The Pain of Losing and Being Relevant

This picture is a great shot my wife took when we were in Cancun. After years of being an amateur photographer, I marveled at how I was "out done" by someone who appears to have a better eye than me!

Indeed, the picture serves as an interesting metaphor for a certain Presidential candidate.

In Sen. Barack Obama's book, "The Audacity of Hope", he recalls, at one point, what it feels like to lose an important race as a politician. Sen. Obama said in the book that he "still burns" from a loss to an incumbent Congressman, Bobby Rush in 2000.

No one likes to lose, and those in public office - often intoxicated from narcissism - have the most difficult time coping with a loss. Unlike private citizens who have private ways of coping with losing, politicians' losses "are on public display", he said.

And so, as I watched Sen. Hillary Clinton give her "exit speech" today, I could not help but to notice how humiliated she looked, almost disgusted or depressed as she was forced to support someone that she probably would rather excoriate. Sen. Clinton did not smile much, save when she spoke about her accomplishments and what she represented for women. At one point - and I thought it perfectly appropriate - I thought she was going to sob, only to be comforted by her husband, the former President Bill Clinton and her beautiful daughter Chelsea.

Sen. Clinton demonstrated what modern women often do in the face of adversity and defeat; she showed how women can be strong. Moreover, I thought that there was something very heroic today about her. Maybe it was the fact that she had come so far, only to lose. But heroes lose. They lose, while trying to do good for the community or a cause. Heroes don't always ride off into the sunset. The best films have heroes who beat the odds - up to a point - and die. I am thinking of William Wallace in Braveheart.

In her speech today, I saw a powerful woman, dealing with the very public loss to someone who will more than likely become the most powerful person in the world. To be sure, having the support of 18 million voters is phenomenal, but we know that the Democratic nomination - no matter what kind of delegate calculus you want to use - is arrived at by who has the most delegates.

Sen. Clinton painfully asked her supporters to support her as she backs Sen. Obama. There were some "boos" to that request, but in the end, this healing was necessary and she knew that it was one painful step towards closure that is critical for the party.

I have criticized Sen. Clilnton, at one point suggesting she suffers from mental disorders. But like Sen. Obama, politicians (all) have to be scrutinized. And the public ought to be more informed and opened about their likes and dislikes. We ought to hold them accountable.

In the end, the system worked.

Sure, the DNC will have to figure out what to do come 2012 in case other rogue states decide to violate the rules. You just can't have rules in place to punish states, only to have a meeting to reverse the policy! It has nothing to do with, in my opinion, "the right to vote"; it has more to do with implementing a policy regardless of the outcome. You break laws, there are consequences and I think that there are too many people in this country ( 2 races I can think of) who believe that laws are relative and should be modified to accommodate them.

In the end, I am glad that the Democratic party is finally moving towards unity.

So, even though Sen. Clinton's sun has set, the run for office, still, was a beautiful endeavor for someone who will remain a powerhouse in modern politics.

And that, as far as I am concerned, is what is important.

"Don't Piss On My Back..And Tell Me Its Raining!": Clinton Tries To Play The Super Delegates

When I was a young boy, my brothers and I, like most boys, would occasionally find ourselves
in trouble, having to explain ourselves to mom.

If you were clever - and there is a certain blogger who was indeed clever - you would try to get to mom first and argue your case before she meted out punishment. The logic was that you could gain an edge (e.g., less severe punishment) if you could reason with mom. I wrote hundreds of letters in my lifetime, but the proximity to mom during those days required face-to-face appeals. But, ah, if I could and if it were appropriate I would have written mom letters hoping to convince her that a very lenient approach to disciplining would be a testament to her compassion. Eloquent and convincing.

I was never effective, because no matter what happened, I would have to explain myself time and time again before listening to the sentence that mom handed down.

Sen. Hillary Clinton is no good letter writer.

She has sent a letter to all Democratic Super Delegates, outlining her case as to why they should support her. In short, why she is more qualified to be the nominee. Tragically, this is another attempt on her part to spin her position, with the ultimate goal to steal the nomination from Sen. Barack Obama.

There is nothing unique or new that, in my opinion, should convince the Super Delegates. Sen. Clinton argues that 17 million people have voted ("supported") her in "my effort to become the Democratic nominee". This is not true, and she knows it. We have been here before. And yet, Sen. Clinton wants to count things that cannot be counted. RealClearPolitics has all the math you need to see that her math is shady. The nomination, according to the rules, will be determined by whichever candidate has the most delegates (2026). So you can argue about how many people supported you (popular) vote; and you can spin the math, but there is a reality and reason why the DNC has 2025 or 2026 as the finish line.

In the letter, Sen. Clinton writes, "[voters] want a President who shares their core beliefs about our country and its future and "gets" what they go through every day to care for their families, pay the bills and try to put something away for the future."

What? Are you kidding me?

How can someone who pulled down over $100 million in less than 10 years "get" what other people are going through? How can you grasp and fully understand how Americans are literally crushing under the combined weight of high gas prices, low home values and an unbelievably selfish government?

Well, Americans "get" that lying about sniper fire is not the best method to win the nomination. We also "get" that accusing your opponent of plagiarism seems odd, when you plagiarize your husband and the former Presidential candidate, Sen. John Edwards in your speeches...."I can take a hit.." or whatever it was... Americans "get" that referencing the assassination of a Kennedy as a suggestion that your opponent may get killed is insane. Americans also "get that if you talk about the inability of your candidate getting the white vote, you maybe a closet racist. They get stuff like that..

One of the best quotes I ever heard that can be used when someone is trying "play games with you", while being less than honest about a situation..." is "don't piss on my back and tell me its raining..." Someone who took home $100 million dollars cannot "get" what everyone else is going through. Okay?

