This makes no sense. Clinton showed his true colors, and it is obvious that he only and contiues to only use his words and black people to acheive his goals. This amazes me "She remains loyal to the Clintons, she says, despite her own uneasy feelings over Bill injecting race into the primary campaign." Watson even knows, is aware of and admits that Clinton tried to use Obama's race against him -- and this is who is chosen to represent black people? Give me a break. Dont be fooled people, and I dont believe anyone is choosing to be a fool any longer. Stand up for what is right, and not for what is politically correct.

Obama '08.

Hill and Bill Clinton ran the most corrupt and morally bankrupt White House since Nixon. Google "Clinton convicts" and see the results, that is the legacy of the Clintons.

If you care about ethics, morals, integrity, then you must vote to reject the Clinton Dynasty. America Deserves better. Al Gore lost because of the scandals of the Clintons. remember George W ran on restoring "honor" and dignity to WH. Vote McCain, Vote Romney, Vote Obama.. God bless our country

More corrupt camp donations for Obama! WHERES THE MEDIA??? NON-BLACK VOTERS ARE SICK OF THE BIASD MEDIA OUSHING OBAMA DOWN OUR THROATS!
But back on Oct. 5, in the aftermath of federal bribery/extortion/conspiracy/other miscellaneous badness indictments of former Dallas Mayor Pro Tem Don Hill Presidential candidate Barrack Obama desperately wants campaign cash senator Obama campaign already has its hands full with other indicted bankrollers Rezko. Now Mr. Hill's campaign finance report shows donations to on April 28, and federal campaign finance reports indicate Mr. Obama received Mr. Hill's donation June 22 as well. The Obama camp couldn't immediately be reached for comment Friday about Mr. Hill's
Obama's Relationship With Rezko Goes Back 17 Years. Obama Kept Contributions From Accused Fixer's (REZKO)Wife And Others ABCNews.com Analysis Shows the Campaign Still Hasn't Returned More Than $100,000 in Obama is referred to in document which outlines case against Rezko As Barack Obama is finding out, it's not as easy to dump politically toxic campaign donations as it might seem. For the third time in more than a year, Obama's presidential campaign announced this week it was shedding more donations tied to indicted fundraiser Antoin "Tony" Rezko. Calculations by the media and Obama's own staff of Rezko's financial impact on his past political campaigns have been all over the map and shifting. In the case of Obama, public records don't make clear every Rezko connection. The records show that since 1995, $74,500 came from Rezko, his relatives or contributors listed on official disclosure forms as employees of one of his businesses. Rezko has not raised money for Obama's presidential campaign.

Various media outlets have reported much larger numbers, though they haven't clearly explained their methodology. The New York Times has pegged Rezko political cash for Obama at $150,000, the Sun-Times at $168,000 and the Los Angeles Times at $200,000. Last weekend, a report by ABCNews.com suggested more than $185,000. The event at Rezko's home resembled a posh dinner party, complete with valet parking and catered dinner. Obama spoke after the meal, and told the crowd about how when he was still in Harvard law school Rezko, a developer, had tried to hire him. Obama staffers set up shop around the kitchen table, where they collected checks.

One donor at the event was Michael Sreenan, a former attorney for a Rezko company. Sreenan gave Obama $2,000 that night, but hasn't heard if the campaign now plans to give it away.

Still, Sreenan said he was baffled by the notion of giving money raised at Rezko's home to charity. "If [Obama] wants to give my donation back to me or let me give it to a charity, I'm fine with that," he said. "But I don't see how this makes a difference now -- the money still got him elected. And how do I know it's not going to a charity that's offensive to me?"
Barack Obama has surfaced in the federal corrupton case against his longtime campaign fund-raiser, Tony Rezko Obama's relationship with Rezko came under greater scrutiny this week after prosecutors disclosed Rezko received $3.5 million from an Iraqi billionaire while claiming to be broke.

Obama criticized again for going negative and misleading on Clinton
Does Sen. Obama think that using divisive GOP tactics is the way to bring the country together? Len Nichols of the New America Foundation said he is "personally outraged at Obama camps recent mailer attacking Clinton! Obama trying to stop health care for everyone! Once again He's caught in lies from the debate. Obama showed vindictiveness and lack of magnanimity after his victory SC. The first part of his victory speech was deeply unpleasant attack on the Clintons. No graciousness there. And how did he handle defeat in New Hampshire and Nevada? With a combination of denial, petulance and the launching of a successful campaign to persuade the American media that the Clintons were engaged in a campaign of lies about him and, even worse, in a campaign of surreptitious racism. Clinton pointed out, it's not enough to hope and demand change; you had to be able to define what change you want and had to be able to deliver it. It was Obama who introduced King into the debate. Hillarys words were being construed not just as disrespect but as hidden racism. Obama's people was briefing the media to create this impression. The consequence has been exactly what you would expect. In the Nevada caucus, blacks voted overwhelmingly for Obama and non-blacks voted overwhelmingly for Clinton. In South Carolina, the black vote was 53 per cent of the total. Obama secured 80 per cent of it. That's the reason for his overwhelming victory there. He won only 23 per cent of the non-black vote. Contrast this to Iowa, where he won a large proportion of the white vote. It's a tragedy for Obama and entirely his own fault that this has happened. he became "the black candidate
Obama's most effective criticisms of Clinton, she voted for authorising the war, he opposed it from the start but (and this is crucially important) he had consistently opposed the war ever since. This story of consistent opposition over years was a "fairytale" the media had bought into.Obama has managed to persuade the media that this was a lie that he would correct. He hasn't corrected it, because he can't. He has not been consistent in the terms he set himself.
Obama supported Kerry for president, Kerry voted for war and continued to justify his support. Obama said that he did not want to cause Kerry embarrassment so he said that he, Obama, did not know how he would have voted. Isn't this the candidate who's about change, whose whole candidacy is based on a "different kind of politics"? Isn't this the candidate who says the country can no longer tolerate political spin, that lying in the name of political advantage is what's destroying the country? Yet on the very issue he identifies as the biggest moral issue facing America Obama effectively states that he was lying for political advantage.
Obama's calls for hope, for change. but hope to do what, to change to what? He hasn't said yet. He doesn't seem to know. He says that one of the high qualities of leadership is the ability to inspire by words, and he is right. It's a rare ability. But inspire to what end? It's a pity. He promised so much.

"Watson predicts Clinton's visit to churches in her district and his letter of apology will be enough to mend fences with those who once considered him one of their own."

"one of their own"? What can that possibly mean?

"Watson predicts Clinton's visit to churches in her district and his letter of apology will be enough to mend fences with those who once considered him one of their own."

"one of their own"? What can that possibly mean?

go hillary. i dont think bill needs to go to church, but go hillary

So is it now the accepted media story that Bill Clinton is a racist and needs to apologize? If Obama is defeated by the GOP does this imply Americans are racists?

Good! I love to see Slick Willie squirm and pander. He's had plenty of practice apologizing to his wife.

"Watson predicts Clinton's visit to churches in her district and his letter of apology will be enough to mend fences with those who once considered him one of their own."

"one of their own" What can this possibly mean??

Do anything, say anything...

It is not a surprise that Ann Coulter is suporting Hillary. Ann Coulter is right. Both the Clintons are centrists and are moving more towards the right. Clinton's policies during his presidency are more conservative than liberal. In fact, the Clintons are wolves in sheep's clothing. They are cold and calculating Republicans disguised as Democrats. McCain on the other hand is more a liberal than a conservative. He is certainly more liberal than Hillary. The McCain-Feingold, McCain-Liberman and McCain-Kennedy bills are excellent indications of why McCain is more liberal than Hillary. Ann Coulter's support for Hillary is refreshing for the Republicans who needed a voice. After examining the Clintons legacy and the prospect of a Clinton co-presidency, it sends shivers through my spine. The thought of mandated health insurance plan by Clinton for the poor like many of us is just beyond belief. Forcing us to buy health insurance at inflated prices is morally wrong, obnoxious and reprehensible. She does not understand the ground realities of poor America because she had not been there. She criticized Obama for raising the issue of mandated health insurance. Is she going to fine us or send us to prison for not buying health insurance we cannot afford.

