Please wait, your request is processed...

mjc

Recent comments by this user

Electing Sweetie

This is for Monique, Patmancando,....and others who don't really want the choice for Democrats to be Obama. There have been very hard fought campaigns before, especially where the Democrats are involved. There is still a chance for the Party and the people assembled in Denver to realize who they should be nominating. When you look at the states that Hillary has won, even though not as many as Obama, they are states with bigger populations, more industrial economies, and perhaps not as many blacks, and there is a lot more work to do on racism in this country by all colors of skin. There is a possibility of either writing her name in at the general or establishing a new political party. But agree that the options are not great. Even if he gets the nomination, he is not likely to do a second term. There will be a lot of folks watching, screening him, and perhaps realizing that he has taken on more than he can chew, perhaps with disastrous results. And if Hillary isn't saying, "I told you so," I will. posted 05/17/2008 at 11:52:44

Getting on Law Review and then becoming the president is not a qualification for the presidency of the US. posted 05/17/2008 at 11:37:31

Very difficult to follow your reasoning, Dietrich. Since Hillary Clinton won New York, California, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Indiana, West Virginia, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Florida, Michigan (when they are counted), and New Mexico, and probably will take Kentucky easily, it is difficult to see how none of those voters, or even only a few of those voters, would vote for her in the general. As to your stuff about Repugs, I've talked to many, many of them and they are not McCain Repugs for many reasons and certainly have told me they would never vote for Obama; that leaves Hillary!! And they aren't terribly unhappy about that either. Many folks realize that the past you and Obama so disdain was very good for individuals and for this country. And many also told me that it is sad that it took the country so long to get it right, although they know very well the Obamacons' record in caucuses....., and don't like it. That behavior will be come out, but unfortunately too late to make a difference, although you see "buyers" remorse in Nebraska. posted 05/17/2008 at 10:35:37

MA4HRC, you are absolutely on the same wave length as I am. I know from calling that Kentucky will go for Clinton, probably in a big way, but if the Party good 'ole boys and girls deny her a chance at the nomination via the convention I am all for finding a way to either write her in or form an independent WOMEN'S ??!! Party to have her run in the general election. posted 05/17/2008 at 09:56:33

Thanks for that poem, visgn. That is the very real question everyone, even the dedicated disciples of Obama ought to be asking: Who is the real Obama? posted 05/16/2008 at 18:30:16

Your misinformation really doesn't give/lend validity to your opinions or "facts" to those who read them. Hillary graduated from Yale Law School and immediately went to work for a trail-blazing program, the Children's Defense Fund; that's the program that Bush borrowed the No Child Left Behind motto from. A lot less like the self-aggrandizing work that Obama engaged in to get himself a stake in Illinois politics and ultimately run for the president. Obama made a speech in Illinois in the Illinois legislature that had no ability to debate or join against the Iraq war. Obama voted for Cheney's oil bill that gave billions to CEOs of those companies. Hillary voted against it. Not sure about the bankruptcy bill. Yeah, Obama just tried to undermine his own government by saying HE would talk to terrorist leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah; no diplomatic efforts paving the way. Obama DID play the gender card, with gestures and a reference to a woman's cycle, arguing that Hillary was grumpy on certain days. And he played the race card. Jumped on Ferraro for her comment that Obama wouldn't be where he was if he hadn't had the support of blacks; just obvious facts, but Obama made into a big racial slur. I could go on but running out of words. posted 05/16/2008 at 18:21:42

So age is as much a consideration with the Obamacons as any other consideration? Your post is one of the things that turn any more or less politically neutral individual totally away from Obama because we are looking at his support, many of whom post on this site. Hillary has more vision and plans to bring that vision into focus than Obama has in his smallest toenail. Just because you don't read..., or resist reading?..., no excuse for not know where she wants this country to go and how to get there. posted 05/16/2008 at 17:58:31

Massive Blowback To NARAL's Obama Endorsement

You'll put up those excuses for the need to slap back at Clinton who has spent a lifetime of working for women's and families' rights???? What a mountain of s...t you serve up! posted 05/15/2008 at 16:01:45

What in the world were they thinking? The sound of memberships dropping must be pretty spectacular. Obama voted in the Illinois Senate "present" instead of "yes" or "no" on abortion rights issues. That's like his saying, I'm here but don't expect me to stick my neck out for women's rights. But the sheer audacity of thinking this was going to help Obama in any way is nuts. More like a slap at Hillary Clinton because she is running for......the presidency?!!! How dare she? Are NARAL policy makers misogynists, dedicated to Obama wonderful plans for women? No, can't be. You rarely hear him even address issues that women care about. posted 05/15/2008 at 15:57:15

Even as Clinton Wins West Virginia, Obama's Magic Number Drops to 143 Delegates -- His Political Stock Rises on News from Mississippi

There is no evidence that Obama has more independent support than Hillary and there is evidence that McCain probably has more than both in SOME states, especially in the Mid-West. While white males and females are on the decline ethnicity-wise in many of the big cities, there are still an awful lot of them out there, again, especially in the Mid-West and in the Far West and perhaps in areas of the Southwest where retirees like to go. That fact and the loose lips of Obama, in re Hamas, etcetera, will sink Obama's ship in a general election. posted 05/16/2008 at 13:52:39

Agree with you that it is strange that this man who the media seem to love, untouchable by any of the scandals that have been roiling around his name---Wright, Rezko, Ayers for example---still has trouble closing the deal. Of the major industrial states, Obama has one: Illinois. Hillary has New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Ohio, West Virginia, Michigan--still not counted, and Oklahoma and Arkansas--with southern tones, and California. She came very close in Missouri. Those are all rather large, populous states. Obama's message, whatever it was that day, didn't come through. When change is all you can come up with after over a year on the campaign trail, maybe those voters couldn't stomach the lack of ideas and plans.
No question: Obama did NOT carry 21 states by 21% of the electorate. posted 05/15/2008 at 15:05:44

