Rep. Insee's Menschy Letter Endorsing Obama

My Congressional representative (and former Clinton superdelegate), Jay Insee (WA-1), announced his decision to endorse Barack Obama for President. It's well done, menschy, with a powerful unity message to both Obama and Clinton backers.

Dear Michael,

First of all, let me offer my congratulations to those who helped Senator Obama secure his historic nomination.

As this Democratic primary process concludes, I want to let you know that I am going to work very hard to help unify our party behind our nominee, Barack Obama. This Saturday, Senator Clinton will announce her support for Senator Obama, and I will be officially endorsing his candidacy as well.

Some of you who receive this are strong Hillary Clinton backers, and have passionately supported her campaign. Others of you are strong Barack Obama supporters and passionately support his candidacy. To all, I ask that we now pull on the same rope.

For a guy who admires Senator Obama, I am deeply concerned when I read in the paper or receive e-mails from Hillary supporters vowing to not support our new candidate. I am already excited about an Obama presidency, but to those who are hesitant I implore you to join this cause because time is a luxury we cannot afford.

Over the next few weeks, or as long as it takes, I will be urging Hillary supporters in Washington State and across the country that we must put the past behind us. We must be unified in our support of Senator Obama, or else we risk another disastrous four years of a Republican White House. Whether Obama or Clinton supporters in the primary, we all are neighbors, we are friends, we are Democrats, and we are family. And, like any family that has occasional squabbles, but who has learned to put their problems behind them and move forward, we must do the same.

I know that many people didn't agree with the candidate that I endorsed. I respect their feelings, and all I can say is that sometimes I even disagree with my own wife after 35 years of marriage. Now we have a job to do together, so let's do it.

I know personally that Senator Obama is uniquely capable of bringing our family together. A couple of weeks ago when I ran into him on the House floor, I asked him when will he get a hoop up on the South Lawn of the White House. He replied "As soon as I'm president...hey, did you know that I've been playing basketball with the North Carolina Tar Heels?" I jokingly replied "Of course, that's why you won North Carolina by such a large margin." He laughed a big Obama laugh. This is a man who can put past differences aside and move on to unify the Democratic Party, as well as the country.

I was asked by a reporter today if I was disappointed in this result. I answered honestly and said no, I always knew that we had two brilliant candidates each in their own way, either of whom would represent a break through for America.

Senator Obama's genius is obvious, his inspirational qualities have touched millions, and I am confident in his ability to win this race - if we all pull on the same rope. Now I am chomping at the bit to hear Senator Obama's Inaugural Address, one that has the capacity to have the same effect as the one we heard in January 1961 by JFK. I will do everything within my power to ensure that America has the chance to hear that speech. I hope that you will do the same.

Very truly yours,


Jay Inslee

Reports of Penn's Departure, Exaggerated, Premature

Sam Stein on Huffington Post reports on a conference call that Mark Penn hed with the managing directors of Burson Marsteller (where he is CEO). They can't have been any happier about the events of the past week than were the Clintons (where he is no longer Chief Strategist, but still plenty plugged in.

Burson Marsteller has even more reason to be upset than the Clinton campaign: Penn's handling of the matter lost them the Colombia contract.

Stein confirms that Penn's resignation is (per Penn, anyway) a non-resignation.

"I think you've heard that I made the decision to step down as chief strategist of the Clinton campaign. Penn Schoen and Berland is going to continue to poll for it and I'll continue to play a role advising Senator Clinton and former President Clinton as well as the rest of the leadership of the campaign."

The Clinton campaign, apparently, is eager to absorb even more of his disastrous advice.

(Tags: Clinton, Hillary, Hillary Clinton, Mark Penn, Mark J Penn, Lobbyist, Burson-Marsteller, campaign)

Mickeleh's Take: Here are three things any chief executive (POTUS included) needs to master:

1. Finding smart advisors,
   
2. Empowering them to develop smart strategic options,
   
3. Having the perspective and judgment to select the best of those options for implementation.

Seems to me that Hillary, working with Penn, is 0 for 3.

Mark Penn's Triangulated "Resignation"

Mark Penn, caught-out selling his knowledge and access to both sides of the free trade war, has resigned from the Clinton campaign. Or has he? He's dropped one title ("Chief Strategist"), but apparently he personally and one of his firms stay on the payroll and will continue to advise the campaign. Here's the official announcement from Maggie Williams, Clinton's campaign manager.

