Late Night: Can They Really Work it Out?

Can the Dems come together tomorrow? Is there a solution that won't leave one side angry?

Thanks to all for your donations today, every one of them is sincerely appreciated.

For tomorrow, we will begin bright and early to live blog the meeting. BackFromOhio is our credentialed correspndent at the meeting and will be live-blogging in one thread while BTD and I will have a separate live-blog going. You can all live blog on your own or post reactions in the comments .

It starts at 9:30 am ET. CNN will be televising and live-streaming it.

Take the poll below, this is an open thread.

Comments now closed.

< 1,000 Attend Hillary Event in Puerto Rico | FL/MI Rules Hearing: Reader's Open Thread II >


Who Will Be the Biggest Loser at the end of the RBC Meeting?
Hillary Clinton 19%
Barack Obama 4%
The Rules and Bylaws Committee 14%
Florida Voters 3%
Michigan Voters 6%
All of the Above 45%
None of the Above, it will be just peachy keen. 6%

Votes: 131
Results | Other Polls
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Biggest Loser (5.00 / 13) (#6)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:11:36 AM EST
    Would be Barack Obama, for not agreeing to a revote in FL and MI.

    I doubt that the Democratic party will ever be the same after this primary season.  I watched the Geraldine Ferraro interview on Fox News.  She said that all the racism and sexism was quite damaging.

    Bill Clinton being called a racist is an offense of the highest degree.  For goodness sake he was ready to appoint Barbara Jordan to the Supreme Court (but because of her poor health he couldn't).

    Ever since someone mentioned Barbara Jordan on the blog earlier I have been reading a lot about her (stuff I knew, just a nice refresher).

    As a Texan, these awesome women come from MY state:

    Sissy Farenthold
    Barbara Jordan
    Ann Richards
    Molly Ivins*

    (*Molly was born in CA but we claim her because she lived here and did so much for progressive politics in TX)

    and the only "unity" we are getting is (5.00 / 11) (#11)
    by MarkL on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:14:18 AM EST
    preemptive scolding for voting against Obama, because McCain is SOOOOO bad.

    Oh I know (5.00 / 9) (#14)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:17:13 AM EST
    I get drive-by's at my own blog about my pro-Hillary stances and how I will write her name in if she's not the nom.

    Obama supporters need to know that gunboat diplomacy doesn't work on Hillary supporters.


    i'd rather accept McJesus into my life. (5.00 / 6) (#19)
    by MarkL on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:18:25 AM EST
    Walk with me (5.00 / 5) (#22)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:20:03 AM EST
    my brother...

    My friend.... (5.00 / 3) (#46)
    by Grace on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:38:55 AM EST
    I don't know about you (5.00 / 6) (#145)
    by livesinashoe on Sat May 31, 2008 at 02:17:49 AM EST
    but I always feel so patronized when I'm told I'll come back to the party.

    I feel as though I am being patted on my purrrrdeee little head and being called "sweetie."

    I have a choice, guys, and I'm going to exercise it.


    Me too (5.00 / 3) (#156)
    by mogal on Sat May 31, 2008 at 04:00:47 AM EST

    Well the party is about to learn something (4.33 / 6) (#149)
    by MisterPleasant on Sat May 31, 2008 at 02:26:57 AM EST
    about how voting really works come November.  Unfortunately I live in blue Oregon, so unless there is a major meltdown I will not have a chance to affect the outcome.  But I suspect there are plenty like me in the swing states who will not soften.

    Not only how voting works (5.00 / 3) (#184)
    by oldpro on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:04:31 AM EST
    but how party building and party operations work (or don't work) without the women who give and raise money and do a rather large share of 'the work.'

    Hope those Obamafolk have a lot better work ethic than I have observed so far or the Democratic Party is in even more trouble than they know.


    Yes, Women (none / 0) (#187)
    by PlayInPeoria on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:12:42 AM EST
    have a choice in this.

    I prefer to remain a Dem and fight for changes within the party. I beleive "taking your toys and going home" is an easy way out. But, I've always been a fighter not a runner.

    I'll vote Dem in Nov... but not FOR the nominee if Sen Obama should be the one. I will be VOTING AGAINST at Repub. And that will be my focus.

    But for all it is worth... I think Sen Obama has ticked off so many Dems or leaning Dem voters that he will lose the GE.

    And I'm going to fight for the Dem Party to change !!!! It is the only way we will get to the WH.


    Play in Peoria #187 (3.00 / 2) (#191)
    by kenoshaMarge on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:25:54 AM EST
    Good luck with that because you will have all ready shown the Democratic Party that they can do what they will and "loyalists" will always vote for them. No act too despicable to lose a loyal Dem. They depend on that.

    Work within? How? How do you do that when no one pays any attention to what we say?

    As for your condescending comment:

    I beleive "taking your toys and going home" is an easy way out. But, I've always been a fighter not a runner.

    Somehow some people just don't get it that each of us has a right and an obligation to cast "our" vote as we see fit and as our conscience dictates. Self-righteous as you apparently are and totally unwilling to grant anyone else "their" right to make their own decision I'm sure this is a total waste of time and space.


    You can do what (none / 0) (#194)
    by PlayInPeoria on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:33:31 AM EST
    you want.But I still can make my own preference know.

    My statement is not condescending.

    Comments like this one.... take away the POWER we hold.

    How do you do that when no one pays any attention to what we say?

    There is a whole community on this board that wants to see the system changed.

    After the election, I plan to find out how we can make that change..... I HAVE THE POWER!!!

    Hey ... where is that song ... I am woman, hear me roar!! I'm on a roll!


    This particular site is filled with extroidinary (none / 0) (#198)
    by zfran on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:40:27 AM EST
    people who believe in count the votes and are deeply committed to the well being of this country. If you truly feel the way you say you do, then vote your conscience. If someone else has told you to say these things (and only you truly know the answer to that), then it is not your own choices you are making but that of someone else. When you are free, truly free, you get to decide for yourself, not someone else deciding.

    I do not (3.00 / 1) (#201)
    by PlayInPeoria on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:49:44 AM EST
    have any idea of what you are saying???

    My husband can tell you... no one tells me to say something that I don't beleive in!!

    If someone else has told you to say these things (and only you truly know the answer to that), then it is not your own choices you are making but that of someone else.

    These things I'm saying...vote Dem... why is that so bad!!

    I won't go against the Dem Party because I still believe the Party is much better than any of the alternatives.


    PlayInPeoria (2.00 / 0) (#202)
    by stxabuela on Sat May 31, 2008 at 09:06:03 AM EST
    I've been a Democrat since 1972 and my first vote as an 18yo woman went to Sissy Farenthold for Governor of TX.  She lost in the runoff, but I was proud to be a member of a party that at least gave women an opportunity to run for office.  

    Here it is, 36 years later, and women are still waiting.  As women, we've proven that our votes make the difference between winning and losing the presidency--the gender gap.  Yet, the Democratic Party remains silent while some of the most outrageously sexist comments I've ever heard come from the mouths of--other Democrats.  And Hispanics seem to be invisible in this "New" Democratic Party.  

    I don't take my toys and go home, either, but it's been 36 freakin' years for me, and nothing I have done has worked so far.  The only option I have left is to vote with my feet.  I am a delegate for Hillary Clinton at the state convention next weekend.  The last thing I plan to do as a Democrat is the first thing I did--vote for an intelligent, articulate, highly qualified female underdog in a high-profile race.  I will become an independent, and my future votes will go only to the candidates who can convince me, by more than mere words, that they are committed to true equality for women.  


