Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Obama Camp Tries to Set Expectations for Potomac Primary


Barack Obama acknowledges the crowd at Tulane University Fogelman Arena February 7, 2008 in New Orleans. (Getty Images.)

By Shailagh Murray
NEW ORLEANS -- Although Sen. Barack Obama had long been viewed as the favorite in all three of Tuesday's "Chesapeake" or "Potomac" primaries, campaign manager David Plouffe said the landscape has changed now that Hillary Clinton appears to be making a strong play for Virginia, tapping the outer counties of Northern Virginia and working-class white areas farther west. "They clearly see Virginia as a must-win for their campaign," Plouffe said. "We think it's going to be a very competitive race."

Obama and Clinton will both speak at the Jefferson-Jackson Day dinner in Richmond on Saturday night, the beginning of a two-day sprint through the region. Obama is expected to campaign in all three locales on Sunday and Monday, but his schedule remains in flux. The Illinois senator is busy blitzing Washington, Louisiana, Nebraska and Maine, which have contests this weekend, before he turns east.

Plouffe conceded that Virginia also is strong Obama turf, given its large African American population, ample stock of high-income voters in the Arlington and Fairfax areas, bumper crop of colleges and universities, and support of influential Democrats like Gov. Timothy Kaine and Reps. Robert C. Scott and Rick Boucher. Boucher is campaigning for Obama in his southwestern district, and who has predicted Obama will beat Clinton in that mostly white corner of the state.

"We're both going to get a lot of the vote," Plouffe predicted. "They think they've got a lot of strengths in certain parts of the state. ... We're just hoping to end up on the high side of delegates by the end of Tuesday night."

By Web Politics Editor  |  February 7, 2008; 1:19 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Romney Ends Presidential Bid
Next: John McCain's Perfect Ride

Comments

Hillary and her hacks are just pushing more of the same. War backers will not will the party's nomination!! Memo to Hillary: You are not entitled to the White House. She needs to show some grace and see the handwriting on the wall before the party is damaged.

Posted by: gmundenat | February 11, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

To the individual who wrote that Clinton has a better chance of beating McCain than Obama...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_clinton-224.html

In hypothetical match-ups between McCain vs Obama and McCain vs Hillary, Obama wins, Hillary loses. Even in California, which Hillary won in the primary, Hillary and McCain are in dead heat, while Obama beats McCain by 7 points. Interesting.

Posted by: ColleenH1983 | February 11, 2008 10:38 AM | Report abuse

To: SeedofChange;

YOU ARE PLUMB CRAZY!

Posted by: aaronr | February 10, 2008 11:58 PM | Report abuse

I thought this needed to be said because it is further proof of how substantative Obama is compared to the fraud Hillary Clinton. I am tired of uninformed voters and HRC campaign posers trying to distort the facts? Please read the following information gathered from the Library of Congress. Feel free to check these records for yourself; better still, read a little more, and try and stay current before posting assinine comments:

Clinton v. Obama on Legislative Experience:
Senator Clinton, 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 in her first six years. These bills can be found on the website of the Library of Congress (www.thomas.loc.gov), but to save you trouble, I'll post them here for you: 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 Honor. 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 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.
There you have it, the fact's straight from the Senate Record.
Now, I would post those of Obama's, but the list is too substantive, so I'll mainly categorize.

During the first (8) eight months of his 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 inculded **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), and many more. In all since he entered the U.S. Senate, Senator Obama has written 890 bills and co-sponsored another 1096. An impressive record, for someone who supposedly has no legislative record. . . . My last point: Obama needs name recognition, he needs to be among the people, so people feel like they have access to him. HRC's debate challenge is more about the fact that her campaign is running low on money and she gets free air-time without spending anything. Would you give up the chance to see 20,000 voters up close and personal to be on a televised debate? No way! Obama, stick to your guns. Debate on your terms, not Hillary's! Go Obama 2008!

Posted by: qlinderman10 | February 10, 2008 3:06 PM | Report abuse

I agree with happyroad2destiny's comment above this one. It really IS a sad day when complex issues of concern to everyone in this country are reduced to formulaic jingoisms that attack race and gender, not to mention repeating lies that are just incredibly false and defaming. All of those comment types are represented here.

To those who threaten to vote for McCain if Hillary isn't the nominee, I say "fine", and also would you mind keeping the names of the future dead, maimed and homeless soldiers in your prayer book for them?

To those who threaten to vote for McCain if Obama isn't the nominee, I say "fine", and also would you mind forking up your job and savings to pay for the war in Iraq AND Iran that will ensue?

I have a preference for a candidate in the primaries, but above everything else, I have a preference for the end of eight years of Republican tyranny, and I will absolutely NOT vote for any candidate other than the Democratic candidate in this election. If it's Hillary, I hope enough pressure can be brought to bear on her to end the folly in Iraq and stay away from Iran. But one way or the other, I will do whatever I can with my writing, my money and my time to see to it that we do not elect another Republican in November, and further to see that another election is not stolen like the last two have been.

Posted by: DrumsNWhistles | February 10, 2008 2:12 AM | Report abuse

I agree with happyroad2destiny's comment above this one. It really IS a sad day when complex issues of concern to everyone in this country are reduced to formulaic jingoisms that attack race and gender, not to mention repeating lies that are just incredibly false and defaming. All of those comment types are represented here.

To those who threaten to vote for McCain if Hillary isn't the nominee, I say "fine", and also would you mind keeping the names of the future dead, maimed and homeless soldiers in your prayer book for them?

To those who threaten to vote for McCain if Obama isn't the nominee, I say "fine", and also would you mind forking up your job and savings to pay for the war in Iraq AND Iran that will ensue?

I have a preference for a candidate in the primaries, but above everything else, I have a preference for the end of eight years of Republican tyranny, and I will absolutely NOT vote for any candidate other than the Democratic candidate in this election. If it's Hillary, I hope enough pressure can be brought to bear on her to end the folly in Iraq and stay away from Iran. But one way or the other, I will do whatever I can with my writing, my money and my time to see to it that we do not elect another Republican in November, and further to see that another election is not stolen like the last two have been.

Posted by: DrumsNWhistles | February 10, 2008 2:11 AM | Report abuse

it's a sad day in America when we as American's go for the jugular and character assassinate each other's party, race, sex or religious beliefs. Dem or Rep - we need to get back to basics and remember we are first and foremost AMERICAN'S and see if we can practice bipartisanship and unity. We look to our leaders to make us bipartisan, but yet we don't practice ourselves.

Try "let it begin with me" and don't wait until there is a Dem or a Rep in the White House before we start behaving as one nation. Let's practice being American's, get some backbone for once and start behaving like adults. We can't expect one man or woman to change our attitudes. We must do our part first. Otherwise it won't matter who gets into the White House, because you can't lead mules to drink the water once they get there if they are stubborn and unwilling to participate in getting along and playing nice across party lines. The day we start remembering we are American's and stop the divisions is the day this country will once again turn itself around. Stop thinking one person will make a difference - stop being complacent and lazy and expecting others to do what you yourself need to do first - behave, play nice and get your own house in order first - stop excessive spending, take care of your families, reach out to help those around you and stop complaining about the state of the nation that we all got ourselves into by being irresponsible and blaming others for our own errors in judgement. It's time to grow up America - to get along and participate by voting not only for one person to fix it all, but to vote on the issues at hand and be involved in your own communities first. If everyone cleans up their own back yard first, the whole country will be alot better off, than if we sit in our filth and denial and expect someone else to clean up after us.

Posted by: happyroad2destiny | February 9, 2008 11:16 PM | Report abuse

If the fact that blacks vote for Obama is a manifestation of racism, can we conclude that the fact that women of a certain age vote more for Hillary a manifestation of sexism? Can we conclude that an educated person voting for an educated person is commiting 'social classism'. Can we conclude that people using their own Identity as a gradating tool when they vote are exercising their own judgement based on their values!? Can we accuse people of having a positive perception of the groups they identify themselves to? Can we accuse people of not having our identity?

Posted by: hsibomana | February 9, 2008 11:02 PM | Report abuse

HOPE is FREEDOM from FEAR.

Posted by: merrilyiroll | February 9, 2008 10:58 PM | Report abuse

Beginning as a Clinton partisan, the more I listen to Obama the more I prefer him. Hillary just doesn't reach me like Obama does. I particularly like the sounds of one who is critical of Iraq and the Free Trade job losses to foreign countries plus the favoritism shown to companies that in turn, move manufacturing plants away from American labor. Principle counts for more to me than political maneuvering. Hillary's Iraq vote, compared to Obama's, is incriminating for her. Obama for President; Clinton for Vice President.

Posted by: naahbob | February 9, 2008 10:49 PM | Report abuse

This country is ours. It's time to take it back.

GO OBAMA!!!!!!

Posted by: mrhamham | February 9, 2008 9:01 PM | Report abuse

if oboma wins consider another democrat voting republican

Posted by: ernestto25 | February 9, 2008 8:02 PM | Report abuse

Georgiapeac21556,

Obama has been to Iraq. I met him in Israel in January 2006 when he stopped there on his way back from a trip to Iraq. Please get your facts straight!

Posted by: travel590 | February 9, 2008 4:09 PM | Report abuse

Regarding Experience...

Senator Clinton, 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 in her first six years. These bills can be found on the website of the Library of Congress (www.thomas.loc.gov), but to save you trouble, I'll post them here for you.
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 Honor.
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 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.
There you have it, the fact's straight from the Senate Record.
Now, I would post those of Obama's, but the list is too substantive, so I'll mainly categorize.
During the first (8) eight years of his 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), and many more.

In all since enter the U.S. Senate, Senator Obama has written 890 bills and co-sponsored another 1096. An impressive record.

Posted by: starbuck1 | February 9, 2008 2:27 PM | Report abuse

why is it not called racist when whites support or endorse a white candidate yet it is called racist or 'played the race card' when blacks support a black candidate????? ewwwww---yet another double standard?

Posted by: trhquinton | February 9, 2008 9:55 AM | Report abuse

why is it not called racist when whites support or endorse a white candidate yet it is called racist or 'played the race card' when blacks support a black candidate????? ewwwww---yet another double standard?

Posted by: trhquinton | February 9, 2008 9:55 AM | Report abuse

dreamer, Are you saying that because Obama is half African American you will only vote for a whole white American?
I think you need change.

Posted by: scoates8 | February 9, 2008 2:05 AM | Report abuse

[Note: I apologize if this is a repost (browser crashed during post operation.]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

thomasmwall @ 06:07 PM:

I commend your remarks. I just have one little disagreement with you: I perceive the situation regarding supporters' behavior as being the *exact opposite* of what you describe!

There have been studies that showed how political contests essentially 'shut down' areas in the brain that relate to analytical thinking (I'm sorry, I don't remember the researchers/institutions involved). Basically, partisans were shown pairs of contradictory statements, some made by their candidate's opponent, others by their own candidate. Respondents were found to react critically, calling the opponent a hypocrite, for example, after reading their statements. In contrast, after reading a pair of incongruous statements attributed to their own candidate, the test subjects attempted to explain away the contradictions, bending over backwards to rationalize and defend their champion's words.