"After the events of the last few days, Mark Penn has asked to give up his role as Chief Strategist of the Clinton Campaign; Mark, and Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates, Inc. will continue to provide polling and advice to the campaign."

Two questions: What were the unmentioned "events of the last few days," that led Mark Penn to ask to to give up his role? Is he gone or not? [Update: The answer is "not gone." Penn participated in this morning's conference call.]

• Monday, Penn (wearing his hat as CEO of lobbying and PR giant Burson-Marsteller) met with officials from Colombia to advise them on strategies for getting Congressional approval of the Colombian Free Trade agreement. (Sen. Clinton has been wooing labor with her vigorous opposition to free trade—and has specifically denounced Colombia for anti-union violence.
  
• Thursday, the press and blogosphere started playing back an unfairly edited Clinton remark from early March regarding leaks that an Obama staffer had back-channel conversations with Canada. The snipped version: "“Just ask yourself [what you would do] if some of my advisers had been having private meetings with foreign governments," What Clinton actually said: "Just ask yourself, if some of my advisers had been having private meetings with foreign governments basically saying 'ignore what I’m saying because its only political rhetoric,' I think it raises serious questions.” Well, close enough for politics.
  
• Friday, Penn apologized for the meeting: "“The meeting was an error in judgment that will not be repeated and I am sorry for it. The senator’s well-known opposition to this trade deal is clear and was not discussed.”
• Saturday, Colombia, taking umbrage a the apoloty fired Burson-Marsteller: "The Colombian government considers this a lack of respect to Colombians, and finds this response unacceptable.” (The $300,000 contract had been in place for more than a year, and as Joe Trippi noted, the only question is why hasn't this been an issue earlier?)
  

But there's one other event that surely preceded Mark Penn's asking to step down: A confrontation with Bill and/or Hillary. According to Ann Kornblut and Dan Balz this much has been leaked: "Clinton and her husband, Bill Clinton, were furious with Penn for going to the meeting, campaign officials said." Delicious details, surely to follow.

Steeped in triangulation (the art of finding middle-muddles between two controversial positions), Penn and the Clinton campaign offer us a non-resignation resignation. What exactly happened here? By giving up one title, but retaining a lucrative contract Mark Penn finds himself unable or unwilling to ask the Clash's musical question: "Should I Stay or Should I Go"

Mickeleh's Take: Given the long string of self-wounding strategic blunders that the Clinton campaign has made, and given the ludicrous and transparent goal-post moving spin that Penn has concocted almost daily in his press calls, it's amazing that he's held the Clinton's trust until "the events of the last few days." More amazing that he may still have it.

(Tags: Clinton, Hillary, Hillary Clinton, Mark Penn, Mark J Penn, Lobbyist, Burson-Marsteller, campaign)

Prime Time for Hillary

Sen. Hillary Clinton has just released a second 3:00 AM TV spot. This one is aimed at Sen. John McCain, and focuses on the economy.

"It's 3 am, and your children are safe and asleep.
But there's a phone ringing in the White House and this time the crisis is economic."

Despite the absurdity of anyone making a 3:00 AM phone call on the mortgage crisis, Clinton's team are determined to brand her as President 3:00 AM." Maybe she should change her slogan to "ready on night one."

When did keeping vampire hours become part of the presidency? Makes you wonder what she plans to do with her days. Maybe she'll give Bill the day shift and keep the graveyard shift to herself.

Mickeleh's Take: The Democratic National Convention should offer Hillary Clinton a 3:00 AM speaking slot. In her world, that's prime time.

(Tags: 3:00 AM, Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Campaign)

Did Hillary Just Offer Her Pledged Delegates for Poaching?

Sen. Hillary Clinton has floated a new possible path to victory: she reminds Obama's "pledged" delegates that they're free to switch sides (Newsweek, Daily News). Does she really want to open that door? What's sauce for the gander's delegates is sauce for the goose's.

Mickeleh's Take: I keep encountering folks who are turned off by Clinton's scorched-earth tactics. Among the supers, more folks have switched away from Clinton than to her. What if the same trend takes hold among the pledged delegates?

The Line Obama Needs to Fix In His Speech.

