http://geo.ya.com/kotimare/ bleper

http://geo.ya.com/kotimare/ preved

Obama's efforts to connect to the Republican Party, specifically Bush, and Dick Chaney, of the Halliburton Company, dates back to the Presidents Grandfather, Prescott Bush, and indeed Chaney was once an executive officer of Halliburton.

The American military pounds Iraq with Artillary, bombs, and the like, destroying large sections of cities, and infra-structures, then Halliburton comes in to rebuild. Halliburton and Halliburton associated companies have raked in ten's of billions.

Obama is just like the BIG HALIBURTAN. Haliburton has contracted to build detention centers in the U.S. similiar to the one in Quantanammo Bay, Cuba. Halliburton does nothing to earn the Two Dollars for each meal an American Serviceman in Iraq eats.

http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/

Halliburton was scheduled to take control of the Dubai Ports in The United Arab Emiirate. The deal was canceled when Bush was unable to affect the transfer of the American Ports.

Now we see what some might suspect as similiar financial escapading from the Democrats.

Two years ago, Iraq's Ministry of Electricity gave a $50 million contract to a start-up security company - Companion- owned by now-indicted businessman (TONY REZKO) Tony Rezko and a onetime Chicago cop, Daniel T. Frawley, to train Iraqi power-plant guards in the United States. An Iraqi leadership change left the deal in limbo. Now the company, Companion Security, is working to revive its contract.
Involved along with Antoin "Tony" Rezco, long time friend and neighbor of Democratic Presidential hopeful Barack Obama, and former cop Daniel T. Frawley, is Aiham Alsammarae. Alsammarae was accused of financial corruption by Iraqi authorities and jailed in Iraq last year before escaping and returning here.

LIKE FATHER LIKE SON --
Recently, Obama's campaign staff have been vetted by the IRS to disclose his connection to the criminal money generating underworld. Besides, his connections to the REZCO MAFIA types, his up-coming tax fraud charges -- Obama needs to disclose why he is a MUSLIM "PATWANG-FWEEE" and disclose Obama's MUSLIM Farrakhan mob connection to Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ. Its minister, and Obama's spiritual adviser, is the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. In 1982, the church launched Trumpet Newsmagazine; Wright's daughters serve as publisher and executive editor. Every year, the magazine makes awards in various categories. Last year, it gave the Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award to a man it said "truly epitomized greatness." That man is Louis Farrakhan. Farrakhan and Chicago's Trinity United Church are trumpeting Barack Obama AKA Barack Hussein Obama as the second coming of the messiah. Obama should stop suppoting our intervention in IRAQ. It's time to introduce this false, fake Xerox - X box Obama and invite the self-indicting thief plagiarizing pipsqueke "GLORK" Xerox - X box to meet the Buffalo "GAZOWNT-GAZIKKA" Police Department Buffalo Creek. He is MAD!!! --

OBAM YOU'RE NO JFK --

"GLORK" Obama looks like Alfred E. Newman: "Tales Calculated To Drive You." He is a MUSLIM "Glork" He's MAD!!! Alfred E. Neuman is the fictional mascot of Mad. The face had drifted through American pictography for decades before being claimed by Mad editor Harvey Kurtzman after he spotted it on the bulletin board in the office of Ballantine Books editor Bernard Shir-Cliff, later a contributor to various magazines created by Kurtzman.
Obama needs to disclose why he is a MUSLIM "PATWANG-FWEEE" and stop suppoting our intervention in IRAQ. It's time to introduce this false, fake "GLORK" Xerox - X box Obama and invite the self-indicting thief plagiarizing pipsqueke Xerox - X box to meet the Buffalo "GAZOWNT-GAZIKKA" Police Department Buffalo Creek.

Michelle Obama should be ashamed.

"GLORK" Michelle Obama should be ashamed of her separatist-racist connection to Farrakhan and Chicago's Trinity United Church trumpeting Barack Obama AKA Barack Hussein Obama as the second coming of the messiah. If Michelle Obama new what her husband -- the Hope-A-Dope, Fonster Monster -- Barack Obama AKA Barack Hussein Obama did in Harlem, she would wash her wide-open, Hus-suey loving MUSILM mouth out, with twenty-four (24) mule-team double-cross X-boX-BorraX. He is a MUSLIM "Glork" It's time to introduce this false, fake "GLORK" Xerox - X box Obama and invite the self-indicting thief plagiarizing pipsqueke Xerox - X box to meet the Buffalo "GAZOWNT-GAZIKKA" Police Department Buffalo Creek. He's MAD!!!

http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/

THE SPEECH --

The Apologia has arrived and once again the self-indicting, separatist-racist Barack Obama AKA Barack Hussein Obama, promises to heal the wounds of the world. The speech is the rude awakening of mass messianism of his campaign. Apologetically, Obama the MUSLIM double-cross X-boX-BorraX has an astonishingly empty two-prawn echelon explanation of his misjudgment.
In the first prawn: with regard to his connection to separatist-racist Rev. Wright; Obama summons voodoo and juju to express slavery as beginning and ending with the Rev. Wright.
In the second prawn: Obama's speech takes credit for Ashley's dream. A dream of unity Martin Luther King, Jr. borrowed from Ashley for his historic "I Have A Dream" speech. In Obama's speech, the connective bond Ashley, the elderly black man and Obama's grandmother share; represents Obama's self-indicting rise to the Harvard Yard. For Obama, the grand flag of language is the semi-fore of words, bestowed upon our nation by the messiah-alumni from Harvard. Obama's Swoon-Song Apologia to the nation represents a failed hymn -- a hymn that fails to heal the nation, repair the world, or make this time different than all the rest. Obama's speech is a brilliant failure.

http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/

lavinsr - "However, what is not subject to debate is the significant number of people who actually know Hillary Clinton very well do not support her for the highest office in the land. Those who have declared their support for Barack Obama know first hand that she has grossly exaggerated her "35 years of experience.""

Or it means that they want to go with a winner and think Obama is that ticket. Loyalty has never been a common attribute of politicians.

My take is, no matter how bruised BHO has gotten, the last stage of the path to his nomination has begun , marked by Richardson's endorsement. At least, Richardson is among those who understand that by now the nomination campaigns has become dangerously, if not fatally, negative for the interest of the party. Apparently, the difficulties for damage control lies in the powerful resistance from the Clintons' establishment in the party. If the Clintons prevail eventually, it will be due to their pure arrogance, which will not be tolerate by many other also established Dems.

I am an alumnus of CU law school where Kmiec was dean for a couple of years recently, and he has a reputation -- borne out in the legal commentaries I have seen and hear from him on tv and raido -- as an extreme legal conservative. I don't think this endorsement means much to most voters who don't pay attention to legal issues, but it is nevertheless remarkable.

The most striking part of it is this indictment of Bush:

"Our president has involved our nation in a military engagement without sufficient justification or clear objective. In so doing, he has incurred both tragic loss of life and extraordinary debt jeopardizing the economy and the well-being of the average American citizen. In pursuit of these fatally flawed purposes, the office of the presidency, which it was once my privilege to defend in public office formally, has been distorted beyond its constitutional assignment."

I think we'll see these words again in the fall, no matter whom the Democrats nominate.

Anyone who claims that Bill Richardson is either opportunistic or chauvinistic, does not know the man.

The whole concept of whether or not endorsements matter is subject to debate. However, what is not subject to debate is the significant number of people who actually know Hillary Clinton very well do not support her for the highest office in the land. Those who have declared their support for Barack Obama know first hand that she has grossly exaggerated her "35 years of experience." Those who know the real Hillary know that she has far more ambition than qualifications.

"Wow. That's unexpected. He was also one of Romney's Presidential committee members. Influential Catholic too. Extraordinary."

Again, an endorsement that means absolutely nothing. You can probably count the number of voters that have heard of him on one hand. It appears his reason is strictly limited to his opposition of the execution of the Iraq war and his determination that the US should cut and run. Even well educated remarkable Republicans are allowed to be misguided and wrong occasionally.

This is pescisely why Bill Richardson never received over 10% of any state's primary voters. He has very lttle credibility or name id with anyone other then MSNBC, the 24 hour Obama News Network:

Richardson on Superdelegates Last Month: Vote the Way Your State Votes (Oops)
March 21, 2008 2:54 PM

Superdelegate and new Obama-backer Gov. Bill Richardson told the New York Times
in February that a superdelegate's vote "should reflect the vote of my state, it should represent the vote of my constituency. It shouldn't be because you're a fund-raiser or a big-shot delegate. Superdelegates should reflect their state or constituency. If superdelegates decide this nomination, it's going to look like big-shot politicians and fat-cats decided who should be president."