As an Obama supporter, I have been shocked and upset by comments made by some Hillary supporters. Some are no doubt written by Republicans, but many are not. I have also been dismayed and angered by some Obama supporters/ Republicans(?) remarks, too. I think the rhetoric on both sides has gotten overheated and often despicably nasty. I confess to joining in the unhelpful rhetoric. I am only human, but I must strive to do better.

I don't know what the solution is, other than to continue to call people out on it -- politely -- when it happens, or to just stop reading the comments at some venues (Huffington Post, I'm looking at you!). I hate to do the latter, because I love the dialog, at least when it's constructive. The greater the dialog, the greater the Democracy.

One thing I think is the most important of all, is to try with all one's heart not to confuse the supporters' nastiness with their candidate's views. I have to keep reminding myself that Hillary Clinton is not a racist, or anti-Muslim bigot, just because I happened to come across several racist, "HUSSEIN Obama" posts in a row; nor are the vast majority of her supporters. Likewise, I hope that you, and other Hillary voters, won't take the vicious, divisive rants of some Obama 'supporters' as proof that he is lying when he says that he wants to unite people. It's hard to filter out the ugliness, but I hope we can.

Because I sure as h3ll don't want to see a President McCain.

Posted by: psyberdawg | February 9, 2008 1:59 AM | Report abuse

For all you truth sekers about Obama's true record, whether his supporters or hillary's please view the following.

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

Posted by: rayacop | February 8, 2008 9:49 PM | Report abuse

Can someone please explain to me why it becomes a race issue when there's talk that African Americans will vote for Obama.

My God, for years and years, the African American community has voted overwhemingly for Democrats -- Clinton, Carter, Gore, Kerry -- you didn't hear anyone talking about the race issue.

But here comes a viable African American candidate, who is capable of being president, and now everyone wants to talk jibberish.

If Barack Obama was not up to the task of holding the presidency, it would be one thing. But the man is fully qualified, so what's wrong with African Americans giving their vote. But it is not just African American, it is across the board.

I don't recall African Americans flooding the gates to give Al Sharpton these record numbers of votes when he ran.

Please, people stop this ugliness. Many of the young people in this country are trying to move beyond these draconian thoughts.

The media is no help either. It contributes to this divisiveness.

Posted by: askpeabody | February 8, 2008 8:46 PM | Report abuse

I just love this debate and this process, and honestly believe that this discussion has been and will continue to be good for the Democratic party and for the nation as a whole... it seems to me that too often, this whole process is rushed and we end up dissatisfied with all of the candidates.
At least this time we have some real choices to make that are not simply symbolic. For the first time in years, I will not be voting against the Republican candidate.

That said, although I support Hillary for the nomination, I do like Obama tremendously. I can state right now thaqt I will absolutely support and vote for either candidate if they become the nominee.

One of the things that I just don't understand, though, is why so many Obama supporters are so negative and nasty towards Clinton. I just don't get how a self-proclaimed "movement" that has set its sights on change and hope can attack Hillary with such gusto and vehemence.

These attacks and this intense negativity towards Hillary is making me doubt the Obama camp's sincerity. How can you profess to stand for hope and change while viciously attacking someone like Hillary Clinton, who has a long and distinguished record of service and patriotism?

Also troubling to me is the petulant suggestion that Obama supporters would not support Hillary in a general election. This, also, strikes me as more of the same. That is a childish and dangerous thing to say.

Obama supporters should be careful to not undermine their candidate's message of optimism and hope, and they should also be willing to act maturely and with unity in the event that Hillary wins.

To conclude with a few good old aphorisms - talk is cheap, folks, and actions speak a lot louder than words. Obama supporters should start acting the part, lest their rhetoric be revealed as empty and meaningless.

Posted by: thomasmwall | February 8, 2008 6:07 PM | Report abuse

Barack Obama is a media darling. He's a great orator, the young people love him. He's leading them like the Pied Piper. If he gets the Democratic nomination, you will see just as many disenfranchised Hillary supporters going Republican as the Obama people have threatened to if she is nominated. He is NO JFK. John Kennedy had experience and intelligence and had been exposed to international politics at a young age. He fought in World War II. While they are smiling and cocking their mooney heads and calling Barack the next JFK, they forget when they were throwing rocks at Jack for his playboy antics in the Whitehouse and for his use of medications. Well, I love him, he was brilliant and flawed.
It's time to wake up. I think now we just better get used to John McCain.

Posted by: csherman6369 | February 8, 2008 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Bottom Line:

Like all of you. I know that health care is the most critical, and important issue facing the American people. Now, and in the coming elections. And like the vast majority of the American people, I want HR 676 (Medicare For All) passed into law NOW! "Single payer, Tax Supported, Not For Profit, True Universal Health Care" free for all as a right. Like every other developed country in the world has. See: http://www.house.gov/conyers/news_hr676.htm

"HR 676:
For church goers: less money to insur. companies and more to the church- lots more.
Srs on Medicare: save way over $100/wk. Because no more medigap, long term care & dental insur. needed. No more drug bills."

But if we the American people fail to bring enough pressure on our current politicians to get HR 676 passed into law before the elections. We will have to identify, and replace all the politicians standing in the way of passage of HR 676. And, I think the best first place to start is with the politicians that blocked the bipartisan SCHIP bills for the kids. Passed by congress four times.

But what about the President. It was Bush after all that blocked the bipartisan SCHIP bill passed by congress to assure more health coverage for Americas kids. So which of the presidential hopefuls do I think will be most supportive of implementing the demand of the majority of the American people to have HR 676 (Medicare For All) passed into law immediately!

We have some very fine presidential candidates who would make good presidents. But none of the top Presidential candidates directly support HR 676, the only true Universal Health Care plan. So I am supporting Hillary Clinton. She is the only top candidate that has ever actually fought for universal health care before.

I have enormous admiration, and respect for Hillary Clinton. She fought a pitched battle against overwhelming odds back in 1993. To prevent this disastrous health care crisis that is now devastating the American people, and America. She fought so hard for the American people that she risk almost completely destroying her husbands presidency. I haven't forgotten her heroic effort. If any Presidential hopeful for universal health care deserves my support, it's her.

Also, if we the American people fail to bring enough pressure on our government to give us HR 676 which we all so desperately need NOW! Then we will need the most skilled politician we can get on our side to broker the best health care plan for the American people that we can get. Though it will be less than we need, and less than we deserve. The politician I think to best do this is Hillary Clinton. The Clinton's are probably the most skilled politicians in American history.

The insurance industry, and medical industry that has been ripping you off, and killing you has given Hillary Clinton so much money because they fear her. They have also given Barack Obama so much money because they fear Hillary Clinton. They think they can manipulate Barack Obama against the best interest of the American people better than they can manipulate Hillary Clinton. There is no race issue with Hillary Clinton. The Clinton's are the poster family for how African Americans want white people to be towards African Americans.

As always, African Americans are suffering, and dieing in this health care crisis at a much higher rate than any other group in America. The last time there was any significant drop in the African American death rate was when Bill Clinton was president.

My fellow Americans, you are dieing needlessly at an astounding rate. In higher numbers than any other people in the developed world. Rich, and poor a like. Insured, and uninsured. Young, and old. Men, women, children, and babies. And we the American people must stop it. And fix it NOW! Keep Fighting!!! Never! give up hope. There are millions of lives at stake. Bless you all... You are doing great!

Posted by: JackSmith1 | February 8, 2008 4:05 PM | Report abuse

whatmeregister:

Well stated. And to add to that, barack Obama is our only chance of winning in november.

Are people not tired of Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton fatigue, l know l am. let us usher in new ideas and direction for this great country or it will seize not to be great anymore.

Let us usher in common sense, let us usher in Barack Obama!!!

Posted by: nkgilb | February 8, 2008 3:03 PM | Report abuse

Given that both Clinton and Obama have similar ideas on everything except war, we have to look at who will be able to make the difference in November. Both Clinton and McCain stand for the continuation of war in the middle east. Clinton will have a tough time to clarify her position as something different than McCains on war because they are the same. Hardcore anti-war liberals will stay home on election day if Hillary is on the ballot. Independents will go for McCain. Blacks who wanted Obama will stay home too. Leaving Clinton with very few votes in the general election.

Posted by: ChunkyMonkey1 | February 8, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Since the President of USA matters to the world, Obama is the only one who will have an effect and bring respect to your country and peace we all long for. I cannot understand what sort of intellengence level you have to critisize Obama, either you haven't read such comments by davestickler on Obama's achievements in his short time in the senate or you're too plain lazy to do your homework before you open your little heads to waste your time writing. I bet none of you could even manage a campaign as Obama has done AND all the other many achievements. I do not want to guess you are just plain jealous! Please I beg you to not only think of yourselves but think of your off-springs on what sort of America and world you want to leave behind.

Posted by: refreds | February 8, 2008 5:06 AM | Report abuse

anyone curious why she 'loaned' her campaign the money. are her donors giving her money as a loan? Hey Billary, can i 'loan' you my vote?
Oligarchy =NOdemcracy. Billary put the crown DOWN!

Posted by: teopa | February 7, 2008 11:44 PM | Report abuse

Seriously speaking
How can Sen. Clinton manage AMERICA'S economy when her own (small) campaign went into the red??? This is scary. She is very intelligent but this concerns me and it should concern her voters.

Posted by: lizdukes | February 7, 2008 11:40 PM | Report abuse

Turns out that the news about Hillary Clinton donating $5 million of her own money while her senior staffers faced a loss of their paychecks may be just a ploy to win sympathy, again.

At first, the news of Hillary's financial difficulties struck me as odd, but not because her outside funds were drying up.

After all, Barack Obama is showing us all that Hillary can't even win a fixed fight, and "smart" money is not, well, dumb.

Still I asked myself, how was it that someone of once modest means who claimed to have worked tirelessly for 35 years ("fighting for YOU!") in the notoriously badly-paid public interest sector had become so wealthy?

Sure there's been some financial scandals.

And as the late Sen. Everett Dirksen used to say, "A million here, a million there --it adds up to real money."

But why focus on the negative? What does the skelton of a scandal or six rattling around in your closet matter, when you have so much experience and a well-tested finger to the wind?

Then, suddenly, a tune entered my head and I thought, maybe if I offered a tailored version of it to the Clinton campaign, they'd use it to replace that awful Celine Dion song that used to be Hillary's campaign anthem.

(Ya know, 99.999 percent of those recently surveyed also say they prefer the Obama Girl to that uni-sex Hillary Eunuch that popped up trying to imitate her.)

Anyway, compensation shouldn't been a problem, if the most recent report that Hillary is back in the pink of financial health is true.

For sure, I wouldn't ask what account at Clintons, Inc. the money came from, or which lobbyist forked it over.

(I'm sure if it was the latter it was in a gesture of sheer generosity--why think evil of people, K Street lobbyists have hearts too, no?

(After all, wasn't it those caring medical insurance lobbyists who hired that nice couple, Harry and Louise?)

