Let the Vetting Begin, Obama Campaign Says
ABC News’ Sunlen Miller Reports: The Obama campaign is pushing ahead full force against the Clinton campaign, saying it’s not Barack Obama but rather Hillary Clinton who has not been vetted.
"The point we want to raise is that the vetting of Hillary Clinton has yet to start – that the hard questions have not been asked of Senator Clinton," Obama strategist David Axelrod said. "What’s good for the goose is good for the gander."
Axelrod and Communications Director Robert Gibbs told reporters on a conference call that Clinton is being elusive about her tax returns as well as her records from her years as First Lady.
Playing off the Clinton’s "Change you can Xerox" line, Axelrod said, "You can Xerox your tax returns… there’s not a lot of preparation needed for that."
They called on Clinton to release her tax returns before April 15th, which her campaign has hinted was her deadline. Gibbs says that by then 80% of democrats would have voted.
The campaign insists that this is not a shift in strategy to go negative against Clinton. "This is an attempt to see to it that both the campaign are held to the same yardstick. There’s no candidate that has been vetted less in this campaign than Senator Clinton," Axelrod said.
Despite losing Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island, the Obama campaign said they went in with a strong lead and came out with a strong lead. Additionally, they noted that there are 370 delegates less on the playing field right now. Even with Tuesday night’s outcome, Clinton has not been able to close the gap, cutting into Obama’s lead by only four pledged delegates according to their estimates.
Email
Newt Gingrich's Full Speech at CPAC 2012
USS Gabrielle Giffords Honors Courage
So, Axelrod thinks he can command Senator Clinton to release her tax returns prior to April 15?
Perhaps the Obama campaign czar can get away with that when dealing with his own peasants and minions, but I doubt that the Clinton camp will do much more than laugh.
In my lifetime, April 15 has been the traditional tax deadline for all Americans. Now, we have the Internal Axelrod Revenue Service saying that isn’t good enough.
That’s about right for a campaign that refers to its candidate as “the Messiah.”
Posted by: ken | March 5, 2008, 2:50 pm 2:50 pm
if she has nothing to hide, why not release them?
how about releasing all the First Lady documents
the donors to the Presidential Library, why such a big secret?
bill’s dubai port deal?
how about kazakhstan?
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 2:52 pm 2:52 pm
No candidate that has been less vetted? Axelrod sounds just flat out stupid. Who has been more vetted than Hillary Clinton?
So Mr. Hope and Change had the door slammed shut last night and now moves to campaign tactics he swore he would never use.
Dangerous ground for Obama.
Posted by: Kris | March 5, 2008, 2:55 pm 2:55 pm
When he was getting win after win he did not have a problem but he is sure acting like a sore loser after Hillary has made this come back.
Posted by: SJ | March 5, 2008, 2:56 pm 2:56 pm
Yes.. clinton we need to know.!!!!!!!!!.. democracy = transparency… ooops I forgot you are a Republican
Shame on you for using all the dirty tricks in the clinton’s dictoionary to steal votes and still be proud. I wonder how you are able to sleep at night.
Posted by: aurelia | March 5, 2008, 2:56 pm 2:56 pm
It’s about time!!!
This guy should be fired for not “vetting” Clinton LONG ago. If they had “vetted” Clinton earlier, this race wouldn’t be as close as it is now.
Posted by: Sean | March 5, 2008, 2:57 pm 2:57 pm
hillary believes as long as she ignores it, it will go away. That is how she and bill handled this in the 90′s. Then a slow leak started, and the dam broke…
scandal after scandal
someone explain the experience that qualifies hillary as commander in chief.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 2:57 pm 2:57 pm
LMAO, the press releases fromthe Obama campaign just keep getting funnier and funnier.
Like Clinton hasnt been vetted!! aahahahh
There is no one more vetted on the face of the planet.
LMAO who’s desperate now!
Posted by: s.b. | March 5, 2008, 2:58 pm 2:58 pm
All I can say is thank God all of this stuff is coming out on Obama before the general election, where McCain and Rove would have torn him to shreds. As far as his threat to vet Clinton, good luck — the Repubs have been at that for 16 years. There’s nothing left.
Posted by: LAGuy | March 5, 2008, 2:58 pm 2:58 pm
“LA in Indiana”, what exactly is “Chicago Politics” of which Obama is the master? Does this pertain to Rezko. Clinton has already completed her part of the process and approved papers for release. Why not have Obama answer all the questions on Rezko-Gate?
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | March 5, 2008, 2:59 pm 2:59 pm
other than having a general behind her, because all three candidates have a general supporting them. If its just enough to say she understands….they all ‘understand’, so that doesn’t fly.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 2:59 pm 2:59 pm
Hey Ken, you should have seen Axelrod squirming with George Stephanopolous when a) the Clinton campaign pledged a date certain to release tax returns, and b) George S. continued to hammer Axelrod on the unanswered Rezko questions. Axelrod refused to respond. The cracks in the Obama campaign are just starting to appear, just a matter of time in the pressure cooker.
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | March 5, 2008, 3:02 pm 3:02 pm
he’s already answered them, y’all just don’t like the answers because there is nothing there. so you just keep beating the drum….how disingenuous
The Chicago Tribune has done the vetting on this issue already. When it came up again last year, one of the reporters on CBS or NBC (whichever one it was) did a report on this issue. The result? There was nothing illegal, period.
So tell the first lady to release all her documents so the sheeple can see what she is hiding.
She would rather throw her own party members under the bus, well its about time she got dragged under the bus as well. The dragging will be much worse if she wins the nomination, because then she will surely lose.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 3:04 pm 3:04 pm
ken: I believe Mr. Axelrod is talking about prior years, returns prepared some time go.
Posted by: aka | March 5, 2008, 3:04 pm 3:04 pm
Hillary Clinton has had it very easy on the vetting front. She has not been vetted for the presidential election. Where did that $5 million loan come from?
She thinks people will just let her skate through without revealing her current tax records? The American people deserve to know who is buying access to the Whitehouse.
Hillary is trying out for the most powerful office in the US. I think she should live by same standard that other candidates have honored.
What is she hiding????????
Why no more on her connection with Gupta of Info USA?
Posted by: Grace | March 5, 2008, 3:05 pm 3:05 pm
It must be nice for Hillary to have George Steph. in her back pocket doing her dirty work for her.
Posted by: Sean | March 5, 2008, 3:07 pm 3:07 pm
A lot of talk about answering questions about Rezko. Specifically what questions about Rezko has Obama refused to answer?
Posted by: Don | March 5, 2008, 3:07 pm 3:07 pm
If he is so forth coming with these answers on the Rezko why is the Chicago media after him for answer? Am very sure the media has a lot of other news they can cover but maybe they know something that we don’t and need to get to the bottom of the matter.
Or is it that Obama is going to say the Chicago media houses don’t like him, so they are just sitting there daily waiting to get something on him?
Posted by: SJ | March 5, 2008, 3:13 pm 3:13 pm
they can’t say what he hasn’t answered, they figure if they just keep beating the Rezko drum, then the hillary sheeple will be afraid….
besides, he is a muslim too, right?! I mean, as far as hillary knows, he’s not, right?!
just dishonest rhetoric…she will say or do anything to get elected.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 3:15 pm 3:15 pm
We have not had so much fun since the day after the 2000 election. I would not have believed it – but this is going all the way to Puerto Rico!
Posted by: smartprimate | March 5, 2008, 3:15 pm 3:15 pm
Every single pundit, analyst, statistician and political strategist points out the futility of the Clinton campaign continuing…that they simply cannot overcome the delegate deficit to best Sen. Obama’s lead going into the convention. Why then is Sen. Clinton forging ahead with a campaign that is either destined to lose or lead inevitably to a brokered convention? In the face of certain defeat…against numbers, not advice, that she cannot win…she is marching on. That Sen. Clinton disregards these facts, while beseeching the people to fund her drive, she, more than anyone, echoes the Bush-Cheney mindset…which may explain why she voted for the war in Iraq…and why it is difficult to take her seriously when she claims she can remedy this failing economy — for nothing she does, as the theoretical candidate of action over words — offers any kind of “solution” to this problem.
Posted by: H. Aslan Aslani-Far | March 5, 2008, 3:16 pm 3:16 pm
Again, what are the questions he refuses to answer. Has the media published them?
Posted by: Don | March 5, 2008, 3:16 pm 3:16 pm
Why hasn’t Michelle Obama released her thesis on being a black college woman? How come omana isn’t being vetted? So a Chicago newpaper vetted obama? Really? I would love to read Michelle obamas thesis – Why is it locked away?
The chosen one is kind of wobbly today?
Posted by: Lou | March 5, 2008, 3:16 pm 3:16 pm
The fact is, Obama has waited to late to go negative on Clinton. They shouldn’t be complaining about this stuff now. He said HIS campaign WOULDN’T mention all of her campaign SCANDALS eventhough, camp Clinton threw up Rezco day after day. They can’t mention that stuff in passing now. And while people with MORE money THAN the CLINTONS have RELEASED their records, it’s fine if stupid voters don’t care or won’t to know just who these people have on the favor roll.
Obama should drop out now because he won’t win in the end anyway. However, Clinton will also lose b/c there is no way the people that are attracted to him will vote for her. And there are some fences that won’t be mended. So, Obama should drop out. Hillary will lose and Obama can tell the DUMB Democratic voters of Ohio and Texas, kiss …….
Posted by: Intelligent Dem. voter? hardly | March 5, 2008, 3:18 pm 3:18 pm
Norman Hsu…or better yet, Peter Paul…that trial is about to start, isn’t it?
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 3:22 pm 3:22 pm
Florida and Michigan!!!
Count 2 million plus democratic votes!
Posted by: s.b. | March 5, 2008, 3:23 pm 3:23 pm
The independents and dems who voted for Obama now have another candidate they can back: Ralph Nader.
Posted by: Don | March 5, 2008, 3:23 pm 3:23 pm
With so many incredibly important issues we should be discussing, I find it incredibly desperate of the Obama Campaign to continue their attack about this issue. WHO CARES HOW SHE MADE HER MONEY!!? How about this, if Clinton shows her tax return, will Obama come clean with his dealing with the corupt real estate developer or even better, his dealings with the nuclear power industry.
It’s okay, the longer this race goes on, the more people are seeing Obama isn’t what he appears. He may prefer to wear the halo of a saint, but I for one know that he’s no different from any other politician.
Their campaign is sinking. It’s just a matter of time….
Posted by: Vasilios Birlidis | March 5, 2008, 3:24 pm 3:24 pm
Everyone that is worried about who is bankrolling Hillary or Barak need to step back and ask: Would it be better that they were using their own money or someone else’s money to fund their campaigns?
When Mitt Romney was running, the comments were: “He’s trying to buy the presidency with his own money!”
Now, with Hillary they are asking: “Who’s buying access to the presidency?”
Which is it going to be?? Either they use their own money, or someone else’s money….
Posted by: Moneyman | March 5, 2008, 3:24 pm 3:24 pm
Michelle Obama has personally released her thesis. You should be able to find it with an internet query.
Posted by: Sara | March 5, 2008, 3:25 pm 3:25 pm
Simple minds HRC supporters, go to college and get an education.She is the biggest lier in American politics and you still believe her. She told Tim Russert during the last debate , in front of millions of people: I have requested to have my 100000 files sent to the White House. Next thing is: the White House says they haven’t heard from HRC at all!! In your face, lying. What a nerve! Simple minds like that, they like bullies & liers. Shame on that!The world is watching!
Posted by: carmen | March 5, 2008, 3:28 pm 3:28 pm
very true Intelligent Dem.
And Michelle Obama’s thesis was already released, it was in the news about two weeks ago. Y’all really are lazy, don’t research, just continuous spew of clinton/rove talking points.
lol y’all don’t have a clue.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 3:29 pm 3:29 pm
All of this should have been put to rest last night. No, voters felt sorry for a lady taking a beating by losing back to back contest. Not to mention the negativity coming from her campagin directed at him.
All I can say is this: now that she is the front runner again, she will no doubt face harsh press coverage as all front runners do. So, will she complain again of being treated unfairly?
While I hardly agree with the pundits and commentators, it will be an extremely hard road for her to BOTH attain the Dem. nomination and WIN the general election.