Oh really Governor?

Do not be suprised if Gore and Edwards also comes out for Obama. These folks appear to be willing to destroy the Dem party and any chance of getting back The WH in 08 due to their hatred of the Clintons. The "Envy/Jealous" Factor I mention so often goes back to at least 2000 when Gore turned his back on Bubba, and lost the election. The same thing happened in 2004 and from the looks of things, this very same bunch of losers are doing their best to do it again. The "Clinton Haters" among the Dems is working with the Repubs to stop Hillary at any cost/price that I discovered some time ago.

An interesting position taken by Kmiec about Obama and the matter of Supreme Court appointments. (Wiki reports that one of his kids was a law clerk for Roberts.)

http://www.mirrorofjustice.com/mirrorofjustice/2008/03/doug-kmiec-resp.html

My favorite part is the Krispy Kreme doughnuts. Classy.

"Federalist Society Presents Prof. Doug Kmiec

Stanford Law School

Douglas W. Kmiec is Chair and Professor of Constitutional Law at Pepperdine University.Professor Kmiec served as head of the Office of Legal Counsel to presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. He currently holds the Caruso Family Chair in Constitutional Law at Pepperdine University School of Law and is a frequent contributor to the Los Angeles Times, Wall Street Journal, and other publications.

Krispy Kreme Donuts and Coffee will be served."

"Professor Kmiec is the former Dean and St. Thomas More Professor of the law school at The Catholic University of America (2000-2003). With leaves for government service, Professor Kmiec was a member of the law faculty at the University of Notre Dame from 1980 to 1999. At Notre Dame, he directed the Thomas White Center on Law & Government and founded the Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy.

Prof. Kmiec has been a White House Fellow, a Distinguished Fulbright Scholar on the Constitution (in Asia), and the inaugural Visiting Distinguished Scholar at the National Constitution Center (with Yale's Akhil Amar).

An honors graduate of Northwestern University, Professor Kmiec received his law degree from the University of Southern California, where he served on the Law Review and received the Legion Lex Commencement Prize for Legal Writing. He is a member of the bar of the U.S. Supreme Court and the state bars of Illinois and California."
His published work includes The Attorney General's Lawyer, three books on the American Constitution, a two-volume legal treatise, related books, and hundreds of published articles and essays. He is a frequent guest in the media on programs such as the NewsHour, Meet the Press, and NPR, analyzing constitutional, cultural, and political developments. For a list of Professor Kmiec's recent writings, see this link. He writes the Faith and Precedent column for the Catholic News Service.
Following his CUA deanship, Professor Kmiec assumed the chair in constitutional law at Pepperdine University School of Law.[2] Along with Professor Mary Ann Glendon of the Harvard Law School, he was named by Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney to head the Romney for President Committee on the Courts and the Constitution in 2007."

wpost, thanks for the citation.

I want to know more about the Kmiec endorsement. If you have a chance, read some of Kmiec's opinions and public positions.

Yes, the Douglas W. Kmiec endorsement is remarkable. I read his endorsement but I would like to hear more about his decision. This gives further credence to Obama's claim of attracting Republicans.

This, to me, says it all. This man endorses Obama:
Douglas W. Kmiec is Caruso Family Chair and Professor of Constitutional Law, Pepperdine University. He served as head of the Office of Legal Counsel (U.S. Assistant Attorney General) for Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. Former Dean of the law school at The Catholic University of America, Professor Kmiec was a member of the law faculty for nearly two decades at the University of Notre Dame.
'Today I endorse Barack Obama for president of the United States.

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

Wow. That's unexpected. He was also one of Romney's Presidential committee members. Influential Catholic too. Extraordinary.

This, to me, says it all. This man endorses Obama:

Douglas W. Kmiec is Caruso Family Chair and Professor of Constitutional Law, Pepperdine University. He served as head of the Office of Legal Counsel (U.S. Assistant Attorney General) for Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. Former Dean of the law school at The Catholic University of America, Professor Kmiec was a member of the law faculty for nearly two decades at the University of Notre Dame.

'Today I endorse Barack Obama for president of the United States. I believe him to be a person of integrity, intelligence and genuine good will. I take him at his word that he wants to move the nation beyond its religious and racial divides and to return United States to that company of nations committed to human rights. I do not know if his earlier life experience is sufficient for the challenges of the presidency that lie ahead. I doubt we know this about any of the men or women we might select. It likely depends upon the serendipity of the events that cannot be foreseen.

I do have confidence that the Senator will cast his net widely in search of men and women of diverse, open-minded views and of superior intellectual qualities to assist him in the wide range of responsibilities that he must superintend.

This endorsement may be of little note or consequence, except perhaps that it comes from an unlikely source: namely, a former constitutional legal counsel to two Republican presidents. The endorsement will likely supply no strategic advantage equivalent to that represented by the very helpful accolades the Senator has received from many of high stature and accomplishment, including most recently, from Governor Bill Richardson. Nevertheless, it is important to be said publicly in a public forum in order that it be understood. It is not arrived at without careful thought and some difficulty.

No doubt some of my friends will see this as a matter of party or intellectual treachery. I regret that and I respect their disagreement. But they will readily agree that as Republicans, we are first Americans. As Americans, we must voice our concerns for the well-being of our nation without partisanship when decisions that have been made endanger the body politic. Our president has involved our nation in a military engagement without sufficient justification or clear objective. In so doing, he has incurred both tragic loss of life and extraordinary debt jeopardizing the economy and the well-being of the average American citizen. In pursuit of these fatally flawed purposes, the office of the presidency, which it was once my privilege to defend in public office formally, has been distorted beyond its constitutional assignment. Today, I do no more than raise the defense of that important office anew, but as private citizen."

http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/convictions/archive/2008/03/23/endorsing-obama.aspx

Required reading:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/18/AR2008031802463_pf.html

'Rockets and mortars pounded Baghdad's U.S.-protected Green Zone Sunday and a suicide car bomber struck an Iraqi army post in the northern city of Mosul in a surge of attacks that killed at least 57 people nationwide.

The latest violence underscored the fragile security situation and the resilience of both Sunni and Shiite extremist groups as the war enters its sixth year and the U.S. death toll in the conflict hit 4,000.

Attacks in Baghdad stemmed from rising tensions between rival Shiite groups -- some of whom may have been behind the Green Zone blasts. It was the most sustained assault in months against the nerve center of the U.S. mission.'

Not only is it civil war between the Sunni vs. Shia, but rivalry between assorted Shia private armies -- and US soldiers are caught in the crossfire. And John Mccain wants to continue this madness -- and extend it into Iran.

Bill Richardson scored how many delegates and got what percentage of the vote while he was running? Really, the only two big endorsements left are Edwards and Gore. Richardson falls into the "eh" category, certainly won't hurt but won't really help any either. And here is one of the reasons why (aside from the fact that he is not a major star or candidate):

"New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said today that the people around Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton practice "gutter" politics and that they feel entitled to the presidency, a day after an informal adviser to her campaign compared Richardson to Judas for endorsing Sen. Barack Obama.

James Carville told the New York Times that Richardson, a former member of Bill Clinton's Cabinet, had committed "an act of betrayal," adding that it "came right around the anniversary of the day when Judas sold out [Jesus] for 30 pieces of silver, so I think the timing is appropriate, if ironic."

"I'm not going to get in the gutter like that," Richardson responded on "Fox News Sunday." "And you know, that's typical of many of the people around Senator Clinton. They think they have a sense of entitlement to the presidency."

Yowza! Meow!

Interesting how Ricardson says the Clintons have a sense of entitlement to the Presidency. Hmm, like the teakettle calling the pot black (no pun intended).

Anyhoo, Obama calling Clinton McCarthy is giving Clinton credit where it isn't due, since Clinton sold out to the Chinese...boy, with a field of such winners, it's a wonder the Democrats aren't drinking themselves silly every night.

http://www.townhall.com/news/politics-elections/2008/03/24/candidates_advisers_fault_obama_camp

Is Bill Richardson's endorsement a reason for Superdelegates to vote with their reasoning and not according to who won the State?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1923

.

The question is whether America wants, as its President, someone who seeks out mentors and spirtual advsiors like Jhn Hagee, who calls the Church the Great Wh*re and advocates a nuclear war to bring on the Second Coming.

Does America care that John McCain seeks out for council the very neocons who started this disastrous Iraq War [4000 dead on Easter Sunday]? Now tell me which is the greater blasphemy -- a speech or 4000 Americans dead -- for no bid contracts and record oil company profits?

