Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Obama Outlines Economic Plan


Barack Obama, being introduced by New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg before his speech. (AP).

By Dan Balz
Sen. Barack Obama, tackling the fallout from the collapse of the subprime housing market, today outlined major changes in the way the federal government regulates financial institutions and called for a second stimulus package to boost the economy.

The stimulus package would cost about $30 billion and would include assistance to individuals and areas hard hit by the housing crisis and an extension of unemployment insurance for those who have lost their jobs. "If we can extend a hand to banks on Wall Street, we can extend a hand to Americans who are struggling," he said.

Speaking at historic Cooper Union in New York, Obama was sharply critical of the mindset that led to the subprime mortgage crisis. "Our free market was never meant to be a free license to take whatever you can get, however you can get it," he said. "That is why we have put in place rules of the road to make competition fair, and open, and honest."

The Democratic presidential candidate used the speech to criticize President Bush for contributing to economy's decline. The administration, he argued, instituted policies, including a costly war in Iraq and huge tax cuts, that "threw the economy further out of balance and has been slow to move aggressively enough to cushion the impact of the softening economy on ordinary Americans.

But he was equally critical of Sen. John McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee. On Tuesday, McCain said the subprime mortgage crisis should not result in major government intervention to bail out individuals or institutions who acted irresponsibly.

McCain's plan, Obama said, amounts to "little more than watching the crisis happen. While this is consistent with Senator McCain's determination to run for George Bush's third term, it won't help families who are suffering, and it won't lift our economy out of recession."

While Obama was speaking, McCain's campaign issued a statement from the Republican candidate in which he emphasized that he is prepared to provide assistance to roughly 4 million homeowners who are facing foreclosure and the loss of their homes because of the housing industry crisis. "I am committed to considering any and all proposals to do so," he said in the statement.

But he reiterated his opposition to a broader bailout. "What is not necessary is a multibillion-dollar bailout for big banks and speculators, as Senators Clinton and Obama have proposed," he said.

Obama said federal oversight of financial markets has not kept pace with changes over the past decade. "The American economy does not stand still, and neither should the rules that govern it," he said. "The evolution of industries often warrants regulatory reform -- to foster competition, lower prices, or replace outdated oversight structures. Old institutions cannot adequately oversee new practices. Old rules may not fit the roads where our economy is leading."

Obama blamed the turmoil in the subprime market on the deregulation of financial institutions, which he said was "aided by a legal but corrupt bargain" between Washington lobbyists and lawmakers. "In doing so," he said, "we encouraged a winner-take-all, anything-goes environment that helped foster devastating dislocations in our economy."

Obama said the changes were bad for both Wall Street and Main Street. "Pain trickled up," he said.

The candidate outlined six principles for regulating financial institutions, beginning with the theory that those who borrow from the federal government should be subject to oversight and supervision. He called for overhauling capital requirements for institutions that deal in complex financial instruments, said the federal regulatory structure should be streamlined and argued that the government must do a better job of anticipating broad risks to the financial system.

He also proposed realigning incentives and compensation packages for financial institution executives to assure that shareholders' interests are better protected.

Obama had previously outlined proposals adding up to $30 billion in new assistance but said for the first time today that the elements should be put together into a second stimulus package to supplement the tax cuts already approved by Congress. Those tax cuts will be mailed to American households later this spring.

Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign issued a statement dismissive of Obama's speech. Policy director Neera Tanden said Obama had offered "a series of broad, vague principles, while offering no new concrete solutions."

By Washington Post editors  |  March 27, 2008; 11:48 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The President Speaks, But is Anyone Listening?
Next: Puerto Rico Governor Indicted

Comments

i'm a strait "A" college student goin' to onward in me studies as a proctologist doctor and I find it hard, very hard to cram things up my anal cavity without the smoooooth assistance of a top quality brand anal lubricant such as KY

Posted by: swollen things to come from anal bush, I mean george bush | April 19, 2008 3:04 PM | Report abuse

"cocka focka chocka snoooz dope doggy dog for yaz havin sed dis champ crozin dope da smoke you can haz it in yo grasp fo da takin' shoot
daddy dog u cant touch this cracka crack sella u cant taste this apple jacks hlolms"

Posted by: "quote from george Bush | April 19, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

So if Obama's "Mr. Xerox" what about Hillary in all the early debates?

"I agree with Senator Obama..."
"I agree with Senator Obama..."
"I agree with Senator Obama..." etc.

The fact is there are common-sense solutions (common to economic advisers at least) our current administration is ignoring. Look at the six key differences & decide side you prefer.

My question is which of them can be trusted not to give in to special interests?

Which of them can be trusted not to try to sell us on a lemon of a trade agreement like NAFTA?

Posted by: Not just bitter, pissed off... | April 18, 2008 3:35 PM | Report abuse

Definitely our current economic plan is not working and the only true solution is to change the way we do business. The Clinton's NAFTA plan was the start. I would not want them to craft another economic plan because they were very proud of NAFTA and it has hurt people like us in Indiana.

I believe in change, hope and OBAMA:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s9ubMQX7WE

Posted by: lexi1 | March 28, 2008 9:10 AM | Report abuse

Once again, fellow Americans and middle class workers, may you listen to this man and take courage to overwhelmingly vote for him without even looking at his race at all. This man Obama is not only American called and manufactured by God for America at this late hour of America's sliding downfall, God is about to use him to actually stabilize the world and bring some fresh air that we so long for. may we listen and not be fooled!!!! When a measure is directed to help the whole, the whole grows to the benefit of every part of the whole. Please meditate on this previous statement. OK, let me repeat it--"When a measure is directed to help the whole, the whole grows to the benefit of every part of the whole." Every middle class or lower-educated worker should know that this man is their best friend!!! I pray that Obama will take the time on the campaign trails to explain to these workers how they will benefit!!! In fact, these low and middle income workers are the a huge beneficiaries of Obama economics as the nation holistically grows strong economically, socially, and politically. Some politicians might say specific things to appease specific groups, but if what has been said cannot add to promoting the whole, that politician is either short-sighted, self-serving, or even a traitor. Again, I do not agree with one or two things Mr. Obama may stand for (e.g. abortion and gay rights), but I must not let this prevent me from voting for this man as the next President of the United States of America. We better wake up America. This man will make either the best or one of the top 5 best Presidents this country has ever produced!!!

Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and all good-thinking democrats need to stop this primary campaign and vote for this Mr. Obama. All America's middle class and workers better run to Obama's camp and make this man President for our sake's. This is serious. Dear fellow white folks--we better not be fooled. God will use this man to help us and America.
You may decide to let yourself be deceived by the Pastor issue or not, but we better not make a dangerous mistake this time. I may not agree with one or two things Mr. Obama stands for, but God seems to be leaning on using this man to help America at such a time as this--a time of serious turmoil in America's economy, political system, and international relations/cooperation. One of the worst mistakes America can make in all of America's history is to miss electing Obama President at this CRITICAL PERIOD of America. This man is not black, he's not white, he's not green or yellow or whatever. HE IS A GODLY AND HUMBLY SENSITIVE AMERICAN whom God will work with to bless America again. Don't be surprise that the fuel prices at the pump will soar DOWN to unbelievable price per gallon again, and OPEC will have little or nothing to do with it, and Obama himself may not have anything to do with it except that he is occupying the office. God is God when He gets the right person in place. Hillary is not the one now. Obama has to also think doubly twice before choosing Hillary as VP. She might be a source of problems!!! God is setting up America to be healed through this man. I continue to see it this way.
Ohio and hundreds of thousands of voters in Texas have been duped into voting for Mrs. Clinton. Mrs. Clinton duped them with the lies and innuendos on NAFTA and the 3:00 a.m. ad. But see-God exposed Clinton on NAFTA lies against Obama. She definitely worked to institute NAFTA and the
Canadian government also stated that someone from her campaign contacted Canada's leadership on her non-seriousness of her campaign rhetoric on Ohio NAFTA campaign. Well she gained the votes and won. I strongly call on Ohio and Texas voters to chastise Clinton and to demand their votes back!!! This exposure on NAFTA will let you know about what she means when she talks about the 3:00 a.m. phone call. Hillary will not answer that call. If she does, she won't know what to do or she will most probably make the wrong decision, trying to do things just by herself without consultation or she will be worrying and bugged down with "guilts" about what she has done to people in negative campaigning. Obama will make very good decisions, and he will make sure to get together with the right people to help him explore necessary alternatives and contingencies.
Wake up America and stop being maneuvered by people like Hillary. As someone wrote in the internet concerning Hillary's stunt on NAFTA, "When people talk about Hillary's experience, it is this type of stunt they are referring to...i.e., political experience. She's good at the Dark Arts, but that's about it as far as her experience goes."
Mr. Barack Obama is actually stronger in national security, economy, healthcare, and some of the other issues than either Hillary or McCain. America is at a stage in her life that she needs overhaul. The agent of that overhaul is Obama for such a time as this. His middle name does not matter and there is nothing wrong with it. He did not give himself the name. He loves everyone, including Israel. In fact, he might be the strongest supporter and defender of Israel ever. What people do not know is that Obama attends one of the strictest Christian denominations that commit very seriously to serving Jesus Christ. Church of Christ is STRICT! A weak Christian cannot attend such a denomination. It is seriously Pentecostal. The former Pastor certainly got carried away as many Ministers do and made some regretful comments. But that doesn't mean that man does not love America. The ex-marine just got carried away. It is also becoming very clear that Hillary can do or say anything to win while Obama, on the other hand, being a strong Christian, simply does not want to attack Hillary negatively, although he and everyone else knows how to do it. Right now, Hillary is striving to mess up the chances of the democratic party in the general election and to stop this important move toward truly refreshing and resurrecting prosperous America again. Somebody needs to help and stop the mess. I love the Clintons, but what they are doing now is not in the nation's interest. It might even be termed unpatriotic within some reason.
NOW Catch this: America cannot be resurrected into vitality and prosperity until significant number of her citizens become energized by the inspiration, wakening, and motivating spirit that God has embedded in Obama for the benefit of America AT THIS TIME. When people are aroused and awake again, then they can work hard and participate together toward believing and making everything work toward strengthening the economy, family, political system, national security, and building healthy and trusting relationships within America and between America and the rest of the world. That's NATIONAL SECURITY! THAT'S ECONOMIC STRENGTH! THAT'S PEOPLE TRUSTING AND BELIEVING IN AMERICA AGAIN! I am a Professor of Business Administration and Strategic Management for a long time. Obama is what America needs at this time. Again, I may not agree with one or two of his stands, but cost-benefit analysis clearly places him far on the top right now and for America. World leaders will actually respect him much more than others due to his humble spirit but also quiet inner strength! In fact, terrorists will think much-more than twice before they try to attack any American interests with Obama as President. They already have it in their heads that this man cannot play with them. I presume that Obama may be more humble than Reagan, but he has a tough demeanor similar to Reagan that outside world will fear and respect!
He will humble himself to negotiate with anyone and at any level, but those opponents will know (for sure) that they are not dealing with a push-over or someone they can ride even for a second. He will not make many mistakes and he relatively will not waste resources as many American Presidents have done over the years in dealing with foreign governments. He will appropriate resources wisely and monitor their use and who uses them, especially in relation to foreign aid and foreign wars. Many nations trick the United States into sending the dollars; but the dollars have usually been used to accomplish very little. Most dollars are wasted in highly corrupt foreign leaders who claim to be assisting their nations. Such leaders will find it difficult to try to play Obama. The following ad will fit the Mr. Obama:

"..... Shouldn't the President be the one, the only one that is capable of uniting people and solve problems without letting any problem turn into crises? The inspiration, my ability to relate to people instead of using intimidation or fight-posture, and my ability to manage or analyze contingencies and draw necessary conclusions and judgments define domestic and national security for America. Such qualification leads to getting problems solved without heading into crises that will bruise and drain America and wound our economy and every other thing! That's REAL security! That's the REAL experience you need! That's Barack Obama! We don't have to use force when we don't have to use force! If experience leads to consistently bad judgments, then what is that experience? You be the judge! How can someone who does not mind tricking Ohio into voting for her with lies on NAFTA be your President? How can Hillary Clinton be the President of this great nation if her experience is on flip-flops, innuendos, and accusing Obama wrongly for what she herself is doing? She is both Ms and Mrs. Hood Wink Wink and double-talk! Make Hillary pay for Ohio and Texas! Run away from HILLARY! Leave her alone! She is TOO DESPERATE to be the President of this United States of America. Her mind won't be steady at 3:00 a.m., for she will be worrying about all the negative campaigns. I will make the right judgment at 3:00 a.m., all a.ms., and all p.ms. given the circumstances of the call! People's lives are at stake; therefore, no one can jump into quick and un-chewed decision without consulting the Presidential cabinet or even the congress or even the American people. Run away from misjudgment. [EVEN the '3 a.m. Ad' Girl Wants Obama to Answer Call. Girl featured in Hillary Clinton's ad actually supports Obama. ABC News - Sun Mar 9, 12:35 PM ET] Make me your President and let us deliver Change We Can Believe In. YES WE CAN!"

Dear America, let us open our eyes and see how God is fighting for this man, Mr. Obama, who is a fairly serious Christian running to become our President. The cheep and deceiving Hillary's campaign didn't know that they were using a girl in a campaign who is actually campaigning for Obama right now. That's how God fights for people who are humble and means well like Obama. That's how God will fight for America when the right person becomes her Commander In Chief. Just read the ABC News excerpt:

---["They were parodying this ad, kind of poking fun at it," Knowles said. "My brother was like, 'Is that Casey?' And we just erupted. Sure enough, it's me." The file footage was originally shot for a railroad company advertisement. The Clinton campaign bought it from Getty Images. Knowles, a senior at Bonney Lake High School who turns 18 next month, has been campaigning for Obama. She attended his rally at Seattle's KeyArena on Feb. 8. Her mother, Pam, told The News Tribune of Tacoma that Casey cried and trembled after shaking the candidate's hand. The next day, she was a Democratic precinct captain for the state's caucuses. If she plays her cards right, she could go to the national convention. Not to mention that she could be in another ad. After her identity became known, Obama's campaign contacted her. "I mentioned that we should make a counter ad, me and Obama, against Hillary," she said. "They thought that was really funny. They actually might take me up on it."

Now you make the judgment. This is Obama's time for America. Vote for Obama to vote for America'a security, peace, economic prosperity, and political prosperity again!!!!!!!!!! Don't let any politician dupe your vote.
Dear fellow Americans and all white people: please do not make this mistake and then keep crying years later. I am independent and this is the first time I will be voting a democrat for President. Bad leadership takes away jobs and stifles cities and states. Let us wisely vote for this man Barack Obama. God will use him to resurrect and bless America in-deed through the empowering of middle class, etc. Read the following response by an Indian lady or gentleman from Canada:

"I am an Indian, living in Canada and I am fascinated by this election as an outsider I would like to make the following comments to my friends in America. This is indeed a once in a lifetime opportunity for the US middle class and it looks like they will miss it! Most economist say that the Indian and Chinese economies will equal or surpass the US by 2050 (only 40 years away). I never believed this considering the vast corruption and lack of infrastructure in those countries. But watching how this election has progressed I can see it happening and it is truly fascinating to see a nation capable of making a change in destiny choose a wrong path. The choices are John McCain - a maverick and war hero - that wants the war to continue (a war that US can not win - take a look at Kashmir and the Indian experience) Hillary and her divisive politics - which would lead US back to the 90s wherein were sown most of the seeds of the current economic downturn. NAFTA led to out sourcing of manufacturing to China/ Mexico and service jobs to India. and finally Obama - an inexperienced politician wanting to bring about change and inspiration. His biggest supporters are Intellectuals and educated and the youth however the people who need the change are not them...the people who need change are middle class (it is their wealth that is being shipped to India and China)
The middle class is being exploited by race and non issues by entrenched Washington interests (John and Hillary funders) and they are being led to candidates that will not help them. But here is the crux...the middle class will get less affluent - because of job migration and they won't have money for education the only way out. This is a cycle seen in most countries on the downturn. The 35-40 year old middle class man who needs change the most will not choose it and his grand child will suffer because all those jobs are moving elsewhere. 40 years from now - US can look back and lament this opportunity for a change (flawed as it may be!)
Everyone outside of US will tell Americans - Vote Obama for injection of new blood - But the US middle class just does not get it. It is sad to see a Great Nation take a collective step to its future downfall! Fascinating!! -- Posted by H Sudan (blog March 21, 2008, 1:17 p.m., NEW YORK TIMES, The Caucus, "Three New Obama Ads In Pennsylvania." By Kathrine Seelye).

I am a Strategic Management and International Business and marketing Professor for over 16 years. What this Indian writer stated is MOSTLY clear and true!!! Don't blame anybody but yourself if you fail to vote Obama. FORGET his race, and vote for America's future, your children's future, and strengthening and stabilizing America again! Let us leave racism alone and let God reign for a change. All working people, especially all the white people that work their hearts out and tend to be deceived by divisive politics--we better listen!!! Read:

L.A. Times Endorses Obama, McCain By ARIEL ALEXOVICH The Los Angeles Times, the largest newspaper from the Super Tuesday state with the most delegates, has just endorsed Barack Obama in the Democratic race this week. Mr. Obama, a senator from Illinois, holds most of the same positions as the paper's editorial board -- namely, being anti-war and for health care reform -- combined with a "sense of aspiration." The paper urged its readers to capitalize on this "historic moment" and vote for Mr. Obama in part because he opposed the Iraq War from the start. Yes, Hillary Rodham Clinton has been in the Senate longer, it said, but "experience has value only if it is accompanied by courage and leads to judgment." Furthermore, the editorial had harsh words to say about the Bill Clinton years: Clinton's return to the White House that she occupied for eight years as first lady would resurrect some of the triumph and argument of that era. Yes, Bill Clinton's presidency was a period of growth and opportunity, and Democrats are justly nostalgic for it. But it also was a time of withering political fire, as the former president's recent comments on the campaign trail reminded the nation. Hillary Clinton's election also would drag into a third decade the post-Reagan political duel between two families, the Bushes and the Clintons. Obama is correct: It is time to turn the page. No public relations campaign could do more than Obama's mere presence in the White House to defuse anti-American passion around the world, nor could any political experience surpass Obama's life story in preparing a president to understand the American character."

