Democratic Convention Watch: Open Thread

Tuesday, April 01, 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.

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.

And please be excellent to one another. We do not accept name calling or any attacks on our commenters. Any objectionable comments will be deleted. Try to be civil.

Thanks!

Previous Open Thread here
New Open Thread here

845 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 845 Newer› Newest»

ed iglehart said...: Yamaka,

"In world practice...."

of which you are the designated arbiter, not to mention the perpetuation of patriarchial views.....

COME ON! It's pure bull faeces.; May 03, 2008 10:11 AM
Amot said...: Ed, and all you who are interested in numbers - we have some results on GU page!; May 03, 2008 10:14 AM
ed iglehart said...: And now, for something completely amusing, from my favourite columnist,

THE GOOD THING ABOUT THE THREE CANDIDATES FOR THE PRESIDENCY is that none is a hair-trigger type who leaps to a conclusion before carefully digesting all the facts. We find that habit of measured response enormously reassuring, since one of the trio may have the fate of humanity thrust into his or her hands.

The last thing we want, after all, is some hothead in the White House whose reaction to anybody sticking his tongue out at us is to nuke 'em as fast he or she can press the red button. Such a grave decision ought to be made only after consultation with advisers and a careful mulling of all the options available.

Our calculation is that, worst case, the interval devoted to such prudent reflection between the insult being rendered and dropping the bomb wouldn't run more than 15 minutes max, since it's a given that the advisers, their brows furrowed as they think deep thoughts about their next meal, are chosen strictly on the basis of how fast they can shout "great" to anything the president says, including, "It's a nice day, if it doesn't rain."

The delay in exacting retribution, we submit, would be 15 minutes (max) well spent to gain the approval, perhaps, even the admiration, of the rest of the world for our remarkable restraint.

But, you may well ask, what makes us so confident that Messrs. McCain and Obama and Ms. Clinton possess the requisite patience to arrive at a considered decision on a matter of great consequence, no matter how severe the provocation?

Pure and simple, what convinced us was not their campaign blather or the endless stream of white papers about where they stood on the issues -- which only proved their dire need of a global-positioning system -- nor how cool they were or failed to be in the heat of debate. Rather, it was hard evidence furnished by their actions that revealed to us a becoming inclination to fully weigh the pros and cons before rendering a definitive opinion.

It took Mr. McCain, for example, five long years, when he could have been learning the difference between Sunni and Shiite or reading Proust from beginning to end, to arrive at the conclusion that the famous "Mission Accomplished" banner, hung on an aircraft carrier to congratulate Mr. Bush on the short and sweet end of the Iraq War, was somewhat premature.

And in a model display of serious deliberation, Mr. Obama spent 20 years most every Sunday dutifully listening to a reverend ranting on about this, that and the other thing, before he discovered that Mr. Wright was really Mr. Wrong.

Not to be outdone, Ms. Clinton, after a decade of moaning about a vast right-wing conspiracy, decided that the conspirators had merely been exercised about the unsavory appetites of her Pinocchio husband when he happened to be the nation's chief exec, and deep down were good old boys, especially if they were able to put you on TV or owned a newspaper.

There is a danger, we suppose, that all three of these presidential hopefuls, once elected, might be so predisposed against impulsively rushing to judgment that they would spend their first four years in office fruitlessly dithering and the next four years brooding over why they never accomplished anything in their first four years.

Still, after eight years of a president who never hesitated to make a decision but just couldn't seem to quite get the hang of making the right one, dithering doesn't sound all that bad.
A Work of Art; May 03, 2008 10:15 AM
Yamaka said...: "In world practice...."

of which you are the designated arbiter, not to mention the perpetuation of patriarchial views....."

Are you saying that this patriarchial view is non-existent or

it is there, and is wrong in your opinion?

If it is the former, then we live in two different world.

If it is the latter, I agree with you.

You may have to live in REAL world rather than in YOUR IDEAL world!

:-); May 03, 2008 10:18 AM
Pablo said...: Yamaka,

It's terribly hard to be persuaded that previous unsanctioned votes in FL and MI should now be counted "Because they just obeyed the State Law and went to the polls. Therefore, their votes and choice must be honored as is like any other Primary." Everyone went to the polls with full knowledge that those votes would never be counted, unlike all other primaries.

I agree that the voters of these states should not be punished, party leaders at both the state and national levels are to blame, and a revote of any kind would have been preferred.

Also, I don't think as you stated to "disregard what the Candidates said at the beginning of the Campaign.", is a very strong argument either. You make good points on many other ideas, but start off on really poor footing here.; May 03, 2008 10:35 AM
Yamaka said...: pablo:

On my main point, Gov Dean agrees with me. Please read his Meet the Press statements last week. He said "Peoples of MI and FL did not do anything wrong; only Officials and Politicians did. Therefore, their votes must be counted and their delegates seated, in my opinion".

This provides the basis of my opting for the Option #6 in DCW Boxes.

You know that HRC worked hard for ReVoting. But, BHO's people were non-cooperative, because they knew they would lose.

Tell me what is the logic of leaving two important bellwether States out when we choose a Nominee in a closely contested race? Absurd.

Cheers.; May 03, 2008 10:46 AM
Anonymous said...: Released: May 03, 2008
Zogby Poll: Obama Lead in NC Shrinks; He and Clinton Remain Deadlocked in Indiana; May 03, 2008 10:48 AM
Yamaka said...: jim:

Most probably we will have the

"Game Changer" on Wed morning.

Yes, the Tide is Changing!

:-); May 03, 2008 10:59 AM
jpsedona said...: Guam Update

"As of 12:40am Sunday, 5 out of the 21 precincts had been tallied, with Obama's count besting Clinton's 56% to 44%"

[12:40am = 10:49am Eatern]

In the race for chair/vice-chair [superdelegates], Lujan/Paulino team was significantly ahead in early voting. Paulino is endorsing Obama, Lujan is 'uncommitted' but assumed to be leaing to Obama.; May 03, 2008 11:00 AM
ed iglehart said...: Yamaka,

If we are to accept "world practice" as definitive and authoritative, then perhaps we should be learning Mandarin.

CIA Factbook:

Languages:
Mandarin Chinese 13.22%, Spanish 4.88%, English 4.68%, Arabic 3.12%, Hindi 2.74%, Portuguese 2.69%, Bengali 2.59%, Russian 2.2%, Japanese 1.85%, Standard German 1.44%, Wu Chinese 1.17% (2005 est.)
note: percents are for "first language" speakers only

Religions:
Christians 33.32% (of which Roman Catholics 16.99%, Protestants 5.78%, Orthodox 3.53%, Anglicans 1.25%), Muslims 21.01%, Hindus 13.26%, Buddhists 5.84%, Sikhs 0.35%, Jews 0.23%, Baha'is 0.12%, other religions 11.78%, non-religious 11.77%, atheists 2.32% (2007 est.)

I might note that, in my experience, one may be baptised in infancy, but only becomes truly Christian when 'confirmed' after reaching a designated age of "maturity", thus indicating CHOICE.

Patriarchial conventions are simply that - conventions, and not definitive.

A (wo)man should be taken at her/his word in matters regarding faith. I consider myself 'trans-Christian', in that I accept my cultural roots, but do not feel limited by them.

Jesus was/is cool, but so have been / are many others, including Lao Tzu

知者不言。言者不知。

Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Dorood/Peace
Namaste -ed; May 03, 2008 11:01 AM
Subodh said...: On Tuesday, Obama declared that he himself was surprised at Wright's outrages. But hadn't Obama told us that surprise about Wright is a result of white ignorance of black churches brought on by America's history of segregated services? How then to explain Obama's own presumed ignorance? Surely he too was not sitting in those segregated white churches on those fateful Sundays when he conveniently missed all of Wright's racist rants.

Obama's turning surprise about Wright into something to be counted against whites-- one of the more clever devices in that shameful, brilliantly executed, 5,000-word intellectual fraud in Philadelphia -- now stands discredited by Obama's own admission of surprise. But Obama's liberal acolytes are not daunted. They were taken in by the first great statement on race: the Annunciation, the Chosen One comes to heal us in Philly. They now are taken in by the second: the Renunciation.

Obama's newest attempt to save himself after Wright's latest poisonous performance is now declared the new final word on the subject. Therefore, any future ads linking Obama and Wright are preemptively declared out of bounds, illegitimate, indeed "race-baiting" (a New York Times editorial, April 30).

On what grounds? This 20-year association with Wright calls into question everything about Obama: his truthfulness in his serially adjusted stories of what he knew and when he knew it; his judgment in choosing as his mentor, pastor and great friend a man he just now realizes is a purveyor of racial hatred; and the central premise of his campaign, that he is the bringer of a "new politics," rising above the old Washington ways of expediency. It's hard to think of an act more blatantly expedient than renouncing Wright when his show, once done from the press club instead of the pulpit, could no longer be "contextualized" as something whites could not understand and only Obama could explain in all its complexity.

Hussein Obama YOU ARE A LIAR & THE BIGGEST FRAUD ATTEMPTED ON THE INNOCENT AND GULLIBLE & HONEST PEOPLE OF THE USA. You will NEVER be the President of USA; May 03, 2008 11:05 AM
jpsedona said...: page in Jax ,

"My point is simple: if the delegates are gonna be seated, BO should NOT get all 55 uncommitted from MI"

The reality is that the candidates compete to select the uncommitted delegates. If Hillary were to compete and sit all uncommitted delegates that were dedicated to her, she'd get them all. The reality is that during the competition at the district level, Obama won the majority. So, your opinion means nothing... competing for the uncommitted... priceless.; May 03, 2008 11:05 AM
jpsedona said...: Yamaka,

"On my main point, Gov Dean agrees with me."

You don't know tat he agrees with you; no one knows. He gave no indication on how the delegation gets seated. So, to assume that it will be in full, to be penalized a 1/2 vote, seated in some other proportion is just speculation.

The only thing that we know for certain is that Dean wants MI & FL to be seated in some fashion. That's it. He has not supported any proposal related to seating the delegation. So, Option 6 could be true. So, could any of the other options, as well as the Levin compromise, or a plan yest to be thought of.; May 03, 2008 11:12 AM
Dave in NC said...: jp,

I only have knowledge of CD-9. Early polling place backed up out the door for 2 solid weeks now.

A LOT of Obama buttons, and heavily his demographic.

Yam,

I can't met you at that line. The Wet Willy the police are going to give you would ruin my contacts. Also, we can't share a beer if your bottle is full of gasoline.

I think the fact that you are a Clinton supporter is going to weigh more heavily against her than anyone Obama has been associated with will weigh against him. :)

Also, Yam, since you know what the weather is every day even without having left your dark basement for 20 years, does that make YOU the weather underground? :); May 03, 2008 11:19 AM
jpsedona said...: Jim,

The Zogby polls have been showing undecided in the mid teens. It's so far off of the undecided in other polls as to be questionable. Do you really believe that Hillary only has 37% support in NC at this point???

However, the Zogby margin of 9 points seems to be in line with other recent polls.

Based on the RCP average, Obama's lead still seems to be holding steady in the 7-9% range.; May 03, 2008 11:20 AM
jpsedona said...: Guam update

"With nearly half of Guam's 21 voting precincts having now been tabulated in the Guam Democrat Caucus, Barack Obama is building upon his lead over Hillary Clinton. 10 island municipalities have been accounted for as of 1:50am Sunday, with Obama garnering 53% of the 1,348 votes, leading Clinton's 47%"

[1:50am = 11:50 Eastern]

In the race for chair/vice-chair [superdelegates], Lujan/Paulino team (1 of 3 on ballot) still holds a significant lead.; May 03, 2008 12:03 PM
Yamaka said...: dave nc:

I like the humor.

WSJ ran a WeatherCouple article and BHO.

Not about me!

A 527 Ad is on the way, watch out!
________________________________

Ed:

I know we are like two parallel lines, which will never meet!

I don't get your Mandarin logic and BHO being born to a Muslim father (and a secular mother)! 99.99% of the world population goes with father's family name and religion unless they change it legally.

Can't you handle simple historical facts?

________________________________

jp:

Your point is well taken.

I did not say Dean chose Option # 6.

Option 6 is my choice, and I hope that it will be the choice of Alexis Herman's Committee Members/Members of the Credential Committee.
______________________________

Cheers.; May 03, 2008 12:41 PM
ed iglehart said...: Yamaka,

"99.99% of the world population goes with father's family name and religion unless they change it legally."

And 97.4% of all such statistics are made up on the spur of the moment.

Can't you handle simple historical facts?

xx
ed; May 03, 2008 12:44 PM
ed iglehart said...: Yamaka,

In particular, Jewishness is carried in the matrilineal line, and many cultures, e.g. Icelandic, do not use purely patriarchial naming systems. Certainly far more than 0.01% of the world would consider your statements stupid.

xx
ed; May 03, 2008 12:48 PM
Yamaka said...: "So, your opinion means nothing... competing for the uncommitted... priceless".

But as you said earlier it is still technically "uncommitted", because that is what the original voters said at the time of voting.

Can delegates change the will of the voters?

This "Uncommitted" is really a major headache.

:-); May 03, 2008 12:48 PM
Yamaka said...: "And 97.4% of all such statistics are made up on the spur of the moment."

Where did you get that number from?

At least will you agree that vast vast majority follow paternal family names and the religion until they change it legally?

You IDEAL world appears to be floating in the sky!!!!!!

:-); May 03, 2008 12:53 PM
jpsedona said...: For those of you interested in the 'popular vote', the Columbia Journalism Review released an interesting article comparing the various methodologies of the media.

They sepcifically focus on the four caucus states that did not report popular vote and the variances associated with various media sources.

