CNN & Time Warner Continue Slanted Coverage

CNN has been hiring republican pundits by the bushel to create biased news coverage and thus a close race. Why? A close race means more money donated for both candidates and therefore big advertising dollars when those candidates spend that cash.

CNN’s latest article headline on their tee-shirt news site, CNN.com, says Obama waiting to pick a VP has grown old, tired, and funny. Strange, it seemed to me neither candidate had picked a Vice Presidential running mate as of yet.  I’m sure they’d print the same thing about McCain, if Time Warner weren’t salivating at the prospect of keeping their 10% tax handout that Bush gave them and McCain has promised to keep.

The middle class of this country are falling behind to wage stagnation and cost of living increases, but the billion dollar corporations continue to get tax cuts at the hands of republicans.  All the while, the American people and the future generations of this country are taking a $400 billion loan from China to pay for a war to grab some oil for the corporations that love Bush and McCain the most.

CNN & Time Warner, anything for a buck.

Rublican Pundits Hired By CNN:

Beck, Snow, Holmes, Bennett, Sanchez…just for starters.

Timeline: Part I (Bush, Cheney, War and Oil)

Since the media loves to report a story, but not give context to how it is relevant, I thought I’d try to tie a few items together in a time line. (links and additional info to come)

• 1991 - Dick Cheney, during the first Gulf war begins to privatize the military and hires an oil servicing company called Halliburton to take on random duties such as feeding troops. The are paid millions of dollars to research a privatization of the military plan.
• 1995 - Dick Cheney is appointed CEO of Halliburton.
• 1998 - Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, & Paul Wolfowiz participate in a think tank that concludes that we need to invade Iraq to lock up oil for the 21st Century. Letter is sent to then President Clinton asking him to do as much. Think tank concludes in their document titled “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” (link) that there would need to be a “new Pearl Harbor” to allow a political climate to invade Iraq.
• Dick Cheney receives $20 million for quitting his job as CEO. Has received $12 million in pay and $39 million in stock options over his 5 year reign. Stock will go up 10x in the eight years to come.
• 2000 - Oil at $11 dollars a barrel.
• 2000 - Bush Claims election; Cheney sets up team to determine who will serve in the cabinet including Rumsfeld. Tries to get Wolfowiz in as CIA chief which is rebuked.  Wolfowicz is instead set up as Rumsfeld’s Defense Secretary and puts together a plan for war.  Florida recount halted as it neared completion, Bush “wins” election despite less votes in nation and Florida.
• 2000 - Cheney sets up shadow CIA office, meant to question the CIA’s actual analysis.   They were fixing evidence to go to war with Iraq even before 9/11 according to 2 cabinet members (Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neil & Terrorism Czar Richard Clarke).
• 2001 - Clarke says all evidence points to an upcoming attack and pleads with Condi Rice for a meeting with the President. Unable to get one as Bush has downgraded the Terrorism Czar to a non-cabinet level position. Clarke told that he’s worrying too much about Al Quaida.
• 2001 - Richard Clarke explains to Bush that Iraq is not involved with the 9/11 attack and that the attack came from Al Quaida; Bush tries to intimidate Clarke into giving him an answer that Iraq and the attacks were linked.
• 2002 - Bush nominates Joseph Smitz to become the Defense Department’s inspector general.  77 Companies are awarded, by Smitz, $42 Billion in contracts as of 2005.
• 2002 - Bush gives state of nation speech detailing Iraq’s attempts to obtain nuclear weapons (yellowcake) despite the CIA scratching that from his speech due to it being false. Ambassador Joe Wilson writes an article detailing that this was a false statement after going to Africa to look into the assertion. Wilson’s Wife, a CIA agent, has her secret identity as an agent outed by several in the White House in retaliation for publicly going against the War effort…Plames’ overseas contacts are jeopardized. Bush vows to fire anyone involved. (update: Cheney, Rove, and Scooter Libby were involved. Libby goes to jail for lying to grand jury. Noone is fired, Libby serves no time when Bush commutes sentence.)
• 2003 - The White House “mistakenly” reported tubes that were no stronger than bicycle seat aluminum, were actually nuclear tubes to put increased fear into the public.
• 2003 - Bush invades Iraq
• 2003 - Halliburton gets whistle blown on them for receiving $1.4 Billion in no bid contracts to build bases, feeding troops, and providing logistics to search for Weapons of Mass destruction.
• 2005 - Halliburton Whistleblower is demoted & then fired.
• 2004 - “Downing Street Memo” leaked from England. 2002 top secret memo from a British security meeting saying that Great Britain needed to prepare for war because the U.S. was fixing evidence around the policy to go to war.
• 2004 - Blackwater donates hundreds of thousands George W. Bush’s re-election campain. T. Boone Pickens funds the Swift Boat Veterans for “truth” who lie about John Kerry’s war record.
• 2005 - Joseph Smitz resigns after being accused of interfering with criminal investigations about inappropriately awarded contracts.  Mr. Smitz’s job at the DoD was to oversee contracts with a mandate to prevent waste, fraud and abuse in the Pentagon.
• 2005 - Joseph Smitz takes the job as the CEO at the Prince Group, Blackwater’s Parent Company.
• 2006 - Mercenary soldiers company, Blackwater, kills 11 innocent Iraqis in the streets of Baghdad. No criminal charges are filed as they have immunity signed into law by the new US run government in Iraq the day before the war started. U.S. Troops enjoy no such immunity.
• 2007 - 1/10 soldiers in Iraq and 1/3 of war spending goes to contractors in Iraq. In the first Gulf War, the number was 1/100.
• 2007 - Annual contract with Blackwater reaches $500 million.  In 2001 it was $1 million.  Awarded a narcoterrorism contract that could be worth $15 Billion & made $73 million for Katrina related security.
• 2008 - Halliburton under investigation for: Overcharging the government by billions of dollars, missing cash, building showers that electrocute soldiers who use them. Eleven troops have died in Halliburton built showers. No oil found in shower drains drilled by Oil Servicer Halliburton or their spinoff company KBR.
• 2008 - Halliburton stock 1000% higher than late 2001.
• 2008 - U.S. stock market is stagnant compared to 2001.
• 2008 - T. Boone Pickens has used wealth from Oil to buy up West Texas land with water supply and is building wind farms, to corner the energy and water supply markets once his current product has is dry in the well and has polluted enough to drive up world temperatures and dry up water supplies.
• 2008 - Oil sniffs $150 per barrel. Cost to drill for oil is largely unchanged. By default, oil revenue is up 1000-1500% since 2000.
• 2008 - Exxon and three other companies receive no bid contracts to Iraqi Oil fields previously held by Russia and China under the Sadam leadership.
• 2008 - Exxon brings in a profit of $83,000 per minute. (update:  $88,000/minute…and growing)

