Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Biden: Clinton 'Might Have Been a Better Pick' for Veep

By Perry Bacon, Jr.
Democratic vice-presidential nominee Joe Biden displayed unusual modesty for a vice-presidential candidate at a campaign event in New Hampshire today, responding to a voter who didn't like Sen. Hillary Clinton and was glad Sen. Barack Obama chose the Delaware senator instead.

"Hillary Clinton is as qualified or more qualified than I am to be vice president of the United States of America," Biden replied, standing before a crowd at a Nashua rally. "Let's get that straight. She's a truly close personal friend; she is qualified to be president of the United States of America. She's easily qualified to be vice president of the United States of America and, quite frankly, it might have been a better pick than me, but she is first-rate."

While Clinton is planning to campaign in Ohio for Obama this Sunday, Sen. John McCain's strong showing among white women in polls since he selected Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska as his running mate has prompted some talk, mainly from gleeful Republicans, about whether Obama could have blunted this effect by tapping Clinton rather than Biden.

Clinton enthusiastically praised Biden's selection when it was announced. And Biden had another reason to praise Clinton: she's popular among Democrats in the state, having won an upset victory in the Granite State in January after Obama's own Iowa victory.

By Web Politics Editor  |  September 10, 2008; 5:54 PM ET
Categories:  Joe Biden  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama: 'Believe in Yourself'
Next: Thanks to McCain-Palin 'Click,' Joint Travel Ahead

Comments

Obama 08! Bush has once again grasped at straws by adopting another Obama position--we'll now go after Osama bin Laden in Pakistan and get him by election day! The Atlantic website acknowledges that Obama has been the "shadow" President for months, with Bush taking all his initiative from Obama talking-points and campaign positions. And you thought it was the Democrats who routinely changed their positions to accommodate public opinion! I wonder if Bush will introduce a program of universal health care before November? "President Obama"--get used to it.

Posted by: Webster Ranger | September 12, 2008 8:56 PM | Report abuse

Biden is straight out one of the best VP picks ever. He's very smart, very experienced in all matters foreign and domestic, and well spoken (even if a little boring). What's more he is a good hard working man who loves his country. With a little more pizzaz, he would make the president's chair himself, but as it is, he will be one of the most able advisor's any president could ever want. Them's the straight facts folks, and you can't change it by wishing it weren't so.

Posted by: lov'nit | September 11, 2008 11:48 PM | Report abuse

To JakeD: Pardon for the misunderstanding. I was quite worked up, and the more BS I see on blogs, the angrier I am.

I would be very interested to see what kind of BS spin Obama can put out to trash Palin.

Posted by: peg | September 11, 2008 8:31 PM | Report abuse

I'd like to follow "An American" off-topic for a moment.

I make over four times the amount mentioned and occasionally make it into the top 5% of earners; I send my kids to summer camp every year and we take vacations to Europe, Hawaii, the Bahamas. I paid off my home ($900K) years ago as well as my apartment building so I have pittance for deductions; I pay a lot in taxes - and then I pay more. Yet I never find myself asking questions like "Why should I be paying for others?" and "How much do [you think I] owe you?". This, to me, is one of the fundamental differences between Democrats and Republicans: Dems seem concerned about the well-being of others while Reps seem mostly concerned with themselves.

I'm no saint; I like keeping my money and, despite Republican exaggerations, none of the Democrats I've ever met aspire to socialism either. But we already have socialism - education, for example. I put both of my kids through private schools so why should I pay taxes for education? Because it improves the society in which I live. Education reduces poverty and unwise political decisions, and greatly increases the chance of medical and technological advances that will benefit me as well as Republicans. OK, I'll accept a little socialism. What about a police force? Can't afford to hire my own; same with a fire department. Americans decided to socialize those two too, along with a military to defend ourselves.

We decided years ago to start saving, in the form of the Social Security tax, for retirement. We (including "An American") pay money into this system and we (including "An American") get that money back during retirement: not everyone lives long enough get back everything they paid and others get more back than they paid. I'm not sure this counts as socialism, but it probably will be while we cover the temporary bump known as the "Baby Boomers" (like me).

Now medical expenses have skyrocketed and a serious accident or illness can consume even Republicans' entire life's savings in no time. A national health care system would be just as socialist as the services above, but other democracies have made this work without collapsing into anarchy and I'm sure our country - which boasts a government "for the people and by the people" - can too. Hard work does not guarantee wealth; it is often just the sacrifice one makes for children or elderly parents. Such people shouldn't be considered undeserving of health care because they don't only "look out for #1".

Republicans will hate this post and will no doubt let me know. But eight years of marching lock-step about an unjustified war (which holds us back from addressing many other serious problems), economic de-regulation (in the belief that unfettered capitalism will solve even social problems while coincidentally making themselves rich, but really just gave us the current mortgage debacle and staggering national debt), treason, torture, perjury, bribery, corruption, politicizing the Justice Dept, incompetence during Katrina, and on and on have destroyed their credibility with me. Facing a disastrous election, the Republicans are finally starting to adopt some of the issues the Democrats have been pushing for years but I remember how the slimmest presidential election victory in who-knows-how-many years became a "mandate from the people"; if the Republicans win this year, they will claim a "mandate from God" and even 10% will be too maverick for McCain. Do not trust change to the Republicans. Just as in 2004, America will regret it immediately.

Posted by: washpostonly | September 11, 2008 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Well, the Demo-Clowns are getting seriously desperate, aren't they? I bet Biden is terrified that Clinton and Hillary are going to have him done in or something. I'm sure (not now sweetie Obama) wont hesitate to throw him under the bus to win this election. It is CREEPY how much they want to win AT ALL COSTS. This means lies, deception, back stabbing and embarssing themselves. They are clueless, shameless and full of fear. Kinda reminds me of a crack addict. Obama is such a baby. He can't cope with mistakes made. Who the heck is backing this guy? Is Oprah and others paying off the world? Again, it is frightening. I don't want to have a one party system. I would like to live in a free country. I would like people to be at least remotely honest. This is just a joke. They seem to stand for things that are not what our country is based on. Lies, deception, fear, lack of integrity, desperation...it is ashame.

Posted by: Mamma | September 11, 2008 6:06 PM | Report abuse

Well, the Demo-Clowns are getting seriously desperate, aren't they? I bet Biden is terrified that Clinton and Hillary are going to have him done in or something. I'm sure (not now sweetie Obama) wont hesitate to throw him under the bus to win this election. It is CREEPY how much they want to win AT ALL COSTS. This means lies, deception, back stabbing and embarssing themselves. They are clueless, shameless and full of fear. Kinda reminds me of a crack addict. Obama is such a baby. He can't cope with mistakes made. Who the heck is backing this guy? Is Oprah and others paying off the world? Again, it is frightening. I don't want to have a one party system. I would like to live in a free country. I would like people to be at least remotely honest. This is just a joke. They seem to stand for things that are not what our country is based on. Lies, deception, fear, lack of integrity, desperation...it is ashame.

Posted by: Mamma | September 11, 2008 6:06 PM | Report abuse

the only thing this old assfossil will change is his colostomy bag

Posted by: dick cabesa | September 11, 2008 5:47 PM | Report abuse

any pick would have been better than this butt fossil

Posted by: dick cabesa | September 11, 2008 5:43 PM | Report abuse

peg:

I don't want Obama to be President EVER. I was simply pointing out that a Hillary-Obama ticket would have been unbeatable. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Posted by: JakeD | September 11, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse

To JakeD: So what if Obama won't have his chance as prez until 2017 and beyond. If he's not ready, he's not ready.

The country and Dem the party would have been much better served by Clinton as nominee. Imagine how it would have been, with Clinton on top, and Obama as change agent (lightweight like Palin) as sidekick. THEN, you can go toe-to-toe with McCain/Palin, and shine.

You don't go shoo in a 6-year-old to rule a land, and prop the kid up with the grizzly haired. Do you think the 6-year-old really knows how to make wise decisions? No. In fact, we're having it now - it's called Bush the prince, with Cheney the old hand as sidekick. And look who's been pulling strings and making decisions for the past 7 years in the White House?

You would be kidding yourself if you really expect anyone to vote another inexperienced know-it-all lightweight in WH again, all in the name of "Change" (whatever that means).

Posted by: peg | September 11, 2008 3:35 PM | Report abuse

America is so racist.When will we grow up and and stop taking our ball from the park? We still don't get it and I have little hope that people in this country will ever "get it".

Posted by: Robert | September 11, 2008 3:32 PM | Report abuse

Joe Biden's own son is a Lobbyist working for a top law firm in Washington DC who has lobbied Biden's own office according to ABC News>

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Story?id=5640118&page=1

That same son is named in a lawsuit alledging that the younger Biden defrauded a business partner of millions of $$$.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/23/AR2008082302200.html

Senator Obama sought more than $3.4 million in congressional earmarks for clients of the lobbyist son of his Democratic running mate, Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. according to THE WASHINGTON POST.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/26/AR2008082603894_pf.html

I suspect the type of Change Obama and Biden are talking about is NOT the kind of change we need in America!

Posted by: GeraldD | September 11, 2008 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Dear "Sexist" George. It is not about hurt feelings. Don't try to validate my feelings just go on pontificating and get it out of your system.

Posted by: Jackie Girl | September 11, 2008 1:18 PM | Report abuse

Thank you, Peg. Had Obama and Hillary teamed up from the beginning -- obviously with Hillary on the top of that ticket -- Obama would have been a shoe-in in 4-8 years. As it stands, today, he will NOT be inaugurated President on January 20, 2009, 2013, or 2017.

Posted by: JakeD | September 11, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

To George: Do not trivialize Clinton supporters' reluctance as "hurt feelings."

I, for one, do not desert Dem and Obama because of "hurt feelings." I do so because Obama is simply not ready to be my president. Obama has not shown/convinced me the least, as to how he would have been a better president than McCain, other than the "extension to Bush" myth.

Tell Obama to re-apply in another 4-8 years. Do some real hard work. Get some real accomplishment other than slogans. (Obama is not the only "Change" in town.) I can promise I'll seriously reconsider him, if you show his chops.

Posted by: peg | September 11, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

To Juno: Yes, Biden/Obama are tongue-tied when it comes to attacking Palin/McCain.

So, in each ticket, we have one experienced "tired old hand", and one claims to be change agent. Only that Dem prefers to have the Marc Anderseen (remember the netscape glory days?) to be CEO, and Jim Barksdale (its experienced CEO) to do the dog-and-pony show.

McCain's veep pick is undeniable a brilliant move. Palin debunks every single myth that Obama might have sustained.

Not that I'm that enthusiastic about the over-zealousness and righteousness of GOP, but I've had enough of the Dem hypocrisy, Obama style.

I can settle with McCain for 4 years, and then hail the second coming of Clinton in 2012.

Posted by: peg | September 11, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Carlton:

Neither Adolf Hitler nor Mother Teresa were eligible to be elected President. Also, I am registered Independent, not Republican. Keep up the ad hominem personal attack though.

Posted by: JakeD | September 11, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Reading through the thought processes presented here leads me to a horrifying thought. What if all these people have the right to vote? I think I understand why our forefather's created the Electoral College. It's also easier to understand why our country is in need of change (something on which both sides seemingly agree).
Let us try to focus on what is best for the future of our country and for our children's future and all get over our hurt feelings.

Posted by: George | September 11, 2008 10:41 AM | Report abuse

Mickey Mouse would have been a better pick. This non-sense of change and no more Washington connections is what really won the primary for Obama. So whats he do, pick the second most connected Washington politician he could find in Biden. (Ted K is number 1)
Apparently, Obama does need the Washignton connections. He just doesn;t think the average dummy out there can figure this one out is all.

