Obama on Clinton: ‘I Don’t Know Where All that Experience Got Her’
ABC’s Sunlen Miller and David Wright Report: Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton exchanged barbs while campaigning in the same city in Ohio today.
Obama responded to Clinton’s criticisms that he’s offering only speeches to voters, a charge apparently aimed to bring into question Obama’s foreign policy experience.
First, Obama blamed the press for buying into the argument in order to keep the race interesting. Then, he pinpointed Clinton.
"Sen. Clinton has been running around telling people that our entire campaign, according to her, is only based on the fact that I gave a speech in opposition to the war in Iraq, and that is the only basis of my campaign, and she supposedly has amassed all this foreign policy experience," Obama told the crowd in Westerville, Ohio, "I have to say when it came to making the most important foreign policy decision of our generation, Sen. Clinton got it wrong."
He said Clinton’s failed to read the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq before voting to authorize war as evidence.
"I don’t know where all that experience got her, because I have enough experience to know that if you have a national intelligence estimate," he said, "the chairman of the senate intelligence committee says, ‘You should read this; that’s why I voted against the war,’ then you should probably read it."
Playing off a recent Clinton campaign ad that asks who Americans want picking up the phone at 3 a.m., Obama issued a challenge of sorts: "Besides the decision to invade Iraq, we’re still waiting to hear, Sen. Clinton, what precise foreign policy experience she’s claiming to answer the phone at 3 in the morning."
Obama ended his remarks with a slightly new tone: "This has been a long contest on the Democratic side, and we’ve had strong candidates throughout. Sen. Clinton is a fine candidate. And you know I tried as much as possible to spend my campaign talking not about the flaws of the other candidates but why I am running."
The event in Weterville is Obama’s last Ohio event before the March 4 primary. He will spend the next two days campaigning throughout Texas.

Email
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
Perfect example of his arrogance and superior attitude. Mr. Obama , you peaked too soon. People are waking us and realizing you’re just not ready. Hopefully Hillary will ask you to be her VP, so you will have a great future after learning the ropes.
Posted by: Jay | March 2, 2008, 5:29 pm 5:29 pm
Hey Barack, Jay Rockefeller, Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee voted FOR the resolution authorizing use of force in Iraq.
Posted by: max | March 2, 2008, 5:34 pm 5:34 pm
By the same token, I don’t know where all that hope got Obama. He hopes he wins I guess, but he has a surprise coming. These youngsters always start with the chicken dancin’ as soon as they feel they may win. We’ll see where all this chicken dancin’ gets Mr. Obama.
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | March 2, 2008, 5:37 pm 5:37 pm
I find his points persuasive:
1) Clinton had the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq, but did not read it
(2) She did not read it and made the wrong decision for America that has already wasted $500,000,000,000, almost 4,000 American military lives, made refugees of 2,000,000 Iraqis and caused us to not to deal with the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11.
(3) Neither she nor her surrogates can point to ANY Clinton experience that demonstrates any other foreign policy decision she made.
What am I missing?
Posted by: zoe | March 2, 2008, 5:40 pm 5:40 pm
How come everyone is saying that Sen Clinton should get out now in order not to divide the party but no one says that about Huckabee who has no chance of catching up to McCain, it seems like there is a double standard for women. The general election is not until November, a lot can happen between now and then. Women are getting tired of people teling them that a women who is smart and experience should bow down to make a man happy who’s less qualified. In this country men get paid more than women for the same job, it is an insult to women to tell Sen Clinton to back down before June. If Sen Obama can’t handle the heat than maybe he should get out the kitchen.
Posted by: Kardasia_Prime | March 2, 2008, 5:51 pm 5:51 pm
Senator Obama has never told Hillary to get out of the race or the kitchen.
If she wants to fight until June then that is her choice.
A protracted fight will injure the party and cause even more hard feelings than currently exist. She seems good with that option.
Posted by: Chip | March 2, 2008, 5:54 pm 5:54 pm
zoe – you are missing a lot because you are allowing campaign rhetoric to influence you on that issue. The vote was to authorize force in support of the UN Inspectors if and only if WMDs were found. The WH lied and said they would not use the authority for a pre-emptive war. It is inappropriate for the Obama camp to mislead voters into thinking he authorized war because that is not what was voted on. He stated in 2003-2004 timeframe that he did not have the information to review (because he was not cleared for it) and did not know how he would have voted has he been given the responsibility to do so. She has stated she would take that vote back after the truth came out about how the WH lied. This is the same as Edwards and many others who voted to authorize military support for the UN Inspectors and to support the WH if and only if WMD’s were found. Obama’s own endorsers were among the many who voted the same way Clinton did. I still trust her judgement more than his because he has not convinced me he can do anything more than give speeches. Senator Clinton gives great speeches in my opinion too… the difference is, she has proven to me what she can and has done. He needs more time to develop the experience and good judgement “under fire”.
Posted by: DCVoter | March 2, 2008, 5:56 pm 5:56 pm
Chip – Obama’s camp Axelrod specifically stated in an interview this morning that Clinton should step out of the race. So you are not right about that. He is accountable for the words and actions of those who work for him. He is wrong to dismiss the “will of the voters” of the remaining states as irrelevant.
Posted by: DCVoter | March 2, 2008, 5:58 pm 5:58 pm
Oh give me a break Obama!! Since joining Foreign Relations, Obama has missed three meetings on a “new strategy” in Afghanistan, a country he has never visited.
Obama was absent from a January 31 meeting this year, and also was not present for a hearing on Sept. 21, 2006. He did attend a March 8, 2007 hearing on a new Afghanistan strategy.
On Feb. 15, 2007, Obama also missed a committee hearing on U.S. ambassadors to Iraq and Afghanistan.
Now all of a sudden he knows exactly what to do or not do about all the issue in Iraq and Afghanistan. Right!!!!
Posted by: SJ | March 2, 2008, 6:17 pm 6:17 pm
DC Voter – I know that’s what Sen Clinton has said, and I think she really believes that about the vote not being a vote for war.
It raises more questions about her judgment. I lived through that; so did you. On the news, in the office cubicles, everywhere people were talking about this vote at that time, it was recognized as a vote for war.
To now claim some nuanced difference of opinion on the vote is either disingenuous or reflective of an inability to see what is happening around her.
Posted by: Paul | March 2, 2008, 6:28 pm 6:28 pm
Looks like Obama is going negative and very dismissive of an opponent. Can tell from his body language.
Posted by: MattOhio | March 2, 2008, 6:31 pm 6:31 pm
I think this is a good line of contrast for Obama. Bottom line is neither has significant foreign policy experience, but if it does go past Tuesday, Obama can start pointing to Clinton gaffes regarding foreign and security policy.
There’s been more than a couple. Her comments about Taiwan and use of nuclear weapons illustrate an ignorance of U.S. policy. If she’s adamant about keeping this race going, Obama might as well beat her on national security as a means of mitigating that potential deficit against McCain.
Posted by: Paul | March 2, 2008, 6:31 pm 6:31 pm
I think Obama is talking like the race is over because he does not want everyone to see how he is not a uniter. The core party voters still support Clinton while his supporters are the rich left wing side of the party plus the new voters and disgruntled Reps and Indies. Let’s see… if we do the math based on voter turnouts (I have done the math using numbers published at GMU) it appears the country is still split between the Dem and Rep parties meaning the Indies are split and the Dem party is split between Obama and Clinton. Hmm… he has failed to be a uniter just as Bush failed. It takes more than just great speeches to unite people. I give him credit for admitting that he does not know how he would have voted “under fire” but I do not give him credit for misleading people into thinking he will know because he has failed to do the job he was elected to do and has not voted differently than Clinton on any war related issue since becoming a Senator. Michelle Wie was a phenom golfer but when she had to perform “under fire” she wimped out. She needed more time to develop good judgement “under fire” and so does Obama. Who do you trust to keep you safe… your mother who has been keeping you safe or your brother who steps up arrogantly and says he can do it better?
Posted by: DCVoter | March 2, 2008, 6:35 pm 6:35 pm
What Obama is missing to let everyone know is that there were a lots of senators that did not read the NIE report. He has to stop acting as if Hillary is the only one.
There were 3 copies of this report and the fact of the matter is if the administration tell you something, briefing after briefing you are getting reports do you then take the view that the administration is lying, especially after the 9/11 events.
I don’t think anyone at the time wanted to say the administration was lying and did not have the best interest of the USA.
Is that the claim that Obama is making that the administration was lying? Those who complied the NIE report was lying, the Republican were lying. This man is not only dividing the Democrat party he is he is also destroying the image of the office of the President and administration just for the sake of his own personal power, it is truly a shame.
Posted by: SJ | March 2, 2008, 6:36 pm 6:36 pm
Its funny how Obama is held to an entirely different standard than all the other candidates….are you holding hillary’s feet to the fire for missing anything (how about voting) while she campaigns for president, or is it just Obama that isn’t supposed to miss anything?
Oh, and how about those tax returns? The only response hillary gives to that is, ‘let’s talk about Rezko’….yeah, that’s equivalent.
There is nothing there when it comes to Rezko, but I’m sure there will be something created. It has to be.
People are not ‘waking up’ to Obama, it just so happens that most of the people that don’t want him in office still have yet to vote. No one cares that he won 11 states and the majority of the people in those states are saying ‘it’s time to turn the page’….the ones who still have yet to vote are going to make sure he does not win this election.
Ohio and Texas want bill and hillary back in the white house…so let the drama begin.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 2, 2008, 6:37 pm 6:37 pm
Obama claims not to have discussed the weaknesses of the other candidates. This is nonsense. He has criticized Clinton from the time he entered the race — in fact, he has criticized her entire generation and said he wants to turn the page on it. (He doesn’t say what he wants to reject of the Boomers: civil rights, women’s rights, gay rights, environmentalism.) He has criticized her approach to health care and to Iraq. His campaign and his wife have suggested strongly that they will not support a Clinton nominee,while Clinton has repeatedly and unequivocally said she will support Obama. It is his right to criticize her, but claiming he has not done is part of his holier-than-thou stance that no one really takes a hard look at.
Posted by: CAM | March 2, 2008, 6:39 pm 6:39 pm
oh, and by the way SJ way to distort and accuse Obama of being divisive. I can tell you have been watching hillary very closely.
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 2, 2008, 6:40 pm 6:40 pm
Hillary, the 1st to lose all the way to the nomination. She needs Obama in the end. He will not need her to get elected in the fall.
Posted by: John Compton | March 2, 2008, 6:41 pm 6:41 pm
If Hilary has so much experience in dealing with issues in Washington. Why is our country in the crisis it’s in? Why has her campaign made so many bad decision and squandered many of her donors hard earn dollars. why want Hilary release her tax returns? Let’s remember the Bill and Hilary Clinton Experience when they were in the white house. During the Clinton Presidency years I remember experiencing their numerous scandals, Lies, deception, that brought shame to this Great Nation. Do we want to experience this again? Just Think About It.
Posted by: Another Ron | March 2, 2008, 6:43 pm 6:43 pm
Obama did not read the NIE report he had no authority to, he was not part of the daily briefing either so he is in a position to say anything and since he was not part of the senate no one can prove otherwise.
Most of his endorser did not read the NIE report and there is information to show that they did not, they also voted to go to war so exactly what is Obama’s point.
Would he question the judgment of his endorsers also or is he going to ignore that fact too?
Posted by: SJ | March 2, 2008, 6:45 pm 6:45 pm
Hillary does not and will not need Obama for the Election. She will go for Edwards. I can bet on this and never being able to see Michelle Obama(America-hater) being patriotic very confidently.
Hillary-Edwards ’08
Posted by: MattOhio | March 2, 2008, 6:45 pm 6:45 pm
Hillary Clinton has already destroyed the party. She has distorted and lied her way through this campaign, and the ignorant hang on her every word.
Well my chance to vote is coming, and she will not be getting my vote.
So CAM, as standards go, Obama is not permitted to respond to attacks now?
lol you are all so daggone pitiful! Let’s tear down Obama. Ok, so where do you think all his votes will go???
Posted by: LA in Indiana | March 2, 2008, 6:45 pm 6:45 pm
Paul – good to see you. Comparing the voting records it is clear that since becoming a US Senator, Obama voted the same as Clinton on most national security issues. So I dont think he will be able to draw much contrast there at all. In fact, if he could I think he would have already done it since he was challenged to do so by Clinton. You already know my preference of candidates.
While I dont think much will change for anyone’s preferences, it is evident the numbers are close enough that it could go either way. I think the party and the country has the right to know who the preferred candidate is after all the states have participated not just those up until next Wednesday.
It is absolutely wrong IMHO for Axelrod and Richardson and others to tell Clinton to step out of the race period. I think it is very cowardly of Obama to not be willing to finish the race as is.
Think about it: if one of them steps down, that will not unite the party anymore than they are now. If they both go the distance, the loser can endorse the winner and attempt to unite the party. I think voters would be more accepting of a fair race instead of arguing about who “could have or would have won” and never knowing the real outcome.
Posted by: DCVoter | March 2, 2008, 6:46 pm 6:46 pm
Why would anyone Trust Bill and Hilary Clinton?
