March 2008 Archives

• Maliki blinks in Basra: A truce is implemented, but apparently Iran is calling the shots.
• How far behind does Hillary have to be to call the newspapers to insist that she's still relevant? Or, more likely, how broke does she have to be? Or is she simply trying to stop her campaign staff from tip-toeing quietly to the exits?
• McCain has embarked on his "Service to America" tour. He is visiting all the places where he grew up and got started in his career. The idea is that he is re-acquainting Americans with his life story. But see, here's the thing: I don't care about McCain's life story. Fact is, I don't look up to him. And I sure don't want to be like him. If anything, I want him to be more like me.
• And another thing about McCain: that TV ad. He comes on pretty strong in the opening sequence saying, "Do not yield...We're Americans and we'll never surrender." The problem? It's the words "yield" and "surrender." Why say that in a political ad? Yeah, I know, he says "we'll never surrender." But you know what? People don't hear that part. It's like Nixon saying, "I am not a crook." All people hear is "crook" or "I am a crook." As soon as you say "we'll never surrender," people unconsciously think, "surrender is up for discussion?" Look -- all the Republicans are saying it about all the Democrats. And where has it gotten them? Nowhere. It's not a smart bit of political rhetoric, using the S-word for any reason.
• And speaking of old Vietnam war servicemen: Is it possible that the Green Zone is the new Khe Sanh?
• And speaking of Vietnam, Chuck Todd observes that if McCain loses, no Vietnam vet will likely ever be elected president. Think about that.
• And now for something completely different: The Supreme Court gave Rep. "Dollar Bill" Jefferson (D-LA) a pretty big victory today, letting stand an appeals court ruling that the FBI was wrong in seizing stuff from his Congressional office. The Feds claim they still have plenty of evidence (think "freezer cash") in their case against him. Still, it seems to bolster those who believe in the separation of powers. Of course, at this point the score is: Bush Executive Branch 49, Congress 3.
• People toss around terms like "cult leader" and "Obamatron" when trying to explain the appeal of Barack Obama, but I say nothing can hold a candle to Rev. Moon, aka the King of America. And people say Scientology is crazy.

by shep

I wrote the following comment on a right-wing crap-catapulting blog (you know the one) in response to the idea that: 1) no one should be shocked by the tone of the current Democratic presidential nomination campaign (tragically correct) and 2) that all’s fair in war and politics, including attacking Hillary Clinton (mind you, this blogger is a woman) for her gender:

You’re right about the venom in this campaign relative to historical politics – and wrong about just about everything else. This may come a huge shock to you but some political attacks are true and relevant (rational people call them criticisms) and others are not. For example, Hillary Clinton’s female gender may be true but it isn’t relevant. Likewise, what the pastor at Obama’s church said. John Kerry’s windsurfing and “Frenchness”: not relevant. John Kerry’s military record: relevant but completely untrue as rendered by the Swiftvets. What John Hagee, Pat Robertson and other evangenlical nutjobs have said: true but not relevant. John McCain's pandering flip-flop on "agents of intolerance": true and relevant.

I understand that this stuff is way over your head but the important point is that this is not a fucking party game. Hundreds of thousands of innocent people have been killed and millions more have had their lives destroyed by American soldiers because of Al Gore’s brown suit and lies about what he said about Love Story and the Internet. Irrelevant and untrue crap catapulted by people who don’t care about the difference for consumption by people who are too stupid to know the difference (you know where you fit in here) has brought this country – the world for that matter – to the brink of catastrophe.

If your point is that mindless partisans are always going to create this sort of corrupt politics and the tragic consequences they may lead to, then: 1) the only responsible reaction for lucid, humane people is to call their bullshit immediately and in no uncertain terms and 2) you are constantly on the wrong side of that particular fence. You’ve made a blog around it.

The reason I’m posting this comment here is that, when I reread it later, I realized something quite sickening: I could easily have been addressing it to practically every major media outlet and gasbag in our entire decrepit Fourth Estate. Take out the word “blog” in the last sentence and replace it with the word “career” and it would work just as well for people like Tim Russert and Chris Mathews. Put in the words “news network” and it applies just as well to CNN or MSNBC. Replace it with “News Program” and it describes FOX News.

You get the ugly, inescapable picture: not only is our mainstream political dialogue gripped by people who refuse to or cannot distinguish between what is true and relevant or irrelevant and false but those people and media are indistinguishable (at least in that regard) from the right-wing propaganda machine. Explains quite a bit, doesn’t it? And none of it very good for our politics or our world.

Update: The reprehensible Chris Matthews spends a significant amount of two segments discussing Barrack Obama’s not-macho enough for Chris bowling form, not what Obama is saying in his campaign or the policies he is proposing as a presidential candidate, and finishes his moronic analysis by basically calling Obama a nappy-headed ho. What a horror show.

[Cross-posted at Dispassionate Liberal]

Sometimes you gotta step back and look at things from 40 thousand feet up.

When I do that, when I think about how the story of the 2008 campaign will look to future generations, win or lose, people will marvel (in a year when a sizable number of people believed we were at war with islamofascists) that a black candidate named Barack Hussein Obama fought Hillary Clinton, wife of the first black president, to a standstill. You can get some sense of the dismay and confusion of the wingnuts when you look at it like that.

How'd he get this far, anyway?

The wingnuts chalk it up to "obamatrons" and "prophets" and "cults," etc. But you know and I know that doesn't even begin to explain it. But even if it was mass hysteria/hypnosis, why would so many people react that way to a guy like Obama? I mean it's not like he's another Elvis or something.

It really begs the question of just how bad all the other candidates must seem...or something?

• Moving the goalposts: Forget Ohio, forget Texas, forget Pennsylvania. Newsweek now tells us that the new Super Tuesday is May 6 -- when Indiana votes. Others have said that whoever wins North Carolina (also voting on May 6) wins the nomination. Whatever it is, it's not about the math because the math hates Hillary. It's all about delayed gratification. Hillary wants it; the traditional media craves it; the supers are transfixed by it; and the Republicans most definitely love it.
• The horse race analogy is so 2004: Hillary says the campaign is like a basketball game entering the fourth quarter -- and she sees herself nailing the buzzer-beater. On the other hand, Obama says the campaign is like a good movie that's gone on a half an hour too long -- which begs the question: will he leave the gun and take the canoli?
• Is there a God? Dith Pran dies of pancreatic cancer and Karl Rove blithers on.
• One of those steps better include coffee: How to Reduce Morning Stress in 11 Simple Steps.
• The surge is working! Iraq's new army is "developing steadily," with "strong Iraqi leaders out front," the chief U.S. trainer says. Ooops -- that was Gen. Petraeus talking three-plus years ago.
• Stupid as a bag of bricks: New York's governor is in trouble for (among other things) revealing that he's had multiple affairs (no, not Sptizer -- the other guy). Sooooooooo.....let's push him aside and make way for Bill and Hillary Clinton to take over in Albany! Make sense to you? Me neither.

