Dave:

Sorry for the delay. While I agree with you in the context of a primary election when candidates are fairly close on the issues, but when you break into the general election and the viable choices amount to a dichotomy of ideas such as represented by Obama, Clinton and the Democratic party, and on the other McCain, Bush, and the Neo-conservative agenda, we are forced to pay very strict attention to the issues. Change thus takes on a wider, more fundamental meaning than demeanor or other such traits; it becomes core policies and general direction the nation is taking.

He should choose BILL Clinton as his running mate.

Then Hillary could divorce him as she has wanted to for SOOOOOO many years.

We already know the GOP strategy is to say: "I have a brother who is bigger and richer than you are"

Obama is basically doing what I do to bullies: Ignore them until they cross the line, then punch them in the eye.

CC: former Sen. Tom Daschle (S.D.) -- one of the many people mentioned as a possible running-mate -- was at his side. So much for that.)

If oBaman picks Daschle as his running-mate, either he is up by 21% (Dukakis was up by only 20% and then lost) or he wants to lose 36 states to MacMan.

Barack needs to explain a lot ... This article is a must read . I am extremely unimpressed with his words and actions so far ..

http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/?page_id=15

Barack needs to explain a lot . I am a democrat and voted for him from the VA primary but am concerned about his stance on so many foreign policy issues.

Also a friend send me this link so I am sharing it with everyone here

http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/?page_id=15

AMERICA ahs lost its resolve to be the leaders of the free world. We are too absorbed in TV shows etc.etc. and think that the rest of the sees our election as some "American Idol" spectacular. Well. I am here to ell you that you are WRONG......DEAD WRONG and someday, if this crap keeps up we will all be DEAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Keep on playing a game with your libes and the lives of your future generations by going with the guy who has the "playboy apppeal" but no substance. We will all be doomed. America needs MEN...REAL MEN...WOMEN REAL WOMEN.. like those who stood up for America during WWI and WWII and so forth...the people who brought us to were we are today. I am so ANGRY over the fact that we look like a bunch of spineless, gutless people to the rest of the world and that our values are determined by TV shows and the ehtertainment media. Them along comes Obama with his BS. This is the beginning of the "Day After Tomorrow" and the end of a GREAT NATION tha t will ......BE NO MORE!!!!! STAY TUNED.

First of all I must address all the pinhead idiots out there who are cheering Obama on in the wake of a fight Obama "ficked" with the President of his own country ..FOR POLITICAL GAIN!!!!!!!
In my opinion IT IS A D@#$ SHAME!!!!!!
I must say that eventhough you may disagree with Bush and accent his mistakes, you don't pick fights with your Commander-in Chief. If Obama were in Bush's place and the table were turn Obama would more than likely be crying like a liitle wimp wanting someone. anyone to kiss his boo boo. Bush never mentioned his name...come on. This is the most IGNORANT move Obama has made thus far. You brain dead idiots out there who want this flip-flopper as your next President really need to get a mental health check-up. I read were one lady said (a white female), "every time I watch Obama and hear him speak I have multiple orgasms. WHAT??????????????????? Is this is what this country has sunken to? I tell you what... when we are invaded one of these days by the very countries who HATE US and want to end the American way of life, I hope their first stop will be at the home of the women who made that statement so she can get her MOs from the invading enemy!!!

From the short version book, by roger wallace, "LITTLE BOOK OPEN".
-
-

1 Ch. 1 w/ 36 vs.
-
2 These now opened, unsealed scriptures. They are now being openly declared, by our true christ (christ Jesus is the angel of all that is and is called god, forever), on the sea and on the land. And they are now being preached, by the body of christ, eternally forever.
-
3 This is seen by the world, as the spiritual feet of our true and wonderful, eternal christ.
-
4 And our true and kind one, who is called christ. He is declaring those things, through the body of his saints, which are the spiritual feet of our christ, and who (christianity) are the anointed pillars of smoke,
-
5 And that smoke proceedeth from god, and is found as eternal truth, that is spoken forever, and is eternally forever, as unsealed and unclosed spiritual true interpretation. That interpretation, is eternally forever true interpretation,
-
6 That is given and found unto us in christ forever, and is spokenly spoken true interpretation. That is given unto us, through the anointed heavenly true fire,
-
7 That is a fiery true interpretation, that cometh from god through christ Jesus, forever. And doth come, as interpretation from unknown tongues, and is seen, as heavenly forever true of me (god), forever.
-
8 Fiery spoken, true prophesy. It is even spoken without the gift of unknown true tongues, and it is even seen, as being eternally forever true of myself (god), in christ, forever.
-
9 And both, eternal fiery true prophesies and secondly: "Eternal true prophesying true interpretations through unknown true tongues. They are found given of myself (god), through christ, as christly true interpretations and true prophesies, that are found in the gift of eternal true salvation,
-
10 That salvation, it is seen and is called: Jesus christ, and doth proceed from me (god), the most high god, and who is eternally forever and ever true.
-
11 And, through christ Jesus forever sure, unsealed and unclosed eternal true interpretations, they are most certainly found in the fallen true earth, as forever true.
-
12 And I roger wallace, I do say, that those things are given unto us forever, as given inspired true interpretations, from our kind, eternal, true christ. And is given unto christ Jesus from our true god forever. And it is true of god, as forever sure of god, and is most surely, forever true in god, forever.
-
13 And eternal, true salvation, it is called christ Jesus, and christ is given from god forever, unto the entire true earth, forever.
-
14 And that true salvation. It is christly and is christ in the eternal true Father, as being eternally forever sure of god forever. And it is given forever true, from god forever,
-
15 And that salvation, it is seen as heavenly forever true in and of god, and is for all of given true eternity, and forever.
--
Roger wallace author of: The god of truth, found at i-proclaim, isbn 978-1-60585-521-9.
-

Go Hillary!

GaryK.
Many people don't pick candidates based only on their positions. A president in particular is chosen in large part by how that person comes across and how we perceive they would lead us. While I think that there are slightly more substantial differences in policy between Clinton and Obama, they are lightyears apart in approach and personality. You may call it political posturing and, indeed you may be right. Only time will tell. But most of the independents that I have talked to and a lot of the liberals I know believe in his stated ability to be a candidate of change. No matter how you cut it, "change" is not something that comes to mind when you think Clinton.

Dave: "That's funny. I thought one was the candidate of change and a new way of doing politics and the other was the candidate of politics as usual or politics of the past."

As I said: political posturing. In an election, they are literally FORCED to provide an incentive to vote for one over the other--it's just par and parcel to the political game. So they find the minutest difference and exploit it to no end, like the microscopic difference between their health care systems. The change thing is on the same ground. Does any Obama supporter REALLY think that Clinton will continue the policies of GWB? Someone tell me one major policy of GWB that Clinton would support and that Obama would nix.

Voting for McSane would be an idiotic move, even if Hillary loses, Obama gets my vote

how do i post links here??

Gary K. - " They are alike in almost every way. Clinton and Obama, two peas in the same pod."

That's funny. I thought one was the candidate of change and a new way of doing politics and the other was the candidate of politics as usual or politics of the past.

Dan and Matt,

If you guys are ok with putting a man in office who will continue to "stay the course" in Iraq likely resulting in thousands more killed in this senseless war without end, expand the conflict to include Iran, do nothing to expand healthcare to the millions of Americans who are without healthcare, continue the failed economic policis of Pres Bush, put two more Scalia's on the court to replace Ginsburg and Stevens, all because of sour grapes that your candidate (who agrees with Obama on every major issue facing millions of Americans today), well then, you're just plain pathetic.

