Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Clinton Supporter John Lewis Has Second Thoughts

By Anne E. Kornblut
Confusion erupted Thursday night amid reports that a prominent African American supporter of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's had changed his mind. Rep. John Lewis (Ga.), who is also a Democratic superdelegate, was reported by the New York Times as having decided to switch his superdelegate vote from Clinton to Sen. Barack Obama after Lewis's district, around Atlanta, went for the Illinois senator.

But the Clinton campaign reported having no word from Lewis on the subject, and a spokeswoman for Lewis, Brenda Jones, said the Times story and a similar one by the Associated Press, saying he was contemplating such a switch, were inaccurate. Both the Times and AP stories quoted Lewis directly after speaking with him; he was not available for comment later Thursday. The Obama campaign also said that Lewis and Obama had not talked recently about a change of heart.

"It is plain there is a lot of enthusiasm for Barack Obama," Jones said. But, she said, "those things are observations," not statements of preference. She said Lewis has left the option of changing his superdelegate support for Clinton on the table, but made no decisions. Still, it is clear that Lewis has had misgivings about the Clinton campaign in recent weeks, especially after the racially charged campaign in South Carolina, during which former president Bill Clinton was perceived to have made racially insensitive comments.

Another black superdelegate from Georgia, Rep. David Scott, was also reported by the AP as having said he would switch from Clinton to Obama; a call to his chief of staff went unreturned Thursday night.

By Web Politics Editor  |  February 14, 2008; 11:34 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Shooting for the Stars, Clinton Finds Skeptics on the Ground
Next: Danson to Hit the Road for Clinton Again

Comments

itwdnpjl jmgecu bxrwfyu zawg onacptbj dkajszvnf reid [URL]http://www.tusqjhg.umilg.com[/URL] rovlbs xbno

Posted by: dwhrxli vcqaknmuo | April 16, 2008 9:29 AM | Report abuse

zqdrgefi fcirwa msencdt ktwblafmj pyrlutjg dohryv wpcvk [URL=http://www.wutamcrg.nrjbyecx.com]zpow wdgtinj[/URL]

Posted by: dylkiwo qtxcp | April 16, 2008 9:27 AM | Report abuse

zqdrgefi fcirwa msencdt ktwblafmj pyrlutjg dohryv wpcvk [URL=http://www.wutamcrg.nrjbyecx.com]zpow wdgtinj[/URL]

Posted by: dylkiwo qtxcp | April 16, 2008 9:26 AM | Report abuse

eixqnzlmw lpsjahgzw ozxcvmgt bzqepogvu nfogjptc digpmce uowmx gwstfxjma ncsrpvj

Posted by: gmbukiejd iqtskxl | April 16, 2008 9:24 AM | Report abuse

brfiy igjv kcxpi jigozs dowixj ngwalh dlfb http://www.fgmpy.qgemf.com

Posted by: ehkr tcjkude | April 16, 2008 9:21 AM | Report abuse

brfiy igjv kcxpi jigozs dowixj ngwalh dlfb http://www.fgmpy.qgemf.com

Posted by: ehkr tcjkude | April 16, 2008 9:20 AM | Report abuse

jcqwu isqlog vumpw dyer gkto fpoaqbhw mvgfikrwb

Posted by: ytbpohfsd fcpl | April 16, 2008 9:17 AM | Report abuse

It took a long time to read through all this BS that goes on from supposedly intelligent people. I appreciated reading the factual comments. But the name calling, misquoting of either candidate and basic attempts at making them look bad with words was very childish. Can we all assume that everyone of us is capable of making an intelligent decision, whether we base that decision on race, gender, religion or record. Everyone has a right to make their own choice. I for one have followed Barack Obama very closely for over a year and a half now and regardless of what anyone else says to me, I consider myself an intelligent person and capable of making a decision on mine own. I truly hope that Sen. Obama is the one to run against McCain and when we all enter that booth and those of us who consider ourselves true Democrats will remember that we have had 8 years of Republicans in office and we need a change.

Posted by: lindachilds7 | February 28, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

It took a long time to read through all this BS that goes on from supposedly intelligent people. I appreciated reading the factual comments. But the name calling, misquoting of either candidate and basic attempts at making them look bad with words was very childish. Can we all assume that everyone of us is capable of making an intelligent decision, whether we base that decision on race, gender, religion or record. Everyone has a right to make their own choice. I for one have followed Barack Obama very closely for over a year and a half now and regardless of what anyone else says to me, I consider myself an intelligent person and capable of making a decision on mine own. I truly hope that Sen. Obama is the one to run against McCain and when we all enter that booth and those of us who consider ourselves true Democrats will remember that we have had 8 years of Republicans in office and we need a change.

Posted by: lindachilds7 | February 28, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

Obama's efforts to connect to the Republican Party, specifically Bush, and Dick Chaney, of the Halliburton Company, dates back to the Presidents Grandfather, Prescott Bush, and indeed Chaney was once an executive officer of Halliburton.

The American military pounds Iraq with Artillary, bombs, and the like, destroying large sections of cities, and infra-structures, then Halliburton comes in to rebuild. Halliburton and Halliburton associated companies have raked in ten's of billions.

Obama is just like the BIG HALIBURTAN. Haliburton has contracted to build detention centers in the U.S. similiar to the one in Quantanammo Bay, Cuba. Halliburton does nothing to earn the Two Dollars for each meal an American Serviceman in Iraq eats.

http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/

Halliburton was scheduled to take control of the Dubai Ports in The United Arab Emiirate. The deal was canceled when Bush was unable to affect the transfer of the American Ports.

Now we see what some might suspect as similiar financial escapading from the Democrats.

Two years ago, Iraq's Ministry of Electricity gave a $50 million contract to a start-up security company - Companion- owned by now-indicted businessman (TONY REZKO) Tony Rezko and a onetime Chicago cop, Daniel T. Frawley, to train Iraqi power-plant guards in the United States. An Iraqi leadership change left the deal in limbo. Now the company, Companion Security, is working to revive its contract.
Involved along with Antoin "Tony" Rezco, long time friend and neighbor of Democratic Presidential hopeful Barack Obama, and former cop Daniel T. Frawley, is Aiham Alsammarae. Alsammarae was accused of financial corruption by Iraqi authorities and jailed in Iraq last year before escaping and returning here.

LIKE FATHER LIKE SON --
Obama should be vetted and disclose his connection to the criminal money generating underworld. Besides, his connections to the REZCO MAFIA types, his up-coming tax fraud charges -- Obama needs to disclose why he is a MUSLIM "PATWANG-FWEEE" and stop suppoting our intervention in IRAQ. It's time to introduce this false, fake Xerox - X box Obama and invite the self-indicting thief plagiarizing pipsqueke "GLORK" Xerox - X box to meet the Buffalo "GAZOWNT-GAZIKKA" Police Department Buffalo Creek. He is MAD!!! --

OBAM YOUR NO JFK --
"GLORK" Obama looks like Alfred E. Newman: "Tales Calculated To Drive You." He is a MUSLIM "Glork" He's MAD!!! Alfred E. Neuman is the fictional mascot of Mad. The face had drifted through American pictography for decades before being claimed by Mad editor Harvey Kurtzman after he spotted it on the bulletin board in the office of Ballantine Books editor Bernard Shir-Cliff, later a contributor to various magazines created by Kurtzman.
Obama needs to disclose why he is a MUSLIM "PATWANG-FWEEE" and stop suppoting our intervention in IRAQ. It's time to introduce this false, fake "GLORK" Xerox - X box Obama and invite the self-indicting thief plagiarizing pipsqueke Xerox - X box to meet the Buffalo "GAZOWNT-GAZIKKA" Police Department Buffalo Creek.
http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/

Posted by: jreno2 | February 27, 2008 5:02 PM | Report abuse

I am very disappointed at some of our so call "black leaders"? The thought that we would have some "black leaders" that would endorse any Clinton after their shameful years of poor moral leadership during the White House years is a commentary on how low the moral values are of our so call "black leaders"! If you have folks that can't even be faithful to each other, fail to have full disclosure and transparency in their dealings both personal and business, run a poor managed campaign, display poor working relationship with others, why would we think that they would be good leaders/partners and promote black America interest in a effective way?

The good new is our young people do understand the process and Obama's positions: unify all of America, not forcing a broken universal health system on Americans, but making health care more affordable via subsidies, affordable education, fairness by leveling our playing fields, smart tax brakes for corporation that are helping American worker's, restoring America's position in the world, opening the lines of communication with our enemies without unilateral positions which are disrespectful at best. You can't solve problems without a starting point? If you are a "black leader" and you endorsed Hillary Clinton, maybe you don't understand the big picture in our changing world, and simply may just be out of touch with everyday people both Black, White, Latino, and Asian? It's been my experience when business leaders, sports players, medical and law professional, etc.. are out of touch they retire? What do you think misguided Clinton endorsing "black leaders"? In touch or out of touch?

Posted by: boboknight | February 24, 2008 4:03 PM | Report abuse

Elected officials who are Democratic superdelegates should be careful whom they endorse. If they now vote against the people who put them in office, they aren't going to be re-elected.

Posted by: dunnhaupt | February 18, 2008 10:53 AM | Report abuse

Come on people ! Do you think that a hypocrite with needles stick in his arms has a chance to survive in the general election?
WAKE UP !!!!

Posted by: andybui_cali | February 18, 2008 1:32 AM | Report abuse

Elected Dem superdelegates should think of their OWN future, not Hillary's or Obamas. If they vote against the people who put them in office they can forget about getting re-elected.

Posted by: dunnhaupt | February 17, 2008 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Regarding the super delegates, exactly what is the point of having them? If neither candidate reaches the magic number of delegates needed to win the nomination, Obama supporters are saying those delegates should vote according to the popular vote -- the will of the people. From what I understand, super delegates are supposed to support the candidate they feel is the right one for the job. Now, some of those delegates who publicly support Hillary are feeling pressure to flip flop their support to Obama. Those delegates who have to worry about being re-elected are being forced to give up their principles just to save their jobs. If it ends up that all of Hillary's supporters are forced to flip flop to Obama if he wins the popular vote, the super delegate system should be discontinued. It is not working. However, if Hillary was currently winning the popular vote, would Obama supporters agree that all of the super delegates should vote for her?

Posted by: mafox1 | February 17, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

Mafox,
you want the media to cover that story. You want them to cover that Hillary is a lesbian who had sex with Janet Reno and is having a relationship with current aide Huma Abedin. These are childish rumors. Cool it. They exist on both side. Until you have proof, give us a break

Posted by: al_164_1999 | February 17, 2008 12:06 PM | Report abuse

http://youtube.com/watch?v=9HxGAymz6ek&feature=related
Even is she had all super delegates, why would YOU support her?
She is a liar. Watch this video that is a collection of the different stances she assumed on issues depending on what was more popular or politically safe. Smart woman, yes. Liar, unethical, YES!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=9HxGAymz6ek&feature=related

Posted by: al_164_1999 | February 17, 2008 12:00 PM | Report abuse

blah, blah, blah - Ever since this country was disgraced by Gore and Bush the outstanding quality of our politics has stood out for the rest of the world to see. With all the sleashiness going around who are we to tell anyone how to run their affairs. Face it folks, look hard - we are now the third world

Posted by: zendrell | February 17, 2008 12:49 AM | Report abuse

It seems odd to me that when actual Democrats get together and talk about our two candidates, we usually start by stating how happy we are to have two really good candidates to choose from.

Then out here on these boards, we have anonymous posters trying very hard to stir up hatred and distrust between the two camps.

While it seems that the most vicious (not to mention error-filled) posts are against Senator Obama, there are more than a couple of equally error-filled posts against Senator Clinton.

Could it be that the Republicans have figured out that their candidate really doesn't have much of a chance unless they can get a bunch of us to stay home on election day?

Posted by: jbarelli | February 16, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

Another African American shows their character by stabbing Clinton in the back. This is news?

Posted by: brigittepj | February 15, 2008 8:10 PM | Report abuse

"Lylepink"? Dat do say it all.

Posted by: sawargos | February 15, 2008 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Does you want a ofay what waddle like a duck, or a Chi-town m_____f___?

Posted by: sawargos | February 15, 2008 5:28 PM | Report abuse

I need to take a spelling and grammar class. To Cgplace should of read.

