Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Clinton's Speech: Was It Enough?

John Kerry and John McCain

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton delivers perhaps the most critical speech of the convention, calling on her party to unite behind the candidacy of Barack Obama, her chief rival during the Democratic primaries.

DENVER -- Hillary Rodham Clinton's speech to the delegates of the Democratic National Convention gave supporters of Barack Obama a lot of reasons to smile.

She began the speech by imploring her backers to turn over their loyalties to the Illinois senator, insisting they were fighting for the same causes.

"Whether you voted for me, or voted for Barack, the time is now to unite as a single party with a single purpose," said Clinton. "We are on the same team, and none of us can sit on the sidelines."

Later, Clinton offered a subtle rebuke to those among her supporters who have said they simply cannot bring themselves to support Obama.

"I want you to ask yourselves: Were you in this campaign just for me? . . . [or] were you in it for all the people in this country who feel invisible," Clinton asked.

And so, we ask Fixistas: Did she do enough? If the party begins to coalesce behind Obama in the days and months to come does Clinton deserve the credit?

The comments section awaits.

By Chris Cillizza  |  August 26, 2008; 11:17 PM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Fix Covers the Night
Next: Convention Cheat Sheet: Unite the Clans!

Comments

Hillary’s past behaviour and who she was percieved to be, contrasted starkly with her speech this week. The speech gave the perception that she was stronger and a better pick than Biden. As to Obama needing to close this thing on his own,…I agree completely. I just don’t think he is much of a closer….in a speech, yes. In real legislative matters and being a leader, I think that he is lacking and has always taken the path of least resistance. I am not a liberal or a right winger. I am a moderate Louisiana native. Thus, I believe that perception is everything. Biden comes across as a good man, but not a great politician…not someone with great tact. Hillary, as someone who will do whatever it takes, even if that means breaking a few legs in the process. McCain can be characterized as such also. This is why Hillary would be better. Yes, she is a woman and displayed some wavering in who she is and/or who she wants people to see her as. It’s all because of the new theme of hope. It is good, but not good politics. The Democrats…with the notable exception of James Carville, Bill, and Hillary are wimps when it comes to politics and the attacking that needs to be done in a campaign. Republicans go for the throat. Democrats are better at legislating, and Government, but they are so weak and wanting to be nicy nice all the time, that they can’t even get elected because they come across looking weak. James Carville was right this week when he noted that the Democratic party is looking weak and needs to be stronger and step up the attacks….otherwise it’s going to be like shooting fish in a barrel for the McCain camp. Being positive is ok if you are outraising your opponent and your opponent is stupid. McCain’s people aren’t stupid and they are willing to shed blood. This is why the race is tight, this is why Obama could lose a tight race. I will sum this up with the words of a former Louisiana Congressman named Gillis Long, “Democrats must need to have the compassion to lead, but the strength to govern.”

All else I can recommend to Mr. Axelrod and the rest of the Obama campaign is to read the Art of War, or just hire James Carville so that we can win this thing…., otherwise, get ready for President John McCain.

Bayou Perspective With Joshua W. Delano
http://www.JoshuaWDelano.Blogspot.com

— Joshua W. Delano

Posted by: Joshua W. Delano | August 28, 2008 12:23 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton on Barack Obama: "In this election we need a nominee who can pass the Commander in Chief test. ... Senator McCain will bring a time of experience to the campaign. I will bring a lifetime of experience and Senator Obama will bring a speech he gave in 2002. I think that is a significant difference."

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

Amy, thank you for your kind, sensitive, candid comments. By giving the personal perspective of a beloved family member so clearly, you help anyone reading this blog to see part of the problem Obama faces in November. It also may even help some "borderline" cases to better see themselves and rethink their position.

From your discription of your Dad's psychology (and there are still many people so encumbered) I doubt that my offer would help you. But if you think it would be useful, feel free to tell him in a close "daughter--father" manner, (in a non-threatening, non-argumentative context--if possible, that you have blogged with--or know of, or have corresponded with a white, 75 year old retired U.S. Army Colonel, a Vietnam war veteran, with 2 political appointments from Repulican Administrations (Reagan and Bush 41) currently doing business in Vietnam, etc.

I mention this primarily, because I am almost a decade older than your dad, but certainly don't use this if it would only create father daugher tension. My wife (who I married in Vietnam during the war) and I have a grown daughter to whom we are very close. I would not want you to create unnecessary tension with your dad.

The main thing is to follow your own sound analysis of what America needs and vote for Obama and persude others if you can.

Good luck.

Andre Sauvageot
Colonel, U.S. Army (retired)

Posted by: Andre Sauvageot | August 27, 2008 8:42 PM | Report abuse

Hispanic-Americans that vote for Obama are the Democratic puppets of Obama. Do You Really think Obama knows your History in The Great United States of America? He said during the Hispanic Forum that we've been here for many, many generations. This ego maniac think were young immigrants like his womanizing, drunkard, muslim father of his. Does he know American History or just African History? Well African tribes would capture slaves with nets and sell then to the slave traders for trade or gold. He never mentions that part of History. He's own descendants had a great part in the slave trade in the Americas. I guess he forgot that at one point half of our country was Mexican territory. Again, Lack of American History.Lastly, He just mentions all cons of the unties States and never mentions all the good we've done in the world. Go run for president of Pakistan, since Pakistan left you with a good impression during a college trip. Mccain 2008. Hillary 2012.

Posted by: Mary Esther Salinas | August 27, 2008 5:14 PM | Report abuse

hussain's battlecry of 'change' will only put more 'chains' on 'blacks'...
hillary realizes deep down, that bHo's "audacity of..." is really "mein kampf" all over again, and she's been pusched out of the way, just like bHo's pastor... but what can she do?
the brown shirts have risen to drive the new 'fifth reich' to the pinnicle of power.

Posted by: clintler and hussain | August 27, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Ok. updated version out:

TOP 10 WAYS TO TELL YOUR ELITIST NOMINEE HAS NARCISSISTIC PERSONALITY DISORDER

Repaints campaign airplane with "Air France One"

Affixes his presidential-seal-looking campaign seal to gate outside mansion his indicted corruption buddy helped him buy

Though his debate score was 0-in-22, claims he lost ABC news debate because Stephanopolous set him up

Though his debate score was 0-in-23, claims he lost at Saddleback because McCain cheated -- on questions about what the candidates beliefs were

Entire summer spent strategizing and positioning -- about whether to allow convention delegates to actually cast votes

Some convention concessions labelled "Typical White Food" sell beer and hot dogs instead of wine and crudites

The actual convention theme is "Yet more focus on Michelle and Barack Obama that a $300 million campaign and wall-to-wall media coverage haven't brought you thus far"

Bans Bruce Springsteen from coronation for refusal to declare he's no longer "The Boss" with Obama in the world

Nomination night "fist bump" knocks the other "historic candidate" off the stage

Nominee is crowned with laurel on a Parthenon stage in mile high sports coliseum from which he can gaze down on the mortals

Immediately after nomination starts work on his "historical fiction" presidential memoir with "composite characters"

-- AsperGirl

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

Fellow Democratic Americans,
Let's not waste what precious time we have before E-Day tolerating the Republican attempt to weaken us or divide us into separate camps, pitting Democrat against Democrat. We cannot allow our party’s message of hope to be reduced to an example of division. We must remain focused on the objectives of our campaign; for it is the most important campaign of our time. We have had eight years of meaningless promises and rhetoric, eight years of being made to fear the wrong enemy and an eye opening eight years of seeing what fraud, carefully disguised as integrity, has done to our nation. We cannot allow ourselves, however unintentionally, to become roadblocks to success. Our Democratic leaders need a clear path in order to pave that road on our behalf.
I’ve always felt that our most honorable and compelling characteristic as Democrats is our ability to step up to any challenge responsibly, unselfishly and with the capacity to work tirelessly towards resolutions. We do not neglect our promises. We level the playing field. Our abiding passion to ensure that all Americans are given equal opportunities in all things is what has made us a party that is respected, admired, and emulated around the world.
Every time we are distracted from our common goals a Republican gets his wings. Certainly if we look for faults among ourselves we will always find them. But when we look for leadership in the face of adversity, in the wake of challenges and in real life experiences, we find our common denominators and therein, the heart of the Democratic Party.
Now, more than ever we must be united in our belief and trust that our party's proven ability to effectuate positive, life-long, life-altering change can once again become a reality.

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

Do you think you could be a little bit more vicious towards the Clintons?

Sheila Jacson Lee dared to support HC. Just like the last poster, the response from the O campaign was to announce that they are sending one of their local thugs to run against her. They likely would have done the same thing against Stephanie Tubbs if they had the opportunity.

And you wonder why HC supporters refuse to get behind your candidate?

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

OBVIOUSLY, SEN. CLINTON HAD A GUN TO HER HEAD WHILE BEING FORCED TO INDORSE SEN. BO;
This is also true for Pres. Clinton. If Sen. Clinton and Pres. Clinton don't publicly endorsed Sen. BO then the elites in the Dem. party will cause her to loose her senate seat, prevent her from running for president again and remove her from important committee in the senate. This is why I thing
EVERYONE SHOULD IGNORE EVERYTHING SHE SAID LAST NIGHT.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 4:03 PM | Report abuse

Andre Sauvageot
Colonel, U.S. Army (retired)

Very very good! Thank you for making sense out of all this non sense. As a white 31 year old Democrat, I know why my 66 year old dad is not voting for Obama (even though he stands for all he believes in).Dad will not vote for Obaba because he's black. He told me so. He will not vote for McCain either. Dad plans to stay home in Nov for the 1st time in almost 50 years. Can you imagine? That's how deep this racism thing runs. I had no idea because I have to admit, I was not brought up around racism. However, this campaign is (I guess) too much for my dad and his generation to bear....Well, for me and mine, OBAMA 08. and I think he'll win.

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

Whether the speech "was enough" (to unify the Party) we cannot know until we ascertain the reponses of Hillary supporters from now closer to the election.

That said, her speech was a masterpiece of logical, factual, eloquent political oratory. It's difficult to even imagine how it could have been better. Her assertion that the (issue/policy related)reasons she is supporting Obama against McCain are the same reasons she was running for president before losing to Obama, combined with the question she posed to her ardent supporters whether they were supporting only her as an individual or for the good of all Americans was an incredibly powerful combination of data points wired together by logical reasoning.

So powerful, in fact, that it vitiated the sophistry of those who remain so bitter that they still say they will not vote for Obama or even in fewer cases, vote for McCain. Hillary left such people with no factual or logical rationale. This suggests that the most common variable governing such people is what Bob Herbert described in his column "The Dog That Isn't Barking" (NYT, 26 August 2008) racism, even though it may be masked with concerns about Obama's putative "inexperience" blah, blah.

But it's a real stretch to see how one who agrees with the policy positions of the Democratic Party, Hillary and Obama, which are closely aligned and in sharp contrast to those of McCain and the GOP could vote for McCain and the GOP whose policies, are starkly different and have contributed so much to our accelerated decline of the last 8 years.

Most such ardent Hillary supporters should understand the great risk of continuing the polices that have undermined our economy, society and security. If so, how could they truly believe a somewhat younger, less experienced, but brilliant, compassinate patriot whose policy goals are closely aligned with Hillary's and the Democratic Party be more of a risk than continuing the destructive socio-economic and foreign policies of the last 8 years.

The current horrific Administration, has been staffed by some of the most experienced cadre, including VP Cheney and former Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld.

It would be more logical to attach more weight to judgment, integrity, ethics, and apparent motivation than just age and "experience" associated with greater age. Unless, of course Bob Herbert's "dog" that isn't barking has raised its ugly (perhaps sublimal) head.

Finally, some say, she should have heaped more praise on Obama individually. I believe this would have been a mistake. Such a sharp subjective change of direction could be perceived as insincere. The speech she gave is unassailable in facts and logic. As such it is exactly what the Democratic Party and progressive Americans need at this point in the Convention.

Andre Sauvageot
Colonel, U.S. Army (retired)

Posted by: Andre Sauvageot | August 27, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse

"For all you hurt Hillary fans out there you have every right to be angry....she was not treated well by Obama and the DNC. Time to come home to McCain and the GOP. We have a big tent and you are welcome. Come to Poppa!"Hey "daman1" I had to bust out laughing at your posting...you are FUNNY!!! I'm a Hill supporter. I would have to be really deaf dumb and extremly RACIST to vote for a 96 year old who's only asset is that he's white and a POW (before I was born) give me a break. No true Dem whould vote fore McCain. He's against every fiber of my being.

Posted by: Amy | August 27, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

this link has been posted 7 times here:

http://minx.cc/?post=271619

anyone STILL doubt there are Republican operatives posting here claiming to be Democrats?

Posted by: hmp | August 27, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

I have to say that Hillary has been the only one so far who sounds, looks, and smells like a PRESIDENT. Her presentation last night was OUTSTANDING. She's the real thing!!!!

Posted by: ANGRY IN FLORIDA | August 27, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

You have to talk about Clinton's supporters itn three main groups. Those are the activists in her campaign, the Democratic Party officials and activists who supported her, and the voters who voted for her in the primaries.

The long very competitive primary season plus the Obama campaign's heavy use of negative attacks on the Clintons and exceptional intolerance towards anyone slow to accept the true faith likely has left more than the usual bitterness among Clinton's activists and operatives. But, it is probably not that common for operatives to join the competitors campaign. In any case, Obama appears to have a more than average intention to keep his campaign under the control of a tight innner circle in Chicago. Clinton's activists will likely almost all vote for Obama. But they will probably mostly go work for some more local campaign for this election season.

On the other hand, the Democratic Party officials and activists will surely all work for the party's nominee. Some may be more enthusiastic than others. But their enthusiasm depends more on Obama's effectiveness in working with them. The bigger question is how effective will they be in delivering votes? For example, I have a hard time believing that Mike Easley's support is really going to be the factor that makes the difference in whether or not Obama manages to win North Carolina.

The critical factor are the voters. I doubt that any blanket statement can be made about them. It is quite likely that the voters who will make the difference were marginal supporters of Hillary Clinton as well. It is also not clear that Obama and Clinton had enough voters between the two of them to win. It seems very unlikely that the feelings of Clinton's operatives will make much difference one way or another. Obama has to understand the different constituencies that it takes to win and figure out how to connect with the needed voters. The Mike Easley's and Ed Rendell's may be able to help him. But most of the burden is going to fall on Obama himself and the inner circle of his tightly controlled campaign.

Posted by: dnjake | August 27, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

The difference spectator was that W had absolutely no international experience either and domestically was a poor governor in a state with weak gubenatorial powers. O does not have 1/2 the knowledge or experience of Kerry so that is an absolutely false comparison.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 3:38 PM | Report abuse

Maybe they still have time to call in Bill Ayers to blow up that Greek Temple set before his speech tomorrow.

Posted by: daman1 | August 27, 2008 3:35 PM | Report abuse

Jaci--Curious how sayig Sen O is inexperinced is code about anything other then saying he is inexperienced. Did JFK wih his 13 years in Congress complain about code words being used about his being Catholic when he was called inexperienced? The race card seems to be played every single time this obvious short coming is brought up. Its getting old and wornout.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

Kerry was too haughty and French-looking. His Botox is not holding up well either.

Posted by: daman1 | August 27, 2008 3:26 PM | Report abuse

To those voting for McCain 'cuz of his "experience":

Remember this was Bush's 2004 argument against Kerry.

Today, whom do you think was the better choice in 2004?

I'll take intellect over experience any day, especially when those with "expereience" lack intellect!

Posted by: Spectator | August 27, 2008 3:25 PM | Report abuse

To those voting for McCain 'cuz of his "experience":

Remember this was Bush's 2004 argument against Kerry.

Today, whom do you think was the better choice in 2004?

I'll take intellect over experience any day, especially when those with "expereience" lack intellect!

Posted by: Spectator | August 27, 2008 3:24 PM | Report abuse

For all you hurt Hillary fans out there you have every right to be angry....she was not treated well by Obama and the DNC. Time to come home to McCain and the GOP. We have a big tent and you are welcome. Come to Poppa!

Posted by: daman1 | August 27, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

I think Hillary gave a good speech but was it enough? I guess well have to wait and see. I think that the republicians are wasting no time this week by attacking Obama with false ads across the west. I really hope the democratics can get their act together because this is the last and only chance we must get it right.

If Hillary can't rally her own supporters then who can???????????if her supporters aren't willing to bury the hatchet and swallow their pride then it's not Hillary fault it's their own.

I wonder if an Hispanic or Asian was running for President will he or she be treated the same way as Senator Obama. America we need to stop with all the hate and code words such as he's has no experience or he not ready to be commander and chief, he's a muslin, he's not patiotic enough, which are all a forms of prejudice. (lies,lies and more lies)


Thursday will be an historic event and this country still can't learned how to live together. America what are we teaching our children that hate is better than love, peace and haromny. We are killing each other by words we are teaching our children to hate one another because they're different from them.

America We need a President whose willing to step up and say that enough is enough were tried of President Bush and Dick Chenney we can't afford to elect McSame because he doens't care about the hard working Americans that build this country up.

As Americans We need to look past color a stop all the fear and hatered. America we can't let the republicians bully us with their slogans and fear mogonoring tatics. We can't allow four more years of President Bush/Dick Chenney policies run this country into the ground. Wake up America we need a democrat in the White house not another Republician.

Americans wake up and realize that McSame is very dangerous and he should not be given the keys to the white house.

Obama for President

Posted by: Jacie - San Leandro, Ca | August 27, 2008 3:17 PM | Report abuse

Hillary was awesome, but she can't overcome her supporters' intense dislike of Obama's race bating, shallowness, and narcissism.

I will still be voting McCain.

Posted by: HRC fan | August 27, 2008 3:04 PM
========================================

You are as stupid as your statement

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

Hillary was awesome, but she can't overcome her supporters' intense dislike of Obama's race bating, shallowness, and narcissism.

I will still be voting McCain.

Posted by: HRC fan | August 27, 2008 3:04 PM | Report abuse

I'm sure the Greek/Roman temple theme will go over real well in PA and OHio tomorrow! Who planned this debacle of a convention? Is Bill Shrum still around?

Posted by: daman1 | August 27, 2008 3:00 PM | Report abuse

"The latest polls said that the conservative democrats are bleeding over to McCain in the past few weeks. If that's the case, then I'll be one of them, I guess. I tend to be fiscally conservative.

...

With the sexism and the ignorant immaturity of the Democratic party this year, and the growing strength of the netroots, the party seems to be more dominated by left-wing cultists and bullies.

...

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 2:32 PM "

So...your response to perceived sexism is to vote for a sexist? Ok...

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

TOP 10 WAYS TO TELL YOUR ELITIST NOMINEE HAS NARCISSISTIC PERSONALITY DISORDER

Repaints campaign airplane with "Air France One"

Affixes his presidential-seal-looking campaign seal to gate outside the Georgian mansion his crooked buddy helped buy him

Though his debate score was 0-in-22, claims he lost ABC news debate because Stephanopolous set him up

Though his debate score was 0-in-23, claims he lost Saddleback forum because McCain cheated -- on questions about what the candidates beliefs were

Summer strategizing and positioning is about whether to allow convention delegates to actually vote -- with negotiations continuing to the convention floor!

Some convention concessions labelled "Typical White Food" sell beer and hot dogs instead of wine and crudites

The actual convention theme is "Still more opportunities to get to know Michelle and Barack Obama that a $300 million campaign and wall-to-wall media coverage hasn't brought you thus far"

Nomination night "fist bump" knocks the other "historic candidate" off the stage

Receives nomination by kneeling and being crowned with laurel on a mock Parthenon stage in a sports coliseum

Bans Bruce Springsteen from performing at coronation because he refuses to declare he's no longer "The Boss" with Obama around

Immediately after nomination starts work on his "historical fiction" presidential memoir with "composite characters"

-- AsperGirl

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 2:53 PM | Report abuse

Great speech,Hillary. Thank you!

Now for all of you who love to say that Obama is not experienced enough to be president:
Historians are pretty consistent in ranking Abraham Lincoln as the best president or, at least, one of the best presidents in U.S history. His experience, other than as a lawyer, consisted of two years in the U.S. House of Representatives and eight years in the Illinois House of Representatives. He was not a particularly influential legislator. He was noted for his oratory and for opposing the Mexican-American War, which he said he believed the President(Polk)wanted to wage for his own glory.

Obviously, it was not political/government experience or even commercial experience (of which he had none) that made Lincoln the great leader and president he was.

(By the way when elected Lincoln was only four years older than Obama is now, if years of life, alone, is a person's criterion for experience.)

Conversely, our history shows presidents who had extensive prior experience and who failed at the presidency. James Buchanan, for example, is ranked by historians as either our worst or next-to-worst president ever, and he was probably the most experienced person ever to become president. He had been a U.S. Congressman (10 years), a U.S. Senator (12 years), Ambassador to Russia, and Secretary of State (4 years).

We should be careful of too much embracing "experience" or fearing "inexperience" as we evaluate relevant criteria in choosing our leaders.

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

I am a big Obama fan but I think a lot of this is ill conceived. I would prefer a little more humility but that is just me. The only office I ever ran for I lost so what do I know.

-------
>>Obama's Temple: http://minx.cc/?post=271619
“Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's big speech on Thursday night will be delivered from an elaborate columned stage resembling a miniature Greek temple."

Well, he already did the Germany Hitler rally thing. He might as well evoke a new Golden Age of Man from an Athenian Godly stage.

This is a fitting endgame for a truly bizarre convention for which the only real theme is being all about Obama and his wife.

Even my little dog here is throwing up. This is just too much.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 2:38 PM

Posted by: pop a smoke | August 27, 2008 2:46 PM | Report abuse

>>Obama's Temple: http://minx.cc/?post=271619

I wonder how much fun the Republicans will have with this.

Will the gods descend from Olympus and place a crown of laurel on Obama's head?

How many members of the press are by now sucking their thumbs, curled up in fetal position, furiously repressing an overwhelming desire to write cynical articles laughing at this lightweight with narcissistic personality disorder, but afraid to do so out of fear of losing their jobs?

What will it take for the dam to burst and the wall of denial to come tumbling down and the press to start unloading their derision on this absurd, over-the-top poseur?

I have to update my "TOP TEN WAYS TO TELL YOUR ELITIST NOMINEE HAS NARCISSISTIC PERSONALITY DISORDER" list...

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 2:46 PM | Report abuse


I keep forgetting to sign a name so I will try to be consistent. I blog while I am working. I have a small manufacturing plant and I sit at the computer when I get a chance. .

I didn't want to copy your whole post just enough so you would know I was responding to you. Other the an attack on Obama I didn't see anything to dispute what I said. That being the case regardless what someone may think of Obama we can't have any more years of the same. Even if Obama have to be replaced in four years. I think we are going to be pleasantly surprised though.

------------
>>Anonymous wrote: ""Mccain is Bush 2" is not just a throw out line. It is completely true. The people who are behind the scenes of Bush are the same people behind the scenes of Mccain now and will be if he is elected."
It is a bumper sticker and nothing more! How can you say that?

McCain is totally unlike Bush. Don't you remember the 2000 Republican primaries? It was like Clinton-Obama with the competent pragmatic centrist unseated by the clueless lightweight with a rabid ideological base among the party's extremists. Bush and his evangelicals is like Obama with his black and left-wing netroots fanatical followers. McCain was the voice of sanity and

Posted by: pop a smoke | August 27, 2008 2:44 PM | Report abuse

As an Obama supporter, I think Hillary was just outstanding! I was inspired by her and pledge to support her in whatever she decides to do going forward.

Posted by: farah | August 27, 2008 2:43 PM | Report abuse

>>Obama's Temple: http://minx.cc/?post=271619
“Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's big speech on Thursday night will be delivered from an elaborate columned stage resembling a miniature Greek temple."

Well, he already did the Germany Hitler rally thing. He might as well evoke a new Golden Age of Man from an Athenian Godly stage.

This is a fitting endgame for a truly bizarre convention for which the only real theme is being all about Obama and his wife.

Even my little dog here is throwing up. This is just too much.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 2:38 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous wrote:

"Obama's Temple:

http://minx.cc/?post=271619

“Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's big speech on Thursday night will be delivered from an elaborate columned stage resembling a miniature Greek temple.

The stage, similar to structures used for rock concerts, has been set up at the 50-yard-line, the midpoint of Invesco Field, the stadium where the Denver Broncos' National Football League team plays.

Some 80,000 supporters will see Obama appear from between plywood columns painted off-white, reminiscent of Washington's Capitol building or even the White House, to accept the party's nomination for president.

He will stride out to a raised platform to a podium that can be raised from beneath the floor.”


AND? What's your point???? Be afraid, be very afraid...

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

>>Anonymous wrote: ""Mccain is Bush 2" is not just a throw out line. It is completely true. The people who are behind the scenes of Bush are the same people behind the scenes of Mccain now and will be if he is elected."

It is a bumper sticker and nothing more! How can you say that?

McCain is totally unlike Bush. Don't you remember the 2000 Republican primaries? It was like Clinton-Obama with the competent pragmatic centrist unseated by the clueless lightweight with a rabid ideological base among the party's extremists. Bush and his evangelicals is like Obama with his black and left-wing netroots fanatical followers. McCain was the voice of sanity and experience and it was the compulsive ideologues in the right wing cult followers of Bush who savaged him viciously in the primaries and then supported Bush in a bubble world of unreality in which he could do no wrong and was held unaccountable for anything.

After 8 years of Bush, how can anyone go for that lightweight clueless-outsider-in-the-white-house-sheltered-by-rabid-party-extremists formula again? My God, Obama even has his old partisan Biden who won't be competing his own legacy, just like Dick Cheney was to Bush. It's almost scary.

McCain actually has a lot more in common with Clinton than Obama does, if you set aside the ideology.

I have confidence that a moderate McCain with a Democratically controlled congress that has a clear majority, won't be putting any rabid anti-woman judges on the Supreme Court. McCain might be pro-life but he's had a career long principle of trying to keep religious activism separate from state matters. He won't nominate any pro-choice judges, but he won't be nominating any freaks, either.

The latest polls said that the conservative democrats are bleeding over to McCain in the past few weeks. If that's the case, then I'll be one of them, I guess. I tend to be fiscally conservative.

With the sexism and the ignorant immaturity of the Democratic party this year, and the growing strength of the netroots, the party seems to be more dominated by left-wing cultists and bullies. The more extremist the Democrats go, the more moderates and centrists will be more comfortable in the other party. The conservative and centrist Democrats bleeding over to the Republican party will help moderate its platform and bring about positive changes for the country if the agendas of the evangelicals stop ruling the Republican platform agenda.

If this brace of incompetents (Obama and Biden) is the future of the Democratic leadership, I don't need to follow.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 2:32 PM | Report abuse

Obama's Temple:

http://minx.cc/?post=271619

“Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's big speech on Thursday night will be delivered from an elaborate columned stage resembling a miniature Greek temple.

The stage, similar to structures used for rock concerts, has been set up at the 50-yard-line, the midpoint of Invesco Field, the stadium where the Denver Broncos' National Football League team plays.

Some 80,000 supporters will see Obama appear from between plywood columns painted off-white, reminiscent of Washington's Capitol building or even the White House, to accept the party's nomination for president.

He will stride out to a raised platform to a podium that can be raised from beneath the floor.”


Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 2:28 PM | Report abuse

>>Someone posting as me posted: "I HATE MEN!"

I don't HATE men. They have their uses. Some of them.

(Just kidding).

Looks like I'll be voting for McCain this year... who is, after all, a male of the species.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

To quote John Mccain,

"It is serving a cause bigger then ones self"

This is not about being a woman or being black it is about your country, and children and grandchildren.

To quote George S. Patton,

"Don't worry, when the time comes you will know what to do".

I don't believe people will vote against their own self interest and the interest of their country just for spite. We are better then that, you are better then that.

----------
Hillary's Speech was phenomenal and reinforced all of the many reasons that I supported her during the primaries and beyond. She is truly a great American and I am proud to support her.

I have been one of the many hold-outs when it comes to supporting Obama--both visibly and financially. I have felt disenfranchised as it seems that Obama thinks that I should fall in line, much like the Republican Voters that blindly support their candidates. Democrats are more intelligent and responsible and it is offensive for Obama to act as if we are not.

Hillary gave me my marching orders last night. I truly believe that she supports this campaign and my trust in her makes me support it too.

I am now an Obama Supporter.

Posted by: TexasDem | August 27, 2008 1:54 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 2:10 PM | Report abuse

GRRRRR! Everyone, especially all you MEN, are just so insensitive! There are days (at least three or four every month) that I just want to get postal, one-eight-seven ALL y'all, you make me so mad.

I know that Hillary feels the same way, which is why I have just been off my leash and snarlin' for her these past few months.

Now, out of my way. I have to use the bathroom AGAIN, and when I return I expect raw cucumbers - sliced - and chocolate covered carrots. And a pack of Winstons.

I HATE MEN!

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

"Mccain is Bush 2" is not just a throw out line. It is completely true. The people who are behind the scenes of Bush are the same people behind the scenes of Mccain now and will be if he is elected. Bush is not president, Cheney is. Even when important things are going on Bush will be off somewhere doing who knows what. Why, they don't need him for anything, he doesn't run the country. If Mccain is elected he will just change seats with Bush but nothing and I mean nothing will change. I suspect even though he will not be VP anymore the president will still be Cheney.

----------
A witchhunt is a witchhunt. It's the easiest way to take out a real leader who can't be overcome on the basis of talent alone.

I'm planning to support McCain, now. Nothing Clinton said makes Obama more experienced and knowledgeable than he is. My support of Clinton was never about who she is but what she can do. Obama can't do what she can do. It's my feeling that Obama's too clueless to do anything in the White House except be dominated by a strong Congress. Voting for Obama is voting for Pelosi and Reid to run the country from Congress with a blank check and ignorant, radical and bullying left wing netroots threatening and unseating any centrists.

I think that the government will be more moderate and focused on important businesss if McCain were a bipartisan, centrist president with whom Congress had to negotiate and focus on important issues.

I think we saw enough extremist, ideological and out of control government with Bush's Administration. We are very fortunate that we have at least one pragmatic centrist on a national ticket this year.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 1:54 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

FOOD FIGHT!


Clinton's delegates gathered for a caucus meeting after the breakfast to go over the procedures for casting ballots for the roll call vote that will take place later this evening.

Many Clinton delegates grew furious when their whip, Betsy Reid of Brownsville, announced that she intends to vote for Obama on the first ballot.

Reid said she had intended to vote for Clinton, but changed her mind after listening to Clinton's plea Tuesday night for her supporters to get behind Obama.

Sylvia Woods, a Clinton delegate from Knoxville, angrily demanded that Reid relinquish her post as the Clinton whip.

"She just lost her clout," said Woods, chairwoman of the Knox County Democratic Party. "She should have kept her mouth shut, or she should step down."

Woods' husband, Harold, also a pledged Clinton delegate, said he came to the convention promising to vote for the New York senator, "and that's what I'm going to do."

More details as they develop online and Thursday's fOX News Sentinel.

Posted by: JC | August 27, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Clinton's entire speech (in low res video) is online now at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaUbFk4xp9A

if you want to replay it.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse

>>CarmenK wrote: "Those little girls were darling and behaved like kids."

The Obama girls are adorable. They're the only impressive tangible works the Obamas have produced aside from those two narcissistic autobiographies Obama wrote.

And Condoleezza Rice would be a great VP for McCain.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Hillary's Speech was phenomenal and reinforced all of the many reasons that I supported her during the primaries and beyond. She is truly a great American and I am proud to support her.

I have been one of the many hold-outs when it comes to supporting Obama--both visibly and financially. I have felt disenfranchised as it seems that Obama thinks that I should fall in line, much like the Republican Voters that blindly support their candidates. Democrats are more intelligent and responsible and it is offensive for Obama to act as if we are not.

Hillary gave me my marching orders last night. I truly believe that she supports this campaign and my trust in her makes me support it too.

I am now an Obama Supporter.

Posted by: TexasDem | August 27, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

>>Anonymous wrote: "Why dont you run for President? I mean you act, which is all it is, like you know better than everyone on here, even your heroine Hillary. That is the beauty of a primary, there is a winner and a loser. You sound like a Patriots fan from last Super Bowl, get over it. As for your ridiculous posting about having Hillary as the VP."

Well, do you think it was fair and not exploitive for Arlen Spector to, on the eve of the Superbowl, threaten to have a congressional investigation of the Patriots' "spygate", which everyone knew was a bogus case involving behavior most every team in the NFL engaged in? Spector attacked the Patriots on the eve of the Superbowl with a threat against their beloved coach.

Now the Giants played amazingly and won the game, but the Patriots never played the way they did that day. They weren't just off their game, they had no heart whatsoever. It was obvious that if they won, Belichick would be witchhunted.

A witchhunt is a witchhunt. It's the easiest way to take out a real leader who can't be overcome on the basis of talent alone.

I'm planning to support McCain, now. Nothing Clinton said makes Obama more experienced and knowledgeable than he is. My support of Clinton was never about who she is but what she can do. Obama can't do what she can do. It's my feeling that Obama's too clueless to do anything in the White House except be dominated by a strong Congress. Voting for Obama is voting for Pelosi and Reid to run the country from Congress with a blank check and ignorant, radical and bullying left wing netroots threatening and unseating any centrists.

I think that the government will be more moderate and focused on important businesss if McCain were a bipartisan, centrist president with whom Congress had to negotiate and focus on important issues.

I think we saw enough extremist, ideological and out of control government with Bush's Administration. We are very fortunate that we have at least one pragmatic centrist on a national ticket this year.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Are you going to tell me to tell me John Mccain with his high school education and next to last in his class navel academy finish you want for the leader of the country? He has never held a job in his life or even brought home a paycheck.

He never built a business ran a company in fact did anything on his own without someone else doing it for him. First his family, then his wife, whose father by the way, bought him his political career. The man is in such an intellectual rut, he can't even turn on a computer. Heck, I would like to know how he manages his senatorial duties being to technologically illiterate? This is the man we want to lead our country? A man who even lacks the curiosity or initiative to even keep up with the times. Lets be honest, he is a moron and it would take an even bigger moron to vote for him.

John Mccain is a complete and utter dunce. Totally lazy and unaccomplished his whole life all the way back to his high school days. I won't even get into his years as an admitted drunk confirmed by everyone who knew him. Please give me a break. John Mccain, they really scrapped the bottom of the barrel when they nominated this loser.
-----------

Hillary gave a great speech. However, no matter how great speech it is, it cannot erase Obama's lack of experience. He is not ready to be president of United State on the day 1.

Thus I will vote for McCain. He is not ideal candidate but at least he has credential (he earned it in a hard way) to be president.

It’s that simple!
Posted by: Oita | August 27, 2008 1:33 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:50 PM | Report abuse

Another good one. Again it almost looked like a real post. John would be proud.

----------
Hillary gave a great speech. However, no matter how great speech it is, it cannot erase Obama's lack of experience. He is not ready to be president of United State on the day 1.

Thus I will vote for McCain. He is not ideal candidate but at least he has credential (he earned it in a hard way) to be president.

It’s that simple!
Posted by: Oita | August 27, 2008 1:33 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Hillary gave a great speech. However, no matter how great speech it is, it cannot erase Obama's lack of experience. He is not ready to be president of United State on the day 1.

Thus I will vote for McCain. He is not ideal candidate but at least he has credential (he earned it in a hard way) to be president.

It’s that simple!

Posted by: Oita | August 27, 2008 1:33 PM | Report abuse

When is enough enough?

Let's get on with it and stop the dissection. Clinton's speech was terrific.

We need to elect Obama.

Posted by: carol s barber | August 27, 2008 1:33 PM | Report abuse

Diane72 is sick. Along with the feeble minded John McCain who called them brats...
Those little girls were darling and behaved like kids. Their MOM protects them and their Daddy dotes on them.
Diane72 and John McCain should really try picking on someone their own size. I think Michelle will take real good care of the White House myself. And I look forward, to the days when kids like Caroline and John John were welcome in the oval office.

Posted by: CarmanK | August 27, 2008 1:31 PM | Report abuse


JOHN MCCAIN, A LEADER OR A MAD MAN

You be the judge.


WASHINGTON — Senator John McCain arrived late at his Senate office on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, just after the first plane hit the World Trade Center. “This is war,” he murmured to his aides. The sound of scrambling fighter planes rattled the windows, sending a tremor of panic through the room.


