Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Victorious Obama : 'We Have Liftoff'

Note: Please upgrade your Flash plug-in to view our enhanced content.

Updated 10:03 p.m.
By Jonathan Weisman
HOUSTON -- The Obama campaign already knew the exit poll numbers looked good, but Barack Obama stayed out of sight well past 8:30 local time, as a restless crowd of 19,000 in Houston's Toyota Center tried the wave, then alternating chants and screams to keep itself excited. The crowd packed the rafters, filling the nose-bleed seats that the Houston Rockets can only fill on the occasional good night.

And it looked like another good night for Obama. Despite being bloodied by charges of plagiarism and vapidity, the Illinois senator had taken his ninth win in a row as he completed the first of a four-day swing through Texas.

Without a major warm-up act, the cash-rich Obama campaign turned to the popular YouTube video made for free by Black Eyed Peas star will.i.am to bring on the candidate. Then the crowd erupted into a deafening scream when the Wisconsin results were announced and Obama bounded on stage.

"Houston," he said, "we have liftoff."

Campaign adviser David Axelrod took particular glee in the results after the rough days that preceded it. Obama's win among late deciders, he said, was a clear repudiation of the negative campaigning. A Gallup tracking poll showed the national race between Obama and Clinton tightening substantially, but Axelrod would have none of it.

"All I can read is what we saw from the voters in Wisconsin," he said. "They rendered a verdict."

By Web Politics Editor  |  February 19, 2008; 10:03 PM ET
Categories:  Barack Obama , Primaries , The Democrats  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Clinton Defiant After Wisconsin Loss
Next: Obama Opens Two-Front Fight

Comments

ramy lzfhri
http://ratetiti.fcpages.com/remeron-consistency-problems.html remeron consistency problems

Posted by: remeron consistency problems | August 21, 2008 2:52 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: drug elavil | August 18, 2008 6:11 AM | Report abuse

ceqh nvbcgp bxfptz gupl
http://knotlyri.lookseekpages.com/tamoxafin-and-prozac-interactions.html tamoxafin and prozac interactions

Posted by: tamoxafin and prozac interactions | August 17, 2008 3:20 PM | Report abuse

sucl brapihc ibcz unsd
http://knotlyri.lookseekpages.com/is-prozac-descibed-for-sleeplessness.html is prozac descibed for sleeplessness

Posted by: is prozac descibed for sleeplessness | August 17, 2008 2:27 PM | Report abuse

sucl brapihc ibcz unsd
http://knotlyri.lookseekpages.com/is-prozac-descibed-for-sleeplessness.html is prozac descibed for sleeplessness

Posted by: is prozac descibed for sleeplessness | August 17, 2008 2:27 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: elavil medication type | August 17, 2008 9:12 AM | Report abuse

xhypqlc rmpk lpjhn
http://idioyyinv.25am.com/emsam-how-much-is-cost.html emsam how much is cost

Posted by: emsam how much is cost | August 16, 2008 9:18 PM | Report abuse

udtagl
http://sandiego1.jvl.com/supplements-to-enhance-paxil-cr.html supplements to enhance paxil cr

Posted by: supplements to enhance paxil cr | August 16, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

xcvpfls brhvt cfzmprl
http://sandiego1.jvl.com/dyspepsia-induced-by-effexor.html dyspepsia induced by effexor

Posted by: dyspepsia induced by effexor | August 16, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

taczi niuwc ozfxrnq
http://youngercam.00freehost.com/depression-with-prozac.html depression with prozac

Posted by: depression with prozac | August 16, 2008 3:18 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: elavil side effets | August 16, 2008 1:26 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: effexor xr and wellburin together | August 15, 2008 8:06 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: adverse side effects of lexapro | August 15, 2008 2:38 PM | Report abuse

xbpnqzg reibpv trenwgd atlkuwy
http://armsasdrcd.1freewebspace.com/is-prozac-associated-with-weight-gain.html is prozac associated with weight gain

Posted by: is prozac associated with weight gain | August 15, 2008 6:42 AM | Report abuse

xbpnqzg reibpv trenwgd atlkuwy
http://armsasdrcd.1freewebspace.com/is-prozac-associated-with-weight-gain.html is prozac associated with weight gain

Posted by: is prozac associated with weight gain | August 15, 2008 6:42 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: low price propecia | May 12, 2008 3:32 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: low price propecia | May 12, 2008 3:32 AM | Report abuse

jayptq
http://www.yourhealthforum.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4604 drug interaction soma symptom ultram

Posted by: drug interaction soma symptom ultram | May 11, 2008 12:20 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: 50 mg ultram | May 11, 2008 5:52 AM | Report abuse

lbtp tzpw obvet tslaing
http://www.yourhealthforum.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4530 buy dir ultram

Posted by: buy dir ultram | May 10, 2008 6:32 PM | Report abuse

lbtp tzpw obvet tslaing
http://www.yourhealthforum.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4530 buy dir ultram

