Deadly explosions strike northern Iraq
An explosion ripped through an apartment building and surrounding houses in northern Iraq Wednesday shortly after police arrived to investigate a tip about a weapons cache, killing at least nine people. In a separate incident, a suicide car bomber targeted a police convoy near the northern city of Kirkuk, killing at least five civilians and injuring 11, police said. The entire building, a suspected bomb-making factory, was empty. But the blast devastated nearby houses, killing nine people and injuring 70, al-Jubouri said.
Full Story:

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080123/iraq_blasts_080123/20080123?hub=World

Pa. Gov. Ed Rendell endorses Hillary Clinton in presidential race

By PETER JACKSON

(AP) snip

Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell said Wednesday he is backing Hillary Rodham Clinton for president, a key endorsement in a delegate-rich state that could be critical if the race remains unresolved after Super Tuesday.

GO ED!
GO HILLARY!

speaking of going
I am
PEACE

False statements preceded Iraq war, study finds
WASHINGTON -- A study by two nonprofit journalism organizations found that President Bush and top administration officials issued hundreds of false statements about the national security threat from Iraq in the two years following the 2001 terrorist attacks. The study concluded that the statements "were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses." Full Story:

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080123/war_study_080123?s_name=&no_ads=

You don't have to light up the world, just your corner.

My new slogan, thanks Rev!

Rachel Maddow joined Keith and talked about John Edwards, who was the first presidential candidate who talked about the impending crisis and suggested an economic stimulus package to head it off — and as long as the topic is the economy, he has the upper hand.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/Media/Download/25607/1/countdown_economy_maddow_012208.wmv

MT

Posted by MichelleLaw on January 23, 2008 at 02:12 PM

It all depends on you beliefs. If a demmocrat is closer to my fundamentals ( witch is almost always) than that is how I vote. I don't always agree with all their talking points, for example Tim Ryan a democrat senator is pro life,Iam pro choice but I still vote for him becaue he is strong on protecting the worker in the workplace.Democrats 99% of the time are closer than any repug!!

Posted by MichaelLink on January 23, 2008 at 02:10 PM

The primary reason I am for Obama is because of the following: I want change. Change does not come about because the PRESIDENT works hard for it. Change comes about when you are able to get a large majority of people to believe in a vision so that THEY will willingly work hard for it. A majority is not devised of Democrats, Independents, or Republicans, but a combination of all three.

In Bill C.'s first term, we had a Democratic president and Democratic majorities, and health care reform was still not passed. If we don't include Independents and Republicans in on the process, nothing will ever get done. It is as simple as that.

To make our party effective, we need to be inclusive of moderate Independents and Republicans who are disinfranchised with their own party. If we don't, we lose.

If the first explanation doesn't work, try another...

The mystery of the Stephenville UFOs might have been solved.

Today the Air Force Reserve said on the night of January 8, ten F-16 fighter jets were conducting training flights in the area. Many of the suspected UFO sightings took place on that night.

Originally, the 301st Fighter Wing at the Naval Air Station Fort Worth Joint Reserve Base said none of its jets were in the area that night.

In a statement today, a Wing spokesman says they made a mistake and that jets were flying in the Stephenville area that evening.

http://cbs11tv.com/local/ufo.texas.stephenville.2.636217.html

On the last thread a person commented.I'm paraphasing,that the in fighting started by clinton was ok because we done it in past elections. Wellsee, thats the problem. She talks of change,but uses old school tactics to campaine.Shes a corporate lawyer,and will have lobiest in her cabnit.Why does that not resinate with you people? What am i not seeing here?

My bad, Tim Ryan ia a rep not a senator.

oh cripes I think I'm gone then come across a great comment or article - this from mydd
and decide to post it here ....... crazy
I have CHORES to do! lol anyway

bedobe:

We sometimes make a mistake when we think of "organization" as something you can put together for an election. In reality, an organization is built over years and decades. Clinton hasn't gotten the Latino/a vote by reaching out during this election. She's gotten it as a result of the 35 years of relationships she has built working with people and then during the Clinton campaigns.

This is the nitty gritty of "experience" that the Obama supporters don't understand. The experience Obama needs is not learning where all the cloakrooms in the US Capitol are located. It's the years of immersing himself in the national constituent groups of the Democratic Party so that he understands the interests of these groups -- not from a briefing book, but from meetings and dinners and holiday celebrations and visiting the communities.

by hwc on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:11:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

(how profound, eh? whomever they are)
well DAH!

4 real, 4 real I am gone again
no more sharing today (ribrib)

Grrr, I got the new thread blues...repost

Posted by HillWilliam4Edwards08 on January 23, 2008 at 02:01 PM

I only wish I could be HALF as nice as you when people coming screaming and bitching like WE are the ones making the campaigns run...it's true that SOME here ARe being very negative about everyone who isn't Hillary...or isn't Obama...or isn't an Oscar and NObel prize winner...but since the bitchers and whiners probably haven't read any back posts before posting their own inane drivel, that isn't too much of an issue. I think most of them are Sally anyway & friends anyway, and we're probably wasting our time on them no matter which way we treat them.

But my point was, I love ya, man! :)

Posted by GregL on January 23, 2008 at 02:40 PM

And on clintons healthcare plan.It covers illegals. Compare it to this. Two homes in a neighborhood,one being usa one being mexico.Our house(usa)their house(mexico).In our house we cant afford food,electric our kids are sick the husban is unemployed. And the neighbors from their house and ask for food and want the antibotics are childeren need to become well.Now picture yourself as head of our house hold.what would you tell them.It's a tough answer,but what would you tell them? Honestly.........

Too white for me. What the hell is that supposed to mean you racist biggot! Remember this, You are the one that brought race into this discussion!

Posted by MNDem on January 23, 2008 at 02:37 PM

I'm thinking margot confused you with AR4OBAMA, and I think she thinks AR4OBAMA thinks we should vote for Obama because he's black. Which is partially true, I believe, but AR4OBAMA, or Sally, also spoke of Obama's whole "change" theme...like that theme is new to politics or something. In the words of the man who is otherwise pissing me off lately "Give me a break."

Posted by cntkpusdwn4lng on January 23, 2008 at 02:29 PM
By constantly 'putting down' one candidate rather than 'raising up' another candidate, you are making yourself come across like a repug. troll who is simply masquerading as a democrat for the purpose of causing trouble and in an attept to fracture the Dem. party. If you really are a Dem., you need to prove it by saying good things about the candidate that you support and NOT saying bad things about others. Do you see the difference?

Thats my point exactly. I'm using the same tactics as clinton. So dont tell me that,tell the clinton supporters to tell her not to be that way.

I'm not dividing the party clinton is. Why you can't see that is beyond me. Clinton is not for change,clinton if for clinton. Open your eyes.

Lawsuit says deputies targeted man for medical marijuana

Associated Press
January 17th, 2008

A paraplegic man from Malaga has sued Eddy County sheriff's deputies.

Leonard French alleges they seized marijuana plants and equipment to grow them last summer despite the fact he has a license under New Mexico's medical marijuana law.

According to the American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico, French thought drug task force agents had come to his home to check his compliance with the medical marijuana law.

He showed them his license, growing equipment, two small marijuana plants and a pipe to smoke marijuana.

Deputies seized the plants and equipment and turned them over to the federal Drug Enforcement Administration.

The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages and a ruling that deputies violated the medical marijuana law and other laws.

Posted by cntkpusdwn4lng on January 23, 2008 at 02:48 PM

I would tell them that in the richest most generous nation on this planet, we need to look past where a person was born and treat each human as we would like them to treat us.

This week's Republican of the Week is former Republican representative Mark Siljander of Michigan has been indicted on charges of terrorism, money laundering, conspiracy and obstruction of justice.

Blueinidaho you missed the point. Please read the question again. And please, don't spin me. Answer the tough question.

stocks up 80 plus points

Hi Everybody,
I am worried about the Clinton/Obama bickering. The debate the other night in SC was long on sparks but short on substance. I am not right now committed to either, and I would vote with enthusiasm for Clinton, Obama, or Edwards in the fall. I am most worried about BEATING REPUBLICANS.
I am convinced that sometimes politicians live in their own little support systems, surrounded by their advisors, supporters, confidants, spouses, yes-men and yes-women, and they lose touch with reality a bit. They only hear what people around them think they want to hear. Nixon and Bush are classic pathological and extreme cases of this, but I think that all politicians have this problem to a certain degree. I feel that both Clinton and Obama have lost perspective in terms of how it looks out here.
For whoever wins the nomination, it could be a Pyrrhic victory (i.e., a victory so destructive it is not worth it) that destroys our chances against the Republicans. I don't want the party to self-destruct as it did in 1968 and 1980.
JSal

Posted by GregL on January 23, 2008 at 02:50 PM

I'm not implying that anyone is a bigot or racist. I AM implying that people think they should vote for Obama simply because of his race. I do not know if MNDem feels this way (I doubt it). AR4OBAMA probably does, and you can tell because his argument lacks all substance. Change is nothing new, but it is important this year, if only for the fact that we really need it. However, Obama essentially equals Clinton. They have the same voting record in the senate, and the same fondness for business. Clinton has been around for longer, but neither of them are truly agents of change. I'm sick of all this Obama-hype. Someone please, give me some real substance!

I'm like a lot of my fellow democrats, I dont want the Clintons back in the whitehouse. I support Obama. If it comes to Hillary or not voting, so be it. Why vote for corruption? 2006 and the we will end this occupation of Iraq was an eye opener for me, I will not vote the ticket anymore, for the sake of doing so. I will vote for the person.

