Hillary Clinton’s American Embrace

Update: Don’t miss the video of Club 44 in Boston.
Don’t miss Hillary on Keith Olbermann tonight. Don’t miss all the TEAM HILLARY events TONIGHT. And don’t miss the new poll with Hillary at 50%.
—————-

Hillary Clinton is ready to be president. Hillary Clinton and her vision for America are being embraced by the American people.

This does not mean that PINO, Naderite and Big Blog hater attacks will stop. It does mean that the RIPublicans know their days of wrecking the country are numbered because of Hillary’s popularity and they will step up their attacks on Hillary.

How many times did Sen. Hillary Clinton’s name come up during Tuesday’s Republican debate in Michigan? Twelve. How many times did Sen. Barack Obama’s name come up? Zero.”

In an interview with the Boston Globe Editorial Board Hillary demonstrated her deep knowledge of American constitutional principles and her well focused ideas on where to lead the country. Hillary intends to reverse the damage done to America and our constitutional system.

Hillary Clinton said today that if she is elected president, she intends to roll back President Bush’s expansion of executive authority, including his use of presidential signing statements to put his own interpretation on bills passed by Congress or to claim authority to disobey them entirely.

“I think you have to restore the checks and balances and the separation of powers, which means reining in the presidency,” Clinton told the Boston Globe’s editorial board.

Hillary will be a strong president but she understands the need to restore the constitutional system of checks and balances and respect for the legislature.

While Bush has issued hundreds of signing statements, declarations that accompany his signature on bills approved by Congress, Clinton said she would use signing statements only to clarify bills that might be confusing or contradictory. She also said she did not subscribe to a theory called the “unitary executive” that puts the president’s power above that of Congress and the judiciary.

“It has been a concerted effort by the vice president, with the full acquiescence of the president, to create a more powerful executive at the expense of both branches of government and of the American people,” she said.

Hillary also has a good sense of how she will work with other nations.

In the wide-ranging question-and-answer session, the New York senator also said her policy on Russia would focus on influencing that nation’s role in the world rather than trying to halt its internal move away from democracy. She would seek Russia’s help negotiating with Iran over its suspected nuclear weapons program, she said, and try to prevent Russia from “being a problem in the Middle East” or bullying its neighbors.

“I’m interested in what Russia does outside its borders first,” she said. “I don’t think I can as the president of the United States wave my hand and tell the Russian people they should have a different government.”

Clinton was strongly critical of what she called Bush’s “incoherent” policy on Russia, saying the president was “naive” to rely so strongly on his personal relationship with Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

When questioned about whether she could win Hillary replied “I am winning,” “That’s a good place to start.” Hillary also said she expected to win every state Senator Kerry won in 2004, plus Florida, Ohio, Arkansas, and probably Louisiana, New Mexico, and Nevada.

Like some latter day Zorro fencing PINOs, Naderites and Big Blogs with one hand, while sipping a good glass of Madiera, Hillary is winning the battles for the nomination. Hillary’s fight for the Democratic nomination is being watched with awe and respect by RIPublicans. After Tuesday’s RIPublican debate there was a discussion on MSNBC – The moderator was David Shuster, former Republican House Majority Leader Dick Armey and “Newsweek‘s” senior White House correspondent, Richard Wolffe were the guests.

Assessing Edwards:

SHUSTER: And Dick Armey, Republicans must love the position that you‘re in now of watching the Democrats try to gauge how tough to be with Hillary, knowing that, perhaps, if they soften her up, that makes her even softer for a general election if she‘s the nominee.

ARMEY: Well, it‘s pretty hard to tell. John Edwards has not gotten some of the endorsements he had expected to get. You look at John Edwards, I look at him and I always see there‘s no “there” there. I think that ad backfires on him.

He says are you going to chose Hillary, where there‘s something there, something good and something bad. But there‘s a “there” there. Or me?

SHUSTER: But isn‘t that the elephant in the room?

I mean everybody…

ARMEY: No. I think John Edwards, frankly, needs to understand his race is over.

Assessing Hillary:

ARMEY: Did he have a serious proposal all the time he—I don‘t remember the man as a senator. I can tell you one thing—you cannot ignore the fact that Hillary Clinton is in the race and she‘s got something she wants to do in the White House. She‘s got a policy objective. You can like it or not, but there‘s a real substantive reason for her wanting to be in the White House.

SHUSTER: Do you, then, disagree with John Edwards and believe that Hillary Clinton is a lot more formidable a national candidate in a general election than John Edwards is trying to make Democrats think?

ARMEY: Absolutely. John Edwards needs to understand there are two things about Hillary Clinton that he must know. One, she‘s smarter than he is. And, two, she‘s tougher than he is. And if he hasn‘t figured that out, it‘s going to a painful end instead of just an end.

WOLFFE: And the Hillary folks are right to point out, by the way, that look at the national polls, look at the nominal match-ups between Hillary and all the Republicans across the country. She does as well, if not better, than the other Democratic candidates. So the argument doesn‘t really stack up so much. He‘s projecting at some point in the future—you just can‘t predict like how a general election will play out like that.

Assessing Obama:

SHUSTER: Richard, you mentioned Barack Obama is taking a more sort of nuanced, subtle approach, as far as getting in his digs at Hillary. At a certain point, does he need to sort of ratchet up things if he‘s going to have a chance at essentially defeating Hillary Clinton in Iowa?

Or does he decide, you know what, perhaps she‘s the inevitable frontrunner, I‘m not going to cause that sort of damage?

WOLFFE: I don‘t think that‘s what he‘s doing at all. He thinks he has a—he‘s really got a good ground game in Iowa, that it‘s a three way race and an upset in Iowa will change this whole race completely. And I think that‘s probably true.

Having said that, he does need to improve his game on TV. I think his attitude toward TV is that it‘s somewhere—whether it‘s a TV interview or a TV debate—it‘s somehow more trivial, more glib than his speeches, which are sort of literary exercises. That‘s fine in one sense. It‘s very intellectual and noble. But TV is the medium here. He has to play by the rules of the game. And that means using some of these lines that are in his beautifully crafted speeches and using them on the debates. He doesn‘t use the zingers that he crafts himself.

Why not?

I just haven‘t ever gotten a good answer out of the Obama campaign on that one.

SHUSTER: Dick Armey, what do you think about Barack Obama?

ARMEY: Well, I…

SHUSTER: I mean he‘s got to be an intriguing candidate to you on several levels.

ARMEY: The one thing that I‘ll give him over Edwards, Edwards just cracks me up. I mean Obama at least understands that you ought to try to pretend—project that you have some policy objectives in mind. And he‘s made sort of itty bitty suggestions. He does talk like a sociologist running for president of the faculty senate, and he‘ll never get over that. And that, in the final analysis, will be his undoing, because he just can‘t compete with a realistic able, serious-minded, policy-oriented candidate like Hillary Clinton.

