Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

You Go, Bill!

William Jefferson Clinton, 42nd president of the United States, just made the most compelling case for why Sen. Barack Obama, the man who defeated his wife for the Democratic nomination, should become the 44th.

It wasn't self-indulgent. It wasn't self-pitying. It was a speech only he could give. An address from a former president, wise in the demands of the Oval Office, who wants a Democrat to take it back so that the peaceful, prosperous nation he left George W. Bush can return.

If Bill Clinton's speech does not convince the Hillary holdouts to fall in line, if his compelling case against four more years of Republican rule doesn't kill the P.U.M.A (Party Unity My A**) contingent, then the Democratic Party better get set to salute President McCain.

By Jonathan Capehart  | August 27, 2008; 9:50 PM ET
Categories:  Capehart  | Tags:  Jonathan Capehart  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Clinton Welcome: The Genius of Flags
Next: Clinton's Bridge to Barack Obama

Comments

It was a good speech. Couldn't ask for anything more than what he said tonight. It was a tough loss for his wife. But with class and style both he and Hillary came through.Even though many I expect wanted them to fail.I hope the Obama campaign will welcome them in the coming months and future. Their brilliance should not be put aside but instead be part of the team to keep Democrats strong.

Posted by: DT | August 27, 2008 10:32 PM | Report abuse

Bill did great. And the PUMA people will have to come to rational terms with Hillary's loss in their own way. For some that will mean drama right into the voting booth. That's fine, everybody has their stuff.

From The West Wing's "2162 Votes"
"We all live lives of imperfection and yet we cling to the fantasy that there's a perfect life and that our leaders should embody it, but if we expect our leaders to live on some higher moral plane than the rest of us, well, we're just asking to be deceived. Now, it's been suggested to me this week that I should try to try to buy your support with jobs and the promise of access' it has been suggested to me that party unity is more important than your democratic rights as delegates. That's right, it's not and you have a decision to make. Don't vote for us because you think we're perfect. Don't vote for us because of what we might be able to do for you only. Vote for the person who shares your ideals, your hopes, your dreams. Vote for the person who most embodies what you believe we need to keep our nation strong and free. And when you have done that you can go back ... [home]... with your head held high and say, 'I am a member of the Democratic Party.'" - Matt Santos (jimmy Smits)

Posted by: Deep Blue | August 27, 2008 11:03 PM | Report abuse

Home run. The type of valedictory speech Hillary should have given. Bill took himself out of the picture entirely; it was about Barack from start to finish. Total redemption from Bill's boorish behavior during the primaries.

Posted by: Brad Hill | August 27, 2008 11:22 PM | Report abuse

Yup, you got that right. The Democratic Party better get ready to salute John McCain.

Not b/c Bill didn't make the case.
Not b/c Hillary didn't make the case.

But b/c there is no case to be made for Obama. He has no experience. Name one thing he's done for which he gets credit on the national or international scene. Just one thing. Name one thing that entitles him to lead 300 million people, face off with Putin, deal with the N.Koreans, the Iranians, etc.

Bill did his best. But you gotta have something to work with, for God's sake.

I love Bill.
I love Hillary.

I am voting for McCain.

Posted by: Lesley | August 28, 2008 12:07 AM | Report abuse

His work with Rick Lugar on securing loose nukes in Russia, his support of veterans is second only to Senator Patty Murray

here is the ratings of Mccain and Obama see for yourself who has the better record

Here are their records, they speak for themselves: from Vote Smart website http://www.votesmart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=53270&type=category&category=66&go.x=13&go.y=13

2006 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Disabled American Veterans 20 percent in 2006.

2006 In 2006 Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America gave Senator McCain a grade of D.

2006 Senator McCain sponsored or co-sponsored 18 percent of the legislation favored by the The Retired Enlisted Association in 2006.

2005 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Disabled American Veterans 25 percent in 2005.

From VoteSmart website for Obama

2006 Senator Obama supported the interests of the Disabled American Veterans 80 percent in 2006.

2006 In 2006 Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America gave Senator Obama a grade of B+.

2006 Senator Obama sponsored or co-sponsored 12 percent of the legislation favored by the The Retired Enlisted Association in 2006.

2005 Senator Obama supported the interests of the Disabled American Veterans 92 percent in 2005.

The GI Bill was another example of support for veterans and their families, Senator Obama fully supported Senator Jim Webbs legislation, Senator McCain was publicly opposed to it, and stated that the Pentagon told him that it would hurt retention and with the new benefits to many veterans would leave the service to attend college, while other people were stating that the bill would enable the recruiters to more easily.

explain to me a disabled veteran why McCain would make a better President than Barack Obama would be for the veterans and their families and military families? I don't see it.

Posted by: Mike | August 28, 2008 12:15 AM | Report abuse

I dare say that the Democratic party is unifying. Vote Democratic!

Posted by: John | August 28, 2008 12:16 AM | Report abuse

yippee!

Posted by: preAmerikkkan | August 28, 2008 12:27 AM | Report abuse

Lesley -- Voting for McCain. How does that represent 'love' and respect for the Clintons? Does McCain represent the policies the Clintons support, the issues they work for, the legislation and policies they back, the successes of President Clinton's eight-year administration?
By taking McCain's side, then you truly don't belive in what the Clintons stood for -- what they stand for. Hillary made the case; her husband made the case. And now you're slapping both in the face.
Although there were hard feelings after the primaries, the Democrats put forward two strong, brilliant candidates who inspired voters to register, to vote, to participate in a process most take for granted.
In this election, to dismiss Obama is to dismiss the party the Clintons have worked for, for their entire political careers. That isn't love, that's a grudge.
Plus, Hillary Clinton is sure to have a powerful role in the Senate during Obama's administration. Just because she didn't get the nomination doesn't mean she won't have an important role in the direction of the country.

Posted by: marie | August 28, 2008 12:29 AM | Report abuse

i'm glad the clintons helped themselves, but i'm not voting for obama.

Posted by: proud puma | August 28, 2008 12:32 AM | Report abuse

ps: marie- that's the point: the dismiss the democratic party. the party must pay for its foolishness. four more years sees like suitable punishment.

Posted by: proud puma | August 28, 2008 12:34 AM | Report abuse

President Clinton:
I was disappointed by your conduct during the primaries, but you really made up for it with your speech tonight. It was the best speech of the convention so far, and given Michelle and Hillary's speeches, that's saying something. I imagine it was difficult. Know that it was appreciated.

Posted by: Obama Supporter | August 28, 2008 12:35 AM | Report abuse

Ya know, what I value most about my country is that it has a Constitution and Bill of Rights which protect my rights as an individual. Freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom of religion, etc.

Nowhere do I see a requirement to "fall in line". That is a statement I associate with China or Russia. Not the U.S.!

So I welcome Obama's solicitation of my vote - and I will vote based on what I think the candidates have to offer. But you're dreaming if you think I will "fall in line" by party command !!!

Posted by: Keith | August 28, 2008 12:55 AM | Report abuse

Proud Puma: the Democratic Party must pay?? I'm not sure what you're proud of, but I'm a proud American above all. This election is about our COUNTRY, our families, our homes, our futures. OUR LIVES. This is reality, not a reality show. My Republican Party has taught me shame and taken us all over a cliff. Our nation is in free-fall and needs a parachute. I encourage others like you to help restore sanity, security and stability. Pledge support and votes for Obama/Biden and the Democratic Party.

Posted by: An American Citizen | August 28, 2008 1:02 AM | Report abuse

Jonathan Capehart, I see nothing's changed with you. Still the go-along, get-along type; working for the right-wing Washington Post. Part of the problem, dawg. You're so desperate to be part of the centers of power that you're not credible to monitor them.

At least I hope you've lost the bow ties; hard to tell from that pic.

Posted by: Watson 4? Watson 5? | August 28, 2008 1:17 AM | Report abuse

Yup, you got that right. The Democratic Party better get ready to salute John McCain.

Not b/c Bill didn't make the case.
Not b/c Hillary didn't make the case.

But b/c there is no case to be made for Obama. He has no experience. Name one thing he's done for which he gets credit on the national or international scene. Just one thing. Name one thing that entitles him to lead 300 million people, face off with Putin, deal with the N.Koreans, the Iranians, etc.

Bill did his best. But you gotta have something to work with, for God's sake.

I love Bill.
I love Hillary.

I am voting for McCain.

Posted by: Lesley | August 28, 2008 12:07 AM
---------------------------
What BS.

Name one great thing McCain has done. You can't because McCain has done nothing for 72 years other than promote himself.

And explain why a supposed admirer of Clinton would vote for a man will bring back most of the same 3000 high level appointees who have been running the country for the past 7.5 years and against someone who would put in place pretty much the same 3000 high level appointees that would be there if Hilary Clinton had won the nomination and election.

Posted by: mnjam | August 28, 2008 1:19 AM | Report abuse

Seems to the Puma contributuor that her interests are more important than the country's needs. I am sure she could explaain to the widow of a soldier killed in Afghanistan why her interest are paramount - and the nations interests come down the line. I am proud to have supported Hillary Clinton, but the Democratic Party has spoken, now I have a choice between Obama and McCain. To me my concern about America's needs tops the list and the feeling that "MY" candidate didn't win come way down the list.

Posted by: Frank | August 28, 2008 1:31 AM | Report abuse

I love Bill.
I love Hillary.

I am voting for McCain.

Posted by: Lesley | August 28, 2008 12:07 AM
-------------------------------------------

Ugh. Then you have no moral compass defining your political beliefs.

I'm not saying you have no morals at all, mind you, only that if you believe for one second that John McCain will advance policies closer to that of the Clintons than Obama, then you are crazy.

You wrote: "Name one thing that entitles him to lead 300 million people, face off with Putin, deal with the N.Koreans, the Iranians, etc."

(OK, first a side note: No one -- least of all Obama -- says he is "entitled." The question is...is he qualified?)

I respond: Name one thing that BILL CLINTON DID as governor of a very small state that "entitled" him to lead the US, create our foreign policy, and become commander-in-chief at age 46 (younger than Obama is now!).

He became a great president, despite his failings. And Obama will be, too.

He will begin the long, hard process of cleaning up after Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al, and restore our respect in the world.

Remember that JFK was also said to be too young, too inexperienced, and an elitist. Yet, when his top military brass and the CIA strongly advocated a full-scale invasion of Cuba, Kennedy was wise enough to say NO. And we now know as fact that his courage to NOT GO TO WAR -- and in staring down the Soviets in the missile crisis -- prevented full scale nuclear war. He was youngest president in history (and younger than ALL of those wise, experienced military and intelligence advisers).

Do you think McCain would have kept us out of the apocalyptic war that would have ensued?

Age does not automatically equal wisdom.

We have the opportunity to move from one of the worst presidents in American history to a man who has the raw material to be one of the best; the transformational leader this country needs right now to change course and live up to our ideals.

Wake up.

Posted by: KR in DC | August 28, 2008 1:35 AM | Report abuse

Great job, Bill!

I can't wait to see you stompin' in Pennsylvania, Texas and Florida. Yes, even Texas and Florida. The Republicans don't own these two states - they just think they do ...

Posted by: Liz | August 28, 2008 1:41 AM | Report abuse

Will the Democratic Party pay for its foolishness if McCain is elected? No. America will pay the price, and this country can't afford it.

Posted by: Heather | August 28, 2008 1:41 AM | Report abuse

Neither I nor anyone I know has ever seen or heard of a PUMA person outside a handful of press stories. This appears to be a Gang of One and the press seems to have swallowed the "unity" story hook, line and sinker without even scratching at the surface.
But I see NO stories at all about the fact that there will be 2 Republican conventions next week in St. Paul. Their rift is real and ignored.
Throwing a private barbecue for the press at one of your 13 houses (there are 7 houses on the Sedona property alone) looks like a sound investment.

Posted by: Pragmatist | August 28, 2008 1:47 AM | Report abuse

The Clintons gave Obama affirmative action even after he called them racist and called Hillary a ho.

Obama's perfect job would be in his native land Kynia. Go civilize and help bring his native country into a first world democracy. Obama go and at least build a house for your grandmother, give her a modern toilet and toilet tissue. She lives in a hut.

Posted by: Mrs. Phoenix | August 28, 2008 2:10 AM | Report abuse

I love Bill.
I love Hillary.

I am voting for McCain.

Posted by: Lesley | August 28, 2008 12:07 AM

With all due respect, Lesley, you may love Bill and Hillary, but you're not very smart. You're certainly not a Democrat. McCain stands for the OPPOSITE of what the Clintons stand for. Do you want Roe v Wade overturned? If so, by all means, vote for McCain. But that's not what the Clintons want. How do you feel about the financial burden of health care being put on individuals rather than making it accessible to everyone, regardless of income? Your vote for McCain will make that a reality. I don't think that's what Hillary Clinton has been advocating for all these years.
You can hate Obama all you want but you're cutting your nose off to spite your face.

Posted by: Alex | August 28, 2008 2:26 AM | Report abuse

Been a Democrat since 2000, from the left of the party. Pay attention to me, because as a write this I AM SITTING IN IRAQ as an officer in the US Navy serving with the Marines. Just because some has served in the military doesn't make them POTUS material . . .trust me on this!

You talk about PUMA. Y'all need to get over it. Political ideolology takes a back seat when people (sons and daughters) are DYING. Have enough resepect for the people both military and civilians who die here on a daily basis to elect someone who has reasonable about this War from the beginning, someone like Obama.

I will be casting my vote by mail, because I will still be here! Get over your differences and for once try to be a member of a party. We are counting on you. We can't trust them. You have got to love these 18 yrs old who stand in harms way so that you can even talk about PUMA. Be a Democrat . . . bring 'em home. Vote Obama. Anything else is just full of your own self-interested, self-important, navel gazing, hot air.

Take one for the team . . . I know that I have, as I am away from my family, riding convoys, and braving the sandstorm and heat.

Posted by: Democrat in Iraq | August 28, 2008 2:30 AM | Report abuse

The Clintons gave Obama affirmative action even after he called them racist and called Hillary a ho.

Obama's perfect job would be in his native land Kynia. Go civilize and help bring his native country into a first world democracy. Obama go and at least build a house for your grandmother, give her a modern toilet and toilet tissue. She lives in a hut.

Posted by: Mrs. Phoenix | August 28, 2008 2:10 AM

------------------------------

You are an ignorant fool.

First of all, Obama was born on August 4, 1961, at the Kapiolani Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawaii. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama

Secondly, learn to spell. It's "Kenya."

"Civilize" yourself.

Posted by: KR in DC | August 28, 2008 2:42 AM | Report abuse

4 more years might be something some well off angry PUMAs can afford in their post-menopausal complacency. The rest of the world that has to deal with the sh**t your country sends our way cannot be so cavalier.

Posted by: dimik | August 28, 2008 2:48 AM | Report abuse

Poor Dum Dum Puma Lesley. It's not 4 more years with McCain you want, it's 20-25 years of some right-wing nut on the Supreme Court that will be a big part of McCains agenda. More and more I come to believe that maybe some form of IQ test may need to be administered before one should be able to even post a comment. Then again, maybe we should have had an IQ test for President in 2000, then we might not be in the fix we are in today.....

Posted by: EYEPOD | August 28, 2008 4:11 AM | Report abuse

I wonder what people are thinking when they vote for McCain which is: MORE OF THE SAME! When I think of our troops, I have to wonder who's side he is on?

Also, I was shocked to see Louisiana majority taking a Republican stance. ?? Where were the Republicans when you were ALL stranded from hurricane Katrina? If I remember right, Bush came walking through when the waters receded. Who's side was he on?

I'm here to say that I am voting for Obama because I want a man in the Whitehouse that thinks with his heart, thinks with his mind and is ON OUR SIDE!!!!!!

Posted by: Vicki from MO | August 28, 2008 4:41 AM | Report abuse

Kudos to Bill Clinton on his speech. He was magnificent!*!*! He gave us a little insight as to what goes on in Washington. It definately held my interest, but as usual, everyone haD to analyze his motives....that's just media hogwash!

Posted by: Vicki from MO | August 28, 2008 4:51 AM | Report abuse

Two points:

1. PUMA is a GOP creation. The people who began it are tied to the Republican party and there are under 500 of them, anyway. PUMA is a classic example of ratf*cking, for which that party is so well known.

2. The Clinton crisis, such as it was, was a product of Bill Clinton's childish behavior. The spoiled little prima donna just couldn't accept that his tactics blew up in his face, so he threw a temper tantrum. His speech last night was an acceptance of reality, no more, no less.

Posted by: Helena Montana | August 28, 2008 5:24 AM | Report abuse

Let's be fair to those who are concerned about Barack Obama's lack of "experience". Our nation is led currently by a man who never really held a job until he was elected governor of Texas. 4 years later, he was elected president. The results have been a catastrophe: for America, Americans, the world, the environment, the future. Lack of experience clearly shows in George Bush's performance! It is a valid concern!

HOWEVER:
Before Barack Obama spent 6 years as a legislator (that's 2 years more time in office than Bush), he held a series of jobs that exposed him to the deepest problems in our nation and forced him to demonstrate an ability to solve them WITHOUT the power of the presidency behind him.

Let's imagine how much more he can do for us with that power and influence in his very capable hands.

Experience is a concern: for any who look beyond the superficial measures of it, you will find in Barack Obama a man with more experience entering the White House than the current incumbent. So in the end, it's a valid concern turned into a very bright red herring!

Posted by: 33rdSt | August 28, 2008 5:25 AM | Report abuse

Gee - Republicans were all behind Bush whose only elected experience was 6-years as Gov of Texas - before that a string a failed businesses. Oh, yeah he picked Cheyney as VP because of his mature experience. Now its Obama has no experience - Not buying that. McCain's platform is totally Bush league and flipflops.

Posted by: Joe | August 28, 2008 6:46 AM | Report abuse

"Been a Democrat since 2000, from the left of the party. Pay attention to me, because as a write this I AM SITTING IN IRAQ as an officer in the US Navy serving with the Marines. Just because some has served in the military doesn't make them POTUS material . . .trust me on this!

You talk about PUMA. Y'all need to get over it. Political ideolology takes a back seat when people (sons and daughters) are DYING. Have enough resepect for the people both military and civilians who die here on a daily basis to elect someone who has reasonable about this War from the beginning, someone like Obama.

I will be casting my vote by mail, because I will still be here! Get over your differences and for once try to be a member of a party. We are counting on you. We can't trust them. You have got to love these 18 yrs old who stand in harms way so that you can even talk about PUMA. Be a Democrat . . . bring 'em home. Vote Obama. Anything else is just full of your own self-interested, self-important, navel gazing, hot air.

Take one for the team . . . I know that I have, as I am away from my family, riding convoys, and braving the sandstorm and heat."

And to you, and all the men and women serving our country, we owe a great deal of gratitude, respect and support. We also owe you the right to bring you back home and safe to your families. The actions of select Republicans over the past 8 years have been criminal at best. We do not need more of the same.......McCain as an extension of Bush. That risk is far greater than someone who is intellectually gifted as Obama, who has managed a presidential campaign with utter competence and displays a sense of aptitude to make this world a better place (most of all our piece of it called the United States of America).

I have traveled the world over the past five years and it is heart breaking to see what has happened to the US position overseas. The international (the one that covers 5.8 billion souls) moral authority is lost and that is having a direct impact on our ability to manage future conflicts that are taking shape. Another 4 years of these types of policies will accelerate this decay and it very well may leave us in a situation much, much worse than the one we faced on 9/11/01. As laws of physics go.....for every action there is an equal or stronger reaction. We need to keep our eye on the ball (Afghanistan/Pakistan border), tone down the macho bluster, stop spending the billions of dollars in Iraq and reinvest the money at home to move the economy forward. John McCain has displayed, through his voting record, a complete lack of understanding the whole picture. He is of the same mold as Bush jr……shoot from the hip and then worry about political spin. Is it any wonder that his campaign now limits reporter access to him while he is in transit from one election stop to another?

This election can not be about grudges and self-serving emotions. Our troops, our citizens and our international partners deserve more than what John McCain is offering; tax cuts for the wealthiest citizens, more off-shore drilling that will not have a material impact on gas prices, continued spending in Iraq, draconian rhetoric to our foes that may lead to greater disaster than Iraq and lack of alternative energy plan that will continue to transfer our wealth to countries like Iran, Russia and Venezuela. The same countries that now look like potential adversaries.

An Independent Sumsonic

Posted by: Sumsonic | August 28, 2008 6:50 AM | Report abuse

This is a humble comment and I am not part of the PUMA's. Yes I was a big time Hillary supporter. And I did find Michelle's speech very nice. But the truth is, how is that Michelle different than the Michelle from these past few months and years? And with Hillary and Bill, I thought both gave an amazing speech about the DNC, about the voters, about their legacies, issues, and about why we should vote for Barack Obama. But the last part is what didn't sell me. Why should I vote for Barack Obama? It felt like I should do it more as a Democrat. And to tell you the truth, and again, I am not bitter from Hillar losing, after this primary season, learning more about the election process, learning more about what congress hasn't gotten done since they took over, and the unfair racism chanrges thrown at the Clinton's crafted in a very nasty way from the msm and the Obama campaign, with no apology from Obama, to yet have both of them save the Obama campaign these past two days, I ask myself, do I want to vote for Obama? Like Bill said last night, he was really toughened up during the primary season. But after that, nothing. It's like, well...nothing. The man has done nothing to convince me. He didn't take McCain up on his debate challenge which is excactly what your supposed to do. Not a overseas photo op trip or a 3 am text message vice president announcement. Or flip flop on many issues. That just shows inconsistancy and Marketing plans rather that a true knowledge of issues, unscripted. I did think Bill Clinton was experienced in 1992. He was Governor for many years before he was President and one year younger than Obama. I don't think Barack Obama is experienced in 2008 and technically with the election, has about two and 1/2 in the senate with all of his campaigning. So if we look at the current state of the DNC, Pelosi, Dean, the election process, and if we elect Obama as President, could we actually get things done? And I mean things that would be great for this country in the long runwith Obama ia President? Or would it have been better if we had a fighter like Hillary Clinton as President who would have been a better leader, to put Pelosi in her place, who has done nothing, and really handle the current state of the unreliable DNC, the congress that accusses Bush of not getting things done for every reason why they can't do anything. I am a Dem. I am humble. But I want a fighter. I wanted Hillary. And when she asked if I was in it for her, part of me said, well, yes. Because she is a fighter. And because Barack has proved to me that he is not ready. And EVERY speaker during this convention has said to vote for Obama, yes because, not just because who he is but the MAIN theme was for the DNC, and after these two years, Pelosi, Dean, the congress, who even knows what the DNC really is anymore. But what sickens me most is history repeats itself. The DNC blames the Clintons like they always do something wrong, like it's their fault for everything, but at the end, it's always the Clintons who save them. And tonight it's Obama who gonna act like hese three months (he actually believes he has done a good job these three months to convince voters) have effectively lead him to this huge momemtum that is tonight, when in reality, it was the speeches of both Hillary and Bill Clinton. Obama won't win me over tonight with his speech. I'll have to hear him in debates. And I'll have to see him unscripted. I know the Clintons and I know they are more than speeches. Obama hasn't proved that to me yet.

Posted by: Joedrc | August 28, 2008 7:00 AM | Report abuse

Bill and Hillary especially, gave rousing and generous speeches in behalf of Obama.

Hopefully the Obama campaign will be able to set its cynicism aside and welcome them as ambassadors of the campaign to the small towns where Obama himself has not connected because in such close elections (I don't need to mention '04 '08), such brilliant campaigners can make the difference, as I imagine Al Gore spent 2001 thinking.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 7:14 AM | Report abuse

Remember that JFK was also said to be too young, too inexperienced, and an elitist. Yet, when his top military brass and the CIA strongly advocated a full-scale invasion of Cuba, Kennedy was wise enough to say NO. And we now know as fact that his courage to NOT GO TO WAR -- and in staring down the Soviets in the missile crisis -- prevented full scale nuclear war. He was youngest president in history (and younger than ALL of those wise, experienced military and intelligence advisers).
===================
By the time JFK ran for president, he had been in a major war commanding pt boats, he served 6 years as a representative in Congress and 7 years as a Senator. He was a member of a very influencial family who traveled extensively and knew and had met the leaders of the world.

And you're comparing him to whom? This man you support is being called inexperienced because he IS totally devoid of experience...JFK and Clinton had extensive service prior to running for President of the US. Obama was running for president after two years in the Senate, the seat he won by running against Allan Keyes, a real joke. He did nothing in the Senate but brown nose people like Kennedy and Pelosi to get them to support him to take the black vote from Senator Clinton because she was too moderate and they didn't want to carry on with Bill Clinton's legacy as the only successful Dem president in decades. Now tell me again what it is about this man that makes him qualified to be president of the US....a community organizer? Please. He shouldn't even be allowed in the same room with Bill Clinton.

Posted by: lezah2 | August 28, 2008 7:43 AM | Report abuse

I've been really impressed that people has avoided demogauging the opposition in these posts.

I am a Reserve officer who grew up on welfare and worked all my life for my wife, child, family and country. I don't doubt democrats love their country any more or less than republicans do. And youth, alone, does not disqualify a candidate. Experience and leadership do. If you are young, who do you pick to advise you? I don't know who is advising Senator Obama. I need to know. What I know about his proposals does not convince me that he understands the impact of his plans on a tight economy. I've heard nothing on foreign policy except out of Iraq. I need to know more.

As for McCain -- I am tired of the slogan that he is Bush 3. What I know of his proposals, and his voting record shows that is not true. Still, I need to hear him, and Senator Obama, unscripted. Then I can decide. Right now, I am leaning for McCain. While I don't care for the far right of the Republican party, I am put off by the far left of the Democratic party more. While I support some of what they propose (environmental issues and health care) their belief that they know best and government can make it happen ring hollow to me. After all my years in government, I am not convinced that more Washington involvement is the answer.

Posted by: Winterdog | August 28, 2008 7:48 AM | Report abuse

All these Republicans - who have always been Republicans - pretending to be PUMAs make me laugh.

We know that Rush Limbaugh told them to vote for Hillary Clinton just to help create the discord. I wonder what talk radio show told them to pretend to be PUMAs.

Oh, my little sheep, have you no pride? Have you no self respect?

These extremist Republicans spend so much time talking about honor and so little time practicing it.

