End It Now

There is a bizarre, and even tragic, unreality to the continuing drama playing out in the Democratic primary. Partly due to the seven-week gap between the first 42 contests and this week's match-up in Pennsylvania, and partly due to the tenacity and temerity of the Clintons, this election is being presented as close and not yet over.

But it is over.

Dragging it out any longer only serves to indulge the Clintons' narcissism, while damaging the Democratic party's chances for victory in November. A few observations:

First: The numbers are clear: Clinton cannot surpass Obama's elected delegate total in the contests that remain. It is not unlike a fifty-two lap motor race. In the first forty-three laps, Obama has passed her twice, and built up a lead that is insurmountable. Now, in the midst of the 44th lap, it only appears to be close, but it is not. The only way she could possibly win is either by changing the rules of the game in Michigan and Florida, or convincing a substantial number of superdelegates to cast their ballots for her -- overturning the results of the elections to date. Either of these two scenarios would cause a devastating upheaval within the party, bringing on what I call a "1968 moment."

Second: There is no doubt that the Democratic base has been energized by this election. The record number of voters, volunteers, and contributors point to this fact. But, at the same time, it is important to acknowledge that real damage is occurring within the Democratic constituency. Polls that show a growing fracture within the Democratic coalition should be read as cautionary signs to be heeded. Those Beltway pundits and party regulars who say "Don't worry, after the convention, Democrats will come together" are out of touch with the real damage that has been done in the minds of voters on both sides of the divide.

Early on, Senator Obama spoke eloquently about the degree to which cynicism had infected our politics, resulting in voters no longer believing what politicians have to say. Only those who did not understand his message, or heed the lesson he sought to teach, can believe that Hillary and Bill Clinton will be easily able to undo the negativity they have created. Some voters will surely ask, "Were they lying then, or are they lying now?"

Third: There is no doubt that Senator Clinton is a talented and an extraordinarily intelligent person. Her tragic flaw is her belief that only she is capable of leading. It is this that has caused her to engage in an effort to demean her opponent and engage in the kind of campaign that she once decried as "the politics of personal destruction." It is this that I call her narcissism, and the degree to which it has damaged not only the Democratic chances in November, but also her reputation -- defines the pathological self-destruction that so often follows from narcissistic behavior

This has gone on too long, and should end now. Former President Clinton has argued that all the states should be given a chance to vote. They should have that chance. And, if this campaign were focused on issues and a debate over competing visions of leadership, I would say, "Let it continue."

But this has not been the case. Given the behavior of the Clinton campaign to date, and the expectation this behavior will continue, I believe that prolonging this agony will only create deeper division. For this reason, it should end now.

My fellow superdelegates should wait no longer. As party leaders, we are uniquely positioned, and have the responsibility, to speak out. Indecision only serves to enable bad behavior. It is time for us to either demand that the behavior change, or act to end this now.

Read more reactions from Huffington Post bloggers to the Pennsylvania Primary results

Comments

[VosVos]

Super D's are merely scared crapless by the Clintons. Clintons will eat their young to prove they are "right." Can you imagine what it is like going against them? Ask Richardson. If they had a video of the guy cheating on his wife they would have posted it on youtube. We can't afford to allow those people anywhere near the Whitehouse.

[claudiam]

Absolutely. I have been writing about this for days. It is time for them to show some backbone. If they had stood up when the numbers showed that Hillary could not make the grade our party would not be in such turmoil. I am so heartsick over this. I am an Obama supporter, but if Hillary won it fair and square I would be behind her too. And If she is allowed to steal the nomination I will hold my nose and vote for her because the bottom line is the Supreme Court. I thought we were all sick with the current Administration and their anticks so why would folks continue to vote for someone that continues to exhibit the same lack of integrity? Bill Richard, to date, seems to be the only one out there with some integrity. He stated it well on CNN

[mikekev58]

Thank you all for discounting the millions who have supported Hillary and thousands who still want to cast their votes. Your arrogance mirrors that of your master.

And claudiam..­.you say you will hold your nose and vote for Hillary even if she steals the nomination, yet you question why "would folks continue to vote for someone that continues to exhibit the same lack of integrity(as the Bush administra­tion."

You are not only self-contradictory, you are also hysterical.

[TexasMom]

I won't vote for Sen. Clinton if she "steals" the nomination. I'll vote for her is she was ahead in the pledged delegates at the end of the primary season but that seems virtually impossible so she would have to get it by the superdelegates "disenfranchising" the primary and caucus states that went before.