What utter nonsense! Obama did not contest West Virginia!!! BS He spent millions in tv ads and although one day only on Monday that does not mean he didn't try to contest that race. Obama giving Clinton time to exit gracefully.....what are you smoking? posted 05/15/2008 at 14:52:05

People will believe what is repeated either on the airwaves or in print every time. Obama did not win 21 contests with over or even even 21% And you are right, Moe. If this was his race from the beginning you would think he could have closed the deal long ago. He can't because there is quite a large element of the voting population that is simply not going to vote for him for various reasons or believes Hillary Clinton is the better choice; a large proportion! posted 05/15/2008 at 14:22:41

Why would you assume that the "Obama haters" are not Democrats? That's just crap. Most of us opposed to Obama are opposed to him not because we hate him but because he is so unsuited for the job of being a president and because he represents only a segment of the Democratic base, mostly black and some intellectuals. He doesn't stand much of a chance of taking the national election, no matter what he tells us or his campaign tells us. The problems he is has with the Democratic base was never more obvious than the stinging defeat in West Virginia. But that isn't acknowledged. That arrogance for you. posted 05/15/2008 at 14:15:08

Think you'd get good odds that those Democrats who tried to help and were overrun will not be interested in the Democratic ticket if it includes Obama. posted 05/15/2008 at 14:10:43

I spoke with Democrats in Texas who did more than imply that the Obamacons mobbed the "caucus" sites with family members, friends, folks who had never seen the inside of a voting booth. Lots and lots of chaos was the order of the day, especially in Houston. When older Democrats at the Univ of Texas tried to help out the very inexperienced Obama voters, they were thanked by them when they grabbed the list of voters eligible to vote in the caucus and took over the caucus leaving the old timers completely out. That's a fact. But it is difficult to prove because there was such an overwhelming scene of disorder, with no one of the scheduled caucus supervisors available and unable to get a mic.
fitconnection has no idea how the caucus system works in Texas. It is far and away different from what happened in Nevada. posted 05/15/2008 at 14:07:39

Hillary Agonistes: Why Doesn't She Concede?

Just love the way folks like Edsall have all the scenarios lined up and then predict what will happen if Hillary stays or goes. Something Edsall doesn't realize and lots of the Obamacons don't either, she is in no trouble about keeping her Senate seat. She has a political future, a damn good one, IF she loses this nomination. And just imagine what would happen to the Democratic Party if she should leave......the Democratic Party, perhaps run as an independent? There are many, many folks out there who would still stick solidly behind Hillary. And lots and lots of states where she won, all the industrial states except Illinois, where I know for a fact that she has a lot of very high regard. The Party could be in big trouble of its own. posted 05/15/2008 at 14:44:22

The Bipartisanship Scam

Going to war is no small action of any government. Don't think the resolution to give Bush the option to use force in lue of the Iraqi government not allowing the inspectors to continue to do their job was anywhere close to the Congress' declaring war in 1941. But we have lost a lot of our own freedom and privacy simply because Congress trusted this president. In war times our nation rather depends upon that. posted 05/13/2008 at 19:56:42

Arianna, I had to check to make sure you were the blogger of the piece above. You mean we don't have to join all together with a good chorus of kum-by-ya with the Republicans? That is an Obama prime point. Unity. I have never wanted to do anything but defeat the Republicans, especially their foreign policy and their non-existent health care, But the man you find to be the best presidential candidate is wanting to join with the Republicans, lets find common ground, no problem shedding any primary core beliefs so that we can be unified. I am really surprised at this post. Obama has never been one for ideas and solutions and plans, etcfetera, because they produce disagreement and sides taken and sometimes inaction until the problems can be worked out. Obama thinks charisma will overcome, absolutely overcome. Never expected you would agree with that. posted 05/13/2008 at 19:51:13

Top 10 Reasons Obama Defeated Clinton for the Democratic Nomination

One question: If Barack Obama is the nominee of the Democratic Party, with all the very loving media attention, and so many endorsers, and so much money, WHY CAN'T HE CLOSE THE DEAL ON THIS NOMINATION? Why has it taken so very long for him to even get this close to the nomination? posted 05/15/2008 at 15:36:42

Bluesage...., think that is one of the better posts I have read from someone who I believe supports Obama....; maybe not. But, yeah, in my state there are a least three 'always Repug seats' up for grabs in the House and I intend to pour my support into getting those Dems elected And there are also Senate seats in other states which look to be going to be Democratic. THAT is the good news, even if Obama gets the nomination. posted 05/13/2008 at 12:38:22

Well you don't have any lack of ego, do you?! I can only speak for myself but I know that I like 3oo + Hillary Helloers have been calling for months into each and every state and have donated money as well. Our passion for our candidate is going to make it very, very difficult to vote for Obama. I don't really consider him a real Democrat. Just listen to the returns from West Virginia today and you'll know what we have been doing for our candidate. Some New Yorkers have actually gone into various states nearby and worked the doorbells and the streets for her. If the Democratic Party ignores the number of voters Hillary has won, there will be price for the Party to bear: no Obama! posted 05/13/2008 at 12:26:19

Just as Creamer has suggested, the messenger IS the only reason to vote for Obama. What message? If you say "change", I'd just have to pursue that by asking what is meant? Change to what? Don't you all realize that change is going happen, with or without saying you support it? posted 05/13/2008 at 12:19:24

Can I ask why? Because he is a good orator? That's all it takes??? Hope you can cling to that when we become involved in some very tricky and dangerous dealings with Iran or Syria or China because oratory won't solve our relationships with those countries. posted 05/13/2008 at 12:14:50

Ever heard of the Protestant Reformation? Protestants do vary in the way the worship from Roman Catholic in varying degrees but Protestants believe in God just as much as Catholics. BTW Jesus did not build the Catholic Church, either. Where I draw the line at worshipping as one pleases.., or not..., is when the theology of that church becomes a series of negative and destructive comments on national or political policy. That's what happend at Obama's particular church. To say he doesn't believe those comments, you'd have to explain why he joined the church, was married by this Wright, and whose children sat in the pews listening to this particular pastor. posted 05/13/2008 at 12:09:30

