Too funny. Keith "Obama's O'Reilly" Olbermann goes to the Big Orange Satan's site to whine that Clinton went on Fox. Apparently he missed his eternal love Barack Obama's Fox News Sunday appearance. Paul Krugman did not.

Obama's O'Reilly is now as big a joke as the original. Can we rule out the possibility that he will lead with the Kantor video story? Not entirely. And no, he will not accuse the Obama campaign of being behind it, as he would if the shoe was on the other foot. For the record, Obama was NOT behind it imo and it would be irresponsible for any journalist to even speculate about it. And yes, Olbermann is an irresponsible journalist who HAS speculated in irresponsible fashion in this way when it comes to Hillary Clinton. Remember PassportGate?

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only.

Update: It appears the clip was doctored.

Update (TL): Lambert at Corrente: Smear #3: Hillary killed three Hoosiers in the Clinton Library with the Wrench! Then ate them!

****

No, not just the Media. The Obama blogs too (AmericaBlog pulls its Drudge following post.)

Okay, I think I've figured this out. The YouTube clip is crap. . . . I'm not going to try for a complete transcript, but basically Kantor gets polls from Indiana. They're close. He says even if they don't win the White House has got to be sh**ting themselves. Then what I think he says is something along the lines of "how would you like to be beaten by a worthless white n*****," presumably meaning Bill Clinton himself and referencing the Bush I campaign team's likely view of Clinton.

Moral of the story? The Left blogs have lost their way.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only.

A new Rasmussen poll is out:

A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that just 30% of the nation’s Likely Voters believe Barack Obama denounced his former Pastor, Jeremiah Wright, because he was outraged. Most—58%--say he denounced the Pastor for political convenience. The survey was conducted on Wednesday and Thursday night. Obama made his statements about Wright on Tuesday.

Comments now closed.

Unlike Color Of Change, I am thinking about ways to unify our divided Democratic Party, not further divide it. Chris Bowers writes:

I have to wonder how divisions of this nature can be healed just given an extra month or two. I also have to wonder if this was always the danger we faced in the primary. Clinton and Obama are both pretty centrist, and do not differ from each other on policy that much (although there are some difference on health care and telecom policy). As such, wasn't this really all about identity from the start? For a primary campaign to be based on identity instead of on policy is a ticking time bomb for any coalition, especially one that is built on historically under-represented groups in D.C. like African-Americans, Latinos, women and the LGBT community.

One important way is to stop denigrating portions of this coalition. All parts of the coalition are important - African Americans, Latinos, white women, white working class and yes, Creative Class whites too. Dems must unify for November. Let's respect all parts of our Democratic coalition. The best way to do this is to support a Unity Ticket between two candidates who have split the Democratic primary vote almost right down the middle.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only.

The largest newspaper in Indiana has endorsed Hillary Clinton:

Obama offers an attractive vision for the way things could be. He speaks eloquently of hope and change. He connects with voters, many who formerly felt disenfranchised, on a level few political leaders have attained.

Clinton offers a clear-eyed view of the way things are. She offers nuanced positions on how to address the war in Iraq, trade with China and economic expansion. Her depth of knowledge is remarkable.

More...

While we can pretend there have been recent ebbs and flows in the campaign, the reality is that from Super Tuesday on, almost invariably demography has been political destiny. Tell me the demographics of a state and I can tell you roughly what the electoral result will be. Consider North Carolina and Indiana. In North Carolina, Research2000 has Obama up 7. In Indiana, Ras has Clinton up 5. Why? To put it bluntly, it is because there are many more African American voters in North Carolina. Clinton leads among whites by 36 points in North Carolina and by 19 points in Indiana. She trails among African Americans in North Carolina by 88-5 and in Indiana by 90-4. In North Carolina a third of the electorate will be African American. In Indiana, 10% will be African Americans.

Clinton can not win in North Carolina. Period. And in Indiana, it is looking like Obama can not win. Looking forward, Obama has no chance in West Virginia or Kentucky. Where can he break this demographic narrative? Oregon. More . .

Color of Change is circulating an outrageous, deplorable and fallacious petition:

Leaders of the Democratic Party are playing a dangerous game -- risking the credibility of the party to hand Hillary Clinton the nomination against the will of voters. Heading down this path means disenfranchising millions of voters and legitimizing a campaign strategy that has displayed a clear pattern of race baiting and divisive politics.

If Hillary Clinton wins the popular vote and the Super Delegates hand the nomination to Barack Obama, the Democratic Party will have acted against the will of the voters. Despite that, I would whole heartedly support Barack Obama's candidacy in November. In addition, Color of Change falsely smears the Clinton campaign while engaging in race baiting and divisive politics itself. Color of Change smears not only Hillary Clinton, but the millions of Democrats who support her.

As a Latino, I denounce and reject Color of Change's petition. It is an outrageous, divisive, racially polarizing and deplorable act. At a time when all Democrats should be thinking about unifying the democratic Party behind our eventual nominee, who in all likelihood will be Barack Obama, Color of Change acts to exacerbate divisions. This petition hurts the Democratic Party and it hurts Barack Obama's chances to win in November. Color of Change's petititon should be rejected by Democrats of all stripes.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only.

Two to watch tonight. Barack Obama delivers the "top ten" on Letterman while Hillary is interviewed on Nightline.

Is Obama getting tired? Is Hillary just warming up?

Your reactions?

Update: Comments now closed.

Dallas County just set two records. James Lee Woodard is the latest of 17 wrongfully convicted defendants in Dallas County who have been released as the result of new DNA analysis, the most DNA exonerations of any county. Dallas County also kept Woodard behind bars for more time than any other inmate who has been exonerated by DNA.

Mr. Woodard, 55, was sentenced to life in prison in 1981 for the strangulation and rape of his 21-year-old girlfriend, Beverly Ann Jones. But information that Ms. Jones was with three men – including two later convicted of unrelated sexual assaults – around the time of her death was not disclosed to the defense nor was it thoroughly investigated, said prosecutor Mike Ware, who oversees the Dallas County district attorney's office conviction integrity unit.

Rodney Ellis, a member of the Texas Senate, has been trying to get the state to fund an Innocence Commission. He's organized a forum to be held next week that will focus on the prevention of wrongful convictions. Jeralyn has more here.

BBC News cites an al-Jazeera report that Sami al-Hajj, an al-Jazeera cameraman, has been released from Guantanamo. No explanation has yet been given for the decision to release Hajj after more than six years of captivity. More here.

I'm watching Grey's Anatomy. If you'd rather be chatting, here's an open thread.

The AP and Yahoo News, as part of a polling project, has been returning to the same undecided voters over the course of the past year, in an attempt to analyze how their thinking changes during the course of the presidential campaign.

One of the North Carolina voters the AP followed is Meribeth Howlett, a clinical researcher. She recently made up her mind and just voted absentee for Hillary. She explains her reasoning, which I think is spot-on:

"OK — I made a decision, but I should say up front that I'd be happy to vote for either Hillary or Barack. However, I voted for Hillary Clinton. Yes, I've been on Web sites and found the two to have plans that are remarkably similar and so it came down to a more philosophical decision, who do I BELIEVE will do a better job. Because Barack Obama identifies himself as the best candidate to be an agent of 'real change in Washington,' I was expecting to see some details outlining innovative plans to achieve change, but I did not see anything that stood out as greatly different from what Hillary proposes.

More...