Hillary: Ready On Day … 57?

Absolutely right! Hillary claims experience and capability while calling Obama all words: The conventional ignorance that Hillary is all substance has proven false over and over again. She memorizes facts, but that’s far far less important than the ability to put those facts into context forming a system of wisdom to draw upon when the situation is different which it always is. This is what we call judgement and Obama has it in spades. Clinton is quick to remember what happened in the past. Obama is accurate in predicting what will happen in the future, and in devising ways to act that maximize our benefit. Anyone who can use wikipedia can adopt Clinton’s “big asset”, but there’s no wikipedia for judgement and wisdom.

At one point it was “hers to lose” and it looks like Senator Clinton has given it her best effort.
The true test of character is next…Will she shred Senator Obama?

I agree. But, hey folks, not to worry — she’s 2 or 3 slogans past “Ready on Day One” at this point. Now, “we’re in the solutions business, not the speechmaking business” (or something like that). (Wonder what crack Madison Avenue firm came up with that snappy little line?)

All 20,000 tickets for Obama’s Rally in Houston are gone.
The grassroot effort for Obama on the ground is huge.
That is what Hillary missed. She didn’t connect with the people.

Exactly, you can imagine that this is how Hillary would conduct her administration. Nothing but complaining. Her Texas argument and Iraq sound eerily similar… “If I had known then what I know now” I would have campaigned differently.

The rules were created by the elitists of the Democrat party! This is the party that in 2000 cried that the popular vote should count but if some one can walk out of a state with the least popular vote but the majority of delegates creates an issue. You open minded Dems switch parties to the Republican Party where this corruption is cleaned.

If Obama steals his words from others than it goes to reason he will need to steal his ideas to lead this great country . again like Bush we will get an empty headed president ( if he was elected)Unless Sinclair bites his head off. Our country is in a fight for its life . We need someone with true leadership and our time of need . It is not Obama . I have lost all respect for him . I will vote for Clinton she is intelligent and in command of the facts.She will lead with knowledge and conviction . A man ( Obama ) that can’t find his own words has no true convictions because he lacks his own thoughts and ideas . I will vote McCain if Obama gets the nomination

“If I had known then what I know now”… I would “Be ready one day one”. The problem is that she never knows now, she lacks judgement. The argument over her experience and that she’s been vetted and tested are mute points when you can even manage your campaign.

If you are not ready and able to reach “day 1″, what is the use of being ready for day 1?

Clinton wasn’t “ready on day one” in any of the last 8 contests! Obama won 60-40- ish in most! Against “The Clintons”? THAT is amazing!
To any observer, Obama has shown better managing, fundraising and leadership skills during this Campaign. Reports are Hillary didn’t even know how broke she was as she lost contest after contest, pretending they never happened! Can you spell D-E-N-I-A-L?
I hope the Clintons show some grace and class if Obama wins. It looks like he will, and, unfortunately, it looks like they won’t.
I think they want to hang around long enough to drag him through the mud, dirty him up REAL GOOD, so she can THEN win the ELECTABILITY argument with the Super delegates at the convention, even if she lags in elected delegates.
I bet that’s the plan.
When it becomes CLEAR that one of the Dems, Clinton or Obama, is ahead in ELECTED delegates, and the other could NOT catch up, THAT would be the time for ANY SUPERS to jump on board the winners tally and END this NONSENSE!

And what do the two democratic candidates have in common? They’re both bought and paid for. Part and parcel of a corrupt party where power reigns supreme. Each tied at the hips to special interest groups and shady characters. A party bound by an inherently corrupt nominating process whose existence can only be explained as keeping power concentrated among the elite. Both candidates now try to exploit the corruptness to the maximum extent possible on behalf of their masters.
Oddly enough, the raucous mumblings of Billy himself seem to be more along the lines of a wounded soul who sees his money making base of power eroding away and taking with it, his unethical and profitable habit of selling America to foreigners.
It’s power in the democratic party that’s the main motivator. Not a syllable about individual endeavor. Not a word about individual responsibility. Lemmings following they know not what.

Uh…wasn’t Hillary the one that said you have to “manage” every little detail. You have to be “experienced” ,detial minded, and hands-on. Ops!
Looks like she MISSED A LOT OF BIG DETAILS. Wonder who she will have “step down” on this one. She can’t claim it is discrimatory now can she.
Go Texans for Obama!

Once again another article in favor of Sen. Clinton. Why don’t you write an article asking questions on why Sen. Clinton won’t make her tax records public. What is wrong with giving a balanced report?

