FLORIDA & MI, HOW TO MAKE THEM COUNT...here is an article every Dem should read.

To sum it up, as a Floridian Democrat I agree with the bottom line as stated in the last paragraphs of this post:

Two further suggestions, if the DNC does not budge, Florida and Michigan must be clear about what the DNC is telling them : you count for nothing

As such, Florida and Michigan Democrats are no longer bound to any party platform or allegiance. So they can

1) Florida and Michigan should be encouraged to boycott the General Election. No Democratic party candidate on the state ballot in November in either states. Voters will be encourage to vote third party, or Republican.

2) No contributions from Florida and Michigan to national Democratic fund-raisers, now or five years into the future. FL and MI should demand that costs of running their unrecognized elections are immediately reimbursed.

3) All FL and MI members of Congress should organize state wide rallies, boycotts, and protests. They should lobby for a bill in Congress, asking that the Democratic Party have its registration revoked and its ability to run its candidate nationwide, should be filibustered with legal means.

Here is the post in its entirety

Following Clinton’s Pennsylvania victory, she tallied her popular vote counting MI and FL votes - putting her ahead of Obama. This led to a Media Backlash, with across the board condemnation by leading commentators pompously proclaiming the “inviolability” of DNC election rules. Clinton was chastised for daring to even raise the issue. For the Clinton camp, this marked a major Media defeat of her drive to get FL and MI seated. Voter sentiment soured, and FL and MI were written off.

This is unacceptable. While it seems inconceivable that Obama could be selected as Democratic Presidential Nominee following Wrightgate , Clinton supporters will make it harder on ourselves if we capitulate to the Media verdict on FL and MI, and prematurely forfeit their vote. We are too silent on FL and MI, and this silence is disenfranchisement.

We need to redouble our efforts for these two states’ electoral recognition, and to begin, we need to craft coherent message.

Clinton needs both states to secure the nomination, without them, Wright or no Wright, Obama will push on to Denver. So what can Clinton supporters do, to help improve the odds of a FL and MI vote impacting the Primary verdict on a Democratic nominee?

First, we need to fight harder for FL and MI. Second, we need to fight with an effective rhetorical frame.

We need to keep Florida and Michigan Visible. A recent protest by the League of United Latin American Citizens, was held on behalf of FL and MI, should have been front page news for all Clinton blogs. While it consisted of no more than 300 people, all such events demand our solidarity and attention. For outlets with connections to Democratic Party activists from MI and FL I suggest regular op-eds repeating a basic set of demands for vote recognition.

Second, our message - the outreach we need to pump daily into the blogosphere. I think the following key points must form the core of our FL and MI rhetorical frame, used in various combinations or in stand alone fashion.

1) Overall, do not present FL and MI as a partisan issue. All Democrats, pro-Obama or pro-Clinton, need to send America and the World a clear message of our basic respect for the ideal of Voter Equality fundamental to the fairness of the democratic voting systems.

As Democrats, we cannot afford to be the party of partisan convenience. Were Florida and Michigan states Clinton had lost, we would have to fight for their recognition with equal zeal, as we do now. FL and MI are a perfect opportunity to show Democratic solidarity, and also to send a clear message, what Democracy is about.

FL and MI should not be a partisan question, but one offering a display of Democratic Party unity, concerned for the General Election, and our commitment to respecting the equality of the vote between every American citizen’s regardless of their state of residence.

Does the Democratic Party really want to go down as the party which disenfranchises the vote of 2.3 million people? The only way we can escape such a stigma, is if we make the FL and MI vote count - not after the superdelegates decide- but NOW.

2) It is the Obama camp, and not the DNC or its rules, who are disenfranchising Florida and Michigan voters.

We know Obama will not join in the call to show Democratic solidarity by recognizing the FL and MI vote. This is a perfect opportunity to paint him as someone who Disunites, Disrespects, Discriminates, Dodges, and Dallies. Disunites by not joining the Party in solidarity with FL and MI. Disrespects, by not respecting Florida and Michigan voters. Discriminates, because the votes of SC and IO are fine, but those of FL and MI, are not. Dodges, because he has publicly been evading the issue, and Dallies, because behind the scenes, his camp has deliberately stalled any resolution of the impasse.

The story with DNC rules is simple. FL and MI have nothing to do with DNC rules. That the DNC rules are in play, is Axelrod’s sell - not the DNC’s. As with the “Debate” the media reported canceled by the “North Carolina Democrats” so with Florida and Michigan, its not the Party, its the Obama camp who behind all the trouble!

When Clinton suggested a re-vote for both states, the Obama camp stalled on the talks. When she spoke of a mail-in vote, Obama objected on spurious grounds, even though he sponsored a mail-in vote law in the US Senate. When the FL and MI took their cause to the DNC, Obama did not support them. When Clinton arranged for talks with the DNC, Obama was opposed to any recognition of the two state’s vote. Also

note, that Obama makes no references to FL and MI, and has yet to declare his concern for counting FL and MI vote. So the story is simple. Its not DNC rules, its Obama.

3) Disenfranchisement - Key Term & our rallying cry.

We should all unite behind this term, while throwing out synonymous slogans like “Not Florida Again” or “Voter Theft”, or “Count the Vote Now!,” etc. Based on my second point, it is clear who needs to be singled out as carrying the burden for both undermining Party Unity, propagating the DNC-rules myth, bullying the DNC into inaction, and disenfranchising the voters of these two states -> Obama.

But, Florida and Michigan are not about Clinton winning these states. They are about why Obama refuses to count the votes, he has received. What is wrong with one third of the Florida and Michigan vote for Obama? Are these voters beneath those Obama received in South Carolina or Iowa?

4) No DNC rules allowing for disenfranchisement exist. The DNC’s actions are illegal.

At no point in the Primary did DNC formulate any rules that FL and MI votes would not be eventually counted, nor that their delegates would not be seated. There is nothing in the Party rules which allows the DNC to nix the FL and MI vote. Nothing whatsoever.

5) Under Obama Pressure, DNC violated its own rules, and illegally chose to disenfranchise FL and MI. This was a blatant act of pro-Obama favoritism, disruption of impartiality by the DNC, and an attack on the Party and our Ideals.

DNC rules specify that any state which violates the rules may at most be docked half of its delegates at the convention. However, the DNC chose not to apply these rules, instead choosing, contrary to its own rules, to rob FL and MI of all their votes!

The reason was simple. Counting MI and FL would have given Clinton the delegate lead through the entire Primary up to two weeks ago! Not counting FL and MI was something the DNC chose to do as a direct response to Obama pressure. Because Clinton expressed a different desire at the time, and DNC rules were ignored, the DNC deferred to Obama out of sheer favoritism!

In February, Dean went on record as always intending to seat the FL and MI delegates in Denver, but he was hoping to do it after the Nominee had been selected as a result of a clear Primary victory. This victory was expected by the DNC on February 22, in Texas and Ohio, in Pennsylvania; all instances when top Democrats applied ruthless pressure on Clinton to quit the race as a part of an overall strategy to resolve the MI and FL issue in Obama’s favor.