Your problem is you don't know very much about Hillary Clinton. During and after law school Hillary worked for the Children's Defense Fund. White, black, Hispanic children were helped by this agency in the courts, in the schools and in the agencies. She was a Goldwater Girl but perhaps more importantly she went to Texas during the mid-seventies and campaigned for George McGovern, registering black voters in that state. She has had a great deal more involvement with social justice and civil rights than Obama. Obama was building a machine to support him in his quest for political positions while in Chicago and he got it with the help of Rezko, the Daly machine, and others such as Ayers. posted 05/13/2008 at 11:58:05

Mr. Creamer you took all the reasons one should not allow to influence one's decision to support a candidate. #1. Obama is an Extraordinary Candidate. Inspirational, articulate, brilliant, funny, attractive and naturally empathetic - his history as a community organizer, his experience abroad, his beautiful family, accomplished wife, and adorable kids: Obama is the kind of candidate any campaign manager would want in any year. But he is perfect for this year. While the Clintons represented the Bridge to the 21st Century, Obama is the 21st century. His own, multi-cultural story is the future of America. As the campaign tested him, he showed he was cool, deliberate and effective under fire.

In other words, Obama is ideal tv fiction. Some of what you say is so gooey I don't see how you can put it on paper: He is "21st Century"; "inspirational, articulate,....naturally empathetic". You even bring in his family. My sakes alive, he's better as a candidate for the Democratic Party??? While those personality perks might help any candidate, there is no mention of his passion for ideas, solutions, and issues. The MAN is the only reason he defeated Clinton, and of course in case you have not heard, Obama still is NOT the candidate of the Democratic Party. His beauty is quite well known to all but not all are buying that. posted 05/13/2008 at 11:46:51

Obama In Kentucky And West Virginia: Why Will He Lose?

And for the Obamacons on these threads to assume that anyone who votes for Hillary are racist is just the nonsense that is going to lose Obama the national election. White people do vote in these elections, and older white persons even more so, so the racist attacks on Hillary Clinton and her surrogates should really stop. posted 05/12/2008 at 12:33:57

You explain it by stating that George Bush was the sort of person they wanted for president, even if he isn't a Democrat. Bush went out of his way to be the "bubba" and prove that he does understand ordinary Americans. Obama???? well, not so much....... posted 05/12/2008 at 12:29:38

Well........I tried posting this quite non-controversial comment before, but the HuffPo security dogs must not have gotten enough red meat so......let me just say that the last time West Virginia went Democratic was when Bill Clinton was the candidate. And, in fact, no Democrat has EVER won the White House WITHOUT winning West Virginia. It is highly likely, however, that if Obama is the Democratic candidate McCain will carry this state quite handily. posted 05/12/2008 at 12:19:28

There is talk amongst those of us who are Hillary supporters that we could mount an Independent Party run for her. So your mother might get a chance to vote for the best qualified afterall. Hillary has won in the race with Obama every major industrial based state EXCEPT Illinois That could be bad news for both Obama and McCain. posted 05/12/2008 at 12:09:26

The last time was when a guy named Bill Clinton ran for president. posted 05/12/2008 at 12:02:46

Denigrating these two states will NOT raise your choice one iota; actually, maybe those words you use to describe the voters there could fit you. posted 05/12/2008 at 11:58:34

Most of the commentators here answer the blog's question with one reason: WVA is a racist state. Anyone, apparently, who runs against Obama, who won't vote for Obama, or, God forbid, criticizes Obama is automatically a racist. If you all represent Obama, God help this country. Somewhere along the line you missed the part about America's value as a refuge for the poor, tired and down-trodden. If this sort of reaction is going to happen every time a black, man or woman, runs for office, our nation has already gone down the slippery slope to a apartheid country, everyone to his own color, his own culture. posted 05/12/2008 at 11:45:58

Edwards: Clinton didn't choose words well on race

She may very well take West Virginia and Kentucky later by 20 points. Most everything the American voter knows probably comes from the media, especially the tv version. posted 05/11/2008 at 19:56:16

Rangel Slams Clinton White Support Talk

Can you name those black candidates who ran for president? posted 05/11/2008 at 11:30:30

Absolutely no way you can claim she has said that...."their [blacks] vote is irrelevant and that's pretty disturbing"......Until this contest, both Clintons were highly regarded by black men and women because both have worked many years to help that part of our nation obtain social justice and respect. posted 05/11/2008 at 11:28:06

No matter how it is said, if Clinton or any WHITE supporter analyzes the breakdown in voting patterns and suggests that Obama, saintly as he is, has a problem with a segment of the population, the white population, males, blue collar males....especially if the adjective "hard working" is attached, Clinton or the surrogate is a racist! This is the sickness of this country, trying to find racial degeneration in every statement that uses white or black. IT IS A FACT! The only time Obama didn't have a problem with white, blue collar males was in the Wisconsin primary. People who run campaigns need to have this information and be sure that unless Obama's advisers are quite stupid they DO know this and know that he needs to do something about that, either in the next primaries or in the general election. And, take my word for it, the break down of the West Virginia voting will definitely show this; have been listening to comments that indicate that calling into WVA. Why every black pundit or politican feels so insulted by such a statement is beyond me. posted 05/11/2008 at 11:21:56

Clinton Still Attacking Obama On Campaign Trail

Mandating EVERYONE contribute to healthcare is the only way to make it universal. The very rich say too that they don't need healthcare. If you allow opt-outs, then the healthcare will become very, very expensive. The rich can still choose whatever healthcare plan they like but they have to contribute to the general fund. Those not working and with little income must contribute something of their income as well and the state and federal government will help with a subsidy. It will operate somewhat on the same basis as Medicare. The insurance companies like Obama's plan because it only mandates children and adults don't have to contribute to a general fund. Obama who claims that he gets no financial help from big business is the recipient of a lot of bundled funds from insurance companies, just as he is from the big oil companies. His phony claims seem to indicate a phony front of concern for the disenfranchised. posted 05/10/2008 at 14:51:52