Posted by: Chris | September 11, 2008 9:56 AM | Report abuse

Obama could not controlhis ego and did not pick Sentaor Hillary Cinton becuase of that large ego. Now he needs her to go after Palin. Good for Hillary - she won't go after her. That is the job of the vice presidential candidate...oh yeah Obama you didn't pick her. Tough luck! You could have had 18 million voters in your pocket and been elected president. Instead, you picked Biden, who dropped out of the race again. No worries he can bring you a whopping 8,000 votes - do the math - poor, poor Obama you shot yourself in the foot. At least Biden knows she would have been a better president and better pick for vice president. Good honesty Joe Sorry but this Hillary supporter must now vote for McCain. Get him elected, put up with him for 4 years and then definitely get Hilary elected in 2012.

Posted by: Jackie Girl | September 11, 2008 9:54 AM | Report abuse


Hillary should be the presidential nominee. Obama was always going to lose this, with or without Palin on the scene. Palin just makes it a landslide instead of a sqeaker.

I just don't see Hillary ever joining up with Obama and his sexist liberal hate machine.

OBAMA=SEXIST PIG

Posted by: julia | September 11, 2008 9:38 AM | Report abuse

Real Clear Politics-
September 11, 2008
Words Obama Will Regret
By Ken Blackwell

On Monday, Senator Obama uttered one sentence that could haunt him until Election Day. He said of Senator McCain and Governor Palin telling voters they would bring change, "they must think you're stupid." Given his stances on the surge, social issues, and his past, Mr. Obama will regret those words.

Let's start with social issues like Second Amendment freedoms. Mr. Obama denies that he's ever supported banning handguns, right after the landmark Heller case where the Supreme Court struck down Washington D.C.'s handgun ban.

When a 1996 questionnaire surfaced that had asked if Mr. Obama supported banning all handguns, his one-word written answer was "yes." He said an unnamed staffer must have filled it out without his knowledge. Then another copy surfaced -- this one with his handwriting on it. He says he must not have read that particular question. Sure.

On the hot-button issue of abortion, last month saw a growing concern over Mr. Obama's opposition to the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, which states if an abortion is botched and a live birth results, the baby is entitled to medical care. The federal version of this law unanimously passed the U.S. Senate.

However, when a version of this bill came to the Illinois Senate, Mr. Obama opposed it. When confronted last month with the fact that the federal version of this bill had been supported by the likes of Ted Kennedy and Barbara Boxer, Mr. Obama said the he would have supported the federal version. Those suggesting otherwise were lying, he said. Then it was revealed that a second bill was introduced in the Illinois Senate, and this one was identical to the federal version. Mr. Obama opposed that bill as well. He has yet to come up with an explanation on that one.

Posted by: Scott | September 11, 2008 8:32 AM | Report abuse

Biden still has time to bow out,let Obama be the VP candidate and beg Hillary to be on top of the ticket.Most Americans wont mind a VP getting on the job training but not their president.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 7:32 AM | Report abuse

Obama made a big mistake and Biden knows it as well as any one else!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 7:26 AM | Report abuse

DAVID FRUM: The Democrats’ Credibility Gap
Bob Shrum tells us that John McCain and Sarah Palin are falling short in their populism. Nobody has deployed the rhetoric of populism more ferociously and more often than Bob Shrum, so his assessment carries weight.

Yet populism carries risks too—and the Democrats are now encountering them.

Democratic-leaning pollster Stan Greenberg has just published a fascinating memo detailing one of the most dangerous of those risks:

Democratic populism is destroying Democratic credibility on national security.

Let's go to the numbers.

Republicans have owned the national security issue since the late 1960s. After 9/11, the Republican advantage on poll questions spread to an astounding 30 points.

But since 2005, the Republican advantage has dwindled. By the fall of 2007, the two parties had reached near parity on the issue, only 3 points apart—the best Democratic result since Barry Goldwater led the Republican party!

That parity did not last. Over the past year, Republican standing on the issue has revived while Democratic credibility has tumbled. In Greenberg's latest polling, the Republicans now hold a 14-point lead, 49-35, a return to the kind of advantage they held in the 1980s.

What's going on?

Greenberg advances three reasons, but here is the most important and provocative:

When asked to choose why they think Democrats are weak on security, the number one reason—picked by 33% of all respondents—is that Democrats" change positions depending on public opinion."

“Moreover, when we ask respondents to compare the two parties, likely voters choose Democrats over Republicans as the party "too focused on public opinion" by a 27-point margin. Even Democratic base voters agree: liberal Democrats point to their own party as the one "too focused on public opinion" by an 18-point margin, and moderate/ conservative Democrats say this by 25 points.

In 2001-2002, Democrats chased public opinion in a hawkish direction. In 2004-2007, they chased public opinion in a dovish direction. In 2006, when the war seemed hopeless, that reversal paid off for Democrats. But as conditions have improved in Iraq, Republicans have been vindicated—and Democrats look weak and opportunistic.

Now when Bob Shrum talks of "populism," he has something very specific and highly ideological in mind. But most Americans—and most working politicians—use the word "populism" in a more general sense. They use it to mean, "doing what is popular."

You might think that doing what is popular is always good politics. That would seem true almost by definition!

And in the very short term, it has been true for Democrats.

But there is a longer term too. Voters remember. They compare results. They recall who stayed firm in the moment of decision and who flinched. And if the person who stood firm is also proven right—voters reward it.

Don't misunderstand. There are prizes for the vacillating and the time-serving. John Kerry is still senator from Massachusetts after all. But there is a price to be paid too for too obvious vote-catching—and on national security, the Democrats have already begun to pay it. Just how high that price will go, we must wait until November to know.


Posted by: Scott | September 11, 2008 6:19 AM | Report abuse

Obviously, BIDEN comment is red meat for the GOP and a public relation disaster.

THERE ARE 3 POSSIBILITIES:

1) BIDEN, a Senate old boy whose main achievement is his seniority, lacks the most elemental political intelligence. If BIDEN stays, this will reinforce the will of the HILLARY supporters not to vote for OBAMA.
BIDEN's image is already much damaged by asking the lady-governor of Michigan to "train" him (the veteran), to debate POLIN (the alleged inexperienced young newcomer)!!

2) He is paving the way to his resignation in favor of HILLARY
This would satisfy the rabiate feminists but lead to OBAMA's rejection by a vast majority of independents and moderate Republicans, which hate HILLARY

This, of course, would make available to the GOP the whole baggage which Bill and Hillary are carrying !!

And, most of all, confirm the perception of OBAMA as a leader without experience, unable to make decisions.

3) The is acting as a TROJAN HORSE in OBAMA's camp, damaging at purpose his campaign, so paving the way of a HILLARY's nomination in 2012 !!

ANYWAY, IF OBAMA IS NOT ABLE TO REFORMULATE
HIS CAMPAIGN RADICALLY, HIS CHANCES IN NOVEMBER ARE VERY, VERY POOR !!

caminito


Posted by: caminito | September 11, 2008 1:54 AM | Report abuse

Obama, did not need a vetting process, 18 million democratic voters knew she was more than qualified to be the V.P., they were the other half of the democratic party.

Obama set-up a vetting team because he knew he was not going to pick Hillary. Why would Hillary want to be vetted, she had 1/2 of the democratic party's vote! and they thought she was more qualified than Obama.

Obama failed to united the democratic party! Big mistake!!!

Posted by: abe | September 11, 2008 1:47 AM | Report abuse

Obama and never wanted Hillary because he felt she thought she was more experienced and would be a better president than him. She said he was not ready! He hated this! Michelle did not want Hillary on the ticket, period. The liberal media also did not want Hillary.

Obama, Michelle, and his inner circle just wanted the Clinton's to fade away. Obama and his team attacked Hillary supporters but now they realize they need them after all.

Hillary told them not to vet her unless they were serious. They were not interested that is why he picked a vetting team that did not care for Hillary.

He picked Biden to help him with his experience problem, and because Biden would not overshadow him like Hillary.

Posted by: Abe | September 11, 2008 1:39 AM | Report abuse

McCain bites back with this sassy new ad

Check it out!!!!!

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


McCain bites back with this sassy new ad

Check it out!!!!!

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

Posted by: Yep | September 11, 2008 1:27 AM | Report abuse

Need a break from - Schmit/Rove/Davis/McCain/Bush Attack Machine?

Democrats and Obamacans's courting all Republican and Independent Voters!

Obama’s message rings of a “Beautiful day coming to America” which is similar to Reagan’s “Its morning in america again”

America can wake up to a beautiful day in November.

U2 - beautiful day
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omFdpnSu57U

Obamacan's - “The best defense against usurpatory government is an assertive citizenry.”
William F. Buckley, Jr. quote

The real change team for the last 19 months
Change we can believe in.

Vote Obama/Biden '08

Posted by: Cooday | September 11, 2008 1:23 AM | Report abuse

That's an awful lot of abuse to heap on someone who is being a loyal friend (did you hear the question he was responding to?) and justly complimentary to the person that so many of you say you also respect. ---- Why don't you get over your snit fit and listen to her? There are probably grander things in store for Hillary in an Obama campaign -- she did not WANT to go through the vetting that both she and Bill would have to submit to to be VP. For a cabinet or other post she alone would be the focus of the vetting. ---- McCain/Palin are going to be WORSE than Bush/Cheney have been (b/c more reckless and far more inexperience, respectively) but you'll be able to nurse your wounded pride so who cares about the country, right? --- Are there any grownups left?

Posted by: Elizabeth | September 11, 2008 1:12 AM | Report abuse

The GAFF Candidates!

Obama and Joe are really missing the boat!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 1:06 AM | Report abuse

Katharine,
OK. Let's look at it a little "smart." So Hillary did not want the Veep slot.

And how does this change Obama's EXPERIENCE?

I am not voting for him.

Posted by: NO Experience Necessary | September 11, 2008 12:57 AM | Report abuse

Hillary didn't ask for, or want, the VP slot- they worked that one out long ago, and you can see from Joe's comment that if she had wanted it she would have gotten it. Politics is a complicated business, people- don't pretend to know what's happened by what you see on the surface. Hillary is very capable of making her own decisions and getting what she wants, and it is obvious from the time and the timing of her and Bill's appearances at the convention that that was what they asked for and Obama gave them everything they wanted there. Do you doubt that she has not gotten the position she wants in an Obama administration? It is not VP. Yes, Joe Biden was a second choice pick, but not Obama's second choice pick. And he's a good pick, and greatly approved of by Hillary. Vote Obama, and Hillary will end up on the Supreme court, or perhaps Secretary of State, or wherever it is that she wants to be. Of course they cannot tell this while they are still on the campaign trail, but Biden let the cat out of the bag (a little) for a reason. Look at things a little smart, for once.

Posted by: Katharine | September 11, 2008 12:49 AM | Report abuse

Jen,
As a Democrat, or ex Democrat, I am voting for McCain. But not because of Palin. Because Obama is not qualified to be President. He did steal the election because it was the fastest way up the ladder and that is all Obama cares about. He has been running for office his entire adult life. He has no record but his record of running for office.

And sadly, Hillary Clinton did want the
V P slot. But Obama and his Ego could never share any lime light. He is also over confident by assuming that with a few chosen words like "We are what we have been waiting for" (We meaning me) and "This is your moment" (like a picture from Kodak Cameras) that Americans, including the ones that voted for Hillary Clinton, were going to just get in line. No Expereince Necessary. It is an insult to Americans, regardless of Party.

The fact is that Obama's moment is just about up. And thank goodness. November 4th could not come soon enough for me. I truly do trust this Country to McCain over Obama. Truly.

Posted by: No Experience Necessary | September 11, 2008 12:26 AM | Report abuse

Well if Obama was not an egomaniac and sexist he would have picked Clinton.

Thanks but I will be voting for McCain/Palin!

