May 18, 2008
Please wait, your request is processed...
nk007
Recent comments by this user
Race Is All the Clintons Have Left
Working Class Elitists
Apoyo:
Right on! The Clintons are master at playing by different sets of rules from the rest of us. Witness their constant efforts to change the rules during this primary elections. Witnes their constant praise of the Republican nominee while lambasting and try to denigrate their fellow Democrat. posted 05/07/2008 at 19:55:57
Right on! The Clintons are master at playing by different sets of rules from the rest of us. Witness their constant efforts to change the rules during this primary elections. Witnes their constant praise of the Republican nominee while lambasting and try to denigrate their fellow Democrat. posted 05/07/2008 at 19:55:57
So Like Candy
ElizaW
Thanks for having the omnipotency to predict the future of Sen. Obama. Me thinks you prediction is not based on genuine analysis. Rather, it strikes me as being an angry diatribe against Obama (sour grapes may be) because he defeated Queen Clinton without going into the gutter of politics as usual. Lately, It's been very hard for me to tell the difference between Hillary Clinton and the "Right Wing Conspiracy" that she heroically fought against in the 90's. No wonder many of her nemesis were rooting for her. No one can accuse her of not learning the political lesson of the 90's.: "Personal destruction of your opponent is absolutely necessary if you want to win." by all means if it requires throwing all the garbage in "the Kitchen sin," by all means do it. posted 05/08/2008 at 02:03:20
Thanks for having the omnipotency to predict the future of Sen. Obama. Me thinks you prediction is not based on genuine analysis. Rather, it strikes me as being an angry diatribe against Obama (sour grapes may be) because he defeated Queen Clinton without going into the gutter of politics as usual. Lately, It's been very hard for me to tell the difference between Hillary Clinton and the "Right Wing Conspiracy" that she heroically fought against in the 90's. No wonder many of her nemesis were rooting for her. No one can accuse her of not learning the political lesson of the 90's.: "Personal destruction of your opponent is absolutely necessary if you want to win." by all means if it requires throwing all the garbage in "the Kitchen sin," by all means do it. posted 05/08/2008 at 02:03:20
Game, Set, Match: North Carolina and Indiana Settled the Democratic Nomination
Jazzylady26,
Hillary barely won Indiana with slightly over1%. Barak won North Carolina, a larger state, by over 15% I think the Clinton supporters have been more vicious in attacking Obama than Obama supporters attacking Hillary. Much more importantly, Hillary's campaign set out to destroy Obama's character using tactics borrowed from "the vast right wing." Facts are facts and no matter how much you try, most people know who has been playing dirty. As the saying goes it takes two to tango. posted 05/07/2008 at 17:59:13
Hillary barely won Indiana with slightly over1%. Barak won North Carolina, a larger state, by over 15% I think the Clinton supporters have been more vicious in attacking Obama than Obama supporters attacking Hillary. Much more importantly, Hillary's campaign set out to destroy Obama's character using tactics borrowed from "the vast right wing." Facts are facts and no matter how much you try, most people know who has been playing dirty. As the saying goes it takes two to tango. posted 05/07/2008 at 17:59:13
stalkervision:
Most of you Clinton supporters forget two important historical facts: 1) Bill Clinton was younger and less experienced in national politics than Barak Obama; 2)Bill Clinton won the 1992 election primarily because of Ross Perot. In 1992, most of the so called Reagan Democrats voted Perot. In both 1992 and 1996, Clinton would not have been elected president without the overwhelming support from black voters because, in both elections, he lost the white vote. I am tired of seeing the Paul Begala's lie about Clinton winning the Reagan democrats. May be he got more white votes in 1996 but never the majority of white voters. But he received about 39% of the white vote in 1992. posted 05/07/2008 at 17:52:10
Most of you Clinton supporters forget two important historical facts: 1) Bill Clinton was younger and less experienced in national politics than Barak Obama; 2)Bill Clinton won the 1992 election primarily because of Ross Perot. In 1992, most of the so called Reagan Democrats voted Perot. In both 1992 and 1996, Clinton would not have been elected president without the overwhelming support from black voters because, in both elections, he lost the white vote. I am tired of seeing the Paul Begala's lie about Clinton winning the Reagan democrats. May be he got more white votes in 1996 but never the majority of white voters. But he received about 39% of the white vote in 1992. posted 05/07/2008 at 17:52:10
Obama's Coming. Clear the Way.
hopelessobama:
Your diatribe that Sen. Obama is an "anti-semite communist" is despicable. You cite no concrete evidence to support your allegations. I suppose people like you think that name calling equals evidence. I do not mind you disagreeing with Obama's policies. But accusing him of being an "anti-semite communist" without citing any evidence is disgusting. Clearly your aim is to poison voters against Obama. It is people like you who continually undermine our democracy. As Hillary Clinton would say: "SHAME ON YOU." FOR YOUR RACE/RED BAITING! posted 05/07/2008 at 03:11:47
Your diatribe that Sen. Obama is an "anti-semite communist" is despicable. You cite no concrete evidence to support your allegations. I suppose people like you think that name calling equals evidence. I do not mind you disagreeing with Obama's policies. But accusing him of being an "anti-semite communist" without citing any evidence is disgusting. Clearly your aim is to poison voters against Obama. It is people like you who continually undermine our democracy. As Hillary Clinton would say: "SHAME ON YOU." FOR YOUR RACE/RED BAITING! posted 05/07/2008 at 03:11:47
Exit Polls: Limbaugh Effect Seems To Rear Its Head
kiga,
You are amazing! As always you managed to attack Obama though Rush has been openly urging Republicans to vote Hillary. Obviously you are the one reading 1984 over and over again. Any negative news about Clinton must be entirely blamed on Obama. Amazing! posted 05/08/2008 at 00:13:06
You are amazing! As always you managed to attack Obama though Rush has been openly urging Republicans to vote Hillary. Obviously you are the one reading 1984 over and over again. Any negative news about Clinton must be entirely blamed on Obama. Amazing! posted 05/08/2008 at 00:13:06
Will Hillary Repeal the Clinton Gas Tax?
becky,
I am sorry, but your loyalty to Hillary Clinton clouds your thinking. May be you personally may not drive more. But I know that many of my friends who drive SUV's will definitely drive more and that might just encourage the oil companies to charge more because of high demand. Moreover, there are other important considerations: suspending the gas tax will deprive the federal government of funds to repair our deteriorating roads; It will also take our eyes off from reducing carbon emissions; most importantly, it will do nothing to reduce our dependency on foreign oil, and is likely to fill the coffers of the oil companies while giving a miniscule, short-term, relief to motorists. Above all, Hillary Clinton knows that it will never be enacted into law, as it is opposed by the vast majority of people in Congress. So, ignorant people can buy into her pandering, but it is unlikely that their gas prices will go down between Memorial day and Labor day. I am willing to bet my life on that. As the Talmud says: "You can educate a fool, but you can't make him think." posted 05/05/2008 at 23:43:32
I am sorry, but your loyalty to Hillary Clinton clouds your thinking. May be you personally may not drive more. But I know that many of my friends who drive SUV's will definitely drive more and that might just encourage the oil companies to charge more because of high demand. Moreover, there are other important considerations: suspending the gas tax will deprive the federal government of funds to repair our deteriorating roads; It will also take our eyes off from reducing carbon emissions; most importantly, it will do nothing to reduce our dependency on foreign oil, and is likely to fill the coffers of the oil companies while giving a miniscule, short-term, relief to motorists. Above all, Hillary Clinton knows that it will never be enacted into law, as it is opposed by the vast majority of people in Congress. So, ignorant people can buy into her pandering, but it is unlikely that their gas prices will go down between Memorial day and Labor day. I am willing to bet my life on that. As the Talmud says: "You can educate a fool, but you can't make him think." posted 05/05/2008 at 23:43:32
Questioning Hillary Clinton's 'Victory' in Pennsylvania: The Rush Limbaugh Effect
BillZBubb;
You really underestimate the power of Rush Limbaugh. I know many Republicans who are absolutely committed to his "operation chaos" and would do everything to ensure that democrats continue to waste their resources fighting with one other. What is even more disturbing to me is that Hillary and her campaign must know what is going on, and that is why she is sounding more Right wing Republican than John McCain. Personally, I really do think that people like Rush Limbaugh and Anne Coulter might actually prefer Hilary Clinton over John McCain. So, the call for Republicans to vote for Hillary may be about defeating both Barak Obama and John McCain. If I were a John McCain supporter I would really be very concerned about this. I don't know about Rush, but I think Anne Coulter is on record stating that she would vote for Hillary over John McCain. posted 05/06/2008 at 00:37:59
You really underestimate the power of Rush Limbaugh. I know many Republicans who are absolutely committed to his "operation chaos" and would do everything to ensure that democrats continue to waste their resources fighting with one other. What is even more disturbing to me is that Hillary and her campaign must know what is going on, and that is why she is sounding more Right wing Republican than John McCain. Personally, I really do think that people like Rush Limbaugh and Anne Coulter might actually prefer Hilary Clinton over John McCain. So, the call for Republicans to vote for Hillary may be about defeating both Barak Obama and John McCain. If I were a John McCain supporter I would really be very concerned about this. I don't know about Rush, but I think Anne Coulter is on record stating that she would vote for Hillary over John McCain. posted 05/06/2008 at 00:37:59
One Man's Quest To Save $100 From The 'Gas Tax Holiday'
rwferr
You hit the nail on the head! But then again how do we explain to the American people-especially those who lost loved ones- and the world that we invaded Iraq because of its oil? I am with you> I say we come clean and tell the world Bush's true motive for invading Iraq. At the same we take over the Iraq oil fields, lower the price of oil and tell the families of the soldiers/marines and sailors. who have sacrificed so much, that they loved ones' sacrifice was no in vain-it was for providing cheap energy to America and lowering the gas prices. Of course this might not please the oil companies, and the oil producing nations, who are making out like bandits. The Iraq invasion has been so lucrative to Saudi Arabia, Iran, Russia, Venenzuela, Exxon, Shell, Mobil, etc. The Clinton/McCain gas holiday would do nothing to change that reality> It will only give the illusion of caring and concern for us poor working folks. But the only way to lower prices is for America to completely take over the Iraqi oil fields and begin producing more oil to lower the price of oil and consequently the price of gas. To do that, we have to honestly acknowledge that the United sates is an empire. Stop all this nonsense about Iraqi freedom and Arab democracy. posted 05/06/2008 at 00:17:28
You hit the nail on the head! But then again how do we explain to the American people-especially those who lost loved ones- and the world that we invaded Iraq because of its oil? I am with you> I say we come clean and tell the world Bush's true motive for invading Iraq. At the same we take over the Iraq oil fields, lower the price of oil and tell the families of the soldiers/marines and sailors. who have sacrificed so much, that they loved ones' sacrifice was no in vain-it was for providing cheap energy to America and lowering the gas prices. Of course this might not please the oil companies, and the oil producing nations, who are making out like bandits. The Iraq invasion has been so lucrative to Saudi Arabia, Iran, Russia, Venenzuela, Exxon, Shell, Mobil, etc. The Clinton/McCain gas holiday would do nothing to change that reality> It will only give the illusion of caring and concern for us poor working folks. But the only way to lower prices is for America to completely take over the Iraqi oil fields and begin producing more oil to lower the price of oil and consequently the price of gas. To do that, we have to honestly acknowledge that the United sates is an empire. Stop all this nonsense about Iraqi freedom and Arab democracy. posted 05/06/2008 at 00:17:28
Clinton Camp Says It Will Use The Nuclear Option
Querent:
You are absolutely right. Real Democrats should not vote for Republican John McCain or the Neo-Republican, Hillary Clinton. They have other choices: Ralph Nader, Cynthia McKinney, or writing in Barak Obama. Those are the choices I am considering. Increasingly, I see very little difference between John McCain and Hillary Clinton. Except now and then, McCain seems to have more integrity and decency than the "kitchen sink" throwing Clinton, whose campaign and supporters are making Carl Rove look like a saint. posted 05/05/2008 at 16:42:10
You are absolutely right. Real Democrats should not vote for Republican John McCain or the Neo-Republican, Hillary Clinton. They have other choices: Ralph Nader, Cynthia McKinney, or writing in Barak Obama. Those are the choices I am considering. Increasingly, I see very little difference between John McCain and Hillary Clinton. Except now and then, McCain seems to have more integrity and decency than the "kitchen sink" throwing Clinton, whose campaign and supporters are making Carl Rove look like a saint. posted 05/05/2008 at 16:42:10
stevelagain:
You people are so dishonest and vicious. Absent of any legitimate criticism of Obama you always have to pull out Rev. Wright. Obvama is did not decide the DNC rules. When Clinton decided to run for the presidency she never once objected to the rules. That is because she expected to be crowned as the nominee. Now that she is behind and cannot win under the rules, she wants the rules changed just for her own benefit. That speaks more to her character than the guilt by association that you who support her must resort for failure to present a reasoned argument as to why she should not play by the rules she agreed on at the time she expected to win. posted 05/05/2008 at 16:23:13
You people are so dishonest and vicious. Absent of any legitimate criticism of Obama you always have to pull out Rev. Wright. Obvama is did not decide the DNC rules. When Clinton decided to run for the presidency she never once objected to the rules. That is because she expected to be crowned as the nominee. Now that she is behind and cannot win under the rules, she wants the rules changed just for her own benefit. That speaks more to her character than the guilt by association that you who support her must resort for failure to present a reasoned argument as to why she should not play by the rules she agreed on at the time she expected to win. posted 05/05/2008 at 16:23:13
The New Karl Rove: Sidney Blumenthal (And Hillary Is in Bed with Both of Them)
TXfemmom:
Has the Clinton diseases of lying spread to all her supporters. Which Obama's book did that. I am convinced that you never read any of his book and you are trying to justify your lies hoping that none of us read any of his two books. Well you Hillary's Bosinia lie, yours can be easily debunked by any one who has read his books. PLEASE STOP ALL THE LIES that are poisoning the Democratic party. People like you are better off joining the likes of Carl Rove, Bill O'Reiley, Sean Hannity and Pat Buchanan. posted 05/05/2008 at 01:30:01