Looking on from Sweden, I have only one problem with Obamas message : energy and climate. For all the messy signals McCain sends out, he at least seems to understand that nuclear energy is a big part of the solution. Obama has bought the CO2 wholesale - and not only opportunistically - and promises to go for more wind, bio and ethanol.
Well, we are a decade in front of you over here on renewables. The evidence is in and it's a NO. Denmark, Germany and the UK have had it and say NO to further non-performing wind parks, littering of landscape, global hunger etc. Finland, as the most well-managed Western country, builds more reactors.
So, for all the praise of science and progress in Obamas message it may all come to nothing if he does not have the courage to admit nrenewables just dont cut it - and readjust his energy policy. The answer is nuclear and hydrogen. Powered by THORIUM - because URANIUM is experiencing the PEAK as is the case with OIL.

Dear Leichtman, there are several Barack's goons on this site. I would urge you to ignore them. Like you, I am a Hillary fan. While I won't be voting for McCain I will also not be voting for Barack Hussein Obama. I want him to lose so Hillary can run again in 4yrs.

Barack's supporters seem to think Hillary's supporters will vote for him anyway. Just wait till November.

You know. There has been a too much rancor over this election process.

I'm an Obama supporter. I like his message and his style. With that said, I think Hillary ran a heck of a campaign and she is a damn good candidate in her own right. Yet, both she and Obama are virtually identical on the issues. They just simply appealed to different demographics. If Obama wins, Clinton will wholeheartedly back him and the party, and vice versa. All the debating, badmouthing, criticism, etc... was all political posturing. Don't be naïve enough to think they really dislike each other. They are alike in almost every way. Clinton and Obama, two peas in the same pod.

Now, we see rightists trying to drive a wedge between the two camps. Why? Because it's the only way they can win. The hyperbolic, insanely ridiculous, and pseudo-factual rhetoric slamming both candidates does not help anyone, but the Rush Limbaughs, and Sean Hannitys of the world who are pissing the PJs in glee over a perceived split in the party.

No matter who wins the nomination, let's not forget that McCain has vowed to nominate pro-life judges, to put our service men and women (I have two family members in the Mid-East as I write) in the war in Iraq for many many more years ("It could be a hundred"), will make the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy permanent and seek an expansion of them, and has taken a litany of other neo-conservative positions.

If you agree with these, why are you even a democrat? And why in the hell would you even consider voting for Clinton or Obama, both who oppose vehemently each of these? Put away the bitterness and vote on the issues. If you planned on voting for Clinton or Obama, and plan to vote for McCain in the general if your candidate doesn't get the nod defies all logic. McCain and both democrats are so far apart on the political continuum and the issues, to rationalize such a position requires a schizophrenic delusion.

I'm a big Hillary supporter and I do think she should continue her campaign to June 3. But I realize that Obama will be the nominee and I will vote for him. Voting for John McCain never even crossed my mind. That would be insane! He's a Bush clone. The last thing we need is more wars and more failed economy. I'm sad Hillary lost. But Obama will be a good president. Much better than George W Bush or John McCain!

http://www.Bush-McCainChallenge.com

To the person who quotes Obama out of his books, I suggest you remember that quoting people out of context creates a lot of misunderstanding.

I am not black or white and I would very much like to see a united America, not more of this miserable dung slugging between these two racial groups that seems to be one of the less honorable chapters of American history. Please stop.

From Dreams of My Father: "I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites."

From Dreams of My Father: "I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother?s race."

From Dreams of My Father: "There was something about him that made me wary, a little too sure of himself, maybe. And white."

From Dreams of My Father: ; "It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names."

From Dreams of My Father: "I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It was into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa, that I'd packed all the attributes I sought in myself, the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, Dubois and Mandela."

From Audacity of Hope: "I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."

Of the many things that Team Obama must focus on a primary goal will be the gritty work of voter registration and GOTV efforts.
The key, as we witnessed in MS-1 is to make sure your supporters are identified and get to the polls.

Okay,

Obama's won:

Hawaii - 52.4 points
D.C. - 51.5 points
Idaho - 62.3 points
Alaska - 50.5 points
Georgia - 35.3 points
Nebraska - 35.4 points
Virgin Islands - 82.3 points
Illinois - 31.9 points
Colorado - 34.2 points
Kansas - 48.2 points

Obama has won 21 contests by double digits; Clinton has won 7.

Who's in trouble now?

41 POINTS in WVA GO HILLARY!!!! Obama is in serious trouble.

Edwards endorses Obama.

NARAL endorses Obama.

Obama leads in the number of states won.

Obama leads in the popular vote count.

Obama leads in the pledged delgate count.

Obama leads in the Super Delgate count.

Obama leads in campaign contributions.

Obama leads in numbers of donors.

Obama leads in every single measure of a nominee for President.

ITS OVER!

"kreuz, We have a difference of opinion about what our strategic objectives in the region are. I believe that the US absolutely has a very compelling strategic and national security interest in protecting the Straits of Hormuz and the shipping lanes and to protect the world oil supplies. Of course Greenspan was correct, the war is largely about oil and were it not for that, we wouldn't be there."

That is a strategic interest, not a strategic objective. A strategic objective is the overlying purpose for waging a military campaign, from which operational objectives can be set that, when achieve, result in that strategic objective. No one is saying we don't have a role to play in the Middle East, I personally have no qualms with the Carter Doctrine and the notions of fighting wars even for oil. But, when the troops are on the field, they need a specific objecitve to achieve and a path to achieve that objecitve through specific operaitonal and tactical goals- that is how you run a military operation, and that is not being accomplished. "A peaceful and democratic Iraq that is not a threat to its neighbors" is not a strategic obcjective. "The removal of Iraqi combat forces fro the territories of Kuwait" and "theunconditional surrender of the German command" are strategic objectives. It is the job of the President and the civilian leadership to set those objectives, and the military to develop the plan to achieve those objectives. We're not doing that right now.

"it is the job of the politicians to be involved throughout the process, especially at the strategic level, and especially when we lack clear strategic objectives."

kreuz, We have a difference of opinion about what our strategic objectives in the region are. I believe that the US absolutely has a very compelling strategic and national security interest in protecting the Straits of Hormuz and the shipping lanes and to protect the world oil supplies. Of course Greenspan was correct, the war is largely about oil and were it not for that, we wouldn't be there.

Wait, Leichtman. You want gen Yers to appologize for browbeating their parents (Boomers) during this election cycle? Fark that, and fark you too. It's the boomers fault we're in this mess and we, Gens X and Y, are going to be the ones paying our way out. Boomers deserve to hear it from us, and if they know what's good for them, they'll shut up and take it. After all, we're choosing their retirement homes.

And stop bringing up Dukakis, OK? He was running against a sitting VP and won a mere 111 electoral votes. He even lost CA because of the Reagan infulence. Even if BHO were caught with a live boy or dead girl in September, he'd do better than that. Sheesh. It makes you seem a fool.

"And my post that gas demand has dropped significantly has been recently reported by bloomberg, cnbc and other financial networks while pump prices haven't budged, is according to you revolutionary."

That's not what you said, and I'd be very surprised if any of those sources would back-up your idea that American demand for gasoline has no effect on the price of oil.

Also, KHOU in Houston merely reported that the caucuses were chaotic, and blames the Texas Democratic Party for the disorganization. There is no mention of the Obama thuggery that you allege. Maybe it was a different station, or more likely, it never happened.

Try again, Leichtman.

I have been volunteering for the Democratic party since helping my Dad when I was 13 over 35 years ago. While I did have to hold my nose several times I in no way can vote for anyone in the GOP with all the harm they have done to this country, especialy these past 8 years.