Posted by: buy dir ultram | May 10, 2008 6:32 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: ultram abuse | May 10, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: cheap generic ultram | May 10, 2008 5:38 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: overdose ultram | May 10, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

xzwy swvlk srkcoh xrhkyiwq oqek jpsgq pmxa http://www.hwom.nyup.com

Posted by: ecxtnpg npqrab | April 16, 2008 11:29 AM | Report abuse

owvabig otjw krxq osmpveh byxivrg qvsmhprb uwzmhl

Posted by: hvpndrgox onruzl | April 16, 2008 11:29 AM | Report abuse

To hardfordcity, Michelle Obama comments of her pride is based at the current situation in the country when white voters are voting for a person not based on his/her skin color and she has a right to say so. What makes you believe that she received help from the government for her education? Is it your bigoted conception that if she is black she most have received help to go to Princeton? Ophra and Michelle has every right to give advises to America just has Martha Stewart, Ann Coulter,Barbara Walters,etc, but I guess that they ae black so therefore, they cannot advise you.I'm sure you and your daughter received more help than anyone of us, because these benefits were not intended for people of color to attend college, we just happens to get some of the goodies you have been enjoying for years and that is what causing your resentment. Grow up and smell the coffee, this country is on the move. Either join get on the train or stay at the station.

Posted by: gus1181 | February 20, 2008 5:57 PM | Report abuse

"I, as a white woman, don't need your kind of "unity". hartfordcity"
WOW. hartford, all I can say is, I, as a white woman, find this kind of comment most distasteful and to echo Michelle Obama, this is the first time (since 1968 when Bobbby Kennedy was running)I have been proud to be an American.
People like you should go back to the 20th Century with Hillary. But no matter how hard you try, one cannot turn back the clock.
This seems to be a new day - could it BE?
We certainly HOPE so!!

Posted by: sheridan1 | February 20, 2008 5:36 PM | Report abuse

I sit and listen to the political hacks talking about how Barack has no plans and he is too young and the rest -- just like the screeching of Hillary and the Repubs. The fact is this country is expressing its desire for a real new direction -- what that is may not be completely known but the reality is that the the McCain's and Clinton's of the world have had their day -- they represent a past that has resulted in the same crap we have today -- Bill Clinton did take us forward and he certainly didn't have the great national experience that others accuse Obama of not having -- now is our nation's chance for a sea change -- and Obama is the agent for this change -- Wisconsin and all the other states demonstrate this quite well. This is a man of destiny and I for one am on board all the way -- and to Mr. Obama -- just keep moving forward and don't allow yourself or your staffers to turn negative -- we are tired of it -- you represent change -- manifest it during the run for the Presidency -- stand above the fray and negativity!

Posted by: rchensley | February 20, 2008 2:53 PM | Report abuse

i understood what michelle obama was trying to say even though she could have worded it differently....
i too am as proud as i have ever been for our country....

how could we be proud of our country after the Katrina disaster overwhelmed us and our president stood by for days without real support for good american people?... and even now the devastation remains and people remain homeless...

how could we be proud when we have a president who has continuously lied to the american people about weapons of mass destruction, invading a country that had nothing to do without 911?...meanwhile an innocent country has been destroyed and thousands have been killed...

how could we be proud of this country in the past when we do nothing about the drug problems that have infested our communities, meanwhile we are making deals with leaders of the countries that are producing & smuggling the drugs in!...

how could we possibly be proud of this country when we currently have a president that has let the country spiral into trillion dollar deficit?...

how could we be proud of this country before when we let racism rear it's ugly head, with individuals who place nooses at schools and public places?...

how could we be proud of this country when we forget about the good old fashion values of working hard,& having a steady income to support our families, if we allow our jobs to go overseas?...

how could we be proud of our country, if we allow financial institutions to take advantage of innocent people?..the result, record numbers of home foreclosures...

how could we be proud of our country when we let hollywood and the tv industry, glamorize filth, smut, and general bloody gore that fills our airwaves and eventually fills the minds of young impressionable americans?

how could we be proud of our country before if our leaders perpetuate divisiveness amongst each other?...

should i go on?

michelle obama is proud of the fact that she sees an america that truly wants change in each other and in our country with everyone working together for the common good and with a common cause! as opposed to the large corporations, drug companies, and politicians slamming us with the idea of what is good for America!

Posted by: docdwb | February 20, 2008 12:11 PM | Report abuse

i understood what michelle obama was trying to say even though she could have worded it differently....
i too am as proud as i have ever been for our country....

how could we be proud of our country after the Katrina disaster overwhelmed us and our president stood by for days without real support for good american people?... and even now the devastation remains and people remain homeless...

how could we be proud when we have a president who has continuously lied to the american people about weapons of mass destruction, invading a country that had nothing to do without 911?...meanwhile an innocent country has been destroyed and thousands have been killed...

how could we be proud of this country in the past when we do nothing about the drug problems that have infested our communities, meanwhile we are making deals with leaders of the countries that are producing & smuggling the drugs in!...

how could we possibly be proud of this country when we currently have a president that has let the country spiral into trillion dollar deficit?...