Erik Jacobs for The New York Times
John McCain said he had consulted Henry A. Kissinger on foreign policy before and after the Sept. 11 attacks.

Within hours, Mr. McCain, the Vietnam War hero and famed straight talker of the 2000 Republican primary, had taken on a new role: the leading advocate of taking the American retaliation against Al Qaeda far beyond Afghanistan. In a marathon of television and radio appearances, Mr. McCain recited a short list of other countries said to support terrorism, invariably including Iraq, Iran and Syria.

“There is a system out there or network, and that network is going to have to be attacked,” Mr. McCain said the next morning on ABC News. “It isn’t just Afghanistan,” he added, on MSNBC. “I don’t think if you got bin Laden tomorrow that the threat has disappeared,” he said on CBS, pointing toward other countries in the Middle East.

Within a month he made clear his priority. “Very obviously Iraq is the first country,” he declared on CNN. By Jan. 2, Mr. McCain was on the aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt in the Arabian Sea, yelling to a crowd of sailors and airmen: “Next up, Baghdad!”

Now, as Mr. McCain prepares to accept the Republican presidential nomination, his response to the attacks of Sept. 11 opens a window onto how he might approach the gravest responsibilities of a potential commander in chief. Like many, he immediately recalibrated his assessment of the unseen risks to America’s security. But he also began to suggest that he saw a new “opportunity” to deter other potential foes by punishing not only Al Qaeda but also Iraq.

“Just as Sept. 11 revolutionized our resolve to defeat our enemies, so has it brought into focus the opportunities we now have to secure and expand our freedom,” Mr. McCain told a NATO conference in Munich in early 2002, urging the Europeans to join what he portrayed as an all but certain assault on Saddam Hussein. “A better world is already emerging from the rubble.”

To his admirers, Mr. McCain’s tough response to Sept. 11 is at the heart of his appeal. They argue that he displayed the same decisiveness again last week in his swift calls to penalize Russia for its incursion into Georgia, in part by sending peacekeepers to police its border.

His critics charge that the emotion of Sept. 11 overwhelmed his former cool-eyed caution about deploying American troops without a clear national interest and a well-defined exit, turning him into a tool of the Bush administration in its push for a war to transform the region.

“He has the personality of a fighter pilot: when somebody stings you, you want to strike out,” said retired Gen. John H. Johns, a former friend and supporter of Mr. McCain who turned against him over the Iraq war. “Just like the American people, his reaction was: show me somebody to hit.”

Whether through ideology or instinct, though, Mr. McCain began making his case for invading Iraq to the public more than six months before the White House began to do the same. He drew on principles he learned growing up in a military family and on conclusions he formed as a prisoner in North Vietnam. He also returned to a conviction about “the common identity” of dangerous autocracies as far-flung as Serbia and North Korea that he had developed consulting with hawkish foreign policy thinkers to help sharpen the themes of his 2000 presidential campaign.

While pushing to take on Saddam Hussein, Mr. McCain also made arguments and statements that he may no longer wish to recall. He lauded the war planners he would later criticize, including Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney. (Mr. McCain even volunteered that he would have given the same job to Mr. Cheney.) He urged support for the later-discredited Iraqi exile Ahmad Chalabi’s opposition group, the Iraqi National Congress, and echoed some of its suspect accusations in the national media. And he advanced misleading assertions not only about Mr. Hussein’s supposed weapons programs but also about his possible ties to international terrorists, Al Qaeda and the Sept. 11 attacks.

Five years after the invasion of Iraq, Mr. McCain’s supporters note that he became an early critic of the administration’s execution of the occupation, and they credit him with pushing the troop “surge” that helped bring stability. Mr. McCain, though, stands by his support for the war and expresses no regrets about his advocacy.

In written answers to questions, he blamed “Iraq’s opacity under Saddam” for any misleading remarks he made about the peril it posed.

The Sept. 11 attacks “demonstrated the grave threat posed by a hostile regime, possessing weapons of mass destruction, and with reported ties to terrorists,” Mr. McCain wrote in an e-mail message on Friday. Given Mr. Hussein’s history of pursuing illegal weapons and his avowed hostility to the United States, “his regime posed a threat we had to take seriously.” The attacks were still a reminder, Mr. McCain added, of the importance of international action “to prevent outlaw states — like Iran today — from developing weapons of mass destruction.”

Formative Years

Mr. McCain has been debating questions about the use of military force far longer than most. He grew up in a family that had sent a son to every American war since 1776, and international relations were a staple of the McCain family dinner table. Mr. McCain grew up listening to his father, Adm. John S. McCain Jr., deliver lectures on “The Four Ocean Navy and the Soviet Threat,” closing with a slide of an image he considered the ultimate factor in the balance of power: a soldier marching through a rice paddy with a rifle at his shoulder.

“To quote Sherman, war is all hell and we need to fight it out and get it over with and that is when the killing stops,” recalled Joe McCain, Senator McCain’s younger brother.

Vietnam, for Senator McCain, reinforced those lessons. He has often said he blamed the Johnson administration’s pause in bombing for prolonging the war, and he credited President Richard M. Nixon’s renewed attacks with securing his release from a North Vietnamese prison. He has made the principle that the exercise of military power sets the bargaining table for international relations a consistent theme of his career ever since, and in his 2002 memoir he wrote that one of his lifelong convictions was “the imperative that American power never retreat in response to an inferior adversary’s provocation.”


But Mr. McCain also took away from Vietnam a second, restraining lesson: the necessity for broad domestic support for any military action. For years he opposed a string of interventions — in Lebanon, Haiti, Somalia, and, for a time, the Balkans — on the grounds that the public would balk at the loss of life without clear national interests. “The Vietnam thing,” he recently said.

In the late 1990s, however, while he was beginning to consider his 2000 presidential race, he started rebalancing his view of the needs to project American strength and to sustain public support. The 1995 massacre of 5,000 unarmed Bosnian Muslims at Srebrenica under NATO’s watch struck at his conscience, he has said, and in addition to America’s strategic national interests — in that case, the future and credibility of NATO — Mr. McCain began to speak more expansively about America’s moral obligations as the only remaining superpower.

His aides say he later described the American air strikes in Bosnia in 1996 and in Kosovo in 1999 as a parable of political leadership: Mr. McCain, Senator Bob Dole and others had rallied Congressional support for the strikes despite widespread public opposition, then watched approval soar after the intervention helped to bring peace.

“Americans elect their leaders to make these kinds of judgments,” Mr. McCain said in the e-mail message.

It was during the Balkan wars that Mr. McCain and his advisers read a 1997 article on the Wall Street Journal editorial page by William Kristol and David Brooks of The Weekly Standard — both now Op-Ed page columnists at The New York Times — promoting the idea of “national greatness” conservatism, defined by a more activist agenda at home and a more muscular role in the world.

“I wouldn’t call it a ‘eureka’ moment, but there was a sense that this is where we are headed and this is what we are trying to articulate and they have already done a lot of the work,” said John Weaver, a former McCain political adviser. “And, quite frankly, from a crass political point of view, we were in the making-friends business. The Weekly Standard represented a part of the primary electorate that we could get.”

Soon Mr. McCain and his aides were consulting regularly with the circle of hawkish foreign policy thinkers sometimes referred to as neoconservatives — including Mr. Kristol, Robert Kagan and Randy Scheunemann, a former aide to Mr. Dole who became a McCain campaign adviser — to develop the senator’s foreign policy ideas and instincts into the broad themes of a presidential campaign. (In his e-mail message, Mr. McCain noted that he had also consulted with friends like Henry A. Kissinger, known for a narrower view of American interests.)

One result was a series of speeches in which Mr. McCain called for “rogue state rollback.” He argued that disparate regional troublemakers, including Iraq, North Korea and Serbia, bore a common stamp: they were all autocracies. And as such, he contended, they were more likely to export terrorism, spread dangerous weapons, or start ethnic conflicts. In an early outline of what would become his initial response to the Sept. 11 attacks, Mr. McCain argued that “swift and sure” retribution against any one of the rogue states was an essential deterrent to any of the others. But Mr. McCain’s advisers and aides say his “rogue state” speeches stopped short of the most sweeping international agenda put forth by Mr. Kristol, Mr. Kagan and their allies. Mr. McCain explicitly disavowed direct military action merely to advance American values, foreswearing any “global crusade” of interventions in favor of relying on covert and financial support for internal opposition groups.

As an example, he could point to his 1998 sponsorship of the Iraqi Liberation Act, which sought to direct nearly $100 million to Iraqis who hoped to overthrow Saddam Hussein. The bill, signed by President Bill Clinton, also endorsed the ouster of Mr. Hussein.

Mr. McCain said then that he doubted the United States could muster the political will to use ground troops to remove the Iraqi dictator any time soon. “It was much easier when Saddam Hussein was occupying Kuwait and threatening Saudi Arabia,” the senator told Fox News in November 1998. “We’d have to convince the American people that it’s worth again the sacrifice of American lives, because that would also be part of the price.”

Hard Calls

Mr. McCain spent the afternoon of Sept. 11 in a young aide’s studio apartment near the Capitol. There was no cable television, nothing but water in the kitchen, and the hallway reminded him of an old boxing gym. Evacuated from his office but stranded by traffic, he could not resist imagining himself at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue. “There are not enough Secret Service agents in the world to keep me away from Washington and New York at a time like this,” Mr. McCain told an adviser.


Over the next days and weeks, however, Mr. McCain became almost as visible as he would have been as president. Broadcasters rushed to him as a patriotic icon and reassuring voice, and for weeks he was ubiquitous on the morning news programs, Sunday talk shows, cable news networks, and even late-night comedy shows.

In the spotlight, he pushed rogue state rollback one step further, arguing that the United States should go on the offensive as a warning to any other country that might condone such an attack. “These networks are well-embedded in some of these countries,” Mr. McCain said on Sept. 12, listing Iraq, Iran and Syria as potential targets of United States pressure. “We’re going to have to prove to them that we are very serious, and the price that they will pay will not only be for punishment but also deterrence.”

Although he had campaigned for President Bush during the 2000 general election, he was still largely frozen out of the White House because of animosities left over from the Republican primary. But after Mr. Bush declared he would hold responsible any country condoning terrorism, Mr. McCain called his leadership “magnificent” and his national security team the strongest “that has ever been assembled.” A few weeks later, Larry King of CNN asked whether he would have named Mr. Rumsfeld and Colin L. Powell to a McCain cabinet. “Oh, yes, and Cheney,” Mr. McCain answered, saying he, too, would have offered Mr. Cheney the vice presidency.

Even during the heat of the war in Afghanistan, Mr. McCain kept an eye on Iraq. To Jay Leno in mid-September, Mr. McCain said he believed “some other countries” had assisted Osama bin Laden, going on to suggest Iraq, Syria and Iran as potential suspects. In October 2001, when an Op-Ed page column in The New York Times speculated that Iraq, Russia or some other country might bear responsibility for that month’s anthrax mailings, Mr. McCain interrupted a question about Afghanistan from David Letterman on that night’s “Late Show.” “The second phase is Iraq,” Mr. McCain said, adding, “Some of this anthrax may — and I emphasize may — have come from Iraq.” (The Federal Bureau of Investigation says it came from a federal government laboratory in Maryland.) By October, United States and foreign intelligence agencies had said publicly that they doubted any cooperation between Mr. Hussein and Al Qaeda, noting Al Qaeda’s opposition to such secular nationalists. American intelligence officials soon declared that Mr. Hussein had not supported international terrorism for nearly a decade.

But when the Czech government said that before the attacks, one of the 9/11 hijackers had met in Prague with an Iraqi intelligence official, Mr. McCain seized the report as something close to a smoking gun. “The evidence is very clear,” he said three days later, in an Oct. 29 television interview. (Intelligence agencies quickly cast doubt on the meeting.)

Frustrated by the dearth of American intelligence about Iraq, Mr. McCain’s aides say, he had long sought to learn as much as he could from Iraqi opposition figures in exile, including Mr. Chalabi of the Iraqi National Congress. Over the years, Mr. McCain often urged support for the group, saying it had “significant support, in my view, inside Iraq.”

After Sept. 11, Mr. Chalabi’s group said an Iraqi emissary had once met with Osama bin Laden, and brought forward two Iraqi defectors who described terrorist training camps and biological weapons efforts. At times, Mr. McCain seemed to echo their accusations, citing the “two defectors” in a television interview and attesting to “credible reports of involvement between Iraqi administration officials, Iraqi officials and the terrorists.”

Growing Impatient

But United States intelligence officials had doubts about Mr. Chalabi at the time and have since discredited his group. In 2006, Mr. McCain acknowledged to The New Republic that he had been “too enamored with the I.N.C.” In his e-mail message, though, he said he never relied on the group for information about Iraq’s weapons program.

At a European security conference in February 2002, when the Bush administration still publicly maintained that it had made no decision about moving against Iraq, Mr. McCain described an invasion as all but certain. “A terrorist resides in Baghdad,” he said, adding, “A day of reckoning is approaching.”

Regime change in Iraq in addition to Afghanistan, he argued, would compel other sponsors of terrorism to mend their ways, “accomplishing by example what we would otherwise have to pursue through force of arms.”

Finally, as American troops massed in the Persian Gulf in early 2003, Mr. McCain grew impatient, his aides say, concerned that the White House was failing to act as the hot desert summer neared. Waiting, he warned in a speech in Washington, risked squandering the public and international support aroused by Sept. 11. “Does anyone really believe that the world’s will to contain Saddam won’t eventually collapse as utterly as it did in the 1990s?” Mr. McCain asked.

In retrospect, some of Mr. McCain’s critics now accuse him of looking for a pretext to justify the war. “McCain was hell-bent for leather: ‘Saddam Hussein is a bad guy, we have got to teach him, let’s send a message to the other people in the Middle East,’ ” said Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts.

But Mr. McCain, in his e-mail message, said the reason he had supported the war was the evolving threat from Mr. Hussein.

“I believe voters elect their leaders based on their experience and judgment — their ability to make hard calls, for instance, on matters of war and peace,” he wrote. “It’s important to get them right.”

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:25 PM | Report abuse

What she said was deeper. She said John Mccain is such a war mongering psychopath that even if you despise Obama you have to vote for him. No one is asking Hillary to like Obama, just do what is best for the country. On that note she did. I know complete bigots, I mean like KKK types who are voting for Obama, that is a fact. Mccain is out of his mind and too dangerous to even be allowed to visit the white house much less live there. Hillary got it right and everybody knows it.


------

Did Hillary do enough? If you think she did, it's because of wishful thinking.

She didn't take back any of the negative stuff she said about Obama in the primaries. She didn't say he was ready to lead or take a 3:00 AM phone call. All she said was that McCain is bad.

Posted by: AK | August 27, 2008 12:50 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:19 PM | Report abuse


I would not know but it sounds like you have personal experience. Do you still ware your helmet?

-----
Do you think it's a good idea that Michelle Shaniqua Obama has her special needs child in the White House. Can you imagine running through the Executive Manision knocking down historic objects and writing on the walls?

Posted by: Dianne72 | August 27, 2008 12:38 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:11 PM | Report abuse

Patrick you have apparently become part of the O cult, and in desperation you now use their same name calling tactics against all of those who do not belive that O is qualified to be POTUS. How pathetic. Congratulations you are now officially part of that same O attitude that you once scorned.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:05 PM | Report abuse

AsperGirl,

Why dont you run for President? I mean you act, which is all it is, like you know better than everyone on here, even your heroine Hillary. That is the beauty of a primary, there is a winner and a loser. You sound like a Patriots fan from last Super Bowl, get over it. As for your ridiculous posting about having Hillary as the VP.

In a Political race, when you bring up your rival and assassinations, Odds are you just made the biggest Bone Head moment possible. Hillary killed Hillary's chances at VP.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:04 PM | Report abuse

AsperGirl, do you have nothing nice to say about anyone but HRC? Your rebukes are excessive and disrespectful; a behavior that one observes in children, not adults.

Don't you recognize that your acrimoniousness serves only to steel others against you and your opinions?

Posted by: cbmtrx | August 27, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

"Do you think it's a good idea that Michelle Shaniqua Obama has her special needs child in the White House. Can you imagine running through the Executive Manision knocking down historic objects and writing on the walls?"

This one was pretty stupid. It's not playing on any stereotype.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 27, 2008 12:58 PM | Report abuse

All I am saying that children with extra chromosome may be a danger in a historic setting. Jackie Kennedy worked awfully hard to restore the White House. I would hate to see that work undone.

Posted by: Dianne72 | August 27, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

To all my fellow Democrat Hillary fans, I know most of you are like me, 100% behind Obama just as Hillary has asked, those who are not are either GOP trolls or are in need of major therapy.

Posted by: Patrick NYC | August 27, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

Was it enough? Democrats across the land got a real reminder of what strong women in our party look like, between Michelle Obama on Monday reflecting the epitome of the American Dream to the new "Happy Warrior" Hillary Clinton, graceful and determined in defeat to remind her voters they weren't in this campaign just for her, but for her ideals and ideas. Contrast them to the beer heiress who stole drugs from her charity, stole her husband from a disfigured first wife and family and stole her inheritance from her 2 half-siblings, cutting up their credit cards to boot. I think the Dems got waaay more than enough this week of unity and determination to beat John McCain... and if you want a laugh check out this hilarious parody of Cindy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xT4tbdoZMmc

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Did Hillary do enough? If you think she did, it's because of wishful thinking.

She didn't take back any of the negative stuff she said about Obama in the primaries. She didn't say he was ready to lead or take a 3:00 AM phone call. All she said was that McCain is bad.

Posted by: AK | August 27, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Last monday night at Democratic Convention in Denver. Michelle Obama a mother and wife of the Sen. Barack Obama reminded us that the American dream begins at home. It begins with commitment to family, values that are lived. The pursuit of education, from the inner city to the suburbs. Working hard at our jobs. Serving our communities. Allegiance to our great country.

Last night At convention, Sen.Hillary Rodham clinton rallies troops for Sen. Barack Obama delivered a rousing endoresement of Sen. Barack Obama.!!!!

Posted by: Akber A. Kassam. | August 27, 2008 12:47 PM | Report abuse

HRC's speech was a good effort on her part to make the DEMS come to their senses. Her policies and Obama's are in sinc.. I am 63 and it scares the beegees out of me that McCain and his Repugs will continue to operate their failed economic and war for oil policies that are bankrupting our nation. Would we really be selling our highways, airports and railroads to foreigners to get money, if we weren't in Iraq. The Repugs have used the American treasury like an ATM for failed projects.
Hillary said it. Obama's experience and his loyalty lies squarely with the good of American people, the nation and its pocketbook. What we need in the White House is a man with the vision and courage to lead. My Dad used to say (he was uneducated, but a successful businessman) that he lead the way and with the right people in place, made his business grow.
George Bush has consistantly chosen the wrong people to serve the American people and John McCain would leave the incompetence in place, because they are the ones who have starved government. REMEMBER the SHAME when Katrin hit???? I do. Obama has to win and I have no patience with the malcontents that would sell out the country, to soothe their own egos. Hillary lost the primary..She wants to work for Universal Healthcare and I think she would be a great Senate Majority Leader.

Posted by: CarmanK | August 27, 2008 12:47 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats need to put more effort into exposing the fraudulence of the status quo, the insidious undermining of liberties, the heedless march toward national bankruptcy, the absurdity and strategic irrelevance of the war on terrorism, the studied neglect of the onfoing energy abd environmental crises, and the general distance from reality that characterizes the Bush status quo.

The Bush status quo has made the US into a debtor nation, an economic weakling dependent on unfriendly nations for our very survival, a diplomatic pariah, and a military paper tiger.

That's what the Democrats need to be talking about; the party will unite most effectively if they're faced with a brutally realistic assessment of just how deep in a hole we now are.

Posted by: Ken in Dallas | August 27, 2008 12:45 PM | Report abuse

Actually, this is pretty funny. Something from Jon Stewart's Daily Show on helping Clinton supporters heal. They take them to a child psychologist.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=179256&title=healing-clinton-supporters

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 12:45 PM | Report abuse

Do you think it's a good idea that Michelle Shaniqua Obama has her special needs child in the White House. Can you imagine running through the Executive Manision knocking down historic objects and writing on the walls?

Posted by: Dianne72
-------------------------
You are beyond white trash, white trash is
embarressed of you.

Posted by: Patrick NYC | August 27, 2008 12:45 PM | Report abuse

>>Anonymous wrote: "Those posts are real. Some Democrats are in denial. It will be a rude awakening on a certain Wednesday in November."

They need an intervention.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

>>Bill wrote: "Clinton's speech sets Biden up to fail. Everyone and his brother will compare the two speeches in the context of, "Did Obama pick the right VP?" Who here thinks Biden comes out of that one ahead?"

You've got it all figured out, don't you? How to blame the Clintons for every Obama deficiency, failure to lead the party into unity himself and you can even hold them responsible for trying not to make his incompetent VP pick not look incompetent?

Let me tell you something. There is nothing good about Obama's pick of Biden. Bill Clinton would have to smoke a lot of weed and have skipped sleeping last night, to deliver a speech that rivals one of Biden's.

Biden's rambling verbal obtuseness is such a joke, he's DOA as a VP pick. It's totally unrealistic to expect any Clinton, even Chelsea, not to outperform Biden in a speech.

As Mitt Romney pointed out, no one even WANTS to face Biden in a VP debate:

"You know, Joe Biden is an impenetrable thicket of words,'' Romney replied, in an interview on CNN's The Situation Room. "I can't imagine anybody is ready to debate Joe Biden.''

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Those posts are real. Some Democrats are in denial. It will be a rude awakening on a certain Wednesday in November.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 12:41 PM | Report abuse

Do you think it's a good idea that Michelle Shaniqua Obama has her special needs child in the White House. Can you imagine running through the Executive Manision knocking down historic objects and writing on the walls?

Posted by: Dianne72 | August 27, 2008 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Another good one it almost sounded like a real post. Rush would be proud.

-----------
Senator Clinton did not owe Egobama anything at all.However,she,most graciously went before the delegates and asked them and her supporters to support Egobama.Now we see some of his rabid minions saying it is up to the Clinton suporters whether or not he gets elected in November.Wrong:rather it is entirely up to him.I am one of Clinton's supporters and will definitely NOT vote for him.I will vote for Mccain because in my state we cannot write in a name.I would vote for GWB himself before I would vote for Egobama.I love my country more than some self proclaimed messiah.You people who are so desperate for hope and change can go take a flying leap as far as I am concerned.This is still America,we have the right to vote however we choose for whatever reason we choose.Also I agree with Aspergirl.The Anti american Mrs.Obama did have an ugly expression on her ugly face during Clinton's speech.These people cannot appreciate anything so why even try to apease them?They think the world owes them everything they want.Wrong again.Clearly the DNC chose the wrong candidate.When they lose in November the joke will be on them.

Posted by: cincigal74 | August 27, 2008 12:33 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Senator Clinton did not owe Egobama anything at all.However,she,most graciously went before the delegates and asked them and her supporters to support Egobama.Now we see some of his rabid minions saying it is up to the Clinton suporters whether or not he gets elected in November.Wrong:rather it is entirely up to him.I am one of Clinton's supporters and will definitely NOT vote for him.I will vote for Mccain because in my state we cannot write in a name.I would vote for GWB himself before I would vote for Egobama.I love my country more than some self proclaimed messiah.You people who are so desperate for hope and change can go take a flying leap as far as I am concerned.This is still America,we have the right to vote however we choose for whatever reason we choose.Also I agree with Aspergirl.The Anti american Mrs.Obama did have an ugly expression on her ugly face during Clinton's speech.These people cannot appreciate anything so why even try to apease them?They think the world owes them everything they want.Wrong again.Clearly the DNC chose the wrong candidate.When they lose in November the joke will be on them.

Posted by: cincigal74 | August 27, 2008 12:33 PM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton has lost more then a few steps over the years. I think he is just hoping not to make a fool of himself as he has lately anytime he isn't scripted. If he he wanders off script it could make for some great youtube moments. Biden is always Biden, he has nothing to worry about.

------------
Clinton's speech sets Biden up to fail. Everyone and his brother will compare the two speeches in the context of, "Did Obama pick the right VP?" Who here thinks Biden comes out of that one ahead?

Posted by: Bill | August 27, 2008 12:21 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 12:28 PM | Report abuse

pvogel88 wrote:

"I have a name or those who will vote mccain since hillary is out

Republicans!"

I'll go further. I'll wager 98% of those pretending to be Hillary supporters saying they're going to vote for McCain ALWAYS were Republicans, and are trying to drive a wedge between Democrats, just as the McCain ads are doing on TV.

Hopefully, real Clinton supporters are intelligent enough to process Hillary's remarks yesterday, especially:

"No way, no how, no McCain"

and:

"Ask yourselves, were you in it just for me, or the ideas and principles we represent?"

So is Hillary a leader for them, or not?

Posted by: hmp | August 27, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

Dan Hughes said:

"I have voted both Dem and Rep in past elections and from what I seen in the Obama campaign was they made a huge mistake when they did not choose Hillary as the running mate and vice Prez. That would have been the ticket to get a Dem in the White House. As it is now, I'm not sure Obama can win in November. He has not convince us that he has a real plan !"


Are you serious? Have you been to his website? There isn't an issue out there that he doesnt have a concise, well laid out plan for, that is just a click away for the curious. But I think
I know why Dan thinks this.

The problem we all suffer from is that we tend to listen to a bunch of media sheep offer reactions to the speeches at the convention. These reporters grew tired of issue nuances months ago, so now all that they can offer is water-cooler discussions about their nonsense opinions (please, someone get Andrea Mitchell off the air now -- please!).

Do I really care how reporters "feel" about whether Hillary connected with her supporters? No, I don't. I'd be more interested in seeing David Gregory, Andrea Mitchell, Candy Crowley, and/or any lame Fox reporter actually canvas the hillary delegates for reactions.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

Not being a Hillary fan because of her methods, I was surprised and impressed. She did her bit of self-aggrandizing but after she got past her "I am woman hear me roar" pat on the back zeal-fest, she stepped up to the plate to plead with her supporters and all Americans to unify and support Obama more than I would have ever imagined.

Billy Boy will never be tamed. His narcissism,scoundrel past and continuing antics overshadow the good he did as president. His ego is enormous, still looking for the praise and adulation for his long-past residence in the White House. Unfortunaltely, tho Hillary said she came to us as "...a mother,a Democrat and as a Senator" she did NOT mention that she comes to us as a wife. Michelle Obama so proudly did. That ommission is telling in itself. Bill will always be the millstone around HRC's neck and that is why she couldn't have been chosen as VP on a SuperTicket. Our nation doesn't need Billary drama as it tries to revitalize, unify and re-invent itself.

This experience may humble Hillary. She will hone her skills in more dynamic political arenas. She can be effective in respected and powerful positions offering her complete support and dedication along the way. That alone is a magnificent opportunity for her and for all Americans. We need her THERE at this time in history. Personally, I don't see that as a lesser endeavor. She may be better positioned to affect change than she could be while fighting her opposition from the Presidential office.

Now if only the hard-headed HRC supporters would just listen to her plea and vote for the better of America WITH HER instead of trying to prove some misaligned allegiance IN SPITE OF HER, we might begin to go forward as a nation promoting all that she has worked for and fought for. Putting egos aside will continue to allow her a front and center seat in continuing her fight for change on the behalf of ALL.

It's time for those who are angered over Hillary's lost bid for the Presidency to do what SHE has had to do...swallow hard and put your selfish pride aside. Work as a collective for the better of this nation. As HRC said...God Bless America.

Posted by: rdonal | August 27, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

It's never so easy as the language that commands Hillary supporters to give up on long- and painstakingly fashioned dreams, ideals, narratives. Imagine if BO had lost the primaries --- could his supporters just turn over their passions to HRC? --- I think not. It's really not about "like and dislike" --- it's about effective mixes of principles and passions, trust and mistrust --- for both sides.

I heard Hillary say that her supporters could remain disillusioned and angry but that they MUST vote democratic, Obama, in the general election. She did all that she - as Hillary - could do and she did more than she had to do as demonstrated by the history of Dem Conventions in which losers (Kennedy, etc) were so less gracious. Double-standard for women or for anyone named Clinton?

So, intellectually on a better track after HRC's speech --- I still don't know what I will do in November. I hope I can do the right thing. But it was not, is not, will never be Hillary's responsibility to strategize to influence my November vote. It's an ethical choice that, now devoid of passion, must be carefully and cognitively made.

Posted by: jml | August 27, 2008 12:21 PM | Report abuse

Clinton's speech sets Biden up to fail. Everyone and his brother will compare the two speeches in the context of, "Did Obama pick the right VP?" Who here thinks Biden comes out of that one ahead?

Posted by: Bill | August 27, 2008 12:21 PM | Report abuse

Do you know what the current count is? Hillary only has 5% of he delegates left. If anything they are trying to not have this a big embarrassment for Hillary. Hillary is the one who is going to close it and thats a smart mover. It could put a hole in the Hillary myth.

-----------
So, now Obama and the DNC want to hold the roll call away from the main hall, and stop the vote partially through ... just in case Hillary does well, which might embarrass Obama and the DNC. This is what happens when a candidate and a party manipulate the process, and try to force a candidate down the throats of the constituents. Obama might have trashed the Clintons, and gotten over 90% of the black vote, but in the process America has been thrown under the bus.

Posted by: Gina | August 27, 2008 12:16 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 12:20 PM | Report abuse

>>dl wrote: "Obama's campaign staff helps write a lot of the speeches that is the norm...but in this case he is not."

Well, Bill Clinton is a gifted speaker, with his own kind of charisma. People pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for him to speak at their political and policy events. The Obamas are very, very lucky that the Clintons are both speaking at their convention.

It's a measure of the Obama's own distrust that having the Clintons speaking at Barack's convention was like some kind of bad tasting medicine forced on them.

If he gets any bump at all out of that ill-conceived convention, it will be due to their love of the Democratic party and their embrace of his candidacy, in addition to their stumping and fundraising for him.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 12:19 PM | Report abuse

So, now Obama and the DNC want to hold the roll call away from the main hall, and stop the vote partially through ... just in case Hillary does well, which might embarrass Obama and the DNC. This is what happens when a candidate and a party manipulate the process, and try to force a candidate down the throats of the constituents. Obama might have trashed the Clintons, and gotten over 90% of the black vote, but in the process America has been thrown under the bus.

Posted by: Gina | August 27, 2008 12:16 PM | Report abuse

To borrow a phrase from George Thorogood:

"That's all there is and there ain't no more."

Posted by: NoOneImportant | August 27, 2008 12:15 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: scrivener | August 27, 2008 12:13 PM | Report abuse

People like you will never be satisfied even if Obama will bring you 82 celestials, Here is your WP man "Chrisi West: I think the press is definitely playing a major part in keeping the "divided party" issue alive. I have yet to meet a single Clinton delegate who isn't supporting Senator Obama in November. (And they all loved Michelle's speech on Monday, too!) The issues at stake for the Democratic party are too great, and I think we all realize that. The few who end up on TV are not at all representative of what I've seen at all.

Posted by: Mani | August 27, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Aspergirl

Bill Clinton is writing his own speech (oy false stuff flying all around ugh...no one is writing his speech for him...he's being helped by Penn but he is writing it himself)...and most often speakers run their speeches in front of the candidates campaign staff...

Obama has not even asked for that.

and Paul begala said "that with his finger wagging under an aides nose...he stated that he was going to write it and he was going to write what Barack wanted him to"

but he is writing the speech himself.

Obama's campaign staff helps write a lot of the speeches that is the norm...but in this case he is not.

Posted by: dl | August 27, 2008 12:07 PM | Report abuse


The Clintons have proven historically they can't be trusted. Bill Clinton is a guest at the convention.


--------

The Lord of the Flies's campaign tried to pull off another Clinton abuse:

They gave Bill Clinton a slot to speak on the night when the topic is National Security, which is Obama's greatest weakness and Bill Clinton wants to speak about the economy. And get this -- the Obama camp WROTE BILL CLINTON'S REMARKS FOR HIM.

I'm sure that if this were a 3rd world country, Obama's faction would be those kind of people who would be holding Chelsea hostage with a gun to her head while Bill speaks.

Did it occur to them to just ask for and expect the Clintons to support their party? The Obama campaign mentality is so street. They act like this is gang warfare over turf (the electorate).

The Clintons are so much better class of people.

The Obamas are so Lord of the Flies.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 11:48 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 11:51 AM | Report abuse

If Obama loses in 2012 Hillary will not even make it through the primaries. Her shot came and went, she blew it and will have to just live with it.

--------
AsperGirl:

"Clinton not only had whole policies and positions already laid out, but plans on how to implement them. I.e. she had a whole schema laid out about how to accomplish specific things. With her health care plan she had already built the basics of a coalition of stakeholders to create the lobbying and political will to get universal health care passed (business is being crippled by having to bear the cost of employee-provided health insurance plans, for example). Clinton could have really pulled it off, this time, and had a roadmap already in place. This was not only true for universal health care, but other issues, too that are serious problems we face. Getting legislation passed is more than big ideas and the path from wish lists to implementing an act is a long, partisan road in Washington DC. Clinton not only knows this, but she had specific itineraries and how-tos mapped out for specific issues and acts she wanted passed to implement the ideas she talked about in stump speeches.

That is decades of experience in light years past where Obama is in his development as a politician. Obama not only has no clue how to put together stakeholders and get arms twisted and pull off radical large legislation packages, he can't even get specific below a certain level of vague rhetoric in his speeches."

I hope Obama will be an effective president, but I share your skepticism on Obama's ability to get the necessary coalitions together to govern this country effectively. As it looks now, he may not even get elected. If that is the case, I do hope that Pelosi and Reid will be strong enough to keep a McCain administration in check. But yes, the Democrats missed a wonderful opportunity to elect a strong and experienced leader. Here's the irony, we now have the weaker candidate who arrived based on a superbly run political campaign. From what I have read so far (especially the Chicago Tribune piece on Obama's ascendancy at the cost of Alice Palmer) Obama is a meticulous and clever organizer of a political campaign but a weak legislator and public servant whereas in HRC, we have a weak campaigner, but very experienced legislator and public servant.

In this speech, Hillary was much more comfortable championing the big ideas than she was comfortable championing herself as presidential candidate. Too bad she didn't find this formula on the campaign trail. Oh well, if Obama loses, her speech made sure she's still a strong candidate for 2012... I for one hope she would run.

Posted by: Obamaskeptic | August 27, 2008 11:43 AM

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

The Lord of the Flies's campaign tried to pull off another Clinton abuse:

They gave Bill Clinton a slot to speak on the night when the topic is National Security, which is Obama's greatest weakness and Bill Clinton wants to speak about the economy. And get this -- the Obama camp WROTE BILL CLINTON'S REMARKS FOR HIM.

I'm sure that if this were a 3rd world country, Obama's faction would be those kind of people who would be holding Chelsea hostage with a gun to her head while Bill speaks.

Did it occur to them to just ask for and expect the Clintons to support their party? The Obama campaign mentality is so street. They act like this is gang warfare over turf (the electorate).

The Clintons are so much better class of people.

The Obamas are so Lord of the Flies.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 11:48 AM | Report abuse

I doubt any really care they are just opportunists who are using this Hillary issue to forward their own agendas. These people would never get a shot on Larry King or any main stream media normally. No one would be listening to them or interested in what they have to say. The one woman based in Miami, I forget her name is a joke. To her this is an opportunity to make a buck with her website but it doesn't seem to be working. The last rally she formed she got 4 as in "4" to show up. At the convention one who was interviewed claimed to be the head of an organization with 3 million members for Hillary. When asked how many were there she said just the two us as she waved her cheap looking home made sign. This Hillary thing is completely overblown.
-----------


I have a name or those who will vote mccain since hillary is out

Republicans!

Posted by: pvogel88 | August 27, 2008 11:36 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

AsperGirl:

"Clinton not only had whole policies and positions already laid out, but plans on how to implement them. I.e. she had a whole schema laid out about how to accomplish specific things. With her health care plan she had already built the basics of a coalition of stakeholders to create the lobbying and political will to get universal health care passed (business is being crippled by having to bear the cost of employee-provided health insurance plans, for example). Clinton could have really pulled it off, this time, and had a roadmap already in place. This was not only true for universal health care, but other issues, too that are serious problems we face. Getting legislation passed is more than big ideas and the path from wish lists to implementing an act is a long, partisan road in Washington DC. Clinton not only knows this, but she had specific itineraries and how-tos mapped out for specific issues and acts she wanted passed to implement the ideas she talked about in stump speeches.