Shame on anyone who does, they are not true Democtrats.

that is fine patrick we just don't see eye to eye about that. locally I have not spoken with a single HC supporter here in my precinct who indicates they will be joining you. In fact many of them have already signed up as McCain volunteers and plan on working for him out of state.

Posted by: Leichtman | May 14, 2008 4:19 PM

Leichtman

Since McCain's policies are like night and day from Obama's, you've just proved my point. If you don't get your way you won't play Have a nice day on the playground. The adults in the Democratic party have things to work on, correcting the errors of the last 7.5 years.

that is fine patrick we just don't see eye to eye about that. locally I have not spoken with a single HC supporter here in my precinct who indicates they will be joining you. In fact many of them have already signed up as McCain volunteers and plan on working for him out of state.

am tired of both sides saying they speak for the backers of either Hillary or Obama. I voted for Hillary but plan to vote Democrat as do most of my friends. You do not speak for me or them.

Posted by: Patrick NYC | May 14, 2008 4:13 PM

I completly agree. Democrats need to win in November at all cost.

and who can forget how absolutely obnxious you are.

"I saw it on the news, but no one else did." other than Channel 11 CBS local affiliate.

And my post that gas demand has dropped significantly has been recently reported by bloomberg, cnbc and other financial networks while pump prices haven't budged, is according to you revolutionary. Based upon your PHD in economics market manipulation,energy speculators, price gouging,fluxations and seasonal driving and summer gas reformulations have zero to do with your gas prices since according to you as gas demand goes down with less US driving and a US recession(you were aware of that right) that pump prices are now currently plummeting according to your revolutionary economic theories.

bottom line, get lost and stop harrasing!

You want to win over HC supporters? TRY acting more civil, and not like you are entitled to our vote which you aren't. The more obnoxious your side acts towards HC supporters the less likely you will find many of us supporting your guy in Nov. Try winning in Nov with 17 million fewer votes.

Posted by: Leichtman | May 14, 2008 4:04 PM
-----------------------------
I am tired of both sides saying they speak for the backers of either Hillary or Obama. I voted for Hillary but plan to vote Democrat as do most of my friends. You do not speak for me or them.

Leichtman

OH now it is "personal harrassment" because I replied to your comments and informed you that they were incorrect towards me? You and your ilk are the cause of a large majority of people not liking Clinton supporters because of your inabilty to see the big picture. Are you so use to getting your way that you call foul when someone calls you on your incorrect information? It really is sad that you are so insecure.

isn't it interesting that all these people who have never posted here before are former HC supporters?

and you and your new guy think you are bringing the party together with constant rants and insults of HC supporters? It is that obnoxious behavior by his supporters and his refusal to tell them to back off that makes me certain that he is not the right person or has the character to run this country.

"My goal is to insure that the democratic party wins the White House this fall at all cost."

your goal? you think like all other Obama supporters that you can obnoxiously harrass, bully, and intimidate your way into getting our support. Been there with moveon and DFA members who tried that same stunt back last year trying to intimidate their members to do exactly as they say and is "your goal".

You want to win over HC supporters? TRY acting more civil, and not like you are entitled to our vote which you aren't. The more obnoxious your side acts towards HC supporters the less likely you will find many of us supporting your guy in Nov. Try winning in Nov with 17 million fewer votes.

"The Texas Trial Lawyers Association are uniformed and ignoring their own political analysis and breathlesly waiting for your brilliant opinions about their specialty since you and your crowd arrogantly know much more about our profession."

Well, you sound genuinely shocked to find out that Hillary Clinton's actual position is different than what you have been led to believe, and different than what you have been telling people.

Again, we're not surprised. Who can forget the tall tales of Obama thuggery, and your lame attempt at proof - "I saw it on the news, but no one else did." Who can forget your revolutionary theory that American demand for gasoline has no effect whatsoever on the price of oil. Who can forget your silence every time Obama rolls up superdelegates in the aftermath of a Clinton "victory." Who can forget the disconnect of your candidate's admonition about heat and the kitchen, while you snivel every time you get put in check here. Who can forget your fantasy campaign insider status.

Try again, Leichtman.

dave what are you 5 years old?

incidentally personal harassment of people posting here has been strictly prohibited by the moderator here, so know knock it off!

amaikovich: unfortunately the media has created this bandwagon effect I sincerely believe started the night of the Indiana primary and effected superdelegates even when their candidate got trounced by an unprecedent 41%. Seems to me they really don't care if they end up with another Michael Dukakas campaign.

While I probably agree with you about issues, I sincerely feel that Sen Obama is woefully unqualified to be Pres. I have read both his books, read his policy positions and attended his speech last summer in Austin before coming to that conclusion. Tort Litigation is very important to my life, obviously few others here would care about that secondary issue, but I was terribly uncomfortable to listen to his dismissive attitute towards Trial Attorneys and tort claims with Chris Wallace and this from someone who claims to be a friend of the poor and working class. In my mind that is the attitude of corp and insurance company defense firms that I am not about to support especially from someone claiming to be a progressive D. I see nothing Progressive about that attitude, perhaps more of a product from the Chicago law firms they worked for.

Leichtman

It is better to have people think you are and idiot than to open your mouth than prove it.

hey Dave do you happen to know the legal implication of the word extortion or do you think you are just being clever? Apparently as an Obama worshipper anything goes. Grow Up. I am sure I am old enough to have you as an obnoxious child who talks down to his parents.

Apparently the word civility is foreign to you as well. We have heard the B word, old, whithered, evil, a monster, a withered, uneducated, hags,extortionists, Queen, dinosaurs,racists, shrill and I am sure a whole host of ugly words to describe and be yelled at HC,BC, Chelsea and their supporters.

Exactly which of these words are civil to you and advance your candidate?

Grow Up, where did you learn such arrogance?

Posted by: Leichtman | May 14, 2008 3:20 PM

First thing, you need to do is stop assuming. I am the same age as our next President, Barack Obama. Second, I was a Senator Clinton supporter until I came to the conclusion that she is not going to win the nomination. My goal is to insure that the democratic party wins the White House this fall at all cost. If you stop acting like a petulant child because your,(and my former), candidate is not going to be successful I would not tell you to grow up.
The bottom line is that

Leichtman: Any superdelegate who was swayed because the delay in Indiana election vote counting shouldn't be a superdelegate. And the handful that switched within the last week...well, they are too educated and immersed in Democratic politics to not take all the facts into account.

As to the trial lawyer issue, I may very well agree with you (I'd have to research it.) At the same time, in the hierarchy of issues that will affect my vote--Economy, Iraq, Health, Energy plan--legal proceedings carry far less weight.

"I'm sure all the military folks in Iraq wish the politicians would just stay the hell out of it, and let them do their job."

Clauswitz was pretty clear that war is the extension of politics by other means- IOW, it is the job of the politicians to be involved throughout the process, especially at the strategic level, and especially when we lack clear strategic objectives.

hey Dave do you happen to know the legal implication of the word extortion or do you think you are just being clever? Apparently as an Obama worshipper anything goes. Grow Up. I am sure I am old enough to have you as an obnoxious child who talks down to his parents.

Apparently the word civility is foreign to you as well. We have heard the B word, old, whithered, evil, a monster, a withered, uneducated, hags,extortionists, Queen, dinosaurs,racists, shrill and I am sure a whole host of ugly words to describe and be yelled at HC,BC, Chelsea and their supporters.

Exactly which of these words are civil to you and advance your candidate?

