« Another Version Of The Goolsbee Story From ABC News | Home | New Hillary Mailer: "American Families Can't Afford Barack Obama" »
Sen. Jay Rockefeller Endorses Obama
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, has announced today his endorsement of Barack Obama.
Obama now has the endorsements of 12 fellow Senators by our count, closing in on Hillary Clinton's 13 Senate supporters.
Advertisement
Actually, I have it at Obama 15, Clinton 12.
February 29, 2008 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Will you stop whining? (Since Billy claims to be gone, I suppose someone needs to keep the new meme alive…)
February 29, 2008 3:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
From: http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=799
February 29, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Another big fish for Obama. Why are all these experienced Senators jumping on board with Obama? They must be deluted with Obamania aswell huh Hillary?
February 29, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
The FISA guy? Bleh.
February 29, 2008 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
A very well-timed dent in the argument that Hillary should be the one answering the 3 a.m. phone call.
February 29, 2008 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
So much for the "intelligence" fear mongering.
http://osi-speaks.blogspot.com/2008/02/u-s-senator-jay-rockefeller-chair-of.html#links
February 29, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
The chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee should be in a position to add quite a lot of luster to Obama's effort. Especially as certain attacks come that will surely come.
February 29, 2008 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
And another delegate ticks in the Obama column.
It won't be long before Obama has the most votes, states, pledged delegates, and super delegates. If he had been running against anybody but Hillary Clinton, he would have already had it wrapped up.
February 29, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
According to the latest Wikipedia tally, it's 12 senators + Obama himself + the two DC shadow senators.
February 29, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is EXCELLENT NEWS!!! . . .
February 29, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
FOR HILLARY!!!
u missed that one.
and I tend to agree with delmol above.. "The FISA guy? Bleh...."
February 29, 2008 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Same here, although I am still happy for every delegate we get.
February 29, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
According to the latest Wikipedia tally, it's 13 senators (including Obama himself) + the two DC "shadow" senators, for a total of 15.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_2008_United_States_Democratic_Party_superdelegates
February 29, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Does anybody know if Barack and Hillary themselves are super delegates?
February 29, 2008 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes.
February 29, 2008 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is an endorsement I'd really rather not have. Jay Rockefeller is the poster child for spineless acquiescence to the police state.
February 29, 2008 3:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
It shows which way the wind is blowing.
February 29, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Every politician has their good sides. It's a shame our current political environment demands hostility and animosity to "the other side" in all cases. Either or. For or against.
February 29, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, common sense demands hostility towards people like Jay Rockefeller who have aided and abetting the government's illegal domestic spying programs.
February 29, 2008 6:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Will the good news for Hillary never stop pouring in!
Say it Idiotic. Say it!
February 29, 2008 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
So the only thing that matters is Obama's picking up some, not that Hillary's ahead, until Obama is ahead and then that's all that matters.
Very principled.
February 29, 2008 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I see your point, but on the other hand, surely it does not matter any more that Clinton is ahead in superdelegates. This only mattered in the real sense back when her lead in superdelegates put her ahead in total delegate terms. Total delegates, at the end of the day, is the metric which really matters. If Obama has narrowed the superdelegate race to the point where his pledged delegate lead puts him in the overall lead, then her superdelegate lead really does not matter in the end.
February 29, 2008 4:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Baa. As the lead solidifies for Obama, more super delegates, unburdened by any requirement to stay with Clinton, feel free to come out and support him. It becomes a race running on its own steam, without any effort from the candidate. OTOH, I don't have much respect for delegates I see changing positions for little reason other than a desire to be with the winner in time to hope for support and favor from a new Obama administration.
February 29, 2008 6:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jay Rockefeller is now irrelevant!
Welcome to the club, Jay!
February 29, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
A nice way to wrap up Red Phone Day...
February 29, 2008 4:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, idiotic needs to chime in here.
Also, echoing a witty comment posted when Dodd endorsed Obama ...
