The 2008 Presidential Race

[ShowerBench]

Look where Obama the Uniter receives "spiritual mentorship":

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,337308,00.html

It was not the first time Wright appeared to endorse Obama, who was baptized at Trinity United, has been an active member of the church for two decades and receives spiritual mentorship from Wright.

The title of Obama's second book, "The Audacity of Hope," was taken from a sermon by Wright.

During a Christmas sermon, Wright tried to compare Obama's upbringing to Jesus at the hands of the Romans.

"Barack knows what it means living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people," Wright said. "Hillary would never know that.

"Hillary ain't never been called a nigger. Hillary has never had a people defined as a non-person."

[foodcourtdruide]

Look where Obama the Uniter receives "spiritual mentorship":

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,337308,00.html

It was not the first time Wright appeared to endorse Obama, who was baptized at Trinity United, has been an active member of the church for two decades and receives spiritual mentorship from Wright.

The title of Obama's second book, "The Audacity of Hope," was taken from a sermon by Wright.

During a Christmas sermon, Wright tried to compare Obama's upbringing to Jesus at the hands of the Romans.

"Barack knows what it means living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people," Wright said. "Hillary would never know that.

"Hillary ain't never been called a nigger. Hillary has never had a people defined as a non-person."

I don't get it.

What do you disagree with? That this country and culture is controlled by rich white people, or that Hillary has conceivably been called the n-word?

[Dude!]

Hillary is a nigger

i said it

now the playing field is level

[epo]

I couldn't agree with Keith Olbermann more:

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/GTk7QlqWk08&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/GTk7QlqWk08&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

[ShowerBench]

LOL
What a bloated self-important windbag.

[epo]

LOL
What a bloated self-important windbag.

Truthiness hurts, doesn't it?

[ShowerBench]

Truthiness hurts, doesn't it?

No, truthiness is what Colbert mocks on his show, it bloviates out of O'Reilly and Obamamann on a nightly basis, and it's by and large funny.

[scottinnj]

Ugh. I agree too. Now hand me the Kaopectate, I'm feeling queasy.

What he was saying is what Republicans have known all along-that Senator Clinton and President Clinton will do and say anything for power. Anything. I'm chuckling at Keith's apparant disbelief that Senator Clinton is allowing this to go on in her campaign, when in reality, they wrote the playbook of modern dirty politics.

Moments like this in the Democratic Primaries are why Neo-Con leaders in the talk radio field are urging their listeners to vote for Hillary. The numbers prove that-since Rush and others have started this, the numbers of Republicans voting for Hillary have jumped dramatically. This is because of one other truth Keith didn't mention....McCain will KICK HER ASS if she is the Democratic nominee. And it's because she will continue this "throw the kitchen sink" strategy all the way up to November, and when she starts the campaign with 45% of the voters against her, November will look like 1984 all over again, with only the Empire State being blue by the end of the night.

It is a lie that cannot be ignored anymore by her sympathizers in the media that she is in her mind the winning candidate in the primaries.
She is behind in popular votes.
She is behind in the delegate count.
But yet she is acting as if all of this is just training camp for the general election, that Senator Obama is not really a candidate, and the score doesn't count. It's all just to get her ready to face McCain. Her arrogance and narcism is beyond the pale.
Democrats send a message. The only way to shut her up is to shut her down with an overwhelming series of defeats going into August's convention. You CANNOT allow this to go on until then-the Democratic Party is too important to be torn apart by this type of cynical politcking all spring and summer. The only way she will end this before the convention is to give Barack so many pledged delegates, the superdelegates will have no choice but to pledge to him.

[sailor]

interesting slate article (http://www.slate.com/id/2186487/nav/tap3/) on texas primary/caucus and the super-delegate situation.

on texas:

Obama played by the rules and won fair and square, but if, as an Obama supporter, you insist that he won Texas through a system that thwarts the popular will, you lose standing to complain about a system that thwarts the popular will in picking the nominee. One system may thwart the will more than the other, sure. But either the principle is that the rules are the rules or it isn't.

[A.J.]

"Barack knows what it means living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people," Wright said. "Hillary would never know that.

"Hillary ain't never been called a nigger. Hillary has never had a people defined as a non-person."

But Hillary is married to our first black President.

[Zorro]

No, truthiness is what Colbert mocks on his show, it bloviates out of O'Reilly and Obamamann on a nightly basis, and it's by and large funny.

Olberman has been a Clinton hack for quite a long time so this came as a real shock.

[ShowerBench]

Ugh. I agree too. Now hand me the Kaopectate, I'm feeling queasy.

What he was saying is what Republicans have known all along-that Senator Clinton and President Clinton will do and say anything for power. Anything. I'm chuckling at Keith's apparant disbelief that Senator Clinton is allowing this to go on in her campaign, when in reality, they wrote the playbook of modern dirty politics.

Moments like this in the Democratic Primaries are why Neo-Con leaders in the talk radio field are urging their listeners to vote for Hillary. The numbers prove that-since Rush and others have started this, the numbers of Republicans voting for Hillary have jumped dramatically. This is because of one other truth Keith didn't mention....McCain will KICK HER ASS if she is the Democratic nominee. And it's because she will continue this "throw the kitchen sink" strategy all the way up to November, and when she starts the campaign with 45% of the voters against her, November will look like 1984 all over again, with only the Empire State being blue by the end of the night.

It is a lie that cannot be ignored anymore by her sympathizers in the media that she is in her mind the winning candidate in the primaries.
She is behind in popular votes.
She is behind in the delegate count.
But yet she is acting as if all of this is just training camp for the general election, that Senator Obama is not really a candidate, and the score doesn't count. It's all just to get her ready to face McCain. Her arrogance and narcism is beyond the pale.
Democrats send a message. The only way to shut her up is to shut her down with an overwhelming series of defeats going into August's convention. You CANNOT allow this to go on until then-the Democratic Party is too important to be torn apart by this type of cynical politcking all spring and summer. The only way she will end this before the convention is to give Barack so many pledged delegates, the superdelegates will have no choice but to pledge to him.

On the overwrought side, and you left out one important point about Billary - they are the only Democrats to make it to the White House in 28 years.

Obama is weaker than Gore. He's even weaker than Kerry. Obama = Dukakis.

[ShowerBench]

Obama's pastor of 20 years. "Spiritual mentor" who baptized him, married him, baptized his kids.

We're supposed to believe that Obama will make up for his lack of experience by "picking the right advisors."

Obama's Pastor: God Damn America, U.S. to Blame for 9/11

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4443788&page=1

[A.J.]

On the overwrought side, and you left out one important point about Billary - they are the only Democrats to make it to the White House in 28 years.

Obama is weaker than Gore. He's even weaker than Kerry. Obama = Dukakis.

Maybe they need to drag Ross Perot into the race. It helped them in 1992 and 1996.

[ShowerBench]

Obama now claims mail in voting opens the door to fraud but he co-sponsored a mail in vote grant program that described mail in voting as more accurate and reliable.

Why is Obama fighting against the right of citizens of two large states to have their votes counted? What is he afraid of?

http://facts.hillaryhub.com/

"Obviously there are concerns about a mail-in vote. I mean, there are concerns about eligibility, ballot security," [Axelrod] said during a conference call. [AP, 12/11/08]

Even Sen. Obama is now expressing hesitation to endorse a vote by mail system. The Associated Press reported:

Obama...said in an interview with CNN that he had reservations about a vote by mail. "I think there's some concerns in terms of making sure that whatever we do is fair, and that votes are properly counted and the logistics make sense," he said.

But the Obama campaign is making a political argument that doesn’t match Sen. Obama’s legislative record. In June, Sen. Obama co-sponsored a bill that would establish a vote by mail grant program.

The text of the legislation Sen. Obama endorsed explains the benefits of a vote by mail system over other forms of voting:

(12) Vote by Mail allows voters to educate themselves because they receive ballots well before election day, which provides them with ample time to research issues, study ballots, and deliberate in a way that is not possible at a polling place.
(13) Vote by Mail is accurate--at least 2 studies comparing voting technologies show that absentee voting methods, including Vote by Mail systems, result in a more accurate vote count.
(14) Vote by Mail results in more up-to-date voter rolls, since election officials use forwarding information from the post office to update voter registration.
(15) Vote by Mail allows voters to visually verify that their votes were cast correctly and produces a paper trail for recounts.

[Zorro]

Obama now claims mail in voting opens the door to fraud but he co-sponsored a mail in vote grant program that described mail in voting as more accurate and reliable.

Why is Obama fighting against the right of citizens of two large states to have their votes counted? What is he afraid of?

http://facts.hillaryhub.com/

"Obviously there are concerns about a mail-in vote. I mean, there are concerns about eligibility, ballot security," [Axelrod] said during a conference call. [AP, 12/11/08]

Even Sen. Obama is now expressing hesitation to endorse a vote by mail system. The Associated Press reported:

Obama...said in an interview with CNN that he had reservations about a vote by mail. "I think there's some concerns in terms of making sure that whatever we do is fair, and that votes are properly counted and the logistics make sense," he said.

But the Obama campaign is making a political argument that doesn’t match Sen. Obama’s legislative record. In June, Sen. Obama co-sponsored a bill that would establish a vote by mail grant program.

The text of the legislation Sen. Obama endorsed explains the benefits of a vote by mail system over other forms of voting:

(12) Vote by Mail allows voters to educate themselves because they receive ballots well before election day, which provides them with ample time to research issues, study ballots, and deliberate in a way that is not possible at a polling place.
(13) Vote by Mail is accurate--at least 2 studies comparing voting technologies show that absentee voting methods, including Vote by Mail systems, result in a more accurate vote count.
(14) Vote by Mail results in more up-to-date voter rolls, since election officials use forwarding information from the post office to update voter registration.
(15) Vote by Mail allows voters to visually verify that their votes were cast correctly and produces a paper trail for recounts.

Hillary should be ashamed of herself. Apparently innuendo, racist & anti-muslim attacks aren't enough. Now she feels the need to steal the nomination. Do these people have any decency?

[HBox]

For the sake of my sanity please STOP QUOTING THIS MORON SHOWERBENCH.

[ShowerBench]

Hillary should be ashamed of herself. Apparently innuendo, racist & anti-muslim attacks aren't enough. Now she feels the need to steal the nomination. Do these people have any decency?

Counting the votes of citizens in Michigan and Florida is "stealing the nomination"? Maybe in Obama's world but not in America.

[TheMojoPin]

Counting the votes of citizens in Michigan and Florida is "stealing the nomination"? Maybe in Obama's world but not in America.

We have just witness an epic cyclone of spin and distortion, folks.

[epo]

We have just witness an epic cyclone of spin and distortion, folks.

Remember caucuses and those what 28 states that Obama has won don't matter in the Clinton world. However only those states that she won & the non-contested or non-binding elections totally matter.

The stupidity of these arguments are just freaking pathetic.

[johnniewalker]

[QUOTE=epo;1656027]I couldn't agree with Keith Olbermann more:

Wow he is a bit angry. My only thing against him getting this angry over something that petty is that it could simply be refuted. To shame her as a racist does so little to add to anything i think its worse. So where is the line between analyzing an election and an obvious racial tirade. It's ludicrous, if this is where we are in terms of racial relations in 2008 I think we are going the wrong way. There are very sensitive subjects on both sides. Why is Obama getting 90% of the Aftrican American vote? Can we analyze this or are we forced to characterize this as mere "enthusiasm for Obama." Can you not say people are watching what they say more and more? Is that a good thing? Its going way beyond important issues, it distracts from the campaign.

One last thing, I always here in the media that people are proud of Obama and Clinton for being the in the position they are. Are we proud of John Mccain? Are people proud of Mitt Romney? In some ways people are treated differently. If you want to ridicule and take any importance out of a statement by calling it racist so you don't have to think or analyze it, do it. I think its petty, mindless, and takes away the responsibility of you having to react and think about it.

[underdog]

Counting the votes of citizens in Michigan and Florida is "stealing the nomination"? Maybe in Obama's world but not in America.

Obama's pastor of 20 years. "Spiritual mentor" who baptized him, married him, baptized his kids.

We're supposed to believe that Obama will make up for his lack of experience by "picking the right advisors."

Obama's Pastor: God Damn America, U.S. to Blame for 9/11

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4443788&page=1

On the overwrought side, and you left out one important point about Billary - they are the only Democrats to make it to the White House in 28 years.

Obama is weaker than Gore. He's even weaker than Kerry. Obama = Dukakis.

No, truthiness is what Colbert mocks on his show, it bloviates out of O'Reilly and Obamamann on a nightly basis, and it's by and large funny.

LOL
What a bloated self-important windbag.

Look where Obama the Uniter receives "spiritual mentorship":

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,337308,00.html

It was not the first time Wright appeared to endorse Obama, who was baptized at Trinity United, has been an active member of the church for two decades and receives spiritual mentorship from Wright.

The title of Obama's second book, "The Audacity of Hope," was taken from a sermon by Wright.

During a Christmas sermon, Wright tried to compare Obama's upbringing to Jesus at the hands of the Romans.

"Barack knows what it means living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people," Wright said. "Hillary would never know that.

"Hillary ain't never been called a nigger. Hillary has never had a people defined as a non-person."

For the sake of my sanity please STOP QUOTING THIS MORON SHOWERBENCH.

:bye:

[TheMojoPin]

Why is Obama getting 90% of the Aftrican American vote? Can we analyze this or are we forced to characterize this as mere "enthusiasm for Obama." Can you not say people are watching what they say more and more? Is that a good thing? Its going way beyond important issues, it distracts from the campaign.

Nobody is really dancing around why Obama is getting almost all of the black vote. It's unavoidably obvious that he's getting it because he is black. Nobody's "afraid" to talk about that, nor was that the point that Ferraro was trying to make. Saying that "he is where he is basically ONLY because he's black" is a completely different train of thought than "he's getting most of the black vote because he's black."

[ShowerBench]

Nobody is really dancing around why Obama is getting almost all of the black vote. It's unavoidably obvious that he's getting it because he is black. Nobody's "afraid" to talk about that, nor was that the point that Ferraro was trying to make. Saying that "he is where he is basically ONLY because he's black" is a completely different train of thought than "he's getting most of the black vote because he's black."

In the same interview she said she wouldn't have been selected to run with Mondale if she were not female. Obama is a serious contender in the Democratic nomination "only" because he's black. Also "only" because he reads a speech well. There are probably a couple more "only" factors. In other words, BUT FOR a number of factors he wouldn't be where he is. Being black is one. He wouldn't have won most of the states he won BUT FOR the fact that black people are voting for him because he's black.

All of them? No, but if it were say Clinton-Edwards Clinton would probably be drawing 80% of the black Dem vote.

There's nothing racist about it. I've said here the fact that he is black would be the only reason I would vote FOR him.

[TheMojoPin]

In the same interview she said she wouldn't have been selected to run with Mondale if she were not female. Obama is a serious contender in the Democratic nomination "only" because he's black. Also "only" because he reads a speech well. There are probably a couple more "only" factors. In other words, BUT FOR a number of factors he wouldn't be where he is. Being black is one. He wouldn't have won most of the states he won BUT FOR the fact that black people are voting for him because he's black.

Could you dress up what she sad a little more incomprehensively and completely unrealistically? Thanks.

In a roundabout way, you're debunking her charges. Yes, almost any candidate gets to the top by being "only" certain key factors. She, however, was trying to narrow it down to a sole factor. I don't think what she said was racist at all...just dumb and shortsighted and more desperate spin from a campaign that has zero problem using their candidate's primary distinguishing social characteristic at a moment's notice.

[HBox]

:bye:

The next thing I am doing is putting your friend code on my list. Either Samus/Zero Suit Samus, Zelda/Sheik, or Fox is gonna rip your ass so hard.

:furious:

[pennington]

Obama is making inroads into the wacky Lesbian voters. Today Rosie O'Donnell came out in support of the Illinois senator.

For his sake I hope he doesn't do appearances with her. She's bound to say something stupid.

[scottinnj]

On the overwrought side, and you left out one important point about Billary - they are the only Democrats to make it to the White House in 28 years.

Obama is weaker than Gore. He's even weaker than Kerry. Obama = Dukakis.

Which is true, but you forget to mention the Perot factor. The Clintons didn't win that election, Bush 41 lost it.

Also in 2000, if it weren't for about 500 confused senior citizens voting for Buchanan in Florida, Gore would have won.

My point? Outside forces caused those two outcomes, not good campaigning.

[scottinnj]

Look where Obama the Uniter receives "spiritual mentorship":

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,337308,00.html

It was not the first time Wright appeared to endorse Obama, who was baptized at Trinity United, has been an active member of the church for two decades and receives spiritual mentorship from Wright.

The title of Obama's second book, "The Audacity of Hope," was taken from a sermon by Wright.

During a Christmas sermon, Wright tried to compare Obama's upbringing to Jesus at the hands of the Romans.

"Barack knows what it means living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people," Wright said. "Hillary would never know that.

"Hillary ain't never been called a nigger. Hillary has never had a people defined as a non-person."

I thought that Romney made it clear....no talk about one's religion!