Has the Clinton diseases of lying spread to all her supporters. Which Obama's book did that. I am convinced that you never read any of his book and you are trying to justify your lies hoping that none of us read any of his two books. Well you Hillary's Bosinia lie, yours can be easily debunked by any one who has read his books. PLEASE STOP ALL THE LIES that are poisoning the Democratic party. People like you are better off joining the likes of Carl Rove, Bill O'Reiley, Sean Hannity and Pat Buchanan. posted 05/05/2008 at 01:30:01
Coffeecups and Gutterballs: A Precision Media Hit On Obama, A Pass For Clinton
Hallucinocynic:
They can't. It is Hillary who has chosen to run as a Republican using all the Rove tactics that have disgusted loyal Democrats. She is really the one who has been divisive. In so doing she has damaged the party regardless of who becomes the nominee. On the other hand, Obama has conducted a positive campaign that has attracted new voters and independents, there by expanding the party. posted 05/02/2008 at 18:40:45
They can't. It is Hillary who has chosen to run as a Republican using all the Rove tactics that have disgusted loyal Democrats. She is really the one who has been divisive. In so doing she has damaged the party regardless of who becomes the nominee. On the other hand, Obama has conducted a positive campaign that has attracted new voters and independents, there by expanding the party. posted 05/02/2008 at 18:40:45
Bullies and Pulpits
magen:
Just wanted to thank you for your comments. It is really amazing how the multi-millionaires like Sean Hannity, Charlie Gibson, Chris Mathews, Tim Russert, Rush Limbough and the rest obsess about Rev. Wright and labeling Obama as an elitist. To top it off the multi-millionaires, the Clintons, are the champions of the working class. The tragedy is that their propaganda seem to be working perfectly. posted 05/02/2008 at 20:27:30
Just wanted to thank you for your comments. It is really amazing how the multi-millionaires like Sean Hannity, Charlie Gibson, Chris Mathews, Tim Russert, Rush Limbough and the rest obsess about Rev. Wright and labeling Obama as an elitist. To top it off the multi-millionaires, the Clintons, are the champions of the working class. The tragedy is that their propaganda seem to be working perfectly. posted 05/02/2008 at 20:27:30
Clinton's "Obliteration" Remark is Genocidal, Requires Apology
MattGuillen:
You claim the "Obama has made a number of identical statements." Please can you cite the specific statements. May be you don't want to spare the intellectuals, but how about ordinary Iranians, especially the innocent children? Please tell me why should the US, Britain, France, Russia, China Israel, Pakistan, India and North Korea have nuclear weapons but not Iran?
Please give a good reason why obliterating innocent Iranians is not genocide? posted 05/02/2008 at 19:30:25
You claim the "Obama has made a number of identical statements." Please can you cite the specific statements. May be you don't want to spare the intellectuals, but how about ordinary Iranians, especially the innocent children? Please tell me why should the US, Britain, France, Russia, China Israel, Pakistan, India and North Korea have nuclear weapons but not Iran?
Please give a good reason why obliterating innocent Iranians is not genocide? posted 05/02/2008 at 19:30:25
oafishcad?
According to NIE, Iran does not have nuclear weapons. Is there any NIE telling us about the situation in Israel? Does Israel have nuclear weapons? If they do, will they US obliterate Israel if Israel "used nuclear weapons on ANY other country?" Don't you think the fear of having their country obliterated is just as likely to encourage Iran to acquire nuclear weapons as it is likely to deter them? Besides, why should some countries have nuclear weapons but not others? Is it because their leaders are more rational and humane? The only way to judge that is to see who has used nuclear weapons in the past. So far, of all the nuclear powers, only one country has used nuclear weapons: the US. It seems that if Clinton is elected president she will not hesitate to use them again. Is it irrational for Iran to acquire nuclear weapons in order to deter Pres. Hillary Clinton from obliterating their country? The experience of Iraq vs. the experience of North Korea suggests that Iran would be safer from American attacks if they had nuclear weapons. posted 05/02/2008 at 19:19:42
According to NIE, Iran does not have nuclear weapons. Is there any NIE telling us about the situation in Israel? Does Israel have nuclear weapons? If they do, will they US obliterate Israel if Israel "used nuclear weapons on ANY other country?" Don't you think the fear of having their country obliterated is just as likely to encourage Iran to acquire nuclear weapons as it is likely to deter them? Besides, why should some countries have nuclear weapons but not others? Is it because their leaders are more rational and humane? The only way to judge that is to see who has used nuclear weapons in the past. So far, of all the nuclear powers, only one country has used nuclear weapons: the US. It seems that if Clinton is elected president she will not hesitate to use them again. Is it irrational for Iran to acquire nuclear weapons in order to deter Pres. Hillary Clinton from obliterating their country? The experience of Iraq vs. the experience of North Korea suggests that Iran would be safer from American attacks if they had nuclear weapons. posted 05/02/2008 at 19:19:42
The Deal: Hillary and Obama's "Granita Pact"?
I am sorry to say that some of us who support Obama want to see fundamental changes in political behavior. The Clinton campaign has clearly demonstrated that business will go on as usual. If Obama agrees to be Clinton's VP, he will destroy our hopes in his message "Change You can Believe in." I have reluctantly made up my mind. If Clinton is the nominee of the Democratic party, I will seriously consider voting for either Ralph Nader or Cynthia McKinney. I will never vote for either Hillary Clinton or John McCain. I just don't see that much difference between them. Besides, both Bill and Hillary have repeatedly espoused their admiration for Sen. John McCain; finding him more preferable to, their fellow Democrat, Barack Obama. posted 05/01/2008 at 21:08:45
Michigan's Fake Primary Produced Fake Results
EinChicago:
What do you mean "he can't even win a legitimate senataorial [sic] race or primary? posted 05/01/2008 at 20:29:16
What do you mean "he can't even win a legitimate senataorial [sic] race or primary? posted 05/01/2008 at 20:29:16
Kerry Rips MSNBC On Wright: 'You People Need To Let Go Of This'
mgoody:
Please tell me how Obama sitting in the Rev. Wright's church for 20 years has any thing to do with my dire economic sitution and with the illegal and immoral war in Iraq? Moreover, Why is obama siiting In Rev. Wight's church any more immoral than being married to a man who cheats on you, and lies about it? Why is it more unethical than lying about being under sniper fire just to appear to be tough? Why is Obama the only candidate who is guility by association while all the other candidate are let off the hook despite their shoddy associates. Have you ever heard of Revs. Doug Coe, John Hagee and Rod Parsley? Could it be that your outrage is because Wright is Black and should behave like a good boy? I am just so tired of hypocrites like you! posted 05/01/2008 at 01:23:18
Please tell me how Obama sitting in the Rev. Wright's church for 20 years has any thing to do with my dire economic sitution and with the illegal and immoral war in Iraq? Moreover, Why is obama siiting In Rev. Wight's church any more immoral than being married to a man who cheats on you, and lies about it? Why is it more unethical than lying about being under sniper fire just to appear to be tough? Why is Obama the only candidate who is guility by association while all the other candidate are let off the hook despite their shoddy associates. Have you ever heard of Revs. Doug Coe, John Hagee and Rod Parsley? Could it be that your outrage is because Wright is Black and should behave like a good boy? I am just so tired of hypocrites like you! posted 05/01/2008 at 01:23:18
trailrunner9:
You are such a hypocrite! You think it is o.k for McCain to solicit and and be proud of Hagee's endorsement, although Hagee has uttered outrageous things. Why don't you tell the truth. The difference between Hagee and Rev. Wright is that the former is white and the later is black. That is all. As a matter of fact some of Rev. Wright's statements state the truth about America and its dealing with with African Americans, as well as the American foreign policy. If Obama looses as you predict, it would have absolutely nothing to do with Rev. Wright or Obama's character or capability to be president. Rather, it will be all about race. My gut feeling is that the majority of Americans are ready to transcend race and vote for the best man. But not people like you who would manufacture trivial issues as the basis on how we should chose a president. posted 05/01/2008 at 01:13:01
You are such a hypocrite! You think it is o.k for McCain to solicit and and be proud of Hagee's endorsement, although Hagee has uttered outrageous things. Why don't you tell the truth. The difference between Hagee and Rev. Wright is that the former is white and the later is black. That is all. As a matter of fact some of Rev. Wright's statements state the truth about America and its dealing with with African Americans, as well as the American foreign policy. If Obama looses as you predict, it would have absolutely nothing to do with Rev. Wright or Obama's character or capability to be president. Rather, it will be all about race. My gut feeling is that the majority of Americans are ready to transcend race and vote for the best man. But not people like you who would manufacture trivial issues as the basis on how we should chose a president. posted 05/01/2008 at 01:13:01
lisac63,
Bravo! I think the fixation on Rev. Wright is all about finding something to bring down Sen. Obama. They have been unable to find anything that he has done that would disqualify him to be president and so they have to find him guilty by association. The tragedy for us average people is that the media is not focusing on the real problems we face. Problems such as: the despicable war in Iraq, the increasing budget deficit, the outsourcing of jobs to foreign countries, home foreclosures, skyrocketing gas prices, the crumbling infrastructures, education, the trashing of our Constitution, and yes, the record setting of imprisonment- and especially of young African American males. Except for the self indulgent well paid media people, really Rev. Wright should be a non issue. Personally, I don't think he is as scary as Revs. Moon, Parsley, Hagee, and Pat Robertson. Enough is enough! It is really time to move on. posted 05/01/2008 at 00:58:17
Bravo! I think the fixation on Rev. Wright is all about finding something to bring down Sen. Obama. They have been unable to find anything that he has done that would disqualify him to be president and so they have to find him guilty by association. The tragedy for us average people is that the media is not focusing on the real problems we face. Problems such as: the despicable war in Iraq, the increasing budget deficit, the outsourcing of jobs to foreign countries, home foreclosures, skyrocketing gas prices, the crumbling infrastructures, education, the trashing of our Constitution, and yes, the record setting of imprisonment- and especially of young African American males. Except for the self indulgent well paid media people, really Rev. Wright should be a non issue. Personally, I don't think he is as scary as Revs. Moon, Parsley, Hagee, and Pat Robertson. Enough is enough! It is really time to move on. posted 05/01/2008 at 00:58:17
Charisma and Leadership
JohnBarleycorn:
Why are you so dishonest! Since when did Wright become Obama's "surrogate father?" Just because you said so. No matter what Obama does he can never satisfy people like you. I don't even think you are capable of recognizing character. May be for you the person who has demonstrated character is Hillary Clinton who lied about being under sniper fire in Bosnia and then blamed the lie on lack of sleep, or John McCain who people like Revs. Falwell, and Robertson "agents of intolerance" but the turned around and embraced them in order to win the conservative votes. posted 05/01/2008 at 02:59:52
Why are you so dishonest! Since when did Wright become Obama's "surrogate father?" Just because you said so. No matter what Obama does he can never satisfy people like you. I don't even think you are capable of recognizing character. May be for you the person who has demonstrated character is Hillary Clinton who lied about being under sniper fire in Bosnia and then blamed the lie on lack of sleep, or John McCain who people like Revs. Falwell, and Robertson "agents of intolerance" but the turned around and embraced them in order to win the conservative votes. posted 05/01/2008 at 02:59:52
mickeyrat:
Why is it that support for Obama is translated as regarding Obama as "the messiah?" undoubtedly Obama is a politician. But is it wrong for some of us who support him to see him as the best politician in the field who has energized and inspired people-especially young people- to take an active role in the political process. Can you honestly argue that Obama's candidacy has not had a very positive impact in our politics? May be you would rather see the continuation of the status quo where people are so cynical and turned off from politics that we end up with political leaders beholden to the corporate special interests. posted 05/01/2008 at 02:47:57
Why is it that support for Obama is translated as regarding Obama as "the messiah?" undoubtedly Obama is a politician. But is it wrong for some of us who support him to see him as the best politician in the field who has energized and inspired people-especially young people- to take an active role in the political process. Can you honestly argue that Obama's candidacy has not had a very positive impact in our politics? May be you would rather see the continuation of the status quo where people are so cynical and turned off from politics that we end up with political leaders beholden to the corporate special interests. posted 05/01/2008 at 02:47:57
Camanchero:
Amazing! You managed to display your utter ignorance and stupidity while pretending to be intelligent. Please face reality. You cannot measure up in intelligence with people who support Sen. Obama. His supporters include some of the most distinguished Americans such as: Sens. Sam Nunn, John Kerry,Bob Casey, Byron Dogan, David Boren, Gov. Bill Richardson, Congressman L. Hamilton and others. Surely none of these people can be categorized as "blinded sheep." Thank god ignorant people like you are not part of the Obama movement for change posted 05/01/2008 at 02:33:26
Amazing! You managed to display your utter ignorance and stupidity while pretending to be intelligent. Please face reality. You cannot measure up in intelligence with people who support Sen. Obama. His supporters include some of the most distinguished Americans such as: Sens. Sam Nunn, John Kerry,Bob Casey, Byron Dogan, David Boren, Gov. Bill Richardson, Congressman L. Hamilton and others. Surely none of these people can be categorized as "blinded sheep." Thank god ignorant people like you are not part of the Obama movement for change posted 05/01/2008 at 02:33:26
James Clyburn Happy to Play His Familiar Part Once More
Bravo! I am totally with you Subliminabilty. Sean Wilentz , Lanny Davis, and Bill Clinton, are masters at transmitting subliminal race coded messages and then turning around and blaming Obama. By the way I am so tired of the scrutiny paid to Rev. Wright. Surely Rev. Wright is not as outrageous as Revs. Pat Robinson, John Haggee, Rod Persley, or the late Jerry Falwell. I do not remember the media playing over and over again some of their despicable statements. I am sure if I read race into this double standards, Lanny Davis and Sean Wilentz will accuse me of playing a race card. Besides, why is Obama being crucified for what his pastor says, while Hillary Clinton is let off the hook for telling a bold faced lie? Also, why is she not held accountable for all the sins of her husband? Talk about hypocrisy! posted 04/30/2008 at 01:36:48
Have You Left No Sense Of Decency?
