Comments

  1. says

    Whatever, Andy!
    Quit being one of those Obama ball strokers and start taking this seriously!
    Why haven’t you reported on Obama’s anti-gay vote in the Illinois senate for partners of gay state employees to recieve health benefits?
    Why haven’t you reported on one of his (many, many) “no vote”s on the partners of gay teachers receiving pension benefits when he was in the Illinois senate?

  2. Martin says

    I think Clinton is right about her statement.
    Obama was in the deciding process about going to war, he wasn’t even a senator. So it is easy for him to say: I would not have supported the war.

    I am surprised that Obama makes this race for nominee a question of race.
    Go to his church’s webpage and you will find more appalling facts.
    Change we can believe in!? Or: change we can trust in!?

    America needs a leader now not a preacher.

  3. BusyTimmy says

    Please, please don’t make this an Obama vs. Hillary site, folks. I’m running out of websites to enjoy reading without biased commentary.

  4. says

    It is not as though Clinton is running for the Democratic nomination or anything.

    Oh, wait she is.

    She has just given McCain a free campaign ad if Obama whens the Democratic nomination. She should be ashamed for using Republican talking points to try to beat down another Democratic candidate.

  5. YankinTex says

    I’m sorry, but it’s interesting that the Hillary attacks are ramped up just as it seems that Obama might be losing just the slightest bit of steam. On the other hand, when Hillary was fighting for her life, any attack on Obama was outrageous.

    She’s rightfully pointing out that McCain will cream Obama on the foreign policy questions merely by weight of his experience. She’s sure not saying that McCain has the correct foreign policy. There’s a difference. Get real.

  6. Mike Hunter says

    Oh brother, you can’t say anything negative about Obama without committing some kind of heinous crime. She isn’t saying anything that the republicans don’t already know. Running for president isn’t a team sport, HRC is trying to win – stop whining.

  7. Robert says

    Not really a criticism on Towleroad specifically. But it’s telling that this story receives so much attention on several blogs, but Senator Obama’s interest in stocking his cabinet with Republicans goes relatively unnoticed. Hagel for defense secretary?!

  8. Bears are Fat says

    This is obviously NOT an ‘endorsement’ of McCain — it is simply an argument by Clinton about why she can match McCain as an opponent. Obviously she would not support McCain over Obama and to suggest otherwise is specious.

    Robert makes a good point: Obama is actually planing to put Republicans on his cabinet? Moreover, *Obama* is uttered that famous line about the Republican party being the part of ideas for the ‘last 10 to 15 years’…

  9. noah says

    As Michael points out, Hillary’s statements are disloyal to the party and potentially damaging to the presumptive Democratic party’s nominee. What it shows is that Senator Clinton doesn’t care about the party as much as she cares about her own sucscess. Although it’s fine for her attack Obama, it’s not fine to promote the opposition. That shows Clinton isn’t concerned with ousting the Republicans as much as she is with damaging Obama.

    This could only be part of a strategy that helps her in the 2012 election if she is not the nominee this year and McCain wins.

    So, think about what it would mean if McCain were to win. Do you think McCain would appoint judges to the Supreme Court that would be sympathetic to progressive causes like gay rights or not? Look at the judges Bush appointed to the court.

    Senator Clinton’s remarks are giving aid and comfort to the opposition candidate. That’s just wrong.

  10. Martin says

    Charlie – go to his church’s webpage.
    If this is not about race than he should have gone to a less race oriented, race issue church.
    If you run for president no candidate can be too extreme – this is why Huckabee and others are out now.

  11. kujhawker says

    I keep on saying it Hillary is Lady MacBeth. She will do whatever it takes for the power even endorse the other party’s canidate over her rival.

  12. says

    How is it unfair in a primary to bring up what the republicans might use against the other guy? I thought the primaries were about vetting our party’s best candidates.

    All she was saying is that McCain is more experienced. WTF. I mean if we are going to put up a guy who waltzed into his Senate seat after a short part-time state senate gig against a war hero in a time of war, experience is really something that needs to be brought up. John McCain really has done a lot of bipartisan work with real results he can point to and Obama really hasn’t. Should we all just pretend that won’t be an issues.

    JFK had experience and charisma. And the last candidate that thought he was JFK was Dan Quayle (who also had more experience than Obama). What would be sooo awful about Obama as VP.

    His whole “hope” line dies for me when I hear him say that he will not run again if he fails this time. Because that’s what I want, A president who will give up if he doesn’t succeed the first time.

  13. davey says

    Obama supporters hear very little of truthfulness and facts so they get a little baffled when they hear Senator Clinton speaking wisely. I really don’t think she is in any way putting down her party, give me a break

  14. Derrick from Philly says

    Of course, I and most other Obama supporters will vote for Hillary Clinton if she wins the nomination, but this is some real ugly shit she’s doing: saying the Republican candidate is better suited to be president (because of so-called experience) than her fellow Democrat. It’s something that Republicans never do…well, not traditional Republicans (these new religious fanatic, right-wing nut Republicans threaten that crap, but then they recant before November).

    But two can play at this game. Barack will attack Senator Clinton personally on the issues of her income taxes, her White House papers not be released, and past scandals. Like the Clinton camp, the Barack Campaign will also do the Republicans’ dirty work for them, dammit. By the Pennsylvania Primary these two will have beaten the crap out of each other. Does that make you Hillary folks who are rejoicing at this betrayal of the Democratic Party happy?

    So, stop the “gentlemanly stuff”, Barack, and go on the attack. A man can be a far worse bitch than a woman. As a homo, I’ve been a witness to that from both gay and straight male motha’ fu…

  15. says

    My lifetime of experience tells me should Hillary be elected, the stalemate that is Washington will continue for another four long years. Why the “experience” argument should matter so much is a mystery. Hillary has had six years as a Senator, I don’t believe being the First Lady counts as a political experience. But I think the Bill summed it up nicely when he said: “If one candidate’s trying to scare you and the other one’s trying to get you to think, if one candidate’s appealing to your fears and the other one’s appealing to your hopes, you better vote for the person who wants you to think and hope.”
    Thanks Bill, I’m gonna take your advice.

  16. says

    With these repeated statements about McCain being more qualified for the presidency than Obama, Clinton has given McCain a free campaign ad. It is one thing to make the case that she is better suited to the presidency because of her experience. It is an entirely different thing to support the opposing party’s nominee as a way to attack your party’s frontrunner.

  17. Mike Hunter says

    Good point about her past issues; however that is old news. EVERYBODY already knows all the dirt on HRC and that will be met by a collective yawn – but, what skeletons are lurking in Obama’s closet? If he get’s the nomination I’m sure we’ll all quickly find out. Of course, the Obama response will be “negative campaigning, unfair attacks…” – that won’t hold water with the general election voters when they hit the voting booth.

