Co-Chair Of Clinton's Hispanic Council Endorses Obama

A California congressman who is co-chair of Hillary Clinton's National Hispanic Leadership Council has defected and pledged his support to Barack Obama, Clinton's rival for the Democratic presidential nomination.

The defection came as a new poll showed that Obama would handily defeat John McCain in California in November_ and do so by a larger margin than Clinton would.

U.S. Rep. Dennis Cardoza, whom Clinton named to his Hispanic leadership post in December, shortly after Cardoza announced he would support her for the nomination, announced he was switching sides on Friday.

"I believe that Senator Obama will inevitably be our party's nominee for president," Cardoza, a Democrat from Merced, in the San Joaquin Valley, said.

He was joined by another California superdelegate, U.S. Rep. Jim Costa, a Democrat from Fresno.

Original here

Obama's political team out-organized Clinton

WASHINGTON - Call them Kool-Aid drinkers. Political romantics. Starry-eyed dreamers.

But as the marathon Democratic primary campaign nears an end, Barack Obama's staff is on the verge of vindicating its belief that the eloquent black freshman senator from Illinois was a unique candidate who could win the Democratic nomination in one of the biggest upsets in presidential politics.

The band of Obama loyalists who imagined that could happen have stunned even themselves with their success against Hillary Rodham Clinton, who appeared to have wrapped up the nomination last year, before any votes were cast. Now, they face a new challenge with the impending nomination and campaign against Republican John McCain.

If they succeed, many team members could be helping run the country eight months from now. Presidents often appoint campaign advisers to top administration jobs.

The team was led by calm and focused campaign manager David Plouffe; their strategy was inspired by the candidate's experience as a community organizer. They built a campaign designed to accomplish what other political sensations like Gary Hart and Howard Dean failed to do — turn the energy and excitement of the Obama phenomenon into long-term results.

"I think everyone knew realistically that he was starting as an underdog," said longtime friend and adviser Valerie Jarrett. "But I don't think he would have started down this path with a team that didn't think he would win. It was going to be an uphill battle, but in the end I think we were all confident that it could be done and that he could do it."

Matching Obama's organizing background, the team has roots in conducting on-the-ground congressional campaigns across the country. Many top aides were groomed by former House Democratic leader Dick Gephardt and former Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle instead of by the Clinton wing of the party. Clinton's team was built with Washington and New York operatives.

From its experience in congressional races, the Obama team understood firsthand the extent of Clinton fatigue in the heartland and the lesson of the 2006 midterm elections: America wants change.

Obama's chief directive for hiring the more than 700 staff members who eventually came to work for him was: No Drama Allowed. Obama's even demeanor is reflected in the advisers closest to him. While Clinton's campaign divided into conflicting power centers whose emotional disputes leaked publicly, any fights in the Obama campaign were kept in the family.

Plouffe embodies Obama's vision — a steady and unemotional number cruncher averse to the limelight, able to tune out noise and focus on the moves needed to reach the end game. Plouffe was the mastermind of Obama's long-range campaign plan that looked beyond the Feb. 5 Super Tuesday primaries that Clinton had predicted would deliver the nomination to her. He dispatched staff to states that Clinton's campaign overlooked, particularly small caucus states where intensive organization produced wins that swelled Obama's delegate lead.

A Gephardt guy, Plouffe had worked on campaigns that went broke, so he was notoriously cheap. Obama attracted a talented staff willing to work for much less than they could have made with Clinton. Plouffe carefully minded the bank account to preserve enough money to keep running after the wildly expensive Super Tuesday contests while Clinton's campaign went broke. She had to lend it $11.4 million to stay afloat.

In the month after Super Tuesday, Obama won 11 straight contests and took a delegate lead that Clinton has not been able to erase.

That's not to say Obama's campaign plan worked flawlessly. The initial plan was to turn a win in Iowa into a win in New Hampshire that would make his nomination unstoppable, but Clinton defeated him in New Hampshire and the campaign dragged on for months.

Now the team must reunite the fractured party and introduce Obama to a whole new swath of voters as he takes on a well-known war hero with bipartisan appeal. The campaign is rapidly adding new people, like experienced communications strategist Anita Dunn, who is married to campaign general counsel Bob Bauer and recently joined Obama's inner circle.

