Yes there was the now rousing Obermann 'Final Comment' which shows why Keith has one of the best research teams in the media that backed the "Assassination" subject in the corner. But what no one is broaching is that this apologetically described 'gaffe' is none other than a "Freudian Slip of the tongue". It ranks up there with saying the word "BOMB" on an airplane or "FIRE" in a crowded theater. It is more another gaffe which Keith went on how many times this campaign season has forgiven Hillary for the many other 'gaffe's' be it the "Bosinan Big Fish Story" or the "planting of Q's" in Iowa just to name a couple, she has uttered. But this one takes the proverbial "cake", like how Maria Antoinette is remembered in history saying "let them eat cake!" Thankfully last night the press was eating it up like how sharks in a feeding frenzy.

Going deeper, this "Freudian Slip of the tongue"----meaning a momentary exposure of an unspoken or subconscious thought [or worse, a wish] that Obama and his campaign would be there no more. Sure she was reaching in that interview, expanding a bit further what she has said before about June or RFK, answering the same inquiry from a constant group interrogation by the press, local and national, as to why specifically are she is remaining in the race despite the obvious second grade math land mounting $20M plus debt.  I mean her logic that a sudden Obama implosion reminds me of what my mother used to utter when she insisted I put on a clean pair of underwear back when I started driving a car---insinuating that if I crashed and hospitalized, at least I wouldn't be embarrassed by soiled underpants. My logical reply was always they probably would be blood stained then! But we know that was not a genuine concern, the fear was that I would crash the car, not soil the underwear.  The fear for Clinton here is that Obama will win the election and serve famously for eight years and leave her political legacy behind.

Yet there are many apologists excusing the 'supposed' gaffe as an example of exhaustion, but was it really? In more aptly fits an utterance expressing anger. Haven't your heard loved ones or even acquaintances say things like "I wish him [or her] dead". Or "they should hang the bastard", as if they know whether the human being was born out of wedlock. That said we know the meaning of those phrases in context----complete contempt for the person. Sure most are sorry afterward for saying such a mean and nasty thing, but it still showed a moment of serious contempt. In this case this contempt was in public, and ultimately possessing a serious and defining political consequence. I suspect many Democratic leaders who are associated or supportive of Clinton will quietly separate from her.

For me it actually shows her inexperience in the big political arena. Hillary Rodham Clinton might be a superior political wok but the role she honed over the 30 years was actually the chief supporter of her husband. Like it or not that was her role regardless of her own personal ambitions, the role as standard bearer does ably fit. And this gaffe, on top of the "lost count" ones that Obermann's research staff put together prove it regardless of her base of energized and stridently scorned support.

This now makes total sense why the remaining biggee's of the Dem Party super-duper delegates, those 49 Representatives, 15 Senators and 6 Governors, plus the 97 or so DNC members are sitting silent on the sidelines----they might not have to make a decision after all! Perfect cover, perfect politics, in fact they can say with all sincerity that the system actually worked---IF---Clinton exits on her own terms and even better for their own purposes---Clinton is the VP choice.

I thought it strange that only a Guam superdelegate (Pilar Lujan) publicly announced his endorsement yesterday where even the Obama campaign did not respond in kind letting Clinton her first day in months on this front. Furthermore there has only been seven total announcements where not even the so coined Pelosi Club (6) pledged to the winner of the pledged delegate victor did not come out and make their fateful endorsements.

Politics has its own drumbeats and when there is a pause, a change in tenor, a new sheet of music it is because there are things going on behind the scenes. The thing is now that CNN and the rest of the media hounds are on this trail there is going to be a lot of chatter. STAY TUNED.

Is it just me or am I waiting for the Congress and the Democrats to finally get some teeth in the game and take a bite out of the Bush Administration. Congress does have the legal and statutory right to subpoena and hold in contempt a person who does not comply. They just allowed the justice department to handle their contempt warrants, but if the Administration says "push" than push back and bring back their power.

Haul Rove and the others in front of the Congress and put them under oath. Do it now during the election season. 

Back in the day, when Bill Clinton was the battered President over personal transgressions that made many believe he had permanently tarnished the image of the Oval Office, there was another phenomena---namely the dotcom math. One only has to recall the mantra that many dotcom youthful moguls exclaimed when their was a new age, a new way to value companies, not with profits or revenues but with eyeballs. It was funny-money math.

Now here we go again, Hillary-math reduced to the exclamation that she has somehow, someway prevailed in the popular vote. First thing, for all America stands for in its 240 year democratic experiment we elect our Presidents through a republic system---meaning through delegates and electors. Secondly her math is totally false, in fact I think some of the old Arthur Andersen accountants who used to work on the Enron account have found their station on the Hillary campaign---maybe that is why her campaign is still $20M in debt while having a very good April in fund-raising.

Anyway here is a political science 101 course offering for Hillary fans, popular vote does not count in Presidential selections. Second even if it did Hillary's math is wrong. To get where she wants to say this she discounts the votes in the caucus votes---why because she ignored or didn't understand how to run a campaign in a caucus state. But in reality they record raw votes in caucus states for it is the raw vote that determines the pledged delegate apportionment from each precinct. But Hillary doesn't like this so she uses Hillary-math. By discounting one part of the process she counts another where the rules say doesn't count, in fact she likes to count votes where only she was on the ballot and by all accounts was a beauty contest and the other where there was no campaigning.

Okay but here is the trouble with Hillary-math, it still doesn't add up, for Obama still holds a 200,000 difference when you count FL & MI (for to be fair if you count Hillary votes than you have to count uncommitted as Obama votes). But, but, but no---those go to the uncommitted.  And there is where the whole scheme crashes---uncommitted to what or whom---delegates.