By the way, the sleazy and shady dealings surrounding the Clintons did not come up in the discussions. We need to look more into her integrity. Nothing was raised regarding the New York Times article on the Canadian businessmen who donated $30 millions to the Clintons for political patronage. Doesn't the press and the media, consider that such shady business dealings relevant to the discourse or has truth become irrelevant with the media? The question is, can we trust the Clinton co-presidency who has repeatedly shown a lack of moral integrity and a deficit of truthfulness?

The Clinton who needs to apologize is Hillary, for her Iraq war vote. Sad how the mainstream media finds more interest in real or imagined racial slights than a U.S. made disaster that has claimed a million lives worldwide.

Hear that, Hillary? No apology, no vote. We already know what it looks like when a president thinks he has done no wrong. Not a good role model.

Note to Jimmy O: (1) Hill and Bill were beaten out over twenty time over in corruption by co-presidents Cheney and Rove, and (2) Al Gore actually won but was prevented from taking office by the Reagan-Bush court.

Is this a real apology? Seems totally political and obviously so.

Why is it two days before Super Tuesday? The Black churches should stop being Bill's lapdogs and go tell him to come grovel when he doesn't profit from it.

The Clintons are so sleazy, dishonest and transparent!

As a Hillary supporter, I'm proud of who my enemies are - and I'm sure Hillary is too, since most of the people calling her corrupt and sleazy are the Republicans who have run this country into the ground over the past eight years.

Obama has neither the gravitas nor the experience to run the country, and to reverse the damage the Republicans have inflicted.

I live in Tennessee, where Hillary is expected to rock and roll on Tuesday. I'll be there till the last dog dies to help her.

Well, I think that Bill and Hillay are NOT racist. Bill was not completely proper in talking, and I think that media was the guilty one who took his comments out of context. I think that it is wonderful that they try to reach out to the African-Amercian community. Have not we heard about forgiveness? Does it may us human after all?

Hillay 08!

If people think barack Obama can stand up to Republican easily, think again.

Check the report below. I wonder why US news doesn't report at all.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_amer icas/us_elections/article3284825.ece

How ridiculous. Bill C doesn't have to send letters of apology out... His record stands for itself... He's overall been a friend to Blacks. But wait, Bill's not running. It's his wife who is... So if she wants to send out a letter of apology, go right ahead. She's more important than Bill right now... let's not lose sight of this election... Hillary and not Bill is running... D.

Obviously Bill Clinton still thinks he can say and do anything and African Americans will forgive and forget.

As a constituent in Diane Watson's district, I must say I wish she would have supported Obama.

zzzzzzzzzzzzz

Obama should be playing the clip of Bill sleeping during the MLK tribute. If that isnt telling as to how much he REALLY cares, then I dont know what is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMXt4o826ZY

....look once you play the old racial group grudge card of the white man is being mean to the black man, black man is being disrespectful to the white women thus we hold out her chair for her, it works two ways, it stirs distrust on both sides and galvanizes groups against each other which is what it is intended to do, you just can switch it off or out when the audience changes so while it works in one setting SC it wont were demographics are different unless new strings are pulled like Catholics being trotted out ala Kennedys.

This is not code that is wielded it is Psycho Politics and Sociology 101, this type of politics while very ugly and effective to control group behavior is also not victimless politics and can create danger in our communities as it elevates anger not just inflames passion we all need to be careful of the Masterful Puppet Pullers...................

This is dangerous stuff ...and it alarms me that would pull these levers

The bottom line is I do not want 8 more years of both Clinton's in the White House. I will not vote for a woman who has not stood on her own, rather she rides the coat tails of her husband, while she develops an outsized ambition to become President and plays the card, "You owe me Bill for humiliating me with your most famous indiscretion, Monica."

Electing both Clinton's is looking in the rear view mirror. A vote for both Clinton's is not a vote for change and this country needs change in the worst way.

On the race issue, I think that the "conversation was all started by Mr. Obama during his "Yes we can" speech at the end of the New Hampshire Primary. I think he was a little shocked at the outcome and that he used very strong images in his speech in New Hampshire to the fire hoses, the police dogs and the long Selma March. All images of the Civil Rights Movement in a clear play to the Black Voters in South Carolina and across the South. So Obama made the first pitch to domesticate the Civil Rights Movement as a part and parcel, owned by the Obama Campaign.

As you can imagine, Bill Clinton has been tilling that field for longer that Obama has been in politics. White Democrats in the South have paid the price for listening to the call that came up from Martin Luther King for civil rights legislation and the result was the decimation of the Democratic Party in the South and the rise of the South as Red Republican territory.

Bill Clinton himself is hated in the South by White Southerners because of his advocacy for civil rights.

So when Obama came in and tried to take a proprietary interest in the Cause, sure, it got next to Clinton and he went after it.

Clinton does not need to apologise to anyone for his civil rights record. In fact, those who have questioned his commitment to civil rights in this country and human rights around the world, particularly in Africa where his foundation is finding ways to bring simple things like potable water to African tribes, they owe an apology to this man to think that he would engage in Race Baiting.

This is as wrong and as distorted as the Swift Boating of John Kerry to say that Bill Clinton was not really for civil rights. Obama was the author of this slander on Clinton as Bush was the author of the slander on Kerry.

Such is the new politics. It looks more like the old politics of destroy your enemies to me and Obama is playing it.

I think Bill's comments were a cynical political calculation. He is not racist but, he is smarmy. Either way, he destroyed his bond with african americans.
I am sure most blacks know he is not really a racist but, they also know he betrayed them.
He lightly threw blacks under bus. He used them as a weapon and thought that it was okay because he would just apologize later.
I'm sure tomorrow he will use that hangdog poor me sheepish look and try to charm them.
It will be up to the african americans to decide if they will easily forgive this or trust the Clintons again or give their support.
This primary has proven the sheer callousness of many black leaders, who have allowed themselves to be a party to it and condoned the Clintons behavior for their own personal gain. They, too, have betrayed african americans.

I call BS.

Just one more example of the fact that the Clintons will do or say anything in their relentless pursuit of power. If Hillary wins the Democratic nomination all the diviseness that was the halllmark of the Clinton presidency will come flooding back and the country will never rise above the partisanship in which we have been mired for the past 30 years. Its time to turn the page on the old politics and elect someone who inspires, and brings hope, vision and character to the White House.

The true political genius of this campaign is Obama, who managed to inject race into the campaign--Oprah in SC? Dissing MLK?--and get the media to blame the Clintons for it. Brilliant!

That hate email that said Obama is a "mus" - has hit the hearts of the white-boys around the place - oil companys pushing it now with there workers .......

..

Well it worked for Bill in Arkansas when he apologized to teachers after he was defeated for governor. Say anything. Do anything. Apologize when the heat's too hot.

Bill Clinton said I'm sorry in apologies to the nation more than all presidents put together. Remember the feeling, oh here we go again the feeling of being taken for a ride. Yes, we have to accept and forgive him, but lets help him be good by eliminating future opportunities for screwing up.
The clinitons can be pro-black but that doen's mean we owe them our souls. They were only doing their duty.
Vote Obama. This golden opportunity may never come again. At least in our life times.

I don't think Bill Clinton needs to apologize, but apparently he does, and if part of the reason is to help his wife's campaign, that's fine too.
However, when viewed/listened to in context, his comments re: fairy tale and Jesse Jackson's victory do not seem to me to be race baiting. I guess that makes me racist, irresepctive of my real life history.

It is distressing to see everyone desert the Clintons. Weren't the Clinton years a period when oil was below $25 a barrel and unemployment at its lowest. How many people felt good about being American at that time. Bill would have been elected to a third term if he could have stood again. Now everyone's abandoning Hillary because she is a Clinton. Come on people. You all are upset because of her vote on Iraq. What about all the other people who voted for Iraq? John Kerry voted for Iraq and yet his endorsement of Obama was well received. It IS possible that Hillary is privy to some information ( possibly through Bill) that made her vote the way she did. Ted Kennedy speaks of passing the mantle. Why does he not retire from the Senate and pass on the mantle himself. Did all these stalwarts really do anything to counter Bush over these past 7 years? The Dems have been in charge for over a year now and have they done anything concrete? Anecdotally: do you really want a President with a name that is similar to the names of two of hte greatest headaches of America in recent time: Obama similar to Osama & of course Hussein as in Saddam Hussein. By the way one of the Iraq radicals is known as Barrack.

