Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


The Steamie

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Scotland On Sunday site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

It's Obama, stupid: Carter and Gore to end Clinton bid



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 13 April 2008
DEMOCRAT grandees Jimmy Carter and Al Gore are being lined-up to deliver the coup de grâce to Hillary Clinton and end her campaign to become president.
Falling poll numbers and a string of high-profile blunders have convinced party elders that she must now bow out of the primary race.

Former president Carter and former vice-president Gore have already held high-level discussions about delivering the message that she must stand down for the good of the Democrats.

"They're in discussions," a source close to Carter told Scotland on Sunday. "Carter has been talking to Gore. They will act, possibly together, or in sequence."

An appeal by both men for Democrats to unite behind Clinton's rival, Barack Obama, would have a powerful effect, and insiders say it is a question of when, rather than if, they act.

Obama has an almost unassailable lead in the battle for nomination delegates, and is closing the gap with Clinton in her last stronghold, Pennsylvania, which votes on April 22.

Clinton remains publicly defiant, insisting she will continue the battle with Obama all the way to the Democratic convention in August – when superdelegates, or party top brass, will have the chance to add their weight to primary votes.

But the party's top brass have concluded her further participation in the race can only harm the party as Republican nominee John McCain strives to take advantage of her increasingly bitter battle with Obama.

Both Carter and Gore occupy the rarefied position of elder statesmen – in addition to their White House past, both are winners of the Nobel Peace Prize, giving them additional gravitas to carry the party with them.

Neither of them is likely to object to the role of bringing down the curtain on Clinton. While neither man has formally endorsed either her or Obama, both have clashed in the past with the Clintons.

Gore blames his loss to George Bush in the 2000 presidential election on the impeachment of Clinton triggered by his White House affair with Monica Lewinsky.

Carter, who has carved out a successful career as an international mediator, is believed to detest the flashy style of the Clintons. He recently told an interviewer that his entire family are committed Obama supporters.

A number of options are being considered by the higher echelons of the Democrats, but they fall roughly into two categories. One is for Carter and Gore to go to Clinton privately and ask her to step down. The other is for both men to appear in public and endorse Obama – a move which would see a majority of superdelegates go with them.

The campaign to force Clinton to make an early exit is being masterminded in Congress, home to the most influential of the superdelegates. Senate Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have called on superdelegates to hold an unofficial congress in early June to anoint a winner, rather than waiting for the convention in Denver.

Pelosi has drawn withering fire from the Clinton camp for saying that these superdelegates must follow the national vote, with Clinton insisting that they should "vote with their conscience".

Yet some in the Democratic elite are wary of moving too soon. Polls show that 30% of Clinton's supporters would vote for McCain if she fails to become the nominee. To close off Clinton's bid before millions have had the chance to vote risks causing the very split that officials are desperate to avoid.

But a loss to Obama, or even a single-digit victory, in Pennsylvania will seal Clinton's fate. Pennsylvania is the last big state left in the race, and the last chance for Clinton to claw back Obama's delegate lead. "If he (Obama] wins (Pennsylvania] flat out, I think the big foot will come down," a source said.

Anything less than a resounding victory by her will probably see the race choked off ahead of the final primaries on June 3.

In the 10 remaining primaries, only a catastrophic loss of support by Obama will see Clinton overcome his lead of 160 delegates.

She admits she has little chance of winning the public vote, and is basing her strategy on convincing party-appointed superdelegates that she is, in her own words, the more "electable" of the two candidates.

Clinton enjoys strong support among superdelegates, many from a party elite who worked for her husband Bill during his years in the White House. There are more than 350 superdelegates who have yet to show a preference, potentially enough to rub out Obama's lead and give the presidency to Clinton.

But historically, superdelegates have never gone against the public vote, and party insiders say they would face a revolt, or even riots, if they were to do so now.

Obama's campaign has been a phenomenon in American politics, bringing in record numbers of new voters and record funding, and few think the superdelegates would dare deny him victory if he wins the popular vote.

It would also invite the unedifying spectacle of a mostly white elite denying an African American candidate a chance for the presidency. "It would cause a scandal to do that," says one party official. "To turn around to the black community and say, 'You got the most votes, but no'? Unlikely."

Clinton insists she will see her campaign through to the final primaries in June, and then on to the national convention, where her supporters have powerful lobbies in the organising committees.

But a chain of events in the past two weeks has worked to undermine this strategy, pulling the rug from under her claim to be more experienced and better organised than Obama.

It began with her extraordinary suggestion that she braved sniper fire during a trip to Bosnia in 1996, a statement contradicted by TV footage showing the event was peaceful.

There are suggestions that the long list of wealthy benefactors may be expecting favours to be returned once Hillary is in the White House, suggestions sharpened by the Clinton's refusal to release the list of donors to the William J. Clinton Presidential Library.

Such conflict-of-interest issues came into the open last week when it emerged that Clinton's chief campaign strategist, Mark Penn, was lobbying for the Colombian government to secure a free trade agreement with America, despite Clinton's public opposition to such a deal. Penn stepped down, the second high-profile sacking of a campaign manager this year.

Together with reports that Clinton's money troubles have left her unable to pay event organisers and even the health insurance of her staff, the impression is of a campaign in trouble.

These issues have undermined Clinton's claim to be more "electable", with her own stormy campaign contrasting with the disciplined control of Obama's organisation.

Obama himself has refrained from criticism on these issues, his staff keen to portray their candidate as "presidential" and above the fray.

Conspiracy theorists among her opponents claim Clinton is prolonging the race not because she hopes to win, but to inflict such damage on the party that a weakened Obama loses to John McCain in November, allowing Clinton to have a second tilt at the nomination in four years' time.

For Clinton, defeat in the nomination process would mean consignment to the political wilderness.

Losing nominees rarely get a second chance to run, and although Clinton's seat as a New York senator seems safe, failure in the nomination process leaves her politically neutered.

Talk of a possible consolation prize, in awarding her the job of Senate Majority leader, has petered out with several more senior senators also coveting the job.

Meanwhile, Clinton's poll numbers continue to slide. Obama now leads her nationally by about 10 points, and a CNN poll in Pennsylvania showed him closing the once-yawning gap to just three points.

Should Clinton lose Pennsylvania, the defection of growing numbers of superdelegates from her to Obama could become a flood.

After Pennsylvania

Possible outcomes of the crucial Democrat primary of April 22.

1. Clinton wins big

A win of 20 points or more over Obama in Pennsylvania would keep Clinton's campaign alive. She would also have to replicate this result in the nine states still to vote, narrowing the gap with her rival and convincing the all-important party superdelegates to choose her as nominee.

2. Clinton wins small

A victory in single digits, in a state where Clinton was once 20 points ahead, would make little difference to Obama's lead. Yet a win is a win, and she would be likely to try to stay in the race until June, unless superdelegates stepped in.

3. Obama wins small

A single figure victory on Clinton's 'home turf' would cement Obama's claim to the nomination. Superdelegates would be likely to declare him the nominee before June.

4. Convincing win for Obama

A double-digit Obama victory would be the shock of the primary contest. It would be followed by a stampede of superdelegates rushing to be front of the queue to embrace him.

Obama forced to backtrack

DEMOCRAT Barack Obama last night conceded that comments he made about bitter working-class voters who "cling to guns or religion" were ill chosen, as he tried to stem a burst of complaints that could hurt his chances in upcoming primaries in Pennsylvania and Indiana.

"I didn't say it as well as I should have," he said, at a campaign rally in Indiana.

As he tried to quell the furore, presidential rival Hillary Clinton hit him with one of her lengthiest and most pointed criticisms, saying: "Obama's remarks were elitist and out of touch."

At issue are comments Obama made privately at a fundraiser last Sunday. He explained his troubles winning over white, working-class voters, saying they have become frustrated with economic conditions: "It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment to explain their frustrations."

The comments, posted on the Huffington Post political website, set off a storm of criticism and threatened to highlight an Obama Achilles' heel – the image that the Harvard-trained lawyer is arrogant, aloof and carries himself with an air of superiority.

The content of this story is disputed by former vice president Al Gore.

The full article contains 1724 words and appears in Scotland On Sunday newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Angus Ogg,

12/04/2008 21:05:48
So I take it an invite from Mr Obama to Hillary Clinton to be his Vice Presidential running mate is out of the question ?

IMHO as an interested overseas observer this would seem like a sensible solution. But so often is the case, common sense does't prevail :@)
2

MarkInAlpine,

Alpine, Texas 13/04/2008 01:18:26
I hope they don't end it yet. It's too entertaining.
3

The Daleks,

Longmen 13/04/2008 01:21:59
At the endof the day, it doesn't matter if it's McCain, Obama, or Clinton.

No matter who you vote for in the US or the UK you're guaranteed to get policies that are bad for you, but good for the money-men.

Mass immigration, outsourcing to Asia, etc, etc.

Good for International Capitalism, bad for the man on the Queens/Clapham/Pilton omnibus.
4

The Daleks,

Longmen 13/04/2008 01:22:27
Wake up folks!!
5

Nancy "Stretch" Pelosi,

San Francisco 13/04/2008 01:31:31
We did not have any truly spectacular candidates left running. Obama would be a threat to the worlds security and ruin the free worlds economy beyond belief. Clinton would take the US 10 steps back and would at a minimum ruin the US economy and McCain I hope will continue the great job Bush has done with the middle east and hopefully fix the failed job Bush has done on domestic spending and the boarder problems with everyone wanting to come to the US illegally.
6

,

13/04/2008 01:48:15
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
7

nabodican,

Rural Scotland 13/04/2008 01:48:26
I'm not sure that having Al Gore on your side is a good thing. Perhaps Clinton would be well advised to hang in there.
8

Tom More,

Canada 13/04/2008 01:55:44
I don't think anything Gore or Carter can do or say will have the slightest effect on the campaign. Gore is still sore at the Clintons for what he considers less than enthusiastic support from them when he ran for president, so any endorsement for Obama coming from him is not unexpected.

Carter is admired for his commitment to social work, but is not a figure of great influence -- regarded by many as one of the worst foreign policy presidents of all time. (And you thought that was George Bush, right?) Obama with or without their support should cruise to the nomination and likely to the presidency, too. He has a left-leaning media that refuses to scrutinize him properly--they love "latte liberals" like themselves--and if you think they gave Clinton a rough ride, wait till you see what they will do to McCain when he is up against their favourite son.
9

benbree,

Virginia 13/04/2008 02:02:20
I do not understand why folks believe it is necessary for Mrs. Clinton to leave the race so the party (and all of us) can rally behind Mr. Obama. I also do not understand the love feast with Mr. Obama. Other than speaking loudly and clearly and saying much the same as any other person trying to win, what really has he done and what really do we know about him. I think it is very opportunistic that he jumped into the race at this time – and I am sure there is some POLITICAL strategist out there who is saying “Wow! I told you he could do it!” Folks this is all politics and Mr. Obama is no different. He wants to win and he will have to pay those who got him there – just like all the other politicians. He is a breath of fresh air and he has many people at the polls that would stay home. This is all good. However, the debate should continue between Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton. It is good for us. What the leadership of the Democratic Party should do is ensure that all of the Democratic Party members have their say (Florida and Michigan) and then show up at the convention with a winning plan with Mr. Obama or Mrs. Clinton. They are both worthy and we MUST have a Democrat in the white house come 2009.
10

Valsthewoman,

Massillon 13/04/2008 02:10:04
I cannot believe that after Obama pulls such a blunder that could really push Hillary back to the front the Party is trying their hardest to throw her out. Giveme a break. If the dems want to lose in Nov just keep it up. Gore couldn't win so why would Hillary even listen to him??? He ran a campaign that made him look foolish. As for Carter he is foolish enough to go vist Hamas for Gods sake. I wouldn't listen to these old goats for anything. Like Hillary said The boys have always told her to bow out since grade school. It is time for everyone to shut up count Florida and Mi and lets finish the race. It is not over until the last contest has been held. The media needs to let go of their love fest for Obama the media is just becoming sore because they are unable to continue munipulating the people.
11

,

13/04/2008 02:21:02
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
12

mjp,

ohio 13/04/2008 02:25:08
Let the people decide on this not these men who think they have a right to dictate the outcome of elections. Their personal issues should have nothing to do with this. Obama has not proven himself and Hillary is a strong woman who can obviously take on whatever she is given. To take this away from the American people would be a travesty. If these super delegates were to comment now or try to influence the outcome at this point would push me to possibly change parties. I would definitely be an Independent. It's hard enough watching what the DNC has done with Florida and Michigan by sticking their noses in. Let's let the people decide this and see what the outcome is.
13

Kelvino,

New York 13/04/2008 02:26:25
I never trust those who are easily offended. . . . .
whether it be Hillary or the uneducated, lazy-minded American consumer. If you can't take Obama's truth then revert back to your former prejudice and pretend that he's just another "upety" black man that you are so afraid of. Stay the course. . . . it's working well, isn't it ?
14

,

13/04/2008 02:31:27
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
15

Rusty ... Shackleford,

U.S.A. 13/04/2008 02:34:06
The three "major" candidates leave the choice between

A socialist
A sociopath
A psychopath

Ron Paul remains in the race, and will restore the American Republic. No foreign intervention, sound money, small government, and personal liberty.
16

,

13/04/2008 02:36:36
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
17

Dáithí,

San Jose 13/04/2008 02:45:35
Angus -

I can't speak for Hillary (thank the deity of your choice) but there is a lot of 'baggage' that comes with the job of Vice-President and, thinking of her husband, she has enough baggage.

The biggest danger (IMHO) is that you are not seen as 'the leader', but as an enforcer - and sometimes you have to enforce positions of the President that you don't necessarily agree with.

For instance, Hillary rode her husband's coattails to her current position but is now burdened with trying to shake off his position on NAFTA - which as the first lady she had to forward on behalf of her husband.

Now she looks either weak or duplicitous by claiming that she is against it in the 'rust belt' primaries.

Best bet? Push herself away from Obama, who came from nowhere to deal her a crushing blow - but will drive moderates (75% of Americans) to McCain.

If she loses she is better off to hope for a McCain win, a 4 year tenure, insulation from Obama if he loses on '08, and set herself to run 'against McCain for change' in 2012.

Remember, she's a politician - what is the best for her party or for the people is much lower on the priority scale for her than what is good for her ego.
18

LauraInFlorida,

Florida 13/04/2008 02:53:04
I plan to vote for McCain in the general.

But this story ticks me off. Once again, the boy wants something and the girl is supposed to take the back seat and let him have it. The contest isn't over yet. Hillary has every right to stay in the race as long as she wants to and has the money to fund her candidacy. It is NOT Algore's, Carter's, or anybody else's place to try to force her to hand over the nomination to Obama. If they're so worried about party unity (and they should be worried about it) why is it so unthinkable to ask HIM to step aside? Why does it have to be HER? I shudder to think of her in the White House. But this still stinks.
19

Dáithí,

San Jose 13/04/2008 02:54:22
#8 - Tom

>"Carter is admired for his commitment to social work, but is not a figure of great influence -- regarded by many as one of the worst foreign policy presidents of all time. (And you thought that was George Bush, right?)

Tom - fair assessment, you should post more often.

>"and if you think they gave Clinton a rough ride, wait till you see what they will do to McCain when he is up against their favourite son."

Again, true! My assessment has been that if it was Hillary v McCain. McCain wins, if it is Obama v McCain, Obama wins - and a large part of that is media.

Would you disagree?
20

Willie Macleod,

Wick 13/04/2008 02:57:08
Hillary and Ron should stand down give Obama a clear run against McCain he is the only Candidate who can defeat the Republicans in November. But if this continues it will weaken his position.
21

,

13/04/2008 02:57:48
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
22

JudyKR,

Midwest 13/04/2008 03:01:00
Rusty, which one is which?
23

Dáithí,

San Jose 13/04/2008 03:03:24
#18 - Laurain

>"Once again, the boy wants something and the girl is supposed to take the back seat and let him have it."

I'm not disagreeing with what you are saying Laurain, but I think that it is more of a black-female thing than a male-female thing.

I think that the Demo's have been exploiting race/gender relations since the '60's, and Hillary fully expected to 'walk' into the nomination having the media on her side precisely because of how her 'the first woman' status would play to the media.

She has been trumped by a well-spoken Black man that has enamored the media even more by HIS 'the first black' status. Someone played the game BETTER than her, and caught the imagination of the party and the media!

I believed that she feels that she has been ROBBED of the nomination!

Right now, she is planning her 2012 campaign. Generals ar always fighting the last war, politicians are always fighting the next election.

If Gore and Carter are going to talk to her, then she is going to demand promises that will get her the nomination in '12.

Written and on tape, if necessary. Guaranteed.
24

,

13/04/2008 03:25:56
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
25

Frustated Democrat,

Michigan 13/04/2008 03:31:16
Hi there #21

Go to the court website and look for yourself. Sen Clinton and her Senate Campaign ARE IN FACT defendants in the case. I have read the court documents. She was served on the campaign trail along with their daughter who was 18, Chelsea is a witness but her parents are in fact defendants.
26

Smuhamm,

Detroit MI 13/04/2008 03:31:50
Yes, it is going to be time for HC to vacate and begin to continue to strengthen the Democratic party with and for Barack Obama. Currently,she is only showing some old true colors which are very fuzzy colors and not part of the New rainbow, the person that gets in will be the person of "Morale and integrity" She needs to begin to rally her supporters for Barack, if she is really a leader for women,working class and uneducated folks,(THESE LABLES ARE ALL DEGRADING AND I CRINGE EVERYTIME I HEAR THE MEDIA DESCRIBE THESE TERMS), why has her camp not come out against these lables? To finish my thought...If she truely have their ears,heart and souls they should be listening to her in saying she should be getting herself together to supporting Barack instead of McCain. She should step down after PA, PA is going to be closer than the Polls, and analyst think, a Suprize is coming. HC will not take it by a landslide or double digits, even with the remaining of the kitchen sink she has left to throw out to Barack. She has lost credibility with the public and her Media Friends due to saving and needing their jobs have helped her to loose it. Thank you Media!!! Now report the real deal about Obama and the great rallies, speeches he is doing for a change, the real Polls please
27

coumaris,

washington, dc 13/04/2008 03:32:54
How many regular people had the Emir of Dubai give them $15 million through a partnership in the Cayman Islands last year?

How many regular people were the spoiled rotten brat of a Navy Admiral, getting a brand new Corvette Sting-Ray for his 16th birthday?

That these two can criticize as elitist the son of a humble single mother is amazing ! !
28

JudyKR,

13/04/2008 03:35:06
Well, Rusty, at least we agree on McCain but I had it reversed on the other two. But thank you for responding.
29

,

13/04/2008 03:35:27
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
30

serena1313,

dallas 13/04/2008 03:40:05
*** #23 Dáithí

No it is not a black thing or a female thing. Obama has simply run a better campaign. He is a better candidate. Furthermore the people do not want another Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton.

HRC cannot win mathematically. Obama leads in popular votes, states, delegates and money. While Hillary has more super delegates her lead dwindled from 100 down to 30 or less delegates since January 2008. In contrast Obama gained 69 or more super delegates since January.

Clinton won only 14 states out of 40.

