about time hillary gains one

Yeah, but Pennsylvania doesn't count.

The campaigns are swapping strategies, right?

Those that think she has no path to the nomination should think again

So the earmark King endorses the earmark Queen...I'm shocked I tell you shocked!  Evidently this is a group Murtha can do 'business' with.

So she's one for thirty-seven?  At this rate Obama's got a lock.

This is somewhat interesting considering how Pelosi appears to be trending toward Obama. Either Murtha is being his own man here or there has been some rumbling in the house caucus.

lol todd love the snark at the end.

eerie silence over "there"

This is awesome news.

Murtha can't be happy be with Sen. Obama's focus on ethics reform and transparency in government, especially Sen. Obama's disdain for the role lobbyists play. I don't this one was ever in doubt.

Why do I think this was the worst announcement ever?  The timing.  The day of Obama's speech?  Murtha KNEW that there'd be little attention paid to his endorsement of Senator Clinton.  It gives Clinton a lot less than it could've if it were made on, say, Wednesday or Thursday.  Why not next Monday?  Start the week on a high note.  Why make the announcement when it's going to be drown out?

Big get for Clinton, but like I said the timing is just awkward.

Question to the Obamatons:  Has it occurred to you that Mr. Murtha has endorsed Senator Clinton because he truly believes that she is the best, most qualified person running for the presidency?

Delegate majority? Gone. Majority of states won? Gone. Popular vote? Gone. Florida? Gone. Michigan? Gone. Integrity? Gone. Superdelegate edge? Diminishing in droves. Murtha? Yeeeaaahh baby, the "comeback kid" is back! ... NOT.

After first denying it, Obama now admits he
did hear Wright make 'controversial remarks'

Now, Barack Obama says he did hear Wright's sermons that "could be controversial." If he disagreed with them, why didn't those comments move Obama to repudiate Wright then? Especially since the campaign knew
Wright could pose a problem."

Busted.

Drop out Obama.

Actually, Hillary's ability to work with both sides in the Senate was often noticed.  She had some strange partnerships on various bills, but still maintained a liberal voting record.  Murtha knows her best from Capital Hill, and knows her hard work and ability to get things done.  Her work with and for veterans also didn't go unnoticed to him as well as her plans to get out of Iraq soon after sworn in.  That afterall is his main concern, the soldiers and vets who are being maimed and killed in this war.  He expressed that from the beginning.

Of course Clinton's going to get some superdelegate endorsements.  No one in their right mind thought you wouldn't get any more.  

Seems like the national media coverage of "the speech" has been overwhelmingly positive.  Whether it's just media hype or not, I don't know.  But it moved me, after I have been doubting for a few days.  I imagine that others are feeling the same way.  BO has clearly differentiate himself as a different type of candidate, whether you agree with not.

John Murtha is a conservative Democrat whose primary expertise is bringing the pork home for his district.  Hillary is the Queen of Earmarks in the Senate, so it's not surprising that those two would be on the same page.

That is great news.  I hope supers will come out to support Hillary.  She really is the better democratic candidate for November.

Murtha is an anti-war democrat that you would all love unconditionally if he had endorsed Obama.

I was just thinking about him yesterday, this is a nice bit of news for Hillary... if the MSM can stop fawning over the latest 'big speech' to notice that would be nice

Aurelius he endorsed her because she is going to win Pennsylvania and his district.  Duh...?

If I am Hillary or Jerome, I am worried.  Honesty matters, and the voters understand the lies Hillary and Jerome have told in order to get the lying Hillary nominated.  

What the rest of us in the left blogosphere don't understand is why Hillary and Jerome are willing to give the election in the fall to the Republicans.  THE RIGHT WILL SHOW UP IN UNBELIEVEABLE NUMBERS to squash hillary because they hate Bill and Hillary.

Why do you all hate the Democratic Party?  Why are Jerome and Hillary willing to rip the party apart?

Barack Obama has claimed more delegates than Hillary Clinton in 15 of the last 17 primaries.

Can you feel the Hillmomentum?

Edwards is next.

He was good on the War - but he is bad regarding corruption. His irrational support for divisivenss must be linked to his penchant for milking the system.

Very sad.

But the day of Lobbyists controlling us all are numbered.

I'm not a little bit pissed off that this was barely mentioned on dKos. Yeah I'm not boycotting the site.

fact check to Limabuaghs Gang - Obama always acknowledged that he had witnessed some controversial statements.

So cut out the slander and look at yourself in th e mirror and reform

It's astonishing but sadly predictable.  Murtha being vilified by Obama partisans across the blogosphere!  I've even seen some pre-vilification of John Edwards in response to the mere rumor that he might endorse Clinton.

Poor Daily Obama, MSNBC, CNN and the Obama post are not taking this news too well.

Way to go Mr. Murtha.

