U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell, one of Washington's 17 Democratic superdelegates, isn't ready to shift her allegiance from Sen. Hillary Clinton to Sen. Barack Obama -- yet.

But in an interview with The Columbian's editorial board Monday, she said the candidate with the most pledged delegates at the end of the primary season in late June will have the strongest claim to the party's presidential nomination.

"I definitely don't want the superdelegates to be the deciding factor," she said.

Of course, there are those like Harold Ickes(He Who Laid Down the Smackdown on Florida and Michigan's delegates before he was for Clinton) who have a different view of pledged delegates.  From Ben Smith at Politico( http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/ )

In today's conference call, senior adviser Harold Ickes pointed out that "there's no party rule" binding delegates to their candidate.

"Obviously, circumstances can change," he continued, that can cast doubt on a candidate's viability.

Oh no, no they aren't suggesting this again, are they?

But don't take that the wrong way. Deputy Communications Director Phil Singer jumped in, "We are not seeking or asking pledged delegates for Sen. Obama to flip over, so please don't make any mistake about that."

We won't.

And also remember that pledged delegates in most states are not pledged. You know, there is no requirement that anybody vote for anybody. They're just like superdelegates.

While speaking to the editorial board of the Philadelphia Daily News, Hillary Clinton seeks to empower pledged delegates(so long as they empower her!).  So much consistency!  Where's that steady hand?

On the front that all Democrats can smile over, we have the incredible ground game in Pennsylvania( http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/ 03/24/record-number-of-pa-democrats-regi stered/ ).  Democratic registration has shot up more than 4% this year, surpassing the mark of 4 million Democrats!   Republican registration has changed as well- down 1% from last year.  What does this spell?

Oh, and does anyone ever find themselves oddly attracted to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama?  Attracted for reasons that don't quite reach the eye?  Well, ladies and gentlemen, there is a good reason for that!

Barack Obama is a distant cousin of actor Brad Pitt, and Hillary Rodham Clinton is related to Pitt's girlfriend, Angelina Jolie.

Now it all makes sense!  ( http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/25 /barack-obama-and-brad-pit_n_93356.html )

But what of Wright?  That name which was suppose to be the end of Barack Obama?  Public Policy Polling, the NC-based polling firm, had this to say;

Obama leads 80-14% among black voters.  Clinton leads 47-40% among white voters, which is a noticeable tightening; she led 56-30% only a week before.
Obama leads in the poll by 21 points over his rival, 55-34.

Rasmussen in Pennsylvania, which is a horrible poll to begin with, shows Obama gaining 1 and Clinton losing 2.  Movement despite Wright!  Speaking of Wright..

( http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsbur ghtrib/news/breaking/s_558930.html )

"He would not have been my pastor," Clinton said.

Classy, Clinton.  Very classy.  The response from the Obama campaign?

"After originally refusing to play politics with this issue, it's disappointing to see Hillary Clinton's campaign sink to this low in a transparent effort to distract attention away from the story she made up about dodging sniper fire in Bosnia. The truth is, Barack Obama has already spoken out against his pastor's offensive comments and addressed the issue of race in America with a deeply personal and uncommonly honest speech. The American people deserve better than tired political games that do nothing to solve the larger challenges facing this country," said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton.

It's the economy, stupid!

Yet that's not all there was to Clinton's little talk with the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.

"I joined in the earmark moratorium," Clinton said, adding with a smile, "Obviously I've gotten earmarks, and I think all my earmarks have been wonderful and very important for New York. I'm very proud of my earmarks. It's one of the reasons I won 67 percent of the vote, because I took care of my people. But I also know there have been a lot of abuses."

Proud enough of those earmarks to keep them to herself and the rest of the skeletons in her closet.  Speaking of skeletons, who could forget about the tax returns?  They were "possibly" going to be released before the Ohio/Texas primary, then probably around April 15th, and now April 19th?  After the Pennsylvanian debate?  Whatsup with that?!  What's in those things?  Is she going to try filing an extension to delay them longer?  Release them now and lay your cards on the table!

As reported on Politico( http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith );

At 11:23 this morning, the Clinton campaign sent out an e-mail hitting five areas where it believes Barack Obama hasn't been transparent. The first one: "Sen. Obama has not released his tax returns, except for 2006."

Oops. Two minutes earlier, the Obama campaign had blasted a press release with the subject line, "Obama Posts Tax Returns on the Internet, Calls on Clinton to Follow Suit Immediately."

His tax returns for 2000-2006 can be found here( http://answercenter.barackobama.com/cgi- bin/barackobama.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp. php?p_faqid=173&p_created=1205532891 &p_sid=KHAeiB_i&p_accessibility= 0&p_redirect=&p_lva=&p_sp=cF 9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PSZwX2dyaWRzb3J0PS ZwX3Jvd19jbnQ9MiwyJnBfcHJvZHM9JnBfY2F0cz 0wJnBfcHY9JnBfY3Y9JnBfcGFnZT0xJnBfc2Vhcm NoX3RleHQ9dGF4&p_li=&p_topview=1 ).  So he's released his tax returns from 2000-2007.  Clinton has released none from this period, which covers the time when the Clinton clan grew filthy rich.  You know, those post-Presidency years.

Oh, real issues.  The economy.

Not only that, but the Fed didn't act while he(Alan Greenspan) was there. But he has a calming influence still to this day on Wall Street -- don't ask me why because I never understand what he's saying -- but nevertheless people respond to that Delphic oracle approach.

John McCain?  Nope.  Hillary Clinton, while still speaking to the editorial board of the Philadelphia Daily News( http://www.attytood.com/2008/03/clintons _delphic_oracle_alan_g.html ).  Such a steady and consistent hand.

At least we were spared more of that fake, delayed, strategic outrage over Michigan and Florida.

Amid a festive crowd celebrating Dyngus Day in the Hoosier State, Bill Clinton yesterday morning upped the ante on seating delegates from Florida and Michigan, criticizing his party’s “strategy of denying and disempowering and disenfranchising the voters” there.

Clinton curiously said Democrats “let New Hampshire go out of turn,” adding that they have a Democratic Secretary of State.

The Democratic National Committee’s preliminary calendar called for New Hampshire to vote on Jan. 22. But that Democratic secretary of state, Bill Gardner, moved the first-in-the-nation primary to Jan. 8 when Michigan settled on Jan. 15. The DNC chose not to sanction New Hampshire, since the calendar rules were originally set in part to protect the Granite State’s tradition of being the first-in-the-nation primary.

The "kitchen sink" strategy has had its limits- now it's the bathroom sink.

Big bad lead in North Carolina, tightening race in Pennsylvania, a growing Democratic party up in the Key Stone state, so many tax returns released, got to love some transparency, got to be aching for some from the other side, silly desperation from one side reminds everyone why Obama is so easy to like.  All in all, today has reminded me of the joy it is to be an Obama supporter.