"Explosive" State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration by James Risen
The book the CIA doesn't want you to read:Jawbreaker: The Attack on Bin Laden and Al Qaeda: A Personal Account by the CIA's Key Field Commander
Larry Johnson's review
Pay To Attention To Obama's Voter Registration Drive
[.]
"Nothing to see here, folks, except for ordinary people helping ordinary people gain the franchise.
But it's more than that. The Vote For Change program will lay the foundation for Obama's general election get-out-the-vote efforts. Obama aides won't say much more, but I gather that the campaign is constructing an incredibly elaborate online interface to allow its more than a million donors and volunteers to directly persuade their neighbors through a variety of media. Names gathered from the voter registration effort will be merged with names gathered through Obama's primary efforts and the names off of the Democratic Party's integrated voter file as well as lists purchased from outside vendors.
On election day, Obama might have more than a million individuals volunteering on his behalf. That should scare the beejeesus out of the McCain campaign and the RNC."
The Obama campaign release:
Obama Campaign Announces Vote for Change Co-Chairs
50-state voter registration drive kicks off on Saturday
CHICAGO, IL--Senator Barack Obama today announced the national co-chairs of Vote for Change, the Obama campaign's 50-state voter registration drive. The fourteen co-chairs--leaders in government, the labor movement, the arts, and the faith community--will oversee the program's efforts and act as surrogates to boost participation across the country.
"Barack Obama started his career as a community organizer in Chicago, working with communities devastated by plant closings, and after law school he returned to those neighborhoods to register new voters," co-chair Melissa Etheridge said. "From the beginning of his career, he's made change happen by enfranchising people at the grassroots, and that's what Vote for Change is all about."
[.]
"Everywhere I go, people feel the same urgency to get this country back on track," Governor Deval Patrick said. "We need to restore some sense to our tax code. We need to end our dependence on foreign oil and help relieve the burden of soaring energy prices. And we need to end this misguided war. The larger our coalition in November, the stronger our mandate for change will be."
Vote for Change National Co-Chairs
U.S. Representative John Barrow, 12th District, Georgia
U.S. Representative Melissa Bean, 8th District, Illinois
Anna Burger, Chair, Change to Win
Maria Elena Durazo, Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO
Melissa Etheridge, Musician
Billy Frank Jr., Chairman, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission
Reverend Joseph Lowery, Chairman, Black Leadership Forum
Dave Matthews, Musician
U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill, Missouri
Secretary Norman Mineta, Former Secretary of Transportation
Governor Deval Patrick, Massachusetts
Usher Raymond IV, Musician
U.S. Representative Linda Sanchez, 39th District, California
You can learn more about Vote for Change by clicking on this link:
The site has information about the 101 Vote for Change registration kick-off events on May 10, and also allows visitors from all 50 states to fill out a mail-in voter registration form, volunteer to register others to votes, and invite others to take part in the program.
So, where did Obama get this idea? Many years ago Obama ran ProjectVote in Illinois. Check out this video (HT:Jack and Jill)
Get ready for a nuclear winter. It's coming, May 31, 2008. "It'll be a disaster." declared former senator Tom Daschle.
Over the weekend Thomas Edsall at Huffington Post had a piece that the Clinton Camp was considering using a secret weapon - the nuclear option - on the Michigan and Florida "seat the delegates" fight. The Party Rules and Bylaws Committee meets at the end of this month.
With at least 50 percent of the Democratic Party's 30-member Rules and Bylaws Committee committed to Clinton, her backers could -- when the committee meets at the end of this month -- try to ram through a decision to seat the disputed 210-member Florida and 156-member Michigan delegations. Such a decision would give Clinton an estimated 55 or more delegates than Obama, according to Clinton campaign operatives. The Obama campaign has declined to give an estimate.
Using the Rules and Bylaws Committee to force the seating of two pro-Hillary delegations would provoke a massive outcry from Obama forces. Such a strategy would, additionally, face at least two other major hurdles, and could only be attempted, according to sources in the Clinton camp, under specific circumstances.
[.]
The Edsall piece has been updated
UPDATE | May 5, 11am ET : Hillary Clinton's campaign today acknowledged plans to try to win seating of the disputed Michigan and Florida delegations to the Democratic Nation Convention at a meeting of the party's Rules and Bylaws Committee on May 31.
In a statement issued in response to a story on The Huffington Post ("Clinton Camp Considering Nuclear Option," see below), the campaign declared:
"There is no secret plan.... The Clinton campaign has been vocal in stating that the votes of 2.5 million people must be respected. Hardly a day goes by when a Clinton official doesn't publicly declare that the votes of Michigan and Florida count and that the delegations from those states should be seated."
The campaign's public assertions stand in contrast to its response to inquiries prior to publication of the story. At that point, Clinton aides insisted on keeping all comments either off the record or on deep background, or did not respond to questions at all. The campaign statement appeared to be designed to try to reduce the significance of the story.
In a more typical reaction to the story, political analyst Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia said:
"Wow. The nuclear option will yield nuclear winter for the Democratic Party."
From the Edsall original piece
: :
The controversy over Michigan and Florida grows out of the decision of both states to flout national party rules prohibiting all but a few states -- Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina -- from holding primaries or caucuses before February 5, 2008. Michigan held its primary on January 15 and Florida on January 29.
On December 1, 2007, well before the contests were held, the Rules and Bylaws Committee voted to refuse to seat either state's delegation at the August 2008 convention in Denver.
When the contests were actually held, none of the candidates actively campaigned in either state. In Michigan, Obama had his name taken off the ballot. Clinton "won" both contests.
The Obama campaign contends that the primaries in the two states were not legitimate, especially in Michigan where voters could not cast a ballot for Obama. Clinton "won" the Michigan contest with 55 percent, while 40 percent voted "uncommitted" and the remainder went to minor candidates.
Obama manager David Plouffe has argued that the only way to seat the Michigan delegation would be to divide the delegates evenly between Clinton and Obama: "A 50-50 split would be fair."
Many Democrats, including DNC chair Howard Dean, believe it is critically important to reach some kind of compromise to seat the Michigan and Florida delegations in order not to alienate voters in the two battleground states, each of which could be pivotal in the November general election.
In the case of Florida, there are a number of proposals under consideration. One would be to seat the delegation as is, but give each delegate only one half a vote. Another would be to cut the number of Florida delegates in half.
Spokesmen for the Obama campaign declined to discuss their strategies for dealing with the May 31 Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting, or to speculate on what they think the Clinton forces with try to do.
The Clintons can't be trusted. Ever. Keep it murky. Uncertainty is her friend.
Tom Daschle, an Obama supporter, said today that undecided superdelegates would be more than "ticked" if the Clinton campaign tries to force the so-called "nuclear option" and encourages the Rules and Bylaws committee, which meets May 31st, to seat the Florida and Michigan delegates.
The former South Dakota senator said he was amazed at the number of undecided superdelegates that have called him in the last 24 hours saying that it would be an "absolute disaster."
Asked if the superdelegates would be "ticked" if the nuclear option were implemented he replied, "If we overturn what has happened in all these elections all over the country and do something like that, ticked is mild compared to the feeling I am getting from reports all over the country today."
Yeah, for the curious - a mini diary. They are still counting the votes. In tiny Guam, even though they cannot vote in the General Election, (is that true?) Reuters is reporting record numbers participated. Results were expected at 1:00 PM EDT, but the complete count. due to heavy turnout, won't be available until later.
After 18 districts have been counted, Sen. Barack Obama maintains about 54 percent of the vote, leading Sen. Hillary Clinton in the Democratic caucus. One of the largest districts, Dededo, still hasn't been counted toward the total vote, however. The other two districts yet to be counted are Agat and Yona.