[I will be away from any computers this week; in the interim I'm republishing some of the more popular posts from the recent past. This one was originally published on April 12, 2005 and was part of a larger conversation with our friend Tom "Wince and Nod" Hawkson.]

Reading the drift of the comments here, I feel compelled to link to a brief summary of the case Marbury vs. Madison. So go read it if you must. It's short and sweet.

Now...Wince:

Earlier in the other comment-thread you said, "Supreme Court Justices have a tendancy to think that the Constitution means whatever they say it means. That's overstepping their bounds and it is tyranny."

I think you are looking at this in a shallow way. The entire fabric of our judicial system is rooted in the Judeo-Christian ethic of making difficult judgements based on ambiguous fine points of law. A judge, being only human, listens to both sides, considering the pro's and con's of the opposing arguments and then decides what wins and what loses. It's a "judgement call" in the truest, most profound sense.

And long ago, we the people agreed to invest a selected group of our peers with that authority and with that responsibility.

You can always appeal. But the appeals have to stop somewhere here on Earth. And that is why the Supreme Court is called the highest court. Gosh! even the name is a tipoff.

Some would say God's Law is most high. Perhaps it is, as defined (for example) in the Bible. But we are not a nation that is governed by the church or the temple. Even if we were, all you have to do is look at the Talmud to understand that there is always more than one opinion about everything.

No, we are not a government ruled by the church. We are a government of the people, for the people and by the people. We follow a document that WE wrote.

Some would hope that God guided us in that ongoing endeavor. But if that is the case, it is also certainly true that God helps those who helps themselves.

It's hard to make your way through the difficult questions Wince, I know. But we all agreed, long ago, that this was a job for the people to do. We don't wait for God to judge these difficult cases for us.

Unfortunately we all think we know best. I know better than you, and vice versa. And don't get me started about the lawyers. But in order for there to be progress, we have to have a system of laws and someone needs to judge who is right and who is wrong. Preferably someone here on Earth.

Unfortunately, we're only human. We're all fallible, especially Supreme Court Justices. Maybe that's why they begin each session with a prayer for guidance. They need all the help they can get. Goodness -- it isn't just enough to read the text of the Constitution; you have to be ready to listen to people debate what it means. That alone is a huge job, given that everybody has an opinion and by the time it reaches the Supremes, you've got some high-powered legal minds leaning on you. But if that weren't enough, when the debate is over, you still have to decide who the winners are and who the losers are.

Once you've spoken, it's over.

Sorry. Would that it was more simple, but that's how it goes.

So it takes a special person to do this. It isn't something that you or I can do, unless you or I were to be vested in robes of ultimate, infinite authority and infallibility. But that isn't what this nation is all about.

We're a nation of people who have our own ideas and opinions about what's best for all of us. And we have an earthly mission to work it out in a reasoned way. That's why our government has three branches and that's why each one is checked and balanced against the others.

It's a big job being a Supreme Court judge (there's that word again). And before someone is qualified to judge the law as measured against the Constitution, they must attain a lifetime full of experience. They must show evidence of excellence. Yeah, there have been some real losers on the bench. But that's the occasional price we pay to live in the best nation God ever put on the Earth.

I'd say it was worth it, Wince. Wouldn't you?

Sorry this was so long. I didn't have time to make it shorter.

by shep

John Rogers sends the privileged, white (and somehow still incredibly pissed-off) Barrack haters to school on their fear and loathing of the angry black man:

Attention, Fellow White People:

…If Senator Obama becomes President, we will still run everything.

Everything.

Immediately following his Wright Snark, Rogers explains a lot of anger (except for the inexplicable right-wing kind that always somehow misses the mark):

-- Paying $3 trillion dollars for a war started by rich old white people.

-- Sending your kids off to fight in a war being run very poorly by rich old white people.

-- Allowing many of those kids to die thanks to crappy equipment provided by companies owned by rich old white people.

-- Watching media controlled exclusively by a small number of rich old white people.

-- Consuming tainted medicine or bad meat because government regulatory agencies have been gutted by rich old white people.

-- Getting boned on your pension by investment firms run by rich old white people.

-- Watching your house lose value because of financial screw-ups by rich old white people.

-- Losing said house because your kid's cancer treatments aren't covered by insurance companies run by rich old white people.

-- Losing your job because your company's been moved to Belize by rich old white people.

-- Watching government records being blatantly destroyed by rich old white people.

-- Cheering while the Constitution is used to wipe the ass of several rich old white people.

-- etc.

Rest assured, Management has its priorities in place. We will remain vigilant against the words and actions of radical old black preachers in neighborhood churches.

Just the man you want for color commentary as righty, whitey heads explode at the thought of a black man as President.

[Cross-posted at Dispassionate Liberal]

[I will be away from any computers this week; in the interim I'm republishing some of the more popular posts from the recent past. This one is from June 11, 2003 and is just as relevant now than ever -- perhaps more so.]

The difference between Pre-emptive vs. Preventive war

Let's make an important distinction between pre-emptive war and preventive war.

Pre-emptive war is what happens when a state targets an enemy that represents an imminent threat of attack. The Six-Day War was a pre-emptive war.

Preventive war is what happens when a state targets an enemy before they can become an imminent threat of attack. The attack on Pearl Harbor was a preventive war.

Here's why this is important:

The war against Iraq was justified primarily as a pre-emptive war. But now the WMD are nowhere to be found.

Am I glad that Saddam is gone? Absolutely. I was in favor of regime change before, during, and after the war. It was enough for me that he had links to that thug Arafat's terror organization. After all, the Bush Doctrine is clear: if you support terrorists, you are a terrorist.

Had POTUS sold it in those terms, I think the American public would have bought it.

But if it turns out that the intel on WMD was cooked, or if it turns out that top-level administration officials lied, or if it turns out that POTUS wanted a preventive war along, but knew we wouldn't buy it, then I fear we've lost more than we gained.

[I will be away from any computers this week; in the interim I'm republishing some of the more popular posts from the recent past. This one is from March 9, 2004 and the ideas are just as relevant now as ever -- perhaps more so.]