Congratulations, I guess, though I think it's funny that the diary mocks the "superdelegate concern trolls" when Clinton's path to the nomination is predicated on winning a sizable majority of the superdelegates to offset her pledged delegate deficit.  Aren't...you guys/gals the "superdelegate concern trolls"?  Strange.

not "breaking" enough for them.....

John Murtha is Nancy Pelosi's #1 confidante on the Hill.  They are extremely close.  She worked her ass off to try and get him elected Majority leader.  Murtha endorsing Hillary should tell us something.  It's definitely a sign.

Gee, this Murtha fellow must be one of those old-school, out-of-touch sellout Democrats.

Either that, or he is clearly a racist.

I mean, how can he POSSIBLY go against the Hufpo, Kos crowd?

But don't worry. Obama will be allowed to represent the pary, even if it is clear that there is absolutely no way he is electable.

Because he won all of those Red States. And without the help of the race factor.

Just rename it the Suicide Party.

If it's shown over the next few weeks that Obama cannot win a general election, the Super Delegates are not going to give the nomination to Obama even if he has the most pledged delegates and won popular vote.  They will give it to Hillary to at least have a chance for victory in November.  

CREW ranks Murtha as one of the 22 most corrupt members of Congress. He's one of only four Democrats included on the 2007 list.

Just because the man is right about Iraq doesn't give him a free pass on ethical issues. That he's a right-winger on most other issues makes his adoption by the Clintonista faction of the 'progressive blogosphere' all the more hilarious.

Murtha will help scare up some votes in his district, but Mr. Earmarks may not help her campaign's image overall.

Murtha is not good on the war, as someone else said.  He voted for the war resolution, unlike Pelosi or Boxer, to name two better examples.  He woke up sooner than many others, like Hillary who was in denial that the war wasn't going well all the way until the Fall of 2005.  Her state of denial that she voted for the war has evolved through the present and is still evolving.

Murtha is very corrupt.  He is a founding member of CREW's 22 most corrupt members of Congress list at www.beyonddelay.org

"Rep. John P. Murtha (D-PA) is an 18th-term member of Congress, representing Pennsylvania's 12th congressional district. Rep. Murtha chairs the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee. Rep. Murtha's ethics violations stem from abuse of his position on the subcommittee to benefit the lobbying firm of a former long-term staffer and from threatening to block earmarks of other members for political purposes. Rep. Murtha was included as a member to watch in CREW's 2006 report on congressional corruption.

PMA Group

Paul Magliocchetti worked with Rep. Murtha as a senior staffer on the Appropriations Committee Subcommittee on Defense for 10 years. After leaving the committee, Mr. Magliocchetti founded the PMA Group, which has become one of the most prominent Washington, D.C. defense lobbying firms. In the 2006 campaign cycle, the PMA Group and eleven of the firm's clients ranked in the top 20 contributors to Rep. Murtha, having made campaign contributions totaling $274,649. In the 2004 and 2002 cycles, PMA and nine of the firm's clients ranked in the top twenty contributors having given $236,799 in contributions $279,074 respectively. In turn, many of PMA's clients have benefited significantly from Rep. Murtha's earmarks. In the 2006 Defense appropriations bill, PMA clients received at least 60 earmarks, totaling $95.1 million. In the 2008 election cycle, the PMA group and its clients have contributed $106,000 to Rep. Murtha's campaign committee and PAC

Concurrent Technologies Corporation

In 2007, Rep. Murtha inserted into the Energy and Water Appropriations bill a $1 million earmark to establish the Center for Instrumented Critical Infrastructure - a subsidiary of Concurrent Technologies Corporation, (CTC) a non-profit technology innovation center in Rep. Murtha's district that has received hundreds of millions of dollars in earmarks in recent years. Contrary to Rep. Murtha claims, the Department of Energy has denied supporting the request for the earmark.

CTC is a large non-profit that in 2005 received over $212 million in government grants. Since 2002, CTC's employees and employees' family members have donated over $115,000 to Rep. Murtha's political committees and leadership PAC.

By earmarking funds for companies represented by the PMA group and CTC in return for campaign contributions, Rep. Murtha may have accepted bribes or illegal gratuities, committed honest services fraud and violated House rules prohibiting members from dispensing special favors.

Threat to Deny Spending Projects

After Rep. Mike Rogers offered a motion in May of 2007 that would have stripped a $23 million earmark inserted by Rep. Murtha, Rep. Murtha approached Rep. Rogers on the House floor and stated, "I hope you don't have any earmarks in the defense appropriations bills because they are gone, and you will not get any earmarks now and forever." Rep. Rogers replied, "This is not the way we do things here," and, "is that supposed to make me afraid of you?" Rep. Murtha retorted, "That's the way I do it." Rep. Rogers declined to file a former ethics complaint and a resolution aimed at reprimanding Rep. Murtha was permanently tabled.