Everyone seems to be endorsing Obama because he is fresh and they all feel like he would owe them some plum postings in his administration!! Perhaps Ted Kennedy & Kerry don't prefer the independence of the Clintons!!

And come on all you people! Don't you all have the affinity for BOGO - Buy One, Get One. Even though it is Hillary who will be president, everyone could benefit from a well experienced, seasoned leader like Bill as a spouse - or do we all prefer a school teacher!!!

It is true: Men don't like taking orders from women and women can't stand the thought of being subordinate to one of their own.

So stop burying your heads in the sand and pay back to the Clintons what you all received in the 90s.

I am so sick and tired of the media portraying Obama as some type of savior. For one, I was glad to hear Bill Clinton rip into Obama. I'd be happy for him to do it again. This is politics. It isn't for the faint of heart or the delicate and prim and proper. It's a heated and passionate battle between opposing viewpoints. That's how it should be. The Republicans ain't going quietly. It's going to be a nasty battle.

AND I NEED A FIGHTER TO REPRESENT MY VIEWS. Yes, I support Hillary Clinton because I know she's going to give them hell. Obama just doesn't cut it.

I can't believe people are even debating between Obama and Clinton. On one hand, we have a senator who voted for the authorization of force resolution which at the time EVERYONE knew meant was the authorization for war--common think back did you really think Bush was not marching to war. Realize when you defend Clinton voted for the resolution as a means to pressure Iraq, you are also defending the Bush administration. You can't have it both ways, if you thought that Bush was always going to go to war, and then you have to believe that Clinton also knew that right. Not only that, she never even read the National Intelligence Estimate, these are facts, they might be stubborn but facts nonetheless. So not only did she fail the "exam", she never opened the "book" to study for the "exam". And as if this was not enough, a couple of months back, she actually voted along with Bush on the Iran resolution. Again, she said this was to pressure Iran. So you failed once, maybe we forgive, failing twice, well that disqualifies you from consideration from being a senator let alone the presidency.

On the other hand, you have Obama who spoke out against the war when NOONE was brave enough to do so. Do you remember how EVERYONE who spoke up again the war was branded as a traitor? And keep in mind as well that he was an elected official at the time, he could have done the cravenly act and went along, but he spoke out. Hillary has tried to paint Obama as a man always driven to run for the presidency since he was in "kindergarten". So would it not have been the easy thing for Obama to go along--like Clinton did--and vote for a war that no one wanted to oppose?

Experience in failure is not what America needs; we have had 8 years of that. Additionally, ask yourself, do we really want 28 years (that's right 28 years) of a Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton presidency? Are we not a democracy?? Let's see, a dynastic "monarchy" where families with known names keep winning the presidency. That would put us in league with: 1) Egypt (Where Hosni Mubarak is going to hand the presidency to his son) 2) Syria (where Al-assad handed off the presidency to Bashar 3) North Korea (where "dear leader" handed off the leadership to his son Kim Ill Jong 4) Cuba (where Fidel Castro is handing off his presidency to his brother Raul 5) Saudi Arabia (Where King Fahd handed off his rule to his half brother Abdulla

I can go on and on with this. The point is that we are the United States of America; there is a reason why we have the 22nd amendment which limits the terms a president can serve. That is why our greatest Presidents (George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, and Thomas Jefferson) never served more than 2 terms. Only FDR served more than 2 terms, and that was during WWII, an existential threat to our nation where we needed a continuity of leadership desperately. And trust me; Bill and Hillary are no FDR.

My point is that we are a better country than to vote for someone based on a last name. Do we really want to go back to the divisiveness of the 90s? Do we want to go back to the endless investigations? And how long do you think it would be before we lose both houses of congress once America gets tired of the Clintons running the country ragged. We have a chance to elect a president who inspires 18,000 young and older Americans to attend a rally in the middle of the week. We need a president that gives us a fresh start and a clean break from the Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton years.

For all those supporting Hillary....please please refute ANY of these facts I listed above...I'm waiting

Yet another Clinton bashing article by the Washington Post. I've scarcely seen this paper in specific -- and the mainstream media in general -- so hell bent on sinking a candidacy.

Oh right -- they did the same thing with Al Gore. Just read today's coverage on Obama vs. HRC. I've got nothing against Obama. I may even vote for him. But the way this paper incessantly trashes HRC and Bill Clinton.

All Bill Clinton did was usher in an unprecedented eight years of peace and prosperity. Contrast that with what Bush has done -- dare I run down the litany.

Just stop the clowning already. Please.

God forbid - Bill Clinton is human and reacted to the neverending attacks on his wife. The press especially ignited the racial issue ON PURPOSE. The truth is Obama attacked first.

For those who go to church and believe in God - would be hypocrites if they don't believe in forgiveness and redemption. Any other response would prove them to be the hypocrites.

BS is right. This is designed by Billary to open up a black/white wedge. We whites are supposed to feel for "poor Bill" having to go apology in hand to black churches (whose idea really was it that he not speak? Probably Hillary's!) He's not trying to apologize for anything, he's trying to create an "us" vs "them" atmosphere, he's written off the black vote, he's just trying to get the bigger white vote to rally to their side. NOTHING DOING! Weasels! Have some respect for churches. They really think people are chumps. Like he'd really admit to wrongdoing of any kind. (Especially under oath!) This is a total con.

It's all politics, which means that all actions are calculated and revolve about the acquisition and retention of power.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Conservatism, liberalism, race, gender, marriage, sexual orientation, etc., are simply topics used to keep the public distracted and fighting while power is usurped.

After all, they all know that instead of using logic to assess politics, we will engage in emotionalism and righteousness.

And it always works because we fall for it every time.

To see how brilliantly and maliciously Obama's camp played the race card and baited Bill Clinton into the mud just watch this video - Obama's own words from the pre-Nevada debate where he conceded pushing the race story. Don't believe me, watch for yourself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQY_9ZcsjpQ&NR=1

What I most dislike about this malicious hypocrisy and what I object to is not that Obama's camp tried to secure the african-american vote. Fine. Clinton tried to secure the female vote too. However, Clinton has tried to do that without making Obama out to be a misogynist. What I find disgusting and reprehensible is that Obama played his cards in a way to not only secure his african-american vote but also to bait Bill Clinton and make him seem racist.

It was brilliant. Obama was colorless until he won Iowa. Then when he lost New Hampshire and Nevada, he was suddenly an african-american candidate.

If after watching the video you still want to go with Obama. It's your illusion, go for it. If you feel offended as I felt contribute towards Hillary's campaign:

https://contribute.hillaryclinton.com/form.html?sc=2337

Obama has raised $32 million, he is closing fast, it's now or never.

Oh this is tooo funny! Slick Willie is being trotted out to undo the damage he has done. Did he actually think that his actions wouldn't have consequences?

Prove positive that they'll do and say anything to get elected.

Updated comments:

To see how brilliantly and maliciously Obama's camp played the race card and baited Bill Clinton into the mud just watch this video - Obama's own words from the pre-Nevada debate where he conceded pushing the race story. Don't believe me, watch for yourself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQY_9ZcsjpQ&NR=1

What I most dislike about this malicious hypocrisy and what I object to is not that Obama's camp tried to secure the african-american vote. Fine. Clinton tried to secure the female vote too. However, Clinton has tried to do that without making Obama out to be a misogynist. What I find disgusting and reprehensible is that Obama played his cards in a way to not only secure his african-american vote but also to bait Bill Clinton and make him seem racist. Read for a play-by-play on how it was done:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23140008-7583,00.html

It was brilliant. Obama was colorless until he won Iowa. Then when he lost New Hampshire and Nevada, he was suddenly an african-american candidate.

If after watching the video and reading the article you still want to go with Obama, fine. It's your illusion, go for it. If you feel as offended as I felt, contribute towards Hillary's campaign:

https://contribute.hillaryclinton.com/form.html?sc=2337

Obama has raised $32 million, he is closing fast, it's now or never.

Give me a break. Bill can visit all the Black churches he likes, but there's no undoing the fact that he was willing to race bait to achieve his & Hill's goals. He tried to divide & conquer between White/Black, Black/Latino...and it won't be forgotten at the voting booths. The damage is done & it's permanent.