I mean there is so much substance to Hillary—mind you, from my point of view, all misguided substance. But there is so much substance to Hillary Clinton that these two guys, they just basically look like a couple of sophomores hoping they can make the A Team next year.

Dick Armey gets it. Do other RIPublicans get it?

In last night’s debate, both Rudolph W. Giuliani and Mitt Romney mentioned Hillary Clinton a dozen times, and not in a flattering way.

All of this dredging up of the Clinton name has been presumed to reflect a desire by Republicans that she be the Democratic nominee. She is so polarizing, their thinking has been, that she would be easy to swat down in a general election. And already, a third of the country’s voters say they will never vote for her.

That’s been the conventional wisdom. But how realistic is that today? Could there be a new emerging reality, one that offers Republicans a more cautionary note?

The Real Reality Based Community:

Republicans, like the rest of the country, have watched Mrs. Clinton steamroll over her Democratic opponents. Agree with her or not, like her or not, you have to admit that her campaign machine has been one efficient operation (the Clintons themselves offered the analogy with the Sopranos). Polls show that Mrs. Clinton’s “electability” quotient has been rising, certainly among Democrats. Newt Gingrich acknowledged she was a “formidable” candidate.

“What’s going on is what is called an agonizing reappraisal,” said Ross Baker, a professor of political science at Rutgers.

New results from Quinnipiac and averages of recent polls computed by realclearpolitics.com, show Mrs. Clinton beating all the leading Republican candidates: Mr. Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Mr. Romney and John McCain.

And in her Senate re-election bid in New York last year, Mrs. Clinton scared away serious challengers and won 67 percent of the statewide vote, including Republican counties that had voted for George W. Bush.

As Mrs. Clinton herself continues to point out, as she did in today’s Washington Post, that she believes she has become battle-hardened by the attacks against her and knows how to take on what she calls the right-wing hate machine. [snip]

For one thing, they are hoping to elevate themselves to equal status as front-runner. Neither Mr. Giuliani nor Mr. Romney dominates the Republican field the way she dominates the Democrats.

“What they’re saying is, ‘Only I am tough enough to go head-to-head against Hillary Clinton,’” said Mr. Baker of Rutgers.

But this is a double-edged sword. “It’s a supreme tribute to her,” he said. “In the process of trying to elevate themselves, it makes her seem much more formidable.”

He said that for now, casting her as the giant to be taken down still serves a purpose among Republicans who are likely to vote in the primaries.

“At this point, you’ll still get a heavy dose of scare messages about her because the audience that’s consuming the Republican debates is largely the base and they can be mobilized by these kinds of appeals,” he said.

But if Mrs. Clinton starts winning primaries and becomes the all-but-certain Democratic nominee, he said, it would be unrealistic to paint her as someone who is unelectable and can easily be toppled.

“Look for a message adjustment,” he said. “The Republicans know they can’t win an election with just the Hillary-haters.”

RIPublicans seem to get it. When will PINOs, Naderites, and Big Blogs stop their impotent hate attacks?

Share

91 thoughts on “Hillary Clinton’s American Embrace

  1. good morning hillfans. just got home from work to check my hillary news on here. great post as always admin. the polls look great nationally and at the state level. the barage of direct attacks has started by obama(d-rezko). boy, i hope hillary does not pick this punk for vp.

  2. Heh! Time she shows this punk the door. The meme, Hillary has “Barack in a Box” is gaining momentum. The old axiom for the government: “When you’ve got them in wrong; keep them there., applies appropriatly to Mr. Obama’s recent selective amnesia regarding his Vote for the BINDING S. 970: Iran Counter-Proliferation Act of 2007.
    .

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-970

    add the appropriate html to the address..

    Mrs. S.

  3. “Barack in a Box” or “Obama in a Jam-a” either way Obama and Edwards have committed yet another massive blunder.

    We have been thinking about the Michigan situation quite a bit and making phone calls to double check ourselves as to whether this is as big a blunder as we have ever seen in an election cycle.

    Why we pause – Obama and Edwards and the rest pulled their names out of the Michigan ballot in an obviously coordinated way. They all made the announcement at the same time and just before the deadline at 4 p.m. Tuesday.

    They did not announce their move beforehand nor make any attempt to build pressure on Hillary to withdraw by announcing their move days or weeks ahead of actually filing the necessary papers. It is possible that all these filings on the same day were uncoordinated but that does not seem likely.

    Presumably then, they did not want Hillary to join their coordinated withdrawal, or they did not think they could get Hillary to withdraw. The question still on our minds, which we really answered a long time ago, but want to double or triple check ourselves on, is: Are the opposition campaigns really that completely and utterly and deeply stupid?

    Do these guys in any way think that by withdrawing from Michigan but effectively letting Hillary stay on the Michigan ballot it will hurt her in Iowa or NH? Are they really that stupid? Obviously they hurt themselves greatly in Michigan. Obama hurts himself further with his shrinking group of African-American supporters (think Detroit) and Edwards hurts himself with Unions (think auto makers in Detroit). These guys have handed Hillary an immediate post Iowa caucuses victory.

    The Obama campaign as we posted earlier wants to somehow try to drum up some noise in Iowa about Hillary on the Michigan ballot. We suspect Iowans are going to laugh at this line of attack.

    Here’s the latest Obama whine:

    “A top supporter of Barack Obama says Hillary Clinton could harm the Iowa’s first-in-the-nation caucuses by not removing her name from the Michigan primary ballot.

    Former Iowa Democratic Party chairman Gordon Fisher is calling on Iowa Democrats to pressure Clinton to follow the lead of most other Democratic candidates in choosing not to participate in the Michigan contest.

    “I’m pleased the candidate I am supporting, Sen. Barack Obama — along with Sens. Biden and Edwards and Gov. Richardson — successfully removed their names from the ballot,” Fischer said on his blog, Iowa True Blue.”

    http://www.quadcitytimes.com/articles/2007/10/11/news/local/doc470daf5466be6983190878.txt

  4. The number one diary at daily kos is that Al Gore retrieves his best suit from the cleaners. Oh sweet Jesus, come and squeeze us.

  5. DCDem, that set us howling with laughter. Poor Al. He’s grabbing his best clothes and fleeing from these nuts.

    And they actually write about a suit in the cleaners being retrieved with seriousness? We won’t stop laughing today. Do they think Al is sending messages to them by retrieving garments? Next thing they’ll come up with is a code associated with the color of the shirts and ties. If it’s a green tie he’ll announce on Tuesday; light blue shirts it’s Wednesday; polka dots it will be December; yellow tie it will be a weekend announcement.

