But this time around I feel really good.
And this feeling has certainly increased with Hillarys
solid performances in all the debates, she just doesn’t
make mistakes. I love it. But it’s nice with reassurances.

Taylor Marsh is a radio host, her blog is always updated
and very neutral. She says she is undecided, or at least
will remain that way officially. She very often goes to
debates and conventions personally and blogs about it.
She is really Hillary fair/friendly, one of the few places
other than this place that I have found.

I have also seen her on PoliticsTV.com she is a good
political blogger.

One last thing on Obama, his latest foot in the mouth
incident.
Saying off the record that he thinks he has the best
foreign experience of all candidates, Republican and
Democrat, is just MINDBLOWING!

What an ass!!(pardon my French-and btw, how about Romney
going around saying “Hillary couldn’t even get elected
in France”. Way to repair broken bridges with old allies
again huh? Typical republican ‘go it alone’ thinking.
No restoring Americas reputation around the world here).

I have been to more than 12 countries, can I be President??
I have a passport!
Which other candidate do you think lists as reason why
they should be President, what they did between the ages
of 6 and 10?
He lived abroad and gathered foreign intelligence I suppose.
(shakes head)

Hannity calls Clinton a socialist (video).

Neal Boortz and other wingnut talkers rant about Clinton’s alleged Marxism.

But now Barack Obama has weighed in calling Clinton “Bush-Cheney lite.”

She can’t be both, boys.

Barack Obama has decided to discard his above the fray campaign, while simultaneously embracing his personality campaign. Today, not only did he scream that Clinton is basically Republican lite, aka “Bush-Cheney lite,” which is the worse thing you can call a Democratic presidential candidate, but Mr. Obama also chose to embrace the cult of Reagan. As a former Reagan Democrat I find this lurch into Reagan worship by a leading Democratic contender frightening. As a Democrat wanting to win in 2008 I find it counterproductive, to say the least.

What is it with the bi-partisan fetish for all things Reagan?

After all these years of Bush-Cheney, personally, I’m lookin’ for a little Big Dog.

Then there are the facts revolving around Ronnie. First, Ronald Reagan came to power through the ineffective foreign policy of Jimmy Carter, especially after Desert One. You can disagree with that characterization, but as a recovered Reagan Democrat I can speak to why many of us moved over to vote for Reagan and it wasn’t just his optimism. It was his perceived kick-ass toughness. Secondly, Reagan never promised to meet with the Soviets in the first year of his presidency. He would never have uttered such a phrase. But one thing is clear, Ronald Reagan was an ideologue, an avowed partisan conservative, though he’d work with anyone to get the job done. Most presidents do

It also seems Mr. Obama doesn’t understand what Reagan was all about. But that’s not the worst of it. Because of his unmitigated error in saying he was ready for a sit down with Castro, Mr. Obama seems to now have come unhinged from his “above the fray” politics, turning to not only attacking Clinton, which is fair game in a political high stakes race, but damning her with the one phrase no Democrat should ever call another unless they’re willing to go full on Joe: “Bush-Cheney lite.”

Democratic primary voters put Clinton ahead by double digits in state polling. She’s had stellar performances in the debates and other forums, with Obama not coming across well at all; until this week when diplomacy and what a Democratic foreign policy should be took center stage. Clinton saw a weakness in Obama’s foreign policy philosphy on the diplomatic side and pounced. Obama pushed back, but went way too far. Now both campaigns are taking turns duking it out on tv, as Obama’s “Bush-Cheney lite” sounds more and more strident every time it’s played.

Obama’s got cash to burn and he’s going to have to burn it to take Clinton down. He’s out spending her in primary states. Meanwhile, she continues to lead with Democratic primary voters. But Obama grabbing on to Reagan’s 1980 train is a walk towards the general election, which is a huge mistake in the midst of a primary battle, especially when you tag on the “lite” line. He’s run an impressive campaign in many ways, especially in fundraising. He’s a natural on the stump. But this week we have seen something else revealed in Obama’s styling. He can fight dirty. That’s good. But the different kind of politics Obama once offered, which was his major appeal, has imploded. That’ bad. That he’s willing to call his chief rival “Bush-Cheney lite” says something else entirely. That protecting the Democratic brand for all of our candidates is not important to Mr. Obama. It’s anything but a new kind of politics. If Obama weren’t who he is and I wasn’t giving him the benefit of the doubt, I’d call it swiftboating.

I also agree with you about Hillary’s negatives probably not dropping below 40 percent. I always try to remind people that whomever we nominate is going to be there anyway when the Repubs/right wing/MSM get through with them.

FOX News
07/17 – 07/18
900 RV
Giuliani 41%
Clinton 46%
Clinton +5%

Battleground
07/15 – 07/18
1000 LV
Giuliani 50%
Clinton 44%
Giuliani +6%

Gallup
07/12 – 07/15
908 RV
Giuliani 49%C
Clinton 46%
Giuliani +3%

Zogby
07/12 – 07/14
1012 LV
Giuliani 41%
Clinton 46%
Clinton +5%

Rasmussen
07/09 – 07/10
800 LV
Giuliani 43%
Clinton 44%
Clinton +1%

I didn’t watch hardball, I watched CNN. Howard Wolfson did very well there. Obama’s strategist was really bad, he was stuttering with no coherent answer.

I only saw Wolfson twice on TV. My impression is that he can really think fast on his feet, but his style is a bit soft, hard to judge it’s good or bad at this stage. He’s still a little bit green as well. I think he passed the initial test as a defender of Hillary. But we’ll see how he continues to fare in the future. If it does not work out, Hill always has some other old Clinton pro in the line.

Can somebody help me out on on the ‘embed’ a youtube video in a diary. I tried to cut and paste the ‘embed code’ provided by youtube link, but it did not work.

It still showed the original code, not the actual video.

Help!

BTW, churchofreality, I think Obama is attacking her because he knows he’s not going to catch her just waiting for her to make an egregious error. She doesn’t do that. So this is his only chance.

Also, Gorto, you make a very good point about what this means for Obama’s VP chances. I like the idea of Webb myself. I mean, if your campaign makes a point of painting your main opponent as inexperienced, it doesn’t make sense to pick someone like that as VP.