'Judas' Richardson and the Gospel of Bill Clinton

Those of you complaining about what Carville told the media and what Bill told super-delegates, are really ignorant. I guess that's why you're not political strategists.

Look at the effect.

1. Richardson took a week off campaigning for Obama.

2. He's now doing damage control instead of talking about Obama.

3. He's damaged goods either way. He either lied or betrayed his longtime friends. Lose-Lose situation.

He's smart enough to know what his endorsement meant and now he has to pay the political price. Pure genius, imo, by Carville and Bill.

Richardson could have refrained from endorsing anyone. It was disloyal. Carville is right. People often use the Judas term to refer to betrayal just as Benedict Arnold is used in regard to being a traitor. Religion shouldn't be dragged into this spat. Richardson's umbrage is over the top. Clinton should forget him and never speak of him again. His endorsement is insignificant as are most. Voters should make up their minds independently of endorsements.

In 1968, the Democratic convention produced a presidential candidate that had not campaigned for the nomination.

In 2008, the Democratic convention will do the same.

Albert Gore...he's coming!

Obama supporters seem to hone in on his lead in convention delegates and the popular vote.

The problems remains that no candidate can win the White House by any other means than the electoral college, which Obama cannot win.

George W. Bush taught us that, or has it been that long that some cannot remember?

If you don't agree, then consider the results of a recent (April 1) Rasmussen survey:

"If Obama is nominated, just 56% of Clinton supporters say they are likely to vote for him against John McCain. Forty percent (40%) of Clinton voters in Pennsylvania say they are not likely to vote for Obama."

The same 40% of Clinton voters are the ones that would ensure an electoral loss for Obama in November.

If you really want to see what is going to happen in August at the convention, start reading about the 1968 Democratic Convention.

Perhaps that is why we are starting to hear more from Al Gore.

We can only hope.

"Governor Richardson did indeed promise Clinton his endorsement until Obama promised him a post in his cabinet"

That just doesnt make since considering Richardson was already a 2-time cabinet member for the Clinton administration and a friend of the family. Almost a shoe-in if you ask me.

Worst case I see him as simply jumping on the bandwagon of the person he sees winning before its too late.

I commend Richardson for choosing his endorsement based on what he feels right (the way it should be) and not based on friendship. His maturity is something that is apparently lacking on this board.

Team Clinton is going to be remembered for variations on a single line:
"Imagine what the reaction would be if Obama...."
It's always the reverse-racism line. Always.

Governor Richardson did indeed promise Clinton his endorsement until Obama promised him a post in his cabinet.
Senator Obama wants to come across as a straight arrow but he has a poisoned tip.
There is something sinister, unholy, corrupt and ugly about Senator Obama and no matter how he tries to lie out of it, it can't be changed. He will be a divider of people, not an uniter.

Lana, I saw the Chris Mathews hardball with Obama. You must have been real blind not to see all those University Young Americans and Professors in love with Obama. Blame them for drooling over Obama. Hey, the simple fact is, Obama is 100 times a better candidate than Hillary the Liar and McCain the Moron. If you like Hillary, go vote for her. No one cares!!!

LOM

I see I owe you an answer. Will try to do such over the next couple of days.

Lana writes:
"Chris Matthews was drooling, he should be benched for the entire campaign he is so pro-obama."
-----
It did seem to cross some new line from his usual slightly-embarrassing adulation into the realm of the downright creepy.

Did anyone see Hardball tonight. Chris Matthews was drooling, he should be benched for the entire campaign he is so pro-obama.

I wish he did not cherry pick issues and would have asked Obama about his votes in Illinois on prohibitting the bill to protect a child born alive of a partial birth abortion. Obama is more pro-choice than the NARL. His stances are so far left.

Then for him to say he wants Al Gore in his cabinet and says he talks to him each day. Nice digg.

Using the term "brother" today when fan was annoying him for a pic. So above race lines. I bet he and Michelle sit at home saying "will get all those cracka's voting for us and then we will be sitting pretty in the white house"

MC writes:
"Navarro, The Lincoln quote you post is not mine."
-----
Sorry I didn't make it clear the passage from MC's post was a quotation.

