Andrew Sullivan comments on the new Hillary ad running in Texas and Ohio. Check out this response as well. Obama smashes back with an excellent retort that is blisteringly on point. "Well it won’t work this time. Because the question is not about picking up the phone. The question is — what kind of judgment will you make when you answer? We’ve had a red phone moment. It was the decision to invade Iraq. And Sen. Clinton gave the wrong answer. George Bush gave the wrong answer. John McCain gave the wrong answer." That's very presidential. Counter Hillary's abstract message of "better judgement" vis a vis fear-mongering with a concrete example of her lack of judgment on the crucial Iraq test . Here's hoping HRC realizes she's done on March 4th.

Blog comment threads are full of snippets about voting for McCain if Obama is the Dem candidate. Apparently, supporting someone other than Hillary is a fundamental betrayal of her oft-discussed "35 years" of service to America. Notwithstanding the ridiculous assertion of that much "time in the trenches," I don't buy this argument at all. She was the unelected wife of an Arkansas Governor and a two-term President. Later, ONE STATE elected her to represent them in the Senate. Why exactly does the rest of the country owe her a free pass to the "most powerful political office in the world"? If Gore hadn't been sandbagged by Monicagate, Travelgate, FBI Filegate, Lincoln bedroom "sales", sketchy Chinese donors, NOT TO MENTION Hillary's failed healthcare push, this country might be an entirely different place right now. What about what we owed HIM? or Biden... or Dodd... or Daschle? How is Hillary owed more than any of these solid Dem...

Stories like this make me proud to be an HBCU grad . More than 2,000 students, friends and supporters walked 7.3 miles to the Waller County Seat in protest of restrictive early voting locations. In their county, there is only one early voting location, with only two polling booths. The marchers hope to tie up the machines all day and into the night as necessary to ensure that their votes and voices are heard. Go on Praire View!

It's amazing to me that supporters of other candidates are so willing to make accusations about Obama's "lack of substance" based on... what exactly? He has EXHAUSTIVE policy positions on dozens of subjects on his website. If these "dedicated" Americans were so concerned with the politics in question, they could MORE than satisfy themselves by tipping over www.barackobama.com . Rather, they offer platitudes of their own... "no experience," "all talk, no action." Their candidate is "solutions instead of speeches" and "ready to lead on day one." Now THERE'S substance!!! How convenient that this script has been supplied by the "more experienced" candidate who has now lost NINE PRIMARIES in a row! Incidentally, since when has anyone laid out an actual policy IN DETAIL on a stump speech? It's ALWAYS a generic laundry list of policy POSITIONS, not legislative briefs. Hillary talks about her health ca...

Sully tipped me to this .  I had to share. Most AWESOME campaign song ever .  Obama inspires Yes We Can .  Hillary inspires an Up With People Reunion Concert? P.S.  Any song featuring the lyric "The world is getting hot, but our global warming plan is not," deserves a spot in the Adult Contemporary Hall of Fame.  LOVE THIS!

Have you heard about the Clinton's pardons of terrorists who maimed and killed citizens in New York City?  I hadn't either, but WSJ's Debra Burlingame sure has. No matter that the info is eight years old.  No matter that Sen. Clinton has disavowed the pardons (made at her behest, for her benefit in her then nascent Senatorial campaign).  In a post-9/11 political climate, TERRORIST and PARDON are a campaign-killing combination—especially for a New York Senator. Can you imagine how sordid the ads would be?  Grandpa McCain twisted Mitt's rather non-committal comments about Iraq into a "cut and run" talking point.  Imagine what the GOP smear machine would do with the Clintons on this issue... Sorry, Sen. Clinton, it's time to go.

The following exchange is from a tete a tete with "Jasper" in the comments section of this Marc Ambinder posting . I've been commenting so much on other sites, the home page has suffered. Sorry. AltonDarwin: I'm not suggesting that at all. Either Obama or Clinton should easily win all of Kerry's '04 states. The only exception I reckon is California. I think the Democrats will win it, but I suspect they'll need to spend a few buck to hold it down if Obama's the nominee, given his troubles with Asian and Latino voters (and McCain's popularity with the latter). Still, they should win it. Two points here... There's NO WAY Dems are losing California this cycle. Latinos broke for Hillary on familiarity. When he's the nominee in the general, he will have built PLENTY of broader Latino support. He was La Opinion's choice after all. The Latino metrics will have to be assessed WITHOUT Clinton as an option. Second, McCain's troubled recept...

