Blogging on Meds

Growing up in New England in the 80’s the biggest rivalry in sports was not Red Sox Yankees, as it is today. It was Lakers Celtics, and maybe even more so Bird Magic. One of my favorite stories from that period, is their first meeting in the NBA Finals in 1984. The Celtics were down 2 games to 1 and had just been humiliated by a score of 137-104. During the post game Bird made the following comments:

“We just played like a bunch of women tonight (sorry Hillary). You know we got some great players on this team, but we don’t have the players with the heart some time that we need.”

The next game Kevin McHale clotheslined Kurt Rambis and the rest is history. Celtics went on to win 4 -3.

I would be lying if I didn’t say that my love affair with the Celtics changed after the retirement of Bird and the death of Reggie Lewis. But today, the Celtics are back, and after all these years it is fitting that the Lakers are the team they must go through in order to hang banner 17.

From Dan Shaughnessy of the Boston Globe

Time to dust off the old Larry Bird/Magic Johnson posters. Thursday night on Causeway Street, the Celtics will host the same franchise they faced when they last advanced this far in 1987 - the Los Angeles Lakers. It’ll be the 11th Finals matchup between the Celtics and Lakers.

(Why not dust off a pic of my favorite Sega Genesis game as well)

Are the top-ranking Democratic leaders ready to break away from the spin that the Clinton argument is, “good for the party”?

From the NYTIMES 

 WASHINGTON - Hoping to bring the Democratic presidential nomination fight to an end, party leaders are intensifying their efforts to encourage remaining uncommitted superdelegates to make their choice public by the middle of next week.

In an interview Thursday on a San Francisco talk radio station, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, said he had spoken with Speaker Nancy Pelosi earlier in the day, and they had agreed to take steps to avoid a contest that extends into the convention in August.

“We are going to urge folks to make a decision quickly – next week,” said Mr. Reid on station KGO. He said he had also spoken with party chairman Howard Dean on Wednesday night. (Audio: Interview begins at 8:17)

Mr. Reid’s comments came after Ms. Pelosi told the editorial board of The San Francisco Chronicle on Wednesday that she would intercede in the contest if it were not concluded by the end of June to bring it to a close….Traveling in California to promote his new memoir, Mr. Reid also told an audience in Los Angeles that the nominee would be known by Wednesday. He told others that a sufficient number of superdelegates are prepared to put Senator Barack Obama over the top quickly after Tuesday’s voting is finished.

(Photos by James Flynn)

Obama started his speech with a message from Teddy, “”To all those praying for my return to good health, I offer my heartfelt thanks. And to any who’d rather have a different result, I say, don’t get your hopes up just yet!”

The remainder of Obama’s speech focused on creating what RFK called “Ripples of Hope” through service to ones country.

“At a time of war, we need you to work for peace. At a time of inequality, we need you to work for opportunity. At a time of so much cynicism and so much doubt, we need you to make us believe again,” Obama told the graduates. “That’s your task, Class of 2008.”

(The event was closed to the public but thousands packed the on-looking hill to watch the speech, to the right a women sitting next to us who was overcome by emotion as Obama talked about service to ones country and the legacy of the Kennedy family.)

From the Globe

 ”There’s no community service requirement in the outside world; no one forcing you to care. You can Take your diploma, walk off the stage and chase only after the big house and the nice suits and the other things our money culture says you should buy. You can choose to narrow your concerns and live life in a way that tries to keep your story separate from America’s, but I hope you don’t.”

Watch the speech:

The New Republic has this as “The Worst Campaign Ad of ’08 (So Far)”, but I think it is the best.

(* Unless superdelegates take the nomination away from him because of the color of his skin)

“Nominate me because I am white.” It has been Hillary Clinton’s strategy for awhile. She tried to let the crazy Rev. Wright clips do it for her. Now she is coming out and saying it.

“I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on,” she said in an interview with USA TODAY. As evidence, Clinton cited an Associated Press article “that found how Sen. Obama’s support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me.”

“There’s a pattern emerging here,” she said.

At the same time that Clinton tries to take the nomination away from him because of race, she uses civil rights as a reason to count the votes in Florida and Michigan.

