House Panel Questions High Pay for CEOs

Corporations make big profits from debt and CEOs get obscene salaries and bonuses. Congress wants to investigate this greed, but they themselves are to blame for the subprime mess:

The heads of three companies implicated in the mortgage crisis have been asked to explain how they collectively received hundreds of millions of dollars in compensation while their companies were losing money.

[...]The committee, chaired by Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., has held several hearings on the issue of high executive compensation. Last December it looked at large, publicly traded companies that hire compensation consultants who are receiving millions of dollars from corporate executives whose compensation they were supposed to assess.

Republicans on the committee questioned the need for the hearing, saying it falls outside the panel's primary role of investigating waste, fraud and abuse in the federal government.

Larry David: "Does Anyone Want this nut Answering the Phone?"

Another Hollywood lefty whose turned on Hillary:

Here's an idea for an Obama ad: a montage of Clinton's Sybillish personalities that have surfaced during the campaign with a solemn voiceover at the end saying, "Does anyone want this nut answering the phone?"

[...]A few weeks ago, I started to feel sorry for her. Oh Christ, let her win already...Who cares...It's not worth it. There's not that much difference between them. She can have it. Anything to avoid watching her descend into madness. So I switched. I started rooting for her. It wasn't that hard. Compromise comes easy to me. I was on board.

And then I saw the ad.

I watched, transfixed, as she took the 3 a.m. call...and I was afraid...very afraid. Suddenly, I realized the last thing this country needs is that woman anywhere near a phone. I don't care if it's 3 a.m. or 10 p.m. or any other time. I don't want her talking to Putin, I don't want her talking to Kim Jong Il, I don't want her talking to my nephew. She needs a long rest. She needs to put on a sarong and some sun block and get away from things for a while, a nice beach somewhere -- somewhere far away, where there are...no phones.

Clinton Campaign Behind Canada-Nafta Scandal

Will the Clinton gang get away with this latest dirty trick that might've cost Barack votes during Tuesday's primaries? It once illustrates how Hillary and her thug campaign workers will do anything to win this election. The press should be all over this story. So far it looks like this major scandal is being given little publicity. It's almost as if the Hillary is being rewarded for dirty tricks. All the talk is about how Barack has to, and has, changed his campaign tactics. No, it should be about how the press could start reporting on dishonest Clinton campaign tactics:

The Hillary Clinton campaign has again denied any communication with Canadian officials indicating her anti-NAFTA statements should be taken with "a grain of salt."

The allegation was made by Prime Minister Stephen Harper's chief of staff Ian Brodie in an informal discussion with journalists in Ottawa in the midst of the Ohio Democratic primary.

"We flatly deny this report," said Clinton spokesperson Phil Singer.

"It didn't happen."

It is at least the third time the Clinton campaign has issued such a denial.

Clinton used a Canadian memo, leaked to The Associated Press, to great advantage in Ohio this week, painting rival Barack Obama as soft on trade because a Canadian diplomat believed the Illinois senator's top economic adviser had told him Obama's anti-NAFTA statements were "political positioning."

The scandal is rocking Canada:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper is expanding the investigation into the government leaks that rocked the U.S. presidential race, a decision that could put the future of his own senior aide in jeopardy.

Harper announced the broader probe by an internal security team yesterday after The Canadian Press said it was unguarded comments by Ian Brodie, his chief of staff, that set the controversy in motion and eventually undermined presidential hopeful Barack Obama in a key race this week.

"We will investigate this entire matter and take whatever action is deemed to be necessary, based on the facts we are able to discover," the Prime Minister said in the Commons yesterday.

As well, David Wilkins, the U.S. ambassador to Canada, signalled Washington's quiet displeasure at the controversy.

"I guess you could say it shouldn't have happened. It was interference. But again, I don't think it's something the Canadian government did in its official capacity," Wilkins said in an interview with CBC Radio's The House, to be aired tomorrow.

"I think they've expressed their deep regret and, quite frankly, I accepted that," Wilkins said.