I know I should say I'd vote for her anyway but I can't be a part of sending the Clintons back for another round in the White House if she hasn't legitimately earned the right to try for it. I'll vote for the down-ticket races to increase a Dem. majority in the House and Senate so we can end this war by Congress exercising their legislative abilities to quit funding the war. But I just can't be a part of rewarding her kind of politics.

[MontyCello]

One pleasant thought your post conjured in my mind. If the Clintons
eat their young, (which I think you are right in saying) doesn't that
at some point mean a world free of Clintons..­. like a tropical breeze
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

[lafrance]

But, now the Clintons have managed to get the media in their corner to do more damage to the nominee. If the supers don't get a spine and end this, now, we are going to lose. Period.

[Mctiggs]

Obviously the media is not in Hillary's corner. How more plain can we make it? Should we go with an upstart who knows almost nothing about running the country or a super strong woman who can wether the storm? I'm sick of the media's love of Obama. He is nothing. He cannot win in November. Do you really want 4 more years of the same Republican garbage?/// Enough. Vote for Hillary. The 90s were years of peace and prosperity. Please bring them back.

[StillIRise]

I hadn't thought of this before, but one of my friends suggested something that convinced me even more that the media is obviously helping Hillary. When Hillary ran out of money in PA. and all the talk was about Obama outspending her on ads, etc., the media itself gave her the television coverage that she couldn't afford to purchase. In the days leading to the election, all we saw on the media was Hillary: her speeches, her arguments against Obama, her campaign stops, and so on. There were flashes of Obama here and there, but nothing compared to the coverage Hillary received. The media has been helping Hillary all along. When Obama won an election, no matter how big the margin, the media responded by trying to figure out how Hillary can still beat him. To the contrary, when Hillary won an election, whether by one point or ten points, all the talk was about how well she had done. The media repeats Hillary's spins as if they were truth or fact; when she criticizes Obama, they criticize Obama. And who can even still question what ABC did?

BTW, the nineties are over! Wanting Hillary back in the White House to get Bill back in the White House is wanting to go backward, and it can never happen. Even if Hillary does manage to get elected, she will not bring back the nineties. No one can, and it's delusional to think this way.

Still I Rise

[thesimulacra]

If your candidate is so great, and so electable, and so qualified, why is she losing?

[joyf1]

You just said the operative words, Mctiggs. You said, "Please bring THEM back." Therein lies the problem. Do you really believe Bill will let Hillary run the country and not try to steamroll her? He's so pushy and obnoxious now. My support is for Obama. I don't feel like voting for Bill again. The right wing nuts will come out of the woodwork if THEY are in the general election in November. THEY wouldn't have a prayer's chance.

[thesimulacra]

And furthermore, if you think the "peace and prosperity" of the 90s was thanks to "the Clintons", you need a few lessons in Economics. Bill Clinton wasn't responsible for the record growth of the 90s, Al Gore was because it was he who promoted and passed the legislation that made the Internet available to the public. What Bill Clinton WAS responsible for however was not reigning in Mr. Greenspan and the Fed, whose reckless interest rate games resulted in the crash of 2000.

And by the way, Hillary wasn't president in the 90s!

[combatveteran]

And I am sick of the media's relentless attention to Clinton. Abraham Lincoln was another upstart.
I am sick of the media-Bosnian sniper fire comment would be the end of any candidacy except the Clintons. You sound like Bill o'reiiley.

[AC500]

Hillary's fatal flaw is being Hillary.

[gotsomerice]

Barack Obama = George McGovern, Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis, Al Gore and John Kerry

Everyone better be ready in November!

[lafrance]

Hillary is more like them. A carbon copy of the wooden, disliked and no personality model of your list, Gotsomerice.

[mikekev58]

No, I knew them all, and Hillary would clean their clocks if they had been in this primary, the younger versions of them that is.
Maybe it's the prism of my own preference, but I think Barry comes off wooden. I can not imagine him speaking directly to the American people via the tube and motivating them to follow him as President.
I hope I'm wrong.

[nighthawk808]

McGovern was before my time, but not the others. Obama isn't even CLOSE to being any of them. (Except possibly for Gore, since Gore won popular vote and the election in 2000.) I don't remember any of them energizing and inspiring thousands upon thousands of Americans. I don't remember any of them raising piles of cash from small contributors and those who have never contributed to a campaign before. I don't remember any of them becoming a viable presidential candidate through sheer determination and ability rather than just having been in Washington long enough for their turn to come.