Seriously, she stands even less of a chance of beating McCain. That 3 am ad that she rolled out in the last week, will really bite her in the butt when she faces a war hero or military veteran. Now I can surely see why she has the most support among the uneducated of your party. You people lack deep analytical skills the see the writing on the wall. Oh well congrats to her and him. My party waits in anticipation of going against either of your candidates.
Posted by: Maryanne | March 5, 2008, 3:30 pm 3:30 pm
Bus isn’t this Axelrod person the same one that tried to sell us the messianic image of Barack Obama with a ‘new’ style of politics? I don’t think you can change your campaign so drastically and pretend to still be seen as a reformer. It’s obvious it was just all politics. What’s next? “No more Mr Niceguy?”
Once thing we know for sure: OBAMA LIED! He lied in regards to his relationship with Tony Rezko and he lied in regards to the meeting with the Canadian official. OBAMA LIED!
Posted by: Tony | March 5, 2008, 3:31 pm 3:31 pm
LA in Indiana:
Really?? Did you really just use “clinton/rove” together?? Really? Really?
Posted by: Moneyman | March 5, 2008, 3:32 pm 3:32 pm
Mr. Wolfson since you brought it up…to go with “Tony Rezko.”
Here are some names.
Norman Hsu.
Monica Lewinsky.
Peter Paul.
Mike Espy.
Frank Rich.
Craig Livingstone.
Paula Jones.
Linda Bloodworth Thomason.
Harry Thomason.
Ed Willey.
Cattle Futures.
Hugh Rodham.
Tony Rodham.
White… Water.
Vince Foster.
China-gate.
Travel-gate.
File-gate.
Right-wing conspiracy.
Right wing conspiracy isn’t big enough to pull off all of these.
Posted by: dl | March 5, 2008, 3:32 pm 3:32 pm
sorry but people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones
Posted by: dl | March 5, 2008, 3:35 pm 3:35 pm
OBAMA LIED!
Posted by: Tony | March 5, 2008, 3:35 pm 3:35 pm
Oh, and Hillary has never lied about anything. ANYTHING! She’s as pure as the wind-driven snow.
Posted by: Don | March 5, 2008, 3:35 pm 3:35 pm
OBAMA LIED! LOL.. it’s working already!
Posted by: Tony | March 5, 2008, 3:36 pm 3:36 pm
I think she’s hiding something. Where did the $5 million she “loaned” her campaign come from?
If she has nothing to hide then she should release the tax returns now.
Posted by: major1 | March 5, 2008, 3:38 pm 3:38 pm
IT’S JUST PART OF THE POLITICAL MANEUVERING – YOU DON’T JUST GIVE IT TO THE OPPONENT WHAT THEY WANT FROM YOU – SHE DOESN’T NEED TO RELEASE HER INCOME TAX RETURN SO THEY SCRUTINIZED IT AND GIVE THEM SOME AMMUNITION – IT JUST FEBRUARY – POLITICS ARE DIRTY THEY HAVE AN ULTERIOR MOTIVE AND PEOPLE ARE NOT BORN YESTERDAY.
WHY NOT HAVE SENATOR OBAMA RELEASE ALL THE EMAIL AND COMMUNICATION THAT HE HAS WITH THE REAL ESTATE DEAL WITH REZKO AND THEN SENATOR CLINTON WILL RELEASE HER INCOME TAX RETURN. I THINK THAT IS JUST FAIR AND SQUARE.
SENATOR OBAMA CANNOT BE TRUSTED ON YOUR WORDS. YOU LOST IN OHIO AND TEXAS STOP WHINING AND STOP CRYING WOLF. YOU JUST MENTION ON YOUR PREVIOUS INTERVIEW THAT YOU WON’T GO NEGATIVE AND NOW HERE YOU ARE AGAIN YOU ARE DOUBLE TALKING.
HOW CAN THE AMERICA VOTERS BELIEVE IN YOU – YOU SAY SOMETHING BUT YOU DO DIFFERENT THING.
VOTERS FROM OHIO, TEXAS AND RHODE ISLAND HAS SPOKEN!
INFATUATION HAS ENDED AND REALITY NOW STARTED.
Posted by: Sam Lim | March 5, 2008, 3:40 pm 3:40 pm
Major1:
Uh…hmmm….let’s see….what have Hillary and Bill done to make money since they let the White house?
Uh…2 best selling books, speaking fee’s, senate paychecks…etc…..
Posted by: Moneyman | March 5, 2008, 3:40 pm 3:40 pm
March 05, 2008 2:13 PM
“Complaining about the refs apparently worked a little bit this week,” Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, told reporters today. “So in addition to my call to Lorne Michaels, hopefully now people think everything has evened out.”
Lorne Michaels is, of course, the executive producer of Saturday Night Live, the show that has done several skits about the media being extra tough to Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY., and extra sycophantic to Obama.
Clinton cited one skit in the last Democratic debate.”
IS THIS CHANGE YOU CAN REALLY BELIEVE IN?
Posted by: Anthony | March 5, 2008, 3:41 pm 3:41 pm
these woudl be the tax documents from LAST year, not the ones due this year. Thought those should be released as well. As well as the much touted documents regarding her Whitehouse experience.
She has plenty to hide. This is why she wants to wait until she is the nominee before she will release these docs.
Posted by: Louis | March 5, 2008, 3:41 pm 3:41 pm
The answer to where the $5 million came from will come out too late to help Obama. But it will sure help McCain.
Posted by: Don | March 5, 2008, 3:41 pm 3:41 pm
what did he lie about tony?
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 3:41 pm 3:41 pm
For months, Sun-Times investigative reporters have had a standing request to meet with Obama, face to face, to get answers to questions such as these:
• How many fund-raisers did Rezko throw for Obama?
• Obama is donating $150,000 to charity that Rezko brought into the campaign. But how much in all did Rezko raise?
• Did Rezko find jobs for Obama backers in the Blagojevich administration or elsewhere?
• Why did Obama only recently admit — after Bloomberg News broke the story — that Rezko had toured his South Side mansion with him in 2004 before he bought it?
Dribs and drabs of people’s lives have a most unfortunate way of coming out in trials.
Posted by: SJ | March 5, 2008, 3:41 pm 3:41 pm
OBAMA LIED & LOST!
Posted by: Tony | March 5, 2008, 3:42 pm 3:42 pm
Hillary has been brought in to testify and won. : )
Posted by: dl | March 5, 2008, 3:44 pm 3:44 pm
Yesterday the Obama supporters were licking the feet of Texas, Ohio, and Rhode Island voters and today they curse and call them simple minded voters for choosing Hillary. Pay attention PA and other states to come because if you do not vote as the Obama supporters tell you to vote you could find yourselves being cursed and called simple minded as well. Who knew?
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 5, 2008, 3:44 pm 3:44 pm
he answered the Rezko questions, no lies there….
Tony you don’t read/listen to the news? The canadians quietly apologized about that bogus story, and backed up Obamas response. Seems like the canadians are trying to assist the americans having problems with Obama’s numbers…he’s getting to close to the white house.
How disingenuous for hillary to darken his picture…
you guys are funny and wrong lol
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 3:44 pm 3:44 pm
That was some deep thinking there Tony!!
I can do that too:
TONY LIED & AND IS AN IDIOT!!
How deep was that??
Posted by: Moneyman | March 5, 2008, 3:44 pm 3:44 pm
Carmen,
I agree. Let us not forget she promised the residents of her state 5illion new jobs. Not only did she not produce such, they lost jobs. Now it appears the residents of Ohio must have fallen victim to the same lie. Not only will workers, avg. workers, be working longer hours for less pay, but now the govt. will garnish even more of their salaries by forcing people to pay for something else!
LA in Indiana,
I agree with you as well. In fact, I believe the only reason her keep mentioning Tony is they know he doesn’t want to go negative. They knew he didn’t want to mention her camp woes – or the tasteless bit of auctioning out a room in the White House.
In any case, it doesnt matter. Fortunate for us, we have great careers, nice home, nice cars, very comfortable savings or security blanket. I just think it is a shame people would elect someone out of fear, blind loyalty, bias, etc.
Posted by: Marisol Morgan | March 5, 2008, 3:45 pm 3:45 pm
Rezko and no charges can only go so far gang especially coming from the Clintons.
Fine, finally I am at this point today…If this is the debate you all want to have about ethics … I am sure the Clintons and the American people want that to be the debate
Lets have it.
Posted by: dl | March 5, 2008, 3:47 pm 3:47 pm
How things have changed, first Obama said, he only works for 5 hours in a related lawsuit by his law firm (he worked there) for Tony Rezko, know they are long friends for over 20 years. Second, He said no meeting was perform with any canadian official, then a memo surfaced stating the contrary. Third, now he is more vetted than HRC, What’s he thinking about?
FISHY UH !!!
Posted by: Miguel | March 5, 2008, 3:47 pm 3:47 pm
LA, Barack Obama said his relationship with Tony Rezko was purely business.. “5 hrs” of work but we all know now that not only they were partness in a business related to Obama’s house but also took Rezko for a ‘tour’ prior to buying the house. A lie is a lie.
Posted by: Tony | March 5, 2008, 3:47 pm 3:47 pm
I AM JUST WONDERING IF AXELROD IS RELATED TO AL ROVE?
Posted by: Sam Lim | March 5, 2008, 3:47 pm 3:47 pm
it doesn’t matter dogsoldier, hillary will lose anyway lol
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 3:48 pm 3:48 pm
Actually, LA, the Canadian Government apologized for the leaked memo and NOT the contents of the memo itself. Just one of those facts you spoke about yesterday.
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 5, 2008, 3:49 pm 3:49 pm
Well, as long as demands are being made to release documents, let’s hold that thought.
I, along with many others, would like to read Michelle Obama’s senior thesis she wrote while at Princeton.
The release date for the Michelle Obama’s thesis is tentatively set for one day after election day, November 5, 2008. How convenient!
In the interest of fair play and full disclosure, why not release the thesis the same time Senator Clinton releases her documents?
While Mrs. Obama is not running for office, election of the Senator would make her the First Lady.
We surely would want any skeletons Mrs. Obama and Princeton have to come out of the closet as soon as possible so that the electorate can be fully informed. Wouldn’t we?
Now, if the Obama’s or Axelrod don’t think such a request is fair, perhaps Ken Starr should be called on to dig a little deeper.
Posted by: ken | March 5, 2008, 3:50 pm 3:50 pm
Shame on you, Obama! That is all you got now? After tons of big empty words, dirty politics are all you have? People already voted against you because of your integrity problem. Playing dirty politics like a republican won’t save you.
Why don’t you tell us:
What are you hiding from us when you bought a house from Tony Rezko for $300,000 (!) below the market value?
What are you hiding from us when you casted over 100 ‘abstain’ votes?
What are you hiding from us about your true religion?
What are you hiding from us when your wife got a 300% salary increase?
What are you hiding from us when you missed all the hearings of Senate Foreign Relations Committee?
Shame on you, Obama!
Posted by: UdontHaveCredits | March 5, 2008, 3:50 pm 3:50 pm
??
Nice try Obama. The vetting started 30 years ago in Arkansas. Don’t you remember that she had a special prosecutor assigned to her at birth?
You my orator friend, need the vetting.
You don’t scare anyone away from Hillary. You are the weak candidate.
Posted by: Brian | March 5, 2008, 3:50 pm 3:50 pm
Sam Lim:
Uh…Who is “Al Rove”? Is he Karl Rove’s long lost twin separated at birth??
Or, were you referring to Al Roker??
Posted by: Moneyman | March 5, 2008, 3:50 pm 3:50 pm
Moneyman, I might be an idiot but he still LIED & LOST! Truth doesn’t need to be ‘deep’ but just the truth.
Posted by: Tony | March 5, 2008, 3:51 pm 3:51 pm
now there YOU go dogsoldier lololol
so you’re telling me they didn’t apologize and backup Obamas response??
please don’t make me believe you are just as dishonest as tony…
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 3:51 pm 3:51 pm
It’s all about Obama’s off-shore accounts and aliases and money in his wife’s family name. Just a matter of time
Posted by: Jill Mitchell | March 5, 2008, 3:51 pm 3:51 pm
Go get her lots of dirty laundry to come out …Her returns ,her money is also dirty this is giving them time to hide it into a secret trust like it was before.They are the most under handed two I have ever seen.The time for her White House stay should have been ready years ago but again they have to hide it Dirty money ,dirty peple and if you think she will ever see the White house think again for the rep.will have a field day with her dirty laundry.Billy boy is a peoson I never want to see in politics again.