Which do I care about? Whose judgement do I trust? One who listens to a preacher, or one who listens to apocalyptic lunatics and war profiteers gorging on the blood of our soldiers?

The question is whether America wants, as it's President, someone who sat silently for 20 years while his mentor and close frined brainwashed his community with lies and hate against their own government and their fellow citizens.

Does America care if it's President belongs and is a current member of a church where, on Easter Sunday, the preacher blasphemously compared Jeremiah Wright to Jesus Christ and called for parishoners to donate to a 'Resurrection fund' to help Rev Wright.

I think they do.

'All of those Catholics were not envisioning themselves as a future President of the United States.

It is not comparable, and Wright's lies and hate speech are indefensible, so quit trying to equivocate and defend. '

So proud, it is not comparable. No, it certaily is not. There is no worse crime than sexually abusing innocent children in the name of God. It is heinous, it is an abomination. It is a crime against nature. While a speech is -- a speech.

It doesn't matter whether the congregants were presidents or teachers or plumbers or dentists. To stay in a church when yuo know the preist is a beast is aidinng and abetting a criminal.

So quit trying to equivocate and defend. Are you honestly -- laughably -- contending that a speech is worse than brutally sodomizing a little child?

What is wrong with your mind? Has it completely rotted from listening to rush limbaugh?

'(CNN) -- Gas prices surged nearly 7 cents over the past two weeks to reach an all-time inflation-adjusted high of $3.26 per gallon of self-serve regular, a national survey said Sunday.'

And the death toll in Iraq hits 4000 on Easter Sunday... a grim irony.

And here's the formerly prosperous LA suburbs:

March 22, 2007-- In Ontario, California-- east of Los Angeles-- a "Tent City" of homeless people has grown up. Starting with 20 in July, the "city" now holds 200 people, including several children, a direct product of the housing crisis. Ontario is in San Bernardino County; in San Bernardino, there exists an extraordinary one home foreclosure filing for every 43 households. Further, during November of last year, sales of combined new and used homes in San Bernardino, and surrounding counties, plunged 42.7% from the level of November one year before.

The encampment might be called Bushville,in the tradition of Hoovervilles of 1929-32, right in the middle of Arnold Schwarzenegger's California.'

Bill Richardson's endorsement to a great majority of Hispanics is an UNVEILING! Because we can see him for what he really is: A wannabe Hispanic that will jump at any opportunity thrown to climb up the ladder. The fact is that he was a nobody and only due to the generosity of the Clintons he came to be what he is today. His actions are totally uncharacteristic of our group where LOYALTY and APPRECIATION towards those that help us are paramount.

Don't you see that Hispanics DID NOT support him in his bid? He gave his word that he would support the vote of his constituents and later turns his back on them. He has treated Hillary in a patronizing way that is typical of Hispanics males that fail to pass a major test in our culture and that is to trascend being a MALE CHAUVINIST. It remains an Achilles heel for some males in our society.

Bill Richardson will not score major points among Hispanics and he will find himself being used and then thrown into the bus as it is getting to be so typical of Obama.

The point is that no matter what ploys Obama uses, he will lose this election against any Republican candidate because Reverend Wrights connection is a STAIN in his candidacy that he will not be able to wash out. Nor any major speeches that he comes up. Actions speak louder than words and his stereotyping of his grandmother gives us a definite glimpse of the true character of this individual: he has come crashing and become a mortal with infinite flaws.

His candidacy will prove to be the downfall again of this Party.

We still have time to realize that the best assurance is to vote for Hillary!!!

Truthhunter writes "For those of you who keep bringing up Rev. Wright and why Obama stayed in the church.... how many Catholics left their church after is was discovered (their?) priests were sexually abusing children?"

All of those Catholics were not envisioning themselves as a future President of the United States.

It is not comparable, and Wright's lies and hate speech are indefensible, so quit trying to equivocate and defend. Enough already. Not this time, indeed. Obama showed he is not ready this time.

Threadjack Notice.

From the "Economist":

"The criticism that this crisis is the product of the deregulation of finance misses an important point. The worst excesses in the securitisation mess are encrusted precisely where regulation sought to protect banks and investors from the dangers of untrammelled credit growth. That is because regulations offer not just protection, but also clever ways to make money by getting around them.

Existing rules on capital adequacy require banks to put some capital aside for each asset. If the market leads to losses, the chances are they will have enough capital to cope. Yet this rule sets up a perverse incentive to create structures free of the capital burden--such as credits that last 364 days, and hence do not count as "permanent". The hundreds of billions of dollars in the shadow banking system--the notorious SIVs and conduits that have caused the banks so much pain--have been warehoused there to get round the rules. Spain's banking regulator prudently said that such vehicles could be created, but only if the banks put capital aside. So far the country has escaped the damage seen elsewhere. When reformed capital-adequacy rules are introduced, this is an area that will need to be monitored rigorously.

Like junk bonds, reviled at the end of 1980s, securitisation will rebound, tamed and better understood--and smaller. That is financial progress. It is a pity that it comes at such a cost."

Bill Richardson's endorsement is already paying dividends: the latest Gallup national poll puts Sen. Obama back in the lead by 3 points. And unlike the Clinton supporters, I don't believe it's going to be Obama/Richardson as I think Obama's going to go for more national defense credentials. And that'll be just fine, because Bill Richardson didn't "sell" this endorsement; he made it out of an honest desire to serve his party and put an end to the Clinton savagery and its horrible impact on the party. Let's end this charade and move on to defeat John McCain in November! Yes we can!

Bill Richardson's endorsement of Obama can have a huge impact... It may help convince superdelegates to vote for Obama. Here's the analysis of the blogger "showze2"...

If Obama picks a hispanic VP then he is probably certain to win in november?

consider 15% black vote + 20% hispanic vote + 30% liberal white vote, that gives Obam about 60%, or more of the popular vote.

we could see a liberal democratic landslide in November

that's maybe why richardson endorsed obama, richardson is the likely choice for hispanic VP.

However, the Clintons records in the White House and after the White House speak for themselves...

Under Bill Clinton's presidency, the democrats lost the house, the senat and many other legistlative seats. His presidency was plagued with violations to ethic codes:

- Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates*
- Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation
- Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify
- Most number of witnesses to die suddenly
- First president sued for sexual harassment.
- First first lady to come under criminal investigation
- Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case
- First president to establish a legal defense fund.
- First president to be held in contempt of court
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions from abroad
- First president disbarred from the US Supreme Court and a state court

Before he left office, he seems to have given favors in exchange of money... For example, shortly after beeing pardonned by President Clinton, fugitive financier Marc Rich had his ex-wife giving $400 000 to the Clintons library foundation: Source:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,98756,00.html

Since then, he seems to be in much bigger suspicious money deals ... The Clinton foundation received recently a $31.3 million donation after Bill expressed enthusiastic support for the Kazakh leader's, undercuting both American foreign policy and sharp criticism of Kazakhstan's poor human rights: Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/31/us/politics/31donor.html

Bill and Hillary Clinton would be the target of many attacks by the republicans if Hillary is nominated.

Bill Richardson probably took this into consideration when he sided with Obama.

Maybe Bill Richardson was too busy enjoying his vacation in the Caribbean that he didn't have time to listen to those recording from Rev Jeremiah Wright.

Obama has been ignoring the facts that Jeremiah Wright has been condemning America. According to his statement, he learned about his pastor had been giving those fiery sermons when he launched his campaign. Why didn't he fix it right away by expelling Jeremiah Wright from his campaign long before he was forced by the media?

That's not a good leadership. As a matter of fact is a very poor one. It proved that Obama has a big problem in making decision, especially when it involves people close to him.

Then, Bill Richardson praised Obama for his leadership abilities this week based on Obama speech on race. No, it's not a surprise.

Bill Richardson when asked by Wolf Blitzer from CNN whether the candidate would support concepts of "human rights" over concrete national security policies, or if they would sacrifice democratic ideals upon the altar of the National Security State?
Bill Richardson chose human rights over the National Security. Clinton chose to protect and defend the United States of America as the first obligation of the president.
And with Obama? He doesn't care if the people close to him say: "God damn America!"
And yet he wants to be the president of the United States.

The whole thing is tiresome these days Where are the debates about issues, such as the meltdodwn in credit markets, and possible real bloodbath in the economy. No all we hear is namecalling and regurgitation of lies and innuendos. I wonder how many are going to change their voter registration to Independent after this prolonged self-destructive fantasy

sorry for all the typos! thinking faster than typing.

Good evening, leichtman.

