Barack Obama or John McCain

[Craig Lamson]

BTW your "bold" BHO did say it was BRED into us. [/color]

I'm not suggesting that you made this up, but could you please provide the citation?

It was in my original post on the subject... above

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor-marsh...ic_b_92601.html

[J. Raymond Carroll]

BTW your "bold" BHO did say it was BRED into us. [/color]

I'm not suggesting that you made this up, but could you please provide the citation?

It was in my original post on the subject... above

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor-marsh...ic_b_92601.html

"... .. The point I was making was not that my grandmother harbors any racial animosity. She doesn't. But she is a typical white person who, uh, if she sees somebody on the street that she doesn't know there's a reaction that's been been bred into our experiences that don't go away and that sometimes come out in the wrong way and that's just the nature of race in our society. We have to break through it..."

- Senator Barack Obama

Thanks for the citation Craig.You have convinced me that our bold Barack is definitely calling his grandmother a white racist.

Come to think of it, that would make our bold Barack a white racist also, since he was BRED from his grandmother's genes.

Edited March 21, 2008 by J. Raymond Carroll

[John Simkin]

In a nationwide Gallup poll of Democrats, Clinton established a lead of 49% to 42% over Obama, since the smear campaign over Wright's sermons. The polls do not yet take into account Obama's speech on Wright.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

This is what Bill Clinton and his advisors are reading on this LONG GOOD FRIDAY, with the echoes of Bill Richardson's KINGMAKER SPEECH ringing in their ears:

An analysis by Politico's Avi Zenilman shows that Clinton’s lead in superdelegates has shrunk by about 60 in the past month. And it found Clinton is roughly tied among House members, senators and governors — the party’s most powerful elite.

Journalists, for instance, have become partners with the Clinton campaign in pretending that the contest is closer than it really is.

Her advisers say privately that the nominee will be clear by the end of June. At the same time, they recognize that the nominee probably is clear already.

A Democratic strategist said that given the unlikelihood of prevailing any other way, Clinton now must “scare” superdelegates “who basically just want to win.”

a number of heavyweight Democrats are looking at the landscape and laying the groundwork to dissuade Clinton from trying to overturn the will of the party rank and file.

But let’s assume a best-case scenario for Clinton, one where she wins every remaining contest with 60 percent of the vote (an unlikely outcome since she has hit that level in only three states so far — her home state of New York, Rhode Island and Arkansas).

Even then, she would still be behind Obama in delegates.

One big fact has largely been lost in the recent coverage of the Democratic presidential race: Hillary Rodham Clinton has virtually no chance of winning.

In other words: The notion of the Democratic contest being a dramatic cliffhanger is a game of make-believe

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9149.html

Edited March 21, 2008 by J. Raymond Carroll

[Mark Stapleton]

Has there ever been a precedent for the superdelegates overturning the will of the party's voters?

[Michael Hogan]

Has there ever been a precedent for the superdelegates overturning the will of the party's voters?

According to CNN:

Q: Have superdelegates ever decided the Democratic nominee?

A: No. Since superdelegates were first created in the 1980s, a Democratic nomination race has never come down to the votes of superdelegates at the convention.

From the article: Superdelegates: Why They Matter: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/11/del...iner/index.html

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Has there ever been a precedent for the superdelegates overturning the will of the party's voters?

My quick two cents, and I just know little about party history. Primaries are a new phenomenon. If I am not mistaken, JFK was the first Democrat to use the potential of the primary system as a path to power. All the political commentators I have heard are viewing the present party crisis as unprecedented, meaning that the party elders who comprise the superdelegates are bound only by their own consciences.

Now to round up my reporting for the week:

THis has been a thrilling week for our hero, the bold Barack.

We saw that he can take a punch and bounce right back, and we saw that somebody up there likes him as the Jovial Bill Richardson hurled his 3 a.m. email thunderbolt into the Clinton camp, causing hurt, anger and dismay. THey thought they had God on their side.

Why did Bearded Bill choose 3 a.m., the Clinton's wonder.

