All you can do is laugh…

    

They won’t be doing anything differently, come the Hosanna future that dawns post election… if you did not like the 110th but suffered on, remain bent over…

With a preponderance of attention being paid to the 2008 presidential campaign, the Senate races being waged during this cycle have gone largely ignored by the national media. Which is unfortunate because history is being made.

On Thursday, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee announced that it had raised $13.3 million in the fourth quarter of 2007, bringing its yearly total to $55.4 million. By comparison, the previous record for money raised in a year by the organization was $43.6 million in 2005.

“Every day there is more evidence that the American people are hungry for change and are looking to Democrats to provide it,” DSCC Chair, Sen. Chuck Schumer. “From successful fundraising and recruiting to record turnout in Democratic primaries, there is a wave building across the country, and with nine months to go until Election Day,

we could very well deliver lasting change.”

Try not to choke… try to swallow hard and know that Daddy Schumer (Chuck to his friends but not to you) loves you and wants what is best for you.

On the House side, the Democrats also find their coffers being stuffed. For the year, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee raised a record $67.5 million.

…

In 2008 there are 12 Democratic Senators and 23 Republican who are either retiring or are up for reelection. Of those, according to the Cook Political Report, only two Democrats face any imminent danger, while 10 Republicans find themselves in electoral crosshairs. On the House side, meanwhile, there are ten Republican seats being vacated that are deemed “toss ups” in 2008. For the Democrats that number is zero.

“In the off year you have a few jobs: recruit candidates, retain incumbents and raise money,” Matt Miller, the DSCC’s spokesperson, told the Huffington Post. “We feel good about the off year we have and now that we are in an election year we have a map where there are a number of Republicans held seats where they are playing defense and really only one Democratic seat where they have a challenger.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I read an interesting speculation, and that is all it was but I did pause, Chilliza in The Fix had a list of possible Veepessas for both Obama and Hillary.

One on Obama’s list was TIm Kaine, who supported him very early and iirc is a National Co-Chair.  He is also up in 2009, VA governor is mandated one term…

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Dennis Perrin, a snip from a good post…

[W]hat if it’s McCain vs. Hillary in November? Oh man, that would be a blast to witness. Two nearly identical choices for imperial manager, the one slight difference being that McCain says he’s opposed to torture, while Hillary must wait to check wind velocity and direction. I can see the liberals twisting themselves into numerous knots trying to justify a Hillary vote over McCain, assuring each other that it’s the right thing to do, and of course reaching back to Bill’s criminal years for inspiration. You mules better hope that Saint Obama gets the nod instead. At least with him, the fantasy is easier to pull off. Change! Hope! Stardust! Ponies! If I ruled the world . . .

Funny thing is, not that long ago, McCain was the liberals’ favorite Republican, especially in comparison to the Bushes. His time in a North Vietnamese cell earned McCain a lot of guilt cred among Bill Clinton’s groupies, who felt bad backing a draft dodger over a POW. So, they tried to have it both ways: Clinton, Hero President; McCain, War Hero and All Around Good Guy.

I remember it all too well.

Don’t strain, they will be reminding us.  Maybe Obama can send Kerry out to campaign against McCain.  A sick nasty old man who could level Kerry wtih a glance.  I don’t want to remember…

Here is a snip from Perrin recalling a night on Alan Colmes’ program in NYC, Perrin dared to remind three Clintonistas WHY McCain was in a POW cell in Vietnam:

At one point, Colmes … asked the panel if John McCain was a war hero. Bales puffed out his chest, tilted his head to the side, weighed the issue, then pronounced that, yes, McCain was indeed a war hero. Barrymore quickly chimed in, adding her assent, while Colmes breathlessly spoke of how honored he was to have personally met McCain and basked in his glow.

Then they all turned to me.

“Well,” I said, hesitating a moment, for I knew my answer would elicit some hostility, “I’m not sure how heroic it is to incinerate Vietnamese children.”

“OHHHHHHHHHH!!!!” was the collective reply.

Colmes told me I was tasteless. [Jaid] Barrymore said I should be ashamed of myself. Bales puffed out his chest yet again (he did this a lot during the three-hour show) and demanded to know whether I considered McCain a war criminal.

“No. Not personally. McCain didn’t create the policy. The war criminals were in Washington.”

Still, I added, that doesn’t exonerate McCain for dropping bombs on the Vietnamese.

“Oh!” squeaked Barrymore. “What should he have dropped instead — birthday presents?”

The slagging went on for a little while longer. Here I was, in the middle of three Clinton liberals, reminding them why McCain ended up in a POW cell. Not that I supported torture or reprisal beatings, but some context was in order. The Vietnamese didn’t sneak into the States and kidnap McCain from his snug bed. The three couldn’t care less. What’s more, they defended the U.S. bombing of Vietnam, at least so long as McCain was doing the killing. It was a handy reminder of how crazed liberals become when they taste a little blood.

So absolutely classic.  A moment endlessly repeated thru time. I think Pakistan is clearly being skinned and de-feathered, to be presented to us as fine case for the “blooding of the president”, whomever, which ever it will be.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This last… I bet it has McCain and the Republican machine slobbering at the bit. Kerry pulled that ‘first and foremost an Internationalist’ schtick as well.

Sorry, just don’t see new ideas from the Democratic party… not not… and more of not.

[oh right, necessary addenda:   opposing Obama does not constitute supporting HIllary — I realise that is complicated, god knows why]

***********************************************************