Posted by: G | August 28, 2008 7:51 AM | Report abuse

Bill and Hillary, as expected, were nonpareil. Magnificent. They showed the class that Obama lacked in not even seriously considering Hill for veep. No matter, I didn't want to see Hillary holding the coat for Obama. If OB is elected, he stands a great chance of becoming another ineffective, passive, gutless wonder a la Jimmy Carter,

Posted by: Myrna Geller | August 28, 2008 8:12 AM | Report abuse

Dear Democrat in Iraq,

Thank you for the post and for the service. You said it better than nearly anyone else possibly could.

Posted by: dch | August 28, 2008 8:38 AM | Report abuse

proud puma, you are an idiot. i hope you are not serious

Posted by: elal | August 28, 2008 8:39 AM | Report abuse

well said kr in dc, well said

Posted by: jo | August 28, 2008 8:42 AM | Report abuse

33rd Street - Thanks for the insightful comments. I totally agree. Experience does matter and the Bush lack thereof has been a huge issue. It was Obama's lack of experience that caused me to support Hillary - that and her performances at the numerous debates during the democratic primary. Her command of the issues was extraordinary. But, Obama was inspiring and his life story and experience will serve him well, particularly with domestic issues. I felt torn many times during the campaign and wished both of them weren't running at the same time because it was, for me, a difficult choice. In the end I went with Hillary because of the experience factor but I will absolutely vote for Obama and didn't need Bill and Hillary to convince me. As soon as Hillary conceded, I did too. I think most Hillary supporters did as well.

Posted by: hillary supporter | August 28, 2008 8:46 AM | Report abuse

Bill and Hillary had delivered their magnanimous speeches promoting Barack Obama, and yet, there's still a lot of democrats who won't vote for him in November. In my office alone, 10 out of 15 male or female expresses strong reservations against Barack. Nine will definitely vote for McCain, two will pass and only 4 said they will vote for Barack. In reality, all the polls with Barack leading are all misleading. White caucasians will not openly admit that they are not supporting Barack for fear of being tagged racist. In my family alone, there are six registered voters who normally voted for the democrats in the last three presidential elections, but this time, we will vote for McCain, courtesy of my 76 year old mother.

Posted by: DANEC | August 28, 2008 8:48 AM | Report abuse

The media and the public at large do not seem to understand that the Clinton supporters who are not going to vote for Obama aren't sore losers, and they don't need to "get over it." We're not voting for him because he's NOT QUALIFIED! I'm not bitter because Clinton lost. I'm depressed because my party elected someone who IS NOT QUALIFIED FOR THE JOB. No speech about party unity is going to change that. It's morally wrong to vote for someone you think isn't right for the job. No woman, especially a black woman, could run for president with his resume. If you take away the pretty, empty speeches, there's nothing special about Barak Obama. Except, perhaps, for his enormous ego.

Posted by: Jinmd | August 28, 2008 9:01 AM | Report abuse

Finally we heard spelled out the compelling reasons to vote Obama. On multiple fronts in domestic and foreign policy the republicans have been tragically and demonstrably wrong, and Obama, among others, has been right. In order to claim superior judgement, you have to be right on the major questions- when to get into war, when to get out, how to navigate international relations, and how to help the economy at home.

Posted by: MShaughn | August 28, 2008 9:04 AM | Report abuse

If you were a Hillary supporter and now don't vote for Obama, you're just spiteful and ignorant. We have to kick the GOP out of the White House and repair the damage to our nation! (And I'm a registered Independent)

Posted by: marc d | August 28, 2008 9:04 AM | Report abuse

If you want 10 good reasons not to vote Barak HUSSEIN Obama (if the name isn't enough) just go to http://www.ericcantorforvp.com/

Posted by: Samson | August 28, 2008 9:05 AM | Report abuse

Both Clintons went the extra mile and with class threw their full-hearted support behind Barack Obama. They put party and ideals above their personal feelings.

Now let's see what Barack Obama does for them. Will he call off the African-Americans who falsely and unfairly branded the former President of the United States a racist? Will he personally dispel that lie?

Will he support Hillary Clinton in her life-long quest to make sure that every American has full-access to quality, afforable, health care?

The one thing that Barack Obama hasn't shown the women of the party who support Hillary Clinton is that they matter to him for anything but votes.

He got the Clintons to appeal to those women for their votes in the name of party unity.

Now he needs to appeal to those women for the sake of their needs, wants and values and convince them that he "feels their pain."

Halli Casser-Jayne
http://www.thecjpoliticalreport.com


Posted by: Halli Casser-Jayne | August 28, 2008 9:05 AM | Report abuse

"Yup, you got that right. The Democratic Party better get ready to salute John McCain.

Not b/c Bill didn't make the case.
Not b/c Hillary didn't make the case.

But b/c there is no case to be made for Obama. He has no experience. Name one thing he's done for which he gets credit on the national or international scene. Just one thing. Name one thing that entitles him to lead 300 million people, face off with Putin, deal with the N.Koreans, the Iranians, etc.

Bill did his best. But you gotta have something to work with, for God's sake.

I love Bill.
I love Hillary.

I am voting for McCain."


In one breath you say that you Love the Clintons. In the next breath you say you disagree with the Clintons. So who is flip-flopping?

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 9:05 AM | Report abuse

Bill's speech was a thing of powerful beauty, as was Hillary's the night before. I've been a Democrat my entire life and I've never been prouder to be one than I am right now, for many reasons. I supported Clinton in the primaries and I've got my concerns about Obama, but the choice between Obama and McCain is clear: we cannot afford the status quo for four more years. We must move off of fossil fuel and onto alternative energy, for just one and, imho, the most urgent and important example of the clarity of the choice. We must protect Social Security. We must finally move to universal healthcare as every other civilized nation in this world has, because we cannot afford--financially/economically or morally--to continue with our expensive healthcare system that doesn't even cover all our people. This is a time that demands bold, big changes, and both Clintons clearly laid out in their speeches that the Republicans promise more of the same, whereas the Democrats have a proven record of delivering a healthy economy, a more humane society that truly has "family values" instead of just talking about them, and a vision for a self-sufficient, green future.

Posted by: Edna | August 28, 2008 9:07 AM | Report abuse

I thought your analsis was fine until the last line.

This campaign is not hostage to PUMA, a political ploy of GOP operatives.

Or do you really believe that McCain will have no defectors?

Out of curiousity, will you be giving the same sping during the RNC, considering what conservatives have said about McCain?

Or are your corporate parents not allowing the Post to do that?

Posted by: scootmandubious | August 28, 2008 9:07 AM | Report abuse

What does it take for Obama to become the 44th President?

Are we a capitalist country or are we not?
We are
So pound Mac Cain on age political hypocrisy. Show the guy for what he really is a clone of the Bush regime.
McCain was not elected President at 50 so why would he be elected at 72 when a man of that age has capacity and strength in pure decline.
Mac Cain President is surely hyper bankruptcy and mayhem in America.
What it takes for Obama to become the next President is to show the country he is the man to recover our image wealth and power.

Posted by: bob | August 28, 2008 9:10 AM | Report abuse

hey, let the dems have it! let the world see (again) that the liberal/socialist agenda is inferior to free market capitalism. they will not understand this until they don't have it. and they won't understand terrorism until OBL drops a daisy cutter on their house.

Posted by: Jeff | August 28, 2008 9:10 AM | Report abuse

@ everyone

Why so serious?

Posted by: Joker | August 28, 2008 9:10 AM | Report abuse

This just in... PUMA gnaws off right paw because a thorn is stuck in her left one.

Yeah, that'll teach the thorn a lesson.

Where the heck is Darwin when you need him?

Posted by: martooni | August 28, 2008 9:10 AM | Report abuse

It doesn't matter what Clintons say, Obama is not a good choice.

Posted by: I | August 28, 2008 9:11 AM | Report abuse

Yes, better salute President McCain come November

Irrespective of what Mr. Clinton said, Obama is not the man for the job.

Vote for McCain in November

Registered Democrat for McCain :)

Posted by: AsBee | August 28, 2008 9:12 AM | Report abuse

McCain = Republicans = war.
No working with other countries,
no unity in the world.
Looking forward to WWIII?

Posted by: Linda | August 28, 2008 9:12 AM | Report abuse

If you want handouts and want to take no responsibility for yourself than vote Obama. If you are OK with someone who soaked in black liberation theology for twenty years than vote Obama. I mean come on, it had to sink in while hesat there so many hundreds of times. Look, socialism does not work, get it. We have no choice anymore. The media presents to us the candidates they want. America is heading in the wrong direction and only a return to the epiphany, our consitution, can come even close to salvaging what we once stood for.

Posted by: Grovie | August 28, 2008 9:13 AM | Report abuse

" An address from a former president, wise in the demands of the Oval Office..."

That is hilarious. Remember what Bill did in the Oval office during his term. Those demands got him IMPEACHED.

Posted by: Ignignokt | August 28, 2008 9:13 AM | Report abuse

I suspect that Bill's extraordinarily strong endorsement of B.O. last night actually indicates the Clintons sense very clearly that B.O. will lose and they want to strive mightily to avoid having his loss blamed on them which would preclude Hillary's running in 2012. Bill did it for Hillary, to ensure she'd not be blocked from running successflly in 2012.

Posted by: Hatshepsut | August 28, 2008 9:13 AM | Report abuse

Bill's speech seemed to challenge America: Is America ready for a president that reads books and knows how to pronounce "nuclear"?

Posted by: Revenuer | August 28, 2008 9:13 AM | Report abuse

Some of you folks are funny. 1 speech full of lip service does not change the actions of several months and words do not add experience to Obama. There is absolutely no reason to vote for this party anymore. The left has become a collection of whiners instead of winners. John F. Kennedy would cry at today's Dem representatives. He would vote McCain. He is the only moderate choice.

Posted by: Michael | August 28, 2008 9:13 AM | Report abuse

Experience? What did GWB and Clinton have? Person with the least experience will win, according to recent elections.

Posted by: Experience? | August 28, 2008 9:14 AM | Report abuse

Once again, I find myself posting in support of Barack Obama. I always thought we had two good choices until about a week ago, when Mr. Goldfarb, a member of McCain's campaign, referred to Obama supporters as people who play D+D in their mother's basements.

Well, I'm 38 years old. I still play D+D, for fun and competitively. On paper, since my team took 3rd in the D+D Open at Gencon, I'm one of the best 15 players or so in the entire world.

And yes, sometimes, when I come home, since my parents still pay rent to the LLC that is my house, I still play D+D in my mother's basement.

Those are the kind of people in the Republican Party who love McCain. The kind that disparage people's hobbies, because they know nothing about them. The kind who will stack the Supreme Court with religious right-wing nuts to make my hobby unplayable. The kind who make absolutely no attempt to celebrate America's diversity, America's innovation, or America's intelligence. So the McCain campaign pretty much said "Vote for Barack Obama, because your vote doesn't matter to us."

And for the twelve million people in this country who are smarter than average, serious about their hobby, and love to play those sorts of games, in tournaments, at a friend's place, at a local store, or yes, even in their mother's basement, I really hope you will too.

So, John McCain, your apology to my friends and I is not accepted. Your campaign has failed it's saving throw.

Posted by: Balabanto | August 28, 2008 9:14 AM | Report abuse

I for one am working as hard as I can to see a McCain White House. Obama is underqualified, green and not ready to lead a horse to water.

Posted by: Kha | August 28, 2008 9:14 AM | Report abuse

I watched Bill Clinton speak and was glad that he did what all us Democrats should do - not be divided by tension, but united in our goal. Regardless of whether you are a Hillary supporter or Barack supporter, we are all Democrats with the belief that the Republicans are leading us in the wrong direction. Like Bill said, in 1992, there were also chants of him being too young to lead. Being President is not about gaining 'on-the-job' experience - it's about having the COURAGE to lead and a strong team around you. Let's not allow the fear-mongering the Republicans sling allow us to forget that we have more to lose by electing George v2.0 than electing Obama-Biden in November.

Posted by: Proud Democrat | August 28, 2008 9:14 AM | Report abuse

American Citizen - you have very little standing to lecture me on saving the nation when you were admittedly a Republican. I am a lifetime Democrat, not someone who finally saw the Obama-Light.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 9:14 AM | Report abuse

SOME OF YOU SAY TO VOTE DEMOCRATIC. WELL I SAY THERE IS NOT MUCH THAT IS DEMOCRATIC ABOUT THE DEMOCRAT PARTY, NOR THE REPUBLICAN PARTY EITHER. VOTE INDEPENDANT AND THROW THE BUMS OUT! THESE OLD GAURD WASHINGTON INSIDERS ARE THE PROBLEM, THEY SEEM TO BE MORE INTERESTED IN OBTAINING MORE POWER THAN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE NATION. MAYBE SOME OF THEM SHOULD READ THE CONSTITUTION AND TAKE IT TO HEART.

Posted by: OLD NAVY MAN | August 28, 2008 9:14 AM | Report abuse

I cannot exaggerate the sense of relief over here in the UK once we absorbed the power of Bill Clinton's speech.
Mr. Obama has a massive swell of support here and now it's up to the people of the US to turn the page of history and make the change we all desire and you so urgently need. We know you can do it because you've done it before.
Best wishes, Tony Brown
www.grecofilia.co.uk

Posted by: Tony Brown | August 28, 2008 9:14 AM | Report abuse

Words are cheap. I still see nothing in Obama's resume that shows he is ready to be commander and chief of the strongest country in the world.

Posted by: Jerry | August 28, 2008 9:15 AM | Report abuse

what i find so strange in politics is just this. yesterday, clinton is gritting his teeth when he speaks about Obama. today, he is all respect and admiration. this is the sort of thing that sways people, at least the perseptive ones (read: youth), to feel suspicious of the whole business of politics. while it is admirable to see party unity, what is difficult is to believe anything real in it. it all ends up feeling forced. certainly when you have a "big enemy" pictured (e.g. Bush, Republicans") whatcha gonna do? but sometimes i just want enemies to stay enemies, even within a party. at least then you have something real. people standing up for their passion. but just the same, clinton's passion for his own wife (personal or political) seems suspect too. FYI, I always vote Democratic. I am not some Republican trying to bash Democrats. this is an age of staged politics, and i hope i'm not alone in finding alot of trouble with it.

Posted by: andy | August 28, 2008 9:15 AM | Report abuse

Biden said that it was wonderfull that there was finally a clean articulate black man such as Obama on the national scene. He later said that Mcain was far more experienced and ready to lead than Obama. Then the Democrats pick Biden to be Obamas running mate. Then at the their national convention on national t.v. one of only two living former Demcocrat presidents, Jimmy Carter, calls Obama a nice black boy. Unbelievable. Remove your heads from the sand and watch Obama slip in the polls and be soundly defeated in Nov. Its about country unity not party unity. I would have seriously considered Hilary but now have no choice but to vote for Mcain.

Posted by: Domingo | August 28, 2008 9:15 AM | Report abuse

The problem here are the self righteous women that feel voting for Obama is an admission that Hillary isn't ready for the White House.

Get over yourself, and your gender, and all the problems women face today. And vote democrat.

McCain is nothing more than a puppet. He will continue 4 years of the same BS that got us here. You want to prove us wrong, put us in the corner, tell us we are on a TIME OUT MOM!

Well f**k you MOMs.

Posted by: KOZ | August 28, 2008 9:15 AM | Report abuse

McCain claims to be a man of honor who could not honor his marriage nor honor his commitment to veterans.He also failed to honor his pledge for an issue based Campaign.His answer to this would most likely be,hey I was a pow.My father fought in hand to hand combat in WW11 and was at Anzio beachhead.He never talked much about his wartime experience,when I asked him why he said many of my buddies didn't have the good fortune to come home and it would be shameful to suggest I was special in any way.McCain lacks honor because all he does is talk about it.He capitulated with his captors 32 times.Lots of guys in much dire straits performed better.

Posted by: joseph marcucilli | August 28, 2008 9:15 AM | Report abuse

Bill and Hillary did come through. The republicans are unsettle and are desperately trying to spoil these accomplishments; at least this prepares them for ultimate win - when we elect President Obama!

Posted by: Pedro | August 28, 2008 9:15 AM | Report abuse

OBAMA BIDEN AND THE TWO CLINTONS ARE NOW THE FOUR HORSEMEN FOR THE DEMOCRATS! NO WAY NO HOW NO MCCAIN! Mc Cain did not support the GI Bill so myself and the vast majority of our nations veterans are lining up with Barack Obama. Mc Cain joining George W. Bush and his disgraceful veto threat of the benefits for our troops returning from Afghanistan and Iraq is shameful. America Cindy Mc Cain does not trust John Mc Cain and made him sign a prenuptial agreement to protect her assets from the man she was cheating with. If we want real family values we can trust we need to go with the Bidens and the Obama no lucky sperm there. OBAMA BIDENin 2008!

Posted by: COL Jack Whittington US Army | August 28, 2008 9:15 AM | Report abuse

Which Bill Clinton shall we listen to? Is it the one last night or the one that earlier called Obama’s anti-Iraq message a “fairy tale” and referred to the Big-O as a Chicago thug?

Posted by: Celt | August 28, 2008 9:16 AM | Report abuse

Now I have a question. Aren't PUMA's in the same family Cougars?

Posted by: Flakca | August 28, 2008 9:17 AM | Report abuse

And previously he and his wife made a compelling case why he should not be the nominee. Does anyone remember the first few Clinton years? His on the job training cost us the rise of Al Queda, demonizing of the Israeli's and praise of terrorist groups. Clinton fought tooth and nail against welfare reform and even shut down government to protest a balanced budget. That's why for the first time in 40 years the Republicans got a majority in Congress. I'm disappointed and mad with Bush. Afraid Obama is an empty suit. That leaves McCain who is not a Bush clone but may not be much better. Unfortunatley we never know what we're getting until its over.

Posted by: Rich | August 28, 2008 9:18 AM | Report abuse

One big thing I like about Obama and why he gets my vote....he is not McCain/Bush. Clear enough? The current regime is the worst ever. Do you need a list? Who really wants four more years of this? Only the corrupt.

Posted by: Mark in Santa Fe | August 28, 2008 9:18 AM | Report abuse

While the nation was peaceful and prosperous during Clinton's time, we never hear from the partisans as to why this was the case. Bill Clinton was able to raise taxes, dismantle the military and enjoy the benefits of a booming dot com & housing economy. ( I guess Al Gore invented the internet so he deserves some credit). It was the only time in recent history a president as morally deficient as Clinton and a cabinet rife with amateurs could have gotten away with what it did. Meanwhile, as Bill was receiving favors under his desk from interns, the hatred that Muslim fanatics had for the West did not subside. Al Qaeda members snuck in this country and wreaked the havoc we saw.
I am no fan of George Bush, as this time,
but even less of Barak Obama. All Democrats
seem to be able to do is make great speeches that are full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. The Obamas can talk about terrible America is now while enjoying all the benefits it offers. This emperor has no clothes. His suit his even emptier than Slick Willie's....

Posted by: Steve | August 28, 2008 9:18 AM | Report abuse

Oh, Frank...please cut the melodrama. Invoking a widow of a US soldier in Afghanistan to garner support for Obama seems pretty desperate. How many hearings has Obama had on Afghanistan since he's been in the Senate? I just don't by slick Barry. So spare me the heartstrings. He's not what progressives proclaim him to be. He's a very vague individual who is dead set on getting in the White House. Being undefined but telling everyone you represent what they want ("Change") is not a way to govern; it just wins elections.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 9:19 AM | Report abuse

PUMAs are nothing more than selfish, childish idiots...prefering to 'punish' the Democratic party rather than doing what's right for AMERICA. As I sit here, a deployed member of the US military, I couldn't be more disgusted by these individuals...Vote for someone (McCain or Obama, or even a third party candidate) because you believe it what they believe in, not to spite someone else...time to be responsible ADULTS.

Posted by: deployed service member | August 28, 2008 9:19 AM | Report abuse

So Bill gave a glowing speech in favor of Obama. So Bill is wise in the demands of the Oval Office. Does this mean that Barack Obama is presidential material? Bill Clinton is a Democrat and, as we know, a brilliant speaker. Obama is a Democrat. What did you really think Bill was going to say? Something that would make McCain more likely to get elected?
Secondly, for all of you who are voting Obama because you want "change", have you really considered what these changes might be? From all I have been able to determine, Obama's real policy is "Get elected and to hell with the Constitution". Do the free world a favor and look up Marxism on Wikipedia or somewhere.

Posted by: Citizen in NM | August 28, 2008 9:19 AM | Report abuse

hey england, we came to america because we didn't like the way the euros did things, remember? why in the hell would we want to re-establish a european style government now? and why the hell would we care what a brit thinks about our President?

Posted by: Toby | August 28, 2008 9:19 AM | Report abuse

GIMME, GIMME, GIMME,

Listen to Obamas speeches. It's all about what the government can do for you.


EMPTY PROMISES!!!! RON PAUL or his protege!!

Posted by: Grovie | August 28, 2008 9:19 AM | Report abuse

Funny, when referring to Bill Clinton, you can bring up the Oval Office and peace in the same sentence. Do I need to explain? OK - we don't have peace right now under President Bush because of the do-nothing-for-8-years legacy that Mr. Clinton left for him.

Posted by: JEGjr | August 28, 2008 9:20 AM | Report abuse

Are pro choice female Clinton supporters going to defect to McCain in any significant numbers ? A man who's promising to appoint judges to overturn Roe.

Doubtful.

Obama's task is actually relatively simple. Pick off Colorado and/or Nevada and New Mexico. Remember, Obama only needs 269, not 270 to win the WH. If he gets 269, the Democratically controlled House that sits in January, will elect him.

Obama is currently polling ahead in Colorado narrowly, New Mexico is leaning his way and Nevada is also trending in his favor.

McCain turns 72 tomorrow. If he picks Romney as VP, the first question he'll be asked is how many homes he owns. And Biden will dissect him on foreign policy questions in the debate.

Pawlenty, while a McCain loyalist (and little more) is a lightweight. Biden would make short work of him in a debate as well. And Pawlenty isn't going to swing Minnesota for McCain.

McCain has a problem in his VP pick as a result of Obama picking Biden. A master stroke by the IL Senator.

Republicans have another problem. Tropical storm Gustav is churning near Cuba, is predicted to increase in strength to hurricane level 1 and possibly as high as 3, and right now is forecast to hit somewhere on the gulf coast on Monday night.....right around the time the GOP convention starts.

Posted by: MA | August 28, 2008 9:20 AM | Report abuse


The Clintons gave Obama affirmative action even after he called them racist and called Hillary a ho.

Obama's perfect job would be in his native land Kynia. Go civilize and help bring his native country into a first world democracy. Obama go and at least build a house for your grandmother, give her a modern toilet and toilet tissue. She lives in a hut.

Posted by: Mrs. Phoenix | August 28, 2008 2:10 AM

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

Talk about ignorant and racist?

How do you know that Sen. Obama is from Kenya? Oh wait, you're one of the zillions of educated sloths who BELIEVE everything they read.

Any American THAT KNOWS HIS HISTORY AND CONSTITUTION knows that you can only become a presidential nominee by being a NATURAL BORN citizen and since he is from Hawaii, THAT MAKES HIM A U.S. citizen.

Just because he has family in other parts of the world should not be a negative as to who he is.

But it's people like you who would rather continue to divide this country by idiotic racist statements about somebody's heritage rather than realize that this country is being watched by the rest of the world.

Keep in mind it was the REPUBLICANS that took almost a month to help their own citizens of New Orleans when Katrina hit. Don't think those images haven't been played around the world.

Don't think that the world doesn't realize that the Republicans have stripped the CHiP program that made sure that every child had health insurance and that they have watered down the No Child Left Behind program to where it is just another after school program of milk and cookies.

But yet you think Sen. Obama isn't qualified. You think he doesn't have a strong enough foreign relations policy.

HOW ABOUT A DOMESTIC RELATIONS POLICY where this country is back to being self sufficient???

I'm tired of paying $3.93 a gallon because we have borrowed billions of dollars from the Chinese to pay for oil in the Middle East and yet the only people benefitting is a country like Iraq who has an $80 billion surplus and they don't want us there.

Gee somebody please get these PUMA folk reality glasses!!

Posted by: Gregory | August 28, 2008 9:20 AM | Report abuse

Bill gave a great speech. He pinpointed specifically what needs to be done to fix America. Obama better take note and stop speaking in generalities about what he's gonna do.

Posted by: bobaran | August 28, 2008 9:20 AM | Report abuse

Hey Democrat in Iraq -- soldiers have consistently voted Republican in recent presidential elections, and historically, the Democrats have started just about all of this nation's wars.

Posted by: Proud Puma | August 28, 2008 9:21 AM | Report abuse

But Jerry... China already has a leader.

About the only thing McCain is good for is to yell at kids to get the he11 off his seven lawns.

Posted by: martooni | August 28, 2008 9:21 AM | Report abuse

Any democrat who votes for McCain should have their head examined. The only possible reason has to be latent racism.

Obama clearly represents the values and aspirations of the democratic party. Hillary lost. I'm sorry for your pain, but don't punish the rest of us with four more years on McCain-Bush because your angry. This too shall pass.

Posted by: John Armstrong | August 28, 2008 9:22 AM | Report abuse

Hey Dem. in Iraq...
I pray to God you and your fellow brave soldiers make it out of Iraq. Thankfully
Barck Obama will bring you home. My personal opinion is: I think every American who claim to love their country are are proud of the brave men and women serving their country should vote for Obama who has done more for the soldiers & Vets than McCain has ever done in his 26 years in the Senate. America does not need another rich boy underachiever in the WH. The country needs someone with the intelligence, vision, analytic mind, wisdom, judgement, courage like Obama stood up and said NO to Iraq while running for Illinois Senate seat when most politicans and the American people were for invading Iraq. The country needs change and Barack Obama offers that change. He's more concerned about domestic policies: economy, education, health care, infrastructure to name a few. McBush is about more war... "there will be more wars throughout this century and we'll need the young men and women to fight it". DRAFT

Posted by: Sandra | August 28, 2008 9:23 AM | Report abuse

Bill knows that in 4 years, Hillary will be president... and it's going to be easier for her... if she takes the white house from Obama, than Mccain. (4 years from now... Obama will have made a mess of things... and he will be an easy lose.)

... or do you REALLY think Bill and Hillary's feelings for Obama just instantly changed... when Hillary dropped out of the race? Or that Obama just instantly went from a man that could "never run the country"... to 1 that "will do a great job".

Posted by: Susie | August 28, 2008 9:24 AM | Report abuse

dimik - i'm not post, pre or any other type of menopausal, given that i'm a guy.....a guy who ain't buying the obama rhetoric. why do you guys act as if you own our votes? you dont.
ps: i'm younger than obama, black, double-ivy educated, humble beginnings...no white mama....