That is decades of experience in light years past where Obama is in his development as a politician. Obama not only has no clue how to put together stakeholders and get arms twisted and pull off radical large legislation packages, he can't even get specific below a certain level of vague rhetoric in his speeches."

I hope Obama will be an effective president, but I share your skepticism on Obama's ability to get the necessary coalitions together to govern this country effectively. As it looks now, he may not even get elected. If that is the case, I do hope that Pelosi and Reid will be strong enough to keep a McCain administration in check. But yes, the Democrats missed a wonderful opportunity to elect a strong and experienced leader. Here's the irony, we now have the weaker candidate who arrived based on a superbly run political campaign. From what I have read so far (especially the Chicago Tribune piece on Obama's ascendancy at the cost of Alice Palmer) Obama is a meticulous and clever organizer of a political campaign but a weak legislator and public servant whereas in HRC, we have a weak campaigner, but very experienced legislator and public servant.

In this speech, Hillary was much more comfortable championing the big ideas than she was comfortable championing herself as presidential candidate. Too bad she didn't find this formula on the campaign trail. Oh well, if Obama loses, her speech made sure she's still a strong candidate for 2012... I for one hope she would run.

Posted by: Obamaskeptic | August 27, 2008 11:43 AM | Report abuse

Wow, that almost sounded like a real post. Did you just thet that in todays email?
========

We democrats keep saying we want change. If we really meant this, we would do something very radical and dump this loser we have for a candidate. The republicans already have the country believing he is not ready to be president, that he has ties to Bill ayers, he loves Reverend Wright, and that Michele hates America. They have defined the issues of this election and are in total control. The issues won't matter because all of Obama's shortcomings will overpower them.

In a year that should have been a cakewalk against the Bush policies, we are already left defending a very weak candidate (and a worthless VEEP) that keep getting weaker.

If Obama really believed in change, he would admit that it is not his time right now and pull a Ross Perot. Are we that stubborn as democrats to insist on supporting a big loser??

Posted by: I've Had It | August 27, 2008 11:34 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 11:40 AM | Report abuse

Next week is the GOP Convention!! Yaaah!!

W and Dick will tell us how good we have it!! Yaaah W!! Yaaah Dick!! We will all be reminded of how patriotic they are!! Yaaah W! Yaah Dick!! They will remind us that dose nasty dems are tax and spend liberals!! Yaah W. Yaah Dick!! Remind us "victory"! Yaah! Remind us of "creeping homosexualism" Yaah! Yaah!

(Note to speakers - do NOT mention housing crisis, deficits, energy policy, except drilling, health care, wars except for "victory", failing banks, failing alliances abroad, shredding of Constitution, politicizing of the Justice Department etc.)

Whatever you do - DON'T APPEAR ON THE SAME STAGE OF MCSAME...errr McCain!! Dont hug him! and whatever you do....Don't kiss him!!!

Heehee. Should be quite a show.

Posted by: toritto | August 27, 2008 11:39 AM | Report abuse

The real question is. How did the media get so frickin stupid.

They have always been stupid. Obama owes his nomination to the media.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 11:38 AM | Report abuse

Obama will win no matter what Hillary and her twenty hardcore nuts do.

The real question is. How did the media get so frickin stupid.

Now tell us that McCain has substance and Obmaa does not. You know you want to. Karl Rove will tell you to say it and you will.

Please go away. You are part of the media and you really suck.

Posted by: Ken | August 27, 2008 11:37 AM | Report abuse

I have a name or those who will vote mccain since hillary is out

Republicans!

Posted by: pvogel88 | August 27, 2008 11:36 AM | Report abuse

It really does not take a genius to figure that one one. But if you are that thick, it Obama Biden sounds too much like Osama Bin Laden.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 11:36 AM | Report abuse

We democrats keep saying we want change. If we really meant this, we would do something very radical and dump this loser we have for a candidate. The republicans already have the country believing he is not ready to be president, that he has ties to Bill ayers, he loves Reverend Wright, and that Michele hates America. They have defined the issues of this election and are in total control. The issues won't matter because all of Obama's shortcomings will overpower them.

In a year that should have been a cakewalk against the Bush policies, we are already left defending a very weak candidate (and a worthless VEEP) that keep getting weaker.

If Obama really believed in change, he would admit that it is not his time right now and pull a Ross Perot. Are we that stubborn as democrats to insist on supporting a big loser??

Posted by: I've Had It | August 27, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Why, really you must have a reason. If you only type with two fingers we will wait because we are curious what you think.

----------
Obama Biden

It was a poor choice for VP if only for the way the 2 names sound together. Add another syllable and the results are disasterous.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 11:29 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Obama Biden

It was a poor choice for VP if only for the way the 2 names sound together. Add another syllable and the results are disasterous.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 11:29 AM | Report abuse

That was pathetic. That may be fun to pass around the office but do you think you will get Mccain one vote wasting your time with a post like that? Are you going to tell me to tell me John Mccain with his high school education and next to last in his class navel academy finish. He has never held a job in his life of brought home a paycheck.

He never built a business ran a company in fact did anything on his own without someone else doing it for him. First his family, then his wife, whose father bought him his political career. The man is in such an intellectual rut he can't even turn on a computer. Heck, I would like to know how he manages his senatorial duties being to technologically illiterate? This is the man we want to lead our country? A man who even lacks the curiosity or initiative to even keep up with the times.

John Mccain is a complete and utter dunce. Totally lazy and unaccomplished his whole life all the way back to his high school days. I won't even get into his years as an admitted drunk confirmed by everyone who knew him. Please give me a break. John Mccain, they really scrapped the bottom of the barrel when they nominated this loser.

-------------
Roxy said:


Hi everyone. Roxy here again!

My boss just asked me what I thought about the Obama Economic Position. I told him that my boyfriend and I never tried that position yet, but I would be happy to give it a whirl if he could explain it to me. He just shrugged and walked away.

I then asked several co-workers and they didn't have a clue what the Obama Economic Position was.

Does anybody out there know what it is? An illustration would be helpful.

Roxy, forget about the Obama Economic Position. It involves all talk and no action. You wouldn't enjoy it and neither would your boyfriend.
Posted by: Friendly Therapist | August 27, 2008 10:50 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 11:26 AM | Report abuse

I am a 43y/o black male and I voted for Hillary in the primary. I did it for my own reasons having to do with my feeling about her ability to be President. I'm proud that I did it and would do it again. Having said that, if any of you supposed Democrats choose to vote for John McCain as some sort of payback to the Obama campaign, then as Hillary said last night, you weren't in this for the right reasons. After 8 years of the most disgraceful incompentent administration in my lifetime, if you can bring yourself to vote to continue many of those same failed policies, then you my friends are hypocrites and deserve exactly what you get. The only problem is the rest of us will have to pay for your immaturity and bitterness.

Posted by: robsmarq | August 27, 2008 11:23 AM | Report abuse

I always saw somewhat more potential in Barack personally, but I can honestly say, had Clinton been the nominee, I'd have quickly voted for her had she picked Bucket of Fried Chicken (R-Montana) for VP against McCain. Last night, she reminded me yet again why I feel that way. She really shone, she asked the right questions, and she just knows what's up.


McCain just doesn't get it anymore, as don't the majority of modern republican politicians.


I'd actually love to see, in my lifetime, the Republican party doing some truly right, honest and decent things for their country. I really would.

Posted by: What about the Clinton *and* Obama Supporters? | August 27, 2008 11:20 AM | Report abuse

im gonna vote for whoevr hilray says we shoudl vote for. hiarly told me to vote for a democrat

Posted by: pauli | August 27, 2008 11:11 AM | Report abuse

As an avid Obama supporter (and an over-50 white woman, I might add), I can appreciate how the Hillary supporters are feeling - if my candidate had lost I'd feel the same way. But McCain is very scary - while ending the war in Iraq (and not starting another in Iran) and improving the economy are no doubt critical issues, let's not forget what McCain will do to the Supreme Court! Try and imagine a Supreme Court of 5 or 6 versions of Alito and Thomas. That's what will happen with McCain. Any feminist who supported Hillary and believes in a woman's right to choose can simply NOT vote McCain or sit out this election. It's just too important... Yes, Hillary would love to run again in 2012, but would she really like to see the SC turned over to the Alitos of the world before she takes back the White House? Whereever your support lies, you can't think she'd EVER, EVER want that to happen. Pleeeeze, pleeeeze don't let McCain get that kind of authority. Think this through, PLEEEZE!

Posted by: NoWayNoHowNoMcCain | August 27, 2008 11:10 AM | Report abuse

Hillary gave one of the greatest political
speeches in decades. As a Clinton supporter, I've no problem in following her advice: if it's good enough for HRC, it'll be good enough for me.

Posted by: Liup | August 27, 2008 11:05 AM | Report abuse

Enough with all the nasty snide comments people! Hillary is right... we need to unite. Yes we all lose some sometimes, but then we win some too. I really believe that Hillary is solidly behind Obama to become president. She knows that the issues matter more and that through an Obama administration will she be able to get her agenda through.

This election is beyond one person. Obama and Hillary are much closer politically than John McCain. Obama supporters need to reach out with compassion to Hillary supporters and stop bashing them. Hillary supporters need to let it go and stop bashing Obama and his supporters. In the end we all (Democrats) believe in many of the same concepts and ideas. Cutting off your nose to spite your face is NEVER a good idea. Get OVER it people!!

Posted by: lancelot | August 27, 2008 10:57 AM | Report abuse

Can somebody address at least one of these questions?

1. How many Obama detractors are merely projecting their own personal misery and disappointment onto Obama as an irreconcilable flawed (black) God figure?

2. How many PUMAs have played into the hands of the far right Republican enemy, their new allies willing to show Hillary empathy and pretending to put band aids on the PUMA wounds?

Posted by: stuart | August 27, 2008 10:56 AM | Report abuse

Roxy said:


Hi everyone. Roxy here again!

My boss just asked me what I thought about the Obama Economic Position. I told him that my boyfriend and I never tried that position yet, but I would be happy to give it a whirl if he could explain it to me. He just shrugged and walked away.

I then asked several co-workers and they didn't have a clue what the Obama Economic Position was.

Does anybody out there know what it is? An illustration would be helpful.

Roxy, forget about the Obama Economic Position. It involves all talk and no action. You wouldn't enjoy it and neither would your boyfriend.

Posted by: Friendly Therapist | August 27, 2008 10:50 AM | Report abuse

She did more for her party that watched her and her husband take some low blows and did nothing to stop it.

Posted by: joe | August 27, 2008 10:49 AM | Report abuse

I think Adam T. Hammond raises an excellent point.

I apologize to the Clinton supporters for some of my heated comments. I respect that you feel strongly about your candidate.

I feel strongly about mine and hate to see a great chance to take back the White House go down to the tubes due to infighting.

Even though I supported Obama, there is much to admire and respect about Hillary Clinton and it is appropriate to acknowledge that.

I'll leave it at that.

Posted by: MBW | August 27, 2008 10:46 AM | Report abuse

This is ridiculous and the reason why democrats never win anything! Thank God for the younger generations because if you are 35 and over, you have already been indoctrinated into our society (Hillary’s supporters are crabs in the barrel). I thought I agreed with the democrats, but I can’t stand the ignorance and the unproductive conversations and fights. No wonder the republicans have turned this nation upside down while all of us have been the walking dead. You are fighting over a two people that believe the same things.

SO VOTE FOR mccain AND WHEN YOU DAUGHTERS AND NIECES LOSE THEIR RIGHT TO CHOOSE… oh well Hillary was cheated; WHEN YOUR KIDS ARE DRAFTED TO WAR AND DON’T COME HOME…oh well experience matters; WHEN YOU LOSE YOUR PENTION BECAUSE YOUR COMPNAY PULLS AN ENRON…oh well Barrack’s too young; WHEN YOU LOSE YOUR JOB TO OVERSEAS COMPANIES….oh well I just don’t feel comfortable with Obama, it’s just something about him….FINALLY WHEN YOU ARE FACING FORECLOSURE AND USING YOUR SAVINGS TO TRY AND KEEP UP WITH A LIFESTYLE THAT IS BEING TAKEN AWAY BECAUSE WE ARE BROKE AS A COUNTRY…oh well if they didn’t pick a woman than forgot those blacks. I only care about my issues, I only care about my feelings and they are hurt. THIS IS CRAZINESS PEOPLE AND I AM ASSAMED THAT I EVER BECAME A DEMOCRT. MARK MY WORDS; YOU SHOT YOURSELVES IN THE FOOT WITH THIS PETTINESS. AFTER THIS ELECTION, IF OBAMA DOESN’T WIN THIS ELECTION, THE YOUNG WOMEN AND MEN 18-35 WILL FORM AND START BOOSTING THE THIRD PARTY STRCUTRE UP.

WE ARE NOT IMPRESSED WITH YOUR FOOLISHNESS. WE NOW KNOW WHY WE ARE MESSED UP AS A COUNTRY AND BUSH TOOK IT OVER; YOU DID IT! YOU ARE AND CONTINUE TO BE THE PROBLEM…NARROW FOCUS, FEEBLE MINDS AND INHERIT OPPRESSORS.

Posted by: CE CE | August 27, 2008 10:42 AM | Report abuse

Reading many of these comments, I have to wonder 2 things:

1. How many Obama detractors are merely projecting their own personal misery and disappointment onto Obama as an irreconcilable flawed (black) God figure?

2. How many PUMAs have played into the hands of the far right Republican enemy, their new allies willing to show Hillary empathy and pretending to put band aids on the PUMA wounds?

Posted by: stuart | August 27, 2008 10:41 AM | Report abuse

There is no point in berating the supporters of Hillary Clinton. Politics in this country is an emotional issue, and everyone would rather win than lose. Afterwards, if people vent, the winners should just be still. It is tempting to try to help, or to defend yourself, but none of that works. Acceptance comes once tempers cool, and for that to happen the winners need to just shut up.

You'll make excuses about why you need to try to change their minds (by insulting them?), but you should actually stop, immediately.

Posted by: Adam T. Hammond | August 27, 2008 10:40 AM | Report abuse

Bill Mahr hit the nail on the head when he said "You get the leaders you deserve, and America doesn't deserve good leaders"
Brilliantly said, Bill.

Posted by: pj451 | August 27, 2008 10:37 AM | Report abuse

John McCain:
1. Will start World War 3
2. Will start the DRAFT
3. Will PRIVATIZE SOCIAL SECURITY
4. Hasn't got a clue how to write a check, pay a bill or wait in line at the pharmacy.
HE HAS NEVER HAD TO PUMP HIS OWN GAS IN HIS LIFE!@
5. If you;re not making more than $2.8 million a year, YOU'RE PAYING THE WEALTHIEST AMERICANS TAXES! YOU'RE PAYING THE MCCAIN'S AND CLINTON'S TAXES, HOW'S DO YOU LIKE THAT!
YOU WILL ALL BE LIVING UNDER FREEWAY OVERPASSES, BILL CLINTON SIGNED NAFTA AND SCREWED AMERICANS.
These people don't have a clue what it's like out here. I have lost 50% of my business in the last year, if McSame wins, I'll lose the other 50%! I CAN'T AFFORD 4 MORE YEARS OF A GUY WHO IS NO BETTER WITH THE ECONOMY THAN THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION, CAN YOU?

Posted by: Andrea D | August 27, 2008 10:36 AM | Report abuse

It was a very good speech and very well delivered but it didn't go far enough. HRC did not try to make the case as to why he is the one; that he has the talent, skills and disposition to be a great president. Some facts that HRC supporters overlook: Obama ran a much better campaign than she did which means that he provided better and more successful leadership and organization, and HRC is where she is because she's married to Bill Clinton and Obama is successful because of his own efforts, skills, abilities, and character. Bill C. has to make the case for Obama tonight. If Obama is not our next President and McCain is then our country will be screwed and may never fully recover from the tremendous damaged done by the Bush presidency of the past 8 years. The Clintons and their supporters need to get the hell over it and put the well being of the country and future generations first.

Posted by: Bulldog | August 27, 2008 10:34 AM | Report abuse

As an Obama supporter, I DO want to reach out to the Clinton supporters.

Unfortunately, too many of them are too busy attacking us or Obama to listen.

Posted by: MBW | August 27, 2008 10:31 AM | Report abuse

the phrase Cultists has been copyrighted by the Sore Winner Obama campaign.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 10:31 AM | Report abuse

If he gets any convention bump at all, he can thank the Clintons. But that won't last long because Obama's netroots supporters are too ugly, self-involved and ignorant to really reach out to Clinton supporters. So they, and the Clinton haters in the media will limit the goodwill of any unity-surge.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 10:17 AM
^
Absolutely right.

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

PUMA -

Pick
Up
My dry cleaning,
AsperGirl

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

It is the ultimate hypocrisy for Clinton supporters to attack Obama for being narcissistic.

Seriously?

The Clintons (and their supporters) still seem to think that this election and this party is all about them and their legacy.

You've got to be kidding me.

Posted by: MBW | August 27, 2008 10:27 AM | Report abuse

Hopefully it was enough! And yes, she would deserve the credit for swinging "the Clinton" voters and delegates to vote for Obama.

One thing about these sore Clinton delegates... is that they are out of touch with the overall spirit of the Democratic Party! "The people" have voted and opted for Obama as the Democratic nominee. But yet, some of these sore losers are indicating that though they won't vote for McCain- they aren't voting for Obama either! Well, by not voting for Obama, is like voting for McCain- because that is one less vote McCain doesn't have to contend with! And again, these folks are DEMOCRATIC Delegates and by not voting for their party nominee is a sure sign of them being completely out of touch with the Spirit of the Democratic Party and shows they aren't worthy of representing this Party.

Posted by: Alfred | August 27, 2008 10:26 AM | Report abuse

In US politics, somebody has to lose...there is only one winner.

Too bad these Hillary supporters don't seem to get that yet.

Posted by: MBW | August 27, 2008 10:25 AM | Report abuse

"Obama will lose more ground due to his loser's narcissistic convention"

WTF is the deal with the football stadium? Talk about narcissism.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 10:22 AM | Report abuse

What I don't get is all of the antipathy towards Obama.

I mean, sure, you could blame the media or her campaign staff, or the DNC...

The only thing Obama did was run for president.

And politics ain't beanbag folks....the Clintons should know this better than anyone.

Posted by: MBW | August 27, 2008 10:21 AM | Report abuse

Just wanted to post this, and then I really have to go:

Rasmussen 08/26: Obama 46 McCain 47, McCain up by 1
Gallup 08/25: Obama 44 McCain 46, McCain up by 2

Obama lost ground due to his absurdly stupid VP pick of Biden.

Obama will lose more ground due to his loser's narcissistic convention whose marketable themes are those focused on himself and his wife instead of any princples or agendas.

If he gets any convention bump at all, he can thank the Clintons. But that won't last long because Obama's netroots supporters are too ugly, self-involved and ignorant to really reach out to Clinton supporters. So they, and the Clinton haters in the media will limit the goodwill of any unity-surge.

Whatever goodwill convention bump Obama gets will dissipate within 2 weeks at most.

McCain will steal Obama's thunder and rally the rest of the Clinton supporters away from Obama, with either a series of marketing appeals or his VP pick.

Obama is gonna lose.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 10:17 AM | Report abuse

At this point, I have no hard feelings toward Hillary.

What I do have a problem with is her obnoxious cult of supporters.

In 2004, John Kerry was my THIRD CHOICE candidate...but I still showed up and voted for him on election day.

These Clinton cultists need to get off the bitter bus and do the same.

Posted by: MBW | August 27, 2008 10:17 AM | Report abuse

HRC's speech last night was great. It was just a great speech, and will go right up there with Obama's 2004 speech as one of the most forcefull of all time at a democratic convention.

HRC did her part, Obama has a clear shot, its his responsibility to close the deal. If he loses no rational person can blame her.

Posted by: DCDave | August 27, 2008 10:16 AM | Report abuse

Was it enough? Only time will tell, but I don't know what else Sen. Clinton could do to implore her supporters to vote for Sen. Obama. She certainly hit all five points The Fix said she needed to hit in her speech. The big question is, will all of the good will generated by her speech be undone by the 500-pound gorilla in the hall that speaks tonight. Bill Clinton has been acting like a petulant child during this whole process and is tearing down his legacy as a result. His problem was that he saw Hillary's campaign as his third term, not about moving America towards the future.

Posted by: Ron | August 27, 2008 10:15 AM | Report abuse

What kind of fantasy land do some of these people live in??

1) Barack Obama got more votes than Hillary (even if you don't count the caucus states).

2) The only way Hillary would win the popular vote is if you count all of her votes in MI and give none to Obama....which is pure silliness.

Who cares about her "18 Million votes" ....when there were more than 18.5 million Primary votes cast for candidates who were NOT Hillary.

Posted by: MBW | August 27, 2008 10:12 AM | Report abuse

Yes, Hillary did MORE THAN ENOUGH. Hillary has exited the stage. Leave her alone. It is Obama's turn to sell himself to the American people!

Hillary is NOT the candidate. She can only do what Obama asks her to do on his behalf.

Posted by: ROTTEN | August 27, 2008 10:11 AM | Report abuse

btw, for the PUMAs who are going to write in Hillary, you might want to check in your particular state if you should instead write in "PUMA."

In some states, a write-in vote for a candidate in the primaries becomes a write-in for the Party.

I live in New Hampshire, so I will probably need to vote for Senator McCain in order to defeat Senator Obama.

But if you are in a non-battleground state, I think it would send a great message if Candidate "PUMA" beat Candidate Obama.

Many of my relatives in TX voted for HRC in the primaries, they truly believe that she could have won Texas for Democrats, and they still have a message they want to send to the DNC:

"You have failed in your attempt to make Clinton supporters invisible."

Posted by: Jan | August 27, 2008 10:11 AM | Report abuse

What kind of fantasy land do some of these people live in??

1) Barack Obama got more votes than Hillary (even if you don't count the caucus states).

2) The only way Hillary would win the popular vote is if you count all of her votes in MI and give none to Obama....which is pure silliness.

Posted by: MBW | August 27, 2008 10:09 AM | Report abuse

Senator Hillary Clinton thanks for a wonderful speech. Now, Obama needs to close the deal. It is time that he shows real substance beyond change and hope.

Posted by: mmarii | August 27, 2008 10:08 AM | Report abuse

Jan many share your anger but are not leaving the party only registering their protest vote. There are many downballot Ds who share your values and would gladly appreciate your time, money and vote. Don't abandon the party just b/c they seem to blow preidential electons every 4 years.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 10:08 AM | Report abuse

I think last night's speech will be noted as possibly the greatest Hillary Clinton will ever give. In retrospect you can even see pathos--the runner-up doing everything she can to get her former opponent elected. But as it played, there was nothing "pathetic" about the speech. She obviously loved giving it, and both her daughter and her husband so obviously were proud of her. One of the great moments in American politics.

Posted by: Jim Cramer | August 27, 2008 10:08 AM | Report abuse

Paul Taylor: "she did more for her Party than her Party would have, and has ever done for her."

Really?? Her party only helped her and her husband get two terms in the White House....and defended them during one scandal after another.

If anything, they owe the party, not the other way around.

Posted by: MBW | August 27, 2008 10:06 AM | Report abuse

Hi everyone. Roxy here again!

My boss just asked me what I thought about the Obama Economic Position. I told him that my boyfriend and I never tried that position yet, but I would be happy to give it a whirl if he could explain it to me. He just shrugged and walked away.

I then asked several co-workers and they didn't have a clue what the Obama Economic Position was.

Does anybody out there know what it is? An illustration would be helpful.

Posted by: Roxy | August 27, 2008 10:03 AM | Report abuse

What you're missing out, though, is that if Obama loses this year, a percentage of the population will put the blame squarely on Clinton and her supporters, which I feel will dampen her chances of winning a future primary race.

Posted by: Remus Morin | August 27, 2008 10:01 AM | Report abuse

"Anyone who supported her in the primary and now supports McCain clearly does so: 1) for personal reasons not related to policy goals; 2) because they are conservative voters who don't believe in Senator Clinton's policies but chose her as a supposedly less liberal candidate and probably would have supported McCain anyway; 3) are prejudiced against Obama because of his name or race; or 4) some combination of the above."

Chuck obviously wants to once again play the race card. If you don't support Sen O you must be a racist. How about admitting that many don't feel comfortable voting for a lightweight State Senator with absolutely no (NONE) accomplishments in the few years in the Senate, for POTUS. Maybe its a strange idea to believe that the person we choose to lead our country for the next four years should have a modicom of experience and some sort of resume other than to say he was an organizer on the streets of Chicago. Apparantly that makes anyone who dares to believe that he is unqualified: 1. A Racist 2. A Rush Republican or now we hear 3. Part of the Klan.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 10:01 AM | Report abuse

"That is the point isn't it. Sure Obama is a Democrat. I am having a hard time believing he is what is best for the country. At least with McCain you get a certain level of competence and integrity. Obama? Obama has shown a willingness to throw people under the bus to further himself (see Bill Clinton, Jerimah Wright, Grandmother Obama). Who will he blame when things go bad as Pres? He has also shown a high degree of hypocrisy. Do as I say, not as I do. I just can't vote for someone like that. By writing in HRC I am still voting for a Democrat, just not Obama."


In case you didn't get the memo, Hillary is not the nominee. Writing HRC in on the ballot will not make her the president. McCain has character flaws and is wishy washy. Have you even been paying attention? He as a war monger. A man who cheated on his wife while she was sick. Not to mention a liar who is so out of touch that he doesn't know how many houses he owns.

Did you hear Hillary last night? McSame does not see a problem with women getting treated unfairly in the work place. Writing her name in on the ballot just as bad as voting for McCain. Like I said this is not a game, please get over yourself. In case you have not noticed, this is the United States of America. This is not a dictatorship and if Obama is president, he will not be working alone (see Bush Cheney). Most likely, most people here who have so many negative things to say about Obama's character have done no research on him at all.

If you are okay with the deficit getting bigger, more wars, more foreclosures, more poverty and taking away a women's right to choose which all lead to more crime, go right ahead and write HRC in on the ballot, better yet, just vote for McSame.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 10:00 AM | Report abuse

For those of you who accuse PUMAs of not being "true" Democrats -- you're right.

We're the swing voters in this nation's electorate who are NOT the liberal idiots who consider Nancy Pelosi a "leader."

Tell me why the Democrats passed over the candidate who got the most votes?

Tell me why the Democrats passed over the candidate who won the swing states?

Tell me why hand-picked nominee Barack Obama hand-picked a guy who got 18 thousand votes, instead of a gal who got 18 million?

The Democrats are idiots.
Ted Kennedy drove Reagan DEMOCRATS out of your party in 1980.
Bill Clinton welcomed those DEMOCRATS back in 1992.

The DNC escorted us DEMOCRATS back out the door again this election year.

We're not "real" Democrats?
We should just "shut up"?
We should just "go vote Republican" because you don't need our votes?

Fine.
Because, guess what?

The record clearly reveals that, without the Clintons, the Democrats are just a bunch of losers.

See ya.

Posted by: Jan | August 27, 2008 9:58 AM | Report abuse

Aspergirl, her feelings (which i share) aside, is right about one thing: McCain will have a more moderate Presidency than Obama will (especially with the Democrats in control of both houses of congress). It is doubtful he can or would try to push through a radical Sup Ct. justice, and he will not receive any bills from Congress that will allow any more crazy tax cuts.

Obama, as an undeniably very liberal Senator and presumably President, combined with San Fran's Pelosi at the helm of congress, would be a liberal nightmare who would set the Democrats back a generation.

Posted by: dyinglikeflies | August 27, 2008 9:57 AM | Report abuse

How many people here believe that Obama would have given a speech like this if the tables were turned that:
1.He won the popular vote but Clinton got nominated after DNC refused to count Luisiana and and South Carolina
2.She dissed him after a scenario like this
3.She did not even consider him for VP
4.She painted him and his family as racists
Forget about a gracious speech like this-I am sure that he will be leading an expected riot.
Stop being ungrateful.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 9:56 AM | Report abuse

When Clinton opened her speech, she started by saying she was a proud mother, proud Senator, .... and (with emphasis) a proud American. Clearly this was a slap in the face of Michele Obama and her hate America attitude.

Also, Clinton never refuted the republican claims (and her own words) that Obama is not ready to be president. She totally ignored it and left that issue wide open.

If her speech said anything, it's that she will be back in 2012!

Posted by: Linda T | August 27, 2008 9:52 AM | Report abuse

I seriously need a man. Someone to F some sense into me. I am a typical nagger, if I dont get my way I will cry and complain like a little girl until people do what I want. Sniff Sniff. Why didnt Bobby ask me to Prom?!?!?! Now I am stuck with Butch Barbara and she bites.

Posted by: AsperGirly | August 27, 2008 9:52 AM | Report abuse

"As for writing in her name on your ballot you can't do that on electronic voting machines and most states don't allow that."

North Carolina allows write-ins.

Posted by: hdimig | August 27, 2008 9:51 AM | Report abuse

As a self-proclaimed moderate, I can never stand the comments about "being on the same team." We need to join together to beat the other team. The strange thing is that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are about as different policy wise as Hillary Clinton and John McCain (that is to say that there are differences, but no more or less either way). Ahhh the two party system. What ever happened to the Whig party?

Posted by: Andy | August 27, 2008 9:50 AM | Report abuse

Frank - when we're in a fiscal nightmare, a global recession and prolonged, bloody wars, I care less about a candidate's daughters being on stage to wave to their father, and more about which man will be the better president and can get us out of this nightmare. How can someone committing to doing the same things that got us in this mess help us?

Posted by: Remus Morin | August 27, 2008 9:50 AM | Report abuse

I would like to believe that those who remain unmoved or unconvinced by Hillary's speech last night really are nothing more than 'paid dis-information specialists' from the Republican party. But the buzz in the convention is still troubling. I hope that Rendell is right and 95% of Hillaryites will be on board with Obama by the end of the convention, but so far, that has not happened.

Posted by: dch | August 27, 2008 9:50 AM | Report abuse

"Please make your decisions based on what's best for the country. Don't let those feelings of bitterness and hurt take over."

That is the point isn't it. Sure Obama is a Democrat. I am having a hard time believing he is what is best for the country. At least with McCain you get a certain level of competence and integrity. Obama? Obama has shown a willingness to throw people under the bus to further himself (see Bill Clinton, Jerimah Wright, Grandmother Obama). Who will he blame when things go bad as Pres? He has also shown a high degree of hypocrisy. Do as I say, not as I do. I just can't vote for someone like that. By writing in HRC I am still voting for a Democrat, just not Obama.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 9:49 AM | Report abuse

hdimig
wrote,
" Obama has done absolutely nothing so far to earn my vote. The threat of a conservative Supreme Court pick is not enough to sway me. A Democratic congress can block any bad pick."

does it matter that his arguments have been almost synonymous with Hillary's compared to mccain....

or that he ran a campaign that for someone everyone accuses of not having leadership enough...was better organized managed and facilitated heads and tails above ANY of the other candidates?

so why exactly were you voting for Clinton...and not Obama?

how about education?

the littany of issues for women (not little issues big issues like violence against women and equal pay) that Mccain was against and Obama and Biden for.
how about healthcare...

where Mccain's plan is the same as Bush?

how about the fact that Mccain did not learn ANY lessons from Iraq...and before you argue...there is no political settlement there ...the surge did not achieve the goal...because the goal was political settlement so we could leave. Not violence settlement...that was always a given...with that many troops on the ground.

or social security? same as Bush

Medicare? same as bush

taxes? same as Bush

foreign policy same as Bush

economy same as Bush

the Constitution's standing in our government...the same as Bush.


so if you want to say you are going to vote for mcCain because the supreme court does not matter that much to you and congress will take care of it...

you are not paying attention.

Posted by: dl | August 27, 2008 9:48 AM | Report abuse

"I'd imagine that 85% of the rabid Clinton PUMA posters are sitting in the offices of the RNC"

"I don't believe there are that many angry Hillary supporters on these blogs. People like Aspergirl are obviously Republicans"

Curious where you come up with these numbers, conlusions; obviously not by actually speaking with a HC supporter. For months your campaign has demeaned and underestimated the anger of HC supporters and then you look at the polls and ask why.

Not even vetting her or even considering her for VP, and your campaign's strategy to stop a Fla and Michigan revote, will when the election is looked at from a historical setting will be O's undoing.
As fo writng in her name on your ballot you can't do that on electronic voting machines and most states don't allow that.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 9:46 AM | Report abuse

After I made the below post, I got some responses that I was making it up. Well I wasn't. And just looking at some PUMA posts who were liveblogging the speech, they noticed, too.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 7:38 AM

Yeah, that is a real un-biased source of proof. Hillary supporters who fall into the "unmovable category". Way to back up your argument.

You might as well pull a blog from a Klan site. I guarantee your Puma friends and the Klan have very similiar posts.

Posted by: Sandyblond | August 27, 2008 9:43 AM | Report abuse

The video and speech were more of the same - Hillary for President. Wasn't this supposed to be an endorsement of Obama? The best she could muster is a speech about democratic ideals. Why did she not raise the warning that the Republican campaign would be trying to divide the party? "If you hear them trying to divide us . . . KEEP GOING!"

Posted by: demsensible | August 27, 2008 9:43 AM | Report abuse

Some of the comments here are so disappointing although I know some are posers. To the Hillary supports who refuse to vote for Obama, you are not true Hillary supporters. You are not true democrats. If you call yourself a democrat and vote for McSame, you are cutting off your nose to spite your face. This is not game. People are losing their homes, young men are dying and it is getting harder and harder for many of us to make ends meet.

If you are for the working class, womens rights, gay rights etc., you would not vote republican. How can you vote for a party who wants to take a way a women's right to choose, sends boys to war to die but calls themselves "pro-life"? A party who is against abortion but says "to hell with the babies after they're born. When was the last time you saw one of the Repblican senators, governers or presidents adopt a crack baby? Things are not going be better with McCain.

I loved Bill Clinton but was not happy with some of the things Hillary did during this campaign but if she won the primary, I would have had to suck it up and vote for her. She stands for what I believe in and rather than making it personal, I would have voted for her. Why? Because I am a DEMOCRAT!!!! I will not allow the media or my emotions to take that away from me.

Please make your decisions based on what's best for the country. Don't let those feelings of bitterness and hurt take over. Hillary showed a lot of class last night. I respect her and she certainly would have had my vote if she was the nominee. If you are her supporter, truly her supporter, you will follow her lead, show some class, do what's best for the country and vote for Obama.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 9:42 AM | Report abuse

Oh please! That speech made you cry? You must be the most naive person in the world if you think that Hillary meant a word of it. She can't wait for the end of President McCain's first term so she can run again -- and this time, get the coronation that she believes she so richly deserves. After all, she's a Clinton.

BTW, so what if the only reason she's a U.S. Senator is because of her husband? Isn't that what feminists believe -- women get ahead only because of their husbands?:)
^
The person who made that I cried comment is no feminist-she is just an Obamabot-paid to praise Clinton now that they need her.Wont work-sry.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 9:38 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Roxy | August 27, 2008 9:14 AM

Hi everyone. Roxy here!

..My problem is that every time I try to google "Barck Obama" on my computer, I am directed to sites about Mickey Mouse...

Your problem may be that you do not know how to spell "Barack", but then again even Google will suggest the correct spelling to your poorly constructed query. Perhaps you just do not know how to use a search engine or maybe your father has restricted your access to the internet...LOL

Posted by: Absolute_0K | August 27, 2008 9:38 AM | Report abuse

There is a simple explanation for what you want to do.

It is self-sabotage? It is when people who seem to have everything going for them engage in some foolish behavior that either kills them, hurts them, or gets them into trouble. People use drugs, break the law, steal, starve themselves, find and stay in abusive relationships, cheat on their spouse, drive too fast, drink themselves to death, overeat, don't exercise, push people away, or don't go to the doctor when they get
sick.
Perhaps they may not consciously want to destroy themselves or die. But unconsciously, somewhere inside them, there is a death wish. Freud said that everyone has a death wish, a desire to die, a love of death, thanatos. But I believe some people are more prone to self-sabotage than others.

