Edwards: 'Obama Will Be the Nominee'

By Zachary A. Goldfarb
Former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards said it is likely Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) will be his party's nominee, and he warned Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) against hurting the party's chances in the fall by staying in the race.

"I think it is likely, certainly, at this point, that Senator Obama will be the nominee," said Edwards, a former North Carolina senator and two-time presidential candidate.

He added on CBS's "Face the Nation," "I think the one thing that [Clinton] has to be careful about ... is that, if she makes the case for herself, which she's completely entitled to do, she has to be really careful that she's not damaging our prospects, the Democratic Party, and our cause, for the fall."

Edwards said Clinton has been making "a pretty compelling case for her candidacy," but "you can no longer make a compelling case for the math." Obama on Saturday took a lead among Democratic superdelegates, and he already led among pledged delegates.

Edwards said that, when he got out of the race, he believed "it would accelerate the process of one person pulling away." But, he said, "I was obviously dead wrong about that." He said Clinton is in a "very, very tough place" in deciding whether to stay in the race.

Edwards would not give any clues about whether he will endorse a candidate, saying it's not a "big deal."

On a different show, Obama aide David Axelrod virtually ruled out transferring funds from the campaign to the Clinton campaign, as a way to cover her debt and ease her transition out of the campaign.

"I don't think even under any scenario no one said that we were going to transfer money from the Obama campaign to the Clinton campaign," he said on "Fox News Sunday."

He added, "The truth is I think that Senator Clinton will have the capacity to retire her debt. I don't believe that Senator Clinton is looking for a deal. I don't think that's what this is about."

Top Clinton aide Howard Wolfson acknowledged on Fox that the campaign is $20 million in debt - both to Clinton and to vendors. He brushed aside talk that Obama, in order to ease Clinton's exit from the race, would help retire that debt.

"I think any talk of that is premature. Senator Clinton is going to be the nominee. When she's the nominee, we'll be in a position to retire our own debt," Wolfson said.

Wolfson said that his campaign is committed to seating the Florida and Michigan delegations, even if the Democratic National Committee rules panel elects not to at the end of the month.

"My hope is that they will. My expectation is that they will. And we are committed to seating Florida and Michigan," Wolfson said.

Axelrod said he predicted a steady flow of superdelegates coming out to publicly back Obama.

"I think you're going to continue to see that. I think that's a natural thing. We're coming to the end of the process," Axelrod said.

Axelrod also said Obama is taking "very seriously" the McCain campaign's idea of joint discussions and debates between the two candidates at town halls around the country.

Democrats' Reid: McCain Turned Back on Independents

Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) attacked Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), saying that the Republican nominee has "wrapped his arms around George Bush" and forfeited the independent credentials he carried after the 2000 election, when he was thinking McCain might switch to the Democratic Party.

"John McCain was a different John McCain in those days than he is now," Reid said on ABC's "This Week," adding: "He didn't vote with [Republicans] on the ridiculous things they have done on tax policies, put this country in red ink for the next generation, or two, or three. He didn't walk lockstep with Karl Rove in the White House and Bush. I mean, he's a different person now than he was then, and that's a disappointment."

Carly Fiorina, a business executive who is now one of the top officials in the McCain campaign, said on the same show, "I've heard a lot that John McCain is a third Bush term. Nothing could be further from the truth. It was John McCain, after all, who spoke loudly, for four long years, saying that Don Rumsfeld was the worst secretary of defense in history, that the prosecution of the war in Iraq was going badly, and that we needed a new strategy."

On CNN's "Late Edition," Republican whip Roy Blunt said, when it comes to taxes, a McCain administration would be in effect a third Bush term.

"I think it would be. And I think that's a good thing," he said.

By Post Editor |  May 11, 2008; 1:33 PM ET
Previous: Obama, Clinton Debate Gas Tax Holiday | Next: Clinton pledges to stay in campaign through end of primaries

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



In an ideal world, Edwards would be the party nominee, but he at least had the decency to bow out when he knew he didn't have a chance. It's admirable that he thought dropping out would cause the 2nd weakest candidate to do the same shortly after, but not with the bull-headed approach Clinton has been taking.

Howard Wolfson must not have gotten the memo that this race is over. Sad.

Harry Reid is spot-on about McCain. He used to be the Republican that even the Democrats could support, but now he's just another Bush crony.

As for Roy Blunt saying the Bush tax cuts are a good thing-yeah, if you're in the upper tax bracket.

Posted by: GregB | May 11, 2008 2:40 PM

This is extremely disappointing.

Its clear Obama's scared to death of what will happen in the remaining primaries.

If Democrats nominate Obama they won't only lose the race.

They'll lose half the Democratic Party.

They've already lost our respect.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 2:47 PM

McCain is a nasty joke. The only thing he will bring to the campaign is a "ready to fight" attitude toward the security threats he will soon be fed by Bush Cheney.

Together they will attempt to paint Obama as "aloof and unprepared" to fire cruise missiles here and there (something the Clintons sure got used to doing).

Fortunately for us and the world, Obama is a lot tougher than the people he is about to walk over.

The Clinton collapse is extraordinary, from inevitable to lost and $20 million in debt to boot.

Sure am glad to be a part of it.

Posted by: shrink2 | May 11, 2008 2:50 PM

The race isn't over, six states haven voted, the votes of Florida and Michigan have't been included, and Obama's just claimed that there are 57 states.

Hillary's biggest mistake was letting the issue of Obama's 20 year involvement in "Black Liberation Theology" drop.

Republicans won't make that mistake.

Obama will lose, and the leadership of the Democratic party will only have themselves to blame.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 2:50 PM

For edwards to make his comment on mothers day is unbelievably cruel and insensitive.

I hope that Elizabeth divorces him for doing it.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 3:02 PM

"For edwards to make his comment on mothers day is unbelievably cruel and insensitive.

I hope that Elizabeth divorces him for doing it."
Posted by: | May 11, 2008 3:02 PM
_________________________________

But it perfectly fine for Hillary to campaign and take supporters' cash at fundraisers on Mothers' Day. Grow up already!

Posted by: Black and Bitter like Coffee | May 11, 2008 3:10 PM

anonymous, you don't even make sense. i will be so glad when this race is over and obama is president and all of these bitter naysayers will shut the heck up. obama is going to be a great leader, regain the world's respect for the united states, and end the insane fiscal policy (and ignorance) of the current administration. come on january 2009.

Posted by: dc voter | May 11, 2008 3:13 PM

That's it. Keep going McCain officials.

Keep ripping into Bush. Keep giving me more and more reason to NOT vote for McCain.

I tell you what. I'll show as much loyalty to you that you showed to Bush -- which is none at all. So you better hope that there are a lot of racist Democrats who will refuse to vote for Obama and cross over in order to make up for the votes you are losing on the right.

Posted by: Bender | May 11, 2008 3:16 PM

That's it. Keep going McCain officials.

Keep ripping into Bush. Keep giving me more and more reason to NOT vote for McCain.

I tell you what. I'll show as much loyalty to you that you showed to Bush -- which is none at all. So you better hope that there are a lot of racist Democrats who will refuse to vote for Obama and cross over in order to make up for the votes you are losing on the right.

Posted by: Bender | May 11, 2008 3:18 PM

So, let's forget about Hillary Clinton (if she will let us do so) and turn our attention to The Truth About John McCain:

http://truth-about-mccain.blogspot.com

Posted by: Francis L. Holland, Esq. | May 11, 2008 3:24 PM

For those who are disappointed that their Dem candidate lost (or may be losing) please consider the plight of this great nation under the control of the republican party for the past 14 yrs ( yes 14 yrs.) since Newt & his crowd convinced evangilicals that the republicans wer Gods party.If you wish to continue, vote for Mc & be sure to support ALL republican candidates. This election will be the first in 50 yrs. between opposites. High gas, no health care, education in the tank, etc. American's do have a real choice this time,& it's not a bush nor clinton.

Posted by: tlrasnic | May 11, 2008 3:26 PM

No thanks.

We rather vote for lower taxes, a strong defense and the war hero rather than the coke-head.

Democrats will lose by a landslide if they nominate Obama.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 3:28 PM

Hilary has shown through her campaign that she is not a good money manager. This is somewhat an indicator as to how she will run the country. She wants to win, no matter what the the cost. With the present state of our economy, we certainly don't want her starting another war with Iran, when we can't pay for the mess we are already in. People who want to vote for McCain must have as short a memory as his. Even within these few months of campaigning, he has proved to be the biggest flip-flopper! He will continue the economic and war policies of Bush. Look where that has led us!!

Posted by: Ann | May 11, 2008 4:04 PM

Hilary has shown through her campaign that she is not a good money manager. This is somewhat an indicator as to how she will run the country. She wants to win, no matter what the the cost. With the present state of our economy, we certainly don't want her starting another war with Iran, when we can't pay for the mess we are already in. People who want to vote for McCain must have as short a memory as his. Even within these few months of campaigning, he has proved to be the biggest flip-flopper! He will continue the economic and war policies of Bush. Look where that has led us!!

Posted by: Ann | May 11, 2008 4:05 PM

I like to listen to these republicans saying that if Obama is the candidate they will vot for McCain. Good luck! Obama is already the nominee, and, almost for sure, this nation's next president.

Posted by: Juan Mercado | May 11, 2008 4:11 PM

I like to listen to these republicans saying that if Obama is the candidate they will vot for McCain. Good luck! Obama is already the nominee, and, almost for sure, this nation's next president.

Posted by: Juan Mercado | May 11, 2008 4:11 PM

Edwards was giving Clinton some good advice. I hope she follows it. It won't matter over the long run for Obama, because I think Clinton will look increasingly irrelevant and Obama will continue to take the high road with her. We are going to win this year because the country has seen what the Republicans have done to our country and they are sick of it.

Posted by: Chuck | May 11, 2008 4:28 PM

Dear Democratic Party Hierarchy & American press core:

I have been a life member of the Democratic Party, as have been all of my family and indeed my Irish ancestors all the way back to the early 1800's, when they first came to America. You need to know how truly disgusted and angry I am over all the shenanigans that have been going on against Hillary Clinton, since day number one of the primary elections. You have both painted and showed the ugliest picture that you could possibly find of Hillary, while showing a young, vibrant Barrack Obama. When Hillary has spoken her truth, demonstrated her experience, and connection to everyday America, she has been ridiculed as inflammatory, divisive, racist and mean spirited; when Mr. Obama speaks essentially the same truth, but in more flowery words aimed at the young and more liberal sector of the Democratic Party and Independents, he has been lauded as the messiah, the healer, incapable of doing any wrong. When Hillary has mis-stepped, she has been beaten down to the ground and spit upon by the American press, as well as by much of the Democratic hierarchy; when Obama has mis-stepped, he has been helped back up and offered assistance. When Hillary has talked about her life experiences in politics, it has been so totally twisted out of reality as to represent an obscene monster-like essence; when Barrack's lack of experience, especially in foreign affairs has been brought up, it has quietly been hidden from the public, made to seem immaterial. Hillary talks of using experience to enact change effectively and rightfully; Barack talks of changing the American way of politics to enact a needed, future change. But the press has reported Clinton as tired, corrupt Hillary politics, while presenting a young, glowing vibrant all knowing Obama future. What utter irresponsibility and illusions the American press core and Democratic hierarchy have pandered to the American public. The fact of the matter is that both of the candidates are outstanding in their own right. But, Hillary has a much richer life experience in all areas. Barrack Obama simply does not possess the same political knowledge and wisdom that Hillary has accrued throughout her life. By the way, Mr. Obama, there are only 52 states, not 57 as you recently reported...

Then, there has been the ridiculous mess with the Democratic Party's refusal to seat the delegates from Florida and Michigan. Rules, rules, rules. What utter nonsense. There are, I understand, bylaws that would allow exceptions to be made. Obviously Obama has not wanted Florida and Michigan's votes counted, because it could cost him the election. The Democratic Party hierarchy should know better and have acted neutrally, somehow getting Florida and Michigan's votes counted. Yet, it has been clear from day one, that Dean (the Democratic National Committee boss) has been in the pocket of Obama (who in turn has been backed by Senator Edward Kennedy). Not surprisingly, the Democrat National Committee has not championed getting these two states votes counted. In the case of Florida, it is one of the swing states. How extremely unwise that the Democratic powers to be have refused to seat Florida and Michigan's votes, especially interesting since Florida's 'illegal' voting date was pushed through by a Republican controlled legislature in Florida! Pushed through by a REPUBLICAN Florida legislature: So why in the world would the Democratic National Committee want to "punish" Florida's Democrats? Come November, Florida's Democrats may well decide to "punish" the Democratic Partiy back in retaliation and vote McCain. The Republicans will, I assure you, welcome the Floridian Democrats with two open arms. Why doesn't the Democratic National Committee just shot itself in the leg....

Finally, the Democratic hierarchy and the American press core have not been exactly honest about Hillary's greater electibility power. No matter how you cut it, the mighty electoral swing states are Hillary states. Based on the winner takes all electoral votes policy in the Presidential elections, Hillary has already won the Presidential Elections. Interestingly enough, very little has been said about this by the Democratic hierarchy and by the the news. How inconvenient this will be, if an Obama ticket losses the November elections!

In closing, for the first time I seriously am thinking of not voting Democratic, but rather registering my extreme displeasure with the Democratic Party by writing in Hillary Clinton's name as my choice for President. Many will say this is insane and stupid. Yet, in my conscience I must and will do what I think is right and that is to let the Democratic Party system know how absolutely disgusted with them I am. P.S. Democratic Party: I know many, many others, who feel exactly the same way I do and who plan to register their great upset the same way---at the polls in November.

Carpe Diem, Hillary Clinton!


Posted by: Elaine E | May 11, 2008 4:33 PM

I guess mistakenly saying 57 states is far, far worse than intentionally misspeaking about Bosnian snipers...

Posted by: Tom | May 11, 2008 4:41 PM

Hillary needs to get out now. I voted for her in Maryland but it is OVER!!

Posted by: Election Winner | May 11, 2008 4:47 PM

John Edwards misreads 1/2 of the democratic party. They do not want Obama for any reason.

the DNC is delusional if they think democrats are going to support Obama.

Once again we have Ted Kennedy picking the nominee and once again the dems will lose.

Posted by: JohnAdams1 | May 11, 2008 4:48 PM

There is NO way are all Dems going to vote for Obama.
We just (half of us) don't want him.
Doesn't he get that yet?

Let's see how much of the vote he gets this Tuesday in West Virginia!

Posted by: Veronica | May 11, 2008 4:54 PM

Another (in)famous misstep:

Barrack Obama: Over a 20 year period I never heard or knew that my 'like-an uncle', Rev. Wright say, "God damm America"

Posted by: Elaine E | May 11, 2008 4:55 PM

Well, guess I'll be voting for McCain this fall :)

Posted by: Rina | May 11, 2008 4:56 PM

edwards supports a man who is an anti American afrocentric, sad...
they could not find a man who stood for all Americans, the blood is on their hands on this one...

Posted by: dwight | May 11, 2008 4:58 PM

In his effort to secure enough support from working-class whites to win the nomination, John McCain has flip-flopped on so many issues he doesn't know which way he's heading. He's not even a cranky contrarian any more. He is, simply, an unprincipled politician.

Posted by: hjp | May 11, 2008 5:01 PM

This race, for all intents and purposes, is over. I am in the view that Senator Clinton should be given the space she needs to exit this race gracefully and park her hard fought campain respectfully, but I think every concerned democrat, like Mr. Edwards, wants her to make sure that she doesn't in this process continue such devastating and negative attacks on Mr. Obama, who clearly represents the best hope not only for the democrats to take the White House, but also for our great country to take back its rightful place in the world, a place that was lost disaterously under George W. Bush.

Posted by: Myron Beinsty, Mclean | May 11, 2008 5:01 PM

I admire the dignity with which he has conducted himself. We all should be proud that he is an American leader. I hope that the new administration will give him a senior position.

It has been Clinton's strategy for long time had been to increase Obama's negatives and minimalize him a race candidate, instead of highlighting her policies and plans. To the extant she had had been successful (she certainly had been successful partially), she had damaged the Party and our chances in November. In the process, she had also diminished our Party's chances for other candidates. It is way past the time for her to get out. Clinton's already had 8 years, in which accomplish everything including Universal Health Care. Her divisive and secretive approach had killed it for a generation. Lack of proper universal healthcare plan also in no small measure has contributed competitive disadvantage of American corporations who actually produce the jobs and wealth.

Obama is the product of his mother's unyielding belief in humanity and her story should be highlighted more in this campaign. She had achieved lot for herself and her family. She should make all the feminists and men and woman of all stripes to be proud.

Posted by: George | May 11, 2008 5:03 PM

"

For those who are disappointed that their Dem candidate lost (or may be losing) please consider the plight of this great nation under the control of the republican party for the past 14 yrs ( yes 14 yrs.) since Newt & his crowd convinced evangilicals that the republicans wer Gods party.If you wish to continue, vote for Mc & be sure to support ALL republican candidates. This election will be the first in 50 yrs. between opposites. High gas, no health care, education in the tank, etc. American's do have a real choice this time,& it's not a bush nor clinton.

Posted by: tlrasnic | May 11, 2008 3:26 PM "

your argument doesn't fly, dems will be in charge of the house and senate so it doesn't matter who wins.
better to elect a man who loves America than an afrocentric who will destroy it.

Posted by: dwight | May 11, 2008 5:03 PM

It is amazing to read all of the comments by young Republicans all over the net, saying "I am a Democrat and I will never vote for Obama". They spend hours and hours pumping this stuff out, hoping to influence people. They should better spend some time trying to improve the lives of their fellow citizens

Posted by: Kris | May 11, 2008 5:03 PM

"We rather vote for lower taxes, a strong defense and the war hero rather than the coke-head."

Well, yes, Bush HAS trashed our military capabilities and he IS a cocaine addict, but at least he's got that cute daughter. But this thread is supposed to be about Obama.

Posted by: Mark | May 11, 2008 5:03 PM

Posted by (noname):
Its clear Obama's scared to death of what will happen in the remaining primaries.

.........

Wow, that's quite a stretch. What planet are you from, and do you get Earth news there?

Some of you Clinton supporters need to wake up, smell the roses, be better sports, and be good Democrats.

Posted by: binkynh | May 11, 2008 5:04 PM

Media bias in reporting Edwards' comments:
CBS: Clinton now a stronger candidate
AP: Clinton didn't chose words well
WP: Obama will be nominee

Anyways, Edwards is a two-time loser with a $400 haircut.

Posted by: alee21 | May 11, 2008 5:05 PM

With the shoddy treatment Hillary has gotten from the DNC, the Obama team calling her husband a racist, the failure to redo the Florida and Michigan primaries, and the partisan behind the scenes behavior of Nancy Pelosi, she owes the party nothing, nada, zip.

The deck was stacked against her by the pro-Obama press and daily attacks by MSNBC. The Democratic Party will get what it deserves in November. Once again they will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Posted by: alance | May 11, 2008 5:06 PM

In this situation, it is Sen. Edwards who has reason to be "bitter".

One can only speculate what Barack Obama's fate would have been if Rev. Wright's semon snippets were aired before the early primaries. He would have dropped out fast, and supported another candidate, perhaps Edwards.

By hiding the skeletons in his closet until it is too late, Obama won the delegates by deception. By injecting the race card at every turn, he won the delegates by foul means. Scaring any potential opponent from criticizing him, lest they be called racist, he managed to escape quite a bit scrutiny, and won his delegates by deception.

The republicans need show no such deference to Obama. No racist references at the drop of a hat will deter them. He can't swoon the republican, and moderate voters by his vacation pictures in swimming trunks.

Barack is Wright. Obama is toast.

Posted by: Krishna | May 11, 2008 5:06 PM

At 4:33PM, Elaine E wrote:
"By the way, Mr. Obama, there are only 52 states, not 57 as you recently reported..."

Nope, still not right. Try 50. Guess Mr. Obama's not the only one who has trouble counting.

Posted by: 52 states? | May 11, 2008 5:10 PM

"It is amazing to read all of the comments by young Republicans all over the net, saying "I am a Democrat and I will never vote for Obama". They spend hours and hours pumping this stuff out, hoping to influence people. They should better spend some time trying to improve the lives of their fellow citizens"

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

I'm not'young', I am not a Republican, neither is my husband, or our Democratic circle of friends.
We are not going to vote for Obama, don't kid yourselves.

Obama is not the right man for this job.

Posted by: Veronica | May 11, 2008 5:11 PM

I voted for Hillary...there is no way in you know what that I am voing for Obama...I refuse to drink the kool aide...

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 5:13 PM

We must, MUST, take our government back from corporate special interests. In a divided party, we will never do that. I don't have any fundamental differences with Senator Clinton, however, I, do think she is allegiant to and in alignment with the very special interests that harm our democracy. The many, in the United States, are not here to serve the few. We are all equal. Not one rich and one poor.

Even if we counted Florida and Miami and the Clinton won the rest of the primaries, she could not win. Especially when she would have to rely on a sizable superdelegate percentage.

The Democrats have to remember that the price is to be gained in November, not in a primary, and that the prize belongs to the party, the people, NOT the person.

For the love of God, lets get past this.

Posted by: Concernedaboutdc | May 11, 2008 5:15 PM

Response to Kris,

Hate to break the news to you, but we are not all Republicans, pretending to be Democrats just because many, many of us are saying that we will not vote Obama. We are angry, frustrated Democrats, who are sick and tired of how unfairly Hillary Clinton has been treated by both the Democratic hierarchy and by the American press core. Voting non-Obama is the only way we can effectively register our extreme displeasure with the Democratic National Comittee, Democratic hierarchy and Obama biased news reporting. Enough is enough! We have finally had it and will speak our unhappiness in the November Presidential Elections.

Posted by: angus | May 11, 2008 5:16 PM

..."Coming from Loser Edwards, who couldn't even carry his own state in the Presidential election, I"d say as a registered voter, He's wrong once again, and Hillary and I and America have just begun to FIGHT!

...Obama good man, but sadly his name cuts into his votes, and his color cuts into his votes, and America will not elect an African American, "Not Now, Not yet."

Posted by: Tom Birchfield | May 11, 2008 5:17 PM

There is more smelly stuff here than in a Porta-John: Closet Republicans - masquerading as disgruntled Democrats, Obama worshipers, Clinton Bashers and African American racists (who support one candidate over another only because of the color of skin) and these are trumped only by the Democratic Party "leadership" who would sell their own mother to protect their own interest!

John Edwards is a phony, a poverty pimp who is only interested in self aggrandizement. I only hope that he runs for something again so the spotlight can shine his way more forcefully!

Posted by: Disgusted Voter | May 11, 2008 5:19 PM

There is more smelly stuff here than in a Porta-John: Closet Republicans - masquerading as disgruntled Democrats, Obama worshipers, Clinton Bashers and African American racists (who support one candidate over another only because of the color of skin) and these are trumped only by the Democratic Party "leadership" who would sell their own mother to protect their own interest!