Obama got 37 votes in Ordot, 19 in Maina, 151 in Inarajan, 46 in Asan, 55 in Chalan Pago, 87 in Santa Rita, 102 in Mongmong-Toto-Maite, 28 in Hagåtña, 158 in Barrigada, 36 in Merizo, 49 in Piti, 131 in Sinajana, 108 in Agana Heights, 194 in Sinajana, 192 in Tamuning, 27 in Umatac, 76 in Talofofo and 224 in Yigo for a total of 1,496 votes.
Sen. Hillary Clinton took 18 votes in Ordot, 22 in Maina, 87 in Inarajan, 33 in Asan, 87 in Chalan Pago, 73 in Santa Rita, 81 in Mongmong-Toto-Maite, 29 votes in Hagåtña, 166 in Barrigada, 33 in Merizo, 51 in Piti, 89 in Sinajana, 105 in Agana Heights, 155 in Mangilao, 193 in Tamuning, 24 in Umatac, 52 in Talofofo and 211 in Yigo for a total of 1,298 votes.
6:30 a.m. -- Clinton must win Dededo by 204 votes to overtake Obama
With only Dededo left to count, Sen. Barack Obama leads Sen. Hillary Clinton in the Democratic caucus...[.] Dededo is Guam’s most populous village.
Obama: 1,951
Clinton: 1,748
[UPdate 2]Guam Pacific Daily News
8:50 a.m. - Obama wins close race, beats Clinton on Guam
When all of the ballots were finally counted -- a process that lasted through the night until well after the sun was up -- Sen. Barack Obama had the most votes from Guam Democrats in the party’s caucus held yesterday.
Obama finished with 2,264 votes to Sen. Hillary Clinton’s 2,257 votes – a 7-point difference. Obama never trailed from the first vote count on.
After the Clinton's meaningless PA win and a difficult week for Obama, all eyes have focused on the uncommitted super-delegates. Open the gates, we have evidence they want this race to end. As BooMan reminds us the math is the math.
INDIANAPOLIS: Have Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's chances of winning the Democratic presidential nomination improved as Senator Barack Obama has struggled through his toughest month of this campaign?
After weeks in which her candidacy was seen by many party leaders as a long shot at best, Clinton's advisers argued strenuously on Thursday that the answer was most assuredly yes, that the outlook was turning in her favor in a way that gave her a real chance.
Still, despite a series of trials that have put Obama on the defensive and illustrated the burdens he might carry in a fall campaign, the Obama campaign is rolling along, leaving Clinton with dwindling options.
Obama continues to pick up the support of superdelegates -- elected Democrats and party leaders -- at a quicker pace than Clinton.
On Thursday, he got a boost from a high-profile defection: Joe Andrew, a former Democratic national chairman appointed by former President Bill Clinton, said he had changed his mind and would back Obama. Even after Clinton's victory in Pennsylvania, Obama has held on to a solid lead in pledged delegates, those selected by the voting in primaries and caucuses.
So yesterday we had Joe Andrew and today Mr. Paul Kirk, ex DNC Chair, (1985-1989) joins in:
[.]Speaking of math -- the Obama campaign rolls out another former DNC chairman's endorsement on Friday: Paul Kirk, a superdelegate who led the party from 1985-1989, is coming out for Obama -- a day after Andrew's switch, an Obama campaign official tells The Note. (And don't count on that being it for the day, as the dribble continues.)
"Despite a series of trials that have put Mr. Obama on the defensive and illustrated the burdens he might carry in a fall campaign, the Obama campaign is rolling along, leaving Mrs. Clinton with dwindling options," Adam Nagourney and Carl Hulse write in The New York Times. "By and large, the group that matters most at this point -- the uncommitted superdelegates, who are likely to hold the balance of power -- still seem to view their decision the way the Obama campaign would like them to see it."
Obama is clearly still leading -- but Clinton has a bounce in her step to match her bounce in the polls.
"The Democratic nomination race is murkier than ever," USA Today's Jill Lawrence writes. "Hillary Rodham Clinton is rising in the polls while Barack Obama is gaining ground among superdelegates who will decide the winner."
Says Charlie Cook: "The delegate math couldn't look much worse for Clinton, but the current political dynamics are just horrific for Obama."
The AP's take:"Despite the momentum building behind Clinton after her win in Pennsylvania, it still appeared mathematically impossible for her to overcome Obama's delegate lead for the party nomination. . . . Regardless, Clinton appeared to be gaining strength among voters, especially the white working-class which has reacted negatively Obama's association with Rev. Jeremiah Wright."
Clinton brought a defiant tone to her answers Thursday, her rejection by Andrew and slippage among supers notwithstanding. "I think this has been good for the Democratic Party," Clinton told Cynthia McFadden on ABC's "Nightline" (offering what may be becoming a minority opinion). "I think that this is such a close election, why would any of us think that it shouldn't go to the end?"
She also said that her husband won't have a West Wing office in her administration, and flatly rejected any comparison between Obama '08 and Clinton '92. "No. No, not at all," she said.
Today I am announcing my support for Senator Barack Obama for President of the United States of America. I am changing my support from Senator Clinton to Senator Obama, and calling for my fellow Democrats across my home State of Indiana, and my fellow super delegates across the nation, to heal the rift in our Party and unite behind Barack Obama.
The hardest decisions in life are not between good and bad or right and wrong, but between two goods or two rights. That is the decision Democrats face today. We have an embarrassment of riches, but as much as we may love our candidates and revel in the political process that has brought Presidential politics to places that have not seen it in a generation, we cannot let our family affair hurt America by helping John McCain.
[.]
Let's put things right.
Time to Act
Many will ask, why now? Why, with several primaries still remaining, with Senator Clinton just winning Pennsylvania, with my friend Evan Bayh working hard to make sure Senator Clinton wins Indiana, why switch now? Why call for super delegates to come together now to constructively pick a president?
The simple answer is that while the timing is hard for me personally, it is best for America. We simply cannot wait any longer, nor can we let this race fall any lower and still hope to win in November. June or July may be too late. The time to act is now.
I write this letter from my mom's dining room table in Indianapolis, Indiana. Four generations of my family have argued and laughed around this table. But what I humbly believe today is that we, as Democrats and as Americans, face what Dr. King characterized and what Senator Obama reminds us is the fierce urgency of now. As a nation, we are at a critical moment and we need leaders with the character and vision to see us through the challenges at hand and those to come. I can't guess what will happen tomorrow, so I can't tell you what kind of experience our next President will need to have to deal with those challenges. But I can tell you what kind of character and vision they will need to have -- and that is what inspires me about Barack Obama.
As Democrats, however, we risk letting this moment slip through our fingers. We risk ceding the field to the Republicans and allowing the morally bankrupt Bush Agenda to continue unabated if we do not unite behind a single candidate. Should this race continue after Indiana and North Carolina, it will inevitably become more negative. The polls already show the supporters for both candidates becoming more strident in their positions and more locked into their support. Continuing on this path would be a catastrophe, as we would inadvertently end up doing Republicans work for them. Already, instead of the audacity of hope, we suffer the audacity of one Democrat comparing John McCain favorably to another Democrat. When that happens, you know it is time for all of us to stop, take a deep breath and unite to change America.
We must act and we must act now.
[.]
Read the whole thing
Joe Andrew nails it. Nothing more to add. Andrew's endorsement has received wide MSM coverage and that can only be to the good for Obama.
And wouldn't you know it, Clintons' supporters have been throwing hand grenades at Joe. The campaign's response: - Joe Andrew is not from Indiana.
She just could pass this up. And it's a two-part interview to air Wednesday and Thursday in prime time EDT.
Shit stirer-in-chief.
Hillary Clinton On O'Reilly Factor: Wright's Statement Are Offensive and Outrageous (Video at Huffpost link)
Fox News is releasing highlights from Hillary Clinton's first interview on "The O'Reilly Factor." ABC got its hands on a partial transcript (transcript also pasted below). Hillary says she believes Reverend Wright's comments are "offensive and outrageous."