A Hillary/Barack ticket would ready be a Bill/Hillary/Barack White House. Just ask AL GORE Bill VP Who really was 2nd VP. I think Hilary had more space in the White House then AL GORE.

Posted by: deeleanderross | February 15, 2008 3:16 PM | Report abuse

Hello all,

After Doctormaia comments, I hope that Black Folks(Statements, Political or Economical) in general will stop calling Pres. Bill Clinton the 1st Black President. Many people are not aware of the many people that were push off of welfare, and are not doing as good as they were before President Clinton Welfare for Jobs works. Maybe it would have if they could of been train to be a Accountant or Lawyer, instead of cooking at Bergen King. And the many Black folks that were push into the Jail system, OH I forgot about the amount of money he has made after years in office. Not sure but, the $5 Mil that Ms. Clinton put into her work pot, may have come from the backs of Guess who???????????????
Cgplace Please stop it. A Hillary/Barack ticket will you know will be a Bill/Hillary/Barack White House. Just ask AL GORE........... Who was really 2nd Vice Pres. I think Hillary had more space then AL.

Posted by: deeleanderross | February 15, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

Correction to my email above - the Bill number regarding the Lobbying and Ethics Reform Act that Barack was a co-sponsor on is S.230 not S.192. Status remains the same. Still not the bill that became law.

Posted by: EagleRay1 | February 15, 2008 2:59 PM | Report abuse

I am not oppposed to super delegates voting in line with their constituants.
Therefore; I expect Obama backers Kennedy,Kerry and the Mass. Governor to cast their ballots for Hilary who won
the Massachusetts primary. Similarly,
all of the big states that voted for her such as California, New Jersey and even
Michigan and Florida (although regular
delegates are not eligible, the rule
does not affect super delegates) should
be required to cast their ballots for
her. Agreed ? Or do you only want the rules that would favor Obama? In any case, I'm an Independent and will probably go with McCain for President and hope for a
super majority of Democrats in the Senate and House. In that way, neither party can
do anything really bad and, if they all agree, it must be on matters that are good for everyone.

Posted by: depoulins | February 15, 2008 2:42 PM | Report abuse

Dear Obama supporters;

Mr Lewis denied the comment Secondly have you seen the economic news. The price of imports is up 1.7% Hmm Mr. Obama has been running around saying that NAFTA was a bad Idea. Where do you think prices would be for manufactured goods if there was no overseas compitition to the US manufactuers. The answer is about 5%. Obama doesn;t understand economics and would be a disaster for the country. The story is below. Also, Mr. only have been a Senator for THREE YEARS isn;'t qualified to tackle these issues. Also HRC is ahead in Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania and we are counting Florida and Michigan. The last I checked they are US citezens and will be voting in the general election. Finally Mr. Obam will not win a general election because he only wins Red States which he won't win against the Republicans.

The price of imports rose 1.7 percent in January and was up 13.7 year over year, the highest annual rate since the Labor Department records began in 1983. Fuel costs led the rise, ballooning by 5.5 percent last month. Imported food and beverages also cost more in January, and the price of Chinese goods ticked up by 0.8 percent. Export prices rose 1.2 percent, and American companies are also charging more for food, industrial supplies, and agricultural products.

Posted by: politicalobserver1 | February 15, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

"...now have the facts straight from the Senate Records vault" writes docdwb

This is all together typical of the kind of 'new politics' practiced by Obama and his supporters - call Sen. Clinton (D-Punjab) and ridicule her record by picking and choosing from a long list of efforts and accomplishments of Sen. Clinton - then refuse to respond to Sen. Clinton or Sen. Edwards on his 'present' votes when it comes time to make tough decisions - or that he has to repeatedly state it was a mistake to put his political campaign and ambitions ahead of important votes on Iran or torture legislation in the Senate. This guy was given a seat on the Senate Foreign Relations committee - and he has never conducted a hearing, much less sat across the table with a foreign leader. He tries to be all things to all people - that's not new in politics, and it is certainly not leadership.

I prefer to have someone attempt to solve our health care insurance crises and fail to someone who makes empty proposals - every politician in Washington has empty proposals.

But he knows how to write a book and deliver a speech - maybe in a time of crises he can pontificate endlessly while avoiding offending the sensibilities of all those young kids who have never sacrificed anything - he talk about doing drugs and how he came to realize that there was more 'Hope' in not doing them...

Voters need to ask them selves one question - When Mushariff falls in Pakistan, who do you want as Commander in Chief - I will tell you this, as a Veteran who has spent far too much time in war torn counties, they could care less about the author of the "Audacity of Hope" or his empty rhetoric, or the "face of American foreign policy" that doesn't look any different to them than that of Colin Powell or Condi Rice - its the same foreign policy that is empty words and undelivered promises - and Obama is less prepared by his experiences than anyone who has run for president in modern time - I don't care how many bills he put his name on or how many speeches he has made.

Posted by: clawrence35 | February 15, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

docdwb - In regards to: "His first year in the U.S. Senate, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427."

Response: This is copied & pasted directly from GovTrack (www.govtrack.us) which gets info directly from the Thomas Library of Congress website: "Barack Obama has sponsored 129 bills since Jan 4, 2005, of which 120 haven't made it out of committee (Poor) and 1 were successfully enacted (Average, relative to peers). Obama has co-sponsored 545 bills during the same time period (Average, relative to peers)."

In regards to: These included:
- The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, passed the Senate,
- The 2007 Government Ethics Bill, (became law)

Response: Here you go...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Immigration_Reform_Act_of_2006

Click on Link above and then follow the Library of Congress link to the Bill which will give you who sponsored and co-sponsored the bill. Barack Obama's name is not anywhere on it...

A bill by the same name was introduced in 2007 - this one does not have his name on it either. Unless I am totally missing it Barack had nothing to do with any bill entitled "The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act". However, like the bill I mention below - there might be a related bill that he was a sponsor or co-sponsor on...

Also looked up the "The 2007 Government Ethics Bill" - no bill by this name, however there is a bill called S.1: "A bill to provide greater transparency in the legislative process." Also know as: "Ethics Reform Bill" - which became law and Barack Obama was neither a sponsor or co-sponsor of Bill S.1, which became law. Barack Obama was a co-sponsor of bill S.192 which is a related bill, but the status of that bill is: "1/9/2007 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs." (Text in quotes on status of S.192 is copied & pasted directly from the www.thomas.loc.gov website in reference to this bill). This is not the bill that "became law".

There is an Act called: Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2006 also referred to as the Lobbying Reform Bill, which is S.2180. S.2180 - A bill to provide more rigorous requirements with respect to disclosure and enforcement of ethics and lobbying laws and regulations, and for other purposes, which Barack was a co-sponsor on, but so was Hillary. Then there was S.RES.525 - A resolution to amend the Standing Rules of the Senate to provide greater transparency in the legislative process, which Barack was a co-sponsor on. However, neither of these bills are the ones that became law. All this info comes from www.thomas.loc.gov.

Sounds to me like there is a little twisting and hoodwinking of the facts going on here...

Posted by: EagleRay1 | February 15, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

jbh13 wrote A FACT PEOPLE SEEM TO FORGET:
AMERICANS DO NOT ELECT AN ANTI-WAR PRESIDENT
---------------------------

Wrong again. Woodrow Wilson pledged to keep the U.S. out of WW1. Dwight Eisenhower won the election in 1952 by promising to end the Korean War. Richard Nixon campaigned with a promise to end the Vietnam War. In fact his "secret plan" to do so was ridiculed when he failed to follow up on his promise. All three men were elected.
Sorry, but your premise is false..

Posted by: lhummer | February 15, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

There are "Hillary Haters" on every Blog I visit. I have never seen anything to even come close in comparison in my 60 [sixty] years of being involved and studying politics. The Media continues to flame this Hatred, and for the life of me, I just cannot understand why or how this came about. Some reasonable folks are going to have to speak out about this before this country gets into a much worse fix that is just around the corner.

Posted by: lylepink | February 15, 2008 1:57 PM | Report abuse

MsAh1on1 wrot

Obama is two years older than I am. He hasn't lived long enough or worked long enough to run a country or handle foreign affairs. He doesn't represent a CHANGE from Bush. They are both drastically inexperienced. And, the closest thing that we will see as far as a change will be to go from bad to worse.
--------------------------
Not a CHANGE from Bush? Are you serious? Your argument about Obama's age doesn't fly either. Barack Obama is older than JFK and Teddy Roosevelt were when they became presidents. As I recall, they both did a pretty good job for America.

Posted by: lhummer | February 15, 2008 1:46 PM | Report abuse

I think the country is going to be surprised to find out how much Hillary Clinton inspires and impassions voters.

I know the moment I decided to campaign for her was when I saw her in New Hampshire. Everyone had written her off. But there she was running the state, setting up town hall meetings, reaching out, answering everybody's questions one by one, with detail and substance. All this while Obama was drawing his characteristic crowds, packing the house with people eager to see the show. But she played her game, and at the end of the night, she stood on the stage, and she was beaming. That was inspiration to me, that was the thing that made my heart skip a beat, that is the vision that made me believe anything is possible.

John Lewis probably fells that Obama represents his dream. Well, I can't fault him for that. I know how that feels.

But my dream matters too. And believe it or not, Hillary Clinton really does represent the dream to many, many of us. We love her clap-clap, fist-fist hand motions. And we love her hand waving. And we think its cool that she sees that one person in the crowd and speaks to them directly. She knows she lives in the same world we do. She is not under the delusion that she is a god.

Watch out, you are going to be surprised. I can honestly say, I do not know who will win this race, but I know that there is a lot more fight left in both of these candidates. It is going to be hard work for both of them.

Posted by: syoung1 | February 15, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

talk about clinton rhetoric;

she says that she is ready from day one...how are you going to run the country and you can't even control you own campaign...she's running out of money (then how is she going to handle todays' economy)....she has fired and or had two people quit in her campaign(will this be the same for her cabinet?).. what a mess!

read the facts:

Senator Obama --During the first eight years of Senator Obama's elected service he sponsored over 820 bills. He introduced:
233 regarding healthcare reform,
125 on poverty and public assistance,
112 crime fighting bills,
97 economic bills,
60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,
21 ethics reform bills,
15 gun control,
6 veterans affairs and many others.
His first year in the U.S. Senate, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427. These included:
- the Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 (became law),
- The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act, (became law),
- The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, passed the Senate,
- The 2007 Government Ethics Bill, (became law),
- The Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill, (In committee)
Senator Clinton -- Senator Clinton's, who has served only one full term (6yrs.), and another year campaigning, has managed to author and pass into law, (20) twenty pieces of legislation.
1. Establish the Kate Mullany National Historic Site.
2. Support the goals and ideals of Better Hearing and Speech Month.
3. Recognize the Ellis Island Medal of Hon
4. Name courthouse after Thurgood Marshall.
5. Name courthouse after James L. Watson.
6. Name post office after Jonn A. O'Shea.
7. Designate Aug. 7, 2003, as National Purple Heart Recognition Day.
8. Support the goals and ideals of National Purple Heart Recognition Day.
9. Honor the life and legacy of Alexander Hamilton on the bicentennial of his death.
10. Congratulate the Syracuse Univ. Orange Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.
11. Congratulate the Le Moyne College Dolphins Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.
12. Establish the 225th Anniversary of the American Revolution Commemorative Program.
13. Name post office after Sergeant Riayan A. Tejeda.
14. Honor Shirley Chisholm for her service to the nation and express condolences on her death.
15. Honor John J. Downing, Brian Fahey, and Harry Ford, firefighters who lost their lives on duty.
Only five of Senator Clinton's bills are more substantive:
16. Extend period of unemployment assistance to victims of 9/11.
17. Pay for city projects in response to 9/11
18. Assist landmine victims in other countries.
19. Assist family caregivers in accessing affordable respite care.
20. Designate part of the National Forest System in Puerto Rico as protected in the wilderness preservation system.

In Conclusion, you now have the facts straight from the Senate Records vault.

Posted by: docdwb | February 15, 2008 1:32 PM | Report abuse

This is ridiculous. The Democrats are flirting once again with pulling defeat out of the mouth of victory. If Obama is the nominee of the Democratic Party, he is going to loose BIG. This is perhaps the single most under-qualified candidate to ever consider attempting to be President of the United States and Commander in Chief of our Armed Forces.