4 real, 4 real I am gone again no more sharing today (ribrib)

Posted by Ladydawn on January 23, 2008 at 02:41 PM

Promises, promises...(j/k)

gro, I'm confused, the bill is suppose to help end discriminiation in the work place?

If so, why would you be against that?

Posted by Kristen on January 22, 2008 at 08:09 PM

Yes, dear, you are confused. This bill is about allowing employers to discriminate against disabled people if they are medical marijuana patients. I testified against it.

It was time to make it clear in our State capitol that no rule, law or statute they pass can reduce or lessen the penalties that the ADA imposes because the ADA trumps State law. They can make a rule or law to increase penalties for discrimination, but they cannot reduce those penalties.

They also seemed to need to be reminded that medical marijuana patients are not just potheads, they are disabled people who are covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act regardless of their medication. And the ADA has teeth.

I also mentioned that the War on drug was started when I was 2 years old, and at that time, 30% of US high School Seniors admitted to having tried marijuana at least once in their lives. After 40 years, spending over a Trillion dollars, with more than 2 million people in jail RIGHT NOW, the same survey was released last month and it showed that 50% of high school seniors had tried marijuana at least once in their lives. Now that's a failed policy.

The Chair interupted me and said,"we're not talking about that! this is about this bill." And I answered him, " But this bill is about urine testing which was instituted as part of the failed Republican drug policy under Ronald Reagan. Why would a Democrat follow Reagan and Nixon and Bush? Those guys are morons, whose policies have clearly failed. 40 years of Drug war policy has resulted in a rise in teen marijuana use of 20% - that is a MAJOR FAILURE. Why would you continue their failed policies? This next election cycle is going to be about change, and Oregonians want change in drug policy, not more of the same failed Republican Drug War."

Posted by gro4me on January 23, 2008 at 03:28 PM

I dont want to make anyone mad, but, I would like to see more on the democratic party web site about our canidates and the platforms they are running on and less about the republicans. I can go to their web site to see that.

I come in every day to see what is new at the DNC.

BTW the drug use survey also showed that more teens are doing heroin than in the 60's and more prescription drugs than my parents did in the 70's.

Posted by cntkpusdwn4lng on January 23, 2008 at 03:12 PM

I'm not spinning anything. The nation can afford healthcare for each person who needs it. We just choose to put our dollars elsewhere. And, being a huge believer in the teachings of JC, Ghandi, Mother Teresa, and even perhaps John Lennon, I do not believe that one should close the door on another human simply because that person didn't have the luck of being born here.

Neglecting the healthcare needs of those that have come to this country for work would put this nation in a worse position in jeopardizing the health of all others.

hey dawn, good to see you, you can see the trolls and the uninformed are still here.

Obama camp complains to Nevada Dems

WASHINGTON - Barack Obama's presidential campaign complained in a letter to the Nevada Democratic Party Wednesday that rival Hillary Rodham Clinton benefited from numerous violations of party rules during the state's caucuses on Saturday.

Clinton won the caucuses' popular vote by a margin of 51 percent to 45 percent. Under complicated delegate allocation rules, however, Obama could receive 13 delegates to Clinton's 12.

Link

I think that local, state, and national chapters of the Democratic Party chapters need to regulate the intimidation and corruption that has entered the caucuses and voting booths by the campaigns. There is no room for Bush dirty politics in the Democratic Party, I think the Democratic Party need to police these events with neutral parties and not use "The Machine" mentally to brutalize the Independence of opinion. If need to, strip delegates from campaigns of those found guilty of disruptions of the neutrality of the voting area, where civilians are denied their own choice.

I am not asserting blame but the Democrat must investigate Nevada and stop this abuse of power that inflicts harm on the election process. The Democrats does not want a Chicago type hostile mentality nationwide. I think neutral Democratic members from other states not voting need to be implanted to assure tranquility and where unbiased info can be obtained. I think the Democratic Party need a report card for each election to show how each campaign responded.

Posted by GregL on January 23, 2008 at 02:50 PM

Change, as a word, is nothing new. Change is a process.

- Establish a sense of urgency for change
- Elicit sponsorship of that urgency for change
- Create a vision for change
- Empower others to create change
- Establish short term goals
- Encourage additional changes
- Reinforce changes made as permanent

It sure appears to me that Obama has already hit on the first three, number four is in process, and number five will take place just as soon as he is president.

Like I said before, the PRESIDENT doesn't work hard for change, WE DO!!

GregL,

I take a lot of inspiration from Esmeralda. If someone is screaming, even if you scream back it doesn't do any good. Most folks can't hear with their mouths open anyway.

When I was in the Army, one officer (one of the first female pilots, a woman I still greatly admire) said, "every situation is a vehicle to training". Or these days, I put it, "every situation is a vehicle to education". The more we educate, the more we learn, the better voters (hence better patriots) we can be. There are consequences for everything under the sun.

You brought up another good point. "I'll cast a protest vote" is one the goddam stupidest things anyone can do with their franchise. First of all, it makes no impression on either the candidates, nor the system, nor an election. The candidates won't feel it, nor either party. In short, by being emotional rather than responsible and rational, a person is wasting a chance to do the right thing. "I'll leave the party if I don't get my way" and "I'll vote third party if I don't get my way" are also irresponsible and childish.

It just says "I'm being lazy and whiny and I couldn't be bothered to work for the changes I want". Change happens before an election, not after it. Mark that for truth.

Keep after 'em, man. All hands on deck.

If we taxed and regulated this nation's top cash crop - marijuana - we could pay for healthcare for all Americans, and the immigrants who come here to work as well. We spend over $42 Billion dollars to prohibit a $116 Billion dollar untaxed commodity. It is time for a drug policy change.

Okay, time for my brain to explode again. This is from WSJ's daily "Opinion" email that I receive. Obviously it's a right-wing slant.

Certainly if the AP is going to report on this "study," it ought to disclose the political leanings of the groups that sponsored it. Though come to think of it, given those political leanings, it's hard to see why this is even newsworthy.

They had to do a study to show that Bush is a liar? Some people didn't already know?

but what would you tell them? Honestly.........

Posted by cntkpusdwn4lng on January 23, 2008 at 02:48 PM

"Come on in, we'll throw another rock in the soup for you. And maybe TOGETHER we can find a way to get our kids healthy".

:shrug: So I believe in community...you got a problem with that?

Oh, and we CAN afford to keep everyone in this country healthy, but the fucking conservative PUKES won't LET us. They still can't get it through their thick skulls that no one makes it alone. 'Cept maybe Grizzly Adams. Then again, he did have a bear. :)

Former Senator John Edwards did not receive an endorsement from David Letterman on CBS’s “The Late Show” Tuesday night, but he did receive eight valuable minutes to woo voters.
The candidate even allowed Mr. Letterman to ruffle through his hair at the end of the segment.

Mr. Edwards’ jokes earned several rounds of applause from an approving audience. After Mr. Letterman recalled the conflict between Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and Senator Barack Obama at a debate sponsored by CNN on Monday, Mr. Edwards eagerly responded: “What I was trying to do was represent the grown-up wing of the Democratic Party last night.”

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/23/john-edwards-funny-guy/

Okay, time for my brain to explode again. This is from WSJ's daily "Opinion" email that I receive. Obviously it's a right-wing slant. It's regarding the AP article this

A study by two nonprofit journalism organizations found that President Bush and top administration officials issued hundreds of false statements about the national security threat from Iraq in the two years following the 2001 terrorist attacks," the Associated Press reports: .......

Certainly if the AP is going to report on this "study," it ought to disclose the political leanings of the groups that sponsored it. Though come to think of it, given those political leanings, it's hard to see why this is even newsworthy.

Okay, time for my brain to explode again. This is from WSJ's daily "Opinion" email that I receive. Obviously it's a right-wing slant.

A study by two nonprofit journalism organizations found that President Bush and top administration officials issued hundreds of false statements about the national security threat from Iraq in the two years following the 2001 terrorist attacks," the Associated Press reports: .......

Certainly if the AP is going to report on this "study," it ought to disclose the political leanings of the groups that sponsored it. Though come to think of it, given those political leanings, it's hard to see why this is even newsworthy.

It's interesting to see Clinton and Obama using Republican style mud-slinging. They are either rather dumbly following Democratic Losership Council tactics, or their true natures are coming out.
Either they kiss and make up(figuratively speaking), or they will both kill their campaigns.
A lot of people are tired of that kind of crap throwing, and will hopefully vote for Edwards both in the primary and in the general election.
Go Edwards!

Harry Reid — who has (a) done more than any other individual to ensure that Bush’s demands for telecom immunity and warrantless eavesdropping powers will be met in full and (b) allowed the Republicans all year to block virtually every bill without having to bother to actually filibuster — went to the Senate floor yesterday and, with the scripted assistance of Mitch McConnell and Pat Leahy, warned Chris Dodd, Russ Feingold and others that they would be selfishly wreaking havoc on the schedules of their fellow Senators (making them work over the weekend, ruining their planned “retreat,” and even preventing them from going to Davos!) if they bothered everyone with their annoying, pointless little filibuster.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/01/23/harry-reid-democratic-leader/

Sorry for the numerous posts. Having trouble with my fingers catching up with my brain probably due in large part to brain explosion.