Primaries:
Obama won: 49.5%
Hillary won: 46.9%

Caucuses:
Obama won: 66.3%
Hillary won: 33.7%

pledged delegates:
Obama: 1415
Clinton: 1251

add Michigan & Florida:
Obama: 1481
Clinton: 1428

popular vote:
Obama leads with: 732,518 votes
add Florida: he still leads by 400,000
add Michigan: he still leads by 100,000

Super Delegates:
Clinton leads by 28
add Michigan and Florida she leads by 38

Total Delegates:
Obama: 1639
Clinton: 1503

Obama leads by 136 to 160 delegates depending on the source.

I spent the past two years researching all the candidates from both parties. I came to the conclusion Barack Obama should become the next president. The more I read the more convinced I became. Granted Obama is not perfect nor do I agree with all of his positions, but he is one of the finest candidates America has seen in decades.

Obama is a visionary and a leader. People of all stripes regardless of political affiliation, colour, race are attracted to Obama because he unites us in a common cause and encourages the electorate to engage in the political process.

His background as a community organizer, civil rights attorney, Constitutional law professor, a state senator and a US senator uniquely qualifies him to be the next president.

Obama did not come from wealth and privilege. Yet he chose public service over lucrative job offers.

His commitment to soc
31

serena1313,

dallas 13/04/2008 03:44:43
His commitment to social justice is not rhetoric; it is real. Learning from the ground up gives Obama a unique perspective to work from. Thus when he says something people tend to trust him because of his actions.

We, as world citizens, share a common interest: security. We, as world citizens, share a common interest: humanity.

The way to achieve individual, national and world security entails making every person secure.

Words alone mean nothing, promises mean nothing until those words and promises become actions. Obama not only acts on his convictions, he acts on his word. And that basically, in simplistic terms, describes Obama's moral philosophy. His record speaks for itself.

Decisions that reflect a deep sense of justice, compassion & empathy for humanity with the intelligence & reasoned logic tempered by patience are rare qualities found in politicians, however, they define Obama.
32

gallax,

Illinois 13/04/2008 03:52:44
Obama is a flim-flam candidate who has rubbbed elbows with corrupt figures form Illinois: Tony Rezko and Levine. He is an elitist snob, who wants power no matter
what. I am concerned for this country of ours. This is
not a game of who wins; the issue is who is the best person to lead our country. Do you realize the qualifications of Hillary Clinton? Do you also realize
that her husband is a Rhodes scholar, and has his doctoral degree from the London School of Economics.
You, who want Obama for President are fools, just fools. Unfortunately, I have to live in the country with another 4 years of Republican government because
of you delusional people.
33

Yossi,

MD 13/04/2008 03:57:15
Do people take this guy seriously? Jimmy "one term' Carter is the furthest thing from an elder stateman in the Democratic Party. After the luny things he has said in the last few years he should be advised to smile and not speak on the record. Al Gore has never blamed the Clintons for the miscount in Florida and I dont see any indication that he would support Brack Obama as a superdelegate. It is quite likely that he will support Hillary. And for those who thing Baracks popular vote and delegate lead is insurmountable, you're not paying attention to Pennsylvania, Indiana, and Hillary's trump card Puerto Rico. Good Luck to Obama but I still have my money on the Clintons.
34

Frustated Democrat,

Michigan 13/04/2008 04:06:28
Time magazine did a lengthy article on Obama's Mother who developed the beginnings of a very successful Micro Economics program in Indonesia when she was there. She had a PhD in Anthropology and he was raised in some of the poorest parts of the country becasue of her work. Take the time to read it it was very enlightening and tells alot about how he was raised. Not like HRC.
35

gallax,

Illinois 13/04/2008 04:07:23
Yes! I have much more faith in Al Gore than to do this
to Hillary Clinton. He doesn't have anything against her. Her husband chose him for Vice President. I used to admire Joan Baez, since she marched with Martin Luther
King; however, she has come out for Obama. Lving in
Woodside, CA, and I noticed this, not one black person
lives within miles of her home. I purposely live in a
community where I teach all racial and ethnic backgrounds. She's like those yuppie latte drinker fundraisers who listen to Barack discuss the gun loving,religion clingers, who are bitter and have atipathy toward the government. Bah! I'll never go to
another Joan Baez concert again!
36

drive_by poster,

Boulder, Colorado 13/04/2008 04:12:02
The Clintons are well-documented extreme liars and corrupt, morally depraved politicians of the highest order.

But if they were good enough to elected as co-presidents twice in the 90's, they are certainly good enough to be elected for eight more years now.
37

gallax,

Illininois 13/04/2008 04:13:21
Obama was raised in Hawaii for most of his life. His grandparents were well-to-do, and he lived in a better
economic situation than Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton grew up in Park Ridge, Illinois, not far from where I grew up. Like Hillary, I spent time after school to tutor hispanic kids at the Spanish Center at Hull House. I also ran the music program there in the summers during my junior and senior years. Hillary Clinton is a compasionate woman. She has written books too. Shake it off before it's too late.
38

rajencajen,

13/04/2008 04:28:13
Grasping at straws comes to mine here; Obama supporters! Obama is a ego maniac and very arrogant. We in small town America have figured this out more than a month ago! His rock star status and fame just went to his head and let him show us the truth of who he really is!

The whole Rev Wright issue only confirmed it. What the Obama flock and the media don’t get or the DNC for that matter doesn’t get is, it is not about Rev. Wright or his views, as wrong as they may be. It is about how Obama handled that issue which was so reveling. It was the same with the Canadian issue. It wasn’t the issue as much as the lies and smooth smug answers and never taking responsibility that we find unfit in a Presidential candidate.

It is the same over and over again. Under the bus, Typical white person, didn’t know about statements, Ok knew about but was not in church, not there, Only 5, Ok dozens, Ok general trend, I would have left but retiring, No meeting took place, ok a meeting took place but not about NAFTA, Ok NAFTA was mentioned but no talk of campaign rhetoric, on and on it goes! Farrakhan, Avery, McCulkin, William Ayers, this list is getting rather long isn’t it? NOW WE HAVE BITTER SMALL TOWN LAZY WHITE FOLK WHO ARE GUN TOTEN RELIGION LOVING RACIST……..

Obama is un electable and Super Deligates will rethink their position after April 22.

This comentary is completely Ridiculous, unless your an Obama supporter as the writer of this article is......
39

Lucieann,

South Florida 13/04/2008 04:32:22
It is such a strange dynamic when somebody running for such high office forces the masses to come to terms with the true reality~! I know it is tough to deal with, but the truth us truth~~people are definitely angry,bitter and distrustful of their government...and no amount of "sweet-talk and fluff" or wearing of "rose-colored glases" is gonna change that. WTG Barack Obama~~~ "FIRED UP AND READY TO GO~!"
40

macinjax,

Jacksonville FL 13/04/2008 04:44:17
both the Obamanation and Hitlerry have about as much chance of becoming President as a snowstorm in Miami.
The boy blunder from gangster-ridden Chicago has spit in the faces of working class Americans in his latest "change" speech. The witch from New York can not even manage the mouth of her baggey eyed hubby. McCain may be old but honor still means a lot to most of us Yanks.
41

Bill M,

Austin, Texas 13/04/2008 04:45:39
The story says "Both Carter and Gore occupy the rarefied position of elder statesmen – in addition to their White House past..." It is with much pleasure that I inform you that Gore doesn't not have a White House past. He lived on the grounds of the Naval Observatory as Vice President. It's a pity for America that Carter had a brief White House past.
42

Hatshepsut1988,

13/04/2008 04:55:27
If Gore thinks clearly and has any courage whatsoever he would take this moment to come out wholehardedly in favor of Hillary Clinton. He must know, in his heart of hearts, particularly after the recent disaster (one of many) showing (to anyone who is not an obamabot of the most robotic kind) that Obama cannot win. Moreover, Hillary has been brilliant today, speaking about China and, as always, she's the one who first came out with the charge to Bush to boycott the opening of the Olympics. SHE is a true leader---and if BO is the nominee, we will have one hellish campaign followed by, with certainty, a win for McCain! Wake up America! Wake up Gore. (We know we can't expect Carter to do anything but agree with Obama because he, like Obama, is prepared to sell Israel down the drain, presumably to his friends in Iran!)
43

Dáithí,

San Jose 13/04/2008 04:56:51
#29 - Gallax

>"It is time for a qualified, female candidate
for President of the United States, to lead. You men are
the side of humanity to evoke war...

What sexist cr*p. Maggie Thatcher proved you wrong, learn to live with it.
44

Dáithí,

San Jose 13/04/2008 05:03:13
#30 - Serena

>"Obama has simply run a better campaign."

Serena, I wouldn't disagree with that. Obama has also benefited by maintaining a calm and professional demeanor in the face of Hillary's increasing exasperation when it started becoming clear that she was going to have a race on her hands instead of being given the nomination merely because she suffered silently thru hubby's inability to maintain control of his wee man.

Hillary, for forwarding herself as the 'inside the party' trollop, has made blunders that make Obama seem far more experienced and stately in comparison.

In fact, her incompetence has grown to the point where she will damage the Democratic party.
45

Dryden01,

Redmond, WA/USA 13/04/2008 05:04:50
The democrats need to re-evaluate support for ibnObama in that familiarity is breeding contempt for the man. It seems the more we hear him ad-lib without the benefit of prepared speeches, careful political handlers, and teleprompters, the more he establishes himself as an imbecile. There have been a half dozen or so instances now that clearly illustrate his stupidity. The politically correct try to dismiss them as cases of inexperience or naivete but sooner or later the reality that the man is an idiot has to come through. Let him come back in 8 years with a note from his "typical white grandmother" attesting that he has achieved a degree of knowledge and is less of a threat to the country than her imagined black muggers are to her.
46

Xavier,

Edinburg, TX 13/04/2008 05:05:54
If they endorse Obama, then I will vote for McCain. I don't trust Obama. He is arrogant and naive. The Republicans have so much dirt on Obama to use in the general election. I hope the superdelegates realize this before they make their decision. Obama is unelectable and I wish people would just see this. Hillary clearly has the solutions, the brains and the strength to beat McCain in November.
47

Dáithí,

San Jose 13/04/2008 05:08:10
#40 - Macinjax

>"McCain may be old but honor still means a lot to most of us Yanks."

Macinjax, I've been watching these threads and the main knock against McCain is that he is older.

That was used against Reagan in 1984 and it backfired badly. Do you think that age discrimination will work for the Democrats this time?
48

gallax,

13/04/2008 05:14:45
Daithi and Serena. . .in order. . .misogynist, and air head. You Daithi are! sexist. pathetic! And Serena, I
feel sorry for you, poor hypnotized Obama Zombi. Since
when does running a campaign of bundled corporate open
pockets proclaim the best presidential candidate. Grow
up! I went door-to-door campaigning for Eugene McCarthy
in 1968. When he lost, I worked for the Robert Kennedy
campaign. Don't you dare put this flim-flam Obama anywhere near these candidates! You are being duped.
49

C.U. Jimmy,

13/04/2008 05:18:49
Ho hum, yawn, fascinating to see the the SoS forum being abused by these semi-literate rants on US politicians and would-be presidents...zzzzz
50

gallax,

illinois 13/04/2008 05:22:22
And you. . . C.U. Jimmy have now made the first attempt at illiterate. :-)
51

Dáithí,

San Jose 13/04/2008 05:32:07
#48 - Gallax

>"You Daithi are! sexist."

And you are! an idiot. Learn to work a! exclamation mark! or! you will look! silly.

Sexism is to vote for a person because of their sex - as you are doing.

Not being sexist, I'm free to vote! for the candidate that most reflects my positions. You, being sexist! must vote! for someone because of their! sex.

If Hillary reflects your beliefs Gallax, then by all means support her, and I wish you good luck! If some other candidate best supports mine, don't condemn it because of sex, as I'm issue-oriented not sex oriented, and I wish that you could be the same - but I don't believe that you are.

Is that what this election is turning into by your request - don't vote issues, vote race and sex?

What a shame.
52

DaleW,

CA, USA 13/04/2008 05:35:09
The writer of this article knows little about politics. Clearly Obama is as prone to dumb gaffes as Clinton. And Gore and Carter have little to no power in the Democratic party. One is a complete loser who has found his niche in NGO manipulation, the other wass the worst president in the last 100 years (and that includes the present one, so it took some work to get the nod).
53

gallax,

Illinois 13/04/2008 05:38:24
Sorry about the exclamation mark, albeit I'm a literature professor. :-)emphasis. My opinion of you sticks Daithi. By the way, I'm not voting for Clinton. However, there are enough misogynist men in this count who will keep her from winning. A woman is never the front runner. Remember, Obama is a man, I think. . . anyway.
54

nurseratchet,

Arizona 13/04/2008 05:39:28
How do you spell, "that's a load of horse pucky"? Hillary is NOT SLIPPING in the polls, she is actually gaining! And speaking of gaffes............What about Obama's attorney Andres Lopez on WAPA TV in Puerto Rico?
55

nurseratchet,

USA 13/04/2008 05:47:23
OBAMA WILL NOT BE PRESIDENT! WHY IS OBAMA’S ATTORNEY ANDRES LOPEZ BLASTING LARRY SINCLAIR ON PUERTO RICAN TELEVISION? WHY DOESN’T OBAMA JUST ANSWER THE SEX/DRUG ALLEGATIONS???
http://www.wapa.tv/superxclusivo/ NO DENIAL AT ALL!
56

Dáithí,

San Jose 13/04/2008 05:47:28
#53 - Gallax

>"However, there are enough misogynist men in this count who will keep her from winning."

So, if we disagree with her position on Iraq, the Economy, Abortion, Gun Control, the Death Penalty or any other of what we men call 'issues', you will proclaim that we are only voting against her because we are 'mysogynist'?

You're a sexist. You are not interested in issues, only sex. You vote for her because of her sex and you claim that men vote against her only because of her sex.

You may be the greatest single threat to democracy on the internet - besides anarchists, which stand for nothing at all.
57

None of the above,

Rural Ohio 13/04/2008 05:55:39
#29 gallax, Illinois wrote: "It's time for women to heal, nuture (sic) and guide our society."

Typical angry feminist rant. If you think Shrillary is a healer or nurturer you are indeed a daft person who should stay as far away from the voting booth as possible.

Hillary Clinton is the most vile, corrupt and evil woman in American politics. Since the early days of Arkansas, she and her husband have presided over corruption on a scale that makes typical "machine" politics look like a tea party. The list is endless and need not be repeated here.

That she is even considered a viable candidate is testimony to the gullibility and stupidity of vast numbers of our people. The level of her crimes (yes, crimes) is staggering, yet millions of misguided "progressives" think she's just dandy. Fools.

As a conservative, I don't support ANY of the three remaining candidates, but I will say that at least Obama seems a likable sort with comparatively little baggage. He's a Socialist through and through, but if it is the Dems' race to lose this fall I think I would rather it be Obama than the Witch of the White House.
58

,

13/04/2008 05:58:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
59

,

13/04/2008 05:59:29
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
60

Bobjohnson,

13/04/2008 05:59:48
"Hillary Clinton grew up in Park Ridge, Illinois, not far from where I grew up. Like Hillary, I spent time after school to tutor hispanic kids at the Spanish Center at Hull House. I also ran the music program there in the summers during my junior and senior years. Hillary Clinton is a compasionate woman. She has written books too. Shake it off before it's too late"

She is also a complete liar. I refuse to support a woman who lies about coming under "sniper fire" when video evidence shows that there was a perfectly calm welcoming ceremony.
If anybody comes upon a life or death situation like she claims to have been in, that's sure not something that I would easily forget. She didn't "misspeak", she LIED for sympathy.
61

gallax,

Illinois 13/04/2008 06:01:10
Ohio. . . I mean you. Talk to Daithi. . . maybe you can
get together and campaign for Barack in Pennsylvania.
62

57Nomad,

california 13/04/2008 06:03:18
#13 Kelvino

K said:

"If you can't take Obama's truth then revert back to your former prejudice and pretend that he's just another "upety" black man that you are so afraid of."

'If you can't take Obama's truth,' what truth are you talking about. Can you be a little more specific? And then, 'then revert back to your former prejudice.' Who is this 'your' you are talking about? I notice that you have posited a situation where one either accepts "Obama's truth" or admit to being a guy who goes around pretending that Obama is a frightening "upety black man."

As far as it goes, this 'upety black man' deal you introduced in your post, these sentiments are on your post, you wrote them, consequently every single word came from your mind and no one else's. The only person we know for sure who harbors those thoughts in his mind is you. So the question then arises how can someone who sets his racist musings online accuse others? The fact that you put these thoughts into the mind of others in your post doesn't absolve you of having them. To deflect the approbation due you, you invent fictitious others to express these thoughts for you. Who did you think you were going to fool?



63

gallax,

Illinois 13/04/2008 06:05:08
Big BobJohnson . . . The point is that she was there. . .
little boy. Poor little boys like you don't deserve
any kind of leadership. Open a can and put your spoon in
and chomp down. You are b--- s---
64

Bobjohnson,

13/04/2008 06:08:15
The point is she was there? What does it matter if she was there or somewhere else when there was no threat whatsoever? Why lie about something like that?

Please give some sort of valid argument for her to falsify something like that instead of blindly supporting her.
65

serena1313,

dallas 13/04/2008 06:08:44
*** gallux

Do you think calling people names helps your credibility or telling me Iam being duped without qualifying your remarks?

Do you really need to be condescending?

Considering Obama has over 2 million donors contributing to his campaign I'd say perhaps you are mistaken! Yes he has a couple of bundlers working to collect donations. And yes employees from oil companies and other industries have contributed to his campaign, but the difference therein is they contribute as individuals. Furthermore Obama is beholding to his contributors which over 2 million outnumber two bundlers.

Iam not blind to what is going on.

In contrast HRC has taken in huge amounts of money from the health care, insurance industries, and the weapons-manufactoring-industry are her largest contributors.

Despite claims of having fired Mark Penn, top campaign advisor and pollster, he is still on board. He has to date accumulated $14 million dollars salary for working on her campaign.

Don't you think there is a conflict of interest that Penn met with the Colombians in his role as chief executive of Burson-Mastellar promoting the trade-deal while working on HRC campaign? He also represents Countrywide Financial and a subsidiary of Blackwater. What about Bill Clinton who fully supports the Colombian trade deal which Hillary asserts she is opposed to it?

I suggest you consider dropping the name-calling and unfounded attacks. There is no reason to be rude. If you disagree, fine, but back up your disagreements with facts.

