And that is why I said agree to three...not 10...because 10 is a stupid number since they will both be going to Iraq...

Really, Obama should agree to it -- and McCain by the 5th one would be out of breath...

I wondered if anyone would get my drift...

Looks like you did Taz.

Great minds....

from kos

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/6/4...2186/389/529470

Rendell: "You don't bargain with the nominee" - Updated: Rengel's Concession Call, Clyburn Harassed
by kubla000
Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:49:28 AM PDT
Well it seems that someone has regained their sanity...

There's no bargaining. You don't bargain with the Presidential nominee. Even if you're Hillary Clinton and you have 18 million votes, you don't bargain.
Compare this to some sillier Democrats who think they have a foot to stand on with this subject.

Members of Congress who support Clinton are weighing a joint letter to Senator Barack Obama pressing him to put Clinton on the ticket, a congressional aide confirmed.
kubla000's diary :: ::
Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz of Florida has suggested the letter, which would aim to represent the voices of female members of congress and those from swing states and key demographic groups.
Earlier in the day Hilary Rosen made her feelings clear, as a Clinton Supporter and voter:

I will enthusiastically support Barack Obama's campaign. Because I am not a bargaining chip. I am a Democrat.
Also writing some real insights into how last night went down.

I am also so very disappointed at how she has handled this last week. I know she is exhausted and she had pledged to finish the primaries and let every state vote before any final action. But by the time she got on that podium last night, she knew it was over and that she had lost. I am sure I was not alone in privately urging the campaign over the last two weeks to use the moment to take her due, pass the torch and cement her grace. She had an opportunity to soar and unite. She had a chance to surprise her party and the nation after the day-long denials about expecting any concession and send Obama off on the campaign trail of the general election with the best possible platform. I wrote before how she had a chance for her "Al Gore moment." And if she had done so, the whole country ALL would be talking today about how great she is and give her her due.

Instead she left her supporters empty, Obama's angry, and party leaders trashing her. She said she was stepping back to think about her options. She is waiting to figure out how she would "use" her 18 million voters.
Some Clinton Voters and Supporters are clearly feeling the bad taste shared by many Obama supporters this morning, as Superdelegates flood and Hillary still pretends there is a reason to go on.

UPDATE: Word is Charlie Rangel appeared on MSNBC a little while ago and was equally displeased with the current state of the race and Hillary's speech last night.

News at this moment is that Hillary Clinton will be holding a conference call with major supporters at 4pm to discuss the race.

Clinton, according to one prominent backer, is scheduled to hold a conference call with top supporters at 4 p.m., in which they are expected to hash out how and when to concede the race to Barack Obama and figure out a way to unify the Democratic Party for the fall.

But Representative Charlie Rangel of New York, who is still awaiting cues from Clinton before officially backing Obama, called on her to formally concede, saying she could have been "far more generous" to him in saying Obama is the party's nominee.
Meanwhile some people really have no fricken class at all, this is beyond pathetic

(SC Rep James) Clyburn told FOX News Radio’s "Brian and the Judge" that the callers identified themselves as Hillary Clinton supporters. Clyburn, an African-American and the third ranking House Democrat, said a white intern in his office was so upset by the calls that she had to be consoled by other workers and left the office early.


"We got more vitriolic, nasty phone calls, really racially tinged phone calls in my congressional office, so much so, until one of the interns, a young lady who is not a stranger to politics ... and she is not a black person, she left the office, had to be consoled because of the kinds of phone calls from people who identified themselves as Hillary Clinton supporters," he said.

"I was absolutely shocked, could not believe that this happened. I could understand people saying, ‘Why are you doing this or why would you not support Hillary Clinton?’ but to call me the kinds of names I have not heard since the ’40s and ’50s," he said.

Clyburn said some of the callers threatened to "sabotage this election." He added that he does not think Clinton understands her role in unifying the party.
Exactly... Bargaining and trying to publicly force a spot on the ticket certainly does nothing for Unity.

Gee, Harkin to Landrieu. Now that is a pretty good ideological range!

And Hillary knows all this from Bill piocking Gore...

The President chooses his VP and the VP serves at the pleasure of the president...

HIllary if VP would be no Dick Cheney...

Dick Cheney served more as a Chief of Staff than a VP...he coordinated and executed policy...

I used to think so but not any more. The murderous Aggriculture Bill which is mostly corporate welfare with a few crumbs to the poor is causing wide spread suffering and death in the developing world.

