We have been discussing the GE strategies of both the candidates. The poll numbers and policy positions are a matter of daily discussion. Is there a possibility that either of the candidates could lose their party nominations?

Could this happen if their poll numbers tank? What about a scandal? I do not believe it ever happened before. I do not believe either party would drop their nominee because they have reached a point of no return. Do you agree?

Any physical harm to the candidates is totally out of the Mix. Don't even go there!

The last time I checked Sen. Obama has the nomination locked up due to his superior Caucus strategy but you Hillary supporters should be congratulated for your correct assessment of the so called Obama Phenomenon.  Now you can have the last laugh. The position of POTUS is above all very political position and Sen. Obama the master politician fits it very well. I love the way he maneuvered the Kossacks.

We all can celebrate the second coming of Bill Clinton. Hopefully without his self destructive tendencies. When Sen. Obama talks about change he is really talking about change at the speed of light change like Shapeshifter. I expect him to be a superior politician than Bill. I would call his policy changes (flip flops) as post primary adjustments. He had no choice but assume those positions to fool the primary voters. If elected he would be a great president because we would see a very pragmatic Obama who has absolutely no beliefs.

Here is a prediction: The main purpose of his visit to Iraq is to adjust his position on Iraq. He plans to have a meeting with General Petraeus after which he would announce a change in his position about the withdrawal of troops due realities on the ground.

I decided not to document Sen. Obama's change in positions because I do not want to provide any ammunition to McCain campaign. That is the usual accusation made by "YAWN" and "Why don't you post on Redstate.org".

Enough already you Effing Obambots get lost! BTW I am not talking about Obama supporters. I am specifically talking about Obambots that oppose dissent and act like the Taliban's "moral police". They come out of wood work calling every one that disagrees with them "racists", "dead enders" and "Trolls". Haven't we had enough of Republican Taliban? Obambots seem to think that dissent of any kind is not acceptable. As a good Democrat I would do the right thing by Obama in November but if you think I would kiss his ass and express no dissent you may as well forget it.

It is a fact that Sen. Obama has flip flopped on NAFTA, withdrawal of troops from Iraq and Campaign finance. Sen. McCain has flip flopped on many more issues. The bottom line is I support Obama because he happens to be our SOB and not theirs. End of story. I do not need to rewrite Obama's biography every time I support him.

Life is too short to hold grudges.

After Hillary's concession speech I have been with Sen. O but I find some of his action really puzzling.

During the primary campaign Sen. Obama was solidly opposing NAFTA and was all for renegotiation. He was totally silent about it yesterday when he talked to CNBC. Now we find out that he has appointed a NAFTA cheerleader to be the top economic advisor for his campaign. According to LA Times:

Labor union officials and some liberal activists were seething Tuesday over Barack Obama's choice of centrist economist Jason Furman as the top economic advisor for the campaign. The critics say Furman, who was appointed to the post Monday, has overstated the potential benefits of globalization, Social Security private accounts and the low prices offered by Wal-Mart -- considered a corporate pariah by the labor movement.

Officials from several labor organizations phoned the Obama campaign to complain about the appointment and circulated e-mail messages containing quotes from some of Furman's work. Campaign officials responded that some of the quotes were inaccurate or out of context. They expressed confidence in Furman's abilities and said that Obama would be listening to an array of advisors.

So who is Sen. Obama? Is he the same person that castigated Sen. Clinton as a corporate Shill?

Don't blame me; I am just a new supporter trying to figure out who he really is!

Sen. Obama and his surrogates criticized Hillary for her vote on Iranian revolutionary guards. However he just about did an about face at AIPAC. In his own words:

My presidency will strengthen our hand as we restore our standing. Our willingness to pursue diplomacy will make it easier to mobilize others to join our cause. If Iran fails to change course when presented with this choice by the United States, it will be clear - to the people of Iran, and to the world - that the Iranian regime is the author of its own isolation. That will strengthen our hand with Russia and China as we insist on stronger sanctions in the Security Council. And we should work with Europe, Japan and the Gulf states to find every avenue outside the UN to isolate the Iranian regime - from cutting off loan guarantees and expanding financial sanctions, to banning the export of refined petroleum to Iran, to boycotting firms associated with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, whose Quds force has rightly been labeled a terrorist organization.

