...then we're also humoring you, King. This dead animal you bring out every year during declarin' time once resembled a horse. Now its just a lump of rotting flesh. We get it, dude.

I like the burying a Clemens jersey idea. I like the idea of burying Clemens even more. Talk about half-assed!!

"Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton is sketching an agenda for her first 100 days in office that includes the beginning of a troop withdrawal from Iraq and signing legislation that President Bush vetoed."

There won't be a Democratically controlled Congress if she's the nominee, so there won't be any "vetoed" legislation for her to pass. It's not like bills go "back to the pool" if they're vetoed..

Nothing on "Screw-em-gate" yet?

This is fun!

April 22nd can't come soon enough. I wish it was last week...

The pledged delegate race is over. The popular vote race will be over in 2 weeks. Electability? Here's what Creamer @ HuufPo says (emphasis mine):

"Electability. Clinton's entire strategy rests on the premise that she can convince Super Delegates that Obama is unelectable. Only a massive win in Pennsylvania would have credibly made that case. Clinton's victory did little to enhance her argument.

Regardless of the passions of the moment, history shows us that just because voters prefer one candidate in the primary, it doesn't mean they won't vote for her Democratic opponent in a general election when the choice is a Republican. When all is said and done, primary voters almost always vote for the candidate of their party in a general election - regardless of what they might say (on either side) in the middle of a primary fight.

In fact, the people who decide general elections rarely set foot in primary voting booths. They are the independent voters who vote only in general elections and unengaged voters who are would vote Democratic, but have to be mobilized to go to the polls.

The fact is that to whatever degree Hillary might have more appeal among independent rural and blue collar voters, Obama more than makes up in additional appeal to independent suburban voters. Obama's ability to mobilize new young and African American voters in the general election is indisputably greater than Clinton's.

And of course, Obama will not go into the General Election burdened by the towering Clinton negatives that her own negative campaign strategy increases daily.

The polls, and even Pennsylvania Governor and Clinton supporter Ed Rendell, make it clear that Obama can win Pennsylvania in the general election. But Obama can also broaden the playing field with a shot at winning states like Colorado and Virginia."

The whole article is good, and better than this piece of crap. Check it out:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-creamer/last-night-clinton-won-th_b_98165.html

I'm really starting to question my Salon subscription at this point. I've been here since the stained dress revelations (Clinton supporters would do well to remember that), subscribed on the first day it was available! I've been here longer than Walsh, but she might be the one to drive me away...

"It really looks like Obama's support is really from elitists and crybabies."

Out of the gate, you've already insulted me, twice. For no reason. You've just assumed that the first time I've ever suggested I won't be renewing my subscription is some sort of long, "why me?" sob-story and not a informed choice of media outlets. You know what happens when you assume?

"What if your candidate had to take all the crap from the media that Hillary does?"

And then, as if your first statement didn't even exist, you start doing what you accused me of doing: whining.

"The fact is, this will not be the first time two candidates of the same party had a knock-down drag-out fight that went all the way to the party's convention."

True, but the last time was in the 70s. Political calendar wise, that's like stating that basketball now is the same as basketball in the 50s (Dunking is just a fad, you know). Its not.

"But you elitist Obamatons believe the nomination belongs to your candidate by divine right and the "old white woman" should roll over and play dead."

First, why do you think I'm an elitist? Nothing in my post is remotely close to describing my intellect or financial stature! Second, Obama was not the presumptive nominee from 2006 to Iowa - Hillary was. If anyone's supporters feel a "divine right", its Clinton's. Last, notice how I used quotes to denote something YOU ACTUALLY WROTE? That's how they work. I've never called Hillary an "old white woman", so quotes are inappropriate and undermine your point.

"Well, it ain't gonna happen no matter how much you cry, suck your thumb and stamp your feet!"

More insults. How new and different.

"Obama does not have the number of delegates required to win and neither does Hillary and the primary isn't over."

True, neither will have the number of delegates required. But Hillary will have to persuade about 66% of the remaining supers to go to her side. They're currently running 51%-49% for Hillary (like the popular vote, switched). Highly unlikely.

"So, go ahead hold your breath! Who cares."

If you want to have a breath-holding contest for the nomination, that's fine. Just know you've got a 90% chance of dying first. Anyone else got some Hillary email talking points they want me to debunk?