the day-to-day lives of working-class people? Health care. Education. The housing crisis. Gas prices/energy policy/global warming. Trade policy’s effect on U.S. jobs.

Instead, we ask who loves America more — and by the way, did you know the Rev. Jeremiah Wright volunteered to serve six years first as a Marine and then as a Navy corpsman who provided medical care for President Lyndon Johnson, starting at a time when this nation still subjected him to the most pernicious racial discrimination?

It’s a disgrace, and if you read or listen to the entirety of what Obama said that day in San Francisco, this is exactly what he seemed to be trying to get at: Substantive discussion and action on issues of vital importance to American families has been replaced by shouting about hot-button matters which simply aren’t as important, if at all.

Political operatives, with the complacency and perhaps even conspiratorial cooperation of some media, bait the emotions of people frustrated by the constant struggle to get by, either to get them to the polls or to get them to keep watching. It’s a massive three-card monte, a giant con job.

Should people be bitter? Damn straight. Are they? You betcha. People who love this country should be angry as hell, as were most of American history’s greatest patriots. Injustice should breed contempt, matched by passion for rectification. CNN’s Lou Dobbs — himself too often a perpetrator of hot, empty rhetoric, particularly on immigration — seems to have been caught out by his own viewers in a poll run Tuesday on his Web site:

(H/T to Crooks and Liars for capturing the poll, no longer available on Dobbs’ site.)

Am I, an employee of a corporate-owned, oft-consolidated media outlet, being holier-than-thou? Maybe so; all across America, short-staffed, underpaid and overworked newsrooms too often go for the low-hanging fruit, but many of us still strive to convey useful information that’ll inspire thought, debate and action. And I don’t mean to imply all television journalists are evil; many, including many here in the Bay Area, try hard to bring out the stories that matter.

Yet on a national scale, too many of us fail too often, as do too many of the politicos on whom we report. That’s what I think Obama was talking about, and that’s what you saw last night on ABC.

Once again, I wound up with far more detail then we could accommodate in Lisa Vorderbrueggen’s and my story about East Bay folks elected Sunday as delegates to the Democratic National Convention.

Berkeley author Ayelet Waldman – who with her husband, author Michael Chabon, has been raising funds and writing praise for Obama – was elected as an Obama delegate from Rep. Barbara Lee’s 9th Congressional District.

“I’m thrilled beyond belief, I am happier than I ever thought – I didn’t realize how much I cared until push came to shove,” Waldman, 43, said Monday.

“This is the first time in either of our lives that we’ve been this excited, this committed, this interested quite frankly,” she said of herself and Chabon, adding that for them 2004’s election was all about defeating George Bush rather than about electing John Kerry. “The opportunity to vote for someone rather than against someone is a profound experience that neither of us has ever felt before.”

“My profoundest hope is that it’s going to be a fun-filled few days – that we’ll have it decided long before, that everyone will have thrown their support behind Barack,” she said, but it if the nomination comes down to a battle on the convention floor, “then I want to be there for that too.”

Read more, after the jump… Read the rest of this entry »

As Lisa Vorderbrueggen and I report in today’s editions, unprecedented numbers of Democrats had signed up as candidates to be delegates for Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton in advance of this Sunday’s districts in each of California’s congressionional districts.

Then, on Wednesday, the campaigns invoked their little-known authority to purge almost half those candidates — more from Obama’s side than Clinton’s — fearing that some might be “Trojan horses” who would say they supported one candidate but then flip to the other at the Democratic National Convention this August in Denver. Then, late yesterday, the campaigns seemed to realize how colossally bad this made them look, and reinstated almost everyone.

Lisa and I had started writing the story Tuesday, and had to re-report it twice since then. In all the hubbub, some of the people we’d been talking to didn’t make it into the final story, but I think they’re interesting nonetheless. Read about a few of ‘em, after the jump… Read the rest of this entry »

I got an e-mail yesterday from Brent G. Maupin, a former Hayward-area resident (1980-93, with both his kids born in Castro Valley) who is now an independent candidate for Congress in Arizona’s First Congressional District — where incumbent Rep. Rick Renzi has just been indicted by a federal grand jury on 35 counts of conspiracy, fraud, money laundering and extortion related to his involvement in a land-swap deal. Renzi already had said last year that this would be his final term, but even after being indicted this week, he said he won’t resign.

“Enough is enough! Now is the time for America to vote out every elected official who does not call for reforms that overthrow the political system as we now know it!,” Maupin says in a release he attached to his brief e-mail.