Criminal Charges for Poison Toothpaste Dealers

How many other companies are knowingly selling dangerous products imported from China to Americans:

Criminal charges have been filed against a company that prosecutors say imported and distributed nearly 90,000 tubes of Chinese toothpaste containing a poisonous substance and a wholesaler supplier of the tubes, City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo announced.

Selective Imports Corp. sold the toothpaste containing diethylene glycol to distributors nationwide between December 2005 and May 2007, prosecutors said Thursday. Vernon Sales Inc. is accused of buying some of the tubes and reselling them to Los Angeles stores.

Diethylene glycol is a chemical used in antifreeze and as a solvent. Chinese manufacturers have used the chemical, known as DEG, as a cheaper alternative to glycerin, which thickens toothpaste. Exposure to DEG, however, can cause kidney and liver damage over time.

[...] China's reputation as an exporter has taken a beating in the past year following recalls of products including the toothpaste, toys tainted with lead, and pet food fortified with the toxic chemical melamine.

Last month, a federal grand jury indicted Las Vegas-based ChemNutra Inc. and two Chinese businesses in the tainted pet food incidents that killed potentially thousands of animals.

Study: U.S. troop Morale up in Iraq, those in Afghanistan Depressed

It won't be long before U.S. troop morale declines in Iraq as well as the quagmire continues with no end in sight:

U.S. troop morale improved in Iraq last year, but soldiers fighting in Afghanistan suffered more depression as violence there worsened, an Army mental health report says.

And in a recurring theme for a force strained by its seventh year at war, the annual battlefield study found once again that soldiers on their third and fourth tours of duty had sharply greater rates of mental health problems than those on their first or second deployments, according to several officials familiar with the report.

- Read entire article

Who Leaked Details of a CIA-Mossad Plot Against Iran?

There are those in the Bush administration whom refuse to go along with the neocon conspiracy:

The Bush administration is prolonging the hunting season against journalists. The latest victim is James Risen, The New York Times reporter for national security and intelligence affairs. About three months ago, a federal grand jury issued a subpoena against him, ordering Risen to give evidence in court. A heavy blackout has been imposed on the affair, with the only hint being that it has to do with sensitive matters of "national security."

But conversations with several sources who are familiar with the affair indicate that Risen has been asked to testify as part of an investigation aimed at revealing who leaked apparently confidential information about the planning of secret Central Intelligence Agency and Mossad missions concerning Iran's nuclear program.

Risen included this information in his book, "State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration," which was published in 2006. In the book, he discusses a number of ideas which he says were thought up jointly by CIA and Mossad operatives to sabotage Iran's nuclear capabilities.

One of these ideas was to build electromagnetic devices, smuggling them inside Iran to sabotage electricity lines leading to the country's central nuclear sites. According to the plan, the operation was supposed to cause a series of chain reactions which would damage extremely powerful short circuits in the electrical supply that would have led to failures of the super computers of Iran's nuclear sites

Bush Endorsement May Be Risky for McCain

Run away, John:

Beware, John McCain. The money comes with a price. Sure, President Bush will raise millions of dollars for your Republican presidential campaign and GOP candidates. But he'll also give you the aura of a presidency tarnished by painful gasoline prices, a sagging economy, the threat of recession, a blemished U.S. reputation around the world, turbulence in the Middle East and many more problems.

[..]Al Gore's decision during his 2000 campaign against Bush not to embrace President Clinton was probably a gift to the GOP. Many people think that despite Clinton's personal troubles, Gore should have been standing shoulder to shoulder with Clinton, who had high approval ratings as he left office.

"McCain's got to make it very clear that this is not a third Bush term, but a John McCain presidency," said Republican pollster David Winston.

"As long as he can make that clear separation, then having a president of the United States on the road, helping with fundraising, going around and talking to people is a very different thing," Winston said.

[...]Raising money will clearly be priority No. 1. Even though Bush's approval ratings are low, he remains popular with the party faithful who still pay to get in a room with him. In 2007, Bush raised $66.3 million for the Republican Party and its candidates.

