One face you did not see on the shows this morning among all those other women Democrats sent out by the Obama campaign to trash-talk Sarah Palin: Hillary Clinton.

This is significant. It is unlikely that Hillary will attack Sarah Palin. It is also unlikely that she will campaign for Obama in the rural distrcits of swing-states like OH, PA, WV where she herself campaigned hard and decimated him in the final primaries. And these are the places and people Sarah Palin will reach and win over easily.

Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is not an effective rebuttal personality of Sarah Palin at this point for that particular demographic or any other: she's not in the same league. It sounds like one catty woman trash-talking another woman who is now above her pay grade, and Wasserman-Schultz cannot relate to those voters. Simiarily, Kathleen Sebelius is dull as cardboard and boring to listen to: at this point she also is not an effective rebuttal personality, and seeing her just reminds viewers that Obama misguidedly passed over not only Hillary for his VP pick, but Sebelius as well.

The Democracts are in a lose-lose situation. The more women they send out to trash-talk Sarah Palin, the more small and jealous they seem. Let's face it: the Democrats firmly believe that they are the party of civil rights and that they are the party that is entitled to put a black or a woman in office. The idea that the Republicans will do it first is unacceptable to them: so you have all these women out there talking about how this woman is not a real woman and is not really interested in women. One word: bullshit! Its such a ridiculous line of attack, especially when you listen to her and see her up there.

The has-been that is Gloria Steinem is leading the pack with an unfortunate op-ed in today's LA Times. Then there is Jame Simely and Nora Ephron at HuffPost. These women are out-of-touch. American culture itself has rendered Steinem a footnote of the 1970s, and the other two do not speak for the women of America in any way shape or form.

The only person who can effectively combat Sarah Palin at this point is Hillary Clinton herself. And this is very unlikely to happen. She would have to get out there everyday and campaign for Obama among her new supporters as hard - or harder - than she campaigned for herself. Not gonna happen. I am not talking about women who are sure to vote Democrat regardless; I  am talking about the very new and recent converts she made during the very last leg of her primary battle.

The Palin pcik is so outragouely brilliant its staggering. Not only did she wipe Obama totally out of the news and render him just a person who responds to what is happening in the McCain campaign, going as far as for him to agree to appear on Bill O"reilly exactly a week after his "apotheosis" -these personal attacks on Palin totally decimated his entire argument of being "post-partisan" and it also makes the Obama-Biden ticket look positively Washington Establishment to the very core.

The truth is people are naturally skeptical and cynical. It wins every time. And it might just this time too.

Somewhere along the way the McCain team realized that this election is all about personality and not at all about policy. For more than a year the country was rivited by the Clinton-Obama battle, which was portrayed by the media, and by the Obama campaign itself, as all about personalities and not at all about policies. The Obama people did this because they knew that if it were about policy, Hillary, who was far and away the more progressive of the two, would have won hands down; so they launched covert racist and other attacks against Bill and Hill, argued against dynastic politics, and sought to portray Barack as "special," as Michelle and others said over and over again, forging the image of Barack as The One. The main line in the press about the Obama campaign for over a year was that it was mostly a "cult of personality."

The McCain team's summer "celebrity" ads also pushed that line and were tremendously successful. They negated the ridiculous photo-op trip to Europe and the Middle East, where Barack inserted a prayer into the western wall with 39 words, 13 of which were "me" or "I" and none of which were the United States of America. The celebrity ads really had nothing to  do with the fake issue of "experience:" rather, they painted Obama as completely self-serving, and also continued to send home the message that his entire candidacy was based on a "cult of personality."

But as the summer wore down, they needed something new. And they knew that they could not compete in terms of personality in a McCain-Obama match-up. So, knowing that this entire election will be decided on personalities and identity politics, they did the absolute best thing they could: they chose Sarah Palin.

Time-honored cliche: there is no such thing as bad publicity.

The single best thing the Palin pick did was:

1) permanently knock Obama out of the news. It is now fast going a full week and he has been only a minor news story at best, and always in response to the Palin pick.

The next best thing it did 2) bring Obama way way way back down to earth:

how absoslutely delicious is it that Barack Obama, The One himself, exactly a week after his apotheosis "historic" acceptance speech, now has to sit down for an interview with, drum roll,... Bill O'freakin' Reilly??????!!!!!!!! If you remember, this is the same Bill O'Reilly who Obama totally dismissed and almost had arrested at one of his events during the primary.

