A Bloggers Bleak But True Assessment of the Political Situation- I Agree

The blogger sums up much of what I am feeling. See the blog entry from the DailyKos.

The Morning After - Some Thoughts

This is based on reading in the comments section from the JJP readers. You all are terrific, even when I disagree with you, and I definitely appreciate them.

Hillary Clinton won through race-baiting, fear-mongering, smears and lies. That's who she is. She has no character, and she showed her true self, and the true self of those that she surrounds herself with. She claimed MICHIGAN AND FLORIDA in her speech last night. Michigan - where she was the only one on the ballot, and Florida - where no one competed. Well, if you can't win fairly, then I guess you lie and cheat and try and change the rules in the 4th Quarter of a 4 Quarter game. Thus is Hillary Clinton. THIS IS WHO SHE IS - FACE IT.

Fact is, SHE was leading in both Texas and Ohio by 20 points less than 2 weeks ago, and Obama WON Texas.

So, now, we venture on. She'll gain, maybe 10 delegates in total from the entire process yesterday, which means she's still trailing in PLEDGED DELEGATES.

I believe her ego is such that she just can't remotely believe that she's in this fight, so her camp, once again, is floating the Obama as VP.

Get that...this heifer is the one trailing in delegates, but OBAMA has to be the VP?

It's the only thing they have left.

Make no mistake Barack Obama doesn't need her as HIS VP - he has a stable of folks that he can turn to that would be great matchups for him.

But, she can't win without him.

Period.

A reader points out that:
So I see Clinton's floating the Obama as VP thing again to garner more votes for herself.

I agree with this too, because of the BS meme of her ' more experience', and those on the fence saying, ' well, maybe Obama needs more experience', and would vote for her, thinking that they would get him too. I say once again, that's utter BS, she can't win this on her own.

Another update: just got this from DailyKos:

Asked on CBS's "The Early Show" whether she and Obama should be on the same ticket, Clinton said:

"That may be where this is headed, but of course we have to decide who is on the top of ticket. I think the people of Ohio very clearly said that it should be me."

The people of Ohio? GMAFB.


She already goes into this with HALF THE COUNTRY SAYING THAT THEY WILL NEVER VOTE FOR HER.

HALF THE COUNTRY.

And, she's been working on adding Democrats to that pile too, like my family. There are 12 of us in my immedate family.

Only 2 will vote for Hillary.

The rest of us haven't figured out what we're going to do, but we do know this much:

WE WILL NEVER EVER VOTE FOR HER.

They just assume that Black folks will come around and be Good Darkies and vote for Miss Hillary, because where else will we go? Isn't that what Harold Ickes said last week?

Well, maybe my family's atypical, but maybe not. Maybe the ancestors fought and died for us to be able to make this stand. But, I'm clear. I'm never voting for her, because if I did, I will become complicit in setting the blueprint for how to take out any future Black Politician with aspirations higher than a gerrymandered Congressional Seat. I won't be a party to that.

Media Helping Clinton Once Again - No Surprise

Lou Dobbs on CNN:

"Hillary Clinton has made a comeback of significant proportions"

She'll likely win Ohio and Texas.... States that she WAS SUPPOSED TO WIN ALL ALONG!!!

It was only in the last 3 weeks that Ohio and Texas became competitive.

But now the media is piling on Obama...

The psychological bullshit is already beginning.

In order for Obama to secure the nomination, he will have to face the Clinton beast head on...and play dirtier than she is playing. I see a replay of John Kerry taking shape....with Clinton in the role of the Republicans in 2004 (no surprise).

Obama has to bring up some old Clinton scandals....and force the beast to release her tax returns. He started out good with his response to John McCain...then he faded. He has to learn to keep both Clinton and McCain on the ropes...once he corners them... he can't afford to let up for one minute. He has to throw out scandal after scandal...to keep Clinton on the defensive.

He must also turn the race and religion argument on its head... and defuse it as a weapon that Clinton and McCain can use against him. He must address his religion and point out to voters exactly what Clinton is trying to do...and he must tell voters not to respond to the fearmongering.

Otherwise.... Obama may see his hopes for the nomination slip away.