They do not draw any conclusions other than we will probably never have an agreed to toal for those 4 states.

The Inestimable Popular Vote Estimates

Enjoy...; May 03, 2008 1:05 PM
ed iglehart said...: Yamaka,

""And 97.4% of all such statistics are made up on the spur of the moment."

Where did you get that number from?"

I'll leave you toguess!

;-); May 03, 2008 1:05 PM
Pablo said...: I couldn't agree more that the voters of Michigan and Florida are not to blame........but that does not equate to "Therefore, their votes must be counted and their delegates seated".

A revote....of any kind would have been preferable.
Or perhaps, if Harold Ickes along with the other 11 Clinton supporters on the 30-member committee had better forsight and chosen a different outcome -- and not voted to strip Michigan and Florida of their delegates as punishment for disobeying the DNC primary calendar schedule.; May 03, 2008 1:05 PM
jpsedona said...: Guam update

With 12 of 21 precincts reporting, Obama is holding an 8% lead. Guam's largest village, Dededo, has yet to be tallied.; May 03, 2008 1:07 PM
jpsedona said...: Yamaka,

I agree that those delegates not committed to a candidate can change their minds at any time. This is what we have seen with the Clinton defectors, right?; May 03, 2008 1:11 PM
jpsedona said...: An interesting observation from Guam results, Hillary edged out Obama in Barrigada. Maybe Hillary has bought one of the $1,000,000+ homes on the heights?

The Lujan/Paulino team retains a sizeable lead in the race for chair/vice-chair [superdelegates]. The Lujan/Paulino team has about the same number of votes as the other two teams. Paulino is endorsing Obama, Lujan is 'uncommitted' but assumed to be leaing to Obama.; May 03, 2008 1:24 PM
jpsedona said...: UPDATED:

SD Activity since PA:

Obama: +15 new commitments - incl. SC (1), MD (1)
Obama: +1 switched from Hillary

Hillary: +12 new commitments - incl. MD (1)
Hillary: -1 switched to Obama

Obama now holds a 16-11 margin in SD endorsements since PA. Total includes 4 NY add-ons on 5/1, 2 MD add-ons on 5/3, 1 SC add-on 5/3.

There are 6 additional add-ons before Tuesday: Guam (2), LA (1) and IL (3). Best estimates indicate 5 of 6 will go for Obama; plus 1 uncommitted (Guam).

So, projections since PA:

Obama: +20 (65%)
Hillary: +11 (35%)

If Hillary needs about 60% of the uncommitted superdelegates, this is not a good trend.; May 03, 2008 1:56 PM
Yamaka said...: "I couldn't agree more that the voters of Michigan and Florida are not to blame........but that does not equate to "Therefore, their votes must be counted and their delegates seated".--publo

If you agree with the observation that voters of MI and FL are not to blame, then why don't you count their votes,and seat their delegates?

In this issue the stakeholders are
(in the order of importance IMO)

1. Primary Voters and their Rights
2. State Govt and their Rights
3. Democratic Party and their Rules
4. Candidates and their views.

I believe the Primary voters' Rights trump everything else.

The Officials/Politicians screwed up the Rule. Therefore, punish them somehow, and NOT the voters.

Votes are holier than Pope. Therefore, count ALL votes and seat ALL delegates, as per Primary math.
That's the Option # 6 in DCW.

Cheers.; May 03, 2008 2:02 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Yamaka-
The needle on your record is stuck - Just because you 'wish' something does not make it right.

They can not seat the MI and FL delegates as is - it was an invalid unfair poll.

When the public is told that an election WILL NOT count and people stay home and do not vote - then they can't turn around and then say that it will count as is.

This is AMERICA not Russia!

OBAMA / Kathleen Sebelius '08; May 03, 2008 2:15 PM
jpsedona said...: Yamka,

"1. Primary Voters and their Rights"

Alas, how many voters didn't show up at the polls because their candidate was not on the ballot? We will never know. So, have their rights been infringed? I think there's a fair argument to say yes.

What we do know is that if the MI primary were held today? Well, the polls from mid April showed Obama beating McCain beating by 2pts; and Hillary losing to McCain by a wide margin.

You would like all the votes to count, even though all the votes may not have been cast.

Sen. Levin, an Obama supporter, and others who caused the problem are to blame. Why shouldn't they be penalized for creating this mess? Why seat the SD's with full voting privledges considering that they were the Dem leaders that could have avoided the whole issue?; May 03, 2008 2:24 PM
Yamaka said...: "When the public is told that an election WILL NOT count and people stay home and do not vote -"

Did the State Gov tell this to the citizens? No...No... as Wright says

Do you know who has the legal authority to run Primary in a State?

DNC/RNC has NO Right in running the Primary/GE in the States. The Right goes to the States! They can run any day they want.

Understand, the Law and Procedure.

We will NEVER allow this Primary stolen by some BigMoneyBags of the Skinny Guy with the Funny Name!!

DNC will/must count ALL votes. ALL delegates will be seated.

Otherwise, the Party will be destroyed from bottom up!

Wait and See.

:-); May 03, 2008 2:24 PM
RobH said...: "Did the State Gov tell this to the citizens? No...No... as Wright says"

Wow, Ijeomi, really surprised to see you using Wright as a symbol of authority.; May 03, 2008 2:33 PM
jpsedona said...: Yamaka,

"DNC/RNC has NO Right in running the Primary/GE in the States. The Right goes to the States! They can run any day they want.

Understand, the Law and Procedure"

As a matter of "LAW", primaries for a party's nomination are NOT the same as a GE. You should follow your own advice "Understand the Law and Procedures".

If it was a matter of LAW, then the courts wouldn't have thrown out the Nelson's FL appeal to the courts. The states have the right to set their dates however they want. They do not have any rights with respect to the convention or whether the delegates can be seated. That's up to the party.

If the RNC or DNC came up with a rule that said "we won't seat any state beinning with the letter 'M"", that would be the RULE (no matter how stupid). It's not a matter of law how deligates get selected or in what proportion to other sates their votes at a convention should count.

The GE is a matter of law & constitution. BIG DIFFERENCE.; May 03, 2008 2:34 PM
Yamaka said...: "Alas, how many voters didn't show up at the polls because their candidate was not on the ballot? We will never know".

Jp:

Please remember that there were lot other matters on the ballot to be voted on. Therefore, most of those normally go to polls went to polls, I assume. They voted for the Primary candidates and the other issues on the ballot.

We CANNOT do anything about people who did not go to polls. Only about 20% of the eligible voters go to Primaries in any Election Cycle. What happens to the 80%? They just forfeited their rights by not obeying the State Law!!

"What we do know is that if the MI primary were held today?"

This is impossible. HRC tried for REVOTING, and BHO refused to cooperate! So, who is the trouble maker?

Where is the "Uniter" here when we needed?

:-); May 03, 2008 2:35 PM
RobH said...: "the Skinny Guy with the Funny Name"

Now there's a real compelling reason to not support a certain candidate. He has a funny name....

Is this what it's come to?
This is part of your arsenal?
The more you write, the funnier you get.; May 03, 2008 2:36 PM
jpsedona said...: Yamaka,

"They just forfeited their rights by not obeying the State Law!! "

It's obvious you don't know anything about law. There is no such thing as "obeying the State Law" with respect to the primaries. You are without a clue.; May 03, 2008 2:39 PM
Yamaka said...: "The states have the right to set their dates however they want. They do not have any rights with respect to the convention or whether the delegates can be seated. That's up to the party"

Fine, I agree. My point was States have the right to set the dates. Now we agree.

My argument to the Democratic Party is if the Party wants to be the National Party of ALL States then they have the obligation to accept the voters choice from MI and FL (because voters did not do anything wrong) and seat their delegates.

It is possible that in czarist arrogance the Party may not seat the delegates. Then the grieved people have the right to destroy the Party as they deem it appropriate. That's the issue here!

We want to tell the world loud and clear how undemocratic the Democratic Party has become, and because of it how our Candidate lost the Nomination. With that scar on the face of the Dem Party, let them go to GE and face the music!

Remember again, the voters of MI and FL did not violate any Rule or Law. They just obeyed the State Law, period.

Cheers.; May 03, 2008 2:47 PM
Yamaka said...: "There is no such thing as "obeying the State Law" with respect to the primaries".

The legislature moves/passes a Bill setting the date and the Governor signs it into State Law authorizing the Sec of State to conduct the Primary using the resources of the State. What do you call it, if it is not the State Law, anyway?

(Plus, on the ballot there are many other issues to be voted on. The State Law approves all those other items too).

:-); May 03, 2008 2:53 PM
Yamaka said...: 'He has a funny name...."

This is how he introduced himself to the Nation on the eve of his wonderful speech before the Convention in 2004!

They are his words.... not mine.

Just words.......

:-); May 03, 2008 2:56 PM
jpsedona said...: In a speech today, Hillary said she was "39 points behind" in North Carolina when the campaign started in NC.

Another Bosnia Like Moment?

Hillary started from 39% behind? Is this another Bosina moment? Or is she just so confused from answering those 3am calls?

Going back to Nov (RCP), Hillary was UP BY 24%. The largest margin Obama had in any of the reported polls was a PPP poll on 4/20 when he had a 25% lead. Significantly different than other polls taken at the same time.

If you ignore the PPP polls (outliers), most other polls at the time show Obama in the teens and no better than a 23%. Even some of those polls are questionable.

But down 39%???? Sounds good, but shows one of those Hillary moments and lack of affinity for the truth.; May 03, 2008 3:00 PM
jpsedona said...: Yamaka,

You miss the point of my question about State Law. You said:

"They just forfeited their rights by not obeying the State Law!! "

If voters did not obey the state Laws then they disobeyed State Laws. So exactly what law did the VOTERS disobey???; May 03, 2008 3:04 PM
RobH said...: Hey jp, I'll do ya' one better.

Here's what she said:
"she was "39 points behind" in North Carolina when the campaign started in NC."

When would you say "the campaign started"?

As late as November, she was UP 24 points.

I gues it depens on what the meaning of the word "in" is.; May 03, 2008 3:17 PM
Yamaka said...: "If voters did not obey the state Laws then they disobeyed State Laws. So exactly what law did the VOTERS disobey???"

The State Law I refer to is something like this: "Primary is set on such and such date in Jan. Go and vote for the Primary candidate AND other issues on the ballot".

About 3 million people went to the polls, voted for the Candidate or "Uncommitted". Those who did not vote, forfeited their vote on that issue on the ballot.

Where is the problem?

:-); May 03, 2008 3:20 PM
Yamaka said...: "lack of affinity for the truth".

Yes, he lacks affinity for the truth:

1. I have never been a Muslim
2. I have worked just 5 h for Rezko, that's it.
3. I don't know of Wright speaking with anti-American rhetorics in the last 20 years.
4. Ayers just lives in my neighborhood. That's it.
5. I don't get PAC or Special Interest money.
The list goes on and on and on.

:-); May 03, 2008 3:29 PM
RobH said...: It used to be said that, with the Clinton's, every single statement had a purpose, everything was thought out; subtle or not, they were masters of message and management of the process.

No more. They will now say anything. Stretch any truth, adopt any position, pander any vote.

Masters when dominant, but so, so frantic when they don't own the game. They are so unsteady and ballistic under fire, it's unsettling.

Not the steady hand(s) I want running the show.; May 03, 2008 3:29 PM
jpsedona said...: RobH,

How about she went from 24% up to 39% down. I would think that a 63% plummet might have caught someone's attention.; May 03, 2008 3:50 PM
jpsedona said...: Yamaka,

you've now said:

"They just forfeited their rights by not obeying the State Law!! "

and

"The State Law I refer to is something like this: 'Primary is set on such and such date in Jan. Go and vote for the Primary candidate AND other issues on the ballot'".

You're not implying that voters are REQUIRED to vote are you? Because your first statement implies that they disobeyed a law.; May 03, 2008 3:54 PM
jpsedona said...: Guam Update

With 3 precincts to go (large ones), Obama's percentage margin is now under 6% but continues to extend the number of votes he's leading by. It's looking like the pledged delegates will split 2-2.

In the vote for chair/vice-chair, the team of Pilar & Paulino has what looks to be an insurmountable lead at this point. Paulino is endorsing Obama, Lujan is 'uncommitted' but assumed to be leaing to Obama.; May 03, 2008 4:01 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Pretty good day today!

As it looks now it looks like today will end up being:

Obama +6
Clinton +3

OBAMA '08 - our next POTUS!!!; May 03, 2008 5:07 PM
Yamaka said...: As of this minute, as per DCW BHO leads barely by 8 total delegates and HRC leads by 122K popular votes.

Nothing has changed much.

Tomorrow HRC is walking into Lions Den to face the Nation.

She will come giggling, which would send shivers through the spins of the Skinny Guy!! Because HE could NOT go for a Debate!!

What a bone-head not Debating during a Primary!!

Oh Ya,, he believes in his Money, she believes in her Message.

Wed morning will have the Game Changer.
_________________________________

jp:
It is not required for anyone to go to polls including the GE.

But if you want your votes to get counted, you MUST go to the polls and cast the ballot. Otherwise, you lose it, period.

This is simple common sense!

:-); May 03, 2008 6:05 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: As of now the DCW box (that counts) shows:

Obama 1733
Clinton 1604

Obama leads by +129

Matt or Oreo said on another page that they know that the box with MI and FL is not right because it won't be count as is - but DCW is only leaving it up on the page because of 'tradition' - since they put it up four months ago.

The FIRST BOX on the top left is the only one that COUNTS.

OBAMA '08 - our next POTUS!

