On the Constitution, you’re referring to Hillary Clinton, yes? Because Obama has mentioned the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, many times over, particularly in the context of warrantless wiretaps and signing statements.

Hillary Clinton cannot claim the popular vote and be taken seriously, simply because of the caucus states and her specious claim that Michigan uncommitted votes should not go to Obama. It was publicly known that the Michigan voters for Obama encouraged and even mounted a calling campaign to encourage Obama voters to vote “uncommitted” in case there was an effort to seat their delegation.

Your suggestion of her becoming a Lieberman chills me, and at the same time, concerns me because it could happen, if she figured out how to retire her debt.

Thanks for your comment!

A couple of thoughts that might be worth considering.

On Wednesday, I heard Rachel Maddow on Air America assert that there was a circumstance under which HRC would be able to claim the popular vote, force (?) the inclusion of Florida and Michigan, and become the nominee. The only way Obama can stop her, said Maddow, is to obtain commitments from a certain number of superdelegates.

My specifics are lousy. I want mostly to convey that smart people who understand the whole thing believe she can do it. Of course, I am appalled.

The other notion I have is this: Hillary may decide to copy Lieberman and run as an Independent. She would no doubt receive enough votes to ensure McCain wins. Of course, I am appalled.

I used to be impressed by her doggedness, but it didn’t take long to notice what drives her. It is not her commitment to her country’s well being. Her commitments lie elsewhere, and they all begin with the letter “I.”

Oh, and I wish somebody who wants to be president would now and then mention the Constitution. It would help me sleep better.

I think that probably overstates it, though it is sometimes difficult to discern the difference between the moderate GOP and the conservative Democrats. I think she was working toward gaining appeal with the conservative voters in KY and WV when she did the O’Reilly interview. As to his fawning, that seems more likely to be the desire on the part of the GOP to have Hillary Clinton as their candidate.

Before yesterday, I would have assumed that her tactics were intended to be a play for the VP slot. Now I just think she’s bent on causing as much destruction as possible for the reason that Jeff suggests: 2012.

I believe she will do what she can to help Obama fail in order to position herself for 2012. I also believe she’ll fail.

sphynx,

Your comment, particularly your comment about feeling used by Clinton gives me hope that the newest effort of Clinton’s to destroy a good man for her own gain will fail. Let’s hope they fail without pulling the party along.

Case in point – did you see the interview BillO had with Hillary? He was positively fawning over her. Asking these pseudo-tough questions that were artfully designed to allow her to shine, thereby giving her a great introduction to her future supporters.

alright i’m probably paranoid, over-reacting, and being snarky. but if i hear that woman comparing her manipulative, dishonest, sneaky political strategy to the civil rights movement one more time my head WILL explode.

The only people who are pushing for Michigan/Florida inclusion are hard-core Hillary supporters, because it’s the only chance she has left. As a Floridian, it disgusts me that she is using me like that. As a Floridian, nothing made me convert to OBama faster than her trying to get my delegate vote without using the proper channels to get it.

Look up the term ‘pugnacious’. You’ll see that it refers to personality, not dogs, though the word was likely derived from the character of a pug.

And Jeff, it’s no surprise that she’s angling for 2012. The problem is that she’s positioned herself as a complete liar and cheat. You think that’s going to play well in 2012? Why? Do liars have vintage years? After the last 8 years of lying, cheating, Bush and Cheney, I’m not likely to exchange them for more lies.

Unlike many pundits, I think putting her on the ticket as VP would require Obama to don a bulletproof jacket whenever he was within 50 feet of her. She is a megalomaniacal woman, drunk on her own delusion of power.

She has a choice and many options right now. The only question is how far she will go and how low she will stoop to squander them.

I was a supporter of hers once. No longer. Her lie after lie after lie after lie to people who deserve better than that convinced me.

That, and the “obliterate Iran” statement, which sounded like a Republican in Democrat’s clothing.

Mostly though, it was the incessant lies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUyce6224Mk

That’s right. Be immature, sulk, and see what it gets you. Better to do it right than do it soon.