  18. says

    I don’t know what experience she has over anyone. She won’t get the nomination but in true Clinton style she will spend the next couple of months destroying her own party so that the Dems don’t win in November.

  19. Jimmyboyo says

    Tehnicaly

    McCain is more qualified than Hillary to be president if you use her “experience” schtick as a measuring rod.

    That said. The math is against her. She is going to be Obama’s VP and she just needs to accept that.

    Jeremy , post a link. I have heard the exact opposite of your linkless claim

  20. RJ says

    As an outside observer watching all you Democrats air your dirty laundry and attack each other, I’m not sure I’d want to vote for either of you. Is that your grand strategy?

  21. David says

    So her experience in foreign policy is what? Being Bill’s wife? Her 35 years of experience is such a load of crap, especially when she includes her 8 years in the white house. Give me a break.

  22. noah says

    Martin,

    If Obama were gay and went to a predominately gay church would he then be a horrible gay person deserving of heterosexual fear?

    Are you nuts? A race oriented church? Why is it that a white person can go to a 99%-white populated church and it’s just a church. If some minority goes to a predominately non-white church, it’s a racial issue? Do you even know the difference between race and ethnicity?

    If Obama were Greek and attended a Greek Orthodox church that spoke about Greek heritage or if he attended a predominately Polish church that spoke about Polish culture would you have a problem with that?

    Dude, you are projecting your prejudices and fears onto Obama.

    Obama’s campaign itself has a large white executive leadership. Have you bothered to look at his campaign staff? His chief strategist is David Axelrod, a white, Jewish man.

    Moreover, it’s convenient of you to ignore the fact that Obama is BIRACIAL, raised by his mother and grandparents who were white. Did you bother to read his biography? Obviously not. If you had, you would understand that the man’s key family role models were white.

    As for race in the campaign, it’s terribly convenient of you to ignore the Clintons’ repeated injection of race into the campaign. Prior to Bill Clinton shooting his mouth off and Clinton operatives issuing racially tinged comments, Hillary Clinton had a substantial lead amongst African-American voters over Obama.

    It’s pretty clear that your racial issues are what bother you about Obama. Anyone who’s followed the campaign knows that Obama has vigorously avoided bringing race into the discussion. Have you bothered to look at the crowds who attend Obama’s campaign rallies? They are multiracial and multi-ethnic.

    It looks like the Clintons’ use of racial fear tactics were affective in targeting a key demographic target that includes someone called Martin.

  23. noah says

    Also, why would Obama want to be Hillary’s vice president? It would be a thankless job. Hillary has Bill to be her co-president.

    Also, the crap about Hillary’s experience is a joke. She was a corporate lawyer, then wife of a governor and then wife of a president. Now she’s a senator. How exactly is her experience that dramatically different from Nancy Reagan’s or Laura Bush’s?

    Scratch that, since we all know Ronnie had Alzheimer’s and it’s documented that Nancy served has his chief adviser with the aid of her astrologer, it’s fair to say Nancy Reagan had more experience to qualify her to run as president.

    Unfortunately, with Clinton’s willingness to use Rovian tactics to win, she has alienated a substantial number of progressives who will never vote for her. Add this to the number of Republicans and independent voters and she would be toast in a general election.

  24. Martin says

    Noah – how come that the pastor of Obama’s church said in an interview published over in Europe that Obama had to distance himself from the church???
    I don’t have any racial issues – I have problems with for Blacks, with Blacks for for Blacks only. This is what his church says on their webpage… even you can not deny that!

    How come that 85 % of the Black community supports Obama – if not because of race?
    Works well for Obama!

  25. Jimmyboyo says

    Obama/ Clinton 08

    That is what the math has declard. A simple fact

    http://www.newsweek.com/id/118240/page/1

    This isn’t just for Hillary fans.

    Fellow Obama supporters have to accept this as well and get over their anger at Hillary.

    Her support is not enough to be at the top of the ticket , but her support is so large that Obama and the DNC can not dismiss her without putting her on the ticket as VP.

    Both sides need to calm down, take deep breaths, swallow some pride, and come tgether for the good of the party and the nation.

    8 yrs and Hillary will be President after 8 years as Obamas VP. Now lets go kick some McCain and repub ass!!!!!!!!!!! and fix what bushco has broken.

  26. Jus Sayin' says

    I find HRC insincere. If she was a person for the people and cared about medical care & livable wage then why didn’t she make it happen on the Walmart board she was a member of. I think she, like McCain feel they deserve it and will do or say anything they have to in order to get into the white house.

  27. Jus Sayin' says

    I find HRC insincere. If she was a person for the people and cared about medical care & livable wage then why didn’t she make it happen on the Walmart board she was a member of. I think she, like McCain feel they deserve it and will do or say anything they have to in order to get into the white house.

  28. Archie says

    As a Canadian I can only marvel at the coverage of this primary. It appears that the media have selected who they would like to anoint as the Democratic candidate and anything done by the “other” candidate is labelled crass, below the belt, supportive of the GOP. I’m fascinated at the inability of the fourth and fifth estates to try and emulate even a studied disinterest — but then this the same fourth and fifth estates which jumped on the bandwagon to support the war in Iraq at its start and would broach no oposition. Only later did they make some prefunctory apologies that they had been mislead, but they don’t seem to have learned any lessons.

  29. realitythink says

    I just don’t understand why my fellow gays are so enthralled with Hillary. Is it the victim thing, the diva thing? Just what is it that you all find so appealing about her? Her track record as far as championing gay rights is very slim and her husbands is dismal. He signed DOMA, remember that, in the middle of the night; as if we wouldn’t notice. Obama has come out and said he would work to repeal it, has she?

    The Clintons have demonstrated that they will destroy anyone for their own self interest. Do you really think they are going to fight for us? Don’t you think that maybe, just maybe, a minority President should have a shot at it? He could have the perspective to understand what it’s like to be marginalized because of who you are.

    Not to mention she voted to authorize war would not sign onto a bill banning land minds. She is not as progressive as you all think.

  30. johnosahon says

    can someone PLEASE tell me what experience hilary has.

    obama has more elected experience than hilary.

    all hilary has is 8 years of hosting parties, is that the experience you are not talking?

    ok, there is that FAILED health care plan. i give her that.

  31. Zeke says

    1. Hillary wasn’t so keen to talk about experience when Biden, Kucinich and Kerry were in the race for the Democratic nomination.

    2. Obama has more national experience than Hillary’s husband Bill did when he ran against a MUCH, MUCH, MUCH more experienced George W. Bush in 1992. Is she now saying that her husband was not the best choice in that election due to his experience?

    3. If experience is the end all beat all in this election then she should just drop out now so that we can ALL vote for the much more experienced (in EVERY way) McCain.

