Hey, BooTribbers!

I'm honored to be speaking at Duquesne University's upcoming symposium "Making Sense of the Sixties," about the assassinations of John Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, and Martin Luther King.

The Symposium will be held over three days - Friday-Sunday, October 3-5.

PLEASE COME!!

My talk will be "The CIA and the RFK Assassination" Saturday mid-morning. If you come, introduce yourself to me afterwards. I love meeting fellow activists in person.

Here's a link to the Conference site - covering registration info and the topics. I have to share the speaker list in the hopes that it will pique your interest.

Gary L. Aguilar, M.D.
Head, Division of Ophthalmology, Saint Francis Memorial Hospital, San Francisco
Clinical Professor of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco
Assistant Clinical Professor of Ophthalmology, Stanford University Medical Center

The Honorable Joe Brown
Host, Judge Joe Brown
Former State Criminal Court Judge, Shelby County, TN (presided over James Earl Ray appeals)

Ted Charach
Writer/Director, The Second Gun

Roger Bruce Feinman, J.D.
Independent JFK Assassination Researcher
Former Attorney and CBS News Production Assistant

Isaac Farris, Jr.
CEO, The Martin Luther King Jr. Center for Nonviolent Social Change
Nephew, Martin Luther King, Jr.

Robert J. Groden
Author, High Treason and The Killing of the President
Former Staff Photographic Consultant, U.S. House Select Committee on Assassinations

Godfrey Isaac, Esq.
Former Counsel to Sirhan Sirhan

The Honorable Robert J. Joling, J.D.
Fellow and Past President, American Academy of Forensic Sciences
Founder and Former Chair, Forensic Science Foundation
Co-author, An Open & Shut Case

Robert Blair Kaiser
Author, R.F.K. Must Die! Chasing the Mystery of the Robert Kennedy Assassination

William Matson Law
Co-producer, RFK

Henry C. Lee, Ph.D.
Chief Emeritus, Connecticut Department of Public Safety, Division of Scientific Services

James H. Lesar, Esq.
Freedom of Information Act Attorney, Washington, D.C.
President, Assassination Archives and Research Center
Former Counsel to James Earl Ray

Joan Mellen, Ph.D.
Author, Jim Garrison: His Life and Times,,The Early Years and A Farewell to Justice: Jim Garrison, JFK's Assassination, and the Case that Should Have Changed History
Professor of English, Temple University

Shane O'Sullivan
Author, Who Killed Bobby?
Writer, Director and Producer, RFK Must Die: The Assassination of Bobby Kennedy

Lisa Pease
Chief Archivist, Real History Archives
Co-author/co-editor, The Assassinations: Probe Magazine on JFK, MLK, RFK and Malcolm X

William F. Pepper, Esq.
Counsel to Sirhan Sirhan
Former Counsel to James Earl Ray
Author, An Act of State: The Execution of Martin Luther King and Orders to Kill: The Truth Behind the Murder of Martin Luther King

Erik Randich, Ph.D.
President, Forensic Materials International

Paul Schrade
Former RFK Campaign Aide (wounded during RFK assassination)

Peter Dale Scott, Ph.D.
Professor Emeritus, University of California, Berkeley
Author, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK (2003), The Road to 9/11 (2007)and The War Conspiracy: JFK, 9/11, and the Deep Politics of War (2008)

David Talbot
Author, Brothers: The Hidden History of the Kennedy Years
Founder and Former Editor in Chief, salon.com

Philip Van Praag
Co-author, An Open & Shut Case
Electrical engineer and author, Evolution of the Audio Recorder

Cyril H. Wecht, M.D., J.D.
Forensic Pathology Consultant, Author and Lecturer, Cyril H. Wecht & Pathology Associates
Former Coroner, Allegheny County
Member, Forensic Pathology Panel, U.S. House Select Committee on Assassinations
Consultant, JFK

David R. Wrone, Ph.D.
Author, The Zapruder Film
Former Professor of History, University of Wisconsin, Stevens Point

All those people, interesting topics, great fellow conference attendees - for $120 for the whole weekend, or $50/day.

I hope some of you can attend. This is a key part of the picture that explains why the country is where it is TODAY. Real History matters!

The Emmys this year were replete with political innuendo and outright blatant commentary. I surely helped that two nomination-heavy films were John Adams, about our second president, and Recount, HBO's tale of the Bush-Gore 2000 election debacle in Florida.