[scottinnj]

In the same interview she said she wouldn't have been selected to run with Mondale if she were not female..

The difference is that Mondale had already been nominated and yes, just that, she was chosen.

Obama has been kicking Hillary's ass all over the country, yet she feels it's okay to "choose" him for VP because he doesn't have enough experience.

WOW!

The arrogance in that is amazing. Just amazing.

[Earlshog]

Which is true, but you forget to mention the Perot factor. The Clintons didn't win that election, Bush 41 lost it.

Also in 2000, if it weren't for about 500 confused senior citizens voting for Buchanan in Florida, Gore would have won.

My point? Outside forces caused those two outcomes, not good campaigning.



You could also thorw in that if Nader didn't run Gore would have won in 2000

[TheMojoPin]

SB's histronics have got me thinking as to how Hillary's ongoing slide against Obama only highlights how it's very likely she'd be beaten by McCain. Everyone goes on and on about how the Clintons are "fighters" and "know how to play dirty"...the trick is, those tactics hinge on you having an opponent that's going to play as dirty or dirtier. Obama's camp is avoiding that, and it's causing those tactics to gut the Clinton campaign from sure things to fighting for their lives as they slowly die.

McCain is, "sellout" concessions to Dubya and co. aside, MUCH different than the kind of Republican opponent Hillary was expected to face or that the Clintons have faced before. For one, he's much respected by and sympathetic to a wider range of people across the political spectrum. Secondly, he's INSANELY good at either taking the high road or making it look like he is and people eating it up. That's exactly what Obama has done, and that's exactly wha has brought the Clintons down. How anyone can think that somehow makes her a BETTER candidate to face a similar opponent on the national level with the GOP machine behind him makes absolutely no sense. You fight fire with fire, yes...but when there's litle or no fire from the other opoonent, it just makes the firebreather look even worse.

[scottinnj]

You could also thorw in that if Nader didn't run Gore would have won in 2000

Quite true, Even resetting the Buchanan votes in the Florida count, the Nader Votes cast in other states he lost upset the electora college enough to supercede a Gore Victory

[scottinnj]

Quick question: Spitzer was a superdelegate before he resigned. Is he still a superdelegate, or did he give it up? And if he is no longer a super delegate, does that title go to Patterson, or does it just disappear?

[johnniewalker]

Nobody is really dancing around why Obama is getting almost all of the black vote. It's unavoidably obvious that he's getting it because he is black. Nobody's "afraid" to talk about that, nor was that the point that Ferraro was trying to make. Saying that "he is where he is basically ONLY because he's black" is a completely different train of thought than "he's getting most of the black vote because he's black."

I disagree completely. I think that assuming that black people vote for a candidate based on race is a very touchy subject, I think in itself it is a very volatile comment. It infers that black people are racist and aren't making an educated choice. I mainly found articles repudiating the idea that black people that vote for obama b/c he's black. Assuming I'm wrong, and that is a fact, I wonder at what point do you consider a statement racist. Is it bad to say it was advantageous for him to be black. Is that too bold of a statement? Is it the tie to affirmative action that riles everyone up? I see the distinction in the statements but I'm unclear to the point at which it becomes racist.

[scottinnj]

Why does it even matter if there are people voting for Obama based on his race?
Of course there are-people are allowed to vote for whoever they want for whatever reason they want to.

I'm quite sure there are going to be people voting for McCain in November because he is an old white guy.

In either situation, does the voting habits of a few reflect the method the candidate is running his/her campaign? Nope.

People voting for Obama because he is black is a moot point, and being used as a scare tactic:


"didn't you know all those people are voting for him because he's black? Lord only knows what would happen if he actually got elected. We'd have a black man in the White House begging for change, for God's sake!"

[HBox]

I disagree completely. I think that assuming that black people vote for a candidate based on race is a very touchy subject, I think in itself it is a very volatile comment. It infers that black people are racist and aren't making an educated choice. I mainly found articles repudiating the idea that black people that vote for obama b/c he's black. Assuming I'm wrong, and that is a fact, I wonder at what point do you consider a statement racist. Is it bad to say it was advantageous for him to be black. Is that too bold of a statement? Is it the tie to affirmative action that riles everyone up? I see the distinction in the statements but I'm unclear to the point at which it becomes racist.

What she said was bullshit is because being black isn't lucky, no one's "lucky" to be black. The black vote hasn't gotten anyone anything in the history of politics. It helps Obama, but if helped almost every black candidate and no one has done what Obama has so far. Obama is winning because he has transcended being the "black candidate." If he had all the same positions, experience and oratory skills but were a white man, this race would be over. Long over.

The idea that it was racist is that it was a fairly obvious "dog whistle" to all of those types who really believe they are being held down by affirmative action and the black man. These people call into O&A all the time, trying to link the end of the world to the fact that they can't say nigger anymore. It's racism funneled through different channels, through a false sense of powerlessness. Maybe she is just a racist cunt. Or maybe she was sending hidden signals. Who knows. That Hillary is not outraged is telling.

[NewYorkDragons80]

You could also thorw in that if Nader didn't run Gore would have won in 2000
No, no, no, no! Much of Nader's support came from anti-globalization isolationist conservatives. So their votes probably would've gone to Bush. Combine that with the Buchanan voters and it's pretty fuckin equal.

Same goes for 2004. Combine the Badnarik and Peroutka vote, and they outnumber Nader

[scottinnj]

No, no, no, no! Much of Nader's support came from anti-globalization isolationist conservatives. So their votes probably would've gone to Bush. Combine that with the Buchanan voters and it's pretty fuckin equal.

Then how come the Democrats were the ones begging him to stay out in 2004? Because he siphoned off Democrat voters in 2000.

[NewYorkDragons80]

Maybe they need to drag Ross Perot into the race. It helped them in 1992 and 1996.
No it didn't. When will people realize that most third party votes are people frustrated with both parties who are just voting for the next third most popular guy in the hopes that he/she gets something going for the next election.

[NewYorkDragons80]

Then how come the Democrats were the ones begging him to stay out in 2004? Because he siphoned off Democrat voters in 2000.
That's what people assume because he's a former Democrat and tends to be liberal on most issues. Most of his supporters just want something different. The instances where Republicans take the high road in election season are rare, so I'll give them this: they mostly let anybody run while Democrats universally claim the new guy is bad for their "movement".

[TheMojoPin]

The idea that most of Nader's 2000 votes were from people who would have voted for Bush is insane.

[Zorro]

Counting the votes of citizens in Michigan and Florida is "stealing the nomination"? Maybe in Obama's world but not in America.

Obama's America is where people play by the rules.

[Zorro]

The idea that most of Nader's 2000 votes were from people who would have voted for Bush is insane.

This whole thread is insane.

[NewYorkDragons80]

The idea that most of Nader's 2000 votes were from people who would have voted for Bush is insane.
I didn't say most, I said much. So thanks for not calling me insane

[ShowerBench]

It's racism funneled through different channels, through a false sense of powerlessness. Maybe she is just a racist cunt. Or maybe she was sending hidden signals. Who knows. That Hillary is not outraged is telling.

What Ferraro actually said is completely benign. Tell me what you're "outraged" about and I'll tell you why it's irrational or phony.

Do you also agree that the Clinton "red phone" ad had a racist subtext? A nutcase wrote that other day in the New York Times and Chris Matthews said he agreed. Even the two black panelists laughed at him.

Obama is playing the race card. Billary isn't racist and Ferraro's comments weren't racist. Fake outrage.

[ShowerBench]

Obama's America is where people play by the rules.

There's no rule saying the votes can't be counted or that a mail in vote can't take place. Obama opposes both.

There was no rule saying Obama couldn't be on the ballot in Michigan except the Rule of Obama Cowardice (he didn't want to offend IA and NH).

He wants to win by denying Florida and Michigan voters their right to participate. That doesn't go over in America.

[ShowerBench]

Quick question: Spitzer was a superdelegate before he resigned. Is he still a superdelegate, or did he give it up? And if he is no longer a super delegate, does that title go to Patterson, or does it just disappear?

Patterson is also a SD but Clinton loses Spitzer

[ShowerBench]

Although this new Gallup polling shows Obama and Clinton running even against each other and equally matched against McCain, we all know general elections aren't conducted by tallying national totals.

Obama lost all the big Democratic states that Democrats can win in November including Florida and Ohio. Ed Rendell will leave a lung on the floor to make sure Obama gets the crap beaten out of him in PA for calling him a racist.

(There is hardly anyone left Obama has not accused of being a racist)

Clinton still beats McCain after a year of being savaged by a press in the tank for Obama. Obama had two days of mild scrutiny and collapsed before TX and OH. Clinton is the only Democrat who can beat McCain.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/104962/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Clinton-Equally-Matched-vs-McCain.aspx

[NewYorkDragons80]

The idea that most of Nader's 2000 votes were from people who would have voted for Bush is insane.
By the way, there's a reason the Reform party went from Buchanan in 2000 to Nader in 2004. I may be insane, but no more insane than the fact that 2 seemingly polar opposite political movements could effectively merge in a span of 4 years. So yes, there is a sizable minority of conservatives who are so anti-free trade, anti-intervention that they would vote for Nader when they're most likely to vote for Bush otherwise. If you're going to tell me that anything more than 75% of Nader's supporters are liberals, you're just as crazy.

[TheMojoPin]

By the way, there's a reason the Reform party went from Buchanan in 2000 to Nader in 2004. I may be insane, but no more insane than the fact that 2 seemingly polar opposite political movements could effectively merge in a span of 4 years. So yes, there is a sizable minority of conservatives who are so anti-free trade, anti-intervention that they would vote for Nader when they're most likely to vote for Bush otherwise. If you're going to tell me that anything more than 75% of Nader's supporters are liberals, you're just as crazy.

I'm not, it sounded like you were saying most of his votes were coming from people on the Right. Obviously, he had crossover, kind of like a reverse Ron Paul, but most of his votes would have likely gone to Gore. And I never said you were insane.

[TheMojoPin]

Clinton still beats McCain after a year of being savaged by a press in the tank for Obama. Obama had two days of mild scrutiny and collapsed before TX and OH. Clinton is the only Democrat who can beat McCain.

What "collapse?" He's ahead by more delegates now tha he was going into Texas and Ohio. He won more total delegates out of Texas. What the hell are you talking about?

Explain to me how Clinton's attack tactics, which have put her behind Obama when she was supposed to be the obvious favorite and nomination by now, is going to beat McCain when McCain keeps visibly taking and projecting the high road and she's viewed far and wide as the "fightin' dirty" candidate.

[ShowerBench]

What "collapse?" He's ahead by more delegates now tha he was going into Texas and Ohio. He won more total delegates out of Texas. What the hell are you talking about?

Explain to me how Clinton's attack tactics, which have put her behind Obama when she was supposed to be the obvious favorite and nomination by now, is going to beat McCain when McCain keeps visibly taking and projecting the high road and she's viewed far and wide as the "fightin' dirty" candidate.


Ultimately a Clinton-McCain race will be about issues. Since he will be neutralized on national security the fight will be over the economy and Clinton will win that one hands down.

Obama would be bogged down in defending himself on national security weakness and inexperience and the economy will be of lesser importance. Also the Dem primary is bean bag compared to what he will face from the 527s on the right. McCain can disavow them all he wants but it won't help Obama escape being successfully cast as the lily livered inexperienced/effeminate kid with two Muslim fathers and a weird church.

They would try to do the same to Billary but they would lose for the fourth time (two elections and an attempted removal from office).

[epo]

What "collapse?" He's ahead by more delegates now tha he was going into Texas and Ohio. He won more total delegates out of Texas. What the hell are you talking about?

Explain to me how Clinton's attack tactics, which have put her behind Obama when she was supposed to be the obvious favorite and nomination by now, is going to beat McCain when McCain keeps visibly taking and projecting the high road and she's viewed far and wide as the "fightin' dirty" candidate.

Shh....it's the Clinton collaspe talking point.

A candidate with no brand and no infrastructure at the end of 2007, comes from 10%+ down in a state within two weeks to lose by a couple of points & win the delegate total in a state and it's a collaspe.

Their logic makes perfect sense.....

[TheMojoPin]

but it won't help Obama escape being successfully cast as the lily livered inexperienced/effeminate kid with two Muslim fathers and a weird church

...

You abolutely HAVE to be a board character at this point.

[TheMojoPin]

Ultimately a Clinton-McCain race will be about issues.

If she supposedly has the big advantage in the "issues," by your logic, she should be trouncing Obama, right? Yet she's not, so she's been trying to fight dirty and that's backfired, too.

[ShowerBench]

If she supposedly has the big advantage in the "issues," by your logic, she should be trouncing Obama, right? Yet she's not, so she's been trying to fight dirty and that's backfired, too.

Why is Clinton, who has been outspent 3-1 and savaged by the mainstream media for a year (while they simultaneously propped up BO), leading Obama by 20 points in Pennsylvania?

It's a simple question.

[TheMojoPin]

Why is Clinton, who has been outspent 3-1 and savaged by the mainstream media for a year (while they simultaneously propped up BO), leading Obama by 20 points in Pennsylvania?

It's a simple question.

No it's not, because it's a delusional one seperated from reality. Hillary was supposed to have trounced all comers practically out of the gate and now she's behind in the delegates, neck-and-neck in the national polls and fighting for political her life as the nomination appears to be slipping away...but hey, nice job trying to paint her as the underdog "little guy" who has had to fight and grit and gut her way to where she is. Unbelievabe.

[ShowerBench]

...

You abolutely HAVE to be a board character at this point.

It should be clear that the characterization was how Obama will be successfully cast, in the same way Kerry the war hero was successfully cast as an effeminate weirdo windsurfing coward. Obama's problem is that his church IS weird (and he donated $22,500 to it last year) and he does have two Muslim fathers.

O'Reilly just reported that Obama's pastor said the US government created AIDS to infect and kill black people.

I thought they would hold all that until the general election and then destroy Obama with it but I guess they can't help themselves.

[ShowerBench]

No it's not, because it's a delusional one seperated from reality. Hillary was supposed to have trounced all comers practically out of the gate and now she's behind in the delegates, neck-and-neck in the national polls and fighting for political her life as the nomination appears to be slipping away...but hey, nice job trying to paint her as the underdog "little guy" who has had to fight and grit and gut her way to where she is. Unbelievabe.

No Democrat should want a coronation and the fact that Clinton has to fight for it is not bad news. The fact is, since the primaries began in earnest in Iowa, all "inevitability" advantage related to name recognition disappeared and she HAS been the legitimate underdog. Obama hasn't been able to put her away despite outspending and having the entire media in the tank for him.

She is a known quantity and is beating McCain in the polls. Obama is a blank slate and does no better. He won't improve once he is actually placed under scrutiny.

[TheMojoPin]

Here's yet another example of you usin self-defeating logic in your nonsensical declarations...so according to you, Obama has the press on his side. Also according to you, he'll somehow face more "scrutiny" as the nominee...apparently from the same media that you claim has "been on his side" and "built him up?" By your logic and repeated statements, Obama's mythical "backing by the media" is actually something that would give him advantage against McCain. Which is it?

Just because you speak in absolutes doesn't mean everything you say is anything even close to resembling a fact or reality.

Sign me onto the list of people done dealing with you. There's absolutely no point to it.

[PhilDeez]

It should be clear that the characterization was how Obama will be successfully cast, in the same way Kerry the war hero was successfully cast as an effeminate weirdo windsurfing coward. Obama's problem is that his church IS weird (and he donated $22,500 to it last year) and he does have two Muslim fathers.

O'Reilly just reported that Obama's pastor said the US government created AIDS to infect and kill black people.

I thought they would hold all that until the general election and then destroy Obama with it but I guess they can't help themselves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWvxTUy47Fk&eurl

[scottinnj]

Why is Clinton, who has been outspent 3-1 and savaged by the mainstream media for a year (while they simultaneously propped up BO), leading Obama by 20 points in Pennsylvania?

It's a simple question.

Because the media hasn't trashed her. Every time you see a journalist on TV do a delegate count, you know "even though she's way behind in the delgate count and the popular vote, you can't count her out" is coming. Instead of doing what is right, and reporting the truth about her situation and that she is in fact LOSING this race, the news media, always afraid of burning bridges with the powerful in Washington, handle explaining her situation to the American people with kid gloves.

[TheMojoPin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWvxTUy47Fk&eurl

Sen. Barack Obama's pastor says blacks should not sing "God Bless America" but "God damn America."

The Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama's pastor for the last 20 years at the Trinity United Church of Christ on Chicago's south side, has a long history of what even Obama's campaign aides concede is "inflammatory rhetoric," including the assertion that the United States brought on the 9/11 attacks with its own "terrorism."

In a campaign appearance earlier this month, Sen. Obama said, "I don't think my church is actually particularly controversial." He said Rev. Wright "is like an old uncle who says things I don't always agree with," telling a Jewish group that everyone has someone like that in their family.

Rev. Wright married Obama and his wife Michelle, baptized their two daughters and is credited by Obama for the title of his book, "The Audacity of Hope."