Why would anyone want a rerun of Bill Clinton and Hilary Clinton? I live through the Clinton years when he was president and she was first lady. Let’s take a look at the sad blast from the Past. Clinton years full of scandals, Whitewater, Allegations of affairs. one of his accusers attempted to sue him for sexual harassment while he was a sitting president a disgrace and embarrassment to all women and Americans around the world. He raised taxes; He signed NAFTA into Law, Causing Millions of Workers to lose their jobs to outsourcing for cheap labor at the expense of hard working families in this country. Bill Clinton disgraced this country and was almost IMPEACHEd for lying about having an alleged sexual relationship with a young woman in the white House. He pardon Known criminals. Finally I cannot forget the David Koresh event where many innocent children died in Waco Texas, Bin Laden could have been captured and 911 would not have happen. Should I go on………. Time will not permit all of the negative. Why would anyone want a rerun of Bill and Hilary Clinton as President?
Posted by: Another Ron | March 2, 2008, 6:50 pm 6:50 pm
DC Voter – I didn’t reference voting records. She’s made some statements that illustrate her ignorance – despite the ’35 years of experience.’
With regard to voting for emergency spending bills to support the military efforts, what you say is true. And if the Democrats as a whole hadn’t financially supported the troops in a combat theater, the political winds right now would be behind the Republicans instead of the Democrats. It was what they had to do.
Posted by: Paul | March 2, 2008, 6:50 pm 6:50 pm
Their numerous scandals were investigated and properly vetted and no charges were ever filed, so this talk of scandals is really old bath water. I remember the Clinton years as years of peace, prosperity, good wages, plentiful jobs, and a solid economy and a huge surplus. Of course to all the Obamabots, they were not responsible for any of that, they were just sitting there for 8 years and were lucky. What a CROCK!!!
Posted by: Jay | March 2, 2008, 6:51 pm 6:51 pm
Where’d all that experience get her?
Well for starters she got to see the inside of the White House for 8 years, which is 8 more than you and your spouse will ever see.
Secondly, it got her New York, California, Massachusetts, Michigan, Florida (where you ran ads all day long and still got your a$$ kicked), New Jersey, and probably is going to get her Ohio.
If you can’t win big democratic states in a primary you damn sure aren’t going to win the country. Winning Idaho, Alaska, Utah, North Dakota, Nebraska, and Iowa don’t mean a thing, cause in November Obama you don’t have a hope or one of your ‘I pray to Jesus every night – after my sermon in that Farrakhan loving church’ prayers.
You have lied about everything from Selma convincing your parents to get together and have you (you were born 4 years before Selma), to the fact that you were NOT a constituional lawyer, but rather a somewhat pathetic senior lecturer ON LEAVE. And as for Dad, he was no more a goat herder then Hillary. He was a well paid Goverment employee. And as for that Ethics Bill you wrote? You didn’t write a line of it. And as for that Nuclear Bill to help out your campaign donor, Exelon? Even your own party threw it right back into your face.
This fraud will never be president. Not because of race or religion, but because his resume is an invention and his history is fantasy. He is the James Frey of politics – A Million Tiny Lies.
Oprah should have a show on The Audacity Of Hope. She can retitle it ‘The Audacity To Lie’.
Posted by: 2009 Where Are You? | March 2, 2008, 6:56 pm 6:56 pm
Paul – I agree the Dems did what they had to do and that was support the troops. We simply cannot abandon them or those who have helped them.
On foreign policy statements any of them make or decisions they make, since none of us as voters are privvy to the details they are, isnt it all really an issue of trust?
I certainly do not claim to be a foreign policy expert and do not believe any one Senator is because it is just not possible. We do not expect them all to know everything about everything but we do expect them to represent our values and interests. Obama and Clinton share almost identical values and interests and have almost identical platforms. The difference to me between them is that Clinton has more experience under fire and a stronger resume. Therefore, I trust her more than him.
Posted by: DCVoter | March 2, 2008, 6:59 pm 6:59 pm
Plenty of Washington insiders have Experience. What we need is someone who as a better persepctive, and the courage to put it on the table. I’m sick of the same old same old. I want someone with energy and vision and well as a sincerity.
BARACK OBAMA
Posted by: anya | March 2, 2008, 7:00 pm 7:00 pm
We need someone with the courage to vote “present”.???
Kennedy, Kerry and Rockefeller, but he is sick of the same old same old…
Energy he’s got. Vision and sincerity are written in his speeches by his writers.
Posted by: Jay | March 2, 2008, 7:06 pm 7:06 pm
Jay – LOL actually I think most of his supporters dont remember those years because they were too young. They are also too young to remember any movements relating to civil rights, womens rights, and human rights. They are too young to have experienced first hand discrimination, beatings, and inhumane treatment. They live in a country that has a great deal more equality today (even though much more progress is needed that I can personally attest to) because of the sacrifices made by people over the age of 45. Even if our education system were up to par (which it is not) and taught them the real truth about these things, having not experienced it they cannot know the depth of sacrifice and fight that Senator Clinton and people like her have endured. He was right about one thing… the community still today has not embraced the visions of Dr. King and his own wife is not embracing it in his campaign.
Posted by: DCVoter | March 2, 2008, 7:08 pm 7:08 pm
I’m tired of the shrill pro-Clinton and the shrill pro-Obama remarks. Obama is not going to sell out the country. We’ve had almost 16 years of rude, inflammatory political “discourse” and it is long past time it stopped. I think it’s great that for the first time an African-American and a female are serious candidates for president. Now while we need to make up our own minds, I will suggest some reasons why I don’t believe Ms. Clinton is presidential material. AND before her supporters go ballistic, these objections are based on observations of Ms. Clinton in action.
The first characteristic I think we need from a president is an ability to lead. Ms. Clinton has not demonstrated that. As Ms. Doud noted in her column, Ms. Clinton has complained about being asked the first question in debates. I’m sorry, but there are real issues to deal with. For someone of Ms. Clinton’s experience it is completely ludicrous for her to complain about something so petty. Her experience should inform her about how ridiculous her complaints are however accurate. Secondly, while I think that a completely consistent candidate shows little to no capacity for growth, on the other hand a candidate who is unable to articulate a consistent theme is also concerning. In other words, I think that the charge of “flip flopping” is over used, over rated, and overdone. Nonetheless, Ms. Clinton’s performance since she found her voice in New Hampshire does not inspire confidence. The voice continues to change. Thirdly, her critiques of Mr. Obama are often so lacking substance that it’s hard to take her seriously. The old adage about people in glass houses not throwing stones holds here. Take for example the charge of plagiarism. It wasn’t, it was shown not to be, and Ms. Clinton has been shown to use phrases and thoughts from others that she has also not attributed to their author. There isn’t much room on this. Either she isn’t aware of her own behaviors which would call into question her ability to monitor her own behaviors or she is and does it anyhow – which means she’s hoping that people will buy it what is at best hypocrisy. My next objection is that Ms. Clinton as president will have to respond quickly and decisively to new situations. Her response to finding herself loosing to Mr. Obama since “Super Tuesday” would indicate that she will have difficulty doing so. My point is this. Her whole campaign was predicated on the assumption that she would have the nomination wrapped up by then. That didn’t happen. That it didn’t is not the issue. Life happens. But the way Ms. Clinton has responded by downplaying the significance of the states in which she lost, totally ignoring Wisconsin when she lost and making excuses for those losses when she acknowledged them suggests a leader who will blame others when things do not go her way. We think of her as being battle tested. I know I did. But now as I observe the campaign, I think that she has been “smear” tested. Whatever testing she has endured and in all fairness she has, it has not been as a leader having to make decisions. And now when it is, her responses do not suggest a capacity to respond to crisis’s in any that makes me feel safe that she is the one answering the red phone in the White House.
There are indications that the reason that Ms. Clinton’s campaign is in trouble in part because she has selected her team based on loyalty rather than competence. I’ve already had almost eight years of that and I really, really, really don’t want to see more. We need competent leadership. The challenges are real. But Ms. Clinton’s actions suggest an inability to do so despite her much touted experience.
Posted by: Rhys | March 2, 2008, 7:08 pm 7:08 pm
Someone wrote all of the scandals were invistagated? If Hilary is Prsident Expect More Scandals deceptions,and 4 years of Investigations, and who will lose we the American People. Why would anyone Want a Rerun of Bill and Hilary Clinton?
Posted by: Another Ron | March 2, 2008, 7:10 pm 7:10 pm
DC Voter – it is an issue of trust. Right now I think most Republicans laugh if you ask if Clinton is trusted with national security issues. Even the TV pundits were amazed she went with red phone ad, because in the end its not an intuitive choice that it would be Hillary we prefer to be answering that call.
Inside the Democratic Party, she is given some benefit of doubt; mostly by those who don’t question whether she really has 35 years of public experience.
If the red phone (or off-white, in this case) ad shows some effect in Texas, Obama and the Republicans will both take notice. He’ll have to transition into someone who can hit back on national security – at the expense of Hillary – to demonstrate to the Republicans that there’s a price to pay for going there.
That’s been the subtext of the last couple weeks, with McCain probing and Obama answering. They’re testing general election waters.
Posted by: Paul | March 2, 2008, 7:13 pm 7:13 pm
Sorry Rhys, your wordy and long document is trying to say that campaigning for the presidency and being the President are one in the same. They are not.
There is a huge distinction in how anyone would operate running for a job, and then being hired for that job.
Posted by: Jay | March 2, 2008, 7:13 pm 7:13 pm
I think Obama is an arrogant, pompous @$$!!!! Also, I notice this race is being divided among racial and actually possibly(from what I can sort of tell anyway)gender lines. Look at the fact that his endorsers that VOTED for the Iraq Resolution are all male(again from the ones I know of that he has anyway), and yet he CRITICIZES Hillary for voting for THE SAME THING??? There is something really utterly wrong with this picture if you ask me. I’m not a Dem, BUT I DO SUPPORT HILLARY 110% and frnakly your party is so messed up after this election that I don’t see how you all are going to fix it.
Oh yea, back to the gender thing. I think Obama’s stance on what I was saying is VERY sexist and a double standard if you ask me.
Just my thoughts anyway.
Posted by: Hillary DID help NY: Courtney WNY State | March 2, 2008, 7:16 pm 7:16 pm
It’s nice to see all the neocons backing Hilliary and “threatening” to vote for McCain if she doesn’t get to be the nominee. I never knew loyality to the war and the neocon establishment was so prevalent among so-called “Democratic” voters. I guess this evidence proves once and for all that a vote for Hilliary really is a vote for BUSH. Don’t blame Obama voters for voting for a Democrat in the Democrat party. If your such a Republican, I’m sure that McCain will suit you just fine. Forgive us if we choose an alternative to neo-con John with Obama. But don’t worry John will still be there for you in November, satisfied???
Posted by: cba | March 2, 2008, 7:20 pm 7:20 pm
Paul – exactly… Clinton’s record on national security is very similar to McCain’s but they have some distinct differences. Their vote on the 2002 authorization was the same making that not an issue of an election between them. They also have major differences on most other campaign issues. So if Clinton is the nominee against McCain, she would run on policy relating to all campaign issues while McCain would run on a typical Rep platform with the exception of immigration since he leans the same way Clinton does. McCain of course would point out he has more experience than Clinton and Bill Clinton has already begun a defense for her in the latest stump speeches.
With Obama, experience and judgement would be the key issues McCain will hit him with but I think the Rep machine could possibly take him down with the Rezko issues depending on what details become public or even with perception. They are very good at convincing people of guilt without proof.
Posted by: DCVoter | March 2, 2008, 7:22 pm 7:22 pm
I am still waiting on someone to tell me what her great amount of experience is? Is it the 80 countries she visited on the tax payers dime? If so then people need to recall back in..I think 96 when she got in trouble for taking “vacations” in other countries where she also used tax payers money to take her friends along…big difference in experience and what she was doing.
Posted by: Sam | March 2, 2008, 7:28 pm 7:28 pm
“How come everyone is saying that Sen Clinton should get out now in order not to divide the party but no one says that about Huckabee who has no chance of catching up to McCain”
Bad example. Some in the GOP are indeed unhappy with Huckabee wearing out his welcome. He is now just an irritant to McCain and has no chance.
I guess Hillary will become an irrelevent nuisance with no chance.
Hillary = DNC Huckabee?
Posted by: Jane | March 2, 2008, 7:29 pm 7:29 pm
Typical Obama spin. He is supported by a ton of people who supported the resolution and also had kind words for people who voted for it who have yet to or are not supporting him (ie Edwards) but he seems to state that if you voted for the war resolution you do not have the right experience or judgement to be President. Why did not he say this about John Kerry in 2004?
Posted by: Eric | March 2, 2008, 7:30 pm 7:30 pm
Obama’s entire campaign has been based on now his infamous SPEECH (words) against the war in Iraq! I ask: WHAT DID HE DO IN THE WAKE OF THAT SPEECH?!?!?!!?
Posted by: DMK | March 2, 2008, 7:32 pm 7:32 pm
After all is said and done and after all the latest desperate bla bla bla of all you Clinton supporters, the bottom line is(as you all know)that Obama will win this thing folks!
He already got the momentum on his side and you don´t need to be a brain surgent to realise how America is yearning for real change today.
Go Obama-the JFK incarnation!
Posted by: Billa | March 2, 2008, 7:33 pm 7:33 pm
alot of people denounced the war and many in high public offices. What gives him the right to think that he is qualified just because of his words.