66

57Nomad,

california 13/04/2008 06:15:33
#63 Gal

Gal said:

"The point is that she was there. . .
little boy. "

I must have missed the newsflash when you were appointed Commissar of Points. When did that happen and why did they pick you? Look, Milky, you are mistaken. Hillary's lie calls to mind the old military maxim; war hath no fury like a non-combatant. Faithful in a little, faithful in a lot. She flunked the first. She lied. And what did she lie about? She lied about a little thing. What would it have cost her to never have said it at all? Nothing, that's what. She lied and it's cost her. She's not going to get a free pass like Bubba did.
67

gallax,

Illinois 13/04/2008 06:16:05
Bosnia won the war, and Hillary with her daughter were there to give support to our troops. The ceremony was cut short, and she with others were given bullet proof vests. The plane had to circle a long time so that precautions could be made before they landed. It was a
hazardous situation. As the First Lady she was there to
represent our government. I believe she was generalizing,and embellished the story. She's not a liar,
you know that. These judgments of her are based on lies. It's the hateful condemnation of her that is so
unfair. I don't believe this scrutiny and judgment of
her would exist is she weren't a woman. Her ability to
develop policies and her intellligence is remarkable.
And if you deny this, it is from a sexist position, I
don't care what you say.
68

JamesInDenver,

Colorado 13/04/2008 06:18:15
It's ironic, Bill Clinton loves to be called the first Black president. Yet his wife calls Obama arrogant, a code-word for uppity-black-man. This is a lynching folks, pure and simple.
69

gallax,

Illinois 13/04/2008 06:24:35
Serena. . . facts are one thing. . . distortion and erroneous bull is another. Your information about Clinton's corporate support is dead wrong. Where do you
get this information? The international trade agreement
situation is a complex one. Did you ever hear the expression, "A little learning is a dangerous thing?"
With you it's, "Pretend I know something by making it appear that I do." You are mislead.
70

serena1313,

dallas 13/04/2008 06:25:32
Hillary has "embellished" her record time and again. She cherry-picks from her husband's record confusing being in proximity with work experience.

Considering her tall tales of Bosnia, denying to have supported NAFTA despite quotes for years saying otherwise, her claims to the FMLA proved to also be false makes one wonder what else is she not being truthful about!

After the past 7 years one would think Americans would be more savvy about electing the next president!

71

serena1313,

dallas 13/04/2008 06:29:56

HRC's voted for the AUMF, she also voted against 3 amendments that would have curbed Bush's rush to war. One of which was submitted by Dick Durbin (D-Il) that would have compelled Bush to demonstrate "imminent threat" prior to invading Iraq.

The second was Levin's amendment. Granted Levin's bill called for the UN's approval before force could be used, but it also reinforced America's right to defend itself even if the UN voted against it. Therein nothing in that bill was an impediment to the US in any way. Yet Hillary claimed it would have made the president "subordinate" to the UN.

Although the amendments were defeated Hillary had 3 chances to slow down Bush's rush to war, but chose not to!

PS: add Ireland and the health care story


72

gallax,

Illinois 13/04/2008 06:35:24
Bill Clinton has a doctoral degree in Economics from
the London School of Economics. . . a Rhodes scholar.
Hillary was validictorian of her university graduating
class at Wellesley and has her law degree from Yale.
She has two terms as Senator from New York, the position
that Robert Kennedy held, and had 8 years of the Presidency as her education toward understanding what
the President experiences day to day, problem to problem.
If you don't see that she would be the best person to
solve this country's problems, problems far greater than we have ever faced in history, then you are a fool. I mean that sincerely. Good Night!!! And good luck!!!
73

,

13/04/2008 06:35:50
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
74

serena1313,

dallas 13/04/2008 06:36:48
There is a long list — including ties to Rezko.

http://www.tnr.com/politics/st.....55d748946e
http://www.margieburns.com/blo.....97614.html
http://www.margieburns.com/blo.....01879.html

Then there is the matter of Huge Kazakh’s donation of approximately $31 million dollars to Bill Clinton’s Library having to do with a mining deal, but it was scrubbed from MSNBC’s site:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22926743/

75

Bobjohnson,

13/04/2008 06:42:06
Have you seen none of the videos of the event? There is a precession of at the very LEAST 20 people. All of them are acting in quite the calm manner. None of them are visibly wearing bullet proof vests. There is no bulk whatsoever under their clothing indicating the presence of such a device.

Claiming she was under sniper fire indicates that she was being targeted and actually being fired upon which the video indicates otherwise. I could possibly see the existence of the possibility of a sniper attack, but with that type of logic, apparently I'm under a
"terrorist" attack every day of my life because I could get blown up at any point, or an "automobile attack" because I could be struck and killed by another driver.

This scrutiny is not because she is a woman whatsoever. As fellow members of the human race, I treat women with the same respect as I would any other person. Unfortunately for your generalizations, I am not the same as many of the other sexist men that exist and shame the image of men in general. Were she the correct person for the job as president, I would fully support her. No, I am not one of the many people who feel Obama is the perfect candidate. I have yet to see any candidate in ANY election so far that I feel would take our country in the perfect direction. I feel that the majority of politicians are lying scumbags who do not want to become elected to positions to make the country/world a better place but instead for personal gain for themselves and the lobbyist circle jerk.

I will fully admit that I feel Obama would be a better candidate over Clinton. Regardless, it's sort of a lose/lose-lose situation in my opinion. Do I want to get shot in the hand and lose my typing skills for a job, or shot in the foot and just lose my ability to walk? Either way I'm at a disadvantage. Admittedly, at this point though, I would still be willing to take Clinton over the abomination that is Bush.
76

gallax,

Illinois 13/04/2008 06:49:00
Oh, Serena. . . one last thing! John Kerry, and dozens of other democrats voted for Bush to have power to go to
the U.N. to get behind the U.S. so that the U.N. would
pressure Husein and Iraq to open the country for inspection to see if there were WMDs. They were hoping that he would do this. Clinton and the other senators
didn't expect Bush to pre-emptively begin the invasion
of Iraq without the U.Ns backing. By the way, Obama
was in the Illinois State senate, and did not have to
face this decision, especially when the CIA had warned
of such weapons existing. Everyone later found that
this information was fabricated. Even Colon Powell
resigned in anger at this, since he presented these
so-called findings to the U.N. and everyone to convince
them to sign on to the invasion. Hillary Clinton had
witnessed, first hand, the destruction of the towers.
She had to deal with all the catostrophic results of
what happened to people in New York city. She was on
the frontline of all of this. Don't blame her for this
War in Iraq. Her ideas and policies would help this country find the best and the most clear direction.
You are mistaken about her. Your negative propaganda
is myth and untrue; she's a politician, but she has
dedicated her whole life to serving this country in
many ways. Being a woman, you should be proud of her.

intelligent
77

gallax,

Illinois 13/04/2008 06:51:50
BobJohnson. . . Go to sleep! You're full of babble.
Go Hillary! :-) Did you know that Obama's real! first
name is Barry. Barry Obama! What a ring! lol
78

DaleW,

CA, USA 13/04/2008 06:53:49
JamesInDenver wrote:
"It's ironic, Bill Clinton loves to be called the first Black president. Yet his wife calls Obama arrogant, a code-word for uppity-black-man. This is a lynching folks, pure and simple."

That is rich. To some, treating blacks as equals (they have the capacity for arrogance like everyone else, imagine that) is equal to `code-word' for whatever lameness they want to assert. Nice invocation of `lynching' too...get that double race card played. It is sure to do Obama all kinds of good. You seem more the bigot than those you so readily, and laughably, accuse.

79

SandersJ,

Missouri 13/04/2008 07:05:55
If Clinton can lie about being under sniper fire and McCain can't differentiate between Al Qaeda and Shiites then Obama can make a mistake regarding his chose of words. But he is correct Americans all across America are upset, angry and yes bitter at Washington. If that were not true than George Bush's approval rating would not be 27% and 82% of American would not think our country is on the wrong track. Now if that is not anger, frustration, bitterness than I don't know what is. Also it is a known fact that republicans use social issues to persuade voters to vote republican because they can't win on issues like: the economy, the war in Iraq, and their overall indifference to the American people. There is a negative connotation associate with the word "bitter" but the fact still remains American’s are not happy. If Obama wins the democrat nomination or if he loses, I am proud that he was brave enough to speak hard truths to the American people. But the sad fact is American’s can't handle the truth that is why politicians’ lie to us. If Obama loses because he spoke the truth than we can expect politicians to continue lying to us.
Obama please hit back I can't stand watching you let this Clinton attack machine stomp you in the ground over such an overblown comment. You supporters still love you but we need to see you stand your ground. She has not run a perfect campaign, you have talking points. Attack her and change the news story: give them something else to talk about.
Huffington post has a story regarding some comments McCain made to the New York Daily last year, which would offend some; McCain’s comments were about small town folks and Hispanic voters. Why is McCain getting a free pass from the Media? Fairness is all we are asking from the media. I read a story on MSNBC about Clinton taking money from a company that has one of the largest sexual harassment law suits pending against them. When the Clinton campaign was confronted about their affiliation with thi
80

SandersJ,

Missouri 13/04/2008 07:06:43
Huffington post has a story regarding some comments McCain made to the New York Daily last year, which would offend some; McCain’s comments were about small town folks and Hispanic voters. Why is McCain getting a free pass from the Media? Fairness is all we are asking from the media. I read a story on MSNBC about Clinton taking money from a company that has one of the largest sexual harassment law suits pending against them. When the Clinton campaign was confronted about their affiliation with this company they refused to return the contributions to the company. Also there is a company in Brazil that has been charged with forcing their workers to work and live in slave conditions. The company was raided by the Brazilian police and shut down. Guess who their business partners were. Hint: their last name starts with a “C”. I am not making these stories up-I am telling the truth. I am an Obama supporter but I would not lie on Mrs. Clinton about subjects has serious as these.
Obama supporters I just read this story. I don’t know if it is true, but I hope it is true because Obama could use some help out there on the trail. Can you imagine how difficult it must be fighting the Clintons and the Republican attack machine at the same time? No other politician would even try to take both of these powerful political machines. Obama supporters!! Obama needs our continued support more than ever. Let’s stand proud and support our candidate for President all the way to the White House.
The Republican Attack Machine is going to bury Clinton with her Bosnia Lie. Just think about it McCain is a war hero. He is a POW whom served his country under true sniper fire. Now we can all imagine what that "527" Swift boat ad is going to say and how damaging it will be to her political future. We should all be afraid that the Republicans have not pounced on Clinton already. They are smart and Rove is saving his attack for the General Election.
81

Bobjohnson,

13/04/2008 07:14:43
"BobJohnson. . . Go to sleep! You're full of babble.
Go Hillary! :-) Did you know that Obama's real! first
name is Barry. Barry Obama! What a ring! lol"

I will chalk this one up as a 'win' in that case. I feel I was courteous enough to respond to your arguments. If I am not afforded this same courtesy, I can only assume that you have no valid points to counter mine.
82

gallax,

Illinois 13/04/2008 07:16:25
Bill Clinton was aware of the conditions of such workers;
that is why he began assisting in trade negotiation
agreements that would change these horrible conditions
for the workers. Why do you come on these blogs and
distort the actuality of the facts. That's a main factor
in why Clinton's campaign fired Penn, because he was
lobbying for businesses in Columbia. She is not for
these trade agreements because she is aware of the conditions of workers in such businesses. Stop the
lying sir.
83

AsinineDervish,

New Jersey 13/04/2008 07:32:42
@ Gallax 76, and all prior

Why should anyone be proud of hillary simply because she's a woman? There is nothing special about her being a woman. It should be the biggest non-issue in this race, only competeing against Obama's race. Why anyone would think these things would change their presidency makes no sense.

And if you vote for them based on either race or sex, you're no better than the bigots and sexists which you rail against.
84

Vash01,

Phoenix, AZ 13/04/2008 07:38:57
Obama spoke the truth. As usual, his words are being picked out of context by Clinton and McCain, who seem to have teamed up against the Democratic party. Yes, I say Clinton is against the Democratic party at this point. Her actions are harming her own party, but she does not care as long as she gets to be the president (or nominee, at this point).

The attacks on Obama's statements are too ridiculous to be taken seriously. He grew up extremely poor, and he helped the poor in the Chicago area, before and after he became a Harvard law school graduate. The 'after' is more important, because he could have gotten a lucrative job after getting his law degree. Instead, he chose to work for $18k per year to continue helping the poor. Now contrast that with Clinton and McCain. Clinton recently disclosed her income at 109 million. She was never poor, nor was she in touch with the poor. McCain was and is extremely wealthy. His pain and suffering came as a POW, not as a poor person trying to make ends meet. Obama has the empathy for the working class, and it is a shame that these two wealthy persons call him 'out of touch'.

This is an effort by the Clinton camp to divert attention from her own follies, and there have been numerous. This article lists them correctly, but there is more. Hillary Clinton was a 'Goldwater girl' in the past. She has repeatedly changed her own statements (e.g. regarding gun control) depending on whether they would bring her a win politically. Whatever she says cannot be trusted. This is another effort to divert the attention from the upcoming trial of Paul vs. Clinton on April 25th in Los Angeles, which is about campaign funds. Will our media (CNN and Fox in particular) devote as much time to the real issues as they do to the soundbites from Obama's private fund raiser or from his pastor's speeches? I doubt it because the Clintons seem to own these TV stations. They are the reason the truth is not being told to the people of this country. T
85

sad "poor lady named janet" from alabama,

usa 13/04/2008 07:45:29
I am glad the world can see that the election process in America is corrupt. Hillary has a lot of middle class American's that support her and the DNC doesn't care. I will not vote if this election is cut short and I am not the only one. WE the PEOPLE of the United States of America do not matter in Washington, DC. HILLARY 08!!!!!!!!!!!
86

Bobjohnson,

13/04/2008 07:55:35
AsinineDervish hit the nail on the head. This race isn't about pride of potentially having the first black, let alone non-white president, nor is it about the pride of potentially having the first female president. If that's the reason you support a candidate, you should do your country a favor and restrict yourself from voting (though as an American citizen, this is a right you are afforded and would obviously be taking for granted).

If you feel a candidate will make things better for you, your family, your country, other countries, mankind and the world (and potentially some day other worlds), then by all means vote for the candidate.

I don't think ANYBODY can say that this is the case for them with any of the mainstream candidates. I wish more people would think outside of the Democrats vs Republican mindset. The race for president isn't about a political affiliation, women, blacks, whites or any of that. It's about making our lives better. There's more of a choice than what mainstream media tells you.
87

SandersJ,

Missouri 13/04/2008 08:04:38
gallax: You can spin all you want. But I am telling the truth and you know it. So don't try and spin out of this one. It is my personal mission in life to get this information to as many concerned voters who will listen and research the validity of my claims. As a matter of fact everyone read my early post and spread the word. Let’s watch Clinton try and spin her way out of these truths. Oh yeah, that’s right, she is going to claim she misspoke for the 20th time. Before Senator Clinton gets to go up against the Republican Attack Machine she is going to have to get through Senator Obama’s “Wall of Loyal No Matter What Supporters”. Food for thought: most of us will not, are not, and would never vote for Senator Clinton.
So Senator Clinton and her supporters can forget about the White House because she is never going to see the Oval Office again. The sad fact is Carl Rove has a lot to do with our Democratic Party splitting in-two; partly because he knew that Senator Clinton would rather tear our party apart then lose what Senator Clinton believes rightly belongs to her. The party elders have taken too long to unite and I truly believe this latest gaffe by Obama and attack by Clinton will split our party in half.
Yes I admit Senator Obama used a poor chose of words but so has Senator Clinton. I don’t see Senator Obama producing sound bites for the Republican Party and further more Senator Clinton can forget about her big state argument because the AA community will not vote for her in the General and Democrats cannot win without their heavy turnout. The last time a Democrat won the White House was when former President Clinton won and guess what group of people made the difference both times former President Clinton won? You guess right.
Last but not least Senator Obama’s youth vote is the X factor that will produce a winning coalition that can secure victory this year and for many years to come. But watch what happens if Senator Obama does not win because he spoke
88

BBJR,

OHIO 13/04/2008 08:34:43
Is this article suggesting that these two Great Democrat Minds, Gore and Carter, are about to recommend to Senator Clinton that she ABORT HERSELF so as not to PUNISH the Party? If so it will not be easy and may involve something akin to 'crushing the head with forceps.'
89

`GalacticCannibal,

Kiddy on usa person. N,Y 13/04/2008 09:11:13
As a kiddy on person in the USA (Lanark) i am glad Obama is the clear winner. Clinton is old news and has lots of wrinkles. She only appeals to the muffins high on shrooms and who ware baggy pants.

We the ooh ess ah people will elect the Obama dude for prezzie. Lap it up dudes and have a soda on me.

I also would like to se Nicola Sturgen give Obama a run for his MOM.

ok dudes vote snp..

S= SHROOMS

N= NOW

P= PLEASE

Happy cheese burger day dudes

G.C
90

`GalacticCannibal,

kiddy om California dude 13/04/2008 09:16:33
My !!MOM!! says if it were not for the Scattish dudes we would all be speaking cherokee in the usa.
91

Mrcool,

Hawthorne 13/04/2008 09:24:14
Socialist,Dictatorship---NO its the Democrat Party trying to anoint a 3 1/2 year no pass any law ,no show up to vote Liberal ( Obama) to President of this country just because he is young and can talk like a preacher and get young mush heads
( political and experienced illiterate young kids who want everything for free at our countries expense )to vote ! Everyday he says something stupid and the media is so enamored with him he can say or do no wrong !Wait a minute --according to the left wing democrat party I should feel at ease because Obama is going to talk to all dictators ,terrorist leaders and end the war immediately.Doesn't that sound like Cinton who cut our defense and let Osama Bin Laden go 3 times because he was afraid of a lawsuit ! Oh well at least we'll get free healthcare which will cost 850 million dollars.That means we will have to make a 2-3 week appointment to see doctors and get lousier service to pay more for this than if we had paid for our own private insurance .
Oh well at least-- we have a JFK look-a-like ! You know there is something when the terrorists groups are rooting for a democrat to win .
92

Wally,

By The Rivers Of Babylon (USA) 13/04/2008 09:29:57
Jimmy carter was not a servant of the people who rule our country and that is why his reputation was destroyed while he was president. The bankers imposed purposely a credit crunch when he was president, raising prime interest rates enormously, in order to wreck the economy when he was president. It worked - we had a bad recession and it was blamed on Carter. There was also a lot of effort in the media to destroy his reputation.

Gore of course does serve the people who rule us as does Clinton. Obama I would bet is the same, but if he is elected, then time will tell.

Hilary Clinton belongs in jail because of the things she was involved with when her husband was governor of Arkansas and president as well. McCain has let it be known that he wants war war war.

