The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

Dear Clinton Supporters,

Please join up with the Obama camp. This isn't about ego - its about the future of the party. Obama is growing the party leaps and bounds over anything we've seen since before Reagan. We are on the brink of a Democratic consensus for the first time in a long long time. Obama is the one to lead it. Hillary is an accomplished person who is due respect, but she can't build the consensus that he can. Please join up and help us get out of the 51% era of partisan warfare and lead us into the 65% era of consensus politics.

Obama is person for the job. Please give your support to Obama.

Whatever happened to Governor Bill Richardson, the guy that Bill Clinton evidently sought to place under gag order and consign to house arrest?

Seems like Governor Richardson's time has been served and he might step forward now to help bind up his party's wounds, beginning to close ranks around the Democratic candidacy of Barack Obama.

I am amused and saddened by people who say they do not want to vote for a candidate that takes us back to the 90s.
I assume that means they do not want a candidate that wins.
The Democratic nominee, Bill Clinton, won two times in the 1990s for the first time since Franklin D Roosevelt. (1932-1945)
Does that mean that voters want to go back to having a Democratic nominee who loses like they have in 2004, 2000, 1988, 1984, 1980, 1972, 1968?
We better watch for what we wish for!
Hillary 2008!

Questionable. Let's see...you have a discovery of ballots at the home of an election official, you have Bill Clinton at your home for the Super Bowl and you finally tally up all the votes after a month of voter rejection. Sounds like the Clinton's are up to their ole tricks again. Most people I come across who were early on Clinton supporters feel that once they went negative it was all over. The issue of platform promises and substance is not what garners the support of the people this time around. It is the fact that everyone is tired of fighting and maybe Obama doesn't know it all like the Clinton's, but guess what, he is willing to involve the American people, party members, Subject Matter Experts and other political parties. Hillary Clinton refuses to respect others, demands that you vote for her and discounts you if you disagree. Now you decide. I have. Yes We Can!

OK, so let us add to CakeManJB's "interesting & informative" list for bills sponsored in 2007:

Sen. Obama:

A concurrent resolution honoring the life of Percy Lavon Julian, a pioneer in the field of organic chemistry and the first and only African-American chemist to be inducted into the National Academy of Sciences.

A concurrent resolution condemning the recent violent actions of the Government of Zimbabwe against peaceful opposition party activists and members of civil society.

A concurrent resolution expressing the sense of Congress that a commemorative postage stamp should be issued honoring Rosa Louise McCauley Parks.

A concurrent resolution supporting the goals and ideals of Sickle Cell Disease Awareness Month.

A resolution celebrating the life of Bishop Gilbert Earl Patterson.

A resolution designating July 12, 2007, as "National Summer Learning Day".

A resolution honoring and recognizing the achievements of Carl Stokes, the first African-American mayor of a major American city, in the 40th year since his election as Mayor of Cleveland, Ohio.

Sen. Clinton:

A bill to improve health care for severely injured members and former members of the Armed Forces, and for other purposes.

A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide incentives for employer-provided employee housing assistance, and for other purposes.

A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to establish a national center for public mental health emergency preparedness, and for other purposes.

A bill to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to protect the health of susceptible populations, including pregnant women, infants, and children, by requiring a health advisory, drinking water standard, and reference concentration for trichloroethylene vapor intrusion, and for other purposes.

A bill to require the International Trade Commission to report on the specific impact of each free trade agreement in force with respect to the United States on a sector-by-sector basis, and for other purposes.

In Conclusion, you now have the facts straight from the Senate Records vault.

That "list" puts things in a different light. Do some research sheeple and don't just listen to the drool that is posted by others. Once again, I have no dog in this democratic fight other than taking glee in watching them devour each other. I think Obama is an empty suit and Hillary is a Marxist and McCain is a Democrat in Republican clothes. Once again, these candidates are the best we can come up with? Think about it.

CakeManJB,

Great list. Pretty interesting and informative. Thanks for posting it.

OK, first off, I am not a democrat and I can't stand Hillary or the Clinton's. With that said, to those of you who keep reposting the Obama versus Clinton sponsored bills... STOP IT!! Go to the Library of Congress website, http://thomas.loc.gov/ and Browse Bills by sponsor. Don't just cherry pick.

As a side note: It is quite entertaining to watch the Democrats imploding. Personally, I hope the Republicans do the same. Seriously, 300 million people and this lot is the best that we can come up with? We all need to make a change, and it does start with the ballot box. We need to send EVERY elected official packing and start fresh. Politics were never meant to be a career.

I don't have to "hate" Sen. Clinton to believe that the choices she makes in her life are a very clear indication of how she'd make choices as America's president.

I don't agree with most of her political choices (or her personal ones, either, for that matter) and so I don't think I'd agree with anything she'd choose to do as if she were elected president.

I don't believe that she's shown very good judgment in ANY area of her life.

So I would NEVER vote for her.

That doesn't equate to "hate." To me, it just equates to my own good judgment.

(Contrary to what many of her supporters would like to believe, choosing NOT to support Hillary Clinton need have NO emotional component whatsoever.)

Senator Obama --During the first eight years of Senator Obama's elected service he sponsored over 820 bills. He introduced:
233 regarding healthcare reform,
125 on poverty and public assistance,
112 crime fighting bills,
97 economic bills,
60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,
21 ethics reform bills,
15 gun control,
6 veterans affairs and many others.
His first year in the U.S. Senate, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427. These included:
- the Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 (became law),
- The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act, (became law),
- The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, passed the Senate,
- The 2007 Government Ethics Bill, (became law),
- The Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill, (In committee)
Senator Clinton -- Senator Clinton's, who has served only one full term (6yrs.), and another year campaigning, has managed to author and pass into law, (20) twenty pieces of legislation.
1. Establish the Kate Mullany National Historic Site.
2. Support the goals and ideals of Better Hearing and Speech Month.
3. Recognize the Ellis Island Medal of Hon
4. Name courthouse after Thurgood Marshall.
5. Name courthouse after James L. Watson.
6. Name post office after Jonn A. O'Shea.
7. Designate Aug. 7, 2003, as National Purple Heart Recognition Day.
8. Support the goals and ideals of National Purple Heart Recognition Day.
9. Honor the life and legacy of Alexander Hamilton on the bicentennial of his death.
10. Congratulate the Syracuse Univ. Orange Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.
11. Congratulate the Le Moyne College Dolphins Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.
12. Establish the 225th Anniversary of the American Revolution Commemorative Program.
13. Name post office after Sergeant Riayan A. Tejeda.
14. Honor Shirley Chisholm for her service to the nation and express condolences on her death.
15. Honor John J. Downing, Brian Fahey, and Harry Ford, firefighters who lost their lives on duty.
Only five of Senator Clinton's bills are more substantive:
16. Extend period of unemployment assistance to victims of 9/11.
17. Pay for city projects in response to 9/11
18. Assist landmine victims in other countries.
19. Assist family caregivers in accessing affordable respite care.
20. Designate part of the National Forest System in Puerto Rico as protected in the wilderness preservation system.

In Conclusion, you now have the facts straight from the Senate Records vault.

Clinton should hang on tough. I'm sicken tired of Obama's preacher styed high talk. Is this a talk show, or serious politics? Some of the folks in this country are too dumb to count all fingers in both hands. Just look how thse guys put Bush/Cheney twice in office, as if one disater wasn't enough. Obama is playing a different game now, but more or less the same as Bush's: that's so-called "passion". Let the blind passion ride and we'll all see a yet another blunder. Just look at this guy record. There isn't much else there except a lot of good talk.

DO NOT vote for Hillary Clinton as she is obviously a warmonger and a hypocrite. She voted for the resolution that gave Bush the authority to make a vicious, unnecessary and unjustifiable attack on Iraq, and then criticized him about the war. She continues to vote to give Bush more billions of taxpayers' dollars to continue the war that kills our soldiers and has caused the death of hundreds of thousands of innocent women, children and old people, and she refuses to make a definitive statement that she will bring all our soldiers home even by the end of her first term as president, assuming that she is elected. Ours soldiers are literally being blown apart and kill everyday while the Washington Politicians, including Hillary Clinton give Bush more money for the war so that more of our solders can be blown up and kill in a war that should never have been started. The next soldier that returns home in a body bag or with his/her eyes blown out, brain damaged, no legs or arms and completely paralyzed from head to toe, just might be a relative of yours. Is that really what you want? As Hillary has refused to definitely state that she would bring ours troops home, that is just what you may get. If you want 4 to 8 more years of war after Bush leaves office and if you want yourself, your children and grandchildren to pay for it, vote for Hillary Clinton. A vote for Hillary is the same as a vote for George Bush. If you want an end to the unprovoked and unnecessary war, and America to be set on the right path, then vote for BARACK OBAMA. I have always been a loyal Democrat all of my adult life, but I will not vote for Hillary Clinton under any circumstances.