Posted by: stevem | March 2, 2008, 7:34 pm 7:34 pm
Billa,
YOu think Obama will win? You are in for a big surprise! The Clintons are FIGHTERS! And we want the next president to be a fighter, not some puny boy!
Posted by: DMK | March 2, 2008, 7:37 pm 7:37 pm
OBAMA, you address the following questions which have been sent to you in a letter, you know by WHOM!
1) Did you direct your top economic adviser – Austan Goolsbee – to tell the Canadian government that your speeches railing against NAFTA are just political rhetoric? If so, why?
2) Are you aware that Mr. Goolsbee held a secret meeting with the Canadian Counsel General Georges Rioux? Have you spoken with Mr. Goolsbee about that meeting and will you repudiate his comments?
3) Why has Mr. Goolsbee been unwilling to deny that he discussed your positions on NAFTA with Mr. Rioux? Why won’t your campaign disclose the full details about that meeting?
4) Given these reports, why should Ohioans believe that you will act on the campaign promises you have made about NAFTA?
5) Sen. Clinton has issued a comprehensive plan to fix NAFTA. Why haven’t you done so as well?
Posted by: DMK | March 2, 2008, 7:40 pm 7:40 pm
I looked at Hussein Obama’s face, he is so arrogant. Just same as Bush!!!
Posted by: John | March 2, 2008, 7:41 pm 7:41 pm
Who the heck is Obama, some parvenue from Chicago, to rip Hillary on her foreign policy? NOBAMA read this: … They are among the nearly 30 general and flag officers who have endorsed Hillary Clinton to be the Nation’s next President. Senator Clinton has received five endorsements in recent days, including those of General Henry Hugh Shelton, the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral William Owens, the former vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and Army Major General Antonio M. Taguba. Overall she has the endorsement of two former chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, five admirals and generals at the four-star rank. They are in addition to over 2,000 veterans and military retirees who are members of Senator Clinton’s national and state veterans’ steering committees.
The list of those taking part in today’s call is below.
General Wesley Clark
Admiral William Owens
General Johnnie E. Wilson
Lt. Gen. Joe Ballard
Lt. Gen. Claudia J. Kennedy
Vice Admiral Joseph A. Sestak
Lt. Gen. Frederick E. Vollrath
Major General George A. Buskirk, Jr.
Major General Paul D. Eaton
Rear Admiral Stuart Platt
Rear Admiral David Stone
Major General Antonio M. Taguba
Brigadier General Michael Dunn
Brigadier General Evelyn “Pat” Foote
Brigadier General John M. Watkins, Jr.
Brigadier General Jack Yeager
Former Secretary of the Army and Veterans Affairs Togo West
Former Secretary of the Navy, John Dalton
Posted by: DMK | March 2, 2008, 7:47 pm 7:47 pm
Simple question: Besides being the wife of Bill, what qualifies Hilary so much more than Obama? Just wondering…
(I will remember that Laura Bush has enough experiences to run the country just because I say so)
Posted by: TheOne | March 2, 2008, 7:47 pm 7:47 pm
What is more important? Good for this country or good for our party? Senator Clinton is the best candidate, why she should quit? I’d like Huckbee’s word: “stay in the race until one get the magic number.” Senator Clinton, you will make it!
Posted by: PPDIRIX | March 2, 2008, 7:49 pm 7:49 pm
Poor Obama; he really has done *nothing* but a single speech in 2002….
He has NO military ssupport; noone has any respect in the military for him as a commander in chief or a leader…
Sen. Clinton has received in the last few days the endorsements and teh outspoken support and trust of all the TOP military brass, including that
Gen. Hugh Shelton and Antonio Taguba(among many many others) as the most qualified person to LEAD
and be COMMANDER IN CHIEF !!
This fact of exceeding importance to the people of this country has of course not been reported TODAY by the MSM.
Obama has no judgment whatsover: Rezko, Rezko Rezko…
Obama has no leadership skills whatsoever. In fact he should be impeached for dereliction of duty as a US Senator for failing to do his *job* as chairman of the powerful Foreign Relation Subcommitee on Europe that oversees NATO and among other his mission in Afghanistan.. He didn’t convene a single meeting. No IDEAS, NO Initiatives, Nothing…
He did not pay attention to one of the most important a US SEnator can be entrusted with.
Why would he behave any different as President?
Why would anyone entrust him with the highest job of the land?
He is even ashamed of his middle name…
What a character!!
NO OBAMA.
Posted by: Nod | March 2, 2008, 7:49 pm 7:49 pm
One thing I Love about this campaign and online forum: You seem find more people in the online forums supporting Hilary and more people supporting Obama in real life. Why is that?
Posted by: TheOne | March 2, 2008, 7:51 pm 7:51 pm
Obama is done. the campaign will go on past Tuesday. Why: because $35 million will turn into $60 in March, the country will continue to get tired of his song and dance and will go back to Britney.
REZKO will sing and implicate him, and we’ll all feel better because somehow we ended up with the right choice for president.
HILLARY 08,12
Posted by: TheGoodJuan | March 2, 2008, 7:52 pm 7:52 pm
Hillary invaded Iraq.
Bill funded the Taliban. ($3B to Pakistan 1995-1998).
Bill cheated (again) on Hillary and Hillary decided to stand up against him by running for president?
They should have a reality show, outside of the states. Get out of our country.
Posted by: Patriot | March 2, 2008, 7:54 pm 7:54 pm
Here are facts on why not for Hill:
a) 35 years experience – biggest Fairy
Tale, no plan B after Super Tuesday
with a bankrupt campaign that
resulted in a draw. She has gall to
insult Gen. Petraeus on the surge
with her “suspension in disbelief”
after outsourcing responsibility of
National Intelligence Estimate to
other people before voting for Iraq
war. She has no compunction to lie
nor admit personal mistakes as if
she is our Queen to look down on
others.
b) Media Bias – the Clintons are
actually suffering from Media
Adulation Deficit Disorder – MADD,
another term is pea-green envy.
Habitual SHOW-OFF as in last debate
on Medvedev where she jumps in to
answer for the undirected question
but has the gall to complain why
always asking her the first question !
c) Hard Work – Claims she works hard,
yet produced nothing much of
national significance in Senate as
more of her efforts are worthy of
Tammany Hall patronage for local
politicians. However, Hill’s face is
always on national media as she
always managed to position herself
in front of cameras. Compare that to
Barack’s bill of bipartisan bills
safeguarding nuclear materials and
ethics reform for Congress. In
other words, she always appear busy,
but busy doing nothing ! If she is
really that good in bipartisanship,
why can’t she produced a Universal
Healthcare bill in over six years
she was in the Senate ?
d) Ready – as the Enabler-In-Chief but
not as Commander-In-Chief if we
include her part of “35 years
experience” in Blackhawk Down, wag
the dog episode after USS Cole and
Monicagate. Where was she when all
these happened and it they didn’t
even happen at 3:00 AM !
e) Universal Healthcare – mandate is
enforced by Wage Garnishment despite
denial now, as shown on ABC network
by admitting to a “mechanism” that
will be (forced employees to enroll)
applied on wages. She did not deny
it when Garnishment was used then,
but now denies it.
f) Smart – just a mediocre law graduate
who flunk the Bar Exam, then bragged
about knowing Bhutto family story by
incorrectly saying father was also
assassinated. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto
was hanged by the military regime
that overthrew him.
g) Vetted – refused to release Tax
Returns unless she is the nominee !
She must have something to hide for,
so protective of her secret source
of wealth, when they are personally
bankrupt after leaving public
housing (WH). Won’t release her WH
papers, passing blame for delay to
Bush, who denied her charges, thus
proving as habitual liar.
h) Doer – spectacular flop of
Hillarycare is the showcase of her
doing. She produces less Senate
output and of mediocre quality than
Barack’s first 2 years alone !
i) Talker – Failed to keep her own
promise to wage a national campaign
as she skips a lot of states by
reason of a bankrupt campaign and
resulting in her failing campaign.
j) Fighter – code word for divisiveness
hiding under the cover of waging
campaign against special interest
while hidden hands accept campaign
contributions. Accumulated biggest
campaign funds last year but still
managed to overspend her campaign
into bankruptcy. Very good at
parsing words and moving goal post
for accepting defeat.
k) Result – trailing campaign after
almost a year-long lead among all
candidates. Squandered all her
advantages and even her biggest
lobbyists can help her with her
campaign fund raising now !
l) Focus management – all talk and
never knows how to do it, producing
debacles after debacles and with
scandals. Hsu campaign fund raiser,
Hillarycare, Hill Force One to cover
Iowa campaign for a 3rd place
finish, bankrupt campaign resorted
to personal loan to survive, no
contingency plan for campaign beyond
Super Tuesday.
Posted by: wilson | March 2, 2008, 7:54 pm 7:54 pm
Obama, the Chicago parvenu,is the most arrogant politician in recent history…. right there with Dubya….
Posted by: Obama Hubris | March 2, 2008, 7:55 pm 7:55 pm
Please Hillary keep going to the end. Starting Monday with the Rezko trial and all the articles being written in the Chicago newspapers, all obama’s shady characters are coming to light. It was written today in the Chicago Suntimes that the GOP is already investigating Obama’s shady acquaintances and asking lots of questions.
Mr. McCain is going to have a field day with Obama.
In fact, I think Obama will be done once this trial comes to an end.
Posted by: stevem | March 2, 2008, 7:58 pm 7:58 pm
He may have tried to be arrogant but he won’t match the Clintons ever, he’s simply too genuine to be playing politics with the ever-arrogant Clintons… He must stick to his calling which is to bring hope and unite the country.
OBAMA 08!!!
Posted by: TheOne | March 2, 2008, 7:58 pm 7:58 pm
He better pray for a miracle, because Mr. Obama is going down once the GOP gets ahold of him and his shady acquaintances.
Posted by: stevem | March 2, 2008, 8:02 pm 8:02 pm
There are republicans that will NEVER vote for Mc-Cain because they believe he’s not conservative enough and there are democrats, including some latinos in Texas as we saw it on TV this week, who will NEVER vote for Obama because he’s black….
HOWEVER, these two men are leading the poll as of today
Posted by: TheOne | March 2, 2008, 8:04 pm 8:04 pm
Chavez just sent troops to the border with Colombia. I like to knwo what Obama woulld do about that versus Hillary. This will come up. Here is what I think will happen:
Hillary will answer, then Obama will say: whatever she says. hehe
Posted by: TheGoodJuan | March 2, 2008, 8:05 pm 8:05 pm
I’m looking forward to the strong minded voters of Texas, Ohio, Vermont and Rhode Island to save the Democrats from utter embarrassment.
The race in the general election will be tough. And we’ve got to think twice before putting up a junior senator who would rather vote PRESENT on legislation than take a stand.
You have the power, get us back on track!
Posted by: OhioNative | March 2, 2008, 8:11 pm 8:11 pm
It was Hillary Clinton who passed the bill in congress to get the armour for our troops in Iraq. That is a known fact. Where was Mr. Obama when Hillary was doing all she could to keep our troops safe. Oh! How stupid of me…He was negotiating a $2,000,000.00 house deal, and a $625,000.00 adjacent lot deal for his and MIchelle’s residence per his good buddy…Rezko!!!!!
Posted by: stevem | March 2, 2008, 8:13 pm 8:13 pm
Obama’s experience shows when he wants to invade Pakistan, give healthcare and driver’s license to illegals, will not agree to support Israel, supported the PLO, associated wit muslim criminals for 17 years and has raised concern from Israel and Canada. It is a fact, Obama has less foreign relations knowledge than Bush. This is this a “change” for the “worst”.
Posted by: james | March 2, 2008, 8:13 pm 8:13 pm
It’s simply dishonest to try to spin Hillary’s vote to authorize the war. Most of us remember the millions of people across the world who demonstrated against this war. When you cast such a historical vote, without even reading the NIE report, is criminal.
Posted by: JustinA | March 2, 2008, 8:21 pm 8:21 pm
Hillary will win if Obama wins in every state. When the Resko trial starts, the real facts, concerning Obama and the the muslim criminals, will be public. The DNC will drop Obama like a “hot rock”.
Posted by: leon | March 2, 2008, 8:22 pm 8:22 pm
First of all…some of you really need to do research and get your facts. straight. I remember 2002-2003 very clearly..and the government had no clear evidence for invading Iraq. I was against it from the start. Even France was against it..remember when everybody hated France because they refused to be an ally in a “dumb” war?? Mrs. Clinton was not making a career risking decision..actually she did what was POLITICALLY POPULAR.Obama on the other hand went against the word of his advisers and while running for re-election to the state senate…spoke out courageously against the war. He could have ended his career right there..but he stated that if he can’t stand for what he believes in he doesn’t care about his career.
Posted by: Brian | March 2, 2008, 8:26 pm 8:26 pm
African-American superdelegates are being targeted, harassed and threatened,” said Rep. Emanuel Cleaver II (D-Mo.), a superdelegate who has supported Clinton since August. Cleaver said black superdelegates are receiving “nasty letters, phone calls, threats they’ll get an opponent, being called an Uncle Tom.
Posted by: Edward Franco | March 2, 2008, 8:27 pm 8:27 pm
On 60 Minutes a little while ago Clinton would barely say that she knows that Obama isn’t a Muslim. Then she turned it around to herself saying she’s the victim of rumors too. That woman is unbelieveable. It was her campaign workers that started the false email and it somehow gets sent out right before a primary in a state. Hillary Clinton makes me sick because she is so unethical.
