What cost loyalty?

New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson endorsed Barack Obama for president last week, an event that should draw no more than a polite acknowledgement from the chattering classes. Endorsements are nice, but unless they come with massive phone banks, they are not going to have a huge impact on the election.

But this endorsement was a little more interesting because of Richardson's career, he was promoted to a cabinet position by Bill Clinton and has been a longtime supporter of both Clintons. But when he decided that Obama was the better choice for president he became a "Judas" in the words of Clinton pit bull James Carville. Carville claims he wasn't speaking on behalf of the Clintons, but can there be any doubt that he does anything but echo their feelings?

Carville points out that he stood by Clinton when the '92 campaign started to bad and he did do so because "I was a little-known political consultant until Bill Clinton made me." He said Richardson should have at least stayed silent.

In essence, Carville is saying that loyalty to the Clintons is more important than loyalty to the nation. That even if you believe Obama is a better choice than your friend, you have a duty to remain silent. When people wonder why some of us think Hillary is dangerous, this is why. She wants it too bad and she's a nihilist willing to destroy everything around her if she can't have it all.

4,000

Word comes today from the New York Times that the death toll has reached 4,000 among American soldiers in Iraq. It is not a number that boggles the mind. After the bloodletting of the 20th Century we are accustomed to seeing death tolls in 7 figures or more.

I knew 3 of them. Or rather I met them after they died, covering their funerals. The first was early, but the family turned against the war. The second and third were later, in the third year of the war. The families of each supported the war. They were proud of their dead sons. That is the elephant everyone is tiptoeing around. The survivors must support the war totally. Anything less than a belief that weapons of mass destruction will eventually be found means their loved ones died for nothing. They cannot yet accept that fact, the fact that the lives they hold so dear mean nothing to the men that are running this country right now.

Much will be written of this milestone. Little will be worth reading. But I'd like to have an answer to this question: What has happened in Iraq that is worth a single one of their lives?

Obama

I don't like him on free trade, I don't like him much on health care, but Barack Obama might have locked up my vote this morning. His speech this morning was the most eloquent of my lifetime and possibly the most important. Race remains this nation's original sin. Those who say Obama is all talk and no substance must now answer a very difficult question of their own candidate. "How is he or she addressing the fundamental problem of this nation?"
Hillary's answer was typical of her. She announced that race is very important to discuss and then went on to discuss anything but.
McCain was halfway around the world insisting for much of the day that Iran was supplying Al-Qaeda.
I am beginning to agree with Andrew Shepherd. Being president is all about character. Hillary's is revealed in her explanations of why she didn't bother with the intelligence on Iraq. McCain's has been revealed in his survival of both Vietnam and the primary, his association with the Keating 5 and his reliance on lobbyists, thus he remains to be revealed.
I see no way for Hillary to survive at this point. To get the nomination she must not only address the issues raised in the speech, but also somehow match both the style and the substance. It is unlikely.