which state that a fielder may not deliberately obstruct the runner’s path to ANY base.

7.06 When obstruction occurs, the umpire shall call or signal “Obstruction.”

(a) If a play is being made on the obstructed runner, or if the batter runner is obstructed before he touches first base, the ball is dead and all runners shall advance, without liability to be put out, to the bases they would have reached, in the umpire’s judgment, if there had been no obstruction. The obstructed runner shall be awarded at least one base beyond the base he had last legally touched before the obstruction.

NOTE: The catcher, without the ball in his possession, has no right to block the pathway of the runner attempting to score. The base line belongs to the runner and the catcher should be there only when he is fielding a ball or when he already has the ball in his hand.

Let’s put it another way. No Catcher including Buster Posey may block the plate or be in front of the plate or obstruct the plate without Already having possession of the ball and until the rule is actually changed no Catcher including Posey had any business being where he was in the basepath.

If people want to change the rules, fine, but until then stop blocking the plate.

My Thesis that as long as the DNC thinks Sarah Palin in running for President, Herman Cain will get attention from the MSM took its first step when Dave Weigel’s complement of Cain’s poll position was picked up by the NYT.

How else does a candidate gain credibility? Why being attacked by the DNC of course:

DNC spokesman Hari Sevugan told TheDC that they want to hold Republican candidates accountable, including Cain.

“We fact-check anyone who misstates the facts or misleads the American people about their own or the president’s record,” he said of the DNC’s “Rapid Response” against Cain.

I wonder what the DNC suddenly decided to go after Herman Cain in a forceful way. I’m sure it has nothing to do with this equation:

(Social Conservatives+Tea Party) / (Sarah Palin+Michelle Bachmann + Herman Cain) = Romney wins in early primaries

Will the Democrats regret their decision on Cain, not as long as they are more afraid of Palin they won’t.

Because this is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever seen:

One of the least remarked upon aspects of the Obama presidency has been the lack of scandals. Since Watergate, presidential and executive branch scandal has been an inescapable feature of the American presidency, but the current administration has not yet suffered a major scandal…

Yup there is absolutely no sign at all of anything even resembling the least bit of something you can even think of calling a scandal or even considering referring to as scandal in the Obama administration.

I would like to point out to Mr. Nyhan that instapundit is a link aggregation site, so each of those links actually go to OTHER SITES that have been covering scandals that Nr. Nyhan hasn’t noticed. J. Christian Adams, Black Panthers, ATF, Eric Holder? Never heard of them….tell me Brendan how do you define a scandal?

…which I define as a widespread elite perception of wrongdoing.

The elites? Your waiting for the elites? The same elites who ignored the John Edwards Scandal, are you actually kidding me?

To see how absolutely blind he is you have to read this section

In the 1977-2008 period, the longest that a president has gone without having a scandal featured in a front-page Washington Post article is 34 months – the period between when President Bush took office in January 2001 and the Valerie Plame scandal in October 2003. Obama has already made it almost as long despite the lack of a comparable event to the September 11 terrorist attacks. Why?

You are defining the absence of a scandal based on the Washington Post? A MSM media organ that would rather crawl on broken glass than hit Obama, the home of the Journolist?

Only a person totally clueless in media reality could have written this, which guarantees the MSM will pick this up and run with it boldly.

I’ve commented a few times on how the media has, for the most part ignored Herman Cain and his early success.

Yesterday Dave Weigel wrote quite a few excellent posts but the most interesting was concerning a Gallup poll and Herman Cain:

Cain has come out of the gate making knowledge blunders (not knowing what the “right of return” is, for example), getting generally dismissive coverage. There is no team of reporters covering his every move on the trail, as there is for Huntsman. There’s no massive scrum outside his appearances, as there is for Pawlenty. And yet he’s outpolling Pawlenty.

That’s accurate, but while Stacy is ecstatic that his pal Dave is giving Herman some richly deserved props, I think he is missing the big picture here.

It is axiomatic that the old Journolist crowd hates Sarah Palin and will whenever possible knock her for a loop. I’ve already stated the MSM and the Democratic party (talk about redundancy) actually fear a Palin candidacy and will do their best to derail one.

