the supreme court has decided that you need photo id to vote. should help the republicans a lot which is really what the supreme court sees as it's mission these days. now let's keep tearing the democratic party apart over this inane obama/hillary split and we can get mcsame elected and one or two more right wing nut supremes appointed and that should just about do it for public education, choice, worker's rights and so on....hello gilded age!

Good afternoon, all.

Just passing by....

Why is the mainstream new media so intent on running the Rev. Wright for president? He might as well go ahead and declare his candidacy, because they're going to hound him the rest of his life.

I personally think there are a lot of closet racists within the media. They talk about the issue so much you have to wonder why. At least the hate radio guys are up front.

gregg,

I wonder if a valid gun permit would qualify as a valid I.D. instead?

I guess we will have to get those young people out with their digital equipment to start photographing seniors who are too infirm to make it to the Driver's ID offices. How about holding bake sales to raise frunds for those who can't afford to buy an I.D.... much less milk, eggs, and and gasoline?

Hell, with the cost of gasoline so high. A lot of us might stop driving and let our driver licenses expire. What's the point?

We just have to get over it?

bbl.

From Jared Bernstein
EPI

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jb-powell/economist-jared-bernstein_b_98927.html

I just learned the other day that John McCain's chief economic advisor is former Senator Phil Graham. Can you discuss the significance of that choice?

You could fairly convincingly trace the current financial meltdown back to legislative changes that originated with Phil Graham, including ending a banking regulation called Glass-Stiegel [and banning the federal government from regulating hedge funds].

It's no secret that McCain wants to further deregulate capital markets and that he wants to go way beyond Bush in terms of tax cuts. So if you didn't like Bush-onomics, and I didn't, you really won't like McCain-onomics.

But McCain originally opposed Bush's tax cuts, didn't he?

That's true. I don't know if he's pandering now and the old McCain is going to come back if he gets elected or if he's actually become a really vicious supply-sider, but I'm going to choose to believe what he's saying and what he's saying is quite discordant.

Can you use your economist's crystal ball for a moment? If McCain manages to win in the general election, but the Dems pick up seats in the house and senate as expected, what will happen in terms of our economic direction?

If McCain is elected, I think you'll see massive gridlock, unless the composition of congress changes. I think on domestic policy, you're going to see some really serious head-butting. I can't imagine him getting his tax agenda through, but on the other hand it's hard to imagine that the Democrats will be able to let the Bush tax cuts sunset either. I don't know how that particular train wreck plays out.

On the war, thinking as an economist, you've got McCain spending hundreds of billions of dollars cutting taxes and then hundreds of billions of dollars on [continuing the] war forever, too. The only way he does that without blowing an unbelievable hole in the budget is through massive spending cuts. He likes to talk about earmarks. You can't begin to scratch that itch [by cutting] earmarks. You can't even get there with discretionary spending. You're going to have to cut entitlements. So McCain's real targets if he's serious about all of this are Social Security and Medicare.

But unless the composition of congress changes dramatically, I don't see those cuts occurring, so I think McCain's agenda would wind up being major wheel spinning.

How would that kind of gridlock, if it occurred, affect our current economic situation? How much can and should the government do to avert a possible economic meltdown?

The government can apply some much needed stimulus to the economy as the private sector is recovering from the recession. That will happen. I'm confidant that so-called corrections will work themselves out, though it's going to be very painful.

I don't know that the person who takes office in January of 2009 is going to have a whole lot to do with that. I think the major economic difference between McCain and the two Democrats is less about stimulus and dealing with recession. I think it will show itself mostly in terms of regulation and redistribution, and restoring confidence in government.

On regulation, the Democrats are interested in trying to have federal agencies up and running again and doing what they're supposed to do ... and on the tax side, I think Democrats will be looking to raise needed revenue and also, they'll take steps to reverse market inequalities and [Bush's] regressive tax policies.

Of course, there's a big difference in health care, too [between McCain and the Democrats]. That would also be a government intervention that would play out very differently depending on who wins in November.

sandy, the point is the good burghers of indiana see a way to decrease participation of poor people, people with handicaps and so on...there is of course no documented history of voter fraud in this country and scant few examples of folks lying so they could cast a vote...more of a problem is all the people who choose not to vote because they think the whole system is bullshit...

I am not a media blinded voter. I recearch and learn things on my own. I also watch the canidates and judge the choices they have made and are currently making. I am currenly a Clinton supporter (&TX delegate) (keep in mind Texas isn't decided yet!!- & won't be untill our convention in June. Up until that time I could change my mind and become an Obama delegate!!!)
With that said, I have watched the Clinton camp and I have decided that she has not made good choices about who she has put around her (advisiors, employees, spokespeople). I'm not sure she would make good choices when she is elected to office.
My question is now that I have come to this conculsion what do I do? Do I continue to support someone who I know, but I have deep questions about her decisions. Or do I support someone who I don't know and don't trust?
This is a trust issue!!! I know Clinton. I don't know Obama. You can tell me to go to the web site and read about him, but that just doesn't do it for me. Obama is a freshmen congressman and the first time I heard of him was his speech at the DNC convention. I agree he is a great speaker, but the job (Pres.) requires more than that.
I'm not concerned who his pastor is, or who hs childhood friends grew up to be (goood or bad). I'm not concerned about who she represented in who care's criminal case 27 eons ago. I'm not concerned about who can bowl better or who can ho-down better with the "people". I'm not even concerned about who has a better chance of beating McCan't in November.

To me my vote is presious and I want to vote for someone who not only I believe in but someone I also trust!!!
So as a Texas delegate, with the questions I have, I ask you--- What am I supposed to do now? Continue someone I am starting to question, or support someone I don't trust?

Not voting is NOT an option. Dropping out as delegate is NOT an option.

Or do I support someone who I don't know and don't trust? This is a trust issue!!! I know Clinton. I don't know Obama.

You only think you know Clinton. You only know what she is on TV. If you really knew Clinton, I doubt whether trust would be an issue, because you sure wouldn't be able to trust her.

Hillary's List of Lies

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/hillarys_list_of_lies.html

WASHINGTON — Millions of dollars of lucrative Iraq reconstruction contracts were never finished because of excessive delays, poor performance or other factors, including failed projects that are being falsely described by the U.S. government as complete, federal investigators say.

The audit released Sunday by Stuart Bowen Jr., the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, provides the latest snapshot of an uneven reconstruction effort that has cost U.S. taxpayers more than $100 billion. It also comes as several lawmakers have said they want the Iraqis to pick up more of the cost of reconstruction.

The special IG's review of 47,321 reconstruction projects worth billions of dollars found that at least 855 contracts were terminated by U.S. officials before their completion, primarily because of unforeseen factors such as violence and excessive costs. About 112 of those agreements were ended specifically because of the contractors' actual or anticipated poor performance.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/27/investigators-millions-in_n_98881.htmlhttp://

Here, try this texas gal...a trust list.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/hillarys_list_of_lies.html

I am not a media blinded voter. I recearch and learn things on my own. I also watch the canidates and judge the choices they have made and are currently making. I am currenly a Clinton supporter (&TX delegate) (keep in mind Texas isn't decided yet!!- & won't be untill our convention in June. Up until that time I could change my mind and become an Obama delegate!!!)
With that said, I have watched the Clinton camp and I have decided that she has not made good choices about who she has put around her (advisiors, employees, spokespeople). I'm not sure she would make good choices when she is elected to office.
My question is now that I have come to this conculsion what do I do? Do I continue to support someone who I know, but I have deep questions about her decisions. Or do I support someone who I don't know and don't trust?
This is a trust issue!!! I know Clinton. I don't know Obama. You can tell me to go to the web site and read about him, but that just doesn't do it for me. Obama is a freshmen congressman and the first time I heard of him was his speech at the DNC convention. I agree he is a great speaker, but the job (Pres.) requires more than that.
I'm not concerned who his pastor is, or who hs childhood friends grew up to be (goood or bad). I'm not concerned about who she represented in who care's criminal case 27 eons ago. I'm not concerned about who can bowl better or who can ho-down better with the "people". I'm not even concerned about who has a better chance of beating McCan't in November.
To me my vote is presious and I want to vote for someone who not only I believe in but someone I also trust!!!
So as a Texas delegate, with the questions I have, I ask you--- What am I supposed to do now? Continue someone I am starting to question, or support someone I don't trust?
Not voting is NOT an option. Dropping out as delegate is NOT an option.
(re-post)

Image of the Day: Jeremiah Wright as a Navy Medic tending to President Lyndon Johnson

Sean Robertson
That really says it all. Patriotism is not about how loudly you say the pledge of allegiance, it’s about how hard you work to improve your country and the lives of it’s citizens.

(...comment from page felt it needed a post here)

100-Years McCain Wants To Kick Russia Out Of The G8, Reboot Cold War
By: Blue Texan Monday April 28, 2008 10:30 am

1226943043_8a48c6526c_m.jpgNewsweek's Fareed Zakaria calls it "the most radical idea put forward by a major candidate for the presidency in 25 years."

McCain proposed that the United States expel Russia from the G8, the group of advanced industrial countries. Moscow was included in this body in the 1990s to recognize and reward it for peacefully ending the cold war on Western terms, dismantling the Soviet empire and withdrawing from large chunks of the old Russian Empire as well. McCain also proposed that the United States should expand the G8 by taking in India and Brazil—but pointedly excluded China from the councils of power.

===============================================

McInsane!

sorry about the 2nd re-post comp. seems slow today.