Watch the video and read more from ABC below :
Hillary Clinton, in her first appearance on "The O'Reilly Factor," matched Barack Obama's declared outrage over Rev. Jeremiah Wright, saying she was offended by the pastor's statements about America.
In a two-part interview to air Wednesday and Thursday night at 8 p.m. ET, Clinton said it's up to voters to decide whether the mounting controversy over Obama's retired pastor should impact the race.
O'Reilly: "Some people say it's not a big difference between you and Barack Obama, overall philosophy, overall outlook. It's a democratic liberal line, he's more liberal than you, but it's the same thing. It's a personality run, which is why before Rev. Wright derailed him, Barack Obama had some momentum because you are a more polarizing personality than he is. Do you agree with that?"
ABC News' Eloise Harper Reports: In an "O'Reilly Factor" exclusive, Hillary Clinton rebuked Rev. Jeremiah Wright in her strongest language to-date.
Sen. Clinton, D-N.Y., speaking exclusively to FOX News, called Wright's comments "offensive and outrageous," telling conservative talk show host Bill O'Reilly that she going to leave the controversy "up to voters to decide."
Here's the full exchange between O'Reilly and Clinton, as released by FOX News:
O'Reilly: "Can you believe this Rev. Wright guy? Can you believe this guy?"
Clinton: "Well, I'm going to leave it up to voters to decide."
O'Reilly: "Well, what do you think as an American?"
Clinton: "Well, what I said when I was asked directly is that I would not have stayed in the church.
O'Reilly: "You're an American citizen, I'm an American citizen, He's an American citizen, Rev. Wright. What do you think when you hear a fellow American citizen say that kind of stuff about America."
Clinton: "Well, I take offense. I think it's offensive and outrageous. I'm going to express my opinion, others can express theirs. It is part of just, you know, an atmosphere we're in today."
In an ABC News debate earlier this month, Clinton repeated the assertion she had made on the campaign trail that, if in Obama's position, Rev. Wright would not have been her choice in pastor.
::
go read the rest. Watch the video at the Huffpost link
My comment: make it end. put me out of my misery.
Update [2008-5-1 15:44:12 by idredit]:
This new video has a disconnect with Hillary and working class people.
Hillary: "Rich People, God Bless us, we deserve all the opportunities...."
NY Daily News: says we's been had. The last couple of days we've been served up the Rev. Jeremiah Wright by an enthusiastic Hillary Clinton supporter as head chef:
The Rev. Jeremiah Wright couldn't have done more damage to Barack Obama's campaign if he had tried. And you have to wonder if that's just what one friend of Wright wanted.
Shortly before he rose to deliver his rambling, angry, sarcastic remarks at the National Press Club Monday, Wright sat next to, and chatted with, Barbara Reynolds.
A former editorial board member at USA Today, she runs something called Reynolds News Services and teaches ministry at the Howard University School of Divinity. (She is an ordained minister).It also turns out that Reynolds - introduced Monday as a member of the National Press Club "who organized" the event - is an enthusiastic Hillary Clinton supporter.
On a blog linked to her Web site- www.reynoldsnews.com- Reynolds said in a February post: "My vote for Hillary in the Maryland primary was my way of saying thank you" to Clinton and her husband for the successes of Bill Clinton's presidency.
The same post criticized Obama's "Audacity of Hope" theme: "Hope by definition is not based on facts," wrote Reynolds. It is an emotional expectation. Things hoped for may or may not come. But help based on experience trumps hope every time."
[.]
I don't know if Reynolds' eagerness to help Wright stage a disastrous news conference with the national media was a way of trying to help Clinton - my queries to Reynolds by phone and e-mail weren't returned yesterday - but it's safe to say she didn't see any conflict between promoting Wright and supporting Clinton.
[.]
But Wright should have known - and his friend and ally Reynolds, a media professional, surely knew - that bickering with the press can only harm Wright and, by extension, Obama.
I hope that wasn't their goal.
No surprise then when we read that the Clinton camp when asked to comment on Wright's new speeches said "It's time to move on"- figuring they'd never be exposed.
Betcha a pint of Vermont's finest maple syrup - 2008 production - that the Clinton camp was not left in the dark on Barbara Reynolds' stagings.
The New Yorker has a piece, Bill vs. Barack, essentially reporting that Bill hates Obama, is enraged by Obama's success.
Why? BloombergNews has the answer:
It's Barack Obama's priceless database (estimated value at over $200 million) that will make him a party power broker way into the future...
"that may outlast the current campaign." said, Tad Devine, an independent media consultant.
Wow. Always it's the money, isn't it?
And the Clintons have displayed their crass pursuit of wealth. Now they'll have to yield.
First, let's read The New Yorker's take
The New Yorker:Bill vs. Barack
Within the campaign, Clinton's enthusiasm for rustling votes in these remote corners was a source of amusement.
When I asked what he was doing on Election Day, a Clinton campaign adviser said, "I think he's leading a caravan of Wal-Mart greeters to the polls."
On the stump, the former President dispensed idiosyncratic political analysis. "One of the reasons that she won Ohio that nobody wrote about," he said, without explanation, "is that Ohio has a plant that produces the largest number of solar reflectors in America." He offered commentary about his wife's earlier limitations as a candidate: "I think Hillary's become a much better speaker." But, most of all, Bill Clinton talked about Bill Clinton:
"""The headquarters of my foundation is in Harlem. . . . My Presidential library and school of public service are in Arkansas. . . . I try to save this generation of children from the epidemic of childhood obesity. . . . I am working on rebuilding the Katrina area in New Orleans. . . . I have major global-warming projects in cities all around America. . . . Most of the time I am out in America on the streets. . . . I once gave a speech to a million people in Ghana."""
When Hillary Clinton's Presidential campaign was launched, in January, 2007, her supporters feared that Bill would overshadow her, as he had when they both spoke at the funeral of Coretta Scott King, a year earlier. Now the constant fear is that he will embarrass her.
When he makes news, it is rarely a good day for his spouse. Whether he was publicly comparing Barack Obama's primary victory in South Carolina to Jesse Jackson's campaigns in the eighties or privately, and apoplectically, complaining that Bill Richardson broke his word by endorsing Obama, every story has seemed to reinforce an image of Clinton as a sort of ill-tempered coot driven a little mad by Obama's success. "I think this campaign has enraged him," the adviser told me.
But, as Clinton campaigned in Pennsylvania, he was rarely the cartoon politician portrayed in the press. He still connects better with voters than his wife or Obama. "Hillary is in this race today because of people like you," he told one white working-class audience. "She's in it for you and she's in it because of you. People like you have voted for her in every single state in the country." People like you. The phrase hung in the air and the room quieted. Clinton didn't say what the people who voted for Obama were like, but the suggestion was that they were somehow different.
[.]
That is what offended Bill Clinton.
"Hillary's opponent, in his entire campaign, every two or three weeks has said for months and months and months, beginning in Nevada, that really there wasn't much difference in how America did when I was President and how America's done under President Bush," he said in Lock Haven. "Now, if you believe that, you should probably vote for him, but you get a very bad grade in history."
In the closing days of the campaign, Obama gave at least three speeches criticizing the former President, who, ever vigilant of his legacy, defended himself at every stop. Few paid attention; Barack and Bill were like two boxers trying to have a fight but both getting pelted by a mysterious third force--the saturation gaffe coverage.
Bill Clinton is more than peeved. He sees - the Clinton machine - their status ebbing away, their legacy being repudiated. A third term would have vanquished the Monica years. They left office with that stain.
Obama is a threat to their restoration project...and their future status. Win or loose Obama will be in demand.
BloombergNews: Obama's `Gigantic' Database May Make Him Party's Power Broker
April 28 (Bloomberg) -- Barack Obama's supporters are giving him more than just record amounts of cash. They also are providing personal information that may make his donor list the most powerful tool in U.S. politics.
