This one is getting beat pretty ragged, which generally means it was a non-starter, just something the media fines pretty-shiny and so, like an idiot kitty, wants to play with it until something more bouncable comes along. I can only pray that it is not true.

Not because I think Hillary is Ms Antichrist, but for the same reasons I didn't want her as president: She was horribly wrong about Iraq, she refuses to take personal responsibility for her own damn vote, she's willing to push race just enough to win votes from racist Dems, and she never made her way out of the 1990s. She's wrong for the presidency, and just as wrong for the vice-presidency.

I'm with those who see her in a role like Senate leader — although I think Chris Dodd is probably a better choice — or Supreme Court justice. That role, in particular, I think would be wonderful for her. It would allow her to take all that is good about herself as a politician — and there is a lot that is good — and channel it into thoughtful, humane judgments on the law. For one thing, a woman's right to choose would become sacrosanct. Labor's rights would finally be recognized at the proper level and upheld. The First Amendment would mean something.

And the Supreme Court would not be sitting in wait to undermine President Obama's programs the way FDR was countered by his Supreme Court. By making Hillary Clinton his first selection to the Court, Obama would both solidify the support of women, workers and many other groups; he would demonstrate a long-term commitment to vital issues that many still doubt (ill-placed doubt since he has over 20 years of public service demonstrating that commitment). Over his two terms, Obama will have a chance to totally shatter the hopes of the neocons who thought they'd be contructing a Court to last decades. Obama is the one who can shape the Court, and the future, and he can do it by naming Hillary to the first seat that opens.

And how lovely if that were Scalia's! Ah, a boy can dream.

There is a myth that George Bush beat Al Gore in 2000 because he was the guy voters would most like to have a beer with. The real reason Bush won, of course, is that the Supreme Court stopped the vote in Florida; nonetheless, enough voters were drawn to what they saw as the "real" Dubya to make the vote close enough to let the Court to usurp the national vote. In time, the authentic Bush became clear, and Americans by the tens of millions regret that vote, but all the evidence needed to know he'd be a horrendous president was there in 2000. Al Gore simply failed to match his superior competence with a sufficiently authentic public persona.

Hillary Clinton has failed in exactly the same way. At this point in her career we have seen too many Hillaries to have any idea which one we'd be voting for. And while many are still uncertain whether Obama is experienced enough for the White House, there is little doubt about who he is.

Authenticy versus invention. To win an election, you have to be more than a really good lawmaker or policy expert. You have to be able to connect with enough people to convince them to give you their one and only vote. Few voters want to waste that precious commodity, just like they'd rather not waste their money. And just like they try to buy something that they will like and use, they want to vote for someone they like. Someone they can trust. Someone they think is authentic.

Gore and Clinton never managed to make themselves authentic. Bush did, although in his case, the authentic good-buddy personna overlay the kind of professional incompetence that should not have been allowed within a thousand miles of the White House, much less the Oval Office.

Barack Obama is authentic on all levels.

That's how you're gonna beat 'em, Butch. They keep underestimating you.

I love listening to how the Really Smart People ("Check out the big brain on Brett!") keep explaining how they're going to beat Barack Obama. And yet here we are: The Democratic primaries are nearly over and Obama is riding away on Zed's bike with the pretty birl, and he's the last man standing.

Not only is he Butch, he's also the Wolf.

But that may be flogging the metaphor a bit too much. Onward.

Butch was supposed to go down in Round 5:

MARSELLUS (OS)
In the fifth, your ass goes down.

Butch nods his head: "yes."

MARSELLUS (OS)
Say it!

BUTCH
In the fifth, my ass goes down.

And as we know, Butch's ass did not go down in the fifth:

The SOUND of the CAR RADIO can be heard coming from inside.

SPORTSCASTER #1 (OS)
...Coolidge was out of there faster than I've ever seen a victorious boxer vacate the ring. Do you think he knew Willis was dead?