“I will be sending a letter to Sen. Obama and [Democratic National Committee] Chairman [Howard] Dean expressing my strong belief that this issue about the voters in Florida and Michigan is a civil rights issue,” Clinton said. “And we need to stand up and say the Democratic Party is smart enough to figure out how make sure we don’t disenfranchise two states we have to win.”

Just when the media thinks they are out… the Clintons pull them back in.

Hillary doesn’t need to drop out of the race. She needs to focus on the issues. 

Much has been made about the comments from VT Sen. Patrick Leahy

There is no way that Sen. Clinton is going to win enough delegates to get the nomination,”… “She ought to withdraw, and she ought to be backing Sen. Obama. Now, obviously that’s a decision that only she can make. Frankly, I feel that she would have a tremendous career in the Senate.”

and to a lesser extent but maybe more eloquently by CT Sen Chris Dodd

Well, I think it is hurting. Look, we’ve got five more months to go before the Democratic convention at the end of August and, candidly, we cannot go five more months with the kind of daily sniping that’s going on and have a candidate emerge in that convention. My hope is that it will be Barack Obama, but if it’s Hillary Clinton, she too will suffer, in my view, from this kind of a campaign that I think is undermining the credibility and the quality of the two candidates that we have. We have two very strong candidates. So I’m worried about this going on endlessly and to a large extent, Linda, the media, a lot of these cable networks, are enjoying this. It’s what is keeping them alive financially. The fact that this thing is going on forever, back and forth every day, all night — I don’t think it’s really helping the candidates or the political institutions.

Obama had this to say today in University Park, PA

“I want everybody to understand that this has been a great contest, great for America. It’s engaged and involved people like never before. I think it’s terrific that Senator Clinton’s supporters have been as passionate as my supporters have been because that makes the people invested and engaged in this process, and I am absolutely confident that when this primary season is over, Democrats will be united.”

Bill Clinton said

We’re going to win this election if we just chill out and let everybody have their say”

and Hillary 

“I have no intention of stopping until we finish what we started and until we see what happens in the next 10 contests and until we resolve Florida and Michigan,” Clinton said in the Post interview. “And if we don’t resolve it, we’ll resolve it at the convention.”

Unfortunately a CT Senator with very little charisma has spoken the party line better then the rest. The media does not want to pick it up because it is not as good a story line.

Hillary dropping out is not what is needed.

What is needed is a debate about the issues.

Don’t let the TV media trick you into thinking this is about who is more christian, who came under more fire in Bosnia, whose husband had more extra marital affairs, or whose Reverend is the craziest.

The party message should not be drop out, but rather clean it up and talk about the issues.

(Edwards signing books on Sat 3/29 in N.C. - A.P./Sara D. Davis) 

Not sure how much endorsements matter with real voters but it sounds like they do to the almighty superdelegates. 

John Heilemann of New York Magazine has this to say about a possible Obama/Edwards rift: 

In the days after John Edwards’s withdrawal from the Democratic race, the political world expected his endorsement of Barack Obama would be forthcoming tout de suite. The neo-populist and the hopemonger had spent months tag-teaming Hillary Clinton, pillorying her as a creature of the status quo, not a champion of the kind of “big change” they both deem essential. So appalled was Edwards at Clinton’s gaudy corporatism—her defense of the role of lobbyists, her suckling at the teats of the pharmaceutical and defense industries—that he’d essentially called her corrupt. And then, not least, there were the sentiments of his wife. “Elizabeth hasn’t always been crazy about Mrs. Clinton” is how an Edwards insider puts it; a less delicate member of HRC’s circle says, “Elizabeth hates her guts.”

But now two months have passed since Edwards dropped out—tempus fugit!—and still no endorsement. Why? According to a Democratic strategist unaligned with any campaign but with knowledge of the situation gleaned from all three camps, the answer is simple: Obama blew it. Speaking to Edwards on the day he exited the race, Obama came across as glib and aloof. His response to Edwards’s imprecations that he make poverty a central part of his agenda was shallow, perfunctory, pat. Clinton, by contrast, engaged Edwards in a lengthy policy discussion. Her affect was solicitous and respectful. When Clinton met Edwards face-to-face in North Carolina ten days later, her approach continued to impress; she even made headway with Elizabeth. Whereas in his Edwards sit-down, Obama dug himself in deeper, getting into a fight with Elizabeth about health care, insisting that his plan is universal (a position she considers a crock), high-handedly criticizing Clinton’s plan (and by extension Edwards’s) for its insurance mandate.

