That's a fair inference. You'll note he also talked about John F Kennedy too- where does that fit in the Republican meme?

Oh, fyi, in case your chronology is a bit rusty, Regan was initially elected over 25 years ago, hence, I would imagine your linking Obama's comments about Regan's personal optimism and the environment of the 1970s to the 2000 election. Good. God.

The only meme that is being absorbed unwittingly here, is the useful canard that Obama's statement about Regan was meaningful in any way shaper or form.

Love the interpretation Moderation. I tend to approach these things in terms of what I find likely, but that's just me. Given that counting forward from when Regan was originally elected doesn't get us past the mid-90s, maybe it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to postulate that Obama was actually talking about the 2000 election- in meme code decipherable to Hillary supporters only? But the sharp focus of your profound analysis has challenged that. One thing's for sure, he was including the period of Bill Clinton's tenure as President, when his lowness faithfully followed Regan Republican ideals, in so far as he did anything when it came to domestic policy. Maybe you should consider whether, given that his comments are dead on in that respect, it might be worth not reading into them that he believes the Democrats are currently (27 years on) bereft of ideas or that the 2000 election was a product of said? Or would that deprive you of one of two operative talking points? (and I'm patiently waiting for the one term senator's experience argument)

'Just this one time', uh? To what do I owe the pleasure? Are you working overtime tonight?

U know- the ones that endorsed Hillary. Or do we not know that? Or would we not know about the CWU tactics if they had endorsed Hillary too? And might the CW union have felt a little less aggrieved if the Clintons hadn't launched a lawsuit to disenfranchise their workers? This reads like a Clinton press release.

This from the state Democratic party:

Just like in Iowa, what were awarded today were delegates to the county convention, of which Sen. Clinton won the majority. No national convention delegates were awarded. That said, if the delegate preferences remain unchanged between now and April 2008, the calculations of national convention delegates being circulated by The Associated Press are correct. We look forward to our county and state conventions, where we will choose the delegates for the nominee that Nevadans support.

And this is the AP article referred to:http://www.nola.com/newsflash/index.ssf?/base/politics-13/1200788060245470.xml&storylist=politics

On the Democratic side, Clinton beat rival Barack Obama in a tight Nevada contest. She won the popular vote but Obama won more delegates.

Just some of that reporter stuff.

that went something like, "Do you support Barack Hussein Obama? Are you aware that Barack Hussein Obama takes money from special interests? Why hasn't Barack Hussein Obama... blah blah Hussein, blah blah Hussein Obama". So Glenn, when you say, 'this has been going on for a while' to suggest that this is old hat and therefore there's no reason to push back on this whispering campaign, well I'll have to not only disagree, but wonder out loud whether you've informed yourself of the circumstances before you've stated this opinion. The 'whispering campaign' is actually a quite overt dirty trick perpetrated by some anonymous entity with plausibly deniable links to whomever and benefiting the Clinton camp. Perhaps the more pernicious activity relates to that and not this rather innocuous flyier.

This

Ask anyone who writes about politics these days and they will tell you the same thing. Obama's followers are unique. Unlike any other candidate's supporters (except perhaps for Ron Paul's), they see him as much more than a mere political candidate. Much, much more.

is tremendous insight Glenn. It's heartwarming to see employing the rhetorically compelling 'ask anyone'. Perhaps people that support him just realize how much of a raw deal he is getting in the press and with the establishment deck stacked against him, and find garbage analysis such as this more of the same (inclusive of the Regan storyline, the race baiter, the neoconservative manchurian candidate, the anti-Semite, etc.)? If you want to criticize things for which you have substantive backing, go right ahead. But, just fyi, Obama = Huckabee, is just looks like you're doing your best to caricature yourself.

As an aside, at this point, my support is not about is not in trying to get a candidate elected- I know enough about politics, to know that Obama is done and its just a matter of time. At this point, I'm just expressing myself, and hopefully annoying some of the self-righteous on the left that have gone off the deep end.

Beyond critique? You can't think up a better strawman than that?

Ok, if pushing back on 'fair criticism' from a blogger that we all know has lavished more support on Obama than any other candidate, and therefore himself is beyond reproach, is evidence that we're all just hysterical out-of-our minds Obama backers, please explain to me why Glenn's interpretation of this flyier as, "vote for me because I'm Christian like you", is a more compelling interpretation than, "I am indeed Christian, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise". And before you do, please realize that in Nevada, so much as 3 days ago, there were push polls targeted at prospective voters that called Obama, "Barrack Hussein Obama" on 3 occasions in a short call. So, please the court, even in my irrational state, I'm all ears. Because if you don't back up your point with something remotely substanitive, as Glenn Greenwald clearly has not bothered to, nor it seems cares to, then you are just engaging in name calling like he is.