What is the great platform Obama supporters keep referring to? I'm not supporting any of the candidates at this point -- but Obama's main message is just "Change." And for that, he brought out Ted Kennedy - which reminds me of ever-bigger govt.

I think you are letting the cat out the hat. Obama wants change.

Funny how he dragging out all the old time polititions and old big money.

I fully agree with both of you. It's time to cut thru the rhetoric and the rock star rallies - and get to the real issues. What is this change that Obama keeps talking about and how will he keep his promises? That's what I want to know.

Obama fans should realize that change wont come from candidates of either of the two political parties. Obama talks a good game but he's flush with special interest cash and short on ideas for change. His hands will be tied in Iraq-just like every other candidate. Talk of immediate withdraw is pure nonsense. It's time for Obama to start talking straight to people and get off the "feel good" bandwagon.

OBAMA It isn't about hope and change. It's about hype and chance. Are we going to gamble here.

It is strange that some people are afraid of change. As fuked up as the past seven years have been, some still question the word Change. Its obvious who is afraid of a man of color running for presidentof the U.S. and talking about change. I can see why some people are shaking in their boots. Some question his ideas but disreguard the criminals and their cronies (Hillary) that are running the show right now.
You all who ask these empty questions, your time is up and change is coming with or without this presidency.

Another Clinton dynasty? We just about to finish a Bush dynasty, and it was disastrous.

I just wish that people, especially the young ones, would wake up from this big hype about Obama. He talks about change but does not have any specifics about how to achieve that change. Why can't people see that????? He says he is against lobbyists. Who funded his campaign for the state senate??? Answer>>>> LOBBYISTS!!!! We are face with lots of problems in this country and we need solutions NOW!!!

Wow, I am so happy to see that people are starting to question the Obama persona. He does speak some pretty words but there is nothing to back it up and he has had no past acts, jobs, or experience that compares him to JFK. Hillary 2008, Obama 2016.

why don't we hear anything about obama's past drug use from the media when hes asked a tough question he gets nervous and starts stuttering maybe that's why he did drugs so much i guess i just have a problem putting another drug user in office

i agree i also cant find myself voting for another drug user

if Hillary did drugs it would be in the news everyday i think the media is scared that it might make them look racist there treating him with kid gloves.

Obame is change. Donna Edwards is change we don't want---$1.5 million in "independent" contributions from groups she quotes in her literature. All was spent in nasty, scummy TV ads attacking Wynn. According to the Post 85% of her contributors are from outside Maryland. Vote Wynn for the Fourth District.

Obama would be my choice. The people are mistakenly tired of George Bush, though I believe his policies will prove to be very positive in the long run. By electing Obama, we would be electing another feel-good, space-filler like Carter was. He will be around for four years, do nothing because his "change" rhetoric is mere verbage, and then the country will get serious again and elect another Republican.

The real positive with electing Obama is that the race issue may finally be put to pasture. As a white male, I am not put off at all with the prospect of a black President (or a female for that matter). I want a President who provide leadership and direction, protect the Constitution and my rights as a very hard working American whose family has sacrificed to earn what we have.

Anyone with a brain that believes a first term Senator is going to change an entrench Wash. believes in the tooth fairy.

The problem with Barack Obama is not that he wants change. We all want change. Who wouldn't after the 7 years of hell that we've been through? Unfortunately, the marketing machine that is the Obama campaign is just that . . . a way to sell us a man who, even though imbued with good intentions, has no experience to recommend him for the most important job in the world. Obama has been in the Senate for only 2 years now, and he has spent the entire time campaigning for a new job. When you scratch just a little the surface of Obama's facade, all that you come up with is another politican.

I proudly cast a vote for Hillary Clinton in today's Maryland primary. I don't think that Hillary Clinton (or any other human being) is perfect, but I do think that Hillary Clinton is more qualified to be our Commander in Chief than is Barack Obama.

Wake up. It's either Obama or McCain. The American people will not put up with another Clinton drama. As messed up as the GOP is, McCain will win, in particular if the opponent is a Clinton.
Obama cannot bring up the old bad stuff (Lewinsky, the rape allegations) and the brand new stuff (Kazakhstan) but the GOP WILL. This will be enough.

My first choice was Richardson, then Dodd, then Edwards. Although there are no profound differences between Obama and Clinton (and I would vote for either in the general election) the annoying vapidity of Obama's "Change" message means that I will be voting for Clinton today. Also, his kind words about Reagan, the employer of first resort of Central American nun-rapers and priest-murderers annoys me greatly.

To the one talking about "anyone with a brain".
Last time I checked the more educated you were, the less likely you were to vote Hillary. I hear pundits say Ohio and Texas should work out for her because they rank very low in college graduation. For Washington state, which has a very high college graduation rate, they were saying she had less chances. In fact, she lost every county! I think this says a lot about her people.
Maybe college educated people have no brain...

All of you that complain that Mr. Obama has not put forth any specifics are simply not doing their homework. I have heard him lay out as specifically as possible his plans on several issues. Since any president has to work within the framework of the system, it would be pure speculation for ANY candidate to spell out all the specifics of any issue. As to his lack of experience? Maybe only a first term senator, but the man has an amazing resume of experience and service preceding his election to the office of Senator. And perhaps he hasn't been inside the beltway long enough yet to be anyone's "puppet" yet. I think he is an incredible man with intelligence, eloquence, and vision. He definitely has my vote!
Obama '08!

shirly: Having an education and not being gullible are teo different things. Having an education doesn't say you are always right.

I'll support whoever the Dem. Nominee is.

Hilary is my first choice-- her plans are thoughtful, presented well, and inclusive. Some of her plans come from having learned what does NOT work, which makes her all the more seasoned.

I like inspiration but I also like results.

The only person that can get a working health care system, a fair educational system for all children, a working foreign policy that brings other countries with us, and more money in middle class Americans pockets is OBAMA. I was so proud to cast my vote for him.
I am in Virginia which is a purple state. I am an independant. I am SICK of the republicans. We need a democrate. But the question is which democrate can actually get anything done? The answer is O-B-A-M-A. This is why, at least half the country would NEVER vote for Hillary Clinton. She comes in with SO much baggage. She will make my state go red again.
Even if she were to get elected my state and SO many other states would send in Republicans so that none of her policies would be able to get pass Congress. So that would be another 4 years of NOTHING getting done.
Obama has the ability to work with others, he is not devisive or polarizing. I can't believe that the Clinton supporters can't see that!

oLIVIA,
"OBAMA It isn't about hope and change. It's about hype and chance. Are we going to gamble here. "
Yes, we are. Any candidate would be a gamble - in fact, its' a big gamble whether this rotten old system can achieve anything at all. It seems to me that the best we can do is make a GOOD gamble, one that actually has the potential to pay off. Being able to harness the kind of energy and nonpartisan popular support that Obama seems to command is no mean feat, and it might just be the only thing that could kick some life into decrepit old Washington. And, if nothing else, at least we get to annoy a lot of fat old politicos.

It's about time that one begins to question Obama's "Change" strategy!!!! He has no substence to back up his plans. He talks about Hilary's Universal Health Plan where one's checks will be garnish, did anyone think to ask, what are the details of her plan? Believe me, her plan will reduce the current outrageous health costs to everyone, not just the rich. This is how everyone will be able to afford the universal health plan. With Barack, his plan is to continue with the high health insurance premiums! Hello, we need to start questioning him on the details to his so called "CHANGE"!!! I vote for Hilary!

well....guys...if we want to maintain good life with prestige in the world...
we have to maintain our technology lead, in areas such as making airplanes, medicines, internet/computers,...and all the other high tech stuff. that is how we have been leading the world in material civilization, and that is the only way to do so. now, i have serious doubt about obama in that respect. just look at what has happened to south africa under mandela. the current president there even denies that HIV causes aids (?). You know...a good political leader does not automatically translate into someone who can successfully run a country like ours in the economic sense. another example is detroit. I really am not convinced that obama can lead us into a better life, and a better america.

Senator Barack Obama represents the ONLY chance to change the rotted heart of big machine politics in our nation's capitol. His record of accomplishment in the Illinois Senate and in the short time that he has been in the U.S. Senate is fine...but the reason that he is whipping Mrs. Clinton's campaign has to do with 3 things:
1. widespread and intense fury over the Bush administration - gets people up and to the polls;
2. An increasing recognition that the Clinton's (as a team) represent a slightly less obnoxious version of the status-quo business as usual (Bill brought this on in S.C., and now keeps it alive with his constant apologizing).
3. Obama's voice, style and message about change in the political environment of this country.

