Democratic Convention Watch: Open Thread

Monday, February 11, 2008

Open Thread

WE'VE MOVED! Democratic Convention Watch is now at http://www.DemocraticConventionWatch.com

Who's going to win, who has a better chance against McCain, or whatever else is on your mind.

Update: We have decided to stop allowing anonymous comments. Not because we don't like reading what people have to say but because Blogger has introduced a new "feature" that makes you go to a second page when the number of comments go over 200.

It's very easy to set up a Google account so that you can continue commenting.

Thanks!

We've opened a new Open Thread here

1017 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 1017 Newer› Newest»

Anonymous said...: Districts Across America Who Feel Offended With How This Primary Has Turned Out Would Turn Red Though So Congress Would Suffer Losses Don't you think most especially in NY (hillary land), Michigan and Florida, that is if barack gets the nom?; February 15, 2008 10:24 AM
Protactinium said...: First saying Obama can not win because of the "White Power Groups" and the "NRa". Has nothing to do with poltics, and only to point out that his black so he should lose. Therefore its a racist arguement. Also its no defense of Hillary, because im sure theyve voted republican for decades. They don't want no women either.

Also i would like to point out that Hillary did not take NY 2 - 1. The final score was Clinton 1,003,623 -57%. Obama 697,914 - 40%

Again basic math skills.

As for your wife, Im happy for her for not choosing Obama is she feels hes the best canidite. However if she is to also voting on emotion, I am sorry for her.
Also lets not forget the CLINTONS started with the race. In SC. And now shes stumping about how we need to get rid of oil in Texas. Shes really trying to self-destruct.

Obamas already closing in on texas, ohio, and penn. Btw for the record Chris Matthews did not start that she neede Texas phop. and penn to win. It was James Carville who is one of Hillary people. said Hillary needs Ohio, and Texas or its over.; February 15, 2008 10:27 AM
Anonymous said...: protactinum you failed to notice in tennesee, arkansas, and oklahoma hillary gathered the support of southern republican women Which she can ALSO Do in NY!

The Rejection Of Hillary In Many Southern States Is An Act Of Sexism among white men and big african american voter turn out Which Does Not overcome the republican turnout in many results when hillarys voters are subtracted

consider how many voters will be feeling offended if BARACK is NOMINATED, not JUST, How Many If It's HILLARY!

The Question FOR POLITICS IS:

WHAT WILL THEY DO WITH THEIR VOTES?; February 15, 2008 10:35 AM
Anonymous said...: protactinum,

Using Your Basic Math Skillz, Riddle Me This When Over 1 Million People In NY Feel Offended By The Nomination Of Barack Obama And Over 800,000 IN Florida Feel He Did Nothing To Get Their Voices Heard, WHERE WILL THEY TAKE THEIR VOTES?

BE Careful WHAT YOU WISH FOR!

And Don't Turn Every Hillary Supporter Into A Racist, Or Confess Your Own Ignorance Of Real Politics!

Thank You For Also Pointing Out Hillary Won 10 out of EVERY 17 Total Votes in NY State!
Sounds Like Victory Defined!; February 15, 2008 10:44 AM
Tokar said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; February 15, 2008 10:45 AM
Tokar said...: Polls:

OH:
2/11 56-39 Clinton [+17] SurveyUSA
2/12 55-34 Clinton [+21] Quinnipac
2/13 51-37 Clinton [+14] Rasmussen

PA:
2/12 52-36 Clinton [+16] Quinnipac

RI:
2/11 36-28 Clinton [+8] Brown Univ.

TX:
2/14 58-38 Clinton [+16] Rasmussen
2/15 49-41 Clinton [+8] Texas Credit Union League; February 15, 2008 10:47 AM
Protactinium said...: Yes Hillary did get more vote then Obama in NY. But its not victory defined. Its hard to say Hillary is victorous when on super tuesday Obama took his homestate, IL(where Hillary is from). By more delegates then Hillary took her Homestate, NY. When NY is bigger. If you can not win your home state you should not be running, so Hillary taking NY and AK should be a given. Oh and as of today, Hillary is losing. Victory is a hard thing to claim.

As for my math "skillZ". The million voters in NY, will have to make a desicion. They will be able to vote for Mccain or Obama. I am willing to bet that most of her voters will go to Obama. Espically when Hillary get in line behind Obama. Hillarys not going to let the democratic party hang. I hope. (will she?)

As for your commenting on my poltical knowledge, by looking at what you have read you seem to just repeat whatever another Hillary supporter in the area told you. You have not talked 1 issue. This is what Hillary like to ask Obama people. Do you actually know what she stands for?; February 15, 2008 10:57 AM
Anonymous said...: Protactinum,
Comparing One State To Another Won't Get Him Into The Office (See ELECTORATE) I Could Say Laughably He Got Less Votes In New York Than She Got In Florida!

This Is BIGGER Than The DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION--- THERE IS A BIGGER PICTURE!; February 15, 2008 11:06 AM
Anonymous said...: "If you can not win your home state you should not be running"

Hillary Has Multiple Home States New York, Massachusettes, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Tennesee, Missouri, And Illinois How Many Did She Lose?; February 15, 2008 11:13 AM
Anonymous said...: Listen, I Agree We NEED A Ticket But I Don't Believe In 1 Million Years Hillary Will Take The Back Seat, And Quite Obviously I Still reserve My Right To Object, Due To Inexperience on the grounds of security.; February 15, 2008 11:18 AM
Anonymous said...: By Objecting I Mean Objecting To Him As Pres, Her As V.P.!
Not to him as vice president as well!; February 15, 2008 11:21 AM
Anonymous said...: Oh And Just So I Am READ Clearly, My Reference To "White Power" Groups And "N.R.A." Is Not To Suggest I Agree With Their Message At All, Just That I Do Not DISREGARD Their Financial Power In Advertising And Organizational Skills!; February 15, 2008 12:02 PM
Anonymous said...: Just A Few Interesting Facts I Aquired From:

http://www.census.gov/population/cen2000/phc-t31/tab01-01.pdf

1)There Are 193,376,975 Total U.S. Voters.

2)There Are 22,614,559 African American Voters In The Us Pool.

3)There Are 155,254,313 Caucasian Americans In The Voter Pool.

4)There Are 15,508,103 Race "other" In The American Voter Pool.

4)There Are 92,645,044 Males Of Any Race.

5)There Are 100,731,931 Females Of Any Race.

How Many Of The 155,254,313 Votes Will McCain Get?
interesting, very interesting!!!; February 15, 2008 12:40 PM
Anonymous said...: proct....
do you know AK Is Alaska?

I Assume you mean AR For Arkansas Though.

While You Figure Out How Many More Electorates AR Has Than AK, I Will Remind You, The Math In November Is Very Different Reassess Or Find Yourself Blown Away By How Badly Barack Probably Loses The Presidency!; February 15, 2008 12:46 PM
Anonymous said...: oh and by multiple home states, she has homes all over, vacation and what not.; February 15, 2008 12:48 PM
Anonymous said...: Barack Obama Need A Minimum Of 58,565,826 "White Votes" Just To Get One More Vote In The Popular Out Of 155,254,313 Total "White Votes"

Thats Assuming He Gets EVERY African American Vote, And Every Latino, Asian, Or Other Vote Too.

Whereas McCain Only Needs 96,688,488 Votes To Win 1 More In The Popular Votes Even If He Loses EVERY African American Vote, Latino, Asian, And Other.

I Am Very Worried This Will End Badly And Racially Insensitive Either Way (to white and black Democrats), I Just Want A Democrat In The White House!

I Am Very Sorry But I Object To Barack Obama's Inexperience For SECURITY REASONS, I Have Been Seeing So Many Accusations Of Race Being Thrown At Hillary And Her Supporters For Trying To Articulate In Facts What The National Voters Demographics Are Showing!

Dirty Pool Gets You Nowhere, You Can't Call Me Names And Say You Need My Vote Tommorrow!

And Yes If You Wanted Barack Obama Elected You Would Need The Vote Of Many Who Share MY Opinion TOO!; February 15, 2008 1:26 PM
Independent Voter said...: Anonymous Ny Democrat wrote:
"I Just Want A Democrat In The White House!"

Yet you continue making statements like "if Obama gets the nomination I will vote for McCain".

Sound like you REALLY want a Democrat in the Whitehouse. (Yes that is meant to be sarcastic); February 15, 2008 1:37 PM
Anonymous said...: "Democrat In The White House"
Again Defending My Motives how rude you are, but i digress let me clarify, I Want A Democrat In The White House Prepared To Handle A Nation Crisis; Natural or Otherwise

I Will Never Sacrifice the security of the nation just to see someone elcted, who isn't prepared!

Yes If My Only Option Is Obama Or McCain, I'm Truly Sorry It Hurts Your Feelings But Yes I Choose McCain.; February 15, 2008 1:47 PM
Protactinium said...: Anyonmous in NY said

"Barack Obama Need A Minimum Of 58,565,826 "White Votes" Just To Get One More Vote In The Popular Out Of 155,254,313 Total "White Votes""

Again this shows how your trying to inject race into this race. You have no idea what your talking about. You first took the assumption that every single voter votes, second you assumed that white people will not vote for Obama which has already proven to be true.

However let me explain what issue are to you. Ill give you some that are based on your own national security reasons.

Iraq- Hillary and Mccain both voted for the war in Iraq, Obama was against it from day one.

Iraq - Hillary will withdraw troops wiith in 60 days.(she has flip floped but this is her latest stance) Obama will remove troops in an orderly and honorable fashion is accordance with the genrals. Mccain - Will be in Iraq for 100 years.

Iran - Hillary and Mccain both voted to man the Iranian army a terroist organization. So Bush can bomb them. Obama did not.

Here are a few issue so next time you spew your hate you won't sound so ignorant. I also recommend you look up ssues, before posting anymore. You are really only excatly why shes failing. And you hurting Hillary, and showing are showing everyone you have no idea what your talking about.

Dont blindly vote for a canidite. Learn the issues.; February 15, 2008 2:26 PM
Anonymous said...: 1)
"Iraq- Hillary and Mccain both voted for the war in Iraq, Obama was against it from day one"

Barack Had No National Security Clearance For Senate Armed Forces Committee As Opposed To Barack, So How He WOULD HAVE Voted, The World WILL NEVER Know!

2)
"Obama will remove troops in an orderly and honorable fashion is accordance with the genrals. "

What Else Could He Do He Doesn't Know The Specifics So He Will Trust People To JUST DO IT, Without Necessary Oversite?

3)
"Mccain - Will be in Iraq for 100 years."

Nobody Believes McCain Will Actually Do That, He Has A Hard Time Being A Veteran Dealing With War Protesters, And I Believe Thats McCains Temper Showing When He Says That, But I Don't Dispute His Military Insight!

4)"Iran - Hillary and Mccain both voted to man the Iranian army a terroist organization. So Bush can bomb them. Obama did not."

I Assume You Mean NAME The Iranian Army, Obama Did Not Show Up To Vote, KNOWING FULL WELL IT WAS TAKING PLACE, He Was Campaigning, And I Hope That Because Hilarry And McCain Are Both On The Senate Armed Forced Committee They Know More Than You Or I Do About The Iranian Army, Especially Since They Both Know How Badly Iran Hates Bush! But Maybe You Don't Want To Put Up A Resistance If Neccesary?

Now I Know My Issues And Fully Understand Them And I Fully Understand The Democratic Party Cannot Force My Vote For Obama, Nor Can You, Nor Can I Force Yours For Hillary.

But Issues, Yes Issues.; February 15, 2008 2:45 PM
Tokar said...: Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Obama join the Senate AFTER the vote for the Iraq War resolution?

The resolution was voted on October 11, 2002.
Obama assumed office in the Senate on January 2, 2005.; February 15, 2008 2:58 PM
Anonymous said...: Tokar,
No You Are Not Wrong That Was Part Of The Meaning "the world will never know"
Because obama did not have the national intelligence Hillary, And McCain had (All be it Bush Corrupted), And Because His Responsibility Is Not Factual, The Point Is Irrelevant To Say How He WOULD HAVE Voted, Or Even How He Viewed It

I Disagreed ALL ALONG Too But I Would Not Claim Entitlement To Be President On That ALONE. It's Not An Example Of A Good Decision For Him Because He Wasn't Anything More Than You Or I Then.; February 15, 2008 3:06 PM
Anonymous said...: And If You Take Issue With His NEVER Supporting THIS War You Blame Hillary For, Then Why Would A Barack Supporter Excuse His Vote To Continue Funding This Iraq War He Is Against?
And Then Call Bill Clinton Racist For Pointing Out, Barack Obama Voted To Fund The Iraq War?; February 15, 2008 3:11 PM
Independent Voter said...: Still "ANONYMOUS" poster writes:

"I Will Never Sacrifice the security of the nation just to see someone elcted, who isn't prepared!" and "I'm Truly Sorry It Hurts Your Feelings"

First off, my feeling aren't hurt by any means. Second, what I am offended by is your "win at all costs" attitude, how Clintonian of you. You are now trying to play the "fear" card JUST like a Republican. Don't get me wrong, I WAS a fan of Bill's although I only voted for him in 1996 but NOT so much of Hillary. I no longer trust EITHER one of them. ESPECIALLY after 9/11. I have even defended Bill regarding his extramarital affairs...that was nobody's business except he and his wife, however I would NOT defend him for perjuring himself.

I also LOVE it when people refer to Obama's "Nuclear" bill and exelon.....HILLARY CO-SPONSORED THE BILL!!!!!!!!!!

Next issue...You are correct that Obama did NOT have access to the same information Hillary did regarding the Iraq resolution because he had not yet been seated in the Senate, HOWEVER and this is a BIG HOWEVER, SHE DIDN'T EVEN READ the intelligence report. How anyone can claim they were NOT authorizing the president to use military force in Iraq when the EXACT WORDING of the resolution was "Authorization to USe Military Force in Iraq" is beyond me. Furthermore, anyone who ACCEPTS that explanation is either stupid or insane. Yes, I said it, you accept her explanation, therefore you are either STUPID or INSANE! That may sound harsh but it IS REALITY!!!!!!!!!!!!

Next issue, you are right....Obama was not in the US Senate and therefore did NOT have the right to vote on the resolution, HOWEVER, and again this is a BIG HOWEVER, he came out in public opposition to this resolution and was an ACTIVE protester AGAINST the Iraq War even when it was considered to be political suicide to do so and has been extremely VOCAL since. You can find the full text here http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Barack_Obama's_Iraq_Speech (October 26, 2002) Hillary refuses even to ADMIT her mistake. Had she admitted to her mistake she wouldn't be getting pounded on it now.

Second, she still fails to acknowledge her MISTAKES in regards to her healthcare plan in 1993. She doesn't even state how she will change her approach. First off, she is beholdened to the insurance companies, therefore she will be working for the insurance companies and if her healthcare plan doesn't pass in the first two years be ready for the Republicans to retake Congress like they did in 1994 if they don't this time around.

As far as keeping this country safe, that is a bogus argument as well. First off, I blame BOTH Bill and George for letting the American people down. Sandy Berger destroyed documents surrounding OBL so now we will NEVER get the full truth. By the way, Sandy Berger is CURRENTLY campaigning for the Clintons to return to office. HE IS A FELON!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't have much time to finish so I will close at this point but you can be sure there is ALOT more to come.