Today the DNC continues the policy of making the FL and MI vote count only after a Nominee is chosen! This can’t fly. It is a logical absurdity. It amounts to disenfranchisement, no two ways about it. Do not be mislead by such nonsense for one second, and take a strong, unequivocal stand for Florida and Michigan.

6) Clinton, along with other candidates, signed a document which called for the respect of DNC rules.

Yes, and these rules were immediately violated by the DNC, as stated in point 4 above.

There is a wide misunderstanding, that Clinton and Obama agreed to enforce the DNC’s disenfranchisement of Florida and Michigan. This is false. Neither Clinton or Obama ever agreed to this. Both signed a declaration of allegiance to DNC rules on Florida and Michigan, which amounted to a promise not to campaign in the two states; which in no way bound any candidate (and the others who signed the document) to disenfranchising FL and MI. In fact, it bound the DNC to respect its own rules, which it failed to do!

Neither of the candidates did campaign in either state. They went out of their way to not appear at rallies, make public pronouncements, or address FL and MI viewers via television. They ran advertisements, and both Clinton and Obama held Florida fundraisers, which strictly speaking, did not violate any pledge they had signed.

7) The Obama camp loves to run a clip of Clinton saying “Florida and Michigan count for nothing” .

This is true, she said it, and so what? At the time of their Primaries, the states counted for nothing, and that was part of the agreement. Another part of the agreement was, that they would soon be made to count once the DNC had applied appropriate rules. These intentions are amply evidenced by a ton of quotes from Dean and the DNC at the time of the Florida and Michigan vote.

At no stage has Clinton in no way implied, that she would not seek to seat the Florida and Michigan delegates. She was merely stating the DNC consensus at the time. Did she intend the DNC to violate its own laws and disenfranchise both states?

Certainly not! IN fact, she was and remains the first, loudest, and only advocate that both states vote be counted!

Obama chose not to be on the Michigan ballot

This was a strategic mistake on his part. Further proof that he was intending to disenfranchise Michigan all along. Instead of sending a message of Hope to Michigan Democrats that while their vote was presently not being counted due to their infringement of Party Rules, the Democrats would seek to find a way to make it count, Obama chose to send a clear message that Michigan was worthless. This attitude is further attested by his desire to block any resolution of the impasse up until present.

Clinton, along with three other Democrats, equally sworn to upholding DNC election rules, chose to send a clear message of Hope to Michigan. She knew, like Obama, that presently the Michigan vote would not be featured in the total delegate tally, but unlike Obama she showed solidarity with Michigan voters and held out a promise of respecting their electoral decision in to the future.

9) For the last two months Obama is insulting the people of FL and MI, touting his Delegate and State lead, with FL and MI nowhere to be seen or mentioned.

How can someone, who talks of grass-roots and political engagement and the importance of votes, who poses as the Apostle of Direct Democracy and a candidate running on a popular mandate, get away with the unconscionable farce of running around the country marginalizing Florida and Michigan, without any Media scrutiny?

For the last two months Obama has been touting his victory in the Primary, while cruelly and heartlessly suppressing the vote of 2,300,000 Americans! This shouldn’t be ignored.

10) The DNC theft of the Florida vote is particularly illegal.

While the story of Florida moving its Primary forward is unfortunate, the story of the DNC disenfranchisement of Florida, is Criminal. The Florida Democratic party, was forced to move its primary forward, by a Republican controlled State Legislature. Prominent FL Democrats opposed this State Legislation, but to no avail.

This fact is entirely lost in the Media. Why? Because it exposes the DNC attack on Florida as anti-democratic, biased, and untenable.

All Democrats are entitled to knowing this fact, and Clinton supporters need to get it out there. The DNC action against FLorida, is illegal. The Florida Democratic Party did not violate DNC rules- rather, it was the Republican Controlled State legislature, that did.

In this context , how can the DNC hold Florida accountable for what the State Republicans did? How can the DNC construe its authority over Florida Democrats, when no responsibility for moving the primary forward, be attributed to them!?

In Conclusion:

Too many Clinton supporters get carried away with the legal questions of Florida and Michigan. This is a distraction. The facts are the facts. The DNC played games with us, it allowed Obama to play games with us, and it is attempting to disenfranchise 2.3 million voters, so it can have Obama as the Party Nominee.

The DNC has betrayed the trust of the American people, and if it continues to ignore the Voice of FL and MI voters, it is sending a message not just to Democrats, but it is telling all Americans that one of our country’s two leading parties, is neither Democratic, nor Respectful of the Popular and Delegate vote, nor concerned with impartiality.

It is our duty, as Democrats, to see that DNC election rules are respected, first and foremost at the top of our party. Those who fail to adhere to the rules, need to be handed the pink-slip. DNC representatives are all obliged to respect these rules, otherwise they are not Democrats. It is our duty as Democrats, to fight for the recognition of the vote of every fellow Democrat. If there is a campaign which discourages this fight, which sends a clear message that some voters are more equal than others, this campaign should be held directly responsible for undermining the Party, the democratic process, and our chances in the General Election.

The Obama camp, needs to be held accountable for any misinformation it spreads on account of Florida and Michigan. It must be exposed for the divisive, opportunistic, and anti-democratic Chicago machine, that it is. Already Obama has gone too far in corrupted our Party, already he has divided it and subjected it to incredible bias and prejudice. How much longer can this go on?

It cannot - and Florida and Michigan must be recognized as soon as possible.

***

Two further suggestions, if the DNC does not budge, Florida and Michigan must be clear about what the DNC is telling them : you count for nothing.

As such, Florida and Michigan Democrats are no longer bound to any party platform or allegiance. So they can

1) Florida and Michigan should be encouraged to boycott the General Election. No Democratic party candidate on the state ballot in November in either states. Voters will be encourage to vote third party, or Republican.

2) No contributions from Florida and Michigan to national Democratic fund-raisers, now or five years into the future. FL and MI should demand that costs of running their unrecognized elections are immediately reimbursed.

3) All FL and MI members of Congress should organize state wide rallies, boycotts, and protests. They should lobby for a bill in Congress, asking that the Democratic Party have its registration revoked and its ability to run its candidate nationwide, should be filibustered with legal means.

morning all,

will be in and out all day.

you all have a great day........

Goos morning, Y'All!

I think this is still broken.

Posted by YoungAtHeart on May 7, 2008 at 09:21 AM

Why do you want to allow Telecom companies to have retro-active immunity? What will be achieved by it other than letting them off the hook?

Yes, and these rules were immediately violated by the DNC, as stated in point 4 above.

You want to talk about RULES now, but screw the fact that FL and MI did not follow Rules to begin with??? Enough with that B-S!

There is a wide misunderstanding, that Clinton and Obama agreed to enforce the DNC’s disenfranchisement of Florida and Michigan. This is false. Neither Clinton or Obama ever agreed to this.

