May 18, 2008
Please wait, your request is processed...
StephenS
Recent comments by this user
Massive Blowback To NARAL's Obama Endorsement
Very insightful comment! posted 05/15/2008 at 12:31:31
Why NARAL Pro-Choice America Endorsed Barack Obama
Why Clinton going to the weekly Senate Prayer Breakfasts, or before that to a prayer group as First Lady, indicates to you that all her pro-choice votes and actions and words during nd 7+ years as Senator and 8 years as First Lady are suspect, I do not know.
I do know that no one has been producing objectionable quotes from either venue. If they do, the Repub and Democratic senators, predominantly Christian though with a Jewish co-chair in 2006, will stop the breakfasts.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2006-01-30-prayer-breakfast_x.htm posted 05/16/2008 at 14:44:18
I do know that no one has been producing objectionable quotes from either venue. If they do, the Repub and Democratic senators, predominantly Christian though with a Jewish co-chair in 2006, will stop the breakfasts.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2006-01-30-prayer-breakfast_x.htm posted 05/16/2008 at 14:44:18
It's great that, as NARAL says, since 2005 Obama has been doing in the Senate what Clinton has done there since 2001: "supporting legislation to provide our teens with comprehensive sex education, prevent pharmacies from denying women access to their legal birth-control prescriptions, and increase access for family-planning services."
But I don't see that as a reason for NARAL to endorse Obama over Clinton before Obama wins with his superdelegates at the convention. posted 05/14/2008 at 17:22:56
But I don't see that as a reason for NARAL to endorse Obama over Clinton before Obama wins with his superdelegates at the convention. posted 05/14/2008 at 17:22:56
Is Clinton Looking For An "I Told You So" Moment?
You and many others here sound like political newbies.
Lots of men have continued campaigning for the presidency even when they could not win the nomination. Ronald Reagan against Ford and Jesse Jackson against Dukakis come to mind. I've seen much longer lists elsewhere, but the point is that it's just not that unusual. posted 05/14/2008 at 15:02:36
Lots of men have continued campaigning for the presidency even when they could not win the nomination. Ronald Reagan against Ford and Jesse Jackson against Dukakis come to mind. I've seen much longer lists elsewhere, but the point is that it's just not that unusual. posted 05/14/2008 at 15:02:36
Obama won a landslide primary in Louisiana, the state that really did elect David Duke (to the state legislature). posted 05/14/2008 at 14:32:06
Could Obama Redraw The Map?
In 2004, every state in your 274 electoral votes either went Democratic or went Republican by 4.7% or less. No big shifts to the Democrats despite the Iraq war and the economy.
Only the 26 votes in CO, IA, NV, and NM switch to Democratic from 2004, while New Hampshire goes to McCain. And the latest Rasmussen and/or SurveyUSA polls have McCain beating Obama in NV (5), in NM (5) and, just barely, in Wisconsin (10). That's a current dip down to 264 or 254 for Obama.
According to www.realclearpolitics.com, Clinton is beating McCain and Obama is losing to McCain in polls in Ohio (20) and Florida (27). So Clinton could lose CO, IA, NV, NM, and WI, and still have 285. posted 05/13/2008 at 10:04:50
Only the 26 votes in CO, IA, NV, and NM switch to Democratic from 2004, while New Hampshire goes to McCain. And the latest Rasmussen and/or SurveyUSA polls have McCain beating Obama in NV (5), in NM (5) and, just barely, in Wisconsin (10). That's a current dip down to 264 or 254 for Obama.
According to www.realclearpolitics.com, Clinton is beating McCain and Obama is losing to McCain in polls in Ohio (20) and Florida (27). So Clinton could lose CO, IA, NV, NM, and WI, and still have 285. posted 05/13/2008 at 10:04:50
I believe Democrats can take or retain almost all states decided by 5% or less in 2004. 12 states with 142 electoral votes.
In 2000, it looks like the biggest swing to the other party was AZ, decided by 2% in 1996. In 2004, the biggest swing was NH, decided by 1% in 2000. So a 5% swing in Florida to get it Democratic may be a stretch. Missouri (7% swing) or Virginia (8% swing) are extremely unlikely.
The 6 states to change to Dem, starting with the tightest 2004 results (electoral votes):
Iowa (7) New Mexico (5) Ohio (20)
Nevada (5) Colorado (9) Florida (27)
The 6 states to keep Dem:
Wisconsin (10) New Hampshire (4) Pennsylvania (21)
Michigan (17) Minnesota (10) Oregon (7)
FYI: Counting Oregon for Obama and excluding Michigan where Obama was not one of the 4 Democratic candidates on the ballot, Obama got the most votes in swing states with 43 electoral votes, and Clinton in swing states with 82 electoral votes.
The combined list of 12 states, from closest in 2004:
Wisconsin (10) Iowa (7) New Mexico (5)
New Hampshire (4) Ohio (20) Pennsylvania (21)
Nevada (5) Michigan (17) Minnesota (10)
Oregon (7) Colorado (9) Florida (27)
The 13th closest was New Jersey (15, won by Clinton), which went Democratic by 6.8% last time. posted 05/12/2008 at 18:02:32
In 2000, it looks like the biggest swing to the other party was AZ, decided by 2% in 1996. In 2004, the biggest swing was NH, decided by 1% in 2000. So a 5% swing in Florida to get it Democratic may be a stretch. Missouri (7% swing) or Virginia (8% swing) are extremely unlikely.
The 6 states to change to Dem, starting with the tightest 2004 results (electoral votes):
Iowa (7) New Mexico (5) Ohio (20)
Nevada (5) Colorado (9) Florida (27)
The 6 states to keep Dem:
Wisconsin (10) New Hampshire (4) Pennsylvania (21)
Michigan (17) Minnesota (10) Oregon (7)
FYI: Counting Oregon for Obama and excluding Michigan where Obama was not one of the 4 Democratic candidates on the ballot, Obama got the most votes in swing states with 43 electoral votes, and Clinton in swing states with 82 electoral votes.
The combined list of 12 states, from closest in 2004:
Wisconsin (10) Iowa (7) New Mexico (5)
New Hampshire (4) Ohio (20) Pennsylvania (21)
Nevada (5) Michigan (17) Minnesota (10)
Oregon (7) Colorado (9) Florida (27)
The 13th closest was New Jersey (15, won by Clinton), which went Democratic by 6.8% last time. posted 05/12/2008 at 18:02:32
I believe Democrats can retain or take almost all states decided by posted 05/12/2008 at 17:48:20
Clinton Supporters Send Last-Ditch Obama Attack Emails To Supers
Well said! Obama has been my second choice since Edwards dropped out of the race, but he'll be my first and only choice if he's the Democratic candidate. posted 05/09/2008 at 16:27:37
Big Rewards Await Clinton If She Ends Campaign Now
Obama bribing Clinton to quit won't happen. And the other supposed big reward for ending her campaign - a top Senate leadership spot - is suspect. After Kerry was the actual Democratic candidate, not an also-ran, as far as I can tell his Senate reward was nothing. posted 05/08/2008 at 16:20:23
Clinton Adviser Claims Indiana Slur Video Is Conspiracy
See around 4:40 into the original copy at the link above. The video and soundtrack are not fake. The soundtrack just does not contain the words "worthless", or "n*gger".
Also, Kantor really says "42-40. It doesn't matter if we win, those people are shitting. Excuse me.", when referring to Bush/Quayle losing in Quayle's Indiana by 42% to 40%. posted 05/05/2008 at 18:48:02
Also, Kantor really says "42-40. It doesn't matter if we win, those people are shitting. Excuse me.", when referring to Bush/Quayle losing in Quayle's Indiana by 42% to 40%. posted 05/05/2008 at 18:48:02
Money Ties But Some Holes In Possible Clinton-Robocall Connection
The 20-second robo-call did not say that unless you fill out the paperwork, you will not be able to vote. It said:
"Hello. This is Lamont Williams. In the next few days, you will receive a voter registration packet in the mail. All you need to do is fill it out, sign it, date and return your application. Then you will be able to vote and make your voice heard. Please return the registration form when it arrives. Thank you."
And the NC paperwork is not late for the general election, or if you are an independent, a Repub, a third party person, or a Democrat who doesn't intend to vote in the primary.
One Virginia WVWV mailing in Feb, like this one in NC, also went out too close to the Democratic and Repub primaries. I would expected after that WVWV would check the primary/caucus schedule!
In other states where already-registered people misunderstood the robo-call or the mailing, hundreds or thousands of people in doubt filled out the forms anyway. Which was a waste of time both for them and for election officials, and generated many complaints about the wording of the mailings. (WVWV lately changed their mailing wording, but some people are still confused by it.) posted 05/01/2008 at 15:31:49
"Hello. This is Lamont Williams. In the next few days, you will receive a voter registration packet in the mail. All you need to do is fill it out, sign it, date and return your application. Then you will be able to vote and make your voice heard. Please return the registration form when it arrives. Thank you."
And the NC paperwork is not late for the general election, or if you are an independent, a Repub, a third party person, or a Democrat who doesn't intend to vote in the primary.
One Virginia WVWV mailing in Feb, like this one in NC, also went out too close to the Democratic and Repub primaries. I would expected after that WVWV would check the primary/caucus schedule!