    I used to pray (5.00 / 3) (#30)
    by LoisInCo on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:24:51 AM EST
    Ann Richards would run for President. Sigh.

    I (5.00 / 9) (#32)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:27:02 AM EST
    would have sold everything in my life and worked for her day and night for free.

    Ann Richards and Bill Clinton made me PROUD of being a Democrat.

    Those are my heroes.  ELECTED heroes.


    It's been pretty slim pickin's since...we have (5.00 / 9) (#34)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:29:05 AM EST
    the best candidate in a very long time and yet people are trying to get her out of the way...

    I couldn't (none / 0) (#93)
    by Andy08 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:08:59 AM EST
    agree more with you.

    Ah yes, Molly Ivins (5.00 / 4) (#43)
    by MisterPleasant on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:34:10 AM EST
    I miss her terribly.  Her wit and wisdom could have been of great use to us during this primary season.

    Molly (5.00 / 2) (#99)
    by Edgar08 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:15:55 AM EST
    Would have led the charge of Hillary hate.

    I don't see it, (none / 0) (#105)
    by MisterPleasant on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:19:40 AM EST
    but I have been shocked at the identities of many of those who have joined the sexist bandwagon.  Do you have any insights into why you think Molly would be anti-Clinton?

    Well here then (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by Edgar08 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:24:03 AM EST
    Thanks Edgar for the link (5.00 / 2) (#125)
    by MisterPleasant on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:31:37 AM EST
    In a way I wish I had not clicked on that link.  Molly's argument is the same one used by the progressive residents of my home state of Oregon to defend their vote in this year's primary.  It all comes down to that one vote regarding the Iraq war.  

    Oh well, another one of my icons has fallen to earth.


    Great find (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by Stellaaa on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:34:08 AM EST
    Enough. Enough triangulation, calculation and equivocation. Enough clever straddling, enough not offending anyone This is not a Dick Morris election

    But, but...this is what we have been saying, enough calculation and equivocation.  Oh, well.  

    That's the only thing that makes me pause (5.00 / 4) (#133)
    by Edgar08 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:42:31 AM EST
    Given that Obama now has the support of all the other folks she criticizes there, given that Obama triangulates, and takes no stands on an issue, I wonder how "on the Obama train" she would be.  Would she play the "He's not a triangulator, he's a master statesman" spin game?  I like to think not and that she would, even though I would still disagree with her about Clinton, stay consistent  ... in her approach.... the way BTD has.

    But I do feel safe in saying that she believed every single Clinton hating talking point.  She is a central figure on Clinton hating blogs.


    I guess you are right (5.00 / 4) (#136)
    by Stellaaa on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:51:02 AM EST
    I did have a tinge of Clinton anger but this election cured me.  I am really concerned though about the mess we are in.  

    Remember, Though (none / 0) (#167)
    by creeper on Sat May 31, 2008 at 06:05:48 AM EST
    that Molly, like the voters in early states, did not have the benefit of knowing about the ministers or about Obama's belief that folks like us are "clinging to guns and religion."  She was a good old girl who, I think, would have resented that remark.

    Nor did she live to hear Clinton acknowledge that if the vote were held today she would not vote the same.

    At the time Molly wrote that column I was, like her, an Obama supporter. That changed for me with time and knowledge.  I believe it would have changed for her, too, if she'd had more time.

    Molly had the problem right.  She just had the person wrong.


    To be fair (5.00 / 4) (#176)
    by ineedalife on Sat May 31, 2008 at 07:09:39 AM EST
    I also felt sort of that way going into this primary. But I was open minded and Hillary won me over. Obama on the other hand lost me.

    that's what made her great (5.00 / 3) (#142)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 02:08:03 AM EST
    hers was a principaled stance....not charges of racism and other LUDICROUS charges against her.

    Oppose Hillary on issues, not some made up bullsh1t.


    Well that's the whole thing isn't it? (5.00 / 3) (#144)
    by Edgar08 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 02:12:02 AM EST
    Because I disagreed with Molly on the issues.

    But the whole point of a character based attack, especially a racially infused character based attack is that one is denied a chance to rebut the attack without sounding like one is arguing on behalf of racism.

    In the end though, the Obama campaign is making an attack only the Obama campaign can make.  And that's not because of anything other than his skin color.


    Just to add (none / 0) (#146)
    by Edgar08 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 02:20:49 AM EST
    I think Molly wasn't just attacking Clinton on the issues.

    She wasn't just saying "I disagree with Clinton's vote".

    She was providing lots of guess work about Clinton's motivations for that vote that exist only for one purpose:  To attack someone's character.

    Sorry.  I had to be clear about that.


    Unfortunately (none / 0) (#152)
    by MisterPleasant on Sat May 31, 2008 at 02:36:04 AM EST
    I think you are correct.  And that use of the B* word certainly seems to take things several notches below the belt.

    In retrospect, my appreciation of Molly's commentary was her acidic ability to thrash her victim, and that is exactly the type of attack I see and hear on MSNBC and elsewhere.  When these tactics are turned against those I respect, it is time for me to face reality.  Count me sadder but wiser.


    Happily (none / 0) (#157)
    by Alec82 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 05:04:34 AM EST



     And no, no illusion about Senator Obama on the issue.  But plenty to discredit her run.

     Four thousand dead and counting.  

     You can go ahead and defend her vote, and defend the war and attack Obama.  It will almost certainly not placate the I told you so voters.

     Sorry. Not a principled stance.  Not THAT vote.


    Perspective from a former Hillary backer (none / 0) (#173)
    by Cynicor on Sat May 31, 2008 at 06:41:51 AM EST
    I was a strong Hillary supporter in 2000. I ran dumplazio.org, which I started the day after his vote for impeachment. In 2000, I wrote email to her campaign a few times to find out how I could help further, but never got any response. Oh well. I still supported her strongly and defended her record for the next couple of years.

    It changed on the day of the Iraq war vote. It was wrong. I knew it was wrong at the time. My immediate impressions were that it was done so that no one could accuse her of being weak. I promised myself that she was not going to have my vote if she was going to vote against my conscience in the most important issue of the day - and let's face it, I felt pretty lonely back then.

    Then she told me that if I didn't like her vote, there were other candidates I could choose.

    Then she voted for Kyl-Lieberman.

    And I got to the primary voting booth here in NY, and there were other candidates I could choose, and I did. Those particular candidates are no longer in the race, but I am supporting the anti-McCain nominee, whoever that turns out to be.

    This is, of course, speaking for me only. My spouse's feelings on Hillary closely mirror the majority of this particular blog, and it's been a sore point of late to the point where it's not worth trying to discuss politics, my favorite subject. Why have someone call you an Obamaton when you didn't even vote for him in the primary?

    Anyway, fire away when ready. :-)


    I understand your opinion. (none / 0) (#175)
    by magisterludi on Sat May 31, 2008 at 07:07:30 AM EST
    I just don't think Senate "rock and a hard place" votes really mean much in the end. Hillary gave a passionate floor speech on her AUMF vote. Have you read it? Obama has stated he does not know how he would have voted had he been in the Senate at the time.
    Interesting, eh?

    Kyl-Lieberman was a big disappointment, but the energy bill vote made up for it.

    It seems to me the split in the party is basically two camps- the foreign policy folks and the domestic folks. I am more the latter and I'd venture you may be the former -not that there's anything wrong with that. :-)


    Indeed... (1.00 / 0) (#179)
    by Alec82 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 07:33:57 AM EST
    ...I listened to her nonsensical speech.

