Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Bill Clinton and Barack: Too Alike to Like Each Other?

Sen. Barack Obama and former President Clinton
Some Democrats worry about how the perceived rift between Sen. Barack Obama and former President Clinton could impact the fall campaign. (REUTERS/Lee Celano)

DENVER -- There's little question that Barack Obama and Bill Clinton are the two most compelling political figures to emerge in the Democratic party over the last three decades.

And yet, the relationship between the two men has been described as polite at best and strained and standoffish at worst.

Bill Clinton has made little secret of his distaste for the way in which Obama portrayed his eight years in the White House during the primary campaign, painting the former president's tendency toward hyper-partisanship as part of what's wrong in Washington.

The former president also bristled at the idea that he was somehow out of step on race relations, accusing the Obama campaign of having "played the race card" against him.

Obama, for his part, has praised the former president since the conclusion of the primary process but has made clear, too, that he is a new leader for a new time and will not bow at the shrine of Clinton. He has also not made the sort of time commitment to the former president that Clinton would like; the two men talk infrequently and are not personally close.

It's a fascinating stand-off between two men who, on paper, have much in common.

In today's Washington Post, legendary reporter and author David Maraniss explores the Obama-Clinton relationship.

"Bill Clinton and Barack Obama -- in so many ways two sides of the same coin," writes Maraniss. "Old heat and new cool, two guys who came out of nowhere, bereft of early connections, overcoming the odds."

And yet, according to Maraniss, there is a real tension there. He writes:

"'Obama does not like Clinton, and Clinton knows it,' asserted one longtime Clinton adviser, a refrain that several compatriots repeated almost word for word, though occasionally in stronger terms."

Maraniss also quotes renowned historian Taylor Branch about the personal hurt that was done to Clinton when Obama's campaign seemed to suggest he was unnecessarily injecting race into the contest. "'He was particularly upset about the race card deal,'" Branch told Maraniss of Clinton. "He said, 'I hate that phrase anyway. It makes it sound like a game -- playing a card -- when race is not a game and never was. It is deadly serious.'"

Maraniss' piece is an absolute must-read for anyone wondering what to expect out of Bill Clinton's speech -- set for 9:05 eastern time tonight. While it was widely expected that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) would stick to the script and offer a rousing endorsement of Obama, which she did, there is considerably more question about whether the former president will do his duty tonight.

Bill Clinton -- through his advisers -- has let it be known he is not happy with being asked to speak on a night when foreign policy and making the case that Obama is ready to be commander in chief. And, it's hard to imagine that the former president is happy with the ten minute window he has been given in which to make his remarks.

All of that makes tonight's speech destination viewing for political junkies. Will Bill Clinton play ball? Will he stick to the script? And, most importantly, will he be believable as a strong advocate of Obama's readiness to be president?

By Chris Cillizza  |  August 27, 2008; 2:28 PM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: VIDEO: Convention Wrapup Day Two
Next: Fix Pics: Post Politics TV Goes Hollywood

Comments

@ DAVE "your racist rants are absurd. Run a black republican candidate against a white democrat see who the blacks vote for. I'm sure 10% of blacks might be uninformed enough to switch parties but the Democrats would still get the vast majority."

I think the results of the 2006 election for Junior US Senator from Maryland is evidence in support of your point of view. The liberal White candidate, Cardin, did much better with Blacks than the conservative Black candidate, Steele, did.

Posted by: DexterManley | August 29, 2008 8:21 AM | Report abuse

i lol to your jokes

Posted by: bill | August 28, 2008 7:44 PM | Report abuse

your racist rants are absurd. Run a black republican candidate against a white democrat see who the blacks vote for. I'm sure 10% of blacks might be uninformed enough to switch parties but the Democrats would still get the vast majority. Why is that. The most down trodden sector of the nation can see its flaws esp when they are victim of its flaws.They don't believe hype because they have a front row seat to the hypocrisy. The jews were against hitler way before they were put in concentration camps cause they saw the hypocrisy and they did not trust rhetoric.

Posted by: dave | August 28, 2008 7:41 PM | Report abuse

"but have no desire to do business there or travel there for pleasure."

Posted by: DexterManley | August 28, 2008 1:04 PM

Whatever...I am sure we won't missyou.

Posted by: Me | August 28, 2008 3:22 PM | Report abuse

Biden had to change his position...what choice did he have? recently i saw a video that oe Biden has now been officially introduced as Barack Obama's Vice Presidential selection, at first i was thinking that Hillary will run as VP for Obama, but i think Joe Biden can be a good candidate for VP too, you can see the video in http://pollclash.com

Posted by: Jacque Denise Yap | August 28, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

The Clintons did what was necessary. Obama looks well-positioned. As much as I dislike Joe Biden, for that very reason he'll help Obama where Obama is weak, but a guy I like -- Rendell -- would have done the same, plus gotten votes in Florida and nobody would have to tolerate Biden's insanity.

This whole "greatest country on Earth" jazz is pretty funny. I'll say one thing for the USA. They have excellent colleges and universities. I got my bachelor's and master's degrees there, but I much prefer being Panamanian. I'd never live in the US again.

Define greatness any way you like. We have extremely low taxes (1% cap gains, 10% earned income, 10% corporate, 0% on foreign-source income). We have a balanced budget and a generous public sector which provides education through the end of "secundaria" (HS) and university education is subsidized. Single-payer health care. No military. De-militarized police force.

While you have both banks and telecoms acting as spies for the State, we have a system of private banking. No foreign entity may access your records and local authorities need a court order.

Telecom and internet privacy is absolute. Authorities need a court order even to monitor a cell phone call and the orders are only issued for 10 day periods which the judge may revoke at any time.

We have firm property rights and contract law.

Most of the social things you fight about we've resolved the European way. Economic growth has been 10+% over the last four years with low inflation. Our banks have a grand total of $30 million exposure to your mortgages out of over $3 trillion in system.

We have a population as diverse as New York's with no racism. The skin color issue just doesn't come up and anyone who would bring it up would look like an idiot. We have a Jewish and Arab community which share the same neighborhood and get along more like cousins than like enemies.

Thank you, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton for your jointly wise decision to liberate us and get your military and spies out.

We favored HRC in primaries but are perfectly content with Obama. McCain is a non-starter here. Forget it. We've moved with the rest of the capitalist world far beyond what McCain's offering. He can't cut taxes low enough and this is a banking and trading economy so we have no need for a military. We get threatened we freeze all the money or void all the money and bankrupt the aggressor.

Maybe the USA is a "greater" country. Maybe not. All I know is I'm content with the education I got up there, but have no desire to do business there or travel there for pleasure.

Posted by: DexterManley | August 28, 2008 1:04 PM | Report abuse


Honest Abe,
"Actually roo_P, what Jack was trying to say is that in elections with a black candidate (regardless of the candidacy) blacks overwhelmingly vote for the black person over a white candidate. White voters are less likely to use race as a criteria. The reason you claim 100% voting pattern by blacks for the white person in the last election is because there was not a black viable candidate."

Well put. I see it like this:
Obama won the first 9 primaries before his 20 year relationship with the anti-American racist Wright hit the news. That leveled the playing field and it was nip-and-tuck after that. Even so, Clinton almost won. Obama then dumps her for vice President, further splitting the party. To top it off, he turns the responsibility of uniting the party over to her at Denver. He is a shallow and unprincipled person, best suited to be a dog-catcher.


Posted by: Billw | August 28, 2008 12:08 PM | Report abuse


Obama is an arrogant jerk. He'd better get down off his high horse and start kissing Clinton's butt for tips on how to win and survive and not pass into the pantheon of panty-waisted liberal loser nominees.

Posted by: Chicago1 | August 28, 2008 10:17 AM | Report abuse

Jack, clearly it seems McCain is?

In all seriousness, though, 100% of African-Americans voted for a white guy in the last election. Additionally, they always vote Democratic in overwhelming margins so your "analysis" is without factual basis.

Posted by: roo_P | August 28, 2008 9:12 AM

Actually roo_P, what Jack was trying to say is that in elections with a black candidate (regardless of the candidacy) blacks overwhelmingly vote for the black person over a white candidate. White voters are less likely to use race as a criteria. The reason you claim 100% voting pattern by blacks for the white person in the last election is because there was not a black viable candidate.

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

Actually they are not alike at all. Different color and different cultures. It needs to be said that there is nothing wrong with being a racist! Black culture is 180 degree different than white. Black culture is a bling-bling culture with flashy cars, clothing and names - white culture is more conservative, more likely to trend toward understatement. Nothing wrong with either but we shouldn't be obsessed with trying to be integrated as well. Blacks are overwhelmingly, racially voting for Obama. Evidently blacks are not color blind. Whites should not feel guilty of expressing their pride for their white candidate either. ENOUGH of trying to pretend race doesn't matter. It's okay to be different, really!

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

Jack, clearly it seems McCain is?

In all seriousness, though, 100% of African-Americans voted for a white guy in the last election. Additionally, they always vote Democratic in overwhelming margins so your "analysis" is without factual basis.

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

"I would however, will point out that racism goes both ways too."

Gallup today:

Whites:
For Obama 37%
For McCain 52%

Blacks:
For Obama 93%
For McCain 2%

So who is truly racist?

Posted by: Jack The Ripper | August 27, 2008 11:45 PM | Report abuse

"bondjedi, you just come on here and become verbally abusive toward others."

If you don't want people paying attention to and singling out your flaws, don't post. It's that simple. If you're going to be a gutless punk, don't be mad when people call you a gutless punk.

"All that you prove is that (1) you're too empty to have anything of your own to say, (2) you're too stupid to have any real arguments that anyone would pay attention to if you weren't verbally abusive, and (3) you have ghetto manners."

Don't forget (4) - Barack Obama is going to be the next president of these United States, and there's nothing you can do about it.

YOU'RE THROUGH ASPER GIRL! THROUGH! YOU AND YOUR DECADENT POLITICS OF SLEAZE AND RACE-BAITING! You don't deserve a president as good as Barack Obama, but you're going to get him anyways! That's America, you punk - love it or leave it!

Posted by: bondjedi | August 27, 2008 10:48 PM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton redeemed himself tonight for his very disappointing and off-putting behavior during the primaries.

Al Gore did not LOSE in 2000. The presidency was stolen from him by a systematic, multi-pronged effort to thwart the will of the people in this country, particularly in Florida. And they cheated again in 2004.

Posted by: Alexa Thymia | August 27, 2008 10:48 PM | Report abuse

Does anybody notice how the Clintons seem to have the need for constant validation? Why is it that?

Posted by: Matt | August 27, 2008 9:56 PM | Report abuse

Doug Christian wrote:

Doug Christian wrote:

I love Bill Clinton too, which is why I could never vote for Obama.

Obama is not like Bill Clinton, thank god, he can't even stand in Bill Clinton's shadow! This is why all people who care about their country will vote for the clearly more qualified ticket in McCain/Romney. Obama, unlike Clinton, is on the side of wrong.

GO MCCAIN/ROMNEY 08!

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 9:36 PM | Report abuse

I thank Hillary Clinton for her own journey thru this campaign. I commend her for being a true Democrat and standing with her party.
I do not believe we should continue arguing for/against HRC/BHO. The primary is over and we need to move forward for the greater good.
As for Obama & abortion, read HRC and the BHO below. They are on the same page as we should be.

Democrat Hilary Clinton

This decision marks a dramatic departure from four decades of Supreme Court rulings that upheld a woman's right to choose and recognized the importance of women's health. Today's decision blatantly defies the Court's recent decision in 2000 striking down a state partial-birth abortion law because of its failure to provide an exception for the health of the mother. As the Supreme Court recognized in Roe v. Wade in 1973, this issue is complex and highly personal; the rights and lives of women must be taken into account.

It is precisely this erosion of our constitutional rights that I warned against when I opposed the nominations of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito.

Democrat Barack Obama

I strongly disagree with today's Supreme Court ruling, which dramatically departs from previous precedents safeguarding the health of pregnant women. As Justice Ginsburg emphasized in her dissenting opinion, this ruling signals an alarming willingness on the part of the conservative majority to disregard its prior rulings respecting a woman's medical concerns and the very personal decisions between a doctor and patient.

I am extremely concerned that this ruling will embolden state legislatures to enact further measures to restrict a woman's right to choose, and that the conservative Supreme Court justices will look for other opportunities to erode Roe v. Wade, which is established federal law and a matter of equal rights for women.

Posted by: Katerina Deligiannis | August 27, 2008 9:33 PM | Report abuse

Go Bill!!! So right on. Can't wait to hear the Republican spin on that one.

Posted by: What A Speech | August 27, 2008 9:33 PM | Report abuse

I love Bill Clinton too. He is a beautiful, brilliant, awesome man. His capacity for compassion and understanding were unparalleled. He rocked. But honestly, he didn't achieve as much as he could have because the Dems lost congress and the Repubs pushed constant scandals and we all lost out on Republican dirty games. And now look at things.

Now some people who claim to love Bill Clinton are actively working to bring down Obama and put the people who fought against Clinton into power again. They offer us a worldview that is suspicious and fearful of the rest of the world. They talk and act tough and feel it is weak to negotiate and compromise and seek understanding.

Obama is not like Bill Clinton. He never claimed to be. But he, like Clinton, is on the side of right.

Posted by: Doug Christian | August 27, 2008 9:29 PM | Report abuse

I'm sorry to hear that, AsperGirl-the part about the lauding Obama-I was kinda hoping that Pres. Clinton's speech would be a tad more edgy, with some veiled barbs about the post-1939 Leni Riefenstahl spectacle that is supposed to happen tomorrow when the MESSIAH APPEARS ON A MOVING PLATFORM ABOVE HIS ADORING WORSHIPERS.

I also understand that the Dem. Party is getting complaints (CK-you shoulda kept it a secret, and let that dumb-ass Obama campaign machine go at it full blast, so we could ridicule the hell out of it later-they read your column!)

It remains to be seen whether there will be Reichstag like columns for Obama to appear before tomorrow night, or something just a tad more audacious-like the White House columns-either way-the Dem. Party dolt leadership will be hoisted on their very own petard!

Posted by: Spring Rain | August 27, 2008 9:25 PM | Report abuse

Standing Ovation for Bill Clinton!!!

Posted by: Obama2008 | August 27, 2008 9:23 PM | Report abuse

OK, imagine yourself waiting to see your boss, but you can't go in because he's in there getting a BJ. That is creepy, disrespectful behavior on any level. Bill disrespected Hillary over and over and now that he's cleaned up his act, wants to pretend it never happened. It doesn't work that way. Bill Clinton still has a lot to offer but he should do so out of the public eye. He still wants it to be about him! Obama is right to keep him at arm's length.

Posted by: JohnDoug | August 27, 2008 9:21 PM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton's speech is the lauding-Obama one.

So he and Hillary split up the message. She talks about the future of the democratic party and uniting together. Bill talks about Barack Obama and what he can do and what he needs to do.

That way, when Obama loses this Fall, Hillary isn't tarred by the feathers of Obama's failure on tape. And she doesn't have to lie on camera.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 9:19 PM | Report abuse

Tell it like it is Bill!

Posted by: Obama2008 | August 27, 2008 9:18 PM | Report abuse

JohnDoug wrote:

Spring Rain, I like the all caps. Really gets that malicious anger feeling across, which that worthless SOB Obama so richly deserves! That's the most effective way to get people to consider your point of view, I wish I had done that too. I can't wait for the future when Obama is thrown back where he deserves to be, in the failed political campaign trash heap of history, and men of John McCain and Mitt Romney's stature and attitude are in charge everywhere.

GO McCain/Romney 08!

Posted by: Spring Rain | August 27, 2008 9:17 PM | Report abuse

WE LOVE YOU BILL!!! WOOHOO!!!

Posted by: Obama2008 | August 27, 2008 9:08 PM | Report abuse

For some of you to insinuate that CLinton was responsible for Gore's loss in 2000 is absurd. It was the REPUBLICAN ATACK machine that was responsible for how Mr Clinton was perceived. To think that the Republicans cared SO LITTLE about our Country that they would drag a PRESIDENT through impeachment hearings over a BJ is INSANE...............Yet, our current President is responsible for HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF HUMAN LIVES, YET NO IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS?.............THIS SO CALLED PARTY OF MORALS ARE THE MOST SNEAKY UNDERHANDED EVIL CREATURES THIS COUNTY HAS EVER SCENE, . . they even laugh in private about how they have all those Evangelicals hooked on just TWO ISSUES. . . It's just so unbelievable it's hard to fathom.

