In the Newsweek opinion column linked above, Kos claims that he and the (not fully counted) superdelegates were all wowed by Obama's able handling of the Wright controversy.

This impressive feat is enough to make Kos mentally, and firmly, place these superdelegates in Obama's Win column.

[W]ith nary a serious general-election battle against a Republican on his résumé, he needed to prove his mettle in hand-to-hand political combat. His able handling of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright revelations didn't just prove his deft political skills to worried supporters like me and superdelegates. It allowed him to address a potentially explosive issue well before November (though it's a relationship the GOP is sure to exploit).

No matter how you define victory, Barack Obama holds an insurmountable lead in the race to earn the Democratic nomination. [...]

One has to wonder if Obama has already won, why he hasn't, you know, WON-won. Funny story, true story ... it turns out Obama actually hasn't actually won yet.

Apparently there's mischief afoot to "steal" these superdelegates that Kos has officially decreed as belonging to Obama!

Still, Obama's advantages aren't large enough to allow him an outright victory. He needs the 20 percent of party delegates who aren't bound to a candidate. It's with these superdelegates that Clinton has staked her ephemeral chances.

Clinton's near-lone chance of victory rests with a coup by superdelegate, persuading enough of them to overcome the primary voters' preference. Yet a coup by elite Democrats would be ill-received, to put it mildly. Obama's base spans the party's most loyal and engaged constituencies: African-Americans, professionals who generate hundreds of millions in small-dollar donations and a conventional-wisdom-defying outpouring of youth support.

So if these superdelegates that "belong" to Obama actually do vote for Obama -- outside of Kos's head, that is -- it's democracy allied to the power of charisma in action.

But if those same superdelegates vote for Sen. Clinton even after a force so powerful as a Kos opinion column virtually guarantee them as insurmountably Obama's, it'sbecause she fiendishly persuaded them.

This is apparently deeply unfair as compared to whatever it is that Obama did, clean and honest, in front of God and everything.

It's a coup. Okay, just trying to keep this damn scorecard tidy and legible.

Now there's a scary read.

What I learned was is to get the hell out of the Republican Party.

The reality is, I'd be foolish to think the Democrats didn't have a play book of their own.

Nevertheless, this I think is for certain: Jeremiah Wright will be the elephant in the Democrats room.

But so will Obama's speech on race which, heretofore, has been praised as brilliant.

Republicans will find a way to make it not so.

Because Obama said, in effect -- and Republicans will capitalize on this for certain -- black Americans wear a "mask" when mixing with whites, and remove that mask when in their barbershops, church pews, and among their own.

This is the weak spot in Obama's speech that will prove devastating if Obama is the nominee.

THE MASK OF OBAMA will be the Republican battle cry, with "he says one thing to win your vote, but...." as their tag line, and "God damn America" mixed in.

Even if John McCain doesn't use it, some independent strongarmer will.

Obama's loyalty to Wright will be marketed as proof that he'll put his loyalty to "extremists" before he'll put the good of his own country and campaign.

And then there's Rezko.They won't let sleeping dogs lie. Especially when the sleeping dogs are lying. This is a ticking bomb waiting to explode at just the right moment.

markos is proving himself to not be the brightest bulb in the box daily.

anyone who truly thinks that all this is going to "go away" in nov. has just got to be on some really powerful hallucinagens. not only are all these issues not leaving (should sen. obama be the eventual dem. nominee), they'll be back with a blast. can you say "527" boys & girls? i knew that you could!

by the time the republican/right-wingnut smear machine gets done with sen. obama, his grandmother (remember her, the one he tossed under a bus in that "brilliant" race speech?) won't vote for him. he'll be lucky to not get arrested for treason.

One speech.  I'm sorry, but I have read it and re-read it, and listened to it - and I don't think he really answered anything, don't think he provided leadership on the issue, and find it insulting and disingenuous that his approach in the days since has been one of having put a check mark next to "race speech" and now just wants to move on.

Obama is still gearing his strategy toward just winning the nomination, and has failed, in my opinion, to look at what lies ahead in November.  Yes, I know he cannot get to the general unless he wins the nomination, but he's treating the nomination as the end of the race instead of the beginning of the hardest part of it.  Conquering Hillary will seem like getting over a speed bump only to be faced with a mountain - and if he thinks McCain is going to be easy to beat, he hasn't been paying attention to the way Republicans conduct campaigns.

"More fundamental will be the question of the discrepancy between the image of Obama the uniter and the reality of Obama the liberal. That hasn't been much of a problem for Obama in the Democratic contest, since Clinton hasn't attacked from the right or even the center.

However, addressing your point about Carter, I would suggest you go back and read what I wrote, which in no way made an assumption that Carter would not endorse Obama - just the opposite, in fact.  I clearly stated that Carter mentioned that his entire family is supporting him, and that while Carter made no official endorsement, he invited the media to guess who he would be endorsing.