    MARTIN, I don’t suspect that every person who doesn’t like Obama is a racist (the way Hillary supporters always seem to claim that anyone who doesn’t love Hillary is a misogynist) but I suspect that YOU in fact ARE a racist if your obsession with race demonstrated here is any indication. If you want to find out about Obama’s (and MY church) you should check out the UCC’s NATIONAL website at ucc.org. Yes, Obama’s particular congregation is African-centric but so frickin what! How many of us go to or grew up in a congregation that wasn’t for the most part Afro or Euro-centric? Why are Afro-centric churches scandalous but Euro-centric churches aren’t?

  32. Kevin says

    To those people who criticize Obama for saying he would put Republicans in his cabinet, so did Bill Clinton. His defense secretary from 1996 to 2000, William Cohen, was a former Republican Senator from the state of Maine.
    Churchill also reached across party lines when he created his War Cabinet – including many Labour Party members.
    Why do people think that reaching out to the other 50% of the country is a bad thing as long as those individuals are experienced and knowledgable?

  33. ReasonBased says

    THIS IS A STUPID TITLE.

    Of course she did not “endorse” McCain, she just pointed the obvious! Imagine the novice Obama standing next to the war hero with decades of experience..lol sad…..

  34. Chris says

    Andy,

    Still searching the Obama hub for the wealth of times you’ve criticized Senator Obama.

    You deemed the McClurkin incident a “misstep.” VERY critical. Meanwhile you headline a post about Hillary stating that John McCain has experience to make it out like she’s sent a check to his campaign.

    Thank you for your fair and balanced coverage.

  35. Derrick from Philly says

    MARTIN, as NOAH pointed out, many of those 85% you’re talking about made up our minds after Bill Clinton made racially insulting remarks before the South Carolina Primary “Jesse Jackson won S. Carolina twice–so what?”. I was one who didn’t go to Obama until after her husband’s remarks. It was an ungrateful of him as politician who recieved over 90% of black votes TWICE, and showed contempt for black people.

    But blacks have been far more willing to vote for whites than the other way around. Just last year, here in Pennsylvania, Lynn Swann (the black Republican ) received 13% of of black vote, Ed Rendell (white Democrat) got 87%. That has happened in elections all over this country where Republicans ran blacks for office because they thought blacks were stupid enough to vote for black for black’s sake. It doesn’t work unless black folks believe in the candidate as well as take pride in his skin color. You don’t think Irish Americans took pride in voting for John Kennedy? Why did southern states go back to the Democratic Party when Georgia’s Jimmy Carter ran in 1980?

    Speaking of Republicans’ stupid attempts to get blacks to support black Republicans: “black Republican” was a phrase white Southerners used for all Republicans (& Yankees) from Reconstruction to Richard Nixon. Isn’t that ironic.

  36. Michael Bedwell says

    Ya see, Andy, you make think you have been nonpartisan in what you’ve chosen to post about each one, and how much, but becoming an Obama Zombie is like “Invasion of the Body Snatchers”—it often happens without one realizing it, while one sleeps. Then there’s that little Obama Truism about the importance of words and your rerunning this story choosing to claim that she’s “endorsing “ McCain “again and again and again.” Several posters get the truth that she’s not but speaking to how much better she could run against McCain in the GENERAL election while you keep driving in the nails. If you said Reichen was a “great, great, great actor” that wouldn’t make it true either.

    But, unlike the poster above, Michael Crawford, I doubt you’ve become an OFFICIAL advisor to the Obama campaign—a fact that he keeps refusing to disclose wherever he posts. Someday, Mr. Crawford, you might need a sense of shame and honesty again but it will be too late. Stop with the lies. Leave that to your employer.

    And y’all remember that thing about “the Devil can quote Scripture for his own use.” The so-called “fear” quote from President Clinton is a square peg the brainwashed are trying to fit into a round hole. I can just image Polly Obama’s approach to our safety:

    “Mr. Bin Laden, you should stop blowing up Americans and start embracing them. I hope you’ll start doing that.”

    And, Derrick, Derrick, mon amour! Obama’s campaign “gentlemanly”???? Perhaps you meant EXCEPT FOR WHEN THEY’VE SWIFT BOATED SEN. CLINTON AS A RACIST. And YOU bought it! You’re smarter than that.

    Civil rights icon John Lewis: “I knew Martin Luther King, Jr. I marched with him. I worked with him. He played a major role in inspiring people, giving people hope. I also knew Lyndon Johnson. I was there with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., on March 15, 1965, when we watched Lyndon Johnson deliver his speech in response to what was happening in Selma, when he said, “And we shall overcome.” I looked at Dr. King. He looked at me, and tears came down his eyes. And he said, “We will get the civil rights bill, the voting rights bill passed. We will march from Selma to Montgomery.” Dr. King gave some great speeches. He took to the street, and there was action, but he needed a president to pass the legislation. I think there’s been a deliberate, systematic attempt on the part of some people in the Obama camp to really fan the flame of race and really try to distort what Senator Clinton said. … The Obama camp is … sending out memos to members of the media, trying to suggest that the Clintons are playing the race card. President Clinton and Senator Clinton have a long record of working to bring people together. Long before President Clinton ever dreamed of running for president, long before Senator Clinton ever dreamed of running for president, they have a history, a very, very long history [of supporting civil rights].”

    As for the childish myth and premeditated propaganda that there would be a stalemate in Washington if Sen. Clinton were elected President, try these FACTS on for size from a 2006 “New York Times” article.

    From Senator Clinton, a Lesson in Tactical Bipartisanship

    WASHINGTON, April 29 — Only eight years have passed since Lindsey Graham, then an ambitious Republican member of the House, paraded over to the Senate each day to argue the impeachment case against President Bill Clinton.

    How things have changed. Mr. Graham, of South Carolina, is now a senator. Hillary Rodham Clinton, the wife of his adversary, is now a colleague with ambitions of her own.

    And the two are — to the amusement of their peers and the distress of liberal activists — increasingly close allies and friends, working together on high-profile issues from military benefits to manufacturing, traveling together on extended trips overseas, even publicly praising each other.

    Mr. Graham recently wrote a glowing tribute to Mrs. Clinton for Time magazine’s coming 100 Most Influential People issue, in which he calls her a “smart, prepared, serious senator” who “has managed to build unusual political alliances on a variety of issues with Republicans.”

    “I don’t want her to be president,” Mr. Graham said in an interview. “We’re polar opposites on many issues. But we have been able to find common ground.”

    The pairing may be odd, but it is not unique or, from Mrs. Clinton’s perspective, accidental.

    One by one over the last five years, to team up on specific projects, she has sought out the most conservative of Republicans — many of whom tried to remove her husband from office just two years before she won her seat and derided her candidacy when she stepped into electoral politics. They, in turn, have sought her out.

