I don't think these endorsements really mean anything....people will vote for who they want too not because some one else says too....

Hillary is going to win HUGE in Florida tuesday even if there aren't any delegate seats... It will help her as she heads into super tuesday.

Most polls have her winning all 22 states that vote on super tuesday... obama and edwards are going to lose.

Edwards should go ahead bail out.

Anon..

Things change far too quickly to have any confidence in whatever polls you are looking at today. That should be abundantly clear by now.

Super Tuesday is all about delegates, not poll victories.

What does Dana Perino think?

Let us know when you have some video... yum

To all those who tout billary's advantage in the polls, I would like to point out that the polls have been rather mistaken during this election cycle. One way or another, the actual results are going to be different from the polls, so it's stupid to bludgeon comment-board opponents with poll numbers.

Since Senator Kennedy is endorsing Senator Obama, I guess that means that Senator Clinton is battling the establishment. Senator Kennedy and Senator Keery are both losers, therefore it helps Senator Clinton.
Also, I would remind those who were moved by Caroline Kennedy's endorsement of Senator Obama should remember a few things.
Caroline is a wonderful person who has experienced more tragedy than any ten people I know, and my heart goes out to her and the kind of person she is.

But people should be aware that while President Kennedy inspired many people, me included, his almost 3 year Presidency was not marked by many acheivements, and some disaters, like the Bay of Pigs. As a Senator, he was considered a showhorse, not a workhorse, and for many of you who are fed up with "I did not have sex with that woman"

Well....

So, Alan, is this an argument that people who are fed up with "I did not have sex with that woman" should vote for HRC?

Or that she is likely to be assisted by a latent anti-JFK backlash?

great to see billary fanboys talk trash about JFK and the whole Kennedy clan so fast ROFLMAO

So pathetic.

Who let the dogs out?

Bling? bling? bling? bling?

Clinton vs Kennedy! Wow that is some political battle.

Anybody who thinks that Kennedy does not help ``Obama'' believes in ``fairty tales''.

Kennedy will be a huge help in Unions. I am not sure about Hispanic voters, but Union households will definitely give Obama a second look.

Oh yeah, read this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/opinion/27rich.html?ref=opinion

Always amuses me that in America the supposed pinko Democratic liberals are named Rockefeller and Kennedy.

while President Kennedy inspired many people, me included, his almost 3 year Presidency was not marked by many acheivements

Yes, the Clintons' fans loathe JFK, RFK, and MLK. They much prefer dishonest and warmongering--but very experienced and effective--LBJ. This is getting downright bizarre...

When you are thinking on 2/5 in the big states, you should not pay too much attention to statewide results, especially as far as blacks, latinos or api's are concerned.

This is a race for delegates and that means it is a race for congressional districts. Minority groups tend to concentrate in a relative few number of districts. Consider that of CA's 53 congresspersons only something like 6 or 7 have spanish surnames. Thus a candidate could roll up large numbers in one or another group and have those numbers show directly in the state vote but not pick up a commensurate number of delegates.

Who knows what's going on in LA? Linda Sanchez (LA) is for Obama, her sister in Santa Ana, Clinton. Villagraigosa's huge clinton but that won't matter on the West side or at the beaches..

Remember what happened in NV. Hillary won by 5 pct. Obama won more delegates. The Clintons had a big win among latino voters but they were geographically concentrated.

That will repeat in NJ, NY, CA, MA, GA, MO but probably not so much in IL

Sounds like the Hillary brigade would turn down an endorsement from Senator Kennedy. Sure they would. They really are a bunch of perverse habitual liars. Hillary tried her best to get it, so it is a little late to now start to discount his endorsement of Senator Obama.

Congrats to Obama and everyone who busted their tails in SC to make the blowout a reality. The timing on the release of the two Kennedy endorsements struck me as very smart: Caroline's endorsement was on every commenter's lips last night and now Ted's will lead the news cycle Monday, right alongside the primary blowout headlines. Masterful. The big mo is back for the big O!

Alan:

What's sad is that the Clintons were working HARD to get the Kennedy endorsements. Not sure how that fits into your narrative dismissing the importance of this endorsement, but it will be interesting to see how you distinguish that fact.

Commenting on this blog is good fun and all, but I hope all of the Obama supporters who read and post here will make an effort to

1 stay focused
2 work more than we talk
3 stay positive

If we are effective in these efforts we win. thanks.

Ted is great. But, the Kennedy family cannot compete with the two Clintons' attack machine. No one has ever defeated them. Ever. Forever.

The bait (race, gender, and ethnicity) is now embedded in our blood stream. We cannot have a blood transfer.