New Study Reveals Media Bias Against Obama

Folks who have been paying attention should already be aware of this.

The Project for Excellence in Journalism just released the data. See Report from The Daily Kos.

It has been clear for weeks that the media has been attempting to help Hillary Clinton.

And unfortunately if looks like the dirty politics are paying off for Clinton. According to reports, many observers believe that Obama's momentum may have been blunted. Americans tend to respond more to negative politics than to positive politics. So it's no surprise that Clinton decided to go negative. It's the same reason why Republican strategists choose dirty tricks, and lying, over a more positive message.

Hillary BLACKENS UP Obama in Ad?

What is this, a repeat of Time Magazine & OJ?

From DailyKos

Hillary's ad: debate footage doctored to make Obama blacker
by Troutnut
Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 12:19:22 AM PST
In case you needed yet another reason to despise Hillary Clinton and her vermin strategists, she's now running an ad blatantly lying about Obama's subcommittee. Her ad includes debate footage heavily doctored to make Obama blacker.

I guess this is the "fun part."

Judge for yourself:


Thoughts?

Lies And Consequences

It looks like Margaret B. Jones, author of the so-called "critically acclaimed" gang memoir "Love and Consequences" has turned out to be a major fraud.

See Report from the New York Times

Has the world of book publishing really become this much of a joke Or is this an aberration? Can anyone get published by a major publisher?

I think the issue here is that Penguin books was so eager to gain clout in the World of Black "Thug Literature" and to profit from Black death, that they failed to use the kind of caution and scrutiny that they might have normally used. This is not the kind of book that I would read. And the people who buy this garbage are contributing to the "Thug Literature" madness.
What's even more annoying is the fact that this book appeared to be another effort to glorify the Thug & Gang Culture.

The author turns out to be Margaret "Peggy" Seltzer, a well-to-do white woman who was never a Foster kid and never experienced the trauma that she so vividly recalled in her book. Not only do you have an author attempting to profit from the Black crime culture, but you have a major publisher complicit in the deal, also attempting to profit from it. It's great that they were busted.

But I wonder about all of the legitimate authors who were turned down by this publisher. What about all of the young minority authors who probably had more positive stories to tell about their life experiences? How many were turned away, especially during the time when editors were working on this particular book? There seems to be more of an interest in publishing material that highlights the worst aspects of the "Black race".

And what is it about Whites who seem so eager to identify with the thug culture? I'm Black and I do all I can everyday to rebuke & reject this culture and to be the opposite of the stereotypes that the Black thug culture creates for the rest of Black people (Black men in particular). It is because of that culture that I hate being in my own skin. Yet, so many people are willing to do just about anything to be a part of the thug/criminal street culture, including many Whites. What is so cool about this nonsense? It's baffling. But then again, perhaps it should not be such a surprise considering how hard this lifestyle is pushed by the Rap/Hip Hop industry.

Hear how convincing Margaret Seltzer was in an interview she gave just a few days ago on NPR's OnPointRadio program.

________________________________

UPDATE: Tom Ashbrook wipes the Egg from his face after being duped by the author of "Love(Lies) and Consequences". The host responds for first time since the interview with Seltzer. Listen Here.

________________________________

UPDATE 2: Hear two short segments on this topic from NPR's News and Notes program. Listen Here: Segment 1 and segment 2.

More NPR Links

Tell Me More program with Michel Martin

Tell Me More Audio segment

commentary from News and Views

Overview of the Democratic Primary - UPDATED

UPDATE 3/3/08

Well it appears that Clintons dirty politics has begun to blunt Obama's momentum. She knew that she couldn't win by running a clean, issues-based campaign.

Obama was not expected to win ANY of the March 4th Primary States. The fact that he is leading in one State and competitive in another (Texas) says a lot about his ability to fight, even when faced with the constant smears and racial politics of the Clinton campaign.

If Clinton "wins" the nomination, or takes it by some other means, I will fight against her in the General Election....and I will spend every waking hour fighting against this beast if she wins the White House. I hated Hillary Clinton before this Primary race, and that hate has grown tenfold over the last year, after seeing how she has conducted her campaign. Any win that she gets at this point is a dirty victory... it's tainted. I cannot recognize it as valid.