By the way, I am an Independent voter who is beholdened to NO party.; February 15, 2008 3:35 PM
Anonymous said...: sd_dave,
How Can You Justify His Vote To CONTINUE To Fund The Iraq War You Say He Proudly Protests?

Is It Because In His Short Years In Washington You Have Accepted He Knows Better Than You Do Now?

To Call Me Insane Just Because I Disagree Is Rage, Just Pure Hate It Does Not Translate A Hope or change Message Obama Is Proud Of, Do You See The Irony Here?

This Message Was Approved By Ronald Reagan!lol; February 15, 2008 3:43 PM
Tokar said...: There was a good blog post on RealClearPolitics about Obama and his big government policies.

"The Obama spend-o-meter is now up around $800 billion. And tax hikes on the rich won't pay for it. It's the middle class that will ultimately shoulder this fiscal burden in terms of higher taxes and lower growth."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/02/obamas_gloomy_biggovernment_vi.html; February 15, 2008 3:43 PM
Independent Voter said...: Point 1: "How Can You Justify His Vote To CONTINUE To Fund The Iraq War You Say He Proudly Protests?" As you can see if you were to do ANY kind of research for yourself....that he voted FOR timetables to withdraw, however at the same time, he had a president that would veto the measure and did NOT want to put the troops in further danger than what Clinton helped get them into.

How do you justify Clinton? (http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/23/clinton.iraq/index.html) yet she continued the funding even without timetables as well.

Point 2 "Is It Because In His Short Years In Washington You Have Accepted He Knows Better Than You Do Now?" No, I also protested this war.....PUBLICLY here in San Diego.

Point 3: To Call Me Insane Just Because I Disagree Is Rage, Just Pure Hate It Does Not Translate A Hope or change Message Obama Is Proud Of, Do You See The Irony Here?"
I'm NOT saying you are insane because you disagree with me, I'm calling you INSANE because you simply accept her explanation and don't give it any further thought. (That is called BLIND acceptance).; February 15, 2008 4:14 PM
Independent Voter said...: As far as you "Approved by Reagan" comment.....ROLLING MY EYES AT YOUR IGNORANCE!!!!!!!!!; February 15, 2008 4:15 PM
Anonymous said...: sd_dave,
Examine The Fact That He Supplied Funding Factually!
He Did Vote To Fund This War, The One You Protest!
Yet You Support Him Because You Believe "day one" He Opposed And Go So Far As To Suggest He Would Not Vote With Hillary When The Fact Speaks He Has Voted IDENTICAL To Her?
Why Do You Let Him Get Away With This?
Why Do You Accept BLINDLY He opposes The War, Yet Funds It?

Why Are YOU Any Less Guilty, Insane, Or Stupid Than ME?

I Could Ask Why Does He Vote With Hillary Yet Claim She Is Wrong Thats Insane!; February 15, 2008 4:22 PM
dwit said...: Anon,

Obama wins the POPULAR vote. Do you mean the antiquated and fundamentally corrupt delegate count?; February 15, 2008 4:46 PM
dwit said...: Dave, this aint ignorance your lookin' at with these Reagan comments.

These Hillary staffers know exactly what they are doing. It's character assassination pure and simple.; February 15, 2008 4:50 PM
Carrie said...: ARGH! 3rd time trying to post this...

Protactinium (et al) -
Actually, Hillary began with the position that, while she might begin a withdrawl within 60 days, she expected the withdrawl to be lengthy (withdrawing a brigade at a time). This was an unpopular position when she presented it - resulting to comparisons to McCain. Her reasoning was that the issues were complex and that there were many civilians to think about - both US and iraqis who supported the US. Obama began with a much tighter timeline, but has since said he would listen to the boots on the ground. I'm very glad his position has evolved. It increases my comfort with my commitment to vote democratic in the fall. Speaking of issues diplomatic and foreign policy, any luck finding anything on Kenya?

_______

Obama supporters in general-

It is clear you believe Obama's nomination is inevitable. I would really appreciate a general shifting of gears from Hillary bashing and electability to building Obama up. I would like to believe he would want his supporters to take a more conciliatory and compassionate approach toward Cinton supporters. The anger and hostility I feel coming at me scares me and reinforces my worries about Obama's diplomatic skills and ability to unite us. While I respect his commitment to the consequences levied against MI/FL, I'm concerned about his posturing on the topic. As a former teacher, I learned that consequences delivered with empathy and compassion were the most effective and productive. I believe this is a failing of the Bush administration and worry that it will get us into trouble internationally if it appears to become tradition.

As I'm committed to voting for a democrat in November, I'm sincerely interested in having these fears allayed.

Looking for a glint of hope here...
-Carrie; February 15, 2008 4:52 PM
Anonymous said...: dwit,
No (sigh) I Do Not Mean Delegate Count, I Mean Electorate, I Mean The Math Used In November Where Republicans Get To Play Too!

I Really Don't Wanna Poop On Hope Here, But Hillary Won On Super Tuesday And Before Thats ALL The States We Need To Win The Presidency In November Well Actually We Still Need Pennsylvania But Even Ohio And Texas Aren't Nessecary To Prove Hillary Defeated Not Just Barack Obama But John McCain, In BLUE STATE TERRITORY, Baracks Wins With The Exception Of Illinois (His Home State) And Connecticut (Where He Ties Hillary)Are In Red States And If You Look At The Numbers Of Votes Cast You Will See The Republicans Still Beat Barack Even Though Barack Beats Hillary!
This Is In Exception To Georgia Where It's A Close Tie If You Add Both The Democrat Candidate Votes Together Against The Republicans!

Also Don't Let Baracks Caucus Vote Numbers Fool You If You Don't "CAUCUS" You May Not Know Those Numbers ARE NOT VOTES They Are Representational And The Republican System Uses Half The Delegation Numbers Or Less, So Comparing them To Democratic Numbers Isn't Flat Correct Unless You Multiply The Republican Numbers Correctly Sometimes 2-3 Times As Many.; February 15, 2008 4:57 PM
Anonymous said...: "Hillary staffers"
I Am Not A Hillary Staffer But I Would Be Proud To Be One!; February 15, 2008 4:59 PM
dwit said...: Anon,

"Insulting Hillary voters will NOT Get Barack Obama Elected!

It Is Not Fair That People Who Fear For The Security of this Nation Under Obama To Be Called "Racist" Or "Republicans, anyway""

It is Hillary supporters that are insulting Hillary Clinton by threatening to vote for McCain if she doesn't get the nomination.

THEY are the ones who equate McCain's philosophy with hers.

And to your second point, it is OBAMA SUPPORTERS who fear for our national security under Clinton.

She has tied her boat to the Israeli dock! Anyone with any sense can see she will not have the credibility to negotiate an equitable solution in the ME based on her very public advocacy for the state of Israel.

She supported Kyl-Lieberman most recently and she continues to accept AIPAC money without reservations.

Until we solve the Palestine issue we will be at perpetual war. With Clinton or McCain it will be the "Second Hundred Years War"!

For anyone interested in what Hillary's foreign policy will look like, see my blog. Just click on my handle above and it will take you there.; February 15, 2008 5:13 PM
dwit said...: Anon Democrat(sigh)

Why only take half the pie when you can have it ALL with Obama?; February 15, 2008 5:17 PM
Protactinium said...: anonymous said:

"I Really Don't Wanna Poop On Hope Here, But Hillary Won On Super Tuesday And Before Thats ALL The States We Need To Win The Presidency In November Well Actually We Still Need Pennsylvania But Even Ohio And Texas Aren't Necessary To Prove Hillary Defeated Not Just Barack Obama"

Dude you really are out of touch with reality. Her own campaign has said if she loses Ohio, Texas, or Penn. it is all over. Get over your bigot fairy tale and go support McCain. Obviously you feel Bush invading on Iraq was ok. That the congress should just take blind faith into the president. Not once but two times such as Hillary did after he was wrong the first time.

You mind as well find yourself a new blog, because Obama will be the candidate, and you will find your bigot friends over on the republican side. Obviously you will only vote on hate. So take your hate vote to the republicans. Your bigot fairytale however is over on the democratic side.

Im leaning towards stupid at this point. You would be perfect for the Hillary campaign. Full of hate, and trying to cause racial divide. I do not think he had ever voted in his life until he saw a black man running.; February 15, 2008 5:18 PM
Protactinium said...: As for Obama voting to fund the troops this is a bogus argument. He wanted to put timetables, and the president threatened to veto it.

So Obama had two choices. One say no to funding, and be responsible for troops not having food, bullets, armor, gas, paychecks etc.

Or vote yes. The truth is if the troops would not have gotten funding everyone would be jumping on people that voted no for not caring about the troops.; February 15, 2008 5:22 PM
Anonymous said...: Thanks For Your Info But I Don't Wanna Check Out YOUR Blog To Find Out What HILLARY Will Do, No Offense

I Also Cannot Say I Believe It Logical To turn The Nations Security To Someone So Inexperienced As Barack Would Be Comforting To A Majority Of Americans, Come November, Barack Voted To Fund The Iraq War Recently Because He Realized What Hillary ALLREADY KNEW, After He Became A Senator!

And By The Way I Am Not Threatening To Vote For McCain If Obama Is NOMINATED, I Am Promising!!!

This To Me Is My Family's Safety!
I Cannot Feel Comfortable With Barack Obama, He FEELS LIKE BUSH To Me, I Can't Explain That But He Does, Sometimes When I See Barack Confused, I Am Reminded Of My Pet Goat, Fair Or Not Thats How I Feel!; February 15, 2008 5:25 PM
Independent Voter said...: Carrie,

My apologies if you are offended by anything I have said. And no, I do NOT believe that Obama's nomination is inevitable nor do I think it is going to be an easy road to the Whitehouse. What I have a problem with is individuals who cannot, oops WILL NOT look into Hillary's past. She has been given a free ride by her supporters on her pro-war stance in 2002. They give her a free ride on her already failed healthcare plan (which by the way, she had EVERY opportunity to get it passed in 93 BEFORE Republicans took Congress).

How to get their healthcare plans passed?

Hillary Clinton - closed door deals.
Obama - Online meetings with the public. (stated this in the last debate)

Hillary Clinton - automatically believes that Democrats will continue having a majority in Congress. I think this would only last until the 2010 election where she will lose the majority for the Democrats.

Obama - will more than likely increase the majority in Congress because of all the NEW voters he has gotten involved in politics.

These are just two reasons I think Obama has a better shot at passing his healthcare plan. Remember regardless the person elected MUST be able to work across party lines because it must be fillibuster proof. Obama CAN and DOES work across party lines, Hillary doesn't. She repels Republicans. It is like two negatives of a magnet.

I'm watching CNN right now, and the people receiving the majority of money from service members is Ron Paul (1 - $212K) followed by Obama (2 - $94K), McCain (3 - $80K), and Hillary (4 - $53K). This tells me alot. It tells me not only do they want out of this war, but they trust Obama a lot more than they do Hillary (again, this is my opinion).

Anyway, I will be back in a little while.; February 15, 2008 5:30 PM
Anonymous said...: Allright Listen I Am Sick Of The Racial Accusations Against Hillary Supporters, It Makes Barack Look Really Stupid, And His Supporters Look Ignorant, This Is The Democratic Party And Your ATTEPMTS To Drop RACE Cards STOPS No One From VOTING!
ONLY YOU JUST DON'T GET IT IT WILL NEVER WIN BARACK ONE SINGLE VOTE

Looking For Honest Adult Debate, Not Rhetoric.

You Don't Know Who I Am And If You Really Did You Would Never Think I Am Racist, This Barack Fever Has All Gone To Your Heads!!!; February 15, 2008 5:34 PM
Protactinium said...: When have you ever seen Barack Obama confused. I honestly do not think you have ever seen on his rally or speeches. You do not seem to know about any issues other then white people wont vote for Obama. Give me a break.

Obama understand his campaign will lose the bigot vote. His trajectory for victory does involve a large chunk of bigots.

As for comparing Obama to Bush. All you have to do is look at Hillary's votes, and you will see the Bush like votes. Hell Ann Coulter said Hillary is more conservative then John Mccain. I know anything to justify your bigotry.; February 15, 2008 5:34 PM
Protactinium said...: You need to know the issues before you can have an adult debate.

Carrie I am sorry for you. I am not trying to jump on all Hillary supporters. Just seem the true bigotry is coming out of the wood work after she started losing. I know there is a lot of educated voter out there such as yourself. I will get back to you on Kenya, but it does look like you have a valid point. He was trying to cause debate in the country, and make it more democratic. However I am really unsure if it actually helped or hurt the relations in Kenya.; February 15, 2008 5:38 PM
dwit said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; February 15, 2008 5:39 PM
dwit said...: Yeah Anon NY Dem,

I wouldn't expect you to read anything that doesn't agree with your insular view of the world.

I forget you folks think New York is the known center of the universe. That's exactly why Hillary is in the pickle she is.

She didn't count on little old Washington or Idaho or Colorado having any say in this election.

Don't you think Obama supporters know the Super delegates will come to her rescue in the end? Their very political lives depend on it.

Can't you just let the little guy revel in this fleeting victory for a little while?

Don't worry, it will all be back to status quo in no time. War in the ME well into our children's lives, poor getting poorer, you know how it goes.

ONE CITIZEN, ONE VOTE.

GO OBAMA/EDWARDS!; February 15, 2008 5:41 PM
Anonymous said...: Barack Obama Has been Confused And Stumbles His Words In Debate!

I Have Heard His WELL Rehearsed Speeches, His Wonderful, Spine Tingling Word Annuciations, And Yet I Still Come To The Conclusion He Is Not Naturally Prepared Or Ready To Do What YOU Want Him To!

Hillary Is A B&%$CH, But She Gets The Job Done!(Of Course We All Prefer Bill)

If Barack Obama Could Observe As Vice President I Would Later Reconsider His Readyness To Be President!; February 15, 2008 5:43 PM
Anonymous said...: dwit,
"I wouldn't expect you to read anything that doesn't agree with your insular view of the world."

as i said i meant no offense
It Has Nothing To Do With My View, Just That I Believe I Could Find Many Resources To More Accuratly Cover Hillary's Views, If The Blog Was Say Hillary's, Perhaps I Would Visit!

You Claimed Your Blog Expressed Hillary's Views, Thanks, But No Offense.; February 15, 2008 5:52 PM
Protactinium said...: Anon in Ny,

What are Hillary views?; February 15, 2008 5:54 PM
shelby said...: Dwit-
Just read your comments and blog about Hillary's "advocacy for Israel." Didn't take long for you to show your true colors. Yes, I know, you are not anti-Semitic, just anti-Israel. Yeah, right.

The war in Iraq was fought for Israel? Is that why Obama was against it?

How awful that Hillary supports the only democracy in the Middle East - I mean really how could she!

I thank you for being honest. Now that I know the wonderful world President Obama has in store for us, I'll work all the harder to see that we are spared such a utopia.; February 15, 2008 5:54 PM
Carrie said...: sd_dave,

I have been offended by some of your comments. I've watched Clinton since 1992. Having lived through her initial HC attempts, I think it's important to recognize that in 1993, the country was NOT ready for nationalized healthcare. The models considered then were more along the lines of Canada's, which we're still not ready for. So shortly after the end of the cold war, it was a very steep uphill battle back then. What I think she did do was lay the groundwork, open people's minds to the need. Now it is considered a platform to run on - important to many of us. I believe the evolution in her model reflect changes in how healthcare is viewed and delivered. I've worked in the industry since 1994, and I've been a part of that evolution.

