The Pennsylvania Progressive

Why Does Obama Incite Such Hatred?

Update:  I really love embarrassing Typepad this way after what they've done to me.  Let me clue them in to a pertinent fact about truly anonymous bloggers:  they don't voluntarily reveal anything about themselves.  Cats R Flyfishn did so openly on several blogs.  Here are two:

http://fullbodytransplant.wordpress.com/2008/03/19/thursday-thirteen-cheese-and-crackers-for-obama/

http://nthemouse.blogspot.com/2007/11/mouse-is-out.html

In the first one she is identified via the link as "carol" from Pennsylvania For Change and then as Cats R Flyfishn from Pennsylvania For Change.  So she freely told the readers of this blog, along with everyone in Berks For Obama, that Pennsylvania For Change was her blog and she was Cats R Flyfishn.  In the second link she also identifies herself as Carol in a comment posted by Cats R Flyfishn.  Does any idiot out there still believe this woman was blogging anonymously as Typepad maintains?  How many bloggers want to trust their blogs and all their work to these morons?

One final article for this blog.  It is a follow up and update on my appeal through legal counsel to Typepad.  I have details and documentation at the original location of The Pennsylvania Progressive here.

The defining question, for me, after this presidential primary, is why does Barack Obama incite such intense hatred among his supporters.  I expected to see this among those opposed to him, not those for him.  I am not the only media person driven off the air by conduct even Tavis Smiley condemned when he said "I can't stand the hate."  Larry Johnson's blog was also a target.

The hatred which has been directed towards me based on lies and smears has resulted in my car being vandalized and my blogs silenced.  Family members are fearful for our safety.   All this from people supporting a candidate whose message is one of unity, tolerance and coming together. 

The level and intensity of the hatred is terrifying.  The Obama campaign has done nothing to stem this tide of abuse.  I inquired to my press contact and one other person associated with the campaign to determine if anyone with the Obama For President campaign had anything to do with the action taken against this blog.  I know this woman and she isn't smart enough to do this on her own.  Seventy two hours later the Obama campaign has not responded to my inquiry.  I believe their silence speaks volumes.

Here is the quote from Typepad informing me that they upheld the complaint filed against me for using the name of an elected public official:

Dear Mr. Morgan,

If Ms. Wentz did not give you permission to post her name on your blog, then it is still an invasion of her privacy to do so. I have consulted with Six Apart counsel and he does say that the full name must be removed. This is a valid complaint under our Terms of Service and is not criminal. Please comply with the request. Otherwise, we will need to edit the post and comments ourselves to remove the disputed content.

Thanks,
Laura
Six Apart, Ltd.

They have now upheld that decision.  They are claiming they did so now, because I published the name of an anonymous blogger.  This is at variance with their email Saturday.

I believe one has to actually blog anonymously to qualify as an anonymous blogger.  Typepad disagrees.  This woman openly revealed her blogging identity to hundreds of people as is documented in my other article linked to above.  She chose a blogging name which anyone with even a passing familiarity with her or her husband would instantly recognize.  She wrote openly about herself and revealed her real identity on her blog.  She has since cleansed her blog of all those references in order to claim anonymity.  This is akin to a woman trying to regain her virginity.  Once its lost its lost dear.

I have had truly anonymous writers contribute on both my blogs.  These include Raven, Great Auk, and Ian Smythe.  I have zealously guarded their real identities.  I know and respect numerous anonymous bloggers.  This woman was never an anonymous blogger.  Typepad is contesting the fact she is an elected public official though every Democrat in her Township is her constituent.  She ran and won public office.  She is the Chair of the F Region of the Berks County (PA) Democratic Committee.  I and others have been told by legal counsel we cannot sue for defamation because we hold the same office.  Why is Typepad defending this woman?  Can they be trusted by any blogger to support your use of legitimate sources and to write critically about elected public officials? 

