Hopefully supporters like Paterson can talk her back down to planet reality.

Wow...that was...reasonable.

Shocking! zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz......

Please God let Hillary supporters begin to see the insanity in her spinning and twisting of the Michigan and Florida issue into a crisis -- the woman was in agreement with the stripping of their delegates according to the rules before the primaries!

The only problem is: Hillary does not have a history, or the temperament to be reasonable.

That is why she destroyed all chances for getting
Health Care reform in 1993. She just would not give an inch to even her fellow Democrats in Congress.

She never knows when to face reality until after she has crashed and burned. Look at how she handled the Tuzla Sniper fable. Even after she was told that their was video evidence showing that her story was false, she kept on repeating the lie, and reinforcing it. Recall how she tried to rebut Sinbad by dismissing him as a comedian. In other words she tried to get away with an additional lie by claiming that Sinbad was telling the lie for comedic purposes.

Hillary is like the person who will not ask for directions, but will continue driving in the wrong direction until she has run out of gas. That is her long established nature. She is not going to change now. That is why the DNC rules committee and the Super Delegates are going to have to take the car keys away from her.

edit:
that there was video evidence

What does that womanizing blind man know about elections. He's never run or been elected to public office.

Anybody read the viewer comment about Hillary's long dislike of the electoral college and why she is actually being authentic right now?

First time I've gotten mad about a Hillary issue in a while. Most people who are being destructive, selfish, and mean-spirited believe that they are justified in their actions. Doesn't make them right or excuse their behavior.

He really sounded pained throughout this interview. But I give him credit for being HONEST.

So Obama supporters think he should get 100% of the uncommitted vote? How are you guys able to divine the intentions of these uncommitted voters?

Guess he's not going to Chappaqua for barbeque this weekend. Well done, Guv'nah.

Don't trust them new N****'s ova dare.

Check out Rachel Maddow's great piece on Huff Post - she believes (and I totally agree) that any plan suggested for MI and FL will be flatly turned down by Clinton for the sole reason of delaying everything for the next few months so she can take this to the convention.

And knowing what a weasel Terry Mac is and how close he is with Bill, this whole elaborate scheme was planned last year. She fully knew she was going to bitch and whine about MI, so she purposely left her name on. When she won, BOOM! It should suddenly count! Then FL just landed on her lap like a gift from the heavens above.

I'm so tired of this - she has NO chance of winning the nomination, but it's still tiring to see how low someone will go to achieve power. Truly a sick, sick individual!

He said it. "ALL OF THEM" agreed to the rules at the time. Poor guy. Leave the defending to McAuliffe. He's really the only one that can spin this bs.

That's another thing - Hillary is crusading her ass off about not disenfranchising one single vote, yer her campaign today said they're demanding that the "Uncommitted" votes of MI don't count at all.

HOW HYPOCRITICAL IS THAT, HILLARY???????

Mrs. Patterson must serve him "Truthy Flakes" in the morning.

What's wrong with him?

Someone help me--most of the pundits on MSNBC today seemed to be agreeing that an Obama/Clinton ticket was a reasonable choice for a variety of reasons: that it would "unify the party", bring the white working class into the fold, mollify the female voters as well as the young people, appeal to all bases, and I can't remember the rest I was so upset. Am I the only one who is made crazy by the very idea of this??? If Obama knuckles under to whatever pressure is being brought to bear and puts her on the ticket I AM FINISHED! I will vote for them, but I won't work to get them elected, donate any money, house any staffers like I did during the primary, cook food for the kids at headquarters, nothing! I HATE CLINTON and everything she stands for! I think she ran a filthy campaign and should not be rewarded! I am a 55 year old white woman who would love to see a woman president before I die but not this woman.

Beckyleeprice; read the Field. It is very comforting on this issue.

http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=1248

I am a HUGE Obama supporter, and I would/could NOT vote for him if he chooses Hillary. I just won't vote at all.

And I used to like the Clinton's very much. Go figure!