    Clothes from the cleaners signals – it’s in-depth analysis from the reality based community.

  6. admin,

    you’re absolute right. The more they talk up Al Gore, the worse Obama and Edwards look. Even netnuts have lost confidence in those two to derail Clinton.

  7. One should always pay attention to Dick Armey when he assesses candidates. Regardless of what you may think of his policies, the fact remains that he has excellent political instincts. So when he says that Hillary is tougher and smarter than her primary opponents, and will be formidable in the general election because she has real policy positions on the challenges facing our country (whether or not he personally agrees with them), right wing friends and media skeptics are more inclined to listen, because what we have been trying to tel them is now coming from one of their own.

  8. BREAKING NEWS: Al Gore has announced a change of his socks.
    ——————-
    Kostner, what you wrote is the whole point of this Gore delusion. Obama and Edwards supporters at some level KNOW their candidates have been knocked out of the ring. The more the clamor for Gore grows, the greater the acknowledgment that Obama and Edwards are in a race to the bottom, not the top.

    Gore is a great guy. But, Gore is not running. We wish him the best.

  9. Someone needs to hurry up and start making some “funny” graphics..

    Obama (Jack) in the BOX.

    When you play the tune…’Pop Goes Obama’! OR ‘Weasal’! whichever!

    yes, admin,

    “A top supporter of Barack Obama says Hillary Clinton could harm the Iowa’s first-in-the-nation caucuses by not removing her name from the Michigan primary ballot.”

    “Former Iowa Democratic Party chairman Gordon Fisher is calling on Iowa Democrats to pressure Clinton to follow the lead of most other Democratic candidates in choosing not to participate in the Michigan contest.”

    “I’m pleased the candidate I am supporting, Sen. Barack Obama — along with Sens. Biden and Edwards and Gov. Richardson — successfully removed their names from the ballot,” Fischer said on his blog, Iowa True Blue.”

    Oh yeah, their incessant whining IS endemic to their mental state..
    “One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest”, ring any bells?

    terrondt:

    I can only hope. I can’t take credit for the original find. A top of the line Hillary supporter remembered Obama’s Iran Vote in April of 07′ . All I did was research it! 🙂

    Mrs. S.

  10. I hope we’ll be able to get the tape soon!! So much so for Clinton not being able to handle hostile questions.

    In a wide-ranging, nearly hour-long interview with New Hampshire public radio this morning, Clinton took questions from callers about how she would get out of Iraq, why she didn’t withdraw her name from the Michigan primary ballot, and why she voted to call Iran’s army a terrorist organization.

    A Marine Corps Vietnam veteran called in to ask about Iraq: “Since your judgment was lacking when we initially went into the war, can we trust you to be able to use good judgement to get us out,” the caller asked. Clinton replied that she believed he could, and she repeated her plan to gather her advisers together to begin to withdraw “in a careful and responsible manner” from Iraq as soon as she is elected president. When asked what she meant by “careful and responsible” and why in the recent debate she said she could not promise to have troops out by 2013, Clinton said she didn’t know what she was going to inherit and there could be a need for a continuing presence to protect the embassy and civilian employees.

    On why she didn’t want to remove her name from the Michigan ballot: “I’m not going to campaign there before the deadline for [the] February 5th window. I’m not going to spend any money there. But I did not believe it was fair to just say goodbye Michigan and not take into account the fact that we’re gonna to have to win Michigan if we’re gonna be in the White House in January 2009.” She declined to criticize her rivals for taking their names off the state’s ballot.

  11. Yepsen defended Clinton and blasted her opponents. Edwards & Obama’s gamble looks more and more like a chidish prank.

    Yepsen: Ballot jockeying designed to gang up on Clinton

    A new fault line has emerged in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, this time over whether a candidate’s name is on the Michigan primary ballot.

    Hillary Clinton and Chris Dodd left theirs on. John Edwards, Barack Obama, Bill Richardson and Joe Biden withdrew theirs.

    At one level, the episode is one of those insider flaps that are irrelevant to most people. But it does provide a clue to how the 2008 race may unfold: We can expect the other candidates to start ganging up more on Clinton.

    That’s because she’s starting to break out both nationally and in Iowa. If any of the other candidates are to have a shot at the nomination, they must first slow her down.

    On Tuesday, all but Dodd were trying to do that. All the candidates have pledged not to campaign in Michigan and Florida, which are violating party rules by moving up the date of their primaries.

    Edwards, Obama, Richardson and Biden took the pledge one step farther and asked their names be taken off the ballot for Michigan’s Jan. 15 primary. That assures the event is now a pretty meaningless contest and has further infuriated Michigan Democrats.

    A campaign can look at the “to be, or not to be” on the ballot question two ways: If none of us is campaigning there, it’s already a meaningless primary, so it makes no difference whether our name is on the ballot. So why take our name off? But if we’re not campaigning there, why leave it?

    This was an easy decision for the menfolk. If they don’t do well in Iowa and New Hampshire, events that will be held ahead of Michigan’s, they’re unlikely to be in the race by Jan. 15. So what do they care if they upset Michigan Democrats now?

    The guys are figuring “first things first”: Let’s try a gambit that might trip up the lady. If we don’t stop her now, in Iowa, we don’t have a chance of our own. Maybe we can get her to do something that will tick off Iowa and New Hampshire Democrats. Let’s see if we can force her to pull her name off the Michigan ballot. If she doesn’t, maybe the Hawkeyes and Granite Staters will be miffed.

    Let’s give the lady a little credit for seeing through the maneuver. She is her party’s front-runner. She’s in the difficult spot of having to worry about winning the nomination and then competing in a general election. She knows a Democrat probably can’t win the White House without carrying Michigan. She also knows the state has been beaten down by the crisis in the auto industry. Why pile on?

    The betting here is that she won’t pay a price in Iowa for leaving her name on the ballot in Michigan – as long as she, her husband and her campaign stay clear of Michigan – and Florida. No Clintonian word games about what constitutes campaigning. No going to Michigan to accept Gov. Jennifer Granholm’s expected endorsement.

    If they stay away, they won’t be seen by Iowans as violating the spirit of the pledge not to campaign in those states. Iowa Democratic activists care a lot more about real issues.

    What Clinton should worry about in Iowa is the way she conducts her campaign here.

    She should worry about how she doesn’t take questions from activists at every single stop, or how she lets a hostile question get under her skin when she does, or how her big caravan and security bubble often wall her off from the very people she needs.

    She might also think about how she limits her access to small-state reporters. If she can’t handle a loaded question from a hostile activist, or field a few pitches from us hick journalists, she probably doesn’t handle the big boys and girls of the national media very well.

