This blog is no longer active as of October 31, 2011
Some have Obama on top, some have McCain on top… it’s crazy… go read it and figure it up. Chuck Todd, I’m not.
Technorati Tags: Barack Obama, Conservative, Democrat, Democrats, Election ’08, Election 2008, Liberal, Liberals, Obama, Opinion, Politics, Polls, Republican, Republicans, Stupidity
The reason is, because sheer stupidity of it all, is about deafening.
When Obama comes out with some specifics of HOW exactly he is going to change this country from this stiff veer that it is taking off this Bush-made cliff, then I might have something positive to say about him, but all I ever hear is vagueness, idealism, and smoke and mirrors.
I don’t want to be told to “Just go to Obama’s Website”, I want to hear it out of HIS mouth, of how HE intends to change this country, I want to hear specifics. Not just fluffy speeches, but cold, hard, facts.
Until I hear this, he’s nothing more, to me, than just some inexperienced, empty suit, Idealist politician.
Technorati Tags: Barack Obama, Democrat, Democrats, Election ’08, Election 2008, John McCain, Liberal, Liberals, Libertarian, McCain, Obama, Opinion, Politics, Stupidity, White House
Quote from the New York Daily News:
Hillary Clinton will join Barack Obama for a joint appearance in Washington next week to persuade her donors to begin giving to the Democrats’ nominee, the Daily News has learned.
It’s the first known plan to bring together the victor and vanquished from the Democrat primary race and put their pledges of unity for the fall campaign into action.
Jonathan Mantz, Clinton’s national finance director, sent top Clinton fundraisers an e-mail today inviting them to the event on June 26.
“As we move forward, we invite you to join us for a National Finance Committee meeting with both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama on Thursday, June 26th in Washington, D.C., to discuss how we can work together to support Barack Obama and the Democratic Party,” Mantz wrote.
“Hillary ran for President because she wants to put this country on the right track,” Mantz wrote. “She continues to fight and stand strong for our values and priorities and will do everything she can to unify the party and to elect Barack Obama the next President of the United States.”
I just wonder how much Racism, fear mongering and Republican style attacks will be used at this little get together? I wonder if Hillary will whine publicly about how she was entitled to the Presidency, because she was a woman?
It is to wonder….
Technorati Tags: Barack Obama, Conservative, Democrat, Democrats, Election ’08, Election 2008, Funny, Hillary, Hillary Clinton, Humor, Liberal, Liberals, News, Obama, Opinion, Politics, Stupidity
Me and my Dad are going to Car Race today. So, here are the Sunday stories that are gathering attention and should be big stories today.
—-
Obama mentions the word “Gun” at a private fundraiser and the media and blogging world, especially on the right, flips their proverbial cork.
Iowa is flooded and people are starting to call it another Katrina. I just know the left is going to have a field day with this one.
Moqtada al-Sadr is recalibrating to stage more attacks, so says the Liberal Media. This I got to see. Of course, the Left will use this to say we need to leave Iraq now.
John McCain writers a thesis in 1974, about war and the New York Times discovers it and flips their cork and is now trying to paint John McCain as a warmonger. Grasp at straw much guys?
Black Conservatives are conflicted about Obama. Go Figure.
The Saudi’s are planning to increase oil production. Well, it’s about freakin’ time!
Does Google hate America?
I apologize for the stoppage of Blogging. But the Tim Russert story kind of jarred me quite a bit. in fact, I had to turn the TV to CNN, I just couldn’t not bear watching the stuff at MSNBC anymore. (Yeah, I know, I fired up John Cole for what he said, there’s a difference between me saying I had to change the channel, and taking a nasty swipe at a dead man.)
However, the world, the news, and life does go on, while I will miss Tim Russert’s show and his style of punditry, I must move on….
It seems that things are changing in Iraq.
The Report from the Washington Post:
The Bush administration’s Iraq policy suffered two major setbacks Friday when Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki publicly rejected key U.S. terms for an ongoing military presence and anti-American Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr called for a new militia offensive against U.S. forces.
During a visit to Jordan, Maliki said negotiations over initial U.S. proposals for bilateral political and military agreements had "reached a dead end." While he said talks would continue, his comments fueled doubts that the pacts could be reached this year, before the Dec. 31 expiration of a United Nations mandate sanctioning the U.S. role in Iraq.
The moves by two of Iraq’s most powerful Shiite leaders underscore how the presence of U.S. troops has become a central issue for Iraqi politicians as they position themselves for provincial elections later this year. Iraqis across the political spectrum have grown intolerant of the U.S. presence, but the dominant Shiite parties — including Maliki’s Dawa party — are especially fearful of an electoral challenge from new, grass-roots groups.
CNN’s Michael Ware, who is in Iraq offers this interesting perspective:
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jo54NhiyQig&hl=en]
If Ware is even correct and these talks continue to stall, I look for Bush to just pull our troops out and let Iraq go at it alone. I just do not think that Bush is going to dump the Iraq War into the laps of the Democrats. I just do not think that he wants that on his legacy. I could be wrong, but if this is case, I got a sneaking suspicion you will see a unilateral withdrawal of our troops out of Iraq, before Bush leaves office.