It's interesting how Hillary is so close in the delegate count but has alienated so many people with her campaign. If she had acted just like Obama and not gone negative perhaps she would have been the nominee well before this.
But really Obama has been just as negative, he just leaks comments through his staff to the press. Hillary seems to have made the mistake of saying these things rather than having her staff say them.
We may be approaching the tipping point when people suddenly realise what a turkey they have supported in Obama. No matter how much talent or intelligence someone has at some point one has to acknowledge experience of how things work, or have worked in the past, has some relevance.
But with Obama talent is supposed to make experience totally irrelevant. And who else could he consider as VP but someone equally experienced but Webb? The only experience he has is writing war porn, and his imaginary war experience is supposed to trump real experience of how the world works?
Normally presidential candidates have lots of government experience, usually as governors of a state like Bill Clinton and many others have had. But Obama has nearly no experience in government at all. One could argue that Dubya had little experience, but that was a disaster and also he had the family business and cronies to help him pillage the economy for his base. But any democracy in the world would at least acknowledge that experience is important, but Obama doesn't seem to need it.
Also Obama seems to have all the gravitas and respect for tradition that Wayne Palmer did as president in 24. I realise people in the internet age think everything is different now, and perhaps see Obama as a Google president who is running as the "don't be evil" candidate.
Also this race is being run as much by computer analysis and perhaps by an empty suit running against an empty pantsuit. With demographics and polls two candidates work out how to appeal to nearly half the voters each, and can change what they say so as to make any primary or election a virtual tie. The same thing happening with Gore versus Bush and Gore versus Kerry. What we see here is computer programs deciding the president. This cannot be an accident that the race is so close and has split the Democrats so closely down the middle.
Because Obama has the right computer programs to get 50.01% of the vote or delegates doesn't mean he knows how to run a country. He has nearly all the black vote because he is black, just like a Hispanic candidate or an Asian candidate would have most of his own race's votes. Anyone that thinks he has 90% of the black vote by accident is kidding themselves. Because blacks are a large part of the Democrat base he can just aim for capturing the younger vote by talking vaguely about change. But this is nothing to do with who gets to be president or what they do there, but who gets to run the Democratic Party win or lose. Soon Democrats may realise that the kind of candidate they really like is unelectable overall. This is not surprising, the Republicans have also realised that the candidate they really liked, Dubya, was a disaster and should have been unelectable but for Rove's tricks.
To govern a country, a president has to be able to govern from the center, not to appease Republicans but because a country runs best when its policies balance left and right. Dubya was a failure because the hard right imposed their policies. Likewise the extreme left would cause the same kind of damage, though not initially because they would drag the political pendulum back to the center on its way to the opposite extreme.
That's why Hillary versus McCain would be so good. Both are distrusted by their own parties as too much like the other side. Both are hated by their extremists. Both have survived controversies with their integrity reasonably intact. Both have the experience to change course gradually and have seen so many mistakes made by others. Both will move to the center to capture the independants and will compromise.
Obama is quite likeable but so was Dubya before the election. In fact Obama is running Dubya's campaign, appearing as likeable as possible, pointing out the other candidate is not as nice at every opportunity, being the guy you'd want to have a beer with. Dubya talked about change and being an outsider just like Obama does, though this sounds unbelievable to people now. Gore of all people was seen as the nasty one, picking on Dubya by making him look dumb and inexperienced.
You don't pick an expert to do a job because you like them. You pick the one that knows what they are doing, unlike Dubya and unlike Obama. I hate Hillary too, but this is a presidential election not American Idol. Instead of a likeable idiot like Dubya I want an expert this time, and Obama isn't one yet, maybe in 8 years or so. Politicians aren't supposed to be likeable, that's why approval ratings in Congress are always so low. They are usually competent though.

The highest of high comedy. Thanks, Its, I needed a good laugh to start the day.

Mopron.

Why Hillary should not be VP:

From "Head of State"

http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/05/head-of-state-reasons-that-hillary.html

Friday, May 23, 2008

Head of State: The Reasons That Hillary Should Not Be Vice President

Regarding Hillary Clinton as Barack Obama's running mate:

Originally, this seemed to be a potentially plausible choice--and if presented in the following way, could turn her divisive campaign into a potential coup as a VP candidate. The thinking was the following:

Hillary has run a divisive campaign. Now, just as the nation should mend its divisions in favor a greater unity that would serve the greater needs of our country, so now they would explicitly put these divisions behind them, in the interests of the unity that this nation, after a bitter and divisive Administration, is so in need of. This would serve as a powerful and vibrant example of the very ability to unify that Obama both offers and represents.

However, this would require a candidate that was willing to take such a position of relative shared selflessness in the interests of a greater good--while the Vice Presidency certainly offers its honors (now far beyond the "warm pitcher" of John Vance Garner's famous phrase) and positioning for later Presidential aspirations, such a plan would require the ability to think in terms of a shared effort based on the betterment of the nation, rather than in more grasping, combative and singular terms.

The Clinton camp's behavior over this past week has made such a positive scenario clearly untenable, showcasing the same characteristics that have signified her campaign throughout its long, chaotic, march--its contradictions of previous statements when such changes have a slight possibility of adding a week or two of vitality, its sudden and implausible use of populists guises and specious historical parallels for transparently opportunistic purposes, its near-hallucinogenic transmogrifications of personality and central bases for further continuation,
and the central campaign tendency to place personal attainment over virtually all values that lay in its path.

These characteristics--self over nation, positioning over a consistent presentation of position, values and even self, the willingness to put personal viability over the need to transcend and transform the vast wreckage of state and international relations that remain at this critical time--are as present now, at a moment when wisdom rather than a remorseless, obdurate desperation could fill this gap, as they have been throughout much of the campaign. They would continue to make themselves present during a campaign for vice president, complicating, diminishing and often distracting, in trivial internecine battles, the message of unity and change.

Perhaps Clinton could adopt a more unifying and integrated and less grasping position on the VP subject. However, thus far, the actions of the Clinton camp have made it clear: It's time to clean the slate. Hillary Clinton should not be the Vice Presidential candidate.

Cite:

Head of State

http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/05/head-of-state-reasons-that-hillary.html