Posted by: Janet from NH | March 2, 2008, 8:33 pm 8:33 pm
KardasiaPrime..stop making this about sexism. What you don’t seem to get is..it’s not a coincidence that 40% of the country dislike Clinton. That’s because people want to actually be PROUD of their first female president. I’d love to see Kathleen Sebelius for example become president. Not some woman who claims first lady as experience, refuses to release her tax returns, can’t even properly run her campaign, does what’s politically popular, and ignores the small states
Posted by: Mike | March 2, 2008, 8:33 pm 8:33 pm
I have been to Hillary’s and Obama’s campaign speech. Obama puts on a great show, lots of words, glitter, but no feeling. I believe some parts were from a Bush speech. Hillary’s speech was more specific, discussed solutions, seemed to care. She talked to some of us after the speech, she is real. Hillary made me feel comfortable about her being president. There are too many serious problems with Obama, as of late. I firmly believe Hillary is the right person for the job.
Posted by: martha m. | March 2, 2008, 8:37 pm 8:37 pm
The Obama campaign talks of new style politics but they are more of the same if not worse. The reason they want Senator Clinton out is they want to wrap up the nomination before the REZKO trial leaks a lot of sewage that involves “O Immaculate One Obama” the seepage is about to come to the surface.
HILLARY LEADS IN TEXAS AND OHIO AND RHODE ISLAND POLLS.
And as for Foreign policy, how many of the worlds leaders has Obama actualy met or had exchanges with. I think the World Leaders will welcome President Hillary Clinton.
FIGHT ON HILLARY…MAKE HISTORY!
Posted by: JJ | March 2, 2008, 8:37 pm 8:37 pm
The 2002 Iraq War vote is to Obama what 911 was to Rudy Guiliani’s candidacy. Even when Obama’s protesting Clinton’s characterization that his entire foreign policy revolves around that one vote, he goes right on to prove her point – complaining again about her 2002 vote. Yesterday he described the 3 a.m. red phone ad on the stump as both a “legitimate question to ask” and fearmongering. Two diametrically opposed claims in one sentence.
Here’s another example of a contradiciton no one in the emperor’s clothes press corps never bothers to ask about. He says on the one hand that he’s going to fix a broken government and bring “change”. Yet many of his fundraisers and strategists are from the Bush Administration. (Time published an article about this in November called “Obama’s Red State Appeal”. ) His speechwriter Ben Rhodes is the brother of Fox VP David Rhodes. (Fox is the Rupert Murdoch network associated with theG.O.P. and also featured in Fahrenheit 911 for its role in calling Florida for Bush in the 2000 election.)
There is also Obama’s familiar refrain that he couldn’t wait longer than a year in the senate before running for president because he would have had all his hope “boiled and stewed” out of him by members of Congress. These “Washington insiders”, he said, are “more interested in the next election than the generation”. After insulting these legislators repeatedly in cities across America for the last three months, how is he expecting to bring them together to pass his proposals for health care, college tax credits, etc?
Everything about this candidate makes you feel as though you’d just walked through the looking glass into another world. In this dreamy wonderland, experience and a record of accomplishment are not considered pros but cons. They’re cons, alright, and it may be that people realize too late that they’re being played for fools again – or rather Pavlov’s dogs – just like the “weapons of mass destruction” campaign.
The neoconservaties infiltrated the AARP before the Medicare vote, and they’re infiltrating the Democratic Party through the primaries now, using the perfect disguise. Next time you feel all that Hillary hatred welling up inside you, ask yourself, where exactly did that all intense emotion come from?
Posted by: Factcheck2 | March 2, 2008, 8:38 pm 8:38 pm
I see some people criticizing Obama for so called wanting to invade Pakistan. Put your own spin on it if you want..but the only thing he said is that if the Pakistan government refuses to do anything about the terrorists residing there then he’ll take action. BUt wait..didn’t the government just send a drone into Pakistan and kill a third-ranking al-qaeda official? Everyone criticized him for it..but turns out Obama was right. You people think years in washington makes you a better president? Please do more research.
Posted by: Brian | March 2, 2008, 8:44 pm 8:44 pm
First off, Senator Clinton does “not run around.” Is this similar to “she periodically needs a boost” or “she pulls claws out.”
At some point, people will wake up to this arrogant individual.
Once again, Obama is lying and obscruring Clinton’s vote. She clearly said in her 2002 speech, she was for unlimited inspections, not for preemptive war.
But you’ll go around lying — and lying and lying and distorting. Spinning, much like Bush.
The American people are FED UP with this kind of “old politics.”
You do NOT represent any new politics and this Independent voter will actively campaign against you and never give you a dime.
Posted by: scorber12 | March 2, 2008, 8:45 pm 8:45 pm
There is definitely double standard in the media about handling baby Barack and handling Hillary. Still, i can certainly see that people have come to recognize that who they want to see in White House. Hillary Clinton will win in Ohio with 20% lead and in Texas with 10% lead. Hillary will not need Barack Obama, to win the November. She should certainly go for Edwards.
Hillary-Edwards 08
Posted by: SK | March 2, 2008, 8:52 pm 8:52 pm
Imagine an undertaking as significant to the nation as war, which will cost thousands of lives, limbs, mental health and hundreds of billions of dollars; and the ‘experienced’ Hilary Clinton does even take time to read the so-called intelligence report and and agonize over her authorization to go to war?
Even worse, this person is supposed to be a mother who produced life? Wow!
The IMPULSIVE Bush in his power-drunken state just up and decided to use the US military as his private army to wage an UNPROVOKED war.
And Hilary Clinton IMPULSIVELY went along; and now has the audacity to deceive Americans that she could be commander-in-chief of 300 million?
Incompetent Hilary Clinton can’t run an efficient and effective national campaign. To be sure, Hilary Clinton can’t even run an efficient family and TAKE CARE OF ONE MAN. How on gad’s green earth would ANY American be so daft as to believe that Hilary Clinton could take care of a nation of many millions of men, and women?
Posted by: New Yorker | March 2, 2008, 8:59 pm 8:59 pm
In no way Barack Obama is a Messiah. He’s an ordinary, but gifted and highly intelligent man. The whole Senate on both ailes agrees on that. The admire him. Even McCain agrees on that.
The strange thing is, if you him next to Hillary Clinton, he’s the Messiah.
Posted by: Margot | March 2, 2008, 9:00 pm 9:00 pm
I do not expect to see Obama win in PA Most of the people don’t drink latte. They are hard working they like beer and lots of it they also are still able to wear t-shirts that say how they are feeling thier is no other state like its a free state they also like thier guns and Obama does not I don’t live in Pa anymore I had to find work after Clinton left office but when I go home nothing has change and thats the way I like it .
Posted by: Bishop | March 2, 2008, 9:02 pm 9:02 pm
Fox News Channel “Hannity & Colmes” is at this moment discussing Obama’s relationship with the radical weather Underground group, his friends William Ayers and M. Dohrn.
Posted by: stevem | March 2, 2008, 9:11 pm 9:11 pm
And what kind of foreign policy experience does she have? She was only First Lady for cryin out loud. She had tea and cookies with the other first ladies – what kind of “experience” is that?
Posted by: genlin | March 2, 2008, 9:13 pm 9:13 pm
Hillary has lost 12 straight contests if you include the democratic foreign voters…
Posted by: Playlist | March 2, 2008, 9:18 pm 9:18 pm
The problem with Hillary is that she’s bought and paid for by the New-York crowd. Her allegiance will always be to them and their interests. Where as Obama’s will be to us the average American. No one will dictate to him how he should lead this country’s foreign policy.
Posted by: Rick Benton | March 2, 2008, 9:19 pm 9:19 pm
Time for real change..with Hillary Clinton. I have studied past voting records of both canidates and I am pleased to report that Hillary has a better record for the people. With Bama only being “present” and missing out on 110 senate votes, I do not believe he has the leadership qualities we need for the presidency. Therefore, I am voting for Hillary Clinton. Another business man for Hillary!
Posted by: mike | March 2, 2008, 9:20 pm 9:20 pm
Rick Benton,
What a stupid argument! Following your logic, Obama’s allegiance would be to the people in Illinois!
Posted by: DMK | March 2, 2008, 9:22 pm 9:22 pm
Why are the republicans voting Obama for one day only in the primary? Is it possible Carl Rove wants an easy win in November? I seen the notice to republicans, vote for Obama in the primary and McCain will win the election.
Posted by: Sylvia B. | March 2, 2008, 9:23 pm 9:23 pm
After reading all of the nasty attacks on both Clinton and Obama, there is only one thing to do–vote McCain!
Posted by: Diane | March 2, 2008, 9:25 pm 9:25 pm
Rick, come on please give us something better than that. Hillary is not bought off by the N.Y. crowd. She is very intelligent, confident, experience to back it up, and has a plan on many fronts, including health care. Plus a way to help fund her plan through an ecomonic package. Tax credits for students, and zero interest student loans after they graduate college. Sounds like she has more than just words. Another business man for Hillary Clinton.
Posted by: mike | March 2, 2008, 9:25 pm 9:25 pm
If Hillary had courage and conviction she would have run in 04…she just stayed in the background and voted with MCCain…Now in 08 thinking she was a shoo in….she got run over by someone with the dignity, conviction and courage to run…people see through the fake, dirty campaign and she will be looking for more excuses on Wednesday after she LOSES…Democrats do not want Hillary Clinton… when will it sink in..
Posted by: playlist | March 2, 2008, 9:27 pm 9:27 pm
He has no polices and knows little about foreign relations. He only wants to talk.
Well after seeing his talking, and hearing his speeches, he would give America away, before he would defend it.
With him flip flopping on things, coming back and saying I meant this, he is gonna get someone mad and get us all killed.
Mr Obama you are the weakest link
Posted by: seah | March 2, 2008, 9:29 pm 9:29 pm
From USA Today: “There are so many presidents with a great deal of experience who failed miserably,” Dallek says. “Think first of all of James Buchanan, 1857 to 1861, from the run-up to the Civil War — so experienced that they called him ‘Mr. Government’ — and now invariably listed as one of the worst presidents in the country’s history.”
Buchanan had been a member of the House and Senate, secretary of State and minister to Great Britain. As president, however, he did little to respond when Southern states began to secede from the Union.
Buchanan’s successor was Abraham Lincoln, a prairie lawyer who served eight years in the Illinois Legislature and one term in the U.S. House. “He had next to no experience at all,” Dallek says, “and now is seen as probably the greatest president in the country’s history.”
Posted by: jon sid | March 2, 2008, 9:29 pm 9:29 pm
He has no polices and knows little about foreign relations. He only wants to talk.
Well after seeing his talking, and hearing his speeches, he would give America away, before he would defend it.
With him flip flopping on things, coming back and saying I meant this, he is gonna get someone mad and get us all killed.
Mr Obama you are the weakest link
Posted by: seah | March 2, 2008, 9:30 pm 9:30 pm
Just look at the voting records in congress friends. Hillary won the two categories. 1. Who voted for the people’s best interest?= Hillary over Bama
2. Who was most consitent in their voting record? Yes you guessed it. Hillary.
People please wake up before its too late. Hillary has fought time and time again for you the people. She is battle tested, will not negioate with foes of the U.S. until they demonstrate responsibility with their own people. Then through diplomacy she will be begin a dialog. That jr.varsity canidate Bama wants to embrace everyone, anytime, and everything will be hunky dori. Hillary for President. A canidate who will stand up against terrorists, not embrace them…
Posted by: mike | March 2, 2008, 9:32 pm 9:32 pm
Obama has missed 96% of roll call in the U S Senate, the worst on record. This is a record to be proud of, at taxpayers expense. Obama, I guess with your attendance record, you wouldn’t be there to answer the phone at 3 am in the White House.
Posted by: steve | March 2, 2008, 9:34 pm 9:34 pm
Let one thing be clear..once Obama disposes Clinton…McCain is easy..defending a failed Iraq…inflation…payday advance “Stimulus Checks” and tax breaks for the most wealthy…run away healhcare costs,…..Mclame take your Geritol…
Clinton is just a pesty distraction…
she will be taken off life support on TUESDAY…
Posted by: playlist | March 2, 2008, 9:35 pm 9:35 pm
Two biggest selling points of Obama, according to himself and his fans, are: 1) Obama is a uniter who can bring republicans and independents together, while Clinton is a divisive figure, and 2) Obama has excellent judgement as demonstrated in his anti-war stance and 2002 anti-war speech.
Honestly, I do not think that Clinton has been effective in disect Obama’s claims, perhaps she is worried about hurting democrats’ chance in the general election. Now let me argue that Obama’s claims are bogus.
1) On Obama as a uniter and Hillary as divisive.
Obama’s ability as a uniter only shows up in his speeches. His voting records both as state senator and US-Senator do not support his claim. In fact, if anything, his voting records showed just the opposite. His voting records earned him as the most liberal democrat in the US-Senator, which basically means that he never or most unlikely vote for issues that have some common interest with republicans. This is not what a uniter would do. Therefore, you really have to believe in his words in his speeches that he is a uniter and that he will work with republicans to solve problems.