Posted by: honest | March 5, 2008, 3:54 pm 3:54 pm
Look, if we all say we are democrats, which may well be questionable in and of itself, how can Hillary or Obama win the White House if democrats exclude Fl and Mich? Right now the republicans have a complete free run in both states without having to work for it? Currently the voter in FL and Mich are furious at democrats and I don’t blame them. We MUST count them or have a do over.
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 5, 2008, 3:54 pm 3:54 pm
LOL!!
There you go again Tony….using that deep thinking. Rather than just accusing people of lying…back it up with the proven FACTS (TRUTH)!!
That’s what will convince people you are correct when you say he “LIED & LOST”.
Posted by: Moneyman | March 5, 2008, 3:55 pm 3:55 pm
lololol Rezko is really burning the hillary sheeples brain cells
y’all are too funny.
with the list of scandals that bill and hillary have, looks like THEY have the integrity problem. They had it back in the 90s and STILL have it.
but not to worry, she won’t win
awwwwww, and after all this time she was just waiting for her coronation. That dang Obama (place badword here) just messed it up for her lol that’s why she was caught off balance after Feb 5th….what a manager she is! And she should manage the country??? lol Not!
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 3:56 pm 3:56 pm
Question: How many independent voters will be so fed up with the negative campaigning and infighting of the Dems that they vote for McCain, or even Nader? The Independents who voted for McCain will surely not change their minds about their candidate.
Posted by: Don | March 5, 2008, 3:57 pm 3:57 pm
Jill Mitchell:
REALLY??
“It’s all about Obama’s off-shore accounts and aliases and money in his wife’s family name. Just a matter of time”
REALLY???
Please take off that tin foil hat…it clashes with that sheeple look on your face…
Posted by: Moneyman | March 5, 2008, 3:58 pm 3:58 pm
With regards to vetting Hillary truly has not been vetted via the Obama campaign. I am a Obama suporter and can’t wait for all of the ‘junk in the trunk’ of Bill Clinton to be revealed since he has been globe trotting in the private jets of arab millionaire businessmen and the like and the millions of dollars in fees, honorarians, multinational boards he sits on that pay him millions a year. And don’t forget that Arkansas has more billionaires than any state in the union. How much of that money before and since his presidency do you think he will have show appreciation for once Hillary is in the White House? So, like the Obama camp said let the vetting begin.
Posted by: Mike | March 5, 2008, 3:58 pm 3:58 pm
pure hillary….if you can’t make something stick, just create something lol look how long it will take for them to investigate it, and at the same time calling the person a liar
keep looking people….I’m sure with all of you enrolled in Scooby-Doo Investigations, you’ll come up with something. I have faith in you!
=ctfu=
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 4:00 pm 4:00 pm
SINCE SENATOR OBAMA LOST IN THE BIG STATE: OHIO AND TEXAS. NOW THEY ARE CONTEMPLATING TO HAVE A DEBATE.
ARE YOU KIDDING? VOTERS ALREADY KNOW WHAT THEY NEED TO KNOW ABOUT SENATOR OBAMA.
BUT STILL THERE IS STILL HOPE FOR HIM. THE VICE PRESIDENT TICKET UNDER THE WINGS OF SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON THAT WILL GIVE HIM A GOOD 8 YEARS EXPERIENCE AND THEN HE CAN RUN AS PRESIDENT AND HAVE OPRAH WINFREY AS HIS VICE-PRESIDENT THAT FOR SURE WILL WINNING TICKET FOR YEAR 2017.
Posted by: Sam Lim | March 5, 2008, 4:00 pm 4:00 pm
Why don’t you all google “Clintons” and “Scandals” and see the reams of unanswered questions and people chomping at the bit to bring it all up again.
and although you all like to say none of it took her down…all of them helped take down the democratic party in 2000. …or do we all have that short of memories.
Most of those scandals, as much as you all would like to say they were vetted and put to rest…really just went away because a new scandal came up…or convictions were made or somebody mysteriously or unexpectedly died.
…and with Hillary’s numbers each one of those is going to be trotted out several times a day if she is the nominee.
Posted by: dl | March 5, 2008, 4:00 pm 4:00 pm
LA I always tell the truth except for when I lie. No lie about the Canadian Government however. No doubt it was word play on their part because they’re trying to get themselves out of the American election. But they did not apologize for the content of memo, nor the facts of said memo. CTV still stands by story and have a copy of said memo. Up to now the Canadian Government is desperately trying to make it all go away.
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 5, 2008, 4:02 pm 4:02 pm
I really don’t know how come some of you cant ask yourself why would anyone buy a lot of land not big enough to build a house put up a fence with a gate then make a garden next to someones house to beautify their property which they do not own and have no relationship with the owners of the said house at all?
What is even funnier then have the mans gardener cutting the grass regularly, so exactly when is the owner of this piece of land going to enjoy this wonderful garden?
Stranger than that is access to the said garden is via the property that the house is standing on. Either the owner of this lot of land loves to waste money because he has a lot of it or he is a total idiot.
Posted by: SJ | March 5, 2008, 4:02 pm 4:02 pm
Jill,
I, too, have heard mention of the off-shore accounts with aliases that have been linked to Senator Obama through Tony Rezko. We should see more of that surface as Rezko’s attorneys bargain for less jail time for their client.
The aspects of Michelle Obama being directly involved also pose some interesting questions. Mrs. Obama undoubtedly played a significant role, and being an attorney, she can’t claim innocence.
One more reason to get all of the Michelle Obama papers out for public scrutiny before any more primaries are held.
Posted by: ken | March 5, 2008, 4:02 pm 4:02 pm
GODISNOTREAL:
Nice name by the way since your God is anything with the label “Democrat” or “Socialism” on it. Your God is the State!!
As for a unified ticket, Hillary as said on GMA: “But of course we have to decide who is on the top of the ticket.”
I bet Bill hears that every night!!
Posted by: Moneyman | March 5, 2008, 4:03 pm 4:03 pm
if you do the same with barack obama and scandals…you get rezko…a trial that hasn’t even happened and authorities say has nothing to do with him besides he knew the guy and had one real estate transaction that sounds funny. Which i admit needs to be answered …
and interesting of note …a lot of the clinton money scandals…the tax returns were a key piece of evidence against them.
Posted by: dl | March 5, 2008, 4:03 pm 4:03 pm
dl,here are a few moe names to add to you list..Many more left ,Greg Rhodes,Keith Mc Maskle,Brian Hanley,Tim Sakel,Sue Coleman,Barbara West,Stanley Higgins,Jerry Parks,Kevin Ives,Don Henry,James Mc Dougal Mary Mahoney and Vince Foster,,,Ask Clintons if they knew these people>>>>>>>>
Posted by: honest | March 5, 2008, 4:05 pm 4:05 pm
Dl it was the democratic congress members themselves who took down the democrats that years with their corruption scandals. Oh, how quick we forget.
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 5, 2008, 4:06 pm 4:06 pm
SJ all that has to do with historic property/preservation in the city of Chicago. Maybe instead of just insinuating, when apparently you just don’t know….go do some research, its free AND easy
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 4:07 pm 4:07 pm
When you present yourself as standing above the crowd, you are setting yourself up to be held to a higher standard; and also for a harder fall! Senator Obama has had numerous chances to put these stories to rest immediately. He did not do so. He chose to first deny, then to acknowledge but still with reservations. This is not transparancy.
As to the 5 million Hillary Clinton lent her campaign; her campaign has said she made much for than that amount from the sale of her book. As to being vetted, can there be anyone on the planet who has been more vetted than the Clintons? She has answered readily when policy questions have been put to her. I am still waiting for the same type of concise answers from Senator Obama as to policy.
Posted by: Michiel W | March 5, 2008, 4:07 pm 4:07 pm
Honestly…I know the list I put on here was off the top of my head
can’t tell you how angry I am that people had to go here with the negatives…but Obama keeps trying not to go there and I am not going to let a guy like that go down because the other candidate is use to playing dirty pool.
Posted by: dl | March 5, 2008, 4:08 pm 4:08 pm
the clintons from the 90s are the main reason we’re in the situation with bush now….don’t believe me, do some research!!!
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 4:08 pm 4:08 pm
Someone, Anyone tell me what makes hillary qualified as Commander in Chief….
while you’re thinking, her husbands presidency doesn’t count, and…
she’s not in the military either, as Obama is not….
anyone??
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 4:10 pm 4:10 pm
Clinton scandals…
Correct me if I am wrong, but didn’t we (the taxpayers) have to pay Ken Starr and his team of investigators a huge sum of money to investigate the Clintons only to find that there was nothing to find?
The people who are demanding a (re)investigation must be the same ones calling for a revote in Michigan and Florida.
And we thought Dubya wasted a lot of money…
Posted by: ken | March 5, 2008, 4:10 pm 4:10 pm
So Rezko is such a good kind hearted man that he wanted to ensure that the Obama’s stayed within the code of property/preservation yet the same Rezko did not see it fit to fix the high rise buildings that he took funds for under the guise that he was going to develop low cost housing, no wonder he is where he is today.
Posted by: SJ | March 5, 2008, 4:11 pm 4:11 pm
GODISNOTREAL:
You say: “I HAVE NO GOD. I THINK FOR MYSELF.”
Because you choose to believe that way doesn’t mean “GODISNOTREAL”.
This is the USA, everyone has a right to believe as they wish and not have someone like you scream (in all CAPS) that God is not real in their faces…..
Posted by: Moneyman | March 5, 2008, 4:11 pm 4:11 pm
Mishiel
Why does Obamas policy statements need to be concise? That is what is wrong. His policies (and Hillarys) are intricate and complicated as they should be in a country as large and as diverse as ours.
Simple concise statements are not a policy.
Posted by: dl | March 5, 2008, 4:11 pm 4:11 pm
Clinton supporters (god blessed them) are so deluded. HRC did not approach the point spread she needed to get back in the game. Estimates are that she will had made a gain of no more than 12+ delegates against Obama’s 100+ delegate lead and this was all she could mustered from a lot of 300+ delegates (1/3 of the remaining delegate lot). The only way she could win is by consistently producing a 20+ point spread for all the remaining contest (Michigan and Florida included)…fat chance … or by outright stealing it. Wake up folks …THE MATH DOESN’T ADD UP!!!
Posted by: Rialb58 | March 5, 2008, 4:14 pm 4:14 pm
Obama doesn’t have to score big hits against HRC, all he has to do is hold his own and keep his numbers from collapsing before PA. If he goes into PA with the same support he has now, even if she wins there she won’t pick up enough delegates to make a difference, and she’ll have run out of time. Her only option is to go further negative, and at a certain point it will be negative enough that voters will swing back to Obama, as they did after Bill interjected race into the campaign in S.C. The sad part is, a month ago 75% of Democrat voters were happy with either of their candidates, now only 45% are. Hillary’s mud-slinging is souring everyone on this election, and could cost us the whole shebang in November.
Posted by: balthus | March 5, 2008, 4:14 pm 4:14 pm
Clinton does need vetting like any other candidate in the race, I do not see a problem with that. She seems to be in a lose-lose situation here. Lets assume something bad happens with the Rezko-gate for Obama, Clinton has more baggage than this. If she prevails in the Denver convention she faces Mccain who would remind everybody of her and Bills gabbage, then since she is running on her so called experience, Mccain also wins because he has more experience than her.Even if she wins the presidential elections she cannot accomplish anything as she lacks negotiation skills, no healthcare reform nothing. So I say LOSE-LOSE.
Posted by: Emo | March 5, 2008, 4:14 pm 4:14 pm
“White Collars” will never understand the “Blue Collars” woes. Blinded by Presidency, Obama campaign ignore the Iowa voters verdict and started playing the dirty games.