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 9:24 AM | Report abuse

Bill,
welcome home!!!!! We knew you would be there for us. Can hardly wait for 2016 so we can thank you proper.

Posted by: dave | August 28, 2008 9:24 AM | Report abuse

Name one thing Mccain has done? He served his country with distinction. Apparently some on here consider that to be nothing. How can an American consider miltary service to this country nothing?

Posted by: Keith | August 28, 2008 9:25 AM | Report abuse

I watched last night admittedly sad when Hillary called for the delegates to declare Obama the candidate. Bill's speech was superb and reminded us of the fact that he is a great politician and a smart man no matter what. He made an excellent case for the need for a better president and better government. But the Democratic party seems hell bent on not delivering. I was impressed by Biden's experience, values and commitment to public service and couldn't help wondering what the heck is wrong with the Democratic party? If Biden is such a fantastic person and Senator, why did he get only a 9,000 votes in the primaries? Why are we watching an inexperienced man of yet unproven substance become their star - because they could bank on the color of his skin? Because some wanted to stick it to the Clintons? Did anyone ever consider how reassuring to the American people a Clinton Biden ticket would be? No, that would have been too professional and serious-minded for the Democrats. After all look at their leader Howard Dean. One can only dream... Get ready for Pres. John McCain and hopefully Mit Romney since McCain knows little about economic matters. Heaven help us, the Democrats won't.

Posted by: peachpit | August 28, 2008 9:27 AM | Report abuse

And since when is it the governments job to fix the economy. Have you ever heard of cycles? Socialism has been proven not to work. Does anyone get that?

Posted by: Grovie | August 28, 2008 9:27 AM | Report abuse

Lesley: You are an effing idi0t.

Posted by: AA | August 28, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse

" An address from a former president, wise in the demands of the Oval Office..."

That is hilarious. Remember what Bill did in the Oval office during his term. Those demands got him IMPEACHED.

Posted by: Ignignokt | August 28, 2008 9:13 AM

Bill lied about getting a BJ and a wet cigar in office and got impeached.

George lied and his lie cost this country over 4000 brave souls and walks around with a smile on his face.

It seems to me that it should be the other way around.....no?

Posted by: Sumsonic | August 28, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse

When you elect a president, you elect an entire raft of other people. Not just the VP also, but the chief of staff, the cabinet, the Nat Security Advisor, etc, etc. And you elect POLICIES and positions.

Experience is important, but not nearly so important as your matching up to all of those polices and positions and likely members of government. There really are not all that many 3AM phone calls, and those that do arrive come with a panoply of ready advisors, many of whom (the Joint Chiefs, or the permanent UnderSecretaries) will be the same no matter who is elected.

Positions, and attitude are really important. Moral judgment- what is the right thing to do- is really important. The ability to be self critical and distinguish between what's good for the country vs what's good for you- that's really important.

Is torture ok? Is vetting US Attorneys according to their political beliefs ok? Just how far should we use our power to extend our power? Should we develop an "enemies list" ala Nixon? Is Addington a saint or a devil? This is what you need to decide, and then vote accordingly. PUMA pouting is just immature twaddle.

In my not so humble opinion. [that's what this blog is about, isnt it :) ]

Posted by: jerryb | August 28, 2008 9:29 AM | Report abuse

Think about the next four years.

Take your ego out of the equation - remove your personal pride. Do not let these get in the way of the future direction for our country. Replace these with your morals, values and beliefs. It comes down to a simple question - Who will better represent these for the next four years - Obama or McCain.

Posted by: For a better Country... | August 28, 2008 9:29 AM | Report abuse

It wasn't a speech, it was a chat with friends. No other politician does that, let alone try on a tight rope without a net.

Posted by: grayarea | August 28, 2008 9:29 AM | Report abuse


Bill Clinton is a master. A very good speech. However, the media and pundits keep insisting that it's the Clintons that need to close the deal when infact, all they can do it set the table. Now that they've set the table, Obama needs to deliver the rest. He will not get my ex-Hillary vote until he does his part and closes the deal. It's not going to be handed to him, he can not hide behind their skirt tails, he's got to get out their and finish the job. If he does, he may be able to rally the support he needs. By the way, I think it's ironic that many of his supporters, at first, said that they didn't need Hillary's supporters. Alas, I guess they do.

Posted by: vah | August 28, 2008 9:30 AM | Report abuse

Hillar and Bill Clinton are top class acts. Both gave much more than Obama deserved in their speeches. And yet I still hear blacks saying that they were not happy with Bill's behavior during the primary which is the same as saying that they think he is racist because Obama indicated such. The Clinton's are class acts as I would never have helped Obama if I were them and I do not believe that anyone will still be claiming Bill to be racist after 4 more years of Republicans in the White House.......They did not need to endorse Obama for themselfves as he will look so bad by November they may suffer for their endorsement of him.

I am voting McCain because of the failure of the DNC to run a fair primary without sexism and slanderous racist labeling of good people, the Clinton's. I am glad that the Republican nominee is McCain and not a real conservative but none ther less I would vote any Republican nominated this year just to vote against this race baiting sexist, Obama. If Obama were elected the result would be that employers around this country would no longer believe that they need to promote the strongst or most qualified candidate when that candidate happens to be a woman.......just like this primary where we have nominated the lesser qualified candidate simply because the most qual;ified and most electable candidate happened to be a woman.

S.O.S. (Save Our Sister's rights)
Voting McCain 2008 and Hillary 2012
I have voted democrat only since 1973

Posted by: jodi | August 28, 2008 9:30 AM | Report abuse

1) Best post of the day @ 9:10am!!
2) for the few who say they will vote for mccain to 'punish' the democratic party, 4 years of mccain yadda yadda... whats to say that he wont win re-election and stay 8 years... sounds familiar...

Posted by: 1984 | August 28, 2008 9:30 AM | Report abuse

Thank you Ms. Helena Montana. And I mean that sincerely. At last, someone who sees things as they are.
Personally, I do not think Obama is perfect. Do I trust him? I don't know.
He will have to prove himself in office. What I do beleive is that the country cannot take (and I cannot take) any more of what the republican establishment has done. So I will vote for Obama, because atleast I will have given him a chance to prove himself.

Posted by: A Proud American | August 28, 2008 9:31 AM | Report abuse

I am not a US citizen, although i lived for several years in California. I was born and raised in Belgium and for the last 3 years have lived in Israel. As a resident of Israel i would have to lean to voting for Mc. Cain since the republican party will go out of their way to support Israel. However after living here for some years now i can say that what Israel, Europe and the world needs is a new wind in the White House. And i can honestly not believe that people that claim to be supporting the democratic party would even consider not to vote for Obama. I have many points of criticism on the Democratic system in the US, it must be on of the least democratic system among 'democratic' countries but that is anoother discussion.
what i wanted to say is that the world needs the leader of the US to be somebody that has the intellect and the understanding to stop the tidalwave. For many years there have been no real peace talks in Israel and the next war could be just around the corner so for me this is a bit personal. 4 more years is not something a lot of places in the world can afford. We need leadership in this world and somebody that can open dialogue. Not putting countries in the 'evil' group and then not talking to them. We need to talk to Iran and Pakistan and the muslim world in general. About Iraq we need to realize that this has been an artificial country ever since its independence, only a cruel regime could and can unite them. It was never and will never be a democratie. The reasonable solution is that we need an independent Kurdistan ( including parts of turkey and Iran) a seperate Shiite part ( and yes i know this would be a puppet for Iran or maybe just give it to Iran) the Sunni part can go to Syria. Everybody happy and the US can go home and do what it really should do. Use the money for the economy, the non-existing social system, education etc....
Yes, i know this will not happen with the democratic party either but it will for sure never happen with the republicans

Posted by: Other view | August 28, 2008 9:31 AM | Report abuse

to Lesley:

A bit about experience...

What major national/international accomplishments did Ronald Reagan accomplish BEFORE he was elected President?

What major national/international accomplishments did Bill Clinton accomplish BEFORE he was elected President?

On the other hand, Richard Nixon and George HW Bush were certainly two of the most "experienced" presidents before they became president.

Don Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney were two of the most "experienced" people in government but how have they managed the last 8 years?

We have a choice this year-more of the same or time for a change?

I have had enough "experience" with more of the same...lets experience a little change.

Posted by: JonathanR | August 28, 2008 9:31 AM | Report abuse

"Both Clintons went the extra mile and with class threw their full-hearted support behind Barack Obama. They put party and ideals above their personal feelings. Now let's see what Barack Obama does for them. Will he call off the African-Americans who falsely and unfairly branded the former President of the United States a racist? Will he personally dispel that lie? Will he support Hillary Clinton in her life-long quest to make sure that every American has full-access to quality, afforable, health care? The one thing that Barack Obama hasn't shown the women of the party who support Hillary Clinton is that they matter to him for anything but votes."


Amen. Perfectly stated. Obama's massive ego will surely prevent him from doing any of those things. It was never the Clinton's job to unite the party this year. It was Obama's as the nominee and he blew it by not selecting Hillary as VP. Obama doesn't support true, 100% universal healthcare either. It'll be the same old thing.

Posted by: Steve | August 28, 2008 9:31 AM | Report abuse

While you heap all this praise on Bill Clinton and condemn others keep in mind how he humiliated his wife. While she was running around the country telling everyone people were lying about her husband Bill was doing EXACTLY what they were saying he was doing. He made a complete fool out of Hillary.

Posted by: Keith | August 28, 2008 9:33 AM | Report abuse

It almost brings tears to my eyes to see all these Democrats saying that they're not sold on Obama. What is wrong with you people? How can you turn your back on your party just because Hilary didn't get the nomination? I was a Hilary supporter, but now I am an Obama supporter. I'm not going to sulk in self pity and anger and let the Republicans take advantage of this rift in our party. WAKE UP!!

Posted by: A Proud American | August 28, 2008 9:34 AM | Report abuse

to Deployed Service Member: I don't believe in Obama. Thus, I am not voting for him. Period. Thanks for the advice. I might write in Clinton, but I have to see how Florida counts such votes. Otherwise, I might just vote for Nader or the Green candidate. Not sure....

Posted by: Proud Puma | August 28, 2008 9:35 AM | Report abuse

Wow, that's a lot to read...

With the exception of the dedicated, hard-core supporters who would follow their candidate off a cliff, I think most of would agree that more information would at least be useful, if not necessary.

I need to see these guys debate some real issues. I am not interested in speeches to frenzied crowds of supporters. Most of what you get then is rhetoric. I want to hear their opinion on a variety of issues, and hear how they respond to criticisms of their position.

Maybe this is just the people I speak with, but it seems like most just don't know enough to make an informed decision. Even the ones who are leaning, are leaning because of less than stellar information...

Anyone else feel this way?

Posted by: Scott in Muncie | August 28, 2008 9:38 AM | Report abuse

If you really care about Hillary and Bill Clinton, you honor them by giving them something back, What they asked for is for Hillary supporters to give Obama a chance and your vote. Don't you think after all the Clintons have done for us it's the least we can do? honor their choice and trust their request? When you compare Obama to McCain on the issues, and seriously go do it if you haven't and are Democrat and truly believe in good Democratic values, you will see this is a no brainer. Obama was not my first choice, but he is the nominee now and will make a great President compared to McCain, no question. To all my fellow Hillary supporters let's help our fellow Democrat Barack Obama out and show our party we are true Democrats, let's show the Republicans they can't split us apart and let's show the world we can take back our country from the oppressors of the Republican dictatorship. The time is NOW.

Posted by: Democrats 08 | August 28, 2008 9:38 AM | Report abuse

John Armstrong: grow up. I am a black civil rights attorney, and I fight racism everyday. The frequent spewing of "racism" accusations by Obama supporters is becoming too much to bear. Many of these same morons would deny the existence of racism and believe that simply electing the Lord Obama proves that we have equal opportunity in our country. That to me is more disturbing than not voting for The One.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 9:38 AM | Report abuse

We should consider who between Obama and Mccain has the better judgement. I think that is obvious. Mccain criticized Bush for Iraq when it was going bad and supported the surge that has worked to bring evil under control. Good judgement.

Obama says that, even tho the surge has worked, he still would not support it. He is against success in Iraq. Secondly he remained in his church for 20 years. Honoring Louis Farrakhan did not cause him to leave the church. The pastors racist rants did not cause him to leave the church. Only when it became a political liability did he leave his church. TERRIBLE JUDGEMENT!!!

Posted by: Keith | August 28, 2008 9:39 AM | Report abuse

PeachPit, Obama made very clear his reasons for selecting Joe Biden as his running mate, and the overwhelming majority of people understand and agree with his choice. Even the conservative pundits have said that it was a strategically excellent move. You might do as Hillary Clinton suggested, and get over your obsession with HER. For any of her "supporters" to ignore her suggestion to support Obama, is to slap her in the face. This election is not about you, it's about us.

Posted by: Jerry | August 28, 2008 9:40 AM | Report abuse

Thank you "Democrat in Iraq" for your service to our country, and for your insightful words. God keep you safe! I am a working class white women who is an independent. And I agree with all the intelligient comments made concerning Clinton followers who would vote for McCain instead of Obama, and still call themselves democrats. I am so frustrated by their ignorance that I'm in a state of disbelief. They truly have to be republicans trying to sway the undecided's. Either that, or they won't vote for Obama because he is black, plain and simple. After all, Hilary Clinton did carry the ignorant vote and apparently still does.

Posted by: PBNLM | August 28, 2008 9:40 AM | Report abuse

McCain and Keating had become personal friends following their initial contacts in 1981.[8] Between 1982 and 1987, McCain had received $112,000 in political contributions from Keating and his associates.[14] In addition, McCain's wife Cindy McCain and her father Jim Hensley had invested $359,100 in a Keating shopping center in April 1986, a year before McCain met with the regulators. McCain, his family, and their baby-sitter had made nine trips at Keating's expense, sometimes aboard Keating's jet. Three of the trips were made during vacations to Keating's opulent Bahamas retreat at Cat Cay. McCain did not pay Keating (in the amount of $13,433) for some of the trips until years after they were taken, when he learned that Keating was in trouble over Lincoln.[6][15]


Posted by: Mark M | August 28, 2008 9:41 AM | Report abuse

Bill lied about getting a BJ and a wet cigar in office and got impeached.

George lied and his lie cost this country over 4000 brave souls and walks around with a smile on his face.

It seems to me that it should be the other way around.....no?

Posted by: Sumsonic | August 28, 2008 9:28 AM

It so funny how GW is in charge of everything and caused all of our problems. However, once a president leaves office is when his policies begin to take effect. Clinton did nothing during his term and look what happened when the next bunch took over. So all of his "wet cigar" policies got us to the point we are in now. Not GW lying. He just used the intelligence presented to him form the previous commander in chief, who in a known and documented liar. Just think what position we would be in if this information was given to Al Gore.

Clinton had nothing to do with the economy during his reign. That was the private sector, not the governemtn, that invested all of the money amd created jobs. All of that was lost before GW could take control.

Also thanks to Hillary for the mess we have in the health care industry. What did we get for our $4 billion investment with her?

I could care less who is the next "Party President". What we need is people serving this country to do what is needed and not address issues as party issues.

Posted by: Igningnokt | August 28, 2008 9:42 AM | Report abuse

McCain is an American! Thats why I would vote for him!

Obama is a bushman with a suit on! Go look at his family in africa and how they live, this man doesn't give a rats' ass about his family why should he care about americans?

McCain has faught for our country, he's not GW he's a POW! He will bring back the respect and dignity we have had, with Obama everybody world wide will laugh at us!

I would have voted for Hillary, based on the knowledge and experience she had the qualifications to be president, Obama wouldn't even qualify to be a secretary in the White House let alone a Commander in Chief!!

Give me a break!

Posted by: stan | August 28, 2008 9:42 AM | Report abuse

It is sad that PUMAs have abandoned their ideals in favor of idolatry. You have all elevated the scourge of the one issue voter to a new level.

Posted by: AE | August 28, 2008 9:44 AM | Report abuse

Democrats 08: I gave Clinton $$ and my primary vote. That's all she can get from me at the moment. I am NOT voting for Obama, just because Clinton said so. That would make me a cultist, something I despise.

Posted by: Proud Puma | August 28, 2008 9:45 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: John Armstrong | August 28, 2008 9:22 AM:
"Any democrat who votes for McCain should have their head examined. The only possible reason has to be latent racism."

I grew up believing that race does not matter, and the same applies here. I choose the candidate that I believe will serve the best interests of the country, not by the color of his or her skin. A democrat who embraces BHO because of the color of his skin is the racist.

Posted by: alFALfa | August 28, 2008 9:45 AM | Report abuse

Puma-- You are one of the desperate ones that is afraid of progress. You must be rich or religious fanatic to want more of the same. We Dems are really not that bad. give us a shot. After all, we are the future of tihs great nation.

Posted by: TruePatriot | August 28, 2008 9:48 AM | Report abuse

Wow - all of the unsubstantiated historical "truths" in these reponses proves to me that Republicans and Democrats have failed to provide any decent form of public education in this country for at least 80 years.

First, experience has rarely been a qualifier for the office of the President. Read your history books kids - we've had plenty of folks hold that Commmander in Chief title that weren't experienced or "qualified" - oh wait, the qualifications for President are at least 35 years of age and a natural born citizen. That's it - there ain't no other qualifications.

Second - "the Democrats have started just about all of this nation's wars" may possibly be the most hare-brained statement I've ever heard from a member of the McNation bourgeoisie. Until the War Powers act, virtually every conflict that America has engaged in has required the approval of Democrats and Republicans. And, even with the War Powers Act, still to this day, the Congress and President honor the spirit of jointly making decisions to screw this world up together - with Democrats and Republicans holding hands the whole way.

So, suck up the fact that we might actually have someone in the White House who is not the same rich old caucasian dude (check your history books kids, Republican or Democrat, they've all been male, white and with very few exceptions,much wealthier than the general population) - and deal with the fact that we are an electoral democracy and not a parlimentarian democracy; meaning that in the U.S., the majority wins - even if only by 1%. Hillary lost - hell of a race though.

And get some damn knowledge people. There's this thing, called the library - maybe even the internet could help. But at least make an attempt to search for a fact or two before publishing your "truth".

Posted by: Richard B | August 28, 2008 9:48 AM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton convinced me. I am now solidly behind Obama (as I was Kerry and Gore ... sigh). If only Hillary was VP instead of a talentless sentimental hack like Biden Obama would have a easy cruise to victory. With Biden albatross its going to be a tough close one.

Posted by: ppoads | August 28, 2008 9:48 AM | Report abuse

I find it funny that tons of people say x out of x democrats in my workplace/house/etc are voting for McCain... When it comes down to it... there is only 1 person in that booth in Nov who will ever really know who they voted for. Guess we will all find out in November... or better yet in 4-8 years who the right man said. All of the people who talk about experience this, experience that... a president is only as good as his cabinet. Obama doesn't know a lot about this that and the third.. that is where his cabinet comes in handy. That is just my two cents

Posted by: wow in NYC | August 28, 2008 9:48 AM | Report abuse

yea, bill is right, left the country to the republician and see...it go down the drain...
But then again, so many times we leave it to the democrates and it goes down the same drain too...
time for someone that is not from the 2 parties that both sucks.

Posted by: andy | August 28, 2008 9:48 AM | Report abuse

Aren't pumas an endangered species?

We all know the Republicans' track record when it comes to endangered species.

Posted by: martooni | August 28, 2008 9:48 AM | Report abuse

Lesley smells like a GOP guppy. Nice try Lesley

Posted by: TruePatriot | August 28, 2008 9:49 AM | Report abuse

"We should lead by the power of our example, not by example of our power".

Exactly. This historical election year has finally taught me why I (an unabashed European) have never believed in the "American Dream".

For me, it was reduced to a paper tiger on the 5th of April 1968, when news of the assassination of this great American leader, Dr. Martin Luther King, reached the European continent.

How could a nation sink so low to have a Nobel Peace Prize winner, who did nothing but organize non-violent protest, be assassinated ?

This year, the American Dream might return to be a reality - even for those not living inside the confines of the United States of America.

Go, Barack, go, Joe ! Bring it on !

Posted by: Toon Moene | August 28, 2008 9:50 AM | Report abuse

Bill's speech was fantastic. What more could anyone ask? The whole speech was filled with praise for Obama and the many reasons he was supporting him. His support was 10 times stronger
than Hillary

Posted by: Stuart Lerner | August 28, 2008 9:50 AM | Report abuse

By the time JFK ran for president, he had been in a major war commanding pt boats, he served 6 years as a representative in Congress and 7 years as a Senator. He was a member of a very influencial family who traveled extensively and knew and had met the leaders of the world.

And you're comparing him to whom? This man you support is being called inexperienced because he IS totally devoid of experience...JFK and Clinton had extensive service prior to running for President of the US. Obama was running for president after two years in the Senate, the seat he won by running against Allan Keyes, a real joke. He did nothing in the Senate but brown nose people like Kennedy and Pelosi to get them to support him to take the black vote from Senator Clinton because she was too moderate and they didn't want to carry on with Bill Clinton's legacy as the only successful Dem president in decades. Now tell me again what it is about this man that makes him qualified to be president of the US....a community organizer? Please. He shouldn't even be allowed in the same room with Bill Clinton.

=======

+1 on that. I am so tired of the Kennedy/Obama comparisons. It's ridiculous. Take some time to learn more about Kennedy's political career before his presidency as well his military service and you will quickly see that there is no comparison.

Bill's speech was awesome. He certainly did not disappoint. However, I cannot help but think that Bill and Hillary were there mainly to lay the ground work for 2012.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 9:50 AM | Report abuse

As expected, some posters here have expressed reservations about supporting Obama do to a perceived lack of "experience." Understandably they have a legitimate concern. I would ask them all to look at the alternative. John McCain has flip-flopped on just about every major policy position. I challenge all of you to do your research. I expect that some of you will not vote for Obama because his skin is dark. Then don't complain here, just vote for McCain. And when you do, don't complain when we will not only lose our place in the world, your children will have to go to war because he will institute the draft. Don't complain when his policies will continue to send more jobs overseas. Don't complain when Americans can no longer travel anywhere because of the targets printed on our backs. Don't complain when your teenage daughter won't be able to get that needed abortion in America, but will have to go to Mexico to get it instead.

Please pay attention to the real issues, not to color of his skin. That is at the crux of why most of you whiners won't vote for Obama. Then you get what you pay for with McCain. I know that you expect Obama to be perfect in every respect. It is because of his lack of Washington "experience" that make him attractive as a candidate. To some of you, a Columbia and Harvard Law graduate education, law professor, community organizer, state senator, then finally US senator is not enough experience. I guess a black man can never have enough experience for most of you. Don't complain here, just vote for McCain. I have no desire to convince you, because you can't be convinced.

And finally, to you PUMA's. Whatever dudes. You are in it for yourselves. Getting attention at the expense of Hillary Clinton. It is obvious to anyone that listens that it is about the hurt feelings generated from a heated campaign. They will vote against their own rational interest and put a senile old man as president. One who consistently voted against women's issues. It Post-Rational (thanks Rachel Maddows).

Posted by: B Wilson | August 28, 2008 9:50 AM | Report abuse

the 40 million americans that have been murdered by abortion are probably hoping McCain gets into the white house, for the sake of the 40 million + that will probably be aborted in the future. How can you have dignity and respect for every human being when you murder your own child? I can attest to it - I have had abortions - My vote is straight pro-life this time around. Maybe when we give EVERY human being respect, we can move on to some real changes in this country. Vote for Life! If you want peace, pray for justice!

Posted by: dixie | August 28, 2008 9:51 AM | Report abuse

McCain and Keating had become personal friends following their initial contacts in 1981.[8] Between 1982 and 1987, McCain had received $112,000 in political contributions from Keating and his associates

1982 and 1987. You are aware that this in 2008. Barack Obama had dealings with Tony Rezko THREE YEARS AGO.

If you care what Mccain did 2 decades ago dont you care what Obama was doing just THREE YEARS AGO????????

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 9:52 AM | Report abuse


Yes, Bill Clinton made the best case for Obama that anyone has or will make.

The fact that Obama can't make it himself is why he is trailing in the polls, not Hillary supporters, racism, or the excuse du jour. When is Obama or his supporters going to take responsibility for the fact that he is blowing this election?

Convince people tonight you a) have rubber, and b) that it will hit the road, or continue to be McCain's best argument.

Posted by: Chicago1 | August 28, 2008 9:53 AM | Report abuse

I don't know why the Clinton's, especially Bill, thought they had to grovel to that bunch of misfits. Nothing they said will change this Hillary supporter's leap of faith to McCain. Actually I have already contributed to McCain's campaign...TWICE! Long live the PUMAs.

Posted by: Honest Abe | August 28, 2008 9:53 AM | Report abuse

Well its a good thing MC Cain is not the president right now or he would have us in 2 wars. 1 In Iran the other in Russia he is an old fool who thinks the best way is to Bomb Bomb Bomb. He don't give a hoot cause his life is a few years away from dying a old man so its not going to affect him what happens in the feature with high prices. He want be here to have to deal with it. I cant imagine what will happen with his quick thinking of Bomb Bomb Bomb when he is in office. This man had rather go to war than try to talk to people. I have always said why don't the USA come off its high horse and talk to the other nations like Iran. Make friends with them and then they don't have any reason to harbor terrorist. But keep on this don't talk trail and this never ends till they get the nukes and then there is world war 3. Funny Bush was against talking to them till Obama said he would and now all of a sudden we are talking to them. I guess he is setting Obama course for McCain so he can get all the glory for it if he wins.

Posted by: kenny | August 28, 2008 9:54 AM | Report abuse

I just saw pictures of the Greek temple being built for The One We've Been Waiting For's message to the Citizens of the World tonight and I can't stop laughing.

All Hail Barackus Husseinus Obamamus, Emperor Selfus Importantus!!


Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 9:55 AM | Report abuse

Amazing that Barak all the sudden got this experience and ability to fill the job as president in the two short months that Biden and Clinton said the opposite.

Posted by: big lib | August 28, 2008 9:55 AM | Report abuse

proud puma, your punishing youself, your daughters, your friends daughters and future daughters. Its big trouble for womens rights if we have a McSame president. You need to think about the ramifications of another conservative president.

Posted by: PROobama | August 28, 2008 9:55 AM | Report abuse

Kennedy commentators - besides sharing all of the "experience" possessed by John F. Kennedy; you may also want to cite the well documented academic and governmental records that clearly show that JFK was one of the most ineffectual (and most frequently absent) members of both the House and Senate - in US history.

