Obama '08?

Actually, this much-too-generous scenario (which doesn't even account for Texas's weird "pri-caucus" system, which favors Obama in delegate selection) still leaves the pledged-delegate score at 1,634 for Obama to 1,576 for Clinton. That's a 58-delegate lead.

Some reassuring math from Jonathan Alter:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/118240/output/print

Swath from the middle:

Quote:

Actually, this much-too-generous scenario (which doesn't even account for Texas's weird "pri-caucus" system, which favors Obama in delegate selection) still leaves the pledged-delegate score at 1,634 for Obama to 1,576 for Clinton. That's a 58-delegate lead.

Why does it feel disappointing ? He never was supposed to win in Ohio ! And yet it feels disappointing. Sigh.

One more vote for Obama... Going back tonight to caucus.
--------------------

If this is an indication of what Dem party infrastructure types will be saying about Hillary and the general election after the dust settles from today's contests, she will need a major win in Texas and Ohio to avert pressure to get out of the race:

State Democratic Chairman Chris Redfern said Mrs. Clinton needs an 8-point victory margin in Ohio and Texas to remain in the race against Mr. Obama, who now has a lead of about 100 delegates and victories in the last 11 contests. "She must, in my opinion, make that kind of show. It's not an either-or," Mr. Redfern said. "If we don't have a nominee sooner rather than later, it makes it increasingly difficult to defeat John McCain."

People like Redfern, the Ohio state chair, will only grow more vocal in the days ahead, obviously. So it's do or die -- now.

As the Scandal Turns: Clinton, Obama, Rezko and Whitewater
Is this is a small world, or what?

Just two days ago, on a java-sipping Sunday morning, Clinton campaign spokesman Howard Wolfson and Obama campaign strategist David Alexrod were going at it on ABC's "This Week With George Stephanopolous" over strange real estate deals. Wolfson was in his element, firing away at Barack Obama for his land deal with accused swindler Tony Rezko; Alexrod said Hillary Rodham Clinton should be the last person "wanting to characterize any real estate transaction as unusual" -- a none too subtle reference to Clinton's Whitewater woes.

Cut to Monday: Rezko's extortion and money laundering trial began in Chicago. And who should be presiding as federal judge?


A sketch of Antoin 'Tony' Rezko's appearance before federal Judge Amy J. St. Eve at a federal court in Chicago, Monday, March 3, 2008." (The Associated Press - Verna Sadock) None other than Amy St. Eve, the youthful and diminutive former protégé of Ken Starr, the Whitewater independent counsel.

St. Eve was a deputy on Starr's prosecution team in Little Rock, Ark., that convicted Jim and Susan McDougal, famed former pals and business partners of the Clintons in that really unusual -- to paraphrase Axelrod -- Whitewater real estate deal.

St. Eve has made quite a name for herself as a federal judge since being appointed by President Bush in 2002 at the age of 36.

And not just because the blog Underneath Their Robes nominated her as one of the top "superhotties of the federal judiciary" in a 2004 contest. (They had a competition for male hotties of the federal bench, too.) The blog quoted one its devotees as saying St. Eve is "so cute, you can't believe she's a judge!"

But to Chicago lawyers, the "hottie" is a top-notch, no-nonsense jurist who runs a tight ship, as reported in this profile of St. Eve by the Financial Post.

Among St. Eve's biggest hits: presiding over the trial of medial mogul Conrad Black, another notch in the belt of U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, who -- ironically -- has given Obama one of his premiere talking points against the Bush administration, thanks to his conviction of Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. In fact, Obama regularly vows, if he's elected president, to bring an end to "Scooter Libby justice" -- a reference to Bush's commutation of Libby's prison sentence.

Now, closing the loop on this head-spinning seven degrees of political scandal separation, Fitzgerald, whose office is prosecuting Rezko, could give Clinton a "Tony Rezko justice" talking point.

Depending, of course, on how Judge St. Eve rules.

From blueflame's article a few pages back: "George Orwell rightly warned us about the way politicians use words like "freedom" when such usage begs more questions than it answers. "Words of this kind are often used in a consciously dishonest way," he wrote in his famous essay Politics and the English Language. "That is, the person who uses them has his own private definition, but allows his hearer to think he means something quite different."

Clinton's audience certainly thought that what she was doing was standing four-square behind the veterans. That was they way they took it, and applauded her accordingly. Perhaps, though, before they make their choices tomorrow, the voters of Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island and Vermont should reread her words and ask themselves what the hell she really meant.

This is what her desperation has done; she has shown her true colors of deception to twist words that will win her votes. How can people continue to trust her?

blatham wrote:

Thanks, fellas. I've found this discussion clarifying. Snood, clearly, is the problem.

Snood thinks about race. He thinks about the history of blacks in America. He thinks about the culture of african-americans. He thinks about his skin color. He thinks about the history of whites in America. He thinks about the culture of european-americans. He thinks about their skin color.

And there's the problem of race in america right there. Snood and other blacks (and there's a few whites in here too) think about race.

They ought to stop thinking about this stuff because it is their thinking that now creates racism in america. The premise of their thinking is..."differences"! With that premise, it's no surprise that they will inevitably toss that race card out onto every table, scattering crumpet crumbs and jiggling teacups.

If they would just stop thinking "different!" and begin thinking "ditto!" or "copy" or "clone" or "facsimile" then race would no longer pose problems for everyone. Race would disappear as a factor in social and mental architecture.

Clearly, blacks like snood have commonly failed in this natural progression towards non-blackness because they haven't properly appreciated the vital non-blackness of the conservative world-view and value-set.

blatham wrote:

dys said

Quote:

I've found that by using an 18% gray card and adjusting shutter speed and/or the aperture size I can alter all people and the entire universe to a single neutral non-descript, valueless white rendering the concept "colour blind" with an entirely new meaning.

You're on to something, dys. If we can get the Polaroid people to make an attachment for black peoples' eyes and brains, then that would really help the efforts to get them color-blind.

I sense your sarcasm, blatham, and I want you to know I have had an epiphany ... you are absolutely right. We all (blacks, browns, whites, reds, yellows, etc.) should attend to life in a state of constant awareness of the color of our skin and the color of the skin of the people with whom we interact. I am sure -- now that I have had the benefit of your sage insight on this issue -- that this is the path towards ending racial tensions in America and elsewhere. We should not strive for a society where the color of one's skin does not matter ... a world where we live our lives blind to the blackness or whiteness of the person next to us. After all, the fact that there has been inequality because of skin quality only shows us all the more clearly the value of maintaining our own cultural and racial identities.

In fact, I'm henceforth going to make my voting decisions based upon the color of the skin of the candidate running. Clearly that is at least as -- if not more -- important that the candidate's stance with regard to any of the issues not involving skin color.

I am so fired up about this revelation, I'm going to go out right now and celebrate the color of my skin.

Viva la differance!

spendius wrote:

BTW BPB -- how illegal?

illegal? questions of legality in government decisions officially became a moot point in america anyway in 2000AD

Many of Bill Clinton's missteps and wrong-doings came out after he became a private citizen

I think Hillary wins Ohio, I am really nervous about Texas. Obama lost momentum the 24 hours...

Roxxxanne wrote:

I think Hillary wins Ohio, I am really nervous about Texas. Obama lost momentum the 24 hours...

So many early votes tho.

I think Obama is going to win TX, I really do.

Cycloptichorn