Oh, and about the teenage drug experimentation he reported in his book -

the NY Times (big Hillary supporters) just spent hundreds of hours of reporters' time trying to dig up anyone who could verify or attest to any teenage drug use: they found NOT ONE PERSON.

Their conclusion: Obama must have made up the story to sell more books!

Talk about Clinton bias...

(this is exactly why Obama's winning)

Lex Pk,

I agree with you, I really can't stand to here Obama talk about change anymore. I am really tired of his voice, so no he will not be getting my vote.

I find it noteworthy that Obama has usurped the "Change" motto. Clinton, a child of the 60's and 70's, can speak to changes in civil rights, women's rights, and equality in our government in a way that Obama cannot even begin to claim. Although CHANGE is the mantra of each successive generation, let us not forget how much CHANGE Hillary Clinton has already brought about!!

smith - No one is afraid of change. Both candidates will bring change.

But Obama has no substance. I think the Post called it, "his substance is so thin you could use it to pick a lock".

Personally, I just don't see that he is passionate about any of the issues (except for the amorphous "change") and it worries me that I don't know what he will do or what mistakes he will make in office.

Clinton can't beat McCain - the differences between Clinton's and Obama's platforms is minimal. This one seems like a no-brainer.

Hillary had 8 years during her husband's administration to do something about health care and she accomplished nothing...so much for her 'experience'. Look at the donations she has received from the health industry, don't think she will bite the hand that fed her. Maybe Obama can't accomplish everything he wants to, but at least he doesn't carry with the baggage of pay-offs and corruption that Hillary does. And if that's not enough look at the polls for Hillary vs Mc Cain - do you really want to have Mr. Bomb Iran in office instead of an electable candidate such as Barack Obama?

Good for all of us who are listening to the differences in the words of Clinton and Obama. I want to be energized by an inspirational leader, but I want to be able to articulate what about that leader's message inspires me. I waited, I listened to all debates and read countless news accounts and transcripts. Consistently, Clinton talked about her plans and proposals, her experience and her vision in a way that was accessible and solid. Obama's promise to be a uniter, his call to trust him on faith alone failed to sustain the lift of his oratory. Clinton was an easy choice for me, a loyal Democrat.

Posted by: Shannon | February 12, 2008 02:23 PM

Well, it looks like the haters are having a little party here. Enjoy it while it lasts. Obama will win the nomination, and transform this country by bringing good people together through his leadership.

Listen up girlie. This is all about winning in November. Hillary hasn't got a prayer against McCain. Obama is our only hope. Use whatever small amount of brains you have.

All those who claim Obama has no substance...simply visit his website and click on issues...you will find the specifics you crave ..... the substance is there www.barackobama.com . But more importantly, the ability to unite people of all political persuasions is only able to happen with his leadership style. Obama is a collaborative/consensus leader, HRC is not, she is old school top down heirarchial leader, which even business threw over twenty years ago for the better more eglitarian model of consensus.
I am a Republican who switched parties to vote Obama.....don't discount how badly people want a change of the actors and a style that allows their voices to be heard. And yes, substance of our current discourse...not just from Republican to Democrat but also in a more fundemental way that allows for all people to discuss and yes, disagree but still work together to get things done. I for one, am sick to death of all the insider politics and the Clintons represent this just as much as the Bush does. A change in cast is called for America!

I hear people say that Obama is all flash and no substance. Not true, all you have to do is research and you'll find out what his plans and positions are. As for Hillary, her positions are not that far out of step with his. So it came down to who I believe can work with both houses of Congress and actually start getting some things done. That's Obama, not Hillary.
The president's job is to inspire the nation and the Congress to get things done....not to do everything himself or herself. Personally I think both candidates are great but I'm leaning toward Obama because he has an extra that Hillary just doesn't have!

Not really clear on those who say they don't know what Obama's position on the issues are - I've heard it in speeches, and they are laid out, very succinctly and by subject, on his web site. If you don't agree with him on the issues, fine, but laziness is not an excuse.

And there's no way Clinton wins a general. I like McCain, but he's too far apart on the issues from me.

for those interested - maybe no one - here is an interesting list:

Senator Clinton, who has served six (6.) years in the Senate including a year campaigning, has managed to author and pass into law, (20) twenty pieces of legislation.

1. Establish the Kate Mullany National Historic Site.

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

3. Recognize the Ellis Island Medal of Honor.

4. Name courthouse after Thurgood Marshall.

5. Name courthouse after James L. Watson.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

15. Honor John J. Downing, Brian Fahey, and Harry Ford, firefighters who lost their lives on duty.

Only five of Clinton's bills are, more substantive.

16. Extend period of unemployment assistance to victims of 9/11.

17. Pay for city projects in response to 9/11

18. Assist landmine victims in other countries.

19. Assist family caregivers in accessing affordable respite care.

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

I will tell you what kind of a change Obama is talking about-he's talking about giving up on the divisive politics that defined the Clinton/Bush years. You know, where Democrats and Republicans are at war with one another, rather than trying to work together to come up with solutions to our country's problems. He's talking about not writing off "red" states as unwinable, and taking the Democratic message into places like Kansas, Idaho and Georgia. He's talking about recognizing that farmers in Iowa may have more in common with ranchers in Texas and librarians in Connecticut than we all think.

THAT, my friends, is the change Obama is talking about. He's talking about how each American should play a role in determining the direction we will take as a country, rather than having a course of action shoved down our throats by an arrogant government.

I want that kind of change, thanks. And to echo what a few people have said already, if you want policy proposals, go to the website. There are pages and pages of them.

Tony,

What are you talking about? CLinton is the one that takes money from PAC's and lobbyists. SHe has also taken more money from big companies than any other candidate.

Obama stands for real change and closing the door on Bush for good.

I looked at Obama's website and it confirmed what I had heard.

Obama's health plan doesn't work for the poor.

It encourages them to go without insurance and then go to the emergency room and get charged through the nose for substandard care.

If you care about ending poverty in America, if you care about helping the less fortunate, if you care at all about universal health care,

Vote for Hillary Clinton.

This blog is ridiculous. I see a majority of the people here are obviously Clinton supporters. I see references to his drug use, which is hilarious since snobbist perfectionism (along with religious zealotry) has created a Potemkin city out of politics. Remember, it was Obama that admitted it. I think drug expirementation is far less a crime then bribery:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_cattle_futures_controversy

Anyways, people need to stop talking about "experience". Obama has served in elected office longer than Clinton. Just look it up. With foreign policy, please be aware that it wasn't only that Clinton supported the Iraqi invasion, she has continually tried to mislead voters on her defense of the vote:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E05E6DC1E3EF937A25752C0A96E9C8B63&scp=3&sq=clinton+iraq+vote+&st=nyt
You don't get trash Obama with misquotes from the Post. You can't say drugs is an issue if the man grows up to be the editor of the Harvard Law Review.
When people ask me why politics are the way they are, I respond that they reflect the general interest of the people. The people who've said they'll vote against Obama because they're "tired of his voice/mantra," because he "has no substance" is ironically the most fickle of reasons, the most idiotic of arguments- using vague prediactes to attack with bromedic reasons that have only excluded the "Obama is a muslim" defense.
I understand the misplaced anger. I fear that Obama is bordering on a cult of personality sometimes...someone other than two family dynasties deserves a shot. When has experience determined success (it doesn't)? Why does Bill Clinton get credit for the Economic Boom following the end of the Cold War. You don't deserve credit for Foreign Policy experience if it entails reading books to kids on an African tour.

People should rethink there reasons for voting for whomever they decide. Even if it comes down to "I don't like the way his face looks." At least you'll be honest.

to Gandalfthegrey:

In addition she also twice voted for the Patriot Act (allowing unlimited government spying on U.S. citizens).

She voted to allow the telecoms to have unlimited immunity while they spy on U.S. citizens.