    It’s a little baffling. Clinton has risen in recent polls. She has done so through good debate performances and personal appearances that let people see she’s not the ogre of conservative caricature.

    She could do even better in Iowa if she spent more time here and let the activists get to know her better.

  12. Kostner, excellent analysis of Michigan as always. Your opinion is always right on and valuable to all of us. Thank you.

    Admin, you should warn us not to drink or eat when reading your posts. I damn near ruined my keyboard. 🙂

    Has anyone pointed out yet on Dk that Gore may be getting his “best suit” out bc the Nobel prize announcement is expected today or tomorrow on his category? I hope he does well in the balloting. He’s been a tireless proponent of environmental issues and will be invaluable to out nation when Hillary is sworn in in 2009.

    I believe Hillary did the right thing in Michigan. You know, it has struck me that to some extent the GOP has had a lot to do with the FL primary ballot issues. They control the state legislature there and made that vote. I’m not sure about Michigan, but the Foolish Four just thumbed their noses at the voters who don’t have any control over how and when elections are set. At least Hillary didn’t and has explained she is between a rock and a hard place because of party infighting. I don’t think Iowans give two figs about what happens in Michigan.

  13. Hey, admin: I am tempted to write a diary about the meaning of Al Gore’s ties and the day of his announcement. The Al Gore diaries are coming fast and furious because Kossacks have lost hope that Edwards or Obama can stop Hillary. My take on Gore is that it’s too late. There isn’t sufficient time to put together the machine. A modern campaign is a Fortune 500 company. How could Al get up to speed for such a massive enterprise with November starting to breathe down our necks?

  14. Obama attacks Hillary for her torture comments. Love her campaign’s response (posted from talkingpointsmemo.com).

    Opening up another front in the Dem Primary battle, Barack Obama’s campaign is sharply criticizing Hillary Clinton over some comments she made to The Washington Post on torture, charging that her opposition to torture is too vague and that she’s merely expressing “winks and nods” on the issue.

    As noted yesterday, WaPo claimed that in their interview, Clinton was “vague” about how she would handle the CIA’s special interrogation methods. She suggested she couldn’t directly comment on how she would treat the specific methods because “it is not yet clear” what the administration is doing in terms of torturing terror suspects.

    In response to those WaPo comments, Obama spokesperson Bill Burton emailed Election Central the following:

    Barack Obama thinks that America’s policy on torture needs to be a lot more explicit than the winks and nods she has seemed to put forth on this important issue.
    Hillary spokesperson Phil Singer swiftly hit back, emailing over the following:

    It’s unfortunate that Barack Obama is abandoning the politics of hope as his campaign stagnates and is launching false attacks on other Democrats instead. Senator Clinton explicitly stated that we “have to draw a bright line” against torture and “abide by the Geneva conventions.” Senator Obama’s attacks won’t bring change to America, but Senator Clinton’s strength and experience will.
    In the interview with WaPo Clinton did also say that “we have to draw a bright line” against torture and that we have to “abide by the Geneva conventions.” The paper left those quotes out of its interview, prompting the Hillary campaign to release a full transcript of her remarks.

    The transcript didn’t mollify some Hillary critics. Both Andrew Sullivan and Matthew Yglesias continued to chastise Hillary, saying that the core issue is whether Hillary would explicitly rule out the use of specific techniques such as waterboarding and whether she viewed such techniques as torture. But several others said that the full transcript constituted a clear statement against torture of all kinds and thus exonerated her.

  15. What the hell is Yglesias talking about? That is intellectually dishonest. Hillary could not have been clearer. What she said was no one knows exactly what BUSH is up to. She was clear that she, like all presidents before Bush frankly, would adhere to the Geneva conventions. WaPo deliberately left out her full remarks. Yglesias knows this. I can’t believe him.

  16. Obama’s attack on Hillary for her answer to the torture question is as bizarre as I have ever seen. In order for his words to have versimilitude, one must assume from the get-go that Hillary supports torture and that her answer is intended to disguise that support. His supporters are happy. He’s called her out. But it seems to me that as most of America does not realistically believe that Hillary supports torture so for them, Obama’s attack will be one more miss. He is so completely engaged in this world that his supporters have created for themselves (and there is truly Obama-world, just like there’s Freeper-world, and both equally cast Hillary as the ultimate in evil) that he is now running his campaign for the benefit of the people who already support him, at the expense of expanding his pool of support among the general population – most of whom probably think he looks like some kind of a nut this morning. Everytime he attacks Hillary his poll numbers fall because his attacks are against the ultra-hawk caricature his supporters have created for him to run against rather than against the woman most of America thinks, for better or ill, they know.

    I think that there is a tremendous amount of narcissism in that campaign, in the candidate and in his followers. He has a similar relationship to a lot of his supporters that Bush has with a lot of his. There’s a tremendous enthusiasm for how lovely, noble and enlightened the candidate is, and by extension, how lovely, noble and enlightened his supporters are. And further, how unfair the world is to their sunshine candidate. The willingness to lie about other Democratic candidate is really quite remarkable. They’ve created a universe for themselves, first proposed by Obama and now decorated and anchored by his fans. And in this world, Obama is marvelous and will float to the presidency by dint of his brilliance, and magnaminity, and we’ll all be part of the adoring crowd at his feet – albeit well-behind his original supporters who will be running the show and deciding who gets to be near him. It’ll be a dream, as Michelle Obama mentioned. Now, I could be wrong, but I bet campaigning for the presidency doesn’t feel very dreamlike to serious candidates.

    It often strikes me that his supporters think Obama is running the campaign that Hillary is actually running. One of the posters at DK had a sig line that said “obama is playing chess, and the rest of the candidates are playing checkers.” Dude – if you’re right about that, that’s a big problem. They often talk about how he’s bringing new voters into the system – hmmmm, the pollsters don’t tell us that about Obama, that’s for sure. They talk about his insightful, nuanced answers to foreign policy questions – I guess that’s why his big foreign policy address caused rioting in Pakistan and got him burned in effigy alongside Tom Tancredo, for god’s sakes.

    It’s Obama and his supporters unwillingness to live in the real world that has fated his campaign. It’s why I find his candidacy so disturbing and why I’ll be glad when he’s gone from the national stage. I’m betting a lot of Americans, like me, aren’t going to want to hear too much from him after this campaign is over.

    Obama wants to be the Mighty Quinn but there is no Mighty Quinn. There are just men and women who show up and work hard, and it isn’t glamourous and it isn’t dream-like.

  17. Sweet column: Obama reorganizing. Reinforcing top leadership ranks. Staff to the states.
    White House hopeful Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) is reorganizing his campaign, deploying key staff from the Chicago headquarters to Feb. 5 primary states while bolstering the ranks of his top leadership.