John Edwards is a phony, a poverty pimp who is only interested in self aggrandizement. I only hope that he runs for something again so the spotlight can shine his way more forcefully!

Posted by: Disgusted Voter | May 11, 2008 5:20 PM

There is more smelly stuff here than in a Porta-John: Closet Republicans - masquerading as disgruntled Democrats, Obama worshipers, Clinton Bashers and African American racists (who support one candidate over another only because of the color of skin) and these are trumped only by the Democratic Party "leadership" who would sell their own mother to protect their own interest!

John Edwards is a phony, a poverty pimp who is only interested in self aggrandizement. I only hope that he runs for something again so the spotlight can shine his way more forcefully!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 5:21 PM

There is more smelly stuff here than in a Porta-John: Closet Republicans - masquerading as disgruntled Democrats, Obama worshipers, Clinton Bashers and African American racists (who support one candidate over another only because of the color of skin) and these are trumped only by the Democratic Party "leadership" who would sell their own mother to protect their own interest!

John Edwards is a phony, a poverty pimp who is only interested in self aggrandizement. I only hope that he runs for something again so the spotlight can shine his way more forcefully!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 5:22 PM

Wonder how the Edward's love child is coming along. Should be nice and ripe by now.

Posted by: Carville | May 11, 2008 5:22 PM

Alright, there are 50 States, but I'm not running for the Presidency. Mr. Obama with his recently reported '57' State count is. Everone mis-states (a little humor). So why pick on Hillary for absolutely everything she says? That was my point in mentioning Obama's 57 States.

Elaine

Posted by: Alright 50 States | May 11, 2008 5:25 PM

The cry baby Hillary supporters need to shut up........and get on with life. She is not the candidate....OK?.....threats about who you will vote for is nothing more than female drama.....

Posted by: mike | May 11, 2008 5:26 PM

The simple fact is that Hillary got beat. I question why if she is the best candidate to beat McCain why is she the second place candidiate in her own party. She at the most crucial point in the race absolutely failed to manage her campaign and recognize the threats to her success. The Rev. Wright was available to raise questions about in 2/07. If Hillary is such an overwhelming favorite to beat Senator McCain how come she lost to an upstart with a name that sounds like America's worst enemy? The Democrats ought to worry about the White House not four more years of Bush-Cheney politics.

Posted by: Peter | May 11, 2008 5:27 PM

Elaine E.

"By the way, Mr. Obama, there are only 52 states, not 57 as you recently reported..."


Pssst, Elaine, about that 57 state thing, it was a JOKE! And there are only 50 states the last time I checked.... I will say this though, this "criticism" is certainly as valid as all of your others!

Posted by: orrg1 | May 11, 2008 5:28 PM

Edwards said: "she has to be really careful that she's not damaging our prospects, the Democratic Party, and our cause, for the fall."

----
that sounds to me like a threat.

Based on the talks about her debts, it seems as if Edwards was sent to let her know, publicly, that the party will not help her with her debts if she insists in running.

That's interesting. That's another fight. But if the party and Obama need her, and they do because neither can win the election without her, how can they be threatening her? I think she's got more power than the party. She can make it or break it.

So, please, pay her debt. The party never stood up against the sexist attacks on her by the media. Now they want to be penny pinching?

Posted by: thetruth | May 11, 2008 5:30 PM

In the coming months and years we'll see stories leaking out about how many conservatives and gopers spammed threads like this one, posing as both Clinton and Obama supporters, trying to start fights within the Democratic Party.

Ask yourself, who benefits the most from Democratic intraparty animosity...?

Posted by: see_the_sockpuppets | May 11, 2008 5:33 PM

Seems to me Edwards has a crystal ball now, did he borrow that ball from Dennis, I wonder.

The question has got to be what is in it for Edwards ? I did not find him very sincere through the debate process. At times he was very condescending, sort of a holier than thou attitude with a twang that is not very popular these days.

Anyhow, if Edwards wants to predict the future that is on him. One day he may wish someone had his back. In the meanwhile the Greatest show on Earth is still on. Am wondering if he is jealous that he is not part of that show ? Another spoiled Elitist, maybe.

Showing fear is not becoming of a President or Vice President. He flinched.

Posted by: Hank Whatever | May 11, 2008 5:35 PM

Elaine: step back, take a breath, and don't imbine or inhale foreign stuff for 30 minutes. Hillary has become an egomaniac in front of our eyes. She has lost the aura of a leader with her rants. I feel sorry for her, but not Bill who is someone to keep far away from the White House. I don't know about elitist, since my daughters didn't go to Stanford, nor have five houses in the family, but for ethics and morals, she is clueless.

Posted by: kabarwilly | May 11, 2008 5:43 PM

Kris said:

"Voting non-Obama is the only way we can effectively register our extreme displeasure with the Democratic National Comittee, Democratic hierarchy and Obama biased news reporting. Enough is enough! We have finally had it and will speak our unhappiness in the November Presidential Elections."

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

So, as a registered democrat, you and several others are willing to write in Hillary's name, potentially blowing the election?

You'd rather McCain win in November? You really want a continuation of Bush's policies rather than a democrat in the White House? Is your hatred that strong?

Unbelievable.

I am an Obama supporter, but I've always maintained that if Hillary won the nomination, she would get my vote.

I'm just amazed that people would throw the election away because they don't like the media frenzy or whatever.

Posted by: Allison | May 11, 2008 5:45 PM

The majority of Democrats under 35 prefer Obama as the nominee for the party. I imagine it is difficult for some members of the party to take. If Obama wins, then he is the new leader of our country, and if he loses, then he is the liberal version of Goldwater.

Moreover, Clinton squandered the backing of nearly the entire Democratic establishment. She has a demonstrable record of being morally and intellectually dishonest.

The best example of this behavior is the idea of an impossible to implement gas tax holiday that every economist of record discredits, and then she added insult to injury by referring to them using the trite and nebulous term "elites."

Having once derided the Bush administration for this precise behavior regarding scientists' and they opinion of global warming, she now actively engages in it for near term political benefit. This phoniness and pandering are the the attributes of politicians that new voters despise.

Posted by: JD | May 11, 2008 5:45 PM

Elaine E
Can you please tell me what are the 52 states?
I thought there are 50 states and Washington DC.

Posted by: bdg | May 11, 2008 5:47 PM

May 21, 2008 is the critical day for John Edwards. That is the day that Barack Obama will have reached the point that Hillary can not overtake him in the number of elected delegates. On that day he needs to declare for Mr Obama. That will eliminate the possibility of Clinton winning by stealing the nomination by the Rules Committee.

Running against Clinton, Obama has won because of understanding of the desire of the electorate for change. Integrity also has distinguished the two. Against McCain change will be an important theme but he must appeal more to working class voters.

They do not understand what a community organizer does and how that will impact on their lives. He needs to give more detail on his professional biography. He also will need to stress the importance of Afghanistan so that if there is news on the country in the fall they will know that in foreign policy he is ahead of the curve as he was in Iraq, not reacting as Bush has been.

On the basis of the mood of the country he can squeak out a victory. To make it a blowout he has to better relate to working class voters.


Posted by: Ron M | May 11, 2008 5:48 PM

Elaine E

There are only 50 states. You're mistaken.

Posted by: vmunikoti | May 11, 2008 5:50 PM

Sockpuppets, the subversive tactics have been going on for years and years. I think it borders on industrial espionage myself. Don't expect republicans to do anything about it as they may catch themselves in the act. Although that would not be the first time zealots messed up their own brothers in democracy. I hope there is public discovery available about parties sabotaging the democratic process with or without propaganda

Posted by: Hank Whatever | May 11, 2008 5:50 PM

Sorry to get off track. the article is about Edwards and the conver should stay there. He is a strange man. Trial lawyers are great actors. Saddly, he is a rich lawyer, he could have been a great actor. Sadly, he is spineless and groping for attention. What leader would want him on their team or trust him? He spurned Kerry while the VP candidate. He wants its both ways,to be serious and not risk taking. He is another Southern Fop. a pity.

Posted by: kabarwilly | May 11, 2008 5:51 PM

"They've already lost our respect."

Anonymous, (aka svreader), your mask is slipping. You're referring to Democrats as "they".

You're supposed to say "we", remember?

Churning out repetitive propaganda sixteen hours a day must really addle the brain, eh?

Posted by: OD | May 11, 2008 5:52 PM

"They've already lost our respect."

Anonymous, (aka svreader), your mask is slipping. You're referring to Democrats as "they".

You're supposed to say "we", remember?

Churning out repetitive propaganda sixteen hours a day must really addle the brain, eh?

Posted by: OD | May 11, 2008 5:53 PM

The only thing compelling about Hillary Clinton's candidacy is how low and how pandering she can be to try to win votes. She's lower than Richard Nixon in my view. She epitomizes the ugly American who apparently doesn't think that anyone except her as the great white hope is capable of thinking or running anything. She should go off to lecture at some university and let someone with a more open mind run things.

Posted by: Paul J. Nolan | May 11, 2008 5:55 PM

On the 57 states issue, I did not hear the quote, but there are 57 primaries and caucuses. Could that have been what he was referring to?

All 50 states, D.C., Guam, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Northern Marianas, Virgin Islands, and Democrats Abroad.

Adds up to 57.

Posted by: Allison Elledge | May 11, 2008 5:59 PM

On the 57 states issue, I did not hear the quote, but there are 57 primaries and caucuses. Could that have been what he was referring to?

All 50 states, D.C., Guam, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Northern Marianas, Virgin Islands, and Democrats Abroad.

Adds up to 57.

Posted by: Allison | May 11, 2008 5:59 PM

All Democratic leaders should condemn Hillary Clinton's playing of the race card like Richard Nixon. Its an insult to all peoples' intelligence and suggests that in the deepest part of her heart -- if she has one -- she will stop at nothing to manipulate people for power.

Posted by: Paul J. Nolan | May 11, 2008 6:02 PM

Back in the day, I was a huge Clinton supporter (by the way, back in the day was like last year), today that has changed. Clearly, Obama has demonstrated that he can do well in the general election. If you examine the coalition of folks that he has brought together, i.e., blacks, whites, young, not so young, Independents, and Republicans (Operation Chaos not withstanding), there is no way that you can reasonably conclude that he is less, not more likely to do well as a candidate in November.

Also, contrary to political spin, the base is uber-important. Given Hillary's early support of the Iraq war, this is an achilles heel for her. White rural Republicans will not vote for a D in November. Period. We will need overwhelming support from our base. Obama has proven that he can not only rally the base, but he can reach beyond it, which is not too shabby for a general.

If you visit my website: http://www.drchuckspeaks.com/ you will see that I have been a huge supporter of Bill and Hillary, ergo, this is not some knee jerk reaction from a person swept up in Obamerica. I carefully considered the facts.

Moreover, Hillary will be able to mobilize the GOP base like never before. The disdain they have for the Clintons is legendary and, more importantly, politically damaging for Democrats. Also, when one considers the number of folks who are voting for the first time, in greater numbers than we've seen in recent memory, that is largely attributable to Obama. We all know this. Let me be clear -- It's not that Hillary is a bad person or a bad candidate. It's that she's not the right presidential candidate for the Democratic party at this time. She must concede. The outstanding superdelegates who have not committed can end this. They should end this. This intraparty bickering cannot continue. We are now hurting the likely candidate and the party for November.

So, any superdelegate who hangs on beyond May, knowing this reality, is a coward. This includes Sen. Edwards.

Posted by: Dr. Chuck | May 11, 2008 6:03 PM

There are differences between McCain and Bush but hardly a distinction when it comes to the three biggest issues, Iraq, economy and healthcare.

Carly Fiorina, a good vice presidential choice. Might snag a few ardent feminists. She talks a good game but does not deliver. McCain would hardly want someone more competent than himself.
George Bush made the same type of choice when he chose Cheney.

Posted by: Ronnn | May 11, 2008 6:03 PM

Edwards, I wish you hadn't dropped out. You still get the nod!! =)

Obama '08, but Hillary still gets the nod!

C'mon Oregon!! Deliver a great margin!

Posted by: Obama2008 | May 11, 2008 6:08 PM

Edwards, I wish you hadn't dropped out. You still get the nod!! =)

Obama '08, but Hillary still gets the nod!

C'mon Oregon!! Deliver a great margin!

Posted by: Obama2008 | May 11, 2008 6:08 PM

Here's what's very disturbing to me. Many democrats claim that they will not vote for Obama. Many white democrats already admitted that they will not vote for him simply because of the color of his skin (he is bi-racial not black) And I suspect that more feel this way, as racism is something that people are reluctant to admit. It is very sad that some democrats would rathewr see this country go down than to support a black man (sad). If McCain gets in and continue George Bush's third time, and as a consequence the country is destroyed it would be very very sad. Our number one enemy is not Al Queda or any other terrorist group. Our number one enemy in America is RACISM.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 6:11 PM

I'll fight to the death to preserve the right of every person to speak his/her mind. The tone in this blog and throughout the country is disgraceful. Our country's in a mess - from security, economic and fundamental democratic perspectives - and these comments are the best we can do? Karl Rove must be delighted. His brand of gutter politics has spread through both parties. I'm unaffiliated and will stay that way - and will vote for the candidates who articulate policies that best serve all of us, Republican, Democrat, Unaffiliated, rich, poor, African-American, Hispanic-American, European-American, male, female, etc.
Enough of red and blue states. Isn't the flag red, white and blue?

Posted by: muleman | May 11, 2008 6:12 PM

I'm really saddened at all the vitriolic comments posted on this thread. Frankly, Barack Obama was not my first, second, or third choice of nominee, and until fairly recently I would have been more than adequately happy with either Sen. Obama or Sen. Clinton, and either would be VASTLY preferable to the probability of John McCain's further trashing our great nation. I felt that Sen. Clinton would probably make a better president BUT that taking everything into consideration, Senator Obama would be more electable. (Given who the nominee of the GOP is, I don't really take much stock in the fact that one particular Democrat, or any particular Democrat, could come out on top in a Democratic primary.)

But, when Senator Clinton decided that the only way she could win was by acting like Tanya Harding, I had to change my perspective. Ronald Rotten got so many things wrong. But if there was ONE thing that he got right (even if it was about the only thing), it was his 11th Commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow Republican.

Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton forgot -- or chose to ignore -- the fact that the goal is NOT to make Hillary the nominee (although for them that is of course important) but rather to get a Democrat elected president so as to curb the attacks on the rule of law and on the vast majority of Americans who are not zillionaires and on the light of liberty and freedom that Dick Cheney, George W. Bush, and their accomplices are trying to extinguish.

Of course Hillary supporters have a right to feel disappointed that their candidate is coming in second. But it is vitally important to KEEP OUR EYES ON THE PRIZE. No more Supreme Court injustices like Antonin Scalia, who says that people should get over the fact that he helped stage a coup d'etat and is OK with torture as long as it is not used for punishment, like Samuel Alito, who sees nothing wrong with a president taking power like a Warsaw Pact dictator, like John Roberts, who saw nothing wrong with putting a 14-year-old girl in handcuffs for eating potato chips in the subway.

Again, Obama was not my first, second, or third choice. But he's my choice now. And for background, I'm white, male, and 60 years old and have never come close to earning $100K a year.

Best wishes, and "Can't we all get along?"

Posted by: EdA | May 11, 2008 6:13 PM

Hillary supporters = McCain supporters.

Posted by: john | May 11, 2008 6:15 PM

I have been independant and democratic in the past. I currently live abroad and love socialist government but i will NOT vote Obama. I do not believe he can win it. A huge number of older (aka baby boomers & x gen) do not want Obama as their candidate. If the party chooses Obama we will have a REPUBLICAN president in november. These groups of people are not simply looking at race( as the obama people claim) but at experience, reliabity, and personal convictions. I am many others cannot in good faith vote for Obama for a lots of reasons including his inability to handle simple matters within his own state he represents, intended non voting on particular issues, disrespect for his own country, and the list goes on. We will not vote for Obama because we do LOVE our country and want someone that can represent all people and not one particular group of people.

Posted by: Dawn | May 11, 2008 6:15 PM

Maybe this really isn't about Hillary being the problem.
Maybe it might be that the issue is now news that isn't about hard data any more.
Maybe its what Rove hath wrought in making news manipulation the New Media.

Maybe what this really means, just maybe, is that there is something wrong with the two party system that can come up with such inappropriate choices in the midst of the worst crises we are incrementally facing.

I don't care how young Obama is or how old McCain is.
An election is essentially a job search and neither of these candidates strikes me as credible or capable. So we have the extraordinary good luck to have a third person who is. But we should discard her because some pundit says it would do damage to the Democratic party.

Why not let it?

Do we sacrifice the best qualified so that a party that has shown us what it can't do for the past eight years can keep not doing it?

If all the Democratic Party is good for is what is what it has shown us it's been, why would anyone expect citizen loyalty to it?

How loyal has it been to us?

If anyone has the guts to go off and embody the idea and spirit of being an Independent , it's the Clintons.
There are just too many of us who believe in Hillary Clinton and find no credibility in what there is supposed be to subordinate herself to.
We are supposed to vote for Obama if we don't , very sensibly , want Mccain. But why would we want to vote for Obam?
There simply is nothing there other than displays of increasingly bad judgement. And yet another politician who has no relevance to the average American and no connection to us.

I am so disgusted with the hypocrisy if this election.

It's not supposed to be about race, but is it EVER. And in the oddest way. White racism is rightfully not tolerated. It's gone th eother way. if you are black you get a free pass to say the most vulgar ignorant things and be unchecked in continuing. Worse you use to get to use it as a justification when there is no justifying your behavior.

Of course what this will do is cause onlookers to go over to McCain. Who, unlike Bush, comes across as a kindly ,affable sort of warmonger who knows the power of schmooze to defuse....Just listen to him with Jon Stewart compared to Obama being interviewed. Millions will and Obama does not come out ahead.

It's not supposed to be about misogyny, but every time I post about Hillary Clinton I've been called---and this is just today's load-without anyone ever having laid eyes on me or my beliefs--an old wrinkled feminist.
As if any of those things were fates worse than dying young and stupid and under the thumb of whoever calls the party shots.
Some of us just know better than to get flocked.

It's a Twilight Zone scenario to see the Obamabots adopting the ad hominem nastiness of the right and taking to it so exceptionally easily.
We now have an alternate reality where Obamabots have taken over marketing the media and simply don't reflect anything about what really exists every time I converse with anyone I know. i have just not heard much interest in buying Brand Obama. He's being foisted on us. And we all know what we see around us as opposed to what we view on-screen.

As far as i am concerned, Obama is a marketed insipidity with no track record and no accomplishments.
But his followers are a credit to Karl Rove.

Probably the true legacy of Karl Rove is that he has pioneered the death of the two party system.
If anyone deserves that distinction, how fitting it should be Karl Rove.

He showed the world what it is to have America play dirty as a matter of course .
And now it seems we can't stop.

No one has asked these hysterical pundits what any American citizen gets from voting for another ambitious rhetoritician like Obama.
It's somehow like he is the first person to run on what we want to hear.
And like this inexperienced lambchop is going to be able to deliver when up against a Congress that will spend four years relentlessly chewing him up on tier way, as always, to cashing lobbyist's chits.

And no democratic party wonk sits there and looks at putting Obama up against a personable, intelligent war hero who is a longtime congressional veteran who just happens to be a warmonger and corporate shill and thinks about whether Obama has anything possible to show for the balance.
It's a Karl Rove wet dream, folks.

How can we have lost all our foresight.
Maybe the real problem with Democratic Party is that it is now so decrepit and useless and flat-out vestigial, there is no point in NOT creating a third party.
Because right now it is functioning as a Republican Party subsidiary in providing a candidate that will conveniently steer people to voting for McCain

gala1

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 6:19 PM

I second Dr Chuck's statement above. I, however, have been an ABC (anybody but Clinton) all along. I came to Obama in December.

What Hillary supporters do not acknowledge is that you have to be tough to compete against the Clintons. It really has been two against one. He will have beaten them by the only measure that counts total delegates.

Toughness, integrity, independence and competence quite a combination in one candidate. Clinton certainly has one of the four.

Posted by: Ronnn | May 11, 2008 6:20 PM

Campaign racetrack very long, doo-dah do-dah...

Make more money if it go long doo-dah, do-dah...

All the dough they make
is all the dough they take
from Johnny, yea Johnny

So run that campaign long long long all do-dah night and all the do-dah day.

sank-u, sank-u very mush...

Posted by: Truthhurts | May 11, 2008 6:21 PM

Maybe because I'm from Michigan where we are concerned about the privacy of our vote (and the Hillary supporters in our state govt. tried to take that right away from us by fixing this election in such a way that what ballot we chose on the primary date would become public knowledge - something most of you uninformed people on this board know nothing about. We rejected that, by the way, but in turn they moved our election forward and rigged it in such a way that her name was the only one on the ballot). But I couldn't care less about who anyone is voting for or not voting for. Who cares. All that matters is who shows up on election day. Who you vote for is a private matter. This ridiculous threatening of 'if the nominee is _____ than I'm voting McCain'. Really, who cares what vote you make? Not me.

As for those of you who are yelling "disenfranchisement" of the Michigan voters. Personally - screw you. Where were you when we voted? Did you care about the fact that the Hillary supporters (which includes all our top Democratic leaders of our state) only offered us a banana republic vote with only one name on the ballot? Why weren't you concerned about us then? Where were the calls for a fair election? Why is there no talk on this board of the 40% of voters who showed up to vote uncommitted against Hillary? Why no talk of representing their vote - one made in an election that didn't count yet they knew somehow she would try to warp this false election to her favor. What about all the Democratic voters who crossed over (which we can in our state because we have an open primary) and voted in the Republican primary because it actually counted. Are you concerned about disenfranchising those voters? Because that's exactly what Hillary wants to do. She only wants a re-vote with the voters who voted for her. How is this fair?

The truth is (and this if for all of you who lump the Midwest into one thought) that if there was a fair election in this state it would be overwhelmingly won by Obama. This isn't a rust belt state. This isn't a predominantly "white" state and we definitely are not Ohio or Pennsylvania. We are closer to Wisconsin and Minnesota who both went to Obama. Don't you think we know that one of the reasons this election was rigged the way it was is because the only way Hillary could win this state was to be the only name on the ballot? What was she so afraid of to have a fair election with everyone voting with all names on the ballot?

I'm tired of hearing about all this disenfranchisement. If she was truly concerned about democracy - she wouldn't have even participated in such a false election. And, she wouldn't have the audacity (to borrow a word) to claim a win.

Stop lumping us with Florida. Two completely different situations. We will only feel disenfranchised if such a false election ACTUALLY counts. It didn't count when we voted and it shouldn't count now. How many people didn't even show up to vote because IT DIDN'T COUNT? If you want to talk fairness, then you have to look at all the sides - not just what supports HRC.

Posted by: Iris Jones | May 11, 2008 6:23 PM

Why would Republicans have a problem voting for a coke head? They did it twice, 2000 and 2004. They also seem to have no qualms about voting for a notorious drunk. These "Hillary Supporters" are really Ditto Head members of Operation Chaos.