Obama harmed himself badly the other day with his comments about rural Americans. Obama also received an elite education and obviously his condescending comments the other day show he is of the elite, not having any sentiment or understanding at all of at least many ordinary Americans.
93

SandersJ,

mISSOURI 13/04/2008 09:39:53
Clinton is the true Elitist; she is a millionaire, she feels the White House is her birth-right, she lies to the American people and dares us to question her about her countless "misspeaks" or "lies", she as surrounded her campaign with trade lobbyist and expects the American people to believe she is against free-trade. By the way Free-trade stands for: all us Americans will be poor, just like those poor small town rural voters that have been voting social issues for the last sixteen years, while the Clinton’s and Bush’s have unmerciful sent their jobs overseas.
People wake up and smell the coffee. We are being duped again. The powers to be pull the wool over our eyes ever time. We get all worked up over social issues and we vote the wrong Politian in office. America our great country is bankrupt we are borrowing money from every country under the sun. Now the Clinton's are poised to slip another one sided anti-America, Colombia Trade deal on all of us, I don't care where you live Urban America or Small Town Rural America we will all share in the suffering of losing more jobs to countries we can't compete with because their pay is so low.
And don't forget about Senator McCain besides the fact he wants to keep us mired in a war we can't an don't want to afford, McCain policy proposals consist of legislative changes like: repelling the law that requires employers to provide healthcare to their employees, more tax cuts for the richest Americans, continued tax cuts for companies that ship our jobs overseas, and 4 more years of "No Child Left Behind". I could go on and on because McCain policies are Anti-Main Street and Pro - Wall Street/ Pro - Overseas.
I am a Obama Supporter but what I am writing about is not about whom we all choose to support, these issues are bigger than I don't like Obama, I don’t like Clinton Or I don't like McCain.
What I am writing about the fact the dollar is on the verge of becoming worthless and our once powerful military is being des
94

SandersJ,

Misouri 13/04/2008 09:41:55
I am a Obama Supporter but what I am writing about is not about whom we all choose to support, these issues are bigger than I don't like Obama, I don’t like Clinton Or I don't like McCain.
What I am writing about the fact the dollar is on the verge of becoming worthless and our once powerful military is being destroyed by power hungry foolish men whom have no regard for the American people’s safety and our brave soldiers well being while serving our country with their precious blood or upon returning home and in need of support/rehabilitation help from our government. Now that’s truly unpatriotic behavior. Our fore fathers said this country was founded for the people and by the people but if we cannot, or will not stand together those profound words are useless. We have to bring the principals our fore fathers wrote about to life, we have to put or differences aside and stand together if “We the American People Will Prevail Against Our Enemies Foreign and Domestic.
95

mike - across the pond,

sanders and all the rest of BO's DNC oarsmen.... 13/04/2008 10:14:14
if you think that the 527 & swiftboaters are a danger to Hillary.... and that they'll give a pass to Obama... WOW, YOU have been drinking the Koolaid, havent you???

all you will hear from these guys will be a steady barrage of "wright", michelle obama's "never been proud to be an american", and soundbytes from BO's SF elitist speach...

Democrats will try it against McCain... and will get absolutely TROUNCED...

the only way BO can win is if McCain seriously goofs up his VP selection... like going for Huckabee...

Obama is COOKED...

Obama committed to running his campaign on public funds... and will now back out on that, now that he has gone over that threshold by 3x.... 527 will come out of the woodwork on THAT one....

obama IS a racist... He is unable to separate himself from the likes of Wright... and Farakahn... while those relationships cement his core constituency, they poison him to the broader electorate...

question is how much damage does HE do to the DNC after Hillary does HER damage... will there be ANYTHING left.... providing they lose....
96

Sherri,

Now Martinez then Joplin, Missouri 13/04/2008 10:32:02
J,Sanders,

will you still feel the same if obama looses?

I don't think anyone has the right to ask HRC to bow out. Both are really close in votes and delagates. why should she bow out? hy doesn't BO bow out? why should he? Let the race continue until it is crystal clear.
97

Sherri,

13/04/2008 10:43:58
Mike across the pond...thanks I agree

"Obama harmed himself badly the other day with his comments about rural Americans. Obama also received an elite education and obviously his condescending comments the other day show he is of the elite, not having any sentiment or understanding at all of at least many ordinary Americans"


Not only did he mess up there, his true colors come out when he is trying to have a regular conversation, "Typical White Person" or his wife's comments about being proud for once in her life... and how about the "Get more White People" this whole primary election is a big joke.
98

jsanderssr,

Baton Rouge, LA, USA 13/04/2008 11:45:30
bucktooth carter and algore have gravitas? Their endorsement should carry all the prestige of one from Laurel and Hardy. Add another just like them and you'll have the Three Stooges, only not funny.

I don't like any of the current candidates but despise hillary and obama sama. Then again, I'm just a typical white, bitter, religious, gun owning lesser person not from the country's center...
99

CppThis,

13/04/2008 11:59:30
This isn't exactly a ringing endorsement. Carter is a nutjob, and a lot of Dems still blame Gore for losing in 2000. Honestly, Obama has serious problems in a general election--sure, McCain has a lot of dirt but he's not the one trying to run as Mr. Clean who will change Washington by giving lots of nice speeches. Obama's very liberal, which already counts against him for the moderate a.k.a. sane demographic, and when we find out the truth--that he's a sneaky politician like all the rest of them--a lot of his diehard supporters are going to feel betrayed and probably work against him.
100

,

13/04/2008 12:09:10
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
101

seadawgette,

ny 13/04/2008 12:10:07
Well, I guess the senior MALE democrats feel they have to band together to protect their own. The message they are sending is that ANY MALE is better then a female. They sure picked the right people to show this - 2 male LOSERS- Carter and Gore -LOL
102

,

13/04/2008 12:11:10
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
103

,

13/04/2008 12:12:39
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
104

indc,

usa 13/04/2008 12:13:21
One clarification: Penn lost his title but not his job, it appears that he continues in an identical functional role of polling and advising, but without the title and visibility, now is is a smaller blip on the campaign's radar... he has been the main sleaze for the Clintons as Rove has been for the sociopath in the WH.... Bush and Cheney have their exit strategies for Iraq, as they had for Vietnam.. brave folks with other people's lives.
105

Itchy,

13/04/2008 12:30:17
"DEMOCRAT grandees Jimmy Carter and Al Gore"

Democrat losers more like.
106

Harry Dingey,

Baguio City, philippines 13/04/2008 12:48:34
FREE TRADE IS GOOD.. SO, WHY IS NAFTA and WTO so bad for AMERICA ??
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First I should inform you that I worked as An Industrial Engineer for Rockwell International for over 30 years. The Cost of Wage comparison is exact what I worked on all my life.

I have been a Republican all my life but, I will never vote for another Free Trading Politician of either party, who wants to FREE TRADE with any third world country. Where the wages are 1/40th of the wages paid to American workers.

I believe in FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS, but only with countries that have a comparable wage scale as America. Countries like Canada, England, France, Germany, Japan and America should have their own Free TRADE AGREEMENTS. Remember Free Trade Agreements are not always FAIR Trade Agreements.

If you are an International Company and you are given a choice of paying your Manufacturing Workers $100/day or $2/day which are you going to chose? Remember America is not allowed to level the wage playing field by imposing an IMPORT TARIFF because this is forbidden by NAFTA and WTO laws.

Naturally you’re going to chose paying the lower wage, that’s the Problem America faces as a member to NAFTA and WTO. So, all the higher paying jobs are moved to China. Then all the remaining companies must move to China also to compete with the other companies that moved.

All the Republicans have pushed this FREE TRADING IDEA since the 1980s. But, they could not pass these free trade agreements because most of the Democrats did not believe in free trade with all third world countries.

Then Democratic President Bill Clinton came to power in 1992 and in 1993 Bill and Hillary Clinton both conspired with all the Republicans to totally destroy all of the highest paying blue collar jobs in America by Creating the Free Trade Agreements called NAFTA and WTO.

We just learned on March 1, 2008 that
107

Harry Dingey,

Baguio City, philippines 13/04/2008 12:50:45
We just learned on March 1, 2008 that Bill and Hillary was paid $109 millions dollars in the last 7 years by some America Billionaires for this act of TREASON. They said the compensation was for 2 books and Bill Clinton’s speaking engagements. Get real.. That’s a lot of money.

Now you’re asking yourself why free trade is so bad. Well the answer is NO it is a great idea if you FREE TRADE with countries that have similar wage rates and benefits, like Canada, England, France, Germany, Japan, and America.

But, when you let all these third world Countries where the wages are 1/40th of the wages paid to American workers trade under the same trade agreement, you got big trouble if you’re an American worker.

Here is why this can never work:
The very first time one of these large International Companies closes one American factory and moves the manufacturing operations to China to save company manufacturing cost, every one of the other American manufacturing companies must also do the exact same thing to compete.

This is a never ending process, where America in time will loss its entire manufacturing base to the lowest paying third world country, which is now China.

There is an even big reason why we must get out of these free trade agreements and that is because China is a communist country that twenty-five years ago the American Government wouldn’t permit any American company to even sell them a computer.

Look at China now; they make nearly every item sold in America. But, make no mistake about it China is still a communistic country.

What if Communist China decides to nationalize all the American factories that were moved to china? What the HELL are we to do about that? You know this very thing just happened in Venezuela a few months ago and they are not a Communistic country.

Whether we like it or not America is much along the road to losing its entire manufacturing base for ever. I am not so sure this can ever be reversed thanks to all the
108

Harry Dingey,

Baguio City, philippines 13/04/2008 12:52:54
Whether we like it or not America is much along the road to losing its entire manufacturing base for ever. I am not so sure this can ever be reversed thanks to all these free trading American Politicians of both parties.

Do you know what they call a country that has no manufacturing base and they have no control over its currency when it starts falling; “THEY CALL THAT A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY”.

Watch the U.S. DOLLAR and you’re going see America in one crisis after another. The American Dollar has lost 60% of its value during 8-years of George Bush. As an American Citizen, absolutely everything you own is based on the valued of the dollar. Your House, Car, Bank Account, Retirement Pensions.

If the Dollar keeps falling, at some point the dollar will collapses and then your Social Security Pension may default too. Then your Bank Account could disappear too because when the dollar collapses all Financial companies go down too.

Do you remember Bear Stearns Companies stock fell from $159/share to $2/share on March 17, 2008? That’s exactly what happens when suddenly you don’t have enough money to pay your bills. Or in this case your money is worthless.

When America signed NAFTA and WTO and all these large International Companies started to earn a lot of money from that cheap China labor. The American Stock Market, Dow Jones Industrial average advanced from 1,000 levels to near 14,000 levels. This was nothing more than a Money Transfer from the middle class working man in America to the Large International Companies of the world.

America will end up losing everything if this trend is not changed; all the large International companies make lots of money and then buy-off all the American Politicians. This is the way it has been working for 15 years.

From 1994 to 2007, net manufacturing employment has declined by 3,654,000 jobs during this period. If we can not reverse this trend, then America will end up just like Africa or Brazil or any other third w
109

Harry Dingey,

Baguio City, philippines 13/04/2008 12:54:21
From 1994 to 2007, net manufacturing employment has declined by 3,654,000 jobs during this period. If we can not reverse this trend, then America will end up just like Africa or Brazil or any other third world country making $2 - $5/day. The American Trade Balance increases every year, more and more.

I have news for all these people who think America should just continue down the same FREE TRADE path we been traveling for 15 years. We have lost most of manufacturing base and American trade deficit has increased every year since America started NAFTA and WTO.

Every Manufacturer in the world wants to sell their products in the American market which is the largest in the world. If we go back to adding Tariffs on products made in THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES (where labor cost is 1/40 of American labor) and imported into the American market.

You will start to see all these manufacturing jobs return back to America, because we will have taken away the reason to move all these jobs to China. Then America will be that shining light on the hill again.

WHAT THE HELL ARE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE SMOKING?

Are we going to wait till the American Dollar goes into a total collapse and America becomes a THIRD WORLD COUNTRY? If the American Politicians don’t change and they continue to let this go on the American People is going to be dam angry when America does collapse.


Every Asset in America is based on the value of the Dollar; the dollar has already lost 60% of it value since Bush took office. Look at the housing bubble, Financial Companies going belly up, Oil is over $112/barrel, gold is over $1,000/oz., Gas is near $4.00/gal., food prices are going thru the roof.

The American Politicians are the only ones who can change the outcome. They are the ones who got us into this mess in the name of free trade.

SO, GOD Please HELP US AGAIN… So Mote it Be.

110

mike - across the pond,

indc.... 13/04/2008 13:01:47
sorry you may not LIKE bush's exit strategy... but that doesnt mean you should IGNORE his exit strategy...

did you MISS his exit strategy?

let me spell it out for you... I'll go slow.....

W E - W I L L - W I N....

W E _ W I L L _ L E A V E _ W H E N _ T H E _ D E M O C R A T I C A L L Y
E L E C T E D _ G O V E R N M E N T _ A S K S _ U S _ T O

hope I didnt lose you in those three multi syllable words in the middle there....

it will be just like GERMANY, JAPAN, SPAIN, GREECE, TURKEY, the Phillipines, Korea... or any of the other places we have troops (or HAD in the cases of the PI & Spain)... THAT is the exit strategy.... GET USED TO IT

unlike hillary, BO, or the rest of the DNC looney bin he doesnt have an exit strategy that encompasses losing.... losing is NOT AN OPTION...

do you get that yet?
111

wodiej,

Indiana 13/04/2008 13:06:46
First of all, I could care less what Carter thinks. He is one of the worst Presidents we've ever had alongside George Bush Jr. On Gore, I thought he had more sense but if he endorses Obama after all we have heard about his Rev. Wright and now Rev. Meeks and their racist, hateful, anti American statements, I will no longer have any respect for Gore.

How many times do we have to have this debate about the delegates and popular vote?? Michigan and Florida should be counted. New Hampshire and Iowa moved up their Primary date and were not punished. Who decided that these states should lead in voting for the Primary anyway? If MI and FL were counted, Obama would not be that far ahead. Alot of his lead is from Illinois alone. We have 10 states left to vote. Senator Clinton is ahead in Pennsylvania and expected to win. She is also ahead in Indiana where I expect her to win in most of the state based on the outrage about Obama and his Rev. Wright affiliation that I have seen from letters to the editor in at least my city. Obama has won a single large Democratic state and that was his home state of Illinois. The rest are blue and/or caucus states that either will vote Republican in the GE or voters were disenfranchised at caucuses.

If people truly believe Clinton supporters will vote for Obama if he wins the nom just because he is running on the Dem ticket, you are mistaken. I will not and most everyone I have talked to will not. They will vote McCain or simply not vote. Obama doesn't have a snowballs chance in a GE so I am confident he can't beat McCain and so would not vote if he is the Dem nominee.

Senator Hillary Clinton is extremely intelligent, has many great ideas, plans and details on how to carry them out. She is compassionate and truly cares about this country. Obama won't even put his hand on his heart for the Pledge of Allegiance. He must have learned not to do that from his anti American Reverend Wright. If you think that is ok, then you don't know w
112

Reader11722,

NY, NY 13/04/2008 13:08:13
Obama, Hillary, McCain does it really matter? Unfortunately it took segregationist Governor Wallace to reveal the truth that "there's not a dime's worth of difference between" Republicans and Democrats. The Democrats willingly went along with the War in Iraq, suspension of Habeas Corpus, detaining protesters, banning books like "America Deceived' from Amazon, stealing private lands (Kelo decision), warrant-less wiretapping and refusing to investigate 9/11 properly. They are both guilty of treason.
Write in Dr. Ron Paul and save this great nation.
Last link (before Google Books bends to gov't Will and drops the title):
http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?&isbn=0-595-38523-0
113

wodiej,

Indiana 13/04/2008 13:09:19
Then you don't know what it means to be an American.
114

Pontificatus Maximus of Avignon,

13/04/2008 13:20:17
Mrs Clinton should stand down now. It is absolutely ridiculous that she is not at home doing the cooking and cleaning for her husband.
115

tamarque,

new york 13/04/2008 13:24:23
it is very sad indeed that most of the commentators (reflecting most of the public) can only respond in emotional terms with political name-calling. it there is to be a 'debate' it should be based on meaningful information with some evaluation of that information.

as regards political campaigning, there is an aspect of it that no one can avoid--the jockeying for public credibility across the massively diverse constituent groups. this makes it so very difficult to say anything real and concrete. in this campaign there is the same problem. everytime a candidate says something specific there is negative blowback.

however, that being said, i look at the specific lie that hilary put forth about her ability to deal with danger in bosnia--something caught on tape. how arrogant of her to think she could get away with it! when i look at obama, i don't see lies. i do see someone attempting to be real and he gets slammed for it. he even gets slammed for what he didn't say; ie, the rev. wright's comments. but the difference is that what He says is true. the rev. wright did not lie, nor did was he wrong. and obama's comments about working people was not wrong either. as a sociologist, i might make the same analysis--and i have over the years watching religion, for example, go out and come back in fashion. in the 1960-70's when people had hope for change and understood the power of organizing in numbers, religion was put on the back burner as irrelevant. when the movement faltered and people were left feeling empty of spiritual connection, many of them went back to traditional religions. i recall numerous discussions of the rise of 12-step programs in the 1980's as a replacement for the spiritual connection lost when the movement failed. obama is right that when people are insecure and disempowered they will find something to cling to fill the void. in poor cities gangs do that for the disempowered youth. fundamentalist religions do that also. for other
116

Angus Ogg,

13/04/2008 13:26:16
#17 Dáithí,

Thanks for that. I think it is often the case when overseas observers see presidents and premiers in a different light than those who have to live with them.

Just look at Margaret Thatcher. Many in the US thought she was great, yet virtually, in fact literally the whole of Scotland rejected her when all the Conservative MP's were voted out of office from Scotland. She still commands great respect and great hatred in equal measures here in the UK and that is 17 years after she was deposed by John Major's coup.

From this side of the Atlantic many see Bill Clinton as an excellent, albeit flawed President. Excellent for he handled the econonmy apparently well. Flawed, well for obvious reasons. Even those were human frailties and did not seem to affect him in a politically terminal way.

So it may be that Hillary has a lot of his baggage.

I think it is an indictment of humanity that we don't seem to get the politicians and leaders we want.

Just the ones we deserve !
117

Alfred E. Neuman,

13/04/2008 13:30:12
Blah blah blah, Oil and Iraq, blah blah blah, Bush dynasty, blah blah blah, frickin' yanks, blah blah blah.


Blah blah blah!
118

Sam Wren,

Maine - USA 13/04/2008 13:35:46
Uh gallax you left out the part about Hillary's at best "average" academic achievement at Yale law and the fact that she failed the Bar exam on the first try, but Obama graduated Summa Com (intentionally misspelled as the silly editors think the real word is "dirty") Laude from Harvard Law, was president of the Law Review (the most prestigious in the country, perhaps in the world), passed his bar exam on the first try and taught constitutional law at a prestigious university.

Her vote authorizing Bush's war would be a tad more defensible if she had even bothered to read the intelligence estimate. Her lack of leadership and the extreme absence of due diligence in making the most important decision of her career is frightening. She absolutely should never be commander in chief! We have had 7 years of an incurious boob who doesn't read or understand intelligence estimates, but leaves that task to subordinates. No more!

Obama's first name is "Barry"? Good God no wonder you rant so much. You have NO IDEA what you are talking about. As a youngster in public school Obama used the NICKNAME "Barry" to fit in better. He dropped it and began using his real name, Barrack in college.
119

Angus Ogg,

13/04/2008 13:39:21
Serena1313,dallas,

Good afternoon, and thankyou for that fine forensic analysis.

Your conclusion that Barack Obama whilst not perfect, should become the next president over Clinton and McCain made me think about the quality and above all choice between the current candidates.

Who would win if the contest were between:


BARACK OBAMA or GEORGE W. BUSH ?