She voted in favor of the banking industry against consumers via the Bankruptcy Act (an act which allows banks to charge usuous rates of interest on consumers while not allowing those who legitimatley claim bankruptcy any relief)(According the last GAO report, 80% of those who filed for Bankruptcy did so because of lost jobs and overwhelming medical expenses)

She voted in favor or the military commissions act (which sets the legal precident of REMOVING the right of habeas corpus from all U.S. citizens--translation--you no longer can get protection from the courts if the government decides to incarcerate you--they no longer have to show why or give a reason for the incarceration)

Basically--everything the Bush administration wanted in the last seven years they got thanks to HRC

BTW--I am a liberal, Democrat female who lives in New York city and has a son who served two tours in Iraq

Did I mention she also voted to allow military action in Iraq.

Does anyone remember that when Bill was in the white house, who did he have to set up a new health care plan Hillary!! Did that plan work? No!!! Hillary was in the white House before, we don't need her there now

Obama supporters don't seem to realize what the rest of Democrats have already figured out -- Clinton-bashing is not a strategy to win a national election against the Republicans.

Vote for Democratic victory in November.

Vote for Hillary Clinton.

So far the only change Obama is bringing about is the change in Hillary's future plans.
Just don't expect any real change from any of them. They all work for the CFR. It doesn't really matter if it's Clinton or Obama or McCain or Huckabee. They'll all continue with the neo-con agenda of war for profit & power.
They'll all continue to dismantle the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
They'll all continue to steal your wages and send our jobs overseas.
They'll all continue to give incentives to criminal aliens so they continue to flood over the border driving wages down and sending the cost of housing and health care through the roof.
All these candidates have sworn an allegiance to the multi-national corporations that form the CFR.
All of these candidates will work for them and against you.
If you want to fix the problem, you better find a candidate that isn't part of the problem.

There is NO way I'm giving my vote to Hillary in November. No one on Capitol Hill will work with her! Obama is the only candidate capable of motivating people -- he's real, he's not afraid to speak his mind, and he inspires folks to work together. Seems like that might count for something.

This is not Clinton bashing, it is about facts. Let's focus on the facts. Hillary and Bill Clinton ran the most corrupt administration since Nixon left office. Google "Clinton Convicts", and see the results - This is the horrible legacy of the Clintons.

Should people with this kind of rap sheet be in the White House running this country? Do we want Bill back in the White House selling pardons to the highest bidding felon? America deserves better, reject the Clintons.

We question Obama's experience and his substance. Yet, the facts are these:

He helped pass legislation sharply restricting the gifts that Illinois politicians could accept from lobbyists -- the Gift Ban Act.

He helped establish KidCare, an Illinois program that provided health care to children in families that did not qualify for Medicaid.

Source: Library of Congress, www.thomas.loc.gov

During the first 8 years of his elected service, Obama sponsored more than 820 pieces of legislation:

233 regarding healthcare reform,
125 on poverty and public assistance,
112 crime fighting bills,
97 economic bills,
60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,
21 ethics reform bills,
15 gun control,
6 veterans affairs and many others.

His first year in the U.S. Senate, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427. These included:

the Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 (became law),
the Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act, (became law),
the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, passed the Senate,
the 2007 Government Ethics Bill, (became law),
the Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill, (In committee)

... and others

This is not an argument for or against his candidacy. There are the "present" votes that Clinton has critiqued, but if you go to votesmart.org and check her record, she has about just as many "present" votes ... and she has sponsored far fewer pieces of legislation.

Dear Whatever - Thank you!

Now to my theory. I believe that most of the blogers here are women, and as such are prone to vote for Hillary. They will rationalize that prejudice in any way they can, including impuning Obama, who is a good man.

Look inside yourself. Maybe you've been stepped on by men all your life, but that is no reason to make a bad choice. Vote Obama for a chance. Otherwise we are doomed.

What is all this 'experience' HC has that people refer to? Is being first lady 'experience'? Unless you're being voted for your second term as president, no one has experience at being president! Is it not apparent that this is just going to be Bill's third term? Did you really believe the WMD story? Remember 'he tried to kill my father'? Why does it seem like the same folks who believed that, believes HC's BS? Please recall she wasn't using the 'change' until Obama lit a fire under America. I think some are just happy with their blinders on. HC is smoke and mirrors - you're getting duped again.....

I find the lack of facts appalling here. Fact 1) Women gained the vote in 1920. 2) It took the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to extend that right to many blacks...which leads me to wonder how Hillary knows anything about civil rights simply by being a child of the 60s. (I should also point out that Barack was born in 1961, but I digress I digress.) More importantly, since we're talking about records here, what the hell has Hillary done for civil rights than get her husband involved to stoke up a race riot. Everybody keep talking about Barack's lack of experience because there's nothing else bad to say about the guy. Whoever said that Barack is flush with special interest cash should fact check on opensecrets.org. You'll see in black in white that you're wrong. Next time, check the facts before you spread misinformation.

Obama want's change? I want a personal space shuttle! Pleeeeeeeeeese

Obama is not just about a label, "Change." The people who support him want to change the climate of politics in our country. Like global warming, the partisan attacks and divisiveness that the Clintons play so well have damaged our civilization, resulting in the kind of sleaze and grossness evidenced in Bill's WH sex escapades, the money corruption seen in the Clintons' refusal to make public their income tax returns, and in Bill's multimillion profits working with Middle European dictators and off-shore companies, etc, etc. Hillary promises to deliver more of the same--"I can stand up to Republican attacks," etc. We cannot afford more of the same. Look at what it has brought us--after the Clintons, a Republican Congress and Bush Dynasty redux.

Another Clinton scandal is brewing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPxtv6kcn7s

This is one of the several reasons why I am voting to reject the Clintons. I agree with Ann, America deserves better.

SVREADER,
It's only the lazy non-productive and the millions and millions of criminal aliens that need, or even want, universal health care.
I for one have seen first hand what medical treatment is when it's provided by the government. The VA may well be the worse health care system on earth. I don't want that pushed on ALL citizens.
I also don't feel I should have to pay for your health care. Or that of 30 million criminal aliens.

If Hillary can't find money to fund her own campaign besides lending it to herself and can't prevent her own campaign manager Patti Doyle from quitting, (which coincidentally is another appointment of hers that has stepped down) How will she be able to appoint dedicated aids or even be able manage the economy?

Clintons = scandals. Reject the Clintons

Bill did drugs and Hillary supporters who obviously voted for him can't seem to remember that. Oh yeah, he didn't inhale.... It's a non-issue.

Hillary is not change.

In 1960 I was a naive boy of 11. Nixon was running against Kennedy. In my simple minded way of looking at things, Nixon had more experience than Kennedy. After all he had been a congressman and a vice president. Kennedy had been in the house and senate. Weighing the two I figured Nixon had the edge. I didn't know republican from democrat. Eight years later, Nixon runs again. I was by then 19 (still couldn't vote - the law hadn't been changed yet. We stuck in Vietnam. Nixon has a "plan" to get us out - result: Nixon gets elected, we're in Vietnam until 1975, and 58,000 + good men and women are dead. So much for the value of "experience"

I was distracted to participate in this conversation by the Post's exotic judgment in posting on its website front page, the bizarre insult that Obama is a usurper. We're used to name-calling, but this one sounded quite mass-produced, rather than home-grown. The comment depends on equating "change" with participation in movements of the 1960s and '70s in identity politics, when in fact the change Obama is so transparently proselytizing is the penetration of such constructs. I must say, if we are now going to hear this silliness from Clintonites, I'm going to start being embarrassed for their commitment to equality. Obama is running a direct Protestant assault on a corrupt hierarchy, and it would be polite of the Clintons to hop on board. He is not running as Martin Luther King, Jr. He is running as Martin Luther, and he is winning because we are winning.

Obama supporters. hype, rock-concerts and sheer volume are not the way to select a President.

Obama supporters constantly attack Clinton because they can't support their platform positions.

Whenever Obama actually stakes out a position on an important issue like health care, he puts together a half-baked solution.

I encourage all reader to compare the details of the health plans on both sites.

Hillary's plan is well thought out. Obama's is not.

Every non-incumbent in history has run calling for "change"

That's what elections are all about.

We need someone who knows what to change and how to change it.

Hillary knows. Obama doesn't.

Vote for the person who knows what they'll do is is willing to talk in specifics.

Vote for Hillary.

Let me tell you about experience:

Ummmmm, where should I start. Kennedy got us more involved in Vietnam during his three years in office (you do realize he was elected president right???) and LBJ escalated our involvement after he took over. Nixon did get us out of the conflict. Not sure how you can blame Vietnam on Nixon. Defies logic, not to mention the space time continuum.