If you ask me, it's like Bill with that race card thing. How unfair those critics, who you can be sure all belonged to that Vast Rightwing Conspiracy! (And how slick he was, no? ;D )

Always leave just a little wiggle room, small enough to fit the word "is" through. (Or a cigar.)

Anyway, remember that girls' song, "It's My Party," written by Wally Gold, John Gluck and Herb Weiner and recorded by Lesley Gore?

Well how about this version for HRC?

IT'S MY (DEMOCRATIC) PARTY

Nobody knows where my Bill has gone
Monica (Gennifer/Kathleen/Paula/etc.) left the same time
Why was he holding her/their hand(s)
When he's supposed to be mine?

It's my Democratic Party, and I'll cry if I want to
Cry if I want to, cry if I want to
You would cry too if it happened to you
(For that's what victims do-o-o-o).

Playin' my constituents, flip-flopping like a Wallenda,
Leave me alone for a while
'Till Bill's dancin' with me
I've got no reason to smile

It's my Democratic Party, and I'll cry if I want to
Cry if I want to, cry if I want to
You would cry too if it happened to you.

(lead break)
Monica (Gennifer/Kathleen/Paula/etc.) and Bill just walked through the door
Like a queen(s) with her/their king
Oh what a Dogpatch surprise
Monica (Gennifer/Kathleen/Paula/etc.) is/are wearin' his ring(s)

It's my Democratic Party and I'll cry if I want to
Cry if I want to, cry if I want to
You would cry too if it happened to you. ...

Posted by: Martinedwinandersen | February 7, 2008 11:23 PM | Report abuse

As i see it, with their policies being so similar, there is only one true difference. It is philosophical. Hillary believes in 'top down' government. This is obvious in her views when she talks policy. Remember the whole 'MLK needed LBJ' approach? Obama on the other hand believes in empowerment, and isnt that really the American way? Do you think we would have gotten our independance from G. Britain by negotiation? It was won through determination by individual uniting with individual until a mighty movement became a force to be reckoned with...

Democracy not oligarchy. Billary put the crown dOWn!

Posted by: teopa | February 7, 2008 10:53 PM | Report abuse

Barry's personal problems first surfaced in 1983, with the "This Is It" scandal. Barry was accused of using cocaine at a nightclub party - though a Post inquiry showed no evidence of wrongdoing. The police department was paralyzed by conflicting reports and allegations.
Barry also was seen with various women who were not his wife, and was accused of repeatedly calling a 23-year-old model, Grace Shell. The culmination of a series of embarrassing incidents was an FBI sting that caught Barry on a videotape smoking crack cocaine at the Vista Hotel with a female acquaintance.

During his 1990 trial, Barry's lawyer, R. Kenneth Mundy, acknowledged the mayor occasionally used cocaine. Barry was convicted of one of the 14 charges pending against him - a misdemeanor charge for possessing cocaine in November 1989. Jurors acquitted him of one of the other charges - of possessing cocaine in September 1988. On the other 12 charges, jurors were so deeply and passionately divided they could not reach a verdict. "I believe [the government was] out to get Marion Barry," one juror said. U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson declared a mistrial on the 12 deadlocked charges.

The mayor was sentenced to six months in prison in October 1990, while he was in the midst of a campaign for a D.C. Council seat.

Posted by: dyck21005 | February 7, 2008 9:34 PM | Report abuse

More corrupt camp donations for Obama! WHERES THE MEDIA??? We are sick of the media pushing obama down our throats! on Oct. 5, in the aftermath of federal bribery/extortion/conspiracy/other miscellaneous badness indictments of former Dallas Mayor Pro Tem Don Hill , Obama camp supporter and financial contributor to Presidential candidate Barrack Obama who desperately wants campaign cash from another, criminal or not, Again Obama camp has its hands full with other publically indicted bankrollers Rezko. Now Mr. Hill's campaign finance report shows donations on April 28, and federal campaign finance reports indicate Mr. Obama received donations in June 22 as well. The Obama camp couldn't immediately be reached for comment Friday...Of Couse, did axelrod loose his voice?
Obama's Relationship With Rezko Goes Back 17 Years. Obama Kept Contributions From Accused Fixer's (REZKO)Wife And Others ABCNews.com Analysis Shows the Campaign Still Hasn't Returned More Than $100,000 in Obama is referred to in document which outlines case against Rezko As Barack Obama is finding out, it's not as easy to dump politically toxic campaign donations as it might seem. For the third time in more than a year, Obama's presidential campaign announced this week it was shedding more donations tied to indicted fundraiser Antoin "Tony" Rezko. Calculations by the media and Obama's own staff of Rezko's financial impact on his past political campaigns have been all over the map and shifting. In the case of Obama, public records don't make clear every Rezko connection. The records show that since 1995, $74,500 came from Rezko, his relatives or contributors listed on official disclosure forms as employees of one of his businesses. Rezko has raised money for Obama's presidential campaign.

Posted by: dyck21005 | February 7, 2008 9:25 PM | Report abuse

Loved the one above about the Ex DC-Mayor Marion Barry endorsing Obama, why? well hes black of course, yes its about color! second, Both were junkies, difference Barry was in office at the time he was caught in a DC sting operation on Natioinal TV smoking crack with prositiutes in a DC hotel. Look it up, guess that something he and Obama have in common. NO way in hell would my family or friends ever vote for Oprahbama and put this country in more trouble...He doesnt have a clue whats going on when its not written down for him.
Todays Chuckle: Notice when Obama grins or smiles he looks just like the " Grinch that stole christmas"...hahahaha
Now you know your laughing right now reading this and thinking about it! HE DOES!!!

maybe that will be his next celebr endorsement since Oprah nor Uncle Teddy hasn't done much but help hide his record or the lack there of....

Posted by: dyck21005 | February 7, 2008 9:20 PM | Report abuse

To the people voting in the upcoming primaries, to put you on notice about some common smears that have been proven false about Obama:

1. Claims he is a muslim - false, he is Christian and also believes in keeping religion and state separate.

2. Claims he is soft on pro-choice - he has a 100% rating with the pro-choice campaign and the endorsement of leaders in this field. False mailers and emails have been circulated earlier in the campaign in order to polarize women voters to Clinton. Do not be manipulated.

3. He does take money for Corporations and lobbyists - not true, he takes donations from individuals, some of which could be affiliated with a corporation or a lobby group - but they are individual donations and do not represent a 'buy' of his loyalties to special interests.

4. He has less experience than Clinton and no foreign policy experience - untrue, in many ways his experience is superior to Clinton's and he has managed to get more meaningful acts passed and has high authorship of bills. He also had 8 years in the Illinois Senate and has traveled extensively - including Iraq. Attempts have been made to suggest he was absent from more votes than Hillary - but they do not compare absences for the same time periods - i.e. when both were on the campaign trail.

5. He only talks in generalities, he has no specifics - Again, this is false - a check with his website will provide much detail on his policies, which are well thought out and pragmatic. On most issues, Clinton and Obama have the same policies. Clinton talking details of the content of those policies only points to her preference to explain policies in detail, but she may be spending most of her time talking about details that are identical to Obama's details.

Posted by: JayKay2 | February 7, 2008 9:09 PM | Report abuse

Black people voting for Obama in droves again? Hmmm... and they said that Asians in SF, Latinos in NV, and White women in NH are racists because they voted for Hillary

Hmm. Who's the racist now Obama cry babies?

Posted by: fjstratford | February 7, 2008 8:48 PM | Report abuse

On the point some Hillary supporters make of him lacking substance but conceding him to be a great speaker - its an alogical statement: you can only be a great speaker if you have great substance, good words CANNOT be generated out of nothingness. My guess is these fellows just automatically tune out when he starts speaking for some reason - hence the myth that he lacks substance.

Posted by: rupertornelius | February 7, 2008 8:04 PM | Report abuse

In Hillary's defense, I recall she did mention the homes hit by the tornadoes at the top of her speech that night. (I didn't actually hear her say it; I saw the closed-captioning scrawl at the bottom of the screen in a loud bar.) I'm an Obama supporter, but I still wanna be fair.

Posted by: whatmeregister | February 7, 2008 8:03 PM | Report abuse

Did anyone else notice that on 'super tuesday' night when many people lost there homes, Obama made a point of asking people to be aware of the tragedy at hand. I myself had not heard anything of it having been at a caucus and watching coverage of the results. Even when i heard him mention it i thought, yeah tornadoes, but now i know how serious they were. Cynics (and i am frequently among them,) might dismiss this as a play for votes. I for one appreciated having been told, even the newscasters hadn't alerted me. But interestingly enough Hillary made no mention. Even though people in hardest hit Arkansas and Tennessee had supported her. Was she done with them by then, or just too busy celebrating?

Posted by: teopa | February 7, 2008 7:58 PM | Report abuse

Go Barack !

Posted by: PulSamsara | February 7, 2008 7:47 PM | Report abuse

When people have asked me why I support Sen. Obama in this election, I usually explain that he's a better candidate, a man of personal integrity and strong character, he's been against the war in Iraq from Day One, etc. But then today I came across this picture which reminded me of another, more personal reason I recently found for supporting him:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/02/face-of-the-d-5.html

When I was walking door to door to get out the vote on Primary Days in South Carolina and Delaware, at many of the homes I visited I was met at the door by middle-aged and elderly black Americans who told me how thrilled they were that Obama was in this race. Some of these folks, I am sure, will not be around four or eight years from now. This will be their last opportunity to see, in some tangible way, the promise of this country finally fulfilled before their eyes close for the last time. And even though there are plenty of logical, well-reasoned, practical arguments for electing Barack Obama the next President of the United States, there is also this simple one. We need to take this next step for them.

Don't get me wrong: I'm usually a smartassed, cynical, steely-eyed SOB. But every so often I get infected with that damn hope bug and start thinking that just maybe we as a country are growing up a bit. At 47 I thought my immune system had finally filtered the stupid thing out of my bloodstream, but it's back. And who knows? Maybe we really can buck the odds and do better for ourselves instead of just meekly accepting whatever mediocre establishment hack the machine tells us to vote for.

In any case, I'll keep walking and knocking on doors and doing what I can, this time in Maryland and maybe Virginia. I feel I owe it to those people I've already met along the way who greeted me with smiles and warmth and hope... and especially to those who won't be there when I knock again four years from now. I want them to finally have the chance to see what they've been waiting a lifetime for.

_____________________

"I've never heard so many people during this past election campaign tell us how many things we couldn't do, how many things we couldn't compete with, how many things we couldn't dream about, and how many people we couldn't care for. Unbelievable. If there ever was anything that was part of the American Dream it's 'Yes we can' ... care, believe, dream..."
--Harry Chapin, speaking to his audience during one of his last concerts, at The Bottom Line, NYC, 1981

Posted by: whatmeregister | February 7, 2008 7:33 PM | Report abuse

Time to learn something about:
Barak & Michelle's Obama were married by and belong to pastor Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright - TRINITY CHURCH of CHRIST (www.tucc.org/about.htm )

Here is Jeremiah A. Wright unabashedly preaching his "African Roots" gospel.
www.youtube.com/watch...