To all Caucasians: I humbly ask you to vote for this man Obama. Vote for him with all enthusiasm. There is something in it. God is going to use him to help us--The United States of America, especially in building back our economy and restoring America's honor across the globe. If we fail this time, it will be a big failure. Somebody needs to tell Hillary and her husband to really throw away their own personal ambition and selfishness away and place this country ahead. We better listen. This is not a question of race. This is about saving and reinvigorating the life and blood of America!!! This is a hard letter for me to write, but I have to do it just to clear my conscience. I have done my job. I have informed you. You make your decision.
But because some of you don't hear quickly, I plead again: Pennsylvania and all states--all of you: Please let us vote overwhelmingly for this Mr. Obama for a total overhaul of America (our nation) toward resurrected and sustained economic, moral, political, and international relations prosperity. DON'T EVER LET RACE CAUSE YOU TO COMMIT SUICIDE WITH YOUR VOTE. IF YOU DO, DON'T BLAME ANYONE IN THE FUTURE. YOU REAP WHAT YOU SOW! Don't forget the words of a foreigner (an Indian living in Canada) to us"...The middle class is being exploited by race and non issues by entrenched Washington interests (John and Hillary funders) and they are being led to candidates that will not help them. But here is the crux...the middle class will get less affluent - because of job migration and they won't have money for education the only way out. This is a cycle seen in most countries on the downturn. The 35-40 year old middle class man who needs change the most will not choose it and his grand child will suffer because all those jobs are moving elsewhere. 40 years from now - US can look back and lament this opportunity for a change. Everyone outside of US will tell Americans - Vote Obama for injection of new blood - But the US middle class just does not get it. It is sad to see a Great Nation take a collective step to its future downfall! Fascinating!!" -- Posted by H Sudan (blog March 21, 2008, 1:17 p.m., NEW YORK TIMES, The Caucus, "Three New Obama Ads In Pennsylvania." By Kathrine Seelye). WE BETTER NOT BE fooled this time! ---- With all love for our great nation, Dr. FSAOS.


I will love for him to pick Al Gore as his VP.

Posted by: strongblood | March 28, 2008 1:10 AM | Report abuse

There has only been TWO Dem presidents in the past 30+ years (and one of them got IMPEACHED)! If a Dem is not in the White House for the next 4 years, it won't be an earth-shattering event. Clinton cannot beat McCain. Period. Obama gives the Dems a decent shot, win or lose. Even if he doesn't win, he'll end up richer than Gore, while the ignorant race-baiters lose their homes and jobs under Bush/McCain. IT'S THE ECONOMY STUPID. Grow up.

Posted by: kathomas1 | March 27, 2008 10:53 PM | Report abuse

He steals everything from Hillary, he can't come up with anything on his own. If Obama wins the primary them I am voting for McCain at least I know who he is.

Posted by: kmr1964 | March 27, 2008 10:47 PM | Report abuse

Just like SNL Hillary answers the question and Obama agreees. He has no ideas of his own. Even his speeched belong to other people!!!

Posted by: mw_lovelace | March 27, 2008 10:42 PM | Report abuse

How can the Bushies claim that the Iraq war spending doesn't really have that much impact on the economy. Of course it does and will continue for many years ahead. Are they counting the tens of thousands of disabled veterans from Afghanistan and Iraq? That's a big chunk of medical care, therapy, and for those too disabled to ever work again...that's a lifetime of payments. Unless they pull the same old bait and switch with our veterans.

Posted by: joy2 | March 27, 2008 10:30 PM | Report abuse

heh, thought that was obvious, Haliburton, et al of course. or, more importantly very very rich people, fear induced war is a very clever way to implement reverse robinhooding, thats why you find even the most out of control tax and spend liberals being very frugal on defense, it takes money from the working masses and gives it to defense contractors and in this case, takes mostly the poorest families children to war to be put in harms way, under the guise of opportunity. that way they can take not just mom and dads money to give to rich, they can kill their son in the process.

regardless of how this ends, let us not forget these people and their families, even if it was bush's fault and it was, they paid dearly in service to us.

Posted by: staffordworks | March 27, 2008 10:04 PM | Report abuse

Obama's speech is nothing but Clinton redux.

How does Obama's words jive with his actions?

As a representative of his district in Chicago Obama looked the other way as his buddy Rezko & other slumlords scammed the residents who lived in that squalor.

The Obamas, however, made out real good on some lucrative real estate deals.

Michelle & Barack must have a good laugh at night thinking that they're pulling the wool over the eyes of black folks not as intelligent as they are.

Posted by: dyend | March 27, 2008 9:40 PM | Report abuse

staffordworks
Obama's proposal is to increase the CAP for Social Security FICA payroll tax. The CAP is now at $97,500. Personally, I don't think it's fair for someone earning #30,000 to pay FICA on 100% of their earnings, while someone earning #300,000 only pays 100% FICA tax on the first 1/3 of their income. Anyway, I'm glad you are supporting Obama. I think he's the most in touch with real people and he doesn't demonize those who disagree with him. That's what we need.

Posted by: joy2 | March 27, 2008 7:23 PM | Report abuse

The funny thing with all this brouhaha is that it has been said many times over that Hillary and Barack aren't much different on the issues. If they were "black and white" with respect to their views(no pun intended), this race would have been over. Hillary tries too hard to be centrist while her actions speak "more Republican" like the 3am ad. Truth be told, Hillary is polarising and vitriolic with the general public. As soon as the press says something she doesn't like, she harps on it. The Rev. Wright flap proved a much needed distraction. But she's under attack for the Bosnia trip and she tries to "resurrect" the Wright issue!!! Talk about Karl Rove strategy. That is old news and you lied about the trip not once BUT TWICE for all to see. I don't see her winning the nomination regards of her slim hopes keep getting slimmer. At least Obama tries to be his own man on the issues and doesn't have to 'shore up' his credentials on foreign policy. This country needs a change from the status quo. I thought Obama was a crackpot till I heard him speak. and then saw him demonstrate leadership ability with his campaign. Then it was decided. If you have a person fritter away $130million(according to some estimates), you have no right to be running for president. How is it that Obama has $30 million squirelled away and she is still in the red? Are we trusting our economy with a neophyte who claims to be experienced? So much for that with the Bosnia flap. We all know that Hillary has lost the nomination. The question is how long she would let herself burn.

Posted by: shaking_foundations | March 27, 2008 7:13 PM | Report abuse

kopymatt --

Sorry. That excuse doesn't cut it.

I'm a hard-core Democrat.

I've got great contacts on the inside of both parties.

Obama blocked all attempts at a revote in both Florida and Michigan.

If he's the nominee, Republicans will CRUSH him.

He's grabbed credit for things other people did his whole life.

He says one thing to one group and the opposite to another.

People don't like to be played for fools.

He's not going to be elected to anyhing.

His chickens are coming home to roost.

Posted by: svreader | March 27, 2008 7:04 PM | Report abuse

Good speech. Some similarities to Clinton, but mostly different. In particular, Clinton suggests freezing interest rates and Obama suggest mechanisms to work out foreclosures so that people can keep their homes. Clinton's idea of arbitrarily freezing interest rates reminds me of Nixon freezing wages and prices. That turned out to be one of the worst economic decisions in modern times. However, you do have to give Clinton some respect for at least trying, unlike McCain whose ideas are: "um, um , well my friends let's do nothing".

Obama/Bloomberg '08
Obama/Richardson '12

I can't make up my mind so I gave them each a chance.

Posted by: jimm_barr | March 27, 2008 6:49 PM | Report abuse

dyend: "Oh, I get it.

"Lincoln gave the speech at Cooper Union which introduced him to the nation.

"Obama announced his candidacy in Springfield where Lincoln was from.

"The night he was assassinated Lincoln attended Ford's Theatre.

"President Gerald Rudolph Ford said, 'I'm a Ford, not a Lincoln.'

"Following that logic, does that make Obama a Mercury? Highly volatile, rising rapidly followed by a plunging decline."

dyend,

I don't know about what that makes Obama, but at least we all know that Hillary was never a Hummer, eh?

(Sorry, I couldn't resist. I really, really couldn't!)

Posted by: whatmeregister | March 27, 2008 6:43 PM | Report abuse

Staffordworks:

That is a great testimony. I await the answer to your question as to WHOM received a trillion dollars. That just tickled me.

Any takes on that question anyone???

Posted by: Obama2008 | March 27, 2008 6:36 PM | Report abuse

We know that HIllary Clinton doesn't bother to read bills she signs --any comments she makes about Obama's speeches, his ideas, the way the election is going, her own chances of winning, her alleged "experience," are based on delusional thinking, certainly not on the literacy required to read anything with attention but the worn-out tapes in her own head.

Posted by: bguetti | March 27, 2008 6:24 PM | Report abuse

We know that HIllary Clinton doesn't bother to read bills she signs --any comments she makes about Obama's speeches, his ideas, the way the election is going, her own chances of winning, her alleged "experience," are based on delusional thinking, certainly not on the literacy required to read anything with attention but the worn-out tapes in her own head.

Posted by: bguetti | March 27, 2008 6:24 PM | Report abuse

We know that HIllary Clinton doesn't bother to read bills she signs --any comments she makes about Obama's speeches, his ideas, the way the election is going, her own chances of winning, her alleged "experience," are based on delusional thinking, certainly not on the literacy required to read anything with attention but the worn-out tapes in her own head.

Posted by: bguetti | March 27, 2008 6:24 PM | Report abuse

We know that HIllary Clinton doesn't bother to read bills she signs --any comments she makes about Obama's speeches, his ideas, the way the election is going, her own chances of winning, her alleged "experience," are based on delusional thinking, certainly not on the literacy required to read anything with attention but the worn-out tapes in her own head.

Posted by: bguetti | March 27, 2008 6:24 PM | Report abuse

We know that HIllary Clinton doesn't bother to read bills she signs --any comments she makes about Obama's speeches, his ideas, the way the election is going, her own chances of winning, her alleged "experience," are based on delusional thinking, certainly not on the literacy required to read anything with attention but the worn-out tapes in her own head.

Posted by: bguetti | March 27, 2008 6:24 PM | Report abuse

We know that HIllary Clinton doesn't bother to read bills she signs --any comments she makes about Obama's speeches, his ideas, the way the election is going, her own chances of winning, her alleged "experience," are based on delusional thinking, certainly not on the literacy required to read anything with attention but the worn-out tapes in her own head.

Posted by: bguetti | March 27, 2008 6:23 PM | Report abuse

Here's a plan: Stop wasting money on the war period because that sure isn't going to help our economy a bit. Period. That's definitely where we can start. Absolutely.

Posted by: Obama2008 | March 27, 2008 6:20 PM | Report abuse

Its easy to talk, its easy to say in the light of day that you dont care if mccain is old, hillary is a woman, barack is black, its easy to say that you support the right and the just and you are against the war but for the troops etc... but we all know that people only get really honest when they open their wallet.

Obama's money comes from $100 and less donations from regular people.

But the much larger put your money where your mouth is? I dont make less than $75k/yr not just my taxes but my social security taxes are going to go up if Obama is elected. I have 3 kids to feed, I have never been able to buy a house (only recently make more than 75) and I know that some of the extra tax is going to help someone who is lucky enough to own a home, stay in it, even though I cant buy one yet.

So for me to caucus, be a delegate, rally and vote for Obama, should say something. I am as white bread all american as you can imagine, thought of myself as a republican during the Grahm-Rudman balanced budget amendment days but grew up to be anti-partisan so I could just vote for the smart people instead of whoever was the flavor of the moment.

I get paid, very well, to think. so I humbly submit that if I wholeheartedly support this guy, there just might be something to him, something really big, I am betting with my own money that the long term payoff for me, my kids, my grandkids is going to be worth a whole lot more than the extra taxes are going to cost me. I wont get a dime of that directly, I make too much to get any entitlement from the government.

if you are angry, take a breath, slow down, follow the money, find out where people got their money, find out where decent people are putting their money, like the wall street comment, the economy never lies, can we afford this war? W. can say "mission accomplished-ish" all he wants, the economy says, uh, no, that'd be a no bob, we cant.

where'd that money go? I dont have it, you dont have it, the Iraqi people dont have it, our troops sure as heck dont have it, who does? who got paid one trillion dollars? who?

where do hillary and mccain get their money?

where does your fat cat ceo put his?

where does your hard working neighboor send his?

follow the benjamins.

Posted by: staffordworks | March 27, 2008 6:06 PM | Report abuse

Oh great...The WP does a story on a candidate's economic plan, and the comments sections dissolves into a school-yard fight over whose candidates is best, with appropriate taunts and jeers thrown in.
With regard to the economic story, I am greatly discouraged that none of the candidates seem to get it: This entire economic mess has debt as its root cause. Be it government debt, consumer debt, or Wall Street debt (toxic securities purchased on a 32-1 ratio of secured debt), we as a nation have simply run out of credit. The resulting liquidity freeze is making matters worse by requiring these debtors to pay up, thus precipatating further economic decline. And what are our candidates and policy makers saying is the cure: Why just throw more borrowed money at it, of course. The bloating of the Federal debt, cushioning of mortgage foreclosures, and the tax-payer funded bailout of an investment bank are not economic remedies, they're political fixes that have little to offer to those of us who, come April 15, will be paying real money for them.

Posted by: mtpeaks | March 27, 2008 5:50 PM | Report abuse

SVreader:

Obama denying voters wishes in Florida or Michigan?

Either you are a Repuglican hack or you just don't know what you are talking about.

Simple as this - Dean said to Florida and Michigan that the train track was out up head six freaking months ago. Were you not paying attention, sir? Florida and Michigan decided to play chicken and steamed on. Now all of a sudden it is Obama's or Dean's fault there is a train wreck when rules were agreed upon months ago? It was decided by Edwards, Clinton and Obama and the entire party that there would not be any campaigning in FL and MI and that their names wouldn't be on the ballot.

Florida put their names on the ballot anyway. The state of Florida did not respect the rules of the Demcratic Party and could nailed by a law suit for disenfranchising the rights and rules of the party. Too bad the law suit would solve nothing.

In Michigan, Hillary "Do anything to get elected" Clinton let them put her name on the ballot. Richardson, Edwards and Obama didn't have their names on the ballot because they respected their own promises to obey rules.

Half of your rant doesn't have one iota of substance. You could use HTML to set up some links to lead us to some facts that support your claims at places such as your favorite website in support of your slimy slippery slope empty arguments.

And another thing. There is a world of difference between Bush and Obama. Read Obama's books. Examine and learn about his character, worth ethic and difficult life. If you knew anything you'd know that Obama is the exact opposite of Bush.

Bush was born into privilege and power. He was the ignorant black sheep of the family. He blew up frogs with firecrackers as a child. (If that anecdote doesn't describe Bush I don't know what does.) Didn't have to work to get into elite schools. Didn't work once in those elite schools. Didn't work all his life and ran businesses into the ground. Bush became President and has said the constitution is nothing more than a piece of paper. Bush views life as a joke because his life has been a joke.

Obama was born into a biracial family. He was raised by his mother, a single mother and a brilliant anthropologist. He worked hard and received a scholarship into a prep school in Hawaii. He worked hard and ended up in Columbia. He did social work. Went to Harvard and worked hard there and was the editor at the Harvard law review. Then continued public service working for voters rights. Obama respects constitutional law and has in fact taught constitutional law at the U of Chicago back when he was serving in the Illinois state senate. Obama works hard and views life as a blessing because it has been a blessing.

Why am I sitting down to explain any of this to you. If you are so ignorant this far into the election season you aren't going to take the time to educate yourself now up until November. You'll just sit around continuing to rely on FAUX news to get your news unfettered by that strange thing called logic.

If you have an education I'd demand a refund.

Arron -
Pocatello, Idaho

Posted by: kopymatt | March 27, 2008 5:42 PM | Report abuse

Our advice to Obama is: You thought that Replublicans will empty dumptrucks on opponent in coming fall election campaign. Well! All the worst elements in America could not wait that long and have already started practising their despicable business right away. We should not have been surprised. Please do what your conscience tells you to do and ignore any label they may try to stick on you with contempt.

Dinkar & Vimala Koppikar

Posted by: dinkarvimala | March 27, 2008 5:34 PM | Report abuse

Our advice to Obama is: You thought that Replublicans will empty dumptrucks on opponent in coming fall election campaign. Well! All the worst elements in America could not wait that long and have already started practising their despicable business right away. We should not have been surprised. Please do what your conscience tells you to do and ignore any label they may try to stick on you with contempt.

Dinkar & Vimala Koppikar

Posted by: dinkarvimala | March 27, 2008 5:34 PM | Report abuse

I offer this analogy as to why I prefer Obama over Hillary for president.

Consider the driver and crew chief of a NASCAR team. The crew chief (Hillary in this analogy) may have thorough knowledge of how the car operates and what adjustments should be made depending on conditions. Hillary is a master political mechanic. But should she be driving the car? Hillary belongs in the legislative branch.

The driver (Obama in this analogy) needs to be able to see where he is, where he has been, and where he is going, and demonstrate the ability to steer around obstacles. In his speeches, Obama has demonstrated, through historical perspective, where we are and how we got here. He further recognizes that to steer a successfull course for the country's future, the existing partisan divides must be bridged. The manner in which he has run his campaign demonstrates an ability to react to obstacles. Obama is much better suited to be the driver.

Obama for President.

Posted by: JoeBewildered | March 27, 2008 5:16 PM | Report abuse

I went to the New York Times link above and read Obama's speech. Good speech, even without his eloquent delivery, the text is evidence that either the Senator or somebody on his staff has a keen analytical mind.

Posted by: cinnapatch | March 27, 2008 5:16 PM | Report abuse

How come The POST has nothing on MAYA ANGELOU SUPPORTING CLINTON?????

http://www.urbanacitizen.com/main.asp?SectionID=21&SubSectionID=126&ArticleID=147421

Posted by: mjno | March 27, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Obama=Hardcore Socialism=Pinko Communism

Posted by: autowx | March 27, 2008 5:10 PM | Report abuse

joivtman --

And more

From DD --

Just Embellished Words: Senator Obama's Record of Exaggerations & Misstatements

Once again, the Obama campaign is getting caught saying one thing while doing another. They are personally attacking Hillary even though Sen. Obama has been found mispeaking and embellishing facts about himself more than ten times in recent months. Senator Obama's campaign is based on words -not a record of deeds - and if those words aren't backed up by facts, there's not much else left.

"Senator Obama has called himself a constitutional professor, claimed credit for passing legislation that never left committee, and apparently inflated his role as a community organizer among other issues. When it comes to his record, just words won't do. Senator Obama will have to use facts as well," Clinton spokesman Phil Singer said.