That's not what every pundit, analyst, etc has been repeating on TV ! They say that Hillary agreed to the rules ahead of time, and now wants to CHANGE the rules because they would benefit her! You think Hil would be working so hard for those votes to count, if they had all been for Obama? Come on, give us a break.

The time for all this fighting for votes to count should have been at the beginning of this disaster, not now. The rules committee meets on May 31st to see what to do about this, but I hope they do not throw the rule book out and cheat 48 states that followed the rules, PLUS set a precedent for future elections, that rules be damned, just do whatever you want to do!

Posted by YoungAtHeart on May 7, 2008 at 09:21 AM

I must respectfully disagree with everything in your post. Personally, I think it is a pathetic attempt "to win at all costs"

BBL,...I have a meeting to go to....

Yikes! A Clinton campaign aid has just confirmed that she has loaned herself $6.4 Million Dollars since the PA Primary. She's in debt up to her eyebrows.

I haven't been reading this blog for a long time because of the hate expressed here toward the Clintons. I thought I'd check in today and saw more of the same on yesterday's posts. The thing I don't understand is why in the world so many of you have chosen to destroy the great legacy of the Clinton years which showed that Democrats are better on the economy. You all sound like a bunch of Republicans in your hatred for the Clintons. I truly don't understand this. But when John McCain wins in November, don't come back and blame Hillary! She has fought a good fight against an unvetted rock star who most surely will not win in the general election.

Highserenity, thanks for the link! I see I have some other websites to check out!

I tried to post this link in my first post today but must have done it incorrectly since I am not an experienced blogger like most of you. But I do know how to copy and paste. I suppose I found this article particularly interesting because it expresses my thoughts much more eloquently than I could write myself.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/05/obama_the_one_hit_wonder_1.html

Why does Clinton still talk about counting the Mich vote when Obama wasn't even on the ballot? Thy just makes her look like she' ok do anything to get elected.

I think this whole thing should end. It' a bragging our party down. It' a so over as far asI' m concerned.

Time to move forward. Time to focus on McNuts and who Obama will choose as his running mate.

Posted by YoungAtHeart on May 7, 2008 at 09:21 AM

Tough loss yesterday.

I have read your post and you actually make *some* good points. We certainly do not want the people of FL or MI to think that they don't count. I think they are smarter than that, knowing that they will count in November but you still make a good point. This voting is for the parties. November is for the country. American should have loyalty to the country 1st and party second. (I am not a member of either party but this year, I think the Democrats have the better candidates.)

Here is my challenge for you. Make an honest effort to be objective in your analysis. FL and MI are responsible for themselves and we didn't hear this fire and brimstone from the Clintons before the MI/FL votes. To see it come out now with such furvor looks like sour grapes; certainly not presidential.

If I had my wishes, I would see her become either leadership in the senate or Gov of NY. To do this, she needs to find a graceful, honorable exit. I hope the supers give her a week to do so rather than just ending it. Barack should try to choose a Clinton surrogate as V.P. Again, if I had the button, it would be Wes Clark.

Step back, relax and be objective. Your nation needs you.

Go dems go and get the job done. Much is at stake.

The next president is gonna need some bang-sticks:
-------

“Bad Money: Reckless Finance, Failed Politics, and the Global Crisis of American Capitalism”

*******
KEVIN PHILLIPS: Well, not to single out just one, I have an approach I use to say that normally when a country is—United States is—heading into a recession, there are one or two, sometimes three, factors that you worry about. But at this point in time, the American economy, you can think of it as being kind of in a shark tank, and there are like six or seven sharks, and you don’t usually see anything like that number.

And just to skim the list quickly, we have a financialized economy in which we don’t make much anymore, and finance is up to 20 to 21 percent of the US GDP, and manufacturing down to 12. Finance dominates the US economy.

The second problem is that we have massive debt, both public and private. It’s gone up about 700 percent since the early 1980s, staggering numbers where there—we basically have $50 trillion worth of credit market debt, which is tradable debt. And people just have no idea of this. It’s not government debts that’s the problem, it’s private sector debt, both financial and corporate and then in the consumer sector with credit cards and then mortgage debt. We just have this extraordinary level of it. 340 percent of the gross domestic product, that’s how big debt is. And the last time something was close to this—and it was less—was in the late 1920s and early 1930s. So it’s enormously a vulnerable, dangerous thing.

Third shark in the tank is the collapse of home prices. They continue to follow the scary trajectory that has people predicting that there’s going to be a 15 to 20 percent decline in home prices, which would be the sharpest since the Great Depression.

Then you can go to shark number four, that’s global commodity inflation. Oil and food, people are as worried now about the price of milk as they are about the price of a gallon of gasoline. That’s a global problem, but it makes a mockery of the administration’s pretense that there’s no inflation.

The fifth shark is, frankly, lousy economic statistics. I don’t think the average American should believe either the inflation numbers, the GDP numbers or the unemployment numbers. And there’s a lot of complexity and technical terminology involved here, but the long and the short is that over thirty to forty years, we’ve seen a kind of Pollyanna Creep, and administrations of both parties have done this. They want the figures to be friendlier, not to get them in trouble. And we’re at a point now where the figures lie enough that foreign investors are starting not to believe them and, I think, with considerable justice.

Now, the next shark in the tank is obviously the price of oil. And it’s not just global commodity inflation, it’s the problem that we see of oil production peaking in the world sometime in the next ten to twenty years. And the advance signs of this are scarcity in peaking in certain countries. And the prediction just came out of Goldman Sachs a couple of days ago that within a fairly short period of time, probably this year, you’re going to see $150 or $200 oil.

And that’s because, partly at least, of the scarcity, but the US dollar has been tied historically since the 1970s to oil, because of a deal worked out when OPEC wanted a price increase. Henry Kissinger and others were involved in getting OPEC to commit that they would sell and buy oil only in dollars and that they would invest their petrodollars in the US, in Treasury debt. So we have a currency that’s profited from the connection to oil, which sustained it in many ways. But now oil has boomeranged on the United States.

We have to spend $400 billion a year to import the oil we need. We don’t have the basis for controlling oil anymore, after the idiocy in Iraq, which was partly put in motion to solve the oil problem, and instead you’ve got oil prices going up 500 percent in five years. So the dollar is on the ropes, and that’s the other shark in the tank.

There has never been a period in anybody’s memory, except very old people who remember the late ’20s and ’30s, where you had so many things converging. And that’s what makes it frightening. And every time the administration says it looks like it’s under control or it’s half-over, you start to get evidence that, no, it’s not under control, and maybe it’s not even a third over.

www.democracynow.org/2008/5/6/bad_money_reckless_finance_failed_politics

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24481935/

Mental health care for returning soldiers. Didn't see this posted yesterday, maybe I missed it.

Dear Floridian Democrat

For a year now, the Florida Democratic Party has tried to comply with the Delegate Selection Rules of the Democratic National Committee.