I hesitated to post this but then I realized that its time priorities take the stage and this walking on eggs stops. There is quite simply too much at stake here to play any more games. This is far too important an election for the entire world to allow one individual to dictate whether its a win or a loss and that is what is happening. If anything could demonstrate whether or not Hillary Clinton has what it takes to be the Leader of the Free World her behaviour , which has been destructive for months now, and even now she is sabotagiing any chance of a Democratic victory because of her feelings of entitlement, still there are those who put Hillary Clinton ahead of what is in their own best interests. If women can't see that or realize they are playing with their childrens' futures then they make a very good argument against a woman having what it takes. And I detest seeing this , I KNOW a woman is capable and more than able to lead. Hillary Clinton does not have what it takes to accept loss gracefully.And even her supporters must know that even if they don't want to see it. She is an exceptionally gifted female. Her legacy deserves to be treated with more respect than she is displaying.

Even In Defeat, It's All About Her

It's hip today to step back and allow Senator Clinton some breathing space in order to proceed through the various stages of whatever on her way to eventually -- some day -- conceding this nomination process to Presumptive Nominee Barack Obama. And I'm not exactly sure why the Clintons deserve such latitude -- especially this year and at this dangerous time in our national saga. After all, there's a gigantic OxyContin-buzzed Republican crap-bot bearing down on our presumptive nominee, and yet we're being forced to sit here and wait for Senator Clinton to finally step off.

"What does Hillary want? What does she want?" Senator Clinton asked last night. What does she want? Seriously? This misguided and self-centered attitude is what ultimately doomed her campaign.

It should never have been about what she wants -- or, now, what she's demanding as ransom in exchange for releasing her supporters. Senator Clinton is effectively holding up the works and delaying the big show even though she has spent too many weeks inexplicably bolstering Senator McCain's chances over Senator Obama in November -- even though every second she's remained in this race, despite the mathematical reality, she has forced Senator Obama to keep his army divided, when it ought to have been raging forward in a unified, fist-pumping head-first frontal assault against the nefarious Bush Republican political machine.

But she's Senator Clinton and she gets to do and demand whatever she wants for some reason. Even if it means diminishing the nominee and boosting the Republicans. Even if it means a victory for Senator McCain. Even if it means the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade. Even if it means 100 more years (or whatever McCain is saying today) in Iraq. Even if it means, as Thom Hartmann said yesterday, "More death."

This is one of several reasons why the Clinton campaign ultimately lost: because the Clinton campaign was all about Senator Clinton when, in the hearts and minds of a majority of Democrats, this nomination process was never about Senator Clinton and her ambitions and her famous name and her famous husband and her 3AM phone calls and her war stories and her scars. To wit: "Yes she will." Not only did her actual message fade away in lieu of her campaign's embarrassing attempt to mock Senator Obama's message, but her hackish spoof version of the Obama slogan was configured to be all about her (the Obama message is grounded in the collective "we"). Yes she will. Fortunately for us, Senator McCain has started to do the same thing -- mocking Senator Obama's far-superior branding. And, thankfully, Senator McCain looks a thousand times slimier doing it.

The Clinton campaign should never have been about her. This election, even before anyone officially declared, has always been about the evolution of the modern liberal movement and, more importantly, a newly evolved modern liberal movement gathering the required ammunition necessary to roll back the destructive and often criminal policies of the last 28 years -- and to do so in a way that might actually stick to the wall. And here in June 2008, while Senator Clinton dawdles around the stage doing her best to muscle the presumptive nominee while talking about what she wants, the horrible prospect of a McCain presidency hisses its way towards the zero barrier and the dismantling of American democracy nears the point of no return.

Senator Obama (or even if it had been Senator Clinton) needs a mandate in November. He needs an overwhelming electoral victory in order to have the political capital required to rebuild the nation in the aftermath of the terrible psychobombs George Bush and Dick Cheney have been detonating throughout this decade. And yet, here we sit. Talking about Senator Clinton and what she wants.

What happens if she isn't offered the vice presidential slot? Will she continue to stomp her feet and draw attention away from the nominee? Yes she will. Will she carry her campaign (in name and support only) to the convention? Yes she will. Will she continue to distract attention away from challenging Senator McCain's awfulness? Yes she will. So should she be offered the vice presidential slot, then? No she shouldn't.

Because a would-be Obama-Clinton campaign would end up being entirely about the Clintons. What they said; what they're doing; who's in control; do they get along; is she undermining him from within. Me, me, me. And besides, if she really wanted to be on the ticket, she wouldn't have engaged in this infuriating slash-burn-point-clap strategy in the first place -- a strategy which, by the way, continued through last night's speech.