Grow Up, where did you learn such arrogance?

amaikovich: a more timely release in Indiana and an accurate portrayal that she actually won in Indiana which if you were to believe folks like Olberman would lead you and superdelegates to believe she lost Indiana by 10%. Its that psychology that has likely effected some superdelegates, many obviously ignoring the voices of voters in their own states like in Mass. and mindlessly jumping on the bandwagon. Some in places like Ca where they are up for re-election may come to regret that decision when they call for fundraising and volunteers to HC supporters. Senator Rockefeller should be ashamed to remain with Obama when his own state soundly rejected his candidate by 41%, an unheard of deficit.

"- Obama overwhelmingly received the vote of the entire military forces - - all branches of the military"

Oh really, Dee? I know a lot of McCain supporters on the military base where I live. And they don't view their military service as a "sentence". Only the loony left would characterize voluntary service to our nation's military as some sort of punishment. It is done with a sense of duty, honor and committment. I'm sure all the military folks in Iraq wish the politicians would just stay the hell out of it, and let them do their job.

extortion-Queen, nice choice of words mike.

Posted by: Leichtman | May 14, 2008 2:32 PM

Any words that do not advance Sen Clinton cause in being elected President seems to offend you. Grow up!!!. Oh I am sorry. Was that too mean-spirited? How about a time out?

Leichtman, we're getting somewhere.

You wrote: "If she had won Indiana by 7% instead of 2% it would not have made much difference in delegates even though she was outspent by 3:1. The night's story could easily have been why can't Obama close out HC even when outspending her 3:1 where there are large numbers of rural voters."

Now I see where you are coming from. That's HRC spin. But to the rest of us--and I dare say the majority of Democrats--the story was she no longer could catch him in delegates regardless of whether she won by a point or lost by a point. No spin, no more campaign rhetoric...just the stark reality of primary election math.

Let's assume that you are correct and she would have gotten better spin that night if Gary's mayor was fair. (I don't think it matters, but we'll assume this point.) Do you really think Senator Clinton would have done even better in WV last night? Maybe even would have won even one more delegate? That is too much of a stretch for me. Bottom line--it didn't make a difference other than making you mad.

There's Americans in Iraq, doesn't Obama want their vote, too?

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | May 14, 2008 1:12 PM

----------------------------------------

Obviously, you did do the research or did not hear - - Obama overwhelmingly received the vote of the entire military forces - - all branches of the military

So the answer to your question is yes, he wanted them and received them. All they had to do was to listen to who was going to get them out of that hell they have been sentenced to live in everyday. And come November, they will listen to the one that is going to bring them home.

extortion-Queen, nice choice of words mike.

Contrast himself with McCain (and Clinton) on energy. Make a trip to the tar sands of Alberta. Ask if there is any way to speed it up, are new pipelines needed, etc... Hey look everyone - Obama is doing something in a stable country, that is a neighbor, with the oil reserves (albeit in tar sands) of Saudi Arabia. Then he can tour a wind farm or two. Maybe bash the liberals in Massachusetts who don't want wind power to spoil their ocean view. It's not like MA will be in play.

Obama has shown sympathy towards our disastrous Texas HB 2 which capped med mal practice claims at $250,000 regardless of their merits, HC has opposed that. Obama has also supportered concepts like loser pay, whic means that if the dfendant offers you $5,000 on their drunk driving accident and a jury comes back with a verdict of $4,999, you are responsible for paying all of the litigation and defense costs which has a chilling effect on claimants who could end up winning at trial and be saddled with thousands in litigation costs. In Texas housewives and children who have no loss of earnings are particularly disadvantaged and as a result 90% of Texas trial lawyers are now refusing medmal cases regardless of their merits b/c of the extreme costs of litigating these claims. Obama has suggested he would consider such honorous tort laws which Texas trial lawyers understand has been an absolute disaster and put the insurance industry in the drivers seats, again even when the claims are clear cut and involve catastrophic injuries.

http://www.marylandlawyerblog.com/2008/01/hillary_clinton_and_barack_oba.html

I can't figure out why Hillary supporters complain when we accuse them of being ignorant, poor white Americans when it was Hillary who originally said that's what you are? She is even using that fact as extortion to hold them back from voting for Obama. I could understand your animosity if Obama supporters had come up with it, but it was your own Queen that decided to play that card. And while we're at it, she was the one who decided to throw the kitchen sink. She bragged about it on national TV. As soon as she did, most of her followers became just as nasty as she was. Prior to that, I treated them all with respect but now, even though Obama is taking the high road, that doesn't mean the rest of us have to sit here and listen to the Clintonistas nasty little barbs. I'd suggest you get used to it. This is the road YOUR fearless leader made, not Obama.

Here's a better readings for you that cut through the political spin on both sides:

"Who's side are they all on?"
http://www.economist.com/world/africa/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11332333

Simple fact: Iran plays all sides, and is simultaneously supported and opposed by all. To say that Sadr is allied with Iran and Maliki is against them is the same kind of gross oversimplificatin and misunderstanding in the region that got us into the mess we're in in the first place, ignoring the real politik going on between a diverse range of groups with motivations internal to Iraq. This is the essence of a low grade Civil War that can only be solved by the Iraqi people, not the United States.

JakeD's shadow, And Barack Obama can't recall how many states there are in the country he's trying to be the leader of. He makes gaffes all the time, but you libs are so willing to overlook them, or explain it all away. How about this explanation - Barack Obama is an inexperienced, untested rookie. His brand of liberalism is appealing to the politically naive and the leftover 60s hippies, but leaves the rest of America cold.

The problem isn't necessarily that there's no there, there, it's that what is there the American people have seen -- and rejected -- before: Big government liberalism.

I am a Hillary supporter 100 [per cent and I will be a McCain supporter 100 per cent in November 2008.

So will all my Democrat friends.

We will vote Republican just once to make sure Lawrence Wright's 20-yesr spritual protege doesn't get into the Oval Office.
All decent Americans need to unite to stop that.

Period.

Posted by: Ganpat Ram | May 14, 2008 1:16 PM
---------------------------------------

Okay, and .....................

amaikovich: if she had won Indiana by 7% instead of 2% it would not have made much difference in delegates even though she was outspent by 3:1. The night's story could easily have been why can't Obama close out HC even when outspending her 3:1 where there are large numbers of rural voters. The media spent the whole night promoting doubts whether she would win Indiana through Wed even though it was clear early on on Tues she had won. There was absolutely no credible explanation for the results not being released by the Gary mayor, since absolutely every other Indiana county had done so by 9 pm. New Politics? We will find out what happened as soon as we find out what mayor Dailey did in 1960.

Don't stop brother Obama. Engage McCain now and relentlessly until the election.

Leichtman,

Since you are clearly informed on the matter, please tell us:

What is the difference between Clinton and Obama on tort reform?

Thank you.

Wow, quoting the Wall Street Journal Opinion page as a source. Why not just cite Perino?

The basra campaigl led to mass defections within the Iraqi army, and only has served to reinforce al Sadr's position. Beyond that, the US, not the Iraqis, have been doing most of the fighting in both Basra and Sadr City, to include being 100% responsible for air support. That opinion piece is garbage.

The Indiana vote was a defining moment because it was close. It wasn't a Florida winner-take-all. It was important because it was her last big opportunity to close the delegate gap.

My point was you are giving the mayor of Gary, IN, far more import than you should. You mention Obama's lack of experience as a real issue. That's a factor that people should consider. I pose that the mayor of Gary's experience and actions are not a consideration. We've already seen what "Swift boat" voters take us.

By the way, is John McCain for or against a tax break for the rich? I think dementia is starting to kick in for old Mac... he doesn't know the difference between Sunni and Shia, he can't remember which Gulf war was meant to protect oil prices (psst...someone tell him it was both wars). He is a GOP guy true and true... a grand OLD poobah.
Say no to John McCain (say the "NO" loud).... he's too old to be president.

kreuz writes " the picture they would be given, and it would be total crap. Maliki is doing nothing to limit Iranian influence, quite the contrary .."

