The question is, who has sufficient standing to tell them to do this?  The Clintons are both stubborn and ambitious.

The only thing I can see that will make a difference is that if the superdelegates start to leave her in large numbers.  Even then, she would probably soldier on.

The thing I don't get is the rabid support for her from some quarters.

Boo, you might as well make some room on your couch and in your 'fridge for the hundreds of volunteers heading your way for the 4/22 contest. And this is why:

*Billary doesn't listen to reason. Like Cheney, she believes the presidency is her due.

*Her backers have more money than brains, and Billary is perfectly willing to exploit that.

*The party's backbone grows in fits and starts.

*The media has a juicy political melodrama that can keep the likes of Pat Buchanan and every other washed up racist has-been salivating for another 15 minutes the opportunities they're looking for. Ratings and ad revenue, cha-ching. They can only talk about Spitzer for so long.

We should exhort, persuade and demand an end to this, but I don't expect Billary to think of the party before themselves at this late date. So have your place ready for us.

We'll bring beer.

Can't hear ya, Peach!

Here's another reason for Clinton to call it quits:

Citing his judgment and ability to lead, admirals and generals from the United States Army, Navy and Air Force that together have served under the last nine Commanders-in-Chief today announced their endorsement of Senator Barack Obama for president.

In offering their endorsement, the generals and admirals recognized Obama's judgment to oppose the war in Iraq before it began, his respect for the Constitution and rule of law, his leadership on behalf of America's servicemen and women and his ability to conduct the diplomacy necessary to restore America's standing in the world.  

"Those of us who have served, worn the cloth of our nation, and gone into harm's way know that to be successful we must have the strongest sense of trust in our Commander in Chief.  We must be confident that he or she has listened to the best possible advice, that he or she has garnered the best possible information from all possible sources, that he or she has analyzed and weighed all the possible consequences and outcomes, and that he or she has made the decision to exert military force as a last possible resort," said Admiral (Ret.) Robert "William" Williamson (USN).  "Of this I am certain: Senator Obama will do all of those things and much more to ensure the safety and f reedom of our citizens, our allies, and coalition partners. He has all the great qualities and attributes required to carry out the most difficult duties of the Presidency.

"I spent a career involved in coalition warfare, and I am keenly aware of the importance of working with allies," said Brigadier General (Ret.) James Smith (USAF).  "Senator Obama brings a powerful approach to dealing with national security challenges by truly leveraging multinational relationships.  He brings a new face of America to the rest of the world."

"Senator Obama has a profound, even scholarly knowledge of our Constitution and he has the deepest respect for the rule of law.  As a career naval officer, I trust his judgment, his temperament, and his ability to analyze complex international situations and relationships and to make military decisions that are in the best long term interests of the United States," said Admiral (Ret.) Don Guter (USN).  "It will take the powerful leadership of Senator Obama to forge the consensus we need to right our ship of state, restore our honorable place in the world, and secure the safety of our nation."

"As a child of the Greatest Generation I learned that the attraction, glory and resilience of America come from the principle of "We the People."  In my four decades in the national security arena I developed an increasing appreciation for the intent and expectations of this principle, particularly in terms of the Common Defense and Domestic Tranquility," said Brigadier General (Ret.) David McGinnis (ARNG).  "In recent years, enticed to believe that these roles belonged to a chosen elite, each of us have paid an increasing price in loss of power, liberties, and national treasure. Today, by every measure, our current strategic situation is not good.   It is from that perspective I believe only Senator Obama offers us the opportunity to reclaim our Republic, restore our national dignity and ensure our overall security.  I salute his leadership, embrace his candidacy, and commend his courage."

See the link above for the list of generals and admirals and specifics re their background.

"If you look for the social economic motive, you will not have to wait for history to tell you what was propaganda and what was truth." - George Seldes

Until Obama stands at the convention podium still ALIVE. Hell, until January 20th 2009.

I suggest you chip in and buy the man a first rate personal security team of tall healthy Black men to back up the Secret Service detail. He needs it against red necks.

The red neck Republicans want Hillary as the weakest potential opponent.

The Clinton red necks want Clinton no matter what.

Don't be fooled by the facade of democracy in America. When push comes to shove the red necks will kill their way to the top.

"Oderint dum metuant", "let them hate, so long as they fear", was a favorite saying of the mad Roman emperor Caligula. What made me think of this quote is the likelihood that the support of many superdelegates for Hillary -- the ones that are not out-and-out henchpersons of the Clintons -- comes more from fear than from love. If they see the possibility that the Clintons can be beaten -- which surely they do by now -- the SDs in this position have a real incentive to support Obama, because by the very act of doing so they can help de-fang the Clintons.
     In addition, the 50-state strategy that Obama has been pursuing is a major part of his success. And one of its features is that the Dems in the usually-neglected states will tend to have a deep loyalty to Obama. Not only did they help him, but he has helped rejuvenate their state parties and made them relevant on the national scene for the first time in their political lives.
     Many observers, Republicans with glee, Dems with trepidation -- have been talking about the increasing split that is developing in the Dem campaign. But the fact is, this polarization really began in 2004 under the leadership of Howard Dean, and it is absolutely necessary and salutary. Perhaps it would have been better if it could have played out in a non-camapaign environment, but the truth is, it took the drama of this highly dramatic campaign to bring it to a head. This campaign is about way more than just two personalities, although Hillary certainly symbolizes everything that is wrong with the Party and Obama, what can restore it. The fact is that the Democrats will never be an effective opposition until they neutralize the Clintons and the Clintonistas. This absolutely can happen, and I think the fate of Obama's candidacy lies in whether enough of the Democratic party -- and independents and crossovers -- want it to happen. The Democratic quisling leadership have been getting away with their enabling of the Bush agenda because they have managed to ignore the full weight and import of the Democratic congressional victories of 2006. But in the context of this election, I am hopeful that they can no longer stem the tide. Things really have changed.