how could we be proud of this country before when we let racism rear it's ugly head, with individuals who place nooses at schools and public places?...

how could we be proud of this country when we forget about the good old fashion values of working hard,& having a steady income to support our families, if we allow our jobs to go overseas?...

how could we be proud of our country, if we allow financial institutions to take advantage of innocent people?..the result, record numbers of home foreclosures...

how could we be proud of our country when we let hollywood and the tv industry, glamorize filth, smut, and general bloody gore that fills our airwaves and eventually fills the minds of young impressionable americans?

how could we be proud of our country before if our leaders perpetuate divisiveness amongst each other?...

should i go on?

michelle obama is proud of the fact that she sees an america that truly wants change in each other and in our country with everyone working together for the common good and with a common cause! as opposed to the large corporations, drug companies, and politicians slamming us with the idea of what is good for America!

db'08

Posted by: docdwb | February 20, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

The Cult of Her Own Personality

To my fellow Democratic Party American's; we have a dark specter crossing the landscape of our Party. Divisive primary politics aside, we have a radical element among our membership. This element is becoming more evident with each and every loss that they rack up, in that they are pulling apart of our Party. This element is showing that the pulling apart, and possible fracturing of our great Party, for what seems to be nothing more then feelings of self-entitlement toward the nomination, is a justifiable cost for their goals and aspirations.

"Senator Obama's words are contradicted by deeds. He said he would -- he pledged to take public financing as now Senator McCain has pledged. He has just reversed that pledge.
--Hillary Clinton surrogate Lanny Davis, CNN Late Edition, Feb. 17. 2008.

Again, I feel it necessary that we examine the true benefit of tying the hands of a possible Republican challenger, in this case Sen. Obama, when it comes to financing a general presidential campaign. Is it a responsible move for a Party member to actively fight against another possible presidential candidate in such a way?

Is it wise for the Party to allow ourselves to enter into a most important election with one arm tied behind our backs? Of course it is not a smart political move, yet this dangerous element in our Party feels it is fair game to attack a fellow Party member on such a matter. And, in a sense, help the opposition's presidential candidate's campaign.

By rejecting public funds, which no major party candidate has done for a general election since public funding for elections was instituted in the 1970's, Sen. Obama will be putting himself at an obvious disadvantage. Not just because Sen. Obama would have to return more money then McCain. Sen. Obama has raised $6.1 million toward the general campaign, compared to the $2.2 million that McCain has raised, but his grassroots fundraising machine is massive and not nearly close to being tapped out. This would be not just poor politics on the part of Sen. Obama, but it would be irresponsible to the Party to do such a thing.

The Democratic Party has a wonderful advantage against the Republican nomination this election year cycle when it comes to funding. A tool, which if not utilized, would be a politically reckless action on the part of a presidential Party candidate.

What we are facing with this dangerous Party element, is a high ranking member of the Party that is willing, and desirous, that we concede such an advantage for what? Is it for a possible underlying feeling of presidential self-entitlement? Is it a campaign's last ditch effort to win? A do or die burn fest? Whatever the reasoning behind such a destructive move on the part of Sen. Clinton, it is nonetheless, a very dangerous ploy for such little possible gain.

Is this the kind of politics that we need in the party, let alone in America? The idea which seems to resonate with the American populace is that we need to move away from the typical day to day operations of our political leaders. We need to have a Party, and a Country, that is truly for the people by the people. Not a country controlled by the minority of its citizenry, or by its far right leaning religious minority, nor even by the money-throwing special interest groups, all of which attempt to circumvent the will and betterment of the majority of Americans. No, this is not the type of Party that we should be. This is not what the Democratic Party is all about.

What we are facing is a path that can take us either into a future, which is based on the belief, and yes hope, that we can do truly wonderful things if we pull together, or a future that concedes we have reached the pinnacle of American greatness, and we must go back to the way it was before these disastrous last 7 years. The idea and belief that America should be governed from the bottom up, and not the top down, is a crossroads sign post which we must use to choose our great nations future.

I, personally, will give the benefit of the doubt, and look to what great things we can hope to do with this belief and faith. The past was good, and we were served well by its purveyors, but it was just that, the past. To whatever future we find ourselves living in is yet to be seen, yet the leader of our Party is clear. The time is now to realize the fact that we have our leader for the campaign to reclaim the Presidency of the United States, and we must show unity and support behind Sen. Obama if we are to succeed. The alternative will be more of the same support for the status quo, which is both detrimental, and unacceptable to the American way of life.

---Matthew McGovern

Posted by: CitizenXX | February 20, 2008 11:14 AM | Report abuse

It's just like "Weekend at Bernie's" only it's "Weekend at Hillary's".
She's dead, but her friends are pretending she's still alive so the party can go on.
They won't pronounce her dead until the DNC in August.
Damn.
I didn't WANT to dislike Hillary but that was before Obama.