Part 2 preview (McCain’s war and the economy.)

Big Oil Pollutes, Bribes, and Hijacks Its Place in Power

In 1989 the Exxon Corporation had one of it’s oil tankers wreck off of the coast of Alaska. Due to their negligence, they were convicted in a court of law of negligence and asked to pay $5 billion in punitive damages. After 20 years of appeals and reductions in the ruling, the Supreme Court, just a year into getting two new Bush appointees on the court, has reduced that ruling to $500 million.

Think about that for a moment. At the time of the ruling, the judge in question determined that a company needed to pay one full year’s worth of profit so that they would be incented to never again commit the crime of killing wildlife and forever polluting some of America’s most beautiful habitat due to being so grossly negligent as to put a drunk at the wheel of a boat carrying 1.3 million barrels of oil. Twenty years later, Exxon will now have the tremendous burden of paying out $500 million, or one day’s profit! Imagine, by litigating the Valdez disaster in court, Exxon is now paying 1/365th of what it was originally ordered to pay in terms of income (without regard to its victims and the opportunity cost of getting the money 20 years late)!!!

If Exxon would have been forced to pay this at the actual time the accident occured in 1989, the $500 million would today be worth over $1 Billion at a low 4% rate of return! In other words, they’re paying the actual fine with the interest earned just from getting to keep the money for 19 years.

Ironically, the past week has been a windfall of good news for Exxon in that they got the news that Iraq will grant them and several other Western oil companies (Shell, British Petroleum, Total) the rights to Iraqi Oil drilling that they have not had access to for 30 years. I’ve linked stories about Exxon wanting to go to Iraq to obtain oil contracts before, and in the words of George W. Bush, “Mission Accomplished.” What better time to obtain the rights to trillions of barrels of oil, than the same time you’ve inserted people into power who have created an instability in a region driving oil to over seven times higher than it was prior to Bush becoming president.

A few quick questions about the people who are taking our country down a path of no return:

How do Exxon and other Big Oil companies get away with so much polluting and influence in government. Simply put: bribery.

