AuntSam

Your point? posted 06/25/2008 at 01:34:53

As Rep. Clyburn pointed out today - Obama was right to refuse the 'public financing' as his campaign is driven by the $10-$50 contributions from people of all states that represent all ethnic groups, males and females, old and young, agnostics to evangelicals.
For the first time, these voters are feeling empowered and vested in the election for the POTUS - largely because it's the combination of all their small donations that will pay for the ads and other costs normally funded by lobbyists, the rich and big business.
Obama's campaign received many communications from middle and even low income voters asking him to reject the public financing option. For them. They wanted it to be their dollars to provide the foundation for - this time, this candidate.
"WE, THE PEOPLE, ....." posted 06/20/2008 at 01:42:24

I would like to ask of you what I asked of others on this post: This is a genuine query of interest:

I do not understand Hillary supporters in this category because:
1. Her platform was the polar opposite of McCain's (except for gas tax holiday) and yet aligned closely with Obama's (end war, economy, environment, healthcare, etc.) Therefore, if it wasn't her platform you were endorsing, what was the premise of your support?
2. You obviously trusted her judgment enough to vote for her for POTUS, yet are quick to discard her judgment regarding which of the two General Election (presumed) nominees she says will be the best for our country. Please explain.
I have only been able to obtain two replies from Hillary Supporter who now assert they are voting for McCain to respond. I hope you will.
Thank you. posted 06/19/2008 at 16:16:22

(Response continued - 3rd and last)

Hillary cares deeply about this country and knows Obama is the only positive choice in the GE for our future. I believe her concern for not only her supporters but all Americans and our future is sincere. Therefore, I do not even consider she would support Obama's candidacy simply for political reasons or counsel her supporters to do something she personally does not know to be the right thing. I doubt very much if she would endorse that 'McCain is lesser of two evils'.

So, I've attempted to 'condense' some of my reasons for supporting Obama - I haven't drunk the kool-aid or blindly leaped into the fray. I care too much about our country to do so and respect HRC enough not to take her at her word(s).

Again, I very much appreciate your reply.

(Note: FYI - I am middle-aged white woman who has a career and definitely not an 'elitist'.) posted 06/19/2008 at 15:46:49

(Response continued - 2nd part)
His stances on the war are critical for me.

I believe we can no longer afford to continue 'politics as usual' . He stated if he lost he wouldn't blame it on race(or other such factors) but accept it was because he did not do a good enough job delivering his 'message' to the people - he, for the most part, stuck to the high ground. (He nor HRC could control the media, the bigots who put into play racist and sexist remarks/actions, all his supporters and/or rules of the DNC.)

I do not believe Hillary should be VP as my preference is she would serve in cabinet position and oversee the creation and implementation of our healthcare system (to name one issue). I firmly believe she is the best person to advise and conduct this most important task.

As for your response about Hillary 'having to support' Obama. I disagree because, as previously noted, HRC's platform is closely aligned with his. She knows that McCain's position on the war, women's rights, healthcare and most all the other very important policies would not only be harmful but ensure our country's continued downward spiral. posted 06/19/2008 at 15:43:50

(First part of response) I spent a lot of time and energy researching documented reports regarding his personal and public life. This included his record of actions taken in the Illinois legislative body and the US Senate as well as his earlier professional works. This undertaking did provide support for his avowed stances taken during campaign. (I also read both of his books for background.)
His campaign's organization was impressive - from the prior planning that included researching the DNC rules and state's demographics to the basic structure. His 'vision and blueprint' provided the foundation for this successful enterprise. This supported (for me) the validity that he has the abilities to oversee our nation's business and processes. Also that he can identify and engage others with similiar capabilities.
I am a firm believer we have the type of government we deserve - therefore his message that we, the people, have to do our part - being involved in the processes by volunteering, keeping well-informed, holding our leaders accountable for their actions and communicating better with our elected leaders, resonated with me. We must take responsibility for our own choices and actions, or lack thereof..
I also believe he has the ability (if we, the people, do engage in the process) to lead the country in a more positive direction. He chooses qualified people to assist him in constructing sound policies on everything from the economy and energy to healthcare reform. Yes, I've reviewed his published platform policies. posted 06/19/2008 at 15:30:15

