The truth is non-partisan

I'm a sucker for the news. I wasted most of my evening last night
watching CNN commentators talk about the results from the Iowa caucus.
Typically, the pundits were annoying.

Firstly, the media give the impression of winners and losers. I
thought state caucuses and votes were all about gaining delegates for
a national convention to be held sometime in August. After one state's
vote how can you declare winners. Isn't the winner decided in August?

Both Clinton and Romney were declared losers. I believe it was
Woodward of Watergate fame who described how Clinton's loss was
devastating for her. "Over 70 percent of Democratic caucus goers
voted against her," he said. I thought the 70 percent voted for
someone else; not against Hillary. Hillary took at least 30 percent
of the delegates with her to the convention. Good for her.

Some comments were made about the religious factor. NPR said over 60%
of Republicans attending the Iowa caucus were Evangelical Christians.
Did I not hear that correctly? Or was that 60% of the voters for Mike
Huckabee were Evangelical Christians? I think it's safe to say Mike
Huckabee's win was a vote against someone - that someone was Mitt
Romney. Romney has tried unsuccessfully to woo religious conservatives
and it seems like he has been largely unsuccessful. Religious bigotry
is alive and well in the Midwest.

Ron Paul got 10% of the Republican delegates in Iowa, but the media
said little about it. A CNN pie chart showed the top four vote
getters, but didn't have space to show Ron Paul's 10 percent. Giuliani
who got less votes than Paul was interviewed, mainly about his poor
showing and future chances. No analysis was made of Ron Paul's vote.
Who are Ron Paul supporters? If Ron Paul takes 10% of the delegates
to the Republican convention in August, that's pretty significant.