Rahm Emanuel: Obama Is Our Presumptive Nominee

Great and true post, whizzkid. I am sick of being bamboozeled by pretend Dems. How do we get Hillary in the White House. posted 05/10/2008 at 19:50:22

Rahm Emanuel looked like the cat that dragged in something into the house. It may be a nice dream for you, because Hillary has lost some primaries and caucuses, that he really knows what he is talking about, or, even worse, that Obama knows what HE is talking about. If Michigan and Florida are not counted as they stand, with Obama getting the "uncommitted" and Hillary getting her votes, then you loyal and totally uneducated Obamacons are going to be in for a BIG SURPRISE! He won't take the national election. Emanuel thinks he is in the know, but take a look at some of the HuffPo blogs like Matt Stoller's. Obama is a leader of the brown shirts, and he does indeed intend to "consolidate power." Emanuel will be royally screwed. posted 05/10/2008 at 19:43:48

Flawed Messengers and Wooden Soldiers: Why Obama Beat Clinton -- and Why He'll Beat McCain, Too

WHO is an octogenarian? Think Reagan is dead.....and he would be the closest........ And by the way, America is quite racist in many regions and racism has only been exacerbated by this contest because Obama's supporters cannot handle any criticism or lack of support. He is only a man but if we cannot talk about race as it actually is NOW, then this country will continue to racist, all colors. posted 05/12/2008 at 13:54:36

Not exactly sure what Eskow is saying but do get the general tone of the responses. Hillary never says I was wrong, for instance: She uses the phrase "misspoke" and everyone get soooo AGITATED. We lack a political pilgrimage site in this country, unless its Mt. Vernon. But Hillary gets absolutely no tolerance from the media or the Obamacons, unless she whips out a hair shirt. She explained her vote on the resolution giving Bush the authority to use force umpteen times; not good enough. If a surrogates points out that Obama won South Carolina more because he is black and won 90% of the black votes, there are screams of racism. WHOSE RACISM? The exit polls didn't ask what particular program or issue of Obama's they liked the best. In Mississippi, 90% of the black vote went to Obama. His being black couldn't have a role to play in winning primaries in the South? Talk about authenticity all you want. The pretense is that Obama has all these marvelous ideas he is going to put into place WHEN elected is the least honest. Congress, unless the Movement decides to do away with it, has a role. But least honest is that Obama is going to win states like West Virginia, Kentucky, Ohio or Pennsylvania, and, yes, even Indiana, rings very false knowing what we all do know about the make up of those states and Obama's unwillingness to really deal with racisim right smack in front of him. posted 05/12/2008 at 13:45:53

Reading The Pictures: Preparing For The Second Coming (Of Obama-Mania)

Brave person MA4HRC. Hillary has been all along accused of playing the race card, either through her own statements but mostly through her surrogates...Bill and Geraldine Ferraro. It is more like any mention that Obama is black is a racist statement. posted 05/10/2008 at 10:36:33

Obama's Consolidation of the Party

If you buy into that kind of sick and inhumane logic, then, as you said, you are probably more bitter than perhaps even you imagine. For someone, anyone, to be "gleeful" about the death of a beautiful horse with lots of promise BECAUSE Hillary had hoped she would win is so sick, it is beyond my ability to answer it. God her/himself would be weeping I think........................... posted 05/11/2008 at 19:44:23

Trying once again to respond to your post. Who is the WE you refer to who will be in charge....??? What is the change that is "already happening"? Are the WE African Americans? Is the change happening the dismantling of the Democratic Party? IMO Obama has held off attacking McCain in order to make sure that Clinton doesn't move ahead of him but also because he doesn't want a virtual tie between the two at the Conventon. That might mean the Democrats would choose on several ballots another Democrat who doesn't have the history of attacking one of the Party's strongest presidents and NY Senator. posted 05/10/2008 at 10:01:41

Wondering who the WE is that will be in charge, and it's about time!? And what will it change? Are you referring to African Americans...the WE? Is dismantling the Democratic Party the change...., that is already happening? posted 05/10/2008 at 09:29:28

Really couldn't let this particular post pass. Here you are, an Obama disciple, talking about O bama transcending politics and then you launch into how you don't care if his opponents...you call them neocons, which only covers a small portion of his opposition....have a seat at the table. Look what you have written: they are "obstructionist", 'likely" to be "disruptive"...."They can all go to hell or to prison as they rightly deserve". Is that how Obama inspires you? Is that how he transcends politics? Even the solutions you mention are violent, and quite disruptive. BTW America has probably NEVER been what one would call a liberal nation. You would have Obama ignore the checks and balances, putting companies out of business. No, I want absolutely no part of it and I don't think I am alone. posted 05/09/2008 at 11:13:54

Ya hear what ya want to hear. Obama DOES have a problem with white male blue collar voters and with older women, probably mostly white, and women in general. Those are just facts that the exit polls show to be as true as possible under the circumstances. posted 05/09/2008 at 11:03:46

And putting one man...., and his wife, in charge of solving those problems isn't scary? Change isn't scary. It is a fact. The guy at the top should be looking around for the Party that "brung" him to the place. Obama won't be. He is just arrogant enough to think that he has all the answers. There were echoes of Obama in guys like Huey Long and you sure had some of that in Ronnie Raygun. Reagan fooled a lot of folks but Reagan was whaco enough to leave the Party regulars out. He let them pretend they were governing while he tended to more important things..., like giving speeches. But if Stoller is right, that won't be the case. posted 05/09/2008 at 10:53:57

What vision? What promise of a new direction? Obama simply copies other individuals' plans, tailors them to his own ideas, and declares he has a plan. His vision really bothers me. The man is only interested in getting himself elected with a mob of young, unwashed disciples....remember the brown shirts?.....replacing the usual Party regulars....like myself.....and win an election. Any plans can come later as he "consolidates" power. If he gets the nomination, I'll work my tail off for Ron Paul or join some sort of write in campaign. The stuff Stoller reveals is exactly what has been bothering me for some time about Obama. posted 05/09/2008 at 10:45:26