The fact that Obama and his managers now feel it necessary to sit down for an interview with Bill O'Reilly on Fox News - a person and a network they publicly loathe - tells us just how significant and threatening the Palin pick really is to them.
More importantly, it puts Obama exactly where the Republicans want him - on Fox News! And the best part is, Obama went to them!

If the Obama-O'Reilly internview does even one thing, it shows us that Obama's new kind of politics was stillborn before it was even conceived. It shows us that he is just another partisan shrill going on Bill O'Reilly on Fox News.

The partisan and culture wars contrinue - and now Obama himself is way down deep in it.

When Obama has to go on Fox News just to get himself back in the news, you know the Republicans have ALREADY WON!

The Palin pick rallies social conservatives. The idea that she wasn't vetted is nonsense. The aide who was put in charge of managing her said quite matter of factly on MOnday: "we're flushing the toilet" meaning dropping at once all of the info about the family, etc. You can see today, only two days later, after the hysteria by the mainstream media and bloggers like us, that the McCain campaign is now coming back very strong against two days worth of sexist and salicious and truly disgusting smears. They still have the upper hand, and with her speech tonight, which will no doubt he shining and triumphant, they can and will define her AGAINST two days of hysteria: as a heroine now vicitimized by the liberal left: it only enchances her stature among the right, and may even endear her to swing-vote women voters. All totally brilliant. And poor Obama still can't get himself arrested! And has to go on Bill O'Reilly's show!

I LOVE IT ALL!

The point of all this is: Barack Obama is now history. We haven't  seen him on TV or in the news since Thursday, except for the statements he has been forced to make about Gov Palin and the Palin family. The attention span of the media and the audience is nil: no one cares anymore about his self-proclaimed "historic" speechs, no one cares about his vague invocations of hope and change. He has been wiped off the radar. He has been forced radically off message and is being forced to react to Gov Palin and McCain's campaign, mostly to denounce the statements and remarks of his own campaign, surrogates, and the left-wing blogosphere!

The Palin pick is proving beyond brilliant! Have you seen CNN: every single political pundit, who only last Thursday night were swooning about the "historic" nature of the speech, is now bicking about "abstinance only" education versus sex education and the availablity of birth control. All the pundits, and The One himself, have been brought back down to earth to talk about the controversial social and cultural issues the Republicans want the entire country debating from now until the end of the election!

And everyone, especially the liberal blogpshere, is playing right along like good little sheep. Bahhh Bahhh Bahhh. All the conservative pundits and bloggers have to do is keep fanning the flames to further excite their base and further intice the left-leaning blogs to further denigrate Palin and her family, thereby further fanning the social and cultural issues.

In the meantime, does anyone even remember what Barack's speech was about?! Or anything he said. In fact, I would argue, his grave proclamation to America that "we are better than this," has immediately been proven woefully and extravagently wrong! Proven, simply, by the fact that he himself is now being forced to particpate in a discussion about teen pregnancy: even if he is saying to "back off" the story, he is at the same time reminding us that he was born of an unwed teenage mother!

This is a no-win issue for Barack Obama. On the question of teen pregnancy and abortion the conservatives will win.

I can't wait to see what else will come out! McCain-Palin deserve to win for the sheer brilliance of the politics of all this, if nothing else!

While everyone is trashing Sarah Palin at their own peril, I'm still thinking about the 21st century Leni Riefenstahl film that was on view in Denver this past week.

As I replay it in my mind, I realize there was minimal talk about issues; instead, the entire week-long event, from Michelle's best Laura Bush imitation to the faux Greek temple front and West Wing style musak following the self-proclaimed "historic" speech, was an infomercial on how "American" Barack Obama is.

If he is an ordinary American, just like the rest of us, who rose from poor circumstances to go to Harvard Law but turn down an "lucrative job" to live the "American Dream," why were we assulted with a weeks worth of propaganda telling us how middle-American he is? While the Democrats talk about how "desperate" McCain's pick of Palin is, we might ask how desperate they are over the fact that half the country still doesn't buy Obama as American as apple pie.

It seems to me that the Democrats have internalized the defeats of Gore and Kerry and are, in fact, trying to outdo the Republicans at their own game, trying desperately to manufacture a Reaganesque figure through movie magic (the false sets, the movie musak again), and cloaking all those issues and questions that are legitmiate in a presidential election. They are trying to make Obama "look presidential."