In other states where already-registered people misunderstood the robo-call or the mailing, hundreds or thousands of people in doubt filled out the forms anyway. Which was a waste of time both for them and for election officials, and generated many complaints about the wording of the mailings. (WVWV lately changed their mailing wording, but some people are still confused by it.) posted 05/01/2008 at 15:31:49
Clinton-Linked Group Behind Deceptive North Carolina Robo-Calls
Maggie Rheinstein on the board seems to have given $900 to Obama in 2008 according to OpenSecrets.org.
And did you purposely leave out that the article said John Podesta donated $1000 to Obama in 2004? posted 04/30/2008 at 23:25:30
And did you purposely leave out that the article said John Podesta donated $1000 to Obama in 2004? posted 04/30/2008 at 23:25:30
Maggie Williams is not on their board. I don't know how long ago she left. posted 04/30/2008 at 22:23:28
The North Carolina registration deadline has not passed for the fall election.
WVWV has sent out 3 million vote registration forms this election cycle. Believe it or not, some recipients were people who will not vote in a primary, or are independents, or will vote Republican. They've registered 27,000 NC voters for the fall election so far.
Whenever WVWV knows their phone numbers, WVWV robo-calls with a 20-second message the people who will get the forms. You can find the message through the article above and listen.
Yes, they should have waited on this round of robo-calls followed by mailings until after the Democratic primary. But to suggest Women's Voices, Women Vote wants to suppress the vote is not very reasonable. posted 04/30/2008 at 20:43:40
WVWV has sent out 3 million vote registration forms this election cycle. Believe it or not, some recipients were people who will not vote in a primary, or are independents, or will vote Republican. They've registered 27,000 NC voters for the fall election so far.
Whenever WVWV knows their phone numbers, WVWV robo-calls with a 20-second message the people who will get the forms. You can find the message through the article above and listen.
Yes, they should have waited on this round of robo-calls followed by mailings until after the Democratic primary. But to suggest Women's Voices, Women Vote wants to suppress the vote is not very reasonable. posted 04/30/2008 at 20:43:40
Women's Voices, Women Vote has sent out 3 million voter registration forms in 24 states, including about 280,000 in North Carolina this week. Check their website. They want people registered to vote in the fall election.
In North Carolina, they notified the elections office and sent a press release to North Carolina media before starting robo-calling or mailing. A couple of NC papers noted the campaign.
I don't know where WVWV gets their mailing and phone lists, but they robo-call the mail recipients where possible to tell them know that registration forms are coming. The forms have envelopes with prepaid postage.
Here's their phone message (someone recorded it on an answering machine):
"Hello. This is Lamont Williams. In the next few days, you will receive a voter registration packet in the mail. All you need to do is fill it out, sign it, date and return your application. Then you will be able to vote and make your voice heard. Please return the registration form when it arrives. Thank you."
The two problems are:
1) In North Carolina, WVWV's latest mailing and robo-calls, though in plenty of time for the general election, are past the deadline for registering if you are a Democrat and want to vote in the primary.
2) The robo-call does not say that it is from WVWV, though I presume the mailing has that information. posted 04/30/2008 at 16:33:41
In North Carolina, they notified the elections office and sent a press release to North Carolina media before starting robo-calling or mailing. A couple of NC papers noted the campaign.
I don't know where WVWV gets their mailing and phone lists, but they robo-call the mail recipients where possible to tell them know that registration forms are coming. The forms have envelopes with prepaid postage.
Here's their phone message (someone recorded it on an answering machine):
"Hello. This is Lamont Williams. In the next few days, you will receive a voter registration packet in the mail. All you need to do is fill it out, sign it, date and return your application. Then you will be able to vote and make your voice heard. Please return the registration form when it arrives. Thank you."
The two problems are:
1) In North Carolina, WVWV's latest mailing and robo-calls, though in plenty of time for the general election, are past the deadline for registering if you are a Democrat and want to vote in the primary.
2) The robo-call does not say that it is from WVWV, though I presume the mailing has that information. posted 04/30/2008 at 16:33:41
Maggie Williams is not on the Women's Voices, Women Vote Leadership Team. I don't know when she left. posted 04/30/2008 at 15:55:41
Obama Endorsement Becomes Toxic For Mississippi Democrat
You're apparently forgetting that Mississippi went Republican in the presidential elections of 1980, 1984, and 1988 before Bill ran. posted 04/30/2008 at 16:52:02
Confusion Surrounding Robo-Calls in North Carolina
Where is the documented history of illegal practices by WVWV? Thanks.
All I remember is that they probably broke North Carolina law by not saying "Women's Voices, Women Vote" in their 20-second robo-call to let people know they'd be getting a voter registration packet.
Since Clinton and Obama announced for president, apparently WVWV board member Rheinstein gave $900 to Obama, Podesta gave $2,300 to Clinton, and McNary gave $2,000 to Clinton. Before that, Gardner, Podesta and Lux gave $7,700 or $8,700 to Clinton, and Podesta also gave $1,000 to Obama.
And there is nothing pseudo about mailing out 3 million voter registration packets and registering 400,000 voters since July 2007. posted 05/01/2008 at 00:09:10
All I remember is that they probably broke North Carolina law by not saying "Women's Voices, Women Vote" in their 20-second robo-call to let people know they'd be getting a voter registration packet.
Since Clinton and Obama announced for president, apparently WVWV board member Rheinstein gave $900 to Obama, Podesta gave $2,300 to Clinton, and McNary gave $2,000 to Clinton. Before that, Gardner, Podesta and Lux gave $7,700 or $8,700 to Clinton, and Podesta also gave $1,000 to Obama.
And there is nothing pseudo about mailing out 3 million voter registration packets and registering 400,000 voters since July 2007. posted 05/01/2008 at 00:09:10
You really think that WVWV wants fewer people to vote? If you read the article above, you'll see that they got about 27,000 new North Carolina voters through previous mailings this election cycle.
Here's WVWV's 20-second phone message, as recorded on an answering machine:
"Hello. This is Lamont Williams. In the next few days, you will receive a voter registration packet in the mail. All you need to do is fill it out, sign it, date and return your application. Then you will be able to vote and make your voice heard. Please return the registration form when it arrives. Thank you."
It does not mention WVWV, but it's just a robo-notification that a voter registration packet is coming.
You're right that, even if they're focused on the fall election, it's really dumb of them in the last couple of days to mail this set of forms between the deadline for potential Democrats to register to vote for the primary and the primary itself.
You're wrong if you think that mailing lists and phone lists will screen out everyone except unmarried women - you buy the best list you can find and afford. posted 04/30/2008 at 17:49:35
Here's WVWV's 20-second phone message, as recorded on an answering machine:
"Hello. This is Lamont Williams. In the next few days, you will receive a voter registration packet in the mail. All you need to do is fill it out, sign it, date and return your application. Then you will be able to vote and make your voice heard. Please return the registration form when it arrives. Thank you."
It does not mention WVWV, but it's just a robo-notification that a voter registration packet is coming.
You're right that, even if they're focused on the fall election, it's really dumb of them in the last couple of days to mail this set of forms between the deadline for potential Democrats to register to vote for the primary and the primary itself.
You're wrong if you think that mailing lists and phone lists will screen out everyone except unmarried women - you buy the best list you can find and afford. posted 04/30/2008 at 17:49:35
Hillary $10 Million Claims Questioned
No. posted 04/24/2008 at 14:21:04
Clinton Slams Democratic Activists At Private Fundraiser
votesmart.org, not votesmart.com posted 04/21/2008 at 00:05:54
When Obama and Clinton both vote in the Senate on a bill, they have voted the same 97% across the 20+ issues tracked by Project Vote Smart (votesmart.com).
By your logic, Obama is a Republican.
As an independent, I can vote for either one once they win the nomination. posted 04/20/2008 at 23:51:15
By your logic, Obama is a Republican.
As an independent, I can vote for either one once they win the nomination. posted 04/20/2008 at 23:51:15
Harry Reid: McCain Crossed The Aisle Maybe Three Times In 26 Years
Reid says he's not taking side in the battle between Obama and Clinton. However he says we're going through rough times with "presidents [plural] we've had".
"Q: You represent the state of Nevada, a state with many rural voters, and obviously there is this controversy over the remarks that Barack Obama made about how sometimes economically distressed voters who feel the government hasn't heard them or listened to them might cling to their religion and their guns. How do you react to that statement, and how do voters in your state react to that statement by Obama?
Reid: First of all, I'm not taking sides in that battle between Obama and Clinton. But I do say this: I think that -- and I heard him say this in the faith debate that they had the other night -- that he didn't say very well what he meant, and I think that's probably true. We know that these rough times that we are going through with this Republican-driven Congress and presidents we've had..." posted 04/18/2008 at 17:55:41
"Q: You represent the state of Nevada, a state with many rural voters, and obviously there is this controversy over the remarks that Barack Obama made about how sometimes economically distressed voters who feel the government hasn't heard them or listened to them might cling to their religion and their guns. How do you react to that statement, and how do voters in your state react to that statement by Obama?