Sen. Obama consistently and falsely claims that he was a law professor. The Sun-Times reported that, "Several direct-mail pieces issued for Obama's primary [Senate] campaign said he was a law professor at the University of Chicago. He is not. He is a senior lecturer (now on leave) at the school. In academia, there is a vast difference between the two titles. Details matter." In academia, there's a significant difference: professors have tenure while lecturers do not. [Hotline Blog, 4/9/07; Chicago Sun-Times, 8/8/04]

Obama claimed credit for nuclear leak legislation that never passed. "Obama scolded Exelon and federal regulators for inaction and introduced a bill to require all plant owners to notify state and local authorities immediately of even small leaks. He has boasted of it on the campaign trail, telling a crowd in Iowa in December that it was 'the only nuclear legislation that I've passed.' 'I just did that last year,' he said, to murmurs of approval. A close look at the path his legislation took tells a very different story. While he initially fought to advance his bill, even holding up a presidential nomination to try to force a hearing on it, Mr. Obama eventually rewrote it to reflect changes sought by Senate Republicans, Exelon and nuclear regulators. The new bill removed language mandating prompt reporting and simply offered guidance to regulators, whom it charged with addressing the issue of unreported leaks. Those revisions propelled the bill through a crucial committee. But, contrary to Mr. Obama's comments in Iowa, it ultimately died amid parliamentary wrangling in the full Senate." [New York Times, 2/2/08]

Obama misspoke about his being conceived because of Selma. "Mr. Obama relayed a story of how his Kenyan father and his Kansan mother fell in love because of the tumult of Selma, but he was born in 1961, four years before the confrontation at Selma took place. When asked later, Mr. Obama clarified himself, saying: 'I meant the whole civil rights movement.'" [New York Times, 3/5/07]

LA Times: Fellow organizers say Sen. Obama took too much credit for his community organizing efforts. "As the 24-year-old mentor to public housing residents, Obama says he initiated and led efforts that thrust Altgeld's asbestos problem into the headlines, pushing city officials to call hearings and a reluctant housing authority to start a cleanup. But others tell the story much differently. They say Obama did not play the singular role in the asbestos episode that he portrays in the best-selling memoir 'Dreams From My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance.' Credit for pushing officials to deal with the cancer-causing substance, according to interviews and news accounts from that period, also goes to a well-known preexisting group at Altgeld Gardens and to a local newspaper called the Chicago Reporter. Obama does not mention either one in his book." [Los Angeles Times, 2/19/07]

Chicago Tribune: Obama's assertion that nobody had indications Rezko was engaging in wrongdoing 'strains credulity.' "...Obama has been too self-exculpatory. His assertion in network TV interviews last week that nobody had indications Rezko was engaging in wrongdoing strains credulity: Tribune stories linked Rezko to questionable fundraising for Gov. Rod Blagojevich in 2004 -- more than a year before the adjacent home and property purchases by the Obamas and the Rezkos." [Chicago Tribune editorial, 1/27/08]

Obama was forced to revise his assertion that lobbyists 'won't work in my White House.' "White House hopeful Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) was forced to revise a critical stump line of his on Saturday -- a flat declaration that lobbyists 'won't work in my White House' after it turned out his own written plan says they could, with some restrictions... After being challenged on the accuracy of what he has been saying -- in contrast to his written pledge -- at a news conference Saturday in Waterloo, Obama immediately softened what had been his hard line in his next stump speech." [Chicago Sun-Times, 12/16/07]

FactCheck.org: 'Selective, embellished and out-of-context quotes from newspapers pump up Obama's health plan.' "Obama's ad touting his health care plan quotes phrases from newspaper articles and an editorial, but makes them sound more laudatory and authoritative than they actually are. It attributes to The Washington Post a line saying Obama's plan would save families about $2,500. But the Post was citing the estimate of the Obama campaign and didn't analyze the purported savings independently. It claims that "experts" say Obama's plan is "the best." "Experts" turn out to be editorial writers at the Iowa City Press-Citizen - who, for all their talents, aren't actual experts in the field. It quotes yet another newspaper saying Obama's plan "guarantees coverage for all Americans," neglecting to mention that, as the article makes clear, it's only Clinton's and Edwards' plans that would require coverage for everyone, while Obama's would allow individuals to buy in if they wanted to." [FactCheck.org, 1/3/08]

Sen. Obama said 'I passed a law that put Illinois on a path to universal coverage,' but Obama health care legislation merely set up a task force. "As a state senator, I brought Republicans and Democrats together to pass legislation insuring 20,000 more children. And 65,000 more adults received health care...And I passed a law that put Illinois on a path to universal coverage." The State Journal-Register reported in 2004 that "The [Illinois State] Senate squeaked out a controversial bill along party lines Wednesday to create a task force to study health-care reform in Illinois. [...] In its original form, the bill required the state to offer universal health care by 2007. That put a 'cloud' over the legislation, said Sen. Dale Righter, R-Mattoon. Under the latest version, the 29-member task force would hold at least five public hearings next year." [Obama Health Care speech, 5/29/07; State Journal-Register, 5/20/04]

ABC News: 'Obama...seemed to exaggerate the legislative progress he made' on ethics reform. "ABC News' Teddy Davis Reports: During Monday's Democratic presidential debate, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., seemed to exaggerate the legislative progress he has made on disclosure of "bundlers," those individuals who aggregate their influence with the candidate they support by collecting $2,300 checks from a wide network of wealthy friends and associates. When former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel alleged that Obama had 134 bundlers, Obama responded by telling Gravel that the reason he knows how many bundlers he has raising money for him is "because I helped push through a law this past session to disclose that." Earlier this year, Obama sponsored an amendment [sic] in the Senate requiring lobbyists to disclose the candidates for whom they bundle. Obama's amendment would not, however, require candidates to release the names of their bundlers. What's more, although Obama's amendment was agreed to in the Senate by unanimous consent, the measure never became law as Obama seemed to suggest. Gravel and the rest of the public know how many bundlers Obama has not because of a 'law' that the Illinois Democrat has 'pushed through' but because Obama voluntarily discloses that information." [ABC News, 7/23/07]

Obama drastically overstated Kansas tornado deaths during campaign appearance. "When Sen. Barack Obama exaggerated the death toll of the tornado in Greensburg, Kan, during his visit to Richmond yesterday, The Associated Press headline rapidly evolved from 'Obama visits former Confederate capital for fundraiser' to `Obama rips Bush on Iraq war at Richmond fundraiser' to 'Weary Obama criticizes Bush on Iraq, drastically overstates Kansas tornado death toll' to 'Obama drastically overstates Kansas tornado deaths during campaign appearance.' Drudge made it a banner, ensuring no reporter would miss it." [politico.com, 5/9/07]

Posted by: svreader | March 27, 2008 5:08 PM | Report abuse

joivtman --

And more.

Obama is all talk and no substance.

Read the article. Its about the fact that Obama is a total fraud, a product of the chicago politicial machine.

Its about him stealing credit for bills he never worked when he was in Chicago, just like he did in Washington.

Its about "Obama's Slums" and fact that Barry didn't care one bit about the people who elected him.

Its about the fact that Chicago Barry Obama is the biggest fraud that's been put over on the American public since Bush.

Its filled with facts about Obama from someone who has known him for years.

The title's cute. Obama isn't. He's a fraud.

http://news.houstonpress.com/2008-02-28/news/barack-obama-screamed-at-me/

Posted by: svreader | March 27, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

Rush Limbaugh's Operation Chaos is working marvelously!

As you socialists tear each other down, McCain smokes cigars and laughs. Mrs. McCain is already measuring for new drapes in the White House...LOL!

Any of you Dems see today's RASSMUSSEN tracking polls?

ENJOY-

Looking ahead to the General Election in November, John McCain continues to lead both potential Democratic opponents. McCain leads Barack Obama 51% to 41% and Hillary Clinton 51% to 41% (see recent daily results). McCain is now viewed favorably by 56% of voters nationwide and unfavorably by 41%. Obama's reviews are 46% favorable and 52% unfavorable. For Clinton, those numbers are 44% favorable, 54% unfavorable (see recent daily results).

Posted by: vinnieceskins | March 27, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

joitvman --

Have some more

Barry Obama calls Rev. Wright, "his close friend", "his brother", "his spritual advisor"

Here's some interesting information about Rev. Wrigtht.

Rev Wright Supports Hamas, which supports using children, including new-born babies, as "human bombs"

From Reuters --

Embattled Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has experienced one of the most awful weeks in American political history. As I said here, you know it's bad when revealing extensive ties to Chicago political fixer Tony Rezko isn't the big news of the week. Clearly, the Pastor J-Wright scandal has temporarily sucked the oxygen out of the presidential campaigns. As bas as that seems, this article in WND adds another chapter to the Pastor J-Wright scandal. This headline says it all:

Obama Church Published Hamas Terror Manifesto

It gets worse from there:

The Hamas piece was published on the "Pastor's Page" of the Trinity United Church of Christ newsletter reserved for Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr., whose anti-American, anti-Israel remarks landed Obama in hot water, prompting the presidential candidate to deliver a major race speech earlier this week.

Hamas, responsible for scores of shootings, suicide bombings and rocket launchings against civilian population centers, is listed as a terrorist group by the U.S. State Department.

That it was reprinted in Pastor J-Wright's newsletter calls into question how deep his hatred of Israel runs. Let's remember that this isn't something from 10 years ago. That op-ed ran last July. It's that much more troubling considering the fact that Pastor Wright accompanied Louis Farrakhan on a trip to Libya where he met Col. Qhadhaffi.

I'll take Sen. Obama at his word when he says that Pastor Wright has been his mentor. That's troubling because Pastor Wright's thinking towards Israel is far outside mainstream evangelical Christian thinking. Let's set that aside temporarily for the sake of this discussion. Let's pretend that evangelical Christians didn't take a position on Israel. Instead, let's think about this from a State Department standpoint. It seems like Hamas has been on the State Department's list of known terrorists forever.

That brings me to this question: What impact has Pastor J-Wright's views on Israel had on Sen. Obama? Sen. Obama says that he hasn't talked politics with Pastor J-Wright but, prior to this week, he insisted that he hadn't heard any of Pastor J-Wright's inflammatory sermons, too.

Suffice it to say that this story eliminates the possibility of the Obama-J-Wright controversy going away anytime soon.

Posted by: svreader | March 27, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

jovitman --

Before you send any more money to Obama, why don't you take a look at this --

Please Watch this report on Obama, Obama's slums, Rezko, and $100M of wasted taxpayer money, from Channel 5, Chicago's most respected TV news program.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDHsHM0laT8&feature=related

How do you explain away the fact that Barry Obama never followed up on the 11 slums that his friend Rezko was supposed to repair in Obama's district in Chicago, and continued to do nothing about the 40 slums that Rezko was supposed to repair or replace in Chicago, even after Obama joined the US Senate?

From the Chicago Sun Times:

For more than five weeks during the brutal winter of 1997, tenants shivered without heat in a government-subsidized apartment building on Chicago's South Side.

It was just four years after the landlords -- Antoin "Tony'' Rezko and his partner Daniel Mahru -- had rehabbed the 31-unit building in Englewood with a loan from Chicago taxpayers.

Rezko and Mahru couldn't find money to get the heat back on.

But their company, Rezmar Corp., did come up with $1,000 to give to the political campaign fund of Barack Obama, the newly elected state senator whose district included the unheated building....

The building in Englewood was one of 30 Rezmar rehabbed in a series of troubled deals largely financed by taxpayers. Every project ran into financial difficulty. More than half went into foreclosure, a Chicago Sun-Times investigation has found.

"Their buildings were falling apart,'' said a former city official. "They just didn't pay attention to the condition of these buildings.''

Eleven of Rezko's buildings were in Obama's state Senate district....

Rezko and Mahru had no construction experience when they created Rezmar in 1989 to rehabilitate apartments for the poor under the Daley administration. Between 1989 and 1998, Rezmar made deals to rehab 30 buildings, a total of 1,025 apartments. The last 15 buildings involved Davis Miner Barnhill & Galland during Obama's time with the firm.

Rezko and Mahru also managed the buildings, which were supposed to provide homes for poor people for 30 years. Every one of the projects ran into trouble:

* Seventeen buildings -- many beset with code violations, including a lack of heat -- ended up in foreclosure.

* Six buildings are currently boarded up.

* Hundreds of the apartments are vacant, in need of major repairs.

* Taxpayers have been stuck with millions in unpaid loans.

* At least a dozen times, the city of Chicago sued Rezmar for failure to heat buildings.

Posted by: svreader | March 27, 2008 5:03 PM | Report abuse

svreader: Any mainstream publication would be helpful. Why aren't these serious allegations you continue to make found in places like the Nation, Mother Jones, The Village Voice, or the Drudge Report?

I can't wait to see the Clinton's tax returns and examine all that money President Clinton received for his Presidential library and for the Marc Rich pardon. They are no saints my friend.

Posted by: jovitman | March 27, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

jovitman --

Which one?

Posted by: svreader | March 27, 2008 4:54 PM | Report abuse

What exactly is so new and different about Obama? His economic plan is straight out of the 70 liberal playbook: increase regulation and raise taxes. Nothing new about that failed strategy.

Posted by: bobmoses | March 27, 2008 4:54 PM | Report abuse

dyinglikeflies: So you perfectly comfortable with a Scalia, Thomas, Alito majority U.S. Supreme Court because that's what it will be if McCain is elected? I guess I don't know what it means to be a Democrat anymore?

Posted by: jovitman | March 27, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

asja --

I've posted more facts and detail than all the Obama supporters put together.

Obama supporters are in denial about their candidate.

The think he's a saint and that he's running "a different kind of campaign"

Open your eyes.

He's run the dirtiest campaign in years.

Look at the article about it in today's WP.

People are finding out who Barry Obama really is and they don't like what they see.

He's a slick, slimy, Chicago politician.

The only color he cares about is the green of money.

Obama constantly took credit for bills he wasn't even involved with, starting back in Chicago, and he showed he has absolutely no shame by grabbing the microphone and talking about getting up for 7am meetings about bills that he never even went to.

Obama lied about Rezko on national TV during the debates.

Obama lied about Rev. Wright.

Barry Obama has pulled the biggest "con-job" in history by using his "new kind of politics" pitch to stop the press from looking into his past.

Republicans won't be the least bit shy about doing what the press has failed to do so far.

If we Democrats nominate him, we're going to lose by a landslide.

He's a slick politician.

Just like Bush.

Now he's trying to prevent FL and MI voters from having their votes count.

Just like Bush did with Florida.

Its not going to work.

He's a credit-grabber and a slick fraud.

America's tired of him getting caught doing horrible things, like Rev Wright as his "spiritual advisor" and then preaching to us rather than taking responsibility.

He's done nothing and he is nothing.

You've been sold a bill of goods.

See if you still have the receipt.

If I were you, I'd demand a refund.


Posted by: svreader | March 27, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Scenario:

Obama/Bloomberg
vs
McCain/Lieberman

And Jewish person get into the Whitehouse

Posted by: saraz1 | March 27, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

svreader: Where's the evidence of your allegation for the 10th time about Senator Obama? Doth protesteth too much with no evidence that I can find after checking a number of publications and media like C-SPAN and PBS.

Posted by: jovitman | March 27, 2008 4:50 PM | Report abuse

I agree that Clinton will not be allowed to win. The leadership of the Democratic party is determined to stop this game in the seventh inning with Obama ahead. As for McCain representing my core values, he does not- but I find him more trustworthy than Obama, who had to my mind conveniently forgotten things when it seemed he could get away with doing so, and then slickly rationalized changing his M.O. when he could not. I am philosophically closer to Obama, but do not trust him, and, with the exception of scrappy here who has exhibited some class, I resent the strange and emphatic hatred shown by his followers towards anyone who disagrees with them.

Posted by: dyinglikeflies | March 27, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

The financial institutions that offered subprime mortgages, knew what they were doing long term. All institutions that offered this type of loan should be required to refinance the balances at todays rates. Why pay them to foreclose on homes then resale them at a profit? One sided for the big boys thanks to Bush. It is time to force this group of theves to toe the mark and help the American home owners.

Posted by: wrstx | March 27, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse

The financial institutions that offered subprime mortgages, knew what they were doing long term. All institutions that offered this type of loan should be required to refinance the balances at todays rates. Why pay them to foreclose on homes then resale them at a profit? One sided for the big boys thanks to Bush. It is time to force this group of theves to toe the mark and help the American home owners.

Posted by: wrstx | March 27, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse

dyinglikeflies,
no. when i'm not writing posts, I'm actually working on a PhD in financial engineering and mathematics at an Ivy League college.

do not confuse america's best (who are up there with the best in the world) with america's average (which is mediocre) - the proof is out there for all to see.
If America didn't have hard-working motivated immigrants coming in every year, it would have crumbled a long time ago.

Posted by: asja | March 27, 2008 4:42 PM | Report abuse

johnsonc2 hss requested to the moderator to he or she block any post that doesn't offer praise to the holy Obama or that dares bring up anything negative about his holyness Pope Obama.

As an alternative, he would a limit of one criticism of Pope Obama per post.

Anti-Clinton posters and posts would, of course, be of unlimited duration, frequency and falsity.

Other Obama supporters have previously suggested anyone who does not praise him should be reported to the FBI or Secret Service.

Obama Supporters -- This is America, not East Germany.

We have just as much right to post as you do.

Barry Obama isn't a saint.

He's the slickest Chicago Politician in years.

This is a free country.

We will make sure the facts are known.

The truth will be the end of Chicago Barry Obama.

He ain't no saint.

Posted by: svreader | March 27, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

dyinglikeflies: Thanks for the correction on deracinate. I should have checked the dictionary before I used the word as I thought in my haste, I was using it improperly.

So, as a Senator Clinton supporter and I presume a Democrat who cares about issues like what our Supreme Court and Federal judiciary will look like if we have a McCain Presidency, you would vote for McCain who would want to prove his conservative bona fides to the hard right by allowing him to possibly appoint 3 U.S. Supreme Court justices in the fashion of Scalia, Thomas and Alito? That's scary.

I have alot of ambivalence about Senator Clinton but the notion of a U.S. Supreme Court majority of Scalia, Thomas and Alito clones deters me from such ambivalence and I will absolutely vote for Senator Clinton if she is to prevail over Senator Obama.

I find it hard to fathom the thinking on both sides that they would vote for McCain when you consider the consequences of a hard right U.S. Supreme Court and Federal judiciary and what that would mean to our civil rights, environmental, health, labor and safety laws, right to organize a union, petition our government, reproductive rights and so on.

So, you still want to vote for Senator McCain if Senator Obama is the nominee knowing the implications of such a vote?

Posted by: jovitman | March 27, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Dying like flies,

I am sorry for the veil insult I hurled at you. You have a right to support anyone you wish even Mccain. I just hope he represents your core values not your dislike of Obama.

Scrappy

Posted by: scrappyc20001 | March 27, 2008 4:40 PM | Report abuse

Dyinglikeflies,

Please start campaigning for Senator Mccain now as Hillary will not win. I am sorry to say...but she will not win...I know that there is a snowball's chance in hades that she might but it the world I occupy...not the one our current president lives in...but the one based in reality...she will not win. I am sorry. I think she is a brilliant politician but a poor leader based on her surrogates and some of her followers, her campaign, her speeches, and her misspeaks. Mccain will love to have you and I look forward to a spirited debate in the fall about the issues and not this personal juvenile (BTW you really are too old to be hurling insults at people) crap that infects the media and these blogs everyday.

Posted by: scrappyc20001 | March 27, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton wanted a fight and I'm dead tired of people who are totally unable to be objective. Reading these posts for a month has got to me. No one analyzes anything, people are just coming out and saying insulting things and getting away with it. Obama's supporters can give as good as they're getting.

It's hard to stay positive when you try to reason with people who wont reason. Obama is not an empty suit. He's got his own ideas and as a Democrat, they will roughly the same as Clinton's positions on many things. svreader and thinker spend their whole time copy-pasting nonsense onto these forums instead of focusing on the issues of substantive difference.

you can only bait someone so long.

Posted by: asja | March 27, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Please, lets lower the heat on this Donkey on Donkey action, and get some Donkey on Elephant action going. Democrats committing murder-suicide is nothing to be proud of and a Mccain presidency will hurt at least as much as the last 8 Bush years. Please, we can discuss policy, but please, both sides, turn down the noise.