On history, in addition to living through the Clinton years with all the associated scandal, I've read a great deal about her past. I see the good, I see the bad. I believe she's sincerely dedicated to the values I hold dear (the good side of her - please no insults for this). If you're interested in my perspective, I can elaborate. However, it doesn't really seem like you are.

What I didn't get from your message was a sense that you were trying to build Obama up but rather tear Clinton down. Maybe it's because you aren't ready to declare victory (which I appreciate). You don't have to try to change my mind. I'm a MI voter who believes the sanctions should stand - I think a redo would be an unwise use of resources for us here, even though it might benefit my candidate. At any rate, my vote won't count, even if it did change (which, in all honesty, I don't think will happen).; February 15, 2008 5:57 PM
dwit said...: Oh Shelby,

Did you really just play the anti-semite card? REALLY?

I have never accused Hillary supporters of being RACIST, because they do not support Sen. Obama. I take peoples ideas at face value.

If they say the don't like my candidate because of his stance on the issues I don't call them racist. You, are just plain wrong and frankly that is where the Hillary camp went wrong. She went into smear mode rather than taking the high road.

Her (and Bill's) distortions of Sen. Obamas statements are to blame for her predicament.

People are finally beginning to see through these Rovian tactics. 8 years too late, but maybe we still have a chance to right these wrongs with an Obama victory.; February 15, 2008 6:04 PM
Protactinium said...: Hey Carrie,

Have you been to Obama's website? His healt care plan is very similar to Hillarys', except its not going to be mandated. The fact is your health care plan is not dead, and if anything more likely to pass. I used work in a Pharmacy for a while, and know exactly what you talk about when you say we have a broken health care system. Its a shame that even if your covered you are still better off to quit you job and go onto welfare for better coverage.

However I am not so sure its entirely that we don't all have coverage. A lot of it involve the fact without insurance, DR, Hospitals, Insurance Companies, and drug companies all rape you for way more then your insurance would ever pay. Health care is only a small part of the puzzle, and raising minimum wage to 9.50 so the middle class can afford there new insurance plan is not the way to do it. (this will crush are economy. Chinese labor will look much cheaper.)

Obama will try and solve this problem, he really understands it. His mom had to worry about bills as she was sick because his insurance maxed out. Do not worry Carry. Your democratic ideals are not dead.; February 15, 2008 6:07 PM
Anonymous said...: Carrie,
The Canadian Healthcare Model Fails Because Of Low Investment Compared To GDP, Than Hillary's Model (About 5% GDP HIGHER), Which Has Been Indicated That Alone Could Have Made It Very Feasable By Many In The Medical Profession

Either Way It's Costly But It's What Americans Have To Do, Otherwise We Would Continue To See Declines And Body's Would Stack Up.; February 15, 2008 6:14 PM
inkboi said...: it will take a clinton 2 clean up afther this bush.it cant not take a man that gives good speaches 2 clean up this mess that bush has put us in,yes i'm a black man voting 4 hillary clinton you may call me a race trader just because i'm not voting for obama,if u voting for obama becuse he is black and you are black you are.a race trader i'm voting for the person that knows what 2 do on the first day.and if obama beats hillary i'm voting for MCCain; February 15, 2008 6:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Hey dwit,

Check Out This Transcript Of Barack Obama Surrogate Calling All Hillary's New Hampshire Voters Racist, Where IT ALL GOT OUT OF HAND TO BEGIN WITH!

http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100007220&docId=l:726260364&start=4

It Is January 9, 2008 Wednesday The First Conversation Where Bill Clinton Is ACCUSED Of Making Racist Remarks, That Racism Is Cr@p, dwit, I Don't Buy It!; February 15, 2008 6:20 PM
Protactinium said...: Inkboi I would never call you a race trader. You do not have to vote for a black candidate. If you understand the issues, and are making an informed decision congrats.

However lets not just use Hillary's catch phrases. And lets not forget that after 8 years of Clinton, we where ready for 8 more years of Bush. But honestly I understand why a lot of people would jump ship for Hillary to McCain. Its because your ok with that of the status quo.

Truthfully McCain and Hillary have a lot in common. There both part of the same broken government that put us in this mess. But some say everything is just fine.; February 15, 2008 6:23 PM
dwit said...: Inkboi,

I would never call you a "race trader". I respect your intellect and your choice. It is sad that some have chosen to go down this road.

I am just thrilled that so many folks are gettin' out there to make their voices heard. We have allowed a few "Key" states to decide for far too long. Finally, the entire nation gets to be heard.

We are all putting "democracy" back into "democrat".; February 15, 2008 6:23 PM
Protactinium said...: anon in ny said:

"Check Out This Transcript Of Barack Obama Surrogate Calling All Hillary's New Hampshire Voters Racist, Where IT ALL GOT OUT OF HAND TO BEGIN WITH!"

See your back to race already. Your the one obsessed with race. No one made Bill compare Obama to Jesse Jackson, after being asked about his wife campaign.

You claim that Obama people keep calling you racist, but yet you can not keep your white comment to your self. such as white power groups, and white people will not vote for Obama, and Obamas people set up bill into make this about race.

This is why i call you a bigot. Learn this issues. You won't have to play the race game so much.; February 15, 2008 6:29 PM
shelby said...: Dwit-

On your blog, a fellow named Hank says that he too supports Obama because of this issue - defunding Israel.

I truly mean it when I say thank you. While your views are repellent to me, I thank you and Hank for being honest and highlighting a part of the Obama agenda that he obviously doesn't publicize enough.; February 15, 2008 6:30 PM
Anonymous said...: An Excerpt "Dyson" Is Obama Surrogate Michael Eric Dyson And Obviously "Buchanan" refers to Pat Buchanan:

DYSON: ... but that number two, that women themselves in the competition between race and gender -- and God forbid that it should become down to that because life is more complex than that and we live our lives simultaneously and not in serial -- in succession.

But here`s the point, that I think that with that overwhelming lead that Barack Obama took into New Hampshire, all of these other factors are very critical, but I don`t think race can be discounted. We hope that that`s not the central defining moment here, but as Pat Buchanan trying to dismiss it is typical reassertion of a kind of perspective that discounts at all the reality that race could play a role.

BUCHANAN: Well, you know, look...

DYSON: He never acknowledges the reality that race could play a role significantly in shaping the viewpoints of people about this great candidate!

BUCHANAN: Professor, you`re working your theme, and I understand that. I was up in New Hampshire with my wife and sister, who`s written a very anti-Hillary book, and we talked on Monday about how horrible it was and the beating Hillary was taking and how offensive it was, and Edwards was saying she`s not tough enough. And that was their reaction, two very conservative women, none of whom would ever vote for Hillary. If they`re reacting that way, I can imagine how the women who kind of like Hillary in the Democratic Party reaction, and it doesn`t surprise me.

When you saw that figure on women, that is what did it. And you`re trying to tarnish her victory and get, frankly, the media off the hook because it`s got egg all over its face, by attributing it to racism...; February 15, 2008 6:32 PM
Safia K. said...: shelby --

You should be ashamed of yourself, Really.; February 15, 2008 6:35 PM
dwit said...: Anon NY Dem,

Unfortunately, the link didn't work. I won't defend what some pro Obama blogger may or may not have said regarding "racism".

When Bill and Hillary distorted Obama's comments on Reagan, I didn't play the race card, I played the "Rove Card". That is exactly what it was and they got nailed for it in the media and in public forums. It hurt them because it was dishonest.

I happen to mostly agree with some bloggers here on the issues, but I don't condone them bringing race into the mix. Keep it clean and stick to the issues unless someone clearly claims to base their decisions on race. That's the way I operate.; February 15, 2008 6:36 PM
Anonymous said...: Whether anyone likes it or not race has been brought up and if you think silencing it will make it just go away your mistaken!

Don't Think The Republicans Won't Take Issue With It.

I Don't Silence Anything As Taboo, I Would Rather Have Honesty.; February 15, 2008 6:36 PM
inkboi said...: with hillary people know what there gonna get with obama we don't know,he has not been in the senate long enough for any1 to know.what truned me off on obama was that he called the clinton's raciest,now tell me what part of bill clinton speach was raciset i rember bill saying obama view on the iraq war was a fairytail,and that jesses jackson won south carolina was fact not a raceist comment at all how can some speak the truth be called a raceist.people are walking on eggshell.with obama because what ever comes out of there mouths will be look at as raciest comment's that's how obama will win this thing calling people racesit,if any1 speaks bad about obama they will be called raciest people now how is that change and hope,now bill clinton has been called a raceist that is not right bill and hillary have been fighting for everbody's rights gays black's latinos and childs rights.obama played the race card just in time thats a shame thats not change or hope.obama was loseing so he played there picking on me becaues i'm black card come on people wake up.obama fills like the nation owes him this.obama fills like if he cant be the first black president then hillary cant be the first woman president know thats a shame; February 15, 2008 6:38 PM
Anonymous said...: dwit,
The Link Works Copy And Paste The Whole Thing, It's Not A Blogger

It Is The Apperance Of Barack Obama "Surrogate" (Meaning He Speaks His Message For Him); February 15, 2008 6:40 PM
dwit said...: Good luck with that Shelby. Keep on puttin' the old First Amendment to work. That's what it's there for.; February 15, 2008 6:41 PM
Protactinium said...: Rofl. That is your evidence? You are a bigot. You tried to make a mountian out of a molehill to make yourself feel better. Get off the race issue and fight real issues.

All he said "was all of these other factors are very critical, but I don`t think race can be discounted."

Hmm he admitted that maybe some people voted for Obama because of his race the same thing Hillary supporters have been saying.

Then he goes on to say he(Obama) will not acknowledge that race will have anything to do with election.

Now stop proving how racist you are, and actually nail Obama on some real issues.; February 15, 2008 6:42 PM
NO Obama said...: Hillary needs to do something like what Obama is doing:

Our work so far has taught us one important lesson: that your personal story about why you support Barack Obama is often the most powerful persuasion tool for someone who's undecided. That's true whether that undecided voter is your neighbor or a superdelegate.

The story of where you're from, what brought you into the political process, the issues that matter to you, and why you became part of this movement has the potential to inspire someone who could cast a deciding vote in this contest.

Our staff will compile stories from supporters like you and make them a key part of the conversation with superdelegates as Barack asks for their support.

Share your story to help persuade superdelegates now:

http://my.barackobama.com/superdelegates

I've received a lot of email from folks asking how best to help with the superdelegate effort, and this is it.

Your note, combined with those of other Obama supporters, will tell the story of an extraordinary movement of ordinary people -- a story with a common thread of hope that becomes all the more powerful when it brings together the diverse backgrounds and experiences of our supporters.

Together we're building something historic, and your story can help make someone else a part of it.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Thank you,
Barak Obama; February 15, 2008 6:45 PM
dwit said...: And Shelby,

I don't think Obama is going for the "End Times" crowd anyway. The dems left those votes to the Republicans long ago.

Fortunately, Ted Haggard and the like have put a doubt or two in their minds as well.; February 15, 2008 6:46 PM
Protactinium said...: InkBoi, I think it is possible you may have been misinformed by Hillary supporters.

First Obama has never ever acknowledged race at all. He never called Bill a racist. The fact is the media attacked Bill Clinton, for being racist. I thought it was media hype myself, until I saw Bill Clinton's comment to a question about Hillary's campaign. Out of the blue he said Jesse Jackson took SC twice. Go youtube it. Its pretty blatant. The fact is Hillary people brought the race card up not Obama. He is just going to ignore it all.

Just vote the issues, and not the hype. Obama beats Hillary on issues. I know what Hillary say you wait until the debates. Obama is going to lay out his policy pretty clearly in the debate. Obama and Hillary agree on alot of thing. Just not our foreign policy. He has also made positive roads to work with the republicans. While Hillary will fight with them and get nothing done.; February 15, 2008 6:49 PM
dwit said...: NY Dem

I think my comment on the issue speaks for itself. Still didn't work but try sending it again. It looks like you missed part of it in the above message.; February 15, 2008 6:49 PM
Anonymous said...: protactinum,
I Watched The Show I Witnessed Far More White Hatred Expressed Than Any I Ever Saw Bill Clinton Accussed Of In The Days To Follow, I Am Not The Only Person Who Understood ALL Racial Implications About it, It's FULLY Discussed If You Read ALL Of IT! (see link); February 15, 2008 6:51 PM
inkboi said...: timeforchange answer this for me name me 5 leader's of the UNITED NATIONS that obama has meet with; February 15, 2008 6:53 PM
Anonymous said...: protactinum,
"The fact is the media attacked Bill Clinton, for being racist. I thought it was media hype myself"

The HYPE WAS Directed FROM Michael Eric Dyson, He Encouraged The Media Follow Up FOR Obama.; February 15, 2008 6:54 PM
Anonymous said...: http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100007220&docId=l:726260364&start=4

There Ya Go dwit i just tested it myself.; February 15, 2008 6:58 PM
inkboi said...: the people that are for obama please tell me how dose 3 yrs in the senate make you think you can run for president of the usa the issues?obama took money from this resco guy that money came from from people paying for their heat and hot water.resco gave that money 2 obama and that money resco gave to obama payed for obama 1.5 million dollar mansion mmm obama steal from the poor and give to the rich; February 15, 2008 7:05 PM
Protactinium said...: Inkboi i am not sure who exactly he met with in this countries. But here are a few he has been to science in senate.

As a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Obama made official trips to Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. In August 2005, he traveled to Russia, Ukraine, and Azerbaijan. The trip focused on strategies to control the world's supply of conventional weapons, biological weapons, and weapons of mass destruction as a first defense against potential terrorist attacks.[65] Following meetings with U.S. military in Kuwait and Iraq in January 2006, Obama visited Jordan, Israel, and the Palestinian territories. At a meeting with Palestinian students two weeks before Hamas won the legislative election, Obama warned that "the U.S. will never recognize winning Hamas candidates unless the group renounces its fundamental mission to eliminate Israel."[66] He left for his third official trip in August 2006, traveling to South Africa, Kenya, Djibouti, Ethiopia and Chad. In a nationally televised speech at the University of Nairobi, he spoke forcefully on the influence of ethnic rivalries and corruption in Kenya.[67]; February 15, 2008 7:05 PM
Anonymous said...: Protactimum,
You Are Extremely Offensive, Your Candidates Message Is So Weak You Want Everybody To Throw Him The Election BECAUSE He Is Black, And Anyone Who Disagrees Is Racist

So Just Shut Up Yourself, Extreme Ignorance Is Contagious, And I Don't Wanna Catch Your Hate Filled Words Either!; February 15, 2008 7:07 PM
dwit said...: worked this time. I'll have a look, but I am waaay over this race thing. Its become a real red herring.

It seems to be an favorite attack of those who are die hard Israel supporters too.

I have never thought the Same-sex marriage issue was particularly important either.

You won't get a rise out of me on this one. It aint my thing. You want to talk about foreign or domestic policy? I'm in.; February 15, 2008 7:10 PM
Protactinium said...: LoL Inkboi, again I think you have been read Hillary politics way to much. These are not real statements.

Obama worked for resco for a few months, and did not pay for his 1.5 million dollar manison.