But even after Senator Obama surpassed the original threshold of 2,025; even after he agreed to allowing the reinstatement of the Michigan and Florida delegates despite the previously and unanimously accepted sanctions; even after he surpassed the new threshold of 2,118 and also nears the bogus 2,209 number that the Clintons made up last month, Senator Clinton and her supporters continue to paint the Obama victory as somehow illegitimate. And Senator Clinton refuses to accept the notion that she is holding back the larger campaign -- the most important campaign of our time -- a campaign that isn't about her or even about Senator Obama. It's a campaign about turning the tide on 28 years of Reaganomics and environmental destruction and foreign policy blowback.

It's not so difficult, Senator. And even though I honestly believe that he's a crazy squirrel-munching hooplehead, here's Mike Huckabee's concession, for example:

Ladies and gentlemen, I called Senator McCain a few moments ago. It looks pretty apparent tonight that he will, in fact, achieve 1,191 delegates to become the Republican nominee for our party.
I extended to him not only my congratulations, but my commitment to him and to the party to do everything possible to unite our party, but more importantly to unite our country, so that we can be the best nation we can be, not for ourselves, but for the future generations to whom we owe everything, just as we owe previous generations all that they have done for us.


That's about right (even though it's in the name of a screwy, failed conservative movement).

We have an insanely challenging task ahead of us. Not just in defeating super-crazies like Mike Huckabee and Senator McCain, but also in confronting and debunking the corporate media's ridiculousness (i.e. "What's Obama's problem? Why can't he connect with the racist whites?"). And that's before November. If he manages to overcome the race-baiting 527 ads and all of the sinister e-mail whisper campaigns and the dubious voting machines, Senator Obama will have to achieve more in his first 100 days than most presidents have achieved in two full terms.

And yet, here we sit. Waiting for Senator Clinton to decide what she wants. This routine -- be it Senator Clinton's defiance, or the party's deferential behavior toward her -- illustrates exactly why this party, and liberalism with it, must change. And while we wait here in some kind of twisted Pollyanna limbo, Senator McCain is measuring the White House Residence to see if his Craftmatic adjustable bed will fit through the door.


UPDATE 7:26PM EDT: ABC News is reporting that Senator Clinton will suspend her campaign and endorse Senator Obama on Friday. Congressman Rangel and 23 other members of Congress called her today and told her that it was time. Rangel, a Clinton supporter, in particular was "angry" and thought Senator Clinton's speech was "rude," according to NBC's Andrea Mitchell just now on MSNBC.

Putting all aside that has happened up to this point, I believe Hillary and Bill will do what they can to support Obama because it is in their best interests to do so. We'll see.....Obama has said he needs and wants Bill's input...his desire to have Hillary's active support is obvious.
It's going to be interesting to see how it plays out.

It's all right amy. I think the best policy is for Obama's supporters to continue to trash and brow beat Hillary and Bill. That will turn out just fine for Obama.

David Patterson sees things clear than this statement

But by the same token I don't see the point of simply dismissing the very real things that CO is concerned about. Now I may be more charitable (at least for the moment) to Hillary than Betty is, but I have to say that she has a point and that I am not entirely confident that Hillary will do the right thing. I think that we ought to give her a chance though.

That's the point. I've had as many concerns about Hillary and Bill as most people have had. But, it's over...Obama has the nomination....Hillary will be conceding on Sat.....time to move on for those who would like to see the Dem nominee win....

In truth, as much as I did not support Hillary for the nomination, when I look at her behavior on Tuesday, I see a couple of alternative explanations for what she said or didn't say.....her reasoning might not have been "all about her". But, I don't want to get into that..the race is over for her and I hope that she and Bill do all within their considerable power to help Obama win. I hope most of her supporters find it within themselves to vote for Obama.

It really doesn't matter. The Obama campaign's behavior is all I care about...and they are modeling behavior I respect.
But, just as there are those who will look for all the negatives about Obama, there are those who will continue to focus their attention on the negatives of Bill and Hillary.
In all fairness though, I don't think CO's post was an attempt to trash the Clintons. For a while yet, there will be lots of press focused on Hillary and what she has done...what she might do..that's to be expected. So, posting of that info is fine. I was just saying that in terms of Hillary's speech on Tuesday, I see more than one explanation for why she acted the way she did. Even if it's "all about her", then she is only hurting herself.

But that's the point Amy. She is hurting herself and she is smarter than that.She isn't helping women when she seems to be a poor loser as many are saying. She deserves better herself. I know how losing is hard. Its soul destroying for the candidate. I am not knocking her for being human.