My objection was to Harley throwing in Carter's name as having endorsed Obama when, as far as I know, Carter has not made that official.

But I think it's very clear that if Obama gets the nomination, he will lose the general.

Media darling or not, his support is soft.  And he can't win where he needs to.

And even clearer is the proggy blogosphere will blame his loss on Clinton, and be even more violently opposed to her if she runs again in 2012.

The only good that can possibly come out of this scenario is sensible Dems will abandon the proggy blogs, and the bizarre wing of the party they represent.

It's past time Democrats started standing up to the right and meeting them on our own terms.

Without even taking Wright into the equation, Obama is still toast. Wait until the GOP starts in on the "27 bills in Illinois" that Obama claims to have gotten through almost on his own. Wait until the country as a whole hears, over and over again, how his mentor stuck his name on them and he didn't do any of the work. Yes, Obama says, over and over, that they couldn't have been passed without him, but those are just words, not proof. His former colleagues can simply point out that the Dems have a majority and the bills would have passed without Obama.

His former constituents in low income housing will be front and center, along with Tony Rezko and his shoddy housing projects that deprived Obama's constituents of a decent place to live. And the fact that the housing, and the constituents, were a mile from Obama's home and he never bothered to walk or drive down to see if his good buddy had provided decent housing, will also be front and center. And Obama's protestations that he "didn't know" about Rezko or the housing will be met by "Why didn't he know?? IT WAS HIS JOB TO KNOW!!" Obama's hyper-inflated record is what is going to bring him down, even if no one ever mentions Wright again.

And as a final nail in the coffin, you can be sure that the GOP will also be quoting the letter that his Kenyan grandfather sent his white grandparents before his mother married his father. You remember hearing about that letter, right? The one where his Kenyan grandfather says he doesn't want the Obama blood "sullied by a white woman". That may be forgiven in Chicago, but not in the rest of the country. Obama may not agree with that statement, but he will have to defend it or explain it. That will be a speech to watch..LOL

so, the "considered, thoughtful opinion" is that sen. obama, having virtually no resume', and no history of fending off the republican/right-wingnut smear machine, is now perfectly positioned to do so in nov?

on the other hand, sen. clinton, having dealt successfully with this same republican/right-wingnut smear machine for 16 years, with a good 30-35 years experience under her belt in both public & private sectors, is deemed less able to fend off the repubs in the fall?

the arrogance is................breathtaking in its magnitude. i sit in awe.

as far as recent polls are concerned, i believe jeralyn posted one the other day, showing obama on a downward slide, vis a vis clinton & mccain. you might have to go back a few threads to find it.

The reason we keep loosing is because we refuse to stand on our principles. Because we'll jetison a friend at the first sign of controversy.

You mean a "friend" who calls out "God Damn America", and from the pulpit, no less? A "friend" who takes satisfaction in the events of 9/11 only days after it takes place, mocking it as "chickens coming home to roost", replete with amusing hand gestures? A "friend" who claims that our "white government" has invented AIDS to infect the black population?

By all means, let's not throw that wonderful friend under any bus, because, God knows, there's nothing in those beliefs that should offend us, or offend anyone -- by all means, let's have our own credibility and reputation depend on being our going to the barricades to defend such a "friend".

You know, I keep observing that there was a time, not so many months ago, when liberals were deeply offended that anyone might think that there's anything about our cause that might suggest we love our country any less than anyone else, and that the notion that we in any way "hated America" was ridiculous and disgusting. Indeed I remember when it was a joke we told among ourselves about how "__ hates America" -- as in "the military hates America". How often have we heard that joke of late? Isn't it rather telling that we haven't? No -- instead we are defending people who pretty obviously detest America, if their own words are to be taken seriously.

And now, if we don't come to the defense of a candidate with this nasty baggage, there's something wrong with us?

You and other Obama supporters who defend Wright are the absolutely worst thing that has happened to the Democratic brand in decades. All the work that Democrats have done to try to undo the negative public perception of our party will be thrown down the garbage chute just to defend the indefensible because your candidate happens to have exposure on those issues.

1.  Do not go to Memphis on the 40th anniversary of MLK assassination.
   
2.  Do not go to New Orleans for the Black State of the Union.
   
3.  Do not give interviews to gay papers or take pics with SF mayor.
   
4.  Give speeches but when they go to Senate, do nothing.
   
5.  Answer 8 questions and whine.
   
6.  Are afraid of being compared to Jessie Jackson.
   
7.  Praise Reagan and show disdain for the Dem Values.
   
8.  Come out with a weak healthcare agenda.  
   
9.  Characterize the struggles of the 60'and 70's as excesses.
   
10.  Do not stand up for the community they represent when a slumlord who gives them money rips the community off.
    
11.  Finally, spineless dems keep asking their opponent to drop out cause they are tired of a hard job.  

You decry a lack of guts among Democrats, but expect to browbeat us into supporting your candidate by calling us gutless?

