As Charles said:

Clinton ran right and ruled left for the first two years as he give hillary the lead. the disastrous failure of her health care plan helped give the republicans an opening under newt to take over congress for the first time in decades. subsequently clinton signed a lot of republican legislation that he bitterly fought against. later he would claim credit for the same legislation.

I think Bill Clinton produced a “once bitten, twice shy” effect on the Left. When Hillary’s Nationalized Health Care fiasco was fiascoing, I thought Bill was a much better politician than that. So I figured he was not only giving Hillary enough rope to hang herself, he was showing her how to tie the knot.

I am not trying to suggest he was some sort of centrist. He was a Bill Clintonist. The fact that the Democrats lost Congress was good for Bill because it neutralized the left and made them dependent on him. It was bad for the party not because they lost Congress but because they lost their moderate members, leaving the Pelosi Democrats in charge. And their idea is to polarize the electorate and try to grab 51 percent of the vote by turning out their enthusiastic base and souring everyone else. They think it is working. And they do not want to elect a “Barack Obamaist.”

So while many on the left have given their hearts to Barack they need constant reassurance. The way to have Barack win is to protest when Barack wanders to the center but let him do what he needs to do. But I ain’t seeing that.

When the Obama campaign lets on that they will compromise on oil production, the left protests and they step back. They end up inflating tire inflation into some sort of solution. You pay 75 cents at the “Big Air” machine and Obama takes credit. “It was my idea!” Not the way to win elections.

Not only has the left insisted on a blood oath from Obama, they want a constant supply of new blood.