The democratic party law of unintended consequences kicking in?
I am well aware that Robert Byrd did not endorse Hillary Clinton despite Hillary Clinton's 41 point win in his state. In fact, that is my point.
If there was ever a case to be made to take this to the convention and fight it out, Robert Byrd just made it for Hillary Clinton.
Here is an excerpt from the Washington Wire of Wall Street Journal (link):
In a statement, the 90-year old-Senate legend lauded Obama as a “shining young statesman” a “noble-hearted patriot” and a “humble Christian.” In particular, Byrd said that his shared opposition to the Iraq war with Obama was a key factor in his decision.
“After a great deal of thought, consideration and prayer over the situation in Iraq, I have decided that, as a superdelegate to the Democratic National Convention, I will cast my vote for Senator Barack Obama for president,” Byrd said, adding that Obama “possesses the personal temperament and courage necessary to extricate our country from this costly misadventure in Iraq.”
His announcement came less than one week after the Illinois senator lost Byrd’s state by a 41-point margin to rival Sen. Hillary Clinton. As the senior democratic statesman for the United States Senate, he dissed his own states popular vote and delegates on his personal feelings and liking.
I bet Senator Obama does not view this as selection , rather than election. Did Senator Byrd lose his bearings? Whether he did or not, I believe the law of unintended consequences kicked in. What say you?