The votes are for delegates and by the way these delegate contests are weighted by Congressional Districts not statewide apportionment. This is why the whole popular vote thing is immaterial except in the realm of Hillary-math where Hillary gets to make up the rules as to what to include and what to exclude, where and when.

Funny thing that is what the dotcom accountants did. They counted eyeballs as values and liabilities as values and expenditures and assets. No different than how Enron counted their own transactions as sales or then again simply made them up too. Yes, Hillary-math has a long history.

So many have written how come Clinton is losing what was billed by every political expert as the inevitable election. On paper it seemed like a perfect set up, except that the voters have advanced well past the leaders and have been there since well back in '05, with seeds back in '03. Actually all one has to do is simply look at the calendar to see the obvious---what century are we in?

Obama is winning because he is speaking to the 21st Century Conscience, something that has been brewing since well-the Nixon Era. The seeds began with Earth Day, the Vietnam protests, Woman's Rights, Desegregation, ADA  and are now beginning to bear fruit. Those seeds were sewn to combat the divides in our 20th Century society that brought about horrendous war and suffering. Global communication and economies have challenged tribalism and nationalism where now the challenges of the 21st Century demand fundamental change in how our society is organized and valued.

It has been written by futurists and philosophers that society is no different than organisms in an ecosystem where cooperation and survival are intertwined as essential components for life. Nature finds a way and so does human society on top of the evolutionary chain. We know now that how the 20th Century organization is not working, simply look at our stresses to find out. I mean when did you ever think that America would openly admit that torture was an end that it needed to justify its means for a way of life?

Obama is winning because he is the only leader to rise and say he is going forward into the 21st Century and not back to the 20th Century. Sure there remains a Conservative backlash, reactionary forces who still are privileged who use fear and past values to challenge the uncertainty of change going forward. But many of us are products of that Nixon and post Nixon Era. We respect the necessity of the American Disabilities Act with much question. Desegregation has produced a generation now  approaching their mid '30's that does not fear racial differences or dark strangers walking down the street. Woman belong anywhere they like and can live anyway they want. An outgrowth of that is we are peeling back the ugly prejudice towards homosexuality with still many miles to travel but I see this being piled on the cultural war history books before my college-age children graduate their children from high school. The Vietnam war protests showed how bad the Establishment can be and now they fear to draft our children even to support their failed wars. And Earth Day  is now so deeply spread into our daily life that finally we might have a counter industrial revolution to save the planet.

Obama is winning because he is what the 21st Century needs to move on from the failures of the 20th Century.

My experiences with Clinton supporters, mostly woman, mostly woman in the demographic group between 45-60 years old, many are middle class but not affluent, educated and strident, many are minor party activists or local party leaders and all seem to wrap themselves in the Democratic Party flag as saying they are good Democrats while stunned they are in the minority.

My experiences as a local Democratic Party activist and official, a local ranking Obama volunteer organizer is one of many levels going back before the caucus of Super Tuesday to this weekend's State Convention is one of serious scorn and a deep seeded resentment that I am unsure as to their genuineness of actually being able to fold in behind the Obama ticket without Clinton. Before the caucus I was discounted by their leadership as to the veracity of the volunteer support  20 times their local volunteer support as I was naive and quaint to the estimates. The caucus was overwhelmed statewide, 1000% or more participation and Obama deluged Clinton 69% to 30%, locally and statewide. They were stunned, bitter and even resolved to prove it was corruption or a aberration. The process continued with the Clinton Party Leadership employing every obstacle and petty troublesome efforts in trying to suppress the votes with delay, credentials procedures et cetera, to no avail---Obama continued to carry through at the rate of 69%.

At this year's State Convention the unrepentant and strident Clinton supporters came with two signs apiece, united as a minority and yet their registrations waned below a full turnout. Terry Mac...the Clinton campaign manager came to the State Convention to speak on their behalf and spent most of the time trying to talk about unity and support in a superficial disingenuous manner, but when he tried to make the case that Clinton owned the popular vote through Hillary-Math, he was shouted down for 5 minutes by 69% Obama-"philes". He smiled and tried another tack...more 5 minutes of demonstrations....."Don't lie to us" yelled an Obama  delegate when things calmed down.

And there comes the truth for working as a volunteer helping the overflow crowd get to their cars and hotels conversations arose and they still remained scorned. They believe in the fantasy, the Clinton lie, the Hillary faith of illusion. It was never about the policies, the person, the leadership it was about them as woman getting their due. That was the quote, their due in their lifetime. They look at woman supporters of Obama as gender traitors, they scorn and they will have their wrath.

The good Democrats I know who are local party activists now are focusing on the local campaigns, and saying the words they want a Democrat to win in November. But then today there is Geraldine going on about sexism was to blame, where a political colleague and friend pointed to Ferraro's statement this morning as proof that the fix was in from the start. Proof of what I replied, this is politics.

And there you have it, the Clinton's have fed this campaign with all sorts of lies and emotional falsehoods. The inevitable illusion, the Super Tuesday idea, it is about feminism,not its not, it is about a bi-racial person is not qualified, (I can only recall Campanellis's statement about faculties where African Americans cannot be good baseball manager's), it is only a speech, she has all the white (err Appalachia votes), she was experienced in the White House, she landed under sniper fire, she can get the math, the superdelegates will come her way, she has the popular vote.

The real lie was that this was not really about politics and votes it was about dues.