I wanted to go to bed, but wanted to see what else was in this "love letter" to the Super Delegates. I found particularly interesting that Sen. Clinton wrote about how "recent polls and trends" show that she is the better candidate to beat Sen. McCain. "Recent polls and election results show a clear trend", she said. In her letter to the Super Delegates, I believe she mentions one poll. Awful. Just awful.

She later talks about her analysis with..."I've enclosed a detailed analysis of recent electoral and polling information, and I hope you will take some time to review it carefully." So, let me get this straight. She is writing to the Super Delegates, many of whom are well conversant with politics, telling them that they should review her analysis of polling data? You gotta be kiddin' me!

It's late now..and I can only think of one thing; how much Tylenol is in the medicine cabinet.

Maybe someone on her campaign staff with bring in a doctor or psychiatrist..and just have them travel with the campaign in case things get too out of hand for Mrs. Clinton.

Sen. Clinton's Sun Is Setting

Sometimes a failed endeavor is a process.

It is like puzzle parts coming together, giving you a realistic picture of how things cannot be for you. We see this with athletes and entertainers, and of course, politicians. The smarter person can see these puzzle parts as signs that it is time to pack it in.

The fool presses on, not caring who she or he might hurt in their path. They are blind and mental. They are obssessed with a non-reality. Perhaps in the "other universe" - the parallell universe, their endeavor is crowned with happiness.

I agree that it is a good thing to be ambitious, but in the midst of mounting odds, it can be a losers bet.

One of the central arguments Sen. Clinton is giving for staying in the race is that she believes the votes from Michigan and Florida ought to be counted, even though the states - who knew the consequences - moved up their primaries in defiance of the DNC rules. As a result of "busting in line", those delegates, as it stands now, will not be seated. Sen. Clinton is praying for a miracle; that the Rules Committee of the DNC, which meets at the end of the month, will somehow give her a pass and seat those delegates.

If this happens, I imagine riots. The odds are that it won't.

The problem that I have with Sen. Clinton - indeed there are several - is that she is constantly changing her narrative, or trying to modify the requirements in order to secure the nomination. The key metric is delegates - 2025. Florida and Michigan are not included. We visited this issue before. When you look at every category (i.e., popular vote, delegates, Super Delegates etc..), Sen. Clinton is not leading in either one!

Super Delegates are fast gravitating to Sen. Obama. Former Presidential candidate, Sen. John Edwards, recently announced his endorsement of Sen. Obama. Things are changing rapidly. Nearly every day, Sen. Clinton's predicament becomes even more grave. Her campaign, strapped for cash, is on life support.

The sun is setting on Sen. Clinton, and she cannot accept that reality.

What kind of a message does she need in order to be convinced, "not this time...maybe 2012" or, "pack it up and unite..."? I wrote about her obsession with winning in a previous post, and I still believe that it is an element of her neurosis that has blinded her.

Some of the media spinned her win in WV as if it were some enormous feat, a sign of a possible comeback. But we have been here before. We saw how she squandered a 20+ point lead going into the PA Primary and we saw how she barely took Indiana. In North Carolina, she had her head handed to her. Sen. Clinton is being beaten horribly all over the country, and there is no argument that she can make - that will convince the remainder of the Super Delegates - that will alter the momentum that Sen. Barack Obama has.

Puzzle parts.

It is not only Democrats, but the nation as a whole is yearning for closure with this mess. Sen. Clinton may not believe that the sun will rise the day after she gives up.

If she wants to exercise some element of power, the power to give in, then now is the time. Now is the time to concede and graciously exit, and just let someone else have their turn.

Rev. Wright Got It Wrong

I tried hard to be objective. I watched the Bill Moyers' interview and came away thinking that this was a reasoned and cautious man. I felt that he presented, with some inaccuracies, the plight of the African-American situation with some clarity. I was concerned about his remarks, "I do what I gotta and he says what he has to say as a politician..". At some point, I felt that there was some tension. I dismissed it, because this was a civil dialogue between a journalist I admired and someone that I had heard about.

But then, he took the bait.

The media dangled the cameras in front of him and everything went to hell from there.

When atoms decay or split, they can create a reaction. Depending on the type of atoms (and I want to be careful, lest our Iranian friends are reading), and depending on the amount, you could have enough of splitting and decaying that could create hydrogen bombs or nuclear bombs.

The fallout with this Rev. Wright, who, within a matter of 2-3 days has morphed into a lunatic of the highest order was a nuclear explosion. We will feel the fallout now and probably through the election.

The tragedy of this recent act of stupidity on Rev. Wright's part is that it completely negates (in part, figuratively) what minorities, particularly African-Americans believe.

Yes, there are different styles of worship and learning, but that is where it ends. Wright, naturally, does not speak for the black community. He is a shadowy pastor wanting for the attention that he sees a former member of his church getting - someone who could very well be the next President of the United States and the most powerful man in the world.

As I watched this disaster unfold, it dawned on me that Rev. Wright, though articulate, does possess some of the hallmarks of the underachiever; he wants the attention that someone else is getting, something that he will never get, something that he never had. He wants the successes without the sacrifices. He strikes me, at this point, as someone who harbors an inferiority complex and is quietly intimidated by others. But that is for the psychiatrists to determine.

The reality of Wright's "not deficient, just different" argument, is that if you argue the point ad nauseam, you flirt with negating the very merits of equality (Brown v. Board, Sweat v. Painter)...and what the Constitution and Declaration of Independence addresses.

Moreover, while it may be true that African-American ancestors were on the bottom portion of slave ships, as Rev. Wright reminded us, it is equally important to note - and historically accurate! - that some African Chiefs played a critical in the slave trade and probably could be seen waving goodbye, with loads of gunpowder (in exchange for women and children) as the Colonists left the coasts of Africa!