Posted by: jim | August 27, 2008 9:02 PM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton has been awarded 10 minutes to speak before the convention.
Shall we take bets that he can fill that chasm of time? :-)
How 'bout 1 hour & 10 minutes?
I hope Biden is ready for a long wait.

Posted by: Judy-in-TX | August 27, 2008 8:55 PM | Report abuse

Spring Rain, I like the all caps. Really gets that malicious anger feeling across. That's the most effective way to get people to consider your point of view. I can't wait for the future when men of your attitude are in charge everywhere.

Posted by: Doug Christian | August 27, 2008 8:46 PM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton wouldn't have picked a VP who holds a press conference after getting picked, in which he cries and rambles on obtusely about how much each of the individuals present mean so much to him.

Joe Biden Cries, Rambles in Press Conference
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/08/biden-chokes-up.html

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

I mean, how in the hell can anyone even THINK of electing Obama, when he has absolutely NO COMMON TOUCH WHATSOEVER? ANOTHER THING THAT SHOWS HOW OBAMA IS 180 DEGREES REMOVED FROM THE SUBSTANCE THAT IS BILL CLINTON AS OPPOSED TO THE FLASHY FORM OF OBAMA!

WHAT REALLY GETS ME IS THAT HE WAS SITTING UNCOMFORTABLY THE OTHER NIGHT LISTENING TO HIS WIFE'S SPEECH IN A WHITE FAMILY'S HOME IN KANSAS CITY-THEY BOTH LOOKED EXTREMELY UPTIGHT AND UNCOMFORTABLE (btw, whoever thought that up ought to have their heads examined!) THE TELEPROMPTER WAS RIGHT IN FRONT OF OBAMA'S FRICKIN' FACE AND HE SAID HE WAS HERE IN ST. LOUIS! I CAN'T GET OVER THAT! BILL CLINTON WOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT ENTIRE FAMILY'S HISTORY, AND WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO RECOUNT ON TV WITHOUT A TELEPROMPTER IN A SEAMLESS RENDITION OF THE FAMILY'S ENTIRE LIFE!

HOW CAN OBAMA THINK ABOUT BEING PRESIDENT, WHEN HE CAN'T EVEN REMEMBER WHAT CITY HE IS IN WITH THE TELEPROMPTER IN FRONT OF HIM? THAT'S CRAZY! AND IT IS UTTERLY WHACKED OUT ABSURD OF THE POST REPORTERS TO THINK THAT BILL CLINTON AND OBAMA BELONG TOGETHER IN THE SAME SENTENCE! OBAMA IS NOTHING BUT SMOKE AND MIRRORS, A TOTAL EMPTY SUIT, AND BILL CLINTON IS THE BEST PRESIDENT, THE MOST BRILLIANT THAT WE HAVE HAD IN THIS COUNTRY-BAR NONE! AND PEOPLE ALL OVER THE WORLD RECOGNIZE HIM AS SOMETHING VERY VERY SPECIAL! I KNOW, I SEE HIS PICTURE ALL OVER THE WORLD-BILL CLINTON WITH CHELSEA, BILL CLINTON IN INDIA, IN THE MIDDLE EAST, IN NEPAL, IN LONDON, IN THAILAND IN MORROCCO-EVERYWHERE!

BILL CLINTON IS THE TRUE ROCK STAR-BECAUSE HE'S WORKED LIKE A DEVIL FOR EVERY BIT OF FAME AND RECOGNITION HE SO JUSTLY DESERVES!

THAT IS 180 DEGREES OPPOSITE OF THAT EFF OFF OBAMA! PERIOD. END OF STORY!

Posted by: SPRING RAIN | August 27, 2008 8:30 PM | Report abuse

bondjedi, you just come on here and become verbally abusive toward others.

All that you prove is that (1) you're too empty to have anything of your own to say, (2) you're too stupid to have any real arguments that anyone would pay attention to if you weren't verbally abusive, and (3) you have ghetto manners.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 8:21 PM | Report abuse

This thread is supposed to be about Clinton/Obama.

I cheered the Clinton's grit when they beat Bush 1, but I always resented the fact that from that point on, it became conventional wisdom that Democrats had to fight dirty to win.
Along comes Obama with the transcendant political style and the Clintons dragged him down into the dirt.
Bill is obviously full of childish anger over his wife's loss but its his responsibility to extend the olive branch. I don't blame Obama one bit for not wanting Bill hovering over his term in office. In a way, Bill is responsible for the loss of Gore in 2000. In large part we have Bill to thank for the nightmare of the last 8 years. Yes, Republicans were wrong to pursue impeachment, but Bill set himself up like a bowling pin with his garbage personal behavior. Bill acts as if the scandals he helped create never existed. I remember.
Obama has exposed the "inevitability" of the HRC presidency. Doing so was no small feat. If Hillary could lose to the "inexperienced" Obama, surely she would have lost to the Republicans.

Turn the page.

Posted by: JohnDoug | August 27, 2008 8:19 PM | Report abuse

THE IDEA, THE VERY IDEA THAT ANY NITWIT POST REPORTER WOULD SUGGEST THAT THESE TWO HAVE THINGS IN COMMON, OR WORSE, THAT THEY ARE TOO MUCH ALIKE TELLS ME, SADLY, ONCE AGAIN, THAT THE POST REPORTERS HAVE THE INSIGHT OF A PEANUT. REALLY. BILL CLINTON IS SO ACCOMPLISHED, THE OVER-ACHIEVER, THE SUPER-HARD WORKER-GET A CLUE FOLKS! OBAMA HAS NEVER HAD TO WORK AT ANYTHING IN HIS LIFE! HE DOESN'T DO HARD! IF IT'S HARD HE TAKES A BIG PASS-THAT IS THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF BILL CLINTON-YOU FORGET SOMETHING, OBAMA HAS GOTTEN WHERE HE IS LARGELY BECAUSE OF RACE-THAT PEOPLE HAVE WANTED TO GIVE HIM BREAKS, THAT WHITE MEN WOULD NEVER HAVE GOTTEN IN THE SAME SITUATION-THEY HAVE HANDED HIM LAW PROFESSOR TENURE TRACK JOB WITHOUT HIM WRITING A BLOODY WORD! THAT WOULDN'T HAPPEN WITH A WHITE MAN. IT JUST WOULDN'T. AND EVERYTHING FROM HARVARD TO GETTING HIS STATE SENATE SEAT AND US SENATOR-HE HAD HUGE AMOUNTS OF HELP-OR WAS JUST HANDED THE JOB.

BILL CLINTON ALSO NEVER HUNG OUT WITH UNSAVORY CHARACTERS LIKE AN AVOWED TERRORIST AND CONVICTED FELON, NOT TO MENTION HIS WHACKED OUT SPIRITUAL ADVISOR THE RACIST HATEMONGER REV. WRIGHT!

YOU KNOW WHY BILL CLINTON DOESN'T LIKE HIM? IT'S VERY SIMPLE-OBAMA HAS BEEN AN EFF OFF ALL HIS LIFE, WITH EVERYTHING HANDED TO HIM ON A SILVER PLATTER-AND EVERYONE WILLING TO GIVE HIS LIES, HIS COVERUPS ABOUT HIS RELATIONSHIPS WITH THESE CHARACTERS, AND HIS TOTAL UTTER LACK OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT ANYTHING INVOLVING THE GOVERNANCE OF THIS COUNTRY-INCLUDING FOREIGN AFFAIRS THAT SIMPLY AND JUSTLY GALLLS THE HELL OUT OF BILL CLINTON.

BILL CLINTON CANNOT CONCEIVE OF SOMEONE LIKE AN OBAMA GETTING TO WHERE HE IS WITHOUT DOING A BLOODY DAMN THING TO GET THERE.

AND NEITHER CAN MOST OF THE COUNTRY EITHER-SO THE DEM. PARTY LEADERSHIP, STACKED AGAINST HRC, WILL SEE, ONCE AGAIN, HOW UTTERLY OUT OF TOUCH THEY ARE-JUST LIKE POST REPORTERS-BECAUSE IT WILL TRULY BE A LANDSLIDE FOR MCCAIN/ROMNEY-AND BILL CLINTON, AS ALWAYS, WILL BE 100% CORRECT ABOUT OBAMA-HE IS NOT ELECTABLE.

Posted by: SPRING RAIN | August 27, 2008 8:18 PM | Report abuse

The number of racist twits like AsperGirl and Scrivener are likely balanced by the same amount of "age-ist" twits refusing to back McCain.

The idiot vote will likely cancel each other out in November, but until then, we welcome all responsible viewpoints. The more their repetitive screeds are posted, the more page views for the The Fix. WaPost thanks you, even if Microsoft, Infiniti, etc. aren't exactly delivered the audience promised (i.e. people with jobs, money, an ounce of common sense, discerning taste).

Post away, you nuts.

Posted by: bondjedi | August 27, 2008 8:11 PM | Report abuse

Of course they're not alike. Obama would never think of treating Hillary with the disrespect Bill consistently has for decades.

Posted by: Aleks | August 27, 2008 8:11 PM | Report abuse

I don't believe the media is partisan. I think the incompetence is equal opportunity.
Posted by: DDAWD | August 27, 2008 6:10 PM

Agreed (discounting FOX), but since the Republicans are much shrewder and more strategic and systematic at exploiting the media's incompetence, the result is the same.

Posted by: Aleks | August 27, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Aleks is right. Hey, scrivener, O got nominated so what happened to your convention rebellion that was supposed to crown Billary or Gore, or whatever else you said.

Take a seat next to G. Ferraro, Harriet Christian, Ed Rendell, Carmella Lewis, Asper"Girl," and intandi and have a smile and a coke.

Posted by: Broadway Joe | August 27, 2008 8:05 PM | Report abuse

Barack Obama is black. Bill Clinton is white.

Barack Obama is never going to be president.

Bill Clinton is going to be sleeping with a president.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 8:05 PM | Report abuse

Thank you Hillary!! Thank you state representatives! Thank you Obama/Hillary delegates! Thanks to the supporters of various backgrounds! This time, we are a great family, and Hillary's still with us on this journey. I am so proud of her, seriously.

Now, it's time to get that White House back. No more exploitation from that McCain camp to further his agenda without making a sincere case on behalf of plenty of people; they don't want to really do their homework and make the case of WHY some of these voters should go to his camp (though some probably will).

We're strong this year! Lets do it!

Posted by: Obama2008 | August 27, 2008 8:05 PM | Report abuse

>>Aleks wrote: "Just tuning in to see how AspergersGirl and Scrivener are taking the news. I see AG's lost whatever little mind she had."

Uh, I'm glad you follow me so that you can track my mental status.

I have no clue who you are... so many fans, so little time.

I haven't lost my mind, just shorted out between the sheer genius of the BarAckropolis idea and the notion that Bill Clinton and Barack Obama are alike.

I always mistake Rhodes-Scholar-Attorney-General-Governor-Presidents for pop-cult-narcissistic demagogues.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 8:01 PM | Report abuse

Alike? There is no suggestion that Obama can't keep it in his pants.

Posted by: edbyronadams | August 27, 2008 7:56 PM | Report abuse

There's a big difference between between voting for someone of your own race out of pride and because they are the first real viable candidate for the presidency - and voting against somebody simply because they are of a different race than yourself.
Posted by: Dan | August 27, 2008 7:31 PM
**************

Put it like this: Black people have voted for white presidents before.

Posted by: Aleks | August 27, 2008 7:55 PM | Report abuse

Just tuning in to see how AspergersGirl and Scrivener are taking the news. I see AG's lost whatever little mind she had.

"Aleks:
Maybe I'm "just doing my job."
You know, like you.
Now get back to your "disinfo" campaigns.
Posted by: scrivener | August 27, 2008 3:55 PM "

You don't know how to use quotation marks. Please learn, or stop using them. Anyway, how do you figure I'm responsible for "disinfo" when Hillary did what I said she would and that weird fantasy rebellion you cooked up in your Rush addled little brain never showed a hint of materializing?

Posted by: Aleks | August 27, 2008 7:53 PM | Report abuse

I think that John McCain should pick Condoleezza Rice as his VP.

I think that they should consummate their ticket in Mile High Stadium, before a gathered crowd of speechless nymphs.

Then, afterward, when their child, Arena, springs full grown from Condoleezza Rice's head, the War between the Blue gods and the Red gods will begin from which the Purple (biracial) gods will be excused to go lecture aimlessly at Chicago University Law School without accomplishing anything for twelve years, after which they shall run for President of the United States as a transcendent single being in which they are all merged as The One.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 7:49 PM | Report abuse

"Black people always play the race card when things aren't going their way, and Bill Clinton thankfully wasn't going to bow at THAT extortion."

Anybody who reads this ought to particularly rethink this remark, which was posted by a self described Clintonista below. Ask yourselves, Clinton supporters or not, how does this help get a Republican out of the White House?

This is petty and heinous.

Posted by: Tulane Democrat | August 27, 2008 7:48 PM | Report abuse

Where's the BarAckropolis, man?

TOGA! TOGA! TOGA! TOGA!

Dude, I shouldn't have done that last keg stand.

Oh man, you're a GOD! Check out that laurel wreath!

Whoah, sorry for barfing on your VP, God.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 7:41 PM | Report abuse

How childish and petty was Bill's announcement he is going to boycott Obama's speech (his boycott may or may still be operative)? And no, O and Bill aren't alike as the following might attest:

Paula Jones
Vincent Foster
Dolly Kyle Browning
Arkansas State Troopers
That woman, Ms. Lewinsky
Gennifer Flowers

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 7:39 PM | Report abuse

Its funny how many people conveniently forget what B Clinton had going for him which made his administration so "successful"; the internet explosion. The Clintons are frightening people; the Obama's are frightening people. If you care at all, you'll write in Ron Paul.

Posted by: Montana Boy | August 27, 2008 7:39 PM | Report abuse

"David Maraniss is a fine reporter. He is not legendary. He is not even well-known. "

Well, he does have a Pulitzer, I think.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 27, 2008 7:38 PM | Report abuse

"Let's assume that people don't vote for Obama b/c he's black, there are MANY people voting him BECAUSE he IS black."

There's a big difference between between voting for someone of your own race out of pride and because they are the first real viable candidate for the presidency - and voting against somebody simply because they are of a different race than yourself.

Posted by: Dan | August 27, 2008 7:31 PM | Report abuse

Note to HRC: this convention was supposed to be about "O" not "I." Your speech a 1.0 on a 1-10 scale.

So the narcissistic, hate-fueled Billary “Nobody-But-Me” agenda according to brilliant reporting today in the NY Times by Pulitzer prize winner Maureen Dowd. HRC was assisted by Ed Rendell (who compared O to Adlai Stevenson - way to support O, Ed) and a 74-year-old hate-blaster named Carol Anderson of Vancouver, Wash., a former Hillary volunteer, "who stood in the back of the room in a Hillary T-shirt and hat signed by Hillary and “Nobama” button and booed every time any of the women speakers mentioned Obama’s name.”

When does this prejudiced, stupid HRC junk end????

From Dowd today (great reporting): “There were a lot of bitter Clinton associates, fund-raisers and supporters wandering the halls, spewing vindictiveness, complaining of slights, scheming about Hillary’s roll call and plotting trouble, with some in the Clinton coterie dissing Obama by planning early departures, before the nominee even speaks.

At a press conference with New York reporters on Monday, Hillary looked as if she were straining at the bit to announce her 2012 exploratory committee.

“Remember, 18 million people voted for me, 18 million people, give or take, voted for Barack,” she said, while making a faux pro-Obama point. She keeps acting as if her delegates are out of her control, when she’s been privately egging on people to keep her dream alive as long as possible, no matter what the cost to Obama.”

Mrs. Wm Clinton yesterday had an opportunity to tell the Bold and the Bigoted to stand down once and for all, but declined. What's worse Clinton News Network went into overdrive seeking out anti-Obama harpies and mentals to interview. One totally unrepresentative AA "Hillary" female delegate started crying on cue about how she loved Hillary and that Barack would have to work for her vote. She never said why she opposes him (guess her employer forgot to tell her). In that 15 minute interview, she set back the AA image 188 years.