You have to wonder who she bribed.

"Hillary is the past. Obama and McCain are the future."

AHHAhahahahaha. Give me a *break*. McCain? The FUTURE?

This doddering old Bush clone and political coward would take us further down the Bush path of fascism and Big Brother-like, eternal war.

This spineless loser, being thrown to the dogs by Repubs who KNOW they'll lose this year, claimed today that he voted *against* a bill defining waterboarding as illegal because - and dig the flop sweat cascading off McCain as he tried to say this with a straight face - "waterboarding is already illegal."

Um, sorry Johnny (and my, do you sound brainlessly unversed on current events), but your good buddy Dubya says that he can waterboard or do anything else he pleases to prisoners of war.

Typical McCain supporter: a complete liar who thinks Bush has done other than try and destroy this country.

McCain is a steaming pile of feces. Don't you DARE compare a public servant like Hillary Clinton with a coward who votes for endless war, but can't subsidize poor kids' health insurance.

What kind of man properly labels a religious terrorist like Richard Dobson as such, then turns around and *smooches Dobson right on the butt cheeks* in order to get the nomination? You talk about a useless, flip-flopping zero of a candidate.

McCain is as much about the future as a tail-finned Cadillac. Pull your head out.

lndlouis,

I'm as Democrat. I've voted Democrat in every election since I turned 18, and I can say this with a totally clear conscience that I will ONLY vote Democrat this time IF Obama is the nominee; it not, who knows.

Some American idiot, beating up on a foreigner for daring to support Hillary:
"You have no slightest idea how terribly destructive inspired by her actions had been."

You have 'no slightest idea' how much you sound like a Cheney boot licker.

Hillary caused zero destruction; the Clinton presidency under Bill was wonderful: a screaming economy, and a world that respected our leaders *despite* christian extremists acting as if having oral sex with a willing adult was the equivalent of...oh, let me take a wild stab here...starting a preemptive war based on lies? Continuing that war when lies are exposed while people are dying for an Iraqi constitution that's a *theocratic*, not democratic, document, or say, turning off portions of the Constitution, suspending habeus corpus and insisting that the country should allow *warrantless wiretapping of ALL Americans* while pretending this'll make our country safer.

Frankly, sir, you sound like one of the terrorists that make up the Bush administration.

'Tis a pity so many have drank the Obambi Kool-Aid. Can someone please explain to me why so many intelligent, educated people have fallen for his rhetoric? The moment Islamist fascists announce that they have a nuclear device, Obama will fade. The greatest nation in the history of mankind cannot afford to entrust its protection to an empty shell.

Go Hillary! Go McCain!

Hillary Clinton is a truly amazing woman. I respect and admire her. That being said, I am an Obama supporter and a proud delegate to my county's convention for Barack. It makes me sad when she says she doesn't recognize caucus states as legitimate. I think that comments like that are beneath her. We all know she'd be happy to proclaim how great they are if she'd won.

Clinton counts on superdelegates
Email|Link|Comments (0) Posted by Foon Rhee, deputy national political editor February 13, 2008 04:26 PM
By Susan Milligan, Globe Staff

WASHINGTON -- Hillary Clinton will take the Democratic nomination even if she does not win the popular vote, but persuades enough superdelegates to vote for her at the convention, her campaign advisers say.

The New York senator, who lost three primaries Tuesday night, now lags slightly behind her rival, Illinois Senator Barack Obama, in the delegate count. She is even further behind in "pledged'' delegates, those assigned by virtue of primaries and caucuses.

But Clinton will not concede the race to Obama if he wins a greater number of pledged delegates by the end of the primary season, and will count on the 796 elected officials and party bigwigs to put her over the top, if necessary, said Clinton's communications director, Howard Wolfson.

"I want to be clear about the fact that neither campaign is in a position to win this nomination without the support of the votes of the superdelegates,'' Wolfson told reporters in a conference call.

"We don't make distinctions between delegates chosen by million of voters in a primary and those chosen between tens of thousands in caucuses,'' Wolfson said. "And we don't make distinctions when it comes to elected officials'' who vote as superdelegates at the convention.

"We are interested in acquiring delegates, period,'' he added.

Clinton advisers rejected the notion that the candidate -- and the party -- would be badly wounded in the general election if the nominee were essentially selected by a group of party insiders.

"This is a nomination system that exists of caucuses, primaries, superdelegates and also the issue of voters in Florida and Michigan,'' states whose delegates currently will not be seated at the convention because they broke party rules by moving up their primaries to January, said Mark Penn, senior strategist for the Clinton campaign. But "whoever the nominee is, the party will come together behind that nominee,'' he said.

With the battle for the Democratic nomination excruciatingly close, supporters of both campaigns are questioning the nominating process. The Clinton camp has suggested that the caucuses -- where Obama has bested Clinton in all but one state -- are inherently undemocratic, since only a small percentage of eligible voters are able to make it to a caucus site and commit the time to vote at a particular hour.

Clinton -- who initially joined other Democrats in opposing Michigan and Florida's decisions to go ahead with early primaries -- now wants the votes of those primaries counted. The Obama camp thinks that idea is unfair, since candidates were not allowed to campaign in those states, and Clinton alone kept her name on the Michigan ballot, meaning Obama did not have a chance at getting even provisional delegates.

Superdelegates should "vote their conscience,'' despite how their states voted, Wolfson said. Penn noted that the Obama campaign, for example, has not asked Massachusetts Senators Edward M. Kennedy and John F. Kerry to cast superdelegate votes for Clinton, although the Bay State voted overwhelmingly for her in the primary.

The two candidates head into contests next week in Hawaii and Wisconsin; Obama is leading in the polls in both states. The Clinton campaign is pinning its hopes on the March 4 states of Ohio, Texas, and Rhode Island, but Wolfson said yesterday the campaign is opening offices in every remaining primary and caucus state, including Puerto Rico.

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/02/clinton_counts.html

re: ebubuk2004's post from WorldNetDaily.com

See the first line of the entry about WorldNetDaily on wikipedia:

"WorldNetDaily, also known as WND, is a far right American conservative online news site[1], founded in 1997."

Nuff said.

I live in Albuquerque, NM and a registered Democrat. I voted in the Democrat Caucus cum Primary. Here;s my experience.

Took an hour to get to the sign in table. I signed next to my name on the list of registered voters provided by the County Clerk.

The ballots were availabe at another table about 20 steps away. I was not given any kind of verification paper at the sign in table and the poll worker at the ballot table did not ask for anything.

(I could have skipped the sign)

The ballot was about 5x7 size and looked like it was printed at Kinko's. It had no stub or control number.

I marked my choice and deposited in the ballot box.

Friends voting elsewhere in Albuquerque and in the State have told me that their experience was exactly like mine.

No controls were placed on the provisional ballots. In notorious Rio Arriba county 3 ballot boxes and the county Democrat chairman disappeared. Were the boxes found? How many dead persons voted?

The NM vote is a sad joke.

Senator Clinton got 14 delegates and Senator Obama got 12.

Senator Clinton lauded and praised New Mexican. Given the nature of the vote she should of kept her mouth shut just like Senator Obama did.

Oh yeah, I'm voted for Mr. Obama. And, this November I will vote for him if he is on the ballot. If he is not on the ballot, I will write is name him.

To the Man in Black:

Your noted in your observation that Senator Obama seems to be a decent and honest man...but you mused about his stance on very critical issues of foreign policy.

This is precisely the right thing for us to be thinking about. Frankly I do not see a world of difference between either Democratic candidate's domestic policies (despite what they say and the talking heads blather about).

Where I see Obama's strengths is in Foreign Policy and International Affairs and here I think that he will eat McCain's lunch (despite present prevaling opinion).

There are two primary reasons for this conclusion:

Driven by his absolute mandate to get the center-right Republicans to support him, McCain will have to hew hard to the policies of Dick Cheney and George Bush. Some say he will not - that he's a maverick. To that I point simply to his announcement today that he WILL SUPPORT the Bush policy of torture.

Second, my review of Obama's stance on issues of foreign policy - from legislation agains further nuclear proliferation to the tortue issue...suggest that the brilliant Harvard graduate has many coherent and principled positions that directly confront the stupidlity of Cheney/Bush.

Here, in part, is what Obama said six-months ago about Afghanistan and Bin Laden:

".....Above all, I will send a clear message: we will not repeat the mistake of the past, when we turned our back on Afghanistan following Soviet withdrawal. As 9/11 showed us, the security of Afghanistan and America is shared. And today, that security is most threatened by the al Qaeda and Taliban sanctuary in the tribal regions of northwest Pakistan.