An ABC News review of dozens of Rev. Wright's sermons, offered for sale by the church, found repeated denunciations of the U.S. based on what he described as his reading of the Gospels and the treatment of black Americans.

"The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people," he said in a 2003 sermon. "God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme."

In addition to damning America, he told his congregation on the Sunday after Sept. 11, 2001 that the United States had brought on al Qaeda's attacks because of its own terrorism.

"We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye," Rev. Wright said in a sermon on Sept. 16, 2001.

"We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost," he told his congregation.

The comments on that YouTube page are beyond depressing.

If anyone wants to find me a churchgoing candidate who has found a parish that magically doesn't have at least one religious figure spouting off things that are offensive/inflammatory/shocking/etc., I'll give them $1,000. Hell, find me a single religious institution that doesn't have some variation on this and I'll give you my paycheck for the rest of my life.

What a load of hypocritical horseshit that this country has this sheeplike refusal to consider a candidate who isn't at least somewhat religious in their lives, but then tries to act like a religious official saying something arguably hateful or inflammatory is surprising. THAT'S WHAT RELIGIONS DO. Which is it? Do you want them religious, or do you not want the religious rhetoric? You can't have it both ways.

[scottinnj]

The comments on that YouTube page are beyond depressing.



On the grounds of poor grammar alone, much less the hate-filled rhetoric.

"Taking the Lord's name in Vein" In VEIN ? Are you fucking kidding me?

Even Yerdaddy the atheist knows the proper spelling of V A I N when used in that context. JESUS CHRIST!

[PhilDeez]

The comments on that YouTube page are beyond depressing.

If anyone wants to find me a churchgoing candidate who has found a parish that magically doesn't have at least one religious figure spouting off things that are offensive/inflammatory/shocking/etc., I'll give them $1,000. Hell, find me a single religious institution that doesn't have some variation on this and I'll give you my paycheck for the rest of my life.

What a load of hypocritical horseshit that this country has this sheeplike refusal to consider a candidate who isn't at least somewhat religious in their lives, but then tries to act like a religious official saying something arguably hateful or inflammatory is surprising. THAT'S WHAT RELIGIONS DO. Which is it? Do you want them religious, or do you not want the religious rhetoric? You can't have it both ways.

I didn't post this as hypocritical sheep. I just found it on Politico - not savvy enough to link to it - and figured it would get some play in the next day or so.
I agree with what you are saying to a point, however this is fuel for those that continue to throw around his middle name in hopes of rousing up some sort of anti American fear.

[NewYorkDragons80]

I'm not, it sounded like you were saying most of his votes were coming from people on the Right. Obviously, he had crossover, kind of like a reverse Ron Paul, but most of his votes would have likely gone to Gore. And I never said you were insane.
I'm saying the Buchanan/Nader vote crosses each other out. I'm glad you brought up Ron Paul, because I don't think anyone would argue that his supporters neatly fit into the McCain or Obama/Clinton camps. He represents runaway spending the same way Buchanan and Nader represent protectionism and isolationism. Neither he nor they have particularly partisan supporters. And I don't support Nader's decision because he helps Republicans, I support him because everyone should have a chance to run. If anyone is in danger of a third party candidate, it's McCain.

[NewYorkDragons80]

Hell, find me a single religious institution that doesn't have some variation on this and I'll give you my paycheck for the rest of my life.
http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Lot/7278/images/images2/Mango.jpg
I don't know where I'd put that many singles... OH!

[keithy_19]

Obama's pastor is a douche bag. His comments are rediculous and he's such an asshole.

But every religion has people who spout hate filled messages in the name of god. Granted, Obama should probably try to distance himself from that pastor as much as possible.

[TheMojoPin]

I didn't post this as hypocritical sheep. I just found it on Politico - not savvy enough to link to it - and figured it would get some play in the next day or so.
I agree with what you are saying to a point, however this is fuel for those that continue to throw around his middle name in hopes of rousing up some sort of anti American fear.

Oh, I was just ranting in genera...sorry if you felt it was directed at you.

Personally, I think the pastor sounds like a loon, but I think most religious figures represent varying degrees of looniness. You're never going to seperate inflammatory remarks from religion unless a Buddhist candidate shows up.

[Bulldogcakes]

The comments on that YouTube page are beyond depressing.

If anyone wants to find me a churchgoing candidate who has found a parish that magically doesn't have at least one religious figure spouting off things that are offensive/inflammatory/shocking/etc., I'll give them $1,000. Hell, find me a single religious institution that doesn't have some variation on this and I'll give you my paycheck for the rest of my life.

What a load of hypocritical horseshit that this country has this sheeplike refusal to consider a candidate who isn't at least somewhat religious in their lives, but then tries to act like a religious official saying something arguably hateful or inflammatory is surprising. THAT'S WHAT RELIGIONS DO. Which is it? Do you want them religious, or do you not want the religious rhetoric? You can't have it both ways.

First, the notion that every church, synogogue, mosque across America have pastors saying similar things is so absurd its not even worth discussing. That's the same kind of bigoted, broad sweeping statement that would get you labeled as racist if you substituted the word "Blacks" for "religion". I know that some people assume religion is fair game. Its not. Its like any other large group of people, and shouldn't be defined by its worst elements.

Next, if he found it to be so offensive why didn't he leave the church? If you or I were residents of Kansas and went to the Westboro Church, we'd last about 5 minutes before we got up and walked out of the place.

Unless of course, he didn't find it offensive. His wife's recent comments lead you to believe he surrounds himself with a lot of people who have a low opinion of the US. But that of course, doesn't reflect on him one bit. No sireeee. He has a Chinese wall between himself and everyone around him. Right.

[Kevin]

Oh, I was just ranting in genera...sorry if you felt it was directed at you.

Personally, I think the pastor sounds like a loon, but I think most religious figures represent varying degrees of looniness. You're never going to seperate inflammatory remarks from religion unless a Buddhist candidate shows up.

There is something strangely wrong with that Buddhist Candidate.. He is too nice and too peaceful.. Whats his deal man.. He is hiding something, i know it.

[ShowerBench]

Here's yet another example of you usin self-defeating logic in your nonsensical declarations...so according to you, Obama has the press on his side. Also according to you, he'll somehow face more "scrutiny" as the nominee...apparently from the same media that you claim has "been on his side" and "built him up?" By your logic and repeated statements, Obama's mythical "backing by the media" is actually something that would give him advantage against McCain. Which is it?

Just because you speak in absolutes doesn't mean everything you say is anything even close to resembling a fact or reality.

Sign me onto the list of people done dealing with you. There's absolutely no point to it.

Like I said, the scrutiny will come mainly from the 527's. Although the mainstream media will almost certainly be in the tank for McCain over Obama once the Democratic nomination is over and help those 527's along.

[ShowerBench]

Next, if he found it to be so offensive why didn't he leave the church? If you or I were residents of Kansas and went to the Westboro Church, we'd last about 5 minutes before we got up and walked out of the place.

Unless of course, he didn't find it offensive. His wife's recent comments lead you to believe he surrounds himself with a lot of people who have a low opinion of the US. But that of course, doesn't reflect on him one bit. No sireeee. He has a Chinese wall between himself and everyone around him. Right.

Not only didn't he leave Wright's church he donated $22,500 to it in 2006.

[TheMojoPin]

First, the notion that every church, synogogue, mosque across America have pastors saying similar things is so absurd its not even worth discussing. That's the same kind of bigoted, broad sweeping statement that would get you labeled as racist if you substituted the word "Blacks" for "religion". I know that some people assume religion is fair game. Its not. Its like any other large group of people, and shouldn't be defined by its worst elements.

I'm not saying it's defined by these aspects. I don't think this guy is defined only by these comments. I am saying that their ilk is all too common coming from religious officials. Are they necessarily as explicit? Nope. Are they often even worse? Shots at races or religions, politics or sexuality, it's an all too common theme. Does it negate everything else? Of course not, but it's there, and it's a waste of time when people pretend to be "outraged" by something said by someone in this position.

Next, if he found it to be so offensive why didn't he leave the church? If you or I were residents of Kansas and went to the Westboro Church, we'd last about 5 minutes before we got up and walked out of the place.

Where did Obama say he found him "offensive?" He said he doesn't agree with everything he says. Since this guy isn't, like you pointed out, only defined by these particular comments, that presumably leave plenty of stuff Obama finds appealing. But hey, what he said is clearly similar to the Westboro Church, right? Suddenly, the "worst elements" DO start defining other religious figures!

Unless of course, he didn't find it offensive. His wife's recent comments lead you to believe he surrounds himself with a lot of people who have a low opinion of the US. But that of course, doesn't reflect on him one bit. No sireeee. He has a Chinese wall between himself and everyone around him. Right.

How does this work? You honestly think someone who has a "low opinion of the US" would go to the effort to have the caeer he's had and then run for President?

[ShowerBench]

How does this work? You honestly think someone who has a "low opinion of the US" would go to the effort to have the caeer he's had and then run for President?

He said as much himself. Said he wouldn't know what he was doing as president but he ran anyway, figuring the voters were too dumb to care.

After he was elected to serve in the US Senate in 2004, he was questioned about running on a national ticket. His response was, “I am a believer in knowing what you’re doing when you apply for a job. And I think that if I were to seriously consider running on a national ticket I would essentially have to start now, before having served a day in the Senate. Now, there are some people who might be comfortable doing that, but I’m not one of those people.”

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/4gexyfVpFMU&rel=1&border=0"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/4gexyfVpFMU&rel=1&border=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent"width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

[scottinnj]

Like I said, the scrutiny will come mainly from the 527's. Although the mainstream media will almost certainly be in the tank for McCain over Obama once the Democratic nomination is over and help those 527's along.

That's a bold statement. After what you saw with Bush and Republicans in general, how do you back that up?

[TheMojoPin]

That's a bold statement. After what you saw with Bush and Republicans in general, how do you back that up?

He won't. Everything just magically happens. The "media" loves and builds up Obama now according to him, and then randomly turns and backs McCain after the primaries. Why? Because his "the media helps Obama" theory is actually a boon for Obama's campaign, and SB can't possibly present anything that's positive about Obama...even if it's SB's own scattershot theory in the first place.

[ShowerBench]

That's a bold statement. After what you saw with Bush and Republicans in general, how do you back that up?

They've been in love with McCain for some time, and for as long as I can remember they've tried to destroy the Democrat. You can go back years on this blog to see what they did to Kerry and Gore in all its glorious detail, but here is the latest entry on McCain:

http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh031108.shtml

For ourselves, we recalled a grander affair, conducted during the 2004 Republican convention in New York. A certain saint threw himself a birthday bash—and darlings, forget about Holly Bailey! When the sanctified solon turned 68, the firmament’s biggest stars were there! To his credit (explanation below), Richard Leiby did the play-by-play for the Washington Post. This is your press corps on creme brulee—French tarts, loin of lamb, lobster salad:

LEIBY (8/31/04): Sen. John McCain tended to his political base Sunday night: the entire national media. The maverick Arizona Republican, once (and future?) presidential aspirant and press secretary's dream hosted a hyper-exclusive 68th birthday party for himself at La Goulue on Madison Avenue, leaving no media icon behind. Guests included NBC's Tom Brokaw and Tim Russert, ABC's Peter Jennings, Barbara Walters, Ted Koppel and George Stephanopoulos, CBS's Mike Wallace, Dan Rather and Bob Schieffer, CBS News President Andrew Heyward, ABC News chief David Westin, Time Warner CEO Richard Parsons, CNN's Judy Woodruff and Jeff Greenfield, MSNBC's Chris Matthews, CNBC's Gloria Borger, PBS's Charlie Rose—pause here to exhale—and U.S. News & World Report publisher Mort Zuckerman, Washington Post Chairman Don Graham, New York Times columnists William Safire and David Brooks, author Michael Lewis and USA Today columnist Walter Shapiro. They and others dined on lobster salad, loin of lamb, assorted wines, creme brulee, lemon souffle and French tarts.

[...]

[ShowerBench]

He won't. Everything just magically happens. The "media" loves and builds up Obama now according to him, and then randomly turns and backs McCain after the primaries. Why? Because his "the media helps Obama" theory is actually a boon for Obama's campaign, and SB can't possibly present anything that's positive about Obama...even if it's SB's own scattershot theory in the first place.

Actually it's not a love affair with Obama as much as a hate affair with the Clintons. The mainstream media have a mental illness when it comes to the Clintons.

But once a Clinton were destroyed they would have no problem moving on to destroy the Democratic nominee, especially for their beloved Maverick McCain.

http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh031108.shtml

[foodcourtdruide]

For the Presidential Campaign I think the media will define each candidate with one sweeping flaw, then exploit each equally.

The best example of this was in 2000, we had the robot vs the moron and America was more comfortable voting for the moron. Neither Gore nor Bush were favored by the mainstream media.

I think the labels will be as follows:
Obama - Inexperienced
Clinton - Dishonest
McCain - Possibly unhealthy or temper

[HBox]

For the Presidential Campaign I think the media will define each candidate with one sweeping flaw, then exploit each equally.

The best example of this was in 2000, we had the robot vs the moron and America was more comfortable voting for the moron. Neither Gore nor Bush were favored by the mainstream media.

I think the labels will be as follows:
Obama - Inexperienced
Clinton - Dishonest
McCain - Possibly unhealthy or temper

Now here's a smart man who definitely isn't going on my ignore list. Nice post. Nailed it.

[HBox]

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/451gIv3SKd0&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/451gIv3SKd0&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

[high fly]

What I am finding fascinating about Obama is that whatever anyone says bad about him, it doesn't matter.

He has little experience -it doesn't matter

He's a black fella - it doesn't matter

He used to get high - it doesn't matter

His health care plan is too expensive - it doesn't matter


He just rolls right on over and past any criticism like a monster truck rolling over a '63 Chevy Impala station wagon....

[keithy_19]

I agree with high fly. It is amazing how Obama just skips through everything. I think it'll catch up to him in the general election though. Just a feeling.

[high fly]

I agree with high fly. It is amazing how Obama just skips through everything. I think it'll catch up to him in the general election though. Just a feeling.

I'm thinking that is also the way a lot who support him feel, too.
And I also think that is the effect of criticism on his campaign.
Nothing seems to even scratch the paint on this guy.
Barring a major event like another 9/11, if Obama gets the nod, just go ahead and crown him.

[scottinnj]

For the Presidential Campaign I think the media will define each candidate with one sweeping flaw, then exploit each equally.

The best example of this was in 2000, we had the robot vs the moron and America was more comfortable voting for the moron. Neither Gore nor Bush were favored by the mainstream media.

I think the labels will be as follows:
Obama - Inexperienced
Clinton - Dishonest
McCain - Possibly unhealthy or temper


You forgot the 527s and how they will occupy the media's time throwing accusation after accusation at each candidate.

527 vs. Hillary Clinton = "evil bitch bent on completing husband's goal of destroying America"

527 vs. Barack Obama = "Manchurian Candidate brainwashed by his preacher to give aid and comfort to Al Queada"

527 vs. John McCain = "Bush's crony bent on world domination and absolute power in America"

The News Media will have hours and hours of fun with the 527s and at the end, explain it off as just "reporting the campaign"

[Dude!]

obama lost me today and i think he just lost the general election to mccain
i will tell you why

when i got out of college i moved for my new job to a new town

i went to 6 different churches before i found one where i felt like the church and pastor were on my wavelength

i wanted a pretty liberal church that was good to the poor and did not bash gays

i chose the church that fits me just perfectly

i have to assume obama did exactly the same thing
i have to assume he shares the outlook of his pastor
and what his wife said about america indicates she feels that way too

so today i decided that obama is pretending in the campaign to be a person that he really is not

and that is really really bothering me

i so wanted him to be the real thing but now i am afraid he is even more of an actor than the others and i am even feeling it might almost be sinister

i guess it is better to find it out now than after he is elected but i am disappointed

[HBox]

obama lost me today and i think he just lost the general election to mccain
i will tell you why

when i got out of college i moved for my new job to a new town

i went to 6 different churches before i found one where i felt like the church and pastor were on my wavelength

i wanted a pretty liberal church that was good to the poor and did not bash gays

i chose the church that fits me just perfectly

i have to assume obama did exactly the same thing
i have to assume he shares the outlook of his pastor
and what his wife said about america indicates she feels that way too

so today i decided that obama is pretending in the campaign to be a person that he really is not

and that is really really bothering me

i so wanted him to be the real thing but now i am afraid he is even more of an actor than the others and i am even feeling it might almost be sinister

i guess it is better to find it out now than after he is elected but i am disappointed

So I can judge you completely and totally by what your pastor says? He can essentially speak for you? Anything he says I can assume you think?

This line of thinking is completely asinine. I'm not going to go around thinking that every Catholic thinks what the Pope thinks. I'm not going to go around thinking every Protestant thinks what Pat Robertson thinks. It's just stupid. Completely and utterly STUPID.

[scottinnj]

There's a lot more to this then just a bad preacher and a mind-numbed follower.

First of all, how long has this been going on with these sermons? Is it once in a while, or every week with this garbage?

Secondly, Obama has been calling this "his church" for the past 20 years. What is his attendance record?