More via Memeorandum
Yikes! This isn’t good, at all…
Quote:
So much for party unity: As Florida Dems prepare for Saturday’s Jefferson-Jackson dinner aimed at bringing the party "together once and for all," a spat over the Obama campaign’s decision to replace some already-designated Florida delegates with Obama backers has intensified.
And how. DNC member Jon Ausman late Thursday e-mailed Dems (and reporters) choice sections of what he says were e-mails from Obama’s Florida finance chair Kirk Wagar — in which Wagar curses Ausman out and criticizes Sen. Bill Nelson and party director Leonard Joseph.
The highlights: "You (Jon Ausman) f&^%ed us. We are dealing with it. You need to accept the fact that you f*&^ed us."
And of Nelson: "I am getting very sick of (Senator) Nelson making a bad situation worse."
Said Ausman to Wagar: "We are at a point in time when we need to heal and come together. Help me understand how these messages, which you have sent to me in writing, help Senator Obama’s campaign."
Wagar sent out an e-mail shortly after, apologizing for the profanity, but suggesting Ausman had used "out of context snippets from some ongoing and sometimes heated arguments we have had over the course of this campaign.
"I apologize for the profanity that you were subjected to," he said in the e-mail. "It is a vice of mine that I try to minimize but seems to rear it’s head with more frequency when I deal with Jon."
Of Nelson and Joseph, Wagar said he disagreed with them on seating the delegates, but "did not malign them in private nor in the excerpts Jon blasted out. I have worked with Leonard for years, long before he came to Florida, and I have worked very hard for and with Senator Nelson. On this issue we disagreed and despite Jon’s effort to twist it into something more, it isn’t." – Dems delegate turns ugly (Via Naked Politics)
Hope! Change! Or I’ll kick your ass! *hehe*
Others: Wake up America, Hot Air and EconoPundit
Transcript: (H/T K.O’s NewsHole)
Finally tonight, as promised, a Special Comment on Senator John McCain’s conclusion that it’s "not too important" when American forces come home from Iraq.
Thoughts, offered more in sorrow, than in anger.
For two full days now, the Senator and his supporters have been outraged at what they see as the subtraction of context from this extraordinary remark.
This is, sadly, the excuse of our time, for everything.
Still. If the Senator claims truncation, we will correct that, first.
"A lot of people," Matt Lauer began, "now say the surge is working."
"Anybody who knows the facts on the ground say that," the Senator interjected.
"If it’s now working, Senator," Matt continued, "do you now have a better estimate of when American forces can come home from Iraq?"
"No," answered McCain. "But that’s not too important. What’s important is the casualties in Iraq. Americans are in South Korea. Americans are in Japan. American troops are in Germany.
"That’s all fine. American casualties and the ability to withdraw. We will be able to withdraw.
"General Petraeus is going to tell us in July when he thinks we are. But the key to it is we don’t want any more Americans in harm’s way. And that way they will be safe, and serve our country, and come home with honor and victory – not in defeat, which is what Senator Obama’s proposal would have done. And I’m proud of them, and they’re doing a great job. And we are succeeding. And it’s fascinating that Senator Obama still doesn’t realize it."
And there is the context of what Senator McCain said.
Well… not quite, Senator.
The full context, is that the Iraq you see, is a figment of your imagination.
This is not a war about "honor and victory," Sir.
This is a war you, and the President you support and seek to succeed, conned this nation into.
Yes, sir.
You.
Of the prospect of war in Iraq, you said, quote, "I believe that success will be fairly easy."
John McCain… September 24th… 2002.
"I believe that we can win an overwhelming victory in a very short period of time."
John McCain… September 29th… 2002.
Of the ouster of Saddam and the Baathists:
"There’s no doubt in my mind that once these people are gone, that we will be welcomed as liberators."
John McCain… March 24th… 2003.
Asked, about a long-term commitment in Iraq, quote, "are you talking about something in terms of South Korea, for instance, where you would expect U.S. troops to be in Iraq for decades?"
"No," you answered. "I don’t think decades, but I think years. A little straight talk, I think years. And I hope that we can gradually reduce that presence."
John McCain… March 18th… 2004.
You were asked about the troops, and the future.
"I would hope that we could bring them all home. I would hope that we would probably leave some military advisers, as we have in other countries, to help them with
their training and equipment and that kind of stuff."…I think one of our big problems has been the fact that many Iraqis resent American military presence.
And I don’t pretend to know exactly Iraqi public opinion. But as soon as we can reduce our visibility as much as possible, the better I think it is going to be."
John McCain… January 31st… 2005
When a speaker at your town hall, five months ago, referenced the President’s forecast that we might stay in Iraq for 50 years, you cut him off.
"Make it a hundred! We’ve been in Japan for 60 years. We’ve been in South Korea 50 years or so. That would be fine with me. As long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed. That’s fine by me…"
John McCain… January 3rd… 2008.
And your forecast of your hypothetical first term.
"By January, 2013, America has welcomed home most of the servicemen and women who have sacrificed terribly so that America might be secure in her freedom. The Iraq war has been won."
John McCain… May 15th… 2008.