I do have reservations even now as there is a good chance she will still want a floor vote in Denver even if its simply symbolic but given the Clinton play book that might not be productive for a Dem unity situation. That worries me. Already the GOP has benefited from this Dem Primary fight. They don't need any more help. Another thing I find , although understandable from a personal viewpoint, as being petty and not in the interest of women who trust her so much. I have read and heard that one thing she will demand is that no other woman be selected as a VP candidate this year. She has proven that women have a place on a national ticket but unless its her she doesn't want one at all. Not that I think it will be a woman but for her to make that a condition is telling. She has proven that women are a credible presidential option and finally laid that taboo to rest . That is a legacy for which she deserves enormous credit. She should not tarnish that legacy.

CO, if she is insisting that no other woman should be picked that indeed would be petty in the extreme. But how reliable is that report?

Obama should shove Hillary against the wall and say YOU LOST YOU DO NOT DICTATE THE RULES capiche!
(that way he is treating Hillary like just a person, she would I am sure not want to be treated like a girl, right?)

That would show toughness, for those that think he is a wuss(in Dgg's words)

SHE LOST
SHE DOES NOT TELL THE WINNER WHAT TO DO
She made a mockery of tuesday night

And Bill is NOT vetted and any vetting would show he is NOT qualified to be first lady anyhow so that would cancel him out

WTF does Hillary think she is?

And we were trying to be nice...this is over the top.

OBAMA/CAROLINE KENNEDY

Hillary doesn't want a woman because then she is finished forever

CAROLINE OR NOBODY AT ALL

I'm not trashing anyone TRoU. I am being realistic. I WANT THE DEMS TO WIN. WE NEED them to win. And that should be the only thing everyone should be considering at this point.

IT has nothing to do with a single individual. Its what it is. It has to be accepted and the candidate needs the unqualified support of every single Dem if they are to beat the GOP in November.

Good lord, even Bush acknowledged the historic significance of the Obama nomination. Hillary hasn't, and now is only doing so in a qualified manner after pressure from her own supporters on the Hill.

The message that sends isn't signifying unity.

It is in the mainstream media Arne. That's where I read it and heard it but don't ask me where as I can't remember. I had a fierce headache last night and it was all I could do to watch or read anywhere. But I did hear it and read it. I cannot vouch for its accuracy.

CO-

IF what you heard is true, Hillary must really be scared of Caroline Kennedy, at which point it also means, Caroline is indeed going to be the one chosen if we read tea leaves.

Can we hpe beyond hope it will actually happen? WOW!!!

Graham I love Caroline Kennedy but she would add nothing but name recognition to that ticket.

I might agree with you about Bob Graham. He knows Foreign affairs and he is loved in Florida.

She would add 150 times the women's vote of Hillary
so if Hillary got 18 million, Caroline would bring in 27 million extra

REMEMEBER- mass majority of women nationwide do NOT like Hillary as they don't like how she stayed with Bill.

Caroline is much more popular and has NO negatives whatsoever.

Carolyn Kennedy, as much as I greatly admire her, is not going to be the VP choice. Tea leaves and tarot cards are good sources of truth for those who don't trust their brains to ferret out the truth.

And no qualifications.

cheney vetted for Bush and became VP

so there is a precedence.

And not only me, but many articles recently have called for it to be Caroline.
Some before and some after Ted's illness was revealed.

It would be fitting,as this would be JFK Jr.s term if he was not assasssatinted.

That is a very, very big insult to Caroline you know. I humbly disagree.

She is MORE qualified by far than Hillary.

Obama doesn't need to resort to nastiness or verbal violence. He has the confidence, interpersonal skills and temperment to handle difficult situations with dignity.

Graham....what world do you live in? She is not more qualified than Hillary. She might make a much better candidate than Hillary...her personality and temperment might make her more "electable"...she's certainly very well educated and intelligent.

What are the qualifications to be President?

35 and older
USA born and citizen
No arrest record that makes you a felon with no voting rights

Where does it say you had to have won legislative office?

It doesn't.

Same as SCOTUS

Just because recently it is, does not mean anything.

And there have been many calls this year for people to pick someone NOT in office, but outside

Caroline is more than qualified business wise and in her charitable dealings

What qualifications did Ronald Reagan have before running for Gov? Or Arnold? Or Ventura?

My husband said, he heard that the three Carolyn Kennedy and two others were only on the committee to find candidates for VP position. They aren't being looked at for V.P.