I think it was Chris Matthews who said voters respond most favorably to the candidate who can best articulate the following simple message:

"Follow me!"

This year, POTUS is the first candidate to articulate the reasons why we should follow him: "Steady leadership in changing times." Not the precise message that, say, Reagan had ("Stay the course"), but not bad.

The problem for POTUS is that his credibility is shot. People are skeptical because we've followed him for four years and the best thing we can say is, "Gee we might've been EVEN WORSE off without George W. Bush." That's why you keep hearing Bush apologists begin a sentence, "If the Democrats were in charge, Saddam would still be in power," or "I thank God President Gore wasn't in charge on 9/11." That's pretty weak.

On the Democratic side, Senator Kerry has yet to articulate the reasons why we should follow him. What he has done is similar to POTUS: he's talked about why we should NOT follow President Bush. Obviously, he can highlight POTUS' record ("a trail of broken promises"). Although that will energize the base, that's not going to get him elected. He has to provide a compelling reason to follow him out of this mess. So far, he hasn't done it.

Stay tuned.

[I will be away from all computers this week; in the interim I'm republishing some of my more popular posts from the recent past. This one was originally published on April 27, 2005 -- since then I have gotten slightly better at adapting to the Louisiana swamp air...]

Tuesday, April 19: While out power-walking at lunch, my eyes begin to water.

Wednesday, April 20: Eyes (actually only the right eye) still watery and itchy. Now carrying wads of Kleenex in my pocket. Still walking at lunch.

Thursday, April 21: Skip the walk. Eye still watery. Pass the Kleenex. Call the doctor and set up appointment for Friday morning. Take Benedryl. Sleep like a baby.

Friday, Aprill 22: Doctor gives me a cortisone shot and a prescription for Amoxcel. I also take a Sudafed that night (a mistake). Later, realizing my mistake, I find myself watching Headliners and Legends at 3 am. Bummer.

Saturday, April 23: I wake up with some sinus pain and eyes still watery. Attend Pesach Seder at in-laws, while dabbing eyes with omnipresent Kleenex. Stay late, help clean up. Dry over 40 wine and water glasses, move tables around. Get home, take Benedryl, sleep like baby.

Sunday, April 24: Wake up with sinus pain. Pass on breakfast at in-laws. Later, reach on-call doc who revokes the Amoxcel and prescribes Tequin and Mucinex. Look up Tequin and discover it's what they prescribe these days for gonorrhea. Heh.

Monday, April 25: Wake up feeling OK. Two hours later, at work, my head is on my desk and I am whimpering like a baby. "Please stop the pain. Just cut off my head and be done with it." Go home and put hot towels over my right eye. I feel like I've been hit in the face with a fast ball. No, that's an exaggeration. I feel like I've been stabbed in the face with a knitting needle, where my right eye meets the bridge of my nose.

Put hot towels over entire face. I think of Albert Anastasia, who was shot to death while sitting in a barber chair with hot towels on HIS face. Given how I feel, it would be a blessing.

Call the doctor. He sets up an appointment for the next morning. "We might want you to have a CAT scan." I hang up and call my health insurance provider. "How much will a CAT scan cost me?" The answer is not encouraging.

Tuesday, April 26: I check in at the front desk. "Name and Birthdate?" I tell them. They respond with a smile: "Happy Birthday!" It will be the first of many times I hear that at the clinic today. It's actually the second-best part of the day.

I see the doctor. He's concerned. He sets up an appointment with an ENT specialist for early afternoon. I go home and put hot towels over my eye. Finally, after eating lunch and watching the noon-time episode of The West Wing, I begin to feel a bit better.

Later that afternoon another desk nurse wishes me a happy birthday. The ENT specialist arrives and he looks like he's about 23 years old. I have neckties older than this guy. He shines a flashlight up my nostrils and in my ears.

Just when I think, "Hmmm, not so bad," the bottom drops out.

The nurse arrives, wheeling in a cart holding -- [shudder] -- an endoscope.

My hopes are dashed.

The doctor sprays a liquid up each nostril. "This will kill the pain." But will it kill me, I'm thinking, because right this instant I would rather die than have him slide that thing up my nose. No. No. No. No.

He does it anyway. "You have some accumulated fluid build-up, but not the worst I've seen."

He orders a CAT scan for, like, now. Instantly.

I'm ready for this possibility. "Can I get it tomorrow," I suggest, "because, you know, right this instant, the pain is gone and I'm feeling like I turned a corner." It's the truth. Or maybe it's just the adrenaline talking. I smile encouragingly.

The doctor has thing thing where, while he's talking to me, his eyes are fluttering nearly closed and then when he stops talking he looks at me with his eyes open.

"You know," flutter, flutter, "you might feel good right now," flutter flutter, "but this infection could suddenly get really bad." He pauses and looks at me. "I had a patient who waited too long," flutter flutter, "and when he came in for the CAT scan his eye was bulging out of it's socket." He pauses, looks at me and his eyes are, well, bulging out of their sockets.

I go downstairs to the CAT scan unit. Another chorus of "Happy Birthday!" When I'm done, I wait outside the lab until they tell me they've sent the results upstairs.

In the exam room, the doc and I look at the pictures.

"Not the worst I've seen but still pretty significant." He then writes down all the new medications he is prescribing. Nasal saline spray. Eyedrops. More nasal spray. Skip the Benedryl. "It dries you out. We want the fluid to come out." He prescribes a substitute for the Sudafed. There's more, but I can't remember it all. See the picture (left) -- and THAT isn't even all of it.

The nurse comes in to give me more shots.

"Step away from the window, sugar. We don't anyone to see you when you pull down your shorts." She injects me in the right hip with another cortisone shot; she gets me in the left hip with another anti-biotic. She puts a Tazz band-aid over each spot. "You'll feel those tomorrow." But, you know, I never did. A miracle!

"I want you to please go sit in the waiting room for 20 minutes," says the doctor, "just in case you have an adverse reaction to the shots."

"What symptom am I looking for," I ask.

"You might pass out, feel nauseous, get hives, rapid heartbeat, and so forth."

I don't. Pass out, I mean. Or the other stuff either. I go home, 4 hours after I arrived. Miss Julie is very happy to see me.

The boys are with their grandparents for the evening, so we enjoy my birthday dinner together. We watch a double episode of The West Wing, followed by a double episode of Sex and the City followed by a double episode of The Daily Show. It is finally the best part of the day.