My protesr vote isn't an emotional kneejerk reaction. It has been well thought out. You insult me because of what i think . That makes you sound like a republican. The fact is Hillary will polarize the right. She will fracture left. Her tactics are republican in nature. And with all her babbage i can not in good faith,give her my vote.I would rather vote for McCain whos policies i don't agree. But has bled for this country. Than some one who preaches change,is a corporate lawyer,and who will have lobiest in her cabinet. I will choose the lesser of two evils. P.S. If you want someone to come to your side,it would not behove you to insult that person. Insult are hurtful and make your point less credible. This is good advice. You should head my words hillwilliam4edwards

Posted by cntkpusdwn4lng on January 23, 2008 at 04:02 PM

Do I understand your logic as this: "Because Senator Clinton is polarizing and has qualities I do not like, I will vote for a republican to teach the democrats who like her a lesson."?

If I misread you, my apologies, but I'm having a hard time following...

2006 and the we will end this occupation of Iraq was an eye opener for me, I will not vote the ticket anymore, for the sake of doing so. I will vote for the person.

Posted by diggy on January 23, 2008

why don't you look at the filibustering of the senate as to why the course hasn't changed in Iraq. if anything you would say we need more dems to over ride what is left of the rubber stamp congress.

This is from Time Magazine and the rest of the article is available at time.com
(Sorry, I can't post live links)
Study: Falsehoods Preceded Iraq War
Wednesday, Jan. 23, 2008 By AP/DOUGLASS K. DANIEL

A study by two nonprofit journalism organizations found that President Bush and top Administration officials issued hundreds of false statements about the national security threat from Iraq in the two years following the 2001 terrorist attacks.

The study concluded that the statements "were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses."
The study was posted Tuesday on the Web site of the Center for Public Integrity, which worked with the Fund for Independence in Journalism.

You should head my words ...

Posted by cntkpusdwn4lng on January 23, 2008 at 04:02 PM

Don't you think you're being a bit too "high and mighty" with your "babbage"?

Also, if I'm not mistaken, Hillary started her law career pretty much the same way Barrack did. It wasn't until much later in her law career that she made partner in her law firm. You speak of being a corporate lawyer as a really bad thing to do in one's life. Funny, I believe Michelle Obama has been a "corporate lawyer" her entire law career. I've been around corporate-type lawyers for a long time. I'm the first to agree that some of them are real bozos, but a lot of them are no different than you and I. Most lawyers take various poli-sci courses during undergraduate years because they plan to go into public office.

Obama knew long before law school what path he wanted to take -- i.e., first in public sector and then in politics as elected official. Because he wasn't making a lot of money, Michelle was helping foot their living expenses. The Obamas live in a house valued at over $1.6 million. I'm sure most of that is not from him being in state politics as much as Michelle's income as a corporate lawyer making a sizeable contribution to their down payment.

And, don't forget that Hillary is 15 years older than Barrack. So it's not so unusual that she was already a partner in the Rose firm while Barrack was still in law school.

Posted by MichelleLaw on January 23, 2008 at 03:02 PM
Michelle: my point is that the way that this web site is set up allows people who are not democrats to come here and pretend to support one candidate when they are - in fact - trying to fracture the party and plant the seeds of disent. As I believe that this is exactly who and what you are, I will not respond to you in the future. I think you are actually a reTHUGlican troll who is just trying to stir up trouble. You are terrified that Sen. Clinton can and will beat any THUG that gets the nomination. You and all of your reTHUGlican friends are so scared that you are p**ing in your pants. That is why you and your kind are so desperate that you come here and try to drive wedges between the Democrats. As all you are here to do is bash Democrats, you need to go away.

Idont want to punish anyone.Thats not my job.I would vote for McCain over Hillary for these reasons. McCain bled for us. I wouldn't vote for Hillary because,she would fracture the left,she's a corporate lawyer and she WILL HAVE LOBIEST IN HER CABNET. DON'T PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH. That in a clinton/repulican tactic. BLUEINIDAHO

jimmyc451,

I'm say'ing why vote for the ones that make excuses? What happened to withdraw dates? Every thing bush asks for is given to him with a wimmper from our democrats, enough is enough. I will vote for the person, I refuse to continue to support the weak minded or corrupt.

Posted by cntkpusdwn4lng on January 23, 2008 at 04:02 PM

I'm not following your arguments. You seem to misunderstand that politics is a job. People make their careers being politicians. There isn't one candidate up there who isn't a career politician.

You would be a lot better off working for and supporting the candidate of your choice. Bashing Hillary is not going to earn you much credibility. It also makes ZERO sense to vote for someone whose policies you detest. That won't prove anything. Voting is anonymous for a reason. The only people who will know what you did will be people you tell, and most won't be proud of you.

Americans are dying around the world fighting for democracy. Don't make a joke of it and waste your vote. If you feel strongly, go do something positive.

http://www.serveoutloud.blogspot.com

marymac: The next question should be: Why haven't they started to impeach the bastards???
This ought to be enough to get that Cheney impeachment bill out of committee, where it was sent to die, and impeach Cheney, which will lead to Bush and his cabinet, and we can clean them out before they can continue on with their plans to invade Iran.
The more and more that comes out about the lying and corruption of the Bushiato, the more and more people are going to ask questions as to why the hell Bush/Cheney weren't impeached, and more and more people are going to think that the Democratic party is in cahoots with the Republicans on this.
Even if the Republicans filibuster or whatever they will do to stall, it will be better for the Democrats in the long run if they are on record as trying to do something, anything.

Posted by cntkpusdwn4lng on January 23, 2008 at 04:26 PM

Do you always call people republicans when they ask you to clarify your words?

I'll leave you to ramble on, I couldn't care less.

Posted by marymac_memphis on January 23, 2008 at 04:23 PM

Please get off of the kool-aid. I, and many others who do not want to see Hillary nominated, are Democrats and always have been. Republicans would not come in here going for another candidate. They WANT to run against Hillary. Tell me, who out of all of our Democratic candidates will rile up their base the most. If you say anybody other than Hillary, you are not paying attention. I'm not only worried about Democrats losing the Presidency, I'm worried about Republicans coming out in full force against Hillary and subsuquently voting for other Republicans up and down the ballot. This would absolutely kill Democrats chances of making gains in 2008 and local and national level.

I pray that our party won't self destruct, but I am becoming resigned to the fact that Hillary supporters just don't care.

Hey blue: I beginning to think that cntkpusdwn4lng is actually Dumb A$$ Cactus and diggy is actually Frosty the Blow Man. What do you think?

Posted by marymac_memphis on January 23, 2008 at 04:23 PM

Please get off of the kool-aid. I, and many others who do not want to see Hillary nominated, are Democrats and always have been. Republicans would not come in here going for another candidate. They WANT to run against Hillary. Tell me, who out of all of our Democratic candidates will rile up their base the most. If you say anybody other than Hillary, you are not paying attention. I'm not only worried about Democrats losing the Presidency, I'm worried about Republicans coming out in full force against Hillary and subsuquently voting for other Republicans up and down the ballot. This would absolutely kill Democrats chances of making gains in 2008 and local and national level.

I pray that our party won't self destruct, but I am becoming resigned to the fact that Hillary supporters just don't care.

Good afternoon, all.

Since it's my tax dollars bankrolling this Iraq occupation, I think it's time to do a reality check.

The U.S. Financial Crisis - in Iraq

By DANIEL PEPPER/BAGHDAD Wed Jan 23

The U.S. military in Iraq has been extolling the achievements of its cooperation with civilians in the fight against extremists and insurgents. The mechanism of that cooperation, however, is greased by cash - and the budgetary spigot for it has been tightening in recent months.

That does not sit well for officers like Captain Joel Brown, in charge of Eagle company for the 2-2 Styker Cavalry Regiment. For him, money spent bankrolling the Sunni al-Sahwa ("Awakening") movement is money well spent...

news.yahoo.com/s/time/20080123/wl_time/theusfinancialcrisisiniraq

Since when has it become the official policy of the United States military to pay protection money to thugs?

Read this article closely. That appears to be the prevailing thinking by our officers now. Excuse me? I thought this was a "military" operation.

Why are our "professional" military involved in paying off insurgents instead of fighting them? The troops might as well come home if this occupation has turned into a protection con game.

So we pay the Iraqis so they don't shoot at us?

We don't have to pay any Iraqi criminals if our Natinal Guard troops are back home in their communities and our armed forces are fighting in Afganistan or training for the next national security crisis on their home bases.

It's time for this farce to end.

Than some one who preaches change,is a corporate lawyer,and who will have lobiest in her cabinet. I will choose the lesser of two evils. P.S. If you want someone to come to your side,it would not behove you to insult that person. Insult are hurtful and make your point less credible. This is good advice. You should head my words hillwilliam4edwards

Posted by cntkpusdwn4lng on January 23, 2008 at 04:02 PM

I'm not fond of corporate lawyers either and I also admire McCain and I'm grateful to his service to our country and the sacrifices he made for it. However, I will not vote for any Republican. The Republicans have created havoc to our foreign policy, have created a domestic economic disaster, have politicized our Federal Judicial System, both criminal and civil, and have created a monolithic all-powerful federal government that is more of a monarchy than most of the present European monarchies.

I would vote Democrat if the only thing that was going to change was the U.S. Attorneys but I think we can hope for more than that from either Clinton, Obama, or Edwards.

Posted by marymac_memphis on January 23, 2008 at 04:23 PM

Please get off of the kool-aid. I, and many others who do not want to see Hillary nominated, are Democrats and always have been. Republicans would not come in here going for another candidate. They WANT to run against Hillary. Tell me, who out of all of our Democratic candidates will rile up their base the most. If you say anybody other than Hillary, you are not paying attention. I'm not only worried about Democrats losing the Presidency, I'm worried about Republicans coming out in full force against Hillary and subsuquently voting for other Republicans up and down the ballot. This would absolutely kill Democrats chances of making gains in 2008 and local and national level.