Posted by: Jim | May 11, 2008 6:29 PM

Why doesn't David Axelrod let loose his pony tail he keeps hiding from the cameras. He is a hippe in disguise - and hides other things that are wrong with his boss, Barry Sotero...Obama.

Posted by: ObamaWho? | May 11, 2008 6:29 PM

Let's face it: we are not ready for an Afro-American president, NO MATTER HOW MUCH WE SAY WE ARE.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 6:32 PM

For God's sake! Enough with this "Hillary could damage the party" baloney! If Hillary's supporters don't support Obama, it won't be because "Hillary damaged the party!" It will be because many of us refuse to vote for an inexperienced neophyte to hold the most powerful office in the world! I respect Hillary, but no matter how much she throws her support to Obama, she isn't going to convince me to vote for him. Obama is absolutely NOT prepared to be President! I believe the Democratic leadership is seeing the writing on the wall. They know Obama isn't going to win in November. Well, you get what you ask for, boys!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 6:33 PM

I was going to stay out of this until....
"Obama is the product of his mother's unyielding belief in humanity and her story should be highlighted more in this campaign."

This is exactly what bothers me about Obama supporters. Obama was only raised by his mother alone for 8 years. Non of them as the mother of a teenager. If your idea of raising a son is to drop him off at Grandmas' house, then she was a phenomenal mother. It would be far more appropriate to say he is the product of being raised in a white family with good character values. His mother and father had bugged out on him and he was left behind. If you look to these two people as role models well then you get what you sow.

Posted by: RetCombatVet | May 11, 2008 6:36 PM

Dawn 6:15 PM.

You were not forthright in your antipathy for Obama. You do not like his gender. The rest are just side issues. I did not get the sense you thought highly of McCain either.

Your ilk has tried bombarding the superdelegates with this type of verbiage. You may have been one of them.

I happen to feel like it is anyone but Clinton, but I will freely admit that voting for McCain would be too much. Give a third party candidate a thought, or write in Ron Paul. That's what I decided to do.

Posted by: Ronnn | May 11, 2008 6:37 PM

I agree with you - Hillary will note damage the party. And, I, too, will not vote for an empty shirt who can speak, albeit words of change, and not explain EXACTLY what that means. I would rather vote for McCain for status quo than have someone who is experienced and someone who thinks that the Office of the President is an internship.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 6:37 PM

How kind of Senator Edwards to be so concerned. This Democratic Party has sat on the sidelines and watched two campaigns destroy the character of the Democratic Party. Party leaders have unfairly displayed bias to one candidate. Now, they are doing their best to destroy Mrs. Clinton's chances of being a V.P. nominee. I remember a time when the Democratic Party barely survived off the popularity of the Clintons, now they're kicking them to the curb. This country prides itself on touting democracy and now they want Senator Clinton to thrown in the towel just to satisfy over eager party leaders. People quickly forget all the good things the Clintons have done for this country. Are they perfect? No they are not. If everyone can overlook Senator Obamas "difficulties" why not treat Senator Clinton the same? This campaign was decided a long time ago. This party is divided as much as the country is and Democratic Party leaders should be ashamed of themselves for letting these campaigns get out of hand. It's so very sad. I never thought I'd see the day when this party would treat their own party members like trash. Use them when they need them and through them out with the dirty water. I would've been happy with either one as the nominee whether it was as V.P or Pres. thank you Democratic Party leaders for spoiling this campaign and making it so biased and corrupt. Shame on all of you for not hearing the will of the people.

Posted by: calikid | May 11, 2008 6:38 PM

HATERS! HATERS! HATERS!
HILLARY AND BARACK ARE SO CLOSE IDEALOGICALY WHY DO YOU THINK IT'S SUCH A CLOSE RACE? EITHER ONE OF THEM WILL MOVE US IN THE SAME DIRECTION...HOPEFULLY. AWAY FROM THESE FIASCO YEARS OF GWB.
NO MATTER WHAT YOU SAY ABOUT MCCAIN HE DESERVES SOME KUDOS JUST FOR BEING IN THE RACE STUCK WITH PEDALLING THE REPUBLICAN LINE, WHICH ANYONE WITH HALF A BRAIN HAS FIGURED OUT IS THE EXPRESS LANE TO DISASTER.
WHO EVER THE NOMINEE IS YOU WILL SEE THE OTHER FIGHTING TO GET THEM INTO THE WHITE HOUSE. SHOULDN'T YOU BE FOLLOWING THEIR EXAMPLE IF YOU BELIEVE IN THEM SO MUCH? THEY KNOW EACH OTHER BETTER THAN ANY OF US KNOW THEM. IN THE END YOU WILL SEE ONE THROW THEIR FULL SUPPORT TO THE OTHER

Posted by: ED DALLESPORT, WA | May 11, 2008 6:39 PM

Here's something else that's disturbing. Some democrats are looking for excuses to not vote for OBAMA. They cite his experience as a main reason. Look -- Hillary Clinton claimed 35 years of experience, a claimed that has been adequately discounted. Sure she has experience in healthcare (A plan that failed)
She has some experience in foreign relations (but clearly raised doubts with her misspeaking regarding the Bosnia sniper fire. She could claim NAFTA but she also claimed that she was against it. If the Hillary democrats believed that experience was a real issue, they would have never supported Hillary. So -- back to my original point. Our fellow democrats rather see a Replublican in office that to vote for a black man. If George Bush's policy is continued it won't be because of OBAMA's electibility but RACISM. This is what I read in an article. See it's not just those who support Obama but all those who don't care about skin color or income, or culture or social status
In a way, Hillary Clinton has been right in her analysis. Blacks will certainly vote for Obama, as will the whites who have put Obama over the top in the polls. In the current environment many Independents and even some Republicans will support Barack Obama for president. So, the only question is whether white voters who support Hillary Clinton would rather elect the first Black president or would rather vote to continue the Iraq War for 100 years, while also starting a fresh war with Iran before the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are concluded. The answer will tell us an awful lot about the progressive bonafides of Hillary Clinton supporters.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 6:39 PM

What I would like to know is what Obama is hiding from us? To not be vetted completely for the most important office in this country is just beyond me - and the people who don't take the time, because of laziness, to demand this, is incomprehensible. His book is a tell-all - read it and see exactly what you'll have if he is elected. It is not pretty.

Posted by: Fishing | May 11, 2008 6:39 PM

Elaine E at 4:33 has written extensively about her candidate Hillary. Fair enough, because I was also once a devout Clintons supporter against the vast right wing conspiracy until she became best friends with them and Bill appeared on Rush Limbaugh radio show. As if that is not enough, Hillary and terry McAuliffe proclaimed Foxnews - fair and balanced. I was not in Bosnia to know what happened, but I do know FOXnews.

My major problem is the judgmental part of your note, as if Obama does not deserve to be where he is. You cited Hillary's experience. I for one believe experienced people would show wisdom based on their experience and more importantly their experience would show on how they talk, act, more importantly on results.

In order to stretch this veneer experience, Hillary went to Bosnia and the rest is history. Remember, at this juncture we watch carefully that our leaders tell the truth. Why? because Bush lied to us to go to war and now we have > 4000 Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis dead, so many maimed etc. More Americans died than 9-11, and more Iraqis are killed than what Sadam did for decades, not to mention the million displaced. Secondly, if she were experienced, how come she is tricked into voting for the war by Bush - tricked by Bush!! Hillary admitted that she did not read the intelligence report that was available for her before she voted. If the experience cannot help her for this, then for what?

Hillary is in fact the first American politician who irresponsibly threatened to obliterate a country. Even Bush with his bravado did not say such irresponsible thing. Never mind some of those people want to be like us, aspire for our way of life, but their authoritarian govt. would not let them. Talk about making tons of enemies in just a word - 'just a word'. Is this something an experienced politician would say?

What kind of leader would say divisive things such as uneducated rural whites would not vote for the black candidate? We democrats take this seriously, we always take the republicans to task for their 'southern strategy'. Little did we know, our own candidate would bring it to middle America - in WVA. I grant you in this case she did show her 35 years experience. We want leaders that unite us not divide us.

What kind of experience leads to such dissastrous campaign; the dissaray in staff, the poor money management, etc. I remember early in the campaign, Hillary talking about her managing experience. She attempted to lecture Obama how the president needs to be a good manager. Obama said, I will put able people to manage it and I will set the tone with policy. Of course, the 35 years experience Hillary mocked him for that. Now, we see Hillary, the manager, in big trouble managing her campaign staff and finance, not to mention loosing the votes. Obama's campaign is running smoothly with unprecedented participation from average Americans. How come the most experienced politician could not rally 1.5 million donors, most first time including myself. I was for the Clintons for the taking.

It makes me wonder, if the 35 years experience cannot do any of this, then what? How come the experienced politician could not rally the youth of this country?

I am sorry, but when you write, 'When Hillary has spoken her truth,...' I don't have to tell you what comes to my mind, it is not just Bosnia, it is NAFTA, her passion for MI/FL delegates (I am sure as a supporter you may have excused her stance to agree not to sit them when she was ahead, now she cares about that they should be heard when behind in the votes, and all these bending the rules to suit her ambition). These are the kind of issues with Hillary that has forced some of us who used to be her supporters over the years to look for the alternative. We could not see her as we used to. That goes for Bill as well - they really dissappointed me.

Posted by: selam | May 11, 2008 6:40 PM

I supported Hillary, but will vote for McCain and also contribute for his campaign. I am not impressed as to how the whole DNC establishment and the media (CNN, MSNBC etc) have from day one put her down and Obama up. Well guess what, I will excercise my democratic right and vote for anyone BUT obama. I don't want high taxes and bigger government. I would rather have McCain fight the terrorists and make the Bush tax cuts permanent.

Obama's tax and spend policies will make us the United states of Europe! (USE).

Posted by: Ram | May 11, 2008 6:40 PM

Alright sisters! Thanks for speaking your mind about how angry you are about how Hillary has been treated. I have yet to find ANY reporter speak about ths phenomenon, so I am forced to read commentary on political articles to find out I'm not the only one that feels this way. Now I know why I think the media is trying to influence this election- because they are!

Posted by: sarabellum | May 11, 2008 6:42 PM

Obama is so two-faced. He complains any time someone says something negative about him, but then he turns around and does the same thing and the press just lets it go. HE IS A RACIST and is damaging this country even before he is the candidate. Hateful racist=Obama

Posted by: BlackandWhite | May 11, 2008 6:43 PM

(Updated)

Dear Democratic Party Hierarchy & American press core:

I have been a life member of the Democratic Party, as have been all of my family and indeed my Irish ancestors all the way back to the early 1800's, when they first came to America. You need to know how truly disgusted and angry I am over all the shenanigans that have been going on against Hillary Clinton, since day number one of the primary elections. You have both painted and showed the ugliest picture that you could possibly find of Hillary, while showing a young, vibrant Barrack Obama. When Hillary has spoken her truth, demonstrated her experience, and connection to everyday America, she has been ridiculed as inflammatory, divisive, racist and mean spirited; when Mr. Obama speaks essentially the same truth, but in more flowery words aimed at the young and more liberal sector of the Democratic Party and Independents, he has been lauded as the messiah, the healer, incapable of doing any wrong. When Hillary has mis-stepped, she has been beaten down to the ground and spit upon by the American press, as well as by much of the Democratic hierarchy; when Obama has mis-stepped, he has been helped back up and offered assistance. When Hillary has talked about her life experiences in politics, it has been so totally twisted out of reality as to represent an obscene monster-like essence; when Barrack's lack of experience, especially in foreign affairs has been brought up, it has quietly been hidden from the public, made to seem immaterial. Hillary talks of using experience to enact change effectively and rightfully; Barack talks of changing the American way of politics to enact a needed, future change. But the press has reported Clinton as tired, corrupt Hillary politics, while presenting a young, glowing vibrant all knowing Obama future. What utter irresponsibility and illusions the American press core and Democratic hierarchy have pandered to the American public. The fact of the matter is that both of the candidates are outstanding in their own right. But, Hillary has a much richer life experience in all areas. Barrack Obama simply does not possess the same political knowledge and wisdom that Hillary has accrued throughout her life.
By the way, Mr. Obama, there are only 50 states, not 57 as you recently reported. But, perhaps you were only joking...

Then, there has been the ridiculous mess with the Democratic Party's refusal to seat the delegates from Florida and Michigan. Rules, rules, rules. What utter nonsense. There are, I understand, bylaws that would allow exceptions to be made. Obviously Obama has not wanted Florida and Michigan's votes counted, because it could cost him the election. The Democratic Party hierarchy should know better and have acted neutrally, somehow getting Florida's legally certified votes counted, and Michigan's primary re-done. Yet, it has been clear from day one, that Dean (the Democratic National Committee boss) has been in the pocket of Obama (who in turn has been backed by Senator Edward Kennedy). Not surprisingly, the Democrat National Committee has not championed getting these two states votes counted. In the case of Florida, it is one of the swing states. How extremely unwise that the Democratic powers to be have refused to seat Florida and Michigan's votes, especially interesting since Florida's 'illegal' voting date was pushed through by a Republican controlled legislature in Florida! Pushed through by a REPUBLICAN Florida legislature: So why in the world would the Democratic National Committee want to "punish" Florida's Democrats? Come November, Florida's Democrats may well decide to "punish" the Democratic Partiy back in retaliation and vote McCain. The Republicans will, I assure you, welcome the Floridian Democrats with two open arms. Why doesn't the Democratic National Committee just shot itself in the leg....

Finally, the Democratic hierarchy and the American press core have not been exactly honest about Hillary's greater electibility power. No matter how you cut it, the mighty electoral swing states are Hillary states. Based on the winner takes all electoral votes policy in the Presidential elections, Hillary has already won the Presidential Elections. Interestingly enough, very little has been said about this by the Democratic hierarchy and by the the news. How inconvenient this will be, if an Obama ticket losses the November elections!

In closing, for the first time I seriously am thinking of not voting Democratic, but rather registering my extreme displeasure with the Democratic Party by writing in Hillary Clinton's name as my choice for President. Many will say this is insane, ignorant, and stupid. Yet, in my conscience I must and will do what I think is right and that is to let the Democratic Party system know how absolutely disgusted with them I am. P.S. Democratic Party: I know many, many others, who feel exactly the same way I do and who plan to register their great upset the same way--- at the polls in November.

Carpe Diem, Hillary Clinton!


Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 6:44 PM

I laugh when I get emails from the DNC requesting a donation to help win the election in November. What a joke. I will never again give them one cent - ever - in fact I think I will donate to John McCain's campaign and will vote for him in the fall if Obama is the candidate. With him as the candidate, the Dems have already lost the respect of so many people from their party.

Posted by: DNCnoMORE | May 11, 2008 6:47 PM

To let Black America and a bunch of college kids elect the President of the United States is abolutely assinine. My God, what is happening in this country?

Posted by: Unreal | May 11, 2008 6:56 PM

To let Black America and a bunch of college kids elect the President of the United States is abolutely assinine. My God, what is happening in this country?

Posted by: Unreal | May 11, 2008 6:57 PM

To let Black America and a bunch of college kids elect the President of the United States is abolutely assinine. My God, what is happening in this country?

Posted by: Unreal | May 11, 2008 6:57 PM

I am sick and tired of hearing Hillary should not go all the way to convention.

As number one idiot DONNA BRAZIL says, RULES ARE RULES. OK?
PLEASE EMAIL HOWARD DEAN AND HILLARY TO GET HER OFF THE RULES COMMITTEE!(After she blew up on msnbc/cnn in defense of Obama, she needs to be taken OFF the RULES COMMITTEE).

HILLARY HAS EVERY RIGHT JOHN EDWARDS TO GO TO CONVENTION.

WHY DO YOU THINK THE SUPER DELEGATES ARE JUST DRIP DROPPING
IN, WHY ARE THE REALLY BIG GUYS WAiTING?

They KNOW Wright's other shoe is ready to fall and God knows what else from this HAMAS, REZKO, AYERS, FARAKAN LOVING OPPORTUNIST is going to come out before convention?

Call me stupid, Stupid, but Hillary is only following the rules, now to:
EDWARDS, TED BOOZER KILLER KENNEDY
ROCKEFELLER (ARE YOU EVER A DISAPPOINTMENT TO WEST VIRGINIA)
DONNA BRAZIL (BIASED -- TAKE HER OFF RULES COMMITTEE)
EUGENE ROBINSON - USED TO BE A FAVORITE OF MINE TIL HE TURNED RACIST)
TIM BOOZER RUSSERT - what a biased unkempt reporter)

THESE ARE JUST A FEW people who need to SHUT UP and let HILLARY GO ALL THE WAY TO CONVENTION!!!!!

HILLARY IS GOING ALL THE WAY TO CONVENTION -- THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY WILL SURVIVE NICELY WITHOUT YOU POOR EXCUSES FOR DEMOCRATS.

HILLARY CARES FOR THE BACK BREAKING AMERICANS WHO NEVER STAND A CHANCE IN THIS ROTTEN GOVERNMENT. SOMEBODY GOOD COMES ALONG, AND THE OLD GUYS HAVE TO RUIN IT. YES, OBAMA, THE SAME OLD WASHINGTON YOU PREACH ABOUT BUT TAKE THEIR MONEY AND SUPPORT!

BARRY HUSSEIN OBAMA WILL RUIN AMERICA!

OBAMA'S ABILITY TO INCITE A CROWD IS TANTAMOUNT TO ANY OTHER CULT WHO STEALS THE YOUNG AND THE WEAK MINDED PEOPLE!

VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON

NO TO OBAMMA

Posted by: Grandma Dee | May 11, 2008 6:57 PM

I am sick and tired of hearing Hillary should not go all the way to convention.

As number one idiot DONNA BRAZIL says, RULES ARE RULES. OK?
PLEASE EMAIL HOWARD DEAN AND HILLARY TO GET HER OFF THE RULES COMMITTEE!(After she blew up on msnbc/cnn in defense of Obama, she needs to be taken OFF the RULES COMMITTEE).

HILLARY HAS EVERY RIGHT JOHN EDWARDS TO GO TO CONVENTION.

WHY DO YOU THINK THE SUPER DELEGATES ARE JUST DRIP DROPPING
IN, WHY ARE THE REALLY BIG GUYS WAiTING?

They KNOW Wright's other shoe is ready to fall and God knows what else from this HAMAS, REZKO, AYERS, FARAKAN LOVING OPPORTUNIST is going to come out before convention?

Call me stupid, Stupid, but Hillary is only following the rules, now to:
EDWARDS, TED BOOZER KILLER KENNEDY
ROCKEFELLER (ARE YOU EVER A DISAPPOINTMENT TO WEST VIRGINIA)
DONNA BRAZIL (BIASED -- TAKE HER OFF RULES COMMITTEE)
EUGENE ROBINSON - USED TO BE A FAVORITE OF MINE TIL HE TURNED RACIST)
TIM BOOZER RUSSERT - what a biased unkempt reporter)

THESE ARE JUST A FEW people who need to SHUT UP and let HILLARY GO ALL THE WAY TO CONVENTION!!!!!

HILLARY IS GOING ALL THE WAY TO CONVENTION -- THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY WILL SURVIVE NICELY WITHOUT YOU POOR EXCUSES FOR DEMOCRATS.

HILLARY CARES FOR THE BACK BREAKING AMERICANS WHO NEVER STAND A CHANCE IN THIS ROTTEN GOVERNMENT. SOMEBODY GOOD COMES ALONG, AND THE OLD GUYS HAVE TO RUIN IT. YES, OBAMA, THE SAME OLD WASHINGTON YOU PREACH ABOUT BUT TAKE THEIR MONEY AND SUPPORT!

BARRY HUSSEIN OBAMA WILL RUIN AMERICA!

OBAMA'S ABILITY TO INCITE A CROWD IS TANTAMOUNT TO ANY OTHER CULT WHO STEALS THE YOUNG AND THE WEAK MINDED PEOPLE!

VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON

NO TO OBAMMA

Posted by: Grandma Dee | May 11, 2008 6:59 PM

I am sick and tired of hearing Hillary should not go all the way to convention.

As number one idiot DONNA BRAZIL says, RULES ARE RULES. OK?
PLEASE EMAIL HOWARD DEAN AND HILLARY TO GET HER OFF THE RULES COMMITTEE!(After she blew up on msnbc/cnn in defense of Obama, she needs to be taken OFF the RULES COMMITTEE).

HILLARY HAS EVERY RIGHT JOHN EDWARDS TO GO TO CONVENTION.

WHY DO YOU THINK THE SUPER DELEGATES ARE JUST DRIP DROPPING
IN, WHY ARE THE REALLY BIG GUYS WAiTING?

They KNOW Wright's other shoe is ready to fall and God knows what else from this HAMAS, REZKO, AYERS, FARAKAN LOVING OPPORTUNIST is going to come out before convention?

Call me stupid, Stupid, but Hillary is only following the rules, now to:
EDWARDS, TED BOOZER KILLER KENNEDY
ROCKEFELLER (ARE YOU EVER A DISAPPOINTMENT TO WEST VIRGINIA)
DONNA BRAZIL (BIASED -- TAKE HER OFF RULES COMMITTEE)
EUGENE ROBINSON - USED TO BE A FAVORITE OF MINE TIL HE TURNED RACIST)
TIM BOOZER RUSSERT - what a biased unkempt reporter)

THESE ARE JUST A FEW people who need to SHUT UP and let HILLARY GO ALL THE WAY TO CONVENTION!!!!!

HILLARY IS GOING ALL THE WAY TO CONVENTION -- THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY WILL SURVIVE NICELY WITHOUT YOU POOR EXCUSES FOR DEMOCRATS.

HILLARY CARES FOR THE BACK BREAKING AMERICANS WHO NEVER STAND A CHANCE IN THIS ROTTEN GOVERNMENT. SOMEBODY GOOD COMES ALONG, AND THE OLD GUYS HAVE TO RUIN IT. YES, OBAMA, THE SAME OLD WASHINGTON YOU PREACH ABOUT BUT TAKE THEIR MONEY AND SUPPORT!

BARRY HUSSEIN OBAMA WILL RUIN AMERICA!

OBAMA'S ABILITY TO INCITE A CROWD IS TANTAMOUNT TO ANY OTHER CULT WHO STEALS THE YOUNG AND THE WEAK MINDED PEOPLE!

VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON

NO TO OBAMMA

Posted by: Grandma Dee | May 11, 2008 6:59 PM

I am sick and tired of hearing Hillary should not go all the way to convention.

As number one idiot DONNA BRAZIL says, RULES ARE RULES. OK?
PLEASE EMAIL HOWARD DEAN AND HILLARY TO GET HER OFF THE RULES COMMITTEE!(After she blew up on msnbc/cnn in defense of Obama, she needs to be taken OFF the RULES COMMITTEE).

HILLARY HAS EVERY RIGHT JOHN EDWARDS TO GO TO CONVENTION.

WHY DO YOU THINK THE SUPER DELEGATES ARE JUST DRIP DROPPING
IN, WHY ARE THE REALLY BIG GUYS WAiTING?