On the contrary, Hillary, after she got to the US Senate, has worked with many most conservative republicans including those who led impeachment of her husband on various bills. Many of them actually admitted that Hillary is an excellent colleague in the Senate. McCain of course also has an excellent track of records in bridging with democrats.
In short, among the three major contenders, Obama has the least credentials as a uniter, if you do not count on his speeches. Of course, the fact that Obama jumped into this election by ignoring the seniority (out of his personal political ambition), thus effectively divided the democrats does not help him to be called as a uniter.
2) On Obama’s 2002 anti-war speech and his anti-war stance.
We have to remember that as Bush administration drumed up the war with Iraq in 2002 and early 2003, the majority of democrats (let’s say 20 millions) were very suspicious about administration’s intention and resisted the war idea. Obama was one of those 20 millions. At the heart of the issues was whether or not Iraq had the weapon of mass destruction (WMD) and whether or not the US and UK intelligence information was believable. Besides democrats, Bush’s own secretary of State, Colin Powell (my hero) and his associates, were initially also very suspicious about the information and resisted the war idea. A lot of Americans later on changed their mind, mainly because the intelligence information became more believable or at least believable enough that Colin Powell changed his mind to go to the UN to show part of the information. I started to believe the story after Colin Powell was willing to do.
At this point, most Americans possibly except for the real liberals agreed with the war idea. Therefore, I would argue that given the information that Americans had at the time, it is a solid judgement to vote for the war. That is what and why the congress did. In 2004 election, Kerry and Edwards both said this — they did not question the decision and vote for the war, but they faulted the administration for executing the war.
Of course, the true liberals are those who are against war under any circumstance. Is Obama one of those true liberals? There are only two answers.
The first answer is yes, and I have reasons to believe that he is one of those true liberals. In this case, Obama’s anti-war bet in 2002-2003 was not because of his sound judgement, as he often claims. His bet was derived from his political and philosophical belief that is simply no war no matter what. Do we need such a person in White House? His bet in 2002 was a lucky one, but what about next time?
The second answer is that perhaps Obama is not the true liberal, and he was just like many of us who initially opposed the war but subsequently changed views after seeing more information or hearing Colin Powell’s UN speech. I also have reasons to believe in the second answer, because he later in 2004-2005 admitted that if he had been in the US Senate in 2003 he would have voted the same. In this case, he is no different from Hillary.
Posted by: R. M. | March 2, 2008, 9:39 pm 9:39 pm
Hey Playlist maybe Hillary wanted some experience under her belt from now to 04. Did you ever think of that, or are you to shallow like Bama supportors have shown in all he does on his T.V. ads is defend himself. The real bottom line here is he only can stand on one solid decision, “I opposed the war.” Outside of that what else has he achieved? Please change to republican so you can have a narrow minded politcal party. Believe me experience does count for something.
Posted by: mike | March 2, 2008, 9:42 pm 9:42 pm
it is SO obvious that Obama is so much more ready to be president than Hil. C’mon people, everyone knows it…
Posted by: Thoma | March 2, 2008, 9:45 pm 9:45 pm
Hillary will not be a pushover. Thats how stupid the republicans mindset is. They fear her because she will beat him hands down. Heck, if Al Gore beat Bush by popular vote, but lost on electoral, Hillary will certainly smash McCain..I think she holds the best credentials and another businessman is voting for Hillary Clinton.
Posted by: mike | March 2, 2008, 9:48 pm 9:48 pm
obama just keeps going back to events from 2002. that’s all he’s got. i thought he was the candidate for the future. the future is before us, the past is behind us, etc., all the empty-minded stuff we hear from him and his supporters. doesn’t he know we’ve heard his lines about 2002 over and over again and are really, really, really tired of it?
Posted by: so saddened | March 2, 2008, 9:53 pm 9:53 pm
Any person with a grain of technical would have known that there would be no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq! Why? Because the inspectors had extremely sensitive detection instruments that could detect traces of Nuclear, Chemical or Biological materials in quantities of one part in a billion! WMDs aren’t easily moved and if moved, minute traces are left behind. The USA and others provided inspectors with locations/labs of expected WMD sites. Nothing was found by the inspectors. Then Bush ordered the inspectors out and invaded Iraq. Clinton and others who voted for this foolish war in Iraq GOT IT TOTALLY WRONG! Now we have had 3,973 brave military killed in Iraq, about 30,000 wounded, spent so far about $700 Billion and the total cost of this war is estimated by experts to cost the USA over 3 Trillion dollars, all borrowed, including actual outlays, rebuilding the military, adding at least $10 per barrell on oil prices, long term care of the wounded, interest on the borrowed funding for the war, etc. McCain offers 4 mory year’s of Bush. If you LIKE BUSH, you will LOVE McCAIN! AND Sen Clinton would return memories to the days of WHITEWATER, MONICA, TRAVELGATE,etc.
Posted by: Dr. Paul | March 2, 2008, 9:53 pm 9:53 pm
Whether he is a Christian, Muslim, or Budaist, he does not have the knowledge or experience, or even stepped up and voted in the senate. Who cares about his religion because we all need to vote on their experience. Yes, he has shown a present vote for 110 bills. Present is not voting at ALL. Is that the kind of leader you want? One who does not take a stand consistently. You know it and I know it. The hype is winding down and yes he will go down this Tuesday. Another business man voting for Hillary Clinton.
Posted by: mike | March 2, 2008, 9:54 pm 9:54 pm
Experience counts for something when you make the right decisions…choosing to side with Bush/Cheney on one critical decision after another…George Bush had a lot of experience too…where did that get us??
Barack Obama is the best argument and candidate against the status quo unless you like the status quo…
Posted by: Playlist | March 2, 2008, 9:54 pm 9:54 pm
Hillary continues to try to win by knocking Obama. This is a sad way to run a Democrat’s campaign. I guess she meant it when she said she would do anything to win. Shades of Nixon there. Obama has the common sense and intelligence to be a terrific leader. And no, Hillary being a First Lady for 8 years should not count as polical experience. As a comedian recently pointed out, saying that experience counts is like saying the next time you are on a plane, the pilot’s spouse can fly it instead. Being married to a leader is not experience being a leader.
Posted by: Lydia | March 2, 2008, 9:55 pm 9:55 pm
Hillary Clinton is losing..and will lose miserably on Tuesday…her name is not even mentionable as competition to McCain…
Posted by: playlist | March 2, 2008, 9:57 pm 9:57 pm
I voted for Hilary and I regret it when it became evident that she is a shallow person as she can’t either disclose her tax return or her documents on her “So-called” experience at the white house. What is it that she is hiding?
Posted by: TheOne | March 2, 2008, 9:59 pm 9:59 pm
Obama isn’t pro Islamic, he’s pro american…that doesn’t just mean white,black or any other ethnicity group….He won’t be weak on the middle east…but he won’t narrow his focus to just war…he appears to be the only candidate that recognizes that the U.S. isn’t the only nation in this world and that even in undemocratic nations…relations have a chance for improvement with out the threat of war.
He will not engage in relations that hurt america but will have the courage to meet with leaders that most others won’t….If someone doesn’t offer to speak to these leaders directly how can we expect them to justify engaging in any actions we want them to partake in?
Posted by: melchg | March 2, 2008, 10:00 pm 10:00 pm
I can not believe my Democratic Party is so full of bigots, rascists, hate-spewers, etc. I thought WE were the party of inclusion and human respect. What does it matter if a person’s skin is a different tone than mine; whether a person’s gender is different than mine; whether a person’s name is “not American”? What matters is a person’s general make up.
The two people left in the running are very nearly the same in their political beliefs; why such hate and anger over the little bit of difference. Either would make a good president.
That being said, I am supporting Obama because I see Hilary as an angry, dividing woman. (yes, I’M a woman)
Posted by: touchetgal | March 2, 2008, 10:01 pm 10:01 pm
Dr. Paul thank you for pointing out the Bush administrations biggest blunder to date. With the inspectors showing no traces of WMD’s would you think bush who you love and mccain who you love would have considered that train of logic? That’s right, they did not. Bush and corrupt cheney have had their own agenda to decieve the American public for the sake of their oil rich pockets. However, I am glad Bush chased down those extremists and found bin laden too. It is time to wake up and smell the coffee. Oil in the middle east will soon be at 150 per barrel and were still there pouring billions into Iraq. Folks if you want change for the people in our country to get stable again, choose Hillary Clinton. She has an exit strategy that will not leave the people over there high and dry. We will start to invest in our own country not Iraq which mccain and lil bush keep wanting to do. Another business man for Hillary Clinton.
Posted by: mike | March 2, 2008, 10:01 pm 10:01 pm
I supose that hosting state dinners at the White House counts as experence. If that’s the case she’s clearly qualified.
Posted by: KEA | March 2, 2008, 10:08 pm 10:08 pm
With all this negativity instigated by Sen. Clinton it is going to cost the Democrats the White House in November. She wants to win by any means necessary even if it fractures the Party. I really thought that she had more integrity and character than the way she has decided to run this campaign. She is fighting Obama like she is fighting the “right-wing republicans”. I voted for her in the February 5th contest and I have since watched her degrade her character and legacy. It is just disappointing! I don’t mind a good debate, but the negative turn she has taken has started to make my stomach turn. Playing this victim role is very embarassing for all of us who hold the feminist rules of law in high esteem.
Posted by: CJ | March 2, 2008, 10:09 pm 10:09 pm
With all this negativity instigated by Sen. Clinton it is going to cost the Democrats the White House in November. She wants to win by any means necessary even if it fractures the Party. I really thought that she had more integrity and character than the way she has decided to run this campaign. She is fighting Obama like she is fighting the “right-wing republicans”. I voted for her in the February 5th contest and I have since watched her degrade her character and legacy. It is just disappointing! I don’t mind a good debate, but the negative turn she has taken has started to make my stomach turn. Playing this victim role is very embarassing for all of us who hold the feminist rules of law in high esteem.
Posted by: CJ | March 2, 2008, 10:11 pm 10:11 pm
Why has the vast majority of the U S military endorsed Hillary? I honor and respect the U S military.
Posted by: Charles G. | March 2, 2008, 10:12 pm 10:12 pm
Can anybody see that Hillary is not riding the shirt tails of her husband. The fact is she is bright, has the ability to work with republicans, and has an extenstive history in civil rights, health care, ecomonics, has a glue on how to deal with big business on giving tax incentives for companies who wish to bring back labor jobs in America again. Her past education diligence is commendable as well. She is a go getter and does not copy cat anyone. She does stand up and I think she would be an outstanding choice for our next president. For all the women who rip her and say, ” I am a woman too, ” One thing for you to ponder, ” Who cares what gender you are here!”
Another business man for Hillary Clinton.
Posted by: mike | March 2, 2008, 10:12 pm 10:12 pm
Let’s just wait til Tuesday and see how it all plays out. All of you out there are writing longer and longer posts, they’ve become mini term papers in some instances. Obamasites are looking to God to Bless Obama but there are a lot of prayers out there for Senator Clinton. AND for those clairvoyants out there so sure, so certain, that it’s a done deal, just wait until the REZKO slime starts to boil. Oh and the trial starts TOMORROW, the day before Tuesday. Sometimes anger is a good thing lady, whatever it takes to get motivated, I’ll take anger any day over I’m so cool and I have the right answers for everything. THAT I don’t trust. If it looks to smooth and sounds too smooth, it’s a con job! OH YEAH!
Posted by: JJ | March 2, 2008, 10:15 pm 10:15 pm
People I want to know how many meetings their champion Hillary attended since she began running for president. ZIIIIP!
Posted by: JC | March 2, 2008, 10:15 pm 10:15 pm
Does anyone want Bill Clinton running around the White House with nothing to do? I don’t think so.
Posted by: JC | March 2, 2008, 10:18 pm 10:18 pm
Hillary has made some mistakes and she is not perfect. However, look at what matters. Sure she hosted some dinners but here is the proof in the pudding.
1. Trying to cover 42 million people with a health care plan. Partially funded by switching to electronic records. Save 30% from current health care.
2. Has a superlative energy plan to invest in solar, wind, geo thermal, and tax companies a higher tax who do not clean up thier carbon emissions. Create jobs in U.S. by retrofitting older non energy efficent buildings. Can not outsource that!
3. Has the support of all the military.
4. Trade plan to correct for the blunder of NAFTA, and begin to enforce the trade laws with all nations.
5. Stop the Irag war. Stop the waste of money going to Iraq for what? Has the ability unlike Bush to get more nations on board for joint efforts in chasing the terrosists in Afganistan.
I hope you see the picture more clearer. Hillary Clinton for President!
Posted by: mike | March 2, 2008, 10:25 pm 10:25 pm
Obama is just telling the truth. Hillary thinks people are stupid and just wants to get credit for being married to a former president. I think anyone who argues on her behalf that she has so much experience is just jaded. She won’t even let the white house release her dossier of what she did as the first lady! Nor will she release her tax returns! She’s a fraud, and anyone with half a brain can see that. At least Barack doesn’t pretend to be something he isn’t . It’s called SINCERITY!! Hillary lacks that completely.
Obama/Edwards 08′!
My dream team!!!!