Right from the first moments, the comments were flying. Left without an opening monologue, vamping with his fellow reality host nominees, Howie Mandel said:

We are, like, on Sarah Palin's bridge to nowhere -- that's where we are right now.

When Tommy Smothers of the famously political Smothers Brothers show was finally honored with an Emmy he had taken his name off of years ago so that his writing team could win without his political stigma in the mix, spoke with intense passion:

"Freedom of expression and freedom of speech aren't really important unless they're heard. ... It's hard for me to stay silent when I keep hearing that peace is only attainable through war.  ... [T]here's nothing more scary than watching ignorance in action.

He offered up his award to the "people who feel compelled to speak out, and are not afraid to speak to power, and won't shut up and refuse to be silenced." I've had a lifetime crush on Tommy Smothers. I'm glad it was so warranted.

Laura Linney, whom I've always thought was one of the smartest actresses in Hollywood, proved one of the slyest when accepting her award for her role in John Adams, saying the win:

"will give me a great reason to stop and pause and be so grateful and thankful for the community organizers that helped form our country."

Zzzing!

The writer of John Adams, Kirk Ellis, said while accepting his award how he was grateful to have had a chance to work on a film in a period when:

"articulate men articulated complex thoughts in complete sentences."

At this point, the Emmy producers must have been getting nervous, as his comments were cut off for a commercial. Backstage, Ellis had more to say:

"I love freedom of expression in this country," he said sarcastically, adding that he was told to wrap it up "as soon as I got up and opened my mouth."

Other comments and bits during the night:

Tom Hanks, tres sarcastically:

The election between Jefferson and Adams was filled with innuendo; lies; a bitter, partisan press, and disinformation. How great we've come so far since then.

And from Jay Roach, the director of "Recount":

It's going to get close again this election. ... Keep your local officials honest and please, vote, vote, vote, vote.

The most overt bit was between Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert:

Stephen Colbert, eating from a bag of dried plums, told co-presenter Jon Stewart, "right now, America needs a prune. It may not be a young, sexy plum. Granted, it is shriveled and at times hard to swallow. But this dried-up old fruit has the experience we need."

Replied Stewart, "You know after eight years of prunes, you would think ..."

"Never enough," Colbert responded. "What could possibly go wrong?"

There were others, and more comments made offstage to make clear the people's intentions.

With Hollywood so united on this front, I wonder if their comments swayed any viewers? Check the polls in a couple of days....

The New York Times today describes how Merrill Lynch survived the financial crisis long enough to be sold to Bank of America, while Lehman Brothers had to declare bankruptcy.

A close look at the two executives who saved, and lost, their company, provides a remarkable parallel to Obama and McCain.

John A. Thain, described by the Times as "a dead ringer for Clark Kent," was the recently installed CEO who saved Merrill Lynch. Thain is 53.

Richard S. Fuld Jr., 62, had spent his entire career at Lehman Brothers, before he had to put his 158-year-old firm into bankruptcy.

Consider:

A reserved and almost robotic executive, Mr. Thain approached Merrill's fate like a technocrat, coolly assessing his options and selling the company before the pain got worse.

Sounds like "No drama Obama," doesn't it?

Mr. Fuld, a passionate, dedicated and combative leader, ... [was] a classic Wall Street trader -- taking big risks, reaping huge rewards, exuding intensity and demanding loyalty. A University of Colorado graduate, he stumbled into the industry and through sheer determination rose from a trading floor to the highest ranks of his profession.

Sounds like McCain, the guy who graduated at the bottom of his class but worked his way up to Senator. This quote, re Fuld, also could be applied to McCain via his long stint in the government:

"We are all prisoners of where we have been. The longer you are attached to a place, the harder it is to see it without rose-colored glasses," says James D. Cox, a professor at the Duke University School of Law.

Meanwhile, the newcomer, like Obama, was not so hindered:

"When Mr. Thain got to Merrill, he started moving quickly to put the problems behind him. ...

Mr. Thain ... is cautiously amiable and seemed to act out, rather than inhabit, the role of C.E.O. A graduate of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, he spent his career at Goldman Sachs and the New York Stock Exchange before Merrill's board asked him to calm a firm rife with palace politics and glaringly lax risk management.

In the end, the technocrat brought Merrill a measure of safety, though only by the narrowest of margins.

