This from Pollster.com analyzes poll internals (pre-Speech) and concludes that Obama is stronger than either McCain or Clinton.

Preface of course - polls this early esp w/ no incumbent are totally meaningless.


But it's the Last Dog's last gasp and certainly not sufficient to stampede enough superdelegates to steal the nomination

Not quite sure why the US media hasn't poured over the White House
appointment records just released for Mrs. Clinton's tenure as First
Lady, but the Guardian UK has.

As it turns out Mrs. Clinton may
not have been entirely truthful in her claims of foreign policy
experience (1993-2001), vast or otherwise. That's putting it charitably.

Records Show She Was Not in WH During Most Pivotal Events of Clinton Presidency

The Clintons are desperate
By any measure they are losing the race and cannot win th e nomination

Activists are breaking for Obama.  The Clintons' Inevitablity Campaign will end, not with a bang, but with a whimper

As the fifth Anniversary of Bush-McCain's 100 Years War on Iraq, as Hillary Clinton slowly sinks towards her watery political grave, let's remember that

No Do-Overs in Politics

Video Mrs Clinton on Iraq

The Nation:
 Mrs. Clinton's Iraq Vote 5 Years Later
Probably the biggest concession she made to Bush was accepting his argument that war was a legitimate response to the attacks on 9-11, which had occurred just one year earlier. Although she did not explicitly agree with Bush's statements linking al Qaeda to Iraq, she did say her vote was justified by "last year's terrible attacks," and that "in balancing the risks of action versus inaction, I think New Yorkers who have gone through the fires of hell may be more attuned to the risk of not acting. I know that I am."

      Other Senators rejected precisely those arguments. Russ Feingold voted against the authorization to use force in part because of what he called "the President's singularly unpersuasive attempt . . . to interweave 9-11 and Iraq." He criticized the "shifting justifications for an invasion," noting "the spectacle of the President and senior Administration officials citing a purported connection to al Qaeda one day, weapons of mass destruction the next day, Saddam Hussein's treatment of his own people on another day."

      Ted Kennedy raised a key issue Clinton never considered: going to war against Iraq, he said, "will jeopardize the war against terrorism" - against Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. "One year into the battle against Al Qaeda, the administration is shifting the focus, the resources and the energy to Iraq. The change in priority is coming before we have eliminated the threat from Al Qaeda."

      While Clinton accepted Bush's claims regarding Saddam's possession weapons of mass destruction, others rejected them. Jim Jeffords, Republican of Vermont said, "There is much speculation about his weapons of mass destruction, but no evidence that he has developed nuclear capability and less that he could deliver it."

May the Clintons and the War Wing of the Democratic Party RIP