One of the biggest, surefire, applause lines in Sen. Barack Obama's standard stump speech is this one:

"Here is the good news-the name George W. Bush will not be on the ballot. [CHEERS, APPLAUSE] And my cousin Dick Cheney won’t be on the ballot. [LAUGHTER, APPLAUSE] Well, everyone’s got a black sheep in the family.”"

It's an easy warm up joke. But why just let it lie there? Isn't this a ripe opening for Obama to remind us that, while George Bush won't be on the ballot, his war will be; his confusion about who's the real enemy will be; his economic program will be.

People think highly of John McCain. The press loves him. But he's running for the third term of George W. Bush. The Democrats need to work harder—at all levels—to tie McCain to the failed Bush presidency.

Mickeleh's Take: The best way for Obama to take on Sen. Clinton is to show us how effective he will be in taking on John McCain.

Obama on Race: Breadth, Depth, and Respect

A funny thing happened on my way to blog about Obama's speech on race. I saw the Reuters headline: Obama denounces preacher; says can't disown him. Not inaccurate, but is that really the headline?

True, Obama talked at length about his relationship with Rev. Wright and distanced himself from his former pastor's remarks without denouncing the man. But isn't that what we all expected? Couldn't that headline might have been written last night?

Here's the real headline. Obama talks honestly about race in America (video). He put the whole festering, difficult tangle of issues on the table for open discussion without pandering or patronizing. It's never happened in any presidential campaign I can remember.

What astonished and heartened me about the speech was its breadth, depth, and respect.

Breadth, in that it encompassed the full sweep of race relations in this country from slavery, through constitutional compromise, segregation, and hopeful future.

Depth, in that it embraced our shared and separate experiences from both black and white perspectives—acknowledging resentments and suspicions on both sides—all channeled through the lens of Obama's multi-ethnic heritage.

Respect, in that the tone, structure, language, and argument of the speech appealed to our heads as well as our hearts, adult-to-adult.

Oliver Willis wrote this after the speech:

"One of my personal maxims has been that politicians will disappoint you... With Senator Obama, for the first time in my life, I have watched a political leader who I don’t worry if he’ll be up to the task."

Mickeleh's Take: If I may borrow from Rep. Ferraro, we're very lucky he is who he is.

What the Media Never Bothered to Answer About Rev. Wright

No question that Obama's former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, made outrageous remarks in his sermons. The clips that have been most played on YouTube and TV are harsh, inflamatory, and disturbing. There's no easy way to spin, "God Damn America." Obama did what he needed to do, in written and video communications he distanced himself and denounced the statements. (see below for excerpts and clips).

How is it that this story—based solely on excerpts from old, long-available videos of sermons—was covered breathlessly as breaking news? It was covered with the urgency of of a crane falling and demolishing a New York building or an investment bank suddenly sucked into a sinkhole of bad credit, or the revelation that a righteous governor went to high-priced whores.

We got a lot of "what?" But very little "Why?" and not a bit of "Why now?" Does anyone know the flashpoint of the Rev. Wright firestorm? Anyone tracking that down?

Missing from the coverage was any sense of the context of the Rev. Dr. Wright's remarks. Here are some of the things what I wish the press would have told me.

1. Who is Rev. Wright (other than Obama's former pastor)? What's his bio?
2. What has he accomplished in his community? With his congregation?
3. What, taken as a whole, is his message to his congregation? to the African American community? to the Christian Church, to America?
4. What do his colleagues think of him?
5. What do members of his congregation think of him? What do they think his message is? Why are they drawn to him?
   
6. What is the background of Rev. Wright's black liberation theology?
7. What were the sermons with the nasty bits actually about? What was their message? What did they ask of the congregation?
   

Instead, the standard media play was: Here are some awful things that Obama's minister preached; will it sink his campaign or will it just get people to stop talking about Geraldine Ferraro?

The best main stream attempt to answer any of this came this morning in The Wall Street Journal in an article by Suzanne Satalin and Douglas Belkin. They quote Melissa Harris-Lacewell, associate professor of politics and African-American studies at Princeton University

"America is our country and we love her, yet she has done such awful things. We have to have a place where we say…'This is not okay. I'm still hurt about this.' "

The best perspective piece I've seen on Rev. Wright is not in the traditional media, but in this blog post by Kim Pearson on BlogHer.