From today's WSJ:
the fact that Iran arranged the truce (and so far has made it stick) exposes the pretense that Tehran is an innocent bystander in the war for Iraq.

The truce suggests, instead, that Iran has grudgingly come to respect Mr. Maliki as a serious opponent. Having invested itself so heavily in Mr. Sadr's success, Tehran had little reason to suddenly lend its diplomatic offices unless it felt the Mahdi Army was on the verge of defeat. Last week's truce may have postponed that moment, but there's little doubt Mr. Sadr's movement has suffered an embarrassing defeat.

However fitfully it began, the Basra campaign is a sign that Iraqis are in fact "standing up" for their own security. It is also a personal vindication for Mr. Maliki, who recognized to his credit that his government had to have a monopoly on violence in Shiite neighborhoods as much as in Sunni enclaves.

In the last year we were told first that the surge was a military failure, and later that it was a military success but that Iraq's political class had not lived up to its end of the bargain.

In fact, just as surge supporters said, the Iraqis have become more confident and effective the more they have become convinced that the U.S. was not going to cut and run.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121072590056290307.html?mod=opinion_main_review_and_outlooks

Shouldn't Mr Obama visit and talk with our Iraqi allies and determine for himself whether to continue to support our allies, or is it just that he's now inalterably committed to withdrawl from Iraq because of his opposition to the war and his anti-war constituents, facts on the ground be damned.

yes bonjedi The Texas Trial Lawyers Association are uniformed and ignoring their own political analysis and breathlesly waiting for your brilliant opinions about their specialty since you and your crowd arrogantly know much more about our profession.

When will John McCain release his health records? I'm just afraid he's too OLD to be the president.

"INDIANA WAS THE TIE BREAKER (will be happy to repost that Obama quote)"

Yeah, the Obama campaign threw a nice feint in there...

With the whole Lake County thing, let it go man, the Lake County sherriff, prosecutor and the chairs of the Democratic and Republican party were all there watching the process. It was completely legit.

Obama needs a fundamental change. Since a race change is impossible, I suggest a sex change!

no actually Tuben was complaining b/c he claimed it was unheard of when every other county in the state had released results by 9 pm. He thought it not only highly irregular but potentially manipulative if not illegal, so did all of the mayors from surrounding communities and they said so publicly.

Why is it impt? B/C many analyst are pointing to that evening as a change moment in the primary. The news all evening was can HC hold on in Indiana rather than she was once again outspent 3:1 and against her opponent's obvious predictions that INDIANA WAS THE TIE BREAKER(will be happy to repost that Obama quote),and had won the state( which they obviously were manipulated to not be able to say) all that was talked about was Obama's win in N.Carolina and we don't know IF HC will win Indiana at 9 pm when she was giving her speech, when it was obvious that the Gary Mayor likely knew the results at 7:30 pm when Indiana should have been called for HC but for the Chicago style manipulation by the Gary mayor. Interesting we have yet to have an answer from the Gary Obama operation why those results were not released until 2 am the next day. Apparently that is you above your pay grade understanding of politcal strategies; wouldn't expect you to comprehend its implications, since it is obvious you have attended many political training camps.
Incidentally how will your side feel if for instance the Fla Sec of State say on election eve they can not release the deciding results from Jacksonville. I am sure from your comments you will feel quite comfortable if something like that should happen from an R official in a crucial state, hm do you remember Katherine Harris?

no actually Tuben was complaining b/c he claimed it was unheard of when every other county in the state had released results by 9 pm. He thought it not only highly irregular but potentially manipulative if not illegal, so did all of the mayors from surrounding communities and they said so publicly.

Why is it impt? B/C many analyst are pointing to that evening as a change moment in the primary. The news all evening was can HC hold on in Indiana rather than she was once again outspent 3:1 and against her opponent's obvious predictions that INDIANA WAS THE TIE BREAKER(will be happy to repost that Obama quote),and had won the state( which they obviously were manipulated to not be able to say) all that was talked about was Obama's win in N.Carolina and we don't know IF HC will win Indiana at 9 pm when she was giving her speech, when it was obvious that the Gary Mayor likely knew the results at 7:30 pm when Indiana should have been called for HC but for the Chicago style manipulation by the Gary mayor. Interesting we have yet to have an answer from the Gary Obama operation why those results were not released until 2 am the next day. Apparently that is you above your pay grade understanding of politcal strategies; wouldn't expect you to comprehend its implications, since it is obvious you have attended many political training camps.
Incidentally how will your side feel if for instance the Fla Sec of State say on election eve they can not release the deciding results from Jacksonville. I am sure from your comments you will feel quite comfortable if something like that should happen from a R official.

"kreuz, I fail to see how meeting with Iraqi government officials and seeing firsthand the ongoing efforts by the our Iraqi allies to stabilize thier own country and reject Iranian influence and Al-Qaeda would be bad for anyone who seeks to be Commander in Chief."

Because that would be the picture they would be given, and it would be total crap. Maliki is doing nothing to limit Iranian influence, quite the contrary he's moving the country closer to them. And al Qa'ida is a red herring, has been for years, but I'll get to that following your next point. It wouldn't be a bad idea, but it wouldn't do much good either, it would frankly be a waste of time.

"Retreating from Iraq as Obama has planned to do would carry enormous strategic costs for the United States. It would increase the likelihood that al Qaeda would gain safe havens that they could use to attack us here at home. It would be a propaganda victory of colossal proportions for the global terrorist movement."

al Qa'ida will NEVER gain safe haven in Iraq. The Shi'ites are their mortal enemy, the Kurds hate them, and even the Sunnis can't stand them now. The only people who talk about al Qa'ida in Iraq are the Bush Administration and their political allies- bnecause for all intensive purposes AQIZ has been destroyed, largely as a victim of their own success. Al Qa'ida's strength is when they are the outside insurgent group battling the big bad United States. That piece of their agenda is appealing to some Iraqis, but when we declared Anbar province lost and AQIZ tried to actually establis their Caliphate there, the people realized what a horrible idea it was and rejected it. That is what led to their defeat in Anbar and why they are so on the decline today, and why they will never gain a base of operations in a future Iraqi state.

"It would signal to Iran that we were not serious about confronting its efforts to impose its will on the region. It would signal to people across the Middle East that the United States cannot be trusted to keep its word. Obama has not discussed the consequences of his plan to retreat from Iraq. He should go there and tell the Iraqis to their face."

You keep using that word "retreat," I'd still like an explanation how we retreat from an occupation. We are not on offense or defense there, we are not at war with Iran, and we did not promise the Iraqis a blank check. We have spent five years there, lost 4,000 American lives, and are on pace to have spent more than 2 trillion dollars on this campaign. It is time for the Iraqis to stand up, that is what this is all about. We have done all that we can for them, but their future is in their own hands, not ours. Don't want Iran to have a stronger influence in the region? Well then you should have opposed this fools errand from the beginning, because a stronger Iran will emerge no matter what the outcome of Iraq is in the long run. We took out their two greatest enemies and gave them a means to undermine us through covert action. Staying there only continues to play into their hands.

"The tort reform issue is a big deal to large numbers of lawyers who I have spoken with."

Are they as ill-informed as you are on Hillary's support for tort reform?