That, Senator McCain, is context.
You have attested to: a fairly easy success; an overwhelming victory in a very short period of time; in which we would be welcomed as liberators; which you assured us would not require our troops stay for decades but merely for years; from which we could bring them all home, since you noted many Iraqis resent American military presence; in which all those troops coming home will also stay there, not being injured, for a hundred years; but most will be back by 2013; and the timing of their return, is… not… that… important.
That, Senator McCain, is context.
And that, Senator McCain, is madness.
The Government Accountability Office just released a study Tuesday that concludes that one out of every ten soldiers sent to Iraq, takes with them medical problems "severe enough to significantly limit their ability to fight."
In five years, we have now sent 43-thousand of them to war even though… they were already wounded.
And when they come home, is… not… that… important.
—
Jalal al Din al Sagir, a member of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, and Ali al Adeeb, of the rival Dawa Political Party, gave a series of interviews last week about the particulars of this country’s demand for a "Status of Forces" agreement with Iraq — a treaty …which Mr. Bush does not intend to show Congress before he signs it.
The Iraqi politicians say the treaty demands Iraq’s consent to the establishment of nearly double the number of U-S military bases in Iraq — from about 30, to 58, and from temporary, to permanent.
Those will be American men and women who must, of necessity, staff these bases – staff them, in Mr. McCain’s M-C Escher dream world in which our people can all come home while they stay there for a hundred years but they’ll be back by 2013.
And when they come home, is not… that… important.
—
Last year, a 20-year old soldier from the Bronx, on the day of his re-deployment to a second tour in Iraq, said he just couldn’t face the smell of burning flesh again. So, Jonathan Aponte paid a hit man 500 dollars… to shoot him in the knee.
Mount Sinai Hospital in New York reported treating a patient identifying himself as another Iraq-bound soldier, who claimed he had accidentally swallowed a pen at the bus station. No one doubted his story until examinations proved there was a second pen in his stomach bearing the logo of Greyhound Bus Lines.
In 2006, says his sister, a 24-year old Army Specialist from Washington State, on the eve of his second deployment, strapped a pack full of tools to his back, and then jumped off the roof of his house, injuring his spine.
And when they come home — or more correctly all those like them who did not risk death or disability to avoid going back — when they come home, is not… that… important.
You’ve sold them all out, Senator.
You.
You, whose sacrifice for this country was as all-encompassing and as horrible as the rest of us can only imagine in our darkest moments.
You, who survived, so that you could make America a better place where young men did not have to go and die in pointless wars… or be maimed… or be held prisoner… or have to hire hit-men to shoot them in the knee because that couldn’t be worse.
You… who should know better.
—
Where, Senator, is the man who once said "veterans hate war more than anyone else, because veterans know, because veterans know these brave Americans, and others, know, that there is nothing more painful than the loss of a comrade."
Where is he, Sir?
Where is the man who described that ineffable truth?
Oh, so long ago you touched the essence of the reality of Iraq. Your comments about your lost comrades — yesterday.
The men and women in Iraq, today, Senator — they are your comrades, too.
And you are condemning them to die.
To die, for your misdirection, for Mr. Bush’s lies — for whoever makes the money off building 58 permanent American bases and all the weapons and all the bullets and all the wiring so costly and so slip-shod that it electrocutes our comrades as they step, not to fight freedom’s enemies, but into the shower at the base.
That, Senator, that is context.
It is an easy thing to dismiss Senator McCain as a sad and befuddled figure, already challenging for some kind of campaign record for malaprops.
Just yesterday in Philadelphia he answered Senator Obama, not by defending or explaining his own "not that important" remark, but by seizing upon Obama’s "bitter" remark – or trying to.
Obama had foolishly said that some, in despair, in small towns, cling to their religion and their guns.
Senator McCain vowed he’d go to those towns and tell them, "I don’t agree with Senator Obama that they cling to their religion and the Constitution because they’re bitter."
It was hard not to dismiss with a laugh, Senator McCain, or any Republican, for even accidentally implying that he’s clung to the Constitution — not after the last seven years.
It was hard, the day before, not to become almost bemused when the Senator tried to say he would veto every single bill with ear-marks, but wound up, instead, vowing "I will veto every single beer."
It was hard, this week, not to laugh at how Senator McCain could offer any serious defense against the accusation that he is running for President Bush’s third term, when a 2006 interview suddenly surfaced in which McCain said he would consider Dick Cheney for a position in a McCain administration.
"I don’t know if I would want him as Vice President. He and I have the same strengths. But to serve in other capacities? Hell, yeah."
These are all very funny, in a macabre yet unthreatening way.
And then one remembers Senator McCain’s inability to separate Sunni and Shia, or his insistence that Iran is training Al-Qaeda for service in Iraq, and then being corrected about it, and then saying the same thing again anyway.
And then one is, inevitably, drawn back again to the overlooked substance of yesterday’s remark…
"If (the surge) is now working, Senator, do you now have a better estimate of when American forces can come home from Iraq?"
"No."
No?
The surge is working and even that still tells Senator McCain nothing about when we can ransom our soldiers?
Wasn’t that the ultimate purpose of the surge? To get them out?