First I can tell you his house is nothing special. I have seen it. Its nothing more then a two flat in Hyde Park. I do not really think its 1.5 million. However a condo in chicago can cost you from 200k- 1kk

However if you want to get to dirty politics. Look how many homes the Clinton's own. Look who payed for it. Well she was on the Walmart board, and she has collected a lot of money from lobbyist. And shes the only candidate not claiming she wants campaign reform. She is happy the way it is.; February 15, 2008 7:10 PM
inkboi said...: on the race issues i rember watching oprah talking to the people in south carolina and i rember she saying yes the world is ready for a black president so obama camp came out with the race issue first bill clinton sayed the truth about jesses jackson wining shouth carlolina 2 times how is that racesit? i'm a black man i dont see were's what bill clinton s.c comment was racesit; February 15, 2008 7:13 PM
Anonymous said...: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXAQ3BHTbjs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxyPBmZE69s

Those Concern His Home And Rezko, Yes His Home Is 1.5 Million Dollars, And Rezko's Wife Helped Obama Purchase It By Purchasing The Adjoining Lot.; February 15, 2008 7:15 PM
Protactinium said...: Inkboi maybe your right. Maybe Bill was not trying to appeal to the racist of the democratic party. However I have answered you some of your experience questions. Look at his core issues, and not let race on any side affect your position. Look at the hard facts.; February 15, 2008 7:17 PM
Protactinium said...: LoL the a joning lot. What really happened was Rezko bought the lot. Then he allowed Obama to buy 3 feet(or so) next to his house, so it would not be on top of his. Then Rezko had th rest developed.

Hillary must pay you NY. However I am glad you got off race.

And a 1.5 Mill house is pretty normal in Chicago. I am also guessing Hillary is using the highest value, when in fact housing prices come back down.

Again your trying to smear Obama, and still have shown me you know nothing of the real issues.; February 15, 2008 7:21 PM
Anonymous said...: No Protactinum Now Your A Straight Up Idiot, Because I Said That White Power Groups Would Use Advertising And Organization Against Him, Yer Jumping To Conclusions That Aren't True Cause You Wanna See More Than What Is Being Said.

Your Being From Illinois Explains You Enthusiasm For YOUR Candidate, But It Does Not Excuse Your Behaviour.; February 15, 2008 7:21 PM
Anonymous said...: And Protactinum Rezko's Wife Bought The Adjoining Lot Same Day, Which Sits Abandoned To This Day, He Did However Buy About 3 MORE Feet From Rezko To Expand His (OBAMA'S) Yard.

Watch the Links One Of Them Is Abc.News Reporting.; February 15, 2008 7:24 PM
Anonymous said...: Your Candidate Is About To Be Wrapped Up In Rezko Litigation, Watch And See!; February 15, 2008 7:26 PM
Protactinium said...: In fact you have not told me why your candidate is better. You have only smeared Obama. Who are you supporting again?

Seems that your only goal is to smear Obama with your racist view of the world. Now i have already spent way to much time arguing you over ignorant issues. Get a clue and go vote.

How about you go google Hillary or Mccain and tell us why there better, and not why Obama is so bad. However it will not matter much, for ever 1 bigot out there. There are 20 new voters to offset it.; February 15, 2008 7:33 PM
inkboi said...: Protactinium were u get off the calling any1 a racist so i can call u a sexiest pig right only people with balls can run the u.s goverment? the issues at hand.health care ssi sdi,clinton has said what she will do and has done.obama well he's been is the senate for 3 yrs and mmm thats it and his runing for president no1 out side of shi town has ever heard of obama til he won the senate in 04 and til now tell me beside he's talk speach of change what change has he bought?? a divied in the democrat party and he want's 2 get rid of the superdelicits.and if howard dean doesnt let in F.L or MISCAGIN we lose them in nov.2 mccain; February 15, 2008 7:34 PM
Anonymous said...: Protactinium said..."Learn the issue before you call someone stupid"

Protactinium said.."LoL the a joning lot. What really happened was Rezko bought the lot. Then he allowed Obama to buy 3 feet(or so) next to his house, so it would not be on top of his. Then Rezko had th rest developed."

Take Your Advice.; February 15, 2008 7:41 PM
Protactinium said...: InkBoI read all the comment before commenting on Anon in NY being racist.

As for the three year in the senate. The fact is he ran because he saw a disenfranchised populace, and say that they were ready for a change.

You can call me a sexist if you like. But I would never say Hillary cannot win because shes a women. In fact if Hillary does become the Nominee I will most likely vote for her. Shes the lesser of two evils. However when i got a non - evil pick why would i not support him?
Hillary will probley even win.

Just because you never heard of him, does that make him wrong? Just because he has only three years in the senate, does that make him wrong?

I hear all you supporters attack Obama, but not one of you have told me how Hillary is better.(except for Carrie)

Is Hillary really for experience, or is she just running a hate machine. Does she really want this country better? Because mostly what I have seen from her supporters is just smear. Tell me the issues people. Real issues, and not that Obama's black. Or that he has no experince. How is Hillary better?; February 15, 2008 7:43 PM
Protactinium said...: btw here is some change Obama has brought in his short term in senate.

In the first month of the newly Democratic-controlled 110th Congress, Obama worked with Russ Feingold (D–WI) to eliminate gifts of travel on corporate jets by lobbyists to members of Congress and require disclosure of bundled campaign contributions under the "Honest Leadership and Open Government Act", which was signed into law in September 2007.[70] He joined Chuck Schumer (D-NY) in sponsoring S. 453, a bill to criminalize deceptive practices in federal elections, including fraudulent flyers and automated phone calls, as witnessed in the 2006 midterm elections.[71] Obama's energy initiatives scored pluses and minuses with environmentalists, who welcomed his sponsorship with John McCain (R-AZ) of a climate change bill to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by two-thirds by 2050, but were skeptical of his support for a bill promoting liquefied coal production.[72] Obama also introduced the "Iraq War De-Escalation Act", a bill to cap troop levels in Iraq, begin phased redeployment, and remove all combat brigades from Iraq before April 2008.[73]

Later in 2007, Obama sponsored with Kit Bond (R-MO) an amendment to the 2008 Defense Authorization Act adding safeguards for personality disorder military discharges, and calling for a review by the Government Accountability Office following reports that the procedure had been used inappropriately to reduce government costs.[74] He sponsored the "Iran Sanctions Enabling Act" supporting divestment of state pension funds from Iran's oil and gas industry,[75] and joined Chuck Hagel (R-NE) in introducing legislation to reduce risks of nuclear terrorism.[76] A provision from the Obama-Hagel bill was passed by Congress in December 2007 as an amendment to the State-Foreign Operations appropriations bill.[76] Obama also sponsored a Senate amendment to the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) to provide one year of job protection for family members caring for soldiers with combat-related injuries.[77] After passing both houses of Congress with bipartisan majorities, SCHIP was vetoed by President Bush in early October 2007, a move Obama said "shows a callousness of priorities that is offensive to the ideals we hold as Americans."[78]; February 15, 2008 7:51 PM
Anonymous said...: Hillary Clinton Is A Better Candidate Because She Has An Immense Intimate Knowledge Of Healthcare Through Years Of Experience, Hillary Will Lead Us Strategically Out Of Iraq, Enourmously Decreasing The Demand On Our Budget And Therefore Our Economy, She Has Well Established Foreign Connections, Which Will Help To Ease The Correction Of Our Foreign Relations Issues Damaged By The Bush Administration, Hillary Has Never Stopped Working Domestic And Foreign, To Achieve Greater Education And True Quality Of Life Improvements! Both Her Husband And Herself Have Contributed Charitably In The Name Of The U.S. To Causes Affecting Global Poverty!
Hillary Clinton Is Not New To Media Scrutiny, Her Record Has Been Extremely Documented, She Has Suffered Many Accusations And Yet Comes Out On Top Because She Has A Will Of Steel.
Thats Why Hillary Is Better And SOOO Much More!; February 15, 2008 7:51 PM
inkboi said...: can some1 just tell me this if i come out with a cool slogan will you vote for me he's my slogan always bet on black; February 15, 2008 7:56 PM
Protactinium said...: ok finally issues.

Well Hillary believes in Bush's foreign policy of ignoring Iran, Syria, and Palestine. That as America we should not talk to them.

She voted not only to authorize the Iraq war then lied. She also voted to authorize to government to treat Iran as a terrorist. While Obama is against this, and said he wants to talk to our "enemies" and try to found out the root of the problem.

As the war, Both Obama and Hillary want to pull out. (not McCain) so you saying you will vote for McCain over Obama shows you support this war. Also do not forget Bill never stop bombing Iraq.

As for domestic Hillary does not want to decrease the spending on the government. In fact she will have to raise taxes to pay for it all. Her healthcare plan is already going to be a burden on American companies(its madatory), never mind raising min. wage to 9.50. These things are not the right this to do in a recession. While Obama wants to spend money on building infrastructure. Which will give Amercians jobs (the same way we pulled out of the depression) Raising Taxes, raising minimum wage(a 3 dollar hike is almost a 50% cost in labor which is already American companies #1 cost.), and adding more cost to the middle class are the ways you destroy to economy not help it.

Hillary is the weak one on economy. She is used to having Bill exploding economy, which is all due the growth of the internet which is now slowed down.; February 15, 2008 8:05 PM
dwit said...: To Shelby et al.

Don't take my word for it, see Hillary's own record on ME foreign policy:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Hillary_Clinton_War_+_Peace.htm

Here is Barack Obama's record:

http://www.ontheissues.org/International/Barack_Obama_Foreign_Policy.htm

Now, I never said Obama was "right on" with regard to the ME. In fact I generally disagree with his comments on Israel, but I did imply however that he has been more impartial than Clinton. I believe he will be able to negotiate the situation in good faith without his hands tied.

This is the comment that opened my mind to his foreign policy position:

"Obama OPPOSED the Kyl-Lieberman amendment, which says we should use our military presence in Iraq to counter the threat from Iran."

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/foreignpolicy/#iran

Frankly,Hillary has painted herself into a corner on this one. Obama stands for diplomacy rather than shooting first and asking questions later.; February 15, 2008 8:06 PM
dwit said...: You can find Sen. Obama's positions on his own website:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/foreignpolicy/; February 15, 2008 8:08 PM
Anonymous said...: "She voted not only to authorize the Iraq war then lied"

I Take Issue This Is Fabricated, No Lie Is Involved.

"She also voted to authorize to government to treat Iran as a terrorist. While Obama is against this"

I Take Issue With This because He Knew The Senate Was Voting On This And Yet He Campaigned Instead It Is Not Good Enough To Say Something And Not Act Like You Said!

"As the war, Both Obama and Hillary want to pull out. (not McCain) so you saying you will vote for McCain over Obama shows you support this war"

Unless off course i believe mccain truly intends to withdraw also, He Has Also Been Quoted "WE NEED TO RESET THE FORCES" Being Strong Military He Just Wants To ACT Tough, He Knows The Situation He Is On The Senate Armed Forces Commitee Also.

"As for domestic Hillary does not want to decrease the spending on the government. In fact she will have to raise taxes to pay for it all"

This Is Part True Part Not, She WILL Let Bushes Tax REDUCTIONS EXPIRE, But Healthcare Can Be Offset By Iraq Spending Being Eliminated, I Know This Healthcare Issue Worries People Sometimes But Baracks Plan Still Leaves People Sick And Dieing Because They Can't Afford Help, We Have To Fix It As A Society, Or Watch It Get Worse!
People Are Dieing Because Insurance Companies Refuse To Pay For Operations.

Hillary's Plan Includes Everybody And It Has Been Her KEY Issue She Is Best To Help Lead It, Bill Knew That But The Resmuglicans Derailed It Because They Are Big PHARMA.

And Big Pharma Still Hates Hillary, Because Hillary Wants To Help YOU Even If It Costs Big Pharma Profits!; February 15, 2008 8:21 PM
Protactinium said...: Yes big Pharma does hate Hillary. Thats because she gets huge endorsements from insurance companies, who always want to drive there cost of drugs down. Hmm odd. A huge lobbying group of insurance companies, and mandatory healthcare? Seems like someone might have an agenda.

Yes Hillary did lie. She said, "I did not know that bill meant i was giving Bush the authorization to goto war" or she is not paying attention. But I do not buy that. She just lied.

Obama plan does not leave people sick either. He just is not going to force coverage. There almost identical except for the fact hers is mandatory.

Also both Obama and Hillary want Bush tax cuts to expire. Mccain wants them permanent.; February 15, 2008 8:28 PM
inkboi said...: so like i said obama played the race card just in time race was bought in this by obama camp this is fact afther he lost in new hempshire i'm a black man like i said and i will never vote 4 obama i will vote 4 mccain obama is just as smart as geroge bush when it comes 2 the issuse at hand regan is obama hero.yall have noreal reason 2 dislike hillary yall just dont want a woman being president just because she a female get some real balls a real man,would vote 4 the person that is best for the job,not on the sex of the persons.where was obama in the 90's when the usa was on a good track we was like almost by everbody in the world the usa had jobs people had money not just rich people.grow up and wake up obama will destory us; February 15, 2008 8:29 PM
Protactinium said...: so Inkboi your argument for Hillary being better is because Obamas black and played the race card. And because your black its ok not vote for him because hes just winning by racism. That we are all sexist, and that you will not vote for Obama no matter what.

Oh and btw I do not hate Hillary. Obama just stands better on this issues. You know the things the people are supposed to vote on. You Hillary supporters are all talk and no substance. It does not matter. Take your vote to Mccain, Obama will win as many republicans and democrats will lose. Its a fairytale to think Hillary is still in this. :-) I will see you guys on the other side of the fence. Oh wait i am sure i will not. You probably will just whine for your chairs after Obama become president. While Obama supporters are out there campaigning.; February 15, 2008 8:34 PM
Anonymous said...: What She Means Is She Interpretted it to mean that the president Would Be Supported In His Attempt To Determine If Saddam Hussein Held W.M.D.'s, A Threat Yes, But She And All The Rest Of Congress Underestimated His Resolve, But Ask Yourself If She Had Voted Know And Events Proved He Is In Possession Of W.M.D.'s, Then Wouldn't You Be Upset She Didn't Try to Do More To Protect You?

Move On Beyond This Because In The Senate Obama VOTES ( YES ACTUALLY SHOWS UP) To Support The War, I Can Only Assume (Since He WASN'T Actually A Senator) He Would Have Been Influenced By Bushes Fudged Intelligence Also!; February 15, 2008 8:36 PM
inkboi said...: can some1 tell me what has obama done were has he made change post a link showing he had made change there proof that hillary has made change so were did obama make change whie in the senate; February 15, 2008 8:37 PM
Anonymous said...: "Also both Obama and Hillary want Bush tax cuts to expire. Mccain wants them permanent"

I Have Allready Expressed How I Believe Security Trumps Lesser Issues Haven't I?; February 15, 2008 8:38 PM
Protactinium said...: Obama did not support the war. Hes on recorded as an IL senator saying he was against it. He tryed to get an amendment passed in IL saying that we where against it from before the war started. Quit looking up obama on Hillary's website. I know anything to spread your smear campaign.; February 15, 2008 8:39 PM
dwit said...: Anon NY Dem.

Regardless of whether Obama actually voted for Kyl-Lieberman or not he is on the record as opposing it. See his own website.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/foreignpolicy/

He claims the vote was decided on the night before the actual vote (by insiders and committee members, I might add) and he was out on the campaign trail. Let's not forget, he was hustling around back then because Hillary was the presumptive nominee.

