I have to wonder what impact the James Carville "Judas" epithet (thrown at Bill Richardson) will have on other as-yet-uncommitted "superdelegates."

(1) Will they feel too "scared" to individually endorse Barack Obama because they fear they will receive the same scathing invective from the Clinton camp directed at themselves?

(2) Will they feel compelled to "strike back" at the Clinton camp by endorsing Senator Obama simply to discourage the Clinton camp from attacking any future superdelegates in such a hateful manner?

(3) If in some way (1) and (2) above both apply in some measure, will the frightened but angry superdelegates endorse Senator Obama in large groups so as to acquire "safety in numbers"?

(4) If in some way (3) above applies, will the groups of superdelegate endorsers spread out their group endorsements evenly over the next four weeks before the Pennsylvania primary, so as to make the obvious trend towards Obama even more apparent to voters -- giving Pennsylvania the possible honor of putting Senator Obama over the top -- and/or more of a Chinese water-torture experience for You-Know-Her?

Just wondering. Any other speculations about the long-term effect of the Carville epithet when considered as part-and-parcel with the other numerous Clinton gaffes, lies, low-road innuendo, and just plain falling appeal to Democrats, independents, and Republicians generally?

Okay, I hate to be a downer. But . . .

I am really really glad that the refs are calling the Clinton campaign on their tactics. Not because it will change the outcome, but because it will help us hold the party together. So I share your uplift.

But let's not repeat the gendered film references that have begun to be common on DKos. I know that this will seem really prim and PC -- apologies -- but I think we need to be cautious.

These aren't just films where bad girls die, these are films where bad girls seem to die partly because they *are* girls (or witches, or whatever). Don't want to lecture, especially if, as your avatar suggests, you're female and I ain't. I'm not trying to define morality for anyone -- I'm just saying, though this stuff may not bother you, it could tick off a lot of good Democrats we don't want to tick off.

Great post Amber, very informative.

..Humanity F Critic

Great post!

"The media are obviously simply reflecting the public's displeasure with Clinton."

And you're sure it couldn't be the other way around?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4c47X5ASw8

Praising the Repug over your opponent is unprincipled, at least according to those I know who say they have been around. And more unprincipled than that campaign. As is Bill's they love our country comment. Shameful. Every campaign has their shame, but to conclude that superdelegates don't have a reason based in the principle of the general, fair (3am) or unfair (McCain is CIC), is objectively impossible. The principles could be ones which make them choose Hillary, but unfortunately your candidate has violated a rule (or rules)many of us cant tolerate, and are disgusted that anyone who claims they have he best interests of the party would openly embrace McCain at the expense of the likely nominee.

The Krugman part scared me - I hadn't been paying attention to what she said about solving the economic crisis, but convening a panel and getting Alan Greenspan??? It's like solving the Iraqi crisis by convening a panel of Rumsfeld, Bremer and Wolfowitz.

I was never convinced that she was truly smart, but to say something so dumb as "not understanding what Greenspan says but noting his Tylenol effects on the market", ugh, that's just Bushism without the dyslexia.

Greenspan is obtuse, but there's no shortage of highly intelligent economists out there parsing his ACTIONS and their imlications for the market, including Krugman himself screaming about the danger of sub-prime a couple of years ago.

I'm not the smartest economic pantsuit around but I "got" it by heeding the cassandras and checking out their numbers.

The first time the alarm bells went off was with the nixed Esquire magazine piece which described in nightmarish details the disorganization, the cluelessness, deterioration and incompetence of her campaign burning through $130 million. They were the Titanic approaching the Obama iceberg with Hillary asleep at the wheels. All cronies and loyalists, true, no "Judas" telling them to wake up and smell the latte.

The amazing thing is that *AFTER* the brouhaha and the deepsix, she still didn't put her house in order and went on to lose big in Iowa and Super Tuesday.

She has no vision, no idea, no concept, no strategy, no plan. She's best at pummelling and knocking the shit out of you, not jujitsu.

Ugh!!!!

Btw, Richardson has got to be the most courageous Superdelegate around, seeing how he gets shunned by the establishment and hot-branded as "Judas". I recently saw The Last Temptation of Christ and Richardson certainly fits the "Judas" played by Harvey Keitel, trying to bring some sanity back to the delusional martyr. A great film indeed.

She can't even LIE smart, like Slick Willy. Why the Bosnia, "named after Edmund Hillary" and countless other flaps that are so unnecessary? Hasn't she been wised up to Youtube???

wow, thank you and LouisVille for coming by to prove my point about Hillary supporters. May I recommend helpful anger-management programs to get you through November?

For those interested, here's the full text as Hillary talks about convening her "top consultants":

http://www.attytood.com/2008/03/clintons_delphic_oracle_alan_g.html

Not only was Greenspan responsible for building up the subprime bubble, he gave horrific advice (ARMs) that would bankrupt a lot of homeowners who went for it. And yes, Hillary voted for the bankruptcy bill on the side of Bush, the Republicans, creditors and banks that would make it more difficult to declare bankruptcy and bring on life-long indebtedness. Did I mention Bill & Rubin repealed the Glass-Steagall act that would was erected to protect against banking fraud and enabled the creation of exotic finance instruments that splice frighteningly high-risk investments into AAA rated paper and which is now leeching $$$ from investors at the rate of hundreds of billions?