While I personally think melodramatic comparisions between JFK and Obama are unnecessary - again, try to get some knowledge before suggesting that JFK was way more experienced then he actually was.

And, military experience hasn't necessarily been a guarantee of in-office-success for many of our Presidents.

Posted by: Richard B | August 28, 2008 9:56 AM | Report abuse

Mrs Pheonix-- A true racist that does not deserve to be an American. I hope someday you realize the error of your ways. In the mean time, get the hell out of this country and don't come back. You are not wanted here.

Posted by: TruePatriot | August 28, 2008 9:57 AM | Report abuse

McCain's campaign so far has been childish (celebrities! tire gauges!), negative, gimmicky (no summer gas tax!), flip-flopping (offshore drilling), embarrassing (how many houses?) and full of false claims (http://www.factcheck.org/).

Obama's campaign has been optmistic, positive, direct, clear about policies, and clear about his goals and methods to fix the economy and end the Iraq folly.

The next President is going to be faced with new challenges, and his character and convictions will determine how he reacts to them. Candidates go through campaigns so we can judge their character and convictions through all the daily decisions of the campaign. It's a public, day-to-day demonstration of how they would govern--without the real consequences of being in office.

McCain was willing to hand over his integrity and "straight talk" immediately to the same old Rove-style Republican nasty machine. Obama has reacted quickly and decisively to the smears, but he has also kept his campaign forward-looking, honest, well-organized and level-headed, the qualities I want in a President.

You can vote for an experienced but peevish, sometimes befuddled old man who's aligning himself more closely every day with the Republicans who have been so destructive to America. Or you can vote for a less experienced but determined, intelligent, possibly visionary candidate whose ambition is as much for America as for himself.

The primaries are over. This should be an election about policies and character--and yes, about the party system that has so much to do with how effective a President can be in office. A Democratic president--any Democratic president--will bring the party's policies to appointments from Supreme Court justices to countless less visible government jobs.

Obama is not the perfect potential president. No one is. But from what we've all seen so far--from comparative records in the Senate (which provides more data on McCain, and little of it encouraging) to the tone of each campaign here and now--Obama is the better choice.

Posted by: Thoughtful 1 | August 28, 2008 9:58 AM | Report abuse

Vote for McCain and that counts for your Bush Vote for 4 more years of what.

Vote for a Change Not for the Same

Posted by: Frank New York | August 28, 2008 9:58 AM | Report abuse

I think that the 40 million that will die in the future pales in comparison to the billions that would die in a nuclear war with McWar

Posted by: 40 million | August 28, 2008 9:58 AM | Report abuse

"You go Bill" Always good to see the Washington post supporting their candidate.
Health care... so who is going to pay for the 45 million uninsured? What's the avarage monthy rate per person... $500 - so how about every working family adopt a lazy arse moron that sits on welfare has 20 children and cries because they just can't seem to get enough free stuff while they sip their beer, smoke their cigs and talk to their local drug dealer on thier I phone.
Heard it, wasn't impressed. It's like taking sip of coffee and every 3rd or 4th sip is mud. After a while, you don't care about the coffee anymore because you don't know if your next sip is coffee or more mud. Bill is a liar, and he brags about it and some people appear to be completely oblivous to it.
As far as disabled Vets go - that was your choice - you signed up for it with all the risks involved so don't try that self pitty crap for electing a president to lead. There's plenty of other disabled vets that live with their choice to serve and protect and even go to war.
There's Dim and there's Dumb... The Democrates are looking more Dumb than Dem.

Posted by: Yimir | August 28, 2008 9:59 AM | Report abuse

Grovie writes:

"And since when is it the governments job to fix the economy. Have you ever heard of cycles? Socialism has been proven not to work. Does anyone get that?"


Then why did Bush bail out, with a loan guarantee, the Bear Sterns deal ?

McCain "doesn't get" the economy, in fact he said so. And that's probably why he'll lose.

You don't know much about politics do you Grovie ? Try going out on the campaign trail and telling voters that their government should play no role in the economy and that their economic pain is just a cycle.

You sound like Phil "whiner" Gramm.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 9:59 AM | Report abuse

Age does not automatically equal wisdom

Posted by: KR in DC | August 28, 2008 1:35 AM


Actually, IT DOES!

Posted by: Surely | August 28, 2008 10:00 AM | Report abuse

Aside from the obvious cultural significance of an Obama presidency, what makes the man such a revolutionary? His policy stances are familiar, albeit far more rhetorical than defined by a firm legislative record given limited time in office.

His resonance among much of the base, especially the donor block, derives from: 1) superficial appeal, running mate Joe Biden crassly articulated the sentiment while still a presidential hopeful. And 2) a 2004 DNC speech where he held African Americans suffering hardship accountable (sort of) for certain aspects their lives. This was the speech in which he differentiated himself from the post civil rights movement "black leadership".

Obama is an instrument of cultural change. Discerning would be voters that have a stake in a broad range of economic and social issues are unsure that he is anything more. To many dyed in blue democrats, he represents a final reproach between whites and blacks. To certain members of the democratic elite he is a vehicle of self forgiveness. The problem is that the majority of the electorate that sided with Hillary doesn't share the same guilt trip. So these folks may vote for Obama, but only if he moves away from the "distraction via guns and religion" comments and toward the steel belt populism Hillary was able to co-opt during her run.


Posted by: buying change | August 28, 2008 10:01 AM | Report abuse

I dont know why anyone supports Obama. They have nothing to base it on. He has done nothing in the Senate. So the only thing I can think of for why he gets support is his speeches in which he makes promises.

So he makes promises. Anyone can do that. But the record indicates Obama breaks his promises. He promised to fillibuster FISA then helped pass it into law. While he was giving an anti NAFTA speech to unions one of his aides was off to the side saying it was all rhetorec and that he didnt really mean it. So go ahead and vote for Obama because he promises things he never delivers on.

Posted by: keith | August 28, 2008 10:02 AM | Report abuse

I thought the Clintons did a great job endorsing Obama. If there are those in the party who are still not convinced, they never had any intention of voting for Obama.

I really hope the whole PUMA thing is being blown out of proportion, as far as the numbers of members are concerned. I heard a piece on NPR about these people, one woman was quoted as saying "PUMA is the most important movement in the last 50 years". Laughable. And their so-called group leader went on the record to say that there is nothing Hillary or Bill could say to convince him to vote Obama. These people are absolute children. This is just my opinion, but I find this group absolutely disgusting on several levels. If Hillary was treated unfairly, it was by the media. Last I heard, Obama has no control over them. It is my assertion that the PUMA people are nothing short of hateful bigots, who are attempting to mask their blatant racism with some false cause. These, absolutely, are the worst type of people.
Spoiled infants...


Posted by: Jae | August 28, 2008 10:02 AM | Report abuse

I totally agree with Proud Puma. I just can't wait until McCain appoint somebody to the high court that will finally overturn Roe v. Wade. Yay!

Posted by: PUMA for McCain | August 28, 2008 10:04 AM | Report abuse

I supported Hillary in the primaries. I had misgivings and reservations about Obama, and they have not disappeared since he won the nomination. This isn't some stubborn "sore loser" stance. I honestly don't believe that Obama is qualified to be President.

His inexperience, long-term relationships with questionable individuals, and his silence in the face of the media's sexist attacks against Hillary prevent me from supporting him. Moreover, his policy reversals over the past couple of months tell me he is untrustworthy and has little integrity.

Yes, I agree with Obama more on the issues than McCain, but I don't think Obama can deliver. Please, don't call me a Republican, because I'm going to vote Democratic down the ticket in November.

Believe me, I would love to support Obama. As someone who is half-black, I nevertheless admire Obama deeply for where he has gotten. But that doesn't change his unpreparedness for the highest office in the land. And at the end of the day, I need to vote for the candidate who I think is best to lead this country. So while people throw epithets of "racist" and "Republican" at me, I can rest easy at night.

Posted by: Taj | August 28, 2008 10:04 AM | Report abuse

There will be tons of GOP defectors to balance out the pumas. The only difference between us and the dems are that we are smart enough to not publically show our dissatisfaction with the primaries. But rest assured, those of us shamed by the last 8 years will vote for OB... without drawing attention to ourselves. And by the way, I am willing to bet that if enough foolish people elect McCain... it wont be 4 more years of McSame... but 8 more years.. so no hillary period. Then you will have proven your point right PUMA? I am in Upper class (not to brag, just proving a point)... regardless of who wins, I will be fine financially. My family will have top-notch health care and schooling... its the bottom 75% of the country that will suffer.

Posted by: GOP for OHB | August 28, 2008 10:04 AM | Report abuse

Mrs Phoenix,
The US presidental elections are not about Kenya,do not insult Kenyans on account of your country's elections.We are pround of our primitive country,our "unmodern" toilets and our huts. We are a developing democracy and we do not need Obama to help us modernise our democracy.
We are keenly watching the elections not because of Obama, but because of the pain GOP has caused the world by war mongering and not really solving the terrorism threat. We need a change and we believe it will come from democrats whether Clinton or Obama we don't care !

The Clintons gave Obama affirmative action even after he called them racist and called Hillary a ho.

Obama's perfect job would be in his native land Kynia. Go civilize and help bring his native country into a first world democracy. Obama go and at least build a house for your grandmother, give her a modern toilet and toilet tissue. She lives in a hut.

Posted by: Mrs. Phoenix | August 28, 2008 2:10 AM

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

Posted by: Magoiya , Nairobi Kenya | August 28, 2008 10:05 AM | Report abuse

Obama has reacted quickly and decisively to the smears, but he has also kept his campaign forward-looking, honest, well-organized and level-headed, the qualities I want in a President.


Obama cries like a baby when his wife is criticized then authorizes attack ads against Cindy Mccain in Florida. He is too big of a baby to lead anything. Certainly not the free world.

Posted by: keith | August 28, 2008 10:06 AM | Report abuse

Can Obama have passed over Hillary as VP for any reason other than he isn't strong enough to deal with the Clintons? If he doesn't think he's going to able to work with them during his presidency...is he strong enough to deal with others who oppose him, his party, and America?

My own assessment is that Obama squandered a slam dunk opportunity to return Democrats to power with an Obama/Clinton ticket just so he wouldn't feel threatened or risk being upstaged. If McCain wins, Barack's own vanity will likely be a big part of the cause.

Posted by: OpportunitySquandered | August 28, 2008 10:06 AM | Report abuse

Change is what America needs. Change is what my Mother and Sister needs and all other hard working Americans need. We need someone who will unite America like Obama will - Not push it apart like McCain. Obama will bring America together, he already has and that is experience, THAT is already progress. What has McCain done other than look old, tired, and close minded. McCain will be a replica of a President which tore apart our nation and preyed on young men and women and the citizens of our own homeland for monetary benefit. A fresh new approach is what we all need! Change is what we need. Do we honestly think that McCain will be a person to look after the interests of all Americans and all of it's diverseness, cultures, colors and races? A screaming NO! Obama would! Age does not equal wisdom. This tired old, John McCain, might tell some good stories and read from his well scripted speeches accurately, but he won't unite Whites, Blacks, Mexicans, Asians and all the other important cultures that make the United States who we are. A brilliant mind like Obama is the way to go, hands down. An open mind like Obama is the way to go. An intelligent person, hands down, Obama has my vote. Honestly, could McCain do what Obama does, with such charisma and esteem? McCain reads a script, Obama has the mojo.

I am white. I am gay. I am an American abroad. I left the USA due to lack of opportunities, my city's economy fell to pieces during the ruling of Bush. I have a mixed Sister (African American / Caucasian) I am a proud American. No one can deny that Bush has ripped apart the progress we have made as a nation, as United Americans of the United States, and John McCain will continue the process Bush's Daddy started and Bush Jr continued. I feel and experience the problems Bush has caused, there is disgrace which lingers around being American. I have grown to not mention I'm American unless I'm asked, Obama would make me proud again. Bush has disgraced us all. Bush is a disgrace to himself, his family, his country - everyone.

A true American would vote for Obama. Everyone else needs to swim back to a third world country, because if we don't vote for Obama, a third world country is what the USA will eventually become. Think about Katrina? People jumping from the world trade center buildings. If the USA had the world respect, would people be more likely to threaten our great land and people? I believe, that Obama would improve our international crisis and global respect and bring us back to a ranking #1 country, rather than a chaotic slum like republicans are mindlessly supporting. Billions of dollars being spent to put men and women in danger, Dads, Moms, Sisters, Brothers... If just one billion dollars was spent on healthcare, or education, or providing food to single parents families, or eldery, our America would benefit beyond doubt. Gosh people, think... I hope Obama has the honor to fix our country and help our people. I hope that McCain isn't allowed to hurt our people and our country and others, like Bush has.

Posted by: American Abroad - MrDeming | August 28, 2008 10:07 AM | Report abuse

While I am no psychologist, I am amazed how a species ostenstiously so advanced can be rendered so feeble when passion eclipses reason. How can anyone not have experience? If you are commenting on the quality of experience then say so but that requires something more than parroting a campaign's talking point.

Barack has the experience of loving a country that historically has called people like him monkeys, goons, and other assorted animals that run about here and there.

Obama has the experience of loving a country that has watched people like him twist under grand old trees for sport.

Obama has the experience of excelling at schools that probably wouldn't allow him to even come inside the gates when the house in which I sit was built.

Despite this, Obama is willing to risk his life every day to bring the ideal of America one step closer to the reality of America, a task made so much more difficult by the real monkey who has had his hands in the cookie jar for 8 years too long.

No experience? Sure, no admiral for a dad who can get him into schools he didn't deserve and planes he probably should have washed instead of flew. No experience of dumping an old wife for a cover gal.

Choose your experience. The only man without experience is a man never born.

Finally, as O said recently, the country owes many soldiers, alive and dead, very much for the suffering and indeed torture they endured and are enduring today thanks to W's wargasm.

But if there is one thing that experience should teach us is a vote must be earned.

Posted by: Reginald Avery Wilkins, Ph.D. | August 28, 2008 10:09 AM | Report abuse

PUMA devotees - if you truly believe that a parliamentarian type "coalition" should have been required of the Democratic party and Obama - consider relocating to Pakistan - where they have a Parliament, and dozens of parties. We have a two party system; Hillary lost (and graciously) - time to hang up your egoes. Oh wait, I'm sure that you PUMAs are the same people that still ride around with Confederate flags in you truck windows - forgetting that the South didn't win either.

Posted by: Richard B | August 28, 2008 10:09 AM | Report abuse

Ummm. I am in no way ignorant, I just refuse to let people like you bully me into casting my vote for someone simply because they are democrat. I vote based on the candidate and so far, most things that Obama has stood for are things I simply cannot bring myself to agree with. Plus, I am not impressed with his "The One" slogan. The one what? I fully expect him to come out with a crown and cape exclaiming "bring me a Christian!" during his acceptance speech. Don't you all think it is just a bit much? Are we electing an empire or a president?

Posted by: Dee | August 28, 2008 10:10 AM | Report abuse

"Can Obama have passed over Hillary as VP for any reason other than he isn't strong enough to deal with the Clintons? If he doesn't think he's going to able to work with them during his presidency...is he strong enough to deal with others who oppose him, his party, and America?"

Obama beat Hillary well and truly. He clearly made the point that he IS strong enough. He made a well thought decision, nothing less. Choosing Hillary or not isn't a question which implies Obama's weakness... What an ignorant evaluation.

Posted by: Mr Deming | August 28, 2008 10:12 AM | Report abuse

This election is bigger than America. Here across the pond and throughout the world we are looking for change. Will Obama be a bad president? perhaps? Will he be a great president? Perhaps? But we wont know unless we give him a shot. Overwhelming abroad, Obama is favored. But then again, we are talking about a country that voted for a horrid leader twice, so the world is a bit resilient in putting its faith in the American people. What you do not only affects you and your family, but the entire planet. Just remember... when America sneezes, the whole world catches a cold.

Posted by: Ben from the UK | August 28, 2008 10:12 AM | Report abuse

I don't understand why a marginal amount of people who voted and supported Hilary would be voting for McCain come November. How exactly is that the same? Are their policies the same? No. Are their ideals on the war in Iraq the same (There's still a war in Iraq P.U.M.A)? No. Health Care? No. Economy? No.

To me, it seems like P.U.M.A is an organization filled with sore losers whom would rather throw a petty & childish tantrum than vote using something every American should vote with....Their logic!

Posted by: Wikipedia voting record guy | August 28, 2008 10:13 AM | Report abuse

my question to the PUMAs is this:
How well did you know Bill or Hillary before he ran for president?

Posted by: Penny | August 28, 2008 10:13 AM | Report abuse

Why are so many of The Chosen One's supporters obsessing about the PUMA's? I distinctly remember them saying earlier in the campaign that Hillary's voters were inconsequential. Could it be The Messiah's dropping poll numbers? Hmmm!

Posted by: Truthful | August 28, 2008 10:14 AM | Report abuse

Would a major newspaper dare employ a black writer who does not support Obama? Or, even better, does one exist?

With BHO getting 98% of the black vote, sorry but I can't take you seriously as I don't think you have it in you to look past the color of his, and your, skin.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 10:17 AM | Report abuse

All this is just laughable. These rightwing nutjobs posing as pumas and the like are absolutely Sh*tting themselves. It is truley amazing how afraid of change they are. Hey nutjobs, no reason to fear the inevitable! Change means progress. progress means growth. and growth is good.

Posted by: TruePatriot | August 28, 2008 10:18 AM | Report abuse

JOEDRC & others,

It's okay that Obama hasn't yet proven to you that you should vote for him, as long as you are still willing to listen. You sound like someone who is not steeped in emotions but, rather, in rational thought. So, let Obama earn your vote. That’s the way it SHOULD be. The dialogue about his worthiness and readiness will take two roads: 1) A truthful filling-in-the-gaps because honest voters deserve honest dialogue about why Obama should be the next President, and 2) The ad-hominem attacks that are wholly dishonest and demeaning about the character of a man some don't care to get to know. The right will raise seemingly legitimate questions but will craft duplicitous answers to manipulate the masses. You'll have a chance to make a decision of quality for sure. For me, the methodology speaks volumes about the kind of person I want to lead this country--Rational dialogue vs. Smear and smoke & mirrors.

Anybody with a legitimate case can have a rational conversation about their case. McCain endorses using Paris, Britney, and offensive Moses-Messiah reference to bring Obama down.

Good for you and others like you that you are, indeed, listening. Make them both work (honestly) for your vote. Then, we'll get the person we need to represent America's vital interests at home and abroad.

(As if, for example, having people from Germany, France, and Great Britain cheer on an American, Barack Obama, and wave American flags is a bad thing… Should we want people to boo an American President and burn American flags? We need deserve some rational dialogue.)

Posted by: John | August 28, 2008 10:18 AM | Report abuse

True Patriot - I have been voting Dem since I turned 18. In my first primary, I voted for Jesse Jackson! I have gone on to vote for every losing Democratic candidate for President -- and the one winner, Bill Clinton. I have also voted for the candidate, even when it wasn't the one I initially wanted. For example, I voted for Dukakis even though I had supported Jesse Jackson. I voted for Kerry, even though I supported Dean. I voted for Gore, even though I supported Bradley. I have a lot of experience voting. I do not like what the Saint Obama movement stands for. Some people are unable to separate him from the party. I am. He has not earned my vote, and I cannot see how he will.

PS: I am not a republican. I am not a racist. I am not a self-loathing black man. I am not a millionaire (although I am fortunate in economic terms). I care about international relations, peace, economic development, and civil rights. I do not believe Obama will champion these things. The Democrats, perhaps, but not Obama. Thus, I will vote for Dems in congressional and state races.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 10:20 AM | Report abuse

Igningnokt, you might want to brush up on some reading about where GW got his intelligence, from whom and how he used it. Clinton is not absolved in regard to Al-Qaida, but then Al-Qaida was never in Iraq or supported by Iraq.

As for government involvement in the economy, many of the conveniences we have today is exactly because OF OUR GOVERNMENT involvement and investment many years in advance. It comes through the form of grants to universities and private firms. It’s mine and yours tax money that makes it possible. The engine (internet) that fueled the economy in the 90's was originally developed under the ARPA project (established by the US GOVERNMENT) in the early 60's. Hell, DNS wasn’t even privatized until the end of the 90’s. The jet engines that power today’s aircraft were developed under government projects. Nuclear power…..developed under government projects. The list goes on.

I’m not a Democrat or a Republican, but the amount of money we have wasted in Iraq is staggering. The type of money that should have been used for alternative energy, infrastructure and future sciences that will make our children’s lives better. That is not the failure of Clinton. That is a failure of a small minded person in the White House and an administration that is pandering to short term elitists that run certain huge corporations (who are worried about short term stock performance). This is a person who does not convey any intellectual curiosity and has spent 30%+ on vacation in the past 7 ½ years.

So, if I had a choice again between a wet cigar smoker and a religious nutcase. I’m sorry, I’ll take the wet cigar smoker…….at least he had the judgment to attack the right country (Serbia) and protect people from genocide (Bosnia).

Posted by: Sumsonic | August 28, 2008 10:20 AM | Report abuse

Lookat what ismost important to you; i.e.- anti-abortion, promarriage man/woman, christian expression freedom,gun ownership.
Thus I will vote Republican because the Democratic Party platformisopposedtoeach of the above

V/r
Dr Joe

Posted by: Dr Joe | August 28, 2008 10:20 AM | Report abuse

"With BHO getting 98% of the black vote, sorry but I can't take you seriously as I don't think you have it in you to look past the color of his, and your, skin." - Anonymous @ 10:17

Interesting. When 98% of white people vote for the white candidate - that's only because he's qualified, right?

Posted by: Richard B | August 28, 2008 10:20 AM | Report abuse

I was delighted with the speeches from both Clintons, and Joe Biden's speech gave us a good feel for what his values are. But the most telling speech came from John Kerry.

Being POTUS isn't about what you have done, it is about who you know. Obama is clearly not the Clinton's dog. John Edwards made a bold move by not accepting PAC money. Obama did not follow suit, but he did prove by collecting unprecedented sums of campaign dollars that he can work the system without becoming anybody's dog. Back to John Kerry's observation, the one comparing Senator McCain to Candidate McCain. We may not know who's dog McCain is, but its not John McCain's values that are running for President in the Republican party.

The state of our economy and security is a direct result of President Bush's associations with people who value their own personal financial situation over that of the country. Barack Obama has shaped the Democratic convention to show that he understands that each of our destinies are tied to the one destiny of all of us. Honor comes from giving, not from owning. I'm glad that the Clinton's are hanging out with somebody who wants to give, and even more importantly, somebody who wants to help each of us contribute toward a destiny with honor.

Posted by: Kurt | August 28, 2008 10:21 AM | Report abuse

When we went to war with Iraq - there wasn't a big movement for peace, infact the people I see in my neighborhood crying for peace were the same ones watching the CNN news at the bar as the US invaded Iraq - and they were boasting about how great our military was. Now they cry it's Bush's war. American's wanted vengance for 9-11 but they wanted it fast just like everything else they want. Fast food, fast service everything has to be done right now - so the war drags on and the spoiled little brats want it to end so they can do something else. So lets elect Mr O and see what he does, cause he's new - like the Wii or new video game - everything gets old to americans - gotta have something new.

Posted by: Yimir | August 28, 2008 10:21 AM | Report abuse

YOU SAID IT ALL! Democrat in Iraq

Posted by: Izak | August 28, 2008 10:21 AM | Report abuse

If you're voting for McCain you're a republican. The majority of the "proud pumas" are not and never were democrats- they've voted republican all along and are just running in circles and shouting ... don't fall into the trap of looking at the left hand when it's the right hand that's trying to play a trick on you.

Bill & Hillary aren't leading these people and obviously never had their respect- it's just noise. Don't fall for it. Get out the vote and vote.

Posted by: Larry | August 28, 2008 10:22 AM | Report abuse

"... take it back so that the peaceful, prosperous nation he left George W. Bush can return."

WTC attacks in '93? USS Cole? Embassy attacks in Aftrica? And the list goes on and on. Your hero Bill Clinton was too concerned about getting his willy wet and redistributing the nation's wealth to even care about the proliferation of extremists.

We are living with this problem today, that festered under his watch.

Capehart - you're a hack.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 10:23 AM | Report abuse

I want to tell the Puma's and other 'sour grape' Clinton holdouts...... to please stop and think what 4 more years of McCain/Bush will be like for our country and the world. The past 8 years have done so much damage, in so many areas, it will take much time, and hard work to restore our country's health and respect. We can't afford to wait to start this restorative process. Please think about what our country needs to begin this huge repair job: what seriously concerns me, that I don't hear much about - so many people (esp. newly interested young folks) have become seriously interested & involved in our country's well being - if the Democrats lose this election - I fear they will say 'what's the use'? 'why bother'? - we had this rare, once every generation chance in history, to start anew, to get a fresh start, to restore America's respect and guidance in this world, and we blew it! May as well go back to our own little lives, and leave it all to the corrupt politicians - the George Bushs, Karl Roves, Dick Cheney's, Tom DeLays - if Obama doesn't win - it will be the fault of the hate-mongers, sour grapes-ers, and trouble-stirring media......America will have missed it's chance, and our country will continue its decline.....so sad.

Posted by: hattie | August 28, 2008 10:24 AM | Report abuse

WOW! I'm so "compelled" by Bill's partisan overtures I can't control myself and I MUST vote for Obama.

The Clintons & Biden all strongly believed and verbalized their lack of confidence in Obama. The media just doesn't get it. This election belongs to us independents. The one thing we CAN'T stand is hypocritical knee-jerk partisan compulsions.

Posted by: Dr. Dave | August 28, 2008 10:25 AM | Report abuse

PUMA = Privately Unabashed McCain A*Kisser

Posted by: stan | August 28, 2008 10:25 AM | Report abuse

Oh Lesley

Barack Obama has dedicated his entire adult life to public service. If you are more than a McSame troll, open your mind and read up on what he has done.

Ronald Reagan was an actor.

Bush was a poor businessman and a political wheeler-dealer who played the Christian Right to his advantage.

Jimmy Carter was a nuclear engineer and a peanut farmer.

Bubba was a lawyer and an activist.

BARACK OBAMA is a gifted leader and a really smart guy. Why are we so afraid of that. 2 million and more people just like me are bankrolling this campaign because we care about this country, which we love like no other ever.

WHY THE FEAR??

Because Karl Rove is a Fear Farmer. And a damn good one, Turdblossom.