Posted by: W Taylor | September 11, 2008 12:20 AM | Report abuse

"after Obama's own Iowa victory"

The BIG Iowa victory for Obama was 38% of the vote! Had it just been Hillary and Obama, he would never have won this state. GET REAL!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 12:11 AM | Report abuse

I'm a young Republican. Not crazy about McCain, but supporting him anyhow because Obama is terrifying on many fronts. (Extreme radical, racist, marxist, redistribution of wealth, bad bad bad ideas about how the economy works with regards to taxation yadi yadi yadi - but don't get me started). I could have actually handled a Hillary Clinton Presidency and feel she would have been a better choice for the dems., but she was destroyed by the Obama machine - some people who will stop at nothing to get this man elected. Sarah Palin was a "McBrilliant" choice (thanks Rush) for the Republican VP slot and this has Dems rattled. But their fear is misplaced......If "The Chosen One" does not win in 2008 - there will be two people to thank - Hillary and Bill.


Any liberals out there who thinks Hillary was slighted by not getting the nod for VP by Obama are incredibly blind. Every Republican knows that Obama and Hillary were an unstoppable winning ticket. If Hillary were chosen over Biden to be VP the Dems have a slam dunk landslide victory. Obama knows this too and of course he wants to win. He wanted Hillary to be VP But Hillary DID NOT WANT IT!
Why? Because she wants McCain to win! Why? Because McCain is a one term president (it's going to take more than 4 years to turn this country around, plus he will be too old). She then runs against him in 2012 and will win. Just give it some thought - If Obama wins in 2008, she cannot run until Obama is out in 2016 -presuming he will be a 2 term prez - and then she is borderline too old (and old Hil and Bill don't want to wait that long to get back in the white house anyhow). DO NOT COUNT ON ANYTHING BUT VERY LUKEWARM OBLIGATORY SUPPORT FOR OBAMA FROM THE CLINTONS - I am quite sure that they are undermining Obama every which way they can behind the scenes. If any more dirt is dug up on Obama between now and November you can be sure the Clintons will be behind it. The true Hillary supporters know this too, this is why independant women - especially independant Hillary supporters - are flocking to the McCain/Palin ticket, to pave the way for Hillary in 2012. and this is why they (McCain/Palin) WILL win in 2008.

Posted by: Jen | September 11, 2008 12:11 AM | Report abuse

Joe, It is never necessary to state the facts. But we appreciate it, and you, just the same.

But I am still not voting for Obama.
He stole the Democratic Presidential Nomination from Hillary Clinton with the help of the DNC, MSM and Super Delegates.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 12:06 AM | Report abuse

Joe Biden...for change. LOL

Posted by: Mn nice | September 10, 2008 10:54 PM | Report abuse

To Joe:

Are you saying the candidates for both parties suck? Sad, these were the best people we could come up with. Both parties should be ashamed. This is the best this country has to offer. I guess no one really qualifies wants the job. We can all stop arguing who has the best candidates. Can we start over please?

Posted by: The Smarter Party? | September 10, 2008 10:49 PM | Report abuse

This is for Juno (and others interested): Of the men in the race, there are two empty suits (one being very clever) and an empty head. Two are far left while one is "off" somewhere. Little wonder McCain is so silent while Palin is racking up the votes! If he wants to win, he'd better stay that way.

Posted by: Joe Doherty | September 10, 2008 10:35 PM | Report abuse

What timing for that statement by Biden. So, now you will go from lip-stick to explaining what he really meant. Obama will now be talking about that tomorrow. Makes for a nice ad for McCain later also. It's unraveling, heading for a free fall.

Posted by: Mn nice | September 10, 2008 10:27 PM | Report abuse

To Joe Doherty: I won't be so sure, if I were you. Afterall, you can't argue that Obama has more experience (and useful experience no less) than Palin.

Much as GOP and McCain's staying off from anything racial (to give Obama a chance to trump his race card), Obama/Biden can't really touch on the gender of Palin (just look at the lipstick-on-pig debacle), lest he'd alienate those loser women voters who supported Clinton...

So, what's there left to attack? You know pretty much everything up McCain's alley, probably down to the color of his pajama (in case it's pink, that would be scandalous). Yeah, he has money, but last time I checked, Obama wasn't in the soup kitchen either.

As to Palin, the attack on her family (daughter pregnant at 17? outrageous) doesn't work. Maybe pregnant at 17 is late in Alaska, who knows? She works her way up, not as someone's wife (like Obama's attack on Clinton - that's not the kind of experience we want), but as a governor, dude! Can Obama do that? Has he done that before? I guess not. She also has a life (I never dreamt of moose-hunting, but now I'd like to try). And, omigod, she heads something called a government that has a budget, what d'you think, Barry? And she doesn't have advisors from lobbying firms. Man, I'm getting tired doing the list. But I'm sure Obama/Biden will figure it out.

Oh, and sorry, Barry, the pig-in-lipstick looks good on camera too. I guess you're not the only poster child. And you can't complain that you don't have your 15 minute of fame. Christ, you had it for 2 years, Barry.

Not that Palin is perfect. Her novelty will wear off one day, but I doubt if it'll be in time for Obama to get back in front of the camera.

So, to paraphrase Clinton, no Obama, no way, no how. I've adopted that new mantra, replacing PUMA.

Posted by: Juno | September 10, 2008 10:09 PM | Report abuse

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Democrats offered a broader drilling proposal Wednesday that would allow offshore energy development beyond 50 miles from the coast if a state gives the go-ahead and opens all federal waters 100 miles from land.
The drilling measure is part of a broader energy package expected to come up for a vote next week that also would roll back tax breaks for the largest oil companies and require them to pay additional royalties with the money to be used to spur renewable energy programs and conservation.
Federal waters within 50 miles of shore would continue to be protected from drilling. Waters off Florida's Gulf coast also would remain protected at least until 2022 under the plan.
But the proposal, announced by Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office, would essentially end the long-standing federal ban on oil and gas drilling that has barred oil companies from more than 80 percent of Outer Continental Shelf waters from New England to Washington state.
Congressional Republicans for weeks have demanded a vote on allowing access to more of the country's offshore oil and gas resources, an issue that also has become the core of GOP presidential nominee John McCain's response to high gasoline prices.

Yup, you smart democrats catch on quick!

Posted by: The Smarter Party? | September 10, 2008 10:04 PM | Report abuse

Biden will step down. You can smell the set up coming. Biden will do it, as if Obama didn't. If Obama would have just took Hilary. Now it's too late, Sarah has a bid chunk of that 18 million, and they are getting more hardened every day.

Posted by: Mn nice | September 10, 2008 9:53 PM | Report abuse

"Fighting Joe" Biden's flailing while the Obama Campaign is foundering. Nothing like making Obama's choice of him look like a mistake! Instead of suffering a meltdown before Palin, they should be emphasizing that McCain is even more clueless than they are. A problem Palin will face is having to reconcile probable eccentric McCain statements with her conservative mainstream views. He appears to understand this and is keeping relatively quiet. You never know, though, when the ol' self-described "maverick" is going to rear up and wreck everything.

Posted by: Joe Doherty | September 10, 2008 9:51 PM | Report abuse

Maybe Obama indeed never really asked Clinton to be on his ticket. But if he had, I'd bet Clinton would have turned it down still.

Clinton is a smart and ambitious woman. Having run a campaign that almost got her there (to nomination), if she reduces herself to be a vp, how is she going to come back in 2012? If I were Clinton, I would have done the same. Now, she's doing Obama (and anyone else in her own party) a favor. When it comes to favor giving, there will always be one day to ask a favor back. Ah well, but we know how treacherous people's loyalty are, judging from the way Clinton was treated by the (super)delegates.

But now they know, she can raise money (for herself and the party), and she has loyal fans (18 million strong). How do you beat that?

Posted by: harris | September 10, 2008 9:49 PM | Report abuse

Obam didn't pick Biden because of his integrity. He went against his own campaign of not being a beltway insider. He went with the "safe" choice. Also, HILLARY is the smart one. She probably turned him down. She knows Obama can't win. If she had been on the ticket, it would have been a slam dunk for the democrats. She would have been stuck a VP for the rest of her career. This way, she has a chance to run in 4 years. You smart democrats can't figure that out?

Posted by: The Smarter Party? | September 10, 2008 9:39 PM | Report abuse

Obama has been trying to woo those lost Dem votes since Clinton called to concede in early Jan. It's been, what, eight long months. Instead of moving ahead and squashing McCain, Obama is sliding, and at a much faster pace since RNC.

Now Obama has to do not one, or two, but three things. He has yet to convince and turn around the 18 million votes Clinton carried. He has to halt the downward momentum. And he has to raise cash. More cash.

Obama is collapsing almost on his own success. For him to build up such high expectation to raise an obscene amount of cash every month, it's like public companies doing not quarterly, but monthly progress reports to Wall St. Once Clinton bowed out, he should have toned down the expectation. Ah, he must not have done any performance reviews in his own life: Remember, Barry, always, ALWAYS, exceed expectation. How to do that? Set the expectation lower, then trump it...on a monthly basis, until Nov.

And that's the smart of McCain: Always fight like an underdog. Even if you pull even, you're already ahead. Remember, Wall St (and Main St) is always, ALWAYS, buying on momentum, and on the rate of growth, but not on the absolute growth you're having.

Oh, but Obama doesn't really know economics. He doesn't understand that "the market buys on the uptick of curve." That's the psyche of voters too.

Then again, maybe we'll give Obama a 14-day course at UoC, and he'll come back and tell us he's ready to lead Goldman too. :)

Posted by: A-Rod | September 10, 2008 9:38 PM | Report abuse

How long until Biden steps down? It's being set up now. Obama will pay off Hilary's dept, Biden will step down. More of the same from Obama, changes his mind big-time this time!

Posted by: Mn nice | September 10, 2008 9:35 PM | Report abuse

McCain is no "maverick". If he were, he would have picked the VP candidate who was his first choice, and his own campaign has said it was Ridge or Lieberman. But the EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS that have hijacked the Republican party said "no no no -- you're already too liberal, you need to pick someone who WE like." Hence, along came anti-abortion (even in cases of rape or incest) Sara Palin. Meanwhile, Obama picked the person he WANTED -- even at the risk of losing some of the Hilary supporters. It's called "integrity" and it's a shame the average American voter is too stupid to recognize it.

and JakeD - you no doubt would vote for Hitler over Mother Teresa if he said he was a Republican. Like I said "no brains, no headaches".

Posted by: Carlton | September 10, 2008 9:32 PM | Report abuse

To Beatrice: Dream on, girl. It's not gonna happen.

Posted by: VeryPerry | September 10, 2008 9:25 PM | Report abuse

Obama has wrote two books about himself. It is all about himself, that is why he dumped Hillary. He and Michelle did not want to share the lime light with the Clinton's. Watch him closely at events it is all about his glory.

Posted by: Sid | September 10, 2008 9:23 PM | Report abuse

I just love it, the way this election is turning out. So much drama; so many surprises.

For the Obama balloon to deflate at this late stage in the campaign season, it's absolutely bad news. What other trump card, if any, does Obama still have up his sleeves? I bet none.

To silence critics of his lack of foreign policy credentials, he did 14-day whirlwind celebrity circus tour, as if a few pictures and his signature rah-rah speeches in 14 days are going to make a difference. He's so worried about not having anything to show for, by enlisting Biden the ultimate Washington insider.

He's desperate for women votes. He's dispatched Oprah (now moving off limelight after backlash for supporting Obama), he's embraced Caroline Kennedy and her clan like he's white, now he (and every single Obamaniacs) begs Clinton to go preaching as if Clinton owes him anything.

And he's yet to do anything to turn around the pathetic working class white votes (who clings to guns and religion). All in 2 months. Yeah sure, Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac are going belly up. People are losing jobs. McCain would tell them, sorry folks, jobs are not coming back, we gotta move on. And Obama? Nada for any immediate relief. Oh wait, maybe Obama can plagiarize some of McCain's talking points (like lowering taxes), and spin them around as his own.