*Monday will be a great day for Obama when he picks up the three Illinois add-on delegates :); May 03, 2008 6:19 PM
Dave in NC said...: Hey all!

Big Brown just won the Kentucky Derby and Big Black just won the Guam derby!

Excuse me, too many mint julips; May 03, 2008 6:20 PM
jpsedona said...: Dave,

I believe what you meant to say was that the winning horse left the Filly way back in the dust...; May 03, 2008 6:26 PM
Dave in NC said...: jp,

Yeah, that was it!; May 03, 2008 6:34 PM
Yamaka said...: Just ABC said, Guam is nearly tied.

Sunday will be Hillary's Day. She gets free air time live coast to coast.

Message Matters, Stupid.

Not Money!

The Big Loser will hit Hyde Park very soon.

:-); May 03, 2008 6:39 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Senator Obama will have one full hour Sunday morning on MEET THE PRESS. Check your local tv schedules - it probably will air more than one time during the day/evening.

OBAMA '08; May 03, 2008 6:44 PM
Yamaka said...: It appears Skinny is losing IN for sure in spite of spending 3:1, as in TX, OH and PA Primaries!

What does this mean?

IL is just next door!

There is White Flight.

He cannot hide his hypocrisy, ignorance and ineptitude behind the facade of "Fuzzy Talk".

People see him through that thin veneer!

:-) Vote For Hillary.; May 03, 2008 6:48 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: THE FILLY IS DEAD!

Kentucky Derby Horse Eight Belles Dies On Track

Eight Belles, the runner-up, was euthanized on the track minutes after the race when she collapsed with two broken front ankles.

*** I guess betting on the 'filly' wasn't a good idea for those that had.; May 03, 2008 6:59 PM
Dave in NC said...: Obama lead expands to 5% in Hispanic Guam where he didn't even campaign!

Obama to win in IN and SLAUGHTER in NC on Tuesday.

Goodby to the Monster.; May 03, 2008 7:00 PM
jpsedona said...: Yamaka,

"It appears Skinny is losing IN for sure in spite of spending 3:1, as in TX, OH and PA Primaries"

It looks like Hillary will pick up 1 delegate at the district level in IN and maybe 2 with the statewide. Obama is looking at picking up 11 in NC based on delegate splits and 7% margin statewide.

Again it seems like she can't seem to knock him on his back when he's been on his knees (praying?)...; May 03, 2008 7:03 PM
Yamaka said...: As per REALClearPolitics,

Hillary beats McCain by 3.1%
BHO beats him by only 0.1%

NYT says today,

Suddenly NC becomes very tight!

White Flight!!

But there is Coronation in Hyde Park!

Wright, Ayers, Rezko and Rashid Khalidi in attendance! Only Loonies are welcome!!

:-); May 03, 2008 7:07 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Sen. Barack Obama wins Guam's Democratic presidential caucuses by 7 votes!

Now will the media start asking why Hillary couldn't beat him ?

OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA '08; May 03, 2008 7:07 PM
Yamaka said...: "Again it seems like she can't seem to knock him on his back when he's been on his knees (praying?)..."

Praying Allah for mercy and compassion!

Interesting imagery. lol

Wait for Wed.

:-); May 03, 2008 7:10 PM
ed iglehart said...: Yamaka,

"in spite of spending 3:1, as in TX, OH and PA Primaries!

What does this mean? "

It means folk are voting 3:1 with their dollars.

xx
ed; May 03, 2008 7:11 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: BREAKING NEWS ON CNN ---

Sen. Barack Obama wins Guam's Democratic presidential caucuses by 7 votes!

OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA '08; May 03, 2008 7:12 PM
jpsedona said...: There were 420 'spoiled' ballots in the Guam caucus. With only a 7 vote margin, do I hear echoes like hangiing chads? Hold onto your hats to see if the official numbers when reported get challenged.; May 03, 2008 7:17 PM
Yamaka said...: "It means folk are voting 3:1 with their dollars."

Yes, BigMoneyBags are dumping the counterfeit money at the money launderer!

In spite of that much money, Skinny is losing big time in big primaries!

Do you hear the cries of whining coming from IN and NC? lol.

:-); May 03, 2008 7:31 PM
Pablo said...: It's a strong MANDATE from the people of Guam . lol

They have spoken loudly for the skinny guy with a funny name.; May 03, 2008 7:58 PM
jpsedona said...: Obama has picked up an interesting endorsement from Friends of the Earth. Are you listening Al Gore? They previously endorsed John Edwards.

The reason for the endorsement is most interesting:

"Friends of the Earth Action cites senator’s stand for real energy solutions instead of sham Clinton-McCain ‘gas tax holiday’ as key reason for endorsement".

National Environmental Group Endorses Barack Obama for President; May 03, 2008 8:15 PM
jpsedona said...: Wow, and after turning to the dark side, another SD changes sides (humor)!

Prominent Superdelegate moves from Hillary Clinton; May 03, 2008 8:20 PM
Pablo said...: Here's some irony for you. Hillary while campaigning mentioned some should put a couple bucks on the Philly to win the upcoming Kentucky Derby.

Big Brown ending up winning edging out the Philly Eight Belles, who after finishing runner-up had to be euthanized and put out of her misery.; May 03, 2008 8:48 PM
Nella said...: Leah said...
THE FILLY IS DEAD!

Kentucky Derby Horse Eight Belles Dies On Track

Eight Belles, the runner-up, was euthanized on the track minutes after the race when she collapsed with two broken front ankles.

*** I guess betting on the 'filly' wasn't a good idea for those that had

Really, Leah, and pablo, sounds a bit heartless. Not members of PETA, we see. (no comment on your insinuations about the woman in this race.); May 03, 2008 8:59 PM
Yamaka said...: "They have spoken loudly for the skinny guy with a funny name."

Yes, Guam is such a crucial bellwether like OH and PA!! lol

Any guess, Which way the NC would go?

I predict it is nearly a tie +/- 5% either side.

White Flight has started.

Only the good folks of Blacks, and some mis-educated affluent Whites are hanging to this Insurgent Mud Horse!

Folks, this Mud Horse will NOT cross Nile, Ganges or MS/MO!
It will melt away in the rapid waters!

Get off soon or will get drowned to meet the Devils of Hell!

:-) Vote for Hillary, the Genuine American Classic.; May 03, 2008 9:03 PM
Yamaka said...: "Here's some irony for you"

publo:

Wonderful morbid irony.

Enjoy it to your kind heart!

The Day of Judgment is not too far away, my friend.

IN and NC will give you cold shivers!

:-(; May 03, 2008 9:20 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Nella-

You are correct I do not belong to PETA. But I am an animal lover and own a dog that I love dearly and when I lived in the country I had a menagerie of animals.

I do not believe I am heartless. I was shocked when I read the headline. I was posting nothing more that what was in the news and my one comment about betting on the 'filly' was only included because Hillary had linked the horse race with politics the other day.

I think instead of worrying about how people talk about a horse we should be more concerned about how some people talk about other human beings.

Ciao!; May 03, 2008 9:24 PM
Yamaka said...: "my one comment about betting on the 'filly' was only included because Hillary had linked the horse race with politics the other day."

A majestic macabre morbidity!

:-(; May 03, 2008 9:41 PM
Pablo said...: Actually, I thought the irony was that a horse named Big Brown edged out the Filly horse on the same down Obama appears to have barely squeaked by Hillary in Guam.

I was saddened watching the race on tv today learning the animal had to be destroyed.

However, I have chuckled before reading some of the Darwin awards, so if that labels me morbid.....I guess I am.; May 03, 2008 9:50 PM
Evan said...: Yamaka:

Did Hillary Clinton or the Hillary Clinton Campaingn sign or not sign an agreement that the results of the primary in MI would not coumt?

I have seen the agreement that was signed by the various campaingns, including the Hillary Clinton Campaign for Fl. It is clear to me that all candidates including Hillary, agreed that the results of the Fl Primary would have no standing.

Are you now telling me that the Hillary Clinton Campaign wants to back out of a solumn agreement? If so, where is the trust here? I've worked for 40 plus years as a consultant to large industry, and all of the work done by my company was done on my hand shake. I would never dream of backing out of an agreement even if it turned out to result in a loss to myself.; May 03, 2008 10:15 PM
Dave in NC said...: Obama adds to his ever widening lead in numbers of primaries & caucuses won and comes closer to the magic 2024 in delegate count.

Also adds to his remarkable 611K+ lead in popular vote (per Real Clear Politics), not that popular vote matters since ONLY delegate count will get you nominated.

Although it's almost anticlimatic in this post-competition winding down of the campaign, it is interesting to note how the Hispanic voters have abandoned Clinton even though Obama didn't campaign in Guam.

Minority groups just don't like to associate themselves with a loser.

Pity the deal will be done before PR gets to vote and further illustrate this point.

Cheers and smile for the first good Democrat in the WH since Carter.

"Always bet on black" -Wesley Snipes, Passenger 57; May 03, 2008 10:20 PM
Yamaka said...: "It is clear to me that all candidates including Hillary, agreed that the results of the Fl Primary would have no standing".

What happens to the sanctity of the votes cast by about 3 million voters who just followed the State Law for Primary Date?

Just trash them!

In Full Inclusive Democracy ALL votes are counted, and ALL their delegates are seated, period IMHO.

You may have different political philosophy.

What candidates did is just irrelevant here.

Votes are priceless.

In a very close race like this one, every vote MUST be counted.

That is fair and legitimate.

You can go after some illegitimate process. I will NOT, period.

The whole world is watching and the non-partisan American voters - nearly 50 million not voted in the Primary- are watching how legitimate the process followed by the Democratic Party! Accordingly, they will deliver their verdict for an illegitimate process, if MI and FL are not counted.

Cheer, Smile and Vote for Hillary.; May 03, 2008 10:29 PM
Yamaka said...: Legitimate Delegate Count: 2208

Illegitimate Count: 2024!

Let BHO jump over 2208 hurdle I will clap for him! A fair and clean play.

Otherwise, keep your peace for another day.

See you in NC!

:-); May 03, 2008 10:34 PM
Dave in NC said...: Yam,

Ironically, Obama will probably exceed 2208 at the convention even if FL & MI are net seated.

Also ironic is that 2208 is illegitimate until the point at which FL & MI will not change or determine the outcome of the nomination - per Howard Dean.

This means that the easiest way for FL & MI to get seated is for Clinton to drop out.

But I believe she should wait for now as several more states await there turn to spit on her.; May 03, 2008 10:49 PM
Dave in NC said...: Yam,

Obama doesn't need you to clap for him.

He won Texas without you.; May 03, 2008 10:51 PM
Yamaka said...: "He won Texas without you".

He lost Texas Primary by 4%.

The TX Caucus result depends on what we do on June 6th at the State Convention at Austin.

You have the right to spin whatever you want to spin, my friend.

White Flight has started in a big way.

Wait for IN and NC. Wait till Wed.

:-); May 03, 2008 10:58 PM
Dave in NC said...: Obama's lead in NC widens consistently over the past week.

Obama ahead in IN.

-Real Clear Politics (but probably not so clear to Hellary and her spin-sters); May 03, 2008 11:10 PM
Yamaka said...: Folks:

At this minute, BHO is leading HRC by just 9 total delegates (Option 6 DCW)

She is leading BHO by 122 K popular votes (RCPolitics)

There are about 718 + 32 + 55 undecided.

We may have a fight at the Convention.

Keep your powder dry.

Meet you at the Convention, if it all it opens in Aug end.; May 03, 2008 11:15 PM
Bob in Vancouver said...: Yamaka:

The lack of an answer to my question speaks volumes.

The facts are:

Primaries were held in Mi and Fl as per the state legislation.

Registered Democrats and others, voted or didn't vote for their own reasons accordingly.

The votes were counted.

The votes were recorded.

However, the agreement among the various Campaigns and the DNC was that the vote would have no standing in the nomination of the Presidential Candidate.

Your point that in a democracy, all votes are to be counted, is a mute point. It has no berring on the Nomination process.

I would agree with you if the Pimaries were an election, but the Primaries are not a democratic process. They are not one man one vote.

Hence the reason for the major differences in delegates per vote among districts, counties, caucuses, and even states. Those differences can be dramatic as evidenced by the Guam delegate per vote.

Your arguement has no merit and would never stand up in a court of law. Should either candidate try to abandon the agreement that was signed, after everyone was aware of the situation, will no doubt result in litigation.

Now, there is something we need again: Another Florida 2000.; May 03, 2008 11:16 PM
Dave in NC said...: Yam,

What YOU will likely be doing on June 6 is mourning the defeat of your candidate.

Obama will be the only candidate left to allocate those remaining delegates to.

Obama could not pull off victory without the large group of delegates he received as a result of his adoring voters going to the Texas polls and putting behind them the myriad inane issues that you haven't yet been able to get over.

Perhaps if Texas Democrats pulled together and focused on delivering that great state to the People's Party in November, then we wouldn't have to just write Texas off as a forfeit.

I know we are working very hard to that end in NC, and the polls say it is working.; May 03, 2008 11:22 PM
Yamaka said...: bob:

I agree most of what you said.

However, please listen to Gov Dean last Sunday on Meet the Press:

"1. Voters of MI and FL did not do anything wrong - the Officials/Politicians did. (This meant that the Date Rule was not implemented right: FL is ruled by GOP, and MI has GOP Senate)
2. Therefore, I want to seat their delegates."

The thorny question is MI "Uncommitted" voters. Whether to keep them "Uncommitted" or divide them among all the contestants (except HRC) in Jan or give all to BHO or some to BHO.

This is taken up by May 31st Rule and Bylaws Committee of Alexis Herman. We will see how it turns out.