Edward’s home state of North Carolina votes on May 6. Will Edwards endorse a candidate before that? If Hillary wins Penn big, does Edwards have the political guts to endorse her?

If she wins Penn, Indiana, and N.C. it sounds as if the media will once again anoint her as the front runner. So Edwards could still play a key role.

I find it comical, the position that Hillary Clinton supporters find themselves in at this moment.

It goes like this…“I hope enough people are duped into thinking that Obama is a racist that my girl wins”

Hillary has finally graced us with her opinion on the Wright controversy. This is from the Pittsburg Tribune Review

“He would not have been my pastor,” Clinton said. “You don’t choose your family, but you choose what church you want to attend.”

“You know, I spoke out against Don Imus (who was fired from his radio and television shows after making racially insensitive remarks), saying that hate speech was unacceptable in any setting, and I believe that,” Clinton said. “I just think you have to speak out against that. You certainly have to do that, if not explicitly, then implicitly by getting up and moving.”

Political pundits love to talk about politicians looking like “human beings”, well Hillary missed out on a major opportunity to look like a human being.

That is unless she truly believes that Obama shares the opinions of his pastor.

If not, why bring it up today? Why touch this stuff? How is this good for the Democrats? More importantly, how is this good for America?

Look Obama fucked up. I understand, the Clinton’s have never made friends with shady people for political gain, but at some point her people have to start thinking about November, right? Not doing so is like toppling Baghdad without a plan for the occupation.

Then, there are her comments on pledged delegates, from CNN

“And also remember that pledged delegates in most states are not pledged,” she told the editorial board of the Philadelphia Daily News Monday. “You know there is no requirement that anybody vote for anybody. They’re just like superdelegates.”

I can’t wait to hear someone stick up for that one. Please?

People have said that Obama is better off with Clinton right now then he would be against the GOP. This view ignores the fact that the Right is leading the march on this Wright stuff.

Check out these two segments from Sean Hannity’s March 8th show titled “The Real Barack Obama”.

The first portrays him as a terrorist linked to the radical SDS dropouts the Weather Underground.

The Second is about everyone’s favorite pastor.

This makes the swiftboat stuff look like child’s play and it is only from one night’s broadcast.

Now Democrats are being duped by the Clintons into thinking that this is “the Real Obama”. Cool.

If Hillary beats Obama because she has a better stance on Iraq, Economy, Healthcare, and Education then cool she is the better candidate and I will vote for her in November, but at some point her supporters have to admit that she is playing a dangerous game with this other crap.

This is not “blind Obama love” just common sense.

Over the coming months Senators Clinton and Obama will spend millions of dollars and do irreparable harm to one anothers candidacies. One of them will be elected and have to deal with a situation that is far more complex then either are admitting.

It looks like the McCain camp has decided to paint him as a modern day mix between Winston Churchill & T.R. Other then the fact that McCain is no Churchill, the ad is also a call for continued war with no end in sight. While the Democrats tear eachother apart over specifics, there is no doubt where the Republican nominee stands.

Seriously one of those speeches is considered among the greatest speeches of all time, the other is from a stump speech in a country whose citizens are facing nothing like what the British were in 1940. That being said, the commercial is effective in painting an image of McCain’s heroic past, advice that Karl Rove wrote about in his WSJ editorial.  

Mark Benjamin of Salon writes that many military leaders fear a President McCain with his finger on the button:

It is not difficult in Washington to find high-level military officials who have had close encounters with John McCain’s temper, and who find it worrisome. Politicians sometimes scream for effect, but the concern is that McCain has, at times, come across as out of control. It is difficult to find current or former officers willing to describe those encounters in detail on the record. That’s because, by and large, those officers admire McCain. But that doesn’t mean they want his finger on the proverbial button, and they are supporting Clinton or Obama instead.

(more…)

They quoted the Clinton campaign as saying she, “opposes any attempt to have a revote in Florida” and she “will not accept a caucus in Michigan”.

Interesting, I think she needs to win those legit in order to make a strong case to Super Delegates.