The last eight years of partisan antics, electronic tomfoolery, electoral menace and outright theft of our civil liberties have left us with precious little of our American souls. We have become a nation of cynics and doubters... and I was one of them. But as I prepare to cast one of the most important votes of my young life, I am filled with a renewed sense of purpose.  I have been inspired.  I am CERTAIN that we will elect a leader that will transform the landscape of this great nation. Barack Obama. On February 5th, we have a choice to make.  Can we embrace the partisan politics of the past? Can we face the future with hope and determination?  Can we once again be the nation we thought we were?  YES, WE CAN. This man is the President we NEED right now.  Know it.  Believe it.  And cast your ballot for the next President of the UNITED States of America... Barack Obama.  

Barack Obama is a highly qualified, charismatic, visionary leader. I passionately believe he represents the best hope for America's future in this crucial time. As the weeks progress, it is increasingly clear that the Democratic nominee WILL NOT be a white man. Accordingly, I am thrilled that Black voters are rallying behind Obama's historical candidacy. First in New Hampshire and now in Nevada, Obama had tight races with Hillary Clinton. In both of these races, Obama has eked out one delegate "wins" from popular vote "losses." However, the Nevada tallies hold some discomforting news for Obama. The Latino vote broke 2 to 1 for Clinton. If those ratios hold in the Western states (not to mention Florida), it will be tough to take the nomination, even with Black voters going 3 to 1 to Obama. Obama's pick up of another key endorsement from the president of a strongly Latino union is promising, however, the endorsement was not from the union itsel...

One of the biggest challenges facing a Black candidate is earning the enthusiastic support of BLACK people. Barack Obama is mold-shattering in that his viability is not grounded in the Black community, but rather the American community. His Iowa win awakened many Black voters into taking a second (or first) look at a man who could defeat a Clinton in a state with barely a 2% Black population. Endorsement pick-ups of Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano and Senators Ben Nelson and Tim Johnson (not to mention John Kerry and Bill Bradley) were nice consolation prizes after his narrow loss in New Hampshire. Surely the Clintons needed to slow his "roll." Since Bob Johnson fizzled out in his tacky smear attempt, they trotted out some old guard Dem leaders with legitimate bonafides... and look what they got for their money! Charlie Rangel AND John Lewis attempt to twist Obama's casual comment on Clinton's MLK/LBJ gaffe into some over-reaching indictment on his judgment. ...

Here . While I agree that complaining (even by surrogates) accomplishes little, I wonder what Obama gains by confronting a universally reviled attack goon like Bob Johnson. BJ's comments have been roundly critiqued as questionable or even downright slimy by the media. His attempted backtrack viewed as disingenuous. Outside of Bobcat fans and pre-teen white hipsters, I'm not so sure he's really on anyone's radar in terms of political taste-making. On the other hand, Clinton has to shoulder the burden of another double-edged riff from the new Valedictorian of the Andrew Young School of Loony Marginalized Discourse. Hillary LOSES voters with these attacks; Obama reinforces his "above the fray" persona by deftly deflecting the venom. It's one of the things I like most about him. I, however, can make disparagingly peurile comparisons to Johnson and Clinton's pecadilloes. I wonder if Hillary is still as fond of BJ as she was 48 hours ago?

BJ... phi... bruh... Your tirade about Barack Obama is appalling. You earned your billion on the backs of ass-slapping videos, blaxploitation reruns and informercials and you have THE GALL to talk about being "insulted" that "we are so stupid?" Back at you, dawg. Incidentally, NOT ONE PERSON was confused about your thinly veiled reference about Obama's days "in the neighborhood." It was pathetic when the recently dismissed Clintonian flak floated it out there. Coming from you, it's traitorously venomous. We were smart enough to avoid buying tickets to "Who's Your Caddy?" and we're smart enough to understand your half-assed attempt at a smear. By the way, if you're going to "go there," have the balls to own up to it. Your backtrack about referring to his days as an organizer is even worse than the smear. Are we to understand that Obama's grass roots community leadership is somehow less legitimate than the...

Some will defend Paul saying his racist newsletters are "old news"... He didn't write the damnable articles... he was just lazy in allowing the editorial content to slip past his review. This despite the fact that it was often written in the first person, clearly IMPLYING that the views were his own. How does this theory hold up in reality? I read the James Kirchak's excellent New Republic article . Read the quotes in question . It defies all logic that ALL OF THOSE QUOTES "slipped through the cracks." After all, what politician allows THAT MUCH CONTENT to go out in his name without review? DId he have time to read ANY OF THE ISSUES? And, if not, who were the damn staffers who allowed that vile crap to go out? There are so many despicable statements... it's astonishing. No wonder he's a darling of the white supremacy set. And you heard he refused to return the donation from that avowed racist bastard under the pretense that he would "do some go...

