Some too-seldom told Hyde Park history there too.

Nope. Just plain ol’ Tom Fitzpatrick in Seattle!

oh that’s rich, kind of like a little spoiled child.
will you want “cherries on top” of that?

Yes. In fact, I’d like yours.

Your trolls never disappoint, Suzie.

Imagine that…a positive Obama link from a Clinton supporter.

No, I haven’t drunk any Kool-Aid

Yes!
As I’ve been saying for months (and all over):

If you don’t understand that Obama is a Chicago pol from the Daley Machine then you don’t understand Obama.

The Daley Machine controls Illinois politics even more tightly now than it did when Hizzoner Richard J. was boss. Richard M., his son is an even better power broker than his father (a high compliment) and has expanded the franchise. No one reaches the national political stage from Illinois without the Machine’s support and okay. Surely no one thinks that an obscure, only somewhat outside the ordinary lawyer and run-of-the-mill community activist rose through the jungle of Illinois politics to a US Senate seat on his own in just 8 years? It’s not that Obama is not an adequate politician - he is - but he’s not extraordinary enough to do that alone.

Obama gives an inspirational speech. It’s a fairly rare talent. Someone, probably several someones, saw his potential and put him on the political fast track for their own reasons. He went along for his own reasons. Exactly how much and what he paid will probably become clear over the next few years if he wins the White House.*

The only political model Obama knows is the Chicago Machine. It’s a very effective political entity, and, for its own survival, quite good at basic governing. Obama does not appear to be a particularly deep or original political thinker. He is recreating this very successful and familiar model on a national scale.

What most people outside Chicago do not understand is that the Daley Machine is a tool for consolidating and keeping personal power. If it is necessary to woo certain constituencies in order to keep and expand that power, then those constituencies will be wooed. They will be wooed passionately and relentlessly until they are won over. They will be given as much as is necessary to win their loyalty and to preserve the Machine’s power - but they will be given no more than is necessary and no longer than needed. The wooing is only the means to the political end.**

This sounds like Obama has few core principles, and his politics is that of expediency in the service of self-aggrandizement.
Exactly.
He’s a Chicago pol from the Daley Machine.
.
.
* The price that Hillary Clinton paid to reach her present position is widely known - and was raised higher than anyone ever thought it would go this political cycle. Only fools, and there are more of them around this political season than there should be, believe that Obama did not have a price. He did. It’s just not public yet.

** To understand about wooing the constituencies that must be wooed in order to maintain power read Boss by Mike Royko (still available on Amazon). The events are dated. The methods of gaining and retaining power are not, and Royko’s analysis of the Daleys and the Chicago machine is always worth reading.

“i heard from sources”

or

“I heard but cannot confirm”

is not really “proof”

and again, hrc donors threatened to cut off all donations and refused to work for the dem nominee unless they got their way–as did the owner of this blog.

that’s quite different than what has been claimed about obama.

from dday, that evidence you’re seeking:

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2008/05/obama-party-by-dday-on-saturday-in-over.html

Obama will do what he has been doing: Ignore them. He does not want not to carry anyone’s baggage, particularly the bloggers. And after this primary, do they have baggage. Plus, most of them were Republicans until they couldn’t stand Bush anymore.

Tom Fitzpatrick in Seattle…the one who used to write for Az Republic? Hey, you guys ended up with Jon Talton who I would call a good acquaintance and very good writer.

Stuart…how many times are you going to keep bringing that back up? The landscape changed, she changed…accept it.

steveeboy…as Lambert said…Susie, your fan base never disappoints. If you were on lambert’s site, I’d say that you had je ne sais quoi - instead…I’ll just say you are inimitable.

mbw +1

And frankly, too many Obama supporters frighten me. I see in them a willingness to burn the village in order to save it.

Except in macro terms. Obama winning WOULD change politics, maybe not so much from a policy standpoint, but almost certainly from an optics standpoint.

Ya gotta start somewhere, and even in the most cold-hearted analysis, Hillary wouldn’t be able to do the same. The media, and not coincidentally, mass numbers of the American electorate who think the “news” is Cronkite-like, which happens to be a huge part of the problem, just won’t let it happen.

Personally, I think both Hilary and Obama must care about their country an awful lot to take on the late-term abortion that is the Bush years.

I still like them both, though for entirely different reasons.

I frankly don’t think Obama will beat McCain. But it doesn’t matter how I vote because only 5 or 6 states actually matter anymore (and Obama is viewed by the voters of two of those to not exactly care about them.) So, yeah, you Obamaphiles can rant and rave about us not getting on your bus (and, once again, I don’t support Clinton), but I worked, as in fucking paid staff, for the last three Democratic nominees, and I ran as a Democratic candidate for a state legislature - I’ve paid my dues. Since I feel it’s now a throwaway election, I can vote for whomever I damn please, knowing that you are in fact the fools if you think bludgeoning voters in deeply red or blue states will make a bit of difference.

I’ve decided to be a single issue voter on this race, and on my single issue, Obama sucks, even though he tried to pretend differently, which is even more offensive to me. When given the chance, he wasn’t even able to bring himself to say that I, and people like me, deserve the same protections as every other American. And, no, I’m not gay.

I came into this election cycle and thought enough of Edwards (based somewhat on things I read on this blog)to both vote for him and donate money to his election. Two days after I voted early both for JE and for the delegates on the ballot who specifically promised to vote for him (in Iliinios) he decides to pull out of the race. Given the two remaining (major) Dem candidtates at the time, the choice seemed clear enough to me even though the differences between HRC and BHO were very small.
I also seem to recall a bit of talk back in early 2007 about the ABC factor in the general election….was that possibly a media thing or am I mis-remembering?

whatever could this mean????

“I think having the same upbringing, such as we do, makes us skeptical of who he really is.”

now we are REALLY getting to the heart of the issue!

Yup, and that would be true with any candidate.

oh that’s rich, kind of like a little spoiled child.

will you want “cherries on top” of that?

what sexist attacks has the obama campaign used?

provide specifics.

still waiting for specifics of obama discouraging donors to refrain from giving to other candidates–but gee, didn’t HRC’s donors tell Pelosi and others they would refuse to donate if hrc wasn’t the nominee????

My feeling is: relax, have some confidence, and see how this election unfolds while working like hell to make sure that McCain is NOT the next President.

If your guy “won,” you need to get over it just as much as Susie does. We all do.

but it’s over…she lost. better said — she cannot win. so bitch away and threaten to vote for someone else, threaten a Nov nightmare - threaten all you want. in the end — she will not get the nom and most msm are starting to pick up the meme that she is in fact hurting the party…her legacy is gone…if the dems lose she will be held accountable by history and msm. of course you won’t think so - you’ll contend she and you were trying to save us all…think what you want…still pently of time for you to get on board - but if not? hey free country and all…she lost…accept it.

I dare you!! Accept it.

Yeah, fact-checking would be really helpful, especially considering bloggers like Susie are always raking the MSM over the coals for poor sourcing. hey, maybe it’s time for one of those blogger ethics conferences i hear so much about!