"Well," I say, "I guess this is a birthday I won't soon forget." Miss Julie smiles at me in that way she does. It makes me glad I lived long enough to enjoy this moment. Life is good, given that I've been pumped full of more medications that I've taken in the previous ten years of my life up to this point.

Unfortunately, one of the medications keeps me awake and I find myself, alone at 3 am, watching a double episode of Headliners and Legends. Bummer.

Wednesday, April 27: I go back for a follow-up. The ENT specialist says I look a lot better and the truth is, I feel a lot better. Nonetheless, he vetoes my weekend trip to Detroit to see my daughter in her high school production of Pippin. Wah! I knew it was going to be a problem, but I was hoping I could get there anyway.

I go into work but I leave, mid-afternoon, still feeling a bit tired. No sense in pushing it.

Earlier, the doc told me he wanted to see me again next Monday and strongly urged me to call him if I take a turn for the worse between now and then.

"You know, doc, the earth is going to turn one time on its axis and next year I'm going to get this again. What do I do?"

He smiles. "You'll call me before then and we'll work out a plan."

Fair enough.

Hulu.com has opened the doors on their joint-venture, broadcast TV video sharing site. It's not bad, although the pickings are pretty slim right now. Anyway, I thought the following sketch from SNL was pretty funny...

"This place is like a hot tranny mess up in here!"

"You are a tranny who looks like a hot mess -- and not in a good way. You're a tickety-tack hot tranny mess out of control super tranny from Transylvania who is not apologizing for it. "

Yes, that's me. From the Baton Rouge Advocate:

Ara Rubyan, right, portrays Queen Esther during a Purim skit, or schpiel, Thursday at Beth Shalom Synagogue.

Purim is the Jewish holiday commemorating the deliverance of the Jewish people from the ancient Persian Empire after Queen Esther and her uncle Mordecai foil Haman's plot to use lots, or puim in Hebrew, to choose which Jews to slaughter first.

The joyful holiday is characterized by a public recitation of the Book of Esther, giving gifts of food and drink, giving charity to the poor, and a celebratory meal. It is also customary for players in the skit re-enacting the Purim story to portray characters of the opposite sex.

Heh. Rebecca and I are singing re-written words to the tune of Love Me Tender.

And, yes, I sing better than I look in a dress. Although I thought the dress was flattering to my figure. And the pearls were to die for. And that is my natural hair color. If I had any. Hair, that is. And my boobs are not really that big. Not yet, anyway.

by shep

No matter what, John McCain’s multiple lies about Al Qaeda in Iran are certainly more proof that John McCain is unfit to serve as Commander in Chief.

dday lays out the case: “Whether McCain is confused, believes what he wants to believe, or is actually deviously conflating various enemies to create a sense of the "Other" is immaterial.”

But there is one more possibility that no one has suggested: McCain simply couldn’t keep his lies straight.

It is well-established law enforcement technique to do multiple interviews with a suspect because, when they are lying, gross inconsistencies tend to appear in their story. It can be as basic as the name of a place or person that changes as the perp tells the story again.

So McCain’s intentional lie, that “extremists” were being trained in Iran and sent into Iraq got confused with the usual lie that ”al Qaeda” is the actor in [insert ugly scenario that al Qaeda may or may not have perpetrated here].

So it is quite plausible that McCain just can’t keep his lies straight. He tells a lot of them, he’s not extremely bright and, you may have heard, he’s getting old.

[Cross-posted at Dispassionate Liberal]

Apparently McCain has said (on multiple occasions) that that al Qaeda is going to Iran where they are being trained and then sent back to Iraq. That's simply wrong -- and Joe Lieberman corrected him on one of those occasions, leaning over to whisper in his ear while the cameras captured the image. Ouch.

But Josh Marshall points out that this is probably just the tip of the iceberg of reasons why McCain is unfit to be the next Commander in Chief.

Here's an excerpt from a longer piece, the video for which is embedded below. Read this, then watch the video. It really goes to the heart of why McCain is the last guy you want to be the next President of the US:

What stands out about McCain is his inability to see beyond the immediate issues of tactics -- military tactics, mainly -- to any firm grasp of strategy or America's real vital interests...

The idea that fighting jihadists in Iraq or policing that country's ethnic or religious divides is the calling of our century [as McCain has said] is belied by almost everything we see around the world today -- [the] issues that McCain is unwilling, or unable to confront. And these are the issues that seem most likely to be the challenges that we face throughout the rest of our lifetimes and the lifetiimes of our children...

Military power is almost always based on economic might. The one -- military power -- seldom outlives a country's economic power. What that tells us is that fiscal soundness -- whether a country's budget is in order, whether it has chronic current accounts deficits -- is a much bigger deal than any one weapons system or even any one small conflict as we have in Iraq.

So let's step back and survey what we see around the world today. You see the huge sums of money that we are pouring into Iraq, the mountains of capital that's being built up in China, and -- in the background -- the fossil fuel powered resurgence of Russia. Related to that, you have the weakness of the dollar, not just in the rate of exchange with other currencies, but also the threat that the dollar is under for remaining to be the reserve currency, the dominant currency, around the world. And on top of that, the rising tide of anti-Americanism in almost every corner of the globe...

Each of these issues is inter-related, they fit together in a variety of ways, they are all interlocked. [And] I've watched John McCain pretty closely for more than a decade...and I've never seen anything that has given me any indication that he's given any consideration to these issues -- China, Russia, the economic and fiscal standing of the US -- except as they come up as near term military challenges...

by shep

The partisan use of the word “bi-partisan” never ends:

“A Senate version of the bill, negotiated with the White House, includes retroactive immunity for telecoms. It passed by a bipartisan vote of 68 to 29 on Feb. 12.”

“The House bill proposes an alternative fix for telecom companies facing big lawsuits: to allow a judge to determine whether the executive branch's claim of the state secrets privilege is legitimate. It passed by a partisan vote of 213 to 197, with all Republicans and 12 Democrats voting in opposition.”

So when all Republicans and some Democrats vote for FISA with all of the president’s fondest wishes, it is “bi-partisan.” But when all Republicans and some Democrats vote against FISA without everything the president wants, it is “partisan.” Got it.

What, oh what, would our ever-serious and professional watchdog journalists do without the White House press release?

[Cross-posted at Dispassionate Liberal]

I've been saying it since before anybody else: race excites the base. This election (as so many others have) will hinge on the issue of race -- whether Obama is the nominee or not. I give him a lot of credit for talking about it and not just blowing a dog whistle like some of the other Democratic (and Republican) candidates.