Who is on the take for over $1 million in Oil money since 1990? John McCain.

Who is in charge of writing our energy policy with Dick Cheney in secret? Exxon

Who is in charge of editing our environmental policy after a report is submitted from NASA to downplay reality? Exxon lobbyists hired by Dick Cheney

Who makes multi-million dollar tax deductible contributions to the National Science Teachers of America and have them distribute their film, “You Can’t Be Cool, Without Fuel?” Exxon and Shell

Who turns down 50,000 free copies of An Inconvenient Truth to teach students about global warming? the National Science Teachers of America - out of fear of losing their “donation”/bribe

Who funds think tanks to offer $10,000 bribes to “scientists” to criticize global warming findings? Exxon

John Stewart’s Analysis of Barack Obama’s Victory Night

http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=171106

Barack Asks That the DNC Stop Taking Lobbyist and PAC Money

This will likely go over the heads of your average voter.  However, this is an amazing change in politics that starts to change the direction the country is headed in.  Corporations that have a stranglehold on politicians, and thus the policies of America, are no longer in charge.  The people, by way of donating small amounts, have taken the country back over.  I’m not naive enough to think that politicians who still take PAC and Lobbyist money personally will change, but just changing the way politicians can raise money is a huge start.  Lead by example, and the others will follow.

Linked is an article about the fear the Republican party has over the Barack Obama fundraising machine.  Of course, they might ask themselves why people want to contribute to someone and what his policies are.  Could it be that they know that if he’s not taking money from Exxon, that he might listen to what they think is important?  Unfortunately, when you’re on the take, your policies are already set by the person paying the bills.  The bills in the Democratic Party will now be paid by the people as the DNC changed its current policies today.

Donate to the DNC here

Donate to Barack here

Hillary Attempts to Sabotage Barack’s Campaign for Personal Gain

In what has become painfully obvious, Hillary has attempted to hold her supporters together so that she can herself run in 2012, or at least prevent a rival from winning in 2008.

Howard Fineman of Newsweek reported last night that Clinton’s close friends said that Hillary had no interest whatsoever in the vice-presidency.  However, she knows that her negatives are so high and that since her assassination comments, there is no way he can put her on the ticket.  So, how do you sabotage your opponent’s campaign?  You pretend to want the worthless job of vice-president so your supporters may be upset at your opponent when you aren’t the VP choice.  When they don’t vote for him, you get to run in 2012 (as if anyone in the party would forgive her).  It sounds far fetched, but so did continuing to run up $30 million of debt for apparently no reason.

The reasoning for her neverending campaigning and kitchen sink strategy has revealed itself, so the pundits should stop asking the stupid question of, “what does she want?”.   She’s already got it, a campaign that keeps going.  Luckily, only the most delusional of her supporters will fall for the act, and they’ve already convinced themselves they can’t vote for Barack Obama…who by the way, gave another inspirational speech while McCain looked like it was his first time in front of another crowd of 50 folks.  I’m pretty sure he could be a little more boring…but he’s going to have to try hard.

Last point:  Howard Fineman did a great piece of reporting last night to dig for the truth; but right after he reported it, the supposed gurus of NBC said a few minutes after this report that they had just received a call saying that she really did want VP spot.  Uh, yeah, she’d said that earlier in the day and Howard is now telling you that’s not true!  Tim Russert gets so much credit for being a political genius, but like so many…can’t see the forest for trees.

Tim, next time, don’t use the greatest liar of all time as your “source.”

John McCain’s Economic Adviser Sets John’s Policy and Lobbies for Banking Industry Simultaneously

The year was 2004, and I was working for a bank who’s mortgage company was originating 66% of it’s loans in California in areas where housing had skyrocketed to the point where the average home price was over 30 times the average income in some areas.  The normal ratio of home price to income for a home is usually between 2.5 to 3 times income.  In other words, If you make 100,000 in a year, then your home value should be in a 250,000 to 300,000 range.

Home values were skyrocketing in California and along the East coast due to investors’ greed, people trying to buy a home scared of being priced out if they waited, and/or the corporate market creating new products fueling the skyrocketing costs.  All of these factors fed on eachother creating a huge bubble in housing prices.  Adjustable Rate Mortgages (ARMs), Interest Only ARMS, and ARMs that teased a rate so low that you risked have negative amortization on your home while the rate returned reality…became the norm.  Banks such as mine that originated these loans had done their full due diligence in most cases.  It was plain as day to anyone who could project rates out five years, that the payment shock (the amount the homeowners payment would increase due to the language in the note) would cripple the borrower by sometimes more than double their original home payment…three to five years down the line.

