I think it is bad politics and bad reporting to write-off the importance of a second place finish for Edwards in S.C. It appears certain he will obtain the 15 per cent minimum for delegates.

The nasty Clinton campaign may be hurting Hillary more than the Clintons think. In 1980, Jerry Brown was the difference between Ted Kennedy carrying a bunch of states against Carter and when Brown failed to make the ballot in New York, Kennedy won. It gave his candidacy a brief breath of life. [I confess: I was attorney for the Kennedy campaign in the successful challenge to Brown's nominating petitions. They were pretty awful].

In this situation, Edwards continued candidacy may make it impossible for either Obama or Clinton to sew-up the nomination and of that may very well be the best possible result for the Democratic Party. A true nominating convention. Great television if nothing else. (See Republicans in 1952 and Democrats in 1960).

I screwed-up the signature link to my blog my first post.

If anyone cares its http://johnklotz.blogspot.com

There was a time when American's valued "class" with a small "c." I'm not talking about economic "class" or social "class" but a genuine understanding that it's not all about me and the ability to congratulate an successful opponent with grace and dignity, understanding that there is a tomorrow and that in politics (and sports) today's adversary may be tomorrow’s ally or team mate. Among the classless moments of my memory was Nixon's "You won't have Nixon" to kick around any more" and Roger Maris's comment after the Yankees lost to Pittsburg in the 1960 World Series: "We all know who the best team was. It's too bad it didn't win."

Right up there is Bill Clinton's Fred Thomasesque speech in Missouri following Saturday night. It was all about Bill and not much about Hillary. The anchors at CNN and MSNBC didn't make that up. It was there on the screen.

There's empathy and there is false empathy. There is the empathy of one who truly feels your pain and the pseudo-empathy of a narcissist who adopts empathy as a mask for his or her self involvement.

In Missouri after Hillary's lost Bill Clinton by talking about himself and his administration settled the score for me. His empathy has all the sincerity of Mitt Romney's smile.

Maybe it's time that the Clintonistas started reviewing the great accomplishments of the Clinton administration. Was he better on the environment than Bush - by a million millions. Was he better on the economy: Remember NAFTA/ Clinton rode the Wall Street wave and left office just before the deluge.

NAFTA was his, remember? Not to denigrate his entire administration. To me, the most pressing issue for electing almost any Democrat will be, and remains, the reactionary packing of the Supreme Court. We lose thus one and the Court may be gone for a generation.

In 2000 I played a ,inor role in helping Hillary her the Sierra Club endorsement. I have no regrets. I wish her a long, long productive career in the United States Senate. I think she will have one.

A good political speech is a bit like well written pornography. It makes its points without being graphic.

That's not to say Obama was pornographic but the genius of his speech Saturday night was to be uplifting and inspiring, while at the same time savaging the Clintons with a meat cleaver. Like Mack the Knife, his white gloves showed nary a trace of red.

Hooray for him.

Maybe because I'm from New York and saw it at work in the 1976 primary and beyond, but there is a deeply troubling aspect of Bill Clinton's use of the Jackson analogy that is truly dark. To a certain segment of the Jewish community "Jesse Jackson" is a code word for anti-semite. It may be unfair, but that is an unpleasant aspect of politics.

That may sound harsh, but the use by Neocons of Jackson as a code word has a long history. Of course, there is that unfortunate use by Jackson of the phrase "hymie town" to describe NYC on one occasion. But even to this date, a certain element of Jewish voters are angry at Jackson.

The question is are the deeply polling and sophistcatingly targeting Clintonistas on to that and does that explain Bill Clinton's repeated use of the Jackson analogy?

Don't bet against it.