But . . . But . . . But . . . Senator Clinton has still stacked the rules committee! Hillary is still ahead there!

John Gage just endorsed Obama. He's a super.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/wire/sns-ap-obama-union,1,2397754.story

this just made my weekend

Eric Kleefeld: The MSM, btw, is not identifying his race. Here is one case where I agree with them.

Good lord, Eric.

I am a 37-year-old white guy. I had no idea Donald Payne was African-American. Further, I don't give a shit that he is African-American. Why does that need to be an identifier for his support of Obama? What the fuck?

Why in the world have you identified him that way?

Is it really so hard to understand that Obama can reflect a post race-identifying world? The younger generation (younger than mine) certainly doesn't see things in the stark black/white terms that for too long too many of us have.

C'mon man, you are better than this.

Eric, HRC got Chris Carney of PA?

Um, is that white-guy-Chris Carney of PA? I guess I need to know, so I can understand his suport of her. Is it a white thing?

Please illumine me.

I wonder how an Intelligent and astute woman like Hillary Clinton can stay in the race when it is mathematically impossible to win.

Is she waiting for a miracle, or for some one to assassinate Obama, or she knows something we don't? I'm just wondering here, for lack of logic.

Payne's switch does beg the question of whether Hillary's statement about winning more white voters has alienated her in any way from black supporters.

You think ???

In response to the update:

Late Update: Just to clarify a certain point, Payne's switch does beg the question of whether Hillary's statement about winning more white voters has alienated her in any way from black supporters.

No, it doesn't. Rep. Payne was one of the first superdelegates to endorse Hillary Clinton early on before the race started. He's switching because quite frankly, the writing is on the wall. I also don't think it's a race-based switch, but a pragmatic switch of supporting the eventual Democratic nominee.

The most intelligent magazine in the English speaking world, The Economist, has an article making the case for Obama's nomination. Obama's picture also, is on its cover page.

Wake up Hillary, the race is over.

Well, maybe Eric is stuck back in the prejudice that this contest should focus on race, thanks to Clinton's carefully chosen dog whistles [I have the most 'white supporters'] but that doesn't explain why all those white super delegates are endorsing Obama.

I think Eric just insulted the 'African American' in suggesting that race would be a factor for him, while it wouldn't be a factor for the other endorsers.

In other words, it is the black race which we can assume makes racist decisions, is that right, Eric? Just trying to understand your slant on this, Eric. Care to elaborate?

I think it's completely reasonable for him to mention the superdelegate's race. As Eric pointed out in his update, the reactions of AA superdelegates to Hillary
s "but white people like me more!" pitch is something to watch.

Eric, Your clarification of why you made a point of Congressman Payne race makes some sense, but by not giving your rationale originally you are just flaming the White American argument that Senator Clinton is pushing.

I'm white, I work hard, and I support Senator Obama.

Wow...everyone's touchy this morning. Payne made the point about his race, and I thought, as I read it, that he was sending a message in that message. I think he was commenting on the tipping point without going there. At least, it seemed that way to me.

Whether African-American, Clinton-supporting superdelegates will abandon Clinton after her recent remarks is just as newsworthy as whether African-American voters will abandon Clinton after Bill Clinton's remarks in New Hampshire and South Carolina. Not every mention of race is implicit racism. How are we going to have the dialog that Obama suggested in Philadelphia if we can't talk about race in the political arena?

Eric phrased this poorly (we hope). Hint: reword it, Eric.

I think Eric's got the message.

Good Lord you Obama people are ugly. Suddenly we're post racial? You were the same people arguing with me just last week that Hillary can't have the nomination because black people won't vote. So, group people into race only when it's convenient for you?

IDIOTIC WAVE!!!!

John Edwards Slipped on Morning Joe. He Voted for Obama:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/5/9/74236/08435/130/512432

Then said he will endorse who he voted for soon.

Does anyone here think that the revelation that McCain did not vote for Bush in 2000 only helps him?