In my pointing out that borrowers wouldn’t be able to make their payments, executive management would say the customer would refinance.  However, as I rightly pointed out from the example above, there were areas, that were overvalued by almost 10 times (1000%) their actual value and that nobody would refinance a loan when the bubble busted and the home was worth half as much as what the original loan was for.  The conclusion was not to stop selling what the market was demanding, but to determine which were the riskiest of those loans to sell them at a premium to companies that didn’t care about doing the analysis as they were receiving bonuses for bringing on new loans, and/or were planning to sell off a portion of the loans we’d sold them, to Wall Street…and Wall Street would sell them to banks on a global level.  Everyone keeps making money off of a false market, and keeps getting huge bonuses for doing so.

The Bush administration loved it (and also loved the large contributions my fortune 500 company PAC and millionaire CEO and Board donated to him).  There was less than two percent of actual growth during this time, but since people had rising home prices, they were borrowing against equity in their home that never should have existed.  Result:  people spent money they didn’t really have, and the Bush Administration could claim higher growth, despite the “growth” just coming from consumers running up more debt.  Imagine that, the Bush Administration was lying, again.

‘How could this scheme continue to go unnoticed’ I thought (along with, do I really want to be working at this place…even though it was an industrywide problem)?  Well, the main reason it continued, is because of deregulation.  Regulators who were supposed to oversee the industry had been stripped of power and didn’t oversee the same types of banks.  A regulator for a possible originator Savings and Loan (Office of Thrift Supervision) wouldn’t be the same agency overseeing any other bank down the line.  Picture the CIA and FBI not talking to eachother despite knowing terrorists were getting flight training in Florida before 9/11.

Additionally and more importantly, the regulations (Glass-Stegall Act) that were put in place after the Great Depression to prevent commercial banks and investment banks from having an affiliation with one another was repealed in 1999 and replaced by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.  This act deregulated the banking industry and in essence allowed Investment Banks to get into the mortgage loan industry.  Packaging, or securitizing, large groups of loans and selling them to Wall Wtreet became the key to making large amounts of money.  Partly because of the Gramm Act, the economy is imploding, and people have lost their life savings due to predatory lending practices fueled by the greed of everyone from Realtors, to commercial bankers, appraisers, investment bankers, regulators, and the President.

The question is, what is the solution to this mess?  The answer, as John McCain sees it, is to follow down the path of what got us here.  John would like to DEREGULATE the industry further!  Yes, less oversight is needed according to McCain, but as he says, he doesn’t understand the economy that well.  He’s obviously losing his memory too, since deregulation is what got him in so much hot water in the 80’s as part of the Keating Five.  So, who is advising him on his economic positions since he doesn’t have the capacity to think through the issues himself?  Well, none other than former senator Phil Gramm of Gramm-Leach-Bliley.  As we all know, John has a new policy of firing any of his 60, or 59, or…okay we’re down to 54 lobbyists who are working for his campaign actually lobby for a corporation and advise him at the same time creating a conflict of interest for the American people.  So, who was Phil Graham lobbying AND working for while advising John on what policy position to take on the mortgage crisis?  The huge Swiss bank of UBS.

The obvious question is, what does it matter if you fire your lobbyists (Gramm still advises McCain), if they’ve already convinced you to set your policy position that benefits their employer?

Polls: Obama Starting to Bring All Demographics Into His Corner

While the Clintons continue to cyphen the paychecks of their “hard working white voters” to pay off their campaign debt, most democrats are now starting to back Barack.  While you may not know it from the dualing banjo states of West Virginia and Kentucky (I would worry about offending them, if those outside of Louisville or Lexington had the Internet), Barack has even pulled even among women.  Apparently, they don’t think it’s appropriate to wait until after the race is over to wave the sexism card you’re threatening to sabotage the November election.  Is that the quality of a President?

In the slide below, Obama has pulled even or ahead in each of the previous areas that Clinton had claimed as her own.  Women, Hispanics, and those without a college education.