I was once a Democract, but watching this convention I realized that as an indepedent-thinking person I cannot and will not be a part of a party that uses such blatant and falsifying propaganda in such a way that matches and even outdoes the Republicans.

And I refuse to participate in the knee-jerk reactions to the Palin nomination. I think the Democrats are making a grave mistake in belittling and dismissing her straight out of the gate: lowering the expectation to below zero so that when she gives a shining and powerful speech at the RNC this week everyone is wowed all the more. Here is a woman who has taken on the big boys in her own party, almost single-handedly stared down the most corrupt state government administration in the US, and won! And she is major voice in the emerging discssions on new American energy. She will be an inspiration to millions of middle-American women: working her way up through local and community activism to become Governor of her state, Annie Oakley in the corridors of power. She is both the 21st century version of the Dolly Parton character in 9 to 5 and Erin Brockovich in one.

The Democracts may have succeeded in giving Obama a fake allure of gravitas, but the McCain argument that Palin actually has more exectuive experience, and can show more rreal results in achieving a reformist agenda are quite persuasive.

The Democratic convetion was pure proaganda pumping up the personality of Barack and trying to sell us hard-core on the idea that he is American, using the now tired catchword change. The Republican convention is going to introduce us to a fresh new face that will appeal to middle-Americans in a way Barack simply cannot, and will substitute for change the mantra of "reform," and I bet that many many millions of Americans will be more comfortable with McCain's reform than Obama's change.

Frankly, I am tired of reading in almost every Op-Ed piece and every news piece that Obama is the "likely Democratic nominee." There is every reason to believe that he is failing to close to close the deal and with each passing day there is a new episode or news break to signal that he would be a weak candidate.

First of all, there was the slip by an aid in an article in the NYTimes that Obama is "bored" with the primary campaign and would prefer to be finished with Clinton and move onto a general election strategy. The fact that he is "bored" can be connected to the elitest comments he made in San Fran about "bitter" Americans who "cling" to guns and god. The fact that he is "bored" with the primary seems to signal that he feels entitled in some way to the nomination - just as he was bored in the Senate and decided that only being President would satisfy his ambition -

Would he get "bored" being President? Especially when he comes up against opposition that is much more forceful than what Clinton is posing right now.

There is also Wright. This man is not going to go away. Not only did he defend himseld over the last three days, he elaborated on what he had said, providing more fodder for just about everyone to toss back at Barack. He said is will go after Barack starting on Nov 5th to ennact radical policy proposals that are not in step with most of American tradition.

As regards Barack, he can say until the cows come home that Wright doesn't speak for him or his campaign, but everyone in the country already associates Wright with Obama. If it weren't for Obama, who went to that church for over 20 years and donated god's know how much money to it, no one would know who Wright was. Obama is saddled with Wright.

As Barack fails, Hillary is gainging momentum. Her baggage, even with Bill, is nothing compared to the mess Obama has going on right now.

Barack must be defeated. Hillary must be the nominee.

There was an article in Slate on "Why Richardson's Endorsement Matters" - and it didn't say anything interesting - but it made me think - yea, the endorsement matters to Richardson himself.

None of these high-profile endorsements are made for altruistic reasons. The endorsers are not really looking to help the candidate, they are of course out to help themselves. The question for them is: what do I personally have to gain by endorsing such and such a candidate.

The fact taht Richardson waited so long is telling in and of itself. If he was so passionately committed to Obama why didn't he come out before Fed. 5th?

I beleive he weighed the political costs of endorsing strongly. He must have realized that he stood to gain nothing by endorsing Hillary. He already got out of the Clintons everything he will ever get out of them. Bill elevated him to the national level, made his name in politics. In another Clinton administration, he isn't going to be a high-profile player: he wouldn't be on the ticket, he isn't being re-appointed to the cabinet, he isn't getting another ambassadorship. He remains at the state level.

By endorsing Obama he only stands to gain. Obama has a HUGE hispanic problem - they don't vote for him at all - so that puts Richardon in the running to be on the ticket. And Richardson is still am ambitious politican - he was running for president - so I beleive this is really an attempt to get himself on the ticket if Obama is the nominee.

So as far as I'm concerned the Richardson endorsement was totally political motived by his own personal political ambitions. He put politics above friendship - and in that way it was an "act of betrayal" toward the Clintons who supported him and "mentored" him onto the national level.

