This is a great post by Al Giordano, check it out.

http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=914#comments

offered more spirited defenses of Obama than just about any Democrat.

My church going family most certainly will have noticed and it'll most certainly be shared. Those nice men, they'll say, defended Obama when no one else would. They even understand Rev. Wright and the black community better than Democrats they'll say.

If McCain nominates Huck, and HRC gets the nomination, I'll be interested to see where the black church vote goes.

I said it to ejmw a couple of weeks ago that Hillary's only hope is that Obama implodes without any overt assistance from Hillary before the end.  Then his followers would despair.  They might not like her but they would blame HIM for failing them.   It's the only way she can get the nomination AND not lose large chunks of the Democratic party (i.e. the black vote) as well as the new youth vote in the fall.

It ain't going to work for her in the Wright matter though.  

Hillary thinks she's walking a fine line on this Wright matter by not appearing to wade into the controversery, as do the leaders of the Democratic party, but she and they are wrong.

The lack of defense of Obama on this is as obvious as the nose on Bill Clinton's face.  

Obama isn't only fighting a fight about something in his past - like Bill Clinton did when he fought the media knowledge that he screwed around when he was governor of Arkansas.  

Obama is fighting the biggest problem that our country has had since its inception - racism and how it is used to feed black anger and white anger and keep us apart.   A problem that the DEMOCRATIC PARTY has claimed to want to remedy for the last 50 years.  And he's fighting this fight alone and without any help from any of the party leaders let alone any support from Hillary.  

It may be that only HE can answer for why he remained close to Wright and stayed at the church but he reminded everyone in that speech that this isn't really about Wright - its about racism in this country.  And we ALL have to answer for that.

If he were to go down over this Wright matter - Not only will Hillary will be seen as complicit by the black community, white liberals and the youth vote -- but alse the entire Democratic party leadership will be seen as aiding and abetting this.  They would quite rightly be seen as allowing, once again, the race issue to divide America and the Democratic party.

Personally I don't think he's going to go down because he's shown that he can stand up to the attacks and raise the discussion to a higher level.  AND because he made clear to the Democratic party that this is about more than some swiftboating style incident from Republicans - this is an assault on what the Democratic party is supposed to stand for.

It's very telling that the likes of Jerome Armstrong and Taylor Marsh have a lesser capacity for reasoned, nuanced thinking from multiple perspectives than Mike Huckabee.  I wonder if they have any vestigial sense of shame left.

I guess it is to be expected. Which candidate looks more Presidential?

The NYT says today that Clinton Surrogate,Lanny Davis, has stated the same thing i.e. Obama is not electable because of the Wright controversy.Even the NYT has realized that this is the last gasp of Clinton's imploding candidacy.

She deserves to lose.She is a disgrace.

...but does she have to take the entire Party and the Country down into the depths of destruction with her?

"L'Etat, c'est moi" is a conceit of the ultra-conceited.  It worked for long lines of kings, but not newly-made emperors or wanna-be presidents-for-life.  Clinton can take her entitlement and nurse it like a stale can of soda.  Once the fizz is gone, it is easy to see that there never was any substance.

of nice things being said about Obama by right wingers. Huckabee, McCain, Dick Morris, the Wall Street Journal and others.

Perhaps they're licking their chops at the prospect of beating BO over the head with the Wright affair all through the summer and fall.

Bill's taken to campaigning for McCain:

ALLENTOWN, PA -- Bill Clinton, who earlier today criticized McCain over the US presence in Iraq, praised the likely Republican nominee at a local college, saying he's a "very fine man" who'll be tough to beat.

"He paid as high a price as you can pay to serve this country without getting killed, and we have to honor that," Clinton said. "[And] he has some redeeming qualities for a Republican: he doesn't believe in toture, he supported campaign finance reform and he doesn't think global warming is a myth... So it is not gonna be all that easy to beat him."

"Little people are very stuff-intensive."

Every day the question needs to be directed at the party leadership..........."When will you step in and stop this destructive behavior by Hillary Clinton and her minions?"  Every day that this charade is allowed to continue is another day closer to a McCain administration.  She can't win this thing.  She knows it.  The party knows it.  It's over.  When is someone going to gather together the necessary people and pay Senator Clinton a visit and tell her, "It's time to stop this.  It is destroying the party's chance to win".

The clock is ticking.  Are they willing wait until the damage is irreparable?  If this things continues to drag on in the same vein, and Clinton manhandles this till she  wins by crook, then my vote for President will likely go uncast.

"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity"

All very interesting, but I've got to check in with Jeralyn. After all, there's the Rezko trial going on.

Hillary Clinton is a spoiler. If she can't have it-she'll urinate all over it. Talk about a "sense of entitlement."

On political conservatives: "I was so shocked I nearly dropped the Bible I was using to help me masturbate into my gun." Bill Maher

My LTE to the NYT

Every election cycle has its own version of the big smear.  In 2004, it was the swiftboat ads.  Now it's Mark Penn's "testing and vetting" (Nagourney, Clinton Facing Narrower Path to Nomination, March 20, 2008). If the Clintons truly believed in the importance of the "testing and vetting" process, they would make public their financial and other important records so that the public could examine them for conflicts of interest or improper influence.  If they were held responsible for the words of their supporters, as Barack Obama has been, discussion of the real issues facing this country would grind to a halt.  Because actions speak louder than words, I suggest we bring the behavior of Ron Burkle, Marc Rich and Dick Morris back into the discussion.  And while we're at it, we could examine John McCain's friends and business dealings.  Only then could we claim to have "tested and vetted" the candidates.

My bet: Clinton's trying to force Obama out now because she's got something similarly toxic in her closet that she can't keep under wraps much longer. If she can eliminate her opponent's support before it comes out, she thinks she can manage to strong-arm her way into the nomination regardless. If she can't, she's toast.

Kill because somebody was killed. Get killed because he killed. Do you think peace will ever come like that?

The unfortunate truth is that her complete lack of class won't hurt her one bit with her supporters, who, at least in the blogosphere, are themselves completely lacking in class (not that all Obama supporters are angelic, of course, myself included).

"She has a vagina; her last name is Clinton; and, damn it, this is her reward for everything!"  You can't hope to reason with these people, because Clinton, to them, is always the victim -- whether by her husband's taste for oral sex; or by the Big Mean Black Guy who's taking that which she's entitled to away; or by the imaginary standards many believe are set for female politicians that say she has to behave "like a man" and thus vote for war (never mind men who voted against it, like Bob Graham, or women who got it right, like Barbara Boxer).

I'm typically of the opinion that we should debate in good faith and assume people vote for candidates based on what they believe to be serious judgments.  That's not the case here, I'm afraid.  These are people who openly and happily engage in spin, and who have no issues with spreading smears about a fellow Democrat if it means "our girl" takes the nomination.

These are not thinking people.  They're selfish and ugly people, and they reflect their candidate.  It's not going to end until the superdelegates end it.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to you country.

As most of you know, the term referred to Japanese pilots committing suicide by slamming their planes into US ships. So, by definition, they sacrificed their life (interests) for the good of their country. The Clintons are the exact opposite. They're willing to sacrifice their country's interests in favor of their own.