NAFTA Reform Just the Start - U.S. Trade Critics

U.S. trade policies have been catastrophic for America for decades. We need a dramatic reversal that probably won't come with the next administration:

The next U.S. president needs to fundamentally redirect U.S. trade policy to preserve manufacturing jobs and reduce the huge trade deficit -- not just tinker with the North American Free Trade Agreement, critics of U.S. trade deals said on Wednesday.

"We need to change the whole discussion about investment, about subsidies, about enforcement of trade laws," said Leo Gerard, president of the United Steelworkers union. "How does any country continue to prosper when it's accumulating an average annual trade deficit of about $700 billion per year?"

But Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch, said it was more important in the short term to change the agreement's investment provisions because they encourage U.S. companies to move jobs to Mexico.

Similar reforms are needed in other trade agreements, including the one that set the terms of China's entry into the World Trade Organization in 2001, she said.

Wallach blamed NAFTA, China's WTO accession and other trade agreements for many of the roughly 3 million manufacturing jobs the United States has lost since 2000.

Seized Laptop Shows Chavez-Rebel Ties

Chavez is a big problem in Latin America:

A single laptop can reveal much, and so it is with the digital treasure chest that Colombian commandos found in the jungle quarters of slain rebel leader Raul Reyes.

Files in the computer seized in Saturday's raid into Ecuador that claimed the lives of Reyes and 23 of his comrades offer an intimate portrait of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's desire to undermine Colombia's U.S.-allied government.

If authentic, the documents show that sympathies Chavez first aired publicly in January grew out of a relationship that dates back more than a decade. But Chavez is not one of the correspondents, and his sentiments mentioned in these documents are relayed solely through the rebels.

Venezuela says the documents are lies and fabrications. If they are, they are expertly done.

Its a dangerous situation:

Ecuador broke off diplomatic ties with Colombia on Monday, after Colombian government commandos conducted a weekend strike against communist rebels inside Ecuador's borders.

Venezuela has also announced that it will be expelling Colombia's ambassador as a war of words erupted in South America over the raid that killed Raul Reyes, a prominent member of FARC -- the guerrilla army that is considered the world's richest insurgency.

Don't be surprised if warmonger Bush is inciting the hostilities:

Ecuador and Venezuela say they are moving thousands of troops to Colombia's borders, a day after Colombian forces killed a leftist rebel leader in Ecuadorean territory. Colombia later charged that high-ranking Ecuadorean officials met recently with the slain rebel, Raúl Reyes, to accommodate the guerrillas' presence there.

The developments raised tensions in a region that has been on edge in the several months since Colombian President Álvaro Uribe and Venezuela's Hugo Chávez had a bitter falling-out. Mr. Reyes was the second-ranking commander of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC.

Obama, Clinton Speech Transcripts 3-4-08

Hillary lives to fight another day. In the process she will destroy the Democrats chances of winning in November (Read Entire Transcript here):

This is your campaign and your moment, and I need your support. For more than a year, I've been listening to the voices of people across our country, you know, the single mom who told me she works two jobs, neither provides health care for her kids. She just can't work any harder.

The little girl who asked how I'd help people without homes? It turns out her family was about to lose their own.

The young man in a Marine Corps shirt who said he waited months for medical care, he said to me, "Take care of my buddies. A lot of them are still over there. And then will you please help take care of me?"

Americans don't need more promises. They've heard plenty of speeches. They deserve solutions, and they deserve them now.

(APPLAUSE)

America needs a president who's ready to lead, ready to stand up for what's right even when it's hard. And after seven long years of George W. Bush...

(AUDIENCE BOOS)

... we sure are ready for a president who will be a fighter, a doer, and a champion for the American people again.

(APPLAUSE)

Oh, I think we're ready for health care, not just for some people or most people, but for every American.