I am not a media blinded voter. I recearch and learn things on my own...I'm not concerned who his pastor is, or who hs childhood friends grew up to be (goood or bad).
Posted by TexasGal on April 28, 2008 at 01:10 PM
Posted by TexasGal on April 28, 2008 at 01:41 PM

What "childhood friends" are you refering to?

If you're refering to Ayers, he was not a childhood friend. First and foremost, He's 17 years older than him.

Have you really researched on your own?

Posted by Cubilist on April 28, 2008 at 01:20 PM

Good afternoon fellow Democrats.

Obama \ Clinton 2008

Yes we can!

Si se puede!

Change we can believe in!

Sen. Clinton's website.

i found out why the evil empire of iran ( which is run by a sonny bono look alike holocaust denier ) is such a big threat to our bodily fluids...they are towing an anti-barbie line!!!!AAARRRRGGGGGG....

"TEHRAN (Reuters) - Imports of Barbie dolls and other Western toys will have destructive cultural and social consequences in Iran, the Islamic Republic's top prosecutor was quoted as saying on Monday.

Iran's conservative clerical establishment often rails against the perceived dangers of U.S.-inspired culture and consumerism, branding it "Westoxication."..."

i think i have already been corrupted by westoxication....but there is still hope for the children.

Posted by TexasGal on April 28, 2008 at 01:49 PM

Heavy is the head that wears the crown.

What you're asking for is something we cannot do; make up your mind. You've been elected to that position because of your decision making abilities in part or whole. I certainly understand your reservations about both remaining candidates and I appreciate your candor and civility for not falling for the MSM driven electoral process.

Having said that, my only advice is to follow TX and federal law to the letter and let your conscience be your guide. However, if you're standing there, still undecided, and they call your name for your official vote, holler Al Gore's name. That ought to be a hoot in TX. ;-)

As I said Cubilist- I didn't research that issue because I don't care about that. Nor did I listen to the media garbage about it. I want to know about the issues and the canidates contributions (accomplishments) to America and Americans.

Posted by gregg on April 28, 2008 at 01:56 PM

Are they upset about the anatomically correct ones?

Is Ken also included in the boycott?

Repost:

Think about the real reason THIS democratic party has not yet embraced Obama overwhelmingly. It is something you will have to address.
Follow Rev. Wright’s works, and try to “look within” for the answers

What are the spoken "arguments" against Obama? He doesn't wear a flag pin... His minister said harsh things... The blue collar vote don't all like him... In the words of the inimitable George Stephanopoulos; Obama can't say for sure if his minister is as patriotic as he is...
Since these banalities can't possibly explain why there is even a discussion about the choice between Obama and the Clinton hack machine what's really going on?
Here are the real reasons that the Democratic Party has not yet embraced Obama overwhelmingly:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-schaeffer/the-fight-for-obama-requi_b_98892.html
With real leadership, our country finally has a chance to address the elephant that HAS BEEN KEPT in the middle of the room and thus open up a chance for us to truely HEAL. IMHO

Somehow it keeps getting dismissed that the supers like Richardson, are not stupid. That they don't know all the stuff we guess at.

I know in my heart that Senator Obama is going to be our next leader. So much healing is required at this time.
WE desearve it. WE THE PEOPLE desearve him now.
It is truely OUR turn.
I think until he becomes officially our nominee, I will stay off the blogs. I have worked hard for this and with a good heart. I have spent the last few weeks going after McCain on the blogs. Democrats keep going after each other.
I am not giving up---I am just saying that in my heart it is a done deal, so I want some time to revel in this, before I take on McCain and disembowel him. (so much for my good heart) LOL
I just can't handle anymore, how Hillary's campaign has turned, and what it is doing to the democrats---for now.

I hope you keep sharing the good links and information I have so benefited by.
Keep shining the light, I am so grateful to have found this site and this team.We will all come together after we have a nominee.
Mahalo

Repost:

Think about the real reason THIS democratic party has not yet embraced Obama overwhelmingly. It is something you will have to address.
Follow Rev. Wright’s works, and try to “look within” for the answers

What are the spoken "arguments" against Obama? He doesn't wear a flag pin... His minister said harsh things... The blue collar vote don't all like him... In the words of the inimitable George Stephanopoulos; Obama can't say for sure if his minister is as patriotic as he is...
Since these banalities can't possibly explain why there is even a discussion about the choice between Obama and the Clinton hack machine what's really going on?
Here are the real reasons that the Democratic Party has not yet embraced Obama overwhelmingly:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-schaeffer/the-fight-for-obama-requi_b_98892.html
With real leadership, our country finally has a chance to address the elephant that HAS BEEN KEPT in the middle of the room and thus open up a chance for us to truely HEAL. IMHO

Somehow it keeps getting dismissed that the supers like Richardson, are not stupid. That they don't know all the stuff we guess at.

I know in my heart that Senator Obama is going to be our next leader. So much healing is required at this time.
WE desearve it. WE THE PEOPLE desearve him now.
It is truely OUR turn.
I think until he becomes officially our nominee, I will stay off the blogs. I have worked hard for this and with a good heart. I have spent the last few weeks going after McCain on the blogs. Democrats keep going after each other.
I am not giving up---I am just saying that in my heart it is a done deal, so I want some time to revel in this, before I take on McCain and disembowel him. (so much for my good heart) LOL
I just can't handle anymore, how Hillary's campaign has turned, and what it is doing to the democrats---for now.

I hope you keep sharing the good links and information I have so benefited by.
Keep shining the light, I am so grateful to have found this site and this team.We will all come together after we have a nominee.
Mahalo

McInsane!

Posted by rjsnj on April 28, 2008 at 01:54 PM

McLame/McSame/McInsane, whatever you choose to call him, will finish the destruction started by the dub! The Bill of Rights - excluding the second ammendment - will cease to exist or be so nullified by the SCOTUS that it will do no good. Our economy will spiral into a depression worse than the great depression and thousands will be murdered every year in a war of agression based on lies. Our position in the eyes of the rest of the world will be even further diminished and gas will rise to $15 per gallon!
We must band together behind which ever candidate gets the nomination. We must campaign, support and vote for that candidate with all that we have! We must elect every democrat we possibly can to the House and Senate. We need super majorities for the next three decades to begin to right the wrongs inflicted upon us by this administration. This is our election to win or loose.
Support the candidate of your choice with positive comments but please keep in mind, at this point in time either could become our nominee! Go after any Republican you want to and I'll jump right on that, but, please, stop the 'hate speech' and venom spewing against fellow democrats! Please believe me when I tell you, the THUGS have that covered!

Posted by Cubilist on April 28, 2008 at 01:54 PM
=================================================

This is the sorta of stuff that is beyond insane. Obama was 4 years old at the time! This came up in that interview with Chris Wallace on the Fake News channel this Sunday. Ayers just happens to live in Obama's neighborhood - so what!

Yet Another Serious Concern Over Clinton-mania

We all know their version of the Clinton years. It's the one that elevates every good thing that happened and ignores all the negatives to come of it. (Most importantly the decision Bill Clinton made in 1996 to ignore his lead Weapons Inspector's findings. Findings that found Iraq to be incapable of rebuilding its past weapons programs, so long as a reasonable presence was maintained.) But what of NAFTA and the growing export of American jobs overseas? What do we hear of expanding lobbyist influence during that time?

The truth is that we hear little or nothing of these topics because that is the way the Clinton's and their supporters want it. This reality does not fit well with their carefully constructed fantasy.

How do the Clinton's go about participating in the expansion of this fantasy? By making statements such as those made frequently by Hillary Clinton which paint a utopian picture of her and Bill's performance. Remember the now retracted "sniper fire" statements? Or those which painted Hillary as an unwilling supporter of the Bush administration's Iraq policies, support which continued until she began campaigning for the Democratic nomination and which lives on as she gives voice to radical ideologies concerning Iran?

The truth is that Hillary Clinton could well be as dangerous to our nation as another Bush term, either because she still has not recognized to what degree her foreign policy beliefs have been manipulated by those behind the Bush administration or because she simply isn't herself well informed. And with all of her campaigns abrupt changes is it even likely that she and her potential aides could bring a functional government together in a timely manner. Let's just say it doesn't look likely.

one more

from the Asian times

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JD26Ak02.html

We have all seen sporting tournaments were the championship is fought in the semi-finals and the winner faces an easier opponent in the championship.

This presidential race is one of these contests.

On one hand we have "Mr. Spock," whose campaign battle cries include, "To continue giving tax breaks to the rich and big corporations while the country is in debt is illogical," and "It would be unwise to continue a war that distracts us from those that attacked us."

The other contender is a female version of Yosimite Sam, "Annie Oakley." She runs her campaign with an iron fist with her battle crys, "Debate me, ya flee bitten varmit," and "I'll blow Iran to smitherines."

The winner of this tough fought battle will have to face a tough challenger, "Mr. Magoo." He campaign's by walking around aimlessly and occasionally stops to ask the stop signs "Excuse me Miss, can you tell me what time I can board the airplane," and on more than a few occasions he finds himself appoligizing to his reflection as he bumps into windows.

I still like Olbermann's continuous headline, "Old man yells at cloud."

Those are your choices for the next POTUS. Choose wisely.

Obama Critics Protest Attempts to Engage Nation
By bdh - April 27, 2008, 8:03PM

A few critics and pundits who repeatedly criticize Obama for failing to connect with "Reagan Democrats" are worried they might lose that grounds for criticism. In an interview with Fox News' Chris Wallace on Sunday morning, Obama addressed questions posed to him in a civil and direct fashion, and Obama's critics are fuming.