We researched every potential alternative process - from caucuses to county conventions to mail-in elections - but no plan could come anywhere close to being viable in Florida.

We made a detailed case to the DNC Rules & Bylaws Committee, but we were denied.

Our Democratic legislators in Tallahassee tried to set the Florida primary on Feb. 5, instead of Jan. 29, but of course, their proposed amendment to House Bill 537 was greeted with laughter and derision from the Republicans who control the state government.

Does '537' ring a bell? It should. It's the number of votes that separated Texas Gov. George W. Bush and Vice President Al Gore in Florida in 2000.

It's the number that sent this country and this world in a terrible direction.

We can't let 537 - or the Republicans - determine our future again.

President Bush plans to stop in Florida tomorrow to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for the Republican National Committee's efforts to elect his successor in November.

The last thing America needs is a third Bush term. Despite the widespread anxiety that working families feel, not to mention the broad agreement among economists that we are in a recession, President Bush and John McCain blindly believe that the economy is strong.

And let me remind you that John McCain endorsed President Bush's decision to deny health care to thousands of Florida children by vetoing an expansion of the successful SCHIP program. McCain also promises to jeopardize the financial security of Florida seniors by privatizing Social Security. He continually threatens to push Florida's military families to the brink by keeping American troops in Iraq for "100 years" or more.

This is why we are Democrats, and this is why we must stick together, no matter where this ongoing delegate debate takes us.

Last week, the Florida Democratic Party laid out the only existing way that we can comply with DNC Rules - a statewide revote run by the Party - and asked for input.

Thousands of people responded. We spent the weekend reviewing your messages, and while your reasons vary widely, the consensus is clear: Florida doesn't want to vote again.

So we won't.

A party-run primary or caucus has been ruled out, and it's simply not possible for the state to hold another election, even if the Party were to pay for it. Republican Speaker of the Florida House Marco Rubio refuses to even consider that option. Florida is finally moving to paper ballots, which is a good thing, but it means that at least 15 counties do not have the capacity to handle a major election before the June 10th DNC primary deadline.

This doesn't mean that Democrats are giving up on Florida voters. It means that a solution will have to come from the DNC Rules & Bylaws Committee, which is scheduled to meet again in April.

When this committee stripped us of 100% of our delegates last year, some members summed up their reasoning by saying, "The rules are the rules." Unfortunately, the rules did not apply to Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina when they, too, violated the DNC calendar by moving from their assigned dates.

As the late great Democratic President Franklin D. Roosevelt once said, "We must adjust our ideas to the facts of today... Rules are not necessarily sacred, principles are."

The Florida Democratic Party has stuck to its principles throughout this debate. We've remained open-minded while never wavering from our commitment to an open and fair election that would allow all Florida Democrats to participate, whether serving in Iraq, retiring in Boca, studying abroad or entertaining at a theme park.

Another late great President -Abraham Lincoln, a Republican - said, "A house divided against itself cannot stand."

If Democrats heed this wisdom, we will win in November.

America needs a great president again, but a President McCain will settle for the status quo and carry on the disastrous Bush tradition.

President Clinton or President Obama will make history and lead this nation in a new direction.

Let's remember this as the delegate debate continues. We must stick together as Democrats. The stakes are too high and the opportunities too great.

I will keep you posted on any major developments. Thank you for your concern and your commitment.

Sincerely,

GOOD MORNING, IRAAAAQ!

GOOD MORNING, DEMS!

(Is that guy still publishing books on line?) yawnnnnn.

Posted by Keith1 on May 7, 2008 at 09:58 AM

BREAKING: Wesley Clark reportedly called Hillary tonight, urging her to drop out

Good morning all.

So is this primary race finally over? I think it is. The problem is convincing Hillary Clinton. At some point, it really does become vanity to stay in the race.

Obama - big night!

Yes We Can

According to exit polls, 92% of African-Americans voted for Obama in NC. We are to believe this, despite that Clinton had senior highly-respected African American leaders stumping for her?
Out of 100 AA, 92 picked Obama? I have a hard time believing that, as I have in the past.

Past elections show that NC is plagued electronic voting machines problems, resulting in questionable past election results.

Besides, is it possible that a state would pick Bush over Native son Kerry/EDWARDS by 12 POINTS?
I refuse to believe that so many people could be so stupid. I question the partisan voting machine companies ADMINISTERING THE ELECTION, AND COUNTING THE VOTES.

btw, now that McCain is being promoted by the MSM as going after the AA vote, many people will not be surprised if he gets 10-35%. And with no paper trail, what are dems going to do? It looks like McCain and Republicans are laying the groundwork for vote-flipping is AA areas.

I'm just waiting for Miss Congeniality to come out of her crypt and start shrieking like a banshee.

Just WHAT are you advocating because YOUR "favorite" candidate du Jour (i.e., NOT "black") is losing? ...connie, OTOH, is just your basic KKK racist... Regardless of the spin, it's OVER for her. She NOW has to win over 80% of the delegates in the remaining contests.

Posted Doo-Bee-Doo-Bee-Doo May 6, 08 at 07:59 PM

What are you talking about? You can't go a whole day without insults or playing the race card?

How dare you accuse me of supporting re68!
How dare you call me and Connie racists!
How dare you play the race card when I merely ask a question about something I heard on the radio.
How dare you take a simple question I post, and attack me with charges of racism.

Once again, you show your manipulative and nasty tactics very well. Congratulations, you get the "Race-card playa award" of the week.

You are a vicious person. You undermine the message of Sen. Obama. Sorry you are HOPELESS.

TO: Superdelegates
FROM: David Plouffe, Campaign Manager
RE: An Update on the Race for Delegates
DA: May 7, 2008

There are only six contests remaining in the Democratic primary calendar and only 217 pledged delegates left to be awarded. Only 7 percent of the pledged delegates remain on the table. There are 260 remaining undeclared superdelegates, for a total of 477 delegates left to be awarded.

With North Carolina and Indiana complete, Barack Obama only needs 172 total delegates to capture the Democratic nomination. This is only 36% of the total remaining delegates.

Conversely, Senator Clinton needs 326 delegates to reach the Democratic nomination, which represents a startling 68% of the remaining delegates.

With the Clinton path to the nomination getting even narrower, we expect new and wildly creative scenarios to emerge in the coming days. While those scenarios may be entertaining, they are not legitimate and will not be considered legitimate by this campaign or its millions of supporters, volunteers, and donors.

We believe it is exceedingly unlikely Senator Clinton will overtake our lead in the popular vote and in fact lost ground on that measure last night. However, the popular vote is a deeply flawed and illegitimate metric for deciding the nominee – since each campaign based their strategy on the acquisition of delegates. More importantly, the rules of the nomination are predicated on delegates, not popular vote.

Just as the Presidential election in November will be decided by the electoral college, not popular vote, the Democratic nomination is decided by delegates.