But sorry, Obama the black prez? It's not gonna happen. The Palin effect is not going to wear off in 2 months. Just ask Obama. His took 1.5 years to peel off now. The GOP base is going to get stronger and solidify. Obama won't get enough blacks and college kids to replace those core Dem votes that desert him.

Posted by: suzy | September 10, 2008 9:22 PM | Report abuse

Before You feel too sorry for Joe-

Saturday, September 06, 2008
Delaware Newspaper Calls Out Biden For Drunk Driving Lie

TV's Inside Edition ran a story last week replaying Sen. Joe Biden's claim that Curtis Dunn, the truck driver who struck the car driven by his first wife in 1972 and which killed her and his daughter, was drunk at the time of the accident, bringing tears to the surviving daughter of the innocent truck driver. The Wilmington News Journal writes about Joe Biden's false claim that a drunk driver killed his wife and daughter:


Since his vice presidential nomination, Joe Biden's 2007 statement that a "guy who allegedly ... drank his lunch" and drove the truck that struck and killed his first wife and daughter has gained national media traction.

Alcohol didn't play a role in the 1972 crash, investigators found. But as recently as last week, the syndicated TV show Inside Edition aired a clip from 2001 of Biden describing the accident to an audience at the University of Delaware and saying the truck driver "stopped to drink instead of drive."

The senator's statements don't jibe with news and law enforcement reports from the time, which cleared driver Curtis C. Dunn, who died in 1999, of wrongdoing.

"To see it coming from [Biden's] mouth, I just burst into tears," Dunn's daughter, Glasgow resident Pamela Hamill, 44, said Wednesday. "My dad was always there for us. Now we feel like we should be there for him because he's not here to defend himself."

Biden spokesman David Wade said Wednesday that the senator "fully accepts the Dunn family's word that these rumors were false."


What is particularly outrageous about Biden resurrecting the false claim during his recent 2008 presidential bid is the fact that he wrote a letter of apology to the truck driver's daughter, Pamela Hamill, after she sent a letter to him about the same false claim he made when addressing a college audience shortly after September 11, 2001. The News Journal writes:


After reading a News Journal account of Biden's 2001 speech at UD, Hamill sent Biden a letter on behalf of her father. The newspaper story included Biden's description of getting the call that his wife and daughter had died, but not his comments about Dunn.

Hamill said her note to the senator described how Dunn was affected by the accident.

Printed on the senator's letter head and dated Oct. 11, 2001, the response from Biden reads:

"I apologize for taking so long to acknowledge your thoughtful and heartfelt note," Biden wrote. "All that I can say is I am sorry for all of us and please know that neither I nor my sons feel any animosity whatsoever."


Hamill immediately contacted Biden's office again after Inside Edition ran Biden's claim that his wife and daughter were killed by a drunk driver. The News Journal reports:


Hamill said it wasn't until the Inside Edition report that she became aware that the Delaware senator had said alcohol played a role in the accident. Dunn did not consume any alcohol the day of the crash, Hamill said.

She said she immediately called Biden's office after being contacted by Inside Edition and is waiting for the senator's response.

"The family feels these statements are both hurtful and untrue and we didn't know where they originated from," Hamill said.

As Hamill watched a recording of the Inside Edition report Wednesday, she gasped when the clip of Biden's comments from Iowa came on screen

Posted by: Scott | September 10, 2008 9:19 PM | Report abuse

Funny how everyone forgets that it's not the popular vote that wins the election, it's the Electoral College. And the way this one is looking, it could very well be a case of McCain winning the popular vote but not the electoral vote - and frankly, I can think of nothing sweeter than the karma coming back to bite the Republicans in the ass for 2004 when Gore CLEARLY won the popular vote.

Posted by: Beatrice | September 10, 2008 9:18 PM | Report abuse

obama sends his kids to prvt schools but against school choice

Posted by: school | September 10, 2008 9:18 PM | Report abuse

Obama, made a huge political mistake!

Remember Obama only got 1/2 of the votes of the Democratic Party.

The election will be determined by the other 18 million voters that he tossed aside and put them in their place, along with independents.

Again Obama only got 1/2 of the votes from his own Democratic Party.

Why because he did not appeal to the other 18 million. His first real decision in politics was to pick the best V.P., and what a political mistake he picked Biden. It divided the party. Many passionate female democrats will not forget for a long time.

Obama could not even unite the Democratic Party, so how will he unite the nation. Fireworks at the White House?

McCain on the other hand has united the Republican's.

Posted by: abe | September 10, 2008 9:17 PM | Report abuse

It's to bad all you smart democrats don't watch any cnbc financial news broadcast. You would have seen an interview of Sarah Palin done by Larry Kudlow. There were no script writers, just Sarah being herself, and she was very impressive. The dumb republicans are timing this. Unlike Obama who spent MILLIONS on advertising against HILLARY for over a year. He not only broke HILLARY down, he brain washed all you smart democrats. Come to think of it, the way OBAMA spent all those MILLIONS of dollars on his campaign, should give all you democrats an idea of how he is going to run the administration. He is going to spend like there is no tomorrow!

Posted by: The Smarter Party? | September 10, 2008 9:15 PM | Report abuse

Both Biden and Hillary are qualified to be VP. Hilary as the wife of a former president and almost 8 years in the senate. Biden chair of two powerful senate committees. Whatever Biden said it is only to play down expectations of him so as not to be caricatured[sexist] as aggressive in the debate. People, let put this down to rest. Obama made his choice because he could not work with clinton and she knows it. She would have not chosen him either had she was the nonimee. I tend to believe she did not want a second string position.

As for people who doubt Obama they are mistaken of his ability. The guy has a Harvard education for god sake. He could have had a career in the most prestigious business in america. He chose not to. He was in the Illinois senate for eight years and now a US senator.

Posted by: Omidal | September 10, 2008 9:14 PM | Report abuse

To Kevin25, "Read myprior posts."

Keep your feet on the ground and keep reaching for a clue.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 10, 2008 9:13 PM | Report abuse

No sh**, Sherlock. Women are taking Obama down. Count on it.

Posted by: Chicago1 | September 10, 2008 9:13 PM | Report abuse

If you were Obama would you want to be the only thing standing between Hillary and the presidency...?

Posted by: Carol | September 10, 2008 9:10 PM | Report abuse

So many of you, just don't get it about the Biden choice.
You see elections, more as a Reality Show, than serious business.
What Obama did, was choose a person very qualified to be VP. Someone who actually understands what governing is.
Obama made a very pragmatic choice, that illustrates he takes governing seriously.
The GOP doesn't care about governing... everything is politics. Bush never stops campaigning. Every branch of government, under Bush, has been politicized. That's why we see corruption in every branch.
Today, another one - the Interior Dept.
That's why we see incompetence in every branch. *Heckuva job, Brownie.*
And we see with McCain, it will be more of the same, by choosing Palin. I can think of 10 GOP women, of the top of my head, who are more qualified
I don't care what your political views are, but if you think Gov Palin is even remotely qualified, you haven't a clue, nor do you care anything about America.
And when you see her interview this weekend, remember that everything she's saying, was programmed into her, by someone else. None of it, will be coming from her, otherwise she'd have already been interviewed, and not shielded by her puppet masters.

Posted by: jon | September 10, 2008 9:06 PM | Report abuse

By the way, don't count on those polls. Remember that those redneck republicans don't have computers and don't watch much TV. They are too busy out hunting and don't have time for polls. Ha ha. So if you think Obama is ahead in the polls by just a few points, wait until the election. The dumb hicks do know how to work the voting machine. Democrats, you blew it! Now you will have to wait 4 more years. Then HILLARY will be back!

Posted by: The Smarter Party? | September 10, 2008 9:02 PM | Report abuse

Carlton:

I'd rather have President Palin than either Democrat.

Posted by: JakeD | September 10, 2008 9:00 PM | Report abuse

Obama is in trouble and the Republicans have have yet to roll out Obama's past practice of Islam (his freudian slip may air in October) or his ties to his first cousin Raila Odinga, the Kenyan thug, financed by muammar Gaddafi, who was responsile for the atrocities against the East Indian communities in Kisumu and Mombassa, Kenya.

Obama is an IMPOSTOR. Read myprior posts. Hillary was by far the better candidate. The Republicans will not let Obama's sexist messages go unanswered as hillary allowed. Remember that when Obama went to South Carolina and spewed that racist chant frm Spike Lee's Malcolm X movie about not letting "those politicians" i.e., the white Clintons "bamboozle you" or "hoodwink you." That was pure unadultrated RACISM by OBAMA, which told me Obama has the equivlant personality of George W. Bush: he is stubborn, dismissive of criticism, self absorbed with his own sense of historical importance and extremely vindictive - - just like Bush.

The Democrats have once again misread the rural American culture. Biden is old Washington. He is a plagerist, a liar who inflated his next to last class standing in law school an motor mouth. The wheels are falling off the big money machine and Obama is stutering at interviews. I did not want to tell you "I told you so,' but i have to tell more is yet to come, including a story that may break in October about Obama's "hustling" in West Hollywood while he attended Occidental College.

Posted by: Kevin25 | September 10, 2008 8:59 PM | Report abuse

There're rantings about Rove and company, for whatever dirty GOP tricks (that Obamaniacs call it) that Obama doesn't have an answer for.

Obamaniacs think they're smart. Fact of matter is, you guys keep regurgitate the same line of attack that Obama spoon-feeds you, that McCain is going to be extension to Bush. The same way GOP voters were spoon-fed by Rove.

While we like Dem agenda more, you can't deny it that McCain has stepped over his own party lines often enough in order to pursue matters of his conscience (case in point, McCain-Feingold Act). No one likes that, not even Obama, we'd say, judging from the high profile flip-flop of his pledge, then bowing out of public financing. If we are to get any thing done, we trust McCain to be the man to get it done. Not Obama.

Sure McCain is more ready to stand up (to Russia, for example!), than to stand down (just look at the lukewarm response from Obama to Russia's attack to Georgia), but we're much more confident in McCain handling terrorism, than Obama the book worm.

As to our poor economy, we don't believe in Obama's so-called plan. Obama the law professor knows nothing more about economics 101 than McCain the ex-soldier. Obama just won't admit it, and McCain the straight talker would blurt out his innocence on a subject (not unlike Biden's confessing to Clinton's readiness as commander-in-chief). We do not take that as blunder, but rather, admitting to not knowing a subject allows one to move on and seek out qualified individuals to formulate solutions.

It's about time for the facade of Obama to come down. Time to wake up, folks.

Posted by: Byron+Deb | September 10, 2008 8:58 PM | Report abuse

Why do John McCain and Sarah Palin lie so much?

I guess that's the Christian in them.

Posted by: TRUE CHRISTIAN | September 10, 2008 8:58 PM | Report abuse

Palin doesn't know the difference between the CFR and FDR. She is a "designer" candidate chosen by some very evil retailers and the oil industry.

When she stumbles, the NRA crowd will start using their weapons against us. As they did in 1963 and 1968. Bet on it. The fascists have returned.

Posted by: Bennett Marsh | September 10, 2008 8:56 PM | Report abuse

Harris:

There's no need for that language. Also, I have not seen any proof that Biden was Obama's second choice.

Posted by: JakeD | September 10, 2008 8:55 PM | Report abuse

Well I know for certain that I'd rather have Joe Biden be "a heartbeat away from the presidency" than that evangelical nutcase Sara Palin. You gotta love the USA. The Republicans have done nothing but ring up the biggest deficit in history, and have brought the country to the worst economic condition it has been in since the Great Depression, yet these morons get so excited about Sara Palin being named VP pick that it's enough for them to vote to let the same dumbasses back in the white house that have been in there for the last 8 years. My grandmother used to say it best: "no brains, no headaches".