Therefore, by way of Rev. Wright's reasoning, this would mean that the slave traders and African-American ancestors who sold others into slavery, worshipped the same God! This would contradict what he argued in his speech. Is it possible for the slave trader and African Chief to have the same God in Wright's world?

In Sweat v. Painter, the University of Texas (1946) did not want to admit Mr. Painter to the all white law school, because he was black. As a result, they set up an underfunded school for black law students. It is reported that some black students had to borrow books and faculty from the main university!

A "we're not deficient, we're just different" philosophy would have been applauded by our friends at the University of Texas. Hell, Rev. Wright, even as an African-American, could have been made chancellor with his ridiculous logic. With his reasoning, Sen. Barack Obama, if alive in 1946, would be studying in a school that was "separate" - and "different" of course, with hardly any books and no faculty!

The recent numbers - CNN's Poll of Polls - have Sen. Obama's lead cut, yet,
again.

NATIONAL

45% Obama
44% Clinton

Real Clear Politics Poll

NORTH CAROLINA

+10.3% Obama

INDIANA

+2.2 Clinton

Sen. Clinton's Narrative Myth: The Result of Obssessed Ambition

I know that many voters are having trouble understanding the delegate math, or "delegate calculus" as some pundits like to call it. But a strange thing has happened since the Pennsylvania Primary. Clinton's narrative has morphed ever more into myth.

Sen. Clinton won this primary by 10pts, even though weeks before the primary she was ahead by over 20pts. She argued that Sen. Obama can’t "seal the deal" but she cannot explain why she squandered a 20pt lead and nearly lost a state where she has so many ties.

Sen. Clinton seems to have forgotten basic math, especially when it comes to adding.

The DNC decided not to seat the delegates from Florida and Michigan because they moved up their primaries. These states, violated the very rules that they agreed to have the DNC impose if a state were to breach. Somehow, Mrs. Clinton thinks that, in her calculations, she is ahead in the popular vote. (this could possibly be true if you count FL and MI).

The DNC Chairman, Howard Dean, said that he will not change the rules at the end of the game. Florida and Michigan, sure, are swing states, but that does not make them more important than other states, he said. Case closed.

So what’s Sen. Clinton’s angle here? Why is she spinning that she has more votes?

Mrs. Clinton is trying to convince voters (and the superdelegates!) that she is more credible, because of the "higher amount of votes she has" in her calculations...which is no calculation... The superdelegates know that she doesn’t have more popular votes; she knows it; Sen. Obama knows it, but as always, she is playing some voters for a fool, thinking that they have forgotten that FL and MI are not included - and will not be - in the calculation.

I think she has given in to her own myth. And this is the result of an obsessed ambition. Perhaps she thinks that she can convince voters that FL and MI are being counted, much like she convinced the voters in Ohio that they really did lose jobs because of NAFTA without admitting that she supported the legislation with enthusiasm.

It seems to me that Sen. Clinton is addicted to her own myth.

She simply cannot get away from twisting the truth. We know she cannot provide health care for every American; we know she did not dodge sniper fire in Bosnia and we know that Chelsea was not in New York on 9/11. Sen. Clinton said that she negotiated open borders in Macedonia to fleeing Kosovar refugees. But the border was opened a day before she arrived! And now, she expects the voters to believe that somehow Florida and Michigan are counted in the primary math here.

Here is some math from RealClear Politics that is simple and needs no re-interpretation. I hope she can figure it out.

1. Total Delegates Obama +135
2. Total Pledged Delegates Obama +156
3. Popular Vote Obama +1.7 percentage pts
4. North Carolina (Polls) Obama +15.5
5. Indiana (Polls) Obama +3.0

RCP Avg

Democratic Nomination Obama 48.8%
Clinton 42.2%

Sen. Clinton is a lawyer, so I suspect, at this stage of the primary, she knows what the phrase,
"compelling argument" means.

Sen. Clinton Will Destroy The Party Before Seeing Obama As President

I am of the belief that Sen. Hillary Clinton would rather see Sen. John McCain get elected as President of the United States, than lose to Sen. Barack Obama and return to the Senate.

The evidence that points towards this is overwhelming; delegate math, negative campaigning, and of course her response to Sen. Obama's comments about voters in "small towns" in PA. Here is an excerpt of what Sen. Obama said:

"You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years. ... And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

Sen. Obama was not "looking down" on anybody. He was pointing out a real truth that has plagued, not just small towns in PA, but also towns in Ohio (remember NAFTA?) and other states that have lost jobs because of the current administration and lunatic policies (NAFTA) that Sen. Clinton supported.

Sen. Clinton responded with, "that's not my experience" in response to Sen. Obama's remarks. Oh really? Well, what is it then? You cannot tell me that people who have seen jobs leave their towns are happy and enthusiastic. You cannot tell me that people in PA or Ohio who have seen plants shut down have not either privately or publicly displayed some level of bitterness.

Mrs. Clinton used this as opportunity to make it seem as though Sen. Obama was "looking down on people".

"They take refuge in their faith and their community, and their family, and the things they can count on.", Mr. Obama said. That, to me, clearly does not sound like someone is looking down on another person or persons.

It is tragic, that Sen. Clinton on the brink of failure - failure to get the nomination - will stoop so low, after squandering a double digit lead in the PA polls, and suggest that her "opponent" is so insensitive that he would suggest such a thing.

These are the politics of a desperate candidate, who, after having her own ethics called into question, will attempt to create an image for her opponent that would be unappealing to the voters of PA.

Once again, as with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright issue, the media picked up on this - something which really had no fuel - and gave into the Clinton machine. And sadly, we have another fight; never mind the issues - the main issues - but now we have merely a comment made and then the media and Sen. Clinton hit the airwaves with their spin.

Tragic.