I pray that our party won't self destruct, but I am becoming resigned to the fact that Hillary supporters just don't care.

Posted by cntkpusdwn4lng on January 23, 2008 at 04:26 PM

You are hopeless. You obviously don't understand a president's cabinet. None of the Dem candidates are stupid enough to have a lobbyist as a member of their cabinet.

You just go ahead and believe what you want to believe pet. Apparently you like living in your made up world.

Than some one who preaches change,is a corporate lawyer,and who will have lobiest in her cabinet. I will choose the lesser of two evils. P.S. If you want someone to come to your side,it would not behove you to insult that person. Insult are hurtful and make your point less credible. This is good advice. You should head my words hillwilliam4edwards

Posted by cntkpusdwn4lng on January 23, 2008 at 04:02 PM

I'm not fond of corporate lawyers either and I also admire McCain and I'm grateful to his service to our country and the sacrifices he made for it. However, I will not vote for any Republican. The Republicans have created havoc to our foreign policy, have created a domestic economic disaster, have politicized our Federal Judicial System, both criminal and civil, and have created a monolithic all-powerful federal government that is more of a monarchy than most of the present European monarchies.

I would vote Democrat if the only thing that was going to change was the U.S. Attorneys but I think we can hope for more than that from either Clinton, Obama, or Edwards.

Staing the truth is not bashing she was a lawyer for walmart. WHO spends are dollars abroad pays its assosiates slave wages. I'm sure she wasn't working there for 10 bucks per hour. Most of walmarts workers are part time ,which mean no insurance. After her last debate she had a lobiest doing post debate comentary. He admitted to be on national tv. This is not bashing it is fact. Bashing would be what the clintons do. Taking words out of context,speaking half truths.

Hey blue: I beginning to think that cntkpusdwn4lng is actually Dumb A$$ Cactus and diggy is actually Frosty the Blow Man. What do you think?

Posted by marymac_memphis on January 23, 2008 at 04:31 PM

Mary,

You're probably right, but isn't it fun to f*ck with their little brains?

Speaking of dying, did you hear that Heath Ledger died? They found a collection of pharmaceutical drugs. Just armchair quarterbacking, but I would say he is a victim of American drug policy. The FDA approves all kinds of drugs that are dangerous and the result is drug deaths while under the care of a physician. Ledger is only 1 of over 100,000 Americans (I know, he's Australian, but he was living here in America under our drug policy)who will die this year from drugs that their doctor prescribed.

The saddest part is that if he was only treating insomnia, he could have probably had effective treatment with medical marijuana and never risked death.

In the last debate Edwards asked strait to her face if she would have lobiest in her cabinet.She started to mumble and never directly answered the question. It was on national tv 5,000,000 people. It sounds like you are using selective memory. PUGGLES

Good late afternoon.

So, the surge is working ... how about this?

BAGHDAD — Bombs ripped through an empty apartment building in northern Iraq on Wednesday, killing at least 14 people and injuring as many as 132 in surrounding houses shortly after the Iraqi army arrived to investigate a tip about a weapons cache.

Rescuers were searching for victims buried under the debris of the collapsed building and devastated nearby houses, said Abdul-Karim al-Jubouri, who was heading the operations for police in Mosul, 225 miles northwest of Baghdad.

The cause of the 4:30 p.m. blast was unknown, but it took place after Iraqi soldiers arrived at the three-story building, a suspected bomb-making factory. The army had received calls saying that weapons and explosives were inside, police said.

Al-Jubouri said 14 were killed and the U.S. military said 132 were injured. Al-Jubouri said police do not believe the blast was a trap because insurgents would have waited for security forces to get inside the building to kill as many as possible. Also, he said, insurgents usually warn nearby residents to leave before a bombing.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/23/deadly-explosions-strike-_n_82909.html
==================================================

The degree of violence has rapidly accelerated in Iraq. I think the couple months where it was quiet was mainly a distortion. Probably, the Iraqi resistance was forming new plans.

It's just impossible to occupy another people's country when they don't want you there. That's what these GOP-PERS just don't get. There is populist anger at our presence in Iraq from the Iraqi people themselves.

Thanks for the wonderfull comments, I should have known it was a waste of time to come on this site, after reading it for sometime now, only a select few are allowed their opinons.

After Mr. Letterman recalled the conflict between Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and Senator Barack Obama at a debate sponsored by CNN on Monday, Mr. Edwards eagerly responded: “What I was trying to do was represent the grown-up wing of the Democratic Party last night.”

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/23/john-edwards-funny-guy/

Posted by BlueinIdaho on January 23, 2008 at 03:43 PM

Grrr...the "conflict"...the "fight"...the "argument"...the "meltdown"...the "fit"...WTF? You know, I have that same reaction every time I see words like that and then see the clip...WTF? Where did the people writing this shit grow up? In a fucking silent monastery? I seriously think these people need to live with my family for a little while if they really think speaking above a whisper is screaming. Ya know, it's about fucking time our politicians were a little more passionate in more than their lovemaking with interns.

Posted by marymac_memphis on January 23, 2008 at 04:31 PM

Who knows. I don't really see a similarity between the incoherent blatherings with snide comments thrown in of certain postings and the complete over-the-top, pathetic, vitriol of others. Annoying, just the same.

It is too bad that the same people that incessantly complain about negative campaigning do not detect the irony in their own posts.

They WANT to run against Hillary. Tell me, who out of all of our Democratic candidates will rile up their base the most. If you say anybody other than Hillary, you are not paying attention. I'm not only worried about Democrats losing the Presidency, I'm worried about Republicans coming out in full force against Hillary and subsuquently voting for other Republicans up and down the ballot. This would absolutely kill Democrats chances of making gains in 2008 and local and national level.

I pray that our party won't self destruct, but I am becoming resigned to the fact that Hillary supporters just don't care.

Posted by MNDem on January 23, 2008 at 04:32 PM

That reminds me of a cartoon I saw recently. A guy says "I'm tired of all this partisan bickering."

Then he says something like "I want to see all of them removed from office, jailed and fined and their supporters herded up and hauled off into camps."

"Partisan bickering just doesn't cut it."

That's kind of like how I feel about Hillary and Bill. Although I'm an Edwards supporter I do feel a certain urge to vote for Hillary just to stick it to the neo-cons. They'll be jumping off bridges if Bill gets back into the White House.

Posted by Butte on January 23, 2008 at 03:48 PM

Butte,

Right on. Voters are looking for a change instead of a continuation of the Rove years of dirty tricks and stylized outrage.

margot,

Career politicians don't have to resort to making themselves look like idiots. Just because it worked for George W. Bush, it won't for the rest of them.

Voters are ready for a real change...perhaps back to a time when politicians didn't feel they had to resort to cheap tricks and theatrics to get elected?

I understand the frustration of this poster. We were going down the right path and then somebody (who has shown a hell of a lack of judgment in the past) decided...for everyone else...that we should emulate the Republicans instead.

While I think it would be foolish to vote Republican, maybe the threat of it is what it's going to take to get us back on track. At the very least I'd like to see some concern for all the other Democratic candidates running for state and local offices.

This last two weeks of juvenile behavior is threating all the hard work many at the grass roots level have put in during the last seven years to resurrect our party. It's an insult to the voters as a whole.

I wish Biden and Richardson had been in that debate with Edwards. Dodd would have shined in comparison to the Bickersons.

And the issues would have been discussed instead of us all getting a glimpse at two massive egos (and one in the wings) clashing. Unbelievable.

bbl, maybe.

WASHINGTON - A study by two nonprofit journalism organizations found that President Bush and top administration officials issued hundreds of false statements about the national security threat from Iraq in the two years following the 2001 terrorist attacks.

The study concluded that the statements "were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses."

The study was posted Tuesday on the Web site of the Center for Public Integrity, which worked with the Fund for Independence in Journalism.

White House spokesman Scott Stanzel did not comment on the merits of the study Tuesday night but reiterated the administration's position that the world community viewed Iraq's leader, Saddam Hussein, as a threat.

"The actions taken in 2003 were based on the collective judgment of intelligence agencies around the world," Stanzel said.

The study counted 935 false statements in the two-year period. It found that in speeches, briefings, interviews and other venues, Bush and administration officials stated unequivocally on at least 532 occasions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or was trying to produce or obtain them or had links to al-Qaida or both.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/23/study-false-statements-p_n_82764.html
=================================================

Chimpy's nose is mighty long.

Posted by MNDem on January 23, 2008 at 04:32 PM
Look, you don't know me. I was a Sen. Biden supporter. He is now gone from the race and I don't really have a candidate. As I HATE the neo-con rethuglicans who are destroying this country more than I actually like any one candidate, I vow to vote Democratic no matter who the candidate is. If it is Sen. Clinton, I will work my butt off for her; but, if it is Sen. Obama or Sen. Edwards or even R. Kucinich, I will work equally hard for any of them as well.
I am well aware that reTHUGlicans hate Sen. Clinton; but, please believe me - they will find a way to 'rally the thug base' - no matter who the Democratic Candidate turns out to be.
If you really want change in this country, if you love your country, if you love your family, if you love yourself - commit to voting a straight Democratic ticket - no matter who runs for which office.
A message needs to be sent to the neo-con, rich, elitest that own the reTHUGlican party at this point in time. Everyone needs to stand up to them and tell them that we - the middle class - are sick and tired of paying for their extravagant life-styles of the rich and shameless! We need to tell them that we refuse to be further enslaved, that we refuse to return to the rober/barron societies of the 1930s and will NOT allow them to further destroy OUR Constitution. We ARE the people! We must form a 'MORE PERFECT UNION' that does away with the authoritarian conservatives who want to line their pockets with gold and control us. "I HOLD THAT A LITTLE REBELLION NOW AND THEN IS A GOOD THING." and "I SURRENDER MY CONSCIENCE TO NEITHER KING NOR PRIEST!!!" These are the principles that this country was founded upon. One person = one vote and every single vote counts! RISE UP DEMOCRATS! RISE UP AND TAKE BACK WHAT IS DEAR TO US! RISE UP FOR YOURSELVES, FOR YOUR CHILDREN AND FOR ALL SUBSEQUENT GENERATIONS. The time is now, the place is here! STAND TALL - SHOULDER TO SHOULDER and let no thug place a wedge between us!