Sully makes some good points about Obama's silver lining here . And a kossite points to the "poll confusion" here . For one, I think it's a double-edged sword for Clinton to have eked out a win here. Of course, a win is tasty for her after Iowa, but at the least, it has people questioning the "calculation" of her 24-hour tears... Stephanie Miller fielded a somewhat paranoid call about poll-machine tampering ala Kerry in Ohio... and Bill's peevish "fairy tale" screed (not to mention his tougher than Mandela quote and Hillary's Johnson-trumps-MLK misstep ) is ricocheting throughout the Black community. It has reinvigorated chatter about whether her "machine" is involved in some shenanigans and how negative they are willing to go in this race. Accentuating her negatives is the last thing she can afford right now.

Losing by two points in literally, the whitest state in the country isn't the worst thing in the world. This "loss" is closer to the Edwards/Clinton Iowa toss-up than the ass-kicking Obama handed her. Additionally, looking at the county by county breakdown, there were counties where he matched the pre-primary polling so keep that in mind. Further, it looks like OBAMA walks away with more delegates than Clinton . So it's not a total "win" for Clinton after all. Keep hope alive, people, she's got plenty of time to show her true colors and Michigan could hand her a nasty surprise. In case you don't know, she is the only one "contender" on the ballot in Michigan , so Obama and Edwards voters have been instructed to vote "Uncommited." Since Edwards and Obama's combined vote totals have killed her in the two races so far, she could come in second TO A CHECK BOX. There are plenty of Black folks in Detroit who would be HAPP...

I've been contentedly trolling my favorite blogs for months as the political races have been heating up. Now, on the eve of the eve of the Iowa caucuses, I'm speaking my piece. First, for my favorite candidate, Barack Obama. I'll be brief at the risk of running into effusive paragraphs of support for this outstanding leader. Obama's public service has engaged him with REAL PEOPLE from the start. That's an important distinction IMHO as he has embraced citizens with mortgages, student loans and insurance bills in favor of big money corporate interests. He is a magnetic presence with populist charm. His wife is brilliant, talented, warm and magic on the stage. He represents a return to American values of hard work while still CARING enough to help those in need. After 8 years of the idiot prince "divider/decider," Obama is EXACTLY what we need to make us feel like American isn't a bad word. God bless Kucinich for throwing some 11th hour love in Oba...

A Sully post dedicated to my comment about the UK/Iraq boondoggle... Am I a total blog-geek (bleek??) for smiling widely about this? My office colleagues were impressed, so maybe not. Still... to have my observations played out on such a large stage ( a follow-up appears here ) is enormously gratifying. Even moreso, by someone for whom I have much respect. Now if I could only find Bill Maher's phone number...

I've been much to busy reading and debating other's posts to keep up this blog, but the UK/Iran drama has inspired me. During the the hostage/POW (depends on the context) ordeal, British confessions of trespassing into Iranian waters were released. These tapes and statements offered contrite prisoners, apparently well-treated and healthy. After a relatively brief period, they were returned home where they immediately repudiated the "confessions" as coerced. The conventional wisdom response... "OF COURSE they were coerced." Honestly, did anyone believe for a second that the British Navy had equipment so sketchy that they couldn't settle their location? No, the sailors said what they needed to in order to get home. Meanwhile, the U.S. position is that torture (or torture-like) techniques garner valuable information as opposed to false statements engineered to end discomfort. Anybody else see a disconnect here? Also, a brilliant poem by Suheir Hammad ...

For the first time in history there are three "minority" candidates with some real steam behind them in the Presidential race. Barack Obama announced first, the ubiquitous Hillary Clinton made it official next and now Bill Richardson has made his intentions clear. In constrast to the GOP offerings of McCain, Romney, Brownback and Giuliani (so far), the Dems have a truly diverse slate that speak to their base in a meaningful way. I just wish they were more electable... Debra Dickerson makes some interesting points about Obama at Salon.com (sign in required). I don't buy off on her rationale for calling Obama "not black," but I understand what she's saying. She also shares my concerns about his relative inexperience and other niggling little details that could derail him. DailyKos has some stats on the nearly worthless "hypothetical match-up polling. Clinton and Obama actually look pretty good here, but either/or polling this early in the game is...

Hometown boy Deval Patrick makes good in a big way with his SWEEPING victory in the Dem. primary for the Governorship of Massachussetts. Patrick handily captured 50% of the votes, leaving his competition to split the rest. All told, he won nearly every county in the state, painting an electoral map of surprising uniformity for this history-making win. I didn't hear much about his candidacy until election day, but his progressive positions give me a good feeling for our Bluest of Blue states. Job well done.