I fear the worst. I fear that the Clintons will seriously hurt Obama. I fear that they will take apart his spirit. I fear that even if Obama wins (A BIG BANG IF), the Clintons' will force themselves as VP. Thus, Obama will become a useful tool to them.

In sum, the Clintons will win. This is an axiom. It cannot be proven wrong.

There is of course ONE WAY (and ONLY ONE WAY) to defeat the Clintons. Now and Forever.

- Make the Media zero-in on the supposedly "35" years of experience of HRC, the spousal beneficiary. As a starting point, read Colbert I. King's essay in WashPost (1/26)
- Demand the Clintons papers (especially between the Clintons) to be accessible to all now (or GOP will demand them in General - Have the Press say this again and again).

If these two things happen then and only then the Clintons will be defeated.

Endorsements from the Kennedys may be somewhat more relevant than usual for the simple reason that recently Clinton has been attacking Obama's "liberal" credentials (e.g. doing things like suggesting he is not strongly pro-choice), and the Kennedys are still considered the standard bearers for liberalism by many Democrats (particularly older Democrats).

And taking a slight step back, it really is amazing that Obama is getting endorsements from both the Kennedys, Kerrys, and Leahys of the world as well as the McCaskills, Napolitanos, Ben Nelsons, and Tim Johnsons. And all with the outcome still very much in doubt.

I get your point about JFK, Alan, and I think it would be appropriate, had it been JFK who endorsed Obama (or whoever).

And wirh respect to "womanizing", I happen to think Bill's affair was tacky. Tackiness doesn't really bother me, but arrogance does. It's incredibly arrogant to think that, as President, you could have an affair with an intern and that there wouldn't be any consequences...and as a result of this misjudgment on Clinton's part, our nation spent far too long pondering his sex life, and he got significantly less done, as a result. That's what I object to, wrt to "womanizing".

Billary won Mich with 55% on the strength of name alone.

Obama and Billary fought for South Carolina and Obama won with 55% (spin it which ever way you want but they both tried and Obama won).

Can Billary (who by all appearances is actively campaigning there) beat the 55% threshold in a state where Obama isn't campaigning?

qtip-

Billary only won michigan because no one else was trying to win. I could have swore more people wrote in no votes or something like that. Hillary hasn't had any wins by as high a margin. 5,000 vote margin in NH, lost the delegate race in NV and last night's pummeling.

Hill has the momentum but it is all in the wrong direction.

I'm so glad Bill is showing his true Arkansas colors.

Question: Do these endorsements also count towards the super delegates in the convention? If the super delegates comprise the party leadership, then it logically follows that the endorsement of a party leader, like Sen. Kennedy, would also correlate to his support/vote as a super delegate. If this is a race for delegates, then these endorsements may weigh more down the line. But, I'm not entirely clear on the whole super delegate process, so I could be wrong here.

"As reported Kennedy has asked Mr. Cliton to tune down. Meanwhile, he has been plotting when to endorse Obama. No one sees anything wrong here?"

aka misguided sour grapes..

Yesterday, I saw Obamabots celebrating the narrowing of national poll between Hillary and their lover boy. No one appears to care about this trend anymore. Interesting?!

Having grumbled last night about what I see as the over-estimation of Caroline's endorsement, I thought I'd chime in here to say that, by contrast, I DO think this endorsement is impressive. Teddy has both actual experience and status in the Democratic party. That's great news.

I'm also delighted to see that most of the SC coverage is focusing on the size of overall turnout rather than fulminating about racial divides. That's perhaps even better news.

Barack Obama is no Jack Kennedy. Since he can't run on his light record, his rationale for running is that he's "Kennedyesque."

Obama makes people cry when he gives his speaches while Hillary reads from cue cards.

I think Ted has an easy choice.

Step aside Hillary. Time for the future.

As MLK said, "Now is the time..."

"This could be a fun couple weeks."

*Yawn" Keep spinning.

"Also, note in the video above how Barak seems to have taken on a rather "street" sounding cadence and accent? Obama so pure, so unaffected and genuine! Heh-heh.'

People love embarrassing themselves - does it get any more pathetic?

Josh Marshall and Eric Kleefeld are about to join Jonathan Chait on the other side of the Rubicon

Greg Sargent can't swim

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-oe-chait26jan26,1,6187136.column

Billary, Greg, Eric Meet

Estes Keefauver

Sweet, Caroline! Estes Keefauver, Front Runner 1960

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estes_Kefauver

If you can't swim the Rubicon, we've life preservers available

Si Se Puede!