Reid: First of all, I'm not taking sides in that battle between Obama and Clinton. But I do say this: I think that -- and I heard him say this in the faith debate that they had the other night -- that he didn't say very well what he meant, and I think that's probably true. We know that these rough times that we are going through with this Republican-driven Congress and presidents we've had..." posted 04/18/2008 at 17:55:41
Obama Hamas Ties Pushed In McCain Letter: So Much For "Respectful" Campaign
Only people in Arizona can vote Senator McCain out of office... posted 04/18/2008 at 16:23:10
Questioning Obama, Neither ABC Moderators Nor Clinton Wore Flag Pin Either
Millions watching the debate had never heard of Obama's decision not to wear American flag pins, so the question about pins came out of left field, so to speak, and sounded ridiculous. And they wondered why Gibson remarked "Just to add to that, I noticed you put one on yesterday."
I thought that "controversy" came and went last fall. Now, after a quick search, I found an LA Times blog from Tuesday announce "Breaking News: Obama caves! Flag pin returns to his coat lapel". Sheesh.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/04/obamaflagpinlap.html
Also, for those carefully following flag pins, Obama's answer included the sentence "I have never said that I don't wear flag pins or refuse to wear flag pins." Unfortunately, last October Obama said "I decided I won't wear that pin on my chest." Sigh.
From Oct 4, 2007:
"The truth is that right after 9/11 I had a pin," Obama said. "Shortly after 9/11, particularly because as we're talking about the Iraq war, that became a substitute for I think true patriotism, which is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security.
"I decided I won't wear that pin on my chest," he said in the interview. "Instead, I'm going to try to tell the American people what I believe will make this country great, and hopefully that will be a testament to my patriotism."
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8S2K3UO0&show_article=1 posted 04/18/2008 at 14:43:06
I thought that "controversy" came and went last fall. Now, after a quick search, I found an LA Times blog from Tuesday announce "Breaking News: Obama caves! Flag pin returns to his coat lapel". Sheesh.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/04/obamaflagpinlap.html
Also, for those carefully following flag pins, Obama's answer included the sentence "I have never said that I don't wear flag pins or refuse to wear flag pins." Unfortunately, last October Obama said "I decided I won't wear that pin on my chest." Sigh.
From Oct 4, 2007:
"The truth is that right after 9/11 I had a pin," Obama said. "Shortly after 9/11, particularly because as we're talking about the Iraq war, that became a substitute for I think true patriotism, which is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security.
"I decided I won't wear that pin on my chest," he said in the interview. "Instead, I'm going to try to tell the American people what I believe will make this country great, and hopefully that will be a testament to my patriotism."
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8S2K3UO0&show_article=1 posted 04/18/2008 at 14:43:06
Obama Going Negative? Mailer Hits Clinton On Trade
So you think Obama was lying last night and previously when he said Hillary could beat McCain. posted 04/17/2008 at 15:06:15
Look at the last picture. It says: "Paid for By Obama for America". posted 04/17/2008 at 15:01:46
Obama Denies Filling Out Questionnaire That Bears His Handwriting
There are two versions of the questionnaire. On both, the answers on handgun control are the same.
One has attached Obama's handwriting, as admitted by Obama himself, on the faxed portion which was sent a day after Obama met with the group to discuss the questionnaire.
Answers are somewhat different on the two versions. E.g., the answer to "Do you support c) parental consent/notification for minors seeking abortions?" on one is "No" and on the other a more nuanced "depends on how young -- possibly for extremely young teens, i.e. 12 or 13 year olds".
Clearly there was a reason why there are two sets of answers - to one of which the group attached Obama's writing from the day after Obama met with the group. Clearly there is a reason why the answers on parental consent changed.
If you wish to believe that a short-time aide for Obama, a non-politician running as a first-time candidate, not once but twice made up answers and did not correct the answers after Obama met with group, and the group never asked for the corrected answers, that is your prerogative.
And, by the way, "Obama Forgets Writing on Gun Questionnaire" is the article linked to above, which is not the same as HuffPo's headline of "Obama Denies Filling Out Questionnaire That Bears His Handwriting." posted 04/18/2008 at 15:56:09
One has attached Obama's handwriting, as admitted by Obama himself, on the faxed portion which was sent a day after Obama met with the group to discuss the questionnaire.
Answers are somewhat different on the two versions. E.g., the answer to "Do you support c) parental consent/notification for minors seeking abortions?" on one is "No" and on the other a more nuanced "depends on how young -- possibly for extremely young teens, i.e. 12 or 13 year olds".
Clearly there was a reason why there are two sets of answers - to one of which the group attached Obama's writing from the day after Obama met with the group. Clearly there is a reason why the answers on parental consent changed.
If you wish to believe that a short-time aide for Obama, a non-politician running as a first-time candidate, not once but twice made up answers and did not correct the answers after Obama met with group, and the group never asked for the corrected answers, that is your prerogative.
And, by the way, "Obama Forgets Writing on Gun Questionnaire" is the article linked to above, which is not the same as HuffPo's headline of "Obama Denies Filling Out Questionnaire That Bears His Handwriting." posted 04/18/2008 at 15:56:09
ABC Hosts Heckled After Debate: "The Crowd Is Turning On Me"
Since most people had never heard of Obama's decision not to wear American flag pins, I too wondered why Gibson and Stephanopolous thought that decision was worth bringing up.
Though I'm sure Rush and other Republicans will be mentioning it if Obama gets the nomination, so Obama will need a short pat answer rather than the long one he gave. posted 04/18/2008 at 16:17:21
Though I'm sure Rush and other Republicans will be mentioning it if Obama gets the nomination, so Obama will need a short pat answer rather than the long one he gave. posted 04/18/2008 at 16:17:21
Clinton emphatically says Obama can win White House
Aleka, I was not the one asking a question about this in the debate.
I was not the one who said "My writing wasn't on that particular questionnaire.", which apparently Obama did.
If Obama had given an answer consistent with facts I know from reading articles referenced by HuffPo, I would not have commented. For example, he could have said his views have changed, or answered around it by saying to look to his record rather than the questionnaire.
Did you look at the questionnaire? Did you read where Obama "did not dispute" that it was his handwriting? Here are the links again, starting with the one from HuffPo.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/31/obamas-handwriting-found_n_94213.html
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM43_080328_obama_iviquestionaire_091096.html
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9269.html posted 04/17/2008 at 12:50:04
I was not the one who said "My writing wasn't on that particular questionnaire.", which apparently Obama did.
If Obama had given an answer consistent with facts I know from reading articles referenced by HuffPo, I would not have commented. For example, he could have said his views have changed, or answered around it by saying to look to his record rather than the questionnaire.
Did you look at the questionnaire? Did you read where Obama "did not dispute" that it was his handwriting? Here are the links again, starting with the one from HuffPo.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/31/obamas-handwriting-found_n_94213.html
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM43_080328_obama_iviquestionaire_091096.html
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9269.html posted 04/17/2008 at 12:50:04
Obama looked at the amended questionnaire, sent the day after Obama met the group to discuss it, and replied through an aide that he "did not dispute that the handwriting was his". Surely Obama is an expert on Obama's handwriting.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9269.html
Kindly post a link to the article where Obama denies it is his handwriting, and an aide admits it's the aide's handwriting. Thanks!
No one disputes that an aide typed or had a secretary type answers to the original questionnaire. However, I can think of no reason why an aide in the first campaign of a non-politician would answer without checking with first-time candidate Obama. In any case, we know the questionnaire was changed the day after Obama met with the group, but the handgun control answer was not changed. posted 04/17/2008 at 12:29:44
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9269.html
Kindly post a link to the article where Obama denies it is his handwriting, and an aide admits it's the aide's handwriting. Thanks!
No one disputes that an aide typed or had a secretary type answers to the original questionnaire. However, I can think of no reason why an aide in the first campaign of a non-politician would answer without checking with first-time candidate Obama. In any case, we know the questionnaire was changed the day after Obama met with the group, but the handgun control answer was not changed. posted 04/17/2008 at 12:29:44
Obama "does not dispute" that it's his handwriting. Obama proved it.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9269.html posted 04/17/2008 at 11:11:39
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9269.html posted 04/17/2008 at 11:11:39
Sorry, but Obama admitted it was his handwriting on that questionnaire. I do think Obama is an expert on that.
"Through an aide, Obama, who won the group"s endorsement as well as the statehouse seat, did not dispute that the handwriting was his."
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9269.html posted 04/17/2008 at 11:09:08
"Through an aide, Obama, who won the group"s endorsement as well as the statehouse seat, did not dispute that the handwriting was his."
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9269.html posted 04/17/2008 at 11:09:08
Did Obama really say "My writing wasn't on that particular questionnaire" when referring to the questionnaire that says he would support Illinois state legislation to ban the manufacture, sale, and possession of handguns?
Here you can see Obama's writing on "that particular questionnaire":
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM43_080328_obama_iviquestionaire_091096.html posted 04/17/2008 at 10:57:27
Here you can see Obama's writing on "that particular questionnaire":
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM43_080328_obama_iviquestionaire_091096.html posted 04/17/2008 at 10:57:27
100% Of Clinton's Current Pennsylvania Ads Are Negative
The HuffPo headline is false.
The article referenced is entitled "Hillary-Backing Group Launches Ad Ripping Obama On Health Care" and it links to an article that says:
A bit more than 1/2 of Pennsylvanian households are seeing a positive ad and a negative ad.
A bit under 1/2 of Pennsylvanians households are seeing only a negative Clinton ad.