    With Senator Trent Lott, she worked on improving the Federal Emergency Management Agency. With Representative Tom DeLay it was foster children. Newt Gingrich, the former speaker of the House, jumped in with her on a health care initiative, and the Senate majority leader, Bill Frist, was a partner on legislation concerning computerized medical records.

    The list goes on: Senator Robert Bennett ; Senator Rick Santorum; Senator John Sununu; Senator Mike DeWine on asthma.
    And virtually every Republican member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, whose Republican chairman, John Warner, speaks admiringly of Mrs. Clinton’s “remarkable core of inner strength.”

    Her advisers say the cooperation can also bolster the argument that she is above the political fray, and interested merely in trying to “get things done” in a divided Senate. “She went to the Senate saying, ‘O.K., what do I need to do to get things done? How can I be effective?’ ” said Ann Lewis,. “And that is how you get things done.”

    Mrs. Clinton’s alliances with Republicans appear to be more tactical than evidence of any fundamental ideological shift.
    She has voted with Democrats more than 95 percent of the time since taking office, according to Congressional Quarterly.

    If the alliances are strange coming from Mrs. Clinton, they are perhaps stranger for some Republicans whose constituents are considered to be among the “anti-Hillary” base.

    When Mrs. Clinton first won office, Mr. Lott, the Mississippi Republican, welcomed her to town by warning: “I’ll tell you one thing: when this Hillary gets to the Senate, if she does — maybe lightning will strike and she won’t — she will be one of 100, and we won’t let her forget it.”
    Now, he is an occasional Clinton ally. In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, when his state was devastated by the storm, Mr. Lott teamed up with Mrs. Clinton (and other Democrats) in arguing that FEMA should be taken out of the Department of Homeland Security and restored as an independent agency. He conceded that the alliance was unexpected.

    “This is a weird place,” said a laughing Mr. Lott, who was the Republican majority leader in the Senate during the impeachment trial.

    No less weird is Mrs. Clinton’s alliance with Mr. Gingrich, who a decade ago made undermining the Clintons a chief priority.

    Appearing at the National Press Club with Mr. Gingrich last summer on one of their joint projects, Mrs. Clinton acknowledged that it might come as “a little bit of a shock” to some witnesses who remembered their history.

    Her pairing with Mr. Graham was also awkward at first. It began three years ago when Mr. Graham invited a large group of senators, including Mrs. Clinton, to join him at a news conference to demand broader health benefits for National Guard members and reservists.

    “She was the only one to show up,” Mr. Graham recalled. “I felt weird, and I think she did too. The history is what it is. So I felt uncomfortable. But once we got into the news conference it flowed well, and I think we complemented each other, and we chose at that moment not to let history define us.”

    Isn’t that EXACTLY what the Dali Obama has been preaching? The difference? Sen. Obama has the EXPERIENCE actually DOING it!

  37. Derrick from Philly says

    Jimmy Carter won southern states in 1976. He lost them back to the Republicans in 1980. Sorry. But we blacks sure didn’t mind giving him over 85% of our vote–even with that strong (but beautiful) Central Georgia accent.

  38. jimmyboyo says

    Michael

    “but becoming an Obama Zombie is like “Invasion of the Body Snatchers”—it often happens without one realizing it, while one sleeps.”

    LOL

    :-) Maybe tonight while you sleep.

  39. Derrick from Philly says

    Dear Michael B, mi amigo simpatico & fellow Eartha Kitt lover:

    I didn’t listen to a thing the Obama Campaign said about Bill Clinton, I was too busy being angry at Jesse Jackson Jr for telling blacks to “vote black”. I saw and heard Bill Clinton on the evening news. I was stunned and hurt, and then, angry.

  40. davey says

    Face The Facts People: Hillary WILL BE President whether you like it or not, it has been in the making for YEARS and YEARS. Obama NEEDS to step down, get over his ego and look at what is best for the party. He should also pray that she puts him on the ticket with her, that will be the closest he will ever get to the White House. Hillary ’08!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  41. 24play says

    Yes, Davey. I’m sure the candidate with the insurmountable delegate lead will be the one to suspend his campaign and settle for the VP slot.

    Now, who exactly are the Kool-Aid drinkers around here?

  42. Alleen says

    I have a dream that one day, those who are down with Obamaa, with their vicious sexists, with their blog comments dripping with the words of interposition and nullification; one day right there in Towleroad, little Obama fanboys and Obama girls will be able to join hands with little Hillary fellas and Hillary gals as sisters and brothers.

    Be nice, y’all.

  43. Jimmyboyo says

    Shit fire

    Obama and Hillary would probably come together a lot quicker if their respective supporters would come together more quickly.

    Both consider each other friends from their days in the senate together.

    Take deep breaths and relax.

    In the end we will all be Obama headed clintonistas with a united ticket

    OBAMA/Clinton 08

    I feel positively Carter-esque in trying to bridge the divide between 2 warring people.

    I bet Carter had it easier with Israel and Egypt though and they had thousands of years of issues between them.

    :-)

  44. detb says

    Give me a break, Andy. What Clinton is doing is pointing out what makes her a better candidate against McCain than Obama. It’s called pointing out the public record — not going negative, not endorsing McCain. Don’t buy into all that Obama wingnuttery of the boys club blogosphere. When Obama says he hearts Regan, wants Republithugs in the cabinet and basically pisses on the Clinton presidency, which were largely 8 good years, he’s courting independents, not capitulating the dialogue about Democrats to Republicans. Right. I see how it goes.

    All I need is another site I can’t visit because of total lack of even-handedness about this primary.

  45. chul says

    Actually the math says that no candidate is going to win without the superdelegates. Period. The superdelegates will decide this race — there are lots of ways to go from there. Should they be apportioned by popular vote by district? By state? Overall? You’d get different results for each of these. Should they decide based on who can win the big swing states, OH, MI, FL, PA and now NJ? The race is by no means mathematically over and people who are prematurely declaring it so are the ones “fracturing the party.” BTW, the primaries exist so that the party can chose it’s candidate. It was only last presidential cycle that the decision was arrived at so early. So, no. It isn’t gonna kill the party or the country to think about this until the convention. Why the rush to get it done? It’s the type of efficiency and fear thinking that got us into this Bush nightmare in the first place — with an election Gore won.

  46. Jimmyboyo says

    DETB

    Hillary alo praised Reagan in her biography.

    Reagan though completly wrong on so many issues did unite a country with a vision, a flawed vision, but a vision none the less. Hillry herself is quoted in her biograpy as praising that aspect of reagan just like Obama did.

    Bill had 2 republicans in his cabinet.

    In the end you will be an obama headed clintonista like everyone else.

    The 2 will be united on 1 ticket, and you will regret calling your fellow Obama Headed Clintoistas names by november

  47. realitythink says

    So Davey,
    You want to live in a country where the President is “in the making for years”? Just exactly who is making that happen? So you’re saying that the will of the people doesn’t matter? Davey I have two words for you, FLORIDA 2000!