I think Obama has made it clear that by the time he was elected to the Senate the troops were on the ground and he did not want to cut funding for them.

Whether or not he was in the Senate in '02, he should get credit for having the foresight to recognize that (i) there was no basis for invading, (ii) it was going to cost more than Bush was saying, and (iii) once we were in we were going to get bogged down. (HRC might have reached some of the same conclusions if she had READ the NIE, instead of relying on staff summaries.

Anyway, I agree with both PatrickNYC and washpost that everybody needs to tone things down a bit, and concentrating o beating McCain in November -- woever we nominate.

I think most posters are ignoring the most important aspect of this endorsement: the timing. After the Wright controversy, it was possible that the supers were either going to start endorsing Hillary or dropping away from Obama. But Richardson stepped forward and said, in so many words, "This Wright thing is BS. This guy is legit and you can't hang his pastor's comments around his neck." It may not work, but I think that is the primary significance of it. Also, the commander-in-chief stamp of approval, from a guy with Richardson's foreign-policy and administrative experience can't hurt. Finally, this may be the beginning of a series of party elders expressing their disgust with the Clintons' "kitchen-sink" tactics since Wisconsin and the damage they are potentially doing to Obama if he's the nominee.

As for this being a "betrayal" of the Clintons: please -- that is so high-school! I didn't hear anyone on Obama's side (including posters) complaining about Mayor Nutter of Philadelphia, an African-American, being a "traitor" for endorsing Hillary.

inoyola: Your 2:07 PM Post was on target. This endorsement was expected, but it has very little effect on the remaining primaries. I would not go as far as you did about his betrayal of Bubba, who made him in the political world, but for what it's worth, IMO, he is done in the world of politics. The Hispanic community overwhemly support Hillary, and The Media are still in almost 100% support of Obama. I still think the Dem party will reject the far left wing and go with the folks that decide most elections, Moderates of both parties.

Bill Richardson is admired by many, his endorsement helps Obama and hurts Hillary.... even more so since he was so closely associated with Billary at one time. Bill Clinton even arm-twisted the Super Bowl with Richardson.

For those of you who keep bringing up Rev. Wright and why Obama stayed in the church.... how many Catholics left their church after is was discovered (their?) priests were sexually abusing children?

http://whathappenedtomycountry.blogspot.com

Yeah put Richardson on the ticket! What a great combo that would be- an inexperienced rookie and a two-time loser.

Bill Richardson has never been right about anything a day in his life. He's wrong on Iraq and only the crazy code-pinkers agree with his drastic surrender plan.

He was wrong this time last year when on March 4, he said he believed that the Democratic contest will be decided very early -- by the end of January 2008 after the first four state contests (Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, and South Carolina). "I believe the first four states, with Iowa and New Hampshire being the top ones, will determine who the president is. I always felt that way. What the pundits say about who's in, who's out, who's got the most money doesn't matter."
WRONG!

And I don't need to mention the Wen Ho Lee nuclear espionage scandal that happened on his watch as Secretary of Energy. Yeah, he'd be a great vp.

But his name does sound like the typical white person.

OBAMA/RICHARDSON

AFRICAN AMERICAN POPULATION 18%

HISPANIC AMERICAN POPULATION 33 %

the reality is that the Hispanic voter block will overwhelmingly vote for the chance to have the first Hispanic Vice President.

so what does that mean? It means that OBAMA/RICHARDSON ticket would only need 10% of the white vote to have a blowout in November, Richardson knows that.

moralprotagonist is right. Hillary has every right to continue on to fight for the D nomination. Ed Rendell said it this morning, sure Obama's candidacy is historic, but SO IS HERS. There has never been a female candidate for President of the United States that has gotten this far or has generated as much support as Hillary.

Now, some may argue that she would not be where she is today without her husband. To that, I would say, as a woman who doesn't even agree with her politics, isn't that proof that WOMEN have a lot farther to go and face lot more barriers to power than men in this country? Isn't that fact proof positive that a women will have a more difficult time that a black man at getting elected president? I think it is.

Obama has used sexism and sexist remarks against Hillary during the campaign and yet, the media gives him a pass. He is allowed to refer to her as "feeling down" to explain her disagreements with him in debates and on the campaign trail.

Not only that, but you Dems sure have short-term memory loss when it comes to calls for people to drop out. Hillary has a right and a duty to her supporters to continue on her quest until the convention if necessary. Look at Huckabee...he kept hanging in there until McCain had enough delegates to get the nom.

Stop whining about having competition; it should make your candidate BETTER. If not, then he's not worth all that hype.

And don't forget, lots of women are typical white people too.

"During the the Bush-McCain-Clinton war in Iraq, "

more bs from logan

Perhaps by your logic we should call it the Bush-McCain-Kerry logic sine Sen Kerry also voted to authorize the war,which would also be nonsense.

Logan you are aware that Sen Obama voted against the Kerry Amendment contrary to his colleague Dick Durbin. I presume that you are also aware that Sen Obama was not in the US Senate at the time of the vote and when later asked how he would vote if he was in the US Senate at the time, was at least honest enough to say he really didn't know.I will take the bait logan. Please tell me precisely what Sen Obama has done since he arrived in the US Senate that is any different then Hillary Clinton to end the war. BS will not do here, we expect specifics when you continue to post such outrageous and totally unsubstantiated comments. Apparently you think that we just fell off the turnip truck and will lap up every ridiculous/unsubstantiated remark that you make, and we have read quite a few.

It's too bad this campaign now boils down to race. Richardson himself said his endorsement is due to it. We should be talking about the economy, the environment, health care, and other issues. Obama lost my support in 2005 when he voted for Cheney's energy bill. He has a mediocre environmental record. Hillary is rock-solid not only the environment, but the economy and health care as well. We should be choosing our candidate based on their command of the issues, not on the color of their skin. I don't see Richardson's endorsement as a good thing at all. If race becomes the dominant issue in November, then the Democrats lose.

This election should not be about fear... it should be about changes. The government is not working well since decades. Big projets that are very needed require drastic changes in the way of doing politics. Republicans, independents and democracts need to work together. The Clintons have been polirizing figures in the '90s. Bush II has also be a polirizing figure. The governement is not working well and we must give a little bit of the power back to people. Obama has practical experience of this. As a community organizer, he has worked in the street directly with people. He has also an history of working with republicans since he was a senator in Illinois. And his campaign is inclusive, not divisive.

But his opponents are playing the fear card: What about his middle name? he must be a terrorist... What about his religion? he must be a muslim... What about his skin color? he must be half human... What about his patriotism?... he must be too much a citizen of the world...

As FDR said: "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself". The political establishments and the voters should not be afraid of changes. We are the product of changes.

This election should also not be about religions, but this election may help to a better understanding of them. Countrary to some countries like Iran, in the U.S. there is, in principle, a separation of religion and potitics. Preachers are supposed to put God's issues before political issues. And one of God's commandement is that "one shall not murder". During the the Bush-McCain-Clinton war in Iraq, the U.S. has murdered prisonners after torturing them. When Saddam Hussein was an ally against Iran, the U.S. closed its eyes on a genocide against the kurdes that killed thousands of children and women (secretary of states Rumfeld at that time was meeting with Saddam giving him his benediction to solidify the alliance against Iran). There are too many examples of this type. Many preachers from the right and from the left can often not close their eyes on these types of events without criticizing the system responsible for them. Those who do close their eyes are not men of God, they are politicians.

Bill Richardson seems to understand that.

I think the Bill Richardson endorsement was the worse back stabbing yet! He's a
Judas, all for "30 pieces of gold"! He
most likely asked Obama if he endorsed him
would he give him the V.P. And since Obama
is dropping in rating due to the Wright
controversy, Obama had to make some kind of
deal with Richardson!!! That's a shame!!!
Richardson sold his soul to the company store!!! Traitor! Judas!! Back stabber!!
Richardson is really hurting to be Vice President!!! One think the latinos are
against are Traitors, Judas', Back stabbers!!! Latinos will never support a
traitor, they have too much pride!!!
Down with Obama and Richardson!!!

don't know about Grant or Daughetry are they Congressmen maybe I can google their names mark. I am involved in replacing our State Senator Kyle Janeck with a State Rep Scott Hochberg, but he is waiting to make a commitment to that impt race. I did mention that our Districts were screwed up by Delay' Redistricting boundaries that tried mightily to get rid of Congressman Dogett's who's District goes from the valley outskirts of Houston. We are moving to Lakeway so I will certainly want to learn more about your races perhaps you can post links to Grant and Daughtery you mentioned one was a talk show host hope they are nothing like State Senator Dan Patrick who co hosted with Olberman. I know Houston very well and that Gene Green and Sheila jackson Lee's seats are secure and will likely be involved with Congressman lampson who I am sure will be targeted by the RNC again. It his seat and those like his along with our Harris Cty and Texas Supreme Ct. that speaking with our Judicial candidates they tell me will be effected by the choice of Hillary or Obama. One such candidate told me 'a year ago' that they worried about the effect of Hillary at the top of the ticket, now are telling me that things have now changed and that he felt that Hillary will be stronger candidate for our jduicial races. Dallas had the same problem having 100% Republican judges and they were able to change that last election cycle. As a lawyer our jdicial races here in Texas are very impt to me and how they will be effected by our top of the ticket. Texans tend to vote overwhelmingly straight tickets in Presidential years and I really don't see that changing with Obama especially after the Wright problem, but that mark is my view here in Texas. Lampson's district mark also stretches from galveston and 1/2 way to Austin mark, the boundaries are truly insane.