Mickeleh's Take: If you want to take an even longer view: Rev. Jeremiah Wright's namesake, the prophet Jeremiah delivered even harsher messages against Israel and Jerusalem than anything Rev. Wright has said about the United States. In a ministry spanning the last days of the Kingdom of Judeah through the destruction of the Temple of Solomon, Original Jeremiah was even charged with treason, and indicted on a capital offense for his troubles. He railed against prophets who say all is well, all is well, when it's not well at all. (You probably know the more famous translation, "They cry 'peace, peace,' when there is no peace." Or the more recent version, "'The surge is working, the surge is working,' when the surge is not working.")

PostScript: Obama's statements.

"I vehemently disagree and strongly condemn the statements that have been the subject of this controversy. I categorically denounce any statement that disparages our great country or serves to divide us from our allies. I also believe that words that degrade individuals have no place in our public dialogue, whether it's on the campaign stump or in the pulpit. In sum, I reject outright the statements by Rev. Wright that are at issue."

—Huffington Post

He also sat for a friendly interiew with Keith Olbermann (MSNBC), and a prosecutorial one with Major Garrett (Fox News) and then addressed the issue again at a rally in Plainfield Indiana.

(Tags:Barack Obama, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama's_Pastor, Media, Liberation Theology)

Ferraro's Game: Segment and Conquer

Former Congressional Rep. Geraldine Ferraro is playing a nasty, cynical game. It's a game I know well because I play it professionally. She's not a racist. She's a marketer.

Ferraro is just working the old dodge of market segmentation and positioning. And the Clinton campaign is eagerly playing along.

Ferraro's original claim (in the Daily Breeze) that "if Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position" frames the competitive product as a candidate for blacks and elitist, latte-swilling liberals. What's that leave for her own product (Clinton)? The much larger segments combined from white working-class and rural voters and women.

She's not a racist, but she's dog whistling to them along with whites who resent black progress and to feminists who think that the woman candidate deserves to go first while the African American candidate waits his turn.

Will Bunch calls it "Hillary's 'Archie Bunker' Strategy," and he reminds us that Ferraro was Archie's congresswoman.

Adam Hanft exposes the preposterousness of taking Ferraro's claims at face value by asking us to imagine the impact of a white candidate who had the education, skills, perspective, and vision of Obama.

But Ferraro herself exposes her own cynicism (or idiocy) in the defense she made on ABC yesterday morning.

"I was celebrating the fact that the black community in this country came out with a pride in a historic candidacy, and has shown itself at the polls. You'd think he'd say, 'Yeah thank you for doing that.'"

Right. That's just what you'd think. Obama, whose signature is broad appeal to black and white, old and young, gay and straight, Democrat and Republican is about to thank you for defining him as the niche candidate for the black community.

It's a shameful game. And more shameful is the record of the Clinton campaign moving slowly and gingerly to ever-so-slightly distance itself from it. But the Clinton campaign has no shame.

Even the master shamer of cable TV, Keith Olbermann won't move the Clintonistas. But he has moved me, and I'm hopeful he will move you. His rant is up all over the Web in the left blogosphere. But just in case you've somehow missed it, here it is again.



Mickeleh's Take: Segmentation and positioning are powerful tools in politics as well as marketing. The Clinton campaign has chosen the route of Segment and Conquer.

Obama Netted +13 Delegates Last Week

Kos has revised his delegate math since I posted earlier. Turns out his California total rose (after certification), and it turns out there were even more superdelegates declaring for Obama. So the net gain for Obama is thirteen delegates on the week.

Clinton Obama Takedown Comes in Three Sizes

The Clinton camp continues to trash Obama's ability to serve as commander in chief. As of this morning we have the Poppa Bear, Mama Bear, and Baby Bear versions:

Baby Bear was Gov. Ed Rendell, yesterday on Meet the Press said Obama is qualified, but Clinton more so: 

I think he's qualified. I don't think he's as good a potential commander in chief right now as Hillary Clinton is. But I certainly think he's qualified. And I will work my heart out for him if he's our nominee,

Mama Bear was Sen. Clinton Herself, leaving out a direct pronouncement on Obama's qualifications:

I think it’s imperative that each of us be able to demonstrate we can cross the commander-in-chief threshold. I believe that I’ve done that. Certainly, Sen. McCain has done that and you’ll have to ask Sen. Obama with respect to his candidacy,”

Today, Papa Bear, Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson said no. And then preposterously added that he could get better by Denver (to qualify as Clinton's running mate).