(APPLAUSE)

I think we're ready for an economy that works for everyone, not just those at the top, but every single hard-working American who deserves a shot at the American dream. I think we're ready to declare energy independence and create millions of green-collar jobs.

(APPLAUSE)

We're ready to reach out to our allies and confront our shared challenges. We're ready to end the war in Iraq and win the war in Afghanistan.

(APPLAUSE)

And we're past ready to serve our veterans with the same devotion that they served us.

Barack Obama is undaunted. But he faces hard times ahead (Read Entire Transcript here):

You know, decades ago, as a community organizer, I learned that the real work of democracy begins far from the closed doors and marbled halls of Washington.

It begins on street corners and front porches; in living rooms and meeting halls with ordinary Americans who see the world as it is and realize that we have it within our power to remake the world as it should be.

It is with that hope that we began this unlikely journey – the hope that if we could go block by block, city by city, state by state and build a movement that spanned race and region; party and gender; if we could give young people a reason to vote and the young at heart a reason to believe again; if we could inspire a nation to come together again, then we could turn the page on the politics that’s shut us out, let us down, and told us to settle. We could write a new chapter in the American story.

We were told this wasn’t possible. We were told the climb was too steep. We were told our country was too cynical – that we were just being naïve; that we couldn’t really change the world as it is.

But then a few people in Iowa stood up to say, “Yes we can.” And then a few more of you stood up from the hills of New Hampshire to the coast of South Carolina. And then a few million of you stood up from Savannah to Seattle; from Boise to Baton Rouge. And tonight, because of you – because of a movement you built that stretches from Vermont’s Green Mountains to the streets of San Antonio, we can stand up with confidence and clarity to say that we are turning the page, and we are ready to write the next great chapter in America’s story.

In the coming weeks, we will begin a great debate about the future of this country with a man who has served it bravely and loves it dearly. And tonight, I called John McCain and congratulated him on winning the Republican nomination.

But in this election, we will offer two very different visions of the America we see in the twenty-first century. Because John McCain may claim long history of straight talk and independent-thinking, and I respect that. But in this campaign, he’s fallen in line behind the very same policies that have ill-served America. He has seen where George Bush has taken our country, and he promises to keep us on the very same course.

John McCain Victory Speech Transcript 3-4-08

McCain wins the nomination (Read entire transcript):

I understand the responsibilities I incur with this nomination, and I give you my word, I will not evade or slight a single one. Our campaign must be, and will be more than another tired debate of false promises, empty sound-bites, or useless arguments from the past that address not a single American's concerns for their family's security. Presidential candidates are judged on their records, their character and the whole of their life experiences. But we are also expected to concentrate our efforts on the challenges that will confront America on our watch and explain how we intend to address them.

America is at war in two countries, and involved in a long and difficult fight with violent extremists who despise us, our values and modernity itself. It is of little use to Americans for their candidates to avoid the many complex challenges of these struggles by re-litigating decisions of the past. I will defend the decision to destroy Saddam Hussein's regime as I criticized the failed tactics that were employed for too long to establish the conditions that will allow us to leave that country with our country's interests secure and our honor intact. But Americans know that the next President doesn't get to re-make that decision. We are in Iraq and our most vital security interests are clearly involved there. The next President must explain how he or she intends to bring that war to the swiftest possible conclusion without exacerbating a sectarian conflict that could quickly descend into genocide; destabilizing the entire Middle East; enabling our adversaries in the region to extend their influence and undermine our security there; and emboldening terrorists to attack us elsewhere with weapons we dare not allow them to possess.

The next President must encourage the greater participation and cooperation of our allies in the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Huckabee finally conceded (read entire transcript):

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.

Senator McCain has run an honorable campaign because he's an honorable man. One of the things I'm proudest of is that the two campaigns that I believe have been run in the most civil manner are the two in the Republican Party that have lasted on their feet to the final. And I'm grateful for the manner in which he has conducted his campaign.

And, quite frankly, with your great help, I'm very proud of the way that you have insisted that we conduct our campaign. And it's been one that we will always be able to say was done with honor.