Posted by: Becki | March 2, 2008, 10:25 pm 10:25 pm
After reading everyone’s comments, it’s apparent that the supporters of each candidate are already divided. So why blame Obama or Mrs Clinton for it? Last June the NYT did a piece on the Clintons cashing in all of their investments in major oil companies, drug companies, military contractors, and Wal Mart. THAT is why she won’t show her tax return! That AND Bill’s investments in foriegn countries would be seen in their joint tax return. Anyone can find the real facts on both candidates. It’s pretty sad to see how many people believe false chain emails when they could easily investigate online for the facts. I found a site online that shows detail for detail on where each candidates campaign funds go. What made me decide Mrs Clinton would not benefit this country is her HUGE list of unpaid debts. Some are to caterers and cleaners in Iowa! How long ago was it when she campaigned there? She is hurting Americans already by making these small business owners wait to get reimbursement. tsk tsk Mrs. Clinton. Shame on you.
Posted by: Madre ~ Texas | March 2, 2008, 10:28 pm 10:28 pm
Enough with the divisive politics. Hillary even managed to divide the democrats! I bet she could part the red sea! LOL
I can care less about anything she has done nor any of her proposed policies. This woman even pushed her husband to have relations with the likes of Monica Lewinsky, and her husband is a straight up liar, remember his famous “I did not have relations with that woman” line!! The Clintons are a joke and are world class liars. Not to mention EGO trippers. 2 runs in the white house just wasn’t enough. Shame on you CLINTONS!
OBAMA/EDWARDS 08′!!!!
Posted by: Becki | March 2, 2008, 10:31 pm 10:31 pm
Dont worry JC, Bill will be tending to his global duties. He will be keeping very busy. I think we will be getting 2 for the price of 1. Don’t you? Another business man for Hillary Clinton for President 08
Posted by: mike | March 2, 2008, 10:36 pm 10:36 pm
Hmm… $1 trillion down the drain. 4,000 troop lives lost. To let Bin Laden get a way and make Iran stronger. That’s what “experience” from Bush, Clinton, and McCain got us.
Posted by: JT | March 2, 2008, 10:36 pm 10:36 pm
Obama is so arrogant and full of himself.I vote for Hillary, she is the most qualified candidate
Posted by: Bob | March 2, 2008, 10:42 pm 10:42 pm
Imagine an undertaking as significant to the nation as war, which will cost thousands of lives, limbs, mental health and hundreds of billions of dollars; and the ‘experienced’ Hilary Clinton does even take time to read the so-called intelligence report and and agonize over her authorization to go to war?
Even worse, this person is supposed to be a mother who produced life? Wow!
The IMPULSIVE Bush in his power-drunken state just up and decided to use the US military as his private army to wage an UNPROVOKED war.
And Hilary Clinton IMPULSIVELY went along; and now has the audacity to deceive Americans that she could be commander-in-chief of 300 million?
Incompetent Hilary Clinton can’t run an efficient and effective national campaign. To be sure, Hilary Clinton can’t even run an efficient family and TAKE CARE OF ONE MAN. How on gad’s green earth would ANY American be so daft as to believe that Hilary Clinton could take care of a nation of many millions of men, and women?
Posted by: New Yorker | March 2, 2008, 10:42 pm 10:42 pm
Just saw the Obama commercial with an endorsement from Air Force General McPeak. Might sound impressive to the uninformed but the vast majority of Air Force veterans (like myself) roll their eyes at the very mention of those “McPeak Years” when he was running things. It was micro-management at it’s worst. Talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel. Just my two cents worth. . .
Posted by: Michelle Cole | March 2, 2008, 10:45 pm 10:45 pm
Here is one for you Barack Obama. Let’s settle this Iraw business ONCE and FOR ALL. You are shamelessly preaching a lie. You are telling the nation and your audiences as if it was Hillary Clinton who AUTHORIZED the Iraq war all by her little self. She had the same CIA information that Jay Rockefeller, the Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committe had and THAT IS that Iraq had nuclear weapons and biological weapons and could strike the USA at any time.THE CHOICE: Vote “Yes” to protect the country and its people (for your information and that of Mr. Axelrod: deadly biological weapons can wipe out entire populations which apparently you and your pretend not to know) or vote “NO” and take upon yourself and YOUR CONSCIENCE the destruction of your country and your people. SHE MADE THE RIGHT DECISION, you know-it-all. Now comes the scenario for you, Mr. Obama, since you were nowhere near any decision making process in that matter and coult NOT VOTE against or for anything with respect to the Iraq war. INSTEAD of Hillary YOU sit in the meeting. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO VOTE, MR.OBAMA? FOR YOUR COUNTRY OR TO PROTECT THE ENEMY? Or are you going to vote “PRESENT”? LET US HEAR YOU ANSWER THIS ONE, Mr. Obama. How are you going to vote? You want to be the president, so ANSWER if you are honest.
Posted by: Starlight | March 2, 2008, 10:47 pm 10:47 pm
The personal attacks by these canidates is a bit over the top. The facts are clear as day, and with Hillary having the endorsement of the military I feel the military is the best in this world we have nothing to worry about. Stay focused on Hillary’s record, vision for America and her ability to get results from both political parties. Hillary Clinton for President….Clinton/Gore 08
Posted by: mike | March 2, 2008, 10:54 pm 10:54 pm
“The real issues shift toward experience, solutions to problems, and to a plan on how change will be implimented.”
I have even more comedy, I wonder has Hillary tried that with Bill!
Yeah, she can run the experience campaign because she has enough crow’s feet around her eyes to show for it right?!?!?!?. Besides that, I really haven’t seen or heard anything else from her besides her flip flopping on NAFTA, and her ongoing rant on health care reform which she already failed at, and her extremely poor judgment on the war in Iraq, and her fantasy of green jobs in Ohio. Oh and she even got endorsed by the JOKER!! How fitting.
Obama/Edwards O8′!
Oh, and implimented should be spelled implemented. I would think a business man would know how to spell that. Hmmm.
Posted by: Becki | March 2, 2008, 10:56 pm 10:56 pm
Well put agent Starlight..
Posted by: mike | March 2, 2008, 10:57 pm 10:57 pm
Hillary is not a leader. McCain does favors for lobbyists -he’s like Hillary. A few days ago Hillary basically endorsed McCain for his ‘experience’ over Obama. Both McCain and Hillary think experience is enough for the presidency. Leadership is good judgment, intellegence, willingness to listen to all sides, innovation, likability, the ability to inspire and give hope -Obama has all of these and more.
Posted by: Ken | March 2, 2008, 11:00 pm 11:00 pm
Hillary is not a leader. McCain does favors for lobbyists -he’s like Hillary. A few days ago Hillary basically endorsed McCain for his ‘experience’ over Obama. Both McCain and Hillary think experience is enough for the presidency. Leadership is good judgment, intellegence, willingness to listen to all sides, innovation, likability, the ability to inspire and give hope -Obama has all of these and more.
Posted by: Ken | March 2, 2008, 11:00 pm 11:00 pm
OBAMA embraces and affirms he is an insider of the Old Boys Club/Old Boys Network in Washington DC —
Based on Obama’s inner circle and endorsements many followers of his once believed that he stood for change in DC and still refuse to acknowledge that he is deeper in bed and surrounded by more old guard in the Democratic Party than Hillary Clinton. From Obama’s mentor and close friend, John Kerry, to his most recent endorsement from old-guard and multiple Presidential hopeful Senator Christopher Dodd, and soon to be supporter, Senator Biden (who many speculate will be his Vice Presidential choice), and what few followers of Obama’s will acknowledge is that Senator Obama is more Old Boys Network and very anti-Bi-Partisan than any other candidate in Democratic History.
What is even more frightening is that if Obama does get the nomination and wins the White House and fails – he will be another Jimmy Carter and the Republicans will own the White house for the next 16 years!
Rove-ites are loving Barack Obama and they are hoping he will over Hillary since they know Hillary will expose all the corruption from this current administration that Barack Obama would be too afraid to expose for fear he would not be loved by both parties.
Elect a candadite that will have a back bone and not take the office for a social networking event and the next stepping stone to a multi-million dollar speaking contract
Posted by: Shevone | March 2, 2008, 11:04 pm 11:04 pm
Let’s face it, according to the media, Hillary Rodham Clinton can’t do anything right and Barack Hussein Obama can’t do anything wrong. Poor Obama! I seem to recall Obama recently saying “its all about the delegates”. Now he is spouting that the popular vote is what the superdelegates need to vote on. Hmmm which is it? Obama’s biggest advantage against ANYONE is the MEDIA is on his side! Obama needs less of “yes we can” and a lot of ‘how he can’. We need experience in the Oval Office and Obama does not have it. She is a candidate of action…he is a candidate of words. We need experience in these hard times.
Posted by: PROUDAMERICAN2008 | March 2, 2008, 11:05 pm 11:05 pm
AND OBAMA HAS SUCH GOOD JUDGEMENT! HAH
Obama’s own account of his real-estate entanglement with Rezko was a “boneheaded” mistake. The candidate, who is running on the strength of his good “judgment,” would like for REZKO to disappear on the witness stand.
Posted by: JJ | March 2, 2008, 11:05 pm 11:05 pm
I don’t think it’s the fact that Hillary alone voted on the war, I think she’s getting heat because she went along with the herd. Everyone with a history book or a good memory knew that the proposed Iraq war at that time was about some residual resentment daddy Bush had against Sadam, and that Jr. Bush was tying up loose ends on Daddy Bush’s behalf. And let’s not forget that the U.S. went it alone on this war. I think the fact that Jr.Bush did not want a more diplomatic approach to Iraq should have led some of those supposedly smart senators to be like hey, wait a minute, what are you up to? Are you making up weapons of mass destruction. And NO ONE, including Hillary stepped up. Imagine someone doing that at you job, just coming up with a unilateral decision out of nowhere, you’d be like hey, wait a minute. That’s why I just don’t trust her at 3:00 am to answer that phone. What the heck!!
Obama/Edwards 08′!
Posted by: Becki | March 2, 2008, 11:06 pm 11:06 pm
Beki thank you for stepping up. I think its time to share with the rest of class your canidates experience, solutions to our current problems, and to his ethical reform package. Oh thats right his ethical dealings with Rezco. You know the crook from Chicago who goes on trail in the morning, who took millions of dollars from Hezbolah and laundred it. Pleae list for the class what he has done…Mr. Obama is not the answer for our nation. It is like taking the 8th grade Vice President, and promoting him to the deans list at Stanford. Please put John Edwards with a winner. Clinton/Edwards 08 and another business man voting for Hillary Clinton!
Posted by: mike | March 2, 2008, 11:07 pm 11:07 pm
We all know who will win right?
who is it?
Posted by: mike | March 2, 2008, 11:10 pm 11:10 pm
To the person who posted this:
“What people do not know is that Obama attends one of the strictest Christian denominations that commit very seriously to serving Jesus Christ. Church of Christ is STRICT! A weak Christian cannot attend such a denomination. It is seriously Pentecostal.”
That’s exactly what scares me the most about Obama. I guess if he wins people will be speaking in tongues at the Whitehouse.
Posted by: JJ | March 2, 2008, 11:11 pm 11:11 pm
Hey ObamaPolicy…
The speech he made in 2002 was not at a re-election campaign. It was an anti-war rally. DUH!
Posted by: Madre ~ Texas | March 2, 2008, 11:11 pm 11:11 pm
Obama is a corrupt politician, he is pretending to be a centrist when in reality he is a left winger extremist. he is setting an example that it is OK to have ANTI AMERICAN FRIENDS and still be eligible to become President.
Posted by: Antonn | March 2, 2008, 11:12 pm 11:12 pm
This race is not about the past lets turn the page Go Hillary
Posted by: Bishop | March 2, 2008, 11:13 pm 11:13 pm
Obama’s only fame to claim is his 2002 speech against the war. This is the one and only line on his resume for the presidency. Even with this, he spoke up in support of the Bush strategy a year later when he was in the senate. Obama is no where near having the right qualification for president. When the phone rings at 3am in the morning….Obama will not be ready and will not be prepared. The speech he made will not make an ounce of difference when that phone rings at 3am in the morning.
Posted by: San Francisco, California | March 2, 2008, 11:16 pm 11:16 pm
In tough economic times…..why do we want to roll the dice on our financial and job security?………………the U.S. Chamber of Commerce gives Obama the lowest rating in national economic qualification of any of the three major contenders for the presidency, behind Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).
Posted by: Austin, Texas | March 2, 2008, 11:17 pm 11:17 pm
Based on integrity, calmness, education, battle hardened, proven track record, ability to get results from all political parties, support of our military who do you want to answer the “call” ?
Hillary Clinton
Posted by: mike | March 2, 2008, 11:18 pm 11:18 pm
Senator Obama is mistaken. Jay Rockefeller and Joe Biden both voted to authorize force. As did John Kerry, John Edwards, Evan Bayh, Diane Feinstein, and Arlen Spector. Does Senator Obama believe his judgment is superior to that of these individuals?
Posted by: Samir | March 2, 2008, 11:19 pm 11:19 pm
Obama is a political opportunist who placed qualifications for the presidency low on his list of must dos. A man who has the audacity to think that only after 2 years f/t in the senate that he is somehow ready to run for the presidency without regards to the urgency of americans needing real solutions. Solutions do not come once the end state is imagined. Solutions come with experience, hardwork, smart, tests, information and through many lessons learned. Hillary is the right candidate for 2008.