Posted by: Carlton | September 10, 2008 8:54 PM | Report abuse

I would not bet on Obama/Biden losing this election. I am sure you trolls would like to think so. Your are hiding your VP candidate from the public. How long do you think that will last before people start to wonder about her. Her anti Jewish pastor comments are not playing well in FL.

Posted by: Ross | September 10, 2008 8:51 PM | Report abuse

Biden is a strong politician and he can stand on his own.

Who is running for president on the Republican ticket? Not Mcsame. He is a Sidekick in his own party and this race. Palin is not the one who cannot stand on her own, it is Mcain. How sad for a guy who has thirst for power cannot even stand for himself going to take a stand with Russia, and the terrorists. Do this remind us of someone: George W Bush. He is a photocopy president. We know that Cheney make all the decisions. Mcain more of the same.

Posted by: Omidal | September 10, 2008 8:45 PM | Report abuse

I read so many comments on how stupid the republican party is, as well as the republican voters. But you democrats have to ask yourself how stupid are you? You picked a nobody. Yes, no knew who Obama was. I guess that's why they started the campaign over a year in advance. So democrats could feel like they know Obama. You democrats cry all the time how evil the republicans are. The reality is both parties parties are evil! They commit the same offenses. Bill made some big ones. Anyway, you stupid democrats passed over the one qualified candidate that could have squashed the republican party, HILLARY! Now how smart are all you bleeding liberals. Did you think it would be nice to be able to pick an African American? Did you think you could be part of history? Did it make you feel good to say I'm not racist because I'm voting for the black guy? Did you think it was more important to make a statement on race? When this is over and the republicans take the house, again, you are all going to wake up and feel like you have a huge hangover. If you cared about the issues and putting the country back on track,YOU SHOULD HAVE PUT COUNTRY FIRST AND VOTED FOR HILLARY! DUMB ASSES.

Posted by: The Smarter Party? | September 10, 2008 8:43 PM | Report abuse

The sleazy and shameless NObama is piling on HRC and Bill for not doing enough. AFter the disgraceful manner in which he spurned her in the VP process, and after stealing the nomination by branding Bill a racist and using a bunch of race and sex cards on HRC, Nobama has to beg HRC and Bill that they should attack Palin?

Why should HRC be his attack dog anyway? Biden should be that, it is part of his job description.

Hart and Teddy K almost refused to shake hands with Walt and Jimmy, and the latter two did not even steal the nomination.


Bill and Hill should remember everything that was said in the primaries, and tell the shameless NObama and his gutter rat groupies to go fight on their own.

Posted by: intcamd1 | September 10, 2008 8:42 PM | Report abuse

There is no hiding from the obvious. Obama blew it by not choosing Hillary. I will likely vote for Obama in November. That's why it's so painful to see his campaign falling apart right now. The Republicans have the momentum now, and Obama doesn't. It's hard to see my guy blow it. Truth is, it's that Obama should be winning by 6 to 10 points during this election. The fact that the race is this close doesn't bode well on Obama's competence as a politician.

Posted by: Justsaying Joe | September 10, 2008 8:38 PM | Report abuse

Joe Biden can become the greatest VP in American history. I believe he will go down in history...and could be President in 8 years if the DEMS play this game right.
Hillary Clinton, by her current absence, is causing serious harm to this country. I could go on an on, spending time in speculation as to where she is and what she may be up to. The fact is, both Clintons could be countering this charade with some statesmen like responses.
People listen to them; I assume even this 20% of obviously ‘uneducated on the issues’ crowd who have jumped from the torpedoed ship, right into the oil spill that is the McCain campaign. McCain/Palin stray from the truth on a daily basis on the campaign trail.

Let’s be candid about their behavior: They are lying straight into the faces of their new adoring fans. I’m going to bet the ones lapping up these fablications, don’t know the difference between a Filibuster and a HungerBuster.

Oil spills do catch fire. They also produce the most searing, palinful and deeply scarring injuries immaginable. As I write, Dana Perino is issuing another terrorist alert of current “plotting and planning” to attack us. Why can’t the average American see through these tactics? This is not the GOP's first dirty rodeo.

Hillary Clinton needs to immediately grab a hose and Bill Clinton needs to man the eqivalent of an abandoned 30 caliber and blast away some sense on what may very well become the next great USS Arizona disaster.

Posted by: SteveKelson | September 10, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

You know, you Dems love to assign the "Nazi" moniker to anyone who doesn't believe in the right to be stupid at someone else's expense.

You do know that the Faschists and Communists were the darlings of the left until the war.

So sorry your boys Benito, Adolf, and Joe showed their true colors -- Like all you modern day dems eventtually do.

Kisses and Hugs,

AL

Posted by: Big AL | September 10, 2008 8:33 PM | Report abuse

Not too long ago, Biden ALSO said Obama was not qualified to be POTUS and now he's running on the guy's ticket.

My take: Either Biden is getting ready to step down (unlikely, the guy likes the sound of his own voice too much) and Hillary to step up or Obamabiden is trying to reach out to Hillary supporters.

Posted by: Whatever | September 10, 2008 8:33 PM | Report abuse

"If Obama were to get down in the pond scum...he would lose a lot of respect from his supporters".

Possibly, but not enough to make them vote for Palin-McCain, I can assure you. I feel like I'm yelling at the Indians at the first Thanksgiving dinner. The Republicans were lying when they said they were going to stay away from negative campaigning. The Democrats weren't, believing that Obama is such a cool dude that he was going to run the first successful political campaign in American history that succeeded without going negative.

Wrong. They're about to have their lunch handed to them. The point of negative campaigning is to depress the vote of the candidates supporters. Not to rally one's base. And Obama osciunting on unprecedented enthusiasm from his base. Without that, he's done.

Elections are won by the Atwaters, Carvilles and Roves of the world. People who aren't just willing to kneecap their opponents, but will make that quest the central theme of their strategy.

If they don't get this tomorrow, the Obama folks can look forward to thirty years of respecting Obama as he shares an office with Michael Dukakis at Harvard.

Posted by: Frank H | September 10, 2008 8:33 PM | Report abuse

Truth be told, Biden is more qualified to have been a nominee than Obama. In fact, Obama has nothing to show for, when compared to any one of the guys/gal in the race before the nomination. It's utterly pathetic for DNC to have pushed for Obama, when all he can garner and guarantee is the black votes, and less than a few million college votes, perhaps. In the process, Dem erodes almost all its core support.

I'm tempted to say, I can't believe it that Obama loses the un-loseable; but you know, YES I CAN.
While

Posted by: Julie R. | September 10, 2008 8:28 PM | Report abuse

I'm still waiting for some to tell me one single issue on which Hillary and Palin agree, and on which Obama disagrees. Any Hillary supporter who supports the GOP ticket this year does not care about issues, they are only carrying a grudge.

Posted by: bgjd1979 | September 10, 2008 8:28 PM | Report abuse

Pick you heads up. These are the ebbs and flows of every election. Tomorrow is another day. Obama/Biden 08

Posted by: Ross | September 10, 2008 8:19 PM | Report abuse

No, ron, Biden is nothing. He doesn't help WIN the election.

------

Jim,

Biden has already done what he was brought on to do. He's prevented the election from focusing on Obama's experience, particularly on foreign policy, where he's personally weak. McCain has a distinct perception advantage on that issue, and it would have been ad after ad of 'it's three in the morning...' and more '04 style fear mongering. With Biden on his ticket, Obama has a solid check in the foreign policy box.

I think McCain went the other direction and chose Palin because the foreign policy avenue was blocked by Biden. It has turned out to be successful for him in a whole other way, but I still think Obama made the right choice at the time. It may look like he brings nothing, but that's because his value was played up front.

Hillary may yet wind up on Obama's cabinet anyway, so it's not as if she's disappeared from politics.

Posted by: Joe | September 10, 2008 8:18 PM | Report abuse

The way i see it is, that if we elect McCain were only going to have another four years of hell.Didn't anyone learn anything
from electing that hilbillie George Bush?Well I for one do NOT want that for our country.In my opinion,I think OBAMA would be good for our country.I understand that he is a different skin color,but he IS human,and he deserves a chance.I think he would be a way better president than McCain.People it doesn't matter what race,color,or religion we have.Thats what makes America so great=],we don't have to worry about those things,we just need to try to live the best life we can!,and I think that Obama CAN help us do that.So please,VOTE FOR OBAMA!
PS-
Please reply what think about this.
Thanks alot!


Posted by: Helena<3 | September 10, 2008 8:15 PM | Report abuse

There's a reason why so many people turned down the veep consideration (let alone offer) before Obama settled on Biden. Biden knows it in his gut that Obama's campaign is in trouble. Then again, for Biden, it's better to go down history as the veep who lost, rather than just another tired old senator.

So many of postings here are so pathetic. You obamaniacs can't admit to it that Clinton would have brought so much to the table, should she want the job. But nope, Obama, you're on your own. Now, DIE.

Posted by: harris | September 10, 2008 8:13 PM | Report abuse

Bud, good points again, especially about Bill Clinton. He'd have been a handful. lol But, to me, that's not reason to back off Hillary. It's the job of the President to take tough cases and make them work. I believe Barack would have kept both in line. But I'll acknowledge there's reasonable room to disagree on that.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 10, 2008 8:09 PM | Report abuse

No, ron, Biden is nothing. He doesn't help WIN the election. He was the safe choice, nothing more. Barack got scared and choked. The idiot. What's even more idiotic is that I'm still going to vote for him. What else is there to do? But I'm not the issue. I was going to vote Democratic anyway. THAT'S the problem and why Biden was the loser's choice.

Posted by: Jim | September 10, 2008 8:07 PM | Report abuse

Well, Anonymous, by the time she was done with the kitchen sink in the primary I was really pretty sure she would not hesitate to have Barack "taken out" if she was elected VP.

Clinton-Obama would have been attacked in exactly the same way as we are seeing now. And you know there's a lot to work with. And then there's Billy ...

Posted by: BudG024 | September 10, 2008 8:06 PM | Report abuse

Joe was a great pick. He'll be a superb VP

Posted by: ron | September 10, 2008 8:03 PM | Report abuse

To Kevin and Heather, we might have been able to say that once. No more. It's clear that we can't. The only thing we seem to be able to do is grasp defeat from the jaws of victory. I'm voting for Obama, of course. But he can't win. After the last few days and the tactics of Rove, it's obvious to me that we never could. They just won't allow it. Just as there are those in our own party who wouldn't allow a woman to be President. It's sickening.

Posted by: No, Obviously We Can't | September 10, 2008 8:03 PM | Report abuse

People need to stop panicking. The debates are coming. Team Obama isn't stupid, but they are relying on us to get out the vote and work hard at the phone banks and volunteer. If we do that, we'll win.

Posted by: John | September 10, 2008 8:03 PM | Report abuse

Yes, Barack betrayed us all. In the end, with the pressure on, he's just another black man egged on by an ambitious angry woman, himself unable to grasp the gold ring when it's virtually handed to him. We put our trust in him and he failed us. Biden is such a joke. And now the damn dirty pigs at the trough in DC will have another long run through the White House. They'll get to pick the next SCOTUS justice. With the public crying about the price of gasoline we'll see all our environmental gains evaporate with more drilling on and off the coast and a resurgence of nuclear power. The damage that Barack the Betrayer did will be seen in history to be nearly incalculable.

Posted by: Kyle | September 10, 2008 7:57 PM | Report abuse

Bud, you make good points, it would have been tough, yes, BUT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN WIN-ABLE.

Screw Rush anyway. The "Palinites" as you call them weren't going to vote for Obama any more than "DailyKosters" would ever vote for McLame. The key this election is with the swing votes.

