While Clinton has the right to continue through the primaries, hopefully she will not damage the Dem. Party in the process. The primaries are about, and always have been about delegates, which her campaign managers seemed to have forgotten. The only sexism in this race is coming from Hillary's campaign itself by her inference that because she is a woman she has a right to be President.

Her strong fight to get the Florida and Michigan All TO HERSELF is another example of her belief that she has an unalieable right to be president bcause she is a woman and a Clinton. This the most clear and egregious example of her arrogance. unfortunately she apears to be ready to prostitute her personal integrity on the altar of her ambitions.

In the past I've always held her Presidential qualifications to be very high. Her recent campaign tactics, however, have led me to the inescapable conclusion that she is neither ethically, moraly, nor has the honesty or integrety, to be qualified for the Presidentcy.

Given that she virtually mathematically cannot win the Presidential nomination her recent campaign tactics are likely to destroy her political future. She could have been the natural successor to Ted Kennedy and a virtual legend and power in the Senate. It is indeed unfortunate she has shown herself to be just another polical hack who is willing to say and do ANYTHING to satisfy her ambitions even to the extent of destroying her Party.

The media may not count Michigan or Florida votes; Israel or the Jewish people may not count Florida or Michigan vote; nor the rest of Barack supporters. However, since there are no rules for super-delegates, the super-delegates can consider these two states votes, regardless of whatever happens.

The super-delegates considering these two states votes is a wise choice, since all 51 and not 49 states will be voting in the general election.

By the way the super-delegates should be more concerned about Hillary supporters. Her supporters are in the middle politically; while Barack supporters are all the way to the left. Her supporters might go over to the Republicans and permanently stay there. This would be bad for the democrats in future elections. However, Barack supporters usually don't vote; also, come back a million years from now and all of Barack supporters will still be voting democratic

At this point Hillary has demonstrated herself to be someone I want nothing to do with, will not associate myself with in any way including voting for her on any ticket.
The Clintons have proven themselves to be despicable and I am completely disgusted...
Just last weeken during his introduction of Hillary Bill Clinton used class warefar... all those people who say Hillary can' win...they are rich and educated...they have no problem paying for gas at the pump... she is your candidate... she is for the working class folks.... i was livid when I heard the things he was saying... how divisive and disgusting they were.
The democratic party will be a loser if they allow Hillary on the ticket in any way shape or form...
Because I will fight to keep her out of office. I will be fighting for a third party candidate. I will never sit back and do nothing and watch her go back to the white house. I could not live with myself if I did. It would be like once again seeing George Bush take office. I won't stand for it. I won't sit by and watch it happen. I will fight because she is exactly what we don't need in a president.

I don't think there's any confusion within the Clinton ranks except for purposeful disinformation -- fighting to the end and peaceloving; race baiting, rumor mongering about obama and complimenting on the other hand; good cop bad cop games between top aides with talking points, surrogates and the candidate herself. These strategies are getting more obvious and sinister, not less so.

You're a mean one, Mrs. Grinch.
You really are a heel.
You're as cuddly as a cactus,
You're as charming as an eel.
Mrs. Grinch.

You're a bad banana
With a greasy black peel.

-adapted by Dr. Seuss

"For all the talk that Clinton would rather blow up the party than see Obama chosen as the Democratic nominee, there seems to be little evidence that Clinton or her campaign are planning to push this fight to the convention."

you mean other than the fact that hillary said she would take it to the convention?

Re: the lengthy "open letter to Hillary" posted by PT at 4:13. Ph.D. or not, this writer perpetrates many untruths about Barack Obama, in troll-worthy fashion. Just one example: Obama's curiosity led him to travel to Africa not just once but several times as an adult.

She ain't stopping until its official.

Hillary has every right to go to the convention. Should she just turn over her 17 million votes and delegates to Obama. Why? What is she getting in return? They probably won't even thank her. She's invested her own money and has every right to fight on. If the democratic party does not treat her with respect, she should be prepared to run as an independent.

It is time for the leadership of the Democratic party to firmly ask this desperate and deluded candidate to abide by the rules or get out. This is the exact reason people want her out of the race. She can never play fair. I would like to hear one reasonable response from a Hillary supporter as to why Michigan and Florida should be seated when it was agreed upon by ALL the candidates BEFORE the election that they would not. Hillary agreed to it. And now she wants them seated b/c she "won" in those states - you cannot "win" if no one was competing against you(competing in politics involves campaigning which did not happen in those states) and if there was no contest to begin with as was agreed upon, and I will say again, by HILLARY BEFORE THE ELECTIONS. We do not want more slime in politics.

An open letter to Hillary....A candidates character and life choices matter. Please fight on until the convention...may the best candidate win....
I am frustrated. I keep hearing about Barak Obama's life story and I can't help compare it to my own. No, I am not black. But I am a person who grew up without a father, with a mother struggling to pay the bills and with no mentor, just my own aspirations as a girl from a working class neighborhood. This letter is not only about Barak Obama's seriously flawed qualifications to be President of the United States, it is also about your perfect resume for the job. It is difficult for me to not compare my own life accomplishments with that of each Presidential candidate. Why can't we choose a President who from the very start of their formative years was working hard for change and on the right path, like you were? Why doesn't anyone notice that unlike Barak Obama, you did not seek your election to the Senate as an immediate springboard to the Presidency. Barak Obama entered the Senate, spent his first 18 month writing a book in the Senate, then announced for Presidency against the backdrop of very little experience. You entered the Senate and promised you would complete your entire first term -- you did. That was the right thing to do. Doesn't anyone care about character anymore.
Please don't exit this race. Please fight on all the way until the convention. If you pull out of the race for any reason, you will be yielding to not only a very flawed democratic primary system, not only to a media who is trying to influence this race, not only to the disenfranchisement of 2.3 million people in this very close race, not only to the very hard glass ceiling, but you will also be yielding to the status quo. In order to change the system, you need to fight on. In my view, this primary and the lack of leadership at the DNC regarding this primary demonstrates just how much repair needs to occur in the democratic party. While I have never registered with the democratic party, I have voted democratic my whole life (including Hillary's first bid for Senator of NY), but I no longer feel much aligned with the democratic party. If you withdraw, all the issues that have arisen in this primary will ultimately be ignored and swept under the carpet.
I hear things everyday in this campaign that drive me crazy. Let's start with the term "downscale" voter. I cannot even start to understand how anyone "educated" can willingly us a term like that on national TV. I guess they are referring to my blue collar working class sister on Long Island. Next time I send her a card, I'll say Hi to my "downscale sister".
Then there is Caroline Kennedy (promoting Sen. Obama) indicating how she understands, because she grew up in a single mother household. Really. That is interesting. Sure, it is tragic when any child's father dies, but we really need to re-define the concept of a single mother household. From my own experience, my mother (with no family support) was raising three kids on less than $12,500 per year. When it was my time for college (the first and only one in my family to graduate from college), my single mother could not afford to give me more than $750 per term. It happened that my university - NYU - made college a reality for me. I mention NYU by name because it was the only school to offer me a financial aid package that I could actually afford (Thank you NYU). I paid tuition each year with 6 slips of paper (loans, grants, scholoarships) and my own saved cash.
Then there is Barak Obama, saying that he can prove he was disadvantaged when growing up because he worked in a burger joint after school. Well, I worked in a burger joint when I was in high school too. Getting that job in the burger joint at 16 years-old was one of the most exciting days of my life. It is not something I look back on as if it was a burden or disadvantage. I could start to earn money for college and start to secure my own future.
An Obama surrogate (I forget who, but I think it was Senator Rockerfeller), who comments that you have to have spent time abroad to understand how the world views America. Yes, as someone who had lived abroad for more than 14 years, I agree. But what Sen. Rockefeller offered as experience abroad was that Barak Obama lived abroad with his mother between the ages of 5-10 years old. Now that one really got me. Sen. Obama did not have the curiosity to travel. His mother was there and he was living with her. Moreover, it was his childhood years, a time in which he would no less read the newspaper than discuss politics with the locals.
I have to say, I wanted to travel abroad and see the world for as long as I can remember. But, being from a single parent household, my first plane flight ever (and basically my first trip out of the tri-state NY area) was at the age of 20 for my semester abroad in Italy. During my semester in Italy, I only just started to get my feet wet about perceptions regarding the international community's view of America. How on earth could Sen. Obama make any formative opinions between the ages of 5-10 years-old. I traveled all over Europe (some say Sen. Obama has only been to one Nato country), to learn about these cultures. I even ventured on my own into Eastern Germany in 1988 before the wall came down. At that young age, I was only just starting to formulate some views of how America was seen. I strengthened those views by traveling to South America and South East Asia. But it was really only during my graduate studies at the London School of Economics in pursuit of a Phd that I really started to understand the depth of the world view of America.
I arrived in London in 1991. Thanks to President Clinton, in 1992 when the Student Loan amount was raised from $7500 to $18,000 per year, I could see my pathway to the Phd, prior to that, I constantly wondered how I could afford to achieve my goal of a Phd. Oh, and by the way.....unlike Senator Obama and his wife's apparent frustration that they had to pay back student loans into their 40s, I do still have student loans and every month I pay them I am not bitter....I am grateful.
The early 1990s in London was a time that the IRA was still active, the Tories where in Power and America was derided often by my classmates as an "unworldly" place. According to my international classmates, America was always on the wrong side, doing the wrong thing. Inadvertently, I was made to feel a bit unworldly simply because I was an a American. I started challenging my international classmates and their America-critical and America-cynical sentiments. Then September 11, 2001 happened. It was on that day, the day those iconic buildings - the twin towers, the towers I took a picture of in 5 th grade and wrote "I will work here some day"; the twin towers - 2 World Trade Center Floor 65 - the place I worked as an investment banking analyst after university -- it was the day those buildings disappeared that I stopped apologizing to my international classmates for being an American. It was their view, not America's actions which needed to change. Is America perfect. Certainly not. There is room for improvement in every country in the world. Yet, the Liberal wing of the democratic party simply assume it must be us, not them, without even having observing it from abroad. The liberal wing of the democratic party reminds me too much of my international classmates who think that America should be embarrassed and ashamed. I feel Senator Obama extends that view with the mis-guided belief that "talking" and showing understanding to America's critics is the path forward to a mutual understanding. That greatly concerns me. As a person who has experience abroad, that view from a Presidential Candidate greatly concerns me. Talking is necessary, but hard resolve, like you have Senator Clinton is vital.
Hillary, you cannot withdraw from this race because people are making you feel like you are damaging Barak Obama, or because they are making you feel like you should be embarrassed to continue ,or because people believe that your withdrawing will somehow help the democratic party. The only way you can help to fix this democratic party is by fighting to do the right thing and stop the rampant misconceptions. The misconception that people in West Virginia and Kentucy are maybe "Archie Bunkers" and voting against Barak Obama rather than for you, the more qualified candidate; the misconception that it is fine to exclude 2.3 million people in such a close race; the misconception that it just fine for Sen. Obama to try and block a re-vote in MI and FL; the misconception that it is acceptable to handicap a candidate for the Presidential nomination by giving them a pass on everything; the misconception that people like me who are supporting you will somehow back a seriously flawed candidate like Barak Obama; the misconception that a candidate's character and associations do not matter If the character and associations of someone of wants to be President of the United States does not matter, than I guess there really is no ideal anyone can live up to
Hillary, you must fight on until the convention. How can we stop all the misconceptions and put America on the right path if you pull out of the race? Staying in will keep the discussions open. Thank you for continuing to fight. We are depending on you to go to the convention. It is true that you must always pick your fights carefully, but Hillary, this is a fight worth having.