Obama's other closest advisers:

• David Axelrod, a former newspaper columnist who shares Obama's talent with words, is the most experienced and visible political strategist. An idealist who exudes enthusiasm for his candidate, Axelrod helps buck Obama up on the road. Also from Chicago, he can play down-and-dirty politics with a Midwestern smile.

• Jarrett, who has helped guide Obama's entire political career, brings blunt assessments only a longtime friend can provide. Jarrett has known the Obamas since before they were married, when she hired Michelle to work for Chicago Mayor Richard Daley. Known to be cool under pressure, she stepped up her campaign role last fall when Obama was a distant second to Clinton. Bringing a fresh outsider perspective, she held staff accountable.

• Pete Rouse, who has run Obama's Senate office, is known for loyalty and a self-effacing manner. Rouse brings expert knowledge of Washington to a team based in Chicago. He protects Obama's standing in the capital city and has brought in other D.C. operatives, particularly from the Daschle fold where he used to run things.

• Robert Gibbs, who has been at Obama's side since his Senate campaign, is communications director. A Southerner and tough fighter, Gibbs is a passionate defender and can channel the candidate's thoughts. He's also among a few who can frankly tell Obama what needs to improve.

• Michelle Obama, the candidate's wife, is his closest confidant. She often says, "I'm not his senior adviser, I'm his wife." But she also talks about how dinner conversations about their family are what's in his mind when he's crafting policy. She's the ultimate truth teller to the candidate; he calls her for feedback after debates. She has led the campaign's outreach to female voters: As a lawyer and hospital executive, she provides evidence that Obama respects strong women even as he's campaigning against one.

Another crucial adviser is Steve Hildebrand, who oversaw state-by-state efforts to run up Obama wins. Other key team members are finance chairwoman Penny Pritzker, finance director Julianna Smoot, policy director Heather Higginbottom, scheduling director Alyssa Mastromonaco, deputy communications director Dan Pfeiffer, national press secretary Bill Burton, economics adviser Austan Goolsbee and foreign policy aides Anthony Lake and Susan Rice.

Original here

HILLARY’S ASSASSINATION REMARK

Everybody who has thought seriously about the Obama candidacy, including me and probably including the Senator himself, have reflected on the horrible possibility that he would be assassinated. One cannot think about Obama, the Kennedy-esque candidate without worrying about his safety. But we all observe the discipline of not raising the issue in public. We all worry that to do so would be to encourage some maniac to take a shot. Now Hillary has violated this unstated but heretofore universal taboo and brought up the possibility. That is not to say that she is hoping for a murder. But it is to say that the possibility is uppermost in her mind and a significant part of her rationale for staying in the race. And, by raising it, she has made it more possible.

Original here

Sharpshooters on the roof, Updated

Obama came to Clemson University sometime before the South Carolina primary, and my son went to hear him speak.

His first and most-lasting impression? The sharpshooters on the rooftops that he spotted around the area where Obama was speaking.

This is a kid who's probably never seen weapons like that in person. His nearest reference to that kind of firepower is from video games. And he was amazed to see those guns panning the crowd at his school.

Which gave me the opportunity to explain to my son: Merely standing before us and offering himself to us as a Presidential candidate is an act of courage on behalf of Barack Obama every day he's on the campaign trail.

Death threats came early, we know, judging by how early the Secret Service stepped in to try to protect him. I suspect, the death threats come in greater numbers for him than any Presidential candidate before him.

• teresahill's diary :: ::
• 
  

And yet, he still stands before us. He stands before us with his wife and with his daughters by his side. Think about that.

Think about what it would take for any of us here to believe so strongly in the need to change our country that we could handle constant death threats. That we could handle the danger inherent in our campaign not just to our spouse, but to our children?

Think about Wing-Nut radio show hosts who feel free to joke about the possibility of him being assassinated. Didn't a Fox News person make some kind of reference to assassination, too?

And the good Rev. Mike Huckabee? How funny. That sound? Someone shooting at Obama. That was within the last week, right?

Apparently, it's still OK in this country to many people to joke about shooting and killing a black politician.

And yet, Obama stands before us, offering himself to us.

Think about the stadiums, 15,000, 30,000, 50,000, 75,000 people. And how many in Oregon this week?

There's no way to get them all through metal detectors. We've seen reports of the Secret Service getting a certain percentage of people close to the stage through screening with metal detectors, but no way they can get everybody through.