These words were clicking in my mind “Madam President” when the race started. But the way we goby and after reading this article, I can see not from far away that the wind is blowing off “THE CROWN” from her. What a pity!

Firefighter: To set the record straight, it is Clinton who has taken more money from lobbyists than any other candidate (dem or republican). Obama takes money from the employees of corporations, but he doesn’t actually take money from the special interest groups or lobbyists. If that is what your basing your decision on, you had better switch sides. I’ve heard a number of people saying this about special interest groups and I think it just goes to show how emotionally people vote and will see everything through the lens of that emotion. As an Obama person I can’t understand how people can think his speeches have no policy proposals in them. Hers are a lists of facts – not that useful when it actually comes time to implement a plan – situations are always different than they seem on paper. Evident from her campaign.

Senator Clinton’s campaign was certainly not ready from day one as they had no plan in place after February 5. Her campaign has yet to find a solution to stopping Senator Obama’s momentum. It concerns me that she has failed to “right the ship” of her campaign. What would she do as President when meets resistence from Congress? Would her administration unravel like her campaign?

Sue:
It would be wonderful if the Republicans put Condoleeza Rice on the ticket thinking they would get Black votes. If Obama is the Democratic nominee, she would bring absolutely zilch to the ticket in terms of Black votes. This is the flaw of many observers who believe that people are voting for Obama simply because he’s Black. It is much deeper than that. Rice is actually an admired, but despised figure because she has promoted the failed Bush policies. Her inclusion on the ticket will get the GOP absolutely nowhere.

Running a campaign well is like running the government well: you select the most competent people, make sure they work together, get the best information out of them and make clear decisions. By that measure the crony loaded, flip flopping over budget Clinton campaign is a disaster.
I was an early Clinton supporter and made a substantial contribution. Since then all I have heard from the campaign is daily pleas for more money (contribute and you can be in a sweepstakes to watch football with Bill). Never have they sent me any policy positions nor have they asked me to help organize (say talk to my neighbors before my local primaries)…That is until yesterday when they emailed me a “Persuasion and ID” script and told me I was to call an 800 number which would forward me to Wisconsin voters I should persuade to vote for Hillary.
Too late…I have switched my support to Obama.

I enjoy reading these posts. You can feel the emotion jumping off the screen. When, however, will I read that our country is one terrific nation. A number of people knock Hillary, and a number knock Barack. Guess what ? It relly makes no difference ! We have survived many poor presidents, and will continue to do no matter who is elected. Our country survived a great Civil War even though the very best president, Abe Lincoln was in office. We survived, as a nation, even though the wonderful president, JFK,was in office at the onset of that calamity, and we will survive even after Bush got us into the mess in Iraq. There’s no reason to be negative about anyone, at anytime, for any reason. It takes way too much energy, and makes too many people uncomfortable. God Bless America, now, for the nextPresident, and for many years thereafter.

I’ve listen to the news this morning at one of the local radio in Boston MA.The announcer had mentioned that Barrack’s wife Mitchelle when ever she’s campaings for her husband that she’s always said We love Jesus and ours soul. I feel that she’ll be more than the First Lady! she appears to Aggressive person to me and to be in the White House and that she’s be the person that will make most of the decision. Also that Barrack belongs to Black Church that not crazy about the White people in Chicago. If this is true I think that the people should carefully rethinking about the voting to his platform as President. The more I have watching Barrack on TV its appears to me that his words more toward Preeching to people. He does not have the expereince to run the country
and this is not the trial states for him. Sure that the younger people votes for him this as the same with when Senator Kerry, ran for President too. But when come to the actual votes the young people didn’t anticipated. I feels that this is just a fast for youngs people and they may took aways from the Real candidate that have the experience and ability and cares for the people in USA.

BUT …. BUT …. BUT …., I thought she was the smartest woman in the world …. How can this be…

Gwen, I think you meant to respond to S.B.’s post. Anywho :), I agree that Secretary Rice wouldn’t get many “black” votes, because we know she’s drinking the Kool-Aid they’re serving at the White House. Now, if McCain convinced Colin Powell to be VP, then Obama might have trouble with the “black” vote in a general election.
Anyway, as an Obama supporter, it’s good to see Hillary’s having a SNAFU’s in Texas.