Here's Obama, speaking in Iowa in November of last year. Listen carefully, it's how a leader talks:

"But here's the thing that I've said before and I'll say it again. We do have a legacy of racism in this country, and we see it in our daily lives. There's a reason why African Americans are more likely to be incarcerated. There's a reason why Hispanic Americans are more likely to be without health care and in low-wage jobs. It has to do with the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow and discrimination.

And even if people aren't discriminated against now...that legacy still persists. And one of the things that we have to do is finally acknowledge that legacy and go ahead and try to make it right. Not by calling each other by names, not by acting suspicious towards each other, but rather simply saying, let's go ahead and solve this problem in this generation, so it doesn't persist for the next generation."

This sweeping narrative is big enough to include the Rev. Wrights AND the Sean Hannitys.

I don't know of anyone else who can provide that narrative. That's why Obama gets my vote every time.

Speaking of Wright, I'm more convinced than ever that he is a real turn-on for the likes of Sean Hannity and Howard Fineman (and everybody in between). In fact, if he (Wright) didn't exist, the powdered, pampered poodles of the press probably would have invented him.

Yeah, Rev. Wright. Want to know the dirty secret about him? Michael Wright has the scoop:

...[T]he problem is that Wright's opinions are well within the mainstream of those of black America. As public opinion researchers know, the problem is that despite all the oratory about racial unity and transcending race, this country remains deeply racially divided, especially in the realm of politics.

Most white people and the mainstream media tend to be horrified (in a titillating voyeuristic type of way), when they 'look under the hood' to see what's really on blacks folks' mind. Two thirds of whites believe that blacks have achieved or will soon achieve racial equality. Nearly eighty percent of blacks believe that racial justice for blacks will not be achieved either in their lifetime or at all in the U.S.

In March 2003, when polls were showing strong support among whites for an invasion of Iraq, a large majority of blacks were shown to oppose military intervention.

...one could argue that Reverend Wright's criticism of racial dynamics in the U.S. and American foreign policy is milder than the biting criticism of American capitalism and imperialism found in the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. during the last years of his life.

I've been saying it since before anybody else: race excites the base. So Obama's got his work cut out for him. Can he lead? We'll see...

by shep

Mainstream Republicans can spew all kinds of toxic shit about liberals committing treason, Democrats appeasing terrorists, all of them hating America, Islam is a religion of violence, evolution is only a theory, global warming a) doesn’t exist, b) isn’t a problem, or c) isn’t man’s problem but this, said by the pastor of Obama’s church is somehow unacceptable?:

“That’s when Wright blamed the “arrogance” of the “United States of White America” for much of the world’s suffering, especially the oppression of blacks.”

“Young African-American men” were “dying for nothing.” The “illegal war,” he shouted, was “based on Bush’s lies” and is being “fought for oil money.”

“The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing ‘God Bless America.’ No, no, no, not God bless America, God damn America, that’s in the Bible for killing innocent people. ... God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human.”

I’m not sure what’s even arguable about those statements. They obviously make white people (deservedly) uncomfortable but they are the words of an African-American preacher to a (mostly) African-American congregation who understand firsthand the unquestionable truth of that rhetoric.

Barack Obama’s politic mistake wasn’t attending that church or listening to Pastor Wright. Think for moment of all of the abominable shit we sit and listen too, much of it called entertainment, and we pay money to hear it. Obama hasn’t saddled up to evangelical icons who say, homosexually goes with Satanism or can ”kill you spiritually” He didn’t go to a bookstore and buy a book that says, “liberals are always against America,” or that puts a Hitler mustache on a smiley face under the title “Liberal Fascism” and includes the quote, "The white male is the Jew of Liberal Fascism".

Obama should be asking the hypocritical gasbags in the Village Press whether George Bush and John McCain should be to made to repudiate all of their supporter’s hateful and bat-shit crazy rhetoric or are they applying a double-standard to him. Instead, he repudiated Rev. Wright and his sentiments. That was his political mistake:

”Obama seems to have seen, early in his career, the utility of joining a prominent church that would help him establish political roots in the community in which he lives. Now he sees the utility of distancing himself from that church.”
--Bill Kristol

That is point of this entire exercise, to make the Democrat look like the one thing no Democrat can afford to appear: weak and afraid. When Democrats learn not to be cowed by the outrageously hypocritical and disgusting right-wing smear machine, they will be able to beat Republicanism and the conservative movement thinking back to the dank caves of the lizard-brained where they belong. Until then, here’s one more example of how it’s done:

“I didn’t hear Reverend Wright’s words firsthand but he expresses the upset at the way many African-Americans have been treated which is shared by many people, both black and white. I don’t think that white Christians or Jews shouldn’t be able to listen to their clergy express similar feelings about how those people may have suffered in the past. I understand that Reverend John Hagee has said some scurrilous things about Catholics, Muslims and gay people, does that mean that John McCain shouldn’t be able to stand with Reverend Hagee and say that he was proud to have his endorsement?”

End of sermon. You can wake up now.

[Cross-posted at Dispassionate Liberal]

The Fed cuts the benchmark Fed funds rate by 25 basis points. Is it enough? Or is it just more of the same thing that got us to where we are today -- at the brink of a global rout of the dollar?

A quick summary:

• The greenback has lost the world's confidence
• Oil is up (because the dollar is down)
• Gold is up (ditto)
• Commodities are up (ditto)
• Food is up
• The Euro is up (see above)
• The dollar is down below the swiss franc
• US based investments are crap ... so we can't raise capital
• Import prices are surging
• Here comes stagflation (inflation plus unemployment) because the Fed just keeps printing more money to bail out Bear Sterns et. al.
• Good news -- exports are up, trade deficit down.
• Bad news -- oil imports offset those gains.

You can cut the benchmark fed funds rate all you want but the real problem is bank solvency -- and where is the capital for that going to come from (see above, "US-based investments are crap")?

Heckuva job, Bushie. Only one thing left to do: hand it off to the Dems and then blame them when the world economy crashes.

• Is it just me or did AP's Ron Fournier just imply that Barack Obama was uppity? Fournier describes qualities that all presidential candidates have -- arrogance, self-importance and a sense of entitlement -- and, identifying them in Obama, tells the Senator he "better watch his step."
• Sen. McCain backs up Obama on Wright saying, "I do know Senator Obama, he does not share those views." Certainly he'll let the 527s slam the Illinois Senator while he (McCain) remains above the fray. Still, it stands in contrast to the Clinton/Ferraro campaign's approach to Obama's race.
• And, for the record, Obama was not in church on July 22, 2007 -- despite what Bill Kristol et. al. are suggesting.
• Excuse me but WTF? A run on one of the nation's biggest banks happens and the response from the presidential candidates is...crickets?