It is like someone who thinks to themselves "I will kill myself, that will show them, they will be sorry".

Not really, all that happens is you are dead and soon forgotten and for them life goes on.

In your case your are willing to do something against your own best interest in the belief you are punishing someone. It's a delusion, and you are the one who suffers. It is a sickness to purposely abuse yourself, some will even cut themselves with razor blades. Out of curiosity, who are these people you are teaching this lesson to? I hope you are not letting faceless bloggers rule your life and decisions.
----------

"I don't believe there are that many angry Hillary supporters on these blogs. People like Aspergirl are obviously Republicans"

Aspergirl was around through out the primaries. Obama-bots can believe that no one dislikes their candidate except racists and Republicans, but that is not the case. I enjoyed Hillary's speech, but it does not change my position on the election. I will write-in HRC. Obama has done absolutely nothing so far to earn my vote. The threat of a conservative Supreme Court pick is not enough to sway me. A Democratic congress can block any bad pick.

Posted by: hdimig | August 27, 2008 9:32 AM

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

She is only a US senator because Rudy Giuliani got cancer. She was brought to this place in history trough chance. Because of who here husband is and luck.

------------
Oh please! That speech made you cry? You must be the most naive person in the world if you think that Hillary meant a word of it. She can't wait for the end of President McCain's first term so she can run again -- and this time, get the coronation that she believes she so richly deserves. After all, she's a Clinton.

BTW, so what if the only reason she's a U.S. Senator is because of her husband? Isn't that what feminists believe -- women get ahead only because of their husbands?:)

Posted by: In the Middle | August 27, 2008 9:28 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 9:33 AM | Report abuse

"I don't believe there are that many angry Hillary supporters on these blogs. People like Aspergirl are obviously Republicans"

Aspergirl was around through out the primaries. Obama-bots can believe that no one dislikes their candidate except racists and Republicans, but that is not the case. I enjoyed Hillary's speech, but it does not change my position on the election. I will write-in HRC. Obama has done absolutely nothing so far to earn my vote. The threat of a conservative Supreme Court pick is not enough to sway me. A Democratic congress can block any bad pick.

Posted by: hdimig | August 27, 2008 9:32 AM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton did very well. She had a tough job, but the real kicker was the line you pointed out "were you just in it for me?". That was the smart argument. Nobody expected her to stand there and swoon over Obama. That would sound fake and demeaning to what she had, which was a LOT of VOTERS on her side. But the positions on the issues - which people tend to forget when personalities and gossip take over the news - are almost exactly the same.

So she went to the big picture. She talked about her own accomplishments, and well she should because she has accomplished a lot. But she talked about her overall goals, and why those goals would be shot if John McCain becomes the next president. Maybe Obama got the ticket, but they are fighting for the same things.

Now PUMA and whoever else, they can fight for the new spotlight all they want. They'll be on every Fox News show, that's for certain. But they are really just doing it for themselves at that point.

Posted by: Grimmix | August 27, 2008 9:31 AM | Report abuse

I'd imagine that 85% of the rabid Clinton PUMA posters are sitting in the offices of the RNC. It's long been a Republican strategy to rely on nonissues rather than focus on their own merits. They cannot win outright, so they count on convincing minorities that they cannot vote, faux scare issues like gay marriage, outright misinformation campaigns like the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth," or fanning the flames of dissension on the other side.

Congratulations to the short-sighted and easily deluded remaining 15% who may end up costing the Democrats the election because they feel that somehow they have been slighted personally by the electoral process.

Hlllary Clinton is a great woman, and I would have been happy to have her as the nominee. However, she lost the primary, and she is not entitled to the VP slot just because she exists, or because she is a woman, or even because she came in second.

Obama has every right to select someone he wants for the post; if you really hate the ticket, don't vote for it, but keep in mind that you are, as Ms. Clinton herself said, voting against everything she stood for throughout the primary. Allowing personal petulance to influence an election this important means that you will get the government you deserve.

Posted by: HHS | August 27, 2008 9:31 AM | Report abuse

Chris, it was a brilliant speech, sincerely given, and anyone who supports Hillary Clinton for her beliefs clearly heard that they should leave aside personal grievances and work to elect Barack Obama President. There wasn't any ambiguity. She clearly rejected McCain and embraced Obama.

Anyone who supported her in the primary and now supports McCain clearly does so: 1) for personal reasons not related to policy goals; 2) because they are conservative voters who don't believe in Senator Clinton's policies but chose her as a supposedly less liberal candidate and probably would have supported McCain anyway; 3) are prejudiced against Obama because of his name or race; or 4) some combination of the above.

Posted by: Chuck | August 27, 2008 9:31 AM | Report abuse

This whole debate is stupid in the truest sense of the word. These "Billary" supporters are the reason why so many people have said that a woman could never be president. For all of their rallying, parading, and shouting is a farce: What they really are doing is crying and stomping their feet, yelling like brats "This isn't fair!" Guess what, a vote for McCain is a vote for funding terrorism through oil profiteering and war-mongering. A vote for McCain is a vote for ending access to contraception, comprehensive sexuality education, and eventually CHOICE. A vote for McCain is saying that drilling for oil offshore of the U.S. is good because it emotionally soothes Americans...we're just that dumb that even though it won't help gas costs or our dependence on this fuel that is destroying our planets, we really just want to feel good. A vote for McCain is telling the various industries in the United States that shipping our jobs off to India, China, and other countries is just what the doctor ordered to fix the foreclosure debacle.

How is it that these Hillary supporters can actually, with a straight face, insist that they will either sit home or vote for McCain? That tells me one thing...your support of her was NEVER for AMERICA.

And by the way, I'm a woman who for a split-second actually supported Hillary. Once it became clear that her winning was a pipe-dream (and this was long before that so-called "concession" speech that she gave), I began to fully support Barack Obama. ANYONE WHO CALLS THEMSELVES AN AMERICAN DEMOCRAT WOULD DO NO LESS. No, this is not about party politics, I have been known to vote for a Republican or two. This is simply about beginning to address the nonsense that has been called "The Bush Administration." PLEASE QUIT YOUR CRYING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. KEEP IT MOVING, NOTHING TO SEE HERE, HILLARY IS OUT OF THE RUNNING!!!

OBAMA/BIDEN 2008

Posted by: Ohioan4ever | August 27, 2008 9:31 AM | Report abuse

where are the adults who care about their kids' futures.

Posted by: dl | August 27, 2008 9:30 AM | Report abuse

the speech it the nail on the head about the need to unify the party. i felel it was enough to swing most of her supporters, but not all, to obama.

Posted by: captenamerica | August 27, 2008 9:29 AM | Report abuse

Obama needs to man-up and quit relying on others to do the heavy lifting for him. Then again he has done this all his life. Using the system and others to advance himself. Then when these people serve their purpose he tosses them under the bus. The trouble he has now is that he tossed Hillary under the bus too early and now he can't get any more use from her.

Hillary swallowed her pride last night and did what George Soros told her to do. I wouldn't blame her if she sticks it to Obama after the convention is over. I want to see what Bill Clinton does tonight. He is the only one left with the balls to stand up to Obama. I bet he smacks Obama around tonight with a craftily worded speech.

Posted by: obiewan | August 27, 2008 9:29 AM | Report abuse

Yes, it was enough. I voted for Hillary in NC because I thought she had the better chance of winning. Her speech was just fine. Obama is our candidate now and he deserves our unqualified support. For those Hillary supporters for whom her speech was not enough to get them on board (including Bill), the rest of us will remember your misguided stubbornness, just like we remember what Ralph Nader's people did to Al Gore. Don't expect us to help your first choice candiate next time if you don't do your part this time. Get over it and focus on the getting rid of that horrible Republican crowd in Washington.

Posted by: NorthCarolinaHillaryVoter | August 27, 2008 9:29 AM | Report abuse

Oh please! That speech made you cry? You must be the most naive person in the world if you think that Hillary meant a word of it. She can't wait for the end of President McCain's first term so she can run again -- and this time, get the coronation that she believes she so richly deserves. After all, she's a Clinton.

BTW, so what if the only reason she's a U.S. Senator is because of her husband? Isn't that what feminists believe -- women get ahead only because of their husbands?:)

Posted by: In the Middle | August 27, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse

SS

her ads calling McCain the better Commander in Chief ran 3 times this morning...


I think the speech was great last night and she probably can't do enough...

the statements she made about Commander in Chief

The problem is...those ads and words from the primary are prettyy powerfully in the wrong direction for everything she argued last night.. and they are haunting all those causes she brought up.

That's the problem when you go for the jugular during a primary.

The republicans are using her image...and her words from earlier to win this election.

why are you getting mad at Obama supporters for the fact that her words are being broadcast every day ...all day somewhere telling people why Mccain is better than Obama.

if the issues lose and we end up with 4 more years of Bush... it is bad for everybody...

and everyone will get blamed by half the party...

and everyone has a point.

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

@jim jones

You forgot your tagline--Segregation then, segregation now, segreation forever!! The Democratic Party did not leave the South, the South left the Democratic Party.

@Asper Girl

We had six years of "united government" until the 2006 election. I am glad you feel that two years of your vaunted "divided government" has undone the amazing strach of incompetence, cupidity, and illegality of Fearless Leader and his cronies. I cannot share your feelings. I suspect you are a doing agitprop for the pubs (your personal attack on Mrs. Obama was as bizaare as it was completely wrong), so I will not attempt to further tutor you on recent American political history.

As a Clinton supporter, I say Victory in November for Presidnt Obama!!

Posted by: A Hardwick | August 27, 2008 9:26 AM | Report abuse

I almost cried. It was THAT moment, that I definitely felt represented by Hillary. I certainly didn't wait ALL OF THIS TIME just to get more of what we've gotten; at the least, I want to know that there will be more effort away from that position. Hillary told it how it needed to be told.

I am thankful for Bill and I am proud of their daughter for her support. I admire the will and strength of that family trio.

I don't think anyone can honestly say that she didn't come through. I don't believe there are many, at least, who can honestly do that. She hit that speech SMOOTH out of the ball park.

Most of us love you Hillary!! You told it well! Lord bless!

Posted by: Obama2008 | August 27, 2008 9:24 AM | Report abuse

Hillary made it clear. A vote for McCain is not a vote for her. Sitting on the sidelines is not doing anything for her. People who continue to insist they will do so are either deaf or idiots.

I never thought I would say this after her conduct in the primaries, but after watching her last night, I would hope that the Democrats push aside that wimp Harry Reid and make Hillary Majority leader, or if she were interested, a high level cabinet position.

Posted by: A great speech | August 27, 2008 9:24 AM | Report abuse

Roxy said:

I'm new to politics but am trying to learn everything I can about the candidates. My problem is that every time I try to google "Barck Obama" on my computer, I am directed to sites about Mickey Mouse. My boyfriend said I have a virus. My father said "What did you expect? The guy's an idiot!"

Who's right??

Roxy, your father is right. Obama IS an idiot. But I would dump your boyfriend, though.

Posted by: Heather | August 27, 2008 9:22 AM | Report abuse

The Vice Presidency is NOT the Presidency

yes you want someone like Hillary that could step in...

but it is a position that needs to have 3 things

#1 who is going to be most effective in the role

#2. who could step in (which many could step in effectively and considering there is only a 10% chance they would have to the first point has to be given weight)

#3 who balances the ticket for election purposes (infortunately often this gets heavily weighted because of our system...and the decision ends up being political rather than judicious)

Hillary may have been a great President...but can you honestly see her (and Bill) being VP to Obama?

logic people logic not buying into self fulfilling answers of your own personal frustration.

Posted by: dl | August 27, 2008 9:19 AM | Report abuse

Not enough?You mustbe kidding me!
You insult her,paint her as racist,ignore her and still expected her to deliver you the presidency in a platter?She has done more than any opponent ever have-including your god father the Kennedy.
How many true democrats came out of that convention hall last night with buyers remorse? How many true democrats went to bed teary eyed thinking about the missed opportunity to elect probably one of the greatest leaders we have had in modern times?Tell me the truth-how many of you asked yourself-why was she not even considered for VP? Hillary proved that she is a true leader,true fighter for democratic cause.Obama and fans including shameless media can keep calling her names,diss her,blame her for his inevitable defeat,but she has placed herself in Americas history books and the chapter is not closed yet.

Posted by: SS | August 27, 2008 9:18 AM | Report abuse

First of all, the Bush twins did several political appearances as did Chelsea Clinton, so the crap about the Obamas exploiting their children is just that: crap.

Secondly, it would be too funny if the delegate count showed a shift in votes as Hillary received more delegates than Obama and then ceded the nomination to him. The election would be so over for the Democrats. This might the surprise everyone was waiting for.

Posted by: dcp | August 27, 2008 9:17 AM | Report abuse

Aspergirl:

That is a lot of faith in a line of thought that is improvable. Your assesment of a bipartisan leadership is actually demonstrable. Thats why I asked you the question. You state that a divided government works better then a unified one and this is normally correct. It has been proven throughout the years. Your personal assessment, or judge of character does not have this luxury of proof.

I think that if you want to justify voting for McCain, you cannot use the partisan argument. Because, at its base level, it remains that you prefer one democrat to another, and that simply voting against single party leadership is a poor line to draw at this juncture.

Posted by: Jane | August 27, 2008 9:16 AM | Report abuse

Hi everyone. Roxy here!

I'm new to politics but am trying to learn everything I can about the candidates. My problem is that every time I try to google "Barck Obama" on my computer, I am directed to sites about Mickey Mouse. My boyfriend said I have a virus. My father said "What did you expect? The guy's an idiot!"

Who's right??

Posted by: Roxy | August 27, 2008 9:14 AM | Report abuse

Gotta go. Sorry can't answer all posts.

Obama's running out of time to do those things he needs to do to win the election.

There are 3 ways he can win the election after the convention if he doesn't put Clinton on his ticket. They all involve the politics of destruction and ignorance.

It would be sad to see the Democratic Party's promise reduced to that.

To really win the election in a good way and be a great president, Obama needs to put Clinton on his ticket and do whatever he needs to do to pull that off. Even if he has to raid the whole staff of "As the World Turns" to write the story line of how to explain it.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 9:14 AM | Report abuse

I have voted both Dem and Rep in past elections and from what I seen in the Obama campaign was they made a huge mistake when they did not choose Hillary as the running mate and vice Prez. That would have been the ticket to get a Dem in the White House. As it is now, I'm not sure Obama can win in November. He has not convince us that he has a real plan !

Posted by: Don Hughes | August 27, 2008 9:12 AM | Report abuse

It was enough for any logical person...

...but we are not always dealing with mature logicians here.

Self centered spite can be powerful in those who are not mature enough or smart enough or even basely noble enough to

get by their own most self-indulgent frustration...

Have you ever been in a relationship with someone who doesn't care about you...it's about being in the "relationship"...

These are some of the same people who have held on to the spite that's "cutting off their noses" ...who never fully cared about their parents saying it to them when they were 5 years old and still won't acknowledge the theory now.

Anyone who when looking at the experience question, who screams they won't vote for Barack because of that...who can't acknowledge that there is an obvious achievement in Barack's leadership and management just in the campaign alone compared to all the other candidate's who have gone bankrupt, into debt and had staff's they could not control...

is not going to listen to reason.

They were not listening when they were 5 and they are not going to listen now.

and unfortunately for them (and their children) they get what they deserve.

Unfortunately all those ads that have been running (I have seen three just this morning ugh)with Hillary saying all those things (that candidates of the same party in a contested primary or not ...should not say repeatedly) on video about their party's other candidate...

like "John Mccain is a commander in chief and Barack is not"... ...lessen the effect of what Clinton said last night.


It was a great speech unfortunately the damage may have been done to both Barack's presidential run ...and unfortunately her senate seat.

Let's hope the party unites because if he loses then everyone gets blamed by half the party.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 9:10 AM | Report abuse

The only way Obama is going to win this election is to pull a JFK and nominate his LBJ as his VP.

It's not too late, and it would create a big drama but it would electrify the country, and create a big story, the momentum of which would carry him over the top over the next few weeks to winning the election.

It's like a real American Idol storyline in which the two top competitors both get to win, after a long election year that is like a political American Idol season.

If he doesn't do it, he'll lose.

It's that simple.

He's failing all the tests so far.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 9:10 AM | Report abuse

Did Hilary Clinton do enough to move her supporters to the camp of Barack Obama? No, but remember, that's Obama's job.

What Clinton did do was plant brillant seeds within her core supporters. Lines that questioned her supporters reasons for their support of her will not convince people overnight, but will in my opinion force many of her supporters to canvas their souls for what truly motivated their involvement with her campaign. Obama couldn't ask for anything more.

Posted by: Wade Tomlin | August 27, 2008 9:06 AM | Report abuse

I am an independent ... I have voted for both Democrats and Republicans in the past. To me, Hillary's speech seemed more about supporting the Democratic party than specifically supporting Obama.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 9:05 AM | Report abuse

Well, I see the usual Puma-ettes and Ditto Heads are here to disparage a FANTASTIC speech by Hillary and a very strong demonstration of a unified Democratic Party.

Let them vent. Let them spew nonsense to their hearts' content. They are only impressing themselves -- certainly no one who has enough brain cells to think for themselves.

They were never really Hillary supporters. They were just following Rush Limbaugh's marching orders. When your entire personal life appears to be tied up in making a fool of yourself online or cheering along with the Limbaugh's, Colters and Hannitys of the "media world" that is what you do!

Posted by: RadioMom | August 27, 2008 9:04 AM | Report abuse

The reason Barack Obama won was very simple: he ran a much better campaign. I was a Hillary supporter but have to acknowledge that basic fact. Had Hillary relied less on Mark Penn and more on others such as Harold Ickes, the outcome could well have been different. But the bottom line is that Barack and Hillary were ultimately responsible for managing their campaigns, and Barack did a much better job.

Posted by: esp | August 27, 2008 9:03 AM | Report abuse

>>Jane wrote: "An interesting discussion AsperGirl - but if Hillary was the nominee - you would still be facing a one party government. By your own assesment, you would vote for McCain to avoid this."

Pelosi wouldn't be able to dominate the Clintons.

Clinton not only had whole policies and positions already laid out, but plans on how to implement them. I.e. she had a whole schema laid out about how to accomplish specific things. With her health care plan she had already built the basics of a coalition of stakeholders to create the lobbying and political will to get universal health care passed (business is being crippled by having to bear the cost of employee-provided health insurance plans, for example). Clinton could have really pulled it off, this time, and had a roadmap already in place. This was not only true for universal health care, but other issues, too that are serious problems we face. Getting legislation passed is more than big ideas and the path from wish lists to implementing an act is a long, partisan road in Washington DC. Clinton not only knows this, but she had specific itineraries and how-tos mapped out for specific issues and acts she wanted passed to implement the ideas she talked about in stump speeches.

That is decades of experience in light years past where Obama is in his development as a politician. Obama not only has no clue how to put together stakeholders and get arms twisted and pull off radical large legislation packages, he can't even get specific below a certain level of vague rhetoric in his speeches.

There is no realistic way Obama can deal with Pelosi and Reid if he gets elected. He will be totally outclassed, dominated and they will run the country from Congress with little interference from him.

This is why Pelosi opposed Clinton being on Obama's ticket.

If we elect Obama, we'll really be electing Pelosi, with the expectation of seeing Obama trot out from time to time for inspirational speeches in-between vacations at his ranch in Texas -- excuse me, at his mansion in Chicago.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 9:03 AM | Report abuse

Senator Clinton was magnificent this evening. While I supported her 100% in her campaign for POTUS, that is now over. I will not be supporting Obama in any fashion.

McCain '08

Posted by: notagain | August 27, 2008 12:55 AM

Funny that their name is notagain, but thats what they are voting for. 4 more years of "not again".

Posted by: Sandyblond | August 27, 2008 9:02 AM | Report abuse

Please be aware that many of the posts on these blogs come from McCain operatives who are paid to distort the facts and divide the country.

Republican-backed FOX and CNN will continue to fan the flames of "angry Hillary supporters" while at the same time undermining Obama so that another corporation-friendly president will occupy the White House.

C-Span, onscreen and online, is the best source for unbiased information. MSNBC is moving in that direction.

Hillary supporters who think that if McCain wins, Hillary will have a chance in 2012 should think about the likelihood that Hillary wouldn't even survive the primaries in 2012. Because of her lowball primary attacks on Obama, which will be replayed ad nauseum by McCain, many Democrats will attribute an Obama loss to Hillary. Young people and African-Americans won't vote for her, and her (older) demographic will have shrunk, while current teens will have come of voting age and won't connect with her.

Hillary's best bet for political advancement is Obama's success in November. I hope her supporters see it before they wreck the country and the planet.

Posted by: Barbara Campbell | August 27, 2008 9:01 AM | Report abuse

I believe the speech was excellent. I was moved. I supported Hillary and grieved when she lost, but I now have moved on and see something very special about Obama. Although I supported Hillary, I did it with great reservations at times. Hillary and Bill are not the most honest or honorable, let's face it. I hope Obama, especially if he wins, does not disappointment us. I would like a Democrat to go down as a great President when it comes to his or her Presidency and general integrity. I guess that is a long shot considering the psychological type that is attracted to the presidency (narcissistic). We can only hope.

Posted by: Karl Warrington | August 27, 2008 9:00 AM | Report abuse

It would surprise me little if many of the angry "democratic" voices in comments such as these aren't planted by Republicans trying to make much of the primary strife. It's certainly in the Repulican party's interest to distract.

Despite the toughness of the primary season, it's worth noting that the worst misogyny came from places like Fox News and its ilk, not from the Obama campaign. I'd hope that any democrat who is angry about Senator Clinton's treatment will direct their anger towards the outlets that really did her in.

In the meantime, if you care about women's issues, a woman's right to choose, the economy, education, energy policy, and (oh yes) the war, then Obama is overwhelmingly the right choice. A democrat who turns to McCain is being foooooled.

Posted by: ALotIsSpin | August 27, 2008 8:58 AM | Report abuse

I believe the speech was excellent. I was moved. I supported Hillary and grieved when she lost, but I now have moved on and see something very special about Obama. Although I supported Hillary, I did it with great reservations at times. Hillary and Bill are not the most honest or honorable, let's face it. I hope Obama, especially if he wins, does not disappointment us. I would like a Democrat to go down as a great President when it comes to his or her Presidency and general integrity. I guess that is a long shot considering the psychological type that is attracted to the presidency (narcissistic). We can only hope.

Posted by: Karl Warrington | August 27, 2008 8:58 AM | Report abuse

The question is "was the speech enough?" The answer is "absolutely." Sen. Clinton did everything asked of her. She touted Obama's issues and decried the alternative. She pointed out that a campaign is more than a cult of personality, but a commitment to a broader and greater cause. Having said that, the real question is: "Will it convert 'No to Obama' types into supporters of Sen. Obama?" I believe the answer to this question is "absolutely not!" Many of the most ardent pro Hillary, anti Obama types are simply angry that a minority MAN has been given the chance to run for president before a WOMAN, regardless of color. This is the basic objection. Of course they would prefer to see McCain win, regardless of what he would do to the Supreme Court. It would validate their argument that a WOMAN was far more qualified than the MAN chosen to lead the party. Sounds petty, but that seems the only explanation for folks who supported Sen. Clinton who are now bound and determined to see Sen. McCain win.

Posted by: Victor from Detroit | August 27, 2008 8:56 AM | Report abuse

Wow, holy wall of text!

Trying to equate GW Bush's experience to that of Barack Obama is just plain silly.

Seriously, what accomplishments in life before he became governor of Texas did Bush have? His sole credential was that he was the son of an accomplished bureaucrat and politician.

Obama did not receive any sort of legacy benefits from his family on his rise to political prominence. At each level of accomplishment, he appears to have excelled and received widespread affirmation of his successes. Quite a different story from GW Bush, and one that everyone should be able to see.

I would have been happy with either Obama or Clinton as the Democratic Party's nominee. The differences between the two are no vast chasm that requires a huge leap of personal philosophy to bridge.

That the choice for president is not obvious completely befuddles me.

Posted by: Consequences | August 27, 2008 8:55 AM | Report abuse

"Maybe that was Hillary's plan all along."

Come one, are you also one of those people who believe that she unbuttoned her suit jacket at 2:00 am while speaking on the senate floor because she wanted to project her feminine side to all those people watching CSPAN at 2:00 at night?

It was a great speech and it should help open up her supporters to Obama. There wasn't any intent to show him up, this was about helping out the Democratic party.

Posted by: Hillary Supporter | August 27, 2008 8:55 AM | Report abuse

>>Jim Jones wrote: "AsperGirl, The only "damage" being inflicted upon the Democratic Party is being committed from within. It began when Lyndon Johnson broke many arms with his determination to achieve John Kennedy's domestic social agenda. He got the Civil Rights Act of 1964 passed, but alienated many Southern Whites who felt betrayed, and have NEVER returned to the Democratic Party."

No, you're making this election about race. While it is about race for some people, that's not the issue for hardcore Clinton supporters. No hardcore racist would love the Clintons, who have spent their whole life and Foundation advancing black agendas as one of their top few agenda interests. I seriously doubt you'd find a lot of white supremicists who are Clinton huggers.

JKF would never have gotten the Civil Rights act passed because he was too into his own popularity and iconic status and that would have cost too much. It took an LBJ, who believed in things greater than his own posterity, to pull off the things that got the Civil Rights act of 1964 passed. It's funny (and sad) that JFK who would have, in reality, accomplished so little but was a pop iconic figure, is so revered while LBJ was truly the transformative president of the latter half of the twentieth century. It's the Obamas of the world who do little and get attention but it's the Clintons of the world who make it worth living in.

JFK swallowed his pride, and took the unglamorous but really substantial and talented LBJ as his VP because he had to and it was what he had to do to win over LBJ's pragmatic supporters.

Obama is no JFK.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 8:53 AM | Report abuse

Aspergirl,
It's a shame you're so naive.
If you really think "McCain is a pragmatic centrist and a bipartisan who is issue-focused. He's incredibly non-ideological in his impulses" then you have absolutely no idea who this man is.
Wise up- he's a Republican whose "maverick" label stems from one or two fairly minor deviations from party orthodoxy.
Let's check some facts:
- McCain is anti-abortion (lots of women seem not to realize that)
- McCain supports an ongoing heavy military presence in Iraq and boosting our footprint in Afghanistan--where are we going to get these troops? The word "draft" may enter your vocabulary sometime soon
- McCain is shaking a belligerent stick at Russia over Georgia ("we are all Georgians now"--really? I didn't sign up for that), and could well be on course toward another Cold War (I lived through the latter days of the last one, in case you didn't, and it wasn't fun)
- McCain pretends to want renewable energy but has never voted for any renewable energy tax breaks
- Shall we continue?

He is not non-ideological; he is ideologically a Republican. He is not non-partisan; he is a Republican.

Say what you like but don't spout nonsense on this board. It's hard enough getting the truth out to people without uninformed nitwits clouding the issues.

Posted by: DB | August 27, 2008 8:52 AM | Report abuse

Obama
Right Color....Wrong Man
Right Message....Wrong Man

Nominate Hillary TODAY!

Posted by: Linda | August 27, 2008 8:51 AM | Report abuse

I won't vote for Obama because of his friendship with Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn. I probably won't vote for McCain either. The Ayers story is still unfolding -- how did the MSM miss the fact that Ayers hired Obama to chair the Annenberg Challenge? Steve Diamond, the Santa Clara law prof, had been writing about that for some time. And now Obama says they didn't really know each other, other than on an incidental basis? It sure looks like a coverup to me.

Posted by: katmandu1 | August 27, 2008 8:49 AM | Report abuse

An interesting discussion AsperGirl - but if Hillary was the nominee - you would still be facing a one party government. By your own assesment, you would vote for McCain to avoid this.

What gives? A Democratic president whom you feel is more ready to lead would still be a partisan one, mentors aside. Im interested that you would tout a two party government but be ready to vote the opposite if it was your preferred candidate.

Posted by: Jane | August 27, 2008 8:48 AM | Report abuse

I voted for, and supported Obama throughout this process.... I must say that Hillary Clinton completely left me in awe with her speech last night. Truly one of the best speeches I have seen through this political process over the past 18 months. Of course all the Republicans and their sympathizers are going to take jabs to devide the Democrats and raise the question that Hillary should have been the VP nominee as strategically if that would have happened they would have a stronger message to get their base to the polls to vote in November...the anti-Clinton message is persuasive with all those Republican fanatics in the rural south.

I think Obama knows exactly what he is doing and is executing a plan with precision. Its amazing to notice how absurd the McCain attacks and ads are getting...this guy has no platform of his own to stand on and campaign on and needs to sling mud because otherwise he has little substance.

I liked John McCain, I still like the guy in a way....but his integrity is becoming increasingly clouded by all of his handlers and even though I was not going to vote for him either way...I am severely disappointed in this low "swift boat" ugly campaign he is running.

I am clearly convinced the November numbers will shock a lot of people when Obama carries a lot more "battleground" states then people realize.

-S-

Posted by: Krasner | August 27, 2008 8:47 AM | Report abuse

"A vote for Obama is a vote to lose freedom and democracy.

Posted by: Ken | August 27, 2008 8:27 AM "

What is that suppose to mean? You mean I have not lost my freedom and democracy as a middle class worker in the Bush years? Have you not forgotten 9/11, the Iraq war and the war on terrorism occurred all during the Bush years? Have you not seen the decline of the United States' respect by the other Nations of the world just because Bush acted out his personal agenda against Saddam in Iraq against their recommendations? Have you not traveled in an airport, filled up a gas car or looked at your savings account lately? Do you feel more free and democratic now? How low can we go? I, for one, will not vote to continue this trend. America took a gamble on Bush and lost, and McCain is not much different than Bush in philosophy. I am voting for "Change"!

Posted by: BeWildered | August 27, 2008 8:47 AM | Report abuse

AsperGirl,
The only "damage" being inflicted upon the Democratic Party is being committed from within. It began when Lyndon Johnson broke many arms with his determination to achieve John Kennedy's domestic social agenda. He got the Civil Rights Act of 1964 passed, but alienated many Southern Whites who felt betrayed, and have NEVER returned to the Democratic Party. Since then, they have endured the deployment of federal troops to integrate Little Rock High School, a massive and expensive forced busing program, and an affirmative action program which denies non minorities equal employment. They have watched their neighborhoods be disintegated by integration, and the resulting rise in crime. And you expect them to happily forget the past and make like good little masochists and vote for Obama? Not likely.

Posted by: Jim Jones | August 27, 2008 8:45 AM | Report abuse

If Barack Obama doesn´t win in November DNC has to accept responsibility for a wrong decision. Hillary Clinton was the most competent Nominee and she cannot be blamed i any way.

Posted by: Elisabeth | August 27, 2008 8:45 AM | Report abuse

OMG! It's becoming abundantly clear! HilBilly supporters that refuse to vote for Barack Obama would rather cut off thier nose to spite thier faces. How else can you explain why they would rather vote for McBusch.

Posted by: nomolos40 | August 27, 2008 8:43 AM | Report abuse

I am getting the sense from these responses that her speech, being well-executed, did more harm than good. It has the effect of spreading the told-ya-so mentality. Maybe that was Hillary's plan all along.

Posted by: dcp | August 27, 2008 8:41 AM | Report abuse

>> poortrekker wrote: "AsperGirl, chill out; anger and hysterics accomplishes nothing. To get back brass tacks, I take it you didn't agree with HRC's talking points?"

Well, that is a really good question. In truth, I'm thinking about them. But I have a thought process that is a little more involved than liking or not liking talking points. I'm still processing her speech and thinking about the things she has raised.

I do have some things I'm considering that I think is a subliminal process that the rest of the country is at least subconsciously processing: how much better is it to have a divided government under a bipartisan leader than it is to have Pelosi and Reid running the country from Congress with a clueless naive guy in the White House? That formula didn't work out well during the Bush Administration, why should it be the optimal one for an Obama Administration?

Obama's already shown he's incompetent. He can't put together a decent convention that is genuinely about unity but is about himself and his wife. He has no real vision. When you weigh a man (or a woman) you look at their actual works. Obama has nothing really except for two historical fiction autobiographies with composite characters. The only really beautiful or stirring vision he has is as him having visions for leading the world. His visions are about himself. So he delivers great rhetoric because that's part of the narcissistic system of beliefs he has, but he can't be specific about the ideas in the rhetoric because implementation isn't about him but about the issues in the ideas in his rhetoric. In short, Obama doesn't seem to have any achievement competence in any area outside his ability to advance himself and position himself.

His ability to advance -- his real gift -- is the ability to absorb and assimilate the mentorship of others. He absorbs and projects. For that reason, his only real path to greatness or even competence as the country's top executive, is to have the right mentors in place.

His pick of VP was very important. Biden has seniority but no executive mentality and is no kind of mentor.

If Obama sets aside Biden and picks Clinton, he will create an electrifying convention night drama and get the right mentors for himself.

Picking the Clintons was Obama's one preconvention way to win. That would make him suitable presidential material because of the mentorship they can provide him that will grow him rapidly into top executive material. Without them, if elected, he is just going to be wallowing in an ignorant bubble like Bush did, with an empowered Pelosi and Reid running the country with or without his leadership "vision". Obama needs Clinton's believers to get elected, but the only way to really bring them on is to give them some reason to believe he'd be able to govern. The thing that would give them some reason to believe he'd be able to govern, not coincidentally, is if Obama has the right mentorship to avoid the bubble-boy, clueless president in a one-party government that Bush fell into. That thing he could have done -- pick Clinton as his VP, therefore is also the thing that would help make him a truly good president.

Obama's failing one test after another. He's running out of opportunities to turn his candidacy into a winner's one.

It doesn't matter what Clinton's talking points are if there will be a one-party government with an out of control Congress and a callow, inexperienced president in the White House.

McCain is a pragmatic centrist and a bipartisan who is issue-focused. He's incredibly non-ideological in his impulses.

I'm thinking that a two-party government, with a Congress strongly dominated by Democrats and a pragmatic, issue-focused, non-ideological bipartisan Republican president is a really good recipe for productive government that avoids too much special interest, ideological excesses. One of the features of Clinton's presidency's successes was the divided government that had to work together.

McCain won't be able to push any anti-abortion freak judges past a Democratically dominated Congress, and Pelosi and Reid won't be able to raise capital gains taxes to a 30% rate during a recession with a Republican president. If McCain is elected, I have no doubt that a lot of Democratic objectives will be obtained by a Congress that has a clear Democratic majority. If Obama is elected, I think we'll be electing Pelosi and Reid and giving them the reins with no sanity check in place.

Obama has a few hours to electrify the country, ask Biden to step aside and stage a convention night drama by bringing Clinton onto his ticket.

Their mentorship backing up his promise of leadership, and injecting some maturity and expertise in the prospective Obama Administration, is what would bring the doubters over to him.

Why do you think Pelosi opposes Clinton on Obama's ticket so much? It would stand in her way.

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

As an independent, I thought Hillary did the best she could, but I was not overwhelmed. The overall message that I got was: "Vote for Obama b/c he's not McCain", which is not exactly a rousing endorsement. I think this whole "Unity" theme is a bit of a farce. The primary was so divisive between these 2 that the Dems are trying to make up for lost ground. If she believes so much in party unity, then her and Bill shouldn't have gone so negative in the primary.

Posted by: indy | August 27, 2008 8:39 AM | Report abuse

I never voted for G.W. Bush. This means I never have to feel guilty that I empowered him to do all the damage to this country that he and his administration have done. While saddened at what the Republicans have done to our country, I personally did not assist them in their misguided adventures by casting a vote for them.

So what every Democrat who is considering either voting for John McCain or not voting for Obama needs to decide is this: Will I be able to sleep easily each night if John McCain is in office, adding 4 more years to the pain and torment our country has already suffered at the hands of the Republican Party?

