Anyone else been wondering why Congressman Bob Brady (and Superdelegate) hasn’t picked a side yet?
Because he’s got his palm out.
They see Obama spending millions of dollars on advertising: television, radio, and the Internet. As state Rep…

They know this…if Obama won’t pay now, he won’t pay later…and some of these people actually count on this as planned income.

She also must worry that the media may likely skewer her if she pays up (whether to turn out the vote or suppress it). jeanneb on April 11, 2008 at 8:25 AM

Are you that naive, or are you kidding? I have personally witnessed much worse in relatively civilized neighborhoods in LA county. The press could care less.

He figures that when push comes to shove Philly will vote for him anyway. Plus, he can always repay anybody he wants after becoming POTUS.

Obama has the high ground here, but it will likely cost him.

No and no. Obama knows he is going to lose Pennsylvania so he has set himself up with an excuse: “I lost because I wouldn’t pay for votes. Hillary won because she bought the election”.

If Obama were really so saintly in such matters he would embrace public financing of the general election as he promised. This is nothing but a smokesceen to mask his failure in the state primary.

I don’t see how that is humanly possible.

rockmom on April 11, 2008 at 11:12 AM

Can you possibly be serious?

I think Obama has to take this stance. But he had best be ready to take the flak over it and lose a lot of votes over it. Hillary will shell out that half a mil out of her own pocket without blinking.

Suppose she ponies up the money & the machine scares up all those black voters who, in the privacy of the voting booth, vote for Obama anyway.

jeanneb on April 11, 2008 at 8:25 AM

If she gives walking around money to her white supporters, just wait for the demogogic nukes to fly.

She also must worry that the media may likely skewer her if she pays up (whether to turn out the vote or suppress it).

And lastly, the media has a dilemma. Do they skewer Hillary…even if it means shining a light on the Dems’ dirty politics that reporters usually work so hard to ignore?

What a delicious irony.

If he (Hussein Ossama) alienates his constituency with a failure to play the corrupt Democratic game, he may still win the nomination but lose the general election in November.

posted at 7:19 am on April 11, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

I’m not sure what you’re talking about here.

You greatly missed the point of this election cycle.

This is not about “playing any Democratic game,” this is about two things:

1 – Getting rid of the Republicans.

2 – Affirmative Actioning a Black in the White House.

That’s it.

The rest is blah blah blah.

canopfor on April 11, 2008 at 8:06 AM

Actually, it’s not. Only too late did I realize that it was money for black people only. Sorry for my racism.

So if the Dems use bagmen, does that finally make Hillary a bag lady?

Hening on April 11, 2008 at 7:40 AM

The competition for ‘pig in a poke’ is still up for grabs, though…Obama’s going for more of the traditional meaning, while Clinton’s stuck with the more literal meaning.

JiangxiDad: Excellent point!

I like the idea of paying people to vote though. It’s a different take on the 3rd world election practice of killing people who don’t vote or rather who vote the wrong way.

Every democrat social program legislated means money going to somebody.