If we believed the popular vote was somehow the key measurement, we would have campaigned much more intensively in our home state of Illinois and in all the other populous states, in the pursuit of larger raw vote totals. But it is not the key measurement. We played by the rules, set by you, the DNC members, and campaigned as hard as we could, in as many places as we could, to acquire delegates. Essentially, the popular vote is not much better as a metric than basing the nominee on which candidate raised more money, has more volunteers, contacted more voters, or is taller.

The Clinton campaign was very clear about their own strategy until the numbers become too ominous for them. They were like a broken record , repeating ad nauseum that this nomination race is about delegates. Now, the word delegate has disappeared from their vocabulary, in an attempt to change the rules and create an alternative reality.

We want to be clear – we believe that the winner of a majority of pledged delegates will and should be the nominee of our party. And we estimate that after the Oregon and Kentucky primaries on May 20, we will have won a majority of the overall pledged delegates According to a recent news report, by even their most optimistic estimates the Clinton Campaign expects to trail by more than 100 pledged delegates and will then ask the superdelegates to overturn the will of the voters.

But of course superdelegates are free to and have been utilizing their own criteria for deciding who our nominee should be. Many are deciding on the basis of electability, a favorite Clinton refrain. And if you look at the numbers, during a period where the Clinton campaign has been making an increasingly strident pitch on electability, it is clear their argument is failing miserably with superdelegates.

Since February 5, the Obama campaign has netted 107 superdelegates, and the Clinton campaign only 21. Since the Pennsylvania primary, much of it during the challenging Rev. Wright period, we have netted 24 and the Clinton campaign 17.

At some point – we would argue that time is now – this ceases to be a theoretical exercise about how superdelegates view electability. The reality of the preferences in the last several weeks offer a clear guide of how strongly superdelegates feel Senator Obama will perform in November, both in building a winning campaign for the presidency as well as providing the best electoral climate across the country for all Democratic candidates.

It is important to note that Senator Obama leads Senator Clinton in superdelegate endorsements among Governors, United States Senators and members of the House of Representatives. These elected officials all have a keen sense for who our strongest nominee will be in November.

It is only among DNC members where Senator Clinton holds a lead, which has been rapidly dwindling.

As we head into the final days of the campaign, we just wanted to be clear with you as a party leader, who will be instrumental in making the final decision of who our nominee will be, how we view the race at this point.

Senator Obama, our campaign and our supporters believe pledged delegates is the most legitimate metric for determining how this race has unfolded. It is simply the ratification of the DNC rules – your rules – which we built this campaign and our strategy around.

No vote for Obama here...ever. Sorry, but I am a true Democrat for almost thirty years now, and I wonder what has happened to my party.

This unvetted, inexperienced candidate with no real record, and a thin resume will lose the Dems' chances of getting the White House back. The dirt on this man, and what he really is, will come out...the "October Surprise" you bet, and if Obama becomes the nominee, will surely wipe away any chances of my Democratic Party winning the White House against McCain. Obama associates with terrorists, criminals, anti-white, anti-American characters, and you reallly think the American people is going to stand by and let this "empty suit" will get the keys to the White House.

This man has been coddled by the media, and the extreme left wing of my party....what a disgrace and an injustice. And to add insult to injury, because he is black, and some Dems are afraid of losing the so-called black vote, will not support the truely vetted, experienced, resilient, intelligent party candidate, Hillary Clinton!

Well, come November, I won't tell you I told you so. We will get through four more years of McBush, pray, and ask for forgiveness from those that knew better.

Hillary Clinton for President '08

Posted by Doo-Bee-Doo-Bee-Doo on May 7, 2008 at 10:28 AM
===================================================

Doo-Bee, it's really bad right now. Senator Clinton needs to see that staying in this race is now nothing but destructive to our chances in 2008. If the Clintons still want to be held in high regard, the time to stop this is now. Wes Clark already called her according to america's blog and asked her to step down.

It's over! Please let Barack get moving on McCain without these distractions.

Oh, cut the crap, Big Yellow Whatever. BILL Clinton got 84% of the Black vote when HE ran. Is that "reverse discrimination"?

She lost. Get over it. I have.

Clinton supporters - it's over. She has lost. Face up to the reality. Obama is our nominee. You can sulk and threaten to let McSame win (or even claim that you'll vote for McSame). But, I think in the end you'll decide that's just cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Posted by Doo-Bee-Doo-Bee-Doo on May 7, 2008 at 10:20 AM

I would be so happy. I campaigned for him in '04. Love to see him in a leadership role again. He is a very talented man.

Young at Heart: Hillary Clinton is a qualified candidate. So was Edwards. Richardson was pretty good too. They didn't win either. Obama did.

The coming flood of superdelegates Hotlist
by kos
Wed May 07, 2008 at 07:09:16 AM PDT

George Stephanopoulos, this morning:

More superdelegates will come out today for Barack Obama –they will come three, four, five at a time, and this nomination will be locked up.

I don't think he meant to say that the nomination will be locked up today. But it should be soon.

I still say that Oregon should push Obama over the 2,024.5 mark. Or if the Clinton campaign remains obtuse, enough to get him over whatever number he needs when including Michigan and Florida.
================================================

It is over. Obama is the nominee.

What's with the "Ooops!" screen on the "GOP getting nervous" thread? It won't let me post.

Stephanopoulos: "This nomination fight is over"
by John Aravosis (DC) · 5/07/2008 10:42:00 AM ET · Link
Discuss this post here: 0 Comments · reddit · FARK ·· Digg It!

George Stephanopoulos said this morning that "this nomination fight is over."

Then what the hell is Hillary doing staying in the race? Fighting for Florida and Michigan, even though we learned last night that even if you just give Hillary her "wins" in FL and MI she still loses the nationwide delegate count and vote count to Obama? There are simply no more excuses for why Hillary is staying in the race. She can't catch up. Even after getting thumped with Rev Wright for two weeks, Obama still "routed" her in North Carolina (that's ABC's word), and she only barely won Indiana, a state she was going to win handily. It's now time for the SuperDelegates, and for Hillary's surrogates and staff, to hold an intervention. She is in the race to hurt Obama, to make sure he doesn't win in the fall against McCain, so that she can say "I told you so" and then run again in 2012. It's over. Hillary lost. It's time for the SuperDs and her staff to stage a mutiny.

http://www.americablog.com/2008/05/stephanopoulos-this-nomination-fight-is.html
=================================================

I truly hope this is not true. If it is, Democrats will hold it against the Clintons forever. She won't run in 2012. Her best shot at running again is to bow out gracefully now.

Clinton employee George Stuffituphisbutt just said that Obama will be rolling out Superdelegates 3, 4, 5, at a time starting today. He appears to have had a boatload of them waiting in the wings, and now is the time to unleash them at will.

Obama is NOT a good candidate. Keep ignoring the signs.

http://www.stop-obama.org/

dpd how about those siding shots?

