Barack Obama

Having unintentionally evolved into a New York Times bias watch-dog, I diligently attempt to remain on top of the mountainous heap of slanted news which is issued forth from that venerable institution. However, Powerline has beaten me to the punch this time, noting the Times' outright misrepresentations of the McCain/Obama/Hamas issue (which would cause a lesser instrument of journalism to slink away in shame).

The Times' story, "On McCain, Obama and a Hamas Link.," covers the issue of Obama's embarrassing endorsement by the terrorist organization Hamas. However, instead of contemplating why the thugs and murderers of Hamas have taken a liking to Obama, the Times' denounces McCain for untruthfully stating that Obama would pursue "unconditional" talks with Iran.

This shift in focus is distracting and fictitious, simply a means of covering for Obama and smearing McCain. In fact, Obama's web site states: "Obama is the only major candidate who supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions." Watch Obama discuss the issue here. As Jim Geraghty notes over at NRO, an Obama adviser has held meetings with Hamas.

I repeat and repeat again: a news organization which misrepresents the truth in order to deceive and mislead the public in critical issues of national import has betrayed its nation with a boldness and effectiveness beyond the scope of nearly any other institution. These are institutions imbued, by their very nature, with the public trust - their sedition is a matter of unparalleled shame.

Not long after MoveOn.org decided to endorse Barack Obama, the group announced a video ad contest: "Obama in 30 Seconds'.

5.5 million votes were cast for the 1100 submissions and 15 finalists were selected. An eclectic group of 24 judges that included Ben Affleck, Jesse Jackson, Oliver Stone and Moby, chose the winner, "Obamacan" by David Gaw and Lance Mungia of Monrovia, CA.

MoveOn's donors have committed $200,000 to run this ad in selected markets.

The new ad airing in West Virginia by Barack Obama is a :30 second spot titled "Service." It makes sure to let the Mountain state voters know about his "Christian faith."

Although I reported last week, with much disappointment, that John Edwards does not intend to endorse a candidate before the Democratic National Convention, he seems to be finding other ways to get his point across. First, there was this possible "slip", and then, this weekend, he had some words of caution for Hillary Clinton. Via CNN's Political Ticker:

Appearing on CBS' Face the Nation, Edwards said Clinton has to be "has to be really careful that she's not damaging our prospects," with continuing to take jabs at Obama.

"She doesn't need my advice, she knows this full well," Edwards said. "If she makes the case for herself, which she's completely entitled to do, she has to be really careful that she's not damaging our prospects, the Democratic Party, and our cause, for the fall."

Now, I do still believe that Edwards would do everyone a favor by weighing in, but this may just do the trick. It sounded pretty friendly for a shot across the bow, but it was also unmistakable. The warnings aren't going to get any nicer.

I renew my recommendation that Hillary drop out now and accept the VP nod, while it can still look like it was her idea. The longer she holds on now, the harder the push will be.

Following Friday's resignation by Obama Middle East advisor Rob Malley over his many meetings with Palestinian terrorist organization Hamas, the Obama-Hamas controversy is bubbling up once more. Over the last few weeks the controversy has been a particular point of discussion between the McCain and Obama campaigns. In an interview last week, Senator Obama said that McCain was "losing his bearings" and suggested that the Hamas issue was nothing more than a "smear" tactic. In a subsequent appearance, Senator McCain said he believed the endorsement of Senator Obama by Hamas was "a legitimate point of discussion." Conservative and liberal blogs have been abuzz, albeit to a lesser extent than the "When Will She Get Out" speculation.

Senator Obama's position with regard to rogue states and terrorist groups has been a point of contention for months, starting with his statement during a CNN Debate in July of last year that he would meet with such states without precondition. The Clinton campaign made much use of this, with Senator Clinton herself calling Obama's answer "irresponsible and frankly naive," in an interview with an Iowa newspaper that same month.

We have already discussed crackpot theory #1: Hillary 2012, which necessitates an Obama loss. In this theory she stays in not because she can win, but to make sure that McCain wins so she can run against him later. The downside and where the theory falls flat is the assumption that the party would forgive her enough to give her a plausible run.

Theory #2, which is plausible, is that she is staying in because the longer she stays in, the more leverage she gets. This article suggests that she will deploy that leverage to demand the Veep slot from a hesitant Barack Obama:

A person close to her, with whom her campaign staff has counseled at various points, said this week, "I think the following will happen: Obama will be in a position where the party declares him the nominee by the first week in June. She'll still be fighting with everybody -- the Rules Committee, the party leaders -- and arguing, 'I'm winning these key states; I've got almost half the delegates. I have a whole constituency he hasn't reached. I've got real differences on approach to how we win this election, and I'm going to press the hell out of this guy. ... Relief for the middle class, universal health care, etc.; I'm Ms. Blue Collar, and I'm going to press my fight, because he can't win without my being on the ticket.' "

Another major Democratic Party figure, who supports her for president, agreed: "It's not going to be a quiet exit. ... Obama has got a terrible situation. He marches to a different drummer. He won't want to take her on the ticket. But he might have to, even though the idea of Vice President Hillary with Bill in the background at the White House is not something -- especially after what [the Clintons] have thrown at him that he relishes. I believe she'll go for it."