    The move, Obama advisers told the Sun-Times, has been long planned and is not a reaction to the lead chief rival Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) has in national and early state polls

  18. Check this out. Looks like Obama is reshuffling his campaign. What do you all think? The Feb. 5 primary states are the ones where Hillary has huge leads.

    White House hopeful Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) is reorganizing his campaign, deploying key staff from the Chicago headquarters to Feb. 5 primary states while bolstering the ranks of his top leadership.
    The move, Obama advisers told the Sun-Times, has been long planned and is not a reaction to the lead chief rival Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) has in national and early state polls.

  19. yeah right kostner ,and im the next president if u believe that spin from obama. his run is sinking FAST. and this gore talk from the daily kooks, do they really think gore is running. he is very koy after all.

  20. I thought Gore was pretty clear about not running. It’s the big blogger types who keep grasping at nonexistent straws.

  21. Hillary’s campaign also responds to Obama’s attack on her Iran vote. You know, the bill he never even bothered to cast a vote on.

    Hillary Clinton’s campaign has a sharp response out to Barack sternly-worded — and in a rare occurrence, specific by name — attack on Hillary published in the New Hampshire Union Leader.

    In a rebuttal to Obama’s accusation that Hillary was effectively backing military action against Iran when she voted for the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment, Clinton spokesman Phil Singer says:

    It’s unfortunate that Sen. Obama is abandoning the politics of hope and embracing the same old attack politics as his support stagnates. Sen. Obama is well aware that Sen. Clinton was one of the first to say George Bush must get explicit congressional authority before attacking Iran and is the sole co-sponsor of legislation forbidding the president from expending any money on military action there without Congressional approval. Sen. Obama’s attacks won’t bring change, but Sen. Clinton’s strength and experience will.
    Clinton supporters also point out two other relevant points: Obama didn’t show up for the vote on Kyl-Lieberman, and his fellow Illinois Senator and prominent supporter Dick Durbin also voted for the amendment.

    Update: And on the subject of Dick Durbin, his view of the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment was very different from Obama’s. “If I thought there was any way it could be used as a pretense to launch an invasion of Iran I would have voted no,” Durbin said.

  22. Y’all, This joint is jumpin’ today. Obamba’s voting box, RFK Jr’s endorsement, the ole “let’s fool Hillary to drop out of Michigan ploy.” So much excitin’ to talk about today that I’ll have to read through again later. But I had to wonder when I read Armey’s comments about Edwards…Do ya think Elizabeth will call him on the phone like she did Ann Coulter. I’ve just got this big image in my mind of “i just want you to quit sayin’ that John’s not as smart or as tough as Hillary. I mean, his daddy worked in a tex-tile mill. And look how much he’s done for poor people.” Sorry I just get carried away. But comments like Armey’s about Edwards are what my ole granny used to call “god’s justice.” Ain’t god’s justice wonderful,” she’d say. And she was real poor with no electricity and a dirt floor, but she could spot a phoney at 500 paces. Thanks for the note wb. I will be in touch soon. -mollyj

  23. Obama’s eating his Wheaties. He’s trying to say that K/L was a defining moment in our nation’s history, that K/L will take our nation to war with Iran.

    If he’s so anti-war, why did he back S. 970 in the spring? If he’s so anti-war, why did he propose a bill identical to Hillary’s – allowing for residual forces in Iraq once we start to redeploy our troops back home? If he’s so anti-war, why did he vote in lockstep with Hillary on Iraq
    once he was elected to the Senate two-and-a-half years ago? If he’s so anti-war, why did he skip out on the vote re Kyl/Lieberman? (and don’t feed me that load of bull that he didn’t know the vote was coming up – Durbin’s the Dem. Whip and he had to have told people that vote was coming up).

    If he’s so anti-war, why didn’t he filibuster this amendment? If he’s so anti-war, why did he wait 10 hours to issue a statement on K/L and how he would have voted against it had he bothered to show up for that vote in the first place?

    This basically boils down to one thing – Obama was for it (declaring the IRG a terrorist org) before he didn’t show up to vote against it.

    I understand that Obama’s going on cable news with these attacks on Hillary. He’s even put together a web-ad on this shit.

    We’ve gotta nip this bullshit in the bud, guys

  24. Well, that’s what the Clintons do so brilliantly and why the win so many elections – they nip bullshit in the bud.

  25. RE: Michigan

    A little under reported comment from DNC chairman Dean, we
    “will work” thngs out with “Michigan” and presumably Florida.
    If Dean ultimately tries not to recognize both delegations, he
    is nuts. He is throwing away next years general elections. This is not good politics.

    The convention itself will restore sanity to the party, if Dean
    can’t or is unwilling. Also, Hillary (or any other nominee) will replace him as DNC chair for the GE. He has allowed this situation
    to fester. It can no longer be torerated.

    Keep an eye on the composition of the Rules committee over
    the next couple of months. This will tell which candidate is in control of the state parties.

  26. Kegs, Maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t see this as having any impact on the general election.

    Also, DCDemocrat, Hillary’s campaign has wasted no time in pushing back against Obama’s Iran crap. They were expecting it, I’m sure, and are on top of it, as usual.

  27. Also, how many Dem voters would even buy the argument she’s for war with Iran? That’s like saying she supports torture.

  28. Paula, state parties that feel they were insulted or left out
    by the DNC and or the convention, end only working for locale and statewide candidates. I don’t think this will happen this year
    but there is growing frustion because of these events. Hell,
    its mid-October and there is no published primary calander for
    the month of January ’08. Too many games are being played.

  29. guys, i just saw the new foxnews national poll and it has hillary up by 33 points over obama. it is on the realclear politics.com. the rcp average is now 25 point lead. hillary is really pulling this away. GO HILLARY GO!!!! sorry i don;t have the link. i have trouble linking on here but check out the website. rassmussen has it at 21 points up for hillary also.

  30. Wow, terrondt, that’s huge. Hey, did anyone see CNN this afternoon? Obama’s campaign in new “anti-Clinton” phase? He’s got ot lose his handlers. This is terrible advice.