I have not bashed anyone. Simply stated facts.I'm sorry if its agaainst your canadate. Sometimes the truth hurts.

All in all it's extremely disappointing that Obama and Clinton have engaged in a mudslinging contest.
For everyone's good, they should stop it including Bill Clinton.

And, being a huge believer in the teachings of JC, Ghandi, Mother Teresa, and even perhaps John Lennon

Posted by BlueinIdaho on January 23, 2008 at 03:34 PM

John Lennon WAS JC...and he got crucified again.

Later all...time to head home

http://cbs11tv.com/local/ufo.texas.stephenville.2.636217.html

Posted by BlueinIdaho on Jan 23, 2008 at 02:28 PM

You mean like how the mission in Iraq changed?

Didn't the first reports say it was the size of a football field, and made no noise?

By the way, the right wing media is just eating up the mudslinging between Obama and Clinton. That sour puss Buchanan is absolutely gleeful.

I think it's time to put that sort of stuff aside and get back to issues.

Posted by Manymoonsago on January 23, 2008 at 04:50 PM

The problem is that you won't be sticking it to the neo-cons, you would be playing right into their hands. Like I said, they WANT to run against Hillary. They know that it is the only way their disinfranchised voters will turn out.

If it were to end up Clinton vs. McCain, Hillary wouldn't stand a chance. Independents would favor McCain at least 2 to 1. There would even be Democrats voting for McCain with the thought that 4 years of McCain is much better than the possibility of 8 years of Clinton. I, myself, wouldn't vote for Hillary, but I wouldn't vote Republican either.

BHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Congressional candidate Dean Hrbacek appears slimmer than usual in a new campaign brochure because a photo of his head was affixed to the image of a different body.

While the mailer sent to voters this week by the former Sugar Land mayor says “Dean’s record speaks for itself,” his physique clearly does not.

The picture, presented as a true image of the candidate, is a computerized composite of Hrbacek’s face and someone else’s slimmer figure, in suit and tie, from neck to kneecaps.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/01/23/taking-political-vanity-to-a-whole-new-level/

am writing you today out of my DISAPPOINTMENT by the MEDIA, THe Clinton's (Billary), and the National Democratic party. I can PROMISE you I am NOT alone in this. There are MANY who have become litterly SICK to out stomachs over how Sen. Barack Obama has been treated. I see why they call CNN (Clinton News Network) Fox News (Bush and the Republicans) and MSNBC, CBS, ABC ( Are RACIAL and VERY divisive. I see why they call the Democratic party the "group of Jelly-backs" because there is NO way on EARTH the the NDP shoud allow Bill or Hillary Clinton to BASH and LIE and RACIAL divide this Party and this Country.

I am a PROUD College-graduate with a sucesseful job and income that was raised to be a Democrat my ENTIRE life. After this situation if Sen. Obama is NOT elected as the Democratic Nominee I will OFFICIALLY change parties!!!

Atleast with the republican machine, they are honest to let African - Americans know that they don't care about us. After this situation it is my belief that The Clintons were intimidated with Sen. Obama's win in Iowa, with not only African-Americans, but older and younger white voters and women and they saw their "Entitled Presidency" being threated that they decided to LIE and bring up RACE to make "White" voters leave Obama and "black" voters doubt him.

This ENTIRE process has been AWFUL!! THe news lies and twist the stories, the Democratic party does not stand up for the RIGHT canidate, and the Clinton's only care about themselves.

If Sen. Obama does not get the nomination not only will I LEAVE the democratic party but I will PERSONALLY talk to ANY and EVERY news media, person whether they are black, white, latino, old, you, low income, middle income, or high income as to the LIES that the Democratic Party and the Clintons embottle.

Only Sen. Kerry has stood up for him b/c YOU have done him the same way. We stand by you as you LIE year after year to get elected, NEVER passing bills or raising pay, but ALWAYS take millions of dollars for YOURSELf. YOU don't stand for the PEOPLE or the TRUTH you ONLY stand for LIE, MONEY, RATINGS, and Personal gain. And as an African-American woman, they way the Democratic black Caucus has been, THEY NEED TO BE DONE AWAY WITH TOO!!!!

I PRAY God have mercy on your soul and the reason we have SO MUCH PASSION for Sen. Obama is b/c he seems to be the ONLY one left in Washington that care about the truth, the common man, and making the world better.
Everyone talks about Pres. Bush, but TODAY Pres. Clinton is NO BETTER and Bush lied about the War, but Pres. Clinton LIED about SOOO many things.

I don't understand how you can sleep at night with yourselves. One day the world will end and YOU WILL HAVE TO ANSWER for EVERYTHING you've done!

TODAY is the Time to stand up against LIES of the "Clinton" Dynasty!!! 28 years of Bush/Clinton are ENOUGH. I am convienced that they are ALL in on it together and there is NO real problem between "democrats and republicans".

If you DON'T stand up TODAY for Sen. OBAMA, you will pay later because I PROMISE the Democrats WILL not have the White House in November and there will be A LOT of NEW Representatives and Senators. You must have forgot YOU WORK FOR THE AMERICAN people, NOT the other way around!!!!

Al Gore, Ted Kennedy should STAND up. What's so SAD to my heart is that not only will this tear the party up, BUT it WILL turn people off from the political process and the news and WE ARE NOT BETTER than IRAN, IRAQ, or anyone else we like to point the finger at. They kill people, but WE CHARACTER kill people as you have done with Sen. Obama and Sen. Kerry.

AMERICAN as whole wants CHANGE but the powers that be DOESN'T!!!

Sen. Obama's campaign is not just a Campaign BUT A MOVEMENT that regardless to what the MEDIA says is beyond, black, white, lation, women, men, old, young, rich and poor. I have SOOO much love for my Obama "brothers" and sisters". WE ARE THE NEW AMERICA whether you like it or not and the people are to the point that WE WILL NOT let you win this time and CHANGE WILL HAPPEN whether you like it or not. Look at ALL of your positions closely today, if you are not HONEST in this WE will elect you ALL out and write to the news stations until we get NEW Anchors that are JUST and FAIR. Do you think Bill Clinton cares about people. He will take his 20 Million dollar from Duabi and walk in the sunset, but as someone who as been sick before he should be careful BECAUSE GOD has a Way to HUMBLE you all to the breaking point. NEVER under- estimate the POWER of Prayer!!!!!

Well, from the sound of things here lately, it's obvious the fascists are scared silly by the fact that Hillary is likely to be the our president. I say this with a great deal of confidence given the strong likelyness that McCain will be her opponent. I just finished looking at this guy's voting record and there is no way the american public is going to elect as our nation's president someone who is as much a ducks-in-a-row rethug as he is. Look at his record for just '07 and you can see he's 100% BushCo, votes the rethug line if he troubles himself to vote at all, and frequently changes his vote. Does this man really have any thoughts of his own?

Posted by marymac_memphis on January 23, 2008 at 04:52 PM

Sorry, I wish I could say that I could support any Democratic candidate, but I cannot support Clinton. The fact that she voted for the Kyl-Lieberman amendment signals to me clearly that she did not learn from her Iraq War vote. She can spin it that she was trying for aggressive diplomacy, but it was obvious that she was just trying to look tough on the "War on Terror", which was a very neo-con thing to do. I cannot support someone who is a member of the DLC (the Democratic Wing of the Republican Party). I also cannot support someone who changes their charachter from day to day to fit the situation. I just want somebody I can trust and Clinton does not pass that test.

Being from MN, I am a great admirer of Paul Wellstone. He didn't tell us what we wanted to hear, he told us what we needed to hear. Republicans even voted for him (the most liberal Senator) because even though they didn't agree with him on everything, they knew he was honest and they respected him for that.

That is how I, many other Democrats, Independents, and, yes, even Republicans (gasp!) feel about Obama.

Posted by Big_Yellow_Dog on January 23, 2008 at 04:56 PM

Yeah, but they've learned from this republican administration that sometimes the best explanation is the one that sounds the most improbable. They know that the MSM won't followup or challenge what they say, so why not spew a doozie?

It seems that the Pentagon is getting ready to send troops into Pakistan. This was just on CNN. With Bush wanting to keep troops in Iraq, Afghanistan and now Pakistan and maybe to Iran, how are they going to do this without a draft?

Give US a JFK proud Democrat.

For change I would love to see Obama, for even greater change Edwards, and the greatest Constitutional change Kucinech. Any of these combinations will bring the White House back to "We the people."

Why is it that Bill is running Hillary campaign again, you see more of Bill than Hillary anymore? You look around and see Bill this and Bill that. Will he run America like Putin runs Russia? Where is Hillary, it seems she has slipped in the background, while Bill and Obama duke it out? How can Hillary lead when Bill takes the limelight away from her? Can you see the First Man running the White House?