They KNOW Wright's other shoe is ready to fall and God knows what else from this HAMAS, REZKO, AYERS, FARAKAN LOVING OPPORTUNIST is going to come out before convention?

Call me stupid, Stupid, but Hillary is only following the rules, now to:
EDWARDS, TED BOOZER KILLER KENNEDY
ROCKEFELLER (ARE YOU EVER A DISAPPOINTMENT TO WEST VIRGINIA)
DONNA BRAZIL (BIASED -- TAKE HER OFF RULES COMMITTEE)
EUGENE ROBINSON - USED TO BE A FAVORITE OF MINE TIL HE TURNED RACIST)
TIM BOOZER RUSSERT - what a biased unkempt reporter)

THESE ARE JUST A FEW people who need to SHUT UP and let HILLARY GO ALL THE WAY TO CONVENTION!!!!!

HILLARY IS GOING ALL THE WAY TO CONVENTION -- THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY WILL SURVIVE NICELY WITHOUT YOU POOR EXCUSES FOR DEMOCRATS.

HILLARY CARE FOR THE BACK BREAKING AMERICANS WHO NEVER STAND A CHANCE IN THIS ROTTEN GOVERNMENT. SOMEBODY GOOD COMES ALONG, AND THE OLD GUYS HAVE TO RUIN IT. YES, OBAMA, THE SAME OLD WASHINGTON YOU PREACH ABOUT BUT TAKE THEIR MONEY AND SUPPORT!

BARRY HUSSEIN OBAMA WILL RUIN AMERICA!

OBAMA'S ABILITY TO INCITE A CROWD IS TANTAMOUNT TO ANY OTHER CULT WHO STEALS THE YOUNG AND THE WEAK MINDED PEOPLE!

VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON

NO TO OBAMMA

Posted by: Grandma Dee | May 11, 2008 6:59 PM

Look this election has already shown that many voters do not care about the color of a candidate's skin. The issue of race is divisive. Someone mentioned Obama's upbring. Let me tell you, pointing to someone's social status as an indicator of their character is anti-American. America has chosen in the past presidents who were viewed as inexperienced. Look John McCain, Hillary Clinton nor Barack Obama has never been president, so none has experience. People generally elect a president who has character, intelligence, integrity, and dignity. Sure Americans have made mistakes but I believe that the true Americans who believe and uphold the American spirit will give Barack Obama a chance.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 7:02 PM

I am sick and tired of hearing Hillary should not go all the way to convention.

As number one idiot DONNA BRAZIL says, RULES ARE RULES. OK?
PLEASE EMAIL HOWARD DEAN AND HILLARY TO GET HER OFF THE RULES COMMITTEE!(After she blew up on msnbc/cnn in defense of Obama, she needs to be taken OFF the RULES COMMITTEE).

HILLARY HAS EVERY RIGHT JOHN EDWARDS TO GO TO CONVENTION.

WHY DO YOU THINK THE SUPER DELEGATES ARE JUST DRIP DROPPING
IN, WHY ARE THE REALLY BIG GUYS WAiTING?

They KNOW Wright's other shoe is ready to fall and God knows what else from this HAMAS, REZKO, AYERS, FARAKAN LOVING OPPORTUNIST is going to come out before convention?

Call me stupid, Stupid, but Hillary is only following the rules, now to:
EDWARDS, TED BOOZER KILLER KENNEDY
ROCKEFELLER (ARE YOU EVER A DISAPPOINTMENT TO WEST VIRGINIA)
DONNA BRAZIL (BIASED -- TAKE HER OFF RULES COMMITTEE)
EUGENE ROBINSON - USED TO BE A FAVORITE OF MINE TIL HE TURNED RACIST)
TIM BOOZER RUSSERT - what a biased unkempt reporter)

THESE ARE JUST A FEW people who need to SHUT UP and let HILLARY GO ALL THE WAY TO CONVENTION!!!!!

HILLARY IS GOING ALL THE WAY TO CONVENTION -- THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY WILL SURVIVE NICELY WITHOUT YOU POOR EXCUSES FOR DEMOCRATS.

HILLARY CARE FOR THE BACK BREAKING AMERICANS WHO NEVER STAND A CHANCE IN THIS ROTTEN GOVERNMENT. SOMEBODY GOOD COMES ALONG, AND THE OLD GUYS HAVE TO RUIN IT. YES, OBAMA, THE SAME OLD WASHINGTON YOU PREACH ABOUT BUT TAKE THEIR MONEY AND SUPPORT!

BARRY HUSSEIN OBAMA WILL RUIN AMERICA!

OBAMA'S ABILITY TO INCITE A CROWD IS TANTAMOUNT TO ANY OTHER CULT WHO STEALS THE YOUNG AND THE WEAK MINDED PEOPLE!

VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON

NO TO OBAMMA

Posted by: Grandma Dee | May 11, 2008 7:03 PM

MISLEADING AND INACCURATE HEADLINE!

EDITORS, YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELF.

Posted by: scott v | May 11, 2008 7:05 PM

I am sick and tired of hearing Hillary should not go all the way to convention.

As number one idiot DONNA BRAZIL says, RULES ARE RULES. OK?
PLEASE EMAIL HOWARD DEAN AND HILLARY TO GET HER OFF THE RULES COMMITTEE!(After she blew up on msnbc/cnn in defense of Obama, she needs to be taken OFF the RULES COMMITTEE).

HILLARY HAS EVERY RIGHT JOHN EDWARDS TO GO TO CONVENTION.

WHY DO YOU THINK THE SUPER DELEGATES ARE JUST DRIP DROPPING
IN, WHY ARE THE REALLY BIG GUYS WAiTING?

They KNOW Wright's other shoe is ready to fall and God knows what else from this HAMAS, REZKO, AYERS, FARAKAN LOVING OPPORTUNIST is going to come out before convention?

Call me stupid, Stupid, but Hillary is only following the rules, now to:
EDWARDS, TED BOOZER KILLER KENNEDY
ROCKEFELLER (ARE YOU EVER A DISAPPOINTMENT TO WEST VIRGINIA)

DONNA BRAZIL (BIASED -- TAKE HER OFF RULES COMMITTEE)

EUGENE ROBINSON - USED TO BE A FAVORITE OF MINE TIL HE TURNED RACIST)
TIM BOOZER RUSSERT - what a biased unkempt reporter)

THESE ARE JUST A FEW people who need to SHUT UP and let HILLARY GO ALL THE WAY TO CONVENTION!!!!!

HILLARY IS GOING ALL THE WAY TO CONVENTION -- THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY WILL SURVIVE NICELY WITHOUT YOU POOR EXCUSES FOR DEMOCRATS.

HILLARY CARES FOR THE BACK BREAKING AMERICANS WHO NEVER STAND A CHANCE IN THIS ROTTEN GOVERNMENT. SOMEBODY GOOD COMES ALONG, AND THE OLD GUYS HAVE TO RUIN IT. YES, OBAMA, THE SAME OLD WASHINGTON YOU PREACH ABOUT BUT TAKE THEIR MONEY AND SUPPORT!

BARRY HUSSEIN OBAMA WILL RUIN AMERICA!

OBAMA'S ABILITY TO INCITE A CROWD IS TANTAMOUNT TO ANY OTHER CULT WHO STEALS THE YOUNG AND THE WEAK MINDED PEOPLE!

VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON

NO TO OBAMMA

Posted by: Grandma Dee | May 11, 2008 7:05 PM

Obama has not earned the chance to be President.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 7:05 PM

MISLEADING AND INACCURATE HEADLINE!

EDITORS, YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELVES.

Posted by: scott v | May 11, 2008 7:06 PM

Obama has not earned the chance to be President.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 7:06 PM

Going only by what McCain will do to the supreme court, anyone who claims that they are a committed Democrat, let alone progressive, but will now vote for McCain is in no way progressive and would not have voted for Obama anyway.

Vote McSame and:

>kiss Roe v Wade goodbye

>say hello to war with Iran

>say hello to war with N Korea

>watch the economy continue to benefit the corporate rich and screw everyone else

>watch our civil liberties continue to dwindle

>etc, etc etc

Posted by: see_the_sockpuppets | May 11, 2008 7:07 PM

No ,race has nothing to do with this election,you are as big a dope as that loser edwards.

Posted by: mcnertny | May 11, 2008 7:08 PM

Fear not, all this will pass. As columnist Ellen Goodman wrote ten years ago, the Clintons are like food poisoning. In time, they will pass out the natural way.

Posted by: bodo | May 11, 2008 7:10 PM

The Clintons approach seems to be if I can not have it nobody can. This is an attempt to supercede the majority of the people. It almost appears the Clintions are creating the argument for a third party. The party leadership need to take a page from the Republicans and shut this down. No single individual can put their individual asperations ahead of the majority's will.

So once upon a time I respected the Clintons and thought the only interest they had was that of the country. But their behavior is to the contrary.

So, in the words of two former presidents, read my lips, what is, is and that is a fact.

Posted by: cdiddy | May 11, 2008 7:10 PM

I am sick and tired of hearing Hillary should not go all the way to convention.

As number one idiot DONNA BRAZIL says, RULES ARE RULES. OK?
PLEASE EMAIL HOWARD DEAN AND HILLARY TO GET HER OFF THE RULES COMMITTEE!(After she blew up on msnbc/cnn in defense of Obama, she needs to be taken OFF the RULES COMMITTEE).

HILLARY HAS EVERY RIGHT JOHN EDWARDS TO GO TO CONVENTION.

WHY DO YOU THINK THE SUPER DELEGATES ARE JUST DRIP DROPPING
IN, WHY ARE THE REALLY BIG GUYS WAiTING?

They KNOW Wright's other shoe is ready to fall and God knows what else from this HAMAS, REZKO, AYERS, FARAKAN LOVING OPPORTUNIST is going to come out before convention?

Call me stupid, Stupid, but Hillary is only following the rules, now to:
EDWARDS, TED BOOZER KILLER KENNEDY
ROCKEFELLER (ARE YOU EVER A DISAPPOINTMENT TO WEST VIRGINIA)

DONNA BRAZIL (BIASED -- TAKE HER OFF RULES COMMITTEE)

EUGENE ROBINSON - USED TO BE A FAVORITE OF MINE TIL HE TURNED RACIST)
TIM BOOZER RUSSERT - what a biased unkempt reporter)

THESE ARE JUST A FEW people who need to SHUT UP and let HILLARY GO ALL THE WAY TO CONVENTION!!!!!

HILLARY IS GOING ALL THE WAY TO CONVENTION -- THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY WILL SURVIVE NICELY WITHOUT YOU POOR EXCUSES FOR DEMOCRATS.

HILLARY CARES FOR THE BACK BREAKING AMERICANS WHO NEVER STAND A CHANCE IN THIS ROTTEN GOVERNMENT. SOMEBODY GOOD COMES ALONG, AND THE OLD GUYS HAVE TO RUIN IT. YES, OBAMA, THE SAME OLD WASHINGTON YOU PREACH ABOUT BUT TAKE THEIR MONEY AND SUPPORT!

BARRY HUSSEIN OBAMA WILL RUIN AMERICA!

OBAMA'S ABILITY TO INCITE A CROWD IS TANTAMOUNT TO ANY OTHER CULT WHO STEALS THE YOUNG AND THE WEAK MINDED PEOPLE!

VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON

NO TO OBAMMA

Posted by: Grandma Dee | May 11, 2008 7:12 PM

RACE HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH THIS ELECTION - DON'T BE SO STUPID

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 7:13 PM

grand(old party)mother dee,

Nice caps -- you gop trolls are funny.

Posted by: see_the_sockpuppets | May 11, 2008 7:21 PM

You know I initially supported Hillary Clinton because of the Clintons support of the black community. I like many Americans had questions regarding Barack Obama's experience. Plus the black community was not sure that a bi-racial candidate held more interest in the black community. Barack Obama still hasn't stood up for just the black community but he did stand up for all Americans. That's good enough for me. But I am very concern that some democrats will dare to vote for McCain who vowed to stay in Iraq for 100 years. That means more lives and trillions of dollars committed to a war that no one has yet explained. This will inevitably destroy our economy and utterly destroy America, while the big oil companies will only profit.

You mean to tell me that some of you, my fellow democrats would rather see people die, the economy destroyed, and America fall, than to vote for a bi-racial candidate? The fate of America will depend on unity, equality, and justice. The rest of the world has an overwhelmingly favor of Obama. Why can't we get it right? Don't let our cultural, and ethnic differences destroy us. We are one nation under God with liberty and justice for all.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 7:26 PM

grand(old party)mother dee,

Nice caps -- you gop trolls are funny.

Posted by: see_the_sockpuppets | May 11, 2008 7:26 PM

Edwards is just wrong. First he cannot predict the future. It is very rovian of him to try to change reality, the Presidential campaign is not over. There is a chance to take more money away from the opposition with extending the race.

There are many disgruntled republicans out here in the real world. As the economy gets worse, gas prices get higher and people lose equity in their homes and on the stock market there will be more disillusioned republicans. So there is still a market to tap into through republicans and independents. Seems to me McCain just offers more disillusionment and Obama is green.

Now, race may not matter but it is a factor no doubt about that. Obama is only half black. He has a white mother and a black father. His family of origin has been witnessed to be dysfunctional. By his own ommission he had a cocaine problem. I don't like to see him in bars ordering beers, that is a no-no for recovering cokeheads, coconuts or cocaine addicts. Maybe he thinks it is ok to drink beer, I don't know or maybe he just tasted it, right, sure, you betcha. Some people would say he is playing with fire.

To me, drinking, would be a compromise of principles, politically motivated (an appeal to the working class) that would negate my clean and sober status.

So, look, call me a racist, so what. I am a honkey, there, I said it. I just don't like to see people taken by political machines that have no ethics or morals, just like the Republicans.

Hi honey, I miss you on mother's day.

Posted by: Hank Whatever | May 11, 2008 7:27 PM

Edwards is just wrong. First he cannot predict the future. It is very rovian of him to try to change reality, the Presidential campaign is not over. There is a chance to take more money away from the opposition with extending the race.

There are many disgruntled republicans out here in the real world. As the economy gets worse, gas prices get higher and people lose equity in their homes and on the stock market there will be more disillusioned republicans. So there is still a market to tap into through republicans and independents. Seems to me McCain just offers more disillusionment and Obama is green.

Now, race may not matter but it is a factor no doubt about that. Obama is only half black. He has a white mother and a black father. His family of origin has been witnessed to be dysfunctional. By his own ommission he had a cocaine problem. I don't like to see him in bars ordering beers, that is a no-no for recovering cokeheads, coconuts or cocaine addicts. Maybe he thinks it is ok to drink beer, I don't know or maybe he just tasted it, right, sure, you betcha. Some people would say he is playing with fire.

To me, drinking, would be a compromise of principles, politically motivated (an appeal to the working class) that would negate my clean and sober status.

So, look, call me a racist, so what. I am a honkey, there, I said it. I just don't like to see people taken by political machines that have no ethics or morals, just like the Republicans.

Posted by: Hank Whatever | May 11, 2008 7:27 PM

I've actually been somewhat torn between Obama and Clinton, and am reasonably neutral, especially considering that my vote will not count in November.

What Edwards is saying makes a lot of sense.

These 'Democrats', who say they will not vote for Oabama are either 1) Republicans in disguise, or 2) Democrats with a single digit IQ. I can't imagine how any Democrat could conclude that Bush III would be better than Obama.

dwight and unreal are blatant racists, based on their comments. When you've lived in Alabama for 30+ years, it's easy to detect racism. :-)

Posted by: MyVoteDoesNotCountInAlabama | May 11, 2008 7:28 PM

When this race started, I thought "well, Hillary will be the nominee, and I'll hold my nose and vote for her"

Why hold my nose, you may ask? Because Senator Clinton basically represents the tried, tired and true Democratic principle of nominating the candidate with basically the most name recognition, and little chance of exciting voters beyond the usual Democratic base. If Senator Clinton becomes the nominee, by some miracle, she will fight the general election across the same lines as the last 7 elections; the Republicans will get claim that they are the party of American values, and Democrats will fight to eke out enough blue states to win the electoral college.

Senator Obama, regardless of what you think of his experience, will run a different campaign. He is the first Democratic candidate in 30 years that sees clearly that Democrats need to speak with a different voice, and appeal across party lines to all Americans.

Quite honestly, I'd rather take my chances with his approach and move the country in a different direction; to get the people of "fly-over" America to think about the Democratic party differently.

This would neve happen with Hillary Clinton as the nominee, and won't happen if she were elected to the presidency. The Bush presidency would be reversed; right now 1/2 of the people in this country hate the president. If Senator Clinton were elected, the other 1/2 of the country would.

I don't think that that is a fair result to our country in this impotant election.

I understand why those of you who feel strongly about Senator Clinton do so. If you absolutely feel that you must vote against Senator Obama, so be it. But think long and hard about your choice. Senator Obama stands for the same things your candidate does. His campaign has done nothing worse than what Senator Clinton did in trying to win a close primary battle. Don't blame the media; no one was even focusing on Senator Obama prior to the Iowa caucus; by winning the caucus, he earned the attention he got.

Please think about your vote; think about what our country would look like with a second Clinton presidency. Don't be hasty.

Posted by: John D in Houston | May 11, 2008 7:28 PM

Kinda funny. Here is the guy that helped Obama start the negative campaigning against Hillary, in the MSNBC debate, chastising her.
I know, because I was a supporter of his, up to that night. No negatives up to then. Hillary is a better person than both Edwards and Obama put together, even with her faults. Doesn't speak well for either of them does it. Two low life's. And one of those low lifes has the nomination. Intelligent Dem. electorate?

Posted by: Chief | May 11, 2008 7:30 PM

To let Black America and a bunch of college kids elect the President of the United States is abolutely assinine. My God, what is happening in this country?

Posted by: Unreal | May 11, 2008 6:57 PM

________________________________________________

So are you saying that black 'AMERICANS' are not smart enough or informed enough to select a President? We have been doing it since we've had the right to vote? Irrespective of the hue of color of the democratic President, had it not been for the black vote, that "white" President, to include Bill Clinton would not have been the president.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 7:31 PM

Hey, MYVOTEDOESN'TCOUNT: I live in Washington, DC - sorry you think I am a racist. I KNOW what I am talking about. I live and work on the Hill - and I hear it everyday.

Posted by: Unreal | May 11, 2008 7:34 PM

POLITICAL ETHICS OR SEXISM


Regarding ethics, both Hillary and Obama have made mis-steps, serious ones at that. I find it disgusting that it is about Hillary's that we mostly hear and I am disgusted at how she gets spit upon by the American news. Yes, Hillary has her Bosnia. Yes, Obama has his Reverend Mr. Wright. Yes Hillary is said to have supported NAFTA. Yes an Obama campaign envoy went to Canada to insure Canada that while Obama publically said he was against NAFTA, it was just mere political posturing. What is the point in continuing to bash Hillary, yet not Obama?


This is sexism at its worst. I repeat sexism at its worst.

And, while we are at it, why is Hillary Clinton being asked to step down from the Democratic race at this time, with the rationale being that she is behind in the delegate and popular vote count? Yet in recent past history, male Presidential candidates, who were far more behind in the delegate and popular vote counts at this point in time, were allowed to go ahead running their various races unharassed, without being called all the derogatory terms being thrown at Hillary. No one asked them to step down. And, I might add, this group of male candidates allowed to continue to run unharassed, though substantially behind, includes none other than Senator Ted Kennedy himself, one of Hillary Clinton's worst detractors. He should talk.

Sexism, anyone...

Posted by: Elaine E | May 11, 2008 7:34 PM

POLITICAL ETHICS OR SEXISM


Regarding ethics, both Hillary and Obama have made mis-steps, serious ones at that. I find it disgusting that it is about Hillary's that we mostly hear and I am disgusted at how she gets spit upon by the American news. Yes, Hillary has her Bosnia. Yes, Obama has his Reverend Mr. Wright. Yes Hillary is said to have supported NAFTA. Yes an Obama campaign envoy went to Canada to insure Canada that while Obama publically said he was against NAFTA, it was just mere political posturing. What is the point in continuing to bash Hillary, yet not Obama?


This is sexism at its worst. I repeat sexism at its worst.

And, while we are at it, why is Hillary Clinton being asked to step down from the Democratic race at this time, with the rationale being that she is behind in the delegate and popular vote count? Yet in recent past history, male Presidential candidates, who were far more behind in the delegate and popular vote counts at this point in time, were allowed to go ahead running their various races unharassed, without being called all the derogatory terms being thrown at Hillary. No one asked them to step down. And, I might add, this group of male candidates allowed to continue to run unharassed, though substantially behind, includes none other than Senator Ted Kennedy himself, one of Hillary Clinton's worst detractors. He should talk.

Sexism, anyone...

Posted by: Elaine E | May 11, 2008 7:35 PM

What a dope Edwards is!

HE could have gotten his plug on the Sunday shows. Instead, as usual, he twitted about.

At least he has come out against the dread Hillary --the worst candidate since Alf Landon or Goebbels or somebody...

Posted by: Jeff Wagner | May 11, 2008 7:35 PM

the dem party is a freak show to normal americans.

Posted by: gunclinger | May 11, 2008 7:36 PM

sockpuppet, you could not be so FAR from the truth.

Although I really ENJOYED Romney so accurately portraying Obama as the inexperienced one today!

I love Hillary, she and Bill gave my family a reason for living in the 90's. I certainly was not afraid to fly. We had PEACE AND PROSPERITY.

Now you Obama cultists are another thing to deal with. Why don't you guys stop ruining the Democrat party? All of you can buy some land in Chicago and be crooks together. Have your own sort of government, just leave America alone!

Obama has done more to bring our country back to RACISM since the 1960's.

He has destroyed all progress that has been made for the black community. He is like a leech!

There is a movement going on now should he succeed in cheating and get the nomination, for Hillary to run as an Independent.

She has more experience in her little finger than Obama has in his entire body.

Wright trained him well, with his stupid gestures to prove his point (loved it when he flipped Hillary off, what class Obama. You disgust half of America!

Hearing Romney speak today so decisively about Obama, well, I may be a died in the wook Democrat, but I will tell you, the Republicans fight dirty, he won't stand a chance in the debates with all his stuttering.

DEMOCRATS UNITE FOR HILLARY CLINTON, TELL HER TO GO ALL THE WAY TO CONVENTION!!!!!

WE ARE BEHIND YOU HILLARY!

Send Obama and his clan to a Muslim country where he can live a better life. Maybe Michelle will be proud once again????


Posted by: Grandma Dee | May 11, 2008 7:37 PM

Grandma Dee - you have got it right, girl! GOOOOOOOOO HILLARY!

Posted by: Unreal | May 11, 2008 7:39 PM

Oh wow, the dim light bulb speaks, and no one cares. Go back to chasing ambulances John, so we can watch our health insurance increase. Imagine no liberals, what a wonderful world it would be.