Thank you for fighting on....

I note that many of the posts here say that it is not racist for blacks to vote
for blacks because they have voted for
whites in the past. True. But maybe
someone can find a situation anywhere
in this country where 90% of the blacks
voted for a white when the election included a black person. I am an
Independent voter and a non-racist, and
I do use the same criteria to determine
what racism involves. There certainly are
pockets of racism against blacks in some areas of the country; however, I know of
no instance where where whites gave 90%
of their votes in a contest between
equally capable candidates. That can't be said of this primary.
Anyway, I'm not planning on voting for
Obama because of his skin color, I just
don't think he is qualified. He doesn't
even have U.S. Senate experience since
he started running for president almost from his first day in that chamber and
missed most of the votes and sessions.
He has a Chairmanship position on a
subcommitted regarding Afghanistan, which
he often mentions will get his complete
attention after he pulls the troups from
Iraq. Why then has he failed to convene
even a single meeting of that subcommittee?
It is plain that he is only interested in
his public image and not interested in
taking any action which would reveal his
lack of substance. As the old saying goes,"It is far better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your moouth and remove all doubt."
Unfortunately, the choice we will have
to make in this election is difficult as
we certainly aren't going to be deciding between the two best qualified leaders
for this country. Again, it seems we are going to be left with choosing the best
of the least. In that regard, I am leaning
toward McCain as it now seems that the
Democrats will have substantial gains in
congressional races and probably get to
the magic "60" vote margin in the Senate to get good legislation passed. In that
case, Congress will be able to control the
President's ability to do anything really
bad, and the President can veto any real
bad Democratic bills. In my opinion, it is
always better to have at least the Executive Branch and Legislative Branch of
our government be split between the two
major parties. Part of my final decision will be based on who McCain pick as his VP.
Another consideration is the situation in
November as to what the majority will be
in a Democratic Senate. I would prefer a
large majority to be able to stifle any
attempt at making judicial nominations to ultra conservative jurists. This is especially true in the Supreme Court where there should certainly be a less biased court that what we have now.

If the DNC and Obama supporters are so focus in the rules, WHY they are silent with the behavior of the College Democrats of America? As you are aware, the College Democrats of America, as an organization, are not allowed to endorse any presidential candidate. College Democrats of America are breaking the rules of the DNC. They recently, endorsed Senator Obama in YouTube. This is illegal and unfair. The President and Vice President of College Democrats of America are using the machinery, resources, staff, funding,and credentials of the Democratic Party to favour Obama over Senator Hillary Clinton. This is illegal.They are breaking the rules. This is unfair. No wonder why Obama is successful in the caucuses. Senator Obama not only has his campaign; but he has the extra branch of the College Democrats of America as well! Where is Howard Dean? Where is Nancy Pelosi? Be fair. Check the rules. Be honest. I am a doctoral student supporting Senator Hillary Clinton.

Senator Hillary Clinton should go all the way to the convention. She is winning the popular vote. Florida and Michigan matters. She has a clear victory in Florida. Also, Senator Hillary Clinton won Michigan as well. If Senator Barack Obama chosed to remove his name from Michigan,too bad. Obama is a "rookie" in politics. Vote forexperience.Experience matters. For your information,in Michigan, Senator Hillary Clinton was not the only candidate inthe ballot.
She shared the ballot withSenator Christopher Dodd, and even with Kucinich. They kept their names in the ballots. After all is a presidential primary. It was a smart decision.Now, I do not have a problem if the DNC would like to make a re-do primary in MI. Perhaps this could be the next step. Vote smart. Vote for the best option in November. Vote for Senator Hillary Clinton.

Please someone enlighten me on those who claim my Senator's is the superior candidate for the fall election. To date her political resume is thin, full of mistakes and failures.

Her is my assessment of her relevent experience

National Security - Voted for the Iraq fiasco. Not learning from that long unacknowledged error, voted for a back door authorization to attack Iran (by declaring that the Iranian arm forces is a terrorist organization). Surpassing the stupidity and lack of forsight of the GOP, she now proposes a nuclear umbrella in the middle east for those nations who support our democratic ideals (Saudi Arabia? Kuwait? Egypt?). Does she understand diplomacy in the middle east or is she depending on riding George Bush's horse in a superior manner?

Economy - Pretends renegotiating trade agreements that her husband and the GOP put into place will solve the problems of those who have not fared well with those global trade agreements. Wants to give us all $30 to offset high gas prices this summer in lieu of a workable energy plan that will end the pain at the gas pump. After rolling back the tax cuts for those making over $200K spends that money multiple times for programs she can't or won't deliver.

Health care - She does propose an excellent and laudable plan. But, she is taking huge political contributions from those in the Health Care industry that will certainly oppose that plan. Can those folks be that stupid? So far, her health care history is one of failure.

She will stay in to the end and has every right to do so. But stop the blather that she has proven to be the superior candidate to face John McCain.

It's a fair fight. Hillary should stay in as long as the nomination is not clinched and she has the money to do so.

