Corleone Family Tactics... Or Montana?

The question is, after she's done wiping out the disloyal, freezing out the interest groups who betrayed her, who's left to elect her in November? This is less like The Godfather, and more like Scarface, even if it works out for her. Unfortunately for her, just about everybody recognizes that whatever she says about Barack Obama's electability, she's kneecapped herself with major constituencies of the party, and many find her politics against her own party distasteful.

And that really is the heart of it: It isn't just that she attacked Obama. That's to be expected; politics ain't beanbag. It's that she's attacking her own party in a certan fashion. She's cooperated with folks on the right to do this(even folks that hounded her in the past), folks looking for strategic advantage on their own side who won't vote for her. She's taken up many of the Republican standards against her own party, with a party that no longer has any patience for the demonization of the left, and which can get independents and disaffected Republicans without having to sell themselves out.

So, in the end, she's dug her own electoral grave, and pretty soon the party's going to start burying her candidacy with no small sense of relief.

From the Files of "You know you're in deep s*** when..."

For the Republicans, you know you're in deep s*** when the Democrats beat you in Mississippi.

Should we call it Mississ-hippy now? Damn dirty hippy Southern States.

Loyalty Defined Down

I will have serious reservations about backing the Clintons in future contests because of this one. This article in the New York Times isn't what pushed me over the edge, I think their behavior over the past few weeks has been more the cause of that.

I'm really sick of politicians who define loyalty one way, towards themselves, but don't give back. It would be easier for the Clintons to keep friends if they acted like friends; friends of the party, friends of the middle class, friends to those who helped them, supported them, but have had differences of opinion.

If they took these things more maturely, if they accepted that they weren't entitled to win every contest, and that letting a few fights go might help keep them in the running for future candidacy, they might not have screwed themselves so royally. As it is, now, they've turned a huge portion of their party against them. What the hell now makes them the better candidates? Obama's not going to punish people for supporting Clinton. They won't be so forgiving, but as they decline, Obama's open arms are going to look a lot more welcoming than their turned backs.

Reality Call for Evan Bayh, Steve Daugherty on the Line...

I know the Indiana senator's just trying to back his candidate, but it's a little too early to start calling these states for Hillary in the General Election.

Here's how it breaks down: she's a long shot in the general election if she can't unite her party behind her. No matter what the poll results say now, they will say something else entirely eight months from now.

Senator Clinton has a chance to beat McCain that's better than even odds, but she will depend upon and campaign mainly in the swing states, and in the safe states that form our core constituency. This will make for a fragile set up, where local victories by McCain will make more of a difference.

Obama has the skills and organization to move past this, to make our victory more robust. Every time we've depended on swing states to win, we've lost. We need to move into new territory to win. Obama can take on challenges in both the Swing States and the Red States, and by doing that lead us to a comfortable win and mandate, as opposed to a weak 50+1 victory that only benefits Clinton politically, and that, by getting her into office.

I'm afraid I can't say I share this guy's pessimism

There needs to be some confrontation, I think, so Obama has a chance to shine once again, and Hillary has the chance to announce that's she's returned to her senses and has ditched the advisors who are sinking the Clinton's popularity.

Harry Reid: when you're finished shooting yourself in the foot, I'd like to talk to you.

It's stuff like this which amazes me. I mean, really. Of all the wasted opportunities. Americans have no problem believing that Democrats are more like them in their values, better at protecting them, better in so many other ways than their rivals. Yet you and the rest of the Senate Democrats have them so frustrated that they feel the need for a third party.

It's pathetic. You're making us look bad. I mean, why are we giving the telecommunication companies immunity? Their people should have seen this coming. are we doing this because Bush will accuse us of being terrorist sympathizers? Take a nice long walk outside the swamp-gas saturated air of Washington, and you will find that most people are scared, not grateful for what our friends in the Maisson Blanche have been doing.

Let me tell you what you're doing: you're wasting valuable credibility, not to mention the opportunity to stand up to Bush when it really matters. Of course we'll be far less cautious when and if a Democratic party president is elected. But that won't tell people the depth of our committment to fight for them. What if another Republican is elected President, unlikely as that may be? What if we find ourselves dealing with another Oval Office tyrant?

I know you might want to be civil, not to make waves, not to offend people, but that only works if the other side is cooperating. These people are not. They are actively trying to stifle your agenda, and you are letting them do this. What will people think when they see this? That we're so gracious and bi-partisan? Or are they going to think what the hell are these people good for? At this point in time, our most valuable role as the majority is to be the antidote to the political poison that the former majority power has become.

We no longer have to go along to get along. We no longer have to tolerate their agenda of obstruction of anything and everything liberal. We have every right and every mandate now to change the equation of power, to quit letting victories flow in their direction. It's time for them to learn the true meaning of obstruction. They can filibuster us (or threaten it seems, since you don't hold them to such idle promises), but we can absolutely take anything everything they want an bring it to a screeching halt. We'll see how long they maintain their taste for such tactics when we put that flavor in their oatmeal for a change.

So far, the verdict for your Senate, and as a result this congress will be that you are a bunch of wimps who could back down the most unpopular president of modern times, or break the losing party on its way to losing more seats in that chamber. I could understand the brief lingering of timidity from the days of Republican Majority, but this is just convincing people that your folks are congenitally lacking in spine, and that is just going to get your butts into trouble in upcoming elections. If you really want to consolidate your power, don't be afraid to use it. If you want the Republicans to be able to show your party to be weak and ineffectual, you're doing a good job.