Neither was Cheney when he vetted for Bush in 1980. No one ever thought he would pick himself. But he did.

Gee Graham, maybe voters would like to know what her policy positions are on various issues before we decide if she's qualified to run as VP.

http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=7632

Caroline Kennedy for Vice President


Diary Entry by Lord Stirling
Caroline Kennedy would make a fantastic choice for Vice President.

::::::::

Eight years ago, former Bush Cabinet insider (from the administration of Bush I) Dick Cheney was selected to head up the vetting process of selecting a Vice President candidate to run with Governor George Bush. He ended up being the VP choice himself. We may be seeing a historic replete of this process with Caroline Bouvier Kennedy Schlossberg.

Many people are upset that the first serious woman candidate for president has failed, and just barely, to obtain the nomination. The Clintons badly want her to have the VP slot, however, as former President Carter has pointed out that would be a terrible choice. While she does well with working class voters and women, she has the highest negatives of any of the candidates who sought the Presidential nomination this year. The political history of Bill and Hillary is very "checkered" to say the least. After all, Bill Clinton was only the second President in American history to be voted an indictment of impeachment by the US House of Representatives.

Caroline Kennedy, on the other hand, would be a totally fantastic choice. She is both an outside Washington "change we can believe in" person, yet one linked to the Kennedy Camelot years. She is, in fact, the last of the Camelot children after her brother John's death. She would appeal to women, to young people, to working class voters (the "bread and butter" of the Kennedy political machines for over 40 years), to Catholics, to Jews (her husband Edwin is Jewish), to all of those of us 50 and above who remember the Camelot years. Caroline is a well educated attorney and editor with an American background linked to both far better times and to a America that has traditional high moral standards. She is Jack and Jackie's daughter and heir.

Her selection would be a totally fantastic choice that would electrify the coming election.

Stirling




Earl of Stirling, Hereditary Governor and Lord Lieutenant of Canada. Author of CASH FOR PEERAGES: THE SMOKING GUN (Lulu Press at www.lulu.com/content/953682). Web site: http://europebusines.blogspot.com/

and from last week
For Barack Obama's consideration, Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg for vice president
Submitted by Chad on Tue, 05/27/2008 - 10:13am. Be-Elected
http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/election08/191

(Photo: Chitose Suzuki/AP Wide World)


Whether you are a supporter of Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton, the one idea associated with Obama is "Change." Obama supporters are looking for a new direction of leadership. Those who are tired of the infighting politics want something different from Washington. And Obama represents that for them.

Now we know that this infighting started with Newt Gingrich and his cronies after Bill Clinton got elected, and how the MSM finally got tough on a president (funny how it was a Democrat, after all). But the people who are fresh onto the Obama bandwagon, the true independents of this country, and those who don't vote for president on party but on the person don't really care who started it and why. They just want it to stop.

I have argued that Obama needs to send a new message in picking a vice president, to go in a direction that truly symbolizes change. And I think I found someone.

Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg

After you have stopped laughing, consider these points. (As always, this is a creative exercise. This reflects my views and not those of BuzzFlash management. It's a suggestion.)

Yes, she doesn't have political experience, and has never been elected to public office. But she does have a track record as an attorney, editor, and writer. She and Ellen Alderman have written two books together on civil liberties, a topic that certainly needs to be addressed in an Obama administration. Kennedy Schlossberg is one of the founders of the Profiles in Courage Award. And she has represented her family on a number of occasions, a task vice presidents have traditionally had to do.

Also, she is a woman who didn't come out of nowhere. If Hillary Clinton isn't going to be on the ticket, and a woman ends up on that ticket, it will be difficult for Clinton supporters to say Kennedy Schlossberg doesn't deserve a shot. She is a name that voters know. And she is at an age (50) where her youth will be appealing standing next to 46-year-old Barack Obama.

Kennedy Schlossberg is also a fervent Obama supporter. Her January 27 essay in The New York Times spoke volumes of her feelings for Obama.


"Sometimes it takes a while to recognize that someone has a special ability to get us to believe in ourselves, to tie that belief to our highest ideals and imagine that together we can do great things. In those rare moments, when such a person comes along, we need to put aside our plans and reach for what we know is possible."

And that gets me to my next point: "put aside our plans." It is fair to say that she hasn't campaigned for higher office, but if Obama were to come to her, she might have to follow her father's own words, "Ask not what your country can do for you -- ask what you can do for your country."