(Photo: GK)

Last week on Fox News Sunday, Bill Kristol had some advice for the Clinton campaign: 

“The way you puncture euphoria is with reality, or to be a little more blunt…fear. I recommend to Senator Clinton the politics of fear”

The most “newsworthy” storyline to come out of that debate on Tuesday had nothing to do with the things Hillary Clinton says she will “fight” for as president. It had nothing to do with education, the economy, or the environment, not even health care.  No, the most important question of the night turned out to be one about Luis Farrakhan.

In an effort to create “buyers remorse” the storyline was the “safety of the American people”. It was a war that was waged on two fronts.

For her part, Hillary continued her strategy of portraying Obama as untrustworthy on national security issues and unrealistic about the harsh world of politics. Implying that Democrats should fear him as Commander in Chief, but should also fear what types of Skeletons the GOP might pull out of his closet.

Say what you want about the Clintons style of politics but they have successfully changed the way this campaign has been covered on TV.

Here is her last minute ad in Texas, where she takes direct hits on Obama’s national security credentials.

It was on the other front that a much more interesting battle was being waged, a blitzkrieg of sorts.

The Party of Lincoln decided that it could no longer wait till the end of the primaries to unveil its Obama strategy and decided to give us all a sneak peak. How Obama handles it will determine the fate of his candidacy.

(more…)

1. The latest CNN poll out of Texas has Obama 50% Clinton 46%. Here is how they report it.

In the CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey released Monday, 50 percent of likely Democratic primary voters said Obama is their choice for the party’s nominee, while 46 percent backed Clinton.

But taking into account the poll’s sampling error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points for Democratic respondents, the race is a virtual tie.

I know this is just a poll, but if someone tells you this is not big news, they work for the Clintons.

According to usaelectionpolls.com the Rasmussen poll taken on 2/14 had Clinton holding a 54% to 38% lead over Obama with 9% unsure. That was 2 days after Potomac Primary.

The CNN poll taken between 2/15-2/17 saw the gap tighten to Clinton 50% Obama 48% with 2% unsure.

The period between the 2/14 Rasmussen and the 2/17 CNN polls was the same time that Hillary picked up her negative attacks on Obama with her Wisconsin television commercials.

All of this makes the latest CNN poll big news. It looks like Obama is drawing more then just the unsure to his side.

Peter Canellos of the Boston Globe writes:

Barack Obama last night was wonky and detailed enough to set heads nodding in Capitol committee rooms, but delivered probably the most effectively boring debate performance in recent presidential politics.

Obama held his own during detailed policy debates through out the night prompting CNN moderator John King to ask Clinton:

But, since we’re in Texas, I’d like to borrow a phrase that they often use here and you’ve used yourself in the context of President Bush. Are you saying that your opponent is all hat and no cattle, and can you say that after the last 45 minutes?

I thought Hillary summed up the begining of the debate after the first break when she said.

You  now, I think you can tell from the first 45 minutes, you know, Senator Obama and I have a lot in common. We both care passionately about our country. We are devoted to public service. We care deeply about the future, and we have run a very vigorous and contested primary campaign, which has been by most standards, I think, very positive and extremely civil.

While it was not a knockout performance for Obama it was the closest he has come. He hammered home his theme that the two of them have similiar stances on most policies issues and that those that they disagree on he is happy to explain. He says he is offering voters a choice:  you can elect her and divide us with more years of partisan politics or elect me who will inspire people to come together for change.    

If you want the reason for the success of the Obama campaign look no further then his answer to the plagiarism attacks from the Clinton campaign. (more…)

Photo: Akhtar Soomro for The New York Times

Senators McCain and Clinton are now on the same team at least until the Texas and Ohio primaries. Obama will have to fight off attacks from the both of them. Last night on MSNBC Howard Fineman of Newsweek said the Clinton campaign thinks the loss in Wisconsin (which turned out to be anything but close) could have been much worse if it wasn’t for the attack politics.

Last night McCain held up his end of the bargain when he specifically attacked Obama on Pakistan saying:

Today, political change in Pakistan is occurring that might affect our relationship with a nuclear armed nation that is indispensable to our success in combating al Qaeda in Afghanistan and elsewhere. . .

Will the next President have the experience, the judgment experience informs, and the strength of purpose to respond to each of these developments in ways that strengthen our security and advance the global progress of our ideals? Or will we risk the confused leadership of an inexperienced candidate who once suggested invading our ally, Pakistan, and sitting down without pre-conditions or clear purpose with enemies who support terrorists and are intent on destabilizing the world by acquiring nuclear weapons?’

