LeeFromVA

I vote for the 2nd possibility. Much like the economy, I don't think he knows a lot about Foreign Policy. What Wes Clark said was true, being a war hero doesn't qualify you for the Presidency. posted 07/23/2008 at 14:06:15

My number one reason for supporting Senator Obama has always been Foreign Policy. I want more than anything for him to represent me and my nation on a world stage. ...and I'm filled with great hope and pride!!! posted 07/21/2008 at 13:02:31

Frustrated, timing is important in an election. Obama has a lot of challenges to overcome. He should be winning by a landslide, but he is a black man with a funny name and his enemies are trying their best to portray him in a bad light. All I was saying is that he has to play it safe. Unfortunately for him and for us, he has to do more than just be right on the issues and show good judgement. HE HAS TO MAKE HIMSELF ACCEPTABLE TO REDNECK AMERICA. Fortunately for us, he is willing to do what it takes to win. AND truth be known, he really does have respect for every American, so it's not that big of a stretch. There's no way everybody can agree with every position of any candidate. The problem is that liberals want to project their beliefs on to our candidate, and if they keep it up they're going to screw up a good thing. Given all that Obama has going against him, I think he's doing a phenominal job, and I trust him. posted 07/14/2008 at 23:08:57

The one thing progressives need is for Senator Obama to win this election, and that is exactly what he is doing. Just think about how incredibly smart he is playing his hand. If he were to continue down the road with a tactic of being a "new kind of politician," with lofty rhetoric, the spin would be that he was all talk and no action. That kind of campaigning cannot be sustained for 3 or 4 months. He's in a unique position where seeming like a normal politician is good for him. His biggest hurdle right now is that people see him as too much change, or too different, or just plain scary. So while he is down playing the things that we all fell in love with him about, he is appealing to the center. He's getting in there comfort zone, and he's also saving up his charisma for the convention and beyond. This election is all about Barack Obama. It's his to win or lose. No one can understand why the polls show this race as being so close, but this is exactly where he needs to be a this point in time. He's still the challenger. He has an uphill battle to convince people he is not scary. I have every confidence that he'll pull it off, and that he will in fact be a new kind of politician when he gets in office. He has the makings of a truly great President. posted 07/14/2008 at 11:18:50

Oh happy Day! Hand over the keys, Dubya. There's a new kid in town. Can't wait. posted 07/02/2008 at 13:47:28

I think Obama will win in a close election, but he'll win his re-election by a landslide. The good feeling coming from an Obama White House will be overwhelming even to the cynics out there, and in comparison to a Bush administration, he will be seen as one of the greatest Presidents ever. The first thing he'll change is the mood of this nation. Hand over the keys W. There's a new kid in town! Oh happy day. posted 07/01/2008 at 11:06:15

Cyndi, you are an amazing human being. At the risk of sounding like Paula Abdul... Your light shines brightly. Please keep doing all that you do. I love your authenticity. posted 06/11/2008 at 17:39:05

Hot? or chubby? posted 06/11/2008 at 17:24:34

"Obamaloons would flock here to spout vitriol"

Dude, try some decaf.

I like John Edwards, and I wouldn't vote for Hillary if Jesus endorsed her.

It must be hell trying to defend the Clintons all the time. It's a full time job that never ends. I bet you've already defended her for her Bosnia lie, haven't you? I felt as if a huge weight had been lifted from my shoulders when I realized I didn't have to defend them anymore. They don't deserve your support Jacob. Seriously, you should rethink that. posted 04/01/2008 at 16:40:02

This article has absolutely nothing to do with Obama. I think it's you that has the fixation. posted 04/01/2008 at 13:05:32

Mayhill, This was a VERY honest post. It seems honesty is coming back in style. Good for you, and good for the country! We don't have to spin everything. things are what they are. posted 04/01/2008 at 13:28:48