And yet, Obama stands before us, a humbling act of courage day after day.

He was standing before crowds of people today when Hillary Clinton added her two cents about the possibility of his assassination, and he'll stand before even more crowds of people tomorrow and he next day and the next. With his family.

To take jokes from Republicans and wing-nut radio hosts is one thing, but to take it from a Democrat is something else. And to take it from a person claiming to be fit to be President, is something else entirely.

A woman who is also a mother, who knows what it's like to try to raise and protect a child in the White House, to have a husband who I'm sure got a lot of death threats of his own, who stood before huge crowds and generated horrific amounts of irrational hatred from the Republicans... Think about that?

She knows what it's like to need the kind of protection Obama has. For her daughter to need it and her husband to need it, and it has to be even worse for Obama, a black man who dares to think he can break through hundreds of years of racism in this country and be President.

She has a better idea of that fear than most any of us could have, and yet she said it anyway.

Oddly enough, my 16-year-old daughter and I were talking politics one night this week, and she said in her honors English class, they got onto the subject of Obama one day, and a girl in her class said, "There's no sense in voting for him. They'll just kill him anyway."

And the girl was black. A teenager.

The idea is out there in a big way. I've heard a few African Americans interviewed who say they don't want to vote for Obama because they don't want him to be killed. They don't want to help put him into a position to be shot.

The fear is everywhere, and it's huge.

His courage to stand before us, day after day, despite the fear is amazing and humbling.

We should all honor his courage, and if we don't, shame on us.

Shame on you, Hillary. I am ashamed to call you a Democrat today, to have people know you're a Democrat. I'm ashamed as a woman to have a female candidate acting this way. I expect better from women candidates than men. I expect a more human approach. Shame on you as a mother and as the wife of a former President.

And know that I did not start out angry at you or being ashamed of you. I voted for your husband twice. I love the idea of a woman President, one I could be proud of. I always thought you were a brilliant, disciplined, careful woman until some point in this campaign when it became obvious to me that you're not.

You've made my impression of you worse with nearly everything you've done since... the South Carolina Primary, I guess, when Bill started in with his "Jesse Jackson won South Carolina twice..." Especially when someone brought up the fact that after the whole Monica Lewinsky news broke, which had to be one of your husband's darkest hours, Jesse Jackson came to the White House to talk to him and try to help him through it. What kind of person turns on a friend who helped him through his darkest hour?

I am ashamed of you. I'm angry at you. I just want you to go away and be quiet for a long time, and I am not alone.

To me, Barack Obama seems to be everything you are not.

UPDATE: Some people are saying I'm accusing Hillary of advocating violence toward Obama. I am not.

I'm saying some things should be off-limits to us as decent people, especially people saying they're qualified to lead us. We've seen assassination crap from Republicans and Wing-Nuts, but I want Democrats to be better than this. Much better.

I think Hillary, in a very matter-of-fact manner, maybe coldly, maybe calculatingly, pointed out once again that something very bad might happen to Obama, and that if it did, she could still become President.
It's obvious she's thought about it. I think it's the last real hope she has left of being the nominee.

Does she wish for it to happen? I don't know, but she sure does want to be President, doesn't she? And the way she talked about it today says to me that she's just thinking about herself and what she wants. If Obama dies, she wins. She said it today, using other words. Remember, I could still win, and here's how.

I think the danger to Obama and his family is greater than it has been for anyone else ever. He's gotten closer than any African American to winning, and there's still a lot of hatred out there.

As a candidate, the wife of a President and a mother, Hillary should know this all too well and common decency, to me, says that she doesn't touch the assassination talk ever under any circumstances. No matter what.

I think at the very least, she should honor the courage he's shown as a candidate and the very real dangers he and his family face.

Original here

Hillary Clinton's candidacy has done feminism no favours

Has Clinton hindered women’s advance towards the presidency?

When the dust settles over the 2008 election, will Hillary Clinton have helped or hindered women's advance toward the US presidency?

Right now, Hillary is in Godzilla mode, refusing to accept Barack Obama's looming nomination and threatening to tie the Democratic party in legal knots until the August convention and beyond.

Those who think she will withdraw gracefully in a few weeks are living in cloud cuckoo land. The Clintons are ruthless scrappers who will lock their bulldog teeth in any bloody towel.