Probably be more like "Enlightened Despot" Obama and his Queen. This "movement", with no particular plans, solutions, leaves all the imagining and determination to the great leader. If this article is a true representation of an Obama presidency, I will certainly vote for anyone else. posted 05/09/2008 at 08:46:38

Stoller simply states what I've suspected all along: Obama is going to represent the Movement, his movement, not a Democratic Party, nor any of the solutions, issues or plans of various Party leaders. I wonder if groups like Vote for Vets and especially True Majority and MoveOn are aware of just how far he is willing to go to produce his own party. That would definitely turn me off. What issues are going to be important to this Movement? Are the issues going to be ones that further divide this nation along racial lines? posted 05/09/2008 at 08:39:17

Washington's Great "No Inflation" Hoax

We ARE in a recession; no doubt. Whether or not inflation will make some difference in transcending that economic turn down is still in debate. posted 05/11/2008 at 20:01:13

Ed Koch: Obama Is A Sure Loser, Clinton Should Fight On

Based on her vote for the resolution to give the president the right to use force in Iraq if the inspectors were not allowed to continue their work you are calling her a warmonger? There were at least 80 others in the Senate who did the same. Please don't throw slurs around so casually. As for racist, don't know where you were 8 years ago or 30 years before that, but no one would accuse her of being a racist. She fought for children's right to health care and families' rights to justice, black and white, even before she graduated from law school. You are not well informed. Again, don't slander someone without some facts. posted 05/08/2008 at 11:55:18

While the truth of much of what you have written about our government may be true, the only one I know to so is the Tuskeegee experiments. That CIA has gone way beyond their "mode of operations" is well suspected and in some cases documented; however, for charges that you mention you do need some valid evidence. And I don't for a moment believe that Clinton, Bill or Hillary, would be involved in such skull-dudgery and evil. Jeremiah Wright offered absolutely no evidence for either and preached his disdain and negativity for this nation from the pulpit, supposedly a CHRISTIAN pulpit, as if Jesus would have approved of his rantings. Obama did not denounce him the first time and barely did the second time he talk of his pastor. posted 05/08/2008 at 11:47:24

That is the most self-serving posting I have ever read anywhere. As for young people being involved, you should wait until November to see if all those sentiments are realized at the polls. When do you think old folks should retire from politics? posted 05/08/2008 at 11:02:49

My problem is not with a black president: my problem is with THIS black president, a man who does seem to accept a black nationalist ideology---whether you call it "liberation theology" or whatever, and a man with a wife who isn't above dissing this nation in the same way that Jeremiah Wright dissed it. posted 05/08/2008 at 11:00:03

Obama has similar policy stances as Hillary Clinton because he waited until the plans of all his Democratic opponents were out there and then he cherry-picked what he wanted. Obama lacks experience and judgment and it is going to be a full plate for the Republicans to attack. But think these folks you are addressing don't get that at all. As for having the sainted Obama serve as a vice president....., why you have some nerve! I would be fully afraid if I thought that Obama has a snowballs chance in hell of winning the national election, but think you are right about McCain being the benefactor. posted 05/08/2008 at 10:39:25

You can see below all the reasons why the Democratic Party will NOT be unified, no matter whether Clinton or Obama is the nominee. The first 10 of the comments are from Obamacons who know nothing about Ed Koch and couldn't face the actual arguments he makes. So little information, so much prejudice. There is a lot of evidence from the poll takers that Obama WILL have a problem with independents in a general election, a problem Hillary would not. McCain is not your average Republican and a lot of his support today and in the past has come from independents. posted 05/08/2008 at 10:31:34

McCain's Rough Night Overshadowed By Clinton's

I thought I posted this but maybe not. Don't be fooled by the number of Republicans NOT supporting McCain. They will be in the fall. In Indiana lots of Republicans I talked to were voting in the Democratic primary, either to upset Clinton or hurt Obama. They will be there for McCain in the fall, along with independents and Democrats who do not care for Obama. posted 05/07/2008 at 10:52:55

While the numbers and percentages Stein posts are rather surprising, remember that many Republicans, and I talked to a lot of them in Indiana, were busy voting in the Democratic primary, either to upset Clinton or to hurt Obama. Don't think for one moment that there won't be plenty of Republicans to elect McCain, and add to his total a lot of independents and Democrats. posted 05/07/2008 at 10:48:00

Donna Brazile, Paul Begala Angrily Spar Over Dem Stereotypes

If you really believe that, you will have a rude awakening in the fall. Obama is indeed the black candidate. And do not know where you get the idea that racial divisiveness is something that Clinton has been fostering. For starters, check the Geraldine Ferraro comments. She merely stated the obvious that 90% of the black population in South Carolina voted for Obama and that basically he would not be where he was if he weren't black. That was before Obama had filched various solutions and ideas from Clinton, one of his ways of educating himself. Obama jumped all over Ferraro's comments. Saint that he is, in his talk with financial supporters in San Francisco, whined about the bitter whites in Penna. who "cling" to the guns and religion. You don't consider that racist?!!! While I agree that Obama probably now has the nomination, don't expect Hillary to just pick up her marbles and go home. We'll have four more years....of the same and black and white Americans will be the worst for it. It will be interesting to see if the young, new Democrats go to the polls to vote in November for Obama. posted 05/07/2008 at 10:23:09

Juan Cole: Clinton's Iran Comments "Monstrous"

Gee, and with all the comments about how Hillary Clinton doesn't appeal to well-educated and well-off. Krugman AND Kristol have complimented her and disagreed with her. Why is it that Obama disciples think there is only black and white when it comes to opinions? There is an awful lot immaturity out there. Do we excuse it because they're young? posted 05/06/2008 at 14:38:06

Obliterate was not the best choice of words, but think it is clearly representative of her attitude about standing with Israel if they were attacked. Ahmadinejhad used the same kind of language targeting Israel. And of course, as Hillary said, there is no question that Israel can take care of themselves. Even so, we would probably never have to plan such "obliteration". But diplomacy doesn't always get the message across, whereas that comment might. posted 05/06/2008 at 14:34:45