Very well said. This is MY HuffPost Pick for today. And you're right, the Clinton supporters remind me more and more of the Bush Republicans. posted 04/01/2008 at 12:08:24

The media is all-Hillary all the time. It's not always favorable, but it's always about her. This nomination would be over if the media hadn't played her crying in a continuous loop prior to the NH primary. A typical news show will headline with something like Obama wins big, and then spend an entire 30 minutes discussing how Hillary can "still win this thing." Suddenly everybody, including Obama supporters and Republicans, are giving advice: "She needs to find her voice and show us the real Hillary" or something equally retarded. Then her campaign has the nerve to criticise the media and references an SNL skit as evidence. Suddenly none of the media will say anything even remotely against her, and they all get "tough" with Obama to prove they aren't biased. People are all caught up in this media-created narrative that Hillary is being treated unfairly. Give me a break. Meanwhile they keep moving the bar on Obama. They try to count states they were perfectly happy to ignore prior, winning delegates no longer means anything, the new litmus test is state size, now caucuses aren't fair, superdelegates should overturn the people's choice. The latest is we need the credentials committee to decide this. ENOUGH ALREADY.

If the Democrats manage to screw this up, I'm through with them. posted 03/31/2008 at 15:34:00

Doesn't defending the Clintons get tiresome? It's such a big job. A full-time job. It never ends. I felt a big weight was lifted off my shoulders when I quit defending them. Smaggie, they really don't deserve your support. There should be a 12-step program for co-dependent Clinton supporters. posted 04/01/2008 at 16:32:56

RJ, you absolutely nailed it. If you step back and look at it, it's hilarious. The Bosnia story hasn't yet had it's full impact. There are so many layers to that story. Her having told it many times. Her having stuck with it after being called out on it. And the thing that blows me away is that even if the story were true, it would be an awful story. They send the first lady and only child into a dangerous, sniper fire, location? Huh? And when she recites the story she has this silly grin on her face, like it's something to be proud of? I mean how would that give her credibility for anything? If they really had tried to put her in danger, she would have been pissed off. Heads would've rolled. It doesn't pass the idiot test. Not only is she a liar, but she's a bad liar, telling unbelievable, silly lies, that wouldn't even help make her case. This is WAY BEYOND mis-speaking. This is LUNACY. posted 04/01/2008 at 14:04:49

Sinbad called her out on this, and she still spoke about it again after that. And the lie makes no sense anyway. Why would they send Hillary and Chelsea into an area that was dangerous. If it were true she'd be a bad mother. She doesn't even tell good lies. She has really bad judgement. Seriously, it's one thing to misspeak, but to continue with a lie, even after doubt had been cast? That's just crazy. posted 03/31/2008 at 15:45:10

All good points. And add to that the fact that she continued this lie even after she was called out by Sinbad. And the fact that she then lied to cover up her lie by saying she was sleep deprived (boads well for her 3am claim), when she has been filmed saying this same lie many, many times. Face it people, she really does have trouble with the truth. posted 04/02/2008 at 17:26:54

OR.... the people of PA could vote for Obama and quickly end this thing. posted 03/28/2008 at 14:21:43

The reverend was a Marine. He's earned his right to criticize this country. In fact, that's what it means to live in a free society. We are allow to criticize our country. The opposite is called communism. posted 03/27/2008 at 12:40:34

Wow, Joe, you're just a political hack. Sad. posted 03/26/2008 at 15:27:40

Now we know what they meant when they said Hillary Clinton was polarizing. She has polarized the Democrats, and if she steals the nomination she will polarize the nation even more than Dubya has already. posted 03/27/2008 at 14:00:28