-I know the church I grew up in, my preacher was "controversial" when it came to matters of sex and abortion and birth control. But he was a good man, who also preached love and tolerance to others. And even if there is a lot of things I disagreed with him about, I would still consider him a "mentor" because the baseline he taught me to live my life has proven successful for me.

-Also my father. He has said and done things that would be considered, oh shall we say, "politically incorrect?" If I ever ran for office, and my father was interviewed as a background story, and went off on a tangent about something, am I to "separate" myself from him and condemn him, not just his words?

I think this is a story to be reported, but I'm not in favor with the idea being put forth in the media that just because the preacher said it, Obama believes it.

It is fair to ask Obama where he stands on this, as much as it is fair to ask Republican candidates where they stand on issues that Liberty University (the one that Falwell founded) and Oral Roberts University have when they go and give speeches to those students. But that is as far as it should go. Ask, and get an answer. You cannot speculate-no one in the media is a mind reader and should never assume what is in the heart of the candidate.

[PhilDeez]

So I can judge you completely and totally by what your pastor says? He can essentially speak for you? Anything he says I can assume you think?

This line of thinking is completely asinine. I'm not going to go around thinking that every Catholic thinks what the Pope thinks. I'm not going to go around thinking every Protestant thinks what Pat Robertson thinks. It's just stupid. Completely and utterly STUPID.

I agree, but this was not just Obama's pastor. He is much closer to Wright than most lay people are to their pastor. The large donations, the book, he married Obama, the overall close relationship are all why this is going to hurt him - how much, who knows. The real problem is these comments are years old and Obama has kept his ties with Wright until today after the shit hit the fan. This is not going away, the McCain camp says they won't touch it, I doubt the same of Hillary.

[Kevin]

So I can judge you completely and totally by what your pastor says? He can essentially speak for you? Anything he says I can assume you think?

This line of thinking is completely asinine. I'm not going to go around thinking that every Catholic thinks what the Pope thinks. I'm not going to go around thinking every Protestant thinks what Pat Robertson thinks. It's just stupid. Completely and utterly STUPID.

You can probably judge the people who go to his church, not every protestant.
Seriously though, if i went to a place of worship and my pastor or whatever was saying all of that, i would tell him tone it down or i am not coming back. I do not know why people do not get that. I am sorry, if that happend the other way around (color) and the white candidate did not come out and renounce it RIGHT AWAY! There would be a huge uproar, Let alone giving money to the church. This is coming from a guy who voted for Obama during the NY primaries..

[PhilDeez]

It is fair to ask Obama where he stands on this, as much as it is fair to ask Republican candidates where they stand on issues that Liberty University (the one that Falwell founded) and Oral Roberts University have when they go and give speeches to those students. But that is as far as it should go. Ask, and get an answer. You cannot speculate-no one in the media is a mind reader and should never assume what is in the heart of the candidate.

This is different. If a republican candidate attended Jerry Fallwells chruch for over 20 years, contributed large donations to it, wrote a book with him, ignored absurd comments until they were brought out in the media - I think it would be the same.

[HBox]

You can probably judge the people who go to his church, not every protestant.
Seriously though, if i went to a place of worship and my pastor or whatever was saying all of that, i would tell him tone it down or i am not coming back. I do not know why people do not get that. I am sorry, if that happend the other way around (color) and the white candidate did not come out and renounce it RIGHT AWAY! There would be a huge uproar, Let alone giving money to the church. This is coming from a guy who voted for Obama during the NY primaries..

And yet if John McCain actively seeks and accepts the endorsement of a man who says this:

It was the disobedience and rebellion of the Jews, God’s chosen people, to their covenantal responsibility to serve only the one true God, Jehovah, that gave rise to the opposition and persecution that they experienced beginning in Canaan and continuing to this very day.

How utterly repulsive, insulting, and heartbreaking to God for his chosen people to credit idols with bringing blessings he had showered upon the chosen people. Their own rebellion had birthed the seed of anti-Semitism that would arise and bring destruction to them for centuries to come.

All hurricanes are acts of God, because God controls the heavens. I believe that New Orleans had a level of sin that was offensive to God, and they are — were recipients of the judgment of God for that. The newspaper carried the story in our local area that was not carried nationally that there was to be a homosexual parade there on the Monday that the Katrina came. And the promise of that parade was that it was going to reach a level of sexuality never demonstrated before in any of the other Gay Pride parades. So I believe that the judgment of God is a very real thing. I know that there are people who demur from that, but I believe that the Bible teaches that when you violate the law of God, that God brings punishment sometimes before the day of judgment. And I believe that the Hurricane Katrina was, in fact, the judgment of God against the city of New Orleans.

No one pays any attention. (http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/the_mccainhagee_connection_1.php)

[scottinnj]

i would tell him tone it down or i am not coming back...

But like I said Obama has him listed as a "mentor" which means more then the preacher of this church.

I am assuming, (and this is my opinion) the reason why he has him as a mentor is that while he was a young man, without the guidance and example of his father, the Reverend Wright entered into his life when he really needed him. That "saving grace" of being able to help guide a young person will yield a loyalty that goes beyond description.

Again, Obama has said he doesn't agree with the pastor on everything. Beyond ESP we won't ever know how much in tune he is with Wright.

[Kevin]

And yet if John McCain actively seeks and accepts the endorsement of a man who says this:







No one pays any attention. (http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/the_mccainhagee_connection_1.php)

That is very disturbing too. And for his credit, Obama did not except the endorsement of Farakan. But yea, that should really be a bigger issue than it is. I kinda think it is because McCain is not running against anyone right now and he is under the radar a bit. Maybe the Presidential race kicks in, It will be brougt up.. But I do not know if Obama can without his pastor being thrown right back at him.

[scottinnj]

And yet if John McCain actively seeks and accepts the endorsement of a man who says this:







No one pays any attention. (http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/the_mccainhagee_connection_1.php)




But that's the problem with these campaigns. On the Right you have to get these people to vote for you, while at the same time successfully garnering the independant vote.

The same thing for the Left. John Kerry, a Catholic, had to go to "black" Baptist churches during his campaign to shore up votes as well as reach out to moderate independants.

Do we automatically assume the candidate of either side is in lockstep with every voter and every social position these churches have? Or is it simply the basics of politicking, "make sure your base is in your pocket"

[HBox]

There is much too much attention paid to what supporters of candidates think and not what they actually think.

[Zorro]

Isn't the fact that they all (Clinton, McCain, Obama) believe in some mystery man in the sky whacky enough all by itself?

[scottinnj]

Isn't the fact that they all (Clinton, McCain, Obama) believe in some mystery man in the sky whacky enough all by itself?

Or the fact that this mass hallucination of the world to believe in a higher power somehow missed you.

[Zorro]

Or the fact that this mass hallucination of the world to believe in a higher power somehow missed you.

Yeah, guess I'm lucky that way

[scottinnj]

Yeah, guess I'm lucky that way


:lol: Touche, Zorro. I liked that one.

[NewYorkDragons80]

Isn't the fact that they all (Clinton, McCain, Obama) believe in some mystery man in the sky whacky enough all by itself?
Aren't you the fuckin cool guy

[NewYorkDragons80]

And yet if John McCain actively seeks and accepts the endorsement of a man who says this:







No one pays any attention. (http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/the_mccainhagee_connection_1.php)
Unfortunately, he pretty much has to accept the endorsement of assholes like this to shore up the "social conservatives." McCain's been in the public eye for 9 years now and we pretty much know he's not one of these asses. Hagee didn't marry ole John and Cindy, nor was Jack, James, or Meagan baptized by the guy. No, Hagee and McCain shook hands once and that's the extent of their relationship. Obama is friends with the guy and admits that his church is what led to his acceptance of Christianity. See the difference?

[TheMojoPin]

Unfortunately, he pretty much has to accept the endorsement of assholes like this to shore up the "social conservatives." McCain's been in the public eye for 9 years now and we pretty much know he's not one of these asses. Hagee didn't marry ole John and Cindy, nor was Jack, James, or Meagan baptized by the guy. No, Hagee and McCain shook hands once and that's the extent of their relationship. Obama is friends with the guy and admits that his church is what led to his acceptance of Christianity. See the difference?

Yes. And still, everyone acts like Obama's pastor is ONLY defined by this handful of inflammatory statements, statements which, in my opinion don't even touch the stuff too many Christian leaders toss out every chance he get. This guy basically siad this country has a shitty history racially that's still reflected all too often today and that America's foreign policies and actions basically put them in a position where something like 9/11 was able to happen and arguably even inevitable. Did he say it that succinctly? Obviously not, but that stuff doesn't even sniff the anti-gay, anti-women, anti-different religions garbage that get spewed by other men in his position.

Why is it impossible that this man exists as a person beyond these seconds of soundbites? Why is it that these short clips HAVE to be what Obama supports or believes in or defines his relationship with this man?

This guy just reinforces my minimal tolerance of religion, but he's obviously not solely defined by these quotes and clips. If people want their politicians to have a "faithful" side, this is what they get. Politicians glom onto the bigger religious names, and the bigger religious names in Christianity tend to be the bigger names because they spew the most and the loudest and the most obnoxious bullshit and dress it up as "God's word" and get al the atention because of it. Does that mean they all don't actually do a ton of good and only say asinine or inflammatory things? Of course not...but they got to where they are by being gloryhounds, and in that world, unfortunately, talking the most shit when needed gets you the most attention.

[HBox]

Unfortunately, he pretty much has to accept the endorsement of assholes like this to shore up the "social conservatives." McCain's been in the public eye for 9 years now and we pretty much know he's not one of these asses. Hagee didn't marry ole John and Cindy, nor was Jack, James, or Meagan baptized by the guy. No, Hagee and McCain shook hands once and that's the extent of their relationship. Obama is friends with the guy and admits that his church is what led to his acceptance of Christianity. See the difference?

I followed that up with a post that people should stop paying so much attention to what a candidates supporters think. I think they are both a non-issue but I do think its unfair McCain skates on this while Clinton takes flak for Ferraro and Obama for this.

And I naively thought that we were beyond the "He hates America" attacks. But I was being naive. There will always be people out there attempting this shit.

[NewYorkDragons80]

And I'll agree with you there. Before these sound bites came out, I had heard about this guy and checked out his website. Most of his rhetoric is liberation theology, which is pretty radical, but wouldn't necessarily raise the ire of mainstream America. There's nothing wrong with pulling most of Africa out of the Bronze Age and as a bull-moose type, I'm totally cool with it. However, instead of saying "Hey this guy isn't *that* crazy," most of the tone here seems to be "Oh yeah? well look who McCain took his photo with." This is the other drawback of inexperience. When people are just learning who Obama is, his enemies control how they perceive his life and associates.

[NewYorkDragons80]

I think they are both a non-issue but I do think its unfair McCain skates on this while Clinton takes flak for Ferraro and Obama for this.
McCain did not skate by. The media buried him in 2007 and he's not getting shit on as much now because the story is the Democrats' public knife fight

[Dude!]

i dont understand why hbox does not see how serious this is

this is exactly the spitzer situation
he came in as i am so moral and will crusade for morality
and then he is part of a prostitute ring as governor of new york
the hypocricy and irony did him in

obama comes in as i am the new post-racial candidate
i will get beyond the old politics of hate
and here comes his pastor who is his friend and mentor as well
with the most radical and inflammatory old style rhetoric
and old style racial hate...but on steroids
the hypocrisy and irony of this will do obama in

they are both hoisted on their own petards
and it is very disillusioning

[TheMojoPin]

i dont understand why hbox does not see how serious this is

this is exactly the spitzer situation
he came in as i am so moral and will crusade for morality
and then he is part of a prostitute ring as governor of new york
the hypocricy and irony did him in

obama comes in as i am the new post-racial candidate
i will get beyond the old politics of hate
and here comes his pastor who is his friend and mentor as well
with the most radical and inflammatory old style rhetoric
and old style racial hate...but on steroids
the hypocrisy and irony of this will do obama in

they are both hoisted on their own petards
and it is very disillusioning

Except Obama isn't his pastor, and since when is trying to improve the black community/population "racial hate?" This is absurd that since a congregation is "pro-black," they must "hate white people" or be seperatists or whatever other garbage people can come up with.

This is wha needs to be looked at when people just assume that Obama's blackness somehow gives him an unfair advantage...it doesn't. He's gotten to where he is in spite of people looking at anything even remotely "black" about him like they're trying to paint this church.

[ShowerBench]

Except Obama isn't his pastor, and since when is trying to improve the black community/population "racial hate?" This is absurd that since a congregation is "pro-black," they must "hate white people" or be seperatists or whatever other garbage people can come up with.



Since when does saying "the government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color" represent "trying to improve the black community"?

Wright is either a nutcase or a con and the question is what kind of judgment someone has who gives a nutcase or con a role as his "spiritual advisor."

Speaking of con artists, the NYT reports:

Mr. Wright, who has long prided himself on criticizing the establishment, said he knew that he may not play well in Mr. Obama’s audition for the ultimate establishment job.

“If Barack gets past the primary, he might have to publicly distance himself from me,” Mr. Wright said with a shrug. “I said it to Barack personally, and he said yeah, that might have to happen.”

[A.J.]

I wish ALL politicians would stop having "spiritual advisors".

Separation of church and state baby.

[TheMojoPin]

Since when does saying "the government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color" represent "trying to improve the black community"?

Wright is either a nutcase or a con and the question is what kind of judgment someone has who gives a nutcase or con a role as his "spiritual advisor."

He's a nutcase. There's no defending a statement like that, but the criticism of him has expanded beyond that to his opinions on the black community and how it can stregthen itself as if those are radical or "bad." Just google "Obama's pastor" and you'll see what I'm talking about. There's also zero that indicates that Obama shares any of these fringe opinions. Of course, realizing that would mean they're two seperate men, and that the pastor isn't deinfed solely by this smidgen of soundbytes. Personally, I think he sounds like a royal douche, but I think that about pretty much any religious official. HBox made the point even better...prominent politicias pair themselves with prominent reliious officials as they rise through the ranks because they want to look "faithful" and the public eats it up like a bunch of fucking suckers...well, prominent religious officials are usually where they are because they talk the most sensational, dogmatic shit. That's what people are asking for by expecting their politicians to fill their "fath" quota. They're pretty much all gonna end being shams or scumbas or saying ridiculous shit. That's how it's been for way too long now, and it's never gonna chane, so people can can the fake outrage, especially since men like McCain and Obama show that these schmucks have basically zero influence in their actual jobs outside of frivolous stuff like photo ops and book titles.

[epo]

And yet if John McCain actively seeks and accepts the endorsement of a man who says this:

No one pays any attention. (http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/the_mccainhagee_connection_1.php)

Don't worry McCain has another one of those in the person of Rod Parsley. Link here (http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/rod_parsleys_free_pass_1.php).

How do these nutty spiritual advisors strengthen the US on the world market again?

[ShowerBench]

He's a nutcase. There's no defending a statement like that, but the criticism of him has expanded beyond that to his opinions on the black community and how it can stregthen itself as if those are radical or "bad." Just google "Obama's pastor" and you'll see what I'm talking about. There's also zero that indicates that Obama shares any of these fringe opinions. Of course, realizing that would mean they're two seperate men, and that the pastor isn't deinfed solely by this smidgen of soundbytes. Personally, I think he sounds like a royal douche, but I think that about pretty much any religious official. HBox made the point even better...prominent politicias pair themselves with prominent reliious officials as they rise through the ranks because they want to look "faithful" and the public eats it up like a bunch of fucking suckers...well, prominent religious officials are usually where they are because they talk the most sensational, dogmatic shit. That's what people are asking for by expecting their politicians to fill their "fath" quota. They're pretty much all gonna end being shams or scumbas or saying ridiculous shit. That's how it's been for way too long now, and it's never gonna chane, so people can can the fake outrage, especially since men like McCain and Obama show that these schmucks have basically zero influence in their actual jobs outside of frivolous stuff like photo ops and book titles.

Completely agree although while I think Obama's association might be more political than anything else, his wife probably buys into Wright's BS. Still it's a problem for Obama because his is a candidacy claiming the candidate holds a post-racial world view which contradicts supporting a racist church for 20 years, and/or he claims he is not your typical cynical politician but supports that church at least in part for political reasons.

Religion never bites Republicans because it's already factored in that they are religious fanatics and bigots.

[NewYorkDragons80]

Again, Ron Parsley is some guy John McCain met. Rev. Wright married Barack and Michelle Obama and baptized his kids.

[epo]

This morning Clinton asked for Obama to release the documents on his home purchase to see if there is a further link to Rezko in that matter. I'll admit that seems fair. Link here. (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=4458258&page=1)

Of course her people must have forgotten how to use the interwebz...as Obama already has that information available on his website. Link here. (http://answercenter.barackobama.com/cgi-bin/barackobama.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=174&p_created=1205534256&p_sid=i5jdVI-i&p_accessibility=0&p_redirect=&p_lva=173&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PSZwX2dyaWRzb3J0PSZwX 3Jvd19jbnQ9MiwyJnBfcHJvZHM9JnBfY2F0cz0wJnBfcHY9JnB fY3Y9JnBfcGFnZT0xJnBfc2VhcmNoX3RleHQ9cmVjb3Jkcw**&p_li=&p_topview=1)

This is just another example of the Clinton communications team being fucking terrible at their jobs. But I'll go one further & ask why Clinton has refused to release her tax returns, the list of the donors to the Clinton library, or her sealed White House records.