We do not believe that Senator Obama has passed the commander-in-chief test. But there is a long way between now and Denver."

Mickeleh's Take: Wolfson is spinning so hard, he's in danger of disintegrating. Obama is not qualified if you're voting in a primary. But by Denver, if you're voting for Veep, maybe he will be. I wonder if Governor Rendell got a reprimand for speaking honorably.

Obama's Top Five Wins Last Week

No question that Hillary has had a good run these past two weeks. She snapped her 11-state losing streak with wins in Ohio and Rhode Island, and the perception of a win in Texas. Her "kitchen sink" strategy planted doubts about Obama's fitness as commander-in-chief and his forthrightness. She successfully worked the refs (with an assist from SNL). She won the spin cycle when two of Obama's key advisors (Goosling and Power) were caught talking trash. She managed her public personas, tamping down the over-the-top "shame on you," scold and "the sky will open" sarcasm.

Conventional wisdom says all this has rattled the Obama campaign and thrown it off stride. I hope not. Because he's had a terrific week and Clinton has given him ammunition to come out of this stronger than ever.

1. IL-14. Former Republican House speaker Denny Hastert's house seat went Democratic (53-47) in a race where Obama endorsed victorious Bill Foster and John McCain endorsed the loser. This district hasn't voted Democratic since the 70's. Obama's camp should flog this win heavily. Obama has coattails. Superdelegates notice those things. Here's Obama's TV Spot. (By the way... Foster himself counts as one more superdelegate for Obama.) Extra bonus: Foster opposes retroactive immunity for the telecoms.

2. Wyoming. It's not just that Obama won, but his win gave the Clintons one more chance to repeat their disrespectful spin that some states just don't count. (I live in Washington, and I'm tired of hearing from Clinton camp that we don't matter.) And more important, it gives the Obama camp an opportunity to remind superdelegates in a majority of states that Clinton dismisses them as unimportant.

3. McCain. Hillary Clinton actually rated the Republican standard bearer as more qualified than Obama (while out of the other side of her mouth she touted Obama as a potential "dream-ticket" running mate). What a golden opportunity to tie Clinton to McCain/Bush. Clinton needs to be held to account and penalized for creating sound bites and video clips for the Republicans.

4. Delegates. Kos did the delegate math for the week. In all the primaries and caucuses (OH, RI, VT, TX, WY), Hillary nets a gain of four. Obama picked up a total of four supers (including Foster). But, according to Kos, it doesn't end in a tie, as there's an "unpledged" delegate in Wyoming who will be selected by the elected delegates. Since Obama has a majority of Wyoming's elected delegates, he's going to get that one too. So Obama's net for the week is plus one.

5. Focus. The downside spin is that Obama is rattled and thrown off stride. Here's the upside. Last week was a wake-up call. Obama's got the more disciplined campaign engine (Goosling and Power notwithstanding); he's got the cleaner, larger donor base; he's got a huge dollar advantage; he's all got charisma. But, it seems, he's been coasting in a bit of a complacency bubble which just popped.

Mickeleh's Take: This is going to be a fine, fun week for Obama fans.

(Tags: campaign, Obama, Barack Obama, Hillary, Hillary Clinton, delegates, superdelegates)

Do Florida and Michigan Supers Fall to Clinton by Default?

The DNC, the states, and the campaigns continue to wrestle with the issue of the disqualified delegates from Florida and Michigan. Chuck Todd (NBC) points out that the two states have 53 superdelegates between them who will owe a big debt to Sen. Clinton if her efforts to get them seated pay off.

Mickeleh's Take: The Clintons launched their campaign with a YouTube video that cast them as the Sopranos. I'll bet they know a thing or two about collecting debts.

Obama's Gloves

Eriposte in The Left Coaster compiles a long list of negative attacks from the Obama campaign against Clinton.

He says it's a "fairy tale" that Obama has run a purely positive campaign.

Mickeleh's Take: Obama fans: is this good news or bad? Pundits keep saying Obama needs to take the gloves off. What if they've been off and nobody noticed?

Nader in; Takes "Oldest" spot from McCain

Ralph Nader, 73, whose spoiler role in the 2000 election enabled the Bush victory, is running again. So, now, John McCain, 71, isn't the oldest candidate in the race.