Per Ambinder, apparently Kathleen Sebelius (Governor of Kansas) is also planning to endorse Obama on Tuesday after she gives the Democratic response to the State of the Union on Monday.

By the way, I agree with Yeswecan: if the question is who could do the most to build the Democratic Party and strengthen it for the future--and that probably is the question for a lot of long-time Democrats--then I think the choice is pretty darn easy.

Thanks for the link, loki. So Obama calls on Democrats, and specifically, Ted Kennedy, to grow a spine, and Ted Kennedy turns around and endorses him?

That's gotta hurt.

And Anonymous at 3:48 PM

You know it is impossible that the Republicans will stop using filibuster to combat his legistative initiatives

Well, those filibusters will be pointless if the Democrats grow a large enough majority after this election. Which candidate has a better chance of attracting new voters to the polls? And thereby help increase the Democratic majority? I think all three candidates for good--we could do a lot worse.

But in my opinion, they are not equal in terms of bringing people to the polls. In fact, I think Clinton will in fact bring people to the polls: Republican voters...which will be a problem for Democratic candidates on the ticket with Clinton.

A NYT magazine article from about five months ago had a lot of Dem senators claiming that she swoops in at the last minute to take credit for things others have been working on, and buffaloes her colleagues into allowing her to cosponsor bills she has done little work on.

That's very interesting. One of the things I've always been a little suspicious of is the amount of credit she takes for Kennedy's SCHIP.

"Hillary "supporters" are all over the blog comment boards with mean, vicious, dishonext attacks on Ted, Caroline, JFK."

Really? Where?

One wonders what the message of Kennedy's endorsement would have been from Clinton Surrogates and supporters if Hillary had gotten it. Methinks they would be saying, "See, this shows that Obama is offering false hope - the Kennedy's have voted NO." Instead, they're gonna trash these as meaningless and try to make the case that this just means Obama represents the old-style establishment.

The moral of this story is that when an attack machine like theirs is in high gear, you don't really have to bother with the details, as "Truthiness" as they relate to poll-tested responses guides their responses.

.just like the unintended gutlessness people display when they intentionally misspell Obamas name.

loki, don't you get it? Hillary's digs at Obama's record don't work.

He has vision, ideas, charisma, integrity, the capacity to inspire, unit, persuade and lead the nation, not just a small fraction of it. Hillary does not offer that, and with Bill, offers a lot of complication and distraction.

We need leadership for the future. Change. Not more of the selfish, dishonest Clintons.

"unintended gutlessness?"

You really don't have any idea how stupid you appear do you?

"You really don't have any idea how stupid you appear do you?"

..this coming from a Hillary-shill, trying to convince himself/herself that a Kennedy endorsement is bad - good luck with that though.

Oh and Mack...it was a typo...just like when you forgot to use an apostrophe. Unless you didn't foget and just are too stupid to know you should have...hell you even posted it twice and "forgot" both times...what must that say about you?

I'm a Hillary supporter and I'm feeling pretty down. It is difficult to run a successful compaign if the media hate you and the establishment is closing on you. The endorsements of Obama by teh Arizona governor and likely by Kansas governor, on top of Senator McCaskill, really hurt. Old bull Ted Kennedy, a supposedly long-term friend of the Clinton's, will go out of his way to block her effort. it will also hurt. You are running against a talker who talks of hope and unity. How can you run against that? You are running against teh messenger but people will mistake you for running against the message. How can you separate the messenager from teh message. It is a very difficult task. People want to feel good even though you think such feeling is misguided. It is a very difficult task. Heck even you cannot run against his far-left position in IL senate. of course all of these will change in the General Election if Obama makes that far. The Repugants will have no trouble running against his record or lack of it, will run his association with kennedy, ...

If I were Hillary, I could have just quitted. this piling on by the media and Democratic establish would be too unbearable for me. But Hillary is not me, she will fight on and she will win, somehow. On every step of way, I will cheer her on. Next time I receive a fundraising letter, I will give her $25. Heck, I may well go to $2,300.

Jay,

Read a few of my posts. I don't think the endorsement is bad. I actually think it will have a very powerfully negative effect on Clinton.

I just don't buy into the Obama hype. Haven't drunk the koolaide!

Yeah loki, Mack "forgot" twice.
And Obama "accidently voted wrong" over and over and over.
What does that say about him? hmmmm?

I guess Kennedy's endorsement of Obama against the Clintons shows that he got a spine, eh?

Oh, that's going to frost the Clinton supporters...

As I said: these endorsements have gotta smart...I guess you could argue against Caroline Kennedy's Op-Ed today and say "No, we DON'T need someone to inspire us..." but as a bumper-sticker slogan, that's not very catchy...