     And indeed, she was correct, in one respect: dissenters are often proven correct.

     I hope that the domestic and foreign policy wings will come together.  For me, Iraq is the be all end all, for reasons I will not get into here.  Obama is imperfect.  Clinton is worse.

     Miles to go before we sleep...  


    Foreign vs. Domestic (none / 0) (#181)
    by Cynicor on Sat May 31, 2008 at 07:47:02 AM EST
    I think that in a big way, foreign and domestic are interrelated. If we had a sane foreign policy, we might have a stronger dollar now, and gas wouldn't be at $4. It wouldn't be at $1.50, but even if it were at $3 it would make a difference. (Of course, I'm one of those liberal nutjobs who always thought "Man, I can't wait to see what these idiots in Escalades do when gas hits $4! Oh wait, I'd have to pay that too?")

    What's upsetting to me is when ANY of our candidates adopts a right-wing frame on issues. This encompasses both Clinton marginalizing MoveOn and Obama talking about Social Security "reform."

    Bottom line is that let's face it, whoever we get into the White House is going to end up disappointing us in some major way. Clinton just did it five years too early.


    Foreign and domestic interests (5.00 / 1) (#186)
    by magisterludi on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:12:21 AM EST
    very obviously impact each other. It's a matter of balance, which we have been out of for decades and now all the ubiquitous chickens are coming home to crash.

    You're all about the war. I'm all about climate change, UHC, diminishing the gap between haves and have nots, and then the war. I think it's pretty clear Clinton or Obama would prepare for a partial withdrawal, so to me, that issue is moot.

    I just do not trust Obama domestically. I don't trust him on energy and Roe any more than I trust McCain. And from what i can glean, his stance on UHC is weakening further.



    War vs UHC (none / 0) (#207)
    by Cynicor on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:50:45 PM EST
    Let's say what's really going on here. You're an incredible racist, and I'm a disgusting misogynist.

    I would like to have seen Obama for a bit longer - I doubt that he thought he'd be here now, and I think that his candidacy snowballed unexpectedly. But it is what it is. What does encourage me is that he is fairly agile in not taking the bait, and arguing from conservative frames is what always hurts us no matter which candidate it is.

    I think that he will help downslate races as well. They tried running against him in Mississippi, and it didn't work. That might be him, or it might just be the once-in-a-generation fundamentals we're looking at right now. His support appears to be quite broad, just looking at where donors are coming from, so he MAY be less likely to be beholden to corporate interests a la Biden and bankruptcy.

    In the end I mostly want to see Bush and Cheney in jail, or forced to do community service tending to wounded veterans coming back home. But the White House and 67 Senate seats would be nice too.


    I hated the vote too and I killed Bush for bringin (none / 0) (#185)
    by cpa1 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:06:42 AM EST
    it.  But, some very good people voted for that authorization and if it was complied with the way it was presented, it would have been fine.  Saddam wanted to surrender and take his money and kids to Bahrain.  Bush rejected the surrender because he wanted a war to make him look like a decider.

    Also, unlike Obama, Hillary had real responsibilities here to make sure the country was protected and she was told by some of her closest friends that Iraq was on the verge of nuclear weapons.

    Her fault was trusting Bush and Cheney and not seeing how evil they were and then not admitting for years that what she did was a mistake.  Even today, if Saddam and his kids were taken out and we left the country to the Army and those still left in Iraq, it might not have been the worst thing ever.  But, that was never the plan that Bush, Cheney and the neo-cons had.  

    I forgot what this story was about..I think it was about the DNC.  My feeling is that the DNC should have to return every penny it received from Florida and Michigan residents if they don't get their representation.


    We didn't start the... (none / 0) (#199)
    by Alec82 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:44:54 AM EST
    ...fire, so to speak.

     The Iraq war, to me, is inexcusable on every level.  They can deny all they want.  I will be paying for that so-called "innocent" "mistake" my entire life.  

     If she could not see them for what they were, she has no business running for president.  Much less her coronation ceremony.  As much as I like her, that vote is close to unforgivable.  


    I believe the vote for the (none / 0) (#205)
    by Grace on Sat May 31, 2008 at 09:50:20 AM EST
    war was the toughest vote any Senator has had to make in a lot of years.  

    I think it would have been tough for Clinton to not vote the way she did primarily because a lot of people were trying to tie 9/11 to the War.  You have to remember that Clinton represents the area that was the site of the World Trade Center where 3000 people died.  A good many of the people who died that day were her constituents.  The pressure on her to vote the way she did must have been intense.

    I would be much less forgiving today if she had been a senator from another state.  


    Just an added note.... (none / 0) (#206)
    by Grace on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:00:40 AM EST
    I have to believe that, if Obama had been a Senator from Illinois at the time, and the 9/11 terrorists had slammed a plane into the Sears Tower in Chicago, he would have voted exactly like Clinton did.  

    She is no pushover.  He is considerably weaker than she is.  


    A quick Google search (none / 0) (#137)
    by MisterPleasant on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:54:09 AM EST
    of "Molly Ivins Clinton" returned more vitriol aimed  at Hillary than I ever could have imagined.  Molly even used the B* word to describe her.  Ahem.  If only she could have kept that awesome energy of her's focused on the real villains of democracy.  She did have good things to say about Bill, but it seems that she hardened towards the Clinton's as time wore on.

    Keeping it all in perspective (none / 0) (#138)
    by MisterPleasant on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:58:34 AM EST
    From Bill Clinton the year before Molly passed away:

    Ivins was someone who was "good when she praised me and who was painfully good when she criticized me."


    Sounds like Bill (5.00 / 3) (#143)
    by Edgar08 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 02:08:59 AM EST
    And it sounds like he respected her opinion.

    I have limits Bill doesn't have.

    There are certain things one should not say about me if one still wants me to respect their opinion.

    LOL.  Probably why I'd be a crappy politician.


    I don't see it either (none / 0) (#108)
    by Stellaaa on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:21:30 AM EST
    but then again a lot of women surprised me.  

    Sissy Farenthold (5.00 / 2) (#147)
    by arwe on Sat May 31, 2008 at 02:21:53 AM EST
    TX, I thought I was the only one around who remembered Sissy.  I would add Sarah Weddington to your list of greats.  So many lost or marginalized who could have added so much more to a sane dialogue.

    Sissy was one of my first political crushes after the incomparable Ralph Yarborough.


    Could We Grant (none / 0) (#169)
    by creeper on Sat May 31, 2008 at 06:09:27 AM EST
    Jim Hightower honorary status among the "great women of Texas"?

    Please don't forget (5.00 / 2) (#178)
    by mikeyleigh on Sat May 31, 2008 at 07:24:45 AM EST
    Billy Carr.  These Texas Democrats make the current crop of females and a lot of the males look like do-nothing, know-nothing weaklings.  Damn I miss the good old days.

    Not, they can't. (5.00 / 5) (#9)
    by masslib on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:12:34 AM EST
    Because they want to be "fair" to Obama, while Hillary won both states.  The fair thing is to just seat the delegates as is, and let it work itself out from there.  But that's not deemed "fair" to Obama.

    In my opinion, Hillary Clinton is resigned (none / 0) (#16)
    by oculus on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:17:24 AM EST
    to losing tomorrow and has moved on:



    Why? They can as easily pick her. (5.00 / 0) (#18)
    by masslib on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:18:23 AM EST
    I don't agree, here's why: (5.00 / 5) (#64)
    by Eleanor A on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:55:58 AM EST
    From Saturday's WashPost:

    The story of how the Democrats got to this moment is a tale of personal egos, state pride, institutional integrity and raw political maneuvering. Its beginning dates back many years, and is rooted in competition between political leaders in Michigan, led by Sen. Carl M. Levin, who think their state should have a larger role in the nominating process; and those in New Hampshire, who have zealously guarded their state's first-in-the-nation primary.