Al Qaeda terrorists train, travel, and maintain global communications in this safe-haven. The Taliban pursues a hit and run strategy, striking in Afghanistan, then skulking across the border to safety.

This is the wild frontier of our globalized world. There are wind-swept deserts and cave-dotted mountains. There are tribes that see borders as nothing more than lines on a map, and governments as forces that come and go. There are blood ties deeper than alliances of convenience, and pockets of extremism that follow religion to violence. It's a tough place.

But that is no excuse. There must be no safe-haven for terrorists who threaten America. We cannot fail to act because action is hard.

As President, I would make the hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. military aid to Pakistan conditional, and I would make our conditions clear: Pakistan must make substantial progress in closing down the training camps, evicting foreign fighters, and preventing the Taliban from using Pakistan as a staging area for attacks in Afghanistan.

I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges. But let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will.

....

Beyond Pakistan, there is a core of terrorists -- probably in the tens of thousands -- who have made their choice to attack America. So the second step in my strategy will be to build our capacity and our partnerships to track down, capture or kill terrorists around the world, and to deny them the world's most dangerous weapons.

I will not hesitate to use military force to take out terrorists who pose a direct threat to America. This requires a broader set of capabilities, as outlined in the Army and Marine Corps's new counter-insurgency manual. I will ensure that our military becomes more stealth, agile, and lethal in its ability to capture or kill terrorists. We need to recruit, train, and equip our armed forces to better target terrorists, and to help foreign militaries to do the same. This must include a program to bolster our ability to speak different languages, understand different cultures, and coordinate complex missions with our civilian agencies.

To succeed, we must improve our civilian capacity. The finest military in the world is adapting to the challenges of the 21st century. But it cannot counter insurgent and terrorist threats without civilian counterparts who can carry out economic and political reconstruction missions -- sometimes in dangerous places.

As President, I will strengthen these civilian capacities, recruiting our best and brightest to take on this challenge. I will increase both the numbers and capabilities of our diplomats, development experts, and other civilians who can work alongside our military. We can't just say there is no military solution to these problems. We need to integrate all aspects of American might.

One component of this integrated approach will be new Mobile Development Teams that bring together personnel from the State Department, the Pentagon, and USAID. These teams will work with civil society and local governments to make an immediate impact in peoples' lives, and to turn the tide against extremism. Where people are most vulnerable, where the light of hope has grown dark, and where we are in a position to make a real difference in advancing security and opportunity -- that is where these teams will go.

I will also strengthen our intelligence. This is about more than an organizational chart. We need leadership that forces our agencies to share information, and leadership that never -- ever -- twists the facts to support bad policies. But we must also build our capacity to better collect and analyze information, and to carry out operations to disrupt terrorist plots and break up terrorist networks." ...

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

To those who read these posts

- and are not turned off by the (20 or so) rabid ranters -

I offer this observation: After enduring for 7 years the very limited perspectives and inacticulate espression of concepts by the person who currently leads our country, reading what Obama has written is a really wonderful experience. Even when I do not agree with him, I can see the stream of logic from where his views are formed.

I've realized that his uplifting speeches are driven by a clear and crisp sense of the world...he connects the dots with grace and power.

What a difference it will be to have him as our President.

Clinton pays rent; money goes to Obama.

PORTSMOUTH -- Rochester physician Terry Bennett said he believes the only reason Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign paid for renting a building he owns in Portsmouth is because he became the "squeaky wheel."

Now, Bennett said, he will donate the $500 check to Sen. Barack Obama's rival presidential campaign. He said he's doing it because he likes Obama, but also as a statement on the way he feels he was treated by the staff of the Clinton campaign.

http://www.seacoastonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080214/NEWS/802140403

platynum...

Hey, why doesn't PM Martin and Harper not join Bush in signing the Security and Prosperity Partnership that abuses Mexico?

How come Canada doesn't get out of Afghanistan?

How come Canada doesn't close all of its mines that exploit the environment and abuse labor all over Latin America and the world?

How come Canada doesn't stop signing free trade agreements with countries like Colombia that abuse human rights and hurt the interests of farmers there?

Climb off your self-righteous high Canadian moose and take off that backpack with the 142 Maple Leaf patches on it and butt out.

Happy Valentines Day. gw.

rippercord:
You rail on:
Hillary STARTS with a 47% negative rating. She's had years to correct that, and still, that's the best she can get even now. When the GOP dogs are set loose, you can bet Whitewater, Vince Foster, Monica, Norman Hsu, Lincoln bedroom rentals, 1st WTC bombing and more will come up.
______________________________________________________________________________________
I say, when the GOP dogs get set loose and the ruthless McCain takes Obama on, when Obama gets vetted, which he surely will, one way or another, all the things you say against Hillary will pale in comparison.

Obama lied at a recent debate when he said "na na na, I only did about five hours worth of work for Rezko."

The truth: Obama and Rezko have been tight buds for 17 years, ever since Obama got out of law school, where, by the way, Obama pandered his way into being the President of the Law Review by telling conservatives what they wanted to hear, and telling liberals what they wanted to hear.

What does it mean when a person is a liar - is a pathological liar one who believes his own lies, or can't tell the truth from what he just wants others to hear?

Obama and Rezko have had a long history together. For starters, Illinois Senator Barack Obama wrote letters on his official state senate letterhead in Rezko's behalf to city and state officials which netted fourteen million dollars being paid to Rezko out of taxpayer monies.

Obama also sat in on Rezko business deals to impress potential investors.

When Michelle and Barack Obama couldn't afford the 1.9 million dollar mansion they wanted, on the same day they got $300,000 knocked off the price of their mansion, Rezko's wife purchased the inaccessible, adjacent vacant lot next to the Obama Mansion for $650,000.

Later, after Rezko was indicted for "influence peddling and corruption charges, Michelle and Barack Obama purchased that same inaccessible vacant lot next to their mansion for $110,000.

Obama said that was a "mistake," and the media let him fluff that off, plus his lie that he barely had anything to do with Rezko.

Rezko is from Syria and receives huge amounts of money from people in the middle east. Rezko was free awaiting trial, but the FBI picked Rezko up a few days ago because they discovered REzko was "moving large amounts of money around," and he is now confined, awaiting trial on Feb. 25th.

Couple this devious relationship with the fact that Obama worked out of an office in the anti-Israel radical Trinity Church when he was doing "community work on the streets of Chicago."

Michelle and Barack Obama were married in that radical Trinity Church, which, is also affiliated with Farrakut. Obama got the title for his book, "Audacity of Hope," from one of Rev. Wright's sermons.

Obama claims to be a Christian and has gone to the same Christian Church for 20 years.
The radical anti-Israel Church is the church Obama is talking about.

It is my opinion, because of these close associations of Obama, that Obama is a security risk to our country.

The media should be careful. They gave us one bad president, and now they are trying to give us an even more dangerous one. President Clinton was being kind when he said that "Obama is a roll of the dice."

Obama and Rezko, and Rev. Wright and Farrakut cannot have access to our White House, our government intelligence, and our nuclear weapons.

Hillary will give us universal health care, bring our troops home from Iraq, and work to make our economy strong again.
* * * * * *
About the article on this board,

I say: This sounds like Obama is one of the same old insiders in Washington doing the same old thing and expecting a different result.

The chief Exelon lobbyist on the Obama bill was David C. Brown. He told me that Exelon supported the "spirit" of the Obama legislation, in contrast to some other nuclear operators, who opposed more regulation of the industry.

Brown says that he met with the Obama staffer responsible for the notification legislation, Todd Atkinson, half a dozen times between January and June 2006, while the bill was being considered by the Senate environment committee.

In addition, he helped arrange a five-minute meeting between Exelon CEO (and Obama contributor) John W. Rowe and Senator Obama outside a Senate hearing room on March 29, at which the bill was briefly discussed.

As Brown remembers this conversation, Rowe told Obama that he supported his bill, but that the company had some concerns about the language. According to Brown, Obama replied, "Fine, work with Todd."

For the record, Obama has not received any corporate contributions from Exelon. But senior Exelon executives have contributed more than $160,000 to Obama's presidential campaign and $46,000 to his 2004 Senate run

Obama claims to want to "change" things in Washington, to eliminate lobbyists from influencing legislation.

Obama had legislation passed so that lobbyists couldn't buy lunch for people if they were sitting down, but lobbyists could buy lunch for congress people if they were standing up.

Is this what Obama meant when he said that first "one stood up, then another stood up, then they all stood up.?" gw

It's so sad, and I'm furious at the media, but I want Obama to win.

I'm a strong Hillary Clinton supporter; I think she truly would be the best-qualified and I appreciate everything that she has done. However, the media has become so enamored with the "Obamamentum underdog" story that little else can satisfy Americans around the world too biased and ignorant to evaluate the successes Hillary has had over the years. I do like Obama, a lot, and he is a refreshing chane and inspiration, but - I certainly don't see how he's better-equipped than Hillary.

