Listen to Obama's speech on race. He does mention that these side bars on Ferraro and Wright do not amount to a hill of beans and will keep politics as we know it instead of any meaningful change.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/30/opinion/30rich.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

This says it all.

Hillary gets caught in a lie. She says she misspeaks. She deflects it back to Wright. Back to racial fearmongering.

Obama will win against McCain. He was so far behind when Hillary was queen-in-waiting. How hard will it be to trounce McCain? McCain is only a bogeyman that Clintons have constructed. Obama will win and he will win big because even as flawed as he is, he is still a uniter and not the divider of at least the Democratic Party.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/30/opinion/30rich.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

This says it all.

Hillary gets caught in a lie. She says she misspeaks. She deflects it back to Wright. Back to racial fearmongering.

Obama will win against McCain. He was so far behind when Hillary was queen-in-waiting. How hard will it be to trounce McCain? McCain is only a bogeyman that Clintons have constructed. Obama will win and he will win big because even as flawed as he is, he is still a uniter and not the divider of at least the Democratic Party.

What I'm commenting on is the instant acceptance by the Nation, and the HuffPo, and a large constituency here, of the assumption that because he has a winning personality, that his policies are progressive. They're not, time and again. Notice the recent endorsement of Obama by Casey. Big victory! Really? Why do you think that Obama's endorsements come so heavily from the Blue Dogs? Could it be that he's in their pocket? Could it be that, when he gets elected, all the people expecting the second coming of FDR will find a Calvin Coolidge in blackface?

Ted Kennedy is a Blue Dog Democrat? John Kerry, Bill Richardson, Marian Edelman, Chris Dodd, Byron Dorgan, Russ Feingold, Tim Johnson, Patrick Leahy, Jay Rockefeller, Tom Daschle, Bill Bradley, Gary Hart are Blue Dog Democrats?

I do have my doubts about Arriana Huffington from a Republican shill artiste to a reconstructed progressive liberal. But The Nation can sniff out a Blue Dog before you can say it.

The very fact that Richard M. Scaife had anything good to say about hillary means that he has already bought her to do his bidding. Read all about him in a Vanity Fair article on the vast right wing hypocrisy

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/02/scaife200802

To be sure, Edwards took on the populism of Kucinich, clearly after many debates, to separate himself from middle of the road Obama and Clinton. Populism, i.e. caring for the poor, providing stop gap measures to raise education as well as living standards for those below the poverty line, is really stench in the noses of those Americans who call such measures communist, handouts, welfare frauds, welfare mothers, etc.

That is what the Klintons took on as they moved the Democratic party to the right and corporate welfare. The chasm between the rich and the poor has so widened that America now looks and acts like "third" world countries with corruption at the top and rampant illiteracy and poverty at the bottom.

Hillary can never claim the road to that because after all it was she and her cuckold husband who wiped out the very sustainance of these people. Obama is afraid to venture into that territory, because he would lose all the Reagan Democrats who voted for Klinton for that very reason. Kucinich was the only candidate who took this road and look what everyone did to him, including Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. Enter Edwards.

I am willing to buy this story and see where that goes. Obama is afraid to lose the right of center Repubcrats and he should in all honesty address the issue of poverty without blaming the victims.

Many on Salon, most notably LJWalker is afraid of just that, about Obama and Barbara Ehrenreich who she ridicules as hanging on to the fringe when in fact, she is one of the most celebrated social commentators of our times. I don't doubt that LJWalker will hold her nose and vote for Obama when the time comes, but the anxiety of bringing in that block of voters disenfranchised by the Klintons is quite noxious for many Americans. But people below the poverty line are Americans too and Democracy is not only the rule of the majority but also the protection for the least amongst us.

NAFTA is Only Half the Story

http://www.counterpunch.org/

Newly released White House records demonstrate that Clinton lied about NAFTA. NAFTA, however, is but a single thread in a web of deception regarding globalization and free trade. Clinton is lying not only about NAFTA, but about outsourcing as well. And the evidence comes, not from Obama, but from official records, video tapes, quotations and recordings of Clinton speeches abroad.

Consider this. In 2005 Senator Clinton visited New Delhi, India, ("far, far from our shores"), where she met wealthy business leaders, venture capitalists eager for U.S. investment. A few years prior to her visit, Enron gained a foothold in India's economy. Enron uprooted local communities, fleeced the public coffers, then pulled out of India with the profits of unregulated greed.

Can anyone point me to who won the delegate race in Texas?