Posted by: rmcnicoll | February 7, 2008 7:32 PM | Report abuse

Both Obama and Hillary are great candidates. I want them both and I think most democrats feel this way. If Obama wins, there's no way she would want Hillary on his ticket and carry her history (both an asset and liability).

If Hillary wins, she would have no choice but to choose Obama as Vice President due to the strong showing he has and his ability to attract the youth vote. Obama is young and I don't see him rejecting a VP ticket. That VP place can solve his experience problem and he can learn from Slick Willy a trick or two. Then can be pres in 2016.

After a brutal 8 years of W, a long 16 year of Democratic Reign is what I really want to see.

I want them both. This means, to get Hillary, Obama and Slick Willy back in the white house, we need Hillary to win.

Posted by: yeunganson | February 7, 2008 7:15 PM | Report abuse

HUSSEIN OBAMA, HUSSEIN OBAMA, HUSSEIN OBAMA, HUSSEIN OBAMA, HUSSEIN OBAMA, SADDAM HUSSEIN, SADDAM HUSSEIN, HUSSEIN OBAMA, SADDAM HUSSEIN, OSAMA OBAMA HUSSEIN OSAMA OBAMA, YO MAMMA!

Posted by: 102060 | February 7, 2008 6:44 PM | Report abuse

HUSSEIN Obama will be too busy rolling out his muslim prayer rug and sacraficing sheep in the bathtub to be worried about politics of foreign policy. His foreign policy consists of pulling all US forces out of 'his' precious muslim holy lands (just like his pal Osama told US to do)!

HUSSEIN Obama cannot and will not hold a candle to John McCain when it comes to foreign policy and military issues! HUSSEIN Obama is a pretty little sissy-boy when it comes to military issues! He can't handle the truth!

All you pacifist, liberal neo-dems put that in your pipes and smoke it!

Posted by: 102060 | February 7, 2008 6:40 PM | Report abuse

"Either way we can't lose with the choices [Hillary or Barack] in front of us."

Want to bet? Hillary likes to say she knows how to beat republicans. I would like to point out that if winning a contest in one of the liberal Northeastern states were proof that you know how to beat republicans than we could now talk about the Dukakis and Kerry presidencies.

What Hillary really knows is how to anger the GOP - remember "the vast right wing conspiracy?" Nothing will unite the republicans more than nominating Hillary. Obama can win every state that has been carried by Clinton, but the reverse is not true. Hillary, will not carry traditional red states like MT and ID. Remember, you need independents to win in the Fall. Don't count on independents to send The Clintons back to the oval office. While many democrats are - or after South Carolina should I say "were" - fond of Bill, most independents are acutely aware that he shamed the office and have not forgotten the disgusting pardons he handed out as he left the White House. His post-presidential profiteering isn't exactly a point of pride either. Enough with the Clintons already, Obama is a much better choice. He can win the general election. Hillary cannot.

Posted by: brooksofsheffield | February 7, 2008 6:32 PM | Report abuse

'Plouffe conceded that Virginia also is strong Obama turf, given its large African American population'--indicates use of race for vote.But if you say it,you are a racist.How rediculous!!!

Posted by: mgm18122003 | February 7, 2008 6:19 PM | Report abuse

I don't understand how it can be call racist when black Americans in truly the first time in American History support a inspiring viable candidate that happens to be black. If that's true than we can say that the majority of our white brothers and sisters before this campaign were always racist in their choices. In the history of this nation there has been only four black senators and about that many governors. It's extremely rare for popular qualified mainstream black politicians to win statewide office. My goodness what possibly could be behind that phenomenon? However, on the other hand blacks have supported the FDR's, JFK's, LBJ's, Clinton, Carter, etc. with considerable enthusiasm and even love. Obama is the real thing and that is verified by the fact that whites are voting for him. This validation was in fact the cue to blacks that this guy is the real item and someone that can win the nomination. Before that we were all willing to March in lockstep with Hillary like the rest of the Dems. I guaranteed you if Obama would had finished badly in the first two extremely white states - Iowa & NH, most blacks would had stuck with the wife of the "1st Black president". So if someone is to be blamed...blame those beautiful colorblind white citizens of Iowa & NH for being so revolutionary and courageous.

In the past presidential campaigns of Chisholm, Jackson, and Sharpton, mainstream white support was not the case and blacks subsequently did not lend their support to these candidates and instead supported the white guy most likely to garner the nomination.

Please do not characterize blacks as being racist because after 43 white male presidents later(we never made a fuss about it)...we find ourselves in the midst of the one guy who is inspiring, smart and has the right stuff to pull it off. My late mom never thought this day would come and I was in total agreement. If Obama is elected I think it will go a long way in making us as black Americans prouder than ever of this great land we love and helped to build...by just merely providing us with a feeling of relevance and true acceptance.

However, if sister Clinton wins the nomination, you better believe the vast majority of us will be buoyantly behind her historical quest 100%. Either way we can't lose with the choices in front of us.

Posted by: blairnesbitt | February 7, 2008 5:56 PM | Report abuse

the media is pushing the emphasis black demographic too hard, and the clinton camp and the media are eager to discount states w/ black populations. what happened to 1 person 1 vote. are the media and clinton campaign repudiating this fundamental ? This is why people from people in ID,MO to people in SC, and GA want change.

Posted by: jacade | February 7, 2008 5:49 PM | Report abuse

obama was not in the senate when the vote for the war was taken. correct. senator clinton was and she VOTED FOR IT. SHE VOTED FOR THE IRAQ WAR.

obama was not at the senate when the kyl-lieberman vote was taken. he was away. correct. senator clinton was there and SHE VOTED FOR IT.

you can fault him for not being there, personally I fault her for voting yes.

Posted by: tulone | February 7, 2008 5:48 PM | Report abuse

>>>>Plouffe conceded that Virginia also is strong Obama turf, given its large African American population,

Is Clinton that bad of a candidate that deserves no more than 20% of female Afrian American votes?

Posted by: kat7 | February 7, 2008 5:47 PM | Report abuse

Virginia's Obama followers sound like they looked at the 61 year old "work horse" senator from New York and decided they didn't want an old gray mare. I do see the point. Like the giddy MSNBC reporters, the Obama Dems choose a golden-tongued prince recently crowned by moldy Camelot; a fit sibling to Caroline, with her own unremarkable accomplishments. The glitz of Hollywood, the daytime soap of Oprah, the empty refrain of hope and change make them want to be transported out of the stodgy Old Dominion to Obamamania. Never mind the hard business of government and solid planning; they can leave that to boring workers while they bask in the glow of their new show horse. Trouble is, when they wake up, those boring workers will be the newly elected Republican administration laughing and grateful to Obamamaniacs for rejecting the better candidate: Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Posted by: epperlytrudel | February 7, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Sen. Obama was not in the Senate when the vote for the war was taken. Since he has gotten to the Senate he has voted exactly like Sen. Clinton on issues of the war.

He now criticizes Sen. Clinton for her Iran vote, but he was the only Senator who neglected to return to The Senate to cast a vote.

Of the three Senators left in the race Sen. Clinton is the only one who has sponsored any bills since the start of the year. She still takes her job seriously.

And, if I am correct Sen. Obama has never been to Iraq, but Sen. Clinton has been more than once.

Posted by: LadyEagle | February 7, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Please ANYONE tell me what has Hillary Clinton ever achieved as a US Senator.

Posted by: ne_voice | February 7, 2008 5:41 PM | Report abuse

Politicalobserver1 wrote... Secondly, HRC has Bill Clinton to ask for advice.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's true, but many of us who remember the scandals of Bill's last year in the White House don't want him anywhere near the place. As your comment suggests, a vote for Hillary is a vote for Bill as he would likely be Hillary's co-president. Among other things, he lied under oath, which got him disbarred by the U.S. Supreme Court and the State of Arkansas. He's one of only two presidents who ever underwent impeachment proceedings. In short he disgraced the Office of the Presidency. You may want him back but just be mindful of the venality that is part of his makeup. I'm embarrassed that I voted for him twice, but that's before I realized how morally bankrupt they both are!

Posted by: lhummer | February 7, 2008 5:37 PM | Report abuse

I think it is fair to say that The Clintons are not exactly embraced by half the people in this country (the GOP) and they are also distrusted by a significant number of people inside their own party.

So why support a candidate that sparks partisanship and division?

Why nominate a northeast liberal that is guaranteed to engender the wrath of the oppostion when you can send Obama instead? How does she defend her for-it-then-against-it Iraq vote against John McCain? She can't even defend it against Obama.

I am an independent. I will consider voting for Obama but I will not vote for Hillary.

Let's stop this bush-clinton-bush-clinton nonsense. Is anyone actually proud of that? Does anyone think more that is the answer?

Posted by: brooksofsheffield | February 7, 2008 5:36 PM | Report abuse

I notice that Obama was blaming Bush for the fiasco in New Orleans. He failed to make note that both the state and the city are bastions of the democratic party, nor did he mention that it is the responsibility of congress to oversee government monies and grants, etc,. he switched blame for everything from the responsible parties to someone who was not responsible and the press loves him for it. Mayor Nagan had hundreds of busses to move people out of New Orleans,he knew where they lived and which ones needed transportation, yet he chooses to blame the president his own inability to act in an emergency, and hundreds died because of Nagan's and the Governors ineptness.
Something for everyone to note. In These tornados that killed many and destroyed much of several states, did anyone see any rioting, or screaming people asking where the government money or help was??? No! They saw people who were not used to being spoon fed, they saw people who were hard working and who, seeing the destruction, now take charge of fixing things themselves not waiting for some government agency to do it for them.
Neither Obama or Clinton have been truthful in the campaign to be president,and they certainly will not be truthful if elected president.
That they can stand before the American people and tell US what they know to be a total falsehood, a complete lie, with a straight face,then ask for your vote demonstrates that they will lie to you even more so if elected.
This is an election year when "none of the above" should get most of the votes.
Respectfully

Posted by: dg11703 | February 7, 2008 5:34 PM | Report abuse

MaruAngarita: you are a retard and need probably a new brain. Bid for it on ebay...

Posted by: laplumelefirmament | February 7, 2008 5:32 PM | Report abuse

CASES OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION AGAINST LATINOS BY THE CLINTONS!
http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/hillarDy.htm
STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS!

Hilarious. Bill Clinton falls asleep at MLK celebration

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2008/01/clinton_gets_sleepy_at_mlk_day.php

CLINTON SAYS WE HAVE THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT BECAUSE LYNDON JOHNSON SIGNED IT.

GOLDWATER RAN A CAMPAIGN AGAINST JOHNSON...
SO WHY WAS SHE CAMPAIGNING FOR BARRY GOLDWATER WHO WAS AGAINST THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT???

BY THE WAY CHECK OUT BILL CLINTON'S RACIST POSTCARD HE SENT TO HIS GRANDMA IN 1966 DURING THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT.

http://serr8d.blogspot.com/2007/10/bill-clinton-racist-postcard-buy-it-now.html

Posted by: laplumelefirmament | February 7, 2008 5:31 PM | Report abuse

FROM THE VOTO LATINO WEBSITE : CLINTON VOTED FOR THE USE OF CLUSTER BOMBS

Clinton, Obama, and Cluster Bombs

by David Rees

If you're a friend of mine, or a fan of "Get Your War On," you probably know how important the issue of cluster bombs and landmines is to me.