That's what I expect Obama will do - and just barely. It's tough running a country.

And this Fuld description provides a good warning re the so similar McCain:

[T]he defiance and independence that marked Mr. Fuld's tenure and made him one of Wall Street's most admired chief executives served him poorly when -- like many -- he misjudged the severity of the financial upheaval.

I'll take the calm, cool, well-educated younger executive over the emotion-driven combative veteran any time.

I hope America joins me in that sentiment come election day.

There I was, literally sobbing, as I listened to Ted Kennedy, so thrilled that in my lifetime I'd see a Kennedy pass the torch to someone worthy.

Then Chris Matthews had to go and gum it up.

He said JFK was killed by "a communist" and RFK by "a middle east terrorist."

WRONG WRONG WRONG, on both counts, and so documentably so.

This guy's entire interview is a must see. Here's the part I want to draw your attention to first, but then please, PLEASE, watch the other parts, below. This guy is my new hero, Republican or not. He tells the truth. And he shares my passion for accurate elections:

There are people out there - and there's a lot of them - who don't want to win elections. What they want to do is to steal them. They have enormous incentive for power, they have enormous incentive for money, and they have enormous willingness to go and do it. I don't want to have a society where we're not sure who won. I want to live in a democracy where there's a valid capacity to audit the entire trail.

In this section, he describes that the ONLY system that can give us a verifiable result is one cast on paper ballots, scanned optically, and then randomly handcounted - audited - to verify or challenge the results. There is NO other way to have elections with computers than to do this. Any other way is an open invitation for fraud, and if you watch the other segments, this guy is basically accusing Diebold of doing exactly that.



That was Segment 6. Here are all the segments. This guy was interviewed by ABC, but they never aired the interview. See the last segment to clearly understand why.

I was shocked to come home and see Keith Olbermann again turning to Gerald Posner for "information" regarding the Anthrax case. I had to sit down and fire off a letter to him pronto. I doubt he'll even see it, but he should. Because Gerald Posner is clearly not his friend, or ours, and should NOT be featured on his show.

Here's what I wrote:

This has to be one of the most brilliant presentations of history I have seen yet. Funny, interesting, provocative, and entertaining.

Please set aside 45 minutes this week and watch this. It sounds like a big commitment, but believe me, I'm saving you time. You'd have to read a lot to get this condensed an understanding of the history of oil, the reasons for the war in Iraq, and the way to save your food costs from skyrocketing.

My hat is WAY off to the remarkable comic historian who penned and performs this, Robert Newman.

Watch it here.

And hey, Newman's quite the thinker/writer as well. Here's a snippet from his blog:

I'm not marrying Obama. Therefore, I don't promise to support Obama "for better or for worse." He's my candidate, not my prospective husband. I'll support him "for better." But I'm absolutely going to criticize him "for worse." I'm talking about FISA.

I could never vote for a Republican. I will not ever support or encourage others to support John McCain. I don't believe criticizing one candidate means you are supporting another. I think dissent and vigorous discussion is important in a Democracy.

I want Obama to do the right thing re the FISA debate. The people would be on his side if he made the case for no telco immunity, and for allowing investigations into past abuses.

Our founding fathers carefully set up a government that had three parts, insisting they must act not in accord, but to counter balance each other. The President is not supposed to make policy. He is supposed to enforce it. The president is the leader of the executive branch. They execute the laws and wishes of the American people. They don't make new ones through illegal activity, as Bush did when his team asked the telecommunications companies to illegally spy on Americans without a warrant.

Under the current wording of the FISA bill, we would not be able to investigate past abuses. We'll never know, for example, if Bush tapped Obama's phone. We'll never know whether blackmail on people like Steny Hoyer, for example, was gathered and is now being used. And in a Democracy, these are things we MUST be able to know.

I'll leave you with the immortal words of Ella Wheeler Wilcox:

To sin by silence, when we should protest, makes cowards out of men.

While we push for Obama to see the light, PLEASE get in touch with your Senators and urge them to reject this FISA bill. Urge them to follow the principled leadership of Russ Feingold on this matter. This is truly one of the most important issues of our time. It's passage sets a very scary precedent. A Democrat will not always be at the helm. We'd be legalizing the crimes of the Bush administration for the next Bush. If that doesn't make your skin crawl maybe you're not a real Democrat!