There is the Kennedy factor - pro and con. She is well respected for her stands and views. It will be difficult for Republicans to attack her personally, even if there will be attacks on her family. And there is the Ted Kennedy legacy. You can easily imagine Sen. Kennedy will give a speech in Denver during the convention in what might be his last Democratic National Convention. Imagine the joy and splendor of him speaking, knowing his niece will be on the Democratic ticket in the fall.

There have been some in her generation of Kennedys who have stepped into higher office: her cousins former Maryland Lt. Gov. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-RI), and former Rep. Joseph P. Kennedy II (D-MA). But so far, Kennedy Schlossberg hasn't heard the calling. But Obama and 2008 may change her mind.


"There is a generation coming of age that is hopeful, hard-working, innovative and imaginative. But too many of them are also hopeless, defeated and disengaged. As parents, we have a responsibility to help our children to believe in themselves and in their power to shape their future."

There is an appeal to her not wanting a lot of power. She won't be swayed in a situation, unlike Dick Cheney, to abuse her power and trust. She can be trusted in great part because she isn't eager to be a part of the process.

And there is nothing that says she has to go on and be president. If she were the pick and served eight years, she might have something in common with Dick Cheney: she may not choose to run for president. And that could open the door for someone else to run in 2016, such as Sen. Hillary Clinton, among others.

Unlike Clinton or McCain, Obama has a chance to reshape the vice presidency. It would be a huge risk to pick someone out of the political process. But to those independents, those outside observers, picking an unconventional choice could have strong appeal. And as for Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg, this may be her time to step up and be a part of the political process.

Bookmark/Search this post with:
buzzflash | delicious | digg | technorati
Technorati Tags: Be-Elected Chad Rubel 2008 race Barack Obama Hillary Clinton Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg Ted Kennedy vice president

And it looks like Obama is making changes at the DNC.

BREAKING: Obama to Change DNC $ Policy
by JJC
Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 06:44:54 AM PDT

I'm at work, so this is just a quick head's up. Barack Obama has announced that he will change the DNC fundraising policy to disallow accepting contributions from federal lobyists and political action committees (PACs). What's more, he's indicated that all of his fundraising events will be open to at least one pool reporter.

http://www.politico.com/...

This sounds like a major change of how Washington works. And he's not even President yet!

Update below the fold!

JJC's diary :: ::
Update: Wow!! My first Diary and it got on the Rec list! Thanks people. You are a major reason I still have faith in democracy and the progressive movement.

Sorry about the lack of detail. Here's more detail that TennesseeGurl posted in one of the comments below:



Mr. Obama is announcing today that the D.N.C. will no longer accept contributions from federal lobbyists or political action committees, which follows the rules he established for his own campaign last year.
"We want the Democratic Party to conform to his standards of openness to reduce the influence of special interests," Linda Douglass, a campaign spokeswoman, told reporters today before Mr. Obama flew from New York City for a campaign stop in Virginia.

NY Times

Obama also is expected to overhaul the DNC staff in coming weeks, including by dispatching one of his senior strategists, Paul Tewes, to run the organization

Washington Post

Three cheers for change

BTW, its time we start donating to the DNC
Donate here

www.democrats.org/

This is great news.

[b]SORRY I HAVEN'T JOINED IN LATELY! BEEN TOO BUSY CELEBRATING OBAMA'S VICTORY!

Obama should challenge the Republican National Committee to do the same and hit 'em hard if they don't.

This may also annoy some. I am a realist. And the fact is she is treating the Democratic Presidential Candidate with very little respect. That does not rally her supporters and foster unity. He is bending over backwards to show respect to her. This alone will be seen as deference and weakness on his part by some of those blue collar workers he needs to reach. Thjis should not be necessary. Not if the party is being considered before self. He will have enough difficulty as it is. He doesn't need this additional problem.

I would be saying exactly the same thing if the situation were reversed and Clinton was the presumptive nominee.

And just btw .. I just heard on MSNBC she may not be going to release her delegates or concede but simply suspend and will have her name put forward in Denver. This may only be rumour. We'll know on Saturday.

Obama treads gingerly around Clinton

By: Carrie Budoff Brown
June 5, 2008 08:54 AM EST

For days, Barack Obama did not step foot in public without praising Hillary Rodham Clinton. Even on Wednesday, less than 12 hours after Clinton delivered a defiant nonconcession speech with more than a few eyebrow-raising lines, Obama was still at it, extolling her history-making run.

But an awkward reality hung over what was supposed to be the first day of the general election campaign — even after news broke Wednesday evening that Clinton would be dropping out of the race Friday. Like a family groping to move past a feud, Obama appeared eager to make up and Clinton seemed to want little part of a public coming together.