If voters knew then what the rest of us knonw now, Obama would not have made it past Super Tuesday. No Keith1, Obama is Not a good candidate for the presidency, let alone to beat McBush.

http://www.theobamafile.com/

And before you say, this stuff on Obama is bogus, the only thing bogus is Obama!

Wake up true Democrats. With Obama, we will surely lose the White House in November.

In a speech at Harvard's Institute of Politics on Monday, Chris Matthews admitted that MSNBC bosses were "basically pro-war during the war." The remark came in a larger discussion of top-down editorial control at the network — of which Matthews claimed there was none, citing the fact that many of his bosses supported Hillary Clinton while he has been very vocal for Obama.

His full statement, in response to a question whether MSNBC officially supports Obama (via Politico's Michael Calderone):

"Well, it's not official." (LAUGH) "Well, I don't think Joe Scarborough has. And I don't think Tucker Carlson did. And Keith does his thing. He does his thing--it's something and it's very successful. I do my thing. I don't think that's true. I think... my sense is that everybody that lives in New York is for Hillary. The people I work with--all my bosses--seem to be for Hillary. I just sense it. They don't actually say it, but there's no sense from the top I can tell you that it's pro-Obama.. by any means. That's not what I get. And it was basically pro-war during the war.. the bosses were. And I was up against that. And if there's anybody telling me to push Obama, I haven't heard it yet. And by the way, they're so fickle.... but there seems to be a New York thing about Hillary. Just the people from... it's like the Yankees and the Mets... it's their thing. You know? It's Hillary. You know? And I feel it. I find it. It's hard to figure sometimes. But I don't know who you are talking about. I know who you are talking about."

As revealed in the New York Times Magazine profile of Matthews by Mark Leibovich, Matthews idolizes NBC News Washington Bureau Chief Tim Russert like an older brother:

Tim -- as in Russert, the inquisitive jackhammer host of "Meet the Press" -- is a particular obsession of Matthews's. Matthews craves Russert's approval like that of an older brother. He is often solicitous.

In her new book Right is Wrong, Arianna Huffington critiques the media for being too compliant with administration policy during the run-up to war, and she particularly lays into Russert, saying, among other things, that he helped pump up the terrorist panic:

Take Tim Russert, whose July 1, 2007, Meet the Press interview with Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff was about as priapic a display as you're ever likely to see outside of a porno film or the monkey cage at the zoo, with Russert desperately trying to get Chertoff to pump up the panic meter...You could almost hear the blood rushing to his loins--and the palpable sense of deflation when Chertoff refused to stroke his fantasy

================================================

Oh gee Tweety, you think they really are pro-war?
Are these pundits that naive or do they just don't care as long as their paycheck comes in? Probably the latter.

pray, and ask for forgiveness from those that knew better.

Hillary Clinton for President '08

Posted by YoungAtHeart on May 7, 2008 at 10:31 AM

How arrogant is that? "Pray and ask for forgiveness"....

Posted by gregg on May 7, 2008 at 10:57 AM

Hey, gregg. Maureen is coming over this weekend to look at them. I was at the local mega gonzo mondo head poppingly huge home improvement "mart" last Saturday (EEEEKK!!!!) and checked out some of their "Wall of Walls" displays. She is hiring the same guy who did my remodeling, so she should get a good deal on the work.

Thanks for the pics. I like your choice of siding and stain. It will look great when it weathers and has a patina to it. Just like it has always been there.

(Hillary has just ended a conference call and she says she is staying in the race all the way to Denver.)

Posted by OldinReality on May 7, 2008 at 11:01 AM

Are you trying to convince us or scold us?

Ok, now what should you be trying to do if you are truely convinced you are right?

Obama is a good candidate. I like what he brings. His vision of the future is the best we have. Hillary has great talents and I hope she stays as active as possible in the party, she is truly an asset and loved by this country; her close second place finish proves that. We need her as much as we need everyone!
It would be easy for anyone to post links to websites that are anti-Hillary as they are numerous.
As we heard last night in Obama's speech, the time for that type of politics is over. I can't control how you choose to campaign, only how I do.

May peace come to you.

BBL

To young at heart. How much is Hillary paying you? Oh wait, she can't pay you, she is BROKE. If she can't run her campaign budget, how will she handle the nations economy? Hillary LOST the election and it is time for you to get over it and support Senator Obama. Senator Clinton can do alot of good still for the country, but she needs to drop out and endorse Senator Obama now.
To all the Hillary supporters who say you won't support Senator Obama in the general election, or will vote for McCain. If McCain wins due to your utter lack of convictions ,I hope YOUR sons or husbands get drafted to serve in the wars he wants to continue and the ones he wants to start. I hope your daughters or granddaughters get pregnant and are forced to keep the baby whether she wants it or not becaue McCain got to pick more supreme court justices. I hope you enjoy paying more and more for worse healthcare. I hope you enjoy seeing corporations make record profits quarter after quarter while you struggle to feed your family or keep a roof over your head. WE CAN NOT ALLOW MCCAIN TO WIN THIS ELECTION FOR THE REASONS LISTED ABOVE AND MANY MORE.

Is this thing broken?

Hillary-Supporter George McGovern Calls On Her To Drop Out

glad you were able to get them dpd...one never knows with the puters.

I can't believe Clinton is gonna try and hang in there. I guess I have come to expect the absurd from her, so I shouldn't be surprised.

@ YoungAtHeart: I recommend checking back with your doctor to lighten up on the meds. Your facts are dillusional.

I can't really get on her for saying she won't vote for Obama, because I was of the same mind, but in the reverse. Would be hypocritical of me to pull out the unity card. The only thing I can say about that with a degree of honesty is "Follow your personal principals, hopes and dreams. If at the end of that you find yourself with us in November, welcome aboard. If not, I (for what that is worth) completely understand."

Checking in with the analysis, I suspect that Hillary's "going forward" is merely a move to find a graceful and face-saving way to exit. She has said a lot of things and made some rather far-fetched promises that she has to try and make good to insure herself a reasonable political future. My guess is she'll coast through WV and Ky, hit the MI/FLA issue on the 31st and make a fairly public display at keeping her word to count the votes, and then broker a deal for her election debt and perhaps some politically favorable commitments for herself. Then finally, she'll come out in the public to grandstand her withdraw and offer her support to the nominee.

However, except for some plaful poking, I say her agressive campaign against Obama is done. The fat lady may not have sung yet, but she if definitely doing the sound check.

Update: I just watched her speech in WV and she was greatly subdued. She hit on her standard messages, however she took them on as a more mutual position. She referred to the gas tax, but never said the words "Gas Tax Holiday". Judging from what I just saw, I would say 1) She is really tired -or- 2) The analysis above is right on target. She's coasting through a state that appears to be a sure win anyway.

g'afternoon, everyone...to me the choice is really very simple. either vote for the fascist rethuglicans and have a dog-eat-dog, every man for himself country where the only rights a person has are those he can afford to buy. or vote for the democratic ticket and have a country where each of us has a seat at the table, where taking care of the other person is the same as taking care of one's self, where rights are truely inalienable and unquestionably human, and where each of us can once again feel proud of being an American.