The solution is for the DNC and the State Party of Michigan to hold a Primary, one that allows every Democrat to have a voice in who their nominee should be, (not a caucus that excludes the working poor or our military personnel who can not participate) and for the DNC to seat the FL delegation - they had a primary with both names on the Ballot - and 1.6 million Democrats made their choice.

As far as the super delegates, if they want to go with the will of the people in their district, that is fine. I am sure that Sen. Clinton would be fine with the votes of Sen. Kennedy, Sen. Kerry, and the Gov. of Mass in exchange for the super delegates coming from such democratic strong holds like Idaho, Kansas, Alaska, Montana, Alabama and all those red states who through their support to Obama, and whom neither Clinton or Obama has a chance of winning in a general election.

I will say that if Obama is the nominee of my party, my party will have abandoned me, and I will have little choice but to be an independent till the party rids its control from the DailyKos crowd - and I am likely to vote for McCain who has worked across party lines to deliver real reform to our campaign finance laws, shown compassion toward the plight of immigrants, delivers with authority why the practice of torture is detrimental to this nation, and is a genuine American Hero who's judgment I can trust in a time of crises - he might deliver a speech as well, but he has a record of accomplishments, not a record of deliver hollow speeches.

Obama hasn't changed the dirty politics practiced in IL - there is no reason, absolutely none - to believe he is going to change things in Washington. And I am so sick of hearing about his authoring two books - big deal - there are thousands of writers in America, that doesn't make them qualified to president of the US.

Obama is an empty suit - all hat and no bull - the single biggest fraud ever foisted upon the electorate and fawned over by the press. The inspiration that he inspires wares off quickly, and the Dem's would be wise to look at the merits of his record and argument to be president.

It wasn't that long ago that we had someone else promising to heal the partisan divide based on their ability to work across party lines in the state house, and that proved to be a disaster for this nation.

Posted by: clawrence35 | February 15, 2008 1:32 PM | Report abuse

Well LABC you should'nt assume to know what someone else thinks,that only shows your lack of intellect.I dont need to prove anything to anyone,Im not trying to change anyones opinon,your entitled to yours and Im entitled to mine and I know what I have heard him say.As a voter,I want to hear about what he can do in the future,not about the past.A voter is a voter,speak to them all the same,you may decide your canidate by race therefore you assume everyone does,but everyone does'nt.
Dont be so quick to assume.I still have'nt heard your thoughts on the entire election? care to voice them or just argue with me? Hope ya have a great day.

Posted by: realtexan | February 15, 2008 1:29 PM | Report abuse

No one on the planet loves and respects the Clintons more than I-

NO ONE

But, I want Senator Obama to be our next president.

Posted by: kase | February 15, 2008 1:25 PM | Report abuse

I feel sad and ashamed of my country and countrymen.
You'd think that after the lessons of Bush/Cheney people would focus on the issues and the candidates positions on them.

Instead, we've in danger of what choosing another "empty suit"

Read the policy proposals on both candidates web sites

Obama's plans are half-baked and don't work.

Make sure you know who you're hiring before you hire them.

Obama is nothing but charm and hot air.

Posted by: svreader | February 15, 2008 1:06 PM | Report abuse

Clinton supporters are sadly, an absolutely mess... and it's a bit shocking how quickly this conversation has sunk towards depravity and innuendo. How charming, and modern to talk tough through a blog!! I cannot stress, that the strong sentiment against Hillary leaves her little to no chance at all in November. And the more her campaign relies upon hate speech, the more Dems she loses. 2 weeks ago I would have voted for her, if in fact she won the nomination. Now I have no choice but to stand against her and her machine... even if that means McCain gets the Presidency.

Posted by: twofeathers50 | February 15, 2008 1:05 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, the cartoon link is here.

Posted by: washpost | February 15, 2008 1:04 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is defunct. But Obamania has its own pitfalls. Right now he is popular because he is not asking people to do anything. See
this cartoon for a hilarious view of Obama's appeal.

Posted by: washpost | February 15, 2008 12:58 PM | Report abuse

I received an absentee ballot for the Michigan primary. The only major candidate on the ballot was Hillary Clinton. She had pledged, with the other candidates, not to campaign in Michigan. I wrote in Obama's name, but apparently that wasn't allowed or counted. The hypocracy is Hillary Clinton's. The only way to seat Michigan delegates fairly is for the DNC to hold a state caucus.

Posted by: newmanle | February 15, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

Obama's fall will be the hardest and most severe in recent political history.

He is not the man you think he is.

Thank God I've seen his type before. Silicon valley used to be crawling with them. Empty suits that sound good on the surface but there's nothing there.

Then we woke up.

OBAMA IS A SALESMAN

Posted by: svreader | February 15, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse

My email to John Lewis today:

John, please continue your support of Hillary. Since "hope" has been Barack's main message, consider the following:

Re: Hope
"Let faith, hope, and love abide, but the greatest of these is love." - 1st Corinthians 13

Love is the creative force that FULFILLS hope. When Hillary talks "solutions," she is focusing on fulfilling the hopes of millions of Americans.

As you well know, and I know, that Blacks, Women, Hispanics, and all underprivileged HAVE HAD HOPE FOR A VERY LONG TIME. Barack seems to have just discovered "hope," or doesn't realize that hope has existed for years. I was there for the Civil Rights movement with "hope". We need the FOCUS, as Hillary confirms, on fulfilling the hopes of our people.

"Well done is better than well said."
-- Benjamin Franklin

As Hillary has said, you can't just TALK THE TALK; as you know, you must WALK THE WALK to make real change. Barack talks, and talks. Rhetoric is nice, cozy, and even can be inspirational; but IT TAKES MORE than talk.

ALSO. It is misleading when people say that "Hillary voted FOR the war." Barack and his supporters, including the Media, are misusing this one vote.
The vote was to give the President the authorization, if necessary, to use force. President Bush HAD THE AUTHORITY. ACCOUNTABILITY FOLLOWS AUTHORITY. PRESIDENT BUSH DECIDED TO PREEMPTIVELY GO TO WAR, NOT HILLARY. Her vote was NOT "FOR" WAR. The President could have used the vote in a more responsible way. HE, and only he, decided "for" war--preemptive war. Hold President Bush accountable. Beating up on Hillary for that one vote has been the only seeming rationale Barack had with the "left" to promote his candidacy. HE HAS "USED" THIS ONE VOTE (when he said he didn't even know how he would have voted had he had access to the same information and had been a Senator). Barack was not "in the arena." He even admitted in 2004 that he didn't know how he would have voted if he had access to the same info at that time.
President Bush NEEDS TO BE HELD RESPONSIBLE AND ACCOUNTABLE, NOT HILLARY. ALSO, this is the only thing that seems to justify Barack's statement that he would be "smarter on day 1." JUST ONE THING--one thing-- which determines intelligence or good judgment! Hardly. By the way, since Barack has been in the U.S. Senate, his Iraq votes have been the same as Hillary's. AND, Hillary has shown excellent judgment throughout her public life--even the courageous decision to keep her marriage together. (The Christian "right" should admire that decision.) Also, as a mature man & father, Barack has been a smoker; does that show good judgment? He has long known its danger to himself and his family. Setting an example is a big part of leadership.

Consider Hillary and Bill's strong contributions here and globally. Peace AND prosperity here, Peace in Northern Ireland & the Balkans, Bill's Global Initiatives, including African AIDs relief, Hillary's Women's Rights Advocacy, even speaking to the Leaders of China, in Shanghai. Obama does not have the stature worldwide that Hillary and Bill do. Talking a good game isn't enough. The Clintons walk the walk. Since that ONE VOTE that Barack didn't even have to make in the U.S. Senate is the ONLY thing that those who support him use to rationalize their support,

I thought you might want to read Barack's own words:

"So it's not clear to me what differences we've had since I've been in the Senate. I think what people might point to is our different assessments of the war in Iraq, although I'm always careful to say that I was not in the Senate, so perhaps the reason I thought it was such a bad idea was that I didn't have the benefit of U.S. intelligence. And, for those who did, it might have led to a different set of choices. So that might be something that sort of is obvious. But, again, we were in different circumstances at that time: I was running for the U.S. Senate, she had to take a vote, and casting votes is always a difficult test." [The New Yorker, 10/30/06]

"Not only was the idea of an invasion increasingly popular, but on the merits I didn't consider the case against war to be cut-and- dried." ["Audacity of Hope," 2006, p. 294]

In this regard, Barack is actually undermining the Democrats by making Hillary and Congress equally complicit in waging war in Iraq. President Bush ALONE made the decision for a PREEMPTIVE WAR. Barack gives the Republicans the ammunition to blame others rather than Bush. (Unintended consequences of lumping Hillary in with McCain & Bush) THE RESPONSIBILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THIS TRAGIC WAR IS THE PRESIDENT AND HIS ADMINISTRATION. Barack seems to be blaming Hillary in order to win the far left in our Party. You know that it's possible to win the battle and lose the war.

I'm for a Hillary/Barack ticket. Please work for that. Barack will add a great deal...and will be positioned well for 2016.

Respectfully,
CG


Posted by: cgplace | February 15, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

This campaign has seen an incredible surge in opinion about who is best to lead the Democratic party into the future. The heated commentary from supporters of Clinton and Obama has created a "buzz" around the primaries and energized the base. No matter who wins we will remember the last 8 years and "fall in line".

I belive that Obama will lead our party into a bright future. He has the oratory skills to inspire Americans to believe in ourselves and it is this belief that can bring about change.

Ms. Clinton had this belief when she introduced a viable healthcare plan to Americans in the 90s. We (the people) did not believe this plan was plausible and rejected it-through public opinion. However, let us not forget that it was Ms. Clinton that had the courage to stand up and fight for us when she knew the consequences of her actions.

Justified or not it was this single action that painted our perceptions of Ms. Clinton. To this day I remember the reaction to the plan and the smear campaign that followed even though I was only a teenager.

I believe that Barack Obama can inspire us in a direction that Hillary Clinton cannot. But I also believe that the only reason he can do this is because the Clintons have laid a solid base in this country for our views and opinions to be taken seriously.

Clintons, to you I say, "thank you" for carrying this torch and lighting the way and please keep guiding and mentoring the party, but when you see the runner with fresh legs have confidence that he will keep the torch lit and deliver it to its destination.

Posted by: brianiwakiri | February 15, 2008 12:28 PM | Report abuse

Wow. Slow news day when this is a top story. Why don't the superdelegates shut up until we're done actually counting votes from the people? And why is this news anyway? Any of the superdelegates can change their pledge whenever they want (as we can now clearly see), it doesn't mean Obama's getting it either. Message to Lewis: If you're going to endorse a candidate, you need to do like Kerry or Albright and start making phone calls instead of holding out your fancy superdelegate vote like candy and waiting to be pampered.

The ordinary people supporting Obama are organizing and doing hard work, and their hard work will pay off with or without fair-weather friends in the exclusive superdelegate club. Woe to the person that thinks they can sell their influence, because nothing would make John McCain happier than if DNC superdelegates defied the will of the people.

Posted by: grimmix | February 15, 2008 12:26 PM | Report abuse

These switches in support cause me to question the integrity of those who would withdraw their pledge. If they were simply going to be fair-weather supporters of which ever candidate was most popular at a given moment - why offer an advanced endorsement at all?

While I do very much like Obama, I would rather vote for him in future contest when he has both vision and a commitment to the details of day-to-day work.

Talk never did bake a pie.

Posted by: karmachica | February 15, 2008 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Technically, Ms. Jones is correct. Lewis only left the option on the table but also in his statement on CNN were these words: "I will not vote against the people in my district". Well, guess what: the people in Lewis' district voted for Obama. That aught to tell Ms.Jones something about Lewis' decision to go with Obama.

Like every one else Lewis wants the same change that he got a cracked skull and a bloody face for seeking, the same change that Dr.Martin Luther King died for. It just wouldn't make sense to a sane person for him to vote for any body else but Obama.

It was clear to me from jump street that Lewis was over powered by direct pressure from Bill Clinton to vote for Hillary just as he has gone around the country calling in his markers. However, Bill Clinton did not count on the little people remembering the fact that he did not do anything for African American people at the bottom of America's psychosocial, political and economic ladder. His "welfare to work" program was as worthless as Bush's "No Child Left Behind".

Thousands, no millions of single mothers were pushed in the gutter looking to snag one of a few low paying jobs available at McDonald, Wall Mart and Burger King.