As to Richardson, I see it as a 1 day stor. Edwards endorsement if it comes before N. carolna could make a real difference. Personally I wish they would all show as much class as John Edwards, a real mentsch.

leichtman, I saw your post a couple of nights ago and do not agree with you that the congressional races in TX are static.

My snake of a district, stretching from Lago Vista in Travis County to the northwest Houston sprawl was gerrymandered by DeLay to give it a rural flavor for 145 mi. in between Harris and Travis Counties. But the growth is at the snake's ends, not in the middle. So McCaul, a weak and silly R, only got 54% last time against an unknown first time D, Ankrum, who spent only $65k.

This time, the Ds put up two actual candidates - one from Austin [Grant], whom I supported, and one from Houston [Doherty], who won the Primary, who will be well financed. The new nominee is someone I am sure you know - TV judge and plaintiff's attorney Larry Joe Doherty, whom I will now support. I probably would not support him against a more moderate and more effective R, but against McCaul, he is a no-brainer.

Grant, who worked in the Foreign Service, was for graduated pullback, no hard timeline, with large residual forces in Kuwait and the Kurdish north, while pushing regional diplomacy a la Baker-Hamilton and Biden-Gelb, using the residual forces as tactical support for the diplomacy. Doherty toes the antiwar line, which is to draw down as fast as logistically possible.

That policy, popular on the left, makes no sense to me. It is why Richardson, whom I have always admired, first fell out of favor with me in this race.

But McCaul offers no strategy either and just wants to stay. On most [all?] issues, McCaul offers no sense of independence. Doherty reminds me of Charlie Wilson in some [favorable] ways, and at least he would be for strengthening the military and veterans benefits, and be against torture as public policy.

Who helps Doherty? I continue to think BHO, but I am not about to be in crystal ball land on this. We wait and learn.

This is pretty much how a lot of "typical white people" are viewing the Obama speech. He actually has a huge problem in a general election campaign.

From today's Staten Island Advance.

Sen. Barack Obama's address on race in America
The speech was more about damage-control than defining his candidacy
Sunday, March 23, 2008
STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. -- After more than a year of campaigning as the color-blind candidate of unity, hope and change, Barack Obama last week decided to address the topic of race in America.

And why not? Even such a weighty topic as race relations is no doubt preferable to dealing with the anti-American hate speech of his close family friend and now-former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

Obama's "bridging the divide" address in Philadelphia last week, despite its gauzy haze of uplifting language and thought-provoking passages, was as much about damage-control as it was about race.

Obama knew that Wright -- who, among other things, blames American foreign policy for triggering 9/11 and said that the white-dominated U.S. government invented the HIV virus as a means of genocide against blacks -- had dealt a serious blow to his campaign.

And the timing couldn't have been worse: Obama was already lagging behind Democratic rival Hillary Clinton in Pennsylvania, the next red-letter stop on the presidential primary calendar.

A CBS poll last week showed that a third of voters who'd heard some of Wright's comments said they made them feel more negative about Obama.

The day after the speech was given, a Zogby poll showed that Obama's 14-point national lead over Hillary had evaporated to a "statistically insignificant" three points. Obama was also shown trailing GOP candidate John McCain in the same poll.

By the end of the week, Gallup was showing Mrs. Clinton with a national lead over Obama.

If CBS, Zogby and Gallup saw the deteriorating trend, surely Obama's internal pollsters did too.

A blowout loss to Hillary in Pennsylvania, a state the Democrats absolutely must hold in the general election, might give some nervous, undecided super-delegates all the justification they'd need to run to Mrs. Clinton.

Especially so if the loss were to be seen as being attributable to doubts Mrs. Clinton and others have raised about Obama's judgment and ability to lead, doubts that Obama himself has help fuel through the Wright controversy and his own bungled handling of the NAFTA issue before the Ohio primary earlier this month.

That's why Obama would take the "politically risky" move of tackling race in America. And that's precisely why the whole thing rang just a little hollow.

Why address race now? Why not after the incendiary South Carolina primary, for example, when Bill Clinton's stirred up a racial hornet's nest that helped spur Obama to victory? Failing that, why address race at all?

Because, like any other good politician, Obama needed to do something to shift the focus away from an issue that's hurting him.

Meanwhile, we had to chuckle at Obama railing against Wright's comments being played in endless loops on YouTube.

As if we haven't been inundated by all those celebrity-drenched, hip-hop campaign videos of Obama's on the very same Web site.

And as if there's any way to misinterpret or take it out of context when Wright says things like "God damn America" and calls America the "U.S. of K.K.K. A."

Not to rip the scab off the "Isn't-Obama-Muslim?" controversy, but that's exactly the kind of extremist talk you'd expect to hear coming out of a radical Islamic madrasa, aimed solely at reinforcing ethnic, racial or religious stereotypes, particularly in the impressionable young.

No wonder Obama's wife, Michelle, who attended the now-retired Wright's church with her husband for years, hadn't felt proud of America in her adult life.

Oh, and nice of Obama to throw his white grandma under the bus, saying that the woman who loved him and raised him had some racist tendencies of her own. We're sure the entire Obama family was proud of him on that one.

" Bill Richardson will now be a great asset for Barack "

logan we heard you post that exact same message when John Kerry, Caroline and John Kerry endorse before Ca. your guarantee that their endorsement will seal Ca. Exactly how does Richardson help in ky, Indiana, West Va or Pa? And how did those endorsements work out in Ca. We were also told by the Texas media that Edward Kennedy's campaigning would seal the Texas Valley, Corpus Christi and El Paso Texas for Obama, places Hillary ended up winning by 65+% even with the endorsement. Don't you get it logan, voters are smarter than that. They DO NOT CARE about endorsements unless the endorsement is from a local official like Strickland in Ohio or Richardson in New Mexico.

These past few days have shown more of the "Clinton/Hillary Haters" by yet another Obama supporter, this retired General [McPeak? spelling] and his remarks about the McCarthy era [1950s]. The Media just cannot help themselves by failing to report relevant facts about these folks. Seems as if I heard something about uniting our people a few years ago, and wonder if this is how the "Hate America" campaign is now doing the same.

A good race, Game Over!

I just wonder if CNN, MSNBC and others will happily playing original of 9/11 sermon as they are playing prefabrication from FOX.
Want to know the true about it then listen here:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=RvMbeVQj6Lw

"Come on Hillary, be a hero. Drop out and unite the Dem Party behind Obama"

how childish.

She owes you somthing matt? and she should give the finger to her 13 million supporters to stroke your ego.? After your campaign is crushed in Pa, W. Va, Puerto Rico and Ky will you be asking your campaign to be doing the same thing? If Hillary squeaks by with a win in N. Carolina(polling now shows it to to be a 1-3% race) the media will seriously be asking that very question regardless of your obvious support in Oregon.

Doing a little more research, I find under the most favorable conditions, Obama has ZERO chance of winning the GE in 2008. I have said from early in the campaign, IMHO, about this ZERO chance, and by looking at the Electoral College Map, looking at all the polls now available, it is impossible for Obama to win. The BR endorsement was another thing that furthers my argument of my contention of the "Envy/Jealous" Factor as well as the Race Factor being injected at every opportunity by his supporters. Notice how the SDs, Kerry, Kennedy, and BR and others are endorsing him despite what his campaign claims they should support the one with the most votes, Nope, not when they support him. A new word I've thought of "DEBOOZLEBAM" seems to make sense, and I will explain the meaning as time goes by.