James Carville, the RAGIN' CAJUN who has defended the Clintons through thick and thin, saw significance in the timing, but pretended not to notice the pointed parallel to Hillary's notorious "3.am phone call" campaign commerial. Instead, Carville compares Hillary to Jesus Christ before the crucifixion:

“Mr. Richardson’s endorsement came right around the anniversary of the day when Judas sold out for 30 pieces of silver, so I think the timing is appropriate, if ironic,” Mr. Carville said, referring to Holy Week.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/22/us/polit...amp;oref=slogin

I suppose on Easter Sunday (tomorrow) we can expect to wake up to the news that Hillary has risen from the dead.

Funny guy, that James Carville. He has a great future behind him.

Peggy Noonan's FERARRO MOMENT in the Wall St. Journal

Peggy Noonan was Ronald Reagan's speechwriter, and she has been a faithful keeper of the Reagan flame. Our bold Barack made Peggy cringe as she listened to his Philadelphia speech. Peggy thought it was another attack on the Reagan legacy by some privileged trust-fund yuppie who is out of touch with the lives of common people but happens to be a bleeding-heart liberal.

This connected in my mind to the persistent feeling one has -- the fear one has, actually -- that the Obamas, he and she, may not actually know all that much about America. They are bright, accomplished, decent, they know all about the yuppie experience, the buppie experience, Ivy League ways, networking. But they bring along with all this -- perhaps defensively, to keep their ideological views from being refuted by the evidence of their own lives, or so as not to be embarrassed about how nice fame, success, and power are -- habitual reversions to how tough it is to be in America, and to be black in America, and how everyone since the Reagan days has been dying of nothing to eat, and of exploding untreated diseases. America is always coming to them on crutches.

But most people didn't experience the past 25 years that way. Because it wasn't that way. Do the Obamas know it?

http://online.wsj.com/article/declarations.html

Of course this has been ATTACK BARACK week at the Wall Street Journal (led by Ronald Kessler and Shelby Steele), but I am fond of Ms. Noonan from watching her on TV, so I'll be kind and assume that she was afraid she would lose her job if she said ONLY nice things about "the speech."

Speaking of irony, even the Wall St. Journal cannot deny that Barack is a can-do guy when it comes to managing his campaign money.

"If only the moneymen on Wall Street had OBAMA'S MIDAS TOUCH," I can hear Journal readers mutter, "we would not be in our current financial fix."

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB120...ff_main_tff_top

Meanwhile, our hero, the bold Barack, takes a well-earned vacation on the beautiful sun-drenched beaches of the UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS.

http://www.usvi.net/usvi/

I asked if I could come along too and he said NO YOU CAN"T.

Edited March 22, 2008 by J. Raymond Carroll

[Mark Stapleton]

Thanks for the replies, guys. My guess is that such an action would eventually destroy the Democratic Party, so I doubt they'll risk it.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Thanks for the replies, guys. My guess is that such an action would eventually destroy the Democratic Party, so I doubt they'll risk it.

The most influential superdelegates should be able to see this, and no one will be terribly surprised if Bill Richardson persuades a few uncommitted superdelegates who happen to be friends (Richardson has many friends and of all denominations throughout the country) to pop up like Easter Bunnies and say INSTANT KARMA WITH BARAK OBAMA.

The question then becomes: Does Hillary have the CLASS to "STEP DOWN" (to quote our first woman vice-presidentwhowasnottobe) before the cards come tumbling down.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

PRINCETON, NJ -- Barack Obama has quickly made up the deficit he faced with Hillary Clinton earlier this week, with the latest Gallup Poll Daily tracking update on Democratic presidential nomination preferences showing 48% of Democratic voters favoring Obama and 45% Clinton.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/105529/Gallup-D...ad-Clinton.aspx

[J. Raymond Carroll]

The Clinton camp scoffs at the Richardson endorsement as too late to make a difference.

Meantime, everyone knows that Al Gore is not a Hillary fan, but he is ON RECORD as saying he will endorse SOMEONE before the primaries are over. If he wants to be THE BIG DOMINO, NOW would be the time to make his play.