I think Obama is doing great battling both Bill and Hillary at the same time. If Obama can tackle a Clinton machine buzz saw then he should do very well in Washington. It seems as the Clinton's both attack, the ones that benefit are Edwards and Obama.

I think Edwards needs to speak out more on the issues, and problems facing America.

The Clinton's sure are putting on a new face anymore, I would hate to have both of them against me. can you see the two of them ruling our White House together in Executive Bush Privilege. look at them now do you think they will relent the totalitarian power Bush has accumulated? In fact they might expand it by bullying Congress like they have other Democrats in their way, Queen Victoria and Prince Bill with no Camelot, and no Poetry verse just Bush/Clinton prose Ambassadorships.

Maybe Obama and Edwards needs to use some Poetry about the Constitution. Some singing verse of our heritage to show that the White House needs the diversity of prose and poetry.

With so many Bush lies leading to the WMD Iraq invasion, it seems they should have first spent some time capturing Osama bin Laden. With hundreds and hundreds of Bush lies. Why did Congress not do their homework? They are the checks and balances of TRUTH! For a President that says he does not lie that is Plame-ing incorrect, it is more like when has this War President ever told US the truth, about 50/50 if we were lucky.

It seems that Israel and the U.S. miscalculated by putting a Warsaw choke hold on Gaza. You would think that Israel would not make an internment camp of Gaza.

I am glad Egypt let them get food stuffs and fuel like propane for survival, helping them like starving people in Darfur. look at the carts full of flour going back to Gaza. While I do not condone Hamas, maybe Egypt can police Gaza.

I support Israel except when it goes too far like when it bulldozed hundreds of homes because of one person. So when it goes into banning food and fuel for cooking, it is too much for a civilized country. It does not have to use principles that the Nazi's used in Warsaw on the Palestinian people in mass like in Warsaw where the same tactic was used.

It seems Huckabee is like Giuliani, they cannot handle their finances very well, so how will they handle a nation? Republican's Conservative Right Wing does not want Huckabee for he is not pro-Conglomerate in his religion. It seems he is more for human compassion than corporate profit compassion of idolatry.

Do you think Bill Clinton cares about people.
Posted by AR4OBAMA on January 23, 2008 at 05:02 PM

Yes, actually I do. I really do and have always felt that way. I think he cares just as much as Sen. Obama, Sen. Edwards and Rep. Kucinich and A MILLION times more than any of the reTHUGS. I think that, while he may have the personal morals of an alley cat, he did an excellent job as President. I think that we could (and have done) far worse.

I am a PROUD College-graduate with a sucesseful job and income that was raised to be a Democrat my ENTIRE life. After this situation if Sen. Obama is NOT elected as the Democratic Nominee I will OFFICIALLY change parties!!!
=================================================

Well now, I wouldn't go that far. What do you have waiting for you on the GOP side? It isn't pretty.

I'll say it again. The Clintons, Obama and all of the candidates should stop the unseemly mudslinging. It isn't helping anyone make a decision.

Just a few months ago i was a hillary supporter. But after carefuly listening to her obam and edwards. I started leaning more towards edwards. But edwards message has not resinated with voters. And a couple days ago on msnbc tim russert was talking about the first debate. Russert said during the first break edwards went to obama grabbed him by the shoulders and said.C'mon man get into the debate we have to go after her (hillary). And thats when i made up my mind to support obama. It told me that they are on the same page. REAL CHANGE

The problem is that you won't be sticking it to the neo-cons, you would be playing right into their hands. Like I said, they WANT to run against Hillary. They know that it is the only way their disinfranchised voters will turn out.

If it were to end up Clinton vs. McCain, Hillary wouldn't stand a chance. Independents would favor McCain at least 2 to 1. There would even be Democrats voting for McCain with the thought that 4 years of McCain is much better than the possibility of 8 years of Clinton. I, myself, wouldn't vote for Hillary, but I wouldn't vote Republican either.

Posted by MNDem on January 23, 2008 at 04:57 PM

Well, I'm not so sure about that. Remember that women are not a minority in this country, they are a majority. They aren't as vocal about who they are going to vote for because they don't want to be bullied by us loud-mouthed know-it-all males who want to make them vote for this one or that one.

I was going to a Catholic grade school when JFK ran and among 48 children 46 voted for JFK when the kids in the public school came in a ratio of about 50/50. I think women have been waiting a long time for one of their sex to be President and Hillary may win it. Obama may win it for the same reason. There are a whole lot of non-white southerners who vote these days.

Anyway, I'll vote for Edwards in the primary but whoever gets the Democratic nomination gets my vote in the main election.

Does this man really have any thoughts of his own?

Posted by BoilerMan on January 23, 2008 at 05:03 PM
=================================================

He's very much BushCo. I don't get this reputation he has for being a "maverick". I haven't seen any evidence of that. This is the nut case that wants to stay in Iraq for 100 years!

We should have went into pakistan in the first place and stayed out of iraq. PBS did a show proving that the money spent by the highjackers came from pakistan. Probably to little to late'

if Sen. Obama is NOT elected as the Democratic Nominee I will OFFICIALLY change parties!!!
Posted by AR4OBAMA on January 23, 2008 at 05:02 PM

Why wait? Go now! Don't let the door hit you on your way out! We don't need people who bash other Democrats. If you like Sen. Obama, that's fine but to come in here and call names and bash other Dems. is absolutely reTHUGlican TROLL-like and we don't need you! So just go away now. That's just my opinion.

Posted by MNDem on January 23, 2008 at 05:07 PM

Sorry, MN, but try as you might we're not going to engage ourselves here in a slug-fest over which dem we support, why we support him/her, or what we don't like that's wrong or bad with the other candidates. We know who we like and we know we'll vote for which ever dem is nominated. It's simple really, either you're for what has become of our country in the last 7 years and you vote republican, independent, or not at all, or you're ready to help guide the nation down a more equitable and caring path and vote democratic. As has been said on here many many times before and will likely be repeated many more times, any of our democratic candidates will be 100 times better that any the fascist rethuglicans have to offer.

Good job mary disinfranchise another potential dem. vote. Who's the repubiccan now. BRAVO BRAVO!!!!!!!!!

Posted by cntkpusdwn4lng on January 23, 2008 at 04:53 PM

Keep it up pet. Your dribble is no longer read.

Sorry, MN, but try as you might we're not going to engage ourselves here in a slug-fest over which dem we support, why we support him/her, or what we don't like that's wrong or bad with the other candidates.
===================================================

Boilerman, agreed! I just want the campaigns to elevate their tone. We don't need them engaging in slug fests either! Let's concentrate on issues and leave the slug festing to the deserving GOP candidates.

he should be careful BECAUSE GOD has a Way to HUMBLE you all to the breaking point. NEVER under- estimate the POWER of Prayer!!!!!

Posted by AR4OBAMA on January 23, 2008 at 12:02 PM

Are a "pro-life" voter with all this God talk?

FYI, Obama started the smears and attacks LAST SUMMER. Do you remember the "Big Brother" ad?
Do you remember how many times Obama repeated the false republican talking point that the Senate led us to war? Obama ignored the MAJOR fact that the Administration presented false, misleading, and "cherry-picked" intel to the Senate. Furthermore, Obama was not in the Senate, and has admitted that if he had been in the Senate, he might of authorized to war too.

You claim to be a life-long Democrat, but you will switch parties if Obama is not nominated. This makes no sense. Funny you have nothing to say about Republicans, only misleading and harsh statements about Democrats.

In closing, I don't believe your Party history assertions. I don't believe you are now a Democrat. I think you are a "pro-life" Republican, and your only goal here is to support Obama so Democrats get the weakest candidate and lose, and you get your Republican pro-lifer. Many of your type have jumped parties, and voted in the Democratic Primaries for Obama.

If you want to switch parties because you don't agree with the democratic process, and haven't learned that Republicans are wrong on everything, and have wrecked this country, then I PRAY that HELL has a special PLACE for YOU. Have a nice DAY!

CNN = CORPORATE NETWORK NONSENSE, u holy roller.

What is wrong with you people??? You bash me, saying i'm being emotional for stating fact.Then in the same breath you bash people because your canadate hillary is fracturing our party. Keep it up let the rebublicans win yet again. You apologize to ar4obama. Grow up people!!!!!!!

Who's the repubiccan now. BRAVO BRAVO!!!!!!!!!

Posted by cntkpusdwn4lng on January 23, 2008 at 05:20 PM

I suspect you are. Further, I suspect that the person that I sent that post to is actually a reTHUGlican troll. I can't stand people who come in here under false pretenses and spout garbage about Democrats. You included. I agree with Boilerman. You may try to start some slug-fest but as far as I am concerned, you and other reTHUGlican trolls are the only ones I'm interested in slugging. I like and will support any/all of our candidates!

eewh...the troll's about to blow a gasket. gotta run, people...later.

Obama has allready started change he put through a bill banning gifts froms from lobiest.

Posted by cntkpusdwn4lng on January 23, 2008 at 05:28 PM

Michael:

The above is throwing a tantrum. Is there anything you can do to help this poor child?

Thanks in advance for your courtesy and cooperation.

Posted by cntkpusdwn4lng on January 23, 2008 at 05:12 PM

Absolute BS.

this isn't dnc blog. This is a HRC blog. instead of debating our differaces, you all spit hate. You are very,very sad.I am a dem. with differant views from you HRC people. The white house is not her birthright. And i will fight you all and her until she cleans up herr campaine.