Obama will eventually win. And Obama is scared of a fair fight. Let Hillary bring it on. Let her throw her best shot. She will still lose.

Then, Obama will resoundingly defeat John McCain (who is running as George W Bush's 3rd term) in the general election.

History is on Obama's side. McCain is yesterday. Obama is today -- and tomorrow.

Hillary has made this one of the most fantastic election cycles in US History. She is tough.

But Obama is the man of the hour. He is great for America. Ultimately, he will be great for the world.

So she won't take it to the convention, per her advisors, kind of like how she voted for the Iraq War, but didn't really mean it? Give this woman some hormones, it's obvious she's going through the change, been there, then take her back to NYC and make her Queen of some Island, where her and Bill can rule and make up the rules they like! She's really becoming pathetic!

"These Obama sewer jockeys do not represent unity, just ungrateful anarchists that will never have a shot in hell at getting Presidential representation."

Nice, he's a lot closer than Hillary will ever get. BTW: name one "shining" accomplishment Hillary Clinton has achieved because we are not voting for Bill.

Again, Clinton supporters vitriol with NOTHING to back up their claims.

There is a huge difference between the oppressed voting for a candidate (e.g. Blacks voting for Obama) and the oppressors refusing to vote for a candidate based on their race (e.g. people in WV and Ken. saying they would never vote for a black candidate under any circumstances)

Blacks have turned out in record numbers to vote for whites in the past. The opposite is still not true.

If the shoe were on the other foot, Hillary Clinton would haved asked Sen. Obama to accept the math and end his campaign--immediately. It's amazing to me how she thinks no one can (or should) be president, but her. Who does she think she is...the Messiah? Our Savior? The answer to all of our problems?

Hillary thinks she's superior to Barak just as many whites think they're superior to blacks and that is, partly, why the woman refuses to quite.

I can only think that this "Hillary's supporters will not vote for Obama" threat is being propagated by a few rabid Clinton supporters because if she is so wonderful and so electable and so deserves this nomination in their eyes then why is she over 20 mill dollars in debt? Why don't these supporters put their money where their mouth is?

Support your candidate or shut up.

And don't come crying to Obama to pick up the tab.

She can't even manage the finances of her campaign, how is she going to manage the country?

lil, are you aware that Clinton herself as well as many of her top advisors are the very ones who decided your vote didn't count? But why let some basic research get in the way of your rantings? Please continue.

lil, are you aware that Clinton herself as well as many of her top advisors are the very ones who decided your vote didn't count? But why let some basic research get in the way of your rantings? Please continue.

That's right Osama is a racist and so are the 90% of blacks who voted for Osama because his skin is black! They turn their backs on the Clintons that passed a multitude of laws to strengthen affirmative action and create grants for blacks and minorites to go to college with. Osama has done nothing to help blacks yet he gets their vote because he is black. There's your racism, BLACK RACISM.

ShellyI, I read your post and it struck me as funny that you are trying to come across as holier-than-thou but yet there are several stereotypical attacks in your own post. Then again maybe this is what we should expect by now from aged female Hillary supporters.

And this is the country that wish to bring democracy to every corner of the earth... when theirs is only skin deep!

Ignorant, uneducated, misinformed, besotted Clintonistas!

Every time I see a post spewing hate at Hillary Clinton I am certain they are not Democrats or they have not been Democrats until now. These poorly behaved hacks do not represent the Democratic Party, they crawled out of sewers. That is why they are blind to the stellar accomplishments of the Clintons. It will be nice when they crawl back in their sewers after Clinton gets the nomination and wins the Presidency.

These Obama sewer jockeys do not represent unity, just ungrateful anarchists that will never have a shot in hell at getting Presidential representation. They most certainly are not strategists or they would know that an Obama nomination = a McCain Presidency.

Now we see the true colours of the citizens of this so-called greatest democracy in the world!

So Ignorant! And Racists!

I have difficulty reading opinions that place blame on candidates for their religion, gender, or ethnicity. Running for the nomination is an arduous business all the way around. Leave the inflammatory statements to the people who are paid to make their opinions at least look professional.

Both Clinton and Obama have the right to run it out to the end. I do not fault either for showing the diligence to do so, and perhaps, Clinton's reasons to stick it out run far deeper than this campaign.

If we backtrack to the early twentieth century, we'll remember that voting rights also came down to a race of minorities. With all the positives and negatives thrown around at that time, it took intelligent leaders, men, women, black, and white to bring this country together and work toward better equality.

Perhaps, Clinton simply wishes to show that a woman will stick with the task at hand. I do not see her as pulling the party down. I see her as an individual that is making a stand for her constituents, and I have every reason to believe that this woman, who has taken a beating over and over, (as should any candidate), has the skin to take leadership. She hasn't taken shelter from the media downpour, and I have every reason to believe that she will support the party's final say on the matter. She may not be the most popular, she may not be the best candidate, but she stays the course.

There have been many female leaders through history that were described as the bane of existence, and now we hold them up as the models of perseverance, because why? They stayed the course.

Criticize her policies, criticize everything, but givng her a hard time for not dropping out is like telling your daughter to give up because she has no chance of winning. I couldn't say that to my daughter, to my friends, to my mother.

Let her run the course if she so wishes. She'll win or lose in good time on her own.

"The Obama campaign position on Michigan and Florida is just wrong, given the rare historical nature of this nomination. Leaving them out of the convention or not counting every one of those primary voters is much more threatening to the Dem party. Ask any life-long Dem, not the new voters."

I could not disagree more with this perspective. Claiming the 'rare historical nature of this nomination' is like starting the alphabet at the letter 'H'. The current difference about this election can not be used as a justifier to include states that otherwise broke known policy.
There would no fighting over MI/FL Delegates and/or votes if Joe Biden and Chris Dodd were the two left standing. There would be nothing historical at stake at all.
The obvious question to me is whether the Clintons would be making this stand for what they believe in had Obama won MI/FL and or if the outcomes there were 52/47, providing no clear statistical advantage?
Electing a President with 48 states, I agree is absurd. Electing a Nominee for a Party with 48, is not absurd.
You can't validate the votes cast in MI/FL (by well intentioned voters) but not validate the (well intentioned vote) of the elderly Nuns who went to cast their votes but had no valid, government issued ID. A rule is a rule, if they can't cast because they don't have ID, MI/FL can't count because theirs were out of order.

So Hillary signs the rules agreement and agrees to abide by them along with Obama.

So imagine if the NFL said well these are the rules and you agree to play within these rules.

You're ten yards from the goal line and have 8 seconds on the clock. Does anybody in their right mind think the NFL would say gee your close! we'll just add a minute to the clock just for you cause we like you.

Get real people Florida and Michigan decided they were above the rules and went ahead, so now they are paying the price.

And of course now that Hill is behind she thinks its ok to throw the rules out.

Wouldn't life be wonderful if we could just change the regulations to fit out personal lives.

Without rules and regulations life would be chaos, and if Senator Clinton thinks she is above them and can change them to suit her personal needs then is she really someone you want in the White House?

New-York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has a right to continue in this race, she has won the most votes of any potential Democratic nominee in history. But Sen. Barack Obama reaches a Democratic majority of pledged deligation, so at the end of the day Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton will not be able for nomination. It's bad luck for her,!!!!!

Obama Not Electable!!!

After annointing himself as the Democratic Nominee for weeks now one would think that Voters will swing to his corner.

However, they're saying NO TO BARACK'S CANDIDACY.

RISE HILLARY RISE!!!

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x2882.xml?ReleaseID=1180

May 22, 2008 - McCain Leads Obama In Two Of Three Key Swing States, Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll Finds; Clinton Has Big Leads In Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania

FLORIDA: Clinton 48 - McCain 41; McCain 45 - Obama 41;

OHIO: Clinton 48 - McCain 41; McCain 44 - Obama 40:

PENNSYLVANIA: Clinton 50 - McCain 37; Obama 46 - McCain 40

I think y'all have narrow tunnel vision. The question here is not whether Obama is being conspired against, or whether whites are too racist to vote for him, or whether Obama turned on his old friend when his friend became inconvenient.It is not even whether Obama can be elected while spending his campaign dripping contempt for blue collar white voters.

The question here is this: does the Democratic party condemn ALL racism or does it condemn only racism directed at blacks?

