Perhaps that explained why Obama raised $40 million in one month? Because of people like us that actually question all the bullshit put out by the media concerning Obama? Because we have the nerve to dispute the ridiculous lies that the Obama campaign uses as excuses to rephrase what Obama really meant when he said all that stupid stuff. Because some of us are offended by his racist bigoted spiritual mentor and his typical white person comments?
<!--more-->
Yes, according to Donna Brazile it is because of people like us that Hillary is currently losing this race.

I just sent Hillary a private e-mail telling her that supporters like you are destroying her candidacy.

Isn't that sweet of you Donna. And I am sure that Hillary really appreciates that what you said came from that unbiased heart of yours. Yeah, and pigs fly and take showers daily.

A regular commenter here at No Quarter named mimi sent an email to Donna Brazile pointing out the irony that an African American was disenfranchising the voters of two large states (MI and FL). And this was the response she received:

"Thanks for the joyful email. Like most of the other pro Clinton emails, I have now put them in a special folder called 'tales from the gutter.

Stay positive and remember if she wins, you will need Obama supporters and donors. So please stop throwing stones. Give her the support now and stop sending frivolous emails.".

It is now called throwing stones to point out the truth according to Donna Brazile. Of course we all know that she is the one that laid down the law totally disenfranchising Florida's voters because of the decision to move their primary up. She even said at the time that she intended to send a clear signal to other states that the mighty rules of the DNC were much more important that the millions of Democratic voters in Florida or any other state. And this seems to be a trend with Brazile. Her "independence" is so transparently false that one need only take a casual glance at her own words to reveal where the woman is actually coming from.

But Donna Brazile isn't satisfied taking just pot shots at "angry" Hillary supporters. She decided to weigh in on James Carville for his "Judas" comment which she sees as over the top. And she took it a step further by finding a way to blame this on Hillary.

Hillary, stop throwing elbows at Barack

Mere months ago, Richardson was running against Clinton. Why is his endorsing the presidential candidate with the most pledged delegates, state victories and popular vote count anymore traitorous than running against the former first lady and U.S. senator? Isn't it a little too late to be getting up in arms about misplaced loyalty? Or is this just a warning to any other former presidential candidates, Cabinet secretaries, schedule C appointees, civil servants or former campaign workers of what lies in wait for them should they try to influence the outcome of this nominations process? If so, let me send an urgent message to Al Gore: Stay quiet.

You see to Donna, there is nothing wrong with hopping aboard a train that you perceive to be winning a race even though your past and your loyalties are elsewhere aligned. If you can be on the what you think is a winning team that somehow trumps loyalty, giving your word and honoring your commitments. For wasn't it Bill Richardson who said he would endorse the campaign that ran the most positive message? I wonder how he squares that with Obama's surrogate McPeak claiming that Bill Clinton was just like Joe McCarthy? Or Obama's spiritual mentor God damning AmeriKKK A? And what of the truth behind Carville's statement that Richardson really did betray Hillary? Didn't Bill Clinton state forcefully that Richardson had told him to his face 5 times that he would never do that? But I guess if Bill Clinton is actually Joe McCarthy in disguise that destroys the credibility of anything he has to say. Discredit the messenger so you can safely ignore the message.

And the "warning" comment is what takes me over the edge completely. Nothing like playing the old Republican ruthless card on the Clintons if it just so happens to help the guy you support but you really can't support because you are a DNC official and you are supposed to be unbiased but who cares, He is the One. But you know, Donna Brazile can't keep her biases to herself. She has already made her mind up that Obama is going to get the nomination. And that apparently justifies, at least in her puny mind, her right to attack Hillary and Hillary supporters with impunity.

Poor governor. I don't think Richardson deserves the attacks against him for doing what he thought best to unite the Democratic Party. Rallying behind the presumptive nominee is not traitorous, though I understand why the Clinton campaign would desire to label it as such. Unfortunately for team Clinton, these random and personal attacks aren't working. In fact, Clinton approval ratings have plummeted to the lowest recorded level (37 percent in a recent NBC/WSJ poll) since March 2001. The last seven years have seen war, scandal, recession and terrorism, yet it is the Clintons' scorched earth electoral policy that is tanking her approval ratings.

Yes, those of us that demand that the votes of every state count, that demand that the voters of every state in the nation be given the opportunity to vote before deciding a nominee, we are are the one's that are standing in the way of unifying the party. And yet it is Brazile and Richardson and the rest of the "leaders" that have anointed Obama and called for Hillary to quit the race that are doing their absolute best to rip this party to shreds. They are so completely convinced that Hillary supporters are like uninformed cattle that will come home when they start ringing the bell, that they are willing to throw the majority of DEMOCRATIC party under a bus. Because they have decided that THEY want Obama to be the nominee. Never mind the fact that HILLARY has won more Democratic votes than Obama. Funny how it is only our side that seems to remember that this is a Democratic primary.

If you had any doubt that Brazile hopped upon the Obama bandwagon long ago just read a few of her writings. Of course she doesn't come right out and say that Obama is her choice. But when you read between the lines and especially don't read what an otherwise balanced assessment of things should include you discover that she has endorsed Obama by omission if nothing else. In an article on her website deploring the negative tone of the primary Brazile lets her true bias shine through.

