Well I don't even want to state the obvious. We were out- campaigned, out-played, out-gunned, and out-smarted by the best campaign in modern times. Hats off to Senator Obama and his whole team. I have problems with the process but absolutely none with the candidate. The chasm in vision, policy and ethics between Barack Obama and John McCain is staggering. Perhaps John McCain was a maverick once upon a time but he has become a Bush sycophant over the past eight years. If ever tomorrow was fighting against yesterday it is now, it is this election.

It is not John McCain's age which puts him at a disadvantage. It his pursuit of one failed policy after another in defiance of all the contrary evidence that makes him so vulnerable. His politics are backward looking and prey on dividing the American people.
I think Barack Obama is uniquely suited to bridge many of the artificial divides put in place by successive Republican regimes.

I was struck by Obama's medical records. as a practicing physician
for almost 30 years two things in his medical history seemed patently improbable. First, there are virtually no 47 year old men with blood pressures of 90/60. Most men with that kind of B.P. would be in the throes of acute blood loss! I would say that kind of B.P. would be more likely in an 8 year old. Second, Obama may be the only smoker in America with a resting heart rate of 60! He is in fact a walking advertisement for taking up smoking.

These medical findings are so surprising. They are in fact unbelievable. Maybe the blood pressure would make sense if against all odds we had a second Addisonian president in 50 years! I believe the good doctor made up these numbers. Maybe he's not used to lying. Maybe both his watch and his sphygnomanometer (B.P. device) were broken that day. No physician, nurse, EMT or frequent viewer of E.R. would believe those numbers.

I used to really like Keith Olbermann. Sadly he has strayed from the great canon of journalism, objectivity. When he isn't involved
in his humorous, if ego-laden, spat with Bill-O, he is in constant Hillary attack mode. I simply can't stand watching anymore. He puts an anti-Hillary spin in every political question, every discussion.

I appreciated his early denunciation of the war and his refusal to join the lemming like press corps in the drumbeat to conflict. However he has taken to bashing Hillary at every opportunity. I can only conclude that there is some misogynist demon he is dealing with (or rather not dealing with). Mere political difference could not explain this level of vitriol.

His shtick used to be novel and funny. Now he seems a bit like a left leaning Denis Miller, a tad pedantic, and more than a tad repetitive. Keith Olbermann is rapidly becoming the worst journalist ......IN THE WOOOOORLD!
 

Earlier I expanded on the qualities I like in Hillary. Now as a counterpoint I would like to discuss the character flaws I see in Barack Obama. First and foremost I find him a dissembler. He changed his story on Rezko several times. The amount Rezko had given has steadily increased each time he is pressed. The truth does not exist in increments!

I am also troubled by a politician who has voted "present" on numerous occasions, often when the issue was controversial. Equally troubling is a politician who explained some votes by saying "I pushed the wrong button".

How is one to view a man who is big on anti-war rhetoric and yet
has repeatedly voted to fund the war. Where is the courage of his convictions?

I also have trouble with his ability to put his head in the sand.
As the Jeremiah Wright debacle grew he was very slow to distance himself from this pariah. I also found that throwing his grandma under the bus in his defense of Wright was utterly appalling. Where is the loyalty for the woman that raised him? His handling of nuclear safety has shown to be just a run of the mill pol ready to take money wherever he could get it.

Now it turns out that numerous literary devices were used in Dreams of MY Father. Devices such as composite characters, imprecise dates and chronology. No mention was made of this in the original version. Funny lots of authors and journalists have been castigated for this form of dishonesty.

On a personal note I find him weak and short on conviction. He just doesn't strike me like the kind of commander in chief who will inspire confidence in our military or respect from our adversaries. Maybe he will talk us out of jams, but I doubt it.

Why do I like Hillay when she is almost certain to lose? That is the very reason I like her, because she is almost certain to lose. When others looking at the numbers would have bowed out gracefully there is something inside her that says "go on". We are very much a nation of quitters. We quit when we have 2 kids and a mortgage and let our bodies and minds go to seed. We give up on relationships and seemingly divorce at the drop of a hat when the going gets tough. We are a nation where nearly half the citizenry doesn't bother voting. We quit high school, college and university for any variety of manufactured reasons.

So my admiration for Hillary is that she defies popular wisdom. She listens to her own drummer. She has had it doubly tough as a woman. Despite all the ridicule she trundles on with her message. Despite near insurmountable odds she perseveres. I can tell you which candidate I would want in my foxhole!

Maybe this is the pluck of an earlier age. Something out of a Knute Rockne halftime sermon. She may not be president this time round. But don't ever doubt that this lady has heart and the mettle of the great presidents.

You can dismiss the scoffers most of whom have never even taken a swipe at the brass ring. It is easy to be buoyant in front of sycophants and supporters. How much braver a feat when all you hear is the chorus of your detractors and constant criticism of
self appointed pundits? I think Hillary truly is a profile in courage. Churchill underwent two decades of derision. Did he succumb?

I don't know when Hillary will be president but I think it is a good bet that she will be one day.

Obama's numbers in Oregon seem to be flagging. A once certain double digit win appears to have been pared into low single digits.
Two polls have the already cast mail in vote at dead even. This morning's Suffolk poll has Obama up 4 points. Now Oregon is the kind of state Obama has to carry in the general. Now I don't subscribe to the logic that states one loses in a primary are lost to one in the general, nonetheless, it is troubling when the presumptive nominee gets routed in W.V. (a swing state) and is trailing by upwards of 30 points in Kentucky.

Obama is ending this primary season not with a bang associated with a likely winner, but with a whimper one associates with indecision and doubt. Had he not run up multiple wins in caucus states where a tiny fraction of the electorate participated, than the narrative would be altogether different today. But the fact is he did. And the nomination is likely his. But has he really captured the soul of the party? I wonder.

Hillary is staying in Kentucky until Tuesday (a tactical blunder on her part). A win in Oregon, which would be a huge upset, might give some SDs pause for thought. Hillary get on that plane!!

There comes a time when even the most die-hard fan must realize that his team is not going to win the pennant or be in the Super Bowl. It is one of life's unpleasant realities. Now let me say that I really, really like Hillary. I think she is the stronger of the two candidates and the one most likely to win in November. Unfortunately, regardless of what I think and feel, Obama will be the nominee.

It's the delegates, stupid. Winning the popular vote is simply not
sufficient to claim the prize. Perhaps Hillary wants a moral victory, but it will not give her the nomination. As much as it pains me to say it. Taking the nomination away from Obama with procedural and technical squabbling will rend the Party. It will alienate the Obama side far worse that the transient pain being felt on the the Clinton side.

With her huge win last night in West Virginia, and a similar win likely in Kentucky, Hillary seems poised to carry the popular vote
without counting Michigan. It is even conceivable that she could win the popular vote without counting Florida. It's all up to Puerto Rico. Hillary could garner up to a 500,000 vote gain in the Commonwealth. Just remember how Obamites crowed after a 7 vote win in Guam.

One can see exactly how the system was gamed when one compares caucus results in Nebraska and Washington versus the results in those states respective beauty contests. Texas is another case in point. It seems where there were few participants in caucus states Obama operatives were able to pack the caucuses. When the people as a whole got to speak there were material differences in the outcomes.

Obama has a weakness with the Democratic Party's core constituency, white working class voters. That is the group that will ultimately determine who becomes president. While blacks are another core constituency, they are a much smaller group and many are in southern states where their votes are effectively nullified by larger Republican leaning majorities.