"Obama supporters. hype, rock-concerts and sheer volume are not the way to select a President."

Sounds an aweful lot like Bill's presidential campaigns doesn't it??? Perhaps Obama should hang out in Hollywood and show up on late night TV with a sax? Get real.

If you don't think Obama has an agenda I suggest you go to his web site. They are spelled out with specifics. Sounds like desperation fron the Clinton camp.

Sure Hillary's plan is well-thought out. Yeah right. Garnishing wages for Health Insurance Mandate is really a great idea... Collecting cash from felons and pardoning them is also a great idea. Reject the Clintons.

Anonymous:

You made my point beautifully. LBJ, after years in the Senate (some as majority leader) and 2 years as VP lookedd to me like he dad a lot of experience. Yet he totally fuc*ked up in Vietnam, and used a ruse (gulf of tonkin incident) to get congress to give him the power to escalate - sound familiar? You have no f'ing idea what you're writing about.

Chris --

Voters should go to both Hillary and Obama's web sites and look at their health care plans.

Hillary's plan is well thought out. Obama's plan isn't and is especially bad for the poor.

Yes - I want CHANGE. I want this election to CHANGE to "anyone but Obama".

I don't trust this guy and he's a complete phony.

I voted for Hillary today and if Obama wins the Democratic nomination, I will vote for McCain.

Someone who's been around just a couple of years thinks he's earned the right to be President?

It was a difficult decision, but the African American woman voted for Hillary. I personally am not all that impressed with Obama being a great speaker, if you go to a black church you'll hear even better. But lets stick to experience. This country is in a mess. I trust Hillary to lead us. If Obama gets the not from the Dems, I never thought I'd say it but I think Mccain gets my vote.

I find it astounding and absolutely comical that Clinton supporters who say they grew up in the 60's are lamenting young voters for getting involved in politics and excited about a charasmatic candidate. I'm not sure whether to file that under hyprocisy or amnesia.

To Anonymous:

I forgot to mention that we'll never know how Kennedy would have panned out, but we sure as hell know how the two very experienced Nixon and LBJ turned out, don't we. A-Hole!

Let me tell you about experience:

First: you blamed Vietnam on Nixon which is utter stupidity.

Second: Kennedy (who had no experience) increased our involvment in Vietnam prior to LBJ. Contrary to popular fiction, Kennedy had no plans to get us out of Vietnam.

Third: Please try to keep your timelines straight.

HAHAHAHAHHA. That's a good one. Accuse the other side of what you yourself have done. Obama was the only one *specifically* campaigning on "Change." No Republicans, no other Democrats. Then, it turns out people liked "Change" more than "Experience" or "9/11!!" and suddenly everyone is the "Change" candidate from Hillary to Mitt.

I agree with all the HRC supporters. Obama is divisive as he says HRC is but continuously tells us she can't win because less than 50% of Democrats don't like her...he's immature and lacks a credible argument.

CHANGE IS GOOD...BUT PLEASE EXPLAIN AND STOP PREACHING - STOP THE RHETORIC AND FOCUS ON THE ISSUES.

BTW - Obama's is a militant black like Farrakhan...his minister is a militant pastor in Chicago....SEE WHAT TYPE OF CHANGE YOU ARE IN FOR....DO YOUR RESEARCH PEOPLE! I HAVE....GO HILLARY! HILLARY for President!

Anonymous -

You don't know squat.

End of my discussion with you - I'm not wasting any more time on a moron.

P.S. I'm off to the polls now to vote for Obama. I'll be LOL'ing over my morning coffee.

Clinton campaign workers on this thread, please check your email. New talking points from HQ. Thanks.

Ok. It's like this.

I am a believer that if he can unite Americans like he has been, then he is the best choice to repair the current state of international affairs and reconnect our government with those of other countries. Bush has worn out America's welcome on all international fronts. The Clintons are tired and as far as I'm concerned, all Hilary did by running for office is pull the wool off the eyes of those Americans who believed her husband was a great President (and she stood by while he lied, cheated, and manipulated his way through office). If she gets the Democratic nod, all she will succeed in doing is dismantling her husband's legacy. McCain will smash her to pieces.

They are BOTH first term Senators, who did good work prior to coming to office. Hilary talks about 35 years, Barack talks about his work for the underprivileged and being a civil rights attorney. I got that. Now, who would be voting for Hilary if she wasn't married to Bill? Would she even be in this election if she wasn't the former First Lady? Let's look at it from that perspective. Folks want to make an issue about Obama's desire for Change, but I know I grew tired of Hilary when she jumped on Obama's bandwagon after she lost in Iowa. In the first rally in New Hampshire, that's all she preached. She CHANGED her platform, didn't she? Just like CHANGED her mind about backing Bush and going to war. Just like she just CHANGED her Campaign Manager. All of these changes and she still hasn't gotten it right! Obama was clear from day one - with his lack of experience - that we did not need to go to war. And by the way, what did Hilary do when the tallies started coming in during the New Hampshire primary? She CRIED. A leader cannot cry. So let's see, she changed her mind on several occasions, and cried when she became frustrated and overwhelmed. Any way you look at it, she's not leadership material. She's not even Vice President material!

In order for Hilary's Heath Care package to be Universal - and similar to Canada's or our European counterparts (say France, for instance) it would have to be paid for with tax dollars - that's how it's done in other countnries. What makes Hilary's plan Universal is the fact that you HAVE to have it or be fined - that ain't so Universal, now is it? Obama has been stating REPEATEDLY: reduce the cost, make it affordable, then, if it makes sense, go after whatever health care you want including Universal. And it makes sense.

Any Democrat interested in voting for Hilary might as well vote Republican.

Let me tell you about exper:

I voted for Obama too. I just like pointing out the stupidity of others. You're an idiot.

Enjoy your coffee.

BTW, MsBlackPrincess - thanking you for calling Obama a militant black. Hillary supporters like you made my choice very easy this morning - I voted for Barack and I am so glad I did. Please continue spreading your hatred and venom. As a white mother of mixed race children, I resent your comments but I believe the results tonight would show you that hatred and the divisive politics of the past no longer work.

In Kansas less than three percent of the population when to the caucus, yet from that small sample, Obama thinks he can win this red state. That in itself tells me just how naive he is. His votes came mostly in the larger caucuses located at or near university campuses and the more populated minority areas of the larger cities. He will not carry Kansas or almost any other Great Plains state and neither will Hillary Clinton. If he is not able to predict this accurately, why should we assume he can do better with major issues affecting the world? Seeing the major trends in caucus states, I would much prefer to analyze who would be the best candidate when voters go to polls and cast ballots in primaries. Having talked to a black woman at our caucus sitting on the Hillary side, I said "It must have taken some courage to come to this side." She replied, "Yes, several of my friends have called me a traitor." Voter intimidation does not take place inside the curtain...even if it is only implicit intimidation. I also apparently bucked the trend...I am a financially secure, well educated professional who did not vote for Obama...I see through eloquence and read the policy statements when I am searching for the person to lead the "free" world and for every other office for which I vote.

Let me tell you about exper:

After due consideration I've come to the conclusion that you are right. I am an A-hole.

Lee, The Governor of Kansas is a democrat

For me, a relativly young American in his early twenties, I have heard Obama's preachings of hope and change. My entire life I have known nothing except for Bush Clinton Bush and now another Clinton? I will be the first to concede that Mrs. Clinton does illustrate her plans and the issues that plague this country clearly, and her experience is indeed worthy of toting. But if the people who say Obama is only running his campaign on empty speeches heralded by "Change" and "Hope", well you all should dig a little bit deeper.

Have any of you actually visited Obama's website and read his individual outlined plans? From the economy to civil liberties, healthcare to the war, he details the current situation in each topic and specifically states every measure he will take to rectify them. My guess is most of these posts that say they are sick of hearing Obama talk about change turns on the tv every night and gets their 20 minute fill of politics and all of a sudden they know Obama inside and out. The everyday stump speech highlights on msnbc hardly does Obama justice because behind the eloquent rhetoric, there is something thats is incredibly substantive and real.