Thanks for responding.
WOW! So did not expect to get this type of reply from you after reading your post. It's difficult to address it since I do not understand your rationale - but here goes:
I understand your frustration and anger with the media, etc. as I too have had some of the same emotions and reactions.
What I don't understand is why you initially supported Hillary and now are rejecting all she emobied as a candidate.
However - If pertinent issues, stances on policy and candidate's views as to the direction they state they will take the country are not what you base your vote on - well, I guess that answers the questions.
Again, I appreciate your taking the time to answer. posted 06/19/2008 at 13:15:54

Thank you for responding. However, you did not actually answer (2.)
One more query regarding your answer - "The reasons you all give to not vote for him.... "
I didn't give you my reasons - but, if you were to ask me I would be glad to list them and tell you what processes I utilized to make my decision regarding who I will be voting for in November.
Hope to hear back from you, and again, I appreciate your responding. posted 06/19/2008 at 12:53:28

As I read it, 2B is Vote for McCain. Therefore, I genuinely would appreciate your input...
I do not understand Hillary supporters in this category because:
1. Her platform was the polar opposite of McCain's (except for gas tax holiday) and yet aligned closely with Obama's (end war, economy, environment, healthcare, etc.) Therefore, if it wasn't her platform her supporters were endorsing, what was the premise of their support?
2. Her supporters obviously trusted her judgment enough to vote for her for POTUS, yet are quick to discard her judgment regarding which of the two General Election (presumed) nominees she says will be the best for our country. Please explain.
I have been unable to get any Hillary Supporter who now asserts they are voting for McCain to respond. I hope you will.
Thank you. posted 06/19/2008 at 01:07:21

You really think that we won't be hearing more from Bill on how his wife was so disrespected and robbed of the nomination? Shove a microphone in his red face and there he goes again... posted 06/13/2008 at 01:42:33

And yet, not one mention of where's the AA's on these media outlets? And how many black women have you seen as reporters/journalists on MSM? And please quit alluding to SEXISM - Hillary did not lose because she's a woman. Can we please quit trying to place blame everywhere but where it belongs? posted 06/09/2008 at 04:03:07

No more than her for the millions of votes she received simply because of her gender.
Do you really think all these 'angry women' based their votes on factual data from her history (both personal and professional)?
It is ludicrous for any to blame sexism for her loss when it is because of her gender that she garnered most of her votes. Unfortunately she didn't share Obama's stance, "If I lose it won't be because of my race, but because I failed to deliver my message." (And I am a middle-aged white woman who didn't cast my vote based on gender or race.) posted 06/07/2008 at 02:15:11

Thank you Mr. Weber.
Poignant and needed.
For all those who posted below, we must always have hope and acknowledge that it is up to the people to decide our country's future. For one fact remains constant, due to our actions or inactions we will always have the government we deserve. posted 06/07/2008 at 02:28:15

If Ickes was head of DNC - never mind, it's too awful to even contemplate. posted 06/07/2008 at 00:48:28

The negative fallout has already begun: http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/06/04/clyburn-clinton-supporters-flood-office-with-hate-calls/
Rep. Clyburn's office has received dozens of racist hate calls from those indentifying themselves as Clinton supporters because of his endorsement of Obama. (Bill Clinton (per WSJ article) using an expletive name to Rep. Clyburn himself may have contributed to this?!?)
While I don't endorse FOX, please go to link and then do as I did, contact HRC, Pelosi and other Democratic public officials to tell them HRC must get in front of this NOW! She needs to condemn this type of negative action as well as the cretins who utilize these actions.
While trying to not 'blame' Clintons, her speech on Tuesday only further enflamed many of her 'angry supporters' - and No, I am not discounting the possibility some Republican Whackos put this in play.
However, the important issue is for us to counter with positive actions, such as having our public officials come forward and take a united stand against these bigots. posted 06/06/2008 at 15:36:01