Comparing Obama to any of them is a sign of just how desperate you've become. I'm ready for November. I'm ready for change!

[gotsomerice]

Desperate? No not really. At this point I don't even think that either of them can beat McCain. I just feel like the history is about to repeat itself.

[Mctiggs]

That's why we need to vote for Hillary. Do you really want 4 more years of republicans? You forgot to mention Jimmy Carter. A wonderful man who really shouldn't have been president. Remember? Do you also remember the Clinton years? A balanced budget? Need I say more?

[TexasMom]

I remember the 90's. I especially remember all the sordid stuff I had to explain to my then 5 year old because we ALL heard about it on the tv, or the radio, or from the person in the grocery store. You know I think this would have all be sewed up for Hillary if she just would have decked Bill and thrown his stuff onto the White House lawn.

Don't flame me over this like it's unfair to mention because this was also the reality of the Clinton White House and I'm a Democrat. It was her personal choice to do what she did when faced with her husband's bad habits and she has to live with the consequences. If her judgement looked calculating or the ultimate in victimhood this is some of the "vetting" the public has done and some of us don't like what we saw.

[combatveteran]

Yes you need to say more. Loss of Congress. Gridlock. Polarization. No energy policy.
al-Queda. Further loss of Congress. Need I say more.
Who are we voting for? Bill? The good old days?

[thesimulacra]

And aren't you just so excited at the prospect of Barack Obama losing in the General election! You're so obsessed with Hillary that you'd gleefully subject this country to 4 more years of GOP rule just because you're mad that your candidate couldn't win the nomination? Grow up!

[gotsomerice]

thesimulacra, there is no need for personal attack. I am just stating my point.

I think the reason that Hillary won PA is:

Hillary = Devil we know.
Obama = Devil we don't know.

[combatveteran]

I don't think so my friend. he has a prohillary media to get past, but he will chew mccain up. he will make him look as silly as that plastasized blonde alien looking thing he calls his second family value wife

[druidmary]

end it? No one says that if either of them hasn't reached the 2025 by now, the other one should concede!

the rules are 2,025, anything else is stealing and reason for up-rising.

[HillbillyBob]

I have already voted in NC early voting for Obama. Would that I had had the choice to vote for Dennis Kucinnich or John Edwards. I am tempted to say I will stay home if HRC is the nominee, but I can't stand 4 more years of imperial bushnazi corporatist theonutcase bullshit. I m sick unto death of their traitorous lies, thieving, rights stealing etc ad nauseum.

[Mctiggs]

Will someone please tell me why we should vote for an upstart person whose only talent is to know how to work the system thinks he should be entitled to be president? He is a dreamer, the son of dreamer parents who abandoned him. Hello, what about that makes him presidential material? I hope you're happy when McCain is president, because Obama is unelectable in a national election.

[thesimulacra]

"He is a dreamer, the son of dreamer parents who abandoned him."

How disgusting. You use his parents transience against him? What a foul mind you must have. And I suppose all presidents should come from the pedigreed backgrounds of the Rodhams, eh? You like aristocracy?

If your candidate is so electable then why is she losing? And why does every national poll show her behind McCain and Obama? Obama is winning because more people in America want him to be president than they do Hillary. That's why he's winning. There are no numbers or facts that exist that contradict this and the fact that you keep spreading this misinformation leads me to believe you lack the capacity for critical thought.

[combatveteran]

My you love to repeat yourself. Obama will make McCain look like a fool. he is a man who can't understand the difference between tactics and strategy. Has no concept of asymetric warfare.
Mr Obama is not bought, he is youthful, he is articulate, inspirational, intelligent, and he is not afraid to make the right decision even when not politically expedient to do so. Iraq invasion-No, a bad idea.
"I hope your happy when you've broken your toy Johnny"

[combatveteran]

He was such a jerk his mom even died on him. "I hope you are happy when McCain is president.­" Man that make me want to vote for clinton.

[GV97]

His mother did not abandon him.

[whatsmyname]

Mctiggs, you think you can come in here with your hat in your hand and asheepish smile on your face and make an end run on Obama, and you think no one will "SPOT" you? We smell ya comin' and you are all alike; you can't stand to have a black as your leader -it does something to your head and you really haven't thought much about it since you werew 5-years-old, when you learned to be biased. That was the same time you learned to "signify" and how's that workin' for ya? it's a laugh a minute because y'all think you are so slick. Oh, and your kinda thinkin? Well, it has nothing to do with YOUR RACE NOR DOES IT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH YOUR JOB, YOUR ZIP CODE. YOU'RE JUST THAT WAY! AND BECAUSE OF THAT, YOU NEVER, EVER HEAR A WORD THE MAN SAYS, DO YOU? Psst, here's a tip Mc, change don't hurt; it's good for the soul, the mind and thinking never cost as much as people says it does. So, Mc, remember THE MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE, IT ONLY WORKS.....­..... WHEN IT'S OPEN!