She took the stage Wednesday at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference — minutes after Obama spoke from the same dais — and barely mentioned him, vouching only for his commitment to Israel. Associates elsewhere in Washington were floating her name for vice president, yet Clinton did not even acknowledge that most of the political world had conferred the presidential nomination on her opponent.

The uneasy dance put the Obama campaign in a fix. Even in their moment of triumph, aides were still navigating the Clinton waters, underscoring the extent to which Obama may not be able to fully immerse himself in the general election campaign until the New York senator steps out of the race.

President Bush, through his spokesman, congratulated Obama for his “historic achievement.” Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice did the same. Clinton supporters were coalescing around Obama. But nothing came from the candidate herself — at least not publicly.

Obama aides, while rolling their eyes in private at the tone of Clinton’s speech, could not seem to distance themselves enough from questions about the state of the relationship. They declined to describe the senator’s reaction to the speech, which he watched backstage at the Xcel Energy Center in St. Paul, Minn.

Press aides were told not to comment on the speech, which did more to whip up her supporters than encourage party unity. Clinton congratulated Obama for an “extraordinary” race and called him a friend, but those lines were overshadowed by others. She sounded very much like a candidate, reiterating the claim that she’s won more votes than any primary candidate in history and eliciting cheers from the audience of “Denver, Denver,” the site of the Democratic National Convention in August.

David Axelrod, Obama’s chief strategist, shrugged his shoulders when asked early Wednesday morning aboard the campaign plane from St. Paul to Washington whether the speech bothered Obama.

“We are mindful of the fact that they have gone through an epic struggle,” Axelrod said. “It is challenging. There are hard feelings.”

Axelrod almost seemed prepared for the less-than-conciliatory posture, saying earlier Tuesday that he “wouldn’t begrudge anyone those feelings. People invested in Clinton’s candidacy have every right to be unhappy tonight … and nobody would deny that.”

Confronted by reporters at the Capitol, Obama didn’t take the opportunity to criticize.

“I thought Sen. Clinton, after a long-fought campaign, was understandably focused on her supporters,” Obama said Wednesday. “I just spoke to her today, and we are going to be having a conversation in the coming weeks. I am very confident about how unified the Democratic Party is going to be to win in November.”

Obama and Clinton spoke briefly by phone after their speeches Tuesday, and again Wednesday, when they crossed paths backstage at the AIPAC conference.

Asked whether Clinton had given him any indication that she’d be dropping out of the race, Obama said: “It wasn’t a detailed conversation.”

The peace-making approach from a campaign that is usually quick to defend — and from a candidate who occasionally seems thin-skinned — reflected the belief that there was no benefit to engaging in a public spat with Clinton.

“This is a time to move on and not look back to the primary,” said Linda Douglass, a senior adviser.

Obama aides said Clinton deserved to make decisions on her own timetable.

“How much time has it been, really? It’s only been a few hours,” Douglass said Wednesday afternoon. “[Obama] is very much opposed to pressure in this situation, any pressure on anybody. What is the point? It has only been a few hours. She ran this spectacular campaign and she has a right to proceed here as she chooses.”

If Obama was irked after Clinton’s speech, he wasn’t showing it early Wednesday morning aboard his campaign plane. He stood in the front cabin, surrounded by close Chicago friends and immersed in conversations that prompted smiles and laughter.

He was happy, supporters said, but reluctant to celebrate.

"You don't cut down the nets at the conference finals," Obama said twice last night, according to his friend and fundraiser James Crown.

But even when news reports circulated early Wednesday evening that Clinton would drop out of the race Friday, the initial reaction was muted.

"No comment," said an Obama aide.

The Clinton campaign had not yet made contact with the Obama campaign, another aide said outside an evening fundraiser in Manhattan.

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uui...049848A1D230E41

She can't officially give them up while she still wants a way to pay off her debt legally
That is one of the oddities of the campaign laws

She wants a hand count in Denver instead of Acclamation

I would not hire her to be dog catcher let alone any position

You know what Obama should tell her- either you obey or your health plan will NOT pass

He should start blackmailing her like she is doing to him

One is with him or against him
There is no middle ground

I for one would not cede an inch. And I would name a woman VP today that is not her.
But then again, I would tramp the dirt down too as Elvis Costello sang, just changing the name from Margaret to Hillary in the song.

It was being talked about on CNN last night that she was "suspending" and not "ending" her campaign. They were saying that she's doing so because of the historical significance of her run and prsumably wanting to get her vote (the women's vote) on the record. But... doing this allows her to hold her delegates until the convention... which opens up several issues imho.

