Hillary's Iraq Vote...

It was the point when she voted with her ambition -- and NOT with her heart, mind, or intellect

It was a point when she very visibly put her own personal ambition ahead of altruism or the good of the nation

It was the point when she, very publicly and very clearly, pandered for everyone to see

It was the point when she showed us how "soft" her Democratic principles really are, and how her decades of experience prepared her -- to make the worst decision of her political career

No amount of disingenuous rhetoric or memory failure can take that away from those of us who knew -- who opposed the war then -- and who contacted Clinton and her ilk to urge them to vote against the war.

But Hillary Clinton did what she thought would be good for HILLARY CLINTON.

She usually does, and and she usually will. Just like her hubby.

End of story.

She's going down in flames if she's the nominee. Luckily, unless there is some truly dirty Billary-mandering, and the party decides to nominate her against their own best interests and chance of winning in November, we're not going to have to find out.

Hi LW --

I don't have any particular advice on this issue, but I wish you and your boyfriend well in the days and months ahead.

But when I read your letter, I thought right away that you might want to read a wonderful article by Washington Post reporter Ruben Casteneda. He actually covered the DC crack epidemic for the Post, and held down his reporter job, while being a crack addict.

It's called "Cracked" and you can read it online.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122801357_pf.html

It might offer both you and your boyfriend some insight.

It means she's losing.

As I've said before, she's going down in flames, and she knows it.

She's so convinced that she is OWED the presidency, like some sort of birthright, that she's clawing at it as it slips away, determined to do anything to save her dream, even as it fades away.

It's getting hilarious, actually, watching all the desperate tactics she's trying.

Attacking Obama's speeches

Trying to subvert democracy

Sending her husband out to fight her battles

Stealing delegates

Fake crying scenes

What's next? Is she going to claim she got Castro to step down? Will she personally find Obama bin Laden? Start hacking at voting machines one by one with her nail file? Have a sex change and go for the male vote? Start wearing blackface?

I'm just waiting for the next ridiculous pandering ploy from Hillaryland, because each one means they're even more desperate than before, and that's a good sign for those of us who want to see an electable candidate on the Democratic ticket.

Soopergrover wrote:

Ok, much ado about nothing

I guess Salon needed something ot drum up some traffic today. Cause if you follow the jump you will see that the Clinton camp responded to the story . . .

"We have not, are not and will not pursue the pledged delegates of Barack Obama."

See, even they know this would be suicide.

But given that reporters are also confirming that they have heard this from Clinton campaign spokespeople, this may just be more triangulation and "interpretation" by the Clintons.

As in, what is the meaning of "pursue." Maybe she's going to "attract" or "woo" or whatever word she wants to use that's not "pursue" so that she can deny the story.

Or maybe the campaign's not going after the delegates, but those famous surrogates of hers are strapping on the sidearms and heading into battle.

So, no, I don't buy it. It's much more likely that Clinton's campaign strategy is in fact to pursue delegates. Because it wouldn't be the Clintons if they didn't try to get every single delegate they can -- no matter how: strongarm, coerce, blackmail, guilt, or subvert.

Aren't you Hillary fans always touting her 35 years of experience -- with most of her experience coming from her role as political wife to Bill?

So why would it be any surprise for her to pull out a classic Clinton tactic -- deny the truth and lie about it to our face?

The sad fact is, true or not, she's so divisive and Machiavellian that it's hard to believe, after a leak like this, that her denials are nothing more than damage control to keep her win-at-all-costs poaching strategy from the public.

Someone tell David Brooks and Notoriously Repetitive W.E.S.

All the backbiting and internecine warfare (on Salon, and within the party) aside, it's simply a truly exciting time to watch American politics in action.

of the fat lady singing?

Yes, Hillary will not be the Democratic nominee. Thankfully.