Mississippi may no longer be "burning" with an Obama win.

http://osi-speaks.blogspot.com/2008/03/obama-continues-momentum-and.html#links

because they were told to. They will NOT in november.

I know it. You know it (even if you haven't admitted it to yourself). The numbers support it. There's no way Hillary is getting over 50% of the black vote in Penn, especially after Ferrarro's dumbass comments, and that's pretty much what she's got to do to still stay in the game.

So why is she staying in the race if not to mess up the Obama's chance of winning in November? It's the only answer that makes sense to me, and it reeks of sour grapes and blind, dangerous ambition.

I'd like to hear from a Clinton supporter on this.

The exit polls continue to be extremely ominous for Obama. The election in the south and border states has become an almost complete black/white split. While it currently helps Obama it will be disastrous for the Democrats in the general election. Current national polls also show this trend spreading to other areas, i.e., Pennsylvannia and New Jersey. This is an election trend that needs to be discussed intelligently otherwise democrats may not be celebrating in November.

I think they should discuss why Clinton injected race into the race.

You say: "I think they should discuss why Clinton injected race into the race."

You just don't get it, do you? She didn't. He did. Sorry, but that's what the history books are going to say. Guarantee it.

77 percent of rethugs, who could cross over in an open primary (even though their nominee is already coronated) voted for Hillary because that's who they want to run against. Tush Fatblob told 'em so. So, the racial divide will not be nearly as stark in the general election. It does mean that black turnout will be historically high, and the allegiance blacks have shown to Democrats (even though we probably don't deserve it to the extent we get it) will be even more pronounced than usual. How is that bad, exactly? It isn't.

"You just don't get it, do you? She didn't. He did. Sorry, but that's what the history books are going to say. Guarantee it."

Okay. Help us get it. Please explain how Obama is solely responsible for bringing race into this election.

...is Hillary Clinton consistently described as "greedy," or "blindly ambitious" (and other variations of that trope) along with calls for her to quit? If she folded up shop tomorrow, she'd likely be called a quitter whose greed and ambition did her in.

And if I say that I think Mr. Obama is "arrogant," "smug" and "greedy for power," does that make any more sense?

While no one cares what I think, I'm starting to feel sorry for Mrs. Clinton with this seething, visceral hatred of her from members of her own party. (And I'm not referring to any specific person here, just in general.)

This entire process has become a zero-sum game, with everybody hating everyone else. All of this has become so ugly, it's depressing.

Bill Clinton did appear on the Rush Limbaugh radio show on March 4th. Rush came down with a 24 hour flu that enabled the interview. Rush has been taking credit for Clinton's "best moment of her campaign since recovering.

The full interview is here - in case some of you

http://images.radcity.net/5155/2461772.mp3

The Clintons injected race into the campaign and have lived to reap the fruits of their divisive campaign. Mississippi one can argue, was won because of a large African American population. How can anyone explain Wyoming and Utah, then?

I am sorry to see the complete degradation of Hillary Clinton's campaign. Geraldine Ferraro's comments today, mark a low point in Hillary's quest for the highest office in the land. Hillary learned that going negative would buy her votes. She did win in Ohio, but that was a short term victory. Now, she is unravelling as all her claims on foreign policy and experiece are coming home to roost.

Before Hillary Clinton destroys the party, it is imperative that she now leave with grace. If she does not, she will go down in infamy.

KateTex:

And how exactly did he do that? Specifics?

I THINK I get what you mean. But your "we" re: the Democratic Party? It reads as if Blacks are visitors, not bona fide members (for whom you seem grateful to have stop by in such large numbers). Now, of ALL demographic groups who can claim Democratic Party bona fides? Uh, Blacks are on THAT list. I'm a lifelong registered Independent and I know that.

I decided a while ago that Obama is a smug, naive little whiner who really threw his hat into the ring way too early, out of arrogance I suppose. Hillary has her faults but it seems so clear to me that she is the smarter, tougher, and just more presidential of the two. However, at this point I want Obama to win the nomination because I am sure McCain will beat either one of them after this whole debacle. And if Obama somehow wins the presidency, I have a feeling it will be such a travesty that his numbers will be lower than Bush. There is no way this feel-good Mr Hope and Change guy can rescue us from the economy, the war, and the multitude of other horrendous problems this country is facing. Hillary can survive to fight another day.

You say: "Okay. Help us get it. Please explain how Obama is solely responsible for bringing race into this election."

Obama all but pounced on the Clintons' remarks - which have been twisted out of all recognition, promptly but quietly seguing into his Malcolm X, talking-in-code act in SC, which NO ONE covered in the media. I found video of this depressing display on YouTube, Obama sneer and all. He repeated it today in MS. It's one thing for the guy to run for president and encourage fellow blacks to vote for him; it's another for him to encourage a complete trashing of the Clintons in the process and attempt to turn blacks AGAINST them. This he has done and if you can't see it, you're pretty much blind.