In the race since last fall, Maupin says neither the Republican Party nor the Democratic Party serves the needs of the American people: “The system is broken and only the citizens of America can fix it. I have no party affiliation and only the best interests of Arizona and America at heart.”

Maupin has lived in Sedona, Ariz., since leaving the Bay Area 15 years ago, and describes himself as “a respected businessman, a licensed Civil Engineer, a licensed Architect and a licensed contractor” not to mention a musician and a cancer survivor. “I balance my checkbook every month and there is no reason why Congress can not do the same. As an engineer I am trained to find solutions, not ‘litigate to legislate’ as we see in Washington D.C.”

Among the reforms Maupin seeks are full public disclosure of the Congressional committee selection process; reducing special-interest groups’ influence; replacing paid television ads with televised forums and debates; and forced resignation, loss of pension and healthcare benefits and mandatory prison time for any member of Congress “that has not lived up to his or her oath of office or has otherwise been proven to have been gravely unethical in the administration of his or her duties,” as his release puts it. He also wants all Congressional earmarks voted upon line-by-line before they’re sent to the President.

That’s all he sent me, but I did some snooping. His campaign Web site includes his latest song, “Stand Up America:”

And his music Web site says:

The motivation behind my music is driven by the fact that I believe it is my destiny, and that of several other millions of Americans, to implement what I call The Second American Revolution. In doing so, I intend to “overthrow the legal and illegal corruption” within the current political structure of the government of the United States of America. For a more detailed explanation on my political stand see my web site at www.winwithmaupin.com. This political revolution will be achieved, of course, without advocating force or violence of any kind. I intend to achieve this by continuing to transform my own life, and more importantly to live my life based on the absolute highest levels of my own personal integrity. Also, as can be seen in my web site www.winwithmaupin.com, I am running for office for the United States House of Representatives and when elected I will bring this level of integrity into the governing system. I believe this will in turn have a domino effect of bringing the same for all who run for office. In short, I intend to co-create with God, or this omnipotent-omnipresent force that exists within the universe, a government whereby those who desire to run for office will be those who will live to the absolute highest levels of their own personal integrity and run their campaigns and political responsibilities accordingly. It is through the personal transformational process that such intentions are manifested into reality.

His campaign Web site also notes his vow to spend 70 percent less on his campaign than the $2.2 million Renzi spent to get re-elected in 2006. Sticking to that limit shouldn’t be a problem; FEC reports show that as of Dec. 31, Maupin had raised $739 and spent $669, leaving his campaign $70 cash on hand. (And of that $739, he put up $669 and one other person gave him $70.)

That’s gonna be quite a race down there, whether or not Maupin’s call for revolution catches on. Among the possible Democratic contenders are a state representative; the mayor of Winslow; an Apache magazine publisher; a former U.S. House staffer; a prominent attorney; and a part-time cabbie who was a GLBT coordinator for Dennis Kucinich’s campaign. The GOP contenders include the Arizona Mining Corporation’s president and a computer programmer, and a state representative who dropped out of the race but might be considering jumping back in.

This week I received review copies of a pair of new novelty books — y’know, the little square things you find near the bookstore checkout counter — entitled “185 Stupid Things Republicans Have Said” and “185 Stupid Things Democrats Have Said.”

“Perfect for a laugh during what is sure to be a politically charged year, and alphabetized by category for easy perusal, ‘185 Stupid Things ——– Have Said’ is the perfect gift for your favorite light-hearted Republican or Democrat seeking revenge,” says a news release from Andrews McMeel Publishing, appropriately printed with the Democratic release and the Republican release on two sides of the same sheet of paper.

“I tried to walk a fine line between acting lawfully and testifying falsely, but now I recognize that I did not fully accomplish that goal.” — former president Bill Clinton

“There’s an old saying in Tennessee — I know it’s in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can’t get fooled again.” — President George W. Bush

You get the idea.

Author Ted Rueter “earned a Master’s degree from the University of Chicago and a Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin, Madison, both in political science,” the release says, also noting his experience as an aide to a mayor, a Congressman, state lawmakers and several campaigns. “He is also the director of Noise Free America, a national citizens group opposed to noise pollution.”

Well, then, why is he polluting the political landscape with this noise?

Hey, I love a good laugh too. And I admire books that give equal time to thoughtful, opposing political viewpoints on issues of importance.

But what does anyone gain from books like this, which only to confirm people’s already-formed and often all-too-shallow political allegiances? Ha ha, look how the funny Republican stumbled over his words — what a gas! Watch the Democrat play verbal Twister — how entertaining! I always knew the people on the other side were cretins, and now this book proves it!