Have you ever noticed that everytime the Clintons are involved they divide people 50/50. That's their strategy, to divide and conquer, to appeal only to their base and never try to expand it. It's very similar to what Dubya did. That's the way less appealing candidates are able to win. As soon as they realized they didn't have the black vote, they did everything possible to win the bigot vote. So now we have the older, uneducated Dems dictating to the rest of us, and the media plays right along, never conceding that she can't win this race without tearing the Dems apart. Does that bother Hillary? No. She would seriously do anything to win. Her tactics are petty. Obama has tried to rise above this crap, and talk to us like we're adults. If you silly Dems can't figure this one out, you don't deserve to be a party anymore. Good riddance. It's time to start a new party that combines the good people left in the Dems and the good Repubs. Time to get rid of politics as usual. THIS IS YOUR LAST CHANCE! posted 03/26/2008 at 14:53:44

The Democratic leadership is weak and spineless, and I'm begining to think that many registered Democrats are idiots. This is the same group that let Dubya win twice. The same group that supported Dubya with his authorization to go to war in Iraq. The same group that now has a hard time choosing between a phenominal, inspirational, exciting candidate; and a lying, hawkish, divisive, old school politician. I'm an Independent that has always supported the Dems over the Repubs, but if they can't get their head out of their ass and nominate the most obvious choice in our lifetime, then I will NEVER support one other Dem. I will not only vote for John McCain, but I will vote for every Republican on the ballot in my VA district. There is no way in hell I could support the party of Hillary Clinton. posted 03/26/2008 at 14:52:39

Did you ever notice that when the Clintons are involved they managed to split things 50/50. They cater to their base and screw everyone else. When they realized they wouldn't get the black vote they played the race card so they could sure up the bigot vote. Hell, Bill Clinton never even won 50 percent of the vote. They could never rely on broad appeal. They just attack and smear their enemies. posted 03/25/2008 at 15:25:15

Sam, I agree with you 100 percent. The Reverends words did not upset me because everything I hear coming from churches sounds crazy to me. God impregnates some man's virgin wife so that the child can be viciously killed and therefore allow people into heaven? You'd think an all powerful God could find an easier way to do it. Even if it were true, why should I be punished with an eternity of burning in hell simply for not believeing it? It's strange that we would call that a loving God. And of course the ultimate defense, God works in mysterious ways, and we're not suppose to understand (or question). posted 03/21/2008 at 13:32:25

Can you imagine the Republican response to Senator Clinton in a general election? She couldn't even win the Dem nomination without marginalizing her opponent as the "black candidate." They could probably win over at least half of the black vote, never letting them forget how she got there. She wouldn't stand a chance against McCain who is probably the only Republican who has actually tried to reach across the aisle. Not to mention the built-in Republican hatred for the Clintons. There's simply no way she could perform any better than Senator Kerry, especially with a lack of black votes. Conversely, Senator Obama will emerge from the primary being fully vetted at this point, and he'll win the admiration of many for being able to run a better campaign than the formerly unbeatable Clinton machine. Clinton supporters talk a lot about voting for John McCain, and a few of them probably will. But the majority will realize that Senator Obama is clearly a better choice. posted 03/21/2008 at 14:11:35

Awesome post Frank. Ultimately this election will say more about us than the candidates. For years we've talked about changing politics and wanting an honest, straight forward candidate. The question is, when presented with such a candidate, will we be swayed against him by politics as usual? If Obama doesn't succeed here, then when will we ever see someone like him try again? If cynicism wins out, what will it cost us? Too many of us pick a candidate the same way we might pick a favorite football team, and then fight for that candidate against all logic. The Kitchen sink approach no longer bothers us as long as it's in our candidate's favor. Changing the rules of the election no longer bothers us as long as it benefits our candidate. A racially divided nation is perfectly acceptable as long as it benefits our candidate. This is not the superbowl folks. Running a campaign with dignity and honor should be rewarded. Speaking honestly and not pandering should be rewarded. Wanting to bring people together is a good thing, a strategy of divide and conquer is not. Politics of fear and identity should not be rewarded. Remember when we used to criticize the Republicans for dirty politics? It's time for a new begining. Time for change. Time for unitiy. posted 03/21/2008 at 14:48:35