In her raw ambition and stubborn, grinding energy, Hillary will certainly cast a long shadow on young women aspiring to high office. She is both inspiring role model and cringe-making bad example — an overtly feminist careerist who never found a way to succeed without her husband's connections, advice, and intervention.

Bill Clinton may have masterminded Hillary's runs for the Senate and for the Democratic nomination, but he has been a gross liability in recent months, as he has co-opted the hustings to maunder on about himself or to inject divisive racial overtones into the debate.

The next major female presidential candidate will be well advised to stuff any errant husband into a rucksack and chuck him down a laundry chute. If they are to be truly equal, women must fight their own fights and not rely on a borrowed spotlight.

Hillary has tried to have it both ways: to batten on her husband's nostalgic popularity while simultaneously claiming to be a victim of sexism.

Well, which is it? Are men convenient sugar daddies or condescending oppressors?

As her presidential hopes have begun to evaporate, Hillary has upped the ante in the crusading feminist department. Her surrogates are beating the grievance drums, trying to scare every angry female out of the bush.

From that rag-tag crew, she will build her army. Let the red flags fly! Hillary is positioning herself as the Crucified One, betrayed, mocked, flogged, and shunted aside for the cause of Ultimate Womanhood. But doesn't this saccharine melodrama undermine the central goals of feminism?

For all her claims of media bias and ill treatment by her male fellow candidates, Hillary has got off absurdly softly in this campaign. No one — neither her rivals nor mainstream journalists — has had the guts to explore or even list the bursting catalogue of past Clinton scandals, in which Hillary was nearly always hip deep.

Charges of sexism have become Hillary's rote strategy for evading scrutiny. But by entangling the noble movement of modern feminism with her own knotty psychodrama, Hillary is reinforcing hoary stereotypes about women. Will every losing woman candidate now turn on the waterworks and claim to be maimed by male pride and prejudice?

The biggest barrier to women winning the White House is that the president must serve as commander-in-chief of the armed forces and thus convey strength and purpose to defend the nation. Hillary shrewdly tried to address this gender problem by getting herself appointed to the Senate Armed Services Committee, where she absorbed information and slowly gained the trust of high-ranking military officers.

However, the plan went awry when, servilely following polling data about national opinion, she voted for the War Resolution authorising George W Bush to invade Iraq. That fateful decision, meant to shore up her military credibility, would alienate her from the left wing of her party and ironically boost the presidential hopes of a virtual unknown, Obama, who had publicly opposed the war.

Women contemplating the Hillary precedent would do better to ignore evanescent polls and study military history instead. When women try to masquerade in the lion skin of military bravado, it leads to embarrassments like Hillary's daffy tale about running for cover under sniper fire in Bosnia — which insulted the US military by implying it would put a First Lady and her daughter in danger.

Then there was Hillary's threat to “obliterate” Iran should it attack Israel, a shocking word-choice that betrayed naivete about military options and indifference to their human consequences. Feminist ideologues sniffle about how hard the road is for women candidates. Hillary, it is alleged, has had to be both tough and soft, masculine and feminine.

So that's the rationale for her head-spinning personality changes? For every new state or region, she trots out a new tone or accent, from the crisp to the cornpone. It's crude and patronizing —which is partly why she has surprisingly lost support among her peers, educated upper-middle-class women.

No, the first woman president must have a consistent character and steady demeanour. She will also, however, need a mountain of cash, crucial for the blizzard of advertising that unfortunately constitutes national campaigns in the US. Here Hillary, tutored by her husband, has definitely blazed a trail.

There's no one better at flattering and soaking the rich and famous. But she has blown through her hoard with breathtaking profligacy. After raising well over $100 million, she is now more than $20 million in debt and sinking deeper every day.

Clamouring hosts of small vendors remain callously unpaid in her wake. A prudent money manager she clearly is not — hence the reluctance of so many voters to put Hillary in charge of the US budget. Sexism has nothing to do with it.

Original here

McCain's Puts His Temper on Full Display with Anti-Obama Rant

If John McCain goes ballistic every time he's mildly criticized by Barack Obama, this is going to be a much more interesting campaign than I thought. Yesterday Obama said this:

I respect Sen. John McCain's service to our country. He is one of those heroes of which I speak. But I can't understand why he would line up behind the president in his opposition to this GI bill. I can't believe why he believes it is too generous to our veterans. I could not disagree with him and the president more on this issue. There are many issues that lend themselves to partisan posturing, but giving our veterans the chance to go to college should not be one of them.