If we cannot tell — if McCain cannot even guess — doesn’t that, by definition, mean… the surge isn’t working?
—
And ultimately we are drawn back to the "not… too… important" remark, in its full context:
The context of the kaleidoscope of confused rhetoric, and endless non sequitur, and mutually exclusive conclusions — and what they add up to: a veritable tragedy, a microcosm of the American tragedy that is Iraq, a tragedy of a man who himself will never understand… "the context."
Your tragedy, Senator McCain?
No. I’m sorry.
This tragedy… is of Justin Mixon of Bogalusa, Louisiana.
And it’s of Christopher McCarthy of Virginia Beach.
It’s of Quincy Green of El Paso, and Joshua Waltenbaugh of Ford City, P.A.
The tragedy is of Shane Duffy of Taunton Mass, and Jonathan Emard of Mesquite, Texas.
It’s of Cody Legg of Escondido in California, and David Hurst of Fort Sill in Oklahoma.
The tragedy is of Thomas Duncan the 3rd of Rowlett, Texas, and Tyler Pickett of Saratoga, Wyoming.
And who are they, Senator?
They are ten Americans…. who have died in Iraq… since the first of this month. There are four more. The Defense Department has not yet identified the others.
And while you, Senator, may ask for all the context you can get, those ten men… will never know any of it.
Because the true context here, is that if you could ask those American war heroes, or the family and the friends that loved them, if they have a better estimate of when American forces can come home from Iraq…
They could rightly say, "No. But that’s… not… too… important."
Good night, and good luck.
Yes I do know about the big story.
The right is howling about the this ruling being the end of America as we know it. The left is hailing it as a major victory. Bush said he disagreed on the ruling.
I have mixed feelings on it, I seriously doubt that this rule will affect much with the terrorists, which the United States has a watertight case against.
It will affect one’s that the United States does not have a watertight case against. The United States will not be able to hold anyone, who is merely suspected of terrorism any longer.
Either way, I believe this debate will be raging long after the little man, who started this whole mess, is out of office.
So much for that idea! Check it out…:
Quote:
Since Hillary Clinton decided to concede the Democratic nomination to Barack Obama last week, Obama has established a lead over Republican John McCain in general-election polling. Obama’s gains have come more from women than men, though he has picked up among both groups in recent days.
Obama’s lead among women has now expanded from five percentage points to 13, while his deficit among men has shrunk from six points to two.
These figures are based on aggregated Gallup Poll Daily tracking interviews with national registered voters conducted May 27-June 2 (the week immediately before Obama clinched the nomination on June 3), which showed Obama and McCain tied at 46%, and June 5-9 (the five days since it was reported that Clinton would suspend her campaign), which show Obama ahead, 48% to 42%. Obama clinched the nomination on the evening of June 3, and the news media reported Clinton would suspend her campaign on the evening of June 4. Thus, the data give a clear picture of voter support before and after Clinton’s exit.
While campaigning for president, Clinton demonstrated an especially strong appeal to women. She led McCain by 52% to 40% in her final full week as a candidate, exactly equal to the average since mid-March. By comparison, Obama held only an average 47% to 42% lead over McCain among women during the same time span. At least for now, he seems to be matching Clinton’s performance among women versus McCain, given his current 13-point lead among female voters.
One of Clinton’s core groups of supporters during the nomination phase of the campaign was older women. During the last few days of her active candidacy, Clinton led McCain by 51% to 41% among women aged 50 and older, while Obama trailed McCain among this group, 46% to 43%.
Since Clinton suspended her campaign, older women’s vote preferences have shifted toward Obama, so that he now enjoys a six-point advantage over McCain. Obama Gains Among Women After Clinton Exit (via Gallup)
I think at this point, the best John McCain can do go after the older White Conservatives who distrust Obama and the Military crowd. The startling thing about this poll, is it was taken not long after Hillary said she was dropping out.
Call it a hunch, but I tend to believe, that Juan McSame is going to get his ass handed to him on a platter in November.
I mean, Bush is leaving office in 7 months, so why bother? Nice waste of taxpayers money if you ask me.
Of course, Dennis represents the far lefty loon fringe of the Democratic Party. He is the type that Fox News and every other Conservative talking head accuse Senator Barack Obama of being.
Technorati Tags: Dennis Kucinich, Liberal, Liberals, Democrats, Democrat, Bush, Cheney, White House, Politics, Opinion, Impeachment,
I’m still working on this old beast. I’m at the defragging stage. (the computer I mentioned earlier)
Technorati Tags: McCain, Obama, John McCain, Politics, Election 2008, Election ’08
The point is, there are hatemongers on both sides of the political fence.
…..and the hate is wrong.
Technorati Tags: Barack Obama, blacks, Conservative, Democrat, Democrats, Election ’08, Election 2008, Identity Politics, John McCain, Liberal, Liberals, Obama, Opinion, Politics, racism, Republican, Republicans, Stupidity
Holy cow!!!!
Mark Penn in the New York Times Writes:
Perhaps the most frustrating part of losing a close race is thinking about what else you could have done to win. You replay the campaign over and over again in your head. As an adviser to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, I sure do.