Chemwitz:
What are you smoking or drinking? By the way the media must agree with you because they spend more time rehashing snippets from Rev. Wright as if that is the most important problem facing our country. posted 04/30/2008 at 19:19:48
What are you smoking or drinking? By the way the media must agree with you because they spend more time rehashing snippets from Rev. Wright as if that is the most important problem facing our country. posted 04/30/2008 at 19:19:48
urweatherman:
I am overwhelmed by your absurd reasoning! posted 04/30/2008 at 19:15:40
I am overwhelmed by your absurd reasoning! posted 04/30/2008 at 19:15:40
Obama's Reverend Wright Press Conference (VIDEO)
immkib:
Please cite evidence to support you claim that Obama used Wright to build his political base. Even Rev. Wright rejected the notion that he was Obama's "father figure." But you must know something that neither Wright nor Obama knows. Personally I don't think you have any clue. posted 04/30/2008 at 00:38:32
Please cite evidence to support you claim that Obama used Wright to build his political base. Even Rev. Wright rejected the notion that he was Obama's "father figure." But you must know something that neither Wright nor Obama knows. Personally I don't think you have any clue. posted 04/30/2008 at 00:38:32
JohnBarleycorn:
Wow! Are you for real in your assertion about "the muk Obama has slimed the entire Democratic Party? If that is the case i think it is time for for all African Americans to re think their support of the Democratic Party. Obama has tried his best to bridge the racial divide but there are people like you who would have none of it. People like you are more interested in blaming everything a black person does to another black person. Just imagine me holding you responsible for supporting Hillary Clinton who lied to the country about her Bosnia escapade. Or for her staying with a man who lied and committed adultery. You really want to talk about "the muck?" The Clintons have been the experts at doing that to the party. posted 04/30/2008 at 00:34:00
Wow! Are you for real in your assertion about "the muk Obama has slimed the entire Democratic Party? If that is the case i think it is time for for all African Americans to re think their support of the Democratic Party. Obama has tried his best to bridge the racial divide but there are people like you who would have none of it. People like you are more interested in blaming everything a black person does to another black person. Just imagine me holding you responsible for supporting Hillary Clinton who lied to the country about her Bosnia escapade. Or for her staying with a man who lied and committed adultery. You really want to talk about "the muck?" The Clintons have been the experts at doing that to the party. posted 04/30/2008 at 00:34:00
Apoyo:
I totally agree with you. Moreover, Rev. Wright and his church have done some commendable things. As my daughter always reminds me when ever I am critical of her mistakes: "No one is perfect." The news media pundits are the least perfect. I bet you they could not stand the sme scrutiny that they put these candidates through. I am also tired of the double standards. Why are they not questioning McCain for his ties with some of the racist preachers? Because they know fully well that McCain should be judged by his own cations and ideas and not the ideas actions of those he associates with. The same thing goes for Hillary Clinton. For people Like Chris Mathews, only Obama is found guilty by association. posted 04/30/2008 at 00:21:24
I totally agree with you. Moreover, Rev. Wright and his church have done some commendable things. As my daughter always reminds me when ever I am critical of her mistakes: "No one is perfect." The news media pundits are the least perfect. I bet you they could not stand the sme scrutiny that they put these candidates through. I am also tired of the double standards. Why are they not questioning McCain for his ties with some of the racist preachers? Because they know fully well that McCain should be judged by his own cations and ideas and not the ideas actions of those he associates with. The same thing goes for Hillary Clinton. For people Like Chris Mathews, only Obama is found guilty by association. posted 04/30/2008 at 00:21:24
lucidthoughts:
why are you people so hypocritical? What if Hillary Clinton had to answer day in and day out about Bill Clinton, Mark Penn, Norman Hsu, Marc Rich, Wal-mart, ducking enemy fire in Tuzla, etc. Etc. What if John McCain had to continually answer for Charles Keating, Rev. Hagee, Rev. Persley, etc., etc. Why the double standards? Just don't tell me it has nothing to do with race! Obama is guilty by association but we can all forgive Hillary for lying about ducking enemy fire. After all she is human and she was sleep deprived. As for McCain, It is o.k for him to have the support of Rev Hagee, who blamed Katrina on the evil people in New Orleans. After all McCain is a patriot and Rev. Hagee is a strong supporter of Israel. Is Bush being held accountable because he is supported by Pat Robertson who has made some of the most outrageous statements, including his call to assassinate a foreign leader? I may be biased, but I think Rev. Wright is much saner that Revs. John Hagee and Pat Robertson. But you see they can say outrageous things and still be highly valued because they are white. So Sean Hannity, Rish Limbough, ABC, NBC, CNN, when are you going to show the same outrage against White pastors like John Hageer? Hillary and Bill, do you still hold McCain in such high esteem, knowing that he sought the support and endorsement of Pastor Hagee? posted 04/30/2008 at 00:07:28
why are you people so hypocritical? What if Hillary Clinton had to answer day in and day out about Bill Clinton, Mark Penn, Norman Hsu, Marc Rich, Wal-mart, ducking enemy fire in Tuzla, etc. Etc. What if John McCain had to continually answer for Charles Keating, Rev. Hagee, Rev. Persley, etc., etc. Why the double standards? Just don't tell me it has nothing to do with race! Obama is guilty by association but we can all forgive Hillary for lying about ducking enemy fire. After all she is human and she was sleep deprived. As for McCain, It is o.k for him to have the support of Rev Hagee, who blamed Katrina on the evil people in New Orleans. After all McCain is a patriot and Rev. Hagee is a strong supporter of Israel. Is Bush being held accountable because he is supported by Pat Robertson who has made some of the most outrageous statements, including his call to assassinate a foreign leader? I may be biased, but I think Rev. Wright is much saner that Revs. John Hagee and Pat Robertson. But you see they can say outrageous things and still be highly valued because they are white. So Sean Hannity, Rish Limbough, ABC, NBC, CNN, when are you going to show the same outrage against White pastors like John Hageer? Hillary and Bill, do you still hold McCain in such high esteem, knowing that he sought the support and endorsement of Pastor Hagee? posted 04/30/2008 at 00:07:28
America May Owe Reverend Wright a Debt of Gratitude
I think it is the Bible that teaches: "ye shall know the truth, and the truth will make you free." Judging from some of the reactions about Rev. Wright, it seems to me that many people in America are not at interested in knowing the truth about race/ racism in America. Undoubtedly, Rev. Wright's rhetoric and delivery, unlike Dr. King's, makes most whites uncomfortable. But they both speak truth. The unfortunate thing is that Rev. Wright, a man who has dedicated most of his life to improving the conditions of his people would be shunned and dismissed. And, Senator Obama, who has has struggled to unite the country, beyond race, class and ethnicity, will also be rejected, even by those people that he might have inspired by his vision. We are back to square one. Clinton or McCain(but not Obama) will be the next president. Black people will bitter and cynical arguing that: " the country will never elect a Black president." White people, especially white conservative, will congratulate the WASHINGTON Talking heads will declare that the U.S. is a color-blind country. Ultimately, issues of race, class, and the corporate strangulation of America will be swept under the rug. Then, we (black, white, Hispanic, Native Americans, Asians, male and females, gays and straight) will go back to singing, "God Bless America." A land dedicated to" justice and liberty for all." posted 04/28/2008 at 23:05:17
Inspiration Versus Degradation
tempus:
What were you smoking/ drinking when you watched to the speech? It is really amazing howq people like you try to project, when exposed to truth, by denigrating the truth teller. How despicable that you would compare Rev. Wright with David Duke. Did Rev. Wright say that Blacks are superior to whites? May be you wanted to hear a black person who has no pride in Black culture, or who would not tell the truth about America. posted 04/28/2008 at 00:37:55
What were you smoking/ drinking when you watched to the speech? It is really amazing howq people like you try to project, when exposed to truth, by denigrating the truth teller. How despicable that you would compare Rev. Wright with David Duke. Did Rev. Wright say that Blacks are superior to whites? May be you wanted to hear a black person who has no pride in Black culture, or who would not tell the truth about America. posted 04/28/2008 at 00:37:55
Bravo! mesuki. It is all about what people like Simonfish chose to hear. As the Talmud teaches: "You can educate a fool but you can't make him (her) think." posted 04/28/2008 at 00:29:00
Stevelagain:
Did you honestly reach your conclusion about Rev. Wright after watching his interview with Bill Moyers? Or are you just repeating the talking points of your "far right agenda?" Just be honest and tell us how you arrived at the conclusion that Rev. Wright is "a racist and a bigot." posted 04/28/2008 at 00:22:54
Did you honestly reach your conclusion about Rev. Wright after watching his interview with Bill Moyers? Or are you just repeating the talking points of your "far right agenda?" Just be honest and tell us how you arrived at the conclusion that Rev. Wright is "a racist and a bigot." posted 04/28/2008 at 00:22:54
Clinton: Not Exactly The Great White Hope
patmancando:
Do you, or Hillary, know what it means to be called a "nigger?" How is that race baiting? posted 04/28/2008 at 01:12:28
Do you, or Hillary, know what it means to be called a "nigger?" How is that race baiting? posted 04/28/2008 at 01:12:28
bauersox,
So here is the question: Can Hillary Clinton win in November without the Black vote? Do you think Bill Clinton would have been elected President in 1992, and 1996 without the Black vote? Just in case you have forgotten, he lost the white vote in both elections but received overwhelming black votes. It seems to me that the Clintons, and people like you, take African American voters for granted. You may be in for a rude awakening! Of all the members of the Democratic coalition, African Americans have been the most loyal for the past 48 years, unlike the so called "Reagan democrats." Guess what, if Hillary Clinton cares more about "Reagan democrats" than she does about African American democrats, African Americans have absolutely no reason to vote for her. We will see if she can win without their support. posted 04/28/2008 at 01:09:34
So here is the question: Can Hillary Clinton win in November without the Black vote? Do you think Bill Clinton would have been elected President in 1992, and 1996 without the Black vote? Just in case you have forgotten, he lost the white vote in both elections but received overwhelming black votes. It seems to me that the Clintons, and people like you, take African American voters for granted. You may be in for a rude awakening! Of all the members of the Democratic coalition, African Americans have been the most loyal for the past 48 years, unlike the so called "Reagan democrats." Guess what, if Hillary Clinton cares more about "Reagan democrats" than she does about African American democrats, African Americans have absolutely no reason to vote for her. We will see if she can win without their support. posted 04/28/2008 at 01:09:34
The Undeniable Virtue of Jeremiah Wright's Pro-Blackness (and the Problem with Pro-Whiteness)
djk20042
Would you have the same reaction to jews, italians, Irish, Polish, etc. who embrace their culture? Why the double standards when it comes to Blacks who have for centuries been denigrated and made to reject who they are? Embracing one's culture does not equal racism. Racism entails belief in ones racial superiority. That is what white supremacy has been all about. However embracing" Irish green" on St. Patrick, for example, is all about appreciating and celebrating Irish culture. It does not mean that the Irish are practicing racial/ ethnic superiority. By the way racism, especially if you are a person of color, is not a thing of the past. No matter how much you a privileged white/ colored person may pretend not to notice. posted 04/26/2008 at 02:01:52
Would you have the same reaction to jews, italians, Irish, Polish, etc. who embrace their culture? Why the double standards when it comes to Blacks who have for centuries been denigrated and made to reject who they are? Embracing one's culture does not equal racism. Racism entails belief in ones racial superiority. That is what white supremacy has been all about. However embracing" Irish green" on St. Patrick, for example, is all about appreciating and celebrating Irish culture. It does not mean that the Irish are practicing racial/ ethnic superiority. By the way racism, especially if you are a person of color, is not a thing of the past. No matter how much you a privileged white/ colored person may pretend not to notice. posted 04/26/2008 at 02:01:52
Is Hillary's Win a Win?