Pro-Clinton Video Calls Obama a "Muslim" Jihadist

This is pure vile filth put out by someone who claims to be a Hillary Clinton supporter. It shouldn't surprise you that a Clinton campaign worker was behind this garbage. The person who posted has been a member for only 7 hours. Meaning its a hit-and-run video. My account was canceled for doing much less. I've already complained about this video to Youtube:

It Looks Like Hillary Clinton will Survive Today's Results

The results in Ohio and Texas look like they will be very close for the Democrats. This means the Clinton campaign will interpret it as a victory and will fight on. Dan Rather said today on the Morning Show that Ms.Clinton will stay in the race regardless of the harm done to the party and their chances of winning in November. If she can't win Hillary will make sure that Obama does not come the Fall. She wants to be able to run in 2012.

Apparently her appearances on comedy programs the last 3 days have benefited her. In addition, the negative publicity surrounding the claims that Obama and the government of Canada have some understanding on NAFTA, along with the Rezko scandal, have had an impact. Polls show late movement in favor of Hillary. Even if the results are close this could mean Obama gets more delegates from all of Tuesday's primaries. Nevertheless, the press hype will translate it as a victory for Clinton and dub her the comeback kid. This will give Hillary the excuse to fight on despite the unlikeliness that she will win the nomination. This in turn will mean that Obama will be too bloodied come the general election. Bottomline: Obama loses to McCain in November. The Clintons are good at damaging the Democratic Party.

UPDATE:

• Chuck Todd, MSNBC's top political analyst, said this morning that Hillary has no statistical chance of winning regardless of what happens tonight.
• A Washington Post poll gives hope to Hillary. It showed almost a majority of the public thinks the former First Lady should remain in the race regardless of today's results.
  

China's Defense Budget up 17.6 Percent

China continues to build up their military and threaten America without a wimper from our so-called leadership in Washington. It is the same kind of indifference that existed prior to 9-11. It will continue to be ignored until there is a conflict between our two sides, probably over Taiwan:

China's defense budget for 2008 will be up 17.6 percent from last year to more than $58 billion, a parliamentary spokesman announced Tuesday.

Jiang Enzhu, spokesman for the National People's Congress, whose session opens Wednesday, told reporters in Beijing the budget represents an increase of nearly $8.8 billion from last year's actual military spending, Xinhua reported.

Then there is the highly provocative hacking the Chinese are engaging in:

China rejected a U.S. report concluding that the Chinese military is secretly increasing spending to break into U.S. military computer systems, expand its Navy, and invest in intercontinental nuclear missiles and weapons to destroy satellites.

Speaking of Taiwan:

China warned Tuesday that Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian will "pay a dear price" if he continues with current pro-independence plans.

Texas Gets B+ Rating, Runs a $3.3 Billion Shortfall

So much for ratings of State governments:

Texas' state government got a B-plus in a report card released Monday by The Pew Center on the States. The center ranked the states based on how well they manage their budgets, staffs, infrastructure and information. A closer look:Texas' grade: B+. The state made a B in 2005, when the last report card was issued.

Here's the reality that really matters, not some worthless rating system:

Texas would lose more than $3.3 billion in Medicaid funding if Congress doesn't stop new rules designed to arrest the growth of federal health care spending, according to a congressional report issued Monday.

The new rules target hospitals and other organizations that use Medicaid to provide health care to the uninsured. In a letter to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the Texas Health and Human Services Commission estimated that the changes to hospital reimbursements would create a shortfall that could imperil health care for 185,000 patients.

Hillary Still Hiding her First Lady Phone Logs

The Clintons have been trying to stall any and all releasing of records that might derail and candidacy that is on the verge of collapsing anyway:

Hillary Clinton has taken heat throughout her presidential campaign for not forcing the release of documents detailing her activities during her time as first lady. Conservative advocacy group Judicial Watch and rival Barack Obama, among others, have called on Clinton to intervene to expedite the release of the documents.