And while economists like Stiglitz and Krugman have been shouting about the calamnity and the moral hazard for years, says Hillary,

"And recently he's (Greenspan) come out, and very smartly so, that we have to deal with housing and maybe we need to have some kind of buyout mechanism for mortgages. So he's moved on his understanding and depth of the problem -- but you know you could pick three others. You just have to have some demonstrable involvement of presidential leadership..."

Ugh!!!!!

What about the Clinton's being tied to Rev. Wright, the photo of Clinton and Wright while he was president? The statement that the Clinton's church in DC put out in support of Wright? This whole thing deflates the Clinton argument about Wright to a large degree. Why isn't this being covered more? Hypocritical...

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Somebody forgot to tell Hillary Clinton the Democratic presidential race is over and Barack Obama won.

Obama has captured more state contests, more votes and more of the pledged convention delegates who will help decide which Democrat faces Republican Sen. John McCain in November's presidential election.

But Clinton, a New York senator who has flirted with disaster before in the back-and-forth nominating battle with Obama, shrugs off growing predictions of doom and still sees at least a narrow path to victory..."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080327/pl_nm/usa_politics_campaign_dc;_ylt=AuWG6fLNg1THtSJ98ekO0yWs0NUE

Whoa, BevD is hurling insults at me again. Ouch. Double ouch to all of those nasty journalists. I know their histories and can respect them (even David Brooks who I weekly route against when he appears on PBS with Mark Shields.) Journalists are not in the business of being liked.

Keith Olbermann

David Letterman makes just as fierce jokes at W's expense as he did/does with "Bubba." I expect John Stewart to tear up the Democratic president. Look at period political cartoons harsh criticism through U.S. history contrasted against flattering idealized candidates before taking office.

You're right, I do believe everything I see on TV: monkeys fly, horses talk and Fox News is fair and balanced. And about destroying the Democratic Party. Check, that's me too. What can I say.

I've got to give you credit, you could have just attacked Maureen Dowd's big feet. I thought her "Obambi" tag was pretty funny and appropriate when Senator Obama was letting himself get steamrolled by the Clintons. A lot of people, particularly his big-money supporters shared that sentiment.

If only there was someone telling calling Al Gore Bambi when he was letting himself get thumped with the help of the Clintons (see Oct. 2007 Vanity Fair: http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/10/gore200710), perhaps Bush II would be screwing up another business instead of the world. The Times editorial page does fact check their columnists (ask Bill Kristol).

And as far as oracles, I do love thee Goracle and would be perfectly fine if there was a brokered convention resulting in a Gore/Obama ticket. But elevating journalists to oracle status, hmmm, perhaps Keith Olbermann because he can make me laugh while being deadly serious, but he will definitely be just as hard on a Dem as he is with the Republicans as his Hillary special commentary showed. Michael Moore?...he's been demonized and has a bit too much of a crush on Cindy Sheehan. Kos...he hated Obama before he loved him and he's a bit demonized now too. Robert Sheer...nah, man love for Dennis Kucinich. I give up.

In all seriousness, I actually do have the attention span of a circus monkey.

Obviously, to avoid too much gender-laden hostility, we need to compare the Clinton campaign to a masculine model, so I vote for Monty Python and the Holy Grail:

ARTHUR: Look, you stupid bastard. You've got no arms left.
BLACK KNIGHT: Yes, I have.
ARTHUR: Look!
BLACK KNIGHT: Just a flesh wound. [kick]
ARTHUR: Look, stop that.
BLACK KNIGHT: Chicken! [kick] Chickennn!
ARTHUR: Look, I'll have your leg. [kick] Right! [whop] [ARTHUR chops the BLACK KNIGHT's right leg off]
BLACK KNIGHT: Right. I'll do you for that!
ARTHUR: You'll what?
BLACK KNIGHT: Come here!
ARTHUR: What are you going to do, bleed on me?
BLACK KNIGHT: I'm invincible!
ARTHUR: You're a looney.
BLACK KNIGHT: The Black Knight always triumphs! Have at you! Come on, then. [whop] [ARTHUR chops the BLACK KNIGHT's last leg off]
BLACK KNIGHT: Oh? All right, we'll call it a draw.
ARTHUR: Come, Patsy.
BLACK KNIGHT: Oh. Oh, I see. Running away, eh? You yellow bastards! Come back here and take what's coming to you. I'll bite your legs off!

Today the Washington Post takes her lie a step further and demonstrates how not only did she lie about the Bosnia trip repeatedly, she stole the story from Republican Olympia Snowe.

So, now is it a lie or plagarism?

Excuse me, Louisville, but what the FUCK are you babbling about?

I don't understand how your fucking either-or snark applies to me or my comments. What do you mean about what I've said in the past? Are you mistaking me for someone else?

I don't give a fuck about Hillary's poll-taking or being a "consumate (sic) politican." I've never criticized her for anything like that.

Read carefully. What I said was: (regarding stirring up racial fear) I can't deal with this kind of tactic from Democrats. This is one issue that hurts me deeply on a personal level. So I may not cast a vote for Hillary after all.

This is my personal decision. It is not one I have reached haphazardly.

I'm careful to avoid using degrading terms like "Clintonista" or "Hillbot" to describe anyone on this site. I normally try to refrain from insulting anyone here for that matter, unless they're being hostile or disrespectful. So I really resent being called an "Obamaista." Asshole.