Posted by: Consequences | August 27, 2008 8:38 AM | Report abuse

HILLARY IS ONE AMAZING WOMAN!!!!
nObama does not believe in Hillary's HealthCare Plan... therefor, I see no difference between voting for nObama or McCain... OH WAIT, except that McCain won't pander to terrorists and has no ties to Lefty Radicals! oops! my bad... FALL IN LINE MY %$##

Posted by: LatteSipper | August 27, 2008 8:36 AM | Report abuse

here's the deal: clinton ran a terrible campaign, probably because she relied on men instead of trusting her instincts. losing the primary = not deserving the opportunity to be president. and i say that having voted for her in the ohio primary.

honestly, i strongly suspect that many of the bloggers complaining about obama and his vp pick are republicans trying to stir the pot.

and every republican i talked to is disappointed that obama didn't pick her to be vp, because that would've helped mccain more than it would've helped obama. the anti-clinton sentiment is incredibly arousing to these people; they would've traversed hell and high water to stike her down.

so clinton gave an incredible speech, obama picked the right running mate, and mccain is stuck running on his own merit.

"president obama" - get used to saying it.

Posted by: rational in cmh | August 27, 2008 8:33 AM | Report abuse

As many point out, it was a much more supportive speech than Kennedy in 1980 or Reagan in 1976. Obviously, it's in her interest to avoid seeming obstructionist, lest she become the party's new Joe Lieberman, and I think she was clear enough in her support to put the "unity question" to rest, at least for those voters who watched the speech (I'm guessing a majority do not watch convention coverage). More important now will be how she stumps for Obama. Now let's see what Bill Clinton says tonight.

Posted by: sergio | August 27, 2008 8:32 AM | Report abuse

I think her speech was the best speech I have ever seen from her. It was really great and after wards I was just sad that she ended up losing out of the nomination. She would have made a great President.

That being said, I'm going to vote for Obama. I think he will be a good President and while he's not my first choice (to tell you the truth I would rather vote for his Vice President then him) I know that he will be better for our country then McCain.

So I will be one of those tepid votes for Obama. I had decided I was going to vote for him before her speech. But what a great speech it was.

Posted by: Hillary Supporter | August 27, 2008 8:32 AM | Report abuse

I don't believe there are that many angry Hillary supporters on these blogs. People like Aspergirl are obviously Republicans who, lacking any positive things to say about their own candidate, turn to dishonesty and nasty personal attacks. It's the Republican way.

Posted by: hanapapa | August 27, 2008 8:31 AM | Report abuse

The Socialist Democrat Liberal need to just
accept that their phony Messiah His Total
Smirking Arrogance Barack Hussein Obama and
Verbose Mouthy Old Joe Biden will not be
elected in 2008. And no speech by that
phony two face gutless Hillary Sell Out
Clinton will save them or the Leftist
Eletist Marxist Social Democrat Liberal
Loser Party as well. And face it Democrats
Hillary Clinton will never be elected in
2012 either not after Clinton sold out the
18 Million Voters,who trusted her and got
Hillary Clinton helping Barack and Michelle
Obama throw them under Obama's Bus! The
Independent Voters like myself will never
vote for Obama and Biden and Clinton!

Posted by: Sherry Kay 2004 | August 27, 2008 8:30 AM | Report abuse

I am amazed at the personal attacks and sheer nastiness of so many of the comments here. Isn't voting our opportunity to move the nation in the direction we think it should go? Didn't Clinton's supporters vote for her because they wanted better health care, better education, better environmental policies, better treatment for women, better energy policies, a break for the middle class, fewer tax breaks for big business, and so on? How many of these things do they think we will get from McCain?

Posted by: keith hudson | August 27, 2008 8:28 AM | Report abuse

You are right about Mark Warner--his call earlier in the day to "radical centrism" reminds me a little of what Sister Anne Marie used to tell me (Convent of the Visitation in DC for those who care) She said: "Moderation in all things. . .including moderation--too much moderation is not good for anybody!"

As for Schweitzer, I believe HIS will be the star that ascends as a result of this convention. He's the real deal and we could use a lot more like him.

I don't know if Hillary could have done more. I thought she did quite well, but yet, the vitriol and complete lack of reason persist. I am especially troubled by the voices of those who would allow their disappointment to so color their thinking that they would actually claim to "hate" Barack Obama. My goodness-- I think that George W. Bush is easily the worst president in my lifetime, and actually, I think you'd have to go back as far as Tyler to find a worse president--but I would never say i "Hate" him.

I really hope that we can turn a corner on this one. I realize that will only happen once people start to recognize in the candidate, the faint glimmer of hope that his words, his policies and his administration can foster the same loyalty they felt for Hillary. It appears it will be a long, slow slog, but I remain convinced that Obama is sincere AND able.

Posted by: dch | August 27, 2008 8:28 AM | Report abuse

A vote for Obama is a vote to lose freedom and democracy.

Posted by: Ken | August 27, 2008 8:27 AM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton's speech was spectacular. It showcased her grace under fire and her superb credentials.

Sadly enough for Democrats, no speech she could ever give will make Barak Obama ready for or worthy of the presidency. He just doesn't cut it.

When he loses in November, it will be in part due to a large number of Democrats not voting for him. Many of those same Democrats did vote for Clinton in the primaries. Does this mean it's Hillary Clinton's fault that Barak Obama is so unqualified for office that even his own party members won't vote for him? Of course not.

And for those of you who think it's justified to hold a candidate responsible for the actions of his/her supporters, does this mean you're advocating holding Barak Obama responsible for the mean-spirited, race-baiting vitriol his supporters are so full of? Because if the candidate is defined by his supporters, then Barak Obama is an ugly, juvenile, emotional nightmare who believes that bone deep hatred toward whites is a birthright and won't recognize it for the racism it is.

Posted by: Lynn | August 27, 2008 8:27 AM | Report abuse

Wow, you're nasty, AsperGirl!

Posted by: jchaney | August 27, 2008 12:03 AM

Spot on, if you have been on here before, you would expect nothing less. It kind of speaks to what kind of character she truly has. She is an ugly person on the inside, try to ignore her/him (I would be surprised if it is a male republican).

Posted by: Sandyblond | August 27, 2008 8:24 AM | Report abuse

I am amazed at the personal attacks and sheer nastiness of so many of the comments here. Isn't voting a matter of trying to ensure that the nation will move in the direction we think it should? Didn't Clinton's supporters vote for her because they liked her policies: better health care, better education, better treatment for women, a break for the middle class, fewer tax breaks for big business, care for the environment, etc., etc? How many of those things do they think we will get from McCain? And they're thinking of voting for him?

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 8:23 AM | Report abuse

To AsperGirl and the rest of the Clintonites:
What would you be saying in Clinton won and Barack supporters were acting like spoiled little childern like you. She lost. Get over it. Go ahead and vote fo McCain and see us get in another war, nothing done about health care, oil and other big companies be given tax breaks to take our jobs overseas, women not given equal pay for equal work. You are are cultist. Even Hillary said vote not for a person but for ideals. let me ask you, do you think Hillary would have shown Barack as much deference as Barack did Hillary? So go vote for McCain or whatever but shut up already about how Hillary was direspected, she was cheated out of the election, etc. She lost fair and square. By the way, most Obama supporters like my self like and would have supported Hillary unlike you morons whom are like spoiled children. "Wahhh, my candidate lost so I am going home". Grow up and get a life or whatever but shut up already. I'm sick of the whining.

Posted by: Luis | August 27, 2008 8:22 AM | Report abuse

Other than the fact that I do not agree with her on the issue of abortion, Hillary seemed like someone I would support as President. Seriously. Am I persuaded to vote for Barack? No. He's still far left.

Posted by: dcp | August 27, 2008 8:21 AM | Report abuse

I listened to that speech and said to myself "Oh my God! She sounds like she is still running for president!" I wish she had used her ENTIRE speech to blast Bush and McCain's connection to him. I didn't hear anything about a president condoining torture, capitalizing on our post 9/11 fears to launch a war against the wrong country, authorizing illegal domestic surveillance, socialism for the very richest in our country, and so on and so on. I suppose the Obamas will continue to be gracious to the Clintons. I sure hope somebody at the convention quits wasting time and starts connecting McCain with Bush, and Bush with epic failure.

Posted by: Webb Piercer | August 27, 2008 8:18 AM | Report abuse

John said "There is no getting away with it they picked the wrong candidate. Unless something drastic happens the election is already lost by the Democrats. Barack should do the decent thing and stand down for the sake of the ideas. That's what a real candidate would do and that's what Hilary did do."

There is no reason on earth for the person who won the primary to step down. I voted for Hillary, but if she could not win the primary she should not be the candidate. Hillary would not stand down even when there was no way she could win as demonstrated in the primary. And she was within her rights.

We all know that if we had been able to get Hillary nominated we would have been in for an ugly campaign because the republicans will use ANYTHING to win and there is simply more history to use against Hillary. She is also strongly hated by the right so it would have motivated them more to get out and vote if she was our candidate. Having her in the number 2 spot would probably have been just as invigorating for those republicans.

Hillary wants Barack to win because she cares about our country. I know that she has integrity and would not be supporting him if she did not honestly believe he will be a good president. McCain does have more experience, which demonstrates his lousy judgement and his willingness to go along with any republican idea to get votes. Once upon a time (2000) I said McCain was the only Republican I could ever vote for because of his honesty and fairness. That John McCain no longer exists. The current John McCain is a George Bush clone.

I hope and expect that all Democrats will put our country, including our Supreme Court, ahead of our hurt feelings, just as Hillary already has, and elect Barack as our next president.

Posted by: Sharon | August 27, 2008 8:18 AM | Report abuse

Wow,

Some of you can continue hating after THAT speech. Anyone who continues to write hating sxxt here and claims to be a supporter of Barak is just someone who jumped on board the bandwagon without any political or historical understanding- an ignorant fools who would have been on McCain's bandwagon if that had been the trend. Her policies were essentially more ambitiously progressive than his are- so it's not about policy. Her response since losing the delegate race with 1/2 the vote is better than any "loser" in the past 40 years- saint Edward of Kennedy's was probably the worst- yet he is celebrated by the same people who told her to drop out and continue to hate.

The speech was amazing. She likely helped turn this thing around for Barak. If she walked on water, some of you would say "well, she thinks she's too good to swim". Do something more productive with your time than insulting my great senator thank you

Leon

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 8:17 AM | Report abuse

>> lucky wrote: "HRC's performance opened up the question of whether-or-not she would have been a better VP candidate than JB. She drove home the point that she could have brought both her 'votes' and her 'support' to BO campaign."

There was no way for her to win because the party diehards are behind the stupid, lesser and inadequate candidate and she way outclasses him. What kind of speech could she have given in that situation. If she crawled out there and was ineffective, people would have cried "sabotage", if she shines, she's showing everyone how she should be the nominee.

Clinton did the exact right thing, which was to take the focus off the individual candidates and talk about the greater needs of the country and the dreams of the Democratic party. By taking the focus off the individual candidates and speaking to the exciting future and the greater problems, she pointed the way to unity, which Obama's narcissistic self-obsessed convention has failed to do thus far. People were happy and excited after her speech, and she gave them other things than who is on the ticket to get mobilized for. She even had Bill crying.

Clinton did more than she was required to, and she did a lot for Obama. I hope he appreciates it.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 8:16 AM | Report abuse

AsperGirl, chill out; anger and hysterics accomplishes nothing.

To get back brass tacks, I take it you didn't agree with HRC's talking points?

Posted by: poortrekker | August 27, 2008 8:15 AM | Report abuse

I keep reading posts and hear people say that Barack Obama does not have enough experience to be President. But he has more experience in public office than many former Presidents had when they were elected. And as Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld have shown, you can all the experience in the world, but if you do not have good judgment all of that experience is worthless. Look at the way Mr. Obama has run his campaign - no one thought he could win the nomination, but by running an efficient and astute campaign (as well as being a compelling candidate), he did. Look at his judgment concerning the Iraq war - he was right while many of those with much more experience were absolutely wrong. Look at the way the current administration is adopting many of his positions with regard to Iraq (timetable), Georgia (diplomacy, no military action), Pakistan (with actionable intelligence take out Al Qaeda leaders even unilaterally, which the current administration did). Listen to him speak about the issues - he is obviously intelligent, thoughtful, willing to listen to and consider opposing views to inform his own decision, surrounds himself with expert advisers - all of these qualities speak to his ability to lead and to govern.

Posted by: Susan Fix | August 27, 2008 8:14 AM | Report abuse

It is nice to see that Obama is being listened to by the 527 groups. However, there are some GOP leaning political ads on TV that are beyond the pale. The swiftbeaters for "lies" are out there bigtime. I cannot believe that people can be so brazen as to publish their lies like this. It is bad enough to see the lies all over the internet. I know because I have chased some of them down. I guess that a lot of money will do about anything.

Obama is the breath of fresh air that we need. He is also supported by a very strong cast of conscientious, dedicated, and honest Democrats.

Posted by: Earl C | August 27, 2008 8:12 AM | Report abuse

>> Spritopias wrote: "He's going to win without her - but if he loses the albatross will hang around her neck as well and there will be no 2012."

I bet you're going to find any way to make Clinton take the blame for Obama's loss.

If it was so important for Obama to win, then why is the only ugly thing that undermined her speech Michelle Obama's expressions? The PUMAs noticed it!

If Obama was so set on winning, he should be hiding that nasty wife of his. He should have kept her out of the audience or like that one PUMA's post said, sent her to acting school so that she can learn to control her face when she's on national TV.

Obama's had every advantage a candidate ever had, from legions of media fans, to Kennedy support, the party bending and breaking rules to nominate him when delegate credentialing questions arose, and to the losing runner-up giving him unprecedented fundraising and cheerleading support.

If he loses, it's the ignorant, destructive netroots like you who should be punished for all the damage and stupidity you are inflicting on the Democratic party.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 8:09 AM | Report abuse

Hillary's focus, and Obama's focus on Hillary voters, has to be: if you cared enough about what I believe in to vote for me, vote for Obama. if the right to choose, a stable supreme court, universal healthcare, ending the war in Iraq, lower taxes for the working class don't matter anymore, vote for McCain.

Hillary's supporters need to see that there are three choices: best, good, horrid. Best is unavailable; choose good.

Posted by: f2 | August 27, 2008 8:08 AM | Report abuse

Hillary has already said it in at least two previous speeches and/or appearances. Some will always say that it is not enough. Example: Bill Clinton can ask the religious right for forgiveness on his hands and knees and they'll not forgive him. However, McCain has apparently already received forgiveness and has never asked.

Hillary gave an impassioned plea for the Democrats to unite. She had a few key lines. One of her greatest introduction lines was to suggest that it was not about her but about those people whose stories she told. The other great line was about the Twin Cities.

Whether favorite preachers, favorite politicians, favorite sports figures, some people will always worship them regardless of their desires that they support others.

I hope that everyone heard Charles Barkley. A better spokesperson for the Democrats could not be found yesterday.
The chart that was used on CNN to show the tax proposals of both the Democrats and the Republicans was the most biased piece of trash I have seen in a long time. The income breakdowns on the chart were so unrealistic as to be laughable.

Posted by: Earl C | August 27, 2008 8:07 AM | Report abuse

To dyinglikeflies:
It has nothing to do with feeling threatened. For every voter Hillary would have brought to the ticket, there is at least one voter who would leave and either vote for the sellout known as McSame, write in a name, or just not vote. I am planning to vote for Obama, but would not do so had she been on the ticket.

Posted by: Arlington, VA | August 27, 2008 8:06 AM | Report abuse

Hillary was terrific last night. I think she was not selected to be Barack's running mate because of the difficulty of having a strong former President, namely Bill Clinton, as the husband of the Vice-President. Too many chiefs. I also think she will have a strong leadership role in the Senate. If she does not get the opportunity to be President she can still have an amazing impact in the Senate as Ted Kennedy has. Aren't we fortunate as Democrats to have so many strong leaders right now?

Posted by: Susan Fix | August 27, 2008 8:06 AM | Report abuse

Obama will not win...

Posted by: Meredeth | August 27, 2008 8:06 AM | Report abuse

PUMA is made up of about 100 people

Paid by the GOP with magical rays of sunshine that come down from the sky when you're feeling blue.

Posted by: PUMAs, it's STFU time | August 27, 2008 8:03 AM | Report abuse

Wow - that will go down as one of the all-time Machiavellian moves in convention politics.

HRC's performance opened up the question of whether-or-not she would have been a better VP candidate than JB. She drove home the point that she could have brought both her 'votes' and her 'support' to BO campaign.

And it now looks like BO blew the so called 'first' important decision of a future president - who will be his VP. History will record that at best JB was his second best choice - which will make BO look weak and afraid.

For at least one more night - HRC beat BO.

Posted by: lucky | August 27, 2008 8:02 AM | Report abuse

>> Spritopias wrote: "He's going to win without her - but if he loses the albatross will hang around her neck as well and there will be no 2012."

Spoken like a true dead weight stupid bully. Your guy is an obvious dud -- already running behind the Republican in a year where no Democrat should lose, millions of voters telling the Democrats that Obama can't win, and you're going to blame the woman who should have been nominated, for his loss.

Not only are you stupid and obstinate, you will, after your stupidity and obstinacy creates a crash-and-burn, go around beating up on others just to prove that they caused your loss -- because no way could you have been wrong.

The albatross around the neck is the burden the netroots' ignorant and clueless interference is for the Democratic party. First you create the Liebermann problem and now you push the lesser candidate over the better one and promise to beat up on any leading Democrat who interferes with your failing vision.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 8:02 AM | Report abuse

"THX Hillary said-
PUMAs.....Kill Yoursleves!"

Nah. I wanna hang around to watch McCain's inauguration. I'm curious to see how he can lift his right hand, since the torture he went through for his country impeded his mobility.

Posted by: dyinglikeflies | August 27, 2008 8:01 AM | Report abuse

Clinton's speech was brilliant. She didn't praise Obama personally or professionally. The reason that was brilliant is that the Obama convention is all wrong, the convention of a losing candidate trying to stop the hemorrhaging. Instead of sending a positive, winning message, the Obama convention is all about Obama: getting to know him better, trying to change America's opinion about his nasty wife. Obama's convention theme is "know me and Michelle more and like us better" -- the convention theme that only a defensive narcissist who is obsessing over his image would put on.

Clinton effectively sent messages that were about things that emerged as important questions in Rev. Warren's Saddleback forum: party unity (but not under a particular person but for the larger projects the party is working on), long term characteristics that define the Democratic party's rank and file (not the traits of one particular candidate).

Clinton's theme was the right one for a convention. By the focus of her speech being the greater Democratic party platform and goals, a focus that Obama isn't sending in his weird, narcissistic convention that is all about him and his wife, she generated more excitement about the future and unity than Obama has been able to do with all the resources expended thus far.

The party is nominating a narcissist and the real leadership candidate this year isn't even on the ticket.

Sad.

Clinton gave Obama more than he deserved and a better speech than she could have gotten away with. She could have just delivered an Obama-style soaring rhetoric speech praising Obama and talking about his message of transcendence, and thrilled the shallow liberal arts dummies in the media and the netroots who live off that junk-calories political rhetoric, and they would have thought she was amazing without getting the joke. Instead she gave them the real stuff on many levels.

Clinton gave Obama more than he deserved and yet, I bet, she will still get beaten up and punished for his failures and his losing the election this Fall. At no point will the media and netroots admit their delusions and screwups and that Obama is a loser that only an affected dimwit journalism major could love.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 7:57 AM | Report abuse

There is no getting away with it they picked the wrong candidate. Unless something drastic happens the election is already lost by the Democrats. Barack should do the decent thing and stand down for the sake of the ideas. That's what a real candidate would do and that's what Hilary did do.

Posted by: John | August 27, 2008 7:56 AM | Report abuse

Enough already with this story. It's all hype. 95% of these voters will vote for Obama...and if they don't, then they have clearly fallen for a cult of personality rather than loyalty to their party and the best interests of the country. But really, this seems more like the media hyping something up more than anything else...

Posted by: SoonerThought.blogspot.com | August 27, 2008 7:56 AM | Report abuse

PUMAs.....Kill Yoursleves!


Posted by: THX Hillary! | August 27, 2008 7:56 AM | Report abuse

I think the close primary and so-called 'divided' Democratic party will actually end up helping Obama be president. This whole storyline has had the side-effect of keeping Hillary supporters engaged in the process and now they will get behind Obama to create one of the most enthusiastic electorates in history. McCain should be very worried. (And Democrats should be very confident).

Posted by: Jo-D | August 27, 2008 7:54 AM | Report abuse

AsperGirl Said:

"Obama has a few hours left to make a dramatic throw-in-the-towel move, say sorry to Biden and electrify the party and the country by asking Hillary Clinton to be his VP.

He's going to lose without her."

Actually, had Senator Clinton done this on the night she lost or anytime between last friday and that night when she lost, she would be Vice-President. Her own actions, which bordered on Bush-like hubris, have kept her not only from a glorious return to Pennsylvania Avenue but from a respectable finish at the Naval Observatory.

He's going to win without her - but if he loses the albatross will hang around her neck as well and there will be no 2012.

Posted by: Spritopias | August 27, 2008 7:50 AM | Report abuse

As an Obama supporter, I am really grateful to Hillary for being so strong and having the courage to set her disappointments aside and get to work on electing the Democratic nominee. Contrary to the media storylines, we Obama supporters LOVE Hillary and Bill and realize how important they have been and will be to the democratic party for years to come.

Posted by: HGG | August 27, 2008 7:48 AM | Report abuse

According to Gallup poll (along with few others), Senator Obama is getting no bounce in Post-Bidden tracking.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/109834/Gallup-Daily-Bounce-Obama-Post-Biden-Tracking.aspx

In fact, Michelle Obama introduced herself Monday but did no good in early poll tracking.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 7:45 AM | Report abuse

She did a wonderful job. It is obvious that nothing she can say is going to move some of her "supporters". It is a shame they are being so disrespectful of her wishes and still trying to pretend it out of loyalty to her. Hillary was my candidate, but she lost the primary. End of story. It is time to copy her grace and try to save our country from more republican damage. We should all try to behave as well as Hillary herself is.

Posted by: Sharon | August 27, 2008 7:45 AM | Report abuse

She was our best hope, and last night's speech made that clear, but I will certainly vote for Barack Obama because only the Democratic party is offering a way out of the mess this country is in. And John McCain's campaign has been about nothing so far except name calling, innuendo, and misrepresenting his opponents, so he has demonstrated a complete loss of integrity. At least Obama is a man of character who is 'one of us' and has the right views on policy, and that should be enough for any Democrat.

Posted by: Gina888 | August 27, 2008 7:44 AM | Report abuse

I am confused isn't Congress predominately democratic now? why would we want a republican president with a predominately democratic congress? Nothing would ever get done. Clinton's speech was great. The people who voted for her should support Obama and in all honesty it is their choice whether or not they do. Think about it though what really will change if McCain gets in office? Personally I think if there is any change it will be minor. This whole time all of the ads endorsed by him have been slanderous to the ninth degree and he is doing more and more to divide the democratic party. It's called divide and conquer and he is doing a heck of a job f it. A lot of people have hangups about how un-experienced Obama is but I agree with Live_1 we had Dick Cheney who had a lot of experience and look where it got us. We need a fresh start. We need a democrat in office, whether we decide to put him there is up to us. To the Hillary supporters who are voting for McCain, you would rather vote for someone who is does not have the same plan or platform as Hillary all because you feel that Obama is less experienced than him? I mean at least Obama's platform was close if not identical to Hillary's.What's the real reason you are not voting for Obama?

Posted by: confused | August 27, 2008 7:42 AM | Report abuse

Aspergirl, sometimes you're over the top, but you are right on that one.

Posted by: dyinglikeflies | August 27, 2008 7:42 AM | Report abuse

Hillary hit a home run last night. The Clinton people have absolutely NO excuse not to support Barack Obama now. It's time to get over it and move on.

Posted by: Doug Steimle | August 27, 2008 7:41 AM | Report abuse

Obama has a few hours left to make a dramatic throw-in-the-towel move, say sorry to Biden and electrify the party and the country by asking Hillary Clinton to be his VP.

He's going to lose without her.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 7:40 AM | Report abuse

MY OPINION ABOUT OBAMAS WENT DOWN DURING CLINTON SPEECH DUE TO MICHELLE OBAMA MAKING JEALOUS UGLY FACES

After I made the below post, I got some responses that I was making it up. Well I wasn't. And just looking at some PUMA posts who were liveblogging the speech, they noticed, too. It was obvious that Michelle Obama hated Clinton and the jealousy was all over her face. (I can find more quotes, online if you want them). The Obamas are too immature and inappropriate to be the country's top exec couple.

Liveblogging observations about Michelle Obama radiating jealousy & hatred:

:::::::::
AsperGirl 08/26/08:
"And I think it's pretty clear where the animosity comes from. When the camera cut away from Clinton while her delegates were screaming for her, to Michelle Obama in the audience, Michelle Obama had an ugly, jealous look on her face.

"I suppose Michelle Obama, being a wife, could get a convention night all for herself, put "Michelle" vertical signs in everyone's hands, but she couldn't get them to scream for her like that.

"Michelle Obama is evil. Clinton's lucky not to get picked as VP. You don't want to be on the receiving end of that jealous, ugly stare for years when the face that it's on belongs to your boss."

:::::::::::::
quote from some pumas who was liveblogging
(http://alegrescorner.soapblox.net/showDiary.do;jsessionid=A507C36FEF3B4B674073A3BE9598C4E9?diaryId=796)


"heh! i'm getting radiation poisoning..."
...from what michelle obama is giving off. hillary's doing so well that they won't be able to blame the loss in november on her. that look in michelle's eyes is the recognition that she's been outclassed. and no, she won't "have to think about that." she knows."
by: campskunk @ Tue Aug 26, 2008 at 22:14:24 PM CDT

Hate to say it
But Michelle really is a B-word. She couldn't even pretend to like Hillary as Hillary was saying good things about Michelle's husband. Oh Lordy, somebody take Michelle to acting school.
by: izarradar @ Tue Aug 26, 2008 at 22:28:09 PM CDT

If looks could kill
Hillary would have burst into flames. MO looked like she was seething.
by: grlpatriot @ Tue Aug 26, 2008 at 22:31:26 PM CDT


::::::::::::

The more I pay attention to the Obamas the creepier and stupider they appear to be under their shiny, glossy surfaces. The Biden pick was a gross misstep. There's something wrong with both of them.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 27, 2008 7:38 AM | Report abuse

It's disappointing to see so many knuckleheaded comments here from "bitter" people "clinging" to a defunct candidacy.

Anyone that votes for the GOP this fall - or even that sits this one out - deserves what they get. It's a shame that you'll take down the rest of us with you, but that's the nature of democracy. Yippee!

Posted by: JT | August 27, 2008 7:37 AM | Report abuse

Odd how the intellectual who considers himself a modern Lincoln forgets that Lincoln freed black men to vote, but left out white women.

Some things never "change" do they?

Posted by: Say Nobama | August 27, 2008 7:32 AM | Report abuse

Speak for yourself Dee I did want a Democrate until it was Obama. The shameless use of his kids thing is just another reason added to the pile of reasons not to vote for Obama

Posted by: Rep now Maybe? | August 27, 2008 7:27 AM | Report abuse

Hillary whipped the delegates into a frenzy. People watching on TV (I was with a group of Democrats in PA) saw the same thing ---- Obama is going to be President and she's supporting him, campaigning for him, etc.

What story does the MSM push --- doubts, secret 2012 plans, weak support, some bizarre lack of enthusiam fo a progressive in the White House.

The reality --- HRC could not havce been more supportive, enthusiatic, emphatic or more sincere about eklecting Obama as president

Posted by: Kevin | August 27, 2008 7:25 AM | Report abuse

Speek for yourself Dee I did want a Democrate until it was Obama. The kids thing is just another reason added to the pile of reasons not to vote or, vote MCcain.

Posted by: Rep now Maybe? | August 27, 2008 7:23 AM | Report abuse

RealChoices what? Jimmy Carter did not use his kid in a skit on a national convention stage. He had sense enough to know better. Who cares right? Little kids don't show emotional scars outwardly lets get the family image going for the home viewing audience... No one else has been iresponsible enough to do that with two little girls their ages.

Posted by: Ava | August 27, 2008 7:14 AM | Report abuse

For all you Obama people who agree Clinton did a great job, one question: why didn't Obama have the cujones to not feel threatened and to pick her as his running mate (especially since she got as many votes as he did while Biden got virtually none, and Obama and Clinton are not that far apart on their positions)? Had he done so, he could have done his party and the country some good and sealed the election, right?

Posted by: dyinglikeflies | August 27, 2008 7:14 AM | Report abuse

Yes, she was brilliant. Honestly, what did people want -- that she ask forgiveness for having the audacity to run against Obama?

She made a great case for him. Obamanistas can't blame her supporters for feeling a bit sad; I'm sure they would feel the same way if the situation was reversed. But we're not stupid -- we want a Democratic president.

Posted by: Dee | August 27, 2008 7:08 AM | Report abuse

This whole thing is ridiculous. Yes there are a few irrational Hillbots out there but most of this stuff is republican operatives living out operation chaos.
If Obama doesn't have the right stuff then how the heck did he beat Hillary in the primary? That alone shows his determination, mettle, discipline, organizational skills, and qualifies him for office. He did it on the high road too.

Posted by: JohnDoug | August 27, 2008 7:06 AM | Report abuse

SHE didn't need to do anything. The election will either be won or lost by Obama. If Obama is going to play the victim because of his own inability to close the deal in November, he doesn't deserve the job anyway.

Posted by: dyinglikeflies | August 27, 2008 7:05 AM | Report abuse

Remus Morin you wouldn't if you support Obama. Us free thinkers don't believe having your kids pushed into the limelight is alright for any reason. My kids love playing in the street but I don't let them even if it might get me votes. Which it will not thank goodness.

Posted by: Frank | August 27, 2008 7:03 AM | Report abuse

Meredith, you should grow up. Candidates have been showing their kids for decades, Obama isn't doing anything new. Your post is childish.

Anyone remember Amy Carter, she was 8 when Jimmy ran. Obama's kids weren't dragged out kicking and screaming. Anyone who knocks theirs presence is just a Republican looking for any excuse to bash Obama.

Posted by: RealChoices | August 27, 2008 7:01 AM | Report abuse

I thought Hillary gave a great speech which hopefully many of her supporters will take to heart. I support Obama and feel of either candidates he will provide the best leadership in the coming years.

I am very concerned about the issue of experience just like others, yet if the president can't think or remember things well-how good is that experience for the job of president...Are we going to have a 3am phone call where the commander-in-chief has to say"I'll have my staff get back to you?" I think this really should become a major concern for all Americans we need a president who can think clearly, and is not handled by the masses of ex-lobbyists who are toadies to their prior corporate bosses. In addition, already McCain's "handlers" are keeping him on a one event only schedule-I don't think the presidency is job that can limit that. The next president needs to be able to handle multiple emergencies/problems in a 24/7-7day week. Our country has been run by corporate America for the last 8 years and it is time to get back to "We the People...not We the Corporation (that then outsources thousands of jobs to outside the US)!

Go Obama!

Posted by: anonblogger | August 27, 2008 7:01 AM | Report abuse

Do any of you agitating for a McCain presidency realise what it'll do to this country? It won't do us any good, and although Obama may not be your first choice (or my first choice) - how can you think that his administration will have a worse effect on us than 4 more years of the same?

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 6:57 AM | Report abuse

clinton did a good job by reminding people that her personality my differ from Obama's but their policies were barely distinguishable. I certainly hope Clinton supporters vote for Obama (i know my wife and parents plan to) if they live in 20 battleground states. if they live in a state highly likely to be in one candidates win column, they should vote a third party candidate that is closest to their conscience especially Cynthia McKinney if you think the corporate media has dissed women.

Posted by: djw3505 | August 27, 2008 6:57 AM | Report abuse

JohnDoug I wonder if he was the same guy who advised Obama to use his kids in a shameless ploy for votes?

Posted by: Stiles | August 27, 2008 6:55 AM | Report abuse

Frank - I didn't see anything exploitative in it. They love their pa, what's wrong with that?

Posted by: Remus Morin | August 27, 2008 6:53 AM | Report abuse

OMG some guy below posted his entire inbox!
I see that and wonder why I'm on this thread.

Posted by: JohnDoug | August 27, 2008 6:46 AM | Report abuse

hmp no they are talking about Obama using his two little girls in a apalling stunt to improve his image and hopefully get votes. Once again showing his "Good" judgement.

Posted by: Frank | August 27, 2008 6:41 AM | Report abuse

re:

"I don't see MCcain serving up his kids for votes"

Are you talking about the kids from his first marriage? You know, the one where he slept around and finally divorced his wife (who was disfigured in an automobile accident) and left her for Cindy?

There's plenty the American public doesn't know about McCain. It's just lucky for him that the Democrats don't play in the gutter the way the Republicans do.

The Dems won't even drag out true dirty linens on McCain (like the Keating 5 affair), whereas the Republicans make up b*llsh*t and post it over and over again (as in, Obama is a Muslim, and went to a madrassah).

Posted by: hmp | August 27, 2008 6:34 AM | Report abuse

lmw952 so attacks upon them give the Obama's the excuse to drag their kids into the fray. For them to use two innocent little girls for improving their image. You are sick as well as the Obama's if you still believe throwning your kids on such a large stage is alright for any reason!

Posted by: Meredith | August 27, 2008 6:33 AM | Report abuse

On the morning after HRC gave a fantastic speech in which she could not have been more gracious, a whole bunch of media pimps like Dowd, Dionne, Cafferty are out, and attacking CLinton once more. Whatever she does, these media pimps will attack and tarnish her name.

Kennedy hardly shook hands with Carter in 1980 after losing, and yet he is a darling of these so called liberal prostitutes.

So, no, the speech changed no minds. HRC did what she had to, but HRC supporters will stay away or vote Mac.

Posted by: intcamd1 | August 27, 2008 6:30 AM | Report abuse

Amazing... there are Americans who would hand the Republicans control of this country again because they are angry that their candidate did not win.

And please help me understand... what exactly are McCain's credentials? His years in the Senate? Yes, that is experience and yes it has earned him a reputation as a hot-headed guy who is not at all above vengeful behavior. His vast knowledge of world affairs? Sorry, the "world" see's John McCain as another 4 years of George Bush and that's enough to nullify this so called experience. His knowledge and grasp of economic issues? Well, he already answered that one.

What sets McCain apart is his ability to tap into a greased up marketing machine knwon as the RNC and it's supporters. That is the one thing that McCain has going for him... and oh by the way it is many of the same people who smeared him in 2000.

Sorry, in this election I'm calling the "experience" argument a wash because we simply do not know what either of these men will do... however I want the Republicans as far from decision making power as is possible.

I hope they would use this time to re-think their party and policies so I can re-consider them in the future.

Posted by: Rick | August 27, 2008 6:25 AM | Report abuse

There was nothing HRC could say that would appease Barry's cult members. They want HRC to carry Barry on her back to victory. It's obvious, see polls, that he can't do it on his own.

Posted by: Jack Straw | August 27, 2008 6:23 AM | Report abuse

8.27. 2008 new york obama is non electable. he abuse race relations in usa. He manipulated his his own facts in life for gain. time to his fall into hard ground has commenced. see an issue of usaof non partisan nature;
8.27. 2008 new yor : related issue
Yahoo!My Yahoo!Mail Make Y! your home pageYahoo! SearchSearch:Welcome, harryrobert@ymail...
[Sign Out, My Account]Answers Home -Forum -Blog -Help
Ask Answer Discover Search for questions: Advanced My Profile
Home > Politics & Government > Other - Politics & Government > Your Open Question Harry R Member since:
August 25, 2008
Total points:
58 (Level 1) Your Open QuestionShow me another »
New generation strategy strange bed fellow coalitions in pakistan: zardari/pty & musharraf/pty stable govt?
the above is telegraphic message to a zardari & pervez musharaff. zardari has political strength and pervez has military experience. musharaff could join as jr partners in zardari/party ; apolitical resolve for pakistani problem of insecure future of nation. Pakistan should seek ner strategy for new horizon in political life. the strategic idea borrowed from expressed opinion of the rev dr kamal karna k roy us politician. author and a tactical legal candidate/ hopeful gop president 2008 electoral competition for u s president.
1 second ago - 3 days left to answer.
Report Abuse

0 stars - mark this as Interesting! Who found this interesting?
No one has marked this question as interesting yet.
Email
Edit
Add Details
Extend Expiration

Delete Question

Stop Emailing me new Answers
Does your question meet our Community Guidelines?
Do your part in making the community a safe and enriching place by treating each other with integrity, decency, and respect.