"What is this guy trying to do, run for President of the United States?" asked one detractor. "We insist that he confine himself to championing the liberal blogosphere and let the entire Fox News viewership define him through caricatures of his positions and associations."

Some Clinton supporters feel that these caricatures supported and sometimes created by Fox News have been a boon to their candidate.

"We've painted Obama into a "liberal" box and we would appreciate it if he'd stay there," one critic said. "If he starts stepping up his public efforts to engage voters to the right of people like Michael Moore, we're going to have a lot harder time dismissing him as a Michael Dukakis sort of candidate. This guy is a liberal elitist and the sooner he accepts that the better it will be for all of us who don't support his candidacy."

There is also frustration among some that Obama may be trying to live up to one of the major claims of his campaign--that he will attempt to overcome party divisions to create a productive dialogue and maybe get some things done for the country.

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/04/obama-critics-protest-attempts.php
=================================================

Poor Obama. All he is trying to do is cut through the crap that gets us nowhere. For that he's getting crap from the right wing (more than expected and something we'll have to deal with) but also from HRC who uses right wing talking points against him.

You might of thought you said it, but you wrote, "I research and learn things on my own."

Concerning You're statement about not caring who his childhood friends are or were, who are you refering to???

If you are refering to the fabricated story about William Ayers, your (non-questioning) questioning show you haven't done much research at all on Barack and aren't grasping the most simplistic fact that Ayers is 17 years older and lived in a different part of the country. They couldn't have possibly been "childhood friends."

If you want to know about the issues and candidates accomplishments/contributions to America go to their website.
I know you said the candidate website "just doesn't do it for you." How do you expect to educate yourself on the candidates positions? I suggest you follow some of the links posted by Dave or others on this site if your not interested in the candidates sites.

As Dave said (I think, sorry if it was someone else):
Obama has 10 years of elected public service

Hillary Clinton only has 6 years of elected public service.

I don't want an Obama/Clinton ticket

I don't want Bill back in the White House

I want a Obama/Edwards ticket

Posted by BobVADemHawk-Obama08 on April 28, 2008 at 01:55 PM
===================================================

Hi Bob,

Obama-Clinton huh? I'll live with that. With Obama's common sense and Clinton's inside contacts they could get alot done together (if they don't kill each other ... tee, hee, hee ... just some levity). Kennedy and LBJ worked together very well even though at some levels they didn't like each other.

Will I live with Clinton-Obama? Grit my teeth - okay, I'll live with it but it's not my desired result.

I know politics is tough. But, the campaigns really do need to find a higher ground. There is way too much at stake and pastor wright plays no role in any of it.

Hey Bob, thank you for not lashing out as others have done. People comment on my post with why I shouldn't trust Clinton. I'm not here to listen to people rip the canidates to shreads (leave that crappy practice to the media) I want to hear the positive.

Keep in mind TRUST is a big pie::: I trusted Bush when he was "selected". I trusted he would screw us to the wall, and he did. I trusted that he would screw up the job, and he did. I trusted that we would take us to war within a year, and I was right. (make no mistake- if 9/11 hadn't happened he still would have found a war somewhere, it's still the best way to funnel money to his buddies)

Posted by TexasGal on April 28, 2008 at 02:05 PM

I am unsure by your post if you are a delegate or a super delegate. If you are a delegate, (and I'm not sure about the next comment - so please correct me if I am wrong about this) but is it not your job to vote the wishes of the majority of the voters you represent?
I certainly do not envy the super delegates whose job is to factor in electability. A race this close being decided by super delegates could do some real damage to the party. Does anyone else think that Gov. Dean (who is awesome by the way!) and the DNC should consider re-vamping the democratic primary system? I, personally, would love to see a 'primary week Sun - Sat' where all of the states vote that same week and the results for all states are announced that Saturday Night or the Sunday afterward. Does anyone else like this idea?

dave, ken is ok as long as he strikes a manly pose and knows the words to "i got you babe".

why I shouldn't trust Clinton.
==================================================

Isn't that why I should trust XYZ? Strange way of wording the question.

It comes down to honesty running a campaign. HRC's campaign has been disingenous. Let me count the ways:

1) She hired Mark Penn and allegedly fired him. Except, that turns out to be a lie. Mark Penn is still there. All that changed was his title.

2) Why did she "fire Mark Penn"? Well, supposedly HRC is against the Columbia Free Trade agreement (the one that Chimpy is trying to shove down our throats right now) but Mark Penn was facilitating that agreement.

3) MoveOn was formed to help the Clintons during the impeachment, White water investigations and Kenneth Starr witch hunt. What did HRC do? She ditched MoveOn because they didn't endorse her.

4) Then there is the fib on Bosnia ... oh boy what a whopper.

5) There is the lie about Obama calling the Canadian government to tell them not to worry about NAFTA. Now, we find it was Clinton all along who did that!

6) Then there is McCain passed the commander in chief test (whatever that is), so did I but not Obama ... Geez what nonsense.

7) Then there is HRC's harping on Jeremiah Wright when the Clintons turned to him for support dirung the Monia Lweinsky situation. Interesting ...

I could go on including issues such as job outsourcing where Clinton claims to be against it but owned stock in a large Indian IT outsourcing company. She even went to India to facilitate further outsourcing.

Yes, I could definitely go on.

So, how about reasons to trust Clinton?

Don't make the mistake of seating ANY delegates from Florida and Michigan. If you do it will be the demise of the party.

I for one will leave the party!

Posted by GBGram on April 28, 2008 at 12:08 PM

Howard was on TV yesterday morning, and he said THE RULES COMMITTEE of the DNC was looking at what to do . IMO, I believe that each state will be given Half.

Now I have no sympathy for these 2 states that thought they were more important than the other 48, but this situation MUST be resolved, or else there will be no more Democratic Party for you to leave.

Selective Memories

It would appear from some of our fellow Democrats that selective memory loss may be contageous. To illustrate my point I'd like to remind those of paying attention of the numerous comments made by Hillary Clinton's campaign towards the beginning of her run for the nomination which wrongly represented her as a highly active participant within her husband's administration and thus highly experienced. As a matter of fact, those who continue to portay Hillary as the more experienced Democrat rely primarily on this illusion, though they no longer feel the need to exagerate quite as much as they did in the beginning. Obviously this change of events has much to do with Hillary's being caught up in a number of frequently repeated exagerations, exagerations she and her supporters now blame on "exhaustion" much as George Bush supporters once blamed his own missteps on something other than an intentional attempt to manipulate.

Hillary Clinton and her campaign have made the argument that she has somehow benefitted from her husband's time in office and for that reason it is appropriate to site her failure to vote in accordance with information made available during his time in office. Add to this the fact that the testimony in question was available to all and all arguments citing a lack of security clearances fall by the wayside. The reality is that Mrs. Clinton had access to information showing that Bush's claims about Iraq were questionable, and she still chose to authorize that war and to support it well into this primary season. Then there are her comments on Iran, comments which make it abundantly clear that Hillary Clinton is still giving voice to the same type of manipulation that got us into Iraq in the first place. And in this case, she has not only failed to accept the findings of our intelligence community (who has found no evidence that Iran continues any effort to produce nuclear arms) but has shown her true colors in calling for that nation's "total annihalation" should Iran attack Israel.

My next question is. What happened to the Clinton's who supported efforts to bring about peace between Israel and her neighbors? What happened to the Clinton's who sought to reduce violence in the Mid East? Because what I see today is a Clinton making increased violence a more likley outcome there.

Howard was on TV yesterday morning, and he said THE RULES COMMITTEE of the DNC was looking at what to do . IMO, I believe that each state will be given Half.
====================================================

That's what the GOP did. I have no problem with that for Florida but Michigan should be a re-do as Obama wasn't even on the ballot.

By DAN DORFMAN
Special to the Sun
April 28, 2008

Get ready for another economic shock of major proportions — a virtual doubling of prices at the gas pump to as much as $10 a gallon.

That's the message from a couple of analytical energy industry trackers, both of whom, based on the surging oil prices, see considerably more pain at the pump than most drivers realize.

Gasoline nationally is in an accelerated upswing, having jumped to $3.58 a gallon from $3.50 in just the past week. In some parts of the country, including New York City and the West Coast, gas is already sporting a price tag above $4 a gallon. There was a pray-in at a Chevron station in San Francisco on Friday led by a minister asking God for cheaper gas, and an Arco gas station in San Mateo, Calif., has already raised its price to a sky-high $4.62.

In Manhattan, at a Mobil gas station at York Avenue and East 61st Street, premium gas is now $4.03 a gallon. Two days ago, it was $3.96. Why such a high price? "Blame the people at STOPEC (he meant OPEC) and the oil companies," an attendant there told me.

These increases are taking place before the all-important summer driving season, signaling even higher prices ahead.

That's also the outlook of the Automobile Association of America. "As long as the price of crude oil stays above $100 a barrel, drivers will be forced to pay more and more at the gas pump," a AAA spokesman, Troy Green, said...

http://www2.nysun.com/article/75363

And yet all of the major oil companies are recording record revenues and profits. All of the major oil companies still get tax breaks because we're so afraid that they'll pass the cost of losing said tax breaks onto the consumer. OK, fine. Stop buying so damn much gas, people!