But how good is Dowd? Does it get any better? Wow. Also, the legendary Roger Simon in politico.com was great today, too: all about HRC not accepting defeat gracefully. Check it out.

Posted by: Broadway Joe | August 27, 2008 7:30 PM | Report abuse

Thank you for renewing my faith in the Democratic party and our Democratic leaders. I am an American first and I will stand with all of my sisters and brothers of this country. Thank you to all who participated in making this afternoon's roll call one to make all Democrats proud. And, thank you Senator Clinton.

Posted by: Sue in Ohio | August 27, 2008 7:28 PM | Report abuse

Milbrook, I'm not dangerous, I'm not a liar and I don't believe I'm a lunatic. I can truly understand the pro-choice stance. I held it until I found God and I'm not being sarcastic here. I'm serious when i say that I can fully understand thinking of a fetus a a group of cells with no soul. I believed that at one point in my life. I don't believe that now, however. At some point that group of cells has a soul. When that point is, I truly don't know. I figure that abortions are about as old as time and legal or not, they'll be performed so basically I've come to the decision that as long as they'll be performed, it may as well be done in a medical enviroment. I wouldn't do it but I don't think I have the right to impose my religious beliefs on others in this regard. However, when it comes to late term partial birth abortions and leaving living aborted babies to die with no medical assistance, yes, I draw a line. In 1996, there were 650 partial birth on record-in 2000, there were 2,200. Way too many in my book, and if my being against this makes me a lunatic, so be it.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 7:27 PM | Report abuse

a victory for mccain will be seen as a mandate of the electorate to stay the course, even if by only one vote. in this election the question should not be: "am I better off?" it needs to be "is this really the road I honestly think we should take?"
stay the course, ask yourself how deregulation helps you when you pay to receive your phone bill by mail(strangely, many on fixed income do not have e-mail). visit your bank, talk to a human, pay a fee (your bank does not like YOU, your money if it is enough). call a non-healthcare call center, ...in America. you can not talk to the operator at the phone company (don't exist). self check-out means cashiers jobs will vanish (you can do it, soon for a fee).
my true ire is at banks and that "minimum balance" thing. this says your money is not enough for me to hold, and to prove it, this month I will charge you more for me having it than I will give you in a year of me using it. and every month thereafter i will do te same untill all of your money is gone then i will charge you a fee to tell you to get lost. BTW, can i manage your investments for you?
yes, vote to stay the course, its good for the rich.

Posted by: THE curious black | August 27, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: piktor | August 27, 2008 7:22 PM | Report abuse

I will never, ever vote for A BLACK MAN FOR PRESIDENT ...

So I guess it is all about racism, after all.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 5:56 PM
_____________________________________________

And this is news?

Posted by: gbooksdc | August 27, 2008 7:16 PM | Report abuse

to aspergirl, saying things like that might hurt you later on in the future if there ever was a black person who wanted to look up to you,they shouldn't cause right now you are posing as a big racist. fyi if you shold ever be something in life that you would want someone to support you're gonna have a hard time running

Posted by: gbb44 | August 27, 2008 7:15 PM | Report abuse

David Maraniss is a fine reporter. He is not legendary. He is not even well-known. It is impossible to take this piece seriously after such hyperbole. Furthermore, the piece is a recap of Mariniss' piece; there's not a single original point from the WRITER (Cilizza) to justify the space. Just another example of CC's "mail it in" work ethic. Hey, the editors let it go and the checks don't bounce -- money for nothing.

And readers can't complain that they didn't get their money's worth.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 7:08 PM | Report abuse

If you wonder why people are disparaging the mainstream media for following a script, here's all the ammunition you need to know that this is not the result of paranoid ravings.

Posted by: Dave in Northridge | August 27, 2008 7:07 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: VBArthur
Your sentiment asking the Obama supporters to cool it is thoughtful and well founded but believe me is falling on deaf ears. Many have urged your exat sentiment fo months and told to shut and get on board. Asyou accurately posted, many who opposed him and find him wanting inexperience are that much less likely to change their minds as long as the antiClinton venom continues. Maybe by November they will finally hear what you are saying but from the months of ugly antClinton rants here, that certanly appears doubtful. They are doing moe to destroy your candidat then anything John McCain'scampaign could possibly imagine.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 6:55 PM | Report abuse

"You start out as a racist and you can't try to go back on that. You are a bigot. "

Well, in all fairness, I don't think she has ever disputed her racism.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 27, 2008 6:40 PM | Report abuse

aspergirl wrote: "I will never, ever vote for A BLACK MAN FOR PRESIDENT who has, despite having an ivy league law degree, no meaningful body of professional works except for 2 hyperbolic "historical fiction" autobiographies with "composite characters", who has not made any meaningful legislative contributions before running for the presidency as a freshman senator, who spent 20 years in an activist church that aggressively preaches racist conspiracy theories and Afrocentric grievances and publishes terrorist manifestos in the Church newsletter, who was closely associated with an unrepentant terrorist, who bought his house with help from a corruption figure under indictment with ties to Iraqi oil for food money laundering, who loses each of the 22 debates he has participated in as a presidential candidate including one forum in which all the candidates had to do was explain their own beliefs and defining life experiences, who issues a series of incoherent foreign and military policy statements, who is a staunch supporter of corn oil ethanol, who opposes oil exploration and drilling and nuclear power, who wants to levy a series of extreme taxes not seen since Jimmy Carter stagflation times, and who has a wife who is not proud of America.

So I guess it is all about racism, after all."
but a white an who says it is okay for women to NOT receive equal pay for equal work, who said to a dying wife that faithfully stood by him: "...You stupid C**t ..." who courts the endorsement of john hagee knowing of his "christian" viewpoints, to have on his resume that he is one of the keating 5 and had a key role in bankrupting the savings and loan industry, robbing millions of elderly of their nest egg. for you, he's ok?
maybe you are right, maybe there is still a use for a double standard.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 6:39 PM | Report abuse

Some guy,

Right on. I am a Barack Obama supporter and, like so many others, it doesn't matter what color his skin is or is not. He is a very smart guy and has a vision of this country that is more to my liking than McCain. And I am a white veteran from a small rural town.

All you haters and bigots need to look inside yourself and examine your nasty little secrets. Was it your daddy or mommy talking about all them colored and blacks or was it somebody else that started you down the road of damnation?

You all make me sick. Keep it up Some guy

Posted by: Mike in Sac | August 27, 2008 6:37 PM | Report abuse

Yes Aspergirl. When you say "I will never, ever vote for A BLACK MAN FOR PRESIDENT" it is all about race and you being a racist. It doesn't matter how you end your statement or what you say past that point.

You start out as a racist and you can't try to go back on that. You are a bigot.

Posted by: Mike in Sac | August 27, 2008 6:32 PM | Report abuse

"Most people support Obama because they like the idea of a black man as President. But when they get to know Obama, they realize that this guy is incompetent, inexperienced and a communist and gets scared. This election will be a landslide victory for McCain."

I'm sure some people are voting for him solely because he's black but to say "most" is an utter crock of ****. This whole inexperienced thing has GOT TO GO. Maybe my views are skewed but I don't believe he would have gotten this far if people believed he was inexperienced. Like I said before, plenty of people are able to look beyond his color and completely value what he believes in and wouldn't have voted for him if they thought he was inexperienced. Sure some don't care about his experience and just care that he's black but not all who support him fit into that category.

Scared communist????? Are we in the 50's/60's? You sound like a conservative talk radio host.

Posted by: some guy | August 27, 2008 6:28 PM | Report abuse

I wish Bill was given a much longer time slot. He deserves it and he is enough of a man to get over things that were said in the heat of battle. I think he is capable of giving a supportive enthusiastic speech that would make Teddys' great speech look like a McCain speech by comparison. I think though both were extremely intelligent with incredible spouses. I still however feel Clinton sold the people out and has profited handsomely from it.Carter is just another example.What people don't understand is that the Republicans strategy is to repeat lies until people have heard them so many times from so many (on message) people they start to believe them.MSM owned by fewer and fewer people are easily controlled by the right wing. The reason American's believe Carter was the worst president sits in the Clinton lap. Just like they did with Obama they repeat the Republican talking points so then the lie "has got to be true because even enemies agree on it." The war in Iraq would be nothing new cause we would still be fighting the war in Iran if someone other than Carter had been in power then.If we had had Carter for 2 terms we would not be stuck in our oil addiction by this time also. We would not be limited to fish 1 x a week due to mercury levels. Since I was old enough to vote the least inspiring Democrat in the primary race has won until this year. The reason they win is because the corporations hedge their bet by giving most of ther money to Republicans but choose the Democrat who will give them the most power.Thats why we get uninpiring Democratic candidates. Till this election!!!! Why do people keep saying they haven't been this inspired sine Kennedy.
The same Republican attack machine will go both barrels at president Obama as they did Carter. If some Democrat sells him out like Clinton did Carter it will be another sad day for the world.

Posted by: dave | August 27, 2008 6:28 PM | Report abuse

Sue in Ohio: "Again, what are we showing our young people? What are we saying to them about handling disappointment, about winning and losing, about human kindness and respect? Perhaps, simple values like kindness and respect don't matter. Only winning at any cost."

Well said, my dear, well said!
Reading your post made my day...

Posted by: MomsHugs | August 27, 2008 6:27 PM | Report abuse

Speaking as an Obama supporter, I have to say I wish other Obama supporters wouldn't attack the Clintons so harshly. Yes, it's clear that there is something of a divide between Obama and the Clintons -- and I think the "this town ain't big enough fer the both of us" dynamic between Obama and Bill Clinton is part of that -- but with Hillary throwing her support behind Obama last night and Bill likely to do so tonight, continued attacks on the Clintons only serve to energize their staunchest supporters to continue resisting the urge to vote for Obama. Remember, right or wrong, a lot of those staunch supporters object more to the behavior of Obama supporters unaffiliated with Obama's campaign than they do to anything Obama himself has said or done. There's no sense in alienating them.

At the same time, it's worth noting to Clinton holdouts that negative sentiments directed toward the Clintons by Obama supporters on this message board and others are likely not indicative of the feelings of Obama himself, his campaign or even most of his supporters. What you're seeing is just Internet venom. Online message boards attract belligerent idiots with the (sometimes false) promise of anonymity, and that's where you're going to see the most hateful comments from all sides. Trust me when I say that whether the topic is presidential politics or the latest season of "Lost," Internet vitriol is not at all representative of the feelings of most people.

'Course, this is all predicated on the theory that none of the vicious anti-Clinton or anti-Obama posts are the product of sneaky Republicans looking to create dissension in the Democratic ranks, and I'm pretty confident that sort of sneakiness is going on here. Pay close enough attention to the negative posts -- particularly the timing of them -- and it's pretty easy to pick out who's expressing their own thoughts and who's just trying to turn Democrats against each other.

Posted by: VBArthur | August 27, 2008 6:27 PM | Report abuse

Voters should be troubled by Obama's abortion stance

Dennis Byrne
August 26, 2008

Can we just listen to ourselves? We're debating whether some babies born alive have a right to medical attention.

How have we come to this? Can't we all agree that everyone whose heart beats, brain functions and lungs respire at birth should have a chance to live? If we're a compassionate, rational and just society, we would say, "Of course, every infant has a right to lifesaving medical attention. Even if it's not wanted."

But an unthinkable debate is raging as a part of the presidential campaign, centering on how Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama voted while he was an Illinois state senator on legislation designed to protect the lives and health of all newborns. The debate over Obama's voting record has grown so arcane that we've lost sight of why this question ever came up: Some infants that survive abortion are denied medical assistance. They are left to die.

Jill Stanek, a former nurse at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, described in 2001 during congressional testimony how it happens: In a "live-birth abortion," doctors "do not attempt to kill the baby in the uterus. The goal is simply to prematurely deliver a baby who dies during the birth process or soon afterward." Medication stimulates the cervix to open, allowing the baby to emerge, sometimes alive. "It is not uncommon for a live aborted baby to linger for an hour or two or even longer. At Christ Hospital, one . . . lived for almost an entire eight-hour shift." Some actually are born healthy because they are aborted to preserve the "health" of the mother, or because the pregnancy was due to rape or incest. At best, they are left in a "comfort room," complete with a camera (for pictures of the aborted baby) "baptismal supplies, gowns, and certificates, footprinting equipment and baby bracelets for mementos and a rocking chair," where they are rocked to death. "Before the comfort room was established," Stanek said, "babies were taken to the soiled utility room to die."

Yes, there ought to be a law against this, and Congress passed one unanimously. It declares that a person is defined as "every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development." Born alive means any human being that after "expulsion or extraction" from the mother "breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, Caesarean section, or induced abortion."

Pretty simple, right?

Well, not really. Some people fear that this fundamental protection, ensuring to all the first of the rights of "life, liberty and pursuit of happiness," is in reality a sneak attack on a woman's right to choose an abortion. To prevent this "Trojan horse," they insisted, and got, in the federal law a guarantee against construing the law to "affirm, deny or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being 'born alive'. . ." This mumbo jumbo is supposed to mean that abortions can't be restricted.

To mollify pro-choice concerns, including Obama's, this was inserted in several versions of the Illinois legislation. But it didn't matter, because the legislation died anyway, with Obama's help. Whether or not he refused to vote for a version that contained the right-to-an-abortion provision isn't what's important here. What is important is that Obama put the supposed and vague threat to an abortion right ahead of a real and concrete threat to the most innocent of human lives.

Obama's response to all this is to sidestep any discussion about when human personhood begins, the key question in the abortion debate. Some say it begins at the moment of conception; others say it begins at birth. (Still others look for a middle ground, suggesting it begins when brain activity starts.) But by arguing against the born-alive legislation because it might in some distant and ambiguous way obstruct abortion, Obama implies that the right to an abortion trumps an infant's right to life, even after he is born.

Such logic is breathtaking. It says that even after birth, a mother's right to rid herself of the baby supersedes any right that a child, now independent of the mother's body and domain, has a right to live. Where America stands on this issue truly is a measure of its sense of justice and compassion. On this score, Obama fails.

Dennis Byrne is a Chicago-area writer. His blog can be viewed at

Posted by: Switzer | August 27, 2008 6:25 PM | Report abuse

“McCain is like a Grumpy Elephant with no vision and a flip flopping memory! There is a reason this Elephant is always attacking without a postive message. His trainers are Rove & Schmidt at the circus! We know what to expect at the McCain’s convention a Grumpy Elephant entwining his trunk with 2 Rogue elephants in Bush/Cheney with two cheering trainers in Rove & Schmidt who are trying to sell the American People a 3 rd George Bush Term.” RFK

Posted by: Cooday | August 27, 2008 6:25 PM | Report abuse

Obama FINALLY gets a better day of polling, as he leads big today in New Mexico, as well as comfortable leads in PA and NV. There are mixed numbers from Florida. Full roundup: http://campaigndiaries.com/2008/08/27/better-polling-day/

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 6:23 PM | Report abuse

Kathy - You are either ignorant, a liar and likely a dangerous lunatic. Are you one of those "activists" that advocates killing "abortion doctors"? To begin with, "partial birth abortions" (Intact dilation and extraction - IDE) account for 0.17% of abortions in this country. Of those, the vast majority, 90%, "deliver" already dead fetuses!!! The reason the base of the skull is surgically opened and the brain sucked out is to deflate the head so as to prevent tearing and stress to the cervix of the mother. In the case of dead fetuses bacterial growth begins almost immediately and that procedure to done to less chances of a life threatening infection to the mother!

I cannot express to you just how disgusted I am with your posts. You have taken a known and rare medical procedure and either purposefully distorted it, taking a part of that procedure out of context to inflame a debate or you are doing so out of ignorance. I suggest you go to a MEDICAL SITE on the internet, one not connected with either side of the abortion debate, and read! I would stroingly suggest that anyone else, before blathering about this do precisely the same.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | August 27, 2008 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Most people support Obama because they like the idea of a black man as President. But when they get to know Obama, they realize that this guy is incompetent, inexperienced and a communist and gets scared. This election will be a landslide victory for McCain.

