WOW!

I mean wow. What a waste of time. They went into over time to make sure they got to ask at least one more non substance issue.

This is kinda short.

Clinton's PA surrogate extraordinaire, Gov. Ed Rendell, to Tim Russert:

Tim, you run against uncommitted, that's the toughest election to win. I'd rather run against an opponent anytime than against uncommitted, and Hillary Clinton got 55 percent of the vote against uncommitted.

Goodbye to the hopelessness...
• Obama is too young a person, too inexperienced and uncynical to be a great leader.
• Hillary is seasoned, and her longevity makes her a better choice. She knows that hope is a foolish luxury.
• Obama couldn't raise the money. He hasn't even got 1,000,000 donors!
• Obama couldn't build the organization. No one volunteers for his campaign. No one gets involved in politics because of him.
• Obama couldn't win. He has not won 23 states.

Now, in order to qualify something as plagiarism, the definition seems to suggest you need two things:
A.You need to use someone else's idea.
B. And you have to pass (or attempt to pass) said idea off as your own (ie not cite it).

Let's think about this after the jump.

I wrote this somewhat stream of conscious. It's based on ideas I have synthesized from my observations and opinions over the past 8 years or so, both directly formed on my own and indirectly through absorbing opinions offered up from a myriad of sources (columns, discussions with family/ friends/teachers, talking heads, blogs, etc), as well as books which stick out in my mind recently (Obama's Audacity of Hope and Dreams from my Father and Krugman's Conscience of a Liberal). I do not offer this up as a factual analysis. Only as my view of the situation we are currently in in our country. It's my first diary, so go easy on me. :) I welcome any and all feedback, but I do hope we can keep things civil, no matter where we are coming from or who we support.