When it became apparent that Joe Biden couldn't win the nomination, he dropped out gracefully and his supporters started working for other candidates.

When it became apparent that Bill Richardson couldn't win the nomination, he dropped out gracefully and his supporters started working for other candidates.

When it became apparent that John Edwards couldn't win the nomination, he dropped out gracefully and his supporters started working for other candidates.

Looks like Huffington Post is at it again. Benjamin Barber, author of "The Truth of Power: Intellectual Affairs in the Clinton White House," was present at a Camp David meeting just after the Republicans took congress in 1994 and witnessed Hillary's response to questions regarding how the Clinton administration should address the needs of working class white southerners in an effort to win their approval.

The first lady responded, "Screw 'em. You don't owe them a thing, Bill. They're doing nothing for you; you don't have to do anything for them."

I wonder if this one has more legs that the late, not-particularly-lamented Bittergate affair?

Yesterday, candidates B and C, to not mention any names, accused candidate A of being condescending toward the struggling working class people of Pennsylvania, demanding an apology of candidate A. These remarks were made in response to candidate A's expression of empathy toward those Pennsylvanians, angry and, yes, bitter about the government's complicity in the outsourcing of their jobs to far off ports.

Candidate A responded that candidates B and C, unaware apparently of the feelings of the people of Pennsylvania, were out of touch.

So my question is: who exactly is condescending? Candidates B and C, who apparently believe that the people of Pennsylvania are too stupid to differentiate between empathy and condescension or candidate A, who suggested that the people of Pennsylvania are bitter at their government's lack of concern for the well-being of working folk, while it bends over backwards for their corporate buddies?

"Bare Debauchery at Franconia College: Drugs, Liquor, Sex Rampant on Campus." Manchester (NH) Union Leader, April 5, 1968.

That was the headline, forty years ago today, above the masthead, above the headline below, "Dr. King Killed by Sniper." The article, by Arthur C. Egan, started out, "A wonderful dream has turned into a terrible nightmare." This is a townsman's characterization of an institution of "higher learning" which is making a mockery of education--a school whose birth was the pride of this White Mountain community, but has now become an arena for scenes of incredible debauchery."

"College policy allows virtually unlimited license to students and faculty alike-in the pursuit of academic studies and personal pleasures. Drugs, alcohol and sex are among the main ingredients of campus life."

Yes, Obama is losing to McCain in NJ, MI, and nationwide. But in ALL THREE CASES, he's losing by less than is Hillary.

NJ: Obama down 1; Hillary down 3
MI: Obama down 1; Hillary down 3
Nationwide: Obama down 5; Hillary down 9

I say let Hillary have Florida and Michigan; they simply don't help her cause.

Using the counts from demconwatch, with Florida and Michigan and giving Obama the 55 "Anybody but Hillary" delegates from Michigan, she trails Obama by 59 delegates. Now add on to Obama's count the 4 "Pelosi Club" delegates and the 7 North Carolina congressmen and Obama's lead is up to 70.

When you consider that Clinton's Superdelegate lead has diminished from nearly 100 to 22 in the last month or so, and when you consider that the "Pelosi Club" is only likely to grow, I think it's a fair assumption that Obama will garner at least half of the remaining uncommitted Superdelegates.

First, my allegiance. I supported no one until November, when I finally gave up on Al Gore's entry into the race. Signing on to the small John Edwards bandwagon, my reason had to do with Edwards' focus on corporate greed, a central piece of many of our other problems. With Edwards out of the race, I joined the Obama team. My feeling here was that 4-8 more years of the bitter partisanship that we've endured for the past 16 years would continue the stalemate.

From South Carolina on, I've been horrified at the sleaziness of the Clinton campaign, which, as I see it, has now degenerated into what's being referred to as the "Tonya Harding option." Much of what emanates from her mouth rings as disingenuous at best, from "Michigan counts for nothing" to "Michigan must be counted" after she registered a paltry 55% versus nobody.

Then I start looking at MyDD and run into legions of Hillary supporters bashing Obama for running a dirty, dishonest campaign. My sense has been that he's been totally above board until just a couple of weeks ago, when it became necessary to strike back.

There's only one candidate who's unelectable.

Who's the only candidate who repeatedly says he doesn't understand economics and that he hasn't focused on domestic affairs during his years in the Senate?

Who's the only candidate who talks about staying in Iraq for 100 years?