After Obamas resignation from Trinty, Trinity church is suing Obama for all the Black creds Obama garnered while being a member of the church for the last twenty years. Details as to how the black creds are to be returned are still being worked out.

Moderate Michigan voters are considering suing Obama for the return of MI delegates granted by the DNC Kangaroo Committee to Obama. A MI voter representative stated, "That joker Obama didn't even have the damn sense to put his name on the ballot, and now he wants our delegates!” soon a group of moderate democrats starting chanting, “Screw him and sue him! Yes we can! Screw him and sue him .Yes we can!"

Axelrod was quick to respond stating, "Our message is unity, we must all unify so that Obama is elected and he can screw all those bastards, black or white who did not support him. Sue Obama my ass!"

Obama quickly apologized for Axelrods outburst, blaming a mix up with his medications.

“I have never believed Obama shared the divisive views of Wright.” – JW

Why? Both you and apparent recently Obama agree that Wright is divisive. So if Obama didn’t agree with him, then why did Mr. Unity remain in the church of Mr. Divisive? None of the answers to that question places Obama well in a national spotlight.

Obama is being too cute too many times. First he did not repudiate Wright, only some of his words and then later repudiated Wright himself after Wright repudiated Obama as playing “politics” with him and the church. Now he is not repudiating the church itself but only all the negative attention the church is receiving because of his campaign. Yeah, that’s genuine and pigs fly.

Obama may keep his black creds with Blacks since Wright stated Obama privately agrees with him and only because of “politics” publicly disagrees. And for whites he gets to claim he has distanced himself from the hateful and devisive views of the “past”. (Stuff that the bleeding keyboard Walsh haters love to hear). If successful that would be a political manuever that would make Rove and Bush envious.

No ones knows what is in Obamas heart or anyones heart. People are lucky if they know whats in their own heart.

The point is no one is judging Obamas heart, his actions are being judged.

Love him or hate him, Matt Drudge has an outsized influence on national political coverage.

Drudge is a hack, a rumormonger who like fortunetellers, gets things right only by accident. So the statement should read, -Matt Drudge has an outsized influence on national political coverage, because the media is mesmerized with Drudges articles as they are with turds spiraling down a flushed toilet, and are compelled to follow.-

-------------------

"Florida and Michigan should not be counted, period. They broke the rules." --Christopher1988

It was against the law to be gay in England in the last century and you could be jailed or forced to take hormone drugs to "heal" your gayness. Gays I am sure appreciated how important it was to follow the "rules" at that time. Following the rules is not always the best path. The discussion is not about playing Monopoly or Checkers, it's about the right to vote.

The rules as written are a train wreck. In fact the Florida repubs couldn't believe their luck when they saw how easily they could force the Dems to hang themselves with their own rules. Now there is a rule worth fighting for, one that allows opponents to make you hit yourself in the head with a 2x4 at their bidding.

This past weekend added further embarassment.

Which alternative reality is Mike talking about?

The one where there are bizarre combinations of caucus vs popular votes in states to determine delegate counts?

The one where disenfranchising the voters of two potential make or break states in the general is a good idea.

The alternate reality where according to RCP the candidate (Clinton) leading by 36 electoral college votes and according to www.electoral-vote.com the candidate (Clinton) forecast to win by a landslide over the other candidate barely sqweeking by is not the nominee?

Is the "real" reality, the one where the candidate most likely to lose is automatically the pre-emptive nominee?

Is the real reality the one where resigning from a controversial church where a candidate has been a member for 20 years is a boost to a candidancy?

Mike, helps us out, there are so many confusing realities out there.

but pretty good old style politics. Have one bill for feeding fresh meat to your anti-war crowd and another to feed red meat to the hawk crowd you now need to court.

Well it's pretty good politics as long as both sides don't figure out they are being played. Maybe he can use the "nuance" angle to explain talking out of both sides of his mouth at the same time?

...just wait until Obama cleans up in those caucus states where you can pick up huge amounts of electoral votes with only a fraction of the votes required in true popular vote contests.

What?

There are no caucuses in the general election?

All the states are based on popular vote?

Ok, never mind.

So what?

I want Dem leaders to lock themsleves in a room for a week and beat each other with sticks over the way this nomination process has gone.

But you know how it goes.

Can't always get what you want, but if you try sometime...