And yet, "it still moves". The Obama campaign will survive. Sen. Clinton does not want a position in an Obama White House, that is why she will (a) fight to the death and (b) do whatever she can to destroy Sen. Obama, thereby letting McCain win. If I can't have it, nobody in the party can...

I would rather have a President who speaks realities about my predicament, than one who lies and lies..and lies...and lies and characterizes these lies as words that were "misspoken" even though she was often reading from prepared remarks!

This is why the Democratic election is so remarkably unprecedented. Not so much because you have a woman and an African-American, but because the African-American candidate - his demeanor and his way of deflecting, and tolerating, is so representative of what many people go through day-to-day.

Sen. Clinton's energy does not come from her belief that she is "more qualified" To be sure, they are probably equally qualified at this point. But her energy and obsession is fueled by the myth that she, and her economic background (earning $109 million over a 6-7 year period) is better and that even if she lies and lies and lies, she is still entitled to win, because of who she is, and of course, who her candidate is....

She reminds me of a disgruntled baseball pitcher, whose team has no shot at the World Series.

The next batter she faces happens to be the opposing team's pitcher, who interestingly, has a pretty impressive batting average. The pitcher who is batting could very well see his team go to the World Series. As the pitcher on the mound, what does she do? Does she walk him? No. Does she throw a change-up? No. She hits the opposing pitcher who happens to be the opposing team's ace. End result? He cannot pitch in the world series.

Every time she says something, she is hitting the Democratic Party!

Shredding Of The Democratic Party

The other night, I listened to a CNN journalist grill one of Sen. Clinton's supporters about her lies regarding her trip to Bosnia, which she characterized as statements that were "misspoke".

I think the journalist was Campbell Brown, if I am correct. And if she were an attorney, she would make a good one, only because she made sure that Clinton's supporter stayed on track, when he tried to bring up Sen. Barack Obama, even though the question had nothing to do with him.

We now have more evidence which shows how awful of a candidate Ms. Clinton has become. Dick Morris wrote an interesting article on Realclearpolitics which outlines a list of lies as if it were a mulit-count felony indictment against the Senator. To listen to her attempt to explain away with comments like, "I made a mistake" and "I misspoke" or, "I am occasionally human" is disgusting, because to me, it is another attempt, on her part, to fool the voters into believing that she is above everyone else and, more than qualified than Sen. Obama - they both are wanting in foreign policy experience - when it comes to a certain area.

In a funny way, I am inclined to believe that her entire family are a bunch of unethical people. But then again, they can't help it. Here is the thing: if several years after your spouse stood before the public and lied and then apologized for lying, you find that you are standing in front of reporters, explaining why you lied (or misspoke), then I'd say there could be a few serial liars in the household!

We know that being first lady to the governor or President does not give you the right to touch up your resume to the point where you actually start believing your myth!

But more to the point.

Both candidates, and to a greater degree Mrs. Clinton, have been literally destroying the party.

The delegate math, no matter how you look at it is compelling. The odds of Sen. Clinton winning the nomination are so small, that a near miracle would have to take place in order for her to do so. This has nothing to do with the polls. It has more to do with her inability to win by big margins. More importantly, her message has not caught on. I wonder why.

To be sure, she would have to win 60% of the votes in the remaining primaries, among other things - something that she has rarely done! - if she has a chance of coming close to winning the nomination.

The tide has changed drastically since Ohio and Texas.

Her narrative has dissolved into a pathetic myth, one that she believed to be true.

Sen. Clinton has accused Sen. Obama of plagiarism while plagiarizing her husband and the former Presidential candidate, Sen. John Edwards, she has lied about her policy experience which was never experience. And now, she is participating in creating a vortex of shredding everything that matters; and every resource the Democrats need, much like the shredding chaos that happens in the middle of a black hole, where atoms are split apart.

This is how unmitigated and unjustified ambition, coupled with bouts of insanity can ruin a party.
She will take Pennsylvania, but day after day, the Super Delegates will come to their senses and quietly rally behind "the candidate", Sen. Obama. One by one, they will fall in line, and soon the end will be here for Senator Clinton.

Historians will write about the 2008 Democratic Primary with a sense of unbelievable bewilderment. Well, a lot of people are writing about it with that mindset now!

Democrats Can't Get It Together

At some point, the Democrats will remember that this is an election year and the country is in an recession.

Presidential candidates who grossly lie about their "foreign policy" experience, radical preachers who curse the very country that provides the liberty and freedom that allows them to speak out against it, and stupid comments by staffers - all of this, has to end, otherwise, this political party will stumble into their convention, stumble into the General Election and ultimately lose.

It is a recipe for disaster.

Presidential candidate, Sen. Barack Obama said that he "vehemently disagrees and strongly condemns the statements" made by Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who is the retiring pastor at his church. Wright has given a racially charged sermon that is so un-American that you have to wonder if he was high on crack or something when he gave it. Sometimes I think people run out of things to say, and just don't know how to shut the __! up. Instead, they go on and on, and before you know it, they are ruining their careers and possibly, someone else's.

In his response to this firestorm, Sen. Obama goes on to say that the controversial statements Rev. Wright made were statements made when he was not in his presence or statements "I did not personally hear him preach while I sat in the pews."

This is significant, because it is a denial of being aware of any of Wright's inflammatory racist rhetoric. More importantly, if it turns out that Obama is placed in a sermon - remember he attended that church for 20 years! - when Wright was giving one of those "hate talks, then his Presidential bid is over. He is cooked.

It is too bad the media is all over this stuff about Obama's goofy pastor, because it takes away from a really important campaign issue relating to Sen. Hillary Clinton.

Everybody embellishes a little on their resume, but Sen. Clinton really took embellishing to another level! In fact, in nearly every aspect of her foreign policy experience that she campaigned on, factcheck.org found that she either lied or grossly exaggerated everything. In one case, she claimed that she negotiated open borders in Macedonia for fleeing Kosovar refugees. But there was one problem:

The Macdedonian border was opened a full day before she arrived!! This, to me, is the equivalent of a lie, not embellishment.