Posted by: JS | March 5, 2008, 4:14 pm 4:14 pm
Senator Obama can’t help it if you hillary sheeple don’t like the answers. You want him to create more of a story just so you all can be satisfied???
lol this is bordering on the ridiculous now, ain’t it….hmmmm I wonder if hillary feels the same way over all her scandals.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 4:14 pm 4:14 pm
As long as he doesn’t go negative like Clinton, then I’m for asking for more details about Clinton’s foreign policy experience. She was saying that she did work for Kosovo and Northern Ireland, and I’d frankly be intrigued as to what she did.
While Kosovo still has issues, Northern Ireland seems to have settled. So if she does have the experience, then Obama can’t argue her on that point.
But if she doesn’t – that’s good to know too. I just don’t want any more negativity. Clinton has done enough for a lifetime as far as I’m concerned, and has totally turned me off joining the Democratic Party.
Posted by: Ladyvoter | March 5, 2008, 4:16 pm 4:16 pm
Iwant to ask Obama about his relationship with SlumLord Tony Rezko and Farrakahn.
Statement from Howard Wolfson, Communications Director
Send to a Friend »
Faced with many legitimate questions about Senator Obama’s long-time relationship with indicted political fixer Tony Rezko, the Obama campaign has chosen to lash out at Senator Clinton.
Here are the facts:
Over 20 years of the Clintons’ tax returns are in the public domain.
Their tax returns since they left the White House will be made available on or around April 15.
This information will be in addition to 15 years of uninterrupted public financial disclosure reports.
Instead of making false attacks, we urge Senator Obama to release all relevant financial and
Posted by: Christines | March 5, 2008, 4:16 pm 4:16 pm
hillary will probably win PA too, so all you sheeple can relax. There is a large number of racist whites in southwest philadelphia…
As much as I hate to say it, its true. I’m from there, I know.
lol now someone call me a liar….hurry up!
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 4:17 pm 4:17 pm
What is there to show that Obama is qualified as Commander in Chief…. don’t give me the line that he lived overseas because he was less than 10 yrs of age at that time, and am sure he had to idea what was going on in the world or cared.
Since Hillary is not qualified in your eyse then what make Obama better suited for the job?
Posted by: SJ | March 5, 2008, 4:17 pm 4:17 pm
The Clintons are rich… so what? I could care less if Hillary Clinton’s tax return showed that she was the richest woman in the world, or if she lived a mere middle class life. Now, Obama is trying to make this a class struggle. Maybe this should tell us something. Hillary Clinton has been successful in life, while Obama has been much less so. Case closed.
Posted by: JM | March 5, 2008, 4:18 pm 4:18 pm
quick, who is Leon Panetta???
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 4:19 pm 4:19 pm
Obama’s Foriegn Policy:
One story for American Public and different story and closed door diplomacy with Canada. Obama does not even know that every diplomats keep records of the communication. How Naive?
Obama campaign is trying to cover their mistakes.
Posted by: SP | March 5, 2008, 4:21 pm 4:21 pm
Has the USA ever had a down and out man as President I don’t think so and there is a reason for that in case some of you don’t understand why.
Posted by: SJ | March 5, 2008, 4:21 pm 4:21 pm
oh c’mon SJ….you were supposed to answer the question, not answer with another question regarding Obama. I already said he’s not in the military either.
But hillary is your candidate right? what makes her qualified to be CIC?
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 4:21 pm 4:21 pm
Dogsoldier the answers back and forth on each of these is the same as the Rezko issue. You don’t know the answers with that but have a lot of questions and I don’t know the answers for the lists…lists of the Clintons…we can talk for a long time…but their are many questions by people who know a lot more than you and I… …and have credibility and legitimacy. just google them (Many of them the Clintons have been fined for or disbarred, or censured, hello…) sorry but the info is all there… not just in republican news and tabloids…
…adn better people than i are going to bring that out.
Posted by: dl | March 5, 2008, 4:22 pm 4:22 pm
LA,
Philadelphia is a violent city. Much racism exists because of violence perpetrated by one race upon another. I believe that a reduction in violence would result in an eventual (since beliefs take time to change) in racism. I have been to Philadelphia and have felt threatened in certain areas. It is what it is.
Posted by: JM | March 5, 2008, 4:22 pm 4:22 pm
Dogsoldier the answers back and forth on each of these is the same as the Rezko issue. You don’t know the answers with that but have a lot of questions and I don’t know the answers for the lists…lists of the Clintons…we can talk for a long time…but their are many questions by people who know a lot more than you and I… …and have credibility and legitimacy. just google them (Many of them the Clintons have been fined for or disbarred, or censured, hello…) sorry but the info is all there… not just in republican news and tabloids…
…adn better people than i are going to bring that out.
Posted by: dl | March 5, 2008, 4:23 pm 4:23 pm
David Axelrod, did Goolsbee speak to a forgeign government?
David Axelrod, please discuss totally before the courts do, the 17 year love fest between Obama and Rezko, it is a simple thing to do!
David Axelrod, do the math, your candidate cannot win the nomination either with the remaining Pimary’s, so please learn math 101 and speak without denials as your candidate has yet to be vetted, your candidate was posed a simple question, “who do you want answering the phone in the Oval Office at 3AM” Your response was the one with the better “JUDGEMENT” so the better judgement you proved over the last week was to deny and lie and twist things around!
Thank you for finally proving proof of the sort of “Change and Judgement” Obama would (past tense on purpose) bring to the Whitehouse!
So enough of the Iraq stump speech he gave with no political retribution from it in 2002 when Obama was not running for anything but was soley a State Senator at the time! We’d rather hear his position on his words of 2003, 04, o5 and 06 when he stated reality of not knowing how he’d vote if he actually was a US Senator at the time and his praise of GW Bush on his handling of the war!
Posted by: Clear Choice | March 5, 2008, 4:23 pm 4:23 pm
another disingenuous hillary sheeple….so quick to call the man a liar, and you know nothing about him.
All you folks preaching about him being an ‘empty suit’….do you even know what he has done since he’s been in the Senate?
If you actually look it up, you will probably be surprised that he has done soooo much more than hillary. She was worried about naming buildings. I guess that is the prerequisite for helping and fighting for the american people….interesting.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 4:24 pm 4:24 pm
Who needs the republicans to beat us up? We’re all doing a better job of beating each other up here on these bogs that any republican even could and we’re both racing for the bottom as fast as we can. I vote for Hillary because I think she is one tough lady, can take a punch, she will not meet with dictators without doing proper background diplomacy before doing so. I think Hillary is a better Commander in Chief because she did address national security that matters to folks. That’s my choice to make and I did.
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 5, 2008, 4:26 pm 4:26 pm
Obama should treat Dem. party’s benefit higher priority than his own benefit. He should sacrifice and be VP of Hillary. That’s the way the Dem. can win in general election. Otherwise, lots of Dem. will vote for McCain eventaully. Obama lacks of experience, I suggest him exit gracefully now. Although he has more delegates, there are some reasons, 1) Texas two steps and the delegate allocation is not fair to Hillary. Hillary won almost 100,000 more votes than Obama in Texas, she should get lots of delegates, but turns out not. 2) Obama didn’t win any big states. His supporter are mainly young people and African-American. He is still vulunable.
Posted by: golfgirlusa | March 5, 2008, 4:26 pm 4:26 pm
no political retribution???
my God people…the man was running for the Senate. He spoke out against the war when it was not politically correct to do so….he was running for office.
But hey, he didn’t think about the consequences….he was thinking about the lives that would be lost.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 4:27 pm 4:27 pm
LA Obama was the one that once told the public that he will not run for president because he was not ready, he did not feel he was up to the job he was too green, his words not mine.
Now he seems to have changed his mind on his past admission he is now saying he is the best person for this job, so which admission do you want me to take the one he made before he entered this race or what he is saying now?
Seems to me he need to make up his mind as to exactly how he wants people to view him.
Posted by: SJ | March 5, 2008, 4:29 pm 4:29 pm
golfgirlusa…Hillary needs to step down…
and dogsoldier…I just took these simple statements from a site that lists the ABC’s of the Clinton scandals(The a to z guide of the Clinton scandal…just to footnote…I have no idea but itseems to just put the topics in single sentences)…I can give them to you 5 at a time how’s that sound?
“A is for Arkansas, where Bill Clinton got his political start, where Hillary Rodham Clinton worked at Rose Law Firm, and where Whitewater began as a land deal between the Clintons and Jim and Susan McDougal.
B is for Billing-gate, Hillary Clinton’s missing law-billing records. Those records — which raised questions about Mrs. Clinton’s role in the Castle Grande deal — were subpoenaed in 1994. They were missing until early 1996, when they turned up in a White House room next to her office. She says she doesn’t know how they got there.
C is for Cattlegate, Hillary Clinton’s mysterious ability to turn a $1,000 investment into a $100,000 profit on cattle futures, a feat experts say was virtually impossible in normal trading.
C is also for Castle Grande, a real-estate scheme that federal regulators say was a sham. A federal inspector general’s report found Hillary Clinton drew up the legal papers that were used to improperly funnel hundreds of thousands of dollars to Seth Ward, father-in-law of her ex-law partner Webster Hubbell.
D is for Billy Dale, the career head of the White House Travel Office, who was fired along with six other career staffers, to make way for Clinton cronies in Travelgate. The White House then brought in the FBI to justify the firing, and Dale was hit with criminal charges that wrecked his life for two years. A jury cleared him in just two hours. “
Posted by: dl | March 5, 2008, 4:29 pm 4:29 pm
I could go through and list the rest but I think that people would be annoyed …don’t you? There is actually more than just the alphabet.
But see what I mean…this is what is going to be pulled up and I can tell you if Hillary had won on her policies and not going negative…I would have fought for her…but I realized over the past few weeks with how her campaign has been running… that these claims about her might actually have some credence.
Posted by: dl | March 5, 2008, 4:33 pm 4:33 pm
SJ, I thought that was part of being human, changing your mind when other things in life have altered….why is he not permitted to change his mind?
All these politicians change their minds, look at Mitt Romney!
It’s the human element, stupid.
(i’m not calling you stupid sj)
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 4:34 pm 4:34 pm
LA in Indiana sorry to disappoint you, but Obama was not running for the Senate in 2002, he ran for the Senate in 2004!
Any other exagerations?
Posted by: Clear Choice | March 5, 2008, 4:35 pm 4:35 pm
Dl most of these innuendos were addressed with the Ken Starr investigations with $40 million taxpayer dollars and they came up with . . . wait for it . . . Zero! Now, do you want to address larger issues such as how do we win the White House when the democratic party excludes FL and Mich? How can anyone democrat win when we have just given the republicans complete free reign like this? How? Few, other than myself, seem to see larger problems here? Why is that?
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 5, 2008, 4:36 pm 4:36 pm
and that’s a good point dogsoldier, however….isn’t that the situation we have now with georgie porgie…not talking with our enemies?
Why not talk with them, tell them to get their sh** together or else…nothing wrong with that.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 4:37 pm 4:37 pm
Why, after reading the vettings about Senator Obama on this blog, I was able to be really proud of America for the first time.
Posted by: ken | March 5, 2008, 4:39 pm 4:39 pm
I agree Chan, all the candidates should have been asked the ‘tough’ questions, but they should have done it way before now….now its like a witchhunt (don’t take that personal hillary supporters)
I have a few better names for her…
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 4:39 pm 4:39 pm
Michelle Obama and Barack Obama are from the far left side of the Democratic Party. I, for one, want a more centrist politician. How can the most liberal Senator in the US Senate, who espouses so many extremely liberal views, be expected to compromise on his core beliefs? Open your eyes, people. He is not a compromiser. It has been noted that Mrs. Clinton has had more bipartisan dealings in her Senate capacity than Obama has. And for all those people who have been referring to her supporters as being stupid, etc., you should be ashamed. It is not enough for someone to cite change as a reason for running for the presidency of the US. A candidates past experiences can be a good indicator of future promises. If the emperor has no clothes, then I won’t expect much of a wardrobe in the future.
Posted by: JM | March 5, 2008, 4:40 pm 4:40 pm
I don’t know ken, what specifically made you proud?
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 4:40 pm 4:40 pm
Democrats, we are killing each other! The Republicans will just have to pick up the pieces on the way to the White House.
Posted by: michael | March 5, 2008, 4:40 pm 4:40 pm
dl – when did Clinton go negative?
A simple question was asked, not negative in the least! Is it not right to ask who should be sitting in the Oval Office, after all, this is what it is all about?
