The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

Archives

Sunday Talkies

Clinton Camp Stokes RFK Flap by Blaming Obama

By Zachary A. Goldfarb
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign accused Sen. Barack Obama's campaign of fanning a controversy over her describing the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy late in the 1968 Democratic primary as one reason she is continuing to run for the presidency.

"The Obama campaign ... tried to take these words out of context," Clinton campaign chairman Terence R. McAuliffe said on "Fox News Sunday." "She was making a point merely about the time line."

The issue is particularly sensitive given longstanding concerns about Obama's safety as a presidential candidate. (He first received Secret Service protection last May.) The Obama campaign called Clinton's words unfortunate and circulated a TV commentary criticizing them, although Obama himself said Saturday that he took Clinton at her word that she meant no harm.

Hours after mentioning Kennedy's assassination, Clinton said, "I regret that if my referencing that moment of trauma for our entire nation, and particularly for the Kennedy family, was in any way offensive."

Continue reading at The Talk »

Posted at 4:41 PM ET on May 25, 2008  | Category:  Sunday Talkies
Share This: Technorati talk bubble Technorati | Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This
Previous: Clinton Again Seeks to Explain RFK Remarks | Next: Obama Reminds Grads What They Can Do for Country


Add 44 to Your Site
Be the first to know when there's a new installment of The Trail. This widget is easy to add to your Web site, and it will update every time there's a new entry on The Trail.
Get This Widget >>


Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



Mrs. Clinton's remark was not thoughtless. It was well thought out malice on her part.

Posted by: Mary Ann Zych | May 27, 2008 1:56 PM

Wow...you Hillary supporters are sickeningly dillusional. Getting your ass whooped fair and square doesn't entitle you people to ANYTHING!

Posted by: J | May 27, 2008 12:43 PM

Obama and McCain were the Bosnia snipers!!!

Posted by: ClintonIsAJoke | May 27, 2008 12:32 PM

vote the hillary, britney spears ticket. goverment by the insane for the insane. (loved your last cd hillary!)

Posted by: timberwuff | May 27, 2008 8:43 AM

I am disheartened by the shallowness of comments and lack of intellectual depth. People making comments about a female candidate by referring to anatomy; people making racist comments about a black candidate - how enlightening! As for the endless griping about candidates making stupid or cruel comments and attacking one another, where are your collective memories? It's politics as usual. Personally, I find it hard to believe that Clinton, given her intelligence and experience, really meant anything sinister. Dumb? Absolutely! Here are two people competing for a nomination who have been on a dead run for months. They are exhausted and stressed out. What bothers me more are comments made by a man who is not running for office. A man who calls a grieving mother " unpatriotic." Why? Because she disagrees with the war. How shameful is that? We have a president whose legacy will be death, war and political cronyism at the expense of the American people.A man who, like some child, stoops to name calling. A president who sits by and watches the financial rape of hard working Americans while he takes care of his buddies. For God's sake, get off the arguing and vote for whichever Democrat gets the nod. McCain will only gives us more of what Bush has already handed us - more war, more debt and the lie that drilling in Alaska will actually reduce the cost of gas!Do what you can to keep the Dem. party together. The people will decide whether Clinton or Obama get the nod. Let it play out with or without candidate blunders.

Posted by: tiredofstupidity | May 27, 2008 12:53 AM

This sounds frighteningly familiar: do something REALLY STUPID and then blame it on someone else. Let's follow Clinton's logic for a second: Breaking the rules is not the problem. Getting caught is the problem.

Lawlessness is OK, but snitches are bad.

America, would any of us really fall for Hillary's bs anymore? Are you SO determined to have a vagina in the oval office that you will overlook the obvious fact that she is not qualified?

Posted by: martiniano | May 26, 2008 8:54 PM

Just another reason to dislike candidate Clinton. Was this just another slip similar to the sniper fire? Was this a calculated, desperate attempt to give people another reason to vote for her highness. She is truly dishonest. We're suffering through eight years of dishonesty with the current administration. Do we really want another four?

Just keep blaming everyone else for your failures. That's a great strategy. Why we would ever want someone in the White House who can not admit she made a mistake. Oh, that's right, let's not think about that Iraq vote.

Posted by: darsis | May 26, 2008 8:03 PM

The Real Truth - Since you and your illiterate, racist, and biased counterparts like to toss around the pieces of the constitution you like best and ignore the rest - be enlightened as to Article VI "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."


Did you idiots catch the "no religious test" part? Its people like you why we remain the class dunce of the world stage, you cherry pick the constitution to suit your self centered points of view,. Do the rest of us a favor and never reproduce; we have enought GWB-types around. Stupid fool

Posted by: Paul | May 26, 2008 7:11 PM

So Hillary was caught,
Expressing that which is in her soul.
That Obama would simply disappear,
By any mean, by any fear.

So Hillary was caught,
Expressing that which is in her mind.
Since she can't win the nomination ride
Maybe some coo coo, might take obama out.

So Hillary was caught,
Expressing that which is in her heart.
Evil, malice and super spinning lies,
To reach her non-destiny White House.

She has moved the bar, which he has constantly surpassed.
She has cried her way to a win, while he has double the wins with dignity.
She has used the race card, the gender card, while he has evaded everything but his heart.
She will become a caricature marked by time, and judged by history instead of lies.
While he will be stamped in years to come, as a simple president that became a great man.

Posted by: P.A.A. | May 26, 2008 4:17 PM

WHAAAA WHAAAAAAA...

I love it, the Dems fighting the Dems... Now a portion of the Dems finally get the treatment in the news media and from Libs that the Republicans have for years. We are just sitting back loving the imploding.. Go RUSH LIMBAUGH and Operation Chaos....

Posted by: reshas1 | May 26, 2008 3:39 PM

This is Obama's fault. Hillary said it, so Obama must be to blame!

Posted by: Spritle | May 26, 2008 3:07 PM

I was considering voting for her in the beginning, but now she has become like an annoying clinging leach who won't let go. She is slowly sucking the blood out of the American people.

Posted by: Inspector Detector | May 26, 2008 3:01 PM

Why are they blaming him?? The news media picked up and ran with it the moment she made the statement. The are again playing the blame game.

Posted by: Cruncher Block | May 26, 2008 2:55 PM

Hillary Clinton is a very intelligent person and for her to make such a comment is unreal.She could have referred to many other examples to get her point across other than RFK. I don't believe she said what she did to bring harm to Obama, but for her to choose those words is unforgiveable. She is exhausted and needs a couple of days off. I wonder how she would handle herself in the White House under pressure. She has done just about everything and anything to stay in this race. All she is doing is hurting the Democrats and the chance for them to try and straighten out the mess that Bush made. She needs to step aside and let Obama do what he does best. Also, for her to put the blame on him is funny. Why is it that she blames everyone else (Obama) for all her blunders. Of course "The O Team" had to make a statement. What does she think????

Posted by: cji | May 26, 2008 2:31 PM

Clinton is a moral coward and an advocate for piss-poor state-craft in voting to invade Iraq.

She made her bed - and now she will sleep in it.

Posted by: PulSamsara | May 26, 2008 2:10 PM

To those who would ever consider taking the words of Ken Blackwell (failed candidate of Uncle Toms everywhere) or Thomas Sowell (Rush Limbaugh's favorite purveyor of Black self-hate) seriously, remember that Republicans (Blackwell is one at least) love these guys for a reason.

Posted by: VTAlpha | May 26, 2008 2:08 PM

The remarks may not have been intended to scare the country over the possibility of an assassination, but her "explanation" that Ted Kennedy was on her mind is so like her. Just like she cried in New Hampshire for the country and not for any personal hurt feelings. The trouble with the Clintons is that they are situationally dishonest. We should not let someone lie her way into the office, even though the lies are not like the lies of Chaney and Bush.

Posted by: Sooner1 | May 26, 2008 2:07 PM

I don't need the Obama campaign to tell me what to think. I do my own thinking, thank you. I think anyone with a brain in his/her head would see Clinton's remark as a not-so-veiled hint that someone would or should shoot Obama. Hillary sounds more and more like the "vast, right-wing conspiracy" in her self-serving meanness and her lack of dedication to reality.
An implication of her statement that I haven't seen commented on is that it is a tacit admission that her only chance to get the nomination this year is to have someone shoot Obama.

Posted by: Alan Sawyer | May 26, 2008 12:35 PM

Either Hilary is complete idiot who cannot place words properly when she is talking about something, or she is a very evil person - Both which makes her very unsuitable to be President of the US.

Posted by: SW | May 26, 2008 11:59 AM

I used to be a Clinton supporter. But her trying to cling on to a nomination that is almost over, and the venomous rhetoric coming out of her is just appalling. She needs special counseling to come to terms with her loss of the nomination. After watching her for some months, I have switched my support for Obama - who will go on to be the Democratic nominee for the Presidential election. Let all Democrats come together and vote for Obama.

Posted by: Walter. | May 26, 2008 11:55 AM

At best, Senator Clinton's remark was hugely insensitive (especially since her "facts" were wrong, and she could easily have mentioned other and more recent examples where the Democratic candidate in June survived). What bothers me even more, however, is the assertion that it must have been OK because RFK, Jr., did not take offense. Lest anyone forget, Senator R. Kennedy's widow Ethel is still alive (and an Obama supporter) and he had eleven children -- it is entirely possible that some of them found the remark to be unnecessary and tasteless, again to say the least. Sad.

Posted by: LoisE | May 26, 2008 11:53 AM

She needs MEDICATION!! Seriously, we are witnessing a profile in self-destruction. It is a very ugly side of the human condition. I can only wish her help in seeking medical attention. I see her self-pity ending up disastrously if she does not get some objective minds in there to help her.

Posted by: Shannon | May 26, 2008 11:26 AM

BORING AND TOTALLY DISGUSTING POSTS. PARTICULARLY THE ENDLESS DUPLICATES. GET A LIFE, ALL OF YOU.

Posted by: PAVEMENTRAT | May 26, 2008 11:25 AM

Finally, the Hill camp fights fire with fire. This Obama scum somehow thought RFK's assassination was about him? What an arrogant ego-centric dirt bag. This is a start. Obama needs to be exposed for his dirty politics. He claims to be change and unity? This is not the 'change' America wants.

Obama is disgusting thug. I am contacting the DNC to ask that he be removed from the primary race for not only blocking voters rights in both FL and MI, but also for running a racist and cut-throat campaign against Hillary Clinton.

The superdelegates must make the right decision at the convention and get rid of this horrible drug using racist. Hillary Clinton has already proven that she can defeat McCain via the primaries. Obama will lose. Democrats are not in this to lose and America will not elect a racist drug using president.

I hope the Obama valkyries start to realize how hopeless this is for them and also how these attacks on Clinton are securing her nomination at the convention.

Posted by: NO_OBAMA_EVER | May 26, 2008 11:25 AM

Do you Obama fans realize that the rest of the nation is disgusted with the Obama camp inventing opportunities to turn nearly everything Hillary (or Bill) Clinton says into something it's not? Can we ever get past the paranoia? All this protective defense of Obama says and does is beyond sickening.

The only thing more disgusting than the man himself are his sycophantic followers. Once he loses either the nomination or the general and we get past the several days of rioting sure to follow his loss, it will be a relief to put him and his ugly, racist, divisive campaign into cold storage -- forever.

Posted by: Lynn | May 26, 2008 11:22 AM

Pardon me???? I believe it was Mr. Obama who told reporters he believes her line, when most of America doesn't. These are the guys who lost her campaign for her and they're now as nuts as her. Who's drinking the Kool-Aid??

Posted by: Observer | May 26, 2008 11:01 AM

Clinton is beyond vile.

Please contact Howard Dean (deanh@dnc.org) and Nancy Pelosi (http://speaker.house.gov/) to let them know how you feel. You can also go to this website and lobby the Uncommitted Superdelegates in each state (https://www.lobbydelegates.com/)

Please take action.

Posted by: AWoman | May 26, 2008 10:59 AM

DAMN YOU, OBAMA! I KNOW OF YOUR MIND CONTROL DEVICE! GET OUTTA MY HEAD! YOU WERE THE SNIPER IN BOSNIA! I KNEW IT!

Posted by: Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton | May 26, 2008 10:57 AM

Sorry but Clinton is a creep. Not only did she make a bad historical comparison since the primary campaigns have changed dramatically from the references she made (California was at the end with many delegates up for grabs), but she didn't just say Kennedy had just won the primary in California in June, she mentioned his assassination. Anybody who doesn't understand the difference ought to be prevented from voting for 'stupidity'. But more typical of Clinton is her blaming others for HER words. What a loser!

Posted by: Debra` | May 26, 2008 10:55 AM

Hay moron, It was watched on a live video feed by a room full of reporters. It didn't take anyone to rat out Hillary everybody had the story at the same time.

++++++++
Urgent and Important:

Obama's Campaign were responsible for reporting Clinton gaffe on Bobby Kennedy Assassination

MSNBC News: 9: 15 am May 26, 2008
Lynn Sweet informs MSNBC that Obama's campaign were the first to complain to the NY media outlet to report the "Bobby Kennedy Assassination" remark by Hillary.
Obama's campaign reported it and the other stations followed suit.

Pleasee investigate the transcript of Lynn Sweet's conversation and make an issue out of this to be fair to Clinton supporters. There are over 17 million of Americans that love and support Senator Clinton.

Thank you.

Posted by: | May 26, 2008 10:09 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 10:26 AM

It is as though everything is an IQ test and no one is getting anything right. If you watch the clip on youtube you will see she was talking in the second person as though she is speaking as Hillary. This is what she is saying Hillary would like, not herself. My God, how much do people have to dumb down their conversation so the average listener can understand? It is like you are talking to children or something. I wonder if anyone here will even understand what I just wrote.


==========
I just saw the FOX NEWS video clip featuring the Liz Trotta interview and I have to admit I didn't know who she was - so I looked up her bio on the Internet. I thought that she must be some wacko wing-nut, but lo and behold, she is a well respected journalist with several awards to her credit. So can someone please tell me how she can get away with not only hoping for, but also laughing about the assassination of Barack Obama on a major news network and no one seems to be making a big deal about it? For God's sake, this man is potentially the next President of the United States of America. Have we sunk that low? Hillary Clinton, what have you started?

Posted by: Dave R. | May 26, 2008 9:02 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 10:17 AM

That MSNBC report about Obama's camp being the first to report the Clinton blooper is incorrect. The reporters who were with Clinton stated that the actual breaking of the news was done by the reporter for the New York Post and then by the Drudge Report. There were articles in this very paper telling of that. Check the time line.

Posted by: LetthemdrinkCrownRoyal | May 26, 2008 10:16 AM

Look Oh Dense One====++++ you were the one who said the words in poor taste, not Obama. You wouldn't admit that you told a big lie about your Bosnia trip and sniper fire. People aren't going to believe you if you said the sky was blue. You said something awful and it was in poor taste . There is no excuse for it, and the more you stick to your vile train of thought, the worse it is going to get. Obama was gracious enough to give you and out. Be gracious enough to apologize to the country , to Obama supporters, and especially to the Obama family, this would be your best bet on damage control. Instead , you show a distinct bent toward the George W. Bush method of never admitting you are wrong and hanging with it until it is drove right up you know where , just like your vote to go to war in Iraq and your backing of Bush on the Iran vote.You don't know when to let something drop. People think you savor the fighting more than doing the right thing.

Posted by: My Ears Are Tired, Please Stop Talking | May 26, 2008 10:12 AM

Urgent and Important:

Obama's Campaign were responsible for reporting Clinton gaffe on Bobby Kennedy Assassination

MSNBC News: 9: 15 am May 26, 2008
Lynn Sweet informs MSNBC that Obama's campaign were the first to complain to the NY media outlet to report the "Bobby Kennedy Assassination" remark by Hillary.
Obama's campaign reported it and the other stations followed suit.

Pleasee investigate the transcript of Lynn Sweet's conversation and make an issue out of this to be fair to Clinton supporters. There are over 17 million of Americans that love and support Senator Clinton.

Thank you.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 10:09 AM

Urgent and Important:

Obama's Campaign was responsible for reporting Clinton gaffe on Bobby Kennedy Assassination

MSNBC News: 9: 15 am May 26, 2008
Lynn Sweet informs MSNBC that Obama's campaign were the first to complain to the NY media outlet to report the "Bobby Kennedy Assassination" remark by Hillary.
Obama's campaign reported it and the other stations followed suit.

Pleasee investigate the transcript of Lynn Sweet's conversation and make an issue out of this to be fair to Clinton supporters. There are over 17 million of Americans that love and support Senator Clinton.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 10:06 AM

Urgent and Important:

Obama's Campaign were responsible for reporting Clinton gaffe on Bobby Kennedy Assassination

MSNBC News: 9: 15 am May 26, 2008
Lynn Sweet informs MSNBC that Obama's campaign were the first to complain to the NY media outlet to report the "Bobby Kennedy Assassination" remark by Hillary.
Obama's campaign reported it and the other stations followed suit.

Pleasee investigate the transcript of Lynn Sweet's conversation and make an issue out of this to be fair to Clinton supporters. There are over 17 million of Americans that love and support Senator Clinton.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 10:05 AM

I hope the WP is keeping track of the real death threats made in their blogs against Sen. Clinton, such as the one shorty below this post. Yes, Obamites, you are the ones we've been waiting for all right. Your class knows no boundaries.

Posted by: thinkwithyourbrain | May 26, 2008 10:05 AM

I just wish Hillary would drop dead and get out of our lives for good.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 10:01 AM

Hill and Bill. Will you PLEASE stop the BS?

We the People know that you will do anything including raising fear to possibly get a vote.

I used to like Bill. I don't now.

Hillary, I met you once. 'I NEVER had warm feelings or admiration for you.'

Drop this drivel and try to act like a dedicated public servant who is a Democrat.

Posted by: wilkestraphill | May 26, 2008 9:47 AM

to Gregory Peek you posted @ 7:51 pm on 5/25/08

I totaly agree with you but you forgot about the $100mil from the Kazstin(sp) billionair. and the columbin drug lords.
He sold the White House and now can

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 9:19 AM

It is astounding. Obama let her off easy over the weekend saying he took her at her word, and it's been a long campaign. He was too much of a gentleman to bring up the fact that she talked about assassination before. No gaffe, it was the same thing she said before. And now to blame his people for stoking this story? Can't this awful woman just go away?

Posted by: Missy | May 26, 2008 9:18 AM

Who is Elme? Can we get her a job, or something more interesting to do than writing 100,000 words to support the campaigns of dead, old school, Republican-lite, dynasty-minded Democrats like the Hilldog?

Posted by: TC | May 26, 2008 9:10 AM

I just saw the FOX NEWS video clip featuring the Liz Trotta interview and I have to admit I didn't know who she was - so I looked up her bio on the Internet. I thought that she must be some wacko wing-nut, but lo and behold, she is a well respected journalist with several awards to her credit. So can someone please tell me how she can get away with not only hoping for, but also laughing about the assassination of Barack Obama on a major news network and no one seems to be making a big deal about it? For God's sake, this man is potentially the next President of the United States of America. Have we sunk that low? Hillary Clinton, what have you started?

Posted by: Dave R. | May 26, 2008 9:02 AM

Hillary is being disingenuous, at best. If she really meant only that this has been a long race and there are parallels in history, all she had to say was, "My husband didn't clinch the nomination until June, and Bobby Kennedy was still campaigning in California in June, 1968." Instad, she said, "My husband didn't clinch the nomination until June, and Bobby Kennedy was assassinated." There are so many other choices of words she could have used. She didn't. She meant every word. It was a cold, calculated, lame attempt to cast a shadow on Obama's viability as a candidate. She deserves all the scorn and "special comments" she gotten.

Posted by: Apostle | May 26, 2008 8:26 AM


How I long for the days of Walter Cronkite!
To anyone who listened to the comment, Sen. Clinton's remarks were deep in a 20-minute clip of an otherwise routine conversation. She was responding to a question about the Democratic Party being divided by the length of the campaign. She first referenced her husband and said that he was in the race in June. Then as a second illustration, she added that Sen. Kennedy was in the race in June when he was assassinated.

As Paul Krugman (New York Times) argues, it wasn't the best example to use, but it's absurd to suggest, as Obama supporters immediately did, that Mrs. Clinton was making some kind of dark hint about Barack Obama's future. Similarly, it was divisive for the Obama campaign to portray Mrs. Clinton's assertion that it took L.B.J.'s political skills to turn Martin Luther King's vision into legislation as an example of politicizing race. Yet the claim that Mrs. Clinton was playing the race card, which was promoted by Obama supporters as well as in a memo by a member of Mr. Obama's staff turned the tide for Sen. Obama. This tactic may have gained Sen. Obama the nomination but it has been extremely divisive. It only serves to divide the Democratic Party and make it more difficult for either candidate to win in November.

Posted by: Wilson | May 26, 2008 8:19 AM

Obama is a GE product sponsored by NBC/MSNBC. You have seen the stocks of GE fall last year and now thet are selling their appliance industries. Hillary supporters like me are boycotting GE and watch its stock CRASH this year. Same for CNN also. It hurts to say but FOX is more fair and balanced. If not Hillary, vote McCain

- A McCain Democrat

Posted by: vs | May 26, 2008 7:30 AM

Dear Elme, you write:

quoting me: ",,,...Two years ago I was actively encouraging people about H. Clinton's possible bid for the White House.....& then ...,,,,"

quoting you: "Mind explaining to me HOW its possible for you to be so thorougly brainwashed by the Media, on the basis of NOTHING but vague generalities and character assassination?"

Your assumption I am brainwashed is only showing you cannot fathom anything other than what you want to believe about people having opinions other than yours.

Your suggesting the media writes about H. Clinton "on the basis of NOTHING but vague generalities and character assassination?"
...is absurd. what do YOU base that on.

There is not enough room here to go into every detail of the campaign but going back over the statements and utter lies of the Clintons recently should suffice.

The recent remark by H. Clinton regarding the Robert Kennedy assassination, then the lame apology to the Kennedys and AGAIN trying to turn the table and suggest the "bad guy" here is Obama because he reacts, is ample enough evidence and shows the same tactics used before by republicans again and again to slander their opponents.

Also the race issue, first being brought up by the Clintons, then when Obama's camp reacts, they suggest, as Bill did: "it was just a question of time before Obama would play the race card" (paraphrasing)

These are just two examples straight from the horses' mouths and I believe straight thinking people have been more and more able to see through this mean spirited campaign.

And do not suggest only Obama supporters echo one another here. I was NOT an Obama supporter but have become one, precisely due to the fact the Clintons are trying to dupe people to a point that insults me, and all voters, whether they wish to see it or not.

And by the way, from some people's points of view, if she is insane, she will probably make the more competent president after all.....look at where the last few have led this country! Being partially insane may be a prerequisite for holding what used to be a respected office.

Personally I think Obama is a dreamer and if elected will never be able to carry out meaningful, substantial reform to better the country. The difference between him and the Clintons is he cares, and probably believes he can make a difference. The Clintons seem to be in it for some reason(s) I was myself stupidly believing were not as high on their list of priorities as they have proven to be.

Posted by: Ronn | May 26, 2008 7:20 AM

,,,...Well Elme, Thanks for all your information (which is misguiding and manipulating)now we know what you spend your nights on. ....,,,

A. didn't know you were interested in what I spend my night on.

B. "..."which is misguiding and manipulating" ...?

all rithty then ... WHICH ..informations...is misguiding and manipulating ... complain ... more specifically NEXT Time ... then it MIGHT MEAN Something.

Posted by: elme | May 26, 2008 6:46 AM

Does anyone else see a parallel here between Britanny Spears meltdown and Hillary's? Another celebrity gone off the deep end...equally sad, equally out of touch with reality, equally insulated from truth and equally in need of psychiatric care...

Posted by: Dody - Asheville, NC | May 26, 2008 6:45 AM

Box-office movie at the theatre near you, ... "Fatal Election" starring Hillary as Glenn Close, & Obama as Michael Douglas. It's a riveting, never-ending thriller that will put you to sleep.

Posted by: Nam Tombi | May 26, 2008 6:32 AM

Well Elme, Thanks for all your information (which is misguiding and manipulating)now we know what you spend your nights on.

Posted by: ceferin | May 26, 2008 6:22 AM

,,,...Two years ago I was actively encouraging people about H. Clinton's possible bid for the White House.....& then ...,,,,

Mind explaining to me HOW its possible for you to be so thorougly brainwashed by the Media, on the basis of NOTHING but vague generalities and character assassination?

Posted by: elme | May 26, 2008 6:11 AM

Here we go again with the usual Clinton campaign slime, assert something unthinkable and then blame the offended person their trying to destroy. Dont' we know by now, Clinton doesn't ever do anything wrong. Obama is responsible for every dirty strategy the Clinton campaign has caused. The truth, there is only one campaign that is disgusting, underhanded, slimy and out to destroy the other candidate and that is the Clinton campaign. Slick Willy and his cat fighting wife have done everything from putting out defaming emails claiming Obama's a Muslim to organizing her supporters in Nevada to file a suit to get voting booths out of casinos where Obama was endorsed by the culinary union to using the race card-not once, not twice but three times: Slick Willy in SC primary, Ferraro and then the Hillery herself saying he cannot win working white voters. There is much, much more dirty stuff from this campaign but I will leave it here and say there is nothing good that can come out of the Clinton campaign. I believe the DNC will have to tell her it's over and if she doesn't relent, recall her affiliation as a Democrat.

Posted by: 1rap | May 26, 2008 6:06 AM

...,,,...Nuclear energy is clean and safe.France uses it exclusively and they reprocess rather than store the plutonium.All forms of alternative energy should be explored,and it is not a crime to make some money in the attempt to clean the environment....,,,...

How about looking up: nuclear waste dumps & reading about the 50 year nightmare HISTORY of "clean" nuclear energy? How about looking up the newspaper stories from the 1970's about Denver suburbs on the side nearest Rocky Flats where way too many people were DYING from cancer because of the PLUTONIUM released into the AIR from Fires at Rocky Flats?

How about looking up the name and location of the facility in upstate NY that was the LAST nuke REPROCESSING facility in the United States. Closed down decades ago because the buildings and all the equipment at the facility became So Radioactive no one could work there anymore. So radioactive it had to be mothballed, encased in concrete, at a cost of how many BILLIONS of dollars...I forget how much $$$ ... its been decades since I read the NEWS.

NEXT ... ask yourself this question: What does it MEAN ... ENERGY HOLE? You don't know? Ok, I will tell you. It MEANS, IF the Energy you have to (Input)/USE to GET...Transport...USE ENERGY = MORE Energy than you get out/OUTPUT; that's an Energy Hole, and, just like if you get "in the hole" in the matter of money ... if it keeps up ... you will go BROKE.

Besides, what we folks pay in Higher Electricity COSTS for nuclear power plants, The FED Govt. SPENDS BILLIONS ... supporting the nuke industry...THAT Costs US Money TOO. Building MAMMOTH extremely COMPLEX Centralized Power PLANTS makes no sense ... economically, or ANY OTHER WAY.

Don't think so? Think nuclear power plants are SAFE? Ok, then go live NEAR one, and HOPE some garden variety LOONY, or, some terrorist ... does not start a FIRE, lob a grenade, or shoot an RPG into that NUKE WASTE they have been STORING on-site For DECADES.

It is a crime to make money from polluting the earth water and air... Look up Hanford WA nuke waste and the Columbia River, Look up Barnwell SC nuke waste and groundwater.

It is a crime to MAKE electicity MORE EXPENSIVE for everyone to line the Pockets of a wealthy FEW. It is a crime to TURN the PAGE BACK to Obsolete 70-year old technology/MONOPOLY Energy ... instead of Going Forward into the Future with RENEWABLE, CLEAN, De-Centralized, CHEAPER Energy.


Posted by: elme | May 26, 2008 6:05 AM

Elme, tell me "specifically" how you feel about Sen. Clinton's behavior in this race>

Tell me how you feel about "the kitchen sink" (Ok, but you will have to be more specific, yourself, about that vague "kitchen sink")

The racists remarks (As I previously posted: When a crime is alleged, the police look for MOTIVE and OPPORTUNITY.
The Clintons had NO MOTIVE, NOTHING to GAIN by making racist remarks.

Clinton was ahead in the South Carolina Primary Polls by 20 points ---at the time Obama's campaign started Pushing those accusations of racism TO THE MEDIA. Those accusations were ABSURD on their face and an insult to the intelligence of all of us.

Obama had MOTIVE, and, he was caught red-handed making those accusations in a 4-Page Internal Campaign MEMO created for the purpose of PUSHING those accusations to the MEDIA.

The pandering to republicans (John McCain would make a better President) { I don't think Clinton said that.)

The NAFTA lies (Multiple witnesses say she WAS opposed to NAFTA on the same grounds she objects to it today, but did loyally agree to help Bill work that COMPROMISE with the Republicans -- it was originally Bush Sr's legislation. I don't know the details, but it may have been during the time when the Republicans had Control of Congress & could have Passed any NAFTA legislation they wanted, but may have agreed to a COMPROMISE with Clinton so he wouldn't VETO it.) TWO or more witnesses do constitute PROOF in a Court, so since more than TWO witnesses have attested that Clinton was Opposed to NAFTA, as it was written, I have no cause to believe she is lying about it.)


The Foreign Policy experience lies. (You would have to be more Specific on that one. The idea that Hillary Clinton has no foreign policy experience is ridiculous given that even the Republicans know she was a PARTNER fully Politically involved in Bill's presidency, and in his Governorship of Arkansas, for that matter.)

The signing off on Florida and Mich. and then trying to change the rules in a flawed election. (Hillary signed a Pledge NOT TO CAMPAIGN in Florida or Michigan. The voters in Florida was told NOT TO GO TO THE POLLS. But they did. The Florida Primary DATE was, incidentally, MOVED UP by the completely REPUBLICAN controlled Florida Legislature --- thereby making a whole lot of trouble for the Democratic Party and the Democratic Voters in Florida. I really don't think the Democrat Party should ALLOW the Republicans to Make the Democrat Voters in Floriday and MICHIGAN Lose their Votes, nor, do I see any GOOD reason for the Democratic Party to LET the REPUBLICANS get away with that dirty trick. Next, Obama signed a pledge NOT TO CAMPAIGN in Florida, but he DID it anyway. He had TV ADS running in Florida for 2 weeks before the Florida Primary. Clinton had none. Some Democrats think the Florida & Michigan Votes/Delegates should be counted, but Obama should have NO VOTES or Delegates from the Florida Primary because HE broke the RULES. IN Michigan, Obama took his name off the ballot, and then, his campaign PAID FOR and RAN ADS and an "Operation" urging people to VOTE:
... geez, its late, can't get hold of the word: to Vote something like, UnAssigned, or UNCOMMITTED, I think that's the word.

WITH all that scheming and game-playing by the Republican Party, and, Obama regarding the Florida and Michigan Primaries -- one thing is CLEAR ... there was a lot of dirty politics involved.

The "sniper" lies (When one is very tired and has been sleep-deprived, it may be that one remembers things on a More EMOTIONAL than RATIONAL FACTUAL basis, much as, late at night one sees things more emotionally ... so that she may have been remembering her EMOTIONS and FEELINGS about the Bosnia trip --- where she was WARNED that it was dangerous, there might be sniper fire, she may have have bad dreams about it on the plane, and for years afterward ... so that in a sleep-deprived state those emotional memories/or nightmare memories came back to her... OR, she may have been embroidering the story to gain more popularity, since, the MEDIA was lying, smearing, and slandering her everyday all day long, as they had been doing for months.

and now this, where she raises the specter of assassination. (...uh...huh... just like Bill Clinton raised the...specter... of Fairytales, stated a ("racist") historical FACT: Jesse Jackson won the South Carolina Primary,... etc.)

Well, dear, for those of us old enough to remember Bobby Kennedy's assasination MENTIONING that FACT is NOT Unusual To US, we have made mention of that FACT many many times in our lives and discussed at length Bobby Kennedy, his life, what he meant to us, how much was taken from & robbed from all of us. I do not find it SURPRISING or UNUSUAL for Clinton to speak about it. Nor, do I buy Olberman/MSNBC's "outrage" over it. IF they had ANY Concern Whatsoever that some nutcase would do the deed to ... that other candidate ... because the nutcase HEARD Clinton say the words: ..."when Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in JUNE" -
---THEN they sure as .... Should NOT be giving it BLARING PUBLICITY all over the TV MEDIA for DAYS.

I could go on if you like (Pleasd do.)

Posted by: elme | May 26, 2008 5:38 AM

Nuclear energy is clean and safe.France uses it exclusively and they reprocess rather than store the plutonium.All forms of alternative energy should be explored,and it is not a crime to make some money in the attempt to clean the environment.

Posted by: joseph marcucilli | May 26, 2008 5:25 AM

Someone has mentioned in his post that the Kennedy family is seething with anger over Hillary's RFK comments. And this despite Robert Kennedy (Jr), son of late RFK, saying that "Hillary was invoking a familiar political circumstance in order to support her decision to stay in the race through June......I think it is a mistake for people to take offense." If someone had to be mightily offended by Hillary's comment, it should have been Robert Kennedy (Jr), not anyone else. But the Kennedy clan, supporting BO, is giving public vent to their dislike of the Clintons. Perhaps they cannot bear the fact that their clan lost their grip on the party to the Clintons in terms of the popularity index, that they being the first Dem family for such a long time, who enjoyed the adulation for the clan, do not matter to the party supporters anymore. Do they remember how senator Kennedy treated Jimmy Carter during the convention and the innumerable scandals they were party to? Do they realize that they have lost their place in the era of new age politics, just as their protege BO condemns the old Washington style of politics, which has no place for their clan.

Posted by: Rocker_Rick | May 26, 2008 4:55 AM

Concerning the assertion Obama is where he is today mainly because he is a Black Americn, I would like to suggest the following:

Hillary Clinton would NOT be where she is today if she were a Black American.

About that there is no doubt.

That assumption of race playing an important role, if it must be considered works both ways...

Posted by: Ronn | May 26, 2008 4:46 AM

Two years ago I was actively encouraging people about H. Clinton's possible bid for the White House.

One year ago I still thought it an interesting idea.

Six months ago I began having doubts.

Three months ago her dishonesty and power craze became apparent.

Today I believe she may be the most vicious, manipulative politician around or is nearing a point she may be certifiably insane....

Posted by: Ronn | May 26, 2008 4:42 AM

Sorry SDUndecided I did not see your post until late this evening. I hope you will be able to see this reply.

I have written a lot about this election campaign. Below are copies of two things I have written - sunnarizing, as briefly as I can, much of the information I have gathered from internet & TV over the past months since Nov. 2007:

This Presidential Election is not about skin color, or gender, or liberal vs. conservative.

Its about .... BIG MONEY --and 29 nuclear power plants.

WHY has NBC, MSNBC, CBS (& FOX & CNN) been putting out PRO-Obama/Anti-Clinton PROPAGANDA...everyday all day long - since last November?

ANSWER: Because Obama is PRO-Nuclear & he voted FOR the Cheney Energy Bill; Clinton is NOT Pro-Nuke & Voted AGAINST the Cheney Energy Bill.

GE owns NBC & MSNBC, Westinghouse owns CBS ... & Thanks to the Cheney Energy Bill they are planning to reap BILLIONS in profits (Risk-Free) from building 29 new nukes AND from 30-40 years of HIGHER ELECTRICITY RATES.

(GE & Westinghouse have been pumping $Billions of ADVERTISING dollars for all their PRODUCTS - Into Every FORM of MEDIA, for generations.)... ANY MEDIA that even MENTIONS The Cheney Energy Bill, let alone provides any real COVERAGE of one of the MOST IMPORTANT ISSUES of our time ---KNOWS they would put themselves at risk of losing a lot of $$$ ADVERTISING Revenue).

Other participants in Cheney's NExt Big
MONOPOLY POWER
---ENERGY RIPoff---
Excelon Corp. of ILLINOIS, Entergy (owners of many utilities in the Southern States); 3 consortiums of nuke industry corporations.

McCain voted for the Cheney Energy Bill & has already said on the campaign trail: "I have to remember to say ... its absoultely necessary for...us...to build nuclear power plants."

Cheney, GE, Westinghouse (NBC,MSNBC,CNN,FOX,CBS ...(The TV MEDIA)... the nuke industry...Are running Obama AND McCain for President.

The only way we are going to get the NEW Clean Green ENERGY / ECONOMY we NEED is the election of Clinton to the Presidency. We cannot afford to squander hundreds of $Billions on Obsolete 70-yr old nuclear power plants.

Last week's NEWS: The governor of South Carolina is refusing to allow the Federal govt. to ship 30 tons of plutonium into South Carolina---until the Feds provide him with a written agreement that the Feds will --REMOVE-- the plutonium from South Carolina---in the event their plans to produce nuke reactor FUEL are --- unsuccessful.

The govt. wants to move 30 TONS of plutonium from the western states to South Carolina to locate it closer to the 29 nukes to be built in many of the Eastern & Southern states.

(See Map at NY Times LINK showing locations where the first 17 reactors are to be built): "Energy Bill aids Expansion of Atomic Power"

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/31/washington/31nuclear.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1211360505-THF+hgbTrxetSkzjIgoiAw

(BTW a microscopic particle of plutonium, once inhaled, will kill you from lung cancer in about a week.)

Plans to build those nuclear power plants are well advanced - with licensing hearings already scheduled for the first few.

If you think nukes are ok... just
GOOGLE: Rocky Flats Denver plutonium, and, Hanford WA nuclear waste.

Sound far-fetched, to you ... The MEDIA in league with the Big Corporations (GE, Westinghouse, et al)...to Pull Off Cheney's NEXT Big Energy Ripoff...by PROMOTING a FAKE Democrat Candidate to run against, and lose to, the REPUBLICAN Candidate?
Think about it:

SAME MEDIA that helped Bush/Cheney LIE us into a WAR. SAME MEDIA that sold the American public Bush/Cheney ---- Twice.

SAME Corporations that OWN the MEDIA --- are planning to reap hundreds of BIllions in Profits --RISK FREE-- thanks to the Cheney Energy Bill which decreed that US TAXPAYERS will PAY Back any of the nuke building loans that Default.--- (WITH the Congressional Budget Office rating the risk of default at 50% or greater.)

(From a Taxpayer/Risk/ODDS point of view The Cheney Energy Bill might as well have said --- let any nuke industry company go get bank loans for 5-10 $Billion --- then go to VEGAS & Place Their Bets--and--YOU the People Will PAY BACK Every Penny they LOSE.)

No new nukes were built in the US for 30 years because, following 3 Mile Island & Chernobyl, the banks wouldn't loan the money --- too risky.

PLEASE ---Pass the Word any way you can. Since the TV "News" has become nothing but Lying PROPAGANDA, its up to We The People to get the REAL NEWS out to the public.

"Getting off coal to go nuclear is like giving up cigarettes to take up smoking crack."
________________________________________

Change Nobody can believe in

Obama's whole campaign is based on
ONE BIG LIE:
***CHANGE***
He didn't make.

OBAMA = NO Experience/ NO CHANGE

Obama claims 7 years experience in the Illinois legislature - Working Across the Aisles, Bringing people together to get good CHANGES passed -as exemplified by 26 good bills with his name on them.

A Chicago reporter says all 26 bills were passed in ONE Year and they were NOT Obama's.

http://wweek.com/editorial/3418/10516/

EXCERPTS:
But what's interesting, and almost never discussed, is that he built his entire legislative record in Illinois in a single year.

Republicans controlled the Illinois General Assembly for six years of Obama's seven-year tenure.

Then Emil Jones Jr. (became the Senate Majority leader), He became Obama's kingmaker. Jones appointed Obama sponsor of virtually every high-profile piece of legislation, angering many rank-and-file state legislators who had more seniority than Obama and had spent years championing the bills.

During his seventh year in the state Senate, Obama ... sponsored a whopping 26 bills including many he now cites in his presidential campaign when attacked as inexperienced.

Working Across the Aisles/
Making CHANGES = ZILCH

Taking Credit for Other People's Work/
INTEGRITY = ZERO

(Obama's book "Audacity ..." Shows:
Democrats had Majority Control of the Illinois Senate when those bills were passed. They were passed during his last year in the state Senate.)

QUOTE:
"After two terms during which I labored in the minority, Democrats had gained control of the state senate, and I had subsequently passed a slew of bills, from reforms of the Illinois death penalty system to an expansion of the state's health program for kids. I had continued to teach at the University of Chicago Law School, a job I enjoyed, and was frequently invited to speak around town."

Please Pass the Word to anyone you can.


Posted by: elme | May 26, 2008 4:37 AM

Mr. Goldfarb, your misleading headline tells us who you are rooting for, doesn't it? I know you media folks, print and tv, are taking for Obama; but would it be asking too much if you can at least pretend to be objective and report the news!

Had it not been for the media's bias towards Obama (ignoring, dismissing or under-reporting his many gaffes, missteps and questionable ties), Hillary's RFK reference would not have been miscontrued, "analyzed" and over-played by the media. That this has been the case goes to the heart of fact that many in the print and tv media are not only shamelessly carrying water for Obama, but also hate Hillary and would do and say anything to hurt her chances - even going on deranged rants as Keith Olbermann is doing.

As for the Obama supporters, with two polls (Gallup and Rasmussen)showing McCain beating him and one (Newsweek) showing him tied with McCain, one would have thought they would stop their vicious, nasty, vile and sexist attacks on Hillary and her supporters. Unfortunately, the attacks are getting worse everyday and with every posting. My guess is, like Obama and his campign, they are living with the false hope that Hillary's supporters will rally to the party and vote for Obama in November, if he is the party's nominee. Fat chance, I say! DailyKos, TPM, Huffington Post, Keith Olbermann, etc. have to understand that a heavy price will be paid for going after another Democrat as they've done! They can kiss the support of Hillary Democrats goodbye this November and for a long time!

Posted by: dennisdean | May 26, 2008 4:23 AM

Jr just found your post on nuclear energy.

May I recommend that you Google: Rocky Flats Denver Plutonium.

Earlier I posted this question:

Does anybody here really believe we NEED to build gigantic structures to house hideously complex equipment TO: SPLIT ATOMS to Boil Water ... to Make STEAM?
(& produce More nuke waste)?

...WHEN we can use mirrors to focus the rays of the sun to produce enough HEAT to melt steel, or, Boil Water to Make STEAM?

Posted by: elme | May 26, 2008 4:07 AM

Jr, I just found your Obama quotes on authorizing "the war".

As Clinton has pointed out ... authorizing the USE of Military Force --- does not mean WAR. It means military force which CAN include War ... but SANE presidents do not go to WAR ... unless they have to.

They can and do use much lesser military force ... like Bill Clinton when he bombed Saddam's homes after Saddam sent assassins to kill George Bush Sr....like Bill Clinton had missles on standby ready to kill Osama.

NONE of us knew AT THAT TIME what lying insane bastidges Bush/Cheney were.

Obama says he ... was not privy to the Senate intelligence reports. Clinton was, and was privy to the people who wrote them, BUT, Valerie Plame, and Hillary Clinton Did NOT Know Whether Saddam had WMD's, or Not, and, Most of US recognize that we Did have to find out.

Obama's attacks on Clinton are NOT motivated by any MORAL authority on his part, nor by any REAL Fault, that he percieves, on her part.

Those attacks are motivated by nothing but a campaign tactic he's using to try to win the nomination.

I remember very well: Seeing Obama's speeches on TV where he repeatedly said ... he would be taking "the high ground"; would not be doing any dirty politics' would not be making personal attacks on others; would not engage in Name Calling (That was in Jan, early Feb.)

THEN, later in Feb. there was Chris Matthews on TV ...everyday for a week... before the 1st debate that was held in Philadelphia ... screeching: He's behind in the polls. He's GOT TO ATTACK Hillary, Attack Hillary!

& it was that debate night when Obama and Edwards BEGAN their PERSONAL ATTACKS. a few days following that debate, Hillary commented when asked about the two guys attacking her ... "So, now the fun begins." A slightly sarcastic, dry, wry, humorous comment on the FACT that "the boys" had turned to negative campaigning.

The NEXT day Chris Matthews, all the boys at MSNBC ... pretending to be soooo stupid they could not recognize SARCASTIC joking about a Negative circumstance ... SAID... huff, snort ... OH! So! SHE Thinks negative campaigning is FUN! You would have to be... some kind of IDIOT to take Clinton's remark about the Boy's negative campaigning ... to mean that ... SHE was doing negative campaigning... Enjoyed Negative campaigning ... Enjoyed having the Boys start THEIR negative campaigning by making personal attacks on her.

THAT one example is TYPICAL of the Twisting, Smearing, and LYING engaged in by all hands at MSNBC --- ever since.

Posted by: elme | May 26, 2008 3:56 AM

...>>

JR, I addressed those remarks to: quite a few people here who were alleging ... all the above. If you were among them, I was not aware of it.

& I don't believe I called anybody here racist, or typed the word racism on this blog today. If I am mistaken & I did do so, please copy and paste my words so I can see them.

Posted by: elme | May 26, 2008 3:20 AM

...>>>

No, dear, I do not see how we CAN conclude Obama was saying ... something OTHER THAN what he said. He did not say he could not know because he did not get to read the reports. He said: "I don't know what I would have done IF I had been in the Senate...at the time." My question remains; having Said That, how is it OK; not hypocritical for him to CONDEMN Clinton for her Vote?

An analogy:
suppose you were standing in your yard, with a gun in your hand, near a neighbor's house where the neighbor's 2 year old child is sitting playing ...WHEN... a man you don't know well is chasing a dog -- a dog that is headed at full speed Toward the child ... and the man is screaming: the Dog's got RABIES! Shoot him, Shoot him before he bites the child!

And you shoot the dog. Later, the dog's owner informs you: the dog did not have rabies, he's never bitten anyone, he loves children; the dog was just running from the man because the man has kicked and beat him several times before. The man just LIED when he said the dog had rabies, was chasing him because he hates animals and screamed for you to shoot the dog because he just LIKES to see things die.

Did you do the WRONG thing? Yes. Did you do the WRONG thing, make that mistake ... because of a morally reprehensible MOTIVE, or for a worthy MOTIVE: a Desire to PROTECT the Child ...from... any POSSIBILITY of being being bitten by a rabid dog? YOU did not have the TRUTH the Whole TRUTH and nothing but the TRUTH; You had to ACT With the INFORMATION you HAD in front of you at the time.

...>>>

As Clinton has said: She had ACCESS to the PEOPLE who WROTE the REPORTS, and, was thoroughly briefed by them ... given MORE information, AND, DISCUSSION with THEM ... than she could have gotten from the Reports. i.e. She did BETTER than READ the Reports ... she interviewed and discussed them with the PEOPLE who wrote them....in person with the People ... more REAL than words on paper.

You remember Valerie Plame. It was her JOB at the CIA to come up with EVIDENCE that Saddam had WMD's. As Valerie has said: She could Find NOTHING as evidence that Saddam DID have WMD's --- but that DID NOT Mean He DID NOT Have Them; that did NOT MEAN We could ASSUME he did not have them.

Clinton Could Not ASSUME he did not have them. THAT is WHY she Voted to USE MILITARY FORCE, if necessary, to FIND OUT if he had WMD's, or NOT.

That Authorization did not authorize an INVASION of IRAQ; Her Vote for the Authorization WAS NOT the CAUSE of Bush's stupidity and incompetence in ... INVADING Iraq, Nor, in CONTINUING the WAR ... long after WE FOUND OUT IF SADDAM had WMD's or Not.

Posted by: elme | May 26, 2008 3:11 AM

...>>>

No, dear, I do not see how we CAN conclude Obama was saying ... something OTHER THAN what he said. He did not say he could not know because he did not get to read the reports. He said: "I don't know what I would have done IF I had been in the Senate...at the time." My question remains; having Said That, how is it OK; not hypocritical for him to CONDEMN Clinton for her Vote?

An analogy:
suppose you were standing in your yard, with a gun in your hand, near a neighbor's house where the neighbor's 2 year old child is sitting playing ...WHEN... a man you don't know well is chasing a dog -- a dog that is headed at full speed Toward the child ... and the man is screaming: the Dog's got RABIES! Shoot him, Shoot him before he bites the child!

And you shoot the dog. Later, the dog's owner informs you: the dog did not have rabies, he's never bitten anyone, he loves children; the dog was just running from the man because the man has kicked and beat him several times before. The man just LIED when he said the dog had rabies, was chasing him because he hates animals and screamed for you to shoot the dog because he just LIKES to see things die.

Did you do the WRONG thing? Yes. Did you do the WRONG thing, make that mistake ... because of a morally reprehensible MOTIVE, or for a worthy MOTIVE: a Desire to PROTECT the Child ...from... any POSSIBILITY of being being bitten by a rabid dog? YOU did not have the TRUTH the Whole TRUTH and nothing but the TRUTH; You had to ACT With the INFORMATION you HAD in front of you at the time.

...>>>

As Clinton has said: She had ACCESS to the PEOPLE who WROTE the REPORTS, and, was thoroughly briefed by them ... given MORE information, AND, DISCUSSION with THEM ... than she could have gotten from the Reports. i.e. She did BETTER than READ the Reports ... she interviewed and discussed them with the PEOPLE who wrote them....in person with the People ... more REAL than words on paper.

You remember Valerie Plame. It was her JOB at the CIA to come up with EVIDENCE that Saddam had WMD's. As Valerie has said: She could Find NOTHING as evidence that Saddam DID have WMD's --- but that DID NOT Mean He DID NOT Have Them; that did NOT MEAN We could ASSUME he did not have them.

Clinton Could Not ASSUME he did not have them. THAT is WHY she Voted to USE MILITARY FORCE, if necessary, to FIND OUT if he had WMD's, or NOT.

That Authorization did not authorize an INVASION of IRAQ; Her Vote for the Authorization WAS NOT the CAUSE of Bush's stupidity and incompetence in ... INVADING Iraq, Nor, in CONTINUING the WAR ... long after WE FOUND OUT IF SADDAM had WMD's or Not.

Posted by: elme | May 26, 2008 3:09 AM

Whoops, didn't mean to type in racism..

Posted by: JR | May 26, 2008 2:43 AM

Elme,
I thought that I had responded in a rather logical fashion (see below). All I can say is I am glad we are not having this debate in person because you would be yelling at the top of your lungs.

Where is my racism? or drivel? Not sure what you are getting at here.

I can think, read and make decisions based on thoughtful discourse, it seems like you are more interested in name-calling.

Posted by: JR | May 26, 2008 2:41 AM

For all those ... alleging ... rants, unbalanced, twisted logic, no facts ...

CAN ANY OF YOUR READ, or, THINK, or SEE?

If so, then it has to be obvious to YOU that YOU are doing xactly what you accuse me of ... while I am using FACTS, good reasoning, Links ... NONE of which have any of you made use of.

YOUR Mental Problem is the same as Obama & the MEDIA that supports him: DENIAL & Projection. Denial of REALITY and PROJECTION of you own faults and actions onto others.

WHY is it Peeps, you never ADDRESS or Discuss ANY of the FACTS or ISSUES, all you do is launch personal attacks?...just like your Obama "hero".... & all of GE's "news" people on MSNBC.

You are just Sooooo addicted to ugly hate speech, gossip, and character assassination - you just can't STOP your ridiculous, repetitive, boring, empty drivel.

Posted by: elme | May 26, 2008 2:33 AM

So Elme, we must conclude that Obama was saying that he could not know what he would do because he did not get to see the reports but thought it was not right.

Clinton had access to the reports but didn't bother to read them so she cannot make the claim that given the evidence at the time it seemed like the right thing to do.

See the distinction?

Posted by: JR | May 26, 2008 2:32 AM

Elme: Below are Obama's quotes

"I'm not privy to Senate intelligence reports. What would I have done? I don't know, what I know is that from my vantage point the case was not made for authorizing the war."

Barack Obama

Posted by: JR | May 26, 2008 2:30 AM

"WHY is it NOT Obvious to YOU that The CHENEY Energy Bill is NOT LIKELY to be of BENEFIT to YOU, Your Country, our ENERGY situation, going GREEN, or, OUR ECONOMY?"

I agree that it is hard to vote for anything Cheney puts forth, but it is not a reason to not vote for it. For one thing the bill has more money into green energy development than ever before, so it's a start. With the current energy situation we can choose extremly dirty ways to produce energy, or we can choose cleaner ways. Unfortunately we do not have the luxury of choosing dirty energy anymore.

Nuclear power is relatively clean and can produce a lot of power in a small area and prevent tons of pollutants from entering our atmosphere. There is the threat of a nuclear disaster but over the years that threat has been minimized to almost zero (you may have noticed there hasn't been an accident for a long while now). There is the problem of nuclear waste but now we can recycle the spent fuel rods more efficiently than in the past thereby minimizing waste.

Nuclear power will also help us reduce our reliance on foreign oil.

So, dirty energy, more oil or cleaner energy, less oil, take your pick.

Posted by: JR | May 26, 2008 2:24 AM

...Elme, may I recommend you read Obama's speech on the Iraq war during the run up, everything he said in that speech came true

Well, fine dear, I've heard the speech and its nothing better than I or many others discussing on the internet -the run up to the War --- could not have written, or did write at the time ... just as well.

NOw, dear, Mind addressing my very Direct Question: Given OBAMA's Own Words: "I don't know how I would have voted IF I had been in the Senate .." ...don't you COMPREHEND it is ABSURD, hypocritical, morally indefensible for Obama to Blame Clinton for how she voted?

Posted by: elme | May 26, 2008 2:21 AM

PEEPS,

WHY is so hard for you to BELIEVE this election is NOT about skin color, gender, or even Liberal vs. Conservative?

WHY, after 8 Bush/Cheney YEARS is it so hard for you to believe all this DIVISION is about MONEY & POWER?

WHY is it NOT Obvious to YOU that The CHENEY Energy Bill is NOT LIKELY to be of BENEFIT to YOU, Your Country, our ENERGY situation, going GREEN, or, OUR ECONOMY?

WHY is it NOT Obvious to YOU that the MEDIA ...(SAME MEDIA-Owned by- the planned BUILDERS/Profiteers from building 29 new Nuclear Power Plants) has hundreds of Billions of $$$DOLLARS Worth of MOTIVE to: Tell you NOTHING about the Cheney Energy Bill;

SLAM, Smear, and LIE about the Clintons because Clinton Voted Against the Cheney Energy Bill AND the CHENEY Energy Ripoff will NOT happen If she is elected President.

Whereas, the Cheney ENERGY RIPOFF ... building 29 new nuclear power plants ... WILL happen IF Obama, who Voted FOR the Cheney Energy Bill, or, McCain who voted for the Cheney Energy Bill ... get elected.

I have been closely watching the campaign coverage of MSNBC & CNN, & ocassionally checking on what FOX/Republicans are up to, since last November and I KNOW beyond ANY doubt ... MSNBC & CNN's "news" coverage is so OBVIOUS extreme, absurd, even ludicruous in its BLATANT PRO-Obama/Anti-Clinton PROPAGANDA ... that there's GOT to be some REALLY BIG REASON for it.

MOTIVE: GE, Westinghouse, the nuke industry ... have been planning to build 29 new nukes - since 2005 - When The Cheney Energy Bill made it possible for them to do so: BY guaranteeing that US Taxpayers will PAY BACK any of the nuke building loans that go into default.

i.e. MOTIVE for GE, Westinghouse, the nuke industry: BIG MONEY.

OPPORTUNITY: GE --OWNS-- NBC & MSNBC. Westinghouse --OWNS-- CBS. THEY have BIG ADdertising BUCKS to INFLUENCE every form of MEDIA in the USA from Wall Street to the middle of nowhere South Dakota.

Strange, far-fetched, a rant? Nope. Just FACTS & info YOU can go GOOGLE for YOURSELF: Cheney Energy Bill (H.R. 6, of 2005) ---Rezko, Auichi, Alsammarae. Chicago Sun Times Rezko Trial Obama.

IF you want to be INFORMED Voters ... instead of DIS-INFORMED by the TV MEDIA, go READ NEWSPAPER articles all over the Internet.

Posted by: elme | May 26, 2008 2:12 AM

Elme, may I recommend you read Obama's speech on the Iraq war during the run up, everything he said in that speech came true.

I think Sen. Clinton should have at least read the report before voting considering it has turned out to be one of the biggest foreign policy disasters in our history as a country.

and NO, I was never fooled by Bush and his cronies because I never trusted him after he stole the election but primarily I didn't believe him because of the way the run up to the war was handled.

I know it was hard, especially when you get a guy like Colin Powel up there to make the case but something told me there was something not right about this whole thing so NO I was never for the war.

Oh, and try to calm down a bit, you sound out of balance and it weakens your case.

Posted by: JR | May 26, 2008 2:08 AM

...>>>I don't think Hillary or Bill are real racists, only when it is politically expedient for them to be so....>>>

When a crime is alleged to have been committed - the police look for:

A. A Motive
B. Opportunity

WHAT, exactly, do YOU See as the Clinton's MOTIVE for their allegedly racist WORDS?

and ... please IDENTIFY their OPPORTUNITY/S to use racism to their BENEFIT ... because it was ... politically expedient.

Posted by: elme | May 26, 2008 1:45 AM

You know what is bothering me about the passionate (to be politically correct) Clinton supporters is that I am reading a lot of very strong statements, but there don't seem to be any facts to back them up. Lots of wild accusations, but no evidence to support their arguments, and when they get challenged they gravitate to blame-shifting and name calling rather than thoughtful discourse.

What's up with that anyway?

Posted by: JR | May 26, 2008 1:44 AM

... & those OBAMA quotes: "i don't know how I would have voted on it, IF, I had been in the Senate at the time", and, later on, after the war had been going on for awhile: "My position on the war would be about the same as Bush's"

...WHAT, exactly, do Obama's words on the subject MEAN to YOU?

WERE YOU in favor of the IRaq WAR --- WHEN Bush first INVADED?, or Not? Do you REMEMBER that MOST Americans WERE in favor of that invasion? Do you recall that Bush had a VERY High approval rating at the time?

With YOURSELF, NOT KNOWING, at that time -----Whether Saddam HAD WMD's, or NOT ... how do YOU think our Congresspeople should have VOTED? WITH REPUBLICANS in Complete Control of BOTH Houses of Congress AT THE TIME do YOU think Clinton Could Have STOPPED Bush from going to War - If she had Voted differently?

Since SHE did not KNOW whether Saddam had WMD's or NOT; should she have VOTED to DO NOTHING, Take NO further Steps to FIND OUT, Voted NO on ... the use of military force/(NOT Invasion) if necessary, TO FIND OUT?

Obama/The MEDIA are distorting, over-simplifying, lying, and hypocritically CLAIMING Obama's POSITION to be what it WAS NOT; consistently against the War from the day he made his first speech about it to an Ultra-liberal Anti-War crowd...& just ignoring Obama's later statements about HIS Position.

"I don't know how I would have Voted". THAT being said - it is utter hypocricy for him to BLAME her for her vote.

Posted by: elme | May 26, 2008 1:40 AM

I don't think Hillary or Bill are real racists, only when it is politically expedient for them to be so.

Posted by: JR | May 26, 2008 1:36 AM

elme your rants make think you are a bit unbalanced. I understand your passion but you are not helping your case by just ranting and not defending your positions. have you not noticed other posters are asking you questions about your statements? why are you not defending yourself?

Posted by: MD | May 26, 2008 1:33 AM

Elme: your twisted and demented logic matches that of Hillary's no wonder you are so devoted. Kindred souls with no morals or scruples have found each other.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 1:33 AM

The woman is clearly a sociopath. Nothing is ever her fault and she takes responsibility for nothing.

She says she wants to stay in to unify the country. How will she accomplish that when she claims that men hate her, the media hates her, the educated hate her, latte drinkers hate her, caucus states hates her, Hawaii hates her, Oregon hates, Washington hates her, moveon.org hates her, activitists hate her. she has decried victim and martyr, sexism and favoritism... some uniter she is.

And once again, Obama is to blame for her choice of words, that she has repeated on more than one occasion - Hillary patience with you and your sharks is wearing thin.

Exit now while you still have a chance to salvage your political life... because even your new york base is getting sick of you.

Posted by: prima donna | May 26, 2008 1:28 AM

"...SAME MEDIA that DID NOT Sell ME the Iraq War."

But apparently sold it to Sen. Clinton who did not even read the report before voting on it.

Lazy and gullible, afraid to go against the grain because it wasn't politically expedient. That is part of the reason why she is losing, or dare I say it, has lost.

Posted by: JR | May 26, 2008 1:24 AM

Let's all stop talking out the sides of our nexts and trying to make excuses for Hillary. She is a racist NUT case and what she said about Obama being assasinated is not the 1st time. Everyone has already seen her polarizing self for what she really is and hopefully she'll get thrown out of the senate sooner than later. She has been wishing that Obama gets assasinated because she is embarrassed that he toppled the Cinton Machine without a warning. But what's really funny is that Hillary and Bill need to really be careful about wishing something so horrible on someone, especially the next POTUS. What Hillary wants to happen to Obama may just end up happening to her. You never know what she and Bill have promised those crooks that have given millions of dollars to Bill's library. Based on Hillary's desperation, it seems like she and Bill have promisted the crooks something if she became the President. I can't wait until Obama raps this mess up and Hillar goes away some where. She's toxic.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 1:17 AM

... ...>>>

Talking out of both sides of his ...mouth ... -Obama PUBLICLY says: Its time to just drop it...while his campaign is busy emailing out a LINK to Keith Olbermann's "Special Comment" ... wherein Keith says its just UNFORGIVEABLE for her to have Spoken THAT WORD, in ANY circumstances, along with a really long boring UGLY Anti-Clinton TIRADE.

How much more UNFORGIVEABLE is it then, for Olbermann & All of MSNBC to BLAST it all over the world for the past 4 days ... giving it Blaring PUBLICITY...a circumstance...that MUST QUALIFY for Keith's own...judgment...UNFORGIVEABLE in ---ANY-- CIRCUMSTANCES.

So ...horrible for Clinton to MENTION the WORD ... in a small newspaper office ... in Sioux Falls South Dakota! So horrible for HER to Mention that WORD ... without MAKING ANY MENTION or reference whatsoever to Obama ... NOPE --- it was KEITH and MSNBC who just HAD to do that, over & over & over ... for DAYS....ON TV.

The MEDIA have taken "political correctness" to such an absurd EXTREME it will soon be impossible for ANY of US to SPEAK, at all, --- without being ACCUSEd of "racism", or, WHATEVER any idiotic unprincipled MORON wants to TURN OUR Words INTO.

Can't say "Fairytale" anymore --- because ohooohh that's racist. (Can't speak historical FACTS anymore ... LBJ got the civil right legislation passed, Jesse Jackson won the South Carolina Primary, The primary campaign was still going on in JUNE when Bobby Kennedy was assassinated --- because ohhohhhh that's racist, or ohhhohh that's saying she's ..hoping..

WHERE then was all this OUTRAGE, WHEN, a reporter asked Michelle, on a televised interview ... IF she worries about Obama getting shot/ASSASSINATED? OH MY GOD, the man actually uttered BOTH concepts/words!

Where was the OUTRAGE when Michelle Actually ANSWERED the question ... instead of throwing a hissy fit at very IDEA?

Curiously ... the TV MEDIA ...parses... every WORD Clinton says ... looking for ... SOMETHING ELSE to make it INTO; But FAILS to even MENTION Sensational REAL & serious BAD News about Obama....like, a prosecution witness testified last week that Obama and Michelle did attend a party at Rezko's home with Auichi as the guest of honor. (Obama has previously said - he doesn't remember meeting Auichi. Pretty hard to BELIEVE ... since Auichi is a billionaire, was the guest of honor at Rezko's home party, and has been Rezko's friend for all of the years that Obama has known Rezko....20 years.)

Obama is the DIRTY campaigner. The only reason you don't know that is because you have not seen enough of the MEDIA coverage since last November ... to have SEEN it as it DEVELOPED, with the LYING MEDIA covering up Obama's dirty campaigning while ... with NO Justification whatsoever ...BLAMING Clinton ...instead.

CLUE: Its about MONEY, BIG MONEY; BIG Corporations CONTROLLING THEIR wholly-OWNED MEDIA & our Govt, with THEIR Media Enabling them to do it, by FEEDING you LYING PROPAGANDA.

SAME MEDIA that Sold YOU the Iraq War. SAME MEDIA that Sold YOU Bush/Cheney TWICE.

SAME MEDIA that DID NOT Sell ME Bush/Cheney even ONCE. SAME MEDIA that DID NOT Sell ME the Iraq War.

Posted by: elme | May 26, 2008 1:08 AM

Now I'm convinced she's crazy. I've been trying to give her the benefit of the doubt, but once again she not only can't say the words "I'm sorry" or "I made a mistake" - she's actually blaming person most offended who not only didn't make a big deal out of it but has been trying to minimize it.

Its dangerous to believe you're own b.s. We have a president who's shared that delusion for too long.

We don't need another.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 1:00 AM

"...never ceases to take advantage of the modern day nuclear option when his campaign cries racism."
David

I have heard others say this but I have never heard Obama or his campaign staff make this claim, can you give me an example?

Posted by: JR | May 26, 2008 12:57 AM

I won't defend Clinton's comments. I don't, however, believe that she is holding out in the hopes that Obama will be assassinated. It was unfortunate, but the Obama campaign no doubt will turn this to their advantage. This multi-racial man, raised and educated by whites never ceases to take advantage of the modern day nuclear option when his campaign cries racism.

I am Hispanic, so I don't feel the overwhelming guilt of slavery. I have lived, attended schools, and worked with both blacks and whites. I have witnessed the subtle racism of whites and the overt racism of blacks. So, I don't feel I owe anything to Obama except a fair hearing. I find his campaign message and his speeches unbelievable. I cannot support him because of his inexperience and his indefensible linking of the other candidates with GW Bush. Obama is the most cynical and opportunistic politician I have ever witnessed.

Posted by: David | May 26, 2008 12:54 AM

Nobody is listening to their own candidates and over-reacting.

Hillary screwed up, but not how people are saying.

Obama said it was a mistake and he takes her at her word.

What's the problem, or do our strong emotions for our candidates make us react so forcefully and amplify the situation?

I still think she shouldn't have tried to turn it on him, especially after his gracious remarks.

Posted by: nobody is listening | May 26, 2008 12:50 AM

Clinton made the comment knowingly and now tries to backtrack--but that is characteristic of Billary and Slick Willie. What is so uncomfortable are the comments from the racists/bigots regarding Obama. I would hope that this country would be getting past that but, so sadly, we aren't. Where do these people come from? There is real danger for Obama from the looney-tunes sneaking around, especially those with limited sense and morals.

Posted by: JM | May 26, 2008 12:49 AM

RE: Rafael PR51

Read the article written by Michael Goodwin--if you can read. And please use decent language for the readers: The world is reading what you just wrote here.

Posted by: Susie | May 26, 2008 12:43 AM

"No. They will not. Obama and his TV MEDIA have been too dirty, too insane, TOO INSULTING to the INTELLIGENCE of the American People --- most of US will not vote for him."

Hi, I am an undecided voter in South Dakota. I've been reading these postings and was wondering what you meant by the above comments, could you please explain them to me because I just recently started paying attention. I like Clinton but I've also heard some good things about Obama, not sure who to vote for so I'm trying to get as much info as possible before I vote.

Thanks

Posted by: SDundecided | May 26, 2008 12:41 AM

Elme, tell me "specifically" how you feel about Sen. Clinton's behavior in this race>

Tell me how you feel about "the kitchen sink"
The racists remarks
The pandering to republicans (John McCain would make a better President)
The NAFTA lies
The Foreign Policy experience lies
The signing off on Florida and Mich. and then trying to change the rules in a flawed election.
The "sniper" lies
and now this, where she raises the specter of assassination.

I could go on if you like .

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 12:37 AM

"The First thing that doesn't ADD Up is: WHY is this man in this race?"
Aussie2000

Because this is America, not Russia where people are appointed. And he is winning because people are voting for him and he and his team were smart enough to plan for a NATIONAL election and gain enough delegates to the point where Clinton could not catch him.

And, he has acted like a gentleman while Clinton has behaved horribly playing every dirty trick she possibly could.


Posted by: JR | May 26, 2008 12:31 AM

...I again "Can't believe" this wicked witch of the west. She makes what is possibly the most offensive remark ever made in a political primary race, gives a half-assed apology to the Kennedy's ...

Since you obviously can't Think for yourself, I am wondering how you can possibly manage to TYPE.

BE SPECIFIC in your criticisms of Clinton, or shut up. Calling her NAMES & making vague nebulous ... accusations ... while employing character assassination --- is frowned upon by SANE Decent People.

Posted by: elme | May 26, 2008 12:31 AM

"The last two political assassinations were Benzir Bhutto in Pakistan by a man!! and Anna Lindh in Stockholm by a man"
Aussie2000

So naturally this means an Obama supporter is going to go after Clinton?, my how "sexist of you"

Two things-
Clinton is losing
Clinton is the one referencing assassinations.

One more thing, I've notice that your screen name is Aussie2000, does this mean you are Australian?, because if so IT IS NONE OF YOU GD BUSINESS SO SHUT THE *UCK UP!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 12:27 AM

A wolf in sheep skins. He will lead many many astray as he has. But what will be his credentials. He will not have any. Sound familiar?

Posted by: Aussie2020 | May 26, 2008 12:26 AM

HE'S GOT THE MATH.

The Problem with that is -
its MATH FOR MORONS

Things that don't ADD Up:

The First thing that doesn't ADD Up is: WHY is this man in this race?

The Democratic Party started out this campaign season with a near certainty of WINNING the Presidency. Nationwide Polls consistently showed that 60+ percent of the People stood ready, willing, and eager to elect Clinton President.

So, WHY did the Democrat Party "Leadership", Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry...,et al--DECIDE to back a SECOND Candidate for President?

---When--- anybody with a functioning brain must RECOGNIZE -running TWO candidates -WILL- DIVIDE the Democratic Party. (& its real hard to think of any BETTER WAY to DIVIDE the Democratic Party than -running a black man against a white woman.)

IN FACT, its the SAME Strategy --Republicans-- always use for winning elections: DIVIDE and CONQUER. (How else is a very small minority of extremely wealthy going to Control a much larger majority)?

The Republicans have historically used scapegoats to DIVIDE, by class, color, religion; (its those welfare cheats, welfare mothers, lazy poor people, black people, gays, secular ungodly people, liberals)--who are THE Problem/ The ENEMY
---VOTE Republican and
VOTE AGAINST...THEM.)

In order To back Obama for President Those Democratic Party Leaders Must be:

Unbelievably STUPID; a bunch of LOSERS who don't care if they lose; have something PERSONALLY to gain; or, are Sell-Outs to the other side.

WHO wants Obama to be the Nominee? Some Democratic Party "Leaders", and, the Republicans. When the campaign season starts out with---No discernable difference---between MSNBC & FOX; when all the "newspeople" on both Networks are spending all day everyday incessantly babbling Obama's praises (he's fabulous, he's wonderful, he's a rock star, he's so inspiring, such a good speaker)...then it's obvious the Republican Party wants to "Nominate" Obama as the Democrat candidate for President.

The question is: WHY do they BOTH --- Some Democrat "leaders" AND the Republican Party -- want Obama to get the Nomination?

In the case of FOX & the Republican Party its obvious -they want Obama to be the "Democrat" candidate because they believe he will lose to McCain.

There's plenty of REAL News about Obama, IN THE NEWSPAPERS, to Provide the Republicans with AMPLE Cause for that belief.

A. Obama's OTHER prominent 20 year "friendship" --- Rezko.

Given a 4-year FBI investigation of bribes, kickbacks, extortion, money laundering and fraud --involving multi-dozens of Illinois politicans at every level of government; with Rezko's "equal opportunity" political corruption stretching from local, state, national, and international Republican and Democrat govt. officials --- it would indeed be miraculous IF the FBI did not HAVE THE GOODS on .... someone so enmeshed with all the PLAYERS and POLITICS, and money involved in that corrruption; someone so ...connected ... to all those ...connections, as Mr. Obama.

B. IF and WHEN the TV MEDIA ...gets around to... reporting this NEWSPAPER News about Obama: [ He's not just in-experienced at the National Political Level --- His whole campaign is based on ONE BIG LIE : CHANGE ... he never made while in the Illinois Senate ]
http://wweek.com/editorial/3418/10516/
...he will lose most of his remaining supporters.

C. He's already lost too many VOTERS to get elected. The TV MEDIA ADMITS ... "he's got a lot of work to do" ... TRYING ... to get older women, white working class people, jewish people, hispanics, to VOTE for him ---- but the TV MEDIA FAILS to ADMIT --- Obama already appears to be Un-electable and cannot withstand ANY bad news coming out about him; Clinton is by far the strongest Candidate. The TV MEDIA continues to PROCLAIM Obama the nominee.

The MORON MATH:

"HE'S GOT THE MOST PLEDGED DELEGATES"

Uh, huh, ...and... IF That actually bore any Relationship to the Actual Number of People who went to the polls and VOTED for him .... then, that might be a real good POINT; good argument in his favor.

However, Since, the number of Pledged Delegates DOES NOT bear any correlation with the Actual NUMBER of VOTES he actually got; nor does it serve as any INDICATION of the NUMBER of VOTES he might reasonably ANTICIPATE getting in the General Election --- the NUMBER of PLEDGED Delegates is POINTLESS; of NO Import; provides NO Guidance ... in the matter of: ELECTABILITY.

THE REAL MATH:

"Clinton is ahead in the POPULAR VOTE only IF you COUNT Florida and Michigan ... and, you CAN'T Count Florida and Michigan.

Mathmatically, ABSTRACTLY, IF you CAN'T count Florida and Michigan, then, Clinton did not get the most Popular Vote.

In the REAL World tho, Real People did go to Real Polls and cast REAL VOTES. IN THE REAL World... those are REAL numbers you CAN Count. In The REAL WORLD CLINTON IS AHEAD IN THE POPULAR VOTE --- which DOES provide Guidance in the Matter of: ELECTABILITY.

THE *****REAL***** MATH QUESTION IS:

DO WE NOMINATE THE PERSON WHO HAS THE REAL VOTES, or, nominate the person who makes an ABSTRACT, "case" for being the nominee? ... are ABSTRACT "voters", or, REAL VOTERS going to turn out at the Polls in November?

The MEDIA continues to PROCLAIM the party will be unified, and those Clinton voters will Vote for Obama.

No. They will not. Obama and his TV MEDIA have been too dirty, too insane, TOO INSULTING to the INTELLIGENCE of the American People --- most of US will not vote for him.

WHAT are we going to do then, Vote for McCain or just sit at home?

No. It's not an either/or proposition.

WE can VOTE for Ralph Nader.

(If enough ex-Republicans Vote for Bob Barr & Ron Paul, and enough ex-Democrats VOTE for Ralph Nader, then perhaps the TV MEDIA will have managed to accomplish the seemingly impossible --- electing Ralph Nader President.)

BTW: The REASON the TV MEDIA has been pushing PRO-Obama/Anti-Clinton LYING PROPAGANDA since last November is: GE owns MSNBC & NBC. Westinghouse owns CBS. & Thanks To THE CHENEY Energy Bill (H.R. 6) GE, Westinghouse, the nuke industry are planning to build 29 new nuclear power plants...to reap $Hundreds of $$BILLIONS in (RISK-FREE) profits from building the nukes, and, from 30-40 years of Higher Electricity Rates.

McCain Voted FOR the Cheney Energy Bill, and those nukes will get built if he is elected. Obama Voted FOR the Cheney Energy Bill and those nukes will get built if he is elected.

Clinton Voted AGAINST the Cheney Energy Bill and those nukes will not get built if Clinton is elected President.

i.e. VOTE McCain or Obama AND HELP CHENEY pull off his NEXt Big Energy RIPOFF.

"Getting off coal to go nuclear is like giving up cigarettes to take up smoking crack." ... & will be just about as "good" for the economy.

Posted by: elme | May 26, 2008 12:24 AM

I again "Can't believe" this wicked witch of the west. She makes what is possibly the most offensive remark ever made in a political primary race, gives a half-assed apology to the Kennedy's (not to Obama) then Obama has the decency to throw her a rope and then she tries to throw him under the bus after she's pulled to shore.

Now it's time to stop playing games, Obama, don't play nice with this poisonous *itch.

Posted by: JR | May 26, 2008 12:23 AM

Obama and his supporters are nuts. One of them is more likely to go after Hillary if she stays in the race. The last two political assassinations were Benzir Bhutto in Pakistan by a man!! and Anna Lindh in Stockholm by a man. If she wanted to talk about assassination, these are the two political assassination she should have mentioned. Many men can deal with a minority man leader than they can with a women leader. It was the same with the right to vote, where American black, white, Asian, Hispanic an Native American Indian women did not get the right to vote with Black men, even though they fought in the trenches with them for universal suffrage, only to be disenfranchised and denied the right to vote, when the Black men made one of their dirty deals to deny women the right to vote. This is happening once again where the DNC Insiders have made a deal with Obama and his supporters to disenfranchise the millions of Michigan and Florida voters who have voted overwhelmingly for Hillary. So let us not allow what happened to Susan B. Anthony, to happen to Hillary R. Clinton. Let the DNC Insiders and Super Delegates choose Obama as their candidate.

Hillary is the American People's candidate. The DNC Insiders have their candidate: Obama. The RNC Insiders have their candidate: McCain.

It is also Proper, Right and Correct for the American People to have a candidate who REPRESENTS them, their interests. Hence we need to make
sure that Hillary R. Clinton is on the ballot as a Presidential candidate in all 50 states come November. We need to prevent the DNC and RNC from limiting the CHOICES we have. The DNC, Howard Dean and Obama are TRYING TO PREVENT Hillary R. Clinton from having her name on the CANDIDATE on the ballot as a Presidential candidate. Well we need to fight at the grass roots level to put Hillary R. Clinton's name on the ballot in all 50 states as the American People's Candidate. Time to stop Washington Insiders politics from Controlling Democracy in the USA. Like the Military controlling democracy in some countries, the DNC and RNC are trying to control it in the USA.

By having Hillary R. Clinton as a non political Party aligned candidate, the USA will finally have an American People's candidate.

Hillary R. Clinton, The American People's candidate for President of the USA in 2008.

Posted by: Aussie2020 | May 26, 2008 12:21 AM

who made that slogan " kill them with their own remorse " clinton cannot win if she would get the nomination she cant be link to anyone until she stops lying a black man

Posted by: kenney | May 26, 2008 12:14 AM

obama is perfect, is an angel,is a messiah even though he has that kind of life priest and life partner. He rejected his pin of national flag and are unaware of his hand's position when hearing national song.At the same time ,he is respected as a perfect patriot
and U.S uniter! Just at the latest campaign, he benin to learn to say "God bless you and God bless America" too quickly to pass his heart. Perhaps when elected as perident,obama is moved by the favors of the popular voters and do U.S good. But anyway, you America can just based this on "hope"! haha.......

Posted by: john | May 26, 2008 12:12 AM

OBAMA WAS THE BOSNIA SNIPER!!!

Posted by: Steve Charb | May 26, 2008 12:08 AM

may the best person win and stop all this racial cries, were all americans. join up or shut up. a black man

Posted by: kenney | May 26, 2008 12:06 AM

I don't expect the family of RFK to be offended. He is already dead and can't be killed again. It is the voters in general, Obama's supporters and especially Obama's family to whom she owes an unqualified apology, not some half-assed attempt to throw something out there if somebody might have been offended. Then Obama takes her off the hook. I would have let her simmer for a while in her own stew.

Posted by: LetthemdrinkCrownRoyal | May 25, 2008 11:51 PM

---------
Did anybody heard her mention Obamas name in that speech? Please let me know cause I seem to miss that part! No Apologies if bobbys son was not offended then Obama deserves nothing. Wise up sir!

Posted by: Rafael PR51 | May 25, 2008 11:55 PM

"Hillary Clinton is her own worst enemy"
by Michael Goodwin
New York Daily, 25 May 2008

...
Context, as in "you've taken my words out of context," is the last refuge of a politician caught with foot in mouth. That's where Hillary Clinton is today, alternately explaining and apologizing. But with both feet in her mouth, she doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Gravity is the toughest opponent of all, even for a Clinton hellbent on a comeback.

Of course the meaning of words can be distorted if they are lifted from their surroundings. The problem for Clinton is that her reference to the assassination to Robert F. Kennedy is just as outlandish when everything she said before and after is taken into account.

There is no question she was citing the RFK murder of 40 years ago in the spirit of "anything can happen" and thus as a reason she should stay in the race against Barack Obama.

Which means she was thinking of murder as a momentum changer. Not a pretty thought in any context.
....

Posted by: peace4world | May 25, 2008 11:52 PM

Gmundenat Dailykos? You read that? no wonder you are voting for Obama!!! Dailykos what a joke!!!!

Posted by: Rafael PR51 | May 25, 2008 11:51 PM

I don't expect the family of RFK to be offended. He is already dead and can't be killed again. It is the voters in general, Obama's supporters and especially Obama's family to whom she owes an unqualified apology, not some half-assed attempt to throw something out there if somebody might have been offended. Then Obama takes her off the hook. I would have let her simmer for a while in her own stew.

Posted by: LetthemdrinkCrownRoyal | May 25, 2008 11:51 PM

REALITY CHECK: In the last 60-90 minutes, Obama has picked up three more superdelegate endorsements. He now needs a total of 49 to wrap it up. Go to www.DailyKos and see for yourself.

Hillary: It's been real. It's been nice. But it has not been real nice. Back to the senate.

Posted by: gmundenat | May 25, 2008 11:49 PM

Stick a fork in her she is done, come on SD vote Obama in

Posted by: Zippy the Pinhead | May 25, 2008 11:26 PM

--------
is any Obama supporter offended by this comments by zippy? Wrighttt!!!!!!! Double standard Obama supporters!

Posted by: Rafael VA | May 25, 2008 11:45 PM

I am a white working-class woman. For the first time in my life, Hillary has made me feel shame that I am a white woman.

The way she has managed her campaign and finance, the way she has blamed everything to others' faults (including media), and the way she has handled her mistake (RFK comments) just make no-sense and no-excuses, please.

I wish to see a woman president elected someday but not this time--not Hillary. You lost my vote: You crossed the line.

Posted by: Susie | May 25, 2008 11:13 PM

------
This lady is more offended than Bobby Kennedy Jr. who should be the one who should be offended but, because he is smart and understood what Hillary was saying. Bobby said he was not offended so why is everybody else is? wise up America! Lady go vote for Obama and when a year goes by you will be beggin for Hillary to save your a**! Seriously

Posted by: Rafael PR51 | May 25, 2008 11:44 PM

Stick a fork in her she is done, come on SD vote Obama in

Posted by: Zippy the Pinhead | May 25, 2008 11:26 PM

I am a white working-class woman. For the first time in my life, Hillary has made me feel shame that I am a white woman.

The way she has managed her campaign and finance, the way she has blamed everything to others' faults (including media), and the way she has handled her mistake (RFK comments) just make no-sense and no-excuses, please.

I wish to see a woman president elected someday but not this time--not Hillary. You lost my vote: You crossed the line.

Posted by: Susie | May 25, 2008 11:13 PM

Most sad part of this is that her campaign has to run to Bush News for support...gosh these people don't know what means to be ashamed.

Posted by: Jarda1 | May 25, 2008 11:01 PM

The most disturbing things about this flap:

1. That HRC can't even say, after seeing the reaction, that her evocation of the assasination of a presidential candidate was a mistake.

2. That McAuliffe airily denies that any sort of apology is owed to Obama, claiming that only RFL jr had a stake.

3. That the Clinton campaign reflexively trots out all its tawdry and overused defenses -- Obama did it! (sounds like kids caught out by their parents, doesn't it?), the press is against me, this is a sexist situation. How can they be so oblivious to their bad taste?

4. And the breathtakingly vile, lying, and racist posts that have appeared on the subject, here and elsewhere.

I just hope this is the whimper that signals the end.

Posted by: Helen | May 25, 2008 10:59 PM

Hilary's comments - like so much of what she has said lately - reflect thoughtlessness and desperation. Does she never think before she speaks? My respect for her has dwindled to almost nothing. I don't care what she "meant"... she should have the intelligence to know how it would sound.

Posted by: Marla | May 25, 2008 9:30 PM

Clinton is a disgrace to the American people & the Democrate Party for making such insensitive statements like these..
I find her comments absolutely Repulsive...
First she claimed that these horrendous remarks about RFK will made by accident.
Clintons latest reponse demonstrats what a mean self center person she really is.
If Hillary doesn't like the heat then she should get out of the Race.
When are the Leaders of Democratic Party
going to end this soap opera!!!!


Posted by: Steve CA. | May 25, 2008 9:03 PM

Clinton is a disgrace to the American people & the Democrate Party for making such insensitive statements like these..
I find her comments absolutely Repulsive...
First she claimed that these horrendous remarks about RFK will made by accident.
Clintons latest reponse demonstrats what a mean self center person she really is.
If Hillary doesn't like the heat then she should get out of the Race.
When are the Leaders of Democratic Party
going to end this soap opera!!!!


Posted by: Steve CA. | May 25, 2008 9:03 PM

Clinton is a disgrace to the American people & the Democrate Party for making such insensitive statements like these..
I find her comments absolutely Repulsive...
First she claimed that these horrendous remarks about RFK will made by accident.
Clintons latest reponse demonstrats what a mean self center person she really is.
If Hillary doesn't like the heat then she should get out of the Race.
When are the Leaders of Democratic Party
going to end this soap opera!!!!


Posted by: Steve CA. | May 25, 2008 9:03 PM

Have you ever noticed how abusive people always try to blame the targets of their verbal or physical abuse? Husbands who beat their wives often cry "she made me do it, she made me angry!" or how about "look what you made me do" or "you brought this on yourself" or . . . "you just take things the wrong way." If you defend Hillary's abuse, then what more do you condone?

Posted by: VeganTRex | May 25, 2008 8:54 PM

It was a Freudian slip. Clinton has been saying for months that "something unexpected" could happen to Obama that will give her the nomination. She always refrained from going into further detail.

Even worse, it's not even surprising. She's hellbent on this.

Posted by: Dissent | May 25, 2008 8:53 PM

The assassin will come from those who have paid Bill Clinton tens of millions of dollars because he assured them Hillary would become president. Now that Hillary has blown it, they may have to take matters into their own hands to get her elected. I don't think this is a crazy conspiracy theory. You don't pay an ex president ten million dollars for a speech or make 20 million dollar donations to his foundation for nothing. This was influence peddling and now the Clintons can't make good.

++++++++++++
The good news is that most assassins insist on being paid in advance. That makes it difficult for the Clinton campaign.

Posted by: Gregory Peek | May 25, 2008 7:51 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 25, 2008 8:39 PM

The comments by "kzeus" below places importance on the opinions of Thomas Sewel. For anyone who does not know who Thomas Sewel is, he is the infamous mentor of the infamous Clarence Thomas. Enough said.

Posted by: Gregory Peek | May 25, 2008 8:22 PM

I think I have to say something about this RIDICULOUS RANTING that has been taking place on more than just this site.

1)By all metrics agreed upon by the Denocratic Party - including Hillary Clinton - DELEGATE COUNT wins the nomination. It did for BILL CLINTON TWO SUCCESSIVE TERMS. How is it that that was fine for bim and Hillary when he was running, but not now that she is running?

2)How is it African Americans werent racist when they were voting for Bill Clinton - two successive Presidencies, but now that they are voting for another person who inspires them who happens to be black NOW they are racist? Not to mention that all along, they have been voting for one White person after another every presidential race. They didnt vote for Jesse Jackson when he ran by the numbers they are voting for Obama now. So how is it that NOW they are racist?

3) Hillary made the same comments about Bobby Kennedy - more than once, before Ted Kennedy was hospitalized, yet she says that it was his situation (Ted's) why they to came to mind. Uh-huh...right.

4) Hillary had agreed that they FL and MI races and delegates would not count and that the rules the DNC made were good enough for her. Now that she really needs the MI and FL delegates, she is now on a angry divisive crusade to demonize Obama as the reason the delegates arent seated, rather than act with even a sliver of integrity and point the voters to their LOCAL party leadership who were the ones to put them in this position.

5) Anyone who will objectively look at the recent months' campaigning will clearly see that Hillary Clinton is destructively divisive in her approach, and should ask themselves how much they think congress would get done (with her as POTUS)with someone whose approach to govt and politics is this destructive. Dismissing Economic evidence and advice, turning blacks against white with her "winning white votes" comment, turning young feminists against older feminists, women against men (with the sexist accusations), middle class against upper class (with the elitist classification), Hispanics against black, saying which states are important and which ones arent....on and on.

6)If Obama had been in her place, she would have had the whole party castigate him for prolonging the race. Dont believe me? Look back at the ABC debate. When asked about her outright LIE about sniper fire, Obama responded that she has said it was misspeaking and he would accept that. When Rev. Wright came up she not only took the opportunity to slam him, but added Ayers and Farrakhan (whose endorsement Obama had long rejected) to sweeten the pot. When he made the "bitter" remark, it became a campaign slogan and talking point for her every stop she made, yet in this most recent case with the RFK comment, he AGAIN said he takes her word that it was not meant the way everyone is taking it.

He has made stupid mistakes too, but I think that to continue to blame him for all her screw ups, and to continue to adamantly defend AND support her in the vicious way she has conducted her campaign, in the deceptive way she has been manipulating FL and MI to her own benefit, palyed on the emotions of women, particlarly feminists and the EVERYTHING is his fault is a national DISGRACE. People who are falling in line behind her and the unethical team running her campaign, without objectively examining what has been going on, run the risk of having to do as many Republicans are doing now, rejecting Bush because they didnt look before they leapt. Hindsight may be 20/20, but the consequences will linger for a long time...just think on our last 8 years.

Posted by: Kevin | May 25, 2008 8:17 PM

Hillary's objective is to keep the woman supporters focused on her so that Barack will have a harder time to win them over.

This campaign rests in the hands of the superdelegates. Get with it already.

Posted by: Ronnn | May 25, 2008 8:09 PM

It's hard to take responsibility for your words when you are as perfect and well liked as Hillary is. I can not understand why Obama was not aware of her perfection and just let her win. All those who voted for Hillary's opponents were dunces.

Posted by: Gator-ron | May 25, 2008 8:04 PM

Hillary is simply making things worst the presumptive Democratic nominee, Barack Obama.

Forget the spin and lies coming from Hillary, Howard Wolfson, Terry MacAuliffe, and Bill Clinton. This late major gaffe will not only eliminate Hillary from the presidential race but from getting the VP nod.

Why would or should Obama choose a VP that thinks he is not qualified to be president, the Democratic party disenfranchises voters, the Democratic pary nomination process is terrible and expects Obama to be assasinated?

Hillary's campaign has become a sad joke at this stage of the game. The undeclared superdelegates would have to be crazy to give Hillary the nomination and risk severely dividing the Democratic Party for decades.

Posted by: AJ | May 25, 2008 7:58 PM

The good news is that most assassins insist on being paid in advance. That makes it difficult for the Clinton campaign.

Posted by: Gregory Peek | May 25, 2008 7:51 PM

Interesting a guy like him even wants to get in the middle of this. He doesn't enjoy secret service protection.

---------
What absolute garbage from McAuliffe. Obama himself tried to calm things down in PR the other day, saying that it was a simple slip of the tongue. Sure Obama staffers will try to push this story along, but they weren't exactly ravenous vultures here. After all, it was Hillary who made the horrible quip.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: matt | May 25, 2008 6:25 PM

Posted by: | May 25, 2008 6:36 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 25, 2008 7:42 PM


Beware of what you wish and vote for.

What a Black Columnist has to say about Obama.
Ken Blackwell - Columnist for the New York Sun

It's an amazing time to be alive in America . We're in a year of firsts in
this presidential election: the first viable woman candidate; the first
viable African-American candidate; and, a candidate who is the first
frontrunning freedom fighter over 70. The next president of America will
be a first.

We won't truly be in an election of firsts, however, until we judge every
candidate by where they stand. We won't arrive where we should be until
we no longer talk about skin color or gender. Now that Barack Obama
steps to the front of the Democratic field, we need to stop talking about his
race, and start talking about his policies and his politics.

The reality is this: Though the Democrats will not have a nominee until
August, unless Hillary Clinton drops out, Mr. Obama is now the
frontrunner and its time America takes a closer and deeper look at him.

Some pundits are calling him the next John F. Kennedy. He's not. He's the
next George McGovern. And it's time people learned the facts.

Because the truth is that Mr. Obama is the single most liberal senator in
the entire U.S. Senate. He is more liberal than Ted Kennedy, Bernie Sanders,
or Mrs. Clinton. Never in my life have I seen a presidential frontrunner
whose rhetoric is so far removed from his record. Walter Mondale promised
to raise our taxes and he lost. George McGovern promised military weakness,
and he lost. Michael Dukakis promised a liberal domestic agenda, and he lost.

Yet Mr. Obama is promising all those things, and he's not behind in the
polls. Why? Because the press has dealt with him as if he were in a
beauty pageant. Mr. Obama talks about getting past party, getting past red
and blue, to lead the United States of America . But let's look at the more
defined strokes of who he is underneath this superficial "beauty."

Start with national security, since the president's most important duties
are as commander-in-chief. Over the summer, Mr. Obama talked about
invading Pakistan , a nation armed with nuclear weapons; meeting without
preconditions with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who vows to destroy Israel and
create another Holocaust; and Kim Jong II, who is murdering and starving his
people, but emphasized that the nuclear option was off the table against terrorists -
something no president has ever taken off the table since we created nuclear
weapons in the 1940s. Even Democrats who have worked in national security
condemned all of those remarks. Mr. Obama is a foreign-policy novice who
would put our national security at risk.

Next, consider economic policy. For all its faults, our health care system
is the strongest in the world. And free trade agreements, created by Bill
Clinton as well as President Bush, have made more goods more affordable
So that even people of modest means can live a life that no one imagined a
generation ago. Yet Mr. Obama promises to raise taxes on "the rich." How
to fix Social Security? Raise taxes. How to fix Medicare? Raise taxes.
Prescription drugs? Raise taxes. Free college? Raise taxes. Socialize
medicine? Raise taxes. His solution to everything is to have government
take it over. Big Brother on steroids, funded by your paycheck.

Finally, look at the social issues. Mr. Obama had the audacity to open a
stadium rally by saying, "All praise and glory to God!" but says that
Christian leaders speaking for life and marriage have "hijacked" -
hijacked - Christianity. He is pro-partial birth abortion, and promises
to appoint Supreme Court justices who will rule any restriction on it
unconstitutional. He espouses the abortion views of Margaret Sanger, one
of the early advocates of racial cleansing. His spiritual leaders endorse
homosexual marriage, and he is moving in that direction. In Illinois , he
refused to vote against a statewide ban - ban - on all handguns in the
state. These are radical left, Hollywood , and San Francis co values, not
Middle America values.

The real Mr. Obama is an easy target for the general election. Mrs.
Clinton is a far tougher opponent. But Mr. Obama could win if people don't start
looking behind his veneer and flowery speeches. His vision of "bringing
America together" means saying that those who disagree with his agenda
For America are hijackers or warmongers. Uniting the country means adopting
His liberal agenda and abandoning any conflicting beliefs.

But right now everyone is talking about how eloquent of a speaker he is
and - yes - they're talking about his race. Those should never be the
factors on which we base our choice for president. Mr. Obama's radical
agenda sets him far outside the American mainstream, to the left of Mrs.
Clinton .

It's time to talk about the real Barack Obama. In an election of firsts,
let's first make sure we elect the person who is qualified to be our
president in a nuclear age during a global civilizational war.

Kind of scary, wouldn't you think

Remember--God is good, and is in time, on time--every time.

According to The Book of Revelations the anti-christ is: The anti-christ
will be a man, in his 40s, of MUSLIM descent, who will deceive the
nations with persuasive language, and have a MASSIVE Christ-like appeal....the
prophecy says that people will flock to him and he will promise false
hope and world peace, and when he is in power, will destroy everything. Is
it OBAMA??

I STRONGLY URGE each one of you to repost this as many times as you can!
Each opportunity that you have to send it to a friend or media
outlet...do it!

Just for informational purposes; Thomas Sowell is a black columnist who
writes columns in the Dothan Eagle periodically.

Race and Politics
By Thomas Sowell
March 18, 2008


There is something both poignant and galling about the candidacy of Barack
Obama. Any American, regardless of party or race, has to find it heartening
that the country has reached the point where a black candidate for Presi dent

of the United States sweeps so many primaries in states where the
overwhelming majority of the population is white.

We have all seen the crowds enthralled by Barack Obama's rhetoric and
theatrical style. Many of his supporters put their money where their mouths
were, so that this recently arrived Senator received more millions of
dollars in donations than candidates who have been far more visible on the
national stage for far more years.

That's the good news. The bad news is that Barack Obama has been leading as
much of a double life as Eliot Spitzer. While talking about bringing us
together and deploring "divisive" actions, Senator Obama has for 20 years
been a member of a church whose minister, Jeremiah Wright, has said that
"God Bless America" should be replaced by "God damn America" -- among many
other wild and even obscene denunciations of American society, including
blanket racist attacks on whites.

Nor was this an isolated example. Fox News Channel has played tapes of
various sermons of Jeremiah Wright, and says that it has tapes with hours of

more of the same. Wright's actions matched his words. He went with Louis
Farrakhan to Libya and Farrakhan received an award from his church.

Sean Hannity began reporting on Jeremiah Wright back in April of 2007. But
the mainstream media saw no evil, heard no evil and spoke no evil. Now that
the facts have come out in a number of places, and can no longer be
suppressed, many in the media are trying to spin these facts out of
existence.

Spin number one is that Jeremiah Wright's words were "taken out of context."

Like most people who use this escape hatch, those who say this do not
explain what the words mean when taken in context. In just what context does

"God damn America" mean something different?

Spin number two is that Barack Obama says he didn't hear the particular
things that Jeremiah Wright said that are now causing so much comment.
It wasn't just an isolated remark. Nor were the enthusiastic responses of
the churchgoers something which suggests that this anti-American attitude
was news to them or something that they didn't agree with.

If Barack Obama was not in church that particular day, he belonged to that
church for 20 years. He made a donation of more than $20,000 to that church.
In all that time, he never had a clue as to what kind of man Jeremiah Wright

was? Give me a break! You can't be with someone for 20 years, call him your
mentor, and not know about his racist and anti-American views.

Neither Barack Obama nor his media spinmeisters can put this story behind
him with some facile election year rhetoric. If Senator Obama wants to run
with the rabbits and hunt with the hounds, then at least let the rabbits and

the hounds know that.

The fact that Obama talks differently than Jeremiah Wright does not mean
that his track record is different. Barack Obama's voting record in the
Senate is perfectly consistent with the far left ideology and the grievance
culture, just as his wife's statement that she was never proud of her
country before..... is consistent with that ideology.

Senator Barack Obama's political success thus far has been a blow for
equality. But equality has its down side. Equality means that a black
demagogue who has been exposed as a phony deserves exactly the same
treatment as a white demagogue who has been exposed as a phony.

We don't need a President of the United States who got to the White House by

talking one way, voting a very different way in the Senate, and who for 20
years followed a man whose words and deeds contradict Obama's carefully
crafted election year image.


--------


Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford
University, Stanford, CA 94305. His Web site is www.tsowell.com

Posted by: kzeus | May 25, 2008 7:21 PM

Clinton is beyond vile.

Please contact Howard Dean (deanh@dnc.org) and Nancy Pelosi (http://speaker.house.gov/) to let them know how you feel. You can also go to this website and lobby the Uncommitted Superdelegates in each state (https://www.lobbydelegates.com/)

Please take action.

Posted by: Andi | May 25, 2008 7:02 PM

Q: Why are you still in a race you have no chance of winnning?

A: Well, you know anything can still happen-- remember there was a guy who almost got the nomination, but was killed prior to securing it.

Posted by: Franklin T. | May 25, 2008 6:49 PM

Barack Obama was responsible for the Earthquake after shock in China.

Posted by: Franklin T. | May 25, 2008 6:42 PM

Did you not know that Barack Obama was responsible for the 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor, and all intervening wars through the Iraq fiasco? What the hell, if Shrilary's camp chooses to blame Obama's camp for fueling political fires with her evil use of the word, "assassination, I suggest we really get rediculous and blame Obama for the foregoing wars!

To do so demonstrates that the Clinton camp is desperate and dangerous at this pointin their hopeless primary campaign, and I might add, boring as hell! GO AWAY.

Posted by: Forrest Gerard | May 25, 2008 6:38 PM

As stated previously, to bring the misfortune of Senator Ted Kennedy as a way to excuse her blunder shows that she has no shame.

Posted by: nmben | May 25, 2008 6:37 PM

Interesting a guy like him even wants to get in the middle of this. He doesn't enjoy secret service protection.

---------
What absolute garbage from McAuliffe. Obama himself tried to calm things down in PR the other day, saying that it was a simple slip of the tongue. Sure Obama staffers will try to push this story along, but they weren't exactly ravenous vultures here. After all, it was Hillary who made the horrible quip.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: matt | May 25, 2008 6:25 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 25, 2008 6:36 PM

There ain't no "Whistling" past this Grave-Yard.

RFK, and JFK are Rolling in their Coffins so hard you are going to have to Scream and Shout to be heard!

Audacity? For EITHER Billary or Obasama to even MENTION Bobby or John's Names, is AUDACIOUS!

Neither Kennedy would have ANYTHING to do with the two of them! The one who is even close, is the Demented and Senile RINO McCain.

I judge by Actions.

McCain's IDIOCY with his misguided and very stupid Amnesty has proved he is UNFIT to be the President. HE, is lost in his own weird Reality! To deny the Conservative Base is completely against his stupid stance is as sure a sign of Dementia I could ever imagine!

To switch BACK to it, after securing(Please tell me it IS NOT too late to take it away) the Nomination, is only trying to give the White House to the Dimocrats!

But, PLEASE Billary and "Barry", leave JFK and Bobby alone! Your "PAL", is Teddy "Black-Sheep Socialist" Kennedy! :-(

Posted by: SAINT---The | May 25, 2008 6:36 PM

It's unbelievable that the Clinton campaign can accuse Obama of fanning her words when Obama calmed it all down by saying he took her at her word.

If I recall Hillary put out an ad that twisted Obama's words on bitter comments. The nerve of the Clinton campaign!

Now I believe that Karma does work and one doesn't have to wait very long to see it work.

Posted by: XXX | May 25, 2008 6:35 PM

What absolute garbage from McAuliffe. Obama himself tried to calm things down in PR the other day, saying that it was a simple slip of the tongue. Sure Obama staffers will try to push this story along, but they weren't exactly ravenous vultures here. After all, it was Hillary who made the horrible quip.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: matt | May 25, 2008 6:25 PM

There is never a good reason to evoke an assassination and regardless of where one stands in the Obama/Clinton contest, it is both dangerous and classless. If this is what we will settle for in someone who chooses to be our president, then I fear for us all. It is poor taste and even worst taste to blame it on the person who would be the target of this devious action. The Clinton's are despicable people.

Posted by: Glenn | May 25, 2008 6:21 PM

I don't believe that Clinton was insinuating that Obama might be assassinated.

I do think her claim to be a student of history is either (A) a complete fabrication or (B) she hopes no one else is a student of history and won't debunk her statement.

In 1968, the primary election season began in mid-February, and at the beginning of the primary season, we had a sitting Democratic president who was in the running. Subtract 6 weeks from the current primary season, and it would have been over in mid-April.

In 1992, Bill Clinton's rivals had, for the most part, dropped out and the party leaders were coalesced behind his campaign by the end of April. Ask anyone who voted in the primaries in May and June of 1992 if their vote counted for anything. They will tell you no.

There is so much talk about Senator Clinton's brilliance in politics and history, but I am increasingly unconvinced.

Posted by: Ann | May 25, 2008 6:15 PM

This desperate horrible person interjects assasination into a campaign with an African American candidate, in an effort to justify the continuance of her candidacy, and then blames it on her opponent.

Is anyone actually buying this? Really?

Posted by: Susan | May 25, 2008 6:02 PM

Hillary threatened to have the woman killed who her husband raped. She is capable of anything

Posted by: Anonymous | May 25, 2008 5:56 PM

@angel 5

you are in league with the devil. Sick, very sick. The Clintons are sociopaths. They care only for themselves. There is so much dirty baggage in their closets they need more closet space.

Posted by: bob | May 25, 2008 5:48 PM

She didn't suggest that. She didn't say that. Why don't you blame an irresponsible media for floating such a hateful idea?? Bill Schneider had a show last week before Hillary made her remark and said that Hillary supporters had better be careful pushing for a VP slot, because Lincoln had been forced to put Johnson on the ticket and he was killed and Johnson became President, but was impeached. Was Schneider SUGGESTING that because Hillary has brought out more voters than anyone else in the history of the primaries that this would be the scenario of an OBAMA-CLINTON ticket? Learn to recognize when these kinds of press comments are intended to inflame both groups. The sad thing is there is not going to be any "coming together" because of how hardened the media has made both groups of supporters. That's the real shame. All of this talent, and it's over.

Posted by: LonghornMama | May 25, 2008 5:47 PM

"It's all Obama's fault." Unbelievable.

All passes, all the time is Clinton motto forever.

Posted by: Rita | May 25, 2008 5:38 PM

Hillary Supporters, why is it everytime she screws up it's Barack's fault. She invoked the words "assassination". With this countries history that word she never be uttered in a campaign battle. Now you say that Barack is sexist. Give me a freakin' break. Let me school you kids on this site who want to crucify BO because of his associations. Please Bill and Hillary's associations since the days of AR are unbelieveable. It hasn't been an issue in this campaign because Barack has chosen not to bring it up. That is class.

Posted by: outrageous in IL | May 25, 2008 5:38 PM

Yes, it is Obama's fault . If he weren't a black man and ahead in the delegate count she wouldn't be able to stir up racist feelings and ignite attempts to assassinate him.

Posted by: LetthemdrinkCrownRoyal | May 25, 2008 5:38 PM

The real blame lies with the media who is so desperately trying to chart a new course following the death of newspapers that they create this kind of churn to fill the space. In the old days of elite newspapers, real news would be gathered, vetted (sometimes for months and months) and carefully laid out after all of the fact-finding was complete. Here we are post-elite newspapers in a medium that would devour its young just to keep the velocity going. This Clinton story has been "clarified" by all of those outlets that rushed it out and tagged it so that it would float to the top of search engines for 24 hours. Now all of those sources from Politico to the Argus Leader (Mrs. Clinton was interviewing with that paper's editorial board when this statement was made) are saying "oops," she really did intend it to relate historically to a timeline of political races. In the old days, Mrs. Clinton would have been able to file suit against the paper that first suggested she may have intended something more nefarious with her comment. That hysteria rolled until one cable anchor soiled more than his pants on national television. Keith Olbermann soiled himself and every thinking person in this country with his insane spewing and calculations about what Clinton may have really meant. Olbermann's hate speech was not based on anything other than his desperation to become the story himself. Shocking that the media took the tack they did through this campaign. They wanted Obama so badly, they took him and crushed him like an egg, until he is decidely not appealing to the other half of the vote he needs to get into office.

Posted by: LonghornMama | May 25, 2008 5:35 PM

Another Clinton blunder, and of course it's not her fault--it's the other guy! Yeah, that's the ticket! First she references assassination, issues some non-apology, and trots RFK Jr. out to try and somehow clean up the mess Clinton made. Now they try to spin the story to suggest that this is all somehow the Obama campaign's fault.

Noting that her dumb comment about assassination was "unfortunate" and "has not place in this campaign" is hardly an attack or inflammatory, but McAuliffe and Wolfson exist in another dimension in terms of meaning and logic.

I've become as tired of Senator Clinton as I am of Bush and Cheney, and that's saying a lot.

Posted by: Piter | May 25, 2008 5:33 PM

Wilson --- where is your humanity? Barack Obama has received death threats. HE could potentially be our first black president and we all know that racism has not been irradicated. There could be some crazy kook out there who could take Hillary's words as permission to act foolishly. Even if you disagree with Barack's policies and even if you don't like him as a person I would hope that all candidates would take better care in their comments.

Posted by: outrageous in IL | May 25, 2008 5:33 PM

Why are people still talking about this? The only way to make the media stop adding fuel to the fire is to ignore the story.
http://theidaexpress.com

Posted by: Ida | May 25, 2008 5:32 PM

"Last nail in her campaign's coffin"
May 25, 2008 (New York Post)

Members of the Kennedy family are incensed over Hillary Rodham Clinton's invoking the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy to explain why she's staying in the race - and they think it could be the death knell of an increasingly desperate and sloppy campaign.

"That comment may be the last nail in her campaign's coffin," a Kennedy relative told The Post. "How can Hillary even use the experience argument when she repeatedly pushes the wrong buttons in her comments?"

An insider added, "I think people really felt that a line was crossed and that her campaign - and even her legitimacy as a politician - ended today."

Said a second relative, "She no longer has only her husband to blame for the ill-chosen comments coming from her camp."

While Robert Kennedy Jr. immediately came out in support of Sen. Clinton on Friday, others in the family's inner circle are fuming.

One cited "a perceived insensitivity" in her comment, made Friday before a South Dakota newspaper's editorial board, especially with the 40th anniversary of RFK's death two weeks away and Sen. Ted Kennedy battling a brain tumor.

"We were all sort of dumbfounded that she would say such a thing," the insider said.

There was also anger outside the family. Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), a Hillary supporter, told Bloomberg News that she said "the dumbest thing you could have possibly said." And the Rev. Al Sharpton ripped the comment as dangerous.

The Kennedy family insider added: "I know that many Clinton supporters in New York and New Jersey are sickened by her comments and that they are more concerned with Senator Kennedy's health and well-being than they are her campaign anymore.

Posted by: Jewel | May 25, 2008 5:31 PM

>>>THIS #3 ARTICLE OF THE 14TH AMENDMENT COULD BE USED AGAINST OBAMA FOR HIS LINKS TO WRIGHT, REZKO, AYRES, FARAKAN ETC WHICH WOULD DISQUALIFY HIM FROM THIS PRESIDENTIAL RACE!!!!
Amendment 14 - Citizenship Rights
3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Posted by: john | May 25, 2008 5:30 PM

Angel 5, Time for your meds. hillary will have neither the delegates, states won, popular vote, nor the superdelegates.

Other than those measures, some of which actually count, she has won everything else.


Posted by: jeffp | May 25, 2008 5:30 PM

Someone has released a copy of Hillary Clinton's bedtime prayer. Here it is:

"Now I lay me down to sleep,
I pray the Lord my soul to keep.
Keep me safe through all the drama -
Just let someone shoot Obama!"

Posted by: ILoveAmerica | May 25, 2008 5:28 PM

The Obama camp's attempt to discredit Clinton with the eager help of the sycophantic media is one more sign of B.O.'s desperation. She will have the popular vote and the majority of super delegates. Clinton was merely referencing the length of previous campaigns. Take this all the way to the convention, Hillary! OBAMA CANNOT WIN THE SWING STATES. IT IS CLEAR TO ALL BUT THE FAWNING ASSES ON MSNBC, NYTIMES, WASHINGTON POST.

Posted by: angel 5 | May 25, 2008 5:26 PM

Hillary will never be president in 09 or 2012. As an African American Woman you cannot continue to insult my intelligence. You will not slap me (figuratively speaking) and tell me I like it. Hillary may not have meant it the way it came out (which I highly doubt) but all she had to do was apologize for the reference and the implied reference. But no her classless and devisive self blame Obama. I guess he's responsible for her vote to go to war in iraq, her failed healthcare attempt, World War I and II. She is a joke!!

Posted by: outrageous in IL | May 25, 2008 5:26 PM

Let's set the record straight. Bill had his 1992 nomination in the bag long before the California primary. If Hillary was looking for a legitimate campaign to reference, she might just as correctly referred to those of Mondale or Dukakis. No, for a person so fit and ready for the job from day one, it seems unlikely this was an innocent comment.

Posted by: charlie | May 25, 2008 5:25 PM

Cindy,

No matter how hard you try you can't dismiss Barak's deft achievement at besting a Clinton. Even a young Bill Clinton couldn't beat Barak Obama. Those are the stripes he needs to sit in the White House.

Also, it is interesting how you seek to equate one African American with another when determining who "deserves" the White House. I believe you are making the same mistake that Hillary made.

Permit me to educate you: the Democratic nomination for the President of the United States (POTUS) is not given away by you or anyone else; it is EARNED delegate by delegate.

Posted by: VeganTRex | May 25, 2008 5:24 PM

How I long for the days of Walter Cronkite--and fair and unbiased reporting, rather than the level to which even frontline organizations have sunk. To anyone who listened to the comment, Sen. Clinton's remarks were deep in a 20-minute clip of an otherwise routine conversation. She was responding to a question about the Democratic Party being divided by the length of the campaign. She first referenced her husband and said that he was in the race in June and that Sen. Kennedy was in the race in June when he was assassinated. I was appalled that the media implied that Sen. Clinton's remarks meant she was waiting for Sen. Obama to be assassinated and that Mr. Obama's campaign encouraged this interpretation. Sen. Clinton did not mention Sen. Obama or any other candidates in her statement. This reporting goes beyond media bias; it is slander and has no place in mainstream media. It only serves to divide the Democratic Party and make it more difficult for either candidate to win in November.

Sen. Robert Kennedy's son has stated that it is a mistake for people to take offense at this reference:
"It is clear from the context that Hillary was invoking a familiar political circumstance in order to support her decision to stay in the race through June. I have heard her make this reference before, also citing her husband's 1992 race, both of which were hard fought through June. I understand how highly charged the atmosphere is, but I think it is a mistake for people to take offense."

Posted by: Wilson | May 25, 2008 5:16 PM

What was Clinton thinking?

RFK was not the frontrunner in delegates when he was killed.

Was Clinton envoking the death of her own campaign?

Posted by: TheNumantine | May 25, 2008 5:15 PM

Obama is acting like a whimp. He blames Fox, he accuses Bush for saying he is an appeaser, his campaign suggests that Clinton has used this RFK remark as some indirect assasination reference!!!!!!!! All of this is ridiculous and Obama and his campaign should be ashamed of taking these things out of context. Even RFK Jr., RFK's own son, said that it wasn't meant in a bad way and yet Obama goes after it because he doesn't really have much to say or stand for on his own. He constantly says, "Let's get to the issues" and yet spend so much of his supporters time and money doing typical Washington politics. I am a mcCain supporter but would vote for Clinton anyday over Obama. I have to admit that the bottom line for the Democratic party is that Clinton is by all means, the party's best candidate. She has a much better grip on things than Obama. He is lost and out of his league and element and as time goes by it will show more and more. If Americans want the next president to be an African American I would much rather vote for Powell than Obama. He has earned his stripes.

Posted by: Cindy | May 25, 2008 5:11 PM

Does she not get tired blaming people for every failure she brought on herself? I thought Mr. Obama and his campaign showed class by letting it go. She is the one fanning the flames. I can only imagine if the roles were reversed.

Even if she did not mean what most people have now concluded was in fact in her mind, can't she acknowledge some culpability and celibate her reaction?

To fabricate an excuse (lie) suggesting that she said what she said because of Senator Kennedy's current misfortune is worse that the original statement: now she is brining yet another family pain to the Kenney family to cover her blunder. She had said pretty much the same thing at three other occasions for God's sakes.

Posted by: nmben | May 25, 2008 5:05 PM

At worst it was a despicable attack, next worst a stupid mistake (though she has said it before), or is it a carefully crafted way to grab the headlines in a race that more and more excludes her?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 25, 2008 5:01 PM

The Obama campaign lit the match and the media then fanned the flames into a firestorm. Both the Obama campaign and the media should be ashamed of their reaction and the subsequent reporting. Obama himself has defended Clinton and stated that he takes Clinton at her word on this Obama campaign and media created issue. Any sensible person who watched the video and read the reaction of the Argus Leader editors knows that this was a campaign and media created issue. The overreaction by Obama bloggers and supporters to try to destroy Clinton on this issue does make one wonder why the lack of confidence that Obama will be the nominee.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 25, 2008 4:59 PM

Senator Clinton fanned the flames of Bitter-gate and Pastor-Gate. We all saw it. Remember the Stephanopolous debate? Well, Karma has caught up with her and now her own gaffe is gathering a life of it's own.

Importantly, it is clear that Obama did not get on the bull-horn about this latest bit of garbage she uttered and he really has no incentive to do so. After all, who wants to elevate threats? In fact, he accepted Hillary explanation of what was clearly a horrible mistake at best needing explanation.

Hillary's latest response demonstrates the true mean-spiritedness of Hillary: blaming the victim. But everyone heard you Hillary. You can no longer pee on our legs and tell us it's raining. We know you for who/what you are and we don't like what we see. No, not at all.

Posted by: VeganTRex | May 25, 2008 4:55 PM

To find facts and videos of Barack Obama or other politicians search thru the site www.treehoo.com that plants trees for most of its profit. This way you can easily help to fight global warming and climate change for free! Can any other webportal beat that helping you to find Obama as well?

Posted by: James | May 25, 2008 4:54 PM

All she had to say was that RFK didn't lock up the nomination until June. She just had to say he was assassinated in June. Obama has been very gracious about this, how can they lay the blame for the media attacks on him?

Posted by: Ellen | May 25, 2008 4:54 PM

I was appalled that the media implied that Sen. Clinton's remarks meant she was waiting for Sen. Obama to be assassinated and that Mr. Obama's campaign encouraged this interpretation. Sen. Clinton did not mention Sen. Obama or any other candidates in her statement. To anyone who listened, Sen. Clinton responded to a question about the Democratic Party being divided by the length of the campaign. She first referenced her husband and said that he was in the race in June and then added that Sen. Kennedy was in the race in June when he was assassinated. This reporting goes beyond media bias; it is slander and has no place in mainstream media. It only serves to divide the Democratic Party and make it more difficult for either candidate to win in November.

Posted by: Wilson | May 25, 2008 4:46 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2009 The Washington Post Company