Taking Clinton's dirty racist politics into account, I will consider the worst case scenario for Obama from here on out. The problem for the beast is that even under the worst case scenario for Obama... Obama still wins the Democratic nomination.

Hillary Clinton and her Superdelegates can go straight to Hell.

Obama may lose some ground on March 4th, but he can rebound on March 8th (Wyoming) and March 11th (Mississippi)....and can quickly blunt the psychological advantage that Clinton hopes to use coming out of March 4th. The beast will have about a week to celebrate.
However, this all depends on how the smear campaign goes. With the dirty, negative politics, Clinton may be able to put enough doubt in the minds of White voters over the next several weeks that it could seriously damage Obama (the signs of that are already showing). If Whites begin to leave Obama.... it won't be in a trickle.... it will be in a torrent. Obama could see his hopes for the White House vanish within a month.... if Clinton keeps up the smear tactics.

I'm hoping that Obama (now in a fight for his political life, under the circumstances) can hang on and stay strong until the May 6th Primary in Indiana and North Carolina. This could be Obama's firewall. I predicted in another post that if it went into the Spring and Summer, that Obama could end it on May 6th.

Another good sign for Obama is that he will have the momentum coming out of Mississippi. This is a double edged sword however... because there is a huge gap between Mississippi and Pennsylvania. Some might think that this would be good for Obama...but not necessarily. All of that dead time = time that Obama is not racking up any victories. It also allows Clinton more time for her smear attacks against Obama. I wish there could be a primary every week.

I'm assuming that there will be another debate before Pennsylvania. Obama must come out swinging, while remaining Presidential. He can no longer allow Clinton to get away with her negative politics. He should call her out for it....and he must label her campaign as the negative and dirty campaign that it is. And he must beat her on the issues. He has to be more aggressive in pointing out that the beast is in bed with lobbyists...and has taken more of their money (particularly the Healthcare industry) than any other candidate. Therefore, how in the Hell is she going to change anything...when she has been bought and paid for?

So far, Obama has been too weak against Clinton (this is what John Edwards was talking about when he lashed out at Obama). Obama was to run this above the fray campaign....and that will only get you so far. When your opponent (with the help of media...and with the help of the Republican nominee) is attempting to swiftboat you on a daily basis.... you can't afford to be weak. John Kerry tried that clean, above the fray nonsense in 2004, and he was destroyed.

See Chuck Todds Analysis from February.

Below is a schedule of the remaining Democratic Primary constests, including which way the States lean.

Pledged Delegate Count So Far (not including Superdelegates):

As of 3/3/08

Obama: 1184

Clinton: 1031

Remaining Schedule For The Democrats

February 19th

Hawaii Caucus (toss up) Delegates have already been awarded Obama Win

Wisconsin (toss up) 74 Pledged delegates at stake Obama Win

March 4th (Tonight)

Ohio Primary (leans heavily Clinton) 141 Pledged delegates at stake

Texas- Hybrid Primary/Caucus (leans Clinton) 193 Pledged delegates at stake

Rhode Island Primary (leans Clinton) 21 Pledged delegates at stake

Vermont Primary (toss up) 15 Pledged delegates at stake

March 8th

Wyoming Caucus (toss up) 12 Pledged delegates at stake

March 11th

Mississippi Primary (toss up, but looks good for Obama) 33 Pledged delegates at stake

April 22nd

Pennsylvania Primary (leans Clinton) 158 Pledged delegates at stake

May 3rd

Guam Caucus (toss up) 6 Pledged delegates at stake (9 total)

May 6th

Indiana Primary (toss up) 72 Pledged delegates at stake

North Carolina Primary (leans Obama) 115 Pledged delegates at stake

May 13

West Virginia Primary (toss up, but I would say W.V. looks good for Clinton) 28 Pledged delegates at stake

May 20th

Kentucky Primary (no recent polling data, but looks good for Clinton) 51 Pledged delegates at stake

Oregon Primary (deep Blue Country.... strong deep progressive, & anti-war voters. Similar demographics as Washington State and Minnesota, both of which Obama has already won. So it has to look good for Obama). 52 Pledged delegates at stake

June 3rd

Montana Primary (toss up) 16 Pledged delegates at stake

South Dakota Primary (toss up) 15 Pledged delegates at stake

June 7th

Puerto Rico (toss up...but Obama needs to get down there to help sell his platform and to seal the deal) The 63 delegates from PR are typically awarded as a block, due to the complicated PR politics.