At least this time the USA appears to have an embarrassment of riches in their choice.
120

victor dirnfeld,

los angeles 13/04/2008 13:52:10
Daithi and Serena---let's get down to the bottom line here.Just how many battleground states do you guys,being intellectually honest,think Obama will win in November,besides Illinois? Maybe California? Maybe New York? But how about Pennsylvania,New Jersey, Ohio, Texas, Michigan, Missouri,Tennessee, Florida,etc. Please don't tell me that all those primary and stupid caucus victories in the South and Western states are going to add up to general election wins this November. At this point Mccain is looking pretty good.I am a Democrat,but it is apparent to me that Obama will go the way of all the other elitist Democratic candidates,to wit: Stevenson, McCarthy, Dukakis, ad nauseam.
121

lonnak,

northwood, iowa 13/04/2008 14:02:00
America has troops in at least 130 countries. Our military is making us enemies where we had friends before, (look at what all our meddling in South America in the past few decades did for us -- those nations have all gone "left" due in large part to our meddling -- and military spending will bankrupt us. That and corporate greed will be what will end the supremacy of this country. It was the altruism of our Marshall Plan that made us friends. As General Shoup said before the Vietnam War 'If we had and would keep our dirty, dollar crooked fingers out of the business of these nations full of exploited, oppressed people, they would arrive at a solution of their own.' AND as General Butler said "War is a racket, fought by the many to benefit the very few..' Butler, a 2 time Congressional Medal of Honor winner said that in his military career he was a "racketeer, a gangster for capitalism" who could have taught "Al Capone a few lessons." He said "To hell with war!"
If we would only remember that every country wants to be in charge of its own destiny, perhaps we would stop antagonizing the world. After all, when we fought our revolution we fought it because we did not believe that the country across the sea that thought it "owned us" had the right to tell us how to live our lives OR to take our resources for her own. Yet we think other nations are going to be just fine with us doing that to them!! We also fought our own civil war and probably could not have been stopped FROM fighting that war by anyone.
Perhaps we would not be in the war we are in now, however, had we followed the much maligned Jimmy Carter's lead. HE dictated fuel economy standards for cars that were to be raised every year and he put solar panels on the White House. But that president whose goal was to benefit corporations and the rich, Ronald Reagan, took away the fuel economy requirements AND he removed the solar panels from the White House. He then cut taxes on the richest among us fro
122

victor dirnfeld,

Los Angeles 13/04/2008 14:06:14
As a moderate left of center Democrat,I will become one of the 30% of Democrats who will cross the line to vote for McCain before I allow the faux intelligentsia and the far left Progressive wing of the party carry the day in November.
123

acaveman,

13/04/2008 14:08:29
I hope Clinton won't drop until the convention.
Whoever become the next president I hope he is not McCain.
124

BAG,

GA 13/04/2008 14:12:44
Re: #16 in Michigan

I am soooooo glad to see someone else is cognizant of the Peter Paul vs. Clinton fraud case, which is forthcoming very soon. I have attempted many times via MASS MEDIA to query this case (i.e. email, telephone calls, etc.). I've been very unsuccessful in getting a response to my questions, relative to the above- named.

I had already visited the site you refernced, (in addition to other avenues), in attempts to get as much information as possible. (It appears the panacea in finding results is...strictly the "internet.") You are right...no one wishes to touch this bit of GERMANE information. However, it is my contention--the American voters should be kept abreast as to this bit of news.

To further update what you have presented...I have found out that the hearing shall take place April 25th, 2008. The presiding judge is someone named Munoz. Thus, at this hearing, hopefully, the decision for the trial itself, shall be made. This case is against Bill Clinton. And, yes. Hillary will be a witness, as well as their daughter and many in the entertainment arena as well. Some sources atate, perhaps Al Gore will serve as a witness, because they believe he has some interesting info he could offer. This will prove to be very INTERESTING!!

Unfortunately though, once again, it proves how we, the little people are kept in the dark (about many things), simply because the powers that be...those with the dynamic dollars, can dictate just how they wish to conduct business, reguardless of what we the people think...believe.

However, there is one power mightier than all. The public WILL learn of this case and shall have the ability to judge for themselves, rather than being directed!

Thank you, Michigan for giving the readers the info you revealed.

Readers...Google the name "Peter Paul." You will find tons of information on this gentleman, the case, videos and the like.

A retired senior residing in the state of GA!
125

Robbierunciman,

Romney Marsh 13/04/2008 14:19:39
I hope Mrs Clinton does not drop out. Democratic voters should reflect whether they would be happy with a candidate that makes them feel good or one that can win. The former will lead to a further 4 republican years. If Clinton drops out that it will be a gift to McCain - Obama seems to be in the same vacuous mold as Blair. The two 'elder' statesmen being trotted out here were primarily responsible for huge political mistakes that led to a republican whitehouse in the first place - so perhaps not the best choice? Surely we should ask the last Democratic winner, oh yes that's...
126

Bob Scofield,

New York 13/04/2008 14:39:57
Hillary cannot win. Even though they are very similar in terms of policy, there is a big difference between the way Obama and Clinton are viewed by Republicans & Independents in this country. Much of that doesn't even have to do with Hillary, but relates to the misdeeds of her husband. Her argument that the superdelegates should override the will of the Democratic voters and choose her because she is "more electable" against McCain is a specious argument. That is not to say that many true Conservatives will go out and vote for Obama; rather many of them, who are not that enthused with McCain to begin with, may simply stay home on election day if he is the nominee. Those same folks would dodge sniper fire to make it to the polls to cast a vote against the Clintons (and we're talking real sniper fire, not the fairy tale kind). :o)
127

iuris dea ,

13/04/2008 14:47:31
@16 Frustated Democrat, Michigan
@34 Frustated Democrat, Michigan

1. The court case was dismissed against Hillary Clinton
Here's an easy link to a read about it:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=3738672

2. In Indonesia Obama attended a Catholic school but registered as a Muslim.

3. He did NOT stay to live or work with his mother while she was helping Indonesian workers. Obama wanted to live with his grandparents in Hawaii.

In Hawaii he attended a private school attended by other elitists, the richest and most accomplished students in Hawaii

3. You obviously deleted my comment at #21 because you prefer ignorance and Obamania:- Even if you delete my comment again it doesn't change the fact that Clinton won the case including court costs; same for vocabulary: 'frustated' is spelled Frustrated.

Obama and his wife are still elitists and will always be elitists.

The last thing America needs is two more elitists with power
128

JudyKR,

13/04/2008 14:56:01
I know quite a few repub women and I have no doubt that if Hill is the nominee, there is gonna be some major line crossing to vote for the first woman president. Hillary has the best health care plan according to Elizabeth Edwards and Sanjay Gupta, MD. Frankly, many of our country's ills trace back to the health care problem(no pun intended). If our companies didn't have to provide health care, they could compete more effectively with other countries who don't have to provide it(which is just about everybody now. Companies would quit firing employees when they get of a certain age because the cost of their health care is higher. Making our companies competitive again so we could keep the work here would boost our economy. It's the health care, Stupid!!
129

iuris dea ,

13/04/2008 15:08:09
118 Sam Wren,Maine - USA

Obama is NOT and NEVER was a professor of constitutional law at Chicago.

Furthermore, there is NOT one law article ever written by Obama. None. To be a professor a lawyer MUST write on the law. Obama never has done that.
130

Browards,

13/04/2008 15:08:16
116 Angus Ogg

Your praise is misplaced, the economy during he Clinton years did well “in spite” of Clinton, not because of Clinton. The media may give him credit but those who pay attention realize he was elected in 92 and took office in January of 93, from January 93 to February 95 the economy was fairly flat. When the Republicans took over congress during the94 election it boosted the confidence that a fiscally conservative congress would be holding the checkbook, it was after they took office the economy took off.

Clintons first 2 years with a democrat congress nothing got done except major cuts in intelligence.

Ever since the democrats took over with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid in Charge of Congress the economy has turned south.

Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 we've seen:
1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) The cost of regular gasoline has soared to over $3 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion dollars;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.

America voted for change in 2006, and we got it!
131

KyleSennett,

FL 13/04/2008 15:17:32
I'd like to see some direct quotes from either Carter or Gore that they definitely think Obama is it. I saw Carter interviewed this morning and he again refused to say who he was endorsing. Also, I'd like to know more about this alleged "source" that says Carter and Gore and "in high level meetings." You can't just claim that kind of thing and think the intelligent will not want proof. Let's also not forget that both Carter and Gore represent some of the biggest failures in Democratic campaigning. Carter couldn't hang onto the presidency even as the incumbent, and at the moment is looking like he has lost his mind by meeting with terrorist leaders. Al Gore has also made more positive comments about Clinton than any other candidate, endorsing her Clean Energy platform and her economic positions. Add to that John Edwards who has also said that he has met more often with Clinton than Obama and that their talks have been more productive. Also, since Edwards won't openly endorse either, Elizabeth Edwards has come out loud and strong in favor of Clinton health care reforms. I'm curious where you get the idea that any party elders have openly called for Clinton to quit, as all of them have fairly clearly said they expect the primary season to run its full course.
132

gallax,

Illinois 13/04/2008 15:30:21
To Sam Wren:
Hillary Clinton graduated suma cume laude at Yale, and shepassed the bar exam on the first try. Get your facts
straight before you expound. You are another misogynist
with a big member.
133

beaupritchard,

youngstown ohio 13/04/2008 15:30:46
Doctor:
What is it she does now? Look how she rubs her hands.

Gentlewoman:
It is an accustom'd action with her, to seem thus washing her hands. I have known her continue in this a quarter of an hour.

Lady MacClinton:
Yet here's a spot.

Doctor:
Hark, she speaks. I will set down what comes from her, to satisfy my remembrance the more strongly.

Lady MacClinton:
Out, damn'd spot! out, I say!—One; two: why, then 'tis time to do't.—Hell is murky.—Fie, my lord, fie, a soldier, and afeard? What need we fear who knows it,when none can call our pow'r to accompt?—Yet who would
134

JanisL,

Ocala, FL US 13/04/2008 15:37:50
Gallax, I am with you--Hillary Clinton or an as yet unnamed nominee will prevail. The rank and file Dems are about to fall into yet another Karl Rove trap--they are touting Obama for one reason: there is a ton of deal-breaking negative facts in Obama's background in Chicago, and the GOP dirty tricks committee will slice and dice Barack into mincemeat over this information--I have seen it, and he is RADIOACTIVE because of it! They are, right now, preparing their swiftboat ads to destroy him and (WTF!) install another George Bush but with dementia for another four years of disaster! All of the starry-eyed young folks shaking the pom-poms for Barack have NO IDEA what is about to hit their candidate! Let's just say--NO politician who cut his teeth in Chi-town politics will EVER survive a prez campaign and gain the WH--it is a cesspool of corruption, and the GOPsleazes know that! They wrote the book on political corruption--as we all know! So, for the millions of voters over 35 who know the score in U.S. politics, who are determined NOT to vote for an inexperienced rube and watch the disaster for 8 years like we have from 2000-2008, a caution: nominate Obama and watch us stay home. It's a matter of principal, stupid!
135

JanisL,

Ocala, FL US 13/04/2008 15:42:24
Gallax, I am with you--Hillary Clinton or an as yet unnamed nominee will prevail. The rank and file Dems are about to fall into yet another Karl Rove trap--they are touting Obama for one reason: there is a ton of deal-breaking negative facts in Obama's background in Chicago, and the GOP dirty tricks committee will slice and dice Barack into mincemeat over this information--I have seen it, and he is RADIOACTIVE because of it! They are, right now, preparing their swiftboat ads to destroy him and (WTF!) install another George Bush but with dementia for another four years of disaster! All of the starry-eyed young folks shaking the pom-poms for Barack have NO IDEA what is about to hit their candidate! Let's just say--NO politician who cut his teeth in Chi-town politics will EVER survive a prez campaign and gain the WH--it is a cesspool of corruption, and the GOPsleazes know that! They wrote the book on political corruption--as we all know! So, for the millions of voters over 35 who know the score in U.S. politics, who are determined NOT to vote for an inexperienced rube and watch the disaster for 8 years like we have from 2000-2008, a caution: nominate Obama and watch us stay home. It's a matter of principal, stupid!
136

Greg Neubeck,

Lynn Haven, FL 13/04/2008 15:47:26
Does America really want someone prone to hallucinations in the WH? Reviewing Hillary's methodical playing of the "Race card", and "The Perpetual Victim" against Obama; her inability to control her own campaign finances; and, her recent commentary on: Iraq; Pakistan; Energy Policy; her stated intention to confiscate the profits of American energy companies; the need for her to control the 14 Trillion $ American Economy from her White House Politburo, since she has declared the free-market to be a failure (this from a woman who hasn't managed so much as a corner vegetable stand, or for that matter her own marriage; but, of course you could count Whitewater, and her tenure as "Madam" and Bimbo Containment Chief for Bill's White House Brothel); her Marxist statement in San Francisco: "We're going to have to take more from you, and give it to others for the common good."; Illegal Immigration; Taxes; Infanticide; Massive new Government spending; Multi million $ Senate earmarks for supporters of Hillary's Presidential campaign; Garnishing of your wages to fund her coveted Socialized medicine program; a fanatical advocate of confiscating all civilian handguns; and, the Clinton's history of emasculating the military, verifies that this grievously flawed woman would be the female version of the Jimmy Carter debacle that gave us the Ayatollah Khomeini who ushered in rampant Islamic radicalism; block-long lines at our gasoline stations; a severely hollow military; and, a record Misery Index. Only much worse. Considering all of Hillary's recent gaffes, e.g. "I voted FOR IT (referring to the Bankruptcy Bill); but, I was glad to see that it didn't pass."; her hallucinations over "Landing under intense sniper fire in Bosnia."; misrepresentations on NAFTA; or, her fantasized role in the Irish Peace Process; and, her increasingly frequent crying jags, one has to wonder if excessive use of Botox has affected her mental stability. It's no wonder that her campaign staff is shielding h
137

Frustated Democrat,

Michigan 13/04/2008 15:56:43
Hello #127

No I did not delete you comments, I believe in Free Speech. I agree that the article you cite is correct, however, Peter Paul was granted an appeal when he presented videotapes that the Department of Justice had previously held. When he presented the evidence of a contradiction in testimony and additional facts in the case, he was granted an appeal on January 9th of this year.

I understand that Peter Paul does not have the best reputation. He was introduced to the Clintons in 1993 by Ed Rendell; Contrary to the sworn testimony of HRC that she met him in 2000. He has a videotape introduced into evidence that shows a conversation with her where they have conversation about his past criminal record. He also introduced a photo of she, Bill, Peter Paul and Fabio (you remember the longhaired blonde guy) and Peter Paul from 1993. I am not sure why they chose this relationship, but they did.

I understand that the media coverage (or lack of) doesn't help keep us informed about the appeal. Unfortunately, the Clintons are not telling thier side of things. Peter Paul has a site up with updates in the case at www.paulvclinton.com

138

Frustated Democrat,

Michigan 13/04/2008 15:59:40
FYI #127

Time magazine has an excellent article this week regarding Obama's Mother and his stay with her in Idonesia the first time and her second stay when he was in High School and chose to stay with Grandparents in Hawaii. I think you can access it on line.
139

Sandi,

San Diego 13/04/2008 16:02:18
I would be shocked if either Carter or Gore were stupid enough to try to persuade Hillary Clinton to step down now-before all the primaries are complete and before millions of Americans have the opportunity to cast a vote. If "she" were a "he" there isn't a snowflake's chance in h*** that this would even be a topic of conversation.

The purpose of the National Convention is precisely this, to choose the Democratic nominee for president. This year they will have to do that.

This nominee will be the Democratic Party nominee, so the candidate who has more votes from Democrats is a serious contender. That person is Hillary Clinton.

Barack Obama has fewer Party votes and more
"independents" and cross-over Republicans. I know who I wnat choosing my party's nominee, and it isn't 'independents" or cross-over Republicans, none of whom will vote for a Deomctar in November, especially not Barack Obama. many of them are now publicly regretting their vote for him/

140

Dáithí,

13/04/2008 16:03:29
#120 - Victor

>"Daithi and Serena---let's get down to the bottom line here.Just how many battleground states do you guys,being intellectually honest,think Obama will win in November,besides Illinois? Maybe California? Maybe New York?"

Add Mass. and don't underestimate the South. I'm not an Obama backer, I'm saying that media backing, coupled with voter boredom ('change') may allow him to win close contests.

I'm voting McCain (because of his positions), but we will see...
141

gallax,

Illinois 13/04/2008 16:05:10
Yes. The "bitter" people will be those in Florida and
Michigan who want their votes counted.
142

gallax,

Illinois 13/04/2008 16:08:56
Sitting out there in the sun rubbing yours, after the
comments about Senator Clinton? Another one raises his. . .
143

Sandi,

San Diego 13/04/2008 16:11:23
Barack Obama lived in Indonesia with his mother and stepfather for four years only from age 6 to age 10. Then he was sent to live with his maternal grandparents (the "typical white woman" grandmother he called racist) in Honolulu. He attended Punahou, a very prestigious private school in Honolulu.

He has failed to make public his records form his years as an Illinois State senator, claiming they are lost. These records would shed more light on his long-time relationship with the crook Rezko.

In the Illinois State senate, most of his "achievements" came in his last year there, when the Democrats had regained control from the Republicnas. Unfortunately, many of the bills he now claims as his were originally the work of other senators and the Democratic leader arranged for Barack Obama's name to be added as a way of padding his weak resume for higher elective office.

Here's an interesting article about how sleekit Barack Obama is.

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/03/24/barack-i-didnt-know-obama/#more-1919
144

Sconan,

Seattle 13/04/2008 16:11:50
# 29 and all the rest of you HRC lovers supporting her for no other reason than shes female are doing the party and country much more harm than good..Show me a "Qualified" female and I/we just might support her, cuz it certainly IS NOT HRC!!!!!
145

Browards,

13/04/2008 16:19:33
143 Sandi,San Diego

I especially BLAME you for the change we have since the 2006 mid term elections.


Ever since the democrats took over with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid in Charge of Congress the economy has turned south.

Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 we've seen:
1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) The cost of regular gasoline has soared to over $3 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion dollars;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.

America voted for change in 2006, and we got it!

146

BorisBadinov,

Idyllwild, CA, USA 13/04/2008 16:20:13
This is like Castro and Stalin telling Mao to give up the Cultural Revolution. Pots and kettles...
147

gallax,

Illinois 13/04/2008 16:20:26
Hey. . .Sconan! You don't get it,do you? What you need to
finally realize is that Senator Clinton is highly qualified, and she happens to be a woman. You are blind,
deaf and dumb if you can't perceive this by now. I bet
you're a man, right?
148

cramos,

PA. 13/04/2008 16:22:14
Who cares what Gore and Carter think!


I am one of those that if Obama gets the nomination will be voting and working for McCain
149

Sandi,

San Diego 13/04/2008 16:30:01
#145 Browards,

The Democrats in Congress (who have pretty spineless leaders, let's be honest)don't have a big enough majority in the Senate to be able to pass the bills they want to pass.

One thing that is rarely mentioned in all the adulation of Obama is that none of his "change" will happen without a much stronger Democratic majority in the US Senate. Without that, he can continue spouting his "change" nonsense, and nothing will happen. Every candidate promotes "change", even McCain, whose "change" would have to be viewed under a microscope.

I just found another interesting article, this one from politico.com.