ReVan:
I think you are absolutely wrong. If Obama was in the position she is in, Party elders, the newsmedia would be putting pressure for him to quit. By now She would have all the Super delegates supporting her. As a matter of fact they wouldn't even be paying Obama any attention. For a Candidate who lost 12 states in succession, It is really amazing to me (and I am a senior citizen) that she was not pressured to withdraw. But you see she has three things in her favor over Obama; She is the first Lady who believed she was entitled to be the nominee, she has powerful people, including her ex-president husband and all his minions supporting her, and she has powerful white women, who also feel entitled to a woman president. There is another powerful reason why she is still in. It is because the candidate is Baraka Obama. I bet you, if the candidate who had won more states, won the majority of popular vote, and had a commanding lead in pledged delegates, was let us say John Edwards, Hillary would have been long gone in the name of party unity. That is the disturbing answer we dare not confront! posted 04/23/2008 at 02:14:41
I think you are absolutely wrong. If Obama was in the position she is in, Party elders, the newsmedia would be putting pressure for him to quit. By now She would have all the Super delegates supporting her. As a matter of fact they wouldn't even be paying Obama any attention. For a Candidate who lost 12 states in succession, It is really amazing to me (and I am a senior citizen) that she was not pressured to withdraw. But you see she has three things in her favor over Obama; She is the first Lady who believed she was entitled to be the nominee, she has powerful people, including her ex-president husband and all his minions supporting her, and she has powerful white women, who also feel entitled to a woman president. There is another powerful reason why she is still in. It is because the candidate is Baraka Obama. I bet you, if the candidate who had won more states, won the majority of popular vote, and had a commanding lead in pledged delegates, was let us say John Edwards, Hillary would have been long gone in the name of party unity. That is the disturbing answer we dare not confront! posted 04/23/2008 at 02:14:41
harrisjb:
What kind of logic is that? Why should someone in the first place give up first place to take second place? That is what is wrong your position. Obama is in first place. There is absolutely no way Hillary can overtake him in the elections. Why do you take Obama, and the millions of his supporters, for granted. Besides, I don't want a "terminator," I want a leader with vision and class to rescue our country. We have had a terminator for eight years and just look at the sate the country is in. As the saying goes: " A people without vision perish." posted 04/23/2008 at 01:55:50
What kind of logic is that? Why should someone in the first place give up first place to take second place? That is what is wrong your position. Obama is in first place. There is absolutely no way Hillary can overtake him in the elections. Why do you take Obama, and the millions of his supporters, for granted. Besides, I don't want a "terminator," I want a leader with vision and class to rescue our country. We have had a terminator for eight years and just look at the sate the country is in. As the saying goes: " A people without vision perish." posted 04/23/2008 at 01:55:50
generaldelivery:
First, more Clinton supporters prefer McCain over Obama than Obama supporters who would vote for McCain over Clinton. So you can stop all your lies which is typical of the Clintons and her supporters. Second, The Clintons' themselves have voiced their preferences of McCain over Obama on numerous occasions. Third, Obama supporters, like me, started willing to support Clinton, but are deeply disgusted and offended by her dirty campaign that has done every thing to destroy a fellow democrat. posted 04/23/2008 at 01:42:04
First, more Clinton supporters prefer McCain over Obama than Obama supporters who would vote for McCain over Clinton. So you can stop all your lies which is typical of the Clintons and her supporters. Second, The Clintons' themselves have voiced their preferences of McCain over Obama on numerous occasions. Third, Obama supporters, like me, started willing to support Clinton, but are deeply disgusted and offended by her dirty campaign that has done every thing to destroy a fellow democrat. posted 04/23/2008 at 01:42:04
ResidentChimp:
Here is one Democrat that will never vote for Candidate that employs the Republican dirty tricks on a fellow democrat. posted 04/23/2008 at 01:35:11
Here is one Democrat that will never vote for Candidate that employs the Republican dirty tricks on a fellow democrat. posted 04/23/2008 at 01:35:11
GOP Strategist Says Racism Would Give McCain 15% Edge on Obama
RichLiberal:
Can you cite one example where Obama has portrayed his opponent as racist? I know the trick now: charge Obama for being racist so that you can then be safe in race baiting him. That is what is known as projecting! posted 04/22/2008 at 15:47:18
Can you cite one example where Obama has portrayed his opponent as racist? I know the trick now: charge Obama for being racist so that you can then be safe in race baiting him. That is what is known as projecting! posted 04/22/2008 at 15:47:18
Latest Gallup National Democratic Tracking Poll: Obama-Clinton Now in Dead Heat -- Will the Pundits and Media Analyze Why?
GerryOpines:
What were are tired of is the superiority complex of the Clinton supporters. This argument that a loosing candidate in the primaries is going to miraculously become a winning candidate in the general elections. First, that is pure self-serving speculation. Second, It is based on the arrogant idea that Obama supporters are to be taken for granted while the Clinton supporters are to be given special attention. Finally, it goes against the whole purpose of primary elections to select a party nominee. Why go through this exercise when in the end the loosing candidate is anointed as the nominee, because her supporters are more important and have to be appeased. posted 04/21/2008 at 03:16:54
What were are tired of is the superiority complex of the Clinton supporters. This argument that a loosing candidate in the primaries is going to miraculously become a winning candidate in the general elections. First, that is pure self-serving speculation. Second, It is based on the arrogant idea that Obama supporters are to be taken for granted while the Clinton supporters are to be given special attention. Finally, it goes against the whole purpose of primary elections to select a party nominee. Why go through this exercise when in the end the loosing candidate is anointed as the nominee, because her supporters are more important and have to be appeased. posted 04/21/2008 at 03:16:54
Dear Mr. Davis:
Are you suggesting that Ms. Clinton can win the election without Blacks and upper income liberals, the inspired young voters and the Independent and Republicans who have been mobilized by Mr. Obama. Or you playing the same old game of taking these voters for granted. I am for one I am tired of the DLC fear mongering. They are more worried about the so called conservative whites while they take for granted the most loyal democratic base. The Republican part does exactly the opposite, they pay much attention to their base. Let me worn you Mr. Davis, If the Clintons, who have trashed their fellow democrat, using tactics out of Carl Rove's play book, end up stealing the nomination, don't expect us to be taken for granted. Many of us are tired in being in this abusive relationship with the DLC. We demand attention and respect. Otherwise we too may not be there for the Clinton dynasty. posted 04/21/2008 at 03:07:20
Are you suggesting that Ms. Clinton can win the election without Blacks and upper income liberals, the inspired young voters and the Independent and Republicans who have been mobilized by Mr. Obama. Or you playing the same old game of taking these voters for granted. I am for one I am tired of the DLC fear mongering. They are more worried about the so called conservative whites while they take for granted the most loyal democratic base. The Republican part does exactly the opposite, they pay much attention to their base. Let me worn you Mr. Davis, If the Clintons, who have trashed their fellow democrat, using tactics out of Carl Rove's play book, end up stealing the nomination, don't expect us to be taken for granted. Many of us are tired in being in this abusive relationship with the DLC. We demand attention and respect. Otherwise we too may not be there for the Clinton dynasty. posted 04/21/2008 at 03:07:20
John McCain, Charles Grassley Physical Altercation Confirmed By Washington Post
KBAR:
What is this obsession with Rezko! What exactly does it have to do with the story about McCain's temper? Are you just repeating and repeating this over and over again so as to brainwash voters about Obama's character. You people are so despicable! posted 04/20/2008 at 20:47:27
What is this obsession with Rezko! What exactly does it have to do with the story about McCain's temper? Are you just repeating and repeating this over and over again so as to brainwash voters about Obama's character. You people are so despicable! posted 04/20/2008 at 20:47:27
Clinton Backer Distributes Essay On How GOP Would Link Obama To '70s Radicals
TheSholveler:
You want us to stop "Hillary-bashing" but you love Obama bashing, even if it means you tag him with an organization that may have done awful things when he was 8 years old. You also can't hide your racism. Otherwise what is the relevancy of your comparing Obama to "Sidny Poitier? The trouble with all of you Clinton supporters is any critical examination of Clinton is interpreted as "Hillary-bashing." On the otherhand you can call Obama all kinds of names, make him guilty by association, and then claim to be doing it in the interest of saving the party. Here you have a candidate who is inspiring new voters, has a message of unity, has demonstrated that he can attract independents and Republicans, has won the majority of states, viewed more positively than Hillary and yet he will lose. This Ayers manufactured controversy is stupid. People will see through it. Look some of the most conservative Democrats like Sen. Sam Nunn, and Sen. David Boran, must not see this as a big deal. Otherwise why endorse Obama. You said "life is unfair." I agree. Clinton, and people like you, expected her coronation. You seem to forget that this a democracy. posted 04/19/2008 at 17:17:59
You want us to stop "Hillary-bashing" but you love Obama bashing, even if it means you tag him with an organization that may have done awful things when he was 8 years old. You also can't hide your racism. Otherwise what is the relevancy of your comparing Obama to "Sidny Poitier? The trouble with all of you Clinton supporters is any critical examination of Clinton is interpreted as "Hillary-bashing." On the otherhand you can call Obama all kinds of names, make him guilty by association, and then claim to be doing it in the interest of saving the party. Here you have a candidate who is inspiring new voters, has a message of unity, has demonstrated that he can attract independents and Republicans, has won the majority of states, viewed more positively than Hillary and yet he will lose. This Ayers manufactured controversy is stupid. People will see through it. Look some of the most conservative Democrats like Sen. Sam Nunn, and Sen. David Boran, must not see this as a big deal. Otherwise why endorse Obama. You said "life is unfair." I agree. Clinton, and people like you, expected her coronation. You seem to forget that this a democracy. posted 04/19/2008 at 17:17:59
vsign:
Why don't you keep your tired racist diatribes to yourself. Obama is is an American born citizen just like Hillary. Here in California we have a foreign born governor who is an American citizen, a republican and quite popular with many conservatives. I never heard any one trash him. But May be that is because he is white. posted 04/19/2008 at 16:58:49
Why don't you keep your tired racist diatribes to yourself. Obama is is an American born citizen just like Hillary. Here in California we have a foreign born governor who is an American citizen, a republican and quite popular with many conservatives. I never heard any one trash him. But May be that is because he is white. posted 04/19/2008 at 16:58:49
Benmyoho?