So, it looks like the Dems have a lot of work to do if either one of them are going to make some headway. Obama has to focus on the campaign and stop spending time answering questions about this moron of a preacher; he should just find a new church. Period. Hillary has got to find one thing that she can honestly say she did from a Foreign Policy standpoint and run with that. Having a phone ringing at 3am was effective, but too bad she doesn't have the experience or judgement...

Sen. Clinton's Obsession & Miscalculations

One of the advantages of a lengthy primary is that you get to see candidates evolve. Another advantage, is the public can learn more and more about a candidate's "true colors".

I think that both Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton have twisted the truth in the campaign, especially when it comes to universal health care, but for now, I can't understand why Sen. Clinton will not release her tax returns.

What is she hiding?

We now know that both Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton have a NAFTA position which, at least, one of them, were able to fool a lot of voters in Ohio. When a politician talks about possibly "renegotiating", that is code for "I am not committing to anything..but I do need your vote...." Factcheck.org exposed both of the candidates true positions on NAFTA and the near insignificant impact it had on Ohio jobs.

If you really want to know what is really going on with the "NAFTA-GATE" check out the clip on
youtube.com

But Sen. Clinton - the master of deceit - was able to scare Ohio voters into thinking that (a) Sen. Obama had side deals on NAFTA with Canada and (b) somehow her husband, the former President Bill Clinton, had nothing to do with NAFTA in 1992-1993. Moreover, her success at convincing the media that she - a Senator who is worth close to $50 million - is "the victim" was quite impressive.

Whites have a hidden anger when they believe that an African-American (politics or corporate America) are getting special attention. And we saw this during the debates. We saw how Sen. Clinton got really upset when the moderators opened with a question for her.

I watched the March 4th Primaries with excitement. But as the numbers started coming in, it became clear to me that Sen. Obama would have his hands full in Ohio and Texas. Prior to these primaries, he had cut into Sen. Clinton's lead. But an onslaught of negative campaigning by Sen. Clinton and the suggestion that Sen. Obama is unqualified when it comes to national security, convinced some people - most of the uneducated in Ohio and Texas of course - that she could have a real shot of securing the Democratic nomination. Too bad those voters do not understand delegate math.

Sen. Clinton was in a fight for her life. And just like she said, when she took "whole passages" from her husband '94 speech, when she remarked, "I can take a hit..", she certainly proved that she could get back up before the bell rang.

But the margins that she won Ohio and Texas by, still reveal an ongoing problem for her.

The math. The math. The math.

Sen. Obama leads her by nearly every category that matters in order to secure the nomination. He has more delegates, leads in the popular vote. And, furthermore, the polls show that in a head to head match up with Sen. McCain, only Obama would win, not Clinton.

It is possible, then, that her campaign staffers are lacking in delegate math. Maybe they really believe the slogan Sen. Obama campaign intones, "yes we can!". Or, just maybe, Sen. Clinton believes what she said, when she (plagiarism?) used a phrase from Sen. John Edwards, without giving him credit, with, "no matter what happens [we are going to be fine]"

I am not looking for the perfect candidate, but I believe that Sen. Clinton - no she is not a monster, but has monster-like tendencies - is ruining the party by staying in the race. Her refusal to step aside, based on the probability of LOSING, is taking vast resources from the party, resources that could be used to fight the GOP. Her selfishness, and obsession with winning have reached a point of romantic lunacy.

Obama: "And Yet It Moves.."

In 1633, the Catholic church brought Galileo to trial for heresy. He argued that the earth was not at the center of the universe.

He was forced to recant, and according to Simon Singh in his book, Big Bang, Galileo was sentenced to indefinite house arrest. As he rose during sentencing, Galileo muttered, "and yet it moves", referring to how the earth does, in fact, orbit the sun. Indeed, no matter what is said or done, there are certain realities that cannot be denied.

Scientists and astronomers like Kepler, Copernicus and Galileo often had to confront the lunacy of the church, even when their observations proved what was true in the cosmos. Americans are fodder for situations that warrant packing it in, but instead, they deny reality and fight to the death like a fool. There is no other candidate that embodies this behavior more so than Sen. Hillary Clinton. Tragically, of course.

Today, Sen. Clinton is the presidential candidate who is denying the truth - what is proven in the polls and after 11 consecutive primary losses - that her quest for the presidency will almost inevitably end or, should end on March 4th if she cannot deliver Texas or Ohio with significant margins. Sen. Clinton, while being overly optimistic, may have lost her mind or has simply become so emotionally tied to her quest, that she cannot accept the odds that she is facing.

The odds are daunting, when you consider the momentum Sen. Obama has gained.

"And yet, it moves."

This is how I describe the resiliency the Obama campaign has demonstrated over the past several months. In spite of the ridiculous negative campaigns, the rumors about his affiliation with Islam, the attempt to associate him with radicals, his campaign is unfettered.

The latest polls show that Sen. Obama has chipped away at Sen. Clinton's lead to a point where she is probably thinking about her next move, because there will be no more debates for her after March 4th. In Ohio, Sen. Clinton is ahead by 3.8%, while Sen. Obama leads in Texas with 1.2% all within the margin of error. Most people believe that in a head-to-head match up with Sen. McCain, Sen. Clinton would lose. If Sen. Obama was the Democratic nominee, the polls suggest he would win against McCain.

What the voters want sometimes, can be entirely different than what the candidate wants.

Polls are not the arbiters of truth.