As many of my cohorts will tell you, the reason Obama is seen has truly representing change is because he IS different. Obama doesn't say or do things for sake of purely furthering his own political agenda or only if its popular to do so. Why was he so candid about his drug use as a child when Bill Clinton couldn't even admit to inhaling marijuana smoke? Because Obama is being REAL, hes a straight talker who will admit to his mistakes and be honest with the American people. Thats What Young People Truly Value, we don't really care that hes experimented with drugs, we care that he's honest enough to confess to it and admit that he was wrong. This is why he is so different in our eyes. After being lied to repeatedly our entire young lives, the Lewinski scandel, WMDs, a little honesty and straight talk goes a long ways. Hillary Clinton recently said on a national presidential debate that even though she voted for a bankruptcy bill in which everyday consumers are denied the benefits of bankruptcy whereas corporations are able to get out of debt free, she hoped that it wouldn't pass!?!? What kind of game is she playing here? Which side is she really on?

Why was Obama the only one left out of the candidates to speak in 2002 publically against the war while everyone else gave Bush the greenlight? Was it the prudent and wise thing to do to further his political career? No, but he did it because he believed the war was fundamentally wrong. When the rest of congress was allowing Bush to run the show with his agenda of paranoia and fear, Obama had the foresight and judgement to stand against the overwhelming majority and is now vindicated.

So what does Experience count for? Isn't Experience suppose to be the guide to making the right decisions? With all of Hillary's experience she still made the wrong ones. Obama despite his lack of so called "experience" has made the right call whereas Hillary with her years of "experience" failed miserably. He has had the right Judgement from day one which in my book, beats out experience anyday. What does it matter how much experience you have if in the end you're still making the same mistakes?

Lastly, whoever the next president of the United States is, he/she will have to bring the country together to get anything done. I am sure many of you are tired of hearing that Obama is a "uniter", probably getting overused right up there with change and hope, but its the plain self evident truth that no one can deny. No president is ever going to pass any agenda without reaching out to the other side, and this is where Obama has a huge advantage. Hillary Clinton is probably one of the most if not The Most polarizing figures in American politicas right now. For every person thats a die hard Hillary fan, there is someone who despises her just much. This, I think, is where Obama's rhetoric of "hope" and "change" actually serves him well, because despite all our differences, I think the majority of Americans can all agree that we all have hope that America needs to change for a better tomorrow. Hasn't Hillary recently started to use the "change" word frequently as well in her stump speechs?

In the end I want the next president of the United States to be honest with the American people. I want him/her to make the right decisions of whats best for our country irregardless of experience. And I want him/her to bring the country together so we as a people can move forward together to meet the challenges of the 21st century and fulfill our destiny.

As part of the youth of America, we are the catalyst of change and the embodiment of hope. Perhaps thats why we never get tired of hearing those two words...

Allow me to add my voice to the chorus of people saying, if you want proof that Obama indeed has substance and sound policy proposals, read all about them on his website. Listen to a full speech, not soundbytes. Do your homework.

And if you want to argue about a lack of foreign policy experience, I find it amazing that no one has mentioned another ex-president who had little foreign policy experience when he was elected -- Bill Clinton.

CLINTON = SCANDALS. Reject the Clintons. Our country deserves better.

I thought I was the only one questioning what "change" meant. I even read Obama's "plan" posted on his websight. He hits the issues that are important i.e healthcare, economy, civil rights, middle east etc. but even here Obama does not give the specific plans by which he will make "change". Much of his plan promises new laws (much bigger gov't) to manage our social problems. He discuses neogtiating with moderate leaders in Palestine to bring peace (I'm sure someone's thought of that before) How will he get his laws passed? Well...probably making deals giving favors, compromising and writing political checks. Come on...He's still going to Washington, not Mars! I was on the fence for some time, but keep coming back to Hillary for her amazing grasp of the issues- not as bullet points, but detailed challenges with difficult solutions. She's really a brilliant woman. Let's elect Obama in 16!

I find the argument that Obama hasn't put forth enough "specifics" about his change agenda to be specious.

Surely he needs to put forth something more than vague platitudes (which he's done) but no candidate in his or her right mind wants to be drawn into a line by line debate about details of plans when the person is not even elected yet.

The question is really about whether Obama (or Clinton or McCain or whomever) has the wherewithal to bring about the type of change that is desired.

Clearly not everyone even desires the same change, but if we move away from arguing over policy specifics (which may be intesting to a minority but is not what motivates most to vote) and focus on who has the best opportunity to change the tone and tenor of the political debate in this country, It seems obvious that person is Obama.

No one really believes that Obama's election will cause Republicans and Democrats to join hands and sing the proverbial Kumbaya chorus. It is possible, however that the continuing political debate can be moved to a less toxic place than where we've been recently.

It's been done in the past to varying degrees,even by Reagan.

Bush his chances, first after the 2000 election when he promised to be a uniter and then after 9/11 when he had a huge resevoir of support and good will.
Both times he blew it, mostly because he was not perceptive enough to seek wiser counsel than Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove et.al.
We are all poorer for it but if we accept the current mean spirited assumptions of the most rabid and power hungry we make a huge, possibly catastrophic error.

What exactly is Hillary's *experience* that everyone keeps citing? What has she done that is far superior then Obama's? I guess if you keep repeating something enough times people will end up believing it...

Both Hillary and Obama let you keep your existing insurance if you want to.

Hillary's plan saves a ton of money because it eliminates "gaming of the system" by the insurance companies and it eliminates the incentive to go without insurance.

For people that work, its a mandate just like social security is a mandate. For people who are out of work, its the revolutionary idea that America is a good enough country that we can afford to make sure our citizens don't die in pain in the gutter.

Obama's plan hurts the poor because it encourages them to go without insurance to save money, then to go to the emergency room and pay through the nose for substandard care.

For anyone who would be tempted to save money by going without insurance, Obama's plan is no better than what we have now.

Excellent, Nanotech. Brava!!!

Svreader, do you really thing that one who cannot afford healthcare, say, a homeless person, will receive the same level of care that someone who could afford it can?

Homeless folk can't afford much, but to mandate they have healthcare and fine them if they do not, is a crime in and of itself.

Have read and paid attention to the premiums folks are paysing nowadays? OMG. You cannot be serious.

I haven't read all of the comments here... but has anyone actually watched the debates? Obama talks about real issues and has real answers. I will vote for whichever Democratic candidate we end up with in November, but I think Obama can win against McCain. I shudder to think where we will be, who we will be at war with [read Iran, Pakistan] if McCain is our president. Or if any Republican is our president.

While I admit that I am an Obama supporter, I question the validity of the criticisms of the Senator. It's not as if all he preaches are change and hope- he does have clearly outlined policies and plans for our country. If you don't believe me, try going to his website http://www.barackobama.com/issues/
So I think it's unfair to criticize him on being all talk and no substance. As to the reason that change and hope are two themes so prevalent in this campaign, honestly, both candidates have fairly similar policy (some would argue that they differ on health care, but we'll leave that for another day). Senator Obama talks about changing the way that politics is conducted , about a hope for a better America, the belief that yes, we can. Because without that, if we continue to stay on this course of divisive, 50+1 politics, then none of the policies that Senator Clinton and Obama promote will be realized. I deeply respect Senator Clinton and her political experience, but it's not what this country needs right now. And what really prepares you to be the president? Nothing. So because the two candidates are politically similar, we must look to something else, what will work for the Democrats? It is an argument between experience and change and I think that Senator Obama realizes that what we need is change.

i wonder if obama and hilary were beige...would half of these comments be made?

let's stick to the message. hilary is just as inexperienced as obama is when it comes to taking over this job...

but while you all are throwing "drug" stones...just think of the grand ole time Bill will have in the White House again...New Term..New Interns....

Obama has plenty of substance. Those who say he doesnt are just repeating Clinton talking points. Basically, the only thing Clinton provides is a laundry list of promises.

We pay more for health care and get less for what we pay than any other country.

Under Hillary's plan every American would be covered.

If you are out of work and can't afford it, the government will pick up the tab as part of unemployeement. FDR lives.

We spend more money on "defense" than the rest of the word combined, and then some.

Its amazing what you can do with a few less F22's and B-1's.

We need to CHANGE our priorities in this country.

That's what this election is all about.

Hillary is CHANGE. She's been a force for positive change her whole career.

What Obama supporters don't understand is that what they chant about is obvious to the rest of us.

The hard part is knowing what to change and how to change it.

Hillary knows what's broken and what we need to do to fix it.