If you're driving a SUV this is your fault. If your car does not get at least 50kpg (30mpg), it's your fault. If your tires are underinflated, if you have unnecessary weight in your trunk, if you drive with your windows down, if you floor it from every stop, and if you do not consolidate your trips it's your fault.

There are really only two ways to stop this. Find an alternative fuel source or stop using so much gas. It is really that simple.

Hey Bob, thank you for not lashing out as others have done. People comment on my post with why I shouldn't trust Clinton. I'm not here to listen to people rip the canidates to shreads (leave that crappy practice to the media) I want to hear the positive.

Posted by TexasGal on April 28, 2008 at 02:24 PM

You will find those kind of hard to find here, TexasGal. there are those who's only position on their own candidate, is tearing down the other. It gets really old, fast !

I want to know about the issues and the canidates contributions (accomplishments) to America and Americans

Posted by TexasGal on April 28, 2008 at 02:05 PM

Hillary is the white one that looks like a woman.

Everything you need to know.

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

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

There are really only two ways to stop this. Find an alternative fuel source or stop using so much gas. It is really that simple.

Posted by BobVADemHawk-Obama08 on April 28, 2008 at 02:41 PM
================================================

No problem with conservation. Carter was on the right track with that a long time ago. However, the oil companies should get no tax breaks.

Posted by Marine on April 28, 2008 at 02:36 PM
==================================================

Marine, I agree with all you said. It's Obama that I want taking the "3AM call on the emergency line". He is way more measured and level headed.

is rev wright working for hillary or mcsame? someone needs to buy him a vacation in bali for the next seven months or so....

Posted by Michigan_Dave on April 28, 2008 at 02:44 PM
====================================================

The issues? I didn't know there were any ... aren't flag lapel pins and pastors the issues? Health care ... who needs that when you have a flag lapel pin! Jobs ... don't need one as long as my pastor is righteous. Then there always is bowling ... wee!!!

Thx candidates for making this into an election all about nothing. Monumental issues are at all but instead all the campaigns fight about is TRASH!

Hey Rj,

Did you see this yesterday?

Elizabeth Edwards: Media are giving Americans only ‘Cliffs Notes’ of campaign news/

In an op-ed titled “Bowling 1, Health Care 0” in The New York Times today, Center for American Progress senior fellow Elizabeth Edwards laments that for the last month, the news media’s coverage of the Democratic presidential primary has focused on the “rancor” and “money spent” as opposed to “information about the candidates’ priorities, policies and principles“:

I am saying that every analysis that is shortened, every corner that is cut, moves us further away from the truth until what is left is the Cliffs Notes of the news, or what I call strobe-light journalism, in which the outlines are accurate enough but we cannot really see the whole picture. […]

Did you, for example, ever know a single fact about Joe Biden’s health care plan? Anything at all? But let me guess, you know Barack Obama’s bowling score. We are choosing a president, the next leader of the free world. We are not buying soap, and we are not choosing a court clerk with primarily administrative duties.

“Watching the campaign unfold,” Edwards said, “I saw how the press gravitated toward a narrative template for the campaign, searching out characters as if for a novel.”

McCain focuses on lower costs on health-care tour

John Whitesides, Political Correspondent
Reuters North American News Service

Apr 27, 2008 23:23 EST

MIAMI (Reuters) - Republican presidential candidate John McCain Monday will argue the way to improve U.S. health-care coverage lies in lowering costs and increasing competition rather than the "big-government" schemes he says the Democrats advocate.

McCain, opening a week-long U.S. campaign swing to focus on his health care proposals, will visit a Miami children's hospital on the first stop Monday.

"America can have a health care system that is characterized by better prevention, coordinated care, electronic health records, cutting-edge treatments -- and lower costs," McCain will say, according to excerpts of his speech provided by his campaign.

"We can build a health care system that is more responsive to our needs and is delivered to more people at lower cost. The solution, my friends, isn't a one-size-fits-all big-government takeover of health care."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2008/04/mccain_focuses_on_lower_costs.php

=================================================
So how did McSame's idiotic "poverty tour" go? I bet they just loved him in the poor areas of America ... Typical pull yourself up by your bootstraps while they steal the boots Republican (thx Dennis K. for that line!).

So, what is McSame's plan? Sounds like more of
the

M
C

S
A
M
E

Posted by TexasGal on April 28, 2008 at 02:24 PM

You're certainly welcome. Here's my two cents.

Sen. Clinton (D-NY) pretty much knows where all of the proverbial bodies are hidden. She has seen the levers of power manipulated at the highest level though she has done no manipulation herself. She has run two successful U.S. Senate campaigns.

Sen. Obama (D-IL) could be the reincarnation of JFK or RFK for his vision of the future. Or, he could be another Jimmy Carter (i.e. great man, bad politician). I think he is the next JFK which is why I support him. Most Clinton supporters think he may be the next Jimmy Carter.

I could go on and on. I'm sure my fellow bloggers will have some input as well. For what it's worth, I do not envy your position. And I am obligated to make it worse. Not only do you have to choose the next Democratic nominee for POTUS but, that choice will have historical implications for decades, if not centuries, to come. Choose wrong and the GOP nominee could blow us out of the water guaranteeing a defacto third Bush term. Choose correctly and you could save us from such. But ultimately, TexasGal, this decision is yours. Good luck and God bless.

Posted by PamB on April 28, 2008 at 02:42 PM

Whoa...I'll admit that I have a bias, but when I have one along with an opinion, I base it on the facts and those are obtained by a pretty thorough daily search on a number of websites.

This is a forum for voicing opinion along with a little bit of bullshit. A visitor here discovers a whole lot of attitude and diverse opinions. IN many cases, those opinions are supported with facts.

I find it astounding that a person would appear here as a delegate,at this point in the game, wanting to know about the candidates. Who they are, what they have done and the issues.

Bullshit.

This person has either been serving time as a felon, been under a witness protection program and living in a remote location or has been shipped to one of the former soviet union "slav's" as part of dumbya's "we don't do rendition" program.

Or....he or she was abducted by aliens, had the needle in the brain operation, along with a genital examination (that happens alot to abductees in Texas), and was tossed off the space ship.

I like the fourth option...just because it's Texas and they gave us Dumbya.

Posted by Cubilist on April 28, 2008 at 02:56 PM
==================================================

Hi Cubi,

I read that one. Elizabeth Edwards is 100% right.

Have you noticed how the media is covering up the "military analyst" scandal? Only PBS will go near the subject:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/media/jan-june08/tvgenerals_04-24.html

Posted by BobVADemHawk-Obama08 on April 28, 2008 at 02:58 PM

You are just gonna love my post :)

"Good Cop-Bad Cop"

wow here is some great news!!!

"VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Americans are among the world's most 'Bible-literate' people and Spaniards, French and Italians are among the most ignorant about what the "good book" says, according to a new study released on Monday.

A poll carried out in nine countries -- the United States, Britain, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Russia, Italy, Spain and Poland -- also showed Americans were most willing to donate money to spread the message of the Bible."

unfortunately the study also indicated that americans are the most mendacious people in the world and to quote the vatican " the most likely to burn in the all consuming fires of hell for eternity"

but we're great on quoting scripture!

he or she was abducted by aliens, had the needle in the brain operation
================================================

Sounds about right!

Posted by Michigan_Dave on April 28, 2008 at 03:06 PM

That's what the 1st Amendment is all about, ol' sport.

McCain's Iraq nightmare continues:

Monday, April 28, 2008
Sadr Rejects al-Maliki's Terms;
Green Zone hit by Mortar Barrage;
Turkish Military Strikes at PKK

Muqtada al-Sadr on Sunday rejected Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's terms for ending his campaign against Sadr's Mahdi Army. Al-Maliki wants the militia to give up heavy weaponry and turn over wanted commanders. Salah al-Ubaydi, a Sadr spokesman, called the demands "illogical."

Some 50 Iraqi political leaders from various parties (including Sunnis) protested on Sunday against the US siege of East Baghdad (Sadr City).

The campaign appears to have been launched in part to protect the Green Zone (site of government offices and the US embassy) from incoming mortar fire. Nevertheless, on Sunday as a sandstorm descended on the capital, the Green Zone faced a barrage of mortar fire:

' Thunderous explosions resounded throughout the evening as rockets or mortar shells slammed into the heavily fortified area in central Baghdad. . .

Sirens wailed in the Green Zone, which houses the U.S. Embassy and much of the Iraqi government on the west side of the Tigris River. The public address system warned people to "duck and cover" and stay away from windows.

The U.S. Embassy confirmed the area was hit by indirect fire, the military's term for rocket or mortar attacks, but said it had no immediate word on casualties.'

There were also clashes between forces loyal to the al-Maliki government and Mahdi Army militiamen in parts of Baghdad.

On Saturday, mortar fire killed 8 and wounded 42 in the area around the Green Zone.

Posted by rjsnj on April 28, 2008 at 03:03 PM

I saw that article,

Media Matters is documenting the blackout. It's pretty disgusting that the media won't cover that story. Fist they get manipulated into being pawns for the administration adn when they can prove that it wasn't their fault but a coordinated effort by the administration, they are quiet. Ridiculous.

but we're great on quoting scripture!

Posted by gregg on April 28, 2008 at 03:08 PM
====================================================

gregg, we're even better than that.

we're great on quoting scripture while wearing our flag lapel pins (Made in China of course).

