Obama '08?

Do you really care how blatham regards you?

Speak on brother and worry not about blatham's disregard.

Butrflynet, I'm afraid no matter how good Obama may be in giving speeches, the solution to fix our economy is going to take decades. Our econony has been too bastaredized for easy short-term solutions. It's not only jobs that continue to pay lower and lower wages, but the deficit spending by both consumers and our government.

Lowering the interest rate only exacerbates what's already bad about our economy, and giving one-time cash rebates to taxpayers does nothing for the short-term or long-term. We have a bunch of idiots in Washington; they only do things they think wins votes.

We all know what a sham is, and our government continues to do all the wrong things. They continue to fund the war in Iraq while our own citizens lose jobs, lose homes, and lose health insurance.

It's hopeless.

And meanwhile New Mexico is counting. . . .and counting. . . .and counting. . . .

Buck up, Butrflynet, and all you other Obama supporters...

This, I believe, can be taken only as GOOD NEWS to those of us who believe Obama is the best way to go in this presidential race. John Lewis, the Congressman who is a civil rights icon and has been solidly in Clinton's corner - has come over to Obama's side. He is now saying he would cast his vote as a superdelegate for Obama, in order to avoid the kind of destructive schism that might occur if the superdelegates resisted the clear wishes of the constituency.

I am overjoyed at this - Lewis was one of the main ones of the old guard of civil rights leaders who I was most discouraged about being in Clinton's corner. This is big, IMO.

A figure like Lewis also brings, for good reason, a vast moral credibility with him. He gives permission - even encouragement - for other Clinton super-delegates to move to prevent a bruising and bitter fight through the spring. It's a tipping point. I predict others will follow.

(by the way to you more technically skilled, how do I shorten the length of a link, or change its name, to fit it in more conveniently?)

Won't Go There
In the thick of a campaign it is easy to overrate the importance of an endorsement or a political hit. But it is difficult to overstate the significance of John Lewis' switch from the Clinton to Obama camps because it is a devastating blow on two or three levels wrapped together in a single person. Lewis' historic and moral stature in the African-American community and in the modern Democratic party bulks very large. "In recent days, there is a sense of movement and a sense of spirit," Lewis told the Times. "Something is happening in America, and people are prepared and ready to make that great leap." This is a curious statement as he seems to be suggesting that his earlier endorsement of Clinton was based on his own failure to set his sights sufficiently high. What's more, the willingness of a high-profile politician not simply to endorse one candidate but to switch from one to another (at least in terms of who he believes he'll vote for as a super delegate) is a powerful sign that a tipping point is at hand.

But the most immediate and significant import is Lewis's signal that whatever the basis of his original endorsement he is unwilling to join Clinton in carving a path to the nomination through the heart of the Democratic party. The tell in Lewis's announcement is that he is not technically withdrawing his endorsement from Hillary, at least not yet. He is saying that as a super delegate (which is by virtue of being a member of Congress) he plans to vote for Obama at the convention. On Wednesday the Clinton camp started pushing hard on the idea that a delegate is a delegate and if they need to pack on super delegates to overwhelm Obama's edge with elected delegates then so be it. A win is a win is a win. I take this as Lewis saying he just won't sign on for that.

This also points to an argument I tried to make in today's episode of TPMtv. The Clinton camp's super delegate gambit is not only audacious. Far more than that it is simply unrealistic...

Didn't look too crowded from my angle, haven't read any coverage yet.

"Isn't it great that we've seen women astronauts?" Clinton told the crowd of about 2,500 gathered at the French Field House at Ohio State University. "We have seen so much change in a relatively short period of time."

Towards the end of the nearly 30-minute speech, some attendees started trickling out. It's Valentine's Day, after all, and a few told The Trail that they had dates. But Aisling McKeom, a marketing student at Ohio State, said she's leaving because the speech left her uninspired. "She was talking about the usual things she talks about. I want to support her. I want to support what could our first female president. I'm just not sure she's the one," the 19-year-old told The Trail. McKeom said she's leaning towards Obama.

MM

My respect for you is already on thin ice. Please cease with the ridiculous "chicom". It makes you look like another cliche-for-brains freerepublic toadie.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

With this news, Obama's overall lead shrinks to 42 delegates, per CNN. His lead in Pledged delegates shrinks to 119, per CNN.

Cycloptichorn

You are affixed to the mathematics of this race - it will not, as have we wagered, be determined so.

blatham wrote:

MM

My respect for you is already on thin ice. Please cease with the ridiculous "chicom". It makes you look like another cliche-for-brains freerepublic toadie.

MM - Do you really care how blatham regards you?

Actually, no I dont.
But that doesnt mean I am going to go out of my way to insult or embarass someone either.
And he was right, I did use an abbreviation that I dont normally use and that is a cliche.

There are a few A2K icons and far less A2K sages. Blatham, in this case, would lay claim to membership in both groups.

Speak on brother and worry not about blatham's disregard.

Josh Marshall this morning...

blatham wrote:

Josh Marshall this morning...

In the piece above that Blatham pasted here we see that Josh Marshal suggests that John Lewis' switch of his endorsement (and forthcoming superdelegate vote) from Hillary Clinton to Barac Obama is a necessary consequence of the Clinton's attempts to "tear the heart out of the Democrat party". There is of course another explanation that is equally consistent with the facts as we know them. Namely that this is an act of racism on the part of John Lewis. I recognize that it is a gross violation of the cannon of political correctitude to suggest that an African American can, under any circumstances be guilty, of racism. However as we have already seen on these threads the fact that southern white males voted predominantly for Hillary in the earlier Democrat primaries was generally accepted - almost without comment - as a sufficient proof of racism on their part. No one has raised the corresponding point about Black voters and no one about John Lewis. I am correcting that omission.