Posted by: Fisher | August 27, 2008 6:14 PM | Report abuse

By the way, My last post went under Anonymous because I didn't fill in my name by mistake. I am Kathy of Elburn and I'm proud that my family has all races included.

Posted by: Kathy | August 27, 2008 6:13 PM | Report abuse

Very little similarities and a lot of stark contrasts.
1.Bill Clinton is a moderate,pro-business democrat whose patriotism can never be questioned.Obama-a socialist anti-business candidate with several connections with anti-Americans(to put it mildly)
2.Bill Clinton was an experienced governor when he decided to run for the white house and did not depend on affirmative action to achieve this.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 6:11 PM | Report abuse

"But don't assume that the few racist voting against him equates to everyone voting against him b/c of race. B/c that would just be silly."

I think this was to me but not sure.

I definitely don't think that. I know some people genuinely disagree with him and his views. It was statements like "I won't vote for a black man" that I was referring to.

Posted by: some guy | August 27, 2008 6:11 PM | Report abuse

"Our news media doesn't educate with facts... their comments belie their partisanship to say the least!"

I don't believe the media is partisan. I think the incompetence is equal opportunity.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 27, 2008 6:10 PM | Report abuse

Come on, get off the race issue. Bush has more African Americans in his administration than any prior president.
republicans are not racists simply because Democrats say we are as they will do pretty much anything it takes to get the black vote. Republicans ,on the whole, don't believe in government handouts because we actually do believe that everyone is equal in strengths and abilities. We also believe that putting people on the dole removes incentive and destroys families-which it has. Are there hardcore racists in society? You betcha and it's on both sides. I'm obviously a hardcore conservative republican that happens to have quite a few African Americans in my family and I love them all. How dare liberals assume I'm a racist because I'm a republican.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 6:09 PM | Report abuse

"Hillary has a great track record with health care "

I'll agree that she has a track record, but the "great" is a bit misplaced.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 27, 2008 6:07 PM | Report abuse

"We all know that if Boy Barack were white, we would never have heard of him."

Uhh no WE don't all KNOW that. Maybe YOU THINK that but do you honestly believe that people who have voted for him and supported him so far have only done so because he is black? This may be hard for you to fathom but there are actually people that are able to value a person by their beliefs, values, and actions regardless of the color of their skin.

Maybe if he wasn't black he wouldn't have gotten so much press but that doesn't prove that the reason for the amount of press is because he's black. It's not his color that's such a big deal, it's the fact that Americans are so damn divided on race that is.

Posted by: some guy | August 27, 2008 6:06 PM | Report abuse

Wow, I didn't know the Brian Schweitzer speech was that good. I skipped over it while flipping to go watch Sportscenter. I'll try and catch a video of it.

To the person who said CSPAN is the way to go, I whole heartedly agree. Yesterday was my first time watching coverage on CSPAN. I'll be watching it on there tonight. No talking heads or annoying commentary. You see the speeches as they are.

And I think Bill Clinton is being really disingenuous about the whole South Carolina thing. To blame Obama for it is pretty immature. I know Obama's campaign didn't tell me about it. It was widely reported in the press. That's not Obama's fault. That said, I'm still a big Bill Clinton fan. I saw Clinton give a talk in New Orleans in the lull between the Ohio/Texas and the Pennsylvania primaries. It was for his charity work. Very inspiring and a reminder on how great of a speaker he is.

And I agree with Obama that the term "race card" really trivializes the race issue (which I guess is the point) I don't know the origin of the term, but I first heard it back in the days of the OJ Simpson trial. In the trial, at some point it stopped becoming about Simpson and the murder of his ex-wife and became about a black man in a white justice system. The jurors found Simpson innocent and hailed it as a victory for civil rights. But was it? I say it cheapened the cause. It gave a window for white people to scream "race card" at every opportunity. Since the race issue was used improperly for OJ, they claim it is used improperly everywhere. Sure, OJ got off scot free, but can you say that the lot of black people has improved in the justice system? No way.

The same thing seems to be happening with Hillary Clinton. Like OJ, she stopped making this about her and made it into a women's equality issue. And yes, there was a lot of sexism in the media. But there wasn't sexism coming from Obama. Just as the jurors derailed the work of the DA for Simpson, PUMA is trying to derail the work of Obama for Clinton. They might even succeed. But what will that accomplish? Even on the surface, you put into office a man who has no interest in furthering the cause of women rights. Furthermore, you cheapen the movement by screaming sexism where there wasn't any. PUMA does not have the effort or discipline to organize a boycott of the advertisers of FOX News or MSNBC or whatever.

And then we get stuck with a lousy president. And the worst part is that women aren't going to find themselves any closer to the respect they should be getting. Men are going to see them as a group of tempermental sore losers. What do you think that will do to their opinion of the next potential female president? I doubt it will help.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 27, 2008 6:03 PM | Report abuse

"SOME of us have seen right through the fake exterior, FROM DAY ONE."

I love lines like this.

I knew I hated him as soon as I saw him.

Wonder why?

Posted by: Doug Christian | August 27, 2008 6:03 PM | Report abuse

I agree all this race talk is getting old. And if people are indeed racist, it's truly sad. I would however, will point out that racism goes both ways too.

Let's assume that people don't vote for Obama b/c he's black, there are MANY people voting him BECAUSE he IS black.

But don't assume that the few racist voting against him equates to everyone voting against him b/c of race. B/c that would just be silly.

Posted by: Later | August 27, 2008 6:01 PM | Report abuse

In my opinion the one who has to knock our socks off is Obama. Hillary has a great track record with health care and being side by side with Former president Bill Clinton, during a wonderful economy. I am not knocking Obama for giving up top pay upon becoming a lawyer then going to work in a Chicago community back home. But the reality is we have a huge mess in the US now. It is going to take experience for any president to hit the ground running, and frankly he does not have me sold on the idea that he can begin to do the job. Michelle Obama does not strike me as warm and fuzzy. I believe in the hard core Michelle who did not think twice to say she was ashamed to be an American. Words like that carry alot of weight for many us voters. However, her sweet and complelling speech the other night seemed rehearsed and difficult for her. I guess we will see if she can keep up with her talk as " I am one of you"

Posted by: avcarson | August 27, 2008 5:59 PM | Report abuse

Kathy,

Is there another K out there that I am not aware of? You asked me to explain to the unintelligent repubs... or whatever that was. To which post was it intended for? I agree w/what you said. I am not sure if there is a post out there from me that I am not aware of.

Posted by: K | August 27, 2008 5:57 PM | Report abuse

Hey, mibrooks27! I'm with you!! I could not have summarized better the debacle resulting from Bush/Cheney's Team GOP. People keep their head in the sand... thanks to Fox/Rush/Beck/etal, whose garbage is repeated every day. Our news media doesn't educate with facts... their comments belie their partisanship to say the least!

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 5:56 PM | Report abuse

>>disgusted in NYC wrote: "I've read some incredibly ridiculous generalizations about race ("black people always play the race card"), shocking but "honest" racist remarks ("No one I know in West Virginia will vote for a black man"), and other similar comments that do nothing but divide us as a nation. What year is it, 1958 or 2008? I can't tell anymore."

I will never, ever vote for A BLACK MAN FOR PRESIDENT who has, despite having an ivy league law degree, no meaningful body of professional works except for 2 hyperbolic "historical fiction" autobiographies with "composite characters", who has not made any meaningful legislative contributions before running for the presidency as a freshman senator, who spent 20 years in an activist church that aggressively preaches racist conspiracy theories and Afrocentric grievances and publishes terrorist manifestos in the Church newsletter, who was closely associated with an unrepentant terrorist, who bought his house with help from a corruption figure under indictment with ties to Iraqi oil for food money laundering, who loses each of the 22 debates he has participated in as a presidential candidate including one forum in which all the candidates had to do was explain their own beliefs and defining life experiences, who issues a series of incoherent foreign and military policy statements, who is a staunch supporter of corn oil ethanol, who opposes oil exploration and drilling and nuclear power, who wants to levy a series of extreme taxes not seen since Jimmy Carter stagflation times, and who has a wife who is not proud of America.

So I guess it is all about racism, after all.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 5:56 PM | Report abuse

lacks experience:
the republican party and its surrogates have put forth the opinion that african americans are not truly americans and therefore should not be seriously considered for president of the US. it reminded me of my youth, hearing white CHILDREN refer to my grandfather as "boy". African American children after the civil rights movement were taught to never accept that type of denigrating treatment in any form. why should we?
we are no longer 2nd class americans, and as a candidate forpresident of the US, sen. Obama should not see himself as having to meet a more rigid standard than those who went before. or maybe i just missed president Clintn's homages to president Carter.


it needs to be remembered that the bigotry and ignorance that has clouded the vision of this nation will continue to blind us and hold us back as a nation. Some whites in America state: "slavery was a long time ago, get over it" they need to acknowlege that jim crow is not dead yet, or the incidents of Jena, La, the Duke U. lacrosse team, James Byrd, Rodney King and Sean Bell would be aberrations.


in the eyes of some americans, Sen. obama will always be seen as a boy who will never have enough experience to be a man. they may never be convinced that they are wrong, but their bigotry must always be exposed for what it is. a fear of the future and its inevitablilty. true, sen. Obama may lose the election, or he may win the election, but tell me why he should be the first candidate to need to give obeisance to the runner-up? is it because of not who he is, but what he is?

Posted by: THE curious black | August 27, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse

The racism that this election has shown is saddening and disgusting. People still exist to this day who will only value the beliefs and actions of a person if they're the same color. A person of different color with THE SAME beliefs and actions will not be valued because of their skin. THEIR SKIN. How can people still think like is? It's horrible that the young ones growing up here are still prone to be raised with such beliefs. And as you can see by the RACIST ADULTS posting on the internet, there's not much hope for changing those beliefs once they've been ingrained so deeply throughout someone's upbringing.

The election has equally shown the sexism that still exists.

I can't believe people can say things like "I won't vote for a black man" and not think twice about how illogical it is.

Posted by: some guy | August 27, 2008 5:54 PM | Report abuse

"Well why don't you stop talking and start listening. " Why do people assume that people don't listen?... I am listening... I've been listening to him since he ran for Sentator in Illinois.

There's nothing there... Although he did say that his speech on Thursday will have more content... finally.

Thanks for reminding us to "listen" however ... as if we don't already. So nice to always assume.

Posted by: Chicago | August 27, 2008 5:52 PM | Report abuse

I for one hope that Bill Clinton doesn't stick to the script and says something riveting, refreshing, and unifying.

So far the DNC feels more scripted than a Christmas pageant, and is likely turning the stomach of every undecided voter who can bear to watch it.

sobes.

Posted by: sobes | August 27, 2008 5:50 PM | Report abuse

The Obamanbots are great at denying reality.

Bill Clinton won two Presidential elections...on his own, with some help from Ross Perot.

We all know that if Boy Barack were white, we would never have heard of him.

Posted by: Steve007 | August 27, 2008 5:50 PM | Report abuse

So K, please inform us unintelligent , uninformed and biased republicans why we're so very wrong. And no media sound bites please. We went to Iraq after the UN gave the go ahead along with most democrats and our allies. Personally, I think waiting the 6 mos. or so for said go ahead was a big mistake. How bout those mega tons of yellow cake that were just shipped to Canada to Iraq? Course I suppose you heard nothing of it if you only depend on the mainstream media. And Bush didn't steal the election as much as you like to think he did. Several of your liberal media outlets did recounts after the fact. Bush won-deal with it. Do I approve of Bush's handling of just about everything? Nope-he's an appeaser to say nothing of a big spender. But let's just throw the baby out with the bath water. Speaking of babies, Obama seems to think it's OK to put aborted babies born alive on shelves in utility rooms to die with no medical attention whatsoever. He also seems to think that women dumb enough to wait til their 7th month or so are entitled to have the babies delivered up to the head and have the brains sucked out while their hands and legs spasm. After all, the rights belong to the idiot that couldn't manage to take one lousy pill a day.

Posted by: Kathy | August 27, 2008 5:49 PM | Report abuse

From: Jon Carson, BarackObama.com
Here is how Camp Obama works, notice they do not mention anything about the Clintons in this message? Sounds like they want to shut them down, just like they are doing to my vote for Obama, it is shut down.

[mailto:info@barackobama.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 3:33 PM
To: William
Subject: Rolling up our sleeves

This has been a convention of extraordinary moments. Ted Kennedy passing the torch to a new generation. Michelle Obama moving the crowd to tears. And tonight, Joe Biden will give the biggest speech of his life.

Millions of Americans are watching and counting on us to win this election and deliver real change.

They're not just counting on Barack and Joe -- they are counting on you. Hillary couldn't have said it better: "None of us can afford to sit on the sidelines."

This is our one shot, so let's roll up our sleeves -- or risk another four or eight years of the same disastrous Bush-McCain policies.

Sign up right now for events happening this week in your community.

Tomorrow, Barack will accept the Democratic nomination, and supporters all across the country are getting together to be a part of this historic moment.

Then, this weekend, we'll kick off the biggest voter registration and mobilization drive in the history of politics.

Attend a Convention Watch Party this Thursday evening, and find a Weekend of Action event near you:

http://my.barackobama.com/WOAevents

If this convention has shown us anything, it's how much energy and enthusiasm is out there -- and how much passion for change.

Voters in all 50 states are realizing what's at stake. And they're hearing Barack's message of change in every corner of the country.

Let's seize this incredible opportunity and work together to get out the vote like never before.

Attend a Convention Watch Party and sign up for a Weekend of Action event near you.

Supporters like you have brought us this far, but there's still a lot work to be done.

At this crucial time in our campaign, it's never been more important to get involved.

Thanks,

Jon

Jon Carson
National Field Director
Obama for America


Posted by: William | August 27, 2008 5:49 PM | Report abuse

Doug, I am not voting for Obama not out of Spite. I am just not a fan of him or his friends (I lived next to two of them, both lawyers). His ideals are nice... I just don't believe he has the capability to pull it off.

I believe in McCain more is all. You have your belief, I have mine, and Obama is not it. I have children too... so don't assume just b/c we don't vote for Obama... means we don't want what's best for the country.

Posted by: Kim | August 27, 2008 5:47 PM | Report abuse

Uh... which nation/s have higher standards of living for it's population?

And this race thing is old. first off understand you will NEVER get rid of "racism", because leaders of "minorities" promote racism, and there will always be jerks who no matter what will be racist. SO get off the damn horse already its' been dead for a while now. The longer folks WANT to see racism the longer it will exist, and now days it is a WANT to see racism more than anything else. Poverty, debauchery, and discrimination do not "BELONG" to any one race, it's common to EVERY race as it is an attribute of humanity itself. I am an American, I work with Americans, I'm going to war with Americans, and I get mad when folks claim to be "hyphenated" americans... Just stop it already and be just an American and you'll be surprised how much farther that will take you.

Posted by: Norm | August 27, 2008 5:46 PM | Report abuse

"But now everyone knows Hope and Change and Hope and Change... needs substance. The people of the U.S. want to know what that "change" entail... or is it the same thing all over again since Obama's campaign has already shown it's the same old politics all over again."

Well why don't you stop talking and start listening. There's a convention going on where Obama is showcasing his agenda, but it doesn't get covered on FOX or even CNN. Listen to Mark Warner's keynote address. That's the economic plan.

The foreign policy plan is a return to our Christian values: Love thy Neighbor (and love thine enemy too). If we act calmly, try to understand people, and save our weapons for when they're needed, we will be respected again. Do you have any idea how weak we are perceived in Russia right now because of our current macho stance? Does that make us safe? We're literally spending trillions on our own insecurity.

Posted by: Doug Christian | August 27, 2008 5:46 PM | Report abuse

All your comments on this post represent nothing. What do you gain from Bush presidency? McCain is just another Bush so consider your options and vote for the better. We do not need another war, we are tired of loosing our children. The world need to unite and there is only one person and one party that can do that- Barack obama and Democrats.