Posted by: swatantra | February 20, 2008 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Completely agree with edwcorey. ralphdaugherty, I think you have your horses crossed. The real fear for embracers of democracy everywhere is not Republicans going to the polls to vote for obama, its republicans going to the polls to vote for Hillary. The Republicans are salivating to go after her, and they're shaking in their shoes about the concept of an obama campaign. They've seen what he can do, how potent a force he is, and they're terrified. No, republicans are not the ones going to the polls to give Obama the victory, its actually people who want him to be President.

Posted by: Nemotoad | February 20, 2008 10:45 AM | Report abuse

bessmount,

It is obviously your choice to feel that way. But, both Clinton and Obama attempt to appeal to both mind and emotion. The difference is that Obama does a much better job of appealing to positive emotions, while Clinton seems intent on appealing to negative ones.

Posted by: jameswhanger | February 20, 2008 10:44 AM | Report abuse

NoDebris, thank you for putting forth a rational argument for your support of Obama. I wish more of your fellow travelers would employ their intellect instead of their emotions when posting comments! Your point that 40% of the voters won't vote for Hillary because they are implacably opposed to her, might also apply in respect of Obama.

There is a core contingent, of which I own I am one, who could never bring themselves to vote for Obama. I don't doubt that he is sincere, but I cannot abide the blatant emotional manipulation that is an integral part of his repertoire. He is mixing politics and personality in a way that I find distasteful, appealing to emotions as much as the mind. The final straw for me was when I read the transcript of a Michelle Obama speech, in which she referred to our "broken souls", implying that the 'hope' offered by her husband would mend them. Sorry, but my soul is a spiritual matter, if it's broken, I don't expect to turn to the President to fix it, as I thought we were electing a politician, not a spiritual God!

Posted by: bessmount | February 20, 2008 10:40 AM | Report abuse

georgiapeac,

Raising the payroll tax above $102k would more than offset the reduction in taxes for retirees. Do the math.

Posted by: jameswhanger | February 20, 2008 10:40 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: ralphdaugherty

"Republicans will dismantle Obama in November."

There you go again, Ralphie. You are so clairvoyant, it's a wonder that you haven't bought lottery tickets or recently put your money on the stock market bears. Did you?

Posted by: edwcorey | February 20, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

Okay Georgiapeac21556...We get it. You are afraid. Afraid of the future. Afraid of change. At least you seem to be informed. Many Obama-haters states he is all speech and no substance, but your blog dismisses that argument. Americans are NOT BLIND! In fact, more and more Americans are opening their eyes and hearts, and see a better way out of the GW Bush years.

Obama has been the most uplifting and authentic candidate for president that America has had in many years.

I wish you and other Obama-haters take your comments and analysis and then apply them to Hillary and McCain. What is McCains's or Hillary's plan for Social Security solvency? How would McCain and Hillary structure tax cuts so that they help the middle class? Unfortunately, you will see that Obama has more positions on the issues than Hillary, and definitely much more than McCain.

Posted by: ajtiger92 | February 20, 2008 9:52 AM | Report abuse

I can't believe Americans are SO BLIND !

Please read this article from Real Clear Politics. It is spot on to my feelings from the beginning. Obama has never shown me anything but the same status quo on his policy.

Here is a quote from the article for the younger people to read:

Obama pledges not to raise the retirement age and to "protect Social Security benefits for current and future beneficiaries." This isn't "change"; it's sanctification of the status quo. He would also exempt all retirees making less than $50,000 annually from income tax. By his math, that would provide average tax relief of $1,400 to 7 million retirees -- shifting more of the tax burden onto younger workers. Obama's main proposal for Social Security is to raise the payroll tax beyond the present $102,000 ceiling."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/02/the_obama_delusion.html

Please people, what has Obama done or said that is SO original?

Can he take all of these Americans to Congres with him to vote on issues? NO he can not.

I foresee interest rates going through the ceiling, gas prices at $5.00/gallon, and old people sleeping on the streets in the near future.

Another Jimmy Carter.

Holy moly....we're screwed.

Posted by: Georgiapeac21556 | February 20, 2008 9:36 AM | Report abuse

Landslide victory again.

GO WISCONSIN!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwNlaY8busw

Posted by: Rubiconski | February 20, 2008 1:41 AM | Report abuse

I AM FROM UK WATCHING THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE RACE WITH GREAT INTEREST.OBAMA IS LIKE FRESH COOL BREEZE IN THE DESERT.I LIKEN HIM TO THE STATURE OF AMRERICAN FORE FATHERS "ABRAHAM LINCOLN"AMERICA IS LUCKY, THEY SHOULD EMBRACE ABAMA ,IT WILL ENHACE AMERICAN STANDING IN THE WORLD

Posted by: SHARMAHomoeopath | February 20, 2008 12:40 AM | Report abuse

Absent some horrible revelation (something a little deeper than a failure to debate the underdog or an unattributed rhetorical flourish), Obama has these huge strengths that Hillary simply cannot overcome:

1) Does not start with 40% of the population irrationally opposed to him.

2) Clearly a superior organizational ability, in taking one year to surpass Hillary's seven-year lead in planning and resources and her twenty-year lead in networking -- not to mention her enthusiastic support from the last, very popular, Democratic president. To challenge and surpass that advantage in one year is not chump change and deserves respect.

