The Obama campaign is right about one thing. Clinton's only hope is that something unforeseen and very bad happens to Obama. The issue with Obama's church was foreseeable and foreseen, and Clinton's supporters who brought it up were right that it would become an issue once it was more broadly covered. However, Obama handled it masterfully, going beyond damage control and into turning a problem into an opportunity. Clinton has every right to hold out in hopes something else goes wrong, but that's all she's running on at this point.

Now please, both campaigns, get after McCain on this Al Qaida/Iran flap. The media will just ignore it if the campaigns ignore it. One thing we should have learned from Rove is that going after an opponent on his perceived strength is an effective strategy, and unlike Rove, Clinton and Obama don't even need to lie about McCain's record.

Those of you arguing that she should go to prison because arson can be terrorism are completely missing the point. You're being fooled by an argument frequently used against wrongly accused people: the crime was terrible, therefore the defendant must be guilty. Whether this is terrorism or not is beside the point. The point is this appears to have been a political prosecution, and any of here could have been convicted in the same circumstances. After all the politicization of the Justice Department and all the political prosecutions at the hands of the US Attorneys who didn't get fired, why are you so quick to presume the trial was fair and Waters is guilty? You could much more safely assume the opposite. You could assume they were locking up every leftist dissident they could, and false criminal charges are just a tool for doing that.

No, I don't know for sure she's innocent, but from this article which is what all of us are going on, you sure can't be sure she's guilty. And don't tell me we have to believe the jury. Even in the Georgia Thompson case, the jury was fooled.

In this story on generals telling Bush the armed forces are strained, the only non-government spokesman quoted is Fred Kagan:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-03-26-bush-iraq_N.htm?csp=34

This is an impressive speech, I say that as an Obama supporter, but there are some things she still doesn't get. Her proposed commission consists of people who helped create the problem, especially Greenspan, but also Rubin. She has never figured out, with foreclosures or other issues, that solving them isn't a matter of getting the beltway elite to do something different, but to stop listening to them and get them out of power.

Same with the proposal to protect mortgage brokers from lawsuits. The problem has been the lack of accountability, not the excess of it. This immunity from lawsuits is something Congress has grown fond of granting to favored corporate special interests. We need less of it, not more. Clinton is smart and knows her details, but in her intimate familiarity with the problems of each tree, she can't see the problems of the forest.

In the linked Fox article, Rich Lowry said, “A statement like that suggests a distorted view of America and what it’s about.” This is coming the editor of National Review. He and his magazine haven't gotten anything right in this century, at least, yet with a consistent record of getting it wrong he says that about Mrs. Obama. What a delusional twit. They're obviously desperately stretching for anything to twist.

If you're trying to rebuild a country, wouldn't the brick factory be one of the first things you'd get operating rather than waiting six years? Oh right, it wasn't privatized. Can't have bricks produced the wrong way in neocon laissez-faire heaven.

A couple things truck me. Hagen was working on Native American issues, as was Tom Heffelfinger, the Minnesota USA who was on the firing list before he left "voluntarily" (in quotes because I suspect he's still too loyal to admit he jumped before he was pushed). While Hagen and Heffelfinger were doing that, state secretary of state Mary Kiffmeyer (since defeated) did her best to interfere with Indians from voting, like suddenly announcing right before the election that tribal IDs weren't acceptable for registering. It still seems more likely DOJ fired her for being lesbian, but maybe it was racial, or racial as well.

By the way, a lesbian who was a loyal Republican? Isn't that like a homeless man applying for country club membership?

Obama remembers it being acrimonious and she doesn't. Obama is so measured and steady, he might have blown up at her and nobody could tell.

Just kidding. You're saying the same thing about the Twins as those with their fannies in the Metrodome seats. You'll hear us saying those young guys are going to be good, but the context clearly refers to next year, not next month. no, the dissing came not from you, but the schedule makers, who decided that with Hunter being signed away by the free-spending team, the best thing to do is have the Angels play their first series in Minnesota!