SPORTSCASTER #2 (OS)
My guess would be yes, Richard. I could see from my position here, the frenzy in his eyes give way to the realization of what he was doing. I think any man would've left the ring that fast.

The other big hope for the Clinton campaign is making the argument that Mr. Obama would suffer against Senator John McCain, the likely Republican presidential nominee. The exit polls gave Mrs. Clinton some ammunition to that effect; about half the Democrats who voted in Indiana and North Carolina said Mr. Obama’s association with his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., was very or somewhat important to their vote.

After a month of pounding on Obama with the Rev Wright stick, he wins big in North Carolina and, with about 15% left to count in Indiana, is within 2%. Yet we're supposed to believe that the Wright "controversy" is going to weaken Obama over the next six months? Sorry, this one is about used up.

A Pew Research poll shows Obama losing supporting among white working class Dems. Gee, I wonder why? Could it be a month of shoving the Rev Wright boogie-man down their throats? Hillary reminding white working class Dems that Obama doesn't give a shit about them because he reads books? The media pushing some caricature of him that neglects his upbringing which was a lot less privileged than either Clinton or McCain?

Nah, it's just because he's black.

Just kidding, of course. The fact that he's black means very little to white working class Dems in the United States. They've never been bothered by the skin color of other people. Or their religion. Or their gender. Or sexual orientation. Or support for the Vietnam War... whoa, wait. Just because white working class Dems (and their historic predecessors, who may have been Whigs?) have been voting on the basis of various bigotries since the Union was created doesn't mean that has anything to do with Obama, does it?

From the NY Times:

One week before Democratic primaries in Indiana and North Carolina, contests that party officials are watching as they try to gauge whether Mr. Obama or Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton would be the stronger nominee, the controversy surrounding Mr. Wright again erupted into a threat to Mr. Obama’s ability to show that he could unify the Democratic Party and bring the nominating contest to a quick and clean end.

Because, after all, Hillary Clinton is not the most divisive person in American politics today.

Unifying the Democratic Party is, and has always been, a fool's game. Talking about a unified party always brings to mind Will Rogers' famous quote, "I don't belong to any organized party; I'm a Democrat." The Democratic Party consists of a unwieldy amalgamation of beliefs, goals and perspectives. The presidential nominee does not so much organize this melange as begs them to please play nice until after election day.

And yet Barack Obama has, until the recent media onslaught conducted by the Clinton campaign and happily carried out by the much of the maintstream media, been bringing a wider variety of belies and perspectives than even before into the madhouse of the party's tent. With the goal of making a real difference in both Washington and the nation, millions of Democrats, independents and even some disaffected Republicans have united to promote the Obama candidacy, only to run up against the person who is proving to be the biggest divider of all: Hillary Clinton.

No one should be terribly shocked. Hillary's new ad, playing in both Indiana and North Carolina, uses the gas tax and mortgage crisis to promote the message Obama does not care what's happening to American families. To do this, of course, she both distorts his record and aligns herself with John McCain.

Odd moments she finds to side with McNasty. They both also thought auhorizing the invasion of Iraq was a good idea.

Obama's ads are about what his goals are as president; the second ad focuses on veterans and the work he's done in the Senate to care for returning veterans. He's lets slide the opportunity to note that the need to care for so many "wounded warriors" is because of Clinton's calamitous vote: he's not concerned with attacking her but with advancing his own campaign of hope.

Ask me again: Why am I supporting Barack Obama? And why am I so terribly disappionted in Hillary Clinton?

There are two excellent, completely positive ads for Indiana, available for viewing at the Obama website

Tuesday, April 29, 5:00 pm — if the County Elections office does not have a voter registration card in-house by then, it's too late. For the May primary, that is. That's an important election; the goal, after all, at this point is to get the nomination for Barack Obama. Not being able to vote for him in the primary is a bad thing.