Vote for Real Change.

Vote for Hillary.

Interesting that the "uniter" has cultivated whether on purpose or not, a whole rash of negative and mean spirited attacks on Senator Clinton from his supporters. Only six months ago Sen. Clinton would have enjoyed the unvanquished support of most Obama supporters, young old, male,female, black,white, pink or purple. You can support Sen. Obama whole heartedly without being so bitter toward Clinton. She's a strong, qualified candidate. We're lucky to have this choice people...Stop muddying the waters. I don't see the same comments coming from Clinton supporters. Perhaps it's the age factor. All of this "if Hillary win's I'll vote republican" nonsense sounds like the lovely Ann Coulter herself who vowed allegiance to Hillary if McCain won the nomination.

Here is my take on the use of the word "Change". Hillary Clinton was active during Civil Rights movement and woman's rights movement. She was by no means a leader. She participated much like many of her peers. I'm very proud of her for commitment. But just because she participated in "Change" during the 60's and 70's doesn't mean she is capable of leading the "Change" of now. Hey my parents participated in the Civil Rights movement and woman's rights movement too. I'm not voting for them either. Also, I don't want a leader that boasts about experience, but can't seem to manager their own national campaign. She leads into interviews bragging about her experience. I've researched and found little to make her a standout. I do love our Clintons. However in good faith, I can't vote for her/them again. Yes We Can!!!!

I'm not a Hillary hater...but since when does being First Lady prepare one to "lead from day one?" Her experience is no more extensive than Obama's or W's for that matter when he was first "elected."

There is as much proof Hillary can start wielding her years and years and years of "experience" to bring about "change" on her ubiquitous "Day One" as there is proof Obama can.

The difference for me is that I agree with Obama in the few instances the two platforms disagree, and trust him more than I could ever fathom trusting Hillary. I believe the changes he will try to make will be the right ones, even if he doesn't get around to it till Day Two.

Look at the debates. Hillary knows her stuff far better than Obama does.

Obama's "dirty little secret" is that he doesn't do that well without cue cards.

This time, I want the smartest guy in the room, the really smartest guy, even if that "guy" happens to be a woman.

Hillary shouldn't be penalized for being a woman.

She has the best policy ideas. She's got the best vision and best command of the details.

Obama's good, but Hillary's great!

Vote for the best.

Vote for Hillary.

I definitely agree with Shirley. How can anyone be saying there is nothing behind Obama's CHANGE campaign! If one would take the time to listen and learn about Obama's platforms, they would certainly see that he means what he says. And yes, he may have been a senator for 2 years, but he's been doing so much more work for the good of the American people. Read about his work in Chicago. I would also suggest reading his book Dreams from my father. He obviously does not hide his adolescence with drugs. Take him for what he is and see how the American people will reap the benefits of a president who does not hide the truth. He faces the facts, and I believe he will most definitely make a positive change for America and the world.

Hillary's been a force for possitive change her whole career? Do explain, and I want specifics.

All this talk about her fighting for civil rights and women's rights is a joke. If that's the case then why is she still married to a womanizer? The answer can be either (a) she has no self esteem; or (b) she made a political decision at the expense of her principles. Either way, she's a joke.

The first thing that Obama should change is his campain lemma: Yes we can!, or he could be charged with plagiarism.

Some years ago, a bunch of kids from Monterrey, Mexico, became little league champions of the world supported by their parent's chant: Si se puede! Si se puede!, that with a lousy translation was transformed in Yes we can! Yes we can!

It is worth noting that the kids won because they had the skills to do it and not because their parents were so enthusiastic.

I rather pick an old pilot to fly a troubled plane than a rookie flight attendant with a candid smile and no flying experience. The last time you selected a cowboy and the plane almost crashed!

Think about it and enjoy the ride for the next four years my dear fellow americans!

Nicole:

"unvanquished" support? I think you meant to say "unvarnished"

Clinton does not ask for sacrifice, Obama does. Clinton does not ask for everyone to work together, Obama does. He acknowledges Republicans have ideas - the "dynamism and entrepreneurship" he cites will be needed galore if we are to get out of our fiscal mess. Clinton does not have the money to pay for her health care plan, Obama makes very clear we have to cut costs of care in order to get more people covered. Clinton is dogmatic about her plan and parrots the mantra of "universal care" just as she was dogmatic in the past and see what it got us. Obama worked for and helped pass care for kids in Illinois - that's what I call real "experience" in health care reform. Clinton "demagoged" in her support of a flag burning amentment. She had the same mentality in her support of the Iraq resolution, voting against the Levin amentment, voting for the Iran Rep Guard resolution. She flip flopped on the drivers license issue. She brought up the proposition that hispanics were getting the jobs of blacks in a debate based on ONE CONVERSATION she had. She specializes in driving wedges and using the wedge issue. She is playing the gender card time and time again in her presentations while placing a black label on Obama at the same time. She writes a check for 5 million dollars for her campaign. Where did that money come from? Did she earn it? If so release those tax records now or they will be had before November when goodness knows how many financial scandals will be revealed. Obama did much less with Renko than the Clintons did with Whitewater. Obama has released his tax records. Obama has inspired people to work on ways to make the system work. He has certainly inspired me a retired primary care physician to work on how everyone can get better preventive care, a necessity if we are to save money in our broken health care system so that many more people can have access to reasonable care at a reasonable cost. Clinton's plan is same ole, same ole, ram things down people's throat. The five year interest rate freeze is an example of proposing something completely autocratic that will go against all economic sanity for the sake of looking good. On what fiscal "experience" is that one based?

You know, if Hillary had divorced that no good lying womanizer, I'd probably be voting for her. However, given that she helped Bill in his obfuscations, I think I'll vote for Obama. How's that for a shallow reason to vote against her?

Anonymous
It's really rude to correct another...however
"unvanquished" means "not conquered" look it up...

Nicole:

Thanks for the clarificaion. Now it makes even less sense. Put away the thesaurus and the dictionary and use words you understand.

:-)

Where have you all been that you don't understand the ways that Obama wants to change how we do politics?

Here is a clue: look into how he raises his money - a $million per day - and check to see how many PAC's and huge corporations are giving him money.

Saying no to big buck contributors is change.

anonymous
You really should stay off these blogs as they're meant to be positive & your comments are only meant to be hurtful. You are just mean. I meant what I said & sorry to have needed to corrected you. Many Obama supporters are the same people who would have given Clinton their "unvanquished" support only six months ago. Or were all of these current Obama voters old Romney supporters?
Oh...& maybe you should try dusting off an old dictionary or thesaurus sometime..it might be useful to you.

Of the myriad things about HRC I don't trust, here's one: How can HRC have 35 years' experience changing politics when she just "found her voice" 2 days before the NH primary?

Check out the latest AP Poll -- She will not take a SINGLE independent vote away from McCain. Vote Obama, and the Dems have it.

Oops! My bad. Using "unvanquished" is indeed incorrect. Thanks, Anonymous.

Nicole:

Apology accepted.

Time for change? Obama is sounding a bit too much like Jimmy Carter's campaign and some of us may remember what a fiasco THAT was.

If Obama really is going to give the country "Change", have you asked him WHY he has not changed this? The church Obama attends in Chicago is three blocks from the Princeton Park projects. Why after 8 years as an Illinois Senator and less than three as a U.S. Senator hasn't he changed that? Why, or why the areas that Obama drives and lives near in Chicago, is still the "Ghetto"? So Obama, tell me, why haven't you changed that? What exactly are you going to change?

Thank you Nancy...I voted for Hillary and I'm very happy. The fact that you have biracial children means nothing to me...I'm black with a biracial husband....btw I VOTED FOR HILLARY. Obama message of change is racist and sexist.

Hillary has been helping minorities and women since her college days. Ask Obama where he goes to church and you need to examine what he said. I would suggest people go to any Black church and they can hear some of what Obama says...

Obama is a very weak candidate with no substance.

GO HILLARY! VOTE HILLARY FOR PRESIDENT!

Could someone explain to me why the Profet of Change is riding on the media express and benefitting from the tons of money the networks are throwing to keep Hillary away and maintain their privileges?

Way to go cbday! As I was scrolling through this blog I found myself getting more and more agitated because of the amount of ignorance, fear mongering, non-truths and just plain despicable distortions. For those of you who are going to attack Obama, please use a fact or two.