"America can have a health care system that is characterized by better prevention, coordinated care, electronic health records, cutting-edge treatments -- and lower costs," McCain will say,
Posted by rjsnj on April 28, 2008 at 02:58 PM

McLost-

"The answer my fellow americans is "NO CARE!!"

Here's how it works. I don't care, we don't care, and there is no care. More and more americans don't have health care and that's a great thing. The more that don't, the more will die. When they die, they don't cost any money. Health care cost go down. Less americans, mean lower costs.

If there aren't so many americans, there won't be so many medical records to keep. Records will be easy to organize, easy to coordinate, it is just so much easier to control. With new cutting edge treatments like refusual to perform surgery or give emergency medical treatment to those americans that can't pay, imagine how much lower our overall health care costs will be.

It's time for straight talk in the US. It's time for a reality check and the reality is if you are waiting for the government to do something about taking care of you and you think, I'm gonna do something about it, you are sadly mistaken.

We are building a stronger america. I am the candidate for the strong americans. We can't afford americans who can't pay and the longer they hang around, the more expensive they will be.

So join me in a campaign for NO CARE. Just because you are an american it doesn't mean you have to take care of the sick or the infirm. Nope, NO CARE, addresses that. The path to economic prosperity and a reduction of the budget deficit will be addressed as soon as these people die.

As POTUS, you have my committment to reduce health care costs and provide health care for everyone that can afford it. It will be affordable as soon as these people die and I will do everything in my power to expedite that.

NO CARE...Let's build a healthy america together!

Posted by gregg on April 28, 2008 at 03:08 PM

I looked up the meaning of the word mendacious. I like that word and then I gave an example..Oooops, it was the first one I could think of.

Warning...it's a negative about one of the candidates.

mendacious \men-DAY-shuhs\, adjective:
1. Given to deception or falsehood; lying; untruthful; as, a mendacious person.
2. False; untrue; as, a mendacious statement.

"We landed under sniper fire!
We ran for cover, terrified!
The bullets flew around my head!
I thought for sure that I was dead!"

She told the tale in hopes it meant
We'd vote for her for president.
Instead we looked for evidence
Of Hillary's experience,
And found that not a bullet flew.
Her thrilling story wasn't true.

Over the past 40 years, the Republicans have won the White House 7 times for 28 years, versus 3 times for 12 years for the Democrats. The Republicans have done a better job of selling their presidential candidates and platform to swing voters than we have. Reading through the posting each day on the DNC blog, it is obvious that many Democrats don't understand how to win a presidential election. Unless Hillary and/or Barack can attract most of the swing voters in the key electoral states for Democrats, John McCain will win in November.

John McCain: Liar, Ignorant, or Just Forgetful? Hotlist
by DarkSyde
Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:25:06 AM PDT

Isn't it amazing how so many facets of conservative economic policy converge on some variant of "Give the rich more money," and end with some version of, "And this will help the middle class and the poor." Like the Underpants Gnomes, they just never get around to filling in that middle part with anything coherent. The clever cons know it's a scam. But I'm pretty sure this is what a lot of grassroots conservatives, mostly the duller or more ignorant ones to be sure, really believe.

Apparently the rest of us are just supposed to be so stupid or apathetic that we never point out that, despite almost three decades of cutting taxes on billionaires, the trickle-down economic Promised Land never seems to materialize (We did manage to accrue one hell of a national debt though!). Why, if I were a cynical person, I'd say all this supply side and trickle down conservative bullshit was just a ruse to defend the class warfare that's been in effect since the dawn of civilization: take from the poor and powerless and give to the rich and powerful.

McCain of course rightly senses the jig of giving zillionaires even more zillions is in jeopardy, what with gas prices at 4 bucks a gallon and the economy crumbling after eight years of George Bush the CEO President. But being a staunch defender of the wealthy, McCain he has to try something. So he tried this:

This Week -- Senator Obama says that he doesn’t want to raise taxes on anybody over — making over $200,000 a year, yet he wants to nearly double the capital gains tax. Nearly double it, which 100 million Americans have investments in — mutual funds, 401(k)s — policemen, firemen, nurses. He wants to increase their taxes. --John McCain

The problem is that is flatly false. It is in fact so fundamentally, embarrassingly wrong that if any other Presidential contender said it, that comment alone might be the end of their bid for the White House.

Investments contained in 401-K's (Or in the case of 'policemen, firemen' usually a 403-B), pensions, IRAs, tax deferred variable annuities, and similar retirement vehicles aren't subject to capital gains tax -- they're not taxed at all. Changing the capital gains tax rate will have zero effect on them. Withdrawals from tax deferred accounts by retirees are generally taxed at whatever the income tax rate is for that person at the time of withdrawal (Which, incidentally, is usually a hell of a lot more than the current long term capital gains tax rate, yet another way to rip off the middle class).

This feature of pension and retirement accounts is about as fundamental as it can get in the retirement planning and tax preparation business. Most laypeople over age 40 know this; let alone rookie financial advisors studying for the series 7, or a barely legal teen on her first day at H & R Block. For McCain not to know that would be, well, terrifying, as this is something that will affect upwards of 80 million freakin retirees during his potential Presidential term[s]. The other possibility is he knowingly lied.

I'm not sure which one of those options is worse, a candidate running for President in the midst of the worst economic crises since the Arab Oil Embargo who can't handle the most basic features of retirement and tax policy, or one who just lies his ass off about it in hopes of handing more money to billionaires. Then again there is a third and even more chilling possibility, one I dearly hope is off the mark: John McCain is struggling with some kind mental or memory issue, he can't remember shit.

=================================================
McSame! How about all three - liar, ignorant and just forgetful. Yeah, I bet they are lining uo for his "health care bus tour". Worry not ... it will be a very short smoke and mirrors show from McSame. Don't forget to mention that 100 million will lose their health care coverage if McSame has his way.

McCain ... same as Bush.

"We must move away from a system that is fragmented and pays for expensive procedures, toward one where a family has a medical home, providers coordinate their efforts and take advantage of technology to do so cheaply, and where the focus is on affordable quality outcomes," McCain said during a speech at the Miami Children's Hospital in Miami, Florida.

McCain: why fix healthcare if it's not broken?

Less americans, mean lower costs.
================================================

Bloody brilliant that McSame ... and I do mean bloody. Now didn't the fascists make exactly that argument? Does McSame believe in eugenics as well?

It can no longer be denied: the right-wing lunatics are running the Republican asylum and their madness has infected the entire country and poisoned the world beyond.

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=4720822

FYI: By definition, if you blog here, you are NOT a swing voter.

Posted by anne_smith on April 28, 2008 at 03:33 PM

On that point, there can be no arguement.

Posted by BlueinIdaho on April 28, 2008 at 03:39 PM
==================================================

I betcha old Johnny uses the best care on the tax payer's dime no less!

Yes I see McCain's Health Care Bus Tour is going along smashingly. Don't get in front of the bus though because McSame will run you over.

Posted by anne_smith on April 28, 2008 at 03:33 PM

By "swing voters" do you mean the ignorant, scared masses who are more interested in whether or not one can quote the Bible verbatim than they are in who would make the best leader of America?

Oh, why do I bother, you don't read the reponse posts to your republican taking points, anyway.

In yet another example of her utter dishonesty ,Hillarys new commercial running in Indiana has some fundamental flaws with it. Check out this piece by David Sirota.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20080428/cm_huffpost/098972;_ylt=A0WTcSYJKhZIu3sB1wms0NUE
Well Hillary supporters what should we think of this one. Just like her support of NAFTA in the 90's, and then telling the people of PA that shes against NAFTA. This woman has a problem with lying and makes it look almost as easy as Bill did and has.

Posted by rjsnj on April 28, 2008 at 03:45 PM

That quote I posted makes absolutely no sense. What is a "medical home"? Is that a primary care physician? And, what does he mean when he says that providers should coordinate their efforts? Is he imagining some sort of tag-team system? And when he says "affordable quality outcomes", don't you think he just means HMO?

"Straight talk express" my ass.

Posted by anne_smith on April 28, 2008 at 03:33 PM

Do the math again.

On Independents...they are neither their ass nor their elbow. They sit on the side lines, piss and moan and do nothing, in fact, the vast majority that identify themselves as "INDEPENDENTS", don't vote at all....

How's this for an appeal to the independents.

Get off your ass and get busy and get educated as far as the issues. And if that offends them, great...

Independents...another name or label for victims.

"In short, the vast majority of self-defined Independents are not neutral but partisan—a bit bashful about admitting it, but partisan nevertheless. Once this is recognized, the proportion of the electorate that is truly neutral between the two parties is scarcely different now than from what it was in the Eisenhower era. Moreover, because these "pure Independents" now are less inclined to vote, their share of the voting population is, if anything, a bit smaller now than in the 1950s and 1960s.

http://www.mapsofworld.com/us-presidents/democrat-us-presidents.html

http://www.mapsofworld.com/us-presidents/republican-us-presidents.html

Texas Gal,It sounds like you have pretty good instincts. I`m not sure what else there is for you to look over.Two other candidates remain after Hillary. You have plenty of time to process that. Good luck.

Posted by Michigan_Dave on April 28, 2008 at 03:59 PM

You know who calls themself an independent? Bill-O

Nuff said.

Posted by BlueinIdaho on April 28, 2008 at 03:48 PM

I read your posts :)

FYI: SWING VOTER...by definition a swing voter is a dumb ass. A swing voter is a fair weather friend and fan. A swing voter uses the minimum amount of grey matter possible to develop an opinion and a subsequent vote. A swing voter can't find their ass with both hands. A swing voter can't make a committment, can't determine what a real issue is and is a flake.