Hillary Supporters...I'm still waiting for any one to refute the following....

I can't believe people are even debating between Obama and Clinton. On one hand, we have a senator who voted for the authorization of force resolution which at the time EVERYONE knew meant was the authorization for war--common think back did you really think Bush was not marching to war. Realize when you defend Clinton voted for the resolution as a means to pressure Iraq, you are also defending the Bush administration. You can't have it both ways, if you thought that Bush was always going to go to war, and then you have to believe that Clinton also knew that right. Not only that, she never even read the National Intelligence Estimate, these are facts, they might be stubborn but facts nonetheless. So not only did she fail the "exam", she never opened the "book" to study for the "exam". And as if this was not enough, a couple of months back, she actually voted along with Bush on the Iran resolution. Again, she said this was to pressure Iran. So you failed once, maybe we forgive, failing twice, well that disqualifies you from consideration from being a senator let alone the presidency.

On the other hand, you have Obama who spoke out against the war when NOONE was brave enough to do so. Do you remember how EVERYONE who spoke up again the war was branded as a traitor? And keep in mind as well that he was an elected official at the time, he could have done the cravenly act and went along, but he spoke out. Hillary has tried to paint Obama as a man always driven to run for the presidency since he was in "kindergarten". So would it not have been the easy thing for Obama to go along--like Clinton did--and vote for a war that no one wanted to oppose?

Experience in failure is not what America needs; we have had 8 years of that. Additionally, ask yourself, do we really want 28 years (that's right 28 years) of a Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton presidency? Are we not a democracy?? Let's see, a dynastic "monarchy" where families with known names keep winning the presidency. That would put us in league with: 1) Egypt (Where Hosni Mubarak is going to hand the presidency to his son) 2) Syria (where Al-assad handed off the presidency to Bashar 3) North Korea (where "dear leader" handed off the leadership to his son Kim Ill Jong 4) Cuba (where Fidel Castro is handing off his presidency to his brother Raul 5) Saudi Arabia (Where King Fahd handed off his rule to his half brother Abdulla

I can go on and on with this. The point is that we are the United States of America; there is a reason why we have the 22nd amendment which limits the terms a president can serve. That is why our greatest Presidents (George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, and Thomas Jefferson) never served more than 2 terms. Only FDR served more than 2 terms, and that was during WWII, an existential threat to our nation where we needed a continuity of leadership desperately. And trust me; Bill and Hillary are no FDR.

My point is that we are a better country than to vote for someone based on a last name. Do we really want to go back to the divisiveness of the 90s? Do we want to go back to the endless investigations? And how long do you think it would be before we lose both houses of congress once America gets tired of the Clintons running the country ragged. We have a chance to elect a president who inspires 18,000 young and older Americans to attend a rally in the middle of the week. We need a president that gives us a fresh start and a clean break from the Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton years.

For all those supporting Hillary....please please refute ANY of these facts I listed above...I'm waiting

What baloney ansh, Obama wasn't supposed to respond to attacks from the Clintons? Why did you edit that video so that we couldn't even hear a whole sentence from Obama??? The rest of the SENTENCE didn't suit your purpose? Why on earth would you be citing an Australian newspaper for insight into our elections???? Can't find any US papers to support your view???? Talk about "malicious hypocrisy."

Hate George W. Bush as president? Blame Bill Clinton. It is Clinton, not Bush, who will go down as one of our worst presidents. Why? Because Gore had to run away from him in 2000, which resulted in his defeat.

If Bill and/or Hillary were human beings instead of political machines, one of two events should have happened:

1) Bill would have had sex or whatever you want to call it with a 20-year-old intern. Clinton, a very popular president, would have campaigned with Gore, and Gore would have routed Bush.

2) When word got out about Monica, Hillary should have dumped him. Bill resigns, Gore becomes president, and he routs Bush in 2000.

Remember - Bill Clinton, the WORST president.

Sorry, I meant Bill would NOT HAVE had sex in the above post.

@Jason
On the other hand, you have Obama who spoke out against the war when NOONE was brave enough to do so. Do you remember how EVERYONE who spoke up again the war was branded as a traitor?

My only point is that Obama was not in an office anywhere that mattered when this was happening. You should read Hillary's actual words from the Senate floor as she cast that vote; they are not quite as black and white as the public wants to believe.

I am an undecided voter, but I am sick of hearing about how Obama was against the war from the beginning. Guess what, I was against the war from the beginning too, but I was in college and no one gave a s***. We will never know how he would have voted if he would have been in the Senate/Congress then because he was NOT there. That's my only point.

Again, I'm not sure who I'm voting for, but as usual in politics, things are not so clear-cut.

Lynne posts: "God forbid - Bill Clinton is human and reacted to the neverending attacks on his wife. The press especially ignited the racial issue ON PURPOSE. The truth is Obama attacked first.

For those who go to church and believe in God - would be hypocrites if they don't believe in forgiveness and redemption. Any other response would prove them to be the hypocrites."

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

If, as you say, the press ignited the racial issue, or if Obama raised the racial issue first, then Bill would not and should not apologize. The fact is that Bill and Hillary BOTH inserted race into the campaign (Bill more than Hillary). Now, they realize that they went too far, so they have concluded that an "apology tour" at this time will win them votes next Tuesday and beyond.

I'll accept Bill's and Hillary's apologies after they LOSE the nomination.

Vote FOR the fairy tale!

The former President needs to apologize to the nation if he thinks one is necessary. There were many Americans of all stripes who were repulsed by that kind of politics. To do it only at black churches at this time shows how hollow it is. Why not a week ago or during the many speeches he has made since the South Carolina primary? The bible says "You cannot get to heaven with a carnal mind." This man has demonstrated his penchant for this kind of stuff. Look, Kennedy endorsed Obama and he attacks him on "no child left behind" even though his wife voted for it. Read Andy's piece on the Huffington Post about the keying of Obama's car in New Hampshire followed by what happened in South Carolina. Can you imagine what vengeance this guy would wreak on those who opposed his wife in this election if he gets near to the levers of this government again? All black people on death row..prepare to meet your maker. Remember that death row inmate in Arkansas while he was govenor? Read Mr Krauthammer's piece in the Atlanta Journal 02/01/08. It's right on point. God Help us! One Love!!

LOL. A sign of your mental instability is believing you have "enemies." We know that Clinton believes it - it's the rationalization that allows her to get through her day ("all of these nasty things people say about Bill and me...they couldn't POSSIBLY be based on the facts...").

But why the hell would YOU believe it? Who cares enough about you to bother being "your enemy"?

The whole race thing in SC was overplayed in the media. I think Bill Clinton was just saying that Hillary could not win SC because all of the black voters were going for Obama. Thats racist? Obama got over 82% of the black vote in SC, so what Bill Clinton was saying was basically true. I supported Obama to begin with but have since switched to HRC. I see a huge double standard on the media coverage of Obama and Clinton. Obama can get away with stuff like "Senator Punjab", the MLK/LBJ comments, telling Nevada Republicans to register as Democrats to beat Hillary, etc. Hillary fights back and the media says she is going negative. Bill Clinton points out the fact the black voters are supporting Obama unconditionally and he gets called a racist. Huge double standard here.

I wish every voter in the country could read the pro-Hillary comments here. The self-delusion, the desperation, the baseless justifications, the rank appeals to fear and the absurd claims of victimization. Unfortunately for all of you, the electorate appears to be paying attention this year.

So, by all means, continue to praise Hillary's record as Senator - we know better. Continue to defend Bill's dixiecrat southern strategy - we see it for what it is. Continue with the snide putdowns of this uppity negro - you've already lost the African-American community. Continue to drive those wedges, dividing brown against black, black against white, male against female - we recognize that despicable acts reflect a despicable morality. We see your hollow core of pure narcissism, ambition without empathy, triangulation without principle... in short, Clintonism.

So I urge you to keep airing your true colors, continue to reveal what a Clinton restoration would actually look like, and keep reminding us why we got so sick of you the first time around and why so many of us lamented our votes on your behalf. You're all doing so well here.