I'm sure you see the paradox there.

Yes, I want a fighter and I found one in Sen. Clinton. Taking my cue from her, I will continue to fight on behalf of her candidacy regardles of the namecalling and attempts to smear my character.

And BTW, I did stick up for Sen. Obama's support of Rev. Wright. I've also defended Rev. Wright where I thought he was being unfairly attacked.

Say one thing to the public then have their officials creating an alternate plan.  

Axelrod?  Mr. Astro Turf, false grass roots campaign king.  

Oh, yes, the real dem gave a speech but did not lead an anti war movement, but then took the speech down.  

That doesn't mean the GOP or some 527 won't Swift Boat this in the general.  They probably will.  The question is whether they are any more successful at reducing Obama's electibility.  If nothing else, it will  be old news.  And they will have to do more than simply rouse the usual GOP base.  They'll need to use this to cut into Obama's indie and Dem support.  I'm simply not convinced it will work.

And remember, this will start a larger conversation about race, as it did in March.  We've already seen how Obama handles that conversation.  And whether you agree or not, the Media raced to anoint that response not just as successful, but as one of the Best Speeches On Race Ever Given.

John McCain doesn't want to talk about this.  He wants to talk about his experience and his strength.  The Detour will seem fruitful to the Haters, and it will not doubt resonate with some, but I don't see the kind of impact that Ickes is no doubt trying to sell to Supers at the moment.

And one more thing.  The bottom line is pretty simple.  Does the Wright scandal make Obama's negatives higher than Senator Clinton's?  Which candidate is more likely to turbo-charge opposition in the GOP base?

speaking of 527s Kos is head of Obama's therefore I can't put much into his  'ópinions'. And he's w often wrong.

Margaruite Q.:

[THE MASK OF OBAMA will be the Republican battle cry, with "he says one thing to win your vote, but...." as their tag line, and "God damn America" mixed in ]

**********

It is the pink elephant in the room, but Clinton supporters fearful of being called racists and Obama supporters that are simply delusional, continue to act as if Obama's largest liability simply does not exist: Obama is associated with Louis Farrakhan and his organization, which has been defined by the Southern Povertly Law Center, Anti-Defamation League and other organizations as a hate group.

To futher complicate the matter, Obama has not dealt adequately dealt with his association with Farrakhan like he did with Wright. Yes, he "denounced and rejected" Farrakhan's statements, but he's never condemned the man or the organization that he leads. Like Wright, he is always careful to condemn individual statements or categorically condemn offensive statements regarding specific topics, but never the overall man.

In addition, he has a double standard. He told the "The View" that he would have left his church if Rev. Wright had not changed. But why doesn't he leave the church over their continued collaboration and promotion of Farrakhan? Has he given them the same hypothetical ultimatum that he would have given Wright? Why not?

It's also a reason why the threats of unhappy Obamans ripping up Denver at the convention are such unwise words, reminding many voters of the 1968 convention in Chicago.  

They knew nothing of the "Bill Clinton did us like he did Monica" or "Hillary doesn't know what it's like to live in a world controlled by rich, white people."

Why?

The Wright affair.

She's voting down ticket, but not for president.

If they waited it would lose it's effect, because it would have been "Obama's former pastor."  But now that they have set the foundation, they are holding back some videos for the fall campaign.

that said, i will not be shocked should sen. obama be defeated in a landslide. i don't expect  sen. clinton or sen. obama to be either's VP on a dem. ticket, it wouldn't work.

those of you who are hard core obama supporters should give serious thought to procuring a bottle of good whiskey, in the event that he's the dem. nominee, you'll need a stiff drink to help recover from the fall.

to those of you who contend that we clinton supporters aren't "standing up" to the republican/right-wingnut smear machine: you miss the point, it's a waste of scarce allocable resources. sen. clinton's been there, done that for 16 years. she can do so with an efficiency that sen. obama can't match.

And then there's Hillary's enthusiasm for Mick Jagger and the Rolling Stones.  The lyrics for their great song, Stray Cat Blues:

I hear the click-clack of your feet on the stairs
I know you're no scare-eyed honey.
There'll be a feast if you just come upstairs
But it's no hanging matter
It's no capital crime

I can see that you're fifteen years old
No I don't want your I.D.
I can see you're so far from home
But it's no hanging matter
It's no capital crime

Oh yeah, you're a strange stray cat
Oh yeah, don'tcha scratch like that
Oh yeah, you're a strange stray cat
Bet your mama don't know you scream like that
I bet your mother don't know you can spit like that.

Can you just imagine what the Republicans will do with something like that:  Hillary loves pedophile crooner.  It's a time bomb just waiting to blow on her.