He also surprised me with his Jim Johnson appointment. I take Sen. Obama at his word that he is a change candidate. Jim Johnson is a relic from the past going all the way back to Mondale campaign. According to Craig Crawford:

Not only is Johnson a big-business Democrat with icky ties to even ickier businesses, like mortgage lending firms in trouble. But the longtime party insider is also firmly entrenched with Democratic losers going back to Walter Mondale, whose pathetic 1984 presidential campaign was run by Johnson.

If Obama is about a break with the past, he could find no one more counter-intuitive than Johnson. Already, Johnson is under fire for his own sweetheart loans. More than likely Obama will eventually come under intense pressure to dump his VP Vetter.

http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/trailmix/

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la- na-furman11-2008jun11,0,2347842.story

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/article s/2008/06/obamas_remarks_at_aipac_policy .html

The primary campaign has come to an end with Hillary's speech past Saturday. Our leader Hillary Clinton has told us that the time has come for the "two paths" to merge and support our party nominee Sen. Barack Obama. I agree with her.

For Hillary Clinton supporters one part of our struggle has just started. The media misogyny and bias against Hillary has been nothing short of savage and it continues even to this day under the guise of "Anatomy of Hillary's failure". Their snarky attitudes, their veiled bashing continues.

Hillary Clinton supporters on various websites are coming together and we plan to target MSNBC and their biased anchors. We plan to talk to various advertisers on MSNBC and organize boycotts. We plan to target other networks and their media personalities as well that have exhibited similar misogynist attitudes.

Here is a sample of how Hillary has been treated this primary season. Their behavior will not be swept under the rug:

Initially I thought it was good idea if she chooses to campaign but further analysis proves beyond doubt that it is a bad idea. Here is why:

I believe that it is a great idea for Sen. Clinton to endorse Sen. Obama but if she campaigns for him it would totally undercut the credibility of Hillary, Bill and Barack. We live in a youtube age where every thing is so visual. Many of the people that would be voting in the GE are not people who would understand all the nuances of this primary campaign. There are videos floating around youtube that Republicans could use very effectively when ever the Clintons campaigns for Sen. Obama.

Hillary Clinton told reporters that both she and the presumptive Republican nominee John McCain offer the experience to be ready to tackle any crisis facing the country under their watch, but Barack Obama simply offers more rhetoric. "I think you'll be able to imagine many things Senator McCain will be able to say," she said. "He's never been the president, but he will put forth his lifetime of experience. I will put forth my lifetime of experience. Senator Obama will put forth a speech he made in 2002." Clinton was referring to Obama's anti-war speech he delivered in Chicago before entering the United States Senate.

Sen. Obama stated many times that Hillary could not be trusted and lacks integrity so if Hillary campaigns for him it would undercut his image.

We may or may not readily admit it but the fact remains that the media has savaged Hillary during this primary season. When she campaigns do you really expect their knives would not come out?

Here is a press release from Hillary Clinton Campaign:

Clinton Not Seeking To Be Obama's VP Choice -Clinton Campaign

WASHINGTON (AFP)--Democrat Hillary Clinton is not seeking to be Barack Obama's choice for vice president, her campaign said Thursday.

"While Senator Clinton has made clear throughout this process that she will do whatever she can to elect a Democrat to the White House, she is not seeking the vice presidency, and no one speaks for her but her," the campaign said in a statement.

"The choice here is Senator Obama's and his alone," the statement said.

Obama clinched the Democratic nomination for president this week, and Clinton has said she'll formally bow out of the race Saturday.

The media totally blew out of propotion here earlier comments:

The senator's remarks came in response to a question from Democratic Rep. Nydia Velazquez who said she believed the best way for Obama to win over key voting blocs, including Hispanics, would be for him to choose Clinton as his running mate.

"I am open to it," Clinton replied, if it would help the party's prospects in November.