Comments on: Obama, Clinton Shower Cash on Delegates

By: T Kemp

T Kemp — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 01:48:40 +0000

Sounds to me that Money can buy the Presidency!

By: AY

AY — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 20:23:41 +0000

The headline says: Obama, Clinton Shower Cash on Delegates
Americans are very gullible. Read and think, do not jump into conclusions.

By: AY

AY — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 20:23:26 +0000

The headline says: Obama, Clinton Shower Cash on Delegates
Americans are very gullible. Read and think, don not jump into conclusions.

By: PRINCE ANYAKORA

PRINCE ANYAKORA — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 07:21:16 +0000

GAIN understanding, and be wise. Read what you may, but always ask yourself- what is this that I have read trying to tell me, and is it logical and legally sound. Ask your Senator if that is true, and source of whatever you have read. We elected Congress to make laws, represent us, and tell us the truth no matter how difficuld the truth is hard to swallow.

By: PRINCE ANYAKORA

PRINCE ANYAKORA — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 07:09:51 +0000

Some people get entangled with media spins about this presidential election and they forget what we want to achieve-CHANGE IN WASHINGTON POLITICS AND MINDSET.
WE NEED PROOF OF ANY SPINS BEFORE WE CAN MAKE SOUND JUDGMENT- IF GOVERNORS, CONGRESSMEN AND CONGRESSWOMEN RECEIVED MONEY FROM CLINTON’S OR OBAMA CAMPAIGN, WE WILL KNOW FROM OFFICIAL SOURCES, NOT FROM BLOGGERS, PUNDITS, OR MEDIA.
UNITED STATES DOES HAVE LAWS TO CHECK EVERY CAMPAIGN, AS WELL AS POLITICAL PARTIES. WE HAVE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENTS WITH INVESTIGATORS.
ONLY AN IDIOT BELIEVES EVERYTHING BLOGGERS, PUNDITS, EVEN MEDIA DO SAY. THIS IS OPEN AND TRANSPARENT DEMOCRACY. YOU CAN GET ALL AND ACCURATE INFORMATION BY GOING TO SOURCE [CAMPAIGNS ] OR BY FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT [FOIA].
IT IS NONSENSICAL AND RUBBISH TO BELIEVE THAT A PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE WOULD PURCHASE DELEGATES OR SUPERDELEGATES. BOTH THE GIVER AND RECEIVER WOULD FACE THE FULL WRATH OF LAW. USE YOUR COMMONSENSE. THERE IS LOTS OF GARBAGE OUT THERE DESIGNED TO MISLED YOU. BE CAREFUL OF WHAT YOU READ.
WHATEVER YOU READ, AS YOUR SELF- Does this make sense. Common sense dictates that millions of Dollars spent on Democratic campaign, travels, debates, etc. can easily purchace enough superdelegates without making any efforts to tell American what a given candidate intends to do. It means that money would buy our presidency. What a shallow and hollow thinking.

By: Freddy

Freddy — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 04:28:37 +0000

PEOPLE: think about it… you are a democrat with a minority status in our government, what is god’s name is wrong with offering campaign contributions to your co-senators????
The wording of this “issue” is wrong as to lead readers to think that this is some kind of a bribe, this is a way that for a long time both sides keep each other going, this was for the senatorial re-election when THEY would be running, and this was campaign contributions to THEIR campaigns, is it not? It averages somewhere like 7,500 or so per senate re-election, per senator.
Think about it, you’d do the same thing when the whole system is set up to be one against the other, maybe if we have more than two parties, or NONE AT ALL, this wouldn’t be needed, but until then, why is it wrong for one party to try everything they can do to keep themselves alive, this was not done with the hopes of buying votes, this was done mostly before he had any idea we would be where he was now. This was one democratic senator donating to another’s campaign, where is it written that WE can contribute to a campaign, but they cannot?

By: trance_master4u

trance_master4u — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 04:15:43 +0000

As an onlooker of the political system of the USA I am amazed to find this so called democratic country may decide the Democratic Nomination for President by buying “Super Delegate” votes. What makes any one person more super than the next ? No doubt those Super Delegates all have their particular axe to grind and I also see that big money is involved too. But no matter who wins, the system is still fatally flawed when a President can overrule decisions of the peoples representatives in Congress and the Senate when it doesn’t suit him. I suggest that Democracy has somehow gone astray. One person, one vote, winner takes all, thats the decision of the people politicians are supposed to represent.

By: okdokethen

okdokethen — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 20:18:10 +0000

CAREFUL PEOPLE, ANYTHING YOU SAY ABOUT OBAMA CAN AND WILL BE USED AGAINST YOU! what a freakin’ joke!

By: Ken McMullan

Ken McMullan — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 15:31:49 +0000

In Canada Leaders of a party on picked by insiders all the time. Their is always
political trade offs in any system. If one
party wins more votes in a election which
gives them more winning candidates across
Canada then their leader becomes Prime Minister. You don’t have much to complain
about because voters have at least partial chance to make the decision.
their leader of that party

By: Lisa

Lisa — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 11:31:38 +0000

Crying out loud – PEOPLE – Read the details. “GOING BACK TO 2005!” When a candidate finishes their campaign and have money left in their coffers, it is legal to donate the remainder to other campaigns.
These payments weren’t made in 2006, or 2007, or 2008! Or last week!
The headline is VERY misleading and incendiary – “Obama, Clinton shower cash on delegates” and I think their editors need to knock someone upside the head for writing it in present tense like they did.