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/04/hillary_tv_ad_campaign_is_100.php
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/04/hillarybacking_group_launches.php posted 04/16/2008 at 18:45:09
The article referenced is entitled "Hillary-Backing Group Launches Ad Ripping Obama On Health Care" and it links to an article that says:
A bit more than 1/2 of Pennsylvanian households are seeing a positive ad and a negative ad.
A bit under 1/2 of Pennsylvanians households are seeing only a negative Clinton ad.
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/04/hillary_tv_ad_campaign_is_100.php
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/04/hillarybacking_group_launches.php posted 04/16/2008 at 18:45:09
Obama Campaign Won't Say Whether Tax Returns From 1997-1999 Will Be Released
I don't believe Obama is hiding anything.
The only reason I can think of to "demand" the complete 1997-1999 forms is that the Obamas' level of charity giving would come up again.
While the national giving rate was averaging 2.2%, the Obamas were giving less than 1% in 1997, in 1998, and in 1999, and a maximum rate of 1.4% in 2000 through 2004.
The Clintons had one year down at the Obamas' level in 2002, but still gave a higher percentage that year. posted 04/17/2008 at 16:31:06
The only reason I can think of to "demand" the complete 1997-1999 forms is that the Obamas' level of charity giving would come up again.
While the national giving rate was averaging 2.2%, the Obamas were giving less than 1% in 1997, in 1998, and in 1999, and a maximum rate of 1.4% in 2000 through 2004.
The Clintons had one year down at the Obamas' level in 2002, but still gave a higher percentage that year. posted 04/17/2008 at 16:31:06
The Clinton's charity is the Clinton Family Foundation, which is separate from the Clinton Foundation. posted 04/17/2008 at 16:16:48
I'm not disappointed; I knew they'd release before Tuesday's primary. I'm glad we can compare 2000 through 2007.
I thought the Obamas had a reason for missing their deadline, so they'd wait until Friday afternoon. I never suspected anything sinister - just awkward.
I bet the Obamas gave a higher percentage to charity and were much nearer the Clintons' 14.7%. Instead, the Obama gave less: 5.8% versus 6.1% in 2006.
By the way, your obamas' AGI was $4.1 million, which is just more than 1/5 of the Clintons'. In taxes plus charitable contributions, the Obamas paid a tiny bit lower percent than the Clintons, but only because the Obamas' charitable giving percentage was so much less.
For the 8th time in 8 years, the Obamas earned less than the Clintons.
8 year total: Obamas $8.0 million Clintons $108.0 million
For the 3rd time in 8 years, the Obamas paid a higher tax rate than the Clintons.
8 year avg: Obamas 31.6% in taxes Clintons 31.3% in taxes
8 year total: Obamas $2.5 million Clintons $33.8 million
The Obamas have paid a fractionally higher tax rate (31.6% vs 31.3%) over 8 years even though the Clintons earned much more.
For the 8th time in 8 years, the Obamas gave a lower percentage to charity than the Clintons.
8 year avg: Obamas 4.9% to charity Clintons 9.5% to charity
8 year total: Obamas $389,000 Clintons $10.2 million posted 04/17/2008 at 16:12:12
I thought the Obamas had a reason for missing their deadline, so they'd wait until Friday afternoon. I never suspected anything sinister - just awkward.
I bet the Obamas gave a higher percentage to charity and were much nearer the Clintons' 14.7%. Instead, the Obama gave less: 5.8% versus 6.1% in 2006.
By the way, your obamas' AGI was $4.1 million, which is just more than 1/5 of the Clintons'. In taxes plus charitable contributions, the Obamas paid a tiny bit lower percent than the Clintons, but only because the Obamas' charitable giving percentage was so much less.
For the 8th time in 8 years, the Obamas earned less than the Clintons.
8 year total: Obamas $8.0 million Clintons $108.0 million
For the 3rd time in 8 years, the Obamas paid a higher tax rate than the Clintons.
8 year avg: Obamas 31.6% in taxes Clintons 31.3% in taxes
8 year total: Obamas $2.5 million Clintons $33.8 million
The Obamas have paid a fractionally higher tax rate (31.6% vs 31.3%) over 8 years even though the Clintons earned much more.
For the 8th time in 8 years, the Obamas gave a lower percentage to charity than the Clintons.
8 year avg: Obamas 4.9% to charity Clintons 9.5% to charity
8 year total: Obamas $389,000 Clintons $10.2 million posted 04/17/2008 at 16:12:12
Until about 3 weeks ago, I believe Obama only released info about his tax returns (plus his 2006 Form 1040), rather than his actual tax returns.
I don't think the complete 1997-1999 forms would reveal anything, but the Obamas' level of charity giving would come up again (less than 1% in 1997, in 1998, and in 1999 to add to the max of 1.4% in 2000 through 2004).
From April 2005:
"Obama released information from the tax return in response to a request from The Associated Press, which first reported the financial details. A spokesman for Obama later confirmed the tax information."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/obama/chi-060926obamareturn-story,1,2178016.story
From April 2007:
"Obama released only Form 1040 from his tax return and not underlying attachments which provide detail about income and spending. But a summary released by his campaign said..."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/chi-070416obama-tax,0,445005.story posted 04/16/2008 at 18:32:20
I don't think the complete 1997-1999 forms would reveal anything, but the Obamas' level of charity giving would come up again (less than 1% in 1997, in 1998, and in 1999 to add to the max of 1.4% in 2000 through 2004).
From April 2005:
"Obama released information from the tax return in response to a request from The Associated Press, which first reported the financial details. A spokesman for Obama later confirmed the tax information."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/obama/chi-060926obamareturn-story,1,2178016.story
From April 2007:
"Obama released only Form 1040 from his tax return and not underlying attachments which provide detail about income and spending. But a summary released by his campaign said..."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/chi-070416obama-tax,0,445005.story posted 04/16/2008 at 18:32:20
Obama failed to release his 2007 tax return by April 15, though 3 weeks ago his campaign said he would. I guess they misspoke.
The Clintons released estimates for 2007 on April 4. They filed for an extension a 4th year in a row because of waiting for "information related to partnership income". But we know their approximate income, taxes, charitable giving, main income sources.
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/returns/2007est.pdf posted 04/16/2008 at 17:54:05
The Clintons released estimates for 2007 on April 4. They filed for an extension a 4th year in a row because of waiting for "information related to partnership income". But we know their approximate income, taxes, charitable giving, main income sources.
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/returns/2007est.pdf posted 04/16/2008 at 17:54:05
Three weeks ago, Obama's campaign said Obama would release his 2007 tax return by April 15.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/861627,obamagive032608.stng
I now expect the release to be Friday afternoon. Since the Obamas gave away $240,000, and have contributed at most 6.1% to charity, that would put their income at about $3.9 million. I'm betting they were much more generous than last year, so I'll guess their income at about $2 million.
Since last month, we've known this about the Clintons' 2007 income (they filed for an extension for a 4th year in row waiting for information related to partnership income).
Income: about $20,400,000
Taxes: about $5,100,000 (25%)
Charity: more than $3,000,000 (about 14.7%)
The Clintons' estimated 2007 total income includes, among other items:
Senator Clinton's salary $150,200
Senator Clinton's book royalties $152,864
President's Clinton's pension $186,600
President Clinton's book income $4,434,446
President Clinton's speeches $10,145,000
Partnership income $2,750,000
Advisor income from InfoUSA $400,000
Income from savings accounts $485,000
Investment income from Blind Trust $3,515,000
(The partnership, speeches and investment income above are estimated figures)
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/returns/2007est.pdf posted 04/16/2008 at 17:41:55
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/861627,obamagive032608.stng
I now expect the release to be Friday afternoon. Since the Obamas gave away $240,000, and have contributed at most 6.1% to charity, that would put their income at about $3.9 million. I'm betting they were much more generous than last year, so I'll guess their income at about $2 million.
Since last month, we've known this about the Clintons' 2007 income (they filed for an extension for a 4th year in row waiting for information related to partnership income).
Income: about $20,400,000
Taxes: about $5,100,000 (25%)
Charity: more than $3,000,000 (about 14.7%)
The Clintons' estimated 2007 total income includes, among other items:
Senator Clinton's salary $150,200
Senator Clinton's book royalties $152,864
President's Clinton's pension $186,600
President Clinton's book income $4,434,446
President Clinton's speeches $10,145,000
Partnership income $2,750,000
Advisor income from InfoUSA $400,000
Income from savings accounts $485,000
Investment income from Blind Trust $3,515,000
(The partnership, speeches and investment income above are estimated figures)
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/returns/2007est.pdf posted 04/16/2008 at 17:41:55
Poll: Clinton Losing Trust Among Voters, Majority See Her As Dishonest
Clinton was never for attacking Iran.
You probably mean the Kyl/Lieberman non-binding "Sense of the Senate" amendment that only Obama and McCain missed the vote on. It recommended that Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps be designated a terrorist organization, was passed by a majority of Democrats, and not even Bush/Cheney have used it to attack Iran.
Plus Obama is cosponsor of a bill that says it's the sense of the Congress that the Guard be designated a terrorist organization. I don't think you believe Obama is for attacking Iran, or he doesn't read bills before he cosponsors them. posted 04/16/2008 at 16:12:51
You probably mean the Kyl/Lieberman non-binding "Sense of the Senate" amendment that only Obama and McCain missed the vote on. It recommended that Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps be designated a terrorist organization, was passed by a majority of Democrats, and not even Bush/Cheney have used it to attack Iran.