Jeeezzz you people are long-winded! It's the SMILE....Obama has a great smile - ensorcelling was what Maureen Dowd called it - I looked it up - it means 'bewitching or enchanting'. It's his secret weapon - he needs to use it much more often. I think he often looks too serious.

kreuz, I fail to see how meeting with Iraqi government officials and seeing firsthand the ongoing efforts by the our Iraqi allies to stabilize thier own country and reject Iranian influence and Al-Qaeda would be bad for anyone who seeks to be Commander in Chief.

Retreating from Iraq as Obama has planned to do would carry enormous strategic costs for the United States. It would increase the likelihood that al Qaeda would gain safe havens that they could use to attack us here at home. It would be a propaganda victory of colossal proportions for the global terrorist movement.

It would signal to Iran that we were not serious about confronting its efforts to impose its will on the region. It would signal to people across the Middle East that the United States cannot be trusted to keep its word. Obama has not discussed the consequences of his plan to retreat from Iraq. He should go there and tell the Iraqis to their face.

amaikovich: my post about the Gary mayor has to do with the hypocrisy of the Obama campaign saying things like we practice New Politics or don't take lobbyist money. The Gary stunt reminds me of Mayor Dailey and the 1960 campaign finding thousands of ballots from deceased voters, would you call that NEW POLITICS or claiming he doesn't take corp contributions when no one can.

As to his supporters insults that to me represents cowardice of his campaign to simply tell his supporters to shut up and stop the constant insults of boomers and women voters. Sorry but the constant racists comments directed at the Clintons and the B word yelled at HC and Chelsea are unacceptable, and it is totally unbelievable that even when they claim they have won the nomination has not stopped.

The experience factor is a big deal to me. I couldn't imagine my Texas State Senator with a few year in the US Senate having the qualifications to run this nation.

The tort reform issue is a big deal to large numbers of lawyers who I have spoken with.

Wright, the flag pin who cares.His support by Farrakhan and Hamas leaders is problematic and will likely cost him any shot at Fla. And I couldn't believe I saw him wearing the flag pin yesterday, what the heck is that about.

AS an educated white I find it troubling when you are trying to say W.Va represents all Americans. Here is why the Post says Hillary did well:

Clinton was heavily favored in West Virginia because of the demographics of the state. The population is older, overwhelmingly white, heavily rural, and less affluent and less educated than in some other states.

I want a bunch of old, poor, uneducated people being the deciding population that tells us how America is viewing this election.

"So will all my Democrat friends."

You give yourself away...a real Democrat would refer to their Democratic friends.

"He decried the decision for a troop surge, but has made no return trips to Iraq to see the effects of it."

You honestly think politicians on junkets see the ground truth? C'mon. The last thing folks need at VBC is another dog and pony show for another politician moving through the area, it takes too much time away from other vital tasks because it's always given priority, and they are never allowed to deviate from a meticulously planned schedule where they are fed what DoD wants them to see. They get far more from hearings, and that's saying a lot because they get next to nothing from them as is.

whatever, very thoughtful.

If CBS reported it earlier they were the only news org to do so including Chuck Todd and Jffrey Tubin who have a lot more influence on political commentary then CBS. Indiana has been know for some pretty shady politcal stunts including their voter id policies. The mayors in Lake County were really ticked with the Gary mayor and all of the spinning in the world won't change that. I don't find Tuben to be anything but a straight shooter and he was truly upset by that Indiana political stunt by an Obama supporter who guaranteed he would deliver the state to Obama.

And are you denying that Senator Obama bragged to Chris Wallace how he was a leader, contrary to what they would believe, in comprehensive tort reform. Somehow he thought that comment just like his comment in SF would be overlooked. You and Sen Obama might think that children who die from medical practice as they do here in Texas or victims with broken bones from drunk drivers should be precluded from recovery and Sen Obama's political whipping boys, I don't.

scrivener

You are insane. Reread your post. Obama has the MAJORITY of votes. Gore has none, if people wanted Edwards they should have voted for him. You people are crazy, since your person is LOSING, which they are, you are saying destroy a democratic process to suit your needs. UNREAL. THE MAJORITY OF VOTES ARE FOR OBAMA!!!

Your basing your argument on W.VA? Known best throughout all of this country for in-breeding. Are you serious? So you are saying screw the majority of voters for this idiotic plan. Forget FL and MI, you are talking about not counting the MAJORITY of votes. Go to Russia, thats where stuff like you are suggesting happens.

If you were winning and it was mathematically improbable to lose, would you throw in the towel and upset the MAJORITY of the party that voted for you? Insanity runs wild.

Posted by: scrivener | May 14, 2008 12:47 PM
-------------------
You have been ranting about this for weeks. Gore and Edwards are not going to be given the nomination. Put down the pipe, people should not post when they are clearly high.

I am a Hillary supporter 100 [per cent and I will be a McCain supporter 100 per cent in November 2008.

So will all my Democrat friends.

We will vote Republican just once to make sure Lawrence Wright's 20-yesr spritual protege doesn't get into the Oval Office.
All decent Americans need to unite to stop that.

Period.

kreuz writes "Do you really think the President never has to make long plane trips and be prepared to make major policy statements afterwards? Not the best defense out there for somethning that is so important"

I agree it's important, which is why I wonder why Obama has spent a grand total of 2 days in Iraq in 2006, before the surge. He decried the decision for a troop surge, but has made no return trips to Iraq to see the effects of it.

He took 15 days during the same year to go to Africa to hawk his book, Audacity of Hope.

There's Americans in Iraq, doesn't Obama want their vote, too?

I usually don't read the personal blogs, as opposed to blogs about issues, but today's was relatively amusing.

I just couldn't follow one part of Leichtman's reasoning. He wrote, "I could care less about Rev Wright and the stupid flag pin, totally non issues...", yet lists as real issues as the mayor of Gary, IN, holding up a vote count? In other words, he's not voting for someone because of what the mayor of Gary, IN, may or may not have done? Sheesh.

In another blog, it sounded like he wouldn't vote for Obama because PDiddy and other Obama supporters are mean to him. Double sheesh.

As for tort reform, I really don't know about the issue. But at least that's the type of topic I hope the voters will consider...and then pick the best man based on all of the major issues combined.

scrivener, lay off the crack. No one other than Obama or Clinton is going to be the nominee, and the odds of it being Clinton are completely unrealistic.

I would like to know what comes with Obama. I would like him to start lining up his possible cabinet and give some indication of who would be on it. Do they fill in his weaknesses? Which are the top people he will bring together?

Yes, you'll have to excuse us if we don't find the notion of wrecklessly surrendering to yet another country and putting our country more at risk is a subject for humor.

"i was a strong hillary supporter, but the contest is basically over and i am now with obama 100%. the time has come for all democrats to set aside their bitterness and unite."

That is certainly your right but I find it interesting, that we certainly did not get that sense weeks ago from you when you posted here. Your posts as I recall were very strongly proObama. That is fine if you want to support someone who is totally unqualified to run this country that is not for me. Considering how JFK with 13 years in Congress was called by his colleagues a lightweight would would that make Sen Obama with less than 4 years in the US Senate, a featherweight?

"Do you just love to MAKE THINGS UP AND CALL THEM FACTS?"

Whatever. You have been busted (again) pulling things from your bum. You have been informed that CBS called Indiana before the 9:00 p.m. "news cycle" (?), and you say that's wrong because ... CNN and MSNBC called it later? Try again, Leichtman.

We're still waiting for explaining the disconnect between Hillary's sponsoring a tort reform bill, and your understanding that she opposes it. One of you is lying.

"First of all, have ANY of you ever flown over to Iraq and expereienced the extreme jet lag that ensues?"

Done it a couple of times, thank you. Do you really think the President never has to make long plane trips and be prepared to make major policy statements afterwards? Not the best defense out there for somethning that is so important (and it wasn't just in Iraq, it's happened several times here at home too).