Never take a swing voter to a restaurant. They can't order for themselves and if they do order something, wish that they had gone to a different restaurant or ordered what you did.

Obama opposes the gas tax holiday.

I guess it's no Big surprise since she is running for McCain's VP slot, but I just heard on the radioHillary agrees with John McCain on the Summer Gas Tax holiday.

I guess this article can now apply to her too.

------------------------------------------------
Confused Again: McCain’s Gas Tax Holiday Violates His Own Principles

...How does McCain’s proposal to suspend the federal gas tax from Memorial Day to Labor Day violate those precepts?

McCain’s Holiday Would Cost $11 Billion. Suspending the gas tax — whose revenues are fully dedicated the federal highway trust fund that maintains our crumbling infrastructure — for three months would cost $11 billion. McCain has not said how — or if — he would replace those revenues. [CAPAF, 4/15/08]

McCain’s Holiday Sends More Money ‘Out Of Our Economy Immediately.’ The Wall Street Journal notes “Many economists have also questioned the wisdom of suspending or cutting gas taxes; doing so, they say, simply stimulates more consumption of gasoline.” In McCain’s own words, that increased consumption would send more money “out of our economy immediately” to oil-producing countries, “unfortunately, to fund terrorist organizations.” [WSJ, 4/15/08]

Cutting Transportation Investment Kills Jobs. The Wall Street Journal asked: “Relief — or fewer jobs? According to a white paper circulated on Capitol Hill last week by the U.S. Transportation Department, every $1 billion of federal highway investment supports 34,779 jobs.” McCain’s plan could put over 300,000 workers on an unpaid “holiday.” [WSJ, 4/15/08]

McCain’s Holiday Threatens ‘Fundamental Fiscal Underpinnings.’ McCain spokesman Brian Rogers said “general revenue transfers” would pay for the “holiday” — increasing the budget deficit by $11 billion. As Matthew Jeanneret, a spokesman for the American Road & Transportation Builders Association, says: “It might be good politics. But it is shortsighted, and it won’t do anything to stimulate the economy.” [MSNBC, 4/15/08]

McCain’s plan would push gas prices up and force policymakers to choose between killing jobs and infrastructure investment or blowing up the budget.

Posted by Michigan_Dave on April 28, 2008 at 03:59 PM

"Get off your ass and get busy and get educated as far as the issues." I did that and that is exactly why I stay and Indy. Dem are not 100% correct nor Repubs. To think otherwise is teetering on group think!

So I challenge you. Get educated! Do you realize how close this country was to banning political parties? I think they had a good idea. Democrats are mostly correct but no one party has the line on truth.

Indy's decided POTUS. We are educated, active and have given the lead to one of your candidates. Check the map.

Whoa...I'll admit that I have a bias, but when I have one along with an opinion, I base it on the facts and those are obtained by a pretty thorough daily search on a number of websites.
This is a forum for voicing opinion along with a little bit of bullshit. A visitor here discovers a whole lot of attitude and diverse opinions. IN many cases, those opinions are supported with facts.

{{{Davey}}} my friend, you KNOW the posts I am talking about. No websites or facts backing them up. Merely spewing hatred of an opposing candidate.

I thought I had seen it all when the Deaniacs came out, but that was nothing compared to now. And they don't give a shit if they tear this party in two or no---all they are about is boosting their own candidate up.

It is not pretty to watch........

hey Dave: No I was not abducted by aliens! I am a wife, mother, volunteer, & a full time student w/ a part time job. I have two teenagers, a mother I take care of, a husband who, after 20 years of marriage still can't fnd hs own sock drawer. Needless to say I have a LIFE. I don't sit around all day play political football. I'm one of the ones in the middle class trying to make life work in a Bush economy.

My point was that I am a Clinton supporter now, however as the campaigns continue, I am questioning the negativity coming out of her camp.

Then I bring my questions here in hopes of finding intellegent people who could make a better argument FOR thier canidate. What I find is that the Obama supporters are just as nasty as Hillary's. SAD SAD SAD.

Rj,

Pentagon suspends retired military analyst program

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Pentagon has suspended a program that fed information about the Iraq war to retired military officers who appeared on U.S. television networks as independent analysts, the Defense Department said on Monday.

The program, uncovered last week in a New York Times investigation, was criticized by Democrats for providing private briefings, trips and access to classified intelligence to influence analysts' comments about Iraq and portray the situation as positive even as violence rose in the war zone.

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman called the suspension "temporary" and said the Defense Department would review the program to ensure it did not violate department policy.

"It's temporarily suspended just so that we can take a look at some of the concerns," Whitman told reporters.

providers coordinate their efforts and take advantage of technology to do so cheaply,

Posted by BlueinIdaho on April 28, 2008 at 04:06 PM

Great...the HMO's are going to get together to conspire to provide the rock bottom, cheapest and nastiest healthcare program they can dream up.

Taking advantage of technology means...diagnosis over a webcam via a satellite link to a doctor in India. Too bad if you are on dial-up and you die before you can be diagnosed.

"Home based" means getting together with the neighbors and having healthcare parties. Every month you invite the neighbors and the relatives over and play doctor and nurses. You draw straws for the colonoscopy's and bring your own rubber gloves. Those will be supplied with a mail in rebate certificate.

As a group, you can nominate a birthing ground. Someone will be charged with keeping the common area mowed, with a big tree in the center. The expecting mother can be trained to walk out to the tree, grab hold with both hands and drop the newborn out on the ground, after squatting for a couple of hours. Mid-wives can be organized to observe and a mobile phone can be used to take short videos that can be uploaded to a computer.

Yep, what a novel approach to healthcare. Swing Voters will love it. Saves money and no increase in taxes. Besides, they might get to use their camera phones..if they could decide which one to pick out.

I think there is a real difference between "swing voters" and those who have not registered for one party or the other. I remained 'unaffiliated' until 2001, when I watched SCOTUS give the Presidency to Bush. I went and registered Democratic as a statement.

But I never 'swung' or remained undecided . I always knew which side my bread was best buttered on. I knew which candidates and party cared about me more than they did big business. I knew Liberals were the ones who put in all the things that were important to We the People.

The Democratic party is not just a party. It is an ideal. If you are an American citizen, it has done a lot for you. Check it out and tell me WHY anyone would EVER vote for a Republican. The Party of Criminals, Corruption and Sexual Perverts !

http://www.turnleft.com/libgood.html

Posted by Michigan_Dave on April 28, 2008 at 04:23 PM

Dave: there you go again, being optomistic about those dang reTHUGs! You assume that internet access - dial up or other - will be available and not "tiered" off by price! (See Comcast)

Quit hounding Dean. He is doing the best he can over candidates of which he has no control!

Dean Says Either Clinton or Obama Must Drop Out in June
The Associated Press

Washington - Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean said Monday that either Hillary Rodham Clinton or Barack Obama must drop out of the Democratic presidential race after the June primaries in order to unify the party by the convention and win the election in November.

But Dean didn't say which candidate should drop out, only that it should happen after primary voters have been to the polls.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/042808F.shtml

Posted by Michigan_Dave on April 28, 2008 at 04:23 PM

I always wondered what it would feel like to have Diet Pepsi shoot out one's nose....now I know.

bbl. gotta get a rag to clean up the keyboard.

:)

TexasGal,

You said the following about Hillary Clinton earlier today:

I have watched the Clinton camp and I have decided that she has not made good choices about who she has put around her (advisiors, employees, spokespeople). I'm not sure she would make good choices when she is elected to office.

You then went on to say that you did not know Barack Obama and could not for that reason simply shift your support from one campaign to the other.

What I'd like to point out to you at this point is that you don't either Hillary Clinton nor Barack Obama. For if you knew Hillary Clinton then you would not find yourself surprised by the bad choices that she and her advisors have made, either because their plans have changed without your knowledge or because things at the Clinton headquarters are merely chaotic.

As for myself, I liked and supported the Clintons until it became abundently clear that they were not going to look out for truth in Iraq. If they had one of the first challenges that Hillary Clinton might have made in 2003 as the Bush administration pushed for war was that the Saddam government did not qualify as a "terrorist threat" for it had not at any time, except in self-defense, participated in a terrorist type attack on our nation. Further, she could have pointed to the then accepted definition of terrorist which precluded state threats, such as Iraq then was, as the two would require vastly different strategies to confront.

I can't say much more of Hillary Clinton, apart to say that she has in recent years begun to appear misguided. And perhaps this is we have difficulty seperating her comments on Iran from those of John McCain.

At any rate, what we all do know is that only Barack Obama has cited a willingness to speak with nations like Iran in a proactive attempt to head of conflict. Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton and John McCain both suggest that preexisting conditions conditions be met before they even begin to address an issue that is now 5 years old and has yet to improve in spite of the same strategy being taken by the Bush administration.

It is one thing to be a tough negotiator, and another thing entirely to be bullheaded to point of refusing to ever begin those negotiations until certain sticking points are resolved. Is that not after all the point of negotiations, to resolve these sticking points?

As a former Marine Corps Sergeant and a one time Officer in training I see leadership in Barack Obama that is non-existent or lacking in either Hillary Clinton or McCain. I have confidence that he will make the right decision, while I am afraid that Hillary will make the same mistakes she's made in regard to Iraq and Iran and I know John McCain will urge us on down the road blazed by Bush.