Plus Obama is cosponsor of a bill that says it's the sense of the Congress that the Guard be designated a terrorist organization. I don't think you believe Obama is for attacking Iran, or he doesn't read bills before he cosponsors them. posted 04/16/2008 at 16:12:51
USA Today: Obama Is Surrounded By Lawyers From Lobbying Firms
Thanks! posted 04/16/2008 at 15:27:55
http://soprweb.senate.gov/index.cfm?events=chooseFields is a great link if I want to register as a lobbyist.. Where is it that "At Obama's Website you can find out information about each and every lobbyist connection."? Thanks. posted 04/16/2008 at 15:26:19
More recent data:
Through February, Obama got 40% of his money from donors of $200 or less, while Clinton got 23% and McCain 24%.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/donordems.asp
(Center for Responsive Politics) posted 04/16/2008 at 14:47:22
Through February, Obama got 40% of his money from donors of $200 or less, while Clinton got 23% and McCain 24%.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/donordems.asp
(Center for Responsive Politics) posted 04/16/2008 at 14:47:22
So about 0.5% of Clinton's $169 million in donations has comes from lobbyists. posted 04/16/2008 at 14:28:00
Pennsylvania Debate Live Updates: ABC Hosts April 16 Democratic Debate
The non-binding Kyl-Lieberman "Sense of the Senate" amendment recommended that Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps be designated a terrorist organization. Even Bush and Cheney have not found in Kyl/Lieberman an excuse to attack Iran.
Obama clearly doesn't think it's a prelude to an Iran war. Obama is a cosponsor of the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act , which starts by stating its the sense of the Congress that the Guard be considered a terrorist organization. If Obama thought that language was step toward war, Obama would not cosponsor the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act until that language was removed.
Obama and McCain missed the vote, so Obama never voted on the final, watered down version that passed 76 to 22. If you trust the military affairs judgment of Sen. Levin, he voted for it with the majority of Democratic senators.
http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/kyl-lieberman.pdf posted 04/16/2008 at 16:01:41
Obama clearly doesn't think it's a prelude to an Iran war. Obama is a cosponsor of the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act , which starts by stating its the sense of the Congress that the Guard be considered a terrorist organization. If Obama thought that language was step toward war, Obama would not cosponsor the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act until that language was removed.
Obama and McCain missed the vote, so Obama never voted on the final, watered down version that passed 76 to 22. If you trust the military affairs judgment of Sen. Levin, he voted for it with the majority of Democratic senators.
http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/kyl-lieberman.pdf posted 04/16/2008 at 16:01:41
Bill Clinton Suggests Young Voters Too Easily Fooled
Bill Clinton is just upset because Obama equated Bill Clinton's economic performance in Pennsylvania's small towns with Bush's and said Pennsylvania's small towns were better off economically in the Reagan years 25 years ago.
Bill thinks people who don't remember the Reagan years or the Clinton years are likely to believe Obama, while those who do remember will disagree with Obama.
"You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not." posted 04/16/2008 at 10:00:35
Bill thinks people who don't remember the Reagan years or the Clinton years are likely to believe Obama, while those who do remember will disagree with Obama.
"You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not." posted 04/16/2008 at 10:00:35
Michelle Obama's College Roommate: "I Was Horrified" To Live With A Black Person
The video at http://www.breitbart.tv/html/49244.html has a glitch, which I missed because I did not read their transcript beneath the video.
So you won't hear the word "really". You hear the R sound followed by "proud". posted 04/16/2008 at 17:12:05
So you won't hear the word "really". You hear the R sound followed by "proud". posted 04/16/2008 at 17:12:05
That should say:
FOR THE FIRST TIME IN MY ADULT LIFETIME, I AM REALLY PROUD OF MY COUNTRY.
I hope that in reality Michelle was really proud of our country several times in her adult life before this political campaign in which "Barack has done well" and "people are hungry for change". posted 04/16/2008 at 17:00:24
FOR THE FIRST TIME IN MY ADULT LIFETIME, I AM REALLY PROUD OF MY COUNTRY.
I hope that in reality Michelle was really proud of our country several times in her adult life before this political campaign in which "Barack has done well" and "people are hungry for change". posted 04/16/2008 at 17:00:24
Hear it (just over 1 minute) at:
http://www.breitbart.tv/html/49244.html posted 04/16/2008 at 16:56:57
http://www.breitbart.tv/html/49244.html posted 04/16/2008 at 16:56:57
Michelle Obama did not say she was nothing but ashamed - she said she never before was proud:
"...Hope is making a comeback. It is making a comeback.
And, let me tell you something:
For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am proud of my country.
And not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change.
And I have been desperate to see our country moving in that direction, and just not feeling so alone in my frustration and disappointment.
I have seen people who are hungry to be unified around some basic common issues.
And it's made me proud..."
I hope that in reality Michelle was proud of our country several times in her adult life before this political campaign in which "Barack has done well" and "people are hungry for change". posted 04/16/2008 at 16:48:59
"...Hope is making a comeback. It is making a comeback.
And, let me tell you something:
For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am proud of my country.
And not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change.
And I have been desperate to see our country moving in that direction, and just not feeling so alone in my frustration and disappointment.
I have seen people who are hungry to be unified around some basic common issues.
And it's made me proud..."
I hope that in reality Michelle was proud of our country several times in her adult life before this political campaign in which "Barack has done well" and "people are hungry for change". posted 04/16/2008 at 16:48:59
Campaign AdWatch: Pennsylvania Yells At Obama
We know the Clinton's 2007 income, taxes paid, and charitable contributions, though not to the penny. The Obamas has told us nothing.
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/returns/2007est.pdf posted 04/15/2008 at 11:53:31
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/returns/2007est.pdf posted 04/15/2008 at 11:53:31
The Clintons gave us preliminary data on their 2007 income weeks ago. The Obamas have given us nothing.
The Clintons had to file for an extension in 2004, 2005, 2006, and now 2007 until they received information related to partnerships. However, they made the following available weeks ago.
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/returns/2007est.pdf
Read and enjoy. posted 04/15/2008 at 11:50:58
The Clintons had to file for an extension in 2004, 2005, 2006, and now 2007 until they received information related to partnerships. However, they made the following available weeks ago.
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/returns/2007est.pdf
Read and enjoy. posted 04/15/2008 at 11:50:58
In 2006, the Obamas had $460,000 to $1.1 million in publicly-traded assets, which excludes things like houses. So their bank account is probably fine.
The Obamas made $3.6 million from 2001 through 2006. The Clintons made $87.3million in the same time period.
We don't know what the Obamas made in 2007 since, unlike the Clintons, Obama has failed to provide any numbers on 2007 income. If he's happy with what they'll show, I think he'll release them on April 15. Otherwise, expect a Friday afternoon release, since he pledged to release them before the Penn primary. posted 04/15/2008 at 01:56:48
The Obamas made $3.6 million from 2001 through 2006. The Clintons made $87.3million in the same time period.
We don't know what the Obamas made in 2007 since, unlike the Clintons, Obama has failed to provide any numbers on 2007 income. If he's happy with what they'll show, I think he'll release them on April 15. Otherwise, expect a Friday afternoon release, since he pledged to release them before the Penn primary. posted 04/15/2008 at 01:56:48
Clinton's Pennsylvania Lead: Is It Really 20 Points?
Who are the "we" who tried to get the questions on the ARG and couldn't?
I went straight to the ARG website, chose the D for Democrat next to the name Pennsylvania and found the wording.
http://americanresearchgroup.com/pres08/padem8-705.html
Question Wording:
If the 2008 Democratic presidential preference primary were being held today between (names rotated) Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, for whom would you vote - Clinton, Obama, or someone else?
Would you say that you definitely plan to vote in the 2008 Democratic presidential primary, that you might vote in the 2008 Democratic presidential primary, or that you will probably not vote in the 2008 Democratic presidential primary? posted 04/15/2008 at 00:47:56
I went straight to the ARG website, chose the D for Democrat next to the name Pennsylvania and found the wording.
http://americanresearchgroup.com/pres08/padem8-705.html
Question Wording:
If the 2008 Democratic presidential preference primary were being held today between (names rotated) Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, for whom would you vote - Clinton, Obama, or someone else?
Would you say that you definitely plan to vote in the 2008 Democratic presidential primary, that you might vote in the 2008 Democratic presidential primary, or that you will probably not vote in the 2008 Democratic presidential primary? posted 04/15/2008 at 00:47:56
The article above says that ARG is ranked low in 2008 primary accuracy by a rival. The rival is Survey USA, which claims it, Gallup and Market Shares are the best. It's latest Penn poll has Clinton up by 18%. We'll know in a week who's right.
http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/surveyusa-report-cards/
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/pa/pennsylvania_democratic_primary-240.html posted 04/15/2008 at 00:39:15
http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/surveyusa-report-cards/
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/pa/pennsylvania_democratic_primary-240.html posted 04/15/2008 at 00:39:15
CNN is owned by Time Warner, which has given more money this election cycle to Obama than to Clinton ($186,008 to $163,750).