Posted by: DoctorMaia | February 15, 2008 12:15 PM | Report abuse

Texan, what intellectual conversation? You make some comment about Senator Obama speaking differently to whites and blacks - (where is proof, by the way? )Give me break, you are basing your voting on some patently ridiculous comment? You want to vote for Clinton, have at it. I think she is great, but please base it on something real.

Posted by: LABC | February 15, 2008 12:13 PM | Report abuse

If Obama gets the nod this is one democrat who won't be voting for him. John McCain is to put it mildly acid reflex. Having said that the Obamabots are a creepy lot and I'd rather go with McCain for 4 years than be part of a cult.

Posted by: jamesbaie | February 15, 2008 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Okay,LABC whats your take on the election?
I will be happy with either democrat,but its evident you could be disappointed.My advise is to vote.Vote your choice but vote.Sarcasm can be very deleterious to an intellectual conversation.

Posted by: realtexan | February 15, 2008 12:05 PM | Report abuse

"I can see the Clinton slander machine is probably going to end his chances.

Posted by: jstratt2"
==========================

I'm getting sick of this crap.
Name one "slander", liar.

Posted by: zukermand | February 15, 2008 12:05 PM | Report abuse


As a libertarian, I normally end up voting for Republican candidates for national office because I would rather have a clumsy capitalist running the federal government than an efficient socialist.The USSR had the most experienced and efficient Socialists money could bribe, and look at the nightmare and deaths they created. However, as impressed as I am with Senator Obama, I can see the Clinton slander machine is probably going to end his chances. This would be the best thing for the conservatives and Republicans because if Obama is screwed out by BillHill, the number of Democratic voters that will not vote, or will vote Republican, will shift the tide and we will have a Republican president again. Rock on Hill.

Posted by: jstratt2 | February 15, 2008 12:02 PM | Report abuse

Hillary has only herself to blame.

Obama is out front and center answering questions to anyone that asks.

Hillary time and time again only takes questions from plants, she's as scripted as the hard drive on my PC. She simply refuses to let her hair down and be Hillary. Every answer/statement is pre-planned and calculated.

She lacks confidence in herself to just be Hillary. She's the head ### in charge and she has only herself to blame for her failed campaign.

This campaign i believe is more about peception and how the candidtate comes across to the public. Obama literally cleaned her clock on that score.

Summary - Obama reaches out - Hillary doesn't.

Posted by: BuffyTheBanana | February 15, 2008 12:01 PM | Report abuse

All,

Get this now. 2008 will be a watershed moment - from when CHARACTER and AUTHENTICITY prevails in American politics - symbolized by OBAMA and MCCAIN (at least before he started courting the conservative base). All the fakes and phonies will whither away. ROMNEY is done and so will CLINTON. Check OBAMA.
The man has character, is honest, authentic, grounded, humble to point that he always self-deprecates. Normal Americans of all creed see this and can relate to that easily. No amount of spin from Hillary or the so-called republican attack machine can obfuscate that.

Forget all the issues nonesense. You can talk about all the issues you want but if you are very willing to cut deals with lobbyists and special interests, won't release your records on taxes and your business dealings, people won't trust to handle the their business, period.

Posted by: digizenship | February 15, 2008 12:00 PM | Report abuse

John Lewis was partial to Obama all along. But he felt a commitment to the Clintons and did not want to betray a long relationship he had with the couple during the Clinton adminstration. Having met and spent a little time with the Congressman, I found him to be a man of strong conviction. I asked him, in Winter 2007, who he supported for president. I sensed he was going through a lot of soul searching and was partial to Obama though could not yet take that step. In the end Lewis had to be true to his beliefs in turning to Obama.

Posted by: shaiyabaer | February 15, 2008 12:00 PM | Report abuse

deeleanderross said: " In Conclusion, you now have the facts straight from the Senate Records vault. "

Link please. If you can.

Posted by: PhilTR | February 15, 2008 11:56 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: deeleanderross | February 15, 2008 11:31 AM
=======================
I'm very uncomfortable with the Republican style of misleading argument often adopted by supporters of Sen Obama. It does not reflect well on the candidate.

Posted by: zukermand | February 15, 2008 11:37 AM | Report abuse

Dear MR. Its over..

Firstly, Mr Lewis has denied this story. Secondly, the issue of HRC winnign Florida and Michigan hasn;t been decided. Thirdly, HRC is ahead in the polls in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Texas. Obama is still in for a very rough ride.

Posted by: politicalobserver1 | February 15, 2008 11:35 AM | Report abuse

"That being as soon as a white person has a disagreement they go "N-word, N-word, N-word" (figuretively). This is what the entire nation saw, or should I say world. I would venture to say that a lot of blacks Clintonites are harbouring second thoughts and it's really not about Obama, its about the perceived slight"
======================

What I saw were a few perfectly innocent, common and accurate observations mischaracterized for political gain in a shortsighted scorched earth strategy.

Since the "perception" of slight was unfounded, shouldn't you be trying to clear that up instead of falsely accusing good people of racism?

Posted by: zukermand | February 15, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

1st let me say thank you to Cakemanjb for the comment. Now we know who will be ready and right on day one, and that will be Obama. As for JBH13 please STOP. As for Mr. Jackson comments, he is right any statesmen who will vote against the Constituent that voted for him or her will have a big job trying to keep his or her job. Color wil not factor into it. It could be about Oil,Gas, you name it. 60% of your Constituent wants one thing you give them something else. By By. Oh for you who miss Cakemanjb Commment Look at why sen. Clinton Should pack up and call it a year........

Senator Obama --During the first eight years of Senator Obama's elected service he sponsored over 820 bills. He introduced:
233 regarding healthcare reform,
125 on poverty and public assistance,
112 crime fighting bills,
97 economic bills,
60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,
21 ethics reform bills,
15 gun control,
6 veterans affairs and many others.
His first year in the U.S. Senate, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427. These included:
- the Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 (became law),
- The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act, (became law),
- The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, passed the Senate,
- The 2007 Government Ethics Bill, (became law),
- The Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill, (In committee)
Senator Clinton -- Senator Clinton's, who has served only one full term (6yrs.), and another year campaigning, has managed to author and pass into law, (20) twenty pieces of legislation.
1. Establish the Kate Mullany National Historic Site.
2. Support the goals and ideals of Better Hearing and Speech Month.
3. Recognize the Ellis Island Medal of Hon
4. Name courthouse after Thurgood Marshall.
5. Name courthouse after James L. Watson.
6. Name post office after Jonn A. O'Shea.
7. Designate Aug. 7, 2003, as National Purple Heart Recognition Day.
8. Support the goals and ideals of National Purple Heart Recognition Day.
9. Honor the life and legacy of Alexander Hamilton on the bicentennial of his death.
10. Congratulate the Syracuse Univ. Orange Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.
11. Congratulate the Le Moyne College Dolphins Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.
12. Establish the 225th Anniversary of the American Revolution Commemorative Program.
13. Name post office after Sergeant Riayan A. Tejeda.
14. Honor Shirley Chisholm for her service to the nation and express condolences on her death.
15. Honor John J. Downing, Brian Fahey, and Harry Ford, firefighters who lost their lives on duty.
Only five of Senator Clinton's bills are more substantive:
16. Extend period of unemployment assistance to victims of 9/11.
17. Pay for city projects in response to 9/11
18. Assist landmine victims in other countries.
19. Assist family caregivers in accessing affordable respite care.
20. Designate part of the National Forest System in Puerto Rico as protected in the wilderness preservation system.
In Conclusion, you now have the facts straight from the Senate Records vault.

Posted by: deeleanderross | February 15, 2008 11:31 AM | Report abuse

What whites don't realize is that Clinton displayed behavior in SCarolina that is very familiar to blacks.

That being as soon as a white person has a disagreement they go "N-word, N-word, N-word" (figuretively). This is what the entire nation saw, or should I say world. I would venture to say that a lot of blacks Clintonites are harbouring second thoughts and it's really not about Obama, its about the perceived slight.

Posted by: fresno500 | February 15, 2008 11:23 AM | Report abuse

The voters in Rep. Lewis' district voted for Obama 3 to 1. It is likely that he does not seek to undermine their voice. I applaud the courage to allow voters to decide. This superdelegate business is insulting and should not exist.

Posted by: stephaniemaddin | February 15, 2008 11:23 AM | Report abuse

Hillary will be the nominee.

There are a few reasons for this, all pointed out in this blog:
1. America will not elect an anti-war President w/troops in the field.

2. His voting record in Illinois. Voting present doesn't mean a thing.

3. All this hype about Obama is just that; hype. The talking heads have to have something to talk about for the next 8 months, and the columnists have to have something to babble on about.

My own opinion is that I can't see Women not voting for a woman.


Posted by: koneill8 | February 15, 2008 11:19 AM | Report abuse

Universal healthcare, Hillary has it.
I am a Yellowdog Democrat which means I have never voted for any Republican- ever.
The way we show care for all humans is to provide basic health care for all.

Hillary is a tuff loving lady who cares for all people.

Posted by: timbergkamp | February 15, 2008 11:18 AM | Report abuse

To dcmenefee1:

You're right, Michigan and Florida really should have their say otherwise a lot of Dems living there may just sit out the election in November. Delegates in the winter ignored may equal electoral college losses in the fall.

Posted by: hc2254 | February 15, 2008 11:09 AM | Report abuse

Just a thought: if Clinton really wanted to win Wisconsin, you'd think she would be there by now. But no, she is in Ohio!

Posted by: storyofthefifthpeach | February 15, 2008 11:07 AM | Report abuse


Why is this guy/gal, auntmo9990, posting the same comment again and again and cluttering the comment page with his mendacity?

For example here with an interval of 10 minuets he has posted twice the same comment.
Posted by: auntmo9990 | February 15, 2008 01:23 AM
again Posted by: auntmo9990 | February 15, 2008 02:12 AM.

I think we should report this!!

Posted by: dan8 | February 15, 2008 11:06 AM | Report abuse

My God! It seems like the hard-core Clinton supporters are out in force!

Did you folks mind when Kerry got swift-boated? So why are you trying to do it to Obama.

For years you have been complaining about the nasty tactics of Karl Rove, and yet it seems many of you are quite ready to use them on one of your fellow democrats.

Obama even donated to Clinton's last senate campaign.

He is one of the good guys, so please lighten up and don't take Clinton's faltering campaign so seriously.

Posted by: storyofthefifthpeach | February 15, 2008 11:05 AM | Report abuse

With the advent of 24 hour cable news and the internet, some journalism teachers lamented the new journalism. That is, reporting that someone else was reporting something, in this case the New York Times. This way the sur-reporter doesn't have to source the story, fact check it or even get out of their cubicle.

The Onion today reported that China attacked East Timor, no wait, or was that The Daily Show? The Drudge Report is confirming that . . .

Posted by: hc2254 | February 15, 2008 11:05 AM | Report abuse

From the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

"Lewis' office: Report that he's endorsing Obama "is not accurate"

http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stories/2008/02/15/lewis_0215.html?cxntlid=homepage_tab_newstab

Beni Dakar
Duluth, GA

Posted by: wedaconnectionmoderator | February 15, 2008 11:04 AM | Report abuse

People identify with candidates based on race, ethnics, gender, class status, and
religions.
None of these are extinct from politics or from our government, and society.
The spirit of hope/dreams went out in the 1960's. We are in a political crisis with
the superdelegates, but for leaders like
Jesse Jackson to insert their beliefs now,
only adds fuel to the fire, with Obama's
dream becoming a nightmare.

Hillary will bring this nation together.
She fights for all human rights! We are the home of the free, and brave!


Posted by: electress | February 15, 2008 11:00 AM | Report abuse

"But the co-author of Foxes in the Henhouse: How the Republicans Stole the South and the Heartland and What the Democrats Must do To Run 'em Out, has long warned that Democrats should avoid the mistakes of past elections.

"Historically, while hope may well sell in the spring, it wears thin by fall when it is trumped by issues of security and experience," Jarding said."

Posted by: prabir1960 | February 15, 2008 10:59 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: realtexan: I was once an Obama supporter,but after watching him speak differantly to blacks than whites,I now support Clinton.

**********************
When was he on Def Comedy Jam? I missed it. Speaks differently, huh...well, son, ah tell yew this race is hotter than a junebug fryin' on pickup truck in the middle of Dallas!

Posted by: LABC | February 15, 2008 10:58 AM | Report abuse

What do you mean baseless speculation, she's losing. Her organization is crumbling and her ability to keep pace financially has deminished. There's the proof in the pudding!!