Cheers

YoungAtHeart, It's too bad Florida is run by Republicans. That is the problem with Florida. If Jeb Bush hadn't been govenor, Al Gore would be president and we would have money in that lock box, Bin Laden would be dead and Sudam Hussain would be running Iraq with 300,000 less women and children dead there. It is because of Florida and it's voters that Florida is in this position. You went from Jeb Bush to another Republican Govenor Charlie Crist who screwed your state again. Florida can't get democratic control of its state and that hurts the country. So leave the DNC alone, rules are rules!

good afternoon, Democrats. Happy day-after-primary day. How HILARIOUS is it that more than 20% of Republican voters voted against McLame?!!! What a beautiful thing! Any msm covering this fact?!

dag, I killed the blog, or something. Everyone left? I know everyone IS left ;), but apparently I am talking to myself now. I swear I bathed today. I even washed my hair.

Bush threatens housing aid veto
By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - President Bush threatened Wednesday to veto Democrats' broad housing rescue package, saying it won't help struggling homeowners.

We have to defeat lamebrain mcsame! We have to be rid of these guys!

Just a quick fly by - busy, busy, busy at work! (Yeah! lots of business!)
Mary

I even washed my hair.

Posted by MIKaren on May 7, 2008 at 01:12 PM

And it looks GOOD, too!

Sorry, just got lots of business today - very happy about that. Most business in one day this year! Maybe people are starting to get hopeful about the economy with the virtual selection of Sen. Obama as our candidate. Wouldn't that be a great sign!

bbl - maybe.

There is no way that Hillsry will go all the way to Denver. If she is honest and means what she says, if she really loves this country, she will quite and throw her support to Obama.

To stay on a race she can't win is going to split this party wide open. It's time for Clinton to go.

Please Hillary - it's time.

George McGovern Now Endorsing Obama Hotlist
by BarbinMD
Wed May 07, 2008 at 09:30:19 AM PDT

Former Senator George McGovern, who endorsed Hillary Clinton last October, has read the writing on the wall, and today:

...urged her to drop out of the Democratic presidential race and endorsed her rival, Barack Obama.

After watching the returns from the North Carolina and Indiana primaries Tuesday night, McGovern says it's virtually impossible for Clinton to win the nomination.

Who's next?
=================================================

I think Gore, Carter and Edwards.

It is over!

By the way, what gives with the OOPS when you try to post on threads above?

It's too bad Florida is run by Republicans. That is the problem with Florida. If Jeb Bush hadn't been govenor, Al Gore would be president and we would have money in that lock box, Bin Laden would be dead and Sudam Hussain would be running Iraq with 300,000 less women and children dead there. It is because of Florida and it's voters that Florida is in this position. You went from Jeb Bush to another Republican Govenor Charlie Crist who screwed your state again. Florida can't get democratic control of its state and that hurts the country. So leave the DNC alone, rules are rules!
Posted by newsjunkie on May 7, 2008 at 12:56 PM

This is SO true ! This is the state that voters could not even make sure their voting equipment was updated and good. This is the state where little elderly men and women punched for the Reublican instead of the Dem. This is the State that Dems have not won in how many years anyways, yet they want us to be afraid they will not be blue this election ! This is the state where they allow Cubans to hate Democrats because of that little Cuban boy being given back to his father in Cuba, but do nothing to change their minds. Where are the ACTIVISTS in FL? Are they all too old and senile to fight for their Social Security, their Medicare, their other benefits given to them by Dems? What will we lose should they vote Republican, or not vote at all? NOTHING !

Posted by rjsnj on May 7, 2008 at 10:30 AM

It appears that you would like to IGNORE the fact that with more thing like Rev. Wright many of the supers will jump ship. By the same token, if something very damaging comes out on Hillary, some of her supers could jump ship. As I said, the state parties are better by having a practice election before November. Rolls change and precincts need to have a practice GOTV.

I'm sick of hearing the media act like these supers are set in stone. They can change, and they do change. Just last week, we heard many times about a Clinton super that jumped ship. What was his name... the guy that lives in DC but counts for IN? Andrews. So this math some use is totally flawed. The numbers used can change in a moment.

I find it funny that people who know this are acting like they don't know this fact. It's sad when we let the MSM get away with these lies. It's sadder when some dems use these MSM lies.

Either candidate might have a something come out before the convention that would cause the supers to jump ship. Therefore, it's best for the PARTY that we keep all options open, and go to the convention using good sportsmanship.

I salute both candidate for being conciliatory last night. I was glad to hear both candidates practice good sportsmanship. Too bad the MSM AND nasty supporters can't be the same way. I see
"the beef." My question is "WHERE'S THE HOPE?"

Stephanopolis claims he had to use anti-depressants because Bill was too hard on him. I can't believe people listen to a word that jerk says.

From Nir Rosen, another great independent

Note from Steve Clemons. My colleague and friend Nir Rosen who has been one of America's most significant chroniclers of the Islamic dimensions of America's war in the Middle East has just become a regular contributer to The Washington Note. Please welcome him. And as always, the views he expresses are exclusively his own and not those necessarily of The Washington Note or mine. -- Steve Clemons

In June of 2003, two months after the United States conquered Iraq, I sat in on a briefing given by US Army intelligence officers in that most Sunni of Iraq's cities, Tikrit, to a couple of officers visiting from Baghdad. One of the American intelligence officers based in Saddam's famous hometown explained that they were worried about "Shiite fingers" from Iran "creeping" up to Tikrit to establish an Iranian style government.

At a time when the mostly Sunni Iraqi resistance had already established itself and its ability was improving, I was astounded by how stupid the notion of an Iranian threat in Tikrit was. I have remained shocked, like many journalists and academics familiar with the region and its languages, that the Americans have shown no improvement in their understanding of the Muslim world with which they are so deeply engaged militarily and as an imperial power.

We should expect little interest in understanding the outside world from an insular and isolated government whose leaders show open contempt for their own people. And we should expect diplomatic and military officials themselves required to maintain ideological purity to voice an equally unsophisticated world view.

But too often the so called experts are equally ignorant. Remarkably, their lack of background, expertise or language skills and their repeated errors have not diminished the credibility of people such as Fred Kagan of the far right American Enterprise Institute (a Russia expert!), or Kenneth Pollock of the Brookings Institute or their cohorts.

Ridiculously, Kagan and his wife, both of whom have only gone on official tours of Iraq with US Army babysitters, and neither of whom know Arabic, described the recent clashes in Basra as an operation initiated by the "legitimate Government of Iraq and its legally constituted security forces [against] illegal, foreign-backed, insurgent and criminal militias serving leaders who openly call for the defeat and humiliation of the United States and its allies in Iraq and throughout the region."

