Well, I don't KNOW that.

But I suspect it.

And I think he's going for Obama.

Follow my logic below the fold.

Last night, my wife groaned as Countdown came on.  I was in the kitchen, and poked my head in.  
"Again?" she said.
Rev. Wright was on the screen during the promo bit at the beginning.]

Then we watched KO deliberate with Richard Wolfe and friends as to whether BO was getting into a feud with the reverend, whether Wright was jealous of BO.

Seems pretty bizarro, right?

Wrong.  Barack is playing the media right where he wants them.

Y'know, I was thinking of writing a diary to expand on my earlier comment on another thread, which was my reaction to the possibility that Clinton won't give up until the voting is over in Denver.  Needless to say, I'm steamed at the idea that she might try to get pledged delegates to switch or other such tricks ...

I thought about informing the elected officials in the party that they'd pay at the polls for allowing such nonsense.

I thought about aiding the GOP in 2009 in impeaching President Clinton for some small infraction she is likely to commit, like jaywalking.

But then I realized that even if she tries some shenanigans, the odds that she'd succeed are still small.

And I realized that hatred and fear is exactly what is destroying her candidacy before our very eyes.

I heard the song by Sia (who did "Breathe Me," the song that closes out the show Six Feet Under in its last episode) called "The Church of What's Happening Now."

Other than the messianic quality of the word Church, it's a great song to close out a Dem convention, particularly if it's contentious.  And it reminded me that even if Obama loses the nomination contest, we can keep fighting, because we're getting closer and closer to our goals.

I just received my annual city census form, and there are two more residents listed in my apartment than actually live here.

What's odder still is that they have the same birthday.

Anyone else have this happen to them, and if so, are the birthdays of those "extra residents" 1/1/60?

The only reason this could happen, other than bizarre error, is so voter fraud could be (or already has been) committed in the upcoming elections.

This will be a short one, but there's not much to say.  People who donate this week to the Obama campaign will be considered for a dinner for five.  That's four supporters and Senator Obama, discussing issues and concerns.  It's political genius, and I encourage all of you to "enter" this contest.  

Even the Clinton supporters.  What better way to air your concerns than to donate 15 dollars, and win a chance to get flown out at Obama's expense and tell him yourself over dinner?  Maybe you can even get him to drop out?

Full email below the fold:

And no, it's not just because he is black.  There have been Green Lanterns of various ethnicities (and species) and it is THIS reason, among others, that Obama reminds me of the Green Lantern.

My local radio station had a poll this AM as to who the Official American Cartoon Character should be.  I proposed GL, as the John Stewart (black) GL would look nice standing next to a President Obama, but other GLs (including female ones) could be used for various other Presidents.  

Unlike Batman, who works out of a developmental injury, or Superman, who has been bestowed on humanity, the GL on Earth is always human but has been ENTRUSTED by outside powers with the RESPONSIBILITY to GUARD Earth.

Sometimes he goes out into the cosmos to do this.

Sometimes he stays at home.

And, much like Superman, the John Stewart GL believes no problem is too small.  Every little bit supports the common good.  This is partially borne from his experience as a black man in Central City (largely recognized as the DC comics analogue of Chicago).

And thus, Barack Obama is the Green Lantern ... follow me below for a fun yet hopefully interesting dissection:

What an odd honor to be asked to write tonight's Feminisms.  I mean, it's not as odd as Ann Coulter being asked, or Pat Buchanan.  I am a Feminist.  However, I am white.  I am straight.  I am a man.  If we really want to get picky about my "disqualifications," I am a part of a power structure that routinely strips people of their civil rights in the name of psychiatric health.

But I am a Feminist.  Born in the Northeast as part of GenX, I was raised as one and it existed as an assumed background condition to progressive thought.  Both my parents worked in full-time jobs.  Both my parents took an active role in my emotional development.  Thus, I remained a Feminist.  I did the usual Feminist guy things in college, like take part in political actions organized through the women's center and denigrate the boors in the Party of the Right.

What being a Feminist means, though, has changed over time.  I never would have accepted the invitation to write this column 16 years ago, at the other end of the Clinton era.  I never would have thought backing the Democratic candidate other than Hillary Clinton constituted Feminism.  Let's go back in time, to those heady days in the early 1990s, and see how times have changed.

Bill Clinton has this to say about a Clinton-Obama ticket.

Presumably he has the same thing to say about an Obama-Clinton ticket.

"You look at most of these places -- he would win the urban areas and the upscale voters, and she wins the traditional rural areas that we lost when President Reagan was president.  If you put those two things together, you'd have an almost unstoppable force."

Really?  He wins urban areas and she wins rural areas that we lost when Reagan was President?  Let's take this apart.

Here's some unfiltered advice from an Obama supporter.  I know you're going on the show, no matter what, so it doesn't matter if I say this here.  As Admiral Ackbar said in Return of the Jedi, "It's a TRAP!!!!"