It may be too little to late - The fallout is already starting: http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/06/04/clyburn-clinton-supporters-flood-office-with-hate-calls/
Clyburns office has received dozens of racist hate calls from those identifying themselves as Clinton Supporters. (WSJ has article about Bill calling Clyburn 'name' after Clyburn endorsed HRC too - this might have had some impact on these whackos too.) These callers talked about sabotaging election as well as using racial slurs directed at Rep. Clyburn.
After reading this I contacted Pelosi's office and other public officials asking them to speak with HRC as she must get in front of this NOW! And she needs to shut down those VP sites her 'friends' have put up for her. This is very bad and we all must stand up to these cretins.
While I don't endorse FOX - I urge all to go to above and read about this travesty, then contact Pelosi, Reid, Dean and whoever to put pressure on Clinton to denounce these types of actions. posted 06/06/2008 at 02:50:17

The fallout is already starting: http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/06/04/clyburn-clinton-supporters-flood-office-with-hate-calls/
Clyburns office has received dozens of racist hate calls from those identifying themselves as Clinton Supporters. (WSJ has article about Bill calling Clyburn 'name' after Clyburn endorsed HRC too - this might have had some impact on these whackos too.) These callers talked about sabotaging election as well as using racial slurs directed at Rep. Clyburn.
After reading this I contacted Pelosi's office and other public officials asking them to speak with HRC as she must get in front of this NOW! And she needs to shut down those VP sites her 'friends' have put up for her. This is very bad and we all must stand up to these cretins.
While I don't endorse FOX - I urge all to go to above and read about this travesty, then contact Pelosi, Reid, Dean and whoever to put pressure on Clinton to denounce these types of actions. posted 06/06/2008 at 02:41:40

Do you really believe that just because someone didn't serve in the military, he/she is a coward? That this automatically makes him/her 'not fit' to be President?
I honor McCain for his service and respect him, but that wouldn't be the reason I would vote or not vote for him. Being the President of US requires many things, not just one heroic time in anyone's life. posted 06/07/2008 at 02:35:58

I'm not quite sure why I have the same thoughts and fears. However, there are reports out there that the DNC leaders are wise to this and the Clinton delegates are being 'urged' to switch to Obama. But the truth is until August/Convention and votes are cast 'in stone', it's still a slippery slope.
I want to believe she isn't waiting and hoping that Obama 'slips' - then she will step into the nomination. But even worse, I worry she will do all she can to (at the very least) orchestrate his 'fall from grace'. Okay, I admit - I don't like this paranoia and distrust of HRC but it is what it is.....I really want to be wrong about her and her 'supporters'.
So for now, I'm taking the high road - wishing her well and God Bless as I pray and hope she will prove mine and others thoughts and fears wrong. posted 06/05/2008 at 12:40:31

Most have been acknowledging that the odds are Clinton will unleash some type of 'misinformation' within 3-5 days of 22nd primary. I think we should ask Huffington to set up a format that allows people to enter their date and time and topic for this expected sabotage. I like this idea. As for 'prize' for winner - I'm sure Huff could come up with something appropriate! posted 04/01/2008 at 15:25:02

Tonight on Larry King, Clinton's spokeperson (kiKi) when asked about $8M in unpaid campaign debt responded that all campaign debts have been paid. Why do I doubt that is true?
KiKi and Lanny Davis kept reiterating that Obama was responsible for not allowing MI and FL to 'be counted' and it was his fault those voters are disenfranchised. They also repeated several times that Obama cannot carry the large industrial states and would not win against McCain. Between Bill, Hillary and their talking heads, they are doing all they can to arm the Republicans. I disagree with those who say let it run its course. posted 04/01/2008 at 02:57:15