The campaign continues only because Obama is in the lead and cannot be caught. Even when America is at its best, we allow our worst instincts to question us and hold us back

It's too bad that this campaign now boils down to race. Richardson himself said his endorsement is due to it. This is a bad turn for the Democrats. We should be talking about the economy and the environment. Obama lost my vote in 2005 when he voted for Cheney's energy bill. He has a mediocre environmental record. Hillary is rock-solid not only the environment, but the economy and health care as well. We should be choosing our candidate based on their command of the issues, not on the color of their skin. I don't see Richardson's endorsement as a good thing at all. If race becomes the dominant issue in November, then the Democrats lose.

Carville has it absolutely right: Richardson and Judas are brothers in sin.

Carville has absolutely right: Richardson and Judas are brothers in sin.

Most political novices and even some professionals missed the real point of Richardson's endorsement. It starts building a bridge between Blacks and Hispanics so even if Obama loses in this election cycle, an Obama _Like Hispanic candidate in future can make a run at the White House and actually reach out for black voters support unlike Obama himself who enjoyed very little support from that group particularly in California and Texas.

Texas in particular has a very large minority population and could easily be put into play if both groups (Blacks & Hispanics) support the same candidate. However, I do not look for this to happen in the current election cycle.

Also, another observation, there may be a woman on the Democratic ticket in November but her name may not be Hillary...the Democratic Party is looking more and more likely to give the nod to Obama.

From a tactical perspective this might make sense, since both candidates now have extremely high negatives, and the issue with Pastor Wright will fade away by November. For the opposition, this should have been the October surprise. They will certainly give it a good spin but it's already old news...

An example, Can anyone recall what was John Mccain's problem with the lobbist? Does anyone even remember her name without having to look it up on Google?

While the situation with Obama is somewhat more serious than McCain, truth is that we have very short attention span...

There will be far more pressing issues to deal with in November...It's called the economy and the never ending war in Iraq...

From an economic perspective both are tied together, one could successful argue that the war is creating a big drag on the economy as well and connect that to the effects on people pocket books.

Eric White, you should pay attention. Neither Hillary nor her husband ever said anything racist. Obama lied and twisted what was said to jumpstart his campaign. That is the truth. This is when I saw Obama for what he really is. He stands back and nods his head (I've seen it) and agrees to all the lies and nastiness, then he talks all nice and pretends to be nice, which he is not.

However, this post is supposed to be about Richardson. Bill Richardson sold his soul. He disrespected the Spanish Americans who made him and gave him all that he has. This will now be his downfall.

Good Night and God bless. May He save us from evil.

Hillary has the right to stay in the race. This is America. We don't call the game in the third quarter, just because one team has a lead. We play the game until the very end, giving our all the whole way. And we count all the votes, not just some of them.

Why would Hillary drop out now, and more importantly, why does she not have the right to stay in this race? Obama's delegate lead is not that big and he has real electability issues come fall. For example, he has not won the big states outside his home state and, so far, none of the critical three swing states of Ohio, FL and Penn. Obama's victories in many states (even states where he has won by large margins) will disappear to the GOP in the fall, like Miss. Moreover, unless Hillary just cuts and runs, Obama cannot win a majority of the delegates before the convention. She has every right to be in this race, and every right to let all voters decide this race, not just the voters in the first 20 or 30 states.

Oh, that's right, I forgot, we ARE talking about Barrack Obama. We're supposed to coddle him and give him preferential treatment. What was I thinking? I should have turned to the news media to be reminded how we're supposed to treat him.

Richardson's endorsement does help Obama. I think Richardson's endorsement helps in terms of moving superdelegates to Obama's corner because of the pledged delegate count. The DNC selects its nominee based on a number of factors but the most important one is pledged delegate count.

It is kind of sad to see the Hillary-supporters (yes this includes Jim Carville) going so low as to personally insult any Obama-supporter from a voter to a superdelegate like Bill Richardson. Carville calling Richardson "Judas" and selling out for "pieces of silver" is just plain pathetic and over-the-top. The ultimate betrayal is when a married man or woman numerously cheats on the other for over 15 years!

As a Hispanic this endorsement by Richardson is disgusting. As Richardson is aware of an ongoing racism against Hispanics that Barack Obama has been condoning for some time.
This is a basic text of a letter. I faxed to Governor Bill Richardson, after learning of his unconscionable endorsement.

Attention to; Governor Bill Richardson March 21, 2008

Ongoing Complaint and Notice

You are aware and it can be confirmed with full documentation that during the time you were a presidential candidate you and other former presidential candidates (i.e Senator Chris Dodd) were repeatedly placed on written notice that presidential candidate/Illinois US Senator Barack Obama and co-chair Obama 2008/Illinois US Senator Dick Durbin had been placed on prior repeated noticed that when I a Hispanic American citizen reported incidents of race discrimination towards me by Hormel foods Corp., UFCW, and Target Corp., the agencies the Illinois Department of Human Rights and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (four instance, but not limited to) refused and are still continuing to refuse (even to the date) to afford me, a US American born citizen from the state of Illinois, the full language and the same full and equal protections under Title VII that non-Hispanics enjoy as a matter of record. You and other former presidential candidates (i.e., Senator Chris Dodd, who has already made it abundantly clear by endorsing Obama that he doesn't care about Hispanics/Latinos being treated unequally in Obama's own state of Illinois) were repeatedly placed on written notice about presidential candidates/Illinois US Senator Barack Obama's unwillingness to stop ongoing illegal discrimination. In his own state of Illinois as it relates to his Illinois constituents (who happened to be Hispanic/Latino) when they report race discrimination in Illinois, which are facts that can be verified. By endorsing Barack Obama you are helping Obama to facilitate this harm against Hispanic Americans, which makes this ongoing fight against this form of discrimination harder because you are Hispanic. Governor Bill Richardson, you are knowingly selling Hispanics out for whatever Barack Obama is promising you. I am not a governor I am just an average Hispanic American citizen in Illinois and in Barack Obama's own state of Illinois. If you identify yourself as being Hispanic and report race discrimination not as a governor you will run into the same discrimination and obstacles I am fighting against that without dispute prevent me, a Hispanic American natural born citizen, the same rights and language non-Hispanics enjoy as a matter of record when non-Hispanics assert race discrimination in Illinois, and having been placed on repeated written notice by me about this ongoing discrimination in Illinois against Hispanics/Latinos you are now being complicit in this discrimination against Hispanics/Latinos by endorsing Barack Obama as there can be no dispute this obstruction of justice and discrimination is ongoing in my particular case. Barack Obama has given a supposedly historic speech about race recently to defend his pastor's hate of America but Hispanics like me who love America cannot assert race discrimination because of Barack Obama's inaction. This should be more than a simple red flag, but with history on my side and facts that back up the true nature of Barack Obama you endorsing Obama will forever include you with Barack Obama's racist legacy.

cc: U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
Senate majority leader Harry Reid,
John Edwards

If any good reporter wants they can check this out! Included is a link to just one example (If you happen to be a Hispanic in Illinois you have no race and therefore cannot be a victim of race discrimination as I can atest) this is on IDHR's own website in the public domain.

http://www.state.il.us/dhr/Orders/2006/Oct_06/Zuniga,%20M.htm

This is nothing knew and Chris Cillizza has yet to report this despite me posting this verifible information on his blog as far back as april 2007. Barack Obama has gotton a free pass for to long wouldn't you agree.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2007/04/fix_picks_edwards_and_obama_un.html

I wrote this for the first time over a month ago and it is still true. There are only two questions left regarding Hillary:

1. When (not if) will she drop out of the race?
2. How low will she go in the meantime?

I have thought from the beginning that the one person who could unite the Republican Party would be Hillary Clinton. I assumed she'd need to be the Dem nominee to do so but now I realize that she has started already by pretending to be a Republican in her attacks on Obama.

Come on Hillary, be a hero. Drop out and unite the Dem Party behind Obama. It'd be a complete positive image makeover for you and you could get whatever you want (aside from the top spot on the ticket.)

Politico has a great article on how many news outlets are still running with the myth that Hillary might win. If Obama had Hillary's numbers, no one would be taking him seriously. Kudos to Politico for pointing out the Empress has no clothes. Will the Washington Post and the New York Times now also admit the truth of the math?

http://scarlettswhirled.blogspot.com/

Richarson's endorsement is not likely to help, particularly in the primary. Why? (1) Endorsements have proven not to have much impact in this election cycle. (2) Richardson couldn't deliver the Hispanic vote to himself, much less someone else. (3) 95% of Hispanics have already voted. (4) Hispanics don't vote as a block, but are fairly splintered. (5) Hispanics, especially in places like Calif were there is a great deal of tension between the Hispanic and African American communities, will be hesitant to support an African American candidate. (6) Most people view Richardson's late-in-the-game endorsement to be a VP fishing expedition and not so much an endorsement of Obama himself.

