Okay, so it's an odd title for the blogosphere, but I am very excited here. Today, my local paper—a paper which endorsed Bush not once but twice—ran a very conciliatory editorial about Hillary’s concession, in which the editor essentially endorsed Obama through a very concise comparison with McCain in terms of policies on Iraq, the economy, and health care. Oh, Day of JOY! (The paper is actually called “The Day.”)

I actually cried when I read this (something about this campaign keeps getting stuck in my eye):

http://democrats.org/a/2008/06/democratic_part_10.php

I am a flat broke (deeply in debt) single mother graduate student, and I had to make a donation when hearing this news. In terms of what it means to me, personally and politically, and what it could mean for my children and this country, it is too damned important to not say loudly and clearly that this is a move we support, in whatever increment possible. Shout it from the rooftops, baby: the time has come.

Okay. So she indirectly dissed Obama and his supporters, and implied that maybe--or more than just maybe--she was not ready to give up the fight. It is her supporters' campaign, after all, (eh-hem) and she needs to hear from them before deciding what to do.

And yes, there is a frightening element of crazy at play, a level of "deranged narcissism" (thanks, Toobin) and denial deep enough to flood the Grand Canyon. I have posted about my fears of sabotage and secession, little paranoid ramblings about her will to win or die trying--or even to take the rest of us down on the way.

But maybe--or more than just maybe--Hillary has to back out slowly, not only for her the purpose of nursing personal ego, but as a means to allow the heat to die down before tossing a wet blanket on the fire. Maybe her supporters need the opportunity to weigh in and say their piece before they will be ready to change tac and embrace unity. Maybe it would be ill-advised to throw on the e-brake while hauling down the freeway at a cool 95. Let them decelerate before asking them to board another bus.

I am doing a terrible job with my metaphors this morning, but I think you know what I mean. Maybe this was a concession speech, in its way.

The key to deciphering it is time. We need to wait and see whether Hillary will decide to keep quiet and let the reality sink in or whether she will amp up the rhetoric and dig in with the denial.

Has anyone else noticed a sudden increase in semi-articulate posts raving about the downfall of the Democratic party--or blatantly (and not even cleverly) bashing either one of the dem candidates or the other candidate's supporters? A quick background check shows many of these to be the work of mystery posters, with no profiles and no posting histories. In the interest of maintaining the integrity of the site, perhaps we should refrain from comments to these posts? (I rue the day I long for BillyGlad!)

This from today's New York Times:

"Still, the comments touched on one of the most sensitive aspects of the current presidential campaign — concern for Mr. Obama’s safety. And they come as Democrats have been talking increasingly of an Obama/Clinton ticket, with friends of the Clintons saying that Bill Clinton is musing about the possibility that the vice presidency might be his wife’s best path to the presidency if she loses the nomination."

Admittedly, there is no direct source quoted for this, and it is possible that Bill is looking toward 2012. But it sure sounds horrendous.

Thoughts?

I normally do not blog this much in one day (or in one week, for that matter), but in the true spirit of finding common ground--and in revulsion against the trolls who claim to support Obama--I would like to extend an invitation to Hillary supporters: Tell us your story. Why Hillary? Not why not Obama, but why her?

Please follow the rules I have asked Obama supporters to follow: No snark. No finger-pointing or comparing. No bashing or baiting. Because I know you have reasons that are really not about Obama, or his supporters (or trolls). Tell me why Hillary rocks your socks.

Earlier today I posted my concerns about the Democratic divide—a plea, really, for us to remember why we are Democrats in the first place. But it was also a request. I would really like Obama supporters to take a few minutes to write a thoughtful post about why we support Obama.

I am writing this post as a woman who was not decided at the beginning of this primary race. As a struggling single mother of both a bi-racial son and a white daughter. I am writing this post as a “hard-working American,” with generations of military service in my family, and as a person who spent most of my adult life without health insurance and no money in the bank. As a person who worked hard to finish college later in life, and as a present student attaining a graduate degree in social work so that I can help others who are struggling.

Welp, Hillary's at it again. A new round of email pleas came out today, urging her supporters to contact the DNC to make the "right" decision about MI and FL. I am sure she'll get plenty of sympathetic folks who care about Clintonocracy to respond, so I think it's important for the rest of us to weigh in ASAP. I did not follow the link in Hillary's email, for fear it would somehow be counted as a vote of support (one can't be too careful these days), but the DNC contact link is http://www.democrats.org/contact.html

Thanks for being the voice of reason.

My Nonni had a sign in her house:

Even though you're a Republican and I'm a Democrat, we can still be friends -- I'll hug your elephant and you can kiss my ass!

Can we think of one for Obama/Clinton supporters?

Try to be nice, now. Remember, we are friends. (We are firends, right?)

545 People
By Charlie Reese

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them. Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, we have deficits? Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does. You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does. You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does. You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does. You and I don't control monetary policy, The Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president and nine Supreme Court justices - 545 human beings out of the 300 million - are directly, legally, morally and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered but private central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million can not replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people.

When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist. If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair. If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red. If the Marines are in IRAQ, it's because they want them in IRAQ. If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.

There are no insoluble government problems. Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power.

Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like 'the economy,' 'inflation' or 'politics' that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible. They, and they alone, have the power. They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses -- provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.

We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!

Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper

I am concerned about all the fluff over Obama's campaign dredging up old Clinton dirt. If they do this, too much of it will stick to him, and invoke Hillary's "poor, devoted wife" sympathy.

Obama needs to get back on message, and let Hillary bring about her own demise with her baffling lies and self-interested efforts to undermine the Democratic party. 

Obama needs to stay positive and show why he IS the best choice for ALL Americans. Hillary will prove why she isn't all on her own.

This from some guy named "Ezekial" commenting on The New Republic pro-Obama article about the flurry of voter registrations and cross-overs in PA:

"The vast majority of 'new' Democrats are folks like me who switched because of Operation Chaos. We are simply tring to prolong the Dems misery by voting for Clinton."

See the article here: http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=d67776d8-ab4e-4c12-9c1f-bfa041dcb314

Brushing off attacks is elitist!

What if he had said, "Turn the other cheek"?

Likening himself to Jesus???

The audacity, indeed!

 

Brushing off superfluous attacks must be elitist. Can't wait for that flap to begin. Meanwhile, let's hope for an end to the gossip-column media coverage.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video_log/2008/04/obama_attacks_debate_we_set_a.html

Incidentally, MoveOn.org has a petition to end the media madness here:

http://pol.moveon.org/enoughdistractions/?r_by=12455-9117635-i2NqrE&rc=mailto