Posted by: pat.oates | February 15, 2008 10:56 AM | Report abuse

This is nothing new is the camgain. In California Clinton crushed Obama in districts where the super delegates have endorsed him.

Ms. Sanchez of the 39th district saw a 3-1 advantage for Clinton (by 26,000 votes)buit endorsed Obama anyway.

If the super delegates are to go with there state then fine, but do it across the board, otherwise it's a free-for-all.

The press is not covering this impartially.

If you look at the Surper Delegate Transparency Project, you will see that Clinton and Obama, equally, have super delegate voting against the outcomes of the popular vote in their districts.

If you wnat to make the Supr delegates moot, then let Florida and Michigan Vote again.

Posted by: dcmenefee1 | February 15, 2008 10:54 AM | Report abuse

auntmo and cab, have you a link between Obama's campaign and Jesse Jackson regarding superdelegates? Or do you think that we are all alike? Could it be that Jackson does whatever the hell he wants without Senator Obama's blessing? Oh, no of course not. Well, I will be sure to keep an eye out on Gloria Steinem roughing up any of the female superdelegates!

Posted by: LABC | February 15, 2008 10:52 AM | Report abuse

Barack Obama, another Jimmy Carter, another George W. Bush with no experience. Sadly, this lifetime Democrat who worked on Al Gore's campaign will switch to the Conservative Democrat in the race, John McCain, if Hillary isn't our nominee.

Posted by: jubran1 | February 15, 2008 10:39 AM | Report abuse

Since MA went for Hillary, will Ted and John, superdelegates each, vote for Hillary in Denver?

Posted by: PhilTR | February 15, 2008 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Please read highwayscribery's reasoned analysis, "Hillbert Clintphrey (Is this 1968?) at

http://highwayscribery.blogspot.com/2008_02_01_archive.html#3194292333529128090

Posted by: highwayscribery1 | February 15, 2008 10:38 AM | Report abuse

I say Democrats should stick togather,and quit giving Republicans the ammunition they need for the general election.Obama or Clinton would be better than what we have had or what we might get with McCain.I say both Clinton and Obama are suitable for being president.My only problem is,I keep hearing people say they dont want Washington politics,well thats impossible,without knowing Washington politics and the insiders you can acchomplish nothing,an inexperianced person must then surround himself or herself with those type people such as the current Adm. has done and you see what thats done for our Country.So therefore it will always be Washington politics.What you have to figure out,is who will have the most pull in Washington?I was once an Obama supporter,but after watching him speak differantly to blacks than whites,I now support Clinton.Im concerned with the future not the past.However,I will most definatly vote Democrat either way.I say vote your choice,but for a better future make it Democrat either way.

Posted by: realtexan | February 15, 2008 10:37 AM | Report abuse

Fellow bloggers, don't buy into the media hype that pushes "race" to the forefront of this presidential campaign season. Hillary was able to get a lot of superdelegates early on in the presidential campaign season mainly because of Bill Clinton's contacts. The superdelegates who supported Hillary early on thought that she would be the "inevitable" nominee based on the large leads she had in polling at the time. The superdelegates want to get the nomination process over as soon as possible since McCain will likely be the Republican nominee.

If Obama can maintain a pledged delegate, total delegate, and total popular vote lead by April 23rd, the remaining superdelegates will push him over the finish line (i.e. 2025 total delegate count). The Democratics will need to quickly unite the party to face McCain and the Republican party.

OBAMA in 08!

Posted by: ajtiger92 | February 15, 2008 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Of course 99% of the comments here (and 60% of the Post's political coverage) rely either on baseless speculation or misinformation, so it's nothing personal.

Posted by: zukermand | February 15, 2008 10:35 AM | Report abuse

"It appears as if she completely underestimated her competitor and has failed to lead her organization"

I think this "appearance" relies entirely on your baseless speculation. Prove otherwise.

Posted by: zukermand | February 15, 2008 10:31 AM | Report abuse

Name calling is counterproductive and childish.

Posted by: zukermand | February 15, 2008 10:27 AM | Report abuse

jac 13,

Thanks for sharing the link. I would agree, Barack Obama has shown Americans extraordinary leadership acumen. He's been able to raise a huge some of money, galvonize an exceptional team of workers, and strategically navigate challenging waters.

I personally am very disappointed in the Clinton campaign. It appears as if she completely underestimated her competitor and has failed to lead her organization. If she is successful in obtaining the party nomination, I'm doubtful that she has the leadership skills to secure a win in November.

Posted by: pat.oates | February 15, 2008 10:26 AM | Report abuse

To be honest, it's all about Hussein Obama's color. That's why he can go to HLS. That's why he can easily get into senate. That's why John Lewis shifted. That's why he will definitely lose in general election even if he can be nominated by DEM. Come on, don't be so naive any more.

Posted by: hgogo | February 15, 2008 10:25 AM | Report abuse

Interesting piece of writing there, Ms Kornblut. All of the Obama supporters here seem to think Rep Lewis has expressed second thoughts about his endorsement of Sen Clinton. Of course, he's done nothing of the kind, but has discussed his superdelegate vote, an entirely separate matter, and how in that capacity he ought not vote against his constituency.

Why is there so much misunderstanding? We all know Anne Kornblut is a capable and talented writer, one doesn't write for the Washington Post if that's not true. How could she leave such a misimpression?
I think one might be justified to suspect it is intentional.

Posted by: zukermand | February 15, 2008 10:23 AM | Report abuse

"Please note that the main purpose of smear campaigns (such as are now being conducted on comment boards all over the place) is vote suppression."

So what was the purpose of the Obama smear job on Hillary and the whole Clinton Era? Vote suppression? Hmm.

Posted by: hdimig | February 15, 2008 10:16 AM | Report abuse

Big endorsement in Texas that is not getting much media coverage -- former Agriculture Commissioner for the state of Texas and populist hero Jim Hightower will endorse and campaign for Barack Obama. This is huge. Hightower is a hero and a legend for many in Texas. This is about the best endorsement Barack could get in TX short of an Ann Richards endorsement from heaven.

Posted by: zbob99 | February 15, 2008 10:15 AM | Report abuse

Loopybin: All you need to do to stop sounding like a retard is find the caps lock key on your keyboard. Now start looking, idiot!

Posted by: vmunikoti | February 15, 2008 10:12 AM | Report abuse

Friends,

Please note that the main purpose of smear campaigns (such as are now being conducted on comment boards all over the place) is vote suppression. That is, the smearers throw mud everywhere in order to dissuade people from trusting anyone. They seek to destroy those they attack.

Please expect to see a lot of this. But please vote your conscience. Obama might be a Martian scheming to take over the world. Or he might be a very talented politician running a principled campaign who sticks to his message because he means it.

If you listen to the people bashing him, you'll observe they are trying to be as "knowing" and cynical as possible. Let them.

They're called trolls.

Obama '08

(Oh, and I'm a thoughtful voter, not a cult member, thanks for asking.)

Posted by: fdurgin1 | February 15, 2008 10:10 AM | Report abuse

Don't get it twisted. These are Black leaders who would have supported Obama but they didn't feel that white america was ready for a black president. They endorsed Clinton a long time ago not expecting the situation to be tied like it is. Do you honestly believe Lewis doesn't think Obama is qualified? This is what he has been waiting for. Of course he is torn. Some of it is political on his part and some is self-reflection. How can a civil rights leader such as Lewis not get behind a qualifield and capable, obviously ready candidate such as Obama. Just give Lewis a few days and he will make his switch final.

Posted by: telly.whitfield | February 15, 2008 10:08 AM | Report abuse

People who say Obama has no managerial experience, check out

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1713497,00.html

Posted by: jac13 | February 15, 2008 9:57 AM | Report abuse

If Obama wins, I'll think I will no-vote in the Fall. There is no way in heck I would vote for McCain like all of you Obama supporters claim you will do if Hillary wins. I cannot stand the utter smear job you all have done on a good Democrat who has devoted her life to issues that are important to me.

Posted by: hdimig | February 15, 2008 9:57 AM | Report abuse

Black delegates would be committing political suicide if they do NOT back Obama. That is why the whole super delegate policy is wrong. If the candidates are so very close, there should be anothere primary run off done by a country wide popular vote.

resubmitted.

Posted by: maddymappo | February 15, 2008 9:53 AM | Report abuse

"Obama has exaggerated his legislative accomplishments on the campaign trail. He misspoke last December when he told Iowa voters that he had "passed" a nuclear notification bill. There are certainly legitimate questions to be asked about his dealings with senior Exelon executives, who have poured large sums of money into his campaign."

Obama seems to have a big contributor in Exelon.

Posted by: hdimig | February 15, 2008 9:52 AM | Report abuse

Black delegates would be committing political suicide if they do back Obama. That is why the whole super delegate policy is wrong. If the candidates are so very close, there should be anothere primary run off done by a country wide popular vote.

Posted by: maddymappo | February 15, 2008 9:52 AM | Report abuse

" . . . but it doesn't mean we people who support Obama have been duped."

When a person is duped, by definition they don't know they've been duped. And, oh my, you've been sooooooooo duped by Obama that you (his supporters) think he's the Second Coming. Cults of Personality are always a worrisome thing to witness.

Posted by: Splatter | February 15, 2008 9:48 AM | Report abuse

Rep. John Lewis and any other "super delegate" should be concerned with the future of their jobs if they ignore their constituents- the people have spoken. I think that it is silly to think that Jessie Jackson, Jr. can intimidate a seasoned statesman like John Lewis. You risk the future of your office if you choose not to represent the interest of the people that put you in office.

Posted by: pat.oates | February 15, 2008 9:48 AM | Report abuse

Did you know that Hillary Clinton's biggest donors include Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Citigroup, Lehman Brothers, and JP Morgan Chase & Co. -- the biggest corporate banking / subprime loan companies out there?

Did you know that Hillary Clinton's plan for bailing out Americans with subprime loans also bails out the corporate bankers who gave them the loans, who won't have to deal with getting 50 cents on the dollar in expensive foreclosure proceedings?

Did you know her plan not only bails out families who own only one home, as Barack Obama's plan does, but also bails out wealthy real estate speculators who own more than one home, who used subprime loans to make money flipping houses?

Did you know that her plan locks real estate speculators in with low interest rates, but will lead to higher interest rates for all new homebuyers, putting even more money into the pockets of corporate bankers?

Hillary Clinton is a corporate banker's best friend!

Posted by: markkraft | February 15, 2008 9:48 AM | Report abuse

THIS IS WHY MANY CHOOSE NOT TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCESS. THE MONEY, THE DELEGATES, PRIMARY THEN GENERAL ELECTION, SUPERDELEGATES, AND MOST OF ALL HOW CANDIDATES RUN A DIRTY CAMPAIGN THEN MAKE UP WITH THE ONE THEY HAVE BEEN MUDSLINGING WITH. IT'S DISGUSTING. WHY CAN'T WE JUST GO TO THE POLLS ONCE AND VOTE FOR WHO WE WANT TO BE PRESIDENT. I SEE WHY MANY YOUNG PEOPLE DON'T GIVE A SH$T.

Posted by: Keedrowe | February 15, 2008 9:44 AM | Report abuse

jac13, fair enough, I appreciate your comments. However, I still put forth that your characterization of Hillary's career was wrong, and omitted much (if not most) of her accomplishments. And I see this day in and day out from Obama supporters, so I guess I'm sensitive to it.

For those who still believe that Hillary's "35 years of experience" is all fluff, or equivalent to a football quarterback's wife saying she could play the game, or other such nonsense, please do some research. For starters, the Wikipedia entry on Hillary Clinton is informative, and if you feel that's not a reliable source, you can always research anything claimed there (plus they have citations you can follow).

Posted by: hoopy42 | February 15, 2008 9:38 AM | Report abuse

Rep. Lewis is only looking out for himself after receiving Jackson's THREAT, and it is a THREAT. It isn't about Obama or Clinton, it's about keeping his district.

What is unfortunate is that Jackson would use the race card against a fellow black american. That is just sad, but it happens even within miniority groups.


Posted by: dmoralestx | February 15, 2008 9:31 AM | Report abuse

I am not suprised at all. No one did more and better for the African Americans than Bill Clinton and he was nicknamed the "Black President", but look at what he got. He got betrayed. I sincerely believe the Kennedys will be next. Not even God could stop them from doing it.