There is a faction that has consistently, passionately disliked Hillary, especially on the GOP side, for whatever reasons (although one main reason, her '94 healthcare disaster, was largely their own fault for unduly bashing). Then there are those who simply find her impersonable, don't support her stances on the issues, and don't like her style of politics. However, many don't like her because they are so repulsed by the idea of a female president and simply find not reasons, but excuses to hate her.

It's a damn shame. But largely because he's received much more favorable press coverage (I truly cannot remember the last time the media portrayed Hillary in a pleasant light), I believe that Obama is much better able to unify the country. He seems to me simply like a smooth talker, if genuine and inspiring; I would much prefer Hillary, but the country needs unity right now, and therefore, needs Obama.

Danielmcmartin,

I live in Chicago.

I supported Obama in his run for the Senate in 06. I went to his rallies, I put his sign in my window. I voted for him.

I wanted him to fight Bush from day 1. Make a skillful speech on the Senate floor!

End the War NOW!

He hasn't done anything. He's a skillful politician in that he knows how to play the game.

I got a 2 year head start on you, the speeches where thin after you realize he's like everyone else.

Sure, the experience gap is not great. But Obama is a stretch of everyone's imagination.

Obama is not going to get at 35% of the vote in the U.S. off the bat.

Hillary is not as well liked. But to think that Obama can just keep this train rolling without any real attacks on him is completely naive.

Look at the torture vote today.

McCain. Against the ban on torture.
Hillary. NOT PRESENT.
Obama.NOT PRESENT

Are you surprised by Hillary? No. Am I surprised by Obama...NO!

Obama is a pol. We know Hillary is a pol.

Obama is NOT a UNITER. HE's a Democrat. Just wait. He's more liberal than Hillary is, and the RNC will let the independents know that. Then a Vietnam War who is more right of center veteran won't seem so unappealing compared to a Senator further left of center.

Nice posting Gandalf!

The more and more the details of Obama's plan comes out, the better it will get.

It's so sad, and I'm furious at the media, but I want Obama to win.

I'm a strong Hillary Clinton supporter; I think she truly would be the best-qualified and I appreciate everything that she has done. However, the media has become so enamored with the "Obamamentum underdog" story that little else can satisfy Americans around the world too biased and ignorant to evaluate the successes Hillary has had over the years. I do like Obama, a lot, and he is a refreshing chane and inspiration, but - I certainly don't see how he's better-equipped than Hillary.

There is a faction that has consistently, passionately disliked Hillary, especially on the GOP side, for whatever reasons (although one main reason, her '94 healthcare disaster, was largely their own fault for unduly bashing). Then there are those who simply find her impersonable, don't support her stances on the issues, and don't like her style of politics. However, many don't like her because they are so repulsed by the idea of a female president and simply find not reasons, but excuses to hate her.

It's a damn shame. But largely because he's received much more favorable press coverage (I truly cannot remember the last time the media portrayed Hillary in a pleasant light), I believe that Obama is much better able to unify the country. He seems to me simply like a smooth talker, if genuine and inspiring; I would much prefer Hillary, but the country needs unity right now, and therefore, needs Obama.

To those who care -

Here is an excerpt from Obama's talk yesterday at the Janesville, WI General Motors Assembly Plant.

".... A few weeks ago I offered an economic stimulus package based on a simple principle - we should get immediate relief into the hands of people who need it the most and will spend it the quickest. I proposed sending each working family a $500 tax cut and each senior a $250 supplement to their Social Security check. And if the economy gets worse, we should double those amounts.

Neither George Bush nor Hillary Clinton had that kind of immediate, broad-based relief in their original stimulus proposals, but I'm glad that the stimulus package that was recently passed by Congress does.

We still need to go further, though, and make unemployment insurance available for a longer period of time and for more Americans who find themselves out of work. We should also provide assistance to state and local governments so that they don't slash critical services like health care or education.

For those Americans who are facing the brunt of the housing crisis, I've proposed a fund that would provide direct relief to victims of mortgage fraud. We'd also help those who are facing closure refinance their mortgages so they can stay in their homes. And I'd provide struggling homeowners relief by offering a tax credit to low- and middle-income Americans that would cover ten percent of their mortgage interest payment every year.

To make sure that folks aren't tricked into purchasing loans they can't afford, I've proposed tough new penalties for those who commit mortgage fraud, and a Home Score system that would allow consumers to compare various mortgage products so that they can find out whether or not they'll be able to afford the payments ahead of time.

The second major economic challenge we have to address is the cost crisis facing the middle-class and the working poor. As the housing crisis spills over into other parts of the economy, we've seen people's entire life savings wiped out in an instant. It's the result of skyrocketing costs, stagnant wages, and disappearing benefits that are pushing more and more Americans towards a debt spiral from which they can't escape. We have to give them a way out by cutting costs, putting more money in their pockets, and rebuilding a safety net that's become badly frayed over the last decades.

One of the principles that John Edwards has passionately advanced is that this country should be rewarding work, not wealth. That starts with our tax code, which has been rigged by lobbyists with page after page of loopholes that benefit big corporations and the wealthiest few. For example, we should not be giving tax breaks to corporations that make their profits in some other country with some other workers. Before she started running for President, Senator Clinton actually voted for this loophole.

I'll change our tax code so that it's simple, fair, and advances opportunity, not the agenda of some lobbyist. I am the only candidate in this race who's proposed a genuine middle-class tax cut that will provide relief to 95% of working Americans. This is a tax cut -paid for in part by closing corporate loopholes and shutting down tax havens - that will offset the payroll tax that working Americans are already paying, and it'll be worth up to $1000 for a working family. We'll also eliminate income taxes for any retiree making less than $50,000 per year, because our seniors are struggling enough with rising costs, and should be able to retire in dignity and respect. Since the Earned Income Tax Credit lifts nearly 5 million Americans out of poverty each year, I'll double the number of workers who receive it and triple the benefit for minimum wage workers. And I won't wait another ten years to raise the minimum wage - I'll guarantee that it keeps pace with inflation every single year so that it's not just a minimum wage, but a living wage. Because that's the change that working Americans need. .....

How are they going to handle Iraq, Afghanistan, and the other growing problems in the middle east?

Obama doesn't have as much experience - but he's not the corrupt scoundral that Hillary and McCaine have proven to be.

I agree Man in Black!

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site.

We need to e-mail everyone we know in Texas to remind the good citizens of the Lone Star State of the way the Clintons handled Waco.

If they found it necessary to fill a building with fuel - ignite the building - the shoot the burning men, women, and children as they fleed from an inferno.

citizenxx - you're pretty violent in your posts. vulgar as well. is your wife ok and safe? or is she somewhere tied up in your house and we should we send the police over? you may want to pick the potato chip crumbs off your sweatshirt and calm down. it's also not acceptable or in compliance with policies here to be threatening. or did you really read them?
----------------------------
Who is trying to strong arm and silence opinion?

Posted by: Thinker | February 14, 2008 10:47 PM

Thinker,

What world do you live on? Threatening? Where? When? Again, like the Clinton machine, attack without substance, make derogatory and baseless statements, and then run away.

I consider you a joke. When you can really answer honest questions posed to you, feel free to join the adult table. Until then, work on the list.

Thinks, CitizenXX has a point. Your all talk. List the experience Hillary has. Don't get all petty like you are and divert the question into unwarranted flame war.

Obama - War We Need To Win. He stated the obvious. Wooo hooo.

What sexist slur? Teat? I have them also. It is a phrase... Are you one of those women Dems that back Hillary because, "I have always wanted to see a woman in the WH in my lifetime?" LIST HER EXPERIENCE.

I want a unifying president. I could care less what color or gender or race. Obama can unify our country and our party. Hillary is a polarizing figure, who also happens to be highly hated by the GOP. Do you think she can pull the indies like Obama can? The middle of the road GOP'ers? She can't, and I dare you to argue that she can.

Please, now, the list!

This place is degenerating. McCain is on Larry King. Better things to be aware of. Bye

Bottom line. Hillary can't beat McCain. Obama might beat McCain. The Supreme Court's at stake.

Don't be stupid.

so many sticks and stones here. someone must be saying something so intelligent you can't stand it. threatened by intelligent gab? tsk tsk tsk

citizenxx - you're pretty violent in your posts. vulgar as well. is your wife ok and safe? or is she somewhere tied up in your house and we should we send the police over? you may want to pick the potato chip crumbs off your sweatshirt and calm down. it's also not acceptable or in compliance with policies here to be threatening. or did you really read them?