Posted by: Bud | August 28, 2008 10:26 AM | Report abuse

TO MIKE WHO POSTED ON 8/28/08 ASKING FOR SOMEONE TO GIVE ONE GOOD REASON OBAMA COULDN'T DO THE JOB AS WELL AS MCCAIN. ANSWER: THT'S ABOVE MY PAY GRADE! WHEN A SENATOR STATES THAT HE IS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENCY OF THESE UNITED STATES AND IS ASKED A QUESTION AND HIS RESPONSE IS THAT'S
ABOVE MY PAY GRADE IS SCARY

Posted by: LAURIE PERRY | August 28, 2008 10:27 AM | Report abuse

Bill rumbled against McCain/Bush last night. He came through for Obama/Biden Bigtime. A great speech! Harlem going to fall in love with him again! Not right away, but they will. I guest we can start calling Bill Clinton and Barack Obama friends again and their bond will strengthen with all the attack ads being thrown at the voters! Everytime I see one of those attack ads it reminds me that McCain needs to be sent back to all of his seven houses and not the White House.

Posted by: Yeil | August 28, 2008 10:28 AM | Report abuse

Some people just do not belong in the USA or apart of any other free world. Those of you taking ridiculous jabs at Democrats, The Clintons, and Obama are in ways taking jabs at are what we Americans fought to obtain for decades.

We American people need someone as a role model like Obama. Not a grouchy old man to carry on wars and put burdens on us. What about our best interest? McCain for the best interest of Americans? Pfft! I wouldn't believe that for a moment.

Honestly, McCain looks like the grouchy old man who complains about his coffee being too hot or too cold, demanding to speak to a manager, and holding up a line at McDonalds. Obama would be the guy saying "get over it" and "can we think about the other people in line who haven't been served?"

Posted by: Mr Deming | August 28, 2008 10:28 AM | Report abuse

Richard B: "Interesting. When 98% of white people vote for the white candidate - that's only because he's qualified, right?"

Sorry, pal, that's never happened in history. Just be honest about this discussion. A good percentage of blacks are voting for BHO because he is black. Period. That makes them racist. Period.

And, yes, I'm sure there are whites not voting for BHO because he's black. They are also racist.

But look at the numbers. 98% of white people aren't voting for McCain. Sorry, Richard, racism comes in all colors. BHO has a penchant for attracting more of them.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

kenny - they got the idea of columns from the virginia republican convention, and prob the pics of mccain posing in front of a greek column - to suggest DC - which is full of columns. i wouldn't be surprised if there were more columns in dc than in greece!

Posted by: prairiecomm | August 28, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

McCain's campaign so far has been childish (celebrities! tire gauges!), negative, gimmicky (no summer gas tax!), flip-flopping (offshore drilling), embarrassing (how many houses?) and full of false claims (http://www.factcheck.org/).

That's because the Bushies (Bush's people) are running it.

Posted by: Sumsonic | August 28, 2008 10:30 AM | Report abuse

What has Obama done and what has he run to qualify him?
NOTHING!!!! Rock star status aside.

Posted by: Marty | August 28, 2008 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Dee, Dee, Dee:

It's great if Obama stands for something that you simply can't accept, and, therefore, you vote for the other guy. But, if you are actually LISTENING, then you would know that 'The One' slogan is cast by the same people who are calling Barack 'The Anointed One' and offensively comparing him to Moses and The Messiah--Republicans (Sean Hannity, Karl Rove, Rush Limbaugh, etc.). I listen to them every day. They are the ones saying 'Obama THINKS he's the one'. They are the ones playing on evangelicals' anti-Christ fears. They are the ones singing 'Barack, The magic Negro'.

You have bought into their hype, not Barack's. Barack has said that 'We are the ones we have been waiting for'... In other words, the change from the way things have been to the way we want things to be depends on us, now, changing it.

Right, don't allow yourself to be bullied. Listen. Think.

Posted by: John | August 28, 2008 10:31 AM | Report abuse

Talk is cheap. Actions are what defines the man. We need to look at qualifications and not speeches that promise everything, but only empty words.

Posted by: Jim | August 28, 2008 10:32 AM | Report abuse

For the life of me I dont understand why we dont have Hillary nominated for president

The clintons did what was needed for the party after all the bad mouthing they took and are still taking

When bill gave the speech last night..it was a joy to listen too..his southern accent is alluring.

Obamas voice just grates on me..after he becomes president he better keep his mouth shut or I will have to turn him off all the time.

Obama needs to develop slower talk and a deeper voice and not stumble so much when he talks.

Posted by: sidney smith | August 28, 2008 10:32 AM | Report abuse

Mr. Deming - you are a first class idiot. Since when do we vote for a president based on how we think they will order coffee at McDonald's? That's the best you can do because you can't point to one policy accomplishment of Obama. He was a community organizer. He may get your blood flowing, but he is anything but qualified to lead our country.

Just to play on your analogy - Obama would take the guy's coffee in the front of the line (because his success is because of the government, not because he paid his dues to stand in line), and give it to the guy sitting outside who never bothered to get in line because he was too lazy and knew the "great redistributor" would give him a handout.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Someone please explain to me, why a Hillary supporter would vote for a guy who has promised to nominate justices who will overturn Roe v Wade? Who has said we'll be in Iraq for 100 years. Who doesn't know the difference between a Shii'ite and a Sunni Who is saber rattling (sabers we don't have, they are kind of busy right now) at Russia. Who is saber rattling (those same busy sabers) at Iran. Who would appoint "Foreclose Phil" Gramm as Treasury Secretary. Who lobbyist laden campaign would ship US jobs to Europe in the form of an massive transfer of taxpayer dollars to Airbus through the tanker contract. Who thinks that opening America's shoreline to oil leasing will solve the energy crisis when the oil companies already have millions of acres under lease that they are doing absolutely nothing with.

The experience argument just makes me laugh. Our current President brought one of the most experienced teams to Washington in memory. Look at how well that has worked out.

Posted by: ziggy | August 28, 2008 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Well... I'm another of the thousands of Republicans for Obama. I confess to even voting for the idiot son, but I was lost and now I'm found. I don't want a short-fused, old man with early signes of dementia running my country. I want someone more thoughtful, who cares about everyone, and not just those making $5 million a year and owning 7+ houses (maybe more?). I want someone who supported the GI bill as I'm a Vet and these kids need all our help after what Bush & Cheney did to them. I want someone who doesn't call us whiners and acknowledges that the economy is totally in the tank. Sure, Bush created 5 million new jobs, but 90% of them were at the level of flipping burgers at Mickey D's or standing in the doorway of walmart and offering a verbal welcome. Will that get us back on track? NO! I want someone who realizes that all the oil that international companies drill for on our coasts goes into the international market and not in our fuel reserves. We still have to outpay China & India for that fuel. I want someone who even cares about affordable health insurance for families who don't make hundreds of thousands of dollars in income.

Lastly, any "Democrat" who votes for McCain in spite, claiming Obama doesn't have experience is kidding themselves. What international experience did Clinton or Bush have before being elected?

And as a Vet and a senior... I'm sick of hearing that John McCain's POW stint gives him a free pass for everything from infidelity to his unmemorable memory. At least you got to come home on your own two feet Senator McCain. How about the friends of mine who came home in aluminum boxes or without limbs? Quit crying already.

Posted by: Another Mike | August 28, 2008 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Anonymous at 10:33 - I couldn't have said it better myself!

Posted by: Sam H. | August 28, 2008 10:36 AM | Report abuse

If Obama respected life inside the womb as any Christian should, he would be more believable. Do you all know how he's going to make all these changes he has suppossed? Kiss your current lifestyle goodbye, because you'll be paying more taxes at the gas pump, grocery store and out of your paycheck. Maybe I should be teaching my children that welfare is the way to go! Free college, free food, free home and FREE HEALTHCARE.... yeah, that's what I'll do. My neighbors won't be able to speak English, but I can learn the new National language, Spanish. One last thing, I'll make sure my children learn "I'd like to teach the world to sing" instead of our National Anthem... the flag, maybe I can make a nice table cloth out of it.... Honestly Matt Santos, I could never hold my head up high and say, "I'm a member of the Democratic Party!" Respect life, all life, innocent precious life and the rest will fall into place.

Posted by: Rebekah | August 28, 2008 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Why is it that as republicans democrats think that we have to be ashamed to be associated with George Bush but Democrats aren't ashamed to be associated with Bill Clinton? Perhaps a bit of media bias is involved in this phenomenon. Clinton is a disgrace to this great country. He was an EMBARASSMENT to our nation. Does anyone remember that?! Mr. give me a cigar and a female intern and i'll make good use of the White House. At least Bush has a sense of morality. Yes Bush has made some mistakes but what we are up against is not his fault. Democrats would rather hide behind lies and deceit than face the truth. Frankly I'm disqusted with the media bias in this election. Especially as it pertains to the Clintons.

Posted by: Dman | August 28, 2008 10:37 AM | Report abuse

Well I can tell you all, I am White and I'll be voting for, who I hope to be, the first Black President of one of the greatest nations in the world. Not because of color, but because of intelligence. So, in reply to those who continue to ask, name one good reason why Obama - he's smart. McCain is a puppet, only as gifted as the group controlling him and that's not very smart.

Posted by: Mr Deming | August 28, 2008 10:37 AM | Report abuse

So many black people are voting for Obama and not McCain because hes someone they can support. They never voted for white president because none of them could associate themselves with it.

PUMA is now very obviously a RNC front. Rove figured women would go crazy and forget McCains lack of support for them.

Posted by: Jim | August 28, 2008 10:37 AM | Report abuse

Good for wild Bill, I'm voting McCain.

Posted by: Thozmaniac | August 28, 2008 10:38 AM | Report abuse

pro-Obama: I am not punishing myself or the daughter I do not have. Sorry. Also the "Roe" scare-tactics do not frighten me. The Supreme Court is a reflection of society. Contrary to popular beliefs, the Court is fairly lockstep with popular opinion. Thus, the Court has not overruled Roe, despite the arguments from "liberals" that it was going to do so since the decision was first issued in the 70s. The Court has instead, consistent with public opinion, maintained Roe, but validated restrictions such as parental consent, informed consent, 24-waiting periods, and late term procedures. This is consistent with public opinion. Don't expect this to change - even with a McCain appointed justice. Also, many (most?) state constitutions protect choice as well....
Perhaps you guys should have thought of these arguments when we were saying that Obama was just chanting about "Change" and "hope" rather than substance. All of a sudden, substance matters. Yet, when Clinton said "you govern in prose, not poetry" she was lambasted as a racist. I do not support foolishness like this .

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 10:40 AM | Report abuse

Honestly, who cares what Bill Clinton did with his intern. Oh, that's right, republicans and people wanting to bring him down by over exaggerating something that every man desires. Sorry, doesn't fly DMan.

Posted by: Mr Deming | August 28, 2008 10:41 AM | Report abuse

It has to be one of the most gratifying speech Bill Clinton gave last night. I voted for Bush for the first term after getting turned off by Bill's scandal but boy has he turnaround completely after the scandal. He has done so much good for the average person all over the world and Obama following his footsteps I can't see how anyone can actually vote for the McCain and GOP hate party. The GOP betrayed the very people who elected them in power, the middle-class like most of us.

Posted by: aphouston | August 28, 2008 10:42 AM | Report abuse

Great post "Another Mike".

Posted by: ziggy | August 28, 2008 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Please, vote with your brain. Look at the candidates, not the party. I don't like most of what the Republicans or Democrats have to say as parties because no political party is unified; everyone has their own ideas. I absolutely hate the extremism of both parties, the far left and far right. If you characterize what a candidate will do based on their party, you are cheapening that candidate's vision. Afterall, do you think Obama would have gotten this far if he joined a socialist party? Or McCain if he joined a moderate party? The only way a candidate can be elected right now is to choose one of the two major parties. I have a hard time selling my soul to a political party. One of the major candidates is just horrible, but that doesn't automatically swing my vote to the other. If both candidates are bad, vote for someone who isn't, even if it's 'throwing your vote away.' Please, I beg you, think and vote; don't just vote party lines.

Posted by: Brown | August 28, 2008 10:47 AM | Report abuse

I need some facts, I need some platforms, I need to hear plans for the future.
I have always voted for the person, not the party.
This "Party" loyalty stuff turns my stomach.
Just look at the party representatives of both sides. Rich, pompous hypocrytes who think they know what is good for you.
Major issues to me;
Our international status as the leader (not the cop) of the free world.
A reinvestment in our own country to get us back to what we once were, peaceful, prosperous and secure.
In need more facts............

Posted by: ace | August 28, 2008 10:47 AM | Report abuse

Larry - don't delude yourself. there are a lot of Dems who havent accepted Obama. I'm one of them. The Repubs are disgusting. I have never voted for a Repub and cannot imagine doing so. But thankfully, despite the existence of only two parties, we can still NOT vote for the presidential candidate and just vote in the other races. I don't like Obama; thus, I am not voting for him.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 10:47 AM | Report abuse

Experience.

The experience of the two greatest wartime Presidents in our history:

FDR, a wheel-chair bound cripple who had probably never shouldered a gun, had been for a short an Assistant Secretary of the Navy in a war where the Navy was a minor component (the U-Boats had been essentially defeated by the time the US entered WWI), and a one-term governor.

Abraham Lincoln: a few months in a militia during a small Indian War, never saw any fighting. One term as a Congressman, opposing the Mexican War and soundly defeated. Minority president, given to depression and flip-flopping (he came into office publicly opposed to Abolition, although privately deploring slavery, and issued the Emancipation Proclamation --- BTW a presidential war measure --- 2 years later), and possibly one of the greatest human beings in history. And certainly one of the greatest speakers in the history of English-speaking peoples.

What made them succeed? many things, including luck, but certainly among them to a great degree intelligence, and the courage to change under changing circumstances. They were not always right, and certainly not perfect. But their lack of experience was not a hindrance.

Intelligence can be a hindrance if it inhibits action when the situation is not clear (which in the real world is most often the case). But in the very act of seeking the Presindency it seems to me that BO had shown that he can act and act intelligently in just this situation. And his thoughtful and well-crafted speeches (especially on race in America) have me convinced that he will be far better able to meet the demands of the world's most punishing office far better than his opponent, if only (but not only) because of his stamina and proven ability to persevere.

By the signs, I also believe that there is a far too strong chance that John McCain would be all too soon incapable of doing that because of age and prior stress. Far from his POW experience strengthening him, it is hard to believe that it did not damage him in ways that are becoming more obvious every day. I speak as one approaching 70 whose senior moments come more often all the time.

Watch carefully who is his running mate, because there is a strong chance that that person will be the virtual if the not the actual president all too soon.

The point: maybe BO is a good pick and maybe he isn't but THERE IS NO WAY TO TELL in advance. The cards may not fall for him and for us, but I am a good enough poker player to know when the chances of an "out" are better or worse. OB is the better draw.

Posted by: jrosen | August 28, 2008 10:48 AM | Report abuse

"At least Bush has a sense of morality."

How absurd! Are you in 3RD grade, where Bush belongs? Morality and Bush cannot even be related to each other, impossible. Morality isn't blindly sending young people to kill and be killed. Morality isn't making the people he's supposed to protect actually suffer.

Posted by: Mr Deming | August 28, 2008 10:48 AM | Report abuse

Mr Deming has the lock on the dumbest to post here. First, the only reason you can find to vote for BHO is that he's smart. Didn't he say there are 57 states? Didn't he say Iran is small and not a threat? Doesn't he want to bomb Pakistan? Doesn't he want to increase the capital gains tax to 28%? You tell me, Deming, is he really smart or does he simply make your pants tight?

But your most disturbing comment was "one of the greatest nations in the world." We are the greatest, not one of them, despite what the liberal nut jobs like you have done to this country.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 10:48 AM | Report abuse

Pop Quiz everyone. Who were the two "most experienced" Presidents post World War Two? Would you answer Richard Nixon and LBJ? Look at how well they worked out.

Posted by: zounds | August 28, 2008 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Lesley wrote:

But b/c there is no case to be made for Obama. He has no experience. Name one thing he's done for which he gets credit on the national or international scene. Just one thing. Name one thing that entitles him to lead 300 million people, face off with Putin, deal with the N.Koreans, the Iranians, etc.

There is nothing in McCain's experience to suggest that he would be anything more than a mediocre president. There is nothing in his character to suggest that he would do anything better than an adequate job. Obama is a little riskier of a choice, true, but I would rather take a chance on someone with the potential to truly succeed instead of just marking four more years. There is a case for Obama: it's called aptitude.

What I really dislike about McCain is this: I have seen little to no evidence that he regards women, in general, as equals. I have seen evidence to the contrary, in the way he acts towards his wife, in the type of jokes he tells. I am sure there are a few women he treats well, but we have already had eight years of a President who only treated a few of our nation's citizens as equals, and, in fact, as citizens. We have had eight years of a president who has allowed Americans to be second-class to special interests. We have had our basic rights tarnished--our right to privacy, others' rights to not suffer cruel and unsual punishment. We have had our rights as women and as people clipped, trimmed, abridged, and denied. I do not see anything in John McCain that indicates he has any more respect for the American people than Bush does--that he sees the majority of Americans as people and not as voters.

I am supporting Obama not because I think he will be a perfect president, but because I think he has the ability and the respect that McCain lacks. Like our two youngest presidents, he will probably show a bit unevenly a first; although neither Kennedy nor Teddy Roosevelt presents a perfect comparsion to Barack Obama, both had the same experience of being more brilliant than experienced. I support Obama because there have been times in the past eight years where a smart monkey could have done a better job than our current president, and I certainly don't think that Obama can do worse. I support Obama because the best way that we as voters can support hope and change is to use our vote to pressure for them; I support Obama because I believe that hope and change can be self-fulfilling prophecies.

Posted by: hen | August 28, 2008 10:50 AM | Report abuse

GOP-UMA seems as though a couple of letters were forgotten by the Bushies who started this crap

Posted by: GOPUMA | August 28, 2008 10:50 AM | Report abuse

Well thought, well explained, well said. Good Job JROSEN!

Posted by: Mr Deming | August 28, 2008 10:50 AM | Report abuse

BARACK OBAMA is a gifted leader and a really smart guy. Why are we so afraid of that. 2 million and more people just like me are bankrolling this campaign because we care about this country, which we love like no other ever.


What has Obama ever lead? He is 1 of 100 Senators. And he hasnt even done that for one full term. The ONLY reason we have ever even heard of Obama is because he was elected in one of the most corrupt states in the country. He was able to get the Chicago political machine behind him. And they are famous for corruption.

Posted by: keith | August 28, 2008 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Last time I check the history books.. It was the Republicans that lead the move to abolish slavery... to give women the right to vote... and it was the Dems that were fighting to keep slaves and to keep the women quite.

Posted by: Rep | August 28, 2008 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Hattie: is it fun being an Obama-enabler? Throughout the primaries, we heard that Clinton was making it hard for Obama's image. Clinton was dividing the party -- although Obama said he was the uniter. Clinton has to unite the party -- although Obama is the uniter and she is the divider. If he loses to McCain, it's Clinton's fault. If someone doesn't support him they are racist... Blah blah blah. You guys need to go to therapy. You depend on a social construct for "hope," and then you blame everyone else for that construct's shortcomings. Pretty lame.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 10:52 AM | Report abuse

PUMA is now very obviously a RNC front.

Posted by: Jim | August 28, 2008 10:37 AM

Not so! This PUMA supporter, probably like all of them, IS a conservative Democrat who is politically closer to McCain than the far-lefty Obama. Contrary to what the Democrat propaganda portrays, McCain is NOT a far-right conservative nut-case like Bush! It is no stretch at all to have wanted Hillary but will settle for McCain. And NO, Hillary is not like Obama. Hillary is nowhere near as liberal as Obama! She said what she had to say! Enough said. Right on PUMAs!

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 10:53 AM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton endorsed Barack Obama at the Democratic National Convention, but he endorsed himself far more. I counted thirty-one uses of the first person (I, me, my).

Speeches like this are notoriously disingenuous and Clinton did not disappoint. He claimed for himself and prophesied for Obama nothing but success.

On the critical issue of whether Obama is fit to be commander in chief, Clinton said there were many who claimed he was too young and inexperienced to be president when he ran in 1992. The statement was meant to answer itself, but given Clinton’s failure to take out Usama bin Laden when he had the chance and his tepid response to the first World Trade Center attack, the Kobar Towers attack and the bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria — all of which brought nothing more than a couple of missiles on inconsequential targets in Iraq — the question should answer itself. Clinton also dismantled the American military, which is why he could claim a surplus when he left office. A monetary surplus, yes, but a deficit in America’s defense capability.

And, of course, Clinton directed his extended adolescence into extra marital affairs that diminished the office of the presidency and made him a laughingstock on late night TV and known for little else around the world. Who doesn’t think “sex” first when they hear the name “Bill Clinton”? Was Bill Clinton too young and immature to be president? Yes, he was.


Clinton accused the Republicans of not caring as much about HIV/AIDS as he and Obama do. But that isn’t true. President Bush has done more for HIV/AIDS than any president, Democrat or Republican.

Clinton gave the delegates what they wanted — red meat criticism of the Republicans, but it will be up to Obama to seal the deal Thursday night with the American people.

Given that his speech may resemble a scene from “My Big Fat Greek Wedding” with retro Greek architecture as a backdrop, it may be more difficult for Obama to persuade Americans he is ready to be president than if he were to climb the steep hill to the Acropolis.

Posted by: foxnews blog | August 28, 2008 10:53 AM | Report abuse

Lincoln's GOP was a way different animal. Heck, Nixon's was like the frickin' Green Party compared to the post-Gingerich GOP.

Apples and oranges baby. I still love T. Jefferson though.

Originally it was about state's rights. I'd like to see less federalism today. GO STATES!

Hey, I'm an Oregonian ...

Posted by: Bud | August 28, 2008 10:54 AM | Report abuse

It is funny. All these people have to try to prop up Obama in the area of being able to lead.

The fact is if he was ready they would not need to state it soooooooooo much.

McCain is the man, given, the alternative.

Posted by: John | August 28, 2008 10:55 AM | Report abuse

"We need someone who will unite America like Obama will - Not push it apart like McCain"

I love statements like this. When has Obama EVER risked political capital or taken any risks and gone out on a limb to do anything bipartisan? McCain has ticked off republicans and done a lot of bipartisan legislation. McCains actions speak louder than Obama's words. McCain is in several ways a republicrat.

"Obama did not follow suit, but he did prove by collecting unprecedented sums of campaign dollars that he can work the system without becoming anybody's dog."

I know a lot of people won't want to read up on the truth but Obama has a lot of special interest and bundles money in his campaign tied into areas in the economy in trouble. His biggest contributions come from lawyers who wrote and subprime mortgage contracts, the financial firms that made the loans, and the involved real estate firms who made royalties off of the sales.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/06/us/politics/06bundlers.html?_r=1&bl&ex=1218168000&en=13e70dd4b3a5f45b&ei=5087%0A&oref=slogin

Posted by: Cryos | August 28, 2008 10:56 AM | Report abuse

Rebeckah,

"Respect life, all life, innocent precious life and the rest will fall into place."

And the first step there is respecting women as a whole enough to acknowledge that they have a right to their own bodies.

I don't like abortion, but I can't get behind a platform that supports the species' right to a womb at the expense of recognizing women as people rather than housing for those wombs.

Posted by: heya | August 28, 2008 10:56 AM | Report abuse

You know it is REALLY fun being an "Obama-enabler."

The Kool-Aid is delicious, I've gone back for more! Try it! We're going to roll over you in November or you can get together with us because ALL are invited.

SI SE PUEDE

Posted by: Bud | August 28, 2008 10:57 AM | Report abuse

For all of you PUMA'S and the like, after Pres. & Sen. Clinton's speeches the past two nights and you are still going to stay home, or vote for McCain, this has nothing to do with Hillary and you are being disingenuous at the least. How can you support McCain or stand by and possibly let him win, when you supported what Hillary stood for, considering she and McCain are politically pretty much polar opposites? The Clinton's have dealt with the fact that Hillary lost the Primary and have focused on the real goal, which is to get the Democrats back in the White House. I find it interesting how many people are now saying that they would rather vote for McCain as opposed to the Democratic nominee. The rules were laid out in advance, he played by them and he won, end of story. Hillary ran a great campaign, but it did not work out. That is life. One 80+ woman stated on MSNBC that she was so sad that Hillary lost as she felt that this was her last opportunity to see a female president in her lifetime. Well, if Sen. Obama had lost the primary, there would also be elderly blacks in this country who possibly will not live long enough to see a black president. On want/wish does not outweigh the other. BTW Geraldine Ferarro was on the national ticket with Mondale, blacks have never had anyone on a national ticket in any capacity for a major party. This kind of reminds me of the OJ Simpson case (BTW, I think he was guilty, lets get that out of the way) One black man beats the system using it's own rules,rules not designed for us, and they want to revamp the entire justice system. How many times have blacks had to vote for whomever the Democrats nominated? Especially when other Dems would tell us "What are you going to do? Vote GOP?" The Dems expected, no demanded, that the blacks fall in line with the nominee, no matter who it was. Now, It seems that those rules don't apply for the Hillary supporters, no some of the Hillary supporters. It would not be fair to generalize all Hillary supporters with a bunch of sore losers who cannot let go, especially since Barak would have not made it this far without the support of many whites and non-blacks. I go through all of this to say maybe the PUMAS and the like need to look inward and question some of their views, because this has nothing to do with Hillary at this point, no matter what they say. Thank you for your time.

Posted by: Carroll In FL | August 28, 2008 10:57 AM | Report abuse

Equal rights are gone if Obama is elected.

McCain has voted against and fought against the republicans on many issues. So close to a democrat that John Kerry seriously considered McCain as his VP in 2004.

We have a majority of democrats in the Senate and no Supreme Court Justice can be appointed without the approval of the Senate majority.....Roe v Wade is a scare tactic the left wing is putting out.

The democrats need to get back to their roots which include equal rights, women's rights and no tolerance for racists and sexism. They have failedf this primary. Had they done their job as Super Delegates we would have history making with a woman as President and a black man as VP. Because they failed to do their job we will have nominated a black man to run for President but he will lose badly and become just another "also ran" like Kerry and Kennedy.

S.O.S.