-an Obama supporter who will vote Democrat in November

Posted by: cain097 | March 27, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

scrappyc20001- Absolutely. bill clinton should shut up. He's been the main problem with Hillary's campaign. Her campaign was fine when it was about her, but when it started being about him, well that's when her problems began. She's extremely bright but nobody can hear her through all the personality crap that was thrown off by his misguided attempt to make things up to her for the past by helping out. Darn shame.

Posted by: dyinglikeflies | March 27, 2008 4:36 PM | Report abuse

Too bad the files of the pending SEC investigations of Enron and Worldcom were destroyed when WTC 7 spontaneously collapsed after not being hit by a plane on 9/11. Could have nipped that one in the bud.

Posted by: chrisdunning1 | March 27, 2008 4:31 PM | Report abuse

Lady Macbeth Obama should just be quiet already. Her husband already is known to surround himself with loonies. She shouldn't make it so plain that his wife, who manages him, is one herself.

Posted by: dyinglikeflies | March 27, 2008 03:55 PM

Okay as an Obama supporter I will enthusiastically say...Michelle Obama tap down the rhetoric...Now will you say the same thing to Bill Clinton?

Posted by: scrappyc20001 | March 27, 2008 4:29 PM | Report abuse

The post by pedraza1 was written from the heart and I am glad we have guys like him who are fighting for us. But as for Obama...are you going to make him stand by his campaign promise to bring our troops home in 16 months and what will you say to him if he does not??? I doubt you will say it is okay!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: ray_herbst | March 27, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Jovitman, most of the people I know who, like myself, prefer Clinton, are much more likely to vote for McCain than Obama in November if those are the choices. So your warning about the consequences of this ongoing "deracination" is misplaced. That having been said, thanks for using deracinate, although my understanding of the definition of that word was that it meant to uproot a people, not to insult them. Good try, though.

Posted by: dyinglikeflies | March 27, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Does this mean the media's done pastorbating?

Posted by: treetopflyer | March 27, 2008 4:22 PM | Report abuse

The level of sophomoric,vain, and petty comments by both Senator Clinton and Senator Obama supporters is so dispiriting. I am a Senator Obama supporter who each day sees a depressing truth. We are going to lose in November as we continue to deracinate each other. So this is the Dems, the big tent party? Pretty sad.

Why can't both sides acknowledge when one of their candidates makes a good and thoughtful speech as Senator Obama did,instead of reading such insipid, stupid comments like Senator Obama's economic plan is a Xerox copy of Senator Clinton's or Senator Obama never managed a budget. It's so petty and ridiculous it's painful to read.

Keep this up and we will be watching in January 2009, another Republican being sworn in as president. Isn't that depressing?

Posted by: jovitman | March 27, 2008 4:19 PM | Report abuse

I wonder if there is a moderator reading these posts who can screen some of this chaff out. It would be nice is some of the regular people who provide negative background noise, JakeD, rat_the, svreader, and the ironically named "thinker" for example, could be limited to one gratuitous ad hominem attack on Obama per article.
If you want to say you think Obamas plan is a lot like Hillary's or something else, then give your examples and make your point. Otherwise, stop using up space on the comment thread so that others who are interested in the issues in the campaign can comment.

Posted by: johnsonc2 | March 27, 2008 4:18 PM | Report abuse

visit your nearest veterans hospital this weekend and spend time with young people who's futures have permanently changed because of a war based on a lie.

some are alive but will never start families or eat unaided in their lives again. if republicans want this war to continue, they should pay for it with a special tax hike.

Posted by: asja | March 27, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

Yes asja, we Americans are so amazingly ignorant. We, who still function as the world's largest economy by far, who provide more Nobel winners than any other nation, who have created more material wealth than any other nation in history for the benefit of all mankind, are just pre-evolutionary morons. We will be nothing until we are bather in the light of the Holy Obama and his blinding, blessed, all encompassing liberalism.

Tell me, when you are not posting on this site, are you making good money selling flowers and pamphlets at the airport?

Posted by: dyinglikeflies | March 27, 2008 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Oh, I get it.

Lincoln gave the speech at Cooper Union which introduced him to the nation.

Obama announced his candidacy in Springfield where Lincoln was from.

The night he was assassinated Lincoln attended Ford's Theatre.

President Gerald Rudolph Ford said, "I'm a Ford, not a Lincoln."

Following that logic, does that make Obama a Mercury? Highly volatile, rising rapidly followed by a plunging decline.

Posted by: dyend | March 27, 2008 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Where does Obama, a man who Tony Rezko helped buy a mansion with money that almost certainly came from an Arab Muslim associated with Saddam Hussein's fuel-for-food program, get off lecturing America about home mortgage finance crises?

Maybe he should propose that we should have corruption figures under indictment help us buy our homes using money laundered from a fuel-for-food program while Iraqis starve?

That would lighten the burden on U.S. banks and the Fed.

Posted by: ephemerella | March 27, 2008 4:08 PM | Report abuse

Just what the country DOESN'T need: more spending. Also, Obama needs to take that idiot wife of his and put her in a refrigerator for awhile.

Posted by: birvin9999 | March 27, 2008 4:06 PM | Report abuse

Let's watch these videos and wonder where our country gets its reputation for ignorance from:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8SuCBHqXtQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJuNgBkloFE

People pretending to be indignant about being told the truth are just plain old hypocrites. If there is any single defining characteristic of Americans that the WHOLE WIDE WORLD can agree on, it is our insular ignorance.
Quit sweating the obvious truth.

Posted by: asja | March 27, 2008 4:02 PM | Report abuse

mtpeaks writes:

"I will vote for the candidate who: ... 6. And finally, when elected will actually enact what was promised."

How does one determine that, exactly? A campaign promise is just that, a promise. It may be sincerely pledged, but circumstances, or the will of Congress, might not allow the promise to come to fruition. Unless, of course, you can see into the future (or own a time machine), in which case, it would be unnecessary to vote.

Posted by: mnteng | March 27, 2008 3:59 PM | Report abuse

asja,
i will lose out when obama repeals bush's tax cuts. I worked very hard to get into that tax bracket. I find it appalling that obama wants to take that away.

Why should people who made bad decision be rewarded! I really don't get that. ARMs are bad decisions, no money down, bad decision. People characterize these mortgage lenders like snake oil salesman. Mortgages are not some big secret, these people should have done their homework before signing on the dotted line.

John McCain has a proven record of fiscal responsibility. (Pundits can insert trite war spending comment here.) Not one single earmark! That means something to me. Dems have a "plan" that they have been apparently passing back and forth between themselves trying to figure out how they can increase taxes and votes at the same time.

Posted by: gmcc | March 27, 2008 3:59 PM | Report abuse

Are there any New Yorkers who would kindly inform those in the outer provinces that Michael Ruben Bloomberg endorsed Joseph Isadore Lieberman for re-election in '06.

Bloomberg, who has flipped from Democrat to Republican to Independent and now to speculation as a VP choice?

Fuhgetaboutit!

Posted by: dyend | March 27, 2008 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Obama has come so far for media bias.Media like W. Post,CNN,MSNBC,NBC etc are dedicated Obama Soldier.

Posted by: mgm18122003 | March 27, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

Lady Macbeth Obama should just be quiet already. Her husband already is known to surround himself with loonies. She shouldn't make it so plain that his wife, who manages him, is one herself.

Posted by: dyinglikeflies | March 27, 2008 3:55 PM | Report abuse

Everyone should seek out and read the posting by pedraza1, which was posted at 1:44pm. Brilliant.....

Thank you for your service....your country appreciates you.

Posted by: natman19 | March 27, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

saying americans are ignorant is like saying the earth goes round the sun. accept it, smile and move on. america is the butt of the rest of the world's jokes when it comes to insularity and ignorance. and we're arrogantly proud of it. michelle obama shouldn't deny saying what is absolutely irrefutably true.

quit the fake indignation and find bern or canberra on a map. hint, its not close to iran.

that's just true and here's a video to prove it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6W3T7MTh4M

Posted by: asja | March 27, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse


This is Michelle Obama telling us all we are ignorant. Previous post was an error in the link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1etj68cO7zk


Mr. Obama's campaign tried to say that wasn't what Michelle Obama said here in this video.

They are always denying the truth. Must have learned that in the crazy church.


Posted by: chrishh | March 27, 2008 3:35 PM | Report abuse

Oh Dang!!!!

I guess that 3:00 AM call is not going to get answered until 4:30 AM when she finishes putting on makeup.

Oh.. I'm sorry Hillary "sniper-fire" Clinton. Your 3:00 AM call cannot wait that long.

No liars for president.
No crooks for president.
No more pity votes.
No more sympathy votes.
Release your tax return.
Let us see your land dealings.
Let us see your sources of income.
Let us see whom you paid to murder Vince Forster.

Posted by: Dave27
======================================

I see you bought Obama's BS speech. You need to re-read and listen to his Friday before interviews if you really want to see some lies that will affect America.
Do you folks ever think for yourself. I think Clinton's remarks were extra stupid. It is hard to understand why pols say things that have videos to contridict it. I acknowledge she is not perfect. You sheep seem to think Obama is God. How blind. Be objective at least a little bit.

Posted by: bnw173 | March 27, 2008 3:33 PM | Report abuse

About 41 percent of Americans have no income tax liability or do not file a return. But every wage-earner is hit by the payroll tax, amounting to more than they pay in income taxes for 86 percent of them.

Under whose administration will you pay more tax?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1985

.

Posted by: jeffboste | March 27, 2008 3:32 PM | Report abuse

Obama is a progressive?? Obama as the man to resolve the Iraqi crisis??

Not according to writers like Pierre Tristam. Writers have documented the ways in which Sen. Obama is pro-War, pro-lobbyist, and pro-patriot act.

Tristam calls Barack Obama a "Republican hawk in Kennedy clothing."

"If this is what we are to expect from the new generation of Democratic leaders, Bush's legacy has nothing to fear. It's writhing with life under a new guise. Call it neo-conservatism with a human face."

"Repeating his [Obama's] idea for a "phased withdrawal" from Iraq only to call it a "redeployment" in the same breath (the coy deflection from cutting and running, which is what this is and what it must be, dates back to Ronald Reagan calling the Marines' withdrawal from Beirut in 1984 a "redeployment"), he leaves open the door for a longer stay..."

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/07/20/2648/

http://tampabay.indymedia.org/article/barack-obama-fraud

Posted by: jj394857 | March 27, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse


Obam - Mr. Teleprompter.

Here is Michelle Obama telling us that American's are ignorant - and happily so:

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

The Obama campaign responded that that isn't what she said.

Wow. They really need to stop insulting our intelligence. Anytime now would be a good time to stop doing that.

Posted by: chrishh | March 27, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

exhooper - You are so ignorant it is flat out amazing. Affirmation Action programs were designed to provide employment opportunities and training for those black men. What happened, instead, was spoiled white women, the college educated privileged brats of the the white middle class, sqwacked and TOOK those set asides. This left those black men with no jobs, no training, no future, and those feminist bigits in charge of the very programs designed to lift black families out of poverty. Small wonder, with nothing else available, those black men have turned to drugs and alcoholism and crime. Hillary and her white middle class crones, the feminists, CAUSED this. The high illegitimate birth rate is directly traced to them, too. Black women are as much victims of the bigotry of these feminists as black men. They have children to get on welfare. It's that or starve. In turn, those same feminist hags, persue those black men for "child support", imprson them when they can, and blather on and on some more about how awful men are. The solution is actually pretty simple -- remove any and all protected status for women. Deny them affirmative action jobs, set them aside for genuine racial minorities. Give those black men jobs and training and a chance to feed a family, provide for them, and you would soon see most of the "black" problems created by feminists disappear.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | March 27, 2008 3:26 PM | Report abuse

Here's my six-point economic plan for deciding whom to support. I will vote for the candidate who:
1. Is committed to eliminating our national debt by reducing government spending.
2. Understands that enacting massive "stimulus" packages is only making the problem worse by adding to the debt.
3. Will take back control of our economy from Wall Street by not allowing ruthless speculators to run up the price of oil, food, and other vital commodities beyond their true value.
4. Understands that the so-called Global Economy has enriched a few at the expense of all.
5. Will pursue self-sustainability as a worthy economic goal.
6. And finally, when elected will actually enact what was promised.

Posted by: mtpeaks | March 27, 2008 3:26 PM | Report abuse

gmcc,
if you're middle class and earn less than 75,000 a year, your tax will go down not up under obama. if your stupid neighbors down the street are about to foreclose, it will bring your own property value down, he'll help ensure that doesn't happen.

you can be dogmatic and wallow in ignorance or pragmatic and understand that you can't live in an island when 2 million americans are being foreclosed. vote for mccain and he'll borrow some more from china, spend in 2 months in iraq what obama will do to preserve your home value and you wont be safer and your children's children will be selling federal land on auction to pay back interest to the chinese and the saudis.

obama is more fiscally conservative than mccain. ask anyone who understands economics and has read the democrats plans and mccains plan. you are relying on a reputation for good fiscal governance the republicans don't have. bush inherited a surplus and control of both houses of congress. where did it go? how did it become 10 trillion dollars of debt?

i see people like you don't mind becoming poorer, just as long as it's under a republican who lowers the value of your hard assets and your dollars without "reaching into your pocket"
gimmie a break!

Posted by: asja | March 27, 2008 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Oh Dang!!!!

I guess that 3:00 AM call is not going to get answered until 4:30 AM when she finishes putting on makeup.

Oh.. I'm sorry Hillary "sniper-fire" Clinton. Your 3:00 AM call cannot wait that long.

No liars for president.
No crooks for president.
No more pity votes.
No more sympathy votes.
Release your tax return.
Let us see your land dealings.
Let us see your sources of income.
Let us see whom you paid to murder Vince Forster.

Posted by: Dave27 | March 27, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse


I'm not sure how Mr. Obama can give a speech on the economy.

He seems convinced that 50% = 100%

I think, based on this equation that he really should release his college transcripts.

Posted by: chrishh | March 27, 2008 3:18 PM | Report abuse

Haven't you seen the interview of college students where Hillary held her initial campaign speeches and qa sessions?

Students told news reporters that Hillary's campaign staff gave pre-printed questions to ask Hillary during the q/a session, and the unsuspecting students fell for it. I am not making this up.

She is now mocking Obama for discussing what is important to the people in America. She has no clue, no foresight, no class, no decency, and now most Americans and even people in other countries trust even a word that comes out of her mouth.

Release your tax return.
Let us see your land dealings.
Let us see your sources of income.
Let us see whom you paid to murder Vince Forster.

Posted by: Dave27 | March 27, 2008 3:18 PM | Report abuse

DON'T BE DUPED !!!

Large numbers of Republicans have been voting for Barack Obama in the DEMOCRATIC primaries, and caucuses from early on. Because they feel he would be a weaker opponent against John McCain. And because they feel that a Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama ticket would be unbeatable. And also because with a Clinton and Obama ticket you are almost 100% certain to get quality, affordable universal health care very soon.

But first, all of you have to make certain that Hillary Clinton takes the democratic nomination and then the Whitehouse. NOW! is the time. THIS! is the moment you have all been working, and waiting for. You can do this America. "Carpe diem" (harvest the day).

I think Hillary Clinton see's a beautiful world of plenty for all. She is a woman, and a mother. And it's time America. Do this for your-selves, and your children's future. You will have to work together on this and be aggressive, relentless, and creative. Americans face an even worse catastrophe ahead than the one you are living through now.

You see, the medical and insurance industry mostly support the republicans with the money they ripped off from you. And they don't want you to have quality, affordable universal health care. They want to be able to continue to rip you off, and kill you and your children by continuing to deny you life saving medical care that you have already paid for. So they can continue to make more immoral profits for them-selves.

Hillary Clinton has actually won by much larger margins than the vote totals showed. And lost by much smaller vote margins than the vote totals showed. Her delegate count is actually much higher than it shows. And higher than Obama's. She also leads in the electoral college numbers that you must win to become President in the November national election. HILLARY CLINTON IS ALREADY THE TRUE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE!

As much as 30% of Obama's primary, and caucus votes are Republicans trying to choose the weakest democratic candidate for McCain to run against. These Republicans have been gaming the caucuses where it is easier to vote cheat. This is why Obama has not been able to win the BIG! states primaries. Even with Republican vote cheating help.

Hillary Clinton has been out manned, out gunned, and out spent 2 and 3 to 1. Yet Obama has only been able to manage a very tenuous, and questionable tie with Hillary Clinton.

If Obama is the democratic nominee for the national election in November he will be slaughtered. Because the Republican vote cheating help will suddenly evaporate. All of this vote fraud and republican manipulation has made Obama falsely look like a much stronger candidate than he really is. YOUNG PEOPLE. DON'T BE DUPED! Think about it. You have the most to lose.

The democratic party needs to fix this outrage. I suggest a Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama ticket. Everyone needs to throw all your support to Hillary Clinton NOW! So you can end this outrage against YOU the voter, and against democracy.

I think Barack Obama has a once in a life time chance to make the ultimate historic gesture for unity, and change in America by accepting Hillary Clinton's offer as running mate. Such an act now would for ever seal Barack Obama's place at the top of the list of Americas all time great leaders, and unifiers for all of history.

The democratic party, and the super-delegates have a decision to make. Are the democrats, and the democratic party going to choose the DEMOCRATIC party nominee to fight for the American people. Or are the republicans going to choose the DEMOCRATIC party nominee through vote fraud, and gaming the DEMOCRATIC party primaries, and caucuses.

Fortunately the Clinton's have been able to hold on against this fraudulent outrage with those repeated dramatic comebacks of Hillary Clinton's. Only the Clinton's are that resourceful, and strong. Hillary Clinton is your NOMINEE. They are the best I have ever seen.

"This is not a game" (Hillary Clinton)

Sincerely

jacksmith...

Posted by: JackSmith1 | March 27, 2008 3:18 PM | Report abuse

America, If a guy is good, he is simply good. Sen. Obama is good for America,
Posted by: tintin08
---------------------------------------------


Before I vote for McCain if Obama wins, tell me how you know he is a good guy? How is he good for America? I don't see what you see, inform me. All I see is liberal BS. I would like to vote Dem. I'm a Blue Dog Dem. Convince me?

Posted by: bnw173 | March 27, 2008 3:17 PM | Report abuse

There are a lot of hateful words on here for Senator Obama. A lot of posters stating that the media is STILL unfair to Senator Clinton. You people amaze me. If I did not support Senator Obama I would now. If you hate him that much and spread lies about the media being unfair to Senator Clinton like you do, he MUST BE GOOD! I don't think any of the candidates have a clue when it comes to the economy because economies are not run by goverments, just STIMULATED by them. Go take an economics class, talk to an economist or economics professor. The lies and tall tales you are spreading about Senator Obama yet at the same time crying how everyone is SO UNFAIR TO Hilary. Please! The nation in a whole has rated her negative. She and all her supporters are making this campaign negative. Read all the negative post on here about Senator Obama, READ IT!!! Tell me who is attacking who.