Posted by: Bone Crusher | August 27, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Will Bill Cltinon stay on script? Are you kidding, this is a former President of the United States, the most powerfu man in the world, and you expect him to stay on script? Excse me while I choke with laughter! Of course he wont stay on script! He'll sya darned well what he wants, he'll go over his time limit, and it will be worth every second just to watch him speak. Will he help Obama? (Yes) Will he hurt Obama? (Yes!). Will every thing he says be meaningful? You bet! I expect him to just flatten McCain and Bush and set the stage for the most important speech of the convention..... The speech I REALLY want to hear is Joe Biden's. We will get to see what he is made of. If he successfully ties McCain to Bush, and THAT is exactly his sole task tonight, the whole country will be paying attention tomorrow. If he fails, the grumbling will be heard across the globe. There wont be much middle ground nor room to spin Biden's speech. Either he drives a stake through McCain's heart with something that plays over and over for weeks to come in the press or he fails miserably. Mr Biden is Mr. Middle Class, a plain spoken genuine father and husband. Either he hits the balll clear out of the park or Obama has almost no chance.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | August 27, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

You have GOT to be out of your minds. Bill Clinton and Obama alike? Bill Clinton is a genius; Obama is an affirmative action drug using slacker who got through life cozying up to the white folks to get ahead. Obama has far more in common with George Bush, "all hat and no cattle", an empty suit MUCH too familiar with cocaine. Sure he's a better public speaker than Bush, but so is Roseanne Barr. Obama says nothing because he realized early on in life the way to get ahead was to let other people project what they wanted to see and believe in on him; the more of the real Barry they saw, the less they'd like or support him. SOME of us have seen right through the fake exterior, FROM DAY ONE. The problem isn't that he'll be too far left or right; the problem is he'll be NOTHING and the same folks pulling Geroge W. Bush's strings will be running rings around Obama behind the scenes the way they did for eight years of a dottering senile Reagan. Change we can believe in... all we want, but it still won't happen.

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

I have seen many posters state that Obama was a beneficiary of affirmative action. It seems as though they are saying that he did not earn the nomination in a fair manner. These posters are not giving Obama enough credit.

I preface my remarks by saying that I support affirmative action. It is an imperfect remedy for the disadvantages that many blacks face in K-12 education.

But none of these posters have provided any proof that Obama benefited from affirmative action. Maureen Dowd points out that when he applied to law school, Obama did not identify his race. Also, he was editor-in-chief of Harvard Law Review. This is clear evidence that Obama is an extremely smart man(keep in mind, Chief Justice Robets was also editor-in-chief of Harvard Law Review). Students on law review decide who should be editor-in-chief. They would not make this decision on the basis of affirmative action -- law students are not that "generous."

Simply put, Obama used his intellect and political skills to beat the Clintons at their own game. Obama organized; he had people canvassing in every state. Clinton did not; she used the old-fashioned approach of getting rich donors. By the time, she "found her voice," she was too far behind.

Also, I am sad that Bill Clinton is blaming Obama for his fall from grace. The Clintons only have themselves to blame. He did denigrate Obama's win in South Carolina by saying that Jesse Jackson also won there. Clinton obviously knew what he was doing. He is a Southerner who regularly frequents black churches; he understands how to talk in racial code. Many blacks felt betrayed when he lumped Obama with Jesse Jackson. They did not need Obama to spell it out for them.

Hillary Clinton frequently pointed out that she was the candidate for hard-working white people. Now, I doubt that she is a racist -- but she willingly spoke in racially insensitive ways when she became desperate.

Clinton might have indeed made a good president -- and she still may have the chance. If she has another chance, she should follow the template provided by Obama. Get people on the ground in every state. Canvas neighborhoods. Use the Internet. Be innovative. Do your homework.

Posted by: Concerned in PA | August 27, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Doug Christian,

I appreciate your comment and respect your vote for whomever you decide. Again however, you named a bunch of people who Hillary can NOT control. I am not and did NOT complain about Hillary losing and blaming it on Obama. I blame it on Hillary's campaign. YOU however, are blaming it on HER. Isn't that silly?

I don't like Obama b/c I see his reactions and how he treats people that don't agree with him, amognst MANY other factors that's too long to list. "I" make my judgements... not the media as you've suggested. As a matter of fact, the Media is so pro-Obama that I can't get away with it.

So... all I am saying is, you can't point fingers to anyone but the self. Obama needs to energize voters to want him as President... if he needs someone else to do so. Why would I want a president so dependent on another? I need a strong president... and stop poiting fingers.

Posted by: Kim | August 27, 2008 5:41 PM | Report abuse

Obama is more like MUGABE than Clinton. America has been really good to Obamas while their step brothers live in huts in Kenya. They are too stupid to see that. Obamas friends include America haters like Rev Wright, communists and terrorists. He is so far from mainstream America and knows very little about governance.

Posted by: Sammy | August 27, 2008 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Coming from a different country, who is now a U.S.Citizen... We are indeed the greatest country in the world.

We have the Freedom of speech? I wonder if you can burn the national flag in other countries, I wonder if we can call the leader of our country foul names, I wonder if we can complain and nag and do as we wish in the name of freedom of speech? I don't agree with these absurb mean spirited talks/acts... but we can do that.

Other countries (specifically communists)... you can yell and scream as much as you want. At night, they'll come to your home and take you out, send you to "re-education" camp.

And when you look at China and India... and see wealth... the weatlthy are VERY VERY wealthy. The poor .... believe me, you'd rather be a poor living in the U.S.

Posted by: K | August 27, 2008 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Clintons are grateful for the opportunities America had given them. Obamas are too stupid to realize that Obama is more like MUGABE than Clinton. America has been really good to Obamas while their step brothers live in huts in Kenya. They are too stupid to see that. Obamas friends include America haters like Rev Wright, communists and terrorists. He is so far from mainstream America and knows very little about governance.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 5:34 PM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton didn't hold his coronation in a Barackropolis.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Kim, you asked what EXACTLY has she done since she stepped down that makes you think she's unworthy for 2012?

It's not anything that she's done that makes this a reality. Just like it's not anything that Obama himself did that has Hillary people upset. It's over-zealous supporters and biased pundits and the 24 hour media circus that played the race and sex cards you are all so upset about. But it is a reality. The same way you feel about Obama is how I will feel about Hillary if her supporters destroy our campaign. The difference is, you will have done it out of spite and not in a fair campaign. You will have sold my child's future to the industrial-military complex out of spite. Do you think the 18 million Democrats that didn't agree with you on Hillary will ever vote for her if that happens? I voted for her and I never would.

Hillary can not ever win the presidency if Obama loses. It's a simple matter of perception.

Posted by: Doug Christian | August 27, 2008 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Obama like Bill Clinton? Hardly. Obama tries to be everything to everybody. Obama is slow on his feet when he doesn't have a prompter. Clinton is at his best. And he certainly doesn't have the commanding presence that Clinton does. Look who's commanding the agenda at HIS convention. Even after having enjoyed what must be the greatest media bias advantage in history, Obama is slipping in the polls, not gaining. Hey, the garbage about Hillary supporters this week is a smoke screen. For his plunge in the polls, he has no-one to blame but himself. Elections aren't charity events. No, Obama isn't a fly on Clinton's butt.

Posted by: Don | August 27, 2008 5:31 PM | Report abuse

I've read some incredibly ridiculous generalizations about race ("black people always play the race card"), shocking but "honest" racist remarks ("No one I know in West Virginia will vote for a black man"), and other similar comments that do nothing but divide us as a nation. What year is it, 1958 or 2008? I can't tell anymore.

Posted by: disgusted in NYC | August 27, 2008 5:28 PM | Report abuse

Rick F., your comment assumes that the U.S. is the greatest country in the world. Do you have any statistics to back that up? Because we rank less than #1 in almost EVERY category. And, in 50 years, the global economy will have flattened the "greatness" of this country into the mediocrity of the struggling upstarts (India, China, etc., as they currently stand).

Posted by: James John | August 27, 2008 5:25 PM | Report abuse

Everybody keeps on saying "greatest country in the world" - by what measure? In case you haven't noticed, the U.S. is now behind much of the world in quality of life, education, health care, and a host of other factors. We need Change before we fall even farther behind.

Posted by: Steve in Colorado | August 27, 2008 5:25 PM | Report abuse

As an African American I am saddened by what I have watched the media do relative to this campaign, and I am saddened by the fact that so few Americans of all races and ethnicities have paused long enough to see what is being done. I have 3 things to say: 1) As a female, I have been saddened to watch women who talk about the importance of women, treat Michelle with such disrespect. Black women in this country have stood side by side with White women, often to our detriment, yet when the time came to stand up for us "simply as a woman", that respect has not been returned. I have not seen a white woman under the banner of feminism and women's rights stand up for Michelle. I have seen women who are members of the Democratic party, a party that says its for democracy and fairness, women rights, equal rights, and social justice provide Cindy McCain more respect as a woman than someone who is suppose to be one of their own. This is the what younger women of all races are looking at. 2) I have watched this same party, the democratic party, do little to defend Obama. A man who has done what the country espouses - kindness, goodness, hardwork, family, strong belief in God - and have watched these things be used against him. When he makes a mistake is treated very differently than someone who has made the same mistake or one much worse. This is why the young are so disallusioned and the Republicans are having a good time watching our hypocracy. They knew just which buttons to push and they knew that we were more like them than we wanted to admit. They knew there was a difference between what we said we believed and our actions. And we have not disappointed them. 3) Blacks have supported every Democratic president and have strongly supported the Democractic party. We supported the Clintons and we were the primary reason they won their second term when everyone had turned their back on him. We are not asking Hillary to give up her chance to be President. Had she won, we would have gladly supported. But she didn't. And since she didn't we are seeing that she nor her husband are gladly willing to support the candidate that did. We talk about Christian values, what I am witnessing is far from that. The Bible says "the greatest" commandment is love others as I have loved you. What we have coined the golden rule - treat others the way you would like to be treated. I would ask anyone who reads this whether their thoughts, words and deeds reflect this simple yet profound statement. And whether what they have witnessed so far in the campaign. I say these words not out of anger, but out of genuine sense of sadness in seeing how the rest of the world is viewing the U.S. right now. Even if you belive that he should not have won, he did. And he won playing by the rules. The rules that everyone agreed to and now are trying to change because the candidate they wanted to win did not win. Is this what what made America great? Is this what the Democratic party now stands for? Do we now make up the rules only to suit those we want to win and when they don't win, try to change them mid-stream, or try to destroy the candidate that has won. Again, what are we showing our young people? What are we saying to them about handling disappointment, about winning and losing, about human kindness and respect? Perhaps, simple values like kindness and respect don't matter. Only winning at any cost.

Posted by: Sue in Ohio | August 27, 2008 5:24 PM | Report abuse

"Ah, such a forum of the under informed, biased, and prejudices aspects of our society. I have to wonder about the lack of intelligence shown in these posts and the complete lack of truthfulness. " ....

LOL, I was wondering to who this message was meant for... but thought...hmm it must be directed towards repubs... b/c it's getting so old to hear: No intelligence = repubs. It's name calling like this that makes people roll their eyes too you know.

Posted by: K | August 27, 2008 5:20 PM | Report abuse

I suggest that you political writers give the alleged Clinton-Obama clash a break.

Cease your endless "parsing" (your favorite term nowadays) of every word, nuance, grimace, and gesture deriving from the Clintons.

Some Democrats, including this one, preferred that Hillary be the Democratic presidential nominee.

But such is not the case and we Democrats, unlike Republicans, accept a democratically derived verdict.

We are all united now in our determination to wrest control of this nation from the hands of the most inept, unlawful, and dangerous regime ever to sit in Washington.

A Democrat MUST be elected in November if America is to survive.

We Democrats do not have the luxury of internecine squabbling that could heighten the chances of a McCain win. We are united in our determination to prevent that unspeakable disaster.

Nothing you at the Washington Post, John McCain's campaign operatives, or phalanxes of lingering Clinton haters can write, say, or do will drive a wedge between Democrats this fall.

Give it up, Cillizza and crew.

D. Grant Haynes

Posted by: D. Grant Haynes | August 27, 2008 5:19 PM | Report abuse

"I have a challenge for all those Clinton supporters that say they'll vote for McCain or will not vote at all: Go to McCain rallies. Literally. Cheer him on, applaud when his fellow Republicans applaud. Really listen to his message and embrace it. Consider yourself part of his team,"
posted by DCRican

Yo DC,
I tried that and now I am a Mccain supporter!

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 5:17 PM | Report abuse

To add on Clinton's bad campaign, I agree. Additionally, I've always thought her advisors (at that time) were also inspired by the "novelty" of Obama... and was caught on the hype. Poor Clinton.

But now everyone knows Hope and Change and Hope and Change... needs substance. The people of the U.S. want to know what that "change" entail... or is it the same thing all over again since Obama's campaign has already shown it's the same old politics all over again.

Posted by: Chicago | August 27, 2008 5:17 PM | Report abuse

Ah, such a forum of the under informed, biased, and prejudices aspects of our society. I have to wonder about the lack of intelligence shown in these posts and the complete lack of truthfulness.

The below posts present opinions and falsehoods as fact. Fiction spun into a reality of delusion to confuse and confound those not informed.

Before you state what you think or would like to believe is fact, perhaps you should check it out. Make sure you are not sounding like a complete and total idiot.

Perhaps this is based on the lack of fact in this piece's premise. Barack and Bill are similar in that they are Democrats, educated, and smart, but that is about it.

For example, Bill is about as corporate as any Republican, more so than some, and has made millions off them. Obama worked to help out of work steel workers for next to nothing.

Their whole philosophies and where they come to public service is profoundly different. Making everything else that is based upon this, also profoundly different.

Get real and a grip, both might help.

Posted by: Mike in Sac | August 27, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

"At least Bill Clinton balanced the budget and worked with Republicans. You won't see that with Obama."

What makes you say that? Where do you people get this stuff? This is Obama's whole platform. That we strive for common sense and transparency and compromise. This is why he picked a VP who doesn't fully agree with his foreign policy ideas. So he can discuss things out and get better results. Not only will he work with Repubs, but he will have them in his cabinet.

The current system is too full of venom and deception. There is no debate taking place on any of the issues. It's just a big fight with predetermined stances. We can't go anywhere until we stop that. Obama is post-partisan. There's plenty you can attack him on, but not closed-minded partisanship.

Posted by: Doug Christian | August 27, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

I have a challenge for all those Clinton supporters that say they'll vote for McCain or will not vote at all: Go to McCain rallies. Literally. Cheer him on, applaud when his fellow Republicans applaud. Really listen to his message and embrace it. Consider yourself part of his team, because whether you vote for him because you agree with him (as voting should be) or because you're angry at Obama, you'll be part of his team. And ask yourself, do you REALLY agree with him? Are his policies really aligned with your core beliefs? If they aren't, don't give him your vote!

Posted by: DCRican | August 27, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Sure the race card was played. It was played by the Obama people. The Black racists will vote for Obama.

Posted by: Moe Ben | August 27, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

In a lot of ways, this article is on the money. Obama is basically Clinton . . . without the womanizing. Same intelligence, same ego, cocksure attitude, same optimistic outlook on the world, but no real skeletons in the closet, he’s more cognizant of who and what he is and moreover, the wife though strong-minded, isn't as ambitious as Clinton's wife. Perhaps that's the reason of Obama's dislike towards the former President. He sees someone who could've did better than he did as President, but couldn't

Posted by: Gerald Shields, Seattle, WA | August 27, 2008 5:12 PM | Report abuse

Plz... just b/c people don't like Obama, it's not b/c of race. He has a TON of negatives going for him. If anything, I feel all other races is more at a disadvantage... there are tons of powerful wealthy blacks. and you know it.

Now, as a minority... should I feel cheated too?

Posted by: K | August 27, 2008 5:12 PM | Report abuse

OK so Bill does what's good for Bill and Barack does what's good for Barack. I'd say the similarity ends there. Bill was a consumate politician that knew the ropes. barack's a Chicago politician that ,I believe doesn't know the ropes because of lack of experience although he does know how to play the game to his advantage. As much as I dislike Clinton and his wife, I never believed either was dumb enough to destroy the economy, I do, however, believe that Barack is totally into wealth redistribution, which may sound just fabulous to the poor but neither the poor or Obama are aware of the repercussions of such a policy. If a small businessman that employs say 15 people is taxed to the extent that Obama is calling for, he will simply fire employees. There is no way that business owners will accept making the same amount as their employees while taking all the risks, putting in their own capital and spending the time they must. Unless, of course we become a communist country.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 5:10 PM | Report abuse

"We live in the greatest country in the World. Help me change it!"