Posted by: jodi | August 28, 2008 10:57 AM | Report abuse

All of these people talking about jumping ship and supporting McCain cannot be too bright...sorry but someone has to tell you. Do you realize that the next President will be appointing members to the Supreme Court? Do you realize the significance of just that? Say good bye to rights to abortion. Say good bye to Roe v. Wade. say good bye to those freedoms that you enjoy simply by being an American and nothing more. Say hello to more war and death. You know "The Great POW" has to prove to all of the world that he was able to overcome the odds and get back at the world. I'm sorry but what does being a POW have to do with running the country? No disrespect to other POWs because I have the most respect for you to even have served in the military, better yet being held captive by the enemy. Does he ever talk about what he did wrong or perhaps that he didn't follow directions? I'm just saying. I read a response from a person serving the military in Iraq. That was a plea for help if we ever needed one! I'm sorry but because we are the strongest (and this may soon come into question if we continue down the current path) nation in the world doesn't give us the right to pick fights all over the world. What have we gained from Iraq? We caught Saddam...BIG DEAL! He wasn't a threat to us in the first place! Our people are dying overseas. I ask you PUMA pains in the @ss, have you ever lost a friend or neighbor, not even a relative but someone that you know? I have and it sucks! It sucks because McCain and others like him are willing to send more of our people overseas to die for your PUMA BS...they fight for your right to even entertain the thought and this is how you'll treat them, by continuing with the same abusive behavior of thought? As we speak, we're in a potential face off with the Russians...and who's getting sent? Not your sons or daughters or loved ones but those of others. And we're still on shaky ground with N. Korea and Iran. Swallow your pride for once and let's get someone in office that will at least attempt to change the direction in which we're heading...it can't be any worse than where we'll head if McCain wins, that's for sure!

Posted by: Levi | August 28, 2008 11:00 AM | Report abuse

Anonymous: I'm not just talking about Roe v Wade, what about the fact that McSame Opposes Equal Pay Law and tells jokes about rape while being totally unfaithful. http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/04/24/by_juliet_eilperin_washington.htm

Posted by: proObama | August 28, 2008 11:01 AM | Report abuse

"Equal rights are gone if Obama is elected."

I'm sorry, your argument failed. Your logic is a bunch of pretty flower which smell bad.

Posted by: Bud | August 28, 2008 11:01 AM | Report abuse

"I love Bill.
I love Hillary.

I am voting for McCain."

Posted by: Lesley |
______________________________________________
This statement speaks volumes about today's Democratic Party and the schism that still exists. The Presidential reality, if anyone will stop and pull their emotional head out of the sand, is that every President inherits the good and the bad of their predecessor. So stop finger pointing and playing the blame game propaganda. Can Obama be a party and national unifier? Whatever the answer to that question is, unless the Democrats get their act together, we may never find out!

Posted by: Cassandra | August 28, 2008 11:01 AM | Report abuse

to Jim and anonymous: I am not a Republican, and I am not a "conservative Democrat." I consider myself fairly progressive. Examples - I believe same-sex marriage itself is conservative. Why should the government be involved with intimate relationships in the first place? I think that affirmative action is a liberal cop-out. Why not invest heavily in the educational and economic infrastructure in poor communities? I do not believe in shipping US jobs abroad, but protectionism keeps wealth in privileged countries. I could go on, but I really do not need to prove myself to doubters. I am a thinking, rather than kneejerk progressive. I am more left than Obama (especially considering his recent "death penalty" statements and his selection of Biden, the corporatist). I am not supporting him because he wrapped himself in progressive politics -- including race -- but he's not really that progressive. It is more dangerous to elect this deceiver than to have a straight up conservative.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 11:02 AM | Report abuse

"I go through all of this to say maybe the PUMAS and the like need to look inward and question some of their views, because this has nothing to do with Hillary at this point, no matter what they say. Thank you for your time."

Posted by: Carroll In FL | August 28, 2008 10:57 AM

I am not sure what you are implying, except that maybe we are racist? Maybe. So what??

Posted by: Well... | August 28, 2008 11:05 AM | Report abuse

"But look at the numbers. 98% of white people aren't voting for McCain. " Anonymous @ 10:29

Oh, but wait - 98% of the electorate has voted for a white man in every election in the past 200 years. Why? Well, that would be because there hasn't been anything but a white man running for the office for the last 200 years.

So, when a candidate that actually looks like the rest of the Presidentially unrepresented population garners 98% of the black vote (which is not an accurate statement either Mr. Anonymous - check your facts) - we're somehow supposed to be indignant about that?

I guess after 200 years of white Presidents that have allowed the continuation of slavery, the less than 1/2 citizenship of black people, the unpunished lynching of innocent men, women and children, the poll tax punishment of duly qualified voters, the wholesale slaughter of residents of black neighborhoods and communities, and the systematic dismantling of the black family (please note that before the introduction of the welfare state by southern Dixiecrats - Republicans wrapped in Democratic clothing (hmmm, sounds like PUMAs) - the divorce rate amongst black families was identical to that of white families) - I guess after all that, Mr. Anonymous, which should be aghast that a black man would only consider voting for a black man (which again, isn't an accurate statement).

Didn't Ku Klux Klan members wear sheets and cones to keep their identity anonymous, Mr. Anonymous? Racism is alive and well in America - but don't ascribe it to black people. They may be prejudiced and biased, even to the point of only voting for Obama. But being racist requires access to the power to disenfranchise others of their rights, property and lives based on something as superfluous as their skin color. That pretty much leaves us white folk as the only qualified racists in society today....oh yeah, forgot to mention - I'm an o'fay, lily white caucausian member of the priveleged class in America....and I'm voting for Obama.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 11:05 AM | Report abuse

Forgot to tag my last entry - because I ain't Anonymous.

Posted by: Richard B | August 28, 2008 11:06 AM | Report abuse

Anonymous, you seem like a thoughtful person and even understand the pointless labels of liberal v. conservative.

Why do you call BO a deceiver? Yes, he's a politician. I've been watching the guy since 2004 and I think I'm a fairly good judge of character, in real life anyway.

I am still behind Barack 900%. Tell me why you have given in to the fear.

Posted by: Bud | August 28, 2008 11:08 AM | Report abuse

Whether PUMA represents a few dissapointed Hillary supporters or yet another GOP attempt, its all going to keep a fire under our butts and I think will keep DEMS fighting the "good fight" So keep up your antics, whoever you are.

Posted by: Mary | August 28, 2008 11:09 AM | Report abuse

the military gentlemans letters is eloquent.
the failure of the bush presidency to represent all of the people didnt result from his lack of experience , but from his lack of integrity .

Posted by: steve | August 28, 2008 11:09 AM | Report abuse

There is a lot of talk about Obama's lack of experience. His VP pick has strengths where he is weaker. Good team. What qualifications did Bush have when he was elected? Not much, except that he was a reformed screwup. And he was voted in. And the American voters, like sheep, voted him in a second term, when he was already driving us into the ground. Unbelievable! So, along comes McCain. While he follows many of Bush's policies, he does separate himself from Bush on others. He is not a Bush clone. But McCain will put Supreme Court judges on the bench that will reek havoc on our constitution long after McCain is gone. While I respect McCain, I am concerned about his choices about the war, the economy, etc. and fear it will not be enough to pull our country out of this mess we are in. I did support Hillary, but was displeased with both her & Bill's actions when she lost to Obama. I will say that after her & Bill's speeches at the convention (for whatever reason), I have gained back some of my respect for her. I do not believe people should vote for Obama because Bill & Hillary say so. Sex and race should not be a deciding factor in voting for our leader. Obama's middle name means "good looking". It does not mean he is arabic or sides with terrorists. Let's look at what the candidates stand for...look at the big picture. Bush has driven us into the ground. We need a leader who will pull us out. Part of this means we need to bring our troops home. This was Bush's war. It is putting us further into debt. McCain supports the war and not bring the troops home. McCain will put right wing mentality into the Supreme Court. I am pro life, but the government should not dictate what to do with my body. While I am not sure about Obama, I am willing to take a chance on him because he embodies my beliefs. Sometimes we need a fresh outlook and not the same old politics. For those democrats who are voting for McCain: Don't do it because Hillary didn't win, don't do it because of race, don't do it because you believe Obama is not experienced enough. Do it because you believe in what McCain stands for and what he intends to do. You vote for McCain to keep the war going & to continue to diminish free choice & escalate poverty among the poor and middle classes. Under McCain, the rivh will get richer and the poor will get poorer. Health care will cost more and more and only the rich will be able to afford it. Think long & hard before you make that decision.

Posted by: Marie | August 28, 2008 11:09 AM | Report abuse

To Jerry,

Did I say anything about gender? It's about leadership, knowledge, and experience and how we believe the person will perform on the job, period. Yes it would be momentous to have someone other than a white male as president, and one that speaks well to boot (can you say nooocleear?) but perhaps it is people like you who are too focused on gender or perhaps race?

I'd say you are the one who has to get beyond the superficial and down to who can best do our business in Washington no matter what their anatomy or pigmentation is.

Yes, many women are aggravated by the pressure for her to leave the race from the get go and how many times have we heard comments like your "Get over it" and the Obama's "Later Sweetie." But sorry, I'm not going to quell my uneasiness about voting for a neophyte catapulted into the spotlight just because Hillary says its OK and the party says Obama is Grrrrreat! My point was that the Democrats need to get their act together. Obama has to earn the votes and it will be tough - mine included.

Posted by: peachpit | August 28, 2008 11:09 AM | Report abuse

Bravo Richard B!!!

Posted by: Sumsonic | August 28, 2008 11:10 AM | Report abuse

This "Obama has no experience" talk is unsurprisingly as tired as it has been for months. What about McCain's experience makes him all the wiser? Sure, he's been in the Senate longer (allowing ample time to accumulate more lobbyist connections). And if I hear the POW thing one more time... someone who's running on his "military accomplishments" spent a surprising amount of time trying to cover them up. LOOK THIS STUFF UP! How about leaving his disabled wife for a rich beer heiress (who secured his entry into politics in the first place). THERE'S a big steaming load of "experience" for you. Stop looking for excuses and consider which candidate could actually IMPROVE conditions in this country.

Posted by: Joe in PA | August 28, 2008 11:10 AM | Report abuse

"Mr Deming has the lock on the dumbest to post here. First, the only reason you can find to vote for BHO is that he's smart. Didn't he say there are 57 states? Didn't he say Iran is small and not a threat? Doesn't he want to bomb Pakistan? Doesn't he want to increase the capital gains tax to 28%? You tell me, Deming, is he really smart or does he simply make your pants tight?"

Yeah, he does make my pants tight. How'd you guess? I'm guessing McCain does the same for you?

"But your most disturbing comment was "one of the greatest nations in the world." We are the greatest, not one of them, despite what the liberal nut jobs like you have done to this country."

Liberal nut jobs like me? What is Bush? What has be done? What I've done? I fight and believe in the rights of all Americans, not just the BEST American, ALL OF AMERICANS. Unlike you...

Believing is sometimes more important than succeeding, at being the best. No one is ever, always, the best. So when you're not the best, do you fall and cry about it? Cause that's when believing in yourself, in your country, matters the most. So you can sit and believe that we are the best, or actually make the best decision and choose someone for the best of America, unlike a small % of goofs like you. Is there a best race or a best color, in your opinion? My opinion, no, we are all just as relevant to the USA, diversity is the backbone of the USA along with BELIEVERS.

All countries are relevant, due to the USA and it's effect on a global scale.

Posted by: Mr Deming | August 28, 2008 11:10 AM | Report abuse

Bravo Richard B!!!

Posted by: Sumsonic | August 28, 2008 11:11 AM | Report abuse

If America elects an old man, it will end like Soviet Union : a crumbling empire.
How the US could reconduct to the White House the Party which basically ruined your economy with an abysmal debt owned today by the Chinese and the Gulf states ?
The US deficit in 2008 is twice as much the US deficit in 1929. Read your history books, gentlemen : how many empires survived under such a debt ?
None.
Bill Clinton has been awesome yesterday, as he was in 1993-2001.
Please, don't elect a man which will reproduce the same banana republic policies as the current imposter in the White House.
As Pope John Paul II said to soviet colonies in 1983 : "dont' be afraid". Don't be afraid of change and youth.
I'll vote for Obama.

Posted by: Hellstan | August 28, 2008 11:11 AM | Report abuse

Great speech. Hillary and Bill are doing all they can for Obama. But it won't change our minds. Obama is a charlatan. He does not represent me or any moderates values.

I voted for Bill for president because he was a moderate. I voted for Hillary in the primary because she was a moderate.

Obama is too extreme for us. He is the most liberal democrat in congress. Too liberal or too conservative, it doesn't matter because extremists are always bad for the country.

I do not trust Obama and will never vote for him.

Posted by: Hillary2012 | August 28, 2008 11:11 AM | Report abuse

Dear fellow Americans, today I announce that I shall also be running for the presidency of the United States, the highest office in this country and in the free world. And why should all Americans elect me? Here's the top 10 reasons:

10. Because I was not from a rich family.
9. Because when I was a baby, my parents brought me to Canada for a one-week holiday, and therefore exposed me to non-American culture and I gained a world view.
8. Because when I was in fifth grade, I was the class monitor and I helped my teachers collect worksheets, kept the class quiet when the teacher was not around, and organised after-school class activities.
7. Because I said Hillary would be on anybody's shortlist (but I didn't say she would be on mine, it's your own fault for having drawn the wrong conclusion).
6. Because I did not serve the military.
5. Because I wrote two storybooks (and it is all fiction, but I can't help it if you thought otherwise).
4. Because I also had the same dream as Martin the Martian.
3. Because I will change Washington and make it like Chicago.
2. Because I am change and because I say so.
1. Because from no onwards, American can have only one view, and that is my view; if you are not for me, you are against me, and therefore I will call you a racist.

Posted by: Jackie | August 28, 2008 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Lesley,

On behalf of the 3000+ soldiers who have died since Bush was re-elected and continued the war that both he AND MCCAIN sought and thought would be sooooo easy, and, on behalf of their surviving families: A pox on you and all of yours.

Posted by: bob | August 28, 2008 11:13 AM | Report abuse

You haven't a clue.

Posted by: YESPUMACAN | August 28, 2008 11:15 AM | Report abuse

Pro-Obama - the Ledbetter Act was not an "equal pay" law. It was a statute that would extend the statute of limitations for bringing pay equity cases. While I agree with the Ledbetter Act, opposition to it does not mean one does not believe in equal pay between the sexes. Not having the statute makes it more difficult for civil rights plaintiffs, but it does not eradicate the notion of equal pay that is already an entrenched part of our civil rights law.

As for the "rape" joke -- I read that it's unsubstantiated, but regardless, I have stated over and over that I am not a Repub or a conservative. Also, if I were to abandon a party or candidate due to sexism, I'd be in the same place as I currently am: unable to vote for Obama or McCain. The sexist double-standard that the Dems applied against HRC (versus the now beloved Ted Kennedy and Gary Hart -the "cheater" as well) is just as bad as McCain's rape joke.

Posted by: A Puma | August 28, 2008 11:15 AM | Report abuse

You say you want change I think you have already seen change. Sense the Demarcates took over congress we have seen higher tax's, higher gas, We have spent over $338 Billion on illegal aliens in one year.They have sent $54 Billion to their native county,Money not spent in this county.Illegal aliens are now voting.no one says a word about that because they are important voters.They shouldn't be voting thats a American right.Another thing to think about is congress makes the Law's the President just says yes or no if he or she can.Maybe we need a change in congress.You say the Clinton's won you over with their speeches, but your not voting for them.They say you must vote for your party sounds more like a order and your standing in line to take that order.You say McCain is not standing up for the service men and woman but why did Obama vote against money for them? You people have to read between the lines and vote for the right person not just because it's your party and you were told too.The kind of change Obama says he's for might not be the best thing for this county.Changing your mind all the time may not be the best thing.Change has to come one sept at a time or it could be a bad thing.YES WE DO NEED CHANGE. but not at the cost of the people.Vote for the right things not because someone says it's right.really think about why your voting and make a sound decision.What I am seeing why you would vote for someone is sad.This county is in bad shape if you are voting for someone just because he or she is in your party and not because of the facts then this country will not make it.It should not be because of power of a party, (we won we won) it should be for the country and I don't see any of that.I just see yes the democrats or the republicans are in power.. its so sad.And because of that power hungry attitude we the American people will surfer.And because of that power hungry attitude most people are playing with fire.

Posted by: mom | August 28, 2008 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Who will improve our country and who will continue this terrible trend? Anyone would be better than a Bush clone. PERIOD

Posted by: Mr Deming | August 28, 2008 11:18 AM | Report abuse

I appreciate and enjoy the comments posted on this website. I think there are highly educated comments, and ignorant ones too. So thanks to the highly educated ones for bringing the highly ignorant ones to their knees.

Joker,

You ask why everyone is so serious. This is a serious matter...It's not a high school ASB election.

Posted by: Ozan | August 28, 2008 11:19 AM | Report abuse

Bush's monetary gains was at the cost of the people. The USA is in this state due to Bush pushing all out of whack in the first place.

Posted by: Mr Deming | August 28, 2008 11:20 AM | Report abuse

Folks, Take a break. Have a home remodeling project to do? Post it online at: http://contractorjoint.com/


And Freelancing Programming Web Design projects? Post it at
http://FreelancerNetwork.Org/

That simple.
Good Luck to McCain, The Clintons and Barak.

Posted by: CJ | August 28, 2008 11:20 AM | Report abuse

McSame = senile war monger. HE's 72 years old!!!!!!!!! A heartbeat away from alzheimer's.

Posted by: NoMcCain | August 28, 2008 11:21 AM | Report abuse

Loyal Democrats never let the truth get get in the way of a good speech. Reagrdless of what Bill said last night, the fact is that Bill and Hillary are in no way behind Obama. They are in it for themselves.

As a true independent worried about losing more freedoms I was 100% behind Obama. That is until he lied about the FISA bill. After clearly stating he would vote to filabuster this terrible bill, he not only did not filabuster, but voted YES?!?!? Even hillary voted no.

With that he lost my vote. I am staying home this year.

Posted by: Irwin | August 28, 2008 11:21 AM | Report abuse

I am supporting Obama not because I think he will be a perfect president, but because I think he has the ability and the respect that McCain lacks.


I dont believe it was John Mccains pastor, spiritual adviser and mentor that was GDing America and making fun of women like Hillary Clinton. No that was Obamas pastor, the one that performed his wedding ceremony and baptized his children. And you call that respectful? Id hate to see what you call DISrespectful!!!

Posted by: Keith | August 28, 2008 11:21 AM | Report abuse

Hellstan: the country was in debt before Bush, and the Democrats have been known for engaging in deficit spending as well. The country lacks a culure of saving - which is precisely why we borrow money from foreign nations. If people were investing in treasury bills and corporate bonds, rather than buying SUVs, flat screen tvs, upgrading their cellphones every other month, and taking trips to Disney World, then maybe we would only be in debt to ourselves. Our savings rate is ZERO. PATHETIC. One of the richest countries borrows money from developing countries, because it's population is hellbent on spending...What on earth is Obama going to do to "Change" this?

Posted by: Proud Puma | August 28, 2008 11:22 AM | Report abuse

"Illegal aliens are now voting.no one says a word about that because they are important voters"

Posted by: mom | August 28, 2008 11:17 AM

Newsflash......you need to be a US CITIZEN to vote and registration requires a little bit more than a fake ID.

Posted by: Sumsonic | August 28, 2008 11:22 AM | Report abuse

I was lucky enough to be in Iowa before the caucuses and was able to hear both Clintons and Obama in person. I was left with greater enthusiasm for Hillary (even bought a button!) but also with the sense that I had as a Democrat an unbelievable choice between several enlightened, progressive, talented and possibly successful candidates. Their positions and values were and are more alike than different. I was disappointed to see Hillary's campaign flounder and then fall apart. I personally delighted in the idea of making many of the patriarchial and reactionary leaders of the world deal with a female president of the United States (deal with it boys – she's smarter and more powerful than you and your friends). However, Hillary did not run the campaign that brought her to the convention in first place, and it is Hillary herself who must take much of the responsibility for her own failure. There is a good story in a recent Atlantic covering her own lack of critical leadership and decisiveness in managing her campaign – she kind of sank her own boat.
To be still fixating on her loss and fussing over whether "I like Obama enough" is to be seeing this process through the eyes of a child, or an overly-indulged american consumer/voter, which can sometimes seem very similar.
We had two or more nearly equally strong choices for our presidential candidate, and now the process has produced our selection. Would you rather have a candidate with 90% similarity to Hillary in position and values, or have McCain, with perhaps 20%?

Posted by: jmadam | August 28, 2008 11:23 AM | Report abuse

"There will be tons of GOP defectors to balance out the pumas. But rest assured, those of us shamed by the last 8 years will vote for OB... without drawing attention to ourselves. And by the way, I am willing to bet that if enough foolish people elect McCain... it wont be 4 more years of McSame... but 8 more years.. so no hillary period. Then you will have proven your point right PUMA? I am in Upper class (not to brag, just proving a point)... regardless of who wins, I will be fine financially. My family will have top-notch health care and schooling... its the bottom 75% of the country that will suffer.

Posted by: GOP for OHB | August 28, 2008 10:04 AM "

LMAO do you think you are actually fooling anyone into believing you were a republican. "McSame" and your "I'm voting for the little people" comments mark you squarely as an elitist democrat. Nice try though. FYI if you want to make false posts at least learn to disguise yourself. Orange camoflague.

Maybe neocons or wedge issue voters would vote Obama but what I consider genuine conservatives who believe in personal responsibility, small government and low spending would NEVER vote for a borderline marxist left wing president.

Posted by: Cryos | August 28, 2008 11:25 AM | Report abuse

Any bitter (YES, i said BITTER) Hillary supporters that are willing to let the US swirl down the toilet for four more years as revenge for hurt feelings deserve what they get. Shame about the "collateral damage" to 300 million other people. McCain supports trickle-down economics (that worked well!), privatized health care (already tried, and failed), and overturning Roe v. Wade, but you're right: your egos are more important! Back-alley abortions with no health insurance for everyone!

Posted by: Joe in PA | August 28, 2008 11:26 AM | Report abuse

Whoa - hold up there Proud PUMA. I left the Republican fold after 20 years, because the Republican party was supposed to be the party of small government and states' rights. Last I checked, of the last 4 Presidents, 1 hasn't run a deficit - and that was Bill C. The other 3 were Republicans. Last I checked, Republicans were leading the outlawing of same-sex marriages at the federal level, event though states have been the recognized legal arbiter of marriage since the our nation was founded. So much for small government and states rights....

So, what is it that Republicans do stand for nowadays? If I knew, I'd probably still be one. I guess they are for making Dick Cheney the next multi-gozillionaire after he rescinds all of his blind trusts that hold tons of Halliburton stock. Maybe Gordon Gekko should be McCain's running mate this year?

Posted by: Richard B | August 28, 2008 11:28 AM | Report abuse

I'm a proud American. But Bush being elected really speaks volumes about our country. What is next said about us, as Americans, if we vote for McCain? What will go in history books as the turning point or the downfall of American, the great land of the USA.

Posted by: Mr Deming | August 28, 2008 11:29 AM | Report abuse

I'd make a better president than any of them.
First off - in a war, the shock and awe and mission completed would have happened after I dropped 30 nukes and wiped out the entire region.
Second - anyone without health insurance or without a job or on welfare - I would give them Iraq as their new home.
third - I would make abortion mandatory for anyone without the means to take care thier offspring. Or better yet -just snip it to all those dead beat dads.
Obama will not bring change - change takes several generations - not a new president. Unless you elect, I'll bring some real change.

Posted by: Change | August 28, 2008 11:29 AM | Report abuse

"the Dums still don't know that the message that appeals to their moonbats doesn't appeal to the rest of the country.""

that's because they're not aware of the rest of the country.

they think the country consists of schools, colleges, starbucks and hollywood movies.

i watched a little of it and it's very unsettling. it's kind of like watching a pep rally at a "progressive" school in a town where most of the men have mysteriously disappeared. which come to think of it describes what a lot of colleges are turning into.

crazy howard dean has become a moderate dem. obama is the nerd that teachers like because he wears a tie and never says motherf&*)r in front of them. and joe biden looks like the burnt out principal trying to make the kids think he's hip by saying "what up dog?"

Bill Clinton seems like the alumnus who never got over his success in school and Hillary looking like the girl who did not get asked to the prom.

What a party and lord help us if Obama gets in, as my Russian friends say. “We don’t think Americans are dumb enough to elect Obama, but if they do, we will have a field day with him” Sad but true. So, what you will about Bush, but the Russkies respect him and the Republicans.

Posted by: jvpski | August 28, 2008 11:30 AM | Report abuse

Whoa - hold up there Proud PUMA. I left the Republican fold after 20 years, because the Republican party was supposed to be the party of small government and states' rights. Last I checked, of the last 4 Presidents, 1 hasn't run a deficit - and that was Bill C. The other 3 were Republicans. Last I checked, Republicans were leading the outlawing of same-sex marriages at the federal level, event though states have been the recognized legal arbiter of marriage since the our nation was founded. So much for small government and states rights....

Don't forget one of the largest expansions of the US government in years if not decades. We are now proud owners of the homeland security department that is only second in size to the DoD......40Billion/yr budget.

Posted by: Sumsonic | August 28, 2008 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Will the Democratic Party pay for its foolishness if McCain is elected? No. America will pay the price, and this country can't afford it.
-------------------------------------
Heather, we've had almost 30 years of trickle down Reagan economics and will the Republicans pay for the damage done? Will they return to life all the people killed in their wars of choice, places like Grenada, Panama, and Iraq? Will they give back all the tax refunds they gave themselves and their favorite corporations? Will they give media control back to smaller companies who view the news division not as a profit center but as a public trust? Of course not.

All we have for this Reagan era is almost 10 trillion dollars in debt, a crumbling infrastructure, a broken Constitution, a pack judiciary (which, oddly enough, still decides based on merits not ideology except for the Supreme Court), and on and on. Do you know that 1600 Americans died because of Hurricane Katrina? That there was enough Section 8 housing available for the refugees but, instead, the Republicans chose to pay our tax dollars to their contributers in the the manufactured home industry and cruise lines to provide housing?

I read recently that the estate tax debate in 2006 was funded by 18 families that together control $185 billion dollars in assets. They wanted to save themselves $75 billion dollars in estate taxes. Think about that the next time you shop at WalMart, one of the 18 families. Or buy M&Ms, another of the families.

Obama is a pig in a poke but the people he surrounds himself with suggest that he'll do better than the Republicans. McCain so far surrounds himself with lobbyists, the very people his supposed maverickness abhors. My choice was Dodd but I'll vote Obama in a heartbeat.