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/toprecips.asp?ID=D000000094&Type=A&Sort=A&Cycle=2008 posted 04/15/2008 at 00:31:37
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/toprecips.asp?ID=D000000094&Type=A&Sort=A&Cycle=2008 posted 04/15/2008 at 00:31:37
Clinton Heckled, Obama Cheered Over 'Bitter' Remarks
The only war in 2002 was against Afghanistan.
When Obama made his anti-Iraq war speech in October 2002, it wasn't unpatriotic to be against using force to take out Saddam. About 40% of Americans were either against using force or had not yet made up their mind. And the Pew "use force" poll did not asked how many of the other 60% wanted air strikes to take out Saddam versus wanted to invade Iraq. posted 04/14/2008 at 17:10:08
When Obama made his anti-Iraq war speech in October 2002, it wasn't unpatriotic to be against using force to take out Saddam. About 40% of Americans were either against using force or had not yet made up their mind. And the Pew "use force" poll did not asked how many of the other 60% wanted air strikes to take out Saddam versus wanted to invade Iraq. posted 04/14/2008 at 17:10:08
Compassion Forum On CNN: Clinton, Obama Square Off
Then I guess you won't be voting for Obama or Clinton, who obviously both disagree with you. posted 04/13/2008 at 22:29:06
Obviously Obama does not agree with you that this forum directly conflicts with our Constitution. He agreed to be part of the forum. Maybe you are a better constitutional scholar than Obama is, but I doubt it. posted 04/13/2008 at 21:36:42
Noteworthy Political Scientist Says Clinton Was For Characterization Of Working-Class Voters Before She Was Against It
Since the event was in California, any laughter was Californians laughing at the racism of Pennsylvania, not Pennsylvanians uncomfortably laughing at themselves. posted 04/13/2008 at 23:21:59
Hillary Clinton Support Among White Women Slipping In Pennsylvania
The slippage is that Clinton dropped in a week from a 34% lead over Obama to a mere 28% lead in the latest Quinnipiac poll. posted 04/14/2008 at 00:32:58
Bill Clinton Foundation Tied To Firm Assisting China In Tibet Crackdown
Same was and is true for Google China. Makes you wonder if Bill decided to let Alibaba contribute to good works done by his foundation because he was uncomfortable taking their money for himself. There was a story on HuffPo a while ago about another Chinese internet-related firm where Bill refused personal payment but arranged a donation to his foundation. It was shares of stock that later got sold. posted 04/14/2008 at 00:25:02
In 2005, Bill Clinton spoke to a conference by Alibaba (which runs Yahoo China).
Instead of earning $100,000 or more for himself and Hillary, Bill accepted an unspecified private donation from Alibaba to the Clinton Foundation, which has spent tens of millions of dollars on disaster response, AIDS prevention and Third World medical and poverty relief.
So Bill Clinton should have known that in 2008 the government of China would force Yahoo China to carry a government-issued posting on its homepage to turn in Tibet activists? Right... posted 04/13/2008 at 22:18:48
Instead of earning $100,000 or more for himself and Hillary, Bill accepted an unspecified private donation from Alibaba to the Clinton Foundation, which has spent tens of millions of dollars on disaster response, AIDS prevention and Third World medical and poverty relief.
So Bill Clinton should have known that in 2008 the government of China would force Yahoo China to carry a government-issued posting on its homepage to turn in Tibet activists? Right... posted 04/13/2008 at 22:18:48
Clinton has no ties to Alibaba to sever. Read the article. posted 04/13/2008 at 21:54:17
Axelrod: Obama Regrets But Won't Apologize For His Remarks
"disappointed" might have helped, but saying that people "cling to guns or religion" "as a way to explain their frustrations" would still be problematic. Lots of people are religious not because they are frustrated but because they are religious. And most strong proponents of gun ownership are that way through thick and thin.
Saying people cling to antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations would probably not have caused a flap. posted 04/13/2008 at 00:48:24
Saying people cling to antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations would probably not have caused a flap. posted 04/13/2008 at 00:48:24
Since Obama joined Clinton in the Senate, they BOTH voted for the USA PATRIOT and Terrorism Prevention Reauthorization.
The original Patriot Act vote was 98-1, before Obama joined the Senate. The Use of Military Force Against Iraq vote was 77-23, again before Obama joined the Senate. posted 04/13/2008 at 00:35:48
The original Patriot Act vote was 98-1, before Obama joined the Senate. The Use of Military Force Against Iraq vote was 77-23, again before Obama joined the Senate. posted 04/13/2008 at 00:35:48
Here We Go Again
"But the truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there's not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. So it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
Jane, please re-read Obama's words above or listen to the tape. Obama's words do not support your interpretation. If you leave off the "He points out that", I agree with your sentence, but Obama did not say that.
"He points out that immigrant-baiting, gay-baiting, gun-baiting, and religious pandering have helped to destroy those towns and that countryside, that those being destroyed have been cynically enlisted by their very own destroyers to provide the votes that help accomplish the destruction." posted 04/15/2008 at 14:17:04
Jane, please re-read Obama's words above or listen to the tape. Obama's words do not support your interpretation. If you leave off the "He points out that", I agree with your sentence, but Obama did not say that.
"He points out that immigrant-baiting, gay-baiting, gun-baiting, and religious pandering have helped to destroy those towns and that countryside, that those being destroyed have been cynically enlisted by their very own destroyers to provide the votes that help accomplish the destruction." posted 04/15/2008 at 14:17:04
Obama 'Small Town' Comments Draw Fire, Support
I see now. Obama is skipping the 2005 "credit card-sponsored bankruptcy bill that made it harder for people to get out of debt" that became law while he was in the Senate. A bill Clinton did not vote for.
Obama is instead talking about a Clinton vote on a 2001 bill, when Obama wasn't in the Senate, that never became law and got as far as a House/Senate conference report before dying.
By the way, Clinton never said she voted for the 2001 bill hoping at the time that it wouldn't pass. Obama mischaracterized what Clinton said in 2008: "It was a bill that had some things I agreed with and other things I didn't agree with, and I was happy that it never became law." posted 04/14/2008 at 13:02:27
Obama is instead talking about a Clinton vote on a 2001 bill, when Obama wasn't in the Senate, that never became law and got as far as a House/Senate conference report before dying.
By the way, Clinton never said she voted for the 2001 bill hoping at the time that it wouldn't pass. Obama mischaracterized what Clinton said in 2008: "It was a bill that had some things I agreed with and other things I didn't agree with, and I was happy that it never became law." posted 04/14/2008 at 13:02:27
Clinton did not vote on the bill that became law. Period. I don't even know if she voted on a preliminary or alternative version of the bill.
Senators vote for and against preliminary versions of bills all the time, and then change their votes after the bills are amended in ways the senators like or dislike.
The whole "I was for it before I was against it" smear of Kerry by Republicans four years ago was based on his short explanation ("I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it.") of such a vote change. Kerry voted for Iraq & Afghanistan war founding when the Democrat's bill included an $87 billion reduction in Bush's tax cuts to pay for it, and then he voted against the final bill when there was no way to pay for it. posted 04/14/2008 at 11:30:19
Senators vote for and against preliminary versions of bills all the time, and then change their votes after the bills are amended in ways the senators like or dislike.
The whole "I was for it before I was against it" smear of Kerry by Republicans four years ago was based on his short explanation ("I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it.") of such a vote change. Kerry voted for Iraq & Afghanistan war founding when the Democrat's bill included an $87 billion reduction in Bush's tax cuts to pay for it, and then he voted against the final bill when there was no way to pay for it. posted 04/14/2008 at 11:30:19
Obama says above: "Senator Clinton voted for a credit card-sponsored bankruptcy bill that made it harder for people to get out of debt after taking money from the financial services companies"
That is simply not true.
There were two senate roll call votes on the BANKRUPTCY ABUSE PREVENTION AND CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT OF 2005. A closure motion where Obama and Clinton voted the same, and the final roll call vote on the bill. Clinton did not vote on that roll call.
I checked both thomas.gov and Project Vote Smart.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SN00256:@@@X
http://votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_member.php?cs_id=V3480 posted 04/14/2008 at 00:59:05
That is simply not true.
There were two senate roll call votes on the BANKRUPTCY ABUSE PREVENTION AND CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT OF 2005. A closure motion where Obama and Clinton voted the same, and the final roll call vote on the bill. Clinton did not vote on that roll call.
I checked both thomas.gov and Project Vote Smart.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SN00256:@@@X
http://votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_member.php?cs_id=V3480 posted 04/14/2008 at 00:59:05
Obama: Public Finance System 'Creaky'
The article on the demographics of Obama's bundlers is interesting, but every campaign uses bundlers.
And Obama, through February, got 40% of his money from donors of $200 or less, while Clinton got 23% and McCain 24%.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/donordems.asp
(Center for Responsive Politics) posted 04/12/2008 at 00:31:51
And Obama, through February, got 40% of his money from donors of $200 or less, while Clinton got 23% and McCain 24%.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/donordems.asp
(Center for Responsive Politics) posted 04/12/2008 at 00:31:51
'"It may be a situation where my accountant didn't do it," he said.'