Hi loki, glad you brought up obama's senate record. By the way, what were the crowning legislative achievements of the clintons the first time they occupied the white house? Please be specific. Thanks.

Jay wrote on January 27, 2008 4:27 PM:
"What does that say about him? hmmmm?"

..and Hillary voted to authorize one of the biggest colossal clusterfucks this country has ever known - what does that say about her? hmmmm?

>>> Different people read the intelligence reports and reached different conclusions. Kerry, Biden, Dodd, a lot of good Senators voted for the resolution. You think all of them are less worthy than Obama. What I resent most about Obama's candidacy is his so called good judgement against war. That's bullshit. The man made a decision by hunch, without access to the wealth of information to the senators. Even he said himself that had he been in the Senate at teh time of vote, he might have made a different decision. Gimme a break! YOur love boy is not born with superb judgement. Just asked him how he decided to buy the adjacent lot from Tony Rezko.

Get ready to hear a lot more about Rezko!

Bill Clinton almost singlehandedly destroying his wife's shot at the Presidency. You gotta admit, it's one helluva story. One for the ages.

For the untalented, uninspiring Hillary, that was just too much for her, or Democrats to shoulder.

Wow. The political genius couple of the 1990's makes one of the biggest miscalculations in recent political history.

Helluva story.

"Get ready to hear a lot more about Rezko!"

What a battle-cry of desperation if I ever heard one.

Outside of the box:

Maybe Bill doesn't want to go back to the White House and he's pulling the rug out from under her. After all, he'd only be back in the spotlight for four or eight years. And the media would be following him more than her! No chance for poon-tang.

loki is a douchebag. nanny nanny boo boo

"We Clinton supporters have never said they are perfect. At least they have not done this kind of deal to enrich themselves. This is very close to bribery! Be very careful!"

Again, you have to be very careful when it comes to the Clinton's "enriching" themselves..

This is pretty stupid, by both sides.

You aren't convincing anyone, and, in the end, y'all are just playing into the current media narrative.

Obama supporters will love the SC victory. HRC supporters will pump up Michigan and Florida.

So fucking what?! Neither Michigan nor FLorida are contested primaries. Wherever HRC and Obama meet, HRC has a lead in the beginning, while gradually her support begins dropping. In NH and Nevada, her support had not dropped off enough.

In Iowa and SC, it was quite different, and her support had collapsed.

Now, from an objective standpoint, I think we will see the same dynamic play out in 2/5 states. The question is, will she maintain her hold in Massachusetts, California, and her insurmountable leads in NY and NJ?

Mighty big question mark.

But for the moment, may I remind all of you shills of the following facts?

No HRC supporter is going to ditch her candidacy because of her marriage to Big Bill, Bill's antics, HRC's war vote, or the failure to implement health care reform in 1994.

No Obama supporter is going to ditch him because of limited "links" between him and someone up for corruption charges (and as a fact he did not buy that land from Rezko; instead, Rezko bought an adjoining property), because Obama is "inexperienced," because the Republicans would be mean to him in the GE, or because his middle name is Hussein.

ENOUGH ALREADY!

DTM,

Thanks for answering my question. I think it helps put these endorsements in context to think of them as also potentially turning into delegate votes.

Yes, it was "liberal elitists" (pace Karl Rove) who gave Obama a 43-point win in his Illinois Senate race, an 8-point win in Iowa and a 27-point win in SC. Those States are nothing but overgrown wine bars.

What's becoming truly absurd about this race is we see an extremely talented woman candidate who by all accounts is genius (whether or not we personally like her), needing her strong hubby to try to push her over the top.

Its hard to imagine a worse message here if Hillary wins the nomination - that if you're a woman candidate going for President, when the going gets tough, don't bother trying to win it on your own as a "man" would - instead you need to bring out your more charismatic and ego-driven successful husband to beat up anyone who says anything bad about you.

At this point its pretty much embedded in everyone's psyche that its not Hillary vs Obama - its "Bill and Hillary" vs Obama. That Edwards' concession speech essentially started, "I want to join Hillary and Bill in congratulating Obama..." pretty much hammers the point home.

"You've come a long way, baby" - just make sure you have your big strong hubby get rid of the riff-raff if you want to win.

Is Ted Kennedy part of the status quo? When republicans want to talk about liberals, who is first mentioned? How will this help unite the country? Ted Kennedy's endorsement goes againist everything Barak Obama is preaching from the pulpit. period. If you think republicans don't notice this endorsement you are kidding yourself. You just joined the polarized club Barak, as you so often say Hillary is. What a hypocrit. Just read the article saying South Carolina win turns a page, and while reading what he says about the 90's think about Ted Kennedy's endorsement.

