The Dems are encouraging Carol Mosely Braun to run, to minimize the chances of a Sharpton primary victory in the south.

As Lili Tomlin said, no matter how cynical I get, I can't keep up.

And the most amazing thing is that they'll expect the blacks to vote for the eventual white liberal plantation owner nominee, and their expectation will probably be met.

They pulled a similar strategy in '88, at least having meetings to discuss how to keep Jackson from winning the nomination after his Michigan primary win. They wanted a more "electable" candidate.

Now with Sharpton in the ring, they want another black candidate to keep him from being nominated.

Now let me make sure I understand this. Republicans are the racist segregationists? Republican's want to keep blacks out of power? Yeah, whatever.

Mark my words, the first black president of the US will be a Republican and a woman no less. And when President Rice is sworn in in January of 2009, the black "leadership" will denounce her as a sellout.

It's almost getting to be too easy to figure these guys out. Like you said, no matter how cynical you get, you can't keep up.

I don't think they're worried about him getting nominated, but they don't want to risk his winning any primaries, and going into the convention able to broker a close race with his votes.

The core of my argument stands. The Dem's have a history of courting the black vote while simultaneously trying to keep them out of power.

Maybe they're willing to do anything necessary to keep this PARTICULAR black candidate from succeeding? I would.

-K

And "that" particular black candidate as well back in 1988. (Jackson) I guess as soon as an "acceptable" black runs, they'll be more than willing to let them run.

Hypocricy, pure and simple.

Mr. Simberg;

I believe that that is a Dorothy Parker quote, not Lily Tomlin.

Well, I heard it from Lili Tomlin. She may well have stolen it from Mrs. Parker.

This is laughable from so many levels I don't know where to start. But here's a new wrinkle: they're doing this because they don't wand Al Sharpton to be in a bargaining position in the nomination process, now why wouldn't they want that? so they wouldn't have to actually do anything for the group he (sort of) represents, despite they're voting for dems in the 90% range consistently. So they want to keep the 90+% without doing anything for it, and to do this they're seeking to put a welfare cheat in a prime position. The Clinton Legacy continues.