It was America's use of cluster bombs during Operation: Enduring Freedom that led me to start GYWO seven(!) years ago this fall, and it has been my pleasure and my honor to donate the royalties from the two GYWO anthologies to Mine Detection & Dog Center Team #5, a landmine removal team in western Afghanistan.

[...]
Cluster bombs and landmines are particularly terrifying weapons that wreak havoc on communities trying to recover from war. They are fatal impediments to reconstruction and rehabilitation of agricultural land; they destroy valuable livestock; they disable otherwise productive members of society; they maim or kill children trying to salvage them for scrap metal.

[...]

Senator Obama of Illinois voted IN FAVOR of the ban.

Senator Clinton of New York voted AGAINST the ban.

I'm not a single-issue voter. But as Obama and Clinton share many policy positions, this vote was revelatory for me. After all, Amendment No. 4882 was an easy one to vote against:...one decided her vote on Amendment No. 4882 according to a political calculation. The other used a moral calculation.

http://blog.votolatino.org/

Posted by: laplumelefirmament | February 7, 2008 5:30 PM | Report abuse

I keep hearing Senator Barack Obama telling the crowds that he will "talk" to terrorists, guerrillas and the psycho dictators of the world. How naive can Obama be? I feel that this is a dangerous approach since most of the thug leaders do hate Americans. Is Obama supporting the thug leaders or are the thug leaders supporting Obama? I have read that those who support Obama have met with guerrillas and dictators to talk to them.

As an independent voter, I am very concerned that Senator Obama's lack of understanding of world affairs will put Hugo Chavez, and other questionable leaders on The White House guest list.

Posted by: MaruAngarita | February 7, 2008 5:30 PM | Report abuse

Obama may be in for a big surprise. Virginia has a sizable Latino and Asian population and will overwhelmingly go for Clinton. It's time we have a candidate that represents all people, not just the African American voice.

Posted by: diplomat111 | February 7, 2008 5:28 PM | Report abuse

This democratic election HAS indeed become all about black and white and gender! Who are we kidding? The pattern of votes on Super Tues. came from blacks, white men for Obama and Latinos and women for Clinton. The press plays a huge role in downplaying the Clinton victories and boosting Obama's win. Add to this the additional players: the Kennedys and the Oprahs. This election is no longer about issues and hard-pressed problems of the country. It's about who is who and who knows who and people airing their prejudices and preferences based on preconceived notions, not about what the country needs to stand up on its feet again.
I will not be voting this time.

Posted by: utopia53 | February 7, 2008 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Historically in America, how partial would you say white males have been to white males? Sooooo partial they denied women and blacks the right to vote to ensure they'd never be elected and yet called America a democracy. On the other hand, women and blacks after finally wresting the vote, have continually voted for white males over females and blacks. This is an historical fact.

Posted by: jhbyer | February 7, 2008 5:26 PM | Report abuse

FROM THE VOTO LATINO WEBSITE : CLINTON VOTED FOR THE USE OF CLUSTER BOMBS

Clinton, Obama, and Cluster Bombs

by David Rees

If you're a friend of mine, or a fan of "Get Your War On," you probably know how important the issue of cluster bombs and landmines is to me.

It was America's use of cluster bombs during Operation: Enduring Freedom that led me to start GYWO seven(!) years ago this fall, and it has been my pleasure and my honor to donate the royalties from the two GYWO anthologies to Mine Detection & Dog Center Team #5, a landmine removal team in western Afghanistan.

[...]
Cluster bombs and landmines are particularly terrifying weapons that wreak havoc on communities trying to recover from war. They are fatal impediments to reconstruction and rehabilitation of agricultural land; they destroy valuable livestock; they disable otherwise productive members of society; they maim or kill children trying to salvage them for scrap metal.

[...]

Senator Obama of Illinois voted IN FAVOR of the ban.

Senator Clinton of New York voted AGAINST the ban.

I'm not a single-issue voter. But as Obama and Clinton share many policy positions, this vote was revelatory for me. After all, Amendment No. 4882 was an easy one to vote against:...one decided her vote on Amendment No. 4882 according to a political calculation. The other used a moral calculation.

http://blog.votolatino.org/

Posted by: laplumelefirmament | February 7, 2008 5:23 PM | Report abuse

People,

You must read carefully.

Plouffe did not say what Obama's strenght were. He never mentioned african american in Virginia or anywhere. The author of the article did. Quotes are put in "..." marks.

Obama never plays the race card. Ever.

Obama 08!

Posted by: reginald.hodges | February 7, 2008 5:22 PM | Report abuse

To the couple of people who insinuate that Obama is less experienced than Hillary, I think you're confusing experience with age. He's held elected for 8 years (State Senate 6 years, US Senate, 2 years), and has campaigned 3 times. Hillary has campaigned once and held elected office 7 years (7 Years US Senate. Plus, he was president of the Harvard Law Review, a professor of Constitutional law, and was a community organizer on the streets of Chicago.

Name recognition from being the first lady and being 14 years older doesn't make you more 'experienced.' (Although I'll admit she's tough enough to handle GOP attacks, I'd rather have a president in the White House, not a target).

In fact, it is precisely Obama's experience that swayed me to support him. And you know what? I actually like Hillary. I think she's been vilified unfairly by the press, and I think she's intelligent and likable. But there are things in her'experience' that raise questions about her judgment, and she clearly has an electability problem.

I think Obama is vastly more electable and, much more importantly, his career and political actions demonstrate a self-made man of unique intelligence, perception, compasssion, judgment, and much needed humility (given the bravado arrogance of the last 8 years). This is a democrat who could not only win the presidencybut could do so with many swing votes and begin his presidency with an actual mandate.

Dems, don't screw this up. He's the one who can deliver the White House.

Posted by: ChrisDC | February 7, 2008 5:22 PM | Report abuse

ask and you shall receive zukermand:

san francisco chronicle, 1/27/08

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON

Would draw up a phased withdrawal plan within first two months, with the goal of having most troops out by the end of her term in 2013. Careful not to promise a complete withdrawal and would keep residual forces in Iraq to combat terrorists, deter outside military intervention and aid the Iraqi army, but not prop up the Iraqi government. Pledges to gather U.S. allies and Iraq's neighbors to discuss ways to stabilize Iraq.

BARACK OBAMA

...Would remove one to two combat brigades each month until most U.S. troops are out in 16 months. Would leave residual force to fight terrorists.

Posted by: tulone | February 7, 2008 5:20 PM | Report abuse

I have a question for tim591...why do you think the Republicans will win red states such as South Carolina and Hispanic-dominated states such as Florida, Arizona, etc.? American voters have overwhelmingly supported Democratic candidates in all state elections held so far with an unprecedented increase in voters casting ballots (15% increase in voter participation for Democratic candidates) since the 2004 presidential election. I'm sure McCain and other conservative right-wingers are looking at this staggering increase in numbers with much apprehension. Obama can and will unify the Democratic Party to present a strong and unified front that will defeat McCain in the general election. I'm not so sure Hllary Clinton can do the same.

Posted by: saint4life | February 7, 2008 5:16 PM | Report abuse

CASES OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION AGAINST LATINOS BY THE CLINTONS!
http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/hillarDy.htm
STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS!

Hilarious. Bill Clinton falls asleep at MLK celebration

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2008/01/clinton_gets_sleepy_at_mlk_day.php

CLINTON SAYS WE HAVE THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT BECAUSE LYNDON JOHNSON SIGNED IT.

GOLDWATER RAN A CAMPAIGN AGAINST JOHNSON...
SO WHY WAS SHE CAMPAIGNING FOR BARRY GOLDWATER WHO WAS AGAINST THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT???

BY THE WAY CHECK OUT BILL CLINTON'S RACIST POSTCARD HE SENT TO HIS GRANDMA IN 1966 DURING THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT.

http://serr8d.blogspot.com/2007/10/bill-clinton-racist-postcard-buy-it-now.html

Posted by: laplumelefirmament | February 7, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

I think it to be very naive that people are actually saying Obama can only win in predominant blac states. Obama's most crushing wins came in states that have a vast amount of white voters. So your saying that there is a lot of african americans in NORTH DAKOTA,IDAHO,IOWA,KANSAS,COLORADO,UTAH AND ALASKA?

IN ALL THE AFOREMENTIONED STATED OBAMA WHOOPED HILLARY

Posted by: WIKKIDINSANE | February 7, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

I think it to be very naive that people are actually saying Obama can only win in predominant blac states. Obama's most crushing wins came in states that have a vast amount of white voters. So your saying that there is a lot of african americans in NORTH DAKOTA,IDAHO,IOWA,KANSAS,COLORADO,UTAH AND ALASKA?

IN ALL THE AFOREMENTIONED STATED OBAMA WHOOPED HILLARY

Posted by: WIKKIDINSANE | February 7, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Aepelbaum, you're very offensive. Is that your intention?

Posted by: zukermand | February 7, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Caucasus in Florida is the very good idea, I think. At least, it would be the expression of what people want others to think about them. No insecurities, no paranoia, and no secret scizophrenia in booths. I would never forget how after this strange illegal primary in Florida one gal, or pretending to be a gal, wrote to me that she voted for Clinton "because of Gore's non selfish book about the environment, which he-Gore published in 1992". I do not think that anybody would say something like that during any caucasus. So, caucasus is much better under the current circumstances, as the presence of beholders force people, especially females, to be, at least, a bit rational.

Posted by: aepelbaum | February 7, 2008 5:11 PM | Report abuse

tulone:"And Obama has a much more aggressive strategy to get the troops out than she does"

How do they differ? Enlighten me.

Posted by: zukermand | February 7, 2008 5:09 PM | Report abuse


FROM THE VOTO LATINO WEBSITE : CLINTON VOTED FOR THE USE OF CLUSTER BOMBS

Clinton, Obama, and Cluster Bombs

by David Rees

If you're a friend of mine, or a fan of "Get Your War On," you probably know how important the issue of cluster bombs and landmines is to me.

It was America's use of cluster bombs during Operation: Enduring Freedom that led me to start GYWO seven(!) years ago this fall, and it has been my pleasure and my honor to donate the royalties from the two GYWO anthologies to Mine Detection & Dog Center Team #5, a landmine removal team in western Afghanistan.

[...]
Cluster bombs and landmines are particularly terrifying weapons that wreak havoc on communities trying to recover from war. They are fatal impediments to reconstruction and rehabilitation of agricultural land; they destroy valuable livestock; they disable otherwise productive members of society; they maim or kill children trying to salvage them for scrap metal.

[...]

Senator Obama of Illinois voted IN FAVOR of the ban.

Senator Clinton of New York voted AGAINST the ban.