Mickeleh's Take: Nader, who saw no practical difference between Bush and Gore is unsafe at any age.

(Tags:Ralph Nader, Nader, Campaign)

Who Won Last Night's Debate? Here's a Clue.

Note: McCain-Obama First Debate Who Won?

Both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton had strong debate showings last night. Many folks are calling it a draw today. And in the sense that the debate probably changed no votes, it was a draw. Which, of course, means that Clinton lost.

Mickeleh's Take: There were two memorable moments last night and Clinton owned both: When she dissed Obama with a cheap joke, she was boo'd. And when she praised him at the end and promised unity no matter who got the nomination, she got a standing ovation.

I think that says it all.

(Tags:Hillary Clinton, Hillary, Clinton, Barack Obama, Barack, Obama, Debate, Democratic Party, Campaign)

Viva Obama

Mickeleh's Take: Yum.

Jokes You Can Xerox

That plagiarism thing came up again. Obama said Deval Patrick is one of his national co-chairs, and gave him the line. Clinton said, Obama should use his own words. Otherwise it isn't "Change you can believe in. It's Change you can Xerox."

So where did Hillary get that line? Anybody out there think she wrote that joke? Anybody?

Obama and Hillary on Edwards: Both gracious, one masterful.

With John Edwards dropping out of the race for the Democratic nomination for president, the two remaining candidates are both reaching out to Edwards supporters on their websites. Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama lead with gracious nods to John and Elizabeth and to the issues and causes that they championed in the campaign.

As an Edwards supporter, I appreciate both statements. But it is Barack's statement that gets my vote. Here's why:

Hillary' statement is in her prosaic voice:

John Edwards ended his campaign today in the same way he started it - by standing with the people who are too often left behind and nearly always left out of our national debate.

John ran with compassion and conviction and lifted this campaign with his deep concern for the daily lives of the American people. That is what this election is about - it's about our people. And John is one of the greatest champions the American people could ask for.

I wish John and Elizabeth all the best. They have my great personal respect and gratitude. And I know they will continue to fight passionately for the country and the people they love so deeply.

—Hillary Clinton

It praises John, identifies with his issues, and wishes John and Elizabeth well. By the numbers.

Now read Barack's statement. It is a much more savvy embrace of the tonality and history of the Edwards campaign.

John Edwards has spent a lifetime fighting to give voice to the voiceless and hope to the struggling, even when it wasn’t popular to do or covered in the news. At a time when our politics is too focused on who’s up and who’s down, he made a nation focus again on who matters – the New Orleans child without a home, the West Virginia miner without a job, the families who live in that other America that is not seen or heard or talked about by our leaders in Washington. John and Elizabeth Edwards have always believed deeply that we can change this – that two Americas can become one, and that our country can rally around this common purpose. So while his campaign may end today, the cause of their lives endures for all of us who still believe that we can achieve that dream of one America.

—Barack Obama

In the opening sentence Obama acknowledges that the media largely kept John in shadow and silence. He chides the media for horserace coverage rather than issues and causes. He personalizes abstract issues with examples in the way that Edwards did in his stump speeches. He then uses his own campaign lexicon of "believe" and "change" to embrace the Edwards quest. And he closes by embracing Edwards key phrases "cause of my life," and "one America."

Graphically, Obama's site has absorbed Elizabeth and John into its own design language, while Clinton has posted a news photo.

The Hillary statement feels obligatory. The Barack statement feels like John's voice is still heard.

Mickeleh's Take: Regardless of whether John Edwards chooses to endorse either of the remaining candidates, Obama has already endorsed Edwards issues and embraced his supporters.

(Tags:Edwards, John_Edwards, Barack, Obama, Barack Obama, Hillary, Hillary Clinto, HRC, Campaign, Democratic, Primary)

Ann Coulter, Christian Revisionist

Isn't it off message for Coulter to talk about "perfecting" the Jews? I thought the object of the game was to "save" us.

She called Christianity the FedEx version of Judaism. As in, "There's a lady who's sure all that glitters is gold And she's buying the FedEx to heaven."

Mickeleh's Take: In Coulter's view of her religion, she gets to think of herself as being perfect, without actually having to be decent.

(Tags:Ann Coulter, Coulter, Jews)