Is President Clinton Serious?

It looks like President Clinton and the HRC campaign have come up with a new reason that they're losing - a vast left wing conspiracy led by the media, Moveon.org, and other liberal groups. He's claiming that since March 4th, the college educated elites have been pushing her out of the race by suppressing her supporters and minimizing her momentum. He's basically saying that the upper class Obama supporters are holding down the poor, working class white folks.

This new excuse from the HRC campaign shows just how desperate they are becoming. Rather than accept the primary results in a dignified manner, they're now clinging to whining, finger pointing, and conspiracy theories. Through their sophomoric tactics, they've become the liberal version of George Bush. The Clinton campaign has regressed into the combative, personal attack driven campaign that is usually seen from the Republican attack machine (a machine that is in full force against Obama). It's disappointing to see this from a Democrat.

The frustrating part of all of this is the damage which the campaign is inflicting on the Democratic Party and on the liberal movement that has been sweeping across the country within the past few years. At this rate, the Clinton campaign will have sucked the life out of all the momentum that Democrats saw in 2006, with the worst case being an Obama loss in November. At this point, however, I wonder if HRC is even concerned about the party's fate beyond her own personal interest.

McLellan Blasts Bush Administration and "Culture of Deception"

Former White House Press Secretary Scott McLellan is releasing a new book chronicling his time in the Bush White House. Among other topics, McLellan discusses how he, along with the rest of the administration, went to Washington to change it, but ultimately ended up contributing to the "culture of deception" that existed. He goes on to discuss the lead up to the war in Iraq, getting caught up in the White House bubble, and the secrecy and compartmentalization surrounding the Vice President's office. The book is certainly worth checking out.

Although few of McLellan's comments are new, it is so incredibly damning for them to have come from a former member of Bush's inner circle. To hear these allegations from a man that was, between 1999 and 2008, the quintessential "Bushie" must lend credibility to his claims. McLellan's words also reiterate the recounts of other former Bush administration officials such as George Tenet, Richard Clarke, and Douglas Feith; men who were condemned by the Bush administration, but now have their criticisms validated by the memoir of yet another former staffer. The only difference is that this time it comes from a man with that had direct access to the President.

Not surprisingly, the Bush attack machine is responding by doing what it does best - attack the messenger. From Karl Rove to Dan Bartlett to Ari Fleischer, the only comments you heard in response to McLellan's book yesterday were attacks on his character and on him personally. Just this morning Bob Dole called McLellan a "miserable creature." Unfortunately, this has become the Bush (and Republican) motto when it comes to defending itself. Rather than discuss the charges of the book (or the issue at hand), they attack who the message is coming from. This nonsense is no different than their slander of John McCain in the 2000 primaries, the Swifboating of John Kerry in 2004, or the numerous attacks they've leveled on opponents of their policies. I guess when you don't have a basis to argue the issue, you might as well stoop to the lowest rung possible and kill the messenger.

Please tell me all Repub's don't think like this

Uber-conservative commentator Charlie Sykes made the argument in his blog that because of smoking bans, more people are dying of drunk driving. *scratches head* This logic is so baffling I'll just let the column speak for itself. Here's a gem that you can sift through:

By comparing data from a variety of locations around the United States where laws requiring smoke-free bars exist with locations without bans, economists Scott Adams and Chad Cotti found a relative increase in fatalities caused by drunk driving following ban enactment.

While the results at first seemed surprising to Adams, a UWM assistant professor of economics, and Cotti, now at the University of South Carolina, literature on consumer behavior suggests an explanation: Smokers are willing to drive longer distances to an establishment that allows smoking.

I'm only wondering if this is really the new Repub. talking point to combat the smoking bans. I mean c'mon, seriously?