Barrack Obama
Socialist Party of America

Posted by: Rick F | August 27, 2008 5:10 PM | Report abuse

The Clinons like to blame their loss on everything, like race to everyone like the Obama campaign but the reality is Hillary lost because of Hillary. She lost many votes because she had voted to go to war in Iraq. She lost many votes for lying about Bosnia and NAFTA. She lost votes because she ran a bad campaign. It was Hillary's campaign she hired the people and the top guy didn't know the caucus rules. Hillary thought she would wrap it up on Super Tuesday and didn't and her campaign used up the funds with nothing left afterwards. People at that point saw Obama win a bunch of caucuses and Hillary lending money to her campaign. Hillary ran a bad campaign. It wasn't race that lost them the race but bad management.

Posted by: Scott | August 27, 2008 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Nathan, what EXACTLY has she done since she stepped down that makes you think she's unworthy for 2012?

Obama asked her to make a supportive speech... to campaign for him on the road. She did that... and her speech was amazing, eventhough he treated her like dirt and some "sweetie" like gal who is not qualified to be president (obviously on the contrary).

Just b/c those support her refuse to support someone they see used his corrupt "chicago politics" and claims "change"... doesn't make her bad. She can only ask for her supporters to support him... but "we the people" have our own minds. Obama absolutely does not "awe" the majority of the U.S. Does that surprise you?

Posted by: Kim | August 27, 2008 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Clinton is so 20th century. Maybe he should have inhaled more! Get over it. We've got problems to solve here, either help or get out of the way but don't make it more difficult!

Posted by: thebob.bob | August 27, 2008 5:08 PM | Report abuse

From Reading the comments, to the Washington Post nonetheless, it confirms how prejudice and so one sided America still is, when will everyone wake and finally realize that America is just not one color, not one party, and that if things don't change the future for my generation and the generations after me are in a very horrible state. Sometimes I think older adults do a disservice for young adults, teens and kids who interact daily with all types of people and do get along greatly with one another. No one on here is using facts and especially those whose speak very ill of Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama, everyone needs to think before they react.

Posted by: Danni | August 27, 2008 5:07 PM | Report abuse

The Trinity Church-of-Hate is the nine-hundred pound Gorilla on the Democrat Convention floor. Reverend Jeremiah Wright and his hate-filled parishioners are the folks Barrack Hussein Obama is used to hanging with. If white eyes mind long enough to review what Reverend Wright said on the available video and audio, they might see the gorilla in the room. The goriila is bigotry and racism, the two things you Democrats are supposedly against... but here you are, trying to send Reverend Wright's junior decon to the White House.
I despise the Clintons because they lie so often they believe their own lies. They are ignorant and sick.

However, Obama is dangerous because of all the truly deep-seated anti-American ideologies he represents, starting with racism and bigotry as represented by his church.
No thanks, Obama. I don't need you!

Posted by: Logan | August 27, 2008 5:07 PM | Report abuse

There are a LOT of people who blindly follow party or pick a candidate based on personality. Young people are especially prone to this "bandwagon mentality." This, and Hollywood's enamor, and the MSM's love for Obama explain why young people were "for" Obama. But as people learn more about the candidates, ignore the rhetoric, McCain looks very good. He is a true American hero, even considering ONLY his political life and NOT his POW status. He has a HISTORY of reaching across the aisle, especially to limit graft in politics. He's the original reformer, fighting against the set-asides that Obama has thoroughly abused from DAY ONE (Obama got excessive gov. funds for U. of Chicago in exchange for his wife getting a HUGE raise). McCain was the candidate we deserved eight years ago and we will finally get. Yes, America will change but it will NOT go communist.

Posted by: Christine Whiteson | August 27, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

Haha, Lots of people pretending to be Democrats on this forum... but really Republican PR people trying to create a controversy that isn't there. I vote on the issues and not whether someone is black or white, or the 2012 election. I am sorry but our country is in trouble, my bills are skyrocketing and I want our young men to come home and stop fighting a trumped up war. You really just can't distract me with this trash.

Posted by: Leah | August 27, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

Senator Obama is so different from Bill Clinton that I am surprised this article was ever written. You can be sure that all of us former Republicans would never have supported the Senator during the primaries had we thought that he was in any way similar to Bill. Probably because he is so different from Bill (and, incidentally, so different from John) we all will be voting for him in the presidential election.

Posted by: formerrepublican | August 27, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

Obama is calling for a $1,000 Emergency Rebate to consumers (code-name for buying votes). He will pay for those votes by increasing taxes on mutual fund investors and people in a pension plan in the form of a surtax on energy company profits, and higher taxes on people who own businesses and create jobs.

So, I hope everyone spends their $1,000 UNEMPLOYMENT check wisely.

Posted by: Rick F | August 27, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

In the great character tug of war you all pull for your man Bill or Obama. Imagine if Barack did pick Hillary as his running mate. We'd be debating every move by what Bill would have done. The Presidency, if elected, would be forever know as the Obama/Clinton war of egos. Our country would suffer. Look at all the nuts who wrote in here and see the friction. Obama was right to pick someone else, anybody, and thank God, he picked Joe Biden, the best fit for him and the country.

Posted by: dana | August 27, 2008 5:04 PM | Report abuse

This country has been left of center or far left for the past 20 years. The federal government is larger, more involved in our daily lives and spending is completely out of control with hundreds of new social programs being run and mismanaged by the federal government. This is the fault of both parties and the reason we need term limits in the legislature and the supreme court. Had the government been far right and right of center we'd have seen a LOT of deregulation, LOTS of tax cuts, SOCIAL program CUTS, SS smaller government budgets, a supreme court only citing constitutional law not world or national opinion for it's rulings, and more power passed down to the states.

Obama is a rank socialist communist advocate and is against what true freedom is all about. Read "the Law" by frederick Bastiat and you will know how far into socialism and communism the democrat party is. Most republicans are democrats just wearing a red shirt and elephant pin. Obama has a GOVERNMENT program for every little thing that ails america. That is not FREEDOM that's slavery in the form of dependence on the federal government. He has proposed no "change" that even remotely resembles an actual change to the country's current course into socialism which by the way is a proven failure. If anything his so called "change" is to turbo boost us into socialism making it harder to get out instead of the gradual slide we are currently in.

Posted by: Norm | August 27, 2008 5:03 PM | Report abuse

What is it with the Clintons that they think everyone should lick their a--holes?

Posted by: Wang Bang | August 27, 2008 5:03 PM | Report abuse

NObama will Tax the crap out of this country, and ruin the economy which is already in a bad shape. Vote for the lesser evil...

Voting for NObama is voting for socialism...

Posted by: John Galt | August 27, 2008 5:03 PM | Report abuse

As always Senator Clinton once again rises above the tabloid cable news bias opinion, she proves again to be a "CLASS ACT" and a Great American ICON! As her faithful supporter, I understand her position but strongly feel Obama is not ready to lead. We still will not support Obama, not because of Hillary because of Michelle and Barack Obama period...

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Read The Audacity of Hope. Obama is young, bright - really bright - focused, dynamic, and able to execute. The only things that matter are his positions on policy, and his ability to execute, to implement policy.

Based on his age and accomplishments, Obama has done more than McCain. He was graduated Columbia and Harvard, edited the Harvard Law Review, worked as a community organizer, taught Constitutional Law, ran several election campaigns, won most, learned from the one he lost ... is very focused.

Posted by: XB Cold Fingers | August 27, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

"Watch out Lincoln Bedroom" is right! Can you imagine The White House staff cleaning "watch springs" from the Lincoln bed?

Posted by: Dianne72 | August 27, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Imagine a loser like you, sitting home probably 300 pounds spending all day on the internet. Trying to imagine what your life may have been like if you were just a little smarter or could work just a little harder, but you never had it in you. I doubt Michelle spends a second of her valuable time thinking about someone like you. She has important things to accomplish. Now back to your keyboard, it is all you have.

--------
One has to wonder why Michelle Shaniqua Obama is so mad at "whitey". Afterall she owes everything she has to affirmative action. Otherwise, she would have been one of those women you see with a baby on each hip shuffling around the supermarket in bedroom slippers.

Posted by: Dianne72 | August 27, 2008 4:53 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

I think there's some merit in Chris's quesiton. There shouldn't be any particular reason for animus between Obama and the Clintons.

South Carolina was hardball nothing more. Obama had three goals: stop Clinton's momentum, crack her lead among African-American voters, and prevent her from making Donny McClurkin the issue in South Carolina. Clinton could have pre-empted all of that by tying Obama to McClurkin a week earlier and thereby calling into question both Obama's uneasy relationship with gay Democrats and also somehow tie really twisted up closet cases like McClurkin to Obama thereby making the SC black electorate a little seasick.

The only way he could break Clinton on race was to take her's or Bill's words on anything tangentially racial and twist them up. The Clintons not seeing this coming because they're so very not racist served up three pitches: the LBJ/MLK polemic, the "fairy tale" quote of Bill's which had to do not with Obama's candidacy but with his flip-flopping on Iraq, and finally Bill made the observation that Jesse Jackson Sr had won SC in 84 and 88. Jesse Sr, of course, is one of Clinton's closest friends despite Jesse's support of Obama. As a close friend, Bill knew that Jackson had taken no offense, something Jackson immediately confirmed.

That was all the Obama team needed and she never had a chance to bring up McClurkin.

It was not Obama's fault that they had to play hardball. They did. It was not Obama's fault that his nuttier supporters beyond the inside team really began to get off on hating the Clintons. It was not Obama's fault that the hating has continued until today.

It is Obama's fault that he didn't call the Clintons up afterwards and say "sorry for that, but you know politics better than anyone...how about the four of us play a round of golf and have dinner and drinks?"

It IS Obama's fault that he allowed the innacurate image his nutters painted of the Clintons to hang there. It was also his fault that, while he didn't say anything negative about Spanish-speaking people himself because like the Clintons, Obama is not a racist either, he let his nutters run with that one for awhile stoking tensions between the "black" and "latino" communities. Again, this was hardball of the kind the Clintons and Richardson are used to. Obama owed them a call to say "look, I'm in this to win and I need 90% of the Black vote and I'm never going to put up your numbers, Hillary, with the Latino community." They could have laughed about it.

On the flip side, when Obama was out of his element among Slavic-Americans in coal-country, Hillary could have called Obama and Michelle and tell them, I, too, have to go to my strengths just as with the C-o-C stuff. I have blue-collar Slavic support and I'm going to use it. You stymied me in SC with you're strength and I'm stymieng you with my stregnth. I've got Kelly Pavlik in my corner and you can't bowl. I'm White them's the breaks. We are all pros here. Let's fight hard but enjoy that we're all on the same page."

The media was so enthralled by Obama's story and his "safe Black" image and had such animus towards all Clintons that they gave Obama a rocking chair ride instead of the grilling they gave Clinton. This may have caused Obama to believe his own press -- not that Clinton was a racist -- but that he was invicible and maybe try to peck away at Clinton's White evangelical support and some of her remaiing Black support as well. By adopting an almost Scaife-like posture on the Clintons.

It got so bad Scaife editorialized FOR CLINTON.

David Axelrod has done a picture perfect job in a lot of ways getting Obama to the point he had. Perhaps, none of them liked the alienation from the Clitons but they realized it was too late. Any olive branches could hurt Obama with his more extreme Black support.

Clinton did a good job of winning every debate on preparedness and issues and connecting with middle-class Americans who wanted a fighting Democratic party.

I pin the ultimate blame on HRC and Mark Penn for not putting in the effort to learn each and every state rulebook as Axelrod had. She also gets blamed for using Penn to begin with because he was a horrible adinistrator and often had other clients' whose lines of business were at odds with the Clinton message and Penn won.

Replacing Penn with Maggie Williams was a great move and almost won it for Clinton.

Bill Clinton and Barack Obama have to have some sort of father/son thing going on but at the same time the are so ALIKE that I imagine they will be close friends once the results are in.

Besides, if Obama stays on this anti-Democratic pro-Repulican theocratic thing, if Obama loses he can forget getting a dime out of Hollywood or Wall Street again.

It's intresting with those three, that's for sure. I happen to like them all. The Clintons, Obama, Axelrod and rest.

They shoud be together enough by election day and great old friends during the first Obama admin.

Posted by: DexterManley | August 27, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

In the great character tug of war you all pull for your man Bill or Obama. Imagine if Barack did pick Hillery as his running mate. We'd be debating every move by what Bill would have done. The Presidency, if elected, would be forever know as the Obama/Clinton war of egos. Our country would suffer. Look at all the nuts who wrote in here and see the friction. Obama was right to pick someone else, anybody, and thank God, he picked Joe Biden, the best fit for him and the country.

Posted by: dana | August 27, 2008 4:59 PM | Report abuse

The sad part is that the democrats who are against obama with EVEN clinton support truly will not vote for him and that is something he won't be able to change because he can't change his skin color. poor fella. Call it something else, but at the end of the day, it is his skin color that they can't get over + his No war stance on a country, that some influencial group don't agree with it.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 4:59 PM | Report abuse

Too much alike to like each other? This seems about as far from reality as possible.
Both good orators in a big crowd, yes. But, Obama seems on a personal level, much more thoughtful and willing to be honest. Clinton has never seemed "genuine", and has also seemed much more "smug" in his charisma. And for him to blame Obama for his own racially anachronistic comments during the campaign is, simply, bunk at its basest.

Posted by: sean o | August 27, 2008 4:59 PM | Report abuse

Every Hillary supporter should vote for McCain because the best thing that can happen to the Clinton's is that Obama loses. That way Hillary can run again in four years rather than having to wait eight. Plus, Bill will continue to be top dog in the Democratic party.

Posted by: Rick F | August 27, 2008 4:53 PM
------------------------------

Wrong Hillary had her time and lost it. In 4 years she won't win over any of the Obama supporters. Her best chance is if Obama wins and she runs in 8 year against Vice Presiednt Biden. By then she will be seen as a team player ready to be president. Old and tough like Thatcher.

Posted by: Scott | August 27, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

This is really too serious. Why are reporters engaged in this junkfood rather than concentrating on the serious issues that confront this nation?

Posted by: John | August 27, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

"watch out Lincoln Bedroom" is right! Can you imagine The White House staff cleaning up watch springs from the Lincoln bed?

Posted by: Dianne72 | August 27, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

At least Bill Clinton balanced the budget and worked with Republicans. You won't see that with Obama.

Posted by: Cheryl | August 27, 2008 4:57 PM | Report abuse

It's going to be fun tonight! Here's the game: see how many people you can identify whose words are stolen by Plagiarist-Joe and used in his speech - without attribution. If you get:

0-10 right = you are an ignoramus who would vote for anybody, including a liar and plagiarist
11-100 right = you are not a totally brain-dead democrat, and there might be hope for you
101-1000 right = you actually seem to have some discernment and ethics and probably did not cheat on your law school exam
1001+ = you are a winner! you are clearly too smart for the hope-change, change-hope, hopeable-change, changeable-hope BS and will vote for somebody other than sweetie hussein.

Enjoy!

Posted by: ALEX H. | August 27, 2008 4:56 PM | Report abuse

If they are alike and NOscama gets elected

Watch out investors - Millions lost billions due to his administration lack of oversight od industry Enon - etc

Watch out militatry

watch out Intel agencies

Watch out interns

Watch out Lincoln bedroom

Posted by: robt | August 27, 2008 4:56 PM | Report abuse

Here in Alaska, as elsewhere, The morally and ethically bankrupt Republican "pahons" like Stevens and Young are too busy bribing their me-me voters for votes with pork to worry about doing the right thing. With that in mind, any Democrat would be a step up on the way towards better government.

Posted by: REL | August 27, 2008 4:55 PM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton did what helped Bill Clinton. If it cost the Democrats seats in Congress he didn't care. That is why the Clintons are different they will do and say anything as long as it favors them.

How many times did Bill Clinton say something in this campaign only to say that it was a lie and he didn't say it only to have a video come out showing him saying what he said he didn't? Bill and Hillary are compulsive liars. They can't help themselves and their supporters are so much part of the cult they ignore it.