Posted by: Toxic Avenger | May 11, 2008 7:40 PM

your vote won't count, i get a kick out of you libs that equate IQ with being able to vote for the person who holds your values. and one might think that exessive intelligence may be a hindrance,enabling you to rationalize your flawed decisions. most of the time rationalizing has to do with making things easier for yourself. you know,okay to do,right or wrong.

Posted by: gunclinger | May 11, 2008 7:43 PM

I am happy that more lifetime Dems have seen through Obama, the great divider. I hope he is glad to have permanently split the party even though his ignorant young followers keep trying to blame the Clintons. I never thought I would regret a candidate more than Bush, but now we Dems have our own to regret. Look up how much more than the others running he has taken in $$$ from big oil. Look at his books and lifestyle. He and his wife give nothing to charity but insist on looking at the tax paperwork of all other candidates. I will write in another Dem name if the party fools actually nominate Obama. He made it into crooked IL politics by the same slight-of hand that he is now using. What a pity.

Posted by: jean | May 11, 2008 7:43 PM

Obama's tax and spend policies will make us the United states of Europe! (USE)

Posted by: Ram | May 11, 2008 6:40 PM
---------------------------------------------

Which is one of the best thing that could happen to the USA: 5 to 6 weeks of paid vacation, universal free health care coverage, welcome in every country, a much lower ratio of inequality, etc...

Posted by: Oscar | May 11, 2008 7:44 PM

Sorry for the double post. I think a second Clinton Presidency would clean up alot of mistakes made in the past like Nafta, Iraq, the economy and automatically foreign relations would improve.

McCain, globally trash talking with Russians right now, for old republican guard votes, does not seem to be beneficial to our international standing at this juncture. McCain's roadtrip abroad with Lieberman and Graham was a waste of fuel to me. Fighting on, even if it takes 100 years in not in the best interest of our country either. The United States is approaching insolvency and McCain offers a gas tax rebate without a revenue offset ? Has he seen the value of the dollar lately, that guy is just a professional politician now, not even a duly elected Senator, but I guess those constiuents in Arizona don't care about that. They won't care until their own daughter gets raped or shot by a criminal illegal alien. I am not going to second guess Flip-Flop John but he may be sabotaging his own second run at the Whitehouse. Does he really know what he is doing ?

So that brings me to Barry Obama that says he is for everyone while mostly, he is getting black votes in heavy predominately black populated areas. That is not a melting pot theme to me. I really do have some questions about his charactor now with or without Rev. Wright but he seems to be just another politician in my book too. I just wonder if as civil rights marches on why not Lady's first. Or perhaps the African-American community would consider a black candidate with both parents being african-american. The spin will get you everytime.

Posted by: Hank Whatever | May 11, 2008 7:44 PM

ELAINE, YOU ARE SO RIGHT!

...."this group of male candidates allowed to continue to run unharassed, though substantially behind, includes none other than Senator Ted Kennedy himself, one of Hillary Clinton's worst detractors. He should talk."........

Oh this makes me so angry!
Ted Kennedy left a young lady that CAMPAIGNED for him to die, and he is now thought of as one of the Senior SENATors??

Only in America -- no wonder Teddy is so much in favor of getting his "boy" into the White House. But wait,
there is hope --
Maybe he will throw Teddy, Donna Brazil, Tim Russert and the likes under the wheels of the bus?

GO HILLARY!!!

ALL THE WAY TO CONVENTION!!!!

DO AS TEDDY DOES, NOT AS HE SAYS!!

JOHN EDWARDS, GO HOME AND TAKE CARE OF YOUR FAMILY! ELIZABETH NEEDS YOU!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 7:48 PM

I do not especially care about either dem. candidate, as long as they gather enough consensus to reverse the republican policies.

After having completely destroyed the US public image across the world (along with physically destroying a couple of countries), it is time Americans elect someone that can rebuild some brand equity abroad, design a policy to bridge the inequality gap and stops favouring Big business and starts caring about citizens

Posted by: Oscar | May 11, 2008 7:49 PM

The truly sad thing about these complaints that Hillary Clinton is somehow endangering the Democrat Party by attacking aspects of Barrack Obama's character, etc. lies in the fact that what she is doing is precisely what the electoral process intends. If anyone is naive enough to think that the McCain campaign will pull any punches or play nice, then they are seriously deluded. If Obama's campaign cannot survive Hillary's attacks, then it is indeed in no way ready for what is to come in the next few months. I think the real problem is that the Democratic party needs to grow up, stop being a bunch of sniveling crybabies, and deal with the political situation as it really is.

Posted by: sutree | May 11, 2008 7:49 PM

Hillary's Dowfall

Staring dick Cheney as Hillary Hitler:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6Lstkiexhc

Posted by: Kevin Schmidt | May 11, 2008 7:51 PM

grand(old party)mother dee

yah, chicago is gangsterland;

obama flipped off clinton;

obama is a muslim(??!!);

lay off the kool-aid just for a minute.

Are you serious that you prefer McCain to Obama?

Roe v Wade, war, economy in the toilet for most of us, civil liberties disappeared...?


Everyone can see that you and your ilk are gop trolls. But keep it up -- it's very entertaining.

If you're willing to accept all that McSame will bring, then how can anyone believe you were ever a Democrat let alone progressive?

Posted by: see_the_sockpuppets | May 11, 2008 7:51 PM

Tony Campolo

What is Liberation Theology?
Tony Campolo

With all the upset over Jeremiah Wright and his so-called Liberation Theology, many have been asking what Liberation Theology is all about. Well, it is not very complicated! It is the simple belief that in the struggles of poor and oppressed people against their powerful and rich oppressors, God sides with the oppressed against the oppressors.
Those who adhere to Liberation Theology point out that all through the Bible we find that God always champions the cause of those who are poor and beaten down as they struggle for dignity, freedom and economic justice. When the children of Israel cry out for help as they suffer the agonies of their enslavement under Pharaoh, God hears their cry and joins them in their fight for freedom. God sides with the Jews as they seek deliverance from Egyptian domination.
Later on, when the Israelites are settled in the Holy Land, there emerge rich and powerful Jews who live lives of affluence without regard for the sufferings of the poor. In response to their indifference, God raises up prophets to decry the plight of the poor and call the rich to repent. The prophets of ancient Israel challenged, in the name of God, what was happening to those who were victimized in an unjustly stratified society.
When we come to the New Testament, we find that Jesus also comes as a liberator. Mary, the mother of Jesus, responds to the annunciation that she will give birth to the Messiah by claiming that it will one day be said of her soon-to-be-born son:
...He hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts. He hath put down the mighty from their seats, and exalted them of low degree. He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich He hath sent away empty.--Luke 1:51-53
Jesus himself, in his initial sermon, declares that He has come to bring "good news for the poor" and to "preach deliverance to the captives" (Luke 4:18-19).
The social implications of this biblical theme of liberation have been taken up by a variety of oppressed groups over the past fifty years. Christian feminists have claimed that Jesus came to liberate women from oppression--especially as oppression of women manifests itself in certain Islamic countries, as well as in the male domination encouraged by some forms of Christianity.
Gays who are Christians also have made Jesus their liberator as they have fought for dignity and acceptance in what they believe to be a homophobic society.
And of course, Jeremiah Wright has declared for the African-American community that, in their struggle to overcome the oppression they have had to endure at the hands of what he believes is a racist society, the God revealed in scripture will fight for them.
There will be those who will claim that Liberation Theology is nothing more than a baptized version of a Marxist revolutionary ideology. There is good reason for this because some prominent Latin American theologians have integrated Marxism with a theology of liberation and offered it up as justification for the violent overthrow of what they considered to be evil dictatorships. But it must be noted that most forms of Liberation Theology have nothing to do with Marxism and violent revolutions.
Certainly, Jeremiah Wright is advocating neither Marxism nor violent revolution. What Rev. Wright does say is that, as the African-American community endeavors to establish itself as a people who are both equal with whites and deserving of the dignity that God wills for all human beings, they have God on their side.
Rev. Wright's words may seem harsh and his style may be strident, but that just may be the way that those of us in the white establishment react. For his African-American brothers and sisters, there may be a different reaction. Many of them will hear him as an angry prophet in the tradition of ancient Israel.
To we white folks, Jeremiah Wright sounds threatening. But we might ask ourselves if we deserve to be threatened.
Tony Campolo, professor emeritus at Eastern University, is the founder of the Evangelical Association for the Promotion of Education, an organization that develops schools and social programs in various third world countries and in cities across North America. He is the author of 35 books, his latest three being, "Letters to a Young Evangelical," "The God of Intimacy and Action" and his most recently release is "Red Letter Christians, A Citizen's Guide to Faith and Politics."
POSTED BY TONY CAMPOLO ON APRIL 30, 2008 12:16 AM

Posted by: Don't be scared of the hype. | May 11, 2008 7:56 PM

Why schedule primaries if they are meaningless? Seems to me that Edwards is content with disenfranchising some of his former base. He should go get another one of those swell haircuts and spend more time with his wife.

Posted by: Kevin | May 11, 2008 7:58 PM

Oh, Barry needs to buckle up his seat-belt because the SWIFT BOATERS are gonna sail! LOL!!!

Posted by: Unreal | May 11, 2008 7:58 PM

Why schedule primaries if they are meaningless? Seems to me that Edwards is content with disenfranchising some of his former base. He should go get another one of those swell haircuts and spend more time with his wife.

Posted by: Kevin | May 11, 2008 7:59 PM

John Edwards should just keep his mouth shut instead of trying to weasel himself into the Obama Campaign, now that Obama has become the Democratic Presidential Nominee.

The time for Edwards to speak out was four years ago just after the second stolen election. Instead he and Kerry went silent and became willing participants in a treasonous crime against the voters.

Do the country a favor Edwards, crawl back into your hole and stay silent.

Posted by: Kevin Schmidt | May 11, 2008 8:00 PM

Why Barack Hussein Obama can not be our next president :

1. He is an ultra liberal, inexperienced
2. His connection with the unpatriotic, fanatic Rev Wright has been so long, 20 years, haft of his life time.
3. He and his wife were forced to distance from Wright, not due to their willing. it's clear he is lying . I could not believe him.

If he is defeated in the General Election, who would be blamed ?
Obama first then the Liberals, the Leaders of the Democratic Party; Don't blame Hillary Clinton

Posted by: zien106 | May 11, 2008 8:02 PM

Why Barack Hussein Obama can not be our next president :

1. He is an ultra liberal, inexperienced
2. His connection with the unpatriotic, fanatic Rev Wright has been so long, 20 years, haft of his life time.
3. He and his wife were forced to distance from Wright, not due to their willing. it's clear he is lying . I could not believe him.

If he is defeated in the General Election, who would be blamed ?
Obama first then the Liberals, the Leaders of the Democratic Party; Don't blame Hillary Clinton

Posted by: zien106 | May 11, 2008 8:03 PM

Why Barack Hussein Obama can not be our next president :

1. He is an ultra liberal, inexperienced
2. His connection with the unpatriotic, fanatic Rev Wright has been so long, 20 years, haft of his life time.
3. He and his wife were forced to distance from Wright, not due to their willing. it's clear he is lying . I could not believe him.

If he is defeated in the General Election, who would be blamed ?
Obama first then the Liberals, the Leaders of the Democratic Party; Don't blame Hillary Clinton

Posted by: zien106 | May 11, 2008 8:03 PM

Sutree,

But Obama's campaign HAS survived Hillary's attacks, and McCain's attacks. I don't think he's naive enough to think that it's all roses ahead.

Obama is going to be the nominee.

I just don't understand those Hillary supporters that won't vote for Obama in November. Why the divisiveness?

Grandma Dee, your attacks are absurd and offensive. Enough with the caps and the quadruple posts. How can you say Obama and his supporters are offensive when you are spewing meanness, hatred, and ignorance?

Why the hatred? Do you really wish to see another 4 years of failed policies?

Oscar, I agree completely. But no one here wants to give up the money to have those things. Gee, I'd pay higher taxes to have health care for my family. I'd pay higher taxes so that I can have a quality of life with my family and not have to work overtime. I'd pay higher taxes for my children to have a free college education.

I'd pay higher taxes so that YOUR children can have free college education too.

Posted by: Ali | May 11, 2008 8:03 PM

Yea, the trolls say they will vote for McCain. Polls taken in the heat of the moment are nearly worthless especially when unscientific polls ask leading questions.

Now look, I don't care if a kid is white, black, latino or any other color of the rainbow, a drug, is a drug is a drug. I would hate to see a recovering coconut get an idea from Barry Obama that it is ok to drink beer and hang out in bars. So that example bothers me.

But hey, if you want your kids to grow up to be suck-ups, liars and thieves then by all means vote a straight Republican ticket. Send your hard earned cash to the party that brought us all another oil related recsession, a housing market crash and a terrible war or two. Vote republican if you believe mere mortals can change reality with rhetoric. Vote Republican if you don't want our world standing to approve. Remember GITMO is still open, no one really has been held accountable for torture and renditions to nations that do torture, people are losing their homes while gas prices cause people to lose their minds.

Sure, Democrats are going to vote for McCain. What is this, if Barry is not the Presidential candidate, you gonna take your ball off the playground and go home ? Well fine with me, cya. I stand up to bullies myself.

Posted by: Hank Whatever | May 11, 2008 8:03 PM

unreal: So, I'm expected to believe that because you live in DC, you know what you are talking about? LOL

Racism is the same in all 50 states, including DC. You are obviously a racist based on your comments in this thread.

Posted by: MyVoteDoesNotCountInAlabama | May 11, 2008 8:04 PM

Sutree,

But Obama's campaign HAS survived Hillary's attacks, and McCain's attacks. I don't think he's naive enough to think that it's all roses ahead.

Obama is going to be the nominee.

I just don't understand those Hillary supporters that won't vote for Obama in November. Why the divisiveness?

Grandma Dee, your attacks are absurd and offensive. Enough with the caps and the quadruple posts. How can you say Obama and his supporters are offensive when you are spewing meanness, hatred, and ignorance?

Why the hatred? Do you really wish to see another 4 years of failed policies?

Oscar, I agree completely. But no one here wants to give up the money to have those things. Gee, I'd pay higher taxes to have health care for my family. I'd pay higher taxes so that I can have a quality of life with my family and not have to work overtime. I'd pay higher taxes for my children to have a free college education.

I'd pay higher taxes so that YOUR children can have free college education too.

Posted by: Ali | May 11, 2008 8:05 PM

It's comments like this made earlier Posted by: Unreal "To let Black America and a bunch of college kids elect the President of the United States is abolutely assinine. My God, what is happening in this country?"

Which confirms my earlier point. People will refuse to vote for Obama simply because of the color of his Skin. Racism is ignorance and destructive. We rather go to war for 100 years. Have millions to die. destroy the economy and utterly destroy America rather than to vote for a black man.

Posted by: David | May 11, 2008 8:06 PM

To Veronica, Elaine, Dwight and all the other Clinton supporters who won't vote for Obama in November:

What do you plan to do when Obama wins the election in November? Hold your breathe? Lie on the floor and kick and scream? Move to Bosnia? Just wondering.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 8:06 PM

PEOPLE FOR HILLARY UNITE!

AS ELAINE SAYS, TEDDY KENNEDY lost the popular vote and delegate vote and HE, TEDDY, still went on in the race unharrassed!

NOW THE OBAMA SUPPORTERS WANT HILLARY TO DROP OUT!

THE PARTY WILL NOT FALL APART, JUST THESE OLD GEEZERS!

THEY ARE SCARED OF HER!

KEEP HILLARY IN ALL THE WAY TO CONVENTION, SHE AND WE HER SUPPORTERS HAVE THAT RIGHT!

We sent another donation, and we are sending another, not much extra money here for sure, I am a caregiver, but PEOPLE, PLEASE, SHOW HILLARY YOU CARE FOR HER AND WANT HER TO CONTINUE ON TO CONVENTION

-- SEND WHAT YOU CAN, MILLIONS OF US -- IT ADDS UP., $5, 10, nothing is too small to help her!!!!!

HILLARY KEEP GOING, ALL THE WAY TO CONVENTION!

Posted by: GRANDMA DEE | May 11, 2008 8:08 PM

John Edwards should just keep his mouth shut instead of trying to weasel himself into the Obama Campaign, now that Obama has become the Democratic Presidential Nominee.

The time for Edwards to speak out was four years ago just after the second stolen election. Instead he and Kerry went silent and became willing participants in a treasonous crime against the voters.

Do the country a favor Edwards, crawl back into your hole and stay silent.

Posted by: Kevin Schmidt | May 11, 2008 8:09 PM

David, as sad as it is, racism is alive and real in this country. Perhaps if Obama "became of age" in a softer way, he would be more palatable. His arrogance is stunning.

Posted by: Unreal | May 11, 2008 8:14 PM

There's a lot of angry back and forth in these blogs. The clear result of the Democratic nomination process is that Senator Obama will be our nominee. It is time for all Democrats to smell the coffee and get behind our candidate. Petty revenge at the expense of the people of the United States is unimaginable. Eight years of Republican ineptitude, human and constitutional rights abuses, and financial irresponsibility is quite enough. When people consider Senator McCain's votes, policies, and supporters, they should be able to arrive at the right conclusion. We badly need a new Democratic President, and more robust Democratic majorities in the Senate and House. Those outcomes become less likely the longer that the Democratic nomination contest goes on. I hope Senator Clinton looks at the math and draws the right conclusion.

Posted by: Karl Shipps | May 11, 2008 8:17 PM

dontbescaredofthehype, i bust my arse everyday at work and i help everybody i can. i never owned anybody and dont want to. i dont see any blacks or anyone else starving in this country on a scale of the biblical hebrews. the other thing is that black theology says that if God isn't against white people and for black people He is a murderer. that sure sounds like i should be condemned for being white ,not starving black people. wright has been turning people into haters for a long time. i see he really gives up alot,a 1.6 million house and a 10 mil credit line at his churches expence.

Posted by: gunclinger | May 11, 2008 8:18 PM

Karl, I think you are asking too much at this point. There might be some movement from the Clinton supporters to Obama, but my guess is that it will be very litte. Clinton supporters feel as though Obama stole the nomination with the help from the liberal press, not to mention so many of HRC's super delegates who the Clintons helped through the years. That would leave a bad taste in my mouth.

Posted by: Unreal | May 11, 2008 8:22 PM

But, what is the will of the people?

The press is silent on the issue of caucuses, but caucuses have led to the lead in pledged delegates for Obama and what has happened since then. Caucuses disenfranchise Hillary's main voter base: older voters, working people who cannot take off from work or cannot afford baby sitters so that they can participate in lengthy caucus processes, and the many women who are intimidated or pressured by the fact that caucuses are public. Primaries use secret ballots and absentee ballots for a reason. An additional problem is that the delegates of a caucus state were awarded on the basis of low caucus voting numbers, making the skew towards Obama even more pronounced.

Look at the website election.msn.com, specifically the states of Washington and Texas, to compare primary results to caucus results. The delegates were awarded on the basis of the caucus. Obama won the following caucus states: Alaska, Colorado, Connecti cut, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Minnesota, Nebraska , North Dakota, Utah, Wyoming. Hillary won Nevada because many caucuses were held in the workplace and people were given time off to vote.

Obama supporters, to whom I gave this argument, say that Obama won the caucuses because of his superior organization and that is why he should have the delegates, but I contend that it is not a matter of organization. I fell last year and broke my T5 vertebrae. I would not have been able to vote in the caucus in Texas because of the long lines and the cold night. But, I live in the great state of California and we have a primary, that Hillary won by 10%. And, yes, I am an older woman, part of Hillary's voter base.

Caucuses should be declared illegal, for the future. But, the future is not my argument now: look at the outcome of primaries to determine electability in November. The general election is like a primary, not a caucus. Everyone votes.

Posted by: jchbrock | May 11, 2008 8:22 PM

John Edwards should just keep his mouth shut instead of trying to weasel himself into the Obama Campaign, now that Obama has become the Democratic Presidential Nominee.

The time for Edwards to speak out was four years ago just after the second stolen election. Instead he and Kerry went silent and became willing participants in a treasonous crime against the voters.

Do the country a favor Edwards, crawl back into your hole and stay silent.

Posted by: Kevin Schmidt | May 11, 2008 8:23 PM

Ya gotta love the gop trolls -- they're not very good at impersonating dems and progressives but they're great at making everyone else laugh.

McCain =

>dubya's third term

>100+ more years in Iraq

>100+ years of war in Iraq and N Korea

>criminalization of reproductive freedom

>tax holidays for the corporate rich

>creeping police state

>etc

You really think anyone will believe that you're a Democrat or a progressive and you're willing to sign up for all this just because you claim to support the candidate who has, by the math, lost the primary...?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 8:23 PM

ALI:

I did not purposely double or triple post. It kept going back to the preview screen and never went through. That happens in heavy posting.

I too would pay higher taxes for education, etc., for my grandchildren. I am a supporter in our levies.

That is not my point!

Our media and crooks such as Ted Kennedy are stepping on my rights through stepping on Hillary's.

He demands preferential treatment for himself, and tries to ruin a woman who has deeply cared for America since her young life!

Manipulation like this from the male chauvinists out there, is disgusting and demeaning!

The old guys do one thing in an election, then another in another election, just to suit themselves and their agendas. They are no different from Bush. Money is just flowing a different direction.

Ted Kennedy left his young campaigner to die in a car accident. Saved his own pitiful self, but left her to die. Don't you get it?

Ted Kennedy's poor wife destroyed her life with alcohol from living with this poor excuse of a man.

Its all hate toward Hillary as a strong woman, that, my friend, is the disgusting part of it all!
THEY ARE THE WORST WOMEN HATERS!

HILLARY GO ALL THE WAY TO CONVENTION!

SAVE AMERICA HILLARY!!!!

Posted by: GRANDMA DEE | May 11, 2008 8:23 PM

Unfortunately, Obama is not a Muslim but just another weasal christian.

I like the way people are using his full name, though -- Barack HUSSEIN Obama! With luck, he will stand for the increasingly open country that we are -- not just Xtians and Israelites but Muslims and -- thank GxD -- atheists, too!

Posted by: Jeff Wagner | May 11, 2008 8:24 PM

Unfortunately, Obama is not a Muslim but just another weasal christian.

I like the way people are using his full name, though -- Barack HUSSEIN Obama! With luck, he will stand for the increasingly open country that we are -- not just Xtians and Israelites but Muslims and -- thank GxD -- atheists, too!

Posted by: Jeff Wagner | May 11, 2008 8:24 PM

This is the stupidest thing edwards has ever said.

If Hillary drops out, the first things that will come out from the Republicans are the info in Obama's hard drugs and Obama's slums.

Next will be Obama's sex-scandals, and they're not with women, they're the republican kind, with men.

Obma's trying to get the party into a situation where they're stuck with him and can't back out.

That's not going to help anything.

We live under a two party system.

IF Obama's the nominee, McCain's the next President.