This only accelerates the extremely dangerous dumbing-down of American politics and policy; it only cements the partisan rhetoric which has ground real American progress to a halt in recent decades, only deepens the divide. What happens in the halls of government isn’t supposed to be “Us Weekly” fodder; it often involves life-or-death decisions. And, with all due respect to Professor Rueter, you’d think someone with an advanced degree in political science would know that.

Look around — there’s a war on, the economy is in a tailspin, millions lack healthcare insurance, schools are struggling, a presidential election is nigh. But, hey, didja hear that corker from Ann Coulter? Who cares?

There’s no substance in books like these, only a celebration of spite — the kind of spite that eclipses truly important things that are or aren’t happening in the halls of power. These books are a distraction, an anesthetic actively seeking to prevent us from truly listening to each other and finding our way out of the colossal messes we’re in.

And there’s nothing funny about that.

UPDATE @ 4:33 P.M. FRIDAY: Sure, I know — pretty high and mighty from a guy who posts the “Schwarzenegger video of the week.” But not every political journalist is lucky enough to have a bodybuilder-turned-actor-turned-governor, and hopefully this blog is more than just that.

Will the Democratic “superdelegates” — the members of Congress and party apparatchiks — end up determining whether it’s Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton who gets the nomination this year? Quite possibly, if neither gets enough pledged delegates from the state primaries and caucuses (a scenario that seems more and more likely). In California, we’ve got 66 superdelegates, and as I count ‘em, I see 26 already saying they’ll support Clinton, 11 for Obama and 29 who haven’t said anything yet, although any could change their mind at any time.

(Sorry it took me so long to get this list up — other bloggers beat me to it — but finding links for all these DNC members was time consuming!)

U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. —- Clinton
U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. —– none
Rep. Mike Thompson, D-St. Helena —– Clinton
Rep. Doris Matsui, D-Sacramento —– Clinton
Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Petaluma —– Clinton
Rep. George Miller, D-Martinez —– Obama
Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco —– none
Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Oakland —– Obama
Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Alamo —– Clinton
Rep. Jerry McNerney, D-Pleasanton —– none
12th District seat (the late Tom Lantos, most likely will be Jackie Speier) —– none
Rep. Pete Stark, D-Fremont —– none
Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Palo Alto —– Obama
Rep. Mike Honda, D-San Jose —– none
Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose —– Obama
Rep. Sam Farr, D-Santa Cruz —– none
Rep. Dennis Cardoza, D-Atwater —– Clinton
Rep. Jim Costa, D-Fresno —– none
Rep. Lois Capps, D-Santa Barbara —– none
Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Sherman Oaks —– Clinton
Rep. Howard Berman, D-North Hollywood —– none
Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Burbank —– Obama
Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles —– none
Rep. Xavier Becerra, D-Los Angeles —– Obama
Rep. Hilda Solis, D-El Monte —– Clinton
Rep. Diane Watson, D-Los Angeles —– Clinton
Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard, D-Los Angeles —– Clinton
Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Los Angeles —– Clinton
Rep. Jane Harman, D-Venice —– Clinton
Rep. Laura Richardson, D-Long Beach —– Clinton
Rep. Grace Napolitano, D-Norwalk —– Clinton
Rep. Linda Sanchez, D-Lakewood —– Obama
Rep. Joe Baca, D-Rialto —– Clinton
Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Anaheim —– Clinton
Rep. Bob Filner, D-San Diego —– none
Rep. Susan Davis, D-San Diego —– none
DNC member Steven Alari —– none
DNC member Jeremy Bernard —– Obama
DNC member Rachel Binah —– Clinton
DNC member Mary Ellen Early —– Obama
DNC member Maria Echaveste —– Clinton
DNC member Edward Espinoza —– none
DNC member Alexandra Gallardo-Rooker —– none
DNC member Eric Garcetti —– Obama
DNC member Kamil Hasan —– Clinton
DNC member Inola Henry —– none
DNC member Alice Huffman —– Clinton
DNC member Aleita Huguenin —– none
DNC member Charles Manatt —– Clinton
DNC member Carole Midgen —– none
DNC member Bob Mulholland —– none
DNC member Mona Pasquil —– Clinton
DNC member Christine Pelosi —– none
DNC member John Perez —– none
DNC member Robert Rankin —– none
DNC member Mirian Saez —– Clinton
DNC member Garry Shay —– none
DNC member Christopher Stampolis —– Clinton
DNC member Crystal Strait —– none
DNC member Art Torres —– none
DNC member Norma Torres —– Obama
DNC member Keith Umemoto —– none
DNC member Alicia Wang —– Clinton
DNC member Vernon Watkins —– none
DNC member Rosalind Wyman —– Clinton
DNC member Steve Ybarra —– none