But the endless armchair chatter often obscures what actually needed to be done.
The conventional criticisms of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign are these: she had no message; she ran just on experience; she should have shown more of her warmer side; she was too negative; President Clinton’s campaigning hurt her; and she presented herself as inevitable. It is amazing she got any votes at all.
So let’s take on a few of the myths. Even schoolchildren got the message that Mrs. Clinton was ready to be president on Day One. As a result of her campaigning and ads, people saw her as a strong commander in chief, a good steward of the economy and a champion for people who needed one.
As the primaries came to an end, she had built a coalition of working-class voters, women, older voters and Latinos, and it held together — and even strengthened — as Barack Obama gained enough superdelegates to put him over the top. Nearly 18 million people responded to her message with their votes. But she went from a lead of 120 superdelegates in early February to a deficit of 40 before last Tuesday.
Experience was a major part of the campaign message, but far from the only one. She talked about the strength it takes to make change happen. Her campaign plans were bold: universal health care, universal preschool, new retirement accounts, a strategic energy fund. She was the first to jump on the housing crisis. She showed a relentless focus on substance and issues, which appealed to working-class and middle-class voters.
She did show her warmer side, and campaigned often with her mom and with her daughter. But it was her strength as a warrior that voters saw — as they had in New York — as she won primary after primary against the odds.
President Clinton tirelessly served as her adviser, fund-raiser and relentless campaigner. He drew enormous crowds and gained significant votes for his wife. In Pennsylvania, for example, she won by almost double the typical margin in the rural and suburban counties he visited.
The Clintons have spent their lives fighting as much as any leaders in their generation for greater equality across racial and gender lines. I believe nothing they said was ever intended to divide the country by race. Any suggestion to the contrary was perhaps the greatest injustice done to them in this campaign.
Are there a lot of other things the campaign could have done differently? Of course. We should have taken on Mr. Obama more directly and much earlier, and we needed a different kind of operation to win caucuses and to retain the support of superdelegates. From more aggressively courting young people earlier to mobilizing the full power of women, there are things that could have been done differently.
While everyone loves to talk about the message, campaigns are equally about money and organization. Having raised more than $100 million in 2007, the Clinton campaign found itself without adequate money at the beginning of 2008, and without organizations in a lot of states as a result. Given her successes in high-turnout primary elections and defeats in low-turnout caucuses, that simple fact may just have had a lot more to do with who won than anyone imagines.
And sometimes your opponent just runs a good campaign.
….and sometimes you’re an idiot. No, that would be all the damn time.
Wow, talk about living in denial! I wrote earlier why Hillary lost. Go read it, because this douche bag is so out of touch with reality, that it is almost pitiful. I suppose we will be hearing this sort naval grazing for the next month or so. Gosh, it is quite sad to watch, isn’t it?
Now this could be very bad, if this catches on in the MSM.
Go Look Update: Page removed, Wow! That was fast!
Just in case, they pull it, here it is:
Now, any other time, I would not have given this a second glance, but seeing that Fox News just did an report on the ties Obama has to a former PLO member Rashid Khalid, this could bite Obama in the behind in a big way.
You would think that someone like Obama would employ someone in that campaign to actively monitor the site and watch the log files for sites like this to spring up. Because you just know that the Hillary supporters, especially the more militant ones, will create sites like this to torpedo his chances of getting into the White House.
Is it disgusting? For someone running for the White House? Yes. Am I surprised? No.
Others: Little Green Footballs, Doug Ross, Israel Matzav and The Other McCain
I remember blogging about this way back on March 22, 2008, Before the MSM started talking about it. But just as well, it seems that Fox News is now talking about it.
Seen over at HotAir.com:
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gW4ZcY-VHA4&hl=en]
While the piece is a bit overly dramatic, which does appeal to those on the far right. It does paint a stark picture of the friends and relationships of the current Democratic Party candidate for President of the United States.
Cross-Posted @ The American Nationalist News Service
An interesting assessment, although a bit over blown, I believe.
Quote:
Senator Clinton did all she needed to do: thanked everyone and unequivocally endorsed and supported Barack Obama. One theme stuck out to me: she essentially said that even though she was careful to avoid ever saying that she was running because she was a woman and that people should vote for her because she is a woman, that’s what she believes in private. That’s the theme she spoke of most compellingly. She is Ellen
Malcolm’s spiritual sister. In the end, Clinton remains wedded to the identity politics of her generation and her time. It’s a powerful message after so many long decades and centuries in which women have been denied full equality in law and society. It’s a necessary message and a moral message. But it becomes circular and self-defeating when it becomes its own rationale.
I think history will show that she didn’t quite have the talent to do it on her own steam, but that she made it much easier for another woman to become president one day. Her two biggest problems: She first married a man who was her political superior and was then defeated by one. She is a very talented politician but it was her fate to find her career hemmed in by two even more talented ones: Bill and Barack. She made up for it all with enormous hard work, diligence and ruthlessness. At any other moment, she would have won. But this is history and politics at the highest level. You cannot defeat such a moment if you are a Salieri. And she had to deal with two Mozarts.