However, several important Democrats aligned with Obama predicted that he -- and Michelle Obama -- will vigorously resist any Clinton effort to get on the ticket. Rather, Obama is more likely to try to convince Clinton to either stay in the Senate or accept another position in an Obama administration, should he win the presidency.

Good morning, and welcome again to Videos of the Week. The big story this week was, of course, the virtual coronation of Barack Obama as the Democratic nominee. We have a couple of clips related to the making of that sausage, plus a few morsels of John McCain, a couple of cool tricks, and a Mike Gravel chaser.

Before we get to those, I just want to quickly plug Political Machine reader Tom Fitzsimmons' satire work over at The Specious Report, and at Daily Kos. Drop in there, laugh it up, and leave him a good rating, won't you?

By popular demand, I am adding the Obama 59 state gaffe, right after the jump.

Leading off this week is a video from my buddy Cenk at The Young Turks. For reasons that will be obvious later, I'm going to tell you nothing about it.

Tommy has a great rundown, but let me add one interesting fact-o-tum to the mix. UPI is reporting that the Clinton campaign is out of money and canceling events:

The cash-strapped campaign of Sen. Hillary Clinton has forced curtailments of political events and advertising as the primary season winds down, aides say.

...

Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Times reported options are being considered to allow Clinton a graceful exit from race with Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, who leads in pledged delegates and popular vote.

One supporter familiar with the campaign said Clinton wanted to leave on an up note, possibly after winning a couple of the remaining primaries. The supporter also said Clinton would want a resolution concerning the seating of Florida and Michigan delegates, who lost their seats the Democratic national convention as punishment for the states' changing their primaries.

The last paragraph (emphasis mine) is an important one and the reason why she hasn't thrown in the towel yet. She will win in WV and KY, she may even blow Obama out, and this is where I disagree with Tommy, even with the late news, I don't think it's likely that she will lose outright. She will have more delegates and more bargaining power in a few days, so it would be quite easy to persuade her that she owes it to her supporters to stick it out for at least a little while longer.

And if that's so bad, why did Reagan go to the convention in 1976 and Kennedy in 1980. That was Kennedy's last hurrah, but Reagan weirdly enough might be an inspiration to Hillary (yeah I know!) . By going to the convention and fighting for his platform, he was able to set himself up for 1980, thanks to Gerald Ford's loss.

It's not outside the realm of possibility that Hillary doesn't care about the damage to the party, because she is setting herself up for 2012 in the face of an Obama loss. In this case, she would need Obama to actually lose, so again, her interests are aligned with McCain, not the Democratic party. If that's the scenario, she fights to the end, regardless of the delegate count. For the Democratic party, that's one ugly thing to think about. This is where my healthy dose of cynicism comes in handy.

Barack Obama makes the remark he's visited all "57 states" but still hasn't made it to Hawaii (his birthplace) or Alaska. (His 57 plus the two he mentions having missed equal 59 states!) Here's the quip:

Via ABC News, the inevitable has happened:

For the first time this campaign season, Barack Obama has surpassed Hillary Clinton's support among superdelegates, according to the ABC News delegate estimate.

The tipping point occurred this morning, when New Jersey's Rep. Donald Payne defected from Clinton to Obama, and Oregon's Rep. Peter DeFazio, previously uncommitted, saw fit to join up with the Obama wagon trail.

By ABC's count, that gives Obama 267 supers, while Clinton has 256. Later this morning, Clinton edged back with the endorsement of Pennsylvania Rep. Chris Carter, so it looks as though she only trails now by 1 superdelegate.

UPDATE: Back up to a two-point lead. Obama nabs another.
UPDATE II: Make it a three-point lead courtesy of another California super, Ed Espinoza.
UPDATE III: Up to seven. Wilber Lee Jeffcoat (S.C.), Vernon Watkins (Ca.), Mazie Hirono (Hi.), and Laurie Weahkee (N.M.) all get on board Obama's bus.
UPDATE IV: Add five more for Obama on Saturday, including another defector.
UPDATE V: Since last Tuesday's primaries in Indiana and North Carolina, Obama has picked up 24 superdelegates. Clinton has received 1.5, a net gain of 22.5 for Obama.
UPDATE VI: Hawaii's Sen. Akaka, and Idaho Dem. Chairman Keith Roark both give Obama the nod. Today's score, 4-0.


My hunch is that many supers were waiting to see if Clinton was going to make a graceful exit from the race. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem like it's going to happen. Therefore, she has put many reluctant supersdelegates in the position of having to do the dirty work.

How dire is Hillary's situation? She is now asking fence-sitters for their secret allegiance. If your supporters won't publicly declare their support, you know you're in trouble.

Well, the proverbial fat lady, she has ditched the sotto voce and is belting it out loudly for all to hear.