 

 

 

Clinton Begs Superdelegates to Allow Her to Stay in the Race

Clinton’s appeals to superdelegates are running parallel to her promises not to hurt the eventual winner.  Huh?  If you still think you’re in it, why are you saying you won’t hurt the obvious nominee, and why are you trying to push the goalposts out a little further to keep the race going (by saying the delegate number needed is 2209+ instead of the actual 2026)?  

What possible reason could Clinton have to want to stay in the race after her staff has admitted it is over and has already started looking for new jobs and book deals?  Oh, that’s right, Hillary can continue to collect money until the National Convention in August, but if her supporters think she’s out of the race, then she can’t get them to pay off her debt. 

I’m not sure what’s more sad, Hillary’s new reasons for convincing her supporters she’s still in the race (my favorite is that Karl Rove thinks she rocks!), or that she’s bragging about cashing the check of a young boy who sold his bike and video games to contribute to her campaign after she already knew it was over.  Congrats to this young man for helping Clinton pay off $11 million of money she lent to herself (while the overall debt of the campaign is up to $31 million) to spend on an ego campaign that Hillary’s advisers admit they knew was over in February.  Poor kid now has to sit on his blistered feet (from walking home from school) while playing jacks instead of getting in shape with his Wii.

As of tonight, Barack will now have the majority of the elected delegates (i.e.:  even if Clinton wins 100% of the remaining delegates due to Barack supporters forgetting to vote, she cannot catch up).  Furthermore, if he wins over 50 delegates (probably a few short), she can’t catch up even if she gets the delegates from Michigan and Florida in the %’s she has requested (which you know are on the up and up since everyone but Hillary wasn’t on the ballot in Michigan).

So, the question is, why does Hillary get to stay in the game longer than she should?  The answer, because nobody wants to upset her supporters…and with Hillary wielding the “sexism” card every few hours and the “her”oggate Gerraldine Ferraro threatening to not vote for Obama (again), expect Clinton’s debt to be paid in full…and the enormous strides Clinton has made for women to take one giant step back.

Hillary says:  Bike…check, video games…check, check from 11 year old…check.  Money repaid to self so I don’t have to sell my Madden 2007 or Wii Bowling…check.  Now I can exit the race with a clear conscience.

 

Bring on Oregon!

75,000 plus came out to listen to Barack Obama in Oregon.  It received a decent amount of press, but when was the last time a politician other than Barack had more than 20,000 listen to them speak?  When was the last time McCain had more than 200?  This is a movement spurned by the corporate takeover of the Republican party that has put the country in debt, at war, and loaded the supreme court with lunatics to ensure the corporations aren’t punished for poisoning our food, drugs, and environment. 

This new form of government for the corporation is set up to put us in debt (by cutting corporate taxes) and take us to war to further profit the same corporations who took us there and benefit from everything from the oil contracts to the bullets and insurance for the employees of the privatized workers. 

McCain would like to add this privatization strategy to education, social security, and 401k’s.  Great idea!!  Nothing like trying to cut costs on my kids schooling and making sure Merrill Lynch gets a cut of everyone’s 401k.  It’s become nothing but a highway toll mentality where the corporations by the right to take a cut off of everyone just because they’re one of the 54 lobbyist who haven’t quit John’s campaign yet.

John counts the number of people standing in front of him.

 

 

 

Bush Sacrifices Golf for Troops (except for the playing it part)

Maybe he just meant that he wasn’t going to watch it anymore, even though that’s not what he said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/16/bush-lied-about-giving-up_n_102138.html

He says he doesn’t want mothers and fathers who have lost a son to see him doing things that make it look like he’s not in “solidarity with them.” You know, like when he made jokes about not being able to find weapons of mass destruction/distraction in the White House. Or tap dancing in front of the White House waiting for John McBush, or dancing like a fool at another White House “celebration”; probably a mission accomplished function.

Bill O’Reilly Blows Up Due to His Inability to Read

This is mainly for my own viewing pleasure, but feel free to enjoy along with me.

The original:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/24586540#24586540

The remix:

Let the Barack Obama Superdelegate Flood Begin!

Superdelegates gave Hillary the space she needed to bow out gracefully from the race. Hillary’s allegiance is not to the country’s future, her supporters, or the American people. Hillary is about power and money. She rewarded the supers generosity with trying to encite a race war. One of her top supporters called her comments “dumb.” Understatement of the year.

The time for being nice to Hillary is over, and the supers are starting to flow. Nine today along with a new union endorsement. The decision will apparently have to be made for her.