[britethere]

If it is HRC...The Clintons I will find another way to go...Nader­...maybe even McCain....­NEVER CLINTON

[OrionGal]

I have a quote I would like to post -

"He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche

[mikekev58]

And Nietzsche is whose consultant?

[December7]

End the v/pBush-Bu­sh-Clinton­-Bush-Clin­ton, dynasty since 1984
Its tried, tried, flawed and failed

[Tovlogos]

Amen.

"Dragging it out any longer only serves to indulge the Clintons' narcissism­."

This is the thrust of the issue. Therefore, how could I vote for these Clinton people undr any circumstances? Their behavior has made my skin crawl. If the Clintons have been this flagrant before the acquisition of the presidency; what would they be like if given unbridled power? Bush may have gone mad; but Hillary will be worse.

[mikekev58]

I wish those of you using the word "dynasty" would look it up. Dynasties don't involve merely two people, or even three, in a short period of time.
I suppose your revulsion to so-called political dynasties would extend to the Kennedys as well then? They had 3 shots at the Presidency within 20 years.
Furthermore, for you to fail to distinguish between the 8 Clinton years and the 12 Bush years demonstrates your blindness to anything Clinton. I think that was George W. Bush's approach when he took over and look where we are.

[combatveteran]

herbert wasn't that bad. clinton was a bad dream. walker is a night terror

[Chanrazig]

Stop screeching for Hillary to quit. Why should she? Virtually half the people voting in the primaries voted for Hillary. That means roughly half of us want her to be president. 'Progressives' who keep trashing Hillary are antagonizing other Dems/liberals etc. Why do that when eventfully we'll have to pull it together?

There are many reasons to support Hillary and they all spell "WIN". She’s captured every big state the Dems have to win in the general with the exception of Ill. She’s strong and focused with incredible courage just to withstand the abuse aimed at her. (The left needs lessons in compassion). She connects to ordinary voters.
Many Obama wins are in red states Republican will probably take. His big caucus state wins are organizationally impressive. However, about 4% of party loyalists attend caucuses. This is not the demographic that will decide the election. Yes, Fla and MI broke the rules but discounting them will be divisive and risky. When they're counted Hillary is in the running.

I don't think Obama is electable: he’s inexperienced; does poorly in debates. He comes across unsure and tentative. (Someone needs to set up coaching sessions and grill him 'till he gets it right...li­ke they did for Reagan); he is light on content and specifics and is not connecting with the blue-collar crowd. There's a gritty part to politics, as there is to life, and Obama doesn't seem to want to go there. And this leaves people feeling unsure.

[Schnitzel]

The operative word in your post is "virtually". You're attempting to use it as a surrogate for "Less than." If that wasn't the case she'd have more delegates.

The big states that you refer to trend democratic in national elections anyway. They're not likely to be that decisive. New York and California didn't stop Bush from getting elected twice did they? Do you really think hillary will WIN when she's confronted by John McCain about the fact that her husband accepted an $800,000 payoff from the Columbian government which was then diverted into her campaign coffers? Hillary has more skeletons in her closet than Arlington National Cemetary and the republicans have been collecting ALL of them for the last 8 years. If Obama decided to stoop to Hillary's level of "Gotcha" campaigning her campaign would not only be over, she'd probably be looking at some serious prison time. You can't WIN if you're a CROOK.

You might not think Obama is electable, fair enough. I have some questions about that myself; but I'm certainly not crazy to think that Hillary is electable. That's just absurd.

[mikekev58]

She is more electable than Barry, because there's nothing they can throw at her that we don't already know about, and the Clintons don't wait for a week before they respond to attacks.
Based on Barry's deer-in-th­e-headligh­ts demeanor following the opening questions of the Philly debate, I am very unconvinced that he can communicate the bearing that Americans expect of their Presidents. McCain will be the war hero, Barry will be the lawyer. With Hillary, there is no war hero contrast, just two tough people fighting it out and connecting the the American people as they do.
Barry needs to work on his toughness.

[McFlipFlop]

Yes, please stop screeching. Didn't read the article did you?