Buh-bye – "Yes She Did" – (Via The Daily Dish By Andrew Sullivan)
I somewhat agree with this, But I wouldn’t compare Hillary to Salieri or even her competitors to Mozart. The reason Hillary’s campaign failed is because of the abject idiots who were running the show. Mark Penn, Patty Solis Doyle, the factions within the campaign, the leaks of the infighting, and the list goes on and on…
The honest truth is that Hillary Clinton somehow or another thought that because her husband was the former President, that she somehow was just going to waltz into the nomination for President, however when Barack Obama jumped out front, and beat Hillary in a few of the primaries, Hillary’s campaign had zero clue as to how to deal with it.
Not to mention the fact that Hillary’s campaign, when threatened, began to play the feminist card, the race card, the fear-mongering card, the “Obama is a Muslim” Card, and every other damn card out there, only to see it fly back in their face and hurt their campaign.
Lastly, Hillary Clinton lost for a very simple reason. Because of what she represents, and that is old politics. The Clintons are yesterday’s news, the old kind of Politics, the “slash and burn” style of elections, and people saw that, (I say this in a honest tone and not mockingly….) they really want change, hope, and a new direction, and I am afraid that Hillary was seen as someone from the old school of Politics. She, as some felt, represented the 1990’s era of Liberalism, and people wanted something new.
Oddly enough, it sounds to me like Sullivan is delivering a final swift kick in the rear, rather than offering an object Political assessment……..and he gets paid for this? Quite bizarre, if you ask me.
Others: PoliGazette, Outside The Beltway, Corrente, Cliff Schecter, Fumbling Toward Divinity, About.com US Politics, Power Line, Comments from Left Field, Taylor Marsh and Crooks and Liars (H/T Memeorandum)
Silver: AP for Publishing Biased Articles
Bronze: Bill O’. for using NewsBusters Articles for his show.
Gold: Senator Joe Lieberman for referring to the Democratic Party as the Democrat Party.
The truth comes out.
Via The Star-Ledger- Andrews says he heard racist strategy from Clinton camp
U.S. Rep. Rob Andrews, who supported Hillary Clinton throughout the primary season, disclosed he received a phone call shortly before the April 22 Pennsylvania primary from a top member of Clinton’s organization and that the caller explicitly discussed a strategy of winning over Jewish voters by exploiting tensions between Jews and African-Americans.
"There have been signals coming out of the Clinton campaign that have racial overtones that indeed disturb me," Andrews said at his campaign headquarters in Cherry Hill Tuesday night after he lost his bid for the Democratic U.S. Senate nomination.
"Frankly, I had a private conversation with a high-ranking person in the campaign … that used a racial line of argument that I found very disconcerting. It was extremely disconcerting given the rank of this person. It was very disturbing."
Andrews said the phone call came after he angered the Clinton camp by making some positive comments about Obama. He would not disclose the caller’s name because of the private nature of the conversation.
The Obama camp declined to comment. Clinton’s campaign issued an angry response to Andrews, who once was charged with lobbying other members of Congress to support her.
"Comments like these, coming so soon after Congressman Andrews’ crushing defeat, are sad and divisive," said Clinton’s chief national spokesman, Phil Singer.
Andrews stood by his statements and said: "I would hope that all Democrats can put this divisiveness behind them. I’m glad the Clinton campaign is finally about to change its tone." He said he made his comments only after his primary loss to Sen. Frank Lautenberg because "I didn’t want people to think I was trying to win over Obama supporters in the primary."
I suspected as such, but now it has been confirmed. Hillary’s camp wanted to effectively divide the Democrat Party, and pit Jews and against blacks.
A very sad thing indeed, shows just how desperate that they really were.
No wonder she lost. This ought to serve as lesson to anyone thinking of running for President, you cannot pit to groups against one another and be elected President.
Ah, Identity Politics, Don’t ya just love it?
It’s about time. But she finally did it. Admitted that she has been beaten.
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton will endorse Senator Barack Obama on Saturday, bringing a close to her 17-month campaign for the White House, aides said. Her decision came after Democrats urged her on Wednesday to leave the race and allow the party to coalesce around Mr. Obama. – Clinton to End Bid and Endorse Obama (Via NYTimes.com)
I’ve also read and heard on MSNBC last night that her backers actually had to contact members of the Senate and House to have them urge her, at the stongest terms possible, that she needed to drop out and release her super-delegates to Obama. I mean, how damn hard headed does a person have to be, when your backers have to ask members of congress to get you to stop, now that’s a hard-headed woman there man!
Here is her “Swan Song” E-mail that was sent out:
I wanted you to be one of the first to know: on Saturday, I will hold an event in Washington D.C. to thank everyone who has supported my campaign. Over the course of the last 16 months, I have been privileged and touched to witness the incredible dedication and sacrifice of so many people working for our campaign. Every minute you put into helping us win, every dollar you gave to keep up the fight meant more to me than I can ever possibly tell you.
On Saturday, I will extend my congratulations to Senator Obama and my support for his candidacy. This has been a long and hard-fought campaign, but as I have always said, my differences with Senator Obama are small compared to the differences we have with Senator McCain and the Republicans.