My prediction is if FL and MI voters are disrespected by the Democratic Party, then in the General Election the Party will lose both the WH AND the Congress. IMHO.

Dean has said that we will lose many Congressional Seats!

Cheers.; May 03, 2008 11:31 PM
Nella said...: Evan(and Bob in Vancouver),

Someone here had posted the following pledge as the one signed by the candidates. If there is another agreement that they signed in which they agreed that the results would have no standing, please be so kind as to post it for us all. Thanks.

WHEREAS, Over a year ago, the Democratic National Committee established a 2008 nominating calendar;

WHEREAS, this calendar honors the racial, ethnic, economic and geographic diversity of our party and our country;

WHEREAS, the DNC also honored the traditional role of retail politics early in the nominating process, to insure that money alone will not determine our presidential nominee;

WHEREAS, it is the desire of Presidential campaigns, the DNC, the states and the American people to bring finality, predictability and common sense to the nominating calendar.

THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by rules and regulations of the DNC.; May 03, 2008 11:32 PM
Yamaka said...: "Your arguement has no merit and would never stand up in a court of law. Should either candidate try to abandon the agreement that was signed, after everyone was aware of the situation, will no doubt result in litigation."

Bob:

Some pundits in this site have said that the Courts will NOT take this issue.

I am not sure about it.

The current Supreme Court may take a look at and see whether 3 million people can be disenfranchised by the Democratic Party, and whether FL and MI can officially shut out the Nominee of the Party in the GE.

My concern is the wrath of American people, first.
________________________________

Dave,

Keep dreaming; nothing wrong in it!

:-); May 03, 2008 11:38 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Total delegates:

Obama 1737
Clinton 1604

Obama's lead +130

OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA '08 - POTUS!; May 03, 2008 11:43 PM
Yamaka said...: "THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by rules and regulations of the DNC."

nella:

Please you remember this, BHO has already violated this Agreement by running campaign cable Ads in FL.

His sidekicks have hundred reasons for this violation. blah.. blah. But violation is a violation, period.

To my knowledge, HRC has NOT violated this Agreement.

What should be the punishment for BHO?

:-); May 03, 2008 11:57 PM
Bob in Vancouver said...: Nella:

Yes, that is the agreement that I am referring to. I have seen no other.

Bob; May 04, 2008 12:06 AM
Yamaka said...: Folks:

Ben Smith in Politico writes,

"Recount Imminent in Guam"

Unless it is completed no one knows the final result.

Vote for Full Inclusive Democracy.

Not for bogus 48-State Democracy.

2208 is the Legitimate Number.
2024.5 is Illegitimate Baby of BHO.

:-); May 04, 2008 12:07 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Yamaka-

You fail to mention that the DNC approved Obama's national ad. There is no way to exclude one state when airing a national ad. THE DNC SAID THAT AIRING THE AD WOULD NOT VIOLATE THE AGREEMENT.

The DNC is in charge of this nomination process - even if you do not like that fact it is still a fact.

This is a nomination race for the DNC to choose a nominee. It is not a race for the American people to seat an elected official.

The DNC sets the rules and decides if or when someone is in violation of THEIR rules.; May 04, 2008 12:10 AM
Yamaka said...: "THE DNC SAID THAT AIRING THE AD WOULD NOT VIOLATE THE AGREEMENT".

Legally speaking, if you make amendments to the Agreement in the middle of the Game, then the Agreement is VOID and NULL.

This needs to be litigated in the Court of Law.

If DNC prefers to disenfranchise the 3 million voters, the consequences WILL be severe and deadly to the Party, besides it has to be litigated before the Supreme Court, as Bob mentioned above.

Remember DNC MUST serve the VOTERS of ALL States, not just 48 States.

Voters need not listen to DNC.

You have wrong polarity problem.

:-(; May 04, 2008 12:20 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: If voters do not wish to belong to the Democratic Party then they are free to go join another party.

If a person wishes to be part of the Democratic Party then they should respect the party rules and bylaws.; May 04, 2008 12:26 AM
Yamaka said...: Folks:

Politico has an article about the new photo ID Law and NC voting: Black voter participation may be affected.

What would happen to BHO's paper-thin margin?

Some people will be shivering!; May 04, 2008 12:28 AM
Yamaka said...: "If voters do not wish to belong to the Democratic Party then they are free to go join another party."

Another option is people can destroy the Democratic Party because it has become undemocratic! Did you think of it?

I know the reason for this czarist arrogance and ignorance.

The Party is dominated at the top by the perennial losers -the FAR LEFT Liberals -who need to be broomed out. Then the Party will be democratic to ALL 50 States.

We have lots of work to do,in deed.; May 04, 2008 12:33 AM
Bob in Vancouver said...: Yamaka:

I did not say that the matter would have to be litigated by the supreme court. What I said or intended to say was that the agreement is like a contract, and if one of the parties (DNC, Clinton, Obama) tried to negate it, it could be taken to the courts. And who wants another round of hanging chads.

I read the agreement as saying the parties agree not to "participate" in the Fl and MI Primaries. That means to me that useing or relying on the results, without the consent of all the signators, would be a violation of the agreement.; May 04, 2008 12:34 AM
Yamaka said...: Bob:

I feel that Agreement and the subsequent violation of it by BHO needs to be addressed by a Court of Law. After appeals, it could reach the Supreme Court. I predict that they will like to adjudicate on it.

Another aspect is what would be the perception by the non-partisan Americans who are GE voters, who have not normally voted in the Primary? If they perceive that the Democratic Party is undemocratic in disenfranchising 3 million voters, the GE result will be devastating to the Party, I am afraid.

After all, why do we have a Primary? Is it not to win the GE?

Cheers.; May 04, 2008 12:44 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Hey guys I thought Obama's mother was an atheist or at the very least an agnostic. That does not make her a christian. I do believe that obama LIED!! Hi all Hillary supporters!!!Jean; May 04, 2008 12:52 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Leah I think your rcord got stuck it should be saying CLINTON CLINTON CLINTON our next POTUS!! OH YES DEAR LORD!! JEAN; May 04, 2008 12:59 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Aunt Jean,

We've already had Bush/Clinton/Clinton/Bush

Now it's time for OBAMA!

Come on and hop on the Obama train - there is room for everyone ;)

OBAMA / Kathleen Sebelius '08; May 04, 2008 1:09 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Leah sorry but no can do I want someone in there that I know will be for the people. I know what you are going to say Obama will. Do you know what my one hope is that you could see Obama for what he really wants to do and what he is. Jean GO Hillary all the way!!!; May 04, 2008 1:17 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Can someone answer this question? Jaime Paulino says that he will support the winner.Why is he on Obama's list of SD's?Ballots are being looked at and it is such a small margin between them so far.So what gives does anyone know?They said that Paulino used to be an Obama supporter but that doesn't mean that he will endorse obama. [just wondering] Jean; May 04, 2008 1:41 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: aunt jean,
Matt answered you on the other page.
_______________

Matt said...
One of those articles has it backwards. Paulino is a clear Obama supporter. It's Lujan that some have said would vote for the Guam winner.

.; May 04, 2008 2:32 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Leah found the link but thanks anyway. Jean; May 04, 2008 2:41 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Leah found the link but thanks anyway. Jean; May 04, 2008 2:42 AM
ed iglehart said...: Jean,

"I thought Obama's mother was an atheist or at the very least an agnostic. That does not make her a christian."

It does according to Yamaha, because her dad was a Christian (and her mom as well).

xx
ed; May 04, 2008 6:43 AM
ed iglehart said...: Evan,

"all of the work done by my company was done on my hand shake. I would never dream of backing out of an agreement even if it turned out to result in a loss to myself. "

Ah, but you're not "Her Entitledness," the presumptive heir. A handshake (or even one's spoken agreement) is sufficient and binding here in Scotland - one of the cultural qualities which has kept me here for three and a half decades.

Slainte!
ed; May 04, 2008 7:05 AM
ed iglehart said...: Obama gets another big ebdorsement!

Go Forrest Gump!

xx
ed; May 04, 2008 7:25 AM
Economy said...: Hillary is proposing change. Obama supports the status quo and probably wants to increase the gas tax by 40 cents per gallon. If An Increase in the Gas Tax Would Hurt Consumers and Slow the Economy then a decrease should help.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/wm451.cfm

Macroeconomic analysis performed by the Center for Data Analysis at the Heritage Foundation, however, shows that increasing the gas tax would depress economic activity and the incomes of millions of Americans. It would also raise significantly less revenue than its proponents project. The President should be commended for his firm stand against raising the federal gasoline tax, and Congress would do well to abandon proposals to increase the gas tax and instead focus on spending highway dollars more efficiently, ideally by turning them back to the states.

Taxes add a significant amount to the price of motor fuel and vary widely by state. For the first quarter of 2008, the average state gasoline tax is 28.6 cents per gallon, plus 18.4 cents per gallon federal tax making the total 47 cents per gallon. For diesel, the average state tax is 29.2 cents per gallon plus an additional 24.4 cents per gallon federal tax making the total 53.6 cents per gallon.

Ronald Reagan cut federal taxes which lead to an increase of state taxes. Hillary has a plan to get huge corporate profits make up the difference so everyone is lifted in the economy.; May 04, 2008 8:44 AM
Emit R Detsaw said...: Couple comments on this lovely Sunday morning:

1) We need to have Hillary in the best political office where she can initiate all of her fabulous ideas - In Congress. It takes congress drafting and passing legislation for the President to sign into law. So vote Obama for President. ;o)

2) On the Florida/Michigan thing. Yes I can see the arguement on both sides of the aisle. I might even agree that you could count the votes of the people of Florida, but strip the Florida Super Delegate for failure to follow Party Rules (that way the voters count). Michigan is a different story though. In 2004 Michigan tried to move their primary up and got threatened with their vote not counting so they backed off. This year they decided to test the DNCs resolve. They should loose their voice for the nomination of the Democrats nomination, they will still get to vote come November.

08ama; May 04, 2008 9:07 AM
Anonymous said...: Pacific News Center Staff Reporter 04.MAY.08
9:30 a.m. Guam - The Democrat Party Nominating Committee said officials will look over the large amount of "spoiled ballots" in the coming days.

At issue is the small margin of victory of Senator Barack Obama. He beat his rival, Senator Hillary Clinton by 7 votes, but well over 500 ballots were deemed invalid during the tabulation process.

Herbie Perez, chairman of the nominating committee, said she will not certify the results because the Committee needs to ensure that all the uncounted ballots were properly identified as "spoiled."; May 04, 2008 9:44 AM
Anonymous said...: Most all of the Junior Jocks ( that is my new tag for Obama Supporters)
Disputed claims of a 10% Clinton
Victory in PA with "round up, round down" arguments.
As it stands now Guam is a tie.; May 04, 2008 9:57 AM
Nella said...: Bob in Vancouver: maybe that agreement "means to" you something that is not in it, but it DEFINITELY does not say that results would not count. One would use it to that purpose ONLY if one had an agenda.

The candidates do not participate in the tallying or use of the votes; that is the role of the DNC (state and national), as is so evident. So your leap to that as agreed within this pledge is illogical to me.

Leah: The facts are:
1. Yes, you can . . .
run "national" ads and not include a state, although that is irrelevant in this case, because:

2. The ad that was run DID omit Florida; it was an Alabama ad with an overlap into northern FL that was left in place, because Obama was able to get approval from:

3. The SOUTH CAROLINA DNC (NOT the national DNC).

You believe this cuts the mustard, as you may. Again, I would submit that such reasoning is acceptable if one has an agenda.

Is there not an interest in first facing the truth, and then accepting it?

C'mon, if you support the guy, support him warts and all. That's the only way it seems legitimate. Putting that halo on him only makes YOU look at the very least naive. So stop looking for bosnia-gate (now 39 vs 25 point in NC), it is weak to need to resort to that.

Start standing up for your guy, but stand up for him just the way he is (apologies to Billy Joel.); May 04, 2008 10:39 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Leah obama's mother was an atheist. That doesn't make her a bad person but it doesn't make her a christian. So Obama LIED AGAIN!!! Jean; May 04, 2008 11:07 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Leah what did Nella say that you can exclude a state I be darn. So he did have an advantage but still lost big time. lol lol.No wonder he doesn't want a revote in Florida he's afraid that he will lose even bigger. lol lol!Jean; May 04, 2008 11:13 AM
Nella said...: emit:

on your first point, I have to agree that we would more benefit from the work of Clinton than from that of Obama in the Senate. Interesting posit.

on your second point, I might also agree, and especially think the whole party might benefit by virtue of NOT doing anything to assuage the Michigan party or the Michigan voters.

The point to be made (and Michigan has made it twice now) is that the primary scheduling supports what may well be misguided reasoning. Some might say that this race certainly shows that the forced use of Republican-leaning states as the barometers of the strength of any candidacy, is counterintuitive.

Leaving the status quo for Michigan may very well lead to real revolt within the party, and have an ultimate good effect on the DNC hierarchy.; May 04, 2008 11:19 AM
Aunt Jean said...: ed give me a break Tom Hanks is no big deal as far as that goes no star is unless they gives a concert for a person to raise money for then like Elton John now that is a BIG DEAL!!!!! I'm sure most stars know less as to what is going on than I do because of their busy life style.Jean; May 04, 2008 11:19 AM
Nella said...: jean - re Florida

at the time of the primary the polls were Clinton 50% to Obama 33, and the vote was very consistent with those polls.

At the time of the Florida re-vote shutdown, the polls were:
3/15 - 3/20:Clinton 55% to Obama 39%

So, yes, he was definitely against that re-vote. By the way, today in general election polls, the results are:
McCain 49% to Obama 40%
McCain 44% to Clinton 46%; May 04, 2008 11:49 AM
Yamaka said...: Good Morning Democrats:

Another sunny day in Houston.