Posted by: Austin, Texas | March 2, 2008, 11:23 pm 11:23 pm
The only politician sweating bullets about Rezko is Governor Blagojevich! If there was ANYTHING that could be thrown at Obama about Rezko, it would have hit him already. Think about it. The Clinton Machine would have dug that up. You all keep harping on that and there is nothing to the story. Can’t say that for Blagojevich though. Rezko sold Obama a house. There is only so much a Realtor could do. LOL! End of Story!!
If you want to hear Obama’s plan. Go to a rally. I suggest that. I don’t have to convince you. Did you watch the debate? Right. You’ve already heard Obama’s Plan, but you weren’t listening because you didn’t want to.
Obama/Edwards 08′!
Don’t give Hillary another chance to send more jobs to other countries.
Posted by: Becki | March 2, 2008, 11:23 pm 11:23 pm
Michelle and Barack Obama will need to explain How they were able to purchase the empty lot next to their home? or we need to ask Rezko What he got in return for helping the Obama’s purchase the empty lot???..
Posted by: Antonn | March 2, 2008, 11:27 pm 11:27 pm
Are you seriously asking how did he buy a vacant lot in Chicago!! HAAA! You are sooo funny. It’s easy. It goes like this, is that vacant lot for sale? Yes. Can I buy it? Sure. LOL!
Um, Rezko probably got his commission like all Realtor’s do. You are reaching for straws here.
Obama/Edwards 08′!
Mike, stop begging people to vote for Hillary. LOL!
Posted by: Becki | March 2, 2008, 11:32 pm 11:32 pm
Hillary does not have the final say on sending any jobs to foreign countries. That is big business decisions. What she has done since the NAFTA blunder is say that she will give tax credits to businesses who bring jobs back to the U.S. That’s an encouring sign to me. And as far as the sale to the house for Bama, it was priced $300,000 under market value. HHMMMMMMMMM,,,,can you say “Gift” How about Bama keeping millions of dollars of tax payers money for his campaign coffers. He recently said, he is considering giving it back to the people. Sounds like a double, flip flop special. Not at my expense and stop the nonsense now.
Posted by: mike | March 2, 2008, 11:33 pm 11:33 pm
The Obama’s didn’t pay the full price for the empty lot next to their home becouse the Rezko’s took a lost in the sale..Why? PAYBACK, PAYBACK..DON’T BE SO NAIVE
Posted by: Antonn | March 2, 2008, 11:36 pm 11:36 pm
Fellow Texan…open your ears and listen. The future is too important to fooled by a politician’s magic tricks. Obama claimed today in one of his speech that he is about bringing the party together and about clean politics. As though the manufactured image is all that’s needed to blind the voters. I remember fliers going out with untruth information about hillary clinton. I remember Michelle Obama in an interview claimed that’s hillary was at fault for bill’s cheating. I remeber the words he used were not his own. I remember monsterous leap his campaign made in injecting the race card into the election by critiqing all of Bill’s statements as racist. I remeber hearing from a senior associated press journalist pointing out that it was the Obama camp that led reporters to the picture of him in the Kenya garb in order to once again inject the race card. I remember it was him that uses his anti-war speech as the one and only claim for his qualification, yet he is now proposing the bombing of pakistan even without consent and proposing to put troops back in Iraq if Alqeada remains….when alqeada is already there. I remember the condescending tone he uses to minimize a female candidate…taking advantage of the gender bias ingrained in our society. I remember Michelle Obama injecting the race card again implying he is more in danger of an assasination because he is black….as though, Hillary would not as a woman!@#$. I remember much and thus I concluded that this man is a fraud. The shame of all this is that he has no shame in selling an empty call for change during a time when so many americans are desperate for real change. The shame of all this is how he has been able to fooled so many to part ways with their hard earn money. We deserve better! We can be better! Hillary 2008
Posted by: Loreda,Texas | March 2, 2008, 11:37 pm 11:37 pm
Hell, if Rezko got him a house for $300,00.00 under market value, I need to HIRE HIM! What a deal! Would you have passed that up! No!
Besides, the seller had to say it was okay to sell it for that price, as a buyer, if someone wants to sell you something for allot cheaper than what’s it’s worth, you say THANKS SUCKER! How can that be Obama’s fault,the onus is then on the seller. That’s why this Rezko discussion concerning Obama is moot.
And if you are in real estate like me, you don’t walk away from a deal like that. I would think a real business man would agree?!?!?!
Obama/Edwards 08′!
Posted by: Becki | March 2, 2008, 11:40 pm 11:40 pm
Obama claimes hes the candidate for the future yet he uses his 2002 speech as a qualification for everything while regurgitate events of the past most of the times in his speeches for change. Where are the solutions? What’s the strategy? Why will it be successful? Who will pay for it? Ask before you vote….ask Mr Obama the where, why, what and how…because up to now…I hear much immitation in tone and words to MLK and JFK but I’ve seen little actions and even less on specific solutions.
Posted by: Ohio | March 2, 2008, 11:42 pm 11:42 pm
Obama claims that he is as pure as the driven snow, LOL! Just wait until the Republicans have a chance to get their hands on him, all of his arrogant, self-righteous psychobabble will go up in smoke with his familiar associates like Rezko, Farrakhan, and the Postman bomber! Wow…what a shady entourage for a presidential candidate! Actually, we know nothing about this man Obama other than his weak-willed…missing in action voting record. Guess he was too busy cutting a deal with his buddy Rezko for the 1.5 million dollar home he now lives in.
The bottom line is that he has no genuine, solid plan to change America. Does he think that mere rhetoric will do it? Hillary Clinton would defeat John McCain in a heartbeat. She has the endorsement of 28 decorated Generals! Is Obama stupid enough to think that his speech against empowering the President of the United States to use force if Sadam Hussein continued to stall U.N. inspections is really going to hold any water against McCain? Is that all he has to promote himself? A campaign speech to which he had no responsibility in voting? In fact, after he finally got elected and had the opportunity to vote, he voted the same as everyone else…including Hillary! What a coward he is! Even worse, after being appointed to chair a committee that deals directly with NATO, where he could have had some influence on advocating, “change” in the war, to which he constantly touts, he doesn’t even hold ONE SOLITARY MEETING! Why? Because now the Chicago shyster was off politicking for the presidency! His anti-war speech was after all, just a speech, and was not to be misconstrued with deliberate action! When is he going to buckle his pants down and DO SOMETHING INSTEAD OF JUST COMPLAINING ABOUT IT! He is by far the worst politician I have ever seen. How presumptuous of him to think that he doesn’t have to offer a viable resume to be elected to the highest office in our nation. Is this crazy cat for real?
Posted by: Pat Mejia | March 2, 2008, 11:42 pm 11:42 pm
I am ecstatic to know that my young son will finally have someone in the person of President Barack Obama to emulate than the sleasy Clintons with all their baggage.
He has more experience than Bill Clinton when he was elected President. And besides, he is an intelligent man who is capable for the presidency.
Posted by: Ed | March 2, 2008, 11:46 pm 11:46 pm
No, You are going to win this argument.. The Recko’s took a lost becouse they were buying FAVORS from Obama..Mr Recko’s is no a Real Estate agent and you don’t see to be a good one either.
Posted by: Antonn | March 2, 2008, 11:47 pm 11:47 pm
If you scored a house way under market, wouldn’t you feel obligated, wouldn’t you owe them $$, a favor, something useful to them? Lawyers doing deals, dirty deals sometimes – that’s what the Obama home purchase was. Hell! Don’t be naive. We’re not dummies here.
Posted by: Jezebel | March 2, 2008, 11:53 pm 11:53 pm
Ladies and Gentlemen,
There really is a lot at stake for this next president. Take all the facts, and if you think things can be improved upon like I do then Hillary is a solid choice for us. Forget all the endorsements and the back and forth between us and the canidates. The fact is Hillary provides encouragement and that is important for this nation. In my industry seeing a full blown mortgage crisis is affecting all of us. She has offered a short-term solution which lil’bush jumped all over, and she has a trade plan to help us compete globally again. Right now with no trade enforcement in affect, we can not compete with China, or South America. Sure she voted for NAFTA but she has recognized that it is not working. It needs to be fixed. By the way, why did lil’bush and at that time his republican congress allow mexician trucks on our highways??? Another Realtor for Hillary Clinton.
Posted by: mike | March 2, 2008, 11:53 pm 11:53 pm
Becki, Mrs Rezko was the seller, I am sure with Mr Rezko approval, The took a lost in exchange for FAVORS…LETS ASK MR. REZKO?
Posted by: Antonn | March 2, 2008, 11:57 pm 11:57 pm
Obama is a used car salesman without a car to sell.
Posted by: Ohio | March 2, 2008, 11:58 pm 11:58 pm
Obama’s got a whole store he wants to sell to americans without products on the shelves.
Posted by: San Francisco, California | March 3, 2008, 12:00 am 12:00 am
I’m betting there’s enough smart Hillary supporters, like Mike here, who will join in supporting Obama after Tues.
Posted by: Jack | March 3, 2008, 12:01 am 12:01 am
So what is the relation between the Clinton’s and Rezko? The Clinton’s had strong ties in Illinois long before Obama came along. It is Hillary’s home state.
Posted by: Madre ~ Texas | March 3, 2008, 12:04 am 12:04 am
I agree Madre, let’s not forget that picture of the Clintons with Mr. Rezko, trust me, this guy gets round.
Obama/Edwards 08′!
Posted by: Becki | March 3, 2008, 12:07 am 12:07 am
Madre, madre,,why don’t you enlighting the class…Go ahead explain what the Clintons and Rezko have done.
Posted by: mike | March 3, 2008, 12:09 am 12:09 am
Obama and democratic party will be a big joke in general election.
Posted by: jmaya, iowa | March 3, 2008, 12:10 am 12:10 am
Picture, does this mean my picture with Bill Clinton means he gets around?
Posted by: mike | March 3, 2008, 12:10 am 12:10 am
Pentecostals are NOT bad people, I never said that. My beloved grandmother was a devout pentecostal, so I know a lot about it. My point is the presidency should not be decided on some kind of religous fever. People falling out at Obama rally’s and people lifting Obama up to the heavens. Sounds a little like people are expecting the man to be JESUS and CHANGE things. DELUSIONAL. Politics does not work that way. This is what scares me, what happens when O is a big fat disappointment? But don’t worry it may not get that far. REZKO will be the headline on every major newspaper in the morning. TIMING IS EVERYTHING! You almost had us Obama, but there’s something underneath the fingernails and it ain’t soap.
Posted by: JJ | March 3, 2008, 12:11 am 12:11 am
I just noticed your Hillary/Gore combo! LOL! That will NEVER HAPPEN!!! Gore is done running with the likes of the Shady Clintons. If Bill could have kept his zipper up, he could have helped campaign with Al, but Al had to distance himself from Billy boy because of all his scandalousness! Can you say Resentment!
Obama/Edwards 08′!
Posted by: Becki | March 3, 2008, 12:12 am 12:12 am
Hey Jack,
Thank you for your compliment. I agree if Hillary loses Tues. then I have no choice. Because for one McCain and his Iraq ideas alone scare the hell out of me.
Hillary will pull off this task. It’s not over until Sandy starts singing!
Posted by: mike | March 3, 2008, 12:14 am 12:14 am
Becki,
I like Gore except his comment, he invented the internet. I think his efforts towards global warming are admirable. I like Edwards but he has not stepped up for her. Who knows! We just need her in there before jr.
Posted by: mike | March 3, 2008, 12:17 am 12:17 am
The picture, taken sometime in the early 90′s, of the Clintons with Rezko appeared after Hillary through Rzko’s name at Obama in that debate. Ever since then, Hillary hasn’t thrown Rezko’s name in Obama’s face again. Why is that Clinton supporters?
Posted by: Madre ~ Texas | March 3, 2008, 12:18 am 12:18 am
Yes, Gore is admirable. See we agree on something. Now if you would just support Barack, we could all just get along, the heavens would open up, doves would fly, and we could hold hands and sing cum ba ya!
Lol!
Edwards is waiting for Barack to get the nomination, I think they had this planned since that debate when they both ganged up on Hillary.
Posted by: Becki | March 3, 2008, 12:23 am 12:23 am
Thank you Madre, you noticed that too, HILLARY doesn’t want anything to splatter on one of her illustrious pants suits,just in case something hits the fan .
Posted by: Becki | March 3, 2008, 12:25 am 12:25 am
I was thinking that too, Becky! I thought they had something planned together But now I am not so sure. I guess we’ll see soon enough :)
Posted by: Madre ~ Texas | March 3, 2008, 12:26 am 12:26 am
Hillary is business as usual. Vote for change. It’s needed pretty badly you know.
I think that’s where people are missing the point.
Posted by: Becki | March 3, 2008, 12:27 am 12:27 am
Becki,
Seriously your alright and have brought some darn great points to the forum. I admire you professionally. The doves, and rabbits are all happy now!
Clinton/Gore 08
Clinton/Edwards 08
Clinton/Obama ? (Yeah right that will be a cold day!)
Posted by: mike | March 3, 2008, 12:27 am 12:27 am
Actually if we talk about unification, maybe that would be a great idea!
Posted by: mike | March 3, 2008, 12:29 am 12:29 am
Well something is going to have to give, because we CANNOT let John McCain win.
That is just scary in itself.
