"Perhaps the Clinton campaign felt justified in slamming McPeak because of his own recent assault on Bill Clinton, whom he accused of "McCarthyism" over an innocent comment praising the patriotism of Hillary Clinton and John McCain. Indeed, McPeak was required to apologize for an ugly sexist statement about Sen. Clinton, and he sometimes sounds like a loose cannon who should be locked up in the policy shop. Whatever McPeak's offenses, however, the Clinton campaign went too far in responding."

Huh? Wow.

One possible reason the American Spectator is being treated as a respectable source could be that Salon no longer fills that role. Salon hasn't had the guts to call the Obama campaign out on its consistently sleazy and underhanded tactics.

I'm sure by now given the Wright "problem" the Republicans are absolutely sure they'd rather go against Obama than this mad woman who will stop at nothing (for better or for worse) regardless if it is out of their own play book. Who knows what she might actually say to McCain to his face? Or what dirt she can find about him in the liberal press?

Ben Sen

But you don't seem to grasp that the important thing, Ben Sen, is not that McCain be defeated. The important thing is that Obama be nominated, even if his poisonous anti-Semitic surrogates like McPeak and Wright-Farrakhan have already cost him the general election.

When Obama loses to McCain, it will make lots of us feel good about our unprecedented levels of decency. The bigger McCain's margin, the more strenuously we can adore ourselves.

How do you feel about the Obama people trying to freeze out voters in the remaining states? Everyone knows they were behind eliminating Michigan & Florida,now they're going after the remaining 10. Hmm, reminds me of someone else that fixed elections. I'd say that was crossing a really big line. But then, we should be used to fixed elections,right?

-- lilybean

Are you nuts?

I love how you Hillbots try to compare the fact that Obama sends his lawyers to smother Florida or Michigan re-votes in their cradles with real sleaze like reading or quoting the wrong magazine.

Next you'll tell us Salon should feature a negative and divisive story on Barack Obama's fight to exclude those voters.

Guess what? Tucker Carlson agrees with Shrillary and says voters in those states matter and should be allowed to sully the Democratic nomination with their votes. That right there should tell you all you need to know.

"I believe that Barack can win PA, myself."

Bet you believe he can win the general election too.

This type of delusional thinking is prevalent in cults. It will even persist beyond November, with Obama's following blaming his embarrassing defeat on Hillary.

Read it and weep. Hillary succeeded as a "unifier." Scaife says the interview "changed my mind about her."

The only thing inexperienced, vapid Nobama has succeeded in is dividing the party and ensuring a Democratic loss if he is nominated.

(ShawnWM: big fan)

Hillary, reassessed

By Richard M. Scaife

TRIBUNE-REVIEW

Sunday, March 30, 2008

Hillary Clinton walked into a Pittsburgh Tribune-Review conference room last Tuesday to meet with some of the newspaper's editors and reporters and declared, "It was so counterintuitive, I just thought it would be fun to do."

The room erupted in laughter. Her remark defused what could have been a confrontational meeting.

More than that, it said something about the New York senator and former first lady who hopes to be America's next president.

The very morning that she came to the Trib, our editorial page raised questions about her campaign and criticized her on several other scores.

Reading that, a lesser politician -- one less self-assured, less informed on domestic and foreign issues, less confident of her positions -- might well have canceled the interview right then and there.

Sen. Clinton came to the Trib anyway and, for 90 minutes, answered questions.

Her meeting and her remarks during it changed my mind about her.

Hillary, reassessed

By Richard M. Scaife

Sunday, March 30, 2008

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/multimedia/s_559659.html

Real world account of Obama's "ability to bring people together"

"But now two months have passed since Edwards dropped out—tempus fugit!—and still no endorsement. Why? According to a Democratic strategist unaligned with any campaign but with knowledge of the situation gleaned from all three camps, the answer is simple: Obama blew it. Speaking to Edwards on the day he exited the race, Obama came across as glib and aloof. His response to Edwards’s imprecations that he make poverty a central part of his agenda was shallow, perfunctory, pat.

Obama dug himself in deeper, getting into a fight with Elizabeth about health care, insisting that his plan is universal (a position she considers a crock), high-handedly criticizing Clinton’s plan (and by extension Edwards’s) for its insurance mandate.

http://nymag.com/news/politics/powergrid/45604/

Hillary's turned around a powerful right wing billionaire who hates Democrats. We can't have that or Democrats might just start winning elections.

If that happened, it would disastrously undermine the Orchid-tenders' long search for selfhood.

Obama's offensive sense of entitlement and arrogance are obvious to anyone not drinking the cult-aid. The Edwards disaster is a sign of things to come for the "uniter" Obama. He is unlikable and no one will want to work with him to "bridge the gap." That's delusional, folks.