How despicable! Why are you people so evil? Why change a man's name for the purpose of trashing him and making him a terrorist. I suppose you will go around claiming to be an honest Christian who loves America and loves democracy, freedom and justice. posted 04/19/2008 at 16:52:56
How despicable! Why are you people so evil? Why change a man's name for the purpose of trashing him and making him a terrorist. I suppose you will go around claiming to be an honest Christian who loves America and loves democracy, freedom and justice. posted 04/19/2008 at 16:52:56
Obama Draws Largest Crowd Of His Campaign At Philadelphia Rally
awcbuddy8:
You mean the way Bill and Hillary Clinton complains, or the way Paul Krugman,Mark Penn, and Howard Olafuson complains? Or maybe you mean Hillary supporters, like you, who trash any one supporting Obama. But you see your trouble is you don't even notice how pathetic you look when you accuse someone of exactly that which you "incessantly" do. All power to hypocrisy. Clinton and her supporters have embraced the deity. posted 04/19/2008 at 01:44:32
You mean the way Bill and Hillary Clinton complains, or the way Paul Krugman,Mark Penn, and Howard Olafuson complains? Or maybe you mean Hillary supporters, like you, who trash any one supporting Obama. But you see your trouble is you don't even notice how pathetic you look when you accuse someone of exactly that which you "incessantly" do. All power to hypocrisy. Clinton and her supporters have embraced the deity. posted 04/19/2008 at 01:44:32
awcbuddy8:
No! No you fear a good president. You fear a man who has the potential to transform the country. You fear a man who will be beholden to the people and not the special interests. This is a democracy not a monarchy! People are tired of being governed by the same two war mongering families. posted 04/19/2008 at 01:30:03
No! No you fear a good president. You fear a man who has the potential to transform the country. You fear a man who will be beholden to the people and not the special interests. This is a democracy not a monarchy! People are tired of being governed by the same two war mongering families. posted 04/19/2008 at 01:30:03
awcbuddy:
May you would rather have "Royalty" over Jesus. Otherwise why continue to worship a family dynasty? Hail to Her Majesty! posted 04/19/2008 at 01:21:42
May you would rather have "Royalty" over Jesus. Otherwise why continue to worship a family dynasty? Hail to Her Majesty! posted 04/19/2008 at 01:21:42
mommamia526:
There you go being bitter and cynical; you are probably envious too! posted 04/19/2008 at 01:18:40
There you go being bitter and cynical; you are probably envious too! posted 04/19/2008 at 01:18:40
Hillary Clinton Slams MoveOn With Karl Rove's Lies
Roopez123:
Thanks for bringing up the truth about the genesis of MoveOn. But you see, for the Clintons, it is all about loyalty. The Clintons are essentially echoing George W. Bush: "You are either with us or you are against us." If you don't support Hillary, you become the enemy that must be destroyed. Never mind all that all of us did in supporting Bill Clinton, especially when he had his back against the wall.It seems now that Clintons new friends are the right wing conservatives at Fox News. After all didn't Sean Hannity write some of the questions that George asked in the PA debate? posted 04/18/2008 at 20:21:11
Thanks for bringing up the truth about the genesis of MoveOn. But you see, for the Clintons, it is all about loyalty. The Clintons are essentially echoing George W. Bush: "You are either with us or you are against us." If you don't support Hillary, you become the enemy that must be destroyed. Never mind all that all of us did in supporting Bill Clinton, especially when he had his back against the wall.It seems now that Clintons new friends are the right wing conservatives at Fox News. After all didn't Sean Hannity write some of the questions that George asked in the PA debate? posted 04/18/2008 at 20:21:11
Clinton Slams Democratic Activists At Private Fundraiser
gotalife:
I have seen Lou Dobbs, Hillary Clinton, and Bill Clinton whine more than I have ever seen of any Obama supporters. Wasn't it the Hillary supporters who have been whining that any one who opposes Clinton is against women. Look, ABC disgraced itself by focusing half of the debate on stupid issues that have absolutely nothing to do with the lives of people. Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos belong to tabloid journalism. Poor George must have been showcasing for a job in the new Hillary administration. He had conflict of interest written all over him. Obama is not a "Messiah" any more than Bill Clinton was. He is just a more inspiring leader than Hillary. You can try to denigrate all you want, but I think you vicious attacks are more motivated by envy than by reasoned analysis of leadership qualities. I for one I am not depending on that racist-immigrant bashing Lou Dobbs to come up with any reasoned analysis. All he is interested in is preserving white supremacy. posted 04/18/2008 at 19:42:24
I have seen Lou Dobbs, Hillary Clinton, and Bill Clinton whine more than I have ever seen of any Obama supporters. Wasn't it the Hillary supporters who have been whining that any one who opposes Clinton is against women. Look, ABC disgraced itself by focusing half of the debate on stupid issues that have absolutely nothing to do with the lives of people. Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos belong to tabloid journalism. Poor George must have been showcasing for a job in the new Hillary administration. He had conflict of interest written all over him. Obama is not a "Messiah" any more than Bill Clinton was. He is just a more inspiring leader than Hillary. You can try to denigrate all you want, but I think you vicious attacks are more motivated by envy than by reasoned analysis of leadership qualities. I for one I am not depending on that racist-immigrant bashing Lou Dobbs to come up with any reasoned analysis. All he is interested in is preserving white supremacy. posted 04/18/2008 at 19:42:24
Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich Endorses Obama
BeefitswhatsforDinner:
You comment is so evil and ignorant. I have a hunch you might be the one that would be saluting "Hail Hitler!" Based on your comments you seem to be in the same league with both Osama and Hitler. posted 04/18/2008 at 23:15:12
You comment is so evil and ignorant. I have a hunch you might be the one that would be saluting "Hail Hitler!" Based on your comments you seem to be in the same league with both Osama and Hitler. posted 04/18/2008 at 23:15:12
illindependent:
There you go again: Why is it that you must trash people who support Obama? I think people like you are interested in a dictatorship and not democracy. You want every one to salute "Hail Hillary!" How can you call Obama a loser when he trouncing Hillary? I think you are just filled with one of the deadly sins: ENVY! posted 04/18/2008 at 23:10:14
There you go again: Why is it that you must trash people who support Obama? I think people like you are interested in a dictatorship and not democracy. You want every one to salute "Hail Hillary!" How can you call Obama a loser when he trouncing Hillary? I think you are just filled with one of the deadly sins: ENVY! posted 04/18/2008 at 23:10:14
Kevenseven:
You shouldn't be surprised about some of the Clinton supporters. You see they have drunk the Carl Rove arsenic. Any prominent person who declares support for Obama must be trashed. I am waiting to see how they trash Sens. Sam Nunn and David Boren. posted 04/18/2008 at 23:02:36
You shouldn't be surprised about some of the Clinton supporters. You see they have drunk the Carl Rove arsenic. Any prominent person who declares support for Obama must be trashed. I am waiting to see how they trash Sens. Sam Nunn and David Boren. posted 04/18/2008 at 23:02:36
RoseFromPhila,
Why are you so obsessed with Rezko? Is that because you have nothing important to say. Why bring Rezko up to comment on a story about Robert Reich's Obama endorsement. By the way have you ever heard of Norman Hsu, Marc Reich and all the other convicted shady character? I am sure you are going to claim that they all support Obama. You keep beating a dead horse. posted 04/18/2008 at 22:54:51
Why are you so obsessed with Rezko? Is that because you have nothing important to say. Why bring Rezko up to comment on a story about Robert Reich's Obama endorsement. By the way have you ever heard of Norman Hsu, Marc Reich and all the other convicted shady character? I am sure you are going to claim that they all support Obama. You keep beating a dead horse. posted 04/18/2008 at 22:54:51
Kristol, Lieberman, and Will Unmask Obama's Secret Marxist Agenda
none!n2008
Well Clinton has used the kitchen sink and he is still standing. Just keep underestimating him. I think Obama has the capacity "to fly like butterfly, and sting like a bee." Clinton, McCain and all those spoilt neo-coservatives can throw all the mud but the may be the one to end smelling. People have woken up! They will not be fooled again with these idiotic non-issues. Personally I would rather bet on Obama than Clinton. She has too much baggage. If you don't believe me, check out her rising negatives a she engages in mudslinging. The majority of Americans have been fooled before, if we are fooled again, by these neo-con morons, and their Carl Rove tactics, then shame on us. We would deserve the president we get. I think the congressional elections of 2006 demonstrated that Karl Rove is a has been. So stop wetting you pants about what he and the neo-cons will do. we are on to their despicable games. posted 04/19/2008 at 00:19:04
Well Clinton has used the kitchen sink and he is still standing. Just keep underestimating him. I think Obama has the capacity "to fly like butterfly, and sting like a bee." Clinton, McCain and all those spoilt neo-coservatives can throw all the mud but the may be the one to end smelling. People have woken up! They will not be fooled again with these idiotic non-issues. Personally I would rather bet on Obama than Clinton. She has too much baggage. If you don't believe me, check out her rising negatives a she engages in mudslinging. The majority of Americans have been fooled before, if we are fooled again, by these neo-con morons, and their Carl Rove tactics, then shame on us. We would deserve the president we get. I think the congressional elections of 2006 demonstrated that Karl Rove is a has been. So stop wetting you pants about what he and the neo-cons will do. we are on to their despicable games. posted 04/19/2008 at 00:19:04
What Passes For Debate
-What if we had a debate where Candidates were asked their positions on the issue of "unitary
executive?"
-What if we had a debate where Candidates were asked about the issue of whether they would invade another country in violation of the United Nations Charter?
_What if we had a debate where Candidates were asked their views about torture and America's position on the Geneva Conventions?
-What if we had a debate and Candidates were asked what they plan to do to about the crumbling infrastructures.
-What if we had a debate where Candidates were grilled about globalization, and the out sourcing of jobs and the decimation of the industrial heartland?
-What if we had a debate that focused on the trillion dollars war in Iraq that is devastating the future of our Children and our grand children?
-What if we had a debate where Candidates were asked their positions on the role of the mercenaries, like Blackwater, in United States military operations?
-What if we had a debate where Candidates were asked about their positions on the war profiteering by such companies as Haliburton?
Last night's so called Democratic debate in Pennsylvania, was a sham. It was a distraction. It was a shameless attempt to inflame voters over stupid issues. I hope the American people rise up and demand that corporate media, that uses the public airways, respect their interests and not the interests of the Republican machine and Fox talking heads. posted 04/17/2008 at 20:38:07
executive?"
-What if we had a debate where Candidates were asked about the issue of whether they would invade another country in violation of the United Nations Charter?
_What if we had a debate where Candidates were asked their views about torture and America's position on the Geneva Conventions?
-What if we had a debate and Candidates were asked what they plan to do to about the crumbling infrastructures.
-What if we had a debate where Candidates were grilled about globalization, and the out sourcing of jobs and the decimation of the industrial heartland?
-What if we had a debate that focused on the trillion dollars war in Iraq that is devastating the future of our Children and our grand children?
-What if we had a debate where Candidates were asked their positions on the role of the mercenaries, like Blackwater, in United States military operations?
-What if we had a debate where Candidates were asked about their positions on the war profiteering by such companies as Haliburton?