I'm not a single-issue voter. But as Obama and Clinton share many policy positions, this vote was revelatory for me. After all, Amendment No. 4882 was an easy one to vote against:...one decided her vote on Amendment No. 4882 according to a political calculation. The other used a moral calculation.

http://blog.votolatino.org/

Posted by: laplumelefirmament | February 7, 2008 5:07 PM | Report abuse

Peterdc: Even if Obama said he didn't know how he would have voted if he were in the senate (and I know you've read the full quote and know that's not true), she still voted FOR the war. FOR IT. SHE VOTED FOR THE IRAQ WAR. And Obama has a much more aggressive strategy to get the troops out than she does. The frustrating thing is that I know you know these things, but you LIE.

Posted by: tulone | February 7, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

SeedofChange, you have it all wrong. The truth is that without the uneducated voters, who can be easily bamboozled and are Hillary's core support group, Hillary would be nothing.

Posted by: charlesschen | February 7, 2008 5:04 PM | Report abuse

zukermand, the point is that, in twice as many years in the Senate, Clinton has no legislation that even compares to Coburn-Obama, Lugar-Obama, or the ethics reform bill. Clinton has essentially tended to her district without showing any vision or passing any major legislation.

Posted by: davestickler | February 7, 2008 5:03 PM | Report abuse

I'm noticing alot of Obama bashing on this post. It seems the Hillary supporters are running scared, they know sooner or later Obama is going to win the nomination. The end is near my friends. Get used to it.

Posted by: lumi21us | February 7, 2008 5:02 PM | Report abuse

"...Obama ...sponsored ...820 bills"

"Senator Clinton ...author and pass into law 20 twenty pieces of legislation..."

davestickler, one might think you're not such a stickler. One might also think you don't read well.

Posted by: zukermand | February 7, 2008 4:56 PM | Report abuse

McCain '08
Iran '09
China '10
Hooray for militarism...

It's nice to see the Clintonites vitriolic attacks. Let's think back to one year ago. Clinton was the "inevitable" Democratic nominee. Clinton had 25 to 30 point leads nationally and in the Super Tuesday states. Hmm. People who hold power hold it hard.

A majority of Americans know it is time to move into the 21st century. Leave the 1960s style Democratic liberalism, anti-communism based foreign policy and unequivocally pro-corporation trade policies where they belong; in History. Step into the future.

Go Obama.

Posted by: constdefender | February 7, 2008 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Hillary has carried almost all of the states that will vote Democratic and she was the only one who offered an Olive branch to Michigan and Florida. Can you imagine super deglates deciding and these states not having a say. So the only way out for the party right now is to reinstate thsoe states right now and then to get behind Hillary. Obama should get a deal from Hillary to for VP. He is young and can make a run in 4 or 8 years times. She doesn't have that luxury given her age. Lets have a Clinton/Obama ticket starting tomorrow one united party and not have the potential problems of excluding Michigan and Florida and having Obama as the nomiee for the party when he almost carried none of the Democrtic leaning states in the primaries. He has to carry California and the expectation were there he would He lost and now should step aside and raise money for the good of the party. I think the two camps should start talking now and if Obama wants the VP he should have it...Come on Democrats lets get together now or risk another 4 years of the GOP...Clinton/Obama to the white house Please

Posted by: harry.farr | February 7, 2008 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Tulone- you don't understand the Clinton people talking about the war becasue Obama said he was against it in 2003 then in 2004 said he didnt know how he would have voted had he been in the Senate and then when he got there supported every funding bill.

Cindy Sheehan did more to stop this war than Obama has.-

That is not the issue the issue is understanding how to get us out of it and Obama hasn't shown he has that knowledge in any of the debates.

Now he seems to be ducking the next five debates he has been invited too. Don't blame him because after every debate he loses some votes because he just doesn't have the grasp of the issues that Hillary has

Posted by: peterdc | February 7, 2008 4:50 PM | Report abuse

If anyone wonders who would be the best Democrat to go against John McCain, look at the independent vote in Missouri. 230,000 more independents voted in the Democratic primary in Missouri than the Republican and most of those voted for Obama..........

_______________________________________

But don't look at Florida, Tennesse, Arkansas, Nevada,......:-)

Without black votes, Obama will be nothing.

That's why he played the race card in SC.

Obama is an empty suit, and everybody but his "cool aid" drinkers know that.

Posted by: SeedofChange | February 7, 2008 4:50 PM | Report abuse

I hope you don't mind my posting something that someone else put up on another thread, but I thought it really drove home a point I've been trying to make about which candidate is more accomplished.

For your enjoyment, with information gleaned from the Library of Congress website:

"OBAMA RECORDS

What has Obama done in the 3 years he's been in the Senate?

The list is too substantive, so I'll mainly categorize. During the first eight months of his 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), and many more.

In all since he entered the U.S. Senate, Senator Obama has written 890 bills and co-sponsored another 1096. An impressive record, for someone who supposedly has no legislative record. . . .

CLINTON RECORDS

Senator Clinton, who has served one full term (6yrs.) has managed to author and pass into law 20 twenty pieces of legislation. These bills can be found on the website of the Library of Congress (www.thomas.loc.gov), but to save you trouble, I'll post them here for you: 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 Honor. 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 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."

So now, which candidate is the empty suit, and which one is the candidate of "getting things done"?

Posted by: davestickler | February 7, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

Everyone - shut up with the racial comments. Obama has support from every race and gender demographic, and in large numbers. END OF STORY.

______________________________________

If he has support from everyone why is he losing?

He just has support from black and white elite men.

Asian voted 75% for Clinton

Latinos voted 70% for Clinton.

Obama started the race war to win SC and it will take him down, even if he wins nomination.

Posted by: SeedofChange | February 7, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

I don't think people *should* vote primarily based on appearance, but the fact of the matter is that people do vote on appearance. It is natural for people to feel an affinity towards people who are similar to them, people who have shared the same kinds of experiences. Just because someone points out that people vote based on race or sex does not make that person racist or sexist .. more like a realist who has looked at the exit polling.

Posted by: jedipotential | February 7, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

Divisive and hateful comments from Obama supporter show their true identify. They have dual personality like their flip flopping candidate:
1. We are for unity, but will not vote for another democrat
2. Clinton is "***", but can not say Obama pushes the wrong button again and again, in simple word incompetent
3. Clintons vote with the Republicans for NAFTA, our candidate vote for Peru trade deal to drain the jobs from US
4. Clinton voter are old and illiterate, we are young and resentful of old and illiterate. But we will unite the country :-)
5. Clinton is corrupt, although there is no proof other the Republican talking points, but Obama house subsidy from Rezko is kosher
6. Clinton is racist, but we can call her "Senator from Punjab" and express hatred to the Asian
7. And you know when they are talking about illiterate, robot listening to master, etc they are talking about Latinos
Get real. Vote to win. Vote against the wealthy liberal wafflers

Posted by: SeedofChange | February 7, 2008 4:43 PM | Report abuse

If anyone wonders who would be the best Democrat to go against John McCain, look at the independent vote in Missouri. 230,000 more independents voted in the Democratic primary in Missouri than the Republican and most of those voted for Obama. Case closed. This same dynamic works everywhere for Obama. Independents do not like Clinton. So if we want to win... we had better go for Obama.

Posted by: goldie2 | February 7, 2008 4:43 PM | Report abuse

Everyone - shut up with the racial comments. Obama has support from every race and gender demographic, and in large numbers. END OF STORY.

The fact is that Obama is the only authentic candidate left in the race. He's the only person who believed yesterday what he believes today and will believe tomorrow. And his beliefs are not tied to political posturing or motivations, but to core ideas that are based on facts and the lives of regular, working people. Anyone attempting to deny him of that is simply frustrated that their candidate can't find a way to come up with the words that make people be proud to be an American. Not like Obama can, anyways.

But Obama isn't just about words. He can find the words that make people cry not because he's a gifted debater (he's not) or because he's taken millions of dollars worth of speech coaching lessons (he hasn't). No, Obama finds the words that make people tear up because he's the only candidate speaking from his heart. He's the only candidate who ignores the polls and ignores the pundits and mudslinging of daily politics, in favor of adhering to a strict inner belief and passion that all people must be heard, not just one race or one political party.

When he's president, he won't just represent military hawks (McCain) or evangelicals (Huckabee) or entitlement handout junkies (Clinton). The most educated and successful people in the United States are the ones voting for Obama, right along with the most disenfranchised minorities we have in our country. A vote for Obama is a vote for civility and future prosperity. A vote for Obama is a vote for peace and diplomacy, not just overseas, but at home as well.

Posted by: thecrisis | February 7, 2008 4:43 PM | Report abuse

Dear Zukermand
What non sense the below statment. Kennedy supported Obama because he was anoyed that HRC didn't give JFK credit for the Civil Rights legislation. She gave it to LBJ instead. I sure you remember when the Obama camp tried to claim that that was a racist remark which it wasn't. Secondly, Voters in Mass. and California cared so much about Kennedy's endorsement that they overwhelmingly voted for HRC in the primary. HRC will not be stopped by the petty jeolousies of the Old School endorsements that Obama is getting form the Kerry's and the Kennedys. They, the Kerry and Kennedys, couldn't get themselves elected and they won't get Obama elected either.

Statesmen like lion of the Senate Ted Kennedy and so many brilliant public service professionals would not be endorsing and promoting Obama and the Obama campaign, if he were not the superior politician he is.

Posted by: politicalobserver1 | February 7, 2008 4:40 PM | Report abuse

BUSTED ON GMA
HILLARY ON WALMART
http://youtube.com/watch?v=7ZVpPGxuafA

Posted by: laplumelefirmament | February 7, 2008 4:38 PM | Report abuse


CASES OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION AGAINST LATINOS BY THE CLINTONS!
http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/hillarDy.htm
STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS!

Hilarious. Bill Clinton falls asleep at MLK celebration

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2008/01/clinton_gets_sleepy_at_mlk_day.php

CLINTON SAYS WE HAVE THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT BECAUSE LYNDON JOHNSON SIGNED IT.

GOLDWATER RAN A CAMPAIGN AGAINST JOHNSON...
SO WHY WAS SHE CAMPAIGNING FOR BARRY GOLDWATER WHO WAS AGAINST THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT???

BY THE WAY CHECK OUT BILL CLINTON'S RACIST POSTCARD HE SENT TO HIS GRANDMA IN 1966 DURING THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT.

http://serr8d.blogspot.com/2007/10/bill-clinton-racist-postcard-buy-it-now.html

Posted by: laplumelefirmament | February 7, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

I find it interesting that some observers of this year's political campaign (such as dreamersline above) view the endorsements and support of Senator Obama by African Americans as racist, as if they must be supporting the Senator solely because of his race. I wonder if this logic (or lack thereof) holds true for the many white endorsements that every white male presidential candidate has received throughout the history of this country. Were these candidates supported because they were white, or was it because the supporters and endorsers felt the candidate was best for the country? It seems to me that the latter must be true. Therefore, those few narrow-minded Americans (like dreamersline) who can't get past the skin color of Senator Obama, or his supporters, should vote for John McCain on the basis that McCain is white. The rest of us are ready for CHANGE!