There hasn't been a day in the last few weeks that Dobbs hasn't brought up Wright and been snarky and negative re: Obama. However, his bias goes beyond the election - as a white, middle-aged woman I am outraged at Dobbs' derisive and disrespectful distortions of the facts to suit his personal agenda. I urge those who feel the same to send an email to CNN.com as I did and respectfully advise them that Dobbs (and others who have exhibited some of these same traits on CNN) are turning away viewers. Also, Dobbs' sponsors such as American Express, Honda and Bosley (there are others) are receptive to consumers communicating with them about specific shows/personalities if their audience finds them to be negative or offensive. We can blog and gripe ad nauseum, but it is more productive to communicate with those who are in a position to make the positive changes needed. (While no one with any common sense considers Dodds and his ilk to be journalists, the fact is the media does influence -whether obliquely or openly.)
He's consistently ignored Clinton gaffes and daily continues to denigrate Obama. I didn't use to believe that CNN was the Clinton channel, yet they haven't reported on Clinton not paying campaign debts and only minimally on Bosnia lies, etc. posted 03/31/2008 at 22:11:48

There hasn't been a day in the last few weeks that Dobbs hasn't brought up Wright and been snarky and negative re: Obama. However, his bias goes beyond the election - as a white, middle-aged woman I am outraged at Dobbs' derisive and disrespectful distortions of the facts to suit his personal agenda. I urge those who feel the same to send an email to CNN.com as I did and respectfully advise them that Dobbs (and others who have exhibited some of these same traits on CNN) are turning away viewers. Also, Dobbs' sponsors such as American Express, Honda and Bosley (there are others) are receptive to consumers communicating with them about specific shows/personalities if their audience finds them to be negative or offensive. We can blog and gripe ad nauseum, but it is more productive to communicate with those who are in a position to make the positive changes needed. (While no one with any common sense considers Dodds and his ilk to be journalists, the fact is the media does influence -whether obliquely or openly.) posted 03/31/2008 at 21:56:12

Some of these bills appear to be months old...Why isn't the media (cable, network, print and radio) focusing on this matter? This doesn't bode well for entrusting her with our economic well-being nor her ability to effectively and ethically manage our Nation's fiscal program(s).
What about the small businesses and non-profits that are not being paid? The health care programs left unpaid is the ultimate irony! What happens to her employee's coverage - if they should need their benefits, will they be denied due to non-payment of premiums?
Even the staunchest Clinton supporter cannot rationalize this gross mismanagement as a 'good thing'! posted 03/31/2008 at 14:01:32

When asked about 8M dollars in unpaid bills, Clinton's spokeperson (KiKi) on Larry King tonight advises that all Clinton campaign bills have been paid! Hmmm - guess we'll have to find out if that's true. This is an important 'detail' and it matters! posted 03/31/2008 at 22:02:37

Two of the many issues troubling me about this debacle is that Republicans are casting their vote for Hillary in an effort to derail Obama. Some say this could equate to over a million. Then, if she gets the nomination due to these 'frauds', those votes will disappear in the General Election and go to McCain.
Also, Independents were disenfranchised in many state primaries - and I believe it will be the Independent voters who ultimately cast the deciding votes and elect our President. And, it is known that the majority of Independents will not vote for Hillary (McCain and Obama are the front leaders in this group).
Any Thoughts? posted 03/30/2008 at 15:52:29