Bottom line is, Hillary felt so strongly that she wanted to be clearly on the record as designating the Iranian military as a terrorist organization. What do you think her motivation was?

Can you imagine what the US response would be if say China passed a resolution calling American Special Forces a "terrorist Organization"?

Obama, had the wisdom to see that this would ultimately be counter-productive in resolving the ME/Iraq/Palestine issue.

Hillary, showed once again that she acts rashly and belligerently when it is diplomacy that is called for.

This is why many of us reject her and the other insiders like Cheney and Lieberman.; February 15, 2008 8:40 PM
dwit said...: inkboi,

That one was not even intelligible. Give it another go.; February 15, 2008 8:43 PM
Anonymous said...: To Me This Would Not Be Easy, To Vote For McCain, I Have Never Voted For Even A County Clerk That Was Republican, Feels Like Even That Would Be A PARTY Betrayal, But I Have Legitimate Concerns About Obama, And The Issues Of Security, It All Relates To Experience.

I Would Hold My Nose, And Vote .; February 15, 2008 8:43 PM
inkboi said...: and hillary won new mexcio by the way but still no 1 has told me what will change has he made for the people mmm; February 15, 2008 8:48 PM
Anonymous said...: dwit,

"Regardless of whether Obama actually voted for Kyl-Lieberman or not he is on the record as opposing it."

Doesn't This Show You He Does NOT Invest His Energy To Make The Things He Wants Actually Happen?

Yes It Would Matter To Me If He Had Such A Short Record To Find He Fails At Follow Through.

You Prove Your Own Point With The Phrasing Of The Question?
"Does It Matter"
You Tell Me.; February 15, 2008 8:48 PM
dwit said...: Yes Tokar!

Good to see you back! Good work with the numbers. It is a welcome respite. I don't necessarily agree with Hillary having "better policy", but at least that is arguable.

Interesting point about Congress. I'm glad a few of us are thinking about the congressional races.

Hank brought that up in a post way back.; February 15, 2008 8:52 PM
Anonymous said...: "Quit looking up obama on Hillary's website. I know anything to spread your smear campaign."

You Accuse Me Of Racism, Or Being On An Obama "SMEAR" Campaign.

Yet You SMEAR Hillary.

I Am Only At 1 Web Site(this one) With My Tv On No Hillary Website, Just Facts; February 15, 2008 8:54 PM
dwit said...: NY Dem,

You forgot this part of my statement:

"He claims the vote was decided on the night before the actual vote (by insiders and committee members, I might add) and he was out on the campaign trail. Let's not forget, he was hustling around back then because Hillary was the presumptive nominee."

Now I'm not necessarily saying Lieberman and Clinton colluded to exclude him, but things move fast on The Hill with all of the brokering that goes on.

Come on now, don't cherry pick my stuff, man!; February 15, 2008 8:57 PM
Protactinium said...: InkBoi I will post again. Here are some of the things Obama has done. What has Hillary done? None of you guys seem to know.

In the first month of the newly Democratic-controlled 110th Congress, Obama worked with Russ Feingold (D–WI) to eliminate gifts of travel on corporate jets by lobbyists to members of Congress and require disclosure of bundled campaign contributions under the "Honest Leadership and Open Government Act", which was signed into law in September 2007.[70] He joined Chuck Schumer (D-NY) in sponsoring S. 453, a bill to criminalize deceptive practices in federal elections, including fraudulent flyers and automated phone calls, as witnessed in the 2006 midterm elections.[71] Obama's energy initiatives scored pluses and minuses with environmentalists, who welcomed his sponsorship with John McCain (R-AZ) of a climate change bill to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by two-thirds by 2050, but were skeptical of his support for a bill promoting liquefied coal production.[72] Obama also introduced the "Iraq War De-Escalation Act", a bill to cap troop levels in Iraq, begin phased redeployment, and remove all combat brigades from Iraq before April 2008.[73]

Later in 2007, Obama sponsored with Kit Bond (R-MO) an amendment to the 2008 Defense Authorization Act adding safeguards for personality disorder military discharges, and calling for a review by the Government Accountability Office following reports that the procedure had been used inappropriately to reduce government costs.[74] He sponsored the "Iran Sanctions Enabling Act" supporting divestment of state pension funds from Iran's oil and gas industry,[75] and joined Chuck Hagel (R-NE) in introducing legislation to reduce risks of nuclear terrorism.[76] A provision from the Obama-Hagel bill was passed by Congress in December 2007 as an amendment to the State-Foreign Operations appropriations bill.[76] Obama also sponsored a Senate amendment to the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) to provide one year of job protection for family members caring for soldiers with combat-related injuries.[77] After passing both houses of Congress with bipartisan majorities, SCHIP was vetoed by President Bush in early October 2007, a move Obama said "shows a callousness of priorities that is offensive to the ideals we hold as Americans."[78]; February 15, 2008 9:01 PM
Anonymous said...: "He claims the vote was decided on the night before the actual vote"

He Being A Senator Has Ample Time To Return Especially In The Early Election Cycle, For ALL Floor Votes Or Objections, He Choose Not To Attend, I Do Not Give People Credit For NOT Showing Up To Work, Yet Playing Monday Morning Quarterback, As He Did After He Guaged Public Opinion Concerning Iran Guard Being Declared Terrorist,
If He Truly Opposed It And Beleived It Would Hurt America, Why Didn't He Give A MAGIC Floor Speech And Change Everbody's Mind?

Actions Speak Louder Than Words ALWAYS!; February 15, 2008 9:07 PM
dwit said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; February 15, 2008 9:13 PM
Anonymous said...: protactinum,
did you know Senator Schumer Of New York (also MY Senator)Whom You Sited, Supports Hillary Clinton As She Was Instrumental In His election To The Senate, Therefore Good Thing He HELPED Obama With That Bill, So Good Thing Hillary Helped That Democrat GET Elected!; February 15, 2008 9:14 PM
dwit said...: Hillary has missed 27% of the votes in the Senate. Here is a Washington Post article highlighting them:

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/c001041/

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/c001041/votes/missed/

To be fair Obama has missed 38%.

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/o000167/votes/missed/

We should note that most of their absences can both be counted during this campaign season. So both are missing votes because of the campaign.

If we had enacted election reform, neither of these candidates would be compelled to participate in so many fund-raisers.

Let's hope the new Democratically led Congress will FINALLY enact election reform in '09!; February 15, 2008 9:15 PM
dwit said...: NY Dem

Oh yes I realize actions speak louder than words. This is exactly why I did not vote for Hillary in my caucus AND primary.; February 15, 2008 9:18 PM
Independent Voter said...: Anon ny.....I have a question for you. Who did you vote for in 2004?; February 15, 2008 9:21 PM
Protactinium said...: Anon in NY protactinum,

"did you know Senator Schumer Of New York (also MY Senator)Whom You Sited, Supports Hillary Clinton As She Was Instrumental In His election To The Senate, Therefore Good Thing He HELPED Obama With That Bill, So Good Thing Hillary Helped That Democrat GET Elected!"

Well then why was it Obama that he worked with and not Hillary? Seems to me if Hillary was the changer she would have wanted to triumph Obama and sponsor it herself. I guess she was to busy voting for the something else.

Oh and PS. A smear campaign is where you talk about none of the issues, and attack the candidate personally. Like you have. While I have argued the issues. You seem to know very little. However I gather you have started researching them. Which is a plus.; February 15, 2008 9:21 PM
Anonymous said...: protactinum,
Whatever your pasting from also sites his support of mccain sponsored bills.

dwit said...
Hillary has missed 27% of the votes in the Senate. Here is a Washington Post article highlighting them

It's An Issue For Obama Because He Hasn't Voted On CRITICAL Issues Votes (like iran for which he faults hillary without a RECORD Of his own) WHICH the DEMOCRATIC SENATE Could Have Used His Support, But He Played It Safe And Stayed Away.

Dirty Pool; February 15, 2008 9:23 PM
Anonymous said...: dwit what state are you in that has had both?; February 15, 2008 9:27 PM
dwit said...: NY Dem,

I asked you a question earlier:

"Bottom line is, Hillary felt so strongly that she wanted to be clearly on the record as designating the Iranian military as a terrorist organization. What do you think her motivation was?

Can you imagine what the US response would be if say China passed a resolution calling American Special Forces a "terrorist Organization"?

What are your thoughts on your candidates position on this issue? How would the US react?; February 15, 2008 9:28 PM
Protactinium said...: "John McCain (R-AZ) of a climate change bill to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by two-thirds by 2050"

yes. Obama did work with Mccain on trying reduce greenhouse gases. Obama is a uniter and cares more about issues, then to fight party fights.

Are you against the environment?

If funny that you try to use this against him, but then say you will vote for Mccain over Obama. Hmm which is it? Do you love Mccain or not? Why if you would vote for Mccain is it bad that Obama has worked with him. Seems like smear to me.; February 15, 2008 9:29 PM
Anonymous said...: "Well then why was it Obama that he worked with and not Hillary?"

Because Hillary's Committee Works On Armed Forces Issues She Spends Time Focused On Military And Security She is one of a bipartisan Commitee who is very busy doing so, HOWEVER Charles Schumer Is Part Of Hillary's Campaign Now, Working With Her, To Do The Wonderful Thing Called Getting Hillary Elected.; February 15, 2008 9:33 PM
Independent Voter said...: anon-

Who did you vote for in 2004?; February 15, 2008 9:35 PM
Anonymous said...: "John McCain (R-AZ) of a climate change bill to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by two-thirds by 2050

yes. Obama did work with Mccain on trying reduce greenhouse gases."

Maybe John McCain Is The Uniter!; February 15, 2008 9:35 PM
dwit said...: Washington State. The Dem party here is even more f'd up than the national organization. They have a primary ballot that doesn't count at all. Big waste of resources and undemocratic.

I hate the caucus system, btw, as I believe it excludes many disabled, elderly, religious groups and working class people who must work on Saturdays in second or third jobs just to make ends meet.

I can tell you that I have several friends who teach in Seattle and those that do not have a spouse work second jobs because their pay is so terrible.

This is one policy area where Obama has lost me. I do think Hillary is stronger on this issue.; February 15, 2008 9:36 PM
Anonymous said...: sd_dave why would that matter?
If I Voted For A Democrat Which I Did, He Lost, Everybody Said Oh Young Voters Are Electing A Democrat This Time, I Hear It Every Year.; February 15, 2008 9:38 PM
Independent Voter said...: you voted for John Kerry. Right?; February 15, 2008 9:39 PM
Protactinium said...: LoL NY. Your obviously a talking mouth piece for the republicans, posing as a democrat. In order to cause division amongst the democrats. You where never going to vote for a democrat. And I am sure you voted for Bush last 8 years.

Or that you have never voted before, and decided you could not have Obama win so you would go and smear him. You are using any mean necessary and in fact not actually talking about issues.; February 15, 2008 9:40 PM
MOJORISIN' said...: Hey Protactinium - I told you last night (under Anonymous at that time) that you were wasting your breath trying to get any of these Shillary supporters to wake up and smell the truth that is right there in front of their narrow-minded faces. You know what's right and it's a shame you are wasting your time on here with these nimrods. You tried. I wish you'd come over to Barack's site, make a profile, and go under 'blog' and have some real meaningful conversations with some great people that are not racists, bigots, and in general, STUPID. It is going on over there - you would dig it!! Come on, leave this crap behind!!

Another thing, when people Write In Caps For Every Word On Every Post, there is some serious 'little' issues going on. Doing this makes this person feel dominating in an anonymous setting where that person is normally an outcast or loser in real life. I suspect there's also a 'tiny' nub going on between his panties. This guy is truly a major douche.

Leave this stupid thread, you deserve to spend your time supporting our next president with others that support you. Isn't that the message we are trying to get across? See ya on the other side.

PEACE!!; February 15, 2008 9:41 PM
Anonymous said...: If We Do Not Put Forth Our Strongest Candidate(Hillary), Proven To Deliver On The Promises She Has Made, How Can We Win The Election?; February 15, 2008 9:44 PM
Independent Voter said...: I have to agree with mojorisin'. I already have a profile setup over there. I'm tired of arguing with a fool.

The longer I argue with this fool, the more foolish I feel. Not because they have out argued me because he simply cannot, it is because when you argue with a fool, it can be hard for others to tell who the fool really is. So with that said I'm DONE arguing with the fool known as anonymous ny democrat.

I think I will do some more phone-banking for the Obama campaign.

OUT!; February 15, 2008 9:47 PM
Protactinium said...: I am with you guys on this. You on BarackObama.com?

LoL SD I know your right. Just could not believe how idiotic the fool was being. Oh well. C-ya guys there. Ill c-ya hate mongers in Mccain's camp in the primary.; February 15, 2008 9:51 PM
Anonymous said...: "Protactinium said...
LoL NY. Your obviously a talking mouth piece for the republicans, posing as a democrat"

Thats Crazy I Am Not Republican, Rasict Or Smearing.
But I Will Not Be Convinced Something Is Right When I Know It Is Wrong

If You Said I Were Independent Not Democrat, I Could Maybe Understand That Even Though I Am Registered Democrat all My Life, But Republican I Am Not I Just Don't Agree With Barack Obama And I Will Say So, No Matter How Many Others Make Vulgar Or Rude Remarks to defend a candidate, who's reputation is destroyed most by his supporters!; February 15, 2008 9:54 PM
dwit said...: NY Dem,

Unfortunately, Clinton is not the strongest candidate. Why do you think the republicans want to run against her so bad?

I'm watching David Brooks (a conservative pundit) on News Hour right now. Even he is trying to give her advice on how to win.

And Mark Shields (the liberal pundit) has pointed out just what I said yesterday about Kennedy and LBJ.

Kennedy clearly was a greenhorn compared to LBJ and yet he was leaning toward withdrawing US troops in Vietnam before his death.

It was LBJ with 30 + years experience that escalated the situation into a full blown war, committing a half million troops.

I think we all know where that policy took us.; February 15, 2008 9:55 PM
MOJORISIN' said...: Yes I am. If you go over tonight, mention LittleMan in the first blog and I'll find you guys!

I think I'll have to send our soon to be president some more bucks tonight in LittleMan's honor! HAHAHA!; February 15, 2008 9:57 PM
dwit said...: Everyone has got to watch "The Fog of War"!; February 15, 2008 10:01 PM
Anonymous said...: sd_dave in fact yes i did vote for kerry and yes i totally agree he has extreme weakness here thats why i too voted for edwards But He Dropped Out Right After I Voted In 2004, So What Could I Do? He Didn't Even Make It To New York He Was Out In Florida!
Unfortunately Barack Is So Unconnected And Inexperienced In Terms Of Deep Powerful Connections That I Cannot SETTLE For Obama Like I Did For Kerry.; February 15, 2008 10:02 PM
dwit said...: I won't go to the Obama site. I much prefer to debate those who DON'T always agree with me.; February 15, 2008 10:05 PM
Anonymous said...: dwit,
"Why do you think the republicans want to run against her so bad?"

Because They Consider Her LESS Threatening Than Obama, They Would Rather LOSE To Her Than Obama!

They Will Fight Harder Not To Lose With HIm I Assure You.; February 15, 2008 10:07 PM
dwit said...: That is some pretty convoluted logic dude. You think they are playing to lose?; February 15, 2008 10:32 PM
dwit said...: Alright, my work is done here. I think I will take a look at the McCain site. Do they even have a forum? That will be fun!; February 15, 2008 10:43 PM
Anonymous said...: "That is some pretty convoluted logic dude. You think they are playing to lose?"