Posted by: wlwhite201 | February 7, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse


FROM THE VOTO LATINO WEBSITE : CLINTON VOTED FOR THE USE OF CLUSTER BOMBS

Clinton, Obama, and Cluster Bombs

by David Rees

If you're a friend of mine, or a fan of "Get Your War On," you probably know how important the issue of cluster bombs and landmines is to me.

It was America's use of cluster bombs during Operation: Enduring Freedom that led me to start GYWO seven(!) years ago this fall, and it has been my pleasure and my honor to donate the royalties from the two GYWO anthologies to Mine Detection & Dog Center Team #5, a landmine removal team in western Afghanistan.

[...]
Cluster bombs and landmines are particularly terrifying weapons that wreak havoc on communities trying to recover from war. They are fatal impediments to reconstruction and rehabilitation of agricultural land; they destroy valuable livestock; they disable otherwise productive members of society; they maim or kill children trying to salvage them for scrap metal.

[...]

Senator Obama of Illinois voted IN FAVOR of the ban.

Senator Clinton of New York voted AGAINST the ban.

I'm not a single-issue voter. But as Obama and Clinton share many policy positions, this vote was revelatory for me. After all, Amendment No. 4882 was an easy one to vote against:...one decided her vote on Amendment No. 4882 according to a political calculation. The other used a moral calculation.

http://blog.votolatino.org/

Posted by: laplumelefirmament | February 7, 2008 4:33 PM | Report abuse

"Why in the world are Obamas "supporters" saying that this reduction of voters to their race or gender is somehow logical ??"

Because they think Mr Plouffe might have said it. If they thought Sen Clinton had said it, our eyes would be watering from the caterwauling.

Posted by: zukermand | February 7, 2008 4:31 PM | Report abuse

This discussion is weird. For me it's abuse of "voters intelligence" (but perhaps you consider this to be oxymoron) to suggest that you should vote for candidate who is over 6 feet high if you are yourself over 6 feet high. Why do we need such simplifications? Bill Clinton's statement was that women will vote for a woman, and African Americans for Obama, not stating, but implying that whites will vote for whites. For me it was a clear racist and sexist suggestion. Smart and educated people try to avoid this simplifications based on prejudice. Why in the world are Obamas "supporters" saying that this reduction of voters to their race or gender is somehow logical ??

Posted by: bo7fun | February 7, 2008 4:29 PM | Report abuse

Sorry Georgiapeach but as much as I respect McCain for his 5 years in a cage in Nam and will consider voting for him if Hillary tops the ticket I do not think his work trumps Obama's on foreign Policy. Not to mention McCain embarrassed himself and the Pro-Invasion advocates last when he was in Iraq by claiming it was safe as he was surrounded by no less than 100 guards. Angelina Jolie is in Iraq right now doing a better job than he did. As for Obama:

"Obama has traveled extensively in his capacity as a member of the Foreign Relations Committee and has visited Russia, Ukraine, and Azerbaijan in Asia; Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, and the Palestinian Territories in the Middle East; and Chad, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, and South Africa in Africa. Obama has also co-sponsored the "Lugar-Obama Act" with Republican Senator Richard Lugar who was Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations at the time. This act was a bi-partisan effort to increase U.S. security in terms of the elimination of conventional weapons and weapons of mass destruction. This legislation came out of Obama's trip with Senator Richard Lugar to Russia, the Ukraine and Azerbaijan.

Obama has also sponsored legislation such as the "Democratic Republic of Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act" which was signed into law by President Bush on December 22, 2006. Obama has co-sponsored immigration related bills related to his service on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee including the Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act"

You need to get your facts strait Georgia Peach

Posted by: aschifter1 | February 7, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Either way, by the published standards of the Washington Post's Anne Kornblut, either Shailagh Murray or Mr Plouffe is a racist and should either apologize publicly or resign their position.
This will not stand!

Posted by: zukermand | February 7, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Those who argue that Clinton has more "experience" are simply regurgitating a campaign line of hers. If you are right, and Clinton has more experience, name one bill that she has sponsored that has been enacted.

You all point to her experience as First Lady. However, this experience, so called, is limited for two reasons. First, after her health care plan debacle (her current one looks suspciously like the old one that failed, too), she was pretty much out of the political picture. Second, being First Lady hasn't given Laura Bush or any other First Lady experience chops, I think you'd argue. So why does Hillary's WH "experience" count so much?

I'm not discounting that Hillary is smart and a good politician, but I want to see what experience you all are so fond of touting.

Posted by: alterego1 | February 7, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

CASES OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION AGAINST LATINOS BY THE CLINTONS!
http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/hillarDy.htm
STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS!

Hilarious. Bill Clinton falls asleep at MLK celebration

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2008/01/clinton_gets_sleepy_at_mlk_day.php

CLINTON SAYS WE HAVE THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT BECAUSE LYNDON JOHNSON SIGNED IT.

GOLDWATER RAN A CAMPAIGN AGAINST JOHNSON...
SO WHY WAS SHE CAMPAIGNING FOR BARRY GOLDWATER WHO WAS AGAINST THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT???

BY THE WAY CHECK OUT BILL CLINTON'S RACIST POSTCARD HE SENT TO HIS GRANDMA IN 1966 DURING THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT.

http://serr8d.blogspot.com/2007/10/bill-clinton-racist-postcard-buy-it-now.html

Posted by: laplumelefirmament | February 7, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse

Marion Barry endorsement?

Obama may get a few votes form the African Americans in DC but Barry is an embarrassment. Tax evader drugie convicted criminal? I think Obama should lose more than a few votes from that endorsement. In fact the African Americans should distance themsleves from anything or anyone that Mario Barry endorses. Vote for HRC experienced intelligent leadership.

Posted by: politicalobserver1 | February 7, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

The endorsement of Council Member Marion Barry of Washinton D.C. of Sen. Barak Obama came in as no surprise because of the on-going trend that African-Americans are going for the senator at an all-time high. Both of them are blacks. The use such words as "fresh start,", "new direction," and the like are nothing but simply excuses to comouflage the real reason. Because of this, and if Senator Obama is nominated, count me as a democrat supporter of John McCain for whatever it is worth.
................................
Talk about racism. dreamersline..turn in your hood please.

Posted by: natman19 | February 7, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

it doesn't matter that obama wasn't in the senate to vote against the war. it only matters that clinton VOTED FOR THE WAR. maybe she has more experience, but she obviously hasn't gained the wisdom that should accompany it. if experience is the ONLY measure of who should be president, then you should be on board the straight talk express.

Posted by: tulone | February 7, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

That's a novel form of argument.

Posted by: zukermand | February 7, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

CASES OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION AGAINST LATINOS BY THE CLINTONS!
http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/hillarDy.htm
STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS!

Hilarious. Bill Clinton falls asleep at MLK celebration

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2008/01/clinton_gets_sleepy_at_mlk_day.php

CLINTON SAYS WE HAVE THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT BECAUSE LYNDON JOHNSON SIGNED IT.

GOLDWATER RAN A CAMPAIGN AGAINST JOHNSON...
SO WHY WAS SHE CAMPAIGNING FOR BARRY GOLDWATER WHO WAS AGAINST THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT???

BY THE WAY CHECK OUT BILL CLINTON'S RACIST POSTCARD HE SENT TO HIS GRANDMA IN 1966 DURING THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT.

http://serr8d.blogspot.com/2007/10/bill-clinton-racist-postcard-buy-it-now.html

Posted by: laplumelefirmament | February 7, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

zukermand you're not making any sense. you're contradicting yourself. and mr. clinton comparing obama to jackson ONLY because they're black IS racist. there was no other reason for the comparison.

Posted by: tulone | February 7, 2008 4:18 PM | Report abuse


FROM THE VOTO LATINO WEBSITE : CLINTON VOTED FOR THE USE OF CLUSTER BOMBS

Clinton, Obama, and Cluster Bombs

by David Rees

If you're a friend of mine, or a fan of "Get Your War On," you probably know how important the issue of cluster bombs and landmines is to me.

It was America's use of cluster bombs during Operation: Enduring Freedom that led me to start GYWO seven(!) years ago this fall, and it has been my pleasure and my honor to donate the royalties from the two GYWO anthologies to Mine Detection & Dog Center Team #5, a landmine removal team in western Afghanistan.

[...]
Cluster bombs and landmines are particularly terrifying weapons that wreak havoc on communities trying to recover from war. They are fatal impediments to reconstruction and rehabilitation of agricultural land; they destroy valuable livestock; they disable otherwise productive members of society; they maim or kill children trying to salvage them for scrap metal.

[...]

Senator Obama of Illinois voted IN FAVOR of the ban.

Senator Clinton of New York voted AGAINST the ban.

I'm not a single-issue voter. But as Obama and Clinton share many policy positions, this vote was revelatory for me. After all, Amendment No. 4882 was an easy one to vote against:...one decided her vote on Amendment No. 4882 according to a political calculation. The other used a moral calculation.

http://blog.votolatino.org/

Posted by: laplumelefirmament | February 7, 2008 4:18 PM | Report abuse

Dear BarackTheVote

He most absolutely is a rookie. First term Senator elected in 04 only state expereince before that election. JFK the youngest pResident who Obama supportors like to compare him to servered in congress for many years before he was elected to the senate before he was elected to the White House. HRC is a second term Senator who was very activly involved in the executive office and Policy during Bill Clinton;s administration. HRC represented the Clinton administraion in meeting with overseas leaders. Secondly, HRC has Bill Clinton to ask for advice. Obama would be spending the first days of his administration looking for the White House men's room never mind figuring out who to talk to at the Pentagon. Who would he ask for advice from Michelle Obama? Give me a break the experience factor isn't even close.

Posted by: politicalobserver1 | February 7, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Obama corrupt at heart:

This is typical of Obama's tactics:

1. White in Iowa
2. Black in SC
3. Regan hugger in Nevada villages
4. Union hugger in Las Vegas
5. Latino hugger in California
6. Republican hugger in NY suburb

I actually like this instinct of winning at any cost.

But it shows a corrup person at heart.

Taking money from Rezko to buy his house does not bother him, then he acts he does not know the guy.

Posted by: SeedofChange | February 7, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse

It's funny how a candidate's electoral victories are being viewed with an asterik because he received a large number of African-American votes in S.C., Georgia, and Alabama. When last I checked there were very few African-Americans in Iowa, Colorado and the western states where he won a majority of the electorate. I would say Sen. Obama is doing a great job of winning a large number of American votes. Sen. Obama has a message that is resonating throughout this land. A message of hope for a different path. I voted for Bill Clinton twice and supported his wife in her senatatorial career. I remember his presidency and the times we lived in during it. The election of Hillary Clinton as president would return us to those times and those battles. Elections are about the future. Well, Obama and those who support him are the future. I hear the arguements about experience versus hope/change, but that's not the choice. It is about judgement. It is about being able to make the right call at the right time. Mr. Obama saw the problems of invading Iraq. He saw the coming economic crises we are in. Sen. Clinton would make a fine Senate Majority Leader. Mr. Obama will be a great president. I trust his judgement to lead our nation.