My son's film, Life is for the Living, premiered in Ann Arbor last night to a packed house: over one thousand people showed up. It was a huge success.

I have two podcasts and you HAVE to listen to them:

• Jack Lessenberry's film review podcast of Life is for the Living (3:00)


• Jack Lessenberry's interview with filmmaker Michael Rubyan (4:25)


• Life is for the Living trailer (Quicktime, 3:00)

Here's some print coverage:

• Ann Arbor News


• Michigan Daily


• Great Lakes IT Report

The film may also become a catalyst for change, as Michigan's stem cell research ballot initiative will be up for a vote in November. The film will be showing around the state between now and then.

At the end of the film review (you gotta listen to it!) Lessenberry actually says this:

If I were Michael Rubyan's father I might be thinking, "Whether my son becomes a doctor or a filmmaker, I'm pretty darn proud."

I can't even begin to tell you how proud I am of Michael. I always said that I grew up in the shadow of Michael Rubyan. Now everyone knows what I meant.

• Shorter Mickey Kaus: Ferraro is right -- Obama is black. If he wasn't he wouldn't be Obama!
• Shorter Wall Street Journal: Obama wants it both ways: He wants to be black and not be insulted because of it. Not fair, Mr. Obama!
• Shorter Dorothy Rabinowitz: Hillary is right -- No one really knows for sure whether or not Obama is a Muslim.

Bonus related entry:
In a story entitled "Racial issue bubbles up again for Democrats," we read this subhead: "Clinton, Obama have each used race, sex against the other." But you have to read all the way to the18th paragraph to be informed that "Mr. Obama’s advisers suggested that Mrs. Clinton was playing the sex card last fall after a brutal debate where several male contenders criticized her." Last fall? What's he done or said since then? Well, he's quoted in the 6th paragraph he says (last Wednesday): “I don’t want to deny the role of race and gender in our society. They’re there, and they’re powerful. But I don’t think it’s productive.” The rest of the article is about Hillary and Geraldine Ferraro -- playing the race card.

If so, I encourage you to attend the premiere, on U-Mich campus, of a new film: Life is for the Living, a documentary about the people, the politics and the science of stem cell research. It will be shown on March 12 at the Michigan Theater (603 E. Liberty St.) at 7:30 pm.

The film has added relevance as Michigan will be voting on a stem cell ballot initiative this fall.

The film includes the stories of five American families living with the painful realities of Juvenile Diabetes, Parkinson’s, and Spinal Cord Injury.

It is in the context of the statewide ballot initiative in Michigan this fall and the national debate over embryonic stem cell research.

As that debate continues in Washington and across the country, three generations of Americans reveal their challenges, their frustration with the President’s policy, and the hope that more funding for embryonic stem cell research will lead to new treatments and cures to relieve their suffering and save their lives.

Life is for the Living also explores the science behind stem cell research and the political debate taking place across the nation.

The film includes an introduction by CBS 60 Minutes' Mike Wallace and interviews with the nation's leading scientific researchers, political leaders, and advocates.

Here's a partial list of those who are in the documentary:

• The Honorable Janet Reno, Former United States Attorney General
• Senator Carl Levin (D-MI)
• Michigan Governor Jennifer M. Granholm
• Congressman Michael Castle (R-DE)
• Former Congressman Joe Schwarz (R-MI)
• Dr. Sean Morrison, Director, University of Michigan Center for Stem Cell Biology
• Dr. Clive Svendsen, University of Wisconsin Madison
• Dr. David T. Scadden, Co-Director, Harvard Stem Cell Institute
• Dr. Stuart H. Orkin, Chair, Department of Pediatric Oncology, Harvard Medical School
• Dr. Amy Wagers, Harvard Stem Cell Institute
• Dr. Alejandro Sánchez Alvarado, University of Utah School of Medicine
• Dr. Robert Lanza, VP Research, Advanced Cell Technology

Again, if you are in the area tomorrowthis evening, March 12, go see Life is for the Living at 7:30 pm at the Michigan Theater.

P.S. Oh and one more thing: the filmmaker, Michael Rubyan, is my son. He's 20 and a junior at U-M. I couldn't be prouder of him!

You don't have to denigrate, er, your opponent's race to play the race card.

by shep

Considering the people he went after, Elliot Spitzer painted one giant target on his back. The uber-rich never forgive or forget; they get even. Once you’ve sold your soul, “the game” is all that’s left. So I can’t speak much for the wisdom the Governor showed getting caught with his pants down because there was no there there (wisdom, I mean, I have no knowledge of what’s in Spitzer’s pants).

But, (listen up, Blitzer) having sex with a prostitute isn’t:

1) “being involved in a prostitution ring”

2) any of the public’s business, just because he’s a public official

or

3) unethical.

He had sex and he paid for it. Sad but, considering our puritanical, repressed and otherwise backward attitudes toward the perfectly normal and healthy (and quite fun I might add) act of having sex with another person (I do have some standards), it is totally understandable. And, unlike many gasbags in the media and on the political right, he was never self-righteous and hypocritical about sex.

On the other hand, what the whores in the media sell and what they sell it for is a completely different and a completely shameful matter.

[Cross-posted at Dispassionate Liberal]

• Good news, bad news: First, the good news: Democratic voters in my home district, Lousiana's 6th (the fightin sixth!), outnumbered Republican voters 48 thousand to 38 thousand during Saturday's primary to fill a seat left vacant when Republican Richard Baker skipped town to become a million dollar lobbyist. The bad news? My guy, Andy Kopplin, didn't make the run-off.

• Scott Pelley of 60 Minutes totally lets McCain off the hook for his flip flop on torture.

• Too good to hope for: William "The Bloody" Kristol wants to see McCain pick Clarence Thomas as his VP. Please please please pretty please with sugar on top!

• Speaking of daydreams, how's this: Obama picks Clinton as his VP and then trounces McCain 538-0 in the Electoral College -- then picks McCain as his Secretary of Defense.

• Yet more daydreams: Mark Penn says Obama's momentum is "broken."

• Sir Paul McCartney signs a deal to license the Beatles catalog to iTunes. Or did he? Either way, all that's left is for American Idol to air it's Lennon-McCartney theme week and reveal who the mentor is. Then younger viewers will hear the stuff and...buy it on iTunes! Smart guy, that Macca.

Jon Stewart compares and contrasts the reception our president gets when visiting Iraq...and the reception recently received by Iranian President Ahmedenijad.

