I know this isn't much of a diary, but this is what we're dealing with and it needs to be called out and put in peoples faces as much as possible.  Read the entire thing and spread it around.

Excerpt & link below:

...HE probably thought that the left would be sophisticated enough to realize that he is an African American man with an Arab name trying to get a predominantly White European ancestried country to elect him to the highest office in the land, THE LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD (or what's left of it), and that no matter how good it looks right now, he WILL BE THE UNDERDOG until the moment he's sitting in the oval office...

on how much Obama caters to the left?  I have been dismayed at how quickly so many of us are to pronounce our disgust with our nominee.  It's as if he has no other obligation but to satisfy our netroots community and damn the consequences among the greater electorate that is not in any way as informed on the issues as most of us are.  

This latest dust up over Gen. Clark is amazing to me.  Does anyone realize that to the vast majority of the country, it will appear that the guy who never served is criticizing the service of the guy who did and nearly died doing so?  The nuance of arguing that he's not criticizing his service, just whether that qualifies him to be CIC will never penetrate the megaphone of the MSM who ALWAYS have the Republican candidate's back.  

In 2004, a few days before the election, Osama bin Laden released a videotape in which he basically endorsed John Kerry.  Now, obviously, those of us paying attention realized that GWB was the best thing that ever happened to Al Queda, and that they knew by saying they wanted Kerry to win, a certain number of uninformed voters would be influenced to vote for the candidate NOT endorsed by the perpertrators of 9-11.

Who knows how many thousands of votes that well-timed 'surprise' cost Kerry? Perhaps enough to have made the difference in a couple of swing states?  Throw in the BlackBox voting and it's entirely possible.

Continued below:

Apparently John McCain has some empathy with Michelle Obama.  Either that or he just inexplicably decided to give the Obama campaign a lifeline on the one line of attack that they've been able to get traction with on Michelle, and thru her, her husband re: 'patriotism'.

And, it happened all because some a**hole was trying to take a shot at Mrs. Obama at a McCain townhall and 'grampa' didn't get it.  Serve's 'em both right.

I wonder if this will make all the network evening newscasts and be on an all day loop on the cable channels?  Yea...I won't hold my breath either.

.........................................................

From Huffington Post and Politco.com:

So a man finally got a question into McCain and he had a very different sort of question. The questioner noted that he had been educated at Princeton and Harvard and made more than $300,000 a year. "How can I be proud of my country?" he asked....

"I'll admit to you that it's tough, it's tough in some respects," McCain said, seeming to lend credence to Michelle Obama's observation. McCain said America needed to be "more humble, more inclusive."

In her ongoing effort to further divide the party, this time White women against Blacks, Hillary has taken to arguing that she is the victim of rampant sexism and mysogyny and, according to her, its a much worse problem than racism.  So people should pity her, of course, because she's has a much harder struggle winning this contest because of her gender than Obama does because of his race.  She's not losing because she mispent her money early on and failed to plan for post-Super Tuesday contests.  Oh no, its because of those mean boys in the media who just won't give her a fair shake.  Never mind that the media has propped up her candidacy for the last 3 months on the lie that she could still win, even though anyone who could count (and was honest) knew it was over in February.

see excerpt below:

In an effort to pit White women against Blacks, Hillary has taken to arguing that she is the victim of rampant sexism and mysogyny and, according to her, its a much worse problem than racism.  So people should pity her, of course, because she's has a much harder struggle winning this contest because of her gender than Obama does because of his race.  She's not losing because she mispent her money early on and failed to plan for post-Super Tuesday contests.  Oh no, its because of those mean boys in the media who just won't give her a fair shake.  Never mind that the media has propped up her candidacy for the last 3 months on the lie that she could still win, even though anyone who could count (and was honest) knew it was over in February.

see excerpt below:

politico article link

excerpt:

"Why, ask many Democrats and media commentators, won’t Hillary Rodham Clinton see the long odds against her, put her own ambitions aside, and gracefully embrace Barack Obama as the inevitable Democratic nominee?

Here is why: She and Bill Clinton both devoutly believe that Obama’s likely victory is a disaster-in-waiting. Naïve Democrats just don’t see it. And a timid, pro-Obama press corps, in their view, won’t tell the story.

But Hillary Clinton won’t tell it, either.

A lot of coverage of the Clinton campaign supposes them to be in kitchen-sink mode—hurling every pot and pan, no matter the damage this might do to Obama as the likely Democratic nominee in the fall."

Can you imagine being the vice president in a White House with not one, but TWO, President Clintons?  Talk about marginalized.  Hillary doesn't need or want a runnning mate, she already has one. They just want Obama to tote their baggage to the WH for them.  They will do to him what the Bushes did to Colin Powell...use him to do their dirty work(i.e., force him to clean up the mess they are making in the party by accepting VP if they manage to steal it)...then, if, God help him, they actually win in November, they will spend their the next 4 years using the space between his shoulder blades for target practice.  

Shortly after Obama announced he was running for president, I remember him giving a short speech where he exorted the crowd by saying "if I can get a million people...I will be your next president".  At the time, I thought, he's gonna need a lot more that a million people.  However, I think I can see what he may have been envisioning.