However, they are telling. And in the real world - Mrs. Clinton - we can see what the voters want; we can feel and hear how they react to your messages which have changed like a tropical depression off the coast of Africa; we just don't know what to expect from you. In Sen. Obama, it appears that the voters do not want a hot head commander-in-chief who lies about his experience - you do not have 35 years of experience!

Voters are gravitating towards the candidate who moves on, in spite of the stupidity that exist in the campaigning process. The polls show Sen. Clinton's lead in Texas and Ohio have diminished to alarming levels. But, ah, Sen. Obama's campaign moves on...

"And yet, it moves..." (Galileo)

Time To Say Goodbye Hillary...

Why is it that everyone in the country is aware of the implosion taking place within the Clinton campaign, except for Sen. Hillary Clinton?

The polls show her lead down to single digits in Texas and Ohio, two states that she must win by huge margins in order for her candidacy get off of life support. And yet, during debates she speaks to Sen. Obama as if they are having tea, but on the stump, she is as angry as a wild boar!

The world is full of men and women who feel some sense of entitlement - I work with hundreds of them - but the Clinton machine is at a point where the evidence is so overwhelming, that it is almost impossible for her to win; the voters are gravitating towards a candidate by the millions, the same candidate whom she has tried to destroy with negative after negative ads to no avail.

And yet, sadly, with her campaign staff exhausted and afraid to tell her that it is time to pack it in, she will fight to the death, to a point of utter embarrassment.

Health Care & The Obama Tsunami

I can't wait for baseball season to start.

It will give me something even more exciting to watch. Well, what could be more exciting than watching presidential hopefuls say the same pathetic lines, "my friends", "yes we can!" and now I recently heard Sen. Clinton yell, "yes we will!". It seems like an awfully desperate tactic; to borrow part of a battle cry from your opponent.

In another post, I commented on how disingenuous Sen. McCain sounds when he says, "my friends" about 3 dozen times in his speeches. Not only does it sound fake, but often, he sounds as if he wish he had something better to say. It is okay to open a sentence with, "my friends..." once or twice in a speech. But for me, it just sounds so nauseating at times, especially when the guy who is saying it sounds like a robot. Turn the channel?

I can't.

This election has not given us the best candidates. And now that McCain will be the GOP nominee, I am still wondering if I like one of the Dems. The other night, Sean Hannity of Hannity & Colmes argued that, in the end, Sen. Obama does not have the experience to be president, but wasn't very clear on exactly what kind of experience someone would need. None of the other debaters challenged him on the experience our current President had before he took over the White House.

But the one thing that is vexing me about the Democratic candidates is this thing on universal health care.

Both Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton claim that they will provide "universal health care", but a review of their plans and some analysis by Factcheck.org shows that neither one of their plans will cover everyone. Clinton's idea of garnishing wages of those who do not participant does not coincide with what her website says about you "being in the driver seat.." Moreover, how do you garnish wages of someone who is not working? It seems that this will be a large part of the population that will benefit from the so called "universal health care" which really isn't universal, because everyone does not get covered.

If I vote for a Democrat, I am particularly concerned about universal health care, because it is unclear as to how things will be for me since I have an employer sponsored plan which also covers my wife. Will I have to wait 3 weeks just to get an appointment to see my doctor?

On a separate note, recently an adviser to Clinton, Harold Ickels said that she will have the nomination wrapped up by June. The tragedy of this assertion is that it has denial written all over it. The reality is that Sen. Clinton's campaign is on life support. She has tried everything possible to stop Sen. Obama's momentum, from making loans to her campaign; shifting staff around, using her daughter, Chelsea and anything else necessary to gain significant momentum.

The margins that Sen. Obama has been winning by are daunting for her.

When Obama takes Wisconsin and Ohio, the effects of his momentum could be like a tsunami.

The party establishment will have no choice but to go to Sen. Clinton and politely encourage her to step aside, lest she drowns in a "sea of change" unknown to the political spectrum.

Obama: The Untenable Candidate

Politicians can be some of the most ridiculous and embarassing public figures in the country.

Thomas Jefferson, who was no saint, said that there is always a moment when the public will not trust elected officials. Even the French laughed at him when he argued "liberty" while housing hundreds of slaves! In fact, I imagine the French were probably roaring with laughter when Jefferson talked about liberty... That would have been funny on youtube.

You can go to youtube and just look at some of the speeches and goofs, or read their comments from the past to get an idea of what I am talking about. I don't think they have anything on Jefferson.

America, we are an interesting and insanely laughable group of people.

Nowadays, if you really want to know what people think about the realistic possibility of this country having the first African-American president, then all you need to do is listen to the near moronic explanation Gov. Ed Rendell gave when he was asked to clarify his comment that some white people in Pennsylvania are not ready for a black candidate. (maybe he polled them himself or something)

Mr. Rendell does not want to acknowledge that Sen. Obama won in a state (Iowa) which is home to some of the most racist groups around (e.g., the Aryan Nation).

Rendell is a superdelegate for the Democratic party, who happens to harbor racist feelings.

Odd.

The polls and results of the Democratic contest are compelling. There is a good chance that come January 2009, we will be swearing in a black President. And Gov. Rendell's attempt to convince the PA Voters that a vote for the black candidate would be counterproductive will, in retrospect, seem silly.

I have found that Sen. Obama, while not the smarter of the two Democratic candidates, has evolved to a point where he has so much momentum and support that he is untenable.

You can go to CNN's election site to read the data on delegate counts etc.

Gravitating Towards The Electable Candidate

It's funny how a big contest like Super Tuesday can change the reality of the presidential election! Prior to Feb. 5th, my thinking was that Sen. Clinton, who still leads Sen. Borack Obama in delegates, would somehow destroy him.

But as it turns out, Obama won more states, even though he still lags behind Clinton in delegates.