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=47B82639-3048-5C12-006FAA614CC2E556
150

Sconan,

Seattle 13/04/2008 16:36:03
What makes her so qualified, being married to Bill? Her glowing record in the Senate or maybe its her love affair with Wal-Mart? And yes I am male but unlike you HRC supporters if it comes down to her or Mcstain I'd have to go with the lessor of 2 evils, hold my nose and vote for her..Unlike you folks who would vote for Mcstain over Obama cuz you didnt get what you wanted.....Wahhhhh
151

gallax,

Illinois 13/04/2008 16:38:44
Ah, I see....Sconan is a hater. Why don't you go into
a corner and self-destruct.
152

Sconan,

Seattle 13/04/2008 16:40:48
gallax, boy you told me didnt ya.......Cant comment on what I said cuz you knows its true????????
153

gallax,

Illinois 13/04/2008 16:43:36
Come to think of it: married to Bill Clinton Rhodes scholar and doctoral degree in economics,(I'd say that's
a plus). Her record in the senate and all her work for
this country; yes, I'd say this is a plus too. When
she worked as a lawyer for Walmart, she was working on
the regulations that protected children in countries
that might exploit them. She again, was protecting
childrens rights. So, another plus. Boo Sconan, go work
for your country instead of spending time on blogs.
154

Sconan,

Seattle 13/04/2008 16:47:59
How'd she vote on cluster bombs or invading Iraq..."Go work for your country instead of spending time on blogs"
What the hell are you doing here then????
155

President Crunch,

Planet Earth 13/04/2008 16:48:13
Gore and Carter are not trying to save the democratic party...they are endorsing Obama...can you see their stupidity...If you you want to endorse...ENDORSE...If you want to save SAVE!

Dont tell me you are trying to save the democratic party while at the same time give out an endorsement.
Stop wiping your ass with your hands and buy some toilet paper Gore and Carter
156

Sconan,

Seattle 13/04/2008 16:50:26
And as for the Rhodes scholar, I use to think more highly of him till he got so chummy with Georgie Sr.
157

gallax,

Illinois 13/04/2008 16:52:24
I do work for my country. I teach English and grammar,
by the way. Sounds like you need to go back and get some with "cuz you knows its true". A little learning is a dangerous thing! lol
158

Sconan,

Seattle 13/04/2008 16:56:32
Thats it, attack my typing/spelling instead of defending your position....Thats mature!!!!!
159

victor dirnfeld,

Los Angeles 13/04/2008 17:01:13
#140 Daitha--You are correct; I did forget Mass. However,don't even think about the vast majority of the Southern states.He may have been impressive in the Democratic primaries and caucases which were loaded in his favor,but the numbers are against him in the general election.
160

Emilio,

Ocala, Florida 13/04/2008 17:01:15
It's about time this primary contest is ended. The people who have studied the results thus far have concluded that Clinton has only an hail mary's chance of winning the nomination, yet she doggedly holds her ground and continues to give false hope to her naive supporters. To continue this charade is wasteful, both in time and energies, and most of all money. If Hillary Clinton had the best interest of the Democratic Party at heart she would not have extolled the Republican McCain's virtues, whilst denigtrating her rival, nor would she have prolonged her hatefully manipulative campaign to destroy Obama and or the Democratic Party.
161

Emilio,

13/04/2008 17:12:42
All those Republican hacks masquerading as Hillary Democrats who will vote for insane McShame, we know what you are. Your vote was never going to be for a Democrat. You had the insane dude in mind all along, but Hillary would also fit - we've noticed that she is carpetbagging Republican seeking the nomination of the Democratic Party. So don't give Hillary's Democratic supporters a bad name with your poison. We Democrats will unite come November, to flush you Republicans and your culture of corruption down the crap-hole where you all belong.
162

iuris dea ,

13/04/2008 17:14:43
137 Frustated Democrat,Michigan

Wow.
You're really sticking to your ignorance.

Obviously you're one of the guys who would never vote for a woman.

Good luck with the caveman mentality.

The case against Hillary was DISMISSED as a FRIVOLOUS law suit. Frivolous means not only was there no case, but the case never should have been filed.

How about a really simple Wikipedia article? Can you understand that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_v._Clinton

163

Sandi,

San Diego 13/04/2008 17:15:55
Hillary Clinton has not "extolled the Republican McCain's values". What she did say was that McCain is better qualified to be commander-in-chief. How can anyone argue that Obama, who barely has enough of a resume to be running for this position at all, has better qualifications than McCain for that particular aspect of the job of being president? McCain has better qualifications than Clinton too for that part of the job. It's just that his ideas for the future are abysmal.
164

JudyKR,

Midwest 13/04/2008 17:23:58
Okay, saying that "Obama is the winner" and "Hillary better drop out" over and over is not going to make it true. I mean, you can keep telling yourselves what you want to hear and what you want to brainwash people to think but it is NOT going to make it true. As far as endorsing McCain, she never did that and she is pretty unlikely to buddy up enough with him to run an ad with him--ewww!
165

Sconan,

Seattle 13/04/2008 17:36:02
# 53 gallax comment "By the way, I'm not voting for Clinton" What the hell are you doing supporting her then???
166

Sconan,

Seattle 13/04/2008 17:39:32
I guess gallax had to go admonish others elswhere for their spelling and grammar???????
167

LeeM,

North Carolina 13/04/2008 17:44:33
Gore and Carter are unlikely to persuade Clinton to end her campaign, especially if she does well in the Pennsylvania and Indiana primaries. The "bitterness" comment could be a problem for Obama, but if he got through the Rev. Wright minefield, he should be able to weather this.

In the end, the super delegates will have to decide who is the stronger candidate to win in November. Polls consistently show Obama does better against McCain in head-to-head matchups, though not by a large margin.

If, however, Clinton were to succeed in her strategy of making Obama "unelectable," the super delegates might conclude, for reasons you cite, that giving her the nomination would leave the party hopelessly ruptured and make Clinton "unelectable" with large sections of Democratic voters.

In that case, the role of Al Gore would be to offer himself and allow the Democrats to offer a credible opponent to McCain and preserve party unity. Joe Klein recently posited this theory in Time with Gore taking Obama as his running mate:

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1725678,00.html

But to avoid humiliating either candidate's supporters, Gore needs to choose someone else as veep. Obama and Clinton could go back to their respective Senate roles and live to fight another day.
168

Kelvino,

New York 13/04/2008 17:48:41
Any Democratic plans to visit the now-famous "ALLENTOWN?" As I recall, Billy Joel had difficulties similar to Barak in his "elitist" observations regarding the plight of the working-class
at the time. Is it "elitist" to draw attention to real problems, or does patriotism disable one's ability to
clearly observe reality ? I think we are all living in Allentown at present. . . . GO OBAMA !
169

DeTroyes,

Chicago, IL 13/04/2008 17:54:53
To those who think that the die-hard Hillary supporters are really stealth Republicans trying to keep the primary going, I will say this: You have not met my in-laws.

There are many, many Hillary supporters who simply WILL NOT vote for Obama, and many of the ones I know are saying they will either vote for McCain or sit out the election if she does not get the nomination.

Why is this happening? I think the answer is simply, this election (more than any in recent memory) has offered two candidates that large percentages of the electorate identify with on a personal level. When people put that much of themselves into a candidate, they feel angry, betrayed, and resentful when they do not win. Since our natural reaction when hurt is to hurt back at that which caused us pain, Clinton's supporters seem to be reacting by striking back at the Democratic party which they feel has been unkind and unfair to their candidate.

Will they still feel this way come November? Perhaps, perhaps not. But each day that she stays in the race is another day of discord, another day for McCain to gather his strength, and another day less for Clinton's supporters to "get over it".
170

Sandi,

San Diego 13/04/2008 17:55:26
#167 LeeM,

Sorry, but polls do not "consistently show that Obama deoes better in head-to-head matchups". In fact, in the must-win states for Democrats, Hillary Clinton does much better.
171

DeTroyes,

Chicago 13/04/2008 18:05:57
I do not think Obama would choose Clinton as his running mate, unless he was delivered an ultimatum by the DNC. At this moment, I think there is too much bad blood between the camps.

And the suggestion that Al Gore should step in at the last minute if the convention becomes deadlocked is simply ludicrous. It would anger both the Clinton and Obama camps, would be widely seen as a back room deal by party bigwigs, and would probably result in a landslide defeat of McGovern and Mondale proportions.
172

Fallfree,

U.S.A. 13/04/2008 18:17:41
Didn't have to get far in this story to know it can't be relied upon, as several facts are wrong. Carter did not say everyone in his family is for Obama, and Carter now has said that he is not endorsing until the convention -- and is staying out of it.

And new polls today are showing that Obama now has higher unfavorables than favorables, that he has been dropping since the Wright debacle -- and that Clinton is ahead. Obama's mistakes make this campaign far from settled, and Gore, Carter, and smart super-delegates who will decide this know it.

The ones who don't know it are reporters clinging to the coasts, like those in New York. They cannot know what is really going on out in the heartland that the big-city guy dissed. I'm in a state that went for Obama, but it would not do so today. And my super-d's know it . . . and also know that the last time Dems won, with a Clinton in '92, it wasn't decided until the summer.
173

Frustated Democrat,

Michigan 13/04/2008 18:27:30
Hello 162

Unfortunately, wikipedia can be edited by anyone, all 3 candidates have people who constantly monitor the site. I respect your opinion, but believe that when an american files a lawsuit in our country and is granted an appeal by a sitting judge with cause, that individual citizen is entitled to thier day in court. I also believe that a person who is running for the highest office in our country should disclose these types of difficulty so that citizens can make thier own judgements about the situation until the court reaches a decision in the case. I cannot call the case frivolous because I do not know the facts in the case. I am anxious to see how it all turns out. It also appears that the Plaintiff feels that he has a case and continues to pursue it as the law allows citizens.

They are moving forward with testimony of witnesses via depositions and a trial date will be set on April 25th, 2008.
174

Southwesterner,

Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA 13/04/2008 18:27:46
Can't fault you guys for being a little behind on things. But Sen. Obama has mortally wounded his candidacy with elitist, condescending remarks about small town Americans. These remarks were recounted on HuffingtonPost Friday evening. I doubt Presidents Gore or Carter want to be associated with that. It would trash their legacies. The right is in full feeding frenzy mode. Appears Sen. Obama may be done for.
175

Frustated Democrat,

Michigan 13/04/2008 18:28:39
The Allentown Pennsylvania Newspaper "The Morning Call" has endorsed Senator Obama.
176

LeeM,

North Carolina 13/04/2008 18:44:51
#170 Sandi: Clinton does better in "must-win states for Democrats"

But Obama does better in national polling than Clinton. And with the exception of 2000, in every election since 1892, the candidate who won the popular vote also won the electoral vote. If Obama wins the national popular vote against McCain, he will almost certainly carry enough swing states to win an electoral college majority.

#171 DeTroyes: "the suggestion that Al Gore should step in at the last minute if the convention deadlocked is simply ludicrous"

Gore would not "step in." The convention would ask him to be the compromise candidate in the event of a deadlock between Obama and Clinton. I know it's hard to picture, but that's the solution "deadlocked conventions" have always turned to.
177

jdcarmine,

Pittsburgh 13/04/2008 18:47:31
If I were a Democrat I would vote for Obama! Yes I am bitter, I do cling to my guns and my religion, and Obama is exactly right about why. He has courageously told the truth about men like me: Identity Politics makes us very very bitter, and Obama is trying to rise above that, while Hillary represents all that makes us bitter. Ones genitals or skin color does not give one a better or worse view of truth. Damn right I'm bitter, the demeaning paternalism of Pelosi, Reid, Clinton would make any reasonable person bitter.

178

Fallfree,

13/04/2008 18:52:45
Lee, #176, the national polls coming out today are starting to show Clinton ahead of Obama -- and the effect of his comments won't be seen in tracking polls for three days. And especially watch for SUSA this week, as it has done best this year.

But national vote doesn't do it, as you note -- and as Gore knows all too well. We'll see what keeps happening in those pro-Clinton "must-win states" in coming weeks. As I noted, my state went for Obama months ago but definitely would not do so today -- and it was so close in my state in 2004 that it is being watched closely by the super-delegates.
179

Kelvino,

NY 13/04/2008 18:55:19
Att: Frustrated Democrat. . . . .

Let's see if the folks that were enraged at the "Allentown" lyrics years ago will now put aside their "patriotism" in favor of a clear vision of
the effects of a profit-at-any-cost economy. . . and
vote for Obama !
180

LeeM,

13/04/2008 19:02:43
#178 Fallfree: "the national polls coming out today are starting to show Clinton ahead of Obama -- and the effect of his comments won't be seen in tracking polls for three days."

One day's tracking polls do not a trend make. Over time, Obama has maintained a national lead over both Clinton and McCain. The current controversy is serious, but if he handles it as successfully as he did the Rev. Wright thing, his ratings should rebound, as they did after Rev. Wright.
181

Sandi,

San Diego 13/04/2008 19:12:27
#176 LeeM,

As#178 Fallfree points out, new polls today have Hillary Clinton ahead of Barack Obama.

Also, nothing in our system for electing a president works on a national basis, so what value do national polls have? Not much would be my answer.

As everything is voted on at the state level, and electors for the Electoral College come from States, not from the national vote.

The sad thing is that this "new" information about Barack Obama has been available for months and if the media had done their job and reported negatives about all the candidates, not just Hillary Clinton, Obama would not be in the position he is today. As The Great One himself has said, he is an empty slate and he has intenionally kept it empty. His supporters write on it what they want to see and hear. If he is elected, a lot of people will be in for a big disappointment, just like the people in his district in Illinois, who also elected him because of the "change" he promised-and got none.
182

JHCowboy,

Wyoming 13/04/2008 19:27:23
Get real people. Hillary Clinton has a ton of baggage to bring with her. Her list of lies are a mile long including the Bosnian sniper lies and her NAFTA, CAFTA and other list of lies. The statement (taken completely out of tontext) of Barack Obama in California is a molehill compared to what Hillary has done. Her attacks on Barack have become incredibly shrill lately as she uses whatever means she deems necessary to get the lead in Pennsylvania. My prayer is that Pennsylvanians will see through the media and Clinton spin on this and vote for Barack. Who needs a liar in the white house and Hillary Clinton would set us back and our party back decades if she is nominated and elected. She sounds more like a Republican these days than a Democrat especially with her rants against her opponent.
183

LeeM,

North Carolina 13/04/2008 19:29:45
#181 Sandi,

You are obviously a Clinton supporter, and I am an Obama supporter. But I'm trying to take a broader view of how best to defeat the Republicans and promote the progressive issues we both support. If that requires my candidate to step aside for a compromise candidacy of Al Gore, I can live with that. But I do not believe Hillary Clinton can unite enough Democratic voters to win in November if she can only win nomination through a "rule or ruin" strategy.
184

Shandog,

Washington "The State" 13/04/2008 19:30:31
I thought this was a blog in a Scottish newspaper, look at all these Americans...I want to hear what the other side of the globe thinks of the US Elections..thats why I read "THEIR" blogs not ours.
185

JHCowboy,

13/04/2008 19:35:22
I have one more thing to add. Would Pennsylvanians and for that matter this nation feel better about having a liar leading us (we had one for the past 8 years) or would we rather have someone who speaks the truth? Barack spoke the truth in California. I grew up in a western state where guns and religion are major issues. We do tend to fall back on these issues when we fall on hard economic times. We cling to things that make us feel protected and safe when we are under this kind of stress. If you want to be like sheep and follow the Clinton spin which is a scream about any little thing that Barack may say that seems out of touch with the message when in all reality it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure the truth out then we're going to be in the same old rut we have been in for the past several decades. If Pennsylvanians want a liar who is guilty of double talk and good at political spin leading them then they deserve her.
186

Kipling,

13/04/2008 19:43:00
Is everybody sure Hilary didn't say she braved 'Snapper' fire, ie, photographers' shots, which of course is true. And it's all a pronounciation misunderstanding?
187

57Nomad,

13/04/2008 19:46:45
#153 Exlax

Exlax said:

"Come to think of it: married to Bill Clinton Rhodes scholar and doctoral degree in economics,(I'd say that's
a plus)."

Bill Clinton was given a Rhodes Scholarship. He dropped out of Oxford and did not receive a degree from that university. Neither Bill nor Hillary Clinton have a PhD in anything.
188

marie3548,

13/04/2008 19:47:15
They should not force Hillary out of the race Obama should just beat her there are remaining contests let the people vote they have already disefranchised two states he need to finish her off.
189

alan1111,

palm springs 13/04/2008 19:52:14
t-h-e n-e-w-l-y-

e-l-e--c-t-e-d

d-e-m-o-c-a-t-i-c

s-o-v-e-r-i-g-n

g-o-v-e-r-n-m-e-n-t-

o-f I-r-a-q

has asked us to leave. On Thursday, the day after the idiots open ended commitment to Pretraus that he would "have as much time" as he needed in Irag, Malaki was quoted as saying it was time to START WIDRAWING OUR FORCES OUT OF HIS COUNTRY.
Apparently none of what he said means a thing to the idiot or any of these "wanna be's: because not a one of them has made the remotest reference to his statement.
What is should show us all in this debate going on above, which i have been reading with great amusement, is that among these three contenders is that not one of them has been remotely honest when it comes to the war.
I know know Hillary speaks thru forked tongue about starting to "bring them home within 60 days" but i am afraid that opinion is so chock full of rethoric is can not be truly believed. She is but pandering to what people WANT to hear because when she listens to the experts she is told it just cannot simply be done that way.
Face the simple facts people once again we are screwed. We are not faced in my opinion with a clear winning candidate pool from which to choose. It bothers me to no end of having to vote for who will do the least amount of damage if they are elected.
All of the ranting and raving i did prior to the last presidentals did no good and look at the tole that has taken on our country.
At least in my county in California we have succeeded in having the electronic systems cast asside and have returned to a paper ballot system having used it in the primaries.
We know for a fact the last two elections were "stolen", rigged, fixed manipulated whatever term you choose to use. The fact that the system is so unreliable and tainted makes you question what/how the outcome will be any different this time around.
I do not claim to have any answers to the ongoing thread of this conversation but my
190

Kipling,

13/04/2008 20:36:58
but your- still waiting on this alain 1111.
191

,

13/04/2008 20:45:23
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
192

victor dirnfeld,

Los Angeles 13/04/2008 20:52:04
JHCowboy #185----You write as if you are an "Obama Responder".Obama's half-truths and empty statements will lead this country right to a Republican White House.He talks a good story from a prepared sermon- like speech.However, he does not have the "hickory" needed to think on his feet and act in a decisive manner.He is nothing more than a clone of Jimmy Carter(well, maybe not an exact clone).His inability to respond to inquiries without a prepared script in front of him as he mouths meaningless phrases is becoming more apparent daily.
193

Wally,

By The Rivers Of babylon (USA) 13/04/2008 22:15:33
Alan1111 in 189 is exactly correct and represents the thinking of many Americans.

Mike From Across Pond said above that we would leave Iraq when their democratically elected government asked us to leave. He mimics president bush's promise of this. But such a promise is ridiculous. I tell you the Iraqi legislature passed a resolution about a year ago that asked for the US to withdraw all forces. and Maliki said something the other day that he wants the US troops gone too. All the opinion polls taken in Iraq for years now show that the vast majority of Iraqis believe that the US has hurt them and that they want US troops to leave.

Alan is also correct that the Americans want to hear from the candidates that they will withdraw the troops, but what we get is rhetoric that deceives. Both Clinton & Obama have a pro-war track record. and neither will promise to bring all the troops home quickly. Obama says he wants to leave troops in the Iraqi bases and use those bases to attack other countries. If you don't believe me - go to his web site. a sad reality that I've tried to tell you all is that you don't get to be one of the last people left in this contest unless you work for the people who rule us.

I advocate that we Americans do not vote for the lesser of 2 evils in November. Such a choice is a clear decision for evil. don't do it.