But she's going to win 3 of the next 4 contests! That will change EVERYTHING!! Terry McA. explained it to me on Morning Joe. It all makes sense now. To the White House and beyond!

I am so sad to hear the news that has been coming out.... saying that hillary clinton should drop out of the race and that Obama has won......

I feel its fair to continue the race, even though Obama has clearly won, and here is why....

West Virginia, Kentucky, Oregon, Montana, Puerto Rico still have to vote..... Let them vote, them there voices heard, even though its not going to change anything.

Let Michigan and Florida delegates be seated and let all the votes been counted, let there voices be heard, even though its not going to change anything.

I hope Obama will pick Clinton has his VP.... "DREAM TICKET".... If Obama & Clinton are on a ticket together.... we shall win in November..... Poor John McCain will lose badly.

If Obama chooses some one else, please go with Bill Richardson:)

However, I wish Hillary all the good luck in the next few contestes even though they aren't going to mean much..... GO HILLARY!!!!

To use to beg the question as a synonym for "to call for the question" is a mistake. Why? It's a mistake because it is in error. (That's begging the question.)

William Safire

!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yay, way to go Pete!! And all the others...

:o)

HC '08, only once have I ever seen you post something that wasn't positive and, dare I say, hopeful. Your faith and enthusiasm is really great, and I mean that very sincerely. We should all remember that the best way to support our candidate is to be so positive.

Also, deep breaths, my fellows. I think the fact an Af-Am superdelegate is switching is, perhaps, news. Wasn't clearthinker calling for people to write non-white supers and ask them to come out against Clinton's race-baiting?

Anne,

It is not news that an African American switched his sup vote, it is news that a hillary supporter switched his vote (as has a few others) I think Eric's explanation is lacking as to why he chose to use that particular identifier as opposed to just a 'clinton' supporter. this primary is not black vs white and to boil it down as such is insulting.

Even though it is obvious that Clinton has virtually no chance of winning the nomination the continued arrogant, self-congratulatory atmosphere only reinforces my expectation, and I suspect other Clinton supporters, to sit out the election rather than vote for either candidate.

I hope you think you can win this without the Clinton supporters because that is a realistic possibility.

Clinton is still the best choice.

Actually, I think most Clinton supporters love their country and care about electing a Democrat more than licking their wounds and don't think their own interpersonal drama is somehow more important than the fate of millions who would suffer under a McCain administration.

Bill in action in Idaho.

Open Mouth - Insert Foot - Catch some flak.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0508/Umbrage_in_Idaho.html#comments

I'm gratified to see that others have already spoken out about the shocking emphasis on "African American" in the report at the head of this thread. This isn't supposed to be the Third Reich we're living in, for God's sake.

DirkVA
Mongrel German-Welsh-Scottish-English-Jew

One other point, when CNN and MSNBC and the blubbering Clintonettes keep pushing this white vote thing, they never look to the general statistics that prove them wrong.

The spineless Dems have NEVER had the majority of white voters in recent elections.

And John Edwards -a white guy/Senator homeboy from his own Southern state of North Carolina, if I remember correctly, won his race with just 41% of the white vote.

Obama -a black guy/Senator won the white vote in that same state by 40%.

Hillary rightfully focuses on the importance -to her -of Democrat only primaries, because it isn't the country as a whole that shows marked signs of racism and bigotry.
It's the 'insiders' of the Democratic party itself.

"The supers, they don't love you, anymore..."

Roy Orbison has a song for Clinton.

Clinton is calling for a debate in Oregon?!

::sigh::

When will you Obamabot peons learn? It's not about who has the most superdelegates, pledged delegates, or the popular vote! It's doesn't matter who the voters or the Party wants to be the nominee!

What's important is to acknowledge that Queen Hillary is entitled to the White House. You see, last year she was "inevitable". That's a sort of verbal contract which obligates the Party to turn the nomination over to her whether they want to or not.