3) Vastly superior speaking skills. That ability to motivate people is not a sin per se, as some would argue. It's obviously a huge asset. Arguments to the contrary are clearly tendentious.

4) Huge fund-raising advantage without appealing to lobbyists (really: check any non-partisan tracking organization and compare their funding sources).

Hillary has nothing significant to put against this except nostalgia for her husband's administration and respect for the hits she has taken for fighting the good fight so hard and for so long. That's not a small thing, but Democrats' nostalgia and respect isn't enough to win a *general* election. If she had a vastly superior machine, that might be one thing, but clearly she doesn't. And remember: picking a good team is a huge part of being a good president, and Obama's team is superior.

We can bicker back and forth about minutiae of policy differences, knowing that any policy they propose as president will be unrecognizable by the time it passes Congress, anyway. Essentially, on issues, they are identical, the differences too subtle to appeal to any but that fringe of wonks amongst us.

Essentially, on experience, they are also identical, when we compare either of these Jr. Senators to the Sr. Senator and war hero McCain. Not one of the three has any executive experience, though. How any of them would perform in the absolutely unique role of President is pure guess work.

Based on what we know, though, Obama is the better candidate for the general election. Hillary is not a bad candidate, she's a good one. But if winning the general election is the preeminent goal, then clearly Obama is the better candidate.

Thank you for hearing me out.

Posted by: nodebris | February 20, 2008 12:31 AM | Report abuse

Obama just keeps churning out the wins, and I hope that he continues to do so. And then in November I will be reminded of the feeling when the USA was about to touch down on the moon. "The Eagle Has Landed".

Posted by: jrev7620042000 | February 20, 2008 12:25 AM | Report abuse

The Bushes have endorsed McCain. I guess that pretty much seals McCain's fate in the general elections.

Obamarama is coming to the White House!!!

Posted by: yakumo.baka66 | February 20, 2008 12:21 AM | Report abuse

I just came back from the Obama rally in Houston. The energy was like nothing I've seen in politics before. What I saw tonight convinces me that no force on earth, not Clinton, not the Republicans, not anyone, can stop this man from becoming the next president of the United States. I can guarantee that.

Posted by: Anis_Shivani | February 20, 2008 12:02 AM | Report abuse

@ralphdaugherty:

"I wonder how many Republicans voted for Obama in the open Wisconsin primary to stop Hillary in the primaries."

This seems completely anti-intuitive to me, as every Republican I have talked to for almost eight years now has been drooling over the possibility of meeting Hillary in the 2008 general election.

This seems like the worst sort of rationalization, to me.

Posted by: nodebris | February 19, 2008 11:59 PM | Report abuse

Don't forget the amazing situation HRC finds herself in now.

Several months ago, she was 30 points ahead of EVERYONE nationally. The media was talking about the "inevitability" of her campaign. Few even knew who Obama was.

Now, suddenly she is behind even McCain in national polls and has raised only 1/3 of Obama's take in January. The media has suddenly "turned" on the inevitable candidate.

This turn of events is is amazing. And it is a testament to one thing: charisma matters. Passion matters. Intelligent and inspiring speech matters.

This why waves of fundraisers, new voters, and independents are flooding to Obama's campaign. This is why he has not only gained the momentum but it keeps building. It has nothing to do with special interest groups, inside pollsters, political operatives. It has to do with vision and convincing people to give you a chance.

As for the talk about "empty rhetoric," give me a break!!! What Presidential candidate doesn't base their entire campaign on speeches? Based on the "experience" marker, Hillary would lose big time to McCain. And what is this 30-year "experience" of which she speaks?

At the end of the day, the stump speech is convincing people to believe in you. Period. Its all speech. Of course, people have to live up to that speech--and congress has to help them, etc. But that is the same for all candidates, everywhere, all the time.

In the end, they are just jealous because there is nothing else to say---Obama smokes them on the stump, and this is why he will win the election.

Posted by: hillmannic | February 19, 2008 11:58 PM | Report abuse

@gbooksdc: No, I won't stay with any comment that starts by comparing one of our candidates to Nazi Germany. Immediately this tells me that you either have a very shallow understanding of Nazi Germany, or an extravagent tendency to gross generalizations.

Posted by: nodebris | February 19, 2008 11:55 PM | Report abuse

johnsonc2, I agree with you. People recognize sour grapes, and grappling for an edge when they see one. The voters are turning their backs to campaign rhetoric in favor of dealing with the issues that will move us forward. Nobody said anything when John McCain said "I'm fired up and ready to go!" the other evening -- giving credit to no one. The Clinton argument regarding words not getting solutions is silly as can be. One must use words. One thing I know for certain, some people can say "I have a dream," and nobody will say anything, but another person can say "I have a dream," and bring people to their feet. I like John McCain, but I would never vote for his having back-pedaled on his principles in order to win the conservative vote, with which he is still grappling. And the prospects of listening to the State of the Union speech with John McCain as speaker, just kills me. Who in God's name wants to listen to a dull speaker!