As a test my co writer Kirk Wentzel had a series of emails with Typepad yesterday.  They show a policy which goes against their policy towards me as represented by their legal counsel to mine.  Here is the exchange, published with Kirk's express permission:

Hi:
 
I was thinking about starting a blog that would cater to local politics but I had a question about your terms of service. Is it permitted to publish the names, public office addresses and office phone numbers for elected or appointed local (city, couty and state) public political officials.
 
For example, can I write an opinion article about our Mayor and say "Call Mayor X at his office xxx-xxx-xxxx and express your opinion). Keep in mind please that this is a publically avaialbe phone number published in the phone book and on the City's website.
 
Your privacy terms are somewhat less specific that other blog hosting companies terms are and so we though it might be good to check before we start this venture.
 
   Thanks in advance!
 
   K Ashton Wentzel

Hi there,
 
   You can read our Terms of Service online. Because of the size of our user base, we are not able to police or pre-approve content before it goes up. Instead, we only remove content if we receive information that the content is illegal. This would include if it is in violation of copyright or if a court has found it to be illegal for any of the reasons listed in our Terms of Service.
 
Please note, however, that we are very strict regarding any type of child pornography and we fully investigate all reports of this.
 
   Thanks,
   Zalary
   TypePad Technical Services
   Six Apart, Ltd.

I have read your terms of service and your privacy section is not very clear which is why I asked the question. Do you have objection to bloggers publishing the names of public officials (elected and appointed) along with theiir official office addresses and phone numbers...NOT their home numbers or addresses.
 
If you cannot answer that specific question, please just say the you refuse to answer the questions. Your terms of service does not address that question. If it did, I wouldn't be asking.
 
I am glad that you investigate child pronography...it's disgusting, why you chose to address that specific item in regard to my question is, however, somewhat of a mystery.
Kirk

Hi Kirk,
 
   Thanks for the note. It should be fine to post their official addresses and   phone numbers on your TypePad weblog.
 
   Please let us know if there is anything else we can do for you.
 
   Thanks,
   Kymberlie

That’s helpful. We already assume there is never a problem publishing a public official’s name even if the official would file a complaint, public official’s names are, by definition are ‘public’.  If Typepad holds a different view then please let me know otherwise we will assume the federal court ruling on that subject is the standard you adhere to.
 
Sorry for all the questions but we want to be sure we don’t do anything wrong by accident and create a problem.  I’m sure you understand.
 
   Kirk

Hi Kirk,
 
   Thanks for the note. As I mentioned, you should be fine with mentioning only   official information, but please let us know if you need anything else.
 
   Thanks,
   Kymberlie

Out of Control Obama Volunteers

One of my chief concerns about Barack Obama are the out of control volunteers turning people off.  I wrote an article a couple weeks ago about some of them and I understand the campaign has little or no control over these people.  This is the flip side of a grassroots operation which is largely volunteer driven.  One local Berks County volunteer is especially out of control and this is about her and her blog Pennsylvania For Change, a pro Obama website.  It is written by several people including Cats R Fly Fishin' (Censored by Typepad.com) and Allen Minch, both of whom have commented here.  I finally banned ------ (censored by Typepad and subject to litigation) for repeatedly posting false and malicious comments as smears.  She knows the facts and ignores them so she can spread her vile rumors.

People like this are hurting Barack Obama and I'm afraid they'll cost us a general election should he be the nominee.  Can you imagine these folks trying to persuade swing voters?  There's an article on their blog even showing one of their writers using a non union print shop to make Obama posters.  Oops.  There go the union voters.

Then there's this article which must have been written by an elitist autocrat:

"The vast majority of the voting republic is either too ignorant, or too set in their ways and close-minded to make a fair assessment to make their choice…"
"Why should the outcome of these people who are most likely much less informed be held at a higher standard than people who are most likely in the know.

Now obviously this doesn’t apply to all people, but i would say its a good chunk 70-80%."