Having Hillary drop out is the stupidest thing Democrats can do, because then the Republicans will let Obama have it with everything they've got, and they've got a lot to of stuff they can use.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 8:25 PM

Unreal makes a good point that if Obama thinks he has been mistreated, the Republicans will Swift Boat him with things he will never be able to defend. He incriminated himself in his books - a pretty stupid thing to do for someone with presidential aspirations.

Posted by: JustWatching | May 11, 2008 8:31 PM

On the eve of the US's most difficult financial crisis in decades we have a choice between three candidates. Two of these candidates have either little or no money in their campaign. These two have seen their campaigns go bankrupt in the last year and have borrowed money to keep their ships afloat.

One has raised money by the boat load by being creative. This one has raised more cash than any other presidential contender and from a grass roots campaign of average American people (not a small group of wealthy investors).

If the campaign is anything like the Presidency (and it always is: Clinton had women calling him a womanizer and Bush was labeled "the dumb guy" by the press)...we know what we get with each of these candidates.

Posted by: Vote your wallet | May 11, 2008 8:37 PM

Restore Honor and Integrity to the White House and to the Democratic Party ... Barack Obama, '08!!!

Posted by: martin edwin andersen | May 11, 2008 8:40 PM

The SNL piece last night was the dagger through her campaing and tghe Clinton's reputataion.

They have become pathetic bad loser laughing stock.

They are so unapealling, unethical and racists.

Posted by: dana | May 11, 2008 8:42 PM

Hillary is a fighter. I believe she could weather a rough campaign that would be thrown at her. Obama cries about every little swipe anyone takes at him. If he thinks this is bad, he is living in a cave.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 8:42 PM

Life is a game and money is how we keep score.

McCain campaign - bankruptcy, personal loan in the millions to stay in the race.

Clinton campaign - bankruptcy, personal loan in the tens of millions to stay in the race.

Obama - Cash cow shattering campaign contribution records in depth and breadth.

Life is a game and money is how we keep score.

Posted by: Vote your wallet | May 11, 2008 8:48 PM

Rumors are that she plans to show up in WVA in KKK garb as a Grand Wizard and lynch a black male manican.
She's a fighter, and not a quitter.

Go Hillary. Go lynch some black folk and show up in white face too.

Soooo much fun.

If Obama can't stand the lyncing then he can't handle the 3 am call.

He is a Muslum terrorist, "at leaset as far as I know". Has he proved otherwise?

She is all class.

Posted by: Ann Lewis | May 11, 2008 8:50 PM

Vote: yep, the stupidity of the voting public to waste their money on such a loser.

Posted by: Heavenly | May 11, 2008 8:50 PM

Obama wants to raise taxes more than any other candidate.

Vote for your wallet.

Vote for the war hero not the coke head.

If Obama's the nominee, he will lose by a landslide.

You Obama supporters amaze me.

You think that everybody else is as much of a left-wing lunatic as you are.

They aren't.

If we nominate Obama, we lose by a landslide.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 8:51 PM

Obama supporters will succeed in what everyone thought would be impossible.

They will get a Republican elected to the Whitehouse after everything Bush has done.

Obama wants to raise taxes through the roof.

That's going to go over really well in the middle of a recession.

Obama supporters aren't just dumb, they're nuts too.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 8:53 PM

must...not...feed...the...trolls...

but it is fun to see them try to pose as dems and progressives...

Posted by: see_the_sockpuppets | May 11, 2008 8:56 PM

Well Justwatching he is just green. If he threatens to throw the kitchen sink at McCain the sink comes back to haunt him.

I mean, the guy profiled himself with the dysfunctional family, being of mixed blood, and a cocaine problem. Believe it or not, citizens do respect the law, cocaine and weed are illegal substances. At what age does a kid know right from wrong ? There are some value issues there combined with peer pressure, yadda, yadda, yadda, typical path and background for an addict but he can sell himself as turned around if he likes.

The other thing is that he followed Hillary into the bar metaphorically speaking. Press reported him ordering a bud, a pabst or a local beer elsewhere. It's just not kosher for me to see someone bar hopping who admitted to substance abuse in the past. And what was the cop-out here if there was one at all, political pressure, handlers saying you need to be a "blue collar" type of guy, now go in there and order a bud son.

So there are other reasons to be discussed about his vision for a America but Rev. Wright pretty much lost it saying Obama is just a politician. Not hard to put those pieces together but hey, it sells more cereal on those commercials trying to sell Wright as a radical and attached to Obama. Rev. Sharpton was not so stupid as to add an endorsement, good for him, and good for Rev. Jackson.

Posted by: Hank Whatever | May 11, 2008 8:57 PM

I listened to this report and I think this article is biased. Edwards really said nothing of the sort.

Posted by: Jim Dickerson | May 11, 2008 8:58 PM

Obama doesn't stand a chance in the general election.

Republicans don't even have to stick to the truth.

They can make up lies like claiming that Obama will push for reperations for slavery and push it through the Democratic congress, and people will believe it.

Americans are not going to risk combining a Democratic controlled congress with a guy that has a history of going to a racist, anti-white, anti-semitic, anti-American church for 20 years.

Republicans will drag up every possible race related red-herring and make it a 24 hour a day buffet of race related fear.

Obama will never be President.

They will make him so unelectable that he'll lose worst than McGovern did.

They'll do it through 527, under the table, just like Obama shafted Hillary under the table by trashing her reputation by using staffers that post on these and other boards.

Republicans will frame the election as an attempt by Blacks to take over the country from Whites.

Republicans are tenth degree black belts in dirty politics and they love racism.

Their whole "Southern Strategy" is based on it.

They will use Obama's race to bring out every Republican voter, and they'll scare them into voting Republican house and senate race to stop Obama at all costs.

Barack Obama is Republican's dream candidate -- A Black man who beat up a white woman.

The Clinton's aren't racists, but Republicans are and they're nasty ones.

If we Democrats nominate Obama we're going to screw things up for ourselves for a generation.

They will paint Obama as an anti-white Black man on Cocaine that's a threat to white women, and no, this post isn't telling them anything that they haven't already thought of.

Wake up people!!!

You've destroying our chance to take back the Whitehouse by choosing the most unelectable candidate possible.

If we nominate Obama we lose and we will deserve to lose.

Obama chose Rev Wright and Black Liberation Theology."

He lied to us about being "Post Racial"

Obama chose Rev Wright.

All Republicans have to do is to tell people to "connect the dots"

Democrats don't have to choose Obama.

If we do, we lose.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 8:58 PM

you know what's sad? he nastiness displayed by so many Obama supporters. sometimes they sound just like the GOP. i thought you following someone with a message of hope, not more of the GOP.

please stop. I am tired of that after almost 30 years, lets move to a newer level.

Like it or not, when it comes time to vote, you will find that racism is alive and well in the north and midwest, and Obama will not get the votes. he might still hzve higher ratings nationally than McCain, but he doesn't have Hillary's pull in the electoral college, and thats what mattered in 2000, if any of you remember.

Hillary IS the stronger candidate, and she always has been. she might not be exactly where we want to go, but it is becuase of things that SHE has done- BEFORE Bill Clinton, that people like Obama even have a shot. I find some of the nastiness from the 'youth' who have the Clintons to thank for such a wealthy and spoiled childhood to be downright deplorable.

I think Obama is an excellent candidate - in 2016. He will make a BEAUTIFUL dovetail off of Hillary Clinton.

But if you want to beat McCain, you had best support Hillary for now. She is a worker and she has something that Obama has yet to show.

Grit.

THAt is what is now making her very popular among the working class. TRUE GRIT. Striking it when it gets tough.

As a libertarian she often irritated me. Now I really do support her.

Will I vote for an Obama? yes, faced with more fascist policies in the name of McSame, but I would rather vote for a Hillary, becuase we CANNOT survive McSame.

Posted by: Tortfeezer | May 11, 2008 9:01 PM

Heavenly, I put up some facts that are undeniably true. Obama has outraised the other two candidates. You cannot deny that. And it's not just that he out raised his opponents, after all Bush out raised others that were much smarter than him. It's how Obama did it. The majority of his contributions are from a LARGE base of donors giving in small amounts.

He is the peoples candidate moreso than Hillary or McCain.

Your relpy to this was that Obama supporters are stupid. OK. What would you say for the swath of Americans who voted for Bush, twice?

Scary fact #1: That's the majority of our country - twice.

Scary fact #2: That swath is Hillary and McCains base.

Mull those facts over and reply with your opinion of stupidity again.

Posted by: Vote your wallet | May 11, 2008 9:05 PM

John Edwards should just keep his mouth shut instead of trying to weasel himself into the Obama Campaign, now that Obama has become the Democratic Presidential Nominee.

The time for Edwards to speak out was four years ago just after the second stolen election. Instead he and Kerry went silent and became willing participants in a treasonous crime against the voters.

Do the country a favor Edwards, crawl back into your hole and stay silent.

Posted by: Kevin Schmidt | May 11, 2008 9:13 PM

her candidacy needs to be euthanized

Posted by: stew118 | May 11, 2008 9:14 PM

her candidacy needs to be euthanized

Posted by: stew118 | May 11, 2008 9:14 PM

Edwards is a two time loser. Why is anyone listening to him?

Posted by: Mark F. | May 11, 2008 9:16 PM

Obama is an uppity black. We all know it. I'd rather have a few more wars and keep our boys overseas than let a house slave RULE us.

I'd rather let the rich get richer than let a darkie sit in the WHITE House.

I'd rather have our kids have alley abortions instead of letting some guy who should be shining my shoes stand in the Oval White Office.

All the damn eggheads with their fancy degrees can kiss my butt. Women were the original slaves not the Africans. Eve was enslaved by Adam.

Posted by: Alice | May 11, 2008 9:17 PM

Tortfeezer, in general far left liberals or far right conservatives are radical. I mean the fear mongers of the self righteous right had nearly everyone believing Hussein would give wmds to al-queda to use against us in the Homeland. Add the anthrax scare into that equation and the picture is more apparent. Just let me say that the truth is out there on that one too.

But look at Kerry or a few others, screaming "Save the Caribou" during ANWAR debates. If nothing else that project could have been on its way to being strategic reserves right now. The under the table stuff was that the Oil clan wanted to sell it directly to Russia. That is hardly the answer.

This background check on Obama has been extended, probably through subversive politics and less noble networks that hardly ever put content ahead of spin. In this modern age, why not play everything open face because it looks like to me, one day contractors work for Uncle Sam and the next day they work for a political party or a 527, go figure.

Ashcroft and Mueller never learned that if you want the Press to put something on the radar, then just try to hide it, speaking of gags on gags, oops I forgot, "That's Classified".

Posted by: Hank Whatever | May 11, 2008 9:17 PM

"

Karl, I think you are asking too much at this point. There might be some movement from the Clinton supporters to Obama, but my guess is that it will be very litte. Clinton supporters feel as though Obama stole the nomination with the help from the liberal press, not to mention so many of HRC's super delegates who the Clintons helped through the years. That would leave a bad taste in my mouth.
Posted by: Unreal | May 11, 2008 8:22 PM "

I don't understand the delusions of Clinton supporters. You do realize that by any democratic metric- even if you count Florida and stupidly count Mich.- he has won the popular vote. And still you have the gall to act as if your candidate somehow deserved the nomination?

"The republicans even have to follow the truth..." -anon

Judging from the rest of your post, neither do you.

The folks on these boards trying to hype this divide are either good republicans are democrats that the party and country could do without.

Posted by: ep thorn | May 11, 2008 9:19 PM

"and be good Democrats!". Voting your conscious makes you a good Democrat and a good American. Not voting for Obama does not make you a bad Democrat. I've voted nearly party line since I could back in '92. Obama has clinched a republican victory this November.

Posted by: A Good American | May 11, 2008 9:21 PM

Speaking of far right radicals, is Rush Limbaugh under investigation ? I mean for over a year we had known some hard drives were wiped at the OSC. Were Republican headquarters or the Whitehouse raided due to wiped harddrives, not. So did Limbaugh violate any statutes include new statutes dealing with terrorism, now what was that gem called, "The Patriot Act", ahha. They did not get away with one darn thing. And they will not avoid consequence according to my crystal ball.

Posted by: Hank Whatever | May 11, 2008 9:22 PM

Looks like democrats have agreed on their latest talking point. In the last few days a series of party leaders have made the claim that McCain has changed and isn't the same person he once was. This is a very clever maneuver to try to explain away the obvious contradiction in Obama's campaign -- that Obama claims to be the magic man who can bring the country together, and yet he is the most liberal, extreme member of the United States Senate. This fiction worked well against Hillary, because she has a similarly thin resume. It won't work as well against McCain, since McCain has regularly crossed party lines to lead and bring together diverse factions in the Senate and has a long track record of actually achieving large goals.

Posted by: Bill | May 11, 2008 9:22 PM

Why are all you clinton supporters whinning and playing the victim card? You lost. She claims she will support the party's nomimnee. If she does will you not continue to support her or are you really Repubs?

Posted by: The truth is | May 11, 2008 9:26 PM

Why are all you clinton supporters whinning and playing the victim card? You lost. She claims she will support the party's nomimnee. If she does will you not continue to support her or are you really Repubs?

Posted by: The truth is | May 11, 2008 9:27 PM

McCain and the GOP are afraid of Obama and they know he's the strongest candidate. Why?

MONEY. He can out raise them and out spend them...and out think them.

Obama mastered the Democratic process with enough grit an fortitude to out raise and outspend and out maneuver Washingtons political power house couple. Beating the Clintons inside the beltway - with nowhere near the experience or connections - is an accomplishment indeed.

Coming out of nowhere and beating a Clinton is a typical David and Goliath story.

A nobody from nowhere with a crazy pastor, admitted drug use, a Rezko trial and fumbled comments about middle Americans beat a political dynasty fair and square. That shows grit as well as thoughfulness, judgement, planning and intelligence.

McCain was trying to tie Obama to public financing months ago because he's afraid of being up against a grassroots juggernaut of a fundraiser.

Any political candidate would be afraid of that. Make no mistake people. Anyone with any insight to politics or Washington can easily see that Obama has built a formidable campaign and accomplished a major milestone by knocking Hillary out. That's what Edwards (someone who has been through a Presidential campaign before) was saying on the talk shows today.

Obama proved, without a shadow of a doubt, that judgement trumps experience - and that he has the judgement.

Posted by: Vote your wallet | May 11, 2008 9:28 PM

It's simply too funny.
Most Obama supporters argue on the reasons they believe he's the best candidate whereas most McCain declared voters, including a few extreme Hillaryphilic, just furiously state why they won't vote for Obama, calling him to lose.
Just two evident options right now: pro Obama or anti Obama. It's pretty clear who will lead American and world politics over the next eight years. Like it or not, you are all getting used to it. Look yourselves at the mirror!

Posted by: Luke | May 11, 2008 9:28 PM

For the folks stressing electability, how do you judge that, how should we judge that? Personally, I sort of think maybe we should judge the candidate who has won more votes as more electable. I know it's in a primary, but I find this metric to be slightly more useful than your gut.

Posted by: ep thorn | May 11, 2008 9:28 PM

Hillary ran a lousy, mismanaged and now bankrupt ($20M in debt) campaign--if her supporters want to get angry at anybody, they should get angry at her for having no post-Super Tuesday plan of action.


Posted by: Shmenge | May 11, 2008 9:28 PM

A lot of anonymous posts today, and I can understand the reason since they are so poisonous. Yeah, Happy Mothers' Day allright. Listen, the "Democratic Establishment" didn't tell me to vote for Barack Obama -- I'm a middle aged feminist that decided based on my examination of the candidates, their issues and their character (as I judged them , not you) to vote for, support and contribute to Sen. Obama. Mrs. Clinton's supporters seem to believe that my decision to support Sen. Obama is a direct affront to them -- as if I only decided to support him to tick them off. And that if they threaten to torpedo change and vote Republican (4 more Bush years anyone) in November that I'll all of a sudden hit my forehead and go "I coulda had a v-8" and change my support to Mrs. Clinton even though it couldn't change the MATH that guarantees Sen. Obama's victory in pledged delegates, states, popular votes and finally Super Delegates. Oh, and despite the fact that I plan to support the Democratic nominee in November, they claim that it is I and the other loyal Democratic party members (doing nothing more than picking a candidate and sticking by him) that are going to be responsible for some supposed loss to McCain. A loss that could only happen if THEY plan to stay home. Or vote for a 3rd Bush term. Yeah. That'll really prove it to ME! People, be disappointed, be unhappy, but do your investigation. Once you truly see John McCain's policies and plans you cannot possibly vote for him and call yourselves a Democrat.

Posted by: omyobama | May 11, 2008 9:34 PM

A lot of anonymous posts today, and I can understand the reason since they are so poisonous. Yeah, Happy Mothers' Day allright. Listen, the "Democratic Establishment" didn't tell me to vote for Barack Obama -- I'm a middle aged feminist that decided based on my examination of the candidates, their issues and their character (as I judged them , not you) to vote for, support and contribute to Sen. Obama. Mrs. Clinton's supporters seem to believe that my decision to support Sen. Obama is a direct affront to them -- as if I only decided to support him to tick them off. And that if they threaten to torpedo change and vote Republican (4 more Bush years anyone) in November that I'll all of a sudden hit my forehead and go "I coulda had a v-8" and change my support to Mrs. Clinton even though it couldn't change the MATH that guarantees Sen. Obama's victory in pledged delegates, states, popular votes and finally Super Delegates. Oh, and despite the fact that I plan to support the Democratic nominee in November, they claim that it is I and the other loyal Democratic party members (doing nothing more than picking a candidate and sticking by him) that are going to be responsible for some supposed loss to McCain. A loss that could only happen if THEY plan to stay home. Or vote for a 3rd Bush term. Yeah. That'll really prove it to ME! People, be disappointed, be unhappy, but do your investigation. Once you truly see John McCain's policies and plans you cannot possibly vote for him and call yourselves a Democrat.

Posted by: omyobama | May 11, 2008 9:34 PM

A lot of anonymous posts today, and I can understand the reason since they are so poisonous. Yeah, Happy Mothers' Day allright. Listen, the "Democratic Establishment" didn't tell me to vote for Barack Obama -- I'm a middle aged feminist that decided based on my examination of the candidates, their issues and their character (as I judged them , not you) to vote for, support and contribute to Sen. Obama. Mrs. Clinton's supporters seem to believe that my decision to support Sen. Obama is a direct affront to them -- as if I only decided to support him to tick them off. And that if they threaten to torpedo change and vote Republican (4 more Bush years anyone) in November that I'll all of a sudden hit my forehead and go "I coulda had a v-8" and change my support to Mrs. Clinton even though it couldn't change the MATH that guarantees Sen. Obama's victory in pledged delegates, states, popular votes and finally Super Delegates. Oh, and despite the fact that I plan to support the Democratic nominee in November, they claim that it is I and the other loyal Democratic party members (doing nothing more than picking a candidate and sticking by him) that are going to be responsible for some supposed loss to McCain. A loss that could only happen if THEY plan to stay home. Or vote for a 3rd Bush term. Yeah. That'll really prove it to ME! People, be disappointed, be unhappy, but do your investigation. Once you truly see John McCain's policies and plans you cannot possibly vote for him and call yourselves a Democrat.

Posted by: omyobama | May 11, 2008 9:34 PM

A lot of anonymous posts today, and I can understand the reason since they are so poisonous. Yeah, Happy Mothers' Day allright. Listen, the "Democratic Establishment" didn't tell me to vote for Barack Obama -- I'm a middle aged feminist that decided based on my examination of the candidates, their issues and their character (as I judged them , not you) to vote for, support and contribute to Sen. Obama. Mrs. Clinton's supporters seem to believe that my decision to support Sen. Obama is a direct affront to them -- as if I only decided to support him to tick them off. And that if they threaten to torpedo change and vote Republican (4 more Bush years anyone) in November that I'll all of a sudden hit my forehead and go "I coulda had a v-8" and change my support to Mrs. Clinton even though it couldn't change the MATH that guarantees Sen. Obama's victory in pledged delegates, states, popular votes and finally Super Delegates. Oh, and despite the fact that I plan to support the Democratic nominee in November, they claim that it is I and the other loyal Democratic party members (doing nothing more than picking a candidate and sticking by him) that are going to be responsible for some supposed loss to McCain. A loss that could only happen if THEY plan to stay home. Or vote for a 3rd Bush term. Yeah. That'll really prove it to ME! People, be disappointed, be unhappy, but do your investigation. Once you truly see John McCain's policies and plans you cannot possibly vote for him and call yourselves a Democrat.

Posted by: omyobama | May 11, 2008 9:34 PM

Edwards....why did you wait all these days without endorsing Clinton or Obama? Seems like now you want to be in the winner's side. Obamaniacs are jumping here that Edwards made a wise decision..uh..

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 9:35 PM

There is no reason for Hillary's name not to be on the ballot for the USA Presidency in ALL 50 States. She has more support than Jessie Jackson, Ross Perot and also Ralph Nader, who all appeared on the ballot for the USA President in the November ballot. The only question is how she appears, as the Democratic party nominee or whether she appears as an Independent, or ... It would be really a TRAVESTY for both democracy and the millions of Americans who support her for them to be ROBBED and to be DISENFRANCHISED as they have been in both Florida and Michigan. So the only REAL, ETHICAL, MORAL and SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE SOLUTION is for BOTH Hillary AND Obama to both appear on the Presidential ballot in NOVEMBER in all 50 States. No one is against Obama, but Hillary supporters should not and must not be forced to vote for Obama or McCain come November. All three candidates should be on the ballot come November. If Ross Perot, Jessie Jackson and Ralph Nader have appeared on the Presidential ballot, then SURELY Hillary Clinton has EARNED THE RIGHT to appear on the ballot come November and also to debate McCain and Obama. It is what Democracy is all about. The CHANGE WHICH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE has asked for and demanded is HERE. Not a campaign between 2 candidates, but between 3 candidates.
Hillary R. Clinton, Obama and McCain.
So forget about which two, the REAL question is how to set up the campaigning and debates for the 3 viable candidates. To deny either Obama's or Hillary's supporters would be A CRIME AGAINST the American Constitution and against Democracy.
So a 3 Candidate ticket come November is the ONLY FAIR AND EQUITABLE SOLUTION. The DNC insider and the super delegates should not BE ALLOWED to CHOOSE for the American people. The American People can CHOOSE between Hillary, Obama and McCain come NOVEMBER!!

Posted by: Aussie2020 | May 11, 2008 9:35 PM

"I voted for Hillary...there is no way in you know what that I am voing for Obama...I refuse to drink the kool aide..."

Too late - seems you already drank the Cinton-aid and it is cluding your judgment - as it has with Hillbillary.

The party's over. Long live the party.

Posted by: DonJulio | May 11, 2008 9:35 PM

will be only one victim here if the

Hillary Clinton and her team are not nominated.....and that victim


will be the United States of AMERICA.

let's face it, George W.


a coke snorting alcoholic, draft dodging, hatemonger that happens to be homosexual while using HOMOPHOBIA as a "family value," who also happens to be incompentent, as well as having a grandfather that colluded with nazis against the United States...

managed to become president without any of that becoming news...


somehow this scum of the earht managed to become


"the president," I'm not saying electoral fraud didn't figure in it heavily...

but a complicit media was the KEY FACTOR...