Almost 2 million people have entered personal information on Obama pages on social-networking Web sites such as Facebook, MySpace and his campaign's mybarackobama.com, offering home addresses, phone numbers, their views on specific issues and the names of friends. The data have allowed Obama, 46, to raise more than $200 million, fill sports arenas with supporters across the nation and motivate millions more with custom-tailored messages.
[.]
`It's gigantic,'' said Laura Quinn, chief executive officer of Catalist, a company that maintains a database of 280 million Americans. The list is as ``transformational'' as the advent of political advertising, she said.
[.]
McIntyre, a Republican and former chief national spokesman for the National Rifle Association, said the data entered by 800,000 names on mybarakobama.com may be worth as much as $200 million.
[.]
It's the kind of detailed information that Republican operatives such as Karl Rove, who directed President George W. Bush's campaigns, excelled at gathering through expensive microtargeting techniques that combine data from several sources.
[.]
Obama's success stems from a decision early in his campaign to embrace the concept of social networking, allowing him to leap ahead of his Democratic rival, Senator Hillary Clinton of New York, or the presumptive Republican nominee, Senator John McCain of Arizona. For example, Obama now has 790,000 Facebook ``friends,'' compared with 150,000 for Clinton, 60, and 117,000 for McCain, 71.
[.]
Even as Obama's interactive databases prove to be efficient ways to energize volunteers, their ability to raise large amounts of money may outlast the current campaign, said Tad Devine, an independent media consultant.
[.]
This ability to produce results ensures Obama will play a prominent role in the future.
``Win or lose, it's his list,'' McIntyre said.
I've been puzzled by Bill's undercurrent of rage... had he displayed some sincerity in advancing the interest of AA community, (being the "first balck president") Bill would be cheering on Obama, even if his wife is the rival. Quite the opposite, Bill has been trashing Obama at every stump.
You know, it's not that Bill and Hillary are so much bigots...at least I hope not...but I'm compelled to conclude it's the money, it's the power that comes with it.
The Clinton's been out-campaigned, out-funded and now Obama has built a valuable asset, added to his oratory...that means, in the future, paid speeches. Now there's added competition for Bill, coming only eight years, too early in the game.
Kinda leaves Bill envious. He no longer owns the Democratic Party, has lost it to this upstart who wouldn't wait his turn.
Oh, how it hurts.
I disagree with that surgeon who offered that Bill's personality change is from his by-pass surgery.
No, it's the new competition for power and money that has Bill rattled with envy.
OK dust ourselves off, the grieving is over. Maybe a tad, but before we move on to the prize it may bring closure to read wtf happened in PA.
Here's a clear eyed view on the PA disappointing results brought to us by MyDD.(feel free to disagree).
This post-PA analysis is by Dan Wolford, an Obama delegate, followed with a critique from Jerome Armstrong. (Yes, the Jerome Armstrong who at times just don't get it - thinks Obama supporters are stuck in a "Pre-Wright bubble" and that Nancy Pelosi should not chair the Denver Convention because she has said the 'dream ticket' is a bad idea).
Don't run away, keep reading. I found this interesting.
WTF happened? My question too. Yeah I know, BooMan's analysis dried our tears - but with some of us, including moi, they're still flowing.
.
From: Dan Wofford
Sent: Wed Apr 23 14:18
Subject: RE: Wa d f happened?
He visited San Fransisco two weeks ago. That's what happened.
Message to all Democratic Candidates: Never to go San Fransicso, unless incognito;
Message to Barack: Don't think out loud at fundraisers in San Fransisco if you're stupid enough to go there.
Message # 3: If someone in SF asks you about those "strange rural people in PA"...don't indulge their liberal, latte drinking bull shit...Just tell them if they want to understand rural and ethnic PA that they should get in the Prius's and drive down to Bakersfield or any of the other mid state towns in California where there are people who actually lead ordinary lives and care about God and own guns....That's what Barack should have done and then not apologized for making remarks that while poorly worded were fundamentally accurate on one level (while not others...since when times are bad, people actually start caring about the 'big" issues like jobs and health care....that's why HW could win the senate seat in 1991...)
To answer your question more specifically:
Bittergate hurt a lot -- bc is slowed down and then with the poor debate performance stopped what was truly real closing momentum. No question had he not gone to SF or said those comments, we lose by 3-4 pts.
Debate hurt him for same reason as #1, and bc it cost us a couple days and didn't help with undecideds. Thank god we had a brillant state wide tour that was very effective or this could have been a real blow-out...as it is she just got 8 more delegates than we did out of PA.
Field Operation didn't put all the possible assets on the table: As much as admire the campaign's field leadership (and I mean that, some very capable and good folks who have a fantastic organizational model). I do believe they were overconfident about their ability in Philly to get the vote out without paying street money or sucking up to the ward leaders so that party regulars along with BO volunteers would get the job done.....too reliant on the massive number of "volunteers" in the city -- but many not true locals or party stalwarts.
I would have paid "street" money... See (Legendary Philly Inquirer columnist) Tom Ferrick's op-ed in yesterday's NY Times....paying volunteers to work a whole day in the city is a long held tradition and frankly is a sure way to see that you get every possible vote. Danger of course is that Ward leaders skim some of the money, which some do or that they give it out and then help the other candidate. Well that's the risk you take. I felt it was bullshit for the Obama campaign to say they weren't going to play that "old"
[.]5. 6. 7.
Working class PA folks, esp those over 45, don't trust Obama...this is a problem and other than getting them to meet Obama retail style...don't know how we solve it, unless we can get him to do a quick tour of duty in Iraq...
Losing the Catholic and Jewish vote: Way to cautious in outreach to Jewish community...did not put enough assets out on the table...not enough Jewish folks involved....self perpetuating problem...Think the same is true for Catholics.....A friend close to the campaign said she was surprised to see how few Catholics and Jews there were
[.]
Jerome Armstrong's critique:
1-2, yes, like Obama's NAFTA crapta in Ohio, he had last-weekish misteps that set him up for failure-- or more importantly, an event for the pundits to point toward as the reason for his failure to close a 55-45 gap.
But, I am not sold that 'bitter & cling' took away a closer PA election from Obama. It's not like he was 3-4 points down before it happened, and none of the state polls showed a movement away from him after 'bitter & cling', and the same for the debate. Perhaps, combined, they had an effect. But it seems just as possible, given points 3-9, that Obama would have lost by the same margin, and we'd see the pundits blaming the terrible bowling score instead. Dan might be right, but the polling...
[.]
9. This is the real crux of the matter.
This bitterness, amplified on the internet by some of his supporters, especially in their obsessive hatred tone toward anything Clinton, has replaced the hopefulness that pervaded his earlier supporter message.
I'm not saying that Obama has changed his message, or suggesting this is a portrayal of all Obama supporters, but pointing toward a vocal part of what has become his part of his most strident base (on this note Keith Olbermann might reflect on his responsibility in having fostered a part of this attitude).
I'm also not saying that there is nothing in the country that needs changing, there is, but Presidential elections are won by the candidate and movement message which is the most hopeful about the country.doesn't back him up. Clinton's uptick was more or less matched by Obama's uptick in the closing polls, the difference, like Ohio, being that the polls (some of them including the average) didn't show Clinton pulling away at the very end. But give Zogby credit, as he caught the Sunday-Monday movement to Clinton and nailed the final margin.
I've singled out Jerome Armstrong's response to item 9. Show hands, do you see yourself somewhere in there? Why blame Olbermann? Just too asshat for me is this:
" There does seem to have been a shift of a part of Obama's base, from Church-attending voters, toward secular warrior voters. When Edwards was in the race, many of them backed him instead of Obama, and it allowed a much fresher and younger voice of the Obama supporter to emerge.
Now, the 'pissed off and not gonna hide it' Democrats have become a vocal part of Obama's base, beyond the youth and African-American supporters.