Obama had this to say on the matter: "We have just gone through one of the most secretive administrations in our history. And not releasing, I think, these records — at the same time, Hillary, that you're making the claim that this is the basis for your experience — I think, is a problem."

Now the Associated Press reports that the National Archives said today that "it expects to release Hillary Rodham Clinton's schedules as first lady later this month, but has asked a judge to delay the release of thousands of her telephone logs for one to two years."

Clinton critics suggest that the Clintons are intervening to keep the papers secret[...]

Obama Must Build a Movement Beyond Winning White House

This is an excellent article on how its not enough to just win the White House. Obamamania must get beyond just winning the White House. We need a movement that will sweep out the old guard that has run this country on behalf of the few for so long:

For her win was the product not just of electoral momentum but a political movement. For several years now online activists have been building a progressive counterweight to rightward drift within the Democratic party. In general elections, they attack Republicans. In primaries, they support progressives. And in between time they light a fire under Democrats lest they forget why they were elected.

Edwards was, among other things, a product of that movement. It made her candidacy viable and sustained it after her narrow defeat in 2006. If she goes to Congress and sells out, they will turn on her. If she delivers progressive policies and comes under fire, they will support her. The interests of her candidacy and their priorities coincided. But they are not identical.

As the primary race reaches its denouement, Obama needs to reflect on how he can nurture a similar relationship with his base - not just to sustain his candidacy but to bolster his prospects of actually delivering on his promises. Obama has been described as running a grassroots movement. This is only half true. It is certainly grassroots. In the various states that I have seen it operate there are plenty of local volunteers and local staff. At web-driven meet-ups people get together, independent of the campaign. On Facebook his candidacy has a life of its own. One of the reasons he has won every caucus state is because his supporters are far more dedicated and far better organised at a local level than Clinton's.

But it is not a movement. It has no purpose or meaning beyond getting him elected. Once he wins or loses it will cease to exist. It operates not from the bottom up but the top down. The change he refers to is principally a change in leadership. The chant "Yes we can", in essence, means yes he can.

[...]What Obama does have is a highly professional electoral campaign that has proved itself adept at getting people involved at every level and harnessing new technologies to that end. So far so good. It is perfectly possible (although by no means inevitable) that by the end of tomorrow night Obama will effectively be the nominee. His team could be forgiven for dwelling on making that immediate prospect a reality.

But then what? If Obama is serious about his desire to fundamentally change the way America operates at home and abroad then he will have take on entrenched, vested interests to beat John McCain and deliver on his promises.

[...]An electoral coalition of independents, wealthy progressives, African Americans, white men and the young have come together to vote for him, but has yet to mobilise itself into a political movement that can support him. A movement sparked by the issues his candidacy has raised that moves beyond his personality as a candidate.

Were he to win, he would need to tap their outrage at the pharmaceutical companies, Halliburton, lobbyists, Pentagon torturers and corporate tax-dodgers. He would need them sufficiently empowered to confront the banks over their lending practices, multinationals over outsourcing, and universities over rising fees. And in his negotiations with Congress and other powerbrokers he would need to know the limits to what he can concede without antagonising his base.

Obama cannot turn this around on his own any more than Bush got America into this mess on his own. Enough of the public had to be actively complicit in the Bush agenda for it to be possible to make things this bad. Indeed, the right has been extraordinarily adept in this regard. When Bush nominated Harriet Miers or sought to pass immigration reform, they blocked him. When he cut taxes and started war, they backed him. Without them his presidency would have crumbled sooner, and even more dramatically. Enough of the public would have to be equally complicit in Obama's agenda for him to right Bush's wrongs.

Obama: Hillary Clinton Getting a "Little Desperate"

This is an excerpt from a Nightline interview to be shown on Monday:

The Obama campaign accused the Clinton campaign of "fear-mongering."

"I think she has got a little desperate toward the end of this campaign," Obama told "Nightline's" Terry Moran, while campaigning in Ohio. "[She] has been a lot more aggressive in her negative attacks.