How do you recommend conveying that message?

---Cthulhu for President: Why vote for the lesser evil?

This isn't helping make it over sooner.

From http://www.kveo.com/news/local/16594611.html:

The Texas Democratic Party has washed its hands of trying to tally up last weeks Texas caucus votes. What does that mean for the estimated 1 million votes from the post-primary caucuses?

Plenty of caucus chaos and confusion from last week's super Tuesday primary caused the Texas Democratic Party to end their voluntary call in system. with fewer than half of the state precincts reported. This all because, they say they were overwhelmed with trying to tally the flood of votes.

...

According to the State Democratic Party, just 40% of the precinct caucuses were reported. In caucus votes, Barack Obama, held the lead, 56% to Hillary Clinton's 44%. While in popular votes, Clinton won the primary, with 51% to Obama's 47%.

...

All this, Bocanerga says, Obama is negatively affected, and Clinton could ultimately end up taking Texas. All this won't be settled, he believes until the Democratic Convention in August, where the super delegates, will decide who finally gets the nomination.

I have so many expletives I don't know where to put them!!! OUTRAGEOUS.

I think we should all call Texas and ask either WTF or, more politely, "how can we help"?

Leave it to Texas. I would say I can't BELIEVE this, but it's Texas, so nothing is beyond belief.


"If you look for the social economic motive, you will not have to wait for history to tell you what was propaganda and what was truth." - George Seldes

Only the money crowd could do it.  According to http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/, they are having a private confab today to go over strategy, etc.  Wonder of crazy Geraldine Ferraro will be there?

Perhaps they party leaders believe this long process, which is building a ground game in each state, is good for the party. Maybe they don't like the Clintons and don't mind them destroying their legacy. Maybe they are in the bag for the Clintons and want her to get as close as possible so they can hand the nomination to her.

If the last statement is true, then they are so cynical and so out of touch that they actually believe that she can beat McCain after tearing apart the party. Of course that's not true. But politicians and political insiders of the Democratic Party are proven losers not winners.  

The Clintons are being cheated out of what is rightfully theirs. As examplars to the nation, they cannot let this injustice stand. They  intend to right this dreadful wrong, going right to the core of the matter, re-educating the pitiful ignorants who lack the means, intellect and, might I say, class to recognize the darkness of their ways. And if need be, force will be used as a last resort. It's all for our own good. We don't know what we're missing. How will they act during Obama's GE campaign and when she is back in the Senate? I really can't see this whole thing ending in any kind of reasonable accord. The longer it goes on, the more bad blood there will be everywhere. There already is so much bad blood.

the fat lady sings. Monica's on vacation....so...there...

"Why not get together and tell the Clintons that the nomination is over?"

A two-part simple answer to simple questions:

(a) because the party is run by a lot of risk-averse pussies, many of whom are in Bill and Hillary's collective pocket and most of whom are at any rate afraid of them.  

(b) because the Clintons whon't listen.

Hillary doesn't care about the Democratic Party, she cares only about herself. We are suppose to be the pawns who vote for her because she is the heir to the Presidency.

Her refusal to fire Ms. Ferraro is proof of her willingness to destroy her the Democratic base of African American voters, instead of doing what's right.  She cannot win the nomination without trying to steal the delegates already pledged to Barack Obama.

Breaking news banner at MSNBC says that Ferraro is leaving the Clinton campaign.  No story to link yet...

The question brings me back to Steven D's 'Quote of the Day II' this morning: Is Nancy Pelosi, one THE key superdelegates, actually angling at ANYTHING with these curiously cryptic little 'I don't want there to be any ambiguity for anyone about any of this' statements?
Are her statements indicative of a shifting, a movement within the core of the superdelegate elites toward some kind of a preemptive resolution of this thing? Common sense would suggest she's trying to influence the direction of all this to some degree. But is she simply trying to steer these events, or end the nomination fight? Is she just talking to hear the sound of her own voice? I'd like some answers. The consensus is that she likely favors Obama as the nominee. But where, if anywhere is she going with this?
Oh yeah-- And this supposed reserve cache of Obama superdelegates? Would they wait until after PA to come out, and if so... why?

It's probably because they haven't had a chance to buy the supreme court off yet. :/

But it being over wouldn't make for such great news!

I am SO SICK of the NY Times.

(copied from my diary...)

 "Clinton Presses for Florida, Michigan Voters"

If you click on this... notice what happens as you scroll the page.  Clinton & McCain are paired.  Obama & Ron Paul are paired.  As a designer, I'd like to say - no decisions like this are accidental.  Not that it's some big conspiracy, but it would have been a do-able design decision to show Obama & Clinton next to each other, or otherwise prevent this from appearing the way it does.

Ugh.

Not until something happens with Michigan and Florida - they're too damn big to just say they don't count