Last night's so called Democratic debate in Pennsylvania, was a sham. It was a distraction. It was a shameless attempt to inflame voters over stupid issues. I hope the American people rise up and demand that corporate media, that uses the public airways, respect their interests and not the interests of the Republican machine and Fox talking heads. posted 04/17/2008 at 20:38:07
Me and Barack: Michelle Obama Talks To Pennsylvanians
Jazz42:
You may be on to something. I think she bought her access to Obama by making the maximum contribution. But, I understand that she also contributed to Sen. Clinton and Sen. Fred Thompson. In that case she may even be a well disguised Republican operative pretending to be an Obama supporter to enhance her credibility with the Huffington Post. My apology to her if she is really an Obama supporter. If she is truly an Obama supporter, Obama surely does not need enemies. She just reminds me of the old OJ tune: "They smile in your faces...." posted 04/17/2008 at 23:30:21
You may be on to something. I think she bought her access to Obama by making the maximum contribution. But, I understand that she also contributed to Sen. Clinton and Sen. Fred Thompson. In that case she may even be a well disguised Republican operative pretending to be an Obama supporter to enhance her credibility with the Huffington Post. My apology to her if she is really an Obama supporter. If she is truly an Obama supporter, Obama surely does not need enemies. She just reminds me of the old OJ tune: "They smile in your faces...." posted 04/17/2008 at 23:30:21
Hillary And The Commies
Here is my problem with all those who attacking Obama because of his association with Rezko, Rev. Wright and Prof. Ayers: They have not shown me what is that Obama did that resulted from that association. Did he advocate any of their views, both inside and outside government? What about other politicians that have other associations? Should we hold that against them? Let take an example: Sen Clinton's husband made money from Colombia, he supports the Colombia Trade Bill. Colombia has terrible record in oppressing workers, opposing unions,and assassinating union leaders. But Hillary Opposes the Colombia Trade Bill. Since Obama is being held accountable for the views of his pastor,that he rejects and denounces, shouldn't Hillary Clinton be held accountable, perhaps more so since her husband is vigorously campaigning for her, for the deeds of her husband? Why the double standards? I think Mr. Cooper raised an important question about the way George Stephanopoulos was selective in his questions. Mr Stephanopoulos should also have come straight by alerting the viewers that he was a former high placed Bill Clinton Official. That he didn't do that is quite telling. posted 04/17/2008 at 03:12:01
Benton:
I am absolutely with you there. This was no a debate. It was a media organized attack not only on Sen. Obama, but on the millions of Americans who want to see real issues discussed rather these silly meaningless issues that have absolutely nothing to do with improving the quality of our lives. Just imagine how it felt for the families with loved ones in the wars to see so much time wasted on Bill Ayers and Rev. Wright. I suppose the reason I am having financial difficulties with the rise of gasoline prices, the decline of the value of my mortgage, the fact that I cannot afford college tuition for my daughter, should all be blamed on Bill Ayers and Rev. Wright. Never mind the debacle of this obscene war, the corporate friendly globalization, and the unfair tax burdens. According to ABC and George Stephanopoulos, the mot important issue facing me as a voter, is Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers, and Obama's inarticulate, but truthful remarks. I tell you after tonight's sham debate, I am really bitter. I am bitter about the corporate media that no longer serves the interests of the people. posted 04/17/2008 at 02:39:38
I am absolutely with you there. This was no a debate. It was a media organized attack not only on Sen. Obama, but on the millions of Americans who want to see real issues discussed rather these silly meaningless issues that have absolutely nothing to do with improving the quality of our lives. Just imagine how it felt for the families with loved ones in the wars to see so much time wasted on Bill Ayers and Rev. Wright. I suppose the reason I am having financial difficulties with the rise of gasoline prices, the decline of the value of my mortgage, the fact that I cannot afford college tuition for my daughter, should all be blamed on Bill Ayers and Rev. Wright. Never mind the debacle of this obscene war, the corporate friendly globalization, and the unfair tax burdens. According to ABC and George Stephanopoulos, the mot important issue facing me as a voter, is Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers, and Obama's inarticulate, but truthful remarks. I tell you after tonight's sham debate, I am really bitter. I am bitter about the corporate media that no longer serves the interests of the people. posted 04/17/2008 at 02:39:38
FearlessSpeech,
I am also sending Obama $50 from my meager resources. We cannot allow the real "ruling elites" in the media and corporations to continue derailing the interests of ordinary people. Tonight's so called debate was clearly aimed at destroying the candidacy of Barak Obama and all that he stands for. May be He should have known. I certainly didn't know that a supposedly major News organization would stoop so low! Disney and ABC News should be ashamed! Never again will I watch ABC. posted 04/17/2008 at 02:25:30
I am also sending Obama $50 from my meager resources. We cannot allow the real "ruling elites" in the media and corporations to continue derailing the interests of ordinary people. Tonight's so called debate was clearly aimed at destroying the candidacy of Barak Obama and all that he stands for. May be He should have known. I certainly didn't know that a supposedly major News organization would stoop so low! Disney and ABC News should be ashamed! Never again will I watch ABC. posted 04/17/2008 at 02:25:30
onthegoodfoot:
The trouble with you clinton supporters is that you are always in the attack mod. He is not blaming Clinton but he is blaming the Clinton surrogate, pretending to be a journalist, asking stupid question aimed at at making Obama guilty by association but does not do the same thing to Clinton. The fault is squarely with ABC News. George Stephnanopoulos, a former highly placed Clinton Aid, had conflict of interest written all over him. He had no business pretending to be an impartial Journalist. The choice of his questions revealed his biases. He might also have been trying to carry favors with Sean Hannity and the people at FOXX News. posted 04/17/2008 at 02:18:03
The trouble with you clinton supporters is that you are always in the attack mod. He is not blaming Clinton but he is blaming the Clinton surrogate, pretending to be a journalist, asking stupid question aimed at at making Obama guilty by association but does not do the same thing to Clinton. The fault is squarely with ABC News. George Stephnanopoulos, a former highly placed Clinton Aid, had conflict of interest written all over him. He had no business pretending to be an impartial Journalist. The choice of his questions revealed his biases. He might also have been trying to carry favors with Sean Hannity and the people at FOXX News. posted 04/17/2008 at 02:18:03
Where Is the League of Women Voters When We Need Them?
zozosmom:
Can you please give an example of Obama "tabloid, biased journalism?" I don't think tonight's ABC performance benefited Clinton. Most of us know that George Stephanopoulos had conflict of interest. He should never have been a moderator. He was more like Jeff Gannon. A plant pretending to be a journalist. You can not cite an example of any one who has worked for Obama asking questions in a nationally televised debate. This was not about Karma. This was avery vicious ambush. Tonight both George and Hillary lost their souls in their quest for power that they may never get. It is possible that Obama may not be the nominee. But I can almost guarantee that Hillary Clinton is not going to elected president. The majority of people are disgusted with her lies and her win at all costs. So, she may have stolen this battle with the help of George S. but she will surely loose the war. I doubt that George S. will ever get another chance to come to her aid. We are all on to him. By the way Obama is such a strong and decent guy that you will never see him "cry" or whine like Hillary. It is us the Obama supporters that utterly disgusted. So don't blame it on him. posted 04/17/2008 at 06:18:40
Can you please give an example of Obama "tabloid, biased journalism?" I don't think tonight's ABC performance benefited Clinton. Most of us know that George Stephanopoulos had conflict of interest. He should never have been a moderator. He was more like Jeff Gannon. A plant pretending to be a journalist. You can not cite an example of any one who has worked for Obama asking questions in a nationally televised debate. This was not about Karma. This was avery vicious ambush. Tonight both George and Hillary lost their souls in their quest for power that they may never get. It is possible that Obama may not be the nominee. But I can almost guarantee that Hillary Clinton is not going to elected president. The majority of people are disgusted with her lies and her win at all costs. So, she may have stolen this battle with the help of George S. but she will surely loose the war. I doubt that George S. will ever get another chance to come to her aid. We are all on to him. By the way Obama is such a strong and decent guy that you will never see him "cry" or whine like Hillary. It is us the Obama supporters that utterly disgusted. So don't blame it on him. posted 04/17/2008 at 06:18:40
Worst. Debate. Ever.
Zuni,
I agree! I also think ABC=FOXX NEWS. Many of the questions asked to-night were proposed by Sean Hannity. posted 04/16/2008 at 23:51:13
I agree! I also think ABC=FOXX NEWS. Many of the questions asked to-night were proposed by Sean Hannity. posted 04/16/2008 at 23:51:13
SFnashuaNH:
Are you a member of FOXX News? "ABC was fair and balanced?" You must have been smoking something when you watched. Obama did quite well thank you. The only problem is that most of the issues covered are so stupid. They had absolutely nothing to do with the real issues that affect my life. The aim to night was not enlighten the public on which candidate is based equipped to deal with the critical problems facing this country. Rather the aim was to destroy Baraka Obama. I am sure that reasonable Americans saw through the games ABC played. Don't be surprised if people end up supporting Obama more than ever. If Clinton is teaming up with McCain and the corporate media in attacking Obama, he must be doing something good. May it is because he is more beholden to the people than he is to the elitist corporate class that include Washington based politicians, the media and corporate lobbyists. posted 04/16/2008 at 23:48:18
Are you a member of FOXX News? "ABC was fair and balanced?" You must have been smoking something when you watched. Obama did quite well thank you. The only problem is that most of the issues covered are so stupid. They had absolutely nothing to do with the real issues that affect my life. The aim to night was not enlighten the public on which candidate is based equipped to deal with the critical problems facing this country. Rather the aim was to destroy Baraka Obama. I am sure that reasonable Americans saw through the games ABC played. Don't be surprised if people end up supporting Obama more than ever. If Clinton is teaming up with McCain and the corporate media in attacking Obama, he must be doing something good. May it is because he is more beholden to the people than he is to the elitist corporate class that include Washington based politicians, the media and corporate lobbyists. posted 04/16/2008 at 23:48:18
jeffhas:
You are an idiot! Tell me how the questions asked to night have any relevancy to the messy economy we are in, the debacle in Iraq, the destruction of the constitution. Hey, If all that you are interested is how destroy Barak Obama, all power to you. The looser tonight was the vast majority of people who are so beyond these "politics of personal destruction." They want leaders who are about uplifting the country. Hopefully, they were not fooled by the games played by ABC tonight. No wonder many registered their disgust. Shame on ABC and charles Gibson and his fellow Clinton lackey pretending to be a journalist. posted 04/16/2008 at 23:37:32
You are an idiot! Tell me how the questions asked to night have any relevancy to the messy economy we are in, the debacle in Iraq, the destruction of the constitution. Hey, If all that you are interested is how destroy Barak Obama, all power to you. The looser tonight was the vast majority of people who are so beyond these "politics of personal destruction." They want leaders who are about uplifting the country. Hopefully, they were not fooled by the games played by ABC tonight. No wonder many registered their disgust. Shame on ABC and charles Gibson and his fellow Clinton lackey pretending to be a journalist. posted 04/16/2008 at 23:37:32
The ABC Debate: A Shameful Night for the U.S. Media
VitaBrevis:
So do all these things have to do with my being laid off, in the process of loosing my house, paying almost $4 a gallon of gas? Talk about elitism. What I saw to night was the media elite that is consumed with trivia. What I needed to the debate focused were the economic crisis and this illegal war in Iraq that has taken the lives of thousands of Americans, drained our treasury, with no end in sight.. Pastor White and Tuzla have absolutely nothing to do with my situation. Only privileged people like you love this gotcha politics that ends up electing people like George Bush. I am sick of the media and all of you hypocrites! posted 04/16/2008 at 23:24:15
So do all these things have to do with my being laid off, in the process of loosing my house, paying almost $4 a gallon of gas? Talk about elitism. What I saw to night was the media elite that is consumed with trivia. What I needed to the debate focused were the economic crisis and this illegal war in Iraq that has taken the lives of thousands of Americans, drained our treasury, with no end in sight.. Pastor White and Tuzla have absolutely nothing to do with my situation. Only privileged people like you love this gotcha politics that ends up electing people like George Bush. I am sick of the media and all of you hypocrites! posted 04/16/2008 at 23:24:15
Obama: Hillary, McCain Using "Very Same Words" Against Me
What exactly did Obama say that was so egregious to provoke Hillary Clinton and John McCain's Attacks. Surely it is not the word "bitterness." I know many people who are "bitter" and angry about the dire economic situations they face, or have faced for decades. Is it the word "cling" as in clinging to religion, guns, and antipathy towards immigrants. Has any one bothered to look up the meaning of "cling?" Here Is how the Webster's Dictionary renders the meanings of the word "cling":
1 (a): to hold together; (b):to adhere as if glued firmly; (c): to hold on tightly or tenaciously."
2 (a): to have strong emotional attachment or dependence; (b): to remain or linger as if resisting complete dissipation or dispersal
Based on the above definitions what exactly did Obama say that was either negative or untrue? Why must we be subjected to this silly manufactured outrage? posted 04/15/2008 at 19:14:03
1 (a): to hold together; (b):to adhere as if glued firmly; (c): to hold on tightly or tenaciously."