Abortion Group Launches Robocall Attack On Obama In Indiana

Really don't see how what you say computes. Casey has a lot of critics, most of whom say he is the charm guy, not the issue guy, opportunistic, as in Barack Obama. They are two peas in a pod in a sense. Think Casey, and Obama, don't think Catholic dogma amounts to much. The unity stuff is fluff, allowing Obama, and perhaps Casey, to hide their lack of interest in the issues under. Have called into Indiana many times and reached women who are extremely interested in the position of the candidates in abortion and abortion rights. I am calling for Hillary Clinton and I'm quite honest to identify her as a pro-choice person, all her life. McCain has flipped on this issue big time, but besides some happy talk on Obama's web site have never heard him really discuss this issue. But think like lots of deeply emotional issues, Obama doesn't really seem to care. posted 05/06/2008 at 09:43:57

The Firewall: Obama Wins NC primary

That is exactly why I believe NOTHING of what Carmichael has said. He implied, you read it not-so-between-the-lines that the Clinton campaign brought Wright forward once again. You are saying the same. That is the sickness of total devotion to one candidate and it is patently evil. There is no evidence AT ALL that Clinton had anything to do with it nor any of her surrogates. Of course you have to fabricate the ratings of MeettPress and ThisWeek. Even if that were correct there is a lot of interest in the two persons who were "for the hour" on Russert's program: he is a Hillary hater and Obama knew he'd get the softball questions he got. I watched both. This Week was far more interesting and much more than just two 'good ole boys' tearing down someone they detest. Other folks in the audience had questions that were answered. posted 05/06/2008 at 14:14:26

Most of the blacks who now support Obama never have seen what you attribute to a "typical white person". Nor has Obama himself. Racism, racial hatred, is not a static issue. Obama himself has said that, so it must be true.....And racism, racial hatred, is an emotional condition that emanates from blacks against whites, and Hispanics, as well. posted 05/06/2008 at 14:04:44

John And Elizabeth Edwards: What Do They Like (And Dislike) About Dem Candidates?

Such anti-Edwards rhetoric from the posters here! Whining is not very attractive, nor will it make much of a difference in John Edwards attitude. The only time I saw Edwards and Obama united was in their take downs of Hillary Clinton in the debates. Edwards is almost the antithesis of Obama. Passionate about issues, not some vague MOVEMENT, and social justice. Obama is not that person at all. posted 05/06/2008 at 09:52:37

Latest Indiana And North Carolina Polling Averages

Two more issues between you and me: Ever heard of NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND? That was Bush's ugly attempt to have the Federal government intervene in the educational process, which, as you said, are normally the purview of the states. The Federal government has money to distribute to school districts and that is why this was paid attention to. And that is why so many teachers are supporting Hillary Clinton. It is NOT a good thing, not in the slightest. It is teaching to the test, not teaching and not an education.
As to racist attacks, you'd better check out Jeremiah Wright or Obama's own dissing of Hillary and before that Geraldine Ferraro. His disgusting gesture when talking about Hillary and dissing Ferraro because she merely stated the obvious raised the issue of race way about the grass. posted 05/06/2008 at 10:22:08

Where to begin....... Health care as Hillary has proposed it would indeed require a mandate. A mandate is absolutely necessary to reduce the cost to all Americans and with a Democratic Congress which seems likely to come in 2009, it will be possible to be passed. As to the gas tax, have to agree that it somewhat of a populist pledge, which no one would ever accuse Obama being...i.e., populist, but, guess what: Obama voted for such a deal THREE times as an Illinois Senator. Clinton's energy policy is nothing like Obama's and as I said, Obama VOTED WITH CHENEY on the administration's proposal, which did nothing to reduce the windfall profits of the oil companies to which Obama is grateful. Yes, the president is given a lot of lattitude on foreign policy, but pre-emptive war is another cup of tea. Congress is the body that must declare war. The fact that Bush did not really consult Congress on declaring war, the resolution only threatened to use force, and there was no real discussion of going into Iraq besides that resolution, the matter was taken from Congress' hands. Calling Clinton names...neo-con..., doesn't identify her position on issues in foreign policy at all. Of course name calling seems to be the only form of identification for Obamacons. posted 05/06/2008 at 10:12:25

Yes, as you said, many of these goals are not achieveable. BUT of some of the ones that are, Barack Obama's health care will NOT be universal. Perhaps children, but not all adults. Hillary's plan IS for universal health care and IS achievable.
Energy policy: Obama voted with Cheney on HIS energy policy. Hillary did not.
Affordable education: That depends on how high up you want that education to go. Right now education costs are breaking the backs of local school districts, EXCEPT in the districts where there is a lot of great real estate. Obama has not talked at all, as far as I know, about No Child Left Behind. Hillary has. There are many teachers' unions supporting her in every state so far.
Ending discrimination: A fairly vague goal. Lots has been done in our society, but other than forcing people to set aside their own likes and dislikes, it is hard to see how it will be achieved, even if Obama is such a "unifying" figure....., something I truly do not see, being white.
Ending poverty: Lyndon Johnson and some others made that a goal and did make inroads into that problem but unless this country is really ready to take guidelines from the top to the bottom, probably won't be completely solved.
Stopping the war: Any president, even Obama, has to be ready to go to war. What should never happen again is pre-emptive war. Obama wants to enlarge the military: WHY? posted 05/05/2008 at 13:24:08

Clinton Defends 'Obliterate Iran' Comment, Obama Calls It Bush-Style 'Cowboy Diplomacy'

What quotes on Iraq?? Actually, McCain could hardly "skewer" Clinton on Iran since he has a rather wild position of his own......but do get the country right! posted 05/04/2008 at 14:32:12