MsBlackPrincess:

How is his message racist and sexist? Clearly Clinton supporters are desparate as they are now resorting to lobing bombs.

Hillary is the one still married to a womanizer. You're right, she really serious about women's rights. Hahahaha!

First of all,

the ignorance some of you are showing in using the excuse that Obama has no platform, or that he doesn't have any experience is just what it is, an excuse. Come a little better than that. Do you think the man would be running for the highest office in the land, and sucessfully doing so if he didn't have solid plaforms? Cmon people, get your heads outta MSNBC and CNN and actually listen when the man speaks and listen to what he is actually saying, not how he's saying it. Secondly, change is the exact thing this country needs and not the same good ole boy politics that's been thrown in our faces every two and four years. Enough is enough. We need someone who's not been corrupted by the establishment who can unify and bring people together in a country where we are greatly divided by race, class, gender, etc even further after 8 years of Dubya. We can't solve Iraqs or Afghanistans problems if we can't unify people and all the parties to solve our problems here at home. I believe Obama can at least unify people here in this country to demand better of our government officials and demand that the officials they elect spend more time fixing problems at home instead of holding baseball steroid hearings or NFL Spygate hearings. Our priorities right now as a nation are at an all time low and it's time for new ideas, new ways of running this country because obviously the business as usual way of doing it has our economy in tubes, and a person who will unify, not divide as George Bush has done and as Hillary Clinton almost did in the South Carolina and Louisiana primaries but dismissing black voters who helped Obama win those states as just people who are proud to see a brother win instead of being educated voters who were smart enough to pick the best candidate. I'm tired of the same recycled milk cartons being thrown at us every two and fours years.

It's clear that as Dems we're either running with Obama or Hillary as our candidate.

I'm having a hard time finding all this "experience" that Hillary has over Obama. She is only a second term Senator and being married to the President doesn't count!

Please read this article about Obama's minister...the preaching sounds familiar...

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-wright_11feb11,1,4431179.story

A lot of people are screaming here that they want to hear what Obama stands for on specific issues. That doesn't happen by osmosis, but if you are actually interested, you can get full details at:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/

From Amy Goodman's Interview: Obama's top adviser is Zbigniew Brzezinski. Brzezinski gave an interview to the French press a number of years ago where he boasted about the fact that it was he who created the whole Afghan jihadi movement, the movement that produced Osama bin Laden. And he was asked by the interviewer, "Well, don't you think this might have had some bad consequences?" And Brzezinski replied, "Absolutely not. It was definitely worth it, because we were going after the Soviets. We were getting the Soviets." Later, during Bill Clinton's administration, during the Bosnia killing, the US actually flew some of the Afghan Mujahideen, the early al-Qaeda people--the US actually arranged for them to be flown from there to Bosnia to fight on the Muslim/NATO side.

Another key Obama adviser, Anthony Lake, he was the main force behind the US invasion of Haiti in the mid-Clinton years during which they brought back Aristide essentially in political chains, pledged to support a World Bank/IMF overhaul of the economy, which resulted in an increase in malnutrition deaths among Haitians and set the stage for the current ongoing political disaster in Haiti.

Another Obama adviser, General Merrill McPeak, an Air Force man, who not long after the Dili massacre in East Timor in '91 that you and I survived, he was--I happened to see on Indonesian TV shortly after that--there was General McPeak overseeing the delivery to Indonesia of US fighter planes.

Another key Obama adviser, Dennis Ross -for many years advised Clinton and both Bushes. He oversaw US policy toward Israel/Palestine. He pushed the principle that the legal rights of the Palestinians, the rights recognized under international law, must be subordinated to the needs of the Israeli government--in other words, their desires, their desires to expand to do whatever they want in the Occupied Territories. And Ross was one of the people who, interestingly, led the political assault on former Democratic President Jimmy Carter. Carter, no peacenik--I mean, Carter is the one who bears ultimate responsibility for that Timor terror that Holbrooke was involved in. But Ross led an assault on him, because, regarding Palestine, Carter was so bold as to agree with Bishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa that what Israel was doing in the Occupied Territories was tantamount to apartheid. And so, Ross was one of those who fiercely attacked him.

Another Obama adviser, Sarah Sewall, who heads a human rights center at Harvard and is a former Defense official, she wrote the introduction to General Petraeus's Marine Corps/Army counterinsurgency handbook, the handbook that is now being used worldwide by US troops in various killing operations. That's the Obama team.

I have never heard so many dumb b*stards in my entire life as I have on this board. Get your collective heads out of your a$$es! There is a lot more to Obama than "change" and "hope". Check out his webiste if you want the specifics. He doesn't go into detail in his rally's and speeches because he's trying to get people excited, not put them to sleep. His answers during debates have been full of details and specifics. Get over it, Hillary supporters. Obama is kicking your candidates arse and their seems to be nothing you or your candidate can do about it.

If Obama's speeches are too complicated for you to follow, it doesn't take a lot of research to get to his actual platform (aka his stance on foreign policy, economics, health care, taxation, social security, and domestic security). Visit his website, read the papers, read up on the analysis of the various discussions in which he has taken part. It concerns me to read people commenting that they don't know what he means by "change" when the information is readily available. And for those of you who are about to go do that research, let me spoil the surprise for you: the man makes sense.

Why do Peggy Noonan, George Will and David Brooks favor Obama? (David Seaton's News Links) Because they are terrified of Hillary Clinton, that's why... It is this simple: in recent decades the Clintons are the only Democrats that win elections against Republicans... They don't want to ever face them again, no more complicated than that. As soon as Barack Obama is declared the official candidate of the Democratic party the voters will be treated to something similar to the old TV show, "This is your Life"...

And below are some of the things they'll bring out about him. Now, to those who will surely say that I shouldn't do the right's work for them, I say you must have been living under a rock for the last 18 years. The information below is already in the belly of the beast, waiting for the right moment to regurgitate all over the "transformation". And to those who say I shouldn't "bash" Obama, I say, it's not bashing if it's true. How can Democratic primary voters possibly make an informed decision about which candidate to vote for, when they know almost nothing about one of the two who remain?

We Illinois progressives sent Obama to the U.S. Senate, where he promptly joined the Joe Lieberman wing of the Democratic Party. He's not a progressive. But he's a master at pretending to be one. "Obama is a company man."

His economic advisers are very conservative, from the University of Chicago-Milton Friedman school of economics. My favorite economist, Paul Krugman, caught Obama using right-wing talking points on what to do about Social Security and about his health care plan....

For all of you who are criticizing Obama because of his supporters, like Ted Kennedy, please remember, that as a candidate, you don't in the end control who votes or backs you.
Ted Kennedy made his own decision, bottom line. Obama didn't force him to back him, and it really didn't matter any way did it? Obama lost Massachusetts even with Ted and Kerry's vote. People are going to vote the way they want too.
No matter what, the fact is, people are excited about this election, and I think it's great...every vote is important.

Some of these post read straight out of the Clinton Camp.

Obama has some amazing public appearances no doubt. He is also a fantastic speaker.

Some question his policy. Even though it is clearly written out on his web site. Which, by the way; the youth of America has already figured out.

Obama is also making more of an effort to spell out his policy during his speeches.

He does have a stance when it's comes to policy, and anyone who truly cares, can read it on his web site.

I am an Obama supporter. But, I support him based on many factors. I did my research and I truly beleive he is the man to take us into the future.

Do your research, and cast your vote.

REAL RESEARCH.. all the information is there.

Either way it goes, we will all have to live with the next leader. The question is, will we rally as Americans, or will we remain divided?

IllinoisGal :

Sounds like Bill Clinton you are describing. Here's a guy who campaigned as a liberal and as soon as he got into office he got welfare reforms and NAFTA through congress. In fact, he got a lot of Republican policies passed that the Republican's had been trying to push through for years. He completely sold out the "liberals." But, as illogical as party partisanship is, the Dems loved him for it and the Republicans tried to impeach him.

the repubs do not like either candidate, so that is really not an issue. you all keep getting caught up in irrelevant items like who the repubs don't like and who they are scared of. they are politicians with a well established plan. they fear no-one, they are playing you dems like drums.

if you would only pay attention to what is being spouted back and forth here - it is apparently clear....point these fools at each other, let them tear each other apart for us....they will so dispise each other by the time the REAL game starts we can walk back in, get the throne again, smile down on them like the little children they are.....pat them on the head and say, one day you will learn this dance. but until then, go back to claiming to be united.