Posted by: StevenT | February 7, 2008 4:11 PM | Report abuse

Georgiapeac21556: Other than 4 years in Indonesia, a trip to Israel, Jordan, the Palestinian territories, Iraq and Kuwait, another trip that hit South Africa, Kenya, Djibouti, Ethiopia and Chad, you're right-- he hasn't been out of the country much.

davidflorida: The primary in Florida was meaningless, as all the candidates were forbidden from campaigning here, which gave Hillary Clinton a fairly distinct advantage, yet no one seemed to care.

Posted by: jeg | February 7, 2008 4:10 PM | Report abuse

The fact that he voted no to the Iraq war resolution does not qualify him to be the president no more than if I voted no to the war. The Idea that he has to be the "candidate" because he voted no to the Iraq war resolution is proposterous. Obama was elected to the Senate in 2004, He has barely qualified for that job never mind President of the United States. HRC is the far superior candidate with a much deeper understanding of polices Iraq and the world. The reason Obama doesn't want to dabte HRC anymore is that it is Obvious when they debate that she is the superior candidate. The empty chant we can do it bla bla bla. Obama is an empty suit that the Republicans will crush in the General election. In fact I beleive that consrvative independents are voting for him so they don't have to face HRC. Wake up People!

Posted by: politicalobserver1 | February 7, 2008 4:08 PM | Report abuse

"I'm not sure I understand how it is racist to cite population statistics.

Posted by: tulone"

Me neither, but Anne Kornblut wrote it was last week, right here in the Washington Post:
"For Bill Clinton, Echoes of Jackson in Obama Win
By Anne E. Kornblut
NASHVILLE, Tenn. -- So much for moving beyond race.

On Saturday, as Sen. Barack Obama was sweeping up the South Carolina primary, former Pres. Bill Clinton was busy downplaying the significance of Obama's impending win, casting it as a function of the state's demographics and the Illinois senator's heavy African American support. "Jesse Jackson won South Carolina in '84 and '88," Clinton said at a rally in Columbia. "Jackson ran a good campaign. And Obama ran a good campaign here."

It was a sour note on which to end the contentious Democratic race in South Carolina...
Posted at 11:33 PM ET on Jan 26, 2008 "

A "sour note"? Why? I seem to recall a lot of discussion of Pres Clinton's "dog-whistle" racist politicking at the time. Perhaps we react differently when it suits us to do so. Like Anne Kornblut.

Posted by: zukermand | February 7, 2008 4:05 PM | Report abuse

The fact that he voted no to the Iraq war resolution does not qualify him to be the president no more than if I voted no to the war. The he has to be the candidate because he voted no to the Iraq war resolution is proposterous. Obama was elected to the Senate in 2004, He has barely qualified for that job never mind President of the United States

Posted by: politicalobserver1 | February 7, 2008 4:03 PM | Report abuse

Another primary in a red state where Sen. Obama will win. If he becomes the nominee, he will lose this state in November just like South Carolina and other southern states. While he may get 80% of the african-american votes Sen. Obama will not be elected president because they are mostly in red state that always go republican. Also, how can he win Florida, Arizona, Nevada, Colorado and other red states with many Hispanics? Let us be realistic. These states are critical and may vote Democrat. I doubt however, if the nominee is Sen. Obama.

Posted by: tim591 | February 7, 2008 4:02 PM | Report abuse

To the person who referred to Obama as a "rookie," this whole experience thing is just a red herring. Obama has held elected office longer than Hillary, and he's accomplished much more while in office than she has. For Hillary to count the 12 years as first lady, where she was neither elected by nor beholden to voters, that's really padding her resume.

No doubt that Hillary is much more of a Washington insider than Barack, but that doesn't make her a better candidate. In fact, I'd argue that Washington is so corrosive that much of Hillary's morals and ethics have already been stripped away by our dysfunctional political system.

No doubt, Barack is a different candidate. But he's also better. He's more electable and has a much better track record of building coalitions to get things done.

Regardless of the reasons, Barack is able to get people who disagree to work together. That's why his peers voted him president of the Harvard Law Review. They saw in him this innate ability to bring people with disparate opinions together to work towards a common goal.

Posted by: BarackTheVote | February 7, 2008 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Earlier poster will do well not to confuse demographics for racism. Although I do think there is too much media attention on demographics that incite anger (i.e. race, gender, religion).

Posted by: beth.c.drake | February 7, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Can the Washington Post confirm that the DNC has been approached to pressure for a caucus in Florida for Democrats ?

We have voted here and with a clear message. Only one campaign can benefit from this. Interesting to have a call for a caucus. What is wrong with the secret ballot we had ?

Obama lost the big states heavily. Is this way of trying to fix results ?

I am left wondering.

Just what part of democracy does the Obama campaign fail to understand ?

If this sort of bullying tactic takes place then it is a sad, sad day for the Democratic party.


Posted by: davidflorida | February 7, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

We just can't trust a rookie (If not worst) with the most important job in the free world just because he is a great SPEAKER.

Talk is cheap, We need substance. People who are greedy for money and power usually are good speakers, like Reagan, who managed to fool the entire nation into believing that he had done a lot, while he was the laziest president ever. Reagan and his wife had literately turned the WH into a circus Hollywood style, with them being the clown and actors for 8 years. Many woman, children, and minority people are still suffering financially today because of Reagan.

Posted by: sunrise41510 | February 7, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

Zukermand, etc. Re THE BLACK VOTE
Don't be so stereotypical in judgment of Americans who are black. They make reasoned choices too. They know that Barack Obama is a superior candidate because he can win in the Capital, floor of the senate, where as of this day he happens to be the only senator of color out of the 100! Statesmen like lion of the Senate Ted Kennedy and so many brilliant public service professionals would not be endorsing and promoting Obama and the Obama campaign, if he were not the superior politician he is. He is on fast-track to White House. If "white" Washington says Barack is BIG TALENT for the democratic party, you better believe "black" Americans vote for him all the way with great pride. Before the "black" voters got the signal that Barack Obama was a very good presidential candidate, they were shaking their heads and saying that "I don't think Barack Obama can win anything." They talked against him. Not black enough, he can't win, white won't vote for him, so we won't vote for him. THE "black" VOTE CAME TO BARACK OBAMA after he won in Iowa and came very close to winning in NH. How hard The Clintons worked against Obama in SC! Michelle Obama, Harvard J.D. and wife of Senator Obama was sent to S.C. to teach Civics in Action 101 to EVERYBODY, a lot Black because descendants of slaves born Southland never migrated North. Leave race alone. Barack Obama to a lot of amazement is proving he is a real mover and shaker on the political front because he has been endowed by his creator with superior intelligence, wisdom, judgment, strategy, creativity, and grace to be a leader. Maybe it is not fair that white women of senior ages don't vote for Barack but vote for Hillary in landslide numbers. So, I am so proud that Black voters join the rest of us in voting Obama who has been endowed by the Creator with brilliance, wisdom, creativity, oratory, leadership and to boot--Rock Star Style!
Stand for Change, Potomac Voters! Obama mounted the audacity of his hope for change, even before DESCENDANTS OF SLAVES got Obamania and came over to OBAMADON. BLACK VOTE is about voting the self-interest, so Obama campaign expects and say it! What is the matter with that?

Posted by: Victoria3 | February 7, 2008 3:26 PM | Report abuse

You guys had better take a real good looky at the Rep. front runner. JOHN MCCAIN.

John McCain fully intends to chew Obama up and spit him out as to National Security. Obama has NEVER traveled to Iraq, or anywhere else for that matter concerning US foreign affairs.

Obama CAN NOT beat McCain.

Pay attention to this when you vote.

Posted by: Georgiapeac21556 | February 7, 2008 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Your comment is offensive, "dreamersline," and Senator McCain is welcome to your support and that of others who share your views.

To those who choose to view Mr. Plouffe's comment as "racist," or taking the African-American vote for granted:

His recognition of the fact that Obama has done well with African-American voters in all the primaries and caucuses doesn't constitute racism or taking the black vote for granted, any more than the Clinton campaign's observing that she has done well with women voters would be sexist or taking the women's vote for granted.

You people obviously have an agenda, and I would prefer that you pursue it somewhere else, so that the rest of us can share our comments about the issues and the perceived strengths and weaknesses of our chosen candidates.

Posted by: jac13 | February 7, 2008 3:23 PM | Report abuse

At least two posters have already attempted to label the following remark as "racist":
"Virginia also is strong Obama turf, given its large African-American population".

And while it is unclear who said it, or in what context, what is currently KNOWN about the voting patterns in the recent primaries (e.g. South Carolina and Georgia) is that in those states with large African-American populations, Obama has done very well with that segment of the voters; at the same time, Mrs. Clinton seems to be doing better than Obama with older women, voters with lower educational attainment, and Hispanics (in California). These are facts, based on analyses of voting patterns from Super Tuesday. Obama is also doing much better than Mrs. Clinton in the 18-34 voter segment.
Again, these are facts. And in all likelihood, the statement above is based on all that... just published in many fewer words.
So don't see racism or sexism everywhere, especially in those times when you would do well to recall the words of Sigmud Freud who remarked, "It may be a phallic symbol, but sometimes a good cigar is just a good cigar."

Posted by: TheShadowKnows | February 7, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Look at the Clintons past, Google "Clinton, China" or "Clinton, NAFTA" or "Clinton, bribe", the list is endless. Then see if you would want another Clinton as president.

Posted by: jerrypayneontherez | February 7, 2008 3:17 PM | Report abuse

I'm not sure I understand how it is racist to cite population statistics.

Posted by: tulone | February 7, 2008 3:14 PM | Report abuse

"Plouffe conceded that Virginia also is strong Obama turf, given its large African-American population".
_______________

Ironic how African Americans who have fought so hard for rights can now be taken for granted. Very ironic, and sad.

Posted by: brigittepj | February 7, 2008 3:02 PM | Report abuse

I don't understand all of you Clintonites. They're basically the same candidate, they're both very capable, they stand for the same things, have many policy ideas in common, except SHE voted for the WAR. That's it. The decision should be over.

Posted by: tulone | February 7, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

The endorsement of Council Member Marion Barry of Washinton D.C. of Sen. Barak Obama came in as no surprise because of the on-going trend that African-Americans are going for the senator at an all-time high. Both of them are blacks. The use such words as "fresh start,", "new direction," and the like are nothing but simply excuses to comouflage the real reason. Because of this, and if Senator Obama is nominated, count me as a democrat supporter of John McCain for whatever it is worth.

Posted by: dreamersline | February 7, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

Obama is looking strong, nationwide really, including Virgina, as this link below highlights in a postscript.

He has gained ground steadily on Clinton on the Internet and now holds a commanding lead:

Barack vs. Hillary- The Google Effect:

http://newsusa.myfeedportal.com/viewarticle.php?articleid=47

Posted by: davidmwe | February 7, 2008 2:45 PM | Report abuse

"Plouffe conceded that Virginia also is strong Obama turf, given its large African-American population"

The author of this point, whether it be Murray or Plouffe, is obviously racist. An apology is absolutely mandatory.

Posted by: zukermand | February 7, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company