Its also recognizable in the polling done asking if people feel good about America as a whole, or people who think that America is failing as a whole, the former supporting Clinton and the latter Obama.
What a piece of crap?
Armstrong does not understand Barack Obama's message, the campaign's well thought out strategy or Obama's supporters who are invested in taking back the party apparatus from the DLC - the Harold Ickes, Terry McAuliffe and Clinton icky types.
Many like Armstrong have missed the precise deployment by the Obama campaign. Win or lose, the Obama movement will mature; even as the Clintons try to kill it in the bathtub.
Have no fear, unlike us, Obama has no time to grieve. He has been very busy this week. In fact, I received an email recruiting volunteers for Kentucky. The Obama movement is masterful.
It is striking how well planned each roll out is executed - from timely endorsements to what happens after each state's primary vote - whether it's a win or a perceived loss. Take this week after the PA disappointment, a Clinton 9-point edge. Not double digits as the media would have us believe.
Howard Dean, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi gotta love these:
Obama rolls out his 50 state strategy; confident he'll prevail to the nomination he sets out for victory in November. He ignores the Clintons white noise.
Here's Todd Beeton -MyDD with details on the 50 state roll out.
Senator Barack Obama's campaign today announced the kickoff of Vote for Change, an unprecedented 50-state voter registration and mobilization drive. The campaign will work with grassroots volunteers and partner with local organizations to register new voters and boost engagement in our Democratic process. The program will launch on May 10 with dozens of events around the country.
"If we're going to push back on the special interests and finally solve the challenges we face, we're going to need everyone to get involved," said Senator Obama. "Over the next six months, Vote for Change is going to bring new participants into the process, adding scores of new voices to this critical dialogue about our future.
I started my career as a community organizer, and I worked to register voters in communities where hope was all but lost. I've seen what can happen when Americans re-engage and take ownership in the process."
"We've already seen amazing new enthusiasm and involvement over the course of this campaign, and now we're taking that excitement to the next level in all 50 states," said deputy campaign manager Steve Hildebrand. "We've seen too many elections where turnout was less than 50 percent. At this critical time in our history, we know we can do better--this year and beyond.
Obama has adopted Howard Dean's 50 state strategy into his campaign. In so doing, coupled with the DNC fundraising deal, Obama sends a clear message to all super-delegates and other politicians:
" hey look, I maybe a young upstart but I've out-campaigned the Clintons' machine and here's what the Obama movement can do for you. "
"I'm a team player. The party's interest, your interest is paramount. "
Clinton, the inevitable one, can't match the Obama organization. More over, we have seen nothing else but her self interest and selfishness.
Listen up super-Ds; the Clintons would rather destroy the party if they can't have the nomination for a third term.
Now take a hammer and some nails. Go here, finish the job. Nail it shut.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Thursday that he may try to force undecided superdelegates to make their decisions in the Democratic presidential race if it stretches into June.
Reid said he would consider writing a joint letter with Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) demanding that superdelegates make their endorsements public.
"The three of us, we may write a joint letter [to superdelegates]," said Reid. "We might do individual letters. We are in contact with each other."
Reid's comments suggest that the party's top three officials are contemplating a high-level intervention if the primary season concludes in June without a nominee and many superdelegates still undecided.
Reid said he would not rush any of the superdelegates for now.
"People will have plenty of opportunity after the last primary on June 2 to make a decision about what they are going to do," he said.
However, when asked by a reporter if he would be forced to weigh in on the race, Reid replied, "I might have to."
The Senate majority leader also hinted that another high-profile superdelegate could be making an endorsement in the coming days.
What difference does a month make? Why not say August?
Reid is sending mixed messages or playing with our heads. Either you're going to get some spine, intervene or STFU.
Dunno about you but I'm kinda tired reading, "something will be done", "something will be done before the convention"
There is no reason for undecided Super-Delegates to remain on the fence unless they are very afraid:
But what if the remaining undecided delegates are afraid? They've seen Bill Richardson called a Judas, Robert Reich and others before him said it was not a pleasant conversation...
Could be. Here are some theories:
Megan McArdle, The Atlantic blog
As Matt [Yglesias] points out, they undoubtedly already know which way they're going to go, so why are they subjecting us all to this painful ordeal?
Working theories:
They are afraid of retaliation by a vengeful Senator Clinton
They are afraid that she will somehow get the nomination, and retaliate from the Oval Office
They need the Clintons to fundraise for the general
No one wants to be the guy who put the last nail in the Clinton campaign's coffin.
3. They need the Clintons to fundraise for the general
What, has the Democratic Party come to this - one couple, - Bill and Hillary Clinton are holding party members hostage?
4. No one wants to be the guy who puts the last nail in the Clintons campaign coffin.
WTF.
Why should we put up with this blatant political blackmail extortion?
Having taken the low road to victory in PA, a look ahead and I'm seeing that the Clintons risk being dis-invited, not just from the party - but from the very circles --big biz titans that they court and will need for any future earnings.
Their reputation is already shot. Not worth a pinch of Sh^^t.
We all recall John Kerry's 2004 campaign and the swift-boating of his war hero status. As the grenades were tossed, Kerry offered up "Hope is on the Way."
Over at Newsweek there's this teaser set to go in the April 28, 2008 issue:
Obama: Can't `Swift Boat' Me - Mark Honsenball and Michael Isikoff.
The Obama campaign is planning to expand its research and rapid-response team in order to repel attacks it anticipates over his ties to 1960s radical Bill Ayers, indicted developer Antoin Rezko and other figures from his past. David Axelrod, Obama's chief strategist, tells NEWSWEEK that the Illinois senator won't let himself be "Swift Boated" like John Kerry in 2004.
"He's not going to sit there and sing 'Kumbaya' as the missiles are raining in," Axelrod said. "I don't think people should mistake civility for a willingness to deal with the challenges to come."
The move appears to be an acknowledgment that the Obama campaign may not have moved aggressively enough when questions about Ayers and Rezko first arose, and it comes amid fresh indications that conservative groups are preparing a wave of attack ads over the links.
There's nothing more hollow or damaging than guilt by association. Beware thy neighbor.
Feb. 18 (Bloomberg) -- The couple who sold Barack Obama his Chicago home said the Illinois senator's $1.65 million bid ``was the best offer'' and they didn't cut their asking price because a campaign donor bought their adjacent land, according to e-mails between Obama's presidential campaign and the seller.
The Illinois senator has said he made a ``boneheaded'' move in involving contributor Antoin ``Tony'' Rezko, a Chicago businessman, in the purchase of the property on June 15, 2005.
Rezko's wife, Rita, also an Obama donor, bought the adjoining plot in Hyde Park from the couple, Fredric Wondisford and Sally Radovick, for the $625,000 asking price, the same day that Obama bought the house for $300,000 less than the asking price. Antoin Rezko was under federal investigation at the time.
Rezko was indicted on unrelated fraud charges 16 months later, in October 2006. Obama has since returned about $85,000 in campaign contributions made or raised by Rezko. Obama's Democratic presidential rival, Hillary Clinton, has questioned Obama's ties with Rezko.
The sellers hadn't previously made their side of the story public out of concern for their privacy, according to Bill Burton, a spokesman for Obama's campaign. They approached Obama's Senate office 15 months ago and agreed to break their silence now through the campaign out of concern that the story was being distorted in the media, Burton said.
Toured Property
Burton said Obama, 46, toured the property with Rezko for 15 to 30 minutes at some point before the purchase. Burton said Obama wanted Rezko's opinion of the property because Rezko was a real-estate developer in the area. Burton said he didn't know when the pre-sale tour occurred.
In my view the bleating of Rezko is an attempt to spin pig's ear into a silk purse. After two years of investigative reporting, The Chicago-Tribune, wrote there's nothing here.
Let's take Ayers. Those over 55-65, baby boomers who came through the 60s/70s... the Vietnam era, will see this in a very different light.