    Levin, who will present Michigan's case today, said in an interview Thursday night that he is prepared to carry on the fight if his state's full delegation is not seated in Denver with full voting rights, arguing that any other outcome would be appealed to the credentials committee.

    She's gonna get the states to push the case to the Convention.

    Smart.  But what else have we come to expect from our gal?  GO HILLARY!


    Like Gore, she doesn't really want to fight. (none / 0) (#21)
    by MarkL on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:18:59 AM EST
    I'm disappointed, if you are correct.

    But note her language: if MI and FL (none / 0) (#24)
    by oculus on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:20:51 AM EST
    want to push the issue to the convention, I'm there with them.  

    She's already said that (5.00 / 3) (#60)
    by Davidson on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:54:51 AM EST
    When she made her "Count the votes" speech in FL last week or so she said that very same thing: she'll go to the convention if FL and MI want her to.

    And as for the poll: Of course, Clinton will the short-term loser, but the Democratic Party will be brutalized in the GE for tomorrow.  And they deserve it.  What a shame the American people will have to bear the true brunt of that punishment: a McCain presidency.

    I wonder what price, if any, Dean, Pelosi, or Reid will suffer because of this?  Anyone?


    Translation: SHE's not going to be pushing (5.00 / 2) (#81)
    by Eleanor A on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:01:59 AM EST
    all the way to the Convention, they are.  And she'll of course have to honor their wishes and stay in the race.

    Well played, Hillary.


    So she's playing it that she has no (none / 0) (#26)
    by MarkL on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:21:57 AM EST
    interest except for supporting FL and MI?

    In the face of Thurman's letter to (none / 0) (#31)
    by oculus on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:25:33 AM EST
    the committee, should Clinton be in front if FL isn't following?  A dilemna.

    Not (none / 0) (#107)
    by Edgar08 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:21:26 AM EST
    Just for the sake of fighting.

    Just for us bloggers.


    I edit my comment (none / 0) (#110)
    by Edgar08 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:22:36 AM EST
    Not just for the sake of fighting.

    Fighting for the sake of fighting is what bloggers do.


    I don't get this attack on Clinton (none / 0) (#196)
    by Cream City on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:36:24 AM EST
    frankly -- as if a candidate, any candidate, can fight this fight.  Only states can do so, and it has been clear for a long time that these states are divided between each other and within as well about what solution to seek.  Look back at the backing down about the revotes.

    Really, with all the dissection of the rules here,  was this point somehow missed?  Clinton has no standing before this committee.  Only the states do.  The states need to want the fight to the end -- and, clearly, there are those in these states who are afraid to do so, as the DNC can do them a lot of damage in scheduling the next round of primaries and in not supporting the state super-delegates when they come up for re-election.


    My Tribute to Rep. Corrine Brown... (5.00 / 7) (#12)
    by SunnyLC on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:14:32 AM EST
    Corrine Brown Has Been Fighting for the Vote Since 2000 and Is Fighting for Hillary Clinton Today

    Here's my tribute to her...

    "Corrine Brown Has Been Fighting for the Vote Since 2000 and Is Fighting for Hillary Clinton Today"


    Revisit some of here courageous acts...

    She was awesome in the Gore v. Bush debacle (5.00 / 2) (#67)
    by Eleanor A on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:56:40 AM EST
    I remember seeing her on TV and being very impressed.

    Corrine Brown votes progressive (5.00 / 2) (#160)
    by Josey on Sat May 31, 2008 at 05:16:33 AM EST
    and as an AA rep endorsing Hillary, has been under tremendous pressure from Congressional reps and the Congressional Black Caucus to switch to you-know-who based on you-know-what.
    Kudos to Corrine!

    A Democrat I love (5.00 / 8) (#27)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:22:34 AM EST
    Our Washington Senator Patty Murray: Today I heard on the news that her many years of work to designate the Wild Sky Wilderness Area in Snohomish County, WA has been successful. A trail there will be named after Jennifer Dunn, Republican, who recently died.

    Senator Murray really has been extraordinary for Washington State in many ways, and is a roll model for politicians and for women.

    Of course, the fact that she's a strong endorser of Hillary doesn't hurt matters for me either.

    Yep Patty is a keeper (5.00 / 3) (#37)
    by MisterPleasant on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:31:13 AM EST
    Now that I am an Oregon resident, I envy Washingtonians for their two fine senators.  And I certainly appreciate both of them standing solid for Hillary when so many turncoats have fallen for the party line.

    I will never forget Maria Cantwell's amazing come-from-behind victory to put Slade out of OUR misery.


    Will moms be able to walk the trail in (none / 0) (#29)
    by MarkL on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:24:32 AM EST
    tennis shoes?

    I agree... (none / 0) (#44)
    by Jackson Hunter on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:35:50 AM EST
    I love Senator Murray, and I'm so glad that she represents my State.  Being from Eastern Washington, I appreciate her all the more considering just how "red" it is around my parts.  LOL  I'm glad she has stuck to Clinton as well.



    My only question is (5.00 / 3) (#33)
    by hlr on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:28:02 AM EST
    will Donna Brazile enter the hotel via the front or sneak in thru the back?

    She has a new stupid post at her site (none / 0) (#79)
    by rjarnold on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:00:46 AM EST
    that is pretty much nuts and the Dailykos people are praising because she "really socks it to the Clinton campaign/supporters".


    Here is a direct quote:

    "The most tragic thing I have heard is this need to link the Obama camp to pundits inside the media who have used the "math" historically used to call an election with attempts to push Hillary out of the race. After all, when the senator held a lead in every national poll in 2007, the media described her groundbreaking campaign as being inevitable. No one called that sexist."

    She also says that the meeting tomorrow shouldn't change the outcome of the election and she insists that the punishments for MI and FL were just.


    If she would (5.00 / 4) (#82)
    by LoisInCo on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:03:27 AM EST
    have been half as nasty and 1/4th as underhanded when she was working for Gore, Gore might have won.

    I disagree, (5.00 / 7) (#112)
    by rjarnold on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:23:13 AM EST
    in that she could never have been an asset to Al Gore. The quote from her article is lacking of any logic whatsoever. (It seems that she was saying that it is ridiculous to criticize the pundits and Obama camp for asserting that the race is over and jumps to hinting that the media was sexist when it described Hillary's campaign as inevitable.)

    Donna Brazile has three major problems that show up in just about everything she does. 1) She is quick to form judgements. 2) She is really stubborn with these judgments. And 3) She is not self-aware of the impacts of her actions. A person like that can't be of any help in a general election campaign for a Dem especially if they are going on attacks that are devoid of logic.


    Why, oh why, do people listen to idiots (5.00 / 10) (#86)
    by Eleanor A on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:04:37 AM EST
    (Not you, OP...Brazile.)

    First she ruins the 2000 race for Gore.  Stories of her malfeasance abound.  People are still taking her seriously?  WHY?

    I had hopes for Dean, really I did.  But I'm forced to notice that his campaign was not successful, either.

    Perhaps we are in this pickle because the experts at losing campaigns are in charge of the DNC machinery...