Today on his must read blog Informed Comment Juan Cole came to the aid of Senator Obama and offered his own critique on Senator McCain’s history in the region.

I personally think that Obama was unwise to make the statement he did, because there are some things better left unsaid. But aside from pure pacifists, what American would not pull the trigger on that old monster Usamah if he or she had the chance? I mind McCain pulling a Rove and making hay with a policy stance of his opponent that he actually agrees with.

And I think there is good reason to ask whether McCain helped create al-Qaeda and the mess in Pakistan to begin with. It is time for someone to start holding the Cold Warriors who deployed a militant Muslim covert army against their leftist enemies accountable for the blow-back they created.

Cole the takes an in-depth look at a quote that was made by McCain after jump

(more…)

It was the eve of Super Tuesday, and I was standing in line with about 17,000 other people in Hartford, CT to see Barack Obama speak. My friends and I began speaking to the fifty-something year old, well to do, women from Weston (CT home of Kieth Richards) who are standing in front of us in line.

They were both sporting expensive jewelry and Obama pins so I asked what made them Obama supporters. One of the women looked at me and said, “I was watching Hardball and heard Howard Wolfson say the word coke three times, that was it for me.”

She was referring to the Clinton campaigns earlier attempts to use Obama’s admitted drug use against him, which included BET founder Robert Johnson brining it up at a Clinton campaign rally.

Yesterday’s “major news” was a narrative that was crafted by the Clinton campaign and then delivered to the masses beautifully, by the media. Here is how the story line goes, Obama gave a speech in which he quoted Deval Patrick (D Gov. of Mass) with out giving him credit and because of that his entire campaign is a fraud.

The LA Times reports that Hillary told reporters on her campaign plane:

“If your whole candidacy is about words, they should be your own words,” she said. “That’s what I think.”

From the same article the story line is continued:

In response to a reporter’s question, Wolfson also pointed to the Obama campaign theme of “Yes, we can,” echoing the Spanish-language slogan that once was the rallying cry of Cesar Chavez: “Sí, se puede.”

For the rest of the day this drum was beat by the media. I flipped past FNC, CNN, MSNBC all where giving “Steroid/Clemens” like coverage to it. It was the major campaign story on CBS, NBC, and ABC evening newscasts. Not the economy, education, the war, health insurance, or poverty but petty high school he said she said crap.

Responding to these allegations Obama said (From LA Time):

“When Sen. Clinton says, ‘It’s time to turn the page’ in one of her stump speeches or says she’s ‘fired up and ready to go,’ I don’t think that anybody sort of suggests that somehow she’s not focused on the issues that she’s focused on.”

Obama did say that he “should have” credited Patrick

Look, Obama should have given Deval credit for the line. But when candidates are able to highjack the day’s storylines with cheap attack politics we all lose. Remember, in a race as close as Wisc. (Obama, Clinton each ahead in different Wisconsin polls) she does not have to win this argument just muddy the waters enough to cause doubt in the electorate.

I agree with those who would like a closer look at Obama’s policies. If Hillary Clinton thinks the same then her campaign should stop these “swiftboating” strategies and begin to point out “real” reasons why the Democrat voters of Wisconsin and the rest of the remaining states should not vote for Senator Obama.

Wishes he did in 2000.

Speaking at a GM Plant in Ohio Clinton defined her message about Obama to the American voters,

“There’s a big difference between us, speeches vs. solutions, talk vs. action”

“Speeches don’t put food on the table, speeches don’t fill up your tank, speeches don’t fill your prescriptions”

“That’s the difference between me and my Democratic opponent. My opponent makes speeches, I offer solutions.”

She is now battling Obama over a debate at Marquette in Wisconsin. Check out the ad she is running in Wisconsin.

Here is the thing, I agree with what she is saying but hate the ad. Why the weird music and the creepy voice? It should be her talking to the camera saying she wants to debate important issues and Sen. Obama does not. I hate the style that political ads have taken on recently, CT television was inundated with them during the 06 congressional elections.

Where are the days when candidates tackled the difficult issues in their campaign ads?

Notice he rips off Obama’s change theme.