Yes dwit Even The Republicans are playing to lose to hillary this year! They Realized It Some Time Ago.; February 15, 2008 11:28 PM
Safia K. said...: Protactinium

Where are you blogging after this insanity?

Ny Dem

You are the rudest blogger I have ever read, so rude that you've effectively shut down any productive conversation. Disgusting.; February 16, 2008 12:20 AM
Protactinium said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; February 16, 2008 12:51 AM
Protactinium said...: Heres an intreasting article. Turns out Hillary health care is modeled after Mitt Romneys Mass. failed health care plan. Also Arnold tryed to get the same one passed, and shot down. Hillary's healthcare plan did not work in mass. and will not work for the country. Mandate is the key to failure.

Please read it very intreasting.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120173996744030445.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries; February 16, 2008 1:24 AM
Artemis said...: Dear Obama supporters,
Did you hear how Hillary took NM? If Obama had won it, we would not hear the end of it from your people. You see how nice Hillary and her supporters are. Come to our camp, we are pretty nice.; February 16, 2008 1:56 AM
Tokar said...: People need to start reading stuff thats not written by people in the US. Writers in the US dont write on a level playing field, they are all biased one way or another. People outside of the US have particular interest in the presidency because of what it holds in store for the economic future of our country which directly affects their country.

Canada is a good start:
http://www.financialpost.com/analysis/columnists/story.html?id=b3a087a1-90f2-423e-9840-5870e7b0034d&k=32911; February 16, 2008 4:59 AM
Anonymous said...: I've been reading this site daily for a little while now. I really love to hear differing opinions and to debate the issues. I am seriously interested them. But I have to say, I've never seen such a vile exchange with almost nothing meaningful communicated. I'm sorry I wasted my time reading it. I'm starting to feel a little embarassed to call myself a Democrat.
C'mon people, time to grow up!
This isn't high school, please try to stick to the issues...; February 16, 2008 7:49 AM
Anonymous said...: To Those Who Have Called Me Rude, Consider This, Some Of What You Have Seen Posted From Me Is Tame And Sheepish, Compared To The Candidate Who Is Nominated, If It's Hillary, We Hear Men Talk About Womens Shortcomings For Months As They Go On A Roll With Inappropriate Hillary Jokes, If It's Barack, There Will Be Racism Through The Roof, Either Way You Choose, Your Candidate Will Face These Issues Head On. SO WILL YOU

Hillary Has To Be Prepared Not Only To Lead But To Efficiently Deal With Sexism!

Barack Has To Be Prepared Not Only To Lead But To Efficiently Deal With Racism!

Those Are Just Facts Not Meant To Be Rude, But Please Don't Be Naive Enough To Think These Are NON-ISSUES, Not Everybody Will Agree, And You Must Be Determined To Better Deal With The Issue Head On As Well, Just Like The Candidate You Support, What You Have Read From Me Is My Reaction To Posts Tainted With Sexism, I Was Pointing Out That Racism Is Also An Issue In That Regard.

I Myself Have Already Seen Signs Of People Angered With The Prospect Of Obama Becoming President, They Will No Doubt Become More Vocal Should He Win The Nomination, I Recognize These People Do Not Agree With Me or you, But I Do Not Pretend They Do Not Exist! We Pretended Terrorists Didn't Exist Before 9/11, But It Still Happened.

Electing Barack Obama Will Require A Greater Exploration Of Race As It Relates In Society, An ADULT Conversation On The Issue Is No Doubt A Start.
If You Disagree, It's Your Perogative.; February 16, 2008 9:15 AM
Anonymous said...: P.S.
I Also Believe "The Greatest Thing We Have To Fear Is Fear Itself"

But I Also Recognize FEAR Will Be Voting John McCain, And All Our Resmuglican Friends Need Do Is Make A Sufficient Number Of Us FEAR Before November, Our President And His Administration Might Still Have A Few FEAR Tactics Up Their Sleeves Yet!; February 16, 2008 9:25 AM
Anonymous said...: MSNBC News Just Reported McCain Is Calling For Barack Obama To Honor The Pledge Barack Obama Made Many Months Ago, To Use Only The Funds Provided By The Government To Run His Campaign, As McCain Agreed To As Well.

Barack Obama Issued A Statement, (Sounded Like Barack Was Saying [We Will SEE])

Shouldn't He Have To Do What He Agreed To, Or Does He Get A Pass For This?; February 16, 2008 10:59 AM
Carrie said...: Howdy, some clarification around my candidate (Clinton)

- She did vote for the designation of Iran's revolutionary guard as a terrorist organization. This vote did not give Bush power to bomb them. What it did do is set in motion a series of automatic sanctions that would make it easier for the United States to block financial accounts and other assets controlled by the guard, particularly those in the US. It discouraged others from working with them. It might have been poking a rattlesnake - we can debate the merits of that tact. However, it in no way approved the use of force.

- She did say she would not PROMISE to meet with leaders of Iran and Syria without preconditions in the first year of her presidency. She said she would open diplomatic exchanges with them immediately via her cabinet, but that she wouldn't meet with the leaders directly until she knew it was not going to be manipulated and used as a media ploy. Obama did commit to meeting without preconditions. Both stances are a huge change from Bush's approach. These statements were made in a debate, pretty sure it was the youtube debate.

- There was a comment that Clinton's healthcare was based on Romney's Scott Horsely (NPR business correspondent) said in 11/07 that:
"So far, the Massachusetts health-care plan appears to be working well, although some of the mandates don't take effect until next year. About 200,000 more people now have health insurance in the state, and individual premiums have fallen. That's a victory for Romney, the pragmatic problem solver."
This is good news, as Clinton and Obama share the same basic policies (aside from the mandate). I'm actually glad she raised the mandate both because I think it's economically sound, and because I think it's a good "asking price" from which negotiations will begin. FactCheck.org has a bit on the BO/HC health plans. His would be much less expensive and only mandate coverage for children. Both have given reasonable explanations on how they would pay for their plans. The trade off here is that Clinton's would probably cover 90-100% of the currently uninsured, while Obama's would probably cover less than half. (Protact: I did visit the site you listed. It is an opinion piece written by a libertarian nonprofit, which would not likely support this type of plan. I am more comfortable with NPR's report and factcheck.com as sources as I've reviewed them both and they both support and pan each of the candidates.) The good news is that Romney's was a bipartisan deal...hope for this yet?!?

BTW - Anyone know which unions pushed back on Schwarzenegger's plan? I'm wondering how UAW big-3 auto employees feel about it now that their retirees have taken on responsibility for making their own plan deals.; February 16, 2008 11:37 AM
Tokar said...: @Anonymous NY Democrat
Quick question:

Are you using some specialized plugin for your internet browser or some kind of specialized software which assists you in posting?
I ask because every one of your words are capitalized, even words like "the". It is something that I would find very difficult to do, typing at 60-100WPM, with the consistency that I see in your posts.; February 16, 2008 12:18 PM
Anonymous said...: "Are you using some specialized plugin for your internet browser or some kind of specialized software which assists you in posting?"

I Currently Use The Special Software In My Brain For All Typing, (lol)

I Use It To Distinguish My Text From Others. It Comes Very Natural To Me, But I Do Not Always Type Like This Just In Public Forums,
Nothing Special.; February 16, 2008 1:07 PM
Tokar said...: I guess you get a lot of alerts for Windows StickyKeys :).; February 16, 2008 5:13 PM
Anonymous said...: I Hope Howard Dean Is Forced To Resign Over This!!!!!!; February 16, 2008 5:33 PM
Old City Jim said...: To Anon in NY

Regards Obama’s pledge to limit himself to public funds ($85 M) in a general election if his opponent does likewise. He said that before he realized he could raise about 3 times that if he wants. If the shoe was on the other foot, do you think McCain (or Rove-like Republicans) would unilaterally disarm? Should a presidential candidate (or President) be that magnanimous? Would Democrats want to nominate a candidate so foolish?

Of course I’ll give him a pass. It would be a real head-scratcher if he stuck to it.; February 16, 2008 6:30 PM
inkboi said...: soory to tell u obama lover the poll that has clinton @ 49% and obama @ 41 % was a MSNBC POLL the real poll is clinton 55% obama @ 33% sorry 2 bust yall bubble like that mm no i'm not; February 16, 2008 6:40 PM
inkboi said...: 2 anno democrat in ny yes he will get a free pass at that because the press love him and they dont wanna be called racist; February 16, 2008 6:45 PM
Protactinium said...: Ok. Heres another article from the Boston Globe. This is newer then the article you citied.

http://www.boston.com/news/health/articles/2008/02/03/subsidized_care_plans_cost_to_double/?page=3

Heres some highlights:

-Subsidized care plan's cost to double

-State projections obtained by the Globe show the program reaching 342,000 people and $1.35 billion in annual expenses by June 2011. Those figures would far outstrip the original plans for the Commonwealth Care program

-Even with federal backing, the state may not be able to afford the insurance initiative as designed; February 16, 2008 6:46 PM
Protactinium said...: Inkboi the polls have a real issue counting Obama real vote total. This reason is because alot of people are new voters, and independants. Alot of times those polls are only taking guarrenteed voters. I mean all the polls have underesitmated how big Obama wins will be. Also theres alot of time left, I expect Hillary lead to collapse short of something amazing at the debate next week.

MSNBC said Obama will take chesapake area by 18-20 points, when in fact he won by 30-50%. So in fact they looked conservative. Also are all your polls from the same day? Alot of times people have polls from a week or two ago that they still tout around.; February 16, 2008 6:50 PM
inkboi said...: Protactinium tell me this why did the biggest union in chicago went to clinton? there worlds was this obama didnt do anything to help us keep are jobs they lost 1,600 jobs now every union in ny went to hillary obama lost the biggest union in is home state went 2 clinton.things that make u go mmm.; February 16, 2008 6:54 PM
Protactinium said...: Inkboi,

First I would like to point out that Boston is not a state. Boston is in MASS.

Obama did not lose Mass, because of Ted Kennedy. It was a very close state, and came out in Hillary favor. Its close to Newyork, but I will not take away from Hillary's wins.

Also Hillary did take Cali, but Obama did not get stomped on. Remember democrats do not have winner take all states. Also I am sure alot of people in the states of FL, MI, Mass., NY, and many other states will get a chance to look at Obama vs Mccain. I am willing to bet alot of them will go to Obama.

Also you say you a Black Male, and your boyfriend is a White Male. You both will vote for Mccain over Hillary. Well be my guest. If you want to vote for a man that will continue to try and crush gay rights. I hope Obama does win just to see this happen. However then I do not want to see you crying on blogs about how Mccain is taking all your rights away.; February 16, 2008 7:28 PM
Carrie said...: Protactinium -

Great article from the Globe. I think it's worth pointing out some of the reasons they gave for the plan's problems:
- Underestimation of # of uninsured (hopefully Clinton & Obama will learn from this)
- Lack of plan for improving efficiency (Clinton & Obama both include things like Electronic Medical Records to increase efficiency)
- Romney changed the rules re: business responsibilities, which left the program with 10s of millions fewer in revenues. (Clinton & Obama can also learn from this)

Interesting quote: "I wouldn't say there's an imminent danger that the whole thing is going to collapse," said Robert Seifert, senior associate at the Center for Health Law and Economics at the University of Massachusetts Medical School. "It's challenging, but if it's a priority for the administration, then I think it's doable. There are benefits that don't appear in the budget numbers," including healthier residents, who are less of a financial drain in the long run." These benefits would include things like fewer ER visits, higher productivity, etc.

The Clinton & Obama plans factor in the other benefits.

Mandates are not mentioned as a factor here, probably because they haven't gone into effect in Mass.

I was impressed by the article. I don't think it paints a dire picture, but it's definitely gloomier than the earlier NPR bit I'd seen/heard.

Thanks!; February 16, 2008 8:51 PM
Carrie said...: Protactinium -
I think you've made reference to health insurers backing Clinton. I've looked - really made an honest effort - and I can't find any references. Can you send me a link?

All I've seen are articles that talk about how they aggressively lobbied against her in 1993, but they don't hate her now and are skeptical but listening.

I'd also that you read up on Obama's involvement with/campaign funding from Exelon and Maytag executives and how they present conflicts of interest from his IL senate days. I'd be interested to hear your take as you might have a more positive point of view.; February 16, 2008 10:13 PM
Protactinium said...: Carrie you correct. It is not in not guareenteed to fail. However it has costed way more money the anticipated.(goverment as usual)

The reason it's not going to fail yet is because the feds will bail them out for a while. But mandates have only been in affect for a couple of months now.
It will take longer to really decide if this was a failed project, however it all has tell tail signs of the begining of failure.

Also I really disagree with the belief that if more people are insured people will have fewer ER visits, and higher productivity.

People are even more likey to go to the doctor. For stuff like anti-botics, and pain meds. Or getting an X-ray instead of waiting an hour in order to make sure its really broken.

Also is Hillary plan going to have a maximum limit? That is really the biggest problems with insurances. That if you get really sick or injured. They max out on you, and the hospital proceeds to ruin the rest of your finaces.

However I do insist mandates, with Hillary raise in min. wage will crush small buisness, as well as factorys.; February 16, 2008 10:14 PM
Protactinium said...: Oh and the Exelon thing you refer to. Is a bill that Hillary CO-SPONSERED.; February 16, 2008 10:24 PM
Carrie said...: Protactinium -
I can attest to the decrease in ER visits and increased productivity as I work with administrative data and have analyzed the issue. This topic is the one I probably know best because I've worked in the industry since 1994 (minus a 3-year hiatus spent teaching). The reason for reduced ER visits is that people with insurance go to a primary care doctor for things like antibiotics and ongoing management of chronic diseases rather than waiting until they are really sick and have to go to the ER. Also, most PCPs aren't reimbursed for, so don't take uninsured patients. Those patients end up in public ERs because they have no choice. An ER visit is WAY, WAY more expensive than an office visit. In terms of productivity, better preventive care (a focus of Clinton & Obama's plans) and management of chronic diseases lead to less time away from work.

I have to admit, I need to read up on the minimum wage. I know Obama's economic plan was just published and, once again, it is very similar to Clinton's. This, I think, is good news. We really can't lose in November...as long as we get one of these two elected!; February 16, 2008 10:25 PM
Carrie said...: The Exelon bill I'm taking about was in IL state senate. If you're interested, I can look for the article. I think it was in the NY Times or Chicago Tribune.; February 16, 2008 10:26 PM
Protactinium said...: Here is your link for Hillary getting alot of healthcare money.
Its even a New york paper.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/12/nyregion/12donate.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

As she runs for re-election to the Senate from New York this year and lays the groundwork for a possible presidential bid in 2008, Mrs. Clinton is receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from doctors, hospitals, drug manufacturers and insurers. Nationwide, she is the No. 2 recipient of donations from the industry, trailing only Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, a member of the Republican leadership.