    Donna Brazile has done more to help (5.00 / 2) (#170)
    by MO Blue on Sat May 31, 2008 at 06:19:19 AM EST
    John McCain than some of his own supporters. Donna: Hey white working class and hispanics, we don't need you in the new Brazile/Obama Party. Some of us are hearing her loud and clear.

    Also, the Republicans like getting a two state handicap for the GE.


    I wish (none / 0) (#91)
    by janarchy on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:06:15 AM EST
    we could find a way to cut Donna Brazile in half. That might be a just punishment. /snark

    (I solemnly swear I actually mean no harm to Ms Brazile -- I just want her to shut up and go away)


    I f she does for Obama (5.00 / 6) (#116)
    by themomcat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:24:05 AM EST
    what she did for Al Gore, maybe the DNC will be rid of her then.

    that would still leave enough for (none / 0) (#92)
    by MarkL on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:08:05 AM EST
    two full slates.

    Personally (5.00 / 2) (#102)
    by janarchy on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:16:54 AM EST
    I bet she'd just regenerate into two annoying Prima Donnas like a newt...or a hydra.

    We could always glue (none / 0) (#114)
    by LoisInCo on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:23:20 AM EST
     a cone of silence to her head. Good times, good times.

    Get Smart Movie (none / 0) (#120)
    by themomcat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:27:07 AM EST
    I'm not a big fan of Steve Catrell but I've seen the trailers for "Get Smart" and I'm looking forward to seeing it.

    I will (none / 0) (#129)
    by LoisInCo on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:35:02 AM EST
    be waiting for the DVD, although I love the original Get Smart. I so rarely go to the movies anymore. But it does look promising.

    Hey! (5.00 / 0) (#36)
    by Steve M on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:31:08 AM EST
    I guess my prediction that my comments would still be deleted despite my donation to Jeralyn came true :)

    Those were real supermarket tabloid hearings I was sharing!  I think there was something about a Bill/Hillary divorce too... although that's probably just a rerun.

    Those tabloid covers (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by waldenpond on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:51:49 AM EST
    have been extremely mock worthy this campaign.  I remember we were laughing at some of them (they had Clinton's next to the Obama's) and the check out person pursed her lips at us. She was not amuuuused.

    Well, that was not a difficult bet, Steve. (none / 0) (#39)
    by MarkL on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:32:22 AM EST
    I didn't even need a tabloid psychic to predict that.

    I love this clip! (5.00 / 4) (#38)
    by janarchy on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:32:09 AM EST
    It's always been one of my fave Beatle songs and one of their best mimed performances. The Fabs before the rot set in.

    Personally, I think the Democratic party is the biggest loser as are the American people since we've had this candidate foisted upon us by one rabid wing of the party. It's not democracy at all, unfortunately.

    Jearlyn (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by flashman on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:39:22 AM EST
    Do you ever sleep?

    I'm going to try now (5.00 / 7) (#51)
    by Jeralyn on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:45:49 AM EST
    I had court at 9:00 this morning (and won my crack cocaine sentence reduction under the newly lowered guidelines over the government's objection -- my client went from 15 years down to 12, her four kids and her mother and sister are thrilled).

    Whether I succeed is debateable -- I'm quite a night owl in case you didn't know. But I do usually get 6 hours a night which is all I seem to need. Thanks for asking.


    15 to 12 (5.00 / 6) (#66)
    by phat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:56:29 AM EST

    We've got problems.


    and that's an understatement (5.00 / 6) (#89)
    by Jeralyn on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:05:40 AM EST
    Of all my crack clients since the 80's, this was the only one who even qualified for the reduction. There are so crack cocaine defendants doing 20 to 30 to life who get no benefit. There's a lot of hoops to go through and DOJ has instructed the prosecutors to make every argument against the reduction. Even when  the defendant qualifies, it's discretionary and the Government still gets to make the argument that the client doesn't deserve it -- or would be a danger if released early -- or has had writeups since getting to their designated federal prison. You woudn't believe some of the objections I've seen them file.

    Ok, I'm out of here. See you all tomorrow.


    Criminal defense lawyers (5.00 / 4) (#103)
    by phat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:17:23 AM EST
    are on the front line of the fight for all of our civil liberties.

    That's where the rubber hits the road. Easy cases, tough cases, they are all important.

    My brief stint working for ACLU Nebraska taught me that.

    We've got a lot of work to do.


    I was about to inquire how your case (none / 0) (#54)
    by oculus on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:47:53 AM EST
    turned out.  Good job.  

    Thanks (5.00 / 5) (#72)
    by Jeralyn on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:58:39 AM EST
    but there were no fireworks although I was prepared for them. I had filed so many briefs and objections that when the Judge came out, he told the Government it didn't have a leg to stand on and he was going to grant it and then asked me if I still wanted to argue, so I did what any smart lawyer does at that point and sat down. The AUSA told the judge she wasn't surprised and the Judge ruled. Just another lesson to new lawyers who might be reading that preparation is 90% of the game.

    Heh (5.00 / 2) (#121)
    by Steve M on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:27:13 AM EST
    My oral argument today lasted for an hour and 20 minutes.  I wish I could have either your judge or your briefing ability.

    Man I love criminal law (none / 0) (#78)
    by phat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:00:31 AM EST
    This kind of story is very encouraging.

    And you still think Hillary Clinton's (none / 0) (#83)
    by oculus on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:03:35 AM EST
    campaign is doing the right thing re Sat. mtg.?  Do as I say, not as I do?  

    geez, my answer wasn't there... (5.00 / 7) (#48)
    by p lukasiak on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:40:22 AM EST
    the biggest loser from tomorrows show will be the people who watch it.

    Because what they are going to see is a bunch of people making fools of themselves trying to act as if they care about stuff like "voters" and "democracy" and "the party" and "the country" when all they care about is promoting their personal agendas.

    These things are bad enough when no one is paying attention...when its just on C-span.  But they are going to be shown on CNN and MSNBC.  That means that all the BS that one hears at a meeting recorded by C-Span is increased by at least 2500%.  

    Its going to be horrible.  really, really horrible.

    Biggest Loser (5.00 / 6) (#76)
    by themomcat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:59:58 AM EST
    will be the American people if these fools do not put HRC at the top of the ticket. I won't be watching but I will check in here from time to time.

    Personally (5.00 / 2) (#126)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:32:48 AM EST
    I expect to spend the day stacking firewood tomorrow.  Y'all can let me know what happened...

    OMG. Did you just say MSNBC? (none / 0) (#50)
    by oculus on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:44:17 AM EST
    BTD is going to go apoplectic.

    Media Critic (none / 0) (#68)
    by waldenpond on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:56:48 AM EST
    He said he wasn't going to the convention with Jeralyn and that he would cover it as a 'media critic' and he has been covering the media.  Wouldn't it stand to reason that he must watch MSNBC to see how they cover it? hmmmmm? Ha!

    BTD shold put a barrier (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by themomcat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:04:20 AM EST
    between him and his TV and remove all but soft, fluffy pillows from the room if he is going to watch MSNBC. Although, I don't think he has to watch them, it will be very predictable.

    Too bad. (none / 0) (#73)
    by oculus on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:58:40 AM EST
    Although he thinks this is his greatest benefit to society, I'd reather he spend his energy and admirable brainpower on issues.  

    Can we really work it out? (5.00 / 2) (#88)
    by livesinashoe on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:04:50 AM EST
    I don't think I want to.

    The Beatles also sang:

    "You say you've seen seven wonders,
    And your bird can sing.
    But you don't get me.
    You don't get me."