The Courage Campaign is gathering petition signatures online urging Los Angeles County acting Registrar of Voters Dean Logan to hand-count about 94,000 decline-to-state ballots cast in last week’s Super Tuesday presidential primary election. From the campaign’s Web site:

A few days before the primary, lawyers for the Courage Campaign uncovered the “double bubble” problem — a shocking requirement that “Decline-to-State” voters fill in a redundant “Democratic” bubble (on a ballot clearly marked “Democratic Party”) as well as a bubble next to their preferred presidential candidate. Our legal team realized that — without the “Democratic” bubble filled in — the county’s optical scanners would void votes for “President of the United States,” regardless of voter intent.

Actually, although the Courage Campaign “uncovered” this just before the primary, LA’s ballots have been this way for years — a problem that has been blasted in the past, and probably should have been fixed before now but wasn’t.

Nonetheless, Los Angeles last week saw a record-breaking turnout of 189,000 voters registered without party affiliation, and about half of those now stand to be ignored because they didn’t fill out the party bubble as well as the candidate’s bubble on their ballots.

A Sacramento Bee editorial put the disenfranchisement’s scale in perspective: during the 2000 presidential election’s Florida butterfly ballot debacle, 19,120 Palm Beach County ballots went uncounted because of the bad ballot design. Here, we’ve potentially got five times as many victims.

Here’s what Logan said in a statement issued the day of the election:

The manner in which cross over voting was presented in Los Angeles County was no different than that of the last three statewide primary elections (2002, 2004 and 2006). The voter instructions provided in the sample ballot booklets, which were mailed to all voters in the County, highlighted the steps to be taken by nonpartisan voters when voting a cross over ballot. Likewise, poll worker training materials and the actual vote recorder page instructions were consistent with past practice. Additionally, this office engaged in extensive voter outreach and education focused on cross over voting.
[snip]
In cooperation and consultation with the Secretary of State we will seek to determine whether or not this issue has potential impact on the outcome of the Democratic Presidential contest. If such an impact is established, we will exhaust every available option under state law to count cross over votes on nonpartisan ballots where the intent of the voter can be clearly and definitively determined.

Glancing at the election returns as posted so far, Barack Obama took three districts down there — Diane Watson’s 33rd, Maxine Waters‘ 35th and Laura Richardson’s 37th — while Hillary Clinton took the rest. In a few LA districts, the victory margins might be such that these uncounted ballots mean the difference of a few delegates one way or another under the California Democratic Party’s byzantine allocation rules.

For my own part, however, the delegate count is a secondary concern. I think public officials should bend over backwards to make voting as simple to understand as possible and to ensure every vote is counted, whether it can tip a balance or not.

This extremely sad news, just in:

Congressman Tom Lantos (D-San Mateo, San Francisco), 80, passed away this morning due to complications from cancer at Bethesda Naval Medical Center.

Elected to office in 1980, Lantos was Chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and one of the country’s leading champions of human rights. His commitment to this issue was forged when, as a young man, he lost nearly his entire family in the Holocaust.

Today he was surrounded by his wife, two daughters, and many of his 18 grandchildren and two great-grandchildren.

After being diagnosed with esophageal cancer in late December, Lantos announced on January 2 that he would not seek reelection. He said at the time, “It is only in the United States that a penniless survivor of the Holocaust and a fighter in the anti-Nazi underground could have received an education, raised a family, and had the privilege of serving the last three decades of his life as a Member of Congress. I will never be able to express fully my profoundly felt gratitude to this great country.”

The only survivor of the Shoah ever elected to Congress, Tom Lantos was in his 14th term. His Democratic colleagues elected him chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs in January 2007. He was also a senior member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

Throughout his adult life Lantos sought to be a voice for human rights and civil liberties. He and Annette Lantos, his childhood sweetheart and wife of nearly 58 years were, as Lantos put it, “full partners both in Congress and in life,” and they continued their work right up to his final days. Tom Lantos was the founding co-chairman of the 24-year-old Congressional Human Rights Caucus, which Annette directed as a volunteer since its inception. He also founded the Congressional Friends of Animals Caucus.

Annette said that her husband’s life was “defined by courage, optimism, and unwavering dedication to his principles and to his family.”

The date for a public memorial service has not yet been set.

I’ll be adding testimonials from various VIPs as the day progresses, after the jump… Read the rest of this entry »