Obama/Edwards 08′!
Thanks Mike!
Posted by: Becki | March 3, 2008, 12:31 am 12:31 am
A republican in the White House Is NOT in the forecast! YIKES!
Posted by: Madre ~ Texas | March 3, 2008, 12:33 am 12:33 am
Becki,
I do agree that McCain is more of ‘lil’ bush…
I think this has been a hell of a race..Infact, I say Bill speak at Virginia Tech a month ago, met him, and decided to get involved.
Posted by: mike | March 3, 2008, 12:35 am 12:35 am
Like it has been told…We all Americans at the end of the day!
Posted by: mike | March 3, 2008, 12:38 am 12:38 am
Ok, ok so you think he is dreamy…What do you think Madre?
I still think she is better for us right now! He has just spouted up and with his track record what can you really see in this (I do not have to vote for 110 times in the senate)
I guess I am a little old fashion. I like to know a lot and think before I just jump in..for the most part.
Another business man for Hillary Clinton 08
Posted by: mike | March 3, 2008, 12:42 am 12:42 am
And I love the fact the Barack is biracial. He is the example of what good could come from great relations between blacks and whites in this country. I would love to see America move beyond racial bias.
I enjoy having a diverse group of friends. I enjoy variety in my life. Change. That’s what America needs rite now. Change.
I would have loved to stomp for Barack.
Posted by: Becki | March 3, 2008, 12:43 am 12:43 am
If Obama’s the nominee, I WILL vote for McCain! What I see about Obama is not good-even scary! I’m not sure what kind of “change” a man like Obama would bring.
Posted by: tired of obama | March 3, 2008, 12:43 am 12:43 am
Both Hillary and Bill are career politcians who have helped out people for many years now. I have not always agreed on Bill’s ethics, but as a president he did keep the car between the lines.
Hillary has won my support largely due to her health care stand. Big business hates her and I feel so does the media. However, she has offered solutions. Being a manager too, when employees came to me with problems, I would always ask for their input. It is easy to point out flaws with people, but then give me your solutions to fix it. That is the difference right now is that Hillary has been fighting, fighting, made a few mistakes, but has hung in there.
Hillary 08″
Posted by: mike | March 3, 2008, 12:48 am 12:48 am
If Clinton didn’t have so many different moods AND if she would quit waffling on some issues, I could stand her. But I am a woman who sees the kind of woman who can’t be trusted in Hillary. When I listen to her recently, she seems so power hungry to me. She has done many great things in her career. But I think she lost what was in her heart back then and something darker toook it’s place.
Posted by: Madre ~ Texas | March 3, 2008, 12:50 am 12:50 am
Thank you Hillary for giving us hope. Everyone be safe we all will unite through this outcome.
Another business man for Hillary 08′
Posted by: mike | March 3, 2008, 12:53 am 12:53 am
Madre,
You do not think her moods have anything to do with the media not being fair toward her. Example, the last debate they told her at one commercial that they did not have time for her answer to wait till they come back after break…they never gave her the chance to speak at that time. I can agree with you that at times she seems whinny, but for gosh sakes she has fought and fought some tough battles..I think with the right cabinet she could be one of our best presidents. You know by being a woman that being determined is a trait you all have. I think she could be one of the best!..She will keep Bill at check for sure.
Posted by: mike | March 3, 2008, 12:57 am 12:57 am
How about Bama not pledge of allgiance to the flag? Hand over the heart too??
Hillary Clinton 08
Posted by: mike | March 3, 2008, 1:06 am 1:06 am
Hillary Clinton has destroyed the Democratic party, for how long I can’t really say.
She can’t win without beating Obama in every remaining state by 65%. She won’t get those numbers in Texas or Ohio so dragging this fight out is destroying the party.
Here you have Obama an inspiration to young people and potentially a trans formative figure in how America’s enemies see America and rather then conceed to the fact that Obama is exactly what the country needs in a world that see’s America as intollerent bullies who care more about forwarding there own self interests then the lives those interests effect.
Hillary can’t beat McCain. Hillary claims it’s an experience issue, well McCain beats her on experience. Hillary says it’s a national defense issue. McCain beats her here as well. What about personality and likability. McCain wins. Finally what about independent voters seeing as they will likely decide who is the next president. McCain wins here as well. Add McCains republican base, his fairly liberal ideals, and you have a recipe for disaster for democrats as independent (who generally can’t stand Hillary) would rather see a moderate republican like McCain in office then Hillary.
Look into these facts yourself, America doesn’t like Hillary very much and if it wasn’t for the trade mark loyalty shown by Latin American’s she would’ve been crushed long ago.
A vote for Hillary is a vote for McCain and if most of you Hillay supporters had done your research instead of chugging the Clinton Koolaide you’d know she is the very last thing America needs right know.
Bush–> Clinton–> Bush–> Clinton
Enough already, America is meant to be run as a democracy not a dynasty.
If you want another 4 years of Bush and his policies vote Clinton on Tuesday.
Posted by: Mike | March 3, 2008, 1:07 am 1:07 am
Hey bama 4 life,
‘ll start with your reply first. Tell us about the 20 million dollars Rezko harboured for hezbolah? You need to do some more research before you chirp up..
Bama has only stood on two things period..”I opposed the war from the start.” Also, ” I am on the ethics reform commitee.” Tell me that what ethics have to do with shady real estate deals..? Alot. It show character.
In addition, tell me about him not voting on 110 senate bills? You got it, lack of leadership. I guess I can go on and on, but I need to discuss facts with you. Please do reply.
Posted by: mike | March 3, 2008, 1:12 am 1:12 am
Hey Mike were you around during the 90′s?? We had some pretty good years then didn’t we. Like a balanced budget with a surplus.
Hillary is not a Bush, infact history has shown us how well the last Clinton did for our nation. Hillary has carried more than latin America too. You will see and I do hope your arrogance and pride do not trip you up. It is time for all of us to not embrace Obama when he can’t even put a stamp on his first 5 years in the senate…
Posted by: mike | March 3, 2008, 1:18 am 1:18 am
Another point to ponder is if she does lose Tues, then she should drop out. If she wins she will be close with the delegates and then she needs to grab Florida. She has recently received the all mighty military endorsement which is vote of confidence. In addition, to her leadership qualilities and ablility to gain bi-partisian support she would be great for our nation right now. When Bill was president before, he had respect throughout the world and we had their favor. He can help mend our image now. Or Bama would make a great Secretary of State before he could deliver a great message. Hillary is about change. Civil rights, Health care, solutions to pay for her plan, energy policy which creates jobs here in the states, green mindset, economic package which includes no more loans from China, Japan, or the middle eastern oil rich countries. Trade enforcement with all nations, and re-examine NAFTA. Sounds pretty good for starters. She is the only canidate who offers hope through her experience!
Posted by: mike | March 3, 2008, 1:27 am 1:27 am
Hey Bama, that was done during the lil bush administrations. Including offering power to California at 3 times the market rate during thier crisis several years ago. That has Corrupt cheney written all over it. My business is in the real estate sector. Thank you for asking.
Posted by: mike | March 3, 2008, 1:31 am 1:31 am
Tax earned dollars…hmm…How many billions each month are going out for Iraq..and how about taxing those companies who do use foreign labor? Lets give tax incentives to companies who want to bring back jobs to the U.S.
Yes if you make 250K or more per year, your taxes will be increased. Oh and on her health care plan….Let’s start by going to all electronic records…This will save 30% off of todays health care system.
Another Business Man for Hillary Clinton 08
Part of Hillary Clintons ecomonic package.
Posted by: mike | March 3, 2008, 1:37 am 1:37 am
Clinton’s experience did not help us but created more problems for America.
1. She voted to authorize war in Iraq
2. NAFTA
Many Americans are jobless today because of NAFTA.
GO HOME CLINTON AND RELAX.
Posted by: I.A.T Smith | March 3, 2008, 1:47 am 1:47 am
Even with this – Obama has STILL NOT answered what his foreign policy is going to be!!! He keeps talking about the Iraq vote – well he wasn’t Senator at the time, so he can say anything that the people want to hear! That’s the past – I want to know what he’s going to do for our country in the future…how is he going to deal with the issues??? Mr. Obama, please answer that!
Posted by: Mireille | March 3, 2008, 2:40 am 2:40 am
Every persons has a right to their own personal views.
OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT 2008!
The American people need a president that encourage all to work towards a better America
Posted by: Artholla Rone | March 3, 2008, 3:23 am 3:23 am
By the time Obama decides to remind everybody how bad the situation was during Clinton years that democrats had to struggle to just survive, the superdelegates will leave Clintons as fast as a rabbit seeing a fox.
She is a joke. With a former president running for her like crazy, she still can not get the nominee. Her compelling reason to run for WH “I was the first lady”. Huhuhuh … And, she actually believes in her arguement.
Posted by: catiger | March 3, 2008, 5:18 am 5:18 am
Hillary for President!
Posted by: San Francisco, California | March 3, 2008, 9:08 am 9:08 am
Use your god giving intelligence and vote for experience in this election. Leave the good acting to hollywood and get real solutions back into the whitehouse. Hillary for President!
Posted by: Maryland | March 3, 2008, 9:12 am 9:12 am
2008 will be the year where the good Ole USA will elect the first ever Female President into the Whitehouse. This is the year for the daughters of america. Talk to your daughters and explain to them what is happenning here. Explain the giant step women all over the world are banding together to make happen…explain to them that women in mass can bring on a voice so loud that the country and the world can no longer ignore!
Posted by: Maryland | March 3, 2008, 9:16 am 9:16 am
Hillary’s foreign policy experience consists mostly of graciously welcoming Yasser Arafat, the father of Modern Terrorism, to a dozen of Bill’s White House Dinner parties.
Posted by: carl | March 3, 2008, 1:28 pm 1:28 pm
There will be no unification of the Democratic party behind Barack Obama. Especially if his camp continues to try and force Clinton out of the campaign. The resentment and the outright rage Clinton’s camp will have will drive them right out of the Democratic party right straight to McCain’s camp. We will not stand for our votes to be discounted and in our view, if the DNC considers our vote inconsequential, we’ll take them to someone who will welcome and value them. Flordia and Michigan have already set the tone there. If their votes don’t matter to the DNC now, why should they give them to the DNC in November? We are not supporting Obama because we don’t trust him, we don’t like him, we don’t believe he is good for this country. Why would we violate our own principles to adhere to the party line? It is experience that we care about. It is who we trust with our military and with our issues. And for us that is Hillary Clinton, and if not her, John McCain. Yes her experienc on the Armed Forces Committee is important to us, the endorsement of 2 former Chairmans of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Shelton, and General Shalikashvili, the endorsement of Wesley Clark, Supremee Allied Commander of Nato, and the endorsements of all the other Brigadier Generals, Admirals and other flag officers, give us reason to believe she is the preferred choice for Commander in Chief. They have confidence in Hillary, not Obama. As far as I am concerned when the top brass of our military will not support Obama, and will support Clinton, then I’m going to sit up and take notice.
Posted by: jdona | March 3, 2008, 2:06 pm 2:06 pm
Obama did not vot for the war but he voted for the funding. What’s the difference. And why was he absent from the senate so much. Where was he? So he could say I didn’t vote I wasn’t there? He is the worst underhanded senator we ever had. I hope he is called to the trial for Tony Rezko his bosom buddy that bought the house for Obama. Obama kept company with crooks and one of them was Ayers also who was in trouble with the law over and over again. This is what we want for a president of our country. No president ever had a past like Obama.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | March 3, 2008, 8:32 pm 8:32 pm
Why is Obama running? “…I tried as much as possible to spend my campaign talking not about the flaws of the other candidates but why I am running.”
Read some of the articles at the Washington Post and the Huffington Report about Obama.
“As a consequence of Obama’s dereliction of duty on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, a feckless administration has had absolutely no oversight as it careens from disaster to disaster in Afghanistan, including the central governments loss of control over 70 percent of the country and yet another bumper crop of opium to fuel the efforts of the Taliban and their terrorist allies. Of course, if you don’t hold hearings, conduct oversight, make recommendations or sponsor legislation, then you have no record to explain or defend and you are free to take whatever position is convenient when attacking those who actually did address issues. Meanwhile, on the campaign trail, Obama holds forth on Afghanistan, chiding the administration and our allies as though he’s a profile in courage and not someone who has abandoned his post in establishing accountability.”
I’d like to see him actually do something that is his own work; say something that is his own words; … why is he running?
Posted by: AmazonTraveler | March 4, 2008, 6:41 am 6:41 am
Yes, we need foreign policy experience which Obama severely lacks!
Obama’s website says:
“Talk to our Foes and Friends: Obama is willing to meet with the leaders of all nations, friend and foe. He will do the careful preparation necessary, but will signal that America is ready to come to the table, and that he is willing to lead. And if America is willing to come to the table, the world will be more willing to rally behind American leadership to deal with challenges like terrorism, and Iran and North Korea’s nuclear programs.”
However, the new President of South Korea, Lee Myung-bak refused an offer in January to meet with North Korea, saying “it was not appropriate to meet without principle or with no results expected.”
President Lee–who is within range of tens of thousands of NorK artillery and missiles–apparently has more common sense when dealing with murderous tyrants than Obama does!
Posted by: carl | March 5, 2008, 12:37 pm 12:37 pm