Saw the program and don't believe there was ANY mention of the Cuban missile crisis, but now that you bring it up, Kennedy didn't send a nice diplomatic note to Kruschev saying they should remove their missiles, please.... His generals sent a plane with a camera mounted on it at Kennedy's request and photographed the site, knowing that if the plane went down because it would be fire upon there could be war. THEN he threatened the Russian ships bring the missile parts in to Cuba with our Navy if they were not turned around and the missiles disassembled NOW! Yep, risked nuclear war? I remember as a mother with small children discussing what we would do if any of the missiles landed here. So yes, sometimes you have to talk tougher than you might actually act but you do get the point across. Obama doesn't have the judgment in my mind to know that: his way or the highway rationale. posted 05/04/2008 at 14:26:29

Your objective, sympathetic understanding of our next president is so much appreciated. Can we count on you to campaign for Hillary in September? posted 05/04/2008 at 14:17:58

Hillary wouldn't be the first candidate nor the first president to rattle the sabre. She is simply signaling to Iran that there will be no discussion of this, that attacking Israel should be taken off their agenda...., if it is on it. She also said prior to and after talking to George that we don't know who is really calling the shots in Iran and whether or not they would EVER actually attack Iran or say they would. I'm not sure I like the language but I understand the need to let someone who MIGHT be wanting to acquire nuclear weapons to attack an ally of this country that it is considered very, very dangerous. She also talked about the fact that Iran is a state, a political entity that can be impressed with our particular point of view. The problem comes when we have non-states, al-Qaeda or the Talliban for instance acquiring nuclear weapons. Much more difficult to negotiate with rogue groups. The problem with HuffPo and lots of the media whores and probably Obama as well is that they don't know the complete story or background. Obama could never have filled us in on Iran, its rulers, the deal with rogue groups; maybe I should say would, but that is the difference between Clinton and Obama. posted 05/04/2008 at 14:09:59

NC Political Class Says Edwards Lacks Clout

Where you get your information is a mystery to me. Obama has not even completed half of one term as a Senator. Clinton is closing on 8 years as a Senator, elected twice to that office by good margins. Clinton after graduating from law school went to work for the Children's Defense Fund, which a woman named Edelman began, to give every child, black or white or purple, representation in school systems, in the courts and in the agencies of various governments. She has had lots of experience helping the poor and un-powerful, much more than Obama. What local experience did Obama have, pray tell? He ran for the Illinois Senate after working as a community organizer in Chicago. Those are folks who get people to register to vote, show them about the offices or agencies that can be helpful, and not least of which for Obama, provide a voting base for various politicians. I haven't mentioned Clinton's role as a first lady for Arkansas, where she was very active for families concerns, nor her role as first lady of this nation for eight years which of course gave her lots of clout and experience in the ways of government. Obama can't even begin to compare to her, much less to Edwards. posted 05/04/2008 at 12:23:22

Eight Belles, Kentucky Derby Horse, Dies On Track

Think we all know who "sucks". My only hope is that they will move the age of the Derby runners up at least a year. 1300 lbs of animal on ankles the same size as humans is asking for trouble if the growth of the animal hasn't been completed.

billrott, and some others here, you are not asked to like or respect animals but you could at least respect those of who do. Very sick, shallow humans should keep their attitudes to themselves. posted 05/04/2008 at 13:19:32

Why Obama Provides a More Compelling Contrast to McCain than Hillary

A post script: McCain isn't a "flip-flopper"????? You don't know the record Creamer. Only on Iraq, and even there, has he not had a major flip. Three or four years ago you heard McCain on how the war was not being executed properly but now that the "surge" was instituted everything is fine; trust Maliki; bomb Iran. Pro-life or pro-choice: which? Flipppppp! posted 05/04/2008 at 13:09:47

Creamer always seems to attract the concrete-minded Obamacons and this blog is no different than his usual fare. We really don't have any true idea of what Obama will be like as president nor what he will propose but there have been hints that make me sure I don't want to see him as president. Cap on Social Security, the capital gains tax, his half-baked health care plan, all seem to indicate that he'll have ideas and plans more in keeping with the Republicans. He may look in the run to November as if he is a contrast, and he'll have to search hard to find some real differences with McCain, but in the end McCain is not going to have any problem defeating Obama: inexperience, bad judgement in re associates Wright, Rezko, and Ayers, his slimy presentation of his opponent and the shots of him giving her the bird, and his total lack of understanding of a large portion of Americans, some of whom may not vote but many of whom would never vote for Obama. Yep, there are contrasts and they are such that Obama will look a lot less promising to voters. McCain, whether you like him or not, is a war hero of sorts and he's had plenty of experience in the Senate. Obama can't match that at all: contrast. posted 05/04/2008 at 13:05:56

Early Indiana turnout heavy in strong Obama counties

Without a doubt this site is supporting Obama although pretending to be a little tiny bit skeptical. You only have to read the Iraq stuff to know that. If that is the way you do research, you'd better be prepared for someon to lambast you. Your sources are important; yours are biased and partisan. posted 05/03/2008 at 12:33:18

I love the HuffPo sneaky technique of posting a blog that makes it seem as Obama is winning the early Indiana primary votes when none have been counted and only the large number of turn out in an early voting state is an indicator. It's called counting your chickens before they hatch.....! Further down in the blog, Robert Schmuhl, a political analyst, says that Clinton has the momentum and there is note that some early voting regions are expected to go for Clinton as well. Sure, Obama has been trying to reel in the early votes but don't for a moment think that Clinton isn't doing that as well. The Clinton campaign, of which I am a small part---a caller--has also been calling in to Indiana for the early vote and locating voting places etcetera for the voters we reach. Clinton's campaign is very organized in Indiana. posted 05/03/2008 at 12:23:13

Shameful Days: Why Won't The Media Pursue the Pentagon Propaganda Scandal?

