Correction: McGovern Is Not a Superdelegate

In our top story on the radio show today, we talked about former Senator and Democratic presidential nominee George McGovern's switch from the Clinton camp to the Obama camp. We described Senator McGovern as a superdelegate, but he is not one. We regret the error.



Please keep your community civil. All comments must follow the Community rules and terms of use, and will be moderated prior to posting. NPR reserves the right to use the comments we receive, in whole or in part, and to use the commenter's name and location, in any medium. See also the Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and Community FAQ.

I love the show, but I'm going to be rude and off topic here: Mike's interview with Sarah Longwell was combative and unnecessary. Generally the BPP doesn't take that kind of tone with guests. Why this time? And why didn't a MADD representative get a similar grilling on the statistics? It was obnoxious. My God, this is public radio. I'm a libertarian, so perhaps that explains my hatred for Boomer helicopter moms like the members of MADD. It is not an insane assumption to think that MADD is trying to over-regulate. The GAO (an office I like more and more- eat it Petraeus!) report has pointed out some issues with the NHTSA figures. Some of us are VERY tired of this country's hysterical drug and alcohol policies. It's important to draw lines when it comes to government regulation. When it comes to radio shows, it's important to not have long, boring arguments on imperfect statistics cherry-picked by an overly zealous band of grieving mothers.

Sent by Emilie | 4:54 PM | 5-8-2008

That is just one of many things George McGovern isn't; relevant being the most important. Wanted to drive off the road and into a telephone pole when I heard his comment re: Hillary.

Sent by David Hollis, Hamilton, NY | 9:17 AM | 5-9-2008


I like Mike being a bit aggressive with BSers. "We have no problem with interlocks, but we don't want them on cars". The starting point for this woman's position is nonsense. If you don't drink and drive, interlocks don't concern you.

LAURA! You really do need a specific post each day for comments on stories. One post would be enough, but one for each story would be better. Pretty please?

Sent by Marc Naimark | 9:40 AM | 5-13-2008

I think she made many valid points about danger zones for overreaching in terms of regulation. If interlock companies are going to be liable for what happens when people use their devices, the limit will NEVER just be .08 for legal reasons. MADD is insane, and I cannot believe this organization has an ounce of credibility. Organizations like this are always able to overreach because no one wants to stand up for drugs and alcohol. I will. I stand by my point: this interview was dumb.

Sent by emilie | 10:33 AM | 5-15-2008