Posted by: ajackson3 | March 27, 2008 3:17 PM | Report abuse

The speech was not Sen. Obama's best, and although I am no fan of federal regulation, he made a good argument for modernization of the oversight process. Unfortunately, most Americans know so little about economic theory that most can't tell good ideas from bad ones from borrowed ones; sadly, this includes most of the comments here. At the very least, Sen. Obama's positions are far more cogent to his quality as a President than the out of context quotes from his Pastor that have gotten too much attention. We need to fix our education system so our electorate knows what it is doing.

P.S. to getcentered:
"We do not yet know much about Obama such as:"
...followed by talking points circulated more than a U.S. penny.
"7. Should I go on?"
No. Sorry they made you serve in Vietnam, that the whole thing was a huge mistake, that nobody held a parade for the brave men who served there, and that Iraq is another Vietnam. None of which excuses race-baiting.

Posted by: qaliqo | March 27, 2008 3:16 PM | Report abuse

Democrats ROCK???

man, i am so nostalgic for the times when young people did not care about politics...

I really do not want a president who ROCKS. I want one who will stay out of my life and my wallet.

That is not a democrat, it is a republican. Young people do not have a lot to lose in this election. I have a family and I have to support them, I really do not want to pay more taxes to bail out people who do not understand that the payment in adjustable rate mortgage can only go up! how stupid are you?

Posted by: gmcc | March 27, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

***************************************
***************************************

In a January speech at the University of South Carolina, First Lady aspirant Michelle Obama made remarks making the rounds on the internet today.

Talking about her experience at Princeton where she hung with a largely African-American crowd, she said, "We don't like being pushed outside of our comfort zones. You know it right here on this campus. You know people sitting at different tables- you all living in different dorms. I was there. You're not talking to each other, taking advantage that you're in this diverse community. Because sometimes it's easier to hold on to your own stereotypes and misconceptions. It makes you feel justified in your own ignorance. That's America. So the challenge for us is are we ready for change?"

I'm sure we all know what she's talking about when she reflects on the comfort many of us feel with those of our specific cultural or ethnic groups.

But her comments are under fire by many conservative commentators because of her construct that seems to imply that feeling justified in one's own ignorance in somehow quintessentially "America."

The Obama campaign says that's a mis-interpretation of her comments, that it was the proclivity for "comfort zones" that she thought was so "America."

Source: ABC News

*******************************************
*******************************************

Posted by: nnia | March 27, 2008 3:14 PM | Report abuse

Wow. If Obama ever had an original economic idea in his head it would die of lonliness. Some of these ideas "to fix the economy" are so old and tired they were first set down in cave drawings. Of course, this will get fawning coverage from the press which is always eager to shower Obama with "the soft prejudice of low expectations". This is just the mirror image, democratic version of the simplistic pap that Bush could have come up with in his Republican, simple, playskool mind. Since the Democratic leadership and the press has decided to prematurely kill the Hillary Clinton candidacy, is there anyone else who actually UNDERSTANDS how things work who would take the job? (Gore- are you listening)?

Posted by: dyinglikeflies | March 27, 2008 3:12 PM | Report abuse

To stabilize the housing market you have to let the prices fall down to where they should be, not prop up inflated prices. What is Barrack going to do for people who want to buy a house but can't do their their "bailout" plan creating inflated home prices?

I always love when candidates talk about having the lenders work with the borrowers. I could just imagine what the terms on the new loan, if offered, would be. I guess they extend the loan from 30 years to 50 years then tack on all sorts of criteria like if they sale the property later and actually make a profit then that money must be given to the bank to make up for their lost revenue.

Posted by: imaginaryfriend2 | March 27, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Blacks need to start taking some personal responsibility for high rate of high school drop out, sexual promiscuity, children born out of wedlock, , absence of male parenting/role models, drugs, crime, incarceration, AIDS, instead of playing the victim hood game and blaming everyone else for their plight! Until that time there will always be hate mongers & race baiter,s to use them and profit from their plight like the Rev. Wright, Rev. Jessie Jackson, Rev. Al Sharpton, Barack Obama as well as 10,s of thousands of White and Black Politicians. In fact the whole Democrat party! Hand outs, instead of a hand up, is the means of keeping Blacks down and economic Slaves! Keeping Blacks as an race of victims and believing all of the above is Whitey fault is designed to keep them from progressing instead of a race of achievers! It is in the best interest of Black preachers and Democrat politicians! Blacks will never be lead to the promise land by hate mongering Preachers like Rev. Wright or by bottom feeding Politicians like Obama that wants and works to keep Blacks in the Ghetto, on Welfare, and voting Democrat.........American1 ......blacks have been here longer than 90% of whites they just haven't had the financial or social backing.....they have represented the US with excellence everywhere they have been deployed or visited as embassadors of the US....every....I mean every war they have fought in free or not....and gangster rap would not be popular if white kids didn't buy the CDs.....so go hide in the hills with your divisive message America doesn't need people like you...misrepresenting.....its values....because America is about to change and I would suggest you get with the program

Posted by: exhooper | March 27, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Isn't it ironic that Obama's speech was given at the Cooper Union, the same place where Araham Lincoln spoke so brilliantly in 1860:

http://www2.nysun.com/article/49402

We are witnessing history in the making.


Posted by: adrienne_najjar | March 27, 2008 3:08 PM | Report abuse

"Thinker" and the other middle aged white crones, leftovers from 1970's feminism, are back tossing bombs again! What's wrong "thinker"? Do you see that sledge hammer, that toxic hag, you were planning on using against all men for some delussional past wrong, going down in flames? Look, Senator Outsourcer got most of her campaign money from giant corporations, both U.S. and Indian and Chinese... I am sitting here, flat out amazed, that the Post hasn't got some sort of investigation of those thousands of minimum wage earning dishwashers and sore clerks donating the maximum amount to her campaign. This is a clear cut a case of outright money laundering as I have ever heard of. On the economic front, Hillary's idiot husband dumped trade tariff's that were used to protect U.S. jobs and replaced it with this gigantic Ponzi Scheme called "free trade". You are as poisonous and corrupt and dishonest as your candidate, a part of Hillary's Army Of Darkness.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | March 27, 2008 3:08 PM | Report abuse

Sounds like Obama has a plan. He is trying to be the magic pill for curing all the countries ills. Well there is one thing we can rely on: He will give us a speach every time something goes wrong. This nation needs GOALS to be acconplished. Plans can change. Goals lets one plow through the crap to reach the GOAL.

Posted by: jfisher23 | March 27, 2008 3:07 PM | Report abuse

Thinker, find yourself something else to do, you've said enough.

Obama 08

Posted by: adiawiit | March 27, 2008 3:07 PM | Report abuse

Enough with the speeches delivered with the backdrop of multiple American flags. We get it. Obama is very, very Patriotic and Presidential.

Posted by: janeleeb | March 27, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Go get 'em Obama! Very good economic speech.

Posted by: ajtiger92 | March 27, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

rat_the, You see what I'm saying. It's the canary in the coal mine.
The comments battling Obama, Clinton and McCain, are the mists that blind the writers to the calamity just beyond their vision. Anyone can find their structures of stone were really Styrofoam over night. Example, interest only arm loans, no-doc. loans. Now come up with the increased mortgage payments or, let me introduce you to my little friend, government subsidized housing! Not Fannie Mae, but Public Housing! And to think it was said that folks living there were lazy, stupid you fill in the blanks. But not you.
See, folks in the middle know how easy it is to slide down into the bottom of the hourglass.
Lose your job at 55 and see how quick you bounce back into your previous income bracket. Go to the unemployment office? It has been a long time hasn't it? It's all done online. Erases the disgrace of applying in person. I mean people like you don't lose jobs, right?

And you're smart. That cavity is on your nerve now, and no health/dental coverages mean pack that thing with aspirin and hope it doesn't infect your blood. Lord knows what its like to show up in emergency w/o insurance!
Its the canary in the coal mine. Better heed the signs.

Posted by: nebulenz | March 27, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Enough with the speeches delivered with the backdrop of multiple American flags. We get it. Obama is very, very Patriotic and Presidential.

Posted by: janeleeb | March 27, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Obama is a dope who has not been tested. He's a newbie on the job and already we have lots of dirt on him. At least, we all know Hillary's issues since she has gone throught the meat grinder for 30 years.

We do not yet know much about Obama such as:

1. His mother was married 3 times
2. Has 8 brothers and sisters
3. Is proud to call the lunetic racist Rev. Wright "Uncle" and whose church rec'd $27,000
4. Is budy-budy with the disgraced Tony Rezko who gave him $147,000
5. Is friendly with William C. Ayers, the sefl-proclaimed Pentagon terrorist
6. Whose wife, Michelle calls Americans "Ignorants" (Source: ABCNews)
7. Should I go on?

You dopes who are supporting Obama need to wake up and smell the coffee. If you want a BLACK man for president, vote someone else ... anybody except racists like Obama and Rev. Wright. Read:

http://www.wmal.com/Article.asp?id=629269&spid=

Vietnam Vet
Where 58,000 Americans gave up their lives for your liberty and freedom!

Posted by: nnia | March 27, 2008 2:59 PM | Report abuse

The GOP will be HURTING in the next elections!!!!

The GOP/Republican tools on these forums wouldn't dare talk about Republicans and their failed policies. Instead they help themselves feel better about blind support for the Republicans, by attacking Democrats trying to fan the flames of dissent within the DNC.

Well now I know, a vote for a Republican is literally a vote for ignorance, and misguided spending in an unnecessary war in Iraq, which causes more hate........

Democrats ROCK!!!!!!!!!!

Obama is an amazing speaker! I have never heard any politician speak so candidly and clearly about so many topics, much less the state of racism in America. I'd love to see a Republican address this subject in such a direct and intelligent way.
MAJOR APLAUSE FOR BARRAK OBAMA!!

I'm proud to be a part of such a historic election. We can have our first woman or African-American President!!! This country has some healing to do and Republicans just GET IN THE WAY.

This election will be historic, and it's not about Hillary versus Obama, it's about Democrat versus Republican.

Hillary or Obama, or both. Go Democrats!

Posted by: getcentered | March 27, 2008 2:53 PM | Report abuse

Get rid of the 20 million illegal immigrants!!

That should be Job #1 of any Economic Stimulus Plan!!

66 billion dollars a year wouldn't be sent out of country by illegal immigrants!!

Millions of jobs would be freed up!!

40 billion dollars of taxpayer money would not be spent on illegal immigrant students.

Automatically Send an email, or fax to your representative
CAPPS Immigration Issues
http://capwiz.com/caps/issues/

NumbersUSA Action - free faxes
http://www.numbersusa.com/actionbuffet

Think of the savings on Healthcare, Welfare, Food Stamps, Section-8 housing, law enforcement, incarceration.

Obama???

Posted by: buzzm1 | March 27, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse


NOT ROCKET SCIENCE - SCARY
Michelle Obama said that the experience that Barack does not have he will acquire - because "most of it is not rocket science".
Whew. Wow. I feel safer already.

3AM: MICHELE OBAMA ANSWERS THE PHONE
She says. "Call back tomorrow, we're not feeling particularly proud of America today - so just let it go to heck. But there are a ton of lapel flag pins in our house that Barack would never use. Send a few of those over to the dangerous person. Better yet, call Hillary - that's our first choice for answers. I'm sure she can help you, too.

3AM: BARACK OBAMA ANSWERS THE PHONE
He says: "Who?" Call my campaign and ask them what I should do!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fwog6E08CFU

Posted by: Thinker | March 27, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

ephemerella....

You want some cheese with that whine?

You sounds as whiny and pathetic as your girl Hillary. Here's a hint...pulling out Karl Rove's playbook ain't helping your cause.

Gotta love the above comment also. Did I not hear that Obama's wife today called whites arrogant when they talk about race. Now who's playbook did that come from!!!!!

Posted by: ray_herbst | March 27, 2008 2:43 PM | Report abuse

Since Obama wants to send federal dollars to people who took out unwise mortgages, can't he send a few bucks to my family members who made unwise decisions with their credit cards?

Perhaps he could just explain the difference in unwise borrowing in each case.

Posted by: edbyronadams
___________________________________________

Since Bush did not oversee horrible lending practices by lenders, can't he turn away if I rob a bank?

Perhaps he could just explain why he did not care that people were given loans that banks knew they could not afford to pay.


Seriously, how old are you?? Your logic is that of a monkey.

Posted by: cheguevara1970 | March 27, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

"The candidate outlined six principles for regulating financial institutions, beginning with the theory . . . "

Is he not listening to the millions of people who think he's just talk? This sounds like an economic theory undergrad class! The more he talks, the more I believe that's all he can do.

Clinton '08

Posted by: Susan9 | March 27, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

Ephemerella - your insights are right on

My husband and I both noticed the same thing quite some time ago and it is rampant not only in the washington post but in the ABC, CBS, MSNBC (web and tv) and CNN networks are the same.

I note that these same corporations sold us George W Bush and the Iraq war.

We would boycott the advertisers of these corporations but they are mostly drug companies and since we don't do drugs, well we are out of luck.

We stopped watching these broadcasts quite some time ago and it is a shame becaue I used to really like keith oberman (you know the guy who stole edward r murrows "good night and good luck) but I can't stand him anymore.

But I have left the democratic party because 35% of the democratic men said they would "never" vote for a woman" so I am not going to vote this time. Just can't vote republican but I am an Independent now and I could care less what happens to the democratic party.

I do love and still support Hillary. It's the democrats I can't stand.

Posted by: lndlouis | March 27, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

I anticipated, from the headline, this article would shed some flattering light on Barack Obama's socio-political values and economic positions. Instead, the reporter offered nothing new. Worse, he uses the coverage as an opportunity to bash McCain, and gain sympathy with that segment of voters who are underwater on their mortgages. It's sad commentary that one has to rely on CNBC's interview with Obama to discover he's a socialist beneath the sheepskin coat of his polished Harvard law degree. I like Obama. I respect his intellect and admire his oratory skills. As a Republican, I was -- untile today -- still considering giving him my support this fall. However, I now believe he is far more socialist tham capitalist, far more prone to insite than unite. His pastor's hateful sermons are disturbing, but Obama's fear of distancing himself from his fellow Chicago compatriot is even more troubling. Both reveal one of two possible explanations: Either Obama fears an embarrassing retribution from his pastor if he condemns him; or he agrees, in principle with what his pastor said for 20 years, if not wholly with the words he chose to frame his viewpoint. In any case, Obama's response revealled that he is, in fact, more black than white. For some, that may be good; for others, it may be alarming. For me, it's just disappointed, because I had previously viewed Obama as an American. Now, I fear he's a socialist, and I'm afraid many journalists are trying to paint Obama with the softer overtones of the dissenfranhised -- the so-called working middle-class. Truth be told, the middle-class in North America would get hit the hardest by billions of dollars in federally subsidized payments toward home-mortgage dilinquecies. If Congress passes such a program under Obama -- or Clinton --it will require increased taxes on the backs of all responsible, hard-working Americans who borrow only what they can afford and who pay their bills on time. Unfortunately, I'm inclined to believe that the only candidate who comes close to representing such Americans is John McCain.

Posted by: euclidzoo | March 27, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

Why are we talking about the government bailouts? It's really a taxpayer bailout. That means all of us who work and pay taxes are doing the bailing out. I am tired of politicians claiming high ground by spending my money without me having a say. Since I never took a credit risk and have a manageable mortgage I can handle, the only thing dems will do for me is increase my taxes so they can spend more of my money to get more credit for their compassion. I am feeling more and more disenfranchised from my governemnt, both fed and local.

Posted by: robert.griscavage | March 27, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

I'm so glad Obama seems to be following FDR's economic plans. I mean who could argue that Social Security, Farm Subsidies, destroying crops to prop up prices, stealing the people's gold, and the worst depression in our history lasting for 10 years weren't all resounding successes?

Posted by: thomasw78 | March 27, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

politicalobserver1:
You're the fool who doesn't understand the economy. Wall Street cannot thrive if Main Street is under water. Borrowing a trillion dollars from China to fight an ego war in Iraq then cutting taxes for the wealthiest while Main Street is drowning is voodoo economics.

Homeowners, people with only one home, the one that they live in with their dependants, are the ones most at risk. If 2 million homeowners foreclose, the value of the homes in thousands of suburbs will fall, hurting everybody. Providing aid to them to allow them breathing space in exchange for a share in future capital gains is a fair bargain. Especially in a time when an investment bank outside the depositor base can be bailed out by the Fed to preserve stability of the system. Americans drowning in the suburbs with falling home values also need their system preserved, otherwise you'll start seeing steep layoffs at your grocer and retailer and the cycle will come back to haunt Wall Street.

Pain on Main Street is Pain on Wall Street.
Investment bankers and smart money on Wall Street listened to Obama and they liked what they heard, even though they didn't agree with all he had to say, they saw someone they could work with. Someone with the intellectual curiosity to analyze complex problems and explain them to the American people. Everybody on Wall Street knows that Obama is more fiscally conservative than the GOP and the dollar will rise under a Democrat Administration.

Borrow and Splurge GOP Bushenomics is about to come to an end. Young people will not accept their future being mortgaged for today's short term pleasure. I don't want my kids to work for China.

Posted by: asja | March 27, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

Obama continues to immpress me........He seem to have though much about the issues that Americans face, enve about the use of our military.

"In other words, Senator Obama was correct, and the Red Bushies and their Fuhrer McCain/Bush 08 were wrong. See, you should do unilateral strikes into Pakistan!"

Hey, is this true? Did Obama in fact say that this would be his strategy?

If so I agree, because this region is not really under anyone's control. You send out the Marine recon teams to point lasers at targets, wait to see the enemy then call in the round. Simple, no one sees you, enemies dead.

I don't know if I can take anymore comments from our President. He and the people pulling his strings think Americans are dumb, and maybe some of us are, but I know what the word DEFICIT means and that's what this country is in. A huge deficit. The dollar was matched againsts the euro 8 years ago. We are plain PRINTING money for Iraq!!

I know lets just print some more money.....AND THEN give it to the banks!! So they can loan us some money that we aren't making from our jobs to help us pay for things like houses, which we will eventually defalt the payments on becaue the interest rates scyrocketed!! (because the country was in debt) Then our GOVERNEMNT bails out the banks!! Yea!! Rich people win!!!

A vote for McCain is like another 4 years of BUSH. Same string pullers.........

Vote for Democrats!!

Posted by: getcentered | March 27, 2008 2:29 PM | Report abuse

ephemerella....

You want some cheese with that whine?

You sounds as whiny and pathetic as your girl Hillary. Here's a hint...pulling out Karl Rove's playbook ain't helping your cause.

Posted by: RightDownTheMiddle | March 27, 2008 2:29 PM | Report abuse

The truth will be the end of Chicago Barry Obama.

Read the article. Its about the fact that Obama is a total fraud, a manufactured product of the chicago politicial machine.

Its about him stealing credit for bills he never worked when he was in Chicago, just like he did in Washington,, which the WP reported on just a few days ago

Its about "Obama's Slums" and fact that Barry didn't care one bit about the people who elected him.

Its about the fact that Chicago Barry Obama is the biggest fraud that's been put over on the American public since Bush.

Its filled with facts about Obama from someone who has known him for years.

http://news.houstonpress.com/2008-02-28/news/barack-obama-screamed-at-me/

The truth will be the end of Chicago Barry Obama.