CalD wrote on January 27, 2008 5:04 PM:
I'd have to say that if all this firepower should fail to deliver the Commonwealth of MA for Senator Obama, people are definitely going to talk.

>>> Obama will not win MA. People have seen the play in MA before. they are all having buyer's remorse regarding Deval Patrick.

For the moron who mentioned whitewater before hand, you need to get the fact right. The Clinton entered into a real estate venture and ended up losing a lot of money. It has been thoroughly investigated and nothing has been found against the Clinton's. If you idiot thinks Ken Starr has not done a thorough job, you can hire attorneys and re-fight it. How can you mother bring up a son or daughter so stupid as you!!!

I believe this is a good opportunity for the clinton compaign to tout the difference between Clinton's healthcare proposal and Obama's. They can say they respect Kennedy's long-term effort of bringing healthcare to all people. If he thinks a plan should start with 15 million uncovered, he is welcome endorse Obama. Kennedy was instrumental to bring universal healthcare to MA. If he now regrets that it has a mandate, he should say so and he is welcome to support Obama. they may even make a little bit of fun with Obmama's old comment regarding ted's spine.

Of course Hillary wants Florida to count. Its full of old people from the Northeast, her base.

Clinton could only plausibly claim to no longer be the establishment candidate if at some point she fell substantially behind in the count of declared superdelegates.

And frankly, it is way too late even for that.

Ni Daye wrote on January 27, 2008 5:36 PM:

Furthermore, the Cliton compaign should point out Kennedy cannot be more a part of establishment.
----------------------
Was that why the Clintons tried so desperately to try and win Senator Kennedy's endorsement?. You Clintonites are truly pathetic. If Senator Kennedy had agreed to what HillBillery had sought, and endorsed her, you would all be crowing about how that trumped the Kerry endorsement of Obama.
You lost again, so people are no longer buying the Clinton fairy tales.

Recycled to this more appropriate thread:

Where is Lloyd Bentsen when you need him! But I believe that the following would blow any notion that Obama is like JFK out of the water:
Ask Not! Why Obama is No JFK
By Ted Widmer.

Speaking of Kennedy endorsements, Kathleen Kennedy Townsend along with her brother and sister just endorsed Hillary, which should help with women voters (I am not sure how valuable Teddy's endorsement of Obama is, except with very liberal voters):

1/27/2008 Statement from Kathleen Kennedy Townsend

"I respect Caroline and Teddy's decision but I have made a different choice. While I admire Senator Obama greatly, I have known Hillary Clinton for over 25 years and have seen first hand how she gets results. As a woman, leader, and person of deep convictions, I believe Hillary Clinton would make the best possible choice for president. She shares so many of the concerns of my father. Hillary has spent a lifetime speaking out on behalf of the powerless and working to alleviate poverty, in our country and around the world. I have seen her work up close and know she will be a great President. At this moment when so much is at stake at home and overseas, I urge our fellow Americans to support Hillary Clinton. That is why my brother Bobby, my sister Kerry, and I are supporting Hillary Clinton."

Now you see how "polarizing" Hillary is? She just split even the Kennedy family! LOL.

Halperin also gets the politics of it:

http://thepage.time.com/halperins-take-five-reasons-why-the-kennedy-endorsement-is-a-big-deal/

It's still gonna be a crapload of work, but a path through the thicket of the next two weeks is now vaguely discernible.

NCSteve wrote on January 27, 2008 5:39 PM:

Of course Hillary wants Florida to count. Its full of old people from the Northeast, her base.

Too much is made of the retiree vote in FL. According to the census bureau, Florida's percentage of persons age 65 or older is only 16.8%, just 4.4% above the national average of 12.4%. In Iowa, where Barack Obama won, the percentage is nearly as high at 14.6%. NH is bang on average at 12.4% and SC is just a tick above at 12.8%.

As for the FL delegates, I'm sure Clinton would love to have them count but it's as important for her that Floridians know she thinks they should count. Florida will certainly be good for some buzz value going into Super Tuesday, national delegates or no national delegates.

LOL

Next Billary and the supporters will be exhuberantely but sublety pointing out the fact that Kennedy is a Catholic. LOL.

Since Catholics are involved in scandals re the priests, that means Kennedy's endorsement is moot. LOL
Wouldn't put it past them at all at this point.

I would not put it past Bill Clinton to come out with something similar to that, artfully disguised of course, given his disgusting behavior in the past month and the most recent disguised smear he thought up by invoking Jesse Jackson's win in South Carolina. And the defender of feminists, Hillary will stand meekly by and let her man do it so she can be the first woman president, when it is really Bill who will be the president.