So far in the entire Wright/Obama debacle all the democrats have been able to do is scream that whites are racists for bringing the debacle to public debate and poor Obama.

But what is actually being brought to public debate and obviously is not going to go away on it's own is the extreme racism of Obama himself along with his known associates. Now the new pastor of Trinity (prayed for and hired this month by the congregation) is even MORE racist towards whites, Jews, etc. than Wright was. But when asked if he will continue with that church, Obama's reaction was "Of course".
If we couple that with Obama's contempt for blue collar whites, his cackling preacher's amusement at the idea of his own visit to Tripoli causing Obama's "votes from the Jews drying up faster than a snowball in hell" we start to get an even more unpleasant picture of Obama. Especially after his stated reluctance to have Floridian voters count-Florida with it's huge Jewish voting block.

How is it that a political party that champions itself as an opponent of racism even runs such a guy on their platform? Unless of course democrats only oppose racism against blacks. This is the question it boils down to in many voters minds. Are Democrats only opposed to racism in whites and no one else?

Unless they get on the ball and make a shift toward Hillary, the Democrats may end up being the new "racism" party just because the message Democrats are sending to the American people with this candidate is so wrong.

And knowing this, you bet Clinton stays in the race. She just cannot lose while her party is falling on it's own sword.

I don't care about how FL and MI came to be left out of this.
Posted by: lil
-----------------------------------------

Yeah, why be bothered with the facts when you can just spout off in ignorance.

Face it Barack Hussein Obama is totally
Un-Electable in 2008 and 2012 and will never be elected President! And no one I
know wants his bitter hateful loser wife
Michelle Obama as First Lady! The Democrats
Once Again Stole Failure Out Of The Jaws
Of Success With This Loser Obama!

Obama chose to pull his name from the ballot in Michigan - rather than face defeat. If you stop running before the race is over, you do NOT get to split the prize money 50/50 with the winner. Clinton should get the delegates she won in MI - Obama gets none of them. (The other Democratic candidates remained on the ballot - only Obama chose to remove his name).
Posted by: GimmeAbreak | May 22, 2008 10:18 AM

You never know with these people whether they're lying or whether they're just witlessly parroting the lies of others. Edwards and Richardson also removed their names from the Michigan ballot. Hillary said that she couldn't be bothered because she knew Michigan wouldn't count anyway.

Dear Mr. Cillizza,
I did not have time to read more than a few commenters this morning, but I have wanted to comment on the unfounded assumptions being made on the Internet and in the media about Mrs. Clinton's intentions, motivations, interpretations, political decisions, etc. I think the Clinton campaign has actually been restrained in this nominating fight. She is a life-long Dem; the party matters to her. I see no evidence that she has conducted this campaign to blow up the party by chasing African American voters or any other constituency. The Obama campaign position on Michigan and Florida is just wrong, given the rare historical nature of this nomination. Leaving them out of the convention or not counting every one of those primary voters is much more threatening to the Dem party. Ask any life-long Dem, not the new voters.
I think Mrs. Clinton does feel (and rightly so) obligated to women and other voters for her to finish the nomination process. She is the first woman to go this far. It matters a great deal that she finish with every vote allotted to her counted and with all the dignity that she can gather for women candidates in the future. The mentality of much analysis seems to be ignorant of history and political knowledge. Thanks for the opportunity to write.

37th&OStreet wrote:

"In the interests of fairness, Obama has only himself to blame for actively attempting to PREVENT re-vote in Florida and Michigan. Obama has sought to take advantage of this issue, and has not lended any help in solving this issue."
----------------

Keep in mind the re-vote in FLA was quashed by a GOP-led state legislature.

Also, this issue was already "solved" last summer when the DNC punished the 2 states. It only became an issue that needed "solving" when Hillary Clinton needed the results of those contests as is to make a case for the nomination.

The plan all along probably was to seat them and count them as 50% sometime after the party had a nominee.

She's been VETTED, alright! That's why 60% of Americans DISTRUST her!

Wake up, Supers!

let me get something straight to you "T".

even if Clinton dropped out now, at the convention, or five months ago I would still never vote for Obama. Clinton is not tearing the Democratic Party apart, OBAMA IS! Those who voted for Clinton WOULD NEVER VOTE FOR OBAMA because he scares us on may levels:

He is racist and we watched 90% of blacks vote racist.

Clinton has been bashed by the media and the DNC while Obama has been praised.

Obama stalled on Florida and Michigan, making it impossible for a revote.

His church hates America as does his wife.

We don't trust him.

His Muslim name. (sorry but that matters when Americans see radical Muslims want to annialate Israel.)

He has no experience.

His supporters have behaved in a disgusting manner to the Clintons.

Obama and the DNC have attempted to force Clinton out even BEFORE Florida and Michigan were included!

oh there's more and I'm just getting started.

I love this notion put out there by Tucker Carlson and Pat Buchanan and some posters in the comments section that because Obama's goal is to unite the country if he doesn't win every state by a wide margin, then he is somehow underperforming against some arbitrary high bar. The question of the last 2 weeks should not have been "what is wrong with Obama that he can't win in Appalachia?" (forgetting to point out that the Dems have lost that area for the better part of 40 years now) but "what is up with at least 20% of the people in those areas who won't support a black candidate under any circumstances?" It's like do you want better healthcare or do you want to feel good for the 5 seconds that you vote for a white person? Do you want to end our referreeing of a civil war in Iraq or do you want to feel good for the 5 seconds you vote for a white person and then make sure we stay for another 5, 10, 15 years or until we have achieved victory (whatever "victory" means this week)?

Unfortunately for the Dems this campaign has highlighted some fissures in the Democratic party's major interest groups and constituents.

Hillary's comments on fighting till the convention are a bluff. Obama has ran a terrific campaign, one for the history books, plain and simple. Hillary ran a good campaign but it was short-sighted.

When all the analysts and historians go back and look at where Hillary started off when she first announced her candidacy in Feb 2007 to where she ended up in Jan 2008, they will see that Hillary had the "inevitability factor" as her campaign mantra. Hillary lead in all the polls nationally over Obama and the other candidates by 20 or more points. Hillary has access to the Bill Clinton Political and Fundraising machine that set records in 2007. Hillary had strong and relatively consistent debate performances throughout 2007. Hillary enjoyed the status of front-runner and as the inevitable Democratic nominee throughout most of 2007.

"Clinton has made clear she will remain in the race until the end of the balloting. She is likely to continue campaigning after that date until it is clear that superdelegates have no stomach for overturning the choice of the pledged delegates."

In other words she will stay in the race until she is forced out. How is that even remotely reasonable or good for the party?

Despite your confidence that she is unwilling to "blow up the party" and is no longer "attacking" Senator Obama, Clinton's campaign is using arguments that do exactly that. Her claims that she won the popular vote (based on electoral math that resembles Enron's accounting practices), coupled with her insistence that it is sexism which has defeated her, on top of the "disenfranchisement" meme her campaign is (hypocritically) pushing regarding the illegitimate and unrepresentative primaries in Florida and Michigan; all add up to an effort to de-legitimize Obama's nomination. These arguments are an attack on Obama and are threatening to tear the party apart.

In an echo of the sense of entitlement and inevitability with which she started this campaign; Clinton is trying to convince her supporters that they were cheated out of their rightful victory. If she succeeds this could split the party and depress the Democratic vote in November; costing us the election. And, in deed, that maybe the point, because it would position her to run in 2012 on the basis that if she had been the nominee in 2008 the Dems would have won.

I don't care about how FL and MI came to be left out of this. I am a FL voter who voted for Clinton and I will not stand for that fraud Obama getting HALF OF MY VOTE! They had better make my vote for Clinton count IN FULL just like everybody elses. If they do not then McCain will win FL and MI!!! In fact I will bet that many Clinton supporters nationwide will vote in protest against Obama. We have seen corruption and we will not forget!

FIGHT ON HILLARY!!!!

heh, why do i have the feeling that at some point, at 3am, all of Clinton's staffers are going to sneak out and run away?