Posted by PamB on April 28, 2008 at 04:25 PM

Great Post! Very, very true!

Sorry, I had to correct a few errors in my previous post. Here it is with corrections highlighted.

TexasGal,

You said the following about Hillary Clinton earlier today:

I have watched the Clinton camp and I have decided that she has not made good choices about who she has put around her (advisiors, employees, spokespeople). I'm not sure she would make good choices when she is elected to office.

You then went on to say that you did not know Barack Obama and could not for that reason simply shift your support from one campaign to the other.

What I'd like to point out to you at this point is that you don't know either Hillary Clinton nor Barack Obama. For if you knew Hillary Clinton then you would not find yourself surprised by the bad choices that she and her advisors have made, either because their plans have changed without your knowledge or because things at the Clinton headquarters are merely chaotic.

As for myself, I liked and supported the Clintons until it became abundently clear that they were not going to look out for truth in Iraq. If they had, one of the first challenges that Hillary Clinton might have made in 2003 as the Bush administration pushed for war was that the Saddam government did not qualify as a "terrorist threat" for it had not at any time, except in self-defense or in opposition to embargo, attacked our military forces. Further, she could have pointed to the then accepted definition of terrorist which precluded state threats, such as Iraq then was, as the two would require vastly different strategies to confront. Beyond that she could have cited the testimony of U.S. weapons inspectors who found Saddam's government to be cooperative and incapable at that time of producing WMD.
I can't say much more of Hillary Clinton, apart to say that she has in recent years begun to appear misguided. And perhaps this is we have difficulty seperating her comments on Iran from those of John McCain.

At any rate, what we all do know is that only Barack Obama has cited a willingness to speak with nations like Iran in a proactive attempt to head of conflict. Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton and John McCain both suggest that preexisting conditions conditions be met before they even begin to address an issue that is now 5 years old and has yet to improve in spite of the same strategy being taken by the Bush administration.

It is one thing to be a tough negotiator, and another thing entirely to be bullheaded to point of refusing to ever begin those negotiations until certain sticking points are resolved. Is that not after all the point of negotiations, to resolve these sticking points?

As a former Marine Corps Sergeant and a one time Officer in training I see leadership in Barack Obama that is non-existent or lacking in either Hillary Clinton or McCain. I have confidence that he will make the right decision, while I am afraid that Hillary will make the same mistakes she's made in regard to Iraq and Iran and I know John McCain will urge us on down the road blazed by Bush.

With Bingaman Endorsement, Obama Takes Senate Support Lead

Sen. Barack Obama officially pulled ahead today in the scramble for endorsements from colleagues in the U.S. Senate, thanks to Sen. Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico.

Never one of the Senate's most high-profile members, Bingaman now has a claim to political fame: He put Obama over the top after his long slog to catch Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, who had a head start in winning the support of her peers. Obama now has 14 endorsements to Clinton's 13.

Obama will also get the vote of Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), who has not officially endorsed him but said he will support Obama at the convention in deference to his state's voters. Clinton has a similar pledge from Sen. Barbara Boxer of California.

"Our nation faces a daunting number of critical challenges: reasserting America's leadership in the world, meeting our needs for energy independence, addressing global warming, making healthcare accessible and affordable, positioning our economy to effectively compete globally, and extricating ourselves from the war in Iraq, to name a few," Bingaman wrote in his endorsement announcement. "To make progress, we must rise above the partisanship and the issues that divide us to find common ground. We must move the country in a dramatically new direction."

Posted by marymac_memphis on April 28, 2008 at 04:28 PM

Always the eternal optimist. My new med's are working :)

Sorry that I can't post live links but this article is so very worth the read!

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/28/opinion/28krugman.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

The McCain campaign wants us to accept the success of that deception as a fact of life. Mr. Holtz-Eakin is saying, in effect, “We’re not engaged in any new irresponsibility — we’re just perpetuating the Bush administration’s irresponsibility. That doesn’t count.”

It’s the sort of fiscal double-talk that has been a Bush administration hallmark. In any case, it offers no answer to the principal point raised by the Tax Policy Center analysis, which has nothing to do with scoring: the McCain tax plan would leave the federal government with far too little revenue to cover its expenses, leading to huge budget deficits unless there were deep cuts in spending.

Posted by marymac_memphis on April 28, 2008 at 05:06 PM

Do you not get those cute little boxes above the comment box for bolding, italicising and linking?

My new med's are working :)

Posted by Michigan_Dave on April 28, 2008 at 05:05 PM

Kewl! Can you recommend any for sheer, utter and complete frustration?

CNN) -- The U.S. military is promising action to address conditions in a barracks at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, after a soldier's father posted images on YouTube showing a building that he said "should be condemned."

Frawley's 10-minute video shows still photos from throughout the building, which appears to be falling apart and filled with mold and rust.

Paint -- which Frawley said is lead-based -- is chipping. Ceiling tiles are missing. A broken drain pipe allows sewer gas into the building, while another one has tissues stuffed into it in an apparent effort to stop the gas from coming in.

Photos from the communal bathroom show some of the most disgusting images. In one, a soldier stands in a sink to avoid what Frawley describes as 3 inches of sewage water that filled the floor when toilets overflowed.

Don't look at me, I bought my yellow-ribbon magnet

6.5 Million Foreclosures, 18.6 Million Vacant Homes

Here are some cheery housing numbers, as the bankrupt truckers impotently beep their horns at Congress and the food is rationed and "consumer expectations" hit lows not seen since the early 1970s: More than 6 million homes will go into foreclosure before this housing collapse is finished, and the number of houses now sitting empty in America has reached a staggering 18.6 million.

Imagine every housing unit in the entire state of California suddenly empty. That's about how many houses are vacant today.

Meanwhile, about one in eight households will meet Mr. Foreclosure in the next five years, according to the probably-too-rosy Credit Suisse.

Hey, maybe the 10 million new homeless families can move into some of the 18.6 million vacant houses ... ha ha, just kidding. That's not allowed! But if they try anyway, guess what all those mentally ruined home-from-Iraq soldiers will be put to work doing?

Columbia professor and Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz did an interview with CNBC on Friday. Guess what he said about the combination of food and energy inflation plus the housing collapse?

"This is going to be one of the worst economic downturns since the Great Depression."

And this is why we need to take a long, hard look at Jeremiah Wright's religious sermons about black people.

Posted by BlueinIdaho on April 28, 2008 at 05:10 PM

No, I have none of that. I'm on an old Mac with the original version of Safari! Lots of nice people here have tried to help with the ability to post live links, but so far nothing has worked. But, thanks for trying to help.

I'm so glad they've moved up the timing for our Chinese loans, er, stimulus checks. This way, it will be apparent long before the election that this was an utterly stoooopid idea.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/04/28/news/economy/rebate_update_monday/index.htm?cnn=yes

Posted by Cubilist on April 28, 2008 at 05:12 PM

I love, love, love Stiglitz. I read everything that I can get by him. If you have not yet done so, please go and read:

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/12/bush200712?currentPage=1

Sorry again about the inability to post live links but I gotta' tell ya' this is one of the best articles I have ever read!

Also, go to NYtimes and read Paul Krugman. Awesome!

Posted by BlueinIdaho on April 28, 2008 at 04:31 PM

That shit burns too. Did you get like brain freeze? If you leave it in your nose for a couple of hours, it will get hard and you have to bang your head on the desk to break the pepsi booogers out.

I gotta go. I did my best to incite a perpetual riot on this blog and bring a little ancedotal humor to the table.

Pepsi booogers...they are like coke booogers only brown...

Hmmmmmm...med's are working real good now.

Independent Keith...Thank you for delivering Dumbya to the people of the united states. I really appreciate your participation and more importantly, your educated examination of the issues. Thanks to you, we have had to endure 8 years of an administration that is led by the dumbest sonsabitches ever to occupy the oval office.

Thanks to you, we have the largest deficit in the history of our government,our global image and reputation is in tatters and the economy is on the brink of a depression.

With friends like independents we're in great shape....

Time to redeem yourself. Vote for a democrat. Any other vote and you might as well set yourself on fire.

Posted by marymac_memphis on April 28, 2008 at 05:13 PM

Pepsi booogers. Ask Blue...she's gotta desk full.

Bye now...:)

You know when the crazy Kristol is in Hillary's camp that they are SCARED of an Obama Nomination:

I normally don’t claim to speak for other members of the vast right-wing conspiracy. After all, we’re each nefarious in our own, individual way. Indeed, we often disagree with one another.

But I do think I can speak for most of my fellow right-wingers when I say this: We once looked forward with unambivalent glee to the fall of the house of Clinton. Many of us still do. But we also see the liberal media failing to give Hillary Clinton the respect she deserves. So, since we conservatives believe in giving credit where credit is due, it falls to us to praise Hillary.

Nail meet Coffin

Posted by BlueinIdaho on April 28, 2008 at 05:28 PM

Blue: Maybe you know the answer to this. I think that I remember Congressman Kucinich at one of the debates saying something to the effect that the country has shifted so far to the right that he is actually the centerist position, not really to the left?
Do you remember this? I was trying to find the quote and couldn't.

It is so apparent that the rightwing smear machine has all its gears ready to spew anti-Clinton propaganda and very little to spew on Obama. An Obama nomination will set them on their rears with little to do except rattle the racial sabres of fear. Ah, but a Clinton nomination....that is what they are salivating for. They already have all the ammunition they need and then some.