Does Weigel do this, Why yes! While Praising Herman Cain he damns Sarah Palin in the guise of critiquing Byron York for missing the primary story:

But we’re talking about the 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee who has been the subject of multiple books (including two of her own), two documentaries, and in some months as much as 50 percent of all media coverage of the GOP field. Fifteen percent? That’s actually about half of what she got in the very first survey of this primary, a February 2009 CNN poll.

Dave somehow doesn’t take into consideration in his critique relentless attacks from a media that never mentions her successes while always attempting to belittle her.

The simple fact is the left needs to stop Sarah Palin and the best equation to stop her has already been written:

(Social Conservatives+Tea Party) / (Sarah Palin+Michelle Bachmann + Herman Cain) = Romney wins in early primaries

As long as the left was reasonably sure Sarah Palin was not running, Herman Cain needed to be ignored by the MSM. They couldn’t take the chance of him becoming a threat to Mitt Romney and/or Jon Hunstman, who are the most likely GOP candidates to lose to Obama. That means any attention Dave gave Herman online wasn’t picked up by the MSM.

And while his obligatory Palin Bus post was fun:

I sort of like the idea of Palin doing this on Memorial Day weekend, a time when plenty of reporters (like, er, me) are headed out of D.C. Brings back memories of her giving reporters a July 3, 2009 assignment to cover her resignation announcement.

It seemed interesting to me the very day polls indicate that Palin might be running, Weigel’s first post is: “Gosh that Herman Cain looks pretty impressive doesn’t he?”

Well of course that’s just Dave. It doesn’t mean the old Journolist crew is back in business deciding to suddenly notice Herman Cain . I mean you’d need something like a pollster from Daily Kos writing for the NYT saying the same thing for that to be true wouldn’t you?

But what I found more newsworthy is the strong performance of Herman Cain, the entrepreneur and talk-show host who was included in Gallup’s poll for the first time. He polls at 8 percent, ahead of candidates like Tim Pawlenty, Michele Bachmann and Jon Hunstman, who have received far more attention.

Well what do you know Nate Silver in the NYT is impressed by Herman Cain too! What an amazing coincidence!

Now I’ve already said I like Herman Cain, but mark my words, the “Journo-listic” MSM will suddenly find him a lot more interesting and worthy of coverage for as long as they think he will take votes away from Palin.

Will Herman take advantage of it? He’s not running to lose so of course he will, but I suspect that if the media’s attempt to use him to neutralize Palin succeeds then they will no longer consider him newsworthy or electable.

EXTRA UPDATE…CBS follows suit.

Update: Exhibit B: the DNC attacks

Update 2: On Morning Joe the entire thesis of the opening team is Sarah Palin is NOT running (One thing they didn’t mention her age, she would only be 60 in 2024 so she has a ton of time). They spent their time saying she will not, Politico also says she was not running, calling it an “attention grab”. (They don’t deign to mention this Byron York Piece)

And surprise surprise, who do they not mention by name? Herman Cain!

Remember the thesis, If Palin is running they boost Cain, if not they ignore him. As long as they believe Palin is out, Cain (who they also fear) must be kept down.

Update 3: Same theme on Today. They maintain Palin is not running so not only to they fail to mention Cain they don’t even show the Herman Cain Graphic in the Gallup poll. Can’t show a Black Republican in 3rd 5th place if Palin isn’t running.

Update 4: Welcome Conservatives for Palin readers, You will want to check out this post on why I support Palin and today’s DaTechGuy on DaRadio’s 2nd hour on political courage.

Update 5: Welcome Weigel readers, exhibits B C and D are here. Also might I point out that Charles Johnson and co are not arguing with me but with Paul Revere’s own words.

I really like Dave, only met him one but Stacy McCain vouches for him and there was something about the man that just seems right, but I think he’s dead wrong on Palin. But check out my stuff and make up your own mind and give me what for if you would like to.

Update 6: BTW Charles Johnson btw is having a very bad day.