I think this works out as a good thing for the Democrats and I expect the Republicans to drop talking about it today. It gives Democrats another opportunity to branch from this nonsense to talk about the war, like Bob Casey so aptly did. This is another opportunity to frame the discussion and bash the Republicans over their incredibly poor performance again.

So Kerry botched a joke, or worst case, made an inopportune remark - Bush has botched a war, national security, the economy, domestic issues, etc. and his corrupt allies in Congress have rolled over on every occasion.

I really do not care for the customary Defeatocrats who are critizing Kerry in any way today; this plays right into the right wing spin.

Where is that vaulted integrity of John McCain, supposed friend of Kerry and fellow veteran? I wouldn't vote for McCain for dogcatcher at this point.

I really think most Americans will evaluate this fairly and wonder why the Republicans are spending so much time on criticizing a statement, that has already been easily explained. I think Americans will readily come to the conclusion that the Republicans don't have much else to talk about.

There is truth to this: Bush may have been personally motivated by revenge and the administration certainly manipulated revenge emotions to develop public support for the war.

But I'd like to see Salon and other invesigators spend more time researching and exposing the more basic reasons for this war. Which are more than likely concrete and brutally economic. Including the desire to get Iraq's oil grid back online in the face of shrinking worldwide oil reserves so the petrochemical firms continue to handsomely profit. And gross war profiteering by some of the more heinous backers of the Republican party. In Cheney, these base forces are in full union.

Investigative journalism has more work to do to expose, document, correct. Americans have been passive in the face of the billions squandered, even accepting budget cuts in vital programs and rising middle class taxes. We need independent invetigation to raise awareness and demand for change.

The Guardian reports that the US will, absolutely incredulously, spend one million dollars for each Iraqi killed in this war. Let's follow the money and not get too concerned about political manipulation of emotion.

In the shank of the morning, I think Mr. Shapiro left out the most effective Clinton on Obama moment: her zinger about the 2005 oil company giveaway bill. That she opposed it and he voted for it.

Obama has had a lot to say about her judgment voting for the recent Iran Guard bill, but her position on that can at least be intellectually supported.

But voting for the energy bill? Big change? Good judgment? Environmentally responsible? Not to my way of thinking.

Hmmm. Take a look at the below referenced Washington Post article from 1988 (link and clip below). I don't think Bill's observations and analysis have been inaccurate or out of line or really anything but mild expert commentary. Yesterday's SC results seem to line up with history. I voted for Jackson in Illinois's primary in 1988 and in that year, he won 9 states, 7 in the south. He was "the rainbow candidate", not a black candidate, but he certainly benefited from states with large AA voting blocs.

I agree with Joan Walsh that the press gets most of the blame for emphasizing race in South Carolina. Similarly, I think its the Obama supporters who are increasingly risking dividing our party with unwarranted Clinton bashing. In the likely event that Hillary wins, we are certainly going to want the Clintons to be supported as strongly as possible by all Democrats and we are going to want Bill engaged even more than he is now.

P.S. If it matters, I am of a race that "can't dance like a brother."

=======================================================

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-1244969.html

Jesse L. Jackson rode a tidal wave of support in his home state to win a decisive victory tonight in the battle for South Carolina's 44 convention delegates, swamping his nearest competitor, Sen. Albert Gore Jr. (Tenn.), by three to one.

With 93 percent of the Democratic caucus results in, Jackson won a majority, 54 percent. Gore had 18 percent, Massachusetts Gov. Michael S. Dukakis 7 percent and Rep. Richard A. Gephardt (Mo.) 2 percent. Another 19 percent of the estimated 45,000 caucus-goers-a record turnout-declared themselves uncommitted.

Are you interviewing for an MSM job, Walter?

What I think is that you young white boys will say anything to try to tear Ms. Clinton, a good progressive Democrat, down.

War Room's standard for fact based reporting and objectivity have slipped to about the gutter level of the MSM.

You should truly be ashamed of yourselves.

Chill out; you candidate has won, why must you continue your snark?