Wow, 70-80% of the people shouldn't be allowed to vote because they're too ignorant.  It's difficult for me to digest that this was written by an Obama supporter.  Not just a supporter but one who got his picture taken with the candidate this week:

(censored by Typepad.com) has been sending emails and leaving comments here (cats r fly fishin) accusing me of being paid by the Clinton campaign.  She knows this isn't factual, she knows it isn't true, she has no concern for facts of any kind and now has been banned for leaving false and malicious comments.  The fact is she and her husband have a habit of using false information to smear fellow Democrats.  A year ago they used false information faxed to them from the Berks County Office of Commissioners by County Commissioner (Republican) Mark Scott to smear incumbent Democrat Tom Gajewski.  The Wentz's sent the information out via email along with copies of the faxes.
I have the faxes and the fax number for the Berks County Commissioners is right on the page as required by law.  Mark Scott denied being the source but Lou Wentz has acknowledged they came from a Republican in an email.

I'll recap the controversy for a second.  Berks County is one of the top four counties in the nation for farmland preservation.  This was a major issue in last year's commissioners election when Gajewski lost his seat to Christian Leinbach, the Home Builders Association candidate.  We lost the majority of the commissioners and now the Republican Board is trying to privatize county services, throw good people out of good jobs and are sitting as the Elections Board in a major election year.  This email helped derail Gajewski's re-election by accusing him of accepting $90,000 from the HBA.  It was a false smear.  They knew it came from Mark Scott, the minority Republican on the Board but they used it anyway.  The information was easily debunked with a visit to the County Elections Services to examine the campaign finance reports or with a phone call to Gajewski.

Mark Scott denied having sent the faxes when I confronted him with one of them this morning.  He also denied knowing Lou Wentz even though both are very involved in trout.  Scott owns a trout farm and Wentz is heavily involved in PA trout.  For good measure they took a swipe at me in that smear email also and have yet to apologize.

Cats left a comment on my first post on Sunday's Obama event in Harrisburg.  After having gone around accusing me of bias, for being paid by Hillary (false) and leaving comments to that effect here on my blog, she berated me for not posting video.  The event hadn't even begun so there was nothing to record...  When I did begin posting video during the event, instead of realizing she was wrong and apologizing she, again, posted comments (twice) accusing me of being on the Clinton payroll.

FEC rules require all expenditures be reported and when this quarterly report is filed by Hillary's campaign Cats will not find any such payment to me or anyone else I know because we were NOT paid by or worked for Hillary's campaign.  Why she persists in making these malicious claims on a repeated basis is beyond me.  One look at her blog however and one can gain some perspective.

Are these the people we want doing phone banking and canvassing in the fall?

Update:  The blogger who has publicly revealed her identity and made no attempt to conceal her identity on her own blog and at TPZoo.com has filed a complaint against me with Typepad, the host of The Pennsylvania Progressive.  This woman freely and opnly volunteered to me and two other individuals on January 26, 2008 that she was blogging at TPZoo.  It only takes a few seconds to determine her blogger identity if you know anything about the woman.

She never said she blogged anonymously or made any statement that the information she provided was at all confidential.  In fact she freely and openly discusses facts about herself and her husband which clearly indicate her identity.  She has made no effort to conceal her identity on her own blog and even linked to this article discussing it.  When she told me she was blogging and where she also told others, did not say the information was off the record and none of us, to my knowledge, presumed it was secret.  There is no presumption of confidentiality, it must be clearly expressed.  She failed to do so.

In her blogging persona she left a comment on my blog seeking to damage my reputation and factually wrong.  She knew the facts to be otherwise but chose to make public false information in a malicious attempt to damage my reputation with my readers.  Now she is seeking to damage my relationship with Typepad.  They have ordered me to remove her name from this article and I will do so pending legal action.

This is further action taken by a woman who is criminally harassing me with  false public statements.  If she is so concerned with, after the fact, trying to keep her real identity secret, did she link to this article and inform her readers they could discover her actual identity here?  She has made no attempts in her own blog articles to remain confidential.  No one could reasonable conclude she blogged confidentially.

The Deep Divide

Everyone seems to be discussing the division among Democrats supporting the candidates, the anger, hostility, and hard feelings being engendered by a fractious and divisive primary.  The process is extending  well into spring as Democrats seem to be split between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.  People cite polls showing how many supporters on the opposite side will refuse to support and vote for the nominee come November.  The media is all over this as an indicator that John McCain might actually have life this fall.  The man is barely alive now according to his repeated misstatements saying Iran is training Sunni Al Qaeda terrorists in Iraq.