With the help of grace, a clear-eyed electorate, a recognition that the world needs something more of us than we've managed over the last 4 decades, we may all wake up to the possibility of true national and political reconciliation next November. And no one will call you out when you say "I supported him from the beginning". After all, in your heart of hearts, in that part of you that's still free of the grievances, the cynicism, the fears, the collection of old scores that must be settled... deep down, you know you already support him. Embrace hope. Embrace the future. Let's make a revolution.

Some people can't see past race and all the things that divide us. I am White and resent the Clintons, it has nothing to do with race. With leadership comes responsibility, and the Clintons have shown over and over again, that they are incapable of being responsible. Also most of my adult life, we've had a Clinton or Bush in the White House, and I am so tired of both families. Who next after Hillary, Roger or Chelsea Clinton or Jeb Bush? We do not have a monarchy system of government.

I am not an Obama supporter, neither am I crazy about the McCain or Romney. My vote is to reject the Clintons. I was around in the 90s and I saw the damage of the Monica Lewinsky scandal, the Marc Rich money for pardon scandal, Hugh Rodham money for pardon scandal, travelgate, Bill Clinton lying under oath. That's why the Clintons would never have my vote.

I don't know why people keep complaining about Obama shoving race down their throats. It seems that it should be blatently obvious he's been trying to downplay the whole situation. If anything the media and the Clintons have been playing it up and the majority of the semantic slants I've seen, read and heard on the news doesn't seem to be working in his favor. To be honest I thought Dennis was our best bet because I never was much of a Clinton fan during Bill's reign yet I hear people talk about the good economics when he was in but that whole process is cyclical. The reason Bill looked so good was because he was squeezed in between Reagan, H. W. Bush, and W right now. He, like every president that we've had before, has a track record they try to suppress and his tactics as of late seem to be petty "soapbox" styled politicking. If he's so in love with black people then why did Ruwanda happen? Affirmative action was killed when he was around also (246 years of slavery to 38 years of reconstruction aid/ affirmative action) and he didn't present any methods to try to co-opt the situation. He's just trying to benefit himself and Hilary.

"Just cos you have a sax and live Uptown, don't mean your down and your skin's brown"

Be sure to file Bill and Hill under O for Opportunists.

Wake up Americans! We need to end our co-dependent, love affair with this co-dependent couple. I want the first, female President to be real. Not a co-President. But, to have accomplished this on her own merits. The office of Presidency isn't a shared experience between married couples. I also do not want to go through four more years of hearing Bill apologize. After awhile, enough is enough. Let's move on. I believe Barack Obama will lead us in a new direction. After 8 years of George W., we need to go in a new direction. With Billary, I feel it will be more of the same-deceptions, apologies, and scandals.

If WheelinzFunz |believes that Mrs. Clinton has "gravitas," so does Bill Clinton. The glib couple can talk the bark off a tree, but they never delivered on any promise that the Clintons made when they were in the White House. Little wonder that after he fooled the voters, Bill Clinton fooled his wife; and now that she has him chastened, after saving him from impeachment, she's got him under her thumb, until she gets in the White House again and is faced with her first crisis in the Islamic world (Muslim leaders will try to avoid shaking her hand in a photo op). Then we'll hear her screaming "Bill!" And he'll have her back where he wants her, dependent and submissive, ready for the fun to begin ("Now if you want me to help you, Hill, you'll have to stop checking my emails, getting the Secret Service to report who I see, and my Blackberry calls.") "Gravitas!" you say! Yeah, right!!ROFLMAO

First, there is no need for President Bill Clinton to apologize. I really think that Rev. Jesse Jackson's victory was much more impressive due to following reasons: first, in 1984 Reagan was riding so high in popularity, nobody even imagined that any democrat could defeat him and second, unlike Mr. Obama-- who is hiding behind the skirts of Ms. Oprah and thus avoiding the media completely while getting a free pass from the same media like the current occupant of the White House-- Rev. Jackson was hated by then media (similar to the treatment President Clinton and Ms. Clinton are getting from the press) and hounded him with criticisms everywhere! Unlike Mr.Obama, Rev. Jackson did not go about telling African Americans in South Carolina "see my opponent is saying this and that about you". He talked about issues such as affirmative action and the government's role in removing povery that Mr. Obama would not even think about saying for fear of offending his white base. I am sure that Rev. Jackson would not have referred to the ethnic cleansing of New Orleans as colorblind inefficiency or something in anticipation of his entering the presidential race! There was no way Rev. Jackson with the powerful media and white people opposed to him could have won in South Carolina with just two ethnic groups, but for majority of African-Americans voting for him in a state. In fact, President Clinton, in my opinion, insulted Rev. Jackson by comparing him with Mr. Obama!

I'll believe it when I see and hear it. The Clintons, like the Bushes, don't apologize. That's why we need to turn the page on these American dynasties and elect a leader with vision and integrity - Barack Obama.

I am so sick of the Clinton pattern--do/say whatever you want, apologize later (but only if you really have to). Do people think there's anything sincere about this? Can't we move on?

Bill Clinton lied to the country, cheated on his wife, and lost his license to practice law. Why are we even listening to this guy?

Come on...aren't there more important issues that face us, that we should be puting our energy into debating/defeating than this drivel? Arianna and the bloggers here seem to me will post anything to get a charge out of the Clinton "haters", and anything to get a charge out of...geeze who knows who gets a charge out of "I'm F&$kIN# Matt Damon"? What the hell does that have to do with informed political conversation and/or debate, or the future and welfare of our country? Used to come to HuffPo for discourse above the sort of discourse you can find at any supermarket check-out stand. And now we get, ""I'm F&$kIN# Matt Damon"?

By the way, most people that are screaming about race. All the African American leaders in SC endorsed Hillary. In NYC, Congressman Rangel is endorsing Hillary. Most of the African American politicians cannot stand Obama. They see him as an someone that would diminish their relevance. Bob Johnson (Founder of BET) went on National TV whilst introducing Hillary and mentioned that Obama experimented with drug as teenager. Bill and Hillary Clinton have a long-standing political relationship with many African American Politicians and continue to do so. So let's stop this nonsense about race and focus on the future of our country. I strongly believe our country will be better of without the Clintons. The Clintons bring back terrible memories of the 90s, it is time to turn a new page. Vote McCain, or Romney or Obama. Reject the Clinton dynasty

As an African-American I must say that the damage has already been done. African-Americans are now FULLY in Barack Obama's camp. The "Jesse Jackson" comment was the last straw. An apology will not matter and will just remind everyone about the stupid comment.

If HRC wins the primary and does NOT appoint Obama as her Vice President than I predict that the African-American voters will stay home for the most part in the general election.

How can these churches allow something so political to go on and not lose their tax exempt status? Isn't there a community center that he could appear? I really don't get it. My pastor is extremely careful to not inject political discourse into the service to not jeopardize the tax exempt status.

A person who has integrity, ethics, and honesty....and who cares about his fellow man....should act/behave in a way that he never creates a situation in which he would have to apologize. Say what you mean...and mean what you say. It should be about "how you play the game"....not merely "who wins". The way you play the game shows your character...or your lack of character. Wake up, people. Don't be twisted around any more. Enough of the Clintons....both of them.

In response to an above comment: In New York, Congressman Rangel's wife endorsed Obama.

I wonder how much money those preachers will get from Bill

enuff! after losing NH & NA, obama injected race in to the campaign by misrepresenting clinton's comments into racially tinged sound bites. the tactic worked and black pride won him SC.

but america is not a black majority country. sen. clinton's coalition of supporters of various race & creed will have a chance to voice their support on super tuesday.

we support clinton because of her lifetime work on issues important to working americans and the underserved. we will vote for her because of her intelligence, guts and YES, experience!

we will nominate sen. clinton and vote her president!

end of story.

it will be a shame if Obama is on the same ticket with the Clintons. That would destroy his platform and his appeal. He is against everything the Clintons stand for. That ticket would be defeated by the Republicans. Obama-Clinton, Clinton-Obama ticket would be a disaster for the Democrats. McCain would trounce them big time. Reject the Clinton dynasty.

So typical Clintons. Slam them and when it's over apoligize. Use them when you need them and then move on with your agenda.

How I hope the black's don't fall for the Clinton line this time....both Bill and Hillary are "users" and "abusers"....it's ALL about Clintons, d&mn the country and the black community.