Hillary Clinton has been receiving very little media support, and has had all sorts of crap thrown at her...

disinformation is fraud.


Hillary Clinton is the only one still running that understands the power of the machine that she is staring down...


bam ma man? he's nothing and that is what he will deliver if you all are stupid enough to believe the

Republick Scammer HATE MACHINE...


they need someone naive, or someone that will bend over and let them have their way...


I believe that O ba ma is both of those people...

I think Hillary will shave their azzes and make them walk on their hands...


and I vote for that.


a better looking republick scammer party....behind bars, without funds....

hoooooooooooooooooooo rahhhhhhhhhh !!!!

.

Posted by: there | May 11, 2008 9:38 PM

Look -- Hillary Clinton claimed 35 years of experience, a claimed that has been adequately discounted.
==========================================
What fools discounted it? Clinton haters? The dem party has treated Hillary terrible. I'm proud of her. She has fought like a warrior. The left wing Obamanuts have repeated every lie the right wing nuts ever stated against the Clintons. Even murder. Why should I respect a party thats lets traitors within the party tarnish a member candidate. Liberal losers again. Not me.

Posted by: Chief | May 11, 2008 9:41 PM

The comments since my comment have gone back and forth. My observation still stands. Senator Obama will be our nominee. ALL Democrats need to look themselves in the mirror and ask if they really want another four years of Republican misrule. If they don't, they need to get started with a successful general election campaign, not some whiny effort to exact revenge for losses due to a poorly thought out campaign.

Posted by: Karl Shipps | May 11, 2008 9:48 PM

Well look here is the deal. Hollywood star adult child gets popped for doing something stupid. Judge sends them off to rehab, they get community service and maybe probation. What happens next ? Same Hollywood adult child gets popped again for DUI or doing something stupid again and is back in court. Why, because the can't stay away from the bars even risking custody of their own children. At a famous place not known to many in the desert of Colorado a wise man said to me, "Kid, stay out of the Bars". Eventually I did take his advice.

All things being equal, the two for one plan is a better deal for our nation. McCain taunts adversaries real or imagined while Obama has yet to pay his dues. He would be a wise man to take the VP spot furthering his education. After-all, expecting the unexpected keeps him in a position to assume the rule as President if needed.

I don't trust Edwards anyway, he is a corporation himself, just like Ophry what's her name. What is in it for Edwards ???

Posted by: Hank Whatever | May 11, 2008 9:48 PM

Why should Hillary get out of the race to give Obama a free ride to the nomination.

Obama got into this race knowing that the final decision would be made at the Convention in August.

The DNC made the rules that said the final decision would be made in August.

I don't get why anyone thinks Hillary should be forced out of the race just to please Obama and his supporters. Hillary's supporters have a vested interest in her campaign, and we agree she shouldn't get out until there is a nominee.

The more the elitists in the Democratic Party and the people who are following the Pied Obama Piper, witlessly, doesn't mean that people who think clearly and look at the backgrounds of the two candidates shouldn't have the same rights.

We want our candidate in the race. Hillary isn't blowing the Democrats taking back the White House - it is the people who are trying to force her out of the race that are doing that.

I am encouraging everyone who sincerely is loyal to Hillary Clinton to vote for her in the fall regardless of what goes on between now and then.

If she isn't the nominee, we can vote her as a write in. A write in vote carries just as much as a checked box next to Obama or McCain's name.

Hillary might not win that way, but it would be a protest vote for all the wrongs that have been committed on Hillary and the Clinton family. They deserve a show of support from the people that love them.

Obama has played down and dirty corrupt Chicago politics, the quid pro quo Chicago Way.

I will 100% never vote for Obama if Hillary even asked us to, I wouldn't.

I don't want to vote for McCain, so my last choice is the protest vote. It will make me feel better to have a way to express my dismay at how Obama turned this into an unfair fight.

If anyone says that such and such state or district will go for Obama because it is black, that's o.k., but when Hillary quoted an article that said white people would support her in West Virginia, that was considered racial and a reason for her to get out of the race and be ashamed of herself.

Hillary has conducted her campaign respectfully and admirably - Obama has not. gw.

Posted by: Iowatreasures | May 11, 2008 9:48 PM

Why should Hillary get out of the race to give Obama a free ride to the nomination.

Obama got into this race knowing that the final decision would be made at the Convention in August.

The DNC made the rules that said the final decision would be made in August.

I don't get why anyone thinks Hillary should be forced out of the race just to please Obama and his supporters. Hillary's supporters have a vested interest in her campaign, and we agree she shouldn't get out until there is a nominee.

The more the elitists in the Democratic Party and the people who are following the Pied Obama Piper, witlessly, doesn't mean that people who think clearly and look at the backgrounds of the two candidates shouldn't have the same rights.

We want our candidate in the race. Hillary isn't blowing the Democrats taking back the White House - it is the people who are trying to force her out of the race that are doing that.

I am encouraging everyone who sincerely is loyal to Hillary Clinton to vote for her in the fall regardless of what goes on between now and then.

If she isn't the nominee, we can vote her as a write in. A write in vote carries just as much as a checked box next to Obama or McCain's name.

Hillary might not win that way, but it would be a protest vote for all the wrongs that have been committed on Hillary and the Clinton family. They deserve a show of support from the people that love them.

Obama has played down and dirty corrupt Chicago politics, the quid pro quo Chicago Way.

I will 100% never vote for Obama if Hillary even asked us to, I wouldn't.

I don't want to vote for McCain, so my last choice is the protest vote. It will make me feel better to have a way to express my dismay at how Obama turned this into an unfair fight.

If anyone says that such and such state or district will go for Obama because it is black, that's o.k., but when Hillary quoted an article that said white people would support her in West Virginia, that was considered racial and a reason for her to get out of the race and be ashamed of herself.

Hillary has conducted her campaign respectfully and admirably - Obama has not. gw.

Posted by: Iowatreasures | May 11, 2008 9:49 PM

hey AUSSIE2020

a THREE party TICKET is a POSSIBILITY. BUT the DEMOCRATIC and REPUBLICAN parties CAN only NOMINATE one PERSON each. HILLARY can RUN as an INDEPENDENT if she REGISTERED as one BEFORE the CUTOFF DATE.

THATS how WE do IT in AMERICA.

Posted by: BiPOLAR | May 11, 2008 9:49 PM

I'm a hard core Democrat who has worked for civil rights my whole life.

But if Obama's the nominee, I will PROUDLY vote for John McCain.

I don't trust Obama to be commander in chief.

He can't think on his feet and can't think under pressure.

He doesn't have a clue about whats involved in being President.

But even though I want to see him defeated I'll give you a tip that will help him, but I'm sure he and his supporters will be too dumb to follow it.

If I were in Obama's shoes, I'd want this primary season to run right through the convetion, because the longer it runs the less time McCain and the Republicans have to attack him.

Hillary will defeat McCain.

Obama doesn't stand a chance.

One national security alert and Obama's history.

Republicans will use his speech against the war against him.

They will paint him as a coward who it would be nuts to trust the country to, and they will be right.

Hillary is Obama's best friend right now.

Thanks to her, Republicans are holding back.

If she drops out, its open season on Obama.

Republicans will CRUSH him like a cigarette butt.

There's an old saying -- Never ask for something, you might get it.

If Hillary drops out, both Obama and Democrats are toast.

As a Democrat I don't want to see that happen.

As an American, I would never put the safety of my country and my family into the hands of a guy with only 1.5 years of experience in the senate and no military or other management experience.

When I'm asked the question -- "Who would you rather vote for, the drug addict or the war hero?" my answer will be to vote for John McCain.

At least with him, I know my country and my family will be safe.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 9:55 PM

Obama has Farakahn - he doesn't need Hillary supporters!

Posted by: pgr88 | May 11, 2008 9:57 PM

"To Veronica, Elaine, Dwight and all the other Clinton supporters who won't vote for Obama in November:

What do you plan to do when Obama wins the election in November? Hold your breathe? Lie on the floor and kick and scream? Move to Bosnia? Just wondering".


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

No, sorry. None of us will have to resort to that because Obama, the ultra-liberal, no-experience candidate who can't even unite his own party, is not going to win. In fact, his will be a loss of Dukakis or Mondale or McGovern proportions.
So, no it won't be us anti-Obama Dems who will be crying.

Posted by: Veronica | May 11, 2008 10:00 PM

The elitists killed the Democratic Party. It is not alive and well as the people who engineered this Obama thing will find out in November.

When I see Obama say we are all going to unite behind his candidacy, I think he was still be dreaming, because it isn't going to happen.

I wouldn't vote for Obama if he was the only one running in November. He is anti-American as far as I am concerned, and it would be foolish to put someone in the White House who has listened to Rev.
Wright hate rhetoric all of his life. You know he has. He was born to a radical anti-American woman. You know he heard her rants until he was 10 years old.

Then he went to live in Hawaii with his grandparents. He was mentored by a guy named Frank who was an avowed communist. Frank also took Obama to marxist meetings.

After Obama went to four elite, private schools on scholarships, he was taken under his wing by none other than Antoin Rezko - before he even got out of Harvard.

Rezko liked to get involved early. Also, Obama hooked up with Michelle who was liking the Black Panthers and who also worked in Mayor Daley's office for low income housing - helping to distribute monies to crooks like Antoin Rezko.

Rezko was Obama's campaign finance chairman for both of his senate campaigns.

Illinois Senator Barack Obama, in turn, wrote letters on his official senate letterhead to city and state officials that netted Rezko fourteen million dollars in taxpayer monies.

Illinois Senator Barack Obama also sat in on Rezko's business meetings to influence potential investors.

Barack Obama also provided "drop in" service for Rezko when he entertained foreign investors.

gw.

Posted by: Iowatreasures | May 11, 2008 10:01 PM

The elitists killed the Democratic Party. It is not alive and well as the people who engineered this Obama thing will find out in November.

When I see Obama say we are all going to unite behind his candidacy, I think he was still be dreaming, because it isn't going to happen.

I wouldn't vote for Obama if he was the only one running in November. He is anti-American as far as I am concerned, and it would be foolish to put someone in the White House who has listened to Rev.
Wright hate rhetoric all of his life. You know he has. He was born to a radical anti-American woman. You know he heard her rants until he was 10 years old.

Then he went to live in Hawaii with his grandparents. He was mentored by a guy named Frank who was an avowed communist. Frank also took Obama to marxist meetings.

After Obama went to four elite, private schools on scholarships, he was taken under his wing by none other than Antoin Rezko - before he even got out of Harvard.

Rezko liked to get involved early. Also, Obama hooked up with Michelle who was liking the Black Panthers and who also worked in Mayor Daley's office for low income housing - helping to distribute monies to crooks like Antoin Rezko.

Rezko was Obama's campaign finance chairman for both of his senate campaigns.

Illinois Senator Barack Obama, in turn, wrote letters on his official senate letterhead to city and state officials that netted Rezko fourteen million dollars in taxpayer monies.

Illinois Senator Barack Obama also sat in on Rezko's business meetings to influence potential investors.

Barack Obama also provided "drop in" service for Rezko when he entertained foreign investors.

gw.

Posted by: Iowatreasures | May 11, 2008 10:01 PM

Those people in WV will not support a Blackman,because they'll still living in the Civil War days. I also would like to say there are a few good people left in WV.

Posted by: Billy Boy | May 11, 2008 10:04 PM

It's hard to believe many of the anti-Obama posts are actually coming from Dems, particularly when many of them are unsigned by even a pen name. "The Truth is" has it right. Hillary and her campaign spokespersons have all said they will support Obama in the fall if he is the nominee. So why are Hillary's admirers so distraught?

Posted by: azjim | May 11, 2008 10:05 PM

azjim --

Why are we "distraught?"

Because we don't want Democrats to lose, and Obama's radioactive toxic waste thanks to going to a racist, anti-white, anti-semitic, anti-American "Black Liberation Theology" church for 20 years and choosing Rev. "God Damm America" Wright as his spiritual advisor, that's why!!!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 10:07 PM

anon: "I'm a hard core Democrat who has worked for civil rights my whole life.

But if Obama's the nominee, I will PROUDLY vote for John McCain.

...

When I'm asked the question -- "Who would you rather vote for, the drug addict or the war hero?" my answer will be to vote for John McCain."

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

Can there be any doubt that this person and the authors of many other posts here and in other threads are gop trolls badly impersonating Democrats and progressives?

i have no doubt that you'll 'proudly' vote for four more years of Bush/Cheney policy, the criminalization of reproductive rights, 100+ more years in Iraq, war with Iran and N Korea, tax breaks for the corporate rich and the advancement of the surveillance police state.

But please, keep claiming you're a Democrat and a progressive -- no one's buying it but it's quite fun to see you try so desperately hard to strike a pose you obviously have no real belief in.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 10:10 PM

Let me please ask ALL of you knuckleheads: WHEN has a candidate NOT said something stupid? When have YOU not said something stupid? ALL three of the candidates McCain, Clinton, and Obama have had gaffes. We're all human. What happened to all of us being American, regardless of race or party? I can't believe some of the crap you guys are saying that is misinformed. I don't believe any of the candidates are racist. I don't hold it against John McCain that he didn't initially want a ML King holiday. Has anyone noted how recently he apologized for that. Yet blacks are going around saying he's racist. Give Hillary and Obama the benefit of the doubt. It's tough to be out there campaigning and to say thngs that will please everyone. I think ANY one of those three will be a good candidate because they're all American. Please, please stop saying Obama is a racist. His mother is WHITE. I haven't heard anything he has said that is racist. He, as well as Hillary and McCain, could have said things better. But we ALL make mistakes. And none of the things any of them has said is enough to make me believe any one of them isn't capable.

As for Rev. Wright, he has every right to speak since we do have "freedom of speech." Does any one disagree that when you continue to bully other countries as America (where I was born) has that it will not come back to haunt this country. Why are we telling Iraq how to run its country when we have probablems that need to be fixed, like racism, sexism, poverty, illiteracy, etc. That's hypocritical and egotistic of America to presume only it has the right solution to the world's problems. Other countries deserve to have their say, too.

Also, what specifically has Rev. Wright said that was racist? I haven't him say ANYTHING racist. Controversial, yes, but not racist.

Please tell me why we have the bogus holiday of Columbus Day? Does that NOT negate the Indians' contribution? How can you "discover" a place that's already inhabited. It's time for us to unify and stop thinking about just our own plights. We've always had a white male president. The last one we had was a knuckleheaded C student. Now, let's try something new. This is a melting pot, and every voice deserves to be heard. And it has already been proven that Hillary is not as experienced on foreign policy as she previously stated. The White House papers proved that. But I don't doubt that she, Obama, or McCain wouldn't surround themselves with the best people to help them make the best decisions about how to run the country.

Posted by: Cindy | May 11, 2008 10:10 PM

is a good looking, nice talking,

inconvenient numbskull....


I love his talk but not his walk...

If I hire someone that can do the job, I don't care if they look like Jabba the Hut and dress like a street person...


I hire the person with ABILITY...


any lack of credibility that Hillary or Bill have has been

served to you by the corporatocracy and the BOUGHT and PAID FOR MEDIA...


60 years of REPUBLICK SCAMMER RULE by deceit


and Edwards doesn't know the truth when he sees it...

I have defended both Edwards and O bama on occaision...

but I have no love for eithers understanding of the situation that AMERICA FACES

apparently alone.

....the number of clueless is breathtaking...

I personally could hammer o ba ba man a new

level of understanding. He couldn't hold his own against _me_

much less Hillary, or the the "real insider Washington,"

not the one currentl y sucking on his root and telling him...

he's their man....


Teddy is teaching him the Chappaquidkic crawl....

how to steal from the people and serve the elitists

while talking about "family values....."


once again.


.

Posted by: Edwards... | May 11, 2008 10:10 PM

I guess the real joke will be on Hillary supporters when they vote for McCain out of spite, and then the Supreme Court judges he appoints break the deadlock and overturn Roe v. Wade.

Oops--didn't consider that, huh?

Posted by: Shmenge | May 11, 2008 10:14 PM

is a good looking, nice talking,

inconvenient numbskull....


I love his talk but not his walk...

If I hire someone that can do the job, I don't care if they look like Jabba the Hut and dress like a street person...


I hire the person with ABILITY...


any lack of credibility that Hillary or Bill have has been

served to you by the corporatocracy and the BOUGHT and PAID FOR MEDIA...


60 years of REPUBLICK SCAMMER RULE by deceit


and Edwards doesn't know the truth when he sees it...

I have defended both Edwards and O bama on occaision...

but I have no love for eithers understanding of the situation that AMERICA FACES

apparently alone.

....the number of clueless is breathtaking...

I personally could hammer o ba ba man a new

level of understanding. He couldn't hold his own against _me_

much less Hillary, or the the "real insider Washington,"

not the one currentl y sucking on his root and telling him...

he's their man....


Teddy is teaching him the Chappaquidkic crawl....

how to steal from the people and serve the elitists

while talking about "family values....."


once again.


.

Posted by: Edwards... | May 11, 2008 10:15 PM

Let me please ask ALL of you knuckleheads: WHEN has a candidate NOT said something stupid? When have YOU not said something stupid? ALL three of the candidates McCain, Clinton, and Obama have had gaffes. We're all human. What happened to all of us being American, regardless of race or party? I can't believe some of the crap you guys are saying that is misinformed. I don't believe any of the candidates are racist. I don't hold it against John McCain that he didn't initially want a ML King holiday. Has anyone noted how recently he apologized for that. Yet blacks are going around saying he's racist. Give Hillary and Obama the benefit of the doubt. It's tough to be out there campaigning and to say thngs that will please everyone. I think ANY one of those three will be a good candidate because they're all American. Please, please stop saying Obama is a racist. His mother is WHITE. I haven't heard anything he has said that is racist. He, as well as Hillary and McCain, could have said things better. But we ALL make mistakes. And none of the things any of them has said is enough to make me believe any one of them isn't capable.

As for Rev. Wright, he has every right to speak since we do have "freedom of speech." Does any one disagree that when you continue to bully other countries as America (where I was born) has that it will not come back to haunt this country. Why are we telling Iraq how to run its country when we have probablems that need to be fixed, like racism, sexism, poverty, illiteracy, etc. That's hypocritical and egotistic of America to presume only it has the right solution to the world's problems. Other countries deserve to have their say, too.

Also, what specifically has Rev. Wright said that was racist? I haven't heard him say ANYTHING racist. Controversial, yes, but not racist.

Please tell me why we have the bogus holiday of Columbus Day? Does that NOT negate the Indians' contribution? How can you "discover" a place that's already inhabited. It's time for us to unify and stop thinking about just our own plights. We've always had a white male president. The last one we had was a knuckleheaded C student. Now, let's try something new. This is a melting pot, and every voice deserves to be heard. And it has already been proven that Hillary is not as experienced on foreign policy as she previously stated. The White House papers proved that. But I don't doubt that she, Obama, or McCain wouldn't surround themselves with the best people to help them make the best decisions about how to run the country.

Posted by: Cindy B. | May 11, 2008 10:15 PM

Let me please ask ALL of you knuckleheads: WHEN has a candidate NOT said something stupid? When have YOU not said something stupid? ALL three of the candidates McCain, Clinton, and Obama have had gaffes. We're all human. What happened to all of us being American, regardless of race or party? I can't believe some of the crap you guys are saying that is misinformed. I don't believe any of the candidates are racist. I don't hold it against John McCain that he didn't initially want a ML King holiday. Has anyone noted how recently he apologized for that. Yet blacks are going around saying he's racist. Give Hillary and Obama the benefit of the doubt. It's tough to be out there campaigning and to say thngs that will please everyone. I think ANY one of those three will be a good candidate because they're all American. Please, please stop saying Obama is a racist. His mother is WHITE. I haven't heard anything he has said that is racist. He, as well as Hillary and McCain, could have said things better. But we ALL make mistakes. And none of the things any of them has said is enough to make me believe any one of them isn't capable.

As for Rev. Wright, he has every right to speak since we do have "freedom of speech." Does any one disagree that when you continue to bully other countries as America (where I was born) has that it will not come back to haunt this country. Why are we telling Iraq how to run its country when we have probablems that need to be fixed, like racism, sexism, poverty, illiteracy, etc. That's hypocritical and egotistic of America to presume only it has the right solution to the world's problems. Other countries deserve to have their say, too.

Also, what specifically has Rev. Wright said that was racist? I haven't heard him say ANYTHING racist. Controversial, yes, but not racist.

Please tell me why we have the bogus holiday of Columbus Day? Does that NOT negate the Indians' contribution? How can you "discover" a place that's already inhabited. It's time for us to unify and stop thinking about just our own plights. We've always had a white male president. The last one we had was a knuckleheaded C student. Now, let's try something new. This is a melting pot, and every voice deserves to be heard. And it has already been proven that Hillary is not as experienced on foreign policy as she previously stated. The White House papers proved that. But I don't doubt that she, Obama, or McCain wouldn't surround themselves with the best people to help them make the best decisions about how to run the country.

Posted by: Cindy B. | May 11, 2008 10:15 PM

I have a suspicion that half the pro-Hillary rants here are from Limbaugh's ditto-heads trying to prolong the agony for the Democratic party.

It's over, people! Don't let the Republicans prolong this race. It's time to unify behind our presumptive candidate. Btw, no candidate is perfect. At least ours is better than the 100-year-war, "let them eat short term dividends" McCain.

Posted by: DrRay from Ohio | May 11, 2008 10:18 PM

oops -- forgot to sign mu 10:10pm comment above...

Posted by: see_the_sockpuppets | May 11, 2008 10:19 PM

people really have no idea who is in power or why...


you have the attention span of fruit flys...

ob ba ba am has no clue either...


here's a clue...


"In a remarkable new book, Firewall: The Iran-Contra Conspiracy and Cover-up, [Judge Lawrence] Walsh [special prosecutor in charge of the complex investigation into President Reagan's foreign policy mis-adventures] details his six-year battle to break through the 'firewall' that White House officials built around President Reagan and Vice President Bush after the Iran-contra scandal exploded in November 1986. For Walsh, a lifelong Republican who shared the foreign policy views of the Reagan administration, the Iran-contra experience was a life-changing one, as his investigation penetrated one wall of lies only to be confronted with another and another -- and not just lies from Oliver North and his cohorts but lies from nearly every senior administration official who spoke with investigators. According to Firewall, the cover-up conspiracy took formal shape at a meeting of Reagan and his top advisers in the Situation Room at the White House on Nov. 24, 1986. The meeting's principal point of concern was how to handle the troublesome fact that Reagan had approved illegal arms sales to Iran in fall 1985, before any covert-action finding had been signed. The act was a clear felony -- a violation of the Arms Export Control Act -- and possibly an impeachable offense... everyone at the meeting knew that Reagan had approved those shipments through Israel... Bush, who had been told of the shipment in advance by McFarlane, said nothing. Casey, who [had] requested that the president sign the retroactive finding to authorize the CIA-facilitated delivery, said nothing. [NSC adviser John] Poindexter, who had torn up the finding, said nothing. Meese asked whether anyone knew anything else that hadn't been revealed. No one spoke.... When Shultz returned to the State Department, he dictated a note to his aide, Charles Hill, who wrote down that Reagan's men were 'rearranging the record.'...The story might have stopped there but for the work of Walsh and his small team of lawyers. Yet Walsh's investigation was hampered from the start by congressional rashness and hostility from key elements of the media.... Walsh's investigation broke through the White House cover-up in 1991-92. Almost by accident, as Walsh's staff was double-checking some long-standing document requests, the lawyers discovered hidden notes belonging to Weinberger and other senior officials. The notes made clear that there was widespread knowledge of the 1985 illegal shipments to Iran and that a major cover-up had been orchestrated by the Reagan and Bush administrations.... The Republican independent counsel also infuriated the GOP when he submitted a second indictment of Weinberger on the Friday before the 1992 elections.