Obama Demonstrates a Commitment to LGBT Issues

Dale Carpenter, in his article in The Bay Area Reporter articulates perfectly what makes Obama the superior candidate when it comes to LGBT issues. While Obama and Sen. Clinton are similar in their stances and legislative abilities, Obama soars over HRC when it comes to his commitment to advancing gay equality. Carpenter writes:

Neither Obama nor Clinton is perfect on this score. Obama campaigned last fall with a homophobic minister. Both hesitated when confronted with the remarks of Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Peter Pace that DADT is justified because homosexuality is immoral. As if testing the political winds, they denounced Pace only after Sen. John Warner (R-VA) flatly declared that homosexuality is not immoral.

Nevertheless, Obama speaks movingly of gay equality, and not just before gay audiences. He has raised the issue among white farmers and in black churches, where the message is both unwelcome and needed.

Hillary Clinton, by contrast, rarely raises the issue on her own, never does so before unfriendly audiences, and seems reluctant even to say the word “gay.”

Obama “gets it” in a way that no previous candidate for president has. Part of this is generational, but it is nonetheless real.

On commitment: strong advantage to Obama.

The Next VP?

Assuming Barack Obama ends up with the Democratic nomination, the next question to be answered is "Who will be Obama's running mate?" How about Jim Webb? He had an interesting interview with NPR this week, and among other topics, they discuss a possible VP nomination. Personally, I love the idea. Webb represents strong military experience, centrist appeal, and "blue collar" Democrats. He is also someone that is part of the new Democratic party (as opposed to old, establishment Dems that have been the party leaders for the past two decades) in that he understands the diversity of the US and the challenges the country faces in a 2008 mindset.

Get Well Teddy

Off to the side of my blog, I have always displayed a picture of former Senator and presidential nominee Robert F. Kennedy, a man whom I have always idolized and held in the highest regard. His brother, Senator Ted Kennedy, has served the country in the same spirit that he served. The news today of Sen. Ted Kennedy's malignant brain tumor has been both shocking and disheartening to all Americans. Since 1962, Sen. Kennedy and his family have fought for those in our country that have not had the voice to fight for themselves. He has advocated for children, the underserved, healthcare for all citizens, and innumerable other causes which have made the United States a better place. His undying spirit and commanding oratory have been staples in the US Senate over the past 40 plus years.

Beyond politics, Sen. Kennedy's distinguished honor has gained him the respect and love of Senators and Representives, regardless of political party. Colleagues and citizens alike have described him as a man of great courage and steadfast dedication, a man that is willing to cross party lines to compromise in order to pass legislation that would otherwise remain stuck in Congress. Sen. Kennedy has become a living institution in the Senate. His public service has been unmatched in American history. On this day I hope for Sen. Kennedy's healthy recovery and pray that we all can once again see him advocating for the people he has so diligently served in his term as a US Senator.

Get well Teddy.

What would a study break be without a crazy Bill O'Reilly video?

The State of the Primary

In two words, it's over. And when you look at what has been said by pundits and experts over the last two months, it's really not very surprising. With a few exceptions, all of the contests that have taken place since Wisconsin and Hawaii have come down just like the experts have said they would (and, coincidentally, the Obama campaign). Following election night here in the Badger state, I said that to get back in the race HRC needed to win, and win big, in places like Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. While she did pull out victories in each of these states(well, a pseudo-victory in Texas), her margins have not been great enough. With the exception of Pennsylvania, a state that has a Democratic Party structure conducive to HRC, she has not made up any substantial ground on the lead that Obama has built. Even on primary night in Ohio and Texas, the delegate count the following morning stood with virtually the same distance between HRC and Obama.

This pattern has got to be troubling for her campaign, and as Barack inches closer and closer to reaching the magic number of 2,025 delegates, HRC's margin for error grows razor thin. While the prognostications in March have had many of the primary contests accurately laid out, the results have now validated these predictions. Seeing the elections that have taken place over the past month, a month in which Obama has been held to standards Zeus could not meet, HRC's campaign is all but over. Granted, there is no official nominee yet and Obama has not yet gotten the required delegates, but the electoral math makes HRC's task nearly insurmountable at this point.

Oh, and could we please get back to discussing the issues!!