Why anybody even hires or publishes Kagan on the Middle East is a mystery, but there is nothing legitimate in the government of Iraq, it provides none of the services we would associate with a government, not even the pretense of a monopoly on violence, it was established under an illegitimate foreign military occupation and it is entirely unrepresentative of the majority of Sunnis and Shiites who are opposed to the American occupation and despise the Iraqi government.

Moreover the dominant parties in the government and in those units of the security forces that battled their political rivals in Basra and elsewhere are the ones closest to Iran. The leadership of the Iraqi government regularly consults Iranian officials and is closer to Iran than any other element in Iraq today. Moreover, the Americans have always blamed their failures in Iraq on outsiders, Baathists, al Qaeda, Iranians, because they refuse to admit that the Iraqi people don't want them. So Iran is a convenient scapegoat to explain the strength of the Sadrists, a strength actually resulting from the fact that they are a genuinely popular mass movement. Blaming Iran also lets the Americans maintain the illusion that the Mahdi Army's ceasefire is still in effect.

I expect this from the Bush administration and the ideologues who back it. But when the American media, which, in the build up to the American attack on Iraq abdicated its duty to challenge those in power and inform the public, continues to demonstrate the same lack of skepticism, it is very distressing.

In April I testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to attempt to explain what was really happening in Iraq, where I have spent most of the last five years, so that they could better challenge General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker during their Senate testimony. But it made little difference.

As always, little interest was shown in the Iraqi people, and the fact that they were enduring a brutal foreign military occupation. Those who opposed the war did so because it was too expensive for American taxpayers, not even because American men and women were dying for absolutely nothing, and certainly not because anybody cares about Iraqis. But one of the main themes I heard repeated by the General and the Ambassador and by the senators who questioned them, was that Iran was the bad guy in Iraq these days. They accused Iran of supporting "Shiite extremists" and said that Muqtada al Sadr was one such extremist. They even managed to blame Iran for the Iran-Iraq war, which Iraq had initiated with US backing. Iran was the bad guy and the US was fighting a proxy war against it.

There has never been any evidence of this, save the accusations of a US regime that still hopes it can score a last minute war against Iran, but lack of evidence did not stop the Washington Post editorial page from declaring war against Iran on April 13th.

The Post talked about the "growing aggressiveness of Iran," taking at face value the Senate testimony of two politicized US officials about "Iranian-backed militias" which are the largest threat to U.S. forces and the Iraqi government." This "proxy war in Iraq is just one front in a much larger Iranian offensive," said the Post, citing Gaza and Lebanon as well as examples of "Iran's military adventurism," and stating that military force would have to be used to counter this "growing menace." The Post actually thinks there is a way to "nurture" a "popular backlash against Iran's military adventurism" in the region.

In a region devoid of democracy a popular backlash would not matter anyway, but Hizballah and Hamas are popular in the region, the U.S. and its occupation of Iraq are not popular. Perhaps with enough payoffs, cajoling and threats the U.S. can nurture a backlash among the unpopular dictators it supports in the Middle East. But the backlash by the people of the region is against America's military adventurism, not Iran's. The Americans hope to persuade the skeptical people of the region that Iran is their real enemy. And it was clear the Prime Minister and President of Iraq clearly did not view Iran as a threat when they welcomed Mahmud Ahmedinajad to Baghdad like a dear friend.

The Post's writers focus on claims to progress in Iran's nuclear power program that are exaggerated while denigrating the National Intelligence Estimate's own claim that Iran's nuclear program is on hold. And producing a nuclear device is about more than just centrifuges, and Iran is nowhere near progress in other important technologies that essential for a nuclear weapon. Iran's religious and political leaders have forsworn nuclear weapons, its supreme religious ruler has repudiated them.

We cannot at once condemn Iran for being a theocracy and then disregard the rulings of its theocrats. Though with an aggressive nuclear Israel and U.S regularly rattling their sabers who could blame Iran even if it did seek the security nuclear weapons seem to provide? Hillary Clinton recently threatened to "totally obliterate" Iran while John McCain sings about bombing Iran and president Bush called al Qaeda and Iran two of the greatest threats to America in the 21st century. This is slightly hyperbolic since al Qaeda's only successful attack against the U.S. on September 11 ago was a strategic pinprick, not to mention a lucky shot, and Iran has no global ambitions and no interest in attacking the U.S. and in fact has never invaded another country (Iraq started the Iran-Iraq war).

The repeated accusations of American officials do not suffice, as the catastrophic war in Iraq should have taught journalists who are still all too gullible and too willing to venerate automaton mouth pieces, even those who should know better, such as former secretary of state Colin Powell who gave an ignominious speech in front of the United Nations that was hailed by the media.

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2008/05/selling_the_war/

Good afternoon, all.

Posted by YoungAtHeart on May 7, 2008 at 09:21 AM

If this is The Clintons' "easy" answer to Florida and Michigan, I can see why their campaign is in so much trouble. They better call Limbaugh for more help. I'm sure Bill will sub for Rush again in exchange for a few more percentage points in Oregan.

There is a NEW AFTERNOON THREAD.

I trust that Dr Dean will work it out. All Dems want MI and FL seated and they will be. It is a matter of sorting out how it will be done.

Certainly there will be little problem if one of our great candidates reaches the magic number by June 10. I hope that is the case.

I will support, financially as well as by whatever other means available, the Dem candidate. We, the party of the people, stand for unity and welcome the GOP members to join us in electing our next great leader.

Posted by Doo-Bee-Doo- on May 7, 2008 at 10:41 AM

That means nothing. We should sue you for slander.
You are a very poor representative for Obama. You make his platform for "hope" look like a joke.

To: Young at heart
From: A friend
Hillary Clinton is wonderful woman and a good person and her husband was a great President. But there is viturally no way she can win this election for the Dem Nomination. I understand you dislike Sen. Obama and that is your right as an American but ask yourself this if Sen. Obama is the nominee will you vote for Sen. McCain ? if so you may be doing more damage to Sen. Clinton and her surrogates in the Senate and the House because when she comes back Next Jan. 2009 and Mccain wins the Senate floor will be a very cold and angry place for her because everyone will blame her for the lost election and it wil tear the party in two with Hillary and her supports on one side and everybody on the other and we will not be able to check McCain and his policies . On the other hand if she drops out and Sen. Obama wins ,the Senate and the House will be united and with the amount of victories we are expecting in both chambers you might be singing "VICTORY IS MINE VICTORY IS MINE GREAT DAY IN THE MORNING VICTORY IS MINE!!!" HILLARY WILL PROBABLY GET A LEADERSHIP POSITION IN THE SENATE EVEN SENATE PRESIDENT OR A VERY HIGH LEVEL committee chairmanship. I know you love Hillary Clinton but the advantages of her dropping out now are very large and BTW she might also become Gov. of The empire state "NEW YORK" and she will be able to say I told you so from there but not if she does not drop out NOW.
Sincerely yours,
A Good Dem. and Your Friend
Happy in CT