Buffy the Republican Slayer to Missouri Voters: Obama Really Wants Your Votes! (Not)

Awhile back, I signed up for email from both McCain and Obama's campaign.   I get these updates so that I can get an idea of what is happening politically in the "bellwether state" of Missouri. Obama's campaign has been spamming me at least twice a day for weeks.  McCain, not so much.  He definitely did not take a page out of the Bush/Rove campaign strategy. 

So, I came home last night to find an email from the Missouri Barack Obama campaign.  The sender's name was Buffy Wicks.  She was urging me to find Obama events in Missouri to attend.  I guess she doesn't want anyone home alone watching Obama's speech Thursday night.  Who knows what sort of leg tingling, breath stealing moment might overcome an erstwhile Obama supporter?  Somebody could pass out or accidentally kick the cat or dog with all those leg spasms. 

However, it wasn't the "don't watch Obama's speech alone" thing that got me.  It was her name.  Pardon me?  Buffy Wicks?  I had no idea anyone in Missouri was named Buffy.  Anyone.  The entire name sounds like a stage name.  I decided to google it and see what came up. 

Guess what?  I was right to be skeptical.  Buffy Wicks is not from Missouri, but from Chicago.  In her spare time, she slays republicans with her charming wit and powerful emails. 

Anyway, Buffy was urging me to go out and join the Missouri state wide canvassing project to "help build the momentum" from the convention.  I think that's interesting considering that Gateway Pundit reports that the Missouri delegation was sidelined to the nosebleed section of the convention center. THE bellwether state "because every president for the past century carried the state at least once. Missouri voters have chosen correctly each election since 1904, except for the 1952 race".  That's over 100 years of success.  You don't mess with success. 

What does that say about Obama's chances for being elected president if he has already pushed Missouri to the side?  Does he think he has Missouri all sown up?  Or, is he planning to lose Missouri since it's full of bible clinging, gun toting rednecks that think he doesn't look like any of those other presidents and has a funny name? 

Does Obama think he can buck history and win the presidency while losing Missouri?  Or, win the state with some flimsy "canvassing" program he barely funded?  He should worry, too, because he barely carried the state in the primaries with 49% to Clinton's 48%.

The reasons may be legion, but the most important aspect is that, despite St. Louis and parts of Kansas City proper, Missouri is a Social Conservative state.  Including the "Democrats" outside of the two urban areas.  The state typically goes strong on defense and has a nice, big, rural population that attends church regularly and enjoys hunting season.  Yep.  Second Amendment supporting, bible clingers.

To get a little Missouri cred his campaign had brand new kid on the congressional block, Claire McCaskill give a speech.  A speech that had all the commenters talking over her asking who she was.  His campaign is batting 1.000 in these selection processes.  If he'd checked, not only is McCaskill new up on the hill, but she was little known in Missouri before she came out of the State Auditor's office to run for Governor.  She won the Democrat Primary, but lost to Matt Blunt before trying her hand for the Senate. 

McCaskill had problems in Missouri for the governor's race, despite winning the Senate seat later.  One of her main issues that doesn't win Obama any points is McCaskill's stance on guns that flows with his general attitude about gun owners and bible clingers. 

McCaskill, who does not believe law-abiding citizens have a right to carry a firearm, is actually on the record as saying, “ It’s startling to realize this concept (right-to-carry) came within three votes of passing in the Missouri Senate. Imagine the carnage that could have been wrought by would-be Dirty Harrys…” This is not surprising coming from a candidate who believes “voters understand guns are not the answer for safety.” It’s also not surprising that according to the Center for Responsive Politics the bulk of McCaskill’s campaign contributions have come from anti-gun havens Washington, D.C. ($3 million) and New York City ($250,000), not her home state of Missouri.

Washington D.C.?  The district that keeps trying to avoid the Supreme Court ruling in Heller v. D.C. by calling everything with bottom loading clip a "machine gun" and insists on having weapons dismantled even in the home? 

What does McCaskill bring to the elections in Missouri?  St. Louis, which reliably votes Democrat every race and was McCaskill's largest population base in the run for the Senate.  That is not going to help Obama in Missouri.  As a reminder, in 2004, St. Louis and Kansas City, Missouri went blue for Kerry and it did him no good.  The state over all went red and voted Bush. 

Maybe he'll win them over with the whole Greek Temple faux entry into Invesco field? 

Seriously, McCain ought to grab on to this with both hands and swing for the bleechers.  Put those Missouri folks up front somewhere along with the Ohio delegates.  Remind the mid-west bellwether and swing states who shares their ideas. 

Is Kit Bond or Roy Blunt giving any speeches at the RNC?