Alan is correct also about the voting system. PC World magazine just ran a big article quoting computer experts saying that the US vote system is wide open to fraud and that when the fraud occurs we can't detect it.
194

Wally,

By The Rivers Of babylon (USA) 13/04/2008 22:31:23
Clinton supporters - you should view these 2 videos about the Peter Paul case.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xq8aopATYyw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMfUajhL24I

Hilary & bill Clinton are both criminals at heart and they've been engaging in criminal acts for a long time. I'm not sure that the case is dead as some claim.

Obama the other day offended me with his comments. He showed himself to be a gun-grabber which from what I understand is his track record as well. He's a gun-grabber just like george W Bush & Hilary clinton. Please don't tell me those idiot republicans like bush aren't gun-grabbers. GW Bush's federal gestapo was in New Orleans in September 2005 going door to door pointing guns at people yelling & cussing at them to intimidate and forcibly taking their guns from them under threat of death. and these were just ordinary law-abiding citizens who legally owned guns.

You like evil? Fine - go ahead vote for Obama or clinton or McCain. ain't a dime's worth of difference between them. they all 3 go for the evil agenda of the mercantile clique that dominates our government. They all 3 support wars. They support the trade treaties. They support the prostitution of our nation on behalf of the federal reserve. all 3 are against us.

If you want to do what's right, write Ron Paul's name in. He won't win. but at least you can avoid voting for their agenda. Don't put any faith in man's ability to rule here on earth. It just ain't there.
195

,

13/04/2008 22:36:38
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
196

Edgy,

California 13/04/2008 22:59:03
Jimmy Boy! Big AL! Where in the H, E double hockey sticks have you two been. Well, it's about time. Stick a fork in her, boys. Lets move on to November....
197

tessie,

Staunton 13/04/2008 22:59:12
Obama=sociopath: see Todd Spivak's Houston article
198

Edgy,

13/04/2008 23:01:08
Wally, have you seen Hillary the movie? It is another good piece of film on those two.
199

MDR,

NEW YORK CITY 13/04/2008 23:14:07
Is the person who wrote this article on drugs or just dishonest? Clintons' poll numbers are skyrocketing, Obama shows what a disengenous liar he is everytime he opens his mouth and is now in even more hot water after his stupid comments insulting working people, Jimmy Carter is despised in the Democratic party and sneered at by most Americans, and every metric one can use to measure the strength of a candidate shows Clinton is far and away the stronger candidate. There is not a super delegate uncommitted with a penny for a brain who is going to vote for Obama who has been landslided by Clinton in 13 of 15 of the biggest states in the country and won the 14th. The latest poll in Pennsylvania shows her up by 18 pts and is in double digits in 6 of the 8 remaining primaries. In other words this story is total rubbish without a shred of truth to it. Clinton looks unbeatable to get the nomination both in terms of winning the popular vote and the fact that everyone knows the Wright scandal would destroy Obama in a general election.And if Democrats counted delegates the way the Republicans did which is the only way that makes sense she would have a 300 delegate lead right now.

This is either an intentionally dishonest article, or written by someone who doesnt have a clue as to what is really going on.
200

tessie,

Staunton 13/04/2008 23:21:13
Obama=sociopath: see Todd Spivak's Houston article
201

lchow,

Honolulu, HI 13/04/2008 23:26:07
I am not trying to be a spoiled sport, but Barack Obama should never be elected as the next President of the United States of America on the following grounds: (1) He lacks the experience for the job, (2) He is not a man of integrity, (3) He knows nothing or very little about US foreign affairs and will escalate the current war into World War III, (4) From the day of his announcing his candidacy, statements made by him were untruthful and he refuses to correct his mistakes and act honorably as our next President should.

The man has no experience and no integrity. He doesn't understand issues and therefore will dig a far larger hole for our nation, than even done by both Bush administrations.

I and the company that I work for were the Iraq War government-to-government negotiators, who successfully secured Saddam's withdrawal from Kuwait in 1990 and it was the Bush administration that reneged on the matter, not informing the American people as to what had actually transpired.

Obama's position on the Iraq War is the same position advocated by President Bush and his administration. Obama has lied about this to the general public.

Because of his lack of real integrity and his propensity to act like a lawyer in the cover up of the truth, we can not see how he can ever represent our nation as an honest individual.

If anyone wants to verify the above facts, we would be more than happy to speak with you.

Hillary, yes, Obama, no!

202

tessie,

Staunton 13/04/2008 23:26:34
Obama=sociopath: see Todd Spivak's Houston article
203

DeTroyes,

Chicago 13/04/2008 23:27:42
Clinton's national poll numbers versus Obama are NOT skyrocketing. As of today (4/13), Rasmussen is the only one to show her even with Obama; CBS, Gallup, AP, and Zogby all have Obama in the lead nationally, with some polls showing double-digit leads.

Clinton is probably right in that she will win Pennsylvania. She'll probably also win West Virginia, maybe Indiana. But the bottom line is, she is extremely unlikely to win by large enough margins to catch up with Obama - and no amount of political spin can change that.

If she goes to the convention and tries to fight for the nomination, she will damage her party beyond repair, whether or not she succeeds. And sadly, I think her supporters are perfectly willing to cheer her on in doing so. This will not end well, and assuming Obama gets the nomination but losses to McCain, she - not Obama - will get the blame.

Oh, and just to satisfy Bird of Prey (post #191) -- This Yank says "UK, Vote for Nick Clegg!!"
204

tessie,

Staunton 13/04/2008 23:45:46
Obama=sociopath: see Todd Spivak's Houston article
205

Sheridan Bucket,

14/04/2008 00:00:11
This is quite the entertaining primary season - Hillary cannot win the nomination without total rebellion and upheaval of the party and Obama can't win the general -

I'll say that again - Obama can't win the general

Hillary could - but he can't

Lets be serious - Impressive an individual as he may be the guy gets elected to the Senate running against Alan Keyes and almost immediately starts a run for the White House. Democrats, this is just foolishness that you passed up candidates far more qualified to hand the nomination to a guy with good stage presence and little else unless you include the most liberal record in the US Senate. I guess that can be called an achievement in four short years - OK - you can include twenty years of listening to a crazy preacher yelling "G D America"!! Maybe the media will distract us enough to get us to forget about that but in the end:

President Obama - Not going to happen

Say hello to President McCain
206

Wally,

By The Rivers Of Babylon (USA) 14/04/2008 00:22:00
McCain is a fellow who gets very angry very quickly, uses tremendous foul language, loves to flippantly threaten war. You should read what some of the witnesses say they've seen him say even to his own wife.
207

Venango,

northwestern Pennsylvania 14/04/2008 01:38:12
The only candidate who is consistant in what he says and how he votes in Congress is Ron Paul. Having met him last Friday, he comes accross as a humble and sincere man. I will vote for him on April 22nd (Penn. primary) with pride.
208

DeTroyes,

14/04/2008 02:02:35
Except... Ron Paul has already ended his campaign. He could run as an Independent or 3rd Party (and his supporters keep urging him to), but only the Ron Paul faithful think he can get more than 1% or 2% of the vote. More likely, he'll just take votes away from Gravel, who might also run as a Libertarian.

Anyone who thinks he'll take a significant number of votes away from McCain is just smoking something illegal.

Lets be realistic here. As much as I would like to see a third party come to prominence in the US, it ain't gonna happen with this current group of low grade wannabe's (Cynthia McKinnon? Puhleeze!).
209

seah,

Ohio 14/04/2008 02:07:25
Since the DNC and high powered Democratic Party are playing God and political fixer.

They are sending the Democratic voters, that they do not care about the people or Democracy.

The majority of the Democratic voters do not want Obama, but he is being shoved down our throat.

The DNC refuse to seat Florida and Michigan. but they know who they wanted and it wasn't Obama. So we will carry their voice.

Unless Obama is being used as the DNC's puppet to play in the white house, there is no other excuse or reason to ignore the people.

I hope the Democratic voters remember who played The power plays in this election and vote those out of office next time they are up for re-election. That they will justly deserve.

We the people, The Democratic voters Do not want Obama!



210

seah,

Ohio 14/04/2008 02:08:01
Since the DNC and high powered Democratic Party are playing God and political fixer.

They are sending the Democratic voters, that they do not care about the people or Democracy.

The majority of the Democratic voters do not want Obama, but he is being shoved down our throat.

The DNC refuse to seat Florida and Michigan. but they know who they wanted and it wasn't Obama. So we will carry their voice.

Unless Obama is being used as the DNC's puppet to play in the white house, there is no other excuse or reason to ignore the people.

I hope the Democratic voters remember who played The power plays in this election and vote those out of office next time they are up for re-election. That they will justly deserve.

We the people, The Democratic voters Do not want Obama!



211

DeTroyes,

14/04/2008 02:11:15
>The majority of the Democratic voters do not want
>Obama, but he is being shoved down our throat.

Is this the same DNC that was shoving Hillary down our throat as the "inevitable" candidate not more than four months ago?

Sorry, I ain't buying it.
212

seah,

Ohio 14/04/2008 02:13:37
Obama should be the one leaving the race.

He is the worst Democratic candidate I have seen in 40 years.

His Friends that he owes, Rezko, Wright, Ayers, Sharpton and Jackson. He is indebted to.

If you thought the tabloids in the UK were amazing when Bush got elected. They will read "Yes, Americans are Stupid" if Obama is elected.

Plus Obama can't beat McCain and the DNC does something illegal. is that what you plan?
213

Hillary 08,

Colorado 14/04/2008 03:15:07
It is funny how the pundits believe they have the all mighty power in telling the people how much Hillary has to win by in order to win. Real Clear Politics showed several different paths to Hillary's victory, so I am really getting sick and tired of all this propogating of obama, he cannot win the general. I will tell you this if Carter and Gore are STUPID enough to butt into this they are going to see a backlash from hell, and it will be well deserved. Oh and the article was quite wrong on the number of Hillary supporters who won't vote for obama it was a total of 42% not 30. 28% would vote for McCain and 16 would sit it out. See how many leave the Democratic Party if they keep trying to shove obama down our throats, I already know several who have already left and registered as Independents, because of their rigging this by disenfranchising 2.5 million voters in MI & FL when the rules only required 1/2 of the delegates be taken away and NONE of the SuperDelegates under any circumstance are to be stripped of their votes. It was obama supporters on the rules committee that went nuclear on FL & MI by demanding 100% of the delegates be taken away.
214

From LaLaLand,

Los Angeles 14/04/2008 04:09:44
Great Scot!!! I'm sorry but this story sounds like an Obamabot plant! First of all, Jimmy Carter, not very well thought of here in America. A failed 1-term media created President who didn't accomplish much except to pave the way for the Reagan years. Gore would never ask Hillary to stop; he has been quoted as saying he believes it should go all the way to the convention and it will. Gore owes the DNC nothing as they did not have his back during the 2000 election debacle. They pressured him to stop the recount for the "good of the country." That was a huge concession for him. His own party didn't back him, so what does he owe them now? NOTHING. He's sitting back and laughing at the DNC and its leaders twisting in the wind while Clinton continues to march on. So why on earth would he ask Hillary to stop for the "good of the DNC???" Obama is clueless about who the voters are in middle America. After his recent elitist comments about small towns he's shown his true feelings. How many more lies, blunders, boneheaded moves and comments can Obama make before the DNC comes to their senses and asks HIM to bow out and let Hillary Clinton take the nomination and win this thing in November? Hillary Clinton is the best candidate and completely vetted. Obama would be a disaster and the Republicans are just salivating at all the stuff they can pull out of their war chest to use on him. He will be swift boated and Willie Browned to death!
215

,

14/04/2008 04:55:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
216

Koyla,

NYC, USA 14/04/2008 05:17:43
Here is a gigantic List of Lies of Obama. It appeared on savage politics drawn up by a fervent and diligent visitor. It is the truth and nothing but the truth.

1.) Selma Got Me Born - LIAR, your parents felt safe enough to have you in 1961 - Selma had no effect on your birth, as Selma was in 1965.

2.) Father Was A Goat Herder - LIAR, he was a privileged, well educated youth, who went on to work with the Kenyan Government.

3.) Father Was A Proud Freedom Fighter - LIAR, he was part of one of the most corrupt and violent governments Kenya has ever had

4.) My Family Has Strong Ties To African Freedom - LIAR, your cousin Raila Odinga has created mass violence in attempting to overturn a legitimate election in 2007, in Kenya. It is the first widespread violence in decades.

5.) My Grandmother Has Always Been A Christian - LIAR, she does her daily Salat prayers at 5am according to her own interviews. Not to mention, Christianity wouldn’t allow her to have been one of 14 wives to 1 man.

6.) My Name is African Swahili - LIAR, your name is Arabic and ‘Baraka’ (from which Barack came) means ‘blessed’ in that language. Hussein is also Arabic and so is Obama.

7.) I Never Practiced Islam - LIAR, you practiced it daily at school, where you were registered as a Muslim and kept that faith for 31 years,until your wife made you change, so you could run for office.

8.) My School In Indonesia Was Christian - LIAR, you were registered as Muslim there and got in trouble in Koranic Studies for making faces (check your own book).

9.) I Was Fluent In Indonesian - LIAR, not one teacher says you could speak the language.

10.) Because I Lived In Indonesia, I Have More Foreign Experience - LIAR, you were there from the ages of 6 to 10, and couldn’t even speak the language. What did you learn, how to study the Koran and watch cartoons.

11.) I Am Stronger On Foreign Affairs - LIAR, except for Africa (surprise) and the Middle East (bigger surprise), you have never b
217

Koyla,

NYC, USA 14/04/2008 05:20:22
12.) I Blame My Early Drug Use On Ethnic Confusion - LIAR, you were quite content in high school to be Barry Obama, no mention of Kenya and no mention of struggle to identify - your classmates said you were just fine.

13.)An Ebony Article Moved Me To Run For Office - LIAR, Ebony has yet to find the article you mention in your book. It doesn’t, and never did, exist.

14.) A Life Magazine Article Changed My Outlook On Life - LIAR, Life has yet to find the article you mention in your book. It doesn’t, and never did, exist.

15.) I Won’t Run On A National Ticket In ‘08 - LIAR, here you are, despite saying, live on TV, that you would not have enough experience by then, and you are all about having experience first.

16.) Present Votes Are Common In Illinois - LIAR, they are common for YOU, but not many others have 130 NO VOTES.

17.) Oops, I Misvoted - LIAR, only when caught by church groups and democrats, did you beg to change your misvote.

18.) I Was A Professor Of Law - LIAR, you were a senior lecturer ON LEAVE.

19.) I Was A Constitutional Lawyer - LIAR, you were a senior lecturer ON LEAVE.

20.) Without Me, There Would Be No Ethics Bill - LIAR, you didn’t write it,introduce it, change it, or create it.

21.) The Ethics Bill Was Hard To Pass - LIAR, it took just 14 days from start to finish.
218

Koyla,

NYC, USA 14/04/2008 05:21:28
22.) I Wrote A Tough Nuclear Bill - LIAR, your bill was rejected by your own party for its pandering and lack of all regulation - mainly because of your Nuclear Donor, Exelon, from which David Axelrod came.

23.) I Have Released My State Records - LIAR, as of March, 2008, state bills you sponsored or voted for have yet to be released, exposing all the special interests pork hidden within.

24.) I Took On The Asbestos Altgeld Gardens Mess - LIAR, you were part of a large group of people who remedied Altgeld Gardens. You failed to mention anyone else but yourself, in your books.

25.) My Economics Bill Will Help America - LIAR, your 111 economic policies were just combined into a proposal which lost 99-0, and even YOU voted against your own bill.

26.) I Have Been A Bold Leader In Illinois - LIAR, even your own supporters claim to have not seen BOLD action on your part.

27.) I Passed 26 Of My Own Bills In One Year - LIAR, they were not YOUR bills, but rather handed to you, after their creation by a fellow Senator, to assist you in a future bid for higher office.

28.) No One Contacted Canada About NAFTA - LIAR, the Candian Government issued the names and a memo of the conversation your campaign had with them.

29.) I Am Tough On Terrorism - LIAR, you missed the Iran Resolution vote on terrorism and your good friend Ali Abunimah supports the destruction of Israel.

30.) I Am Not Acting As President Yet - LIAR, after the NAFTA Memo, a dead terrorist in the FARC, in Colombia, was found with a letter stating how you and he were working together on getting FARC recognized officially.

31.) I Didn’t Run Ads In Florida - LIAR, you allowed national ads to run 8-12 times per day for two weeks - and you still lost.

32.) I Won Michigan - LIAR, no you didn’t.

33.) I won Nevada - LIAR, no you did not.
219

Koyla,

NYC, USA 14/04/2008 05:23:08
34.) I Want All Votes To Count - LIAR, you said let the delegates decide.

35.) I Want Americans To Decide - LIAR, you prefer caucuses that limit the vote, confuse the voters, force a public vote, and only operate during small windows of time.

36.) I passed 900 Bills in the State Senate - LIAR, you passed 26, most of which you didn’t write yourself.

37.) My Campaign Was Extorted By A Friend - LIAR, that friend is threatening to sue if you do not stop saying this. Obama has stopped saying this.

38.) I Believe In Fairness, Not Tactics - LIAR, you used tactics to eliminate Alice Palmer from running against you.

39.) I Don’t Take PAC Money - LIAR, you take loads of it.

40.) I don’t Have Lobbysists - LIAR, you have over 47 lobbyists, and counting.

41.) My Campaign Had Nothing To Do With The 1984 Ad - LIAR, your own campaign worker made the ad on his Apple in one afternoon.

42.) My Campaign Never Took Over MySpace - LIAR, Tom, who started MySpace issued a warning about this advertising to MySpace clients.

43.) I Inspire People With My Words - LIAR, you inspire people with other people’s words.

44.) I Have Passed Bills In The U.S. Senate - LIAR, you have passed A BILL in the U.S. Senate - for Africa, which shows YOUR priorities.

45.) I Have Always Been Against Iraq - LIAR, you weren’t in office to vote against it AND you have voted to fund it every single time, unlike Kucinich, who seems to be out gutting you Obama. You also seem to be stepping back from your departure date - AGAIN.

46.) I Have Always Supported Universal Health Care - LIAR, your plan leaves us all to pay the 15,000,000 who don’t have to buy it.
220

Koyla,

14/04/2008 05:24:53
47.) I Only Found Out About My Investment Conflicts Via Mail - LIAR, both companies you site as having sent you letters about this conflict have no record of any such letter ever being created or sent.

48.) I Am As Patriotic As Anyone - LIAR, you won’t wear a flag pin and you don’t put your hand over your heart during the Anthem.

49.) My Wife Didn’t Mean What She Said About Pride In Country - LIAR, your wife’s words follow lock-step in the vain of Wright and Farrahkan, in relation to their contempt and hatred of America.

50.) Wal-Mart Is A Company I Wouldn’t Support - LIAR, your wife has received nearly a quater of a million dollars through Treehouse, which is connected to Wal-Mart.

51.) Treehouse Is A Small Company - LIAR, the CEO of Treehouse last year, made more than the CEO of Wal-Mart, according to public records.

52.) University Of Chicago Hospital Pay Is Fair - LIAR, your wife’s pay raise was nearly 150% her already bloated rate and the hospital is a Non-Profit Hospital, which made $100,000,000 in the last 3 years. They overcharge blacks VS whites for services, and overcharge everyone in general by 538%!

