My answer to the pundits who are saying the race is over and that Obama has won!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on April 28, 2008 - 6:32am.
Rapid Response
Hello Everyone:
I am absolutely sick and tired of Obama's biased apologists in the media who are saying now the race is over and that Obama has won!
Two of Obama's biased apologists in the media who are trying to say the race is over and that Obama has won are Chris Matthews at MSNBC and Jack Cafferty at CNN.
Howard Kurtz exposed Chris Matthews for saying this on CNN Reliable Sources last Sunday when he was doing the good job that he does of keeping the media honest:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0804/27/rs.01.html
CNN RELIABLE SOURCES
Media's Coverage of Pennsylvania Primary; 'New York Times' Reveals DOD Media Program
Aired April 27, 2008 - 10:00 ET
HOWARD KURTZ, HOST: "The media made it clear in the weeks before the Pennsylvania primary that Hillary Clinton would have to score a double-digit victory to remain a viable candidate. But when she won the state by nearly 10 points this week, the journalistic verdict was nothing's changed, she's still a loser, and why doesn't she just get out?
So much for winning three big states in a row. Why do we all go crazy covering this contest for seven weeks, only to say in the end it didn't matter? One anchor, in fact, declared Pennsylvania meaningless even before the polls closed on Tuesday night.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC: This contest is essentially over. In the effort of the media to try to keep this game going, we've created the delusion that somehow this race is still open.
(END VIDEO CLIP)..."
Jack Cafferty in my opinion definitely made himself look like an idiot when he tried to argue that the primary race is over and that Obama has won on a CNN panel last Friday, April 25. Here is the transcript of this and where Cafferty was contradicted by Gloria Borger (who in my opinion leans toward Obama in her analysis but is not as blatant as Cafferty is) and by Tony Snow:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0804/25/sitroom.03.html
THE SITUATION ROOM
Reverend Wright Speaks Out; Clinton's North Carolina Chances; Justice Scalia Tells Dems: "Get Over It"
Aired April 25, 2008 - 18:00 ET
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Jack, I will start with you -- 45-45, 10 percent unsure. It's a snapshot, 12 days to go in Indiana. This is another one of those critical primaries. What do you think?
JACK CAFFERTY, CNN ANCHOR: Well, at the risk of bursting anybody's bubble, I think we're kind of perpetuating a myth here that this race is still close. I don't think it is.
I think it's -- for all intents and purposes, it's over, and Barack Obama is going to be the next nominee. Unless she wins, unless Hillary Clinton wins all of the remaining primaries and gets something in the neighborhood of 60 percent of the vote, she's going to end this thing behind him in pledged delegates.
Delegates are the way you get the nomination. The Democratic Party is not going to overturn the will of voters in 48 states and alienate the largest and most dependable constituency they have, African-Americans, by taking the nomination away from Obama and handing it to Clinton. So, there's -- this is a lot more smoke than fire.
BLITZER: But it's not that simple, Gloria, is it?
GLORIA BORGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: No, I don't think it's that simple.
I think Jack may be right about the numbers and the math. He is right. But this is also about the psychology, because, if Barack Obama is going to be the nominee, he doesn't want to go into this election against John McCain hobbled. He doesn't want to go in with the sense that he can't win these white working-class voters that are a very important part of the Democratic base.
He says he can win them, particularly when he's up against John McCain. But I think there is some burden on him, not only to win Indiana, but to show that he has an appeal to these voters, because she's painted a picture of him as this elite candidate who cannot attract them. So, he needs to start showing that he can do it.
BLITZER: Is it effectively over, all but the dust, Tony?
TONY SNOW, FORMER WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, it's hard to say, Wolf. I mean Jack's absolutely right about the primary math. But, on the other hand, you've got superdelegates. They've got to make the calculation who can win the presidency.
You saw Barack Obama stumble pretty badly in Pennsylvania and a lot of the damage was self- inflicted. You had the "Bittergate" comment. You had the pretty mediocre performance in the debate there. So the question is, can this guy take pressure, does he have what it takes in terms of experience and also sharply defined and credible positions on key issues or is he just a smooth talking guy that people love because he's got such a wonderful personality and is there going to be buyer's remorse on the part of Democrats as they get closer to an election that will be driven, yes, by personalities, but also by issues..."
Tony Snow in my opinion got it exactly right about the criteria that the superdelegates need to be looking at when they make a decision about which candidate they will vote to give the nomination to!
Jack Cafferty is in error when he made this stupid comment "taking the nomination away from Obama and handing it to Clinton" because under the rules, the nomination does NOT belong to Obama or anyone until they get 2024 delegates. It is clear that neither Obama or Hillary will get 2024 delegates so the nomination is NOT Obama's to lose right now. It is up in the air for the superdelegates to make a decision about and vote on based on the criteria that Tony Snow mentioned above!
Jack Cafferty is also wrongly bringing Obama's race into the picture when he argued "The Democratic Party is not going to overturn the will of voters in 48 states and alienate the largest and most dependable constituency they have, African-Americans, by taking the nomination away from Obama and handing it to Clinton..."