Posted by: Scott | August 27, 2008 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Last night all of the coverage, her online and on TV, missed the actual news of the night, which was Brian Schweitzer's rip-roaring, crowd-pleasing stemwinder in praise of alternative energy (!). I have seen it several times now online but obviously most people won't. What a shame. It wasn't in the print edition of the Post or on the Today show, either. How can a star be born if nobody bothers to cover or televise his speech?

Tonight, I fear all the attention will be on former President Clinton, instead of Joe Biden. I'm looking forward more to Biden. Within this campaign, he's much fresher story for me, and I like what I see so far.

Posted by: Fairfax Voter | August 27, 2008 3:30 PM

I compeletey agree. That was the best part of the day. He upstaged the keynote speaker and Hillary. But you're right - no one noticed because they were too busy gossiping.

Posted by: k | August 27, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Every Hillary supporter should vote for McCain because the best thing that can happen to the Clinton's is that Obama loses. That way Hillary can run again in four years rather than having to wait eight. Plus, Bill will continue to be top dog in the Democratic party.

Posted by: Rick F | August 27, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

One has to wonder why Michelle Shaniqua Obama is so mad at "whitey". Afterall she owes everything she has to affirmative action. Otherwise, she would have been one of those women you see with a baby on each hip shuffling around the supermarket in bedroom slippers.

Posted by: Dianne72 | August 27, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

They're alike in that both are arrogant... only Obama was more arrogant when he was on his high... and gave the Clintons no respect, thinking he (Obama) is now the more popular person and hence don't need Clinton. Mistake, especially when he was the popular democrat president

See where arrogance can take you? But you can't blame Obama for his actions... the public was feeding it to him. The feel of power and fame is like a drug that took him to his high, that "I can't do wrong" feeling is a mistake we all have made in our youth. Only through understanding life and having experiences makes you more humble.

Obama's grandiose behavior and arrogance created that animosity between the Clinton and Obama.

Posted by: Kim | August 27, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

The latest abuse by Obama (The Change Candidate) is a commercial where he claims that McCain thinks you're middle class if you make less than $5 million a year. McCain said that as an obvious joke and immediately followed up by saying Obama and his camp would abuse the joke. They have. The watchdog group that polices truth in ads should jump all over this one. I could NOT believe it was an ad that was "approved by Barack Obama."

Posted by: Topher Wilson | August 27, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

You have GOT to be out of your minds. Bill Clinton and Obama alike? Bill Clinton is a genius; Obama is an affirmative action drug using slacker who got through life cozying up to the white folks to get ahead. Obama has far more in common with George Bush, "all hat and no cattle", an empty suit MUCH too familiar with cocaine. Sure he's a better public speaker than Bush, but so is Roseanne Barr. Obama says nothing because he realized early on in life the way to get ahead was to let other people project what they wanted to see and believe in on him; the more of the real Barry they saw, the less they'd like or support him. SOME of us have seen right through the fake exterior, FROM DAY ONE. The problem isn't that he'll be too far left or right; the problem is he'll be NOTHING and the same folks pulling Geroge W. Bush's strings will be running rings around Obama behind the scenes the way they did for eight years of a dottering senile Reagan. Change we can believe in... all we want, but it still won't happen.

Posted by: xbjllb | August 27, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Hil's the Only Way Out... | August 27, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse


Picture it, Trinity Church 2006. Michelle Shiniqua Obama is speaking from the pulpit. Her prominent nostrils are flared, brow furrowed, and a scowl across her face. She is ranting against "whitey" and how they keep "raising the bar". All the while punching the air with a fist-bump. This my friends is what we will see in October when they release her "whitey-gate" tapes on YouTube.

Posted by: Dianne72 | August 27, 2008 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Uh, since I'm a New Yorker too, I thought I'd put in my two cents. I've talked to many people here and there are A LOT of folks who have buyer's remorse about Hillary Clinton. If she keeps it up, she'll be lucky to get re-elected in 2012. All she and Bill are proving is that they are just one step above being white trailer trash.

Posted by: Nathan | August 27, 2008 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Turn it around. If Hillary had been nominated with Barack just a step behind, would Hillary have chosen Barack to be her Vice-President? I think not. Barack will govern better without a Clinton in the Whitehouse. The Clintons, especially Bill, will undermine Barack and really, Hillary, she made it on her husband's coat-tails. I look forward to an independent woman as President, one day. And be she Republican or Democrat, I will vote for her.

Posted by: mom18 | August 27, 2008 4:50 PM | Report abuse

I hope these two think and talk about a "right now" problem with Russian and US navy ships nose to nose in the Black Sea.

Posted by: PH | August 27, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

I was rolling on the floor with laughter when I read this:

"And Obama and Clinton are not that much alike, for example Obama's treated Hillary with a lot of respect.

Posted by: Aleks | August 27, 2008 3:22 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

Senator Obama and the DNC allocated 10 minutes of national TV and convention time to one of the Democrat's greatest campaigners of the 20th century?

That alone is disrespectful.

Posted by: Richard | August 27, 2008 4:47 PM | Report abuse

They may have some similarities but Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar and much smarter than Obama. Clinton had pro-business philosophy. Obama is a communist and can never be elected in USA

Posted by: Zach | August 27, 2008 4:47 PM | Report abuse

Alike? Hardly, compared to Obama, Clinton is a staunch right wing conservative.

Obama/Biden
AMERICAN SOLIALISM

After listening to Michelle Obama on Monday, I got a much clearer picture of exactly how left-wing these people are. Although to her credit, she did remember to mention the military once, "The military families who say grace each night with an empty seat at the table. The servicemen and women who love this country so much, they leave those they love most to defend it."

So, she is admitting that service people in Iraq are 'defending' our best interest. That is good.

Obama/Biden
AMERICAN SOLIALISM

Posted by: Rick F | August 27, 2008 4:47 PM | Report abuse

bc stood by 'blacks' - bHo sheds them off
your article compares the two...
bHo dissed his 'black' pastor of 20 years
bHo never even considered a 'black' veep
bHo has a "lily-white" power cartel around him that keeps 'blacks' off the sidewalks;
bc has continued to support good relations with 'black' communities and leaders, even though they deserted him in the hour of need...
bHo personifies arab/white in his body; the arabs who historically sold 'blacks' into slavery, and the whites who bought them from the arab slave trade...
Hussain only has a little black in him, and it's not the same black as those afro-americans who came from the east coast of africa - it's actually a kenyan tribe who sold other blacks into slavery.
bc stands for equality...
bHo's 'change' is really just more 'chains' for the black community!

Posted by: bc loyalty | August 27, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

Relax, people. Obama is going to lose just fine.

Breathe. You can try again in 2012...but this time, bring someone who you'd consider to be a statesman.

And nothing less.

Posted by: Mark | August 27, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

"Barack Hussein Obama and Bill Clinton too much alike?"

Memo to Cillizza:

Barack Obama was the Billary's opponent. Therefore, during the primaries, he gently and ever so carefully provoked them on a couple of minor points.

The Clintons, on the other hand, lay anyone who opposes them to waste. You are about to see how serious they are about taking Obama down. Not tonight, but over the next two months Obama will die the proverbial death by 1000 cuts, courtesy of the Clintons.
It's so simple. Hillary knows she blew it this time around, although she will claim it is the media which is true to a degree. So, It's 2012! McCain will be too old to run, or to win anyway, and this will be Hillary's last chance. She doesn't want to run against an encumbent Democrat, Barrack Hussein Obama.
What to do? Make sure Obama isn't elected in 2008. They (Clintons) aren't stupid enough to try and get rid of his campaign tonight. They will continue to rip him and drain his campaign to pay off Hillary. When he is severely weakened, they will stick the political knife way in and he will be defeated by McCain.
You Democrats should know how devious and deceptive these two are.
Now you know the reast of the story....

Posted by: Toliver Mohauefer | August 27, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

Both are flawed (more than the average), but Clinton is of presidential fibre while Obama is ... well, not. Clinton was known for being a moderate Democrat, capable of accomplishing things through bipartisanship. Obama, despite his rhetoric, is hyper-liberal and has ZERO history of bipartisanship.

Posted by: Jenny Westor | August 27, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

This is what we need to change in america if you dont like the guy dont try to take his intelligence away from him, if you cant say something good just shut up that why america getting to personal.people think about themself they're not connected any more because people like the knokl head who wrote the previous negative message the under some type of influence :drug or alcool or some on them the dont know the Christ, the need to repent of the evil thinking

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

My earlier comment about how clinton ran as the anti carter was simply to point out that both men are politicians. There are so many urgent needs in our country that I believe both men want to address yet we allow ourselves to get side tracked when politicians engage in politics to get elected. Bill Clinton told BO to "buck up" running for president is a contact sport, well bo did

Posted by: gimmie a break | August 27, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Hey JimDogg, I live in NY too and for all the disgust you claim is directed towards Obama, it's a wonder that Obama is leading McCain by double digits here. Let's be honest, YOU are disgusted by Obama, New Yorkers are disgusted by Repiglicans because THEY failed to protect us on 9/11.

Posted by: BrooklynGirl | August 27, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

I fear that Osama will take us down the path of Venezuela. I do not want government to take care of me. I take care of myself.

Posted by: Magumba | August 27, 2008 4:43 PM | Report abuse

Two Leos- never work out.

Posted by: trueblue | August 27, 2008 4:42 PM | Report abuse

uh oh, a bunch of Mad Mac's "points" posters here again. or is it usual two or three who have multiple handles. sometimes it seems as you are multiple people, mainly it seems like two or three posting multiple times. give it up will you? the keychain in not worth it. luckily, it doesn't matter what we think, Kill Bill will come out and do what he know he needs to do, support our next president and get those (R)'s OUT and into jail where they belong.

Posted by: preAmerikkkan | August 27, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

I am registered Democrat in West Virgina. I will be voting for Obama. Regarding other West Virginians who would not vote for a man because of his race I can only quote someone else far more cynical who once asked, "There are so many reasons to hate other people, why choose skin color?"

Posted by: WIDTAP | August 27, 2008 4:40 PM | Report abuse

So now we have reporters reporting on what other reporters reported, and wrap it up as "news". Get a real life Cillizza, or at least some originality.

Not that it matters, American politics bears a striking resemblance to American religion. Both promise nirvana, work on faith and deliver nothing. What a laughing stock!

Posted by: The Minder | August 27, 2008 4:40 PM | Report abuse

Hey June
Have you watched Obamas commercials?
All he does is attack McCain, I guess you drank that watered down CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE, HOPE HOPE HOPE cool aid - Obama is a joke and the only thing he would lead is this country down the toilet

Posted by: TO JUNEB | August 27, 2008 4:39 PM | Report abuse

Well if their to much alike and Obama wins then we are definitely in for a world of hurt

Posted by: charles0390 | August 27, 2008 4:39 PM | Report abuse

Once more, we're watching not a big discussion of the future of our country and what will be done about it, but rather we're watching, writing and talking about - the Clintons.

What might you expect?

Posted by: John of Arizona | August 27, 2008 4:38 PM | Report abuse

What if Bubba talks longer than his alloted time? Will the network be told to go to a commercial break? This ought to be fun tonight especially if the crowd goes wild for him. Bill might think his is still in charge.

Posted by: Jeff in Orlando | August 27, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

I doubt very much that Obama would defile the honor of the presidency or his marriage the way Clinton did. That makes Obama a better man to me and hopefully a better president.

Posted by: MJ | August 27, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THIS WHY IS
EVERYBODY HEEK SAYING BILL AND OBAMA DONT LIKE EACH OTHER WELL I
LOOK AT THE NEWS ALL THE TIME AND
I NEVER HERED NITHER ONE SAY I DONT LIKE EACH OTHER IT ALL WAYS COME FROM THE NEWS

Posted by: WILLIE SPEIGHT | August 27, 2008 4:36 PM | Report abuse

Let's see... two head-of-the-class boys that both want to be in control of the same team. Why would there be friction?

And to all of you who are crying "liberal!" about Obama: get real. He's a pragmatist in the Clinton style and his Presidency is going to seem very familiar to the Clinton years.

Obama wins and he's going to do the same thing Clinton did (no, not the cigar thing): Take a country that had been steered toward the extreme right and navigate it back toward just-right-of-center.

Maybe one of these days, we'll get to see the pendulum swing all the way to the left for an administration or two instead of swinging right-center-right like it has been for the past few decades.

Posted by: philko | August 27, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

The only thing that these two have in common is all the talking they do, the difference is Bill actually says something while Obama cannot get a message out.

Obama is a joke, he is not Bill Clinton.

Obama could only hope to fill the shoes of Bill Clinton.

Posted by: bill | August 27, 2008 4:33 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, "JimDogg"? Where do you live in New York? Howard Beach? I didn't know it was the president's job to protect any one particular city but I'm confident that Obama will do just fine when he take office in January.

Posted by: Daniel | August 27, 2008 4:33 PM | Report abuse

I think the author who said "Clinton delivered"....oh yes, that is right...
"I DID NOT HAVE SEX WITH THAT WOMAN"...
He did deliver sperm all over her dress!
Will the Clintons never be embarrassed about bad behavior?
I HOPE THEIR PAGE IS TURNED TONIGHT...
We need good moral leaders not over taken
by strong lobby!
WITH NAFTA...DID YOU FORGET?
THE JOBS STARTED FALLING BY THE THOUSANDS AND THEN MILLIONS = OUT OF THE COUNTRY INFERIOR PRODUCTS AND SERVICES.
BIG LOBBIES, BIG GOVERNMENT, BIG COMPANIES X HUGE FAVORS FOR THE CLINTONS AND BUSHES = HUGE BANK ACCOUNTS $$$$$

Posted by: DEB-Z | August 27, 2008 4:32 PM | Report abuse

dc voter, and all of you who wants to vote for mcsame and cut off your nose to spite your face. go right ahead maybe you will be the only ones to lose your home, your child to another lie of a war, high gas prices,lose roe v wade. i hope all you die heart clinton lovers lose your job, have to continue to play huge gas prices at the pump. if your kids aren't killed in a mcsame war, will they be able to afford college. make sure the person you vote for again will help you and not continue to make this country the laughing stock of the world.remember the headlines in europe, "how can they be so stupid?" after mcbush won twice. how did that work for you?

Posted by: dee schultz | August 27, 2008 4:31 PM | Report abuse

I think Clinton's resume was a little more developed by the time he first ran for President. The fact that Clinton knows Obama hates him, if true, shows Obama is not that skillful a politician. You never show your opponent your cards. Bill already has two superbowl rings, Obama is a rookie. And it shows.

Posted by: Jay | August 27, 2008 4:31 PM | Report abuse

Obama and Clinton might have come from similar family structures, but what they learned from those families, and the men they grew to be, are entirely different.

Obama is a optimist who has never been shown to be vengeful or cruel. He always assumes the "most respectful interpretation" of any remark or event. (Stories say that his mother was the same way.)

And Barack and Michelle have extremely high moral and ethical standards that they teach to their children and exemplify in their lives.

Bill and Hillary Clinton are quick to revenge and bitterness and take a nasty delight in the seemiest side of politics. Negative campaigning and small-minded meanness are their trade.

And I see no evidence that either Clinton has moral standards at all; whatever it takes to get elected; whatever feels good seems to carry the day.

Obama is worlds away from Bill Clinton. I hope it stays that way.

Posted by: JuneB | August 27, 2008 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Daniel: I live in NYC. I know many people disgusted by Obama. He is too soft on protecting NY and USA from Muslim radicals. His views are more similar to the views on the streets of Riyadh than NYC.

Posted by: JimDogg | August 27, 2008 4:29 PM | Report abuse

"Black people always play the race card when things aren't going their way"

If there were any truth to this statement, the writer need only look in the mirror to find out why.

Posted by: self.sycophant@gmail.com | August 27, 2008 4:29 PM | Report abuse

It seems highly likely that the anti-Obama rhetoric I'm reading here and elsewhere comes from Republicans posing as disenchanted Clintonites, trying to drive a dividing wedge into the Democratic Party.

