Friday, May 9, 2008

Letter from Hillary to Barack - The un-edited version

* Below is the original letter written by Hillary Clinton to Barack Obama, as released to the press May 8. The areas highlighted in red are what I imagine Hillary might have written, but edited out before sending. Let me know if you agree with my guess.


Letter from Sen. Clinton to Sen. Obama

Senator Barack Obama
Obama for America
P.O. Box 8102
Chicago, IL 60680

Dear (Hate) Senator Obama,

This has been an historic and exciting campaign. Millions of new voters have been brought into the process and their enthusiasm for the Democratic Party and the principles for which you and I but mostly I have fought and continue to fight is unprecedented, all thanks to me, and who cares about the 1.5 million individual supporters you have.

One of the foremost principles of our party is that citizens be allowed to vote and that those votes be counted, except when I don't think they should count, like caucuses, for instance. Except for Nevada. That caucus is the only one that counts. That principle is not currently being applied to the nearly 2.5 million people who voted in primaries in Florida and Michigan, and it obviously does not matter to me that I signed a pledge stating that the Michigan votes would not count, and that I wouldn't campaign in Florida, even though I did have a victory celebration there. Whoever emerges as the Democratic nominee will be hamstrung in the general election if a fair and quick resolution is not reached that ensures that the voices of these voters are heard, although one could argue that apart from selecting a nominee of a particular party, votes cast in primaries are in no way reflective of how voters will vote in the general election. Our commitment now to this goal could be the difference between winning and losing in November.

I have consistently said that the votes cast in Florida and Michigan in January should be counted, except when I signed that pledge, along with you and the other candidates, stating otherwise. So I guess that is not really consistent, but I do have a propensity to misspeak. We cannot ignore the fact that the people in those states took the time to be a part of this process and to make their preferences known, except in Michigan where mine was the only name on the ballot. When efforts were untaken (sorry, I'm not good with grammer) by leaders in those states to hold revotes to ensure that they had a voice in selecting our nominee, I supported those efforts. In Michigan, I supported a legislative effort to hold a revote that the Democratic National Committee said was in complete compliance with the party's rules. You did not support those efforts and your supporters in Michigan publically opposed them. Who cares if that's not how they wanted their campaign donations spent, right? In Florida a number of revote options were proposed. I am not aware of any that you supported. In 2000, the Republicans won an election by successfully opposing a fair counting of votes in Florida. As Democrats, we must reject any proposals that would do the same, just like I rejected the signed pledge and other promises to abide by the DNC rules because of Michigan and Florida violating party rules.

Your commitment to the voters of these states must be clearly stated and your support for a fair and quick resolution must be clearly demonstrated.

I am asking you to join me in working with representatives from Florida and Michigan and the Democratic National Committee to arrive at a solution that honors the votes of the millions of people who went to the polls in Florida and Michigan. It is not enough to simply seat their representatives at the convention in Denver. The people of these great states, like the people who have voted and are to vote in other states, must have a voice in selecting our party's nominee. Therefore, I propose that I get all of the delegates from Florida and Michigan, in a winner-take-all method, just like the Republicans do, which would be consistent with how I have been campaigning.

Sincerely (NOT),

Hillary "Hillrod" Rodham Clinton

(future) President of the United States of America

Old v. New: p1

This comment from jsarets on HuffPo has some great metaphors for the difference between the Obama and Clinton campaigns, and the future of politics:

The tragedy of Clintonism is that they package the kind of policies we need in the kind of politics we most certainly don't. The "Third Way" is really just a hybrid of Democratic policy and Republican politics, and the inevitable result is that Democrats have to run the right on policy in order to beat the Republicans at their brand of politics.

The Republicans and Clintons sell politics like IBM sells computers, through an arcane network of distribution channels accumulated over time: the MSM, lobbyists, think tanks, PACs, patronage, etc. This paradigm works well to the extent that politics (and computers) can be sold from the top down.

But Obama has arrived with a direct model that brings to politics what Dell brought to the computer industry. In his style of politics, Obama controls his relationship with the electorate by providing direct access through a centralized communications hub. His plan is to coopt the burgeoning sea of online political communities with one of his own, where he can deliver -- and the American people can receive -- his message unfiltered.

It's all part of Obama's "take back your government" agenda. Americans like to feel important, and the direct model extends this sensation to those who aren't really important enough to have their own IBM sales rep or K Street lobbyist, but who have a Constitutional right to participate in our democracy. He's won't just "work" for us, he'll listen to us.

Nice use of metaphor, and is a great retort to anyone who still stupidly says "Obama can't change Washington any more than Bill Clinton could." Bullshit. The main difference between Barack and Bill is that Bill promised change, but he tried to do it top down by trying to get the players to play the game differently. Barack is getting the fans tuned into a different game altogether, making the old game irrelevant, causing the older players to join in or get out, and hopefully bringing in a bunch of new players.

Matt Stoller has a bit more detailed analysis on this topic of how Obama is changing Washington, with our help. Read it.

At the end of the day, what we're talking about is accountability. When our leaders are accountable to the people, and not just interest groups and lobbyists, that means something. Every person who has given $5 or more to the Obama campaign has a voice now. When other politicians learn what that kind of accountability means, we the people will have that much more power in our government.

Meanwhile, at Camp McCain, we don't have to guess who he's accountable to.

Edwards voted for Obama...

...and will, by his own words, endorse him.

Of course, I'm assuming this based on what it sounds like I heard from his appearance on Morning Joe. But you can jump to 9:45 and gauge for yourselves.

Tuesday, May 6, 2008

"I love this country too much..."

" see it divided and distracted at this critical moment in history.

"I believe in our ability to perfect this nation, because it's the only reason I am standing here today. I know the promise of America because I've lived it!"

Barack's words - and deeds - are infinitely more patriotic than any flag pin.

Spinning the goal post

With a fresh Obama win in North Carolina, and Indiana polls still open, you can damn well bet that Clinton and the big media will spin her goal post into next week... and then again the week after that... and... well, Al Giordano says it all right here: The Primary Day Ritual: Open Thread

Atheist Humor

Banksy Rules!

Hee hee

From Vanity Fair

Monday, May 5, 2008

The Iran You Don't Know

Operation Northwoods: Coming to Iran?

While Bush rattles his saber, and McCain sings his bomb song, and Hillary unnecessarily threatens to obliterate Iran, it is important to keep in mind just how evil our leaders can be. Consider for instance, Operation Northwoods and the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty:

More on the declassified Operation Northwoods, and on the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty.

Dismissing Hillary

I agree that Hillary should be dismissed from the Democratic party, but not just for her disgusting threat to "obliterate Iran." Her sudden morphing into a female version of John McCain (with balls) is another reason.

Send her off, along with Lieberman, to join Zell Miller. Good riddance.