As soon as someone explains to the Arizona Senator about the hatred between Shias and Sunnis you can then explain why Americans would vote for four more years of Republicans in the White House, four more years of Bush's failed policies, and four more years of GOP corruption.  There's no way Americans will vote for John McCain this fall after witnessing  the incompetence in Iraq, Katrina and Wall Street.

Democrats will come together in the fall.  I feel confident that once we realize the foe isn't the other candidate, the other camp or those other Democrats, but those trying to impose a third Bush term on the country in the guise of John McCain.  Yes, some of these people are going to be upset when their nominee fails.  It will be critically important for that nominee, whichever one, to rally behind the nominee at the convention and reunite the Party.

Every primary season provides splits and every end of primary season requires Party leaders and candidates to reunite everyone behind our candidate.  I'm confident Democrats will do so rather than suffer for four more years.

We can all mitigate this if we cease trashing the other side, those supporting the other candidate or those who remain undecided.  I'm not targeting either side for this criticism because all are to blame.  Let's treat everyone with respect, everyone has serious reasons for supporting their choice and shouldn't face condemnation by the other side's avid supporters.  All Democrats are avid for either Senator and are advocating strongly for their choice.  Let's show some respect and remember where our fire should be directed:  at the failed Republican policies of the past eight years.

Hillary's Waterloo

Hillary Clinton salvaged her campaign by winning Texas and Ohio and that enabled her to survive long enough to make Pennsylvania relevant.  Her strategy in winning the two earlier states is coming home to roost however as the issues raised in her campaign are coming apart at the seams.  Clinton won Ohio by stating she was against NAFTA and she won Texas with her 3 am telephone call commercial.   She seems to have padded her resume by saying she had to fly into Bosnia under sniper fire and went because it was too dangerous for her husband.  So he sent his wife and daughter instead???

The Bosnia story was necessary to defend herself against charges nothing she'd done as First Lady really qualified her to be readier than her opponent to take that 3 am red phone call.  It's all unraveling now as the focus of this campaign shifts from Rev. Wright to NAFTA and Bosnia.  Ahh, the swings of Big Mo on the campaign trail are endless.

Let's begin with the NAFTA argument.  Hillary is claiming she fought NAFTA when she was First Lady.  Her husband, the President, was a strong supporter of the ill fated trade agreement and pushed it through Congress.  This trade policy has cost millions of jobs and states like Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania were extremely hard hit.  Our jobs went to Mexico and thousands of middle class incomes soon followed.

Hillary's support in Pennsylvania is rooted in all the river towns.  The Commonwealth, when you think about it, is defined by its rivers.  Almost all the towns and cities are along the Delaware, Schuylkill, Susquehanna, Ohio, Monongahela, Columbia, and others.  These were old style mill towns built around factories.  What is now called the Rust Belt.  Very union, very labor oriented communities where workers unionized in groups like the Molly Maguires to fight for themselves.

These should be Hillary Clinton voters.  Should be, and are, unless NAFTA convinces them she was part and parcel of the destruction of their river towns and the jobs they once had instead of their new ones driving trucks, greeting customers at Wal-Mart or flipping burgers.  This is Barack Obama's opportunity and he is seizing upon it.

A leader of the International Transport Workers Union (sorry I missed his name) was on an Obama media call this week stating he worked hard against NAFTA around Capital Hill and knew Mrs. Clinton was working equally hard for it.  Now people lobbying always know who their opposition is, who is working the other argument.  I have no doubt he is telling the truth.  Everyone who followed that debate knew how hard the Clintons were pushing this trade bill.  Ross Perot made his opposition to NAFTA the central tenet of his presidential campaign in 1992.

The Clinton campaign continues insisting Hillary opposed NAFTA.  Her First Lady schedules, however, paint a contrary picture.  They show she hosted several meetings about it and health care.  They are claiming she was pushing healthcare over NAFTA.  Those who attended these meetings have a different recollection.  Hmmmm.