    Are you sure you’re not a republican? They are the ones that are king makers (or Queen makers in this instance).

    It sure is sad to see what has happened to this country.

  48. Zeke says

    My aunt just called to tell me that she’s opening her own medical practice next week. She’s been a housewife her entire adult life but after hearing how being First Lady of Arkansas for eight years and the United States for eight years gives Hillary the experience and qualifications to be president she’s now decided that her marriage to a surgeon for over 50 years certainly gives her the experience and qualifications to be a surgeon.

    Makes perfectly good sense to me.

    :)

  49. Derrick from Philly says

    LOL@Zeke:

    You had me going, man. I thought, “what a wonderful family Zeke must come from…his elderly aunt opening up a medical practice for some under-priviledged black community in Mississippi.” I was imagining some nice old white lady looking like Eudora Welty with white nurse’s shoes–way down South. You had me for a minute, Zeke. LOL.

  50. says

    Why do the Obamanuts keep going on and on about the math not being there for Hillary, as if it’s there for Barack?? These people are insane.

    Both of these candidates have a long battle on their hands, thanks to Hillarys’ stunning comeback. The obamanuts can go suck it in fairytale land.

    As far as that clip goes, she was not endorsing McCain, but the obamanuts see everything said by Hillary as machiavellan.

  51. Ken says

    Neither of them can get the numbers they need to become the Nominee. The super delegates will swing her way, if it looks like the party is swinging that way. As we speak the Govs for Florida and Michign are scrambing to get their delegates to be seated. The DNC want’s the states to pay for new elections…The states want the DNC to pay for new elections, which they do not have money for? For any one who thinks that one of these two candidates will go gently into the good night, with out a fight to the end, you are mistaken. There isn’t a chance in hell that Hillary will run as Vice President. The ticket should read CLINTON/Obama. Then we might beat McCain.

  52. AdamN says

    Clinton’s behavior in these clips is just inexcusable in my mind. She is hurting the Democratic Party with this kind of tactic.
    As a former Edwards supporter, I have to say that for a long time I really did not see that much of a difference between Clinton and Obama, certainly not the kind of difference that, say, causes Michael Bedwell to crack up on every election post Andy puts up. I thought they were both good choices. Butthis kind of nonsense in her campaign has been a major factor in turning me against Clinton.

  53. Greg says

    Michael, you’re a fool. “Stunning comeback”? LOL! She won Ohio on the support of “Archie Bunker” Democrats, a dying breed to say the least. And she didn’t “win” Texas. At best, she tied.

  54. Henry says

    Obama is like the guy who whispers “sweet nothings” into your ear just to get in to your “cookie jar.” Once he gets your “cherry” (and your vote) he will never return your call.

    Talk is just that and nothing more. Experience matters!

    CLINTON has my vote!

  55. silverskreen says

    M.Bedwell – Great article to find, and very interesting that none of Sen.Obama’s supporters care to comment on it.

    Granted, this is Andy’s blog and his views should be respected. Nevertheless, UTTERLY misleading headline.

    Oh, and ditto on the comments about the math. Neither one of then can win it with delegates alone. So, stop with the clicking of the heels.

    Derrick From Philly – I had the same reaction to watching the news when the Bill story broke out; only for the opposite reason. It’s one of the main reasons I stopped considering Obama as a possibility.

    Hey M.Bedwell – did you read the story about Wolfson Ken Starr comment? Priceless.

  56. noah says

    Martin,

    Where’s your proof that 85% of African-Americans support Obama? Did you bother to look at the number of high profile supporters of Clinton’s who are African-American? Maya Angelou, Julian Bond (head of the NAACP), Andrew Young (former U.N. Ambassador), Robert Johnson (founder of BET, billionaire), etc.

    Obama has been winning large number of African-Americans for a large number of reasons but that didn’t take place until after the Clintons and their operatives started attacking him for his African heritage. It’s also convenient that you ignore the effects of the Clinton’s injection of race into the election cycle. Again, look at the numbers, Hillary Clinton has a huge majority lead over Obama amongst African-Americans.

    If Hillary Clinton’s campaign had made as many homophobic remarks as they have against African-Americans there would be similar defections amongst her gay followers as her once African-American supporters.

    Also, please drop this canard about African-Americans voting only for African-Americans. That’s a frickin’ joke! Hello! Repeatedly, African-Americans have chosen white politicians over African-American politicians when the white politicians better represented their needs.

    I seem to recall there being severe antipathy towards Clarence Thomas existing amongst African-Americans. I also recall Colin Powell and Condi Rice being denounced by Harry Belafonte. There have also been the recent butt-kickings that Republicans like Ken Blackwell and Michael Steele took.

    Yes, you do have problems with race. You’re more than willing to overlook an abundance of facts to make Obama into a racial boogeyman, regardless of his personal history. Got news for you, people who are BIRACIAL and have loving, healthy relationships with both branches of their families are not haters.

    How much sense would it make for Obama whose mother and grandparents raised him would be anti-white in any way? Again, did you bother to read his biography? Did you look at his website to see his campaign officials?

    You are allowing your racism to cloud your judgment.

    Also, did you bother to look at the fact that Obama has consistently campaigned for white Democratic candidates, even donating money to their campaigns? Of course not. Ignoring those facts makes it easier for you to make Obama into a scary “black man” event though he is BIRACIAL and was raised by his white relatives.

    That’s one of the things that I find amazing about your argument. It’s 2008 and you continue make a biracial man into this figure who must hold anti-white beliefs. Logically, doesn’t it seem kind of strange that a man who was tucked into bed at night by his mother who was white, read to by his grandmother who was white, and mentored to by grandfather who was white would have anti-white beliefs? Does not compute!

    I wish you could understand that your embracing of your fears is the equivalent of the homophobes who unreasonably hate gay people. You’re willing to ignore facts. You refuse to look at Obama’s website. You refuse to investigate. Instead, it’s easier for you to allow your fears to rule your judgment.

    BTW, after the 2004 presidential campaign, John Kerry’s campaign staff came forward and explained that Bill Clinton advised Kerry to support an anti-gay marriage amendment to win conservative votes. Do some research into the Clintons and you will find that there is a repeated pattern of them tossing their friends and allies under the bus to win votes. Whether it was Bill Clinton’s Sistah Souljah moment in 1992, Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, DOMA, or NAFTA the Clintons have always sacrificed principles and allies to win.

    Also, it’s interesting to see the number of people who refer to Obama supporters as “nuts” but no similar attacks on Clinton supporters.

  57. abracadaver says

    I can’t believe that no one has explored the possibility of what has seemed perfectly obvious to me all along…and that is that the “powers that be” have intentionally given the American people a Democratic contest pitting race against gender. The purpose? To once again divide and conquer us, so that another Neocon will win the White House despite how fed up the American people are with their policies.