All the women that Bill Clinton has pawed and demeaned know what a real sexist pig is like, after they have been assaulted by him.

Liam

Just like 1992 more Bimbo eruptions coming
Along with the unrevealed donations to the Clinton library and the papers from the Clinton presidency.

Bill has moved on up in the world and now plays with super rich divorcees who probably will not talk like the Arkansas trailer trash. But you never now.

Like always the Clintons are awash in scandals

I really don't think we need to hypothesize some as yet unrevealed scandals to explain why all these endorsements are coming Obama's way.

Let's review:

Clinton is getting her support mostly from running up the score among relatively narrow (and older) slices of traditional Democratic voters.

Obama is getting his support from a broader cross-section of traditional Democrats and by attracting new people--independents, former Republicans, and young people--to the Party.

Now who would you choose if you were thinking about the future of the Party?

DRinOH said at the beginning of this thread at 1:54 PM: "Endorsements are wildly overrated, and this one will be no exception."

WRONG. The Ted and Caroline Kennedy endorsements are enormously important. The news has bolstered battle weary Democrats eager to unify behind a truly outstanding new leader.

All the cynical, Clinton attack dogs take notice. Your dirty, dishonest, divisive brand of politics will not win this election. It is of a past era, and the Democratic Party and the nation are moving forward past the Bush-Clinton era of partisan warfare. Your agressive mean spirited attacks are wasted.

You are saying "you cannot change Washington and claim the future," Obama and supporters are saying "YES WE CAN"

Bill should have listened when Kennedy asked him to cool it, stop the dishonest attacks on Obama, and stop the race baiting.

But red-faced, finger-wagging, lying Bill was having none of that. He was having too much fun making the news.
IF Hillary can't run her own campaign and keep Bill accountable, how would she ever run the country?
Where exactly is the evidence of Hillary's own voice and tough leadership?

NEWS FLASH! Rumors are running rampant that BILL CLINTON is now considering endorsing Obama.

"Shoot, he's got the best game in town," the former President was overheard telling advisors. "I'm having some real doubts about my early endorsemwnt. May have been premature. I like Hillary and all that, but president?"

We are perhaps making too much of endorsements. I cannot think of a case where an endorsement made a huge difference. Gore endorsed Dean, and then he went up in a scream shortly thereafter. Obama got the "huge" Culinary Workers Union endorsement in NV and he lost the state...etc...etc...

Vive la difference!

jeanette wrote on January 27, 2008 6:36 PM:

this is ridiculous

kennedy's endorsement does nothing but undermine obama. he's run his entire campaign on how bad democrats are. he's even called kennedy a tired old hack. the endorsement hurts the central rationale for obama's candidacy

i guess sexism runs deep even in the democratic party. remember, chappaquiddick ted belongs to the catholic church, not known for its progressive views on women

wow. that's some desperate spin. not only kneecapping the entire Dem party but having a whack at The Church while you're at it. again, wow.

Michael...

It's in your posting history, and anybody can look it up...and they all should.

Shrill, insulting, naive, ignorant and...wait for it... sexist. Heh, they can't say you aren't well rounded.

Chump.

Meet The Press addresses Clinton’s race-baiting:

Today, an amazing thing happened; the MTP panel confronted the Clinton’s race-baiting strategy against Obama head on. Here’s the link. Watch it for yourself. The discussion begins at around 27 minutes (after the John McCain interview).

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/22867810#22867810

Actually, older Democrats who actually experienced the Kennedy Presidency may be the least impressed with the Kennedy legacy. Icons tend to impress the uninitiated.

Angry Vet, I usually stay out of these one on ones, but somebody needs to set the record straight on the Rezko deal.

1. Obama wanted to buy a house.
2. The owner of the house was selling the house and the lot next door at the same time. The owner would only sell the house and the next door lot together.
3. Obama says he couldn't afford both the house and the lot next door.
4. Rezko's wife bought the lot next door at the same time that Obama bought the house as a favor to Obama. She paid $680,000 for the lot.
5. Later, in an "unrelated" transaction, she sold some of the lot to Obama.

So that's the favor the Rezkos did for the Obamas. That's what Obama is talking about when he says it was dumb for him to let a Rezco do something that he might think obligated Obama to him. For some reason, Obama just can't quite come clean about it. I don't know why. Pretty much he gets a pass from the liberal msm. I don't know why. Personally, I don't care if people get rich in public office. I just think the Obama explanations bob and weave some. He explains things away a lot.