Seriously, the comedy levels in this race is getting very high.

[epo]

The Iowa delegate caucus process today netted the Obama seven additional delegates today. The Clinton campaign did not add any delegates in the process, as essentially half of the former Edwards delegates switched their affiliation to Obama. Story here. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080315/ap_on_el_pr/democrats_iowa_4;_ylt=AgfTsvPjR0oJ0gdvw64qOpwE1vAI )

So now the delegate count according to Real Clear Politics (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_delegate_count.html)is at:

Obama - 1619
Clinton - 1494

If you do some math on the available delegates, there are 566 popular vote delegates left, with 334 superdelegates yet to commit. This does not include Michigan or Florida. The magic number for the nomination is 2025.

I'm starting to think that even if Florida & Michigan delegates are not seated with a proper vote, that Obama could outright win the nomination without a backroom deal.

[scottinnj]

My mom thinks Obama is the anti-Christ, because he is charismatic. Please shoot me.

[epo]

My mom thinks Obama is the anti-Christ, because he is charismatic. Please shoot me.

I don't remember making Bill Clinton or Ronald Reagan the devil?

[scottinnj]

I don't remember making Bill Clinton or Ronald Reagan the devil?

That's what I said. I called it a bunch of nonsense to be looking for an anti-Christ during the elections, because

1. God never told us when the Tribulation or Armageddon is to occur.

2. The best teachers of Bible prophecy all think that America won't even exist.

2-1/2. (I know this is all a stretch, so just go with it, humor me.)

3. The Anti-Christ will rule from Rome with a unified world government beneath him.


But my mom is really scared of Obama. Like hide-in-the-house-because-the-boogeyman-is-outside scared of him. She's a smart person. I'd like to meet the person who got her this way, and kick his ass.

I'm beginning to think I should start with Rush, although the religious shit gets me to believe it's one of the clergy people she watches on TV.

[epo]

That's what I said. I called it a bunch of nonsense to be looking for an anti-Christ during the elections, because

1. God never told us when the Tribulation or Armageddon is to occur.

2. The best teachers of Bible prophecy all think that America won't even exist.

2-1/2. (I know this is all a stretch, so just go with it, humor me.)

3. The Anti-Christ will rule from Rome with a unified world government beneath him.


But my mom is really scared of Obama. Like hide-in-the-house-because-the-boogeyman-is-outside scared of him. She's a smart person. I'd like to meet the person who got her this way, and kick his ass.

I'm beginning to think I should start with Rush, although the religious shit gets me to believe it's one of the clergy people she watches on TV.

Glenn Beck did ask the question to one of his guests (Rev. Hagee) on his CNN show, so that scare tactic is definitely out there. It truly is a sad indictment of our culture in many ways.

[scottinnj]

Glenn Beck did ask the question to one of his guests (Rev. Hagee) on his CNN show, so that scare tactic is definitely out there. It truly is a sad indictment of our culture in many ways.

That's the guy! He used to have sermons and lay the whole "Rapture happens, then Tribulation, then Anti-Christ, then Armageddon" scenario out on a time graph. I'll bet you 10 bucks he's beginning to match Bible propecy with names in modern politics. I'd love to see the IRS take a look at his church's tax status if he is.
The only others I could think of would be the LaHayes. They have this late-night Sunday show and all they talk about is the end times and how everything that is happening now correllates to prophecy.

[PhilDeez]

Obama just put his neck on the line as well as his campaign in an interview with Major Garrett, any one else catch this?
He said he was completely unaware of Wright's comments until they came out in the last few days, and if he knew of them would have quit the church. If this can be disproven, look out.

[NewYorkDragons80]

Obama just put his neck on the line as well as his campaign in an interview with Major Garrett, any one else catch this?
He said he was completely unaware of Wright's comments until they came out in the last few days, and if he knew of them would have quit the church. If this can be disproven, look out.
This is not looking good for Obama. There have been rumblings about this guy for at least months. Don't tell me nobody pulled Obama aside and told him to watch out for this guy. Wright retired at the end of last year because he knew this shit was coming and he wanted to save Obama the embarasssment. That is, of course, assuming that Obama didn't know he said this shit before March of 2008.

[sailor]

Obama just put his neck on the line as well as his campaign in an interview with Major Garrett, any one else catch this?
He said he was completely unaware of Wright's comments until they came out in the last few days, and if he knew of them would have quit the church. If this can be disproven, look out.

so that means he's now quitting the church? nevermind, just saw the last poster said that pastor had retired.

[NewYorkDragons80]

Here's the Major Garrett interview (http://www.breitbart.tv/html/62894.html)

[HBox]

Obama just put his neck on the line as well as his campaign in an interview with Major Garrett, any one else catch this?
He said he was completely unaware of Wright's comments until they came out in the last few days, and if he knew of them would have quit the church. If this can be disproven, look out.

You are being inaccurate. He said he had heard of one or two comments before and denounced them. And he did not say he would quit the church. He said that if he had thought that this kind of stuff was repeated over and over again he would not attend. He further said that Wright had been preaching for 20 years and
he wasn't going to ditch him because of a few mistakes taken from investigating everything a man said for over 20 years.

He did say he had never been present when any of these kinds of comments had been made.

Click on the link above and you can see for yourself.

[NewYorkDragons80]

He did say he had never been present when any of these kinds of comments had been made.
Correct. Having seen the interview, that is something PhilDeez failed to mention. Obama didn't say he hadn't heard them, he said he hadn't heard them *personally*.

[PhilDeez]

You are being inaccurate. He said he had heard of one or two comments before and denounced them. And he did not say he would quit the church. He said that if he had thought that this kind of stuff was repeated over and over again he would not attend. He further said that Wright had been preaching for 20 years and
he wasn't going to ditch him because of a few mistakes taken from investigating everything a man said for over 20 years.

He did say he had never been present when any of these kinds of comments had been made.

Click on the link above and you can see for yourself.


I am not attempting to be inaccurate. I watched it already. Obama went back and forth. He said early in the interview he would have quit, and then at the end tried to skate around it.
He says, "When I heard these statements, many for the first time I thought I should come out and say..." Then he goes on to say to say he would have quit the church had he heard them in person - which is exactly what I meant. I was not being inaccurate, just posting something I watched and think is going to be huge to the future of his campaign. I was not posting it as a shot at him.

[NewYorkDragons80]

I am not attempting to be inaccurate. I watched it already. Obama went back and forth. He said early in the interview he would have quit, and then at the end tried to skate around it.
What's wrong with skating around it? It's possible to think that the idea that AIDS was manufactured in a lab is reprehensible, and not want to sell out the guy who helped you find Jesus at the same time. It's the first time I've seen Obama sweat, though.

[PhilDeez]

What's wrong with skating around it? It's possible to think that the idea that AIDS was manufactured in a lab is reprehensible, and not want to sell out the guy who helped you find Jesus at the same time. It's the first time I've seen Obama sweat, though.

Skating around what statements he was aware of and when he was aware, that is the issue. The fact that until now, he has said nothing while many believe he has been aware of these types of statements for a long time, including when placing Wright in an advisory role on his team.

[scottinnj]

What's wrong with skating around it? It's possible to think that the idea that AIDS was manufactured in a lab is reprehensible, and not want to sell out the guy who helped you find Jesus at the same time. It's the first time I've seen Obama sweat, though.

Exactly. It's unfair to put Obama in that position. But the Clinton machine is going to use this for all it's worth, and frighten more people.

[HBox]

I am not attempting to be inaccurate. I watched it already. Obama went back and forth. He said early in the interview he would have quit, and then at the end tried to skate around it.
He says, "When I heard these statements, many for the first time I thought I should come out and say..." Then he goes on to say to say he would have quit the church had he heard them in person - which is exactly what I meant. I was not being inaccurate, just posting something I watched and think is going to be huge to the future of his campaign. I was not posting it as a shot at him.

I didn't mean to imply you were being purposely inaccurate. i watched it again to make sure. He didn't mention quitting the church in any context outside of if these kinds of comments were repeatedly regularly.

On a side note, I'd love to see an interview that in depth and challenging on any network on subject matter much more important than this.

[PhilDeez]

Exactly. It's unfair to put Obama in that position. But the Clinton machine is going to use this for all it's worth, and frighten more people.

That was not my point. My point was he is dancing around what he knew and when.

[scottinnj]

That was not my point. My point was he is dancing around what he knew and when.

But that is the point. How do you rat out and separate yourself from a person who is quite possibly the one who saved your life, no matter how you feel about things he says?

What he knew and when he knew it? You make it sound like he witnessed a crime, not the constitutionally protected speech of a wacky preacher.

[PhilDeez]

I didn't mean to imply you were being purposely inaccurate. i watched it again to make sure. He didn't mention quitting the church in any context outside of if these kinds of comments were repeatedly regularly.

On a side note, I'd love to see an interview that in depth and challenging on any network on subject matter much more important than this.

Kind of reminds me of the Clemens hearings and I agree.
Look, I really could care less what happens with this, I just took my initial viewing of the interview as not so good of Obama - he has really put himself in the bullseye for either Hillary or McCain. McCain has already said he won't touch it, and I doubt Hillary will either so that she isn't inadvertantly doing what most republicans wish McCain would do. Just anxious to see how far this goes in the media.

[PhilDeez]

But that is the point. How do you rat out and separate yourself from a person who is quite possibly the one who saved your life, no matter how you feel about things he says?

What he knew and when he knew it? You make it sound like he witnessed a crime, not the constitutionally protected speech of a wacky preacher.

Not saying he had to rat out or totally separtate himself, just why put him on your advisory board if you knew this crap might come out?

[Zorro]

Why the outrage at Obama over this? John Hagee major McCain supporter calls the Catholic Church the great whore of Babylon depicted in Revelation 17 and nary a whisper in the media.

[TheMojoPin]

Not saying he had to rat out or totally separtate himself, just why put him on your advisory board if you knew this crap might come out?

Again, why are we only defining this man by the selected few comments from his 20 year life with the church? Some of what he said is ridiculous, and I've made my personal feelings about religious officials in general very clear, but that doesn't mean this guy should be made out to be the black Fred Phelps. The most inflammatory thing he said was the AIDS idea...everything else tossed out there are pro-black ideas and condemnations of US policy...hardly end of the world stuff. Why does everyone act like he can't possily be appealing to people for anything else?

[keithy_19]

On a side note, I'd love to see an interview that in depth and challenging on any network on subject matter much more important than this.

I may be alone with this, but I think Fox News has been very good in their coverage of the election.

And I agree that it would be great to get down to more meaningful issues and have it be as 'intense'.

[PhilDeez]

Again, why are we only defining this man by the selected few comments from his 20 year life with the church? Some of what he said is ridiculous, and I've made my personal feelings about religious officials in general very clear, but that doesn't mean this guy should be made out to be the black Fred Phelps. The most inflammatory thing he said was the AIDS idea...everything else tossed out there are pro-black ideas and condemnations of US policy...hardly end of the world stuff. Why does everyone act like he can't possily be appealing to people for anything else?

I am not defining Obama by any of this. It is all about perception, and the vast majority of the public will perceive this in a negative light, one that casts doubt on his judgment.

[Bulldogcakes]

I didn't mean to imply you were being purposely inaccurate. i watched it again to make sure. He didn't mention quitting the church in any context outside of if these kinds of comments were repeatedly regularly.

On a side note, I'd love to see an interview that in depth and challenging on any network on subject matter much more important than this.


You're absolutely right about that, this isn't an important national issue. But most people don't follow elections as closely as you do. Things like this can define a candidate in the minds of many swing voters. They can also be the lasting impression people have of a candidate.

George H.W. Bush-The supermaket scanner moment where he said "Hey, look at that gizmo". Made him seem out of touch, and that resonated with voters.

Dukakis-The tank photo. Woke people up to the idea that this man has no business being the Commander in Chief.

Kerry-The windsurfing video. What on earth was he thinking.

And the SNL bit about Obama getting a free pass from the media may end up defining his campaign. It has certainly affected the way he's covered and the perception of his campaign.

Again, the hurdle Obama has to overcome as the 1st black candidate is making himself seem like a 'safe' choice. He represents a big change, something new, and that can seem risky in the minds of many voters. Specifically older and female voters. If he gets attached to radical elements of the Black community, I think he's cooked.

[NewYorkDragons80]

Kerry-The windsurfing video. What on earth was he thinking.
I think he pulled that one off. The Dukakis one was devastating, though

[Bulldogcakes]

I think he pulled that one off. The Dukakis one was devastating, though

Whether you or I think something is OK isn't the issue. If it ends up on SNL or the Late Night talk shows, it's a problem.

[NewYorkDragons80]

Whether you or I think something is OK isn't the issue. If it ends up on SNL or the Late Night talk shows, it's a problem.
Did SNL have a windsurfing video I wasn't aware of?

[Bulldogcakes]

Did SNL have a windsurfing video I wasn't aware of?

No, maybe you misunderstood my point. It's just very hard for most people to support someone who's a laughing stock.

Against the assault of laughter, nothing can stand." –Mark Twain

[TheMojoPin]

No, maybe you misunderstood my point. It's just very hard for most people to support someone who's a laughing stock.

Against the assault of laughter, nothing can stand." –Mark Twain

And yet, we're just wrapping up 8 yeas of George W. Bush. And 8 years of Bill Clinton before that.

[scottinnj]

Not saying he had to rat out or totally separtate himself, just why put him on your advisory board if you knew this crap might come out?

I don't know. I heard him today on tape during MTP saying he didn't know what he had said.
Again, unless someone has a video of Obama saying "Amen" while sitting in the pew, it's a non-issue to me.
Same with McCain and the Hagee deal.

[epo]

From today's Boston Globe: (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/03/17/many_voting_for_clinton_to_boost_gop/)

Many voting for Clinton to boost GOP

For a party that loves to hate the Clintons, Republican voters have cast an awful lot of ballots lately for Senator Hillary Clinton: About 100,000 GOP loyalists voted for her in Ohio, 119,000 in Texas, and about 38,000 in Mississippi, exit polls show.

Kinda shoots that whole Clinton is getting the democrats talking point in the ass, huh?

[ShowerBench]

Obama the unifier scrubs Wright from website. This act alone shows him to be deceptive, waffling, and disloyal:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/03/pastor_wright_goes_down_the_ob.html

[ShowerBench]

Arrogance with nothing to back it up. Sounds a lot like the last 7 years of Little Lord Pissypants.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap_campaignplus/20080317/ap_ca/on_deadline_arrogance

But both Obama and his wife, Michelle, ooze a sense of entitlement.

"Barack is one of the smartest people you will ever encounter who will deign to enter this messy thing called politics," his wife said a few weeks ago, adding that Americans will get only one chance to elect him.

Privately, aides and associates of Obama tell stories about a boss who can be aloof and ungracious. He holds firmly to views and doesn't like to be challenged, traits that President Bush packaged and sold under the "resolute" brand in the 2004 election. For Bush, those qualities proved to be dangerous in a time of war and in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

[Zorro]

Arrogance with nothing to back it up. Sounds a lot like the last 7 years of Little Lord Pissypants.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap_campaignplus/20080317/ap_ca/on_deadline_arrogance

But both Obama and his wife, Michelle, ooze a sense of entitlement.

"Barack is one of the smartest people you will ever encounter who will deign to enter this messy thing called politics," his wife said a few weeks ago, adding that Americans will get only one chance to elect him.

Privately, aides and associates of Obama tell stories about a boss who can be aloof and ungracious. He holds firmly to views and doesn't like to be challenged, traits that President Bush packaged and sold under the "resolute" brand in the 2004 election. For Bush, those qualities proved to be dangerous in a time of war and in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.


Could be worse....could be hiding tax records and donor lists

[epo]

Arrogance with nothing to back it up. Sounds a lot like the last 7 years of Little Lord Pissypants.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap_campaignplus/20080317/ap_ca/on_deadline_arrogance

But both Obama and his wife, Michelle, ooze a sense of entitlement.

"Barack is one of the smartest people you will ever encounter who will deign to enter this messy thing called politics," his wife said a few weeks ago, adding that Americans will get only one chance to elect him.

Privately, aides and associates of Obama tell stories about a boss who can be aloof and ungracious. He holds firmly to views and doesn't like to be challenged, traits that President Bush packaged and sold under the "resolute" brand in the 2004 election. For Bush, those qualities proved to be dangerous in a time of war and in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

Thanks for the editorial.

Now who are the donors to the Clinton library?

Oh and how did the Clinton's made $34 million in the last 2 years?

[A.J.]

Arrogance with nothing to back it up. Sounds a lot like the last 7 years of Little Lord Pissypants.

But both Obama and his wife, Michelle, ooze a sense of entitlement.

Compared to HILLARY? Are you serious???

[ShowerBench]

Compared to HILLARY? Are you serious???