I read the whole article. A bit snarky and seemed full of suppositions as opposed to first person facts. If it is true Edwards, Richardson or whoever, put their personal agenda and political future in place of endorsing the candidate they truly believe would be best for our country, then this should be publicized.
Chicago Sun columnist also wrote: Word is former Dem presidential hopeful John Edwards is now leaning toward endorsing Hillary . . . but it's still a wait and see. Translation: Sneed hears Edwards' wife, cancer survivor Elizabeth Edwards, does NOT favor Barack Obama's candidacy . . . but NOT because of racism. "She feels her husband should have been the man in the center of the presidential sweepstakes, rather than Obama," a source said.
I believed Richardson's explanation he gave for his choice and hope it's untrue that he endorsed for a cabinet position. If Edwards is waiting for the highest bidder, this tells us it's a good thing he wasn't a 'finalist'.
I'm leaning towards this article being less than factual - regarding Obama's behaviour - and Edward's and Richardson being that petty and self-serving. Until there are real facts to the contrary - I'll take the high road. If the Edwards or Richardson do not speak out and denounce the contents, then we are left to make our own assumptions. However, I hope that Biden and Edwards both will come forward and endorse. At this point, there's no good reason not to - unless posted 03/29/2008 at 23:50:35

CHICAGO SUN TIMES:

Word is former Dem presidential hopeful John Edwards is now leaning toward endorsing Hillary . . . but it's still a wait and see.

¢ Translation: Sneed hears Edwards' wife, cancer survivor Elizabeth Edwards, does NOT favor Barack Obama's candidacy . . . but NOT because of racism. "She feels her husband should have been the man in the center of the presidential sweepstakes, rather than Obama," a source said. posted 03/29/2008 at 02:50:23

CHICAGO SUN TIMES: SNEED'S COLUMN

Word is former Dem presidential hopeful John Edwards is now leaning toward endorsing Hillary . . . but it's still a wait and see.

¢ Translation: Sneed hears Edwards' wife, cancer survivor Elizabeth Edwards, does NOT favor Barack Obama's candidacy . . . but NOT because of racism. "She feels her husband should have been the man in the center of the presidential sweepstakes, rather than Obama," a source said. posted 03/29/2008 at 03:26:18

Would you please post all the same facts about Clinton? Thanks. posted 03/27/2008 at 13:21:28

Everyone needs to read this article. And send it in to MSM, cable and print media - asking why HRC's ties to this sect have not been broadcast/published. posted 03/26/2008 at 13:27:17

Carville has confirmed that he is not 'part' of the Hillary campaign staff. So, why is he out there up close and personal? The reason.... Carville is known to be Bill Clinton's 'guy' and some political analysts claim that the perception of many is that if you vote for Hillary, you're also getting Bill. Without him, no argument, her candidacy would have been derailed long ago. In fact, who can truly argue that without Bill she wouldn't even be a blip on the political screen. Point: Male blue collar worker in PA who attested he is voting for HRC, because "It she gets that 3:00 a.m. call, she could just roll over and wake up Bill. " The papers today cite that China and Mexico favor her because of her husbands NAFTA and free trade agreements and believe she will continue in his footsteps. Okay, you get the picture.
So, when you see James Carville, most immediately think of Bill Clinton who is linked to ..........which keeps alive that if Hillary stumbles, Bill and his cronies will be there to defend, support and advise (and call out the attack dogs on perceived foes). A big twist on the two-fer deal !
With reference to Governor Richardson - my respect for this man has increased enormously - he of all people knew the 'consequences' that would be forthcoming from the Clinton camp and yet, (I believe) made his declaration because he truly believed it was the right thing for the country. posted 03/26/2008 at 14:32:10

Perfect. Thank you. Now please send it to DNC, Florida and Michigan papers. Oh, and Hillary's campaign! Also, CNN, FOX, MSNBC, NBC, FOX and ABC! I haven't seen or heard anybody say it better! posted 03/25/2008 at 00:01:41

Peter Daou is Hillary Clinton for President's Internet Director. posted 03/25/2008 at 12:25:35