As early as next week, the House may vote on an Iran War resolution, H. CON. RES. 362, titled, "Expressing the sense of Congress regarding the threat posed to international peace, stability in the Middle East, and the vital national security interests of the United States by Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons and regional hegemony, and for other purposes."

The text includes this disturbing item:

I love that I get to have Barbara Boxer as my senator. She did me proud this week, with her senate floor statement:

Senate Floor Statement of Senator Boxer
Boxer Statement on FISA Bill

Tuesday, June 24, 2008

One of the most basic tenets of our freedom is justice, and at the heart of justice lies the search for truth.

Washington, DC -- U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer today made the following statement on the floor of the Senate regarding the FISA bill:

Throughout history, whenever the United States government has violated the trust of the American people, we have always worked to regain that trust by seeking the truth and allowing for a full examination of the abuses of government power.

In 1975, the Church Committee--which would later become the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence--looked into allegations of covert and illegal spying by the federal government on Americans.

What did the Committee find?  The Committee found that the FBI, under J. Edgar Hoover, and the CIA had engaged in spying on the political activities of American citizens.

As a result, Congress passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in 1978, setting up a new court with authority to approve electronic surveillance on a case-by-case basis.

But in late 2005, we learned that the U.S. government had again violated the trust of the American people when the New York Times published a story exposing a warrantless surveillance program authorized by President Bush shortly after 9/11.  

Since that time, Congress and the American people have been grappling with the disclosure and working, with absolutely no help from the Bush Administration, to find out exactly what happened.  

Unfortunately, what we have before us today is a bill that would not only deny the Court the ability to finally make a judicial determination as to the legality of the NSA program but would effectively guarantee immunity for the telecommunications companies that cooperated with the Administration and violated the privacy of their customers.

Now, I would support granting the telecom companies indemnification, but this immunity provision blocks us from finding the truth.  

I know that many of my colleagues in the Senate think we know enough about this program.

But we do not know enough.  The Bush Administration trampled on the Constitution, and we are not doing anything in this bill to provide accountability.

This bill goes along with the premise that we hold up the Constitution when it suits us, and we set it aside when it hinders what we want to do.

Simply put, this bill is a fig leaf that attempts to hide the truth about the warrantless surveillance program at the expense of the rights of our citizens.

And if we vote for it today, we are perpetuating a cover-up.  

I want to be clear - I support giving our government every tool necessary to track down terrorists and protect our citizens.

I voted to go after al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden, and I believe it is the responsibility of the Congress to provide all of the tools necessary to fight terrorism and protect the American people.

But we have another responsibility, I believe, of equal importance; and that is our responsibility to uphold the Constitution and the rights of our citizens.

While there have been improvements to Title I in the bill before us, the provisions in Title II that effectively grant immunity and block the Courts from moving forward and learning whose privacy was violated, simply put, undermine any improvements that were made to this bill.  

These are extraordinary and difficult times.  Our sons and daughters were sent to Iraq by our President to fight for our freedom.  

But we should remember, as former Justice Thurgood Marshall said, "History teaches us that grave threats to liberty often come in times of urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure."

So our brave soldiers are fighting for freedom on one hand, while our government is covering up the erosion of our freedoms with the other.

This bill--while improved upon--does not strike the kind of balance we need between broadening the government's authority to conduct surveillance and protecting the rights of our citizens.

We can and must do better, and therefore I oppose this bill.

The blogosphere has been going crazy all day at Obama's apparent support of the FISA bill that just passed the house. While Obama says he'll "try" to remove the immunity provisions for the telephone companies who provided the government illegal access to our phone calls, emails, and other electronic communications, others say he should focus on the othe provisions of the bill, which take away our right to privacy.

They want Obama's head on a platter. And if they're not careful, they're going to get it.

People who do what we are asking of Obama have been killed. Over and over.

Those who did the noble, right thing, who challenged big money head on, who protested war and took steps to end it, have paid a heavy price. President John Kennedy. Senator Bob Kennedy. Martin Luther King.

Obama is not naive. He knows what the stakes are. A part of me is mad at him for not trying harder, but another part is hearing him say to himself, "but when I'm president, things will be different."

Promoted by Steven D

I've been afraid to breathe and hope in the last several months. Today it is finally sinking in.