Posted by: JRose | August 27, 2008 4:29 PM | Report abuse

I don't know what's up with a lot of these previous posters. Obama and Clinton are remarkably alike in campaign style and policy preferences. Each ran as a hopeful change agent centrist Democratic outsider to great success. If Hillary hadn't been in the campaign, I rather think Bill would be one of Obama's strongest supporters.

In the end, people need to get the heck over this family feud. Bill was a great prez. Obama will be a great prez. Or we could have McCain, who will be a terrible and deranged prez with a neocon foreign policy that puts Bush's to shame and a crushing debt-ridden domestic policy that will make the rich richer and the poor poorer. Take your pick.

Posted by: joeskeys | August 27, 2008 4:29 PM | Report abuse

It seems highly likely that the anti-Obama rhetoric I'm reading here and elsewhere comes from Republicans posing as disenchanted Clintonites, trying to drive a dividing wedge into the Democratic Party.

Posted by: JRose | August 27, 2008 4:28 PM | Report abuse

I'm a Democrat in West Virginia and me and most of the people I know will never vote for a black man. Sorry if that bothers liberals. I'm just being honest. Hillary won many states for the same reason!

Posted by: C. Curry | August 27, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

No one with any brains at all WANTS to president of the USA.

Posted by: Abolhassan Bani Sadr | August 27, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse

The main reason that Barack went after Clinton was that Clinton was campaigning against him, campaigning for a rival candidate. What exactly did he expect? Deferential treatment while Clinton got to take potshots at him?

I understand B Clinton did not like when Barack praised Reagan ("Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not, and a way that Bill Clinton did not") but I'm not sure how Clinton can dispute this. There are people who are still known as "Reagan Democrats". Clinton never captured a group in the same way. Any majority slipped away like sand through your hand as soon as he wasn't there to spin people together. Clinton didn't create a coheasive voting block and that's what's killed the Democratic party the past two elections.

Posted by: ThingsThatShine | August 27, 2008 4:22 PM | Report abuse

If Bill Clinton gave the speech of his life endorsing Obama, it would only reinforce the notion that this convention's hero is Billary. For three days, the media and public chatter over the two Clinton's has (thankfully for Barack) hidden the nominee's lack of gravitas; at the same time, once the convention ends, nothing has been done to bolster his credentials (because there are none.) But it sure has added to the Clinton lustre.

However, tomorrow, Obama digs his political grave. No matter how valiantly (and probably insincerely) Billary tries to sell him, Obama seems determined to be an impending rock star (first in Berlin, now at Invesco) rather than a president. I remember months ago, when many pundits were urging him to shoot for 2012 or 2016, his big buds at MSNBC kept screaming (and Matthews never does anything else) that he had to seize the moment. Well, Obama and MSNBC have had quite a run; but the excesses are about to implode. Let the Dems enjoy one last night of Billary; the party comes crashing down tomorrow.

Posted by: jayjay9 | August 27, 2008 4:22 PM | Report abuse

I'm assuming most of you here are adults. Are any of you ever embarrassed when you read what you post here? So many of you act like disgusting children. Yuk.

Posted by: Jason | August 27, 2008 4:22 PM | Report abuse

The comment blog spots (like this one)
that litter the internet have become the quintessential haven for the lunatic fringe of this country. There is nothing of substance here!

Posted by: URallNUTS! | August 27, 2008 4:19 PM | Report abuse

"Obama is a socialist with ties to radical leftists and terrorists. He is admired in the Middle East but disliked in New York City."

What?? I guess facts don't count on the Internet. Just come on here and say whatever you want. What a shame. As for the comment about New York - not only is it factually wrong...but I'm a New Yorker and I'm not arrogant enough to think that people really give a crap about who I or my fellow New Yorkers support. I've read a lot of dumb things today but that takes the cake.

Posted by: Daniel | August 27, 2008 4:18 PM | Report abuse

Obama succeeded in making us support Bill Clinton more than we ever have.

Obama's whiny and heinous and phony accusations of Bill Clinton (and Sen. Clinton) making racist statements were as predictable and pathetic as they were baseless.

Black people always play the race card when things aren't going their way, and Bill Clinton thankfully wasn't going to bow at THAT extortion.

Obama showed himself to be what he truly is behind that vapid, carefully manufactured persona - venal and craven, deceitful, self-serving, and without conscience.

Bill Clinton has every right to be chilly towards Obama. Obama dissed him and the diss wasn't even accurate or intelligent.

Obnoxious hateful Michelle Obama said times were not good when Bill Clinton was Pres. If that's so, then why should we bother with a Dem. Pres.? Fact is, times were good when Clinton was Pres. and if this country has any genuine chance of renewal before it's too late, it WILL take another Clinton.

Obama is feckless and opportunistic and a self-serving flip-flopper. His record proves that.

Neither Clinton had to learn on the job or pick a VP that would give them credibility or tell them what to do.

Vote Clinton.

Posted by: Disgusting Obamas | August 27, 2008 4:18 PM | Report abuse

Clinton is nothing like Obama, Bill is at home in the White House, or a smokey bar, Obama needs herbal tea and bottled water. Bill is down home, Obama uptown. Both have a terrible ego. Like to see them in a peeing contest.

Posted by: Pamela | August 27, 2008 4:18 PM | Report abuse

2 macho alpha males; up from humble origins; both brilliant; both exceedingly powerful personalities; both married to highly intelligent, equally over-educated career role-model type women from somewhat more stable and solid-citizen backgrounds.
Both with strong commitment to social justice, etc.
There's not enough room in the planet for two of these guys - let alone in the same convention hall.

Posted by: malach hamovess | August 27, 2008 4:15 PM | Report abuse

Obama, before starting his campaign, laid out his platform in great detail in his second book, "The Audacity of Hope." No one who hasn't read this book is entitled to claim that they don't know what Obama stands for. He has organized a 50-state campaign which runs like a well-oiled machine. He has chosen a very strong v-p running mate. He's ready to be President.

Posted by: oldhonky | August 27, 2008 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Obama is nothing like Clinton. Bill was moderate as president and more like McCain than Obama. Obama is a socialist with ties to radical leftists and terrorists. He is admired in the Middle East but disliked in New York City. Bill Clinton is smarter and more accomplished and a better politician.

Posted by: JimDogg | August 27, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

Correction:
Ridiculous camparison. Apart from their single mother/ivy league lawyer background they have nothing in common.Clinton was an experienced governeor who delivered.Obama is an empty suit media creation.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

Ridiculous camparison. Apart from their single mother/ivy league lawyer background they have nothing in common.Clinton was an experienced president who delivered.Obama is an empty suit media creation.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 4:11 PM | Report abuse

Chris:

I saw the banner for your post, then scanned the body of it looking for tales of how Obama is a sexual predator and a finger pointer.

I don't think he is like Clinton at all.

Posted by: bondjedi | August 27, 2008 4:08 PM | Report abuse

Bill ran as "not Carter" in '92 because Carter was a disaster for America and the democrats Bill didnt need him.Obama on the other hand,dissed the the most successful presidency of modern times yet want the Clintons to help him to win the white house.Big difference.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 4:07 PM | Report abuse

Brain Schweitzer. He's a farmer, never been in polictics before. He was TERRIFIC! We need more like him, and maybe politics would have more respect.

Posted by: annbier | August 27, 2008 4:02 PM | Report abuse

Chris,

Obama: product of a corrupt northern big city political machine without any achievement
Bill Clinton: governor of southern state who balanced budgets working with a contentious legislature; 2-term president

You say they are alike? You ridiculous child.

Posted by: avwrobel | August 27, 2008 4:02 PM | Report abuse

They should have given Bill Clinton 1/2 hour 45 minutes and then Biden the same. That way it would have been a night of great speeches for everyone... But I suppose the pressure of the networks.....

Sad... for everyone...

Posted by: Kurt | August 27, 2008 4:01 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone remember that Clinton based his 92 election on the premise that he is not jimmy carter? "new democrat" The two allegedly are still bitter about that. Hillary ran on her experience in the white house bo's team had to remind people that everything was not peachy in the 90's. This is politics. Meanwhile has anyone had to buy GAS LATELY!

Posted by: gimme a break | August 27, 2008 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Obama Junkie writes
"Unfortunately, the platforms of the Democratic Party are being missed due to the media fixation on the "primary" and "post-primary" relations of the Obamas and the Clintons."

Agreed. What is interesting to me is watching how most of the speakers thus far (with the notable exception of Sen Clinton) have been laying the groundwork for Obama's speech tomorrow. Last night Deval Patrick & Mark Warner both were pretty clearly on message & foreshadowing some of what Sen Obama will talk about. Monday night Mrs Obama & Teddy Kennedy also pretty clearly were laying groundwork for bringing Obama primary campaign themes around full-circle, to be tied together with both tonight's speeches & concluding tomorrow.

Even the PBS coverage seems to focus on each speech as a standalone event & the commentators don't seem to be stitching together some pretty obvious themes that are carried from one to the next. It is odd to seem them all fall for the same themes & pre-established storylines for the convention.

Posted by: bsimon | August 27, 2008 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Chris,

Why don't you do us a favor?
Please go home and try combing your hair again!

Posted by: Caronte | August 27, 2008 3:55 PM | Report abuse

Aleks:

Maybe I'm "just doing my job."

You know, like you.

Now get back to your "disinfo" campaigns.

Posted by: scrivener | August 27, 2008 3:55 PM | Report abuse

To "Fairfax Voter":

Here's a post from last night, re: Schweitzer, my favorite comedy pol.

He's a reincarnation of Jackie Gleason, the way he mugs, his arm gestures, and the shoulder shrugs... I don't have a link handy from "The Honeymooners," but this Gov. could star in the revival!

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

BRIAN SCHWEITZER FOR PRESIDENT! THE JACKIE GLEASON
OF AMERICAN POLITICS! HE'S GOT A MILLION OF 'EM!

And Aaa-way we go!

What a speech! I wanna tell ya! He's got a little Gleason... a little Dangerfield... a little Jack E. Leonard... a little Alan King... a little Uncle Miltie!

I want the DVD of that speech! What a performer! What a performer!

Wait... he's got another one! Wait, wait!

Wow-ser!

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

Posted by: scrivener | August 27, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

Chris,

Bill and Barack are as similar as ...
Hillary and Michelle!

What are you smoking kid? Stop before the damage is permanent!

Are you dating Katie Couric or just drinking from the same cup?

Posted by: Caronte | August 27, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Unfortunately, the platforms of the Democratic Party are being missed due to the media fixation on the "primary" and "post-primary" relations of the Obamas and the Clintons.

From CNN to FOX to MSNBC (even the main three networks, ABC, CBS, and NBC) all are focused on the drama of the Clintons like "What will Hillary say?! Will she unite the party?! Will Bill stay on script?!"

For many us new to the political process this year, especially the details of what happens at the conventions, I say thank GOODNESS for C-SPAN!

For a fair and balanced view of the Democratic convention, I urge everyone to watch C-SPAN. CNN, MSNBC, and FOX spend over half of their convention coverage with political pundits commenting on some key speeches and the whole "Clinton/Obama" Drama.

Obama in 08!

Posted by: Obama-Junkie | August 27, 2008 3:48 PM | Report abuse

This convention has more freaks than the bar room scene from Star Wars.

Posted by: daman1 | August 27, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Last night all of the coverage, her online and on TV, missed the actual news of the night, which was Brian Schweitzer's rip-roaring, crowd-pleasing stemwinder in praise of alternative energy (!). I have seen it several times now online but obviously most people won't. What a shame. It wasn't in the print edition of the Post or on the Today show, either. How can a star be born if nobody bothers to cover or televise his speech?

Tonight, I fear all the attention will be on former President Clinton, instead of Joe Biden. I'm looking forward more to Biden. Within this campaign, he's much fresher story for me, and I like what I see so far.

Posted by: Fairfax Voter | August 27, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

the conspiracy theorists and kooks have returned. keep you head down, look out for black helos and don't let the sky fall on your head.

Posted by: cue the twilight zone music | August 27, 2008 3:25 PM | Report abuse

I think all the Dems with substance have either left the party or been kicked out. this is not your grandfather's party.
Posted by: kingofzouk | August 27, 2008 2:47 PM

Jesse Helms, Stom Thurmond, Zell Miller . . . King of Zouk's idea of "substance."

And Obama and Clinton are not that much alike, for example Obama's treated Hillary with a lot of respect.

Posted by: Aleks | August 27, 2008 3:22 PM | Report abuse

Maybe Bill has done some nose-counting and knows something you don't --
That Hillary is going to emerge with the presidential nomination, and Obama will be the VP.
Posted by: scrivener | August 27, 2008 2:57 PM

If nothing like that happens, will you admit your absolute ignorance and stop polluting the internet with it?

Posted by: Aleks | August 27, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

DC voter - As someone familiar with the history of your psots, if you're a "registered" Democrat, then I am the Queen of France! Actually, I'm thinking of changing you name to "Lemming". All you and similar posters do, day in and day out, is serve up the latest talking points from Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. Both of these clodhoppers could care less about YOU or this country. Look, under the very sort of government these swine advocate, we have offshored 60 million jobs, the dollar has fallen to an all time low, wages and ebenefits have *FALLEN*, in adjusted dollared, to thier lowest level since after the Second World War. Their disasterous "war on terror" was nothing more, ever, than a ploy to frighten the soccor moms into voting for them. That worked just fine, but it bled this country dry and led directly to the resurgence of Russia, territorial ambitions by China. Their utterly insane economic policies amount to turning Wall Street loose, unfettered and unwatched, where they have defrauded not just this country, but much of Europe. The mortgage candle alone amounts to well over 1.5 trillion dollars in uncovered worthless paper that threatens a DEPRESSION. And, you, silly fool, sit back and blather about McCain being "not so bad". If McCain is elected President, you wont have to worry about 4 or 8 years from now, because there wont be any future! Follow the Limbaugh crowd, follow Fox News, follow the scummy dishonest and outright treasonous campaign of corrupot gasbags like Harold Simmons (the Texas billionaire who funded the Swift Boaters and is now funding all of these boiler roomers where the filthy rumors about Obama originate, where the ginned up Obama vs. Clinton fight is kept going), follow them and they wll run this country right off a cliff.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | August 27, 2008 3:02 PM | Report abuse

How can you make a statement like "Obama doesn't like Clinton and Clinton knows it" without providing us a source for this alleged fact? When, exactly, would Obama -- in his brief time in national politics -- have had enough exposure to Clinton to even decide if he likes or dislikes him? Could it be that he's p.o.'d at Clinton because of what he's said ( as recently as 2 weeks ago, for example, refusing to say that Obama's qualified to be president) and that is being described as "dislike?"

Posted by: jac13 | August 27, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

IT'S "DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN" TIME!


Maybe Bill has done some nose-counting and knows something you don't --

That Hillary is going to emerge with the presidential nomination, and Obama will be the VP.

In about seven hours, we'll know.

"HILLARY'S CHOICE": Ambition Over Principle?
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/hillarys-choice-ambition-over-principle-get-political-w-vic-livingston

BUT WILL THE ELECTION EVEN MATTER? Not when government-supported "vigilante injustice" squads are "gang stalking" American citizens, making a mockery of the rule of law:
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/get-political-vic-livingston-opinion-expose-state-supported-vigilante-squads-doing-domestic-terrorism

WHAT IF THEY COULD SHOOT YOU
WITHOUT LEAVING A TRACE? THEY CAN.
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/zap-have-you-been-targeted-directed-energy-weapon-victims-organized-gang-stalking-say-its-happening-usa-1

Posted by: scrivener | August 27, 2008 2:57 PM | Report abuse

I think all the Dems with substance have either left the party or been kicked out. this is not your grandfather's party.

Posted by: kingofzouk | August 27, 2008 2:47 PM | Report abuse

I remember Bill Clinton's presidency as a Rockefeller Republican -- not as hyper-partisan. The word 'triangulation' comes to mind. As I recall, the House GOP were the hyper-partisans, not Bill Clinton.

Posted by: Scott in PacNW | August 27, 2008 2:45 PM | Report abuse

As usual, Hillary poses for her sound bites with cute little phrases and no substance, and the press lap dogs eat it up.

As a registered Democrat, I am getting more than a little sick of this.

Keep it up. 4-8 years of McCain will be the result. And looking at the alternative, that may not be so bad.

Posted by: DC Voter | August 27, 2008 2:40 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company