touche! Yes, it only appears that Hillary is throwing a solid convergence of a diverse economic agreement to the wind. Actually she is testing us. Are we going to go with the secular point-of-view, or are we courageous enough to have faith in her statements that she is doing this because she cares the most about the working-class?

You'll notice that most Barack supporters will get into the details of what the economists are saying, whereas Hillary supporters are willing to go on her experience. Barack needs others to make his decisions. Hillary only needs her knowledge that she understands the working-class. This is another perfect example of Joan's concern that Barack is out of touch. Why else (other than being in better touch)would Hillary understand this issue more deeply than Barack?

Chuck Todd wrote:

...nearly half of all remaining delegates will get handed out tomorrow. And the math will be a lot more crystal clear after tomorrow, both in delegates and the popular vote. Following Guam, there are now 404 pledged delegates up grabs, and 187 of them will be decided on Tuesday. Plus, per our count, there are 268 undeclared superdelegates. Here are the basics of what each candidate needs: Assuming he wins half of the delegates tomorrow (93), Obama needs just 38% of ALL remaining delegates to get to the magic number of 2,025. If Clinton wins 94 delegates on Tuesday, she will need 66% of all remaining delegates. In addition, assuming that delegate split tomorrow, then Clinton will need 85% of all remaining PLEDGED delegates to catch Obama for the lead in that category. Moreover, if Clinton simply wanted to cut Obama's pledged delegate lead to 100, she'd need to win 62% of all remaining delegates after tomorrow. As we've noted before, the math is certainly difficult for Clinton.

What a major point misser, Mr. Todd is!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nobody disputes that Hillary, based on the math of who is winning, probably won't win the primary. But the reason Hillary will and SHOULD win has nothing to with the present math involved. It has everything to do with the fact that we simply don't know what Barack will do or say next. I defy anybody on the earth to tell me exactly what Barack will say later today or what we will learn about his past. As long as Hillary stays in the race, she will win if we find out that Barack said something really snide about the working-class or if he turns out to be secretly telling his friends that he has no idea how to run the nation. Anything like that will make Hillary the winner. It has nothing to do with math. It has nothing to do with votes. It has nothing to do with this primary thus far.

It has everything to do with the possibility that an awful truth about Obama might come out. This is why we often stress that Hillary has been vetted. We can be almost certain that we won't be surprised by Hillary. Even when she shocks us with her "memory", "misstatements" or dis-economic theories, we don't dwell on it because it doesn't mean the same thing as it would mean about Barack.

Here is an example: Wright.

Here is another example: "bitter".

You want another example: "I'll talk to Iran".

It really is endless. But when it comes to Clinton, the people who already can't stand her already can't stand her!!! They don't need to know more about her; they already feel sick about her the same way that more people might start feeling sick about Obama. We simply don't know.

So when I read all this math and how it relates to the primary, I almost start to laugh. Just wait and see what happens....

I think when Hillary made that comment two years ago in which she referred to God as "She", she was just kidding. I think the bible never mentions God having female genitals. And while it never explicitly makes reference to God's penis, it does use "He" whenever it refers to Him.

For instance in Deutoronomy when God says that any man with crushed testicles CAN NOT enter the house of the Lord (as well as seven generations of his family) the bible refers to God as a man.

Also, when the bible says that God created the rainbow to ensure that He always remembers the promise He just made to never again kill every human being, it explicitly mentions that God has a man's body.

I think it will be very hard for people to prove that God menstruates. In fact, I bet nobody will ever prove that.

There is no way Hillary really meant that God was into wearing dresses!

I think AKA read your use of "IF" to imply that you had evidence that God was a boy. But you were simply letting me know that this issue of God's gender isn't officially settled yet, right?

Jeez, it is not easy proving all this stuff about God, Hillary and Barack. It takes a lot of thinking and feeling and wishing and hoping. I need a break. somebody send me an email at

itotallycommameanit at yahoo

if there is any good evidence that the media find which proves Barack is as ready on day one, is equally electable or is definitely not just a dreamy worker who expect results to just emerge from the clouds of his dreams. Send me an email if the media can prove otherwise...