Also, non-college educated whities are all racist! Can't you see?! Why can't anyone see?!!

fogo2, let me state that personally, i believe you are a republican. mainly, because i've been given no proof to the contrary. you consistently fan the flames of controversy and bring up divisive and polarizing issues. pretty much what a republican operative would like to do in a more democrat based format like this.

However, giving you the benefit of the doubt: what's your big concern about Obama that makes you consider sitting out the election: racial voting, experience, matchups against McCain, the pastor issue, or what?

Michelle Obama’s Writings Display Disturbing Racism

Americans must ask: ‘Do we really want this woman in the White House’?

By Pat Shannan

Just what kind of “change” is Barack Obama offering and just how much influence has his wife, Michelle had over him in their married life the past two decades? It appears that Michelle LaVaughn Robinson Obama does not look into a crowd of Obama supporters and see Americans. She sees black people and white people, eternally conflicted with one another.

In her senior thesis at Princeton University, Michelle LaVaughn, the future wife of the Democratic presidential candidate, stated that America was a nation founded on “crime and hatred.” Moreover, she stated that whites in America were “ineradicably racist.”

The 1985 thesis, entitled Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community, was written under her maiden name, Michelle LaVaughn. Michelle Obama writes that the path she chose by attending Princeton would likely lead to her “further integration and/or assimilation into a white cultural and social structure that will only allow me to remain on the periphery of society, never becoming a full participant.”

Not only does she see separate black and white societies in America, but emphatically elevates black over white in her world. As first lady, would she insist the White House be painted black? That’s been a standard joke in this venue since the civil rights movement of the 1960s, but this next ominous quote from her thesis suggests that she would in fact urge her husband toward just such an extreme position.

“There was no doubt in my mind that as a member of the black community, I am obligated to this community and will utilize all of my present and future resources to benefit the black community first and foremost.”

She seems to justify those feelings with what she claims to see on the other side of the issue: “Predominantly white universities like Princeton are socially and academically designed to cater to the needs of the white students, comprising the bulk of their enrollments.”

Michelle added in her thesis that to “whites at Princeton, it often seems as if, to them, [I] will always be black first.” However, it was reported by a fellow black classmate, “if those ‘whites at Princeton ‘ really saw Michelle as one who always would ‘be black first,’ it seems that she gave them that impression.”

Michelle Obama’s poll of black alumni concludes that other black former students at Princeton do not share her obsession with blackness. But rather than celebrate, she is horrified that black alumni identify with our common American culture more than they value the color of their skins.

“I hoped that these findings would help me conclude that despite the high degree of identification with whites as a result of the educational and occupational path that black Princeton alumni follow, the alumni would still maintain a certain level of identification with the black community. However, these findings do not support this possibility,” she wrote.

Most black alumni ignored her racist questionnaire. Only 89 students responded, out of 400 who were asked for input.

The thesis provides a trove of Mrs. Obama’s thoughts and world view seen through a race-based prism. For a potential first lady, this is a very divisive view that would do untold damage to race relations in this country in a Barack Hussein Obama administration.

During this presidential election year in which the term “transparency” has been frequently bandied about, candidates have buried a number of potentially revealing documents and papers. In Hillary Rodham Clinton’s case, there’s been a clamoring for tax records, White House memos and other material the candidate’s team has chosen to keep from release.

The 96-page, 1985 Princeton thesis, restricted from release by the school’s Mudd Library, has also been the subject of recent scrutiny. Commentator Jonah Goldberg remarked on National Review Online, “A
reader in the know informs me that Michelle Obama’s thesis is unavailable until Nov. 5, 2008, at the Princeton library. I wonder why.”

“Why a restricted thesis?” asked Pastor Louis Lapides on his website,
Thinking Outside the Blog. “Is the concern based on what’s in the thesis? Will Michelle Obama appear to be too black for white America or not black enough for black America?”

Will an Obama administration really offer constructive “change” or just an intellectually refined racism?