Real quick I only have a second- is it possible Hillary is staying in because she knows Obama may be about to take another hit just as large as the Rev Wright issue? Apparantly there is a new issue arising in regards to Obama fundraising numbers. Hundreds of thousands of donors have NO income or no viable income but yet have donated to Obama multiple times. It appears the republicans intend to attack Obama with some serious questions about these donations, some donors that cannot be verified and some donors that were counted repeatedly despite donating just once. In other words the numbers are not adding up and how and who is giving him the money is being scruntized much more closely. Apparantly due to overhwleming fund raisedeach month it was very hard for anyone to verify every donation-

That said it seems the republicans want to help push Hillary out of the race now afraid if she continues all their holding cards against Obama will be exposed in the primary and not the GE. They are banking on the media to keep writing about his bowling and basketball skills and nothing else. It leaves them with all kinds of issues to slam him with in the GE, the longer Hillary stays the more that comes out now.

It certainly makes sense on why McCain is so quiet and keeping a low profile, definitely not his style, unless he has ammo he doesn't want to launch until this party locks themselves into Obama and any VP but Clinton.

So one of the bands we are sponsoring toured in ohio a few days this week and we went with them. One thing I can assure you, it will be as red as can be come November.

After talking to many people we ran across from gas station attendants to college students this is the overwhelming feeling and problems with Obama the majority had.

1. Most do not believe he has a problem with Reverend Wright. They think he knew exactly what the guy was about and he privately agrees with him.

2. Younger people are puzzled and annoyed at the racist charges his team has levied against Democratic Politicians. They believe the Obama campaign has actually refueled Racism to a greater extent with their accusations. Many believe, hispanics, asians, vietnamese and arabs suffer far greater and routine racism today in America and Obama's accusations will once again turn the focus off these groups and on to ONLY African Americans in educating against racism, despite the fact Obama's campaign has claimed Obama has not experienced the level of racisim these groups suffer daily THROUGH OUT the USA.

3. They believe he is dishonest and arrogant and the party in general has a problem with women in power. As one woman told me it's pretty obvious if you look at the primary they would never let Hillary win. Examples she gave:

They tried to declare him victory before New Hampshire, when he didn't win, they trotted out Kennedy to publicly insult Clinton ( Male ). They tried to declare victory after Feb 5th, when he lost Ohio and Texas they trotted out Richardson to blame Hillary for the party splitting ( male ) They tried to declare victory before West Virginia, when he didn't win they trotted out Edwards ( Male) to put the final nail in her coffin in their eyes. The pattern of him trying to silence voters in their minds goes much further then Fla and Michigan and has been the main thread of his campaign and they do NOT like that.

4. Obama's campaigns are pigs. They left messes all over the place, bussed in hundreds of people who walked across yards, became pushy at front doors and littered everywhere and left the mess behind for the residents to clean up. Not smart. Hotel Clerk, definitely bitter toward the slobs as he calls them.

Other notable remarks:

On voting in November:

Heck yea girlie I'm voting in November, didn't you hear me, I don't want that guy in the WH. I'm voting but not for him! ( senior )

He's mad at the Tenn GOP for taking Michelle to task after what he said about Bill Clinton? Hasn't Michelle been campaigning for him and giving her own speeches? She's fair game and he looks like a little boy that says I want what I want but only my way. ( College Grad income 130 grand a year )

Republican who admitted voting for Obama: Because we don't want Clinton on that ticket in any way, shape or form, she can beat us. Obama was the rising star in your Party who alienated a large portion of his own party's base and after this election he will be so battered he'll be lucky to be another Kennedy ( lifelong senator with no chance of ever ascending to the WH)

They banded against Hillary and made her lose. I'll never vote Democratic again.

and on and on the statements goes. You think bitterness is keeping Obama out in November. Well in Ohio oh yeah you might be right there is a healthy amount of distrust toward him and the party, bitterness for the way the party tried to end this primary many times. Ohio is now republican through and through because from what I heard its going to take a long time to get the people of Ohio to trust this party again.

I was justing listening to the radio as I responded to Blue's post and the host asked viewers to call in and let them know if they found Obama honest and trustworthy-

This is basically what he said.

I support Hillary Clinton and I know he has been less then truthful many times when talking about her and her agenda and record. He is dishonest, just look at his speeches and ads about Senator Clinton. If he lied about her I KNOW he is lying when he talks about McCain. No I do not find him honest and trustworthy at all. He says he can win my vote back? How? I don't trust him he lied, why would I believe him NOW?

He hit on an excellent point as a Hillary supporter I to know he has twisted the facts almost unrecognizable at times to portray her in a bad light. How can I possibly honestly say anything he tells me about the Republicans is the truth if he would try to destroy a member of his own party with false facts and accusations? Excellent point!

I think it's clear many of us no longer align ourselves with the behavior of the party. The fact of the matter is Obama is the name on the ballot whether we like it or not but from what I read besides having great concern and pause over Obama being elected everyone's biggest problem is with the party itself and how they meddled and handled this primary.

I think now the question for many of us is are we closet republicans as Obama supporters would love to label us. Not likely one vote doesn't change your core beliefs, which is probably a big reason why Obama could not convince half this party Hillary is bad for the country over the one Iraq vote. It's also probably why he failed to carry the states that have the most casulaties from the Iraq war.