I guess this is her back when she was a senator. But im sure shes still in there pockets. I know there she also has recived more then any other presidental candiate. I will find; February 16, 2008 10:33 PM
Carrie said...: You were right - Exelon was a US senate bill. I was mistaken on the year - thought it was at the end of his state senate run, but was in his freshman year in the US senate. Here's a link to the article. It does look like Clinton cosponsored the bill (he sponsored a couple that year, on she cosponsored).
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/us/politics/03exelon.html?_r=1&hp=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1203220065-tqGLOoyYveBKZxubUVPKZA

On Maytag ties (while in IL senate):
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-galesburg_obama_webfeb01,0,4286527.story

Please note - not trying to get into a stink & slime fest here, but to get your perspective, like the fact that Clinton cosponsored the bill. I'll look into the healthcare stuff and see what I think.; February 16, 2008 10:58 PM
Protactinium said...: Here are some more articles about Hillarys lobbiest money.

http://politicalinquirer.com/2007/10/19/hillary-clinton-receives-the-largest-number-of-military-donationsfrom-the-defense-industry/

Senator Clinton took in more than half of the total going to all Democrats, and a figure equaling 60 percent of the sum going to the entire GOP field

Here is another intreasted pick up of donations for her foundation.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22335754/

Heres my favorite part.

The examination found that while some $1 million contributors were longtime Clinton friends, others were seeking policy changes from the administration. Two pledged $1 million each while they or their companies were under investigation by the Justice Department.

Here another Article about Hillary takes alot of lobbist money.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20080204/pl_bloomberg/apnpwl7xnjik

Clinton took in $823,087 from registered lobbyists and members of their firms in 2007 and the second-biggest recipient was McCain, who took in $416,321, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington-based group which tracks political giving

Here are some.; February 16, 2008 11:08 PM
Protactinium said...: Carrie I do not want to get in a slime fest with you. I am happy to talk about just facts.

I live in chicago, and was very aware of it while it happened. To be very honest I really do not think he could of kept the plant in IL. However it is one of his poltical blunder. Its unfortanate that it is impossible to have a candite that has not recieved dirty money(even unknowingly.), or had some questionable experince along the way.

However I do believe they happened to him, and he was not maliciously abusing his power. He is a go getter and will get a ton done, while in the White House.; February 16, 2008 11:32 PM
Protactinium said...: good morning. I looked up what you said about ER visits. Your right. People will go to the DR instead of waiting until they are dieing to goto the ER. However DR visits will go way up.(but we need something like 5 dr visits = the cost of a ER visit.(I am shakey on that math)) We defiantly need to do something with the healthcare system. Just seems all goverment models are not the greatest. TO be honest even Obama's plan worries me a bit.

However Do you know if either Hillary or Obama will have maximiums?; February 17, 2008 3:30 AM
Anonymous said...: ":Also Hillary did take Cali, but Obama did not get stomped on."

Obama Got Stomped in California
Hillary 204 Delegates - Obama 161 Delegates (not including super's)

Obama Got Stopmed In New York
Hillary 139 Delegates - Obama 93 Delegates

Obama Got Stomped In Massachuesettes Hillary 55 Delegates Obama 38 Delegates

Also In The End When Florida WILL EVENTUALLY COUNT Obama Gots Stomped There Too Hillary 105 Delegates - Obama 67 Delegates

Obama Lost Every BLUE STATE On Super Tuesday, Except Illinois And Connecticut, Get Real He Was STOMPED!!!
He Would Be Stomped Worse In November Too When He Loses ALL The States He WON Against Hillary To John McCain, The Democratic Party Should Never Consider What IDAHO, Alaska, Or Alabama VOTES Versus Mass., Cali., New Jersey, New York, Or FLORIDA (remember george bush 2000? Florida MATTERS)

You Can Argue Many Things, But Super Tuesday And Therefore Blue States Belong To Hillary!; February 17, 2008 5:41 AM
Protactinium said...: This will be the only thing I say to you, because you are two ignorant to actually talk to.

As of today. Hillary is losing. When you count super delegates and all. Hillary is losing the popular vote. Yes that right Hillary is losing. Preety hard to say shes stomping over Obama. You are living in a fairytale.

As for Michigan and Flordia. They will not be counted period. Now go over to your republican side of the fence, and cry about how the democrats are so mean in your blogs. I am confident you will not work the campign.

Go look up the issues, then try and talk. That is all I have to say to you Ignorant in NY.; February 17, 2008 7:07 AM
Anonymous said...: Protactinum,
You Are Ignorantly Buying Into, And Counting On Michigan And Florida Remaining Disqualified, When You Make Your ATTACKS, When Michigan And Florida Delegates And Votes Get Added, Your Gunna Be Sitting There Going Huh?, How'd That Happen, It Won't Be Racism Or Ignorance, It Will Be The Rightful Acknowledgement That People Voted In Florida And Michigan Too, And They Have No Control Over What The Republican Controlled Legislature Does To The Primary, But They Are Valuable To Winning The Electorate In November For The Presidency, You Don't Talk Issues Here, You Site Web Pages Full Of Opinions That Agree With You, Instead Of Whats Right And Wrong, Forgive Me For Not Caring That YOU Consider Me Ignorant, You Must Have A Link Where You Can Site This I Am Sure

I Disagree With You Thats All, But Attacking Me (Who's Vote You Need For Obama, Gets You No Where) Doesn't Make Obama A Better Candidate!; February 17, 2008 7:33 AM
Artemis said...: matt & Oreo,
please correct the visual depiction of the table that show Senator Obama ahead by thousands. It is misleading that you show Senator Obama ahead by thousands (I know you really would like that, but just not true). but just true! BTW, this is my 2nd attempt to correct your error. thank you in advance.; February 17, 2008 6:30 PM
Artemis said...: To David Pearl, Here is what you emailed me, "It is not an oversight. The tables of delegates do NOT show Billary's delegates one digit off. Please notice the decimal point for the half delegate." this is the problem with Obama supporter, somehow, your truth is more true and we should all vote for your guy because you are so smart. You depicting the numbers to fool people is not constructive. I know you really want that, but just not true.
you say "The numbers are just not aligned. As for the new graph that depicts Senator Clinton's delegates taking a sharp dive, well, the graph accurately represents what is actually happening in comparison to momentum of increasing numbers of delegates for Obama." Again, we did not see the graph when she was so much ahead. double standard, I think so.
you say "Seating the FL &MI delegates would be in violation to the rules agreed to by HRC and BHO. I, for one, do not want a president who breaks rules and agreements. We have put up with that for the last two terms and I do not want more of the same!" I know you don't want Hillary presidency, but no matter how much you try to fool people, the truth that Hillary is the only one that can save us. Nobody is wanting you to change your vote, just don't force you idea onto others as forcefully as you are trying to do. get a grip of yourself my friend>; February 17, 2008 6:51 PM
Artemis said...: o David Pearl, Here is what you emailed me, "It is not an oversight. The tables of delegates do NOT show Billary's delegates one digit off. Please notice the decimal point for the half delegate." this is the problem with Obama supporter, somehow, your truth is more true and we should all vote for your guy because you are so smart. You depicting the numbers to fool people is not constructive. I know you really want that, but just not true.
you say "The numbers are just not aligned. As for the new graph that depicts Senator Clinton's delegates taking a sharp dive, well, the graph accurately represents what is actually happening in comparison to momentum of increasing numbers of delegates for Obama." Again, we did not see the graph when she was so much ahead. double standard, I think so.
you say "Seating the FL &MI delegates would be in violation to the rules agreed to by HRC and BHO. I, for one, do not want a president who breaks rules and agreements. We have put up with that for the last two terms and I do not want more of the same!" I know you don't want Hillary presidency, but no matter how much you try to fool people, the truth that Hillary is the only one that can save us. Nobody is wanting you to change your vote, just don't force you idea onto others as forcefully as you are trying to do. get a grip of yourself my friend>; February 17, 2008 6:54 PM
MOJORISIN' said...: Protactinium,
I see that LittleMan is still around and so are you, here it is my man...........

Unless Hilliary can employ InfoUSA to get higher approval ratings, I think her insincerity will pull her down further.

I like that Obama looks forward with positive resolve, does not chronically blame and slander others, and is less anxious to use our military.

At 03:38 PM on 15 Feb 2008, Solomon G. wrote:
Republican Presidential Nominee?
Regarding the leading contenders,
McCain on the side of the Democrats and Hilary Clinton and Obama vying among the Republicans, we are prompted to ask two questions. How credible is each one of them? How predictable?
McCain is, in my opinion, both credible and predictable, if his track record is anything to go by.
As to the credibility of the Republican contenders, the fact that
they are running neck to neck shows
that both of them are 'so-so' in the
Primaries and caucuses so far. As for
predictability both seem to fall short of McCain. Therefore, to compete successfully against McCain,
the choice for the Republicans may
have to be among three and not two, the third being you know who.

At 03:58 PM on 15 Feb 2008, ryan b. wrote:
I saw Obama speak in Madison, WI this past Tuesday in front of 20,000 people. He had an autocue on each side of the podium but I never saw him staring at it. Maybe he was very familiar with the speech he was giving and didn't really need it.

At 04:22 PM on 15 Feb 2008, JB wrote:

The Clintons seem to think that the White House is theirs by 'right'.
What did they really do with their 8 years in residence? Bill was a grand orator but realistically, very shifty. Both are frighteningly desperate to get back in the big house at almost any price.
Their falling star can't all be due to a 'right wing conspiracy' as HRC has always argued in the past.Why are they surprised that the poorest sections of US society aren't that bothered about their impending demise? The answer is realy easy. What did they effectively do with all those years at the top for those most in need? Move off the stage for the love of God and the American people. Let a brilliant young,gifted,charismatic black man have a go.... if you're really democrats at heart. Which i doubt.
Obama could not do any worse than BC or GB, and could well move that nation a long way towards the reconcilement it so desperately needs within itself and with others. Obama is electable and acceptable to very many shades of opinion. The Clintons guarantee deadlock and stalemate for the lenght of their 'stay' in power.

At 04:47 PM on 15 Feb 2008, Peter Roberts wrote:
Obama has the style but not the content; it is annoying that Clinton is being cast aside by Obama’s campaign as a representative of ‘dynasty politics’ whilst in the same breath his campaign staffers compare him to being either the new Robert or John Kennedy. The biggest worry for myself as a pro-Democrat British citizen is that Obama (although not promising anything and remaining vague on the key issues) will suffer if elected President to win a second term. He is building-up hopes that can't be matched by even the greatest statesman. Good policy takes time to initiate and deliver - and if elected the results will not be seen straight away. I always remember a Turkish poet stating that the bigger the fanfare you come into office with, the bigger the disappointment you will be to the electorate when you leave. At the minute I'm sticking with Clinton for the long term strategy required and for pragmatic reasons - the very hope that Obama might bring to a new generation of Americans, if it fails to be translated into clear policies once in power, could be the catalyst for apathy in future elections. Also in relation to the autocue comments, Obama always appears lost when adlibbing and granted he is a good orator but compared to our parliamentarians he would be murdered at the despatch box on PMQs because of this lack of spontaneity.

At 04:47 PM on 15 Feb 2008, William Campbell wrote:
Could Clinton's slide and Obama's rise have something to do with McCain's virtual coronation? With the right losing their grip on the Republican nomination, taking a risk on the more radical figure might seem less dangerous.

If I had a vote in these primaries, I'd have been inclined to support Clinton as the candidate more likely to survive the heat of the main campaign and emerge victorious over Romney. Knowing that the worst we'll end up with is McCain I'd switch to Obama.

At 06:05 PM on 15 Feb 2008, Eben wrote:
Let's take a closer look at who's really qualified and or who's really working for the good of all of us in the Senate. Obama or Clinton.

Let's take a look at the "experience" of Senator Clinton

Senator Clinton, who has served only one full term - 6yrs. - and another year campaigning, has managed to author and pass into law - 20 - twenty pieces of legislation in her first six years.

These bills can be found on the website of the Library of Congress www.thomas.loc.gov, but to save you trouble, I'll post them here for you.

1. Establish the Kate Mullany National Historic Site.

2. Support the goals and ideals of Better Hearing and Speech Month.

3. Recognize the Ellis Island Medal of Honor.

4. Name courthouse after Thurgood Marshall.

5. Name courthouse after James L. Watson.

6. Name post office after Jonn A. O'Shea.

7. Designate Aug. 7, 2003, as National Purple Heart Recognition Day.

8. Support the goals and ideals of National Purple Heart Recognition Day.

9. Honor the life and legacy of Alexander Hamilton on the bicentennial of his death.

10. Congratulate the Syracuse Univ. Orange Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.

11. Congratulate the Le Moyne College Dolphins Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.

12. Establish the 225th Anniversary of the American Revolution Commemorative Program.

13. Name post office after Sergeant Riayan A. Tejeda.

14. Honor Shirley Chisholm for her service to the nation and express condolences on her death.

15. Honor John J. Downing, Brian Fahey, and Harry Ford, firefighters who lost their lives on duty. Only five of Clinton's bills are, more substantive. 16. Extend period of unemployment assistance to victims of 9/11.

17. Pay for city projects in response to 9/11 18. Assist landmine victims in other countries.

19. Assist family caregivers in accessing affordable respite care.

20. Designate part of the National Forest System in Puerto Rico as protected in the wilderness preservation system.

There you have it, the fact's straight from the Senate Record.

Now, I would post those of Obama's, but the list is too substantive, so I'll mainly categorize.

During the first - 8 - eight years of his elected service he sponsored over 820 bills. He introduced

233 regarding healthcare reform,

125 on poverty and public assistance,

112 crime fighting bills,

97 economic bills,

60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,

21 ethics reform bills,

15 gun control,

6 veterans affairs and many others.

His first year in the U.S. Senate, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427. These inculded **the Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 - became law, **The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act, - became law, **The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, passed the Senate, **The 2007 Government Ethics Bill, - became law, **The Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill, In committee, and many more.

In all, since entering the U.S. Senate, Senator Obama has written 890 bills and co-sponsored another 1096.

An impressive record, for someone who supposedly has no record according to some who would prefer that this comparison not be made public.

He's not just a talker.

He's a doer.

So, protactinium, here it is, run with it and get your self off this particular site. Go to another site .......MOJO; February 18, 2008 4:10 AM
just_thinking said...: new obama ad:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xqu3u9ISctA; February 18, 2008 6:03 AM
Tokar said...: New Wisconsin poll is out from American Research Group (ARG):

http://americanresearchgroup.com/

Clinton +6

49% - Clinton
43% - Obama
1% - someone else
7% - undecided

+/- - 4%
Sample size: 600 democratic pollers

Conducted from Feb 15-16.; February 18, 2008 8:42 AM
Steve said...: An Open Letter to Hillary Clinton from Another Wellesley College Alumna

Hillary, Will You Renounce Your Ties to Monsanto?

By LINN COHEN-COLE

Dear Hillary,

By polling logic, I should be your supporter -- Democrat, woman, white,
liberal. But this past summer I saw a News Hour show on farmers
committing suicide in Maharastra, India, which affected me deeply. I
started learning what was happening to farmers and to food and how the
Clintons are connected.

The News Hour piece said Monsanto, a US agricultural corporation, hired
Bollywood actors to sell illiterate farmers Bt (genetically engineered)
cotton seeds, promising they'd get rich from big yields. The expensive
seeds needed expensive fertilizer and pesticides (Monsanto's) and
irrigation. There is no irrigation there. Crops failed. Farmers had
immense debt and couldn't collect seeds to try again because Monsanto
seeds are "patented" as "intellectual property").

"Genetic Engineering is often justified as a human technology, one
that feeds more people with better food. Nothing could be further
from the truth. With very few exceptions, the whole point of genetic
engineering is to increase sales of chemicals and bio-engineered
products to dependent farmers."