What is so much worse in my book, bepa, is that most Americans really don't want to know what is happening in re foreign policy, want someone to tell them what is important and what to pay attention to. Many of those folks post on this particular site and from their "protective" position toss out nasty comments and complete misstatements if their hero is challenged. All democracy means to some is a sort of mob rule; to hell with minority concerns. The media knows this, unfortunately, and George Bush and Dick Cheney have known it forever. posted 05/01/2008 at 15:01:49

This is the first I have heard that Obama arranged Jeremiah Wright to do his ranting and raving on various forums. If that is indeed so, God help us all if he is the nominee. My answer to Arianna is quite simply that this election, which super delegate jumped the fence, which vile comment was made by whom, etcetera, has limited the free wheeling range of our rather boyish media whores who like the "gotcha" but not the reality behind some of the most disastrous events in our history posted 05/01/2008 at 14:56:39

North Carolina Polls: Democratic Primary

Maybe North Carolinians don't get suckered into the charisma like their neighbor to the south. posted 05/01/2008 at 10:35:20

Senator: Obama Has Dozens Of Secret Superdelegates Lined Up

Obama matches only the values of the Democratic Party that he believes support his candidacy or the ones that he can point to for the liberal/lefties in the Party. Social justice is something most Democrats support and that means leveling the playing field for all who need health care or are seeking jobs. He advocated bringing the troops home from Iraq, without actually seeming to look at hows and whens. I don't see anything on his web site that really supports plans such as those. Perhaps you are watching too much tv. Resorting to name calling doesn't make you look very attractive, either. posted 05/03/2008 at 17:22:36

Think you are exactly the person who needs the definition. Yes, after the Civil War the Democrats, all most all in the South at that time, did implicitly support the KKK and were very racist in their attempt to put the blacks in what they thought as their place. 100 years later the Party did promote civil rights thanks to efforts of such presidents as JFK and Lyndon Johnson and because of a man named Martin Luther King who inspired them both. The Democratic Part has never been a UNITED organization. It has a big tent and there are many varying points of view. The Republican Party, on the other hand, now has taken over most of the South as the majority party. And that doesn't mean they were or are in favor of civil rights and fair and equitable treatment. Truth be know, Cheney gave us Bush and the neocons then came out of the woodwork to justify his presidency, but of course it wasn't truely Bush's presidency alone because Cheney was the working guy. posted 05/03/2008 at 17:16:18

Abbey4ever and Dortmunder, you may not be able to recognize a real Democrat, being such devoted disciples of saint Obama. Each political party has a set of issues and positions on solving those issues which best represent the party. You'll not be able to find anything of Obama's there for sure because he really isn't very issue oriented. My personal view of Obama is that he isn't a Democrat; he is a demagogue, and if there is a party formed to include him and his non-ideas he'll run on it. posted 05/03/2008 at 12:13:36

The video you referrenced has been removed from YouTube site AT HIS REQUEST. Must have been on the bits of slime that seem to be circulating from the Obama campaign. posted 05/03/2008 at 12:07:25

Thank you for pointing that out, ntmessage. It is getting so bad that pollsters are like a fragrant garden and you have to be very careful to pick the least stinky. posted 05/03/2008 at 12:00:53

Common sense alone supports your view, ByeObama. posted 05/03/2008 at 11:57:16

Not revealed in any polling I've seen. Yes, a Democrat is MORE likely to beat McCain but that depends on whether or not there is unity in the Party for the candidate. Obama is the weakest in the polling against McCain, and that is before the action gets started on some of his real problems. posted 05/03/2008 at 11:53:34

James Frey And Nan Talese: Oprah Duped Us!

Oprah is the new P.T. Barnum of America. In her own world she does make all the decisions and all the decisions are the right ones..., i.e., the ones that sell her show and are beyond the pale of most shows in ethics or truthfulness. posted 04/30/2008 at 10:24:38

Geoff Garin, Clinton Chief Strategist, Once Called For Violent Revolution

Just for the record, Ayers was more than a neighbor of Obama. He helped finance Obama's run for the Illinois Senate and the US Senate, held fund raisers in his home, and generally supported Obama. Nobody has asked him why, of course, but that is the bottom line. Howard Dean, btw, never had a preacher like Wright nor an unrepentant radical like Ayers backing him. The more I know about Obama the more I know he is not my guy and the scary he gets for the democracy. posted 04/30/2008 at 10:02:03

Thirty years ago my political friends thought maybe it was impossible for a democracy to withstand a Nixon or an Agnew as well and perhaps the only way things could change was through manning the barricades and taking our case to the people. But Nixon was defeated by legally elected members of Congress and his reign ended. That was not lost on us. posted 04/30/2008 at 09:55:21

Fox News Lincoln-Douglas Graphic Shows Frederick Douglass

So many young Americans are missing an accurate history of their country and so many older Americans, in influential jobs and powerful places, missed an accurate history of their country. Sad, isn't? posted 04/30/2008 at 10:14:15

Obama's Pivot

Yes, he could and if you are implying that he would get 80% of the black vote in the process you are probably right. That is what I have always suspected about Senator Obama. The Democratic Party is only a means to an end, not a concept that carries a lot his values and his issues, whatever they might be. posted 05/01/2008 at 17:40:32

Is that possibly because Obama is a man....., not a woman? posted 05/01/2008 at 10:50:53

Exactly, meanguy. That so-worshipped speech actually was an attempt to BLAME this country and slaveowners and white racists for Wright's attitude and words. Obama was afraid to denounce Wright, at least at that time, because he didn't want to lose the black nationalists and more radical blacks he was appealing to in some of his speeches. posted 05/01/2008 at 10:42:55

Pro-Clinton Group Swiftboating Obama In Indiana

So Obama finally got someone to fill out a plan for the economy, and it's on the Obama website!!! Hooray. Now when will it be in Obama's head? Hillary has had plans all along, for months, and you don't have to go to hillaryclinton.com to know about it. Her plans are easy to know because she has talked about them, answered questions about them in every debate, and can answer questions from the audience about them. That is the big BIG difference between Clinton and Obama. posted 04/30/2008 at 10:11:16

Fans of this user

vsign
MinerSam
patmancando

Log in to become a fan of this user.

Bloggers I Like

Stephen Schlesinger
Mayhill Fowler
David Paul Kuhn

mjc

Recent comments by this user

Fans of this user

Fan of

Bloggers I Like

Posts this user has commented on