"Hey Iraq: After we built you an entire Green Zone....It would be nice, when our sworn enemy visits your country, that you give him a slightly tougher reception than the one he got when he visited Columbia University."

by shep

I don’t envy Hillary Clinton. If you assume, as I do, that she wants what’s best for the country as well as for the Democratic Party she has a tragic choice to make. She has to concede the Democratic nomination for president to Barack Obama.

The simple fact is, there is no way for Hillary to win the nomination without fracturing the Democratic Party and alienating vast numbers of young and independent voters who are ready and excited to pull the lever for a Democrat for their first time. In the process, she will dramatically weaken the Democrat’s chances to win the presidency against John McCain, which is why Republicans such as Rush Limbaugh and Charley Crist and much of the McCain-worshiping, Clinton-hating corporate media is working so hard on her behalf.

And, in the end, even if she were to defeat McCain, her governing coalition would amount to little more than half the Democratic Party, against Obama Democrats, Independents, Republicans and the mass media gasbags.

If she cares for the good of the Democratic Party and the country and the rest of the world, Hillary Clinton has only one choice to make and she has no reason to delay that choice and inflict additional damage on the likely Democratic nominee. Even though this is a relatively bloodless campaign, certainly compared to the nasty, dishonest shit we’re used to seeing from Republicans, and it’s actually (historically) quite early to settle on a nominee, for her to choose otherwise would be a tacit admission that the thing that ultimately matters most to Hillary Clinton, is her own ambition to be president.

[Cross-posted at Dispassionate Liberal]

I think Obama should spend the rest of the primary campaign running against the Republicans' McCain/Clinton ticket.

Hear me out...

We all know now that Sen. Clinton has conspicuously and repeatedly stated in recent days that both she and John McCain has a lifetime of experience behind them while Barack Obama has but a single speech. This prompted Rachel Maddow of Air America to observe, "That's what you say when you want to be John McCain's Vice Presidential choice."

That got me going on the following thought experiment: How would a McCain/Clinton "unity ticket" do?

Some (translation: David Broder) would say it is the marriage of two centrists that frustrated Americans have been pining for. Mike Bloomberg? Feh! McCain/Clinton would run away from the rest of the field.

Not so fast.

I think it would ensure that Barack Obama pitches a perfect game shutout in the Electoral College World Series: 538-0.

Think about it:

Obama's already running against both of them and has been for a while. How's he doing? Well, he's raised more money than both of them put together and has a clear path to his own party's nomination.

He should simply put them in a burlap sack together, tie President "Cinderblock" Bush to it, drop them into the middle of the Potomac swamp, and watch them sink from sight.

Think about it.

Make Hillary Virtual VP on the Republican ticket. Force the issue. Watch her fundraising dry up. After all, there is no reason to believe that Republicans would donate to her in any comparable amount -- Hillary unites Republicans AGAINST the Democratic nominee.

So that's a net loss for Hillary, McCain and the Republicans....and a huge net gain for Obama. He'll have to hire a batallion of new people just to open the avalanche of money-bearing envelopes that will swamp his HQ.

And not only that: the Republican base will never, never EVER vote for Hillary; in fact they're not sure they'd vote for McCain WHOEVER his VP is. Hillary would make their heads explode.

The more I think about it, the more I like it.

I think that between now and the Pennsylvania Primary, Barack Obama should campaign as though the Republican ticket was, in fact, McCain/Clinton.

Hillary -- feeling her oats -- suggests that she might offer Obama the VP slot on a unity ticket. As if.

But wait -- if you're Obama, wouldn't it make sense to take it? After all you'd occupy the high ground and gain the undying gratitude of a weary party.

So let's say he takes it -- putting party unity above his own ambition. I suppose his thinking is that he'll have a pretty good chance of ascending to the presidency while still a relatively young man. Never mind that history doesn't support that idea. Lately, old political nostrums and conventional wisdom don't mean much.

But on the other hand, it seems likely that Hillary would be a loser running against McCain. Her negatives are too high, she doesn't get the Independents that McCain does and those stray Republicans who might have voted for Obama out of frustration with Bush will NEVER vote for Hillary. So if your're Obama, you're thinking "who needs to go down with THAT battleship?"

And not only that -- having failed in '08, it is even harder for him to win the nomination at the top of some future ticket -- and even rarer still to win election. FDR did it after losing the election with Cox in 1920 to Warren Harding. But, holy crap, that was almost 90 years ago.

So, if I'm Barack Obama, I'd have to say "thanks, but no thanks" to Hillary's invitation to be her running mate.

But, fact is, he would still be in control of his own destiny because by the time the Pennsylvania primary is past, he'll still be leading in the delegate count.

However, would the nomination be worth anything after the Clintons scorch the earth under his feet? That's a question I can't answer at this distance from the convention.

But I think Obama would be willing to make a go of it and the contrast he would offer versus McCain would still make him the guy to beat in November.

That's just my opinion; I could be wrong.

But I doubt it.

Hillary wins the night by narrowing the gap in pledged delegates between her and Obama. It will take a while for election officials to come up with the final count in Texas, but it looks like she'll reduce Obama's lead in pledged delegates from 157 down to 150 or so. So that's good for her.

But even if she wins every other contest from here on out, she'll still be behind in pledged delegates when all the primaries are over, even under the most optimistic projections.

So what's her strategy?

In terms of delegates, she has to convince the supers that she has the momentum and for them to come to her instead of Obama. If I'm Hillary Clinton, I'll talk about him being a fatally weak candidate with ties to the corrupt Chicago political machine (the Rezko connection); I'll talk about his lack of experience at the highest levels of government (do you want him answering that 3 am phone call); I'll talk about his being just like all the other politicians (saying one thing about NAFTA while doing another). And so on and so forth. And, despite the ugly experience of South Carolina, Hillary will continue the whispering campaign about how Obama's race hurts him -- and, frankly, the numbers bear her out:

Per NBC’s AnaMaria Arumi, 18% of white Ohio voters in the exit polls said race was important to their vote, and 75% of those people voted for Clinton. Those numbers are comparable to what we saw in southern states. But they’re higher than in neighboring Missouri, where a comparable number (17%) said that the race of the candidate was important to their vote and the vote split was 10 points less -- 65% to Clinton. In Texas, 10% of whites said that race was a factor, and they went 65% for Clinton as well.

Think about that: in Ohio 18 out of 100 Democrats said race was important and 14 of them voted for the white candidate. Hillary's margin of victory in Ohio: 14%.