Now we get to the issue of the 3 am red phone crisis call.  After the release of this ad Sen. Clinton was asked for specific instances where her experience in the White House qualifies her to accept that call over Sen. Obama.  She began using a tale about her trip to Bosnia in 1996.  She claims she and Chelsea went there because it was too dangerous for the President.  She claimed they landed amid sniper fire and had to run and duck into an airport terminal for safety.

This story was completely debunked yesterday by the contemporaneous press reports and pictures of the event.  This picture is of the greeting ceremony where Mrs. Clinton and Chelsea are warmly greeted by eight year old  Emina Bicakcic on the tarmac.   None of the reporters along on the trip recalls any danger nor wrote about any danger to the First Lady.

Now both of the arguments Senator Clinton used to win Ohio and Texas have blown up in her face.  Both have been substantially rebuked and debunked.  Her chickens have come home to roost, one might say (though not Rev. Wright, I'm sure.)  Will Pennsylvania be her Waterloo, the end of the line for her campaign?

Clinton is running out of field as the Obama staff puts it.  With no revotes likely in Florida and Michigan she must win here convincingly.  She must play to two critical audiences:  Pennsylvania Democrats and the undecided super delegates.  She must win both and win both by convincing margins to remain in the race.  April 22nd is her rendezvous at Waterloo.  It's a shame we aren't in Iowa, Waterloo, Iowa to be specific.

How will Hillary overcome these double blows to her credibility?  How will she keep her lead in the Keystone state if those laborers in all our river towns abandon her on these two issues?  This will be interesting.  It's going to be a wild raft ride down the river with many a winding turn and no idea where the falls and polls sit ready to capsize either campaign.  Hold on and keep your life jacket tight.  Waterloo may be the final destination.

Update:  Here is a news video of Hillary's Bosnia trip.

The Cat Fight Between the Camps

I was on back to back catfights conference calls between the Obama and Clinton campaigns this morning as they traded sharply worded assaults upon one another over the issue of NAFTA, trustworthiness and credibility.  The Obama campaign is condemning Hillary for, as they say, lying about her role in NAFTA, while their opponent condemns their negative tactics after calling for an end to the politics of old.

Frankly I'm fed up with them both for all of this fighting and bickering.  Trading jabs is one thing but crawling all the way into the sinkhole of negative politics against one another isn't winning them any votes, not here or anywhere.  People are sick and tired of this argument, this catfighting, this bickering.  The candidate to go after, the one Democrats everywhere will judge both of them on, is John McCain.

John McCain is the winner in all of this.  He's over in Iraq conflating Al Qaeda, the insurgents, Iran and making a complete fool of himself and destroying any credibility he has in foreign policy and Senators Clinton and Obama are here destroying each other.  It's bad politics.  It's bad politics because Democratic voters, and remember Pennsylvania is a closed primary state, want to see which of these candidates can win in the fall.  They want to see which one will go after John McCain and the continuation of the Bush Administration.  They don't want to witness this carnage, this crap, this infighting.

The surest way to pick up the support of Democrats is to go after the Republicans, not one another.

If you agree let's all send a message to both campaigns to concentrate their fire where it counts.  John McCain's major gaffes this week were swallowed up in the media by the fighting between the Dems.  He got off nearly scot free because Obama and Clinton were completely focused on one another.

The Perils of Strict Constructionism

Republican love appointing their strict constructionist judges, especially to the Supreme Court.  Yesterday these right wing Justices, whose avowed judicial philosophy is to enforce the constitution exactly as it is written and neither read nor interpret anything else into it, heard this thrown back at them in the form of a challenge to the Second Amendment.

The District of Columbia argued that a strict constructionist reading of the right to bear arms limits gun ownership to those in the military.  That IS what the document says and it's even what it means in the context of the times and men who wrote it into the constitution.  These strict constructionist Justices however will abandon their widely heralded judicial philosophy on the altar of the NRA and the gods to which gun owners around the country sacrifice children and others to the violence wrought by these products.