In our society we do not believe in rehabilitation but in revision. Back in the 60-70s-80s anti-war militants of the Vietnam years and freedom fighters of the Reagan years are today relabeled Qaedy terrorists.
Olie North participated in illegal trade of guns, fueled a guerrilla war in Central America that did more damage and death than Ayers' planting bombs in the Pentagon washroom.
I do not condone bombings or terrorists but we need to put everything in context.
How old was Obama when Ayers led the underground?
From The Chicago-Tribune: Mayor Richard Daley and friends of Ayers
Bill Ayers' turbulent past contrasts with quiet academic life
Bill Ayers long ago settled into a life of quiet respectability as a well-regarded professor of education and a much-published activist for better schools. With his Ivy League doctorate, 48-page curriculum vitae and liberal politics, he fits comfortably into Chicago's Kenwood neighborhood.
But Ayers' unquiet past as a leader of the violent Weathermen during the Vietnam War has been thrust into the Democratic presidential race because of his relationship with a neighbor, Barack Obama.
In Wednesday night's Democratic debate, Obama was asked to defend his connection to Ayers, which has been fodder for conservative TV and radio talkers for weeks.
On Thursday, neighbors, friends and colleagues who know Ayers and the work he has done on behalf of educational reform in Chicago and nationally joined his defense.
"He's been a valuable member of the community with regards to education. Helping young people," said Mayor Richard Daley, who was also friends with Ayers' father, Thomas, a civic activist and former chief executive officer of Commonwealth Edison.
"Bill has contributed heavily to the quality of life not only in the city but in the entire world as well," Daley said.
The pundits are having a heyday with Hillary Clinton's sleazy McCarthyite attack on Barack Obama during the April 16 debate, trying to link him to the Weather Underground because of his having served on a charity organization board with one of the Weathermen, Bill Ayers, who is currently a distinguished professor of education at the University of Illinois, and who is married to Bernadine Dohrn, another Weather Underground veteran.
What has them in a lather is Ayer's comment, made a few years ago, that he has no regrets for the organization's having set off several bombs back in the early 1970s, and that in fact they "should have set of more."
(Incidentally, as Robert Parry notes, those comments were made before 9-11, not, as Hillary Clinton charged duplicitously in the April 16 Philadelphia debate, right after 9-11.)
In fact, it's important to remember that while three members of the Weather Underground died at their own hands because of a failed bomb they were constructing, no one else died at their hands. The group scrupulously worked to make sure that their attacks were on property, not people.
It's also important to remember that they were targeting a government that was engaged in a criminal war against a peasant country half a world away, that had killed nearly two million Indochinese people, most of them civilians, and that was well on the way to pointlessly sending 58,000 American troops to their deaths.
The actions of the Weather Underground may have been misguided and quixotic, but they were not terrorists in the sense of trying to cause mass terror among the American public, in the way that Al Qaeda terrorists or other terror groups indiscriminately attack civilians. They were much more carefully targeting the levers of power, and in effect, trying to "bring the war home."
[.]
It's not as if the Republicans and, especially candidate, McCain have no skeletons.
McCain has baggage: `The Keating Five' and Vietnam.
Two days ago, McCain dropped his pledge to run a "respectable" campaign.
All is fair game in politics. If McCain supporters have their sights on Obama, there are those who have their sights on McCain, and within his party too.
John Kerry was a war hero made controversial. Did he throw those medals? Brutal questions are raised over McCain `s Vietnam years at Counterpunch Magazine, in print and at their website, this weekend. Ouch.
War Hero? Meet the Real John McCain: North Vietnam's Go-To Collaborator
John McCain's been getting kid-glove treatment from the press for years, ever since he wriggled free of the Keating scandal and his profitable association - another collaboration, you might say -- with the nation's top bank swindler in the 1980s. But nothing equals the astounding tact with which his claque on the press bus avoids the topic of McCain's collaborating with his Vietnamese captors after he'd been shot down.
How McCain behaved when he was a prisoner is key. McCain is probably the most unstable man ever to have got this close to the White House. He's one election away from it. Republican senator Thad Cochrane has openly said he trembles at the thought of an unstable McCain in the Oval Office with his finger on the nuclear trigger.
Shall we count the last eight years - The GOP culture of corruption. The war crimes?
"Moveon.org endorsed [Sen. Barack Obama] -- which is like a gusher of money that never seems to slow down," Clinton said to a meeting of donors. "We have been less successful in caucuses because it brings out the activist base of the Democratic Party. MoveOn didn't even want us to go into Afghanistan. I mean, that's what we're dealing with. And you know they turn out in great numbers. And they are very driven by their view of our positions, and It's primarily national security and foreign policy that drives them. I don't agree with them. They know I don't agree with them. So they flood into these caucuses and dominate them and really intimidate people who actually show up to support me."
Senator Clinton's remarks depart radically from the traditional position of presidential candidates who in the past have celebrated high levels of turnout by party activists and partisans as a harbinger for their own party's success -- regardless of who is the eventual nominee -- in the general election showdown."
After 'the debate that was' debacle on Tuesday night, this news is deserving of a diary, a billboard too...just saying imho.
Call this day "a whiff of doom" - a blow back - for the Clintons. The big momentum of super-delegates shifting. (there was a 5.2 quake in the mid-west this morning, make that in the Clinton camp too). All that mud Miss Piggy wallowed in have good people running in the other direction. Ever been to a piggery? Know that smell.
First pal, Robert Reich, Clinton's first Secretary of Labor has officially endorsed Barack Obama. Reich and Clinton go way back, at least 40 years.
"I saw the ads" -- the negative man-on-street commercials that the Clinton campaign put up in Pennsylvania in the wake of Obama's bitter/cling comments a week ago -- "and I was appalled, frankly. I thought it represented the nadir of mean-spirited, negative politics. And also of the politics of distraction, of gotcha politics. It's the worst of all worlds. We have three terrible traditions that we've developed in American campaigns. One is outright meanness and negativity. The second is taking out of context something your opponent said, maybe inartfully, and blowing it up into something your opponent doesn't possibly believe and doesn't possibly represent. And third is a kind of tradition of distraction, of getting off the big subject with sideshows that have nothing to do with what matters. And these three aspects of the old politics I've seen growing in Hillary's campaign.
And I've come to the point, after seeing those ads, where I can't in good conscience not say out loud what I believe about who should be president. Those ads are nothing but Republicanism. They're lending legitimacy to a Republican message that's wrong to begin with, and they harken back to the past twenty years of demagoguery on guns and religion. It's old politics at its worst -- and old Republican politics, not even old Democratic politics. It's just so deeply cynical."
The Clinton campaign will, no doubt, shrug off the Reich endorsement of Obama. (And hey, who knows, maybe James Carville will get into the act and declare Reich a Benedict Arnold!) They will say that it's unlikely to move any votes, and that, since Reich is not a superdelegate, it does nothing tangible to move Obama even one inch closer to the nomination.
Moments ago Senators Sam Nunn and David Boren announced joining the Obama Team.
(HT: TPM)
Both will serve on Obama's national security team, giving the Obama camp an effective weapon against the Hillary campaign's claims that Obama has not passed the "commander in chief test."
"America remains the strongest nation in the world, but we can only be successful in tackling our toughest problems if we gain cooperation at home and abroad. Our next president - working across party and economic lines - must restore and strengthen our national purpose, our credibility, our competence and our spirit.
"We need a president who has the temperament of a leader - a sharp, incisive, strategic mind, a rare capacity for self criticism, and a willingness to hear contrary points of view.
"Based on my conversations with Senator Obama, reading his book and his speeches and seeing the kind of campaign he has run, I believe that he is our best choice to lead our nation. Senator Obama, as evidenced by his words and his deeds, recognizes that:
· We have developed a habit of avoiding the tough decisions and seemingly lost our ability to build consensus to tackle head-on our biggest challenges.