Anyone who wants to help that certain group of people from now on should pause and think if they want to be treated like how Clinton is being treated now, and what good is it to work so hard for them. Bill Clinton is not stupid. He certain is not a fool. Unfortunately, he is now being treated like a stupid fool and nothing can be more unfair than this.

Think of it and think hard. No one wants to be fooled twice.

May God bless the Clintons for doing something good for those who are betraying them.

Posted by: signaturepieces | February 15, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse

ghokee:

Hillary "won" New Mexico by less than a percentage point -- 2,000 votes out of more than 150,000 cast; she gets 14 delegates, Obama gets 12. and she should be worried about how well Obama did among the Latinos there (very small African-American vote in NM, by the way).

As for WI, TX, OH and PA: She has to win 55% of the remaining delegates to catch Obama, and if he wins WI, even close, it goes to 57%. If she doesn't blow him out in all of the remaining states, he ends up with more pledged delegates than she, because there are other contests where he's favored to win. Looking back, her prospects are not good: I think her widest margin outside her home state has been about 10 points.

djm9063:

Please, stop the name-calling. And your information is all wrong.

P.S. Typing your diatribe ALL IN CAPS doesn't help; in fact, a lot of people skip posts with caps and multiple exclamation points.

Posted by: jac13 | February 15, 2008 9:24 AM | Report abuse

The negative stories about Obama are beng held by the media until "if" he gets the nomination.

The pro Isreal forces in this country are enormous, Baraks past association with anti Isreal forces will be what the republicans use against him "if" he gets the nomination. (See his support of JOe LIeberman to get the Jewish pro Isreal votes). He dumped all his anti isreal associations with a certain pastor and a certain church, which really means very little but the "swift boat machine" is ready (look what they did to Kerry's war record).

Obama supporters need to right now figure out how to combat what unfortunately is a real association from the past.

But as you Obama supporters seem to be very good at is smear campaign tactics, so get busy and figure out how to defend him from this attack. The republicans, as you can see what they did to the Clintns (and you are now doing to Hillary) are ready to do this to the nominee, except there is nothing left to vet on Hillary.

So if Obama wins, will it be because he is the best candidate or because people hate Hillary. If it's the latter, how sad is this.

I was amused by the writers list of HIllary legislature history compared to Baraks. I wonder if that person actually works for the post because that was quite an inaacurate list of HIllary's accomplishments. Obviously not a well read poster.

If, if Jessie Jackson is using "fear" to get delegates to change their vote based on hw it will affect "their" future, then this process has been adulterized and will need reform.

Why are black leaders being "pressured". This is democracy and no one can be pressured. They should have the courage of their convictions. This will undermine the countries confidence in their leader with all this negative press.

Actually, you can watch this process unfold.

Posted by: lndlouis | February 15, 2008 9:21 AM | Report abuse

Don't forget just a couple of months ago Clinton had about 70% of the black vote and Obama was just as much a "black" man then as now. The Clinton's stupid remarks that insulted many blacks plus Obama rise in popularity changed all that.

Posted by: zbob99 | February 15, 2008 9:21 AM | Report abuse

Let's not forget my fellow Americans that the Super delegates should represent the interest of their constituents. If John Lewis' constituents favor Barack Obama then his vote should also reflect that. This is a democracy people. He was elected to serve the people of Georgia!!

PMO

Posted by: pat.oates | February 15, 2008 9:15 AM | Report abuse

STUPID STUPID MORONS...WHAT HAS OBAMA EVER ACCOMPLISHED???? NOTHING!!! HE COULDN'T EVEN MAKE PARTNER AT THE LAW FIRM HE WORKED FOR. NEVER RAN A COMPANY...NEVER DRAFTED ANY SIGNIFICANT BILL AS SENATOR...NEVER SERVED HIS COUNTRY IN THE MILITARY....ABSOLUTELY NOTHING...JUST BECAUSE HE'S BLACK ALL THE BLACKS ARE VOTING FOR HIM...NOW HOW IS PREJUDICE YOU ASK????

Posted by: djm9063 | February 15, 2008 9:12 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: dremd1983 | February 15, 2008 9:10 AM | Report abuse

Do not get lulled by polls now that are showing Obama is leading McCain by 5 points or so. Dukakis was leading Bush Sr. by 14 points or more after the convention before the Republican attack machine went to work. Kerry also led Bush jr substantially at this time in 2003. Bush Sr. was experienced, war hero against Dukakis (more experienced than Obama). I see the similarity again this year.

Posted by: prabir1960 | February 15, 2008 9:08 AM | Report abuse

hoopy 42:

I wasn't "crying" about mischaracterizations of Obama's record. That kind of language doesn't promote dialogue.

As for Hillary Clinton's experience, I don't have to investigate her record; I lived it. I voted for Bill Clinton twice. He badly disappointed me, and his and Hillary's conduct during his time in office was characterized by a worrisome lack of integrity -- much as she is now overstating her experience, and trying to claim the MI and FL delegates by changing the rules after the fact.

I have no doubt that she is an intelligent person who could run the country. But there is no shedding the divisive baggage of the 90s, and I fear that she cannot win the general election, or bring people together to get things done if she were elected.

It's not personal. I don't hate her (although I do hate some of the things she and Bill have said and done in this campaign). I just think Obama is the better candidate.

Posted by: jac13 | February 15, 2008 9:07 AM | Report abuse

I thought Obama didn't want this to e about a "black president" but you know now it is. Too bad, it was exciting until now, now it has become something ugly.

And by the way, Hillary Clinton farts, burbs, has hormones, moves her body in all the "wrong" ways, wears pants suits, cackles doesn't laught, omg - crys, and usually acts like OMG - a human being. Which is more than I can say for some of the posters here who apparently thinks the messiah has returned.

I am stil voting for Hillary and all this biased press doesn not discourage me except that I can only hope that the democratic nominee whoever it is, is elected.

Posted by: lndlouis | February 15, 2008 9:06 AM | Report abuse

People like Hillary are truely above race. They have fought all their lives to bring justice and equality among the great divides in this country. It is astonishing how all African-Amercians forget this and are all lining up behind one of their own who is promising the sky but can deliver none. I am a woman. Why, in the future, I should support an African-American candidate? I can remember 1972 when McGovern was nominated who won only one state if I remember correctly.

Posted by: prabir1960 | February 15, 2008 9:04 AM | Report abuse

How about reporting on something of substance? For example, Senator Obama has declined to appear at the Black State of the Union in New Orleans next week. Guess he figures we're no longer worthy. Senator Clinton, on the other hand, has agreed to appear. Kinda makes you wonder . . . .

Posted by: dremd1983 | February 15, 2008 9:03 AM | Report abuse

Clinton can't even run her own campaign, but we want to trust her with the country?

She picked people who were loyal rather than competent. Haven't we already seen how disastrous that was under George Bush?

She had to lend her own campaign money when it failed. What kind of loan will she make to the country if her economic plan fails?

Seriously. How can people mention her "solutions" or believe she is "ready on Day One" when the biggest enterprise she has run to date, her campaign, is in such disarray?

No thank you. We've already seen the disastrous effects of incompetence in the White House.

Posted by: OneForAll | February 15, 2008 9:00 AM | Report abuse

FYI:

Rep. John Lewis of Georgia "unequivocally" said last night that he will vote for Sen. Barack Obama at this summer's Democratic National Convention, New York Times reporters Jeff Zeleny just said on CNN.

Posted by: zbob99 | February 15, 2008 8:50 AM | Report abuse

I think Lewis and Scott should not have pledged in the first place, neither, for that matter, should have the others.
I'm a political floater, I vote my conscience. Always have. This time Obama has won my support and, by association, so has the Democratic Party. But their going have to kill this superdelegate system if they would like me to stay with them post-Obama.
Of course, I'm assuming here that Obama will win the nomination, and draw me to the polls in November. But he won't just draw me. Many of Obama's supporters have never voted before in any election for any one. The Democratic party would do well to remember this. It is not just the Presidency that is on the line in November. The House and the Senate races will look alot different if Obama's on the ticket. I highly doubt that many voting for Obama will be casting votes for local Republicans. An Obama candidacy could me that Congressional seats are in play that weren't before. It could also mean that the Democratic Party really differenciates itself from the Republicans and establishes itself as a home for real progressives.
To all the registered Democrats who are supporting Clinton,
Don't let this opportunity slip away. If Clinton hits the ticket, I for one will be voting Green. Many others may just stay home.

Posted by: JPHemingway | February 15, 2008 8:48 AM | Report abuse

HILLARY HAS MORE BRAINS IN HER LITTLE FINGER THAN OBAMA HAS IN ALL HIS GREY MATTER. WHAT OBAMA HAS IS HIS HOLD ON OPRAH'S MONEY (AND WHAT ELSE)???????

Posted by: LOONYBIN2000 | February 15, 2008 8:47 AM | Report abuse

This campaign is getting to sound more and more like a BLACK/WHIT COMPETION as opposed to WHAT SHOULD BE A JUDGEMENT OF WHO IS THE BEST PERSON TO SERVE THIS COUNTRY. I COULD NOT BELIEVE AND UNDERSTAND HOW JOHN LEWIS CAN SWITCH WITHIN A FEW WEEKS FROM HILLARY TO BO. DID HE NOT DO HIS HOMEWORK BEFORE MAKING HIS COMMITMENT, OR IS HE AFRAID IF HE DOESN'T ENDORSE OBAMA, THE HALF BACK MUSLIN INDOCTRINATED FOOL, HE WILL LOOSE HIS POSITION. I GUESS HE WOULD DO THE SAME THING IF MADAME OPRAH WAS LOOKING TO BE NOMINATED. MONEY,MONEY,POWER ,POWER AND THE HELL WITH THE WELL BEING OF OUR COUNTRY!

WHATEVER BILL'S COMMENTS ARE,FAVORABLE OR NOT IN ANYONES OPINION, HE IS NOT RUNNING, HILLARY IS!

Posted by: LOONYBIN2000 | February 15, 2008 8:40 AM | Report abuse

Now it seems the Superdelegates will get to decide. A nightmare because if they go with the population then their superdelegate powers become useless, and if they don't go with the pop they'll be considered 'undemocratic'. There would be no such problem if the British system were used, that is: everyone votes on the same day!

Posted by: director | February 15, 2008 8:36 AM | Report abuse

jac13, if you're going to cry about Obama's record being mischaracterized, then don't proceed to do the same to Clinton. It is flat-out wrong to suggest that all Hillary has done is work at patent law, a year or so for children's issues, and then just be Bill's wife. Her career has been much more than that, and it's easy to find if you care to investigate instead of mindlessly agree to whatever partisans say. It's curious that Obama supporters, who decry the smear and subtle (and not-so-subtle) mischaracterizations of a political opponent, do the exact same thing when it comes to Clinton.

Posted by: hoopy42 | February 15, 2008 8:33 AM | Report abuse

I think Obama may be in trouble. Hillary just won New Mexico. If she comes close or wins in WI, and wins TX, OH, and PA Obama would be done. If the guy goes the whole primary without winning any major states he is going to have problems making his case.

Especially losing New Hampshire and Ohio which will be critical in November.

Posted by: ghokee | February 15, 2008 8:26 AM | Report abuse

100 present votes out of 4,000 in 7 years? Please.

People who are beating this drum are being disingenuous. Everyone knows that legislators often vote "present" for strategic reasons. Anybody ever hear of the concept of "pairing" in the US Congress? Has Sen. Clinton never done that?

Pretty weak stuff.

By contrast, while Clinton says she's been "vetted," Bill Clinton has never answered for the Marc Rich pardon, won't release the names of his presidential-library donors, and won't release 3 million pages of documents from the health-care fiasco Hillary presided over. The GOP will have a field day if she's the nominee. They're just waiting in the weeds.

Posted by: jac13 | February 15, 2008 8:20 AM | Report abuse

"We are on the brink of a Democratic consensus for the first time in a long long time. Obama is the one to lead it."

How? Do you think Obama will get Republicans who think McCain is too liberal? How about all of the Republicans that supported the war? Will Obama get them after how he scorched Hillary and how the DFA goes after "Bush Democrats"? How about the Republicans who vote only on moral issues? Will Obama win them? It all sounds very nice, but the fact is the passing an agenda is a dog fight that requires compromise and tough decisions, not "Present" votes.

Posted by: hdimig | February 15, 2008 8:19 AM | Report abuse

If this is true it is very significant.