I was already wondering whether Jon Stewart planned on having HRC on the show on Monday.  It would seem like a perfect time to ambush her.  I expect a few softballs, and then he's going to ask her what she's still doing in the race.  Then he'll laugh, and she'll laugh, and he'll say something like:

"No, but seriously, what are you still doing in the race?"

If she truly believes the media is in the tank for Obama, and she's coming to TDS, then she hasn't been watching TDS lately.

Oh, yeah.  The video says he endorses Hillary Clinton.  It's a web ad for Hillary Clinton.

But, make no mistake ... this ...

http://youtube.com/...

... is an ad for Barack Obama.  It's even arguably a hitpiece against Hillary Clinton.

Let's take it apart below the fold.

Between the debate and the new polls in OH and PA, it doesn't even matter if Obama loses RI.  This is over.  

I think the debate and the endorsements yesterday clinched it.

Now, Clinton may never see the handwriting on the wall, but I suspect someone over in her camp (or multiple someones) will get her out before she gets really ridiculous.

Or not, in which case she squanders her entire legacy.

This doesn't mean we shouldn't continue to campaign for Obama and raise money, etc.  Every voter we convince is steeled support in the general against McCain.  Every mistruth we smack down is a tired cliche in the general.

But I'm breathing easier.

There's a bad trend in New England.  I called twenty homes in RI and twenty in VT, and NO ONE supports Obama.  Not a one.

Sampling error?  Probably.  But I don't think it bodes well.  No one even engaged me on the phone today.  

I think we're seeing the beginning of a bad trend.  I'm not sure what did it, but something has got New Englanders in a foul mood towards the Senator.

So, the rumble in Ohio is set.  Obama's patriotism is questioned.  His hope is questioned.  His physical existence has been questioned.  No, that last one hasn't happened yet ... but wait until Tuesday afternoon.  Clinton has vowed to take this to the brink, and perhaps beyond.  We have accusations that Mark Penn is conspiring with his colleague at Burston-Marsteller, Charlie Black of the McCain camp, since Clinton is going down by the day.

So, how will it end?  Will it end with the MSNBC debate?

I think we're getting too cocky here.  The polls do not indicate him clearly winning ANY state other than VT right now, and the media is just waiting (they can wait infinitely) for Clinton to stage a comeback.  We have to keep calling other states, and donating, etc., just as we did before, because we are losing three of four contests right now.

Why?

Below the fold, folks, below the fold.

Oh, and "I drink your milkshake" is from "There Will Be Blood."  Keith Olbermann uses it all the time now.

Based on neighboring states, both in terms of election results, delegate counts, and superdelegate endorsements ... I think I have the base odds for the four big states 10 days from now.  This predicts what will happen if Obama and Clinton do nothing in terms of a ground game or TV ads or organizing call banks, unions, and regional efforts.

It is the base odds if the regional supporters are left to their own chaotic devices.

And they look horrible for Obama.  If the Oba-Maniacs don't fight like they are thirty points down (and they are thirty points down), then Clinton is going to parlay Mar 4 into the nomination.

I don't think this will make the rec list, because the facts favor Clinton, but that would be a massive mistake on the Oba-Maniacs part.  This diary is meant as a warning that they ignore at their peril.

Therefore, I have activated the "Keith Olbermann" tag, in the hopes that his staff will print this out and give him an alternative to Chuck Todd's crystal ball and Tweety's divinations.

Could tonight's CNN debate be the end of the Democratic campaign?  Probably not.  But there are some possibilities it could be the beginning of the end.  Obama cannot screw up in a way that he can't fix within a week, or he may give Clinton the comeback her allies have been waiting a month for.  Clinton cannot screw up in a way that her foes have been waiting a lifetime for.

So, what might end the largely stalemated race?  Could it happen tonight, with Wolf Blitzer and the Best Political Team not based in New York City?

February 18th and 19th will be long remembered dates.  Heck, 2008 will be analogous to 1989, I think, based on the last 24 hours and the 24 hours to come.

1. Slovenia, who is one of my favorite countries other than this one, has given the green light to Kosovo becoming its own nation.  They did so as the leader of the EU, the first Eastern Bloc nation to head the body in the rotating presidency.  We quickly followed suit once the EU welcomed Kosovo into existence, and the Serbs went bananas.  They've withdrawn their envoys to Washington DC and the Hague, and individual Serbs are making small parries at the Kosovo border.  So far, the Kosovo police are repelling these attacks, but the Slovenes may be forced into action.  Whether they merely use their own tiny force, marshal support among other Balkan nations, or activate an EU/NATO force, it will decide the course of history.  They may just use their own army, which, when it was the Slovene police, defeated the Yugoslav National Army and gained their own independence in 10 days without any casualties.  Slovenes are much like Israelis in that sense: they're fairly smart, on average, but you don't want to tick them off.  There is some evidence that Spartacus was Slovene.

I agree with Kos that the delegates should be seated in some way that does not use the bizarre "non-election" results.  However, just splitting them 50-50 doesn't seem right either.

Here's what I propose ...

Use the delegate counts in the neighboring states to decide proportional allotment of delegates.

This could be done in one of two ways ... see below.