This isn’t about crowning someone because he says he should be crowned because he will bring change!
What change will he bring, well he was tested on his words and actions and failed totally, with lies, denials and twistings followed by avoidance in answering things! This the kind of person you want sitting in the Oval Offie, get real!
Posted by: Clear Choice | March 5, 2008, 4:42 pm 4:42 pm
ok clearchoice, go to google, type in obamas position in 2002….
and you will find this statement….
As a candidate for the United States Senate in 2002, Obama put his political career on the line to oppose going to war in Iraq, and warned of “an occupation …
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 4:44 pm 4:44 pm
see….you’re so quick to call me a liar….
you guys are too much!
I knew about that then clear choice, as I was afraid my son would be sent directly in the line of fire during that time.
So I’m kind of sorry to disappoint you
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 4:46 pm 4:46 pm
LA for someone who frequently accuses Hillary of twisting words and facts to suit herself she could learn some serious lessons from your posts. You knew exactly what was said so why distort the meanings? This doesn’t help us to talk with each other what-so-ever. Things like this is causing us to refuse to talk with each other at all and for what purpose? I don’t understand. Why not deal with the larger issues of how can any democrat win the White House giving the republicans a free pass to Fl and Mich? How can we prevent that?
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 5, 2008, 4:48 pm 4:48 pm
Chan, the Republicans are going to loose the Whitehouse. Respectfully, McCain is a war veteran. Some question whether he is actually a hero. I would say he is. With that written, I think that McCain will not have an easy ride as the Republican nominee. With all this talk about Clinton’s history, McCain has one, too. His history will be gone through with a fine toothed comb, so don’t be so smug. I am a Hillary supporter who has actually thought of voting for McCain if Obama becomes the nominee. What I think I will probably do if this becomes the case, is write Hillary Clinton’s name as a write-in candidate. Hopefully, I can just vote for her when she becomes the actual nominee and sends Obama back to the southside. The Clinton years were good for the US. I hope to see them repeated again after the disaster of these past 8 years.
Posted by: Florida | March 5, 2008, 4:48 pm 4:48 pm
Typo: lose, not loose.
Posted by: Florida | March 5, 2008, 4:49 pm 4:49 pm
JM Obama wouldn’t have the support of most of the senators if he wasn’t able to reach across the aisle, as they like to say….
he did it in the Chicago legislator. I know y’all think he hasn’t done anything, but the man was a professor of constitutional law at the same time he was a state legislator, so he was working his butt off….
those years are what made him interested in transparency in government and getting the people involved. We the people….it must have hit home for him after getting into goverment.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 4:49 pm 4:49 pm
I’m putting my money on a Clinton\Obama ticket…notice who’s on top??
Obama doesn’t have the national experience….period. He doesn’t have experience with critics, and he doesn’t have personal relationships (read as: back room deals) with other members of congress. He isn’t kissing super delegates butts!!
They are gonna pick the Democratic nominee…not the sheeple!!
Posted by: Moneyman | March 5, 2008, 4:50 pm 4:50 pm
wait dogsoldier….what did I twist?
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 4:51 pm 4:51 pm
That’s right…she’s on top!!
Just the way she LIKES it!!
Posted by: Moneyman | March 5, 2008, 4:53 pm 4:53 pm
dogsoldier, they made a major mistake by disenfranchising FL and MI….I’m shocked the knuckleheads didn’t think of this while they were chastising them for moving up their primary date.
I say they should strip the delegates (i think I saw someone else say that before) and let the people vote. Some people didn’t bother to vote already knowing there vote wouldn’t count.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 4:54 pm 4:54 pm
LA in Indiana sorry to disappoint you but the fact of the matter is, and you can go to the Chicago Sun Times or Chicago Tribune and verify for yourself that Obama was NOT running in 2002 for the US Senate, he only began running in 2003! The elections for the US Senate began in 2004 and were held in Nov of 2004!
Posted by: Clear Choice | March 5, 2008, 4:54 pm 4:54 pm
that should have read, strip the superdelegates….make them give up their vote since they were trying to buck the system
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 4:55 pm 4:55 pm
Clinton said before meeting with folks from Iran, Chavez, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Cuba, and others she wanted her (if she’s even elected) state department to prepare the background diplomacy before she meets with them. Obama said he would meet with those folks period. However, in the last NBC debate Obama seems to be leaning toward Clinton’s view which she stated all along.
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 5, 2008, 4:57 pm 4:57 pm
LA, you make me kind of mad. Florida had record voter turnout for their primary, even though no Democrat campaigned here. Stop slanting things to your own views. I live here, you don’t. I know what happened here.
Posted by: Florida | March 5, 2008, 4:57 pm 4:57 pm
lawdhavmercy clearchoice….ok, if you say so….I’ll go read more about Obama. Who knows maybe I’ll learn something I didn’t know before, right?!
Any information on there about Rezko??
lololol
I gave you the information that came up on google, I didn’t make it up clear choice, but you accused me of exaggerating….you should be careful before you accuse
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 4:58 pm 4:58 pm
Florida…what??? what did I miss?
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 4:59 pm 4:59 pm
Florida…you are absolutely correct, I can’t speak for you, I can only speak of what has been in the news regarding FL and MI and the reason your votes were stripped because your state(s) tried to move up the primary date before super tuesday.
but I say don’t penalize the people, penalize the ones in charge, so strip the superdelegates and let the people vote.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 5:01 pm 5:01 pm
John Roberts of CNN asked Senator Obama today “What specific experience do you have in handling a crisis that would make you the better person to field that 3am phone call?”
Senator Obama: “Well, that’s the point. Nobody does because nobody’s been in that situation unless you’ve been
President…The question is who has the best judgment and I think my record looks pretty good compared to theirs [Senators Clinton and McCain].”
Can someone please outline the specific parts of his record that shows he has the superior judgment? How is his response any different than his statement “She’s yet to cite what experience, in fact, prepares her for that 3am phone call.”
Posted by: LOM | March 5, 2008, 5:05 pm 5:05 pm
Guys
Obama’s body language has changed. He has a sarcastic tone in his voice. He is very defensive now.
He is saying he doesnt want to go negative but is going negative. His campaign spokespersons are not helping either, complaining like kids. If he loses even one state from now, the DNC will put him aside. One big reason for this guy is not used to critics.
Posted by: MattOhio | March 5, 2008, 5:06 pm 5:06 pm
Clear Choice…
Hillary’s campaign got on the phone everyday with a report of rezko, continued to push the misinformation in the NAFTA/Canada memos (which have been disavowed by all parties involved besides that the canadian government approached an advisor who neve had the authority to speak about this issue and whom the writer of the memo even admitted it was misstatement on his part), and the do you forget the infamous interview with the three chairs and Mark penn’s slips of the tongue?
You will be hard pressed to even find someone who supports Hillary to say she hasn’t gone negative…and you reap what you sow.
Posted by: dl | March 5, 2008, 5:06 pm 5:06 pm
oh who cares, check, meet…it doesn’t matter how, just as long as they meet.
Someone needs to tell these leaders, like Chavez and others, tell them where we stand, and what we won’t stand for. Not just threaten sanctions when they don’t jump through our hoop….when did we start dictating to all countries on how they should behave? I thought there was some diplomacy involved in this process….
I could care less who does it, just get it done.
I think georgie bush is scared. what a leader, huh?!
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 5:07 pm 5:07 pm
Been on another site, LA.
Sorry, but the remark was a jest.
You know, we never have anything to laugh at on this site.
Posted by: ken | March 5, 2008, 5:07 pm 5:07 pm
LOM…he’s referring to his judgement opposing the Iraq war…and whether we like it or not, the man was right.
Where we are today, is exactly where Obama said we would be, back in 2002. He said he’s not opposed to all wars, just dumb wars. And he was right.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 5:10 pm 5:10 pm
That’s the Obama campaigns idea of vetting? Tax returns? Heh. She already said she’d release them. Obama folks just seem to imply she’s hiding something because it’s not on their timetable.
If the IRS has no problem with the Clinton tax returns, neither do I.
All those other scandals people keep posting about (over and over) are old news. How about something new?
Posted by: Belle | March 5, 2008, 5:11 pm 5:11 pm
LA, I state facts, which some cannot take, the fact is the truth of the matter and in 2002, Obama was not running for anything!
But even so, let’s say he was, for a moment, then please explain why Obama told Tim Russert in 2004 that HAD he been a US Senator at the time, he had no idea how he would have voted on the war!
Also, please explain Obama’s stance in supporting Bush’s conduct of the war in 2006!
Let’s add one more thing, why did Obama accept being a speaker at the 2004 Democratic Convention supporting Kerry/Edwards who both voted for the war!
Contradictions in abundance with Senator Obama and when actions speak louder than words, what has continually occurred, Obama falls flat on his face!
This the type of President you want? A guy who claims to be a champion of workers, who did nothing for those of Maytag when their jobs went off to Mexico, yet he stood with his hand out to the Crown family (directors of Maytag) for $200,000?
So a stump speech and lousy actions, he is a typical politician and nothing more! Except for this, he claims many things to people and yet his practices prove otherwise!
Posted by: Clear Choice | March 5, 2008, 5:12 pm 5:12 pm
clear choice, I took that as the man just being honest. He said he didn’t have the intelligence, so he wasn’t informed as the ones that WERE in the Senate at the time. However, there were some that did not vote for the war.
But he did say, since he wasn’t there, he doesn’t know if his vote would have been different based on the NIE
CC, I like the man because he has been nothing but honest, within the last year, that I have followed him, listened to what he had to say. He seems to be very sincere, and I think I’m a good judge of character.
I could be wrong, but I don’t think so.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 5:16 pm 5:16 pm
The facts are neither Clinton or Obama has torn the democratic part apart. Actually, they are conducting themselves better than most of us on these blogs. Perhaps we could take their example of how we should conduct ourselves.
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 5, 2008, 5:17 pm 5:17 pm
Well, Matt,
After watching Obama on CNN this morning, I also noticed the change.
And, you are right, about Axelrod. The man is a backstabbing whiner…Par for campaign managers as a whole.
To be fair, could be that he is just burnt out after all the campaigning in Ohio and Texas.
Could be that he realizes the “liberal” accusations that will come out from his win in Vermont.
Could be that he is somewhat down after the losses and momentum swing of last night.
In my opinion, the loss of momentum would be tough.
Posted by: ken | March 5, 2008, 5:17 pm 5:17 pm
dl, please give me ONE place where I can go to see where the writer of the memo that exposed Obama and his campaign as liars and twisters of facts!
The person who stated it was misinterprited was Goolsbee, the senior advisor to the Obama campaign, who denied meeting with the Canadian Government, so give me a break!
So please you can’t because the facts are out there as to who did what and no Obama camp spin will change the truth!
Stupid thing is, Obama’s camp could have come clean from the begining and said someone met with them and bla bla bla, instead they denied and lied! The Change for Washington revealed!
As for Rezko, what is wrong in talking again on the truth, which will reveal itself in the coming weeks too! And how has Obama reacted since day one when the press talked of Rezko, denial and forgetfulness, give me a break, someone who has paid someones way through life you don’t forget, and it takes revealing and being confronted with discoveries to get the truth from the man!
Enough, must go, been a blast reading the blogs of misfacts and spin makers over reality once again, enjoy your play and be nice folks! Tomorrow will reveal another load on display!
Posted by: Clear Choice | March 5, 2008, 5:25 pm 5:25 pm
Hey, LA, I always did like strong, tough, ladies what can I say? We’re had a good night. God only knows we’ve had our fair share of bad ones. I’m not so sure I can handle winning a few. It’s a brand new experience and if you’ll excuse me for a moment I’m not quite sure how I aught to act here today.