So, Clinton supporters, does the support of people like Limbaugh, Coulter and Bill Kristol for Hillary give you any pause? Are you ready to welcome these bloodthirsty neocons into your house parties?

I have another question. Is it a requirement that to be a prominent member of the reTHUGlican Party, you must be an ugly, old, white man? Think about it: dub, dickhead, mclame, f. thompson, r. guilliani, man coulter, o'lielly, kristol, etc...

C'mon everyone! Let's bash reTHUGs! It's great fun, excellent stress management and not difficult at all! Think of a re-thug, any rethug and get after them! They aren't just the party of corruption & perversion, they are ugly. No, let me re-state that, they are fugly!

well mary as an ugly/old/white/man i would like to know as well cause all these years as a commie/hippie/democrat wannabee have left me poor as a church mouse and if i can join up with the other side maybe i can git me some white shoes and a buick lebaron!

We just had a tornado come through Colonial Heights, VA (20 km south of the capitol, Richmond) and tear up a Sam's Club and a mall. Needless to say, my office will be quite busy over the next few days with the clean up. I'll see y'all when I can.

Good night fellow Democrats. Keep the Faith and keep the faith. The populist revolution has begun.

Posted by marymac_memphis on April 28, 2008 at 05:35 PM

That doesn't sound right for Kucinich, he would be considered not centerist but dropping off the edge of left at this point. John Dean, former counsel to Nixon, made a similar statement about Barry Goldwater:

Contemporary conservatives have moved so far toward the radical right, of course, that they barely recognize Barry Goldwater as one of their own, not to mention that many are unfamiliar with his rather courtly conservatism based on civility and common sense. Liberals, meanwhile, can see how far to the center they have moved because their views on many issues are indistinguishable from those of the man once known as "Mr. Conservative."

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20071228.html

Good evening, all.

Where have all the adults gone?

The country has turned down a road that will insure it's demise if we don't make a course correction soon. Instead of arguing about the morals and values, we should be demanding that our government officals fix the economic/trade problems and foreign policy blunders.

The longer we procrastinate, the bigger our problems get. It is the height of cowardice to hide behind legal arguments and religious or racial strife.

I find is highly ironic that the youngest person left in the race to the White House is the only one wise enough to face the facts. But nobody can hear what he is saying because of all the red herrings being thrown out to detract from his message.

If you can't find anything positive to say, it goes to figure you are trying to cover up a world of mistakes.

Since the day I watched the military that I loved forced into a mission inside Iraq that was to be conducted, in a way that expert analysis and exercises had each proven to be a failure, I have begun and concluded my days with one simple hope. That hope is that this nation's leadership be once again placed into the hands of competent individuals who do not pick an choose what information they like best, but who instead take all intelligence into consideration. And it is here that I see the candidates widely divided.

Because neither Hillary Clinton nor John McCain were capable of avoiding manipulation by those proposing the use of the current damaging process I described about, I have found it absolutely impossible to support either. At the same time I understand why these individuals have chosen their present course of action, because it has certainly been popular up until now. But then comes this leader in Barack Obama who refuses to go along with the same flow that Hillary and John have floundered in.

Barack Obama is willing to expound upon these difficult issues, and to speak of opposing sources of intelligence as he alone seeks to make a decision with all of this in mind. Sure it is sometimes difficult to follow, especially for those of us who have become accustomed to the Bush administration's pervertion of intelligence to represent entirely one action while ignoring any and all information in support of another, but I promise those of you considering this bizare concept that only good can come of it. Strangely enough, his methodology stands apart from all other presidential contenders, as the only methodology that reminds me of that used by competent military analysts as they attempt to better understand the mission at hand.

Posted by marymac_memphis on April 28, 2008 at 05:45 PM

I have a republican friend that many years ago told me that she had it going on for Hannity. I threw up a little in my mouth that moment.

I don't think they start out ugly, but after spewing hate for so long and practicing that "dead eye" look they just head down that route. That is why I knew both Zell Miller and Lieberman were republicans long before they "came out".

Posted by BobVADemHawk-Obama08 on April 28, 2008 at 05:48 PM

Bob,

Glad you made it to the storm cellar in time. Sorry to hear about the destruction. Why does it take a natural disaster to get everyone to work together?

The fact that this didn't happen after Katrina says volumes about how screwed up the Republicans have made things in this great nation.

Posted by marymac_memphis on April 28, 2008 at 05:45 PM

I have a republican friend that many years ago told me that she had it going on for Hannity. I threw up a little in my mouth that moment.

I don't think they start out ugly, but after spewing hate for so long and practicing that "dead eye" look they just head down that route. That is why I knew both Zell Miller and Lieberman were republicans long before they "came out".

Posted by BlueinIdaho on April 28, 2008 at 05:37 PM

Don't kid yourself. The repugs want more than anything to run against anything but "8 years of Clinton/Gore v. 8 years of Bush/McCain. Are you better off now?" They can not win that argument. They will run away from it.

Just last week a big repug was saying we haven't heard the beginning of Rev. JW. I don't think he was kidding. Republicans love to have distractions. They can't go back to the Scaffe-Mellow-Starr witch hunt. Well, they can... but the truth will come out.

Nothing would burn Rove more than losing to a Clinton because it would prove that he was wrong.

Rev. Wright says that this noise is an attack on "the black church." Okay... it's just a race issue. I don't think he's doing Obama any favors.

Posted by Big_Yellow_Dog on April 28, 2008 at 06:01 PM

The one little pin that will deflate an "8 years of Clinton/Gore" discussion is the fact that neither of those candidates are running. I know it's hard to admit it, but Hillary had nothing to do with that administration, save for the health care fiasco. The republicans understand this too well...which is probably why they refrained from dressing up Nancy and running her as "Reagan 2008".

New open thread!

Blue,

I believe I've seen the same "dead eye" look in Joe Scarborough, infamous MSNBC political pundit and former Republican Congressman. I didn't know what to call that way he had of BSing the audience with a completely straight face and total lack of emotion, until now. And I thank you for that.

For me, the "dead eye" look is destinctive of those individuals with nothing more than the manipulation of others in mind. I see behind those eyes a soulless, calculating individual determined to advance his interests, the interests of his party, as well as the interests of his fans, through any means necessary. In this the cost is of course honest journalism.

Posted by BlueinIdaho on April 28, 2008 at 05:51 PM

Blue,

If this campagin has left both of our candidates so damaged that their likabability numbers are both below 50%, I say we would be stupid not to draft an alternative at the convention.

I find Edwards, Biden, Richardson, and Dodd very attractive. They all support essentially the same agenda that has been attracting millions of Independents, new voters, and our base.

Perhaps if the principals realized that the prize is slipping away from both of them, they would get back to pushing our agenda and not responding to a lot of silly accusations and gossip put out there by the Republicans.

The GOP can't win in November with their agenda. But we can turn this country around with our's. The majority of voters are more than ready for this change.

Are our two front runners ready to push past the hype? If not, there are other Democrats who can.

Posted by Marine on April 28, 2008 at 04:32 PM
Marine, you have one each retired Army Warrant Officer, who agrees with you.

MaryMac,
Yes, I remember DK saying that. I've been saying that for years. People like Rush, the Republican echo machine, and the corporate controlled media have moved the spectrum to the right... way right.

I was in Memphis last week and I saw a "1-20-09 Bush's last day" sticker. It made me think of you.

Posted by BlueinIdaho on April 28, 2008 at 05:12 PM
They usually save the run down barracks for the Reservists on annual training. ;-p
Snide remarks aside, Even as a Reservist on annual training, at least the plumbing worked. Although the Reserve units I've worked with have been housed in some pretty crappy barracks, not even the 50 year old WWII "temporaries" were that bad.
More of the Bushaito's "care" for the soldiers.
Can a a president be tried for war crimes against his own military?

I know it's hard to admit it, but Hillary had nothing to do with that administration...
Posted by BlueinIdaho on April 28, 08 at 06:09 PM

You can fool yourself, and try to fool us, but most Americans know better. This is why she was re-elected as the US Senator from New York, after beating up on "America's Mayor," Rudy.

One of these days, you might ask yourself if you are a sexist male chauvinist, and have a problem with a strong woman in charge.

Posted by Big_Yellow_Dog on April 28, 2008 at 06:38 PM
Gee, I thought it was because nobody, particularly the cops and firefighters would vote for Guiliani.
I have been the woman in charge running motor pool operations and training, and I have worked for, and with women in charge, up to general officer level.
I know what a competent woman in charge can be and do, so I hold Hillary to a higher standard.
Just being female doesn't cut it, especially if you play fast and loose with the facts.
If she can't control her campaign, how is she going to control the country, and if she is controlling her campaign, then she has proven that she lacks integrity. Either way she is my last choice.

sandy, i see you have been watching the coverage of the reverend wright today. amazing that this guy decided to go hollywood and sink obama's ship. while the reverend is claiming he needs to defend the "black church in america" i suspect he is defending himself and perhaps positioning for some great book deal or something. this whole primary has become a nightmare...hillary has been caricatured as the wicked witch of the east and obama is now so deep in the american race issues he wanted to transcend that he is gonna need an air hose to catch his breath. getting a new candidate is one solution but i still believe if these two would agree to run together they could win big. but what a goddam mess we have and we have it when the repelicans are as weak as weak could be...

Does Rev. Wright believe that he is helping Senator Obama? Wright's appearance on PBS on Friday was fine for that audience. But parts Wright's speech at the NAACP (on CNN), and at the National Press Club (all over network news) were offensive, like his previous videos.