I just finished watching HRC hitting another home run on This Week with George Stepha talking live to voters of NC and IN. Good job. This was in a Debate Format live audience asking important questions. I still wonder why BHO is running away from Debates?

In a political campaign, Debates are very vital. He chose to run away from hard questions. His choice. His poor judgment.

She came across very tough, knowledgeable and highly Presidential. Good for her.

Nella:

I like your reading of the Agreement. Bob was over interpreting fitting his extended agenda. Anyway, it can be litigated before a Court of Law.

As we speak HRC is behind BHO only 9 total delegates, when you seat MI and FL. She is leading in popular votes by 122K as per RealClearPolitics.

IN and NC are very important.

Wait and See.

Message will always win over Money, he is spending 3:1 as he did in TX, OH and PA. He lost all the three battle ground bellwether Primaries.

I hope IN and NC will follow suit.

Cheers.; May 04, 2008 12:04 PM
billyjay66 said...: economy

re gas taxes (5-04 on Pelosi Thread)

My local pump prices :
2/1/2007 $2.20/gal (oil $60/barrel)
5/1/2008 $3.60/gal (oil $120/barrel)
pump price increase $1.40/gal in 14 months

We have been "taxed" to the tune of $1.40/gal in 14 months by a thing called demand and whatever greed has driven prices up. Kind of like a drug we are unwilling to even curb our use.

Imagine the outcry back in 1-'07 Bush and congress 14 months ago would have announced a $1.40 gas tax increase over the next 14 months to a total of $1.90 a gallon! (Fantasy of course) but we would have said "My god gas WILL go to $3.60 a gal by middle of '08!

Yes we are here! Facts are $3.60/gal and the economy is bad. Of course we our opinions will differ but on a scale of 1 to 10 hurting our economy - I think that higher gas/food prices are a 3 and the bank crisis, falling dollar and weak employment is the bigger factor (7).

Now - my opinion (with the $1.40 tax fantasy) do you believe oil driven would have added an ADDITIONAL $1.40 pump price increase to $5.00/gal? My opinion - we would have broken the back of demand and total pump price would have been no more than $4.25/gal. That sounds terrible but what if a true conservation policy would delay the day that pump prices surpass $7 or $8/gal?

The economy is my favorite subject, so I like you name but know we differ. Let's get our differing opinions out in a respectful manner.; May 04, 2008 12:15 PM
RobH said...: Jim,

Thanks for the Junior Jocks moniker. I'm 50, but I feel young at heart, and getting younger every day. I still manage to play club football (European version) even at my advanced age, ao both "junior" and "jock" are OK by me. I'll prefer to be counted there than in what I guess would be the linquistic opposite "Senior Sedentaries". Trust me, I will not suggest we apply that to HRC generally, as you have yours to Obama supporters. Ours is so much more complimentary.

You're absolutely correct, Guam is a tie: 50.1 to 49.9 is a tie. But that doesn't diminish the mathematical absurdity behind arguing that 9.2 rounds to 10, right?

Remember our exchange from more than a week ago when you speculated the impact of an Obama margin deterioration in NC from high teens? And I said "yeah, if he slips into single digits they'll be calling for him to drop out due to electability issues?"

Well, it looks like get to see if that plays out. This week should be very interesting.; May 04, 2008 12:23 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Nella-

I have no idea what you are talking about and apparently you don't know what I was talking about.

I was NOT talking about a South Carolina or Alabama ad.

I was talking about the national CABLE ad that was run nationally on CABLE.
There is no way to exclude one state.

If you are talking about local regional area ads then 'yes' the local networks would have control over those.

For example: When Budweiser or Coca-Cola buys national air time during the Super Bowl the ad runs in ALL of the states. There is no way to exclude one state.; May 04, 2008 12:28 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Jim-

If you are looking at the percentages then yes they are 'almost' tied.

But in an election the person that has the most 'votes' wins. The person with even ONE more vote than the other person 'wins'. So in this case Obama has 7 more votes than his opponent and therefore he wins the Guam contest.

Overall, Senator Obama has a +130 lead in delegates and therefore when the Clinton camp says the 'race' in a virtual tie they are spinning the facts to skew the perception of the American public ;)

OBAMA '08; May 04, 2008 12:40 PM
RobH said...: Billyjay:

How ironic, and tragic for us, that Bush is so beholden to big oil. As a lame duck, he had an unmatched opportunity to manifestly influence events, but wouldn't due to his special interests.

Your speculations regarding the $1.40 fax "fantasy" and the likely reaction by the populous, and todays market reality, and the implications for demand management are insightful.

I wonder what we might have done in the field of alternate energy R&D with that 1/4 of a TRILLION dollars.
(24M vehicles, 12K mile/yr, 20 mpg, 15 months, #1.40/gal).

Have you read "Freedom From Oil: What the Next President Can Do to End the US Addiction to Oil" by David Sandalow, or "The End of Oil" by Paul Roberts?; May 04, 2008 12:45 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Aunt Jean-

I think Tom Hanks video message endorsement IS a big thing. He spent time to explain in a logical way why he thinks Senator Obama is the better candidate and tons of people will be watching what he has to say.

If you base the fact that Elton John helped raise money for the Clinton campaign then in fact you are saying that 'only money matters' ? Ha!

Elton John is not even an American - who cares what he thinks. This is an American election that affects Americans!

Be careful there - there are many celebs that have come out for Hillary too - are you saying that none of them matter?

If you want to disregard celebs that support Obama then you must disregard the ones that support Clinton also.

OBAMA / Kathleen Sebelius '08; May 04, 2008 12:48 PM
Nella said...: billyjay66
I agree, this country has done NOTHING to force a reduction in demand for oil/gas, which is a necessity in this economy AND for this planet.

Taxing the usage, and bringing the price in line with what is paid elsewhere, is necessary, but I think that hand-in-hand with that should be incentives to use efficient vehicles. BIG incentives. Mandatory 50 mpg should be just the beginning.

And, except in a very few cities, we have virtually no investment in workable transit systems. Doing most of my driving in Canada and Europe, I know the effect of these approaches. "Petrol" is hardly affordable, cars are more fuel efficient, and there are trains and buses to every village.

Their taxes are enormous, and their economies go up and down, but they do have a more intelligent approach to fossil fuels and to dependence on gas/oil.; May 04, 2008 1:04 PM
RobH said...: Leah (& Jim):

Another way of presenting these margins....

50.1 to 49.9 "is a tie", "is almost a tie"

But 130 delegates on the basis of 3346 voted and pledged to date is 52% to 48%. No basis for rounding here, that's a half a landslide by Clinton (PA) standards.; May 04, 2008 1:11 PM
Subodh said...: Hillary is right. I guess obama wants to pull a carter if iran attacks israel and do nothing or just talk. If iran nukes israel; we should nuke iran and not sit idle. obama has no foreign logic, no foreign policy experience other than possibly supporting islamic agenda's. with hillary, we know where she stands. with barack, we just dont know. attack pakistan, dont attack pakistan. support wright, condemn wright. who is this guy? I think he is outrageous. if barack gets the nomination; i switch sides. obama is dangerous for our country.

Obama won't appear on tough talk shows, such as the O'Reilly Factor, would not accept another debate from any of the prime news stations, and refused to participate in a Lincoln-Douglas style debate with Hillary where both sides get to ask each other any question they want. The guy is a smooth talking hypocrite who has somehow charmed the likes of Clinton haters, Richardson, Kerry, and Kennedy. Keep in mind folks, Clinton won their states in the primaries but they are not going along with the voice of the people; they are supporting Obama, because they personally favor him over Hillary. AND WE CALL THIS FAIR POLITICS; IT IS A SHAM!

Hillary is ahead if you consider the voices of all the people who have voted but OBAMA's biased super-delegates want to ignore this fact and are pushing to get him nonimated before she can win any other primaries. Is this fair politics? Is this the voice of America? We send our men and women to other countries to fight for a fair democracy. Look what is happening in our own back yards. This is all wrong. If anyone should leave this race early, it should be the inexperienced candidate.

Look at the venues for each candidates appearances today. Clinton faces tough questions from voters - those who support Obama as well as her own. George Stephanopolis, i think everyone would agree went out of his way (not only by interrupting her) to pose tough follow up questions to her responses. What does Obama do? After refusing to debate - face to face - he only agrees to go on Meet the Press - otherwise known as the weekly Obama infomercial. Does Russert ask tough follow up questions? - No, what a softball interview. What will this finally do to Russert's reputation? Especially regarding his standing among other journalists?
Hillary is the difference between a leader and a follower!! She proposes and Obama disposes!! She is always one step ahead of Obama and the voters are starting to notice that she is the only one who can defeat McCain this fall!! Hillary is on the rise and Obama is fallling things are breaking her way and she will come close in NC and win by 10 in In!! In the end she will have the popular vote and southern superdelegates will vote as a bloc and insist on Hillary because they do not want to run with Obama at the top of the ticket!!

I am really weary of hearing Obama supporters accuse anyone NOT supporting him as being a racist. When asked what he has accomplished in his career, very few can even come up with an answer at all, or if they do, "he was a community organizer." Big deal! You accuse anyone who doesn't believe all of his empty rhetoric as wanting to vote for a liar or vote for an "old man", but at least we know Clinton and McCain actually have records of accomplishments and don't run and hide when the going gets tough.

Democrats are divided right in the middle.Clinton will win Indiana by 10% and may win NC or be behind by less than 5%.
The only choice the Democrats have is to have the Dream Ticket with Clinton on top. By any other combination we lose GE; May 04, 2008 1:14 PM
Aunt Jean said...: ROBH One more time I see where you get your figure from for the 9.2. But they DON"T do it that way. There was 2306664 votes Hillary got 1260444, obama got 1046220. So total was 2306664 votes she got 54.65% obama got 45.35% of those votes. Then they round it to the nearest whole number. So it would be 55% for Hillary and 45% for obama. Or if we do it your way we need to go back and refigure all the wins and see how obama comes out. I don't believe that he would come out as well as he did. So please stop with the catty [YES CATTY] remarks about the 9.2.They get real old it's like you are a broken record! Jean; May 04, 2008 1:19 PM
Anonymous said...: leah,
'But in an election the person that has the most 'votes' wins."

That is what every Clinton supporter has been saying all along. Welcome to the world of reality.
You and other Obama Jr. supporters have always said, it is the delegates won that determines who won a primary.

Keep your ya-buts and flip-flops coming.; May 04, 2008 1:20 PM
Anonymous said...: I also predict Clinton will win the popular vote count in Guam after the recount.; May 04, 2008 1:23 PM
jpsedona said...: On "Face The Nation", Jim Clyburn said that superdelegates would have to have a really good reason to overturn the state votes. That's about as close as he's gotten to a Pelosi Club. Not quite close enough, but it would seem that he's heavily leaning toward Obama.; May 04, 2008 1:26 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Subodh said "...You accuse anyone who doesn't believe all of his empty rhetoric as wanting to vote for a liar or vote for an "old man",..."
____________________

Well, HRC has lied and McCain IS an old man. Those are two true facts.

Why would you say an Obama/Clinton is a 'dream ticket' when you dislike Obama? Is this just a strategy to get her back into the White House? ;)

HRC only wants to debate because she is behind and having a debate would garner her more free air-time and another opportunity to do some more Obama bashing.

Democracy. America is a land of rules and laws. Ya gotta play by the RULES - perhaps this is something HRC has forgotten about.

OBAMA '08; May 04, 2008 1:30 PM
jpsedona said...: Hillary is likely to pick up Heath Shuler as a SD endorser on Tuesday. He's stated that he will endorse whoever wins his district.

CD11 is a rural district and I think that Hillary will have a 4-2 delegate margin in that district. Even if it's a 3-3 split, I would be shocked if Obama were able to pull ahesd in the CD11 popular vote.; May 04, 2008 1:33 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Jim-

Are you getting dizzy from that SPIN.

In this nomination race the votes are tallied to determine the DELEGATES, then the DELEGATES cast the deciding votes.
That is the rule of THIS game.

The candidate with more votes FROM THE DELEGATES wins.

This race is not based on 'the person with the most popular votes wins'.

Play by the rules!
Respect the rules!
Respect the winner!; May 04, 2008 1:35 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Leah let me explain this enough way. I never said that it wasn't good that Hanks backed obama [Don't know if I'll ever watch enough one of his show but who knows] anyway the way you jrs haha see it that it's such a BIG deal I don't happen to see it that way.Yes there have been some that has supported Hillary but I don't think that their support is any better than mine [daaa they are people just like us]. They are not in politics. They are just people with a name and stardom doesn't make them better. Now for Elton no money is not the be all end all. But he was willing to take time away from him making money for himself for Hillary so that to me proves something really BIG. So please don't try and demean what Elton did for Hillary it's insulting to him and makes you look really BAD and jealous!!! Jean; May 04, 2008 1:36 PM
Economy said...: Estimated 2008 Gasoline Price Breakdown & Margins Details

http://www.energy.ca.gov/gasoline/margins/index.html

Crude oil cost is significant; $2.83 out of a gas price of $3.89 in California; May 04, 2008 1:43 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Leah you said this

play by the rules: obama should

respect the rules: obama should

respect the winner: obama should

He does do any of these things !!!! Jean; May 04, 2008 1:52 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Leah please excuse me obama doesn't I said does my MISTAKE!!! Jean; May 04, 2008 1:53 PM
Nella said...: Leah,

I stand corrected. I was remembering a story at the time and so I looked it up, and I had misunderstood the facts. The Alabama part of it was posited as a situation if Obama had actually made the effort to stand by the pledge. He didn’t, so you are correct.