Posted by cntkpusdwn4lng on Jan 23, 08 at 05:20 PM

Do you really believe everything you read? He/she was a life-long Democrat, and now he/she just supports Obama? Sure. It's the DNC's fault that Obama is not getting treated with kid gloves, and mud is flying? Sure. Obama has been very fair in his campaigning? Sure. Obama has never attacked anyone? Sure. That nasty "big brother" ad was not him, that was just someone in the firm he hired. Sure. Obama is not playing the race card? Sure. Give me a break.

BLUE you are sad . Everything i've said is true. Do some research and you will see.

Posted by BlueinIdaho on January 23, 2008 at 05:35 PM
Blue: cntkpus is a 'masked' reTHUGlican troll. Everything that IT posts is "Absolute BS." For that matter so are AR4Obama and MNDem.

It isn't helping anyone make a decision.
Posted by rjsnj on January 23, 2008 at 05:11 PM

Oh, I don't know. I think it makes people realize how much stronger Edwards is as a person/candidate.

Posted by cntkpusdwn4lng on January 23, 2008 at 05:39 PM
In an effort to cover your identity, you are making the same purposful spelling/syntax errors as you do under the reTHUGlican troll name D (Dumb) A (A$$) Cactus. Go away troll

Go to any of the fact check websites look for yourself.The clintons are wrong in their attacks.BBL to scap with all you all after dinner

Posted by SandyH on January 23, 2008 at 04:51 PM

I agree that people want change. I definitely feel that we need some change, but let's not forget that politics is a job, too. You wouldn't criticize a doctor or lawyer for having "too much experience." That doesn't make sense. Being "fresh" also has the flip side of being "untested" and that isn't what we need now.

Unfortunately there are people that resort to dirty tactics. Unfortunately, the general electorate only responds to the grotesque and outrageous. I will do my best to support my candidate without bashing the others. I will also support the Democrats because I know that whoever is in office will work to bring change. I'm interested in how much change and how quickly.

BYD:

I wish that Dems would look at Edwards more seriously. He has a lot of gifts but with the media locking him out early in the game it's doubtful he can win this go around. I'm fairly confident that either of the other two Dem candidates will recognize what he could bring and utilize him in as Atty Gen.

Well, fellow Dems, time to start packing up for the day. Afterall, tomorrow's another day!

Posted by puggles on January 23, 2008 at 05:48 PM

I totally agree. I would love to see Sen. Edwards with a place in the cabinet of the next Pres. I wouldn't mind seeing him as VP; however, I really believe that the VP needs to be Sen. Biden or Sen. Dodd or Gov. Richardson because of their foreign policy exp. Whomever is not VP, should be Sec. State and NSA.

Posted by marymac_memphis on January 23, 2008 at 05:42 PM

Don't you dare call me a Republican!! I may be a pissed off Democrat, but I am surely a Democrat. Just because I am a voice of dissention within our Party, all of a sudden I am a Republican in your mind.

You know how if you were against the war, you were unpatriotic, which I was also called many times. Look how ironic your statement is compared to that.

If you don't see that there are members of our Party who are only greedy for power, and don't really give a damn about us, then I can only say, god help us all.

Posted by marymac_memphis on January 23, 2008 at 05:17 PM
Wow, Mary part of the process of electing someone is to find out who they really are. The Democrats nominees themselves started bashing each other.

What can we do just talk about Republicans?

Everything i've said is true. Do some research and you will see.
Posted by cntkpusdwn4lng on Jan 23, 08 at 05:42 PM

You say that HC is throwing the mud. I really don't know where you get this from? In fact, I think that Obama is responsible for the mud.

True or false:
Last summer, Obama ad firm did a commercial claiming that HC was "Big Brother." True.

OBama keeps repeating that Hillary took us to war, ignoring the MAJOR detail that the Administration lied to the Senate. True.

Obama has made over 80 attacks against Hillary? True.

And now Obama is belly-aching about some rush-style muslim anti-christian ads. Poor baby.
He's a dirt-bag for assuming Clinton or Edwards are responsible. As if Democrats HC or JE would do that. Those ads are so stupid nobody would fall for them. It looks like when Romney funded push poll against HIM so he could play the victim.

Reposted in answer to:
Posted by MNDem on January 23, 2008 at 05:54 PM
Posted by MNDem on January 23, 2008 at 05:07 PM

Sorry, MN, but try as you might we're not going to engage ourselves here in a slug-fest over which dem we support, why we support him/her, or what we don't like that's wrong or bad with the other candidates. We know who we like and we know we'll vote for which ever dem is nominated. It's simple really, either you're for what has become of our country in the last 7 years and you vote republican, independent, or not at all, or you're ready to help guide the nation down a more equitable and caring path and vote democratic. As has been said on here many many times before and will likely be repeated many more times, any of our democratic candidates will be 100 times better that any the fascist rethuglicans have to offer.

Posted by BoilerMan on January 23, 2008 at 05:19 PM

I agree with BoilerMan - you are just trying to start trouble and we aren't falling for it. Go away reTHUGlican troll. I will no longer respond to your reTHUGlican posts.

"am writing you today out of my DISAPPOINTMENT by the MEDIA, The Clinton's (Billary), and the National Democratic party. I can PROMISE you I am NOT alone in this. There are MANY who have become litterly SICK to out stomachs over how Sen. Barack Obama has been treated."

I don't share AR4OBAMA's depth of passion for Obama, but I do share the disappointment is the Clintons' ugly tactics. A lot of people are talking about not voting for Hillary if she gets the nomination because of the way they are treating Obama. The Clintons are playing a dangerous game with Black people. These wounds are deep and don't heal easily.

I am also disappointed in the National Democratic Party. Where is the leadership? Why has no one put a stop to the Clintons' razing of the party in order to dominate it? The Republicans are gaining favor with the American voters just by standing aside and watching the Democrats self-destruct.

I don't know what Obama's chances are, but every day I'm finding it harder and harder to support a ticket that has Hillary on it.

Posted by Big_Yellow_Dog on January 23, 2008 at 05:59 PM

BYD: DON'T FALL FOR IT! Don't fall into the reTHUGlican trap that this troll is setting for all of us. We know that Sen. Clinton, Sen. Edwards and Sen. Obama are all GREAT candidates and we will support whomever wins the Nomination!

CNN's Carol Costello just did a "Keeping them honest" piece and asked, "Obama says he is change, but can he deliver." They went over Obama assertions, and found it's more talk than substance. They showed how he said that he lead the way for "ethics reform." No really. They found it's mostly rhetoric, and no substance. NO JOKE.

Posted by marymac_memphis on January 23, 2008 at 06:01 PM

Just explain to me what in my comments has anything to do with what a Republican might say.

If anybody is more Republican, it is you. If you don't agree with someone else's comments, then that person should be shunned. I have fought hard over the past 12 years, when I finally became an activist for the party in college, to get people to see how superior the Democratic values are. When I see comments like the one you posted above, it truly makes me wonder what all that work was for. You make me ashamed to be a Democrat. You can go ahead a call me whatever names you like, but it only shows what an embarassment you are to the Democratic Party.

Me, I will continue to fight for this party. This is a party of WE THE PEOPLE, and I will do whatever I can to make sure some power-hungry politicians don't take that away from us.

OK all you hrcs grab a handful im back

Lets talk health care

Posted by SouthernGirl on Jan 23, 2008 at 06:04 PM

What are you talking about? OBAMA has been going dirty ever since HIS "Hillary as Big Brother" LAST SUMMER. And Obmaa just keeps pointing his finger at the Clintons. Give me a break! Obama is the one who needs to be talked to. Oh wait, civil rights leaders who KNEW MLK DID TELL OBAMA to knock it off.

Why are some Dems working against Edwards like Kucinech?

Posted by cntkpusdwn4lng on Jan 23, 08 at 06:13 PM

Nice try. You have some answering to do:
Posted by Big_Yellow_Dog on Jan 23, 08 at 05:59 PM

There they go again. The media is stirring up the old debate about Bill Clinton and if he is pushing aside everyone to make himself the story. I think that if you Google Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, you'll see will be more stories on Bill Clinton than the candidates. They write the stories, then ask why Bill Clinton is trying to run for a third term. It's not Bill Clinton's fault if the media seems to be obsessed with him and not his wife. The next thing you'll seet them do is start asking if women voters are being turned off by Bill Clinton pushing Hillary to the side and hogging the spot light. The spot light couldn't be hogged if they didn't shine it.

With the Pentagon making plans to put troops into Pakistan, how does that effect Iraq and Afghanistan? Does the U.S. want to have a military presence, then also in Iran? What is your opinion?

Posted by Big_Yellow_Dog on January 23, 2008 at 06:14 PM

You are full of it. Ever since her loss in Iowa, Hillary's team (Bill and surrogates) have been pouring it on thick. Unfortunately, so many people are sheep, they are buying it.

Tell me, how many times have Hillary's surrogates had to apologize to the Obama campaign because of nasty attacks. Then, tell me how many times Obama's surrogates have had to apologize to Hillary's campaign (the answer to the second one is zero).

The actions of Bill and Hillary over the past couple of weeks have guaranteed that a significant amount of normally Democratic voters will vote Independent instead of Democrat should she win the nomination. With how nasty it's gotten, how can you really blame them.

Posted by Big_Yellow_Dog on January 23, 2008 at 06:07 PM

I knew it! Obama is getting by on the fact that he is a young minority! When people start to question him on matters of substance, he gets defensive and cries 'racism'. Shame on the media for protecting him. If these are the tactics he uses, he needs to mature before he is ready to be POTUS. We need a candidate that won't crack under pressure.