Obama who is a legitimate, qualified, inspirational candidate has got to be irresistible in the end to anybody who has felt the pain of years of oppression black or not.

The Clintons played their part in the dawning of this day but do we stay and glorify the dawn or do we walk in the light?

Posted by: deirdrekeatingkearns | February 15, 2008 8:17 AM | Report abuse

The times they are a changing ...

Posted by: Martinedwinandersen | February 15, 2008 8:12 AM | Report abuse

Dear Clinton Supporters,

Please join up with the Obama camp. This isn't about ego - its about the future of the party. Obama is growing the party leaps and bounds over anything we've seen since before Reagan. We are on the brink of a Democratic consensus for the first time in a long long time. Obama is the one to lead it. Hillary is an accomplished person due respect, but she can't build the consensus as he can. Please join up and help us get out of the 51% era of partisan warfare and lead us into the 65% era of consensus politics.

Obama is person for the job. Please give your support to Obama.

Posted by: maq1 | February 15, 2008 8:09 AM | Report abuse

it doesn't matter who the next president is -- both parties believe in printing money, which means creating more debt -- debt slows down the economy -- bush has been printing money to pay for his warmongering -- mccain will do the same -- hillary will do the same, just to show she has balls -- obama may tone down the warmongering but he'll still print money -- the result will be economic disaster for americans, but they deserve it because they all believe in a free lunch

Posted by: herbert-de-turbot | February 15, 2008 8:08 AM | Report abuse

Ready on Day One?
With all the advantages ahe had,
Hillary has made a mess of her primary campaign.
How can she claim to be a "Doer" rather than a "talker"?
On the other hand, Obama depends not only on his oratory but also on fine oraganisational skills and management.
Who is ready on Day One?

Posted by: rastignax | February 15, 2008 8:08 AM | Report abuse

Rep. John Lewis is protecting his political career. His seat in Georgia's 5th Congressional District is considered to be a "safe" one, but if Lewis does not bend to the will of his constituents and back Senator Obama, then he has a weak spot and some eager upstart with a lot of pretty rhetoric may use his support of Senator Clinton to cast Lewis as being old school and out of touch with the will of the people.

Lewis is a venerable and wise man; but he is also an astute politician and I truly believe that his now endorsement of Obama is a skillful chess move that is more about Lewis maintaining his congressional seat, than it being about him really believing Obama is a better candidate than Clinton.

Beni Dakar
Duluth, GA

Posted by: wedaconnectionmoderator | February 15, 2008 8:07 AM | Report abuse

Obama wins red states and HRC wins blue states. What do super delegates want? A President or to preserve their on seat or is it seat at the table? It's obvious that they will choose self preservation first and just hope it turns out right. And if not, so what. They still get to come to the party and eat and drink for free.

Posted by: keithcoones | February 15, 2008 8:06 AM | Report abuse

The articles about "how to fix" Hillary's campaign miss a crucial point. If Hillary can answer the Mitt Romney challenge she can turn things around. Romney stated the unspoken fear of MOST Americans "The prospect of Bill Clinton running around the White House with nothing to do [and with young females around] is not one I relish." Hillary has experience by osmosis and her pre-Senator experience is bad -- Hillarycare, Pork Belly Futures, Whitewater Billing Records, an alleged affair with Foster. All that can be forgiven if she TELLS US what she will do with Bill. The uncertainty about Bill [and about Bill's ability to weigh Hillary down emotionally] is sitting unspoken in every voter's mind. All Al Queda has to do is plant a few beautiful and available females in an HRC White House to capture Bill's affections and create a nasty distraction for Hillary. With HRC emotionally screwed up at that point all of the US is vulnerable. The key to a future HRC presidency is knowing what with be done with Bill. {I recommend ambassador to Russia}

--


Posted by: lissack | February 15, 2008 7:58 AM | Report abuse

Well it would help things immensely if Jesse Jackson, Jr. would stop issuing threats:

"[Rep. Emanuel Cleaver of Missouri] said Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. of Illinois had recently asked him "if it comes down to the last day and you're the only superdelegate? ... Do you want to go down in history as the one to prevent a black from winning the White House?

"I told him I'd think about it," Cleaver concluded.

"Jackson, an Obama supporter, confirmed the conversation, and said the dilemma may pose a career risk for some black politicians. "Many of these guys have offered their support to Mrs. Clinton, but Obama has won their districts. So you wake up without the carpet under your feet. You might find some young primary challenger placing you in a difficult position" in the future, he added. ... .."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080215/ap_on_el_pr/clinton_superdelegates_6;_ylt=ApeAuR7qy3M.kGJ6rUOZk50E1vAI

This is the scorched earth politics that Obama uses to insure he wins, people. Now his national co-chair is outright threatening African American lawmakers currently supporting Hillary Clinton.

The story being told through the Obama campaign is that Rep. John Lewis and others should be influenced to lean towards Obama out of racial solidarity.

And they have the chutzpah to complain that the Clintons are "race baiting." The audacity.

Posted by: cab91 | February 15, 2008 7:57 AM | Report abuse

When the vote gets tough, Obama votes "Present". Can you vote "present" as the Chief Executive? After all the negative stories about Hillary, will the media ever run a negative story about Obama? Can you really be called a uniter if you demonize members of your own party?

Posted by: hdimig | February 15, 2008 7:54 AM | Report abuse

John 5750, that has the be the STUPIDEST comment I have EVER heard from a Democrat. You are delusional. Hillary is dodne, stick a fork in her. What she is doing now is not what is best for America and YOU KNOW IT. Stop trying to perpetuate the us vs. then nonsense that the Republicans have created.

"Only a Clinton can clean up a Bush mess as bad as this one. It's the economy, stupid."

Posted by: King3 | February 15, 2008 7:52 AM | Report abuse

I hope this country and its intelligent, honest, hard working people don't allow the Clintons (and I mean both) the steal the Democratic nomination for Obama, with their political schemes and lies. I'm embarrassed to call Bill Clinton our past President.

Posted by: nscheidel | February 15, 2008 7:47 AM | Report abuse

Looks like jbh13 has given us the first pathetic attempt by the swift boaters this year.

My guess is it won't be the last.

They love their free speech, don't they?

Posted by: steveboyington | February 15, 2008 7:42 AM | Report abuse

seandeason:

Yep, we are just hopeless hopemongers.

Posted by: zbob99 | February 15, 2008 7:41 AM | Report abuse

Listening to Hillary's speeches these days, it seems her counter to Obamas "hope" speech is that we should give up on "hope and aspirations" we shouldn't aspire to greatness but instead settle for more of the same from the Bush/Clinton power monopoly. she fails to remember that this country was founded on "hope". From the pilgrims making their way across oceans, to our revolt against the British empire, to our explorations out west. Even our journey to the moon was based on "hope". And now she expects us to just roll over and abandon it?

Posted by: seandeason | February 15, 2008 7:39 AM | Report abuse

Won't it be interesting that after winning a war to change the establishment, the establishment turns around and steal the verdict for its preferred candidate.

It will also be the end of the Democratic party if it ever came to that!

Posted by: kwakuazar | February 15, 2008 7:31 AM | Report abuse

That's ok, Hillary always gets rid of token minorities when she's used them up. At least this gentlemen will get out before Hillary runs over him. Senorita Solis wasn't so lucky however (from the Wall Street Journal):

Ms. Solis Doyle recently returned home after two months on the road to find a family accustomed to her absence, she told colleagues. When her 6-year-old son cried out one night recently, he rebuffed his mom, saying, "I want Daddy." Ms. Solis Doyle flew out of the room in tears and told her husband: "Joey doesn't want me. S- this campaign, I'm quitting."

Ha, ha!

Go Obama!

Posted by: afgooey74 | February 15, 2008 7:27 AM | Report abuse

Lewis just got tired of defending the indefensible, that's all.

He woke up, like the rest of us did, after NH. The Clintons have exposed themselves to be the fakes the Republicans always said they were.

And who would know better than them?

Posted by: nads1 | February 15, 2008 7:23 AM | Report abuse

Clinton supporters who repeatedly chant the "no substance/no experience" mantra about Obama:

1. Read his books.

2. Go to his web site and read his plans/positions on all the issues.

3. Scroll back up and read cakemanjb's post.

Before mindlessly repeating what you hear or read from the Clinton campaign and supporters and nameless "political operatives," exert a little effort and educate yourself. What you will find is an intelligent, thoughtful individual who has worked hard and overcome many disadvantages to get where he is. He has gotten his hands dirty working in poor communities, given up lucrative legal jobs to represent the disadvantaged, and built a record of solid accomplishment during his 11 years in elective office, often by bringing members of both parties together.

By contrast, Sen. Clinton's alleged "35 years" of "experience" consist of a year or so working for children's rights -- for which she is to be commended -- followed by 17 years of law practice at the Rose Law Firm in Arkansas, representing corporations and sitting on corporate boards. This included the board of WalMart, where she sat mute while WalMart fought unionization of its employees. This extended right up to the Clintons' move to the White House in 1993. Her public policy experience pretty much consists of the failed attempt to reform the health-care system, which was doomed by her insular, paranoid, my-way-or-the-highway mismanagement of the process.

Obama or Clinton to change the tone and help us recover from the disasters of the past 8 years (brought on, in part, by Bill Clinton's inexcusable behavior)?

No contest.

Posted by: jac13 | February 15, 2008 7:23 AM | Report abuse

Doesn't really matter if it's Clinton or Obama. They will both send this country in a direction from which it may never recover.

Posted by: JoeDon | February 15, 2008 7:18 AM | Report abuse

So Congressman Jackson is threatening the black caucus? That is the gist of his comments. So who is playing the race card now? And when will he hear about it from the press? I'd say this was pretty reprehensible behavior from Mr. Jackson and should be repudiated by all of us.

Posted by: baptisa77ohio | February 15, 2008 7:15 AM | Report abuse

Don't count on MI or FL to save Hillary's arse. Even if they are counted she would only get about a 50 net gain in pledged delegates. Obama is already 125 ahead today and that will grow on Tuesday. And don't count on TX and OH either. The polls are rapidly closing. In fact there are early reports that a Rasmussen overnight TX poll was looking very good for Obama. It will be released later today. It's over folks.

Posted by: zbob99 | February 15, 2008 7:10 AM | Report abuse

From the NYT article:

"In recent days, there is a sense of movement and a sense of spirit," said Mr. Lewis, a Georgia Democrat who endorsed Mrs. Clinton last fall. "Something is happening in America, and people are prepared and ready to make that great leap. I've been very impressed with the campaign of Senator Obama, He's getting better and better every single day."

Though Mr. Lewis had praise for Mrs. Clinton and for her historic candidacy, he said he could decide within days whether to formally endorse Mr. Obama.

=========

Sounds like it is just a matter of time before Lewis makes it formal and then the end will be near for Ms Clinton and her campaign.

Posted by: zbob99 | February 15, 2008 7:01 AM | Report abuse

Obama basically wants to disenfranchise Florida's and Michigan's voters and delegates. The DNC in those states broke a rule and the party judged by giving the voters and delegates the death penalty basically stripping them of their rights and voices in this all important primary. The voters still went to the polls in record number and voted anyway, and that says alot about them. Obama should be for re-instating these votes or at least for a month of campaigning and a new polling date. Democrats do not stand for disenfranchising voters and taking away their rights to vote and for their votes to COUNT. I think it is quite obvious why Obama is against it, because he knows they all voted for Hillary. Obama is a hypocrite and self serving, honest question, if they were all black voters voting for him what do you think he would have to say about it then? As a life long Democrat, I will NEVER vote for this guy, he is a liar, a hypocrite and a charlatan.

Hillary All the Way.

Posted by: Hillary08 | February 15, 2008 6:56 AM | Report abuse

Sounds like John had made up his mind but Clinton's "convinced" him to keep quiet.

Posted by: zbob99 | February 15, 2008 6:46 AM | Report abuse

To Ms. Kornblut: I don't recall Congressman Lewis ever saying he was unhappy with various allegedly racially tinged remarks supposedly made by the Clinton campaign. In fact, he went on the PBS NewsHour to defend her:

"It is unfortunate that people have tried to distort what Mrs. Clinton had to say about Dr. King," "I think there has been a deliberate and systematic attempt by some people in the Obama campaign to really fan the flames about race and to really distort what Senator Clinton said. I understood and I think most right thinking people understood what she said.