Politico story:
The Clinton campaign is complaining that by allowing viewers in all states to see the spots, the national buy violates a pledge made by each Democratic candidate not to compete in Florida.

Obama's campaign responded by saying that it is not possible to make a nationwide cable ad buy that does not include Florida.

“For that reason we consulted with … South Carolina Democratic Party Chair Carol Fowler who told us unequivocally she did not consider this to be in violation of pledge made to the early states,” Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton said in a statement.

Obama’s ad began airing Monday on CNN and MSNBC. NBC News Political Director Chuck Todd pointed out the complexity of the matter by noting that buying advertising in Mobile, Ala., gives a campaign substantial reach into the Florida Panhandle.

Elleithee responded that Clinton has not yet bought ads in Alabama, which has a Feb. 5 primary, but said the campaign reserves the right to do so.

Clinton’s campaign acknowledged that it’s not possible to buy 49-state coverage — that the only alternative would be the much more complex process of buying state by state and market by market.

So Leah, I guess you would agree that apparently this was too complex a process for the Obama campaign to handle.

However, I still think it was a deliberate way around the pledge, especially going to the SC DNC for “approval.” I guess you did know that, and it passes muster for you. Not for me. So I find it irksome every time an Obama supporter assets that he DID follow the rules. A little slick – maybe it’s the change we’ve all been waiting for: slick barry in exchange for slick willie.; May 04, 2008 1:53 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Nella I like you and your way of thinking. Go Hillary our next POTUS!! Jean; May 04, 2008 1:57 PM
Nella said...: leah
I agree, obama as vp is not REALLY a dream ticket, because it is true that he does not have the requisite character or experience for the Presidency, so it would not be sensible to give him the vp job.

However, it is the dream of democrats to win the general election, and it is possible that his losing the nomination will lead to a loss of voters. Not as great a loss as if Clinton loses the nomination, but possibly too great a loss to withstand.

She wins against McCain in electoral votes NOW, but that could change if the black vote does not turn out in November.

On the other hand, if events go that way, I do not believe he will take the offer. Do you?; May 04, 2008 2:03 PM
Pablo said...: I got a big laugh over that Subodh. Thanks, I needed that.

We need a good, honest woman in the White House. Kathleen Sebelius will make a great VP choice.; May 04, 2008 2:04 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Nella-

I do not believe that Senator Obama would ever accept to be on a ticket with Hillary.

He truly is a person that believes in a new kind of politics. And the way Hillary operates is not a way he believes in.

He would lose all credibility by accepting an offer from her and he would run his reputation and political career.

I really believe that HRC will not win the nomination but lets go into 'fairy tale land' for a moment - if she did win the nomination she would have to pick someone that would not mind being insignificant because with Hill and BILL in the White House the V.P. would be a name only position.

Now back to reality.
I believe that Senator Obama will receive the nomination and I also believe that he will pick someone like Gov. Kathleen Sebelius to be on he ticket with him. Sebelius is a white woman close to 60 years old - so that would appease the Hillary supporters that want to see a woman in the White House.

I don't believe the super-delegates are going to overturn Obama's pledged-delegate lead - it would be political suicide for them. The DNC also realizes that they do not want to lose the 'new voters/young folks', the black vote, and the college educated vote.

I also believe the DNC realizes that Senator Obama has not pulled out ALL of Hillary's baggage to use against her in this nomination race BUT the Republicans will - and it wouldn't be a pretty sight.

Even if Hillary were to get back into the White House things will not go back to how they were in the 90's. Bill was just lucky that he was in the WH during the DOTcom boom otherwise things would have been different for him. Let's not lose sight of part of the mess we are in now is due to Bill and his push for NAFTA, etc.
Ciao!

OBAMA '08 - our next POTUS!; May 04, 2008 2:30 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Regarding the national cable ad...
Nella said:"So Leah, I guess you would agree that apparently this was too complex a process for the Obama campaign to handle."
__________________________-

I do not agree that it was too complex to handle.

I believe that it would have been TOO EXPENSIVE.

The cost of buying individual air-time in all the markets across America would have been an outrageous amount of money compared to the cost of the national ad.; May 04, 2008 2:36 PM
jpsedona said...: There's an interesting trend in the Gallop Daily Tracking Poll since Obama threw Rev. Wright under the bus:

4/30: Obama 46 Clinton 47
5/1: Obama 45 Clinton 49
5/2: Obama 46 Clinton 48
5/3 Obama 47 Clinton 47
5/4: Obama 49 Clinton 45

The poll released 4/30 was conducted April 27-29. The poll released on 5/1 was conducted April 28-30. Both of these included data prior to Obama's denunciation of Wright at the Washington Press Club.

The polls beginning 5/2 show results after Obama's denouncing Wright. The 5/2 poll was conducted April 30-May 2.

Gallop Tracking Polls

So, what insights can we gain from Clinton being ahead by 4% to Obama now being ahead by 4%?

First, this is not a one day abboration. There's a steady trend showing renewed strength by Obama and declining support for Clinton.

It would seem that the negative impact of Wright's statements have been offset by Obama's speech or the debate over the gas tax issue.

Interestingly, the undecided across all the polls since 5/1 show a 6% undecided.

Is the trend likely to change again? probably. But this tracking poll may bode well for Obama in NC where his support has been fairly constant but Hillary appears to have been winning over undecideds.; May 04, 2008 2:49 PM
Yamaka said...: Hello ALL:

I have a feeling Pelosi does NOT want to be the Speaker. She wants to be just a regular member yapping about anything everything thoughtlessly.

As a Speaker I expect her to be calm and quite and see how things play out. Not opening her silly small mouth often.

She and Jim Klyburn (SC)talk nonsense endlessly about how the SDs should vote. As per the Rule the SDs can and MUST vote their conscience, period. Their view of the world is what is important. Not this FAR LEFT Liberal bone-heads'!

Who the hell these two jokers are to tell other SDs to how to think and analyze? Morons.

Nancy Pelosi should resign her position and run away to CA, IMO.

If Pelosi wants to endorse BHO, let her do it openly. We know she is one of these bleeding FAR LEFT Liberals - the perennial losers of National Election.

Folks, in the past 30 years NO Liberal of the type of BHO got elected to WH. This time is no different. Save America from these endless tax and spend ideologues.

Vast majority of the American electorate is in the middle, either Center Left (like Clintons) or Center Right (like McCain).

BHO is just NON-Electable, period.
He is a novice with very poor name recognition in the heartland of America.

Many people ask, who is this Obama or Osama? Who is this Hussein or Saddam Hussein? Where is he from? Africa or Middle East?

SDs, think hard and act fast. For the viability of the Democratic Party is at stake. You cannot afford to take any RISK with BHO.

Therefore, Nominate HRC, the Genuine American Classic, the First Woman POTUS.

Cheers. :-); May 04, 2008 3:14 PM
Yamaka said...: "the cost of buying individual air-time in all the markets across America would have been an outrageous amount of money compared to the"

Therefore, can he violate the Agreement unilaterally w/o the written agreement from others who signed it?

Any violation of the Agreement, is a violation and make it NULL and VOID.

Cost, inconvenience and other hundred reasons ARE NOT reasons to violate the Agreement, period.

BHO violated the Agreement. Let him take responsibility, if he knows anything about Contracts and Agreements.

Oh, he is just a novice, new to the National Politics. He is from Chicago petty small politics. What else can you expect from the Funny Guy, anyway?

Vote for experienced matured HRC as the FIRST WOMAN POTUS.
:-); May 04, 2008 3:24 PM
jpsedona said...: Yamaka,

tsk, tsk, tsk

Your arguments about Pelosi were certainly valid, right up until you got to:

"Many people ask, who is this Obama or Osama? Who is this Hussein or Saddam Hussein? Where is he from? Africa or Middle East?"

Don't you see that as soon as you add this meaningless dribble and name calling, you loose all validity to your overall argument.

On your argument about Pelosi in general, if you think that SD's are making their decisions in a complete vaccuum, you're kidding yourself. Leaders are supposed to lead. So what's wrong with Bayh telling SD's NOT to decide? Sounds like the flip side of the same coin to me.; May 04, 2008 3:32 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Yakama-

If you have a grievance perhaps you should take it up with the DNC bylaws committee and see how far that gets you.

You can be sure that if there is any hint of fowl play that Hillary's attorneys will ponce on it and if not then there isn't a valid issue.

Don't forget that both Senator Obama and Senator Clinton are ATTORNEYS and they both have LEGAL TEAMS working for their campaigns that have been looking at everything with a fine-toothed comb.

OBAMA / Kathleen Sebelius '08
America's next President and Vice-President of the UNITED States of America!

.; May 04, 2008 3:41 PM
Nella said...: Leah,

I agree he would never be on that "fairy tale" ticket. However, my thinking regarding his reasons is a bit less generous than yours. That’s OK with me.

I disagree that picking Sebelius will make any difference for the Clinton backers who will either go with McCain or stay home. Most of them are more concerned with Obama’s problems than with wanting a woman, or a middle-aged person, or a middle-aged woman, on the ticket. I realize that you cannot see those problems, but they exist for those voters, and they are a major concern.

I agree that the DNC might make the mistake to worry more about losing the ‘new voters’ than losing the rank and file. However, the black voters and the so-called educated voters are not going to the dark side. What the DNC and the supers might well worry about is losing the general, and taking the blame for that when their re-elections come up, but I do not see that is in their thinking. (Unless you count the black congressmen and women who were threatened if they did not flip to Obama.)

I agree that if Clinton is elected she will not have the situation Bill Clinton had. We are in much direr straits than we were in ’92, which is one of Clinton’s main advantages in this race. Many believe she has more to offer to solve those problems than Obama has, particularly as she has always had the edge in specific plans to address problems.

Can you cite the cost factors involved in the two processes for the ads? I have never seen anything wherein the Obama camp stated it was a financial decision, or there was any discussion of the cost differences. I have only seen, “. . .it is not possible to make a nationwide cable ad buy that does not include Florida.” So please provide your link. Is the argument that they were too broke to stick to the rules?

By the way, I have seen this: Hillary Clinton and Obama each spent about $130,000 in Michigan while Obama spent $1.3 million in Florida—more than any other Democratic candidate and more than eight Republican candidates, who were eligible to win delegates from the state.

I guess they weren't too broke -- they just wouldn't stick to the rules. Now, you are a rules cheerleader, so why in this case are you disingenuous?; May 04, 2008 3:44 PM
Meg said...: I have a question. Are the Indiana and NC primaries open? Any registered voter can vote? How fair is that?; May 04, 2008 3:51 PM
Economy said...: billyjay66
My local pump prices :
2/1/2007 $2.20/gal (oil $60/barrel)
5/1/2008 $3.60/gal (oil $120/barrel)
pump price increase $1.40/gal in 14 months
Estimated 2008 Gasoline Price Breakdown & Margins Details

http://www.energy.ca.gov/gasoline/margins/index.html

Crude oil cost is significant; $2.83 out of a gas price of $3.89 in California
Crude Oil Cost $1.22 on January 29, 2007 with a gas retail price of $2.49 per gallon.
Crude Oil increased from $1.22 to $2.83 or $1.61 per gallon. Thus the question you pose is oil reaching $180/barrel without any other tax increases of 40 cents per gallon for roads. I would need to revisit my driving habits at $5 per gallon. Other countries (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, UK) currently pay over $8 per gallon but have different taxes. Some countries (Kuwait) pay less than us also.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/gas1.html; May 04, 2008 4:02 PM
Nella said...: Leah,

I like this line: You can be sure that if there is any hint of fowl play that Hillary's attorneys will ponce on it and if not then there isn't a valid issue.

I’ll skip the chicken reference and get right to the beef:

I have seen many posts in which some have been quite happy to list many of the old right-wing attacks on Hillary Clinton, so remember this maxim:

You can be sure that if there is any hint of foul play that Ken Starr will have pounced on it and if there was not any further action then there isn't a valid issue.

Thanks for the words of wisdom!; May 04, 2008 4:27 PM
billyjay66 said...: economy
Think you were giving me info. I follow prices daily when I watch the stock channel. Usually future prices come pretty close to .65-.70 cents above wholesale prices with a 5-8 week lag. When wholesale surged a little above 3.00 I thought that 3.75 was getting pretty close but prices have backed off some. Wasn't sure what point you were making to me, but your words "I would need to revisit my driving habits at $5 a gal" were well taken.

robh
My fear is that future price spikes may bring us to look back at now as the good old days. Oil looks to be peaking around 84-85 mil/barrels/day. We haven't started to see the downslope from a peak yet but with China/India/USA wanting more and getting less, I won't even try to predict the future curve.

Nella

All I can say is right on. Less usage by a drastic amount and higher efficiency is something we can either plan for or it will be forced upon us.; May 04, 2008 4:52 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Nella-

I don't have statistics to post showing the cost differences regarding national vs. regional ads. But it is logical to think that a national ad would cost less then buying up individual ad time in thousands of cites - otherwise all the major companies would do that in order to save money and they don't. Perhaps someone else here on the thread has more inside info regarding advertising than I do.

I can't believe that you would think that the republicans will not use all of Hillary's scandals and ties to unsavory people against her if she were to win the nomination. Sure there are a few out there that don't hold water but the majority of them do and I won't waste my time to post them all here since I am sure most everyone knows what they are.

Now I must get back out to my vegetable garden and get some work done before supper time - see ya'll later this evening. Ciao ;)

OBAMA / Kathleen Sebelius '08
.; May 04, 2008 5:09 PM
Yamaka said...: "Don't you see that as soon as you add this meaningless dribble and name calling, you loose all validity to your overall argument."