I thought it was amusing that Obama is trying to blame his accountant, rather than himself, for the fact that the Obamas did not support public financing on their 2005 and 2006 income tax forms. So at least twice Obama did not check that his tax return was accurate before submitting it to the federal government. posted 04/11/2008 at 23:54:09
I thought it was amusing that Obama is trying to blame his accountant, rather than himself, for the fact that the Obamas did not support public financing on their 2005 and 2006 income tax forms. So at least twice Obama did not check that his tax return was accurate before submitting it to the federal government. posted 04/11/2008 at 23:54:09
Bushes Pay Taxes on $923,807 Income
To be fair to the Bushes, they gave an extremely generous 17.9% of their income to charity (Laura donated all net income from her children's book co-authored with Jenna) . That surprised me a lot, despite the Bush family wealth. The Cheneys gave about 5.5%.
By the way, it looks like the ever secretive Cheney only released his 1040, while Bush released his schedules, worksheets, and forms. posted 04/11/2008 at 23:19:55
By the way, it looks like the ever secretive Cheney only released his 1040, while Bush released his schedules, worksheets, and forms. posted 04/11/2008 at 23:19:55
Gary Hart: If PA/NC Results Show Racial Divide, Obama Could Face Trouble In General
Obama doesn't need the majority of popular votes or of states to be the nominee - just the majority of delegates. (Except in extreme cases, winning the popular vote means winning the election. But the majority of states does not matter at all - the most populous 11 states have the majority of electoral college votes and of people.) posted 04/12/2008 at 00:18:37
Obama: I Would Have Fired Mark Penn
factcheck.org has not debunked NAFTA-gate. In fact, they end their analysis with "On this one, you"ll have to be the judge." Then they chronicle the story.
So you purposefully misreporting what factcheck.org said.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/the_facts_about_nafta-gate.html posted 04/12/2008 at 01:27:48
So you purposefully misreporting what factcheck.org said.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/the_facts_about_nafta-gate.html posted 04/12/2008 at 01:27:48
Bush Admin Wants To Move Animal Disease Lab To Area Near Livestock Herds
Moving an animal disease lab near food animal herds had nothing to do with the British mad cow outbreak according to any reputable or disreputable source I can find on the internet.
What animal disease lab are you talking about, or did you make that up? posted 04/12/2008 at 22:58:18
What animal disease lab are you talking about, or did you make that up? posted 04/12/2008 at 22:58:18
Clinton Firm's Deal Left Pennsylvania Churches In Shambles
K-Dog76, that is simply not true.
Bill Clinton did not earn $15 million from the Raffaello's joint venture with Yucaipa, where he was a senior adviser to two funds. In fact, there is no evidence that any of his income was contingent in any way to the Raffaello-Yucaipa business.
Also, it's not clear from the Wall Street Journal article that Yucaipa has so far made any money from the $50 million that the joint venture spent to buy 10 properties. In the one purchase and sale in the article above, Yucaipa made $150,00 when it sold. But Raffaello was sued for misspending $1.3 million. posted 04/11/2008 at 15:34:36
Bill Clinton did not earn $15 million from the Raffaello's joint venture with Yucaipa, where he was a senior adviser to two funds. In fact, there is no evidence that any of his income was contingent in any way to the Raffaello-Yucaipa business.
Also, it's not clear from the Wall Street Journal article that Yucaipa has so far made any money from the $50 million that the joint venture spent to buy 10 properties. In the one purchase and sale in the article above, Yucaipa made $150,00 when it sold. But Raffaello was sued for misspending $1.3 million. posted 04/11/2008 at 15:34:36
joja, if you can give reasons why Raffaello-Bill Clinton is like Rezko-Barack Obama, which is the question I was addressing, go ahead and make your arguments. We're all breathlessly awaiting your well reasoned comment. posted 04/11/2008 at 15:04:32
You really need to read up on current events and foundations. Oh, and thanks for the snappy comeback of complaining that the Clintons did not release more 2007 income data when I pointed out that weeks later the Obamas have released NO 2007 income data.
The Clintons have given a higher percentage of their income to charity than the Obamas in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006 - even when the Obamas made $1.6 million and $980,000. I bet the same will be true in 2007 despite the Obamas' millions in income.
The money they gave to the Clinton Family Foundation they will never get back, any more than money you donate. That foundation has disbursed an ever increasing amount of money:
2002 - 170,000
2003 - 313,000
2004 - 221,000
2005 - 549,000
2006 - 1,274,000
2007 - about $3 million
I guess you are have not figured out that there is a reason that foundations (Ford, Gates, or Clinton Family) do not have to give away all their money every year. I'll just let you research that.
You can also research why the Clintons have not released final 2007 income tax numbers (hint: in 2004, 2005, and 2006, the Clintons filed for income tax extensions until they received information related to partnerships). posted 04/11/2008 at 14:57:27
The Clintons have given a higher percentage of their income to charity than the Obamas in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006 - even when the Obamas made $1.6 million and $980,000. I bet the same will be true in 2007 despite the Obamas' millions in income.
The money they gave to the Clinton Family Foundation they will never get back, any more than money you donate. That foundation has disbursed an ever increasing amount of money:
2002 - 170,000
2003 - 313,000
2004 - 221,000
2005 - 549,000
2006 - 1,274,000
2007 - about $3 million
I guess you are have not figured out that there is a reason that foundations (Ford, Gates, or Clinton Family) do not have to give away all their money every year. I'll just let you research that.
You can also research why the Clintons have not released final 2007 income tax numbers (hint: in 2004, 2005, and 2006, the Clintons filed for income tax extensions until they received information related to partnerships). posted 04/11/2008 at 14:57:27
If the Hillary Clinton only cared about wealth, Hillary Clinton would not need to run for president. Bill was making lots of money before she announced in 2007.
By the way, when do you think Obama will finally give us figures for his 2007 income? The Clintons gave out preliminary 2007 data weeks ago, but the Obamas have released nothing.
I expect the Obamas made $2 million to $3 million in 2007. If the Obamas donated to charity at the Clintons' 2007 rate of about 14.7%, then they earned about $1.6 million. But if Obama gave again that his own personal best rate of 6.1%, then they earned $3.9 million.
Obama said he'll release before the April 22 Pennsylvania primary. If he thinks the numbers will be controversial, he'll release this Friday afternoon or next Friday afternoon. If he thinks they'll look good, I expect him to release April 15 or April 16. posted 04/11/2008 at 10:50:09
By the way, when do you think Obama will finally give us figures for his 2007 income? The Clintons gave out preliminary 2007 data weeks ago, but the Obamas have released nothing.
I expect the Obamas made $2 million to $3 million in 2007. If the Obamas donated to charity at the Clintons' 2007 rate of about 14.7%, then they earned about $1.6 million. But if Obama gave again that his own personal best rate of 6.1%, then they earned $3.9 million.
Obama said he'll release before the April 22 Pennsylvania primary. If he thinks the numbers will be controversial, he'll release this Friday afternoon or next Friday afternoon. If he thinks they'll look good, I expect him to release April 15 or April 16. posted 04/11/2008 at 10:50:09
ConnieB, where does it say that Bill Clinton has profited from the deal to the tune of hundreds of thousands? I cannot find that. Thanks. posted 04/11/2008 at 10:19:11
It does not seem to compare with Obama-Rezko at all.
Bill Clinton had no personal relationship, involvement in the business of, or business transactions with Raffaello. Bill Clinton did meet Raffaello, and it was one of Bill Clinton's aides who helped Raffaello go into business in 2005 with Yucaipa before Raffaello proved to be incompetent and/or dishonest.
If you go back and actually read the story, you would know the following:
In 2005, a Bill Clinton aide helped Raffaello go into business with Yucaipa Companies (where Bill Clinton was an extremely well-paid senior adviser to two funds) to buy and re-purpose Catholic Church properties. Raffaello did a terrible job, and in 2007 Yucaipa's head Burkle sued Raffaello for misappropriating $1.3 million.
Bill Clinton had nothing to do with the Raffaello purchases. Bill Clinton had begun divesting himself from Yucaipa before the biggest mess became known.
Hillary Clinton probably never met Raffaello. Bill Clinton met him several times. He once called him up on stage after he pledged money for a Clinton Global Initiative project in New Orleans. posted 04/11/2008 at 10:07:22
Bill Clinton had no personal relationship, involvement in the business of, or business transactions with Raffaello. Bill Clinton did meet Raffaello, and it was one of Bill Clinton's aides who helped Raffaello go into business in 2005 with Yucaipa before Raffaello proved to be incompetent and/or dishonest.
If you go back and actually read the story, you would know the following:
In 2005, a Bill Clinton aide helped Raffaello go into business with Yucaipa Companies (where Bill Clinton was an extremely well-paid senior adviser to two funds) to buy and re-purpose Catholic Church properties. Raffaello did a terrible job, and in 2007 Yucaipa's head Burkle sued Raffaello for misappropriating $1.3 million.
Bill Clinton had nothing to do with the Raffaello purchases. Bill Clinton had begun divesting himself from Yucaipa before the biggest mess became known.
Hillary Clinton probably never met Raffaello. Bill Clinton met him several times. He once called him up on stage after he pledged money for a Clinton Global Initiative project in New Orleans. posted 04/11/2008 at 10:07:22
Barack Obama has also utterly failed to unite the Democratic Party. Let's hope unity occurs after the convention, no matter who wins.