Bill Richarson's endorsement will not have any effect on the Hispanic vote which is still solidly behind Hillary.

In his quest to aquire a cabinet position in a "fairy tale" Obama administration, he has actually done a great deal of damage to himself. Hispanics are pissed at him for stabbing the Clintons in the back and so are Clinton supporters. You know, the ones who chose Hillary in his home state. Looks like he'll be unemployed soon.

James Carville got it right when he pointed out that this endorsement was fitting since it happened on the anniversary of Judas' betrayal of Christ.

Is this how you buy a position in a possible administration. Wait until you feel the candidate is wrapping up and then declare for him.

If Obama had really impressed the Mr. Richardson, I would have thought he would have endorsed him before now. I guess you would want to wait until you thought it safe.

Rev Wright Supports Hamas, which supports using children, including new-born babies, as "human bombs"

From Reuters --

Embattled Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has experienced one of the most awful weeks in American political history. As I said here, you know it's bad when revealing extensive ties to Chicago political fixer Tony Rezko isn't the big news of the week. Clearly, the Pastor J-Wright scandal has temporarily sucked the oxygen out of the presidential campaigns. As bas as that seems, this article in WND adds another chapter to the Pastor J-Wright scandal. This headline says it all:

Obama Church Published Hamas Terror Manifesto

It gets worse from there:

The Hamas piece was published on the "Pastor's Page" of the Trinity United Church of Christ newsletter reserved for Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr., whose anti-American, anti-Israel remarks landed Obama in hot water, prompting the presidential candidate to deliver a major race speech earlier this week.

Hamas, responsible for scores of shootings, suicide bombings and rocket launchings against civilian population centers, is listed as a terrorist group by the U.S. State Department.

That it was reprinted in Pastor J-Wright's newsletter calls into question how deep his hatred of Israel runs. Let's remember that this isn't something from 10 years ago. That op-ed ran last July. It's that much more troubling considering the fact that Pastor Wright accompanied Louis Farrakhan on a trip to Libya where he met Col. Qhadhaffi.

I'll take Sen. Obama at his word when he says that Pastor Wright has been his mentor. That's troubling because Pastor Wright's thinking towards Israel is far outside mainstream evangelical Christian thinking. Let's set that aside temporarily for the sake of this discussion. Let's pretend that evangelical Christians didn't take a position on Israel. Instead, let's think about this from a State Department standpoint. It seems like Hamas has been on the State Department's list of known terrorists forever.

That brings me to this question: What impact has Pastor J-Wright's views on Israel had on Sen. Obama? Sen. Obama says that he hasn't talked politics with Pastor J-Wright but, prior to this week, he insisted that he hadn't heard any of Pastor J-Wright's inflammatory sermons, too.

Suffice it to say that this story eliminates the possibility of the Obama-J-Wright controversy going away anytime soon.

wpost4112 --

The more people learn about the real Obama the faster he's going to lose.

I kept wondering why "Obama's Slums" hasn't hit the bookshelves.

It turns out they're waiting for him to get the nomination, because then it will be a blockbuster.

I'm hoping the story gets picked up nationally before then.

There's also news from Reuters that Obama's church endorced Hamas.

It was posted to another WP blog by someone else earlier today.

I'll try to find the link.

Obama's not only a really bad guy, he's totally unelectable.

If we had nominated him, we would have lost the general election.

Its much better this way.

Oh yes: if Hillary is the nominee, I cannot vote for her. The way her campaign has injected race has done nothing but divide.

Wow. This is sad.

I thought Richardson's endorsement was brave. He cares about his nation, his party and knows that this primary needs to be wrapped up asap or it's McCain all the way. I admire Richardson, and I admire Obama.

The ignorant hateful people in this country -- not so much

Wow. This is sad.

I thought Richardson's endorsement was brave. He cares about his nation, his party and knows that this primary needs to be wrapped up asap or it's McCain all the way. I admire Richardson, and I admire Obama.

The ignorant hateful people in this country -- not so much

Wow. This is sad.

I thought Richardson's endorsement was brave. He cares about his nation, his party and knows that this primary needs to be wrapped up asap or it's McCain all the way. I admire Richardson, and I admire Obama.

The ignorant hateful people in this country -- not so much

It's really interesting that the media is paying virtually no attention to the fact that Hillary is quickly closing the gap with Obama in in North Carolina, and is way way ahead in Pennsylvania. See http://www.realclearpolitics.com

The momentum has started to shift back to Hillary but the media does not want to undermine its annointed candidate.

I would hope after the media looped the Wright sound bites that they would now tell the truth and show the whole tapes, you know like Wright quoting the Amb. and they were not his words.SHAME ON FOX, CNN AND MSNBC.And where is the print media in this?

wpost
Again I agreed with all you said, I don't like all that is going on in the Clinton campaign either, but I heard that the MI party said they are going to fight this. I just fear that the longer it goes on and the uglier both sides gets, only feeds the GOP. I do not want to see more of the last 8 years.

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

Thanks. Agreed!

The argument for Richardson as opportunist is extraordinarily weak and illogical.

If he were an opportunist, he would have jumped the clinton ship before RTexas when his endorsement would have mneant more and Barack had just come off an amazing win in WIsconsin, not on the worst week in Barack's campaign. That he did it now speaks to his non-opportunistic ethos.

The VP argument is equally weak. First because he is more valuable as Sect State ..yuo don't waste a guy like that in a VP slot. Nor was it so he could be Secy State...Hillary would just as quickly given it to him...after all he was in Bill's cabinet. Opportunistically speaking, endorsing Hilary would have been the way to go.

The fact is, he, like most Dems are sick of the in-fighting and are worried about the general. Barack's speech, a clarion call of leadership, pushed him over to Barack.

And rightly so.

For Hillary's camp to call him a Judas tells us all we need to know about her supposed respect for individual conscience and democratic process.

I expect we'll see more endorsements in the coming weeks.

wpost

Again I agreed with all you said, I don't like all that is going on in the Clinton campaign either, but I heard that the MI party said they are going to fight this. I just fear that the longer it goes on and the uglier both sides gets, only feeds the GOP. I do not want to see more of the last 8 years.

I agree with Kavanaugh1--Richardson never intended to endorse Mrs. Clinton. He's seen as an opportunist in New Mexico and has a reputation as a chauvenist. He has been out there stating that the Superdelegates needed to vote with the will of the people in their state. Well, Hillary won the New Mexico vote.

I have no problem with the reality of the delegate count. I only have a problem with someone who says Barack is not winning fair and square. He has won his votes by the rules. Whether or not the rules are "fair" is immaterial since all the candidates knew the rules going into the primaries..indeed, many of them were established by Terry McAuliffe, former DNC head and now part of Clinton's campaign staff, in order to help Hillary.

I don't put any stock in what people say they will do in November. That's a universe away in political time.

Logan,

Esteem. e-s-t-e-e-m

Sentence: Richardson threw his self-esteem out the window chasing after a vice-presidential nomination.

Leon

Logan,

Esteem. e-s-t-e-e-m

Sentence: Richardson threw hisself-esteem out the window chasing after a vice-presidential nomination.

Leon

Maybe on planet Mars, but here, in the world of reality, where we follow rules, he has won fair and square. Couldn't be simpler or more obvious.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 22, 2008 12:53 PM
-------------------------
The reality is that Barak is ahead at this point, and I agree fairly, but in fact on planet Earth he does not yet have the 2024 needed yet. In fact without FL & MI I don't think either can say they won. If that is the case it will go to the convention.

I'm just glad to see today that the tone on both sides has seemed to calm down. I plan on voting for either, I have heard from others who say they will not, including some saying they will vote for McShame. I hope we can all take a deep breath and
ride this out.

and for those who thought McCain was a 'moderate' --he is as far right as it gets -- grover norquist:

'Everyone knows that John McCain has reversed himself on the Bush tax cuts, which he once said came "at the expense of middle-class Americans." What's not yet well known is that McCain has offered his own massive tax cuts, mostly for corporations, that are as costly as Bush's tax cuts and even more regressive.