Finally, the only good news from a McCain presidency is that it would tip this country into a depression. And the Republicans could not avoid blame. You don't destroy a country's economy in 8 years. It takes decades of drip, drip, drip of bad policy, self policy.

Posted by: JustAGuy | August 28, 2008 11:33 AM | Report abuse

"So, what you will about Bush, but the Russkies respect him and the Republicans."
jvpski @ 11:30

Oh, so that's what I was seeing last week on TV. A respect-fest for Bush and the Republicans?

Do a quick search for the exact quote of this paraphrase - Vladimir Putin to Saakashvili "You can take your alliance with the US and shove it up your a**", which was shared by Putin via phone two weeks ago.

Is that the kind of respect your speaking about jvpski?

Posted by: Richard B | August 28, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Are PUMAs crazy? If you supported Hilary because of her record and her stances on the issues important to her, how can you even think about allowing John McCain to get elected. Are you suddenly opposed to your daughter having choice? Are you opposed to equal pay? Why should your daughter think she is a failure if she works in the business community? Why should she if she stays at home? Why should your daughter only have "reasonable expectations" for her career, but your son can dream of the stars? Perhaps you are very wealthy, and your children will have no problems paying for their education. If so, then think of my 3 daughters. They deserve a chance. Maybe your mother has all of her medical needs covered, but my 95 year old mother needs some help, and I do not mean help dying, but living. Allow McCain to get elected, change the supreme court, and destroy your daughters' futures. Electing Obama is just this serious! Ask Hilary.

Posted by: Gene Smith | August 28, 2008 11:35 AM | Report abuse

"but you're right: your egos are more important"

Posted by: Joe in PA | August 28, 2008 11:26 AM


Yeah, pretty much.

Posted by: Proudly Puma | August 28, 2008 11:36 AM | Report abuse

Mary - my fellow Dems certainly need fire. LOL. They didn't want Clinton's fire. Instead, they wanted mush, fluff, and kum bah ya. Now they realize that fire is necessary. A bit too late. Anyway, keep calling me a Republican, if that makes you guys comfy. It's like those morons who have to stereotype others in order to exclude and reject them. We have heard that blacks are stupid, gays are pedophiles, and women are irrational. Now, any Democrat who doesnt support Obama is irrational, a republican, racist, or stupid. I'm glad that you guys are proving that the Obama "change" generation is indeed true to its words: change now means that Democrats cannot speak their minds and must walk in lock-step. Cool!

Posted by: A Puma | August 28, 2008 11:37 AM | Report abuse

Bravo Gene Smith!

Posted by: proObama | August 28, 2008 11:37 AM | Report abuse

I love how the partially manufactured bad economy of the last 6 months has democratic supporters talking about "the disasterous economy of the last 8 years." I guess democrats need a hot issue to get america into being duped into electing a borderline marxist left wing candidate since the Iraq war situation has dramatically improved. MSM was screaming recession before any signs were there. People that have taken even econ101 know that heavily forecasting a recession can help cause one. You give people a scare tactic and they stop spending money leading to a recession.

The bottom fell out of the dot com and tech bubbles before and at the beginning of Bush's presidency. Add Katrina and the WTC bombing into the mix. I would say the economy up to the election year, where the economy always seems to mysteriously falter and recover beginning November 5th, has actually been pretty good.

It's funny how the industries tied into the economic problems are contributing heavily to Obama and democrats. People blame "big oil" but realists know that American oil companies are small on the world stage and that foreign nationalized oil companies and OPEC control oil prices not "american big oil" so I wouldn't consider the AMERICAN oil industry to be contributing to the problems. Lawyers, financial firms and banks and real estate executives love Obama and democrats.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/06/us/politics/06bundlers.html?_r=1&bl&ex=1218168000&en=13e70dd4b3a5f45b&ei=5087%0A&oref=slogin

Posted by: Cryos | August 28, 2008 11:39 AM | Report abuse

Lesley:

Come on. As it's been pointed out many times, experience certainly isn't a prerequisite for wisdom (see: current administration). It's a rap that was used against both JFK and Bill Clinton when they first ran for president. It's an overrated barometer. Deciding to cast your vote for "four more years of the last eight years" seems like nothing more than the petulant comments of one who has not made peace with the fact that Hillary will not be President of the United States...not this time, at least.
Obama will be surrounded by seasoned advisors. It's not like he'll be up there all alone.
McCain? Really?

Posted by: Steve D. | August 28, 2008 11:44 AM | Report abuse

Sumsonic - unfortunately, due to its grave missteps (and the realignment of the South), the Dems only have one Prez since 1964 - so you need to go back further in time to see what I mean about Dems and deficits.

Also, the Dems are not supporting same-sex marriage, so that's really a non-issue.

Gene: McCain isn't opposed to Equal Pay. Hillary botched that one. The statute he opposed, which I support, would have extended the statute of limitations in pay equity cases. It failed to pass. Pay discrimination still violates federal law - but Congress refused to extend the statute of limitations in lawsuits challenging the discrimination.

Posted by: Puma | August 28, 2008 11:45 AM | Report abuse

I am not sure what you are implying, except that maybe we are racist? Maybe. So what??

Posted by: Well... | August 28, 2008 11:05 AM

If the shoe fits.. Remember you said that, not I. I was suggesting that this was not a Hillary issue, since you cannot support a candidate and not support their views. As a consequence of that reality, you cannot vote for a candidate who has opposing views to the one you supported. That is plainly illogical, & quite frankly, Stupid. My point was that this attitude has nothing to do with Sen. Clinton losing the primary. It has to do more with something personal with the PUMAS & the like. Would you be voting for McCain if Hillary lost to Kerry, Biden, Kennedy? If you feel that I called you a racist, well, a bit dog barks. I am just saying that there is more here than Obama's record and his qualifications, and frustration that Hillary is not going to be President this year. As far as your "so what", thanks for proving that the more things change the more things stay the same. Even in this historic election, we still have people who hold on to outdated, nit witted ideas, no matter whose party they belong to. Thanks for showing the board that those types of views are not just limited to the GOP, as some people like to insinuate.

Posted by: Carroll from FL | August 28, 2008 11:45 AM | Report abuse

If you ARE NOT voting for Barack, chances are you are a wolf in sheep's clothing.

If you ARE NOT voting for Barack, chances are you don't need to publicize that. There is a reason why voting booths are private. If your mind is so made up, why advertise it on a comment post on a website??

PUMA's are probably nothing more than Limbaugh's stealth contingent.

We are picking a leader, not a Resume! If experience was the measuring stick, we'd all be voting for Dick Cheney.

Duh.

Posted by: Rational Voice of Reason | August 28, 2008 11:45 AM | Report abuse

Hate to bust your bubble sumsonic but I know many illegals aliens that vote. They say they can hardly wait to vote for the one who will make them Americans.I worked with one that is now on SS and his parents have been here for 3 months and they are on ss.Don't say they are not voting because they are.

Posted by: mom | August 28, 2008 11:47 AM | Report abuse

Um - voting booths are private, but not blogs. Actually, unless people post with their real names, blogs are at least anonymous (but not private). I despise Rush just like all other neocons. That doesnt mean I have to vote for Obama, which I am not.

Posted by: to "Rational Voice" | August 28, 2008 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Anonymous said...."Didn't he say Iran is small and not a threat? "

Well, no. It's another lying McCain campaign ad.

The actual quote, from which McCain's ad took a few selected words, was about using diplomacy to deal with problems:

Obama, May 18: Strong countries and strong presidents talk to their adversaries. That's what Kennedy did with Khrushchev. That's what Reagan did with Gorbachev. That's what Nixon did with Mao. I mean think about it. Iran, Cuba, Venezuela – these countries are tiny compared to the Soviet Union. They don't pose a serious threat to us the way the Soviet Union posed a threat to us. And yet we were willing to talk to the Soviet Union at the time when they were saying we're going to wipe you off the planet.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/context_included_obama_on_iran.html

Posted by: the truth | August 28, 2008 11:49 AM | Report abuse

we're screwed no matter who gets into office, but atleast with Obama he'll sweet-talk me into it

Posted by: avgamericanjoe | August 28, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

Proud Puma, I'm honoured you're quoting me.

"Hellstan: the country was in debt before Bush, and the Democrats have been known for engaging in deficit spending as well."


This is not the truth. Bush created the deficit
with unreasonable tax cuts that are even making conservative frown this side of the pound, mainly in Germany.
And he's digging deeper with a war we CANNOT afford, strictly speaking.
Clinton left a country whith NO debt.
You want to know more : in history, every Democrat administration since Roosevelt (FDR, not Theodore) has done better for :
1/ Deficits
2/ Debts
3/ Real Estate
4/ Financial Markets.
This is not an opinion, this is a well known study :
"Consider the data compiled by Ned Davis Research, an institutional research firm. The Dow Jones Industrial produced an annualized return of 7.21% during Democratic presidents, in contrast to an average of 3.6% during Republican presidents - or half as much, in other words."

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

I think it is very obvious why Barack did not pick Hillary for his VP; they had closed door talks, the Clintons did not want vetted because they would have had to uncover the ugly truth as to who was funding the Clinton Library. Hillary has more benefit to the democratic party in the Senate, OR he has a cabinet post in mind for her which wouldn't surprise me at all.

As for this talk of Obama's family living in rags in Africa, he didn't grow up with any of those people. He only met his father ONCE. If you had money would you pay for some 18 decendants of your father, people you have met once or twice but don't know, siblings aunts and uncles alike, and pay their way all the time? Read his book Dreams from my Father, read about his visit to Kenya when he first met these people, and you will see they are all eager to take a handout. It isn't his responsibility to take care of them, just as it isn't your responsibility to take care of every extended family member you have!

Obama is the clear choice for a brighter, better America, not because he has years of experience in politics, but because HE DOESN'T. He has wisdom beyond his years, sound judgment, and a lifetime spent dedicated to both teaching and helping the average joe like me. An extraordinary man that will make an extraordinary leader for our country, and will make us proud again!

Obama/Biden 08!!!

Posted by: Steph | August 28, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

Carroll - I almost didnt want to vote for Kerry because Dean lost. I guess I was something other than racist then. Anyway, I'm black, more progressive on race than Obama, and not self-loathing. Please. Find another argument, as the "only a racist cannot support Obama" storyline is very worn out at this point.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

Voting for Cheney? (actually, that's a pretty good one Rational)....

May my ink stained thumb be cut off before I ever vote for the love-spawned clone of Richard Nixon....let's hope he's never on a ticket, ever.

Posted by: Richard B | August 28, 2008 11:51 AM | Report abuse

I used to have some respect for the “straight shooter”. No more. McCain’s views are now fully aligned with the crazy ideas of the fundamentalists and neocons who believe that the righteous will be saved and that righteous power comes only from the barrel of a gun. These people believe that nothing can stand in the way of our military might even as our middle class disintegrates and the economic foundation of our military is undercut by trillions of dollars of debt.

Wake up people. It’s later than you think. Our nation and our people are in decline and anybody who believes that McCain’s paleolithic policies are going to solve our problems has no clue about the predicament we are in. The “experienced” warhorses, the free-market zealots, and the news/entertainment complex have failed us.

Obama deserves a chance to turn this mess around, but he’s going to need a lot of help from we the people - not consumers, not producers, but citizens of the United States.

Posted by: MikeD | August 28, 2008 11:56 AM | Report abuse

Hillary and Bill Clinton had to do what they had to do, BUT americans that love America and have always been proud of our country and supported Hillary for the democratic nomination can not vote for an affirmative action candidate that has no experience or knowledge abut how to fix all the problems our country is facing.

Hillary supporter's allegiance is not towards her but to our country and we can not and will not vote for an individual who has not demonstrated to deserve the highest office in our nation and our love for our country demands we act responsibly and recognize that John McCain is the only reasonable choice for President of the country we all love.

With a majority in congress John McCain as President will be able to work in a partisan way and govern from the center, in a similar way as the Clinton's, because they know things can get done by working together with both parties.

Hillary and Bill Clinton had to do what they had to do and Hillary supporters will vote for the best person for President of the United States of America:
John McCain, a true patriot!

Posted by: Manolete | August 28, 2008 11:59 AM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton spoke of the “American Dream” but is the”American Dream” of what Obama speaks. Can you tax the achievers to create give away programs for the underachievers? Isn’t that what LBJ’s “Great Society” was all about?

This Democrat is voting for McCain.

Posted by: Dave Rowe | August 28, 2008 12:00 PM | Report abuse

Carroll - I almost didnt want to vote for Kerry because Dean lost. I guess I was something other than racist then. Anyway, I'm black, more progressive on race than Obama, and not self-loathing. Please. Find another argument, as the "only a racist cannot support Obama" storyline is very worn out at this point.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 11:50 AM

You are in luck, I usually do not respond to anonymous posts. If you post it, you should take credit for it. With that said, if you read my posts, my point was that if you vote for the other party in the election because your candidate lost the primary, you are STUPID. The issue on race was brought up by someone else, and I addressed it. I did not call them a racist, but if that is how he took it, I cannot help that. Maybe he knows something abut himself that he has not shared in his posts. As a matter of fact I am sure he/she does. If you voted for Bush because Dean lost to Kerry and you are feeling the pinch that most of us are now, and if you do not like the way that the country is going, then you got what you deserved. Remember there are no atheists in foxholes. At the end of the day the GOP will take care of it's own, no matter how many "defect" voters they get in the elections. Once they are in office they owe you nothing, as you are not one of them. STUPID not racist. There is not much difference, just degrees, but they are different in this context.

Posted by: Carroll in FL | August 28, 2008 12:00 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous 11:50 -- apparently you don't know the difference between budget deficits and the national debt. An administration can have a balanced budget but still have debt -- inherited from the past. The Bush administration engaged in deficit spending, financing a lot of it through increasing the national debt (or pillaging social security). Clinton, for most of his admin, had balanced budgets to surpluses, so he was able to pay down some of the debt (but not eradicate it) -- although some web sources indicate that he actually increased the debt.

The nation has always had debt - from the very beginning. Some economists say that despite the ballooning in debt during recent years, it has been relatively flat when its treated as a percent of GNP (because GNP has increased). I think we need to pay down the debt, but the notion that Dems have never engaged in deficit spending or increased the national debt is ludicrous.

Posted by: Obama-Not | August 28, 2008 12:02 PM | Report abuse

"you had money would you pay for some 18 decendants of your father, people you have met once or twice but don't know, siblings aunts and uncles alike, and pay their way all the time?"

Well according to Obama and other socialists' policies we are supposed to pay for EVERYONE ELSE. Typical liberal "do what I say not what I do." Funny how republicans at all income levels give more time and money to charity than democrats.

Posted by: Cryos | August 28, 2008 12:02 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous 11:50 -- apparently you don't know the difference between budget deficits and the national debt. An administration can have a balanced budget but still have debt -- inherited from the past. The Bush administration engaged in deficit spending, financing a lot of it through increasing the national debt (or pillaging social security). Clinton, for most of his admin, had balanced budgets to surpluses, so he was able to pay down some of the debt (but not eradicate it) -- although some web sources indicate that he actually increased the debt.

The nation has always had debt - from the very beginning. Some economists say that despite the ballooning in debt during recent years, it has been relatively flat when its treated as a percent of GNP (because GNP has increased). I think we need to pay down the debt, but the notion that Dems have never engaged in deficit spending or increased the national debt is ludicrous.

Posted by: Obama-Not | August 28, 2008 12:02 PM | Report abuse

Hate to bust your bubble sumsonic but I know many illegals aliens that vote. They say they can hardly wait to vote for the one who will make them Americans.I worked with one that is now on SS and his parents have been here for 3 months and they are on ss.Don't say they are not voting because they are.

Posted by: mom | August 28, 2008 11:47 AM

Then I suggest you report them to the INS. Not even an illegal alien (you know, the one that is here without proper documentation) would be that stupid to risk being caught, deported and loosing their ability to send US Dollars back home. Either you are naive or plain ignorant of what steps are required to vote in the US election. Please read the paragraph that deals with individuals that were not born in the US.

State Voter Registration Requirements
ALABAMA
You must:
• Be a citizen of the United States
• Be a citizen of Alabama and your county at the time of registration
• Be 18 years old before any election
• Not have been convicted of a felony punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary (or have had your civil and political rights restored)
• Not currently be declared mentally incompetent through a competency hearing
• Swear or affirm to "support and defend the Constitution of the U.S. and the State of Alabama and further disavow any belief or affiliation with any group which advocates the overthrow of the governments of the U.S. or the State of Alabama by unlawful means and that the information contained herein is true, so help me God"

However, if your birth took place outside the territorial United States and you acquired U.S. citizenship through your parents, you will not have either of these documents. In this case, you will have to apply for another document. The three types of documents that will work are:
• U.S. passports
• certificates of citizenship, or
• certificates of consular registration of birth.

Thanks to people like you, this country elected an intellectually challenged individual that has spent incredible amounts of money on the WRONG war.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 12:03 PM | Report abuse

Carroll in Fl - that moniker is supposed to identify you? I wonder how many Carrolls live in Fl. Anyway, I'm Puma. I have no anxiety about sticking with the screenname.

Anyway, I never said I would vote for Bush over Kerry. I said I didnt want to vote for Kerry because I supported Dean. That does not mean voting for Bush - just like not voting for Obama does not mean voting for McCain. Perhaps you are the one who is STUPID, as you seem unable to grasp this basic reality about voting.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 12:06 PM | Report abuse

"Anyway, I'm black, more progressive on race than Obama, and not self-loathing.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 11:50 AM "

By the way, self-loathing has nothing to do with calling a spade a spade (pardon the pun). In this day and age no one can tell another who is more progressive on race, unless you live their life. How do you know if I amd half white, asian, hispanic? You do not. How do you know I am not married to a white woman? You don't. I do not spend my life looking for racism, that is a waste of time and at the end of the day you end up very bitter and sad. With that said, I am not afraid to address it when I believe I see it. If you ask me about it, I will give you my opinion straight with no chaser.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 12:07 PM | Report abuse

Obama-Not.

Help yourself with the official figures of Nat. Dbt :
Ronald Reagan R 1981-1985 +11.3%
Ronald Reagan R 1985-1989 +9.2%
Bush GHW George +13.1%
Bill Clinton D 1993-1997 -0.6%
Bill Clinton D 1997-2001 -8.2%
George W. Bush R 2001-2005 +6.9%
George W. Bush R 2005-2009 +3.9% projection and counting

Posted by: Hellstan | August 28, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

"

Carroll in Fl - that moniker is supposed to identify you? I wonder how many Carrolls live in Fl. Anyway, I'm Puma. I have no anxiety about sticking with the screenname.

Anyway, I never said I would vote for Bush over Kerry. I said I didnt want to vote for Kerry because I supported Dean. That does not mean voting for Bush - just like not voting for Obama does not mean voting for McCain. Perhaps you are the one who is STUPID, as you seem unable to grasp this basic reality about voting.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 12:06 PM "

Well last time I checked Puma, there are only three people running for the office. Obama, McCain, & Barr. Since there has been no discussion of the PUMAS voting for Barr, that kind of narrows it down. Like I said before, STUPID. If you are black, considering people died within the last 50-60 years so you could have the right to vote protected, I sure hope not voting is an option you are going to consider.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Hello, anonymous - I am comparing my positions on race with the nebulous ones Obama has taken. I have never speculated about your racial background, viewpoints, or the race of your sexual partners or signficant others.
The only reason I said I'm not self-loathing is that once I say that I am black but not an Obama supporter, many people say I must hate being black. Apparently, internalized racism is the fraternal twin of white racism in the "not voting for Obama" crowd. Only white racists and self-loathing blacks would not vote for Obama, according to the "change" brigade. PATHETIC.

Posted by: Puma | August 28, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, Carroll, the "your ancestors died for you to vote" does not move me. They died for me to have the RIGHT to vote -- not to be forced to vote out of some blind obligation to support a "party." If only Barr, Obama, and McCain are on the ballot, then I'll either write-in a choice and vote in the other contests (state and local). The right to vote includes the right to say no to both candidates, just like the right to reproduction freedom includes the right to have a child or not!

PS: As an historical note, most of my ancestors who died in voting conflicts would have probably voted Republican at the time...

Posted by: Puma | August 28, 2008 12:16 PM | Report abuse

"The only reason I said I'm not self-loathing is that once I say that I am black but not an Obama supporter, many people say I must hate being black.

Posted by: Puma | August 28, 2008 12:12 PM "

Anyone who would say that is a moron on their face. All black people do not think with the same monolithic brain, as do no other ethnic group of people. Just consider this; one day as a black person someone is going to ask you when the first black major candidate ran for president who did you vote for? People say that blacks are always complaining that they do not get a fair shot. We now have a man who has a real shot at being the POTUS. If blacks find reasons not to vote for him, what are you telling other people indirectly? At the end of the day, who are you with? There will be people who will say "If the blacks will not vote for one of their own, why should we?" There will be more people like that than you think.

Posted by: Carroll in FL | August 28, 2008 12:19 PM | Report abuse

Richard B, Thank you. Thank you thank you thank you. Thank you.

The reason that it's so easy for politicians to get away with whatever they want is because they've successfully managed to promote anti-intellectualism.

I don't know anyplace where people are prouder of not knowing things than here. Politicians have advanced the idea that people who are intelligent are elite and snobbish and looking down on real Americans who "don't have no fancy book learnin" and it is counterproductive to our society.

When a loved one is seriously ill, do you want the egghead doctor who knows his stuff or the guy who graduated toward the bottom of the class? If you were on trial for your life, would you want the lawyer with the best understanding of the law and the best trial form or the guy who you most want to have a beer with? Why do we want experts in those sorts of situations, but look for the lowest common denominator when choosing the leader of the country?

Reading these blogs, I see so much parroting of political talking points by people who obviously don't know what they mean, they just know that the talking head on TV said it, so it must be true.

I appreciate reasoned debate on both sides. I'd love to see a bunch of blog posts that debate reality instead of the bland fictions that have been proffered by the media and campaigns. I respect a liberal or a conservative that can argue the merits of a position, not just the "great taste/less filling" kind of arguments we see here.

A little American History (Read patriots! Read!) would solve a lot of the nonsense that clutters political discussion. Personally, I think the two party system is stupid, however, people seem to think that it's the American way. It wasn't always...

I hope that there are many more Richard B's out there, and that instead of fearing intelligent conversation and heckling, people put aside their egos and learn something from one another.

Posted by: Justice Angelicus | August 28, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

Hellstan: as I already pointed out, you have to go deeper into history to find a more accurate sampling, as the Dems only have ONE two term president since 1964 (and only one other one since that time -- Carter). Starting with Reagan skews the sample to Republicans and does not account for growing debt among Dems.

Also, the information you posted does not have debt as a ratio of GNP, which is probably an important factor (analogy - a family earning a million dollars a year with 10,000 debt is probably in a better position than a family earning 20,000 a year with the same amount of debt). According to data I viewed online, the national debt as a ratio of GNP has not soared as the debt in raw numbers has.

I still loathe Republican economic policy, and believe that Clinton was a brilliant president. That's, in fact, one reason why I loathe the Obama crowd: their whole argument was that Clinton ("Billary") was just "more of the same" negativity....that working class white people are "bitter" because of Bush and Clinton's economic policies (even though Bill Clinton actually WON the white working class vote - as did Hillary in the primaries!). The fact that Obama conflated Bush and Clinton was absolutely disgusting and either shows a lack of knowledge of history or that he is a pathetic liar. Either way, he doesn't inspire confidence in me, which is why I am not voting for him.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

"Sorry, Carroll, the "your ancestors died for you to vote" does not move me. They died for me to have the RIGHT to vote -- not to be forced to vote out of some blind obligation to support a "party."

Posted by: Puma | August 28, 2008 12:16 PM "

Don't get it twisted. The right to vote is guaranteed by the constitution, Supreme Court said so. Hence the voting rights act. Allows the Federal govt. to ensure that voters rights are protected, as voting is a states issue, not Federa. As far as who they would vote for,makes no difference to me. The issue is that they be allowed to cast their vote for whomever they wish without fear of violence, poll taxes, literacy tests, ect.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, that is me in the last response to Puma

Posted by: Carroll in FL | August 28, 2008 12:26 PM | Report abuse

Where do you come up with that?? On that note I am out. Go read a book.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 12:28 PM | Report abuse

For those that didn't notice, the "57 states" was a joke - he had travelled a lot, including Puerto Rico, and was tired.

An easier joke to take than "bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran" or "my wife is a c***"

Posted by: Bud | August 28, 2008 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Carroll - basically you are arguing that I must vote for Obama because white people will use me not voting for him as an excuse not to vote for him. Hmm....sounds like peculiar logic. I actually believe that racial progress is not measured by whether we have a black man in the white house. That's only one individual. Instead, I am interested in vital statistics that measure the well being of black people more broadly. As long as blacks, as a class, lack important resources for self-betterment (education, access to employment, health care, etc), then this country lacks equal opportunity. It's pretty naive to view Obama as a symbol of progress, rather than looking at these on the ground measures. A real community organizer would want his "community" to have improved lives, rather than simply have himself elevated professionally.

Posted by: Puma | August 28, 2008 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Anon, I am among the Obama crowd that you loathe. Your perception of my feelings about Clinton are wrong. I still love Bill, think those years were pretty good. I think Hil is brilliant.

I didn't believe she could beat McCain because she is an icon for the wingnuts to dispise. Thanks Rush. That combined with the history of "scandals" was just red meat for Rove & Co.

That's all. She lost, look who managed their campaign better.

Obama is ready to lead, he is leading already. 2 million and counting - si, se puede amigo.

Posted by: Bud | August 28, 2008 12:33 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous,
These ARE the increase ratios Debt/GDP.
You want more ?

Jimmy Carter D 1977-1981 -3.2%

Posted by: Hellstan | August 28, 2008 12:34 PM | Report abuse

Although Hillary Clinton didn't change everybody's mind to vote Obama, She changed mine. Thank you Hillary for being who you are.

Posted by: Rene | August 28, 2008 12:34 PM | Report abuse

No, I am not saying that you must vote for Obama because "whitey" is watching. I am saying that many people, not just here, but around the world are watching, and we do not make these decisions in a vacuum. Just remember that. That's all. And he is a symbol of progress. I know I though I would never live to see the possibility of a black POTUS. Just the fact that he is the nominee is progres, just like the fact that the Dem. nomination was fought for by two people, neither of them white males. That is progress, does not mean that we do not have a long way to go, but it is progress. Good points on the equal opportunity BTW. I have go now, thanks for the debate.