[ruscle]

No, Chanrazig did not read the article. Instead he/she just started screeching for people to stop screeching for his screeching candidate to stop screeching.

[nighthawk808]

I'm sure Texas will be surprised to discover that they're not a big state, since Obama won there, too.

If Hillary was ahead instead of behind, you wouldn't hear a peep from the "FL and MI should count even though they broke the rules and knew they were doing it!" crowd. She didn't care about them until it turned out she wasn't going to be appointed the nomination like she was expecting. Besides, do you really think it's a good idea for your candidate to be pushing to have a state vote when she won less than half the votes in an election in which she was running *unopposed*? That is a pretty weak result, to say the least.

[mikekev58]

Recall that Barry urged his supporters to vote undecided in Michigan, and of course he was on the ballet in Florida.

Yes, Obama went away with more delegates, although fewer popular votes. He will get even fewer popular votes in November, as will Hillary. It's the big swing states, stupid.

[Mctiggs]

I agree. The important point in this message is Obama is unelectable. Talk to real people. People who are afraid to state the obvious, but will vote their gut feelings in November, just as they did in Pennsylvania. What about Obama as VEEP? Of course not, he's too egotistical. It has to be now. My question is, why did the media "crown" him? Comparing him to JFK is unbelievable! JFK was a wonderful statesman. Obama is an upstart who thinks he's "entitled.­" This country is tired of entitlements.

[thesimulacra]

Entitled? ENTITLED? Where do you keep coming up with these things? The guy was over 20 points behind Hillary last summer. He has received donations from more citizens than any candidate in the history of the United States. He is ahead in all national polls of Democrats. He is ahead in delegates. He is ahead in the popular vote. Oh but wait let me guess, because it's convenient to you, you're going to count Florida and Michigan, right? Even though your candidate agreed beforehand that they wouldn't count, and Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan.

What is wrong with you?

[combatveteran]

Mctiggs you a bit mixed up, I would say that JFK was entitiled upstart, think about it.

[ElliotNC]

Stop the voting!
Stop the Counting!
- John Bolton, 2000


"We already have a winner... stop counting!"
- Howard Baker, 2000

"Don't count Florida!"
- Antonin Scalia, 2000

[nighthawk808]

The difference is that Obama is so far ahead that to drag it out further is worse than pointless: it gives McCain more time to strategize and less to defend against. Florida 2000 was a nail-biter; this one is so over the fork is already in the dishwasher.

[mikekev58]

Obama is not "so far ahead" that the question of electabiity can not be presented as an important factor to the super delegates.

I sure hope all the people who are calling for this to end and for the super delegates to respect the will of the people will remind Ted Kennedy and John Kerry of who won MA.

[rma2108]

I was confused for a minute, since I read an utterly inane article a few days ago by John Zogby. Two different people, this one sensible . . .

[rjcrane]

James Zogby is absolutely right. The only thing he fails to mention is the role the media has played in aiding the Clintons' ability to bamboozle their undereducated racist supporters into believing this is still a close race, whereby she can still collect money from these naive souls and get them to work for her for free allowing her to continue. I sort of equate this with the failure of the Democratic party to sell the Iraq war as a lost cause to help end it, allowing Bush and his neocons and military shills to bamboozle enough people into believing we can still win or if we keep throwing more money and fodder into this fiasco we can keep from losing what has already been lost.

I find it appalling when I hear so many media pundits and analysts claim this is still a close race in the face of all evidence to the contrary nor has it been for several months now since the only path the Clintons have left to the nomination is to destroy the party at the Convention or if a meteor strikes Obama.

[December7]

Hilary's foreign policy inexperience

A reader points to a flap underway in New Zealand, in which Hillary — asked by Newsweek, for a good joke — told a fairly insulting one about Prime Minister Helen Clark, referring to her (inaccurately) as the "former" prime minister.

As the blogger Rachel Morris points out, the New Zealand press is up in arms, but along with creating some friction with a charter member of the Coalition of the Willing, the incident points to a broader trend: Clinton, despite her image as a steady hand on foreign policy, leads the field on actual foreign policy blunders this cycle.

Along with the New Zealand flap, she's twice created real tension with key heads of state: Putin, who took it badly when she said he "doesn't have a soul"; and Musharraf, whose government reacted furiously when she suggested he might have had Benazir Bhutto killed.

She also made a fairly basic error on the structure of the Pakistani government, and more recently (if, it seems, deliberately) rattled the foreign policy establishment by openly threatening nuclear retaliation against Iran.