I have my party back! In 1992, I joined Jerry Brown's presidential campaign staff. Our motto was "Take Back America." At the convention, it was obvious to me that to do that, we'd have to first take back our party.

Today, I wake to find Hillary will NOT be VP. Dean will stay on as head of the DNC. Lobbyists and corporate donations are banned for all but the DCCC and presumably the DSCC, and I'm going to add, "for now." If Obama has his way, that may go by the wayside too.

Obama has proved the people can elect a candidate through small contributions. Can they elect a president? That's up to us to decide.

This is just an amazing moment. 40 years ago today, literally, today, our future was stolen from us when Robert Kennedy was shot down in the pantry.

40 years later, we FINALLY have a chance to pick up where we left off. I wasn't sure I'd ever see that in my lifetime. But here we are.

Now, to keep Obama safe, I hope you'll all join me in educating yourselves a bit about conspiracies. By exposing those who did it - whether they are ever prosecuted fully or not - we help prevent further assassinations.

I was on the air this morning in New Hampshire talking about the RFK assassination, and will be speaking on it again in Los Angeles this weekend (details at www.politicalassassinations.com.) This fall, I'll be speaking at Duquesne University as well. I'm doing my part to keep people safe. Support us, please! Buy our books. Tell your friends. Read, learn, and educate others on these cases. The truth couldn't possibly matter more, with the first black president and an anti-current-war candidate headed for the White House.

I joined Paul Schrade last night, who was wounded in the pantry with Bobby 40 years ago, at an event in which William Pepper spoke. Pepper is Sirhan Sirhan's current attorney. Pepper is also very serious about prosecuting the current administration for war crimes as soon as they leave the oval office. He has hopes of getting this done abroad, if not at home.

My big thrill was having both William Pepper and Paul Schrade acknowledge my contributions to the audience gathered. That meant so much to me! Pepper has been reading my articles on RFK while he prepares for legal action re Sirhan and this case. I'll write more about what he's doing if/when time permits, as it's interesting.

This really is our moment to turn the tide. A lot rides on all of us individually, how we choose to spend our time and money, and what media outlets we choose to support.

I have hope, for the first time in 40 years, that from here on, things might actually get better. I am not naive. The forces that oppose us will be very strong. But I feel like Obi Wan Kenobi right now: if they strike us down now, we will become more powerful than they can possibly imagine.

This is our time. Enjoy it through the weekend. Next Monday, the General Election starts in earnest, and Obama will need ALL our help.

As soon as I saw the name of Maureen Dowd's column today, I howled in agreement. Oh, YES. It's titled "All About Eve." I didn't even need to read further to understand what she was saying.

The story is essentially this: an ambitious actress cozies up to a fading star with the ultimate goal of replacing her. She makes friends quickly but stabs them all in the back, using their wounded bodies as rungs on the ladder to her personal success.

Wow. Is that an apt description of how I view Hillary Clinton. I read the column, and it did not disappoint.

[Crossposted from my Real History Blog]

Okay. I am SO DONE with the Clintons. I was no fan of theirs during their administration. And Hillary Clinton has run one of the most negative campaigns in modern history against Barack Obama, who, by contrast, has managed to stay, rather miraculously, above the fray.

I've watched Hillary diss all caucus goers as "activists", claiming HER supporters couldn't get there because they work, implying dishonestly that those who did go weren't employed. I've watched her say that any state she lost was unimportant in the overall scheme of things, whereas states she won were "the most important."

It's been disgusting to me personally to have her carrying any banner for the Democratic party, of which I've been a proud member all my life, because I feel she undermines our values. She complains she's gotten unfair treatment because she's a woman. But Obama never complained he got unfair treatment because he was black. McCain doesn't complain about getting unfair treatment because he's old. Everyone gets unfair treatment at times. To label it misogyny is bizarre, untrue, and demeaning to all the women who have spent lifetimes fighting for equal rights. You can't ask to be President of the United States and then whine about how unfairly you're treated. All people running for President are going to be treated unfairly. As she says herself, if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

When she and her husband tried to paint Obama as unelectable because he was black (and don't even try to argue in their defense - that's EXACTLY what they've been doing) they are basically speaking heresy against core Democratic values.

I'm one of the few Democrats I know who does not look back fondly on the Clinton years. I have to go back to Jimmy Carter to find a president I was at least satisfied with. I watched in shock as the Clintons sold out our economy, our jobs, and our manufacturing base with their unqualified support for NAFTA. I cheered Dick Gephart's valiant effort to defeat his own party's president on this.