Such hypocrisy is truly shocking.  If you're going to wrap yourself in the mantel of a strict constructionist you must also then be consistent about your views.

Listen to Your Candidate

I've been receiving hate filled emails, comments and phone calls from Barack Obama supporters who believe I am supporting Hillary Clinton.  I've been called a whore, a traitor, told I'd sold my soul, etc.  They are over the top and, worse, from friends and others I know.  I wonder if they have actually listened to Sen. Obama.  His message has been one of change; change from the politics of old, the politics of division, this exact kind of behavior.

Do these people really believe in Obama's message?  It doesn't appear so.  There's a serious disconnect.  Vilifying and condemning someone for helping another campaign (especially after also helping yours) or for supporting their opponent isn't aiding their cause.  They will completely alienate those who remain undecided because their actions so contradict their candidate's message.  This is going to cost them votes.

Obama's Pastor

Barack Obama's former pastor and adviser to his campaign has the magnet for controversy since news arose concerning anti-American comments he made after 9/11 and other controversial statements.  He resigned from his campaign position and the Senator condemned the comments.  This issue isn't dying however.  People I'm listening to are saying they aren't happy with Obama's position.  On one hand I think we have to accept the fact he has apologized, condemned the statements and removed Rev. Wright from his campaign staff but many continue to be bothered by this.

The central question, as I hear it, has to do with the act Barack Obama attended this church for 20 years and his children were baptized by Rev. Wright.  According to his campaign though, "he wasn't aware at the time.  He was made made aware during the campaign and condemned them.  He remains with this church community." (March 16, 2008 media conference call)

On Sunday Rev. Wright's congregation stood up for him and called the controversy "a modern day lynching."  They obviously love and respect their preacher:

The world is only seeing this tiny piece of him," Moss said. "Right now, we are all being vilified. This isn't just about Trinity, isn't just about [Wright]. This is an attack on the African American church tradition, and that's the way we see it. This is an attempt to silence our voice."

I'm not Black and I pretend to understand the Black experience in White America.  I'm attempting to find my own opinion of all of this amidst the racial reality of this country.  Oppression of all minorities and of women in this country is strong and virulent.  I've seen it here in these comment threads and I delete false, misleading, racist and sexist comments regarding this race especially.

Rev. Wright made 4,000 sermons and some have been isolated for public condemnation.  I'm looking at this from the standpoint of having written about 3700 blog articles.  Someone could easily cherry pick a few comments, in or out of context, and paint me as some radical also. The campaign said this:  "These comments aren't the totality of who he is."

No, they aren't.  They are what they are however and they must be condemned.  I suppose the bottom line is this:  we caucasians have no concept of what it's like to be Black, Hispanic or Asian in our society.  We have no idea what it takes to be accepted as equals, to gain respect or survive in a culture infused with racism.

Let's all be more tolerant and accepting, of everyone, everywhere.  When we do people like Rev. Wright won't feel the need to make such statements.

The Power of People

I was chatting recently with a candidate I worked for and I reminisced briefly about our first meeting when I traveled to meet him and his volunteers.  I mentioned the twelve incredible people who were at his office that evening and how tremendous they all were and the amazing things they have done because of their involvement in his campaign.  That wasn't an isolated situation however.  As I travel around the state and cover and observe campaigns, groups, and organized efforts I am amazed at the power of people to get involved and do significant things.

I think every community has unbelievable assets that are being tapped and remain untapped.  One of my beliefs is that no volunteer or individual cannot bring something to an organized effort.  Everyone has some talent or ability which can be used in the collective effort.  This is the essence of collective organizing:  identifying and using those individual talents, abilities and opportunities.  Too often we miss these however.

I'm someone who loves to steal good ideas from others and I saw one in 2006 that I believe every Volunteer Coordinator needs to implement:  a volunteer questionaire which asks what unique or special talents, qualifications and abilities each volunteer has to offer.  I credit the Chris Carney Congressional campaign for this gem.  I don't know if Andrew Eldridge-Martin, his 2006 campaign manager is the person to credit, but he was in charge so he gets it.