Posted by: svreader | March 27, 2008 2:28 PM | Report abuse

Part of the Obama snow job where he portrayed Rev. Wright's paranoid rants as coming from anger that is the baggage as the legacy of of old white racism, carried by old blacks. Well, there is current-day stuff that is alive and well, carried by the young blacks, that is a lot worse than the racism, sexism and homophobic intolerance of the older generation of blacks. It's called Hip Hop, Gangsta and Street culture. It's full of racism, paranoia, anger, violence, abuse of women, sexism and a whole lot of dysfunctional antisocial expression schemes. The social psychological disordered behavior that Rev. Wright's hate-speech-as-sermons represents and coveys to blacks and supported by Obama is is alive and well in the current-day generation in Black America. It's just in a newer more dangerous carnation.

Blacks need to start taking some personal responsibility for high rate of high school drop out, sexual promiscuity, children born out of wedlock, , absence of male parenting/role models, drugs, crime, incarceration, AIDS, instead of playing the victim hood game and blaming everyone else for their plight! Until that time there will always be hate mongers & race baiter,s to use them and profit from their plight like the Rev. Wright, Rev. Jessie Jackson, Rev. Al Sharpton, Barack Obama as well as 10,s of thousands of White and Black Politicians. In fact the whole Democrat party! Hand outs, instead of a hand up, is the means of keeping Blacks down and economic Slaves! Keeping Blacks as an race of victims and believing all of the above is Whitey fault is designed to keep them from progressing instead of a race of achievers! It is in the best interest of Black preachers and Democrat politicians! Blacks will never be lead to the promise land by hate mongering Preachers like Rev. Wright or by bottom feeding Politicians like Obama that wants and works to keep Blacks in the Ghetto, on Welfare, and voting Democrat!

Posted by: american1 | March 27, 2008 2:26 PM | Report abuse

"Man...I wish the whites understood us as blacks more, or even tried just a little to get out of their world....and stop blocking the light, so they can see us and understand us better..." I just loved this comment. All I can say is Obama sure got a nice tan from his vacation!!!!! Now I will be called a racist!!!! But how can that be Obama is half white.

Posted by: ray_herbst | March 27, 2008 2:25 PM | Report abuse

McCain/ Moses 08! Not sure who's older though. If he needs a young pup to make him look younger how about McCain/Quayle 08!
Worked for the Bushies.

Posted by: cmsatown | March 27, 2008 2:24 PM | Report abuse

After reading a number of the other comments on "the article" by D. Balz. I fully understand why my cousin told me he likes to read the blogs for laughs. I appreciate the fact that the writer didn't mention Rev. Wright. He covered a position speech, period.

Posted by: waesmith | March 27, 2008 2:24 PM | Report abuse

The press, pundits and gadflies don't get it,
but, don't worry, Obama gets it and that's good enough for me!

I believe there are very few who even understand what Obama really said today. Often the real story is found between the lines; and, other times its found in the nuances. One needs knowledge on the subject of money and corporations to recognize that what Obama stated today shows he is a pretty smart cookie.

In reading Balz's story, listening to CNN and reading through the forgoing comments, it is again driven home to me that so very few, if any, really understand the causes current economic mess in America. If people don't know what causes something to happen, the prospect of finding or recognizing a remedy once it's presented is usually grim.

I'm not going to share with the readers here what really I heard Obama state today because it is too far outside of realm of Balz's article and the comments posted. Today's so-called reporters and pundits just don't have the thinking abilities to understand our current economic woes. This is not to say they are stupid, it's just that they just don't know what money is and how to relate to it as an instrument created by and through government.

I will share one my perceptions of Obama's speech today that amazes me. It's not that Obama understands the problems with our current economic mess, including its historical and constitutional roots, and that he understands the policy shifts that are necessary to stabilize the current mess...but he also understands the incremental steps involved to change the paradigm long-term...how to get there from here...the staged implementation of a permanent fix. That's deep thinking.

The truth of the matters is that if Americans understood money this country would not be in financial turmoil. Actually "turmoil" understates the reality. We are teetering on the precipice of collapse.

It's an understatement to say Obama is a bright fellow. Brilliant is more appropriate.

STRAIGHT AHEAD OBAMA!

Posted by: Vunderlutz | March 27, 2008 2:23 PM | Report abuse

The comments on this and other articles about the presidential campaign are quite an education about the American electorate. Are Washington Post readers really incapable of reading or listening to a candidate's speech and saying what they think about it without making puerile ad hominem attacks? To suggest that the former president of the Harvard Law Review, a man who also happens to be the most eloquent American politician since Kennedy, is an empty suit is preposterous. Obama will be America's next president, and if you listened to his A More Perfect Union speech in its entirety you know it even if you are too close-minded to like it. It is a matter of math that Hillary cannot beat him, even if Mark Penn goes postal in Denver. And McCain will be trounced by Obama in the debates. I would personally rather have Pelosi than Bloomberg as VP, but either of them would guarantee Obama's almost certain victory in November.

Posted by: paulfrank1 | March 27, 2008 2:19 PM | Report abuse

My niece wanted to fly down and visit me for the weekend. She needed a change of scene and be recharged. She lives in the
Midwest, in an increasing rent apartment. She's a Nurse's Assistant, and single, no
children.
The 150.00 she intended to use to rent a car when she'd arrive, went to pay a Monopoly utility company. She has to pay 35.00 each month just for the privilege to have the service. No competition in her town. No other options. (Free enterprise, huh?)

A girl just quit at the agency so now, the vacation she'd had approved, will be at risk until they can find a replacement.

Airline tickets are over 450.00 round trip as of an hour ago. And thats with a seat near the toilet.
Gas, is 3.50 a gallon, so we know which road she won't be taking.

This hard working young lady is in the middle of that hour glass shape thats becoming America's Middle class with the very wealthy at the expanding top and the poor at the expanding bottom.

Wonder what happens when that middle class finally breaks like the ice shelf in Antarctica?
Because she like so many millions of others are starting to crack!


Its the economy!!! Not race, gender or even old age, people.

Posted by: nebulenz | March 27, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Here's my economic plan: Tax the living daylights out of the fat cats who have benefitted from the repugnican largesse for the last 7 years. Enough of this terror on the milddle calss and the poor!!! I want radical change and I want it fast. If the rich SOBs think they are gonna be safe, think again. People will get to the point where they'll start coming after you. Paying more in taxes will seem like a day at the spa compared to what's in store for you.

Posted by: adrienne_najjar | March 27, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Obama is proving that he has no economic no how and or no economic plan. What he said was lets give away thirty million to people who are about to lose there homes. Ok Why are they about to lose there homes? How will you decern those who shouldn't be in there homes becasue they acted reclessly and carelessly or those who are the victims of illness or subprime loans. The government needs to stimulate the liquitiy of mortgae loans but not bail out on an individual basis each mortgae holder. We live in a capitilistic society not a socialist society. Sure lets help people who need it. Job programs educations stimulous pacakges but handouts no way. Obama is a fool. When will this country wake up to the fact that this candidate is nothing but a country bunkin little boy who has a lot to learn.

Posted by: politicalobserver1 | March 27, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

nebulenz-Thanks, in no small part to this exact mess of de-regulated Banks(Way to go Slick Willie!), and all the morons sitting around TALKING about the mess, WHILE STILL ALLOWING;

Sub-Prime(Pay just Interest first two Years) Loans,

House Equity Rape-Oops "Loan" Second Mortgages on a Shell with NO Equity left(Brilliant! Absolutely BRILLIANT!),

and a Capital Gains Waiver for Shells Flipped within Two Years that created a Ponzi Scheme on what used to be considered "Homes" in Communities(Remember those?),

I, am ALREADY BROKEN!

As is my industry, and wages in similar work are destroyed, while employers want to keep hiring people they should be getting fined for hiring!

Walmart wages do not float my boat!

At this point, I really wish, some of these CLUELESS MORONS, would wake-up, and realize I could stop attacking them,

And EASILY be HIRED to HELP!

God knows, they need anyone else at this point! :-(

Posted by: rat-the | March 27, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

As usual, the morons are on the loose...must be computer free time at the nut house again. When does it end? 3PM, okay, I"ll check back later. Blogs, ughh

Posted by: J_thinks | March 27, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

After 8 years of Bush "Borrow trillion from China to waste on Iraq", the Borrow and Splurge GOP has totally lost credibility on fiscal conservatism. Obama agrees with McCain that speculators should not be bailed out so toss the BS distortion field.

Obama's speech and economic policy method is very different from Senator Clinton's. It contains 6 very specific guiding policy proposals for fixing the economy with the recognition that they will be shaped into detail by debate. Only an illiterate poster will claim their speeches are the same.

Obama the Liberal is actually more fiscally conservative than McCain. Wall Street knows it and that's the verdict that matters. Hillary has too many conflicts; Greenspan and Rubin, her advisers, are part of the problem that got us into this mess.

Obama's speech was deeply nuanced with digs at Clinton's naive lobby-crazed deregulation legacy, where rules were taken down without new ones to replace them. Take for example the Treasury Secretary who lobbied for repeal of Glass-Steagall and then joined the unmanageable conglomerate Citigroup afterwards. The same fellow who earned 160 Million in the last 8 years while having "little or no influence" on the bets of the executive committee he chaired. Those thousands of Citi staffers fired in the last 8 months really hate the lack of accountability on Rubin's part. Greenspan's preoccupation with keeping rates low to feed an overheated housing market without recognizing that 65% of mortgages were no longer issued by institutions he supervised.

It was a solid, credible speech and the Street appreciated it.

Posted by: asja | March 27, 2008 2:10 PM | Report abuse

I think that Obama's plan for the economy is way better than either McCain's or Hillary's. McCain has even said himself that he knows nothing about the economy, and I for one do not want a president who can't get us out of our current crisis. Check out this video Barack discussing the economy to see what his plan entails. It's a great speech.

http://campaigncircus.com/video_player.php?v=8845

Posted by: kimberly.hayward | March 27, 2008 2:08 PM | Report abuse

too few writers on this blog have questioned the latest 30 billion dollar economic proposal from candidate obama to help those who need finance assistance with their homes ' and to stimulate the general economy. again, where is this money coming from people ? with any study, even via basic investigation, you would see we're in a desperate, deficit-laden situation.

my sense is neither hilary or obama have any grasp of this...and one can only hope, if mccain is elected, he'll get balanced budget staff opinions to advise him. maybe then he'll see we can't fund the war in iraq forever !

other than that, i'm for mccain !

Posted by: areubel | March 27, 2008 2:06 PM | Report abuse

It boils down to this:

Republicans are for individual responsibility, but corporate welfare.

Democrats are for the individual welfare, and corporate responsibility.

The amount of graft at the expense of federal tax dollars surrounding FEMA/Katrina and Iraq Reconstruction is enough to vote for Ron Paul.

Since I can't abstain from paying the IRS, I'd rather the money go to a person down on their luck, instead of lining the pockets of a corporate criminal.

Posted by: hatchlaw | March 27, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse


So, I'm one of those naughty discusting dirty bad people you call 'renters'. I am going to follow your advice, I will only buy a home I can afford, in fact I will only buy a home most people can afford, that way I will be sure I can sell it when I need to. Where I live I need to spend no less than $400,000 on a modest family home anywhere near where the jobs are, therefore I wont buy a house until they come back down to $250,000 where they ought to be. People who are just a few years older than me who bought a house just a few years ago, couldnt afford to buy the house they live in if they had to today and neither can I. So if you are one of these goody goody people who are so perfect and own one of these overpriced houses I won't be buying anytime soon, I say this in advace, thanks for the hundred and fifty grand that you are going to lose, that savings is going to go right in my pocket. But then again you should have known better, naughty bad overpriced home buyer, what were you thinking?

My 2 cents from the nose bleed seats, 'cause I will probably never come close to either buying a house or retireing is that you can easily spend 30billion without giving anyone a handout. Joe homeowner who is about to foreclose, will go back to being renter, and what a bad, evil person he is for succoming to suffocating gas and food prices, greedily feeding his kids over paying his inflated mortgage. anyway, I dont think anyone intends to pay him for 'getting himself in this situation' (by voting for bush) what I think these plans are for is to find some way to make it possible for this guy to foot the bill for his house, to keep paying, to remain responsible for what he has gotten himself into, otherwise, he rents and someone else has to pay for the entire loss, not just the loss of a few payments. so by not 'helping' him, he 'loses' a house he has no equity in, also loses probably the extra $1000 extra monthly housing expense, rents a place just as nice for way less money and spends that savings fixing his credit, while we end up one way or another paying off ever penny of 'his' loss. no thanks, I want to find a way to keep him paying for it so that if I ever do get a mortgage its not 2 points higher thanks to him.

Posted by: staffordworks | March 27, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

Even Republicans admit that when in commitee meetings, no one is better prepared than Hillary Clinton. . . . . . . I just wonder, did Obama xerox Hillary's economic plan?? . . . . Of course he did, who better to copy off of? . . . . . . . . . . . Why not vote for the real McCoy.

Posted by: coldcomfort | March 27, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

It's your own fault if you allow a news article to tell you what the speech said. And then make a response based on it. FOr God's sakes, the text of the speech is provided.

Posted by: cesar2000 | March 27, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

My niece wanted to fly down and visit me for the weekend. She needed a change of scene and be recharged. She lives in the
Midwest, in an increasing rent apartment. She's a Nurse's Assistant, and single, no
children.
The 150.00 she intended to use to rent a car when she'd arrive, went to pay a Monopoly utility company. She has to pay 35.00 each month just for the privilege to have the service. No competition in her town. No other options. (Free enterprise, huh?)

A girl just quit at the agency so now, the vacation she'd had approved, will be at risk until they can find a replacement.

Airline tickets are over 450.00 round trip as of an hour ago. And thats with a seat near the toilet.
Gas, is 3.50 a gallon, so we know which road she won't be taking.

This hard working young lady is in the middle of that hour glass shape thats becoming America's Middle class with the very wealthy at the expanding top and the poor at the expanding bottom.

Wonder what happens when that middle class finally breaks like the ice shelf in Antarctica?
Because she like so many millions of others are starting to crack!


Its the economy!!! Not race, gender or even old age, people.

Posted by: nebulenz | March 27, 2008 2:02 PM | Report abuse

To all the folks who commented, "what do I get for paying my mortgage every month and not taking undue risk," what you get is a tremendous increase in the value of your home equity, an increase fueled in large part by the easy availability of money and tax breaks of our mortgage system. Because so many people have been able to buy houses, your house is worth much more. Our government and our banks have long encouraged people to invest in their homes, and in the headlong rush, we pushed some people to take risks they should not have taken, we permitted shady operators to take advantage of those with a poor grasp of the market. We can stand in our doorways and watch our neighbors be evicted, smug in our self-satisfaction at having made our payments, but we will be watching the value of our own homes fall away as well, and we will be passing moral judgment on many who do not deserve our scorn, but our sympathy. Or we can extend a helping hand to those struck by the whip hand of economic shifts, doing our best to weed out the speculators and con artists, and protect our economy, our communities, and our moral compass. Senator Obama (and Senator Clinton, and Senator Dodd, and many others) have chosen the path of forgiveness and community. Senator McCain (and many of you on this board) have chosen the path of isolation and decline.

Posted by: jason | March 27, 2008 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Well... I seriously doubt that Obama wrote this speech. The real bottom line is that it is smoke and mirrors about Wall Street and the FED.

He says he takes NO money from Wall Street or PAC 's. Someone should REALLY INVESTIGATE where his campaign money has come from. We already know that some of his funding came from investment bankers.

He speaks about what needs/could be done... but has no specifics..,

He fails to mention that the the mortgage lenders do not want to maintain current rates on loans.. but want to gain more profits by asking for rate increases.

Then you have to take a look at the second and third mortgages that were given to home owners that SPENT that money of keeping up with the JONES.

The United States LIVES on DEBT. Our elected officials have allowed us to have a debt of trillions of dollars and continue to add to this amount daily. This is both a DNC and GOP ISSUE. It is not an issue that can be RESOLVED by smoke and mirrors and an individual that has speeches prepared for him or her.

BEWARE THE WOLF IN LAMB'S CLOTHING

IMPEACH BUSH AND HIS CRONIES... NOW.

Posted by: miller51550 | March 27, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Mandelay,

Your post was so funny, I want to post it again (cut and pasted below). Yes, Obama now has a very long list of legislation of other senators that he claims he's authored. This is an ongoing, absurdly transparent tactic of his: claiming the work of other senators (in Illinois and in Washington DC). Why does he keep getting a free pass on this?

By the way, his major economic policy address point is a near-copy of Clinton's, right down to the $30 billion dollar figure, which she had pulled out as an arbitrary figure because it closely matches the value of the Fed's Bear Sterns bailout/guarantees.

_____

Posted by: Mandelay | March 27, 2008 01:29 PM:

"It's nice to hear him once again take credit for the legislation of Dodd and Frank, as reported in your paper just this week (3/24). Obama really has a pair of them. Here's the info from your article: "Just this week, as the financial markets were roiling in the wake of the Bear Stearns collapse, Obama made another claim that was greeted with disbelief in some corners of Capitol Hill. On March 13, Dodd, the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, and Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, unveiled legislative proposals to allow the Federal Housing Administration to guarantee new loans from banks willing to help homeowners in or approaching foreclosure. Obama and Clinton were in Washington for a day-long round of budget voting, but neither appeared at the housing news conference.

Yet Obama on Monday appeared to seek top billing on Dodd's proposal.

"At this moment, we must come together and act to address the housing crisis that set this downturn in motion and continues to eat away at the public's confidence in the market," Obama said. "We should pass the legislation I put forward with my colleague Chris Dodd to create meaningful incentives for lenders to buy or refinance existing mortgages so that Americans facing foreclosure can keep their homes."

Dodd did say that Obama supported the bill, as does Clinton. But he could not offer pride of authorship to the candidate he wants to see in the White House next year."
_____

Posted by: ephemerella | March 27, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

It seems objectivity is at an all time high in this thread.

The sophistication and complexity of financial markets has increased while the tools to manage and assess risk have stayed the same (sounds familiar). We need to fix that problem. Furthermore, the rules that govern financial markets have to evolve as well. I think that is a pretty good idea.

Posted by: gibsonflower | March 27, 2008 1:58 PM | Report abuse

To all those 5th grader McBushBots who are going crazy in this blog, 100 years in iraq will cost 60 trillion dollars of tax payer money. This is nothing compared the 30 billion obama's offering as stimulus

Posted by: catchsandy | March 27, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

It would be nice if those of you criticising the speech actually read the full transcript. Perhaps you would then note its detail, historical context and relevance. Secondly, some of the policies you accuse him of "copying" have been on his website well before Ms. Clinton's economic policy speech(s). But, oops, we can't be fair, can we?

Posted by: upperdeck4 | March 27, 2008 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Both OBAMA and CLINTON propose "PLANS", which are mainly no more than promised to increase the deficit by spending $ 10 - 20 - 20 millions each.