Read more details in our Community Guidelines.
Your question is open for business
Remember to check for answers on your My Profile page.

Earn back points by answering questionsTell me more

Get 2 points for answering a question and 10 points for a best answer.


Is France politically afraid of Serbia?
0 Stars In Other - Politics & Government - Asked by aeiou_i - 0 answers - 7 minutes ago
McCain would make a better president for America? ?
1 Stars In Other - Politics & Government - Asked by holden350chev - 5 answers - 14 minutes ago
Is it true Bush and Putin plan on dividing up Poland between them?
0 Stars In Other - Politics & Government - Asked by ningis n - 2 answers - 17 minutes ago
What were the Efforts of peace to stop the taliban?
0 Stars In Other - Politics & Government - Asked by Phillip - 1 answer - 22 minutes ago
Answers (0)
No answers yet.

Open Questions in Other - Politics & Government
Is France politically afraid of Serbia?
McCain would make a better president for America? ?
Is it true Bush and Putin plan on dividing up Poland between them?
What were the Efforts of peace to stop the taliban?
Resolved Questions in Other - Politics & Government
Did Hillary Clinton even want to be Obama's Vice President?
Why is it taking so long for new questions to post?
Generally speaking, how long before the Nov. 4th Presidential election will it be clear that Obama is toast?
What is happening in Denver, Colorado?

Hello Harry R

Total Points 58
Level 1 Thanks!

You asked a question

(-5 points)
ADVERTISEMENT


Categories
All Categories
Politics & Government
Civic Participation Elections Embassies & Consulates Government Immigration International Organizations Law & Ethics Law Enforcement & Police Military Politics Other - Politics & Government
Sponsor Results
Military Spec Packaging
Military and Goverment Packaging. veteran owned GSA Certified.
www.militaryspecpackaging.com

Smartvote: political election campaign management
SmartVote is a fully integrated Election Campaign Management...
www.smartvoteecm.com

Military Experience
Find out how you can serve. Get free info here. No obligation.
secure.military.com

See your message here...

Answers International
Argentina Australia Brazil Canada China France Germany Hong Kong India Indonesia Italy Japan Malaysia Mexico New Zealand Philippines Quebec Singapore South Korea Spain Taiwan Thailand United Kingdom United States Vietnam en Español Yahoo! does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any Yahoo! Answers content. Click here for the Full Disclaimer.

Help us improve Yahoo! Answers. Tell us what you think.

Copyright © 2008 Yahoo! Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Copyright/IP Policy - Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - Community Guidelines - Safety Tips
Answers International
Argentina Australia Brazil Canada China France Germany Hong Kong India Indonesia Italy Japan Malaysia Mexico New Zealand Philippines Quebec Singapore South Korea Spain Taiwan Thailand United Kingdom United States Vietnam en Español Yahoo! does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any Yahoo! Answers content. Click here for the Full Disclaimer.

Help us improve Yahoo! Answers. Tell us what you think.

Copyright © 2008 Yahoo! Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Copyright/IP Policy - Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - Community Guidelines - Safety Tips

Posted by: rev atreyee sen roy | August 27, 2008 6:22 AM | Report abuse

Hillary's speech was gracious and, obviously, not heartfelt. And why should it have been? Obama's primary campaign was as vicious as any in recent memory; his unfair attacks on Bill Clinton were outrageous.

But as the days go on, hopefully, voters will see that the most important fact in this election is that the Congress will be dominated by Democrats, most of the far left variety. It is imperative that McCain, the only real "reach across the aisle" man left in the election be placed in the White House.

No one is more pro-choice than I, and my revulsion at the Bush appointees to the Court is as strong as anyone else's. But the feckless Dems, by refusing to fillibuster, allowed Roberts and Alito to join Thomas (the worst Justice in memory) and Scalia in an almost right wing juggernaut. They, not McCain, will ultimately control the Court appointments; and we will see, at last, if they can show some spine. On the other hand, as bad as the far right justices are, one shudders at the potential catch-up we would see on the bench were Obama to take office and find his far far left choices rubber-stamped by Reid and Pelosi with the GOP powerless in numbers to stop them.

Hillary's great speech should make us realise that the Dems made a big mistake when they chose a candidate unqualifed to be president.

It's up to the country to see it won't happen again in November.

Posted by: jayjay9 | August 27, 2008 6:21 AM | Report abuse

Although I was a Hillary supporter, because she's a brilliant debater, motivating and a tough candidate, I think this whole voting for McCain thing is ridiculous. Do you really think that it benefits anyone in this country to put us through 4-8 years more of GOP-ruled hell?

I think that Obama should announce that he intends to make Hillary Senate Majority Leader - it would suit her better than being VP anyhow (and be more powerful), and I bet she'd be brilliant sticking up for the new Democratic administration! I can understand why some people are reticent about putting Obama in the office - because people admire Hillary and may see Barack getting in as the end of her national career. So maybe he should ensure that she's still a player post-November.

Posted by: Remus Morin | August 27, 2008 6:20 AM | Report abuse

Dick Cheney has plenty of "experience." See where that got us.

Posted by: live_1 | August 27, 2008 6:10 AM | Report abuse

For those of you saying that the Obama's are exploiting their kids, in the words of Bill Clinton, 'GIVE ME A BREAK'! Jackie Kennedy didn't have to prove that she was an American. JFK's opponents didn't practice the smears that the McCain campaign has. Michelle Obama had to prove that she's an American - and she did! You can't have it both ways. You can't expect to have idiots constantly demonizing you and not defend yourself. GET REAL PEOPLE!! The McCain has demonized Obama and his wife for absolutely no reason. They have every right to defend themselves !!!

Posted by: lmw952 | August 27, 2008 6:05 AM | Report abuse

"No how, no way, No McCain".

Talk about burying the lede.

If you reported this--what she said--you'd really have no basis for your article, Chris.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 6:04 AM | Report abuse

I am not an American citizen, so I can just give my opinion. I believe that certainly Hillary was a better candidate than Obama, she is more experienced. BUT right now it is not about Hillary or Obama, according to the rules that "game" is over. From now on it is about McCain and Obama. And that means, keep destroying the core values of the US (Constitution, Democracy and Freedom)or restoring them.
McCain will keep doing war, will make an even more conservative Court, will keep on striping rights away of the people, will keep on spoiling your economy, will keep on damagin the image of your Country in the world.
So you better hear Hillary, she is more experienced...Vote Obama.
By the way her speech was great! the best one from her I heard this year.

Posted by: Outsider | August 27, 2008 6:03 AM | Report abuse

It wasn't enough for me. I will NOT vote for Obama. Thanks, Hillary. You did what the party wanted - which just disproves all of the acidic Obamaniac comments about you slaughtering the party. Nonetheless, I am not a Democratic operative. I will vote my heart - and Obama and his crew of delusional yuppies are not in it.

Posted by: Tony | August 27, 2008 5:49 AM | Report abuse

I beleive Hillary was the better candidate, but that point is moot. I'm having difficulty supporting Obama not because of sour grapes, but his lack of experience.

Posted by: eric | August 27, 2008 5:48 AM | Report abuse

Clinton's speech was more than enough...and much more than an Obama could ever hope for or deserve, given that he has thrown Hillary under the bus.

But should I, as a responsible voter, give Obama a second thought?

What background and experience does this guy have to lead 300 million people? Editor of the Harvard Law Review? A couple of years in the Senate? Organizing a neighborhood in Chicago? Give me a break!

What background and experience does this guy have to deal with Putin...and the N. Koreans, and the Iranians, and the Chinese...Biden is not the decision maker. Biden won't have his finger on the nuclear weapons button. Give me a break!

Obama may have good judgment, but we've never seen it. Has the Senate passed an important bill of his that we know about? Where has his judgment been tested? Let's have a couple of memorable examples. As a father? Give me a break!

As a responsible voter who is worried about our country's future as well as my own, I cannot in good conscience vote for Obama - no matter how good an orator he is. He can talk a good thing; he can promise a lot - but has he ever delivered ANYTHING!

Give me a break.

I am a strongly backing McCain.

Posted by: Lesley | August 27, 2008 5:40 AM | Report abuse

The only self-serving ones are those that would vote another Republican presidency just because they can't have Hillary, like it's some kind of game. "My guy didnt win so I dont want to play anymore".

Do you think this is a game you idiots?

Do you realize what McCain wants??? Another war or two or three. Overturn Roe vs Wade. Even more conservative judges on the Supreme Court. He admits he knows nothing about the economy and his entire campaign has been run by lobbyists shilling for oil, anf foreign interests.

READ MCCAINS MEMOIR!! He comes from a long line of warmongers who dont know what to do with themselves when theyre not fighting a war. He admits this.

Last time I checked this was supposed to be about the common good, not your personal wants. Grow up and face the reality - our country is going down the tubes and only the Democrats can stop the tide.

Im the first to admit Obama's not perfect, but his heart is in the right place which is a hell of a lot more than I can say for McCain.

Posted by: mike barrette | August 27, 2008 5:37 AM | Report abuse

I'm from Europe. Ofcourse I am not allowed to vote in the US. That means I am dependent on the common sense of the American voter. Given the fact that I live in the backyard of Russia (and given the fact that I really like mother Earth) I hope that common sense will this time prevail.
I cannot expres the fear that I and most of my fellow Europeans have for another period of Republican supremacy. The question most of us in Europe ask at this moment is: 'How could the Americans have been so blind', usually followed by the little prayer, 'please God, open their eyes'. Do the whole world a favor and vote for Obama.

With excuses for the poor English.

Posted by: Dutch. | August 27, 2008 5:37 AM | Report abuse

The only self-serving ones are those that would vote another Republican presidency just because they can't have Hillary, like it's some kind of game. "My guy didnt win so I dont want to play anymore".

Do you think this is a game you idiots?

Do you realize what McCain wants??? Another war or two or three. Overturn Roe vs Wade. Even more conservative judges on the Supreme Court. He admits he knows nothing about the economy and his entire campaign has been run by lobbyists shilling for oil, anf foreign interests.

READ MCCAINS MEMOIR!! He comes from a long line of warmongers who dont know what to do with themselves when theyre not fighting a war. He admits this.

Last time I checked this was supposed to be about the common good, not your personal wants. Grow up and face the reality - our country is going down the tubes and only the Democrats can stop the tide.

Im the first to admit Obama's not perfect, but his heart is in the right place which is a hell of a lot more than I can say for McCain.

Posted by: mie barrette | August 27, 2008 5:37 AM | Report abuse

It makes me so bitter and angry that other people don't recognize Hillary is entitled to the nomination. Hillary understands completely that it is the reality based community of angry, bitter leftists that will decide this election.

Posted by: twin_peaks_nikki | August 27, 2008 5:33 AM | Report abuse

The Obama's are just lucky the media is on there side. If MCcain used his adopted kid like that at his convention look out. But Obama can pull that kind of stunt at his childrens expense. No big deal as you can see by not one report from Chris.

Posted by: Jacob | August 27, 2008 5:30 AM | Report abuse

Great point Bill. What the hell are the Obama's thinking?! Just because the media wont point the kids being wrongly exposed at this convention out does not mean Americans don't find it over the top and appalling. What wont these two do for votes!

Posted by: Andy | August 27, 2008 5:21 AM | Report abuse

Kay you right. And though they try to compare Obama to JFK. Which is a joke. JFK not Obama had at least the judgement not to throw his kids out on stage at his convention.

Posted by: Bill W | August 27, 2008 5:14 AM | Report abuse

Hillary gave a great speech and it must have been difficult because she knows that if the rules had not excluded the votes in two battleground states, enough superdelegates would have supported her for the nomination. Instead, she has had to witness Joe Biden take the second spot on the ticket even though he dropped out after placing fifth in Iowa. It's astounding that the women in the Democratic Party allowed this opportunity be wrested away by a well-spoken junior senator who hasn't paid his political dues for the mostimportant job in the world.

Posted by: Buck Rutledge | August 27, 2008 5:08 AM | Report abuse

Given that Sen. Clinton is a bit preoccupied with her own career, and therefore is disappointed and maybe even resentful she's not the nominee, she did pretty well. Likewise for Bill, James Carville, and the rest of the 'Clintonistas'; they'll do what best advances themselves politically, which at this moment is to appear supportive of Obama, or at least not seem to be against him, give or take.

Posted by: Steve Collins | August 27, 2008 5:05 AM | Report abuse

Being a Good Girl is of importance only to Obamanistas.
Some of us don't feel any need to have party come before patriotism.

Maybe obamabots do things because Obama tells them to, but much as I was moved by Hillary Clinton's speech, what she wants is not in any way going to make me vote for Obama.

Obama's biggest hindrance isn't Hillary Clinton. It's himself. Branding a paint by numbers hologram is not my idea of voting for President.

Hillary Clinton gave a much more effective idea of what Obama is supposed to stand for than Obama has ever bothered giving himself. Apparently with Obama just the thrill of his presence is supposed to be enough.

It doesn't even begin to wash out here in the Flyover.
You are going to end up seeing some impressively winning numbers for McCain on election day simply because the mid-section of this country is already sick of Obama's vapid self-involvement schtick.

And I do not support McCain, either.
I'll be writing in Hillary Clinton because she is the only one out of the three that isn't a vote-squandered folly.

Tonight's speech proved that we have let the most capable in a crisis slip away.
With our enemies watching and as aware of this as those of us who are sickened and dismayed already worriedly know.

In order to be a Good Girl and probably in order to throw her hat in the 2012 race, Hillary Clinton is doing her party's bidding.
The numbers that Obama will lose by should be enough to make her realize that a bi-partisan ticket with Colin Powell is the winning one in four year's time.

For the rest of us, it's just adding four years to an eight year GOP sentence. And more to undo once 2012 rolls around.
The interesting thing about the next four years will be how a GOP president like McCain deals with an overwhelmingly democratic congress.

-gala1

Posted by: gala1 | August 27, 2008 4:51 AM | Report abuse

As I see it from Sydney, all those idiots who keep talking about lack of experience in a candidate should just reflect on the kind of experience your Bush-Cheny team has given you;eg f*#ked up the US economy, f*#ked up US prestige around the world (most people around the world consider Bush-Cheny the greatest threat to world peace!), f*#ked up a country(Iraq) and in the process sent to unneccessary deaths thousands of US & foreign citizens, ....the list goes on! Get real & get a life, You Idiots!!!

Posted by: Anil Kumar | August 27, 2008 4:50 AM | Report abuse

Why does anyone in the media point the kid thing out. Michelle Obama is nothing like me. I would never expose my children for my husbands political gain. She probably would say her little children wanted to or, had fun doing it. But children also would say the same about playing with guns. Thats why we are parents not children. And this is not the first time it has happened to those two little girls.

Posted by: Kay | August 27, 2008 4:42 AM | Report abuse

The answer to the question?

In a word - yes.

Posted by: CRL Child | August 27, 2008 4:37 AM | Report abuse

Obama does offer up his kids alot for votes. It's disgusting to do that to little ones their age...

Posted by: No way no How Obama | August 27, 2008 4:29 AM | Report abuse

I am a Hillary Clinton supporter ready to help Obama. I am tired of the media and other Clinton supporters who want to exploit differences and replay the primary season. We are now in the general election, with less than 10 weeks to win over those Democrats and Independents whose reluctance to support Obama is tied directly to the media gloating over hurt Clinton pride. Get over it! Get on with the general election! Think of the global warming, think of the Supreme Court, think of health care, think of justice, think of the issues which Clinton and Obama share. Those of us Democrats still reeling over losing the White House in 2000 and again in 2004 have got to develop the "killer instinct" of sustained focus on the weaknesses of the Republican alternative. No way, no how, no McCain.

Posted by: Paul in London | August 27, 2008 4:26 AM | Report abuse

Fred you should have the Fix's job. He asked when he clearly does not know. And you hit it right out of the park with your answer. Clear concise and to the point. I'm in awe and toal agreement. Bravo!

Posted by: June | August 27, 2008 4:24 AM | Report abuse

I can't tell you how much I want John McBush to pick Mittens as his running mate.
Mitty is a horrible candidate, even worse than McBush is.


Romney is the embodiment of the country club Republican and things on that front are bad enough for McCain right now. Making matters worse, Mitt's all-out January 2008 attack on John McCain's incendiary temper gives Democrats a handy road map to follow.


*Mitt's Mansions*
To be sure, Mitt Romney may not have as many houses as John McCain, but he does have more money. The son of auto magnate George Romney, the former Massachusetts governor is worth an estimated $500 million. His stable of homes includes his tony Belmont, Massachusetts estate in addition to "two vacation homes, a lake house in New Hampshire and a ski house outside Park City, Utah." (Mitt's declaration of his Utah property as his primary residence almost disqualified him from his 2002 gubernatorial run in Massachusetts; the crisis was resolved when he paid Utah back the $54,000 his earlier claim had saved him.)


*Mitt's Illegal Immigrant Workers*
During the Republican primaries, Romney's tough talk on immigration was undermined by the presence of illegal aliens working at his home. As the Boston Globe reported in December 2006, Romney hired a landscaping firm that routinely utilized illegal alien workers to tend to his 2-1/2 acre family residence just outside of Boston. The firm also tended to the grounds of his one of his five sons, Taggart. The Globe team interviewed four undocumented workers in Guatemala who confirmed that Romney never asked for them or their employer to produce immigration papers. Confronted by Globe reporters at the Republican Governors Association conference in Miami, Romney simply said, "aw geez," and walked away. Given John McCain's own confused position on illegal immigration, the addition of Romney to the ticket would only further cloud the issue.


*His Sons Serve America By Serving Mitt*
The image of the Romney clan doesn't merely communicate "idle rich," it represents incarnate a rejection of John McCain's supposed "Country First" campaign theme. In Iowa in August 2007, Romney answered a question about why none of his five sons were serving in Iraq by responding that they served America by serving him:


"My sons are all adults and they've made decisions about their careers and they've chosen not to serve in the military and active duty and I respect their decision in that regard. One of the ways my sons are showing support for our nation is helping me get elected because they think I'd be a great president."


As for Mitt's own military service, he avoided duty in the rice fields of Vietnam while performing his Mormon mission outside Paris.


*Swallowing $45 Million in Campaign Loans*
Speaking of Mitt's sons, a large part of their massive inheritance has already been spent. In a sign of both his immense wealth and his desperation to be John McCain's running mate, Mitt Romney in July decided against recouping the staggering $45 million he personally loaned his own campaign. While that frees Mitt to raise money for McCain and McCain alone, voters can only wonder in amazement what they might have with that $45 million.


*Downsizing Workers in Indiana*
Romney would also be a liability for John McCain in the hard-fought but usually Republican state to Indiana. Romney's ostentatious wealth is one thing, but his 1990's business deals that drove layoffs in the Hoosier State is something else. The tale of SCM, a northern Indiana-based stationery company purchased by Ampad, a firm owned by Romney and a group of investors, came to dominate his failed 1994 campaign against Ted Kennedy:


Management has shed 41 of 265 blue-collar jobs, cut wages, tripled some workers' health insurance payments, abolished most of their seniority rights and junked the prior management's union contract, which had two years to run.


*Losing the Dog Vote*
There are roughly 60 million dogs in the United States and their owners will be none too happy with Mitt Romney. Even Fox News' Chris Wallace took Mitt to task for taking family vacations with his Irish Setter Seamus in a kennel tied to the roof of his car. After an incredulous Wallace said of his own Yellow Lab, "I would no sooner put him in a kennel on the roof of my car than I would one of my children," Romney claimed ignorance of the Massachusetts law he had violated with his penchant for rooftop canine waterboarding.


*Romney's Mac Attack*
During the GOP primaries, the man who would be John McCain's running mate decried "the McCain way" of uncontrolled fury towards friends and foes alike. As his make-or-break Florida primary contest against John McCain approached in late January, Mitt Romney abandoned his pledge that "I'm not going to talk about the character of the people I'm running against." Instead, the Romney campaign produced a video and an accompanying memo titled, "The McCain Way: Attack Republicans - A Top 10 List." Echoing many of the episodes detailed in an April Washington Post piece, Mitt Romney refuted John McCain's past claims of serenity ("Do I insult anybody or fly off the handle or anything like that? No, I don't.") going back to 1999.

Posted by: No Way. No How. NO MCCAIN! | August 27, 2008 4:19 AM | Report abuse

No it does not help. It is clear Hillary does not understand why we chose her over Barack in the first place. Barack still does not have the same strength everbody but him has...

Posted by: Dallas | August 27, 2008 4:16 AM | Report abuse

No. She absolutely did NOT heal wounds tonight. She gave a brilliant speech that was completely self-serving and did nothing to help Obama.

She needed to directly address both 1) the frustration of her many supporters who still oppose Obama, and 2) her own attacks on Obama during the campaign, which McCain now uses in his ads. She did neither. She said nothing personal about Obama and gave no new reason for anyone who isn't already an Obama supporter to become one. Every single positive thing she said about Obama was so vague it could have just as easily applied to Edwards, Kucinich, or ANY other Democrat, including herself.

Many die-hard Hillary supporters who have been saying they won't vote for Obama will now be even more enamored with Hillary, more bitter she's not the nominee, and even LESS likely to support Obama.

Posted by: Fred | August 27, 2008 4:13 AM | Report abuse

DDwawd works for Obama and the Fix.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 4:04 AM | Report abuse

I don't see MCcain serving up his kids for votes...

Posted by: My Foot | August 27, 2008 4:01 AM | Report abuse

Wow, if she had given speeches like that in January, history could be very different. Powerful, sincere, and passionate.

Is it enough? No. She has more work to do. Her and Barack both.

But now I'm confident that she is sincere. I hope so. I don't like disliking Hillary. She was so inspiring at one time. Now I think she will be again.

If the country starts to come together, then of course, Hillary's speech will be the turning point. I just don't think it will happen overnight. Let's see if she gets out there and works hard for this mission.

I think she will.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 27, 2008 3:59 AM | Report abuse

Wow, if she had given speeches like that in January, history could be very different. Powerful, sincere, and passionate.

Is it enough? No. She has more work to do. Her and Barack both.

But now I'm confident that she is sincere. I hope so. I don't like disliking Hillary. She was so inspiring at one time. Now I think she will be again.

If the country starts to come together, then of course, Hillary's speech will be the turning point. I just don't think it will happen overnight. Let's see if she gets out there and works hard for this mission.

I think she will.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 27, 2008 3:56 AM | Report abuse

I don't see MCcain serving up his kids for votes...

Posted by: My Foot | August 27, 2008 3:56 AM | Report abuse

Hillary did more than anyone could ask of her. She exceeded expectations. No one can ask her to do more.
-- Yes. We can ask that she tow the part line as those losers of primaries to her husband did. The Clintons don't get to change the rules or the level of the playing field to suit them (as the repubs have done).

So many of us Hillary supporters are still not going to vote for Obama because four years of McCain, he won't run for re-election is tolerable, it is not ideal, but with a Dem Congress it is tolerable...
--This is the way we can easily identify you as either a repub that was voting for HRC because she's a woman, or one of the repub plants that troll these boards. No true blue Dem with a complete grasp of the issues would cut off their nose to spite their face. And Privacy? Please, where have you been? There's no way to get away from Obama in the media, unless you're on the Moon.

Along with his class warfare that he is trying to pull, Obama is not a poor man, nor are a great majority of his backers and or Dems in Congress - I may have always been a Dem, but I don't want a welfare system back and I am seeing that in Obama.
--Funny how you would mention welfare and Obama... We know this can't be a race issue as the #1 demographic of welfare recipient is Single White Female with child(ren). And to address the Obama's wealth, since when was it a crime? Last check of earning for the Clinton's was $100 million in the last 10 years. A tad hypocritical...

Obama should never have pulled out his race card on the Clinton's, then there were those caucuses in which people were brow beat by his supporters, along with Obama's own trashing of Bill's Presidency as he praised Reagan's which got us into so much financial trouble to begin with.
-- The race card was played by both Clintons: The Jesse Jackson remarks on SC, The "working class, blue collar" comments, the assertion of Bobby Kennedy into the equation, suggesting assassination (Seriously? Really?). Bill did a pretty good job of trashing HIS presidency HIMSELF, and yet Black America embraced him. How did he repay them? By saying BHO was living a 'fantasy'...

She is not the candidate, Obama is, it is up to him to unify the party.

The primaries were a competition, it was not up to Hillary to support him during that period of time, but Obama supporters for some reason think she should have and hold it against her that she entered the primaries at all.
--To these last 2 paragraphs, refer to my rebuttal of your first. News flash - you don't get to pack up your toys and go crying to Mama when you lose, no matter how much it hurts. To quote Bill: "Politics is a contact sport..."

Posted by: Mike Jay | August 27, 2008 3:28 AM | Report abuse

Hillary did more than anyone could ask of her. She exceeded expectations. No one can ask her to do more.
-- Yes. We can ask that she tow the part line as those losers of primaries to her husband did. The Clintons don't get to change the rules or the level of the playing field to suit them (as the repubs have done).

So many of us Hillary supporters are still not going to vote for Obama because four years of McCain, he won't run for re-election is tolerable, it is not ideal, but with a Dem Congress it is tolerable. Obama and his cult is too reminiscent of Bush. His secrecy reminds people of Bush, and constantly trying to silence people whenever they ask him anything about him personally that we have a right to know.
--This is the way we can easily identify you as either a repub that was voting for HRC because she's a woman, or one of the repub plants that troll these boards. No true blue Dem with a complete grasp of the issues would cut off their nose to spite their face. And Privacy? Please, where have you been? There's no way to get away from Obama in the media, unless you're on the Moon.

Along with his class warfare that he is trying to pull, Obama is not a poor man, nor are a great majority of his backers and or Dems in Congress - I may have always been a Dem, but I don't want a welfare system back and I am seeing that in Obama.
--Funny how you would mention welfare and Obama... We know this can't be a race issue as the #1 demographic of welfare recipient is Single White Female with child(ren). And to address the Obama's wealth, since when was it a crime? Last check of earning for the Clinton's was $100 million in the last 10 years. A tad hypocritical...

Obama should never have pulled out his race card on the Clinton's, then there were those caucuses in which people were brow beat by his supporters, along with Obama's own trashing of Bill's Presidency as he praised Reagan's which got us into so much financial trouble to begin with. And, the fact that you Obama supporters still think it should be up to Hillary to unify the party.
-- The race card was played by both Clintons: The Jesse Jackson remarks on SC, The "working class, blue collar" comments, the assertion of Bobby Kennedy into the equation, suggesting assassination (Seriously? Really?). Bill did a pretty good job of trashing HIS presidency HIMSELF, and yet Black America embraced him. How did he repay them? By saying BHO was living a 'fantasy'...

She is not the candidate, Obama is, it is up to him to unify the party. Then there is that big issue of how the old boys club thinks that she has to do more to support Obama in this race than any other male candidate has ever been asked to do in the past.

The primaries were a competition, it was not up to Hillary to support him during that period of time, but Obama supporters for some reason think she should have and hold it against her that she entered the primaries at all. I am going to blame your misguided attitude on your youth and ignorance of the political system.
--To these last 2 paragraphs, refer to my rebuttal of your first. News flash - you don't get to pack up your toys and go crying to Mama when you lose, no matter how much it hurts. To quote Bill: "Politics is a contact sport..."

Posted by: Mike Jay | August 27, 2008 3:26 AM | Report abuse

I was most impressed with both Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton. I was a Clinton supporter, and I cried when it became clear she would not win the nomination. Nonetheless, there is a world of difference between John McCain and Barack Obama. With Democrats poised to do well in Congressional races again, how stupid would it be to let the fear mongers once more deprive us of a Democratic president? All it takes is the Executive Branch under the control of the Republicans and enough of them in Congress to stop anything and everything from happening. We have some serious problems that need fixing. We need the Executive Branch and the Legislative Branch under the control of one party, and we can't afford any more appointees to the Supreme Court who say ridiculous things such as occurred in the Ledbetter case. She should have protested earlier, even though she did not know she was being discriminated against. Boy that makes sense, doesn't it?

Polls repeatedly say that the U.S. wants change. If it does, people really need to ask themselves if the Republican party, which had the power to do whatever it wanted for six of Bush's years, are the people who will fix it. They did fix a lot to the benefit of the oil companies, big business, those who want to exploit the national forests, and more. They took actions; they just did not help most of us along the way.

Posted by: Jackie | August 27, 2008 3:26 AM | Report abuse

John McCain is for making the Supreme Court a right wing only club, against Roe v. Wade, thinks Lily Ledbetter's equal pay for equal work law suit was "frivilous, wants to give massive tax cuts to the wealthy at the expense of a massive deficit, and is a corrupt, mean-spirited war monger who was for the biggest foreign policy blunder (the invasion of Iraq which has now cost us over one TRILLION dollars). He is the hip pocket of the Oil industry and has failed 8 times in the last two years to support proposals for alternative alternative energy in his entireHe is still fighting the Vietnam war and believes that we should be as well. He has run a thoroughly dishonorable slime machine of a campaign. And his campaign is run by lobbyists. As Hillary suggested tonight, voting for him will destroy our future, and condemn our children to the massive debt and the demise of the planet.
But let's see, I am miffed the Hillary did not win, so I won't vote for Obama? Wake up and smell the coffee, gang. McCain win would be a disaster of biblical proportions.

Posted by: Paula | August 27, 2008 2:54 AM | Report abuse

I enjoy reading bolgs just as you do, but this is 2008 and we have resources at our finger tips that were never available before. You read a lot of suspect information in these blogs, some on it's face is completely ridiculous. You don't have to take anything at face value. You can check for yourself and not be fed lies by unscrupulous bloggers. They no longer have the power, truth is your power. Below are a couple of the very good fact checking web sites available.
Be an informed voter.

http://www.factcheck.org/
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/
==========

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 2:41 AM | Report abuse


The vast majority of those who voted for Hillary Clinton who are Democrats and/or have generally progressive opinions, already support Barack for president. Most of the rest will follow during coming weeks.

The Republicans have won three of the most recent five presidential elections by eppealing to voter's fears and anxieties, not by offering a positive vision for the country. McCain's campaign seems a repeat of Bush's four years ago, mostly negative, full of distortions, trying to dupe many gillible voters.

McCain is not more qualified to be president because his long experience has not resulted in him displaying sound judgment, especially on foreign policy issues. He is a warmonger, who, if elected president, will be at least as belligerent as the Bush-Cheney regime.

The neo-cons are in a panic mode at the prospect of the Democrats being in the White House and controlling Congress. So are most of the corporate interests, especially oil companies. Expect the Republicans to try to win with their usual gutter tactics, insulting patriotic Americans who have strong moral values, who seek positive changes for our country and more rational foreign policies.

Posted by: Independent | August 27, 2008 2:36 AM | Report abuse

Anonymous... a case in point.

Posted by: Fred | August 27, 2008 2:15 AM | Report abuse

first of all--look at the incredibly high amount of comments that have been posted--this could be a record.

I was there like you were and it was one of the best speeches she ever gave and it moved all the people there.

Posted by: mitch | August 27, 2008 2:14 AM | Report abuse

I think they both went to bed

=========
Hillary supporters: don't let Hillary down at this point. We must support McCain if there is to be any chance of having a woman/Hillary president. As simple as that. Don't buy into this party unity crap. Look at garbage like Ted Kennedy. How come he got away with basically coming to the convention, challenging and insulting the sitting Democratic President and imploring his supporters to ditch him. Today he is a netroots darling. That hypocritical bunch of bloggers make me puke blood and gore. What is this if not misogyny? 18 million votes isn't enough to get you a position on the ticket? I hate my party now. SAY NO TO THE PARTY UNITY SHAM.

Posted by: A plea to all Hillary supporters

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 2:13 AM | Report abuse

If there are in fact any 'diehard Clintonistas' in this forum, they should keep in mind that Republican psyOps stooges are quite capable of playing both sides of this game.

The most vile, racist/sexist and vituperative comments coming from either those claiming to be an "Obama devotee" or a "Hillary-Forever" fanatic are almost certainly posted by gleeful right-wing talk radio addicts following the orders of their idols. The love to rile the gullible.

Posted by: Fred | August 27, 2008 2:13 AM | Report abuse

can't help but chuckle at the "she's done more for the party than the party's done for her"


poor ole' first lady! someone enlighten me on her "35 years in the trenches." sounds more of that "sniper-dodging" she claims.


35 years ago, what, she was a post-grad student from an ivy league school?

she doesn't give up and that is both good and scary. it was a well-delivered speech, in the orange jumpsuits of gitmo colleagues.

she was gunning for obama as her ship sank into the sand of the oceans of time, and it is a bit late to send out mres for her koolaide krew. they turned orange, too.


they'd rather have uncle john flush the country further down the same and have a shot in 4 more years. that is what i think.

hillary and bill made $100 million in the past decade. they've clawed their way into the new money circuit, but have lots to learn about "class"


her "harriet tubman" thing was obviously reciprocal acknowledgement that this fine american democracy has always squelched the rights of the minority, even when it was the women of the nation.

80 big years of voting, ladies.

and hillary in the trenches for 35.

how old is she? should have been BORn in the trenches, like a black man with a Kenyan dad.

anyway, she has bite

Posted by: forest | August 27, 2008 2:10 AM | Report abuse

AK primary results: Ted Stevens, Mark Begich, and Ethan Berkowitz are easily winning their nomination fights. Rep. Don Young is within FOUR VOTES of LG Sean Parnell with 45% of the votes counted: http://soaelections.gci.net/data/results.html

Posted by: Jon Morgan | August 27, 2008 2:10 AM | Report abuse

Clinton accomplished two things tonight: She won Clinton Democrats over to Obama, and she won Obama Democrats over to Hillary Clinton. I guess that is unity.

Very Excellent.

Posted by: Cyclopsina | August 27, 2008 2:08 AM | Report abuse

Hillary supporters: don't let Hillary down at this point. We must support McCain if there is to be any chance of having a woman/Hillary president. As simple as that. Don't buy into this party unity crap. Look at garbage like Ted Kennedy. How come he got away with basically coming to the convention, challenging and insulting the sitting Democratic President and imploring his supporters to ditch him. Today he is a netroots darling. That hypocritical bunch of bloggers make me puke blood and gore. What is this if not misogyny? 18 million votes isn't enough to get you a position on the ticket? I hate my party now. SAY NO TO THE PARTY UNITY SHAM.

Posted by: A plea to all Hillary supporters
===================================
Ditto. Hussein never did anything to heal the rift with women and Hillary's supporters. All he's done is try to scare us with "McCain is going to reverse Roe". He has not presented any plans to fight sexism in the country or in the party. He thinks he is above everybody: NO NEED TO ADDRESS THE OTHER HALF OF THE PARTY.

THE ONLY WAY WOMEN WILL GET THE ATTENTION FROM THE PARTY LEADERS IS IF WE MAKE THE PARTY LOSE. VOTING AND SUPPORTING HIS HIGHNESS WILL CAUSE NO REASON FOR THEM TO CORRECT THEIR ERRORS. THE MEDICINE MAY BE WORST THAN THE ILLNESS, BUT THAT'S THE WAY POLITICS WORK.

VOTE FOR NADER, MCCAIN OR DON'T VOTE. LET THEM LICK THEIR WOUNDS LATER.

HUSSEIN THINKS HE'S GOD. DEALING WITH THE MAC WILL BE EASIER. HUSSEIN IS ALREADY SHOWING HIS STALINIST STREAK. REMEMBER THE WEB SCRUBBERS? HE AGREED TO USE THE SWAT TEAM AGAINST PROTESTERS. SO MUCH FOR UNITY AND PROTECTING FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

HE COULD HAVE INFLUENCED THE STATE TO GIVE THE PROTESTERS BETTER CHANCE TO PRESENT THEIR VIEWS. BUT HE IS JUST ANOTHER POL.

SCREW HIM.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 2:08 AM | Report abuse

There is a simple explanation for what you want to do.

It is self-sabotage? It is when people who seem to have everything going for them engage in some foolish behavior that either kills them, hurts them, or gets them into trouble. People use drugs, break the law, steal, starve themselves, find and stay in abusive relationships, cheat on their spouse, drive too fast, drink themselves to death, overeat, don't exercise, push people away, or don't go to the doctor when they get
sick.
Perhaps they may not consciously want to destroy themselves or die. But unconsciously, somewhere inside them, there is a death wish. Freud said that everyone has a death wish, a desire to die, a love of death, thanatos. But I believe some people are more prone to self-sabotage than others.