Something is unholy and sinister and ugly about this Obama guy.

Obama folks certainly do have assured and certain mentalities. Facts or no facts. They tell us everyday that it "is all over". Obama leads, math defeats HRC, etc.

However, given all their certainty, I wish one, just one, anyone of them. Would answer these questions:

Please tell me (or us, Clinton dummies) the exact formula by which Obama turns his lead into a win. Obama definitely has a lead, no doubt about it!

You folks are always talking about the "math" against HRC. Please be good enough to tell us the equation by which Obama wins. I have no doubt you know, and are just keeping it a secret. Right?

Right now it seems that the only sure way would be for Hillary to "quit", which you are all calling for to do to "save" Obama. Yet she is not going to do quit!

I thought Obama was the Democratic "savior", why should he even need help?

Then all you Obama folks claim Obama won Texas caucuses. If he did we out here in Texas do not know that either. Maybe y'all actually mean "he has been projected" to win the Texas caucus votes by about 7.

Actually the caucus stuff "ain't over yet", will not be decided until June. JUNE, that is when the Texas Democratic convention convenes in Austin. Until then all is one more case of "speculation".

Texas results will be decided then, and until then Obama has won nothing re Texas. Only HRC has, she won the popular vote, the only vote that is "official", so far!

Until any one of you, or the BHO campaign, "produce" the formula for how Obama actually wins, then all of your bravdo is merely speculation and wishful thinking.

Navarro, The Lincoln quote you post is not mine.

If you read what I wrote, you would see that it is a statement, made by a Dean/MoveOn author.

It comes from Dana Duncan, an author/operative for Dean/MoveOn/Obama. You can check it for yourself at "Burning the Grass Roots.com"(the book).

I think you and any others will be surprised to find that the book is basically a Rovian type playbook re the 2004 campaign, Obama's 2004 US Senate run, and the Obama campaign of today.

“There’s something special about this guy,” Mr. Richardson said of Mr. Obama. “I’ve been trying to figure it out, but it’s very good.”

I have been trying to figure out what obam' message is for last six months. And it's upsetting to me too that he gets endorsements based on his debating himself on almost every issue. The only consistent message of his is that he is running for president.

I am getting to the point where I enjoy reading the comments more then the story. It is great that some of you are so deeply committed to your choice. But so many are making their choices on sound bites they hear or what they hear second hand. Some don't like Obama because of what his pastor at the church he attends said. Myself being one of these who has in their life heard something a friend or someone they knew say something that they would never say or support yet never speak up against unless that for the fact they would be considered supporting that. Then we look at Clinton and some don't like her because of her husband or how she has risen to the position her holds. Personal their views on many things are almost the same so for myself the choice of who might be right comes down to personal values. I would not be with my wife if more then once she had been rumored or proven to be unfaithful to the commitment we made to each other. I know you say love is blind but when someone stays with a person like that then becomes elected in a state they never really lived in but is an important state when it comes to electing our president it sends up a warning to me. I view a person like that as not someone who is really thinking of us middle class workers but as someone who has tasted power and is addicted to it and will do what ever it takes to stay in power thru others to take the blame if what they say strikes a nerve with us but plants the seed or their own actions.

MC writes:
"they have finally found their "Lincoln", and "this time it is not a tall white man""
-----
Might not be a great idea to push THAT comparison too far ... there was MRS. Lincoln, the civil war in which zillions died, and that assassination thing.

from swimming freestyle:

"Barack Obama's election to the presidency in November would put a serious crimp in Bill Clinton's power, influence and resulting earnings. Obama and his Administration would, by virtue of their position, become the de facto leaders of the Democratic Party. Bill and Hillary Clinton will continue to be powerful forces in the Party, but the bulk of that power shifts from the Clinton's to the new guys in town. They become a good deal less marketable.

One can understand why the thought of losing all that might make Bill Clinton a little grumpy."