Posted by: SierraBW | February 19, 2008 11:34 PM | Report abuse

FDR is famous for saying "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself."

The only problem is that H.D Thoreau said it a hundred years earlier.

When it comes to plagiarism, I think of the American poet T.S. Eliot who said (and I think he stole this from Coleridge): "Bad poets imitate; good poets steal."

I don't mind stealing, if you are stealing good stuff and pronouncing it correctly.

Dan Duncan

Posted by: unabuilder | February 19, 2008 11:30 PM | Report abuse

I agree with mnjam that McCain won't be nice. I think that the voters are sick to death of Rove tactics and Obama and his campaign know how to respond and not to sink to the level of the accuser. It will be ugly, but the country will turn against the ugliness, just as they did tonight in Wisconsin.

Posted by: johnsonc2 | February 19, 2008 11:27 PM | Report abuse

Those who take issue with Michelle Obama's pride in being an American more now than ever before should perhaps look a bit deeper. Perhaps she is proud because so many people or all stripes have voted for a black man. Given the great racial divide that still exists in some parts, the nation has put aside the petty bickering over white v. black in favor of change. Had Hillary Clinton, John McCain, or any of the other candidates been seen as fresh and new, or the agents of change, they would wear the mantle Obama currently wears. Michelle Obama, I'm proud to be an American for the same reasons you are, and I trust all of us understand that your pride is not just in Barack, but in us all. We have overcome!

Posted by: SierraBW | February 19, 2008 11:25 PM | Report abuse

How can Obama change the tone in Washington, when his supporters spit out the most vile rhetoric? Clinton is like Nazi Germany? Please.

Posted by: shopping | February 19, 2008 10:18 PM
______________________________________

I said "Clinton campaign", not Clinton. Read the post again. And it was prompted by HRC's unwillingness _again_ to even acknowledge another defeat, let alone congratulate Sen. Obama. Americans hate bad sports: see Barry Bonds, Terrell Owens, etc. Not to mention, a willful disregard for reality is downright creepy.

Given the tone the Clinton backers have taken, it is entertaining to see them whine and sputter with every loss. I haven't seen so much press-bashing since the Nixon White House years (and Hill is SO much like Nixon, it's like she's channeling him, down to her courting the Archie Bunker vote). Goes to show, Dems are OK with demonizing Repubs, other Dems not so much.

This line is amped up at HRC's website's blog, where poster after poster is (a) saying it is all so unfair (b) blaming the press and (c) declaring they would never, never vote for Obama. They're such good Democrats. Talk about your cult of personality (or banality). They sound like nothing so much as high school girls who can't get a date to the prom (I'll show him!).

But since I'm a good person, let me give you the talking point straight from HRC's blog: they didn't lose by 13 points, they didn't lose by thousands of votes -- they lost by seven delegates. And what's seven delegates?

Good night now!!

Posted by: gbooksdc | February 19, 2008 11:22 PM | Report abuse

Proof positive that the Clinton strategy of attack & denigration was a mistake. How do the people at the top her campaign defend themselves???

Posted by: jameswhanger | February 19, 2008 11:18 PM | Report abuse

Hey ralphdaugherty

You have no idea what's going on it planet reality. I am a republican and I know of several die hard bush voting republicans who are crossing the lines to vote for Obama in 08. Not just the primaries mind you. The whole thing. Compound that by the zeal which independents have for Obama and you have a very electible candidate. For the record none of us voted for JFK (John Kerry).

Too bad bud. The Richard Nixon of the democratic party is gonna have to wait.

Posted by: jcmholt | February 19, 2008 11:12 PM | Report abuse

I will be at the Obama rally in Dallas tomorrow & will pass the word to:

Stop the DRAMA! Vote OBAMA!

Posted by: tom.brown | February 19, 2008 11:11 PM | Report abuse

If Hillary had dumped Bill post Monica, she would have had a chance of winning.

Obama is the candidate for our times. We need to be uplifted. Why not?

Plus he IS the only one who can beat Obama. Why? He gets the Independent and Swing voters. Hillary has to much Billary nationally to do so.

I respect Hillary. She spoke at my commencement. But you can't go negative against hope in times like these.

Gobama '08!

Posted by: VoiceofReason5 | February 19, 2008 11:01 PM | Report abuse

>crat3

Are the Hillary fans sounding a little nuts. Now they're comparing Obama to Hitler. Take a deep breath my friend............

Posted by: chris30338 | February 19, 2008 10:58 PM | Report abuse

I saw a few seconds of it, starting at the part where he did a sales job on globalization, promising to fluff the pillows of those affected but, nonetheless, still selling globalization. Then, he discussed how he was going to make college affordable for all. My first question was whether that will include foreign citizens who are here illegally, since BHO is a supporter of a bill that lets illegal aliens take college discounts from U.S. citizens.

Both of those issues would be great things to press him on, but no one from the WaPo is going to do it. We're going to have to do it ourselves.