Wow, that was shockingly below the belt, don't you think? No? Well, McCain apparently did:

It is typical, but no less offensive that Senator Obama uses the Senate floor to take cheap shots at an opponent and easy advantage of an issue he has less than zero understanding of. Let me say first in response to Senator Obama, running for President is different than serving as President. The office comes with responsibilities so serious that the occupant can't always take the politically easy route without hurting the country he is sworn to defend. Unlike Senator Obama, my admiration, respect and deep gratitude for America's veterans is something more than a convenient campaign pledge. I think I have earned the right to make that claim...

I know that my friend and fellow veteran, Senator Jim Webb, an honorable man who takes his responsibility to veterans very seriously, has offered legislation with very generous benefits. I respect and admire his position, and I would never suggest that he has anything other than the best of intentions to honor the service of deserving veterans. Both Senator Webb and I are united in our deep appreciation for the men and women who risk their lives so that the rest of us may be secure in our freedom. And I take a backseat to no one in my affection, respect and devotion to veterans. And I will not accept from Senator Obama, who did not feel it was his responsibility to serve our country in uniform, any lectures on my regard for those who did...

Perhaps, if Senator Obama would take the time and trouble to understand this issue he would learn to debate an honest disagreement respectfully. But, as he always does, he prefers impugning the motives of his opponent, and exploiting a thoughtful difference of opinion to advance his own ambitions. If that is how he would behave as President, the country would regret his election.

(He went on to say "You can't handle the truth! You fucked with wrong POW!")

It's well known that McCain has a temper. He is commonly despised by people he works with. But I don't agree with Kevin here that this is just an intemperate blast that shows he's too hot-headed to be president (although he certainly is.) It is to establish his dominance on military issues and the war. As much as he's a mean man for real, he is also a ruthless politician who is positioning himself as the older Alpha Dog against the "disrespectful" upstart. This is some primitive stuff unfolding here.

McCain is also playing rather crudely into the developing theme that Obama isn't patriotic or quite a "real American." You would think that it would be ridiculous to claim such a thing when Obama is voting for a GI Bill and McCain isn't, but when you really look at what McCain does in his statement (you can read it in full, here) he goes out of his way to juxtapose his family's long history in the US military with claims about Obama only supporting veterans out of political convenience. It's really quite insidious.

I have no doubt that McCain really was pissed off. But this statement is also a political document, vetted by the campaign, and they aren't idiots. They released it for a reason. We all think this makes McCain look like a crazed hot head and that people will reject him for it. But keep in mind that this kind of thing also plays into McCain's carefully crafted persona of being a "straight shooter" who doesn't calculate his every word for public consumption. Losing his cool is part of what a lot of people like about him. They see it as a sign of authenticity.

It's a rather audacious shot across the bow to Obama, who came back with a measured and reasonable response:

I am proud to stand with Senator Webb and a bipartisan coalition to give our veterans the support and opportunity they deserve. It's disappointing that Senator McCain and his campaign used this issue to launch yet another lengthy personal, political attack instead of debating an honest policy difference. He should know that this is not about John McCain or Barack Obama — it’s about giving our veterans a real chance to afford four years of college without harming retention. Senator Webb’s bipartisan bill will do this, and the bill that John McCain supports would not. These endless diatribes and schoolyard taunts from the McCain campaign do nothing to advance the debate about what matters to the American people.

I find that convincing, of course. The idea of that macho freak McCain at the helm makes visions of Cheney and Rumselfeld dance in my head. But I don't honestly know if everyone sees it my way. This guy has made a career out of pretending that he answers to no authority and is afraid of no one. I'm not sure that there aren't quite a few people out there who see a man like that as the kind of president that's needed to bring real change to Washington. It fits into a certain archetypal groove. I'm not sure calling such comments "disappointing" is going to be enough over the long haul.

Original here

Say What? Hillary Clinton Does it Again

We have no idea what, exactly, Hillary Clinton was thinking when she referred to the assassination of Bobby Kennedy in explaining her decision to keep on campaigning when it looks like there is virtually no hope of her winning the Democratic nomination.

(We’ve supported her decision to do so. This is a democracy, after all.)