    Actually the diligent site monitoring (5.00 / 7) (#118)
    by MarkL on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:24:41 AM EST
    by Jeralyn is the ONLY thing which keeps the conversation here civil.

    Amen (5.00 / 4) (#122)
    by Stellaaa on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:28:29 AM EST
    There is an actual conversation, not a mob.  I think we should have an award ceremony for our favorite Obama supporter who stuck here the longest and contributed.  

    you have someone in mind?! (none / 0) (#124)
    by MarkL on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:30:26 AM EST
    I am thinking...i am thinking (5.00 / 2) (#130)
    by Stellaaa on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:36:14 AM EST
    so many have come and gone I lose track.  I think Obamamama should get the, "created more accounts and kept getting caught" award.  

    One of the very reasons (5.00 / 4) (#132)
    by themomcat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:42:06 AM EST
    I was attracted to this site was the moderation and civil discussion without the insults and stalking. I could have stayed at the orange balloon if I wanted to put up with that. BTD does a good job, too

    Somerby's 3 day series (5.00 / 2) (#119)
    by Stellaaa on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:26:48 AM EST
    was absolutely brilliant.  I found it extremely satisfying, he said all the things that had to be said about the MSM and the blogsters.  

    Agreed. (5.00 / 2) (#134)
    by phat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:44:07 AM EST
    But unfortunately, he wont get noticed.

    Lines are drawn, opinions are solidified.

    We can only hope that the people who don't see the double standard applied to this nomination race cane figure out how to re-gain some semblance of credibility. I suppose it may not matter, in terms of who wins and loses the presidential race. But the mandate that Obama will claim is likely false. A false understanding of the electorate based on bad assumptions and accepting of poorly understood conventional wisdom is a recipe for disaster.

    Whatever the machinations of campaigns may give us, certain principles should be adhered to. And I say this as a person who works for campaigns.

    We can elect Barack Obama, and likely we will in November, but if we do this in terms and understandings that aren't reflective of what people want and expect, we are in serious trouble.

    We know that most Americans do agree with a Progressive agenda. Obama is not running on that platform. He's not running on any platform, per se. What happens when his governance does not meet his mandate?

    This could be a very difficult problem to deal with.


    There was a great article in the (5.00 / 6) (#141)
    by Grace on Sat May 31, 2008 at 02:07:59 AM EST
    Washington Post a few days ago.  It was about Obama and how policy was formed (and is being formed) within his campaign.  It also talks about his campaign staff.  

    Anyway, the gist of it was that they had no policy going in.  They were going to run on the "hope and change" thing.  He was going to be the "new" candidate who transcends race.  They figured that every Democrat was for the same things basically, so they were going to package a new leader.  (That's what I got out of the article, anyway.)

    The big problem is that people expect Obama to talk about his policies, his platform.  He really doesn't have one.  He cribbed Clinton's for the most part.    

    I have problems viewing Obama as a leader since he's really never led anything.  In his attempt to relate to everybody all the time, it appears that he has fictionalized his biography.  

    I am really discouraged about the Democratic party now.  Discouraged, disheartened, and any other "dis" you can think of.    


    Here's a link to the article (5.00 / 2) (#151)
    by Grace on Sat May 31, 2008 at 02:32:48 AM EST
    Not a great argument for dems (5.00 / 8) (#131)
    by Manuel on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:38:16 AM EST
    Nancy Pelosi:
    "We all have to come together because the American people have to know that the Democratic Party can run its own delegate selection process if they want to know that we can govern America."

    Ssy what?  If they run the country the way they run the nomination process, we are in big trouble.

    What a load (5.00 / 8) (#139)
    by Eleanor A on Sat May 31, 2008 at 02:00:11 AM EST
    I mean, I have no doubt that somewhere down deep she believes that...but what I can't believe is that she apparently thinks you fix a series of deep screwups (MI/FL, the late scheduling of the Convention, etc.) by screwing them up further (trying to strongarm automatic delegates, in public, after you've let it be known you have a personal bias towards one of the candidates.)

    What really burns me up is that in a lot of ways, Pelosi herself is to blame for much of the spleen being vented towards Hillary these days, in terms of failure to lead.  

    She really takes the cake.


    Uhhh, Nancy? (5.00 / 4) (#177)
    by ineedalife on Sat May 31, 2008 at 07:24:12 AM EST
    This is just too easy.

    The American people have seen how you govern and don't approve of your unilateral disarmament approach. Impeachment is off the table and we don't enforce subpeonas. What item of power do you intend to remove from Congress next session? The Republicans are already floating the appeaser concept for Democrats and you handed it too them.

    The current situation is just re-enforcing your brand for the Democrats.


    Doesn't Speaker Pelosi (5.00 / 1) (#195)
    by kenoshaMarge on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:34:45 AM EST
    understand that the American People have all ready seen that the Democratic Party cannot run it's own delegate selection process? Does she think we are all so blind that we don't see the major screw up they've created that makes the meeting today necessary?  Is she so dumb she thinks we're that dumb?

    Obama's fault (5.00 / 7) (#140)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 02:05:12 AM EST
    own it sweetie!!

    protest today (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by Dr Molly on Sat May 31, 2008 at 05:39:16 AM EST
    I'll be there. Turns out I'm stuck in DC for the weekend due to job and meetings early next week.

    I'll be going - mostly just as an observer, not a protestor. Should be interesting to see what the mood of the people is.

    DC (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by Athena on Sat May 31, 2008 at 05:55:10 AM EST
    I may be there also.  Since it's suddenly possible for me to be there, I feel that I should be in the street rather than watching it on TV.  But I'd actually like to watch it completely.  Probably rerun on CSPAN.

    Could (5.00 / 3) (#166)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat May 31, 2008 at 06:04:46 AM EST
    another Pastor disaster have erupted on Obama at a worse time? If he's the nominee I guess it will be a disaster a week for him. And he can't even say there's anything wrong with what the pastors say. He's just "disappointed".

    Obama's tepid response (5.00 / 1) (#171)
    by Josey on Sat May 31, 2008 at 06:19:41 AM EST
    to Phleger's racist and sexist rant against Hillary was very enlightening.
    Obama claims he wants to represent all Americans, but those appear to be "just words."

    Yeah (5.00 / 1) (#172)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat May 31, 2008 at 06:33:42 AM EST
    and his campaign manager is working on a documentary about the priest.

    I wonder if (5.00 / 1) (#197)
    by kenoshaMarge on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:37:58 AM EST
    the Pflegler tape gets big play here in WI if it will open old wounds and bring back memories of Father Groppi and the movement back in the sixties.

    To me, and this is just me, Father Groppi and his followers seem an awful lot like the Obama supporters of today. In that they seem very concerned with the rights of AA but not so much with equally poor, and very alienated white people. To me "working class" shouldn't mean any race or any ethnicity, only income. We're all in the same leaky rowboat and the water won't give a damn what color our skin is as it closes over us. Nor will the "elites" whooshing by in their yachts.

    It seemed to many of us that the "movement" was all about "black poverty" not poverty in general. And black rights not the rights of all. Then as now it seemed, to many of us a movement consisting of the elites who had no reason to be concerned for themselves or their families and the blacks that most definitely did.

    However working class whites were not a concern for the movement then as now. I'm sure someone like Cream City will set me straight if I'm talking nonsense.


    Obama is scary (5.00 / 2) (#168)
    by Josey on Sat May 31, 2008 at 06:09:04 AM EST
    and will be scarier by Nov.