2 (a): to have strong emotional attachment or dependence; (b): to remain or linger as if resisting complete dissipation or dispersal
Based on the above definitions what exactly did Obama say that was either negative or untrue? Why must we be subjected to this silly manufactured outrage? posted 04/15/2008 at 19:14:03
jammerbirdi:
Absolute nonsense! Both your sources are not credible. posted 04/15/2008 at 18:47:09
Absolute nonsense! Both your sources are not credible. posted 04/15/2008 at 18:47:09
It's Impossible to be Proud of the Way Hillary Has Run This Campaign
olderdem,
She may still stand a chance of being McCain's running mate. In any case I think both Bill and Hillary prefer McCain as president over Obama. posted 04/15/2008 at 20:31:51
She may still stand a chance of being McCain's running mate. In any case I think both Bill and Hillary prefer McCain as president over Obama. posted 04/15/2008 at 20:31:51
John McCain Should Go on Vacation, Hillary Clinton is Doing His Job for Him
Cartwheel927:
Apparently you have your head in the sand. Sen Clinton has called Obama elitist not once but several times. Check out her latest ad in PA. posted 04/16/2008 at 00:45:01
Apparently you have your head in the sand. Sen Clinton has called Obama elitist not once but several times. Check out her latest ad in PA. posted 04/16/2008 at 00:45:01
The Uncharted: From Off The Bus to Meet the Press
Mr. Rosen:
I have a great deal of respect for you. I have enjoyed your posts that critically engaged the issues. I am sorry to say that this time you appeared to be more focused on defending Ms. Mayhill Fowler. I have read most of her posts on the Huffington Post and they all tend to be subliminally biased against Obama. May be Ms Fowler is an Obama supporter but the way she reported this incident was aimed at undercutting Obama. By the way is it really a coincidence that the Clinton campaign kept hinting at some "bombshell" that would sink Obama's campaign and then Ms Fowler posted this story. You seem to be critical of NBC for not giving credit to the Huffington Post, but could it be possible that they had already been altered by the anonymous source (who may be Ms Fowler) before her story was posted on the Huffington Post? I am sorry as much as I respect your integrity, your defense of Ms Fowler is not credible. posted 04/14/2008 at 21:36:46
I have a great deal of respect for you. I have enjoyed your posts that critically engaged the issues. I am sorry to say that this time you appeared to be more focused on defending Ms. Mayhill Fowler. I have read most of her posts on the Huffington Post and they all tend to be subliminally biased against Obama. May be Ms Fowler is an Obama supporter but the way she reported this incident was aimed at undercutting Obama. By the way is it really a coincidence that the Clinton campaign kept hinting at some "bombshell" that would sink Obama's campaign and then Ms Fowler posted this story. You seem to be critical of NBC for not giving credit to the Huffington Post, but could it be possible that they had already been altered by the anonymous source (who may be Ms Fowler) before her story was posted on the Huffington Post? I am sorry as much as I respect your integrity, your defense of Ms Fowler is not credible. posted 04/14/2008 at 21:36:46
I Was There: What Obama Really Said About Pennsylvania
meanguy:
You wouldn't know the truth even if it hit you in the eye. You would rather rely on lies so long as Obama is at the receiving end. posted 04/14/2008 at 17:12:58
You wouldn't know the truth even if it hit you in the eye. You would rather rely on lies so long as Obama is at the receiving end. posted 04/14/2008 at 17:12:58
almodleaf:
I am very sorry to say but your comments are idiotic. Please name the billionaires that support Obama. H ave you forgotten the billionaires who threatened Speaker Pelosi just because she said that the so called super delegates should not over turn the will of the people? I don't remember you attacking those elites. posted 04/14/2008 at 17:08:06
I am very sorry to say but your comments are idiotic. Please name the billionaires that support Obama. H ave you forgotten the billionaires who threatened Speaker Pelosi just because she said that the so called super delegates should not over turn the will of the people? I don't remember you attacking those elites. posted 04/14/2008 at 17:08:06
almodleaf
Obama's campaign has been financed mainly by ordinary people contributing $25-50. Compare that to Lobbyist funded and Lobbyist led of the campaigns of Hillary Clinton and John McCain. Obama's pastor has now become reverends. How about all right wing reverends, such as John Hagee supporting McCain. posted 04/14/2008 at 17:02:26
Obama's campaign has been financed mainly by ordinary people contributing $25-50. Compare that to Lobbyist funded and Lobbyist led of the campaigns of Hillary Clinton and John McCain. Obama's pastor has now become reverends. How about all right wing reverends, such as John Hagee supporting McCain. posted 04/14/2008 at 17:02:26
Hearlander:
Where have you been hiding under a rock? Obama did apologize fro remarks that may have offended any one though that was not his intention. Have you ever made a statement that was misconstrued? Did he say anything that was not factual other than using words that are being misconstrued? Enough of this elite nonsense. Obama is not the only elite in this race. John Edwards was an elite. Both McCain and Clinton are super elites. Personally I thought the only true progressive in the race was Dennis Kucinich. I think Obama is as progressive as John Edwards, on some issues, even more progressive. Check out his record. posted 04/14/2008 at 16:56:34
Where have you been hiding under a rock? Obama did apologize fro remarks that may have offended any one though that was not his intention. Have you ever made a statement that was misconstrued? Did he say anything that was not factual other than using words that are being misconstrued? Enough of this elite nonsense. Obama is not the only elite in this race. John Edwards was an elite. Both McCain and Clinton are super elites. Personally I thought the only true progressive in the race was Dennis Kucinich. I think Obama is as progressive as John Edwards, on some issues, even more progressive. Check out his record. posted 04/14/2008 at 16:56:34
Watch: Obama On Annie Oakley
Kevenseven,
This governorship may not be a sure thing. New Yorkers may not want her as governor. Who would want a governor who imagines that she had been under sniper attacks because she was sleep deprived. posted 04/14/2008 at 01:32:26
This governorship may not be a sure thing. New Yorkers may not want her as governor. Who would want a governor who imagines that she had been under sniper attacks because she was sleep deprived. posted 04/14/2008 at 01:32:26
Busterdawg:
Racist voters are not a majority in this country. Hillary should be blamed for campaigning as a republican who prefers McCain over Obama. It may come as a surprise to you, but many people are beginning to wake up. They are on to the Republican games of "God, Guns, and Gays," at the expense of their economic well being. posted 04/14/2008 at 01:09:23
Racist voters are not a majority in this country. Hillary should be blamed for campaigning as a republican who prefers McCain over Obama. It may come as a surprise to you, but many people are beginning to wake up. They are on to the Republican games of "God, Guns, and Gays," at the expense of their economic well being. posted 04/14/2008 at 01:09:23
YellerDawg:
Can you please get over this business of elitism. By the way I don't think Rezko can compete with Norman Hsu, Marc Rich, and Bill Clinton in engaging in shady business deals. So stop beating a dead horse. posted 04/14/2008 at 01:03:06
Can you please get over this business of elitism. By the way I don't think Rezko can compete with Norman Hsu, Marc Rich, and Bill Clinton in engaging in shady business deals. So stop beating a dead horse. posted 04/14/2008 at 01:03:06
YellerDawg:
You are an elitist! Look at how you disrespect Hawaii and Indonesia. So Obama went to Harvard, so did George Bush. Both the Clintons went Yale. Bill was even Rhodes Scholar. Did that make him an elitist. Please stop all this manufactured foolishness! We are not as stupid as you take us to be. Unless your beef with Obama is that he is a black kid who went to Harvard. posted 04/14/2008 at 00:55:51
You are an elitist! Look at how you disrespect Hawaii and Indonesia. So Obama went to Harvard, so did George Bush. Both the Clintons went Yale. Bill was even Rhodes Scholar. Did that make him an elitist. Please stop all this manufactured foolishness! We are not as stupid as you take us to be. Unless your beef with Obama is that he is a black kid who went to Harvard. posted 04/14/2008 at 00:55:51
apcalc:
Stop lying! Obama never "insulted most of the small town America." What he did was point out how both the Bushes and the Clintons have betrayed them. They talk a good game about traditional values when they are busy shipping jobs overseas, rewarding their lobbyists friend, while decimating communities in the "Rust-Belt." No wonder the Hillary-McCain machines reacted the way they did. Obama brought to the open the games they play on the working class people while they are busy amassing hundreds of millions of dollars for themselves and their rich benefactors. It was Hillary who wanted to change the subject once it was revealed that her top campaign official, Mark Penn, and her husband, Bill Clinton were benefiting from advocating trade deals with Colombia-trade deals that will affect jobs and trade unions. So Spin as you may, we know who is changing the subject trying to fool the working class in the depressed cities. posted 04/14/2008 at 00:48:56
Stop lying! Obama never "insulted most of the small town America." What he did was point out how both the Bushes and the Clintons have betrayed them. They talk a good game about traditional values when they are busy shipping jobs overseas, rewarding their lobbyists friend, while decimating communities in the "Rust-Belt." No wonder the Hillary-McCain machines reacted the way they did. Obama brought to the open the games they play on the working class people while they are busy amassing hundreds of millions of dollars for themselves and their rich benefactors. It was Hillary who wanted to change the subject once it was revealed that her top campaign official, Mark Penn, and her husband, Bill Clinton were benefiting from advocating trade deals with Colombia-trade deals that will affect jobs and trade unions. So Spin as you may, we know who is changing the subject trying to fool the working class in the depressed cities. posted 04/14/2008 at 00:48:56
aristippe;
The truth shall set you free. Start with Mark Penn and go down the list. posted 04/14/2008 at 00:37:26
The truth shall set you free. Start with Mark Penn and go down the list. posted 04/14/2008 at 00:37:26
whizkid:
I am sorry to say but you are deranged. You think demeaning Obama advances Clinton. posted 04/14/2008 at 00:34:16
I am sorry to say but you are deranged. You think demeaning Obama advances Clinton. posted 04/14/2008 at 00:34:16
Clinton: Gore And Kerry Lost Because They Were Viewed As Elitist
To the Huffington Post:
I am wondering why the Clinton comments are played in full while Obama's comments are not? Is this part of the pattern to deprive pwoplw from hearing Sen. Obama's response to Clinton's self-serving Republican talking points? I hpe this is a technical issue. Otherwise your posting is patently unfair to Obama. We never get to see his complete response posted 04/14/2008 at 00:20:26
I am wondering why the Clinton comments are played in full while Obama's comments are not? Is this part of the pattern to deprive pwoplw from hearing Sen. Obama's response to Clinton's self-serving Republican talking points? I hpe this is a technical issue. Otherwise your posting is patently unfair to Obama. We never get to see his complete response posted 04/14/2008 at 00:20:26
What Will a Hillary Clinton Presidency Look Like?