Remarks of Senator Obama: The War We Need to Win
Washington, DC | August 01, 2007

After 9/11, our calling was to write a new chapter in the American story. To devise new strategies and build new alliances, to secure our homeland and safeguard our values, and to serve a just cause abroad. We were ready. Americans were united. Friends around the world stood shoulder to shoulder with us. We had the might and moral-suasion that was the legacy of generations of Americans. The tide of history seemed poised to turn, once again, toward hope.

But then everything changed.

We did not finish the job against al Qaeda in Afghanistan. We did not develop new capabilities to defeat a new enemy, or launch a comprehensive strategy to dry up the terrorists' base of support. We did not reaffirm our basic values, or secure our homeland.

Instead, we got a color-coded politics of fear. Patriotism as the possession of one political party. The diplomacy of refusing to talk to other countries. A rigid 20th century ideology that insisted that the 21st century's stateless terrorism could be defeated through the invasion and occupation of a state. A deliberate strategy to misrepresent 9/11 to sell a war against a country that had nothing to do with 9/11.

And so, a little more than a year after that bright September day, I was in the streets of Chicago again, this time speaking at a rally in opposition to war in Iraq. I did not oppose all wars, I said. I was a strong supporter of the war in Afghanistan. But I said I could not support "a dumb war, a rash war" in Iraq. I worried about a " U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences" in the heart of the Muslim world. I pleaded that we "finish the fight with bin Ladin and al Qaeda."

The political winds were blowing in a different direction. The President was determined to go to war. There was just one obstacle: the U.S. Congress. Nine days after I spoke, that obstacle was removed. Congress rubber-stamped the rush to war, giving the President the broad and open-ended authority he uses to this day. With that vote, Congress became co-author of a catastrophic war. And we went off to fight on the wrong battlefield, with no appreciation of how many enemies we would create, and no plan for how to get out.

Hillary can't beat McCain. Obama might beat McCain. The Supreme Court's at stake. Bottom line.

Don't be stupid.

Thinker wrote: "If he can't be honest with the American people and give us anything but speeches AT us - we may as well stay with Mr. Bush.. that's all we're getting now."

Obama released his tax returns for everyone to see. Hillary didn't. Who's more honest?

Why the sexist slur so called citizenXX? Don't care for women?

Thinker and other teat mongers,

I have read your posts, as have others, and again I ask you teat mongers:

LIST ME OUT HER EXPERIENCE:

Don't just say it. Don't attack another, as a way to deflect the question. What is the experience she has? Huh.... All negative attacks on Obama, which is a typical Clintonian ploy, and no answers to the question posed.

Yes, Mr Obama will reach across any aisle and any stage at any time and hug any person for any thing they can give him. No doubt we can trust him to hug and kiss the next President of the United States - John McCain. Because that's what the result will be if he gets this nomination. This isn't a primary - it's the freaking election itself. We need debates, for this man to come clean about who he is. If he can't be honest with the American people and give us anything but speeches AT us - we may as well stay with Mr. Bush.. that's all we're getting now.

Robert Reich, Bill Clinton's secretary of labor and the head of Clinton's economic transition team has the following to say about the Health Care Proposal Debate:

Both of them are big advances over what we have now. But in my view Obama's would insure more people, not fewer, than HRC's.

That's because Obama's puts more money up front and contains sufficient subsidies to insure everyone who's likely to need help -- including all children and young adults up to 25 years old.

Hers requires that everyone insure themselves. Yet we know from experience with mandated auto insurance -- and we're learning from what's happening in Massachusetts where health insurance is now being mandated -- that mandates still leave out a lot of people at the lower end who can't afford to insure themselves even when they're required to do so.

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/why-is-hrc-stooping-so-lo_b_75191.html

Silly people....

Im an Australian and i have been following this election with great interest since Obama declared he was running. And before i give my opinion on this let me make it clear that regardless of the fact i cannot vote in your election i will have my 2c worth. Why? Because whomever you vote to lead your country will have a direct impact on Australia, we are very close allies. Not only that but any negative/positive affect a president has on the US will ripple throughout the world, why? Because that is how you have positioned yourselves.

On with it then. I have been reading these blogs and their comments, independent articles, news pieces etc trying to get as much of an un-bias point of view as possible. Im only 24 so the furthest back i can remember of the US political system is Bush Senior. Coming from outside the US i have always heard from my parents, uncles, aunts etc that the US is a great and grand country. In my life i have never had that impression. My impression is negative, and that's because of how the country has acted since i have been around. Your political system is arrogant, greedy, self absorbed and holds itself on a pedestal.

Now something HAD to happen for the view of an entire nation, especially a nation that represented freedom and hope, to be altered so drastically from the perspective of other nations in the space of a generation. And i know for a fact it isn't just me who thinks this, friends, family, strangers etc all have the same opinion. What was it that changed this perspective?? Im not going to blame the people of the US because i have alot of American friends from all over the country that i consider good mates, laid back and radical people from all walks of life.

Your government, your leaders that's the problem. (which is obvious i know im just ranting to drill the point home).

You need to elect a president that is going to not only lead your country back to it's former glory from a worldwide image perspective (this should be a secondary goal) but also someone who is going to look internally into the issues your country is facing, your economy, health care, employment, exports etc. Why are the rich getting richer and poor getting poorer? Both candidates have released lucid plans for this which are pretty good. Health care etc. But do you realise that these plans still have to get approved?? Which elect is less likely to take a 'donation' from corporations to keep tax's low for them?? Bugger your loyalties off, forget what you think you know and re-investigate the issues your country is having. Then look at candidates and what they represent. Hillary is a stone cold politician. Obama is the new kid on the block with alot of pluck about him. What is seen and portrayed by the majority of the media is nothing but game faces. Hillary is loosing because of the 'wow' affect Obama is having against the masses. Look past that and look at the facts. Hillary having 'more experience' than Obama is fair dinkum BS. Look at their past. Obama has more time as an elected official than Hillary. Hillary has more time sitting in the white house as an off the charts adviser to Bill.

I personally if you couldn't tell by now am a Obama supporter. When you actually listen to and read his goals and proposals (not his crowd wow'ing speeches) he has the intelligence and conviction to do good for the US.

The United States Of America needs to check itself. You really do need change, to get out of the 'rut' your in. Get your troops home, fix your economy, work yourself out because your circling the drain in the eyes of the world that is watching you. I mean come on guys seriously you invaded another country purely on the coat tails of the fear of terror. Now don't get me wrong all terroist should be hunted down and dealt with in the proper fashion. But your current 'leader' invaded Iraq for what? What did he find? His daddy's old nemesis?? Oil. Where are the weapons that were a threat to the world?? So many billion's of $$ spent for nothing, lives lost, credibility down the drain for nothing. Do you really want a president who is going to continue this 'status quo' in the country?

And don't dare give me this 'Hillary is ready to be our nations leader' because she isn't and never will be, nor will Obama. How can anybody be prepared to lead a nation? Especially the US. If she stands for a true democratic nation and wants to bring about change and positive growth then she needs to step aside and let Obama take the reigns, stand aside as an adviser to him. You need to choose the leader who will inspire you to stand up and say with one voice. 'Enough is enough'.

Take it from an outsider you need Obama. I along with the rest of the country don't want to hear your general election results and think 'not again'. We would rather think 'this should be good'.

Now for all you die hard Hillary fans who refuse to even open your eyes and consider any of this. Don't bother flaming because i don't care. Comments welcome, not flaming =)

Peace

mjk47 says:

"Clinton is by far the more qualified candidate and yet so many democrats are blinded..."

Again, you teat mongers, give me a list of this so clearly evident experience she has. List it out. Prove it, and bring it to light.

Don't worry if you don't like the news. The media will under-report it anyhow.

News coverage has put Obama before Clinton in debate ads, show plugs, etc. for quite some time now. If they're not biased, I'd like to know why they changed.

Citizenxx - What's the point? I don't get it.

Mr. Obama's words: "John McCain started attacking me on economic policy, which I thought was flattering. It's clear that he knows who his opponent is gonna be." Well, I guess Mr. Obama has decided he has won -he is not waiting for the voice of We The People... so we don't have to have to hear the voice of the people in Michigan, Hawaii, Ohio, Texas, others. WOW! And you thought Bill Clinton had an ego. At least he had a record of achievements as a basis for his. He was a great president.

amstaur: ahhhhh. let me guess. Per Michelle Obama, Mr. Obamas been making it to all of his daughter's ballerina recitals. A great Dad. hmmm. And every American can relate to that???? We all have daughters who are taking ballerina lessons? Or, should we feel like his daughters have things we don't have? He's a favorite of the "Starbucks latte" crowd, as opposed to Hillary's "Dunkin Donut" supporters. And he is supported by the educated vs. Hillary's support from the not so well educated. He's definitely supported by the white troll boys club and the Oprah book club. He portrays himself as a "uniter". Yes, he's uniting anyone who will follow his float. He'll use and take anyone along who is buying his masks. He's been building this campaign for years, beginnign with his two books about HIMSELF so he could raise money and with a marketing team - he is a PRODUCT of Mr. Axelrod. Dont' fool yourself, be a fool or be fooled. We'll all be the victims of this dupe. Things are too serious in the world, too much is at stake to be playing Pied Piper with our childrens.