53.)I Barely Know Rezko - Only 5 Billed Hours - LIAR, you have known him for 17 years, and decided to do a real estate deal with him during a time when he was proven to be under investigation. Despite this, you divided your property and had them take off $300K before the mortgage problems started. Then Rezko’s wife buys the lot beside it that you can’t afford, saving you $625,000.

54.) My Donations Have Been Checked Thoroughly - LIAR, you only gave back Hsu ($72K) and Rezko ($150K) their money when publically called on their involvement in your campaigns.

55.) My Church Is Like Any Other Christian Church - LIAR, your church is so extreme, the pastor who married you, Rev. Wright, just got done blaming the US for 9/11 and named Louis Farrahkan their person of the year.

56.) I Disagree With My Church All The Time - LIAR, you still hav
221

mike - across the pond,

oh hillary.... 14/04/2008 05:29:31
you cite the hillary defectors to McCain if obama gets the nod.... which I agree with

what about the Obama defectors if HILLARY gets the nod... they will be even MORE significant.... there are the hardcore "I hate the clintons" crowd... who would vote for ANYBODY else (hence them supporting BO).... followed closely by the "hillary screwed the black guy" crowd... these probably make up 20% EACH... Hillary cant win in november just because McCain would only have to pull about 16% of the rest of the vote... considering the GOP holds about 40% of that vote... you are looking at a LANDSLIDE.... one that even W on his most unpopular day could pull off..... lol... dont get me wrong hillary MAY be popular to her core constituency... but shes not Ronald Reagan popular with the rest of the general electorate... ronnie pulled his 40% off of the GOP then split the electorate abroad right down the middle for one of the BIGGEST landslides in american presidentail politics....

what we are seeing is the latest act in the destruction of the DNC...
222

rommel hardian,

USA 14/04/2008 05:37:43
Hey Koyla...how do you know those fifty six "facts" of yours are true? Did you look everything up by yourself or are you taking everything as gospel just because someone spoon fed it to you?
223

kerr,

USA 14/04/2008 06:07:25
If Clinton is forced out instead of being granted the same right to run that every other candidate has been given in contested elections, they have screwed up big time.

I am not the only one who will be registering as an independent as well as voting for McCain. This is not because I adore Hillary. It is because I hate the way the DNC is behaving.

I have been a Democrat all my life. I thought the party stood for things - principles, fairness, equality, even "count every vote".

Howard Dean, Donna Brazile, and Nancy Pelosi have made a mockery of my faith. If Gore joins them in the mud, I can only assume they want Obama to be the candidate so badly that cherry-picking rules isn't enough, now they have to resort to outright bullying - okay, fine, whatever. Wake me up if a party that represents my concerns ever starts up, because clearly the Dems aren't worth voting for. Hating the far right stops being enough when the far left is just as bad.

Think I'm the only one who feels that way? HA.

As for the argument that Obama's supporters are just as devoted - so what? They're not Democrats anyway. They're centrist Republicans and Independents, so the Democratic party shouldn't worry overmuch about losing them.

Oh, and the African-American vote, of course. They're bona fide Democrat. But honestly: wouldn't you pay good money to see Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and their followers showing up for their first day volunteering for the Republicans? ROFL...
224

kerr,

USA 14/04/2008 06:12:14
Oh and btw what it is I would expect if the DNC's leaders weren't totally screwed up?

MY idea of "leadership" is to get a consensus together on how the two of them should run against each other by each of them running the best campaign they can against John McCain. If they didn't both run dirty campaigns against each other, it wouldn't help McCain - it would instead be two against one, which could be an advantage, if those idiots knew how to cooperate.

I blame the leaders more than I blame either candidate for the fact that the two campaigns get locked into a downward spiral. Leadership means doing something, not just sitting around watching and blaming!

I bet they'd both stop campaigning dirty if they knew the other was going to, as well (or if they knew they'd be penalized, like if the DNC could look them in the eye and say they'd lose the support of every PLEO)
225

mike - across the pond,

whackin WALLY again.... and Alan1111 14/04/2008 09:18:49
Wally, I'm afraid I missed the Iraqi resolution you referenced.... I can find several US (non-binding)resolutions, but none by Iraq.... and I'm afraid the internet missed it too.... like your thermite theories... nothing there that a REASONABLE person could see....

and Alan1111... youre gonna have to do better than that pal... its a wee little bit of a stretch to say that malakis comments of 4/10/08 (comments that were given by a source, on the condition of anonymity) that went along the lines that Maliki thought that the scheduled draw down of 20,000 US troops by July 2008 should be able to procede as planned.... THAT comment is a FAR CRY from asking the US to leave Iraq entirely.... jest a subtle nuance of a difference there pal.... one you could drive a TRUCK THROUGH..... IF the conversation actually ever really happened.... you know those unnamed sources are SO reliable....
226

mike - across the pond,

found your Iraqi resolution 14/04/2008 10:13:32
couple little problems there pal...

Sadr's resolution never came to vote....

Sadr did circulate a petition and it was signed by a number of representatives... but it never came to vote... and a significant number of those who signed later recinded their signatures upon further review of what they had signed...
227

cramos,

PA 14/04/2008 11:58:22
Love the way you edit this blog....apparently your source must be Jimmy Carters dog.....FAKE news story
228

Carolyn 1,

14/04/2008 13:23:16
@219,220
Wow.
Good job; really good job.

The photo says Hillary Clinton faces political oblivion if she doesn't win Pennsylvania.
I don't agree with that. First of all, Clinton is and will continue to be, a prominent and respected hardworking senator.
Additionally, she's a Timex fighter, a woman bucking the huge DNC bureaucracy and a national media which constantly puts her through the shredder- Clinton is going to be big on the lecture circuit speaking about this. She'll make another $10 million and the media will rip her apart again while the country falls apart under Obamabum.

She has worked hard and earned my vote. A year ago I said I would vote for anyone except Hillary, I'd vote a monkey before I'd vote for Hillary. I was really wrong about her. If she wins the nomination, I'll vote democratic, which I haven't done in decades.



229

Josh69,

Botswana, Africa 14/04/2008 14:53:11
Koyla:
Never ever again to skip your medication... see whats its doing to you! If you can line up all those as "lies" then i am pretty sure Hillary was in trenches in Bosnia!
230

Number 6,

germany 14/04/2008 15:31:10
At last, maybe now she will see she is neither wanted
or needed. Obama is by far the most serious of all the candidates standing. McCain seems more of a dottering old man every time he speaks. His posistion changes by the minute , this shows he has principles,but he will
change them if you want him to. Clinton ? a one time member of the republican Party, a serial and pathalogical liar, especially when she is speaking to the American people. She is no more than a small time lawyer, did you all know she FAILED the bar exam for Washington DC. Try and do some research on the candidates all you who are bleating "Who is Obama , what has he done"?. His record in public office is way way more superior. Compare their records in congress. There is no comparison. Clinton has done nothing, zilch , go on start bleating about health care, tellus all what she achieved there and then go find the real
story. Obama has achieved so much more, authoured so many more Bills etc etc etc. He is the only candidate for the job, something the rest of the world agrees on.
231

Number 6,

Germany 14/04/2008 15:34:32
Another thing, stop all this garbage about "Glass Ceilings". Since when was a woman barred from standing for President. There is no ban of course. If you are good enough you will make it. Or is the entire country, including the women all sexist?
232

Jason "taking a break at work",

14/04/2008 16:33:43
gallax

Just curious, if you could so kindly answer two small things without being disrespectful I would appreciate it. One is if Barak Obama led all the polls in Michigan and Florida and he was currently losing to Hillary by the same margin Hillary is currently down by, would you advocate for a recount? The second is if Barak Obama had Hillary Clinton’s policies and Hillary Clinton had Barak Obama’s policies, would you vote for Obama?

Thank you.
233

Loch,

colorado plateau 14/04/2008 18:50:26
This election, like all the recent elections in America, will be decided by the power elite, and not the "voters".

But the decision has not been made yet. The primary process, the polls, and all the rest of the charade has its purpose- it provides invaluable information to the P.E. about whom will best act as an "acceptable" (to the masses) figurehead.

All 3 candidates, Clinton, Obama, and McCain, are corrupt and soulless pawns of the Global Corporate Elite. The only question that confronts the king-makers in the shadows is: "Which one will best advance our interests while simultaneously upholding the facade of representing the masses?"

All decisions, large and small are made in a continuously shifting environment in which new information is constantly being received. The same is true with the presidential race. McCain was left for dead six months ago. How was he resurrected? He was deemed the best chance on the Republican side for advancing the Corporate agenda. Suddenly, he was back in the running.

My sense is that Obama will ultimately prove to have the best ability to act the "peoples choice" while advancing the corporate agenda. That agenda includes:

1.The control of all oil reserves by the Global Corporate Elite.
2.The military supremacy if Israel in the Middle East, and of the Anglo/American/German axis over the rest of the world.
3.The suzerainty of International Bankers and "free trade" (ie, trade dominated by the Global Corporate Elite), over national governments or social movements.

Obama is the perfect counter-intuitive foil for the attainment of these ends. He is not white, not jewish, and not christian. He knows how to make soothing and distracting noises while the people who control him steal everything that is not nailed down.

I predict Obama will prove to be the president of the US, with McCain the nightmare second choice.
234

57Nomad,

california 14/04/2008 19:11:04
#233 Loch

Loch said:

"This election, like all the recent elections in America, will be decided by the power elite, and not the "voters".

Ok, if you say so. But, if you do some reading you will see that the election in 2008 is going to be run in the following way. The Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Greens et al will have their candidate name on the ballot in the various states. Then, on election day voter go to the polling place in their respective precinct and mark their choice. Once this is done the votes are all counted and the candidate who has the most votes in each individual state wins all of that states electors. Then the electors meet and cast their ballots and whoever gets the most electoral votes is elected. I think this is the basis of that whole "voter" myth you were alluding to.
235

Sconan,

seattle 14/04/2008 20:05:42
Koyla, #1 I dont know where you got this list? Or how much research you did on it. #2 Whom ever you support I'm sure a list just as big or possibly much bigger could be made concerning them(her).
236

American,

14/04/2008 22:48:03
All 3 candidates are awful!!!
237

Janeebananee,

Chicago, Il USA 15/04/2008 00:36:58

I think it's unfair to push Hilary out right now. It's just too close. And she has worked hard campaigning since before Obama even thought about running. I don't see her as making any more mistakes so far than Obama. And let me share one thing. When Obama was just a few months into his newly elected Illinois Senate seat, a news commentator asked him if he had considered running for President. And he said , to this effect, that he couldn't possibly consider running for Pres. at this time. That he just became a senator and he hadn't learned that job yet! 3 or 4 months later he announced his candidacy!
I like both Obama and Clinton. They both have praiseworthy qualities. (Just to clarify that my thinking Clinton should not be forced out yet is not based on my choice of candidate.)
238

Ben Franklin,

in Asia 15/04/2008 04:19:06
Obama is just being used to get rid of the only candidate (Senator Clinton) who might employ FDR "American System" solutions to solve the economic meltdown and the drive toward war with Russia and China by the free trade financial elite. He will be made unelectable by scandal if he becomes the Democratic candidate, clearing the way for some real fascists (a McCain-Bloomberg ticket, with McCain not living through his first or second year of office?)
239

gallax,

small town bitter-not U.S. 15/04/2008 04:33:04
Sconlon. . . time for viagra; I think you're going to need it.
240

Jer1957,

15/04/2008 04:53:31
Her Majesty's financial handlers prefer 'Barack and Bailout.'

I fear that Senator Obama's friends in the City of London are like Benazir Bhutto's friends there.

They only want such pawns around long enough to make their respective nations' weak, ungovernable and unable to resist the City's financial power.

Most Americans do not want to bailout the City's Quadrillion dollar mortgage securities bubble.

Sen Obama is the City's 'Northern Rock' American Rock Star. God help him when the City has no further use for him--which is apt to be soon.
241

Jason "taking a break at work",

work 15/04/2008 12:56:10
Man gallax im still waiting for you to have an intelligent response. Guess you can't answer these questions without being sexest.

"gallax

Just curious, if you could so kindly answer two small things without being disrespectful I would appreciate it. One is if Barak Obama led all the polls in Michigan and Florida and he was currently losing to Hillary by the same margin Hillary is currently down by, would you advocate for a recount? The second is if Barak Obama had Hillary Clinton’s policies and Hillary Clinton had Barak Obama’s policies, would you vote for Obama?

Thank you."
242

CowtownSweetheart,

Edinburgh 15/04/2008 16:50:35
This is a fascinating debate, considering most of the posters don't know how to spell or use punctuation. If you want to debate the politics, try by spelling the candidates names correctly.
243

Sconan,

Seattle 15/04/2008 19:08:45
"Sconlon. . . time for viagra; I think you're going to need it.
ROFLMFAO.........First off wouldn't a "Professor of Literature" refer to themselves as such. Secondly go back and read your previous post I'm pretty sure you wouldn't get as big a laugh as me but it still might be fun..For someone who passes them self off as being educated I have serious doubts about that(especially literature as you claim)..And finally since I'm not married to/or dating You I don't need viagra, which I'm sure you very well acquainted with
244

Sconan,

Seattle 15/04/2008 19:15:34
Sorry to all you spelling maniacs line 2 of my previous post should have referred to her previous Posts not post.......
245

CombatVet68,

New Babylon 15/04/2008 22:49:21
I kringe to think of a Hillary "Jezebel" Clinton in the White House. I can visualize her now. "Absolutely not, NO, I did not have sex with my political aide. I want the American people to understand that I didn't do it" Hmmmm, sound familiar? She has already shown us all that she is a LIAR! Just like Billy boy.

As for Obama. Well, if I want to see gay couples receive legitimacy through "civil unions" or "gay mariage", if I want to see living infants murdered at the moment of birth (partial birth abortions), if I want to see even more huge federal funding payments to organized abortion groups (5 Million dollars in fed tax money paid to Planned Parenthood alone in the past 5 years), if I want to see a more repressive government, if I want to pay higher taxes, if I want to see the collapse of our economy, then I would vote for him. On second thought, NO I wont vote for Obama!

As for McCain, well, so far he's too left of center for my tastes. He shares some of the views of Obama and Hillary with regards to abortion and legalized "gay unions". Once it has become legitimized, then we'll see "gay marriages" in our courthouses and in our churches. He supported the federal blackmailing of the tobacco companies.

What about the number ONE killer (substnce abuse) of men and women Mr. McCain..."Alcohol".? Alcohol abuse has destroyed far more lives than tobacco ever will. The propaganda campaign against cigarettes was nothing less that legalized thievery by the government. WHY you might ask...for the MONEY! It wasn't about keeping you and me healthy. NOT ANY OF IT! The money will never be used for those who suffer from tobacco related illnesses as they claimed early on.

These bureaucrats play us like a fine fiddle, and most don't know it or just don't care.

246

CombatVet68,

New Babylon 15/04/2008 23:03:03
(Continued)

That is the kind of people we are looking at now to be the next President of this country. Hillary is well versed in manipulating the media, manipulating public opinion, or just plain old lying when it serves her.

I suspect that Obama is not yet well versed in playing this game. But he's most assuredly a willing player. We got a freudian insight to his attitude when he made the callous remark about clinging to our "guns" and "religion". What do you cling to Obama? What do we really know about him?

McCain knows how the game is played, but I hope he doesn't become a real player. After all, haven't we, the people, been lied to and deceived enough?

"OOOPs, we've over spent...let's levy more taxes...what can we tax now that hasn't got a double or triple tax on it?" "Isn't it illegal to tax peoples personal income? The U S Constitution declares that our citizens are to be exempt from pesonal income tax. So does that mean that we are breaking the law of the land to tax these stupid stiffs?" The common philosophy in big govenment nowadays is "if you lie to the people long enough, they'll beleive it."
247

CombatVet68,

New Babylon 15/04/2008 23:34:26
#234 57 Nomad:

I am not in favor of retaining the electoral college aspect of the election process. It makes it easier for the power elite to manipulate these delegates. It is a well known fact that one candidate might win the popular vote, and another be elected by the electoral college. It has happened.

If I were president, I would do my best to rid our country of corrupt politicians, I would prosecute high ranking politicals for graft, corruption, and other crimes (that includes current and former presidents). I would clean house on Capital Hill..period. I would eliminate the Super Delegate and Electoral College phase of the election process. I would eliminate personal income tax, as unconstitutional. I would investigate price gouging among the oil companies and pharmaceutical companies. There would be no get out of jail free cards given to the socially elite. I would order the prosecution of any doctor who performs a partial birth abortion, unless the procedure was necessary to save the life of the birth mother. I would eliminate Inheritance taxes. I would immediately veto any appropriations for funding to abortion mills. After all, if they get pregnant, let them pay for it. Let the abortion mills operate like any other business or medical service. I would order stockpiling and storage management of all non parishable foods, for in the coming years, this nation is going to see food and commodity prices sky rocket. Famine will no longer be a stranger to us. These are but a few of the changes I would incorporate for the good of society.
248

CJ Ardilla,

16/04/2008 14:36:56
If the media would cover the issues and ideas that Ralph Nader is pushing (not the man, but his ideas and proposals and issues) this might force the democratic and republican candidates to debate and state their views on these critical matters. Unless the so called leading candidates are forced to discuss real issues and possible alternative approaches, such as are being suggested by candidates such as Nader we will continue to be mired in the muck of discussing the meaning of "is" and whether small town Americans are "bitter" or "angry." I don't see Gore or Carter urging a discussion of critical topics. I do see Nader doing so, but he is being totally ignored. Excluding people who are trying to encourage healthy debates about real issues and solutions does not serve the common good.
249

DeTroyes,

16/04/2008 16:46:13
The Democrats are in this mess because they think with their emotions rather than their brains. That's why Obama was able to make this a two-person race for the nomination, and why Clinton is succeeding in dividing her party in order to stay alive.
250

kennyh,

Florida 16/04/2008 17:26:51
To VALESTHEWOMAN,

I think you are forgetting that Al Gore actually won the presidency and that it was taken away by the
Supreme Court. Also, both Carter and Gore are more than well-respected in the Democratic party. If they ask Hillary to withdraw and she doesn't, then it is more impossible for her to win than it now is.

As to Florida & Michigan, both candidates, along with all the others, agreed to the rules of engagement. Everyone played by them and now Clinton wants them changed. That is not what Democrats want.
251

American,

16/04/2008 20:28:52
#250-kennyh-Newsflash--gore actually did not win the presidency.
252

OskarTheTalkingBoxerDog,

Milngavie,Scotland 17/04/2008 00:52:39
Barf
253

Scotindy,

Los Angeles 17/04/2008 03:27:13
If you are for real honest change, then OBAMA is your man, and not Hillary, who is tainted by a system ie Washington, who are desperate for a credability lift.
254

Silence of the Yams,

17/04/2008 14:54:04
Obama scares the hell out of me: His crazed mentor Rev Wright, dodgy views on race; his ties to the Chicago mob; his self confessed cocaine use, his elitist attitue towards rural American's and his early Islamic schooling.

Bottom line, his arrogance and massive TV spending denied Hillary the candidacy, when she was the obvious choice. I hope McCain wipes the upstart off the electoral map.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.