Oh, and you do know that the "Iran declaration" was a non-binding Sense of the Senate resolution asking that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards be designated a terrorist organization.
That Obama missed the vote on it, and didn't see the final, watered down form that anti-Bush foreign relations expert Senator Levin voted for.
That not even Bush/Cheney have used it to attack Iran.
And that Obama is sponsoring a bill noting that it is the sense of the Congress that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards be designated a terrorist organization.
I would have hoped that if Obama thinks the "Iran declaration" is a prelude to a Iran war, Obama would not cosponsor the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act until that language was removed. posted 04/10/2008 at 16:02:14
Oh, and you do know that the "Iran declaration" was a non-binding Sense of the Senate resolution asking that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards be designated a terrorist organization.
That Obama missed the vote on it, and didn't see the final, watered down form that anti-Bush foreign relations expert Senator Levin voted for.
That not even Bush/Cheney have used it to attack Iran.
And that Obama is sponsoring a bill noting that it is the sense of the Congress that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards be designated a terrorist organization.
I would have hoped that if Obama thinks the "Iran declaration" is a prelude to a Iran war, Obama would not cosponsor the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act until that language was removed. posted 04/10/2008 at 16:02:14
Obama's "Big Tent" Campaign Cuts Out The Little People In California
Well, if you are the friend, then "intended to vote for Obama" meant "intended to vote for Obama in the general election", rather than "intended to vote for Obama if chosen as a delegate." The first is honorable, and admirable, the second is not. posted 04/11/2008 at 15:46:37
I find it interesting that the only attempt at backstabbing anyone has attested to here is this from msblucow:
"I had a friend register as a Clinton delegate in my congressional district, even though he intended to vote for Obama. There were less candidates filing for the Clinton slots, so he thought he'd have a better chance to be elected, since the competition wasn't as great." posted 04/10/2008 at 14:49:44
"I had a friend register as a Clinton delegate in my congressional district, even though he intended to vote for Obama. There were less candidates filing for the Clinton slots, so he thought he'd have a better chance to be elected, since the competition wasn't as great." posted 04/10/2008 at 14:49:44
The fact that someone is a politician or a long-time activist in California does not mean they are more likely to stay loyal to Obama than a grass roots organizer for Obama. The Obama campaign "knows" those political people only as well as they know the grass roots organizer - it's the first Obama campaign for both sets of people.
And long-time activists in California are getting dropped, too.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/10/92651/5454?detail=f posted 04/10/2008 at 14:40:32
And long-time activists in California are getting dropped, too.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/10/92651/5454?detail=f posted 04/10/2008 at 14:40:32
Clinton Camp: It's A Miracle We're Not Behind In Pennsylvania
Perhaps as people see more of Senator Obama and differentiate the candidates, the margin will widen again. posted 04/09/2008 at 16:35:25
Obama Camp Won't Pull Oil Ad That Clinton Calls Misleading
Hillary does take PAC money, and Barack does not.
About 0.7% of Hillary's $169 million has come from PACs, through Feb.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.asp?id=N00000019&cycle=2008
(Center for Responsive Politics) posted 04/09/2008 at 16:29:45
About 0.7% of Hillary's $169 million has come from PACs, through Feb.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.asp?id=N00000019&cycle=2008
(Center for Responsive Politics) posted 04/09/2008 at 16:29:45
Barack Obama On Public Financing: We've Created A Parallel System
I just checked Obama, Clinton, and McCain at the Center for Responsive Politics site www.opensecrets.org.
Through Feb 29, 2008 (March reports are due April 20):
Obama $193.6 million total: $192.8 million from individual contributions (100%)
Clinton $169.0 million total: $151.6 million from individual contributions (90%) , $1.2 million from PACs (1%), $5 million self-financing (3%), don't know about the rest
McCain $ 58.9 million from individual contributions (91%), $0.7 million from PACs (1%), don't know about the rest
So Clinton would surrender a campaign advantage if she pledged and now becomes the nominee. posted 04/09/2008 at 16:16:14
Through Feb 29, 2008 (March reports are due April 20):
Obama $193.6 million total: $192.8 million from individual contributions (100%)
Clinton $169.0 million total: $151.6 million from individual contributions (90%) , $1.2 million from PACs (1%), $5 million self-financing (3%), don't know about the rest
McCain $ 58.9 million from individual contributions (91%), $0.7 million from PACs (1%), don't know about the rest
So Clinton would surrender a campaign advantage if she pledged and now becomes the nominee. posted 04/09/2008 at 16:16:14
By last October, Obama had already pledged not to accept money from "special interest PACs or registered federal lobbyists", but Obama promised something in addition.
Obama's promise in October 2007:
"In February 2007, I proposed a novel way to preserve the strength of the public financing system in the 2008 election. My plan requires both major party candidates to agree on a fundraising truce, return excess money from donors, and stay within the public financing system for the general election.
...If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election."
If he gets to be the Democratic nominee, we'll see if Obama keeps that promise. posted 04/09/2008 at 15:53:48
Obama's promise in October 2007:
"In February 2007, I proposed a novel way to preserve the strength of the public financing system in the 2008 election. My plan requires both major party candidates to agree on a fundraising truce, return excess money from donors, and stay within the public financing system for the general election.
...If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election."
If he gets to be the Democratic nominee, we'll see if Obama keeps that promise. posted 04/09/2008 at 15:53:48
As you probably know, one or two days after his pledge went into effect, Obama came out of one of his Florida fundraisers, walked over to a group of reporters, and held a short, impromptu press conference. Of course, Edwards and Clinton did not break their pledges like that. posted 04/09/2008 at 15:22:53
Obama Event Coordinator: Get Me More White People
Sorry, I thought when you said "This headline is racially inflammatory." that you meant the headline was racially inflammatory. The headline does not say that Michelle or Barack did anything - right or wrong.
No reader knew that your issue with HuffPo was showing that picture of Michelle Obama at an event under a headline about what one of her event coordinators did. posted 04/09/2008 at 10:27:37
No reader knew that your issue with HuffPo was showing that picture of Michelle Obama at an event under a headline about what one of her event coordinators did. posted 04/09/2008 at 10:27:37
What part of "Obama Event Coordinator" did you not understand? posted 04/09/2008 at 09:21:00
Bill Clinton's Ties To Colombia Trade Deal Stronger Than Even Penn's
Daschle is a national co-chair for Obama's presidential campaign. An inconvenient truth.
(I posted this, and it showed up in my profile, but no longer shows up when I refresh this page.) posted 04/09/2008 at 11:13:59
(I posted this, and it showed up in my profile, but no longer shows up when I refresh this page.) posted 04/09/2008 at 11:13:59
Daschle is a national co-chair for Obama's presidential campaign. An inconvenient truth. posted 04/09/2008 at 09:35:26
When Obama and Clinton both vote in the Senate on substantive issues, they vote the same 97% of the time. (I checked in late February at Project Vote Smart, which recorded of about 270 times they both voted in about 20 issue areas.)
By your logic, The Obamas = The Clintons = McSame = Bush/Cheney. posted 04/09/2008 at 09:28:56
By your logic, The Obamas = The Clintons = McSame = Bush/Cheney. posted 04/09/2008 at 09:28:56
Obama Holds First Committee Meeting Before Petraeus Hearing
Obama has missed 56 more votes than Clinton, but 100 fewer than McCain.
Leaving out Senator Johnson (whose brain hemorrhage had him missing 100% of the votes for a while), the worst Senate vote missers are:
1) 56.8% John McCain (304 missed, 231 cast)
2) 38.1% Barack Obama (204 missed, 331 cast)
3) 33.5% Joe Biden
4) 31.6% Chris Dodd
5) 27.7% Hillary Clinton (148 missed, 387 cast)
Johnson has only missed 7 more than McCain, so McCain will pass him soon...
(In the 109th Congress, McCain missed 58, Clinton 16, and Obama 11.) posted 04/09/2008 at 17:40:46
Leaving out Senator Johnson (whose brain hemorrhage had him missing 100% of the votes for a while), the worst Senate vote missers are:
1) 56.8% John McCain (304 missed, 231 cast)
2) 38.1% Barack Obama (204 missed, 331 cast)
3) 33.5% Joe Biden
4) 31.6% Chris Dodd
5) 27.7% Hillary Clinton (148 missed, 387 cast)
Johnson has only missed 7 more than McCain, so McCain will pass him soon...
(In the 109th Congress, McCain missed 58, Clinton 16, and Obama 11.) posted 04/09/2008 at 17:40:46
Popular Stories on HuffPost
From the AP: Democrat John Edwards endorsed former rival Barack Obama on Wednesday, a...
*** UPDATED BELOW *** President Bush has said repeatedly that he would not insert himself into the...
Utterly insane goings-on tonight on...
It's a pretty well known fact that most women - attractive women -...
Just off the House floor today, the Crypt overheard House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers tell two...
Tonight, Keith Olbermann unleashed what may well have been his...
The AP reports on Obama's swift and forceful response to Bush and McCain's criticism of...
The Tennessee GOP hasn't yet had their fill of Obama dirty tricks. A few months ago,...
***UPDATE*** Roughly five hours after making comments about...
The Democratic Party has finally decided who's going to break it to Hillary that it's time...
Sixteen tips for getting good sleep. There's a lot of advice out there about getting good...