This statement makes Obama look like he is an Affirmative Action candidate who should get the nomination just because of his race! The truth of the matter is that MANY different Democrats on BOTH sides will be alienated if their candidate loses the primary race as I have credibly documented:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/15327
POLLS: Democratic unity will be very hard to achieve after this primary is over!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on April 20, 2008 - 11:59pm.
Obama will also have a very difficult time winning the democraphic of Reagan Democrat voters who Obama could not win in Pennsylvania as John King of CNN credibly documented:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/15365
TRANSCRIPT: John King of CNN broke down the map to show how Hillary won in PA!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on April 25, 2008 - 4:02am.
The superdelegates also have to look at the fact that Obama does NOT understand how to fight back against enemy attacks as a general election candidate while Hillary does know how to as well as the fact that even Obama's own supporters admit that he is not good in debates:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/15387
Obama's own speech shows he has no concept about how to fight back IF nominated!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on April 28, 2008 - 5:16am.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/15340
Obama supporter Jamal Simmons said "Debates are just not his particular forte"
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on April 22, 2008 - 3:13am.
Strangely enough, Jack Cafferty himself gave the superdelegates some very good reasons about why they need to look at Obama again as well as giving some good reasons about why Obama needs to debate Hillary again:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0804/23/sitroom.01.html
THE SITUATION ROOM
Clinton Seeks Bounce Back from Pennsylvania Win; North Carolina Ad: Obama 'Too Extreme'; Race Nastiness Taking a Toll
Aired April 23, 2008 - 16:00 ET
JACK CAFFERTY, CNN ANCHOR: "The last six weeks have tested Obama in a way he hadn't been tested before -- the comments from the pastor, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, which he had to address; his own bitter remarks; and a debate performance that wasn't his finest and raised other questions like his ties to William Ayers, the former Weather Underground member..."
Howard Dean got it right in my opinion when he said that superdelegates "should vote their conscience" which is what the rules are despite what you hear from all of the pro-Obama media pundits like Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, and Jack Cafferty:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0804/17/sitroom.01.html
THE SITUATION ROOM
Pope Benedict Addresses Americans of All Faiths at Catholic University; Did Democratic Debate do Any Damage?; President Bush & Gordon Brown Discuss War, Economy and Politics
Aired April 17, 2008 - 16:00 ET
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: "Should they make their decisions, these undecided superdelegates -- and even those who have made up their minds, they are free to change their minds, obviously -- based...
HOWARD DEAN, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: Right.
BLITZER: ... on the popular vote, the pledged delegate count, the Electoral College states, the most states won, or whatever's in their gut, who they think is most electable?
DEAN: The rules say they should vote their conscience. And I think that's pretty good advice.
My job is to enforce the rules. You can agree with them or not agree with them, but they're going to vote their conscience. And I think that's what they're called upon to do..."
If this race is just to be decided by which candidate has the most delegates when they are both short of the 2024 that are needed to win the nomination, then why is there a superdelegate system in place now?
The reason for the superdelegates is to make sure that the best qualified and most electable candidate is nominated because the high cost of losing this election will be a third Bush term as far as many key policies are concerned. That should be a very sobering thought to everybody about why the issue of electability is so very important!
Please forward this information on so that more people will understand what the true role of the superdelegates are and so that they will not be fooled by the pro-Obama media pundits who are wrongly saying the race is over and that Obama has won!
Mitch Dworkin
http://www.securingamerica.com/
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/10756
StopIranWar.com: "War is not the answer"
Submitted by Wes Clark on February 21, 2007 - 11:40am.
http://www.securingamerica.com/ccn/node/7191
Listen to Gen. Wes Clark fight for Dems on Sean Hannity's radio program: An excellent example for all of us to follow and what we all need to be doing to help fight back against extreme right wing Neocon smear propaganda!
candidate, and his actions (and inactions) demonstrate that he buys it. He purports to believe he can alienate common white folk, anger voters in MI and FL, and then still win the GE by taking red states. When Bill Clinton said there's a fairy tale being told, he was right! But, if BO truly believes that he is already slated to be the nominee, why doesn't he just start going after McCain and ignore Hillary? Why spend a mint in PA unnecessarily? Why not use debates as a platform to skewer the Repubs? (He could just treat Hillary like the proverbial plotted plant while behaving like the Dem nominee.) Everyone involved in this entire campaign to remove Hillary--BO, his camp, the media lackeys--are terrified that she is growing in stature in the minds of the supers day by day. And, Cafferty, black people may be the party's most loyal constituency, but they're not large enough to win the GE! Bill Clinton acknowledged this when he did the Sistah Soljah routine! Again, I say that it seems to me that these bleeding-heart liberal, maybe deep-down racist commentators are willing to use BO as a scapegoat or sin-eater and throw the election under the bus! I've actually heard some say that it would be better to lose this GE than to take the chance of losing the black vote for good. Well, this post-W election provides a golden opportunity for the party to get back the Reagan Dems, and they're too big a group to ignore.
