The confession is in Farsi, a language Jawad does not speak. Which might have mattered if Jawad could read.

Jawed of course can also not write, so the "signature" on it is a thumbprint, which of course is easily coerced.

How can such a system exist that disgraces all men who participate in it.

There is no pressue on Clinton now. It is entirely conceivable she could win the popular vote after the final primaries are completed, regardless of which of the 1/2 dozen different ways you total the votes in these screwed-up "democratic" primaries.

The pressure is on Obama, unless going into the primary convention with less of the popular vote seems appealing to him and his supporters and the super-delegates have no issue pledging their votes to the candidate with less of the popular vote. Stealing the election like GWB did with less then the popular vote and with the help of technicalties, is not change I can believe. Actually it's not even change.

Ask yourself this, why is Obama so hot in the pants to have Clinton bow out if not that he is afraid of embarassment, maybe even of losing. He was certainly afraid to debate Hillary one on one in a race where the candidates were running 50-50. Actually for one who claims to not want to lead by fear, he himself is full of fear. The fact is if Obama truly had it locked up, he and the obomans would not give two craps about what Clinton did or did not do. So instead they pretend she does not exist all the while pleading and screaming she bow out. Instead Clinton should gladly return the finger Mr uniter gave to Clinton while his fans cheered.

...both McCain can both trot out new preachers and then debate whose "new!" preacher is better.

Actually I find Obamas cadence in his speeches disturbing because they sound like preaching. MLK was a preacher and it made sense for him to do that. For a politician, it's creepy, not to mention doesn't align with the whole progressive seperation of church and state thing.

Maybe Obama should just come out and proclaim, "I do not need ~short pause~ preachers ~long pause~ I ~short pause~ am the blessed one, ~pause~ I am the one and only preacher! ~pause~louder~ I ~pause~ am ~pause~really loud~ BARRACK!"

Let's see McCain respond to that.

Whos' worst - Hagee or Wright? I'd pick Hagee.

But Wright is still questionable as a preacher and as a friend and McCain did not sit in Hagees pews or buy his preaching tapes or claim him as his and his childrens personal preacher for 20 years like Obama did. There's alot of backstabbing in Obamas world, done to him and done by him. Probably about typical for the average politician.

Rose colored glass takes on a new meaning with this article. Somehow I don't think updating the "Change we can believe in" posters to "Change to Chicago style politics" is a good move.

The GOP is going to look homeward as well. Bribery, corrpution, militant black policy, militant liberals, anti-white rhetoric, anti-semantic rhetoric, are going to be all highlighted - fairly or not. Obamas individual career in Chicago politics is also colored with ruthless back-stabbing and opportunism. I don't know that that is unique to Chicago politics, but the GOP certainly will make it sound that way, especially as a contrast to Obamas and this writers flowery "new!" way forward rhetoric.

Another place the GOP will look at is Massachusettes, where another Axelrod product P. Deval, is proving to be a progressive, but an inept, wasteful, tin-ear idealogue as well.

It seems elections have now perfected the process so only inept idealogues are electable. GWB being an inept conservative idealogue wrapped in a "Regular Guy!" marketing package. And the best "hope" for "change" is an inept liberal marketed as a "New Everything!" type of guy.

The lawsuit brings up a very interesting question. Since two political parties have exclusive control over who has a chance at elected office, then do they carry a legal burden of resposibility to protect the rights of all voters in their party? If the answer is no, then either party has the power to exclude entire states and their voters if they do not agree with party direction on the candidate of choice.

You'd think no party would ever do something so stupid so you would not need laws to provide voters protection in the nomination process, except well the Democratic party has proved differently.

The GOP outmanuevers the DNC in FL and the DNC willingly puts its hand under the running lawnmower, loses a few fingers and then says proudly, the rulez is the rulez, bleeding all the way into the general election.

They hurt themsleves as well as the voters, but the issue remains; since with only two political parties, it can be reasonably concluded that those two political parties do represent the government. In other words does the argument they are outside election laws start to go out the window?

And Obama is in it to prove lying like a weasel is marketable.

And doesn't marketable lying like a weasel count as spin?

...how Cuba feels about being a political ping pong ball in American politics.