Earlier in May, Rep. Murtha had threatened Rep. Todd Tiahrt for voting in committee in favor of Rep. Rogers' motion to strip the earmark. Rep. Murtha approached Rep. Tiahrt on the House floor and unleashed a tirade, during which he [Rep. Murtha] threatened to withdraw his support from a defense project in Rep. Tiahrt's district. Asked about the issue later, Rep. Tiahrt claimed, "It was a little misunderstanding," and refused to discuss the matter. After his conversation with Rep. Murtha, Rep. Tiahrt apparently changed his position regarding the earmark and despite having voted for Rep. Rogers' amendment in committee, he voted against it on the House floor.

DOWNLOAD THE FULL REPORT ON REP. JOHN P. MURTHA (D-PA)"

http://www.beyonddelay.org/summaries/mur tha.php

over here now.

It's a campaign line for him.  

Both of the candidates have worked to build consensus across the aisle.

Barack Obama is a liar

To all nbc
Obama speech ,,,, Not sure if you caught Not only did Obama,,, Refuses to denounce him,, but even More,, He say in his own words,,,
Barack Obama was in church when Jeremiah Wright,, was spewing Anti-American, Racist ism ,,,, Those were his own words,,, barack was there
After going on keith Oberman ,Show obama said he would denounce that if he heard that language he would leave and not tolerate it , and denounce it
After he went on MSNBC,, he went on FOX CNN ABC< all the news station saying he was never there,,, in his church when he said these things,,
But Now today during his speech,,He states flat out Say's HE was there,,, Last week Barack Obama Lied,, went on all the news stations, and Lied,,
But your not reporting that,,,, You can rest assure,,, cnn ,,, Fox , ABC,,, Msnbc,, are getting more on this ,,, they will be reporting on this, and we will see
If you chose to report, Obama Lying on tv,,, If this was Hilary clinton lying and caught lying on all the new station,,, you can be sure,, you would talk about it every hour
people will be on your station debating this,,,, people analysing , if it is hilary clinton but it was not her it was Barack Obama, ,, it bad enought He lied, about being in church
With Jeremiah  Write, when he said these anti american ,,,,,and still refuse to denounce him...all the news agency want to do is speak on how good his speech was,
Not that he lied,,, Last week on all the news agency ,, He was never there today in how own speech He say I was there,,,,should play  all Obama videos from last week
stating he was not there,,, or heard any of the anti-american Jeremiah Write, said in his churc then play his speech today saying he was there and he did hear him in church and refuse to denounce Jeremiah Wright,,,

I assume this sock puppet thing is an insult, but for the record, I don't visit that website and never have.

At the start of the primary season I was in the Kucinich or Gravel camp. I was anti-Obama because he wasn't left enough for me, so you can imagine how I feel about Clinton. (I was also secretly hoping Russ Feingold would get in the race.) However, I've come to appreciate Barack. Though I think it was unfortunate that he  disavowed Jeremiah Wright, who simply stated the ugly truth about some issues best left undiscussed in polite company, his speech today threaded the needle very effectively and was brilliantly written.

Even Clintonistas must admit that after eight years of President Blockhead, it is refreshing to hear a politician tackling complex issues without resorting to the black/white, good/bad, or patriot/traitor paradigms.

Over at Kos the smearing of Jack Murtha goes unabated. Who is being divisive now?

The voters don't like the idea of the superdelegates throwing the election to HRC:

By 55%-37%, Democrats and independents who "lean" Democratic say an outcome in which Clinton lost among pledged delegates but prevailed with the help of super delegates would be "flawed" and unfair."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/el ection2008/2008-03-17-poll_N.htm

I thought the Johnstown press mentioned Murtha was leaning toward Hillary three months ago? I know the official announcement is today and so that's news. But I don't know that Murtha was ever truly undecided.

And the WV superdelegate didn't "announce" today. A Charleston Gazette happened to mention DNC Pat Moroney's endorsement of Clinton in passing. Who knows when Moroney actually endorsed her?

Al Giordano over at 'The Field' reminds us that Murtha isn't exactly the kind of superdelegate that Hillary can be proud of:

http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/

"The rub among his superdelegate colleagues is ABSCAM: The 1980 sting operation in which Murtha and other members of Congress were videotaped with undercover FBI agents that posed as Saudi Arabian citizens seeking US citizenship, offering massive cash bribes to members of Congress. Murtha was named as an "unindicted co-conspirator" in the ABSCAM case but escaped prosecution, in part, to be fair, because he hadn't taken a bribe (he said "maybe I'll be interested" later). But the other, probably more determinative relief to him was that to lessen his own burden before the law, Murtha instead testified against two other Democratic House members. As house snitch of The House he sealed his fate with his colleagues."