"bsimon, you didn't show that same humor when siding with the left about McCain's joke about Iran"

Yes, you'll have to excuse us if we don't find the notion of wrecklessly bombing yet another country and putting our country more at risk is a subject for humor.

Leichtman, avoiding the question, as expected, posts:
JK5432
"Again, so what? Did the delay change anything,"

"obviously you have convinced yourself that effecting a news cycle and denying HC the opportunity to declare that she won Indiana at 9 pm when CNN and MSNBC could only talk about N Carolina, until the next day had no political implications. Who cares. There are many political consultants who have written that that event was likely the turning event for the nomination, again with no explanations other than to call those who disagree liars and point to those results being released at 9 pm in Guam and Hawaii."

The reason this is my last post on the subject is that nothing will get thru to you. I've asked multiple times what effect this had on the primaries, or anything else? You keep playing parrot that it "affected the news cycle." How? As I said, it simply delayed pundits like Russert from declaring Obama the nominee because they had to wait and see how things played out. As someone else noted, CBS called Indiana for Clinton hours before everyone else did. Did that affect the news cycle? No. Bottom line is that the delay in reporting those votes was meaningless, just like your posts which avoid answering the basic question, which I will repeat for the hard of understanding - "How did the delay affect the primaries, either Indiana or North Carolina?"

"And you refuse to answer my questions: 1. Why did the Gary Mayor brag that he would deliver Indiana for Obama. 2. Why were the 5 mayors results refused to be released at 7:30 pm contrary to what every other Indiana County had done according to these mayors and Jeffrey Toobin, CNN legal analyst, who claimed oh my gosh what are these people in Gary up to. But I am sure that since you are so expert at insulting anyone who disagrees with you you will call Toobin a liar and shill for HC. We are used to your garbage."

Answers: 1. Who cares? He was obviously wrong. No soup for him. 2. Who knows? Who cares? Did the fact they weren't released "on time" affect the voting anyplace else in Indiana (wait, that's right the voting was already over in Indiana, as well as NC by then) or the rest of the free or non-free world? Of course not. Methinks they simply wanted their 15 seconds of publicity. They ended up with a lot more than that because they could extend their agitation for a lot longer than if the numbers had come in quickly. So, from a PR perspective, they should be happy for the delay - they got a lot more face time than they deserved.

As to Toobin, he was hardly the only one asking the question; all of the pundits on MSNBC and Fox were asking the same thing; the emphasis was on why there would be such a delay, since the expectations were that these votes would be heavily Obama, with the potential of turning it into an Obama victory. No one expected that they would generate a massive increase in Clinton's lead, so the delay had no negative effect on her - she was ahead and stayed there.

So, leichtman, feel free to rave on, avoiding the relevant question; we both know you will.

nevadaandy - "A holiday on gas taxes is a band aid. Obama sees this and was honest about it. Unlike most politicians who only want to give good news or no news, he tells you like it is - be it good or bad. Isn't is time we had a president who can tell us both the good and bad news?"

I don't recall him saying that there would be no relief from gas prices for 30 years until all the ideas he has on an energy solution become reality. Coming out against a mediocre short term fix at best should not put him in the Honest Abe category. His solution is to find alternative energy, chiefly in the near future by bio fuel/ethanol. Honesty would have been saying not only will there be no gas price relief in your lifetime, my solutions will raise food prices for everyone.

THE REAL REASON WHY AL GORE AND JOHN EDWARDS HAVE NOT ENDORSED:

Just take a hard, objective look at the demos come out of Hillary's landslide. This was a protest vote of monumental proportions. They don't love Hillary down in WV; they just think Obama is not ready for prime-time. He's not, and what they used to call "the real majority" of this nation knows it.

The pundits are talking about the people of WV as if they're all Li'l Abners and Miss Daisies. Perhaps the voters of WV are sending a dual message to Obama:

(1) You may think we're a bunch of red-necked racists, but the fact is, we think you lack the experience to be president; and

(2) If you're not willing to even TRY to convince WV Democrats that we should vote for you, how in the world are you going to convince enough Independents and the now-phantom "Obamicans" that they should support you in the fall (if indeed he makes it that far)?

Chris, I see that today you're saying Hillary "faces "long odds," as opposed to yesterdayis conclusion that Obama is the inevitable nominee. (Hillary was once "inevitable, too, I recall. The demographic analyses coming out of WV are devastating because folks down there share the same negative opinions of Hillary as do rational people in other regions. The WV voters were not just saying, "This race isn't over." They're crying out for an alternate choice -- not Obama, not Hillary, but someone who can actually win in November.

The supers know this, and they're watching, waiting. John Edwards is preparing for the day when the ultimatum is put to Obama: step aside and unite the party as our vice presidential candidate, or we'll do the job for you. If the supers decide that giving the alternative nod to a primary season loser is too risky, then go with a man who has shown he can win the popular vote for President: Al Gore. It's the only way the party leadership can avoid rewarding Hillary for her slash-and-burn tactics, and it's the only way Obama can emerge from this process with his political future and his political gut instincts intact.

Barack, make the move before you suffer more ignominious defeats at the hands of the Dems' she-devil. Checkmate her; far better to serve as veepee in an Edwards or Gore administration than to be forced to run for president with Hillary at your side, and lose.

Bottom line: Obama nor Hillary can overcome their negatives as the party standard-bearer.

Obama will have secured his place in history IF he wisely wields his delegate power BEFORE Hillary's victories wash it away. Why wait until the likely "Hillary surprise" that's coming in Oregon? Do it now, Barack. Play your ace in the hole and make Hillary fold now by throwing your delegates to Al Gore or John Edwards. You'll make a great vice president and you'll unite the party and you'll set yourself up for a run at the top job in 2016. Is that so bad?

They're calling Hillary the delusional narcissist; what if it turns out the other way around? Only you, Mr. Obama, can keep that from happening.

Call it "the audacity of NOT now, but maybe later." Live to fight another day. Embrace "the third way" and make it YOUR path to the White House and not something you will otherwise may be forced to do in a matter of weeks.

mnteng, Perhaps you'll forgive me for lumping you together with the ardent followers of His Hopefulness, but I am not going to allow this running narrative to continue to go unchallenged. The left is harping on this, just like drindl here, who is anonymously posting about McCain's trip to Bagdhad. In fact, that was not the same trip. McCain has traveled to Iraq many times over the years.

How many times has Barack Obama been to Iraq? Hell, he can't even remember how many states there are, or which one he's in on any given day.

bsimon, you didn't show that same humor when siding with the left about McCain's joke about Iran. funny how the libs are notorious for having no sense of humor, except when it comes to excusing Barama of another foot--in-mouth moment.

i was a strong hillary supporter, but the contest is basically over and i am now with obama 100%. the time has come for all democrats to set aside their bitterness and unite.

throughout this primary season, i have been appalled at the vitriol being hurled between the two democratic candidates' supporters, especially online and in the blogosphere. more than once in the comments section of this blog, the fix, i vented about the irony of hearing such divisiveness from the obama folks. they rail against hillary, her supporters, republicans, evangelical Christians, etc., with such viciousness. his supporters could be "Exhibit A" in the case against obama's own vision for a unified post-partisan nation.

so, let's cool it and keep our eyes on the prize: the white house. hillary is not attacking obama anymore in her speeches. it makes perfect sense for her to keep running: as long as she is a declared candidate, she has some leverage in negotiating an honorable conclusion to her campaign. she came close enough: it was a 51-49 race, not a blowout for obama. the clintons are the two most important people in determining Obama's ability to seal the deal with hillary's loyal constituencies. obama needs them to help him unite the party.