    When I was a young man, I was patently offended once by a remark that an older gay man made to me: “If you’re not a Democrat when you’re young, then you have no heart…but if you’re not a Republican when you’re old, then you have no brain.”

    While I still find this to be somewhat offensive, I’m wondering if its not an element of truth to the statement that is what really bothers me.

  58. Derrick from Philly says

    SILVERSKREEN:

    I hear ya’. Bill Clinton’s strategy worked especially well with Democrats in Ohio, the ones who hate Cleveland because they’re too many folks who look like Jesse Jackson who live there.

    If this type of interaction between Democrats is where this primary fight is taking us–then so be it. I’ve lived through 20years of Reagan/Bush/Bush, so I can live through 4 years of John McCain. But Id rather do that before I’ll kiss the ass of George Wallace/Lester Maddox/John Stennis and Frank Rizzo type Democrats.

  59. silverskreen says

    You’re a funny man, Derrick From Philly. I hear what you’re saying, but that’s really up to you if you resign yourself to that possibility.

    Personally, I would prefer Hillary over Sen.Obama. Very much so. That said, there’s no way in hell I’d vote for McCain. The Supreme Court nominations and the war stance are just too extreme to discount.

    Still, by painting me and others, with opposing views to yours, with such broad generalizations is a disservice to your argument. IMHO.

  60. says

    Noah, you need to STFU with the Clintons are racist bullshit. So sick of that nonsense. As a black person, I have never felt for one minute that either of them have used Obamas’ “race” against him. That’s a complete media construct egged on by Obama and his operatives. No white politicians have been as open with the black community, and comfortable with us as the the Clintons. To denounce all of that history because of some twisted interpretation of “fairytale” is fucking disgusting.

    If people want to support Obama that’s fine, but to characterize his opponent, or anyone who dares to question his qualifications as racist does a disservice to the real racism black people and other minorities still face in this country.

  61. Jimmyboyo says

    Jeremy

    can you read?

    NOT VOTING
    HB 581 (2003)dealt with gay rights, and not voing is not a NO vote. Hillary didn’t show up for the FISA vote. ALL Politicians have tons of no shows for votes.

    NO
    SB 228 (1997) deals with giving rights to unmarried heterosexal couples if they are given to gay ones. It was a right wing sponsored bill to try to end the push for gay rights. Your biased article failed to mention the dem sponsored gay couples rights bill pushed afterward

    OY watch the lazy thing, though I am, your lieng or inability to read does not mean I haven’t researched Obama.

    On the math.

    You need to stop clicking your heels silverskreen and others thinking that the ELECTED OFFICIALS = super delegates are going to slit their own throats and overturn the votes of the people by handinmg the top of the ticket to the looser of the MAJORITY pledged delegate count.

    The majority pledged delegate count is what counts. The supers are by and large elected officials. The math is against Hillary. Stop clicking your heels and accept the fact that she will be VP.

  62. says

    NEITHER of them have the MATH, and by the time this thing is over the party will be destroyed, and McCain will be the next president.

    Hillary will NEVER be a VP for Obama. Those two LOATHE each other at this point.

  63. Rafael says

    Michael – Most did not characterize president Clinton as being racist, not by any stretch of our imagination. On the other hand, it was clear that in his statement in South Carolina, he did use the race card to his advantage and it backfired, to say the contrary is simply delusional.

  64. says

    I know plenty of delusional blacks who now view the Clintons as racist, based solely on that “fairytale” bullshit in South Carolina, and that is the tragedy of this whole thing. Bill Clinton did’nt say anything in that speech that was’nt true. It was the Clinton hating media that jumped at the opportunity to turn it into a “race card”.

  65. Jimmboyo says

    Michael

    Bush Sr and Reagan loathed each other and their party forced them together.

    I would hope dems can do one better than the repubs.

    Supposedly the Gores and the Clintons loathed each other and still do to this day. Yet they worked together

    Besides, I don’t buy that they loahe each other.

    Hillary is pissed because Obama didn’t wait when it was her percieved time.

    Obama is pised at some of the mud slung by Hillary and camp.

    Being pissed at a friend and loathing
    someone are two different things.

    They were friends in the senate.

    They are politicians which means they know how to compromise and put on a smile for the public.

    It appears that their supporters loathe each other more then the actual candidates do.

    Obama does have the math for the MAJORITY!!!! of pledged delegates…. which is what the supers =ELECTED officials will go with.

    Otherwise they would slit their own throats when they are up for re-election.

    By the way, I support Kenedy and Kerry voting for Hillary since their state did.

    Hillary as Obama’s VP benefits in the history books

    -first female VP
    – instrumental in helping get the first AA eleted as president in the US
    – helped clean up bushco fiasco (that would probably cover 10 chapters all on its own)
    – First female presdent to the US after 8 succesful Obama administration years

    A hell of a lot more chapters devoted to her in the history books by taking the vp to prez route then just trying for the prez route.

    She is human, and we humans are notoriously vain creatures = more chapters in the history books devoted to her is a ++ via the vp to prez route.

    We will all be Obamaheaded Clintonistas in the end.

    Hopefuly that turns into 16 years of unending dem rule and the dawn of a new renecance (spell check) in america.

    :-)

    Kumbyaaaaaa Kumbyaaaaaa…LOL Can’t we all just get along.

  66. noah says

    Michael,

    My grandfather fought in WW2 to protect the rights of Americans to speak freely; other relatives worked in the Civil Rights fight to ensure the rights to vote. I’m an American.

    So, I hope you understand when I tell you I don’t give a flying f–k about your desire to silence me. I’m an American and I will damn well say what I want!

    What right do you have to tell me to STFU because you disagree with my opinion? Who died and made you the arbiter of what Americans can and can’t think or say?

    If you don’t agree with my opinions then argue against my opinions instead of acting like a Republican thug. The facts are that the Clintons have injected race into this campaign. You might want to get off your butt and google “Sistah Souljah” or look into Bill Clinton’s remarks about Jesse Jackson winning South Carolina to understand how the Clintons operate. While you’re at it, you should look into the other remarks made by Clinton operatives–like Andrew Young saying Bill Clinton is more black than Barack Obama because Clinton has slept with more black women–a truly despicable sexist and racist statement for which Young should bow his head in shame.

    When someone tells someone else to STFU because they disagree with their opinion, that says a lot about that person’s disregard for freedom of expression. Moreover, if you bothered to read what I wrote, I noted that Clinton had a number of African-American supporters (Julian Bond, Andrew Young, Maxine Waters, and others). I never said that anyone African-American did not, could not, or should not support the Clintons

    I also stated that Clinton has lost her lead amongst African-Americans not because she is personally racist but because she is willing to employ racist tactics to win.