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 5, 2008, 5:30 pm 5:30 pm
lol dogsoldier, you’re cool today
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 5:32 pm 5:32 pm
LA: If we nominate a candidate by the popular vote, then Clinton would win because I believe it is shown that Clinton is slightly ahead with the popular vote from throughout the US. If you break the vote up by state delegate count, then Obama has a slight lead and MIGHT win the nomination. Clinton won the big populated states, Obama did not. In a Democrat versus Republican election, this should be something to be considered. Obama winning the states that normally vote Republican in a general election is of little consequence. For one of the states that has leaned Democrat in past elections (New Jersey), a poll indicated that Clinton would beat McCain, but McCain would beat Obama. This is something to think about. I don’t think Hillary Clinton is as bad as some of Obama’s supporters say she is. And please don’t forget that some of the states in which Obama won have rules that allow anyone, regardless of if they are Republican, Independent or Democrat to vote in their primaries. Why is that? Registered democrats should only be allowed to vote in Democratic primaries. If independents want to vote in a primary, then let them register as either a Republican or Democrat. Personally, I have a feeling that many of Obama’s supporters are independents, and that Clinton has more of the Democrat base. That is something that bothers me about many of Obama’s supporters. How many of them supported George Bush’s candidacy? Many are not Democrats per se, but they are having a large say in the Democratic nomination process.
Posted by: Florida | March 5, 2008, 5:35 pm 5:35 pm
Clear Choise to bad you had to leave but there is only one person spinning this Joseph Demora who wrote the memo stated that “consulate officials reach out to U.S. campaign officials to seek THEIR views,” not the candidates…and above that the Canadian government stated that the discussion was not inconsistent with what Obama was saying.
So Clear Choice I know you are stuck in this thought process and not realizing that this is politics at its worst… …but it seems from all of these blogs that I am reading the tone is changing…I think a lot of people suddenly just remembered whose campaign these attacks were coming from.
I think Hillary’s campaign just sent one of the three character arrows they have against Obama hoping no one would notice or remember they were standing in a mine field of scandals that has been covered by grass for a few years.
Posted by: dl | March 5, 2008, 5:41 pm 5:41 pm
Hey, Florida, I’ve been arguing for FL and MI today as well, and if I can paraphrase LA’s answer, she agrees that we need do something because there is no way any democrat can win the White House by giving both FL an MI to the republicans without a fight. We democrats have no one to blame but the Democratic party brass themselves, the idiots. Now we’re in a world of hurt with no way out of this mess.
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 5, 2008, 5:41 pm 5:41 pm
I understand Florida. I have never voted republican. I voted for bill both times and that was the only time I was ever satisfied with the election process, my candidate won.
But I think if anyone, no matter the affiliation, can register to vote in a particular primary, then they should only be able to vote in that primary AND the same in the general election. That way they are stuck with that position and not permitted to just jump around voting.
I realize the process isn’t perfect, and all states have made their own rules….so whatcha gonna do?
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 5:45 pm 5:45 pm
Dl, CTV does have this memo. The Canadian Government did apologize FOR the memo release and NOT for the contents of the memo itself. Put frankly, the Canadian Government desperately wants this mess to go away.
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 5, 2008, 5:45 pm 5:45 pm
Vetting should start from DAVID AXELROD.
Posted by: Strong | March 5, 2008, 5:48 pm 5:48 pm
lol, obama whines, but didn’t he tell us he’s not a whiner? obama plays dirty, but didn’t he tell us he’s not like other politicians? his halo has fallen off and he has been revealed to be just another candidate. and without the halo, he’s just another very weak candidate. and it turns out he not only did the nafta wink wink thing with the canadians but also with the colombians/farc. now that really really really speaks volumes about what he really is.
Posted by: so saddened | March 5, 2008, 5:54 pm 5:54 pm
Axelrod was bill’s campaign manager. I guess he figured he won before, he could do it again.
I mean really….who, especially black folk, thought Obama would still be in the thick of things in this cycle?
I know I didn’t. Then they said, well he’s not really black, his mother was white…..AND??? His father was from Africa, so that makes him a TRUE African American, yes?!
And when his life story started circulating, people started to pay attention….who is this guy, and where did he come from?
I was in the desert in 2004 when he gave his keynote address for Kerry and Edwards. I couldn’t believe it, so I was interested, probably like everyone else.
I can’t take anything from him, the man is intelligent and he’s got IT. Whatever IT is, he seems to have it.
Dr Susan Rice was another one with bill…now she’s with Obama.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 5:56 pm 5:56 pm
LA: Make the nominating rules the same for all states. Why should they be different in the first place? As for the Clinton votes you made, they were good decisions on your part. Republicans tried to label Bill Clinton as a liberal, but to no avail! He was a moderate (hooray!) who COMPROMISED! I think Hillary would do the same. She has represented New York with good reviews. She has also garnered some support in upstate New York, which is typically a Republican area. I believe she has the capability to be a compromiser which is important to me. As the Stones sang… you can’t always get what you want.
Posted by: Florida | March 5, 2008, 5:57 pm 5:57 pm
so Obama is walking around winking at everybody?
maybe he had something in his eye, I don’t know.
I don’t believe all the stories that come out, some of them just aren’t true. But to each his/her own.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 5:58 pm 5:58 pm
Dl even though it is against my better judgement, I will give you example of how the Obama camp should have argued the Canadian NAFTA matter. For instance, instead of denying meeting took place why not just say isn’t this what a responsible head of state must do? Yes we did say there would be some harsh words over NAFTA, but I’m sure that it is nothing that friends can’t work out for the good of both sides. It would have died there and then.
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 5, 2008, 5:58 pm 5:58 pm
lol Florida, but you can get what you need…
And how you feel about hillary is how I feel about barack. PLUS, I like his views regarding transparent government and getting people involved…our government has run from us. He already passed that law in Illinois to tape all arrests (I believe thats what it was) to make sure everything is open, and he eventually won the support of the police dept, but initially received push back. I believe he has the ability to really bring people together and get things done.
AFter all, teaching constitutional law, he has to know something.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 6:02 pm 6:02 pm
Dogsoldier: I agree about Florida, but Michigan is something different. If all the Democratic candidates had their names on the ballot, then I would agree. Hillary was the only candidate with her name on the ballot. But then again, if you didn’t support Hillary, there was the “uncommitted” selection as a write in. That is what the other candidates supporters had proposed since their candidates names were not on the ballot. In my opinion, Michigan should be allowed to vote again. Let Obama, who is awash in money, and Clinton, pay for it. I would gladly donate some money to the cause. From the past results, I suspect that Hillary would win.
Posted by: Florida | March 5, 2008, 6:03 pm 6:03 pm
I agree stripping the delegates was a blunder the problem was (is as we can see) everybody kept moving there primary up because they wanted to be more important unfortunately NH has always had in it’s state constitution that it has to be first (whether you agree with that or not) and Ohio would not let their caucuses get superceded …so states all jockeying for a more important position because they see that nh gets tourism and attention from it not to mention a focus on needs of that particular state…
So what do you do. The state should have worked harder to find the appropriate time and the demo party heads there should have pushed back against the republicans if that was the problem.
So now we are left with a mess.. in both states. It does not help that Hillary is only fighting for those states because she needs them after she agreed not to… and going in after the election and hyping for the votes to be counted was all political…she doesn’t care that people’s votes aren’t being counted. She cares that it helps her because she has name recognition and people associate her with the white house (in my opinion half the reason she gets most of her votes for being first lady…can’t wait until Mrs Bush and Rosaling Carter run for senate) but as has been proven Barack makes up the difference when he campaigns in a state.
Now we have a situation where Hillary is campaigning for their votes and it makes her seem endearing to them because everyone agreed to this and she is taking advantage of a situation that in any direction isn’t what this country is abouIt sucks…but I blame it on the DNC and the state reps. I hope people in the two states hold theior officials as responsible as the DNC…what a blunder.
Posted by: dl | March 5, 2008, 6:05 pm 6:05 pm
And you’re probably right dogsoldier, however, I believe he answered that quickly because talking to the canadians like that is something they probably would have discussed prior to, and he would have known about it. But he didn’t….so it gave the appearance that he was hiding something. I’m sure he wanted to bust Goolsbee’s butt. That would be something you should discuss first. That is why he came BACK and said yes, there was a discussion, and blah blah blah
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 6:06 pm 6:06 pm
LA: My apologies, but I have to say that I don’t think of Obama that way. I think of Obama as being extremely left-wing to the core. I would think it difficult for an idealogue to be able to compromise with those from the other side of the spectrum. I am a centrist, so I am more inclined to want a candidate that stays closer to the center of the political spectrum. To me, it is the centrist that compromise. Although not popular with the Republican House or Senate, that is why Bill Clinton was so popular with the American public. Bill deserves accolades. It’s too bad that since the Republicans couldn’t beat him on ideas, they smeared him (which was partly his fault). He was good on governing, but bad on personal judgment.
Posted by: Florida | March 5, 2008, 6:09 pm 6:09 pm
exactly right dl, they are the ones that created this mess.
For a while there, people kept blaming Obama, but it wasn’t his fault…hillary’s neither, but you know how folks get protective of their candidate.
If a do-over works, then that’s what they should do….BEFORE the convention. I thought I saw somewhere earlier, someone suggested MI and FL should vote the same day as PA. If it works, do it.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 6:10 pm 6:10 pm
dogsoldier
I agree that Obama should have said “Wait” “Let me check this out?” before denying the meeting happened because he didn’t know that. That was a mistake. I think he would admit that if asked directly.
I also think he should have fired the guy … and not be loyal to be honest. There is no room for miscommunication like that …if the Canadian government didn’t fire someone for making the mistake Barack should have fired his advisor. If for nothing else than just to keep people’s trust of the importance of his message.
Posted by: dl | March 5, 2008, 6:12 pm 6:12 pm
so true Florida, sooooo true.
But that is why folks eventually flock to Obama, the more they find out about him, the more they like him.
He has already functioned as a centrist when he was in Chicago, that’s what helped him get legislation passed. Sure, sometimes he had to concede the point, but that’s what happens sometimes to keep things moving.
So whatever we can get our two/three parties to agree upon, I say lets do it. Its not very often that happens. And we’re the ones that suffer when they can’t agree…everything gets stalled and drags on and out.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 6:15 pm 6:15 pm
dl:
Wasn’t it shown that it was not a miscommunication, but reality? For Obama, it was an unfortunate thing to come to light, but if it happened, no lying is going to change it. This has exposed him in a negative light. He is trying to be everything to everyone. He was bound to slip up. That is why some people refer to him as an empty suit.
Posted by: Florida | March 5, 2008, 6:18 pm 6:18 pm
true dl, and who in here doesn’t/hasn’t made mistakes and wished they could fix it?
And I understand the position he’s in, but just how transparent are we as a people when we bash our leaders for making mistakes? At least he was able to admit he made one. That’s a good trait in a true leader.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 6:18 pm 6:18 pm
True, LA.
Have a good night.
Posted by: Florida | March 5, 2008, 6:19 pm 6:19 pm
Hillary is claiming she has experience? I think she’s claiming her husband’s experience because I’ve never saw her serve in a public office other than NY senator. Hillary knew that Obama has nothing to hide, he is clean but they are trying to find anything to smear his good name. What is wrong with being a Muslim? There so many good Muslim in the whole world. It Obama parents are Muslim, that does not mean he’s a bad person. What is Hillary hiding? If she is not hiding anything about her taxes, she should release it just like the other candidates. Where does she get the $5 million? People should go back and listen to what she said “I will do anything to win this”. She is hungry for power. Be careful what you said Hillary, it might come back to you.
Obama people should stand up now since Hillary already bribed the press to be on her side. She is always winning. Winning Hillary!
Posted by: Tori | March 5, 2008, 6:20 pm 6:20 pm
Florida, the last news report I saw on this issue….they stated the canadians repeated what Obama had stated, that what was actually said, was true, and that the canadian official misinterpreted what the american official had actually stated. The canadians were trying to back away from the story because apparently someone attempted to beef it up a little, and that’s what made it not true.
I believe there was much more to the story, but I’m sure we’ll never know. It just looks like someone was trying to set Obama up. I could be wrong, but I don’t think so.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 6:22 pm 6:22 pm
Tori, although I don’t agree with your assertion, the word you are looking for is “whining”, not winning. If only Hillary was winning outright, I would be very happy!
Posted by: Florida | March 5, 2008, 6:22 pm 6:22 pm
nite Florida
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 6:24 pm 6:24 pm
I don’t know about a set up. I would call it a slip up. What is obvious is that Obama’s camp approached the Canadian government. Why? I think it is entirely possible (and likely) that they knew comments that Obama was making about Nafta might ruffle some Canadian feathers. The big problem for Obama is that it was exposed. That must be pretty embarrassing. Now, the thing that everyone needs to pay attention to is how Obama has reacted to this. It says a lot about who he is.