I would agree the Clintons are arrogant also, but there's is a different brand. It's not "vote for me, I don't stand for much but I'm so fuckin awesome, ain't I?" It's more like "Vote for us, we've dedicated our lives to liberal/Democratic causes and we're the only ones on the planet competent enough to promote that agenda and solve the problems Bushes leave behind."

The Clintons have a liberal/Democratic core under their arrogance, the Obamas have an Obama core.

[TheMojoPin]

Here's a problem for both Democratic candidates, and it throws a spanner in the works of the idea that Hillary can win the big states and Obama can't:

State Date Obama vs McCain Clinton vs McCain
CA 3/13 Obama +15 Clinton +7
OH 3/13 McCain +6 McCain +6
FL 3/12 McCain +4 McCain +7
NY 3/11 Obama +13 Clinton +12
MI 3/10 McCain +3 McCain +3
PA 3/10 McCain +1 McCain +2


Sorry, the board is fucking up the formatting. Rasmussen Reports is the source.

[Zorro]

I would agree the Clintons are arrogant also, but there's is a different brand. It's not "vote for me, I don't stand for much but I'm so fuckin awesome, ain't I?" It's more like "Vote for us, we've dedicated our lives to liberal/Democratic causes and we're the only ones on the planet competent enough to promote that agenda and solve the problems Bushes leave behind."

The Clintons have a liberal/Democratic core under their arrogance, the Obamas have an Obama core.



I think you mean "we've spent a lifetime abandoning liberal/democratic causes in order to further our own careers. We gave you NAFTA, voted for war in Irag, Monica and best of all helped pass the Contract with America.

[ShowerBench]

Thanks for the editorial.

Now who are the donors to the Clinton library?

Oh and how did the Clinton's made $34 million in the last 2 years?

The Clintons underwent a $100 million taxpayer-funded investigation into their personal and financial lives that turned up nothing. Obama in the role of Ken Starr is likely to yield the same - nothing of interest.

[ShowerBench]

I think you mean "we've spent a lifetime abandoning liberal/democratic causes in order to further our own careers. We gave you NAFTA, voted for war in Irag, Monica and best of all helped pass the Contract with America.

Nonsense. They promoted Democratic causes to the extent they could in any political context in which they found themselves. That's why they left office with approval ratings in the 60's and have been wildly popular among Democrats since, particularly black Democrats.

Don't forget they've also been the only Democrats to make it to the White House in 28 years. That trend will continue if Obama is nominated.

[Zorro]

Nonsense. They promoted Democratic causes to the extent they could in any political context in which they found themselves. That's why they left office with approval ratings in the 60's and have been wildly popular among Democrats since, particularly black Democrats.

Don't forget they've also been the only Democrats to make it to the White House in 28 years. That trend will continue if Obama is nominated.

Man you love to throw numbers around...regardless of their accuracy...Carter 77-81 Clinton 93-01.... their was a 12 year lapse in Democratic control of the Presidency... not at all unusual or special in American History.

I do agree though that this year the Democrats could run Satan himself and still win

[scottinnj]

Obama the unifier scrubs Wright from website. This act alone shows him to be deceptive, waffling, and disloyal:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/03/pastor_wright_goes_down_the_ob.html

Wait a minute what? After all he has said about Pastor Wright, the book he wrote based on the sermon, and how he is a mentor to Obama?

I'm sorry to tell you this, but when you take down a webpage, it just goes away. You don't hear "taps" being played while you click on the link to the page, you don't see the page melt into tears of sorrow, you don't hear it crying or asking if God allows webpages into heaven.

It just goes away. You're looking at ones and zeros doing what they do best. Besides, I'd like to hear from a few more religious people about our role as Americans in the world and to each other, and what we should be doing.

[Zorro]

If we can't win honestly... just give it to us

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080317/D8VFE6PG0.html

[scottinnj]

If we can't win honestly... just give it to us

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080317/D8VFE6PG0.html

The Clintons' continued arrogance is stunningly brazen:


On the superdelegates-
"I don't know that it will be an easy decision, but that's what leaders sign up for," said the former president, declaring that a candidate's ability to win a general election should be considered.


How can they tell the Democrats she can win the general election when she is losing the primary election:
Obama leads Clinton, 1,617-1,498, in The Associated Press' count. That advantage masks a larger lead among pledged delegates, which are won in primaries and caucuses. Obama leads Clinton by 155 pledged delegates, 1,404-1,249, while she leads 249-213 among superdelegates, a margin of 36.

[badmonkey]

http://theconservativepost.com/WordPress/Photos/Hillary3.gif
PICK ME! PICK ME!

[ShowerBench]

The Clintons' continued arrogance is stunningly brazen:


On the superdelegates-



How can they tell the Democrats she can win the general election when she is losing the primary election:

Superdelegates were invented to prevent Democrats from latching onto another McGovern, Dukakis, Obama, etc.

[TheMojoPin]

Superdelegates were invented to prevent Democrats from latching onto another McGovern, Dukakis, Obama, etc.

So you have no response to the current polling numbers I posted on the last page? Yeah, it's not November, but they show that Hillary has no advanatge whatsoever to win the "big states" the election. Both she and Obama project only to lead McCain in California and New York out of the "big states" polled. That's potentially bad news for both of them, and shows zero projected advanatge for Hillary as you've been arguing. She actually projects worse.

[epo]

Superdelegates were invented to prevent Democrats from latching onto another McGovern, Dukakis, Obama, etc.

Another post with no real evidence. How about this nugget from CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/17/poll.democrats/):

Poll: Majority of Democrats prefer Obama

(CNN) -- A majority of Democrats would like to see Barack Obama rather than Hillary Clinton win their party's presidential nomination, according to a national poll out Monday.

Fifty-two percent of registered Democrats questioned in a new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey say the senator from Illinois is their choice for president, with 45 percent supporting Clinton.

So let's get this straight by the evidence provided in this thread:

1. Democrats in polling prefer Obama over Clinton.
2. Democrats in voting prefer Obama over Clinton
3. Republicans are voting for Clinton to extend the race.
4. Obama polls better against McCain than Clinton.

We are done here. Until you can prove otherwise you are nothing more than a hack Clinton fan.

[ShowerBench]

Of course these polls vary. Rasmussen shows Clinton ahead among Democrats by six. Keep in mind no one has attacked Obama yet on the Wright controversy, but rest assured they will and it will stick. He's a sure loser in November in PA, OH, and FL, and a very likely loser in MI.

http://media.gallup.com/poll/graphs/031708DailyUpdateGraph1.gif

Both Democrats run roughly even with John McCain in hypothetical trial heats for the fall election. But for the second consecutive Gallup report, McCain does slightly better against Obama than he does against Clinton. From March 12 through March 15, the two Democratic candidates' positions against McCain had been identical in Gallup Poll Daily tracking. -- Lydia Saad

------------

Rasmussen:

The Illinois Senator is viewed favorably today by just 47% of voters nationwide. That’s down five points since last Thursday (see recent daily results). The number with an unfavorable view of Obama has risen from 44% on Thursday to 50% today. Among White voters, Obama is now viewed favorably by 43% and unfavorably by 54%.

In the race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination, Monday’s numbers show Obama with 46% support from Likely Democratic Primary Voters while Clinton earns 44% of the vote (see recent daily results). Among Democrats, Clinton leads 48% to 42%, but Obama has a substantial lead among unaffiliated voters likely to participate in a Democratic Primary.

[MichiganJim]

One year ago I would have found it nearly impossible that a Republican would be elected President in 2008 but now that seems very likely.

The Dems were in charge in Congress and were going to end this endless war. A new Speaker Nancy Pelosi, promised real change. The margin in the Senate was razor thin but it looked like the Dems were ready to make things happen.

What a difference a year makes.

Congress has the lowest approval rating in history

JOHN MCCAIN is the Republican nominee

and Hilary and Barack are still duking it out in mid-march.

I have decided to become a Nader Raider and cast my vote for Ralph. Here's why...

(1) Neither Obama or Clinton have clearly defined exit strategies for Iraq

(2) I have not seen a definitive economic plan from any of the three

(3) The health care plans for both are extremely limited

(4) The energy policy for all three is at best very weak

(5) While I do not neccesarily mind Hilary, she is HATED by the left and may become the most divisive President we have ever had. Probably through no fault of her own.

(6) Barack called for Don Imus to be fired for a throw away radio one liner. Clearly the man is thin skinned and we have enough hatred and mistrust in our country already.

(7) Oprah is campaigning for Obama and that woman has way to much power already.

(8) JOHN MCCAIN is the opponent and this man never met a war he didn't like. To me he is scarier than Reagan was.

I really would like to be convinced that Obama or Clinton would be a good place for my vote. But I think that supporting Nader and keeping the viability of a third party alive is a better place for my weak little vote

Jim in Michigan

[badmonkey]

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1467

Prospective General Election Match-up 3-13/14
McCain 45%
Clinton 39%
Nader 6%
Not sure/Someone else 11%

Prospective General Election Match-up 3-13/14
McCain 44%
Obama 39%
Nader 5%
Not sure/Someone else 11%

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1468
If there is a crisis in the world and the telephone rings at 3 a.m. in the White House, who would you feel more secure answering that phone – Hillary Clinton or John McCain?
Hillary Clinton 37%
John McCain 55%
Not sure 9%



If there is a crisis in the world and the telephone rings at 3 a.m. in the White House, who would you feel more secure answering that phone – John McCain or Barack Obama?
John McCain 56%
Barack Obama 35%
Not sure 10%

If there is a crisis in the world and the telephone rings at 3 a.m. in the White House, who would you feel more secure answering that phone – Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama?
Hillary Clinton 37%
Barack Obama 36%
Not sure 27%

42% Want McCain to Answer 3:00 a.m. Phone Call (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/42_want_mccain_to_answer_3_00_a_m_phone_call)
Survey of 800 Likely Voters March 3-4, 2008
Which candidate would be best President to answer a foreign policy crisis call?
John McCain 42%
Hillary Clinton 25%
Barack Obama 25%

[Zorro]

SOURCES: NY DAILY NEWS SET TO PUBLISH...


MAJOR POLITICAL BOMBSHELL: DEVELOPING


from Drudge... another hooker policitcian ?

[badmonkey]

from Drudge... another hooker policitcian ?

I will not be stepping down from RF.net or ThereIsNoRadio regardless of Drudge's breaking news.

This is not an admission of guilt and cannot be used against me in any court of law or public opinion. It is also excluded forever from evidence that could disqualify me from public office.

[TheMojoPin]

I really have a gut feeling that McCain takes this unless the economy really just tanks out, or there are huge and deadly public setbacks in Iraq or something really dramatic happens that derails the Republicans again. The Democrats fighting it out like this is the best thing that can possibly happen for them, especially with someone who come off so "above the fray" as McCain. Whichever Democratic candidate comes out on top is going to be inherrently tarnished by the battle to do so.

Regardless, here are more tracking numbers/prediction that prove ShowerBench dead wrong when he says only Hillary can win the "big states":

Daily Kos (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3/6/212016/8597/980/470910)

Survey USA (McCain vs. Obama) (http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/2008/03/06/electoral-math-as-of-030608-obama-280-mccain-258/)

Survey USA (McCain vs. Clinton) (http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/2008/03/06/electoral-math-as-of-030608-clinton-276-mccain-262/)

[Zorro]

Turns out the shocking new is David Patterson cheated (big yawn here) on his wife

In a stunning revelation, both Paterson, 53, and his wife, Michelle, 46, acknowledged in a joint interview they each had intimate relationships with others during a rocky period in their marriage several years ago.

[scottinnj]

Is Governor Patterson sure of that? He could have been banging his wife while she had a really bad cold.

[ShowerBench]

Obama seems to be in a constant state of confusion unless he's reading a speech. You figure it out:

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/3/17/225516/066

First Barack Obama was for decriminalization of marijuana. Then he was against it. Then he said he was for it, explaining he raised his hand by mistake at a debate.

Now he's clear: he opposes decriminalization of marijuana.

[epo]

Obama seems to be in a constant state of confusion unless he's reading a speech. You figure it out:

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/3/17/225516/066

First Barack Obama was for decriminalization of marijuana. Then he was against it. Then he said he was for it, explaining he raised his hand by mistake at a debate.

Now he's clear: he opposes decriminalization of marijuana.

So a politician shifted positions?

Sort of like Clinton & Iraq, huh?

[TheMojoPin]

We're just getting done with an administration that for 8 years wouldn't "flip-flop" or "change their mind" about things. Those charges have never failed to be asinine...why would we want a static politcian who refuses to modify their policies based on the needs of the day?

[A.J.]

why would we want a static politcian who refuses to modify their policies based on the needs of the day?

"Fuck Henry Cabot Lodge. I don't need him."

http://www.archives.gov/calendar/images/woodrow-wilson.jpg

[ShowerBench]

Nobody is in the mood for a race war in the midst of a recession.

The fact is, Obama isn't in the midst of a recession, as always he's in the midst of being the awesome Obama and nothing is going to stand in the way of his taking an opportunity to deliver the speech that offered him, the awesome Obama, the moment he was "born for."

Brilliant, Obama!

http://media.gallup.com/poll/graphs/031808DailyUpdateGraph1.gif

[Zorro]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/17/poll.democrats/index.html

[epo]

Nobody is in the mood for a race war in the midst of a recession.

The fact is, Obama isn't in the midst of a recession, as always he's in the midst of being the awesome Obama and nothing is going to stand in the way of his taking an opportunity to deliver the speech that offered him, the awesome Obama, the moment he was "born for."

Brilliant, Obama!


In the glare of actual leadership, you Clinton hacks can do nothing other than criticize?

[ShowerBench]

In the glare of actual leadership, you Clinton hacks can do nothing other than criticize?

Giving a speech in the context of damage control instead of out of conviction isn't leadership, it's typical Obama opportunism.

[sailor]

In the glare of actual leadership, you Clinton hacks can do nothing other than criticize?

i'm no fan of hers but you're constantly attacking clinton.

[TheMojoPin]

Giving a speech in the context of damage control instead of out of conviction isn't leadership, it's typical Obama opportunism.

You live in a weird, weird vacuum.

[epo]

Giving a speech in the context of damage control instead of out of conviction isn't leadership, it's typical Obama opportunism.

Damage control would have been throwing Rev. Wright under the bus. Damage control would have been glossing over the issue.

Instead, you had a man running for the President of the United States addressing race, religion and the challenges we all face as a nation. Today, Senator Obama put everything on the line by giving that speech instead of the textbook version he could have gave. That my friend is taking a bull by the horn. That is the type of leadership this nation could use.

[epo]

i'm no fan of hers but you're constantly attacking clinton.

Sailor, that is fair.

This however is a battle that I'm not going to give an inch of ground. These two candidates are more than just candidates to me. They are symbols of the way that business gets done within the Democratic Party. And personally, I have too much invested in the party to allow business to go back to "the old way".

So I may attack her, but I've only pointed out the truth. I do and will not make things up about Senator Clinton. However, when Senator Obama is unfair attacked in my opinion, I will criticize.

[ShowerBench]

Damage control would have been throwing Rev. Wright under the bus. Damage control would have been glossing over the issue.

Instead, you had a man running for the President of the United States addressing race, religion and the challenges we all face as a nation. Today, Senator Obama put everything on the line by giving that speech instead of the textbook version he could have gave. That my friend is taking a bull by the horn. That is the type of leadership this nation could use.

Rev Wright is a racist lunatic. A leader, (much less a "post-racial" leader) should have thrown the lunatic under the bus when he said white America created AIDS to infect black America.

Instead post-racial Obama let the racist lunatic marry him and baptize his children, and donated 22,500 to his church last year.

I didn't think it was "leadership" when McCain went to Bob Jones U to pander either.

[TheMojoPin]

Rev Wright is a racist lunatic. A leader, (much less a "post-racial" leader) should have thrown the lunatic under the bus when he said white America created AIDS to infect black America.

Instead post-racial Obama let the racist lunatic marry him and baptize his children, and donated 22,500 to his church last year.

You apparently have no idea what a lunatic actually is.

Obama's stated very clearly that he doesn't agree with all of Wright's political stances and some of them he flat-out denounces. Crazily enough, since none of us are actually defined solely by our politics and typically have good friends or family with wildly differing political views, Obama not tossing him under the bus should be something you approve of.

[sailor]

Sailor, that is fair.

This however is a battle that I'm not going to give an inch of ground. These two candidates are more than just candidates to me. They are symbols of the way that business gets done within the Democratic Party. And personally, I have too much invested in the party to allow business to go back to "the old way".

So I may attack her, but I've only pointed out the truth. I do and will not make things up about Senator Clinton. However, when Senator Obama is unfair attacked in my opinion, I will criticize.

fair enough.

[ShowerBench]

You apparently have no idea what a lunatic actually is.

Obama's stated very clearly that he doesn't agree with all of Wright's political stances and some of them he flat-out denounces. Crazily enough, since none of us are actually defined solely by our politics and typically have good friends or family with wildly differing political views, Obama not tossing him under the bus should be something you approve of.