When things sound good for Hillary, he uses them. Now I guess that's more flattering than anything Mr. McCain could ever say. But it's also dishonest.

Hillary is supported, in contrast, by women - who are always wiser than all of the above. They don't like weak women, they get bored so quick. And they don't like strong women cause their hip to their tricks. The boys club of DC is looking for their puppet newbie. Wake up and smell the latte.

I'm a proud, intelligent, informed Dunkin Donuts Democrat!!!
Everyone knows lattes are over prices and so over rated.

Go Hillary.

Citizen XX,

Did you find Obama's vote "Not Present" on whether torture should be banned, inspiring?

Is that the kind of change you want, the change that says, "my vote doesn't matter, so I'm going to campaign", rather than get up and shout to the world, "no more torture!"????

She's got the experience. She's been attacked by Republicans for 15 years. She knows what its like to and to be strong armed.

Being a Democrat in Illinois, where the Democrats control everything, is no real experienc for reaching across the aisle. The Democrats in Illinois hit the Republicans over the head with a hammer when they want something passed. Or you follow orders from your leaders.

She tried to pass health care reform once, and lost. You learn from your failures, Obama has never attempted anything at that scale.

When it comes down to spouse talk, I'd rather have Bill giving advice than Michelle Obama. Nothing against Mrs. Obama, but she doesn't have any legislative or executive experience. I'm sorry, but I'd rather consult someone who had to work with Republicans for 6 years.

Obama has got nothing in comparison to Hillary for this job. Again, Illinois is as Blue as they come. The mayor is a Democrat, the largest county is run by Democrats, the Legislature is run by the Democrats, the Governor is a Democrat.

His reaching across the aisle in Illinois, even during in his tenure, pales in what Hillary was up against with a Republican President and Republican controlled Congress, WITH A COMPLETELY POISONED ATMOSPHERE by Bush.

Hillary is the Democrat for the job of President.

To Gandolf the Grey:

Well put! Nicely done! Bravo!

When I consider why there is so much animosity expressed against Hillary Clinton from so many democrats I conclude that much of it stems from the fact that the republicans' decade and a half long campaign to villify and discredit her at every turn has been effective. It looks like the republican propaganda machine will once again succeed in convincing Americans to act against their own interests. Clinton is by far the more qualified candidate and yet so many democrats are blinded by a negative bias that somehow she represents the status quo or some past they would rather forget. Let's keep in mind that the status quo has been the current administration for the last seven years and the "past" has largely been defined by those who have taken every possible opportunity to discredit her. Why have they been so interested in discrediting her? Because her powerful adversaries perceive her as a true champion of the American people and someone who ould actually work to their benefit. Wake Up.

To camasca:

I repeat my question! Justify your teat sucking hate mongers claim of more experience, and show me her experience. You know, all 35 years of it. You seem to have other things to say besides just answering the question. You teat mongers seem to be ready to so quickly throw the experience statement around. NOW BACK IT UP! Unless you just want to say, "Experience by association".

Influenced by the paragon of truth and virtue to whom she is married, Hillary stepped across the line of good judgment and common sense and has suffered a wound fatal to her Presidential aspirations.

Why? How?

Hillary Clinton's vote aided and abetted George W. Bush in his frontal assault on the U.S. Constitution when she agreed to authorize him to invade Iraq.

"Our Constitution expressly PROHIBITS an unprovoked and pre-emptive war against any nation in the world. It also prohibits the Congress from delegating the authority to declare a war to the President of the United States. This is one of the major pillars of the separation of powers."

Senator Clinton voted to give President Bush the authority to go to war - AFTER - she discussed with senior Democratic colleagues the likelihood that he would take the authorization and use it to mount an invasion of Iraq.

Since then, in increasingly clumsy attempts to re-write history, she claims that all she did was to authorize an invasion if all other diplomatic negotiations failed. In this explanation she is once again standing with her finger in the wind trying to position herself for a general election.

Better that she stands behind her vote - or admits she was wrong - but again, in the debate in L.A., after doing well on domestic issues, she refused once more to choose on which side of the issue she stands....

She spent over 6 minutes in that debate flip-flopping and stumbling around on stage in embarrassing fashion simply trying to explain HER own war authorization vote. She never did. Finally the moderator had to ask was she "duped by the dope." No, she said, adamantly.

Okay,...then WHY did she vote FOR the WAR?

Remember, she knew the Democrats would not carry the issue...a No vote would have cemented her in opposition to the stupid war. It would not have affected the vote outcome. Her N.Y. Democratic constituents would have cheered a NO vote!

Why did she vote YES????

Why did she vote to join with the Republicans and give to George Bush the authority to take this country into a pre-emptive war that has killed and maimed tens of thousands of American soldiers, marines, airmen and sailors?

She brags about her support of children...what about our sons and daughters in uniform?

Hillary voted to authorize the war in Iraq because she did not want to poison the well from which she thought (way back in 2002) she would have to drink when going up against a Republican in 2008.

She voted "YES" to insulate herself from Republican attack.

In other words,

...she took a position with an eye on HER future - and NOT the future of the United States.

She did not think the issue through. Just like George Bush.

Hillary Clinton took her stance on the War with her eye on her political career.

There is no other explanation for her vote - unless she supported the war and is now ducking that conviction.

Either way - she comes off looking like a cheap politician parsing her answers so as to deflect the truth. But again, remember who she learned from -- she was trained by Bill.

Hillary is guilty of the worst sort of political posturing for the worst possible reason - her own career. The Republicans have their knives and spears sharpened and ready for the thrust.

McCain will simply say, "But Hillary - YOU voted FOR the WAR." "You used your experience and judgment and voted YES for the language of the bill....

(language, in part, that stated...)
................

Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;

Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of American citizens;

Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001 underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist organizations;

..............................

Hillary's experience and judgment failed her in 2002, just as it is failing her now in 2008, in the inept management of her own campaign.

HILLARY CLINTON MUST BE DENIED THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION.

Let's take a closer look at who's really qualified and or who's really working for the good of all of us in the Senate. Obama or Clinton.

Senator Clinton, who has served only one full term - 6yrs. - and another year campaigning, has managed to author and pass into law - 20 - twenty pieces of legislation in her first six years.

These bills can be found on the website of the Library of Congress www.thomas.loc.gov, but to save you trouble, I'll post them here for you.

1. Establish the Kate Mullany National Historic Site.

2. Support the goals and ideals of Better Hearing and Speech Month.

3. Recognize the Ellis Island Medal of Honor.

4. Name courthouse after Thurgood Marshall.

5. Name courthouse after James L. Watson.

6. Name post office after Jonn A. O'Shea.

7. Designate Aug. 7, 2003, as National Purple Heart Recognition Day.

8. Support the goals and ideals of National Purple Heart Recognition Day.

9. Honor the life and legacy of Alexander Hamilton on the bicentennial of his death.

10. Congratulate the Syracuse Univ. Orange Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.

11. Congratulate the Le Moyne College Dolphins Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.

12. Establish the 225th Anniversary of the American Revolution Commemorative Program.

13. Name post office after Sergeant Riayan A. Tejeda.

14. Honor Shirley Chisholm for her service to the nation and express condolences on her death.

15. Honor John J. Downing, Brian Fahey, and Harry Ford, firefighters who lost their lives on duty. Only five of Clinton's bills are, more substantive. 16. Extend period of unemployment assistance to victims of 9/11.

17. Pay for city projects in response to 9/11 18. Assist landmine victims in other countries.

19. Assist family caregivers in accessing affordable respite care.

20. Designate part of the National Forest System in Puerto Rico as protected in the wilderness preservation system.

There you have it, the fact's straight from the Senate Record.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Now, I would post those of Obama's, but the list is too substantive, so I'll mainly categorize.

During the first - 8 - eight years of his elected service he sponsored over 820 bills. He introduced

233 regarding healthcare reform,

125 on poverty and public assistance,

112 crime fighting bills,

97 economic bills,

60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,

21 ethics reform bills,

15 gun control,

6 veterans affairs and many others.

His first year in the U.S. Senate, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427. These inculded **the Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 - became law, **The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act, - became law, **The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, passed the Senate, **The 2007 Government Ethics Bill, - became law, **The Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill, In committee, and many more.

In all, since entering the U.S. Senate, Senator Obama has written 890 bills and co-sponsored another 1096.

An impressive record, for someone who supposedly has no record according to some who would prefer that this comparison not be made public.

He's not just a talker.
He's a doer.