    Get it. There is a difference between someone who is a bigot and someone who is willing to use racism or sexism or homophobia to win votes. When a candidate who is supposedly not a bigot uses bigotry to win that says something about the candidates integrity.

    Again, your desire to silence me says more about your lack of ability to defend your candidate with ideas or facts than with oppressive tactics. The irony of you telling me to STFU because I have a different political opinion is really sad and shows a severe disrespect for the struggle of people of color and gays in this country.

    And, for the record, jackass, as I’ve written on this site previously, I supported John Edwards until he dropped out of the race since I think Edwards would make a better president than Obama, Clinton, or McCain. Edwards is far more progressive than either Obama or Clinton.

    It wasn’t until Clinton and her surrogates started injecting race, making an issue of Obama’s middle name, and claiming Obama was a Muslim that I lost all faith in Clinton. Bill Clinton, however, lost my respect a long time ago with Sistah Souljah, Monica, NAFTA, pardoning Marc Rich ( a scumbag who embezzled from a union pension fund and who gave Bill a $1 million donation), DOMA, etc.

  67. silverskreen says

    LOL!!! TOO damn funny, JimmyBoyo:)
    Your comments are nothing if not entertaining (with valid points from time to time).
    Liked the “clicking your heels” comment, did ya? hehe.

    The Superdelegates were not put in place so they could vote along with everyone else. It would make them irrelevant. Obama or Hillary will win WITH the damn superdelegates. And no, they’re not ALL elected officials, OR up for re-election this year. Politics are never clear cut, my friend. How often do politicians do what their constituents want? But you know this, I have no doubt. I hear clicking, JimmyB…don’t wear the pumps out:)…all in good fun, bubb. We should just put the cross trainers on and try finding Mr. Mario Lopez.

    Michael – HERE! HERE! Well said.:)

  68. says

    And you can still STFU Noah, and save the long ass diarheatribe for someone buying into your bullshit.

    Correct me if i’m wrong, but i’ll assume you’re a white guy, and as such YOU HAVE NO FUCKING CLUE ABOUT WHAT IT’S LIKE TO EXPERIENCE REAL RACISM. I do, and I recognize what it is, and what it is’nt. Bill and Hillary are not racists, and I have seen no evidence that they have used racism against Obama. What Bill said about Jesse winning the black vote in South Carolina was TRUE. As far as the statements by Andrew Young, they are not responsible for the words of their supporters, unless you believe they TOLD him to say Bill slept with more black women.

    As far as your explanation as to why Hillary is losing her support amongst blascks, it’s simple. Barack is a viable black candidate, and blacks are supporting him.

    Those are the FACTS.

  69. Wesley says

    Andy,

    Thanks for the blog and all the work you’ve put into it. However, after seeing this trash, I think it time to delete the blog out my bookmarks. Best of luck to you.

  70. Jimmyboyo says

    silverskreen

    LOL

    :-)

    “Liked the “clicking your heels” comment, did ya? hehe.”

    That was wity and I had to toss it back at ya.

    :-)

    I can’t wait till we all combine our passion for our respective candidates against bushco-lite Mccain.

    It will be a united ticket either way.

    OBAMA/ Clinton….Clinton/ Obama. Both have strengths the other needs. The party won’t want to totaly dis the other’s supporters so a forced ticket is a definite.

    For now, we will have to disagree on what the supers will do on placing who on the top of the ticket.

    Obamaheaded Clintonistas

    Clintonheaded Obamamaniacs

    OY

    It is time to go after the old white dude.

  71. Michael Bedwell says

    There’s been a lot of talk in this campaign about “grassroots.” There’s more and more talk of the benefits of a combined H&O ticket. Some have said one or the other of them would never agree, but I’ve not seen anyone say it is a bad idea.

    This morning’s bombing in NYC, no matter how unrelated it will probably turn out to be to “organized terrorists,” reminds us of the kinds of things that could happen between now and November to convert a doddering old warmonger like McCain into someone the majority of voters, regardless of any present support for a Democrat, think is the best person to “protect us.”

    I respectfully urge each of you to start e-mailing both the Clinton and Obama camps, as well as the DNC, and demanding a joint ticket. You can state your preference for which would be better “on top,” but the important thing is the two together—combining their unique strengths and huge groups of supporters to defeat anything that Fate and the Rovians might throw at us.

    Here are some e-mail/contact addresses:

    http://www.hillaryclinton.com/help/contact/

    http://my.barackobama.com/page/s/contact2

    http://www.democrats.org/page/s/contact

    You have nothing to lose but a few minutes of your time—and a new world to gain.

    “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.” – Margaret Mead

    “Human progress is neither automatic nor inevitable… Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle. History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people.” – Martin Luther King, Jr.

    “We must be the change we wish to see in the world.” – Gandhi

  72. Jimmyboyo says

    Thanks Michaelfor those links

    Obamaheaded Clinonistas

    or

    Clintonista Obamamaniacs

    6 of 12 or halfdozen

    :-)

    As long as we never become McCainiacs

  73. Martin says

    I am sorry but I think if Clinton would attend a church for whites, with whites only and for whites only – I would have serious doubts and questions about her. Especially about uniting a country and a people and becoming the next president of the USA.
    Noah: and when Obama attends his “black” church – that’s fine?
    That’s perverted racism. That’s perverted apartheit. But i guess it is politically correct this way…

    And yes either Obama or Obama’s campaign is making it a race issue – 80 to 85 % of the black popluation voting for him shows it. Clinton deserves better.

    And yes perhaps learn that others have their own thoughts without calling them fools, racists…

  74. Jason says

    I don’t think the Clintons are racist, but I do believe they’re willing to do absolutely anything to win, including employing “racial” tactics. Again, I don’t think they’re racists at all, but the “do-anything” mentality is a bit of a turn off.

    And to people who deny any injection of race by the Clintons how do you answer her response of, “No, no. There is nothing to base that on – as far as I know” when asked by CBS if Obama is a secret Muslim. I mean, seriously…what is that? “As far as [you] know?” No, Hillary. You know that Obama is not a Muslim, but the simple-minded don’t know that, and are actually offended by the possibilty, and it’s just another example of the Clintons injection of bigotry into this race.

    If you can’t see that I don’t know what color the sky is in your world.

  75. ASDF says

    Martin,

    what planet do you live on where the majority of blacks and whites attend church together?

    And how does the fact that blacks are voting for him in large numbers “make it a race issue” within the Obama campaign? He has tried diligently to stay away from race (because when blacks talk about race, whites tune out). He would gain absolutely nothing by making his campaign about race because he can’t win with just 80% of blacks voting for him.

  76. says

    Jason,

    The last I checked “muslim” was’nt a race.
    I thought her response to stupid (gotcha!) question was perfectly fine. As far as she knows, he is’nt a muslim. There is no way she could answer that any more definitively than I, or anyone else could. They might as well have asked her if he was GAY.