Raymond T. Anderson:
"The Clinton who needs to apologize is Hillary, for her Iraq war vote. Sad how the mainstream media finds more interest in real or imagined racial slights than a U.S. made disaster that has claimed a million lives worldwide.
Hear that, Hillary? No apology, no vote."

Well said. You speak for me too.

I'll take the candidate with the best judgement and the courage to speak to our enemies as well as our friends. That person is Barack Obama, who had this to say in 2002 "I thought our priority had to be finishing the fight in Afghanistan. I spoke out against what I called "a rash war' in Iraq. I worried about, 'an occupation of undetermined length, with undetermined costs, and undetermined consequences.'"
Meanwhile Hillary Clinton voted FOR the Iraq invasion. She now says she hadn't read the resolution, but was fully briefed and was assured that it didn't mean war. Apparently she hadn't even read the title, which was "Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002."
Ryan is right. The Clintons should be apologizing for her vote and for Bill claiming Obama's judgement on Iraq is a "fairytale." Hillary's weasling on this important issue is a fairy tale.

All of you people who seem to insist that Hillary Clinton is the Devil Incarnate while Barack Obama is some sort of saint need to grow up. They are people, period. Complex, interesting, intelligent people. They are also politicians.

So, Clinton will "say anything, do anything" to get elected? You think Obama won't? Keep smoking whatever is comforting you, then, since you're not interested in reality. You probably voted for Nader, thinking it wouldn't matter whether Bush or Gore won the presidency. Happy now?

Obama's thin skin and easily bruised feelings have turned this lifelong Democrat off completely. What is the poor boy going to do when the Republicans start sliming him (and they will; it's what they do best...)? Cry? Run home to Michelle? What? He already looks like he's going to throw a tantrum any time anyone asks him a question he doesn't like. His petulance and arrogance are extremely disturbing - he acts as though the presidency is his due. It's not. And haven't we had quite enough of Mr. Petulant, "It's all about me, the Decider" for the last eight years?

He supposedly stands for unity. Do you nutjobs really believe that, if Obama is the nominee, all of the Republicans are going to suddenly take their meds, and come sit around the campfire & sing a few choruses of Kumbaya? Not happening, people. To me, Obama sounds a little too much like Republican-lite. Sure, it's necessary to work with people, but you also have to pick your fights. I see Obama caving to everything the Republicans want - after all, isn't anything else "divisive" and "partisan"?

What's Obama going to do the first time one of his proposals is opposed by the Republican bloc in Congress (and let's face it, the Republicans will oppose *any* proposal of *any* Democratic president, just on what passes for their "principles")? Pitch a fit? Preach at them about how they're not "uniting"? Think they're going to care? Whine about how they're being unfair or racist? Or are you betting on a veto-proof Congress? There's no guarantee; some people would vote for a dead chicken if it had a R after its name.

So no wonder so many Republicans supposedly love Obama - they see him as their best chance of getting everything they want from a nominally Democratic president. Clinton has been there, seen that, and she's not falling for it. She knows how to pick her battles; when to compromise and when to fight.

As for those who think people who know they have enemies are delusional, check out any of the right-wing blogs where Senator Clinton is regularly referred to as "Hitlery." What, you think these people are her friends or something?

So grow up, already. Senator Clinton has the best chance of taking on the Republicans and repairing the damage they've done to this country. She's got my vote.

The more Bill Clinton apologizes, the more voters will remember what he is apologizing for - playing the race card. And once you've played that card, if you fall for the apology and vote for Hillary, then you've got no one but yourself to blame when Bill finds himself having to issue apologies on numerous other matters.

Bill, for all his intellect and political instincts, has become a liability. And he's a liability more for the general election than in the primary season. We all know that the general election will be a tarring of the Clinton marriage, Bill's presidency, and his business dealings. He'll be an albatross, not just around Hillary's neck, but around the nation's collective neck. We'll never get the robust policy debate we'd get if Obama were to face off against the GOP nominee. We'd be in scandal city all over again, and I personally won't vote for Hillary in the nominating process to spare us all that fate.

You only have to look at some of these posts to see that the main thing Clintons inspire is hatred. Some against them and some from their backers. It's time to turn the page on BUSH/CLINTON/BUSH.

GO OBAMA '08

If you care about honesty, ethics and morals, then you must reject the Clintons. Google "Clinton Convicts", and see the results. That is the legacy of the Clintons. Reject the Clinton dynasty.

This is the full text of Obama's speech against the idiocy of the Iraq War, which Hillary Clinton voted for...

I Don't Oppose All Wars

I don't oppose all wars. My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton's army. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil.

I don't oppose all wars. After September 11, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this administration's pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such tragedy from happening again.

Opposed to Dumb, Rash Wars

I don't oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.

What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income, to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.

On Saddam Hussein

Now let me be clear: I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power.... The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors...and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences.

I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars. So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president.

You Want a Fight, President Bush?

You want a fight, President Bush? Let's finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to make sure that...we vigorously enforce a nonproliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil through an energy policy that doesn't simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil.

Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and intolerance. Corruption and greed. Poverty and despair."

If this man is not our President, it is a loss for our country. We have a chance to vote for a man who was so precient on the most important matter of our time, versus a Senator from New York who voted for this insane war without ever reading the National Intelligence Estimate....the choice is stark, and the choice is clear.

>> He is against everything the Clintons stand for.

The liberal wing of the Democratic party deludes itself by thinking anyone who has not actually held national office is a saint (See Howard Dean, Ralph Nader, etc.). Obama is not as liberal or apolitical as you folks are making him out to be. I support HRC because she is tough, prepared, and professional.

"Hill and Bill Clinton ran the most corrupt and morally bankrupt White House since Nixon. Google "Clinton convicts" and see the results, that is the legacy of the Clintons."

Where has this person been for the last seven years? Please Bush-Cheney win this contest hands down!

The blacks are falling for it AGAIN!

During Kodak theater debate, Hillary mentioned one person per by name. In fact, she sat next to her daughter during this debate. Congresswoman Maxine Walters's endorsement to Hillary did not get much attention by media outlets. She is the biggest jackpot for Hillary. She can deliver votes in this area. Many insiders are predicting they will split african votes between Obama and Clinton. That will just prove to the rest of the country, Los Angeles is NOT South Carolina. That's also very good news for both candidates.

And to think I actually voted for this man...and thought about doing the same for Hillary until their disgusting campaign...think about the following...

Monica, Kazikstan, Whitewater, FBI Files, Wiley, Lincoln bedroom, $400,000 for pardons, Marc Rich, Chinese contributions, Vince Foster, Nannygate, Travel Gate, Paula Jones, Definition of the word "is" is, Juanita Broadrick, I did not have sex with that woman, disbarment, the republican revolution, contract with America, impeachment...and on and on...

Hillary supporters, is this really the change that you want?? Nominating Hillary is a death pact for the Democratic party, I will gladly vote for McCain before ever voting for Clinton. Not only that, with both Clinton and McCain hated by a significant segment of their own party, Bloomberg will run and capture disaffected Rs and Ds. Why do you think he keeps floating the idea every couple of week. Hillary could not get over 60% in Michigan running unopposed..when the typical number for people that run unopposed is over 90%. We need real change, we don't need to change back the hands of time...

I do not think that Bill Clinton is a racist.
What I do find him to be is a cynical politician who will play any card in the deck in order to gain advantage. He always has been willing to set whites against blacks when he saw that was to his advantage. He wants whites to see Obama as only a candidate of black Americans. Guess who gets to draw from the huge non black majority.
This is not the first time Bill Clinton has played that card.
Go back and read about how he played the Sistah Soljah card against Jesse Jackson, in order to make sure that white voters stayed away from him.
Bill Clinton loves blacks when he needs their support, and he will throw them to the dogs if he thinks that will gain him an advantage. Racists are too full of hate to ever play that game.
In some ways the Bill Clintons of the world are worse than racists. At least with racists, the targets of their hatred always know where they stand. It is far worse when someone who has befriended you, turn around and feeds you the wolves.

Slick Willy visits african-american churchs to say, "I'm sorry, I made mistake." This old school narcissist sex addict is so manipulative it is astounding! How could anyone have a relationship with him? Throw Billary out! We need honesty. Wake up America!

just one question: would bill clinton be apologizing if california wasn't just a three point race?

i highly doubt it.

and that just goes to show the political phoniness of the clintons. They say or do anything to get elected.