"President and Senator Clinton have a record, a history, a very long history of bringing people together. No right thinking American would ever think that Senator or President Clinton would ever do anything that would use the race card"

Unless you have information to the contrary, I suggest you correct your article.

Posted by: orange2299 | February 15, 2008 5:24 AM | Report abuse

A FACT PEOPLE SEEM TO FORGET:

AMERICANS DO NOT ELECT AN ANTI-WAR PRESIDENT.

Posted by: jbh13 | February 15, 2008 5:05 AM | Report abuse

small correction:

I meant to say "Enjoy it WHILE you can, Obama."

Posted by: jbh13 | February 15, 2008 5:03 AM | Report abuse

If the Barack Obama wagon train is able to coast to the Democratic presidential nomination without returning to specific issues and public policy priorities of the sort that it stressed in the early stages of this campaign, then this articulate "New Populism" candidate, while drawing large and enthusiastic crowds, could still lose to a flexible Republican named McCain in the same way that the great speaker William Jennings Bryan, while attracting large and supportive crowds on the campaign trail a century ago, still lost to a pliant Republican named McKinley.

David P. McKnight
Durham, N.C.

Posted by: Proctor2 | February 15, 2008 5:02 AM | Report abuse

I agree with gmundenat: Senator Clinton has started some kind of weird arm-waving thing during her speeches that is very close to self-parody. Such dramatic gestures will get her a spot on William Shatner's next TV series if she loses this race, though.

Has anyone else noticed that when Sen. Clinton comes into a campaign event, there is often a moment as she takes the stage that she seems greatly surprised, as if she recognizes someone in the crowd she hasn't seen for years. She is so glad to see this person, she waves enthusiastically in that person's direction, she points, often with both hands, and she gives a great big smile.

I know there are scores of reporters with Hillary all the time. My job for one of them: Find out who these surprise guests are who so gladden the candidate. How do they get there? What have they done to win such affection from her? How often does this happen?

Posted by: wesfromGA | February 15, 2008 4:39 AM | Report abuse

Jesse Jackson's comments was that any Black superdelegates who did not support Barak Obama might find a young Black candidate well financed to challenge them in their next election.

And several superdelegates have confirmed that he said exactly those words to them.

Everybody got that? JJJr told them vote Obama or else.

Obama better take care of this or his campaign will be seriously damaged by Jackson's behavior.

If Obama says nothing, it speaks VOLUMES about his tactics and his lack of integrity.

Posted by: auntmo9990 | February 15, 2008 02:12 AM

__________________________________________

BLACK PEOPLE DON'T CARE WHAT JESSIE JACKSON AND AL SHARPTON HAVE TO SAY. WE CAN'T STAND EITHER.

THEY ARE BLACK LEADERS IN THEIR OWN MINDS.

Posted by: MsRita | February 15, 2008 4:04 AM | Report abuse

Hillary needs to stop with that out-stretched arm during her speaches...Looks like an endomorph version of some North Korean statue.

Posted by: gmundenat | February 15, 2008 3:36 AM | Report abuse

Senator Obama --During the first eight years of Senator Obama's elected service he sponsored over 820 bills. He introduced:
233 regarding healthcare reform,
125 on poverty and public assistance,
112 crime fighting bills,
97 economic bills,
60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,
21 ethics reform bills,
15 gun control,
6 veterans affairs and many others.
His first year in the U.S. Senate, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427. These included:
- the Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 (became law),
- The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act, (became law),
- The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, passed the Senate,
- The 2007 Government Ethics Bill, (became law),
- The Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill, (In committee)
Senator Clinton -- Senator Clinton's, who has served only one full term (6yrs.), and another year campaigning, has managed to author and pass into law, (20) twenty pieces of legislation.
1. Establish the Kate Mullany National Historic Site.
2. Support the goals and ideals of Better Hearing and Speech Month.
3. Recognize the Ellis Island Medal of Hon
4. Name courthouse after Thurgood Marshall.
5. Name courthouse after James L. Watson.
6. Name post office after Jonn A. O'Shea.
7. Designate Aug. 7, 2003, as National Purple Heart Recognition Day.
8. Support the goals and ideals of National Purple Heart Recognition Day.
9. Honor the life and legacy of Alexander Hamilton on the bicentennial of his death.
10. Congratulate the Syracuse Univ. Orange Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.
11. Congratulate the Le Moyne College Dolphins Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.
12. Establish the 225th Anniversary of the American Revolution Commemorative Program.
13. Name post office after Sergeant Riayan A. Tejeda.
14. Honor Shirley Chisholm for her service to the nation and express condolences on her death.
15. Honor John J. Downing, Brian Fahey, and Harry Ford, firefighters who lost their lives on duty.
Only five of Senator Clinton's bills are more substantive:
16. Extend period of unemployment assistance to victims of 9/11.
17. Pay for city projects in response to 9/11
18. Assist landmine victims in other countries.
19. Assist family caregivers in accessing affordable respite care.
20. Designate part of the National Forest System in Puerto Rico as protected in the wilderness preservation system.

In Conclusion, you now have the facts straight from the Senate Records vault.

Posted by: cakemanjb | February 15, 2008 3:16 AM | Report abuse

HOPE doesn't stop the bank from foreclosing on your home, HOPE doesn't pay your medical bills because you're uninsured, HOPE doesn't end the war in Iraq and or help the situation in Afghanistan, HOPE doesn't ease the tension in Pakistan or resolve the fighting between the Palestinian's and the Israel's. HOPE doesn't restore our reputation throughout the world nor does it eradicate the looming recession and our trillion dollar deficit or fix our depleted military. HOPING Baraka Obama can solve any of this is like HOPING you'll hit the lottery!

Posted by: BJGRASER | February 15, 2008 3:15 AM | Report abuse

Also, now that I'm reading it again, you're even further wrong.

The ONLY thing Jesse Jackson said to Cleaver was the paragraph in italics above.

The stuff about "the carpet under your feet" and young primary challengers was said TO THE AP REPORTER, not Cleaver.

Please, get your facts straight.

Posted by: kevincmurphy | February 15, 2008 2:25 AM | Report abuse

Ok, auntmo9990, you're now officially lying. Jesse Jackson said nothing about financing anybody. The quote you're referring to is here:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080215/ap_on_el_pr/clinton_superdelegates_6;_ylt=ApeAuR7qy3M.kGJ6rUOZk50E1vAI

Here's the pertinent graphs:

"He said Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. of Illinois had recently asked him "if it comes down to the last day and you're the only superdelegate? ... Do you want to go down in history as the one to prevent a black from winning the White House?

"I told him I'd think about it," Cleaver concluded.

Jackson, an Obama supporter, confirmed the conversation, and said the dilemma may pose a career risk for some black politicians. "Many of these guys have offered their support to Mrs. Clinton, but Obama has won their districts. So you wake up without the carpet under your feet. You might find some young primary challenger placing you in a difficult position" in the future, he added.

There is no mention at all of financing candidates there. What Jesse Jackson said is abundantly obvious to every single politician out there. If 80% of your constituency disagree with you on an important issue, that's room for a primary competitor to flourish.

There is absolutely no mention of financing. So, please, stop shading the truth. We're all going to be on the same team eventually...sooner rather than later, in fact.

Posted by: kevincmurphy | February 15, 2008 2:22 AM | Report abuse

Jesse Jackson's comments was that any Black superdelegates who did not support Barak Obama might find a young Black candidate well financed to challenge them in their next election.

And several superdelegates have confirmed that he said exactly those words to them.

Everybody got that? JJJr told them vote Obama or else.

Obama better take care of this or his campaign will be seriously damaged by Jackson's behavior.

If Obama says nothing, it speaks VOLUMES about his tactics and his lack of integrity.

Posted by: auntmo9990 | February 15, 2008 2:12 AM | Report abuse

MsAh1on1,

Barack Obama is the same age as Bill Clinton was in 1992.

And I'm not jumping on a bandwagon. I've supported Sen. Obama for over a year now. He's the more progressive, more principled, more inspiring, and more electable candidate. I'm sure you disagree, and that's your prerogative, but it doesn't mean we people who support Obama have been duped.

Posted by: kevincmurphy | February 15, 2008 2:10 AM | Report abuse

john5750, Clinton could win all of those states and still be down in delegates. Even her own campaign is conceding they'll come in 2nd in pledged delegates.

The writing is on the wall.

Posted by: kevincmurphy | February 15, 2008 2:04 AM | Report abuse

I see the marching orders went out from TalkLeft and related sources, but news flash: Jesse Jackson wasn't threatening black delegates. In fact, he was saying anything that [a] those supers didn't already know and [b] wasn't reported in The New Republic this morning. (http://tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=22eab0c0-de64-4933-9f0d-0fa76f2358e1)

Black, white, latino, or asian: If 80% of your constituents disagree with you on a major issue, you're leaving yourself open to a primary challenger. That isn't a threat. It's a political fact.

And, trust me, the Clintons are employing similar political facts in their own discussions with supers.

Posted by: kevincmurphy | February 15, 2008 2:02 AM | Report abuse

I can't believe people would rather jump on a bandwagon instead of standing by their beliefs. Everybody else is voting for Obama, so why not me, right? That's how Bush got elected and look where what happened. Remember all of his promises? Bring integrity back to the White House? Now, Obama is is shouting CHANGE. How much change can he really do when you've got a congress made up of Democrats AND Republicans. So, we already know he's shouting to the wind. How long, how many times can somebody play the same game on you before you realize that you've been bamboozled by another inexperienced smooth-talker? Obama is two years older than I am. He hasn't lived long enough or worked long enough to run a country or handle foreign affairs. He doesn't represent a CHANGE from Bush. They are both drastically inexperienced. And, the closest thing that we will see as far as a change will be to go from bad to worse. This is about what's right for the country as a whole. And, it is just not Obama's time.

Posted by: MsAh1on1 | February 15, 2008 1:57 AM | Report abuse

Obama is just riding high while he can, for the next couple of weeks. Then Hillary wins TX, OH, WI, and PA, and it's all hers. So, Obama may as well enjoy it while he can. Only a Clinton can clean up a Bush mess as bad as this one. It's the economy, stupid.

Posted by: john5750 | February 15, 2008 1:57 AM | Report abuse

Jesse Jackson Jr is threatening Black superdelegates that if they don't vote for Obama, there may be young Black candidates to compete for their elective offices in the next election?

Is this the same Jesse Jackson Jr who said the day after Clinton's New Hampshire win that she didn't cry after Katrina?

Jesse Jackson Jr is playing the race card AGAIN, and no one calls him out on it?

You'd think Obama would have the integrity to do so, but it appears he doesn't.

That tells me everything I need to know about Barak Obama.

No thanks.

Posted by: auntmo9990 | February 15, 2008 1:23 AM | Report abuse

Anne PLEASE you have lost all journalistic principles. Why not call yourself a rumor mill and be done with it! Join the cast and crew of those who skipped that day in school and morality and just admit you are a hack!!!
Not one single source of evidence. In fact you have dismissive evidence. So why did you write the piece? WHY!!

Posted by: ricksramblings | February 15, 2008 1:21 AM | Report abuse

SuperDelegates are people too and see perhaps the writing on the wall, such as:

Obama vs. McCain- and the winner is...
http://newsusa.myfeedportal.com/viewarticle.php?articleid=48

Posted by: davidmwe | February 15, 2008 1:08 AM | Report abuse

Sen.Clinton is warning voters about politicians who give great speeches and make big promises but ultimately do not deliver on them.

Wow. Is she directing this comment at the President?

Posted by: Iwantmyvoicetobeheard | February 15, 2008 12:36 AM | Report abuse

Patton said, "Americans will not tolerate a loser". Obama is a winner..8 in a row. Hilary, this isn't about you, this is about whats best for America and the Democratic Party. With Bill as an ex-prez, you as a powerful Senator and Obama as president, just think of the positive changes you could make. Let's Stop the Drama, Vote Obama!!

Posted by: thebobbob | February 15, 2008 12:33 AM | Report abuse

It's over. Rep. Lewis is just the first. The Democratic Party will never have the will of it's voters overturned by superdelegates.--Especially after 2000. Hillary heretofor thought she was an exception. She is not. It's over.

Posted by: gmundenat | February 15, 2008 12:31 AM | Report abuse

Curiouser and curiouser.

Posted by: kevincmurphy | February 15, 2008 12:27 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company