---
http://nomoreblather.com/

Posted by: LonewackoDotCom | February 19, 2008 10:56 PM | Report abuse

Hillary will keep moving the goalpost. When Obama defeats her in TX, its gonna be OH and so on. She might win OH but come on. Her campaign is beginning to sound more and more like BAGHDAD BOB. Victory is just around the corner, etc, etc, etc..................LMAO

Posted by: chris30338 | February 19, 2008 10:53 PM | Report abuse

Preaching hope, inspiration, change, with no substance, no specifics, no media challenge, and media fawning, Obama is instructive of how demagogues rise to power to inflict horrors on humanity.

Posted by: crat3 | February 19, 2008 10:49 PM | Report abuse

Desite my Republican "sympathies",I must admit that John McCain doesn't have a chance against Barak Obama. I mean, he's "stuck" with the stupid war, he is "anti" womens choice and gay marriage, and very importantly, he looks, and acts pretty old. Given, that a total of 80% of us will mindlessly vote Republican or Democratic, Obama's appeal To (young) independents will carry the day!
David

Posted by: dandb3 | February 19, 2008 10:48 PM | Report abuse

Wisconsin was a LANDSLIDE, baby!

You're doing a helluva job, Hillary...

Posted by: Brentmack | February 19, 2008 10:47 PM | Report abuse

Agreed...Clinton is out. But for a real change let's get Gore.
I don't want 8 years of Michelle Obama and Oprah telling me how bad it was for them as blacks...sorry Michelle it was so bad for you at Princeton.
It is more and more obvious that you will only see "sisters" if they have black or brown skin.
I, as a white woman, don't need your kind of "unity".
I would have liked to "unify" for the Democratic party around Obama, but the hesitancy I've had for awhile becomes very clear. I'm not going to voluntarily subject myself to the reverse discrimination from Michelle Obama. If they win, I'll deal with it but I'm not going to vote for them. I've had to deal with Bush just more of the so-called Christian unity harmony lies.
Michelle, don't lecture me, I didn't do anything to you. You got more help and support for your education (painful as it was) than my daughters or I did.

Posted by: hartfordcity | February 19, 2008 10:46 PM | Report abuse

Wait a minnute... Y-you mean Obama has trusted associates with whom he counsels, mutually agree, and go forth with ideas? YOU MEAN HE'S NOT IN A BUBBLE OF OLD HACK SYCOPHANTS LIKE BUSH?

Right on! I knew my vote was correct!

Vote Obama for President :)

Posted by: onestring | February 19, 2008 10:33 PM | Report abuse

Let's face reality. Obama has won 9 primaries in a row, by large margins. That's called momentum. That's called being the front runner. That's almost called having it all sewn up. Clnton could never imagine not having it all sewn up after Feb 5th. She had no plan. Nothing on the ground in Texas. No plan to get delegates registered in PA. She still can't believe it. Hilary! This isn't about you!

Congratulations to Obama for a masterful campaign, superb organization on the ground, for energizing the party and bringing in millions of new voters. It's time for Hilary to graciously throw her support being Obama and get ready to send the 100 year war Republicans into the political wilderness for a generation.
Stop the Drama! Vote Obama!!

Posted by: thebobbob | February 19, 2008 10:28 PM | Report abuse

In your opinion is Hillary Clinton finished?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1754


.

Posted by: jeffboste | February 19, 2008 10:27 PM | Report abuse

I'm sure some Republican voters voted in the Democratic primary to promote the Democratic candidate they think is more vulnerable. Problem is, I don't think there's agreement among Republican voters as to which one that is. I do know one thing, though: the party activists and political operatives fear Obama more than Clinton, by a lot -- not even close.

Posted by: jac13 | February 19, 2008 10:24 PM | Report abuse

ralphdaugherty to answer your question 70% of Republicans voted for Obama and here the shocker can you believe 30% voted for Hillary. We do appreciate the Republicans voting in the Democratic primaries. And if for some reason you are insinuating that this is a tactic to get Obama pass Hillary so that he can meet McCain well good. Because listen up - - we will not need the Republicans to vote for Obama in November to beat McCain, although there will be many to stick with Obama that is the next POTUS The Honorable Barack Obama.

Posted by: ddraper81 | February 19, 2008 10:23 PM | Report abuse

Obama is mopping the bathroom floor with the Clinton campaign, and along with their dirt dissolved in the mop water, will flush the McCain campaign down the toilet. The Republican maverick and his disenchanted conservatives will be no match. Go Obama!

Posted by: Quino | February 19, 2008 10:23 PM | Report abuse

Hey MNJAM-

Brush up on your typed expletives. you meant @$$.

Posted by: lloydsullivan | February 19, 2008 10:18 PM | Report abuse

How can Obama change the tone in Washington, when his supporters spit out the most vile rhetoric? Clinton is like Nazi Germany? Please.