Clinton Tries to Create “Race” Spectacle…Nobody is Buying

From MSNBC’s First Read (although I think they should call it ‘Second Read’, we all know who is “first.”

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/05/09/999566.aspx

Clinton: Playing the race card? Posted: Friday, May 09, 2008 9:25 AM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: 2008, Clinton

The New York Post: “Clinton played the race card yesterday as she dismissed Barack Obama as a candidate who will have a hard time winning support from ‘white Americans.’ It was the most starkly racial comment Clinton has made in the campaign, and drew quick condemnation from some Democrats.

“ ‘I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on,’ she told USA Today in an interview published yesterday. She referred to an Associated Press story on Indiana and North Carolina exit polls ‘that found how Sen. Obama’s support among working, hardworking Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me.’ She added, ‘There’s a pattern emerging here.’”

Here’s what some said in response: “Muriel Offerman, a North Carolina superdelegate who has not disclosed her choice, said, ‘That should not have been said. I think it drives a wedge, a racial wedge, and that’s not what the Democratic Party’s about.’ Asked about Clinton’s comments, Massachusetts superdelegate Debra Kozikowsi said, ‘That’s distressing. I’m not even sure how to respond to that.’”

The New York Daily News: “Hillary Clinton misplays race card while Barack Obama is treated like rock star.” “[S]ome of her supporters — including Rep. Charles Rangel (D-Manhattan) — slammed the comments. ‘I can’t believe Sen. Clinton would say anything that dumb,’ Rangel told The News as he headed to the House floor, where earlier he had embraced Obama. The bitter words came as both candidates looked ahead to West Virginia’s primary Tuesday and pressed their talking points — Clinton insisting she was in the race to win, while Obama argued he could have the nomination wrapped up when Oregon and Kentucky vote on May 20.”

Peggy Noonan also believes Clinton played the race card in her USA Today interview. “If John McCain said, ‘I got the white vote, baby!’ his candidacy would be over. And rising in highest indignation against him would be the old Democratic Party. To play the race card as Mrs. Clinton has, to highlight and encourage a sense that we are crudely divided as a nation, to make your argument a brute and cynical ‘the black guy can’t win but the white girl can’ is — well, so vulgar, so cynical, so cold, that once again a Clinton is making us turn off the television in case the children walk by.”

“‘She has unleashed the gates of hell,’ a longtime party leader told me. ‘She’s saying, “He’s not one of us.”’

John Edwards said on MSNBC’s Morning Joe that he disagrees with Clinton’s “white Americans” comment and that she’s got to ask herself, “Where are the lines?” He added, “I think it’s fine for Hillary to keep making the case for her. But when that shifts to everything that is wrong with him, then we’re doing damage instead of being helpful.”

And did Edwards tip his hand on who he’s backing? He called Obama the “likely nominee.” And we’ll chalk this one up to his Southern accent, but he said he “voted for ‘em on Tuesday.” (Sounded an awful lot like “him.”)

Also… “I think Barack Obama’s doing pretty well without my help.” Edwards also said, “He is clearly the likely nominee at this point.”

Edwards said he may choose to publicly declare for one of the candidates, but he’s keeping it to himself “just for now.” He added, though, that he doesn’t think his endorsement matters except to “people like you all” [the media]. He wouldn’t answer if he and his wife, Elizabeth, voted for different people.

Here’s the New York Post’s headline to Charles Hurt’s column: “Desperate Hillbillies threaten to break up party.” “Well, now these racial politics have spilled out into the public and are splintering longtime, devoted Democrats into separate camps. It’s become the ‘working-class whites’ versus the ‘eggheads and African-Americans.’

More: “With no one left to cry to, Sen. Clinton has gone nuclear and she’s getting kookier by the minute. Yesterday she was toast. Today, she’s looking more like scrambled eggs.”

Politico’s Smith on Clinton’s blunt talk about her white support: “Now, the press has talked about the race in these terms constantly, so I won’t feign shock. But it’s a bit strange to hear it so bluntly from the candidate’s mouth, and probably not a great way to endear herself to African-American voters. And it’s also noteworthy that the blunt talk on appealing to whites surfaces the day after the last round of primaries in which there’s a substantial number of black voters.”