"As I've pointed out, we've actually had a pretty significant moment in the last several years, that called people's judgment into question. And that was the war in Iraq."

On the war:

Regarding the Iraq War, this weekend, Clinton told reporters that if she runs against McCain, she will "put forth my lifetime of experience. Sen. Obama will put forth a speech he made in 2002."

Obama disagrees with that characterization. "I was in the midst of a U.S. Senate race," he said. "It wasn't simply a speech. It was an ongoing opposition."

On experience:

On the question of experience, Obama welcomes the contrast between him and Clinton, who has repeatedly described herself as someone who is "tested" and "ready."

"I think the question is, how do you know any president is ready?" Obama said. "[Until] you're president, you haven't made these decisions."

"What people can take a look at is how I exercised judgment on key foreign policy questions over the last several years," he said. "And I think they can have confidence. ... More often than not, I have shown judgment that was superior to some of these people who are claiming much lengthier experience."

As part of her proven experience, Clinton has highlighted her visits to more than 80 countries, her time spent in the White House and her service on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

"Look, I've lived overseas," said Obama. "I have family overseas. I have served on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee."

As for Clinton's experience in the White House, Obama is dubious. "It is true that I've not lived in the White House," he said. "Although, one of the tough things about Sen. Clinton's campaign has been the degree to which she takes credit for good things that happened and doesn't take credit for bad things that happened."

And what about temperament:

Obama believes that his "matter of temperament" best prepares him for the White House.

"One of the things that I've known about myself for a long time," he said, "is that, in difficult or stressful moments, I don't get rattled And I don't get rattled during campaigns. I don't get rattled when things are up ... and I don't get too low when things are down."

Why Hillary Lost: "Mrs Clinton Tries Hard to Fake Sincerity"

It took a British newspaper columnist to expose the real Hillary Clinton:

When Texas and Ohio vote in Tuesday’s Democratic primaries, they may bring Hillary Clinton’s campaign for the presidency to an end. If she loses either of those states, her bid is over barring the formalities. This is a position few expected her to be in. Not long ago, success in the primaries and victory in the general election were regarded as almost inevitable. What went wrong?

For the answer, one should turn (as always) to the teachings of Marx. “The secret of success in life is sincerity,” Groucho once famously observed. “If you can fake that, you’ve got it made.”

This truth about the human condition applies with particular force to politics. Mrs Clinton tries hard to fake sincerity – so hard it is painful to watch. Sometimes, in fact, I suspect that she really is sincere and only looks as though she is faking. Barack Obama, on the other hand, may actually be sincere – and if he is not, he fakes it so well it makes no difference. Elections are won and lost formany reasons, but if I had to point to just one in the present case, this would be it.

It is surely telling that the most effective moments in Mrs Clinton’s campaign have been those rare times when a real person has appeared to break through: the tears in New Hampshire, the moving and seemingly unaffected tribute to wounded soldiers at the end of the Houston debate the other day. But for most of the time she has veered from one false personality to another, often during the course of a single debate or interview. One moment she would be acting tough, the next warm; now aloof, now approachable; now a fun person, fond of a joke (that was the worst), now stern and serious. In every moment of repose came that scary rictus smile, to emphasise the lack of authenticity and remind one irresistibly of Jack Nicholson in The Shining.

Meet The Press Transcript 3-2-08: Looks Grim for Hillary

Clintonista, James Carville, was forced to admit that if Hillary Clinton doesn't win Tuesday she is toast (read the entire transcript here):

MR. SHRUM: Do you agree with me that if Obama carries one state, it's effectively over?

MR. CARVILLE: It is very, very, very difficult. And I've--and, and I said that earlier; President Clinton has said it. It becomes exceedingly difficult if she, if she loses either Ohio or Texas. That's, that's evident. You got to...

MR. RUSSERT: It's over.

MR. CARVILLE: It's very, very, very difficult.

MR. RUSSERT: Oh, you're...

MR. CARVILLE: No.