I think someof us are relying to heavily on too few media sources for the FACTS. As a presidential candidate, Bill Clinton once desperately courted the African American vote on the premise he brought about change (ie. Bush Senior), and that he was the guy with the judgment (vs. Bush Seniors' experience), so its hypocritical and offensive to many African Americans that Clinton would use words like "fairytale," and untruthful to describe the Obama campaign.

Further, I find it disturbing that Senator Clinton seems have relied on her husbands' cache to such a degree she lost her voice (again). As a self-proclaimed feminist, how ironic that a viable female candidate for president is allowing her husband to go and be her voice. It's one thing for Bill to speak to his wofe's accomplishments, its quite another for the spouse to jump into the fray. I wonder if this is the start to a trend when all spouses will feel obliged to go on the attack.

Finally, I think as voters we all need to be honest about who and why we support candidates for public office. I advocate to all to be investigative and seek out news, information, position statements, etc. that will give you an in-depth perspective. We owe it to the country and the world to make INFORMED choices. These televised debates are not enough and if you ONLY rely on them to give you a sense of the candidate, their values, their moral center, etc. You will be left uninformed.

Some of you need to wake up and see what is going on. George W. Bush is the worst thing that has ever happened in the US in politics. He has ruined the economy, the army, the justice dept, the reputation of the US in the world with his torture of prisoners. Also has left us so far in debt that it will take no telling how many years to get over. And Bill Clinton is the best president that we have had in many, many, long years. So support Hillary because she can call upon all of the experience that he has and all of the good smart people of the US that will not give George W. Bush the time of the day!!!

Speaking as a black woman, the Clinton's behavior in this campaign has been deeply painful for me. The Clinton's are the reason why I began following politics in the first place. Bill Clinton was the first president I have ever voted for. If anybody would ever say anything negative about the Clintons, I would fiercly argue in their behalf. I even named my 5 year-old son William Thomas after Bill Clinton. I couldn't have never imagine a time in which I would never support the Clintons.

Unfortuantely, that time has come. I can no longer support anything the Clinton's ever do. I do not believe the Clinton's are racists, but I believe they would do anything to get elected. It is astounshing to see the Clintons jeopardize their close relationship with the African-American community to win an election. How can you do something so vile to a people who had your back when you was going through the whole Monica Lewinsky scandal? We loved you dearly.

I wish the Hillary supporters would stop bashing us when this is very painful for the African-American community. We do not easily turn our backs on someone we deeply adore.

The S.C. actions of Bill and Hillary Clinton showed me what they really stand for: POWER. Politically inspired apologies cannot restore neither my trust in them or respect for them. I hope many other African-Americans will stand with me in this sentiment.

>>Unfortuantely, that time has come. I can no longer support
>>anything the Clinton's ever do.

I guess I can understand this. What turned me away from Obama was the way he was hammering Hillary on stuff like "Senator Punjab", the Walmart comment, MLK/LBJ out of context, Nevada Republicans register as Democrats to defeat Hillary, ... As a father of two daughters it torqued me off that he could get away with that without getting any heat in the media. To paraphrase though: "Let me be perfectly clear", I will gladly take Obama over any Republican come general election time.

What a jerk. Play the race card, because you think it'll get you votes, and then come back on your hands and knees and say you didn't mean it. Really despicable.

The War Vote: Does anyone else remember how GWB had the country over a barrel at the time of that vote? After 9/11 and the Anthrax scare and all, people wanted their senators to give the President what ever leeway he needed to get the job done. In retrospect it was foolish and I remember those votes being very pained and conflicted. I too was against the war from the beginning, but I can understand how a Senator would vote that way. At that time there was hope that any foolishness by Bush would be countered by Colin Powell (again a faulty assumption).

I don't know whether Ms. Diane Watson plays politics though she knows who really the Clintons are.

If she believes Bill Clinton is so-called "first black president crap," she has a long way to go. She seems still in survival mode coming from the toxic environment.

The war is right and important. We are fighting folks out there who would destroy western civilization and winning. They are playing hard ball the democrats are playing politics. The media drones on and a thousand times tells those with a 5th grade mentality that "he lied". Then they take a poll. If the democrats prevail, we will pay the price down the road. It will be harder to defeat them then. Meanwhile, Obama would sell our security for a vote and Hillary would sell anything for a vote. And fools support them.

More Clinton tactic. How disgusting that he will even use a church for his 'flame, blame, then feign remorse' campaign.

Well, I understand that Obama is going to be watching the superbowl Sunday while his racist wife and African Oprah and wild eyed liberal Caroline Kennedy are out campaigning in California. Once again the women are having to get the job done. I am really glad that Moveon.com and Ted Kennedy endorsed Obama. Now we know how to the left Obama is. We don't need liberal left or conservative right, we need moderate. I will vote for Hillary first and Mccain second. Never Obama or Romney. Moderates seem to be in the middle which is were the middle class live. I loved President Kennedy but I realize we will never know what kind of President he would have actually have been since he wasn't there to prove himself. It is easy to idolize him because of his death regardless of what kind of 4 year president he would have been. But we do all know about his brother that drowned the lady and about his voting record. Go moderates.

take it easy,people. white man, black man, who did this, who did that, yada yada yada... all these post only shows how you people are. don't blame MSM for the ugliness, just listen to you, you are all became what MSM wants you to be. shame shame shame. we have a bigger fight ahead. just take a deep breath,get on these two candidates web sites and read through them one more time-and please take your time- then make up your mind for once and for all. REPUBLICANS are watching and getting ready. only way we can go through it is by UNITED. let's stop this 'school yard spit ball fight', all the spit balls will end up on your faces, no one else.

As an independent who voted for Bill Clinton twice, and defended him during the impeachment crisis, I've come to realize the true nature of the Clinton (Billary?) political machine. They care nothing about this country, or the status of their party. Its all about THEM.

My prediction: The Republican candidate will be John McCain. The Democratic candidate will be Hillary Clinton. McCain will win the presidency, as 1) he CAN attract the independent vote, and 2) Hillary's negatives (i.e. her HUSBAND?) are much too high.

And to think we could have had a true "leader" and not a politician with Senator Obama.

Briann wrote:

"Oh this is tooo funny! Slick Willie is being trotted out to undo the damage he has done. Did he actually think that his actions wouldn't have consequences?"
-----------------------------------

I'm sure he knew exactly what the consequences would be. Bill Clinton is only happy when the story is about him, which does not bode well for a Hillary presidency.

I only hope the AA community will chose to vote this woman out of office. Clearly, her loyalty to Clinton money rises above concern for constituents.

And speedo you are clearly a moron. Is it dark in there?

I agree with Lisa. The Clintons are not racists. They hate everyone equally that opposes their absolute power grab and will do anything to destroy that opponent. I would rather have McCain, the lesser of two evils. At least he believes in what he is doing and is not ashamed of his position. Billary does the everything for personal gain. Slick Hilly is absolutely unelectable.

Jim, it maybe dark in here but it sure is not black.

Another African American politician endorses Billary - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/02/AR2008020201003.html?hpid=topnews

People should do what they believe is in the best interest of the country. Race baiters, pls stop it. This is not about race, gender or social status, it is about the future of our country.

The Clintons will do anything to return to the White House. if you care about ethics, integrity, selfless service to mankind, then you must vote to reject the Clinton dynasty. We are a country of 350 million people, there is no reason why we should continue to be ruled by 2 families. We do not run a monarchy system of government. Do you remember Monica Lewinsky? Marc Rich Money for Pardon Scandal? Hugh Rodham Money for Pardon Scandal? Google "Clinton Convicts" and see the results. That is the legacy of the Clintons. It is time for a new beginning, reject the Clintons. Our country deserves better.

The choice is easy: Lenin or Marx for president.

How long are blacks going to keep being fooled by this shameless race-baiter? And all the rest of the shameless race-baiters in the Democrat Party?

Too little, too late, and so patently insincere.

Its Clinton drama pathology at work again in its mind-numbing repetitive pattern: 1. mess up
2. blame the target of the attack / and or deny
3. public outcry
4. have to apologize.