Posted by: Carroll in FL | August 28, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

I can also give you job creations annual increase
Jimmy Carter D +3.1%
Ronald Reagan R 1981-1985 +1.5%
Ronald Reagan R 1985-1989 +2.2%
George H. W. Bush R 1989-1993 +0.6%
Bill Clinton D 1993-1997 +2.6%
Bill Clinton D 1997-2001 +2.3%
George W. Bush R 2001-2005 0.002%
George W. Bush R 2005-June 2008 +1.1%

Apart Reagan, Democrat presidents since Carter did twice better.
And Carter did twice better than Reagan's first term.

Posted by: Hellstan | August 28, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

I love the "right to vote" is not a constitutional one. LOL. It is true that the constitutional text dealing with voting discuss this "right" in equality principles (cannot deny on basis of race, gender, to people over 18, to people who havent paid a tax, etc). But tons of SCT cases and, I would add, the fact that the Constitution establishes and allows the Prez and Congress to protect a "republican form of government" pretty much constitutionalizes the right - as a fundamental one. Unlike strict constructionists, I do not believe that our rights are limited to those listed in the constitution, narrowly defined.

Posted by: To Ignorant Swine...from Puma | August 28, 2008 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Hellstan - you keep missing the point, and apparently arguing something that is irrelevant.

First - the "point" I have made is that the national debt has increased under Democratic presidents. Only including Clinton on the list is just "bad science."

Second -- If you are arguing that Democrats are better stewards of the economy, then please let it go. This is irrelevant to the discussion, because I am not a Republican, nor have I ever voted for one.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse


You are all talking personalities-
Is anyone better off now than they
were eight years ago? Not me,
I love the Clintons but have no
problem voting for Obama...
Proud to do it!

Posted by: Nancy | August 28, 2008 12:41 PM | Report abuse

"

I love the "right to vote" is not a constitutional one. LOL. It is true that the constitutional text dealing with voting discuss this "right" in equality principles (cannot deny on basis of race, gender, to people over 18, to people who havent paid a tax, etc). But tons of SCT cases and, I would add, the fact that the Constitution establishes and allows the Prez and Congress to protect a "republican form of government" pretty much constitutionalizes the right - as a fundamental one. Unlike strict constructionists, I do not believe that our rights are limited to those listed in the constitution, narrowly defined.

Posted by: To Ignorant Swine...from Puma | August 28, 2008 12:38 PM "

I know I said I was leaving, but I had to tell Puma "Good shot, right in the boiler"

Posted by: Carroll from FL | August 28, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Carroll - I think that people around the world are even more inclined than even Americans to view racial progress purely in symbolic terms. These people are largely unfamiliar with the plight of poor people (of all races) and poor people of color in the USA. They view the country as a bunch of selfish, gingoistic, conservative imperialists (which unfortunately is not without support). But there is a lot of oppression here. Merely electing Obama cannot erase that. And if people around the world think that, they are STUPID.

Posted by: PUMA | August 28, 2008 12:43 PM | Report abuse

ps: marie- that's the point: the dismiss the democratic party. the party must pay for its foolishness. four more years sees like suitable punishment.

Posted by: proud puma

Oh sure. Democratic party pays huh? Morons like you are responsible for the last years.
Go to Hell - and you can take your vote and shove it you know where.

Posted by: Shoot PUMA | August 28, 2008 12:43 PM | Report abuse

PUMAs: you're not punishing the Democratic Party by voting for McCain. You're punishing yourselves, you're punishing me, you're punishing our children, you're punishing our nation, and you're punishing the world. Are your hurt feelings really that important? Re-watch Hillary's speech. Is it all about YOU?

Time to forgive and go forward. Please.

Posted by: Martimr1 | August 28, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

I'm not sure exactly what experience McCain has to be president. Age? Plastic surgery he has obviously undergone certainly makes him appear younger than his actual age, but I seriously doubt that at 70+ he has the stamina physically or mentally for the rigors of the presidency even for 4 years (I'll take youth and sharp faculties this election: BHO). Insight? He claims to be the Iraq guru, yet he's demonstrated he can't even decipher a Sunni from a Shiite -- not sure he's able to truly grasp the intricacies of our rapidly changing and complex world (I'll take intellectual prowess this election: BHO). Occupational experience? Long-term senate experience a president does not automatically make. McCain knows how to hold his senate seat -- that's about it (I'll take a dynamic leader that knows how to galvanize a country this election: BHO). Military experience? He has some, but not much, mostly as a POW, and prison captivity is not a qualification for the presidency. His military experience is waaaay overvalued (I'll take a civilian-minded leader that has the acumen to balance diplomacy with military might this election: BHO). Character? It was McCain who dumped an ill wife for a super-rich trophy sugar momma of some 15 years his junior. It was McCain who was eyeball deep in the Keating Five corruption scandal. It is McCain who has been blindly supporting a patently unjust war for the sake of his and his buddy's big fat oil profits. (I'll take someone that actually knows how many houses he owns this election: BHO).It’s time for a change. It’s time to elect Barack Obama.

This message brought to you by a concerned US citizen with no party affiliation.

Posted by: JD | August 28, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous,
First - the "point" I have made is that the national debt has increased under Democratic presidents. Only including Clinton on the list is just "bad science."

Sir, again, it's a no.

Two presidents have reduced the Nat. debt since 1976 :
Carter and Clinton.
Period.

Please read these figures (first figure is the start Nat.dbt, second is the end Nat.Debt of each pres. term)
Jimmy Carter D 1977-1981 35.8%
32.6%
Reagan1 Ronald Reagan R 1981-1985 32.6% 43.9%
Reagan2 Ronald Reagan R 1985-1989 43.9% 53.1%
Bush GHW George H. W. Bush R 1989-1993 53.1% 66.2%
Clinton1 Bill Clinton D 1993-1997 66.2% 65.6%
Clinton2 Bill Clinton D 1997-2001 65.6% 57.4%
Bush GW1 George W. Bush R 2001-2005 57.4% 64.3%
Bush GW2 George W. Bush R 2005-2009 projection 64.3% 68.2%

Posted by: Hellstan | August 28, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Hellstan - that last post was from Puma, not anonymous.

Carroll -thanks. I dont think we disagree on much. I love dialoguing with people who will listen. There are a lot of people who are not "post-menopausal," white racists, hillbillies, uneducated, stupid, etc., who cannot muster up the energy to support Obama. Even a lot of so-called progressives declined to vote for Clinton in 1996, because they hated some of his policies and concessions in his first term. I respect their choice. I can debate whether they were right (and I'd have to debate myself on that one!), but I cannot really say that they are stupid. Voting is personal and public. It is about policy, but policy is emotional and involves our passions. Candidates are chosen based on emotion and personal considerations as well. No one has divorced their own "feelings" from this election.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

I loved Bill's speech, but I don't expect it to cause 'Hillary holdouts to fall into line'. Your assumption that we are robotic in our thinking is condescending. If elected, what is Obama going to do his first day in office? We aren't sure as he has promised so much to so many.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Cryos:

When you say "we" should pay for everyone else, do you mean "we" as in part of the wealthiest 1% of the American population? Because I have to say, if I were one of the wealthiest people, I would really think it would be hard to sleep at night knowing I'm sitting on mounds of money, as greedy rich people most often do, while babies on the streets of America starve.

Everyone should contribute-the wealthiest should contribute more because they have more to give. The "haves" and "have-more's" as Bush calls them. The same ones he has been letting off the hook and sticking their bill to the middle class for YEARS now. The same ones that work for companies who get money for shipping jobs to Mexico and overseas.

People can say "those wealthy foks worked for it, they deserve to keep it". Tell that to the kids being born to kids, living in the ghetto, going to D rated schools because their parents can't afford to live in any other neighborhood, after all they have been paying $4 a gallon to get to the only jobs they could find in this crap economy, kids that never stood a chance, and then look me in the eye and tell me the "republican way" works.

It's sick.

Posted by: Steph | August 28, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

That last post I was replying to was signed by Anonymous, not PUMA.

"Hellstan - you keep missing the point, and apparently arguing something that is irrelevant.
First - the "point" I have made is that the national debt has increased under Democratic presidents. Only including Clinton on the list is just "bad science."
Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 12:40 PM

Posted by: Hellstan | August 28, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

For those so proud that you're not voting for
Obama for reasons that are disguised, I'm glad we weren't counting on your vote in the first place. Campaign headquarters calculated that you'll be around for at least one more generation.

Posted by: Dan | August 28, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Puma 12:12

Ummm no. I wouldn't suggest a a black person who isn't supporting Barack Obama is "self-hating." However, I have to admit I'm somewhat suspicious of a black person who claims to be a progressive democrat, and isn't supporting Obama.

Please...

Posted by: Whitney | August 28, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

To: Richard B:

How many times have you been to Russia? I travel there quite often. I know the word on the street. Russia indeed understands that they can only push so far with Bush. No doubt about it. Georgia invasion was foolish on their part and reaction to their "impotency" vs the USA over the last 8 years.

Obama, will no doubt, be a "patsy". He even claims in his "so called " economic speech that he admires China. I guess he would as he is cut from the same cloth....socialist to the hilt!!

He thinks he is larger than life and his stunt to appear on stage with Biden last night only was done to feed his ego.

I think this quote from McCain sums to up perfectly

"I don't seek the presidency on the presumption I'm blessed with such personal greatness that history has anointed me to save my country in its hour of need. I seek the office with the humility of a man who cannot forget my country saved me"

Posted by: jvpski | August 28, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

I hope that Hispanic voters realize that if Baracky Hussein Obama becomes President, they will be at the bottom of the barrel - Baracky Hussein Obama will have to pacify the Black voters after gaining 99 % of their vote.

Democrats for John McCain in 2008

Posted by: gary | August 28, 2008 1:19 PM | Report abuse

To jpvski

"Obama, will no doubt, be a "patsy". He even claims in his "so called " economic speech that he admires China. I guess he would as he is cut from the same cloth....socialist to the hilt!!"

HL Oswald was a "patsy".
Do the Republican and some corrupt Democrats intend to do to Obama the same as they did to JFK ?

Posted by: Hellstan | August 28, 2008 1:23 PM | Report abuse

To all those who are repeating the ridiculously inane and uninformed accusation that Obama is a socialist, I hear complaints about people having to (gasp) sacrifice some for the good of the many. That's not socialist, that's just social.

I don't hear you anti-socialists complaining about your weekends... or your insurance (and to be honest, ALL insurance, private and public is based on the concept that people pool money to take care of those whom tragedy befalls).. or your 8 hour standard workday, or the idea that your kid goes to school instead of heading to assist daddy at the plant. I don't hear you complaining that the highways are paved. These are all "socialist" ideas.

Furthermore, this idea that the wealthy, by and large earned that wealth is ridiculous. Yes. There are a number of wealthy people who really worked hard to gain the money they have. Their kids, on the other hand did not. Their grandkids did not. That money did not come from nowhere, it was gleaned from the rest of the country--from consumers. Or it was compounded by wealth-friendly policies in the government. Or it was redistributed in the form of tax cuts, shelters and loopholes.

I hear people argue "but the wealthy pay most of the taxes in the country!" Of course they do. They HAVE it all. The difference is that 35% of $40k when taken away as taxes has a much greater impact on that person's basic quality of life than 35% of $4billion. The idea that the wealthy are self-made people who owe their success (and a portion of their prosperity) to no one is a fiction. Those people who are taken care of by "socialist" policies are not beggars with their hands out, they're working people. They're the college students who at 21, enter the world with more student debt than many people accrue in 10 years of credit card use. They're people who work white collar jobs and still struggle to pay bills. They're the people who keep society running.

If you're going to argue that Haves bear no responsibility toward Have Nots, at least recognize the truth.

Posted by: Justice Angelicus | August 28, 2008 1:28 PM | Report abuse

I agree with some of your stands! Bill is great!
PUMAs will help McCain win.
Wow! I never thought we would find common ground!

Posted by: NotYoursweetie | August 28, 2008 1:34 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: PROobama | August 28, 2008 9:55 AM

Kennedy commentators - besides sharing all of the "experience" possessed by John F. Kennedy; you may also want to cite the well documented academic and governmental records that clearly show that JFK was one of the most ineffectual (and most frequently absent) members of both the House and Senate - in US history.

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

Kennedy continued to be dogged by poor health. Left thin and sallow by malaria brought home from the war in the Pacific, he also suffered from Addison's disease, which many doctors considered terminal. He relied on a steady stream of painkillers and steroids to treat the symptoms of his many ailments. Constant back pain would prevent him from lifting even his own small children.
...
...
Due to his continuing poor health, Kennedy had one of the worst attendance records in Congress.

(http://millercenter.org/academic/americanpresident/kennedy/essays/biography/2)

There you go. Since you are so high and f*cking mighty. The man brings home malaria after serving in the greatest struggle the entire world has known and all you can think to say is something completely out of context about his attendance in the Congress. Jesus Christ almighty, help this poor soul.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 1:39 PM | Report abuse

Both Bill and Hillary gave great speeches. I would say "Presidential" speeches.

I'm glad they will never be blamed when Obama is defeated. T

Posted by: Kibby | August 28, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Whitney - you can be suspicious all you want. There are lot of progressives who believe that Obama is bad news for progressive politics - particularly because of attitudes among so-called progressives which view his mere election as some huge triumph. Furthermore, many so-called progressives have been so close-minded that they could only analyze "racism" during the campaign, but could not even muster up a critique of sexism, because it just might portray HRC in a sympathetic light. This isn't progressive politics; it's just a crock of shyt.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Hellsten - your posts do not show that the national debt has never increased under a Dem (either as a percent of gnp or otherwise). Please show me this. Besides, I will reiterate, I do not believe that the Repubs have ownership over an ability to run the economy. Some Repub. administrations have given us disastrous economies, so have some Dems. It's also important to remember international events. Carter was lambasted for his econ policy, but people often fail to take into account the oil price shocks. Also, it's important to look at the composition of Congress. Congress has the constitutional authority to SPEND, not the president. Congress alloocates the budget, and the president executes the legislation. Clearly the prez has a role in shaping the content of the national budget, but some of the republican presidents' debt/deficits occurred when Congress was controlled by Dems.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 1:48 PM | Report abuse

"Campaign headquarters calculated that you'll be around for at least one more generation."

Posted by: Dan | August 28, 2008 12:59 PM

You are wrong. Not just one generation but for many, many more to come

Posted by: Realist | August 28, 2008 1:49 PM | Report abuse

I am saddened at Clinton supporters that are backing McCain. Hillary said it best in her speech that it is not about HER, it is about the best interest of the country and McCain is certainly not that. Obama lacks experience in Washington and thank God for that. Experience in Washington has got us a terrible economy, no healthcare, expensive college tuition, indentured servitude to foreign oil and global warming. So good job Hillary supporters, go vote for McCain and contribute to the problem. In 20 years, when your children ask you why the country is in the state it’s in, proudly tell them that you voted against change because you weren’t thinking of their future, you were getting revenge because your gal didn’t win. Congratulations to you!

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 1:52 PM | Report abuse

"How many times have you been to Russia?" jvpski @ 1:09 p.m.

A. The question is irrelevant
B. I've been there several times, to include places like Norilsk and Murmansk, which are considerably less comfortable than your trips to Moscow or St. Petersburg.
C. You never answered my question - is Putin's direct commentary about Russia's contempt for the U.S. what you would call "respect" toward Bush and Republicans?

I get it though - your visits to Russia, and your Russian friends, are within the confines of the Bolsheviks. You remember, the murderous Russian minority that used the ruse of Communism to support it's local imperialist grab of land from ethnic groups that it has been waging battle with for hundreds of years? Oh, you know - like Georgians? Or maybe Czechs? Or Afghani's? So, the Russia that gives Bush and Republicans so much respect is actually the same Russia that interned, executed and exiled millions.

Yep, sounds like the kind of people I want to get respect from comrade.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous :
"Carter was lambasted for his econ policy, but people often fail to take into account the oil price shocks."

Exactly why I took this period of reference first.
Before, ALL modern presidents have REDUCED the ratio Nat. debt / GDP.
Why ? Because of a strong growth and a balance of trade largely in the positive.

Roosevelt/Truman D 1945-1949 -24.3%
Truman Harry Truman D 1949-1953 -21.9%
Eisenhower1 Dwight Eisenhower R 1953-1957 -10.8%
Eisenhower2 Dwight Eisenhower R 1957-1961 -5.4%
Kennedy/Johnson D 1961-1965 -8.2%
Johnson Lyndon Johnson D 1965-1969 -8.3%
Nixon1 Richard Nixon R 1969-1973 -2.9%

Posted by: Hellstan | August 28, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse

Actually,
the two main culprits of the current tendancy to chronical huge debt are Bush senior and Reagan.
When Reagan got elected : 32,6 %
When Bush senior got elected : 53, 1 %
When Bush senior left office : 66, 2%
Reagan and Bush have more than DOUBLED or Nat.debt/GDP ratio.

Posted by: Hellstan | August 28, 2008 2:02 PM | Report abuse

"The man brings home malaria after serving in the greatest struggle the entire world has known and all you can think to say is something completely out of context about his attendance in the Congress." Anonymous @ 1:39 p.m.

Interesting, until the passage of the American with Disabilities Act; I would have been fired from the job I have for having the worst attendance amongst my peers. Score one for the socialists.

And, before you get all sobby emotional about desecrating the haloed image of JFK - let's remember he got his chance to be President by being funded by his bootlegging father. Nixon lost West Virginia because Bobby Kennedy personally delivered bribes to the local sheriff's; who also conveniently served as the chief of elections in their respective counties. There are no clear consciences in politics.

You actually proved my point. Regardless of the reasons, JFK had the one of the worst attendance records in history. Thanks

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

"Russia post" and JFK gets no pass for malaria" post are mine...as I said, I ain't anonymous

Posted by: Richard B | August 28, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse

"no healthcare"

I have excellent healthcare thank you.

"you were getting revenge because your gal didn’t win. Congratulations to you!"

Thank you.


Posted by: Me | August 28, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

lol. You don't have to thank me for making a point for you because I did not. I forced you to show that you you did indeed use Kennedy's attendance record out of context. And the socialists have never scored anything according to my scorecard. That is just a distraction from your original weak comment. Your original comment about Kennedy's attendance was completely out of context and you know it. You used only the part of the information that suited you. So, now you play devils advocate when you "get the knowledge" that you were preaching to everyone about, handed to you. But, I'm not surprised. I've seen your type in a great many places. You are nothing new.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

"lol. You don't have to thank me for making a point for you because I did not. I forced you to show that you you did indeed use Kennedy's attendance record out of context. And the socialists have never scored anything"

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 2:22 PM

You obviously have me confused for some other commentor. Try again. Actually I was thanking you for acknowledging I was getting revenge for my gal not winning.

Posted by: Me again | August 28, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

I love Bill.
I love Hillary.

I am voting for McCain.

Posted by: Lesley | August 28, 2008 12:07 AM

How about this twist: I love Billary, I'm voting for McBush, I get what I deserve.

Posted by: Smaggery McDillery | August 28, 2008 2:47 PM | Report abuse

The context of the JFK comment was that JFK was more "experienced" than Barack Obama because of 6 years in the House and 7 years in the Senate. However, JFK's attendance record in both Houses calls into question the very basis of that "experience", as he would rarely have participated in the debate, negotiation and amendments associatd with the legislative function.

This fact is born out by the tremendous lack of commentary by JFK in the Congressional record. I don't have access at the moment, but I don't believe JFK ever solely sponsored a single piece of legislation.

So - for context Anonymous - scroll up. The issue wasn't JFK's service to his country, it was his record as a legislator being used to bolster the argument that he was experienced enough to be President.

Posted by: Richard B | August 28, 2008 2:55 PM | Report abuse

The only reason this Hillary supporter is voting for Obama is because four more years of a Republican Administration would decimate the Middle Class, and negate any upwards movement to those who haven't been as fortunate as my husband and children. Our nation and grandchildren, and the generations to come, are more important than our political choices. We survived Bush, we'll survive Obama.

Posted by: Puget Sounder | August 28, 2008 2:59 PM | Report abuse

I had some dillhole accuse me of being unappreciative of my freedoms as an American yesterday because I tried to explain to him our policies on hometime in the trucking industry through our company.

He's a moron obviously, it was such a random comment, but this is the country we live in, he can say whatever he feels like. So can the rest of us.

But when we move from stating opinions to bickering and trying to rake one another over the coals, gridlocked and unable to change the disastorous situation America is in, we become the equivalent of the same politics we have come to despise and are no better.

Please stop fighting. United we stand divided we fail, regardless of who we elect. Unless the American people can come together and start compromising and agreeing to certain terms, nothing will change. Ever.

Posted by: Steph | August 28, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

I have to laugh when anyone says that George W. Bush is a "moral" person. He cooked up the Iraqi war in the oval office when the rest of the world said he shouldn't. He invades a sovereign country unprovoked, and proceeds to incite a civil war in which over 250,000 Iraqi citizens have died. He should be brought before the world court to answer for his murderous crimes. Saddam was awful, but the lack of planning on this administration's part resulted in 90% unemployment in Iraq within 6 months of the invasion as people were running for dear life. The Iraqi people don't want us there, so its easy to get caught up in the "war" against the great satan.

How does a president with any moral fiber turn his back on New Orleans and all the areas hit by Katrina? How does a president with any morals finance an unrighteous war by borrowing money from a country like China where suppressing democracy is the MO? He wants to invade a country where the people are crying for freedom? Then why didn't we invade China?

Isn't anyone paying attention to this administration's abuse of the constitution? That he has written 50 times more side statements to laws being passed than any other president?

And Republicans think electing John McCain is going to turn this abysmal mess around? More like same old, same old. McCain belongs in an old soldiers home rather than even being on the senate floor!

I'm actually hoping that McCrazy picks Joe Leiberman as his VP because that should just about drive a wedge down the middle of the party.

Posted by: Another Mike | August 28, 2008 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Re: KOZ | August 28, 2008 9:15 AM

Your rant epitomized the inability of a vast majority of Americans to accept views not aligned with their own in today’s society. It’s pathetic, actually.

Posted by: Puget Sounder | August 28, 2008 4:04 PM | Report abuse

All the PUMA bashers are correct as long as you believe the following:
1. There is no difference between Bush and McCain.
2. There is no difference between Clinton and Obama.
3. The reasons that you vote Democrat are exactly the same as the reasons I would vote for a Democrat.
4. As a centrist Democrat I have no other choice than to vote for whatever too liberal candidate the DNC shoves down my throat.
5. Democracy is not an important issue to anyone and even if I am pissed because the system was rigged, undemocratic and non inclusive I have no other choice than to vote for Obama.

I didn't vote for Bill or Hillary because of a love fest infatuation, I did it because I thought they would govern somewhat closer to my values than the Republicans, and the Clinton Presidency was awesome. Bill Clinton would still be the best choice for president. But if you think that Obama convinced me he would live up to that legacy when he is clearly a DNC lap dog who hardly ever even utters the name Clinton you are mistaken.

Carter was a centrist, and religious. Bill was very centrist. Contrary to what Fox news says not all Democrats are screaming liberals. Every single one of you blames the election of George Bush for all the countries woes, but none of you are ready to take responsibility for putting up John Kerry as the person running against him, and now this year the DNC suspends democracy to shove Obama down our throats.

I am a PUMA because the DNC is broken, undemocratic, unrealistic, and beligerent towards centrist democrats.

I know that you are not capable of understanding this but voting for the most liberal (centrist) Republican in the senate isn't out of the question when the Democrats expect moderates to just put up with shennanigans and a non inclusive process.

Look at your history, Obama has a Liberal voting record and is loved by all people who hate the DLC. He is going to get smeared. Carter was a centrist, Clinton was a centrist and the next Democratic president will be a centrist (not just in empty rhetoric, but in positions and voting record) Most of you will hate her.

Posted by: AndyShep | August 28, 2008 11:35 PM | Report abuse

Today McCain congratulated Obama. That's class. As a P.U.M.A. I can say it's not about Hillary; it's about Obama. I always voted the Democratic ticket, and this year would not have been different. I've always voted and volunteered for Democrats, and never clung to a candidate, but the party. This year Obama went out of his way to lose my vote. I understand Bill and Hillary doing what they have to do: fall in line. I don't have to. Obama will lose/win without my vote. If others feel as I do, it may come to pass that McCain wins. If that happens, blame Obama. He didn't need to win our support; he just didn't need to go out of his way to lose it.

Posted by: xprab | August 29, 2008 1:43 AM | Report abuse

Humanevents.com needs to get a life

Posted by: vicki in midwest | August 29, 2008 8:36 AM | Report abuse

"How long is the Beast allowed to have authority in Revelations? "

Revelations Chapter 13 tells us that it is 42 months...

... Almost a four-year term of a Presidency...

According to The Book of Revelations the anti-Christ is:


"...a man, in his 40's, of MUSLIM descent, who will deceive the nations with persuasive language, and have a MASSIVE Christ-like appeal....the prophecy says that people will flock to him and he will promise false hope and world peace, and when he is in power, he will destroy everything..."

Do we recognize this description?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Even if you don't believe in the Bible or it's teachings, how can we ignore the fact that this man has such close ties to the Muslim faith and it's beliefs?
And that the Pastor from his church preached hate against America?--No matter how much he may denounce him now, this was his spiritual leader for many years.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In a recent news broadcast, Barack Obama made this statement with pride, 'We are no longer a Christian nation; we are now a nation of Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, . .." To think our forefathers fought and died for the right for our nation to be a Christian nation--then to have this man say with pride that we are no longer that.


How far has this nation come from what our founding fathers intended it to be!

Posted by: Shayna Arnold | August 29, 2008 10:25 AM | Report abuse

Back on your meds dear.
This article has nothing to do with theology stay on topic. Obama is liberal, you are not, not everyone who disagrees with you is the devil.

Posted by: AndyShep | August 29, 2008 10:37 AM | Report abuse

I don't get what is so exciting about party unity, unless you're an actual card carrying NAZI.

Posted by: Not a puma | August 29, 2008 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Dear PUMA:
Enough! I am so tired of your incesant whining. Every last one of you are dillusional, narcistic, man-hating, racist, self-loathing, media created cartoon characters.

You don't care about this party, you don't even care about the Clintons. You care about you. That's it. As a Clinton supporter, I am ashamed to have gone door to door with you. You all are sad people.

I feel especially horrible for Sen. Clinton, as she now realizes that SHE had the true NUTJOBS of the party and not the other way around.

Posted by: Georgia | August 31, 2008 1:56 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company