Meet The Press? The Meet The Press panel accused the Clintons of race baiting? No! I'm so shocked!

All I gotta say is that I just can't wait to see Oliphant's next cartoon!

Couldn't be happier to see an Obama endorsement from an old "D" I was tired of Billary all along they're activities lately have just more offensive!!!

Unfortunately, he was not able to get the endorsement that he really wanted--Ronald Reagan. Reagan was the kind of leader that Obama really want to be like. Here are his own words about why people voted for Reagan.

"I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it. I think they felt like with all the excesses of the 1960s and 1970s and government had grown and grown but there wasn't much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating. I think people, he just tapped into what people were already feeling, which was we want clarity we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing."

The excesses and growth of the government were what the Democrats did. It was the Great Society, The Environmental Movement, Medicare, Civil Rights, Progressive taxation, Government Regulation of the economy and Gay Rights. Calling them excesses is Republican language. Most Democrats didn't think they went far enough. And the "clarity" was against the honest soul searching that Americans had after Vietnam and Watergate of our place in the world.

This is much smaller news than the Kennedy endorsement, but the St Louis Post-Dispatch has also endorsed Obama.

Nice quote at the end of today's NYT piece. It's just one citizen's judgment, but for those of us who remember 1968 it touches a place in the heart:

"...near the end of Mr. Obama’s first year in the Senate, Ethel Kennedy asked him to speak at a ceremony for her husband’s 80th birthday. At the time, she referred to Mr. Obama as “our next president.”

“I think he feels it. He feels it just like Bobby did,” Mrs. Kennedy said in an interview that day, comparing her late husband’s quest for social justice to Mr. Obama’s. “He has the passion in his heart. He’s not selling you. It’s just him.”

Dear HOPE FOR A 3RD PARTY:

*Every* president, except for an incumbent, is on-the-job training.

Moreover, even HRC said that typically the major issues a President deals with are not the ones campaigned on.

Take Lincoln, for example. We fortunately had an extraordinary mind in the White House when it counted. But no one could have prepared for that presidency. (Although most of Lincoln's political enemies thought themselves far smarter than he, Lincoln "rewarded" them with cabinet positions. ;-))

The next president will have to deal with something that *no one* of either party is contending with: the world is in a post-peak oil situation.

That goes beyond just oil for energy. It means the whole hydrocarbon industry, which drives both the phara and ag industries, will be capsized. No amount of hydrogen or nuclear (neither are solutions anyway) will help when we simply don't have the fertilizers to produced crops in the volume we currently do.

This is historically unprecedented.

Therefore, whomever you decide to elect in 2008 will be on-the-job training.

It it therefore critical to pick your candidate on the basis of character, intellect (not IQ points, but real wisdom), and ability to lead and inspire.

I suspect the real reason Ted Kennedy is endorsing Obama has nothing to do with Bill Clinton. When Mrs. Clinton reminded people that passing the Civil Rights legislaton was something John Kennedy tried to do and couldn't, she stuck her finger deep into an open wound. John Kennedy campaigned on Civil Rights, but he didn't get legislation in front of Congress until 1963, shortly before he was assassinated. When Lyndon Johnson pushed the Civil Rights Act through Congress in 1964, he received credit for the legislation. It's not surprising that Ted Kennedy would open up on the Clintons the first chance he got, but it's disingenuous of him to claim it's about Bill Clinton bringing race into the campaign. Accusing the Clintons of making Mr. Obama's race an issue is a cheap shot. The Clinton issue has always been Obama's competence. And it is precisely on the issue of competence that the Kennedy Presidency, and the Kennedy legacy, can be questioned. But not, it appears, by the Clintons.

loki rules. once had a hawk named loki.

also, there's a reason rethugs like to hark back to, and style themselves as JFK types. this is not heresy or treason, when typed by a Democrat.

anyone here remember "bread for peace?" (dough for caudillos).

JFK did his share both of womanizing, and of smashing democracies - aka corporate dirty war-mongering. period. knowledge of these facts does not make one a clintonista.

However, if the party had stuck by Bill Clinton when he was in the clinch, Al Gore would be president today. This shit between obamabots and the rest of us is just as depressing as it could possibly be. The charges of racism are both utterly fucking absurd - and obvioudly being fomented by x-rethugliscum qua corporate political pundit. christ. on a cross.

recommend we all start reading Scott Horton, over at Harpers.org, who's realiably focused on our actual enemy, and his actual evildoing, until all this egregious bullshit is over.