So why did he say he would fire Imus for a few ill-conceived racial comments?

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3031317&page=1

"I understand MSNBC has suspended Mr. Imus," Obama told ABC News, "but I would also say that there's nobody on my staff who would still be working for me if they made a comment like that about anybody of any ethnic group. And I would hope that NBC ends up having that same attitude."

Obama said he appeared once on Imus' show two years ago, and "I have no intention of returning."

"He didn't just cross the line," Obama said. "He fed into some of the worst stereotypes that my two young daughters are having to deal with today in America.

"White America infected black America with AIDS" is OK though. Obama = Racism for me but not for thee.

[TheMojoPin]

So why did he say he would fire Imus for a few ill-conceived racial comments?

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3031317&page=1

"I understand MSNBC has suspended Mr. Imus," Obama told ABC News, "but I would also say that there's nobody on my staff who would still be working for me if they made a comment like that about anybody of any ethnic group. And I would hope that NBC ends up having that same attitude."

Obama said he appeared once on Imus' show two years ago, and "I have no intention of returning."

"He didn't just cross the line," Obama said. "He fed into some of the worst stereotypes that my two young daughters are having to deal with today in America.

"White America infected black America with AIDS" is OK though. Obama = Racism for me but not for thee.

Actualy, I will give this one to you. This is the first time you have actually "busted" Obama on something. His keeping Wright on his campaign in an official capacity after making that statement about Imus is inexcusable.

[Zorro]

Apparently on the day the entire media was focused on Obama the Clinton campaign announced the support of John Murtha...
http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/03/18/rep-jack-murtha-d-pa-endorses-hillary-clinton/

[NewYorkDragons80]

You apparently have no idea what a lunatic actually is.

Obama's stated very clearly that he doesn't agree with all of Wright's political stances and some of them he flat-out denounces. Crazily enough, since none of us are actually defined solely by our politics and typically have good friends or family with wildly differing political views, Obama not tossing him under the bus should be something you approve of.
As long as you're replying to Showerbench's posts, don't forget to prepare for your debate with the nearest wall.

[TheMojoPin]

I finally got to see Obam's speech about Wright...wow. The Daily Show got it right...this was a man talking to people about race as if we're all adults. People can and probably will choose to only focus on a handful of soundbytes spun completely out of control by pundits, but if anyone chooses to actually listen to Obama on this, they'll hear something much more important.

[epo]

Wanna see a lunatic? Rev. James David Manning from the Atlah World Ministry in Harlem would qualify:

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/khuu-RhOBDU&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/khuu-RhOBDU&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

This guy supports Clinton, but if anybody tries to link her deeper with him without evidence would be unfair.

[TheMojoPin]

To be fair, it's not like Wright has come up because he's just the pastor at Obama's church or he supports Obama. Obama clearly has a deeper relationship with him than that, so tossing up a random black religious leader who supports Hillary really isn't comparable at all.

[scottinnj]

To be fair, it's not like Wright has come up because he's just the pastor at Obama's church or he supports Obama. Obama clearly has a deeper relationship with him than that, so tossing up a random black religious leader who supports Hillary really isn't comparable at all.

Oh yes it is the moment she brought up Farrakhan's endorsement of Obama during the debate and challenged Obama he didn't condemn "Calypso Louie" strongly enough. She opened up the door for condemnation of any wack job that supports other people's campaigns, so hers is open game to me.

[epo]

To be fair, it's not like Wright has come up because he's just the pastor at Obama's church or he supports Obama. Obama clearly has a deeper relationship with him than that, so tossing up a random black religious leader who supports Hillary really isn't comparable at all.

True enough, yet the longer this primary goes on the more of this kind of shit I'm going to find on the interwebz.

Can we just talk about issues rather than Rev. Wright, Geraldine Ferraro or Rev. Hagee?

[scottinnj]

Can we just talk about issues rather than Rev. Wright, Geraldine Ferraro or Rev. Hagee?

OOOO! OOOO! OOOO! OOOO! I DO DO! I wanna talk about how quickly we can make the transfer from fossil fuels to renewable energy in order to power our autos and trucks, and also how much government assistance will be needed to help entrepeneurs get good ideas to market.

OOOO! OOOO! OOO! OOOO! I also want to talk about why we have Medicare for our parents but it is divided into parts, and how retail pharmacys push them into certain plans that won't cover catastrophic illnesses that require intravenous medications and feedings.
And why we have that big fat fucking "donut hole" in the prescription portion of Medicare.

OOOO! OOOO! OOOO! OOOO! I want to have a discussion on how much money we should spend to renovate our highway system, if it is worth it and how much traffic are we going to anticipate in the next 25 years and how to plan for that increase.

[ShowerBench]

but if anyone chooses to actually listen to Obama on this, they'll hear something much more important.

I heard some pretty words by a politician performing damage control. But it's one who doesn't really have any credibility on race - since the last thing Obama would have done during this campaign was a major speech on race if he didn't think he had to do it to get himself out of trouble.

If he had given the speech unprompted by political self-interest, it would have represented courageous leadership. Alas, it represented something else altogether - Obama's now familiar brand of self-serving cynicism.

[NewYorkDragons80]

To be fair, it's not like Wright has come up because he's just the pastor at Obama's church or he supports Obama. Obama clearly has a deeper relationship with him than that, so tossing up a random black religious leader who supports Hillary really isn't comparable at all.
I'm not an Obama supporter, but I have to say that so far he's handled this about as well as he could have. I'm impressed that he denounced Wright's words while not totally throwing the guy under the bus. Kudos to him.

[keithy_19]

I've read through the constant bickering between ShowerBench and everyne else. Can we all make a deal though?

If Obama becomes the president and turns out to be a terrible president, can we all buy showerbench a steak?

[AKA]

I've read through the constant bickering between ShowerBench and everyne else. Can we all make a deal though?

If Obama becomes the president and turns out to be a terrible president, can we all buy showerbench a steak?

No.

[NewYorkDragons80]

Assuming Obama gets the nomination, we're set to have one of the most honest, fair, and honorable elections in modern history. Yet we've already seen McCain portrayed as a Falwell and Obama as Farrakhan. Can everybody cut the shit? Even the callers at the beginning of the show yesterday disgusted me with the way they were talking about McCain. I was truly encouraged yesterday when I saw McCain and Obama trading jabs against their respective ideas. All the while, the media doesn't even know how to cover clean debates of ideologies. It makes me wish McCain and Obama did what Goldwater and Kennedy planned on doing-- campaigning together and simply debating from city to city all over the country

The one criticism I have of Obama's style is the comparison of McCain and Bush. It's completely dishonest to link Bush with the guy who ritually drew the hatred of his party for his clashes with Bush. But I guess he pretty much has to link ANY Republican with Bush in order to win, just like McCain has to shake the hand of some pain in the ass hate-monger preacher-types to win over the "base". But you have to admit that the"3rd Bush term" monicker holds almost as much water with Obama as it does with McCain. If they keep it up, McCain should run an ad showing Obama's support for Bush on Immigration and Israel. 3rd Bush term, indeed.

[NewYorkDragons80]

PS its not completely dishonest to link McCain and Bush, but it's pretty close, and its definitely misleading.

[Zorro]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/05/23/ap/politics/mainD8HPO2G80.shtml


Sen. Clinton Pitches Ethanol Energy Plan

A switch to biofuels as called for by Clinton will increase food costs...apparently we are once again being led down the path by a shortsighted politician.

Ethanol Demand Threatens Food Prices

http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?ch=specialsections&sc=biofuels&id=18173&a=

[NewYorkDragons80]

Ethanol is an encouraging concept, but using corn for ethanol is about as practical as buffalo shrimp. Algae and sugar cane are CLEARLY better sources, but try telling Iowans that the future lies with a bunch of stinky Brazilians or [gasp] Cubans. If we really want to help iowa, why not help them with those engineered algae farms instead of encouraging investment in a failed science such as corn ethanol?

[ShowerBench]

Assuming Obama gets the nomination, we're set to have one of the most honest, fair, and honorable elections in modern history.

No we're not. There will be 527's and a McCain loving media helping them destroy Obama for being an effeminate secrety Muslim who goes to a weird whitey-hating church. The candidates would then be forced to discuss the issue and "repudiate" or "denounce" and "demand they stop running" the ads. Surrogates will say things about the issues brought up in the ads and the candidates will be drawn into it whether they like it or not.

Additionally, there is no reason to believe Obama runs clean campaigns. Here he is flip flopping on "taking Clinton at her word" on the Muslim garb photo and using it against her.

There's no other way to read this but that Obama lied about "taking her at her word." He didn't "set aside" the issue as promised, once it became useful for whipping up the black voters in Mississippi:

After Ohio Loss, Obama Flip-Flops, Blames Hillary For Photo
3/10/2008 10:49:44 PM

At the debate in Ohio on February 26, Sen. Obama said he believed Hillary knew nothing about a photo of him that was published on the Drudge Report and said the issue should be "set aside":

SEN. OBAMA: Well, first of all, I take Senator Clinton at her word that she knew nothing about the photo. So I think that's something that we can set aside.

Subsequently, Sen. Obama lost Ohio and Texas. Now, he's telling the voters of Mississippi that Hillary was responsible for the photo appearing on a right wing website and that she did so to scare them. From his event Monday night:

When in the midst of a campaign you decide to throw the kitchen sink at your opponent because you’re behind and your campaign starts leaking photographs of me when I’m traveling overseas wearing the native clothes of those folks to make people afraid, and then you run an ad talking about who’s going to answer the phone at three in the morning, an ad straight out of the Republican playbook, that’s not real change.

[TheMojoPin]

No we're not. There will be 527's and a McCain loving media helping them destroy Obama for being an effeminate secrety Muslim who goes to a weird whitey-hating church. The candidates would then be forced to discuss the issue and "repudiate" or "denounce" and "demand they stop running" the ads. Surrogates will say things about the issues brought up in the ads and the candidates will be drawn into it whether they like it or not.

Additionally, there is no reason to believe Obama runs clean campaigns. Here he is flip flopping on "taking Clinton at her word" on the Muslim garb photo and using it against her.

There's no other way to read this but that Obama lied about "taking her at her word." He didn't "set aside" the issue as promised, once it became useful for whipping up the black voters in Mississippi:

After Ohio Loss, Obama Flip-Flops, Blames Hillary For Photo
3/10/2008 10:49:44 PM

At the debate in Ohio on February 26, Sen. Obama said he believed Hillary knew nothing about a photo of him that was published on the Drudge Report and said the issue should be "set aside":

SEN. OBAMA: Well, first of all, I take Senator Clinton at her word that she knew nothing about the photo. So I think that's something that we can set aside.

Subsequently, Sen. Obama lost Ohio and Texas. Now, he's telling the voters of Mississippi that Hillary was responsible for the photo appearing on a right wing website and that she did so to scare them. From his event Monday night:

When in the midst of a campaign you decide to throw the kitchen sink at your opponent because you’re behind and your campaign starts leaking photographs of me when I’m traveling overseas wearing the native clothes of those folks to make people afraid, and then you run an ad talking about who’s going to answer the phone at three in the morning, an ad straight out of the Republican playbook, that’s not real change.

He said he took Hillary at her word when she says she herself didn't know about the photo. That doesn't mean her campaign didn't leak it. That's not a flip-flop...that's being smart.

SB, why do you take Hillary at her word when sources have shown that the photo push did indeed come from her campaign? Obama took the high ground on that when he could have savaged her for getting busted pulling such a brazen move. Where's your outrage there? Who do you not condemn her for such tactics?

Between articles like this and relying on Republican voters, it's amazing what Hillary's side is resorting to to try and stay alive.

[epo]

No we're not. There will be 527's and a McCain loving media helping them destroy Obama for being an effeminate secrety Muslim who goes to a weird whitey-hating church. The candidates would then be forced to discuss the issue and "repudiate" or "denounce" and "demand they stop running" the ads. Surrogates will say things about the issues brought up in the ads and the candidates will be drawn into it whether they like it or not.

Additionally, there is no reason to believe Obama runs clean campaigns. Here he is flip flopping on "taking Clinton at her word" on the Muslim garb photo and using it against her.

There's no other way to read this but that Obama lied about "taking her at her word." He didn't "set aside" the issue as promised, once it became useful for whipping up the black voters in Mississippi:

After Ohio Loss, Obama Flip-Flops, Blames Hillary For Photo
3/10/2008 10:49:44 PM

At the debate in Ohio on February 26, Sen. Obama said he believed Hillary knew nothing about a photo of him that was published on the Drudge Report and said the issue should be "set aside":

SEN. OBAMA: Well, first of all, I take Senator Clinton at her word that she knew nothing about the photo. So I think that's something that we can set aside.

Subsequently, Sen. Obama lost Ohio and Texas. Now, he's telling the voters of Mississippi that Hillary was responsible for the photo appearing on a right wing website and that she did so to scare them. From his event Monday night:

When in the midst of a campaign you decide to throw the kitchen sink at your opponent because you’re behind and your campaign starts leaking photographs of me when I’m traveling overseas wearing the native clothes of those folks to make people afraid, and then you run an ad talking about who’s going to answer the phone at three in the morning, an ad straight out of the Republican playbook, that’s not real change.

Seriously, stop posting information from the Hillary Clinton campaign "Fact Hub" without a link as "fact".

Here is the fucking link. (http://facts.hillaryhub.com/archive/?id=6457)

Don't hide the source of your information, it makes it look like shit. Oh yea...in this case it is shit.

[ShowerBench]

Seriously, stop posting information from the Hillary Clinton campaign "Fact Hub" without a link as "fact".

Here is the fucking link. (http://facts.hillaryhub.com/archive/?id=6457)

Don't hide the source of your information, it makes it look like shit. Oh yea...in this case it is shit.

That's stupid and paranoid. Are you arguing that Obama didn't say what is highlighted in my post? The source here is utterly irrelevant. But here's a different one (ABC) if it makes you feel better

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/03/obama-flips-on.html

[epo]

That's stupid and paranoid. Are you arguing that Obama didn't say what is highlighted in my post? The source here is utterly irrelevant. But here's a different one (ABC) if it makes you feel better

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/03/obama-flips-on.html

Asking you to consistently link your sources is not stupid, nor is it paranoid.

[TheMojoPin]

That's stupid and paranoid. Are you arguing that Obama didn't say what is highlighted in my post? The source here is utterly irrelevant. But here's a different one (ABC) if it makes you feel better

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/03/obama-flips-on.html

Wow, way to ignore that I already replied. Saying that he believes SHE didn't know about the photos but that someone in her campaign opted to push them are two different things. It's not terribly complicated.

And it's not stupid and paranoid to point out that you consistently use sources and blogs tha are clearly skewed against the person you're trying to tear down. People here always link their sources if they expect to be taken seriously...why wouldn't you be held to tha same standard?

[TheMojoPin]

http://media.gallup.com/poll/graphs/20080318character1.gif

[keithy_19]

http://media.gallup.com/poll/graphs/20080318character1.gif

Ice cold. I'd never vote for Hillary or trust her.

[Zorro]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080320/NATION/541139809/1001

I know it's from the Syung Myun Moon paper, but t seems correct

[keithy_19]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080320/NATION/541139809/1001

I know it's from the Syung Myun Moon paper, but t seems correct

Um, we're fighting a war on terror. With Obama having a muslim background I find this to be entirely suitable...





















...please don't take that seriously.

[epo]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080320/NATION/541139809/1001

I know it's from the Syung Myun Moon paper, but t seems correct

It's all over the news right now.

Isn't that the same thing that Bush Sr. did to Bill Clinton in 1992?

[ShowerBench]

Ice cold. I'd never vote for Hillary or trust her.

Pretty interesting that she's still beating Obama. He must be regarded as completely incompetent or unqualified in any number of other ways.

Keep in mind that Bill Clinton didn't have high "honest and trustworthy" ratings either but when people think about whether they "trust" them to handle the job effectively, it's a different story.

http://media.gallup.com/poll/graphs/032008DailyUpdateGraph1.gif

[keithy_19]

Keep in mind that Bill Clinton didn't have high "honest and trustworthy" ratings either but when people think about whether they "trust" them to handle the job effectively, it's a different story.

[

I think that he failed in areas of foreign policy.

And that poll is all well and good, but against McCain Obama is the better candidate to win. Hillary agains McCain she loses. Obama against McCain, we have a close election.

[AKA]

It's all over the news right now.

Isn't that the same thing that Bush Sr. did to Bill Clinton in 1992?

By "all over the news" it's really only MSNBC who has grabbed this - they have been wall to wall with it since 8pm. Hannity on Fox barely mentioned it, and even Gingrich (his guessed) chided him when he tried to dismiss it as a nothing story. Last I saw the TV, CNN had nothing in their first hour, and at 9pm was running what I think might have been a taped interview with Obama - I eventually had to turn it all off.

It is the same thing as happened to Clinton - it seems that it was just looky-loos taking a peak, however the fact that this has happened THREE times since the first of the year - the most recent being last week and the earliest 70 days ago - and that only TONIGHT the Obama family and camp learned of this, is the real story.

[TheMojoPin]

Pretty interesting that she's still beating Obama.