Former vice president Al Gore's pronouncement that he is likely to endorse one of the Democratic candidates for president before the primary season is over has set off a slew of speculation about who his choice might be.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7090801458.html

[Michael Hogan]

.....Meantime, everyone knows that Al Gore is not a Hillary fan, but he is ON RECORD as saying he will endorse SOMEONE before the primaries are over. If he wants to be THE BIG DOMINO, NOW would be the time to make his play.

Tommy Christopher blogs:

The Clinton campaign clings to hope that it can go to Denver having closed the gap enough to put the Superdelegates in play. Richardson's endorsement could be the signal that it ain't gonna happen that way. If several more endorsements like this, from key Democrats like Al Gore and John Edwards, go Obama's way in short order, that would indicate that the grownups have made their ruling. Because Richardson is so influential with Hispanics, a key Clinton and McCain demographic, this is one HEAVY DOMINO. (caps added)

Full post: http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008...r-barack-obama/

[John Simkin]

PRINCETON, NJ -- Barack Obama has quickly made up the deficit he faced with Hillary Clinton earlier this week, with the latest Gallup Poll Daily tracking update on Democratic presidential nomination preferences showing 48% of Democratic voters favoring Obama and 45% Clinton.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/105529/Gallup-D...ad-Clinton.aspx

This seems to be the reaction to Obama's speech. That is great news for American democracy. Maybe the electorate is more sophisticated than I gave them credit for. More like Ray than Craig.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

GENDER NOW DECISIVE FACTOR?

The “super-delegates” because of their greater flexibility in the choice of a nominee, would have greater power than the female delegates committed to presidential candidates.

(“Unintended Consequences,” by Susan Estrich, Memorandum to the Hunt Commission, September 9, 1981.)

The issue was finally resolved through a compromise created by Congresswoman Geraldine Ferraro. The Ferraro Proposal reduced the total number of un-pledged delegates to 566 or 14% of the Convention, but it left selection of the Congressional delegates in the hands of the House and Senate Democratic Caucuses. (See, Bringing Back the Parties, by David Price, Congressional Quarterly Press, 1984) The 14% number was far short of the original proposal that 30% of the convention be unpledged. However, if the number had been much larger, it would have been practically impossible to meet the equal division between men and women requirements in the rules.

http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/public...?breadcrumb=%2F

Bill Richardson has kicked away two legs from Hillary's three-legged stool -- Hispanics & Bill Clinton loyalists -- leaving only women as a core constituency group.

According to the New York TImes, of the 246 uncommitted superdelegates, only 75 are women. In other words, if I understand this, a majority of Hillary's core superdelegate constituency has already announced for her, while a clear majority of the uncommited are men, and therefore more likely to favor Obama, if exit polls from the primaries are any guide.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton: What about the rest of us?

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said today that the people around Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton practice “gutter” politics and that they feel entitled to the presidency, a day after an informal adviser to her campaign compared Richardson to Judas for endorsing Sen. Barack Obama.

James Carville told the New York Times that Richardson, a former member of Bill Clinton’s Cabinet, had committed “an act of betrayal,” adding that it “came right around the anniversary of the day when Judas sold out [Jesus] for 30 pieces of silver, so I think the timing is appropriate, if ironic.”

“I’m not going to get in the gutter like that,” Richardson responded on “Fox News Sunday.” “And you know, that’s typical of many of the people around Senator Clinton. They think they have a sense of entitlement to the presidency.”

The “entitlement” enters into dangerous terroritory for the Clintons, given the number of commentators who have said over the past few months that Americans could balk at having Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton presidencies.

“I am very loyal to the Clintons,” said Richardson, but he said he wanted something beyond “Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton.” “You know, what about the rest of us?” he asked.

He called for “a new generation of leadership,” and added, “I think Obama represents this new change of not just bipartisanship, but bringing people together, bringing races together, bringing America’s role in the world to be respected again.

http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/bill-...asts-her-aides/