The indictment contained documents revealing that President Bush had been lying for years with his claim that he was 'out of the loop' on the Iran-contra decisions.

The ensuing furor dominated the last several days of the campaign and sealed Bush's defeat at the hands of Bill Clinton.

Walsh had discovered, too, that Bush had withheld his own notes about the Iran-contra affair, a discovery that elevated the president to a possible criminal subject of the investigation. But Bush had one more weapon in his arsenal. On Christmas Eve 1992, Bush destroyed the Iran-contra probe once and for all by pardoning Weinberger and five other convicted or indicted defendants. 'George Bush's misuse of the pardon power made the cover-up complete,' Walsh wrote.

'What set Iran-contra apart from previous political scandals was the fact that a cover-up engineered in the White House of one president and completed by his successor prevented the rule of law from being applied to the perpetrators of criminal activity of CONSTITUTINOAL dimension."


Firewall: Inside the Iran-Contra Cover-up - Robert Parry; Consortium News, 1997
Robert Parry is an investigative reporter who broke many of the Iran-contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek

Posted by: you | May 11, 2008 10:22 PM

isn't it interesting ????


these guys and gals murder people.... overthrow governments and counties in and out of country....


and they get sensitive when AMERICANs start holding them accountable...


they make up _ENTIRE_ STORIES and FALSEHOODS ABOUT GOOD PEOPLE....


drag their names through the dirt, mock Nobel Prize winners and people who invest their ENTIRE LIVES IN GIVING BACK TO AMERICA...

Habitat for Humanity, AND the CARTER FAMILIES work for PEACE...

The CLINTONS Charity Work...

Al GORES work for the ENVIRONMENT...


these people regularly mock spit on and sh*t on anyone doing anything good for humanity because it makes them look bad....


and they want sympathy ?????

the bush families need to do JAIL TIME....every single one of them....and the mothers....


this didn't happen in a vacuum...

.

Posted by: I have a suspicion that DrRay is a whitehouse fudgepacker and loves Ohio's voter fraud hack for the | May 11, 2008 10:25 PM

Trollin trollin trollin
Trollin trollin trollin
Trollin trollin trollin
Trollin trollin trollin

Trollin trollin trollin
Though the polls are blowin
Keep them puppets trollin
Thickhide
Brainless wind and blather
'Hillary for ever'
Wishing my girl was ratified
All the things I'm sayin
And all the crap I'm sprayin
Make more and more people mortified

Line em up (rat em out)
Rat em out (line em up)
Slag em off (slag em off)
Thickhide
Cut em up (spin em in)
Spin em in (cut em up)
Cut em down (slag em off)
Thickhide

Keep movin movin movin
Though their disapprovin
Keep the bull**it flowin
Thickhide
Don't try to understand them
Just rope, throw and brand them
Soon well be living high and wide
My hearts miscalculating
My true love will be waiting
Be waiting at the end of my ride

Line em up (rat em out)
Rat em out (line em up)
Slag em off (slag em off)
Thickhide
Cut em up (spin em in)
Spin em in (cut em up)
Cut em down (slag em off)
Thickhide
Yah!
Line em up (rat em out)
Rat em out (line em up)
Slag em off (slag em off)
Thickhide
Cut em up (spin em in)
Spin em in (cut em up)
Cut em down (slag em off)
Thickhide
etc etc

Posted by: (sorry to lovers of Rawhide) | May 11, 2008 10:28 PM

Let's not forget that the "war hero" is the same person that all the bushies eight year ago were calling a traitor who spilled his guts to the VC.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 11, 2008 10:31 PM

sorry to lovers of rawhide:

Thepollsare blowin'. Right in Hillary's direction. take a look at the national running averages on real Politics.Hillary is more poplar than Obama, and definitely in the big swing states.

Telling the truth is hardly trolling.

But your clever little ditty only shows you to be a lot like the GOP.

its a shame Obama supporters have to show thats what they are like in th end.

Posted by: Tortfeezer | May 11, 2008 10:33 PM

hey Tortfeezer | May 11, 2008 10:33 PM

'national running averages'

'Hillary is more poplar'

I would add that she is better looking

but winning = most delegates

not who has the best stamp collection

or who has the best handwriting

winning = most delegates

Posted by: the old math | May 11, 2008 10:41 PM

I read great passion here. It makes me wonder why people must stoop to such vicious statements about other peoples opinions. I do not earn a lot yet don't think of myself as ignorant. I work for a living as a janitor. I am disabled but do not depend on government handouts. My question to all of you is this: Would it be so horrible to provide the working poor with a living wage, or full coverage health care or a secure future? This election (primary and general)could decide the fate of our nation for generations to come. Are we prepared to squander it with petty political squabbling? Has not the last administration demonstrated to you what can happen when we sit back and let the republicans run things? Is it so hard to put the country's values ahead of your own? I am a democrat and proud of it. I am going to vote for Barack Obama and I am proud of that too. I have witnessed what political expediency has done to this country and seen how "experienced" politicians did it while we did nothing. So think of this when you vote. This is a presidential election not a popularity contest. If you don't see your candidate get the nomination and take your bat and go home rather than play it is on your head. We need to to be able to believe in this country as well as ourselves.

Posted by: Mark R | May 11, 2008 10:42 PM

hey Tortfeezer | May 11, 2008 10:33 PM

'national running averages'

'Hillary is more poplar'

I would add that she is better looking

but winning = most delegates

not who has the best stamp collection

or who has the best handwriting

winning = most delegates

Posted by: the old math | May 11, 2008 10:42 PM

republick scammers,

fudge packers extraordinaire'

SEARCH ON guckert, gannon, victor ashe, Ken Mehlman Head of RNC, George W. "Lips" Bush, ALL GAY...


CIA using, party first con artists....they got the money to buy this papers vote...


and spin...

alienating and poisoning the american people towards each other and the world...

by poisoning the minds of the people with lies....confusing_issues purposely, creating_delusion purposefully.


take McCarthyism:


Joe didn't hate communism, he was hired to rail against it...

why? the elites were afraid of it.


what would communism do to them?

depose them... distribute their lands.

not that communism works, pure anything doesn't work to my knowledge.
[ as an engineer, you have to watch the project...not theorize and then walk away...look at NAFTA, created by George H.W. Bush... ]

but after the McCarthyism the spector of communism became part of our culture like fearing the church after it became a tool of Roman domination...and the spainish inquisition, thus the fear of speaking out against gawd-users....like bush, rove, falwell and the twister blesser brother from hell...robertson...the voodoun christian.

anyone from Britain can tell you what is wrong with our system....

two parties is too few parties...they have more than seven....


open forums, like Parliment, that's more like a brawl, but an honest one, where things are discussed rather than orchestrated...


another thing is "socialism" is a bugaboo word in this country, like "liberal"...but we have it and we need to look at what it really means...it means taking care of those that need it...


but


everyone needs to understand that capitalism,
untempered,

is pure and simple, survival of the fittest....


and without proper laws to actually destroy them, the fittest sometimes turn out to be the most _corrupt_....


I say make some laws that allow us to destroy people financially if they corrupt the system to their advantage.....wipe out the familiy estates....


and I AM SERIOUS, this is not some thoughtless get even kinda thing, I mean that if they risk going over the line to using the political system for personal gain that they are destroyed....


what other thing can you do to discourage it honestly...


look at it this way, in the old days there were certain families, people that you didn't start trouble with unless you were going to destroy them _permanently_


you don't want to wound predators, you want to eliminate them...


looking at the bush familiy tree...this generation, you have a group of selfish, manipulative, we don't need to pay for our mistakes...predators...you really don't want to give them the chance to remain in power,

as they are teaching people _to manipulate_as_a_way_of_doing_business in sort of an "we dont' need to worry about being seen way, because these people are too stupid to catch on."


George W. Bush is like the relentless, demagogue who will see everyone in your family in hell if you cross him...so send him there first....we don't need people like that with power...mean drunk George Wallace seems very much set in the same mold.

demagogue also demagog ( ) n.

A leader who obtains power by means of impassioned appeals to the emotions and

_prejudices_

of the populace....as a way of doing business..


appeal to reason is somewhat different, we haven't seen much of that except in Jimmy Stewart's Mr. Smith Goes to Washington reruns....


George W. Bush links hatred into his addressing of those that oppose him like the racial hatred user, George Wallace...there is a visceral resemblance....and physical resemblance....stylistically there's little difference.

put the southern drawl into it:


let me tell yuh, "the negrah"

let me tell yuh, "the liberal"

kinda thing


or the homo sexu-ahs
or the baby kill-uhs
or the gun control-uhs
or the war hate-tuhs


the mythologizing of the opposing peoples into mother raping monsters...that want you to have boy man love sex with them...


I mean that's good for the people to keep them at each oth-uths throats while you butt fxxx their country isn't it?


hello people...

Posted by: hello people | May 11, 2008 11:12 PM

republick scammers,

fudge packers extraordinaire'

SEARCH ON guckert, gannon, victor ashe, Ken Mehlman Head of RNC, George W. "Lips" Bush, ALL GAY...


CIA using, party first con artists....they got the money to buy this papers vote...


and spin...

alienating and poisoning the american people towards each other and the world...

by poisoning the minds of the people with lies....confusing_issues purposely, creating_delusion purposefully.


take McCarthyism:


Joe didn't hate communism, he was hired to rail against it...

why? the elites were afraid of it.


what would communism do to them?

depose them... distribute their lands.

not that communism works, pure anything doesn't work to my knowledge.
[ as an engineer, you have to watch the project...not theorize and then walk away...look at NAFTA, created by George H.W. Bush... ]

but after the McCarthyism the spector of communism became part of our culture like fearing the church after it became a tool of Roman domination...and the spainish inquisition, thus the fear of speaking out against gawd-users....like bush, rove, falwell and the twister blesser brother from hell...robertson...the voodoun christian.

anyone from Britain can tell you what is wrong with our system....

two parties is too few parties...they have more than seven....


open forums, like Parliment, that's more like a brawl, but an honest one, where things are discussed rather than orchestrated...


another thing is "socialism" is a bugaboo word in this country, like "liberal"...but we have it and we need to look at what it really means...it means taking care of those that need it...


but


everyone needs to understand that capitalism,
untempered,

is pure and simple, survival of the fittest....


and without proper laws to actually destroy them, the fittest sometimes turn out to be the most _corrupt_....


I say make some laws that allow us to destroy people financially if they corrupt the system to their advantage.....wipe out the familiy estates....


and I AM SERIOUS, this is not some thoughtless get even kinda thing, I mean that if they risk going over the line to using the political system for personal gain that they are destroyed....


what other thing can you do to discourage it honestly...


look at it this way, in the old days there were certain families, people that you didn't start trouble with unless you were going to destroy them _permanently_


you don't want to wound predators, you want to eliminate them...


looking at the bush familiy tree...this generation, you have a group of selfish, manipulative, we don't need to pay for our mistakes...predators...you really don't want to give them the chance to remain in power,

as they are teaching people _to manipulate_as_a_way_of_doing_business in sort of an "we dont' need to worry about being seen way, because these people are too stupid to catch on."


George W. Bush is like the relentless, demagogue who will see everyone in your family in hell if you cross him...so send him there first....we don't need people like that with power...mean drunk George Wallace seems very much set in the same mold.

demagogue also demagog ( ) n.

A leader who obtains power by means of impassioned appeals to the emotions and

_prejudices_

of the populace....as a way of doing business..


appeal to reason is somewhat different, we haven't seen much of that except in Jimmy Stewart's Mr. Smith Goes to Washington reruns....


George W. Bush links hatred into his addressing of those that oppose him like the racial hatred user, George Wallace...there is a visceral resemblance....and physical resemblance....stylistically there's little difference.

put the southern drawl into it:


let me tell yuh, "the negrah"

let me tell yuh, "the liberal"

kinda thing


or the homo sexu-ahs
or the baby kill-uhs
or the gun control-uhs
or the war hate-tuhs


the mythologizing of the opposing peoples into mother raping monsters...that want you to have boy man love sex with them...


I mean that's good for the people to keep them at each oth-uths throats while you butt fxxx their country isn't it?


hello people...

Posted by: hello people | May 11, 2008 11:12 PM

The best choice10:53PMMay 11th 2008 reported on one of the aol blogs today the following:

"The European Union is reporting that while the American public is swaying towards Hillary Clinton, the superdelegates are going towards Obama! The EU thinks that the U.S. is at a fork in the road and taking the wrong direction. The EU states that Hillary Clinton is respected throughout the world and Obama does not garner the same respect.

Reports from Europe state that Obama has been getting a lot of money from Jordan and the amount of money spent on this campaign is more than anyone can imagine. Israel is worried that if Obama is elected, it will not have the U.S. as an ally in the Middle East. Russia is talking about starting up the Cold War again because they think that the U.S. is becoming weak and that we are short-sighted in our vision for our next leader.

WHY IS THE AMERICAN MEDIA NOT REPORTING ON THIS???

For those who think that Hillary would do not be a good President, think about what this means. She would be the first female President of this country. She would take this historical opportunity to do good. She would not want to go down in history as a failure; and she has shown that she is a tenacious fighter."

Has anyone heard about the above European Union and other European reports???


Posted by: Aid From Jordan to Obama? | May 11, 2008 11:27 PM

The DNC, Edwards, Obama, Obama supporters, ...
will be very very surprised come November when Hillary appears on the Presidential ballot and wins more States than Obama. Whether Hillary, Obama or McCain win enough to get the USA Presidency is yet to be determined.

So for those who think this is a mess/problem? Wait until November and see what happens when the Electoral College splits 3 ways, 1/3 Hillary, 1/3 Obama and 1/3 McCain. Obama wants change, and Change he and we will all get. But NOT Obama's, the DNC insiders', Howard Dean's, ... change.

The American People's change. By splitting the Electoral College 3 ways, then Washington will BE FORCED to realize that things are Broken.

So the only REAL SOLUTION is for Hillary, Obama and McCain all to appear on the Ballot come November. Here EVERYONE WINS, but most importantly
DEMOCRACY and the AMERICAN PEOPLE Win!!

Posted by: Aussie2020 | May 11, 2008 11:56 PM

It both fascinates and disheartens me how so many people are writing Clinton off - including Edwards. At last count, Obama had 16.7 million votes in terms of the popular vote, while Clinton had 16.6 million. And that's NOT counting the disenfranchised voters in MI and FL, nor the alleged double-counted votes for Obama in NC. This Tuesday's primaries may well put Clinton over the top in the popular vote.

Another recent poll indicates that 19% of Obama supporters will not vote for Clinton if the nominee, while an astonishing 50% of Clinton supporters will not vote for Obama. Merely a month ago, the percentage was only 28%.

And so I ask Dean, Edwards, Peloso, et al. - what's wrong with this picture - How is it that Obama plans to announce that he is the nominee on May 20, when he's only pulling 50% of the popular vote? We're not talking a landslide here, people. We're talking a nation essentially split down the middle between these two candidates, and 8.3 million Clinton supporters allege they will not support Obama, and perhaps might vote for McCain.

Which, of the two, has the best shot at winning the general election? Based upon these figures, my bet's on Clinton. I believe Edwards has shown poor judgment in "pre-announcing" Obama's nomination. He may well be nominated, and it's almost a certainty he'll lose the GE. Thank you Dean, Pelosi, Brazile, Edwards, Hart and the Kennedys for giving us four more years of a Republican presidency.

Posted by: Denise-Mary | May 12, 2008 2:07 AM

Old math:

Nothing wrong with my math. I was commenting on someone's reference to polls, not delegate totals.

But let me give you a lesson in Math:

Most delegates might = winning a party nomination.

It does not = winning the electoral college and GE.

Most electoral voters = winning the GE.

Last time I checked, Dubya, not Gore, became president in 2000.

So mathematically, it is possible to be the popular choice, and lose, whatever the delegate counts were in the primaries.

Regardless of Obama's delegate count, statistically, Hillary is the most probable winner of the national popular vote, and the electoral college.

You can argue untilyou are blue in the face, but THATS the math, as of right now.

Telling the statistical winner that she should drop out before EVERY state primary has a chance to cast its votes is...

at best...


specious...

mathematically.

Posted by: Tortfeezer | May 12, 2008 2:58 AM

hay making fun of my gang man i shoot u

Posted by: 50cent | May 20, 2008 6:32 PM

50cent i will hurt u if u dont talk nice

Posted by: blood | May 20, 2008 6:42 PM

try it see what happense

Posted by: 50cent | May 20, 2008 6:43 PM

owwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww stop kicking me owwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww that hurt 75rkfjcdf sorry this is blood i just hurt 50cent he moved his hand across the key bored

Posted by: 50cent | May 20, 2008 6:46 PM

stop fighting

Posted by: hehehehehehheh | May 20, 2008 6:47 PM

ombama rules sorry he rules

Posted by: hehehehehehheh | May 20, 2008 6:48 PM

the DNC and Obama already split the party NOT HILLARY! The DNC foisted this empty suit Obama on us even though many white voters have rejected him and will do so in November.

Posted by: Jessica | May 25, 2008 6:18 PM

Of course Obama will be Edward' party nominee but he won't be US president in 2009.

Posted by: Bella Liberty | May 25, 2008 7:53 PM

Can we not come together as as a united people of the United States of America?

Can we not lay down our weapons of Mass Distruction (Race and Gender)and save the Democratic Party?

Are we so blinded by our Personal wants and needs that we can no longer work for the common good of this country?

If we fail to bring ourselves together then we will definately have another 8 years of Republicans in office to drag this country down farther than they already have.

What will it take for us to forgive one another as Jesus taught and to love our "Brothers and Sisters" to look out for our "Brothers and Sisters?

Must this country be destroyed before we awaken to what we have lost by our own selfishness?

Posted by: Ted-Zee-Man | May 26, 2008 12:25 AM

To Elaine E.

you wrote an elogant and well thought out comment.

I will only tell you one piece of information for you to consider.

Hillary Clinton is and has been the Chairperson of the Democratic Party's Rules committee and that committee is stacked with Clinton supporters. There were no Barack Obama supporters when this Rules committee was set up.

So Hillary Clinton and Hillary Clinton supporters are the only people "RESPONSIBLE" for Michigan and Florida Delegates not being seated. They made the Rules, which she is now "Pandering" to have changed.

Posted by: Ted-Zee-Man | May 26, 2008 12:34 AM

To all of you who say you will not vote for Barack Obama because he is a Black Man.

Put yourself in this scenario;

You, Your spouse or child are critically ill and will die without a blood transfusion or a Organ Transplant.

We know scientifically that the Blood and DNA of Minorities is the same as a White Person. The only Donors available are Minorities.

Would you refuse the available Blood or Organ? If not, then how can you reject the Only available Minority Democratic Candidate?

Posted by: Ted-Zee-Man | May 26, 2008 1:29 AM

Barack Obama President and John Edwards as his VP would be a GREAT TICKET

OBAMA 08 BLING TEES
http://executees.net

Posted by: Natalia | May 26, 2008 5:41 PM

Bush - uh, yeah, sure, I tried coke... and I got pulled over for drinkin and drivin too! no biggie! Everyone was doin it. = President.

Obama - uh, yeah, sure, I tried coke... next president?

Wanna bet the American public wont go for it? They already did it once.

Posted by: Hmph! | May 26, 2008 10:38 PM

Now I know what McCain was singing about! He was not singing about Iraq. He was cheering for the nomination of Obama! Oh, I really want to go against Obama! Obama! Yippe! I am going to wiii-iiiin! na-na-na-na-na-na!

Posted by: O-bomb-a! | May 26, 2008 10:44 PM

Here are the facts for all to see and read..anyone who thinks rationally can only conclude that Obama is a phoney and a Liar !

Barack Hussein Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, to Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., a Black Muslim from Nyangoma-Kogel, Kenya and Ann Dunham, a white ATHIEST from Wichita, Kansas.

Moderate Muslims can no longer tolerate Obama. He and his wife are haters for his wife to say that this country is no good and this country has never been good to her. Obama should denounce his Pastor Jeremiah Wright, who has connections with Louis Farrakhan, along with him being friends with that underground guy William Ayres who he says is his friend after he bombed the Pentagon in1972, he received money from William Ayres, and this guy is way worse than Mark Rich.

Obama's parents met at the University of Hawaii. When Obama was two years old, his parents divorced. His father returned to Kenya. His mother then married Lolo Soetoro, a RADICAL Muslim from Indonesia. When Obama was 6 years old, the family relocated to Indonesia. Obama attended a MUSLIM school in Jakarta. He also spent two years in a Catholic school. Obama takes great care to conceal the fact that he is a Muslim.

He is quick to point out that, "He was once a Muslim, but that he also attended Catholic school." Obama's political handlers are attempting to make it appear that Obama's introduction to Islam came via his father, and that this influence was temporary at best. In reality, the senior Obama returned to Kenya soon after the divorce, and never again had any direct influence over his son's education. Lolo Soetoro, the second husband of Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, introduced his stepson to Islam. Obama was enrolled in a Wahabi school in Jakarta. Wahabism is the RADICAL teaching that is followed by the Muslim terrorists who are now waging Jihad against the western world. The terrorists that crashed into the Twin Towers were once all enrolled in the study of Wahabism..just as Obama was!!

Since it is politically expedient to be a CHRISTIAN when seeking major public office in the United States, Barack Hussein Obama has joined the United Church of Christ in an attempt to downplay his Muslim background.

Let us all remain alert concerning Obama's expected Presidential candidacy. The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the US from the inside out, what better way to start than at the highest level - through the President of the United States, one of their own!!!! ALSO, keep in mind that when he was sworn into office - he DID NOT use the Holy Bible, but instead the Kuran (Their equivalency to our Bible, but very different beliefs) Obama also refuses to pledge allegiance to the USA flag.

How can someone who wants to be President refuse to commit to the USA? Before you vote for any candidate, remember how many people are disgusted with Obama's autobiography!!!!

Voters be cautious in this crucial election that means so much to the USA and the free world.

Posted by: The Brutal Truth | May 26, 2008 11:50 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2010 The Washington Post Company