· Demonizing the opposition, oversimplifying the issues, and dumbing down the political debate prevent our country from coming together to make tough decisions and tackle our biggest challenges.
· Solving America's problems will require difficult choices and sacrifices and leaders capable of considering new ideas from both political parties.
· On foreign policy and security policy, we must recognize that we are not limited to a choice between belligerency and isolation and that we must listen to lead successfully on the key issues facing America and the world.
· Our next president must also recognize that the battle against violent terrorists, while requiring a prudent use of military power, is also a long-term contest of psychology and ideas.
"I believe that Senator Obama has a rare ability to restore America's credibility and moral authority and to get others to join us in tackling serious global problems that will determine our own well being and security. I believe that he will bring to the White House, high principles, clear vision and sound judgment. I believe that he will inspire people to put aside extreme partisanship for the common good. I believe that he will awaken the energy and idealism of people who have never been active in public affairs, particularly our young people. I believe that he will also attract skilled, experienced and energetic people to government and will have the sound judgment to put together an outstanding governing team, bringing people together across old boundaries.
"I believe that Barack Obama is the right choice for our nation. My own role in this campaign will be as an advisor - particularly in the field of national security and foreign policy."
Boren:
"I am joining Senator Barack Obama's advisory team on foreign policy and national security because I believe it is my duty as a citizen to do all I can to help our country at this critical moment. Our strength is declining. Eighty-one percent of Americans believe we are headed in the wrong direction. We must act quickly to meet and overcome the challenges we face.
"Our most urgent task is to end the divisions in our country, to stop the political bickering, and to unite our talents and efforts. Americans of all persuasions are pleading with our political leaders to bring us together. I believe Senator Obama is sincerely committed to that effort. He has made a non-partisan approach to all issues a top priority.
"Senator Obama is also a person of sound and good judgment. He had the good judgment more than five years ago to warn against our involvement in this tragic and costly war. He also understands the need to repair our partnerships with other nations and to more effectively use diplomacy to serve our national interests.
"It is my hope that in sharing what I have learned during my time in public service, I will be helping my country."
Obama was scuffed up on Tuesday night. These three endorsements should go a long way to putting back some of the shine.
Do you get the sense, in the endorsing statements, there are a few messages directed at the Clintons?
-essentially confirming my immediate reaction last night. BooMan gave me a tickle and I'm honored we're on the same page.
With no disrespect to real male mice, the little mice - mr. mousy George and mr. mousy Charles, in an appalling display of yellow journalism, - lost their tails and integrity in what is dubbed as "The ABC News Freak Show" - Andrew Sullivan and an "a unmitigated travesty" -Josh Marshall
Get that? The falsely advertised "debate" is over and we're agreed that the network lost the debate - blew America away in what will be known as The Mother of all Freak Shows...an unmitigated travesty.
George and Charles lost among their peers. And that gotta hurt. It's become a scandal. Audio and Video link below.
The Mickey ABC Network's stock has no more value than a dead rat's ass.
Winner is John McCain because ex-Clinton aide George, (he should have recused himself) and elitist Charles water carried for the GOP.
I'm no left wing blogger, but I can only imagine how furious they must be with the debate so far. Nothing on any issues. Just a lot of box-checking on how the candidates will respond to various Republican talking points come the fall. Now I think a lot of those Republican talking points are valid and legitimate. But if I were a "fighting Dem" who thinks all of these topics are despicable distractions from the "real issues," I would find this debate to be nothing but Republican water-carrying.
(bold mine)
I read that Jonah piece last night and my blood pressure rose to dangerous levels. I'm so, so, livid. Words fail. WTF.
My rant wouldn't be complete without a side bar on the candidates, Hillary and Barack. Allow me to digress.
As for Hillary Clinton, her negatives will fall off the charts. That's all she has left. Negatives. I repeat very confidently since last summer: Hillary's campaign will implode.
She.will.be.defeated.
Hillary's attacks on Obama were meant to appeal to undecided super-delegates...."see, see Obama can't win."
Hillary Clinton needs to give up this quest for more power and money. Her time chart is negative. She will not become the nominee, unless by a fluke. And if by fluke she claws to become the nominee, Hillary can't win in November.
Tawdry best describes her. Not my words, but the words of a professor in California- not connected to either camp; he was interviewed by BBC News, World Update, aired on NPR at 5:00 A.M this morning. I tuned in too late to record his name, but he said (in part, paraphrased):
"This campaign has gone on too long and has become tawdry and negative. Sen. Clinton went on the attack... and his lead is insurmountable."
As for Barack Obama, today we are in pain for him. On reflection, win or lose, I see this as a great blessing or karma for Barack. Take your pick.
Americans are a caring people. This debate will garner for Obama a lot of sympathy from both men and women - not that he needs sympathy. He'll recover.
This ABC News 'freak show' is seen as Obama having been treated unfairly. Just imagine 5 against one man? As I write, donations are pouring in from people who never thought of giving to his campaign.
The more damning is this: The collusion was in and fixed against Obama:
"First, when Hannity is feeding Stephanopoulos ideas for debate questions, you know there's a problem. Second, for what it's worth, Obama actually had a pretty compelling response to Hannity's question."
There's no doubt on Hannity's role in this freak show.
Obama entered this debate at a great disadvantage. He prepared for policy issues. He could not have imagined an ambush awaited. Up against two networks!!
Indefensible. Who'd have thought? If only he had known, it's doubtful that he would have agreed to this debate. I'll betcha Hillary was prepped through her connection to mousy George Stephanopoulos. She was just so on the attack. Ya think?
It's the morning after and as a biracial person, I'm still in pain for Obama. Ashamed a leading Network could be so dishonest. Rampant dishonesty.
Here is
A Man who had his hands hog-tied but is expected to defend himself. How Unfair. He could not respond without stepping on his message.
A black man who had to restrain himself, less it be seen as 'a black man attacking a white woman.' Yes, we have rednecks - they have not gone away.
The Mice men decided to nibble at cheese curd twisties, (not real cheese as we say around here). It robbed us of the real last opportunity to hear the candidates debate the pressing issues of the day: an economy that's in meltdown with a war that's pushing the country into bankruptcy; torture approval in the Oval Office that are high crimes and misdemeanors. They just don't want us to know so we can prepare.
What did we get? Once again, a royal "Screw 'em"
More paramount:
flag lapel pins are evidence of patriotism.
a black pastor with a history - his honorable service to his country dismissed.
guilt by association - more stereotyping.
Remind me again. How did we display patriotism before 9/11? The ABC mickey mouse display last night gives credence to those who chose to tune out the lame, lazy, rich fat mice media. Fat mice that nibble away at the fabric of America.
If you are any guide, this was a debacle for the network.
One reader:
This debate was disgusting. But, it only motivated me more and made me realize how very important it is that Obama and the politics that he represents wins this election. I don't make much, but ABC just convinced me to make another small donation to Senator Obama.
And, as a side note, it seems like it would've been better to have had George Will moderate the debate. I have much more faith in his fairness and concern with policy than what these two just put forward.
Another:
This debate was the biggest sham I've ever seen. The first hour was nothing but substance-less nonsense, soft ball questions and prattle.
Another:
The best part of this "debate" (likely the worst I've ever seen) just occurred a few minutes ago when the audience booed Charlie. I can't believe I just sat through 2 hours of that.
AS: How many debate moderators actually get booed on live television? That's how bad it was.
Another:
You can tell Gibson and Stephanopoulous are out of touch. They both don't have to worry about health care. It's why not a single question was asked about the issue that I care about so deeply, and instead hours were spent discussing the inane and insane. As an American who can't find a job because of my health care problems, I'm ashamed of ABC News.