Note: The above outlook will change as I find more information. But things are setting up for a possible late comeback for Clinton. If a comeback materializes, will it be enough?


**********************************


General George Custer & Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton Draws Line In the Sand In Texas & Ohio - A Great Comeback Strategy or Custers Last Stand?

When & Where Will This Battle Royale Take Place?

Date: March 4th, 2008

Place: Ohio, Texas (and to a smaller degree, Vermont and Rhode Island).

What does Clinton have to do?

Not only does she have to win on March 4th, but she has to win big, especially in Texas and Ohio. She has to get well over 60% of the vote and crush Obama in all contests.

However, Texas is turning out to be a bit of a problem for Clinton in her comeback quest. Obama (by some miracle) has tightened the race in Texas. Texas was supposed to be her great firewall... But will March 4th turn out to resemble Custers Massacre at Little Big Horn for the Clinton camp? Just 5 days ago, Clinton was heard issuing the following challenge to Obama:

"To my opponent Mr. Obama..... meet me in Texas"

And Obama is answering the call.... with a louder voice than the Clinton camp expected. Did the Clinton camp miscalculate by including Texas in their "last stand", line in the sand strategy? I think they may have....and I will explain why later on. The Clinton camp went as far as saying (earlier this month) that a win in Texas and Ohio would mean that Obama should step out of the race. Is there are problem of over confidence on the part of the Clintons? Or abject arrogance?

The media is already helping Clinton lower expectations for March 4th, especially regarding Texas. The media is also setting up Wisconsin as a great opportunity for Clinton to come back. Even a marginal win for Clinton in Wisconsin, and later in Texas, will be be framed by the media as huge victories for Clinton. The corporate media seems desperate to keep Clinton (the media favorite) in the race.

Clinton is also hoping to get delegates from Florida and Michigan included in the final delegate count. Dirty politics? Of course. But nothing seems to be out of bounds for the Clintons. This seems to be standard operating procedure for them.

She will also run negative advertisements in all of the remaining States. She will attempt (again) to label Obama as "the Black candidate". She will attempt to label him as "all hat no Cattle"...a man with no substance and no experience.... someone who is not competent and not up for the job. She will scare voters by saying that they are "rolling the dice" with this Black guy. He will turn the White House into the Black House.... a den of sin. He will embarrass the Country.

Yes folks... you will see it all from the Clinton camp in the weeks to come.


***************************************

What does Obama have to do?

First of all, Obama has to do well tonight in Wisconsin and Hawaii. He has to at least match Clinton 1-1 in both States, although that would be seen as a big loss for Obama. But the race is all about delegates at this point. As I mentioned, even a marginal win by Clinton would be seen as a huge victory for her and a huge loss for him....that's just the way the biased media works. It wouldn't matter if the delegate advantage remains essentially the same. It's all about the media wanting to claim a victory for Clinton.

After tonight Obama has to somehow get out of March 4th, and April 22nd alive. He needs to pull more miracles in the coming months. To do this, he doesn't have to win... but he has to narrow the gap. Texas has built in advantages for Obama, with its hybrid Primary/Caucus system. It appears that he has narrowed the gap in Texas. He must also narrow the gap in Ohio and Pennsylvania. His performance tonight in Wisconsin could help him narrow the gap in Ohio. It is pretty clear that Clinton will gain delegates in the coming weeks. Obama has to keep Clinton's net delegate gain to an absolute minimum.

The problem for Obama from here on out is that he is dealing with an opponent who has turned completely negative, and is now in swiftboat (nuclear) mode. They are willing to do anything to win (or steal the election). Obama must watch his actions and the actions of his campaign very carefully. Clinton and her media allies are now attempting to take Obama out... TAKE HIM OUT. The Clinton tactics are reminiscent of the Republican stategy that was used against Senator John Kerry in 2004. Sort of a scorched earth policy.... nothing is safe. She will go after the Obama children if she can find an opening. They are already going after Michelle Obama with a vengeance.