Pass it on....It's impressive

JUST GOT THIS FROM THE CLITON CAMPAIGN:

Dear XXXXXX,

My friends ask all the time: "What can we do to help your mom win?"

Well today I have an answer for them and for all of us who support my mom: we can make 1,000,000 calls.

OK, no one person has to make all 1,000,000 calls! But supporters like you and my friends are the best people to speak out on my mom's behalf -- and we need to talk to a lot of voters in the next few weeks.

It's simple: the more people we talk to about why each of us so strongly supports my mom, the more people will get out and vote for her.

If you sign up today to make calls for as little as an hour a week, you can help us reach 1,000,000 voters over the phone before the next big contests.

Please help my mom -- and all of us -- win by signing up to call voters for her campaign!

It's an amazing experience to meet so many people who are working so hard on my mom's campaign and to meet so many more who want to get involved and make a difference in this critical moment.

In less than three weeks, we're facing big races in states like Ohio and Texas. In fact, there are races all over the country where my mom needs help -- and we have to contact a lot of voters in a very short time! I know so many of you have shown a ton of dedication to my mom since Super Tuesday, and I'm sure that working together we will have no problem making our 1,000,000 call goal!

Can you help out? I hope so! Sign up for as little as an hour of calls a week, and you can make a huge difference toward reaching all those people in the next three weeks.

Sign up now to help us call 1,000,000 people for my mom.

Thank you so much for all you're doing to help my mom win!

Chelsea

I am waiting for the "Nanny nanny boo booo..."

I so love the Hillary Clinton and her ideas for a big government solutions for every problem us Americans face...

ok whatever.

Go OBAMA!!

Platynm: if you love Hillary so much, why don't you marry her? =P

Citizen XX,

I know that Hillary plays rough. She does have more experience on the national level and has seen first hand how a President can get things done.

Hillary is no saint.

Obama is a strong campaigner, a good politician, and an intelligent man.

But he isn't "change" for anything. He says "change" in such a general way.

He's not bringing any more change to Washington than Hillary is, and I believe Hillary has more skill.

I want to kick the Republicans to the curb. The Clintons are the ones to do it.

Help me fill in the details:

Clinton and her "35 years" of experience is at best suspect. Sen. Clinton has claimed that due to her experience, she is ready to be President on day one. What really is the 35 years of experience that makes her so ready?

Would that experience include the years from 1977 to 1993, when she was helping her husband campaign, and having Chelsea? During which time when not helping Bill, she worked at one of Arkansas' largest law firms; the Rose Law Firm. While there, she represented large corporations, as well as served on the numerous corporate boards.

Would that experience also include time during her husbands two terms in the Arkansas Governors Mansion and White house? A time in which she did not hold a security clearance, was not given any of her husbands daily intelligence briefing, nor did she attend any of the National Security Council meetings. (Dec. 26 New York Times)

Clinton did work for the Children's Defense Fund, yet did so for less then a year. That is the extent of, and only, full-time job in the nonprofit sector that she has ever had. Oh yea, she also spent a brief moment as a law professor.

She has been an elected official for only seven years. Obama has been an Illinois state senator from 1996 until 2004, at which time he became a State senator to date. That gives Obama five more years of legislative experience then Clinton.

And what makes her ready for the big chair on day one?

platynm,

It's hard to see where you would somehow connect Barack Obama with responsibility for the Iraq invasion or any other invasion, especially when he was one of the few sane voices that opposed the Iraq fiasco (see his speech October 2002) at a time when others (think Hillary) thought supporting the war was politically marvelous!

I see that, in Wisconsin, Clinton's spokesman called Obama a "chicken" for not agreeing to a debate.

If I were Obama's Wisconsin spokesman, I'd issue a press release: "We're rubber, you're glue. Whatever you say bounces off us, and sticks to you."

I'd then stick out my tongue.

To camasca:

That is your reply. Justify your teat sucking hate mongers, and show me her experience. You know, all 35 years of it.

Addendum to previous:

The rest of the world has forgotten what it is like without the influx of the greenback.

Citizen XX,

Give a list of how Obama cleaned up the sleaze and corruption in Cook County and Springfield, Illinois.

He didn't change anything. Did he.

africanqueen202 wrote:

"Men have been given a chance to run the most powerful nation in the world --- The USofA and look where it is now in the world --- it is the most disliked and disrespected country. I think we need to bring Hillary and give her a chance to bring back the glory days of being the most powerful nation in the world"
---------------------------------------------------

If your point is "men bad," "women good," I don't think you have one. World history does not boil down to genitalia or men like Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Churchill, Gandhi and others would not be revered while women like Catherine the Great, Imelda Marcos, Elena Ceausescu and others would be regarded as despots.

Gender hatred: It's not happening for me.

I would not any problem financially butting out of the world for 1 year.

Let some of the other countries pump money into the global village.

To the Hillary sycophants:

She say's she has 35 years of experience. I would like to see the kinds of experience that will make her, more then Sen. Obama, ready on day one.

So, all those people on the Hillary teat please give me a breakdown of all this experience that she has. You know all that experience that makes her so much more ready to run this country?

Let me see that long and justifiable list, please!

Oh platynm

You can have Bill also!

O, Canada!

Your country invades Iraq on the basis of flat out lies and you invite me to ''butt out''?

How about your country ''butting out'' of places where it is not welcome.

Good night and may I remind you that Barack has said he's going to change the world - please ask him to butt out.

Draft Bill Clinton for VP. Obama just can't win it without Bill, and Hillary will lose her senate seat if she and Obama get defeated by McCain.

Draft Bill Clinton for VP. Obama just can't win it without Bill, and Hillary will lose her senate seat if she and Obama get defeated by McCain.

Let's recap, shall we?

(My tribute to Hillary lovers and Obama haters who like to cut and paste their posts):

Hillary STARTS with a 47% negative rating. She's had years to correct that, and still, that's the best she can get even now. When the GOP dogs are set loose, you can bet Whitewater, Vince Foster, Monica, Norman Hsu, Lincoln bedroom rentals, 1st WTC bombing and more will come up.

What does Obama have going for him? Visit www.barackobama.com and find out, if you dare. In the meantime, keep your generalities to yourself. This is one white guy out of millions who adores voting for strong, honest Democrats, both women (my own Sen. McCaskill, for instance) and men, like Obama.

When Clinton was president in 1994, Democrats lost senators, congressmen, governors and big-city mayors to Republicans. He (not Hillary) won re-election in 1996 not because of any battle scars over Whitewater, Vince Foster, Filegate, Travelgate, etc., but because this great Democratic hero betrayed other Democrats to save his own skin. He followed the advice of GOP guru Dick Morris to create the policy of "triangulation" (Wikipedia that one), which gave up Democratic gains in favor of GOP policy proposals and cut the legs out from other Democrats.

GALLUP DAILY TRACKING POLL: Obama gains on Clinton, leading her narrowly

DEMOCRATIC POPULAR VOTE: Obama ahead some 200,000 votes over Clinton

DEMOCRATIC PRIMARIES AND CAUCUSES WON: Obama 23, Clinton 11

DEMOCRATIC PLEDGED DELEGATES WON: Obama leads

OVERALL DEMOCRATIC DELEGATES: Obama leads

AGAINST MCCAIN: OBAMA WINS, HILLARY LOSES

Why are we just getting more of the same in Washington?

Let's see the Senate vote against banning waterboarding, a form of torture.

Now torture is cruelty, and certainly cruelty could be the simplest definitions of evil.

Yet one Senator, tortured himself, named John McCain, votes AGAINST banning waterboarding.

Hillary Clinton votes, NOT PRESENT.

Barack Obama, Mr. "Yes We Can", votes, "Yes We Can.....be...NOT PRESENT".

Now supporters of Obama and Clinton say their votes didn't matter. I couldn't disagree with you more.

This is torture. These people are supposed to be our leaders. They should VOICE their leadership by getting off the campaign trail and saying they are against cruelty with their vote.

The real change candidates exited the race a long time ago.

The only change in Washington will be policy, real leadership, real change in approach to politics won't.

Platynm, I apologize =(

Men have been given a chance to run the most powerful nation in the world --- The USofA and look where it is now in the world --- it is the most disliked and disrespected country. I think we need to bring Hillary and give her a chance to bring back the glory days of being the most powerful nation in the world

I can't believe anyone in Roswell would have voted for Ms. "I'm-So-Ready-To-Lead" with an ET lookalike opposing her on the ballot. Could it have been Ann Coulter's endorsement?

Anyone else see that John Lewis is switching as a superdelegate from Clinton to Obama. NYTimes picked it up.

That, if you are keeping score, is 2 points for Obama.

Courageous move by Rep. Lewis.

jameswhanger wrote:

"And Thinker is intended as irony I imagine?"