Uhm, you seem to be a little removed from reality in terms of who is actually winning over who. Only in SB's world does Obama at his age ad coming from relative obscurity holding the delegate lead at this point over the woman everyone was ready to crown the nominee months ago as the torchbearer of the Age of Clinon qualify as him being perceived "incompetent" or "unqualified." That makes absolutely zero sense. And his proof? The Gallup poll that has shown their numbers repeatedly trading places back and forth. Somehow that's a "failure" for him, but asuccess for her.

[Zorro]

By "all over the news" it's really only MSNBC who has grabbed this - they have been wall to wall with it since 8pm. Hannity on Fox barely mentioned it, and even Gingrich (his guessed) chided him when he tried to dismiss it as a nothing story. Last I saw the TV, CNN had nothing in their first hour, and at 9pm was running what I think might have been a taped interview with Obama - I eventually had to turn it all off.

It is the same thing as happened to Clinton - it seems that it was just looky-loos taking a peak, however the fact that this has happened THREE times since the first of the year - the most recent being last week and the earliest 70 days ago - and that only TONIGHT the Obama family and camp learned of this, is the real story.

Current lead on CNN and newspaper websites...

[ShowerBench]

I think that he failed in areas of foreign policy.

And that poll is all well and good, but against McCain Obama is the better candidate to win. Hillary agains McCain she loses. Obama against McCain, we have a close election.

The electability case favors Clinton. Clinton can win OH, PA and FL in a general election. Obama will win none of those and would probably lose Michigan now that he's fighting against their voters.

Obama is ONLY TIED with McCain in Massachusetts (Clinton leads McCain 55-42)

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=692c0281-9ce4-4c71-8e4f-b970d4ea8193

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/3/20/2322/98517

SUSA had three polls out yesterday:

* Ohio:

If there were an election for President of the United States today, and the only two names on the ballot were Republican John McCain and Democrat Hillary Clinton, who would you vote for?

Clinton leads McCain, 50% to 44%

What if it was John McCain against Democrat Barack Obama?

McCain leads Obama, 50% to 43%

* Missouri, same questions:

McCain leads Hillary, 48% to 46%
McCain leads Obama, 53% to 39%.

* Kentucky, same questions:

McCain leads Hillary, 53% to 43%
McCain leads Obama, 64% to 28%

The AP reports that Gallup daily tracking polls shows Hillary Clinton leading Barack Obama 49% to 42% on Sunday, Monday and Tuesday.

[Zorro]

The AP reports that Gallup daily tracking polls shows Hillary Clinton leading Barack Obama 49% to 42% on Sunday, Monday and Tuesday.

Considering the beating Obama has taken in the last week it's amazing that the Clinton's can't capitalize more. I guess she's just such an awful candidate there's an inability to run with the hand off from the press.

[keithy_19]

The electability case favors Clinton. Clinton can win OH, PA and FL in a general election. Obama will win none of those and would probably lose Michigan now that he's fighting against their voters.

Obama is ONLY TIED with McCain in Massachusetts (Clinton leads McCain 55-42)

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=692c0281-9ce4-4c71-8e4f-b970d4ea8193

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/3/20/2322/98517

SUSA had three polls out yesterday:

* Ohio:

If there were an election for President of the United States today, and the only two names on the ballot were Republican John McCain and Democrat Hillary Clinton, who would you vote for?

Clinton leads McCain, 50% to 44%

What if it was John McCain against Democrat Barack Obama?

McCain leads Obama, 50% to 43%

* Missouri, same questions:

McCain leads Hillary, 48% to 46%
McCain leads Obama, 53% to 39%.

* Kentucky, same questions:

McCain leads Hillary, 53% to 43%
McCain leads Obama, 64% to 28%

The AP reports that Gallup daily tracking polls shows Hillary Clinton leading Barack Obama 49% to 42% on Sunday, Monday and Tuesday.

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/3/20/2322/98517

I'm not a very smart man, but that all seemed to be incredibly biased.

[Dude!]

It's all over the news right now.

Isn't that the same thing that Bush Sr. did to Bill Clinton in 1992?


this story will be extra fun if the peekers turn out to be staffers
hired during the clinton administration

obama should have hired sandy berger to steal his passport files before someone peeked

[TheMojoPin]

It's funny how if Wright is such a horrible, racist, unamerican boogeyman that the Clintons would have zero problem inviting him to the White House:

http://images.politico.com/global/clintonwright2.jpg

Obviously, the relationship between Wright and Obama is much, much deeper, but aain, like the fruitless Rezko smear, the Clintons can't keep themselves clean of the muck they try and spread.

[ShowerBench]

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/Clinton_aide_Obama_pushing_Wright_photo_pathetic.h tml

Responding to the Times's report that Obama campaign had "provided" them a photo of Bill Clinton and Jeremiah Wright (which had surfaced a bit earlier here and elsewhere) , Clinton spokesman Jay Carson emails:

"The Obama campaign put this photo out? How pathetic," he said. "Less than 48 hours after calling for a high-minded conversation on race, the Obama campaign is peddling photos of an occasion when President Clinton shook hands with Rev. Wright. To be clear, President Clinton took tens of thousands of photos during his 8 years as president."

Yeah a photo of Clinton with Wright in it is the same as Wright marrying the Clintons, baptizing their children, and Clinton donating $22,500 to Wright last year. Can't think of a better word for Obama trying to make this a story than "pathetic."

Oh wait I just thought of another one. "Hypocritical" after Obama whined about the photo of himself in a turban.

Here's the close Clinton-Wright relationship:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/15/wobama115.xml

Obama's Pastor Attacks Clinton for Being White

"Barack knows what it means to be a black man living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people. Hillary can never know that. Hillary ain't never been called a n*****."

In another sermon he took aim at former president Bill Clinton's supposedly good relationship with the black community.

"Hillary is married to Bill, and Bill has been good to us. No he ain't! Bill did us, just like he did Monica Lewinsky. He was riding dirty," the clergyman boomed.

By making a political endorsement from the pulpit, Mr Wright's outbursts may attract the attention of the Inland Revenue Service for contravening the church's tax-exempt charitable status.

[ShowerBench]

this story will be extra fun if the peekers turn out to be staffers
hired during the clinton administration

obama should have hired sandy berger to steal his passport files before someone peeked

One of them is a Reagan hire:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maura_Harty

Maura Harty (born c. 1959) is the current United States Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Consular Affairs, a post she has held since 21 November 2002. She is a career Foreign Service Officer, though the Assistant Secretary position is a presidential appointment. In November 2007, Harty announced that she will resign the Assistant Secretary position and retire from the Foreign Service in February 2008.

Harty is a native of Staten Island, New York. She graduated from New Dorp High School in 1977, where she was elected "Most Likely to Succeed" and "Class Citizen". Harty received her bachelor's degree at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service, where she was a member of the Mu Alpha chapter of the service fraternity Alpha Phi Omega. She began her career with the Department of State in 1981 as a vice-consul in Mexico City, Mexico.

Harty went on to serve several tours in Washington, DC, including tours as special assistant to Secretary of State George Shultz, executive assistant to Warren Christopher, and Executive Secretary of the Department. She served abroad as the U.S. Ambassador to Paraguay from 1997 to 1999.

[TheMojoPin]

Yeah a photo of Clinton with Wright in it is the same as Wright marrying the Clintons, baptizing their children, and Clinton donating $22,500 to Wright last year. Can't think of a better word for Obama trying to make this a story than "pathetic."

Uh, yeah, I already said it wasn't the same. That said, if he's such a clearly horrible person, why is he being invited to the White House? Why is Rezko invited to the White House? It simply shows that the Clintons are living double standards on everything. They can't have it both ways...either Wright is a villain, or he isn't.

Oh wait I just thought of another one. "Hypocritical" after Obama whined about the photo of himself in a turban.

The turban pohot was a clear smear intent on spreading lies about Obama and propogating the flasehood that he's a Muslim. The Wright/Clinton photo is a response that simply serves to show that Wright isn't the supervillain the Clintons want him to be if they invited him the White House. It's not like just anyone is invited to those dinners...there are screening and selection processes, and apparently Wright was deemed perfectly acceptable to have apresidential dinner at the White House. Funny how that works.

Obama's Pastor Attacks Clinton for Being White

"Barack knows what it means to be a black man living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people. Hillary can never know that. Hillary ain't never been called a n*****."

In another sermon he took aim at former president Bill Clinton's supposedly good relationship with the black community.

"Hillary is married to Bill, and Bill has been good to us. No he ain't! Bill did us, just like he did Monica Lewinsky. He was riding dirty," the clergyman boomed.

Hmmmm, him saying a white perosn can't know what it is to be black and then debunking the asinine and insulting notion that Clinton was the first "black president" because of many of his negative qualites. How is that "attacking them for being white?"

Good source, too, the Telegraph. The Clintons again relying on conservatives to try and stay alive. That doesn't bug you at all?

So what is it, SB? Is Wright a scary, evil boogeyman, or is he safe to invite to the Clinton White House and meet the President, First Lady and VP?

[Dude!]

Good source, too, the Telegraph.

that was kind of a dumb comment

the source was rev wrights own words

[TheMojoPin]

that was kind of a dumb comment

the source was rev wrights own words

Yeah, but their take on his words is complete spin. The bolded part is nonsensical.

[ShowerBench]

Uh, yeah, I already said it wasn't the same. That said, if he's such a clearly horrible person, why is he being invited to the White House? Why is Rezko invited to the White House? It simply shows that the Clintons are living double standards on everything. They can't have it both ways...either Wright is a villain, or he isn't.

The turban pohot was a clear smear intent on spreading lies about Obama and propogating the flasehood that he's a Muslim. The Wright/Clinton photo is a response that simply serves to show that Wright isn't the supervillain the Clintons want him to be if they invited him the White House. It's not like just anyone is invited to those dinners...there are screening and selection processes, and apparently Wright was deemed perfectly acceptable to have apresidential dinner at the White House. Funny how that works.

Hmmmm, him saying a white perosn can't know what it is to be black and then debunking the asinine and insulting notion that Clinton was the first "black president" because of many of his negative qualites. How is that "attacking them for being white?"

Good source, too, the Telegraph. The Clintons again relying on conservatives to try and stay alive. That doesn't bug you at all?

So wha is it, SB? Is Wright a scary, evil boogeyman, or is he safe to invite to the Clinton White House and meet the President, First Lady and VP?

I know you already said it wasn't the same, but Obama distributing the photo to imply some kind of equivalency -- LAME

As for why they would invite scary Wright to the White House - politics most likely. He was probably one of many politically important religious figures attending a big event.

I don't think the Clintons ever claimed Wright was a physically dangerous person who shouldn't be let in the White House but that's different from whether a Whitey-hater is someone a candidate can rely on as a "spiritual mentor" for 20 years and then maintain credibility as a "post-racial" or "unity" candidate.

[ShowerBench]

This Maura Hardy character named in the Obama passport story was the supervisor of the two employees who accessed the records. Subsequent to that she didn't report their actions and just ignored it.

Apparently accessing the records sets off some kind of alert system and then employees are asked for an explanation. If there is no good explanation they can be subjected to discipline. Legally accessing the record is a misdemeanor, and more serious if the information is disseminated, which it reportedly wasn't.

Anyway the punchline is this Maura Hardy is the employee who botched the review of the 9/11 terrorist visas but was promoted anyway by Bush.

[TheMojoPin]

I know you already said it wasn't the same, but Obama distributing the photo to imply some kind of equivalency -- LAME

What it shows is that everything you and your ilk scramble to show that Obaais "guilty" of, Hillary and Bill are also guilty off long before Obama made the scene, and then some. How does that maker her the better choice?

As for why they would invite scary Wright to the White House - politics most likely. He was probably one of many politically important religious figures attending a big event.

What a load of crap. Like I said, there are screening processes for these things. If he really was the racist hatemonger people like you are trying to spin him as, he wouldn't have been invited, plain and simple. There are many, many, many other black religious and political leaders that could have been invited instead. Again, you can't have it both was. If he's as "eeeeeevil" and racist and crazy as you want him to be, it also taints the Clintons.

I don't think the Clintons ever claimed Wright was a physically dangerous person who shouldn't be let in the White House but that's different from whether a Whitey-hater is someone a candidate can rely on as a "spiritual mentor" for 20 years and then maintain credibility as a "post-racial" or "unity" candidate.

Who was saying he was physically dangerous? Don't be absurd. Stop calling him a "whitey-hater." Being pissed off at racism and being pro-black community and saying that people like Hillary don't know what it's like to be black in America and that calling Bill "the first black president" is insulting and stupid isn't "hating white people." Just stop it. There's also zero indication that Wright's politics are reflected in Obama's. None. Zero. Zip. What is reflected is that Wright has been his RELIGIOUS and SPIRITUAL inspiration. Yet, oddly enough, we don't hear or read about Wright's religious or social messages or works. We only hear a handful of politial statements. That's it. Statements that Obama has in no way come close to reflecting or endorsing over the course of his public life over the next decade. Not in his books, his teaching, his public speaking, his politics, his interviews...nothing.

[epo]

New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson endorses Senator Obama. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080321/ap_on_el_pr/obama_richardson;_ylt=AifhjZXGT3Lg9JaJHo0WnquyFz4D )

"I believe he is the kind of once-in-a-lifetime leader that can bring our nation together and restore America's moral leadership in the world," Richardson said in a statement obtained by the AP. "As a presidential candidate, I know full well Sen. Obama's unique moral ability to inspire the American people to confront our urgent challenges at home and abroad in a spirit of bipartisanship and reconciliation."

[TheMojoPin]

New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson endorses Senator Obama. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080321/ap_on_el_pr/obama_richardson;_ylt=AifhjZXGT3Lg9JaJHo0WnquyFz4D )

Which is awesome, but man, it would have been nice if he could have done this and maybe stumped a little before Texas.

[Zorro]

Which is awesome, but man, it would have been nice if he could have done this and maybe stumped a little before Texas.

What a slap in the face to Clinton. This guy was in her hubbies admin and still went to the other team. Seems like lots of supers that have had close past relations with the Clintons are jumping ship.

[ShowerBench]

Which is awesome, but man, it would have been nice if he could have done this and maybe stumped a little before Texas.

Or New Mexico for that matter.

Of course the reason is obvious. Richardson's angle has always been which candidate would be likely to offer the VP slot. He sees that Clinton doesn't need to shore up support among hispanics so he would be a useless strategic pick.

Whereas Obama would desperately need to do something to win over hispanic voters and Richardson would be the logical strategic pick for him. It's possible Obama already made the offer to try to get Wright off the front page with a new endorsement.

Either way, it's too little to late for any effect except possibly a negative one in PA.

[epo]

Or New Mexico for that matter.

Of course the reason is obvious. Richardson's angle has always been which candidate would be likely to offer the VP slot. He sees that Clinton doesn't need to shore up support among hispanics so he would be a useless strategic pick.

Whereas Obama would desperately need to do something to win over hispanic voters and Richardson would be the logical strategic pick for him. It's possible Obama already made the offer to try to get Wright off the front page with a new endorsement.

Either way, it's too little to late for any effect except possibly a negative one in PA.

There was rumors a month ago that Richardson was gonna make this endorsement...so don't spin it like Richardson is only doing this for political opportunism. I think he actually did Clinton a major favor by staying out of it for so long.

Unlike what the Clinton camp may think, not everyone does everything for political gain.

[keithy_19]

Unlike what the Clinton camp may think, not everyone does everything for political gain.

Unless it's a Clinton...

[epo]

Hmm.....Obama & Richardson. Looks like a helluva team to me:

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/y62jhStuawA&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/y62jhStuawA&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

[TooLowBrow]

Hmm.....Obama & Richardson. Looks like a helluva team to me:

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/y62jhStuawA&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/y62jhStuawA&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

it would go along with the whole 'no one would assassinate a black president with a spanish vice-pres' thing that george lopez stole from chappelle

[Zorro]

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080322/D8VI8JIO0.html

Gee Bill tell us what you really think

[TheMojoPin]

Hmm.....Obama & Richardson. Looks like a helluva team to me:

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/y62jhStuawA&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/y62jhStuawA&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

Oh, SNAP. That is some smooooooooth beardiness.

[Dude!]

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080322/D8VI8JIO0.html

Gee Bill tell us what you really think

that guy is really unbelievable

"I think it would be a great thing if we had an election year where you had two people who loved this country and were devoted to the interest of this country," Clinton said. "And people could actually ask themselves who is right on these issues, instead of all this other stuff that always seems to intrude itself on our politics."

they are trying to spin it otherwise
but he said exactly what he meant to say

no democrat should ever again accuse the republicans of being dirty or divisive
the clinton brothers have put the republicans to shame

[Bulldogcakes]

Hmm.....Obama & Richardson. Looks like a helluva team to me:

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/y62jhStuawA&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/y62jhStuawA&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

His endorsement is largely meaningless for the electorate. What makes it noteworthy is this is the first major Clinton loyalist who has made the political calculation that Obama is the way to go. That speech/endorsement was more for the super delegates than anyone else. Bears watching if it has any impact on them.