I watched as Hillary Clinton was handed the health care issue, with the full power of the presidency behind her. She couldn't get it done. She didn't forge the necessary coalitions, and when she did compromise, it was in all the wrong places, so that by the time she brought forward a bill, there was little left worth supporting.

The best part about this campaign is that now many Democrats are finally seeing the Bill and Hillary Clinton that the right wing has hated for so long. And perhaps that common ground will help us forge some new bridges in the fall. The problems we face in this country - reclaiming our vote, opening up government, turning the Titanic around re global warming, and finding a new energy future are too big to leave to partisan concerns. I'm looking forward to hearing new voices rise in the Republican party, as the neocon philosophy slowly recedes from the national conversation, having utterly failed us for the past eight years.

Today was the final straw for me. For her to bring up the assassination of Robert Kennedy as a reason for staying in the race was the lowest blow yet, even from a Scorpio such as herself. She was trying to make the point about June being the end of the campaign, but the subtext of course was, someone might kill Obama, and that's why she's waiting around.

Go away, Hillary. Please. Go far, far away. You and your husband's lies have aided in destroying people's faith in government. Go duck sniper fire in some other country. You don't belong in our party. You couldn't even run your own campaign well. I don't want you anywhere near government. You don't deserve it.

When this campaign first started, I had no reason to get involved. I thought any of our leaders - John Edwards, Clinton, or Obama, would do a better job than the Republicans so I planned to just sit the primaries out. But when I saw what some Clinton supporters were saying about Obama (having 'no' record, being unqualified for any of a number of bogus reasons) that pressed my button. I have great sympathy for the underdog.

The more I read, the more I realized we'd be crazy NOT to elect Obama. He has it all. He's smart. He's experienced. He's principled. He had a genuine, documented record of forging important legislation and getting bipartisan support. He made a break with politics as usual to run a campaign that was truly of, by, and for the people when he rejected all PAC money. He spoke out against the war when it was politically risky to do so. He chose community organizing over Wall Street. He grew up in two countries, so he has a better understanding in his blood than most of how lucky we are here in America, and how much the rest of the world suffers, often as a result of our foreign policy abroad.

And then there's Hillary. She's a liar. She's a backstabber (telling Obama to his face how "honored" she was to share the debate with him, and then a couple of days later saying, when he wasn't there to respond, "Shame on you.") She valued loyalty to herself over competency, which is why her campaign had so many issues. She ran as if it was a "coronation" - rich drapery at events, spending campaign donor money as if it was water. Staying at the Bellagio in Vegas. And perhaps worst of all, claiming her husband's presidential experience as her own. (See my response to that here.)

I knew she was a climber, that the only reason she stayed with her husband after he embarrassed her in front of the world was so she could make him pay in a different way - by campaigning for her, and leveraging his connections on her behalf. There's a wondrous kind of karma in this, in that he ended up being one of her biggest liabilities, rather than a help.

As a feminist, I was upset that our first female president would only have gotten there on her husband's coattails. She is not qualified to be president. Why not wait for Barbara Boxer, who would make a fine president? Or Kathleen Sebelius? Or Janet Napolitano? Or Christine Gregoire? There are plenty of women who would make good presidents. I'm not someone who would vote for someone just because she was a woman. I will vote for the best person, no matter their color, their sex or sexual orientation, or their race.

For all her nastiness, for all the lies, I have defended her staying in the race. Until today.

Look. The nomination race is over. It's been over since Obama won Wisconsin, just a week after sweeping the Potomac primaries. It's been over, mathematically, for a long time.

But I wanted to allow her and her supporters their fantasy. I saw the contest as building our Democratic party base, given us reasons to go into every state and register new voters. And that's been good for us, to a point. Until now. She knows Obama has received death threats. She knows that people who have stood up from positions of power and said no to war have been assassinated. And she saw the press go after Gov. Huckabee for his beyond dumb and horribly unfunny allusion to the same.

The second to last straw, for me, was her comment about how the "hard-working" "white people" were voting for her, implying that other people were not so hardworking. I wanted her excommunicated from the Democratic party for that statement alone.

But this comment was truly the last straw. Her statement today was simply unconscionable.

She needs to go away. Forever. I never want to see her face on TV or hear that voice again.