But she could, at least, have apologized.

Instead, she issued one of those tedious non-apology apologies in which it sounds like the person who is being offended is somehow at fault: “I regret that if my referencing that moment of trauma for our entire nation, and particularly for the Kennedy family was in any way offensive.”

If?

Is it even possible that Mrs. Clinton thinks someone out there was not offended by her remark, Kennedy relative, Obama relative, or just plain folks?

Mrs. Clinton tried to excuse her inexcusable outburst by saying she was distracted by the shock of the news of Senator Edward Kennedy’s malignant brain tumor. But there was something familiar about what she said, and thanks to Ben Smith of Politico, we remembered what it was. Mrs. Clinton said basically the same thing in an interview with Time on March 6:

“I think people have short memories. Primary contests used to last a lot longer. We all remember the great tragedy of Bobby Kennedy being assassinated in June in L.A.”

What’s next? “Mistakes were made”?

Original here

Olbermann Slams Clinton in Special Comment: "You Are Campaigning As If Barack Obama Were The Democrat And You Were The Republican"

Tonight, as promised, Keith Olbermann attacked Senator Hillary Clinton in a ten-minute "Special Comment," saying that he was not endorsing Barack Obama but that "events insist" that he speak and stand against her "tepid response" to the controversial remarks of Geraldine Ferraro wherein she said that Obama wouldn't have been as successful if he were not black. Last night Olbermann decried the statements as "clearly racist"; tonight, he followed up with a doozy in which he accused her of "campaigning as if Barack Obama were the Democrat and you were the Republican." In so doing, said Olbermann — in letting the opportunity to forcefully oppose Ferraro's comments pass her by — Olbermann said that Clinton had "missed a critical opportunity to do what was right."

Watch the video below and read the transcript here.

Geraldine Ferraro has stood by her comments and denied that they were racist, saying on "NBC Nightly News" tonight that they were response to a specific question about why this election was special, and saying that it was the Obama campaign that was playing "this type of a race card." (See related video here.)

Olbermann chose to frame his comment in terms of bad choices on the part of Senator Clinton, stopping short of calling her inherently racist, instead casting the matter in terms of her receiving bad advice from the "tone deaf" and "arrogant" members of her campaign ("they are killing your chances of becoming president...[and] slowly killing the chances for any democrat to become president"). He characterized Ferraro's remarks as "a blind accusation of sexism and dismissing Senator Obama's campaign as some equal opportunity stunt," and decried her comments both in this instance and historically, pointing to the "cheap, ignorant vile racism that underlines them."

Olbermann specifically fingered (but did not name) Clinton campaign manager Maggie Williams, saying that instead of repudiating Ferraro's words — "words that should make any Democrat retch" — she was instead "letting her campaign manager bend them beyond all recognition into Sentaor Obama's fault...thus giving Ferraro nearly a week to [send the dialogue] back into the vocabulary of David Duke."

"Do you not see, Senator?" Olbermann asked. "Senator Clinton, this is not a campaign strategy. This is a suicide pact."

Olbermann took the opportunity to mention a number of other matters (or, in recent campaign parlance, to 'throw the kitchen sink' at Clinton), criticizing her also for the "shell-game about choosing Obama as Vice-President," as well as her husband Bill Clinton's comments about Jesse Jackson after the South Carolina primary, the "racial undertone of the 3 a.m. ad" and the "moment's hesitation" in her much-parsed answer on 60 minutes and said that after all the accrued episodes in which race had been implicated, people now "see a pattern" of racially-tinged remarks and associations with Clinton — though he carefully stopped short of definitively asserting its existence: "False or true, they see it," said Olbermann.

He was far more definitive about Ferraro, and that's where the comment returned in its final few minutes as Olbermann implored Clinton not to allow herself "to be perceived as standing next to — and standing by — racial divisiveness," and once again brought it back to her campaign members and what they had wrought. "Grab the reins back from whoever has led you to this precipice before it is too late," said Olbermann. "Voluntarily or inadvertently, you are still awash in this filth....your only reaction has been to disagree and call it "regrettable." Unless senator you say something definitive, the former congresswoman is speaking with your approval."

Said Olbermann, in a callback to Clinton's own stand taken at the last Democratic debate: "You must reject and denounce Geraldine Ferraro."

He finished with "Good night and good luck." OUCH.

Original here