It is like someone who thinks to themselves "I will kill myself, that will show them, they will be sorry".

Not really, all that happens is you are dead and soon forgotten and for them life goes on.

In your case your are willing to do something against your own best interest in the belief you are punishing someone. It's a delusion, and you are the one who suffers. It is a sickness to purposely abuse yourself, some will even cut themselves with razor blades. Out of curiosity, who are these people you are teaching this lesson to? I hope you are not letting faceless bloggers rule your life and decisions.

(((((((((((((((((
For every Obama supporter who rants on for over a page. I have never missed an election. I have never voted for a Republican. This time I am voting a straight line Republican ballot as a protest.

As I see people get angrier and more profane it makes me wonder if you are turning off people who haven't yet formed a strong opinion.

Posted by: chris | August 27, 2008 1:51 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 2:05 AM | Report abuse

can't help but chuckle at the "she's done more for the party than the party's done for her"


poor ole' first lady! someone enlighten me on her "35 years in the trenches." sounds more of that "sniper-dodging" she claims.


35 years ago, what, she was a post-grad student from an ivy league school?

she doesn't give up and that is both good and scary. it was a well-delivered speech, in the orange jumpsuits of gitmo colleagues.

she was gunning for obama as her ship sank into the sand of the oceans of time, and it is a bit late to send out mres for her koolaide krew. they turned orange, too.


they'd rather have uncle john flush the country further down the same and have a shot in 4 more years. that is what i think.

hillary and bill made $100 million in the past decade. they've clawed their way into the new money circuit, but have lots to learn about "class"


her "harriet tubman" thing was obviously reciprocal acknowledgement that this fine american democracy has always squelched the rights of the minority, even when it was the women of the nation.

80 big years of voting, ladies.

and hillary in the trenches for 35.

how old is she? should have been BORn in the trenches, like a black man with a Kenyan dad.

anyway, she has bite.

Posted by: bloggod | August 27, 2008 2:04 AM | Report abuse

i just wonder if all of the "anonymous" posts would be secure enough to own up to these comments? somehow i doubt it cuz it's like those big tough kkk members who hide under their sheets. lmao. what a bunch of wusses.

Posted by: no bigot like an old bigot | August 27, 2008 2:02 AM | Report abuse

I thimk people who say they will vote for Mc Cain jus because Obama won the primary are imature.

Go ahead, throw your kids futures away, and get use to penching your pockets for at least 20 years. At least Obama has the ability to start turning our suicidal economy around, an economy that would take at least ten years to progress.

Posted by: chris | August 27, 2008 2:00 AM | Report abuse

"Time" magazine has both candidates pictures on the cover with a caption;

"the economy"

Neither candidate has yet to say anything other than a sound bite indicating that they have even a remote notion as to how the American economy works much less how to fix it.

If Rick Warren was able to get to the core of each candidate on character defining social issues then there must be some similar highly qualified non partisan moderator like Paul Volker {no one representing the bailed out banking or brokerage industries} that can moderate a debate that will define who can best become the Chief Executive Officer or Chief Restructuring Officer of the American economy.

As Bill Clinton so articulately said; "It's the economy STUPID!"

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


p.s. Has Ron Paul pulled out?

Posted by: rtfanning | August 27, 2008 1:59 AM | Report abuse

can't help but chuckle at the "she's done more for the party than the party's done for her"


poor ole' first lady! someone enlighten me on her "35 years in the trenches." sounds more of that "sniper-dodging" she claims.


35 years ago, what, she was a post-grad student from an ivy league school?

she doesn't give up and that is both good and scary. it was a well-delivered speech, in the orange jumpsuits of gitmo colleagues.

she was gunning for obama as her ship sank into the sand of the oceans of time, and it is a bit late to send out mres for her koolaide krew. they turned orange, too.


they'd rather have uncle john flush the country further down the same and have a shot in 4 more years. that is what i think.

hillary and bill made $100 million in the past decade. they've clawed their way into the new money circuit, but have lots to learn about "class"


her "harriet tubman" thing was obviously reciprocal acknowledgement that this fine american democracy has always squelched the rights of the minority, even when it was the women of the nation.

80 big years of voting, ladies.

and hillary in the trenches for 35.

how old is she? should have been BORn in the trenches, like a black man with a Kenyan dad.

anyway, she has bite.

Posted by: bloggod | August 27, 2008 1:59 AM | Report abuse

It was a great start. I hope that we will look back on this day as the one where the Democrats circled the wagons. Now, disgruntled Clinton supporters, who have every right to be upset about losing such a close and historic race will have to betray the woman they claim to support by voting for anyone but Obama. United Dems can't be beat this year.

Posted by: Patrick | August 27, 2008 1:58 AM | Report abuse

to: crybabiesneednotapply

Obama Cries Foul on Obama Girl, Raising Question About His Media Savvy

Obama cries foul over pro-Clinton group

Obama cries about racism

OBAMA CRIES LEAVE MY WIFE ALONE! ...

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:55 AM | Report abuse

I voted for Hillary in the primaries. I don't care for Obama and it showed a flaw in his character that he picked Biden over Hillary. I am not going to vote for Obama.
---------------
I bet you will vote for him, or not at all, because a vote for Mccain is a vote for self-loathing.

If he would make an excellent president, then people would say it. Nobody thinks he will be a good president. People will vote for who they like, but usually will skip voting against someone they don't like.

Posted by: K Ackermann | August 27, 2008 1:54 AM | Report abuse

There were two grand slams hit by the most important women in this campaign: one tonight (without a doubt) and the other by Michelle last night.

If this had been Boston - these would have gone over the Green Wall !

Posted by: amolison | August 27, 2008 1:53 AM | Report abuse

WHAT SOME OF THE PEOPLE WHO KNOW HIM BEST SAY ABOUT JOHN MCCAIN.......

"He is a vicious person"
Former representative Charles LeBoutillier R-NY
---------------
"An embarrassment to the party"
Arizona GOP state senator Susan Johnson
---------------
"There is nothing redeeming about John Mccain...he's a hypocrite"
Former house GOP whip Tom DeLay
-----------------
"The thought of him being president sends a chill down my spine. He is erratic"
Senator Thad Cochran, R- MS
------------------
"Hard headed is one way to say it. Arrogant is another way to say it. It's a quality about him that disturbs me".
Larry Wilkerson, former chief aide to Colin Powell
------------------
"What happens if he gets angry in a crisis...? It's the presidents job to negotiate and stay calm. I just don't see that he has that quality".
Former Arizona GOP chairman John Hinz
-------------------
"His temper would place this country at risk...and the world perhaps in danger. In my mind that should disqualify him"
Former Senator Bob Smith, R-NM
-------------------
"I decided I didn't want this guy anywhere near a trigger."
Senator Pete Domenici, R-NM
)))))))))))))))))))))

Far more important than Hillary’s speech last night are the comments on Obama she made for almost two years: Obama is not ready for the job, he is all speeches and no actions, has few roots in America, just unelectable. Republicans will repeatedly remind us of these comments, and most voters remember them anyway. They are far more important than anything Hillary said in her speech, for the simple reason that they are factual truths while the speech was a sort of command performance. Even Obama’s running-mate. Biden, repeatedly agreed with Hillary comments on Obama.

Posted by: Austin7 | August 27, 2008 1:50 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:53 AM | Report abuse

"Find a single personal attack by Obama against Clinton. By contrast, McCain's ads are full of Clinton's unbelievable attacks on Obama" posted by hmp

Obama apologizies for attack on Clinton
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2007/06/barack_obama_ap.html

Many attacks
http://annienyc.blogspot.com/2008/04/barack-obamas-personal-attacks-on-sen.html

Obama accused Clinton of stealing his ideas, frequently being wrong on policy decisions and lacking honesty with voters.
http://weblogs.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/blog/2008/01/obama_delivers_blistering_atta.html

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:52 AM | Report abuse

For every Obama supporter who rants on for over a page. I have never missed an election. I have never voted for a Republican. This time I am voting a straight line Republican ballot as a protest.

As I see people get angrier and more profane it makes me wonder if you are turning off people who haven't yet formed a strong opinion.

Posted by: chris | August 27, 2008 1:51 AM | Report abuse

Far more important than Hillary’s speech last night are the comments on Obama she made for almost two years: Obama is not ready for the job, he is all speeches and no actions, has few roots in America, just unelectable. Republicans will repeatedly remind us of these comments, and most voters remember them anyway. They are far more important than anything Hillary said in her speech, for the simple reason that they are factual truths while the speech was a sort of command performance. Even Obama’s running-mate. Biden, repeatedly agreed with Hillary comments on Obama.

Posted by: Austin7 | August 27, 2008 1:50 AM | Report abuse


If you really believe that you should head over there and make some money.

http://www.intrade.com/
---

you people are so funny, all of you. Your comments are so funny. The name calling have me in stitches.

Only a level headed person can see the humor in these comments.

Stop taking yourselves so serious. The Mac is going to win by a land slide.

Posted by: forhillarybecausetheotherssuckmore | August 27, 2008 1:45 AM


Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:48 AM | Report abuse

You know what, it's simple...

You can either vote for Obama, who knows Econ., has good foreign relations skills, knows what "middle class" actually means, has great ideas to start leading this country towards better energy sources and tecnology,
or you can vote for McCain, who thinks the middle class is just fine the way it is, would rather stay in Iraq for another 4 years to prove a point instead of pulling out, will not improve the education system, will talk you into drilling for more oil (which would only last us about a year or two, while driving prices higher to process it)instead of putting taxes towards university research programs for alternative energy , will not strengthen the dollar, which would cause higher inflation, etc...

I really do beleive that it' Obama's racial background and his name that is the only thing hurting his chances. Why do I think that? Because, I hear people say that they wouldn't vote for him because of those reasons.

Then there's the experince speculation. Even though all of Bushes experience got us in a world of Sh*t... Go figure.

Posted by: chris | August 27, 2008 1:48 AM | Report abuse

She opened up a vein and gave blood tonight.

She would make a great president, as I know Obama will to.

I look at what republicans offer and all I can picture is Gollum.

Do you want a man who lists not having a table as a qualification for president?

McCain looks backwards, and frankly, I am getting real sick of him reminding us over and over that he surrendered to the Cong.

Posted by: K Ackermann | August 27, 2008 1:47 AM | Report abuse

to : A plea to all Hillary supporters | August 27, 2008 1:19 AM if you think you are ashamed of your party, think of how your party must feel about you. i, for one, feel nothing but revulsion for you and your ilk. just drop your party affiliation, join grandpa john's party and drop the veil. what a phony :(

Posted by: crybabiesneednotapply | August 27, 2008 1:45 AM | Report abuse

I lover the Hillary hard liner who was interviewed by Chris Matthews on the line near the convention. She went on and on and said she was a member of an organization of three million members and they were never voting for Obama. Matthews asked he how many people were with her? There were two of them with a cheep looking sign. So much for the three million members she represents. One woman with a Hillary web site in Miami held a rally and 4 woman showed up. I think this may be a little exaggerated

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:45 AM | Report abuse

you people are so funny, all of you. Your comments are so funny. The name calling have me in stitches.

Only a level headed person can see the humor in these comments.

Stop taking yourselves so serious. The Mac is going to win by a land slide.

Posted by: forhillarybecausetheotherssuckmore | August 27, 2008 1:45 AM | Report abuse

Now, finally, Republicans for Hillary can go home and begin making noise for McCain. He and Hillary will be back in the stuffy old Senate chambers this winter.

Posted by: Reggie Boykins | August 27, 2008 1:43 AM | Report abuse

Hillary did a great job. She should have campaigned this way. She might have even convinced me to vote for her.

I see other Obama supporters looking to help her with her debt. I applaud you, although I am not quite there myself.

Can't wait for Jan 20.

Posted by: Sunshine | August 27, 2008 1:42 AM | Report abuse

Hillary did more than anyone could ask of her. She exceeded expectations. No one can ask her to do more.

So many of us Hillary supporters are still not going to vote for Obama because four years of McCain, he won't run for re-election is tolerable, it is not ideal, but with a Dem Congress it is tolerable. Obama and his cult is too reminiscent of Bush. His secrecy reminds people of Bush, and constantly trying to silence people whenever they ask him anything about him personally that we have a right to know. Along with his class warfare that he is trying to pull, Obama is not a poor man, nor are a great majority of his backers and or Dems in Congress - I may have always been a Dem, but I don't want a welfare system back and I am seeing that in Obama.

Obama should never have pulled out his race card on the Clinton's, then there were those caucuses in which people were brow beat by his supporters, along with Obama's own trashing of Bill's Presidency as he praised Reagan's which got us into so much financial trouble to begin with. And, the fact that you Obama supporters still think it should be up to Hillary to unify the party. She is not the candidate, Obama is, it is up to him to unify the party. Then there is that big issue of how the old boys club thinks that she has to do more to support Obama in this race than any other male candidate has ever been asked to do in the past.

The primaries were a competition, it was not up to Hillary to support him during that period of time, but Obama supporters for some reason think she should have and hold it against her that she entered the primaries at all. I am going to blame your misguided atittude on your youth and ignorance of the political system.

Posted by: Danielle | August 27, 2008 1:42 AM | Report abuse

If your answer to the question of whether you would vote for McCain is anything but an unqualified NO, as your own candidate, Hillary Clinton, herself says, then you are a traitor to not only the Democratic Party, but also your lifelong principles.


You are also a traitor to Hillary Clinton. Indeed, wasn't it James Carville, noted Clinton advisor and supporter, who said last night that all Democrats needed to attack McCain more?


John McCain is not an honorable man today. He is using lies and deceit to win this election.


That is not honor.


He jokes about the rape of women.


That is not honor.


He calls his wife a #unt.


That is not honor.


He desparages Barack and Michelle Obama's patriotism and character at every opportunity.


That is not honor.

If you would vote for McCain it not only means you're dishonorable but it also means you are a stinking Republican.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnb2IrsU1Cg
.


Posted by: Hillary: "No way, No how, NO MCCAIN"! | August 27, 2008 1:42 AM | Report abuse

Yes. Now that thats answered you think you can stop asking for like the hundredth time.

----------
Do you think Michelle Shaniqua Obama will leave "watch-springs" in the Lincoln Bedroom? Ewwwww!

Posted by: Dianne72 | August 27, 2008 1:36 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:39 AM | Report abuse

She said exactly what she needed to say. It was beautiful, heartfelt, and inspiring. I just wish she'd said some things more bluntly.

Posted by: Steve Charb | August 27, 2008 1:38 AM | Report abuse

Do you think Michelle Shaniqua Obama will leave "watch-springs" in the Lincoln Bedroom? Ewwwww!

Posted by: Dianne72 | August 27, 2008 1:36 AM | Report abuse

Except it is true.

----------
Another dumb, minimum wage, Obama blogger taking the shortest route towards discrediting Hillary supporters. Try to be more creative you loser, earn your freakin' wage. This stunt of calling Hillary supporters as Republicans is old as hell.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:36 AM | Report abuse

I am a strong and dedicated supporter of Barack.

Tonight, Mrs. Clinton was in beautiful and rare form. She actually made me proud to be a Democrat.

For the Republicans making all this noise up in here, you may all go home now.

Great job Hillary. Glad you are on our side

Posted by: Reggie Boykins | August 27, 2008 1:36 AM | Report abuse

Thats because only a total jack off like Hillary would say something like that and hurt her party. Good enough reason why she should not be on the top or bottom of the ticket. She think this is about her. She doesn't give a sh&t about anyone else. Everyone who worked on it said she was the reason the health care never got passed the last time. She was the one who screwed everything up.

-----------
This was the first time in my 60 years I heard a candidate in a primary race say a candidate of the other party would be preferable to their opponent.

Posted by: hmp | August 27, 2008 1:20 AM

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It is also the first time in 60 years, hump, that a person of such negligible qualification has sought presidency. GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF THE SAND, YOU MORON. This is the single least qualified nominee in recent history. WAKE UP!

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:29 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:35 AM | Report abuse

Another dumb, minimum wage, Obama blogger taking the shortest route towards discrediting Hillary supporters. Try to be more creative you loser, earn your freakin' wage. This stunt of calling Hillary supporters as Republicans is old as hell.

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

Another silly republican. Time to get some sleep, no one buys those silly posts.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Hillary supporters: don't let Hillary down at this point. We must support McCain if there is to be any chance of having a woman/Hillary president. As simple as that. Don't buy into this party unity crap. Look at garbage like Ted Kennedy. How come he got away with basically coming to the convention, challenging and insulting the sitting Democratic President and imploring his supporters to ditch him. Today he is a netroots darling. That hypocritical bunch of bloggers make me puke blood and gore. What is this if not misogyny? 18 million votes isn't enough to get you a position on the ticket? I hate my party now. SAY NO TO THE PARTY UNITY SHAM.

Posted by: A plea to all Hillary supporters | August 27, 2008 1:19 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:29 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:34 AM | Report abuse

Another silly republican. Time to get some sleep, no one buys those silly posts.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Hillary supporters: don't let Hillary down at this point. We must support McCain if there is to be any chance of having a woman/Hillary president. As simple as that. Don't buy into this party unity crap. Look at garbage like Ted Kennedy. How come he got away with basically coming to the convention, challenging and insulting the sitting Democratic President and imploring his supporters to ditch him. Today he is a netroots darling. That hypocritical bunch of bloggers make me puke blood and gore. What is this if not misogyny? 18 million votes isn't enough to get you a position on the ticket? I hate my party now. SAY NO TO THE PARTY UNITY SHAM.

Posted by: A plea to all Hillary supporters | August 27, 2008 1:19 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:29 AM | Report abuse

This was the first time in my 60 years I heard a candidate in a primary race say a candidate of the other party would be preferable to their opponent.

Posted by: hmp | August 27, 2008 1:20 AM

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It is also the first time in 60 years, hump, that a person of such negligible qualification has sought presidency. GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF THE SAND, YOU MORON. This is the single least qualified nominee in recent history. WAKE UP!

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:29 AM | Report abuse

The Republicans are well known for their "dirty tricks" in campaigns.

"Hillary supporters for McCain" is just too crazy for anyone to believe, especially after her speech tonight. What part of "if you believe in what I stand for, vote for Obama" would a real Hillary supporter not be able to understand?

Anyone who votes for McCain while claiming to ever support Hillary is out of their mind. McCain has said unequivocally what kind of Supreme Court judges he will appoint, and reaffirmed himself to be a life long pro-lifer.

Even if it were possible to ignore McCain saying "the economy is fundamentally strong" and his intention to make the Bush tax cuts possible, his position on Supreme Court judges alone makes it impossible for a Democrat to vote for him.

Posted by: hmp | August 27, 2008 1:29 AM | Report abuse

As an Obama supporter, I was amazed at Hillary's generousity and graciousness. She was incredible. I hope her message of unity and teamwork will appeal to her supporters and they will unite with us to form a truly democratic country for all of us.

Posted by: ulysses2008 | August 27, 2008 1:29 AM | Report abuse

Hillary did indeed stand up as she always
has-putting the party ahead of herself. She was simply magnificent and reaffirms why she was my candidate and how she cannot be duplicated by the will-of-the-wisp who aspires to the highest office in the land. BHO is so insipid compared to her that it really makes me wonder how so
many could be so hoodwinked by his rhetoric
and empty promises. I admire Hillary for
her loyalty to the Democratic Party, but I
am parting ways with her on supporting the
Democratic Ticket. I am merrily supporting
John McCain without a backward look.
Hillary Democrat for McCain.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:25 AM | Report abuse

I say, it isn't Hillary who should be the one under the gun, but Obama. He should be trying to woo the Clinton supporters. He should try to make the unifying remarks, he should try to reach across the divide, becaus he made the divide, not Hillary.
Obama will lose in Nov., I feel, so Hillary should get ready to serve her counrty at a higher level.

Posted by: Samuel | August 27, 2008 1:10 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`

Wanna know why Hillary must make that gesture and not Obama? Because she is a f*king woman. What penalty did Ted Kennedy have to pay for basically taking down a sitting Democratic president? It's misogyny, man.

Posted by: Because she is a woman | August 27, 2008 1:24 AM | Report abuse

Did anyone else notice this: In the film clip before Hillary's speech, the one about her life, narrated by Chelsea, there was a picture of Obama standing next to John Edwards on a stage, with some other candidates. This was a well edited and well crafted film montage. This was not a mistake. So I can say with certainty now that tonight we heard Hillary's first campaign speech for Hillary 2012! And you know what? I will vote for her.

Posted by: thecandypoem | August 27, 2008 1:24 AM | Report abuse

Hillary was magnificent tonight. Democrats are picking the wrong candidate. I am a lifelong registered Democrat, but I will NOT vote for Obama. Obama is the most UNQUALIFIED person ever.

Posted by: HWD | August 27, 2008 1:22 AM | Report abuse

I commend you, at least yo don't just copy and paste like the other impostors. You actually wrote an original post.
-------
Oh, believe you me, Anonymous, Republicans don't dislike Obama as much as this Democrat does. It is typical Obama obtuseness to not comprehend how devastating it was for us Clinton supporters when Obama trash-talked Bill Clinton's legacy. To get up there and say that even Reagan's presidency was better than Bill's ... wow. If this is what we do to our own who was probably the best US president in half a century then what will we do to the general public. Even animals show more loyalty towards their own then us Democrats.
But, yes, if it makes you sleep easier imagining that all the Clinton turned McCain supporters are Republicans posing for effect, do so.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That was a pretty good post, it almost seemed real.
Nice try republican.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:21 AM | Report abuse

I have been with Barack "hardcore" since volunteering for his campaign back in February.

It was a rare beauty eminating from Hillary in that speech.

OUTSTANDING!

I have already watched it three times. Love it!

Posted by: Reggie Boykins | August 27, 2008 1:21 AM | Report abuse

Samuel wrote:

"I say, it isn't Hillary who should be the one under the gun, but Obama. He should be trying to woo the Clinton supporters. He should try to make the unifying remarkes, he should try to reach accross the divide, becaus he made the divide, not Hillary."

Find a single personal attack by Obama against Clinton. By contrast, McCain's ads are full of Clinton's unbelievable attacks on Obama.

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

This was the first time in my 60 years I heard a candidate in a primary race say a candidate of the other party would be preferable to their opponent.

Posted by: hmp | August 27, 2008 1:20 AM | Report abuse

to those clintonistas who are threatening to vote for mccain because they are angry with the obama supporters: i see a case of cutting off one's nose to spite their face. besides, how do you know that these are actual obama supporters posting these rude comments? many of my friends and a few relatives (who by the way are former republicans who felt inspired by barack and frightened by mccain's pow and war obsession) are obama supporters and not one of them trashes hillary. please, let's all grow up and unite for the good of the party and the nation. anyone who chooses the other path does not deserve to consider themselves democrats and should just officially switch parties, instead of pulling a lieberman.

Posted by: realitycheck | August 27, 2008 1:20 AM | Report abuse

Hillary supporters: don't let Hillary down at this point. We must support McCain if there is to be any chance of having a woman/Hillary president. As simple as that. Don't buy into this party unity crap. Look at garbage like Ted Kennedy. How come he got away with basically coming to the convention, challenging and insulting the sitting Democratic President and imploring his supporters to ditch him. Today he is a netroots darling. That hypocritical bunch of bloggers make me puke blood and gore. What is this if not misogyny? 18 million votes isn't enough to get you a position on the ticket? I hate my party now. SAY NO TO THE PARTY UNITY SHAM.

Posted by: A plea to all Hillary supporters | August 27, 2008 1:19 AM | Report abuse

With all due respect, John Mccain has not higher education. He went to the Navel academy, that he didn't want to go in the first place, he thought it was to hard he said in his book. He finished 894 out of 899 in his class and only got through because of who his father was.

He spent most of his time drunk, confirmed by everyone who knew him. He got into flight school because of who his father was, he was not qualified.. After he got out of the military he was in charge of a flight training base in Florida a token job his father got him. Later he married his current wife whose father bought him his political career. He he never held a job in his life, started a business, or built anything.

He was just a drunk and a bum who first lived off his family and later his wife. He is a totally an uneducated unaccomplished man. Pretty much a failure without using others as crutches for his own short comings. John Mccain is nothing, worthless. It has long been said he even collaborated with the enemy when a POW. It was pointed out to me to look at the films of them returning home. I did and I saw what the person meant. As others looked like skeletons and were being carried off the planes on stretchers. You see John Mccain almost bounding down the steps looking fine at around 150 pounds just shy of his current 165 pounds.

He defiantly had it much better then the rest of those guys who came off the planes. One POW said later they had made a pact that what happened in the camp stayed in the camp and all was forgiven. The problem is, the Vietnamese have records or Mccains crimes and collaboration. Maybe even the actual tapes he made. He made 32 of them it is known and people are in the process of getting them. Mccain himself did all he could do in 1992 to block their release and was successful but that is about to change.

=======
jchaney

“As president of the Harvard Law Review, as law professor and as legislator, has he ever produced a single notable piece of scholarship? . . .

Written a single memorable article? His most memorable work is a biography of his favorite subject: himself. For the first few months of the campaign,

the question about Obama was: Who is he? The question now is: Who does he think he is? We are getting to know. Redeemer of our uninvolved, uninformed lives.

Lord of the seas. And more. As he said on victory night, his rise marks the moment when "our planet began to heal." As I recall -- I'm no expert on this -- Jesus

practiced his healing just on the sick. Obama operates on a larger canvas." Charles Krauthamer on Barack Hussein Obama

just for you
Posted by: rtfanning | August 27, 2008 12:50 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:14 AM | Report abuse

Hillary's speech demonstrated she is a truly great speaker and politician. No question. Where the rubber meets the road, she has what it takes.

Now - the bar has been raised for Obama. He must come out with the plans and details to fulfill the mandates of the people Clinton presented. Ball is in his court.

Now - Obama must assume a leadership role and take responsibility for persuading and enthusing Democrats to get behind him. It is not Hillary's responsibility, the buck stops with the leader. It is now Obama's responsibility to heal the party. Obama already knows where the clouds meet heaven, let's see if he can figure out where the rubber meets the road!

Posted by: Keith | August 27, 2008 1:13 AM | Report abuse

I say, it isn't Hillary who should be the one under the gun, but Obama. He should be trying to woo the Clinton supporters. He should try to make the unifying remarkes, he should try to reach accross the divide, becaus he made the divide, not Hillary.
Obama will lose in Nov., I feel, so Hillary should get ready to serve her counrty at a higher level.

Posted by: Samuel | August 27, 2008 1:10 AM | Report abuse

Hillary did as much as she could in a speech. It moved those who were moveable tonight. Others may take a day or two or a month or two and some, a small few, may sit this one out. But I don't think many Hillary voters will vote for McCain.

I'm glad she is staying throughout the convention; that is a sign of unity. And if she continues to campaign for Obama throughout the fall in the states that she won and with her constituency, she'll win more and more folks over to Obama.

And if she does that, she gets even more power; either as a Senator of Secretary of DHHS.

Posted by: Peninsula Matt | August 27, 2008 1:09 AM | Report abuse

I am absolutely amazed! Hillary did justice tonight. She came through and told it how it is, from the beginning of the speech to the end. She hit that speech HARD.

I should like to see on helping her, if it hasn't been solved already, knock down her debt.

Go Hillary!! Spot on!! She stunned the whole nation I bet. Who can honestly sit there and not give her credit where OBVIOUSLY due? That was outstanding. Hillary did more than was possibly expected. She definitely delivered.

Hillary! Hillary! Hillary! Hillary!

Posted by: Obama2008 | August 27, 2008 1:08 AM | Report abuse

It may seem like McCain is, yet again, pulling out the ole "Noun, Verb, POW" card to shield himself from any criticism over any subject. But this is simply not the case. Instead, McCain suffers from PTCRHMHIOD, or Post Traumatic Can't Remember How Many Houses I Own Disorder. This horrible condition has forever altered the lives of countless Vietnam Vets after their return to the States. In fact, it is the number one cause of divorce between former POWs and their millionaire liquor-heiress wives.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxT0s_I5WtA
.

Posted by: PUMA's are Republican's and have been all along | August 27, 2008 1:08 AM | Report abuse

From her own mouth...

"I haven't spent the past 35 years in the trenches advocating for children, campaigning for universal health care, helping parents balance work and family, and fighting for women's rights at home and around the world … to see another Republican in the White House squander the promise of our country and the hopes of our people.
And you haven't worked so hard over the last 18 months, or endured the last eight years, to suffer through more failed leadership.

No way. No how. No McCain.

Barack Obama is my candidate. And he must be our President."

Posted by: Hillraiser | August 27, 2008 1:08 AM | Report abuse

aspergirl, you too, like lynn, could benifit from some psychological counseling. what a pitiful, sick individual.

Posted by: lynn's therapist | August 27, 2008 1:06 AM | Report abuse

Hillary was perfect. And it was perfectly clear that she should be our candidate. BHO is going to go down like a ton of bricks once the attack machine comes out starting on Friday.

I hear his pretentiousness is having a replica of the White House and fireworks for his coronation. Aren't you suckers who donated happy that he is wasting your money like this.

He makes me ill, and I have voted for every Democratic candidate since 1976. But not for him.

No way. No how. No Obamessiah!

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:03 AM | Report abuse

wow what a speech!! i do not know how she did it - very tough and i know that every obama supporter was grateful for her selflessness. any clinton supporter who chooses to vote for mccain is nothing but a poser and better be prepared to keep their whining to themselves for the next 4 years.

Posted by: northernexposure | August 27, 2008 1:03 AM | Report abuse

Hillary was magnificent. She brought me to tears. More, she brought me to reconsider voting for Obama.

The race is neck and neck now. And who is the 15% undecided? Half Hillary supporters last I checked.

My opinion? Obama supporters better start understanding that you can't verbally abuse "Clintonistas" and expect them to vote for your candidate. And, further, they need to understand as much as they hate the thought, that the Clintonistas are the secret to winning the election. Check the latest polls.

I loved the Clinton speech. I am willing to vote Obama, but only if the blogs here and elsewhere give her her due and thank her for trying to convince her supporters to vote for the inexperienced Obama character.

Posted by: Narnia | August 27, 2008 1:02 AM | Report abuse

For those Hillary supporters who are not voting for Obama:

Can you say "Roe v. Wade"?

Get real!

Posted by: tex805 | August 27, 2008 1:02 AM | Report abuse

Hillary was perfect. And it was perfectly clear that she should be our candidate. BHO is going to go down like a ton of bricks once the attack machine comes out starting on Friday.

I hear his pretentiousness is having a replica of the White House and fireworks for his coronation. Aren't you suckers who donated happy that he is wasting your money like this.

He makes me ill, and I have voted for every Democratic candidate since 1976. But not for him.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 1:02 AM | Report abuse

s

Posted by: dw | August 27, 2008 1:01 AM | Report abuse

Oh, boy. I am a Clinton supporter who is not only planning on voting for McCain but the entire Republican ticket. You see, I have changed my affiliation. It is not a one-time blowing my steam kind of a thing.

Posted by: Vote for Obama? | August 27, 2008 12:58 AM | Report abuse

Did she do enough? She delivered a great endorsement speech and the majority of her supporters will be open to Obama. Now he has to speak to those open minds for it to be enough to get their votes.

Does she deserve the credit if the party coalesces behind Obama? Yes to the degree of opening minds to Obama but he has to close the sale.

CNN interviewed a Clinton delegate after the speech who was riveting. She explained what Hillary meant to her and why, and that she cannot vote for McCain but she's not ready to vote for Obama.

Posted by: bj123 | August 27, 2008 12:58 AM | Report abuse

Standing Ovation for Hillary!

Sincerely
Dems '08

Posted by: Obama2008 | August 27, 2008 12:57 AM | Report abuse

As Hillary did not directly point out the question is no longer whether she or Obama would have made the better president. It is now a question of whether Obama or McCain would be the better president and she did all she could do in one night to try to convince voters and particularly her supporters that the next President of the United States should be Barrack Obama.

Was it enough? I think it was more than enough for most of her supporters, but there undoubtedly will be some holdouts, among supporters who were voting with their heart instead of their head. They won't vote for McCain but some of them will sit out the election.

Then there are the lifelong Republicans who switched their registration so they could vote for her. I suspect many of them will gravitate back to the Republican party and its candidate or sit out the election.

As for the others who don't think she did enough, I suspect she couldn't have satisfied them no matter what she did or said. They belong to that abominable group for whom there is no such thing as a former political adversary only political enemies and once a enemy always an enemy.

Hillary did everything she could and that was enough to impress and satisfy most people who heard her speech on Monday.

Posted by: akahidden | August 27, 2008 12:56 AM | Report abuse

Rachael Maddow made the point after the speech..if Hillary's speech does not convince her supporters to get on board after that rousing endorsement, than those who have not been moved are immovable. There are posts above from people who clearly will never ever vote for Obama so I must wonder why they feel the need to keep participating in the election of the Democratic candidate. Why don't you just go support McCain and stop talking about all of the reasons you won't support Obama. Goodbye already. There's the door. True Democrats will stay with the party and vote for the nominee. Fly by night hangers on to the party who have no appreciation of the difference between Democrats and Republicans can leave anytime. I supported Hillary, I would love to have seen her win, but she lost and I'm sure as hell not going to vote Republican now...and any Democrat who says they are is not a true Democrat and should just change their party affiliation now. Just do us a favor..go away already..we don't need or want you in our party.

Posted by: DW | August 27, 2008 12:56 AM | Report abuse

Senator Clinton was magnificent this evening. While I supported her 100% in her campaign for POTUS, that is now over. I will not be supporting Obama in any fashion.

McCain '08

Posted by: notagain | August 27, 2008 12:55 AM | Report abuse

Eight years ago, then Governor George W. Bush revealingly joked about his backers at the 2000 Al Smith Dinner. "This is an impressive crowd - the haves and the have-mores," Bush said, adding, "Some people call you the elites; I call you my base." With his own quip Saturday night that "$5 million" is his definition of "rich," John McCain made no mistake that he is Bush's natural heir.


Now, there is nothing wrong with being happily stinking rich and utterly detached. Nothing, that is, unless you make criticizing your political opponent as "elitist" and "out of touch" a centerpiece of your campaign.

Rick Davis, speaking on behalf of his $100 million man John McCain, earlier this month offered the latest formulation of Barack Obama as an effete, aloof denizen of the upper class:

"Only celebrities like Barack Obama go to the gym three times a day, demand 'MET-RX chocolate roasted-peanut protein bars and bottles of a hard-to-find organic brew - Black Forest Berry Honest Tea' and worry about the price of arugula."

Of course, Davis' "arugula war" is just another attempt at misdirection. After all, John McCain's $5 million threshold where "you move from middle class to rich" is just the latest episode of his enduring disconnect from the real lives of the American people.


For starters, McCain in April declared that there had been "great progress economically" during the Bush years. On more than one occasion, he diagnosed Americans' concerns over the dismal U.S. economy as "psychological." (Phil Gramm, McCain's close friend and adviser supposedly excommunicated over his "whiners" remarks, was back with the campaign last week.) McCain, a man who owns eight homes nationwide, in March lectured Americans facing foreclosure that they ought to be "doing what is necessary -- working a second job, skipping a vacation, and managing their budgets -- to make their payments on time." And when all else fails, McCain told the people of the economically devastated regions in Martin County, Kentucky and Youngstown, Ohio, there's always eBay.

In his defense, McCain's shocking tone-deafness may just be a matter of perspective. When you're as well off as he is, anything below a $5 million income (a figure exceeding that earned on average by the top 0.1% of Americans) seems middle class.


*The $100 Million Man*
Courtesy of his wife Cindy's beer distribution fortune (one her late father apparently chose not to share with her half-sister Kathleen), the McCains are worth well over $100 million. (In the two-page tax summary she eventually released to the public, Cindy McCain reported another $6 million in 2006.) As Salon reported back in 2000, the second Mrs. McCain's millions were essential in launching her husband's political career. Unsurprisingly, the Weekly Standard's Matthew Continetti, who four years ago called Theresa Heinz-Kerry a "sugar mommy," has been silent on the topic of Cindy McCain.