  77. ALlan says

    ANDY

    What the fuck?

    You can support Obama all you want, but this post was stupid. She was clearly not endorsing McCain. What the Hell kind of post was this. For the first time I’m angry at you. I’ve noticed your Pro-Obama posts in the past week or two but didn’t mind. This is just stupid.

    What’s with the Obama pod people/sheep?

  78. jmg says

    Yes, Allan you are correct.

    Andy, this was a VERY shaky post. If you are looking to be fair in your coverage of both candidates, you could have looked a little further for something critical of Hillary.

    She is saying that there will be a challenge in the general election this November and that she is the best candidate to meet that challenge.

    She is hardly endorsing McCain.

    Lame.

  79. realitythink says

    Hi Andy,
    Sorry you’re getting so much grief for this post. I think maybe all these people should watch Keith Olberman’s first segment tonight. She did it again today, and even worse this time.

    She is a traitor to the Democrats. It’s her or nobody. How terrible.

  80. john says

    I disagree. Hillary is still in a position where she has to respond with grace to her Republican “opponent”, regardless of whether she has been elected leader of the Democrats. Her interaction with Barack Obama is a separate issue.

  81. astonedtemple says

    McCain/Clinton 08 imo

    Obama critizes John McCain while Hillary not only doesn’t attack him but responds to McCain’s attacks on both democratic candidates with “grace” (subtle endorsement). Give me a break. I know some of you love to use the Obama cult meme when anyone defends Obama but are some of you so blind to see the harm shes doing? I think there was a story about this on either ABC, CBS, or NBC where a Republican skirms with joy saying (paraphrase) “she’s giving us soundbites to use against Obama in the general election”.

    I’m giving Hillary 1 day to become a democrat again.

  82. Zeke says

    MARTIN, Obama’s church is NOT 100% black. I’ve been to Trinity UCC and there are white and latino people who attend there too. In fact, it has more white members than any church I went to growing up had black members (EXACTLY ZERO).

    I think a MUCH bigger scandal than Hillary’s repeated promoting of McCain at the expense of Obama is the NAFTA-gate scandal and the way the Clinton team pushed a false story that they KNEW was false. ALL the Canadian media is now reporting that it was actually HILLARY’S campaign that assured them that her tough talk about NAFTA was just political posturing. She knew that when she falsely attacked Obama in ads with the bogus claim. Harper has even acknowledged that this is a scandal and has opened an investigation including an investigation of HIS OWN office. Strangely, the US media, who promoted the bogus story ad nauseam, has gone SILENT now that the true story is coming out.

    Now THAT is a Clinton scandal!!

  83. silva66 says

    aye madre! The Clinton partisans are so convinced that she will serve it up better against McCain! They are both insiders to the E-S-T-A-B-L-I-S-H-M-E-N-T, and thus are united in their resolve to beat down the insurgent representing all the alienated citizenry not enthrall to the mommy and daddy state, all those sick and tired of the twisted game of American politics as played these last 16 years. Of course Clinton and McCain will support each other. If Obama were to win the ball would be out of their – and their patrons’ – hands. No, no the powers that be don’t want the youth muscleling in on their prerogatives before “its their turn.” Furthermore, the Clintons’ devotion to the Democratic party is nothing more than window dressing. All one has to do is read up on how they allowed the national Democratic party to wither in the 90s, while they focused all their attention on big-money corporate donations and the “big states” while actually ceding huge swaths of the country to the Republican party indocrination machine. They still hold this line, as is evidenced the rhetoric about “states that matter”. By contrast Obama reaches out – a huge LONG TERM strategic move in the interest of the Democratic party. On the other side its all about Hillary.

    And honestly, its obvious that if nominated Clinton drags the party down down ticket. People in Nebraska are not excited or inspired by Hillary, but the same can not be said of her opponent. If she were to win the Executive she would have a slim Democratic majority in the Congress in all likelyhood, and thus would get next to none of her “plans” through. By contrast it is obvious that Obama brings folks out in all those American places the Clintons feel inclined to ignore. His impact down-ticket is potentially huge, making it likely that with Obama in the Executive we also get a stronger Democratic majority in the Congress, and in turn a President Obama gets more done to correct course after the current disaster of a presidency+congress. Even if Obama were to lose, we most likely get a stronger Democratic Congress. If Clinton were to lose, we most likely get McCain and a weaker Democratic congress, which basically means “4 more years.”

    For the long-term good of the Democratic party, and for the good of the country right now, Obama is the stronger candidate. But you’ve got to get outside the MSM freak show called “race for the white house” and all that other horseshit about zombies and cults. Pay attention people. This election really is about turning the page, or handing it over once again to a generation of leadership that has purposely divided the country and destroyed the Constitution.

  84. mike says

    Well, Hillary, you lost me on this one. Tell me, mama, just exactly WHAT experience do YOU have to be our commander-in-chief? I hardly consider being a “first lady” or a full-time working “power-mother” as those qualifications we would need. And, my dear carpet-bagger Senator, that comment that Obama is not Muslim “as far as we know” made me rip of the “Hillary for President” sticker and toss it into the nearest trash can. For that matter, what are McCain’s qualifications? Military service (and doing time in a concentration camp) do not necessarily translate into “automatic-commander-in-chief cred. Hillary, darlin’, Obama will do just fine as Commander-in-Chief. He’ll do what every other president has done (except GW Bush)–he’ll listen to his Joint Chiefs and consider their advice and opinions, and he’ll surround himself with top-flight civilian advisers to balance the JSC’s views. Hillary, after those comments you have made, I’d say you are pretty much moving into the “b” word territory. I wouldn’t support you now if I was paid to do it. Hang it up, Hillary. You just blew it (your candidacy, I mean).

  85. mike says

    Well, Hillary, you lost me on this one. Tell me, mama, just exactly WHAT experience do YOU have to be our commander-in-chief? I hardly consider being a “first lady” or a full-time working “power-mother” as those qualifications we would need. And, my dear carpet-bagger Senator, that comment that Obama is not Muslim “as far as we know” made me rip of the “Hillary for President” sticker and toss it into the nearest trash can. For that matter, what are McCain’s qualifications? Military service (and doing time in a concentration camp) do not necessarily translate into “automatic-commander-in-chief cred. Hillary, darlin’, Obama will do just fine as Commander-in-Chief. He’ll do what every other president has done (except GW Bush)–he’ll listen to his Joint Chiefs and consider their advice and opinions, and he’ll surround himself with top-flight civilian advisers to balance the JSC’s views. Hillary, after those comments you have made, I’d say you are pretty much moving into the “b” word territory. I wouldn’t support you now if I was paid to do it. Hang it up, Hillary. You just blew it (your candidacy, I mean).

Leave A Reply