Senator Clinton and many of her supporters are so busy wringing their hands about Michigan and Florida and talking about this being an insult to democracy that they seem to have forgotten that the junior Senator from New York agreed with the decision to strip Michigan and Florida of their delegates for violating party rules. The time for her to stand up and protest was when the sanction was being determined - instead she went right along with it. She herself referenced that the Michigan election was meaningless in a speech. She assumed she would clinch the nomination after Super Tuesday and Michgan and Florida would not matter. It was not until she needed the votes that she decided to decry the actions of the Party.

Senator Clinton and her supporters are quick to claim the popular vote by including Michigan and Florida and touting the need for everyone's voice to be heard but the creative math used to swing the popular vote her way fails to include all of the caucus states where voters came out in record numbers. Apparently heeding the voices of some voters is important to Ms. Clinton, and necssary to preserve the democracy, but not all.

As someone one participated in a caucus, I can say unequivocably that I did not see any evidence of fraud, coercion, and all of the other ills that Clinton supporters cling to to explain why their candidate did not do well. In fact, the person running the caucus was an enthusiastic Clinton supporter, and Obama still won. The only group distributing false information were Clinton supporters who were handing out blatantly misleading leaflets regarding Senator Obama's position on heating oil aid. Two minutes of Internet research revealed the pamphlets for the outright lies that they were. The Clinton campaign simply failed to put the time and effort in to establish community connections in the caucus states, and the Obama campaign did.

The bottom line is that a delegate is a delegate no matter which state he/she comes from and Senator Obama has more delegates. If Hillary were winning delegates we would all be hearing a different song.

Obama and his supporters are delusional. They need to wake up. You may as well be handing McCain the Presidency.

What we have seen is that Clinton Democrats are not Obama Democrats. Clinton Democrats are not convinced by a song and a dance. They distrust Obama, the media is throwing him at them. They ask why?

Hillary Clinton is the logical choice, the safe choice. Right now, your average American does not want anarchy or the revolution that Obama offers...they want to be safe in a failing economy where the US dollar gets weaker every day. This is not a time to take chances and gamble on a song and dance. The Clintons have proven what they can do for the economy. I predict Clinton Democrats would vote for McCain or not vote at all, or write in Clintons name if given the choice between Obama and McCain.

I also think that Clinton Democrats are concerned about Obama's unpatriotic America hating church as well as his wife's disdain for America. Obama's Muslim heritage and his devotion to black issues does not represent them. They are concerned about his naivety on foreign policy.

I think Clinton Democrats represent mainstream America and this is why Obama could never win in a national election.

As we have seen in the popular vote, Clinton Democrats are the majority of the party.

If Democrats are in this to win the Presidency, they will nominate Clinton at the convention.

This is what a mental sickness looks like: Hillary!
Before the primaries, she participated in and signed the DNC's decision to punish any state moving their primaries to earlier dates. Her signature back then says these states must be punished with no delegates counted. Until Super Tuesday in March, her signature was her position, believing the primaries are coronation for her. The next day she wakes up after losing in state counts (13-11) and again 11 in a row, she loses her mind and starts screaming that she was drugged when she signed those DNC rules to punish violators. She wants them reversed now. Her new slogan is: I am people; you disenfranchise me, you disenfranchise people of Florida and Michigan. She goes further insane when her desire for VP is rejected. Her hallucinations take twists and turn: Florida and Michigan start appearing to her Zimbabwe, Civil Rights Movement, Bush-Gore CHAD holes, and all other historical events like related to disenfranchisement. She has been seeing that movie Carrie, both 1976 and 2002 versions, and has started imagining herself to be Carrie pulling down everybody in the final act of the Convention. This is what mental sickness looks like: Hillary !

What a surprise for me to wake up this morning, read the blogs, and find out I don't exist! Evidently, I'm a figment of the imagination of some Obama campaign worker. While I am flattered that my message may have been perceived as being professionally and, presumably, strongly written, it continues to stun me how so many people use lies, personal attacks and the "I can yell louder and insult better than you" tactics in these blogs. I suppose it's better than kicking one's dog when frustrated. But not much.

Please don't lie. Don't act like you know something is true when you don't. And, just as my vote should count, so does my voice. Why can't we all stand up for what we believe in and respect others for doing the same?
Now I'm going back to work. Being home sick for the day and reading in the blogosphere was bad for my health.
Signed, a real live white middle-aged female primary care physician. (One who btw, is a member of Physicians for a National Health Program and supports Obama's approach to health care reform, as well as his foreign policy, and his wise use of expert advisors in shaping his policies.) He will be a great president.

Obama chose to pull his name from the ballot in Michigan - rather than face defeat. If you stop running before the race is over, you do NOT get to split the prize money 50/50 with the winner. Clinton should get the delegates she won in MI - Obama gets none of them. (The other Democratic candidates remained on the ballot - only Obama chose to remove his name). And they were both on the ticket in Florida. She should get the delegates she won there as well. We cannot nominate a DEMOcratic candidate if some of the DEMOS (the people) are not represented. The DNC botched this thing. They need to fix it. It's about time we held primaries on the two consecutimve days over a 48 hour period in all states at the same time. Then we wouldn't have any of this brouhaha.

I am worried that Hillary isn't a mere sore loser. She is a violent loser. I suspect her psychology, and that of her mean-spirited campaign brass, is if she cannot win she'll take down the person who beat her.
To wit, she is laying track for 2012 over her own party's chance at the White House this Fall, believing her own rhetoric that Obama cannot beat McCain and that McCain will be a one-term president.
The Clintons indeed have made what might have be an inspirational, transforming period in American politics into a dismal political science of winning by the same old means to the same old ends.

He did nothing for Black people. Stope the BS. What he did was make it easier for Black men to be incarcerated. This is never talked about. With welfare reform, it was about getting the supposed lazy black women back to work. It has been a failed policy. Yes, people should work, but you should also give them the opportunity to go to school/college so that they can get a decent job paying a living wage. For most people, if you take away two to three paychecks they are behind the eightball. Stop saying what he did for Black people because my paycheck continued to rise under Rethuglicans, thank you. He did nothing. He gave a few people job here and there. If you are a president you are to work for ALL of the people. If the nation does good, then naturally all people should prosper! They are crooks and hateful people. They are an embarrassment to themselves and this nation. If she takes it to the convention she will LOSE! She will be embarrassed on the convention floor and so will her supporters. She better not even think of running in 2012 because AA's will not support her EVER AGAIN! We are fed up and we are not going to take it ANYMORE! They have outlived their usefulness and welcome! Go Away!

Thank you for cutting through the BS on both sides, and telling it like it most likely is. Clinton will accept 1/2 votes for all FL MI delegates, and they will be seated. Obama and the DNC will agree.

PR will vote.

Then on Monday, June 2nd, enough Supers will commit to Obama, so that Montana and SD put him over the top.

Everyone's happy.

Anytime the Clintons are involved, it is divisive and high drama....all about ME. They do NOT display true christian behavior and values.

The Clintons are NOT victims as many of you portray them. Politics is tough and they are the best at getting down and dirty. But when someone else challenges them, they complain and whine...always someone else's fault. Hillary Clinton is accountable for a poorly run campaign especially when she was the front runner with hundreds of millions of $$$$$.

Not one Hillary Clinton supporter has acknowledged the mistakes SHE and her campaign have made...just blame everyone else. Where is the accountability that a true leader must have?

Their primary goal now is to elect McCain and come back in 2012. But they will have lost many many many voters forever.

Hillary Clinton = spoiled rich girl who is delusional about her right to the throne. If she wants to fight we'll be there. News to Hillary: you have lost the election. It's over. News to supporters: she has lost the election. There is no way to fix the math. She ran a terrible campaign-- in fact she made the mistake of thinking she didn't really need to run a campaign. Well, she was wrong and she lost. She can't win, she can only wreck the party. She might as well switch the republican party, she is their hero now and they would probably elect her president.

"Clinton or Mc Cain in '08, for the sake of our Country!"

Posted by: steve

You mean for the sake of YOUR country, which only imbeciles would want to live in. Clinton and McCain are so defective in so many ways that whoever votes for them is equivalent in mentality to those who put Bush the Nazi financier's grandson in power for eight years. Their supporters can't point to any real positive qualities--not even their ideas. Those two are hypocrites of the highest order. The times they are a-changing, and as a 60-year-old I say it's about time the U.S. pulled out of its death spiral.

Response to John in Tampa

Obama ran a racial campaign in South Carolina - pushing race the whole way through - (calling into question the wisdom of choosing South Carolina over Florida by the DNC - however that is another issue)

Obama basically destroyed his own campaign theme with his own actions.