The New York Times reports it’s possible Clinton will give herself more money. “Clinton advisers said Mrs. Clinton was committed to spending more of her own cash on the campaign if necessary, although they spoke optimistically about a rise in fund-raising if she prevails in Tuesday’s primary in West Virginia.” More: “Clinton had been increasingly relying on Internet donations this spring from new and small-amount contributors; the day after she won the April 22 Pennsylvania primary, the campaign brought in a record $10 million online. But Hassan Nemazee, one of Mrs. Clinton’s national finance chairmen, put the amount she collected online in the 24 hours after the Indiana and North Carolina primaries at only “$1 million-plus.”

Interestingly, the Times makes the point that Obama’s big spending in PA for his nine-point loss actually may have dealt a devastating financial blow to Clinton. “Obama spent $9 million on television advertisements in North Carolina and Indiana, including a last minute $170,000 purchase in the expensive Chicago market, which extends into northern Indiana. By contrast, Mrs. Clinton spent about $4.7 million in those states, according to CMAG. Even more, said Evan Tracey, spokesman for CMAG, the fact that Mr. Obama was able to pump $10 million into media purchases in Pennsylvania in April, even though he did not win that state, forced Mrs. Clinton to spend $5 million, cash she could have used in Indiana and North Carolina.”

Yesterday, Terry McAuliffe said “seven figures.” That doesn’t quite confirm the million dollar Internet haul but…

During a three-state whirlwind tour yesterday of half of the remaining primaries, Clinton has altered her stump speeches on energy slightly to address the specific needs of those states, NBC’s Lauren Appelbaum notes. While Clinton emphasized coal technology in West Virginia (a topic normally included in a list but rarely specified on), she discussed wind power at more length in South Dakota. “When we get 52% of electricity from coal in the United States, coal is not going anywhere,” Clinton said to applause in Charleston, WV. The New York Senator did emphasize the necessity for clean coal technology but assured the audience, which was sure to have included a good percentage of coal miners, that coal mining would not be eliminated.

None of the coal talk was anywhere to be seen in an expanded rally in Sioux Falls, SD four hours later. Instead, the focus was on wind energy production. “It’s been said that America from the Dakotas down to West Texas is the Saudi Arabia of wind,” Clinton said. “And, you know, that’s not just Washington political hot air talking; that’s actually a fact, that if we harness the wind coming off of these plains and we had an electric grid system with the distribution system to transmit it from right here in South Dakota across our country, we would be moving toward clean renewable energy.”

Why go on? The New York Daily News: “Whatever happens, it’s a profile in true grit. But why is she still in a race that with each passing hour appears more doomed? Admirers say she’s genuinely driven to make America a better place. Critics attribute her doggedness to the consuming ambition, thirst for power and streak of narcissism she shares with her husband.”

“Movie mogul and Hillary Rodham Clinton backer Harvey Weinstein told House Speaker Nancy Pelosi he would stop fund-raising for Democrats if she refused to support new primary elections in Florida and Michigan, it was reported yesterday.”

Post Race Analysis:

As suggested by IG yesterday, Hillary is going to continue to pretend that she’s in the race through May 20 to allow her to pull in money from her supporters to pay off her debt. However, a new twist has been thrown into the mix; Hillary’s debt maybe be twice what is currently known. Most media outlets are reporting the $11.4 million that she loaned to herself is only part of her debt. Former Clinton insider, George Stefanopolous is reporting that that number is likely over 20 million!

Why is this significant? During the month of April, Clinton raised a supposed 20 million in a month where she had a self reported 10 million dollar day after the Pennsylvania win. There were days where they raised as low as $3 thousand, which means her regular donors are dry to the bone. It will be impossible for her to pay off even half this debt. BTW, Barack never had a day of taking in less than $200 thousand+ in April.

Enter the Obama campaign. It is possible to for him to help fundraise to payoff this debt (among other methods), but the question is, after the race bating and questionable tactics, why would he want to, and would his supporters accept this as a place for their money to go?

Hillary knows the campaign is over, in fact, her campaign is quoted as saying they knew it was over in February. However, without the payoff of debt, there will be no paychecks for many of those who still have a job…and a loss of $20 million for a couple who LOVE to make money in the shadiest of ways. Solution? Encite a race war at the end of the campaign by saying that white people all vote for her (she must not have noticed getting blown out in Washington State, Iowa, Kansas, Idaho, Nebraska, Minnesota, etc. ). This, in her mind would ensure that she would have to be picked up on the ticket so Barack will pay off her family’s debt.

Hillary is a sell out for money, fame, and power…and this latest gimmick only moves her one rung lower on the politician scale, and dictates that it’s time for this style of politics to go.