The hubris of the older white man never ceases to amaze and infuriate me (and I'm an older white woman!). For those who don't get it, understand this ... Until we choose to openly communicate about the racial issues and come together as Americans, we will never achieve a positive future. What is he (and others) so afraid of? His bias against Obama is obvious, but is it only Obama or ....? To be clear, it isn't only the hubris of his ilk that is so outrageous - it's anyone who has the audacity to tell another (individual or group) whose path they've never walked, what they should feel, do and speak. (It reminds me of when a woman is in labor and the male doctor deems to tell her to quit pushing - She tells him to get up on the table and feel what she is feeling, then go through the entire labor, give birth and really share the female experience or quit trying to tell her how to do it!) So Mr. Kristol, et al. - until you endure the pains of others and are capable of birthing a new and better ideology, that will take us to a better place, take a deep breath and hold it! posted 03/24/2008 at 23:52:18

I believe that Mr. Dobbs has succombed to a severe attack of ego-itis. He now surrounds himself with sycophants and sadly, now does appear to be another Bill Reilly. CNN, for the most part, no longer reports the news - but tries to manipulate and make news. The distortion and half truths that Dobbs and company 'report' bears no resemblance to journalism.
However - Gergen, Martin, Bernstein are better than any of the anchors. And, I have to admit, I really like Donna B. I no longer watch Dobbs, but will tomorrow only to make a list of advertisers so that I can deliver a message to them. posted 03/24/2008 at 02:49:10

Let's all cut and paste this to an e-mail and send it to CNN, FOX, etc. Me First!
Thanks, Peter. Well done! posted 03/22/2008 at 20:53:36

Pioneer King deserves the best post of the day award! In a few words he summed up the pertinent facts of the matter! posted 03/21/2008 at 23:49:39

Your last four sentences are perfect. Thanks. God Bless.
And for the record, Mr. Bouley's anger and ongoing pain is still evident. posted 03/21/2008 at 23:55:48

Such an important story - And yet the media chooses to ignore these type of important issues and 'report' ad nauseum on sex scandals, he said/she said in the political wars and celebrity muck. And we continue to slurp up this pablum and do not demand they serve up a different/better entree. It's just not the media and pundits, it's us who are really at fault.
Until we stand up and show the respect for these veterans they deserve - and work together to change the politics of wars, we are the main reason these and others continue to suffer the consequences of our ignorance and silence. My profound thanks and sincere apologies to them.
posted 03/22/2008 at 14:06:51

God Bless and Thank You! It's always stunning to me how so many just accept the half truths and bias displayed by media outlets. They talk about drinking the Kool-Aid of Obama - how about inhaling the air polluted by bias, self-serving agendas and greed! Make no mistake, FOX and CNN aren't journalists or truth-tellers - they are basically talking heads whose sole goal is to make money and feed their egos. NO ONE SHOULD EVER ACCEPT THEIR WORDS AS FACTS OR THE WHOLE TRUTH
And no, this isn't about Obama - it's much larger than any single candidate. At the least, these two outlets are feeding racial and ethnic bias without regard for our country or common decency.
Erikka, please post more about this!
posted 03/21/2008 at 21:43:58

You mean like without the blue dress, it would always remain a 'right wing conspiracy'?
If you fact check, Obama always intended to give a speech much regarding Americans and unity issues i.e. race, gender and religious bias. (99% haven't taken the time to read other Wright Sermons or about the church.)
Please, look beyond what you deem as 'the reason' and read, read, read the actual text. There's so much more to this message we all need to acknowledge and own.
Take the positive and work to make something better happen regardless of your individual candidate choice. God Bless. posted 03/21/2008 at 20:39:35

Thank you. If only media would report the news and not keep making the news ....
CNN's (Lou Dobbs) is now just another form of Bill Reilly (FOX)...so anybody have a good answer for: What do you get when you join 'Fair and Balanced' with the 'The Best Political....' = ________
Again, anyone who casts their vote based on televised 'news reports', any media hyperbole or what someone has told them or racial, gender, religious bias is casting their vote in ignorance. Do your homework - fact check - educate yourself on candidates history of character, policy statements, voting record and their contributions to our nation and society. And please, vent to the media outlets if you believe they are misrepresenting facts, telling only half truths and otherwise spinning what they tout to be news when in truth is only their own biased rhetoric. posted 03/21/2008 at 15:02:57