"Look like you're really enjoying being with people, eating corndogs etc. ... " What is the rest of this sentence, I wonder. Perhaps "...even if your not actually enjoying any of it."?

Posted by: Dave! | May 14, 2008 12:39 PM

Can I get some Arugula on my dog? Can you make that a Tofu dog?

"Someone should hire me.

What are these people thinking."

Posted by: Words of Wisdom
****************************
what they always think when you send in your resume - store in circular file.

"Again, so what? Did the delay change anything, "

obviously you have convinced yourself that effecting a news cycle and denying HC the opportunity to declare that she won Indiana at 9 pm when CNN and MSNBC could only talk about N Carolina, until the next day had no political implications. Who cares. There are many political consultants who have written that that event was likely the turning event for the nomination, again with no explanations other than to call those who disagree liars and point to those results being released at 9 pm in Guam and Hawaii.

And you refuse to answer my questions: 1. Why did the Gary Mayor brag that he would deliver Indiana for Obama. 2. Why were the 5 mayors results refused to be released at 7:30 pm contrary to what every other Indiana County had done according to these mayors and Jeffrey Toobin, CNN legal analyst, who claimed oh my gosh what are these people in Gary up to. But I am sure that since you are so expert at insulting anyone who disagrees with you you will call Toobin a liar and shill for HC. We are used to your garbage.

"obama foolishly has allowed the clinton campaign to paint him as someone out of touch with the values and plight of less-educated, less-affluent white americans."

For example by releasing his "bitter-gate" comments. horror of horrors, releasing the truth. why is any revealation about Obama considerd dirt. Interesting.

mnteng, if you wanted to continue the conversation off - blog, email me at mark-in-austin@operamail.com

CC: Some thoughts on your thoughts...

A Middle East Pilgrimage - Is any window dressing really going help him with his fundametal problem - wanting to include, bring to the table and legitimize the likes of Hamas and Ahmedinejad?

Blow the Caps? - The question is can 10s of millions of advertising dollars compensate for the image hit? Despite the fact that this action will show him to be the traditional politician that he rails against, he has enough money and goodwill from the MSM so it will not be fatal.

Revisit the Rust belt - Good ideas here and Obama has the personality to pull it off, as long as he stays out of Frisco...

Big Rhetoric, Big Ideas - Why take the risk? He is winning without it. The public apparently is gullable enough to believe he will solve these things despite his lack of specifics or demonstrated ability to bridge partisanship.

Take Five - Are you sure this isn't just an excuse so that The Fix can get some R&R?

Pull Back the Curtain - This works better if the candidate comes across as legit, something he has a problem with at times. For heavens sake, stay away from bowling alleys. "As one Democratic consultant put it: "Look like you're really enjoying being with people, eating corndogs etc. ... " What is the rest of this sentence, I wonder. Perhaps "...even if your not actually enjoying any of it."?

the socio-economic conditions of blue collar workers in america are changing rapidly. clearly, many blue collar workers in america are apprehensive and suspicious.

hillary clinton may be as phony as a three dollar bill (no pun intended) but she seems willing to at least pretend that she cares about the plight of blue collar workers. not so, apparently, obama.

in west virginia obama made one campaign stop. if obama wants the presidency he must reassure blue collar america that he empathizes with their plight. obama should give a speech on class.

i don't mean a bill clintonesque "i feel your pain" load of bs. obama should give an address that comes from the heart. it should be as honest and powerful as his recent speech on race.

obama foolishly has allowed the clinton campaign to paint him as someone out of touch with the values and plight of less-educated, less-affluent white americans.

by using his rhetorical gifts obama should be able to communicate to blue collar america his history as well as where the less well-off fit into his vision of "change". (obama should be aware that "change" is a scary concept to more than a few in america today!)

an address on class is overdue. it should also include a few lines on women in america. a speech may be the only way obama has of undoing the divisiveness caused by the clintons.

Throughout this campaign Obama has been consistent in his message of change, whereas Hillary has flip flopped from experience to change to experience and change.

Obama's core belief is in We the People - standing together we can change the way things are done in Washington by electing people with fresh ideas and a new approach to managing government.

Obama's engaged Gen Y because they will be the ones who have the most to lose in the coming decades if we don't get control of the major issues facing our nation - the economy, health care, the environment. They and their children and future generations will have to pay the consequences of decisions made by the next President. Gen Y sees this and they are finally engaged in the decision making process that for too long they have left up to the older generation to decide for them. They are looking for a leader who will secure a good future America, not a leader who will continue to take America down a path of self destruction.

The challenges facing all Americans and the next president are daunting.We need a president who has a good perspective on the underlying problems and who won't take a band aid approach to these problems. A holiday on gas taxes is a band aid. Obama sees this and was honest about it. Unlike most politicians who only want to give good news or no news, he tells you like it is - be it good or bad. Isn't is time we had a president who can tell us both the good and bad news? Unfortunately, too many Americans only want to hear the good news and not the bad and that's what they get, so now that we're faced with the possibility of paying $5.00 a gallon for gas, we're upset. I'm sure our leaders saw this coming a long time ago (after all the current administration is in the oil business).

This is certainly the most exciting and most historical presidential campaign in history.

proud:

First off, I didn't excuse any of BHO's misstatements. Though I didn't provide concrete examples, I said he has a problem with direct answers. And now you've provided some examples of misstatements.

Also, I believe I said that McC would come off better in the town halls than BHO. McC IS honest and frank, and sometimes that gets him into trouble.

I've never flown to Iraq, but I have flown across the Pacific and Atlantic many times. Granted I'm significantly younger than McC, but there are some things you forget (did I leave the iron on?) and some things you don't (why am I here?). Joe Lieberman, who was traveling with McC and had the same itinerary, didn't have a problem with remembering the Shia/Sunni thing.

Don't confuse me with the hard-core BHO supporters on this site. I've said previously that I like all three candidates, obviously for different reasons. Personally, I like to have a clear-eyed view of the strengths AND weaknesses of the candidate I vote for.

Well, there are three places to put your money - RNCC, Hillary, or McCain. Since you are so confident...

"Glib is breaking pledges and rules and offering justification when there are no justification."

you mean like not wearing a flag pin before wearing a flag pin? you mean like sitting for 20 years and not hearing? you mean like working with mad bombers and not knowing them?

The fact that McCain allows cameras to always roll and reporters to always have access just shows us how open a guy he is, honest and frank.

Funny Proud, wasn't that the same trip where McShame said that walking in the market was like a stroll in Middle America on any weekend?

This is ACTUALLY a really stupid move on the part of Obama

Obama's team messes up again.

Moving on to the general election only focuses the superdelegates on the McCain Obama matchups. Doing that when they dont have the superdelegates locked up, is a cause for the superdelegates NOT to go with Obama.

Someone should hire me.

What are these people thinking.

.

"I actually heard Obama on npr report where they interviewed a little kid who had just run for student body president and won. Obama asked her over the radio how many debates she had done with her opponents. She said none. And Obama says "None! Thats sounds good!"

This from a guy who wants to be leader of the free world."

My God! A president with a sense of humor! Perish the thought!

You'll see the press, and Obama's surrogates (perhaps I repeat myself) insist that tonight's result means nothing, and indeed, in the delegate count, the effect is marginal. But superdelegates ought to be sweating. White working-class voters, and various overlapping demographics - the elderly, Catholics, Jews - just aren't warming up to Obama, and they've been the backbone for the party for generations. Liberal bloggers (and Saturday Night Live, and arguably the Washington Post) are responding by suggest