The funny thing is the Clinton supporters have pointed to this as Bill really taking Fox down. But if you open the webpage for Chris Wallace's Sunday show, they link to that 2+ year old interview right on the main page! I guess Fox really hated Bill getting all riled up and taking them down several notches, eh?

No...you missed nothing. Matt Stoller is probably the biggest drama queen in the entire liberal blogosphere and considering that we're talking the liberal blogosphere, that's saying a lot.

And I find it hilarious that billy called Stoller "Greg Stoller". Both of these guys are really high on themselves and act as if they are The Gatekeepers and their word is bond. Nevermind the mental juijitsu needed to keep a logical train of thought on why it's okay for one politician to do one thing, while another is "caving" or "just another politician". The only thing Sargent has going for him is that he doesn't pretend to know any analysis. Stoller's biggest downfall is his sad attempt at analysis, especially since 90%o f the time he clearly has no idea what he's talking about...but you know...he has friends.

That's for damn sure...I've been pounding this point since last Sept. It kills me that they think they've Crashed the Gates, yet when Obama actually takes the strategies of Dean and implements them, they thing he's doing it wrong, namely because they were kept out of the loop.

I would suggest that, satisfying as that would have been, he needed to consider the strong Republican audience he would have on a Fox News interview. As TRUE as those words would have been, attacking the Republican base would have made many viewers immediately stop listening to what else he had to say. It's called "Rogerian rhetoric," and the base idea is that the minute you self-identify as the enemy of your audience, your audience stops hearing what you have to say.

This comes back to that whole "fighter" discussion we've been having. As far as I'm concerned, it's much more difficult for a candidate to consistently AVOID fights... even if it doesn't make as entertaining a TV clip.

We are electing a president, not a WWF wrestler.

nice

In this primary season, the Clintons definitely mastered the art of alienating black voters. And the superdelegates can see that too.

There are two false assumptions here I think.

One is that Obama only went on Fox to court lower income white voters. I think it was to appease the naysayers more than court anyone, and I think there are a dozen other important reasons equal to the "only" one you assert.

Second is that lower class whites aren't voting for him. I know thats how the media likes to sell it, but the truth is that he is not getting trounced in that demographic. He's losing that demographic yes but not like Hillary is losing the black vote.

These states that he is dominant, like Wisconsin, are not lacking in lower class whites, and I think we do a disservice to groups like lower class whites, of which I have been most of my life, to lump them together in a big group and assume they all think the same. People are doing this with the black vote as well, assuming they're all voting for Obama because he's black even though a year ago, they, like every other demographic in the nation, were firmly behind Hillary.

I enjoy your posts, Billy Sumday, but I have to say that this whole kerfluffle represents, to me, a serious over-reaction by a lot of people. Greg and Stoller overreacted, the post by Greg was an overreaction, and the response to the post (all the nasty crap being flung in Greg's direction) is an overreaction.

It's a political talk show, people. All this gnashing of teeth and flailing by everyone (Greg, Stoller, and all us political junkies) just gives Fox News more power.

As successful Southern politicians, the Clintons long ago mastered the art of appealing to black voters without alienating lower income white voters.

Guess they've lost their "mastery," huh?

There's no way to prove he failed. The Nascar crowd dislikes Hillary as much as they dislike any Democrat. Her problem is that she makes these voters completely defensive whereas Obama is trying to reach out to them. As an independent, I appreciate Obama's courteousness and I cannot handle Hillary's bellicose posturing. Super delegates understand that in order to win, the democratic party needs to draw in independents as well as some Republicans, including Fox viewers.

Have you been paying attention?

Last month there was a major poll, forget which pollster, where in a matchup of Hillary v., McCain, Hillary gets 55% of the African Am. vote to McCain's 45%.

Do you understand what that means?

Gore got 88%, Kerry got 90%.

She cant' win and despite your pronouncements, she knows nothing. She just hoping.

The supers aren't going to go against the pledge delegate count. Whomever has the majority, will be the nominee.

Popular vote won't sway them, unless they're 10 pledged delegates apart, which ain't happening.

It's over. Been over since she didn't win in BLOWOUT (20% +)in TX & OH just for her to START making up the delegate counts. She didn't do it.

The supers aren't biting. Her claims he's unelectable are bullshit & her hopes of including FL & MI, as is, are being dismissed by anyone but her supporters.

All she is doing is trying to damage Obama as much as possible because her final hope is that his candidacy will collapse completely.

NOT. GOING. TO. HAPPEN.

Billy, The Grackle Bird, Glad:

Back to his old nest fouling ways. Remember what a great laugh we all had when he wrote a blog promising to abandon his Dirty Bird behavior. Click on his name to read it, if you would like to have a good laugh over the self confession of Billy the habitual nest fouler.