Even though Sen. Obama's health care plan is vague, if not, totally viable and even though his goal of getting troops out of Iraq is a little too optimistic, I got to thinking that over the past few months, he has matured on the campaign trail. Maybe it was the whipping Hillary's husband gave him in public, or maybe his campaign staff quietly worked on him, polishing him up a bit. But whatever the case, my wife and I agree that he has improved.

A recent CNN and Time Poll also confirmed his momentum. In both polls, Obama leads McCain by over 7 points! When asked about Sen. Clinton, the numbers point to a statistical dead heat.

I am not sure who I like. But I think I know who the public likes.

One thing for sure, it is quite embarassing when you have to lend money to your campaign, although it is not unheard of. And it is even more troubling, as a candidate, when the voters - most of whom are lower and middle class Americans - find out that you are worth upwards of $50 million dollars! The problem is not the wealth. The problem is the appearance of Republican characteristics.

My wife says that everyone has a right to earn a living, and if it happens that someone earns millions then so what. True, but when a candidate argues about tax issues and suggests that the richest Americans are not paying their fair share, it implies (depending how the speech is crafted) that she is not one of them, although her networth dwarfs many of the GOP candidates!

The fact remains, according to one WSJ columinist, that Sen. Clinton's quest for president has been undermined lately by financial problems which include reports that senior staff members have agreed to go without pay. Meanwhile, Sen. Obama continues to raise records sums of money. The establisment and the electorate is gravitating towards an electable candidate.

It is possible, yes, that we will have either a female or black president. But the momentum building with the possibility - the sheer unprecedented nature of it all - of a black president is refreshing and exciting to a lot of people. While I do not believe Sen. Obama is "the more qualified" candidate, I also didn't believe President George Bush was the more qualified candidate. But "qualified" is a relative turn, and voters come out when they see that their vote has meaning; and that their vote can really - this time! - effect change.

Obama & The Syrian: Slim Shady

Wow.

Maybe when it is all over - Super Tuesday - I will complain about what Sen. Hillary cannot do about the war in Iraq since she originally voted for the darn thing. But heck, at least she is smart and knows how to articulate her ideas well.

She will be the next President. And she should pick John Edwards as her running mate.

It looks like her husband, the former President, Bill Clinton, finally got her into some real trouble. Sen. Ted Kennedy came out with his endorsement of Sen. Barack Obama, after being neutral for a time. This will give Obama some help, but I just don't think it will be enough. (read on).

The WallStreet Journal reported today that polls conducted since January show Clinton with a double digit lead in 8 of the 10 most important Super Tuesday states. And guess what? I think the article mentioned that most of those states have a small black/democratic voting population. CNN has a neat election section on their site that also has a primer on delegates etc. I don't think most voters understand that the candidate with the most delegates gets the nomination.

I had a brief email exchange with a contributor to a major news network, who basically denies the race issue here. He was very offended that I stated Sen. Obama got lucky in South Carolina because blacks rallied after Clinton came after him. If you watch the news, it is easy to spot this contributor! I think that there will be a lot of diappointed African-Americans after Super Tuesday and the Democratic Convention. We sure will need a good articulate speaker!

The reality of Sen. Obama's predicament could not have been more revealing than when the story broke about his friend and longtime contributor, Antoin Rezko, was jailed. You can read about his indictment, but let's just say...shady, shady...shady.. shame on you Obama!! shame on you!! And did I mention that Rezko is Syrian? No, I am not saying that Obama is a closet Muslim, but this connection with this Rezko nut aint gonna help him...

"change gonna come...." and it will come on Super Tuesday...

The Chicago Tribune has a series of articles on this Rezko guy..there is even a picture of Hillary and Bill with him! She explained the photo op with someone on tv a few days ago I believe. Odd. Very odd.

I printed a copy of the article before dinner and "attempted" to hand it to my wife, but she would not have any of it. I think - like me - she has become completely disillusioned by his candidacy and now we are watching something that could have been quite interesting (and grand for some) disintegrate. What you have here is a candidate who talked about uniting the country, someone who played the race card; talked about changing Washington, making tough choices and in most cases, has either done the opposite or nothing at all.

His real estate transactions with Rezko in the midst of the worst mortgage crisis ever - which has literally destroyed millions homeownership dreams (especially minorities) because of foreclosures - will make him look very bad. Maybe. Maybe not.

What will Obama do after Hillary wins? Could he find himself caught up in legal troubles down the road? Will the establishment abandon him, distanced themselves from him if the Rezko thing blows up?

On a lighter note, after President Bush gave his State of the Union speech, CNN's Anderson Cooper interviewed Sen. Obama and asked about the support that Sen. Clinton is getting from her husband. At one point, Sen. Obama said, "[they] are making factual statements that are inaccurate..." Remember Bill with the, "well that depends on what is is.." ? Well, I am not sure if Obama was using legalspeak or rhetoric or what, but I never knew that factual statements could be inaccurate. Maybe it's me. I don't know.

PRIMARily Getting Sick..

My wife and I watched the results of the South Carolina Democratic Primary come in. We also talked a good bit about the GOP primaries and laughed about how the candidates - most of whom are millionaires - talk about tax cuts and how the wealthiest Americans don't pay their fair share of taxes should be penalized etc... It would be nice if they admitted how much they were worth. But that would be disastrous. Romney is worth more than $250 million dollars!

We laughed at Sen. McCain when he says, "my friends" eight zillion times in his speeches. Reagan said that phrase better because it was him and genuine. I liked Reagan although when he was in office I was Democrat (oops!) He was grandfatherly....(now I hope by writing this it does not come back to haunt me...

Anyway, when McCain says, "my friends" it sounds so fake...It is like someone saying "how are you?" when you know they don't mean it... Sometimes at work people say, "how are you?" and I answer with, "hey, what's up?" They never realize that I never answered their question. Politics is all disingenuous. So at the end of the day, the voter is left with voting for the candidate who is the least unethical.