In the end, Barack got scared, and picked an empty suit, a member of the old boy net, and a Washington insider. Hillary is an insider, too, to many people but as a woman it counterbalances that. And I'm afraid after a couple of scripted remarks Biden's been fed by his handlers, Palin's extemporaneous ability and sheer gutter willpower is going to have all the talking point sound bites after their debate. Joe is just too slow, too stupid, and too set in his suit to be able to react as nimbly as Palin's aggressive nature is. In fact, he won't even see her coming. He'll be hit with so many rights, he'll be begging her for a left.

This is so unfair. Biden. What a joke.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 10, 2008 7:52 PM | Report abuse

YES WE CAN.

Posted by: Heather | September 10, 2008 7:48 PM | Report abuse

Yes we can.

Posted by: Kevin | September 10, 2008 7:47 PM | Report abuse

"This nonsense about the American people being smart enough to see through this sort of thing, and trusting them to make the smart choice in November really needs to stop"

Unfortunately for Obama his supporters ARE the smart, educated ones and they DO see through this stuff. If Obama were to get down in the pond scum with McCain he would lose a lot of respect from his supporters.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 10, 2008 7:47 PM | Report abuse

I'd have accepted Richardson, iggy, much more than Biden. That would have worked, I think.

Posted by: Jim | September 10, 2008 7:45 PM | Report abuse

The Obama people should have had a counter-ad on this ridiculous lipstick issue yesterday in every contested market. It should have included Obama's quote, video of McCain saying the same thing twice, the book of the same name and the comment that when one doesn't want to run on one's record, this is what one makes an "issue" of.

They need to be waaaaay more nimble and quick to react. And they need to go harshly negative. This nonsense about the American people being smart enough to see through this sort of thing, and trusting them to make the smart choice in November really needs to stop. The American people aren't that smart. That's why they put Bush back in office in 2004. The Relublicans know how stupid the electorate is, and they are experts to playing to that audience. Dammit Obama people, these people didn't go to Harvard. They mostly had trouble getting through college and finding their own way back to the farm. Stop behaving like this is an interview for a Rhodes scholarship.

Now get to work on how Palin insulted Hillary Clinton numerous times, how McCain never flew a Navy aircraft that he didn't crash, remind us about the Keating Five, about Willie Horton (a Republican classic), about how Democratic Presidents come in to fix economies that Republican Presidents invariably drive into the ditch. And remind the Rush Limbaugh Fox News crowd that McCain is not actually a social conservative. He's a social liberal. And this is not the Palin-McCain ticket. Unless the old man dies in office, they can expect another Reaganesque dismissal of the notion that McCain is going to put their social agenda at the top of his to-do list. No number of moose-hunters will change that.

It is so infuriating to watch you people sit around readying yourselves for yet another lost election. Grrrrrrrrr.

Posted by: Frank H | September 10, 2008 7:44 PM | Report abuse

Let's not forget the reprehensible statements and actions of Hillary Clinton during the primaries


....so much time, such a short memory

Posted by: Anonymous | September 10, 2008 7:44 PM | Report abuse

18 million people voted for Clinton, not just "a woman"

WOMEN aren't any more interchangable than men. If I voted for Gore, I should settle for Bush because he is man?

Millions of people would have voted for Biden if he could have raised the money to stay in the race as long as Hil did.

Clinton would have been a treacherous VP pick, very risky for many reasons. Mostly, Rush Freakin Limbo has built her into the ultimate demon of the Palinites.

Posted by: BudG024 | September 10, 2008 7:43 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, Joey's a great pick for VP if you want more of the same, old white man, longer in Washington than any of the other 3 on either ticket, who... wait for it... represents Delaware, a state about the size of ANWR compared with Alaska and with just about as many people. Good grief, and there are some here telling us 18 million to "wake up."

Stupid self-inflicted losers all of you. We had victory in our grasp, just had to go with Hillary for VP, and now it's McCain-Palin and the rest of the republiCANTs for another possibly 12-16 years. I am so disheartened by this. I figured, okay Biden, what will McCain do, probably pick Romney, etc. and we still have it sewn up. But nooooooooooooooooo.

Where is Steve Martin when we need him?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 10, 2008 7:41 PM | Report abuse

Bill Richardson was the choice; and as we now see Hillary second. NM Guv would have put the "race" card fully on the table: bold and inclusive.

Posted by: iggy227 | September 10, 2008 7:41 PM | Report abuse

SUPPORT THE WAR ... COMMING TO IRAN SOON..
IRAN WAR TOUR , 2009 .... 4 MORE YEARS TO GET ANOTHER 4 MORE , FOR A 100 YEAR WAR.
...WAR WORLD III ... A NEW CHANGE FOR A NEW WORLD ORDER.

Posted by: BUSH | September 10, 2008 7:39 PM | Report abuse

Biden is an empty suit, a guy who's been in the senate longer than McSwine. He was a disgusting pick for VP, given 18 million voted for a woman.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 10, 2008 7:35 PM | Report abuse

Jenna -- Obama lost your respect? Okay, he did not make the choice I wanted, either. But Biden is a good man. McPalin are going to stack the Supreme Court with absolute right-wingers. They are going to send us to a religious war against Iran and GOD knows who else. Please, don't let whatever animosity you have push you into such a rash reaction.

Posted by: Richie | September 10, 2008 7:34 PM | Report abuse

Please, please...take a deep breath, everyone. Condemning a (gentle)man for offering a sincere compliment to Hillary, then spinning it into some partisan talking point is crazy! And I've had enough of the craziness.
We have now gotten to a point of parsing every word, every phrase, every sentence and twisting, turning, manipulating it into whatever it is we want it to mean.
Crazy.
Folks, Joe Biden said a wonderful thing about Sen. Clinton. And he was genuinely humble about it.
I see these as great qualities in a person who will help lead us in a new direction.
Thank you for representing the best of humanity, Sen. Biden. The very best of who we are...the best of who we can become.
I will be so proud, so honored to have you as my vice president.

Posted by: barbyrahmirfluor | September 10, 2008 7:33 PM | Report abuse

Joe Biden is great pick for VP!! Obama couldn't have chosen anyone better. I can't wait to see him chew Palin up and spit her out in the debate. Go Joe!!!

Posted by: linda | September 10, 2008 7:33 PM | Report abuse

See, there's "ml" calling me "insane." Another example of why people are flocking from the Champion of Hope and Change. And I'M A DEMOCRAT WHO WILL VOTE FOR BARACK REGARDLESS.

You know nothing about politics or how people get elected, ml. It's simple. Biden has paved the way today. In a week, as the distance between McSame and Barack increases, he can step down. After a few days of "consultation" (and dramatic pause), Barack nominates Clinton, who accepts. Then WE get all the attention we've lost, the swings swing back, the women swing back, it's a lock.

It would be a freaking lock. So again, if you lose this Barack, and with my vote, God damn you to hell forever for letting us go through another 4, 8, possibly even 12 years if McSame dies in the first term.

God damn you to hell.

Posted by: Jim | September 10, 2008 7:32 PM | Report abuse

How can anyone say their going to vote for MCCAIN , are you stupid? If you're that stupid then i guess we'll have another 9/11.

Posted by: Adam | September 10, 2008 7:32 PM | Report abuse

So when is the pig in lipstick going to set her half a dozen babies, and her riffle down and talk to the news? I think its funny how quickly McCain will toss it out there that since obama said ppig in lipstick it had to be palin. At least we know how McCain realy feels

McCain/ Miss Piggy 2050!

Posted by: Creamsykle | September 10, 2008 7:32 PM | Report abuse

Can a man named Dude be a femminist??????

Posted by: question | September 10, 2008 7:32 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton is absolutely NOT a better choice. She is a warmonger, a fierce business woman and a sell out. I say this as a feminist. Biden is more ethical. Wake up people!!!!

Posted by: Dude | September 10, 2008 7:28 PM | Report abuse

So Barack Obama can just change his mind, dump Joe Biden and pick Hillary Clinton as the replacement. He has changed his mind on just about every other issue, so what's the harm of doing it again?

Posted by: C Nelson | September 10, 2008 7:26 PM | Report abuse

Thats what us Hillary supporters had been telling Obama over and over and over. But would he listen to us? NO! Maybe just maybe Obama will listen to you Sen Biden, a man because he sure has no interest in womens opionions.

Even if Obama asked Biden to stand down and revetted Hillary for VP its too late. Obama has lost ALL my respect. I will be voting for McCain/Palin!

Posted by: Jenna | September 10, 2008 7:26 PM | Report abuse

BIDEN absolutely should NOT STEP DOWN-- JIM YOU ARE ANOTHER NUTCASE LIKE PALIN-- that's insane-- he is qualified for this position and has a smile like a sun-- foreign policy experience-- come on people-- wake up!!!! please..... He is being honest-- but let's face it-- a lot of people wanted Hillary and as I was reminded today-- some Hillary supporters are racist white women-- friendships have broken up over this issuesthe dirty south-- n***er lover they say--- it's f***ed Obama obviously is the better candidate... Yes people.. the ugly truth-- racism rears it's ugly head even more than sexism. Obama is more self-actualized, intelligent and has the best ethics. If you don't get this then you get what you deserve-- 4 MORE YEARS OF BUSH....
TANTO,
ml

Posted by: ml | September 10, 2008 7:26 PM | Report abuse

Why doesn't Biden step down for the good of the country and his party? Hillary should be VP and we all know it. God damn Barack Obama to hell for losing this.

Posted by: Jim | September 10, 2008 7:19 PM | Report abuse

vote for OBAMA ...
p.s Mccain and the lipstick Pig need to stop talking about change.. All you REP will see in NOV when OBAMA wins you'll be so but hurt , i can't wait . And don't tell us about how OBAMA going to mess anything up, or is not ready to be president.

Posted by: Bush | September 10, 2008 7:18 PM | Report abuse

If Biden felt that Hillary was a better candidate why didn't Biden decline the nomination?

Posted by: theodosia1 | September 10, 2008 7:16 PM | Report abuse

Poor Joe Biden. I like the guy and admire him, but I don't agree with his politics. Obama played it safe with his choice of Biden who is experienced but hardly inspiring. He could not select Clinton because that would mean Bubba would be looking over his shoulder. The real reason Hillary wasn't selected was certainly because of the Clintons' finances. Bill would never disclose where his library money came from. Plus, Michelle was against Hillay as her husband's running mate. So, Obama made a weak choice which looked safe before Palin. Now the Democrat ticket looks timid and defensive. Can we all say McCain-Palin adminsitration?

Posted by: Jeff in Orlando | September 10, 2008 7:14 PM | Report abuse

Biden just caused Obama the election.

Posted by: theodosia1 | September 10, 2008 7:13 PM | Report abuse

So Obama did not pick the best Vice President that he could? What is that about? Maybe Obama did not want another pig with lipstick around.

Posted by: Carla | September 10, 2008 7:10 PM | Report abuse

Yes We Can

Posted by: John Shermer | September 10, 2008 7:10 PM | Report abuse

Hey Biden, quit being humble. Humility isn't respected around here anymore. Accusing your opponent of wanting to give condoms to five year old kids is the new 'honor'. Didn't you get the memo?

Why do we keep calling for more respectable politicians, and then get disgusted with them when they act respectably? Biden was defending Clinton, who was a friend of his, by saying she was highly qualified and worthy of respect.

But then, maybe the only way to win an election is to toss your principles and become an ass. Hard to say if it's worth it or not.

Posted by: Joe | September 10, 2008 7:08 PM | Report abuse

Joe Biden is right!! Hillery is a better choice for VP. Considering Obama has no experience in running a country, let alone, being a senator. Being a community organizer is a far cry from being President. The Democrat party has shot itself in the face and foot when they chose Obama, although Hillery had won more of the popular vote in the primaries. Although with the super delegates, the choice was made prior to the conclusion of the primaries, regardless of the popular vote. This country is in for a rude awakining if Obama-Biden are elected. Both are elitists and have no concept of what is going on in blue collar income america. The Dems really screwed up with this choice and the American Taxpayer will have hell to pay if these two are elected.