MR. RUSSERT: Two weeks ago, you said it was over.

MR. CARVILLE: It--I don't know what the difference is. It sounds good to me.

MR. MURPHY: It's one sentence he'd like to have back.

MR. CARVILLE: It's--I don't have this reject...

MR. RUSSERT: I think he got a phone call this morning, "Don't say it's over." Right?

MR. CARVILLE: No, I--in, in effect, I, I agree with President Clinton.

MR. MURPHY: There you go.

MR. CARVILLE: And I--I'll leave it at that.

Then Carville tries to explain away Hillary's position on NAFTA by making an unverified claim that she sort of opposed it when Bill was President:

MR. CARVILLE: I can--something I can attest to personally, and I, I have checked, she--in, in 1992, she was decidedly cool toward NAFTA. Came up with--we came out for NAFTA during the campaign. And I--the reason I remember it so well is it's one of the few times that I actually disagreed with, with Hillary Clinton on anything. I made it my business to try to agree with her on, on most things. Now, I don't know what happened in between 1992 and this campaign, but I do know that she was decidedly cool on, on the idea of us endorsing NAFTA during that campaign.

MR. MURPHY: But she has a theory about what happened...

MR. RUSSERT: But in 2004, she did say, "On balance, NAFTA has been good for New York and for America."

MR. MURPHY: Right.

MR. CARVILLE: I, I--again, I, I do know that--what it was in 1992. I can't attest other...

Bottomline: if she doesn't win big on Tuesday she won't win the nomination:

MR. RUSSERT: All right, let me show you, though, there's a map, and this is a map of the remaining 12 states, 611 delegates starting with this Saturday--next Saturday be Wyoming and in Mississippi, our calculation is, even if Senator Clinton wins Ohio and Texas say 52-48, she'd have to win 70 percent of the vote in each of those states in order to get enough delegates to surpass Obama among selected delegates. If she didn't, James Carville, I understand--I'm hearing you, that even if she was behind amongst elected delegates...

MR. CARVILLE: Right.

MR. RUSSERT: ...she could say "I finished strong.

MR. CARVILLE: Yeah. Of course.

MR. RUSSERT: I won Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania, I should be the nominee."

MR. CARVILLE: And, and, and we're also forgetting they have to do something about Florida and Michigan. Now, you can say we, we discount the, the previous election, they have to go to like what they call a firehouse caucus or something. But part of her calculation would be that she's showing strength...

MR. SHRUM: Right.

MR. CARVILLE: ...and then she does--you got to put the--they're not going to not seat something from Florida and Michigan. It may not be based on the previous...

MR. RUSSERT: But what you're saying is that she would go to a convention and say, "I did not win elected delegates, I did not win as many states, primaries, caucuses as Obama, I did not win as much popular vote, but I should be the nominee because you should seat Michigan and Florida."

MR. CARVILLE: Well, well, well, we may not--wait, I mean, look...

MR. RUSSERT: What would happen inside that convention?

MR. CARVILLE: Well, first of all, I'd say now many Idahos does it take to count as California? I mean, come on, that's a little bit of a...

MS. MATALIN: Wait...

MR. SHRUM: That would be...

MR. CARVILLE: But it would be...

MR. MURPHY: That's the beauty of it.

MR. SHRUM: Someone from the Clinton campaign is a fraud.

MR. CARVILLE: What...

MR. SHRUM: Barack Obama is going to carry California if he's the nominee, he's going to carry New York, he's going to carry New Jersey.

MS. MATALIN: I...

MR. SHRUM:

That's not the issue. The issue here--the issue here is you cannot go into this convention and not have some moral claim to this nomination.

MS. MATALIN: I...

I think she can acquire one in the next few weeks, but she's got to acquire it by winning these two states, then winning Pennsylvania, and doing better.

MS. MATALIN: I agree.

MR. SHRUM: But she cannot in the end, "By the way, nominate me by giving me the delegates out of the Soviet-style primary in Michigan where we only had one person's name on the ballot."