"Hillary4U&Me" was made created by an Hewlett-Packard executive on his own dime and with no connection to the campaign.

Post-Viral Article
Pre-Viral Article
Original Video

Otherwise, David Brooks is entitled to his opinion, as is everyone else.

Last week, an important Clinton adviser told Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen (also of Politico) that Clinton had no more than a 10 percent chance of getting the nomination. Now, she’s probably down to a 5 percent chance.

Five percent.

Let’s take a look at what she’s going to put her party through for the sake of that 5 percent chance: The Democratic Party is probably going to have to endure another three months of daily sniping. For another three months, we’ll have the Carvilles likening the Obamaites to Judas and former generals accusing Clintonites of McCarthyism. For three months, we’ll have the daily round of résumé padding and sulfurous conference calls. We’ll have campaign aides blurting “blue dress” and only-because-he’s-black references as they let slip their private contempt.

For three more months (maybe more!) the campaign will proceed along in its Verdun-like pattern. There will be a steady rifle fire of character assassination from the underlings, interrupted by the occasional firestorm of artillery when the contest touches upon race, gender or patriotism. The policy debates between the two have been long exhausted, so the only way to get the public really engaged is by poking some raw national wound.

For the sake of that 5 percent, this will be the sourest spring. About a fifth of Clinton and Obama supporters now say they wouldn’t vote for the other candidate in the general election. Meanwhile, on the other side, voters get an unobstructed view of the Republican nominee. John McCain’s approval ratings have soared 11 points. He is now viewed positively by 67 percent of Americans. A month ago, McCain was losing to Obama among independents by double digits in a general election matchup. Now McCain has a lead among this group.

For three more months, Clinton is likely to hurt Obama even more against McCain, without hurting him against herself. And all this is happening so she can preserve that 5 percent chance.

When you step back and think about it, she is amazing. She possesses the audacity of hopelessness.

The real tragedy here will be months more of all of this ridiculousness, money spent, political capital squandered and ultimately the outcome will not change. It's the very definition of folly.

The important part of the Brooks article is the last paragraph.

. . . she would surprise everybody with a display of self-sacrifice. Her campaign would cruise along at a lower register until North Carolina, then use that as an occasion to withdraw.

DB is telling how we will know when Hillary has thrown in the towel. And note -- she won't withdraw. She'll "cruise along at a lower register." Continuing to campaign, and press her superior qualifications, but without the 3 am ad or arguments about how McCain would be a better CiC than Obama. Heck, she may even criticize McCain from time to time, as she did yesterday.

Keep your eyes open, folks. It was reported over the weekend that HRC aides refused to take part in a kamikaze finale to this all. So I think we might start seeing a kinder, gentler Clinton campaign that will be a de facto way of setting up a dignified withdrawal. In which case, I think, there will be much rejoicing throughout the party.

I punched up Brooks's column as follows:

Nouri el Maliki may not realize it yet, but he’s just endured one of the worst weeks of his campaign.

First, Moqtadr el Sadr weathered the Iran-Al Qaeda training misinformation without serious damage to his status. Moqtadr still holds a tiny lead among Shiites nationally in the Gallup tracking poll, just as he did before this whole affair blew up.

Second, Moqtadr’s gunmen successfully prevented elections in parts of Iraq. That means it would be virtually impossible for Maliki to take a lead in either elected delegates or total votes.

Third, as Nomo el Shimjah of The New Iraqi Republic has reported, most supergunmen have accepted Ayatollah Sistani's judgment that the winner of the elected delegates should get the nomination. Instead of lining up behind Maliki, they’re drifting away. His lead among them has shrunk by about 60 in the past month, according to Ravi al Zeniwa of Shiitico.com.

In short, Maliki’s presidential prospects continue to dim. The door is closing. Night is coming. The end, however, is not near.

Last week, an important Maliki adviser told Jiv Husseini and Muka Al-Len (also of Shiitico) that Maliki had no more than a 10 percent chance of getting the nomination. Now, he’s probably down to a 5 percent chance.

Five percent.

Let’s take a look at what she’s going to put his sect through for the sake of that 5 percent chance: The Shiites are probably going to have to endure another three months of daily sniping. For another three months, we’ll have the Mullahs likening the Sadrists to Osama and former generals accusing Malikites of Saddamism. For three months, we’ll have the daily round of résumé padding and sulfurous conference calls. We’ll have campaign aides blurting "Bush-lover" and only-because-his-daddy-was-important references as they let slip their private contempt.

For three more months (maybe even a WHOLE FRIEDMAN UNIT!) the campaign will proceed along in its Diyala-like pattern. There will be a steady rifle fire of assassination from the underlings, interrupted by the occasional firestorm of real artillery when the contest touches upon purity of Islamic beliefs. The policy debates between the two have been long exhausted, so the only way to get the public really engaged is by poking some raw national wound.

For the sake of that 5 percent, this will be the sourest spring. About a fifth of Maliki and Moqtadr supporters now say they wouldn’t vote for the other candidate in the general election. Meanwhile, on the other side, voters get an unobstructed view of the Sunni nominee. Baathists' approval ratings have soared 11 points. The former Al-Qaeda allies are now viewed positively by 67 percent of Iraqis. A month ago, they were losing to Moqtadr among independents by double digits in a general election matchup. Now they have a lead among this group.

For three more months, Maliki is likely to hurt Moqtadr even more against the Baathists, without hurting them against himself. And all this is happening so he can preserve that 5 percent chance.

When you step back and think about it, he is amazing. He possesses the audacity of hopelessness.

Why does he go on like this? Does Maliki privately believe that Moqtadr is so incompetent that only he can deliver the policies they both support? Is he simply selfish, and willing to put his party through agony for the sake of his slender chance? Are leading Shiites so narcissistic that they would create bitter stagnation even if they were granted one-party rule?

The better answer is that Maliki’s long rear-guard action is the logical extension of his relentlessly political life.

For nearly 20 years, he has been encased in the apparatus of political celebrity. Look at his schedule as first exile and ever since. Think of the thousands of staged events, the tens of thousands of times he has pretended to be delighted to see someone he doesn’t know, the hundreds of thousands times he has recited empty clichés and exhortatory banalities, the millions of photos he has posed for in which he is supposed to appear empathetic or tough, the billions of politically opportune half-truths that have bounced around his head.

No wonder the Maliki campaign feels impersonal. It’s like a machine for the production of politics. It plows ahead from event to event following its own iron logic. The only question is whether Maliki himself can step outside the apparatus long enough to turn it off and withdraw voluntarily or whether he will force the rest of his Shiites to intervene and jam the gears.

If he does the former, he would surprise everybody with a display of self-sacrifice. His campaign would cruise along at a lower register until Basrah, then use that as an occasion to withdraw. If he does not, he would soldier on doggedly, killing as many allies as necessary.

The point being, of course, that the travails and infighting of the Democratic Party are quite petty set against the fiasco that John McCain continues to celebrate.

Brooks annoys me enough that I won't read him, especially if he is right.

I'm not a big Brooks fan, but I will give him credit for the "audacity of hopelessness" line. That pretty much sums it up.

I think Mark Shields is rubbing off more on David Brooks. Thanks for pointing out this column. I usually read all of the NYT columns (even that awful Bill Kristol), but overlooked this. Powerful stuff. So what was it that Bob Hope said about Democrats?