This blog is completely biased and quite frankly stupid. How one “runs” a campaign doesn’t necessarily reflect how one “runs” a country. Our current president who has had two very successfull “runs” at the Presidency is a perfect example. Clinton’s campaign was set up with a particular mindset: To win big on Super Tuesday and crush the opposition. Obama has run an insurgent campaign that had the opposite scenario *the one we are currently in* as their model. They are running what they *hoped* and *expected* to happen. It is obviously unfair to judge the necessary course corrections of a campaign even the media had dubbed as inevitable just a few months ago.
Nice insight. I love the clear Anti-Clinton bias as well. It’s really tragic to see journalism take such a dramatic dive in the dumpster.

Here’s another indication of Clinton’s poor managerial talents. A president must be able to manage and choose the right people to help her/him manage. Let’s not forget George Bush’s managerial style(or lack thereof), which looks suspiciously similar to Hillary’s. Hillary has exercised extremely poor judgement in her campaign decisions and her choice of people to help her run her campaign. On the other hand, Obama’s organization of his presidential campaign is perhaps the best we’ve ever had, and is lauded by every politician asked about it.

I guess concentrating on getting the votes of the people as a campaign strategy is very passé. Too bad.

The kind of nepotism shown in HRC’s campaign staff is very similar to Bush..that is, stick with the same people, no matter if they are doing all the wrong things, loyalty over competence…same as “Brownie” and “Gonzo”. She supports you 100%, till the next day when she throws you under the bus. HRC has really shown her true colors this year. My sympathies to Patty Solis Doyle.

HM-typical Obama spin, it’s one in the same…just a surrogate who handsover the check. Obama is status quo politician.
Some of Obama’s lobby endorsments:
White House Endorsement Watch
K Street Endorsements
This is a running tabulation of lobbyists who “have made
their endorsements public” in the 2008 White House contest.
Barack Obama Lobby endorsements
Donald Alexander (Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld)
John Buscher (Holland & Knight)
Kevin Chavous (Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal)
Tom Daschle (Alston & Bird)
Stan Fendley (Corning)
Elizabeth Fox (Jolly/Rissler)
Francis Grab (Washington Council Ernst & Young)
Tim Hannegan (Wexler & Walker Public Policy Associates)
Tom Jensen (Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal)
Broderick Johnson (Bryan Cave Strategies)
Mark Keam (Verizon)
Bob Maloney (Maloney Government Relations)
Marcus Mason (The Madison Group)
Andy Rosenberg (Ogilvy Government Relations)
Bobby Sepucha (Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal)
Jarvis Stewart (Stewart Partners)
Tom Walls (McGuireWoods)
Michael Williams (Credit Suisse)

I didn’t vote for Bush because of a gut feeling that he was all talk! I have a that same feeling about Barack! Let’s see what you folks think after his first year in office if he wins!

The writing is on the wall, with the new CNN poll showing them in a dead-heat for Texas and this report showing where Obama has gained even more:

The funny thing is, supporters of HRC subsist on completely words alone – no one seems to document results. That’s the benefit of inheriting Bill Clinton’s political machine but makes it almost impossible for voters to evaluate HRC on her own merits.
Now, watching HRC mismanage her campaign (of course the largest, maybe only, thing she’s ever managed in the public eye) her supporters keep parroting the party line. The slogan “Ready on day 1″ has now become a joke.
They’re both relatively inexperienced but it’s fairly obvious Obama is a natural born leader and is managing his campaign competently.

The Clinton’s have lost their touch and are running a 1992 campaign in 2008. Good thing we see that now because the world is complex and if Hillary’s campaign “can’t” figure out the rules of the primaries…and don’t have a Plan B? Her Iraq vote is the #1 that not only is she not ready for Day 1, if she makes a huge mistake she won’t even own up to it. Reminds me of someone else who never admits error. So much for the solutions person…they can’t figure out the problem.

Wait a minute…she cannot run an effective campaign, but is suppose to run our country? Where is this 35 years of experience?
Once again, this theme of arrogance….cannot admit she was wrong about the war and didn’t have a post-super Tues. game plan because she was the “inevitable” candidate (her words, not mine!).
America, turn the page. I would not trust her to lead me to water.

I first got involved in Texas Democratic politics in 1984. The primary system we had then is basically the same one we’re using now in 2008! The difference is no one outside of Texas cared! By now the nominee would have closed the deal and our primaries would be a moot point.
HRC has behaved from day one as though this were a coronation! And her campaign was totally caught off guard by Obama’s ground swell of support. For HRC to now cry about how Texas conducts it’s primary is crock of BULL!!
Texans have a saying that fits this situation, “Don’t bring a knife to a gun fight”. Lady, your lack of ground work is not the fault of the Texas Democratic Party!!