    Argument for nominating Hillary (5.00 / 3) (#180)
    by Josey on Sat May 31, 2008 at 07:43:51 AM EST
    Lanny Davis - WSJ - 5/31


    Was just about to post that too! (5.00 / 4) (#182)
    by nulee on Sat May 31, 2008 at 07:53:35 AM EST
    awesome article - go Lanny, lay out the facts, I think this is a great strategy, almost daring the SDs to cast their lot in for a likely loser (Obama) in the face of cold hard potential for victory in Clinton.  

    Joy cometh in the morning... (5.00 / 1) (#189)
    by mogal on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:19:56 AM EST
    Things are looking up this AM.

    Woke up feeling bummed this morning (5.00 / 3) (#183)
    by Militarytracy on Sat May 31, 2008 at 07:59:53 AM EST
    that you can't vote with much confidence in this country.

    Me too Tracy. (5.00 / 1) (#193)
    by Teresa on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:31:08 AM EST
    Did our live bloggers oversleep?

    Quelle Surprise! (4.80 / 5) (#61)
    by Jackson Hunter on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:55:13 AM EST
    If my French is wrong, it's been a while, sorry.  Has anyone noticed the top rec diary at the Big Orange tonight?  Apparently, she who has been "undeclared" has let her true feeling be known.  No link, I'm sure that you all can find it if you so desire.

    I think Doug Feith has some competition for his title of "Stupidest Person on the planet"  (cleaned up for TL-lol).  She couldn't have waited just a couple more days?  Nope, she has to really rub it in our faces.  To Hell with her and her pathetic little tin god, they'll never have my vote.  NEVER  I'll nominate Robert Bork myself just to see her and her doomed to fail revolution lose, because at some point principles matter.  You hate me, I hate you right back.  I don't put flowers in gun barrels, I rip the guns out of hands and stick them back into the first convenient orifice that presents itself to me.

    I voted that we will all be losers tomorrow, as will the Country be also I'm afraid.  I really hope I can calm down by November, I really, really do.


    Oh dear, I think my brazile just (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by MarkL on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:58:14 AM EST
    popped! That is shocking news!

    It's far from over, hon. Calm down n/t (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by Eleanor A on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:58:37 AM EST
    Oh man. I'm not sure my computer will (none / 0) (#80)
    by oculus on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:00:56 AM EST
    survive the live blogging.

    Maybe Donna (5.00 / 4) (#90)
    by themomcat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:06:09 AM EST
    can do for Obama what she did for Al Gore? We can hope.

    Some short links (5.00 / 1) (#154)
    by Edgar08 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 02:49:27 AM EST
    From kos' 2005 offering. (none / 0) (#162)
    by Fabian on Sat May 31, 2008 at 05:46:31 AM EST
    She's the highest-ranking black campaign manager in American history, but frankly, she can't deliver a pizza.

    Not Kos' words, but revealing all the same.


    Jackson (none / 0) (#148)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 02:24:01 AM EST
    Man I like ur style.  go to my info and click on my blog....

    It's going to be short, right? (none / 0) (#1)
    by MarkL on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:05:35 AM EST
    Will the decision be rendered tomorrow as well?

    Committee members were instructed (none / 0) (#2)
    by oculus on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:07:47 AM EST
    to be available to stay over Sat. night if necessary.  

    I hope the motel rooms are stocked with (4.66 / 6) (#3)
    by MarkL on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:09:16 AM EST
    Pfleger and Wright videos.

    Yes please (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by RalphB on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:10:43 AM EST
    that would be lovely   :-)

    Or hopefully (5.00 / 0) (#8)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:11:49 AM EST
    someone has installed a jumbotron outside the meeting facility and they can play it all there.

    That would be so wrong; espec. after (none / 0) (#7)
    by oculus on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:11:38 AM EST
    all the criticism of Obama campaign propagating those Olbermann DVDs.

    Apparently all is fair in love and politics... (5.00 / 5) (#10)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:13:54 AM EST
    obama is all about being able to dish it out, but he can't take it....sorry, but life is a biatch...

    Things that make you go hmmmm.....are (none / 0) (#4)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:10:16 AM EST
    they going to have ambulances on site?  :)

    I'd really love to stay and chat, but (none / 0) (#28)
    by oculus on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:23:55 AM EST
    I have to get some sleep b/4 6:30 a.m. Talk Left live blog begins!

    That clip is so very entertaining. (none / 0) (#35)
    by phat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:29:33 AM EST
    Seeing Lennon and McCartney having so much fun together, with Lennon being such an obvious smart-ass and McCartney trying hard not to crack up, until the end, of course.

    I love that song, too.

    Thank-you for the levity.

    On that note (none / 0) (#40)
    by phat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:32:44 AM EST
    As per this video, who is Clinton and who is Obama? Lennon/McCartney?

    Is Bill Richardson Geroge Harrison, or is that John Edwards?

    I think Ringo is Biden.


    Do NOT (5.00 / 4) (#42)
    by janarchy on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:34:07 AM EST
    insult George Harrison like that. Bill Richardson couldn't fill George's shoes in this lifetime or any others. (Seriously, them's fighting words! :))

    I suppose HIllary is Yoko Ono. (none / 0) (#45)
    by oculus on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:36:17 AM EST
    Only if (5.00 / 4) (#49)
    by janarchy on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:40:45 AM EST
    you're equating two amazingly smart, accomplished women who were reviled for no reason other than they were smart, accomplished women.

    Actually if we're going to make comparisons here, Hillary's John and Obama's Paul, especially given Paul's unbelievable ability to rewrite history to make himself the center of the Beatles legacy and accomplishments and his fans ability to believe he's infalliable and incapable of any wrong doing. John always stood up for his principles no matter what.

    This whole half-a-delegation has actually reminded me of Yoko's art piece "Half-A-Room" where everything had been neatly sawed in half and then set up as if someone lived there.


    Actually (5.00 / 10) (#55)
    by Jeralyn on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:50:11 AM EST
    the TL kid is John. My water broke and I went into labor when I heard on tv that night that Lennon was shot-- Howard Cossell announced it during the football game, "An unspeakable tragedy tonight in New York City," and the TL kid was born a few hours later. He has grown up with me telling him that when John Lennon died, he got his spirit.

    You've mentioned this story before (none / 0) (#63)
    by phat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:55:26 AM EST
    The morning after Lennon was killed was one of the longest horrible mornings I've ever had.

    I was just a kid. I'm lucky my mom understood.

    There was one girl in my class who was upset about it too. Some of the teachers were upset.

    It was a terribly long day.

    But watching Lennon goof in that video is very nice to see.


    Seriously (none / 0) (#74)
    by janarchy on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:59:17 AM EST
    I believe you. And that is an amazing story. I'm a strong proponent of reincarnation and karma so if the TL Kid IS John, he's picked a winner! :)

    Lucky soul! n/t (none / 0) (#158)
    by Alec82 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 05:12:07 AM EST
    I enjoy Yoko (5.00 / 3) (#104)
    by LoisInCo on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:18:28 AM EST
    I am not a beatles fan, don't know if its my age (35 in 11 days), but I just never found them that appealing. However there is a song John and Yoko wrote called " woman is the n**ger of the world that I found stunning. Just stunning. Made me think about things in a different way. And thats good enough for me.