Voters can't find the real issues behind all that mud

First she accused him of having presidential ambitions since kindergarten. When that didn't stick, the co-chair of Clinton's New Hampshire campaign raised Obama's teenage experimentation with drugs. She had to apologize.

The Clinton campaign is not without its faults, as well.

The campaign had to force the resignation of two Iowa volunteer coordinators who had forwarded e-mails that tried to tie Barack Hussein Obama, a Christian with a Muslim-sounding name, to Islamic jihadists.

Why can't Clinton just tell her volunteers to stay on message?

But go ahead and read the whole thing yourself. You won't find a single admonition toward Obama or the Obama campaign. It is as if they have been all sweetness and light while that mean old Hillary and her ruthless volunteers have been dragging this whole process through the mud. Isn't that nice of her? And so unbiased. I wonder what she said when Samantha monster Power stuck her foot in her mouth? That's right: ~crickets~

It wouldn't be kind of me to call Brazile deranged. So I won't. But I have to point out something she said that to me demonstrates exactly what is so very wrong about her and why she should be irrelevant. Again, her own words:

Race talk could cost Obama, Americans, more than just the presidency

If Obama loses the race for the presidency, I surely hope it's because the American people decide they want an old. wise hand, or someone who has spent more time inside Washington, D.C. Seriously, I would hope the rejection of Obama is not based on the color of his skin or his past association with a down-to-earth, wild-eyed preacher man who was "just like family." I would find it absolutely horrifying that we would hold Obama to a standard that is rarely applied to others. Obama, like McCain and Clinton, is not perfect. While they might not have a pastor called Wright, they surely have been associated with controversial and sometimes unsavory characters.

Now please pay careful attention to the words in bold. She actually said that Reverend Jeremiah Wright is down-to-earth! After you stop laughing (or crying) perhaps we can examine the seriousness of her outrageousness. Uh... Earth to Donna Brazile: I don't think that anyone that refers to a whole country full of people as "garlic noses" is down-to-earth. I don't think that someone who believes that we live in the US of KKK A is down-to-earth. I don't think that someone who thinks Louis Farrakhan is a person that truly epitomizes greatness is down-to-earth. And I don't think that someone who believes that the AIDS epidemic was created by the US government as a plague to destroy the black population is down-to-earth. I realize it just might be me. But people like that seem more like whack jobs than anything else. Crazy uncle doesn't even come close.

And finally just to give you a taste of how biased and self centered Donna Brazile really is we must recount her efforts to throw the GLBT community under the bus. On no uncertain terms, Brazile made it very clear that the Civil Rights community didn't include GLBT members. It is something based SOLELY on the color of one's skin, not the content of their character.

Deeply disappointing Donna

Dean admitted it was Brazile who objected most strenuously to a proposal put forward by gay Democrats to add GLBT delegates to affirmative action guidelines states follow when selecting those who attend the party's national convention:

Dean said some "influential individuals" within the DNC Black Caucus, such as Donna Brazile, opposed the plan because it was seen as "an affront to the civil rights movement."

"I wanted equal representation for gay and lesbian Americans," he said, "and I wanted to achieve it in a way that wasn't offensive to the history of the civil rights movement."

We've seen this before, of course. One particularly galling example was when the National Association of Black Journalists vetoed the inclusion of the National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Association in an umbrella group of minority journalists called -- ironically enough -- UNITY. Groups representing Hispanic, Native American and Asian American journalists OK'd NLGJA's participation but NABJ balked, and even pressed UNITY to change its name to UNITY: Journalists of Color.

And no, you did not misread this. Under Brazile's leadership the DNC will not consider the minority status of GLBT Democrats in determining delegates to the national convention. Does she sound like someone trying to unify the party? Maybe so in that Obama way that asks black people to reconsider their opinions about gay people by having Donnie I was gay until I was saved McClurkin campaign with him. Or by having Obama spiritual advisors like Reverend James Meeks that preach that homosexuality is an evil sickness. Yes, that is apparently the type of unity that Donna Brazile embraces. So the next time you see Obama supporters like Brazile on TV making all these pleas for unifying our party keep in mind what type of unity they are seeking,. Because it is a unity of none.

Update [2008-4-6 15:34:30 by Fleaflicker]: A member forwarded this exchange she had with Brazile on March 30 and 31 of this year:

Ms. Brazile,

It's come to my attention that this might be a better e-mail address for you, as I am still awaiting your reply to the message below.

Today on CNN, where you persist in having the viewers believe that you are neutral in the primary race, you stated that "it's all been worked out" in reference to the Democratic Party nomination. What did you mean by this? It implies that you have some kind of insider's information about the process. I have been keeping up with the news quite closely and it's my understanding that the super delegates will act independently, as they are required to do, to select the person best qualified to win the general election in November and the person best qualified to serve as our next Democratic president.

What was your implication, made on the air for millions of voters to hear?

Please be advised, Ms. Brazile, that Hillary Clinton's supporters will not go quietly into the night. We will not fall quietly in line behind Barack Obama. You may suggest that we are a radical fringe, but unfortunately you underestimate the power of women.

Now please, do the ethical thing and declare your partisanship and stop taking a salary as an objective journalist. You are not in this matter the least bit neutral, and everyone can see that.

Sincerely,

Hillary Supporter

And Brazile's response:

Yes, I have not declared. But no longer willing to stay parked in the neutral zone. Coming down on the side of reality.