So don't try to tell us what you are tired of - WE are going to tell you what we are tired of - then Obama pulled the same thing on Gerry Ferraro.

This is old politics.

Obama is a FRAUD - this is going to be THE issue this fall - Obama has defined HIMSELF.

The history Obama has made will be a Cast Study on how NOT to run a Presidential Campaign.

Give this nation a break.

Sadly, the HRC situation is beginning to look more and more like an "Old Yeller" scenario. To wit: what do you do with the old beloved family dog once it has become hopelessly and irretrievably rabid? The time has come for the so-called super delegates to exercise a modicum of moral authority and coax her from the stage with a sweeping endorsement of Obama. They may be the party's (and the nation's) last hope of a deus ex machina intervention in the third act of a Greek tragedy that looks and sounds more and more like Medea each minute.

This is 2008, and I can see we have come a long way towards race relations in this country. NOT....I can't believe some of the MORONIC vile being spewed by some/a lot of Angry,Bible,Gun toting,poor, uneducated,simple minded, pinhead, toothless wonders.....fomenting lies and other drivel. (how do you like it).Ive heard everything from "Obama" being a racist, crack head, gay,women demeanor,anti american, etc. etc. Get over it, he is going to be our next president. If he some how gets CHEATED out of it, I hope you enjoy your new old geezer of a President. You know the "Manchurian" candidate one. The one who was brain washed in Hanoi.Lets all say it, "four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years"

I am so tired of this Obama was abusive to Hillary riff. If anybody was abusive to good 'ol Hillary, it was her adoring honest and caring spouse Bill Clinton. But no feminist dare say anything about THAT abuse! If it were me instead of obama, I would have treated her equally by countering her negative campaigning with my own. This is a woman who along with her disreuptable husband approved the pardons of members of the terrorist group the FALN. Why? To pander for the hispanic vote in New York in preparation for her run at the Senate. Yeah, she's been vetted. She's nothing more than a amoral whiner and opportunist. She would have the same amount of problems running for POTUS as Barack would but with a caveat: she is much more polarizing and amoral. The Republicans love her; she is a pinata to them. Hillary the whiner, bleating like a lamb. The Republic is saved, go Hillary. I know its hard for you to give up the spotlight, but its time. The curtain is coming down on this tragic farce. But don't worry, you still have Bill.

Wow, there are a lot of low IQ HillBillies on this blog. I'm leaving.

From the first weeks of the initial primaries
the Secret Service assigned agents to Obama
WHY?
Because they feared then, as they fear now
that he is a candidate for assassination
WHY?
Because he is the ANTI CHRIST!!

Posted by: Nostradamus | May 22, 2008 12:38 AM

Why did Obama get secret service so soon. Because anyone whose heartbeat is between a Clinton and what they want is a dead man (See Vincent Foster)

Obama stay out of FLA!

Obama is using his REVIVAL TENT approach to impress SUPERDELEGATES only! They give out "free", but nonetheless tickets to attend his rallies...big deal...so you get a souvenier to attend the side show at his circus! Swell the crowd!

Clinton, please stand firm that our votes, as cast, must be counted....NO "splitting", etc....we did NOT give such a permission to the DNC in our votes! Our rights as voters are NOT to be tampered with under any circumstance!

Is this a democracy or NOT?

The DNC is complicit in attempting to sway the Superdelegates to vote for Obama.

Obama is making 'promises' all over the place....that is why all the has beens in Congress and elsewhere are 'supporting' them.

Clinton will be her own person, accountable as she so often says, only to the voters. The Presidency under Clinton will not be for sale! And, that is what is ticking off Obama supporters.

Obama go back to the Senate...let us see you CAN:

1. show up to work

2. VOTE

3. Introduce and pass meaningful legislation for the benefit of ALL Americans!

OBAMA HAS UNDERPERFORMED EVERYWHERE HE HAS BEEN!

Clinton or Mc Cain in '08, for the sake of our Country!

the clinton's supported the black cause all along and here comes an inexperienced, drug addict, black candidate and all the black turned their back and talk badly about him especially husein obama. so typical to this minority

Posted by: noobama08 | May 22, 2008 1:10 AM

Response to Honesty is best at 4:00

OK I will concede to you that perhaps the democratic party has taken the black community for granted over the years. They go into the black neighborhoods looking for votes every fall and forget about the black community once they are elected.

That is the charge about the democrats - and I agree -

I have seen that first hand and it makes me sick. As we are fond of saying "A little less talk the talk, and a little more walk the walk."

I find that to be an extremely serious charge against the democratic party make no mistake.

The democrats are essentially a fraud against their own core values.

well.

Having conceded to you that general state of affairs, there is absolutely no excuse for the campaign tactics employed by Obama this year.

First Obama has harmed race relations, we have gone backwards maybe 30 years as a result of Obama's racial baiting campaign.

Once Obama put out there his post-racial campaign theme, he had to match his actions with his words.

It is a question of trust.

For a minority to be elected, first he must show that he can represent ALL the people.

Obama's tactics in South Carolina and with Gerry Ferraro show that he can not represent ALL the people.

Second, Obama opened up a credibility gap which destroyed his own campaign theme.

THAT Obama will go down in history for.

If Obama's campaing theme is to challenge the political system to restrain themselves from racial campaigns, then Obama better be the first on line.

Obama was not - he did not do that. Obama talked the talk but he did not walk the walk.

Charge made.

Charge sticks.

.

sam

The only difference is that the blacks are being told by Obama to vote racist - and all the whites are being told to vote post-racial and not even mention the word "black."

It is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

If you say "Black Liberation Theology" they go absolutely nuts, they can't handle it, they have to start making false charges and they have to start the name calling.

If you say "Black Liberation Theology" they lose their minds.

If you say "Black Liberation Theology" they refuse to have a discussion based on merits, they have to degenerate the conversation into a shouting match.

.

The poster at 7:20 AM is 100% correct.

Do not be afraid to express your views.

They will attempt to shout you down and intimidate you.

Do not back down.

Race, its a term used as I see it only about white voters. Look at all the papers, listen to all the radio talk shows, look at cnn, msnbc, fox..White this , white that. How many white woman , how many white men , how many white educated, how many white uneducated...how many percents of each voted for Obama, for Hillary....how many whites voted against Obama because of his skin color..its all there on all medias...you cant deny or excuse the 92 to 97% black vote for Obama, like all the medias do..its racist to the core..at least Obama is getting many white votes...but you cant deny the black vote for a black man in this race..its disqusting that with the numbers as staggering as they are , it is ignored...but just let the race card fall on the whites ...im sick of the double standard and you will see the backlash in the final election...Mcain will win by a landslide..you have woken the sleeping giant and that giant is whites are sick and tired of being called racist,and they will show this in the end...its not racistseeing that Obama gets 97% black votes...were all equal REMEMBER

A BRIEF HISTORY OF FACSISM!

First they came for the eggheads, and I wasn't one so I kept my mouth shut. Then they came for the Blacks, and I wasn't one so I kept my mouth shut. Then they came for "San Francisco", and I didn't live there, so I kept my mouth shut. Then they came for the elite, and I, certainly not being one of those, I kept my mouth shut. Then they came for all the men(who didn't vote for HRC), but I lied about that one(Hillary said lying is OK--"whatever it takes") and then kept my mouth shut.

Then they came for the DNC--Oy vay! Now its Howard Dean as the Robert Mugabe of Fla. and Mich. Very bizarre!

Hillary loves to play the victim, but even more, she likes to blame and demonize. Making the DNC--"Vote Stealers", "Oppressors"--into her newest model SCAPEGOAT! Does she really think this helps her with superdelegates? Even more bizarre. (Not to mention: selfish and self-serving.)

Very sad and very ugly that these two good people, Hillary and Bill Clinton, are so driven by themselves winning that there is nothing that they will not do. The severity of their moral disability has rendered them politically bankrupt! American's estimation of both has substantially declined. Why can't she get out of the blame game and out of the gutter?