David Ehrenfield: Professor of Biology, Rutgers University.

Monsanto has a $10 million budget and 75 person staff to prosecute farmers.

Since the late 1990s (as industrial agriculture took hold in
India),166,000 Indian farmers have committed suicide and 8 million have
left the land (P. Sainath, The Hindu). Farmers in Europe, Asia, Africa,
Indonesia, South America, Central America and here, have all protested
Monsanto and genetic engineering.

What does this have to do with you?

Your Orwellian-named "Rural Americans for Hillary" were Monsanto's
lobbyists. My greater concern, though, is you former-employer, Rose Law
Firm, representing Monsanto, world's largest GE (GE - genetic
engineering) corporation; Tyson, world's largest meat producer; Walmart,
the world's largest retailer. Rose is home to Industrial FOOD.

Rose's cozy connections: Jon Jacoby, senior at the Stephens Group - one
of the largest shareholders of Tyson, Walmart, DP&L - is C.O.B. of DP&L,
arranged the Wal-Mart deal. Jackson Stephens' Stephens Group staked
Walton, financed Tyson. Monsanto bought DP&L. Walmart's board invited
you on, Tyson executive helped you do $100,000 trade just before Bill'
governorship, Jackson Stephens backed Bill for Governor, then President
(donating $100,000).

Monsanto made Agent Orange, PCBs, nuclear weapons components,
pesticides, and with that diverse background in death, are now "doing"
food.

Bill in office:

USDA immediately significantly weakened chicken waste/contamination
standards, easing Tyson's poultry-factory expansion.

1. Monsanto people were put in charge of food, ...

2. FDA okayed Monsanto's rBGH (bovine growth hormone), first GE-product
ever approved.

3. Despite bovine illness/death, FDA didn't recall or warn.

4. When dairymen labeled milk "rBGH-free," USDA threatened confiscation.

5. Organic food was the last way around unknown danger. FDA tried to
close that escape with new "organic" standards, to include: genetic
engineering of plants/animals, food irradiation , sewage sludge fertilizer.
USDA backed down from public response 20 times greater than to anything
before American food:

Oils: Indian sheep died eating from Bt cotton fields. Our children
eat Bt cottonseed oil in peanut butter, cookies.

Grains: 49 per cent of corn acreage planted in Bt corn in 2007. A
French study indicates it causes kidney and liver toxicity. .
Monsanto controls US's two main crops, soy (90% GMO, 90% of traits
"belong" to Monsanto) and corn, the largest crop (60% GMO, nearly
100% Monsanto "owned" traits).

Meat: Steroids bulk athletes, Monsanto steroids fatten animals, our
fattening children eat steroid-laced meats. FDA allowed "known
TSE-positive (Transmissible spongiform encephalopathy Mad Cow
Disease) material to be used in pet food, pig, chicken and fish
feed." Monsanto's GE-hormone increases risk sick cows are entering
US food chain

Poultry: USDA weakened waste/contamination standards. Waste from
transnational poultry industry is now implicated as the source of
bird flu. The poultry industry is using the crisis to push out small
farmers.

Milk: Scientific studies indicate Monsanto's rBGH increases risks of
breast cancer by up to seven-fold, increases colon, prostate cancers
risks. Canada, 29 European nations, Norway, Switzerland, Japan, New
Zealand, Australia, South Africa ban U.S. rBGH dairy products.
Bill's USFDA put no restrictions, warning labels, or any labels.

*Control out of control.*

Monsanto's Terminator genes make plants sterile after one season, posing
apocalyptic risk of breaking out into nature. GE breakouts have
contaminated maize and weeds, already.

Monsanto, meat-packers, and the USDA are pushing NAIS (National Animal
Identification System), a corporate database tracking small farmers'
livestock.
Monsanto pushing state laws taking control from farmers, communities,
over GE planting.

Cattle living in filth, 12,000-year-old seed loss, poultry industry
implicated in bird flu, Mad Cow disease, bee colony collapse, poisoned
soil, depleted water, Superweed), lawsuits against farmers, loss of
family farms throughout the world, ... farmers committing suicide.
Industrial agriculture.

*Bees and farmers, dead canaries in that mine.*

Your proposed "Department of Food Safety" centralizes control over food
into whose hands? Tough talk on labeling "foreign" food but Bill
degraded US food and prevented minimally sane labeling. You never objected.

Monsanto uses child labor in India.

You take Monsanto donations. Blacks, our poorest group, have to eat
Monsanto's steroid/hormone/antibiotic-filled GE food. You take Monsanto
donations.

Who are you protecting? National Black Farmers Association, boycotting
Monsanto? Babies drinking rBGH milk? Women fearing breast cancer?
Despairing farmers? Suffering animals? Children fed
kidney-and-liver-toxic Bt-corn?

Or Monsanto?

I am a person before I am a woman. Your gender is irrelevant. Given
deadly threats to my grandchildren's future by your corporate
connections (Edwards was right), I don't believe your talk of "caring"
about Blacks/women/children/health/farmers/food.

I will vote for someone committed to small farmers - our ONLY real food
safety. Your friends, though, are the heart of an international
industrial agricultural nightmare.

Linn Cohen-Cole
Atlanta

Disclaimer. I am not a scientist. I have read for months on this
subject, and am including only a tiny portion of the horrifying things I
have learned. I am expressing my opinion as person and may be wrong.
Perhaps things are swell out there and rBGH is fabulous and TSE-laced
feed is great, and genetic engineering is the best thing since manna.
But I am scared for my family and I have not only a right to say so but
an obligation to do so. I am angry that Monsanto was allowed the
influence it had and has done the things it definitely seems to have. I
am disgusted by industrialization of every tender and beautiful part of
our world and hope, for all our children's sake, we are not too late to
pull back.; February 18, 2008 12:44 PM
Tokar said...: *yawn*...that letter lost me after the first paragraph.

It will never get any media attention, just like no one caring about Bhopal, India.; February 18, 2008 1:09 PM
just_thinking said...: Barack Obama and Joann Larkins live less than a mile apart in Chicago’s predominantly black South Side, but they inhabit very different worlds.

What connects her squalid flat and his colonnaded mansion is Antoin “Tony” Rezko, the former Obama donor and friend, who goes on trial for corruption next month - and was denounced as a “slum landlord” by Hillary Clinton in a dramatic and bitter exchange during last week’s Democratic presidential debate.

Mr Obama’s past ties to the Syrian-born property developer, a well-known figure in Chicago politics for his financial largesse, have prompted new questions about the sound political judgement and clean ethics that he touts in his run for the White House.

The charges against Mr Rezko include one that he donated $10,000 (£5,050) to an unnamed political candidate from kickbacks allegedly taken from state contracts. The recipient is reported by Chicago media to have been an unknowing Mr Obama.

“Community Organizer” Obama is nice and warm in his mansion. Mrs. Larkins recalls the Chicago cold:

Separately, in 2005, Mr Obama, 46, struck a property deal with Mr Rezko’s wife, Rita, despite the fact that her husband was already under criminal investigation. Mrs Rezko bought an empty plot next to the Obamas’ $1.65 million home in the affluent enclave of Hyde Park, and later sold the Obamas some of the land so that they could enlarge their plot - a deal that the Illinois senator has since admitted was “bone-headed”.

Mrs Larkins, 51, lives just seven city blocks away, in a district where posters advertise “dirt cheap properties” and “foreclosure advice”. She moved there almost a decade ago, taking a subsidised apartment with her 20-year-old daughter and one-year-old grandson in a building that had fallen into neglect when run by Mr Rezko.

The family boiled water on the stove and draped plastic sheeting across the windows in an effort to keep warm during the city’s bitter winters, as the heating was not working. Rubbish piled up uncollected and repeated requests for basic repairs were ignored.

“It was a terrible place to live: there were a lot of drug dealers and people fighting and getting shot,” Mrs Larkins, a widow who receives invalidity benefit, told The Sunday Telegraph.

“The owners never took any interest in the place; they just wanted the rent money. We had to call the city just to get the garbage collected.”

Obama’s long time friend and patron tormented Obama’s constituents. No one cared.

The 44-apartment complex was one of 30 low-income housing projects run by Mr Rezko and his partners with funds from the city during the 1990s. By early this decade, many were boarded up as bills and mortgage payments went unpaid, but Mr Rezko moved into the fast-food business, while tenants like the Larkins struggled with the legacy of his management.

Mr Rezko was also one of the first to spot the skills of Mr Obama, offering the then Harvard law graduate a job in 1991 and becoming an early financial supporter of the new state legislator, whose inner-city constituency included 11 of his housing projects.

Although Mr Obama makes much of his roots as a community activist in Chicago’s poorest districts, he has said he had “no inkling” that there were problems with Mr Rezko’s operations. But the signs should have been easy to spot, according to John Bartlett, of the Chicago-based Metropolitan Tenants’ Association.

“The problems with Rezko were far from hidden. They were so bad that the city has had to take him to court. Anyone who wanted to look into Rezko’s activities could have learned about them,” he said.

The failure of state senator Obama, to care, to protect his constituents, is masked once again with flowery words - Mrs. Larkins be damned:

Mr Obama has recently said that he “wasn’t particularly knowledgeable” about Mr Rezko’s activities. Asked if he should have investigated his donor’s businesses, Bill Burton, Mr Obama’s spokesman, said: “The senator has a long record of successfully fighting to reform ethics and diminish the role of money in politics.”

Maybe Mrs. Larkins will provide the names of other tenants so they can tell their neglected stories to Obama, via Big Media.

Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun-Times meanwhile, critiqued Obama’s appearance on ABC Sunday morning. Excerpts with Lynn Sweet analysis in parentheses:

Obama was told by the host, “One more time, Senator, you need to divulge all there is to know about that (Rezko) relationship. Take that opportunity here.”

Obama replied, “ Well, George, this is a story that has been out there for a year, and has been thoroughly gnawed on by the press, both in Chicago and nationally. “

(actually, it is not one story but an ongoing series of stories by the Sun-Times and Tribune, exploring the depths of the ties between the two men.)

“Tony Rezko was a friend of mine, a supporter, who I’ve known for 20 years. He was a contributor not just myself but Democrats, as well as some Republicans, throughout Illinois. Everybody perceived him as a businessman and developer.”

(earlier in the week in network interviews, Obama made it seem like he hardly knew Rezko.)

“ He got into trouble that was completely unrelated to me. And nobody has suggested that I have been involved in any of those problems. I did make a mistake by purchasing a small strip of property from him, at a time where, at that point, he was under thecloud of a potential investigation.

(Obama obscures the larger point that the strip was adjacent to his house and bought at the same time in a deal that seemed connected and gave Obama a financial advantage.)

“And I’ve acknowledged that that was a mistake. But again, nobody has suggested any wrongdoing. And you know, I think, at this point, it’s important for people to recognize that I have actually provided all the information that’s out there about it.

(Actually, last week I asked an Obama spokesman information about Rezko’s fund-raising activities for Obama and could not get a straight answer.)

Maybe Lynn Sweet and other reporters willl get some straight answers from Obama endorsers. Maybe, but for Obama the Chicago poor are out of political fashion.; February 18, 2008 1:10 PM
just_thinking said...: obama's new ad:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xqu3u9ISctA; February 18, 2008 1:11 PM
Tokar said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; February 18, 2008 2:00 PM
Carrie said...: Protactinium -
Hi! I just wanted to let you know I haven't dropped off the face of the earth. I had a lovely, long, and rare weekend with my hubby and daughter (he's an ER resident, so he works allllllll the time). I haven't had a chance to read the links you sent. I will. It certainly is a crap load of money we're talking about.

Speaking of my doc husband, we talked quite a bit about the health care proposal/s. I'll try to paraphrase his views sometime soon.

It's cool that you live in Chicago! (I was born 45 min NW of the city.)

I guess one upshot I see for these candidates is that the states that have experienced their influence and who know them best are excited to see them lead.

I'll get back soon.
-c; February 18, 2008 3:12 PM
Carrie said...: By the way, now...I do hope you're not suggesting that I haven't had to deal with my share of hate mongering here...

I would say that the dung is being slung from both directions - whether the candidates would approve or not. (I suspect generally not...)

Yours in a common vision,
Carrie; February 18, 2008 3:15 PM
Carrie said...: On just_thinking's ad post - it's not a Hillary ad. Don't blame that stuff on her, and I won't blame Obama for every piece of misleading or hateful garbage that targets Clinton.

Fair enough?; February 18, 2008 3:20 PM
Tokar said...: Polls in WI:
2-10 45-41 Obama [+4] (400)
2-12 50-39 Obama [+11] (642)
2-13 47-43 Obama [+4] (400)
2-14 47-42 Obama [+5] (852)
2-16 49-43 Clinton [+6] (600)
2-17 53-40 Obama [+13] (822)

Straight up average:
47.5 Obama
42.3 Clinton

Weighted average:
48.0 Obama
42.3 Clinton; February 18, 2008 3:33 PM
just_thinking said...: yer crazy protrator,

"Oh BTw have you ever been to new york? They have just as many ghettos and gangs. SO those are all Hillarys fault? Hillary produces gangs in NY. There ya go. I can smear to. However Hillary supporters you should stop throwing stones when your house is made of glass."

i moved to l.a. (where i now live)from n.y.(where i was born and raised) BTw

this is why all you said there is meaningless.

barack WAS a community organizer, with a goal and responsibilty of cleaning up crime and making a better way for his inner city district, which they elected him to do, thats my point he failed his own district in chicago, Failed to KEEP his promises, failed all the way up his ladder! would FAIL as president too!

besides chuck schumer takes responsibilty for ny city districts, hillary is the upstate gal, just in case ya didn't know?; February 18, 2008 4:50 PM
just_thinking said...: this is obamas accomplishments

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xqu3u9ISctA; February 18, 2008 5:01 PM
NO Obama said...: Today it is revealed the Barak Obama plagerized speeches and ideas, phrases, etc. from others' speeches.

So he is a fraud. Not only does he not have any original words of his own but his "ideas" are probably plagerized too.

Does it make a difference? Certainly!!

It goes to character (lack thereof) for not crediting the original speech maker like "As my friend Deval Patrick has said......"

He knows by doing that, he can't take full credit for being this BIG FRAUD INSPIRATION.

What else will he plagerize if he becomes President?

And this gives the repulicans something really HUGE to play with during the general election.

What else will be found out or even distorted (like the Kerry swiftboating) about him by the republicans?; February 18, 2008 5:23 PM
Old City Jim said...: Dear timeforchange

Whether Obama said "As my friend Deval Patrick has said......" or not, does not give one more American health insurance, or pre-school education, or remove one of our troops from Iraq. I cannot believe this is an issue.

Bobby Kennedy (my political hero) used to say, “Some people see things as they are and say why? I dream of things that never were, and say, why not?” It was not his original work, and he sometimes did not credit the original author of those words. Did that reflect poorly on his character? Did that make him a fraud?

If Obama can get this country out of Iraq, and improve our economy, I don’t care who he plagiarizes that plan from.; February 18, 2008 7:02 PM

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 1017 Newer› Newest»

Welcome to Democratic Convention Watch

Blog Archive

Democratic Convention 2008

Democratic National Convention History

Denver & Colorado Democrats

DCW in the News

Friends of DCW

2008 Republican National Convention

Monday, February 11, 2008

Open Thread

1017 comments:

Tags