Why Obama does not have to win Texas (below is the best explanation that I have seen).

Obama could lose Texas, but still do well in the delegate count...perhaps even winning more delegates, despite losing.

With Texas and Ohio coming up rapidly, we had been curiously deprived of polls from the Lone Star State. But two surveys out this morning confirm that Clinton is in good shape to win the state -- but will she manage to be ahead in the delegate count?

An IRV poll has Hillary Clinton ahead 49% to 41%, relying on a strong showing among Hispanics (63%).

A Rasmussen poll looks even better for Clinton, as she is ahead 54% to 38%. Without providing numbers, Rasmussen does say Clinton is ahead among Latinos, so Obama has not yet been able to contest her advantage there.

Update: As always, ARG comes out with a poll that looks like an outlier. The only institute that has Wisconsin going Clinton (+9), ARG is now the only one that has Texas leaning Obama in its new poll: 48% to 42%. Clinton is ahead among registered Dems and Obama gets all his lead among indies.

More than two weeks before Ohio and Texas, baseline polls in both show that Clinton could win them and survive to fight in Pennsylvania, and possibly even win them big. But the question also is whether she can close her pledged delegate deficit significantly, even on March 4th. And this is where Texas's absurdly complex delegate allocation system kicks in.

In a detailed study of the IRV poll, relying on their indications of regional breakdown, Burnt Orange Report explains that Clinton's 8% lead would still give Obama more delegates out of Texas! This is due in great part to the even/odd district particularities we were discussing in the run-up to Super Tuesday, but this time the odd/even district allocation is not due to chance, but to GOP gerrymandering. Let's embark on a quick overview of the Texas process:

(1) Of Texas's 193 pledged delegates, 126 are allocated through the primary. 64 are allocated through a caucus for which voters have to attend their "precinct conventions" after the polls close. The 64 delegates will not be allocated before the June state convention but they will reflect the wishes of the precinct convention (just like in most caucuses, like Iowa).

(2) Texas's delegates are allocated by state senate district, not by congressional district. And each district has a number of delegates according to the turnout in the last election. Now, the last election saw a very high turnout in African-American districts but very low in Hispanic ones which means that places where Obama is strong will award relatively more delegates than those that are Clinton strongholds. This is the first problem Clinton faces.

(3) The Texas GOP has gerrymandered the state Senate districts to put as many African-Americans in as few districts as possible (as this article from the Huffington Post explains. This will have major consequences on March 4th. Indeed, many districts only have 4 delegates, which will make it extremely difficult for Clinton to get any sort of delegate lead, since you need to get 62.5% to split those districts 3-1. So after votes are counted in most of the districts, the two candidates could still be close to a tie in delegates, even if Clinton is leading by double-digits in them! But the districts that award the most delegates, especially in Houston, have 7 or 8, and those are the places Obama is hoping to do well in, certainly getting more delegates and perhaps even a lead overall depending on the exact percentages.

Ultimately, will Texas cross the line in absurd delegate plots? In Nevada, Clinton had won by 6% but lost the delegate count 13-12. Obama had then argued that Clinton's support was too concentrated in the Vegas area whereas he had appealed statewide. If Clinton wins by 8% in Texas but loses the delegate count, while winning in most of the state, is that the point at which people start wondering whether the delegate system should be reformed? Can Clinton get some mileage out of it to try and undermine what Obama's pledged delegate count consists in? This would give her an ideal occasion to introduce the popular vote argument, a vote she right now trails in but could come ahead in if she wins Ohio and Texas.

Source

Well, well....Hillary takes Barack ' at his word'.

Tonight on 60 minutes Steve Kroft talks to Hillary and Obama as well as voters. This is a quote from Clinton:

Q: "Do you believe that Obama is a Muslim?"
HRC: "No, of course not. I take him at his word."

Take.him.at.his.word.

Well, if I needed another reason NOT to vote for her...she delivered.