AS: Stephanopoulos was schooled in Morris-Rove politics. Under the tutelage of Hillary Clinton and James Carville. I repeat the obvious:
"No questions on the environment, none on terror, none on interrogation, none on torture, none on education, none on spending, none on healthcare, none on Iran ... but four separate questions in the first hour about a lapel-pin, Bitter-gate, Wright-gate and Ayers. I'm all for keeping candidates on their toes. But this was ridiculous. And now we have affirmative action? Again, it's not illegitimate as such - but the only reason it is asked is to try and trip these people up and make Gibson and Stephanopoulos look smart."
AS: Yes, Clinton narrowly bested Obama. But all you could see was the trainwreck of the network. Don't you miss the League Of Women Voters?
Yes, this is"The trainwreck of the ABC News Neetwork." Normally, after a debate we discuss who won, who lost.
In this "freak show"
America was the loser...sponsored and underwritten by The Mickey Mouse Network's two blind mice. Also losers.
Betcha Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos are wondering what the outrage is all about.
They have not a clue; that they've seriously damaged future political debates.
They have not a clue; that a tsunami wave of change is sweeping this country. They too will be swept aside.
They have not a clue; that you can't kill the concept of Hope. It will always return.
Take comfort Obama. More than 8,000 comments at last night's count when I logged out, plus thousands of emails and phone calls are registered with ABC News.
The collusion has failed. Shoddy. Tawdry. Despicable.
A pop just went off. That's the backfiring you hear directed at the MNN - Mickey News Network..
That's quite a fall out, never before witnessed.
Continue to express your outrage by email, at this link.
Yes to both, but she told friends she has a mission.
The hollow scandal this time is over Obama's empathy with small town America. Yes that's what it is and without the prefix, It depends.
Andrew Sullivan's first reaction was that Obama's choice of words, `bitter and angry' would hurt. On reflection, Andrew has changed his view. In a follow-up entry he puts the question:
The "bitter" spat is gold for Morris-Rove politics, which is why Clinton is exploiting it so baldly. It is exactly the kind of debate that has constructed American politics since Vietnam; it is exactly the kind of politics that Obama has been trying to transcend. Clinton will use anything at this point to destroy Obama's candidacy and message; but by adopting Rovism at its reddest, the Clintons do risk looking too obvious.
Check out the comments in CNN's Politicker. At some point people will realize that the Clintons represent a continuation of the kind of politics that has made a serious engagement with this country's profound problems impossible. Or is acknowledging profound problems now unpatriotic?
Is this election about how to salvage the least worst option in the Iraq disaster? Is it about restoring some kind of fiscal sanity? Is it about doing all we can to unite Americans in a war against Islamic terrorism? Is it about restoring America's compliance with the Geneva Conventions? Or is it again about red-blue culture wars?
We know what the professional political class is comfortable with. We know what Rove and Bush and Penn and Clinton believe. What we will find out soon is if Americans want more of the same. It's a free country - and people can vote. Goodbye to all that? Or hello again - for yet another cycle?
Well, yes. Hillary has over-reached.
More than any other, this hollow flap reveals the Clintons are bitter and their jealousies are stark.
They have reached to new gutter lows, using their No: 1 and No: 2 enemies - Richard Mellon Scaife and Drudge - to channel attacks. Drudge has become an extension of HRC's HQ media resource. getting exclusives - their tax returns, the famous photo of Obama in native garb.
More to it, the Clintons are fuming.
They've been out-campaigned by an upstart...... effing man of the visible minority. No elitist. He has lived and worked in the inner city...drugs - you know the stereotypical. How dare he, this darkie? And how dare we voters buy into his fairy tale promises of hope and change?
How unseemly for a former first lady and ex-president? No thought or care given to the consequences of their campaign behavior on the Party.
In my view, that's the real rub.
Obama's success repudiates, lays bare the Clintons' legacy, their restoration project, their third chance to occupy the White House. It's all about their naked quest for more money, more power. Barack Obama is the threat.
Obama did not wait 2 weeks to respond. He's been offering a masterful campaign.
Brillant was his response. (HT: AsiansVote)
Here's a unscientific survey of how bitter-gate and Obama's response is being received outside of the BooMan community:
A reader at Sullivan's The Daily Dish from link provided.
"I am a rustbelt native. I live near Gary, Indiana and have never lived anywhere else. I'll probably die here.
I read and, more importantly, listened to Barack Obama's response to the Clinton cacophony after his remarks about blue collar/regular people/rustbelt voters. The difference between the two politicians is amazing. One is thoughtful and unafraid while defending a politically risky yet righteous position. The other is just noise.
[.]
Obama's right about guns and religion in that there simply isn't much to do in an economically depressed area but hunt and pray. There's nothing insulting or elitist about this, but people can be easily persuaded that an elitist has indeed insulted them.
That's what worries me. People will forget their interests, will forget that their children are moving away en masse, will forget the political idiocy of the Clintonian hypocrisy that inspires Howard Beale-like angst in all of us. They may forget all of that just for the misguided privilege of feeling insulted.
This is a stretch and taking things a lot out of context. Everyone's been bitter at government since government's were first established.
Just take a look at Congress and the President's approval ratings and tell me people are not bitter.
Ryan G. April 11th, 2008 6:07 pm ET
Obama tells it like it is. Give me harsh truth over pretty lies any day.
Todd April 11th, 2008 6:08 pm ET
Darn right people are bitter, and they have a right to be. CNN has no problem calling the Clinton/Obama fight "bitter", and Clinton has done her part to make it so. But people are bitter over gas prices, iraq, unemployment, foreclosures, the war debt, the environement, immigration issues, 9/11, etc., and as Obama states, they have a right to be bitter. But he offers hope.
Daniel, Plattsburgh, NY April 11th, 2008 6:08 pm ET
Good lord, do I really see the Clinton and McCain campaigns suggesting that people who have lost their jobs due to economic change in the last 25 years aren't bitter? What kind of idiots do they think we are?
Bacusla April 11th, 2008 6:08 pm ET
Tough!
Next!!
Faith - Ohio April 11th, 2008 6:08 pm ET
Clinton...Clinton...CLINTON!!!! Just STOP it!!! Why don't you spend your time cleaning up Bill's mess instead of messing with Barack! Why don't you just continue to under mind the voters of PA as you did us here in Ohio. (I wish I could have my vote back!) They from what I see, seems to like that! I just pray the wake up and realize before April 22nd.
Sam April 11th, 2008 6:08 pm ET
These Clintons need to understand this message loud and clear: whatever you are selling....I ain't buying it.
Hillary's hypocrisy knows no bounds. She's now religious; a church-going believer. Never mind this.
Oh, and she's now for gun rights too. Never mind this.
So, What is Hillary's Mission?
Oh yes, glad you reminded.
Hillary's mission, as she has told friends is:
To save the Democrats from themselves
Wheeeeeeeeeeee. Help me up. I fell off my chair and need to finish this diary. Oh, thanks.
John F. Harris, Politico relates
What Clinton wishes she could say [out loud]
There's nothing to say that the Clintonites are right about Obama's presumed vulnerabilities. But one argument seems indisputably true: Obama is on the brink of the Democratic nomination without having had to confront head-on the evidence about his general election challenges.
We have eyes to see the challenges. However, Obama is still standing. He transcends.. People - Democrats, Independents and Republicans - want to say "goodbye to all that; the Bushes/Cheney/McCains and goodbye to the Clintons too." We're fatigued.
I have 10,000 reasons why I'm compelled to conclude that the media - Harris, Vandehei, and the Ben Smiths of this world - are all out of touch with Mr. and Mrs. Joe MainStreet America.
Hillary has not only over-reached. She's over-done...from day one and as with a burnt roast, we'll throw her out. Perhaps, Pennsylvania may lead her to the door.
And because no omen goes unnoted at Deathwatch, we're obligated to mention that a Clinton campaign office in Terre Haute, Ind., caught fire last night. Who needs tea leaves when we have flaming headquarters?