So simple folks. The Clintons shat in the Democrats' nest, the steaming ploppings smelled too much like somebody had been feasting with the Republicans, and loyal Democrats are willing to kick the Clintons out of the nest.

the latest media reports are that Ted Kennedy is not only endorsing Obama but will energetically camppaign for him in northeastern and Western primary states. This will give Obama additional opportunity to persuade union and Hispanic voters.

The Clintons have shown the nation their true colors in ways that Democrats with integrity simply cannot ignore. The Democrat Party will no longer tolerate the Bush-Rove-Clinton brand of dishonest attack and the playing of race and gender to divide the nation.

Billary is history. Good riddance.

If the Dems attempt to pull the party back to the liberal left as Kennedy and Kerry are attempting and continue to wallow in this social justice identity politics alienating the other 70 percent of the country with this hysteria they said MLK and JJ, they loose it just reminds us why the Party almost became the party of oblivion. A coupled of two steps by the Republicans and their dead, one Immigration reform that is positive and a fresh face who is anti Bush at the convention and boom Dem advantage lost. And the Dems will still be discussing why social justice is the burning issue and everyone else is bigots at the pity party when they loose. It worked in Mass, same crowd same campaign.

I can support the Chuck Schumer Hillary Clinton wing of the Party I saw in 2006, Positively America, but not the Kerry Kennedy Clyburn Liberal identity politics old guard that is just as dangerous to our economic health.

What you wont hear from the liberal media. And those Independent voters who happen to show up when there is not also a Republican contest at the same time should worry you as well.

I think we can disagree about the 1957 Civil Rights Act and still agree that it was Lyndon Johnson who pushed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 through the Senate after JFK failed to do so. I'm simply pointing out that Ted Kennedy's resentment of Mrs. Clinton's remark about LBJ doing what Jack Kennedy tried and failed to do probably has more to do with his endorsement of Obama than anything else. Collossal egos are capable of vindictive actions on a grand scale. Clearly, Kennedy is willing to risk his own prestige on the chance of getting even. And, in spite of the chatter in the blogosphere, it was Mrs. Clinton's remark, not Bill's that set him off. Personally, I hope she beats the Kennedy machine in Mass. I'm not supporting either candidate yet, but I'm sick of tired old establishment candidates that have been losing to the Republicans year after year setting the agenda for the Democratic party. I definitely don't need Ted Kennedy and John Kerry telling me who to vote for.

THE TRAIN.

We missed it once... not again.

Are you in your 50s, or older?

Do you remember where you were...

The day John was shot?

The day Bobby was shot?

The day Martin was shot?

Those days closed a chapter of opportunity that has not opened again... until now.

Whatever your age, it is not too late or too soon to be a maker of - not only a witness to - history.

The thing that made so many of us so sad then was that we KNEW that we were watching something great fade away, like a mighty train into the mist, and we had no idea that we would ever see it again.

Well... now we are on the other end of that tortured cycle.

That train is coming again...

Not to give us a ride... that would be too easy.

But to roar into the future on tracks that WE help to lay.

That train is not Obama - he is only a conductor, and not even the only one, though he is now in front.

The train is US.

Young and old... black and white and red and brown and yellow... all of us.

US

North and South... East and West... city and country... all of us.

US

Tired of the foolishness... ready to ROCK!

US

And not just US.

The United States of US.

Go... Be... US.

Obama.

www.gobe.us

South Carolina is 29% black.

Florida is 15% black.

There is a gambling initiative on the ballot in Miami-Dade.

Hillary will not win by much in Florida and the narrative will be her collapsing support heading into Super-Duper Tuesday.

Bill Clinton: "Well, Jesse Jackson won South Carolina in 1984 and 1988" ('Obama is 'the black' candidate here folks... don't you know what that means?').

I used to be a major supporter of Bill Clinton. I am almost in shock over how slimy this comes across (though perhaps I shouldn't be).



I hope everyone understands that this tarnish is not going to simply fade away if Hillary gets the nomination. This moment is going down like Bush versus McCain in 2000: a moment wherein we got a first glimpse of the ugly truth in what Bush was bringing with him.

What these polls are NOT showing is the new split in the Democratic party, that will be effident come the general election. I am one of those NH voters who supported Hillary and still do. When the polls kept saying she was losing popularity, I asked my friends and family what the polls were all about, none of it made sense, it only made me more passionate about my choice. If the choice comes down to Obama vs. McCain, I'll be voting for McCain. So this "electibility" factor, is not calculating how badly us Clinton supporters are being slammed.

DRinOH wrote on January 27, 2008 2:04 PM:
Electability v. McCain:

Obama + 5
Hillary +2
(top right of this page)

It's not much, and I know it's early, but every little bit counts when it's this close.