First, she's remaining on standby... an unless she clearly and unequivocally announces that she is ending her bid (while officially only suspending) it is as if she is remaining on standby. This can be read to mean.... waiting on something to happen that may damage Obama or otherwise leave a door open for her until the convention.

Second, it could mean that she could still try to move delegates before the convention and set up a floor fight... if she chooses to. I would say it is a long-shot, but not impossible depending on the situation between now and the Convention... and whether she gets "what Hillary wants" in the name of her supporters of course.

Third, it leaves some people in political purgatory... holding onto hope that something will still bring her back into the race. Whether intended or not it will put some of her supporters "on hold" rather than moving their full support to Obama, unless she clearly and unconditionally states her intention and commits to it.

IMHO, it is still a halfway measure and a limitation she's imposing on her support of Obama... but we'll see I guess.

The "Obama supporters" are what I'm talking about amy. Not just here, (though that is all I'm dealing with regarding Betty's post), but in general. There seem to be a lot of people (pundits and talking heads, and Obama fans) who want to lecture Hillary about what she should do and when. I think everyone should stick a sock in it. Sorry to be blunt, but maybe if we had poured our heart and soul into something, and spent huge amounts of our own money, and had traveled the country, and had people open their deep feelings to us and supported us, maybe, just maybe we might look askance at the cheap shots, arm-chair psychoanalysis, and arrogant judgements about our soul, our loved ones, our life, and what it means. I know I'd have a handy one finger salute to that myself.

And it being "all about her" is unique I suppose to Hillary isn't it? We could never say it is "all about Obama"? Right? No! He's what? "Above it all"? Right? When it is his campaign and his wife and his supporters, it goes without saying it's all about the welfare of the party, and the country, and the world. Maybe we all need to chill out a bit and recognize that everyone who runs for president probably needs a 2 ton pick-up to carry around their ego. And before any smart remarks follow I'd say Obama's needs might be more in the Mac Truck range.

Just some thoughts.

I hear you loud and clear, TRoU....but you will never get any of the Obama supporters to understand your point. It's a hopeless cause.



Nope, he's above criticism on this board. It's been that way since the beginning of the year -- maybe longer. CGCS members have posted negative threads about the Clintons for years, some have been able to get away with outright accusing them of rape and murder. But just try posting a news article that calls into question Obama's qualifications, and they start crying foul...moderators will pounce on you with both feet demanding that you prove the claim put forth in the article.

I agree with you TRoU. I have no problem with Hillary's handling of things the last few days. Obama is giving her the space she wants...it' supporters and pundits creating the hoopla.

The section that I bolded..well, I'm not in agreement with you on your comments there. There's nothing wrong with a healthy ego (your consciousness of your own identity)...I would hope that all candidates would possess one. Yes, some are more arrogant than others, I suppose, but a robust ego is a good thing to have, in my book. Also, you too are guilty of inserting your Obama barbs whenever you can, evidenced by your Mac truck comment about Obama's ego.
You're free to express your opinions but comments like that do nothing to further a positive discussion with a member who holds a different opinion of the candidate being ridiculed.

Trash and browbeat?

Oh come on. There are an untold number of insulting remarks by a few (and sometimes all) Hillary supporters. We've been called names, derided as whackos, had our positions and our candidate defamed, and put up with the same sort of abuse (save for one poster who is in his own class). I've tried to be respectful and stick with facts... and not namecalling, not derogatory remarks and other such offensive stuff.

Obama has been criticized ad nauseum over Wright, Ayers, bittergate, and so on... and even subjected to wild speculation about things which are not even alleged... such as drug use and dealing and other unfounded deeds.

Would you all like me to find me a few (hundred) examples ?

And TROU, name any Obama supporter (save one) who has said they do not wish to have the support of Senator Clinton and her followers.

Remember, healing is a two way street.

We have two sides here.

The Obama side on Tuesday night offered an olive branch to the Clinton supporters with his praise for Senator Clinton.

On Tuesday night, Senator Clinton did not even acknowledge the historic event that had occurred.

Even now, Senator Clinton suggests that she is keeping her options open.

Despite everything that has occurred during the campaign, we are ready and waiting to embrace Senator Clinton, her supporters, and her issues insofar as that is possible.

We are just waiting for that opportunity.

It has yet to arrive. Will it arrive Saturday? We cannot say.

Are you ready and waiting to embrace Senator Obama, his supporters, and work toward Democratic victory in 2008 crafting a winning party agenda?