Tonight on News Hour Obama Chief Strategist David Axelrod and Clinton Communication Director Howard Wolfson debated the issues then debated the debate.

I don’t want to listen to two campaign guys dumb down the issues with talking points. If I was Obama, I would want voters hearing my policies debated by me and not Axelrod.

Think of how many voters in the upcoming states tuned out of the election thinking that their vote in the primary would mean nothing. The Democratic voters of the states who have not voted deserve a chance to hear these two debate the issues.

Plus, I love this stuff and it is great TV. Obama can even hold a post debate rally at the Bradley Center where the Bucks play. It holds 18,717 so its just the right size.

(Photo: Geoff Kenyon)

and took 48% of the white vote from Clinton

Independents who made up 5% of the electorate went for Obama 66% to 33%

Republicans made up 8% voting in Democratic primary and they went for Obama of 70% to 26%

Hillary doing her best Rudy impersonation “Waiting for Texas and Ohio”. On MSNBC they are projecting a 102 point delegate lead coming out of Virginia alone.

(Photo: Geoff Kenyon)

Interesting conversation between Bill O and MC Karl Rove:

From Rove: “I find it hard to believe that the democrats are going to be able to meet in Denver and not have delegations seated from Michigan and Florida. States that she won…I find it hard to believe that we are going to have a 48 state Democratic convention. She ought to be out there right now declaring there ought to be fairness and that some delegation, she can even say to the democrat (he said republican but meant democrat…just shows you were his mind is) half the delegates from Florida and Michigan should be seated.”

 They call him the architect for a reason, if I was a Hillary staffer this is the same thing I would be saying and you can damn well bet the Clinton’s and their supporters are going to fight tooth and nail to see this happen.

“It’s who ever wins the raw vote from the folks. You can not deprive Barack Obama of the nomination by brining in this one over here and having Lenny over there, that can’t happen there will be a rebellion with in the party if that is tried”

O’Reilly is right, there will be a rebellion by young…. and black Obama supporters if the Super Delegates decide this election. All I can say is if you don’t believe me I respectively disagree. I can’t believe I am agreeing with both of these guys.

“I think Obama is gonna beat her.”- O’Reilly

Roves response….”Obama is inexperienced and does not have what it takes to be commander and chief and he is the most liberal member of the US Senate (A Lie) if a Republican presidential Candidate can’t make mince meat out of that I don’t know what, on the other hand Clinton has very strong negatives, on the other hand she has very strong positives….in the fox poll she does a better at grabbing at keeping democrats in her in column then does Obama she sees 15% of the democrats sliding over to McCain and he sees 18% and I think that because their a weakness among some democrats who view Obama as not fit to be commander in chief.”

What a dilemma for the Democrats. This is so typical for the Democrats to find themselves in a can’t lose situation with a chance to lose, but ask yourselves, are people really going to vote for a 72 year old who can’t even electrify his own base?… I hope (there is that word again) not.

And also picks up Washington, Nebraska, and Louisiana.

Then he made his case to the American people from Virginia, which will vote this Tuesday.

“This fall we owe the American people a real choice, it’s the choice about debating John McCain about who has the most experience in Washington or who is most likely to change Washington, because that is a debate we can win. It’s the choice between debating John McCain about lobbying reform with a nominee who has taken more money from lobbyists than he has or doing it with campaign that hasn’t taken a dime of their money because we’ve been funded by you the American people. It’s a choice between taking on John McCain with republicans and independents who are already united against us or running against him with a campaign that is uniting Americans of all parties around a common purpose. There is a reason why the last six polls in a row show that I’m the strongest candidate against John McCain because I have done better among independents in almost every single contest we’ve had that’s why we won more red states and swing states that the next democratic nominee needs to win in November…John McCain will not be able to say that I supported the war in Iraq, he won’t be able to say that I supported giving George Bush the benefit of the doubt on Iran, he won’t be able to say that I follow the Bush Cheney doctrine of not talking  to leaders we don’t like.”

Interesting from LA exit polls, 50% of the people who voted Obama in Louisiana do not like the idea of Hillary nomination. While 65% of the people who voted Clinton say they would be dissatisfied with an Obama nomination. This is going to be ugly if it is decided by the Super Delegates. Obama is on a roll can he carry it through Tuesday and the Potomac Primary?

(Potomac: Geoff Kenyon)