The decision to vote for Barack instead of Hillary was both a difficult and easy one. Difficult because I loved and unreservedly supported the Clintons up until North Carolina as did most Blacks. Look at the exit polls from before the primaries up until North Carolina and you will see the evidence. Hillary didn't have to earn the Black vote, she had it locked up going into the primaries although there was a Black candidate running. Barack must have started the primary season knowing that he would have to work for the White vote and that most Black people didn't know him and were therefore not inclined to vote for him either, a point made almost daily in the media by prominent and influential Blacks such as Cornel West and borne out clearly in the polls at the time. They (we) just didn't see him as 'one of them/us'.

From North Carolina onwards the decision to vote for Barack was easy because although I was for Hillary before, I was interested in this newby and what he stood for and I found myself 'grudgingly' recognising that he was also an excellent candidate even as I continued to support Hillary. Then the race-baiting, and I decided that I was going to vote Democrat no matter what but since Hillary and Bill's almost daily insulting and belittling people who had been their most loyal supporters, I decided to try my luck with the other candidate who seemed not to take my vote for granted and whose coalition looked more and more like a rainbow every day, meaning that he would welcome my White husband's vote as well.

Make no mistake, although I am bitterly disppointed with the Clintons I would vote for Hillary before any Republican any day of the week! She is still Hillary Clinton and therefore still a qualfied and formidable Democratic candidate for the Presidency. As a woman I am immensely proud of her achievements and I just wish she hadn't gone down the road she has with her campaign.

I was rewarded for my decision to support Barack almost immediately. Just walk into any of his campaign offices and you will see people of all ages, races and persuasions and they will greet you with the warmest of welcomes. I want that to be the America my children and grandchildren inherit. I know that he is not a perfect candidate (it doesn't exist) but I believe that he loves this country and is the right person to lead us into the future. He could have been green and it wouldn't have mattered to me. The way I see it, you are still taking a gamble even on the 'safest' of bets. Peace to you all.

Phuque Hillary Clinton and her entire family of lying dirtbag white trash.

wow, all you people are making stupid, ignorant comments.

If you look at their policies, its pretty much the same. The ONLY difference is their personality.

So cry and whine how you will write in Hillary Clinton on the ballot, the truth is you wont. And not 44% of the Hillary Clinton supporters aren't going to vote for obama... and definitely if you have a semi-half brain you won't vote for mr mccain whose policies are a reverse of the ones you support.

So hypocritical.

The wonder years -

If you had made that post without that Jeremiah Wright stuff and the middle finger stuff, it would have been a pretty good post. Don't dilute strong points with nonsense.

And yeah, the reverse discrimination stuff is just crap. He doesn't do it and everyone knows it.

You people calling the Black community racist for 'voting for Obama because he is Black' are total hypocrites. Blacks have been the most loyal Democratic constituency. Democrats White and Black have always known that they could depend on the Black vote but have always had to woo White voters who were just as likely to go for a Republican. Tell me, after all the years of voting Democrat religiously regardless of skin colour, and after all the hard work that Bill and Hillary Clinton have done on behalf of civil rights, why should I vote for a candidate who implies that I am fickle enough to vote based on race when there has been no evidence to support this, who implies every day that I am not her 'core' constituency of 'hard-working, white' Americans? I was all for Hillary until North Carolina, as were most Blacks. We could see right from the beginning that Obama was Black but we voted overwhelmingly for Hillary until the race-baiting started. If she doesn't want or need my vote and Obama says he'll gladly take it, why shouldn't I vote for him? I suspect there are many White people who feel this way as well. For those on both sides (Black and White) who voted based on race alone, shame on you!

If Barack supporters don't want to see the Democratic party split then they should seek to change the law. However, they should not be allowed to harass Sen. Clinton to quit. America like all civilized nations is a land of law.

STOP drinking the kool-aid!
here in Fl. the Republican administration decided that the money for public electios would be used to hold public elections earlier than the DNC allowed. the "democratic voters" in Fl. had no say in the matter.
after the 2000 election many republicans moved to fl. giving us one of the fastest growth rates in the nation and a lot of electoral votes and a very big inflationary housing bubble. these same newcomers gave us a republican governor (JEB!) and legislature. these are the people that are laughing at the democrats.
now please put down the kool-aid, there's something missing from your cup.

Not the Harvard man, as always, nothing but a suit.

Posted by: paukune | May 21, 2008 11:38 PM
_____________________________________________

John Kennedy was hardly a suit. neither was FDR. Both were Harvard men.

Thank you brother Obama for destroying Hope!

Thank you brother Obama for destroying the democratic Party!

Thank you brother Obama for destroying Hope

Thank you brother Obama for destroying Hope

The assumption that "whites" will not vote for Obama owing to his "race" is itself a not-so-subtle form of racism, as is the tendency to lump all whites (or Latinos, or African-Americans, or Asians) together -- a form of analysis usually known as stereotyping.
.
Obama could easily have distanced himself from Wright by specifically rejecting Wright's claim that Obama was a "poor black boy" and Hillary one of the "rich white" people who rule the country (they are both in the very top income category, based on their earnings, and Obama had as elite an education as Clinton), and he could have rejected Wright's call to his congregation to vote for Obama because he was a poor black boy (a form of racial politic). Obama could also have distanced himself from Wright's theology, which holds that Jesus was a poor black man (like Obama?) crucified by rich white people (like Clinton?). But he did not. Instead, he seeks to present himself as the son of a single mother, barely mentioning his grandparents or his stepfather, who actually raised him, and in considerable comfort on the island of Hawaii, not the mean streets of continental America. When he did mention his grandmother (former VP of the Bank of Hawaii), he implied she was a racist and used her to take the heat off Wright. Evidently surprised that anyone would find such a comparison problematic, he explained that he meant to say she was a typical 'white person,' all of whom have an inbred fear of others. His later remarks about bitter, unemployed white folk clinging to their guns and religion and nervously eyeing strangers and free trade deals simply exacerbated his earlier remarks.
So it is not just what Wright has said, it is also what Obama has said and not said. To be "Catholic," Obama's own sins of commission and omission explain why many do not trust him.
You do not have to be older or white or less educated or less affluent to find such remarks disturbing -- unless you also believe that "down-scale" white folk are even more of a problem in this country than "rich white" folk.
In reality, the history of racism and discrimination in this country is much more complex than Obama's self-serving speech suggests; not only have Asians and Latinos experienced it, so have many whites - unless, of course, you believe that the social and economic segmentation of this country occurred "naturally."
What the media needs to do is to stop pretending there is little difference between the platforms of Clinton and Obama and begin to discuss them seriously. If they did, they would find that there is little in Obama's platform that appeals to those who are not members of officially designated minorities and the more affluent groups in this country, a more rational explanation of the demographics than race. There is no iron-clad protection of Social Security (which is why Obama stumbled in Philly on this question and Clinton did not); there is no universal health care, something those at the lower end of the salary scale desperately need (which is why Obama prefers to launch disingenuous attacks on Clinton's health plan rather than discuss his own); and there is no viable plan to help poorer kids afford college (tax credits are of little use if you don't have the money up front, and loans leave the less advantaged even more disadvantaged after they get their degrees because they are saddled with debt and cannot use their parents' networks and elite degrees to coast into comfortable careers). He appears to have no identifiable foreign policy proposals, other than to end the war in Iraq eventually and talk with people Bush thinks are evil.
Rather than race, look to Obama's platform and his manner and style, all of which reflect his background, which is both elite and black, the first a gift from his white grandparents, the second his own choice. During speeches and debates, he appears to be supercilious - "brushing off" his failure, surreptitiously making a gesture usually associate with college sophomores and high school kids at football games, and continually taking oh-so-clever little digs at his opponent while pretending to disdain such tactics. He also appears to believe that the only reason anyone will not vote for him is because he is black and they refuse to embrace his wondrous message of hope. But that is nonsense -- so much empty rhetoric and meaningless oratory based on flawed assumptions and Obama's peculiar view of the world, which is increasingly clear and increasingly problematic.