Posted by: bobomack | September 10, 2008 7:07 PM | Report abuse

Joe will be great.
It takes a strong personality to say such a thing.

Posted by: M. Tobias | September 10, 2008 7:06 PM | Report abuse

Alas, there are more stupid people. The worst thing will be the Supreme Court nominees. But, a close second will be the decades that Women's Rights will be set back by the first women VP being an idiot. She is out to start a religious World War.

Posted by: Richie | September 10, 2008 7:05 PM | Report abuse

[quote from Sue]Our nation is falling apart and if McCain and the Cheerleader win, we are doomed.

This is who now votes in America???
That is what Democrats are giving our country?

Posted by: Sad About Our Country | September 10, 2008 7:05 PM | Report abuse

The McCain campaign has apparently taken this story and turned into an attack against Obama's selection of vp, and an admission by the selection. While I am a "user" of it, I have now concluded that the internet, in the hands of a political campaign, is an awfully destructive thing. The so called truth squads seem to be about the ultimate in "spin" and micro-semantics. The idea that a frank, self-deprecating, and honorable statement by a candidate about the gal who wasn't picked could be turned into a basis of attack by a "truth squad", no less, is dispiriting to me about the depths to which politics will stoop. I say this about attacking a colloquialism, I say it about attacking a candidate's child, I say it about the low life of high politics. I'm not against truth, or calling out true lies. But to turn a compliment into a truth squad massacre, debases all of us.

Posted by: Sean o | September 10, 2008 7:03 PM | Report abuse

Our nation is falling apart and if McCain and the Cheerleader win, we are doomed.

Posted by: Sad About Our Country | September 10, 2008 7:02 PM | Report abuse

JOE LAYING THE GROUNDWORK FOR A LATERAL TO HILLARY??

Joe Biden is a noble warrior and is loyal to his country as well as his party.

He also is no fool.

He would not have said this without recognizing the significance of his remark, and the possible interpretation of it by the chattering class.

He would rather see the Dems win in the fall than to be part of a losing ticket.

That is why it appears he may be laying the groundwork for a graceful withdrawal, thus allowing Hillary to assume the role of running mate -- the "real McCoy" candidate for American women, as opposed to what the Dems perceive as a pretender.

If Joe does this and the Dems win, he would be suitably rewarded by the new administration. Indeed, he'd probably have his pick of positions, secure in the knowledge that he was, in effect, the KINGMAKER.

A good man and a savvy politician...

Posted by: Outside the Box | September 10, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

Looks like from here on out it's just a contest of whether there are more stupid people or more smart people.

Nuts.

Maybe it will be about HOW STUPID you must be to vote for more Cheney&Rove guidance.

GADZOOKS!!

Their strategy is to repeat gross lies until they settle gentle into empty minds. God help us, it works so well.

arrrrrrrrrrggggggg

YES

WE

CAN


we have to

Posted by: Bud | September 10, 2008 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Republicans:
Let's make the rich richer, god forbid if they pay more taxes their wrath will fall on the poor somehow (what if the rich oilman doesn't buy ferrari for his kids.. that will be a shame)
Ohh yeah I almost forgot, let's keep the rest of the people ignorant by feeding then "pro-life", "creationism" "pro-gun" bull crap and making sure they forget their real economic pain under these agenda.

8 years of corruption, divisiveness, deficit it's time to get rid of these nuts who are running the country and balance our government!

Posted by: Obama 08 | September 10, 2008 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Earmarks make up a total of about 5% of the National budget. Most of the earmarks actually go to things like building hospitals.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 10, 2008 6:58 PM | Report abuse

The polls favorable to McPlain are not lying. There's still time to turn the tide. Joe Biden should make a historical move by asking Hillary Clinton to take his place. Otherwise we'll have the middle aged beauty and the old war beast occupying the white house.

Posted by: larry | September 10, 2008 6:57 PM | Report abuse

If If If

1. Hillary wasn't interested in the job.
2. She said/did things during the primaries that made it impossible for her to be picked.
3. She REFUSED to be vetted unless she was picked first.
4. It would have all been about Bill and his current questionable dealings.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 10, 2008 6:56 PM | Report abuse

To DS it is you who is intentionally mislearing here. Nice of you to provide your source, but you left off one little (BIG) thing that all Democrats keep leaving off.... Earmarks & those WEE BILLION DOLLAR EXTRAS... [QUOTE]

Douglas Holtz-Eakin, senior economic adviser to McCain, noted that the report does not take into account the spending reforms - such as eliminating earmarks - that are central to McCain's strategy to support tax relief and help reduce the deficit.

One of the center's co-directors, William Gale, conceded in a conference call that "if McCain succeeds (in achieving his proposed spending cuts), the fiscal cost of his plan does go down."

But spending cuts can be politically difficult to achieve, said Len Burman, the Tax Policy Center's director.

Holtz-Eakin characterized McCain's plan as one geared toward "reshaping federal bureaucracies and protecting taxpayers' money. [His] plan is based on kicking down doors in Washington, and delivering tax dollars back to the American taxpayers who are struggling with record gas prices, soaring food costs and a down economy."


That is the fear and why Democrats will loose this campaign, as they always do. You cannot take money where there is NONE TO TAKE. The wealthy in America NOW PAY APPROX %40 IN TAXES. Exactly how much do you honestly think ANY EARNER should be taxed? Do you or anyone else even comprehend what %40 is? What or HOW MUCH do you think any citizen in this country should OWE YOU? And how long do you think it will take for citizens to look out there and say "WHY SHOULD I BE THE ONE PAYING ALL THOSE OTHERS WHO LAY OUT AND MAKE $50 THOUSAND A YEAR AND DO NOTHING BUT YET HAVE NO TAX, FREE HEALTHCARE AND FREE WELFARE"? Let me ask any of you...all of you, would you pay up, or be the free ride? Ask your own selves, to thine own self.....

Posted by: An American | September 10, 2008 6:55 PM | Report abuse

I'm a Dem, but sorry, I think Palin would crush Hillary, at least right now until we actually find out SOMETHING about where she stands on issues.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 10, 2008 6:55 PM | Report abuse

If Hillary had run with Obama they would be unbeatable.

Posted by: Jim | September 10, 2008 6:53 PM | Report abuse

Okay...Biden, we get it. Brilliant strategy, claim Hillary is just as good if not better than you. I understand your comment. You are trying to woo-over Hillary Clinton supporters.

Shhhhhh! Don't tell the Republicans.

Posted by: Obama-Junkie | September 10, 2008 6:53 PM | Report abuse

Biden, BOW OUT and let Hillary RUN! PLEASE! It is crucial to USA that Obama-Clinton run so they can win. Our nation is falling apart and if McCain and the Cheerleader win, we are doomed.

Posted by: Sue Basko | September 10, 2008 6:52 PM | Report abuse

I really don't see where the 1972 accident has any relavance what-so-ever. Biden is right about Hillary, but McCain wouldn't have picked Palin, so we don't have a clue what would be going on in that event.

Posted by: Richie | September 10, 2008 6:50 PM | Report abuse

I cannot for the life of me understand why ANY V.P. candidate would say something like this at a time like this.

But then again, he IS a good friend of Hillary's (2012)

Posted by: Anonymous | September 10, 2008 6:49 PM | Report abuse

Gee, really? Then why didn't you say "No, pick Hillary" when Obama offered you the job, Biden?

Because like Obama, you are power-hungry.

Posted by: Jack | September 10, 2008 6:46 PM | Report abuse

Joe's right! I was right! Hillary Clinton is the best! I'm glad I sent her a lot of money almost every week. She won more votes than Obama! She was cheated by the Democratic convention! I thought I would be Democrat, but only for Hillary, not that I love Republicans or the green party either. I rather let God manage my life, perhaps Hillary supporters are scarred forever by the Democratic party and will turn towards Republican and make it their point for the rest of their lives of how they were cheated it. Our grand grand grandchildren will read about this in books, how our lady Hillary Clinton was taken advantage of and forcefully called a racist because she wouldn't put herself down.

Posted by: Amado | September 10, 2008 6:46 PM | Report abuse

DS:

Those are only the personal income tax numbers -- if the Bush tax cuts expire in 2010, then all bets are off -- what about the business tax increases under the Obama plan which will be passed on to consumers?

Posted by: JakeD | September 10, 2008 6:46 PM | Report abuse

Media says that because of Palin, Obama may lose the election.
Well what you can do in democracy when the majority have pigs lips, pigs eyes and pigs back?

Posted by: john baguta | September 10, 2008 6:45 PM | Report abuse

Way to go Joe!

He's trying to get the Veep nod again in 2012 when Hillary runs to unseat McCain.

Posted by: MCLOVIN | September 10, 2008 6:45 PM | Report abuse

He is too kind , he should be a bit more mean to be VP. he is not running for to be a nan he is running for VP of USA,

Posted by: kl | September 10, 2008 6:45 PM | Report abuse

Remember Issues People?

Two Embarrasingly indefensible Obama Issues-

1. Corn Ethanol
-leads to global warming using one unit of petroleum for every unit replaced
-raises food prices
-7x less efficient than sugar cane ethanol (which McCain favors)
(BUT great for Illinois farmers!)

2. Infant Protection Act

-Opposes medical attention for infants who survive LEGAL abortions, not making them illegal
-Obama lied about wording of the Illinois law, later admitting that it was the same wording as in the federal bill
**********
Obama- shows no shame in pandering to farmers and more radical than abortion advocates.

Comments Obama More Pro-Choice Than NARAL

HumanEvents.com

12/26/2006
Sen. Barack Obama (D.-Ill.) portrays himself as a thoughtful Democrat who carefully considers both sides of controversial issues, but his radical stance on abortion puts him further left on that issue than even NARAL Pro-Choice America.

In 2002, as an Illinois legislator, Obama voted against the Induced Infant Liability Act, which would have protected babies that survived late-term abortions. That same year a similar federal law, the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, was signed by President Bush. Only 15 members of the U.S. House opposed it, and it passed the Senate unanimously on a voice vote.

Both the Illinois and the federal bill sought equal treatment for babies who survived premature inducement for the purpose of abortion and wanted babies who were born prematurely and given live-saving medical attention.

When the federal bill was being debated, NARAL Pro-Choice America released a statement that said, “Consistent with our position last year, NARAL does not oppose passage of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act ... floor debate served to clarify the bill’s intent and assure us that it is not targeted at Roe v. Wade or a woman’s right to choose.”

But Obama voted against this bill in the Illinois senate and killed it in committee. Twice, the Induced Infant Liability Act came up in the Judiciary Committee on which he served. At its first reading he voted “present.” At the second he voted “no.”

The bill was then referred to the senate’s Health and Human Services Committee, which Obama chaired after the Illinois Senate went Democratic in 2003. As chairman, he never called the bill up for a vote.

Jill Stanek, a registered delivery-ward nurse who was the prime mover behind the legislation after she witnessed aborted babies’ being born alive and left to die, testified twice before Obama in support of the Induced Infant Liability Act bills. She also testified before the U.S. Congress in support of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act.

Stanek told me her testimony “did not faze” Obama.

In the second hearing, Stanek said, “I brought pictures in and presented them to the committee of very premature babies from my neonatal resuscitation book from the American Pediatric Association, trying to show them unwanted babies were being cast aside. Babies the same age were being treated if they were wanted!”

“And those pictures didn’t faze him [Obama] at all,” she said.

At the end of the hearing, according to the official records of the Illinois State senate, Obama thanked Stanek for being “very clear and forthright,” but said his concern was that Stanek had suggested “doctors really don’t care about children who are being born with a reasonable prospect of life because they are so locked into their pro-abortion views that they would watch an infant that is viable die.” He told her, “That may be your assessment, and I don’t see any evidence of that. What we are doing here is to create one more burden on a woman and I can’t support that.”