I have said throughout the campaign that I would strongly support Senator Obama if he were the Democratic Party’s nominee, and I intend to deliver on that promise.
When I decided to run for president, I knew exactly why I was getting into this race: to work hard every day for the millions of Americans who need a voice in the White House.
I made you — and everyone who supported me — a promise: to stand up for our shared values and to never back down. I’m going to keep that promise today, tomorrow, and for the rest of my life.
I will be speaking on Saturday about how together we can rally the party behind Senator Obama. The stakes are too high and the task before us too important to do otherwise.
I know as I continue my lifelong work for a stronger America and a better world, I will turn to you for the support, the strength, and the commitment that you have shown me in the past 16 months. And I will always keep faith with the issues and causes that are important to you.
In the past few days, you have shown that support once again with hundreds of thousands of messages to the campaign, and again, I am touched by your thoughtfulness and kindness.
I can never possibly express my gratitude, so let me say simply, thank you.
Sincerely,
Hillary
There’s quite a bit of talk about this, more than I can ever say, because really, I could care less, I am not voting for Obama or McCain, anyhow, here is all the Bloggers who are talking about this: CNN, Law Blog, Outside The Beltway, The Swamp, Fox News, Washington Post, ABCNEWS, TVNewser, The Caucus, The Democratic Daily, Boston Globe, Lawyers, Guns and Money, Sister Toldjah, Jack and Jill Politics, The Field, The Belmont Club, BlueOregon, NewsBusters.org, Taylor Marsh, Political Radar, Crooks and Liars, Talking Points Memo, PoliBlog (TM), LiberalOasis, TIME.com, TalkLeft, Wake up America, Donklephant and TPM Election Central and more via Memeorandum
The Media and Blogs are reporting that Obama friend was convicted on 16 of the 24 charges leveled against him.
The obvious question is, how hard will the Right Wing noise machine try and tie Obama to this guy to try and discredit him from getting Presidency.
The RNC wasted no time at all:
RNC chairman Mike Duncan issued this statement:
On the day Barack Obama hoped to unite his party after wheezing over the finish line and claiming the Democrat nomination, a jury in his hometown of Chicago convicted his longtime friend and fundraiser Tony Rezko of multiple felonies. This is further proof that Obama’s high-flying rhetoric is just that and in no way represents the kind of change our nation demands. Today’s verdict and Obama’s friendship with Rezko raise serious questions about whether he has the judgment to serve as president.
No more than John McCain with his lobbyist ties, especially the one he had an affair with.
My take on it all:
Obama sounded very Presidential, Hillary did the swan song thing… She’s not making any decisions tonight.
Grandpa McSame told another bed time story……Even the Conservatives/Republicans hated it!
Of course, in the General, you can expect the attacks on Obama to continue.
Should be an interesting race, come this November.
I will be away tomorrow, Me and my Father will be out doing some work. So, I will be posting later in the afternoon. Until then….
Good Night and Good Luck
Putting politics aside for a moment. There is some sad news to report. Senator Robert Byrd, who is 90 years old, has been admitted to the Hospital.
90 years old people! If and when I happen to live to 90 years old, I hope I am able to speak, much less walk, and he is still a Senator! Holy Hell! 
Hang in there Senator, I think I can speak for all the Blogs, Democrat, Republican, Conservative and Liberal and everything in between, that we’re ALL pulling for you.
Get well soon and get your butt back up there and keep them idiot Right Wingers in line! 
Good Thoughts and Prayers headed his way from here. I would assume there is some coming from all corners of the Blogging world. 
Seems the Liberal sissy Moonbats have no love for one another. 
This comes via Ann Althouse.
As anybody with high-speed Internet knows, MyDD and Daily Kos sit at the top of the liberal Netroots movement, which over the last five years has made astonishing strides in its campaign to transform the Democratic Party into a hard-fighting, proudly liberal, and, most importantly, victorious entity. Though their websites offer distinct communities and commentaries, and though they have very different personalities, MyDD founder Jerome Armstrong (a former astrologer) and Kos’s Markos Moulitsas (a former Army man) have always gotten along–the two co-authored a 2006 book, Crashing the Gate, about the rise of their movement. Their bond has been rooted mostly in common foes: Republicans, namby-pamby Democrats, the Iraq War, divisive "identity politics," and the centrist Democratic Leadership Council. But the harmony that existed between MyDD and Kos since the birth of the Netroots no longer exists today, and a bitter internecine struggle within the progressive blogosphere is to blame. Just as bilious in tone as previous fights with Republicans or Joe Lieberman, it has revealed fault lines in the movement that will be tough to cover back up. There have been charges of misogyny and of bullying, and some longtime members have walked away from their cause altogether. And what’s at the heart of it all is that most loaded of questions: Barack or Hillary?
[….]
After announcing her departure from the site, Alegre was the subject of insults by dozens of commenters. Moulitsas fumed on the site’s front page, "People expect me to give a damn that a bunch of whiny posters ‘go on strike’ and leave in a huff. When I don’t give a damn, people get angry that their expectations aren’t being met." Of course, characterizing Clinton supporters, especially female Clinton supporters, as "whiny," didn’t sit well with many. A Maryland mother of two in her mid-40s, Alegre said she won’t publicize her real name because she fears harassment from anti-Clinton bloggers and commenters.