  31. Yes, you are right, mj, it is horrible advice. I am glad that our girl is doing so well, but I am down right discouraged with all the negativism from Obama and our friend John, I helped elect John senator from NC when I was living there but I don’t recongize him anymore. I think that the great phrase of the mornin’ from basement angel about this race being about narcissism is somethin’ to really think about. We have a major generational difference now between older boomers and younger boomers. I’m a middle boomer. And I don’t think the younger boomers even count. Years ago, and I do mean the 60’s, Margaret Mead talked about the generation gap. We have one now that’s more monumental than anything we’ve ever seen before. And we need somebody who is wise enough to address this age and technology driven diversity. That person, as you all know is certainly not the one who campaigns on being able to bring us together. I knew he wasn’t for real when he talked down about Senator Clinton’s “conversations” as she likes to call them. The difference is she really does listen and learn from people. Yes, Obama is gettin’ a lot of bad advice. Somebody needs to talk with him–and I mean that seriously. And H. Dean is a huge disappointment. The people in Fl and now MI are wondering what the hell they are to do. There are people there who want to campaign for Hillary. I am worried about it simply because there’s so much uncertainty and when people get uncertain they start to make things up about what’s happening. –mollyj

  32. Yup, that foxnews poll will no doub make moustache Alexrold cry. Another devastating poll….

    Clinton 50
    Obama 18

  33. the punk is now with blitzer on cnn. blitzer did hammer him on missing the iran terrorist vote but failed to mention that same vote earlier in the year he voted on. count on the msm to go half assed on this pukemister.

  34. mj, He has no choice because he’s tanking. Tearing her down is the only way he thinks he can make inroads, because his “positive” campaign isn’t working. Of course, now that his “politics of hope” has been thrown out the window, he has nothing left. And we all know attacks on Hillary only make her stronger. This is a lose-lose for Obama.

    BTW, thanks for the heads up about Hillary being on Olbermann. I didn’t even know she was going to be on, lol. Guess I need to pay more attention.

  35. sorry with the name calling but i can’t hold back on this guy anymore. the abuse and names they call our hillary in the msm and the nutkooks make me boil over. i have to vent. i have zero respect for him.

  36. Wow!!!! That Fox poll is un-friggin’ believable. Now everyone’s going to know that Obama’s doing this because he’s desperate, which will make him look pathetic and petty.

    terrondt, At least Blitzer brought up his missing the Iran vote. Some media don’t even do that. And as I said before, does anyone (other than certain lefty bloggers) really believe Hillary would go to war with Iran? The argument is just dumb.

  37. One of those can’t stop laughing days.

    DCDem, If you decide to do an analysis of Al Gore’s clothing, you might want to include the latest Intrade odds. Bettors now give Gore a better chance of getting the nomination than they give Obama. (13.8% Gore, 11.5% Obama)
    http://www.intrade.com/jsp/intrade/contractSearch/#

    Why Obama is attacking Hillary on torture for the Washington Post’s bad writing is beyond anything, but Obama then tops himself by attacking Hillary for a vote he didn’t vote on. Even Andrew Sullivan who attacked Hillary on her torture position now admits his comments are unfair and that the fault was with the Washington Post misquoting Hillary.
    http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/10/too-harsh-on-cl.html

    [BTW, Obama is on Wolf Blitzer and not doing well at all. He is incoherent at times and confusing at others. Can’t wait for the transcript. Obama’s answer on why he didn’t vote seems to be “teacher gave a surprise quiz that’s why I failed”.
    http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2007/10/11/tsr.obama.int.cnnhttp://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2007/10/11/tsr.obama.int.cnn ]

    On K/L Obama must stop attacking Senator Durbin and his position on Iran.

  38. Glad to see Andrew Sullivan’s mea culpa, especially since he’s no HRC fan to begin with. BTW, this made me LOL:

    Obama’s answer on why he didn’t vote seems to be “teacher gave a surprise quiz that’s why I failed.”

  39. watchin ben affleck on hardball. even though he supports obama, he really has a grip on the issues of the day in politics. now watch mathews rail agaonst hillary to egg on affleck.

  40. One of the questions Olbermann asks Hillary tonight:

    OLBERMANN: The Republican debate the other night — you certainly did seem to come up fairly frequently. Do you think they’re doing you a favor, a campaign favor, an advertising favor, by mentioning you so often?

    CLINTON: Well, I guess if you don’t have anything positive to say about yourself or your record or your vision for America, that might be an alternative, but you know, I’m running my campaign. I can’t worry about what they’re doing. It is something, though, that a lot of my friends have noticed, and one of them I thought, rather funny, who said to me, you know, when you get to be our age, it’s kind of nice to have all these men obsessed with you. I guess I could put that spin on it.

  41. admin,

    I love Hillaryhub’s headline ‘Hillary jumps to 32 points lead as Obama goes on attack’. LOL.

    I hope you can can record that video clip and put it on youtube. That’s quite hilarious!

  42. admin,

    I think we need to push this story. This is dirty backroom deal… It has the potential to further hurt Obama’s cause even MSM picks up this story…

    Iowa Independent:

    Five individuals connected to five different campaigns have confirmed — but only under condition of anonymity — that the situation that developed in connection with the Michigan ballot is not at all as it appears on the surface. The campaign for Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, arguably fearing a poor showing in Michigan, reached out to the others with a desire of leaving New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton as the the only candidate on the ballot. The hope was that such a move would provide one more political obstacle for the Clinton campaign to overcome in Iowa.

    Despite speaking in confidence, sources were quick to point out that the discussions were not the final deciding factor when candidates’ names were removed from the ballot.

    “Yes, such discussion did take place,” said one national staffer, “but that doesn’t mean we were influenced by it. The decision to pull from the Michigan ballot — or other renegade states’ ballots for that matter — was made the day we signed the pledge with the four early states.”

    A contact within a second campaign agreed.

    “The belief that this would somehow hurt front-running Clinton in Iowa was icing on an already sweet cake,” he said. “The real meal, however, is the good-will the move generates not only in Iowa, but in all the states who are playing by the DNC rules and that don’t appreciate all of this jumping and chaos.”

  43. As we recall, Obama was in the Senate the day of the Move-on vote but did not vote on the Non-binding Move-on resolution. Obama explained his skipping out on the vote in high minded terms:

    “It’s precisely this kind of political game-playing that makes most Americans cynical about Washington’s ability to solve America’s problems. By not casting a vote, I registered my protest against this empty politics.”

    Is it possible that Obama skipped out on the K/L vote because again he is too high minded to vote for non-binding resolutions?

    There seems to be some consistency (stupidity too) if Obama refuses to vote against all non-binding votes. But Obama votes for some non-binding resolutions and skips out on other non-binding resolutions all with flowery language.

    Taylor Marsh takes Obama on his skipped votes, a previous speech tying Iraq to Iran, Durbin, a whole bunch of stuff.
    http://www.taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=26374

  44. Kostner we speculated on this Michigan business earlier today:
    http://www.hillaryis44.org/?p=280#comment-8131

    Thanks for that Iowa Independent confirmation of our speculation that the Michigan withdrawal was coordinated and done late so that Hillary could not get her name off the Michigan ballot.

    If this report is accurate, which we believe it is, it is yet another confirming incident of our previously made assessment: these guys are really dumb. It’s almost as if they are high school students running election campaigns for student government based on political movies they have seen.