THIS IS A REASON NOT TO VOTE FOR THEM, AS IT IS PURE DEMAGOGERY. COMPARE THIS WITH McCAIN SPEACHES, WHO DOES NOT PROMISE SUCH UNREALISTIC SPENDING, PROBABLY THIS IS THE REASON HE IS ACCUSED FOR NOT BEING
"CONCRETE"(READ "NOT BEING DEMAG0GIC, BY NOT LAUCHING FIGURES IN THE BILLIONS TAKEN OUT OF THIN AIR")

CAMINITO

Posted by: caminito | March 27, 2008 1:53 PM | Report abuse

Oh Baaaraaaaack!

Mr. Wonderful Siiirrrr!

Wanna Mention the "Un-Mentionable"?

All those "Homesteaded" Houses caught up in Chapter 7's the Banks are Caught on?

You worthless Lying Politician YOU!? :-)


Folks, there is so much more to all this than any of these Bribes being offered even begins to discuss, that they should be getting arrested for Fraud! :-(

Posted by: rat-the | March 27, 2008 1:50 PM | Report abuse

Hussein Obama just like his own fellow rappers..keep copying everybody's works. He can never come up with his own plans and ideas because he have no plans and ideas. How can he be comparing to Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. McCain? He needes to go back to JC's and take a econonmics lesson.

Posted by: liberalredneck | March 27, 2008 1:50 PM | Report abuse

Hussein Obama just like his own fellow rappers..keep copying everybody's works. He can never come up with his own plans and ideas because he have no plans and ideas. How can he be comparing to Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. McCain? He needes to go back to JC's and take a econonmics lesson.

Posted by: liberalredneck | March 27, 2008 1:50 PM | Report abuse

FOR ALL OF YOU OBAMA HATERS: READ THIS

With all of the hoopla involving Barack Obama and his pastor, I think that we are forgetting some of the most basic and profound principles of the constitution, " The Freedom of Speech" and most importantly, "The Separation of Church and State"!
Separation of church and state is the political and legal idea that government and religion should be separate, and not interfere in each other's affairs.
In the United States, separation of church and state is often identified with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." The phrase "building a wall of separation between church and state" was written by the U.S. President Thomas Jefferson in a January 1, 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptist Association

Thomas Jefferson says: "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship...

WOW!... we owe account to NONE OTHER for our faith or our worship!..... WOW!.....that means that we can worship wherever or with whomever we choose!.....according Thomas Jefferson...

We can worship God, Jesus, Allah, Buddah, or Atheism, and it should not interfere or be an issue regarding our political experience and the potential to lead this country....

So why is the media crucifying Barack for being in his church for 20 years and not leaving?....
It's none of their business what Obama does on Sunday's in the church! It is a personal choice (according to the Constitution) that we all have a right to choose to worship or not to worship, at anyplace, with any congregation.....so let's move on!...

Chelsea Clinton was asked by a student yesterday at Butler University about the Monica Lewinsky affair and her family...she promptly answered the student that "it was none of her business!"....good for Chelsea!...she is right...it is personal!...let's move on!

And guess what, Barack's worship is personal as well, so why is Hillary Clinton, and the media condemning his personal choice & place of worship....almost everyday of the week....it is really old news now...let's move on!

SHAME! on Hillary for bringing it up...she should have made the same statement as her daughter... "basically it is none of my business... mr. reporter, this subject is between Mr. Obama, his God and his personal choice"...so why don't we move on!

James Madison says: "no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion in matters of religion, and that the same shall in NO WISE DIMINISH, ENLARGE, OR AFFECT THEIR CIVIL CAPACITIES"....do you finally get it Hillary, and the media?...let's move on!

Oh!...by the way....the actual speech that Rev. Jeremiah Wright gave on Sept. 16, 2001 was based on quotes from former Ambassador Edward Peck (Terrorism Advisor to the Reagan Administration) on FOX News...it was MR. PECK who said "that America's chickens had come home to roost!"...and "that America was basically responsible for the damage that was done on 911 because of what we did to others in the world"....in other words...violence begets violence....hate begets hate....what goes around, comes around according to MR. PECK, NOT Rev. Wright!....can we move on please!

We need to stop this crucifiction of Barack Obama and his pastor, based loosely on 30 second soundbytes out of 36 years of his pastorial ministry!.......now Can We Move On........ Please?


Posted by: docdwb | March 27, 2008 1:49 PM | Report abuse

Here we have another example.

Mr. XEROX comes up with NOTHING until Hillary does.

In debates he answers second - so she can give the answers he doesn't have.

Because he COPIES EVERYTHING HILLARY SAYS AND DOES.

THIS MAN HASN'T GOT A CA-LUE !


OBAMA IS RELATED TO: DICK CHENEY , GEORGE BUSH AND JOHN KERRY.

WOW.

WELL - THAT EXPLAINS IT !!

HAAHAAHAHAHAHA


Posted by: Thinker | March 27, 2008 01:01 PM
---------------------------------
Thinker,

How do you type with that straitjacket on?

Posted by: smc91 | March 27, 2008 1:47 PM | Report abuse

Latest WSJ/NBC poll shows McSame lost ground to Barack Obama. Obama leads McSame in the general election despite all those Republicans' efforts to spread their typical slime. Barack Obama also had the highest poll numbers asking who can best unify the country.

It really is all over. McSame is already done. He can't tell who the enemy is, has repeated "senior" moments, and the crashing economy will simply wash him out with Bush.

Posted by: infuse | March 27, 2008 1:47 PM | Report abuse

The fact is that fiscal policy acted quickly as it could when the decision to send tax rebates was enacted and signed straighaway by Washington standards. Any proposals now, by the time they are enacted would be late. These proposals are just lures for votes, nothing more.

Still it does call into question the philosophy of the candidates. I'm against bailouts of any players in this scheme. I don't consider the original Bear Stearns offer a bailout. Sale, essentially liquidation, of BS in which shareholders got $2 for a stock that was trading at $32 seems a shearing instead of a bailout. The Fed just assumed the worthless assets of BS to keep the market afloat. Nobody benefited except the economy at large.

The borrowers knew what they were doing. They bet wrong and lost, just like the holders of Bear Stearns stock. If fraud was involved they have access to the courts to resolve their complaint. No further treasury dollars are required.

Posted by: edbyronadams | March 27, 2008 1:45 PM | Report abuse

Where will the $30B come from? Isn't the U.S. already running up insane deficits because of the worthless war in Iraq?

Posted by: RockvilleBear | March 27, 2008 1:45 PM | Report abuse

Everybody that thinks the WaPo is biased for Obama needs to go and look at the NYT if they want pro-Hillary coverage. I am not condoning it at all. Frankly I wish that WaPo, NYT and Clinton News Network would keep their opinions out of it, but it is true everywhere. So stop complaining, there is as much anti-Obama out there as well. jeez, the governor of PA is out there convincing the people of his state to vote against him. In many other countries, politicians are not allowed to express an opinion so that the people can make up their own minds. This whole process is so corrupt anyway.

Posted by: phorse | March 27, 2008 1:45 PM | Report abuse

Commonsense12,

What a stirring little patriotic reverie, so popular among your ilk. It reveals a latent racism in you and Chuckie K, to rant about the rantings of a preacher in order to bring down Obama.

Right now, your own country (and mine too) has blood on it's hands from at least 100,000 Iraqi's We calmly talk about the merits of the invasion, occupation, and devastation of what was a sovereign Islamic country. Iraq did not threaten us, and peaceful sanctions were working.

We talk about our war dead, while never mentioning the thousands of innocent lives lost in a despicable war. Now one of our excuses is that we must stay there or the "terrorists" will follow us home. To me that sounds cowardly, not to mention stupid. We will fight them there while thousands more civilians die and a county goes to hell?

Wright had something to say, it is unfortunate that he said it the way he did- making it is so easily pounced on by flag waving idiots. What's good for Americans should be good for humanity.

Posted by: ebmaryon | March 27, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Ladies and Gentlemen Barack Obama has won the Democratic nomination period. He has won more pledged delegates, more popular votes and taken twice as many contests as Hillary. YOu cannot move the goal posts any longer just ask Nancy Pelosi or Bobby Bowden. I for one appreciate her helping to temper our candidate with their "Kitchen Sink / Tonya Harding" ways. Barack is now more prepared to face the Republicans and their fear tactics. Karl Rove and his types will attempt to put up a new boogeyman that only Senator McWar can supposedly tackle before us. I am certain the American electorate is not going to be hoodwinked again. We wont allow ourselves to be led down the be afraid, be very afraid road on either foreign affairs or domestic economic policies. He has maintained himself above Billary and their divisiveness win at all costs even if by .5% ways.

I am veteran of the Iraq war having served with honor in the 82nd Airborne Division and am now joined by legions of my comrades in fighting against this war which has taken 4000 plus of my comrades and maimed over 25,000 of us. How much does a trillion and counting of our dollars represent to each and every american family? I challenge each and every reader here to visit the nearest Veterans hospital and see what the true price of this war for no good reason is costing us. No WMDs, No ties to Al Qaeda etc. etc.

Barack Obama will get great counsel on the key issues and always surrounds himself with the sharpest knives in the tool box. Bloomberg and Volker in the audience is a great example.

Senator Obama is brilliant and will surround himself with sage advice in all the key sectors. I pray that our country is really ready for CHANGE and will turn the page on sixteen(16) years of failed leadership.


VOTE BARACK OBAMA AMERICA!

Posted by: pedraza1 | March 27, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

America, If a guy is good, he is simply good. Sen. Obama is good for America, and I am more than convinced that he will make the best out of a very dire situation that the Republicans have put us in. He will work together with other good Americans such as Mike Bloomberg to turn this country around. Good teamwork camp Obama! Let the Democrats stop this bickering and start a vigorous campaign against McCain. BRAVO Obama!

Posted by: tintin08 | March 27, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Just words? Nah, I think there are some numbers in there, too. There is also some effective analysis. What do you want, pictures?

I especially like the "pain trickled up" metaphor as a way of illustrating simply and quickly that an unregulated market eventually hurts, not just ordinary Americans, but big investors, too. If anyone can overcome the mindset that the free market should be a "free license to take whatever you can get, however you can get it," it's the one who can speak to all of us in a way that we can understand and in a way that gives us credit for being able to understand.

Obama 'O8

Posted by: DoTheMath | March 27, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

A Hollow Shell?

Today Barack Obama made a good speech on the economy. Obama clearly understands the problem, and he was speaking in New York, to no doubt rich fat cats, but still speaking far more directly, honestly and powerfully than John McCain's recent peanut butter sandwich of an economic speech.

"Pain would now trickle up instead of prosperity trickling down". Nice idiom...but.

If you look beneath the sheets. In Congress: already the law which Obama trumpets supporting with Chris Dodd may be a hollow shell. Holders of home equity loans (second mortgages) would need to be paid off first, before the government can help.
So what good is that, if those most hurting cannot refinance, because of those second in line? Sounds like a field day for lethargy, sluggish momentum, and lawyers.

Or to paraphrase Whimpy and his hamburger. I will gladly pay off your loan tomorrow if you pay off mine today.

Onward with the crisis, onward to despair. I wonder which group of conniving banker's paid for this? Probably those holding out their right hand for government assistance, while keeping their left hand in the pockets of the people.

Posted by www.deeplyimbedded.com
Deeply Imbedded at 10:41 AM

-- Posted by Deeply Imbedded

Posted by: deeplyimbeddedaolcom | March 27, 2008 1:42 PM | Report abuse

buzzm1 you didn't read the transcript either, did you?

Barack Obama specifically mentions tax breaks for retired persons earning less than $50,000 a year. Or do you earn more?

Posted by: infuse | March 27, 2008 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Things are looking better and better for McCain each day. The Democrat Party is committing suicide and populist non-sense will hasten it's downfall. The big story of 2009 and beyond will be the death of the Democrat Party as we know it. Would that it takes all liberals with it.

Posted by: DCer1 | March 27, 2008 1:41 PM | Report abuse

Obama is a fraud. He and his Mentor Rev Wright should be deported to Kenya where they can hang out with B. Hussein Osama's Dad and read the Koran.

Posted by: vinnieceskins | March 27, 2008 1:39 PM | Report abuse

It does not matter whatObama said on the economy. Even if he were able to pull out the Democrat nomination, he won't win in November.

Posted by: Texan2007 | March 27, 2008 1:39 PM | Report abuse

kirsten you didn't read the transcript did you. Barack Obama actually addressed your question, as well as addressing the questions of others commenting here who didn't bother to read what he said either.

For one thing, Hillary just tossed out the $30 billion number as some sort of reciprocity arrangement to the Fed's $30 billion bailout of Bear Stearns. She never offered any specifics other than her typical generalization of using it in some vague way to help distressed and other homeowners.

Posted by: infuse | March 27, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

You Obama haters on this thread need to READ the speech, not the article, before you call it a Xerox copy of Clintons plan. If you are able to read the speech and comprehend it, you will see that it is nothing like Clinton's approach, other than the total price tag. Obama puts this crisis in a historical context - something Hillary is incapable of doing.

Posted by: NMModerate1 | March 27, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

Can you get any money for buying a house you can afford and making the payments on time?

Posted by: fbros | March 27, 2008 1:35 PM | Report abuse

Can you get any money for buying a house you can afford and making the payments on time?

Posted by: fbros | March 27, 2008 1:35 PM | Report abuse

Gee, my remaining mortgage is only $90,000; I haven't ever been late, or missed a payment. I'm retired and living on a fixed income. Perhaps Obama's plan could pay off my remaining mortgage. Surely he wouldn't exclude citizens who have always been responsible, would he??

Posted by: buzzm1 | March 27, 2008 1:32 PM | Report abuse

Gee, my remaining mortgage is only $90,000; I haven't ever been late, or missed a payment. I'm retired and living on a fixed income. Perhaps Obama's plan could pay off my remaining mortgage. Surely he wouldn't exclude citizens who have always been responsible, would he??

Posted by: buzzm1 | March 27, 2008 1:32 PM | Report abuse

How is the US government going to pay for the 30 billion dollar stimulus package and the tax cuts....by borrowing the money from China. For a guy who wears his integrity like a crown, why is he not telling the truth about the defecits is the US budget and the fact that your children and grandchildren will have a lower standard of living as a result of the reckless spending of this generation. Where is the money coming from since you clearly don't have it??

Posted by: kirsten | March 27, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Uhhh, is it just me, or has it ever occurred to anyone else that rather than Squawking each other's lame notions,

Billary and Obasama should pretend they are US Senators and try to draft up Legislation to remedy, or promote whatever "Great" Ideas they think they have?!

Just try to write all the astounding Ideas on a piece of Soft, Absorbent, Two-Ply Paper, for proper Handling and expedition! ;~)

Posted by: rat-the | March 27, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

It's nice to hear him once again take credit for the legislation of Dodd and Frank, as reported in your paper just this week (3/24). Obama really has a pair of them. Here's the info from your article: "Just this week, as the financial markets were roiling in the wake of the Bear Stearns collapse, Obama made another claim that was greeted with disbelief in some corners of Capitol Hill. On March 13, Dodd, the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, and Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, unveiled legislative proposals to allow the Federal Housing Administration to guarantee new loans from banks willing to help homeowners in or approaching foreclosure. Obama and Clinton were in Washington for a day-long round of budget voting, but neither appeared at the housing news conference.

Yet Obama on Monday appeared to seek top billing on Dodd's proposal.

"At this moment, we must come together and act to address the housing crisis that set this downturn in motion and continues to eat away at the public's confidence in the market," Obama said. "We should pass the legislation I put forward with my colleague Chris Dodd to create meaningful incentives for lenders to buy or refinance existing mortgages so that Americans facing foreclosure can keep their homes."

Dodd did say that Obama supported the bill, as does Clinton. But he could not offer pride of authorship to the candidate he wants to see in the White House next year.

Posted by: Mandelay | March 27, 2008 1:29 PM | Report abuse

McCain also will call for homeowners to provide "responsible" down payments for homes, saying government-backed companies, like Fannie Mae, should never back loans when the borrower "clearly does not have skin in the game."

In your opinion what would be better for the U.S. economy, a bail out business or a bail out of homeowners?


http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1946


.

Posted by: jeffboste | March 27, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Hmmm...some investment bank practices need more oversight. What an amazing observation.

"...an extension of unemployment insurance for those who have lost their jobs."
Translation: vote for me, and you can have an extra month of cheeseburgers.

Posted by: bushieisa | March 27, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

The Clinton clucks still haven't a clue about what harms a candidacy. It's what comes out of the candidate's mouth, not what comes out of another's mouth.

To wit:
"I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."

Posted by: infuse | March 27, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Well, staffordworks, let those who lost their houses become renters again, like most of them probably were in the first place. Since most of them put zero money into their houses, all they lost was equivalent to rent anyway. Sure, there might have been closing costs, although when I bought a house in 03 they offered to put that on the mortgage, too. I put 26% down and ended up with a $300 payment on a fixed mortgage because I cared enough to stick with what I could afford. There aren't many here who would care to subsidize others' stupidity or failure to do a little simple math. Rewarding stupidity, whether that demonstrated by Bear Sterns or by someone who took out a liar loan does not promote the COMMON GOOD, as you put it. It just sets us up for worse next time. Maybe saving instead of spending would cool the economy for a while. No doubt it would. But the end result would be more stability and real prosperity.

Posted by: billmosby | March 27, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

As an Obama supporter and a loan officer,
I don't believe in a $30 billion rescue. I think there should be some help. NOT a bail-out. There has to be some responsibilty. There does need to be extentions of unemployment benefits to get.

There are other ways to save both homeowners and companies. Major govenment intervention is not a help.

Posted by: adonalson | March 27, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

As an Obama supporter and a loan officer,
I don't believe in a $30 billion rescue. I think there should be some help. NOT a bail-out. There has to be some responsibilty. There does need to be extentions of unemployment benefits to get. So there has to

There are other ways to save both homeowners and companies. Major govenment intervention is not a help.

Posted by: adonalson | March 27, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Bloomberg should be Obama's VP.

There is absolutely NO democrat out there more experienced on economic matters than Bloomberg.

Bloomberg is an economic guru, the CEO of the largest economc organization.

He worked his way up from nothing to be a one of the richest people in the world, with over 20 billion dollars, all by understanding the economy and making smart investments.

He turned around New York after it was in a record debt after 9/11 and Giuliani. And now New York City has a surplus and tons of job creation.

Plus he's very green. He pushed New York to all Hybrid cabs and wound up saving money in the process!!

And he draws in the same support from independents that Obama does.

I think with the economic problems we have, Obama-Bloomberg would be a dream ticket and the perfect way to address the "experience" issue that Obama.

Bloomberg has a record turning record defecits into surpluses even during bad economic times and New York City.

And that's exactly what we need to do at the national level.

Posted by: centroles | March 27, 2008 1:23 PM | Report abuse

Wow, Obama is copying Hillary???

Her speech yesterday almost mirrored his policies from early Feb. to the word. The fact is, they agree on many things, and probably forget what their differences are even supposed to be!

I agree with HusslinHoosier, both candidates' supporters are so biased that it really doesn't matter what is said at all, they simply rush to defend their "man"- or "girl" (Bill and Hillary have both said it now!).

