I’m no huge fan of the Republicans either, but only because they have become too liberal. Liberalism/Socialism DOES NOT WORK - NEVER HAS NEVER WILL. Why do you all think if we keep trying this NON-FREE approach to finding Nirvana we’ll eventually get there?

I feel for people in need, and I feel as a nation we should try to help out wherever possible, but allowing the government to be the ones to administer what everyone should give (through taxation) is immoral and just flat wrong. And then for you to complain and lament about power corrupting absolutely - blah blah blah - is just so hypocritical. Why would you want to give them (the establishment whether conservative OR liberal) MORE power?!!! This makes absolutely zero sense. Blame it on the GOP if you will, but it is not their fault alone for whatever mess you think we’re in as a country. Why don’t you put your blind faith in a foreigner, no less a billionaire, who hates this country like George Soros? Oh right, you already do! How stupid is this?!!! This makes no sense at all. Exactly what drug and in what quantity must one consume it to reach this level of enlightenment?!!! There is no doubt this country is headed for a majorly rude awakening! Wake up before it is too late!!!

As for firing Howard Dean, dude when Clinton surrounds herself with the likes of McAuliffe, Begala, and Carville, you think they’re going to have Howard Dean stick around after Clinton deliberately slapped the DNC in the face with all this Michigan/Florida bullshit?

Please: even you’re not that stupid.

And got a link on that? I hear “she’ll get rid of” constantly, but I’ve never seen any evidence.

Someone oughta ask Begala what he thinks of “that asshole from Vermont” now…

Anyway, time for some arugula, followed by a triple soy latte no foam.

last week you said obama was advising people not to give to other CANDIDATES, you were asked for proof, which you never really provided–other than a link to another blog post which said “my sources.”

I am sure that you are well aware that every nominee takes over the DNC and then runs the campaign as they see fit.

I am also sure that on some level you know that clinton et al have never been down with the 50 state strategy and the Dean-led DNC.

Or, not.

maybe you are still in denial.

One would think that Edwards’ endorsement would open your eyes,

but maybe not.

in any case, I must go have another latte.

I not only think it’s preferable but necessary to have an ideological infrastructure that’s independent of the party structure. You think we should starve groups like Media Matters because the founder is friendly with Clinton? I don’t agree.

No, from the traditional fat cats in the party, You know, all those folks who pretty much lined up behind Hillary before one vote was ever cast.

I think the Joshua Green article in the Atlantic talks about this stuff pretty well:

The story of Obama’s success is very much a story about money. It provided his initial credibility. It paid for his impressive campaign operation. It allowed him first to compete with, and then to overwhelm, the most powerful Democratic family in a generation—one that understood the power of money in politics and commanded a network of wealthy donors that has financed the Democratic Party for years.
…
The social-networking model provided Obama with something that insurgents before him, from Gary Hart to McCain, always lacked: a means of capturing excitement and translating it into money. In the 2004 primary, Howard Dean raised $27 million online. Obama is fast approaching $200 million.
…
“What’s amazing,” says Peter Leyden of the New Politics Institute, “is that Hillary built the best campaign that has ever been done in Democratic politics on the old model—she raised more money than anyone before her, she locked down all the party stalwarts, she assembled an all-star team of consultants, and she really mastered this top-down, command-and-control type of outfit. And yet, she’s getting beaten by this political start-up that is essentially a totally different model of the new politics.”

I for one don’t lament the old Clinton model one bit. As for this new one, sure it may become corrupt too. But unlike the old model, this one is requires the consent of a lot more people to sustain. Which makes it ironically much more susceptible to those same people defunding it if that corruption becomes a significant problem.

I will admit, however, that it is somewhat worrisome how independent Obama is of any established institutions. If he wins, he’ll be the most autonomous President since John Kennedy.