    These guys also seem to have contempt for the intelligence of Iowa and NH voters if they really think the voters will “punish” Hillary for having her name on the Michigan ballot. All they managed to do with this stunt was to give Hillary bragging rights to the eventual victory in Michigan and yet another talking point that they can’t win the general election (they have angered Michigan voters which are necessary to a Democratic victory in November).

    Basement Angel made a comment today about chess and checkers and Obama supporters thinking Obama is running the campaign that objective reality teaches Hillary is running. This observation holds for all the candidates. They are children and Hillary is the wise woman of the village (Hillary as Gandalf for you Lord of the Rings fans).

  45. admin,

    Yes we all knew it’s a dirty backroom deal, but now we have an independent source reporting this. We need to push this story to MSM, it definitely has the potential to further drive up Obama’s negativity and paints him as a ‘political as usual’ hypocrite.

    I hope you can write a frontpage story on this, and all of us try us best to write diaries on a variety of blogs. If blogs start to pick up this story, hopefully MSM will do some investigation. If this is pushed into MSM, it will have leg.

  46. Hey people, great news on the poll front!! Another poll showing her reaching the 50% line!! I love it!

    I wanted to post something I read on huffingtonpost, there is a blogger there, his bio: “James Boyce is a blogger, t.v. analyst and radio show host who is a passionate believer and supporter of the progressive community online. James appears at least weekly on both MSNBC and FOX NEWS as a Democratic Strategist and online communication expert.”
    He writes a blog titled: A Few Ways Barack Obama Can Show There’s Some Product Behind All That Marketing.
    Heres the link: http://www.tinyurl.com/3yd3n6

    Now, after the post itself, he replies to a comment from some sheep (my words) that he must have been bought and paid by HRC campaign, which he replies (which is what I found so interesting) this:

    “Have not been bought and paid for by HRC Camp, have plenty of friends over there, but they haven’t sent me a penny.

    By the way, a top field operative from 2004 told me that Obama’s field operation in Iowa is the worst he’s ever seen, just an fyi.”

    This stood out to me, admin have you heard anything that can confirm this?? It would be sweet if more thought/heard the same!

  47. you guys ever notice on the foxnews report roundtable that fred barnes always have to downplay hillary getting the nomination? he badly does not want her to get it. like he knows she is going to win the general.

  48. Wow, so much for Obama’s steller field operation in Iowa. I always had a hard time believing that one. Boy, I wonder if Boyce is right.

  49. Its becoming a daily RITUAL for me…….Come home from work, make dinner for my Partner and I, go on the INTERNET and ENJOY the latest GOOD HILLARY news of the day. This literally happens EVERY DAY, there is MORE GOOD NEWS!!! It must really suck to be supporting OBAMA or Edwards.

    I do wish I had known about this BETTING site earlier. I could have taken ALL of my money OUT of the STOCK MARKET, and bet it ALL on HILLARY, and would have ALREADY doubled my money!!!!!!!!

  50. In my humble opinion, this Michigan “pact” seems to have DNC’s
    Dean all over it. Dean’s has wanted to avoid a confrontation
    and perhaps, he enlisted BO and the boys to stand aside.
    Since, Hillary and Dodd didn’t take the bait, the cabal is
    exposed. Gee, it also comes at the same time Gore is being
    pushed out front again. You just have to wonder.

    I believe in conspiracy theories.

  51. Hello admin & folks,

    Taylor Marsh just got the tip , and put it on her site. She promises to do some further dig on that notorious ‘Michigan pact’. Let’s hope she’ll find out some stuff.

    I hope you folks start to post on ‘Taylor Marsh’. She can be very helpful from time to time!

  52. BTW,

    politico is pushing a story that somehow Clinton is linked to an alleged Edwards sex scandal. This is so stupid. That story was very broken by Huffington, which has been a harsh Clinton critic. Edwards will play his pretty-boy victim card. Just be prepared.

    The Clintonite who owns National Enquirer

    The political world has been holding its nose for the last twenty-four hours while peering at the weekly tabloid National Enquirer, which published a story yesterday alleging that presidential candidate John Edwards had an extra-marital affair.

    “The story is false,” Edwards told reporters in South Carolina today, according to a reporter who was there.

    What the tabloid’s readers, in politics and out, may not know is that a key owner of the Enquirer is a prominent New York investment banker and one of Hillary Clinton’s key backers, Roger Altman. Altman was an official in the first Clinton administration, and his name is often mentioned as a possible Clinton Treasury Secretary.

    The investment boutique which Altman founded and chairs, Evercore Partners, bought a controlling stake in American Media, which publishes the Enquirer, in 1999, which it still holds with a partner. Evercore’s president, Austin Beutner, sits on American Media’s Board of Directors, according to Evercore’s website.

    A spokesman for American Media, Richard Valvo, said in an email that Altman has “no involvement in editorial, ever.” He said that Evercore owns 20% of the company through an investment fund. Altman didn’t respond to an email seeking comment or to a message left with his secretary.

    The National Enquirer story was mirrored by a pair of stories in the Huffington Post — whose public face, Arianna Huffington, is a harsh critic of Clinton. The Huffington Post stories implied that the Edwards campaign was concerned about its relationship with a film-maker, Reille Hunter, who had shot web videos for Edwards. The stories stopped short of directly suggesting the candidate had a relationship with her, something Mickey Kaus made explicit on Slate yesterday.

    “The MSM seems to be strenuously trying to not report it,” Kaus wrote, and indeed, aside from a disapproving link to Kaus’s item on the website of the New Republic, and gleeful coverage on the gossip blog Wonkette, the story has mostly stayed out of the old-line press. But it’s unclear whether that reluctance is the result of Clinton-era neurosis about the topic of sex, or a less fraught sense that there simply isn’t much to report here, particularly in the case of a candidate who lacks the media wattage and poll numbers of his rivals.

    The Enquirer story cites anonymous emails from the un-named woman allegedly involved to another un-named source.

    But Hunter reportedly issued a disgusted denial of the stories earlier today, via a spokesperson quoted by the veteran blogger Jerome Armstrong on MyDD (Armstrong emailed Politico that the spokesman was her lawyer, Robert Gordon):

    The innuendoes and lies that have appeared on the internet and in the National Enquirer concerning John Edwards are not true, completely unfounded and ridiculous….

    When working for the Edwards camp, my conduct as well as the conduct of my entire team was completely professional.

    This concocted story is just dirty politics and I want no part of it.

    [Story updated with comments from American Media and Edwards.]

  53. Admin: Thanks for heads up. I probably should scour the web looking for various sartorial expressions of Al Gore and conjecture what each shade of gray means as a secret code for the draftgore.com movement.