*The Joys of (Eight) Home Ownership*
While fellow adulterer John Edwards was pilloried for his mansion, John McCain's eight homes around the country have received little notice or criticism. His properties include a 10 acre lake-side Sedona estate, euphemistically called a "cabin" by the McCain campaign, and a home featured in Architectural Digest. The one featuring "remote control window coverings" was recently put up for sale. Still, their formidable resources did not prevent the McCains from failing to pay taxes on a tony La Jolla, California condo used by Cindy's aged aunt.


*The Anheuser-Busch Windfall*
As it turns out, the beauty of globalization is in the eye of the beholder. While John McCain apparently played a critical role in facilitating DHL's takeover of Airborne (and with it, the looming loss of 8,000 jobs in Wilmington, Ohio), Cindy McCain is set to earn a staggering multi-million dollar pay-day from the acquisition of Anheuser-Busch by the Belgian beverage giant, In Bev. As the Wall Street Journal reported in July, Mrs. McCain runs the third largest Anheuser-Busch distributorship in the nation, and owns between $2.5 and $5 million in the company's stock. Amazingly, while Missouri's politicians of both parties lined up to try to block the sale, John McCain held a fundraiser in the Show Me State even as the In Bev deal was being finalized.


*McCain's $370,000 Personal Tax Break*
Earlier this year, the Center for American Progress analyzed John McCain's tax proposals. The conclusion? McCain's plan is radically more regressive than even that of Bush's, delivering 58% of its benefits to the wealthiest 1% of American taxpayers. McCain's born-again support for the Bush tax cuts for the rich has one additional bonus for Mr. Straight Talk: the McCains would save an estimated $373,000 a year.


*Paying Off $225,000 Credit Card Debt - Priceless*
That massive windfall from his own tax plan will come in handy for John McCain. As was reported in June, the McCains were carrying over $225,000 in credit card debt. The American Express card - don't leave your homes without it.


*Charity Begins at Home*
As Harpers documented earlier this year, the McCains are true believers in the old saying that charity begins at home:

Between 2001 and 2006, McCain contributed roughly $950,000 to [their] foundation. That accounted for all of its listed income other than for $100 that came from an anonymous donor. During that same period, the McCain foundation made contributions of roughly $1.6 million. More than $500,000 went to his kids' private schools, most of which was donated when his children were attending those institutions. So McCain apparently received major tax deductions for supporting elite schools attended by his children.

Ironically, the McCain campaign last week blasted Barack Obama for having attended a private school in Hawaii on scholarship. That attack came just weeks after John McCain held an event at his old prep school, Episcopal High, an institution where fees now top $38,000 a year.


*Private Jet Setters*
As the New York Times detailed back in April, John McCain enjoyed the use of his wife's private jet for his campaign, courtesy of election law loopholes he helped craft. Despite the controversy, McCain continued to use Cindy's corporate jet. For her part, Cindy McCain says that even with skyrocketing fuel costs, "in Arizona the only way to get around the state is by small private plane."


*Help on the Homefront*
In these tough economic times, the McCains are able to stretch their household budget. As the AP reported in April, "McCain reported paying $136,572 in wages to household employees in 2007. Aides say the McCains pay for a caretaker for a cabin in Sedona, Ariz., child care for their teenage daughter, and a personal assistant for Cindy McCain."


*Well-Heeled in $520 Shoes*
If clothes make the man, then John McCain has it made. As Huffington Post noted in July, "He has worn a pair of $520 black leather Ferragamo shoes on every recent campaign stop - from a news conference with the Dalai Lama to a supermarket visit in Bethlehem, PA." It is altogether fitting that McCain wore the golden loafers during a golf outing with President George H.W. Bush in which he rode around in cart displaying the sign, "Property of Bush #41. Hands Off."

Posted by: Agent Orange | August 27, 2008 12:55 AM | Report abuse

Oh, believe you me, Anonymous, Republicans don't dislike Obama as much as this Democrat does. It is typical Obama obtuseness to not comprehend how devastating it was for us Clinton supporters when Obama trash-talked Bill Clinton's legacy. To get up there and say that even Reagan's presidency was better than Bill's ... wow. If this is what we do to our own who was probably the best US president in half a century then what will we do to the general public. Even animals show more loyalty towards their own then us Democrats.
But, yes, if it makes you sleep easier imagining that all the Clinton turned McCain supporters are Republicans posing for effect, do so.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That was a pretty good post, it almost seemed real.
Nice try republican.

========
Hillary could put a gun to my head and I would not check out of supporting her and opposing Obama. I see her as being threatened and intimidated by everyone. The pretty much exclusive club of men in MSM has basically been saying to Hillary, "Ask your supporters to support Obama or your career is finished." Before this speech I was simply going to stand at the sidelines. Now, I am determined to vote for McCain. Seeing that this is Indiana I think my vote will count.

Posted by: A Clinton supporter | August 27, 2008 12:40 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 12:44 AM

Posted by: A Clinton supporter | August 27, 2008 12:55 AM | Report abuse

There sure are a lot of dumb people and Republicans up here pretending to support Hillary. She ran a long and arduous campaign that fell just short. She is no different than the valiant and hard-working athlete who completes a race in a photo finish and still loses. In sports, the athletes turn around and congratulate one another on the years of training and sacrifice, and the loser accepts the winner's victory with grace.

As far as I can tell, Hillary has accepted her loss with grace. She may not be out campaigning with vigor for Obama, but that's okay. It was a tough loss and a hard fought race. She's not out sabotaging him.

Meanwhile, her supporters who don't see the critical juncture we are in as a country, who can't understand that Clinton and Obama are 100% identical on the issues, and who refuse to accept their defeat gracefully are nothing more than sore losers. They are hardly real Democrats. The inane excuses they invent to justify their opposition to Obama are comical.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 12:54 AM | Report abuse

Hillary did a great job. I thought she would, but she definitely beat my expectations by a mile. I hope that Bill does half as well tomorrow, although I haven't had high expectations for him in 10 years.

And this should fill seal the coffin for any credibility AspergersGirl and her ilk might claim to have as potential Democratic voters. Hillary left it clear and undeniable: you are with her and for Obama, or you are against her and for McCain. I guess she doesn't want Chelsea to live her life in the shadow of a 7-2 Supreme Court after McCain replaces two ancient liberal Justices.

Posted by: Aleks | August 27, 2008 12:54 AM | Report abuse

There is almost zero connection between today's John McCain and the authentic Barry Goldwater whom the "OLD" John McCain version was more like.
.

Barry Goldwater would be considered far left and unwelcome in today's far right fascist theocratic leaning Republican Party full of pastey white old rich guy hypocrites, starting with George Bush, Dick Cheney and John McCain and all their accolytes.

Posted by: Karl Rove runs PUMA | August 27, 2008 12:53 AM | Report abuse

A Clinton supporter wrote:

"Hillary could put a gun to my head and I would not check out of supporting her and opposing Obama. I see her as being threatened and intimidated by everyone."

You think Hillary can be intimidated? If she is so easily manipulated, why the fanatical support?

"Before this speech I was simply going to stand at the sidelines. Now, I am determined to vote for McCain. Seeing that this is Indiana I think my vote will count."

The pundits said her speech must have convinced all but the most lunatic fringe of her supporters. Looks like they were right.

Do you understand the at least 2 liberal Supreme Court judges are likely to leave the bench in the next 4 years? Do you realize that when asked by Rick Warren, which Supreme Court judges he would NOT have appointed, McCain listed all the liberal judges and praised Scalia and Alito?

Read Medea, you can pick up some pointers on how to get even with your husband if he ever disappoints you. Based on your statements, you'll easily relate to Medea.

Posted by: blowoff@drej.com | August 27, 2008 12:50 AM | Report abuse

jchaney

“As president of the Harvard Law Review, as law professor and as legislator, has he ever produced a single notable piece of scholarship? . . .

Written a single memorable article? His most memorable work is a biography of his favorite subject: himself. For the first few months of the campaign,

the question about Obama was: Who is he? The question now is: Who does he think he is? We are getting to know. Redeemer of our uninvolved, uninformed lives.

Lord of the seas. And more. As he said on victory night, his rise marks the moment when "our planet began to heal." As I recall -- I'm no expert on this -- Jesus

practiced his healing just on the sick. Obama operates on a larger canvas." Charles Krauthamer on Barack Hussein Obama

just for you

Posted by: rtfanning | August 27, 2008 12:50 AM | Report abuse

You mean you think a 72 year old psychopath is more electable? Give me a break, this will in the end be a land slide.

----------
I voted for Hillary in the primaries. I don't care for Obama and it showed a flaw in his character that he picked Biden over Hillary. I am not going to vote for Obama.

And Obama isn't going to have the luxury of rigged debates like he had in the primaries. It is unbelievable that the Democratic party chose someone so unelectable with the nation wanting a change so badly. Dukakis part 2.

Posted by: atomic | August 27, 2008 12:36 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 12:50 AM | Report abuse

Senator Clinton did enough and she did it well. She gave a rousing, sincere speech - the best I have heard during this campaign. She hit the ball out of the park.

AXT113: The "burden" is Obama's to bear. He is the candidate. She will work for him; campaign for him because she wants to see a democrat in the White House. But she has no responsibility to carry the load. It is his load now.

Posted by: Karolyn | August 27, 2008 12:49 AM | Report abuse

AsperGirl seems to claim Aspergers disability. One of its main characteristics is an inability to read facial expressions and to obsess on imagined /topics/items. Her statement verges on the delusional.

Posted by: srk | August 27, 2008 12:49 AM | Report abuse

Well "Voting for McCain" I don't believe you were ever a Hillary supporter because the two are oposite. I think you either were never a Hillary supporter or you cannot stand having someone who is black running for president.

Posted by: Mark Stevens | August 27, 2008 12:48 AM | Report abuse

Her stirring rhetoric was uplifting enough to win over to Obama the most reluctant among her supporters. I think she might have even inspired Bill to support Obama.

Posted by: Roger Friedmann | August 27, 2008 12:48 AM | Report abuse

Who Is Eldon Smith?


Why, that would be none other than John McCain:


It turns out that this isn't the first time the issue of John McCain's lavish multiple residences has emerged in the heat of a campaign.


"In 1986, when then-Rep. McCain was running for the Senate seat vacated by Barry Goldwater, he quietly began remodeling a $500,000 house in central Phoenix owned by his wealthy father-in-law James Hensley. The $225,000 project -- which included the construction of a 4,000-square-foot addition, swimming pool, jacuzzi, cabana and barbecue -- held political peril for McCain, who was already fighting charges that he was as an opportunistic carpertbagger."

"The new house was located in Phoenix's fourth congressional district -- outside of the first district in Tempe which he represented at the time."

"AP caught wind of the work at 7110 North Central Ave. shortly before the general election and dispatched a reporter to examine blueprints at the planning department. They found the permit applicants were listed as Hensley and a mysterious "Mr. Smith."

"The reporter tracked down McCain's plumber, who told him he'd been told Mr. Smith's first name was "Eldon."

"Eldon Smith, it turned out, was John McCain."


story here:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/0808/The_GOPs_2008_nominee_isEldon_Smith.html


Good old "Eldon"...I mean John, didn't want people to know that he was planning to leave his congressional district - and also wanted to hide the cost of his lavish quarter-million dollar rennovation plans - so he came up with a ridiculous nom de maison, hoping to keep his plans buried under a sockpuppet. Of course, this might help explain why he lost track of the number of homes he's got.


Barack Obama has been remarkably open about his entire life story - a bio which has been subjected to endless scrutiny. But if there's anyone whose background we should be "unsure" of, it's John McCain's. I, for one, would like to learn about what else he's done in his life under an assumed name.

Posted by: McCain = Bush/Cheney | August 27, 2008 12:48 AM | Report abuse

"Hillary could put a gun to my head and I would not check out of supporting her and opposing Obama. I see her as being threatened and intimidated by everyone. The pretty much exclusive club of men in MSM has basically been saying to Hillary, "Ask your supporters to support Obama or your career is finished." Before this speech I was simply going to stand at the sidelines. Now, I am determined to vote for McCain. Seeing that this is Indiana I think my vote will count."

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

Have fun with four more years of Bush's utterly failed policies. I hope no one ever has to hear you whine in the next four years when your refusal to part with you dream results in epic failure for the rest of us.

Also, have fun when McCain appoints justices who overturn Roe v. Wade and strip away the greatest victory for women's rights in half a century. You'll have only yourself to blame.

Posted by: N.A.P. | August 27, 2008 12:47 AM | Report abuse

Since Obama is going to win, can we get some kind of assurance from you you will all gather in sort of a Jones town setting and do a mass suicide? I will be happy to provide the Cool-aid

=========
I am a Clinton supporter voting for McCain - at ANY cost. I hate Obama and his supporters. I especially puke on the Obama bunch that fill these forums.

Posted by: Voting for McCain | August 27, 2008 12:43 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2008 12:47 AM | Report abuse

That was a pretty good post, it almost seemed real.
Nice try republican.

========
Hillary could put a gun to my head and I would not check out of supporting her and opposing Obama. I see her as being threatened and intimidated by everyone. The pretty much exclusive club of men in MSM has basically been saying to Hillary, "Ask your supporters to support Obama or your career is finished." Before this speech I was simply going to stand at the sidelines. Now, I am determined to vote for McCain. Seeing that this is Indiana I think my vote will count.

Posted by: A Clinton supporter | August 27, 2008 12:40 AM

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

AsperGirl, you are a dog, do you bark for your breakfast in the morning. Hater.

Posted by: What | August 27, 2008 12:43 AM | Report abuse

I am a Clinton supporter voting for McCain - at ANY cost. I hate Obama and his supporters. I especially puke on the Obama bunch that fill these forums.

Posted by: Voting for McCain | August 27, 2008 12:43 AM | Report abuse

So, Chris, Hillary-supporter-turned-McCain, what part of her excellent speech were you not watching?

Did you happen to miss the part where she asked why you supported her? Was it because of her platform? Her enthusiasm? Commitment to womens' rights, health care for all, clean and renewable energy, tax cuts and support for working-class voters? Or were you so fickle that you only cared about Hillary and nobody else?

Mrs. Clinton herself essentially told her supporters: "Obama and I stand for the exact same principles, and you must support him like you supported me." So, either you admit that you don't care, AT ALL, about the issues, policies, and problems facing America, or that you are simply too uninformed to realize that Hillary and Obama have a virtually identical platform.

What other reason could there possibly be?

Posted by: N.A.P. | August 27, 2008 12:41 AM | Report abuse

Hillary could put a gun to my head and I would not check out of supporting her and opposing Obama. I see her as being threatened and intimidated by everyone. The pretty much exclusive club of men in MSM has basically been saying to Hillary, "Ask your supporters to support Obama or your career is finished." Before this speech I was simply going to stand at the sidelines. Now, I am determined to vote for McCain. Seeing that this is Indiana I think my vote will count.

Posted by: A Clinton supporter | August 27, 2008 12:40 AM | Report abuse

jwatson | August 27, 2008 12:28 AM

Yes my dear Watson, Hillary Clinton proved with that speech tonight that there is a huge difference between leadership and style.

She may not have baritone voice and the ability to make a jump shot,but she had substance.

Obama voters will serve the country up on a platter; all for "image".





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


Posted by: rtfanning | August 27, 2008 12:40 AM | Report abuse

She did what she needed to do, and did it very well. And I say this not being a big fan of the Clintons.

The best line in her speech was "I want you to ask yourselves: Were you in this campaign just for me? . . . [or] were you in it for all the people in this country who feel invisible?"

She's right. And do you know what? It's not about Obama, either. It wouldn't matter if it was my demented cat on top of the Democratic ticket. It's about getting back the government from the evil people who are currently running it and ruining it for us and for the world.

P.S. Tim and jchaney: Don't worry about AsperGirl. She's actually doing us a service by showing us why we have to work all the harder to make sure Obama wins, so we can shove that reality right down her throat (in the most Christian way possible, of course).

Posted by: willythekorn | August 27, 2008 12:39 AM | Report abuse

It was a good speech from Hillary but what will Bill say when it's his turn because just like her campaign they are still intertwined. Hopefully he has now recovered from his pouting after losing the support of African Americans due to his ignorant comments during the primaries.

Posted by: Mark Stevens | August 27, 2008 12:38 AM | Report abuse

What an amazing speech! Hillary did everything she possibly could to give Obama a boost. Now it's totally up to him. If he wins, he will owe her for making such a strong pitch for unity. If he loses, it will be his own fault for not inviting her to join the ticket. (Obama has fallen in the Gallup tracking poll in the wake of choosing Biden, who's been in DC for ever and voted to go into Iraq. Heavy sigh...)

Posted by: cadbury | August 27, 2008 12:37 AM | Report abuse

To answer your two questions -

Did she do enough? Yes, absolutely.

If the party begins to coalesce behind Obama in the days and months to come does Clinton deserve the credit? Yes, absolutely.

The Clintons are a class act. It is the media that is despicable.

Posted by: Obamanaut | August 27, 2008 12:37 AM | Report abuse

I voted for Hillary in the primaries. I don't care for Obama and it showed a flaw in his character that he picked Biden over Hillary. I am not going to vote for Obama.

And Obama isn't going to have the luxury of rigged debates like he had in the primaries. It is unbelievable that the Democratic party chose someone so unelectable with the nation wanting a change so badly. Dukakis part 2.

Posted by: atomic | August 27, 2008 12:36 AM | Report abuse

rtfanning: You post the same ridiculous message on every thread! Give it up!

Posted by: jchaney | August 27, 2008 12:35 AM | Report abuse

J.: Obama will be fine, and the Clintons will help. McCain is a fraud.

Posted by: jchaney | August 27, 2008 12:32 AM | Report abuse

Go Hill! I love her. Let's do what she said and make it happen. She deserves much more, but she can't be president. So let's work to make Obama president, and help Hillary get what's due her! Love her! Obama for President.

Posted by: Cedmo | August 27, 2008 12:31 AM | Report abuse


Just who is Barak Obama and why is it such a mystery 9 months into it...what does he have to hide and why is the press hiding it?

Gamaliel , ACORN ( and their 12 Communist Party operatives that left to work on Obama's campaign )& Joyce foundations....who Is Valerie Jarrett?

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1511


Fortunately its up to 300 million voters to decide if Communism is a threat to national security rather than demagogues.

The subversive anarchist ties run deep ..back 2 generations.

VOTE FOR CLINTON >>>THEN WALK OUT<<<JUST BECAUSE SHE HAD TO HOLD HER NOSE AND ENDORSE OBAMA DOSEN'T MEAN YOU HAVE TO.


Posted by: rtfanning | August 27, 2008 12:30 AM | Report abuse

I listened to the speech and it should have been enough. I still find it hard to believe that a person that supported Hillary Clinton in the primarys actually would support or vote for John McCain in the general election. No matter what you may feel about Barack Obama on a personal level, his policies and positions are almost indistinguishable from those of Senator Clinton's. Senator McCain, on the other hand, will work against many of the highest priorities Senator Clinton advocated. Think about McCain on health care, taxes, the environment, women's rights, the next Supreme Court nominees. Is this really what you want?

Posted by: williamhn | August 27, 2008 12:30 AM | Report abuse

She is the presidential one. I can not see Barack with all his elegance topping this.

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

She made a good start, but the burden reamins on her and her supporters to follow through

Posted by: axt113 | August 27, 2008 12:08 AM

burden, smurden, its Obama's party, he is so good he does not need Hillary, does he?

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

God bless Hillary Clinton. "Grace and grit" totally describes her. I had tears in my eyes -- and I'm an Obama girl.

Bottom line, we had two fabulous candidates in our party and one of them had to get the silver medal. I wish she had run in 2004.

Posted by: DGol | August 27, 2008 12:25 AM | Report abuse

At a certain point during the Primaries, when the Clintons were told that they were being too harsh on Obama, they arrogantly responded that if the kitchen is too hot one should get out of the kitchen. Well, prophetic words! When the kitchen got too hot for them, Bill and Hillary refused to get out and got severely burned! All the speeches in the world the two of them will give at the convention and around the country will never undo the meanspirited, untruthful comments they made about Obama, things that are now being used by McCain against Barack Obama.
They have damaged Sen. Obama irreparably, I think. They showed how vicious, arrogant, and ungrateful they are. The forgiveness both received from around the country (especially from the African American community; even Rev. Wright and the great Mandela were at the special "I repent" breakfast!)when they were in deep trouble should have taught them some humility and fairness. Money and power alone are the very stuff that keeps them going. They are vindictive, resentful, and miserable human beings. Don't believe a word they say!

Posted by: J. | August 27, 2008 12:24 AM | Report abuse

This speech showed, clearer than ever, that the Democratic Party has -- again -- chosen the wrong candidate in Obama at the right time! Hillary will be back.

Posted by: Michael, Sydney Australia | August 27, 2008 12:21 AM | Report abuse

Question right back at you, Barack: "Were you in it for us (women, values voters, Hispanics, etc.); or, are you in it just for your insecure self?" No, did not 'fix' a thing. Hillary for President.
Pantsuit analysis on color orange: good for promoting food products and toys.

Posted by: JC | August 27, 2008 12:18 AM | Report abuse

As a sometimes-too-ardent Obama supporter (who had been known on occasion to deride Hillary Clinton as a fake, do-anything-to-win shell), I have to say that this speech was absolutely amazing. She could have done MUCH less and still had coverage for 2012. This was Hillary at her most sincere, which means it was Hillary at her best.

I also have to express surprise at AsperGirl's comment below. I don't know which speech she was watching, but I remember two Michelle Obama shots - one at the beginning when she looked anticipatory (and perhaps a little nervous), and one towards the end, when she was smiling broadly and looked like she might be tearing up a little. I'm assuming you're a Clinton supporter, and I'm shocked and dismayed that you would say almost exactly the same things about Michelle Obama that Republicans have been saying about Hillary Clinton for 16 years. Do you really believe that Michelle Obama is evil? Really? Evil?

I think you need to step back for a minute and remember what politics and this election are really about, as Hillary so eloquently, passionately, and brilliantly reminded us tonight.

Posted by: JosephInBrooklyn | August 27, 2008 12:18 AM | Report abuse

WHAT A SPEECH ... GOD BLESS YOU, HILLARY ... !!! ... I am so sorry we failed you. We should had worked harder for you - we should had worked smarter for you. Now we must accept Obama (the modern JFK) as our Commander-In-Chief, tutored by Biden (his personal Dick Cheney) ... then again, perhaps not ...

Posted by: Louie | August 27, 2008 12:14 AM | Report abuse

I loved her speech and it just magnifies why I can not in good conscience vote for Obama. The Party lost a great opportunity by not making Clinton the nominee. Regrettably, I will vote for McCain or just stay home. Hillary's loss is a rela downer.

Posted by: Chris | August 27, 2008 12:13 AM | Report abuse

She did what she needed to do, and did it with class and effectiveness.

And I am no Hillary fan.

Posted by: Bob Kleinrock | August 27, 2008 12:08 AM | Report abuse

She made a good start, but the burden reamins on her and her supporters to follow through

Posted by: axt113 | August 27, 2008 12:08 AM | Report abuse

AsperGirl - what a needlessly vicious shot at Michelle. I saw the same TV and thought she looked wonderful. You are either a permanently disgruntled Hillary fan (hey - it's over) or just a mean, nasty person with a major chip on your shoulder. "Evil"? You, young lady, have a problem.

Posted by: Tim | August 27, 2008 12:07 AM | Report abuse

I think it was -- I even liked the part where she threw a bone to the Big Dog!!!

There is at least an order of magnitude more brain power in the Democratic camp...let's hope it is employed productively from here on out.

It should be clear to all right now that Harvard fatties like Grover Norquist cheated on their multiple choice tests at Harvard. At least Harvard Law is legit.

Posted by: Jeff | August 27, 2008 12:07 AM | Report abuse

She did everything she needed to do -- as people should have expected. Most of the HRC/BHO rift is among their supporters, fueled by the press trying to gin up controversy and wing-nut bloggers.

But did she do enough? Do enough for whom? For her supporters who are on the fence? Perhaps. For her supporters who say they will vote for McC in the fall? Probably not, though it should have been.


Posted by: mnteng | August 27, 2008 12:07 AM | Report abuse

15 August 2008
RE: McCain Economic Energy Plan, Mealer Companies.
Dear Governor Napolitano,
As a constituent of yours here in Arizona, yet across the political spectrum as a Republican leaning conservative, I must compliment you on the excellent job you have done governing Arizona. We will miss you when you retire from office this year.

I am writing this letter to inform you of the economic strength Senator McCain will be able to bring to the USA when he is elected president. Arizona will benefit from McCain’s economic & energy plan as will America. I began calling this plan the 3R plan as the private sector has defined Senator McCain’s outline to Rethink, Reform and Reinvent the US economy while taking on a tremendous energy plan.

The goals include massive job training for thousands of new USA mfg companies while utilizing existing (thousands of) abandoned buildings for training and new mfg arenas. We expect to allow the current owners of these abandoned buildings to take full advantage of the existing tax breaks as they allow America to retrain and ultimately take-over their defunct buildings. Americans demand more from themselves and from our struggling economy… We will create an incredible amount of new businesses and new jobs through this plan.

All of this while putting hundreds of thousands of people to work through support businesses (food, retail, housing, leisure, etc) while many more people will be furnished jobs during the building(s) transformation. This is a win-win situation and something more along the lines of Teddy Roosevelt… Who is, as we all know, one of John McCain’s political heroes.

We cannot afford a tax and spend, “giveaway-artist” who can’t seem to tell the truth about a single issue. Obama is not ready to lead the USA. You backed him over Clinton and surprised all of America by straying from your otherwise pro-American, pro-Economy, pro-Gun, pro-Freedom beliefs.

Mealer Companies along with many other green auto mfg firms have automobiles that will replace fossil fuel powered vehicles. Of course, Mealer Companies is a mainly Arizona based, wholly Made In USA, automobile mfg who, in my opinion, will offer the most viable green-engineered vehicles and full power supply systems for home/office to the public. Yes, power replacement device that is way ahead of it’s time, yet long overdue. We expect to have an incredible impact on the US economy, the world ecology and eventually we fully expect to halt the need for crude oil and coal as a power source.

Mealer Companies is currently being set-up for massive funding through a joint venture company while accessing added exposure from such Conservative celebrities as actor Stephen Baldwin and radio talk show host, Kevin McCullough. While no agreements have yet been made, we are seeking to gain both business partners and celebrity backing as we move into a new era of Change.
It’s almost comical how environmentalist groups have rallied behind a totally inane mysticism and the candidate furthest from any sort of solution! When they step back and see that Obama’s economic plan is vague, unambiguous and otherwise hollowed out for special interest groups… Perhaps they might still have a chance to make the right choice.

We expect to also gain celebrity insight, promotion and fan-based backing with other McCain supporters; Sylvester Stallone, Jon Voight, Tom Selleck, Lou Ferrigno, Dennis Miller, Roger Staubach and so many more sensible people as an added push into a massive McCain 3R economic-energy agenda.

We must replace the very rapidly lost fuel tax source before we replace fossil fuels. Through the McCain 3R plan, we have this opportunity and we expect to take it. We have the plan, we have the infrastructure, we have a very bright American future if we can put McCain’s plan to work. WE means people who can think for themselves and who care for our nation and for people in general.
Please, accept my personal offer to further honor Arizona and America as you part your ways in politics, by helping to promote a stronger America through Mealer Companies and John McCain’s Economic Energy plans. I am not asking you to drop the endorsement of your fellow Democrat Senator Obama, but simply asking you to endorse a truly American plan for economic growth through USA mfg and energy independence.

Mealer Companies and everything I am telling you may be researched and proven to be true and legitimate through the contacts enclosed- which include the City Government of Show Low, Arizona, the Arizona State Department of Commerce, Homeland Security, my lawyer, my excellent, personal and business references and the joint venture company itself.

Sincerely,
John Lewis Mealer
Founding President Mealer Companies

www.betterconstructed.com (original investor site)
www.mealercompanies.com (parked domain)

Posted by: JL Mealer | August 27, 2008 12:07 AM | Report abuse

Deb from Iowa: You should be a speechwriter. (I mean that as a compliment.)

Posted by: jchaney | August 27, 2008 12:07 AM | Report abuse

I'm a solid Democrat, and one who can not stand the Clintons. However, I must say, that speech was spot on perfect. I never thought I would say this, but I truly admired her tonight and saw what inspired her supporters. She delivered a speech that showed support (unequivocal) for Obama and underlined the historic nature of her candidacy.

The issue of party unity is dead. McCain would be wise to not spend his resources on trying to pry away her supporters.

Posted by: Dominick Argumedo | August 27, 2008 12:06 AM | Report abuse

She did enough to get her a Supreme Court nomination if she would be willing to give up her soon to be achieved Senate Majority Leadership.

Posted by: Frank | August 27, 2008 12:04 AM | Report abuse

Wow, you're nasty, AsperGirl! Generally speaking, though, the Democrats are the adults in the room, and they'll pull together to defeat McCain. Hillary is devoted to the party, because she is devoted to Democratic issues. This is what brings Obama and Clinton together. The failed policies of Bush-McCain-Cheney will come to an end!

Posted by: jchaney | August 27, 2008 12:03 AM | Report abuse

Of course she did enough. After all she is not the one responsible for unifying the party. That job belongs to the nominee. Let's see what HE does on Thursday. So far he has only managed to lose 15 points in this race and so far he is the only guy that has managed to lose points during his convention! He needs to get off his comfortable behind and start campaigning rather than going around the country giving talks.

Posted by: Opa2 | August 27, 2008 12:02 AM | Report abuse

Of course she did enough. After all she is not the one responsible for unifying the party. That job belongs to the nominee. Let's see what HE does on Thursday. So far he has only managed to lose 15 points in this race and so far he is the only guy that has managed to lose points during his convention! He needs to get off his comfortable behind and start campaigning rather than going around the country giving talks.

Posted by: Opa2 | August 27, 2008 12:01 AM | Report abuse

I think parts of her speech were crystal clear and no one could have done that better. BUT she could have addressed the parts of the party that have been broken by her own campaign's inability to let go . . . and helped heal those by clarifying the differences between Obama and McCain. i.e,
"If you voted for me because you believe in a woman's right to choose, you have one choice now: to vote for Obama.
If you voted for me because you believe in universal health care, you have one choice now: to vote for Obama."
etc.
Because if you give her supporters ANY reason to feel justified at staying home, they must be made to understand that they are responsible for the consequences.
the ugly, ugly consequences.

Let's come together.

Posted by: Deb from Iowa | August 27, 2008 12:01 AM | Report abuse

Hard facts= The McCain-Romney split is at least as great and the McCain-Christian split is even greater. But because there are no electrifying personalities involved there is no coverage.
When McCain picks a Mormon who has been Pro-Choice and Pro-Gay Marriage as his VP, the right wing split will become deeper and you will still be covering what for Democrats is a minor gap - nothing like Kennedy-Carter or Humphrey-McCarthy.

Posted by: Pragmatist | August 27, 2008 12:01 AM | Report abuse

As a supporter of Obama, I have to say that I think this was Hillary Clinton's finest hour. If Barack Obama is elected, as I hope he will be, this speech will be looked back upon as the turning point in the campaign. I also think that Clinton has a great role to play in the future, be it as president or justice, and that this speech is the moment she created a separate political entity apart from her husband. A lesser person would have made this moment all about her; Clinton avoided that pitfall, and in so doing has lifted up both her own career and her party. Rather than take the party down with her in flames as Kennedy did in 1980, Hillary Clinton has shown grace and put her party, and country, first. I actually got tears in my eyes during her speech, and that is rare--I'm sure many Democrats around the country were equally moved. I am convinced that Hillary Clinton will leave a lasting mark on the politics of this nation, and that this speech will be moment that made it possible.

Posted by: quincyscott | August 27, 2008 12:00 AM | Report abuse

It's the Clinton opera ... it goes "me me me me." She said all the right things about Obama, but she's still more interested in herself than the party. We'll see what chapter two shows tomorrow night. More of the same, I suppose.

Posted by: keilprti | August 26, 2008 11:55 PM | Report abuse

She gave Obama much, much more than he deserved.

And I think it's pretty clear where the animosity comes from. When the camera cut away from Clinton while her delegates were screaming for her, to Michelle Obama in the audience, Michelle Obama had an ugly, jealous look on her face.

I suppose Michelle Obama, being a wife, could get a convention night all for herself, put "Michelle" vertical signs in everyone's hands, but she couldn't get them to scream for her like that.

Michelle Obama is evil. Clinton's lucky not to get picked as VP. You don't want to be on the receiving end of that jealous, ugly stare for years when the face that it's on belongs to your boss.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 26, 2008 11:54 PM | Report abuse

"Did she do enough?"

It's hard to argue she didn't (though many "disgruntled Hillary supporters" here will of course try). She hit all the notes she had to. The segment you noted where she asked her supporters if their support for her campaign was about her personally or her causes was spot on and added weight to her unity appeal. Also her shots at McCain and Bush were excellent, especially the Twin Cities crack. You can always ask for more, but she did everything she reasonably could tonight.

Posted by: Atlanta, GA | August 26, 2008 11:52 PM | Report abuse

I do not believe Hillary Clinton did quite enough. Yes, she talked a good game to her supporters by associating Obama's policies with her own vs. humurously associating McCain's policies to George Bush's policies. However, she did not effectively address the negative things she said about Obama during the Democratic primary. This is a big issue and McCain will use this very item against Obama in the general election.

Yes, if the party comes together behind Obama Clinton deserves a great deal of credit for being a good loser tonight. Without Clinton addressing all of the negatives she used against Obama, I doubt the party line will be toed completely behind Obama.

Posted by: reason | August 26, 2008 11:51 PM | Report abuse

We don't know yet. Ask that question 11/05. The whole "controversy" was manufactured as it was. i hope you cover Ron Paul as sharply as you did this "story". The best speech EVER! the MSM could have covered her with some kind of objectivity, but NO. so, she gets to be attorney general instead (i got dreams to remember). Thanks Hil AND Bil (because you KNOW he's going to skewer Mad Mac tomorrow night.)

Posted by: preAmerikkkan | August 26, 2008 11:51 PM | Report abuse

Yes, she did enough. Geez. Get over it already. I heard Candy Crowley say, offhandedly, something like the Dems want the Warner speech to be an opportunity to get away from the main storyline here, which is the Obama-Clinton rift. And it's like...really? You think that? The media are the ones making it a storyline. There's really not much there beyond the normal personal dynamics of any two former rivals. It's nothing.

I think this convention is the last gasp for the media to try to make this into something. Once it's over, HRC goes quietly into a largely unseen supporting role as junior senator from NY.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 26, 2008 11:51 PM | Report abuse

I'm not so sure. There wasn't really any discussion of why she supports Obama, merely an encouragement to do so. It's a little bit like a TV product endorsement. She did what she had to do to buy insurance for 2012, but I didn't really see the conviction behind it.

Posted by: Zeke | August 26, 2008 11:50 PM | Report abuse

She couldn't have done better

Posted by: Satya | August 26, 2008 11:50 PM | Report abuse

I think she did enough, and I agree with David Brook's assessment, that the "were you in it for me?" question should have crystalized the moment for all Clinton supporters. One of the few moments he had that evening of even handed analysis.

Posted by: biochemist | August 26, 2008 11:49 PM | Report abuse

I have not been a Hillary supporter throughout this campaign, but I gained an even great deal of respect for her tonight. That speech was just what the doctor ordered.

Posted by: bkriner | August 26, 2008 11:49 PM | Report abuse

Absolutely.
She couldn't outright rebuke her earlier comments about his inexperience because she would damage her own credibility...and the issue isn't experience anyway, it's change. Hillary needed to unite Democrats by showing them that party values are the most important part of politics. That Democrats are for the working class and the majority of Americans, not just the privileged few and will fight for issues like health care, jobs and tax cuts for them.
It was a home run.

Posted by: T-Head | August 26, 2008 11:48 PM | Report abuse

Perfect speech, perfect delivery. Almost makes me glad the Warner speech was such a dud, because it really allowed her to shine. "We don't need 8 more years of the last 4 years." Bravo, Hillary!!

Posted by: epinchicago | August 26, 2008 11:48 PM | Report abuse

YES she did enough!!

Posted by: tkitzmiller | August 26, 2008 11:46 PM | Report abuse

Yes, Hillary did it. And she was wonderful.

And if anybody asks you, you can say: "she did more for her Party than her Party would have, and has ever done for her."

Posted by: paul taylor | August 26, 2008 11:46 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company