I prefer Obama because he is new and lacks some of the stench of politics that the Clinton's have proven they are steeped in! I also prefer his style and his potential for diplomacy. In january, I was excited because it looked like either a woman or a mixed race man could actually be president. As this campaign has worn on, I dearly hope we will not have more of the Clintons. In any case Hill and Bill may have destroyed the party's chances in their desperate hunger to get back in the seat of power. That prospect looks truly dreadful now!

Posted by: ebmaryon | March 27, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

Anyone who is still in doubt as to who will lie in bed with the corporate elite need ask only one question: Which of the three candidates spent fifteen years defending corporations, and during that time watched silently in board meetings where union busting was commonplace?

HINT: Google Rose Law Firm WalMart Board of Directors

Posted by: infuse | March 27, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

The Speech: "A Brilliant Fraud"; By Charles Krauthammer, Friday, March 21, 2008; Washington Post; Page A17


"But Obama was supposed to be new. He flatters himself as a man of the future transcending the anger of the past as represented by his beloved pastor. Obama then waxes rhapsodic about the hope brought by the new consciousness of the young people in his campaign. Then answer this, Senator: If Wright is a man of the past, why would you expose your children to his vitriolic divisiveness? This is a man who curses America and who proclaimed moral satisfaction in the deaths of 3,000 innocents at a time when their bodies were still being sought at Ground Zero. It is not just the older congregants who stand and cheer and roar in wild approval of Wright's rants, but young people as well. Why did you give $22,500 just two years ago to a church run by a man of the past who infects the younger generation with precisely the racial attitudes and animus you say you have come unto us to transcend?"

Charles Krauthammer
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _


It's difficult for me to move past the brilliant and concluding analysis in the above paragraph by the esteemed columnist Charles Krauthammer, here in the Washington Post with his fine article as titled above. The immediate above paragraph concludes his article, and is quoted verbatim.

That is all I will say.

Posted by: CommonSense12 | March 27, 2008 1:16 PM | Report abuse

No free thinking person of morals should vote for this guy.

As a Clinton supporter I will either stay home or vote for Nader if this phony gets the nomination.

Posted by: cleocat | March 27, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse

People take out unwise mortgages and go into unwise credit card debt because they don't read the fine print. They don't read the fine print because they are educated in American public schools. In 15 years of public education (K-AA) I was never taught about shady mortgages or credit card offers. Worse we are told to hand over our minds to 'experts' like lying mortgage brokers who would never be so dumb as to say 'you know, in three years your mortgage payment could go up by $500 a month, can you afford that?' even then joe blow would say "um, you tell me?"

Bailing out this mess is not at all about giving a free handout to either the foreclosing homeowner or the bank, its about the greater good, the government allowed this horrible marriage to take place and we are all paying dearly for it, so proposals like this are really about trying to stem the net total losses, a tanking economy takes so much more out of our pockets in the long run, deepens the national debt far more than stimulus programs cost directly.

Candidates have little choice but to point to the short term gain because so few people can understand or care about the real long term benefits, which is really just providing the money needed for the banks to afford to give people more time, the homeowner still ends up paying their whole mortgage and probably more interest in what would end up being a longer loan, but that costs us all much less than them walking away from it.

Government is there as a tool for us to promote the COMMON good. Even when its not doing something for the majority, its still in the common good, to for example, provide assistance to someone who is paralyzed, you or I could be that person tomorrow, imagine the landscape of our economy if we knew that it would only take a matter of months to go from highly paid professional to homelessness, and loss of our family if something like that happened to us? The protections now are quite thin but can you imagine if there were nothing? Guess what you and I would do? hoard, like crazy, very low risk savings, investments, all sound peachy no? but if we all did that really well, guess what happens to the companies we invest in? they go under, because no one is spending.

Obama is related to Dick Cheney not duhbya, but who cares? My dad was a Brig. General, so what, a high honor for him but no bearing on my qualifications whatsoever.

Posted by: staffordworks | March 27, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

Really hope all of you mesmerized Obamaites are keeping a tally of each of the "good" economic proposals he's making -- if he gets in it'll really break the bank!! Why hasn't anyone proposed giving a few bucks and assistance to those of us who have responsibly managed our mortgages and credit cards -- meeting your financial obligations seems to have real merit to most of us.

Posted by: hairlessbear | March 27, 2008 1:12 PM | Report abuse

Well I see this board has been hijacked by the oxymoron "Thiker" and those fool enough to respond to its drivel. Have a nice day all.

Posted by: HusslinHoosier | March 27, 2008 1:11 PM | Report abuse

I have read, viewed, listened and reflected on the primaries' process. I am thoroughly dismayed and actually, disturbed by the puposefully slanted reporting by this major news outlet, the Washington Post, and its journalists. The smoothing over language when a significant negative issue comes up for Obama, such as his statement that he did not hear the so-called "excerpts" from his mentor/advisor/pastor's speech, vs. the laser-like focus on Hillary's Balkans "misspeaking" is a small, but emblematic example, one of many. Both made errors, one is minimized and the other is magnified.

The fact that this is happening is inescapable. This is the kind of journalism associated with the press either directly or indirectly being paid off or being controlled, neither option one that I would have associated with the Washington Post.

Posted by: irene.corman | March 27, 2008 1:11 PM | Report abuse

Change is a breath of fresh air, look at the mess we are in now---gas prices, foreclosures, sinking price of the dollar, war. We need someone to unite not someone that is willing to burn down a village to win.

Posted by: dwayne112 | March 27, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

who's the guy writing people's middle names in all caps? Kinda strange.

Posted by: eslatter | March 27, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

Why media is giving so much coverage to Obama's economic plan whereas there was very little coverage from the major media? If there is a goof by Hillary it is blown out of proportion. Because of this bias by the media, I will have to think twice whether I should vote Obama in general election.

Posted by: praje | March 27, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

An additional 30 bil. bailout will not drive up inflation as much as decreasing interest rates even further. I would like to know where all of the candidates stand on Ben B's philosophy of shoring up things short term in hopes of a long term miracle.

In fact, Obama's 30b, could shore up spending a little. However the main way to increase liquidity in this market is to decrease overall debt. We are tapped debt wise and spending will not increase unless debt is paid off. Bear Sterns was an example of this. A company that relied on bundled morgage debt at this scale, which was the result of deregulation, could not have been allowed to go under or millions could have literally had their loans vanish and loose their houses.

Posted by: HusslinHoosier | March 27, 2008 1:08 PM | Report abuse

By the time he gets into office, a stimulus plan will probably be too late, by which I mean unnecessary.

Nobody should bail out anything or anybody who engaged in speculation or fraud (for which read lenders AND borrowers of money under false pretenses) whose failure would not bring down the whole economy.

Financial institutions need enough regulation to make speculative bubbles a once in a lifetime (or less frequent) occurrence rather than a yearly one.

Posted by: billmosby | March 27, 2008 1:05 PM | Report abuse


MR. OBAMA UNVEILS HILLARY'S ECONOMIC PLAN.

MR. XEROX YOU'RE SO FLATTERING.

AND CLUELESS.

YOU WOULDN'T KNOW A BUDGE IF IT HIT YOU IN THE FACE.

MUCH LESS A TRILLION DOLLAR BUDGET.

BARACK OBAMA CHENY BUSH KERRY

WHAT A LIST OF RELATIVES.

I SEE YOU LIKE FLAGS AS PROPS BUT NOT AS SUPPORT FOR OUR TROOPS OR PRIDE IN OUR COUNTRY.

OBAMA IS A TOTAL AND SHAMELESS USER.

XEROX XEROX XEROX XEROX

PLAGIARISM PLAGIARISM PLAGIARISM IS ILLEGAL !

Posted by: Thinker | March 27, 2008 1:05 PM | Report abuse

GJ Mr. Obama on copying the exact SAME plan as Hillary Clinton did just a couple of days ago. Obama as audacious, ambitious, far reaching, visionary? How about Mr. Xerox?

Posted by: logicaldoubtofhumansanity | March 27, 2008 1:05 PM | Report abuse


Here we have another example.

Mr. XEROX comes up with NOTHING until Hillary does.

In debates he answers second - so she can give the answers he doesn't have.

Because he COPIES EVERYTHING HILLARY SAYS AND DOES.

THIS MAN HASN'T GOT A CA-LUE !


OBAMA IS RELATED TO: DICK CHENEY , GEORGE BUSH AND JOHN KERRY.

WOW.

WELL - THAT EXPLAINS IT !!

HAAHAAHAHAHAHA

Posted by: Thinker | March 27, 2008 1:01 PM | Report abuse

I have never seen such unfair press coverage of an election in my life. Obama has done nothing but copy Clinton's plans while at the same time tearing her down and no one seems to realize this. Everyone rushes to accuse Senator Clinton of running a negative campaign when in reality is has been just the other way around. Hopefully, he will be exposed before it is too late. Senator Clinton is the only one who can bring this country back to where it should be.

Posted by: TALVES | March 27, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Squawk, Squaaawwk!!

Squaaawk Al! Al Squawwwk!

Al-Al-Al Squuawk!

Squuuuawk, Al's a Dimocrat! Dimocrat Al!

Squawk-Squuuawk!

Big Gay Al! Squaaawk, Squawk! GORE!, Al Gore Dimocrat!

Squuuawk! Hee Heee, Squuawk-Squaaawk! ;~)

Posted by: rat-the | March 27, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse


Obama hasn't got a "PLAN".

What a freaking joke.

This guy never ran a budget in his tiny LIFE.

He is Mr. XEROX. He comes up with NOTHING until Hillary does.

Because he COPIES EVERYTHING SHE SAYS AND DOES.

THIS MAN HASN'T GOT A CA-LUE !


He is such a wicked cocky do nothing. Puke!!

Posted by: Thinker | March 27, 2008 12:58 PM | Report abuse


Obama hasn't got a "PLAN".

What a freaking joke.

This guy never ran a budget in his tiny LIFE.

He is Mr. XEROX.

He is such a wicked cocky do nothing. Puke!!

Posted by: Thinker | March 27, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse


Very good for Obama, the same thing we discussed yesterday, not a bad plan. But right now we need World War 111, a catastrophic change, that will eventually benefit USA and the world's economy. Go ahead Dick Cheney, this is the solution. The war in Iraq is too small, now we need to attack Iran....and this will converge into World war 111...........Go Bush...

Posted by: daxjen13 | March 27, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

What? Another $30 billion? This will increase the deficit even more and drive down US$ to may be $2 for 1 EUR. Gas price will increase to $6-7, and what will be left of that $30 B?

Posted by: work2play | March 27, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse

A great economic bailout package would be the "People's Bailout Package".

If a company like Bear Stearns goes under, rather than having our taxpayer dollars grease the wheels for another private entity to get ownership, we'll use that money to buy it ourselves.

So if crony capitalism screws up, it becomes nationalized. Bear Stearns could then become the People's Investment Bank.

I say this because we taxpayers are always bailing out the capitalists when they screw up. We should just buy them out, capitalism style.

Posted by: camasca | March 27, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

To all wonks...SHUT UP!

Anyone actually read the speech and have anything interesting to say with regards to economics or will it be the usual "I love/hate Obama because he's a black centrist, and I love hate Hillary because she is a Clinton/female. Geesh, the only reason some of you can keep talking is because you can't hear yourselves.

Posted by: HusslinHoosier | March 27, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

I consider myself a strong Obama supporter, but I disagree with his $30 Billion rescue (but agree with need for more regulation). This is following what Hillary proposed while he is on vacation, which politically is wise to insure she doesn't gain a policy position advantage she can exploit. But, bailing people out seems extreme to me (so did the Bears-Stern buy out).

This smells a lot like offering to buy votes in hard-hit states (especially PA). I thought this was an ugly move by Hillary, and I'm disappointed in Barack following her here.

Posted by: mrmatttt | March 27, 2008 12:49 PM | Report abuse

knedd


You need to keep up and realize it is the money. bloomberg has all the loyalty of a
one dollar bill. Obama wants his and he will do ANYTHING to get the money.

The Obama candidacy is what corporate wants. He is their man. It is all about continuing the death grip corporations have over the executive office and our economy.

Posted by: JohnAdams1 | March 27, 2008 12:49 PM | Report abuse

What a total contrast to the incoherent, derisive, sketchy, incomplete and disrespectful article that Anne Kornbutt put up about Clinton's major economic address earlier this week.

Kornbutt's incoherent article didn't even cover Clinton's points coherently, or all of them, obviously expecting the reader to go dig for the info. Kornbutt also used gratuitous and disrespectful imagery like this: "Clinton has lashed herself to the issue of homeowner insecurity..."

Reading these two articles, one wouldn't realize that Obama's economic policy addressed that he rushed out after Clinton's is a poor copy of hers, down to the $30 billion dollar figure.

Watching the Washington Post cover the campaign is like watching a season of the Simpsons, where Bart keeps getting up in class and repeating what Lisa just said, and getting a lot of awe and praise for the ideas, while everyone wonders why Lisa's still hanging around.

Link to Anne Kornubutt's disrespectful and incoherent article (which was up only a few hours one day) about Clinton's major economic policy address that Obama has rushed to mimic. Compare it to this respectful and thorough article on Obama's imitation of Clinton's new economic policy.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/24/AR2008032403230.html

Posted by: ephemerella | March 27, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

Obama , empty suit!
you know he's related to George W. Bush!

Posted by: newagent99 | March 27, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

When Clinton delivered her major economic policy address earlier this week, this is how the Washington Post described her addressing the issue as:

"Clinton has lashed herself to the issue of homeowner insecurity..."

When Obama copies Clinton's new economic policy and rushes out his own version, the Washington Post eloquently declares:

"Sen. Barack Obama, tackling the fallout from the collapse of the subprime housing market, today outlined major changes in the way the federal government regulates financial institutions and called for a second stimulus package to boost the economy."

This level of hypocritical, unequal treatment of candidates should be illegal. The Washington Post is one of the most dishonestly reporting pro-Obama media outlets. Its coverage of the Democratic primary race is more like Stalin-era propaganda than the product of a Western free press.

Here are other articles appearing on the Washington Post site today: An article explaining how Hillary is a poor candidate because as a woman she spends personal time putting on makeup and preparing her hair, etc. and Obama presumably doesn't spend that much time as a woman. A discussion forum throwing up the topic of What's wrong with Chelsea, why isn't it okay to harass a candidate's child about her father's sexual problems?

The Washington Post has a full array of journalistic slants it brings to its pro-Obama propaganda regime, from improperly and dishonestly and inequitably reporting on the candidates' respective policies (like the disparities in its coverage of Clinton's and Obama's major economic policy addresses this week) to its descent into mysogyny and discrimination (the makeup op-ed) and tabloid-style psychological warfare sleaze (Chelsea-bashing re: harassing her about her father's sexuality).

Gee, when will "media matters" cover the pro-Obama bias of the Washington Post's political editor's desk???? When hell freezes over?

Posted by: ephemerella | March 27, 2008 12:45 PM | Report abuse

Some are suggesting an Obama-Bloomberg ticket. How about a McCain-Lieberman one to oppose it? Hillary could strengthen her appeal by a adding a heavyweight such as Rep. Barney Fink, er, Frank.

Posted by: filoporquequilo | March 27, 2008 12:44 PM | Report abuse

JakeD-BITE YOUR FINGERS!(Tongue's Advocates)

Just like Hannity's boner last night with Crist, the LAST thing in the World the RepubliCAN Party needs, is TWO Old looking Geezers! McCain is a Qualified Military Man, and as such good for the Ticket, BUT, he needs a Much Younger(Though not Wet-Behind his Tanned Ears, sort of Young!), Vice President who is even sharper than "Yawn"-Berg.

Sorry, but I cannot think of a Frigging Thing he has accomplished to brag about!

Nope, it needs to be McRomney!

Simple, as that!

Get Giuliani into the Cabinet, that's ENOUGH NYC for anyone! ;~)

Posted by: rat-the | March 27, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Senator Obama's choice of Cooper Union to launch this major address on economic policy is a conscious mirroring of Lincoln's famous speech at the same location. Obama even referred to Lincoln in his opening sentances. Lincoln used the Cooper Union platform to address the nation on the question of federal power to regulate and limit the spread of slavery. Lincoln's 1860 speech electrified the nation and contributed to his gaining the new Republican Party's nomination for the Presidency.

Like Lincoln, Senator Obama is able to use his vast intellectual gifts for synthesis, explication, and analysis to educate and shape public opinion. This ability to lead through education and example is an important quality needed in any president and is arguably even more crucial in our dangerous contemporary world. Senator Obama speaks to the American people as the adults we are, using nuance, subtlety, and complex ideas developed in paragraphs rather than sound bites. And he expects us to respond with openness, curiousity, and intelligence. What a refreshing change!

Posted by: dee5 | March 27, 2008 12:39 PM | Report abuse

mf64, Thank you very much for the link, the WaPo article was a very poor representation of the speech.

I think one of the most crucial points of the speech was Obama acutally supported McCain's position on bail-out for most lenders and many debtors but made a large provision for victims of fraud (who will probably become more numerous as the credit crisis moves into the light of day). Lots of interesting points.

Posted by: HusslinHoosier | March 27, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

JohnAdams1:

Try and keep up...Bloomberg changed his political affiliation to Independent last year.

Posted by: knedd | March 27, 2008 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Man...I wish the whites understood us as blacks more, or even tried just a little to get out of their world....and stop blocking the light, so they can see us and understand us better...

Posted by: sss1219 | March 27, 2008 12:27 PM | Report abuse

Wonder who Obama xeroxed this plan from? Hillary probably?

Posted by: bnw173 | March 27, 2008 12:26 PM | Report abuse

Clearly none of the kneejerk commentors above has actually read or heard the speech. It's on the NYT website here: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/27/us/politics/27text-obama.html?pagewanted=all

The brief story by Baltz doesn't do the speech justice-- the richness and specificity of the speech doesn't translate well into soundbites. So if you want to have in informed opinion of Obama's view of the free market tempered by government oversight, read the speech.

Posted by: mj64 | March 27, 2008 12:21 PM | Report abuse

Obama / Bloomberg 2008

Posted by: piper | March 27, 2008 12:19 PM | Report abuse

edbyronadams:

Good question (you probably will be called "racist" for asking it though ; )

JohnAdams1:

As Mayor, Bloomberg has graciously welcomed John SIDNEY McCain AND Hillary DIANE Clinton to New York City as well -- I wouldn't read that much into it -- if Barack HUSSEIN Obama gets the nomination, I doubt he would need Bloomberg to win the State, but who knows?

Posted by: JakeD | March 27, 2008 12:15 PM | Report abuse

Obama has all the knowledge and insight of of our economy as any 18 year old college freshman.

But I Love the silent endorsement from republican Bloomberg. You can smell the sellout from Obama already.

Posted by: JohnAdams1 | March 27, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Since Obama wants to send federal dollars to people who took out unwise mortgages, can't he send a few bucks to my family members who made unwise decisions with their credit cards?

Perhaps he could just explain the difference in unwise borrowing in each case.

Posted by: edbyronadams | March 27, 2008 12:07 PM | Report abuse

I wonder if Bloomberg would accept the second spot on the McCain ticket?

Posted by: JakeD | March 27, 2008 12:01 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company