Jp:

I am not into name calling here. I am just sharing what I hear and see as to what's happening in the heartland of America.

Please remember only about 28 million Americans have voted in the Democratic Primary so far; my back-of-the-envelope calculation shows that about another 38 million potentially Left-leaning voters out there who will vote for a Democrat in the GE.

Name recognition is very important. Barack Hussein Obama Jr has poor name recognition and identification in America, comparing to Hillary Rodham Clinton, a Brand Name recognized all over America, and in all the worlds. That's the point I am stressing here, possibly to the SDs.

Evan Bayh, Clyburn perhaps can say whatever they want to say to SDs. But I want the Speaker to be quiet and possibly neutral till June 3, IMO.

I strongly believe Obama is NOT Electable in the GE. He is totally inexperienced for the Job, has poor character, judgment and credibility, besides his policies are tax and spend FAR LEFT liberal type - the perennial losers followed thus far.
________________________________

Obama/Osama who? Kathleen Who?

Vote for Hillary, the Genuine American Classic.

:-); May 04, 2008 5:30 PM
Pablo said...: Yam,
"I am not into name calling here. I am just sharing what I hear and see as to what's happening in the heartland of America.", right after you say "who is this Obama or Osama? Who is this Hussein or Saddam Hussein? Where is he from? Africa or Middle East?" :(

Now if you that's not you name calling but you really do hear people asking that...then I appoligize. But if you do you don't have to worry about them voting for someone else, they would be to stupid to pull a lever to vote anyways.

What's more amazing, up to this point at least, is that a novice with very poor name recognition is ahead of matured brand name of Clinton.; May 04, 2008 6:09 PM
RobH said...: Yams, you're the best.

Your own words: "Who the hell these two jokers are to tell other SDs to how to think and analyze?"

Yet that's exactly what you do here every day. "SDs, are you listening?"

Too easy.; May 04, 2008 6:15 PM
Emit R Detsaw said...: Maybe there is a reason it’s so hard for Super Delegate to step forward for Obama:

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/itsdanger.htm; May 04, 2008 6:18 PM
Nella said...: leah,
I thought since you stated it as fact that you knew the cost differential. Maybe someone does, but I have never seen the Obama campaign use that as a reason, so maybe not.

I'm still not sure where you stand regarding the rules when it came to running ads in Florida. Granted, the Obama campaign was able to secure permission from the SC DNC ;-) but . . .

was it an issue of saving money? And in your opinion is that a sufficient reason to not obey the rules?

And by that I guess I mean, "to circumvent the rules," since they were able to get the nod from SC. So are rules sacrosanct, or there to be circumvented?
Thanks.; May 04, 2008 6:31 PM
Yamaka said...: "Now if you that's not you name calling but you really do hear people asking that...then I appoligize. But if you do you don't have to worry about them voting for someone else, they would be to stupid to pull a lever to vote anyways."

publo:

These things I hear from people in the heartland of America, in the grocery stores and medical clinics. They are very sharp and perceptive; they learn more from names, body language and background heritage!

In your bubble land of political correctness you do NOT want their votes; but Candidates need their votes - they are the majority like 38 million vs 28 million (so far voted in primaries).

I know the mis-educated or the hyper-educated elitists cannot handle basic questions of ordinary Americans: What's your full legal name? Where are you from? You look very new to America? Who are your parents? Who is your pastor? Where do you live? All important questions very basic in any decision making process!
______________________________

rob:

I want to remind you that I am just a citizen, not a SD (as yet! lol).

I have all the rights in the world to question our politicians and elected officials. For I am just an American!

That's what happens in my America. We are hard thinking, hard working, risk taking and asking all sorts of questions.

Are you not an American?

Obama Who? Kathleen Who? All Risky.

Vote for Hillary for REAL POSITIVE CHANGE.

Cheer. :-); May 04, 2008 6:36 PM
Yamaka said...: nella:

Good, you ask all the good questions.

I like your posts. Please keep writing.

Cheers. :-); May 04, 2008 6:39 PM
RobH said...: Hey everybody, Yams made the news. Check it out:

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/78337

Yams, SMILE!; May 04, 2008 6:51 PM
Unknown said...: Much more so than we might believe.
1. Reports emanating from Africa allege his mother was in Kenya with his ARAB Kenyan (NOT Black Kenyan) father - this is clearly shown in Kenyan Govt. Registry documents which list the father as an Arab Kenyan - at a very late term of her pregnancy and was not allowed on a flight to return to HAWAII.
She gave birth to him in Kenya, immediately got on a plane and then registered him as being born in Hawaii.

2. He is NOT an African American at all but an Arab American and cannot claim African minority status, which by US Federal regulations require a person to have 1/8 (one eighth) of the minority blood (12%).
From his mother he has 50% white blood, from his father he has 43.25% Arab BLOOD and from his MATERNAL GRANDMOTHER he manages to hold onto 6.75% African or Black heritage blood.
He has had to duck and weave all his life and use whatever lies he could use to even “pass for Black” and the benefits that this minority status provided. So even this, while understandable - IS A documented LIE.
3.) Father Was A Proud Freedom Fighter - LIAR, he was part of one of the most corrupt and violent governments Kenya has ever had
4.) My Family Has Strong Ties To African Freedom - LIAR, your cousin Raila Odinga has created mass violence in attempting to overturn a legitimate election in 2007, in Kenya. It is the first widespread violence in decades.
5.) My Grandmother Has Always Been A Christian - LIAR, she does her daily Salat prayers at 5am according to her own interviews. Not to mention, Christianity wouldn’t allow her to have been one of 14 wives to 1 man.
6.) My Name is African Swahili - LIAR, your name is Arabic and ‘Baraka’ (from which Barack came) means ‘blessed’ in that language. Hussein is also Arabic and so is Obama.
7.) I Never Practiced Islam - LIAR, you practiced it daily at school, where you were registered as a Muslim and kept that faith for 31 years,until your wife made you change, so you could run for office.
8.) My School In Indonesia Was Christian - LIAR, you were registered as Muslim there and got in trouble in Koranic Studies for making faces (check your own book).
9.) I Was Fluent In Indonesian - LIAR, not one teacher says you could speak the language.

10.) Because I Lived In Indonesia, I Have More Foreign Experience - LIAR, you were there from the ages of 6 to 10, and couldn’t even speak the language. What did you learn, how to study the Koran and watch cartoons.

11.) I Am Stronger On Foreign Affairs - LIAR, except for Africa (surprise) and the Middle East (bigger surprise), you have never been anywhere else on the planet and thus have NO experience with our closest allies.

12.) I Blame My Early Drug Use On Ethnic Confusion - LIAR, you were quite content in high school to be Barry Obama, no mention of Kenya and no mention of struggle to identify - your classmates said you were just fine.

13.)An Ebony Article Moved Me To Run For Office - LIAR, Ebony has yet to find the article you mention in your book. It doesn’t, and never did, exist.

14.) A Life Magazine Article Changed My Outlook On Life - LIAR, Life has yet to find the article you mention in your book. It doesn’t, and never did, exist.

15.) I Won’t Run On A National Ticket In ‘08 - LIAR, here you are, despite saying, live on TV, that you would not have enough experience by then, and you are all about having experience first.; May 04, 2008 8:46 PM
Yamaka said...: Nancy:

You are the best. Keep writing.

God Bless You.

:-); May 04, 2008 8:50 PM
Yamaka said...: Folks:

Another Conversation with BHO, Jr

- Hello Senator, Assalamu Alaikum. How are you, Sir?

- Fine Yamaka, What's up my man?

- Sen I saw you this morning on Tim Russert's Show. For half an hour he pulled your nails, talking about your pastor and "Guru": I thought you were really so very uncomfortable talking the truth or telling more lies, whatever, it is. Your body language was telling me you really regret that Rev Wright really opened the can of worms on you! Whatever way you slice, your face told the truth: you are still hiding things from the public. Your character,judgment and credibility all gained you a fat "F". Is it not bothering you at all, Senator?

- Well, Yama, now I am angry at you. You see I do what my Puppet Masters want me to do. I am a Puppet sitting under their armpit!I cannot really tell the whole truth, because truth really hurts. As Wright said, I am a Chicago Politician, I have to follow the Rules that my Sponsors clamp on me.

- Fine Sen. Tell me about your big win in Guam. Is it not refreshing that you finally won another State?

- Well, Yama, the God of Death. Yes I am very very happy that I won Guam with mere 7 votes (but it is doubtful at this time whether it would stand on recounting!). Although Hillary is leading by 122K popular votes, I and my Children are ecstatic that 7 votes matter a lot. That's the caliber of our thinking and issues of celebration!

- Well Sen, How do you see the coming Tuesday? Any k/o punch planned on Hillary?

- Well, I am really shivering: what if she breaks my jaw again? I think she will take IN and I will take NC barely, thanks to the good Black folks who wrongly think I am "One of Them" - which is really very wrong historically speaking, I am just a carpetbagger! But I got that Street Credibility via Wright, for which I must be thankful to him, although he is now a big pain on my small slender neck!

-Senator, Talk to me about your followers who they are?

- Well, Yama. I really don't have real supporters, like FOR Obama followers. They are mostly Against Clinton: the BigMoneyBags and others. There is a world of difference if you think of it. Of course there are a few of my own Children, who believe everything I say and do. I am their Piper, they will follow me to the Sea very soon!

- Very well, Senator. Insha Allah we will meet again.

- Allahu Akbar, Mohammed urasooolilah, Allahu Akbar.
Insha Allah.

-Senator what did you say?

_ Oh, I just said God the Great and Mohammed the Prophet. That's it, one of the recitals I used to do in Indonesia, where I got my Foreign Policy lessons!

- Fine Senator, Good Night, Sir.

_______________________________

Oh another Conversation with BHO. Enjoy.

Cheers. :-); May 04, 2008 9:18 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Nancy give them he## I love it. Our next POTUS! Hillary Clinton.

Who is that lard but running his fat mouth on cnn? He's about one dumb man.He's really out of touch with reality! Jeam; May 04, 2008 9:33 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: A great read:

Operation Anti-Chaos: The Narrative on "White Voters" Is Fiction

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/al-giordano/operation-anti-chaos-the_b_99965.html

(Last paragragh):
"Don't let yourself get upset when some idiot repeats the false media narrative. Don't plead with them to tell the truth (they won't; remember, they're either stupid or dishonest). Mock them. Ridicule them. Expose them as the lightweights they are showing themselves to be, with all the confidence that understanding the hard data ought to provide you.

Let Operation Anti-Chaos begin!"

OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA '08 ;); May 04, 2008 10:48 PM
Emit R Detsaw said...: Susan Coleman: In the 70’s
Larry Guerrin: February 1987
James Milam: May 1987
Kevin Ives & Don Henry: August 1987
Keith Coney: July 1988
Keith McKaskle: November 1988.
Gregory Collins: January 1989.
Jeff Rhodes: April 1989
Richard Winters: July 1989
Jordan Kettleson: June 1990
Alan Standorf: Jan 1991
Dennis Eisman: April 1991
Danny Casalaro: August 1991
Victor Raiser: July 1992
R. Montgomery Raiser: July 1992
Ian Spiro, His wife and 3 children: November 1992
Paula Gober: December 1992
Jim Wilhite: December 1992
Steve Willis, Robert Williams, Todd McKeahan & Conway LeBleu: February 1993
Sgt. Brian Haney, Sgt. Tim Sabel, Maj. William Barkley, Capt. Scott Reynolds: May 1993
The 86 Branch Davidians in Waco Texas: April 1993
John Wilson: May 1993
Paul Wilcher: June 1993
Vincent Foster: July 1993
Jon Parnell Walker: August 1993
Stanley Heard & Steven Dickson: September 1993
Jerry Luther Parks: September 1993
Ed Willey: November 1993
Gandy Baugh: January 1994
Herschell Friday: March 1994
Ronald Rogers: March 1994
Kathy Furguson: May 1994
Bill Shelton: June 1994
Stanley Huggins: July 1994
Calvin Walraven: July 1994
Paul Olson: Sept 1994
Alan G. Whicher: April 1995
Duane Garrett: July 1995
Ron Brown: April 1996
Charles Meissner: April 1996
William Colby: April 1996
Admiral Jeremy Boorda: May 1996
Lance Herndon: August 1996
Neil Moody: August 1996
Barbara Wise: November 1996
Doug Adams: January 1997
Mary Caitrin Mahoney: July 1997
Ronald Miller: October 1997
Sandy Hume: February 1998
Jim McDougal: March 1998
Johnny Lawhon: March 1998
Charles Wilbourne Miller: November 1998
Carlos Ghigliotti: April 2000
Tony Moser: June 2000.
Barbra Olson: September 2001; May 04, 2008 10:51 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: I find it interesting that yesterday evening at the North Carolina dinner and then again this evening at the Indiana dinner Senator Obama was the last speaker of the evening.

Anyone know why Senator Clinton spoke earlier on both evenings and Senator Obama was saved for the grand finale ?

I didn't catch her speech this evening but caught the last fifteen minutes of Obama's. Did anyone see Clinton's speech tonight at the dinner? Anything usual happen - like when she was boo'ed yesterday and the crowd chanted O'bama ?

I bet she is hoping this will be over soon so that she can go home!; May 04, 2008 10:52 PM
Pablo said...: I love it too...you are the best google-er ever.

Desperate times call for less civility.