Posted by: Scott | September 10, 2008 6:45 PM | Report abuse

Its so much easier to get McShame and Patsie-Palin confused by claiming something such as this...

If you are confused by the statement, this quote by Biden was meant EXACTLY for you.

Set-up the fight by praising women and their accomplishments, that way, when he kicks her teeth in during the Debates, she can't claim SEXISM....

Way to go Biden!

C3

Posted by: C3 | September 10, 2008 6:43 PM | Report abuse

Thumbs up to Joe Biden, for being an honest man that exposed Obama's poor biased decision making skills.
Biden never minced words, and has my respect back for the terrible femicidal practices of B.O. male ego, and the Dem party of Chappaquiddick.

Done with the glass dome as a voter.
It will not be the problem in 2012.

Palin 2008

Posted by: Dotty | September 10, 2008 6:40 PM | Report abuse

It's time to retire Joe Biden so we don't get stuck with his $50,000/year Amtrak bills.

You know if he had to pay for it himself, he would not be doing a 2-hour commute on Amtrak every day.

Posted by: mark | September 10, 2008 6:40 PM | Report abuse

Even Barack's VP pick questions his judgement! Get this rookie out of here, give him a few more years in the Senate, and bring him back in 2012 or 2016 when he'll be a little more seasoned.

Posted by: Ryan | September 10, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Well i saw on TMZ.....

Posted by: Tom | September 10, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

ds,

the government is not the only institution that applies increased cost of living. they are simply the only ones who do it through taxes.

each time someone who sells you items is taxed, those prices go up, and who buys the items at the bottom of the chain? the poorest, so who winds up being hit the most by ANY taxes? THATS RIGHT the poor people.

Posted by: dale | September 10, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

ok we know Biden talks too much; granted... this doesnt stop or change anything...He is still here to do what he is experienced and qualified to do ....
Do you all still want Roe V Wade reversal with death penalty or at least life to put teeth into McPalins' platform? next.

Posted by: ukeman | September 10, 2008 6:37 PM | Report abuse

I think Biden was a good pick in general and have had a favorable opinion of him before he was picked.

I wonder sometimes though if Joe Biden and Howard Dean get together and compare notes? They both put their foot in their mouth a lot.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 10, 2008 6:35 PM | Report abuse

McCain is straight-up lying about taxes. Under Obama's plan, your taxes would only go up if you make more than $603,000 per year. On the contrary, McCain plans to further reduce taxes for the richest 1% at the expense lower and middle income workers.

.............................. MCCAIN ....................... OBAMA
Income ................. Avg tax bill ..................Avg. tax bill
Over $2.9M ....... -$269,364 (-4.4%)...... +$701,885 (+11.5%)
$603K and up...... -$45,361 (-3.4%)...... +$115,974 (+8.7%)
$227K-$603K...... -$7,871 (-3.1%)................. +$12 (+0.0%)
$161K-$227K...... -$4,380 (-3.0%)............ -$2,789 (-1.9%)
$112K-$161K...... -$2,614 (-2.5%)............ -$2,204 (-2.1%)
$66K-$112K ....... -$1,009 (-1.4%)............ -$1,290 (-1.8%)
$38K-$66K ........ -$319 (-0.7%)................ -$1,042 (-2.4%)
$19K-$38K ........ -$113 (-0.5%)................... -$892 (-3.6%)
Under $19K ......... -$19 (-0.2%)..................... -$567 (-5.5%)

http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/11/news/economy/candidates_taxproposals_tpc/?postversion=2008061113

Posted by: DS | September 10, 2008 6:33 PM | Report abuse

I fully expect Palin to hijack and airplane and fly it in to a government building within the next 6 months. (Win or Lose!)

Posted by: Anonymous | September 10, 2008 6:31 PM | Report abuse

H. Langdon:

At least he (and Obama) get to keep their day jobs ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 10, 2008 6:27 PM | Report abuse

Can the dems actually find some way to lose this election even though everyone in this country hates republicans?

Just when you think they cant blow it anymore they keep trying.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 10, 2008 6:25 PM | Report abuse

Hillary would be better than Palin, but I'm glad it won't be either of them!

USA Patriots for Obama 2008!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 10, 2008 6:24 PM | Report abuse

Biden knows this is over.

Posted by: H. Langdon | September 10, 2008 6:14 PM | Report abuse

Stav:

You must have missed the memo too. "Hillary would have been a better pick than Biden" was, indeed, today's official message from the Obama campaign.

Posted by: JakeD | September 10, 2008 6:12 PM | Report abuse

This is not what was expected from Biden. Where is the cunning attack dog ready to pounce on McCain-Palin? Where are the fiery rallies and well-timed jabs on cable TV, etc.?

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

Posted by: matt | September 10, 2008 6:11 PM | Report abuse

Saturday, September 06, 2008
Delaware Newspaper Calls Out Biden For Drunk Driving Lie

TV's Inside Edition ran a story last week replaying Sen. Joe Biden's claim that Curtis Dunn, the truck driver who struck the car driven by his first wife in 1972 and which killed her and his daughter, was drunk at the time of the accident, bringing tears to the surviving daughter of the innocent truck driver. The Wilmington News Journal writes about Joe Biden's false claim that a drunk driver killed his wife and daughter:


Since his vice presidential nomination, Joe Biden's 2007 statement that a "guy who allegedly ... drank his lunch" and drove the truck that struck and killed his first wife and daughter has gained national media traction.

Alcohol didn't play a role in the 1972 crash, investigators found. But as recently as last week, the syndicated TV show Inside Edition aired a clip from 2001 of Biden describing the accident to an audience at the University of Delaware and saying the truck driver "stopped to drink instead of drive."

The senator's statements don't jibe with news and law enforcement reports from the time, which cleared driver Curtis C. Dunn, who died in 1999, of wrongdoing.

"To see it coming from [Biden's] mouth, I just burst into tears," Dunn's daughter, Glasgow resident Pamela Hamill, 44, said Wednesday. "My dad was always there for us. Now we feel like we should be there for him because he's not here to defend himself."

Biden spokesman David Wade said Wednesday that the senator "fully accepts the Dunn family's word that these rumors were false."


What is particularly outrageous about Biden resurrecting the false claim during his recent 2008 presidential bid is the fact that he wrote a letter of apology to the truck driver's daughter, Pamela Hamill, after she sent a letter to him about the same false claim he made when addressing a college audience shortly after September 11, 2001. The News Journal writes:


After reading a News Journal account of Biden's 2001 speech at UD, Hamill sent Biden a letter on behalf of her father. The newspaper story included Biden's description of getting the call that his wife and daughter had died, but not his comments about Dunn.

Hamill said her note to the senator described how Dunn was affected by the accident.

Printed on the senator's letter head and dated Oct. 11, 2001, the response from Biden reads:

"I apologize for taking so long to acknowledge your thoughtful and heartfelt note," Biden wrote. "All that I can say is I am sorry for all of us and please know that neither I nor my sons feel any animosity whatsoever."


Hamill immediately contacted Biden's office again after Inside Edition ran Biden's claim that his wife and daughter were killed by a drunk driver. The News Journal reports:


Hamill said it wasn't until the Inside Edition report that she became aware that the Delaware senator had said alcohol played a role in the accident. Dunn did not consume any alcohol the day of the crash, Hamill said.

She said she immediately called Biden's office after being contacted by Inside Edition and is waiting for the senator's response.

"The family feels these statements are both hurtful and untrue and we didn't know where they originated from," Hamill said.

As Hamill watched a recording of the Inside Edition report Wednesday, she gasped when the clip of Biden's comments from Iowa came on screen.

Posted by: Scott | September 10, 2008 6:08 PM | Report abuse

Saturday, September 06, 2008
Delaware Newspaper Calls Out Biden For Drunk Driving Lie

TV's Inside Edition ran a story last week replaying Sen. Joe Biden's claim that Curtis Dunn, the truck driver who struck the car driven by his first wife in 1972 and which killed her and his daughter, was drunk at the time of the accident, bringing tears to the surviving daughter of the innocent truck driver. The Wilmington News Journal writes about Joe Biden's false claim that a drunk driver killed his wife and daughter:


Since his vice presidential nomination, Joe Biden's 2007 statement that a "guy who allegedly ... drank his lunch" and drove the truck that struck and killed his first wife and daughter has gained national media traction.

Alcohol didn't play a role in the 1972 crash, investigators found. But as recently as last week, the syndicated TV show Inside Edition aired a clip from 2001 of Biden describing the accident to an audience at the University of Delaware and saying the truck driver "stopped to drink instead of drive."

The senator's statements don't jibe with news and law enforcement reports from the time, which cleared driver Curtis C. Dunn, who died in 1999, of wrongdoing.

"To see it coming from [Biden's] mouth, I just burst into tears," Dunn's daughter, Glasgow resident Pamela Hamill, 44, said Wednesday. "My dad was always there for us. Now we feel like we should be there for him because he's not here to defend himself."

Biden spokesman David Wade said Wednesday that the senator "fully accepts the Dunn family's word that these rumors were false."


What is particularly outrageous about Biden resurrecting the false claim during his recent 2008 presidential bid is the fact that he wrote a letter of apology to the truck driver's daughter, Pamela Hamill, after she sent a letter to him about the same false claim he made when addressing a college audience shortly after September 11, 2001. The News Journal writes:


After reading a News Journal account of Biden's 2001 speech at UD, Hamill sent Biden a letter on behalf of her father. The newspaper story included Biden's description of getting the call that his wife and daughter had died, but not his comments about Dunn.

Hamill said her note to the senator described how Dunn was affected by the accident.

Printed on the senator's letter head and dated Oct. 11, 2001, the response from Biden reads:

"I apologize for taking so long to acknowledge your thoughtful and heartfelt note," Biden wrote. "All that I can say is I am sorry for all of us and please know that neither I nor my sons feel any animosity whatsoever."


Hamill immediately contacted Biden's office again after Inside Edition ran Biden's claim that his wife and daughter were killed by a drunk driver. The News Journal reports:


Hamill said it wasn't until the Inside Edition report that she became aware that the Delaware senator had said alcohol played a role in the accident. Dunn did not consume any alcohol the day of the crash, Hamill said.

She said she immediately called Biden's office after being contacted by Inside Edition and is waiting for the senator's response.

"The family feels these statements are both hurtful and untrue and we didn't know where they originated from," Hamill said.

As Hamill watched a recording of the Inside Edition report Wednesday, she gasped when the clip of Biden's comments from Iowa came on screen.

Posted by: Scott | September 10, 2008 6:08 PM | Report abuse

Christ, I was going to go to today's fundraiser at the Copley but got an emergency client call. Was going to tell Biden to pull his head out of his @$$ and pick up the fight...but now I learn there was no way possible to get his head out from where it's stuck!

Posted by: Stav | September 10, 2008 6:08 PM | Report abuse

"She's easily qualified to be vice president of the United States of America and, quite frankly, it might have been a better pick than me (OR OBAMA), but she is first-rate."

J. Biden

Posted by: Scott | September 10, 2008 6:05 PM | Report abuse

What the Hell Biden? Go to Iraq and show this Nazi-Palin up. Do it.

I should be the democratic strategist for the Obama campaign. If you want to win..CALL ME.

Posted by: Yeah | September 10, 2008 6:03 PM | Report abuse

KLAGLBT:

Admitting that "Hillary would have been a better pick than Biden" was today's message from the Obama campaign?! I must have missed that press release ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 10, 2008 6:03 PM | Report abuse

Way to stay on message, Joe.

Too many people in this campaign can't stay out of their own way. Obama needs to refocus everybody on his team, and fast.

Posted by: KLAGLBT | September 10, 2008 5:58 PM | Report abuse

Ya think?!

Posted by: JakeD | September 10, 2008 5:56 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company