MMiller:
For you Clinton Supporters your attacks on Obama is all about Rezko! How about Norman Hsu? How about Marc Rich? How about Bill Clinton and the Colombians? How about Mark Penn and the Colombians? How about the lies about sniper fire in Bosnia? How about Bill Clinton's Dubai and Chinese connections? And indeed how about the Clintons' peddling of NAFTA.? Finally how about her Iraq war support? A war that is on track to cost trillions of dollars? And all you have on Obama is Rezko! People in Illinois are laughing at this being an issue when Obama has already put it to rest. Reading your post, I think you dislike Obama for other reasons that you would rather not reveal in public. May be you hinted on that when you said: " I am tired of hearing how I should believe race relations are an issue...." posted 04/14/2008 at 02:14:14
For you Clinton Supporters your attacks on Obama is all about Rezko! How about Norman Hsu? How about Marc Rich? How about Bill Clinton and the Colombians? How about Mark Penn and the Colombians? How about the lies about sniper fire in Bosnia? How about Bill Clinton's Dubai and Chinese connections? And indeed how about the Clintons' peddling of NAFTA.? Finally how about her Iraq war support? A war that is on track to cost trillions of dollars? And all you have on Obama is Rezko! People in Illinois are laughing at this being an issue when Obama has already put it to rest. Reading your post, I think you dislike Obama for other reasons that you would rather not reveal in public. May be you hinted on that when you said: " I am tired of hearing how I should believe race relations are an issue...." posted 04/14/2008 at 02:14:14
David Brody: Obama Comments No Big Deal
Personally I am tired of the bullshit from Clinton supporters. They know the truth of what Obama was talking about but the have to spin it so that it turns out negative. Moreover, the clintons had to larch on this story because it effectively eliminated a more potent story that would speak the issues of workers. That story involves her husband and senior members of her campaign who have been pushing the so called "free trade" with Colombia that would have devastating impact on workers in America. posted 04/13/2008 at 00:30:36
It Takes Real Chutzpah for a Guy Who Owns Eight Houses (McCain) to Call Barack Obama an "Elitist"
rollingdivision
The other day I run into homeless person, but he was such an" elitist." He blamed the Republican and Democratic politicians for neglecting the problems of the poor for 25-30 years. He said that people turn to the churches because they don't think government really cares for them. They see the government serving the interests of the rich who can afford lobbyists, some of whom are former politicians and government officials who practice the"revolving door" belief. He also said he can understand why poor people would rather focus on gun ownership and other issues because they have given up on the government that has outsourced all their jobs. I must confess that before I read the Clinton?McCain supporters' definition of "elitism," it never occurred to me that this homeless person is really an elitist. Your take: "Elitism is not a measure of wealth, its an attitude toward your fellow citizen..." has really enlightened me. Next time I have a conversation with my homeless friend, I will be sure to let him know that he is an "elitist." posted 04/13/2008 at 04:00:18
The other day I run into homeless person, but he was such an" elitist." He blamed the Republican and Democratic politicians for neglecting the problems of the poor for 25-30 years. He said that people turn to the churches because they don't think government really cares for them. They see the government serving the interests of the rich who can afford lobbyists, some of whom are former politicians and government officials who practice the"revolving door" belief. He also said he can understand why poor people would rather focus on gun ownership and other issues because they have given up on the government that has outsourced all their jobs. I must confess that before I read the Clinton?McCain supporters' definition of "elitism," it never occurred to me that this homeless person is really an elitist. Your take: "Elitism is not a measure of wealth, its an attitude toward your fellow citizen..." has really enlightened me. Next time I have a conversation with my homeless friend, I will be sure to let him know that he is an "elitist." posted 04/13/2008 at 04:00:18
kravitz:
well said. posted 04/13/2008 at 03:37:06
well said. posted 04/13/2008 at 03:37:06
larryburns94:
If McCain said that to highlight the plight of the cities and the government neglect that produces the "bitterness" people in cities would applaud. They might even switch to votet for McCain. If he said it the way you phrased it, blaming city folk, instead government neglect, then he would deserve condemnation. You seem to base your post on the snippets promoted by the propaganda machines of the Clintons/McCains, and some in the MSM, Sen Obama put the blame squarely on the failure of government, both Democrat and Republican, to address the economic problems faced by these communities. Obama has said exactly the same thing in explaining the anger ande hostility in the Black community. But people, like Pat Buchanan, jumped all over him, accusing him of portraying Blacks as victims. No where did Obama show any insensitivity towards people in small cities! So dear sir, you are not fooling any one either. You would rather inflame the people in those communities, rather than focus on the dire economic circumstances, that are crying out for attention. The McCain/Clinton campaigns, filled with Lobbyists, some of whom profited from the outsourcing of jobs, are trying to hide their culpability in the destruction of tthese communities. Soon or later, people in those communities will begin to wake up. Politicians who have been pandering to them, "cultural issues," while they are busy rewarding those who are profiting from their miseries, will pay a heavy price. posted 04/13/2008 at 03:35:56
If McCain said that to highlight the plight of the cities and the government neglect that produces the "bitterness" people in cities would applaud. They might even switch to votet for McCain. If he said it the way you phrased it, blaming city folk, instead government neglect, then he would deserve condemnation. You seem to base your post on the snippets promoted by the propaganda machines of the Clintons/McCains, and some in the MSM, Sen Obama put the blame squarely on the failure of government, both Democrat and Republican, to address the economic problems faced by these communities. Obama has said exactly the same thing in explaining the anger ande hostility in the Black community. But people, like Pat Buchanan, jumped all over him, accusing him of portraying Blacks as victims. No where did Obama show any insensitivity towards people in small cities! So dear sir, you are not fooling any one either. You would rather inflame the people in those communities, rather than focus on the dire economic circumstances, that are crying out for attention. The McCain/Clinton campaigns, filled with Lobbyists, some of whom profited from the outsourcing of jobs, are trying to hide their culpability in the destruction of tthese communities. Soon or later, people in those communities will begin to wake up. Politicians who have been pandering to them, "cultural issues," while they are busy rewarding those who are profiting from their miseries, will pay a heavy price. posted 04/13/2008 at 03:35:56
bauresox:
To argue that a person can be an elitist without money is an oxymoronic argument. By the way, I think the Clinton disease is infecting her supporters: event a lie, and pass it on as truth, hoping that no one would pay attention. I have yet to see a single post that argue that Obama "deserves to be President because he went to Harvard...." Not one! So you just invented that, like Hillary's dodging of snipers in Bosinia. On the question of intelligence, I hope you would not want to see a dim-witted President. Intelligence should no be equated with elitism. If that is the way you reason, then both Clinton and McCain are elitist because I have repeatedly seen them described as intelligent/ smart-especially Hillary. posted 04/13/2008 at 01:46:06
To argue that a person can be an elitist without money is an oxymoronic argument. By the way, I think the Clinton disease is infecting her supporters: event a lie, and pass it on as truth, hoping that no one would pay attention. I have yet to see a single post that argue that Obama "deserves to be President because he went to Harvard...." Not one! So you just invented that, like Hillary's dodging of snipers in Bosinia. On the question of intelligence, I hope you would not want to see a dim-witted President. Intelligence should no be equated with elitism. If that is the way you reason, then both Clinton and McCain are elitist because I have repeatedly seen them described as intelligent/ smart-especially Hillary. posted 04/13/2008 at 01:46:06
jrockbg:
What is so elitist about saying that people in the "Rust belt" have suffered economic hardships for over three decades, and have become disillusioned about government and have therefore focused on issues that they believe they could have more control over. Why is telling the truth considered "inexperience?" You see, just because people like you and the Clintons and the McCains would rather be in denial, does not mean that Obama is an elitist. Was Martin Luther King an elitist for pointing out that the violence in the cities was because of the bitterness people felt about their economic conditions? No the elitists are the Clintons and the McCains who would rather pander to the people about faith and the Second Amendment while they are busy supporting economic policies that destroying those small towns, and waging war that not only kill and maim the children of the working class, but is rapidly bankrupting this nation. Obama spoke the truth. Some times people who speak the truth are persecuted. In time though, people will regret for not heeding the truth. Win or lose, Obama has shown us the proper way of engaging in politics, and his faith that ordinary people have the capacity to change their circumstances so long as as they are focused on real issues rather all the fluff . posted 04/13/2008 at 01:27:43
What is so elitist about saying that people in the "Rust belt" have suffered economic hardships for over three decades, and have become disillusioned about government and have therefore focused on issues that they believe they could have more control over. Why is telling the truth considered "inexperience?" You see, just because people like you and the Clintons and the McCains would rather be in denial, does not mean that Obama is an elitist. Was Martin Luther King an elitist for pointing out that the violence in the cities was because of the bitterness people felt about their economic conditions? No the elitists are the Clintons and the McCains who would rather pander to the people about faith and the Second Amendment while they are busy supporting economic policies that destroying those small towns, and waging war that not only kill and maim the children of the working class, but is rapidly bankrupting this nation. Obama spoke the truth. Some times people who speak the truth are persecuted. In time though, people will regret for not heeding the truth. Win or lose, Obama has shown us the proper way of engaging in politics, and his faith that ordinary people have the capacity to change their circumstances so long as as they are focused on real issues rather all the fluff . posted 04/13/2008 at 01:27:43
rollingdivision:
You are a dishonest joker! So Obama who spent year earning $8000.00 a year as a community organizer, organizing steel workers who had lost their jobs when the Steel mills closed in Chicago, is an elitist. But Hillary Clinton, Yale Law school, wife of the Governor of Arkansas, Corporate lawyer with the Rose law Firm, Member of the Board of Directors for Wal-Mart, First Lady of the United States, Sen. from New York, who with husband makes 109 million dollars in 7 years is a woman of the people who is elitist? I really have a solution: Hillary Clinton and John McCain need to team up together because they seem to think alike. This would set free the Democratic party to chose its leaders who are dedicated to advancing the interest of the people. Right now people like me are confuse. We have to choose between a Democrat and a Republican Democrat to run against a Republican. II am the only one who senses that the Clintons are more supportive of Republican John McCain than they are of Sen. Obama? They seem to be giving the Democratic party an ultimatum: Either you nominate Hillary Clinton or we will support John McCain. He is not an elitist like Obama. He shares with Hillary "a lifetime experience" that qualifies him to be Commander in Chief. Besides, he is a real American, and a real Christian like Hillary posted 04/13/2008 at 01:07:34
You are a dishonest joker! So Obama who spent year earning $8000.00 a year as a community organizer, organizing steel workers who had lost their jobs when the Steel mills closed in Chicago, is an elitist. But Hillary Clinton, Yale Law school, wife of the Governor of Arkansas, Corporate lawyer with the Rose law Firm, Member of the Board of Directors for Wal-Mart, First Lady of the United States, Sen. from New York, who with husband makes 109 million dollars in 7 years is a woman of the people who is elitist? I really have a solution: Hillary Clinton and John McCain need to team up together because they seem to think alike. This would set free the Democratic party to chose its leaders who are dedicated to advancing the interest of the people. Right now people like me are confuse. We have to choose between a Democrat and a Republican Democrat to run against a Republican. II am the only one who senses that the Clintons are more supportive of Republican John McCain than they are of Sen. Obama? They seem to be giving the Democratic party an ultimatum: Either you nominate Hillary Clinton or we will support John McCain. He is not an elitist like Obama. He shares with Hillary "a lifetime experience" that qualifies him to be Commander in Chief. Besides, he is a real American, and a real Christian like Hillary posted 04/13/2008 at 01:07:34
Obama: No Surprise That Hard-Pressed Pennsylvanians Turn Bitter
rvme:
It really does not matter which Democrat McCain respects. What matters is the candidate that we the people respect. If McCain respects Hillary so much he is free to chose her as his running mate. Rev. Wright, a former marine, who served this country with distinction, earning him the right to criticize it, is non issue. The war in Iraq, the recession, and the destruction of our constitutional rights are the issues. If Obama loses it will be because of many of you ignorant, biased and spoiled people who would rather support a Republican over your fellow Democrat. posted 04/11/2008 at 23:36:16
It really does not matter which Democrat McCain respects. What matters is the candidate that we the people respect. If McCain respects Hillary so much he is free to chose her as his running mate. Rev. Wright, a former marine, who served this country with distinction, earning him the right to criticize it, is non issue. The war in Iraq, the recession, and the destruction of our constitutional rights are the issues. If Obama loses it will be because of many of you ignorant, biased and spoiled people who would rather support a Republican over your fellow Democrat. posted 04/11/2008 at 23:36:16
cmrine:
You mean the beginning of a dirty campaign against Obama. I wonder who could be more shady than Bill Clinton and Mark Penn the supporters of the Columbian regime that is busy murdering union leaders. You want shady people check out Marc Rich. Enough of this vile Clinton campaign aimed at destroying the party! You may win the battle but lose the war! posted 04/11/2008 at 23:28:05
You mean the beginning of a dirty campaign against Obama. I wonder who could be more shady than Bill Clinton and Mark Penn the supporters of the Columbian regime that is busy murdering union leaders. You want shady people check out Marc Rich. Enough of this vile Clinton campaign aimed at destroying the party! You may win the battle but lose the war! posted 04/11/2008 at 23:28:05
joselopez:
Thank you. It is only in America that people can be fooled to think up is down. so I hear all these wise people telling us: " Elect McCain/ Hillary, the champions of the poor and working class!" This is especially urgent if you are in Pennsylvania and Indiana. "Obama is the candidate of Lobbyists and corporations and a leading advocate of the Iraq war." "He would rather spend billions in Iraq than take care of the needs of our people here at home." Just remember: "up is down" and don't be fooled by the fact that the McCains and the Clintons have each a net worth of over 100 million dollars. They are still the champions of the poor working class. Obama may have come from a poor background and may only have 1/10 of their wealth, He is still " a rich elitist. posted 04/11/2008 at 23:23:53
Thank you. It is only in America that people can be fooled to think up is down. so I hear all these wise people telling us: " Elect McCain/ Hillary, the champions of the poor and working class!" This is especially urgent if you are in Pennsylvania and Indiana. "Obama is the candidate of Lobbyists and corporations and a leading advocate of the Iraq war." "He would rather spend billions in Iraq than take care of the needs of our people here at home." Just remember: "up is down" and don't be fooled by the fact that the McCains and the Clintons have each a net worth of over 100 million dollars. They are still the champions of the poor working class. Obama may have come from a poor background and may only have 1/10 of their wealth, He is still " a rich elitist. posted 04/11/2008 at 23:23:53
Popular Stories on HuffPost
On Tuesday night's "Colbert Report," Stephen Colbert had fun with...
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,...
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...
The Clintons and their supporters are not being honest. Bill Clinton, both in 1992 and 1996, never won the majority of white voters. In fact, in 1992, Clinton probably would not have been elected President if Independent candidate, Ross Perot , who received about 19% of the vote, was not in the race. Every time I see these so called experts like Paul Begala, talk about how Clinton won the so called "Reagan Democrats" I just want to puke. Unfortunately , the pundits in Corporate Media (aka MSM) are so lazy that they have never bothered to research the facts. Obama has been doing exceptionally well in attracting white voters. He certainly did much better than Bill Clinton in states like Virginia, Utah, Kansas, Wisconsin, Colorado, and others. Some one need to point this to the Clintons and their surrogates so that they can stop inflaming race divisions. Senator Clinton is loosing the Black vote at unprecedented level. The question is how can she win the general election without the Black vote? Again her husband could not do it as he lost the white vote in both 1992 and 1996. posted 05/08/2008 at 01:29:28