Actually the above analysis is wrong on two counts. First, the margin was 10% not 14%. But more importantly, 18 out of 100 white Democrats said race was important. To draw any conclusions, we'd have to know what percentage of Democratic voters were white; my numbers don't take that into account -- although I suspect the percentage is high enough that it probably accounted for most of Hillary's winning margin.

Nonetheless, it's clear that a significant number of white Democratic voters chose not to vote for the black Democrat. How many of them will vote for the white Republican if the black Democrat is the nominee? If you're Obama you better not be surprised by that have an answer for that question.

Hillary can also work the refs to demand that the Florida and Michigan delegations be seated and vote for her. I wouldn't want to be in Howard Dean's shoes right now.

If she can do all that -- win blowouts in every remaining contest, get the supers and seat Michigan/Florida -- she can still win this thing. Whether the nomination will be worth having remains to be seen. But she'll have to burn that bridge when she gets to it. For now, it's all about winning the delegate count.

If I'm Obama, what do I do?

In short, I just keep doing what I've been doing: talking about how Clinton (and McCain) are part of the old guard, the old politics, the failed policies of the past. I talk about how I'm the candidate of the future. And (through my surrogates) I remind people that the china shop will always chase the bull. In other words, I remind people that the reason Hillary is a fighter is because so many people hate her.

And, frankly, if I'm Obama, I can say it with some sadness and regret. Nonetheless -- it is what it is. The "cycle of violence" will continue as long as a Clinton is running for (or being) president. So if people want to spend the next four years reliving the past twenty, then Clinton -- and McCain -- are their candidates. But if people are ready to turn the page and start a new and better chapter in American history, then Obama is their candidate.

This isn't over yet, but if I'm Obama I'm feeling pretty good right now about my chances.

Andy Kopplin is running for the Dem nomination for Congress from my home district -- Louisiana's 6th. Maybe you've heard of it: Republican Richard Baker abandoned it to become a million dollar lobbyist.

Anyway, Andy is a friend of mine and when he asked me and Miss Julie to volunteer for his campaign, we jumped at the chance. But even if I didn't already know him, I would have been impressed by the things he's accomplished for Louisiana.

Kopplin was the first Executive Director of the Louisiana Recovery Administration. He built the coalition that doubled Louisiana's federal commitments for levees, housing and infrastructure (from $13.2 billion to $28.1 billion).

He was also head of Louisiana's Americorps Program. He led the way as groups of committed young people built houses, tutored children and helped the elderly.

And Kopplin, who served as the chief of staff to two Louisiana governors, was instrumental in the creation of the Louisiana community college system, the Louisiana Tuition Opportunity Program for Students (TOPS), and Louisiana's pre-school program.

Here's one of Andy's TV ads:

The primary is this Saturday, March 8. There are four other Dems running:

• State Rep. Don Cazayoux, a self-styled "John Breaux Democrat" who is pro-life and enjoys high ratings from the National Rifle Association. Cazayoux is widely seen as the frontrunner for the nomination.
• Jason DeCuir, who ran unsuccessfully for the State Senate in the last election.
• State Rep. Michael Jackson who (like Cazayoux) will be soon be term-limited out of the Louisiana legislature.
• Joe DeLatte, a construction worker.

Despite this being his first race for public office, Andy has already vaulted into the top-tier for fundraising among all Democrats: He has raised over $68 thousand on ActBlue.com to Cazayoux's $30 thousand, attracting far more donors as well. Andy also has Cazayoux beat in another important metric going into the last days of the campaign -- as of today, he has more cash on hand than Cazayoux. None of the other Democrats come close. Lastly, Kopplin's pace is picking up: he's raised over $35 thousand over the last week or so, to Cazayoux's $25 thousand. Not bad, considering that this is his very first race for elective office.

If necessary, there will be a runoff in April and the special election will be in May.

I know very few of you reading this will be voting in the primary on Saturday. But I hope that you'll help us send Andy to Congress by making a contribution via ActBlue.com.

And if you live in the district, please vote for Andy on March 8.

Andy Kopplin for Congress
Andy Kopplin TV
Andy Kopplin's ActBlue page

Everyone is setting the expectations for tonight's results but the Clinton camp has re-set them in a way that is a wonderment to watch. But that just the way the game is played, so good for them.

Chuck Todd, MSNBC, probably has as good an analysis as anyone:

• Obama could net more delegates out of Vermont than Clinton does out of Ohio.

• Clinton can win both Ohio and Texas, 52%-48%, and lose the overall delegate battle tonight, thanks to how both Texas and Ohio award more delegates in African-American heavy areas as well as those crazy Texas caucuses.

• Speaking of Texas, Obama likely has a five-point cushion on the delegate front, meaning he could lose the state by five points and still net delegates.

• How will the media handle Clinton winning two states but Obama winning the most delegates tonight? Who wins the night? [Hint: See below.]

• Bonus question: Who do we reward the state of Texas to if Clinton wins the popular vote in the primary but Obama nets the most delegates?

• And finally, for all the talk of bias against Clinton's campaign in the media, does anyone believe any other candidate could have lost 11-straight contests, be this far behind in delegates, and be simply two victories away from being back in the game? One thing the media has done is they've given Clinton every chance she wants to write her own comeback story. She gets another shot today.

Presuming that Clinton wins one or more of the contests, the story will be that she ended Obama's winning streak.

But, as we know, it's all about the pledged delegates, not how many states you win. And currently, MSNBC counts a gap of 157 delegates between the two candidates (not counting supers).

Obama - 1194 (53.5%)
Clinton - 1037 (46.5%)

To claim victory, Clinton has to have narrowed the gap either in absolute numbers or in percentages of the total. Anything less is a defeat. Period.

• Talk about setting self-serving expectations: Mark Penn wants you to know that -- all along -- he was just an innocent bystander in the Clinton campaign operation. Wonder if they'll cut his pay?

• According to MSNBC, Obama's got 52.9% of the pledged delegates out there to Clinton's 45.9%. Not exactly a close race, but not a blow-out either. He's got her by 157 pledged delegates. So forget all the bar-raising- and bar-lowering-talk: Clinton has got to start closing that gap, fast.

• Is there a worse run campaign than John McCain's? Apparently not -- but by golly he makes good ribs!

• "The world's a tough dangerous place and always has been. That's no reason to reupholster the inside of your trousers and vote like a moron every time they say boo."

• Simon Cowell says he turned down $2 million to become the British spokesman for ... Viagra, declaring that the offer was an insult. Something tells me he wasn't complaining about the money.