I fear that the Clinton campaign will lose and not because of anything she has done but because of the free pass that Obama has with the press. Nothing bad can be said about the little golden messiah. His wife said she's never been really proud of her country in her adult life until now. If someone in the Clinton camp said that, the press would be all over it. Who needs a first lady who's not proud of her country unless her husband wins an election? Obama plagiarized from someone who doesn't care. If Clinton did that, she still be pilloried. Can I tell my children it's okay to plagiarize as long as they get the person's permission to pass off his or work as my child's? You bet not! Maybe if the good people of Wisconsin heard about these things from the press in a fair way, they would have been sufficiently outraged not to vote for Obama.

Posted by: rosepetals64 | February 19, 2008 10:18 PM | Report abuse

WELL, THAT'S IT! WISCONSIN IS THE CLINCHER

OBAMA IS THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE

and the next president.

McCain vs. Obama?

Obama will win

Obama is the next president

Posted by: kevinlarmee | February 19, 2008 10:17 PM | Report abuse

McCain is too decent (and has been on the wrong end of too much negative campaigning) to be as tough on Obama as Clinton has been.
Posted by: gbooksdc | February 19, 2008 10:01 PM
----------------------
McCain reeks of entitlement, even more than HRC. Expect an ultra-mean and ornery campaign in the general election as Senator Forked Tongue, he who is permanently bent over after the wing-nuts got medieval on his sorry decrepit a@@, pulls out every stop to satiate his unbounded ego and persuade the country that it really needs Bush 44.

Posted by: mnjam | February 19, 2008 10:11 PM | Report abuse

Adios Hillary.

Posted by: wideblacksky | February 19, 2008 10:05 PM | Report abuse

This is turning out to be Harold Washington all over again. You have a black guy from Chicago, who had tremendous skills, up against a party hack who demonstrated her incompetence and had sky-high negatives.

Harold beat the GOP candidate, who got a stronger look than he would have otherwise. Obama will do the same to McCain. McCain is too decent (and has been on the wrong end of too much negative campaigning) to be as tough on Obama as Clinton has been.

Obama is the smartest guy in the room, and just like he was right on Iraq, he was right in figuring that this was his moment. The easy thing to do would have been to plan for 2012 or 16, so give him credit for being (a) bold and (b) right. Fortune does favor the bold.

Posted by: gbooksdc | February 19, 2008 10:01 PM | Report abuse

To the extent that Texas is a jump ball at this point and Wisconsin is a fair demographic portent of Ohio; is there a firewall left for HRC?
I just don't see what you pin your hopes on here in the Clinton camp other than some external event changing this ever deepening and strengthening tide in this election.

Posted by: mmoran1 | February 19, 2008 9:56 PM | Report abuse

>Can the end be near?

Let's hope so.

Posted by: bhotchkin | February 19, 2008 9:54 PM | Report abuse


I wonder how many Republicans voted for Obama in the open Wisconsin primary to stop Hillary in the primaries.

Republicans will dismantle Obama in November. He will do better than McGovern but not as well as Kerry.

Oh well, Republicans were trying to do this from the beginning and they succeeded.

rd

Posted by: ralphdaugherty | February 19, 2008 9:54 PM | Report abuse

The Clinton campaign is reminding me of 1945 Nazi Germany.

(Stay with me.)

The reason they knew they were losing is because the glorious victories of the Fatherland were happening closer and closer to Berlin.

No matter how Hillary and her minions may try to spin it, not only are they losing, they're done. They're out of money, out of ideas, and politicians -- never known for loyalty -- are jumping off the sinking ship.

It's like they've been shot in the head -- they're dead and they don't even know it. But the body will hit the ground March 4.

Posted by: gbooksdc | February 19, 2008 9:53 PM | Report abuse

Fired UP:

9:24pm: OBAMA WINS WISCONSIN.

Call *that* plagiarism.

Now the Clinton camp can most *assuredly* use the phrase: "Ready to go."

If you haven't been to a rally, or have, and want to take it with you, you can get the entire Obama rally setlist--all the way from U2's "City of Blinding Lights", to which Obama takes the stage, to the Obama victory anthem "Signed, Sealed, Delivered" at ITunes, here:

http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewIMix?id=273868596&s=143441&v0=575

Posted by: caraprado1 | February 19, 2008 9:52 PM | Report abuse

At this point a denigration of Obama is an attack on the Democratic Party. It is not unauthentic of Obama, for example, to borrow texts he believes in, as opposed to mouthing accusations of bad faith which everyone knows to be false. It is not treachery to accept personal donations, as opposed to surviving utterly on client lobbies. It is time to the Clintons to salvage what's left of their place in history, by joining it.

Posted by: Carter_NIcholas_readily_targetable_in_Virginia | February 19, 2008 9:51 PM | Report abuse

The exits in Wisconsin indicate that Obama continues to cut into Clinton's core constituencies. Wolfson, Penn, et al. can minimize this all they want, and say she expected to lose Wisconsin, but she really needed a win there and it looks like she didn't even get close -- something like a 10-12 point gap. And it's particularly ominous for Clinton that Obama won in this state, which is predominantly white and heavily blue-collar.

Texas is a dead heat and Obama's closing in Ohio.

Can the end be near?

Posted by: jac13 | February 19, 2008 9:45 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company