As of today, approximately 934,000 people have donated to his campaign and they are aiming for 1 million in the next few weeks.  In 2004, according to Wikipedia, approximately 121 million people voted in the general election.  

link

If each of the approximately 1 million donors to Barack Obama's campaign can reach out to 100-150 new people, is it not possible he could get that many votes in the general election by himself?

It seems that the presumption of Republican tilt among the military is just one of many strongholds that conservatives can no longer count on thanks to George Bush.  It seems the blinders may finally be starting to fall from their eyes when it comes to who really has their back.  According to the article below, Ron Paul, libertarian, comes in second among presidential candidates receiving campaign contributions from people who work for the four branches of the military and National Guard, and none other than Barack Hussein Obama is leading among these same soldiers. It seems that not only do they want to support candidates they believe will end this war, but, they want to give their hard-earned, limited resources to candidates who DID NOT play a role in putting them in the godawful situation they're in. This is going to be on hell of an election year for Democrats.  If we can just make sure the bleeping votes get counted!

Greenwald expresses what I have been thinking but unable to coherently put into words about the "lack of substance" meme being tossed at Obama. Very few people are going to cast a vote based of the specifics of this candidate's vs. that candidate's plan for health care or anything else. They obviouslyy will prefer that you have one, but the vast majority won't know jack about it and that will not be what's going through their heads when they pull the lever in the voting booth. Greenwald's analysis is right on the money and the whole thing is worth the read, IMO.

Excerpt and link after the jump:

There still seems to be an effort to try to use Barack Obama's church in Chicago against him somehow.  A number of stories keep popping up in the MSM rehashing the same old stuff.  I guess they figure if he's still getting these huge and diverse crowds, they haven't repeated it enough times to convince people that he's a racist and who goes to a 'kill whitey' type church.  However, here is a link to an audio clip from Chicago Public Radio that goes into a little more depth, including comments from Rev. Wright, Obama's pastor who he supposedly dissed, on how he feels things went down:

http://chicagopublicradio.org/...

http://audio.wbez.org/...

..they are trying to do a Rove and attack their opponent's strong point, but by drawing attention to it, it only makes Obama look better and they look desperate and petty...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Clinton, Obama Camps Spar on War
By Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, March 20, 2007; Page A06

CAMBRIDGE, Mass., March 19 -- A brewing argument over Iraq between the presidential campaigns of Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama broke into public view here Monday night when Clinton's chief strategist challenged Obama's credentials as a consistent opponent of the war.

I thought this was pretty darn interesting.  Of all the candidates they could be supporting (with much more 'experience', no less), they pick Barry...kinda makes you go hmmmm...

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/...

Obama’s Boldface Donors
By Jeff Zeleny

(excerpt)
The roster included two of the event’s hosts: William Kennard and Reed Hundt, both of whom were appointed to the Federal Communications Commission, by President Bill Clinton. And Julius Genachowski¸ a counsel to both men (who just happened to be a classmate of Mr. Obama’s at Harvard Law School).

It seems as if the supposed 'rift' between Obama and Rev. Wright may have been overstated or blown out of proportion.  At any rate, he still seem to be very supportive of him even if he has doubts he can win.

http://www.spiegel.de/...

SPIEGEL: Barack Obama has been criticized as a so-called "post-racial politician" who shies away from those interests traditionally important to black voters in the United States...

Wright: I think that criticism is unjustified. It's a cute term, but he shouldn't be criticized for who he is -- a person who doesn't "play the race card," but who instead talks about the issues. Look at it this way. Nobody wants their wives to live in fear of getting from the house to the grocery store or to her job. Whether they're black wives or white wives isn't the issue. I don't care what color they are. The bullets don't discriminate. We've got to do something to make sure they have a safe environment. Now to call that post-racial is unfair. We've got some common needs that we need to address. How do we put policies in place that will ensure their safety in the future? That's the kind of politician Barack is.

(cont. below)

If Congress actually defunded this war, what happens then?  In Iraq, on the ground, what happens?  We know that Bush and Cheney DO NOT GIVE A DAMN about these soldiers.  That has been proven time and time again.  Every decision related to this war has been about politics and privatization.  The troops are barely an after thought.  What happens when these sociopaths are faced with no more money for their Haliburton stock enrichment program?  Are they going to do the right thing and order the military to redeploy and head home?  Does anyone really believe that? Whatever catastrophe befalls these soldiers in Iraq will be blamed on the Democrats. Then what?

Isn't it ironic that the first 60's era feminist with a chance to win the presidency has to cling to her husbands coattails to do it...just sayin'...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

At Site of '65 March, an '08 Collision
Sunday's Selma Event to Be a Stage for Obama -- and Clinton(s)
By Anne E. Kornblut
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 2, 2007; Page A01

Bill Clinton will join Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton at a commemoration of the 1965 civil rights march in Selma, Ala., on Sunday, bringing his star power and popularity among African Americans to a weekend of events that had been shaping up as a showcase for the candidacy of Sen. Barack Obama.

It will be the former president's first major public appearance with his wife since she launched her campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination last month.

continued below: