Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Online, It's Target Clinton

By Jose Antonio Vargas
From the outset, as she sat on a couch and announced her candidacy via online video, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has had a complicated relationship to the Internet and, in comparison to her chief rival, a consistently losing Web presence.

The tone was set early, with the appearance of the "Vote Different" YouTube, the now infamous mash-up of the "1984" Apple computers Super Bowl commercial that took Clinton's own words -- "Let the conversation begin" -- and, in 74 seconds, presented her as the droning, robotic voice of the establishment, an Orwellian Big Sister. That video, created by an Obama supporter, has been viewed nearly 5.2 million times since it was uploaded in March 2006.

Nearly a year later, in a speech on St. Patrick's Day, Clinton spoke of "landing under sniper fire" when she arrived in Bosnia in 1996. Clinton's account was swiftly disproven by photos, eyewitness reports and video footage; The Post's Fact Checker gave her Four Pinocchios. But more than that, type "Clinton" and "Bosnia" on YouTube and some 675 videos have been uploaded, most of them negative. "Way to go, Hillary Clinton. You lied. You lied in front of millions and millions of people," one YouTube user said in a video.

And on Friday, with the headlong speed characteristic of the Web -- and in a manner that quickly divorced Clinton's words from their context -- her remarks to the editorial board of the Argus Leader in Sioux, S.D., took on a life of their own.

The comments were picked up by the NYPost.com and posted on Drudge.com, a must-read site for reporters and other news junkies, and subsequently spread like viral wildfire to other blogs. The NYPost.com initially reported that Clinton, in describing past protracted primaries, including the 1968 primary in which Sen. Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated, made "an odd comparison between the dead candidate and Barack Obama."

No such "odd comparison" was made, according to video footage and a transcript of the editorial board interview. Kennedy's son, a Clinton supporter, issued a statement saying that he saw nothing wrong with Clinton's remarks; the Argus Leader issued its own statement, noting that her mention of the assassination "appeared to focus on the timeline of his primary candidacy and not the assassination itself." It also turns out that two months ago, Clinton made similar remarks to Time magazine.

But the die, it seems, had been cast. Never mind Clinton's swift apology, also on video, and her letter to the New York Daily News yesterday explaining why she's staying in the race. Online, judging by countless blog postings and comments on YouTube, Clinton was again on the defensive, the ripe and ready target of blistering criticism.

The Web, after all, is fueled by people -- loud, engaged, partisan people. And those online partisans have been better organized by and are more likely to self-organize to support Obama. Not only has Clinton been unable to top Obama in formal online metrics -- he beats her in money raised online, number of supporters on MySpace and Facebook and number of views on a YouTube channel -- she has continued to be the targeted Democratic candidate on the Internet when it comes to the actions of self-organizing swarms.

It was true last fall, when Clinton was deemed the front-runner for the nomination.

And it's been true during this Memorial Day weekend.

This is the fourth in a series of online columns on our growing "clickocracy," in which we are one nation under Google, with e-mail and video for all. Please send suggestions, comments and tips to vargasj-at-washpost-dot-com.

By Web Politics Editor  |  May 26, 2008; 11:31 AM ET
Categories:  The Clickocracy  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: McCain Hosts Three Possible Running Mates
Next: For Memorial Day, McCain Critical of Webb's G.I. Bill

Comments

"behaviour"

Posted by: Lassair

You OBVIOUSLY aren't an American. Why do you spend so much time shrieking anti-Obama nonsense on the Internet? In a mental institution in the UK somewhere and have a lot of free time? Take your meds next time and try and pay attention to your own excuse for a country.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 2:01 PM | Report abuse

"falsely accused of using the BIG "A" word!"

So, now she didn't say assassinated?

Better have your hearing aid checked.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 1:49 PM | Report abuse

Amber, You would think someone with a porn star name would have learned something about not stereotyping people.

College student...RIGHT

AMBER LOVES STEREOTYPES

AMBER = PORN STAR

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 1:34 PM | Report abuse

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: Biographer | May 28, 2008 9:51 AM | Report abuse

You folks who obviously know nothing about politics but choose to interject your opinions anyway need to turn off your computer or get away from the keyboard.

The only reason Obama is in the position he is in right now is because of 90% of the black population, the nutty left-wing bloggers, and because the college kids think he's "cool". They seem to think they are voting for the next American Idol, not the next American President. Its shameful and we all will suffer because of their unknowledgeable, shallow, inexperienced votes.

BTW...I'm a college student myself but I, for one, know better that to fall for the hooplah surrounding "Barack Star" Obama. (Hmm.."Barack Star"...that says it all, doesn't it).

Posted by: Amber | May 28, 2008 9:06 AM | Report abuse

How in the heck can any Democrat even think of vote recount after Hilary excepted the rules as did the party Leaders. You poor people are in deep trouble. Split the votes 50 50 and let the Clintons except the truth that they preach, "NOT". God Bless you America. Hope you come to your senses. Give Hilary a spot on Desperate house wives and call it even. Its time for change, the world needs change to, you must all no that. Obama, 2008 for Mankind.

Posted by: justada55+ | May 28, 2008 12:15 AM | Report abuse

Absolutely right, the bloggers have a voice, never there in 92', 96'. Voter's, domestic and globally, can vent, say how they feel, discuss their take on candidate's. The Clinton's, to their disadvantage, never seen it coming.

The outrage on Friday, the assasination comment, was blogged so much, went beyond expectations for each thread on a blog site. Huffpost had 20,000 posts Friday alone, many more saturday. I checked so many media sources, they were overloaded. I think this is great. The comments were actually very negative toward Clinton, so much some bloggers stating 'how it's making them ill' by her staying in race for the fear of something happening. This has been a pattern during each primary when the Clinton's incite race, 'bitter' comment's, or 'well, he hasn't stolen a car yet' by Bill Clinton. I think as the blogs show, they do not want another Clinton scandal WH. I also fear this, especially when it's such drama all the time for them....they are not going to stop creating scandel therefore, put off the peoples business for another 8 yrs, as it did the Clinton yrs previous. I happen to be one of those people who think either Clinton is capable of 'hitman' hiring.

Posted by: canadagirl | May 27, 2008 6:44 PM | Report abuse

The Party leaders need to show some courage before the Clintons incite even more hate and rage. Bill and Hill are openly revolting against the DNC rules and the delegates by insisting that Hillary was mistreated, etc. They are now running for 2012, and will do anything to destroy Obama 2008 campaign. Including what Hillary spoke of, the real nuclear option, which will clear her path to the White House once and for all.

Posted by: lyn's | May 27, 2008 5:14 PM | Report abuse

No-name said:
"SO, WHERE'S THE REST OF THE QUOTE OPEN MINDED LOVER OF FACTS? I'M WAITING... "

And I replied. So then, do you just post in order to name-call with impunity?

Posted by: Billw | May 27, 2008 5:12 PM | Report abuse

Would you be less likely to vote for John McCain knowing that he has fathered an illegitimate black child?

Posted by: Karl Rove | May 27, 2008 4:06 PM | Report abuse

Hillary isn't a "victim" here. Or elsewhere. And, as she herself has said MANY times, if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.

And, most of the time it seems to me, she the one who turns up the heat on HERSELF.

The "clickocracy" has spoken on Sen. Clinton's candidacy. Truly well informed American voters have rejected her in overwhelming majorities.

Virtually (pun intended) everywhere...

Posted by: Carmen Cameron | May 27, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

ORIGINS OF ASSASSINATION LANGUAGE WHERE OBAMA'S NAME IS MENTIONED:

We have the Internet, folks, so do a little research before you spout off!

_____________________

IN DECEMBER 0f 2006:

Chicago Sun-Times
December 29, 2006
After Interview with Michelle Obama


Title:Should Barack Obama run?

To Michelle Obama: From one mom to another

A letter writer (Erin Vest) tells Michelle:

"I wonder how on earth you and your family will make this decision. ... It
could well mean the word no one wants to say: 'assassination.'"
_________

and then, a few months later:

Chicago Sun-Times, May 2007

Sweet column: Obama getting Secret Service protection.


SIMI VALLEY, CALIF. -- Early last Friday morning, Democratic White House hopeful Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), dressed in a T-shirt and sweat pants, entered an elevator in a Columbia, S.C., hotel heading toward the fitness center.

With him were two men in suits, employees of Global Security Services LLC, the private Severna Park, Md., firm hired by Obama's campaign to provide him with security.

On Thursday, the security around Obama was elevated to a much higher level, with Obama placed under the full-time protection of the Secret Service, confirmed agency spokesman Eric Zahren.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said he got the ball rolling for Obama to get a Secret Service detail after hearing of some "evidence" -- Durbin declined to specify -- that he said was "worrisome."

Several sources said there was not a single incident or specific threat that triggered the request.

Obama's family has been nervous about his safety for some time and Obama talked openly about the concerns of his wife, Michelle, during an interview with the Chicago Sun-Times editorial board last December.

"Being shot, obviously, that is the least-attractive option," Obama said then.


The Secret Service detail was authorized by Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff after the recommendation of a panel
made up of the top House and Senate GOP and Democratic leaders.

Durbin, the assistant majority leader, said he approached Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) several weeks ago
about getting a Secret Service detail for Obama.

Obama, if elected, would be the first black president. Durbin said "the sad reality" in America is "that many times, an African-American candidate is more vulnerable."

Last year, Obama's half-sister Auma told Elle magazine, "There are crazy people in America as well, with crazy ideas. And at the end of the day, what matters is that he's a black man. The history of America is quite violent."

With the first primary and caucus votes not taking place until January, the Secret Service protection for Obama is coming at the earliest stage since the Secret Service started being responsible for guarding candidates in 1968.

_________________________

The May 2007 Secret Service story of May 2007 was covered by all national media...YES, including the ones who are NOW letting Hillary Clinton being falsely accused of using the BIG "A" word!

Media reporters, please research your stories.....American voters, do the same, please...stop the hypes!

Posted by: Steve | May 27, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

In a season of low points for Hillary Clinton, this weekend was one of the lowest. That people took great offense at Senator Clinton's comments should surprise no one.

Clinton insists that she was merely making an (inapt) comparison between her continued candidacy and that of Bobby Kennedy, who campaigned into June 1968 (before he was shot). She was talking about the timeline, Clinton and her surrogates insist, and the assassination was incidental to that point (even though it was the only thing about Kennedy she mentioned).

Clinton later "apologized" if her comments might have offended the Kennedy family (which, she added, they did not). She also decried what she depicted as the efforts of "some" to take her comments "out of context."

As tasteless as the initial reference was, her non-apology was even more outrageous. Many Americans--particularly African Americans--have had serious concerns about Obama's personal security since the outset of this campaign. She may not have cited Kennedy to imply that she's staying in the race in case because a similar fate might befall her rival. But one does not have to "twist" her words to reach that chilling conclusion.

Senator Clinton had (and still has) an obligation to own up for comments that could easily be construed as implying the unthinkable.

Posted by: Justin from VA | May 27, 2008 3:04 PM | Report abuse

To carmMc:


SNOPES.COM?!?

RUMOR HAS IT?!?

Are you serious?

You'd be better off citing quotes from the National Enquirer, they'd be more accurate than this crap!

Posted by: pfondiller | May 27, 2008 2:42 PM | Report abuse

bruce becker:

The 5-page report may indeed be a whitewash -- I am not a medical doctor, so I don't know -- but medical doctors hired by the press have reviewed the RECORDS, so why haven't they reported on the alleged whitewash? Again, I will ask: where are you getting your information? Is it the same web site as those crazy 9/11 conspiracies?

Posted by: JakeD | May 27, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

I read the "MCCain real age" url as requested.

There is not one word about testing for Alzheimer's and not one word about short term memory loss.
The medical report is a whitewash.


Posted by: bruce becker | May 27, 2008 2:10 PM | Report abuse

I see that the facts of the Princeton admission system are making a Clinton supporter claim and pretend the Ivy league is not prejudiced as an attack upon Mrs Obama.
The Ivy league began the use of the point system for people whose parents went there, in part because Jews were beating the pants off the whites on the SAT's. Jews, like me, were taught in school, along with the millions of you whites, that we are a different race. Semites. Go back and see the map in your 8th grade social studies book. Arabs and Jews, referred to as Semites.
We were not allowed into white hotels until the civil rights act of '64.
That's why the Catskills have the Jewish summer retreats. So stop pretending that the Ivy league is even handed to blacks, as a criticism of Mrs Obama's paper about Ivy prejudice.
It is a white bastion run by and for whites. They tolerate a few blacks and Jews, barely.
They dont allow their children to date blacks or Jews, they dont want them in their clubs. See if you can nominate a Jew or black to be in the Augusta "National" golf club.
Stop claiming and even asking us to join you in pretending that Mrs Obama is out of order for noticing that the emperor is stark naked.


Posted by: bruce becker | May 27, 2008 2:07 PM | Report abuse

bruce becker:

Where are you getting your information? Several medical doctors reviewed McCain's records -- including Dr. Jon LaPook for CBS News -- here's another medical doctor reviewing those records to determine McCain's "real age":

http://www.worldontheweb.com/2008/05/27/mccains-real-age/

Posted by: JakeD | May 27, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse

to the unnamed poster who suggests that John McCain is a candidate worthy of consideration because he may have been anally raped while in prison, please answer this:

1. Why does a former war prisoner approve the use of waterboard torture of our prisoners? Waterboarding is a form of requiring a person to testify against themselves. It is specifically forbidden in our Constitution.
Why is is ok for a person who swore an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, to undermine our Constitution on the weak pretext that we may have to find something out using torture. Did you know that England used torture before our revolution, and that is why our forefathers forbade its use? People will say ANYTHING to keep from being tortured. The intelligence is not trustworthy.
So at the bottom of it, we have a former prisoner approving the use of torture against other prisoners. Why is this choice on his part to support the use of torture not unseemly, unmanly even? How can you support such a person at all?
2. If we dont follow the Geneva convention, why should our enemies?

Thank you, for your considered reply.

Posted by: bruce becker | May 27, 2008 1:57 PM | Report abuse

McCain can have all the experience in the world - but if he's suicidal, suffering from PTSD, carrying emotional baggage from being raped, has the slightest bit of Alzheimers - it won't make a difference.

He'll start WWIII one minute and not remember it the next .

Posted by: Jocelyn | May 27, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

From SNOPES.COM

Can ANYONE imagine THIS woman being the "First Lady" of our wonderful country?

In her senior thesis at Princeton, Michele Obama, the wife of Barack Oba ma stated that America was a nation founded on"crime and hatred." Moreover, she stated that whites in America were "ineradicably racist". The 1985 thesis,titled "Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community" was written under her maiden name, Michelle LaVaughn Robinson.

Michelle Obama stated in her thesis that to "Whites at Princeton , it often seems as if, to them, she will always be Black first..." However, it was reported by a fellow black classmate, "If those "Whites at Princeton" really saw Michelle as one who always would "be Black first," it seems that she gave them that & ;nbs p; ;impression".

Most alarming is Michele Obama's use of the terms "separationist" and "integrationist" when describing the views of black people.

Mrs. Obama clearly identifies herself with a "separationist" view of race.
"By actually working with the Black lower class or within their communities as a result of their ideologies, a separationist may better understand the desperation of their situation and feel more hopeless about a resolutionas opposed to an integrationist who is ignorant to their plight."

Obama writes that the path she chose by attending Princeton would likely lead to her "further integration a nd/ or a ssimilation into a white cultural and social structure that will only allow me to remain on the periphery of society; never becoming a full participant."

Michele Obama clearly has a chip on her shoulder.

Not only does she see separate black and white societies in America, but she elevates black over white in her world.

Here is another passage that is uncomfortable and ominous in meaning:
"There was no doubt in my mind that as a member of the black community, I am obligated to this community and will ut iliz e all of my pres ent and future resources to benefit the black community first and foremost. "

What is Michelle Obama planning to do with her future resources if she's first lady that will elevate black over white inAmerica ?

The following passage appears to be a call to arms for affirmative action policies that could be the hallmark of an Obama administration.
"Predominately white universities like Princeton are socially and academically designed to cater to the needs of the white students comprising the bulk of their enrollments."

The conclusion of her thesis is alarming.
Michelle Obama's poll of black alumni concludes that other black students at Princeton do not share her obsession with blackness. But rather than celebrate, she is horri fi ed that black alumni identify with our common American culture more than they value the color of their skin. "I hoped that these findings would help me conclude that despite the high degree of identification with whites as a result of the educational and occupational path that black Princeton alumni follow, the alumni would still maintain a certain level of identification with the black community. However, these findings do not support this possibility."

Is it no wonder that most black alumni ignored her racist questionnaire? Only 89 students responded out of 400 who were asked for input.

Michelle Obama does not look into a crowd of Obama supporters and see Americans. She sees black people and white people eternally conflicted with one another.

The thesis provides a trove of Mrs. Obama's thoughts and world view seen through a race-based prism. This is a very divisive view for a potential first lady that would do untold damage to race relations in this country in a Barack Obama administration.

Michelle Obama's intellectually refined racism should give all Americans pause for deep concern.
Now maybe she's changed, but she sure sounds like someone with an axe to grind with America . Will the press let Michelle get a free pass ov er her obviously racist comment about American whites? I am sure that it will.

PS: We paid for her scholarship.

Posted by: CarmMc | May 27, 2008 1:52 PM | Report abuse

to the independents who have yet to really decide:

Ask the McCain campaign to complete his medical testing.
The results provided this past week have no tests for short term memory and no test was done to determine "incipient" Alzheimer's.

The medical report was a whitewash, and no MD's were allowed to see it at all.

Please, independents, write to McCain and ask for the full complete truth on his short term memory as compared to naval aviators *not to 71 yr olds, and possible Alzheimer's. Comparing him to other 71 yr olds is irrelevant.
Did you know that 13% of persons over 65 have Alzheimer's?
Thank you.

Posted by: bruce becker | May 27, 2008 1:49 PM | Report abuse

Actually - I am an Obama supporter who understands how to use 'Twitter' and watch this space throughout the day for its entertainment purposes.

Oh, and I run a business with 12 employees.

Thanks for stereotyping though. It's an impressive thing, watching demographics push back against comments like 'bitter' when they are applied by outsiders - but reinforce such labels with their own behavior.

Like mice in cage.

Posted by: James Laughlin, CA | May 27, 2008 1:45 PM | Report abuse

DickeyFuller:

Unfortunately, if he wins the Dem nomination, Barack HUSSEIN Obama does indeed have a chance of being elected -- I don't think it's a big chance either, but I wouldn't go as far as saying he's completely "unelectable". Have you seen these Electoral College maps?

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Obama/Maps/May18.html

Posted by: JakeD | May 27, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous:

Thankfully, you are not running for President.

Posted by: JakeD | May 27, 2008 1:34 PM | Report abuse

~

Keep in mind that it is the young people and college students who have the time to spend all day typing on the internet.

That's why so much of the internet conversation is vile Clinton bashing and overt Obama loving.

Clinton's supporters are too busy working 2 jobs to pay the bills.

To the Obama cult: Have a fun summer 'blogging.

Then enjoy your McCain presidency because Obama is not electable.

~

Posted by: DickeyFuller | May 27, 2008 1:33 PM | Report abuse

if i was raped forty years ago and had to relive it through the press again, i might become suicidal. i'm sure being a man, who was captive, and forced anal sex, i might be suicidal too. going through the humiliation again, woah. That's a big deal.
i haven't seen a link for the article, but it was a prison camp and you would be naive to think that it didn't happen on a regular basis. its something people just dont talk about.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 1:28 PM | Report abuse

For the record, I only post Barack HUSSEIN Obama's middle name here at WaPo (not all over the Internet(s), and I am not "a bigoted piece of trash who has no life whatsoever". I am retired with plenty of time to waste here though.

Re: alleged rape -- even if it's true, I'm sure plenty of Republicans will not "blame the victim" -- we'll see in November, I guess. He wrote about his attempted suicide, but that was 40 years ago people. I doubt he has been suicidal since.

Posted by: JakeD | May 27, 2008 1:18 PM | Report abuse

No-name said:
"BILLW IS A RACIST." and
"SO, WHERE'S THE REST OF THE QUOTE OPEN MINDED LOVER OF FACTS? I'M WAITING... "

I usually would not answer the above, but am making an exception. It appears your reason for calling me racist is this statement I made:
"From his book 'Dreams of My Father' Obama wrote: "I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother?s race."

You replied:
"after thinking about it this probably stems from his feelings after encountering a racist incident

OK, first Obama's statement stands strictly on it's own, and here's why. Assume you're correct. I agree, most people would indeed have a 'sense of grievance and animosity" after such an encounter. BUT... It should be directed at the perpetrator or perpetrators, NOT AT HIS MOTHER'S RACE AS A WHOLE. I am white and have been less than happy with an encounter or two with blacks, but DO NOT condemn them as a race. I respect Colin Powell (and would prefer him as President over the three present contenders). I respect Ms Rice, Bill Cosby, Morgan Freeman, and others. I have local black friends - PT (restaruant owner), HM (business owner), GV (fellow veteran I have spent hours with discussing the unfairness of his having to be point-man too often because he was black), and others.

Why do I go to the effort to post the above? Perhaps it will affect you and/or
some others in a positive way. Call it my good deed for the day.

Posted by: Billw | May 27, 2008 1:18 PM | Report abuse

HMM, JakeD is an Internet troll whose sole existence is to post Barack's middle name all over the Internet...

Do you think he does this b/c he is a bigoted piece of trash who has no life whatsoever?

JAKE D,

DON'T TELL ME--THE D STANDS FOR DUMBASS WHITE BOY JEALOUS OF SOMEONE WHO HAS ACCOMPLISHED MORE THAN I EVER WILL IN MY SAD PATHETIC USELESS LIFE.

Barack H (Hussein)

Jake D (DUMBASSWHITEBOYJEALOUSOFSOMEONEWHO HASACCOMPLISHEDMORETHANIEVERWILLINMYSAD PATHETICUSELESSLIFE)

Dude, at least give FULL disclosure, seriously.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

McCain is suicidal and a victim of homosexual rape? Damn. This guy has no chance. If you're a Democrat then being a victim of homosexual rape is kind of expected, but for a Republican - wow. This is as bad as choosing Larry Craig for Veep.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

The media didn't scream loudly when Obama's "bitter" comment was taken out of context. Hillary ran it hard in PA. The four short paragraphs of the "bitter" talk show Obama to be a brilliant and compassionate speaker who did not blanketly stereotype white working people. How many have seen it?

Look below:


Here's how it is: in a lot of these communities in big industrial states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, people have been beaten down so long. They feel so betrayed by government that when they hear a pitch that is premised on not being cynical about government, then a part of them just doesn't buy it. And when it's delivered by -- it's true that when it's delivered by a 46-year-old black man named Barack Obama, then that adds another layer of skepticism.

But -- so the questions you're most likely to get about me, 'Well, what is this guy going to do for me? What is the concrete thing?' What they wanna hear is so we'll give you talking points about what we're proposing -- to close tax loopholes, uh you know uh roll back the tax cuts for the top 1%, Obama's gonna give tax breaks to uh middle-class folks and we're gonna provide healthcare for every American.

But the truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there's not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

Um, now these are in some communities, you know. I think what you'll find is, is that people of every background -- there are gonna be a mix of people, you can go in the toughest neighborhoods, you know working-class lunch-pail folks, you'll find Obama enthusiasts. And you can go into places where you think I'd be very strong and people will just be skeptical. The important thing is that you show up and you're doing what you're doing.

Posted by: YT | May 27, 2008 12:49 PM | Report abuse

At the very least, he is more experienced to lead our country than Barack HUSSEIN Obama.

Posted by: JakeD | May 27, 2008 12:34 PM

OMG!! Barack's middle name is HUSSEIN! Wow, thanks for that info Jake--I'm not bigoted at all D--Now I'll totally vote against him.

I'M A BIGOTED IDIOT SO THAT'S ALL THE INFO I NEED. THANKS!!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 12:44 PM | Report abuse

I agree - if McCain shows no side-effects from being subjected to that kind of punishment, let him address it.

I don't believe Evangelicals will stick by him, or Republicans, who seem have something against victims. And McCain has acted like a victim, with the suicide attempt and all.

Posted by: Greg Davis | May 27, 2008 12:44 PM | Report abuse

if the man showed strength and courage - he should show it again and address the issue in public. show the american people that he no longer suffers from depression or rage from being raped, and that he wont consider suicide when things get tough.

Posted by: jim dorchester | May 27, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

There's something George W. Bush-esque about the Clintons, in that their personal power is more important than their political party, or even the nation.

The Clintons are completely devoid of principle--The only constast is an ever-ending grasp for power for it's own sake.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

jim:

I believe the strength and courage from that dark time has made John SIDNEY McCain the great man he is today. At the very least, he is more experienced to lead our country than Barack HUSSEIN Obama.

Posted by: JakeD | May 27, 2008 12:34 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton Has Lost Her Mind
by Bill Jempty

She compares last January's Democratic primary in Florida to the recent Presidential election in Zimbabwe.

Desperate to get attention for her cause to seat Florida and Michigan delegates, Hillary Clinton compared the plight of Zimbabweans in their recent fraudulent election to the uncounted votes of Michigan and Florida voters saying it is wrong when "people go through the motions of an election only to have them discarded and disregarded."

"We're seeing that right now in Zimbabwe," Clinton explained. "Tragically, an election was held, the president lost, they refused to abide by the will of the people," Clinton told the crowd of senior citizens at a retirement community in south Florida.

"So we can never take for granted our precious right to vote. It is the single most important, privilege and right any of us have, because in that ballot box we are all equal. You're equal to a billionaire. You're equal to the president, every single one of us."

Dr. Steven Taylor at Poliblog, one of the most reasonable people in the conservative blogosphere, sums up Hillary's comments far better than I can:

This is not a healthy notion to be sewing in the minds of the citizenry. Clinton know full well the history of the situation in Florida and Michigan and supported the decisions at the time, and now she is trying to rewrite history to serve her own narrow political interests. That is irresponsible, shameful and is the kind of thing that indicates that she isn't fit to be the president.

MANY OF HILLARY'S SUPPORTERS AREN'T EVEN AWARE THAT HER CAMPAIGN STAFF HELPED DEVISE THE SANCTIONS FOR FL AND MI AND THAT SHE SIGNED OFF ON THEM REPEATEDLY--UNTIL SHE STARTED LOSING.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

kyle:

I meant as to being raped (after capture).

Posted by: JakeD | May 27, 2008 12:18 PM | Report abuse

New York Daily News

Hillary Clinton's colossal blunder simply the last straw

Hillary Clinton apologized Friday after citing the June 1968 assassination of Robert F. Kennedy (below) in defending her decision to keep running for the Democratic presidential nomination. Neel/AP

Hillary Clinton apologized Friday after citing the June 1968 assassination of Robert F. Kennedy (below) in defending her decision to keep running for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Eppridge/Time Life/Getty

SICK. Disgusting. And yet revealing. Hillary Clinton is staying in the race in the event some nut kills Barack Obama.

It could happen, but what definitely has happened is that Clinton has killed her own chances of being vice president. She doesn't deserve to be elected dog catcher anywhere now.

Her shocking comment to a South Dakota newspaper might qualify as the dumbest thing ever said in American politics.

Her lame explanation that she brought up the 1968 assassination of Robert Kennedy because his brother Ted's illness was on her mind doesn't cut it. Not even close.

We have seen an X-ray of a very dark soul. One consumed by raw ambition to where the possible assassination of an opponent is something to ponder in a strategic way. Otherwise, why is murder on her mind?

It's like Tanya Harding's kneecapping has come to politics. Only the senator from New York has more lethal fantasies than that nutty skater.

We could have seen it coming, if only we had realized Clinton's thinking could be so cold. She has grown increasingly wild in her imagery lately, invoking everything from slavery to the political killings in Zimbabwe in making her argument for the Florida and Michigan delegations. She claimed to be the victim of sexism, despite winning the votes of white men.

But none of it was moving the nomination needle, with Obama, despite recent dents, still on course to be the victor.

So she kept digging deeper, looking for the magic button. Instead, she pushed the eject button, lifting herself right out of consideration.

Giving voice to such a vile thought is all the more horrible because fears Obama would be killed have been an undercurrent to his astonishing rise. Republican Mike Huckabee made a stupid joke about it recently. Many black Americans have talked of it, reflecting their assumption that racists would never tolerate a black President and that Obama would be taken from them.

Clinton has now fed that fear. She needs a very long vacation. And we need one from her.

Say good night, Hillary. And go away.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 12:18 PM | Report abuse

JakeD - for not being a smart enough naval officer (bottom of his class) to avoid being captured.

Posted by: kyle | May 27, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Washington State Voters Take Their Power Back from the Republican and Democratic Parties with a Top-Two Primary System!

This is particularly interesting as the Democratic Party elite and the MSM try to nominate Barack Obama even though Hillary Clinton polls as the Dem. candidate who can actually WIN the general election.

In 2004, Washington State voters approved a referendum that implements a primary system where the top two vote getters for state level positions, regardless of party, advance to the general election. Both parties sued to prevent implemenation of the "top two" primary system and lost at the U.S. Supreme Court. Four years later, the will of the voters is finally being implemented. The top two vote getter system will be used for the first time in Washington State during this election cycle.

See http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2004439998_toptwo27m.html for more information.

The voters of Washington State have taken their power back at the state level. I hope that voters in more states will do the same and that some day in the not too distant future voters will take their power back from the party elites and choose their presidential candidates as well. I don't need a party to tell me when my state can hold its primary and I don't need a superdelegate or the MSM to decide who I'm going to vote for. I want the candidates to clearly represent the will of the people.

Posted by: Donna1000 | May 27, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

From Washington Post
By Eugene Robinson
Tuesday, May 27, 2008; A13

Clinton's Grim Scenario

If this campaign goes on much longer, what will be left of Hillary Clinton?

A woman uniformly described by her close friends as genuine, principled and sane has been reduced to citing the timing of Robert F. Kennedy's assassination as a reason to stay in the race -- an argument that is ungenuine, unprincipled and insane. She vows to keep pushing, perhaps all the way to the convention in August. What manner of disintegration is yet to come?

For anyone who missed it, Clinton was pleading her cause before the editorial board of the Sioux Falls, S.D., Argus Leader on Friday. Rejecting calls to drop out because her chances of winning have become so slight, she said the following: "My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. You know I just, I don't understand it."

The point isn't whether you take Clinton at her word that she didn't actually mean to suggest that someone -- guess who? -- might be assassinated. The point is: Whoa, where did that come from?

Setting aside for the moment the ugliness of Clinton's remark, just try to make it hold together. Clinton's basic argument is that attempts to push her out of the race are hasty and premature, since the nomination sometimes isn't decided until June. She cites two election years, 1968 and 1992, as evidence -- but neither is relevant to 2008 because the campaign calendar has been changed.

In 1968, the Democratic race kicked off with the New Hampshire primary on March 12; when Robert Kennedy was killed, the campaign was not quite three months old. In 1992, the first contest was the Iowa caucuses on Feb. 10; by the beginning of June, candidates had been battling for about 3 1/2 months -- and it was clear that Bill Clinton would be the nominee, though he hadn't technically wrapped it up.

This year, the Iowa caucuses were held on Jan. 3, the earliest date ever. Other states scrambled to move their contests up in the calendar as well. When June arrives, the candidates will have been slogging through primaries and caucuses for five full months -- a good deal longer than in those earlier campaign cycles.

So Clinton's disturbing remark wasn't wishful thinking -- as far as I know (to quote Clinton herself, when asked earlier this year about false rumors that her opponent Barack Obama is a Muslim). Clearly, it wasn't logical thinking. It can only have been magical thinking, albeit not the happy-magic kind.

Clinton has always claimed to be the cold-eyed realist in the race, and at one point maybe she was. Increasingly, though, her words and actions reflect the kind of thinking that animates myths and fairy tales: Maybe a sudden and powerful storm will scatter my enemy's ships. Maybe a strapping woodsman will come along and save the day.

Clinton has poured more than $11 million of her own money into the campaign, with no guarantee of ever getting it back. She has changed slogans and themes the way Obama changes his ties. She has been the first major-party presidential candidate in memory to tout her appeal to white voters. She has abandoned any pretense of consistency, inventing new rationales for continuing her candidacy and new yardsticks for measuring its success whenever the old rationales and yardsticks begin to favor Obama.

It could be that any presidential campaign requires a measure of blind faith. But there's a difference between having faith in a dream and being lost in a delusion. The former suggests inner strength; the latter, an inner meltdown.

What Clinton's evocation of RFK suggests isn't that she had some tactical reason for speaking the unspeakable but that she and her closest advisers can't stop running and rerunning through their minds the most far-fetched scenarios, no matter how absurd or even obscene. She gives the impression of having spent long nights convincing herself that the stars really might still align for her -- that something can still happen to make the Democratic Party realize how foolish it has been.

Clinton campaigns as if she knows she will leave some Democrats with bad feelings. That's the Clinton way: Ask forgiveness, not permission. But every day, as more superdelegates trickle to Obama's side, it becomes a surer bet that she will not win. She and her family enjoy good health and fabulous wealth. They'll be fine -- unless, while losing this race for the nomination, Hillary Clinton also loses her soul.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 12:10 PM | Report abuse

85k died from defending America from communism? Communism was a threat? Like terrorism is a threat? Don't you think people just don't want American soldiers in their countries? There would be no terrorism had Reagan not put soldiers in Saudi America. Bin Liden would be working at 7-11 and not blowing sh*t up.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 12:04 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: gilesjp: "You have to look at the fact that the web user is a more informed voter a high information voter."

Allow me to correct you...

"You have to look at the fact that the web user is a more MIS-informed voter a high MIS-information voter."

Posted by: Jerry | May 27, 2008 12:03 PM | Report abuse

kyle (and Greg?):

I blame Barack HUSSEIN Obama for not leaving Rev. Wright's church for 20 years -- that was his OWN action -- please explain what action of McCain's you can blame him for after he got shot down ...

Posted by: JakeD | May 27, 2008 12:03 PM | Report abuse

From Washington Post
By Eugene Robinson
Tuesday, May 27, 2008; A13


Clinton's Grim Scenario

If this campaign goes on much longer, what will be left of Hillary Clinton?

A woman uniformly described by her close friends as genuine, principled and sane has been reduced to citing the timing of Robert F. Kennedy's assassination as a reason to stay in the race -- an argument that is ungenuine, unprincipled and insane. She vows to keep pushing, perhaps all the way to the convention in August. What manner of disintegration is yet to come?

For anyone who missed it, Clinton was pleading her cause before the editorial board of the Sioux Falls, S.D., Argus Leader on Friday. Rejecting calls to drop out because her chances of winning have become so slight, she said the following: "My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. You know I just, I don't understand it."

The point isn't whether you take Clinton at her word that she didn't actually mean to suggest that someone -- guess who? -- might be assassinated. The point is: Whoa, where did that come from?

Setting aside for the moment the ugliness of Clinton's remark, just try to make it hold together. Clinton's basic argument is that attempts to push her out of the race are hasty and premature, since the nomination sometimes isn't decided until June. She cites two election years, 1968 and 1992, as evidence -- but neither is relevant to 2008 because the campaign calendar has been changed.

In 1968, the Democratic race kicked off with the New Hampshire primary on March 12; when Robert Kennedy was killed, the campaign was not quite three months old. In 1992, the first contest was the Iowa caucuses on Feb. 10; by the beginning of June, candidates had been battling for about 3 1/2 months -- and it was clear that Bill Clinton would be the nominee, though he hadn't technically wrapped it up.

This year, the Iowa caucuses were held on Jan. 3, the earliest date ever. Other states scrambled to move their contests up in the calendar as well. When June arrives, the candidates will have been slogging through primaries and caucuses for five full months -- a good deal longer than in those earlier campaign cycles.

So Clinton's disturbing remark wasn't wishful thinking -- as far as I know (to quote Clinton herself, when asked earlier this year about false rumors that her opponent Barack Obama is a Muslim). Clearly, it wasn't logical thinking. It can only have been magical thinking, albeit not the happy-magic kind.

Clinton has always claimed to be the cold-eyed realist in the race, and at one point maybe she was. Increasingly, though, her words and actions reflect the kind of thinking that animates myths and fairy tales: Maybe a sudden and powerful storm will scatter my enemy's ships. Maybe a strapping woodsman will come along and save the day.

Clinton has poured more than $11 million of her own money into the campaign, with no guarantee of ever getting it back. She has changed slogans and themes the way Obama changes his ties. She has been the first major-party presidential candidate in memory to tout her appeal to white voters. She has abandoned any pretense of consistency, inventing new rationales for continuing her candidacy and new yardsticks for measuring its success whenever the old rationales and yardsticks begin to favor Obama.

It could be that any presidential campaign requires a measure of blind faith. But there's a difference between having faith in a dream and being lost in a delusion. The former suggests inner strength; the latter, an inner meltdown.

What Clinton's evocation of RFK suggests isn't that she had some tactical reason for speaking the unspeakable but that she and her closest advisers can't stop running and rerunning through their minds the most far-fetched scenarios, no matter how absurd or even obscene. She gives the impression of having spent long nights convincing herself that the stars really might still align for her -- that something can still happen to make the Democratic Party realize how foolish it has been.

Clinton campaigns as if she knows she will leave some Democrats with bad feelings. That's the Clinton way: Ask forgiveness, not permission. But every day, as more superdelegates trickle to Obama's side, it becomes a surer bet that she will not win. She and her family enjoy good health and fabulous wealth. They'll be fine -- unless, while losing this race for the nomination, Hillary Clinton also loses her soul.

TOO LATE. SHE LOST HER SOUL A LONG TIME AGO. SHE NEEDS TO BE FORCED OUT--JUNE 4TH!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 12:01 PM | Report abuse

Obama's mantra - 'change you can believe in' -
New mantra....
Senator Obama, Are you a member of the Communist Party?

85,944 died defending America from Communism...Senator Obama, Are you a traitor?
Obama mentored by Communist Party figure"

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=65066

Posted by: rtfanning | May 27, 2008 11:58 AM | Report abuse

so you don't blame alter boys for the actions of priests but you blame obama for reverence wright? that's a bit of selective criticism. and the rape story, was on the CNN website late friday.

Posted by: kyle | May 27, 2008 11:54 AM | Report abuse

TOO LATE RETARD, SORRY

ANYONE THREATENING HILLARY OR MCCAIN IS EITHER A RACIST, A REPUBLICAN OR A PAID CLINTON STAFFER. JUST POST RACIST, REPUBLICAN OR PAID CLINTON STAFFER. MUCH EASIER. THANKS!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 11:52 AM | Report abuse

the rape story was from an article in '92 that was reporting on McCain's success and paraphrased his treatment in the POW '...that included rape' - CNN carried the story over the weekend along with the story about the McCain fundraiser being moved to a private residence due to lack of interest. Apparently the link has been removed or replaced this morning.

Posted by: Greg Davis | May 27, 2008 11:51 AM | Report abuse

kyle:

I am an Evangelical, and I can tell you that I don't BLAME rape victims -- for instance, I don't blame altar boys molested by homosexual priest -- do you?

Posted by: JakeD | May 27, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

WE, Hillary Clintons supporters all have strong minds of our own. We don't get swept up in obama chants (of false promises). We can see through his BS.
AND... WE WILL vote for President John Mccain in November.

Posted by: candoo | May 27, 2008 11:18 AM

NO ONE GIVES A RAT'S ASS WHO YOU VOTE FOR CANDOO. TRYING TO INFLUENCE, SUPERDELEGATES. TOO LATER RETARD!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 11:49 AM | Report abuse

jake - don't you think that the evangelicals will implode over this story about being raped - i mean, an act of homosexuality is still an act of homosexuality regardless of whether it was forced or not. And americans want their presidents to be strong, not victims.

Posted by: kyle | May 27, 2008 11:47 AM | Report abuse

Vincent, FL:

I never BLAME the victim of rape. Regardless, I have yet to see any substantiation that he was raped though. Also, I was unaware of JOHN McCain's drug usage -- wasn't that CINDY McCain?

Posted by: JakeD | May 27, 2008 11:43 AM | Report abuse

JakeD - that's a pretty huge leap.

But I'm glad to hear you can still get behind a guy like John 'Mud Monkey' McCain.

I've seen some real tough guys come out of prison with some major issues - which explains McCains drug usage and thoughts of suicide.

Me personally, that's too much baggage. To expect the American people to be married to this guy for four years and that's carrying that kind of emotional baggage - no way.

Posted by: Vincent, FL | May 27, 2008 11:36 AM | Report abuse

Greg Davis:

Not at all -- I just want everyone to also keep in mind how far the man has come from said POW camp -- where he even tried to commit suicide and refused the offer to leave early once it was discovered who his father was. Same as if Barack HUSSEIN Obama was brainwashed in Indonesia and is a secret Muslim ...

Can you hear me now?

Posted by: JakeD | May 27, 2008 11:29 AM | Report abuse

jakeD - I'm not I'm following you - if a man is brutally raped in prison camp, why shouldn't the American people be allowed some insight as to the impact such a violent act of brutality can have on a person psyche, especially if this man is running for the highest office in the country?

It is shameful - but given the fact that our current president could have used a similar prognosis, better safe than sorry.

Are you ashamed that you're supporting a man that was brutally raped as a prisoner for 5 and 1/2 years?

Posted by: Greg Davis | May 27, 2008 11:24 AM | Report abuse

Obama supporters can say what they want, talk is cheap. Just because YOU SAY Hillarys supporters will FALL IN LINE behind Obama, doesn't make that so. You can say anything you want to convince yourself we will all become robots like you all, but the truth is WE WON'T. WE WON'T fall in line behind obama, WE WON'T vote for obama, WE WILL MAKE SURE obama does not win in November.

WE, Hillary Clintons supporters all have strong minds of our own. We don't get swept up in obama chants (of false promises). We can see through his BS.
AND... WE WILL vote for President John Mccain in November.

Posted by: candoo | May 27, 2008 11:18 AM | Report abuse

To all of you that think that HRC's comments were misinterpreted by the media or the Obama campaign:

I don't need ANYONE to interpret what comes out of other people's mouths, in this case, HRC's.
I don't give her the benefit of the doubt because she has established a pattern on what she calls "misspeaking". The Bosnia story it was a LIE. She told it 3 times! until she got caught.
The same is for this last comments.

Hillary is too smart to say something without gain.

Her apology had "ifs" in it. That is not an apology!

Posted by: Pat | May 27, 2008 11:16 AM | Report abuse

there is nothing like doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

I believe that's what they define as 'stupidity'.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 11:14 AM | Report abuse

TWstroud:

I hope that Hillary DIANE Clinton makes an Independent bid for President.

Posted by: JakeD | May 27, 2008 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Many Hillary supporters have little or no internet 'life'. The less educated working class or senior citizen voter does not rely upon a blog. This disconnect further cements her to her base and explains why they think she has been so unfairly treated. They are 'outside' the medium that presents the case against her. This makes her campaigning for Obama once things are settled all the more imperative. Her voters don't have a steady, constantly-checked email address. She will have to rally them directly.

Posted by: TWstroud | May 27, 2008 11:12 AM | Report abuse

jim (and Greg Davis, now, too:

Imagine how far the man has come from being brutally raped repeatedly in that POW camp for 5 1/2 years -- where he even tried to commit suicide and refused the offer to leave early once it was discovered who his father was -- perhaps you could at least take that into consideration?

Posted by: JakeD | May 27, 2008 11:06 AM | Report abuse

Anyone who wants me to "vote different" or even "think different" will never be anyone I take seriously or even carefully.


Idiots.

Posted by: Gary E. Masters | May 27, 2008 11:01 AM | Report abuse

Was McCain pitching or catching in POW camp?

Posted by: Greg Davis | May 27, 2008 10:41 AM | Report abuse

Clinton is always ready to blame others. Claims others whine. When her and her husband whine more than anyone. She is responsible for her loss of supporters, her disaster of a a campaign, namely her entire situation. Hers was the name every in this country recognized. She chose to go very, very, negative. If she cannot run a campaign efficiently, how in the world could she handle the USA.

Posted by: Nana1007 | May 27, 2008 10:32 AM | Report abuse

I can not vote for a man who had sexual relations with another man, forced or not.

I can not vote for John McCain now and will most likely stay home.

Posted by: jim dorchester | May 27, 2008 10:32 AM | Report abuse

I urge you to view the information on the following websites re Florida lawsuit against DNC. The information found at these websites is evidence that the Democratic Leader and Leader Pro-tem joined the State Republicans in moving up the date for the Florida primary.
http://blogs.tampabay.com/buzz/2008/05/gellers-files-s.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r25wUeMAwdE

Posted by: Billeedee | May 27, 2008 10:28 AM | Report abuse

Hillary is the loser now. She and her band of thieves -- Mark Penn comes to mind -- lie all day long and all night long. They want to break the rules, which I taught my children is called cheating, so they can literally steal the nomination from a candidate who our hustled them, out organized them, and consequently is now less than 50 delegates from the nomination.

No matter what happens with MI and FL, Hillary loses.

And, by the way, so do those her campaign owes money to, unless they are insiders like Penn and Clinton.

Posted by: jeffp | May 27, 2008 10:17 AM | Report abuse

Senator Clinton is fast become not just an embarrasement to the Democratic Party but to the whole Nation as well. No wonder so many outside of America look on in amazement as the Clintons hang on with greed and desperation.

Posted by: Geoffrey | May 27, 2008 10:14 AM | Report abuse

If Hillary was ready on day one - why is her campaign tanking?

Why can't Hillary play by the rules? She was okay with the rules before she was losing - so much so, that she signed an agreement that she would not campaign in Florida or Michigan.

Why can't Hillary Dems see that it was Republicans who moved the date of the primary's up as part of a bill to include paper trail voting in Florida. Had nothing to do with Obama, so get over it.

Why do all the Hillary Dems and Republicans talk about Obama being assassinated? Has the blood from the Kennedy assassinations worn off already?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 9:58 AM | Report abuse

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: Biographer | May 27, 2008 9:50 AM | Report abuse

In today's news - what impact does being raped in prison have on McCain supporters?

Obviously, a fund-raiser scheduled to be at the Phoenix Convention Center was moved to a private residence over the weekend over what Faux News called 'threats' but all other new networks called 'lack of interest'.

Seems that no one wants to 'get behind' McCain with the news that his torture in POW camp included forced homosexual relations.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 9:39 AM | Report abuse

gbooksdc -
IIRC, I think that Svreader had taken time off from her job to volunteer for the Clinton campaign in Indiana. Its quite possible she is simply at her job again.

Posted by: Echo2 | May 27, 2008 9:34 AM | Report abuse

The Obama campaign uses Olbermann to shore up their "hopeful" brand of politics? Do they realize what a ridiculous, vain, pompous creature Olbermann is? That's funny.

Posted by: Echo2 | May 27, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse

by the way -- someone earlier referred to "paid Obama posters". That's another example of Clinton doing dirt and then trying to say it's Obama doing the dirt. I posted that either Clinton or the RNC was paying people to post pro-Clinton posts; specifically, that posters like iowatreasures and svreader were paid. They called me all kinds of delusional, but you haven't seen them around lately, have you? svreader's laast opst was May 14; I guess after Oregon and KY, their paymasters decided to cut them lose and conserve funds. Even THEY recognize (a) the fight is ovver and (b) how could they be worth the money if Clinton kept losing?

Posted by: gbooksdc | May 27, 2008 9:22 AM | Report abuse

A few brief points:

1. It makes me happy to see two people find that they are soul mates. Such is the case for Hillary and Bill Clintons. Both pathological liars, both totally devoid of scruples or a sense of propriety or proportion.

2. The "if Hillary doesn't win, I'll vote for McCain" line is so childish. Look, Hillary is not going to win. No SD is going to vote for Ms. "It happened before, it could happen again". And few of them were gong to vote for Ms. "Hardworking White Voters" anyway. The DNC is not going to bail her out with Michigan and Florida; the solution that comes out will be dutifully endorsed by the Obama campaign and both state parties. She can push a floor fight if she wants, but she will control a minority of delegates -- which means she'll lose.

3. The vast majority of Hillary supporters who will go McCain were never much for her anyway -- they were just against the black guy. Race prejudice is still there, but it's not as big as it used to be. You can't win a national election on it, particularly when Republicans are holding their nose on McCain and staying home or voting Obama. McCain's a great guy, but he deserves better than bitter Clinton losers.

All those polls showing Obama ahead -- they include the sentiments of bitter Clinton losers. Obama is going to win. The Republicans need four years of Bush out of power to be taken seriously (not to mention a purge of the religious conservatives who have hijacked the GOP message of small government and low taxes).

Posted by: gbooksdc | May 27, 2008 9:11 AM | Report abuse

Obama should be thrown out of the Democratic Party. I just read that he and his campaign are responsible for sending out Olbermans rant to various media outlets. This is the dirtiest campaign I have ever seen in my 30 some years as a Democrat. Obama must be exposed and thrown out. Obama will never be President because Clinton Democrats will not vote for him. He has not only not earned the nomination, but he has played some dirty tricks against Clinton including racist allegations and asking Clinton to quit w/o counting the the votes of FL/MI and actually blocking a re-vote in these states. Obama is a corrupt politician misleading simple minded voters with words like 'hope' and 'change'. Yet Clinton was the first to offer change 16 years ago when she first proposed national healthcare. Obama is not a unifier, Obama is a divisive racist that attacks the Clintons, Obama should withdraw now before he does any more damage and loses to McCain in the fall.

Posted by: NO_OBAMA! | May 27, 2008 8:55 AM | Report abuse

In October of 1948, Newsweek Magazine ran a poll of 50 expert political journalists. 50-0 they predicted that Thomas Dewey would be the next president of the United States.

Harry Truman looked at Newsweek and said that he knew every one of those journalists, and not one of them had the sense to stuff sand down a rathole. Not much changed in 60 years I guess.

Posted by: Ami Isseroff | May 27, 2008 8:53 AM | Report abuse

I believe this country has seen and heard enough of the Clintons.
Hilary needs to post a note on her mirror. "You're looking at the Problem."
She has what is commonly referred to as Borderline Personality Disorder. This mental health issue showed its ugly head when the former Secret Service agents started talking after Slick was impeached. She was described as the worst first lady they had ever been responsible for In the history of protecting first families. Now we are led to believe she is the one with the most experience to lead this country and she can't remember if she was really being shot at. Wake UP you ignorant females that support her. Apparently you are in denial about just what kind of woman she is. A liar, cheat thief and a con that's short for Attorney.

Posted by: Chris W. | May 27, 2008 8:42 AM | Report abuse

The Clinton supporters that refuse to recognize that the time has come to acknowledge the nominee for the good of the party all have two things in common. They don't understand simple match, and they can't tell the difference between feelings and facts.

Posted by: David | May 27, 2008 8:26 AM | Report abuse

Why blame Hillary?

The main argument seems to be that she was taken out of context.- ok this could be legitimate.

However I'd like to clarify a point. She used the statement twice, months apart, so was either dumb with 2 months to think about it, ie planned, or really this clumsy in the first place. But if she fudges domestic politics this easily, what's to stop her from bungling international relations? I don't want another George Bush in office, being dumb and the president of our country isn't cool.

Posted by: Elizabeth | May 27, 2008 6:26 AM | Report abuse

WHY CAN'T OBAMA SEAL THIS DEAL?

Posted by: rob | May 27, 2008 4:12 AM | Report abuse

WHY CAN'T OBAMA SEAL THIS DEAL?

Posted by: rob | May 27, 2008 4:11 AM | Report abuse

WHY CAN'T OBAMA SEAL THIS DEAL?

Posted by: rob | May 27, 2008 4:10 AM | Report abuse

The drawback?

Internet people seldom push back from the computer long enough to go out and vote.

Posted by: rob | May 27, 2008 4:08 AM | Report abuse

"Hillary's innocent comment"

Dream on Amy. The NY Daily News--one of Hillary's 'hometown' papers (and one of my hometown papers)--called her "Sick", "Disgusting" and said that "She doesn't deserve to be elected dogcatcher now"

Since you're such a big Hillary lover you might want to consider moving to New York to help her hold on to her Senate seat. Cause that's going...going...soon to be gone too.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 1:24 AM | Report abuse

This is how graciously Obama overlooks Hillary's innocent comment and gets back to the issues Americans really want to talk about...geez how many times have we heard that line?

From NYT: In addition, the Obama campaign sent the entire political press corps the transcript of a searing commentary about Mrs. Clinton by Keith Olbermann on MSNBC.

George Stephanopoulos, the host of ABC's "This Week," asked David Axelrod, Mr. Obama's top strategist, about the e-mail:

Mr. Stephanopoulos: You say you're not trying to stir the issue up. But a member of your press staff yesterday was sending around to an entire press list -- I have the e-mail here -- Keith Olbermann's searing commentary against Hillary Clinton. So that is stirring this up, isn't it?"

Mr. Axelrod: "Well, Mr. Olbermann did his commentary and he had his opinion. But as far as we're concerned."

Mr. Stephanopoulos: "But your campaign was sending it around."

Mr. Axelrod: "As far as we're concerned, George, as far as we're concerned, this issue is done. It was an unfortunate statement, as we said, as she's acknowledged. She has apologized. The apology, you know, is accepted. Let's move forward."

Mr. Axelrod: "There's so many important things going on in this country right now, George, that people are interested in that we're not going to spend days dwelling on this."

Posted by: Amy | May 27, 2008 1:19 AM | Report abuse

BILLW IS A RACIST. (HE DOESN'T WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT OF COURSE.)

HE WANTS YOU TO THINK PEOPLE ARE 'PLAYING' THE RACE CARD AGAINST HIM AND HIS VOTE WOULD HAVE BEEN UP FOR GRABS BUT PEOPLE HAVE UNFAIRLY TARGETED HIM FOR HIS RACIST STATEMENTS.

POOR BABY! AND OBAMA'S NOT EVEN LOSING LIKE IN YOUR HATE FILLED DREAMS!

THE DUMBASS RACIST SHOE FITS!!! WEAR IT PROUDLY BILLW!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 12:56 AM | Report abuse

"What's that about name calling You don't know the implication of name-calling? I sort of figured that."

And you don't understand irony? Well, I sort of knew that from the rest of your IQ that's been on display.

SO, WHERE'S THE REST OF THE QUOTE OPEN MINDED LOVER OF FACTS? I'M WAITING...

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 12:44 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: sweetie hearts obama | May 27, 2008 12:40 AM | Report abuse


Hillary 08 is actually Terry McAuliffe.

He writes just like he talks.

Posted by: pfondiller | May 27, 2008 12:38 AM | Report abuse

"What's that about name calling "

You don't know the implication of name-calling? I sort of figured that.

Posted by: Billw | May 27, 2008 12:37 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: sweetie hearts obama | May 27, 2008 12:36 AM | Report abuse

Obama snores and farts, note.

Posted by: Terry | May 27, 2008 12:33 AM | Report abuse

"These people"
What's that about name calling?

And, why don't you prove to me that you're an open-minded person that has read Obama's book. Aren't you the one with the quote? Please quote the paragraphs above and below that to get a sense of what he was talking about. Or did you get that from a racist website against Obama. You know, if the shoe fits...I don't know why you don't wear the label more proudly. Easier to be a closet racist, I guess.

The most ridiculous part is acting as if your vote is up for grabs but you MAY take it elsewhere. Give me break.

And as far as losing goes, OBAMA IS WINNING MUCH TO YOUR OBVIOUS CHAGRIN.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 12:33 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: sweetie hearts obama | May 27, 2008 12:30 AM | Report abuse

Hillary 08

Your numbers are not accurate.

Posted by: pfondiller | May 27, 2008 12:30 AM | Report abuse

Sorry, I mean NARCISSISTIC

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 12:28 AM | Report abuse

"It is over Hillary, please just stop!"

AMEN TO THAT.

AND WHY ARE ALL OF THESE PEOPLE WASTING THEIR TIME ON SUCH A NARCISSTIC SOCIOPATH?

SERIOUSLY, THIS WOMAN COULD CARE LESS ABOUT THEM.

HOW CAN THAT NOT BE OBVIOUS TO SOMEONE WITH EVEN A MARGINAL IQ?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 12:25 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: sweetie hearts obama | May 27, 2008 12:24 AM | Report abuse

Someone said:
"SERIOUSLY, ANY ONE NOT VOTING FOR OBAMA IS APPARENTLY A RACIST, A DUMBASS OR A DUMBASS RACIST. "

You are correct, as someone just said to me:
"SORRY, YOUR COVER HAS BEEN BLOWN TOO. ANOTHER DUMBASS RACIST...NEXT.. "

These people simply don't know that when they resort to ad hominem they lose. Name-calling and the race-card is their stock-in-trade. Too bad.

Posted by: Billw | May 27, 2008 12:23 AM | Report abuse

Hillary 08,

I realize you're dealing with an extremely limited intellect. Here are the delegate counts as of today. THE DELEGATES DETERMINE THE NOMINATION

Total Delegates:

OBAMA
1974

CLINTON
1780

2,026 Needed to Win

OBAMA NEEDS 52

PLEASE TRY AND GET AN EDUCATION AND DEAL WITH REALITY. SERIOUSLY...

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 12:22 AM | Report abuse

Hillary is not winning the popular vote. Stop buying into this delusional nonsense. MI and FA don't count and she could never win MI Ann Arbor, Lansing , and Detroit = Hilllary loses.

Posted by: gilesjp | May 27, 2008 12:16 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: sweetie hearts obama | May 27, 2008 12:14 AM | Report abuse

The bullet doggers are on the march, and they want a fight. Better to cut them off and let them go independent, as in they start off $50 M in debt and everybody hates them.

Posted by: pubichaironmycokecan | May 27, 2008 12:12 AM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton was at it again today blaming everyone and everything for the fact that there is no metric left by which Hillary can take the nomination---she can't even steal it.

He marvels at what he calls the media and others trying to "force Hillary out of the race."

There is a chorus of voices, growing louder by the day for her to just get out- a chorus to which I am now, these past few days, lending my voice.

Hillary Clinton has been given ample time to "get out on her own terms"---time that she and her promoters have chosen to use concocting one divisive scheme after another. She is destroying the Democratic Party, she is harming Obama, the nominee of her own party and she is egregiously wasting funds.

Hillary Clinton need to find it in herself to get ot of this race now.

Hillary and her supporters need to do some deep soul searching and figure out where they really want this country to go now that Obama is the nominee.

If they decide that John McCain's continuation of the fascist Bush doctrine is more acceptable than voting for the Democratic nominee whose vision on the issues are almost exactly the same as Clinton's, then so be it.

The DNC can not let the Clinton's and their supporters hold us hostage any longer- not one more minute, we have a general election to run and win.

It is over Hillary, please just stop!

Posted by: pfondiller | May 27, 2008 12:12 AM | Report abuse


Popular Votes as of today:

HILLARY: 17,426,809
Obama: 17,262,155

HILLARY: +164,654

She will be leading the popular votes with a bigger margin. It takes 2210 delegates to win. This race is neck and neck. Hillary is the stronger candidate and should be the nominee.

Posted by: Hillary 08 | May 27, 2008 12:12 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: sweetie hearts obama | May 27, 2008 12:08 AM | Report abuse

Go home Hillary. Go home! Someone please blow a dog whistle.

Posted by: gmundenat | May 27, 2008 12:08 AM | Report abuse

sweetie hearts obama,

They may give Obama no delegates from MI-b/c you can't prove if those votes were for another Democratic candidate--but they will NOT GIVE 100% of the MI delegates to her--they can't. She didn't win 100% of the vote. Won't happen. But even with Obama getting no delegates from MI, he will still win the nomination easily. See 'worst case scenario' a couple of posts down about delegates.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 27, 2008 12:06 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: sweetie hearts obama | May 26, 2008 11:57 PM | Report abuse

I GUESS NONE OF THE CLINTON ZOMBIE DUMBASSES OR DUMBASS RACISTS CARE TO TAKE ON THE FACTS. I'VE BEEN WAITING FOR ANYONE WITH HALF A BRAIN...AND I GUESS THAT WAS TOO OPTIMISTIC. SINCE I HAVE A LIFE UNLIKE THE REST OF YOU ZOMBIES AND UNEMPLOYED, UNEDUCATED RACISTS, BELOW ARE THE FACTS ONE MORE TIME. READ THEM, COME TO TERMS WITH THEM, TRY AND GET AN EDUCATION AND POSSIBLY A JOB AT WAL-MART RATHER THAN CONTINUING WITH THESE FUTILE IDIOTIC POSTINGS THAT ARE ONLY GOING TO END THE SAME WAY (SEE BELOW).

These are the undeniable facts:
The math simply doesn't work for Hillary. Without Florida and Michigan, Obama or Hillary need 2024.5 delegates to clinch the nomination. To date, here is the breakdown for where they stand:
Obama 1969
Clinton 1724
If Hillary succeeds in getting Florida and Michigan added at full strength, then the needed delegates goes to 2,210, an impossibility, because that would mean the Rules and By-Laws Committee agreed to it, which won't happen. Those delegations will most likely be seated at half strength which moves the magic number to 2,118 or 2,131, depending on whether the supers are also cut to half. Let's say it's the highest, 2,131 and that Obama gets ZERO for Michigan because he was not on the ballot. Using that worst case scenario, that means that Obama needs 95 delegates. Hillary needs 226.
Now. There are 212 pledged delegates in remaining primaries. To win, she needs all of them, plus 14 more Supers or some combination of each. This is not going to happen, especially if some of the Supers are looking for a reason to move to Obama. Her chance of winning this by the numbers, even with the best Clintonesque arm twisting, is ZERO. ZERO. It's clear that Obama is the next Democratic Presidential nominee.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 11:53 PM | Report abuse

"Hillary is currently leading the popular votes and she will increase her lead when the primaries are over."

Really? How will she increase her lead WHEN THE PRIMARIES ARE OVER?

"It takes 2210 delegates to win."
NOT ACCORDING TO THE DNC

Hillary is clearly the stronger candidate to win in November against John McCain.

REALLY. BASED ON WHAT? POLLS LIKE THE ONES FIVE MONTHS AGO THAT SAID SHE WOULD WIN THE NOMINATION BY A LANDSLIDE? SORRY. IT SEEMS LIKE POLLS FIVE MONTHS OUT MAY NOT BE ACCURATE.

SERIOUSLY, ANY ONE NOT VOTING FOR OBAMA IS APPARENTLY A RACIST, A DUMBASS OR A DUMBASS RACIST.

These are the undeniable facts:
The math simply doesn't work for Hillary. Without Florida and Michigan, Obama or Hillary need 2024.5 delegates to clinch the nomination. To date, here is the breakdown for where they stand:
Obama 1969
Clinton 1724
If Hillary succeeds in getting Florida and Michigan added at full strength, then the needed delegates goes to 2,210, an impossibility, because that would mean the Rules and By-Laws Committee agreed to it, which won't happen. Those delegations will most likely be seated at half strength which moves the magic number to 2,118 or 2,131, depending on whether the supers are also cut to half. Let's say it's the highest, 2,131 and that Obama gets ZERO for Michigan because he was not on the ballot. Using that worst case scenario, that means that Obama needs 95 delegates. Hillary needs 226.
Now. There are 212 pledged delegates in remaining primaries. To win, she needs all of them, plus 14 more Supers or some combination of each. This is not going to happen, especially if some of the Supers are looking for a reason to move to Obama. Her chance of winning this by the numbers, even with the best Clintonesque arm twisting, is ZERO. ZERO. It's clear that Obama is the next Democratic Presidential nominee.


Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 11:45 PM | Report abuse

And, in fact, after thinking about it this probably stems from his feelings after encountering a racist incident. Why don't you post what he is writing before this?

Nevermind. I just realized that you pulled this from ANY ONE OF A NUMBER OF RACIST WEBSITES AGAINST OBAMA.

SORRY, YOUR COVER HAS BEEN BLOWN TOO. ANOTHER DUMBASS RACIST...NEXT..

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 11:40 PM | Report abuse


Hillary is currently leading the popular votes and she will increase her lead when the primaries are over.

It takes 2210 delegates to win. Hillary is clearly the stronger candidate to win in November against John McCain.

Posted by: Hillary all the way | May 26, 2008 11:39 PM | Report abuse

"I deal in facts. From his book 'Dreams of My Father' Obama wrote: "I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother?s race."

Someone who is biracial and dealing with issues of racial identity is hardly proof of racism. Try again fact boy...

And, in fact, after thinking about it this probably stems from his feelings after encountering a racist incident. Why don't you post what he is writing before this?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 11:35 PM | Report abuse

"I deal in facts. From his book 'Dreams of My Father' Obama wrote: "I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother?s race."

Someone who is biracial and dealing with issues of racial identity is hardly proof of racism. Try again fact boy...

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 11:28 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Vargas, your idea of a clickocracy is interesting and funny. This column can be expanded to develop your idea by
1. defining swarming. What kind of behavior is swarming? What isn't swarming? Is every post that occurs within, say, an hour of an event an example of swarming? I'll give a definition below.
2. mentioning not just anti-Clinton videos, but also pro-Clinton videos, like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNd_fsTjq5k (BTW, it's longer than the "standard" version being shown). In it we can see where Clinton could have stopped without saying anything about anything that would have required damage control: the people of SD (MT, PR) want to vote.
3. including statistical analysis of representative samples of websites, comments on articles, etc.
4. or looking at several prominent websites: DailyKos, Huffington Post, hillaryis44, and MyDD. DK and HuffPo post-ers lean toward Obama, 44 and DD toward Clinton.
5. showing how each swarming occurs on each of these websites.
5a. Did 44 and DD swarm after "bitter"? 5b. If swarming occurred on 44 and DD, was it different from or about the same as DK's and HuffPo's swarming after "RFK"?
5c. What percentage of "swarming" after "bitter" was anti-Obama?
5d. What percentage of swarming attempted to "protect" him from criticism?
5e and f. Same for Clinton.
6. analyzing some comments on articles. I've categorized the first 10 responses to this article:
--explicitly pro-Obama (Deward Bowles--Response #1),
--analysis leans toward Obama, may be objective (Z--Response #2;gilesjp--Response #3;Howard--Response #6; X--Response #8)
--explicitly pro-Clinton (Monique--Response #4)
--probably pro-Clinton (g--Response #5; Cheryl Wilson--Response #9; George Kesselring--Response #10),
--commentary about use of the Web by people of different ages (Clyde Nugget--Response #7)
Lumping "explicit" and "probable" responses together, the totals are:
Pro-O ~ 5
Pro-C ~ 4
Non-pro-O and non-pro-C = 1.
7. describing what happens when people "swarm." How quickly do people have to respond for their response to be a swarm?
8. showing how people use the internet not only to swarm, but also for many other purposes. In these responses, I see
8a. reasons for favoring or disfavoring Clinton (Bowles--disastrous campaign; Howard--Clinton's staying in in case of Obama slip-up); (Kesselring--O's supporters afraid of C's popularity)
8b. discussion of what an apology would consist of (Z, X)
8c. an apparent explanation of swarming (gilesjp). Definition of swarming: "rapid convergence of partisans in response to a cue." One explanation of swarming, Gilesjp suggests, is that it involves people with low-information, who take lies, etc., personally, who think that C has no reason to lie, and who therefore support her. That explanation suggests that swarming, as I define it, could just as easily favor C as O.
8d. reason for supporting Clinton (Monique--media made gender decisive)
8e. link of swarming with gilesjp's explanation--kids seeing O as Am Idol, etc. (g)
8f. a protest against unfair behavior and hypocrisy on the part of Obama supporters (Cheryl Wilson and, I think, Kesselring).
There's a lot to be learned from these responses. Though I disagree with their positions, Wilson and Kesselring give a sense of what's a stake in the election--people who had their minds made up and won't consider the candidates more objectively, people who favor their own candidate so much that they don't care what harm results for the nation.
8g. later responses include a lot of acting out, efforts to control the actin-out-ers, opportunistic posts to apparently products or services, etc.

Posted by: newddle | May 26, 2008 11:16 PM | Report abuse

"Being a racist and an elitist--in that ivy league way people like to try to pin to Obama--are two pretty mutually exclusive things. In fact, I don't know any upper class, well educated affluent racists. "

I deal in facts. From his book 'Dreams of My Father' Obama wrote: "I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother?s race."
In his his San Francisco speech he spoke of "Small town people" etc etc.

What's mutually exclusive is the facts and your statement.

Posted by: Billw | May 26, 2008 10:46 PM | Report abuse

"I spoke to DNC today and they assure me votes will be counted in FL and MI. Howard Dean strategy for winning the white house was his strategic 50-state plan. Now how can he go back...Too, no one has to obey their own rules...I know I given plenty that I why I found this out."

Jessica, why don't you stop posting on the Internet all day and work on getting a basic education--or at least learning basic grammar. And if you have given a great deal of money to the DNC, please stop b/c you obviously have no education and--at some point--you'll need those funds.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 10:24 PM | Report abuse

Quote: So, don't waste your time trying to make them see the light. They are way too deep in the dark side."

LOL, at least he's not on trial for fraud. Bill AND Hillary Clinton are. That's case number BC304174, Los Angeles Superior Court in case you are interested. There is another hearing scheduled for this week.

Case Number: BC304174
PETER F PAUL VS WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON


Case Type: Fraud (no contract) (General Jurisdiction)
Status: Pending

Future Hearings

05/27/2008 at 09:31 am in department 47 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Order to Show Cause (RE CONTEMPT HEARING)

08/08/2008 at 08:31 am in department 47 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Further Status Conference

Documents Filed | Proceeding Information

Parties

CLINTON HILLARY RODHAM - Defendant/Respondent

CLINTON WILLIAM JEFFERSON - Defendant/Respondent

D. COLETTE WILSON ATTORNEY AT LAW - Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

DOYEN MICHAEL R. - Attorney for Defendant/Respondent

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON FOR U.S. SENATE - Defendant/Respondent

KREEP GARY G. - Former Attorney for Pltf/Petn

LEVIN JAMES - Defendant/Respondent

MACHTINGER LEONARD A. - Attorney for Defendant/Respondent

NORMAN JAN B. - Associated Counsel

NORRIS STERLING E. ESQ. - Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

PAUL PETER F. - Plaintiff/Petitioner

ROSEN DAVID - Defendant/Respondent

SMITH GARY - Defendant/Respondent

TONKEN AARON - Defendant/Respondent

WESTON GARROU WALTERS & MOONEY - Attorney for Respondent

WILLAMS & CONNOLLY - Attorney for Defendant/Respondent

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 10:03 PM | Report abuse

HE ASPIRED TO SERVE.

LOVES HIS COUNTRY.

PLANNED AND CAMPAIGNED MOST INTELLIGENTLY.

NOW HIS OPPONENTS AND HER SUPPORTERS CAN'T GET OVER THEIR LOSS AND ENVY.

Posted by: Peg | May 26, 2008 9:59 PM | Report abuse

YOUR TINY PIN HEADS. SORRY....I KNOW YOU WOULDN'T CATCH THAT BUT--SINCE I HAVE AN EDUCATION--I DID.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 9:44 PM | Report abuse

"listen up, Hillary's supporters"

LISTEN UP POOR, WHITE RACIST LOSERS:

WHY DON'T YOU GET OFF YOUR LAZY ASSES AND GET JOBS. SURE, YOU'RE OBVIOUSLY IDIOTS BUT WAL-MART HIRES IDIOTS FOR NEXT TO NOTHING. BETTER THAN BEING SO OBVIOUSLY THREATENED BY OBAMA'S SUCCESS THAT YOU'RE TINY PIN HEADS WILL EVENTUALLY EXPLODE WITH HATRED AND JEALOUSY.

"Ovama is going no where"
RIGHT.
PROOF YOU'RE AN IDIOT. IT'S YOU WHO'S A LIFE LOSER. LEARN TO SPELL. GET A JOB.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 9:38 PM | Report abuse

listen up, Hillary's supporters:

The ObamiNation is about threatening blacks who don't support Ovama. It's not about logic or fairness.

Olbermann suggest to have Hillary killed and later pukes vile vomit about Hillary's supposed comment about RFK. They will never acknowledge the contradiction and hypocrisy.

The only thing that matters is: get your evidence about Ovama's corrupt past, his drug use, his homosexual encounters, his aliances with the extreme left, his flip flopping in favor of whites, his back stabbing his own people if it curries whites votes, etc, etc,etc, and put it in the Wapo and every where you can.

Ovama is going no where. The more you post his crap the more difficult it will be for them to continue attacking the only democrat that can win the elections. They'll have to spend time cleaning up their false prophet's crap.

So, don't waste your time trying to make them see the light. They are way too deep in the dark side.

Posted by: ovama is a loser. | May 26, 2008 9:31 PM | Report abuse

It is an amazing thing--but now we need to turn our focus to those machines. We all need to become legal eagles, know our voting laws, know who are Secretaries of State are, know the model and make on the voting machines, the names of the private companies contracted to program them (count our votes), and we need to prepare now so that our beautiful ballots are counted fairly and transparently.


Obama 2008

Two stolen Presidential elections are two too many for me!!

Posted by: obama | May 26, 2008 8:53 PM

IT IS THOSE DIEBOLD VOTING MACHINES. GOOGLE AND FIND OUT IF YOUR STATE IS USING DIEBOLD--ALTHOUGH THEY'VE NOW ACTUALLY COME UP WITH ANOTHER COMPANY NAME TO FOOL PEOPLE..

PEOPLE SHOULD TRY AND FIND OUT IF THEIR STATES USE OPTICAL SCAN BALLOTS THAT ARE NOT BACKED UP BY PAPER. ALL BALLOTS SHOULD BE BACKED UP BY PAPER TO PREVENT FRAUD!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 9:22 PM | Report abuse

"He is a racist by his own admission. He is also an elitist by his own statements"

Being a racist and an elitist--in that ivy league way people like to try to pin to Obama--are two pretty mutually exclusive things. In fact, I don't know any upper class, well educated affluent racists.

NOT ONE!

And yet you've got it all figured out?

Actually I have you figured out: YOU ARE THE DOWNWARDLY MOBILE RACIST ONE here. OOPS! YOUR COVER'S BEEN BLOWN!!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 9:18 PM | Report abuse

Please donate over $30 million to Hillary Clinton's campaign today.
www.clinton.org

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 9:17 PM | Report abuse

I wonder how many of these "Hard working white people" she has stiffed while running up her debts so she can make a mockery of the Democratic party?

You know, the blue collar swig 'o whiskey people that she has been "fighting for" all her life.

I'd like to hear one thing this Woman has in common, or done for the working class, any takers?

(by the way I've been asking this question for months but nobody seems to be able to answer it.)

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 9:10 PM | Report abuse

yes we can

Yes We Can - Barack Obama Music Video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjXyqcx-mYY

this is a movement, so join us because u can't beat us.

One love!

Posted by: yes we can | May 26, 2008 9:05 PM | Report abuse

Would you vote for George Bush over Clinton or Obama?

Well, that's basically what you will be doing if you vote for McCain.

May I suggest that you follow your candidate's recommendation once we have a nominee.

Posted by: JR | May 26, 2008 9:03 PM | Report abuse

> I (and many others) would vote for Powell without hesitation, but the posibility of Obama being muslim is real.

Only if you think that religion is passed on the Y chromosome or consume TV programming that has no basis in reality (FOX News being high on that list).

> He is a racist by his own admission. He is also an elitist by his own statements at the private meeting in San Francisco.

He admitted no such thing, unless your idea of 'elitist' has it meaning 'someone smarter than you'.

> He supported Wright for 20 years.

And yet you think him a Muslim. If you're going to come out with ridiculous ideas, at least keep them consistent with each other!

> Unfortunately the only other choice is Clinton. Too bad.

She's not a choice, really. Right now we're playing the last half of the 9th inning, even though the away team is ahead and at bat, because the Clinton home team is hoping to find a way for them to score negative runs or a disqualification.

Maybe if you run the bases backwards and tag the pitcher out?

Posted by: Joe | May 26, 2008 9:01 PM | Report abuse

Since Senator Obama's supporters speak about math, tell me how Obama reaches 270 electoral votes since he will lose every southern state, Ohio, Missouri and Wisconsin."

YOU CAN'T SAY WHAT STATES WILL BE WON AND LOST BASED ON POLLS FIVE MONTHS OUT FROM AN ELECTION.

FIVE MONTHS AGO--LATE DECEMBER--POLLS SAID CLINTON WOULD WIN THE NOMINATION IN A LANDSLIDE. AN ACCURATE PICTURE OF TODAY?

NO--THIS IS ANOTHER BOGUS AND MINDLESS CLINTON TALKING POINT.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 9:00 PM | Report abuse

Obama Vs Mccsame

Barack Obama's best argument to John McCain that will get him elected is: If we stay in Iraq our economy is going to go into a depression. The recession we are now in has little to do with earmarks as John McCain likes to believe, it has to do with the billions of dollars we send everyday to Iraq (no matter what some moronic economists try and make us believe). Republicans will understand this argument and jump on board. The administration can't spin this crap anymore. The economy has gotten too bad and people are pissed off.


Go Obama!!

Posted by: j | May 26, 2008 9:00 PM | Report abuse

Obama Vs Mccsame

Barack Obama's best argument to John McCain that will get him elected is: If we stay in Iraq our economy is going to go into a depression. The recession we are now in has little to do with earmarks as John McCain likes to believe, it has to do with the billions of dollars we send everyday to Iraq (no matter what some moronic economists try and make us believe). Republicans will understand this argument and jump on board. The administration can't spin this crap anymore. The economy has gotten too bad and people are pissed off.


Go Obama!!

Posted by: j | May 26, 2008 9:00 PM | Report abuse

To Obama Nation:

For your info,

Remember, too, that the media is owned by big corporations - NBC by GE, ABC by Disney, CNN and CBS by Time Warner. All these corporations have a vested interest in keeping the public uninformed - i.e. GE gets defense contracts for jet engines, war materials etc. That is why you don't see any hardhitting, investigative reporting about the war and profiteering. The media was complicit in allowing the Iraq War because all the execs saw were ratings. War! Wow, yeah, embedded journalists, everyone will tune in! How much can we make off advertising??
It's disgusting. Those wonderful young men and women dying and being permanently disfigured/maimed for oil company, corporate profits. And instead of giving those young men and women a pay hike and a new GI bill and proper medical care when they return what does this administration do - give them a moment of silence at 3PM. This is a slap in the face to all our veterans. And I blame the media for not doing their job, for trading their integrity for profit.

Stay alert!

Obama 08

Posted by: liz | May 26, 2008 8:58 PM | Report abuse

"You have to look at the fact that the web user is a more informed voter a high information voter. So lies , misrepresentations and low moral character is taken as a personal insult and quickly retaliated against. While Hillary has a large base of people who are low information voters, they only catch a sound bite or two of the news and generally don't understand what Clinton is saying but feels she has no reason to lie so they believe what she says. Basically she betrays the trust of her constituency by lying to them such as the current lie saying she won the popular vote. These people look to her for information but she gives them lies. Her mistake is she thinks she is still in an age where you can get away with a lie."

This is SO true. The Internet has changed American politics forever. And even though there are still many uneducated Clinton supporters posting Clinton Zombie Talking Points ad nauseum, this trend will further erode that kind of ignorance over the years.

It is also why Fox's ratings have dropped dramatically. They continue to offer the same kind of sound bite nonsense but people can surf around the Internet for the truth.

And that is why the Clintons, Bush, Rove and Fox News present the politics of yesterday. Thank god we've ALMOST TURNED THE PAGE!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 8:55 PM | Report abuse

It is an amazing thing--but now we need to turn our focus to those machines. We all need to become legal eagles, know our voting laws, know who are Secretaries of State are, know the model and make on the voting machines, the names of the private companies contracted to program them (count our votes), and we need to prepare now so that our beautiful ballots are counted fairly and transparently.


Obama 2008

Two stolen Presidential elections are two too many for me!!

Posted by: obama | May 26, 2008 8:53 PM | Report abuse

Since Senator Obama's supporters speak about math, tell me how Obama reaches 270 electoral votes since he will lose every southern state, Ohio, Missouri and Wisconsin. This defeat will equal the 1972 devasting defeat of McGovern (left wing nominee)by President Nixon. No democrat can win the presidency without carrying two southern states plus your swing states. Talk about the delegate math, that math won't win in November, only the electoral math counts.

Posted by: bill | May 26, 2008 8:52 PM | Report abuse

Where there is unity, strength
Where there is strength, movement
Where there is movement, change
Where there is change, a new beginning
Where there is a new beginning, hope
Where there is hope, peace
Where there is peace, love.

The fierce urgency of now!

Call - Donate - Participate!

BahamasForObama08

Posted by: BahamasForObama08 | May 26, 2008 8:51 PM | Report abuse

It is amusing how people who have a college education are accused of being "elitists".

The ones making the accusations are the ones who are easily manipulated by emotional and fear tactics, over and over again. God forbid they would pick up a history, political science, or other textbook and do some actual research!

But, it's okay. Keep yourself uneducated. Your responses make for great entertainment.

A bitter white lady for Obama!!

Posted by: MAry | May 26, 2008 8:48 PM | Report abuse

Obama didn't make her say those things and his campaign has been very nice about this whole thing. She has not been so nice to him. Remember "bittergate" where one of her supporters crashed a fundraising event and then she turned it into an attack ad? Obama could easily turn this into an attack, but chooses not to. Yet she somehow thinks he is to blame for what she said?

It's just like when Bill Clinton blamed Obama for the firestorm after SC. Bill Clinton compared Obama to Jesse Jackson at the same time that Hillary Clinton was marginalizing MLK's contribution to the civil rights act, and somehow that was Obama's fault, too?

Nope, no apology. To apologize is to own up to a mistake and take the blame for it. The Clintons have not owned up to a single mistake throughout this entire campaign.

Obama 08 & 12

Posted by: z | May 26, 2008 8:46 PM | Report abuse

Quote; "What Hillary Clinton told you was true."

If you believe that, she has you under her thumb too. Not according to the pilot of her plane and the commander on the ground. Do you think the secret service would allow her to land if she was in ANY danger?? They have the say, not the senator, first lady or even the president. Ridiculous.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 8:45 PM | Report abuse

You have to look at the fact that the web user is a more informed voter a high information voter. So lies , misrepresentations and low moral character is taken as a personal insult and quickly retaliated against. While her Hillary has a large base of people who are low information voters, they only catch a sound bite or two of the news and generally don't understand what Clinton is saying but feels she has no reason to lie so they believe what she says. Basically she betrays the trust of her constituency by lying to them such as the current lie saying she won the popular vote. These people look to her for information but she gives them lies. Her mistake is she thinks she is still in an age where you can get away with a lie.

Posted by: gile | May 26, 2008 8:44 PM | Report abuse

Clinton is responsible for where she is at in this race. Her campaign has been a disaster. She has run it in the red for months and months now reaching recently 30 million dollars owed. Her advisers made dumb mistakes that showed out completely inept they are. The lobbyist running her campaign were so intent on making themselves rich through the presidency they failed even to focus on their own candidate.

It is time to rally around Obama and take the presidency in November.

Posted by: Deward | May 26, 2008 8:42 PM | Report abuse

It is amazing how Obama inspires people. Everyone has fallen in love with him, he is respected by everyone even by our opponents (Castro). I believe America has a golden opportunity this year to change the world and find out how Bush & co made it to the white house in the first place, so vote for CHANGE.

Make History today & Donate $100
to Barackobama.com

Posted by: Mike ,J | May 26, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

"to make the inevitable official, Obama needs how many contests? anyone?"

Barack needs barely over 50 delegates to claim the nomination.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 8:30 PM | Report abuse

Cheryl, for all your purported scholastic achievement, you make a lot of assumptions. A lot of Obama's support comes from educated people of all races -- not just from young people and males. It's insulting to insinuate that young voters who support Senator Obama don't pay their own way. And just how is it, as you assert, that Obama is not winning fair and square? You have absolutely nothing but your own prejudice to back that statement up To say that Obama's knowledge comes from cue cards is another ridiculous allegation and you have nothing to back that up either! You don't become Editor of the Harvard Law Review from lack of knowledge. You don't teach constitutional law without it and you don't become a United States Senator and a candidate for President of the United States without it.

Posted by: lhummer | May 26, 2008 8:26 PM | Report abuse

"I like to just post fact with some opinion keep it short and provide a link. The game is going to change next week."

REALLY? 'CAUSE MY POST WAS SHORTER THAN YOUR POST W/ THE LINK. CAN'T EVEN JUDGE THAT?

AND OBAMATRON IS AN INSULT, BUT I PROVED MY CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS WHERE YOU, SADLY, ARE AT A TOTAL LOSS. AND I DON'T SEE FACTS IN ANY OF YOUR POSTS. HERE ARE MINE:

THIS IS HOW THE MATH WILL CHANGE NEXT WEEK. AND HILLARY WILL STILL LOSE.

These are the undeniable facts:
The math simply doesn't work for Hillary. Without Florida and Michigan, Obama or Hillary need 2024.5 delegates to clinch the nomination. To date, here is the breakdown for where they stand:
Obama 1969
Clinton 1724
If Hillary succeeds in getting Florida and Michigan added at full strength, then the needed delegates goes to 2,210, an impossibility, because that would mean the Rules and By-Laws Committee agreed to it, which won't happen. Those delegations will most likely be seated at half strength which moves the magic number to 2,118 or 2,131, depending on whether the supers are also cut to half. Let's say it's the highest, 2,131 and that Obama gets ZERO for Michigan because he was not on the ballot. Using that worst case scenario, that means that Obama needs 95 delegates. Hillary needs 226.
Now. There are 212 pledged delegates in remaining primaries. To win, she needs all of them, plus 14 more Supers or some combination of each. This is not going to happen, especially if some of the Supers are looking for a reason to move to Obama. Her chance of winning this by the numbers is ZERO. It's clear that Obama is the next Democratic Presidential nominee.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 8:21 PM | Report abuse

Obama supporters had "house parties" to register new votes with beer, pizza a party. No guarantee these kids will vote in November. History says they won't. Where were they in 2000 clearly everyone knew Bush's record from Texas but the youth did not vote. Same thing in 04 Kerry and Co. were sure the they'd come out with the Bruce Springsteen rally and everything that was at stake. But again the youth did not turn on in November and Bush was reelected. Why do you think they will rewrite history and show up in big numbers for Obama in November?

Posted by: Jessica | May 26, 2008 8:19 PM | Report abuse

Jacksmith is a liar- and probably a Rush Limbaugh stoodge. He says Hillary lost in Oregon because Republicans voted for Obama by switching their party affiliation.

That is a lie. Senator Obama won by 98,000 votes. The Democratic Party is Oregon only gained 70,000 new registrants this year- who were mainly young people and independents. It is very evident that the conservative forces want to run against the Clinton baggage.

Not this time.

Posted by: Elizabeth | May 26, 2008 8:13 PM | Report abuse

I think Obama would be ashamed at his surrogates posting vulgar language. Obama runs his campaign like his poster down and dirty willing to stop at nothing. I like to just post fact with some opinion keep it short and provide a link. The game is going to change next week. I say let's get it over with now and win the whitehouse in November.

GO HILLARY!

Posted by: Jessica | May 26, 2008 8:13 PM | Report abuse

"Its seems Obamatrons are angry towards everyone."

Angry at racist trash like you, Jessica. Now, why would that be? I'm waiting to hear your Delegate math, Jessica. Unless you're a Clinton ZOMBIE that can't think for yourself. Let's hear how she wins. Lay it out and prove you're not a mindless, racist piece of garbage. I'm WAITING...

Here's my delegate math, racists second:

These are the undeniable facts:
The math simply doesn't work for Hillary. Without Florida and Michigan, Obama or Hillary need 2024.5 delegates to clinch the nomination. To date, here is the breakdown for where they stand:
Obama 1969
Clinton 1724
If Hillary succeeds in getting Florida and Michigan added at full strength, then the needed delegates goes to 2,210, an impossibility, because that would mean the Rules and By-Laws Committee agreed to it, which won't happen. Those delegations will most likely be seated at half strength which moves the magic number to 2,118 or 2,131, depending on whether the supers are also cut to half. Let's say it's the highest, 2,131 and that Obama gets ZERO for Michigan because he was not on the ballot. Using that worst case scenario, that means that Obama needs 95 delegates. Hillary needs 226.
Now. There are 212 pledged delegates in remaining primaries. To win, she needs all of them, plus 14 more Supers or some combination of each. This is not going to happen, especially if some of the Supers are looking for a reason to move to Obama. Her chance of winning this by the numbers is ZERO. ZERO. It's clear that Obama is the next Democratic Presidential nominee.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 8:07 PM | Report abuse

This is nothing more than a place to vent and we are getting nowhere with all these ridiculous arguments based on passion.

All this venting will have no effect on the general election,cooler heads will prevail.

If you're mad enough to vote for McCain because your candidate didn't win the nomination then I ask you to think carefully what you will be voting for before you make your choice.

Clinton and Obama are not that far apart policy-wise

Posted by: JR | May 26, 2008 8:05 PM | Report abuse

Bosnia was not like some TV, or B-movie shoot out. You did not hear a lot of gunfire all the time. Just the eery quiet quality of impending death until that single pop that echoed the call of innocent death. Do your homework. Look it up. It was a chilling time, and place to be. Death was silent. But all around you. What Hillary Clinton told you was true. She did land under sniper fire. You were always under sniper fire in Bosnia back then. And your life depended on not forgetting that. Just a single silent shot that ripped you apart.

Rather than explain this horror to you babies. Hillary just says. "I'm sorry. I misspoke." You have to remember that Hillary Clinton is a woman, and a mother. She just did not want to frighten you babies.
jacksmith... Working Class :-)
*******************************************

Nice try. I was there. And there for both Pre Dayton and post Dayton.

She and her ever so lovely daughter saw no horror. SHE LIED. GOT CAUGHT. ADMITTED IT.
Like her husband had to. You remember "no sexual relations" (in the eerie quiet quality of the Oval Office.
She didn't get impeached for perjury like him, it is worse! She is proven a liar every time someone, anyone, who views the film sees it proven, again then again. Proven to be a liar (and therefore a sinner)by her own very lovely young daughter.

Even one such as myself, with some very fond memories of those single bursts of light and truth, ringing out in the misty quiet can see it for the lie it is.

When there was sniper fire in Sarajevo, they shot back like lovely little girls. Kind of like Hillary shoots ;)

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 8:04 PM | Report abuse

"No wonder Hillary is fighting I would too."

Good for you two! You STILL LOSE!
BUH BYE, NOW!!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 8:02 PM | Report abuse

Here's the story and the reply to me by the

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20080523_In_most_inclusive_count__Clinton_has_the_numbers.html

and here's the response I received. Its seems Obamatrons are angry towards everyone.

Dear Reader,

I apologize in advance for the impersonal nature of this mass email. Normally I try to answer all correspondence individually, and I did so for the first 600 or so Clinton-Obama popular vote emails. But faced with another 800 emails, a fussy newborn at home, and a half-gone holiday weekend, I'm resorting to a generic reply. I hope you'll find it in your heart to forgive me.

The letters for this column came in two distinct flavors, you'll know instantly to which camp you belong.

Clinton supporters wrote in to generally praise the column for its wisdom. If you wrote one of those letters, I thank you for your kind thoughts, however overly generous they are. Nothing I've written has ever risen to the level of "wise," and this column was no exception, I'm afraid.

Obama supporters took a less collegial view of the piece. Their main complaints were that (1) I'm a Clinton-loving hack; (2) The popular vote doesn't matter because the nomination process is about delegates; (3) Looking to the popular vote is tantamount to changing the rules at the end of the game; and (4) The primary votes in Puerto Rico shouldn't count because PR has no say in the general election. Allow me to address these out of order.

Let's take points (2) and (3) first. It isn't quite right to say that the nomination is decided strictly be delegates. The candidate who wins must have 2,026 delegates, meaning that the super delegates, not the pledged delegates, will decide the nominee. And the rules for super delegates are that there are no rules. They make their decision based on whatever criteria pleases them--and their decision is, by definition, legitimate, no matter who they pick or what their reasons are for doing so.

As for rule changing, if anything, the Obama camp is trying to change the rules by insisting that the pledged delegate count must determine how the supers vote. That has never been part of the understanding of the function and duties of the supers.

For point (4), that Puerto Rico should have no say in the primary process because they have no general election votes--this is not an unreasonable argument. If Sen. Obama somehow finishes behind in the popular vote, he would be free to make it. However, I suspect that for reasons of identity politics, he might be reluctant to do so. We'll see.

As for the first point, I can only insist that I have no dog in this fight. (I certainly don't think it's fair to count me as a "supporter" of Clinton in any substantive way. A few weeks ago I wrote a column likening her to Ivan Drago, the villain in Rocky IV.)

Look, for all we know, the turnout in Puerto Rico could be 500,000 voters and Obama could win by 10 points. Then all of this will be moot. The point of my column was to highlight how little we actually know about what is going to unfold in the next week and to show that the parameters exist for their to be a reasonable chance that Clinton wins some or all versions of the popular vote. And to the extent that it influences the decisions of the super delegates, I believe the popular vote could be important.

Enough of all that. I have to go change diapers. Please have a happy and peaceful Memorial Day. And thanks for taking the time to write in.

Best,
JVL

Posted by: Jessica | May 26, 2008 8:01 PM | Report abuse

"Read how Obama strategically took his name of the ballot. I guess it was bad judgment."

Hank, looks like you learned to spell judgment. Obama still wins!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 7:59 PM | Report abuse

Barack Obama plays dirty politics way back in October.

http://iowaindependent.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1264

Is this "change" we can believe in?


No wonder Hillary is fighting I would too. All along he cried how he took his name of the ballot. Nothing more than another corrupt politician willing to stop at nothing to be elected.

Posted by: hank | May 26, 2008 7:57 PM | Report abuse

Right, Jessica here's how those votes (actually their delegates) will be counted. Hillary still loses.

And it's DemocratIC party unless you're a dumbass racist republican--oops--which you are!

These are the undeniable facts:
The math simply doesn't work for Hillary. Without Florida and Michigan, Obama or Hillary need 2024.5 delegates to clinch the nomination. To date, here is the breakdown for where they stand:
Obama 1969
Clinton 1724
If Hillary succeeds in getting Florida and Michigan added at full strength, then the needed delegates goes to 2,210, an impossibility, because that would mean the Rules and By-Laws Committee agreed to it, which won't happen. Those delegations will most likely be seated at half strength which moves the magic number to 2,118 or 2,131, depending on whether the supers are also cut to half. Let's say it's the highest, 2,131 and that Obama gets ZERO for Michigan because he was not on the ballot. Using that worst case scenario, that means that Obama needs 95 delegates. Hillary needs 226.
Now. There are 212 pledged delegates in remaining primaries. To win, she needs all of them, plus 14 more Supers or some combination of each. This is not going to happen, especially if some of the Supers are looking for a reason to move to Obama. Her chance of winning this by the numbers, even with the best Clintonesque arm twisting, is ZERO. ZERO. It's clear that Obama is the next Democratic Presidential nominee.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 7:55 PM | Report abuse

http://iowaindependent.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1264


Read how Obama strategically took his name of the ballot. I guess it was bad judgment. The DNC makes their own rules that they don't have to follow.

Go Hillary!

Posted by: hank | May 26, 2008 7:53 PM | Report abuse

I spoke to DNC today and they assure me votes will be counted in FL and MI. Howard Dean strategy for winning the white house was his strategic 50-state plan. Now how can he go back.

Too, no one has to obey their own rules. The Democrat party knows that if the votes are not counted the DNC will go bankrupt. It already is. I know I given plenty that I why I found this out. They said thousands have called to say not another dime to DNC unless all the votes are counted.

The game will change next week.

Posted by: jessica | May 26, 2008 7:52 PM | Report abuse

The reason Hillary's supporters won't vote for Obama is because he can't deliver the results. Although their policies are similiar, Obama has no accomplishments, no track records that he can put his words into action. Basically. most people do not have confidence in him that he can make any change (I mean "good" change). So if he can't carry his plans, all his policies are meaningless.

Posted by: Action Counts | May 26, 2008 7:50 PM | Report abuse

Right, Ron Brown died of a gunshot wound and a plane crash in Croatia just before he was to testify before independent counsel against the Clintons.

Ron Brown - Secretary of Commerce and former DNC Chairman. Reported to have died by impact in a plane crash. A pathologist close to the investigation reported that there was a hole in the top of Brown's skull resembling a gunshot wound. At the time of his death Brown was being investigated, and spoke publicly of his willingness to cut a deal with prosecutors. The rest of the people on the plane also died. A few days later the air Traffic controller committed suicide.

From Wiki:

On April 3, 1996, while on an official trade mission, the Air Force CT-43 (a modified Boeing 737) carrying Brown and 34 other people, including New York Times Frankfurt Bureau chief Nathaniel C. Nash, crashed in Croatia. While attempting an instrument approach to ÄŒilipi airport, the airplane crashed into a mountainside killing everyone on board; the final Air Force investigation attributed this to pilot error and a poorly designed landing approach.[2] There were many speculations as to the circumstances surrounding the plane crash that caused Brown's death including many government cover-up and conspiracy theories, i.e. whether the Clintons had him murdered as some conspiracy theorists conjectured about Vince Foster's suicide[3] stemming in part from the fact that Brown was under investigation by independent counsel for corruption.[4]
--------------------------------------
While Hillary may not have been under sniper fire, it could be why she confused their murder of Ron Brown in the same area around the same time. OK, so it wasn't an out and out lie--I'll give her that.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 7:42 PM | Report abuse

Everyone like to call Obama supporters Kool aid drinkers. It is funny because his supporters are free thinking smart upper middle class people of above average education. Not exactly people who would blindly follow anyone.

You may have hit the nail on the head and defined the Clinton followers, ( I can't call then supporters that would indicate a free will). Zombies may be the perfect description for them. They believe anything she says, even in the face of overwhelming evidence she is lying. They give her their money that she misspends. They parrot her lies like they are original thoughts, Mindless zombies is exactly what they are.

Meet the Clinton ladies
http://laughingsquid.com/wp-content/uploads/zombies_sf_6.jpg

+++++++++++
POLLS FIVE MONTHS AGO SAID HILLARY WOULD WIN THE NOMINATION BY A LANDSLIDE. LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THAT ONE--MINDLESS CLINTON TALKING POINT ZOMBIES.

Posted by: | May 26, 2008 4:58 PM

This is so true. It is either Clinton staffers--who shouldn't bother b/c they won't get paid anyway (b/c she'll pay herself back first)--or just people with NO CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS WHATSOEVER.

JUST MINDLESS, RETARDED TALKING POINTS OVER AND OVER JUST LIKE REPUBLICANS AND FAUX NEWS. IN FACT, THE MORE I THINK ABOUT IT I THINK MANY OF THESE CLINTON ZOMBIES ARE REPUBLICANS/RACISTS WHO ARE SO FLIPPED OUT ABOUT OBAMA THEY CAN'T SEE STRAIGHT. EITHER THAT/MINDLESS ZOMBIES OR BOTH.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 7:36 PM | Report abuse

Looks like you pulled the death threats for a presidential candidate from your poster KKK.
Good for you. I'm sure the Secret Service approves.

Posted by: J. Elliot Westland | May 26, 2008 7:29 PM | Report abuse

"well, people, it's official:
big black brother is watching you. You can post violence against Hillary but not against BIG O."

That's because racists aren't human.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

Take it all the way to the convention floor Hillary!

Posted by: No to Obama! | May 26, 2008 6:26 PM

Sorry, NO TO OBAMA, HILLARY STILL LOSES--NOW, ON THE CONVENTION FLOOR AND WILL CONTINUE TO LOSE UNTIL SHE HAS LOST HER SENATE SEAT. WE'RE GOING TO THROW OUT THE RACIST TRASH IN NY.

AND...STILL WAITING TO FIND A HILLARY SUPPORTER WHO CAN ACTUALLY COUNT...

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 7:22 PM | Report abuse

well, people, it's official:
big black brother is watching you. You can post violence against Hillary but not against BIG O.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 7:21 PM | Report abuse

to all that complained, they seem to have removed the threatening comments.

Posted by: k____ | May 26, 2008 7:16 PM | Report abuse

jacksmith POSTS THE SAME MINDLESS GARBAGE OVER AND OVER AND CAN'T ANSWER A SINGLE QUESTION ABOUT THE RIDICULOUS GARBAGE HE'S POSTING.

OBAMAS VOTES ARE INFLATED--EVER HEAR OF OPERATION CHAOS jacksmith? RUSH SENDING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF HIS MINIONS TO VOTE FOR HILLARY? GUESS NOT...

THERE'S ONE THING HILLARY TELLS THE TRUTH ABOUT: HER SUPPORTERS ARE DUMB, IGNORANT RACISTS. YOU PROVE IT, JACKSMITH--RACIST CLASS. HEAD OF THE RETARDS.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 7:09 PM | Report abuse

So you want to vote for the Clinton?

Here's some interesting facts! Oh and how many times can you say "it's just a coincidence?


Just a quick refresher course lest we forget what has happened to many "friends" of the Clinton's

1-James McDougal - Clinton 's convicted Whitewater partner died of an apparent heart attack, while in solitary confinement. He was a key witness in Ken Starr's investigation.

2 - Mary Mahoney - A former White House intern was murdered July 1997 at a Starbucks Coffee Shop in Georgetown. The murder happened just after she was to go public with her story of sexual harassment in the White House.

3- Vince Foster - Former White House counselor and colleague of Hillary Clinton at Little Rock's Rose Law firm. Died of a gunshot wound to the head, ruled a suicide.

4- Ron Brown - Secretary of Commerce and former DNC Chairman. Reported to have died by impact in a plane crash. A pathologist close to the investigation reported that there was a hole in the top of Brown's skull resembling a gunshot wound. At the time of his death Brown was being investigated, and spoke publicly of his willingness to cut a deal with prosecutors. The rest of the people on the plane also died. A few days later the air Traffic controller committed suicide.

5- C. Victor Raiser II- Raiser, a major player in the Clinton fund raising organization died in a private plane crash in July 1992

6- Paul Tulley - Democratic National Committee Political Director found dead in a hotel room in Little Rock, September 1992. Described by Clinton as a "dear friend and trusted advisor".

7- Ed Willey - Clinton fund raiser, found dead November 1993 deep in the woods in VA of a gunshot wound to the head. Ruled a suicide. Ed Willey died on the same day his wife Kathleen Willey claimed Bill Clinton groped her in the oval office in the White House. Ed Willey was involved in several Clinton fund raising events.

8-Jerry Parks -Head of Clinton's gubernatorial security team in Little Rock. Gunned down in his car at a deserted intersection outside Little Rock. Park's son said his father was building a dossier on Clinton . He allegedly threatened to reveal this information. After he died the files were mysteriously removed from his house.

9-James Bunch - Died from a gunshot suicide. It was reported that he had a "Black Book" of people which contained names of influential people who visited prostitutes in Texas and Arkansas.

10-James Wilson - Was found dead in May 1993 from an apparent hanging suicide. He was reported to have ties to Whitewater.

11- Kathy Ferguson- Ex-wife of Arkansas Trooper Danny Ferguson, was found dead in May 1994, in her living room with a gunshot to her head. It was ruled a suicide even though there were several packed suitcases, as if she were going somewhere. Danny Ferguson was a co-defendant along with Bill Clinton in the Paula Jones lawsuit. Kathy Ferguson was a possible corroborating witness for Paula Jones.

12-Bill Shelton - Arkansas State Trooper and fiance of Kathy Ferguson. Critical of the suicide ruling of his fiance, he was found dead in June, 1994 of a gunshot wound also ruled a suicide at the grave site of his
fiance.

13-Gandy Baugh - Attorney for Clinton 's friend Dan Lassater, died by jumping out a window of a tall building January, 1994. His client was a convicted drug distributor.

14-Florence Martin - Account ant & subcontractor for the CIA, was related to the Barry SealMean Airport drug smuggling case. He died of three gunshot wounds.

15- Suzanne Coleman - Reportedly had an affair with Clinton when he was Arkansas Attorney General. Died of a gunshot wound to the back of the head, ruled a suicide. Was pregnant at the time of her death.

16-Paula Grober - Clinton's speech interpreter for the deaf from 1978 until her death December 9, 1992. She died in a one car accident.

17- Danny Casolaro - Investigative reporter. Investigating Mean Airport and Arkansas Development Finance Authority. He slit his wrists, apparently, in the middle of his investigation.

18- Paul Wilcher - Attorney investigating corruption at Mena Airport with Casolaro and the 1980 "October Surprise" was found dead on a toilet June 22, 1993 in his Washington, DC apartment. Had delivered a report to Janet Reno 3 weeks before his death.

19-Jon Parnell Walker - Whitewater investigator for Resolution Trust Corp. Jumped to his death from his Arlington, Virginia apartment balcony August 15, 1993. He was investigating the Morgan Guaranty scandal.

20-Barbara Wise - Commerce Department staffer. Worked closely with Ron Brown and John Huang. Cause of death unknown. Died November 29, 1996. Her bruised, nude body was found locked in her office at the Department of Commerce.

21- Charles Meissner-Assistant Secretary of Commerce who gave John Huang special security clearance, died shortly thereafter in a small plane crash.

22- Dr. Stanley Heard - Chairman of the National Chiropractic Health Care Advisory Committee died with his attorney Steve Dickson in a small plane crash. Dr. Heard, in addition to serving on Clinton's advisory council personally treated Clinton's mother, stepfather and brother.

23-Barry Seal-Drug running pilot out of Mena Arkansas, death was no accident.

24-Johnny Lawhorn Jr. - Mechanic, found a check made out to Bill Clinton in the trunk of a car left at his repair shop. He was found dead after his car had hit a utility pole.

25-Stanley Huggins - Investigated Madison Guaranty. His death was a purpor ted suicide and his report was never released.

26- Hershell Friday - Attorney and Clinton fund raiser died March 1, 1994 when his plane exploded.

27- Kevin Ives & Don Henry - Known as "The boys on the track" case. Reports say the boys may have stumbled upon the Mena Arkansas airport drug operation. A controversial case, the initial report of death said, due to falling asleep on railroad tracks. Later reports claim the 2 boys had been slain before being placed on the tracks. Many linked to the case died before their testimony could come before a Grand Jury.

Posted by: Observer08 | May 26, 2008 7:09 PM | Report abuse

"J. Elliot Westland is a dumb fu@k!"

All obama supporters are!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 7:06 PM | Report abuse

J. Elliot Westland is a dumb fu@k!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 7:05 PM | Report abuse

For threats to presidential candidate's lives - please phone the Secret Service, Washington, D.C. (Local chapters are closed today, Monday.)

Posted by: J. Elliot Westland | May 26, 2008 6:58 PM

==========================

don't forget to include Olbermann's threat of violence against Hillary.

Posted by: oversensitive obamination | May 26, 2008 7:04 PM | Report abuse

"This clip of Keith Olbermann, on Wednesday's Countdown, has Huffington Post media crit Rachel Sklar in a huff. It's because Keith sums up an argument about how to end the Barack vs. Hillary fight - Newsweek's Howard Fineman says the "adults" of the party must finally make a decision - with, "Somebody who can take her into a room and only he comes out."


http://www.jossip.com/keith-olbermann-adds-beating-women-senseless-to-msnbcs-pimping-list-20080425/

==============================
this happened way before Hillary made the RFK reference.

Olbermann should be arrested for inviting violence against Hillary.

Posted by: obamacrap | May 26, 2008 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Obama secretly attends a mosque on Chicago's south side!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 7:02 PM | Report abuse

"DON'T BE DUPED AGAIN AMERICA !!!
IT'S ABOUT ELECTABILITY !!!"

STOP POSTING THIS CONSTANTLY!! IF YOU THINK THE LOSER OF ONE RACE IS IN A BETTER POSITION TO WIN THE NEXT ROUND OF THE RACE THAN YOU ARE A FREAKING RETARD!!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 7:01 PM | Report abuse

I can't believe Barack is a half brother of Osama! How shocking! I'll have to vote for McCain now!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

For threats to presidential candidate's lives - please phone the Secret Service, Washington, D.C. (Local chapters are closed today, Monday.)

Posted by: J. Elliot Westland | May 26, 2008 6:58 PM | Report abuse

jacksmith... Working Class :-)

Since you're clearly such an expert on Bosnian/Serbian sniper fire in the '90s, I'm waiting for you to explain how Ron Brown ended up in a plane crash with a bullet in his head just before he was due to testify against the Clintons.

I'm watiing...EXPERT!!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 6:57 PM | Report abuse

I say vote for Hillary we need more politicians and people like Clinton who know that what's best for you. I like having not to worry. I also like a politician who knows how to say F*** U to the American people with smile and words like I misspoke.....You will get the government You Deserve!

Posted by: Observer08 | May 26, 2008 6:55 PM | Report abuse

"They never were Democrats. They were Republicans trying to take over the Democratic party. They succeeded for many years, but the progressive movement is taking back the party and there is nothing they can do about it."

Interesting statement. I suspect you probably weren't even born when the rest of us were voting for McGovern, marching to end the Vietnam War, for abortion and equal rights and burning our bras for the feminist cause. Your ignorance is showing and most unattractive. Wouldn't be a liberal democratic party if it wasn't for all the hard work, time and energy all the old chicks put into it. But, your assumption that if we all don't fall into line with BO we are not dems is soooo naive and disrepectful. Our voices will not be usurped or denied. The only true indication of our power will be in the voting booth in Nov. Think what you will.

Posted by: mary reilly | May 26, 2008 6:55 PM | Report abuse

"Just the eery quiet quality of impending death until that single pop that echoed the call of innocent death."

Also, Ron Brown died in plane crash/bullet in his head shortly after Hillary's visit. So, no doubt, it was a dangerous place.

Although, it may have been that he was about to testify against Billary that caused this unfortunate sniper fire accident.

Come to think of it:
"Just the eery quiet quality of impending death until that single pop that echoed the call of innocent death."

This is a nice tribute to Ron Brown--an innocent who was murdered by Billary b/c he was due to testify against them.

Google people! Doesn't matter who was born when except jacksmith... Working Class :-)
who either was born yesterday--and is thus able to buy into the Clinton lies--or is just another dumb racist Clinton supporter.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 6:53 PM | Report abuse

i couldn't say it better than jacksmith did.

Posted by: john b california | May 26, 2008 6:52 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is a wanna be. Let's all google "Little first lady with megalomania". Let's all have a good laugh...It's important to make fun of these twits.

Posted by: gmundenat | May 26, 2008 6:49 PM | Report abuse

DON'T BE DUPED AGAIN AMERICA !!!

IT'S ABOUT ELECTABILITY !!!

Large numbers of BUSH_McCain Republicans have been voting for Barack Obama in the DEMOCRATIC primaries, and caucuses from early on with the backing and help of the medical and insurance industry. Under the direction of the George Bush, and Karl Rove vote fraud, and vote manipulation machine. Because they feel Barack Obama would be a weaker opponent against John McCain. And they want to stop Hillary Clinton from fixing the HUGE! American, and Global mess they have created. shocking!!! isn't it. Just gotta love those good old draft dodging, silver spoon Texas boys. Not! :-(

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

With Hillary Clinton you are almost 100% certain to get quality affordable universal health care for everyone very soon. And you are also certain to see major improvements in the economy for everyone.

The American people face even worse catastrophes ahead than the ones you are living through now. It will take all of the skills, and experience of Hillary Clinton to pull the American people out of this mess we are in. Fortunately fixing up, and cleaning up others incompetence, immoral degeneracy, and mess is what the Clinton's do very well.

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

Just look at Oregon for example. Obama won Oregon by about 70,000 votes. But approximately 79,000 Bush republicans switched party's back in January to vote for Obama in the democratic primary. They are not going to vote for, or support any Democrat in November. Are you DEMOCRATS going to put up with that. Are you that stupid, and weak. The Bush republicans think you are that stupid, and weak.

As much as 30% of Obama's primary, and caucus votes are Republicans trying to choose the weakest democratic candidate for McCain to run against. These Republicans have been gaming the caucuses, and open primaries where it is easier to vote cheat. This is why Obama has not been able to win the BIG! states primaries. Even with Republican vote cheating help. Except North Carolina where 35% of the population is African American, and approximately 90% of them block voted for him. African Americans are only approximately 17% of the general population.

Hillary Clinton has been OUT MANNED! and OUT SPENT! 4 and 5 to 1. Yet Obama has only been able to manage a very tenuous, and questionable tie with Hillary Clinton. This is even more phenomenal when you consider she has been also fighting against the George Bush, Karl Rove vote fraud machine in the DEMOCRATIC primaries, and caucuses. Hillary Clinton is STUNNING!.

If Obama is the democratic nominee for the national election in November he will be slaughtered. That is crystal clear now. Because all of the Republican vote cheating help will suddenly evaporate. And the demographics, and experience are completely against him. All of this vote fraud and Bush republican manipulation has made Obama falsely look like a much stronger candidate than he really is.

You will have another McGovern catastrophe where George McGovern lost 49 of 50 states. And was the reason the super-delegates were created to keep that from happening again. Don't let that happen to the party and America again super-delegates. You have the power to prevent it. The only important question now is who can best win in November. And the answer is HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON. That fact is also now crystal clear.

And YOUNG PEOPLE. DON'T BE DUPED! Think about it. You have the most to lose. As do African Americans. Support Hillary Clinton. She will do her best for all of you. And she will know how to best get it done on day one.

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

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

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

"This is not a game" (Hillary Clinton)

Sincerely

jacksmith... Working Class :-)

p.s. Cynthia Ruccia - I'm with ya baby. All the way. "Clinton Supporters Count Too."

Posted by: jacksmith | May 26, 2008 6:47 PM | Report abuse


CNN which claims to be the leader in Cable News cannot even report that the Democratic Presidential Candidate displayed disrespectful and disgusting behavior by parading an erection in front of female press. Now that's what I call being a "Leader" CNN. Maybe CNN should stop misleading its viewers talking about "Jeans" and start reporting how this married father of two gets off on the phone.

http://larrysinclair0926.wordpress.com/2008/05/24/barack-obama-displays-his-penis-for-the-press/

Posted by: seeforyourself | May 26, 2008 6:45 PM | Report abuse

And Go Barry! makes a bigoted piece of garbage who will never accomplish anything!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 6:45 PM | Report abuse

He'll make a great Muslim president!

Posted by: Go Barry! | May 26, 2008 6:37 PM | Report abuse

GO HILLARY!!!

Posted by: Lassair

Bad news for you LASSAIR

SHE LOST!!!!!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 6:37 PM | Report abuse

"Just the eery quiet quality of impending death until that single pop that echoed the call of innocent death."

ROTFLMAO!!!

Also, Ron Brown died in plane crash/bullet in his head shortly after Hillary's visit. So, no doubt, it was a dangerous place.

Although, it may have been that he was about to testify against Billary that caused this unfortunate snipe fire accident.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 6:36 PM | Report abuse

If you can't spell Obama by now, what the hell are you doing on this board?

++++++
have you noticed how the auto correct in your word processor corrects "Osama" but not "Obama"? Every time you write Obama it wants to write "Osama". lol

Posted by: | May 26, 2008 6:26 PM

Posted by: | May 26, 2008 6:32 PM

=========================
oh, yes, I guess the computer is racist too.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 6:34 PM | Report abuse

ice President Cheney delivered the commencement address at the U.S. Coast Guard Academy in New London, Conn., telling new officers last Wednesday that the war on terror will be lengthy but "does not have to go on forever."

---------------------------
Fwee!! now we can relax.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 6:33 PM | Report abuse

"Just the eery quiet quality of impending death until that single pop that echoed the call of innocent death."

ROTFLMAO!!!

Also, Ron Brown died in plane crash/bullet in his head shortly after Hillary's visit. So, no doubt, it was a dangerous place.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 6:33 PM | Report abuse

If you can't spell Obama by now, what the hell are you doing on this board?

++++++
have you noticed how the auto correct in your word processor corrects "Osama" but not "Obama"? Every time you write Obama it wants to write "Osama". lol

Posted by: | May 26, 2008 6:26 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 6:32 PM | Report abuse

It's odd how many people posting on this board don't even follow the subject matter of the article. Yet, it's also typical of Obamabots.

Yes, the media, whether print or network news, has done more than it's share of hyping this whole race. And now it's become obscene.

Obama is an obscene person for allowing this kind of nonsense by doing absolutely nothing to stop it. His staff perpetuates it, and his supporters lose their senses of self-respect in support of what is no more than anti-democracy behaviour.

NO OBAMA!!!

GO HILLARY!!!

Posted by: Lassair | May 26, 2008 6:31 PM | Report abuse

Sounds like she had a pretty good story to tell so why the need to lie? I will answer, it is her nature all the way back to when she was a little girl and known as a story teller. Or should we say lier. It is what she does. Her problem is in todays world with the internet and youtube and so on, she still can't help herself and she gets caught. Same with her husband. The fact it, he could have never gotten elected if we had things like youtube back then. You can't lie now and just cover it up with more lies, you get caught like Hillary did with the sniper story. Hell she could not even stop herself even after they had pictures on the net showing she was lying. her final answer was to say, 'Give me a break". In other words, you all know I am a lier so why are you so surprised, I got caught big deal.

+++++++
I have not responded to any of the post about Hillary Clinton's trip to Bosnia. But since most of you were still in diapers, or on your mama's breast when Hillary was flying into war zones, let me tell you how Bosnia was back then. It was a killing field back then. And worst of all was the extremely effective, and deadly snipers that came out of this conflict.

Those snipers were unfortunately the best in the world. And were very accurate, and deadly. They were well known to be able to take you out with a head shot from a great distance away. And everyone that went there knew that you were not safe anywhere outside there. Everyone was constantly reminded to keep your head down. Because you were always under sniper fire.

Bosnia was not like some TV, or B-movie shoot out. You did not hear a lot of gunfire all the time. Just the eery quiet quality of impending death until that single pop that echoed the call of innocent death. Do your homework. Look it up. It was a chilling time, and place to be. Death was silent. But all around you. What Hillary Clinton told you was true. She did land under sniper fire. You were always under sniper fire in Bosnia back then. And your life depended on not forgetting that. Just a single silent shot that ripped you apart.

Rather than explain this horror to you babies. Hillary just says. "I'm sorry. I misspoke." You have to remember that Hillary Clinton is a woman, and a mother. She just did not want to frighten you babies.

jacksmith... Working Class :-)

Posted by: jacksmith | May 26, 2008 6:22 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 6:30 PM | Report abuse

Disgusted Citizen,

Since you're such an intellectual, perhaps you could also respond to the simple questions no Clinton Zombie has been able to yet:

A) Why did she sign off--easily and often--on sanctioning FL and MI if it was such an unthinkable and disenfranchising concept?

B)How can polls five months out from an election be relevant when five months ago, polls said Hillary would win the nomination in a landslide.

C) How is Obama far-leftist when he and Clinton agree on virtually every position.

D) Also would love a response to the irrefutable delegate math I posted early.

Go at it intellectual--although I strongly suspect you're just another dumb racist poser THREATING to vote for MCCain. What a shocker!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 6:29 PM | Report abuse

NEWS BULLETIN:

OBAMA WITHDRAWS FROM CAMPAIGN BECAUSE HE'S AFRAID HE'S GOING TO GET KILLED.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 6:29 PM | Report abuse

I just learned that if you "loan" a campaign money, the campaign is required to pay that money back with interest. That's the law. If the campaign paid her back today, Hillary would be paid over $250,000 interest for the "Investment" she made in her campaign. Guess who was president when that legislation was signed into law? Mr. Clinton.

Posted by: DWH in WHFD | May 26, 2008 6:27 PM | Report abuse

have you noticed how the auto correct in your word processor corrects "Osama" but not "Obama"? Every time you write Obama it wants to write "Osama". lol

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 6:26 PM | Report abuse

"Her chance of winning this by the numbers, even with the best Clintonesque arm twisting, is ZERO ZERO."

Well if you use Obama's 57 state math zero +zero= 100%!

Take it all the way to the convention floor Hillary!

Posted by: No to Obama! | May 26, 2008 6:26 PM | Report abuse

Obama and Clinton are for the most part the same candidate. You can't slide a card between them really. No one who would vote for Mccain would vote for Clinton or Obama anyway. Voters regardless what they say, in the privacy of a voting booth vote their own interests. I have faith in the democratic they will do the right thing. Forget the silly postings on an internet board.

+++++
Obama as a presidential candidate is the creation of the extreme left of the Democratic Party - who couldn't get elected themselves. And the anti-Hillary nonsense infuriates and pushes her Democratic supporters and Independent voters over to McCain. So keep it up Einstein's, you're making my case with each insult you post.
Posted by: Disgusted Citizen | May 26, 2008 6:16 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 6:22 PM | Report abuse

I have not responded to any of the post about Hillary Clinton's trip to Bosnia. But since most of you were still in diapers, or on your mama's breast when Hillary was flying into war zones, let me tell you how Bosnia was back then. It was a killing field back then. And worst of all was the extremely effective, and deadly snipers that came out of this conflict.

Those snipers were unfortunately the best in the world. And were very accurate, and deadly. They were well known to be able to take you out with a head shot from a great distance away. And everyone that went there knew that you were not safe anywhere outside there. Everyone was constantly reminded to keep your head down. Because you were always under sniper fire.

Bosnia was not like some TV, or B-movie shoot out. You did not hear a lot of gunfire all the time. Just the eery quiet quality of impending death until that single pop that echoed the call of innocent death. Do your homework. Look it up. It was a chilling time, and place to be. Death was silent. But all around you. What Hillary Clinton told you was true. She did land under sniper fire. You were always under sniper fire in Bosnia back then. And your life depended on not forgetting that. Just a single silent shot that ripped you apart.

Rather than explain this horror to you babies. Hillary just says. "I'm sorry. I misspoke." You have to remember that Hillary Clinton is a woman, and a mother. She just did not want to frighten you babies.

jacksmith... Working Class :-)

Posted by: jacksmith | May 26, 2008 6:22 PM | Report abuse

This just in! Obama drops out of race for democrtic nomination at Michelle's insistance!

Posted by: Hillary '08 | May 26, 2008 6:22 PM | Report abuse

Obama as a presidential candidate is the creation of the extreme left of the Democratic Party - who couldn't get elected themselves. And the anti-Hillary nonsense infuriates and pushes her Democratic supporters and Independent voters over to McCain. So keep it up Einstein's, you're making my case with each insult you post.


Posted by: Disgusted Citizen
***************************

well, here's one more - it's "keep it up, Einsteins" - See, if you are going to throw down the gauntlet, at least have it make sense. Bye and have fun voting for McSame, citizen...

Posted by: OMG! Disgusted citizen will be voting for McCain cause he/she didn't get the invitation to the Obama | May 26, 2008 6:22 PM | Report abuse

Really, disgusted citizen? B/c I'm an Obama supporter and here's my diatribe. Put your synapses to work on this:

These are the undeniable facts:
The math simply doesn't work for Hillary. Without Florida and Michigan, Obama or Hillary need 2024.5 delegates to clinch the nomination. To date, here is the breakdown for where they stand:
Obama 1969
Clinton 1724
If Hillary succeeds in getting Florida and Michigan added at full strength, then the needed delegates goes to 2,210, an impossibility, because that would mean the Rules and By-Laws Committee agreed to it, which won't happen. Those delegations will most likely be seated at half strength which moves the magic number to 2,118 or 2,131, depending on whether the supers are also cut to half. Let's say it's the highest, 2,131 and that Obama gets ZERO for Michigan because he was not on the ballot. Using that worst case scenario, that means that Obama needs 95 delegates. Hillary needs 226.
Now. There are 212 pledged delegates in remaining primaries. To win, she needs all of them, plus 14 more Supers or some combination of each. This is not going to happen, especially if some of the Supers are looking for a reason to move to Obama. Her chance of winning this by the numbers, even with the best Clintonesque arm twisting, is ZERO. ZERO. It's clear that Obama is the next Democratic Presidential nominee.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 6:21 PM | Report abuse

Whenever I read anti-Hillary diatribe, my conviction that the majority of Obama supporters are one cell short of an intellectual synapse is further confirmed.

Posted by: Disgusted Citizen | May 26, 2008 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Turned Down for an Auto Loan? There are Options
Here's a Quick and Easy Way to Find High Quality, Low Cost Health Insurance
Jump Start Your Weight Loss Plan

THANKS FOR ALL THE REALLY VALUABLE INFO MINDLESS FREAK

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 6:16 PM | Report abuse

Obama as a presidential candidate is the creation of the extreme left of the Democratic Party - who couldn't get elected themselves. And the anti-Hillary nonsense infuriates and pushes her Democratic supporters and Independent voters over to McCain. So keep it up Einstein's, you're making my case with each insult you post.

Posted by: Disgusted Citizen | May 26, 2008 6:16 PM | Report abuse

"If he were a true leader, he would count the votes in Florida and Michigan. One principle of our democracy is "one person, one vote!"

You posted this before MINDLESS CLINTON ZOMBIE. I'm still waiting for a response to
why HILLARY VOTED TO SANCTION THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE IF COUNTING THE VOTES WAS SO IMPORTANT TO HER HYPOCRITICAL ASS?

HMM, COULD IT BE B/C SHE'S A SELF SERVING, NARCISSITIC SOCIOPATH WHO ONLY CARES ABOUT HERSELF? IF NOT, WHY, PLEASE ANSWER:

WHY DID HILLARY VOTE FOR THE SANCTIONS IN THE FIRST PLACE?

I'M WAITING...SCRATCH YOUR TWO BRAIN CELLS TOGETHER....

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 6:14 PM | Report abuse

Obama campaign all about hype

Obama's Lobbyist Connection
By Michael Isikoff | NEWSWEEK
Jun 2, 2008 Issue
When Illinois utility Commonwealth Edison wanted state lawmakers to back a hefty rate hike two years ago, it took a creative lobbying approach, concocting a new outfit that seemed devoted to the public interest: Consumers Organized for Reliable Electricity, or CORE. CORE ran TV ads warning of a "California-style energy crisis" if the rate increase wasn't approved--but without disclosing the commercials were funded by Commonwealth Edison. The ad campaign provoked a brief uproar when its ties to the utility, which is owned by Exelon Corp., became known. "It's corporate money trying to hoodwink the public," the state's Democratic Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn said. What got scant notice then--but may soon get more scrutiny--is that CORE was the brainchild of ASK Public Strategies, a consulting firm whose senior partner is David Axelrod, now chief strategist for Barack Obama.

Last week, Obama hit John McCain for hiring "some of the biggest lobbyists in Washington" to run his campaign; Obama's aides say their candidate, as a foe of "special interests," has refused to take money from lobbyists or employ them. Neither Axelrod nor his partners at ASK ever registered as lobbyists for Commonwealth Edison--and under Illinois's loose disclosure laws, they were not required to. "I've never lobbied anybody in my life," Axelrod tells NEWSWEEK. "I've never talked to any public official on behalf of a corporate client." (He also says "no one ever denied" that Edison was the "principal funder" of his firm's ad campaign.)

But the activities of ASK (located in the same office as Axelrod's political firm) illustrate the difficulties in defining exactly who a lobbyist is. In 2004, Cablevision hired ASK to set up a group similar to CORE to block a new stadium for the New York Jets in Manhattan. Unlike Illinois, New York disclosure laws do cover such work, and ASK's $1.1 million fee was listed as the "largest lobbying contract" of the year in the annual report of the state's lobbying commission. ASK last year proposed a similar "political campaign style approach" to help Illinois hospitals block a state proposal that would have forced them to provide more medical care to the indigent. One part of its plan: create a "grassroots" group of medical experts "capable of contacting policymakers to advocate for our position," according to a copy of the proposal. (ASK didn't get the contract.) Public-interest watchdogs say these grassroots campaigns are state of the art in the lobbying world. "There's no way with a straight face to say that's not lobbying," says Ellen Miller, director of the Sunlight Foundation, which promotes government transparency.

Turned Down for an Auto Loan? There are Options
Here's a Quick and Easy Way to Find High Quality, Low Cost Health Insurance
Jump Start Your Weight Loss Plan
Axelrod says there are still huge differences between him and top McCain advisers, including the fact that he doesn't work in D.C. But his corporate clients do have business in the capital. One of them, Exelon, lobbied Obama two years ago on a nuclear bill; the firm's executives and employees have also been a top source of cash for Obama's campaign, contributing $236,211. Axelrod says he's never talked to Obama about Exelon matters. "I'm not going to public officials with bundles of money on behalf of a corporate client," Axelrod says.

© 2008

Posted by: jessinwisconsin | May 26, 2008 6:14 PM | Report abuse

That is a fact by the way, as people were drowning and stranded on their roofs and bodies were blotting in the streets. Mccain didn't do a damn thing, he was having a party.

This will all come out in spades in the general, don't worry there are plenty of people on the case to show what a phony this guy is.

+++++++++
New Orleans? McCain says he would never have followed the Bush rescue plan that did nothing. Yet, the day after the hurricane struck there McCain was in AZ WITH Bush celebrating a birthday. Didn't care a bit what had just happened in NO.

McCain is all mouth and little else these days. Didn't even bother to show up for an important vote on veterans' benefits last week.

Posted by: | May 26, 2008 6:01 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 6:09 PM | Report abuse

THE PRIMARIES ARE ALMOST OVER AND TRUTH BE SAID - THE BETTER CAMPAIGN TEAM WON.

THAT IS AMERICA - GOOD STRATEGY AND HARD WORK ARE REWARDED.

I know, I watched this country from afar and now I am a citizen.

Posted by: Agathe | May 26, 2008 6:06 PM | Report abuse

I have been reading this responses and it is scary to me that you are Americans...

Posted by: sad | May 26, 2008 6:05 PM | Report abuse

A Conspiracy? Bill Clinton now actully thinks that the Democrats, his own Party has formed a CONSPIRACY against his wife, Hillary! But how can this be?

I am a woman and very disappointed at Hillary, the way she is using "womanhood" as synonimous with "victimhood" How could she do that? I am not a victm of men, and I dont want Hillary suggesting that.

Hillary has tried to make the country believe that men hate women! NO!!! Hillary is wrong! She is simply the bad kind of woman. I hope there will emerge another kind of woman who loves men as much as she loves women - equally, and not think that wmen are always victims of the big boys clubs everywhere in the country.

1. After the lies about sniper fire in Bosnia?
2. Bill's sexual scandals with interns in the WH?
3. Hillary's disorganized campaign team?
4. Hillary's inablity to manage her campaign funds?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 6:05 PM | Report abuse

Wonder if a warrant is being obtained. That will take prob 3 or four hours since they have to find a Judge to sign it on a holiday.

KNOCK KNOCK KNOCK

Please send your kids outside.

Posted by: Robert | May 26, 2008 6:01 PM | Report abuse

New Orleans? McCain says he would never have followed the Bush rescue plan that did nothing. Yet, the day after the hurricane struck there McCain was in AZ WITH Bush celebrating a birthday. Didn't care a bit what had just happened in NO.

McCain is all mouth and little else these days. Didn't even bother to show up for an important vote on veterans' benefits last week.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 6:01 PM | Report abuse

Obama saved millions for genocide in Darfur.
Just Joking.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 6:01 PM | Report abuse

"SOME NEWS JUST IN...


PRESS TV
CO-CHAIR OF CLINTON'S HISPANIC LEADERSHIP COUNCIL ENDORSES OBAMA

Waterbury Republican American - May 24, 2008
By Michael Doyle | McClatchy Newspapers WASHINGTON - A California congressman who is co-chair of Hillary Clinton's National Hispanic Leadership Council has defected and pledged his support to Barack Obama, Clinton's rival for the Democratic ...

WE HAVE COME A LONG WAY AMERICA - RACISM IS DYING A SLOW BUT SURE DEATH."

Yes, Pauline not all HRC supporters are sore losers - including me.


Posted by: Diana | May 26, 2008 5:56 PM | Report abuse

Re: the comments, insanity fair. A few sane voices buried under a multitude of kooks.

Posted by: musafir | May 26, 2008 5:56 PM | Report abuse

McCain was speaking toveterans in NM also! Maybe they'll join forces!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Obama saved New Orleans single handedly
Just Joking.
LOL

Posted by: hhkeller | May 26, 2008 5:53 PM | Report abuse

Pool? Actually "Barry" was in New Mexico speaking to a group of veterans and getting high marks from them.

Posted by: infuse | May 26, 2008 5:52 PM | Report abuse

SOME NEWS JUST IN...


PRESS TV
CO-CHAIR OF CLINTON'S HISPANIC LEADERSHIP COUNCIL ENDORSES OBAMA

Waterbury Republican American - May 24, 2008
By Michael Doyle | McClatchy Newspapers WASHINGTON - A California congressman who is co-chair of Hillary Clinton's National Hispanic Leadership Council has defected and pledged his support to Barack Obama, Clinton's rival for the Democratic ...

WE HAVE COME A LONG WAY AMERICA - RACISM IS DYING A SLOW BUT SURE DEATH.

Posted by: Pauline | May 26, 2008 5:52 PM | Report abuse

Everyone like to call Obama supporters Kool aid drinkers. It is funny because his supporters are free thinking smart upper middle class people of above average education. Not exactly people who would blindly follow anyone.

You may have hit the nail on the head and defined the Clinton followers, ( I can't call then supporters that would indicate a free will). Zombies may be the perfect description for them. They believe anything she says, even in the face of overwhelming evidence she is lying. They give her their money that she misspends. They parrot her lies like they are original thoughts, Mindless zombies is exactly what they are.

Meet the Clinton ladies
http://laughingsquid.com/wp-content/uploads/zombies_sf_6.jpg

+++++++++++
POLLS FIVE MONTHS AGO SAID HILLARY WOULD WIN THE NOMINATION BY A LANDSLIDE. LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THAT ONE--MINDLESS CLINTON TALKING POINT ZOMBIES.

Posted by: | May 26, 2008 4:58 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 5:49 PM | Report abuse

I wonder what it feels like to not know if a federal swat team is enroute to your house and knowing that at any moment your front door will be knocked down as flash grenades go off.

Share those feelings while you still can.

Posted by: Robert | May 26, 2008 5:48 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, yeah, yeah!!! I suppose your principle of "one person, one vote" does not apply to caucus states.

If you are so "democratic" you will COUNT ALL 50 STATES INCLUDING CAUCUS STATES - EVEN THOUGH HRC STILL LOSES THE POPULAR VOTE!!!!!

Posted by: Tabitha | May 26, 2008 5:47 PM | Report abuse

I don't believe HRC would have been targeted except for the fact that the words out of her mouth have provided us all with reasons to target her. Bubba and Bubbette started in SC and they have not stopped giving us reasons to target them. But this last statement about the RFK assassination comparing apples and oranges [she could have used many other references]was just too much for us to contend with!

When Obama made a statement in PA but did not PHRASE his words well and spoke of understanding how people could become "bitter and cling to their religion, guns, etc", the public and MSM were 'outraged' and continued to promote that story for months DESPITE the fact that he 'OWNED' his statement, apologized for it and explained that he should have 'phrased' it in a better context. [His statement had NO UNDERLYING MESSAGE OR CODE!} But did this make a difference to the MSM or the public? NO! HRC used it against Obama in an effort to exploit her standing with those voters calling him elitist and out of touch. So why now, after 'many vile and hateful remarks' by both clintons should the public or the MSM just IGNORE HRCs statement and let it die where it stands? When people play games they should play 'FAIRLY'!

Posted by: MadasHell in Alex., VA | May 26, 2008 5:45 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, those "self-organizing swarms" are the worst, aren't they? They don't respect the bosses, and they seem to act as if they believe they have minds of their own. No respect for authority at all with them.

And look out, Washington Post, they're coming for you next.

Posted by: Edson C. Hendricks | May 26, 2008 5:45 PM | Report abuse

ENOUGH WITH THE COUNT THE FL AND MI VOTES CRAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!

THEY WILL BE COUNTED - O.K.? AND BILLARY WILL STILL LOSE.

THEN WHAT? IT'S THE DELEGATE MATH - STUPID!!!

Posted by: Jess | May 26, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

I have supported Hillary from the beginning and I will never support Obama.

He's not qualified to be president and for all his claims of superior leadership and judgement, there is no evidence.

If he were a true leader, he would count the votes in Florida and Michigan. One principle of our democracy is "one person, one vote!"

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 5:42 PM | Report abuse

Well whether your statements "upset me" is not important.

I think whether your statements upset the secret service and violate federal law should be your concern.

When people are tried and convicted for spray painting nazi graffitti on the side of a synagog and then sentenced to 20 yrs in federal prison for a hate crime.. i personally think your either a fool or looking for free room and board and a free mental treatment.

Posted by: Robert | May 26, 2008 5:39 PM | Report abuse

oh no my savior barry has been shot while enjoying a pina colada in old san juan, the apocolypse is near!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 5:38 PM | Report abuse

We love concerts, thats why i voted for obama. hope he takes another tour reall soon. my friends dont go to church so i told them he was jus like a preacher plus michael jackson, talkin. ;my fren tol me they closing prisens wen he get in. i say we b glad he is thinkin he is gettin in.

Posted by: crystal | May 26, 2008 5:38 PM | Report abuse

Nothing illegal in wishing someone dead

Not according to the FBI. Racist and dumb, what a surprise!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 5:37 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Scott Talkov | May 26, 2008 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Longhorn Mamma; I have to disappoint a mama but the truth is that HRC's totals are inaccurate.

She LOSES THE POPULAR VOTE IF CAUCUS STATES ARE INCLUDED.

Posted by: Amanda | May 26, 2008 5:33 PM | Report abuse

"McCain is comfortably winning Florida!"

FIVE MONTHS AWAY FROM THE ELECTION, MCCAIN IS WINNING FL?

POLLS FIVE MONTHS AGO SAID HILLARY WOULD WIN THE NOMINATION BY A LANDSLIDE.

LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THAT ONE--MINDLESS CLINTON TALKING POINT ZOMBIES.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 5:33 PM | Report abuse

Anybody but Barack HUSSIEN OBAMA 08!!!! Latinos, Asians and JEws will not vote for a divisive puppet in the white house.. OBAMA is a piece of S. H. I. T!

Posted by: Scott Talkov | May 26, 2008 5:31 PM | Report abuse

What I find odd is that people have suggested, that reporting of this 'assassination' comment could be part of some media conspiracy.

Everyone can look at the video and make up their own minds about what the implication is.

But we all knew what the implication was; That's why everyone was so angry.

Posted by: wolf | May 26, 2008 5:29 PM | Report abuse

A-anna cannot relate to our huge sacrifice, of the wars we have fought and million of lives lost. She could care less about our country. This is OUR country and we will not deter to nominate the person most qualified. It will NEVER be the person Huffy is telling everyone to vote for. Ignore her gall. She is insignificant.

Posted by: R U unaware? |
******************************
Whatever you think of her personally, she just stated facts about McCain based on his record. That you cannot argue and it doesn't suprise me that you do not. Facts are inconvenient. And she is not telling you who to vote for, just letting you in on some facts. So hoist up your skirt, pop some Premarin, and scream at the DNC committee on May 31st. Just remember the fact that Hillary couldn't have given a rat's f**k about the poor Fla/Michigan voters when she thought she had the coronation - I mean - primary sewed up. And that her slicky boy campaigners approved of the decision from the get-go. But get along, you still have a candidate to foist on us after all the ways Obama has won have been explored.

No wonder the super delegates are finally sick of you guys...

Posted by: R U awake? | May 26, 2008 5:28 PM | Report abuse

If Obama's dead I'm glad Hillary styed in the race!

Posted by: Sammy | May 26, 2008 5:27 PM | Report abuse

SniperFire, if Mr. Obama DOES get to repeat the Oath, it won't come until January...not November. ayaya

Posted by: SniperFireIsClueless | May 26, 2008 5:26 PM | Report abuse

On a technical note,

Some uneducated people think because this is the internet that there is no way to trace a post to a blog.

Just for those people's information. Every server whether LINUX or Microsoft or Unix based logs the IP address coming into it.

This is the exact same thing and functions exactly like CALLER ID.

To find out if I am accurate just go to this link.

http://www.answers.com/topic/internet-tracking-and-tracing

Make rash illegal and terrorist threats at your own demise.

Posted by: Robert | May 26, 2008 5:25 PM | Report abuse

Pathetic how racists like hank, and lier's like jessica seem to be 1/3 posts on here, I thought it was the white "working" class that supported hillary, but from people like hank its more the white racist class that supports hillary, and the white unemployed "ill make up any story about where I live or who i voted for in the past" jessica.

Jessica go out and get a job why do you have over 20 posts on every article pointing out what a lying, dirty candidate clinton is?

Posted by: Rick | May 26, 2008 5:22 PM | Report abuse

Here it is again. In any post I have ever made, I have never called the other team names. Obama supporters just cannot help themselves. They don't know how to have an educated debate. That's why they are so rude to everyone else. More voters than any other in history voted for Hillary Clinton. Barack wanted to force her out before Puerto Rico, so she couldn't make that claim anymore. We won't know it for sure until next Sunday, but I believe that's how this one goes into the history books. Go Hillary go. And I said all that without calling any of you a single derogatory term.

Posted by: LonghornMama | May 26, 2008 5:21 PM | Report abuse

Huffington rode into the U S on the back of a gay REPUBLICAN Senator. Now she uses dumb suckers to post on her web site to make money off their backs.

She is now old and getting uglier and wants to sit her old fanny in the White House and cozy up to Obama. She will not get invited by Hillary and she knows it. So she works full time to influence the dumb. She belches out names to impress and Puff herself up. This women is vile and contaminated.

She puts up a web site to SELL HER BOOKS, to maintain her 8 Million Dollar home. Are you going to help this women. Keep her name off this site.

She is lacking in the American Spirit. She has little knowledge of our country and it's people. She most certainly does not relate to U S women's plight. She spits on women that want to elect the very best candidate.
What would it do for Huffy Puffy?

A-anna cannot relate to our huge sacrifice, of the wars we have fought and million of lives lost. She could care less about our country. This is OUR country and we will not deter to nominate the person most qualified. It will NEVER be the person Huffy is telling everyone to vote for. Ignore her gall. She is insignificant.

Posted by: R U unaware? | May 26, 2008 5:20 PM | Report abuse

The FBI just arrested Hillary for threating Obama! The race is officially over!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 5:17 PM | Report abuse

yeah, yeah, yeah.

fear mongering is what you are doing.

I rather vote for him. He can't overturn RoevWade. I put up the fight happily again than vote for some jerk who have insulted 18 million human beings of his own party, no less.

The manipulations, psychological manipulations ("Obama's followers faint during his speech"), media bashing Hillary's supporters and impeding free expression of opinions on TV, etc, etc, etc. You are asking us to vote for Mussolini because he's "better" than Hitler.

That's no choice. I'll find a way to defeat Obama that doesn't include McCain.

And yes, I'm comparing Obama to Mussolini. Go cry to the park.

Posted by: | May 26, 2008 4:54 PM
**********************
insulted 18 million? LOL! Is that the latest screed being used by you guys? We know why you are not voting for Obama.I shed no tears over you, freak.

And by the way, scardey-cat anon poster: "That's no choice. I'll find a way to defeat Obama that doesn't include McCain." That comment is one way to get yourself noticed by federal enforcement agents unless you clarify it - Mussolini was hung and if you are threatening a presidential nominee, your posting without a name will not help you.


-

Posted by: Here's your cross, phony | May 26, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Polls don't mean anything. Certainly not five months away from an election. Case closed.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Since some want to make an issue about prior drug use and people in the Whitehouse

GOOGLE Cindy McCain drugs

Not only is she an admitted drug user she is also an admitted thief who forged other peoples names to precriptions and also stole from them from a charity that regular people like you and I donate to.

Stealing from a charity where I come from is just about the equivalent of stealing from a CHURCH or stealing from God.

Posted by: Robert | May 26, 2008 5:08 PM | Report abuse

ONCE UPON A TIME THERE WAS A WOMAN NAMED HILLARY THE SHILLARY.

She thought she was better than Bhutto, Thatcher, Sirleaf-Johnson, Kumaratunga etc.

Why? UNLIKE THEM SHE THOUGHT SHE COULD WIN AN ELECTION WITHOUT CAMPAIGNING.

After all, She was the other half of Billary.

Anyway IOWA HAPPENED AND SHE WAS SHOCKED. WHAT?!!!! AMERICANS EXPECT ME TO CAMPAIGN AND WORK HARD. MY SMILE AND HEAD NODS SHOULD BE ENOUGH.

She couldn't believe there nerve and thought it would be over by Super Tuesday.

BUT NO!!!! THE FRESHMAN SENATOR HIT HARD.

SHE FAILED TO RECOVER AND RETOOLED HER CAMPAIGN - FOR WOMEN AND THOSE STILL ENCASED IN RACIAL PREJUDICE BY IGNORANCE.


AND YET - she still lost.

Now MI AND FL are her only hope but wait - SHE WILL LOSE EVEN IF THOSE ARE GIVEN TO HER.

Posted by: Becca | May 26, 2008 5:08 PM | Report abuse

I never said polls meant anything so I guess you agree with me!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

Clinton should take this to the convention floor just like that fat @ss Kennedy!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 5:04 PM | Report abuse

"Polls are just polls!"

So you agree with me and you're not even aware of it. And I'm a moron?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 5:02 PM | Report abuse

We have an admitted cocaine user and alcholic in the Whitehouse now.

He speaks with forked tongue. So maybe he was lieing when he admitted cocaine use and being an alcholic.

What a lame political argument.

Posted by: Robert | May 26, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Mariann Pepitone IS AN IGNORANT RACIST PIECE OF TRASH. DO YOUR EMPLOYERS KNOW ABOUT THIS! HMM!!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

To anonymous; Obama does not celebrate his cocaine use.

HE IS AN INSPIRATION TO PARENTS LIKE ME STRUGGLING WITH AN ADDICTED DAUGHTER.

Posted by: Deborah | May 26, 2008 4:59 PM | Report abuse

I answered you moron! Polls are just polls! Some are right, some are wrong. The only poll that will matter is the one on election day!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

POLLS FIVE MONTHS AGO SAID HILLARY WOULD WIN THE NOMINATION BY A LANDSLIDE. LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THAT ONE--MINDLESS CLINTON TALKING POINT ZOMBIES.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

To the white girl: The trouble with you is you don't like to hear he truth when it is stated. Why don't you join Wright's church and sit in the pew with Obama. Your white he's half black you both should get along together. And don't worry about us white's being around race is a big issue in this country and your favorite Obama cannot solve it. He didn't even want to go into Philadelphia in the black community, he doesn't go to the southside of Chicago and console the families of those who lost their young children to violence so why don't you shut your mouth and get a grip. Start reading for a change and learn more about him.

Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | May 26, 2008 4:57 PM | Report abuse

Ickes who is part of making the rules

Ickes voted to SANCTION FL AND MI AND HERE IS THE UPDATE ON FL AND MI. Obama doesn't 'have enough' Why don't you learn to count:

These are the undeniable facts:
The math simply doesn't work for Hillary. Without Florida and Michigan, Obama or Hillary need 2024.5 delegates to clinch the nomination. To date, here is the breakdown for where they stand:
Obama 1969
Clinton 1724
If Hillary succeeds in getting Florida and Michigan added at full strength, then the needed delegates goes to 2,210, an impossibility, because that would mean the Rules and By-Laws Committee agreed to it, which won't happen. Those delegations will most likely be seated at half strength which moves the magic number to 2,118 or 2,131, depending on whether the supers are also cut to half. Let's say it's the highest, 2,131 and that Obama gets ZERO for Michigan because he was not on the ballot. Using that worst case scenario, that means that Obama needs 95 delegates. Hillary needs 226.
Now. There are 212 pledged delegates in remaining primaries. To win, she needs all of them, plus 14 more Supers or some combination of each. This is not going to happen, especially if some of the Supers are looking for a reason to move to Obama. Her chance of winning this by the numbers, even with the best Clintonesque arm twisting, is ZERO. ZERO. It's clear that Obama is the next Democratic Presidential nominee.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:56 PM | Report abuse

"LonghornMama"

I have read a few of your comments here and elsewhere. May be, if you shout it louder enough, like the lunatic, Hillary Clinton, Sen. Obma would put her on the ticket! Haahaaaa, IT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN, you idiot! Not after the abominable remark Hillary Clinton made about RFK, and the import of that remark on her prospect to win the nomination. She has done her self in, and her political fortunes in the Democratic Party have irriversibly, fallen, along the cray feminists who are hell-bent on a Hillary Clinton candidacy!!

Posted by: Ignatius | May 26, 2008 4:56 PM | Report abuse

Hillary needs to run as a Joe Liberman candidate. She does not belong in the Party any more. She can take her nutzo cult-followers with her. I would love to see this woman leave the Democratic Party. Let's pose the challenge to her. The woman can see how long her ample fundament remains in the Senate without Party help.

Posted by: tanaS | May 26, 2008 4:55 PM | Report abuse

Do we all really want an admitted cocaine user such as Obama in the White House?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:55 PM | Report abuse

LADIES, WAKE UP!!!

"From the HuffPost

We've seen the exit polls. We've read the unequivocal quotes. Many women who are avowed Hillary Clinton supporters are declaring they won't vote for Barack Obama in the fall.

I get the anger and the disappointment. But to quote SNL's Amy Poehler and Seth Meyers: Really? You'd rather vote for John McCain, a man who has a 25-year history of voting against a woman's right...
==========================

yeah, yeah, yeah.

fear mongering is what you are doing.

I rather vote for him. He can't overturn RoevWade. I put up the fight happily again than vote for some jerk who have insulted 18 million human beings of his own party, no less.

The manipulations, psychological manipulations ("Obama's followers faint during his speech"), media bashing Hillary's supporters and impeding free expression of opinions on TV, etc, etc, etc. You are asking us to vote for Mussolini because he's "better" than Hitler.

That's no choice. I'll find a way to defeat Obama that doesn't include McCain.

And yes, I'm comparing Obama to Mussolini. Go cry to the park.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:54 PM | Report abuse

"We'll see how laughable this Grand Movement is on election day!"

Actually, I'm ROTFLMAO at you right now. And still waiting for your response on this:

POLLS FIVE MONTHS AGO SAID HILLARY WOULD WIN THE NOMINATION BY A LANDSLIDE. LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THAT ONE--MINDLESS CLINTON TALKING POINT ZOMBIES.

And, while your at it, how about a response to the bottom line of this whole situation:

These are the undeniable facts:
The math simply doesn't work for Hillary. Without Florida and Michigan, Obama or Hillary need 2024.5 delegates to clinch the nomination. To date, here is the breakdown for where they stand:
Obama 1969
Clinton 1724
If Hillary succeeds in getting Florida and Michigan added at full strength, then the needed delegates goes to 2,210, an impossibility, because that would mean the Rules and By-Laws Committee agreed to it, which won't happen. Those delegations will most likely be seated at half strength which moves the magic number to 2,118 or 2,131, depending on whether the supers are also cut to half. Let's say it's the highest, 2,131 and that Obama gets ZERO for Michigan because he was not on the ballot. Using that worst case scenario, that means that Obama needs 95 delegates. Hillary needs 226.
Now. There are 212 pledged delegates in remaining primaries. To win, she needs all of them, plus 14 more Supers or some combination of each. This is not going to happen, especially if some of the Supers are looking for a reason to move to Obama. Her chance of winning this by the numbers, even with the best Clintonesque arm twisting, is ZERO. ZERO. It's clear that Obama is the next Democratic Presidential nominee.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

McCain is comfortably winning Florida! CA is not a swing state. What swing state is Obama comfortably winning? CO won't be enough.

Governor Arnold, McCain and gay marriage might just put Ca in play this year!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

Ha, ha, ha!!!! Hurrah to Bob Burr.

That is one campaign I will not attack.

Now Mr. Burr start stirring those Republican waters as soon as possible.

Posted by: Nina | May 26, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

I BARRACK OBAMA "I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."

hehehehe....thats right...comes NOV08

Posted by: Sniperfire | May 26, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Unfortunately for McCain he won't just be debating McCain, but Bob Burr too (new Libertarian nominee) who is an UNHAPPY REPUBLICAN.

Posted by: Helen | May 26, 2008 4:50 PM | Report abuse

This country doesn't have 57 states it only has 50. Does Obama think that 2 plus 2 equals 5? I think he better go back to college and not Harvard, Yale. Maybe he took too many drugs and drank too heavy so now its taking a toll on his brain. And looking for a VP before he won the general election. Isn't he taking a step forward ahead of time. I would laugh if it fails and she wins the nomination over him. Ickes who is part of making the rules endorsed Hillary and he stated if MI and FL are seated the number 2026 can be increased which means Obama wouldn't have enough to win.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:50 PM | Report abuse

NOTE: Message Board For Entertainment Purposes Only.

Posted by: Factschecker | May 26, 2008 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Obama is a dumb f@ck!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:47 PM | Report abuse

Mariann Pepitone,

Why don't you just post I'm an uneducated racist pig over and over. It's much shorter and cuts to the heart of the matter.

Racist scum like you are dying off little by little each day and this white girl is going to dance on your grave!! Happy dance of joy on YOUR GRAVE!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:47 PM | Report abuse

To Anon., primaries don't dictate gen elections.

The most recent polls show Obama COMFORTABLY WINNING CALIFORNIA.

Posted by: Danielle | May 26, 2008 4:47 PM | Report abuse

Republicans now have an independent - LIBERTARIANS completed their nomination process this weekend.

Bob Burr is expected to SPLIT Republican votes and many Repubs are unhappy with McCain.

DID THE POLLS TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION?

Posted by: Holly | May 26, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, polls are often wrong. The last poll before the CA primary had Obama winning but Hillary won by 10 points!

The good news is that polls are often right too. We'll see how laughable this Grand Movement is on election day!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

I haven't ever seen a group of people like Obama's supporters. They're vile and rude. Don't let these people anywhere near the White House.

Posted by: Obama supporters | May 26, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

I would think by now that even the most die-hard Hillary supporters would realize that she will say and do anything to anyone in order to feed her enormous poisened ego. Does anyone really believe that she would be fighting for Florida or Michigan if the votes on those 2 states went Obama's way. Why didn't she fight for Florida and Michagan before she agreed IN WRITING that their votes would not count. OPEN YOUR EYES Hillary supporters. Do you really want a lying coniving dishonest corrupt person as preseident. Do the right thing and dump her.

Posted by: Steve | May 26, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse

please Obama bloggers stop with the long posts.

Posted by: hank | May 26, 2008 4:34 PM

**************************
Okay, hanky - F.O., pretty please...

Posted by: widdle Hank can't read all those big words.. | May 26, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton is a smart, intellectual, and trained lawyer. A lawyer's words always represent accurrate and exactness. She wants "resolution". Her remark "Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June" last Friday was the second time spoke out hint to whoever listen ,(first time was in March), because time almost running out.

In her apologizy, she blamed Obama canpaign construed her remark out of context. How she blamed others for her ill mind? Fortunately, all Americans who heard on TV or read on internet about the remark took heed of it and fiercely againsted her. Otherwise, who knows what going to happen.

Posted by: John | May 26, 2008 4:42 PM | Report abuse

No one who wins the popular vote ought to be pushed out of the ticket.

Posted by: 18 Million Ways to Win | May 26, 2008 4:42 PM | Report abuse

HILLARY IS A HYPOCRITE!!!!!!!

SHE VOTED TO SANCTION FL AND MI - UNTIL HER INEVITABLE CANDIDACY GROUND TO A HALT.

Posted by: Candice | May 26, 2008 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for pointing that out bloggers.

THE POLLS PREDICTED A HILLARY VICTORY AND WE KNOW SHE LOST (EVEN WITH FL AND MI).

The polls are once again getting ahead of themselves and will be proven wrong when Obama becomes President in Nov.

Posted by: Henrietta | May 26, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Obama won't debate Clinton because he has lost every debate against her. He has nothing to gain but making himself look bad again!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Betty: I hate to spoil your dreams of Obama becoming president however, Hillary can spoil his nomination for him by declaring herself as an independent. What would your poor Obama do then? He would lose the presidency. That's the good news. I would vote for McCain first before Obama anyday. Secondly I only vote for my own race like the blacks vote for their's. Are the blacks giving Hillary the majority of their votes? Wake up and get a grip. That's the trouble with people like you and many of this generation of college student's that are 52% on drugs as stated on the internet who are voting for Obama because the don't have the brains to sit on or a window to throw them out of. They are so dumb they believe everything he says on the platform. Well, get ready for a big letdown should he win the presidency. That's when we will need god's help to keep this country from ruins.

Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | May 26, 2008 4:40 PM | Report abuse

POLLS FIVE MONTHS AGO SAID HILLARY WOULD WIN THE NOMINATION BY A LANDSLIDE. LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THAT ONE--MINDLESS CLINTON TALKING POINT ZOMBIES.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:40 PM | Report abuse

By gosh, by golly, it's true. Pollster did do a poll in Florida this weekend and they did find Obama 12 points behind McCain. This should have been a weekend where Obama would have gotten a bump, because of this ridiculous flap that's been going on for 3 days. But he didn't. He's deflating at the end of the race. That should be more of a concern to you guys who want him to win than jabbing at Clinton supporters on the internet. He's running out of steam at the wrong time.

Posted by: Astonished | May 26, 2008 4:39 PM | Report abuse

"If he were a true leader, he would count the votes in Florida and Michigan. One principle of our democracy is "One person, one vote!"

IF HILLARY IS A LEADER, WHY DID SHE VOTE TO SANCTION THEM. GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR OWN ASS!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:38 PM | Report abuse

Most of us know the internet is full of teenagers that cannot even vote, yet the lonely ones busy themselves posting hateful messages because nobody is held accountable.

So a Clinton strategist claims they are taking it to the convention.
Rightly so, I may add. Carter had 60% Kennedy had 30% in 1980 and WHO ? Him?
Hillary leads in the popular vote, she polls miles ahead of Obama in her ability to win in November. She is leading with the voters.

Super-delegates are watching and they are prepared to make a U turn on a dime.

Watch her supporters. Their motto...
.. "For our country we will work for the best Candidate..We never give up! not on Hillary,not on you, not on our country!

The final MATH is November..see new polls
General Election: McCain vs. Clinton
Poll Date note over 4000 participants.

Clinton (D) McCain (R) Spread
RCP Average 05/11 - 05/24 Clinton. 46.1 over Mccain 44.6 ...+Clinton +1.5
//////////////////////////////////////////
Gallup Tracking 05/20 - 05/24 4423 RV Clinton 49 over Mccain 44= +Clinton +5.0
///////////////////////////////////////////
Rasmussen Tracking 05/21 - 05/24 1600 LV Clinton 47 over Mccain 44 + Clinton +3.0
///////////////////////////////////////////
Newsweek 05/21 - 05/22 1205 RV Clinton 48 over McCain 44 =Clinton +4.0
///////////////////////////////////////
IBD/TIPP 05/12 - 05/18 953 A Clinton 44 over McCain 39 +Clinton +5.0
///////////////////////////////////////////
She continues to beats him every poll while Obama is losing big time.

So you see the Delegates are not dumb, they want someone that can bring results in November, You should, too.

Posted by: 18 Million Votes | May 26, 2008 4:38 PM | Report abuse

THANKS JESSICA YOU RACIST PIG!!!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Here's where Obama supporters are making a huge mistake. Now you want to chide us with comments from Amy Poehler at SNL. No matter where you get the taunts and sarcasm, you still berate the 18 million people who have voted for one candidate MORE THAN ANY OTHER. In public relations, we usually try to come at a problem in a way that doesn't act as if we're a hammer and everything in life is a nail. You're not going to get Clinton supporters by more shame and ridicule. Choose a different tool. Put her on the ballot.

Posted by: LonghornMama | May 26, 2008 4:36 PM | Report abuse

I have supported Hillary from the beginning and I will never support Obama.

He's not qualified to be president and for all his claims of superior leadership and judgement, there is no evidence.

If he were a true leader, he would count the votes in Florida and Michigan. One principle of our democracy is "One person, one vote!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

"Pollster.com has completed a poll in Florida today"

REALLY? GOSH, BY GOLLY!!

FIVE MONTHS AGO POLLS SAID HILLARY CLINTON WOULD WIN THE NOMINATION BY A LANDSLIDE.

TALKING ABOUT CURRENT DAY POLLS AND PROJECTING THEM OUT FIVE MONTHS IS--AT BEST--RETARDED.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

please Obama bloggers stop with the long posts.

Posted by: hank | May 26, 2008 4:34 PM | Report abuse

Let me go on record to state that Obama don't have one once of foreign policy experience. I don't know what dumbo is trying to teach him but he's not doing a good job. You don't sit down and have coffee with Hamas. You don't tell Fidel Castro what your going to do. Obama got in trouble with Castro today opening up his mouth saying nothing but trash. For a Harvard graduate he came out as dumb as they come. He cannot form words together for a speech that's why he studied the speeches of RFK and used his good friend Richard's speech on the platform. Yes, he has close ties to Ayers the three time US bomber and has had dinner with him. Ayers donated to his campaign. That's how much Obama likes this country. Anyone that would vote for a candidate that went to a racist anti-american white hating church has to be anti-american themselves. The white people should wake up to reality.

Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | May 26, 2008 4:33 PM | Report abuse

I would rather have McCain for the next for years and Hillary in 2012 then Barry Obama now!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:32 PM | Report abuse

LADIES, WAKE UP!!!

"From the HuffPost

We've seen the exit polls. We've read the unequivocal quotes. Many women who are avowed Hillary Clinton supporters are declaring they won't vote for Barack Obama in the fall.

I get the anger and the disappointment. But to quote SNL's Amy Poehler and Seth Meyers: Really? You'd rather vote for John McCain, a man who has a 25-year history of voting against a woman's right to choose? A man who over the last eight years that NARAL has released a pro-choice scorecard has received a 0 percent rating (in his time in office, Obama has received a 100 percent rating)? A man whose campaign website says he believes Roe v. Wade "must be overturned"? A man who has vowed that, as president, he will be "a loyal and unswerving friend of the right to life movement"?

Really?

In Clinton vs. Obama, the policy differences were minor (hence the overriding focus on minutiae like flag pins, Bosnian sniper fire, and the real meaning of "bitter"). In McCain vs. Obama, the differences are enormous. Staying the course in Iraq vs. ending an unnecessary and immoral war. Universal health care vs. less regulation for insurance companies. Rolling back the Bush tax cuts vs. making them permanent.

And nowhere is the difference more profound than with reproductive rights.

For anyone -- male or female -- who cares about reproductive rights, family planning, and women's health issues, the choice this fall is not even close.

And yet many voters have no idea how extreme McCain's position on these issues is.

I was in Seattle last week giving a speech at a fundrasing lunch for Votes! Washington, the political arm of Planned Parenthood in Washington State. At the event, the group's CEO Elaine Rose told me about a poll that Planned Parenthood had commissioned of women in 16 battleground states [pdf]. The results are startling:

Over half of all women in these states have no idea what McCain's positions are on reproductive health. Forty-nine percent of women in battleground states who currently favor McCain are pro-choice. Twenty-three percent of them believe McCain agrees with them on choice.

The good news is, 36 percent of pro-choice McCain supporters are less likely to vote for him after learning that McCain opposes Roe v. Wade and favors making most abortions illegal. That number hits 38 percent when those voters learn that McCain has also consistently voted against expanding access to programs that reduce pregnancy and the need for abortion, consistently voted in favor of abstinence-only programs, and against legislation requiring insurance companies to cover birth control.

The poll's encouraging conclusion:

The simple arithmetic of these findings suggests that just filling in McCain's actual voting record and his publicly stated positions on a handful of key issues has the potential to diminish his total vote share among battleground women voters by about 17 to 20 percentage points.
Clearly, when it comes to this key issue, the more voters learn about McCain, the less they like him. So let me add to the educational process:

Since 1983, in votes in the House and the Senate (where he has served since 1987), McCain has cast 130 votes on abortion and other reproductive-rights issues. 125 of those votes were anti-choice [pdf]. Among his voting lowlights:

He has repeatedly voted to deny low-income women access to abortion care except in cases of rape, incest, or danger to the mother's life (although McCain is now wavering on trying to put these exceptions into the party platform).

He voted to shut down the Title X family-planning program, which provides millions of women with health care services ranging from birth control to breast cancer screenings.

He voted against legislation that established criminal and civil penalties for those who use threats and violence to keep women from gaining access to reproductive health clinics.

He voted to uphold the policy that bans overseas health clinics from receiving aid from America if they use their own funds to provide legal abortion services or even adopt a pro-choice position.

Of his anti-choice voting record, McCain has said, "I have many, many votes and it's been consistent," proudly adding: "And I've got a consistent zero from NARAL" through the years. And last month he told Chris Matthews: "The rights of the unborn is one of my most important values."

What's more, McCain has made it very clear that if he becomes president he will appoint judges in the Scalia, Roberts, Alito mold. His big judicial speech earlier this month was filled with coded buzz words that make it clear that, if given the chance, he'd replace 88-year-old Justice John Paul Stevens with an anti-choice Justice who would tip the scales against Roe v Wade. Throw in an additional anti-choice replacement for the 75-year-old Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and you can kiss the right to choose good-bye for a long, long time.

That's why the unmasking of John McCain is job Number One between now and November.

The only way John McCain can win is if his reactionary views on choice and women's health issues remain obscured by his faux maverick reputation and the blinding disappointment of Clinton die-hards.

There is too much at stake to let that happen."


Posted by: Vote for McCain...puleassse! | May 26, 2008 4:32 PM | Report abuse

Fred Akel,

That's not an answer to my question.

And vitriol like yours just might lose my vote for Obama.

Posted by: Gus | May 26, 2008 4:32 PM | Report abuse

Everyone needs to know America is NOT ready to support an inexperienced, afro-american with Kenyan roots and a muslim name.

This is for the President of the United States, men like Jefferson, Washington, Roosevelt, Lincoln.

The United States is still a majority white. With the motherland of Europe NOT Africa! He will never win!

Posted by: Jessica | May 26, 2008 4:32 PM | Report abuse

HILLARY WILL NOT BE CROWNED - SHE LOST EVEN WITH FL AND MI.

Memo to her; live to fight another day and don't destroy the Dem Party.

Posted by: Betty | May 26, 2008 4:30 PM | Report abuse

How great the fall of the mighty!

The hate in this blog is a sight to behold for foreigners like me.

Posted by: Patrice | May 26, 2008 4:27 PM
--------------------------

and you are from...?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Hey Newsflash Molly, How you gonna win it without all those 18 million that voted for her? If you even lose a portion of those, the race is done. Pollster.com has completed a poll in Florida today that shows Obama horribly behind McCain. No Jewish friend of mine is voting for him because of his lifelong friendship with Mr. Khalidi and others at Hamas. Here's a newsflash for you. The continued demonization of Hillary Clinton comes at great peril to Barack Obama's winning the presidency. That's a fact!

Posted by: Astonished | May 26, 2008 4:29 PM | Report abuse

The Committee is dreaming. The divide is real, because it's about more than candidates. For 18 million people, it's about being called everything in the world because we didn't like the other candidate OR because we liked our own candidate so much. Coalition? United? Not this time!

Posted by: Astonished | May 26, 2008 4:22 PM

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

you are absolutely right. It's beyond Hillary by now. It's about the democratic party dragging us into this fascist environment.

Obama will not win. He can't do it without Hillary's supporters votes. As long as the majority of us don't give him the vote, we can show the democratic party where the power resides.

We must stand firm in our position.

Posted by: nobama | May 26, 2008 4:28 PM | Report abuse

LOL! Oh yes, it's a grand movement!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:28 PM | Report abuse

How great the fall of the mighty!

The hate in this blog is a sight to behold for foreigners like me.

Posted by: Patrice | May 26, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

I agree Hillary could win as an independent and I think it is a better fit than the uber liberal democrats. Hillary is more centrist and that's where most people in this country are. Also, we all know the Clintons are very fiscally conservative. The best of both worlds. What we love about the Democrats and also the some of the conservatism we like from the GOP. GO HILLARY fight till the end I will keep sending you money so the DNC does not steal the election from you.

Posted by: Jessica | May 26, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

BO will be the Dem, but nothing is locked until the vote in Denver, HC will stay until then just in case any miss steps by BO.

Posted by: sunseeker | May 26, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

man, you are so blind. Obama worked in NYC for Ralph Nader. Why do you refuse to look at his associations in Illinois? He himself admits his associations with know communists like Ayers.

Your blind adoration for a politician, your unwillingness to cast a minimal critical eye and what he says, will buy you a major disappointment and a heart break very soon.

Posted by: obamaisa fake
****************************
and you are the sort of moron base who internet rumors work on. Is he a Marxist or a Communist? There is a difference, dillweed. His associations with Ayers?
Dana Milbank's brilliant piece in this very paper brought you clods out in the light of day. You are repeating verbatim the same lies they have been cooking up. I don't know if to feel sorry or laugh at you.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/22/AR2008052203905.html

Posted by: Did you know that the prince of Nigeria can make you rich, Obamaisa fake? LOL!!! | May 26, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

STOP CREATING GHOSTS FOR HILLARY TO FIGHT!!!!!!

NOBODY HAS STOPPED HER FROM CAMPAIGNING!!!!!!!!!!!

Let her go on - SHE IS GOING TO LOSE ANYWAY WITH OR WITHOUT FL AND MI.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Astonished - News Flash!!!

After every primary season, there will always be sore losers.

Unfortunately for them, the movement will not be stopped - we are headed straight for the White House with or without you.

Posted by: Molly | May 26, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse

Don't target Clinton, target Barry!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Jessica: I agree with your statement. Obama is in this only to try and make history as the first Mulatto (he is not black) to win he presidency but that may not be if the Mi and FL delegates are seated and she wins Puerto Rico. His campaign wants her to drop out because they know the circumstances. She will win Puerto Rico and Obama cannot win the battleground states. He is trying to pick a VP before the general election and McCain could win it. If Hillary does not win the nomination I am going to write her in. I think that's what all her voters should do so Obama can lose the pesidency. This is a dog eat dog campaign and if I was Hillary I would go for the bone. She should declare herself as an independent.

Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | May 26, 2008 4:24 PM | Report abuse

The DNC never saw this coming. They thought they would be able to repair this party with a "whoosh" of a magic wand. For four months, Hillary Clinton supporters have been called racists and any number of metaphors like one above pointing to living in "trailer park hollers." The Committee is dreaming. The divide is real, because it's about more than candidates. For 18 million people, it's about being called everything in the world because we didn't like the other candidate OR because we liked our own candidate so much. Coalition? United? Not this time!

Posted by: Astonished | May 26, 2008 4:22 PM | Report abuse

I'm so scared that Hillary wants your false prophet dead!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:22 PM | Report abuse

You mean there are still communists around? How about nazi's any of those in his past? Your an idiot.

============
man, you are so blind. Obama worked in NYC for Ralph Nader. Why do you refuse to look at his associations in Illinois? He himself admits his associations with know communists like Ayers.

Your blind adoration for a politician, your unwillingness to cast a minimal critical eye and what he says, will buy you a major disappointment and a heart break very soon.

Posted by: obamaisa fake | May 26, 2008 4:17 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

THIS IS GETTING RIDICULOUS.

DEATH THREATS, RACIST JUNK.

WHERE IS THE SANITY?

AMERICA - YOU ARE BETTER THAN THIS!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Matthew | May 26, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Hillary will take this all the way to the convention! Kennedy did and he was 800 delegates behind. She's far closer!

Posted by: Hill Fan | May 26, 2008 4:20 PM | Report abuse

LOL!! Marxists - what the f**k do you know about Marxism? For a a$$clown like you, it is just some scary word to throw up at people when you have nothing to support your hatred of Senator Obama. Seriously, what sterno are you drinking with this commentary? He is sensitive, how? Let me guess, you are one of these sad white boys that cannot understand why you can't call black people the n-word, like it is some civil rights issue.

If you think death threats and racist diatribes are something protected by our constitution, you are a total fool. It is little wonder you fall for some nonsense like labeling Obama as a Marxist. You haven't an educated clue about any political system.

Posted by: obamaisnotreallywhining, I'mjustachappedassclown | May 26, 2008 4:08 PM

================================
man, you are so blind. Obama worked in NYC for Ralph Nader. Why do you refuse to look at his associations in Illinois? He himself admits his associations with know communists like Ayers.

Your blind adoration for a politician, your unwillingness to cast a minimal critical eye and what he says, will buy you a major disappointment and a heart break very soon.

Posted by: obamaisa fake | May 26, 2008 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Obama has a great deal of experience.

hank

You repeat the ludicrous canard the Obama has no experience.

By the time he'd take office he'd have been in the Senate for 4 years. Add to that 7 years in the Illinois legislature.

His 4 years in the Senate give him 4 years of foreign policy experience, that's 4 more than Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush COMBINED.

Posted by: jackstpaul | May 26, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse

If you don't vote for Obama, YOU ARE A DUMB RACIST!!

It's true!! I saw it on television!!

Posted by: No Longer Democrat | May 26, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse

stop with the long posts paid Obama bloggers. Nothing more than another attempt to drown out objective posters and certainly any pro-Hillary posters.

Enough! There should be a disclosure if you are posting on behalf of the Obama's campain. Another reason I will never support him.

Posted by: hank |
***********************************
hey, racist, we would like a disclosure as to what trailer park holler you call home. Funny how you white people think you are entitled to the presidency...

how's mom?

Posted by: Henry, Hank's black brother... | May 26, 2008 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Deward: I am disputing your statement about Hillary. Hillary does not owe thrity million dollars. She just raised 400,000 and will raise more money after the Puerto Rico primary to pay any bills owed. Neither one of her rivals could write out a check for 10 to 20 million dollars and still have over 100 million. McCain's wife can but he or Obama cannot. Obama is a pauper's millionaire having about 2 million. This campaign is not over yet and the MI and FL delegates might just be seated which will mean more delegates for Hillary and over the top in the poplar vote. There are many more superdelegate that are uncommitted although Obama is trying to convince them to give him the votes inwhich they in turn said they are not in a hurry to vote yet. Obama is a wheeler dealer and probably made deals with the superdelegates behind the scenes to vote for him in return for favors. He is as crooked as his close friend Rezko.

Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | May 26, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

SAVE YOUR BILE FOR OTHERS, I HAVE LOGGED OFF. NEED A BATH

Posted by: Fred Akel | May 26, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

First your Blog:

Sorry, I didn't get you. Are you the Yale graduate? You can't even spell "lieing" correctly."

NO I'm the Yale Graduate. I also posted this. Counter that IDIOT.

NOW MY COUNTER:
All YALE GRADUATES WHO WANT TO BE PRESIDENT
WILL NEVER GET MY VOTE AGAIN. LETS COUNT THE RECENT ONES...BUSH 1.CLINTON, AND OUR CURRENT IDIOT IN RESIDENCE BUSH 11.SO THAT I AM CLEAR, "THE HILLIARY" is a YALE GRADUATE. Am I writing clear enough for the Clinton' clones to understand me.

AND I BET YOU WERE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE CLASS. PLUS THAT IS YOUR HIGHEST ATTAINMENT IN LIFE TO DATE.I.E. YOU ARE A LOSER AND AN IDIOT.

Posted by: Fred Akel | May 26, 2008 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Clinton's path to the white house .

- Every vote counts, all 50 states.

Posted by: Abiyman | May 26, 2008 4:04 PM
******************************
you are right, man. There's no way Hillary can win. She claims she won in 50 states, but what about the other 7 states Obama won?

Yes, Obama won in 57. Do the math:
57 is more than 50, isn't.

jerks!!

Posted by: obama's 57 states | May 26, 2008 4:09 PM | Report abuse

well, dear "Iamjuststupid", (lol)
evidently there's much more that can be done to limit speech, apart from what have already being done by this administration. That's the danger of having ultra sensitive politicians like Obama in power: he can continue to do damage to freedom of speech. Especially when he is supported by Marxists, you know, enemies of freedom of speech.

Posted by: obamaisstillawhiner | May 26, 2008 3:51 PM

********************************
LOL!! Marxists - what the f**k do you know about Marxism? For a a$$clown like you, it is just some scary word to throw up at people when you have nothing to support your hatred of Senator Obama. Seriously, what sterno are you drinking with this commentary? He is sensitive, how? Let me guess, you are one of these sad white boys that cannot understand why you can't call black people the n-word, like it is some civil rights issue.

If you think death threats and racist diatribes are something protected by our constitution, you are a total fool. It is little wonder you fall for some nonsense like labeling Obama as a Marxist. You haven't an educated clue about any political system.

Posted by: obamaisnotreallywhining, I'mjustachappedassclown | May 26, 2008 4:08 PM | Report abuse

This is a Media conspiracy controlled by jews. They want Obama so McCain wins to take care of Iran. Americans you should wake up.

Posted by: Shakeel | May 26, 2008 4:07 PM | Report abuse

"i'm seriously laughing out loud here"

Laughing at yourself--I assume--since I haven't seen you respond to the facts behind the finality of the delegate math.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:04 PM | Report abuse

My response to "don'tvoteforobama"

No I am not a Yale graduate. But you sir claim to be President Of Yale University.
And since I KNOW the President Of Yale. You
are not that person and as I said before a very poor Liar. Also The President of Yale would not attempt in a childish manner to lookdown on mispellings in quick blogging.
To Close You are a Hick.

Posted by: Fred Akel | May 26, 2008 3:53 PM

============================
who the hell is this moron. LOL

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:04 PM | Report abuse

Clinton's path to the white house .

- Every vote counts, all 50 states.

... waiting for someone to shoot Obama.

- Caucus states don't really count.

- ZERO votes for Obama in MI is reasonable.

... still waiting for an assasination. Damn it, where are my loyal wacko supporters ?

- Still behind in elected delegate count.

- Persuade superdelegates to DISCARD ALL VOTES and support Hilary Rodham Clinton.

- Way to go, nomination achieved.

... waiting for someone to shoot McCain ..

I told you I am a FIGHTER !

With hand's-on experience in Bosinia, I might add .

Posted by: Abiyman | May 26, 2008 4:04 PM | Report abuse

"So, in my opinion it does mean something when a person follows this path."

It doesn't make you intelligent or smart though! Bush is proof!

Posted by: Yale Education! | May 26, 2008 4:03 PM | Report abuse

"ells"? Like I say, just an innocent mistake.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:03 PM | Report abuse

who are the "black working class"

voting for?

we know the "white working class" is going all the way for Hillary.

You are correct there is no "black working class" it does not exist in our language. do you know why?

Posted by: hank | May 26, 2008 4:03 PM | Report abuse

All YALE GRADUATES WHO WANT TO BE PRESIDENT
WILL NEVER GET MY VOTE AGAIN. LETS COUNT THE RECENT ONES...BUSH 1.CLINTON, AND OUR CURRENT IDIOT IN RESIDENCE BUSH 11.SO THAT I AM CLEAR, "THE HILLIARY" is a YALE GRADUATE. Am I writing clear enough for the Clinton' clones to understand me.

Posted by: Fred Akel | May 26, 2008 4:02 PM | Report abuse

you are right. Obama is like the rest of the blacks thinking American owes them something.

He thinks this country owes him the presidency.

Posted by: hank | May 26, 2008 4:01 PM | Report abuse

Let's assume Hillary has no experince at all just for the sake of arguement.

What experince does Obama have? Absolutely none!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 4:00 PM | Report abuse

"To all you idiot Yale graduates, FYI it means nothing! W graduated from Yale! You should all be so proud!"

I didn't graduate from a university or college for that matter but that doesn't make me jealous or feel inferior. The fact is Yale is one of the country's top higher learning institutions and it takes a lot of discipline and intellect to apply oneself and graduate from any university not to mention Yale. So, in my opinion it does mean something when a person follows this path.

Posted by: JR | May 26, 2008 4:00 PM | Report abuse

"Sorry, I didn't get you. Are you the Yale graduate? You can't even spell "lieing" correctly."

NO I'm the Yale Graduate. I also posted this. Counter that IDIOT.
=============================

i'm seriously laughing out loud here. These postings are just knee-slapping. you people take yourselves too seriously.

i don't get offended by your responses to me. i actually find some of them good comebacks.

just relax people. don't let "ink" get you all discombobulated.

Posted by: don'tvoteforobama | May 26, 2008 4:00 PM | Report abuse

If McCain's smart, he'll take a woman on, such as Governor Jodi Rell of Conn.

Posted by: Chuckamok | May 26, 2008 4:00 PM | Report abuse

One only needs to look at Barack Hussein Obama's record in Illinois. He has been one of the worst senators we have ever had. When we need him to vote on critical issues, i.e., BP refinery dumping into Lake Michigan he was not there. All his votes amounted to "present." He has ill-served the state and I believe he will ill-serve the country.

In the three years as an Illinois Senator he has written a book, traveled and toured Africa his homeland(on the taxpayers) and ran for president. He is nothing more than a self-serving Afro-American. Those who think this country owes them something. I voted for him in Illinois and I vowed never to support him again.

Posted by: Jessica | May 26, 2008 4:00 PM | Report abuse

I saw the full video and, to me, she was saying that the reason she was staying in the race was because you could never tell what would happen. In 1968 a candidate was assassinated, so who knows what could happen this summer. It was a gaff. She told the truth, but mentioning that an opponent (perhaps your opponent) might have something happen to him is just in poor taste. True there are security concerns. Is that what she is waiting for then? A car accident, heart attack or assassination? I guess that is all the hope she thinks she has left.

Posted by: cpindc | May 26, 2008 3:59 PM | Report abuse

... to make the inevitable official, Obama needs how many contests? anyone?

Posted by: eljefejesus | May 26, 2008 3:59 PM | Report abuse

Every President since Reagan has graduated from Yale or Yale Law School. So I'd say it does mean something.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Has anyone notice that the term:

black working class

does not exist in our language

only white working class

this tells me a lot most afro-americans are on welfare and are not a working class and will not be able to suppport the DNC when they run Obama against the will of the people and the DNC will go bankrupt for foisting empty suit Barack Hussein Obama upon us.

Posted by: hank | May 26, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

It doesn't matter how many Super Delegates Obama picks up If he is the nominee life long democrats will vote Republican- Not because they are racist but because He truly has absolutely no experience, he has done nothing, what? work with a few kids in Chicago are you Kidding- I did more. But it's not only that- people just don't trust him, they may want to but they just don't. Especially with his history -going to a Church for 20 years that preached Hate for Whites, Jews, Italians and most of all America, Do you really think he can get elected after that ? He does attract a younger generation but that's it He has no substance and even some of the younger people are starting to admit that. Maybe he could be a Rock Star because he certainly is no John F.Kennedy, and his wife is no Jackie. They Loved and respected this country unlike his Hateful wife Michelle. This is not American Idol people We need a SMART, CARING and PATRIOTIC President one who will work hard for the country you and I love- So To all you SUPER DELEGATES who love this country-if it's not Hillary be prepared to welcome McCain because that's exactly what is going to happen.

Posted by: mimi362 | May 26, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

Countdown's for Obama's start against McCain as the official Primary victors:

about 50

There are reports of 17 more waiting in the wing to announce their support for him shortly.

With the comming contests June 1st and June 3rd with proportional representations, it's just a matter of time.

Posted by: eljefejesus | May 26, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

"In the three years as an Illinois Senator he has written a book, traveled and toured Africa his homeland(on the taxpayers) and ran for president."

jessie you need to look at his record, in his first term he has sponsored over 890 bills.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

To all you idiot Yale graduates, FYI it means nothing! W graduated from Yale! You should all be so proud!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

My response to "don'tvoteforobama"

No I am not a Yale graduate. But you sir claim to be President Of Yale University.
And since I KNOW the President Of Yale. You
are not that person and as I said before a very poor Liar. Also The President of Yale would not attempt in a childish manner to lookdown on mispellings in quick blogging.
To Close You are a Hick.

Posted by: Fred Akel | May 26, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

Just an innocent mistake, you see. The word "assassination" just kind of slipped out. Freudianly, that is.

Too bad, but, like they say, tou can't unring the bell. So, whenever we hear her name again we'll remember that fatal word and probably forget everything ells she might have said or done.

Posted by: Caspar Fomalhaut | May 26, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

That's what is awaiting the rest of us if the false prophet wins the elections: limitations on freedom of speech and persecution if you disagree with the prophet.

Posted by: obamaisawhiner
********************
Sorry, I mixed up things - Bush did that! Stupid me

Posted by: Obamaisnotawhiner, Iamjuststupid... | May 26, 2008 3:44 PM

=================================
well, dear "Iamjuststupid", (lol)
evidently there's much more that can be done to limit speech, apart from what have already being done by this administration. That's the danger of having ultra sensitive politicians like Obama in power: he can continue to do damage to freedom of speech. Especially when he is supported by Marxists, you know, enemies of freedom of speech.

Posted by: obamaisstillawhiner | May 26, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse

"Sorry, I didn't get you. Are you the Yale graduate? You can't even spell "lieing" correctly."

NO I'm the Yale Graduate. I also posted this. Counter that IDIOT.

These are the undeniable facts:

The math simply doesn't work for Hillary. Without Florida and Michigan, Obama or Hillary need 2024.5 delegates to clinch the nomination. To date, here is the breakdown for where they stand:
Obama 1969
Clinton 1724
If Hillary succeeds in getting Florida and Michigan added at full strength, then the needed delegates goes to 2,210, an impossibility, because that would mean the Rules and By-Laws Committee agreed to it, which won't happen. Those delegations will most likely be seated at half strength which moves the magic number to 2,118 or 2,131, depending on whether the supers are also cut to half. Let's say it's the highest, 2,131 and that Obama gets ZERO for Michigan because he was not on the ballot. Using that worst case scenario, that means that Obama needs 95 delegates. Hillary needs 226.
Now. There are 212 pledged delegates in remaining primaries. To win, she needs all of them, plus 14 more Supers or some combination of each. This is not going to happen, especially if some of the Supers are looking for a reason to move to Obama. Her chance of winning this by the numbers, even with the best Clintonesque arm twisting, is ZERO. ZERO. It's clear that Obama is the next Democratic Presidential nominee.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

I think the Republican tools are doing a good job of riling up those of us planning to vote against them and trying to revive and extend the old Obama-Clinton feud.

Good job Republicans, pretty sneaky.

Still, Obama's support continually consolidates against McCain in sufficient margins to continue to make your efforts laughably in vain.

As an independent, I like Obama and McCain, but that's compared to the options of candidates attempting to represent other pro-Iraq War policies as acceptable.

Experience in War and recession? No thanks. I think the election will turn on change, as does my vote.

Too much fear-mongering and war-mongering the last 5 years unrelated to the acceptable war against Al-Qaida in Afghanistan. Why Iraq as a second target? Because of oil or because of Halliburton and other billions in wealth to be made by the politicians?


Posted by: eljefejesus | May 26, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

A plane crash would be fine, she can hope can't she. Thats what she was saying in not so many words.

+++++++
BS! If the Clinton's want him dead so bad, how then is it that he's still breathing?

Posted by: | May 26, 2008 3:47 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

Hey Phenix:
Ive seen your post many times before. You cant accuse the cLintons of murdering everyone that they have come in contact with thats dies. Its simply wrong and rather strange on your part.
Please see your doctor and get a med change before you go postal.

Posted by: kali | May 26, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

Hay moron. Johnson dropped out of the race and Bobby stepped in and had only been running for president for five weeks in June. The reference was stupid, made no sense and had no correlation to todays primary. Either Hillary is completely in stupid in her history or she had other motives for making the reference.

+++++++++
The NY Post was irresponsible with their inaccruate reporting of the interview twisting Hillary comments that primaries through June are common as in the 2008 primaries. The blind Obama-robots cant think and read the interview transcripts for themselves so they have demonized Hillary unjustly again. Save American if Obama is elected President then again American deserved the president it votes for. We are a highly educated society but easily swayed by how well someone speaks, how they look and their youth instead of sutstance. Let's call it Washington-wood instead.

Posted by: Mary | May 26, 2008 3:41 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Her "apology" amounted to a line from Grease:

"Some people are sooooo touchy!"

Posted by: Kellianne | May 26, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

BS! If the Clinton's want him dead so bad, how then is it that he's still breathing?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

stop with the long posts paid Obama bloggers. Nothing more than another attempt to drown out objective posters and certainly any pro-Hillary posters.

Enough! There should be a disclosure if you are posting on behalf of the Obama's campain. Another reason I will never support him.

Posted by: hank | May 26, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Gus I will answer that question about Obama. Most of the time voting for someone is an act of trust in the person you vote for. Do I know whether Obama will be a good President. Nor I or anybody else know the answer.BUT WE DO KNOW IS BECAUSE THE CLINTON'S PAST EVIL HISTORY IS WELL KNOWN,
ANY THINKING AMERICAN CAN NOT VOTE FOR HER.

tHIS A REPLY TO A POST BY Posted by: Gus | May 26, 2008 3:38 PM

Posted by: Fred Akel | May 26, 2008 3:46 PM | Report abuse

Like millions of other people, I heard about this first by watching the video of her entire interview. The reaction was universal, immediate, honest and visceral: shock, fear and outrage.

I didn't react to the NY Post article. I reacted to HER and HER WORDS.

Millions of people's reactions just might be more spot on than the people who have joined the fray to spin this and defend Clinton.

And worst of all, she could have fixed everything with a real apology - to Obama and his family. She did not.

Posted by: Eileen | May 26, 2008 3:46 PM | Report abuse

The following is a response to
Posted by: don'tvote for obama | May 26, 2008 3:26 PM

You Sir Are A Liar. And a poor one at that.
If you are going to post at least be honest and quiting emulating the Clintons by lieing from the first word out of your mouth.

Posted by: Fred Akel | May 26, 2008 3:32 PM

===========================
Sorry, I didn't get you. Are you the Yale graduate? You can't even spell "lieing" correctly.

Plus, I wasn't lying.

Posted by: don'tvoteforobama | May 26, 2008 3:45 PM | Report abuse

All of these folks are indeed dead and it might all just be a tragic coincidence--- But I wouldn't want to be on their list of associates (just to be on the safe side)!!!!!!!!!!!

SO NOW YOU MIGHT VOTE FOR HILLARY? THINK ABOUT IT FIRST......

This is what happens when you have dirt on the Clintons :

1 - James McDougal - Clinton's convicted Whitewater partner died of an apparent heart attack, while in solitary confinement. He was a key witness in Ken Starr's investigation.

2 - Mary Mahoney - A former White House intern was murdered July 1997 at a Starbucks Coffee Shop in Georgetown. The murder happened just after she was to go public with her story of sexual harassment in the White House.

3 - Vince Foster - Former white House councilor, and colleague of Hillary Clinton at Little Rock's Rose Law firm. Died of a gunshot wound to the head, ruled a suicide.

4 - Ron Brown - Secretary of Commerce and former DNC Chairman. Reported to have died by impact in a plane crash. A pathologist close to the investigation reported that there was a hole in the top of Brown's skull resembling a gunshot wound. At the time of his death Brown was being investigated, and spoke publicly of his willingness to cut a deal with prosecutors.

5 - C. Victor Raiser II and Montgomery Raiser, Major players in the Clinton fund raising organization died in a private plane crash in July 1992.

6 - Paul Tulley - Democratic National Committee Political Director found dead in a hotel room in Little Rock, September 1992... Described by Clinton as a "Dear friend and trusted advisor."

7- Ed Willey - Clinton fund raiser, found dead November 1993 deep in the woods in VA of a gunshot wound to the head. Ruled a suicide. Ed Willey died on the same day his wife Kathleen Willey claimed Bill Clinton groped her in the oval office in the White House. Ed Willey was involved in several Clinton fund raising events.

8 - Jerry Parks - Head of Clinton's gubernatorial security team in Little Rock. Gunned down in his car at a deserted intersection outside Little Rock. Park's son said his father was building a dossier on Clinton. He allegedly threatened to reveal this information. After he died the files were mysteriously removed from his house.

9 - James Bunch - Died from a gunshot suicide. It was reported that he had a "Black Book" of people which contained names of influential people who visited prostitutes in Texas and Arkansas.

10 - James Wilson - Was found dead in May 1993 from an apparent hanging suicide. He was reported to have ties to Whitewater.

11- Kathy Ferguson, ex-wife of Arkansas Trooper Danny Ferguson, was found dead in May 1994, in her living room with a gunshot to her head. It was ruled a suicide even though there were several packed suitcases, as if she were going somewhere. Danny Ferguson was a co-defendant along with Bill Clinton in the Paula Jones lawsuit. Kathy Ferguson was a possible corroborating witness for Paula Jones.

12 - Bill Shelton - Arkansas State Trooper and fiancee of Kathy Ferguson. Critical of the suicide ruling of his fiancee, he was found dead in June, 1994 of a gunshot wound also ruled a suicide at the grave site of his fiancee.

13 - Gandy Baugh - Attorney for Clinton's friend Dan Lassater, died by jumping out a window of a tall building January, 1994. His client was a convicted drug distributor.

14 - Florence Martin - Accountant & sub-contractor for the CIA, was related to the Barry Seal Mena Airport drug smuggling case. He died of three gunshot wounds.

15 - Suzanne Coleman - Reportedly had an affair with Clinton when he was Arkansas Attorney General. Died of a gunshot wound to the back of the head, ruled a suicide. Was pregnant at the time of her death.

16 - Paula Grober - Clinton's speech interpreter for the deaf from 1978 until her death December 9, 1992. She died in a one car accident.

17 - Danny Casolaro - Investigative reporter. Investigating Mena Airport and Arkansas Development Finance Authority. He slit his wrists, apparently, in the middle of his investigation.

18 - Paul Wilcher - Attorney investigating corruption at Mena Airport with Casolaro and the 1980 "October Surprise" was found dead on a toilet June 22, 1993 in his Washington DC apartment. Had delivered a report to Janet Reno three weeks before his death

19 - Jon Parnell Walker - Whitewater investigator for Resolution Trust Corp. Jumped to his death from his Arlington, Virginia apartment balcony August15, 1993. He was investigating the Morgan Guarantee scandal.

20 - Barbara Wise - Commerce Department staffer. Worked closely with Ron Brown and John Huang. Cause of death unknown. Died November 29, 1996. Her bruised, nude body was found locked in her office at the Department of Commerce.

21- Charles Meissner - Assistant Secretary of Commerce who gave John Huang special security clearance, died shortly thereafter in a small plane crash.

22 - Dr. Stanley Heard - Chairman of the National Chiropractic Health Care Advisory Committee, died with his attorney Steve Dickson in a small plane crash. Dr. Heard, in addition to serving on Clinton's advisory council personally treated Clinton's mother, stepfather and brother.

23 - Barry Seal - Drug running pilot out of Mena, Arkansas, death was no accident.

24 - Johnny Lawhorn Jr. - Mechanic, found a check made out to Bill Clinton in the trunk of a car left at his repair shop. He was found dead after his car had hit a utility pole.

25 - Stanley Huggins - Investigated Madison Guarantee. His death was a purported suicide and his report was never released.

26- Hershell Friday - Attorney and Clinton fund raiser died March 1, 1994 when his plane exploded.

27 - Kevin Ives and Don Henry - Known as "The boys on the track" case. Reports say the boys may have stumbled upon the Mena Arkansas airport drug operation. A controversial case, the initial report of death said, due to falling asleep on railroad tracks. Later reports claim the two boys had been slain before being placed on the tracks. Many linked to the case died before their testimony could come before a Grand Jury.

THE FOLLOWING PERSONS HAD INFORMATION ON THE IVES/HENRY CASE:

28 - Keith Coney - Died when his motorcycle slammed into the back of a truck, July 1988.

29 - Keith McMaskle - Died stabbed 113 times, Nov, 1988

30 - Gregory Collins - Died from a gunshot wound January 1989.

31 - Jeff Rhodes - He was shot, mutilated and found burned in a trash dump in April 1989.

33 - James Milan - Found decapitated. However, the Coroner ruled his death was due to "natural causes."

34 - Jordan Kettleson - Was found shot to death in the front seat of his pickup truck in June 1990.

35 - Richard Winters - A suspect in the Ives / Henry deaths. He was killed in a set-up robbery July 1989.

THE FOLLOWING CLINTON BODYGUARDS ARE DEAD: 36 - Major William S. Barkley Jr. 37 - Captain Scott J. Reynolds 38 - Sgt. Brian Hanley 39 - Sgt. Tim Sabel 40 - Major General William Robertson 41 - Col. William Densberger 42 - Col. Robert Kelly 43 - Spec. Gary Rhodes 44 - Steve Willis 45 - Robert Williams 46 - Conway LeBleu 47 - Todd McKeehan

Quite an impressive list! Pass this on. Let the public become aware of what happens to anyone who might damage the Clinton machine

Posted by: Phenix | May 26, 2008 3:44 PM | Report abuse

One only needs to look at Barack Hussein Obama's record in Illinois. He has been one of the worst senators we have ever had. When we need him to vote on critical issues, i.e., BP refinery dumping into Lake Michigan he was not there. All his votes amounted to "present." He has ill-served the state and I believe he will ill-serve the country.

In the three years as an Illinois Senator he has written a book, traveled and toured Africa his homeland(on the taxpayers) and ran for president. He is nothing more than a self-serving Afro-American. Those who think this country owes them something. I voted for him in Illinois and I vowed never to support him again.

Posted by: Jessie | May 26, 2008 3:44 PM | Report abuse

That's what is awaiting the rest of us if the false prophet wins the elections: limitations on freedom of speech and persecution if you disagree with the prophet.

Posted by: obamaisawhiner
********************
Sorry, I mixed up things - Bush did that! Stupid me

Posted by: Obamaisnotawhiner, Iamjuststupid... | May 26, 2008 3:44 PM | Report abuse

it would seem as though some hillary supporters would attempt to make all of us to believe that we owe a woman the oval office. this is contemptuous of any informed voter! i will vote for a woman without reservation when that candidate comes along which exhibits an attitude consistent with putting the best interests of all americans first. hillary doesn't attempt to do that. she is a true elitist concerned with the personal ambitions exhibited by herself and billary. she can't hold a candle to likes of thatcher or gandhi. the jury is still out on merkel, but things are not going well for her either. the fact that i would be willing to vote for an individual of color shows how progressive we have become despite the difficult times and opinions of the 60's and 70's. i will vote in the best interests of america, and not because i feel that i owe some individual my vote. no anti-feminism here. just a gut-feeling that america is due for a more radical change from the past. that means obama.

Posted by: lonewolf | May 26, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

The NY Post was irresponsible with their inaccruate reporting of the interview twisting Hillary comments that primaries through June are common as in the 2008 primaries. The blind Obama-robots cant think and read the interview transcripts for themselves so they have demonized Hillary unjustly again. Save American if Obama is elected President then again American deserved the president it votes for. We are a highly educated society but easily swayed by how well someone speaks, how they look and their youth instead of sutstance. Let's call it Washington-wood instead.

Posted by: Mary | May 26, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

have voted as a Democrat in all elections since I started voting. But if my party's candidate this year could not be a profile in courage, I deeply feel that voting for him will only make JFK groan in grief in his grave, his brother's endorsement notwithstanding.

Posted by: rolymluis@cpluis.com
*************************
SHTFUP - nobody gives a royal F**K and a half about your pontificating reasons not to vote for Senator Obama, you tool. All those big words and you still lie about Florida.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

"I forgot to tell you, I'm the president of Yale Univ."

Being a Yale Law Grad may be a God-like level of achievement for an idiot and racist piece of garbage like you but it was not for me.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Wow, thats all it takes for you to abandon your values are, a bunch of faceless people on an obscure internet board? You are that weak minded you can't make up your own mind? How do you know they are Obama people, it may sinister be a plot to control and manipulate your mind. Examine your true values and vote your own interests, don't let an internet board control your life.


++++
I don't like Obamas online web hack supporters at all so I will vote Republican for the first time. Sometimes you need to lose to learn.

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

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 3:39 PM | Report abuse

Ann - Hillary is as left-wing as Obama. They're both socialists, who want us to emulate the European model.

Dick Morris taught the Clintons how to triangulate - hence the Hill-Bot tacks to the center, when necessary.

Fortunately, for us, she'll not get to the Oval Office.

Obama won't either.

Posted by: Chuckamok | May 26, 2008 3:38 PM | Report abuse

"Give it a rest with your phony question. You want to play possum with his accomplishments and pretend you cannot make a determination to justify not voting for him, fine. Funny, but there is no one coming out of his community to say the opposite. I am guessing most of those people are leading their lives like everyone else...

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070416/moberg

Posted by: Simple question, Gus: you are not voting for Obama, are you? | May 26, 2008 3:17 PM "

It is a reasonable question. Why no one can answer it is beyond me. I'm not against Obama, I just want to know. The proof is in the pudding. Where are the people he helped, just one, give me one.

Posted by: Gus | May 26, 2008 3:38 PM | Report abuse

Good Luck to comments made by Cynthia | May 26, 2008 3:32 PM.. BUT YOUR NON VOTE WILL
SWAMPED BY FOLKS WhO WILL NOT VOTE FOR OBAMA IF HILLIARY IS THE VEEP. If she is the VP and he wins, his first hire will be an official FOOD TASTER, just like in days of old in Europe.

Posted by: Fred Akel | May 26, 2008 3:38 PM | Report abuse

Its a shame the irrationality directed to both candidates. On the one hand, Obama, considered to be a saviour by half of democratic voters and 100% of the media. Unfortuantly, most information about him is simply parroted from his autobiography which is why he always described in idealistics concepts (rather that facts)
On the other hand, Clinton considered by half the democratic voters and the media to be the epitome of evil. Everything she says is manipulative, everything she does and has done is evil, every decision she has ever made and every factabout her is viewed through this lens.
I have a great respect for those of you that have not fallen into the trap and insist on seeing these two candidates just as they are.. as people and politicians. You intelligent voters (not glamour voters) judge their accomplishments fairly and in context.
To the rest of you.... what are you going to do when this is all over, who will you direct your crazed hatred towards next?

Posted by: kali | May 26, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

"There is no way people who believe in hard work and experience will vote for your American idol." Ann

Dear Ann (or should I say IDIOT):

20 years of being a corporate lawyer does not equal public service

8 years of being first lady does not equal executive experience

Also, you might want to learn something about politics. Hillary is just as liberal as Barack--even more LEFTIST when it comes to health care.

You are either a Republican and/or a racist and I don't give a flying F@@K who you vote for.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

You can't vote "present" when you're the President. You can't stand aside and hope not to have to take blame. If Obama had a strategy that WAS HIS OWN, not given to him over 2 decades by Jeremiah Wright or Bill Ayers or the saggy-titted hippies from Code Pink, then he might be a respectable candidate (where is the good Reverand, by the way? Any of you find it convenient how he was on a national speaking tour and just dropped out of the sky when the Obama campaign got through with him??? He'll be back!). Problem is he lawyered his way into his first Senate job (even cutting Alice Palmer, the person who brought him into the process in Chicago -- so much for loyalty!). Second term, Obama had not done anything when he started to petition the party elders to ADD HIM TO THE LEGISLATIVE BILLS. He ruffled some feathers there, but the senior African American members knew that Barack had game. Problem is, a pretty face and pretty smile won't get us out of this mess. And no amount of wondering "boxers or briefs" is going to save the environment, the economy, the planet from all the perils of GWB.

Posted by: LonghornMama | May 26, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

"ObamiNation are known for copying their false prophet habit of self aggrandizement."

By using this term I suppose you mean "padding one's resume"

Do you mean examples like bloating your foreign policy experience when your own White House records show that you were basically a tourist?
or
Lying to people about your stance on NAFTA when you've actually profited off of pushing deals like NAFTA through your husband and your own White Hose records showing you chaired at least five pro-NAFTA meetings shortly before it was passed and having your campaign chairman lobbying for NAFTA like deals?

or

can you give me a solid example of when Obama has done this?

Posted by: JR | May 26, 2008 3:35 PM | Report abuse

I can't wait until the Straight Talk Express arrives at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue!

Posted by: Barry Be Gone! | May 26, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

Remaining true to a declared course of a campaign remains the real test of a candidate's core. Not just the promise to herself weighs in, the tacit covenant with supporters must be respected as well. She becomes not just the agent for her own dreams, she has transformed as the instrument for so many aspirations. To deny her the right to sally forth to the finish is to diminish not just her, it decreases the dignity in each of us. Any suggestion for her to declare surrender for the sake of party unity is nothing less than the clarion call for a dishonorable truce.

After June 3, so long as both candidates remain civil, remain focused on issues, and continue to espouse their own programs of government, the race should remain vibrant until resolution in the August convention.

It is refreshing to hear Hillary speak in simple historical factual statements. Barack's orations tire and jar the ears after awhile.

Ever since I participated in presidential democratic processes in 1976, I have voted Democrat and have not wavered. This year's elections will not be different. I will fail to vote if some are to be disenfranchised for the sole reason of having exercised their freedom at an earlier date.

In this land of constitutionally enshrined rights, the violation of a party rule on time cannot negate the right to suffrage. Not for one voter, never for a million. I have always believe in this country's sense of fairness - of the majority's earned right to rule, of the minority's protected right to express.

It is the majority of the party's earned right to declare the January elections unlawful, it is the inalienable right of the voters to be counted nonetheless.

Just because a Ryan is a private does not mean that a platoon should not be given the mission to ferret him out of the war into the safety. This country has stood arm-in-arm with each other, even if deep differences in opinions exist. Michigan and Florida are much larger than a Ryan. The whole nation cannot allow, must never permit, the shameful abandonment of the voters in these states just because they made their voices heard earlier in time.

When Abe Lincoln Proclaimed the Emancipation, he did the morally right thing, the one choice good for the country, despite widespread clamor to the contrary. Validation of Michigan and Florida voters cannot be wrong, even if it makes the Democratic Party leaders unpopular.

To negate this moral imperative equates this party as one who, because of fear to be unpopular, refuses to do right.

And if this is the course the party undertakes, I can honestly declare that honorable men and women of this country can no longer find reason to remain within its tarnished democratic principles.

When one promises fundamental changes in Washington, not on a pulpit or on a soapbox at the corner, but on a presidential campaign rostrum, the intention pursues votes. Fundamental change comes from the grassroots, in the likes of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., or a Cezar Chavez, or a Mahatma Ghandi. Any politician who comes thus with the promise is foremost a suspect.

I too have observed the political landscape of this great country of ours. I too have felt the hunger for that special individual, that hero who would enrich lives, trod the treacherous roads toward the moral rights, speak the truths that come from the heart.

No politician alas can be that person, not especially if the presidency is the true pursuit. Once the promises for more jobs, more college funds for our youth, or the launching of advanced manufacturing funds are presented as part of that fundamental change, it becomes the highest of betrayal to portray oneself as the messiah for change.

Such a posture is the deepest of hoodwink a person could devise, knowing that in Washington, the process of any presidential act becoming legal is a series of maneuvers, of balances and checks, of discrete interests vying for limited funding.

If one wants fundamental change, one must remove himself from the political process, and deliver directly his truths to the people, and be tested in the crucible of public scrutiny.

Otherwise do not speak of fundamental change, when the purpose is merely to become the president. This deception results in dashed hopes, in broken hearts, and in derailed dreams for a better future.

The seemingly difficult issue is the resulting chaos in 2012, when presumably states would hold elections and caucuses whenever they want to. The DNC bases its reluctance to reconsider its decision to strip Michigan and Florida of their delegates on this premise.

The issue in the large sense is between a choice of imposing discipline versus recognizing the right to exercise suffrage in the selection of a presidential contender. The first preserve party power, the second validates the dignity of man. Both candidates I hope can transcend over the party to reach through to the human dimension, because if one does not then I equate that to a lack of courage, a deep flaw in character, undeserving to be President of this country.

Florida and Michigan deserve no less than the full recognition of their right to participate. DNC's denial was a precipitate act, and to make right this wrong the party leaders must act bravely. Even before the May 31st meeting, steps to ensure reinstatement, including adequate funds availability for full elections, must be put in place now.

Merely washing hands in this imbroglio can easily lead to a crucifixion of biblical proportions to millions of American voters.

Disturbing are some traits that the presumptive nominee show in public. Not yet has he demonstrated the courage required to lead this great nation, and not even the party. Once more today he manifested the craven posture by lambasting at people's active desire to have the voters of Florida to be recognized of their right to select their candidate.

What is he afraid of?

One necessarily courts distrust if he would rather engage in rhetorics and would rather call "stirring up" a movement to have Florida voters to be recognized, than be the brave leader he purports to be and blazed that path to right of suffrage recognition.

On this basis alone of failing to lead a basic right issue, he has, as in so many past failures to speak or make a stand on important issues, that shows the need for him to be forged.

He was not even courageous enough to decline his secret services, at the cost of taxpayers' money. What is he afraid of in this country he calls his own, that he did not at least request the same protection for the other candidates?

That he accepted that privilege without lifting a small finger in protest as if it were a right only perpetuates the notion that blacks are owed preferential treatment for being black. And it certainly reassert the perception that he only talks about changes that he only loves himself to hear said.

I have voted as a Democrat in all elections since I started voting. But if my party's candidate this year could not be a profile in courage, I deeply feel that voting for him will only make JFK groan in grief in his grave, his brother's endorsement notwithstanding.

Posted by: rolymluis@cpluis.com | May 26, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

At least Hillary didn't directly say: "hey, if someone offs him, I would actually win" followed by a McCainian wink,wink.

Kind of like McCain's: "hey, if you elect me and re-elect me 4 years later, I will end the war in fifth year instead of the 100 years that I had mentioned earlier" followed by his wink, wink.

Posted by: eljefejesus | May 26, 2008 3:33 PM | Report abuse

What she said and what she meant are very clear. She wants him killed.

Posted by: David Ehrenstein | May 26, 2008 3:32 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton's nuanced command of facts and concepts, along with her remarkable ability to bring these to bear, with unhesitating fluency, in unpredictable, heat-of-the-moment situations, is unmatched by Barack Obama or any other candidate on the horizon. Our country needs these qualities in our leadership all too much.
Clinton's unsurpassed talents, efforts, and contributions deserve an authentic, not gratuitous, show of respect and appreciation by the Democratic Party and Mr. Obama.
Unless they accord her this with an offer to the Vice Presidency or other commensurate action, I will NOT vote for Mr. Obama in November under any circumstances, but will instead write in Mrs. Clinton's name or vote for Mr. McCain in protest over the egregious treatment she has endured.

(For background on why we Clinton supporters won't just "sit down and shut up," see Debby Applegate's NY Times Op Ed on the feud between Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Frederick Douglass):
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/25/opinion/25applegate.html?scp=1&sq=Two+can+make+history&st=nyt

Posted by: Cynthia | May 26, 2008 3:32 PM | Report abuse

The following is a response to
Posted by: don'tvote for obama | May 26, 2008 3:26 PM

You Sir Are A Liar. And a poor one at that.
If you are going to post at least be honest and quiting emulating the Clintons by lieing from the first word out of your mouth.

Posted by: Fred Akel | May 26, 2008 3:32 PM | Report abuse

"It is refreshing to hear Hillary speak in simple historical factual statements."

ROTFLMAO!!!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 3:32 PM | Report abuse

roly74 your post is too long! No one will read it!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Keep talking guys. In November Hillary supporters will vote McCain so you'll be blamed for blowing up the Dems' chance to take the WH. You had a choice of a centrist Democrat to bring back economic prosperity (which is the Number 1 issue right now) and you are choosing left wing slogans about hope/change/unity instead. There is no way people who believe in hard work and experience will vote for your American idol. This is beyond the Democratic/Republican divide, its about values, principles and priorities guiding people lives.

Posted by: Ann | May 26, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

"I don't like Obamas online web hack supporters at all so I will vote Republican for the first time."

O.K., racist piece of garbage. Like I can't see what you're truly about.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

The same Colin Powell who sat there and lied to us with his little vile of white power? Who created specters of mushroom clouds over the US? Yea, him and Mccain deserve each other. He has more regard for his already tainted legacy then to link up Bush and Mccain again. He wants to get as far from them as he can.

++++++++
If John McCain would choose Colin Powell to be his running mate, Americans would cross parties in droves to vote that ticket. The whole party notion is a bad idea anyway. For years, it's been used to foist candidates upon us when they didn't have a prayer of winning. Dukakis, Teddy Kennedy, Al Gore, John Kerry. They are lily white, folks. No skin color debate here. And completely unelectable. If McCain was anywhere close to smart, he would reach for the General or Condy Rice. People would flock to the ticket. It will prove once again that Dems got it wrong.

Posted by: ProgressiveVote | May 26, 2008 3:22 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

Remaining true to a declared course of a campaign remains the real test of a candidate's core. Not just the promise to herself weighs in, the tacit covenant with supporters must be respected as well. She becomes not just the agent for her own dreams, she has transformed as the instrument for so many aspirations. To deny her the right to sally forth to the finish is to diminish not just her, it decreases the dignity in each of us. Any suggestion for her to declare surrender for the sake of party unity is nothing less than the clarion call for a dishonorable truce.

After June 3, so long as both candidates remain civil, remain focused on issues, and continue to espouse their own programs of government, the race should remain vibrant until resolution in the August convention.

It is refreshing to hear Hillary speak in simple historical factual statements. Barack's orations tire and jar the ears after awhile.

Ever since I participated in presidential democratic processes in 1976, I have voted Democrat and have not wavered. This year's elections will not be different. I will fail to vote if some are to be disenfranchised for the sole reason of having exercised their freedom at an earlier date.

In this land of constitutionally enshrined rights, the violation of a party rule on time cannot negate the right to suffrage. Not for one voter, never for a million. I have always believe in this country's sense of fairness - of the majority's earned right to rule, of the minority's protected right to express.

It is the majority of the party's earned right to declare the January elections unlawful, it is the inalienable right of the voters to be counted nonetheless.

Just because a Ryan is a private does not mean that a platoon should not be given the mission to ferret him out of the war into the safety. This country has stood arm-in-arm with each other, even if deep differences in opinions exist. Michigan and Florida are much larger than a Ryan. The whole nation cannot allow, must never permit, the shameful abandonment of the voters in these states just because they made their voices heard earlier in time.

When Abe Lincoln Proclaimed the Emancipation, he did the morally right thing, the one choice good for the country, despite widespread clamor to the contrary. Validation of Michigan and Florida voters cannot be wrong, even if it makes the Democratic Party leaders unpopular.

To negate this moral imperative equates this party as one who, because of fear to be unpopular, refuses to do right.

And if this is the course the party undertakes, I can honestly declare that honorable men and women of this country can no longer find reason to remain within its tarnished democratic principles.

When one promises fundamental changes in Washington, not on a pulpit or on a soapbox at the corner, but on a presidential campaign rostrum, the intention pursues votes. Fundamental change comes from the grassroots, in the likes of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., or a Cezar Chavez, or a Mahatma Ghandi. Any politician who comes thus with the promise is foremost a suspect.

I too have observed the political landscape of this great country of ours. I too have felt the hunger for that special individual, that hero who would enrich lives, trod the treacherous roads toward the moral rights, speak the truths that come from the heart.

No politician alas can be that person, not especially if the presidency is the true pursuit. Once the promises for more jobs, more college funds for our youth, or the launching of advanced manufacturing funds are presented as part of that fundamental change, it becomes the highest of betrayal to portray oneself as the messiah for change.

Such a posture is the deepest of hoodwink a person could devise, knowing that in Washington, the process of any presidential act becoming legal is a series of maneuvers, of balances and checks, of discrete interests vying for limited funding.

If one wants fundamental change, one must remove himself from the political process, and deliver directly his truths to the people, and be tested in the crucible of public scrutiny.

Otherwise do not speak of fundamental change, when the purpose is merely to become the president. This deception results in dashed hopes, in broken hearts, and in derailed dreams for a better future.

The seemingly difficult issue is the resulting chaos in 2012, when presumably states would hold elections and caucuses whenever they want to. The DNC bases its reluctance to reconsider its decision to strip Michigan and Florida of their delegates on this premise.

The issue in the large sense is between a choice of imposing discipline versus recognizing the right to exercise suffrage in the selection of a presidential contender. The first preserve party power, the second validates the dignity of man. Both candidates I hope can transcend over the party to reach through to the human dimension, because if one does not then I equate that to a lack of courage, a deep flaw in character, undeserving to be President of this country.

Florida and Michigan deserve no less than the full recognition of their right to participate. DNC's denial was a precipitate act, and to make right this wrong the party leaders must act bravely. Even before the May 31st meeting, steps to ensure reinstatement, including adequate funds availability for full elections, must be put in place now.

Merely washing hands in this imbroglio can easily lead to a crucifixion of biblical proportions to millions of American voters.

Disturbing are some traits that the presumptive nominee show in public. Not yet has he demonstrated the courage required to lead this great nation, and not even the party. Once more today he manifested the craven posture by lambasting at people's active desire to have the voters of Florida to be recognized of their right to select their candidate.

What is he afraid of?

One necessarily courts distrust if he would rather engage in rhetorics and would rather call "stirring up" a movement to have Florida voters to be recognized, than be the brave leader he purports to be and blazed that path to right of suffrage recognition.

On this basis alone of failing to lead a basic right issue, he has, as in so many past failures to speak or make a stand on important issues, that shows the need for him to be forged.

He was not even courageous enough to decline his secret services, at the cost of taxpayers' money. What is he afraid of in this country he calls his own, that he did not at least request the same protection for the other candidates?

That he accepted that privilege without lifting a small finger in protest as if it were a right only perpetuates the notion that blacks are owed preferential treatment for being black. And it certainly reassert the perception that he only talks about changes that he only loves himself to hear said.

I have voted as a Democrat in all elections since I started voting. But if my party's candidate this year could not be a profile in courage, I deeply feel that voting for him will only make JFK groan in grief in his grave, his brother's endorsement notwithstanding.

Posted by: roly74 | May 26, 2008 3:29 PM | Report abuse


War and recession anyone?

A vote for Clinton is a vote for McCain.

Clinton in 3 words:
selfish, selfish, selfish.

Posted by: eljefejesus | May 26, 2008 3:29 PM | Report abuse

I don't like Obamas online web hack supporters at all so I will vote Republican for the first time. Sometimes you need to lose to learn.

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

*****************************
let us know what you learned, loser

Posted by: sticking my tongue out at the democrats, so there! | May 26, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

Call John McCain's office tomorrow. Let him know you want General Powell or Condy Rice on his ticket. Tell him you want a more progressive stance on the environment and the war. The economy is on a path to heal itself, though the transition will continue to be hard for 18 months, no matter who is in office. John McCain was always too moderate for Republicans anyway. If he knew he had your vote, he could be himself again.

Posted by: CALL JOHN MCCAIN | May 26, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

I'm going to take a wild guess that best 2 of 3 adamantly pro-Clinton posters on political blogs and forums are actually conservative independents and Republicans who plan to vote McCain - or maybe libertarian - but certainly have no desire to see either Clinton or Obama in the White House.

This is, of course, is a *guess*. Online is the perfect place for spoilers to safeguard their anonymity, but that something is *possible* does not prove that it *is*. That said, I do feel pretty confident that this supposed huge wave of resentment towards Obama from Hillary loyalists will in fact melt down to a galvanized and immovable FEW once the nomination is decided.

Personally, I see Hillary as the GOP's last, best hope for a Democratic President who would leave at least some of the neocon infrastructure in place. By which I mean: Guantanamo, "wide net" surveillance of citizens, a Justice Department accountable solely to the Oval Office, The Patriot Act, and the most egregiously overreaching interpretation of Executive Privilege attempted in this generation's lifetime. (I actually think a lot of GOP would prefer her to flaky McCain - at least if she goes batspit, it desn't reflect on them.)


Posted by: aspertame | May 26, 2008 3:27 PM | Report abuse

Barry Obama has, absolutely, no experience that qualifies him to be president of the United States! I guess you all want another moron with no experience, just like Bush!

Posted by: Hazel | May 26, 2008 3:27 PM | Report abuse

I don't like Obamas online web hack supporters at all so I will vote Republican for the first time. Sometimes you need to lose to learn.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 3:26 PM | Report abuse

I do not consider Obama a messiah or a savior. I am a Yale and Yale Law school grad who can clearly discern who the best leader is for our country. And calling Obama a liar compared to THE CLINTONS. Now there's some DELUSIONAL BS!

Posted by: | May 26, 2008 3:10 PM

===============================

I forgot to tell you, I'm the president of Yale Univ.

You can even claim to be god and it would not be a problem for us here. The ObamiNation are known for copying their false prophet habit of self aggrandizement.

Posted by: don'tvote for obama | May 26, 2008 3:26 PM | Report abuse

The first woman president of the U.S. will

- Assume she is NOT INEVITABLE.
- Have an effective campagin strategy.
- Steer clear of turning her race into a women's race.

BE HONEST AND STEER CLEAR OF ALL FORMS OF HYPOCRISY.

Know when and how to apologise.

THAT WOMAN IS NOT HRC.

Posted by: Beth | May 26, 2008 3:25 PM | Report abuse

"This is Obama intentionally ignoring the fact that the elections and the results they produced were already fair to both sides."

Right, because one person not being on the ballot is FAIR. And pbviously you're ignoring the most important fact that Ickes and other Clinton staffers had a hand in drafting the sancitons and SHE COMPLETELY SIGNED OFF ON THEM.

Going on and on about states being disenfranchised WHEN YOU ORCHESTRATED AND AGREED TO IT TO START WITH only makes Clinton and her supporters look idiotic and desperate.

YOU HAVE LOST. DEAL WITH IT.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 3:25 PM | Report abuse

steven wrote: 90% of internet users are under age 30. i haven't seen that figure before. makes me feel damned old. i'm 50!!! oh, well!! but if this is true then obama wins by a landslide, yes? is that what you meant?

Posted by: lonewolf | May 26, 2008 3:23 PM | Report abuse

The majority of Democratic Primary Voters have not voted for Obama and he can't win the general election without the support of at least the majority of Clinton's supporters.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html

Posted by: Sinclair | May 26, 2008 3:22 PM | Report abuse

The main problem with what she said was as much it's inaccuracy as the choice of example. I won't bother repeating what is now common knowledge that it was again just another lie by Clinton. The fact that it was a lie and not a correct reference to the time line makes you have to wonder, Why the RFK comment in the first place. It was a lie even if she never said the "A" word. It was Mrs. Clinton just getting caught yet again being dishonesty one more time for like the hundredth time. Where do we draw the line? There isn't a job in the world that you could apply for where known dishonesty would not get you scratched off the list instantly. She is applying and interviewing for a job with the American people and must be rejected. Of course the public is well aware and the numbers show it. She has one of the lowest trust worthy ratings ever. I think more people would trust Charles Manson before Clinton.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 3:22 PM | Report abuse

To Posted by: Stephanie | May 26, 2008 3:15 PM Stephanie, you are either to young to remember the Clinton's past or stupid.As for your comment about Obama, I and many other people who support him would never vote for him if Hilliary "Brutus" Clinton is the Veep.

Posted by: Fred Akel | May 26, 2008 3:22 PM | Report abuse

you think all the bad publicity was targeted on an innocent woman cause we're all evil? you numbskull there's a reason why hilary's been attacked so much online. it's a portal for many average citizens to share their disgust of this disgusting woman all they want and that's what they're doing. either you got something twisted in the head or you just don't have the facts, cause clearly, she's NOT the victim.

Posted by: vargas you're an idiot | May 26, 2008 3:22 PM | Report abuse

If John McCain would choose Colin Powell to be his running mate, Americans would cross parties in droves to vote that ticket. The whole party notion is a bad idea anyway. For years, it's been used to foist candidates upon us when they didn't have a prayer of winning. Dukakis, Teddy Kennedy, Al Gore, John Kerry. They are lily white, folks. No skin color debate here. And completely unelectable. If McCain was anywhere close to smart, he would reach for the General or Condy Rice. People would flock to the ticket. It will prove once again that Dems got it wrong.

Posted by: ProgressiveVote | May 26, 2008 3:22 PM | Report abuse

HRC needs to break with the Dems and run as a third party candidate. Leave the democratic party to the obamicans and their campaign of HOpe for the poor and elites. Start a new party HRC and raise the Middle Class.

Posted by: Adios | May 26, 2008 3:20 PM | Report abuse

I AM WATCHING DEMS WITH GLEE.

OBAMA HAS EXPOSED THEM. THEY ARE NOT THE PARTY OF DIVERSITY THEY HAVE ALWAYS CLAIMED TO BE.

THE LIKES OF OBAMA ARE TOLERATED UNTIL THEY THREATEN THE STATUS QUO.

HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Paul | May 26, 2008 3:04 PM
=================================

I agree. check this website. the right wing is not going to sit idle and take this "marxist". They claim they are moving to demand a congressional investigation, a la McCarthist.

America's Survival, Inc. Releases Two New Blockbuster Reports

* Communism in Hawaii and the Obama Connection (PDF)
* Communism in Chicago and the Obama Connection. (PDF)

Posted by: thetruth | May 26, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

OK guys, I am asking a very simple question.

Who are the people he helped as a community organizer and why have they not given a testimonial to his "community organizer" capabilities? Tell me about one steel worker he helped. Just one and I'll be satisfied.

Posted by: Gus | May 26, 2008 3:02 PM

*********************************
Give it a rest with your phony question. You want to play possum with his accomplishments and pretend you cannot make a determination to justify not voting for him, fine. Funny, but there is no one coming out of his community to say the opposite. I am guessing most of those people are leading their lives like everyone else...

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070416/moberg

Posted by: Simple question, Gus: you are not voting for Obama, are you? | May 26, 2008 3:17 PM | Report abuse

I am so astounded that I am still reading posts that defend Hilliary and Bill. My God folks are all of you that ignorant of 16 years of lies, perjury, Bimbo eruptions, disbarment from practice of Law,White House pardons,it everybody's else fault but us,Hillary's stupid fake accents depending where The Hilliary speaks,money in cash coming from China,and last but not at all least or end of the list their total lack of morals. Clinton People quit drinking the Clinton Kool Aid. By the way I voted for Bill twice,But I finally wised up. I am a Republican, never voted for Bush 11, Bush 1 once and I am now supporting Obama. I am also white and from the deep south.

Posted by: Fred Akel | May 26, 2008 3:16 PM | Report abuse

90% of users of the internet are under age 30.

Think about it.

Posted by: Steven | May 26, 2008 3:16 PM | Report abuse

I supported Hillary but even if Obama chose her as his running mate I wouldn't vote for him. I use to like him prior to this long drawn out primary but I despise him now. He has treated her at least as poorly as she has treated him! There is no denying this!

Posted by: Stephanie | May 26, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

The primaries will end in June and Democrats will be united.

Thanks to the Repubs who will join us but those of you laughing at us (below) will BE IN FOR A RUDE SHOCK - and it will begin in Virgina, Colorado and Georgia.

Posted by: Brad | May 26, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

"obviously, can't count"

No obviously you can't count:

These are the undeniable facts:

The math simply doesn't work for Hillary. Without Florida and Michigan, Obama or Hillary need 2024.5 delegates to clinch the nomination. To date, here is the breakdown for where they stand:
Obama 1969
Clinton 1724
If Hillary succeeds in getting Florida and Michigan added at full strength, then the needed delegates goes to 2,210, an impossibility, because that would mean the Rules and By-Laws Committee agreed to it, which won't happen. Those delegations will most likely be seated at half strength which moves the magic number to 2,118 or 2,131, depending on whether the supers are also cut to half. Let's say it's the highest, 2,131 and that Obama gets ZERO for Michigan because he was not on the ballot. Using that worst case scenario, that means that Obama needs 95 delegates. Hillary needs 226.
Now. There are 212 pledged delegates in remaining primaries. To win, she needs all of them, plus 14 more Supers or some combination of each. This is not going to happen, especially if some of the Supers are looking for a reason to move to Obama. Her chance of winning this by the numbers, even with the best Clintonesque arm twisting, is ZERO. ZERO. It's clear that Obama is the next Democratic Presidential nominee.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 3:14 PM | Report abuse

Thanks Mama Rachel.

I am not one of those "emotional women." I did vote HRC but will be happy with Obama.

Posted by: Tracey | May 26, 2008 3:12 PM | Report abuse

He's not telling the truth when he says "...I was without money..." He arrived with a salary of $13,000 a year."

Umm, $13,000 a year is without money unless you're an uneducated Hillary supporter. Get used to saying President Obama you racist pieces of garbage!!!!

Posted by: | May 26, 2008 2:53 PM

==============================

lol lol

--------------------------------------------
Well, at least you can laugh at your own stupidity. A $13,000 annual salary is NO money for 'those' or any days unless you're talking the 1920s or something.

I do not consider Obama a messiah or a savior. I am a Yale and Yale Law school grad who can clearly discern who the best leader is for our country. And calling Obama a liar compared to THE CLINTONS. Now there's some DELUSIONAL BS!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

I am aghast at emotional women.

I have been democrat for 35 years and THIS MAMA WILL BE FOR OBAMA IN THE FALL.

My advice to you all - Grow up. Suck up the loss and be a true Democrat.

Posted by: Rachel | May 26, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

Kate says:
"Women for Obama!"

Yes he does have a charasmatic persona, and ain't he just about the best looker...

Posted by: Louise | May 26, 2008 3:09 PM | Report abuse

Let's just put Hillary and Obama on the ticket together and end this thing. I will vote for either one, but I would sure like it if I could vote for both.

Posted by: Left of Center | May 26, 2008 3:09 PM | Report abuse

ALL of the outrage directed at Hillary Clinton has been brought on by her actions. She has behaved dishonorably, inciting and encouraging racial division because she can't get the popular support she seems to think we owe her. We watched the video, and you can't spin that. She set out--three or four times in this campaign, but never so blatantly as with the Ledger editorial board--to plant in the minds of potential voters and backers this notion that "anything can happen in June," including the demise of a candidate. That is why she's under attack--as hard as this is for Hill Lovers to swallow--because she is hoist with her own petard, done in by her ambitious dream, and unconcerned by any damage she does. We've already had just such an irresponsible and childish president. We don't need another one.

Posted by: Iggy | May 26, 2008 3:09 PM | Report abuse

Four caucus states(IA, NV, ME, WA) never produced popular vote totals! You, obviously, can't count these states in the popular vote totals because there are no totals recorded from these backward states.
No one forced Barry to take his name off the ballot in MI. That was his own choice and very poor judgement!

Posted by: BG | May 26, 2008 3:09 PM | Report abuse

Paul you are wrong.

Times are changing - that is why a majority of Dems have voted Obama.

Posted by: Chris | May 26, 2008 3:07 PM | Report abuse

Clinton attempts to provide an alternate, innocent explanation for her very clear words as follows: "I was discussing the Democratic primary history and in the course of that discussion mentioned the campaigns of both my husband and Senator (Robert) Kennedy waged in California in June in 1992 and 1968 and I was referencing those to make the point that we have had nomination primary contests that go into June. That's a historic fact," she said."

However, Clinton's explanation is unpersuasive. At the time of RFK's death (according to Wikipedia), only 13 states had held a primary (California, Oregon, Nebraska, South Dakota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Florida). So the 1968 primary campaign did NOT stretch into June of 1968 unexpectantly due to the delegate or nomination battle as she tries to suggest; rather, it was just beginning. RFK was also far behind Humphrey in delegates at the time and was not the frontrunner, so Democrats did not lose the frontrunner in 1968 as would be the case if something horrible (God forbid) were to happen in this campaign. Your remarks were beneath contempt, Senator and your attempt to provide an innocent explanation is unpersuasive. Even if Obama forgives you, I doubt the majority of America (or New Yorkers) will ever give you their vote.

Posted by: Patrick Henry | May 26, 2008 3:07 PM | Report abuse

Obama bloggers:

please don't use this board to post excerpts for the Audacity of a Hoax.

Posted by: jessica | May 26, 2008 2:57 PM

-------------------------------

lol lol lol

that's a keeper!!!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

One of the interesting aspects of the Clinton campaign process from the beginning to this point in time is that it can be best understood, when we compare it to peeling a not so fresh onion one layer at a time. The closer you get to the center the more you begin to realize the essential rottenness lurking at the core. The longer Hillary carries on this "Captain of the World" quest for the Democratic Party nomination, the more she reveals to the thinking electorate how essentially devoid she is of that self-proclaimed status. Finally when all is revealed, it turns out that there is rottenness at the core. This self-destruction of a once perceived icon has been painful to watch.

Posted by: Character Counts | May 26, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

everyone who keeps saying Hillary has more votes than Obama: THIS IS NOT TRUE!

If you include ALL THE STATES THAT HAVE VOTED AND CAUCUSED SO FAR, including FL and MI, Obama wins.

If you exclude FL and MI, because they broke the rules, then exclude the caucus states because "cacauses aren't really democratic" (HRC's own words), Obama wins.

You cannot say that FL and MI should count when they violated the rules, but all the caucus states that obeyed the rules don't count just because they didn't vote for you.

Hillary did NOT recieve more votes. She is LOSING the popular vote. She is LOSING the delegate count. She is LOSING the superdelegates in droves.

It has nothing to do with her being a woman. It has everything to do with her being a liar that has been fantasizing about someone shooting Obama before the convention!

Posted by: Cathye | May 26, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

@Jessica - you are a true master of your art form.

Posted by: Lydia | May 26, 2008 3:04 PM | Report abuse

Hillary makes an easy target; she paints one on her back repeatedly!

Hillary, the Queen of Spin and a Legend in Her Own Mind!

http://klintons.com

Posted by: Bob | May 26, 2008 3:04 PM | Report abuse

I AM WATCHING DEMS WITH GLEE.

OBAMA HAS EXPOSED THEM. THEY ARE NOT THE PARTY OF DIVERSITY THEY HAVE ALWAYS CLAIMED TO BE.

THE LIKES OF OBAMA ARE TOLERATED UNTIL THEY THREATEN THE STATUS QUO.

HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Paul | May 26, 2008 3:04 PM | Report abuse

Nothing is more detrimental to the country as a whole than political corruption in any guise. So the statement issued by Barack Obama the other day regarding Florida and Michigan should be seen for what it is: a politician willing to engage in whatever undermining of the democratic process it takes to achieve his political ambition.

http://tominpaine.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2008-01-01T00%3A00%3A00-08%3A00&updated-max=2009-01-01T00%3A00%3A00-08%3A00&max-results=14

In his statement, Obama said that he would support a solution regarding the seating of the Florida and Michigan delegates "as long as it was fair to both sides". This is Obama intentionally ignoring the fact that the elections and the results they produced were already fair to both sides.

Posted by: grace | May 26, 2008 3:03 PM | Report abuse

If it's phony, how come most older black women are voting Obama, and most white women are voting Hillary?

Posted by: AJ
***********************
it's phony because her campaign choose to make a division out of things because it suited her strategy of winning. It's phony because some of her well-heeled feminist supporters (Steinhem, Ferraro, etc) forgot what they fought for in the 60-70's and treated a choice to not vote for Clinton as a betrayal, instead of a recognition that women are not some monolithic voting bloc.

I don't know how much about women you know about, but we all have concerns that cross lines of class and race - our families, our job security, our safety... If Hillary Clinton had stuck to her core message invoking these concerns instead of letting a bunch of stupid men (paging Mark Penn) run her off message, she would be in better shape with all of us.

Obama benefits in part because black and white supporters want to go with the better of their angels and not some dark, angry divisive path that only prolongs addressing the problems that effect all Americans. That is what you and "suzie from Atlanta" fail to understand when you play "po' is us white folks" game.

Posted by: AJ loves dolphins - they speak our language of love... | May 26, 2008 3:03 PM | Report abuse

"The people love Hillary"
"It's all about Hillary's electibility"

Right, thats why over 60% of Americans call her untrustworthy and a liar and close to 50% would never vote for her under any circumstances.

And I thought Hillary was being harsh when she called her supporters dumb and uneducated.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 3:02 PM | Report abuse

Amen Sarah!

Posted by: Joyce | May 26, 2008 3:02 PM | Report abuse

OK guys, I am asking a very simple question.

Who are the people he helped as a community organizer and why have they not given a testimonial to his "community organizer" capabilities? Tell me about one steel worker he helped. Just one and I'll be satisfied.

Posted by: Gus | May 26, 2008 3:02 PM | Report abuse

"He's not telling the truth when he says "...I was without money..." He arrived with a salary of $13,000 a year."

Umm, $13,000 a year is without money unless you're an uneducated Hillary supporter. Get used to saying President Obama you racist pieces of garbage!!!!

Posted by: | May 26, 2008 2:53 PM

==============================

lol lol

first is the issue of him lying: he DID arrive with a salary. On those years, that wasn't that bad.
And finally, he was and never being a pauper. He comes from higher middle class. You know he had enough money in the bank to do what children of wealthy parents do: get a poor paying job, because they don't need the money.

He worked before getting to Illinois in a job that allowed him to pay his student loans IMMEDIATELY. Do you think a lawyer can't save money from that kind of job he had?

Obama has created a myth around him and you suckers bought it.

You believe he's a saint, believe that followers faint while he talks... you are members of a cult, Scientology for leftist and independent fools.

Posted by: thetruth | May 26, 2008 3:02 PM | Report abuse

If only the media had loved her as they love him. By the way, pundits, it will only be August until they are sure that they've got Obama locked in, that the Republicans will make a 527 out of Michelle Obama railing on "whitey" at the TUCC. Now forget all the veiled threat mumbo jumbo (which is all hype coming from his campaign - talk about do anything to win!). Obama's will get knocked to the tarp in September and never get up. And that will be partly because the DNC doesn't have the guts to look at Obama's political metrics across the electoral map. Now add that Obama's vicious supporters have totally peeved Clinton's supporters. I guess y'all better start making babies. There aren't an awful lot of people who can "expand the base" anymore (Axelrode).

Posted by: Clinton408 | May 26, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Sarah, don't worry.

I'm Republican and I'll vote Obama.

It is nice to see high minded Democrats who have pointed the finger at us for decades shrink from their party.

Posted by: Jesse | May 26, 2008 3:00 PM | Report abuse

The Democrat party has lost its values.

The Congress has the majority of democrats for two years now and no articles of impeachment have been filed. Many many democrats voted for the war (i'm sure for self-preservation the number one for all elected officials)

The Democrats now are not counting the votes and have been playing race games in this primary. The DNC has foisted empty suit Barack Obama upon us and that in protest we will vote for John McCain who is at least an American.

Posted by: Jessica | May 26, 2008 3:00 PM | Report abuse

it is truly sad to see people continue to reference w. virginia as some sort of monumental victory for hillary. if the demographics of that state indicate where her support truly lies or mcbush's for that matter then we have truly turned the clock back a few decades. i tend to believe that after this week then we will have seen the last of a hillary that means anything in terms true democracy. as for florida and michigan, they were duly warned that they were straying from the dnc path and chose to do so of their own accord. they should accept their punishment as meted out by the dnc. they were thinking only themselves as the "lynchpins" of the dnc and i see now that they have become unhinged. it's too bad but we can easily rely on other states who chose to participate in a more sensible manner to carry the ball from here on out. hillary needs to call it a day and support obamma. and no, she will not be the v.p. obama is wise enough to run his own show. and why not? if hillary is such an obstructionist now, what would she be like as the veep? scary thought.

Posted by: lonewolf | May 26, 2008 2:59 PM | Report abuse

Henry is an idiot. Out of over 4,000 votes in the Illinois State Senate Obama voted present on somewhere around 150 of them. Further, a vote of present indicates (in this particular body) that the Senator fundamentally agrees with the bill, but that it has some provisions that he can't get behind.

Then, Go Democatic Party! said "The election will be determined by the smaller states.
The same states that Obama has been losing."

You sir are also an idiot. Hasn't HRC's argument lately been that she wins the big states (and she implies that Obama won't carry them in the fall) and that all of Obama's small state victories don't amount to a hill of beans? Yes it has.

There is no rational argument left for her winning the nomination which is why we get these bizarre rationales from ignorant bigoted people popping up everywhere.

These people will keep voicing the unsubstantiated claim that Obama is an empty suit who only promises pie in the sky idealism and no concrete solutions because that is what HRC tells them to think even though it is blatantly untrue. Do just a little bit of research people! Get on Obama's web site and read his detailed policy proposals (which are very very close in substance to Clinton's), google his community service and you find a whole litany of projects he was involved in, look up his voting record in the Illinois State Senate and you will see a long list of policies he supported (or didn't support)while there. He has tons of substance and as for the experience argument Lincoln was our least experienced president ever and is widely regarded as one of the best presidents we've ever had.

Women for Obama!

Posted by: Kate | May 26, 2008 2:58 PM | Report abuse

HERE ARE THE ONLY NUMBERS THAT MATTER FREAKTARDS:

These are the undeniable facts:
The math simply doesn't work for Hillary. Without Florida and Michigan, Obama or Hillary need 2024.5 delegates to clinch the nomination. To date, here is the breakdown for where they stand:
Obama 1969
Clinton 1724
If Hillary succeeds in getting Florida and Michigan added at full strength, then the needed delegates goes to 2,210, an impossibility, because that would mean the Rules and By-Laws Committee agreed to it, which won't happen. Those delegations will most likely be seated at half strength which moves the magic number to 2,118 or 2,131, depending on whether the supers are also cut to half. Let's say it's the highest, 2,131 and that Obama gets ZERO for Michigan because he was not on the ballot. Using that worst case scenario, that means that Obama needs 95 delegates. Hillary needs 226.
Now. There are 212 pledged delegates in remaining primaries. To win, she needs all of them, plus 14 more Supers or some combination of each. This is not going to happen, especially if some of the Supers are looking for a reason to move to Obama. Her chance of winning this by the numbers, even with the best Clintonesque arm twisting, is ZERO. ZERO. It's clear that Obama is the next Democratic Presidential nominee.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 2:58 PM | Report abuse

Obama bloggers:

please don't use this board to post excerpts for the Audacity of a Hoax.

Posted by: jessica | May 26, 2008 2:57 PM | Report abuse

I voted HRC. It is clear she has lost.

I AM NOT FOOLISH ENOUGH TO VOTE MCCAIN IN THE FALL.

What on earth is wrong with Democrats? Don't the party's values mean anything to you?

Posted by: Sarah | May 26, 2008 2:57 PM | Report abuse

Senator Clinton: Good advice for you from Shakespeare (Macbeth): "Stand not on the order of your going, but go at once."

Posted by: Tom in California | May 26, 2008 2:56 PM | Report abuse

The last time I voted for a Republican was 1972 when I was in school at the AF Academy, since then it's been all Dems in every election ( I haven't missed an election no matter were I was living). A majority of the Rep agenda became repugnant to me so I began my long relationship with the Dem party and have been excited about it ever since. Today---- not so excited. My disillusionment with the elected Dem in Congress is so great ( particularly after this weekend) that I now find their inaction as repugnant as the Republican agenda. There will be no names with a D or R behind them selected on my ballot. I will write in Hillary Clinton's name for every race on my ballot and hope that she will start a Centrist Party with the Dems and Reps that are sick and tired of the extreme left and right wings demagoguery of everything not their own. Mayor Bloomberg is another possibility for my vote.

Posted by: Dem no more | May 26, 2008 2:55 PM | Report abuse

And yet, in all that the media has done and attempted to do, you couldn't stop the fact that more people have voted for her than any other candidate in political history. Where are the metrics of the dying elite newspapers? Wrapped in the muddy mess of blogs.

Posted by: Clinton408 | May 26, 2008 2:46 PM
---------------------------------------
WHERE ARE YOU GETTING YOUR NUMBERS? SHOW US PLEASE!

Posted by: Clinton can't add | May 26, 2008 2:55 PM | Report abuse

What are the implications of the online dimension of political campaigning?

It seems to me that the internet is a great leveler, giving ordinary (not super-rich) Americans opportunities to participate in the process in a meaningful, influential way. A candidate who starts out with big money, big connections, and/or fame doesn't necessarily have a monopoly on the political process anymore. We, the people, have a chance to weigh in.

We also have a chance to find the truth if we look carefully and evaluate the reliability of our sources. There's just as much garbage on the internet as there is in any other kind of media, but it's more convenient to sort through and pick out the valid information from internet sources than it is with other media.

Posted by: DoTheMath | May 26, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

Yeah!!! Count all 50 states HRC - INCLUDE THE CAUCUS STATES.

Posted by: Chloe | May 26, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

"He's not telling the truth when he says "...I was without money..." He arrived with a salary of $13,000 a year."

Umm, $13,000 a year is without money unless you're an uneducated Hillary supporter. Get used to saying President Obama you racist pieces of garbage!!!!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 2:53 PM | Report abuse

Make it easy for yourselves, dummies.

Want more war, vote Republican
Want troops home, vote Democrat

If you have no opinion, don't vote.

Posted by: Smartestpersonhere | May 26, 2008 2:53 PM | Report abuse

It is amusing how people who have a college education are accused of being "elitists".

The ones making the accusations are the ones who are easily manipulated by emotional and fear tactics, over and over again. God forbid they would pick up a history, political science, or other textbook and do some actual research!

But, it's okay. Keep yourself uneducated. Your responses make for great entertainment.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

STOP THE HATE AND FEAR MONGERING!!!!!

THAT IS THE POLITICS WE ARE TRYING TO MOVE AWAY FROM.

BTW...We all know Obama's middle name is Hussein - SO WHAT?!!!!

Posted by: Ida | May 26, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

"Obama turned down offers in the six figures upon graduating from Harvard to work for a less than poverty wage (around $10k per year) as a community organizer. One of the tasks he took on was to help steel workers (in Pittsburg) either re-train, or find new jobs since many steel mills had closed."

So where or who are these steel workers and why hasn't one of the spoken up?

Who cares if he turned down other jobs to do good in community work. Lots of people do. But - again - show me who he helped!

Posted by: gus | May 26, 2008 2:37 PM
============================
Obama said in his announcement for president:

"I knew no one in Chicago when I arrived, was without money or family connections. But a group of churches had offered me a job as a community organizer for $13,000 a year. And I accepted the job, site unseen, motivated then by a single, simple, powerful idea - that I might play a small part in building a better America."

That paragraph is a lie and a myth.

But the truth is different from what he wants you to conclude from that paragraph. The truth is that he was far from alone and penniless, as his path to that job demonstrates. Lets trace that path:
A) After graduating from Columbia University in NYC, he got a job writing manuals for a NY -based international trade publication, a Fortune 500 company. This job allowed him to pay his college loans. Obviously, he was well connected, there's no other way to explain him getting this good job. Take for granted that his intellect is part of the package.

B) After that, he spent a year trying to find his place, politically speaking. "He worked briefly for a Ralph Nader outfit in Harlem teaching college kids about recycling and then on a losing assemblyman's race in Brooklyn." (The agitator). You tell me if that's the 'path' of a loner.To run for a city council position, you must know people, you must be connected to somebody...at least to Nader. And then...
C) A year after graduating from Columbia, Obama answered a help-wanted ad in the NY Times. "The Calumet Community Religious Conference, a group that aimed to
convert the black churches of Chicago's South Side into agents of social change, was looking for a community organizer to run the group's inner-city arm, the Developing Communities Project." This job "allowed Obama entrée into the poor black neighborhoods with which he was so eager to connect."

So, there you have it. Maybe he didn't know anyone when he arrived, but that's
because he was just relocating to a new job, backed up by a group of churches from NYC. He must have presented some kind of references to get the job. How much of a problem do you imagine that would have being for him?

He's not telling the truth when he says "...I was without money..." He arrived with a salary of $13,000 a year. But he presents a noble, selfless picture of himself when he says "And I accepted the job, site unseen, ..." Of course it was site unseen! He couldn't see it from New York City offices where he got the job, could he? That would have been claiming super powers. Maybe he'll do that later.

Obama was positioning himself for a run for the presidency. He was no pauper. He has being calculating all along.

That's why no one comes forward to talk about his "goodness" as a community organizer. He was considered arrogant, even by his own poor people. (poor as in moneyless).


Posted by: thetruth | May 26, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

http://www.drudgereport.com

Drudge.com is a parody of Drudge's site. I can't tell if this is just terribly lazy blogging or malicious, but in either case, it's an embarrassment for the WaPo and not a good indication of their prospects in a digital age.

Posted by: Dan | May 26, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

Luka said...
If all 50 states count. WHY ARE CAUCUS STATES EXCLUDED FROM THE HRC TOTAL?
----------------------------------------
That's the point I've been trying to make to Clinton supporters. Clinton says she wants ALL the states' votes to count, but then she turns around and excludes caucus states and counts 0 votes for Obama in Michigan. Clinton is/is logic.
Don't worry, Obama supporters won't be bamboozled.

Posted by: Joyce | May 26, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

Obama will be the nominee of the democrat party whether the Clintons and followers like it or not. Hillary would love to entice Obama into another debate because it is the only chance she has of "hoping he will make a misstep." All her dirty trips are failing and he will not engage this "sad pitiful woman" in another redundant debate.

Posted by: M. Cooke | May 26, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

Clinton 408:

Add Caucus states to HRC's figure and even with FL and MI SHE STILL LOSES THE POPULAR VOTE!!!!!

Posted by: Kathy | May 26, 2008 2:49 PM | Report abuse

'HOPE' media stops giving Barack Hussein Obama a easy and free ride. Media has double stardards for Hillary Rodham Clinton compared to the easy-free ride given to Barack Hussein Obama (Obama does NOT even use his real name).

FOR THE RECORDS:::::::::::::::::::::::::::

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON is the Greatest
Campaigner in America History!

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON is the BETTER of the two candidates to produce the Democratic Presidential WIN for America!

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON is ELECTABILITY!!
HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON is ELECTABILITY!!

FORGET THE MATH----because
It's All About Electability!!!!!

'HOPE' that the 'SUPERDELEGATES' get it.
It's All About Electability!!!!!

John McCain will eat Barack Hussein Obama alive....alive.....alive......alive!!!

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

~~ENOUGH of Barack Hussein Obama.
~~ENOUGH of Michelle Obama...this lady is very negative and depressing and what about her 'America'--what gives?
~~ENOUGH of Rev. Wright--Obama's mentor and pastor for twenty (20) years with shouting 'HATE AMERICA' 'HATE WHITES', etc.

GO HILLARY!!
GO ALL THE WAY TO THE CONVENTION!!
GO ALL THE WAY TO THE WHITE HOUSE!!!
GO HILLARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

IF NOT HILLARY --- THEN,
GO JOHN MCCAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Posted by: blondshag | May 26, 2008 2:48 PM | Report abuse

JR
"Blacks have voted for whites in record numbers"

Was there a black candidate on the ballot box? Please cite the enection.

Posted by: Billw | May 26, 2008 2:48 PM | Report abuse

To Suzie from Atlanta:
I am honored to meet you through these blogs. You and I remember a great history, much sadness, but a time of inspired action pushed forward by the ideals and the person of great men. You and I are fortunate to have had our characters shaped by this time.
I believe the disrespectful people on this blog have not been given anything to live greatly for. One would hope that this "movement", thought to be so inspirational and of a higher nature, would help them to grow in character and maturity. Unfortunately, it seems to bring out the worst in them. When one thinks about it, this "movement" has no teeth in it; there is no positive goal, no measured outcome, is there? It is about negative, what they don't want. Pity them. I suppose there is nothing left for them to do; we did it all and I am proud of what we did!

Posted by: nana4 | May 26, 2008 2:48 PM | Report abuse

I am a white 53 year old female, here in Calif. I voted for Hillary on super Tuesday. I have defended her words and actions over this long primary. It is only the game of politics, I told myself. I was in the car when I heard on NPR her remarks re: why she is still in the race. I had to stop the car, I was shaking. Hearing that word "assassination", no matter what she was trying to say, brought back all the pain and lost hope of 1968. She is a smart woman, she knows better. Could she of not used other less painful history moments to get her point across? She now blames Obama for her words? He gave her a pass, the media took it and ran with it. Even some of her supports in Congress admitted it was a stupid thing to say. So my fellow Hillary supporters, why is it all Obama"s fault again?

Posted by: carla | May 26, 2008 2:48 PM | Report abuse

I pity those who think the current Democrat big state-small state ratios are an accurate measure of gen. election outcomes.

Posted by: Liz | May 26, 2008 2:47 PM | Report abuse

"A MAN LIKE THAT CANNOT BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA."

I think a man like that currently is

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 2:46 PM | Report abuse

And yet, in all that the media has done and attempted to do, you couldn't stop the fact that more people have voted for her than any other candidate in political history. Where are the metrics of the dying elite newspapers? Wrapped in the muddy mess of blogs.

Posted by: Clinton408 | May 26, 2008 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Informed Democrat,

Actually your ignorance is pretty rampantly on display.

Racists are dying breed--literally dying across America each and every day. And this is one white girl that will outlive all of you and dance on your disgusting graves.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 2:46 PM | Report abuse

..you have a group of people who have been oppressed for hundreds of years voting for their candidate who is naturally talented and they can identify with (blacks voting for Obama) and a group of people (the oppressors) specifically voting against a candidate because they would admittedly never vote for a person of color.
------------------
Quickly, name all the white female oppressors who have been presidents of the US.

Posted by: AJ | May 26, 2008 2:46 PM | Report abuse

"Blacks have voted for whites in record numbers"

In what election"

Posted by: Billw | May 26, 2008 2:45 PM | Report abuse

"That is why he cowardly refused to have a free debate against Hillary Clinton"
Elisabeth

They had at least 21 debates during the primary season, how many more do you want?

After the attempted lynching by ABC News it doesn't surprise me that he doesn't want to do more debates with her. Frankly, I'm glad she cannot pull anymore debate shenanigans.

Obama wants to talk about the issues.

Clinton want to shift blame.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 2:45 PM | Report abuse

I am not a psychologist or a shrink, although when I see applied without elaboration in these threads the descriptor "borderline personality disorder" (three different times) or "narcissistic personality" (countless references) I apprehend that some person or persons is in better professional position than I to define terms. I hope s/he will do so.

In any case, I assume such afflictions are gender neutral, sexually-equal-opportunity ailments.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 2:45 PM | Report abuse

Elizabeth get real.

HRC USED DEBATES TO UNFAIRLY LAUNCH ATTACKS. OBAMA RESTRAINED HIMSELF FOR THE SAME OF THE D. PARTY.

HRC will say and do anything to win.

Posted by: Grace | May 26, 2008 2:45 PM | Report abuse

Thanks JR.

AFRICAN AMERICANS HAVE INDEED VOTED FOR WHITE DEMOCRATS DECADE AFTER DECADE.

Why should they be condemned for voting Obama in 2008?

Posted by: Jenny | May 26, 2008 2:43 PM | Report abuse

You know what? Hillary Clinton is spontaneous. She can speak without manuscript and she is not training her speeches in front of a mirror. Barack Obama on the other hand cannot speak without a ms and he lacks spontaneity. That is why he cowardly refused to have a free debate against Hillary Clinton. He knew would be stuttering and that he would lose. A MAN LIKE THAT CANNOT BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
Excuse bad English.

Posted by: Elisabeth
*************************

LOL!! SYou know what? Hillary Clinton is spontaneous. She can speak without manuscript and she is not training her speeches in front of a mirror. Barack Obama on the other hand cannot speak without a ms and he lacks spontaneity. That is why he cowardly refused to have a free debate against Hillary Clinton. He knew would be stuttering and that he would lose. A MAN LIKE THAT CANNOT BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
Excuse bad English.

Posted by: Elisabeth
**********************
LOL!!!! Elizabeth, you are digging yourself in a hole so deep, you will come out in Ch - oops..

He has debated her several times...he does speak without a prompter...and unlike your hero, doesn't spontaneously refer to the act of assassination...please stop, you are too funny...

Posted by: I'd like spring rolls with that order... | May 26, 2008 2:43 PM | Report abuse

This phony division that you advocate between black and white women is exactly why this campaign needs to go away.
----------------
If it's phony, how come most older black women are voting Obama, and most white women are voting Hillary?

Posted by: AJ | May 26, 2008 2:43 PM | Report abuse

Online target Obama.

I read and post daily and the fact of the matter is Obama is the target for online bloggers.

For instance:

Wake Up America! Obama will lose in November because of his bad judgment with associations

America, America, God shed his grace on thee.

Then why are we letting an anti-American, unpatriotic, charlatan who stated from his own lips before speaking to a packed crowd in North Carolina, "Watch me wow these white folks" be our nominee?

Obama will lose in November and all because we, America allowed a few spoken words to woo the White House away from us.

His associations show us Obama lacks judgment: Antoin Rezko, William Ayers, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Iraqi born Aiham Alsammarae, the former electricity minister convicted of corruption in Iraq.

I suppose under God's guidance, since I lived through the Bush years, I will survive this fool's one four year term unscathed if America allows this fraud into the White House.

70% of we Democrats will not vote for Obama; however, since Michigan and Florida do not count I suppose our voices do not either.

Without Hillary Clinton on the top of the ticket, with or without the loser Edwards on the fraudulent Obama ticket ( the true source of race baiting in this countries primary-with Jesse Jackson, Jr. being the race-baiting architect), Obama will NEVER get my vote.

I'd rather be a McCain Democrat than see the fraudulent, mob backed, media created Manchurian candidate Obama in the White House.

"Keep in mind what Dan Morain wrote in the September 8, 2007, Los Angeles Times:

"Now, promoting himself as a fresh face on the national political stage, proclaiming his distance from lobbyists and the Washington culture of special interests, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) has to contend with his own history. ... From Chicago to Springfield, his past is filled with decidedly old-school political tactics -- a history of befriending powerful local elders, assisting benefactors and special interests, and neutralizing rivals."

Oh, yes, and did we mention, Obama's name also appears on the witness list for the current Antoine Rezko trial, making his one more in what former Illinois U.S. Sen. Peter Fitzgerald called the "Illinois Combine".

For more Obama old style politics information, log on to http://www.zimbio.com/Obamamania/articles/366/One+degree+separation+Obama+Illinois+Combine
That's all we Democrats need this year is an indicted Democratic nominee! For more Obama old style politics information, also log on to http://www.opednews.com
Once you read these articles you will find how Obama took money from Iraqi born Aiham Alsammarae, the former electricity minister convicted of corruption in Iraq, who put up $2.7 million in property to help raise $8.5 million to free Tony Rezko from jail in Chicago.

The Times reported that Alsammarae had contributed six times to Obama's presidential campaign, and if Rezko had not been caught and indicted Obama and Michelle "I hate America" Robinson Obama would have profited from building nuclear power plants in Iraq the country we are at war with.

This is not borne out of racism; for I am an African American, female, informed Democrat.

With Obama in the White House and his radical, leftist, socialistic, unpatriotic and often over-bearing and speaking ill of America spouse at his side, we will need less Reverend Wright inspired teachings, Antoin Rezko and William Ayers friendships, and most certainly, less architect of race-baiting Jesse Jackson, Jr. and the Illinois Combine old style politics, and more of the true and living God's spirit in this country.

With Obama in the White House God Bless America will not be a phrase, but will become a prayer.

and:

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FROM INFORMED DEMOCRATS TO DNC

To: DNC Members
From: Informed Democrats
Re: Understanding of Florida Primary Rule Violations
Date: Until Michigan and Florida are Seated

Dear Governor Dean & Esteemed DNC Members,

STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING: As an informed Democrat, I am seeking to understand when will, we, Democratic voters see true equity in the Democratic Presidential Primary race?

RULES OF UNDERSTANDING: According to the rules of the Florida Democratic Presidential Primary, agreed to by all Democratic Presidential Primary candidates, no Democratic candidate was to advertise in Florida prior to the Florida primary.

FACTS OF UNDERSTANDING: Senator Barack Obama purchased national cable advertising and advertised HEAVILY in the State of Florida prior to the January presidential primary.

REQUEST OF OUTCOME BASED ON UNDERSTANDING: When will Senator Barack Obama and his campaign receive written (and publicized) notification he is; therefore, disqualified from receiving ANY of the delegates he and his campaign are seeking when Florida is ultimately seated, based on he and his campaign's failure to follow DNC rules?

EQUITY IN UNDERSTANDING: As a lifelong, Informed Democrat I know and understand you and the esteemed members of the DNC will do everything in your power to make an equitable decision in this matter, with liberty and justice for all.

THANK YOU FOR UNDERSTANDING INFORMED DEMOCRATS REQUEST: Thank you in advance for the time and attention you and the esteemed members of the DNC have and will give to this matter, because we know you and the members, hold that all men and women are related equal in DNC decision-making. Right?

THE ONLY UNDERSTANDABLE OUTCOME: Seat Michigan and Florida, as they are currently counted, and award the only Democratic candidate who can win in November the nomination-Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Why embarrass the Democratic Party any further by awarding the nomination to the media created Manchurian Candidate Obama and wait for the Republicans and the 529 to unload to the world Obama's unelectable dirty laundry: Antoin Rezko, William Ayers, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Iraqi born Aiham Alsammarae, the former electricity minister convicted of corruption in Iraq and his deal with Obama and Rezko to build nuclear power plants in Iraq-a nation we are currently at war?

Democratically Yours,


Informed Democrat

PS Sell your pro-Obama bill of goods to someone else.

We are thinking Americans not idiots of the media.

Posted by: Informed Democrat | May 26, 2008 2:42 PM | Report abuse

Yes, the death threats are deplorable.

Peace on Earth - Democracy ring loud and clear.

Obama is the Democrat nominee.

Posted by: Beth | May 26, 2008 2:42 PM | Report abuse

" nobody has criticized black people for almost unanimously supporting Obama but everyone has jumped on white women who support Hillary."
AJ

AJ the distinction is that you have a group of people who have been oppressed for hundreds of years voting for their candidate who is naturally talented and they can identify with (blacks voting for Obama) and a group of people (the oppressors) specifically voting against a candidate because they would admittedly never vote for a person of color.

Given how the Clintons made their disparaging remarks regarding blacks it doesn't surprise me.

Blacks have voted for whites in record numbers, the same cannot be said about whites voting for blacks.

See the distinction?

Posted by: JR | May 26, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

OBAMA IS STUPID

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

Hate to break the news to all the Obama supporters but he can't win without the majority of Clinton suppoters. So maybe you should all play nice!

Posted by: DJC | May 26, 2008 2:40 PM | Report abuse

I saw the interview of Hillary over the weekend. She clearly emphasized the word JUNE. I guess many people need explanations of what should be self-evident. Obama can get off his self-aggrandizement anytime now. Obama's campaign issued memos to fuel the fire, but later, Obama pretends to be the good guy. Pathetic hypocrite! People have to really stretch the truth to get a story out of the RFK inference.

Posted by: kmb08 | May 26, 2008 2:40 PM | Report abuse

Go Suzie from Atlanta! (my hometown) I am so glad to see Clinton supporters come out with the facts against this Obama machine! Turn down Obama as the nominee. Why? Well how about because every time we say, 'well, what's he done, EXACTLY, to qualify him for the job?" the Obamatrolls scream "RACIST!" Give me a break. She's looking more darned presidential standing up to her own party than either of the other two clowns.

Go Hillary!

Posted by: Sharon in Ca | May 26, 2008 2:40 PM | Report abuse

A woman should never vote for a candidate just because they are "female." They should consider if they are an honest and worthy candidate with policies that are worth backing. Women are acting like robots when they fall in line and just vote for someone who is female and not vote their conscience. If they believe in Hillary's ideas and policies, then vote for her but if you don't even know what Hillary stands for and you just vote for her because she is female then you are not being a well informed voter and do more harm than good. Be intelligent and learn the issues and policies of each candidate irregardless of gender or race.

Posted by: D Fletcher | May 26, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

Lisa, yes, the world is watching - I am one of those foreigners...waiting by the roadside to see whether Democrats will resort to coronation instead of Democracy.

If all 50 states count. WHY ARE CAUCUS STATES EXCLUDED FROM THE HRC TOTAL?

Posted by: Luka | May 26, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

You know what? Hillary Clinton is spontaneous. She can speak without manuscript and she is not training her speeches in front of a mirror. Barack Obama on the other hand cannot speak without a ms and he lacks spontaneity. That is why he cowardly refused to have a free debate against Hillary Clinton. He knew would be stuttering and that he would lose. A MAN LIKE THAT CANNOT BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.


Posted by: Elisabeth | May 26, 2008 2:36 PM

===============================
well said. I agree

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

FYI you racist nuts who want to make death threats, these blogs are monitored by the FBI and secret service and you will be hauled in - It is against the law to make death threats against a senator of the United States or a presidential canidate. Your IP's are being traced and you will be arrested for inciting violence or death on a political figure. Performing terrorist acts via the internet

Have fun at GITMO

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

Jessica, I wish that would happen but sadly there are lots of stupid women who believe gender isn't an issue. Besides, nobody has criticized black people for almost unanimously supporting Obama but everyone has jumped on white women who support Hillary. Women still sit at the back of the bus and it isn't just men who are at fault - they are joined by women who are so good at keeping other women "in their place." Just look at the number of people on this board who laugh at "old white women" while they wouldn't dream of dismissing "old black women".

Posted by: AJ
*************************
What a faux sensitive dude you are, AJ - I bet you went to Lillith fair shows and stood next to the prettiest girl and rocked back and forth extolling the song stylings of sarah mclaughlen or the Indigo Girls. Full of crap then as you are now.

And as Sojourner Truth said "Ain't I a woman?" This phony division that you advocate between black and white women is exactly why this campaign needs to go away. As women, we need to focus on what is the goal. Because McCain and the GOP are color and gender blind - they only see white and male.

Posted by: AJ cries when he sees a sunset, ladies... | May 26, 2008 2:38 PM | Report abuse

"Obama turned down offers in the six figures upon graduating from Harvard to work for a less than poverty wage (around $10k per year) as a community organizer. One of the tasks he took on was to help steel workers (in Pittsburg) either re-train, or find new jobs since many steel mills had closed."

So where or who are these steel workers and why hasn't one of the spoken up?

Who cares if he turned down other jobs to do good in community work. Lots of people do. But - again - show me who he helped!

Posted by: gus | May 26, 2008 2:37 PM | Report abuse

I have supported Hillary from the beginning and I will never support Obama.

He's not qualified to be president and for all his claims of superior leadership and judgement, there is no evidence.

If he were a true leader, he would count the votes in Florida and Michigan. One principle of our democracy is "One person, one vote!"

Posted by: Dan | May 26, 2008 2:37 PM | Report abuse

It's soooo funny...the only people who are supporting the wicked witch "The New York Senator"...who won't be the senator for long because she'll loose her senate seat! Yeah...is the useless vaginas that aren't worth the body that they're embedded in...hahaha...useless and crappy just like their screwed up attitudes...

"Useless vaginas for Hillary!"

Posted by: Useless Vaginas for Hillary | May 26, 2008 2:37 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats are playing a dangerous game. They ignore the sentiments of two crucial demographics they need desperately if they want to beat John McCain in November - women and rural voters.

Hillary Clinton beat Barack Obama by more than 40 points in the crucial swing state of West Virginia. Not since 1916 have the Democrats won the White House without winning in West Virginia. Obama's poor showing demonstrated once more his weakness among rural voters, and among women. Both groups have been deciding American elections for decades.

Hell hath no fury like a woman's scorn! We are tired of being ignored by the DNC and will vote for McCain!

Posted by: Jessica | May 26, 2008 2:37 PM | Report abuse

AJ said:
"nobody has criticized black people for almost unanimously supporting Obama"

Obama received a pass by the media because they were afraid of being accused of playing the race card. That along with black support was unfair to Clinton.

Posted by: Billw | May 26, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

It's amazing how many times the word "arrogant" has been used to describe Obama. Funny, but I've never heard anyone black refer to him that way. I think it's just a code word, that whites are using to describe the only black person in the race. White people, even the most racist ones don't want to be called out as racist, so they use words like arrogant to mask their racist feelings. I have news for you white people who keep calling Obama arrogant - black people know what time it is.

Posted by: marilyn | May 26, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

Anybody can put together a YouTube video, but to think this is the criteria by which most of Obama's supporters are judging the issues is pathetic and naive. They'll learn a very good lesson in politics very soon....

McGovern actually had more young people join his campaign than Obama has...albeit, he lost.

Posted by: kmb08 | May 26, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

You know what? Hillary Clinton is spontaneous. She can speak without manuscript and she is not training her speeches in front of a mirror. Barack Obama on the other hand cannot speak without a ms and he lacks spontaneity. That is why he cowardly refused to have a free debate against Hillary Clinton. He knew would be stuttering and that he would lose. A MAN LIKE THAT CANNOT BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
Excuse bad English.

Posted by: Elisabeth | May 26, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

The liberal media And Obama campaign are so far to the Nazi-left their right.

Whats next Book burning Obama Media and friends! Lets all raise a one fist!

Posted by: NEVER GIVE UP HILLARY | May 26, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Answer me why Obama took his name of MI ballot? anyone?
http://iowaindependent.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1264
Posted by: Jessica | May 26, 2008 2:26 PM

-------------------------------------------
Maybe if you'd actually read that OCTOBER 2007 article you referenced, you wouldn't have to ask. I'll try to 'splain it to you.
You see, there was this PLEDGE that the candidates signed, that stated that only 4 states could have their primaries/caucus's before February 6th. Clinton signed it, but now she wants to weasel out of it. Michigan and Florida broke the rules that everybody agreed upon.
Here's the text of the pledge...

Four State Pledge Letter 2008
Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina
August 28, 2007
WHEREAS, the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee, along with approval from the full body of the DNC, established the 2008 Presidential nominating calendar in 2005.
WHEREAS, the nominating calendar increases diversity with the early participation of African Americans, Hispanics, Asian Americans, Native Americans and labor members.
WHEREAS, the nominating calendar honors the traditional role of retail politics early in the nominating process.
WHEREAS, the nominating calendar provides geographical balance with contests in the Heartland, East, South and West.
WHEREAS, it is the desire of Presidential campaigns, the DNC, the states and the American people to bring finality, predictability and common sense to the nominating calendar.
WHEREAS, the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee will strip states of 100% of their delegates and super delegates to the DNC National Convention if they violate the nomination calendar.
THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, in honor and in accordance with DNC rules, pledge to actively campaign in the pre-approved early states Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina. I pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any election contest occurring in any state not already authorized by the DNC to take place in the DNC approved pre-window (any date prior to February 5, 2008). Campaigning shall include but is not limited to purchasing media or campaign advocacy of any kind, attending or hosting events of more than 200 people to promote one's candidacy for a preference primary and employing staff in the state in question. It does not include activities specifically related to raising campaign resources such as fundraising events or the hiring of fundraising staff.
___________________________ __________
John/Jane Doe, Doe for President DATE

Posted by: Joyce | May 26, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

"That's no doubt because he knew it would look so good on his politician's resume one day."
TIM

OK Tim, name one thing Hillary has done for the working class besides downing shots of imported whiskey and shipping their jobs overseas?

Posted by: JR | May 26, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

The majority of these comments are truly deplorable. How sad that this is on display for all the world to see.

Posted by: Lisa | May 26, 2008 2:34 PM | Report abuse

HILLARY LOST EVEN WITH FL AND MI.

WHAT NEXT? SUCK IT IN AND MOVE ON!!!!

ENOUGH WITH WHINING ALREADY!

Posted by: Kate | May 26, 2008 2:33 PM | Report abuse

Obama turned down offers in the six figures upon graduating from Harvard to work for a less than poverty wage (around $10k per year) as a community organizer. One of the tasks he took on was to help steel workers (in Pittsburg) either re-train, or find new jobs since many steel mills had closed.
----------------
That's no doubt because he knew it would look so good on his politician's resume one day.

Posted by: Tim | May 26, 2008 2:33 PM | Report abuse

Yes, Martha. Women must learn to campaign well to win office.

Secondly, women must learn that they will never win an election "qua women."

Posted by: Joe | May 26, 2008 2:32 PM | Report abuse

So Billary can dance and drink in Puerto Rico but will it matter in the big scheme of things? My guess is no. She and husband are a disgrace. She loves to spin a tale of what she will do as president but if it happened for her she would do the same old things with business as usual and America would not be better off at all. We need to detach from the past and look forward to the future with someone fresh like Obama. Even with his faults he is worth giving the chance as he is not an insider and not part of a "political machine." Clintons have been given too many chances and still America loses with them at the helm. Wake up America! She is all about pandering to get votes. The Clintons act like the mafia and have James Carville go on TV to embarrass anyone who crosses them. Hillary and Bill do feel a sense of entitlement to the office of president and this idea needs to be soundly rejected.

Posted by: G. Murphy | May 26, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Cindy Mccain crawl her ugly drug addict behind
-----------------
You piece of garbage!

Posted by: Tim | May 26, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

Henry stop trying to fool people. WE UNDERSTAND THE TECHNICALITIES OF THE ILLINOIS SENATE AND WHY A SENATOR WOULD VOTE "PRESENT."

Posted by: Jess | May 26, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Part deux - for what it is worth Jessica: | May 26, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

Our next president will be John McCain.

The Democratic Party will be electing another John Kerry or Michael Dukakis.

Obama will win the same states as the last election like California or Illinois.

The election will be determined by the smaller states.

The same states that Obama has been losing.

Posted by: Go Democratic Party! | May 26, 2008 2:29 PM | Report abuse

Jessica, I wish that would happen but sadly there are lots of stupid women who believe gender isn't an issue. Besides, nobody has criticized black people for almost unanimously supporting Obama but everyone has jumped on white women who support Hillary. Women still sit at the back of the bus and it isn't just men who are at fault - they are joined by women who are so good at keeping other women "in their place." Just look at the number of people on this board who laugh at "old white women" while they wouldn't dream of dismissing "old black women".

Posted by: AJ | May 26, 2008 2:29 PM | Report abuse

WOMEN SHOULD STOP EXPECTING TO BE "GIVEN" OFFICES.

HRC ought to have run an EFFECTIVE CAMPAIGN. Learn to fight like Benazir Bhutto, Ellen Sirleaf-Johnson and Margaret Thatcher etc.

STOP THE JUVENILE SULKING - YOU LOST FAIR AND SQUARE.

Posted by: Martha | May 26, 2008 2:28 PM | Report abuse

Barack Hussein Obama has certainly been one of the worst senators Illinois ever had voting "present" on nearly every bill.

Is this the "change" we can believe in?

why do you believe he will be any more effecting in the white house.

Barack is not even qualified to be a senator. Just ask anyone in Illinois.

Posted by: Henry | May 26, 2008 2:28 PM | Report abuse

People voting her, the majority of them, if they were surfing online to learn about her, would not be voting for her. That is why the web is filled with anti Hillary people in the first place.

Posted by: Alan | May 26, 2008 2:27 PM | Report abuse

She comes under criticism because she keeps opening her mouth and inserting her foot.

I resent the implication that Obama supporters and/or Internet users aren't aware of the "context" argument--we know perfectly well the spin that she and her apologists are attempting to put on her words.

She and her husband have done some good things, no doubt about it--but they have also ALWAYS been dishonest with the American people, and incredibly narcissistic in never failing to put the Clinton "brand" ahead of the good of the Democratic party.

For those reasons, this Obama supporter does not trust Hillary Clinton. That has been true since long before I knew a man named Barack Obama even existed.

Now, what has caused me to view Hillary Clinton as dimly as I currently do has been her own words and actions throughout this campaign. She has repeatedly damned herself out of her own mouth. Therefore, since I do not know the woman personally, I have no idea if there is any depth to which she will not sink, nor do I have any idea what she may or may not be capable of.

I find it perfectly realistic to think that someone like Karl Rove or Dick Cheney would consider a "by-any-means-necessary" approach to rid themselves of a political enemy (after all, look at what they did to Don Siegelman). Why should I automatically assume that Hillary Clinton won't? Because she's a Democrat? Whatever. Because she's a woman? Whatever.

Furthermore, this is about the fifth time she has made this same argument. Sometimes she actually uses the word "assassination", sometimes she doesn't. But the possibility sure seems to cross her mind an awful lot, and that alone is enough to make me fear and distrust her a great deal.

You have to understand that there are a lot of us out here who haven't believed in politics or the "system" in a long, long time. Barack Obama connects with me in a way that no other politician ever has. Despite my innate distrust in them, I trust him and I believe he has the best interests of the American people at heart. And I'm not some fool kid; I'm 36, and (by the way) a working-class white male from Mississippi.

You don't realize how much you missed having hope and belief in our government until somebody comes along and restores those feelings. But once they do, it's terrifying to think that someone could come along and take that person away. I wasn't alive during the 60's, but following this election, and having the hope that I have for Barack Obama, I can only imagine how devastating those times were. For anyone to invoke that, no matter how tangentially or whatever their true intentions--of course it's going to freak us out. What do you expect?

Hillary Clinton has a habit of stirring the pot, and then complaining when she sees bubbles in her soup. And a lot of people are getting sick of it--increasingly, contrary to the media spin, her own supporters.

Posted by: Initiate Plan B | May 26, 2008 2:26 PM | Report abuse

I don't hold my breath that you will bother with it....

http://www.pickensdemocrats.org/info/TheAgitator_070319.htm

Posted by: For what it's worth, Gus | May 26, 2008 2:26 PM | Report abuse

Answer me why Obama took his name of MI ballot? anyone?

http://iowaindependent.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1264

Posted by: Jessica | May 26, 2008 2:26 PM | Report abuse

This is the nation I have vowed to defend with my life?

Posted by: Ro | May 26, 2008 2:26 PM | Report abuse

"Can anyone tell me what Obama did as a community organizer"

Obama turned down offers in the six figures upon graduating from Harvard to work for a less than poverty wage (around $10k per year) as a community organizer. One of the tasks he took on was to help steel workers (in Pittsburg) either re-train, or find new jobs since many steel mills had closed.

I can only say that is how the story goes and no one seems to be challenging it. You can rest assured that if it wasn't true someone from the Clinton campaign research team would know by now and bring it to light.

Posted by: JR | May 26, 2008 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Obama will win the election.

Let the national campaigns begin and people will realise just how AWFUL MCCAIN REALLY IS.

Posted by: Tess | May 26, 2008 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Humility is what Obama camp is lacking.When you know that you probbaly have less vote that your competitor,you are less electable,got routed in swing states,campaigning to exclude voters from two swing states from primary rpocess and still have more pledged delegates due to a convoluted affirmative action route of selecting pledged delegates,you are expeted to show a little respect to your opponent.The utter disrespect you people are showing to a lady that has worked almost all her adult life for the party and poor people of this country will not be forgotten.Thank god McCain is not exactly Bush and we may have to just get used to another 4 year republican term.

Posted by: Joan | May 26, 2008 2:25 PM | Report abuse

LOL Henry...

Posted by: Jay | May 26, 2008 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Every woman out there who has been verbally abused and humiliated in public or private should think about sending Hillaryclinton.com at least $5. She is taking the punches for all of us.

Olbermanns's outrageous rant is a reminder why women at least white women must unite under Hillary as the afro-americans do for Obama.

Posted by: jessica | May 26, 2008 2:24 PM | Report abuse

Jane; I think you mean your "surgeon's wife..."

Posted by: Henry | May 26, 2008 2:24 PM | Report abuse

Hillary's experience is FAKE!!!

HOW MANY OF YOU WILL LET YOUR WIFE'S SURGEON OPERATE ON YOU?

Just because you have been married to a Gov./Pres. does not make you "experienced."

Posted by: Jane | May 26, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Ovamanists don't know that they alone can't take saint ovama to the White House. They don't know it because they wear winkers.

They need Hillary's supporters vote, if, and only if he wins the nomination.

The chances of saint ovama setting foot in the WH are inversely proportional to their attacks on Hillary: the longer they continue to demonize her, the smaller their chances of opening the door to saint ovama.

More people will vote for Hillary against McCain. The chances are better for her when she wins the nomination

Posted by: probabilities | May 26, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Just another example of Obama running a better organized, smarter campaign from Day One. Whereas the Clintons counted on her inevitability and didn't plan past Super Tuesday in February. (One more reason to choose Obama.) The sad thing for Clinton supporters is that on hillaryclinton.com there are no number counts. (Correct and direct me if I'm wrong...I couldn't find that info.) Numbers are upfront on Obama's homepage and details easily accessed. The FACT is Obama needs only 49 more delegates to win the majority and secure the nomination. Clinton needs 246 more delegates. If her supporters knew the truth about "hillary-math" they might not be so easily duped into thinking she's the winner.

Posted by: Joyce | May 26, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

No, it's truly a sad day when we elect an unqualified person to the Presidency!

Posted by: So sad! |
**********************

Wait, you and Bush are not running, right? Whew...then nothing to worry about!

Posted by: so sad is so eight years too late | May 26, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

FL and MI will be counted and BILLARY WILL STILL LOSE.

THEN WHAT?

IT'S THE MATH - STUPID!!

Posted by: Tina | May 26, 2008 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Can anyone tell me what Obama did as a community organizer and why have we not seen evidence of his good work as part of being a community organizer? I'm still wondering why no one has answered that. Where is the evidence?

Posted by: Gus | May 26, 2008 2:19 PM | Report abuse

I have wanted to stop criticizing Hillary, in print and on the Web, for the sake of Party unity, but unfortunately the statements coming out of her camp yesterday have made it impossible (at this juncture). Two points: 1) to blame the Obama campaign for the reaction to her assassination comment is appalling, and 2) Bill and Hillary's insistence on the importance of the so-called popular vote, which is a bogus metric, has the potential to undermine Senator Obama.

So she can dance in Puerto Rico, but I would much rather see her paying the piper....or at least stop saying things for which she needs to pay a piper

"Why I Can't Stop Criticizing Hillary (although I wish I could)
http://msa4.wordpress.com/.

Posted by: Mitchell in New York | May 26, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

No, it's truly a sad day when we elect an unqualified person to the Presidency!

Posted by: So sad! | May 26, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Hillary needs to drop out of the campaign and let the country and democratic party get on with the nomination of Obama. She has run a terrible campaign, never being able to control money or remarks from her that have deeply divided the democratic party--even though her steadfast pundits decry differently. We would not want her to run our country the way she has carelessly run her campaign. She and her husband are an embarrassment to America. They are both detached from reality and when looking at their actions in the past "some things never change." They're incapable of being gracious or playing fairly, making up their own rules as they go along. Getting rid of the Clinton political machine would be the best day in America. She will say or do anything to win the presidency, including drinking Presidente beer with the Porte Ricans just to show them she is one of them--lol! She is dividing the part just to make a point--what a selfish, self-serving woman including her husband. Get riddance to Hillary and her mood color pantsuits.

Posted by: Jim Hanes | May 26, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Obamatrons will be disappointed when Howard Dean is forced to count FL and MI because he has always said "50-state" strategy. The game will change.

Posted by: hank | May 26, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Awww, truth hurts, huh? Repeat after me: I'm a racist POS.

Posted by: AJ
**********************
I'm a racist POS...

Posted by: AJ | May 26, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Magdalen said:
"Most women can see through Obama"

You restored my faith in women...


Posted by: JohnT | May 26, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Well, Larry Sinclair already kinda did that back in 99...

Posted by: Mary | May 26, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

I have watched with amusement as HRC supporters have been willing TO THROW DEMOCRACY UNDER THE BUS.

The rules were set before the primaries. SHE AGREED AND LOST.

DEAL WITH IT AND MOVE ON!!!

Posted by: Emma | May 26, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Oh.........To dream about how things could be so different if Vice President Gore had not been such a good American and a gentleman and 'conceeded' the Presidential Race in 2000.

Posted by: Rover cant get over | May 26, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Obama will never have my vote and party unity is lost for the Democrats. Once the ultra leftist views of Obama are more widely known, I think he will not have a chance. Clinton isn't perfect but has a track record that is pretty good in terms of policies and legislation. She gets the work done to the best of her ability.
Young bloggers here seem to think it is appropriate to say that people older will die and stop bothering them and that experience doesn't matter. If they are lucky they will probably age too. You don't dismiss people because they are older than you. Younger people have had less time to process information and life experience, something that only older people can realize because they've been through it. I don't know how this election will turn out but I think that the idea it will be better than the Bush Administration is mute.

Posted by: Lynn E | May 26, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Despite the present furore over Clinton's comments, she would be a far likelier target for assasination than Obama. Lots of people out there hate her so much they'd go to great lengths to kill her.

Posted by: Luke | May 26, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Obama is one of the most arrogant, pompous and condescending politicians that I've seen in my lifetime!

Posted by: Kay
****************************
Did you ever see Nixon? I mean up close? He was a real prick!I almost didn't want to pardon him...

Posted by: Gerald Ford | May 26, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

They keep saying "white working class" as opposed to whites but then say blacks because I don't think there is a "black working class"

Posted by: Jessica | May 26, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

These are the undeniable facts:

The math simply doesn't work for Hillary.

Without Florida and Michigan, Obama or Hillary need 2024.5 delegates to clinch the nomination. To date, here is the breakdown for where they stand:
Obama 1969
Clinton 1724

If Hillary succeeds in getting Florida and Michigan added at full strength, then the needed delegates goes to 2,210, an impossibility, because that would mean the Rules and By-Laws Committee agreed to it, which won't happen.

Those delegations will most likely be seated at half strength which moves the magic number to 2,118 or 2,131, depending on whether the supers are also cut to half. Let's say it's the highest, 2,131 and that Obama gets ZERO for Michigan because he was not on the ballot. Using that worst case scenario, that means that Obama needs 95 delegates. Hillary needs 226.

Now. There are 212 pledged delegates in remaining primaries. To win, she needs all of them, plus 14 more Supers or some combination of each. This is not going to happen, especially if some of the Supers are looking for a reason to move to Obama. Her chance of winning this by the numbers, even with the best Clintonesque arm twisting, is ZERO. ZERO. It's clear that Obama is the next Democratic Presidential nominee.

And the truth is that Hillary has not only lost the nomination--and she lost it quite a while ago--due to the "we all know RFK was assassinated in June" and "hard working Americans, white Americans" comments she will also likely lose her Senate seat.

The New York Daily News has called her "sick", "disgusting" and added that, "she doesn't deserve to be elected dog catcher".
She immediate sent them an 'extended' explanation. But it is too late. Good riddance...

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Wanna see a racist? Take a walk to your bathroom's mirror and look straight ahead.

Posted by: Jay
**********************
why? you taped a picture of yourself there?
---------------------
Awww, truth hurts, huh? Repeat after me: I'm a racist POS.

Posted by: AJ | May 26, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Obama is one of the most arrogant, pompous and condescending politicians that I've seen in my lifetime!

Posted by: Kay | May 26, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

suzie from atlanta wrote about walking with bobby. i think what you did was courageous and very genuine not to mention exhausting. however, in comparison i would say that it is obama that is more in step with bobby because he is not afraid to "mingle" with the people. the same cannot be said of hillary because her venues are small to which few are invited. why? because when you grow up wealthy, you simply don't experience average people. i will give credit where credit is due however. billary does this work for her. he is a great speaker and a very adept liar but is not afraid of average americans. but the question begs to be asked; why can she not do this for herself? i'd buy her a shot of whiskey if i saw her walking the streets in a fashion that did not purvey nothing more that a photo op or campaign video. and then i would ask her; why would she want to exact a genocide against the iranian people? i thought bobby was for peace. therefore you somewhat betray your own background. peace and understanding? not hillary. status quo and self agrandizement is what i see there. bobby had an epiphany. hillary would change nothing. it's all about her.

Posted by: lonewolf | May 26, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Billary has lost - NOW THEY WANT TO BE CROWNED. SORRY THIS IS THE U.S. - NO MONARCHY HERE!!!

Posted by: Janice | May 26, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Where is your post about Hillary being a racist witch? If you don't write it, there will be no extra porn for you.

Posted by: AJ | May 26, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

Never in the history of the republic has so much of the nation's energy been wasted on the diarrhea of the mind that is flowing on the Internet "discussion forums." Imagine if this mental power had been used in the last year to develop ideas to solve problems, mentor children, work in the community and, in general, send out an overwhelming amount of positive instead of negative energy. We ended up with three candidates remaining (most now say only two) who have serious qualifications, experience. talents, knowledge and who have also devoted their adult lives to public service. We have trashed them. So long people. I've had enough of the hatred in most, not all, but most postings.

Posted by: Mandelay | May 26, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

Wanna see a racist? Take a walk to your bathroom's mirror and look straight ahead.

Posted by: Jay
**********************
why? you taped a picture of yourself there?

Posted by: Jay - where's silent Bob? | May 26, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

Yes, Rasputin; HRC is "solid and unwavering" in her HYPOCRISY AND DETERMINATION TO DESTROY THE DEM. PARTY.

She loses even with FL and MI - PERIOD.

Posted by: Molly | May 26, 2008 2:12 PM | Report abuse

TAWANDA!!

Posted by: nana4 | May 26, 2008 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Elizabeth -where is your post on Obama is a christian fascist? You are late and if you do not write it, there will be no extra rice with your check.

Posted by: www.post something bad about Obama. com | May 26, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

Gov - That's cute, but seriously, Obama has massive support among tech savvy people. These are people who can not only turn on a computer and point and click at web pages, but can also design webpages and edit videos without referencing "for dummies" books. Far from having "2 second" attention spans, we are the ones that get paid good money to help people like Mrs. Clinton and her supporters not only turn on their computers, but do something useful with them once they are on.

Among the tech savvy, Ron Paul and Obama are the favorites. These are people who do more with their lives than stare vacantly at a television screen for an average of 4.5 hours a day and trade gossip about hollywood "hunks" and what's been happening in "Days of our Lives"

Posted by: Benjamin | May 26, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

suzie from atlanta: who would want your funky shoes? They got crazy cooties on them! You want to walk a mile in someone's shoes, try to walk in those that boycotted the buses in Montgomery. Of those that marched for freedom in Selma.
----------------------
Wanna see a racist? Take a walk to your bathroom's mirror and look straight ahead.

Posted by: Jay | May 26, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

This is so delicious.


The dems/socialists stood by during the Clinton scandals throughout the 90's and now they are surprised that the Clintons are all about the Clintons. On top of that, the party that wanted to count all the votes since 2000 now has turned 180 degrees and has decided that idea can be disposed of along with Hillary in exchange for an arrogant, unproven, empty suit. Good luck and I can't wait for the cage match in Denver. Yummy!

Posted by: Nelson | May 26, 2008 2:10 PM | Report abuse

Alee21

What are smoking...this is the most despicable person in politics that has come along in some time.

Even before this presidential election, the mainstream media has noted her to be untrustworthy and incapable to tell the truth, 6 out of 10 americans have this opinion of her.

True due hard supporters like yourselve will not waiver on iota, no matter what the truth nay be, however this says more about you than her, saddly.

"No amount of Clinton-bashing and bashing of Clinton supporters will change our minds. Clinton supporters support Senator Clinton because of her spirit, her intelligence, her experience, her record of accomplishments and her stance on policies."

Posted by: without clinton | May 26, 2008 2:09 PM | Report abuse

The TRUTH is that HRC loses even when FL and MI are counted.

If all states mattered to her, she would have campaigned against their disqualification when she was still the "inevitable candidate."

Posted by: Miriam | May 26, 2008 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Among the three, Hillary is the best. She is solid and unwavering. I am confident she will emerge victorious against all. She has lost some friends but many more have come her way. The Clinton are the only two term Democrat President since Truman. They brought prosperity and surplus.
Obama is an opportunist. He knows he can manipulate both blacks and whites to his advantage. Any white who dare criticize him will be tagged racist. But he forgets that Probability is against him. If people sense that race is an issue, then the probability of a Black President is very small. Even if he succeeded forcing his way to become nominee he would face the same fate as George McGovern and would bring down the Democrat Party with him.
In another word, either Hillary or Obama as nominee,there will be a real change. If Hillary is the nominee, the country will be lucky and she will reform both the country and her party. If Obama is the nominee,he will surprisingly be crushed by McCain.The Democrat Party,exploded, will reform itself. Nancy may not stay Speaker. Dean will say good bye to his last job.
McCain is the luckiest Grand Pa President.

Posted by: Rasputin | May 26, 2008 2:09 PM | Report abuse

suzie from atlanta: who would want your funky shoes? They got crazy cooties on them! You want to walk a mile in someone's shoes, try to walk in those that boycotted the buses in Montgomery. Of those that marched for freedom in Selma. You are a simpleton racist and if you do walk away from the democratic ticket, do it fast so that smell of your feet fades... bye, bye

Posted by: Sally from planet Earth | May 26, 2008 2:08 PM | Report abuse

"One person, one vote!" What a joke that is! I'm from Miami and I get no vote at all! It seems that the Democratic Party isn't democratic. If Obama and the Democratic Party do not count my vote then I will vote for McCain in November! Rest assured!

Posted by: Cindy | May 26, 2008 2:08 PM | Report abuse

The highest-ranking leader in U.S. is Main Stream Media. Russian and Chineese ditto are MORE balanced.

The next LEADER is Obama-online-experts. Young college students, teachers, advertisers and other elitists. They are in possession of the same knowledge as Hezollah and they are using the same methods to belittle and humiliate Obamas opponents - Hillary Clinton in particular.

Barack Obama is a "JUDAS GOAT". THE JUDAS GOAT is trained to associate with SHEEP OR CATTLE, leading them to a specific destination. In stockyards, a Judas goat will lead sheep to slaughter, while its own life is spared. His own hands are "clean" but his conscience is not.

He abandons one freind after the other - Rev. Wright his religious adviser since twenty years, Tony Rezko and William Ayes, Hamas and Jimmy Carter.......AND SHE SHOULD ABANDON HIS OWN WIFE.

Excuse bad English, I am an oriental but I regard myself as being clear-sited.

Posted by: Elisabeth | May 26, 2008 2:08 PM | Report abuse

When we brainwash our portube-rocks-the-vote druggies to go out and post nonsense - I mean - facts, we are unable to pay well. Jonathan is really into the web and rap music and Obama rocks dude!, he hates Hillary and stupid old women who don't take their bras off so that is what qualifies him. We give him words like "kitchen sink" and "racist" and "old politics" and make sure that each of his posts mentions Whitewater and Bill. He will be coming out with a "Hillary is a mean old white witch who will bring uneducated idiots from the backwoods to destroy us" one shortly. We will be sure that hisspelling improves. Thank you for your interest...

Posted by: AJ | May 26, 2008 2:07 PM | Report abuse

HRC: "What could I have been thinking! Of course I'm sorry that I mentioned Bobby Kennedy's assassination. My friends, the Kennedys, have been much on my mind lately. But while I still think I am the better candidate, I would deeply regret getting the nomination through any misfortune of my friend, Barack Obama. My recent mistakes clearly show that the stress of the campaign has worn heavily on me, so I will be suspending my active quest for the Democratic nomination for President. I do urge my supporters in the remaining primaries to vote for me, and perhaps we can claim a moral if not delegate victory at the convention. After a brief rest, I will return to my duties in the Senate and be ready to devote my strength to achieving many Democratic victories in November, especially in the White House."

Wow, what a speech! Oh damn, I'm here again! Excuse me, I was just reliving a Hiliary press conference from a parallel universe in which she went down in history as a great American heroine. She said that just before finally apologizing for her Iraq War vote. A couple of years later, Obama appointed her to be Chief Justice after John Roberts got elected Pope.

Posted by: RaymondTAnderson | May 26, 2008 2:07 PM | Report abuse

Obama is the most HUMBLE AND HONEST CANDIDATE OUT THERE.

His humility is the reason why he planned for the long haul and was duly rewarded by the majority of primary voters.

Posted by: Emma | May 26, 2008 2:06 PM | Report abuse

It is painful to me that Democrats started off with so many good candidates and now the intraparty division has grown so deep and rancorous that both Obama and Clinton seem pretty damaged. It is clear that either Obama or Clinton would be a much better choice for dealing with cleaning up Bush's mesh than McCain. Both would appoint better supreme court justices. Both would be more progressive.

Posted by: birdman | May 26, 2008 2:06 PM | Report abuse

I have supported Hillary from the beginning and I will never support Obama.

He's not qualified to be president and for all his claims of superior leadership and judgement, there is no evidence.

If he were a true leader, he would count the votes in Florida and Michigan. One principle of our democracy is "One person, one vote!"

Posted by: Dan | May 26, 2008 2:06 PM | Report abuse

The people here posting that they will vote for McCain if they can't vote for Hillary are racists. Just save some time and post I'm a racist. You are a dying breed in America and get used to saying President Obama.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Uhh.. the Vote Different mashup wasn't created by just any Obama supporter. It was created by an employee of Blue State Digital -- a consulting firm his campaign is paying tons of money to. And coincidentally, the same firm that Joe Rospars, Obama's New Media Strategist is on leave from.

Hmmm... interesting new media strategy. And a foreshadowing of the nasty "no fingerprints" campaign the Obama has waged. To all of you saying that the Obama campaign has not jumped on the Kennedy reference, check the facts -- his campaign pounced and continued sending memos out even after Obama said he accepted her explanation. Consistently a big difference between what we hear Obama say and what his campaign does behind the scenes.

Reminds me of a certain President...

Posted by: Disgusted Democrat in Virginia | May 26, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

GO Hillary GO - GO AWAY !

Posted by: ratl | May 26, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

Obama is one of the most arrogant, pompous and condescending politicians that I've seen in my lifetime!

Posted by: Kay | May 26, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse

Jessica is an IDIOT. YOUR CANDIDATE LOST!!!
WHY DON'T YOU EXPLAIN TO ME OTHERWISE RATHER THAN THIS BS.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse

Suzie from Atlanta - stop the rumbling; we've had enough of that from HRC.

Besides, NOBODY HAS STOPPED HILLARY FROM CAMPAIGNING.

SHE HAS INVENTED HER OWN DEMONS AND CONTINUES TO FIGHT THEM AS WE LOOK ON IN WONDER.

Posted by: Jill | May 26, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

never, never ever Hussein, if not Hillary,vote McCain.

Posted by: hank | May 26, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

Before this year I had positive feelings toward Bill Clinton and would have happily voted for Hillary Clinton if she was the Democrats' choice. Boy things sure have changed in a year. Bill Clinton has embarrassed himself over and over again and completely destroyed his positive legacy (I sure think he's a loon now) and Hillary has proven all those who, last year, I dismissed as ignorant haters as actually being right on. Senator Clinton has proven to me over the course of her campaign that she is an awful person with few redeeming qualities who is so hungry for power she is willing to do anything to get it.

I don't understand this delusion that so many of her supporters seem to have that Obama did something to her. Barack Obama has run a commendable and mostly positive campaign and legitimately winning more votes is the only thing he has done to her.

As a woman I am disgusted by her recent calls of sexism. Mrs. Clinton did so many positive things for women in politics it seems mighty counter productive to nit pick on the few (very very few) examples of misogyny out there and to paint herself as a victim instead of as a pioneer and champion for the advancement of women. I look forward to a woman president, but not this woman.

The nomination was Senator Clintons to lose and she did just that. She ran a terrible campaign with the wrong message, poor management, and awful money handling. She got herself where she is and the blaming of others for her deficiencies needs to stop. I think her "electability" argument is absolutely ridiculous but at this point I would rather lose with Obama than win with a witch like her.

Posted by: Kate | May 26, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

Barack Obama voluntarily took his name of the ballot in MI becaue he was losing by 20% everyone in MI know this. See Oct. 07 Iowa new story explaining his strategy.


http://iowaindependent.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1264

Posted by: Jessica | May 26, 2008 2:02 PM | Report abuse

There are few people in american politics that are as unscrupulous as the Clinton's.

Hillary who has grown up during the anti-establishment rebellious hippie generation, critical and deploring all the manipulation, hypocrisy etc...that she saw in society, has now come to epitomize this behavior.

She is truly a shameless shameful person, her true character came out last week with her freudian slip, (A verbal mistake that is thought to reveal an unconscious belief, thought, or emotion).

For Hillary a dark soul lurks underneath that false populist veneer, this is a person who welcomes and hopes for the assassination of her political opponent.

Yet her supporters are still with her, they have become blind convinced by her propaganda that all is everyone's else fault.

And they say americans are to smart for believing in blatant propaganda, not when it comes to Hillary it seems.


Posted by: Without Clinton's | May 26, 2008 2:02 PM | Report abuse

Hip Hip Hurray for Suzie from Atlanta for all women who have courage! A woman with courage is a rare thing!

Posted by: AJ | May 26, 2008 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Elisabeth, please learn to write and spell, then repost.

Posted by: DH | May 26, 2008 1:44 PM

*************************
When we hire our shills to go out and post nonsense - I mean - facts, we are unable to pay well. Elizabeth is unemployed, she hates Obama and minimum wage suits her, that is what qualifies her. We give her words like "Judas" "fake" and make sure that each of her posts mentions Rezko. She will be coming out with a "Obama is a muslim/christian fascist who will bring aliens from another planet to destroy us" one shortly. We will be sure that her spelling improves. Thank you for your interest...

Posted by: Elizabeth did it - so can you! contact www.post-a-bad-thought-about-Obama.com | May 26, 2008 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Whether Hillary meant anything untoward isn't the issue. She can't possibly suggest that she's more qualified to be President. Sure Obama and Clinton have had their gaffes, but Hillary can't say that Obama's gaffes count for than hers.

HRC is sitting where she is because she couldn't roll-out a comprehensive primary campaign. When she story boarded her primary campaign, there was a big blank spot between Super Tuesday and August. Obama outmaneuvered her. The primaries/caucuses weren't unfair because she didn't win them, they are what they are.

The Clintons have made a career of moving the goal-posts whenever the outcome of the game appeared to go against them.

The Clintons believes that they have a huge reservoir of good-will after Bill's impeachment. The American people favored Clinton because they felt that the GOP was moving the goal-posts in trying to "get him".

Goal-post moving is akin to cheating. If you can't play within the rules, don't play the game!

Get lost Clintons!

Posted by: Roofelstoon, | May 26, 2008 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Obama supporters are like Obama himself -
delusional
conniving
deceitful
hypocritical
superficial
arrogant
self-important
supercilious

I am not white, I am not bitter, I am not poor and I am not uneducated and I am not a "low information" content voter.

I do not have party alliance, but I do vote and certainly will not vote for Obama, the latest of those infamous Chicago politicians, whose rhetoric on change is "change your vote to vote for Obama". Obama's tactics have been transparent and despicable.

No amount of Clinton-bashing and bashing of Clinton supporters will change our minds. Clinton supporters support Senator Clinton because of her spirit, her intelligence, her experience, her record of accomplishments and her stance on policies.

Posted by: alee21 | May 26, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Of course Senator Clinton is a splendid target and it is ENTIRELY of her own making.

She, her husband, and her campaign team are completely out of touch and have failed miserably to understand how news, views and events are shared around the globe by mainstream media, the web, blogs, and live streaming.

They have also failed to graasap that anything spoken, written, or recorded in the past is available at the touch of a button in every household in the nation with a PC and wired up to the Internet.

Hence the word's laughter and contempt for Senator Clinton when she said (three or four times) she had been under sniper fire in Bosnia. Is she really surprised folk rolled around with laughter when the videeo footage showed her and Chelsea calmly walking out of the back of a helicopter, being received by a group including a young girl presenting flowers and walking slowly away!

And this is but one example of 'Spin Clinton' - or 'mispeak' as she calls it - which has been proved to be false. So many other episodes of deceit and 'spin clintion' are now out there on blogs, in the media, on video for all to see at the push of a PC 'enter' button.

No wonder more than 60% of Americans now do not trust Senator Clinton. That is a startling fact worth repeating. Over 60% of Americans do not trust Senator Clinton!

One can imagine therefore how many millions outside of America must be hoping and praying this seriously tarnished woman NEVER sits in the Oval Office other than as an invited guest - if she is lucky!

Posted by: geoffrey | May 26, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse

OldHonky, can you please crawl back to the dank Dark Ages hellhole you climbed out of? Thanks.

Posted by: Tim | May 26, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse

NOTE:

To BO supporters and the children, inner city, uneducated Blacks who are unemployed or underemployed, who hunt people with their stolen guns, do drugs and father kids AND LEAVE THEM, and HATE THE WHITE "MAN" FOR KEEPIN' YOU DOWN, GIVING YOU AIDS AND DRUGS

(How does it feel to be described like that, dismissed as a GROUP by demographic),

NOTE:

To Rich white "oh so liberals" and their spoiled kids and teachers, who feel guilty over the way they treated their maids over the years and think voting for a black guy will fix that, and do not mind the clear racism of the Obama campaign against YOU,

(beat me beat me in the name of love)
(Like that? another demographic),

FROM:

A 60 year old female supporter of Clinton who has never missed an election, worked on RFK's campaign, traveled for him, etc.

He did not have nomination in JUNE when he was murdered on National TV, we still had a couple of primaries left, he had only been in three to begin with, and his nomination was FAR from certain.

Like HRC, EVERYONE, all the DNC party bosses, were behind Humphrey, and telling him to get out.

LIKE HILLARY the DC establishment was throwing their support to Humphrey, and Bobby was busy trying to get them to hold off.

LIKE HILLARY Bobby was loved by the PEOPLE, not the DNC, and was a target of the media and pundits. They called him ruthless, vicious, the worst person in America, etc. READ YOUR HISTORY CHILDREN.

LIKE HILLARY they claimed he had "motives: for running, getting in, not getting out, WAS HURTING THE "PARTY", AND WOULD DAMAGE HUMPHREY AGAINST NIXON IN NOVEMBER

LIKE HILLARY they smeared and twisted his EVERY WORD.

But I was there in the GHETTOS, and in 1968 they WERE ghettos,

I was there with EARL GRAVES and

I was there when he got the love of the people, not by telling them they were right to riot, BUT BY TELLING THEM THEY WERE WRONG, THAT POLITICAL EDUCATION, ACTION AND INVOLVEMENT WERE THE ONLY WAYS OF CHANGING THE LAW.

I was THERE after MLK was killed, and I worked in the GHETTOS where riots had just taken place,

I worked those neighborhoods and I met the people and I HEARD their love and desire for BOBBY, and

IF HE HAD NOT BEEN ASSASSINATED IN JUNE, HE MIGHT HAVE GONE ON AND WON MORE PRIMARIES, MORE DELEGATES, MORE VOTES TO MAKE HIS CASE IN CHICAGO. I WAS THERE.

HRC has EVERY right to talk about Bobby.

Who doesn't have a right?

ALL OF YOU.

HIS SON and DAUGHTER are supporting HRC because they see what I see: a person who represents the same ideals his father did.

So why not join the rest of his extended family? Why not ride the coat tails of their pre-selected guy all the way to the Cabinet?

BECAUSE THEY SEE WHAT I SEE:

A PERSON WHO IS NOT THE RIGHT CHOICE, NOT BECAUSE OF COLOR OR HIS NASTY CHURCH OR HIS BITTER WIFE,

BUT BECAUSE OF WHO HE IS AS A PERSON.

Let me ask:

Does the Obama campaign have a bottom?

Is there anything they WILL NOT do or say to destroy the candidate who has,

in fact won more popular votes, done more to defeat poverty, increase educational opportunity FOR THEM,

improve our social safety nets,

REGISTERED MORE VOTERS,

and get us out of Iraq,

who has been working on these problems since she was 19?

He is afraid to debate her after ABC, where he looked like the empty suit he is.

He doesn't even bother to go to "her" states, as if those voters don't matter,

WHILE SHE WORKS HER HEART OUT IN SOUTHERN STATES WHERE "HIS VOTERS" GET THE DOUBLE LOADED DELEGATES,

He is AGAINST counting TWO states; the VOTES from those TWO states, where he ran ADS in FLORIDA ON RADIO AND CABLE, claiming he couldn't stop them....

OK...........then how did HRC and JE manage to NOT run ads or radio and cable? HOW ABOUT NOT BUY THEM to begin with?

He ran an email campaign in MI. telling his supporters to vote UNCOMMITTED, which 40% did.

NEVER has "uncommitted" received 40% of ANY vote before.

YET he does not want HRC to get these votes or delegates.

WHY? BECAUSE HE IS WILLING TO SACRIFICE DEMOCRACY TO HIS 'MISSION" TO BECOME THE FIRST BLACK PRESIDENT".

Never mind the cost to this country, never mind the hurt and pain he has caused by his name calling ("her votes are racist votes", while HIS 97% OF THE BLACK VOTE IS WHAT.......????),

never mind the incitement of violence he has caused to blacks supporting Clinton,

or the actual threat to Clinton herself by idiots like you on this Blog,

NEVER MIND HIS LIES, NAFTA, WRIGHT, REZKO, his list of gaffs that "go away" like magic with a wave of the media's magic wand,

never mind the DNC's fixing and rigging of this process, and their clear intent to BLOCK the only DEM candidate who can actually win against McCain,

INCLUDING NC, MO, and all the other "wins" he has in those GOP caucus states with NO ability to overcome the GOP majority,

OBAMA is going to STEAL this nomination by HOOK or by CROOK.

Why ignore REALITY?

GUESS WHAT: COUNT THE VOTES, DON'T COUNT THE VOTES, THE PEOPLE STILL VOTED AND THEY KNOW IT, AND THEY WILL REMEMBER THIS FOR YEARS TO COME.

MORE REALITY:

POLL: Newsweek National
Newsweek Survey of 1,205 registered voters, 608 registered voters that identify or lean Democratic,
interviews conducted 5/21-22 (article, results; via TPM).
National Among Registered Voters:
Vote Preference:
Obama 46, McCain 46

Clinton 48, McCain 44

Favorable/Unfavorable:

Obama 55/40

Clinton 53/43...

WOW! 3 POINTS DIFFERENCE IN UNFAVORABLE!!!
Guess Obama's chickens are coming home to roost!

POLL: Rasmussen Kentucky

Rasmussen Reports Kentucky
McCain 57, Obama 32...
Clinton 51, McCain 42...

GUESS THOSE "RACIST" VOTERS WILL STILL NOT "UNITE" AND MARK IN LOCK STEP AFTER ALL

DON'T take my word for it,

go to www.pollster.com

and see for your self.

So please Obama people of the "preferred demographic: Wealthy WHITES, POOR, UNEDUCATED FIRST TIME INNER CITY BLACK VOTERS, STUDENTS AND CLINTON HATERS, THANKFULLY, A MINORITY OF THIS COUNTRY

GO AHEAD AND FORCE HIM ON THE REST OF US.

WATCH US WALK AWAY!

HRC supporters: walk HERE! This is a VOLUNTEER, spontaneous out pouring of men and women who have been ignored, taken for granted, and dismissed by Obama and the DNC and the Super Delegates. WALK over to THIS:

http://www.walkamileinourshoes.org
Tell the Democratic National Committee: Don't Walk Away From Our Winning Base, Walk A Mile In Our Shoes.

Send a pair of shoes to the DNC TODAY!
Request that the DNC donate the shoes to women's shelters & recycle packaging.
1. Mail a pair of your shoes representing your walk in life to the DNC at the address below.
2. Send Virtual Shoes, an image of a pair of shoes representing your walk in life, to the DNC. OR CLICK HERE, then Cut-n-paste full text in blue box at left, and cut-n-paste the name of your shoe from poll list at left, into the DNC email window.
3. Vote in The First Ever Poll To Let You Speak With Your Shoes! Help tell the media how many of us want to be heard.

Where / Mailing Address:
Democratic National Committee
430 S. Capitol St. SE
Washington, DC 20003

Talk the Walk - Help us keep count of shoes, to report to the DNC
Include a printout of this Web page inside your package.
Mail to arrive by May 30th for Sat. 31st committee meeting.
All email virtual shoes should be sent to arrive as soon as possible and by midnight May 30th, 2008.


Posted by: suzie from atlanta | May 26, 2008 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Although Hillary Clinton is now in full-blown damage-control mode, the obvious literal interpretation of what she said is "Hey, if I just hang in there a little bit longer, some bigoted dork will put a bullet through Obama and I'll have a clear path to the Democratic nomination and to the Presidency."

Maybe she misspoke -- although she misspoke similarly at least once before. Or maybe it was a Freudian slip? Barack Obama, charitable as usual, attributed her remark to campaign fatigue, and no doubt that was part of the explanation for it.

Can we really get to sing "Ding, dong, the witch is dead" within the foreseeable future?

Posted by: oldhonky | May 26, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

Wilson, you say that "please know that when this piece of news first hit the airwaves that Sen. Obama's campaign encouraged the story". There's an interesting article over at politico.com - http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10604.html - which describes in detail the origins of the story. As it says there: "I urged Martin to keep his foot on the gas: Be the first to post reaction from the Obama campaign. Obama spokesman Bill Burton quickly obliged, denouncing Clinton's comments and saying such sentiments have "no place in this campaign." Burton's comments quickly went into Martin's blog post. Soon enough, several websites and cable news outlets were giving the story trumpet-blaring treatment."

All Obama's campaign did when the story first broke was give a response when asked for one (and I don't think it's remotely unreasonable for them to say that comments referring to assassination have no place in this campaign). The media didn't need any encouragement on the story - why would they? You've got Sen. Clinton referring to assassination in comments about why she's staying in the race, the idea that today's media would need encouragement on a story like that is absurd.

Posted by: Aengil | May 26, 2008 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Her base can't "grasp" the web? So who are all these Hillary supporters posting here? Just because Obama has lots of 2-second-attention-span supporters hooked up to porntube watching Obamagirl doesn't mean Hillary's supporters can't turn on a computer.

Posted by: gov | May 26, 2008 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Since his meteoric rise to political stardom in 2004 and more recently in the first quarter of 2008, the Senator of Illinois, Barak Obama, has generated much excitement, interest and intrigue? Why? His prospects of winning the Democratic Presidential nomination, thereby becoming America's first black Head-of-State, have galvanised renewed hope among large sections of the American population and the global Progressive Movement alike.

Media institutions are baffled by the character in question, his ideology or message of unifying a sharply divided country since 2001. On Thursday 8 May last, the Senator signalled his intention of reviving America's flagging democratic credentials when he told CCN Wolf Blitz that, "People want to see America lead the world. At the moment we are spending billions fighting two wars and building up other countries rather than investing in education, health, the economy and the country as a whole."

Obama's factual assessment of the problems of his country and the global realities of our time, demonstrates his capacity for understanding the value of change in quality, political leadership rather than the messianic drivel which sections of the media have been spewing during his campaign to change the status quo or `business as usual politics'.

From Iowa to North Carolina and Indiana, the Senator has showed the uncanny ability to empower citizens to trust (again) the system of Government, whilst renewing their faith in the `American Dream'. Critics who dwell on the colour-divide are suspicious that their own excesses will expose their fault-line in transformational politics especially for the good of the USA. The fact is, Obama's style may not fit the conventional mode of electioneering, but his politics is surely what is needed to stem the tide of race hate, religious strife and cultural bigotry, threatening to consume human civilisation.

Citizens who are both products and factors of racism and ideological demagoguery are conscious that genuine leadership is not built on division, hysteria and self-aggrandisement, since these vices can turn-off the most inspired and confident electorate.

Far from glorifying the definitive persona, Obama's campaign has portrayed the genuine face of politics, as a contest of ideas (the message) versus the practicalities of decision-making (policy objectives). Much of these could be found on his website even though some, in an effort to confuse the message of hope with renewal, have derided his `inexperience', without understanding that the logic of experience is based on access to opportunities, as well as equal entrée to the position of leadership. Recent history is replete with examples of leaders such as South Africa's, Nelson Mandela (first generation) and Britain's Tony Blair (second generation) who initially, didn't possess the `so-called statesmanlike' experience, and even though they were different personalities (in the case of Mandela and Blair), they were credited for nationalism, resoluteness, charisma and demonstrative leadership.

CNN's commentator, Jack Cafferty, put it succinctly when he said this about Obama. "He has the attributes of leadership, intelligence. He is astute, confident, and knowledgeable and is capable of winning the Democratic Nomination for the Presidency." Interestingly, Cafferty's judgement was shared by Republicans too, though with `tongue-in-cheek.

In his bestselling political autobiography, The AUDACITY of HOPE, Senator Obama, wrote that "I think America has more than been a force for good than ill in the world. I reject a politics that is based solely on racial identify, gender identity, equal orientation, or victimhood generally." In essence this encompasses the ideals of Obama and a reflection of being a product as well as a factor of the `American Dream'. So, how can the Senator's brand of politics galvanise the progressive forces the world over, for good?

First, he is first real politician of this century who believes and acts according to his values while empathising with others. Second, it is rare to see a relatively young politician, capable of commanding respect across generations, professions, races, cultures, gender and other persuasions. Third, it is the first time in a Western democracy has there been a black person, given almost unfettered access to compete for the high stakes of national office - the Presidency.

Fourth, it is the first time that such a candidate has influenced masses of people to invest their time, money and other resources into electing a candidate they feel can make a real difference to the lives of millions. Fifth, it is quite surreal that a Democratic Party has been forced to acknowledge that not only change is inevitable, but that change is warranted.

Undeniably, in the modern world of governance, Senator Obama will be regarded as the embodiment of Progressive Politics, one that is based on political unity, economic equality, social harmony, cultural tolerance and ideological pluralism. His brand of politics is a (living) philosophy that few politicians of his generation will be able to fathom, more so, emulate, for a long time.

Posted by: C.A. Johnson, S.America | May 26, 2008 1:53 PM | Report abuse

Mike you are so right. Young people are so gullible and empty-headed.

Obama is clever in that he panders to their lack of gravitas and wisdom. Image is important to them, and this is very worrying. Obama poses as if he were the modern Jesus Christ in blue jeans, spreading the word of Change as though he had invented it. Obama professes that he will rid America of all her woes, as though he is the new miracle maker.

Posted by: Magdalen | May 26, 2008 1:53 PM | Report abuse

HRC: "What could I have been thinking! Of course I'm sorry that I mentioned Bobby Kennedy's assassination. My friends, the Kennedys, have been much on my mind lately. But while I still think I am the better candidate, I would deeply regret getting the nomination through any misfortune of my friend, Barack Obama. My recent mistakes clearly show that the stress of the campaign has worn heavily on me, so I will be suspending my active quest for the Democratic nomination for President. I do urge my supporters in the remaining primaries to vote for me, and perhaps we can claim a moral if not delegate victory at the convention. After a brief rest, I will return to my duties in the Senate and be ready to devote my strength to achieving many Democratic victories in November, especially in the White House."

Wow, what a speech! Oh damn, I'm here again! Excuse me, I was just reliving a Hiliary press conference from a parallel universe in which she went down in history as a great American heroine. She said that just before finally apologizing for her Iraq War vote. A couple of years later, Obama appointed her to be Chief Justice after John Roberts got elected Pope.

Posted by: RaymondTAnderson | May 26, 2008 1:52 PM | Report abuse

Spouse of popular former President is not equal to viable choice to lead our nation.

It's that simple... it always has been.

Done.

"Same as it ever was."

Posted by: PulSamsara | May 26, 2008 1:52 PM | Report abuse

Hillary can't grasp the web because her base doesn't want to. Look at her core group of supporters: Older women, rural whites. No quite the younger, more technologically inclined crowd that Obama has.

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

Posted by: matt | May 26, 2008 1:50 PM | Report abuse

keep in mind, that if it were not for the net she would be able to get away with the obfuscation, triangulation, and prevarication that served her so well in the '90s.
__________________
Rush, is that you? I'd have thought you'd be out smoking cigars and fishing on Memorial Day.

Posted by: LJay | May 26, 2008 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Quote: "The economy doesn't matter either. I've got mine now; they may hve to actually crawl out from behind their computers and get a job, maybe 2 jobs, to support their lifestyles. Healthcare? I'm older, I have my insurance; they will have to figure it out for themselves. They will need to roll up their sleeves and put those highly toned, gymned up bodies to work, for a "Change"."
(
Nana, you are all wet if you think that only younger people support Obama. I am white, college educated, retired from the medical profession and I support him as do all my friends. (BTW we all still have gymned up bodies). Old, educated, retired, (white if that matters) and thinking people for Obama.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 1:46 PM | Report abuse

I am glad to see there is no shortage of Hillary excuser's on this blog. It is your pity that fuels her nonsensical campaign. You all are going to make her the biggest victim of all time. Good for you. I just want you to know her self-pity and all your blame game has done NOTHING to promote feminism. In fact I look at her with nothing but disgust as she has set back our movement by years. As an older woman who has had to fight for everything in a truly sexist industry, to watch her use our gender as an EXCUSE is deplorable and makes me sick. She has faced no more sexism than Obama has racism. Yet, he NEVER goes out and complains on the news or radio or in papers - POOR ME. Yes, some bloggers do this but certainly not at his encouragement. You all go vote for McCain, but as you vote to send my and your children off to a MERITLESS war to die than think about what really motivated you. When you vote to put in new Supreme Court justices that will set back the Women's movement for the next 40 years, realize your foolish belief in a pity campaign is the cause.

Posted by: Shannon | May 26, 2008 1:46 PM | Report abuse

jose can you see that you have fallen into the clinton is victim mentality. yes, she has been the source of much attention on the net, but it is not undeserved, in fact she did a lot to earn all of this attention.

keep in mind, that if it were not for the net she would be able to get away with the obfuscation, triangulation, and prevarication that served her so well in the '90s.

Posted by: marianne | May 26, 2008 1:46 PM | Report abuse

if god forbid, something were to happen to obama before november, how would hillary's comments look then? the comments she made were desperate, insensitive(towards the entire kennedy family),and just downright mean. the timing was obviously poor, and i believe that she genuinely wishes she had not made them. nonetheless, she continues to compound her problems by blending together a concoction of apologies and finger-pointing aimed at her opponent. mean is mean, no matter how it is spun. and hillary is looking extremely spun at this point. when she came to portland or. she got a town hall meeting. obama got 75000 supporters. when her husband spoke at lincoln hi one month prior to that he layed out foreign policy priorities that she later added a week later to her own speeches. so who would be the "boss"? why speculate at all? we want obama and we will have obama, if for no other reason than to prove to ourselves and yes to others around the globe as well, that it is time for the people to speak for themselves as opposed to the same old neo scare tactics that have so miserably failed us. "either you are reason, or for war; there are only two paths here". i choose reason.

Posted by: lonewolf | May 26, 2008 1:45 PM | Report abuse

Elisabeth, please learn to write and spell, then repost.

Posted by: DH | May 26, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

The reason young people are supporting Obama and not Hillary is because they are every bit as bigoted as anyone else. The idea that young people are innocent and fair is a MYTH. They will vote for the youngest candidate and the one they find most likable. An old woman isn't likable... and Obama is so cool. That's what the 'politics of change' boils down to: high-school popularity contest.

Posted by: Mike | May 26, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

The highest-ranking leader in U.S. is Main Stream Media. Russian and Chineese ditto are MORE balanced.

The next LEADER is Obama-online-experts. Young college students, teachers, advertisers and other elitists. They are in possession of the same knowledge as Hezollah and they are using the same methods to belittle and humiliate Obamas opponents - Hillary Clinton in particular.

Barack Obama is a "JUDAS GOAT". THE JUDAS GOAT is trained to associate with SHEEP OR CATTLE, leading them to a specific destination. In stockyards, a Judas goat will lead sheep to slaughter, while its own life is spared. His own hands are "clean" but his conscience is not.

He abandons one freind after the other - Rev. Wright his religious adviser since twenty years, Tony Rezko and William Ayes, Hamas and Jimmy Carter.......AND SHE SHOULD ABANDON HIS OWN WIFE.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Wilson,

I agree with you that unless there is a significant shift in the attitude of the Democrats, McCain has all but won the election.

Posted by: Lisa | May 26, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

The dismaying aspect of Clinton's rise is not that she rose. After all, she is a talented politician and is well-qualified to be President. The dismaying aspect is she rose after adopting the concept of victimhood as her theme. She is fighting for all victims... anyone who has been kicked down, and got back up... anyone forgotten and looked down upon by the liberal elites.... anyone that the hoity-toity economists fail to think about.

Her surge on the back of victimhood is dismaying. It speaks volumes for how many folks view themselves in this country.

Posted by: steve boyington | May 26, 2008 1:42 PM | Report abuse

I agree with what Wilson said.Its NOT "republican masquerading as Obama supporters".You just have to watch MSNBC or check Huffington post out to see the true colors of Sen.Obama and his supporters.Just pure vitriol is being spewed against Sen Clinton.

Posted by: Dean | May 26, 2008 1:42 PM | Report abuse

If the Clinton supporters feel that the statements of ostensibly Obama supporters were deliberately orchestrated, just go ahead and register as a supporter of Obama and see if you get any emails or other communications asking for his supporters to be obnoxious.

I contributed to his campaign and all the correspondence has been above reproach.

There are more than 1.5 million contributors to his campaign and even if some of his supporters comments have been a little over the top, this corresponds to less than one-tenth of one percent of his supporters. There are always over enthusiastic supporters of both sides.

There was also a recent report that the McCain campaign was seeking 'trolls' to do dirty work on the internet.

So take every comment on the internet with a grain of salt.

Cheers

Posted by: Hobbs | May 26, 2008 1:41 PM | Report abuse

Rotten Vargas article trying to defend Clinton. Her RFK comments are totally revealing and ghoulish. And now she blames Obama. PUKE!!

Posted by: qualquan | May 26, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

The highest-ranking leader in U.S. is MSM.
The next is Obama-online-experts. Russian and Chineese medias are more balanced.

Young college students, teachers, advertisers and other elitists. They are in possession of the same knowledge as Hezollah and they are using the same methods to belittle and humiliate Obamas opponents - Hillary Clinton in particular.

Barack Obama is a JUDA GOAT. THE JUDAS GOAT is trained to associate with SHEEP OR CATTLE, leading them to a specific destination. In stockyards, a Judas goat will lead sheep to slaughter, while its own life is spared. His own hands are "clean" but his conscience is not.

He abandons one freind after the other - Rev. Wright his religious adviser since twenty years, Tony Rezko and William Ayes, Hamas and Jimmy Carter.......

Posted by: Elisabeth | May 26, 2008 1:39 PM | Report abuse

Its a big mistake at this point for the presumptive nominee to orchestrate even more charector assassination of a fellow democrat,that too a women who has equel support as himself amongst the voting public(if not the partisan media lapdogs or loud mouthed bloggers).This gives Hillary supporters an even better reason to stay home or vote for McCain come November.

Posted by: Dean | May 26, 2008 1:39 PM | Report abuse

To those arguing that "there are posters masquerading as hate-filled Hillary and Obama supporters in hopes of intensifying the strife and division within the party," please know that when this piece of news first hit the airwaves that Sen. Obama's campaign encouraged the story. To anyone who listened, 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 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.

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 and also 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. As a life-long Democrat, I'm convinced that the only way Sen. McCain can loose is if he embraces the right wing nuts in his party. With Sen. Clinton out of the race, he has a large part of the Democratic vote in my area--mine included.

Posted by: Wilson | May 26, 2008 1:38 PM | Report abuse

I am reconciled to the possibility that Hillary will not be the nominee, no matter how much of the popular vote she receives or how much the people may want her. I also am confident that I cannot be a part of a fanatical, hate-filled, manipulative effort and will not vote for Obama, no matter who is on his ticket with him and no matter how hard Hillary will work for his election. I know, now, with their recent strategy revealed re her comment about campaign timelines, how their campaign has operated. It is clear to me now, so soon after the appeasement issue, that their strategy has been spinning and distorting to their perceived political advantage anything it takes to slander and to negate the opponent. They have exploited the idealism of an uninformed, unprincipled, unmotivated, underachieved youth who doesn't seem to value the history and the accomplishments for this country by the generation that they are dissing and inviting to leave the party. In spite of their college educations, they are not educated; they are not leaders; they are followers. They have grown up in a sheltered, comfortable world, where civil rights, womens' rights, were handed to them on a silver platter and they accuse the generation of protestors, marchers, advocacy, of "racism". There has been not one issue that they have embraced or "protested", or taken a stand on, or put their lives on the line for, and we have had a raging, illegal war for 5 years; an economy in the tanks; an evironment in peril; a threatened Constitution; a dysfunctional Dept of Justice; and a corrupt Administration for the past 8 years, long enough for their individual and collective consciousness to have been raised and long enough for them to have been old enough to have done something constructive to effect "Change". I have not seen them putting themselves on the line as my generation did in the 60s. Suddenly, they have come alive and have been inspired by the words of one little known individual who has been wrapped in a slick advertising package and we see how they will effect "Change": through hate, lies, ignorance, divisiveness, vitriole, slander, and they do this in the comfort of their homes behind the protection of their computers and fill the internet with lies and hate. They have no real concept of history; they take talking points given to them by campaign strategists and spit them out like robots with no critical thinking of their own. They are whipped into a fanatical frenzy with hate by a campaign that talks of Hope. They will disrespect anyone not in agreement with them, even the son of RFK Jr. In promoting their agenda of Change, they invoke the names of JFK, Martin Luther King, RFK, and they have no real knowledge or appreciation of the legacies of these great men. Their behaviors and their words indicate it is more exploitation to be used, they think, to their advantage. I knew JFK, MLK, and RFK, and, my friends, you are no JFK, MLK, or RFK! It is a disgraceful shame. Obama and his campaign have taken the inherent psychological profile of today's lazy youth and used it; you have created a monster not easily, if at all, rehabilitated. It is frightening that this is the generation that will be in charge of business, the economy, health, research, government, and the children of tomorrow. There is no way I will vote for Obama. I think his campaign is disgraceful and does not represent even a democratic process. I will vote for McCain; I know what I will get and it cannot be as bad as what I fear with Obama as represented by his supporters. I will have Hillary in the Senate, and if Obama is not pouting and bored because he did not win the Presidency and if he shows up for work, he will be there, too. Roe vs Wade no longer concerns me as that is just another benefit on that silver platter that someone else got for them. The economy doesn't matter either. I've got mine now; they may hve to actually crawl out from behind their computers and get a job, maybe 2 jobs, to support their lifestyles. Healthcare? I'm older, I have my insurance; they will have to figure it out for themselves. They will need to roll up their sleeves and put those highly toned, gymned up bodies to work, for a "Change".

Posted by: nana4 | May 26, 2008 1:37 PM | Report abuse

It is up to Obama to transcend sexism, but he can't sweetie, because he is himself a man who looks down on women, calling them lovely, sweetie this, lovely sweetie that.
A woman's value and beauty should never be judged on physical appearance. A woman is much much more than that. Think about it. Would Obama ever call Golde Meyer, Indira Ghandi, Margeret Thatcher, Angela Merkel, Madeleine Albright and Condoleeza Rice lovely or sweetie. I don't think they would appeal to him on that level. Just as well, as a woman's real value lies in the greatest assets such as courage, knowledge inof all human assets, her competence, intelligence, strength and talent. Bin the Sweetie. Most women can see through Obama, and therefore he has no chance of becoming President.

Posted by: magdalen | May 26, 2008 1:37 PM | Report abuse

We can add foul-mouthed too. Typical.

-------------------

As opposed to what.. racist and sexist, like you?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Quote: "On behalf of all poor, under-educated, white ladies of the United States, I'd like to say "f--k you"

We can add foul-mouthed too. Typical.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 1:35 PM | Report abuse

Fett,

Thank you for encouraging reason and perspective. In all the chaos of the primary, I hope the Democrats don't lose sight of the goal.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 1:34 PM | Report abuse

I'd also like to disagree with another point Vargas made - she didn't actually apologize. As the New York Times editorial board noted, she issued "one of those tedious non-apology apologies". She did not apologize, but expressed "regret", and not for what she said but rather "if anyone was offended".

Posted by: John C. | May 26, 2008 1:34 PM | Report abuse

"Obama is typical black person who cries racism for everything. Is this what we have to look forward to."

Obama has never cried racism. I have followed his campaign for a long time and have never heard him use race except for his speech in Philly, which he was forced into making.

Posted by: Marcus Pryor | May 26, 2008 1:34 PM | Report abuse

BTW, the Clintons are still on trial for fraud in the Los Angeles Superior Court. Look it up. That's case number BC304174.

Case Type: Fraud (no contract) (General Jurisdiction)
Status: Pending

Future Hearings

05/27/2008 at 09:31 am in department 47 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Order to Show Cause (RE CONTEMPT HEARING)

08/08/2008 at 08:31 am in department 47 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Further Status Conference

Documents Filed | Proceeding Information

Parties

CLINTON HILLARY RODHAM - Defendant/Respondent

CLINTON WILLIAM JEFFERSON - Defendant/Respondent

D. COLETTE WILSON ATTORNEY AT LAW - Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

DOYEN MICHAEL R. - Attorney for Defendant/Respondent

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON FOR U.S. SENATE - Defendant/Respondent

KREEP GARY G. - Former Attorney for Pltf/Petn

LEVIN JAMES - Defendant/Respondent

MACHTINGER LEONARD A. - Attorney for Defendant/Respondent

NORMAN JAN B. - Associated Counsel

NORRIS STERLING E. ESQ. - Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

PAUL PETER F. - Plaintiff/Petitioner

ROSEN DAVID - Defendant/Respondent

SMITH GARY - Defendant/Respondent

TONKEN AARON - Defendant/Respondent

WESTON GARROU WALTERS & MOONEY - Attorney for Respondent

WILLAMS & CONNOLLY - Attorney for Defendant/Respondent

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 1:33 PM | Report abuse

As another poster said, many of the nuttiest posts are likely from McCain supporters trying to widen the gulf between Democrats. I know that McCain is courting bloggers to do this sort of thing. So reasonable Democrats, don't lose heart! We will come together and crush the Republicans regardless of who's on the ticket. The hate-mongers on here posing as Dems won't distract us from taking back our country. Much love to all Clinton and Obama supporters.

Posted by: mrfett | May 26, 2008 1:32 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Barrie,

It's interesting to have your perspective from across the pond. Thanks for posting.

ps. I'm a huge fan of your work.

Posted by: Lisa | May 26, 2008 1:32 PM | Report abuse

I think Hillary will have a tough time getting re-elected to her Senate seat in New York after all the nasty comments. She is not going to be VP after talking about RFK's assassination - who would want her on the ticket after comments like that? This lady is not Presidential material.

Posted by: Jim in Illinois | May 26, 2008 1:32 PM | Report abuse

Who needs a bunch of old, poor, under-educated,white ladies (Hillary's own words about her supporters).
--------------------
On behalf of all poor, under-educated, white ladies of the United States, I'd like to say "f--k you"

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 1:32 PM | Report abuse

I'm an Obama supporter, but I seriously doubt that Clinton meant anything sinister by her remark. That said, she's really in no position to complain about the way her comment is being treated in the press and in the blogosphere. When Obama made his now-infamous "bitter" comment, Clinton jumped all over it, as did the press. And she had no problem using it to ascribe bad motives and character defects to Obama. She called him "patronizing" and "elitist" and basically made the remark the centerpiece of her PA primary campaign. She even distributed "I'm not bitter" buttons to her supporters.

Now, when she makes a dumb remark, she complains about how unfair this all is. And she's complaining even though the Obama campaign has given the assassination comment very little attention after the campaign's initial statement calling it "unfortunate." Unlike Clinton, Obama's not trying to make political hay out of this. So Clinton basically wants everyone to apply a double standard -- giving her the benefit of the doubt on any gaffe she makes, but letting her impute the worst possible motivation to Obama if he makes a slip. Sorry, but she can't have it both ways.

Clinton supporters always talk about what a "tough" campaigner she is. To me, this gives the lie to that claim. She seems like she can be a vicious or nasty campaigner, but when things get tough for her, she plays victim and blames everyone else. She dishes it out with relish, but seems unable to take it.

Posted by: FogCityJohn | May 26, 2008 1:31 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone know why Obama doesn't identify himself as biracial?

Posted by: Donna R. | May 26, 2008 1:31 PM | Report abuse

JMBarrie, stay out of our politics. Thanks.

Posted by: TS | May 26, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Given that Hillary Clinton has almost no chance to win the votes needed, and still remains in the race for now in case something "happens" to Senator Obama, it was newsworthy when Clinton invoked Robert F. Kennedy's assassination. It was not only newsworthy but also put Clinton in a position of deserving criticism. So I disagree with the premise of this Vargas post that the criticism of Clinton is driven by bloggers with an agenda.

Posted by: John C. | May 26, 2008 1:29 PM | Report abuse

If you can vote for McCain, go ahead. As the average of all polls show Obama is ahead in the GE. Who needs a bunch of old, poor, under-educated,white ladies (Hillary's own words about her supporters). You are now as irrelevant as the Clintons. Thanks goodness!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 1:28 PM | Report abuse

As European I consider myself rather neutral. The truth is that Sen. Clinton's statement has rebounded on all major European papers and to none of them occurred the idea that this comment was a harmless consideration about the status of the campaign. For someone who pretends to have more diplomatic experience, Sen. Clinton had a very poor choice of words. Later claiming that mean mean Sen. Obama's supporter took it out of context, seems to be a cold intellectual lie. Firstly since all official Sen. Obama's statements seem to minimize what occurred, secondly because all claims by Sen. Clinton's campaign refer to internet. Where the posts are anonymous! In fact cross checking I have discovered several people posting praise to Sen. Clinton and later insults to the same Sen. Clinton under the claim to be Obama's supporter.
There are a lot of people trying to manipulate opinions, and I would expect at least journalist making their job giving credit only to proved sources. This seems not to happen in US, this is a pity.
For the sake of ethicity, I would have much appreciated an apology from Sen. Clinton (she regretted to Bob Kennedy's family, may be I am old fashion, but that's no apology).
It would be a nice change (for once) to see Sen. Clinton recognising a mistake instead of trying to make guilty for her words always other people. This is just ridiculous to every person with a bit of intellectual correctness!

Posted by: jmbarrie | May 26, 2008 1:28 PM | Report abuse

Why are Dems still fighting amongst themselves? This is asinine! Are we united by values or by personalities? Why are Obama people still complaining about Clinton? Do you really believe she's racist? Geraldine Ferraro might be a little off, but let's stop acting like surrogates and misstatements are somehow windows into the soals of the candidates. Who cares if its Obama OR Clinton on the ticket? The important thing is OUR COUNTRY. Are you Americans or are you followers of your chosen deity (this goes equally for Obama and Clinton supporters). I know posting here is futile, but man these stupid comment sections really sadden me.

Posted by: mrfett | May 26, 2008 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Let's focus on the issues?! So what issue is more important in a democracy than fair representation and equality? When people like you keep bleating out about 'the issues' you are not getting that this IS an issue. It's an issue that affects millions of women every day.. dont' you get it?

Posted by: AJ | May 26, 2008 1:27 PM | Report abuse

MARY WROTE: well, mary wrote about that increasingly widening gulf known as the "double standard". as a man who has been drug into court and charged with petty crimes by the "high priestesses of vindictiveness and revenge, it's great to hear from a woman about what women have done; to themselves today. the other "double standard" that needs to be attacked is the propensity to sling mud at men based upon their sexual exploits. read any poll and you will see that women are just as likely to have an extramarital affair as a man. but, for some reason we shouldn't talk about this should we? i think we should or, we should quash the subject all together. i am certain that hillary would prefer that it be quashed.

Posted by: lonewolf | May 26, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

"aneducatedwoman" Rave on.
What you don't know is that this is a sanctioned blogger.
The Houston Chronicle has posted a second item, more harsh than the first. If they didn't approve, they would not allow it.
First, before you rant and rave, know what you are talking about. Move to Houston where we know the Clintons all too well.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

I really think true Democrats (not the hateful Repubs pretending to be) need to focus on the issues and unity. Unless you want 4 more years of arrogant policies then go ahead and vote McCain.

Posted by: vninja | May 26, 2008 1:25 PM | Report abuse

What bothers me the most about all of this bickering is the issue of gender equality. I am all for a woman in office, and have been for years. My concern is many of you are giving Hillary a free pass on her transgressions because you want a woman in the office more than most qualified candidate. If it were Kathleen Seibelus, Claire Mcaskill or any other woman I think the nature of this primary would have been vastly more positive. Vote McCain if you want, but your dreams of a woman in office and equal gender rights will simply be dust in the wind.

Posted by: vninja | May 26, 2008 1:23 PM | Report abuse

I had counted on Obama to be different. When he said his lawfirm did about 5 hours of work for Rezko in one of the earlier debates, my heart sunk. He lost my vote right then and there. Rezko helped him buy his house. Obama was not telling the truth. He's just another politician.

Posted by: gus | May 26, 2008 1:22 PM | Report abuse

"Be advised that there are posters masquerading as hate-filled Hillary and Obama supporters in hopes of intensifying the strife and division within the party. It's a new improved version of Operation Chaos.

Remember that online things are not always as they appear."

Lisa, you are a hoot!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 1:22 PM | Report abuse

TaskerFive

Regarding your comment to Veronica, you call Susan B Anthony a race baiter?! Really, did you know black men got their vote before women did? Did you know what F Douglas said about women's vote? So black men can be sexist but why women shouldn't be racist? If you did your homework as you call it, you would see that white feminists have done far more about rights of black people than black men ever did for the rights of women.. to this day, all feminist groups place great importance on fighting racism, even to the point of putting women 2nd (as when they refuse to criticize rap music for being mysoginist) yet how much do black leaders care about women's right, including white women's rights? Nothing! Black men don't care about women's rights and express hatred for women every day and yet you take the feminists for task for racism! You are either illiterate or you lack half a brain and a concience.

Posted by: AJ | May 26, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

Has anyone out there ever seen the movie, "The Bad Seed?" It's about a blonde blue eyed girl who will do anything to win a metal she came in second place for. She's charming, precocious, has all the adults around her completely fooled, knows how to dress, changes her persona to meet the situation, tells the adults what she thinks they want to hear. In the end it's discovered the pushed the little boy off the dock, stole his metal. It takes the entire movie for the 'adults' in the situation to find out. They are so charmed by her false facade that they can't believe she'd have gone this far to get something she coveted. It's one of the early Post-Freudian films exploring psychology. She's later found out to be the adopted daughter of a psychotic, murderous mother. Like Hillary Clinton and her campaign, the little girl twists the story, lies, displaces the focus. In fact, like HRC's campaign, it's a study in the 7 self-defense mechanisms that Freud delineated.
Former Clinton supporter: The tactics used in the HRC campaign shame all women with dignity who want their place in society won by dignified, intelligent means. Not by any means possible. Not at the expense of her and all our dignity.

Regretfully,

AGC
White woman, 52 years old, Feminist raising two feminist daughters.

Posted by: Arlene | May 26, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

HRC is not losing bco hostility to strong, successful women.
She has never succeeded @ anything w/o her husband's sponsorship. (Even her stint on the Watergate staff which I once thought proved her to be talented was from his recommending his GF.) She got her job @ a white shoe law firm from his connections. She got on the Wal-mart board while he was governor of his state
Strong successful women do not collude in their own abuse & that of other women. They also support other women's success. I have yet to see one statement as to HRC used her derivative power to help another woman succeed. (I'm sure we will now even if she has to "lend" her campaign ano mill or so.)
As a New Yorker I know how HRC relates to other women from her muscling aside so many qualified NY women to grab our Senate seat.
Strong, successful. My Aunt Tillie!

Posted by: Miri NY | May 26, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

Many of the comments here are thinly vieled personality attacks. None account for pluralism. Neither Sen. Clinton or Sen. Obama can win with only half of the Democratic electorate voting. None of the comments relate to local issues. This is the specious marketing that gets Republicans elected. Look at the facts and decide which campaign best supports your values and your interests. And to be fair, if we are asking Sen. Obama to transcend race we should ask Sen. Clinton to do the same. This should be one of the questions asked and answered before we sling claims of racism. Non-White voters have voted for White voters throughout US history.

Posted by: Ansis | May 26, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

"Per the Houston Chronicle..."

LOL. What your PUNY peasized brain did not recognize is a BLOGGER wrote that piece, who is NOT A PAID employee of the paper. Most certainly the Houston Chronicle has not published an editorial or sanctioned any of its staff to write it.

By your logic, one can find the following
"Per the United States, former Prime Minister of Great Britain Lady Thatcher is really a man who had gone through a most successful sex change."

It has not been proven true. It was merely an innuendo by a person who wrote on a website based IN the United States. Bien sûr, the person WAS breathing when he wrote it, but he/she did NOT represent the United States when he/she wrote it. I don't mean the person has breathed his/her last breath. I simply don't know.

(HUMANs ARE permitted to acknowledge there are things that they don't know about, you know. Mr. Albert Einstein didn't know everything; he had the long-run argument with Niels Bohr on quantum mechanics. But I am CONVINCED by his supporters that Mr. Barack Hussein Obama KNOWS EVERYthing. He TRULY is Jesus, Muhammad and Budda rolled into ONE. Which is WHY I cannot possibly vote for him. The White House in Washington DC is TOO SMALL for him. We must expand it to the size of Africa before it will fit his self-perception.)

Posted by: Brent | May 26, 2008 1:18 PM | Report abuse

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: AnEducatedWoman | May 26, 2008 1:18 PM | Report abuse

for all Hillary supporters. We should abide by the rules. After all we are all democrats like Michell Obama. Who claimed she would not vote for Hillary if she was the nominee. Now you can vote Mcain with no guilt if the first lady said so . We ought to listen !

Posted by: cvo | May 26, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Delegates and superdelegates like Carter will not succeed in securing Obama's nomination come June 3rd. Senator Clinton has every chance of still clinching it.
She's triumphed in Florida; Obama needs to be put on the ballot in Michigan so that the Michigan electorate can cast their votes for him IF they want to. Obama will easily fail there to. Senator Clinton will triumph in Puerto Rico, piece of cake. Who needs the dinosaur superdelegates, when Hillary WILL get the popular vote.

Posted by: Magdalen | May 26, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Obama, driven by raw ambition, is ruthless, devious, slick and sly in his conspiracy to swipe the Democratic nomination from Sen. Clinton. He is a radical left-wing liberal who will crash and burn in November.

His conspiring superdelegates, the "men's club" of losers - Kennedy, Kerry, McGovern, Edwards, Kennedy-clone Byrd ("Ted, Ted, my dear friend, I love you...I miss you...Thank God for you, Ted, thank God for you."), Carter - and pro-Obama biased media tyranny want the Democratic Party to go down the path of a train wreck in November with eggheads and African Americans.

Sen. Clinton is fighting a heroic battle for the future of America and all Americans. She must continue full speed ahead to the convention to win the nomination fair and square and save the Democratic Party from a disastrous defeat by McCain. All rational Democrats need to show steadfast support for her campaign by making frequent contributions at HillaryClinton.com.

SUPPORT DEMOCRACY...SUPPORT HRC...NO QUITTING ON DEMOCRACY!

Posted by: crat3 | May 26, 2008 1:16 PM | Report abuse

"veronica"

I can't argue that a strong woman can be thing that makes some successful men that way. If what you are saying is true, however, why wasn't Hillary running in 1992? 1996? In this case, obviously Bill paved the way and HRC is utilizing his campaign apparatus. Wouldn't you? of course you would, you support HRC so you must agree with her, no?
As a feminist, how do you feel about her race-baiting comments (hard working Americans, White Americans)? Ever meet a racist that wasn't a sexist? Well, I suppose you can count Susan b Anthony and Co., the original Feminist Race baiters. Do your homework on that one.

Posted by: TaskerFive | May 26, 2008 1:16 PM | Report abuse

This poor sad pathetic Obamafool doesn't know that everything on the web is not FACTS. I suppose that is why they are so uninformed. Obamafools are not highly informed voters, just highly gullible sheep. As a highly informed Obamafool, perhaps you should learn how to wright a coherent sentence. You probably believe that everything in Wikipedia is true. How truly sad and pathetic.

Posted by: Jack Straw | May 26, 2008 12:51 PM
---------------------------------
I assume this is sarcastic humor. You attack a huge number of people personally, accusing them of not knowing the FACTS. Yet your post is remarkably devoid of, well, FACTS. LOL!

So, I suppose you're really saying that the people who are "wrighting" about "Obamafools" are hypocrites, right? Well done!

Posted by: Scott in NC | May 26, 2008 1:16 PM | Report abuse

What a nasty bunch of people Obama supporters are! To intentionally blame Hillary for saying something she obviously didn't say, just because you want to hate her, because you want to see the worst in her. You're the liars not Hillary because you insist on twisting the truth to suit your purposes.

As for someone named "Sue" who insults Hillary by calling her names and then claiming she stands for women's right... if you are indeed a woman, then you just prove the truth that women can be more sexist and bigoted against OTHER women, than even the worst men. If this election has shown anything it is how stupid many women can be.. we all know women like you have kept the system going. Congratulations, Frau Hitler.

Posted by: AJ | May 26, 2008 1:14 PM | Report abuse

With Clinton's reference to the assassination of RFK in June as part of her rationale for staying in a race that has been lost....just adds to the woman's LEGACY...."it's all about ME".

She has, in my opinion, put a huge black mark on the woman's movement in this country and in the process has left this as her legacy to my granddaughters and all young girls in this country:
1. Changing the RULES of the game after it started is OK.
2. It's OK to whine or shed a tear to get your way.
3. Scratch, spit, stick your tongue out, and lead with your fists swinging when you feel threatened. You are a female and the male 'bullies' can't hit you back.
4. Writing bad checks is OK. It's even OK if you charge, charge, and charge some more - you can always find a 'sugar daddy' that will pay off your debt.
5. Dreaming up story lines that you have experienced danger(s) and telling them like they are true is what will make people believe you are strong.
6. When confronted on a negative issue that may be damning - it's best to say, "I don't recall". Always turn the negative issue to someone else - anyone else!
7. Stay in a game until the end even when you have lost and there's no feasible way to win. (you never know, the other team's star player may get hurt and not be able to play in the Final Four game!)
8. When it get tough cry "foul" on the boys in the game! Let the girls that are watching in the stands think that the reason you aren't winning is because the darn boys 'aren't playing by YOUR rules!"

Is it time for a female in our White House? YES! I have supported Obama from day one and as an Independent was ready to vote for ANY Democrat that got the party nomination....WAS is the key word. Two months ago Clinton lost my support and has dug her hole wider and wider with each day of her campaign follies.

Posted by: Mary | May 26, 2008 1:14 PM | Report abuse

Hillary had every conceivable advantage at the start of the campaign, like no other in history. Millions of Rush Limbaugh's dittoheads voted for her. Despite it all, she blew it! Hard working white people and talking openly about assassination, I for one thank goodness she lost. A lot of people here need to remember why we are Democrats in the first place. Democrats do not vote for millionaire war mongers!

Posted by: gmundenat | May 26, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

"The comments were picked up by the NYPost.com and posted on Drudge.com, a must-read site for reporters and other news junkies..."

I'm no Clinton supporter, but here's what I want to know: what does it say about the reporters and "news" people in this country that they pay any attention at all to the smears, innuendos and outright lies printed on the openly biased Drudge.com?

Reporters, *do your bloody jobs!* That means: think independently; question the nonsense answers the campaigns (and yes, the other "news" services) are spoon-feeding you; do a little research on what you're being told; quit being led around by your noses.

Drudge is nothing more than a Conservative lie-machine bent on taking down anyone with viewpoints opposing its founder. That someone outside your profession has to explain this to you is pathetic. And reporters lament that the press's reputation is so abysmal. Imagine that.

Posted by: tellthetruth | May 26, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

ogdeeds,
I started reading your post with hope, but you rapidly descended into ittybitty-isms that are without foundation--items that have little to do a candidates ability to govern.

Until that time, you sounded like an intelligent person. What is it that makes us so blind to the person we support? Certainly, your candidate is not truthful. We can't depend upon her word because it changes with the winds and with whatever position that will benefit her needs.

I'm not sorry, when I say such a flawed candidate does not need to ascend the Presidency. Personally, I'd like to see a woman in the White House. But, as God is my witness, HRC is not the one who needs to be there. There's too much missing from her presentation of herself.

She'd bring this same doggedness we're seeing to EVERY problem-solving event, even when doggedness isn't warranted or needed to solve the problem. She scares me to death!!!

Posted by: Ollie | May 26, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

for all Hillary supporters. We should abide by the rules. After all we are all democrats like Michell Obama. Who claimed she would not vote for Hillary if she was the nominee. Now you can vote Mcain with no guilt if the first lady said so . We ought to listen !

Posted by: cvo | May 26, 2008 1:12 PM | Report abuse

When has Obama been honest? Show me ...
When has Obama been hard working? Show me.
When has Obama truly apoligized (not regretting) for some of his misspeaks and blunders? Show me.

Name something Obama has accomplished as a political person (no that does not include community organizing or ethics reform).

Show me an actual human being from Chicago that has benefitted from Obama's claimed work?

Show me an entire stump speech where Obama lists his detailed policy plans without reading from a cue card.

Show me an entire sermon by Rev. Wright that was solely based on God and his love and didn't include politics or rich white people doing them some kind of disservice and yet we are not allowed to have any opinions about it regarding his money-paying parishners.

Show me more than 2 times in this whole campaign where Obama took open questions from the press core that didn't occur on his press plane?

Show me 1 time where Michelle said something positive about the Democratic party as a whole and not just her husband.

Show me 1 time where Obama said something positive about his colleagues (not his supporters) and their work of which he has been a part of for years. Not JFK, Reagan or Lincoln.

Show me that during a first term as Senator, where the first 2 years might have included work (a lot of present votes) and that last 2 years included campaigning, that any other candidate from either party was qualified to be POTUS?

Show me the number of state or federal senators or reps have accidentally hit the wrong button while voting on an issue. Only to say so after they get called out on it?

Show me where Obama has a record of bi-partisanism. Not just the one-piece of legislation with Senator Lugar regarding weapons.

Show me where Hillary has written on a piece of paper something damaging to her candidacy and yet lie continuously to our faces that it is not her writing?

Show me where Hillary sat in church pews for 20 years, yet did not hear any controversial comments?

Show me where Obama thought Wright was worthy of over $27,000 in 2006 yet denounced him in 2008 and another Senator agrees that it is okay.

Show me where Hillary stood at a stump speech and let a surrogate stand there beside her and criticize Michelle Obama? And grin about it?

Show me a Hillary endorser who told Obama to drop out?

Show me in the dictionary that says annual net salary over 10 years determines elitism.

Show me a complete news cycle in this campaign where Hillary receive 90% positive exposure and Obama 90% negative?

Show me an early debate where multiple senators ganged up on Obama on issues?

Show me a Obama stump speech where a Hillary supporter shouted above him while speaking. Or held up a sign that says "Shine my shoes" just as a heckler showed a sign at her spech that said "Iron my shirt".

Show me a pundit who took offense to that sign?

Show me a late night talk show host that super-imposed large breasts with cleavage on another government female candidate running for office.

Show me a pundit that calls a male candidate an _SS or a bast_rd or something similar to what CNN's pundit said it was okay to say Hillary was a _itch.

Show me a liberal radio show host that called Obama a _ucking _hore and the crowd laughed and applauded?

Show me. Tell me O informed ones. You are so full of opinions of Hillary supporters. You are the reason I will not vote Obama. Not Roe vs. Wade. Not pro-life vs. pro-choice. Not Iraq. Not tax cuts. Not liberal vs. conservative. Not black vs. white vs. brown vs. plaid. Not annual salary. Not age or body parts. Get real.

Posted by: Cheryl Wilson | May 26, 2008 1:12 PM | Report abuse

My goodness, Hillary Clinton makes the most idiotic blunder of the campaign and now her supporters are whining about how she's the victim again. How pathetic. She should just own up to it, apologize to Obama and the country, and get on with it.

I have no doubt she did not intend to say she was just waiting around for someone to take her rival out. It just came out sounding that way. It certainly wasn't Obama that put that spin on it; all he's ever said about it is that he took her at her word when she tried to explain herself. Nor was it his campaign, which merely called the comment "unfortunate"---and truer words were never spoken. It was the news media, bloggers, and millions of ordinary Americans who read the comment or saw the video who found it shocking, tasteless, and even, frankly, dangerous, because it could almost be taken as an open invitation for some wacko to change the course of history. Of course she didn't mean that. It just came out that way, and that makes it a really, really stupid, artless, staggeringly insensitive, almost incomprehensibly vile thing to say---even if she didn't mean it that way. But she said it, and for her now to try to weasel out of responsibility for it by playing the victim card one more time is shameless and spineless. And those who would cover for her ought to be ashamed of themselves, too.

Posted by: Brad K | May 26, 2008 1:11 PM | Report abuse


Also, shilling is illegal, so, while he has indeed hired campaign bloggers, I find it unlikely that Obama is paying people to comment anonymously on these boards.

Posted by: Lisa | May 26, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

Democrats:

Be advised that there are posters masquerading as hate-filled Hillary and Obama supporters in hopes of intensifying the strife and division within the party. It's a new improved version of Operation Chaos.

Remember that online things are not always as they appear.

Posted by: Lisa | May 26, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

i will vote for obama if for no other reason, than to counter the voters in w. virginia, kentucky, and other states who have decided that to enter into modern times would somehoe make them a sort of endangered species. i thank god that i live in portland oregon where voices of true reason reside. and as for hillary; she has obviously grown mean and angry as she continues to slog down the path mutual destruction and devisiveness. as i watched her speak in florida, i did not see a candidate looking to further the hopes of americans by working hand in hand with the democratic party in its endeavor to flush the neos from power. instead, she believes that she and hubbie bill have some inherent right to the keys of 1600. i would love to see a woman in the white house, but not hillary. what i now see in her is a mean and vindivtive streak which is not compatible with the reins of presidential power. after all, isn't eight long years of this type of behavior in the personna of george bush enough?

Posted by: lonewolf | May 26, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

"useful"

Link me the article you say I am quoting please? I'd love to read it. I appreciate sound arguments.
Don't be afraid of people that know the facts. Every word I posted is true, and it just sooo silly with all the accusing people of being paid to post on blogs. Isn't it the HRC people in here that are posting these silly email talking points about Obama? You think I don't know?

I miss the Huffington post, the HRC people there at least are coherent. Mostly.

Posted by: WasteNJ | May 26, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

"But the die, it seems, had been cast. Never mind Clinton's swift apology, also on video..."

No, apparently you are just as good at misconstruing things. She didn't apologize in that 'swift' video response. She regretted if people felt offended. If you can't tell the difference, no wonder you don't get why this is making such a big splash.

For all the handwringing, for all the blaming of the media, Senator Clinton has only one person to blame for all these 'out of context' remarks- herself. Then, of course, she once again tries to play the card that she was distracted for a bogus reason. Last time she was tired when she talked about Bosnia, and we found out she had repeated it again and again. This time she claimed that the only reason she brought up the assassination was because of Ted Kennedy's illness- well, that's BS, too- she brought it up awhile ago as well, but no one called her out on it. It's only now that she somehow realizes how bad this is that she is responding to it. Part of this is walked back the dog, but she seems to once again think blaming everyone but herself is the way out.

I'm seriously starting to wonder about her political future; it was once bright, now it seems she is sacrificing the good (a worthy and powerful Senatorship) for the impossible (unless, of course, someone does what she mentioned to Obama instead of RFK... but she wouldn't stay in because of that... would she?)

Posted by: epthorn | May 26, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

I have been a republican for 35 yrs. I'm seriously thinking about going Independent. Is this race really about sex? about race? I'm not sure on that but I would like to think it's mostly about Iraq and the devestating state that the Bush administration has left this country. Stop with the ridiculous accusations, and that's all they are, and start talking about the real issues. This is serious people! The next President has a real big mess to clean up and whoever you feel is the best person to do that, well, that is the question now, isn't it? I am so discouraged with the media and analysts stomping on irrelevant issues of what she said, he said UGH! We're all human and make mistakes. We need to get serious and figure this out and decide who can really tackle the next presidential term. I'm scared!

Posted by: vic | May 26, 2008 1:08 PM | Report abuse

The moment Obama is given - if he's given - the nomination, we'll be contacting McCain.

Anything's better than Obama and the kind of people who post comments for him.

Say it again and again,
If not Clinton, then McCain!

Posted by: Say it again and again, | May 26, 2008 1:08 PM | Report abuse

I really don't think Larry Sinclair's relationship with Senator Obama has anything to do with the issues facing America today, Brad.

Posted by: Susan | May 26, 2008 1:07 PM | Report abuse

Jessica,

I'm fully aware of the history of Michigan's primary. I was refuting the logic of your original statement.

All the candidates but Dodd and Hillary requested to have their names removed, as suggested by the DNC. Barack's mistake was not in having his name removed in Michigan, it was in failing to support the revote proposal in March.

Posted by: Lisa | May 26, 2008 1:06 PM | Report abuse

Obama Campaign Theatrics

--Producer Phil writes

A Wall Street Journal writer, James Taranto , has uncovered a hilarious and puzzling coincidence at 5 different Sen. Obama campaign speeches over the last few months, including the recent speech in Seattle.

Dori and listeners have found one other Sen. Obama incident posted on YouTube where a person near the stage faints. Sen. Obama responds to each incident with the same routine and phrases.

Is it phoney, orchestrated, manufactured campaign theatrics or is it merely physiological coincidence? You be the judge.

VIDEO circa Feb. 24th, 2007-Sen. Obama in Los Angeles, CA

VIDEO Sept. 8th, 2007--Sen. Obama in Santa Barbara, CA scroll to 6:29

VIDEO Dec. 8th, 2007--Sen. Obama in Des Moines, IA scroll to 1:45

VIDEOJan. 8th, 2008--Sen. Obama in Hanover, NH

VIDEOFeb. 4th, 2008--Sen. Obama in Hartford, CN scroll to 6:05

AUDIOFeb 8th, 2008 Sen. Obama encountered another fainter at his Key Arena speech in Seattle


-----------------------------
take a look at the Obama "phenomenon". The prophet and messiah displays his power to do miracles. It's being said that he heals people during his rallies.


http://www.mynorthwest.com/?nid=76&sid=27720

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 1:06 PM | Report abuse

"If an Obama presidency is anything like his supporters I don't want any part of it. They are the meanest nastiest and hate mongers I've ever seen. It is downright pitiful."

Sigh... pot meet kettle? I don't think anyone on these comment boards over the course of this primary can claim innocence. You people should stop fighting long enough to look at the bigger picture. For all of the whining and complaining on both sides, neither candidate has experienced a smooth ride. Obama has been just as unfairly blasted in the media, many of his comments taken way out of context, just the same as Hillary's.

Posted by: vninja | May 26, 2008 1:06 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is a less than ethical person, as evidenced by her "say anything to win" candidacy. She has no integrity, has never suffered anything but a silver spoon.
Experience? She was a First Lady!!!

Under fire my ***.

From a very angry female Veteran!

Posted by: Sue | May 26, 2008 1:06 PM | Report abuse

Yes, TaskerFive, I am a real feminist and not some self-hating millenial retro bimbo regurgitating Republican propaganda without knowing its source. It is Bill Clinton who would not be where he is without his wife, not the other way around, as he would be the first to tell you. She was the star of Yale Law School, not him. She was predicted then to be the first female president or Supreme Court justice of the United States, not him.

Posted by: Veronica | May 26, 2008 1:05 PM | Report abuse

Great point Deward.

I wonder how Hillary's supporters can argue these facts:

1. She lost a race in which she had a huge advantage. This was because of poor planning, arrogance, and lying to the American public. Simply put, she lost when she had all the advantages.

2. If this campaign is any indication of how she would run the country then it is clearly obvious she is not ready to be the president of the United States. It was amazing how Clintonesque the campaign showed itself to be with the firing of key staff, mis-steps and the politics of blaming others. Can we expect this person to manage the budget of the federal government when she can't even manage her own campaign finances?

3. Speaking of campaign finances, is it ethical that this personal money being lent to the campaign was in part earned by a former President using his stature for monetary gain?

4. Lastly, Hillary has made herself a target by making false statements and pandering to a particular audience(gas tax relief). The internet has only served to magnify these blunders.

Hillary is part of the politics of the past.

Goodbye!

Posted by: Goodbye Hillary | May 26, 2008 1:05 PM | Report abuse

When the skater kidz come of age, they will vote for Hillary. They will vote for Hillary because they will have been spoon fed by MTV, unable to read or write their own names, and believe everything they see and hear on Youtube and Wikipedia. The most brainless, senseless generation ever to breath oxygen is coming of age. They will vote for Hillary. Their gangsta rap vocabulary and emoticons will propel them into the 22nd century, on the heels of the collapse of Social Security, when Dr Kevorkian nostalgists begin herding them to the carbon monoxide machines to ease the burden on society.

Dig your own graves. I have already bought mine.

Posted by: Sally | May 26, 2008 1:05 PM | Report abuse

I have an idea.....Why doesn't the Democratic Party nominate the candidate with the stongest potential to win a general election in the Fall?

As a true Democrat, that is what I demand of my party.

There is clearly no DECISIVE preference for one candidate over the other at this point. The math is easy to understand. The primary and causus rules are there for the learned; however, it is a reality that none of this will make a singular difference this Fall, if we do not place the strongest candidate on the ballot.

Some Democrats need to grow up and stop the hatred on one another or we will get exactly what we dont need and don't deserve........

Posted by: Average Joe | May 26, 2008 1:04 PM | Report abuse

See, folks, it's already starting

Factual critiques of Obama are met with ad hominem attacks.

Sound familiar? Sound like the Bush years?

Posted by: Obama = Bush | May 26, 2008 1:03 PM | Report abuse

Both candidates are public servants who put their lives out there for the rest of us. Give both candidates some respect. Enough with the hate!

Posted by: gbe | May 26, 2008 1:03 PM | Report abuse

It's too bad the WaPo hasn't learned how to link yet:

http://www.drudge.com/

In any case, Jose Antonio Vargas keeps forgetting to mention that one of the reason's for Obama's popularity online is because the MSM has promoted lightweight videos about him, such as Obama girl or Will.I.Am. Meanwhile, sites like Time's Swampland have mocked similar efforts from or for Clinton/McCain.

And, they've ignored videos about the candidates that ask them questions the MSM is too corrupt to ask, like these:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=YRWRzZ_yPnk
http://youtube.com/watch?v=EiullH5jU1A

Posted by: LonewackoDotCom | May 26, 2008 1:03 PM | Report abuse

"WasteNJ" [appropriate name] - why don't you just post a link to the AP article you cite nearly verbatim in your "comment."

Or is Obama paying you by the word?

Posted by: Useful | May 26, 2008 1:02 PM | Report abuse

I just read the remark about "rallying" around Obama. You must be kidding. Everyone who is going to rally around him has already done it. His 'supporters' have made sure of that: no one else wants the inmates running the asylum.

Posted by: Veronica | May 26, 2008 1:01 PM | Report abuse

There are a lot of negative, abusive comments on here by HRC supporters. The shrillness is familiar, and so is the palpable sense of desperation.

Take a step back and unravel some of your emotional investment in HRC. I know, I initially supported her as well until I really did my homework. Don't cut off your nose to spite your face. Barack Obama is the next Democratic nominee. No last-ditch scheme will change that, but you may feel free to wait until after June 4th to decide. Are you going to help the Democrats or hurt them? HRC is not the savior of women, if she was, she'd have gotten to where she is by herself, without her husband's help and financial connections.

Don't real feminists know that?

Posted by: TaskerFive | May 26, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

How low can someone be, what a despicable comment.

Posted by: hereandnow

__________________________________________________________________________________________

No lower than the Obamafools who trash RFK jr because he defended HRC's remarks. Obamafools think they know more than the SON of RFK. Keep your lame hypocritical comments to yourself until you clean up your own house first. Obamaniacs are the best at hypocrisy.

Posted by: Jack Straw | May 26, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

LOL, that Houston Chronicle "article" was actually a blog post by some middle-aged desperate guy.

Throughout history, the first line of attack against strong successful women has been to hurl accusations of the crazies.

LOL.

Feeling a little threatened by the strong woman, Sparky?

Posted by: LOL | May 26, 2008 12:58 PM | Report abuse

If an Obama presidency is anything like his supporters I don't want any part of it. They are the meanest nastiest and hate mongers I've ever seen. It is downright pitiful.

Posted by: gbe | May 26, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse


Yes, it is interesting that this candidate has the nastiest partisans I have ever seen in a Democratic primary. They certainly have alienated the rest of the party. For any Democrat to call West Virginian miners "hillbillies" beats anything, and I read this repeatedly. I guess they don't know who put Jack Kennedy in the White House. Well, the truth is they are not Democrats, but something else that is crazy. I could not possibly vote for their candidate; he is too divisive.

We openly have become two different parties. We can only hope the Republicans do likewise or we will continue to lose the White House to them, 28 of the last 40 years and counting.

Posted by: Veronica | May 26, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

"Yeah, I like You Tube..."

GOOD for you. Congratulations. I KNOW how MUCH YouTube, xtube or porntube or whatevertube means to you and your cohorts.

If there were a poll on YouTube asking its regulars "WHICH one of them would you vote for as the 44th President of the United States---A genuie male African gorilla whose natural endowment is very impressive or Hillary?" IT will win hands DOWN. It of course is the MALE gorilla in question.

Posted by: Brent | May 26, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

Perhaps many people on the internet are less susceptible to spin. Hillary's comparison to 1968 is disingenious, as is her subsequent explanation. In 1968 there was an incumbent Democratic president who pulled himself out of the race on March 31. The nation, and the party, were torn apart by Vietnam. To use 1968 to base a claim that historically campaigns go through June is an insult to our intelligence.

Posted by: Steve | May 26, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

I'm another USMC female vet....and a HRC supporter. to the other former female usmc vet who posted earlier....if you want to talk about respect...that HRC does not deserve it for her bosnia story...then that is your right. but, you should have an equally critical eye regarding BOs outright lies about rev wright and his lack of judgement in many other areas that are of bigger significance....like his not so long ago association with known terrorists ayers and the american-hating wright, along with BOs ungrateful wife's denigrating of 'mean' america....if an embellishment on bosnia on HRC's part makes her unworthy of your respect....and BOs association with wright and ayers does earn him your respect...than I question YOUR judgment and criteria for what constitutes respect and what doesnt.

Posted by: ogdeeds | May 26, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

Ditto to what Jessica said.

The Obama camp pays followers to post Obama rants and indeed "drown" out Clinton support.

This is part of their cynical grassroots strategy and [mis]use of the internet.

It's what the movie studios tried to do to the writers during that strike last year.

It's becoming a typical strategy to saturate the online world with your agenda.

Even the candidate's websites reveal their intent. Send a comment to Obama and they'll keep spamming you. Clinton ASKS if you'd like to be put on a mailing list - she does not spam like Obama.

Posted by: Obama spams | May 26, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

Per the Houston Chronicle:

"It's Official: Hillary Clinton Is Insane
Posted 5/23/2008 5:12 PM CDT

Write down the date, May 23, 2008-the day Hillary Clinton lost her mind. The pressure of the race and the thought of not getting the Democratic nomination has driven the poor woman stark, raving mad."

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

To all those people who think Hillary is brilliant. I agree. She is brilliantly DANGEROUS!

Posted by: Sher | May 26, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse

R E A L L Y - Just what do you people
think ? Hillary and Billary are out &
OUT Fairy tale tellers. "Nither" one will
tell the truth. They 'bend' everything to
make it appear that they are "MISUNDERSTOOD" or we "DID NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY SAID". GOD HElp the nation if she gets in the White House.
Hey Hillary - have U checked under your
desks or tables where 'it ain't sex Bill '
sits at ???? ALSO, How is the 'sniper' fire doing ???
This Democ is for the Big O, or McCain
if you cheat your way in.....
72 years young and knows a PHONY- U U U
GO BIG O GO.....................

Posted by: P. Richard | May 26, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse

The Obama campaign has been better run with little internal drama, sound fiscal stewardship and has never strayed off of it's core message. The Obama campaign has out-organized Clinton in almost every state, and has embraed the importance of ALL states. Sen Obama has been gracious to a FAULT with Hillary, trying in every way not to hurt her feelings in situations that, if reversed, would have Hillary piling on and going for blood.
The simple fact is the Clinton campaign has been poorly run, has gone broke multiple times, and has been out-organized. Add to that Hillary's incendiary statements and blatant lies, and it's no small wonder she's still around.
For a few more minutes, at least.

Posted by: WasteNJ | May 26, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Lisa,

sorry but Obama took his name off the MI ballot because he was losing by 20% and chose uncommitted instead. It was bad judgement by him. Read the story from Oct. 07 in the Iowa Independent.

http://iowaindependent.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1264

Posted by: jessica | May 26, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

If yo do not vote for Obama you are a racist! That's what Obama makes it seems like! You cannot say anything bad about him or you are labeled a racist. Grow up people. Not liking someone because one feels that person is not qualifyed to be president dose not makes me a racist.

Posted by: Rafael PR51 | May 26, 2008 12:51 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: gilesjp
You have to look at the fact that the web user is a more informed voter a high information voter.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

This poor sad pathetic Obamafool doesn't know that everything on the web is not FACTS. I suppose that is why they are so uninformed. Obamafools are not highly informed voters, just highly gullible sheep. As a highly informed Obamafool, perhaps you should learn how to wright a coherent sentence. You probably believe that everything in Wikipedia is true. How truly sad and pathetic.

Posted by: Jack Straw | May 26, 2008 12:51 PM | Report abuse

Cheryl's statistics need as much work as her spelling.

"I bet 50% of Obama's donors are 18-20 year olds donating to his campaign on credit cards their parents have to pay for. 18-year olds and AA's is not a democratic base in which to win."

I bet not. In fact, I'm pretty certain that you're just flat out wrong.

Posted by: E | May 26, 2008 12:51 PM | Report abuse

If you feel the urge to post something like 'McCain beats Obama in the polls!' or 'Hillary is winning!" please do everyone a favor and visit www.realclearpolitics.com first. The numbers are right there.

And if you're thinking of attacking the supporters of other candidates for being full of hate, it helps if you don't do so in a hate-filled way yourself. Otherwise all you're really doing is advertising your own hypocrisy.

Posted by: Aengil | May 26, 2008 12:49 PM | Report abuse

Hey, Magoo:

You mean like Obama had to "explain" his "bittergate," or "Nafta-gate," or "Sweetie-gate," and much more.....

If you think Obama is not behind this, fanning the flames of this inconsequential RFK remark into hysteria, we have some swampland we'd like to sell you. Obama knows his supporters are hysterics and he'll whip them into a meaningless frenzy.

Get real. Obama's not a Savior. If you need a savior in your empty life, get one elsewhere.

Your blind, unthinking devotion has no place in a Presidential election, especially not this year. There's too much at stake. Voters need to know what they're getting - not just vote again for the one they'd most like to have a beer with.

Posted by: umpteen Obama blunders | May 26, 2008 12:49 PM | Report abuse

If you are posting on behalf of Obama's campaign and I can see many here are you should have to put a disclosure on your post. Obama posts are too long as they try to drown out any objective postings or positive Hillary postings.

How many Obama paid posters here? raise your hand!

Posted by: Jessica | May 26, 2008 12:49 PM | Report abuse

Magdalen,
The people of Michigan couldn't vote for Barack. He wasn't on the ballot.

Posted by: Lisa | May 26, 2008 12:47 PM | Report abuse

all this about Ted Kennedy no one ever like him anyway after he murdered Mary Jo.

and if Obama really cared about the Kennedys he and axelrod would have never started this smear campaign that has the kennedys name being recycled through the news all weekend long.

is this the "change" we can believe in? It this what "unity" smells like?

never never ever Hussein, if not Hillary, vote for McCain.

Posted by: hank | May 26, 2008 12:47 PM | Report abuse

THE PERFECT STORM
The problem that Obama's run for president presents to Americans is well beyond the problem of race. Race in it self is not a problem. That americans are even considering a black man for president, whether he wins or not, is progress in the cultural realm, in spite of the racists attitudes still in vogue in our collective consciousness. Obama's candidacy indicates that we are finally willing to overlook race and follow the lead of a black man. That's not "a problem", that's progress.
The problem resides in the mere, lowly political arena on which he is standing. Obama's "coalition of the willing"(remember the lie about how strong it was and who was in it), as I call his motley political supporters, is based on a gamut of irreconcilable political interest groups. Not only "irreconcilable" but dangerously opposing interests. I'm not talking about "the people", I'm talking about the groups with political and economical power directing and enacting his public campaign.
Among obama's political supporters: members from the extreme right such as Sen. Byrd, the media, including tv and printed media, multinational corporations, pharmaceuticals, unions, the left, black separatists, and the extreme left. It would be an act of self deception to deny that Obama is deeply connected with the extreme left.
We know that groups actively campaigning for a politician expect something in return when their candidate wins the presidency.
If the extreme left, the Marxists and socialist, the black separatists, the unions are supporting Obama, what do they expect from him if he wins the presidency? I think it unnecessary to answer this question. It's elementary.
If the multinationals and the media and the "capitalists" are supporting Obama, what do they expect from him if he wins the presidency? At a minimum, consent for them to continue deriving profits with as little government intervention as possible.
Are the interests of these extreme supporters reconcilable in any way? Do you think that the energy companies that provide funding to Obama's campaign are going to allow that those demanding that they redistribute their wealth, be given access to government offices that would presumably do just that? Who has more power, political and financial: the multinationals and pharmaceuticals, or the political left and the black separatists?

The left and the black separatists are counting on Obama's self identification as "black" to make good on his political promises. Their assumption is that he will stand up for the blacks and will help promote the ideas of the left, on which he stood to gain political power in Illinois. When you read the left's newspapers, you get a sense that they feel that, finally, the worker's state is at hand. The problem is...

In the middle of these contending groups from left to right, stands Obama himself. And when you look at Obama's political record, when you read his speeches dispassionately, with a critical eye, you find an Obama that can't possibly satisfy all the opposing interests at the same time. Somebody has to be cut loose. Guess who.

Obama seldom makes reference to his blackness. I have combed through his two major speeches, the DNC 2008 and the announcement for presidency speech, and found no instance of him talking as a black man, saying "as a black man I" or something to that effect. This is important because, by not saying, he's saying a lot. It is a sad version of "don't ask don't tell". If he finds it a problem to talk about himself as a black man, where is the progress towards eliminating racism? If he's doing it intentionally, as a political effort to avoid rejection as a candidate, to not alienate whites who are uncomfortable with a black candidate reminding them of their racism, then he's being dishonest. Either way he comes short portraying himself as an example against racism.
The "perfect storm" consist of two powerful but opposing forces feeding off the sea of confusion that Obama represents. He himself has said he has gone through moments of confusion about his biracial make up. He said that Ronald Regan was his political role model. He consistently changes the tone of his political positions to accommodate whites and more center-right opinions. He accommodates to whites' interests, as evidenced by his "throwing under the bus" his grandmother and his pastor. Some on the left were not too happy about that.
When the battle between the "capitalists" and the extreme left unfolds after the elections, it will be fought like all battles: with the foot soldiers bearing the brunt of the fire. There is no way to avoid the meeting of these two powerful storms. Obama's "coalition of the willing" is bound to disband. The contradictions within his camp are too powerful

At the end, there will be many disappointed hearts, if he wins the presidency.

Posted by: thetruth | May 26, 2008 12:47 PM | Report abuse

The quake is over

Being old enough to have been awake during the earthquake of the late 60s when our culture split open and two huge plates began to shift and shake the earth, gives me a wider angle on our current political time.

I can sense that what is happening now with Obama and the new movement is the beginning of a new earth growing out of the rubble of the past. We have become bored with our forty years of a split culture that talks endlessly in tape loops of division. We have witnessed the rise and fall of one subdivision after another as our collective mind trembles with the after shocks of the 60's quake.

A new consciousness is now rising, as if the field of battle has itself come awake and holds the two fighting armies within its embrace. Something is moving that is tired of the war, that finds no meaning in the old conflicts, and that stretches far beyond the reduction of everything to a simple either/or. Something is growing that doesn't care for the old good and evil anymore. Some god has risen that can't see the old enemies and the fears that held them apart.

The recent injection of the fear of assassinations into our hope of a new consciousness will not wound the healing. The assassinations of the 60s, the two Kennedy's and Martin Luther King, Jr., were part of the death that comes before the life and a part of the quake that stirred this ground for a new earth.

History does not repeat itself when an old time is replaced by a newer and fuller time. The law of good and evil, of an eye for an eye, can be repealed by a larger consciousness that just bypasses the dysfunction and keeps its eye on the whole. The fear of assassination and the end of the dream is a baseless fear, for it is but a weapon of the past.

We have been wandering in the desert for these last 40 years, cast out of the garden by our fears. Now is the time for old fears to be laid to rest, because they have become so, so boring.

Posted by: ed conley | May 26, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

Obama followers have the hateful mental style of right wingers. The attitude that's so repulsive in the Limbaugh and Coulter crowd is on display everyday among the Obama crowd. It's even worse than this, because it's fused with a Ron Paul-level zealotry. And it's more worse still because Obama followers are young persons and affluent liberals who have the time and resources to bombard the Internet with their propaganda.

Obama is, in his overbearing self-importance, dislikable enough. But his followers make it worse by getting in our faces. He and they constitute the most polarizing force in politics today.

It is as sociologically interesting as it is politically scary to see a personality cult of such magnitude in operation. The logo, the slogans, the posters, the false projection of a movement, the glittering generalities, the vilification of enemies, the swooning, a blank charismatic idol onto which the true believers impress their wishes - all of the elements of a mass cult are present.

One thing the Obama phenomenon proves for sure is that our educational system does a terrible job of teaching young people to think for themselves. Critical thinking and an understanding of history would have gone a long way towards undermining the Obama personality cult from the beginning. But the culture industry teaches our children to jump on board whatever "happens" to be the hip thing at the moment. The Obama campaign is the fad of the day, and the kids have dutifully rushed the stands. They have even learned to call themselves the "Obama generation." They are the "Obama Youth."

Posted by: Andrew Austin | May 26, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

One comment about "elitism": ANY person who thinks they deserve to be put in charge of the country is *by definition* elitist. If they didn't honestly feel that they were somehow better than 300+ million of their fellow citizens then they wouldn't have applied for the job.

Posted by: philko | May 26, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

Obama lied about the increase of Hispanics hate crime in America in USA. He was telling that to a Cuban American crowd in Florida. Where did Obama got those numbers? A lie is a lie. Was he trying to scare Hispanics to vote for him? Well Cyban Americans are not scare of nothing after Fidel nothing is scares them. Obama supporters if you think Hillary lies Obama those too. A lie is a lie big or small is a lie. Go to CNN and review my info is there under videos of politics.

Posted by: Rafael PR51 | May 26, 2008 12:45 PM | Report abuse

If it can help the clintonitas to come to term with the defeat of their champion, let us just pretend that Obama implanted a chip in Hillary's brain forcing her to bring up the assassination of a presidential candidate!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 12:45 PM | Report abuse

The voters in Michigan and Florida must have their votes seriously recognised.
America has fifty states, last time I counted, and the reason why people in Florida and Michigan voted for Hillary is for one reason only. They want and need her to be the nominee. They don't want you Barack, so don't FORCE yourself on the People of Florida and Michigan.America is the greatest democracy in the world.

Posted by: Magdalen | May 26, 2008 12:45 PM | Report abuse

Obama is typical black person who cries racism for everything. Is this what we have to look forward to.

I can never vote for president of the USA a dude named Hussein.

never never ever Hussein, if not Hillary, vote for McCain.

Posted by: hank | May 26, 2008 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: emily in FL | May 26, 2008 12:36 PM "Young people have no idea what they need or want because they have no life experience."

I remember when young people had to become killers or get killed but they were not allowed to vote and have a choice in the matter. It was the young that fought the massacre's being done in Vietnam and it was them that got the government to lower the voting age.

The young people I know are very clear in what they need: good government. Young people have not become jaded and cynical by life; they still have the idealism and think they can make a positive difference in the world.

They have not learned the hard lesson yet: you can not fight city hall and you can not fight Clinton corruption and lies. Thank goodness they are more knowledgeable, thank you internet, than those who believe everything they read in the National Enquirer.

They have been depressed and Obama has given them hope; that their voice counts and that they can have a government "of for and by them". If the old people do not ruin it for them. Again.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 12:44 PM | Report abuse

a vote for Barack Obama is as good as a vote for McCain. Only Hillary can beat McCain.

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Poll_Clinton_beats_McCain_Obama_ties_0526.html

Posted by: deb | May 26, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Right on, Cheryl.

"Jason" is a typical Obama loon. He can't converse in calm fact, but must rant in profanities and ignorant proclamations. He's likely one of those guys who can't get a date and sits in front of porn all day.

There's been no racism in this primary.

OBAMA WHINES RACISM EVERYTIME THINGS DON'T GO HIS WAY.

If quoting an AP article citing voting demographics is racist, we can all see what we have to look forward to if Obama were Pres. [Meanwhile, no one cries racism when Obama gloats that blacks aren't voting Clinton.]

An Obama administration will be fascism, or like the former Soviet Union, where you can't criticize the government or open your mouth at all because you will be branded a racist and the Obama zombies will come for you in the middle of the night.

Posted by: Obama zombies | May 26, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

I don't want a president who feels the need to issue "explanations" for their own statements after the fact.
Right now statements like this might only start controversy, but during a presidency, it could start a war.

Posted by: magoo | May 26, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Instead of denigrating internet activists as self-organizing swarms, Washpo and other news organizations should cease repeating candidates spin verbatim and start challenging them.

Seems like all corporate media does when it comes to political coverage is to transcribe and guess what? That skill has already been automated.

If you don't want to be completely redundant, stop checking your intelligence at the door in order to protect your access and start challenging them -- and I mean all of them, not just Hillary Clinton.

Sure, closeness counts -- in horseshoes. While you think it's a score to be invited to a private gathering for x candidate or nab the best seat on y candidate's bus, your readers (the ones you have left) don't give a damn.

Reveal these politicians for what they are, or cede the field to bloggers -- your choice.

Posted by: brasscupcakes | May 26, 2008 12:41 PM | Report abuse

They don't understand me . If I were a Republican I would be the nominee. If I were a Republican and I said those things about hard working white people they would be worshipping me like they should be. If I were a Republican they would be glas I endorsed John McAnus. What is wrong with you Democrats. If I were a Republican they would be applauding me for mentioning the assassination of RFK and implying that it might well happen to Obama. Look at what Mike Huckabee said in front of the NRA and they applauded him. I was a Goldwater girl. They loved me . What's wrong with you Democrats.

Posted by: I Wish Upon a Reagan Star | May 26, 2008 12:41 PM | Report abuse

When you have a brain tumor you can't think straight. No wonder Ted endorsed Obama! Posted by: Got Cha!


I submit that GotCha has a brain tumor of her/his own. Anyone that would say something as vile as that HAS TO!!!

What's even worse is the Washington Post allowed it to be posted!!!

Posted by: CW-in-Wichita | May 26, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Young people need jobs, affordable college, and healthcare. Trust me, we know that. We also know that the same ole thing hasn't been working and it is time to try something new.

Over 100,000 people a year die in this country from conditions that could have been treated. We have one of the high infant mortality rates, too. And on top of that over 700 soldiers a year are daying.

You want to vote for McCain? That is 402,800 dead Americans on your hands, and that is if he only last one term.

Go ahead vote for McCain. I'm sure history will remember your spiteful vote well.

Posted by: Z | May 26, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Nothing is more detrimental to the country as a whole than political corruption in any guise. So the statement issued by Barack Obama the other day regarding Florida and Michigan should be seen for what it is: a politician willing to engage in whatever undermining of the democratic process it takes to achieve his political ambition.

Count the VOTES!!!

http://tominpaine.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2008-01-01T00%3A00%3A00-08%3A00&updated-max=2009-01-01T00%3A00%3A00-08%3A00&max-results=14

Posted by: Jessica | May 26, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

@jonathan, saying it doesn't make it so. Please show my your number wth HRC winning so we can all discount them with links and proof.

Posted by: Jaosn | May 26, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Although Hillary Clinton is now in full-blown damage-control mode, the obvious literal interpretation of what she said is "Hey, if I just hang in there a little bit longer, some bigoted dork will put a bullet through Obama and I'll have a clear path to the Democratic nomination and to the Presidency."

Maybe she misspoke -- although she misspoke similarly at least once before. Or maybe it was a Freudian slip? Barack Obama, charitable as usual, attributed her remark to campaign fatigue, and no doubt that was part of the explanation for it.

Can we really get to sing "Ding, dong, the witch is dead" within the foreseeable future?

Posted by: oldhonky | May 26, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

I can't get over how nasty and mean the American people have become. Why? It must be harder to be nice. Lazy people are mean. Do something nice for a stranger today and practice it everyday.

Posted by: gus | May 26, 2008 12:39 PM | Report abuse

As a female USMC Vet, I would never vote for Hillary. While women are "boots on the ground", this millionaire broad lies about her visit to Bosnia as coming in under fire. The women in Iraq are taking very REAL casualties. Clinton will say anything to get elected.

Pass it on! She gets zero respect from me.

Posted by: Sue | May 26, 2008 12:39 PM | Report abuse

@Bruce, Dex, Jim, Alex, AJ, and more losers.

Newsflash. Obama didn;t organize anytyhing, we came to him. YOur fearmongering doesn't workj anymore, and just goes to show you total ignorance with regard to the truth in this campaign. What you see about Obama you get from tabloid website and nonsense blogs, as evident by your ridiculous claim in your post. No one cares what you think, as we are focused on November. YOu obviously know nothing about Mr. Obama also evident in your comments. YOu don't list anything that is not complete rhetoric and cannot porve any of the cliam you make, so go way and let someone intelligent post.

Posted by: Jason | May 26, 2008 12:38 PM | Report abuse

She IS winning, at best and at least is neck and neck with Obama,
---------------------------
Jonathon, it's mathematically impossible for Hillary to catch Obama in pledged delegates. He gains in superdelegates daily while she loses. How can you possibly contend that she is winning or EVEN CLOSE? You need to brush up on your math!

Posted by: lhummer | May 26, 2008 12:38 PM | Report abuse

First Jason writes that there has been no sexism in this campaign and that Hillary will count on the racist vote. Anyone who votes against Obama is not racist or uneducated. I am white, cum laude college graduate and salutatorian of my H.S. class. I own a business. I am a Christian. I look for a candidate with experience, knowledge and compassion. Obama has NO experience, his knowledge comes from cue cards, and he has not shown any compassion, just his passion for ambition and entitlement. STFU Jason. Obama did not win fair and square and you know it, Obama knows it, then Democrats know it. How many Obama campaign donations did you make on your mama's credit card since you are living at home while she does your laundry and cooks for you. I bet 50% of Obama's donors are 18-20 year olds donating to his campaign on credit cards their parents have to pay for. 18-year olds and AA's is not a democratic base in which to win.

Posted by: Cheryl Wilson | May 26, 2008 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Very interesting article. I am one of those people who are not part of any campaign organization, but I am, unabashedly, "loud, engaged, and partisan". Online media are my virtual water cooler, where I enjoy expressing my ideas and hearing the ideas of others; now, of course, those ideas come from all over the world, not just my circle of friends and co-workers.

I no longer use the main stream media to hear opinions, but do rely on them to provide information directly from the candidates and their campaign officials. I like the fact that the MSM no longer holds a monopoly on the expression of opinion, so we can be less concerned about that famous media bias.

It's kinda like the political equivalent of wikipedia. When wikipedia was first introduced, the "experts" thought it would be full of nonsense because the information wasn't coming from the "experts." There is certainly some bad information on wikipedia, but we learned that when everyone can present and police information, we end up with a body of knowledge that surpasses anything in human history. I think the same is proving true for online media.

I hope, in a future segment, you will explore how online media have changed the fund-raising game and have broken the stranglehold that Washington fat cats and lobbyists have historically held on the candidates.

Posted by: Scott in NC | May 26, 2008 12:38 PM | Report abuse

I'm a Hillary supporter who will be voting for McCain in the Fall. And I know many others who feel the same way. Obama is a divisive candidate. HE has divided us. And if he and his supporters think that Hillary's supporters will just fall in line. Think again. We will be throwing our support to John McCain as a protest and rejecting Barack Hussein Obama.

Posted by: grace | May 26, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

This Obama dem is no college kid. I'm a 59 year old white working class female, lifelong feminist, and committed Democrat. You Hillary supporter look stupid enough hanging on to Clinton's candidacy as if it were still viable, overlooking her many lies and intentional "mis-speaks" and buying into her eternal spin. You are the ones who need to wake up.

There is nothing false about Obama. What you see is what you get. The man is honest, hard working, and he believes in America 100%. Moreover, HE BELIEVES IN YOU, in your native intelligence, latent though it may be, to see through the lies and the spin Clinton and her husband constantly use to bully us all into buying their lies.

Know this, people, their blind ambition has cost them their chance to win back the WH and has forever damaged Bill Clinton's legacy. There are lame duck presidents like Bush, and then there are just lame former presidents, like Bill.

Posted by: amg | May 26, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is no more a victim of the internets that Senator "Macacca" Allen. Youtube did not force Clinton to stoke the racist fires and then openly cling to the hope that "anything can happen" to Obama.

Posted by: Bob Sackamento | May 26, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

When the favorite (Senator Clinton in this case)loses in a race, excuses tend to fly. The race has been fair and each candidate had an opportunity to participate and win. Somebody wins and sombody loses, that's the nature of the game. Even professional atheletes accept defeat, eventhough it's hard on pride and emotion. It,s time to accept the reality that the campaign for delegates is over and move on to the bigger picture...

Posted by: Robert | May 26, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Hey Elva,
Fact Check,
Muslim countries have had female heads of state.
In fact Iran has had a female vice president.
You and Hillary have a lot to learn about other countries.

Posted by: Anna | May 26, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

When you have a brain tumor you can't think straight. No wonder Ted endorsed Obama!

Posted by: Got Cha! | May 26, 2008 12:19 PM

How low can someone be, what a despicable comment.

Posted by: hereandnow | May 26, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: SHEL-from-FL | May 26, 2008 12:25 PM "as a warning to Obama supporters:"

A warning SHEL? That sound ominous, seeing as Hillary is staying in the contest just in case Obama gets assassinated. I am sure your page is a page of lies Hillary taught you.

Special interests for one.

I am hardly a "young one" with no life experience. 10 months younger than your Queen Hillary. I find the college age students a whole lot brighter than the adults. Bush/Clinton dynasty? They know that is wrong.

Bill Clinton impeached? They know he does not belong back in the White House for his "buy one, get one free" return to his idyllic 1990s "co-presidency" as her close personal adviser.

Iraq? They are the ones that could get drafted if Hillary takes us into Iran. The gals too.

Both McCain and Obama know we do not have enough troops. But Hillary is too busy whining and blaming to talk about issues. Oh that is right, she said Iran is "fantasize and make up" a non issue and her yes vote was "lies being spread by my enemy".

Yeah, I like You Tube; old news footage and debates can be reseen to remember, the special interest lies, but I like Thomas online better. I can see for myself who does the job I want done by the work they did in Congress.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Young people have no idea what they need or want because they have no life experience.

At some level this is true and we should respect veterans and other older, hard-working Americans for paying their dues. But I'm not going to give any clout to older Americans who are ignorant, vitriolic and pig-headed when it comes to issues I care about: the war, the Supreme Court, foreign policy, jobs, etc. I think it's a tragedy that our generation hasn't been previously called on to do more service for America and has been apathetic about the political process. A lot of young people have their priorities messed up. But you raised that generation. Take stock, America.

Please don't insult me with your ageism - you as older voters have done nothing I can support in the last decade. That is a tragedy. Obama in '08 and you better believe it.

However,

Posted by: emily in FL | May 26, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

I love how now everyone's a Clinton supporter that won't vote Obama, and all the Righties that were happy with the fight going on have faded away. This is why you never flirt online. Anyone can pretend to be anyone they please. No matter how many cut/paste or nicks you make you only get one vote. And I'd bet that most were for McCain in the 1st place. Shocking I know, but some people still like Bush. Smart people vote on issues. period.

Posted by: fillmore | May 26, 2008 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Obama will never win the European vote.

Africa is not the homeland of America. Europe is and every Polish, Italian, German, Lithuanian, Irish, Scot, Spanish, Portugeese, English, Croation, Hungarian, Russian etc. is supporting Hillary.

We are not ready for a black president with his history from Kenya. I'd rather have John McCain any day than Barack Hussein and Michelle Obama.

Posted by: grace | May 26, 2008 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Think it was a slip? Same slip 4 times?
Four days after ABC polled that 59% of Americans feared for Obama's safety, Hillary started talking assassination.
Hard to believe,
but this site has the facts and sources: http://zfacts.com
The web arguments against Clinton, are sloppy, but the facts show that their hunches were right. Check the facts. They were right because they've been watching Hillary for months and know how she operates. She is brilliant a plausible deniability. But again, check the facts.

Posted by: Steve | May 26, 2008 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Clinton and her team could have defused this quickly, but instead, they went on the attack.

That combined with her and, particularly, husband Bill's gutter politics, racial triangulation, and disgraceful "Psst... he's black" campaign to heighten racial animosity among her remaining core supporters makes possible a climate where even the most outrageous interpretation of Clinton's now repeated references to the RFK assassination in the context of her staying in the race though she has no reasonable hope of prevailing seems somehow credible.

As a white, middle aged businessman who grew up in the suburbs -- in the Republican party -- and who recently, reluctantly severed ties with the GOP (after not having voted for a Republican for national office since the 2000 primary when I supported McCain), I find Clinton's tactics utterly abhorrent -- a complete disgrace.

Sure, I'd like it if Barack Obama was a fiscal conservative like me. But how long has it been since there were fiscal conservatives in charge of the GOP? That would be... let's see now... looking at the numbers... Eisenhower?

I like John McCain -- and I have come to thoroughly dislike Hillary and Bill Clinton -- and, frankly, I've come to be repulsed by at least some of Clinton's rabid, racist supporters.

If the Democratic Party wants to keep new converts like me, they're going to have to do two things: get real with spending constraints -- and excise the last dregs of Dixiecrat racism from the party.

The GOP as the party of Lincoln may be just a memory, but my new home in the Democratic party may be a fleeting one if the will of the people is subverted by the machinations of what's left of the Clinton Machine.

[Full disclosure: I voted for Bill Clinton, twice. I thought, over all, he did an acceptable job; the fiscal policies were a breath of fresh air. But there are more important things than the economy, stupid. There is honor, dignity, and fair play. Something the Clintons seem to have little or no regard for.]

Posted by: KS2 Problema | May 26, 2008 12:34 PM | Report abuse

The only trolls I see are people claiming to be DEMOCRATS who are threatening to vote for MCCAIN. You call Obama supporters trolls? We are the real Democrats. We are the ones committed to voting for a Democrat, even if it isn't our candidate, and you are the ones trying to use our loyalty against us.

The superdelegates aren't as stupid as you think. Your argument that they should back Hillary because her supporters are not good Democrats is getting no traction what so ever.

Posted by: Z | May 26, 2008 12:34 PM | Report abuse

"Got Cha, This isn't cute. It's probably the tackiest, most tasteless post I have ever seen. You must have the mentality of a garbage can!"

Where have you LIVED? On Mars? I certainly HOPE so. Because YOU are the GARBAGE of humanity. You FAIL to realize people throw 1,000,000 TONS of garbage for every ONE garbage CAN they throw. Misconceived creatures like you are simply LESS than scum. We SANE humans keep our garbage CAN.

"Sir, DON'T take the can, just take the garbage. Thank you very much."

Posted by: Brent | May 26, 2008 12:33 PM | Report abuse

Hillary's murderous comments about assassins brings to mind the rumors about her murders of Vince Foster, as well as the many mysterious deaths of people who were inconvenient for the Clintons.

Obama needs to watch his back whenever this lunatic woman is around him.

Posted by: Neil B | May 26, 2008 12:33 PM | Report abuse

@J Kuan..are you serious. that is laughably idiotic and I am sad you are that naive.

Posted by: Jason | May 26, 2008 12:33 PM | Report abuse

Cheryl -- you complain that Obama voters are not educated and informed? You did not even proof your post well enough to notice that you spelled hypocritical wrong ("hippocritical"?) and that "viserate" is not a word. The message was obviously written in haste, matching your knee-jerk reactions and judgments.

Obama is not a perfect candidate -- many of his supporters would not say otherwise. But he is an admirable one. Hillary has been misleading about everything from her vaunted experience (counting mostly her time by her husband's side) to her status (portraying herself as a savior as the working-class -- as if she is not making over $100 million per year). She has dismissed any state that she hasn't won, and her attempts to seat the Florida and Michigan delegates are absurd. Her approach to governance is less than innovative to say the least, probably a key reason that she fails to attract younger voters. And as for the Rev. Wright issue -- there are plenty of people who have continued to attend churches at which they did not agree with everything said. Not a top issue in my book.

Check a dictionary before you post, and give it some thought before you refuse to consider voting for a progressive, intelligent, and commendable candidate, even if he wasn't your first choice.

Posted by: E | May 26, 2008 12:32 PM | Report abuse

Obama has organized a network of obnoxious trolls who bombard blogs with irrational anti-Clinton hate comments and fanatical pro-Obama comments.

Obama is going to take down this country.

Beware: even the untouchable Oprah's empire is crumbling due to her Obama fanaticism.

Obama plays down and dirty "politics as usual," but he sugarcoats it with preachy speeches and a demure mid-Western smile.

Obama is the devil in disguise.

This country has already suffered 8 years under a fanatical Presidency. We cannot tolerate another one.

Obama cultists are just like Bush supporters - fanatical, thin skinned, rabid. They cannot withstand anyone who dares to disagree with them, and are almost violent in their defensiveness.

With Obama, there will be a continuation of NO free speech. Criticize him and you are branded all sorts of hateful things.

It is irrational hysteria. The facts are there showing Obama has lied and manipulated and done skeevy things and is no different from any other pol, and Clinton has not factually done anything to merit this volume of hate.

Posted by: Bruce, Dex, Jim, Alex, AJ, and more | May 26, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

Never never ever Hussein, if not Hillary then vote McCain.

Our new white mantra.

Let the afro-americans have the DNC and Obama.ss

Posted by: Hank | May 26, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

Jason wrote: Provide proof of your lies or go away, because we know you can't prove anything unless you only tell half the story. Please provide a link or a quote from Obama showing how he is "condescending, so arrogant, sooooo patronising not only to the electorate but mostly to women" You cannot provide such a quote and we all know the sexism charge is nonsense. Now go away.

"You're likable enough, Hillary".
"Not right now, Sweetie."
"Let me eat my waffle."
"Annie Oakley"
"Tonya Harding"
"Punished with a baby"
All of O's surrogates telling Hillary to get out of the race, and O says nothing.

Sexism is alive and well Jason. I bet you are probably 20-25 years old, living off your mama's credit cards and have never worked a job in your life that gave you blisters or callouses on your hands. I also bet you brag and how many women you have "had" and not even known their first name. You Jason, go away.

Posted by: Cheryl Wilson | May 26, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

@elva...How is this about gender, other than YOU saying so? You have NO proof of anything so STFU you sore loser. If anything HRC is courting the racist vote to support her. More racism than sexism but who cares. Obama won fair and square AND he is the best candidate

Posted by: Jason | May 26, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

ORIGINS OF ASSASSINATION LANGUAGE REGARDING OBAMA

We have the Internet, folks, so do a little research before you spout off!

_____________________

IN DECEMBER 0f 2006:

Chicago Sun-Times
December 29, 2006
After Interview with Michelle Obama


Title:Should Barack Obama run?

To Michelle Obama: From one mom to another

A letter writer (Erin Vest) tells Michelle:

"I wonder how on earth you and your family will make this decision. ... It
could well mean the word no one wants to say: 'assassination.'"
_________

and then, a few months later:

Chicago Sun-Times, May 2007

Sweet column: Obama getting Secret Service protection.


SIMI VALLEY, CALIF. -- Early last Friday morning, Democratic White House hopeful Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), dressed in a T-shirt and sweat pants, entered an elevator in a Columbia, S.C., hotel heading toward the fitness center.

With him were two men in suits, employees of Global Security Services LLC, the private Severna Park, Md., firm hired by Obama's campaign to provide him with security.

On Thursday, the security around Obama was elevated to a much higher level, with Obama placed under the full-time protection of the Secret Service, confirmed agency spokesman Eric Zahren.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said he got the ball rolling for Obama to get a Secret Service detail after hearing of some "evidence" -- Durbin declined to specify -- that he said was "worrisome."

Several sources said there was not a single incident or specific threat that triggered the request.

Obama's family has been nervous about his safety for some time and Obama talked openly about the concerns of his wife, Michelle, during an interview with the Chicago Sun-Times editorial board last December.

"Being shot, obviously, that is the least-attractive option," Obama said then.


The Secret Service detail was authorized by Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff after the recommendation of a panel
made up of the top House and Senate GOP and Democratic leaders.

Durbin, the assistant majority leader, said he approached Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) several weeks ago
about getting a Secret Service detail for Obama.

Obama, if elected, would be the first black president. Durbin said "the sad reality" in America is "that many times, an African-American candidate is more vulnerable."

Last year, Obama's half-sister Auma told Elle magazine, "There are crazy people in America as well, with crazy ideas. And at the end of the day, what matters is that he's a black man. The history of America is quite violent."

With the first primary and caucus votes not taking place until January, the Secret Service protection for Obama is coming at the earliest stage since the Secret Service started being responsible for guarding candidates in 1968.

_________________________

The May 2007 Secret Service story of May 2007 was covered by all national media...YES, including the ones who are NOW letting Hillary Clinton being falsely accused of using the BIG "A" word!

Media reporters, please research your stories.....American voters, do the same, please...stop the hypes!

Posted by: Steve | May 26, 2008 12:30 PM | Report abuse

For all you folks who continue to harbor illusions that Hillary will win the nomination, the AP, as well as Senator Obama's campaign web site, announced today that Obama has picked up three additional superdelegates from Hawaii.

Obama now has 1977 delegates to 1782 for Clinton. Only 49 more delegates needed by Senator Obama to win the nomination.

Posted by: New Era | May 26, 2008 12:30 PM | Report abuse

I am also a 20 year Democrat and I will not vote for Obama for so many reasons I would need a page to list them, but for their own interest, not after seeing how these young-uns with no life experience, not even able to ride a bike when Clinton was President, have so disgustingly viciously attacked Hillary Clinton. You show no respect for what the Clintons accomplished..."

Would you list the accomplishments of Hillary Clinton? News for you, I am past 70 and support Obama. Not all are young, but we know Hillary and are able to think.
As for voting for McCain, go ahead, Obama is way ahead in the polls and you are not needed. In other words, like your goddess Hillary, you are now irrelevant.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 12:30 PM | Report abuse

Said shel:

"I am also a 20 year Democrat and I will not vote for Obama for so many reasons I would need a page to list them..."

Proving yet again that sophomores and wisdom are mutually exclusive.

Posted by: lkwalker | May 26, 2008 12:29 PM | Report abuse

"ignoring the sentiments of two crucial demographics"

What are those? Racists and DINOs?

Posted by: Z | May 26, 2008 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, José. Hillary's campaign has imploded and she has no one to blame but herself, though she and Bill are wagging their fingers in the faces of everybody else. Starting out with every conceivable advantage, she and her team have squandered her historic opportunity by running one of the most incompetent and mean-spirited campaigns in recent memory. Despite her claims that she has the best résumé to be president, more and more Americans are beginning to realize that Hillary lacks the vision, character, and moral leadership to guide our nation. I hope she'll come to her senses and stop the madness. Our country needs to move beyond the Bush-Clinton era and choose a leader who will call us to the greater good. That's why Barack Obama will defeat John McCain to become our 44th president.

Posted by: Jay | May 26, 2008 12:29 PM | Report abuse

ORIGINS OF ASSASSINATION LANGUAGE REGARDING OBAMA

We have the Internet, folks, so do a little research before you spout off!

_____________________

IN DECEMBER 0f 2006:

Chicago Sun-Times
December 29, 2006
After Interview with Michelle Obama


Title:Should Barack Obama run?

To Michelle Obama: From one mom to another

A letter writer (Erin Vest) tells Michelle:

"I wonder how on earth you and your family will make this decision. ... It
could well mean the word no one wants to say: 'assassination.'"
_________

and then, a few months later:

Chicago Sun-Times, May 2007

Sweet column: Obama getting Secret Service protection.


SIMI VALLEY, CALIF. -- Early last Friday morning, Democratic White House hopeful Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), dressed in a T-shirt and sweat pants, entered an elevator in a Columbia, S.C., hotel heading toward the fitness center.

With him were two men in suits, employees of Global Security Services LLC, the private Severna Park, Md., firm hired by Obama's campaign to provide him with security.

On Thursday, the security around Obama was elevated to a much higher level, with Obama placed under the full-time protection of the Secret Service, confirmed agency spokesman Eric Zahren.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said he got the ball rolling for Obama to get a Secret Service detail after hearing of some "evidence" -- Durbin declined to specify -- that he said was "worrisome."

Several sources said there was not a single incident or specific threat that triggered the request.

Obama's family has been nervous about his safety for some time and Obama talked openly about the concerns of his wife, Michelle, during an interview with the Chicago Sun-Times editorial board last December.

"Being shot, obviously, that is the least-attractive option," Obama said then.


The Secret Service detail was authorized by Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff after the recommendation of a panel
made up of the top House and Senate GOP and Democratic leaders.

Durbin, the assistant majority leader, said he approached Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) several weeks ago
about getting a Secret Service detail for Obama.

Obama, if elected, would be the first black president. Durbin said "the sad reality" in America is "that many times, an African-American candidate is more vulnerable."

Last year, Obama's half-sister Auma told Elle magazine, "There are crazy people in America as well, with crazy ideas. And at the end of the day, what matters is that he's a black man. The history of America is quite violent."

With the first primary and caucus votes not taking place until January, the Secret Service protection for Obama is coming at the earliest stage since the Secret Service started being responsible for guarding candidates in 1968.

_________________________

The May 2007 Secret Service story of May 2007 was covered by all national media...YES, including the ones who are NOW letting Hillary Clinton being falsely accused of using the BIG "A" word!

Media reporters, please research your stories.....American voters, do the same, please...stop the hypes!

Posted by: Steve | May 26, 2008 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Obama is black Trojan horse, once he gets in power Blacks will dominate whites, cabinet members will be black, old Supreme Court Judges will be replaced with blacks, all top federal positions will be replaced with black persons. All prison wardens will be blacks instead of white. White folks do not comprehend the tsunami of black change that will happen.

Posted by: J. Kuan | May 26, 2008 12:29 PM | Report abuse

I'm a Hillary supporter who will be voting for McCain in the Fall. And I know many others who feel the same way. Obama is a divisive candidate. HE has divided us. And if he and his supporters think that Hillary's supporters will just fall in line. Think again. We will be throwing our support to John McCain.

Posted by: grace | May 26, 2008 12:28 PM | Report abuse

Sounds like Cheryl Wilson is a little upset about something?? Not sure why it's Obama, he's not the one who has lied point blank and then tried to brush it off. He's not the one whose sole ambition is to bomb the crap out of Iran/Syria/whoever else he's told to. You cite criticisms of Obama, which frankly are not well founded. The problems with Hillary or McCain are far greater than any perceived problems with Obama. This guy is the real deal - you can take that to the bank. You can also take this to the bank - that if Hillary or McCain get in, we will be in WW III before you can say "What the f..."

Posted by: WG | May 26, 2008 12:28 PM | Report abuse

@jonathan, you are clueless. Pleas provde a single skred of evidence supporting your claim. Just saying it over and over won't make it true. and by the way, HRC is NOT WINNING. Please show me your candyland math that gave you that outcome. Are you using the Republican counting method...HAHAHAHA...you understnad the flaws witha winner take all systemn don;t you. Loser hypocrite.

Posted by: Jason | May 26, 2008 12:28 PM | Report abuse

We have been enduring a flood of 'shoot Obama jokes' lately. Trotta on FOX TV talked about how 'we' both want to shoot Osama AND Obama. She never apologized, either. Nor did the Washington Post carry this story.

The Huckabee 'joke' about aiming guns and Obama and laughing as he leaps to safety is similar. The apologies that come out of all this 'shoot Obama' joking has been insulting at best. None of the white people doing this express any shame for this para-lynching talk.

Across the web, Hillary supporters have been shrilly yelling at Obama supporters to shut up or they will run away and not support the black candidate! This is going on even here at the Washington Post.

I think Hillary needs to get some help for her psychological problems after she talked openly about 'obliterating' all Iranian women, children, babies, elderly, men, trees, horses, cats, cows, dogs, flowers and every insect. This talk about nuclear war is the most dangerous talk of all! And the Washington Post never meets a war they don't trumpet and blare for more wars!

Shame on everyone involved in such deadly talk! Shame!

Posted by: Elaine Supkis | May 26, 2008 12:27 PM | Report abuse

Imagine...the U.S.cannot let themselves elect a WOMAN...may as well be living in a Muslim country. This is all about gender...make no mistake about it. When Obama loses...as he surely will...blame it on the media, those 'talking heads' who think they have all the answers. Isn't it they who got everyone to vote for Bush...twice?

Posted by: elva | May 26, 2008 12:27 PM | Report abuse

nulee

Haven't you heard about PAID bloggers whose compensation is tied the number of words and number of posts they type? These Obamabots ARE the most ardent supporters of Obama who have propelled him to this point. If it's NOT going to be Mrs. Clinton, then scores of my family and friends and colleagues will be MOST happy to vote for

Mr. John McCain
The 44th President of the United States
(NOT the U.S. of KKK-A that must be damned)

Posted by: Brent | May 26, 2008 12:27 PM | Report abuse

If anyone thinks that Clinton 'misspeaks' they are living in a dreamland. She is cold and calculating and knows exactly what she is saying. Her message was clear, I am in this in the event something happens to Obama, so don't give up hope yet.

On a related note, where is all the 'expeience' from Clinton I keep hearing about? Hasn't she and her husband run a lot of campaigns? How did they mess this one up so bad?

Hillarys campaign looks exactly like the bush presidency. Focus on the negitives, the fear and drive people apart. Ignore all common wisdom and 'stay the course'. Don't worry about money, spend it all now and figure it out later.

30 million in debt! About half of that belongs to her and 'companies' of her advisors. But that still leaves 12-15 million that she owes to small buisnesses.

She is a failure.

Iraq Vote: Failed
NAFTA: Failed (she says she fought against it)
Campaign: Failed
Healthcare: Failed. When she pushed her bill, she first killed a bi-partisan bill that many thought would actually pass.

Posted by: Michael Cowan | May 26, 2008 12:27 PM | Report abuse

When you have a brain tumor you can't think straight. No wonder Ted endorsed Obama!
-----------------------------------------
Got Cha, This isn't cute. It's probably the tackiest, most tasteless post I have ever seen. You must have the mentality of a garbage can!

Posted by: lhummer | May 26, 2008 12:26 PM | Report abuse

The DNC is playing a dangerous game here they are literally ignoring the sentiments of two crucial demographics they need desperately if they want to beat John McCain in November - women and rural voters.


Never never ever Hussein, if not Hillary then vote McCain.

Posted by: jessica | May 26, 2008 12:26 PM | Report abuse

While this campaign may be bitter and leave a bad taste in the mouthes of those that do not get the nomination. It is important to remember that either democratic candidate is a far better choice then John McCain. VOTE BLUE TO SAVE THE NATION!!

Posted by: Chesdem | May 26, 2008 12:26 PM | Report abuse

The discussion threads start with one of te most despicable allegations of this pretty dismal election- that Kennedy's Obama endorsement was the result of his brain tumor.

Hillary Clinton's bulldog/victim campaign may well spell disaster for the Democratic party in the fall, but it has a certain crazy brilliance. It is apparent from the visceral reactions on both sides that rationality has little to do with presidential politics.

The RFK statements were ill-considered, but the firestorm in reaction is completely out of proportion. Of course if the shoe was on the other foot, does anybody doubt that Clinton would be all over Obama? (With the aid, in that case, of the worst of the Kennedy's, RFK Jr.)

In her case, the same people who are protecting her here would be attacking him. It makes you proud to be an American.

Posted by: irishjazz | May 26, 2008 12:26 PM | Report abuse

Clinton was 20 points ahead in February and was seen as inevitable. How come she couldn't close the deal?
She ran a poor campaign and took herself down. And her record isn't appealing to most Democrats and independent voters and Republicans who realize we need a big change. Don't blame the media or the bloggers.

Posted by: Bill | May 26, 2008 12:26 PM | Report abuse

"Obama didn't apologize"

But.. even with his baggage ( muslim education, an admitted racist, admitted elitist, Wright supporter) he has followers. That's because those of like kind don't find much fault with each other.

Posted by: Billw | May 26, 2008 12:26 PM | Report abuse

"You certainly can criticize Clinton for lying about Bosnia but what sort of person doesn't realize personality and judgment changes are cardinal signs of a brain tumor rather than a noteworthy endorsement?

Posted by: N | May 26, 2008 12:11 PM "

There is the typical cruel, cold hearted, Hillary supporter. I took care of my brother before he died of a brain tumor. Hillary's leadership ability; ugliness and lies.

Hillary lies all the time. Maybe she has a brain tumor. She was gleeful about Bosnia, chuckling as if remembering...When first challenged she said: that is what I said and that is the way it was.

A lie to cover the first lie? Then both she and Bill lie some more and indignant "would think she robbed a bank Bill said".

Same indignation he showed when he got in front of the camera when he said "I did not have sexual relations with that woman..."

Value of You Tube; can rewarch Bill's self righteous indignation then and compare it to her's now.

I question the judgment of everyone who would endorse the lying duo. Too bad the press that the Clintons whine is unfair to her, does not report on the fraud trial. More of her lies in that one.

Posted by: alice | May 26, 2008 12:26 PM | Report abuse


She lied again. Bill Clinton had the nomination sewed up in March not June. And why did she have to mention Kennedy's assassination in June. Could she not have said Robert Kennedy was still running in June. A little thing you say? No, it shows the way her mind works. She will say and do anything to be crowned.
If you want to know how effective she is, look up her record on heading education in Arkansas. Taxes on the poor were raised by a raise in sales tax, with no taxes on the corporations. All the while she sat on the board with the "elitists" at Wal-Mart, busting unions and importing billions from China, while education in Arkansas stayed at the bottom.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 12:25 PM | Report abuse

Oh, just to add my voice to the resounding cacophony as a warning to Obama supporters:

I am also a 20 year Democrat and I will not vote for Obama for so many reasons I would need a page to list them, but for their own interest, not after seeing how these young-uns with no life experience, not even able to ride a bike when Clinton was President, have so disgustingly viciously attacked Hillary Clinton. You show no respect for what the Clintons accomplished for our country. Democrats like myself will make sure that Obama loses to McCain IF Obama get's the nomination which is highly unlikely. Oh and yes, I have a college degree. Any one who actually has a degree knows that it is not a measure of intelligence BTW.

And before you ask, yes we would prefer McCain to Obama for a multitude of reasons, including silencing the hatred, animosity, and divisiveness of radical anarchists like yourself. Go back to the school of life before opening your mouths to spew hate.

Posted by: SHEL-from-FL | May 26, 2008 12:25 PM | Report abuse

You are witnessing the death throes of the DLC here. They never were Democrats. They were Republicans trying to take over the Democratic party. They succeeded for many years, but the progressive movement is taking back the party and there is nothing they can do about it.

The reason Clinton supporters are comfortable saying they will vote for McCain is because they were never really Democrats to begin with.

Obama has brought new people into the party and those people hold true the real values of the Democratic party.

Say goodbye to the "third way." You are no longer welcome in my party. Go ahead and vote for John McCain, we'll still beat you because America is TIRED of being under the thumb of corporate greed.

Posted by: Z | May 26, 2008 12:25 PM | Report abuse

If Hillary was toast and supposed to drop out even before the Ohio and Texas primaries so their annointed one could cruise to the general, then why is the MSM and others making such a big deal over what Hillary says now? How can Hillary hurt Obama if she's lost already? Why would the Obama campaign send out strategists and surrogates to comment on Hillary's comments if she's the loser? In order to give him some possible reason NOT to put her in his cabinet? Or, because he knows he looks bad with white voters, FL and MI voters, and hispanics? Why does the MSM cover every Hillary move if she has already lost? They didn't cover Huckabee that way. It is because they all know that Hillary hasn't lost and that many of the early voters are having buyer's remorse. They have seen that the annointed One has not said anything substantive since day one, and the few comments he does try to say are either written for him on cue cards or are exact duplicates of Senator Clinton's comments. Has Obama made a policy speech without reading from a prompter or a cue card? NO. Hillary's speeches are 95% from her knowledge and don't have to be written down. Keep watching O and you will see. It will be McCain this Nov. for sure, because he doesn't try to be somebody he is truly not. O is a manufactured candidate, with puppet strings controlled by those who will call in their favors. That is why the puppet makers won't endorse Hillary in any way. They know she has no strings to pull.

Posted by: Cheryl Wilson | May 26, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

@ hannah....Provide proof of your lies or go away, because we know you can't prove anything unless you only tell half the story. Please provide a link or a quote from Obama showing how he is "condescending, so arrogant, sooooo patronising not only to the electorate but mostly to women" You cannot provide such a quote and we all know the sexism charge is nonsense. Now go away.

Posted by: Jason | May 26, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

It's not the Internet or the blogs or youtube that's against Hillary. The Internet and the blogs and youtube are made of people, plain and simple. These are nothing more and nothing less than the expressions of millions of Americans who have listened to the arguments of both sides, made their choice, and acted accordingly. What has harmed Hillary most of all has been her utter inability to recognize that the throne isn't being denied to her by some back-room cabal or Wall Street or the Internet or the media. It's being denied to her by the American People.

Posted by: Bob | May 26, 2008 12:23 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: lk walker | May 26, 2008 12:23 PM | Report abuse

The world hears common sense in Obama's words,including cuban dissidents:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7418941.stm

Go Barry!

Posted by: Preacherman | May 26, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

The media and the Democrats in Congress have stonewalled Senator Clinton from the beginning. She IS winning, at best and at least is neck and neck with Obama, while waves of negativity from these two sources continue to demand she drop out, but why? Who in their right mind would drop out in her possition? Misogynists, all. And all fools who are so certain Obama will win. He is where he is only because he is black and the overwhelming ''black vote'' that has turned out for him in certain states. No on is thinking with any foresight here.

Posted by: jonathan | May 26, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

Silly people, don't you know this is all part of a vast Obama cover up?

At least Bill Clinton thinks so, I assume this video will rightly spread all over too.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/26/bill-clinton-says-wife-is-victim-of-a-%e2%80%98cover-up%e2%80%99/

"I can't believe it. It is just frantic the way they are trying to push and pressure and bully all these superdelegates to come out," he said at a South Dakota campaign stop Sunday, in remarks first reported by ABC News. "'Oh, this is so terrible: The people they want her. Oh, this is so terrible: She is winning the general election, and he is not. Oh my goodness, we have to cover this up.'"

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

Chrryl, what is wrong with wearing a pink tie? You're bigtory is showing...better go back under your rock.

Posted by: King | May 26, 2008 12:21 PM | Report abuse

Barack Obama is so condescending, so arrogant, sooooo patronising not only to the electorate but mostly to women, how can I possibly vote for him?
John McCain is a humble and modest man, and I trust him. I'm voting republican come November.

Posted by: Hannah | May 26, 2008 12:20 PM | Report abuse

Too bad all those internet kids, children, teenagers, and undeveloped others with so much time on their hands aren't contributing to something healthy like cleaning up their own neighborhoods. The hate coming from Obama supporters is the most sad. And why Obama doesn't speak up about it, is beyond me.

Posted by: Gsu | May 26, 2008 12:20 PM | Report abuse

Every time you Obama supporter hurl your violent anger at Clinton, Obama loses another vote. I hope the people writng here are not working for his campaign, he needs ALL of Clintons supporters to beat McCain...you guys better shape up.

Posted by: nulee | May 26, 2008 12:19 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Richard Rodham Sirhan Cheney Clinton is the mentality of the remarks Hillary made.

Posted by: I Shot the Sheriff | May 26, 2008 12:19 PM | Report abuse

When you have a brain tumor you can't think straight. No wonder Ted endorsed Obama!

Posted by: Got Cha! | May 26, 2008 12:19 PM | Report abuse

The ignorant commnets here about Obama supporters are naive and bitter. Sorry if your "old school" politics don't work anymore old guys, but many, in fact millions of us are educated and not young. Your assumptions make you look like an idiot, and a loser, which is what you are by buying into the Clinton crap...yet again. The naivete of old schoolers is nothing short of amazing....and all you can do is blame yound voters. You hypocrites are quite pathetic and you would be easily defeated in a debaye offline. the internet is a perfectr place for anonymous Clinton supoprter to continue to post their rhetoric, lies, and insults in the hope that something...anything happens to Obama so they can win..

Posted by: New School voter | May 26, 2008 12:18 PM | Report abuse

To insinuate that young people on the internet have no life experience is ludicrous, beyond reason, and unprovable. What is provable is the fact that the Hillary Clinton campaign is to blame for the negative media that she has been receiving both online and offline. I need not give examples from the past year because they are numerous. I only need bring up her own claims of sexism in the campaign. Sexism is a bogus charge that holds no ground. And the old withered women on the Sunday morning talk shows yesterday agreed.
If Clinton supporters decide to go against their own candidates recommendations and switch parties come November, it not only proves that they are hypocritical but also insinuates that the youth really are smarter than their parents.

Posted by: Wah Knot | May 26, 2008 12:18 PM | Report abuse

The furor over Hillary's use of the "A word" draws attention away from the fact that the argument she was trying to make (regardless of how ill-phrased) was inaccurate and illogical.

First she mentioned her husband's campaign in 1992, which she said only "wrap[ped] up the nomination in 1992 [when] he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June." Well, perhaps that's the point at which he clinched the nomination with that final delegate that put him over the threshold, but that's hardly how long it took him to "wrap up" the nomination. He swept Supertuesday, and for all practical purposes sealed his nomination with his April 7th win in New York.

Second, she implied that - for whatever reason - should Obama not be able to fulfill the role of Democratic nominee, she would need to be prepared to step up. Well, that may be true, but that hardly justifies her continued campaigning. That thinking suggests that she's basically campaigning for second place..."just in case." But that's absurd. There's no competition for second place. The other Democratic candidates have won a combined .3% of the delegates available. They have all dropped out of the race. She faces no competition in that respect. If her concern is simply ensuring that she's in the runner-up spot, in beauty pageant style, in case "the winner is unable to perform his duties as nominee," I think she can rest easy. Her place is secure. No need to continue the long and increasingly bitter struggle.

Finally, Mrs. Clinton said she was using "historic fact" to show that there's precedent for carrying the Democratic nomination race all the way through the summer. Well, there is some precedent for that. However, in the years in which that was the case, the Democratic Party lost the election pretty badly. So in making historical allusions to, say, 1968 and 1972, she's merely undermining her own argument as to why she should continue the race.

Focusing on Clinton's invocation of RFK's assassination only plays into Clinton's argument that Obama fans make mountains out of molehills to vilify her. Obama supporters would be wise to focus on the thrust of her argument, which has enough flaws of its own, rather than crying foul over her poorly chosen diction.


~Barbara
republicansforobama.org

Posted by: Barbara | May 26, 2008 12:18 PM | Report abuse

"Way to go, Hillary Clinton. You lied. You lied in front of millions and millions of people." ----promiscuous parents

Yes. Way to go. I just saw Hillary killed 500 million too. Get a freakin clue. Your parents never lied and never cheated on each other. Although their partners in that special activity are so numerous it's more than the number of beans served weekly in a Mexican restaurant.

Posted by: Ted_MaryJo_Water | May 26, 2008 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Do you liberals actually think Arianna Huffington knows anything? Huffington Post is the internet version of the National Enquirer. Especially when they praise Keith (pink tie wearing) Olbermann's special comment regarding Hillary's RFK timeline remark. Did you see the drool that was resting on his bottom lip as he was spitting out his woman-hate? What will Arianna and Keith do after January 2009 if Obama wins. They will have nothing to talk about. If they start bashing O then like they do Bush, Hillary, McCain now, then they look like @$$holes. 20-year olds don't have a clue what life is like and therefore they should not be a voting bloc to count on. They are the entitled generation, and that's what they think about their leader "O". They won't have a clue or will care once he is in office about politics. Once they realize they elected a leader who short-cutted his way to the top, they will expect the same. When O dissappoints them, which will occur with 6 months of office, they will whine. Look at Deval Patrick. He made the same HOPE and CHANGE promises that Axelrod and other wrote on cue cards, and Patrick will never be re-elected. I am sure O knows that too so he will make Patrick a member of his cabinet.
And, Jesse Jackson and son, and Samantha Powers.

Posted by: Cheryl Wilson | May 26, 2008 12:16 PM | Report abuse

Yes - the blogs have been ruthless against Hillary. So has the mainstream media.

The RFK comment was so overblown and overhyped by the blogs and the media.

But Hillary marches on - she has raised almost 200 million dollars, whooped Obama's butt in every debate, received 17 million votes - over 49% of the popular vote (more if you include FL and MI) and keeps winning (PA, IN, WV, KY) as these idiots demand that she quit.

And the Obama supporters are too stupid to realize that without even a fraction of her 17 million voters - he CANNOT win.

And then the Obama blogs and mainstream media would get exactly what they deserve - President John McCain!

Posted by: csh | May 26, 2008 12:16 PM | Report abuse

HERE'S THE PROBLEM

I (and many others)would vote for Powell without hesitation, but the posibility of Obama being muslim is real. He is a racist by his own admission. He is also an elitist by his own statements at the
private meeting in San Francisco. He supported Wright for 20 years. Unfortunately the only other choice is Clinton. Too bad.

Posted by: Billw | May 26, 2008 12:15 PM | Report abuse

I think these younguns targeting Clinton are going to be given a spanking at the convention when Clinton emerges the nominee. Obama should have set them straight, but he didn't to his own demise.

Posted by: Shel-from-FL | May 26, 2008 12:14 PM | Report abuse

Are you serious!? Clinton voters are statistically uneducated so of course lies and death predictions/threats would slip by their ignorant heads. And negativity?!!! Dont get me started. clinton equals stupidity and i look forward to the day she is reduced to campaign for Obama!

Posted by: Chistian | May 26, 2008 12:13 PM | Report abuse

i think the republicans are sitting thebn democrats up to loose the election the republicans are voting for obama to get the nomanation because they know come november the white ones that voted for obama will not vote for him in the fall .but they know that they whould vote for clinton ,they better wake up.

Posted by: elijah | May 26, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Hillary, Hillary, go away
Don't come back another day
Barack Obama is here to stay
Hillary, Hillary, go away.

Posted by: Vince Le Bamo | May 26, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

You certainly can criticize Clinton for lying about Bosnia but what sort of person doesn't realize personality and judgment changes are cardinal signs of a brain tumor rather than a noteworthy endorsement?

Posted by: N | May 26, 2008 12:11 PM | Report abuse

Go Hillary! Go home before you say or do something else dumb!

Posted by: Jim | May 26, 2008 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Any person who would vote for John McCain and allow him to give the Republicans a 7-2 majority in the Supreme Court for the next 30 years has no right to call themselves a Democrat.

Posted by: Z | May 26, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

The pundits, the Obama people, and the Republicans all have done whatever they could to make sure that Hillary would not be McBush's opponent....All the propaganda is because they were afraid of her popularity...so they did what they could to ruin it...Welcome to four more years of McBush......

Posted by: George Kesselring | May 26, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

You O-manics have some nerve. Obama didn't apologize for his bitter, clinging to god and guns remark either. "I regret" and then "I deeply regret". Never I am sorry, or I apologize. You viserate Clinton, when Obama has never apologized for a thing. Rezko property deal, "Was a bonehead move", Rockefeller's unremarkable statement about McCain dropping bombs, "punished with a baby", "I can win her voters, but she can't win mine"... the list goes on and on. You say you are informed, educated voters. You are opinionated hippocritical voters. Your mind was made up about Obama on day one, and not even his lies about sitting in the pews for 20 years listening to the worst kind of crap sways your opinion.

That is why this lifelong DEM will vote for anyone BUT Obama. No cue card or teleprompter speech will make me vote for him. He has not earned it.

Cheryl - Indiana

Posted by: Cheryl Wilson | May 26, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Completely agree with poster Z, above, that Hillary did not apologize. She did express "regret" ("I regret that if my [remark] was in any way offensive"), but that was plainly not an apology, and I don't know why you media types keep referring to it as one.

Posted by: X | May 26, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

You have to look at the fact that the average web user, esp. U Tube, is young and inexperienced. These young people have no life experience: most have been supported by their parents into college, think they know it all when in fact they don't know a damn thing (I was like that, too), thinking they know more than their parents. They have the time (while the older crowd is working to support them) to cruise the web at their leisure. They will not win the election in Nov. Too many mature, working, older people are too busy to be on the net 7/24, but will have the time to vote this Nov. Most of these younsters will mature but will take time.

Posted by: Clyde Nugget | May 26, 2008 12:07 PM | Report abuse

There is no reason for her to stay in the race, other than to take advantage of an Obama slip or fall. What kind of candidacy is that, if not a run for the VP slot?

Posted by: Howard | May 26, 2008 12:07 PM | Report abuse

Well of course a bunch of kids on the internet would buy the empty rhetoric of 'hope' and 'change'. They also think it's cool that Obama smokes. Kids are easily misled into thinking politics is American Idol. The good news is that older voters are not so naive. They do not play in these child's games. They know it has no place in politics and that is why they are anticipating President Hillary Clinton.

Honestly I think they are damaging the Obama campaign. More than 30% of the Clinton Democrats will not vote for Obama and that number steadily grows the more we question the behavior of his divisive supporters as well as his racist divisive campaign.

Democrats that engage in internet hate campaigns are certain to lose. The reason? Democrats tend to dislike dirty political tactics. Kids wouldn't know this, they're too young to have figured this out.

Posted by: g | May 26, 2008 12:03 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is my candidate because of her extraordinary intelligence, her fighting spirit and, yes, her gender. The media has made this last reason a major cause for many of us. Go Hillary!

Posted by: Monique from NC | May 26, 2008 12:03 PM | Report abuse

You have to look at the fact that the web user is a more informed voter a high information voter. So lies , misrepresentations and low moral character is taken as a personal insult and quickly retaliated against. While her Hillary has a large base of people who are low information voters, they only catch a sound bite or two of the news and generally don't understand what Clinton is saying but feels she has no reason to lie so they believe what she says. Basically she betrays the trust of her constituency by lying to them such as the current lie saying she won the popular vote. These people look to her for information but she gives them lies. Her mistake is she thinks she is still in an age where you can get away with a lie.

Posted by: gilesjp | May 26, 2008 11:58 AM | Report abuse

Apologized? Hillary Clinton did not apologize. She "explained" her remarks in a way that made it seem like people who were offended were the ones at fault. If she had actually apologized this might not have taken off the way it did. If you will read what people are saying, the majority of them are upset about her non-apology more than what she actually said.

What she said was a mistake. She is a former first lady and a high-profile presidential candidate, she knows better than to say anything that a crazy person may misinterpret. She could have admitted she made a mistake, but didn't. Now she is blaming Obama? It's absurd.

Obama didn't make her say those things and his campaign has been very nice about this whole thing. She has not been so nice to him. Remember "bittergate" where one of her supporters crashed a fundraising event and then she turned it into an attack ad? Obama could easily turn this into an attack, but chooses not to. Yet she somehow thinks he is to blame for what she said?

It's just like when Bill Clinton blamed Obama for the firestorm after SC. Bill Clinton compared Obama to Jesse Jackson at the same time that Hillary Clinton was marginalizing MLK's contribution to the civil rights act, and somehow that was Obama's fault, too?

Nope, no apology. To apologize is to own up to a mistake and take the blame for it. The Clintons have not owned up to a single mistake throughout this entire campaign.

Posted by: Z | May 26, 2008 11:55 AM | Report abuse

Clinton is responsible for where she is at in this race. Her campaign has been a disaster. She has run it in the red for months and months now reaching recently 30 million dollars owed. Her advisers made dumb mistakes that showed out completely inept they are. The lobbyist running her campaign were so intent on making themselves rich through the presidency they failed even to focus on their own candidate.

It is time to rally around Obama and take the presidency in November.

Posted by: Deward Bowles | May 26, 2008 11:47 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company