How many political campaigns even think to make a volunteer questionaire?  Use it to discover who you have on your effort and what skills they bring to the table.  I assure you, you will be amazed.  You then, obviously, must utilize those unique skills.  When I covered the Carney campaign during their final GOTV push I amazed and amused at one uniquely talented staffer:  she entertained the crowds with a warm up act of juggling and amusing banter.  It turns out she'd been in a circus at one time.  I asked her how they knew she possessed such an intrinsic skill and she replied that they asked what special skills each staffer and volunteer had when they came on board the campaign.

This is such an obvious thing to do yet how often do we do it?  Political campaigns are hectic operations with staff working 15-20 hour days.  We under utilize one of our most finite resources however:  people.  A campaign has three assets, time, money and people.  A manager has to maximize every single one of these assets and people are invaluable, especially volunteers.  A simple questionaire with some simple queries can make all the difference.

Seven Weeks

Aside from primaries in the deeply red states of Wyoming and Mississippi the presidential campaign now arrives in Pennsylvania.  Hillary came from twenty points ahead to squeak out a win in Texas and won Ohio by about ten points.  She did little to dig into Obama's lead in pledged delegates but she probably did stem the flow of super delegates away from supporting her effort.  This was her success yesterday.   With Tom Brokaw reporting fifty super delegates prepared to endorse Barack Obama, this is Clinton's last desperate move to avoid the inevitable.

Ohio and Texas were her firewall but they didn't quell the inferno with which she sits.  Her rival's delegate lead in insurmountable in the primaries.  The mathematics is against Hillary.  Winning every remaining primary by 60-40 ratios will still not win her the nomination.  Her only chance is winning them and convincing the super delegates that she should be the candidate.  She made inroads yesterday towards that goal with her victories.  She revived a campaign gasping on life support.

The way she succeeded is interesting.  The Clintons went hugely negative in Ohio and Texas.  They turned to strategies deeply disturbing and, again, played the race card.  They used both the Muslim and African American issues referring to him as Osama bin Laden and making him appear Blacker in another attempt at racial politics.  These actions are to be condemned.

Hillary has been on television all morning slamming Obama for centering his entire campaign "on one speech he gave in 2002" compared to her "35 years of experience."  This is obviously her latest message.  She is defining Barack Obama for John McCain and going for the jugular.  It worked in Ohio but not Texas.  She barely won that state after having a huge lead.  The NAFTA issue probably won Ohio.  We'll have more to say about trade in the weeks ahead.

We will define and insert three major issues into the Pennsylvania primary debate which we feel haven't been adequately addressed.  Stay tuned for them.

Meanwhile Barack Obama must address Hillary's success using the fear card with her red phone ad.  He must do so better than he has so far.  He must challenge her to specify the specific national security experience she has which gives substance to her claim aside from the "Holiday Inn Express" argument.  He can do this also by emphasizing his other experience and achievements.  If she can cite 35 years of lifetime experience and include her time serving on Wal-Mart's Board of Directors as "public service" he must counter with his commitment to community organizing.

Hillary Clinton must stop ignoring the importance of her field operation.  Sen. Obama is cleaning her clock on the ground.  Their operation here is awesome and hers is nonexistent.   I'd also like to see her be more positive about her, her vision for the country and attack John McCain instead of claiming he's more qualified to be president.  That leaves me with a visceral reaction against Sen. Clinton that will be very difficult to dispel.

John McCain supports the war, thinks we should bomb Iran, wants to privatize Social Security, make Bush's disastrous tax cuts permanent, and is ignoring the reality of the health care crisis.  This man is seeking to extend all of George W. Bush's policies.  One pundit on TV last night even referred to him as John W McCain.  I like that.  If the Republicans insist on using Obama's middle name we can add "W" to McCain's.   It's all about sending a message and this message will be that if you're happy with Bush then vote for McCain.  If not, don't.  This is the entire message of the fall campaign season:  stay the course with McCain or change direction with the Democrats.  If any other message is used those responsible should be hung out to dry and never allowed to consult again.