-----------------------------------------------------
How could it be otherwise?

I have no doubt that Hillary and Bill Clinton will deliver the super delegates to Hillary. Further, I believe they will use every dirty trick in the book to defeat Senator Obama. As a Caucausian retired Professor of History, I assure you I will NOT vote for Hill/Bill and neither will many of my friends. It is too bad the Democrats would have won the election --- not with Hillary but with Obama. What a shame, the demos one more time have screwed it up. Dr. Fred W. Hicks

And Thinker is intended as irony I imagine?

Thinker,

there you go with broad generalizations again. No one's saying it's better to be "pure" and lose. But it is better to be pure and win. And speaking of winning:

GALLUP DAILY TRACKING POLL: Obama gains on Clinton, leading her narrowly

DEMOCRATIC POPULAR VOTE: Obama ahead some 200,000 votes over Clinton

DEMOCRATIC PRIMARIES AND CAUCUSES WON: Obama 23, Clinton 11

DEMOCRATIC PLEDGED DELEGATES WON: Obama leads

OVERALL DEMOCRATIC DELEGATES: Obama leads

AGAINST MCCAIN: OBAMA WINS, HILLARY LOSES

Yeah, pal. We're backing Obama.

You're back in the past.

Jemma1. Absolutely true.

Jemma1 said: The Clinton haters are so pathetic. The Clintons have done more for this country than any political couple since FDR and Eleanor. And yes, Eleanor was political. If the Obama lovers knew a little history, they would not be so ready to back a man whose substance doesn't match his rhetoric. He's accomplished nothing, nada, zip. A C-Span caller had it exactly right. Obama is an empty suit.

Jemma,

If you would like to review the history of Bill's tenure, I'm happy to do so. Do Enron and Worldcom ring a bell? Do the initials NAFTA mean anything to you? Have you ever seen him take credit for the economy that had nothing to do with him and everything to do with the tech bubble? Do you remember the woman after woman after woman that he had slept with come forth? Do you realize there are more of them? Many more??

jameswhanger. What a perfect name for you! I can't even believe it! Is it prented? Like Mr. Obama? Oh yes, I would follow Michelle Obamas opinions... ha ha ha ha ha
She didn't even know that Condaleezza was on McCains short list for VP until Larry King told her the other night. Did you watch? I'm guessing not. She was pretty silly.

As a visitor may I ask why a small handful of trollers are allowed to
use this message board as their personal space?

Start your own blog please and give others a chance to express an opinion.

"I am not eligible to vote in the U.S. election, as I am Canadian. ... She's a fine woman who would easily be elected as president or prime minister had she lived in another country."

platynm, I understand that any citizen of Canada can be elected prime minister. I also understand that a person can apply for Canadian citizenship after being a permanent resident for 3 years.

You are more than welcome to have Hillary. After all, she, a native of Illinois and citizen of Arkansas carpetbagged herself into being a US senator from NY state.

The Clinton haters are so pathetic. The Clintons have done more for this country than any political couple since FDR and Eleanor. And yes, Eleanor was political. If the Obama lovers knew a little history, they would not be so ready to back a man whose substance doesn't match his rhetoric. He's accomplished nothing, nada, zip. A C-Span caller had it exactly right. Obama is an empty suit.

platnm: I am not eligible to vote in the U.S. election, as I am Canadian.

Then how aboot you stop butting in, eh?! This is not aboot Canada. No one cares.

anthony,

I understand your sentiment, but if you think Hillary is capable of getting her Democratic opposition to rally around her after the type of campaign she has run, you are naive. You can either chalk it up to the Clinton's incredible narcissism, OR to perhaps the biggest personal blind spot in the world. Although, the two tend to go hand in hand. They made this decision and we will have to live with the consequences. Sound familiar?

Thinker wrote:

"rippermccord. You prove my point perfect.y"

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

I don't think either of us did, actually.

New Mexico is a Democratic Machine state. I have a friend who remembers that when he was growing up in Albuquerque, Democratic operatives would press $20 bills into his grandmother's hand to help her with 'expenses' the day before the election.

Maybe that's where HRC's $140M went.

This woman will stop at nothing to formalize what she already believes she is entitled to.

"Hillary has been a positive change agent for 35 years"

JamesDC-I have been waiting for someone to explain this. Care to give it a try? What solutions are you referring to?

Robertguinto: "Increased attacks on illegal aliens"? One statistic to back that up please?

Thanks jameswhanger and rippermccord for 'proving' my point. Better to lose and be 'pure', eh people? After all, we are right and everyone else is wrong.

Sigh!

The way we are going it will be 2032 before the Democratic party is ready.

Posted by: Thinker | February 14, 2008 08:48 PM
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Still not thinking I see! You sound like my brother-in-law except he is an ultra right winger. You too should get together maybe you could come up with the ultimate plan to derail the freight train heading your way.

New Mexico is a Democratic Machine state. I have a friend who remembers that when he was growing up in Albuquerque, Democratic operatives would press $20 bills into his grandmother's hand to help her with 'expenses' the day before the election.

Maybe that's where HRC's $140M went.

This woman will stop at nothing to formalize what she already believes she is entitled to.

"Hillary has been a positive change agent for 35 years"

JamesDC-I have been waiting for someone to explain this. Care to give it a try? What solutions are you referring to?

Robertguinto: "Increased attacks on illegal aliens"? One statistic to back that up please?

The Clintons will destroy the Democratic Party before they are done. It's who they are. They can't help themselves.

Here'a another thing for you Clinton backers to feast on:

When Clinton was president in 1994, Democrats lost senators, congressmen, governors and big-city mayors to Republicans. He (not Hillary) won re-election in 1996 not because of any battle scars over Whitewater, Vince Foster, Filegate, Travelgate, etc., but because this great Democratic hero betrayed other Democrats to save his own skin. He followed the advice of GOP guru Dick Morris to create the policy of "triangulation" (Wikipedia that one), which gave up Democratic gains in favor of GOP policy proposals and cut the legs out from other Democrats.

Now you want his wife to do the same. When will you people get it:

A CLINTON TALKING = A CLINTON LYING.

There are those of us who believe HRC would make the better president in 2009. I'm on record as being one of them. There are those who believe that BHO would.

Fine.

But can we ALL stop the slurs and vindictive taunts of our respective candidates and each other?

I don't think that either HRC or BHO are in this rcce purely for egotistical selfish ambition. I believe they BOTH want a better America. Each happens to think that he/ she is better positioned to deliver it.

On the other side sits the GOP, who must surely be rubbing its hands in glee at the ammunition we are delivering them for the campaign, regardless of which candidate ends up winning.

I'm alost starting to wish for a brokered convention, as it might then see a dark horse emerge from the convention floor.

Al Gore anyone? At least he wont have 8 months of slurs from within his OWN party for the GOP operatives to use in the election itself.

I agree with Michelle Obama. I won't vote for any other Democrat but Barrack either.

Thank You rekha.varma2 for sharing your passion for Hillary's campaign. Hillary has been a positive change agent for 35 years. She finds solutions rather than just making promises. And she will be a wonderful president. I especially appreciated the links you provided to Hillary's speeches on human rights issues--which I had heard about but not read.

GO HILLARY!! And come on Barak, you can debate for the good of Wisconsin voters.

JamesDC--a Hill fan

rippermccord. You prove my point perfect.y.

Clinton finally has a win 9 days late and after she says Caucuses do not matter.

So when it comes to immigration where does she really stand.

The Next Scapegoat

There was a time of slavery
There was a time women could not vote
There was a time of segregation
There are ongoing changes to anti discrimination laws to protect a person's rights.

Who is left?

The attacking of gay and lesbian individuals as the downfall for families, society, bad behavior, etc. has been such a focus it has accelerated the passing of equal rights for said individuals. While these protections are not universal in nature, it is becoming more and more difficult to be discriminatory to individuals due to sexuality.

The increase in attacks on illegal immigrants has been the most recent scapegoat. It will be harder to stop this area of scapegoating since many of the individuals with the label want to stay hidden. The illegal immigrants have become the perfect tool to use to attack the problems of our society instead of attacking the real causes. It allows for lots of money to be spent, visual stimulus of actions taken and there is always one example of a problem illegal immigrant to show how dangerous the individuals are.

Organizations who serve the populations of immigrants both illegal and legal need to create public service campaigns to better educate US voters and elected officials to the truths.

To let the current message go unchallenged does not serve anyone justice or benefit anyone but those who wish to convey hate and divert us from the real issues.

Clinton certainly has not been forthcoming.

When Hillary returns to the nasty tones of her attack ads and Bill just plain makes things up and revises history, it just reminds everyone of what we lived through and what we don't care to relive.

Dear Rekha Varma,

It's nice to know that our British friends support the cause of dynasty in my country.

Cheers!