These stories haven't really been told as a narrative, because they don't fit the existing narrative. But they are, together, a fairly striking batch.
politico.com

[OrionGal]

Wow, not good when we are seriously in need of a Foreign Policy Leader rather than an Abuser.

[Beaucat]

You are absolutely right. I've been registered as a Democrat since 1972. If the Clintons steal the nomination, I will change my registration to Independent the following day and will not vote for her in the fall (don't know that I'll vote for McCain, may just leave that part of the ballot blank).

If this happens, I'll know exactly what Ronald Reagan meant when he said "I didn't leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left me." If the will of the majority of the voters is overturned -- the will of the voters who voted under the rules that were accepted by the Clintons at the beginning of the contest -- I will assume the Democratic Party has left me and I'll have no qualms about registering as an Independent.

[mikekev58]

Awww...buh­-bye!

[mikonyc]

Mr Zogby, when did you become a mental health professional? Throwing lables like narcissism around is unbecoming of a lay person as yourself. And, it conitnues to amaze me that you Obama supporters cannot see the self indulgence of Mr. Obama himself. He is not going to change Washington, you can see how weak he was in the most recent debate, and the issues that were discussed are the real issues, his views, partonizing at that, and those views of the people closest to him. Obama is not going to debate Clinton again, because he is so raging mad that she has not just dropped out of the race, he can hardly contain himself. If he cannot debate a fellow Democrat, he DEFINITELY cannot debate a Republican. Stop asking Clinton to end the race, Obama does not have the numbers, the race goes on!

[FrankBlackFrancis]

All your arguments ignore the simple fact that Zogby pointed out. She can't beat Obama's pledged delegate count, no one in the party leadership and many agree, believes using the super delegates to supersed that would be disastorous. The campaigns are wasting time and resources tearing each other down while McCain has a free line.
I don't care if Obama is self indulgent, are you a mental helath professional? He might not change Washington but at least he might. He did fine in the debate. If you didn't notice ABC was largely panned and Hillary looked like a hateful and petty shrew. Soemhow you know he's raging mad and why yet you belittle Zogby for calling her a narcisist. He can most definetly debate John McCain, I have no doubts he could debate just about anybody. The race goes on while the party divides wider, McCain is all alone free to bash who ever he wants. Grow up, she lost.

[tommjk]

Well, if it turns out that she has in fact lost, then we all lose, because Obama has zero chance of winning in the general. I hope your school yard taunts will be a comfort to you then.

[Mctiggs]

Mikonye, Thank God there is someone out there who has some sense left in their head. I am so sick of hearing about how wonderful Obama is from the media and all the delusional electorate. We need a strong, experienced person who can stand the heat to stand with us in Hell's kitchen as we take on the domestic and foreign problems we face. Amen.

[PioneerKing]

The Clintons are not going anywhere. They are the most pollitically corrupt couple in North America.
“…In the least discussed issue of the campaign, if the Clintons manage to steal this nomination, Bill Clinton could be back in the White House. There are only so many overseas missions for him then what? He has conducted himself with all the charm of a syphilitic Tiberius..­. “ imagine how he'll be back in power."
“This presents a problem for Barack Obama because he is a worthy man who recoils from shit. The Clintons bathe in shit. Shit sustains them, and shit sustains their hack mouthpiece­s."
"Watch in Indiana as Evan Bayh puts reality through a fun house mirror of vice presidential ambition."
“There is much one can hate about George W. Bush, such as his delusional good humor in response to abject catastrophe. Yet there is now something Americans have grown to hate almost as much...the Hillary "head-bob.­"
“To witness that quasi-human drone, to hear lie after lie after lie, all the while the head nodding up and down, up and down, is to truly know what faces Obama. He is Richard Benjamin in Westworld, fleeing the remorseless robot Yul Brynner.”
“Clintonism is nothing if not remorseless. Let us hope, for the country's sake, Obama can find a way to obliterate it.”
http://www.236.com/blog/w/jerry_and_joe_long/the_clintons_campaign_the_way_6062.php

[mikonyc]

a little mad pioneer king, it must be hard to know the Clintons have hundreds of millions of dollars!

[PioneerKing]

Dude it's not about the money the trust fund is secure. Everyone is America has the ability to become millionaires. It's their political avarice. They simply creep me out with all of their blatant lies. It's the sheer arrogance that they are the smartest people in the world. The slick Willie lies, the head bobbing and weaving that Hillary does as she lies. It’s the duplicity. I mean it that's what folks want then there is McCain/Bush/Cheney. It’s the playing on one’s intelligence.