Obama Power Broker New Face of Black Politics

Don't know how I found this article this morning, but thought it was interesting. Points out the true generational divide within the Black Community, and who Barack Obama is bringing to the table that wasn't there before now.

Obama power broker new face of black politics
Joe Garofoli, Chronicle Staff Writer
Saturday, March 1, 2008

Comedian George Lopez told his agent Christy Haubegger a couple of weeks ago that he wanted to campaign publicly for Sen. Barack Obama. Haubegger, an executive with the Hollywood talent firm Creative Artists Agency, knew the person to call: her old friend from the Stanford Law Review, Tony West.

West is one of the California finance co-chairs of Obama's campaign, helping him raise a record $65 million in the state, and he also advises the candidate's national finance committee. And he is more than Obama's confidant. West is part of a new generation of African American politicians who grew up outside the black churches or the civil rights community and now are finding their voice - and political power - in the tone of Obama's campaign.

West's bulging Rolodex, like Obama's, is full of contacts made while studying at an Ivy League university (Harvard) and editing his law school review (at Stanford). That network, in West's case, was augmented by working on six presidential campaigns (including both of Bill Clinton's) and at an A-list San Francisco corporate law firm (Morrison & Foerster).

Like Obama, the 42-year-old West knows from experience how race can affect a campaign - even when the candidate tries to transcend it. Eight years ago, the former federal and state prosecutor was running for a San Jose-area state Assembly seat. It was a nasty campaign, with partisans on both sides hitting hard. Days before the primary, voters received a mailer alluding to false claims that West was living in Oakland. His face was darkened and placed inside an Oakland Raiders logo, to make him appear "as if a gangsta were running," as the San Jose Metro newspaper put it. West lost to Manny Diaz, a Democrat, who eventually was elected to the Assembly.

"I think he came out of that race a little less idealistic," said his sister-in-law, San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris, who has endorsed Obama. West married Harris' sister Maya, his best friend from law school, and they have an adult daughter, Meena. "He is so smart, and he always sees the positive in everything, but that was below the belt."

"I certainly hope that he would run for office again," said former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, who called West "one of my mentees." Brown, who has not endorsed a Democratic presidential candidate, said West "could be, like Obama, one of these candidates that transcends race. He is exceptionally gifted."

West said he lost none of his idealism and dismissed the mailer as the "stuff that happens in politics. I think it says more about the process than it does about the voters.

"I think it is sometimes easier for people to appeal to things that are negative," he said. "It is easier sometimes for campaigns to appeal to things that frighten us. The fact that campaigns may do that, and do it successfully, doesn't make it right and doesn't make it lasting."

More than race

Trying to look beyond racial politics is "generational," said Charles Henry, a professor of African American studies at UC Berkeley and an expert on black leadership. "This is a generation that grew up outside the black churches or the civil rights community. They're less likely to see a racial slight than an older generation.

"They're more likely to have met through elite universities or law schools," Henry said. "They've taken advantage of the gains of the civil rights movement," even if they were in diapers during its heyday.

Henry and other analysts said examples of this generation of black politicians include Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick; Newark, N.J., Mayor (and Stanford alumnus) Cory Booker; and Rep. Laura Richardson, D-Long Beach, who has a master's in business administration and was recently elected from a largely Latino district. Richardson, unlike the other two, supports Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.

"Tony's ascension in the various worlds of politics is largely due to the fact that he has always been very meticulous about maintaining his networks - and they are networks that are beyond California," said Sam Rodriguez, an unaffiliated political consultant who worked with West when Rodriguez led the California Democratic Party.

Kerman Maddox, a onetime aide to former Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley who runs his own Southern California consultancy and is African American, said West has shown him the fundraising breadth of the black middle class. Much of the $3 million raised at a fundraiser at Oprah Winfrey's Santa Barbara estate last year came from middle-class African Americans, Maddox said.

"I was surprised at how much money came from African Americans in Southern California," said Maddox, who teaches political science at the University of Southern California and who is an Obama fundraiser. "It used to be that campaigns would come to the (African American) community and ask us to get out the vote. But they have the money. There just haven't been people like Barack Obama and Tony West to tap into it before."

Rest of article is HERE.