  54. I missed the first 15 mins. of Olbermann. Has Hillary been on yet?

    BTW, I never ever heard of that Edwards thing till now.

  55. Y’all I just hope this kinda crap doesn’t get goin’ in the campaign. I don’t care who’s involved or not involved. Just say no. I hope you’ll keep us updated–I don’t read Huffington. –mollyj

  56. I agree with you, molly. I’m glad the MSM is avoiding it. Sounds kind of fishy anyway, with its basis on anonymous sources.

  57. The Edwards story makes very little sense. Why would
    Hillary’s campaign want to knock down Edwards. He barely
    show in the national polls and relegated to third in Iowa.
    He is doing a fine job of knocking down his own campaign.
    Why give him leverage.

    Again, this makes no sense.

  58. Kegs, It doesn’t. And Edwards won’t dare accuse Hillary of being behind it because that would just bring the story front and center. Besides, how many scandal stories has the Enquirer run on the Clintons? They just want to sell papers, period.

  59. No one will be surprised if Edwards does well in Iowa. He’s been here since 2004 campaigning, so I expect him to edge out Obama and I think we can beat him here, but if we lose by a little, that will not be a big deal. She can still win New Hampshire, South Carolina, Nevada, MICHIGAN, California, Florida, and New York, while the others cannot. Edwards doesn’t even have a decent organization in any other state except Iowa. This is his first and last stand. Obama also needs to win Iowa, or he is done. None of them have the exceptional organization that Hillary does, thank god. Wish us luck on our first Students for Hillary Meeting Monday here at UI 🙂

  60. celiff, I’m wonder, is the political science department lining
    up behind a candidate? How about the business school and
    economic departments? These are generally great indicators
    of where students and student activists generally align.
    The faculty has a lot of influence.

  61. I remember asking three of my Poli Sci professors in January 1976 if they wanted to go with me to meet Jimmy Carter at a small campaign event 20 minutes from campus (before the NH primary).

    All three looked at me like was an alien from outer space and said, “Why would I want to meet Jimmy Carter? Who cares about him?”

  62. hwc, I had similar experiences in the late ’60 and early ’70s.
    Times have changed; they are more involved then you might
    think.

  63. I know.

    My daughter’s campus (professors and students) were very active in Joe Sestak’s campaign in 2006. But, it’s a politically active school.

  64. The professors have been pretty quiet about this. They have been spotted at Hillary events, but also I have seen one in the Edwards camp, and a few like obama. But they have been relatively quiet thus far. Definitely not any ripublicans (: I know a lot of people in the law school like Hillary.

  65. Great news that Al Gore wins the Nobel Peace Prize!!

    One can speculate as to whether this will make him want to run for President, but I doubt it. He gets a great platform to speak from now, about the issue that really matters to him and is so important. And politics beside….this issue deserves to have the highest attention!! Especially with the Bush admin trying to make people believe it’s rubbish.

    And also, there is so little time left, if he were to jump inn, he would have problems organizing, and the Nobel institute in Norway always have a busy schedule for the laureate, which takes away time. 🙂

  66. Bowers has a great piece up at Open Left about how gauche a presidential run would seem after the announcement of a Nobel Peace Prize and before its award. It would make Al seem like the little boy in school who can never get enough attention. Bowers’s analysis is that this puts the nail in the coffin on draftgore 2008.

    On a side note, a dkos blogger asked me if I post here at Big Pink. He asked me that question as though the activity was tawdry. He accused this site of being Republican. I replied that the effort of Obama and Edwards supporters to marginalize 50 percent of the Democratic electorate wasn’t working so well. I grieve for my beloved dkos.

  67. dcdemocrat, daily kos lost thier way. from 2003 on i became a loyal member of them but until hillary started running the hatred sprewes her way like crazy. i rarely post a commemt on there anymore. only here and mydd.

  68. I don’t see Al Gore getting into the race. He’s made a success out of his life’s work. Al Gore is a pacifist.The raucousness of a campaign and never ending attacks aren’t his style at all. Presidential campaigns are better left to those who thrive on challenge and exalt in winning.

    And….that would be our dynamic couple, who are in it to Win, the Clintons.

    Bravo, VP Gore, well done. 🙂

    Mrs. S.

  69. Mrs. Smith: I was just reading “The New York Times” article on Al Gore’s win. There is an interesting paragraph at the end where Gore says he now intends to use his Nobel prestige to help disempowered persons in the Third World to muster the force to enact environmental change. That sounds like a full-time job. It doesn’t sound like the plan of a presidential candidate.

    If I were President Hillary Clinton, I would make Bill Clinton my roving political global ambassador and Al Gore, my roving environmental global ambassador.

  70. Just read a report from one of the wire services on Gore’s win. In it, he (Gore) was quoted as saying that he was donating the 1.5 million dollar prize that goes with it to some environmental NGO. That ought to tell you right there that he’s not running!

  71. hehe, yeah, I doubt he is running, Mellisa Ethridge also said in the LOGO debate that he wouldn’t run, “it’s too life sucking” she said he had said.

    Like you write DCDemocrat, it seems this is leading him on a path of a full time job, something that needs his attention and the attention he can bring the cause for who he is and what he represents.
    Not back into politics, it would kind of seem like a step down now, to throw himself back into the ‘mud’ ‘arguing’ fighting’ etc…

  72. I believe we all have a destiny and we’re put on this Earth to find it. Some never do because they give up their dreams and aspirations for a whole host of different reasons.

    Those that know they are fulfilling their destiny, are as unstoppable as a runaway train..it’s theirs, it belongs to them, they know it and effortlessly excel at their predetermined path.

    Gore is a sight to behold. He’s taken ownership of his True destiny and therefore his rightful entitlement of place in the Universe of life..

    DCDem says:

    ===”If I were President Hillary Clinton, I would make Bill Clinton my roving political global ambassador and Al Gore, my roving environmental global ambassador.”===

    Great idea- Of course, it isn’t a secret Bill and Al are the most loved and respected Americans in the world. Through their networking and bridge building, I’ll bet our country will be back on track within the first year.

    the feminine will make it so! 🙂

    Mrs. S.

  73. Barack Obama: “I voted for it before I didn’t vote against it.”

    Yes, it is sad that the once great ‘Daily Kos’ has turned into ‘Daily Freeper’. I followed a link to Free Republic last week. I honestly couldn’t tell the difference – not even ideologically – because just like dKos it was all sickness and hatred.

    Gore has a dream life now. It’s great that he and Bill can continue their positive influence in the world. Hil can make them “Co-Ambassadors To The World”.

  74. Canaan we will have more to say on all this on Saturday.

    “I voted for it before I didn’t vote against it.” – priceless

Comments are closed.