Posted by: Florida | March 5, 2008, 6:26 pm 6:26 pm
Florida …no it was not proven to reality. The only interview that the writer gave was to say that they approached the advisor as they do to political advisors on occasion on his views… and that they did not want to interfere with the US elections.
The Canadian government released one statement with regard directly to the what was in the memo,
“There was no intention to convey, in any way, that Sen. Obama and his campaign team were taking a different position in public from views expressed in private, including about NAFTA.”
Posted by: dl | March 5, 2008, 6:33 pm 6:33 pm
As the story goes, Obama’s parents were atheists, not muslims. His father was born and raised in a muslim country, but people change religions all the time, why couldn’t he?
Barack was raised by his mother, who then married (I don’t know his name) from Indonesia, and Barack spent 4 yrs there, but was sent back to her parents in Hawaii at age 10. His grandparents are/were christians, so he was raised christian.
Now people want to rip his church. Being black I understand the afrocentric church, so I’m not so sure why it bothers others.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 6:35 pm 6:35 pm
RELEASE those tax returns NOW, Mrs. Clinton — NOT “on or around” (yeah, WAY around) April 15! What are you hiding?
Anyone care to discuss Vince Foster?
And who is Peter Paul, and why are we not hearing about the civil suit for fraud he has pending against the Clintons in California?
You wanna play dirty, Hillary?
Then buckle your seatbelt. It’s on! OH, is it ON!!!
Posted by: adam | March 5, 2008, 6:38 pm 6:38 pm
well its been fun people, I gotta run
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 5, 2008, 6:39 pm 6:39 pm
I am glad that you are writing about the Afrocentric church. Admittedly, I don’t know much about it. The Trinity United Church of Christ has some strange ideas. I am Catholic. The Catholic church welcomes anyone. I don’t get the feeling that Obama’s church would welcome me in the same way as a white male since there appears to be so much emphasis on ethnicity as opposed to Jesus. Also, I don’t put race in front of my religious beliefs. I believe in Christ. Was he white or black? I don’t know. Most important to me is that he was here on earth. I don’t think race should be put into religion, although I understand that minorities may look at Christianity as the white man’s religion. This would be to their detriment. Ethiopia, Egypt, and the Sudan were Christian areas since the beginning of the Christian church. Blacks have been a part of the Christian church since the beginning! I am happy to say that the Christian church welcomes everyone! Finally, back to politics. I am not happy that blacks were forced to come to America hundreds of years ago. My view about race in America is that there are inequalities which are being addressed, but at a pace that bothers many people. I would like to see all races in the US reach their full potentials. This will ensure that America is a peaceful and free country with liberty and justice for all.
Posted by: Florida | March 5, 2008, 6:55 pm 6:55 pm
Funny how dl, LA, and other Obamite and RNC bloggers tuck tail and run to other threads when real facts and hard questions negate their rhetoric… very typical of the Rove and Obama bunch. LOL
Googling usually just helps you find fiction put out by the RNC and the Obama camps. So of course they want you to do that. Instead of answering the questions you just deflect elsewhere.
Use real facts to do your own research people. :) Vote Smart has a great fact based website unbiased for all candidates in all parties including statements they have made.
Convienent how the Obama camp refuses to answer legitimate questions for more than a week and refuses to release tax records for the time frame of the house purchase from Rezko. Also convenient that Michelle’s thesis known to have racist overtones wont be released until well after votes are cast.
Clinton’s financials have always been available. Her record as First Lady is in the National Archives hands waiting to be released so that is the RNC holding that up.
Cant you people see when you are being played?
Posted by: DCVoter | March 5, 2008, 7:01 pm 7:01 pm
The “uniter” wants to appoint Rice’s relative to do foreign policy. Another SOS to carry on the Bush policies?
The “uniter” wants to hand off his foreign policy decisions to his vice (rumored to be Gen. Zinni). Delegate the most important part of the President’s job to someone else?
The “uniter” who pretends to be anti-war wants to have a military VP?
The “uniter” would rather split the party in half so the Republicans win in Nov because he refuses to face facts? Maybe there is some truth to the rumor of Rove stacking his camp and he is just too naive to know it?
His judgement is questioned several times with facts and his own lies. Instead of addressing them he points the finger at Clinton about a stupid tax return when the financial disclosures have been available?
He cant control his own campaign troops, wont hold them accountable, wont fire anyone to get control again.
His campaign tactics mimic Rove techniques all along the way.
The list goes on and on and on… perhaps he is just really more naive and arrogant than we thought. It is really starting to show in his mannerisms. The RNC may be deeper inside his camp than anyone knows but Rove.
Posted by: DCVoter | March 5, 2008, 7:11 pm 7:11 pm
Are there any people out there who really think Hillary Clinton won Texas?
Just check the outcomes again, and I’m talking primary + caucus here.
Or let me quote this Texas paper:
AUSTIN — Obama Texas State Director Adrian Saenz issued a statement on the projected primary and caucus results that show Senator Obama won more Texas delegates than Senator Clinton.
Because of the close finish, Senator Clinton will likely net only two delegates up-for-grabs in the Texas Primary. Based on a large sample of caucus results in all 31 state senate districts, Senator Obama is projected to post a substantial victory in the Texas caucus and, thereby, net at least seven delegates. This means that Senator Obama will win at least five more pledged delegates from Texas than Senator Clinton.
Posted by: John Delegate | March 5, 2008, 7:28 pm 7:28 pm
DC Voter, How you feeling? Incredible?
Fact is Obama aint ready to be President. He is fickle, sorry i meant childish. In the past 24hrs since being blasted out of OH and TX, he has alleged everything else . Even calling SNL to complain. This man is a joke! Where did he come from?
Posted by: lluluadorl | March 5, 2008, 7:29 pm 7:29 pm
JOhn, if you counting delegates, you lost! Face it! Dont worry though, you can apply for a refund of your miserly $$$ from Obama for the millions wasted in OH and TX. You counting delegates from caucauses in Utah and Idaho, am sure. Why are most of you obama supporters plain stupid?
Posted by: lluluadorl | March 5, 2008, 7:38 pm 7:38 pm
I feel great llulu! It is sad to see so many people being duped though. We can hope people come to their senses at some point and focus on real issues and maybe have a more united front. I really dont want to see RNC policies continue to be carried forward.
For whoever it was that asked… I am 100% volunteering my effort because I love my country and want the best for it. I just happen to work from home so I can post a lot! I reject and denounce any accusation that I get paid to blog. LOL
Posted by: DCVoter | March 5, 2008, 7:40 pm 7:40 pm
It is sad but men life is like that. Even Jesus was crucified!!! Some people just wont see reason, blinded by hate that they really have no basis for. How can you, if you are not deranged, hate someone that you do not even really know. Except what you hear people say. and on top of that, you claim to be “educated” one! My support FOR HRC is on the simple basis that she appears most intelligent to do the job NOW. If her husband got there first should in no way preclude her from serving the country. Obama ugh, agh, hmmm is symptomatic of “indecisiveness” and a mental search for a prepared speech. Albeit xeroxed!!
Posted by: lluluadorl | March 5, 2008, 8:03 pm 8:03 pm
My support for HRC is based on qualifications and proven track record. I think Obama has some qualfications but he has demonstrated he cant handle pressure, has no original ideas, is not honest and forthcoming, and does not have the party and the country’s needs at heart. Good orators and outsiders are not enough to be President without OJT. Bill Clinton’s first 3 years prove that. HE succeeded because he is extremely intelligent and had experience. HRC is a dedicated public servant motivated by the needs of the party and the people. If she becomes President, she will have achieved it not because of Bill but in spite of Bill.
Posted by: DCVoter | March 5, 2008, 8:10 pm 8:10 pm
DC Voter,
Let me say how much I appreciate your posts. While I am an independent voter, I feel that entirely too much of a free ride has been given to both of the Obamas. All of their personal records from infancy on need to be produced for public scrutiny. And, in my opinion, April 15th will serve as a good timeframe.
To be fair, I expect equal treatment for the McCains and the Naders. When a person chooses to run for the highest office in the land, that person should expect to be held to a higher standard and not whine when such is required.
While we are at it, let’s have the Starr team handle the investigations. If there is any evidence suggesting prosecution, you can be sure Ken Starr will find it…for about $20 million a pop.
Regarding your compensation (or lack of it), sounds like more of the whining, Axelrod mantra. I have heard rumors of an Obama campaign corp of paid, college bloggers. Any truth to that?
Posted by: ken | March 5, 2008, 8:17 pm 8:17 pm
You know, I know. Some people dont! Some will can change. Most online are, sorry to say, unchangeable. The part that gets me mad is the unwarranted hillary (clinton) hatinf for reasons,i daresay, concern them in the least. None, not one of the Clinton haters on the blogs can stand for election,in any capacity yet they have the stupid guts to vomit rubbish. When some one offers to serve publicly, that person ought to be rationally evaluated, not emotionally hyped. Sadly, Obama again is all emotions and hype. Real leadership comes from passion for the followers not passion for oneself!!
Posted by: lluluadorl | March 5, 2008, 8:24 pm 8:24 pm
ken – thanks.. I too am an Independent voter… I only hear rumors and unfortunately, I am not sure if the campaign records are subject to the Freedom of Information Act. If they are we would not know until after the election anyway.
Wouldnt it be nice to have FEC reform that required all candidates to be vetted by an independent commission as a requirement to run for President and Vice President prior to the campaign? While we are at it, force public financed campaign limits and take all this capitalism and dirty tactics out of the campaigns?
Starr is an RNC guy so I wouldnt trust him. But I agree with vetting and full disclosure prior to campaigning.
Posted by: DCVoter | March 5, 2008, 8:31 pm 8:31 pm
I also would advocate a national primary for all parties with the same rules as part of the FEC reform.
Notice today, HRC proved she is dedicated to the needs of the party and country by stating if she gets the nom she would ask Obama to be veep. She is truly a uniter.
Posted by: DCVoter | March 5, 2008, 8:34 pm 8:34 pm
My suggestions going forward will be to 1.dispense with caucus system
2. dispense with the SD’s
3. All primaries in 1day. Even if it in june!!
4. Allocate delegates in ratio to popular vote in any state.
Then there will be no FL/MI scenarios, momemtum and/or threats to SD’s.
Posted by: lluluadorl | March 5, 2008, 8:46 pm 8:46 pm
well said llulu
Each president recites the following oath, in accordance with Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution:
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
The Constitution succinctly defines presidential functions, powers, and responsibilities. The president’s chief duty is to make sure that the laws are faithfully executed, and this duty is performed through an elaborate system of executive agencies that includes cabinet-level departments. Presidents appoint all cabinet heads and most other high-ranking officials of the executive branch of the federal government.
Just thought I would remind people of the job we are really interviewing these candidates for. With the largest, most complex organization in the world, inspirational speeches wont get the job done. Management and experience are key factors.
“You cannot manage men into battle. You manage things; you lead people.
Grace Hopper, Admiral, U. S. Navy (retired), Nova ( PBS TV), 1986 “
Posted by: DCVoter | March 5, 2008, 8:56 pm 8:56 pm
llulu -
The role of SDs are to combat disparities related to the caucus system and ensure a selected candidate is the right one for the nation, ie. what if the selected candidate is indicted on charges or under criminal investigation between the primaries and the convention. They also cast votes when voter turnout is low or cast votes for the non-voting electorate. The more people that vote, the less power they have. The final consideration and most important is the SDs cast votes to ensure the most electable candidate becomes the nominee. They are not determining the nominee but adding their vote into the mix with the other delegates who are also not bound to the electorate. This is the party’s answer to the electoral college system and the RNC has a similar process of SDs for the same reason. There is a valid role for the SDs but most voters do not understand the electoral system and dont cast their vote based on that.
A better system is surely needed but the SDs do serve a purpose. I would bet the DNC is already talking about revising the rules but we cannot change them for this election to be fair to the candidates or the entire election will be perceived as tainted. Seating of the MI and FL delegates can be done under the rules. The SD rules will not be changed for this election.