Make ya wonder how she can be losing to him ....She must have some serious issues.; May 04, 2008 10:54 PM
Emit R Detsaw said...: "INDIANAPOLIS, Indiana (CNN) — In the face of criticism from a slate of economists who say her gas tax holiday plan would be ineffective or even harmful, Hillary Clinton said she wasn’t taking stock of their opinions and emphasized that this was a short-term fix that would primarily benefit long-distance drivers.

“I’m not going to put my lot in with economists,” Clinton told George Stephanopolous on ABC’s ‘This Week’ after he asked her to name a single economist supporting her plan. “If we actually did it right, if we had a president who used all the tools of the presidency, we would design it in such a way that it would be implemented effectively.”

Clinton said she didn’t understand the resistance her plan is getting since its intention is to provide relief."

Doesn't care what the experts say, and then can't figure out why there is resistance - yup more of Bush, and out of touch. Way to go hillary.; May 04, 2008 11:00 PM
Yamaka said...: "crowd chanted O'bama ?"

Yes, crowd chanted

Oooooo..s(b)a....ma!

H...u....ss....e...i...n!!!

The Burnt Arrow!!

:-(; May 04, 2008 11:07 PM
Yamaka said...: “I’m not going to put my lot in with economists,” Clinton told George Stephanopolous--???

Yes, the Economists all predicted that there will NOT be any Credit Crunch and Mortgage Crisis.

Finally, what happened?

Economists are two-handed dismal scientists! Never right about anything!

They have no clue as to what's happening in real world!

Send all Economists home, please.

Cheers.; May 04, 2008 11:12 PM
Emit R Detsaw said...: Hum....

"A status conference hearing is scheduled for April 25, 2008, and a trial date is expected to be announced soon.

Discovery in the case is expected to begin in May, 2008 as it proceeds to trial.

The discovery will expose an ongoing cover-up of the campaign finance crimes and the obstructions of justice directed by Hillary Clinton with the help of Bill Clinton and former DNC Chair Ed Rendell. The cover-up rivals Watergate in its corruption of each branch of government and the media."; May 04, 2008 11:17 PM
Nella said...: Leah,
Do I detect a hint of glee at the thought of rude behavior disrupting Clinton’s speech? (Actually, I did not hear any, but at this point, since the behavior has become commonplace, they often block the sound on the broadcasts.)

The reports of Obama people being rude and disruptive goes back as far as January, and New Hampshire. I recall Edwards supporters complaining – not about the behavior towards Edwards, but the behavior towards Clinton. They have class, those Edwards people.

There have been reports of organized “runs” to Clinton events, with buses of young people who have obviously been instructed. Early on, some (again, mostly Edwards people) had called for Obama to denounce this behavior, but apparently the Obama campaign orchestrates these “events” so that didn’t happen. Now it has become so common as to be dismissed. The runs are made on Clinton supporters as well, especially the superdelegates.

There was a time when opponents in a campaign could expect respect and some courtesy from the opposing side. But I guess this is one of those wonderful “change” tactics: making an opponent the enemy.

I personally find the behavior abhorrent, and it should be decried by anyone with any moral fiber. Truthfully, Leah, if the situation were reversed, would you be so approving?; May 04, 2008 11:44 PM
Pablo said...: Nella,

Somehow I've missed those reports. Links please.

"There was a time when opponents in a campaign could expect respect and some courtesy from the opposing side. But I guess this is one of those wonderful “change” tactics: making an opponent the enemy." One thing Clinton might be reminded of, they are on the SAME side. It's understandable though to get confused which side she is on, when seeing fear mongering adds, brands of elitism, and claiming only herself and the republican opponent have passed some imaginary qualification thresh-hold. Respect and courtesy indeed.; May 05, 2008 8:52 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Pablo

no Clinton isn't confused she understands that only her and McCain are qualified [even though McCain is NOT the best one] it's only you Obama supporters that are blind and deaf to him "NOT" being qualified. He will make a mockery of the presidency. Jean; May 05, 2008 10:24 AM
Unknown said...: I am Nancy PELoosy. Here are some more lies from Hussein Obama about which I am fed up :
16.) Present Votes Are Common In Illinois - LIAR, they are common for YOU, but not many others have 130 NO VOTES.

17.) Oops, I Misvoted - LIAR, only when caught by church groups and democrats, did you beg to change your misvote.

18.) I Was A Professor Of Law - LIAR, you were a senior lecturer ON LEAVE.

19.) I Was A Constitutional Lawyer - LIAR, you were a senior lecturer ON LEAVE.

20.) Without Me, There Would Be No Ethics Bill - LIAR, you didn’t write it,introduce it, change it, or create it.

21.) The Ethics Bill Was Hard To Pass - LIAR, it took just 14 days from start to finish.

22.) I Wrote A Tough Nuclear Bill - LIAR, your bill was rejected by your own party for its pandering and lack of all regulation - mainly because of your Nuclear Donor, Exelon, from which David Axelrod came.

23.) I Have Released My State Records - LIAR, as of March, 2008, state bills you sponsored or voted for have yet to be released, exposing all the special interests pork hidden within.

24.) I Took On The Asbestos Altgeld Gardens Mess - LIAR, you were part of a large group of people who remedied Altgeld Gardens. You failed to mention anyone else but yourself, in your books.

25.) My Economics Bill Will Help America - LIAR, your 111 economic policies were just combined into a proposal which lost 99-0, and even YOU voted against your own bill.

26.) I Have Been A Bold Leader In Illinois - LIAR, even your own supporters claim to have not seen BOLD action on your part.

27.) I Passed 26 Of My Own Bills In One Year - LIAR, they were not YOUR bills, but rather handed to you, after their creation by a fellow Senator, to assist you in a future bid for higher office.

28.) No One Contacted Canada About NAFTA - LIAR, the Candian Government issued the names and a memo of the conversation your campaign had with them.

29.) I Am Tough On Terrorism - LIAR, you missed the Iran Resolution vote on terrorism and your good friend Ali Abunimah supports the destruction of Israel.

30.) I Am Not Acting As President Yet - LIAR, after the NAFTA Memo, a dead terrorist in the FARC, in Colombia, was found with a letter stating how you and he were working together on getting FARC recognized officially.
YOU ARE NOT FIT TO BE THE PRESIDENT OF USA _ THE GREATEST COUNTRY ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH>
GOD BLESS AMERICA A MILLION TIMES; May 05, 2008 10:53 AM
Yamaka said...: Good Morning Democrats:

It's raining in Houston. My pool will get 2-3" rain! Good!!!!!

I was reminded of What Hillary told us regarding Iran using nuclear weapon to destroy Israel. Her response was "I will obliterate Iran, there WILL be massive retaliation".

Our liberal MSM and the anointed leader of the Liberal Movement, BHO, objected to that "type of language"!!

Wait a minute! That is the difference between BHO and HRC. She will be decisive and bold against any aggression, while BHO will be fuzzy and messy with his words and action - that is the contrast that people see before their eyes.

For a tough question, she gave the tough answer, although it is purely hypothetical. Iran will NOT in hundred years use a nuclear device to destroy Israel, and US will NOT obliterate Iran. But if it did, what would happen? That Question deserved a clear decisive answer.

Good for Hillary for such a clear bold thinking. What she says is she WILL become Goddess Durga to destroy the Evil in the world! Yes, she will.

Vote for Hillary, the Genuine American Classic - the First Woman POTUS.

Cheer and Smile for a better America.; May 05, 2008 10:58 AM
RobH said...: Nella,

If the stuff you postulate were true, would the SIGNIFICANT MAJORITY of YOUR ELECTED Democratic Party officials (Governors, Senators, Representatives) who have endosed, preferred Obama Clinton? Would thay fall for that, or even allow that behavior in their candidate's campaign? Are they all kool-aid drinkers, too?

Ya' know, I asked Aunt Jean very nicely to reply to that question a few days ago. She has chosen not to reply, but perhaps you can:

"How is it that the MAJORITY of our elected officials who have endorsed, choose Obama? Should we believe that our entire system/party has been seduced? Are they all foolishly naive?

Do you believe that? If you do, then you believe in candidate over party. If you don't, than how can you push this stuff?; May 05, 2008 10:59 AM
RobH said...: Obviously in my first sentence it should read"...Obama over Clinton..."; May 05, 2008 11:01 AM
Unknown said...: Here are more Lies from B. Hussein Obama - planted by the terrorists to take over USA without a fight like 9-11

31.) I Didn’t Run Ads In Florida - LIAR, you allowed national ads to run 8-12 times per day for two weeks - and you still lost.

32.) I Won Michigan - LIAR, no you didn’t.

33.) I won Nevada - LIAR, no you did not.

34.) I Want All Votes To Count - LIAR, you said let the delegates decide.

35.) I Want Americans To Decide - LIAR, you prefer caucuses that limit the vote, confuse the voters, force a public vote, and only operate during small windows of time.

36.) I passed 900 Bills in the State Senate - LIAR, you passed 26, most of which you didn’t write yourself.

37.) My Campaign Was Extorted By A Friend - LIAR, that friend is threatening to sue if you do not stop saying this. Obama has stopped saying this.

38.) I Believe In Fairness, Not Tactics - LIAR, you used tactics to eliminate Alice Palmer from running against you.

39.) I Don’t Take PAC Money - LIAR, you take loads of it.

40.) I don’t Have Lobbysists - LIAR, you have over 47 lobbyists, and counting.

41.) My Campaign Had Nothing To Do With The 1984 Ad - LIAR, your own campaign worker made the ad on his Apple in one afternoon.

42.) My Campaign Never Took Over MySpace - LIAR, Tom, who started MySpace issued a warning about this advertising to MySpace clients.

43.) I Inspire People With My Words - LIAR, you inspire people with other people’s words.
44.) I Have Passed Bills In The U.S. Senate - LIAR, you have passed A BILL in the U.S. Senate - for Africa, which shows YOUR priorities.

45.) I Have Always Been Against Iraq - LIAR, you weren’t in office to vote against it AND you have voted to fund it every single time, unlike Kucinich, who seems to be out gutting you Obama. You also seem to be stepping back from your departure date - AGAIN.; May 05, 2008 11:05 AM
Yamaka said...: Hi Nancy:

I call BHO a pathological liar.

He and everyone in his Campaign lie every second of every day.
__________________________________

Folks:

BHOs believe they can buy US Presidency by out-spending HRC by 3:1.

It won't happen.

It did not work in PA, OH and TX primaries. Why would it work in IN, NC and other States?

Message is more powerful than Money.

Vote for Hillary, the First Woman POTUS.

:-); May 05, 2008 11:07 AM
Yamaka said...: Who has endorsed BARack Hussein Obama Jr?

1. Most of them are FAR LEFT liberals who hated the guts of Bill Clinton. In other words it is NOT FOR OBa, but against Bill endorsements! They were all kicked by Bill when he governed the country from the Center, as he was the Chairman of DLC. Anti-Clinton gang now retaliates against Clintons via the Funny Name!

2. Some are bought by the BigMoneyBags of BHO's Campaign: he has spent 3:1 in buying the SDs, as he does in regular campaign. Richardson was recently bought by the BHO camp.

This is a common knowledge!

BARack is an unknown entity in the vast stretches of American heartland. Dhaa.....

Vote for Hillary.

:-); May 05, 2008 11:17 AM
Aunt Jean said...: robh I didn't know you asked me a question. I don't always read every post. As far as why I think SD's are voting for obama well 3 reasons. !.He had to of bribed or promised them something.
2. They are just plain fools
3. They have to be kool-aid drinkers.

Have I answered your question? This is a very serious problem I guess they don't pay attention to the news that tell about obama's unsavory friends and assoc's.. Of course also the bigot wright.[his mentor].I guess it's a game to them not to funny to me! Jean; May 05, 2008 11:29 AM
Aunt Jean said...: hey guys Sara Fisher's backing Clinton now that is something to talk about. Now that's one smart lady!!! Hillary Clinton our next POTUS!!!!!!!!!!jean; May 05, 2008 12:19 PM
Aunt Jean said...: hey guys Sara Fisher's backing Clinton now that is something to talk about. Now that's one smart lady!!! Hillary Clinton our next POTUS!!!!!!!!!!jean; May 05, 2008 12:20 PM
Pablo said...: Miss Aunt Jean.

Why would that be something to talk about? Are you going to tell me you've heard of her before?

But I guess that's fantastic for her. One more vote.; May 05, 2008 12:31 PM
Pablo said...: Nancy,

I see you've been taught to cut and paste, congratulations.

Please visit again when you have a thought of your own.; May 05, 2008 12:36 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Pablo no I admit I don't know that much about her but I have seen and heard about her and Danica patrick. I'm not that much of a race car fan but my nephew is and we have talked about them a few times.But it still doesn't matter it's just as big of a deal as Hanks for obama. Jean; May 05, 2008 1:00 PM
countjellybean said...: Rush Limbaugh just reported that Clinton internal polling has her losing Indiana, although no number given. He is continuing to instruct Republican crossovers to vote for Clinton.; May 05, 2008 1:17 PM
jpsedona said...: countjellybean,

"Rush Limbaugh just reported that Clinton internal polling has her losing Indiana, although no number given. He is continuing to instruct Republican crossovers to vote for Clinton."

Since Hillary needs to win one of two contests tomorrow, I cannot see her & Bill both being in NC today if the Clinton internal polls show her behind in Indiana. I'm not saying that this claim by Rush is self-serving (operation Chaos), but unless she's so far behind in IN that she can't close the gap, I can't believe she'd be putting all her eggs into the NC today. She may be hoping for an upset in NC but I can't believe that IN isn't in the bag gieven the stakes if she were to loose both.; May 05, 2008 1:24 PM

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 845 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

Tuesday, April 01, 2008

Open Thread

845 comments:

Tags