GO EDWARDS!

This is crazy. Can you not extoll the virtues of your candidate without trashing another candidate? If one needs to tear down someone else to make their candidate appear better, I have great misgivings about the ACTUAL qualities that candidate possesses.

Absolute insanity. Probably part of the reason we are stuck with a moron in the WH.

PEACE PEOPLE!

Posted by marymac on Jan 23, 08 at 06:05 PM

Sorry, I don't share your confidence in Obama. After the lies and distortions that he's said, I have no respect for this character, and I think he lacks integrity. Besides, I don't want to run a rookie against a seasoned Republican with Executive exp.
If you listen to Obama's CNN commercial, word for word, you will see he has nothing... but rhetoric.

Clintons heathcare and language have shifted too. In 93 she proposed a healhcare program that would establish a manditory insurance purchasind alliance ,not a single patey system.I n98 speaking about the 93 disaster.She said,Icome from the school of smaller steps.It is better to help some than do nothing and help none. Last she was asked about a single payer plan april,it it unfair to tell people we can do something politicaly when we dont yet have tha votes. at mondays debate she said,If you dont start out tryingto get universal healthcarewe knoww.... you'll never get there. her plan would achieve universal coverage not through a single payer system but a "indavidual mandate" requiring everyone to get health insurance,just as most states require drivers to by auto insurance.

Ok, I'll leave you all to trash the democrats. You're doing a great job. I'm outtahere.

Big_Yellow_Dog: The Clintons began an all-out assault on Obama since he won Iowa. Who doesn't know that?

The bickering has reached the boiling point and now both camps are off-message. I've said it before, I'll say it again--The Democratic Party is imploding. What are we doing while that is happening? Squabbling among ourselves. The Repubicans are eating this up.

This tactic has proved successful for the Clintons and they give me the impression that they are willing to risk losing the White House for the Democrats if Hillary isn't going to be in it.

I feel that they are a devisive factor in the party right now. Their strategy in South Carolina, for example is to divide the Black vote. The Democratic Party has worked for a long time to maintain that voting block. What damage will the Clintons have done to the S.C. Democrats when they leave? Who will mend those fences? Obama's strategy was to bring everyone together.

There is no faction of the Democratic Party that has been more loyal to the Clintons than Black people. It seems ironic that it is the Clintons who are, at this point, the major stumbling block to the most viable Black candidate for the Presidency. I understand that Hillary has a right to her own candidacy; I just don't understand how the Clintons can justify to themselves the manner in which they are going about it.

Posted by margotb822 on Jan 23, 2008 at 06:24 PM

You took the words right out of my mouth. The media is handling him with kid gloves. And when HC or JE responds to Obama's unfair attacks, Obama cries foul, and the MSM says Obama is being attacked. It's the biggest crock I've ever seen.

His latest gimmick is forming a "truth squad," to address the muslim ads and attacks on his faith. I can't wait until they find out who's behind it. Obama might be forced to drop out when they find out he's responsible, and he smeared HC and JE for assuming they were behind it. He's playing the race AND faith cards. I surprised more people don't see it.

Posted by margotb822 on January 23, 2008 at 06:24 PM

While I favor Edwards over Obama, By you saying Obama will crack under pressure is totally wrong, has he cracked with the Hillary and Bill onslaught? The fact that he is going one for one against Bill who is not even a Candidate is terrific. Maybe the Obama campaign needs to recruit Carter to attack the Clinton's then Clinton can ask Bush Senior to step in and on and on.

It seems that we now have a ferry going to nowhere is in the works by Republican Stephens of Alaska that was put in Bush's defense bill. I guess a ferry is going to be a warship for the Alaskan Navy.

Ferry money draws scrutiny

MAT-SU: $20 million for Port MacKenzie project put into defense bill.

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Of the more than 11,000 earmarks jammed into two federal budget bills passed late last year, few have drawn as much scrutiny as the $20 million budgeted for the Mat-Su Borough's ferry project.

The $20 million earmark, placed in the defense bill by U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens, helps pay for an experimental, U.S. Navy-designed vessel that will serve as a ferry from Anchorage to Point MacKenzie.

The project, with an estimated $60 to $70 million final cost, could be operational in August 2009. When finished, its builders say, it will be the first ice-breaking catamaran ferry in the world. Crossing the Knik Arm by ferry would cut travel time from two hours to 25 minutes, opening the sparsely populated Point MacKenzie to further development.

Link

With US facing a recession a Republican Senator again wants to build something to nowhere. It seems that Oil profits up there could build it with state money not federal money.

What is wrong with Washington putting in Earmarks in when the country is hurting.

Big_Yellow_Dog: The Clintons began an all-out assault on Obama since he won Iowa. Who doesn't know that?
Posted by SouthernGirl on Jan 23, 2008 at 06:51 PM

And Obama has not been on an "all-out" assault on HC since LAST SUMMER with his HC as Big Brother ad???

Did Obama ask out-of-state students to caucus?
Maybe Dems should have not said anything about this corruption of the IOWA caucus?

New thread!

What damage will the Clintons have done to the S.C. Democrats when they leave? Who will mend those fences? Obama's strategy was to bring everyone together.
Posted by SouthernGirl on Jan 23, 08 at 06:51 PM

You do know that two civil rights leaders who walked with MLK at Selma told Obama to knock it off for his unfair attack on Clinton's LBJ remark?

Obama played the race card, and got called out by the real civil rights leaders for playing a joker.

Hey, WTF is going on? Direct it at the media folks. Conspiracy, cover up, we've a major problem here:
__________

DANIEL ELLSBERG: Covering Up the Coverage - The American Media's Complicit Failure to Investigate and Report on the Sibel Edmonds Case
In an Exclusive BRAD BLOG Op-Ed, the Legendary 'Pentagon Papers' Whistleblower Calls on the Media to Perform Their First Amendment Obligations, on Congressional Leaders to Perform Their Oversight Duty, and for Insider Sources to Come Forward to the American Public...
******

In support of the official cover-up, various American journalists in the last weeks have reportedly received calls from "intelligence sources" hinting that "what Sibel Edmonds stumbled onto" is not a rogue operation by American officials and Congressmen working to their own advantage --- as believed by Edmonds and some other former or active FBI officials --- but a sensitive covert operation authorized at high levels. If there is any truth to that, we clearly have another prize candidate --- giving us, as blowback, the Pakistani Bomb and nuclear sales --- in the category of "worst covert operation in U.S. history," rivaling such contenders as the Bay of Pigs, Iran-Contra, and the secret CIA torture camps abroad.
******

Many, if not most, covert operations deserve to be disclosed by a free press. They are often covert not only because they are illegal but because they are wildly ill-conceived and reckless. "Sensitive" and "covert" are often synonyms for "half-assed," "idiotic," and "dangerous to national security," as well as "criminal." All of these would apply to the pattern of activities revealed by Edmonds if it were truly presidentially authorized, as is being whispered. Such activities persist, covertly, to the point of national disaster because the press neglects what our First Amendment was precisely intended to protect and encourage it to do: expose wrongdoing by officials.

www.bradblog.com/?p=5583#more-5583

"You do know that two civil rights leaders who walked with MLK at Selma told Obama to knock it off for his unfair attack on Clinton's LBJ remark?
Obama played the race card, and got called out by the real civil rights leaders for playing a joker."

Big_Yellow_Dog:

You make my point for me. The Clintons got their Black supporters to ask OBAMA to "knock it off" when the offense was felt Black people around the country. We weren't offended because Obama told us to be! That was a dirty tactic. The Clintons are a devisive factor in the party, as you have just proven.

Here's my main point: The bickering should stop! The Democratic National Party should stop it.

I believe Hillary will get the party's nomination, but I don't believe I can vote for her if the Clintons continue their dirty tactics. I will go into the voting booth and vote for the local Democratic candidates, but Hillary has got to clean up her act or she will lose a lot of us.

Posted by Big_Yellow_Dog on January 23, 2008 at 05:25 PM

Phil de Vellis, until Wednesday an employee of the company that handles Obama's Web site, boasted in a posting on the Huffington Post that he made the ad, though he claimed neither the Obama campaign nor his former employer, Blue State Digital -- which does software development and hosting for Obama's campaign -- was aware that he had.

Missing a few facts, there.

Anti-Clinton Ad Linked to Obama Campaign Tech
'1984' YouTube Apple Ad Comparing Clinton to 'Big Sister' Created by Obama Tech, Campaign Denies Involvement

Posted by marymac_memphis on January 23, 2008 at 05:54 PM

Why not the other 2 as members of an Edwards cabinet?

"A lot of people are talking about not voting for Hillary if she gets the nomination because of the way they are treating Obama. The Clintons are playing a dangerous game with Black people. These wounds are deep and don't heal easily."

I'm a South Carolinian. I strongly feel this sentiment within my community as well. The thing is, the Clintons chose and planned to take this route and to prolong their trip extensively with expensive ads, media interviews, etc... Hillary left SC immediately after the SC debate, leaving Bill to continue his hatchet-job and to campaign for her in her absence. THIS tells me clearly, as a South Carolinian, Hillary does not care about SC whatsoever. The 2-for-1 team just wants to win at ANY COST. This makes it obvious that the 2-for-1 is Hillary and Bill for Hillary ONLY. Very divisive, indeed.

And it didn't have to be this way - This way was chosen. This is the candidate of old-school politics, and this is not a candidate that can even unite her own party. Far from it. I can echo what I've heard loudly within my community here in SC. Many will not be voting for Hillary if she gets the nomination.