This endorsement doesn't matter because Jay Rockefeller is not a caucus. And besides, the Democrats cannot hope to win Jay Rockefeller in the general election.
February 29, 2008 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Woo! Woo! Make way for the Obama Express! Woo! Woooooooooo!
February 29, 2008 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mister Telecom Immunity himself, eh? Fine, we'll take it. Especially if it gives O some security cred. For those following this stuff closely it paints O as limp. It would be so nice if O could join Dodd on the floor to denounce the new and 'improved' FISA. He is, after all, a Constitutional scholar.
BTW, why can't Rockefeller be primaried?
February 29, 2008 4:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just an itsy bit off-topic, but what ever happened to Bill "I'll be endorsing by the end of the week" Richardson? Perhaps Saturday is the real end of the week?
February 29, 2008 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm pretty sure that Richardson emphasized the word "may", but anyway, he seems to be quite busy and he's back in his element. He's got a couple of big issues on his plate and because NM was pretty much evenly split (as usual), I'd really be surprised if he were to endorse anyone.
March 1, 2008 3:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
While Sen. Rockerfeller may endorse Obama, in no way does it mean forgivness for his endorsing retro-active immunity for the telecom industry.
That, is a total give away of the privacy of the American people.
You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.
February 29, 2008 5:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
You stole my line!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
February 29, 2008 5:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Weenies for Obama? This is one endorsement I might denounce and reject.
February 29, 2008 9:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who cares about Rockefeller? He's a Lieberman-dem who really should be honest with everyone and switch parties.
March 1, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Rockefellers are a real curious bunch.
For instance, I don't think many people out there know David Rockefeller lead Chase Manhattan for many years.
David also gives the Rockefellers indirect credit for the "genetic revolution" which largely set the framework for Medical Doctors to practice medicine today. Of course, there are many other sorts of medicine in the world which have nothing to do with genetic causes of disease and pharmaceuticals, so I'd say the Rockefellers were successful in marketing their revolution.
The meme of the day is sort of that they Rockefellers have lost their influence in the United States. I don't believe that one bit.
What I see this as is a ploy by the Rockefellers to mask their support or even control of the Clinton campaign, mostly through the mainstream press. For instace, of course Hillary has a paid campaign staff, but for the large part the only reason her campaign is still standing is due to the extreme, subtle bias towards her within the press. And of course the mainstream press is owned by large corporations like GE, which operate in the same sphere as people like the Rockefellers and coporations like Chase Bank.
So technically Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia has endorsed Obama, but what does it mean? This site is quick to tell us what everything else means, but how about this? Is it an endorsement, or is Jay Rockefeller lending his time, money, and energy to Obama's effort?
March 1, 2008 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rockefeller? What a hypocrite. All of 'em: Dodd, Kerry, Rockefeller, Daschel, voted exactly the same as Clinton. These guys are the worst backstabbing, hypocritical bunch of liars. Now the Rock tells us that Obama has the better judgement??? What are we to make of this? Isn't Jello Jay implying that he himself lacks the judgement that he sees in Obama? Why Obama, or Clinton for that matter, would even accept their endorsements is beyond me. Obama would have us believe that he is a politician cut from a different bolt of cloth, and then he turns around and dons the soiled suit of the very ilk he disreputes! The only reason that could possibly be abscribed to the Rockefeller endorsement is that he is praying that a Obama win would wash away the "sin" of his 2002 Senate vote to authorize force.
March 1, 2008 5:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Byrd gave the copy of the Constitution that he always carries to Obama. His endorsement should follow soon.
March 1, 2008 8:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wouldn't be so enthusiastic about this endorsement. He was furious Roberts didn't do all the necessary investigating of how the White House used the Iraq intelligence and then when he took over as Chairman of the Committee he hasn't done it either. He was supposed to finish Part 3 and has done nothing. So fine Intelligence person he is to be endorsing anyone. He's furious when the repubs won't do it but then doesn't do it himself either.
March 1, 2008 9:51 PM | Reply | Permalink