    I love Yoko (5.00 / 2) (#109)
    by janarchy on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:22:33 AM EST
    and I just posted a link to the lyrics to that very song somewhere on this page. Yoko's actually an incredible person -- I've seen several of her art exhibits and put on one of the best live shows I've ever seen. Most people only know her early work (the primal scream/vocal exercise stuff) but some of her later albums are actually brilliant. They're not to everyone's tastes but they're not just avant garde sound pieces. I'd particularly recommend "Approximate Infinite Universe" and "Feeling the Space". Songs like "Woman Power" and "Men Men Men" are still as topical today as they were 30+ years ago.

    right now... (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by p lukasiak on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:45:53 AM EST
    Clinton is Stu Sutcliffe - the REAL brains behind the beatles -- and the one who got left behind.

    Obama is obviously Paul.  Cute, a good showman, but absolutely no more talent than the average person who tries out for American Idot.

    Brian Epstein is Axelrod.

    Al Gore is John.

    John Edwards is George.

    Bill Richarson is Ringo.

    and Chris Matthews is Ed Sullivan.


    And Eric Clapton? (none / 0) (#53)
    by oculus on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:46:56 AM EST
    Layla (5.00 / 2) (#56)
    by Jeralyn on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:51:31 AM EST
    All-time greatest song (none / 0) (#111)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:23:13 AM EST
    in the history of the universe, IMHO.

    Bell-bottom Blues (none / 0) (#165)
    by magisterludi on Sat May 31, 2008 at 06:00:35 AM EST
    is my fave Clapton song. I don't want Hillary to "fade away" either.

    I keep doing something wrong trying to link (I admit to suffering from technology anxiety) or I'd post it.



    as if you aren't already thinking.. (none / 0) (#58)
    by p lukasiak on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:52:02 AM EST
    William Jefferson Clinton

    Then who (5.00 / 2) (#77)
    by janarchy on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:00:21 AM EST
    is Pattie Boyd?

    George's 1st Wife. (none / 0) (#94)
    by themomcat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:10:51 AM EST
    LOL (none / 0) (#98)
    by janarchy on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:15:41 AM EST
    Yes, I know that. I was just asking who the parallels are esp if WJC is somehow Eric Clapton.

    OK (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by themomcat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:20:54 AM EST
    Michelle Obama could be Patty?

    I'd say (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by janarchy on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:24:30 AM EST
    don't insult Pattie like that. She's actually a very sweet woman. The whole mess with Clapton was actually her reaction to her marriage which was falling apart due to drugs, womanizing and then religion on George's part -- unfortunately, Eric didn't do much better in terms of the way he treated her.

    You're Right, Patty's too nice. (none / 0) (#123)
    by themomcat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:30:23 AM EST
    How about Elizabeth Edwards?

    That might work (none / 0) (#127)
    by janarchy on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:33:10 AM EST
    at least in terms of being supportive of her man etc.

    What I always thought was great was that despite all the weirdness, Eric and George stayed close friends until George's death, and so did George and Pattie. She's even friendly with George's second wife, Olivia (who is quite an impressive lady on her own).


    Funny things happen (none / 0) (#135)
    by themomcat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:45:30 AM EST
    as we get older. I'm sure George and Eric could look back and laugh.

    Actually, I was thinking Hillary Clinton, (none / 0) (#59)
    by oculus on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:53:54 AM EST
    who is edgy and frequently accused of whining.  

    And these guys are so handsome (none / 0) (#41)
    by bridget on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:33:32 AM EST
    I can't think of a single Beatles song I don't like

    GO Hillary!


    I keep forgetting hot genuinely handsome (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by p lukasiak on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:56:58 AM EST
    George was.

    Paul was the guy you had a crush on before you hit puberty.

    John was the guy who you wound up marrying because -- average looking, which is all you thought you deserved anyway.

    Ringo was the guy you didn't go out with because he was just slightly enough below average looking that you're girlfriends would have been embarrassed for you if you said you were dating him.


    George was (5.00 / 6) (#84)
    by janarchy on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:03:58 AM EST
    my imaginary boyfriend from age 14 till the day he died. He was often overlooked in favour of 'cute' Paul and 'witty' John but he was actually pretty sexy (Scorpio Moon + Scorpio Ascendent = sex on 2 legs) and funny as hell. He had a really dry wit and a great sense of humour. Gotta love a man who was such a Monty Python fan that he put out his own money to produce "Life of Brian" when the Pythons couldn't get anyone else to give them capital to make the film.

    He was also a huge fan of the Bonzo Dog Band, frequently quoting "No matter who you vote for, the government always gets in".

    Those of us who 'got' him really got him.


    George (none / 0) (#163)
    by Athena on Sat May 31, 2008 at 05:52:58 AM EST
    Musically underappreciated.  He was as good a writer and J and P but got lost in the crowd.

    I can actually think of one Beatles song (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by phat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 12:59:25 AM EST
    I don't like.

    "Run for Your Life" is a nasty piece of work.

    Lennon regretted that song, from what I understand.


    Beatles Museum in Liverpool (5.00 / 8) (#87)
    by Stellaaa on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:04:47 AM EST
    Great fun, retro and silly, then you get to the last room, white room with piano and they are playing Imagine, and everyone over a certain age is crying.  This year Liverpool has it's 800th anniversary, big to dos.  

    The end of a relationship (none / 0) (#150)
    by nellre on Sat May 31, 2008 at 02:32:31 AM EST
    When one or both parties in a relationship feel contempt for the other it spells the end.
    It is the end, my friend. I feel nothing but contempt for the democratic leadership and how they have totally blown it in the season when we should have shined like a nova.

    I can't let McCain win, so I will vote Obama if indeed he is the nom. I'll hate myself for it, but I'd hate myself worse if McCain won due to protest votes and I contributed.

    I stake my hopes, if Hillary does not prevail, that she will run again.

    The way I look at it (5.00 / 3) (#155)
    by Grace on Sat May 31, 2008 at 03:04:09 AM EST
    A vote for Obama is a vote for Hillary to run in 8 more years, maybe, if the Democratic VP doesn't look like a better candidate.

    A vote for McCain means Clinton can run in 4 more years.  


    Yes the most important thing in the next 4 years (5.00 / 0) (#174)
    by Curious on Sat May 31, 2008 at 06:52:11 AM EST
    ...is that Hillary Rodham Clinton's ambition should not be thwarted.

    Abortion rights, the war, global warning fuel crisis and hunger all pale into insignificance in comparison.


    No, the most important thing (5.00 / 3) (#190)
    by samanthasmom on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:22:33 AM EST
    is that an inexperienced and unproven Democrat not get into the White House and screw things up so badly that we will have a Republican president for the next 12- 16 years after.

    Proven in the heat of battle in Bosnia you mean? (1.00 / 1) (#200)
    by Curious on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:47:07 AM EST
    Yes! Yes! Samanthasmom! (none / 0) (#203)
    by felizarte on Sat May 31, 2008 at 09:16:54 AM EST
    and there's a whole lot more just being silent for the moment. If only the democratic leadership would think.

    An interesting (none / 0) (#153)
    by LoisInCo on Sat May 31, 2008 at 02:36:48 AM EST
    take on Clinton and a 3rd party. The comments are quite good.  Its at Corrente here

    Since His Pledged Delegate Lead (none / 0) (#159)
    by bob h on Sat May 31, 2008 at 05:15:31 AM EST
    will not be affected significantly by anything that happens, Obama should just give Hillary everything she is asking for in the interests of Party unity and appearing magnanimous.  Very simple.

    Joy does come in the morning... (none / 0) (#188)
    by mogal on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:15:58 AM EST
    things arw looking up. Praise God!

    Indeed! (none / 0) (#204)
    by felizarte on Sat May 31, 2008 at 09:21:03 AM EST
    There are signs of a greater force at work.  Keep the faith! There will be more.