McCain has won the heart of far-right tax activist Grover Norquist, who only three years ago was calling McCain "the nut-job from Arizona" and a "gun-grabbing, tax-increasing Bolshevik." But here's what Norquist says about McCain now:

[John McCain] campaigned on being very good on taxes in this election cycle... that he will continue to make [the Bush tax cuts] permanent, that he will veto any tax increase, period, that he wants to cut the corporate rate from 35 percent to 25 percent, that he wants to have full expensing, that he wants to abolish the AMT .... In addition to being the Americans for Tax Reform's entire agenda, that is a very pro-growth set of policies he has put forward, and he articulates why they are important.

The McCain plan may please Norquist, but what does it mean for middle-class families? According to a new analysis released today by the Center for American Progress Action Fund, McCain's new proposals would do the following:

- Double the size of the Bush tax cuts, costing more than $2 trillion in their first decade.

- Do virtually nothing for the middle class: only 12 percent of the tax cuts will go to the bottom 80 percent of households, while 58 percent will go to the top 1 percent of households.

- Follow Norquist's blueprint that's been called a "stealth approach to tax reform" - and that aims to abandon progressive taxation in favor of a wage tax imposed mainly on low- and middle-income households.'

http://thinkprogress.org/wonkroom/

whomever we pick, let's just be rid of the impossibly incompetent republican party. I have never seen a group so hell-bent on defeat. if they were sabotaging this country purposefully they couldn't do a better job:

'The success of the US "surge" strategy in Iraq may be under threat as Sunni militia employed by the US to fight al-Qaida are warning of a national strike because they are not being paid regularly.

Leading members of the 80,000-strong Sahwa, or awakening, councils have said they will stop fighting unless payment of their $10 a day (£5) wage is resumed. The fighters are accusing the US military of using them to clear al-Qaida militants from dangerous areas and then abandoning them.'

The fact that Bill Richardson went for Obama despite the fact that he was part of Bill Clinton's administration and that the Clintons made a lot of pressure on him to get his endorsement tell a lot about few things: the low estime he has for Hillary and her negative campaign, and the high estime he has for Barack as the future of the party. Bill Richardson will now be a great asset for Barack for the nomination and during the general election.

During his endorsement speech, Bill Richardson mentioned that Obama's supporters were enthousiasts. Obama's supporters are going for him because of his qualities (unifier, near the people, intelligent, articulate, etc.) while Hillary's supporters are going for her because of Bill (for some latinos who do not know Barack), her gender (for some angry feminists) and the color of her skin (for some racists). That's why Obama's supporters are more enthousiastics. And that's why Obama's numbers are going up when voters learn to know him, and that Hillary's numbers are going down in the same context.

Bill Richardson knew this and several uncommited superdelegates will soon follow him.

Don't get me wrong; if Obama had won the nomination fair and square, that would be one thing. But that simply is not the case.

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

Maybe on planet Mars, but here, in the world of reality, where we follow rules, he has won fair and square. Couldn't be simpler or more obvious.

Some of the experts in the media now are telling us that it's a done deal, and that Obama is a lock for the nomination.

These are the same bozos who told us McCain was out of the running for the Republican nomination months ago.

Speaking of bozos, the last people who should be telling us who our candidate is going to be are the bozos who turned the 2004 Presidential election into a trainwreck. They are losers; please don't listen to them again.

I guess John Kerry, like Obama, saw himself as a "uniter," and that is why he let Team Bush swift boat him while he sat on his tuffet wringing his unsoiled hands. This same troupe now is shoving Obama down our throats, with absurd arguments about why the votes should not be counted in Florida and Michigan, and so forth.

"This needs to end; it's for the good of the Party." Give me a break. You've created an irreconcilable rift in the Party already, and sending up the more liberal candidate (not to mention a guy who is a rookie with next to no experience or expertise) is not going to get it done in the general election.

The voters are worried about the war on terror and the economy. They aren't going to elect the rookie; they are going to elect John McCain. At the end of the day, those two issues are going to be the clincher. Hillary could beat McCain; Obama doesn't have a prayer.

Let me tell you something, if these clowns in the party leadership blow this election, after eight years of malpractice by the Bush White House, then the Democrats can never win the White House. In that case, the Democratic Party will be identified by most as a loser party that will never get its act together. You will hear a giant sucking sound, as many at the moderate end of the Democratic Party jump over to create a newly re-energized moderate wing of the Republican Party. We're only willing to put up with the nonsense for so long; at some point it will become obvious to everyone that the Democratic Party truly has become irrelevant.

Nancy Pelosi isn't going to shove Obama down my throat, folks. Sorry.

Back on the subject of Forida and Michigan, "those were the rules?" Don't be ridiculous.

No one in the party leadership, and certainly not the candidates, have the right essentially to write Florida and Michigan out of the process. If Florida and Michigan are written out of the process, then the nomination is a fraud.

The only way Obama gets the nomination is to manipulate the rules as he has manipulated the voters. The caucus system allows a discrete minority of the far left nuts a disproporionate number of delegates and, again as I said, the Florida/Michigan business has just turned into a joke.

Don't get me wrong; if Obama had won the nomination fair and square, that would be one thing. But that simply is not the case.

The Democrats need to pick a winner, and Obama is no winner (at least for the 2008 general election). A superdelegate vote for Obama is tantamount to a Republican cheer of "four more years!"

Hillary Clinton should be our next President, whether she gets the Democratic Party nomination or not. I hope she is already laying the foundation for an independent run.

Frankly, I like her chances. Think about it - you'd have McCain on the far right, Obama on the far left, and Clinton in the middle ground. Like it or not, the middle ground is where you'll find most of America, ladies and gentlemen.

Kerry, Pelosi, and the rest of that crowd couldn't find that moderate middle ground with a map. This party needs a leader who can kick a little butt.

No one is accusing the Clintons or Ferraro or anyone of being racists. That is a false charge they have created.

What they are accused of is using race for political purposes.

There's a huge difference. And the charge is true.

Slick Willy's latest passive aggressive attack on Barack's patriotism is a new low point in his pandering to the masses.

That is why Richardson finally tilted to Barack. The Clintons no longer look to the greater good...only their selfish ambitions.

Ok, this Wright stuff is disturbing, very.

Posted by: carlw1 | March 22, 2008 09:35 AM

Only in your Fox/Hannity warped mind.

Rev. Wright is returning from Africa to begin a long-scheduled series of visits to black churches across the country. (He'll be 35 miles from me for three days next week...I would like to go to hear and support him, and I'm just a "typical white person.")

I hope he minces no words in what will likely be sermons with a lot of media attention. He needs to demand an apology from Hannity, Limbaugh, ABC and Faux News. He needs to press that demand everywhere he goes and to clearly elucidate the justifiable reasons for the demand, perhaps by giving his listeners a brief history lesson on McCarthyism (character assassination, guilt by association) and then decrying the new "patriotic correctness." It may not be popular with the dimwits who have bought into the neo-con slime machine's egregiously out-of-context claims of racism and hate-mongering, but it is the kind of political courage and truth-telling that is badly needed at this point in time.

Ok, this Wright stuff is disturbing, very. But the bigger problem I have for Mr. Obama is his pattern of saying one thing and then distancing himself from those words when the opposite is revealed at a later date. That is called "spin", people. We have a need and right to know Senator Obama from every angle and what he believes when he talks of equality and a "vision" for America.

To say that Clinton +/or Obama is at fault for the direction the Democratic campaign has headed, is ludicrous and short-sighted. America is a melting pot of races, genders, culture, etc. and we each have a personal interest in seeing "ourselves" in our President. With that connection comes passion and emotional investment. However, it also must be tempered with information about the candidates (good and bad, without negative "label" attached to said information) so that we can make informed choices, rather than only emotionally-driven ones. To Americans: try to take off the blinders of opinion polls, media spin, mud and excitement. That person is Senator Clinton. She has worked hard and diligently for all Americans, and spent years building strong relationships because she has a passionate vision of what America can be, not just because she's running for President. Vetted, intelligent, tested and hardworking.

Senator Clinton is the right choice for me in '08

YAY! This lily white woman is thrilled that her first choice endorsed her second choice! I was hoping for a Richardson/Obama ticket in the fall, but I am perfectly happy to have it the other way around.

Richardson has more foreign policy experience than all of the candidates put together. If he feels, based upon his knowledge, that Senator Obama is the best candidate, the other superdelegates should get off the fence. The longer this goes on, the better it is for McCain, who is currently flitting all over the world looking presidential.

And for those of you who will undoubtedly call me a traitor to my gender, my race, blah blah blah, and what about the fine voters of MI and FL? I happen to be one of those MI voters. I am not blaming the DNC for my state government' stupid gamble. Neither should you. Senator Obama didn't block re-votes, the state legislatures did, so stop spreading your bull puckey.