Now think back...how many times has this scenario played out with Bill and Hillary Clinton? How many times have we seen them on 60 minutes apologizing or rationalizing? How many times have we been subjected to the painful and emotionally awkward sight of Bill holding Chelsea's hand who's holding Hillary's hand as they walk to the helicopter on the White House lawn?

Well, I for one NEVER want to see them that forced photo op again.

And Senator Obama cannot agree to be her possible VP because then the Clinton scandals will stick to him. You think the Clintons wouldn't relish blaming their VP Obama for some future drama down the road? Believe it.

The only way out of this Clinton family drama pathology is for America to ignore the Billary team and its repetitive antics and to vote for Senator Obama.

This is not about Bill Clinton. Hillary has said she should be judged on her on merits, yet even on this post, people are fondly remembering prosperity during the Clinton years. Does this automatically translate that the economy will be great with her as President? One of the reasons why the economy was good during the Clinton years was the ramping up we did for Y2K. This Country spent more money on preparing for Y2K than any other country. The jobs and prosperity were not being created by Bill Clinton, they were being automatically created by the turn of the century and he got to cash in on it.

Immediately following Y2K, the jobs started disappearing in this country and more and more Americans have either lost their jobs or are fearful of losing them, especially our high technology jobs. Hillary Clinton has supported outsourcing and the free trade global economy at least as far back as 2002. As Senator, she welcomed the biggest Indian outsourcing firm to Buffalo, NY. She has been on the Board of Directors of WalMart, the biggest importer of goods made in Communist China.

Obama is not in favor of special interests groups running this country. Are you? WalMart is one of the biggest special interest groups there is and we cannot turn a blind eye to Hillary's former bed partners.

Obama wants to meet with the enemies of the U.S. and Hillary does not. That also bothers me. How can she say she will pull out of Iraq if she will not meet with those we are protecting Iraq from. We need to improve our likability factor throughout the world. This may prevent us from being such targets of hatred. I believe Obama can deliver that factor that is missing in Hillary. Obama has that ability to provoke people to want to make changes and I believe that would apply to foreign leaders as well.

Some forums claim that if we pull out of Iraq then 9/11 will happen all over again. It might be worth mentioning that terrorists are determined to terrorize. Do you honestly think our occupation of Iraq prevents terrorism? What is the indication that we have won this war and its safe to pull out? Or will this turn into another View Nam. We have been there 5 years and have not stamped out terrorism nor have we put a dent in terrorism. Once you get rid of one cell another forms to take its place. You have children joining these terrorists groups at very young ages. You have suicide bombers. They are willing to die for their cause and we should be ready to die for ours. Nobody ever accomplished anything by being fearful. While we are busy fighting terrorism in Iraq, who says terrorists cells are not forming right here under our noses. The terrorists from 9/11 were based in the United States, not Iraq.

One last thing there may be a Clinton-Clinton ticket. It is not unconstitutional for Bill Clinton to be elected Vice-President. The only rules are he cannot be elected President for a 3rd term. Should something happen to Hillary he would seve as President until the next election at which time he could not run for re-election.

Lets not go for the third decade of either a Bush or a Clinton in the White House. Lets vote for real change. Vote Obama. The time of now.

That whole "ghettoization" ploy was so egregious even conservative commentator Pat Buchanan was shocked.

This character deficit thing with both Clintons has always bugged me. I mean, I don't care if they share my policy views or not, I just can't vote for someone whose ethics are less than pretty darned good. Hey, one or two lapses I can deal with. But here are some more of Hillary's inconvenient behavior patterns I came up with in just 5 hours of research.

No wonder the Republicans have calluses on their knees praying for Hillary to win the nomination.

- In 1988, Bill and Hillary jerry rigged Arkansas' first piece of ethics legislation to exempt Hillary and her law firm from conflict of issues in representing clients before her husband. (NYT Mar 27, 2992)

- Hillary cooked up a plan during her husband's first Presidential administration to "sell" taxpayer paid for "trade missions" in exchange for campaign contributions.

- According to Independent Counsel Robert Ray, Hillary gave "factually false" testimony under oath in connection with the Travelgate investigation. I think that lying under oath is called perjury, isn't it?

- Prevailed upon her husband to grant pardons to convicted Puerto Rican terrorists (and that includes murderers) in a craven bid to ingratiate themselves to Hispanic voters in the run-up to Hillary's first Senate campaign. Nicely done Hillary.

- Allowed her brothers Anthony and Hugh Rodham to "broker" huge cash deals to obtain Presidential pardons from Bill Clinton for Marc Rich and others. In a Democratic debate during the last month Hillary hilariously denied that she knew anything about these pardons. Even Hillary's slimeball/ racist in chief strategist Mark Penn must have laughed over that one.

- Hired a private detective to illegally obtain the FBI files of former Reagan and H.W. Bush staffers.

- Hired multiple detectives to track down the small army of Bill's Bimbos and intimidated or blackmailed them into silence, engaging in ". . . a systematic campaign to intimidate, frighten, threaten, discredit and punish innocent Americans whose only misdeed is their desire to tell the truth in public." Former Hillary strategist / confidant Dick Morris quoted in the NY Post Oct 1, 1998.

- Invested $1,000 in cattle futures via the Chicago Mercantile Exchange and with insider advice turn it into a $100,000 in ten (10) months. A 1995 study by economists from Auburn University and University of North Florida concluded in an article published in the Journal of Economics and Statistics that there was only a 1 in 250 million chance that Rodham could have made the profits she did legitimately.

- Echoing the 18 minute Nixon tapes gap, denied any knowledge of how her Whitewater billing records mysteriously disappeared from the office of Vince Foster, the former Rose Law Firm partner and Clinton White House Counsel. Yet after the heat went way, way up, those records mysteriously reappeared in the Whitehouse book room bearing Hillary's fingerprints (and I mean, her actual fingerprints as determined by the FBI lab). Laughably, she still denies knowing anything about them.

- And revealing that down and dirty 'sleazeball' behavior that comes to the fore with desperate politicians, Hillary totted out so-called "liberal" Bob Kerrey - a former Senator - to go on and on and on about Obama's wonderful Muslim heritage and how great it was that Obama attended a "secular" madrassa. Pretty lame ploy. (And a secular madrassa? I can't believe this idiot is the President of the New School.)

But you know what, in this age of hyper-partisan, societal segmenting and downright tribalization of politics, making character and integrity the foremost considerations of the nation's leader is soooo old school.

Hillary will get the Dem nomination and John McCain will easily win the Whitehouse.

To the poster who claimed McCain is more "liberal" than the Clintons....that's got to be the joke of the month, believe me. The Coulter remarks are all part of the new RNC/Karl Rove strategy:
make McCain appear to be "non-threatening" to independents. But wait till the orchestrated Limbaugh-Hannity phoney indignation subsides, and we'll all see that McCain is basically another NeoCon running on the Fear Factor, and perhaps even worse he'll just be
another advocate of Reagonomics. Savvy independents know that
the last thing we need now are fiscal policies echoing those of Ronald Reagan, Bush I and Bush II. McCain's alleged "maverick, RINO" identification is a sham and a fraud. And independents will figure that out by election day, I guarantee it.

Bill Clinton continues to fight a war that he has long lost. His recent behavor is nothing short of disgusting.
This is a man who was clearly gone after by a number of zealots from the other side. Bill Clinton, pushed into a corner since his presidency because of scandals, some real & some imagine, has decided for good or ill, that in future at least during this season, he will always be on the attack if necessary, and would never allow any attacks or criticism against him or his wife him to go unanswered, no matter how true, relevant or deserving these criticisms are.
The problem is, Clinton's legacy is already sealed. He will always be remembered by reference to female names, e.g. Monica Lewinsky, Paula Jones etc. It is therefore pointless now for the former president to be angry at those who politically disgree with him, or anyone who fails to buy this notion that he and his wife were ordained by God to assume the highest office in the land. Bill Clinton squandered his chance to be remembered as a good president, and no attacks against political foes, no matter how nasty and vitriolic, would make the general public garner any pleasant memories Clinton's presidency.
The sad fact is that Bill Clinton's actions and words are beginning to make him look petty, vindictive, frustrated and downright nasty. The most recent evidence coming within the last few days: no sooner than Ted Kennedy offered his support to Obama, Bill Clinton was appearing on television casting blame on Kennedy for backing 'No