There’s no doubt that the tone of the Netroots’ Clinton-bashing has veered rather far from policy substance. After the Huffington Post scoop, Daily Kos front page writer Dana Houle wrote a bizarre diary (one he didn’t post to the homepage) recounting how his impressions of Hillary Clinton had changed since 1992, when he saw Bill Clinton give a speech at the University of Michigan. "It was the night I learned the term MILF, and it was applied to Hillary Clinton," wrote Houle. In the same post, he described seeing a couple in the crowd at the Clinton speech engaged in a sex act. Later Houle, who is 43 and was once chief-of-staff for New Hampshire Congressman Paul Hodes, brushed off the suggestion that sexualizing Clinton had been inappropriate. "Some people will look for a reason to be outraged no matter what," he explained, telling me that most of Clinton’s support in the liberal blogosphere comes from marginal writers.
However, Ann Althouse disagrees:
Really? Upper middle class? I can believe there are more men than women, but enough to make it "relatively homogenous"?
She has a point, I did not care of Barry’s style either, Being a former Conservative-Minded Democrat, He lacked substance, this was before all the Jeremiah Wright nonsense came out. He never could directly answer a question. He would always, and still does, dance around direct questions, he has zero substance, it is all flash and glam and personality. He might be a great person, but if he has no substance, what good is he? Nobody seems to want to address that question.
The answer is simply this, the Democrat Party is all about entitlements, Hillary is a Woman, she seems to believe that she is entitled to be President, because she was Bill Clinton’s wife and because she is a woman, because she has a vagina, that makes her entitled to be President. The same way with Barry, He is a black man, He believes that he is entitled to be President, because of the injustices that were perpetuated against his people over 300 years ago, that makes B. Hussein Obama entitled to be President. Never mind that the fact that he is an empty suit with zero political experience. Never mind the fact that he did little or nothing of great impact in the Chicago senate, that is unless you count the cocaine snorting and gay sex. However, because he is black, and he is the Obamassiah, he will ride into the White House on the shoulders of one the biggest liberals and communist sympathizers out there, the late Martin Luther King Jr. By the way, the true story on Larry Sinclair’s Lie detector is:
The raw computer readings showed that Larry Sinclair passed the test with flying colours. But two testers hired by Whitehouse.com re-interpreted the readings to claim that they showed deception. One of the testers was Edward I. Gelb who has been exposed by specialists in the field for claiming a phony Ph.D.
Can you say, Cover up? I knew you could!
Like I said, it is all about the entitlements. It is what the Democrats are all about. That and identity Politics, and we all know, Barry is a master at that.
It seems that finally, Mrs. "I am a female and you owe me the Presidency", has finally seen reality.
Members of Hillary Clinton’s advance staff received calls and emails this evening from headquarters summoning them to New York City Tuesday night, and telling them their roles on the campaign are ending, two Clinton staffers tell my colleague Amie Parnes.
The advance staffers — most of them now in Puerto Rico, South Dakota, and Montana — are being given the options of going to New York for a final day Tuesday, or going home, the aides said. The move is a sign that the campaign is beginning to shed — at least — some of its staff. The advance staff is responsible for arranging the candidate’s events around the country.
With the future of her campaign in doubt, Clinton hasn’t announced her plans for the final election night of the primary cycle or beyond, but the aides said she would stage her election night event in New York City. Her entourage is currently expected to wake up Tuesday in New York and to arrive in Washington, D.C. Tuesday night.
However, Ben does report:
Clinton’s senior aides didn’t respond to requests for comment on her Tuesday night plans.
Well, of course, she’s not going to say, "Yeah, I’m dropping out", and risk not getting the votes. She is not stupid. She is looking to get a cabinet position or something out of all this. Of course, I think it would be absolutely hilarious if Obama simply told her, "I will be in touch" and never called her, at all. It would be the ultimate payback for all the stuff she said about him.
Did I mention that I am not a big fan of her? Sorry. I’m not.
Other commentary via Memeorandum
Hillary Clinton has won Puerto Rico, But it doesn’t mean a thing. You know, it really amazes me, that Hillary Supporters are bitching a blue streak, because the popular votes don’t actually select the nominee. My question is, where the hell were these people during civics class? Quite obviously not paying attention.
What really amuses me is, how these people like to complain that Hillary was robbed. Please. 
Obama’s name was not on the Michigan ballot, because the stupid actions of the National Democrat Party, and Obama, in loyalty to his party and it’s idiotic rules, agreed not to campaign there. So, in all honesty, who was really robbed at a chance to win the state? I think that answer is very obvious.
I’m sitting here now, listening to some idiotic Hillary supporter on MSNBC, I mean, can that the stupid bitch be any more out of tune with reality? Holy cripes…
I think that the Hillary camp and her many supporters ought to just get real and just admit that Hillary lost and accept it and move the hell on. Otherwise, we will have to contend with the 3rd term of George W. Bush and the Democrats and Hillary supporters will have no one to blame, but themselves.