But voter registration will continue at 5:01 pm. Anyone registering "late" may be out of luck for the primary, but they'll be primed for the Big Show in November. Arguably, that's the more important election, no matter how much we want Obama to be our nominee. More important than the nomination — I would say infinitely more important, just to make the point — is winning the White House. Under no circumstances can we allow John McCain to win in November. No, I don't want to vote for Hillary Clinton, but goddammit, if she's the nominee I'm voting for her. And I'm raising holy hell with anyone who tells me they "can't" for her. Suck it up, dude: Yes you can. Obama's going to vote for her if she's the nominee; Michelle will vote for her. Anyone with more sense than pride will vote for her.

But not if you're not registered. So get signed up tomorrow — and I recommend going to the Elections Office in person cuz any other way is not going to work — but if you miss that, just get registered. Don't wait until the next deadline in October. Do it Tuesday, or Wednesday.

Any Democrat in the White House is better than John McCain. So register tomorrow and make sure that Democrat is Barack Obama.

Barack Obama went on Fox News today to talk with Chris Matthews, and of course the leftie blogosphere was all in a tiswas. First because he gave in and let them have their interview. This, of course, was both a political blunder and a moral failure. Second, when he didn't use his time on the show to rip Matthews and Fox a new asshole, they then said how he failed to challenge Fox.

Part of Obama's purpose in running this campaign is to get away from the need to do things like rip opponents' a new asshole. That's the Rove way to do thing, and for lefties to suggest Obama should do unto Fox as Fox has done unto himself and others is to give Rove the ultimate victory.

I did not watch the interview or any clips of it. I can just imagine how bad it must have been. I don't think there's much you can do with Chris Matthews except try your best. And then, as numerous writers pointed out before the interview (and rightly), they own the video and can manipulate it anyway they want. Bill Clinton tried to take Matthews to task over his administration's attempts to get bin Laden, and the only result was that Bill got red in the face and Chris couldn't understand why Bill just didn't admit he failed to protect America.

But the one thing I would not expect Barack Obama to do is get on the show and start being confrontational. Maybe Fox deserves little respect as a news agency (ok, they deserve no respect), but Obama has a flaw few in politics suffer from: He genuinely respects other people. To go on Matthews show and attack him for the network's propaganda might feel good, but it would violate his own standards of behavior. He treated the show like he would any other, as if it were a serious attempt by fair newspeople to cover the issues. He knew, of course, they would try to abuse his decency, but that decency left him no option but to play it straight.

And isn't that the heart of any ethics? You stick to it because you know it's right, no matter how others behave. It may make for difficult politics, but at least we can see that our next president will be a man of honor and decency. For the first time since Jimmy Carter left the office. I'm sure ready for it.

Thus spake Hillary:

"I won that double-digit victory that everybody on TV said I had to win, and the voters of Pennsylvania clearly made their views known, that they think I would be the best president and the better candidate to go against Sen. McCain," referring to the presumptive Republican candidate, John McCain of Arizona.

9.2% was the margin of victory. If that rounds up to double-digits — 10% — then oh sweet mother we do not want her in charge of the nation's budget! But she did not win by double-digits; what she did so was give up two-thirds of her massive lead in Pennsylvania in little over a month. What he did was cut into her lead among all the groups that allegedly he is doing so badly in.

Obama is not going to be trapped by the demographics attack Clinton is using among the many arguments why she should be the nominee despite trailing Obama in both delegate count and the national vote:

Speaking to supporters in Evansville, Indiana, on Tuesday night, Obama dismissed questions about his ability to cross racial, gender and generational boundaries.
advertisement

"We can continue to slice and dice this country ... or this time, we can build on the movement we started in this campaign, a movement that's united Democrats, independents, Republicans, young, old, rich, poor, white, black, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, gay, straight," he said. "Because one thing I know, from traveling 46 states this campaign season, is that we are not as divided as our politics suggest."

"Now, it's up to you, Indiana. ... You can decide whether we're going to travel the same worn path or whether we will chart a new course that offers real hope for the future," the Illinois Democrat said.

both quotes from CNN.com