The assumption that "whites" will not vote for Obama owing to his "race" is itself a not-so-subtle form of racism, as is the tendency to lump all whites (or Latinos, or African-Americans, or Asians) together -- a form of analysis usually known as stereotyping.
.
Obama could easily have distanced himself from Wright by specifically rejecting Wright's claim that Obama was a "poor black boy" and Hillary one of the "rich white" people who rule the country (they are both in the very top income category, based on their earnings, and Obama had as elite an education as Clinton), and he could have rejected Wright's call to his congregation to vote for Obama because he was a poor black boy (a form of racial politic). Obama could also have distanced himself from Wright's theology, which holds that Jesus was a poor black man (like Obama?) crucified by rich white people (like Clinton?). But he did not. Instead, he seeks to present himself as the son of a single mother, barely mentioning his grandparents or his stepfather, who actually raised him, and in considerable comfort on the island of Hawaii, not the mean streets of continental America. When he did mention his grandmother (former VP of the Bank of Hawaii), he implied she was a racist and used her to take the heat off Wright. Evidently surprised that anyone would find such a comparison problematic, he explained that he meant to say she was a typical 'white person,' all of whom have an inbred fear of others. His later remarks about bitter, unemployed white folk clinging to their guns and religion and nervously eyeing strangers and free trade deals simply exacerbated his earlier remarks.
So it is not just what Wright has said, it is also what Obama has said and not said. To be "Catholic," Obama's own sins of commission and omission explain why many do not trust him.
You do not have to be older or white or less educated or less affluent to find such remarks disturbing -- unless you also believe that "down-scale" white folk are even more of a problem in this country than "rich white" folk.
In reality, the history of racism and discrimination in this country is much more complex than Obama's self-serving speech suggests; not only have Asians and Latinos experienced it, so have many whites - unless, of course, you believe that the social and economic segmentation of this country occurred "naturally."
What the media needs to do is to stop pretending there is little difference between the platforms of Clinton and Obama and begin to discuss them seriously. If they did, they would find that there is little in Obama's platform that appeals to those who are not members of officially designated minorities and the more affluent groups in this country, a more rational explanation of the demographics than race. There is no iron-clad protection of Social Security (which is why Obama stumbled in Philly on this question and Clinton did not); there is no universal health care, something those at the lower end of the salary scale desperately need (which is why Obama prefers to launch disingenuous attacks on Clinton's health plan rather than discuss his own); and there is no viable plan to help poorer kids afford college (tax credits are of little use if you don't have the money up front, and loans leave the less advantaged even more disadvantaged after they get their degrees because they are saddled with debt and cannot use their parents' networks and elite degrees to coast into comfortable careers). He appears to have no identifiable foreign policy proposals, other than to end the war in Iraq eventually and talk with people Bush thinks are evil.
Rather than race, look to Obama's platform and his manner and style, all of which reflect his background, which is both elite and black, the first a gift from his white grandparents, the second his own choice. During speeches and debates, he appears to be supercilious - "brushing off" his failure, surreptitiously making a gesture usually associate with college sophomores and high school kids at football games, and continually taking oh-so-clever little digs at his opponent while pretending to disdain such tactics. He also appears to believe that the only reason anyone will not vote for him is because he is black and they refuse to embrace his wondrous message of hope. But that is nonsense -- so much empty rhetoric and meaningless oratory based on flawed assumptions and Obama's peculiar view of the world, which is increasingly clear and increasingly problematic.

The assumption that "whites" will not vote for Obama owing to his "race" is itself a not-so-subtle form of racism, as is the tendency to lump all whites (or Latinos, or African-Americans, or Asians) together -- a form of analysis usually known as stereotyping.
.
Obama could easily have distanced himself from Wright by specifically rejecting Wright's claim that Obama was a "poor black boy" and Hillary one of the "rich white" people who rule the country (they are both in the very top income category, based on their earnings, and Obama had as elite an education as Clinton), and he could have rejected Wright's call to his congregation to vote for Obama because he was a poor black boy (a form of racial politic). Obama could also have distanced himself from Wright's theology, which holds that Jesus was a poor black man (like Obama?) crucified by rich white people (like Clinton?). But he did not. Instead, he seeks to present himself as the son of a single mother, barely mentioning his grandparents or his stepfather, who actually raised him, and in considerable comfort on the island of Hawaii, not the mean streets of continental America. When he did mention his grandmother (former VP of the Bank of Hawaii), he implied she was a racist and used her to take the heat off Wright. Evidently surprised that anyone would find such a comparison problematic, he explained that he meant to say she was a typical 'white person,' all of whom have an inbred fear of others. His later remarks about bitter, unemployed white folk clinging to their guns and religion and nervously eyeing strangers and free trade deals simply exacerbated his earlier remarks.
So it is not just what Wright has said, it is also what Obama has said and not said. To be "Catholic," Obama's own sins of commission and omission explain why many do not trust him.
You do not have to be older or white or less educated or less affluent to find such remarks disturbing -- unless you also believe that "down-scale" white folk are even more of a problem in this country than "rich white" folk.
In reality, the history of racism and discrimination in this country is much more complex than Obama's self-serving speech suggests; not only have Asians and Latinos experienced it, so have many whites - unless, of course, you believe that the social and economic segmentation of this country occurred "naturally."
What the media needs to do is to stop pretending there is little difference between the platforms of Clinton and Obama and begin to discuss them seriously. If they did, they would find that there is little in Obama's platform that appeals to those who are not members of officially designated minorities and the more affluent groups in this country, a more rational explanation of the demographics than race. There is no iron-clad protection of Social Security (which is why Obama stumbled in Philly on this question and Clinton did not); there is no universal health care, something those at the lower end of the salary scale desperately need (which is why Obama prefers to launch disingenuous attacks on Clinton's health plan rather than discuss his own); and there is no viable plan to help poorer kids afford college (tax credits are of little use if you don't have the money up front, and loans leave the less advantaged even more disadvantaged after they get their degrees because they are saddled with debt and cannot use their parents' networks and elite degrees to coast into comfortable careers). He appears to have no identifiable foreign policy proposals, other than to end the war in Iraq eventually and talk with people Bush thinks are evil.
Rather than race, look to Obama's platform and his manner and style, all of which reflect his background, which is both elite and black, the first a gift from his white grandparents, the second his own choice. During speeches and debates, he appears to be supercilious - "brushing off" his failure, surreptitiously making a gesture usually associate with college sophomores and high school kids at football games, and continually taking oh-so-clever little digs at his opponent while pretending to disdain such tactics. He also appears to believe that the only reason anyone will not vote for him is because he is black and they refuse to embrace his wondrous message of hope. But that is nonsense -- so much empty rhetoric and meaningless oratory based on flawed assumptions and Obama's peculiar view of the world, which is increasingly clear and increasingly problematic.

wow, all of this venom over the color of a person's skin. the strangest thisg is that we have voted democrat for as long as we have without publicly discussing certain facts. during the years of jim crow (which is in my lifetime), as i came of age in rural south ga. i learned about te legacy of the solid south, always voting democrat, whites and blacks. it is now a mystery to me why this was so. voting republican was always a no way in h*ll proposition, as was not voting (police dogs, firehoses, lynching and nightsticks can galvanize our feelings about the electoral process). most of the elected officials in the south were democrats, which meant that most of the voters were also democrats (you've read this far, try to keep up please). by extending this to one of its logical conclusions then, the people in the sheets were also democrats. reading these blogs has shown me that things have not changed, to be black in america is still a second class citizenship. we are still being bitten by the very hand we are feeding. I know michelle obama has read a few comments this political season, so i salute her courage in gutting out the words that she is proud of her country. i do wonder what this country is doing that makes her proud however. the "i will never help elect a n!!!!!!" rethoric is not that well hidden, and to all of you that make me feel that way you make me ashamed that I wore the uniform for so long. you shi* in the face of the sacrifice of every veteran, and are so proud of yourselves in your ignorance and bigotry. yet even with the white sheet of the internet to hide behind you still couch your words in catchphrases for fear that someone will know you. well i know you, you are the stuff on my shoe that i stepped in, it's past time to scrape you off the political landscape and go forward. fortunately you are dying out, old, afraid and embittered by change tat you cannot change. i do wonder what you see that scares you so much, is it a mirror of your own insecurities?
to the point however is that it does not matter who is the democratic nominee, do you really want to vote to cut your own throat that badly?look at where the republican policies have brought us to. you would make your children suffer for your ignorance! vote mccain or don't vote and that is exactly what you do!

Pelosi just came out and said that sexism is not an issue for Hillary Clinton in this presidential nomination process:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbzT2YqhGT4

Obama needs to do the right thing and become Hillarys VP.

HILLARY CLINTON IS ALREADY THE TRUE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE!

That will unit the party. why this will work.

Everyone k