the race:
http://weeklyreviewusa.blogspot.com/2008/04/hillary-cant-steal-nomination-with.html
Monday, April 28, 2008
Hillary Can’t Steal the Nomination with Super Delegates, But Obama Could Lose Because of Them

Super Delegates have been part of the Democrats’ system for choosing their presidential nominee since 1980! But, by judging from the media’s tone, you’d think that it was all dreamed up by Clinton, Inc., last summer. Here’s some examples:
"How could the Democratic Party be so, well, undemocratic? Backroom double-dealing; Suppressing the will of the voters; Super Delegates will likely decide the Democratic presidential nominee at this year's convention in Denver; Will Super Delegates decide Democrat Nomination? For the first time, Super Delegates may decide their party's nominee."
Doesn’t this coverage pass on a seedy, underhanded and scheming feel to the whole Democrat nomination process?
This is not to say that Democrats are not as Machiavellian as quasi-humanly possible. But the point here is that the rules regarding Super Delegates have been around for 28 years. It is not like the Clintonistas have the list but the Obamamamas don’t. They both do. The fact is that its a fair playing field for both Barack and Hill.
Here’s what’s going on. The media jumped ship with Clinton, just like Barack dumped his grandma, and supported Obama. Unfortunately, Obama has not won, while Clinton has not lost. Now the liberal media is in a quandary. Being liberals, they are as equally sly as politicians. Therefore, they have decided to attack the delegate selection process to push their guy forward, and have begun to predict rioting in the streets and a Chicago-style convention in Denver if the Super Delegates don’t do what the media wants them to do and support Obama.
Here’s the count after Pennsylvania. Obama has won 1,489 delegates to Clinton’s 1,333, while there are only 408 delegates left to win in the nine remaining contests. A quick calculation shows that if either Obama or Clinton wins them all they will both be short of the 2,024 needed to win.
Meanwhile, on the Super Delegate front, Obama has 238, while Clinton has 259. Added to their current totals this puts Obama at 1,727 and Clinton at 1,592. If Obama wins all the 408 delegates up for grabs, which is a practical impossibility, as none of the remaining states are winner take all, he goes over the top and reaches the magic 2,025 mark with 2,135, while if Clinton wins them all she is still short at 2,000.
So, if neither can win, how does someone win? In addition to everything else described there are 298 more Super Delegates that are uncommitted at this point. Depending on how they go, they could push either candidate into the victory circle.
Here’s the interesting thing about Democrats and their process. None of the delegates that have been selected so far, whether regular or Super are bound to vote for any particular candidate. True, regular delegates are more likely to vote for whom they worked for, but that is beside the point. The point is that they are not bound. Super Delegates meanwhile are also not bound. They can vote however they want. . . and, just like regular delegates, they can change their mind. This reality is not indicative of a gamed system, rather it is simply the way the rules work, which is fair to both sides.
In 2004, as an example, Howard Dean was doing great with his Super Delegate count, but after he crashed and burned in the Iowa Caucuses, they all switched to John Kerry. Super Delegate independence happened in 1984 as well. Gary Hart came on strong against Walter Mondale and won 16 states to Mondale’s 10, but Mondale sewed up almost all the Super Delegates. Were those years examples of subverting the will of rank-and-file Democrats? No, they were merely representations of how the system works.
Not everyone agrees though, especially if they are reporters or Obama supporters. U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri, in an interview with History.com, sanctimoniously said, "I'm confident that in my party, which prides itself as being a party of the people, Super Delegates will be nominating the one with the most pledged delegates."
The one with the most pledged delegates? Hardly. Rather, Super Delegates will support the candidate most likely to win in 2008, which seemed like Obama all the way up to the point where his spiritual mentor, Jeremiah Wright, took center stage.
Posted by Bruce E. Hawkins at 3:46 PM
Labels: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Jeremiah Wright, Super Delegates, Superdelegates

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/15054
Jack Cafferty of CNN, an Obama apologist, did a hit job on Hillary on March 18!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on March 19, 2008 - 4:13am.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/15269
YouTube: Hillary said on Ellen that Chris Matthews "manhandles me every night"
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on April 14, 2008 - 3:24pm.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/14717
VIDEO: Chris Matthews said "I Felt This Thrill Going Up My Leg" As Obama Spoke!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 14, 2008 - 10:23am.
Keith Olbermann in my opinion is worse than both Jack Cafferty and Chris Matthews:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/15359
Transcript & Video: Keith Olbermann made fun of Hillary's supporters on April 23
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on April 24, 2008 - 4:41pm.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/14997
Videos & Transcript: Keith Olbermann used Monday's Countdown to trash Hillary!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on March 12, 2008 - 9:03am.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/14859
Keith Olbermann, being a biased apologist for Obama, has lost ALL of my respect!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 27, 2008 - 11:22pm.