When my wife and I listen to Sen. Obama we have to make sure that (a) it is well before dinner or (b) well after dinner. It is really getting to a point where we are getting a little sick. We find him very articulate, but that does not make him "the candidate". Sadly, we find that he has morphed into some kind of a preacher-like candidate; it is a cross between MLK or Jesse with a mixture of the rapper, Common.

He may be good at giving speeches when there is some domestic disaster, but when we hear Hillary speak or some of the GOP candidates speak; when we listen to Sen. Edwards speak, (usually after losing), we are hearing substance. I checked out Obama's website and downloaded one of his 52 second clips/talks on healthcare and he said nothing about solutions only the obvious; who has it and who doesn't. This is no different than what we hear when he debates or gives speeches after a primary. Preachers make the flock feel good. And Obama is a master at it. The Democratic establishment is catching on and I think come Super Tuesday the weeding process will be unapologetic to him.

Admittedly, I was captivated by his freshness, the newness of it all. He is a couple of years older than me and I thought that he could bring real change. But as time went on, his ideas were never fully communicated when he spoke. And don't tell me to read them on the website! If they are his ideas, then he should be able to talk about them.

Dumb Investors: Dumb Ideas

Sometimes when I am at work, ideas come across my mind that I want to post about. Often times, an incident occurs that is so ridiculously silly or unprecedented (maybe) that deserves mentioning, it cannot be ignored.

But alas, at the end of the day, I drive home and the thought goes away. If it is a late night, I look up at the sky and quickly realize that there are far more worthwhile things that have been written about than the filth I ponder.

I work with some of the most interesting people on the planet, and I wonder if some of them are from another planet!

I was up late reading Joe McGinniss' novel, Never Enough about an investment banker who gets murdered by his wife while living in Hong Kong. In the book, you won't find any investment tips etc., but you will learn how stupid people can be and how greedy folks in our industry are at times.

Something else (cats) woke up me up, so I decided that it would be a good time to post. I will sleep in very late this morning and then head to the gym.

Over the past several days, the stock market has thrown investors around, without giving them any clue as to what direction it will go. As soon as the amateur jumps in to buy, the market falls a couple hundred points; as soon as he sells, it goes up another hundred. The individual investor - who basically does not rely on professional advice - is getting mauled! He is trading in and out of his account, with no regard for commissions, trying to find a way to make up for losses that he incurred a few days ago.

As soon as he hears that the market "closed up 200pts...", he is on the phone or on the internet buying his shares. He has no strategy. And if he tells you that he does, it is based solely on what the market does. Again, he has no strategy. He is an irredeemable gambler.

If greed is good, then volatility is better, I believe.

Why? Because it weeds out the stupid investors, wiping out their wealth so that we can have more efficiency in prices within the market. I am glad that millions of people are losing millions and billions of dollars. Why? Because they do not have discipline, nor do they want to learn the fundamental laws of investing. Instead, they sell when the market is tanking and rush to buy when the Dow is trading up 300 points!

I know what I am talking about here, because I see and hear it all day long.

I imagine when most Americans get their rebate checks in a few months, they will be happy to buy their penny stocks, hoping for some miraculous run-up - "a 1000% return overnight" so they can brag to their buddies at the local pub. Maybe. Probably not.

Obama Wins If He Plays The Victim..

At the end of the day, everything comes down to race in America.

There is no way around it. We may act as if the issue dies after the Civil Rights Act was passed, and we may act as if race matters are resolved when MLK Day comes, but in the end, race whether publicly or privately is the dominate factor that occupies most Americans' minds nearly every single day. Anyone who disagrees with this is either on drugs or simply in denial.

It is not so much a bad thing that racial issues are still a dominant phenomena in our country. It is just that they are more interesting to me now that we have a black Presidential candidate who has a good chance of winning, if he can continue to be successful at convincing the electorate that he is a victim who is getting beat up by his opponent's (Sen. Clinton) husband.

I got to thinking the other day. And I now realize that it is impossible for Sen. Obama to win on his own.

He really needs the help of the Clintons! If they do not continue to pummel him, making him look like a poor pathetic victim, then he may have to stand on his own and talk about the issues...with some level of intelligence. God forbid!

The fact of the matter is that the former President's obsession with making sure his wife, the senator, wins this race has made Sen. Obama look innocent; he looks like someone who is getting unfairly beaten up.

Cry Baby Candidates

I feel sorry for Heath Ledger's family, but if he committed suicide, then I find it hard to feel sorry for him.

Men tend to take the easy road out when dealing with problems, particularly depression; the easy road being suicide. Women are most likely the ones piling into therapists' offices or talking amongst themselves trying to sort things out. Men are cowards. We really are. That's my "two cents" on the Ledger thing.

The Democratic Debate in South Carolina was quite interesting. It is sad because you have two of the most sensitive people in the country - one based on race and one on gender, fighting, while the smartest candidate - John Edwards -was nearly screaming for attention. At one point, he reminded "the children" that their bickering would not get health care for people or solve other problems.

I felt that Sen. Obama had an obligation to directly answer the question as to why he answered "present" to over 100 votes while as senator for the state of Illinois. And the fact that he did not answer, makes me feel uncomfortable. Will he be as evasive if he were to become President?

Obama does not seem comfortable with clarity while debating. He lacks detail in his responses and I think the public - the voters - should be very careful not to give into the allure of his charisma and focus more on his credentials.

Sen. Clinton could have maintained what I would described as a stellar performance had she not brought up Obama's "slum landlord" association allegation. Diplomacy can be practiced now. She is lightyears ahead of him and did not need to go there. She is well prepared - always - and never wanting for details when it comes to her arguments.

In the end, the debate cast Obama as "victim" and I cannot see Sen. Clinton winning South Carolina.