PS - Bill Clinton ran the best hope and change campaign ever in 1992 and won, and I would be willing to bet if you went back and looked at all the negative comments about him when he ran for prez the first time it looks eerily familar to what is listed here.....hmmmmmmmm

Politics does a number on women. It makes them look catty; ugly, even; as they vie for positions in that Rich White Men's Club.

Hilary Clinton is no doubt a very intelligent woman. She had the misfortune to have to burn 8 years in that inane, "public figure-by-proxy" position known as First Lady. Being FL may endear you to the public (if you play it safe), but it has its limits as a resume-booster.

When she was elected a NY Senator, Mrs. Clinton proved she had some mettle. But what did she accomplish of note which distinguishes her record? Her stance on the Iraq War made her seem either gullible or self-serving. Whatever happened to championing Health Care? Whatever happened to (another First Lady role) being a sort of guardian and guarantor of Children's Education and Rights?

Nothing registered on the Richter scale.

Her husband, Bill Clinton, was My President. I trusted his judgment. I loved his demeanor. He always seemed jovial, quick-witted, calm, clear-headed, open (pre-trial), and smarter than everyone else in the room.

Senator Clinton is none of these things. A result of trying to force her way into the Rich White Male's Club? Perhaps. But when I elect a woman to the Oval Office, I want to be proud of the way that woman transcended the typical viciousness of politics. At this point, Senator Clinton embodies everything I despise about politics, just in female form: poor judgment, unapologetic behavior, arrogance, self-aggrandizement, hubris...the list goes on.

Senator Obama transcends the typical viciousness of politics. His intelligence and message have been distilled and distorted into convenient, vague buzzwords like, "change" and "unity". What he's advocating is that the Oval Office doesn't need one more rich, well-connected, pedigreed megalomaniac running the country. What this nation needs is not one shining wannabe savior, but all of us. The country needs our full attention and participation, lest we let uncivil servants write history for us.

That is the first time I've heard anyone invite me into the political process--and I've lived in Washington my entire life.

I'm not looking for my generation's Jack Kennedy. We're dealing with a Different Frontier. I want a president who will exercise the best judgment--regardless of experience. I want a president who can reach across party lines when sound legislation calls for it. I want a president who will represent everything I'm proud of about this country, and, as such, earn the respect of the rest of the world. I want a president who will be honest, consistent, and accountable. So. Mr. Obama, do you solemnly swear?

I fully expect both Hillary and Obama to be held to what they've written on their web sites by both the press and the public.

I urge everyone on these boards to read both candidates policy proposals on their web sites, especially their health care proposals.

If you do, you'll choose Hillary.

Her health care proposal, like the rest of her proposals, is much better thought out than Obama's.

The more you know, the better she looks.

Vote for Hillary Clinton.

Make your voice heard.

I fully expect both Hillary and Obama to be held to what they've written on their web sites by both the press and the public.

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

I fully hope that Obama is not held to what is written on his website since most of his policy proposals are nonsense.

Vote Hillary.

f Obama's speeches are too complicated for you to follow, it doesn't take a lot of research to get to his actual platform (aka his stance on foreign policy, economics, health care, taxation, social security, and domestic security). Visit his website.

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

I love how you can see the talking points from the Obama supporters. "look at his website". Obama has started saying this in his stump speech and everyone is parroting him.

It would be nice if the candidate himself actually showed that he understood or was passionate about his policy proposals.

In that regard, I have not found a single Obama supporter who had an understanding of Obama's policies or the impact that they would have.

Many of Obama's policy proposals make no sense.

"Many of Obama's policy proposals make no sense."

Such as? Your comment is about as vague as what you allege Obama supporters of posting.

I wish the media would stop slobbering and drooling over Obama and start holding him to task on issues. He equates to nothing more than a motivational speaker. No thanks.

I hope you all had a chance to see the back to back interviews of Obama and Clinton on 60 minutes last night. She talked about issues. He talked about the "Clinton machine" Give me a break! The guy is a complete fraud and is woefully unqualified to be the President of the United States. He preaches about change and rails on experienced,lifetime politicians, but is seen sitting on Ted Kennedy's lap at the State of the Union speech. If by some farce of a chance Obama is the nominee for the Dems. I will gladly vote Republican (Mc Cain) for the first time in my life. This country is in trouble and we need somebody with a plan and experience.

Please make an intelligent decision and VOTE CLINTON!!

Valerie, there is a good chance that Obama will win the nomination. What will you do? Who will you vote for?

Some of the greatest leaders have been the greatest motivational speakers. We have not had a President in my lifetime who could inspire people to act, the way Obama does. If all you want is executive skills, with a track record of success, then bring back Romney. If you want a motivator who might be able to patch broken International connections, and unite Americans, then I choose Barack!

Speaking of issues and policy positions, did anyone listen to Fresh Air today where Terry Gross's guest did an indepth analysis on health care problems, how the candidates address them and the chances for any of them getting done? What is clear is that health care changes are a complicated ball of wax which will require a LOT of coalition building just to move the ball halfway towards reform (in terms of coverage that is, no one seems to even touch health care costs in their plans). Yet to me, health care is not the most serious nor most complex issue facing us. You think global warming issues will be easier to address, either in the US or the world? How about getting the hell out of Iraq? To say nothing about the GWOT which we are in, for better or worse; the chaos in Pakistan (a nuclear armed Islamic state hostile to the US, a thing that the war in Iraq was supposed to solve, and the saber rattling over Iran, as well); then there is the usual mess with Israel and Palestine (but it keeps racheting up in their equally insane tit for tat); the status of an independent Kosovo or Bosnia, how about an independent Kurdistan, then there is Darfur, now Kenya, Venezuela, the petroleum madness . . .to say nothing about our "normal" trade and economic actions . . .the point? All of these issues are very complicated and just to deal with a few of them will require huge political capital, goodwill and coalition building on a scale not seen in this town (DC) for a long time. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out who would do that best, does it? I know my mind is made up, and I have started giving my own money for the first time since I started voting (and that first time was for George McGovern, btw, another American hero, IMHO). I wish the hell I could give more . . .

if Obama is anti-war why does he want to add 100K troops and increase military funding? Are the extra troops going to be playing checkers all day?

Here it is from his own website

Obama wants 100K more troops

Type ctrl-F and enter "expansion" once u click the link.

Open your eyes.

While Barack gives great speeches he has really actually done very little.

While he draws comparisons to JFK. For all who dont know this...Besides being a war hero. JFK was a three term elected congressman and a two term elected Senator BEFORE he ran for president.

Barack in contrast, never served in military and has been a US Senator for 3year (most of which he has been running for the whitehouse)....

lets stop talking about CHANGE....show us the CHANGE.

Obama is glib. He should be criticized as fiercely as Clinton, because if he is going to become the nominee, the Republicans will try to tear him down in November. Hasn't anyone noticed that not a peep of negative information about Obama has surfaced from the Republicans? They are just waiting to pounce...and then McCain wins the election. So short-sighted.

For those of you who question the "change rhetoric", try for once to listen to what Barack is saying. You'd rather pay money that you can't afford at the gas pumps, pay expensive electric bills, pay college tuition for your children that you can not afford, pay health care premiums that you can not afford, continue to flood money into Iraq because we don't want to send a message to the terrorists that they defeated us, all in the name of questioning change. When you elect John McCain in office and you don't have a DIME to will to your grandchildren, I'll bet your grandchildren will question why did you not vote for change. For those of you who question Barack's inexperience, before you cloud the internet with your erroneous opinions, try for once to RESEARCH ALL of the changes that he made in the Illinois Senate and the U.S. Senate. Don't look for spoon feed information from the media, because the media will not provide those answers. The media is perpetuating your erroneous opinions about his lack of experience. For those of you who question what kind of change can a first term senator bring to Washington, just remember the first term senator from Illiniois that emancipated the slaves, Abraham Lincoln. DO YOUR OWN HOMEWORK, BEFORE YOU POST YOUR UNINFORMED BLOGS. Lincoln wasn't too popular with his change rhetoric either, but somebody had to be bold enough to stand for change.

No matter who getS elected, we are all going to get taken to the cleaners. So it comes down to this - I'd rather listen to a guy like Obama, who speaks the kin