Posted by: DCVoter | March 5, 2008, 9:05 pm 9:05 pm
I know first hand the importance of experience. I hold a CEO position. I have taken decisions that, with benefit of hindsight i.e experience, i would not have taken. Knowing what i know now, i wont do some things the way i did it before. You must make mistakes. Obama’s claim of superior judgement is BS. Who is perfect and can predict the future? If you never fell off a bike, you will never know how to ride abike, simple!! The US presidency is not where you make your mistakes. Judgement will always be tested by reality. Sometimes, most times, you cant control everything to make your judgement right. Then next question is do you have the capacity to effect the changes to redeem the mistake. For that, you then need ideas, people, effort/determination. Not speeches!!!
Posted by: lluluadorl | March 5, 2008, 9:06 pm 9:06 pm
DC Voter, Got to go now though. Its been a long night and day. And work beckons tomorrow. Unlike Obama, we make time to still do our work. In modern age,everyone, except Obama, multitasks. He even xerox’s his speeches. When/Where does he ever work???? Hope to see you tomorrow.
Posted by: lluluadorl | March 5, 2008, 9:13 pm 9:13 pm
I agree… when all is said and done, the voters have to decide who they “trust” to manage the nation’s executive branch and lead its citizens based on the country’s values and laws. This is similar to a CEO and also to a COO. Clinton had it right from the start of the campaign as noted in the debates. In terms of national security, the economy, and the health and welfare of the citizens, we have to make a choice between a woman who is a dedicated public servant who has played a key role in all of the above or a man who steps up with minimal experience and claims he can do a better job than she can. I would choose my mom over my brother anyday!
Posted by: DCVoter | March 5, 2008, 9:25 pm 9:25 pm
have a great one lllulu!!!
Posted by: DCVoter | March 5, 2008, 9:26 pm 9:26 pm
Congrats on your education efforts “Hillary DID..” keep at it!
I actually know many Clinton supporters who are educated in many ways so dont worry about the antagonizers. They are just trying to upset you.
The best thing we can do is post the facts and ask them to use facts. There is no sense in trying to debate with people who make personal attacks because they are incapable of debating the issues with facts and figures.
If we only get through to one voter at a time that is ok… the effort is viral and we will have accomplished the goal of educating each other to achieve the goals of our society.
Posted by: DCVoter | March 5, 2008, 9:32 pm 9:32 pm
Hillary helped ny
I agree with you she has stood strong thru everything they have piled on I believe she would be the second best President in the last 30 years Her Husband being the first. I am sure after all that Washington put the two outsiders thru that Hillary is not covering they have no shame for what they have done and it seems they have off spring tha are no different.
Posted by: Bishop | March 5, 2008, 9:34 pm 9:34 pm
DCVoter: I have read some of your posts and I appreciate them. You are very knowledgeable and perceptive. Keep them coming. Hillary needs people like you to point out the differences between her and Obama. Hillary is being treated like cr&p by so many of Obama’s supporters. The question I would like answered is why? I have never witnessed anything that she has done that would make me feel so hateful. I may not agree with everything about her, but it is very fashionable for Republicans and some Democrats to bash her.
Posted by: Florida | March 5, 2008, 11:37 pm 11:37 pm
Kennedys nomination had to be decided by super delegates because there was no clear winner.And yes Obama supporters one did have more pledged delegates.That must blow a hole in the everybody says gambit doesnt it.
Posted by: girlinvt | March 6, 2008, 12:22 am 12:22 am
Hey, Hillary…
This is where the fun stuff starts.
Posted by: Gorgon '08 | March 6, 2008, 1:11 am 1:11 am
Hey “girlinvt”
Kennedy’s election decided by Super Delegates? Couln’t be.
Kennedy died in 1963.
Super Delegates were created in 1984.
Posted by: Gorgon '08 | March 6, 2008, 1:38 am 1:38 am
Hillary and Camp Clinton made a big deal about Barack Obama returning money from Tony Rezko, at the same time she refuses to return money back from a firm allegedly accused of sexual harrasasment. Read the report below:
Sen. Hillary Clinton has declined to return $170,000 in campaign contributions from individuals at a company accused of widespread sexual harassment, and whose CEO is a disbarred lawyer with a criminal record, federal campaign records show.
The federal government has accused the Illinois management consulting firm, International Profit Associates, or IPA, of a brazen pattern of sexual harassment including “sexual assaults,” “degrading anti-female language” and “obscene suggestions.”
In a 2001 lawsuit full of lurid details, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission claims that 103 women employees at IPA were victimized for years. The civil case is ongoing, and IPA vigorously denies the allegations.
“This is by far, hands down, the worst case I’ve ever experienced,” said Diane Smason, one of the EEOC lawyers handling the lawsuit. “Every woman there experienced sex harassment, they were part of a hostile work environment of sex harassment. And this occurred from the top down.”
Sen. Clinton’s spokesman, Howard Wolfson, told NBC News in a statement that the senator decided to keep the funds because the lawsuit is “ongoing” and because none of the sexual harassment allegations has been proven in court.
“With regard to the pending harassment suit, as a general matter, the campaign assesses findings of fact in deciding whether to return contributions,” Wolfson said.
From NBC’s Lisa Myers and Jim Popkin
Posted by: bacalove | March 6, 2008, 7:06 am 7:06 am
Michelle Obama works (is on temporary leave) for a not for profit hospital which charges uninsured patients 3½ times more than the insured. On top of that she earns $316,000 a year at this hospital then makes speeches to young people all around the country, urging them not to go into corporate America but to, well only she can say it best…..
Michelle Obama – Zanesville, Ohio
‘Don’t go into corporate America. You know, become teachers. Work for the community. Be social workers. Be a nurse. Those are the careers that we need, and we’re encouraging our young people to do that. But if you make that choice, as we did, to move out of the money-making industry into the helping industry, then your salaries respond.
Google search “Obama truth”
Posted by: Condor | March 6, 2008, 7:53 am 7:53 am
I saw one of her spokespeople on Tucker last night. They are trying to make the argument that her returns aren’t ready yet, and she has until April 15 by the law.
That’s fine, for last year. But despite the bluster, let’s not loose sight of the fact that all this is about 2006 returns, which had to be prepared last April 15. It sure seems like there is something in those returns she doesn’t want us to see.
Posted by: Paul | March 6, 2008, 8:17 am 8:17 am
Paul, seems like you up early? Also appears you dreamt of Hillary. Thats good. My question to you is how does Hillary’s tax returns affect you? Or all the problems affecting the US? Cant you see that you contribute nothing with this line of reasoning!!
Posted by: lluluadorl | March 6, 2008, 9:12 am 9:12 am
You people really have to remember that anything and everything such as her first lady schedule down to her tax returns has to be APPROVED BEFORE being released because ONE, she is THE FORMER FIRST LADY OF THE UNITED STATES, AND TWO is MARRIED TO A FORMER PRESIDENT AND THEY HAVE A JOINT BANK ACCOUNT!!!!!!!!! Anyway, there are LEGALITIES involved BECAUSE OF her being married to a FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES!!!!!!!!! GEEZ!!!!!!! YOU OBAMABOTS ARE GRASPING AT STRAWS NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Hillary DID help NY: Courtney WNY State | March 6, 2008, 10:23 am 10:23 am
Condor, Not suprising that your posts get removed. They sound like the rantings of a mad man.I believe you are one very unhappy man. Sorry, Hillary cant help guys like you infected with delusional pessimism.
Posted by: lluluadorl | March 6, 2008, 10:30 am 10:30 am
Look, there are plenty of skeletons Hillary’s closet, and there’s also Rezko. No one is squeaky clean. What happened in the past is done. Does anyone actually think that either of these candidates will repeat past mistakes?
The sad truth is that Clinton had to go negative to stop Obama’s momentum, and it worked so far. If she had enough positives qualify her as the undeniably best candidate she would have the nomination locked up by now. So apparently she doesn’t have enough positives working for her, and now has to go negative.
Posted by: Don | March 6, 2008, 10:55 am 10:55 am
Interesting way to play by not answering questions about himself and touting his record, oh yea, he doesn’t have any experience to tout. Nice touch to pursue Hillary’s tax returns. What a woman doing with that much money anyway? Will Obama disclose his closing documents in the Rezko real estate deal? Or, is it ok if we just take his word for things? Let’s see the documents.
Posted by: AmazonTraveler | March 6, 2008, 11:35 am 11:35 am
I want Obama to show all documentation, emails, etc. that he had with the Slum Lord, tony Rezko. Obama, defended Rezko and took money and purchased property from him. This happened after Rezko was indicted.
Posted by: Christines | March 6, 2008, 2:10 pm 2:10 pm
I think this is too funny. Clinton supporters get real. Obama supporters reality. The Clinton Regime will try any twisted plot they can to get what they want. A pathological super couple that only have their interest at heart. If it does not directly affect the Clinton’s they don’t care about it. Hilary couldn’t maintain a single promise she made as a senator. How can one substantiate all of her years of being disingenuous. Vote for her. Go ahead. Let the lobbyest run the country further into the ground. As far as Obama… His reputation and experience being questioned is her only front? Come on. He could win if he would just throw a tiny bit of the dirt that the Clinton’s are suddenly forgiven for. How simple minded are many of you to think that any politician is without flaw. BTW, a receptionist will answer the phone at the Whitehouse at three in the morning. Maybe if Hillary answers the phone she would ingnore the 9-11 threat just like her dear old womanizing husband did.
Posted by: Chuck | March 6, 2008, 3:23 pm 3:23 pm
You know has anyone ever considered that this whole thing is a staged event for the American people — the roller coaster ride seems to be getting a bit unbelievable.
Posted by: paulet0 | March 6, 2008, 4:35 pm 4:35 pm
I am interested in the offshore accounts that Obama and his wife have. Can anyone provide more information to this?
Posted by: Florida | March 6, 2008, 5:46 pm 5:46 pm
Good point, Condor. Michelle Obama needs to keep her mouth shut. She sticks her foot in it like George Bush sticks his foot in his mouth. Actually, let her speak since I support Hillary, and her comments can only help Hillary in the long run. How nervy is her comment about what people should do with their lives AFTER she makes speeches about how she was always told when growing up that she could not do this or that in life? The Obamas are “do as I say, not as I do” people. I call that hypocrisy! This should open some people’s eyes to the Obama’s chicanery.
Posted by: Florida | March 6, 2008, 6:06 pm 6:06 pm
You think I’m delusional before the dots to be connected are not even on display here yet?
Take your time. Do some in depth searches and reading before you start spouting off claims of delusional pessimism.
Posted by: Condor | March 6, 2008, 7:00 pm 7:00 pm
For some reason I missed this name.
Alexis Herman
Like I said, take your time, connect the dots.
Posted by: Condor | March 6, 2008, 7:08 pm 7:08 pm
The lobbysts and republicans were the driving force behind the Clinton witch hunt of the 90′s.The money was not buying the secret votes that it used to.So all the changes that the Clintons were making rattled the old establishment and they attacked with Ken Star.Even after all the mud slinging Clinton left office with a 60% approval rating.
Posted by: girlinvt | March 6, 2008, 11:56 pm 11:56 pm
I am an Ohio voter. I’m actually a 24 yr old, white, and independent, Ohio law student. Therefore, I fit right in the Obama demographic. As an educated member of this great (or what I once thought was great) state, I was disgusted with the turn-out. I have never sided with either party. But, Obama has impassioned me. I believe he is genuine, and brilliant (harvard law editor and con law professor). Furthermore, as far as experience, he has 20 yrs of public service. A recent TIME magazine article proved, with scientific measurements, that experience is not necessary to be an effective President. If the Democratic Party wants to maintain voters like myself, stop letting Hillary the fear-mongering, personification of evil continue this campaign. She needs to put her ambition aside and do what is best for America, for once.
Posted by: Stephen | March 7, 2008, 1:35 am 1:35 am
Factsyoucantrust,
The very fact her thesis is sealed until the day after the election adds fuel to the fire.
If there is nothing to hide or be ashamed of, why not just lift the ban? Why the
Mrs. Obama has put herself in the position to be scrutinized with all her public rantings. She appears to be a woman with an axe to grind and the media is slobbering all over her.
Posted by: Condor | March 7, 2008, 8:01 am 8:01 am
Vett Bill.
We need to see how many foreign hooks are in their bank account.
Posted by: Jan | March 8, 2008, 4:39 pm 4:39 pm