The same goes for the Kennedy endrosement - old Ted was quite clearly trying to gain some glow from the younger man. It was transparent and pretty disgusting.

                                                            *

Now, for the speech. I find the media response interesting. Is there any commentator other than the reliably cranky Charles Krautheimer who is going to say a single bad word about the speech? No! So in terms of the media narrative it was a win for Obama. The media are scared shitless to say aything even remotely critical of the speech! Thank god we have Krautheimer, who called it a "brilliant fraud," which is exactly what it was.

And kudos to Bill Clinton as well for calling a spade a spade in his comments saying that the speech and the whol eissue of race is a red-herring - and a major distraction from the real issues at hand.

Do the American people really want to be preached at for four or eight years everytime this Obama is caught in an instance of double-talk, which from recent history is just about once or twice a week? I don't think so.

Do the American people want to spend the next four to eight years hearing themselves called racists at every turn, every time they critize Obama on any topic? I don't think so.

With a war to end in Iraq, a war to win in the tirbal areas of Pakistan and Afganistan, with an economy and a currency to rescue do the American people want to put race and "healing" the racial divide, which is more real to Obama than it is to the rest of the country who are struggling day to day to make ends meet, above all of these other problems?

I doubt it.

Am I the only one who is tired of all this already?

I thought the speech yesterday was underwhelming and transparently politically motivated. There was no historic moment.

And what is with this bizarre mania for "historic moments" and "historic candidacies?"
Why can't we just have a government that runs properly and elected officials that tell the truth?

Why do we always have to be catapulted from one "historic moment" to the next? And why do our elected officals always have to be "barrier breakers?" I'm tired of it all.

America has a unholy fixation on media narratives. Nothing is allowed to exist or to play out outside of this grossly distorted narrative-drive that overhypes every event and regulates others to non-existence. But that's not new.

But this addiciton to narrative is killing us! Its suffocating.

I vote for a parlimentary system. Enough with these presidential campaigns and media presidencies. Way too much ideology all around.

One of the appeals for Hillary or McCain for me is no new narratives. we know who they are. Let them govern. And leave us in peace. I can't take four or eight years of being preached to by Mr. Obama every time he is caught in a double-bind, and I certaintly can't take four to eight years of the media everyday spinning every one of his inconsequential words into a historic moment." If he farts, it is a historic moment. One for the textbooks.

Give me a break. Get this thing over already!

Note: Deleted from Dailykos and proud of it!

Very underwhelming. Why should we be awed and amazed that "he wrote it himself?" Should we be surprised that an educated man can write? Shouldn't this be something we expect from our educators and public leaders?

The fact that he had to make the speech in the first place is not a good sign. He is still on the defensive. Nice attempt to try to turn this Wright affair around, to turn a negative into a positive, but the fact that he made it shows us how deeply caught up he is with Wright and the divisive racial history of this country. Moreover, the speech makes vaild the point that his candidacy is to some degree based on the issue of race; race is now the centerpiece of his campaign.

Further, as novel as it may be to see a presidental candidate morph form politician to preacher and educator in one, it sends a mixed message to the electorate. The tone of the speech, in the midst of a heated presidential campaign, seemed off key.

The speech is a sign of the so-called "new politics." Instead of simply disavowing, distancing, renouncing, he preached, he instructed. But is this what the electorate, predominantely white, wants to hear?

Does America want a preacher-in-chief? Does America want an educator-in-chief?

Is Obama Wright-lite? Is it a similar message now garbed in soft words?

To what extent is the speech meant to play on feelings of national guilt in white America?

He wants to be all things to all people. He wants to be a vessel. A vessel through which "divisiveness" and "polarities" can be "healed."

But is America really interested in engaging in some form of national psychotherary truth-commission national reconciliation hand holding for the next four or eight years? Or do we really just want to go about our daily lives with some sense of economic security free from the assult of both liberal and conservative preaching on a daily basis? I would put my money on the second question.

Obama fatigue. Speech fatigue. Preach fatigue.

Stop the speechifying. Show us some committee hearings. Show us some principled Senate votes. Show us some real solutions to real problems in the daily lives of ordinary Americans who are not thinking about racial divisions or "polarities."

The speech means absolutely nothing to ordinary working Americans. Its more of the same from him: self-congratulatory, vain, condescending, feel-good, history-lite.