So where do we belong? I don't know the answer to that, I spent alot of time this primary wondering if as I aged had turned republican. The answer is no while there are some things about McCain I do not like, fact of the matter is there are just as many things about Obama I do not like.

But the one thing that stands out to me is party has moved so far over in a desperate attempt to regain power in Washington they have left behind the middle aged voters who built the party the last 20 years. Not a bad sin change is ok but not when you give speeches and interviews saying you don't need those who built the party to win, that your going to flood the party with republicans.

For me the only real answer is to do what I can to make a third party candidate run strong, let the party know my voice and vote means as much as it did 20 years ago in November and that I am not easily replaced with fly by night voters from the other party.

Ok let's be fair let's say why we won't vote for Obama let's be specific.

My biggest fence to jump is a vote for Obama validates him labeling the Clintons as racists and that's an argument I have never believed, I don't believe they are. He took Clinton's word, possibly poorly phrased and tagged this man as the type of person most of us dems can't stand, a racist. I can't validate that nor can I support tactics like that especially when Obama's campign threw a major fit whenver his words were twisted. You can't have it both ways.

My secondary fence is what the party did during this election, moving polling places in Nevada and silencing two states. I found it very hard to believe it was only a coincidence it affected only one candidate for every change made in this primary.

My last fence, I just do not believe him or trust him, I also know the numbers from the caucuses are very skewed and do not represent a large portion of the Clinton dems in those states so what way will they vote is anyone's guess. You can not give any candidate a caucus state because the numbers are wayyyyy off due to the rules put on a voter to vote. Never mind all the republicans who voted to first make Obama the nominee candidate and then to keep this race going voted Clinton. The numbers from the primaries are probably off more then they ever have been before. The country wide polls of today shows McCain beating Obama before the republicans even begin their campaign against him. Those polls would not show that unless a large portion of this base is jumping the fence.

That's alot of fences to jump and I did that with Kerry and just refuse to do it again. That race card against the Clintons along with the votes he refused to cast is the day he lost my vote and he has never won it back.

If you think I would vote against him out of the spite, the only way I vote against him out of spite would be to vote against Michelle Obama and to be honest if it was that I would just stay home and not even waste the gas. So its not spite, not here.

Not my writing a repost from a column someone sent me from the local college: there are typos I have not corrected apparantly whoever copied it did not know copy and paste and just retyped the entire article-

Anyway, these are some serious questions we should be asking ourselves.


Everyday I'm asked the same question by someone, "Will I vote for Barack Obama," and my reply is always the same, "Does it matter?" The answer is no because Barack Obama will never reside at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and here's why.

"The man has been talking for two years and I still don't know what he plans to do or how he plans to do it." Says Joe G. Gulf War veteran residing in Plymouth, Mass. Fair enough but the general election has just begun. " I'm not listening anymore." Says Joe shaking his head. " I've got a family to feed, a mortgage to pay and kids to put through college, I don't have time to listen anymore, I'll just sit this one out, things never change anyway. Aren't the Dems in charge now?" He says adjusting his cap and shaking his head once again referring to the majority the Dems hold in congress.

Joe is not alone in his opinion, the Democratic Party has been in charge in Congress and they have failed to challenge President Bush on a level that makes enough of a difference that American people see that relief at the gas pumps or in the grocery stores. A large portion of the American population believes Washington is not listening and has not been listening for a very long time. Problem one the Democratic party needs to convince Americans like Joe they are listening and so far they have failed that test.

"He seems to reinvent himself every other month. First he says he never heard that Wright guy say those things then he admits he did. I don't trust him, he's no different then any other politician, he will say anything to get elected." Says Gina L from Trumball, Ct. " I'm not thrilled with Hillary Clinton either but I think she could get the job done," I like McCain he's not anywhere near as bad as Bush." she adds thoughtfully touching on the one aspect of this campaign the Democratic party would like to sweep under the rug.

John MCCain is not President Bush, he does not need to reach to the far conservative corners of the Republican party to win the General Election thanks to the Democratic Party. For months there has been warning signs that Obama's appeal is not broad but pigeonholed into three demographics, African Americans, White Collar and the young voters who fuel his grassroots fundraising machine. What the Democratic party has refused to acknowledge is the far reaches of the extreme conservative and religious voters of the Republican Party that Bush reached out to in order to wrestle power from the Democratic Party in 2000 and 2004 will never be able to reach far enough across the aisle to vote for a man as liberal as Barack Obama. John McCain will reap the benefits of the liberal candidate the Democratic Party seems all but assured to trot out in the General Election.   Read More »

Folks,

Check out this link:
http://wizbangblue.com/2008/04/18/obama-dropping-in-gallup-tracking-poll.php
(it contains other good links too)

Todays Gallup poll shows Obama plummeting drastically in the 5 days since debate!!!

Obama supporters: Please do not take it out on those of us who support Sen. Clinton.

Obama morphs San Francisco statements in his Indiana "response" to his latest disparagement of working-class middle America.

Huffington Post article:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mayhill-fowler/obama-no-surprise-that-ha_b_96188.html?page=3

What he really said:
http://thepage.time.com/transcript-of-obamas-remarks-at-san-francisco-fundraiser-sunday/

Said in SF - snippet:
"And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

This (with or without the rest of the comments as context) equates approximately to: its not surprising that they are 'gun toting + religious nut + racists' because they don't have jobs and a lot of bad things have happened to them. There are people out there in working class middle America smart enough to notice this; they are voicing it.

As an example, one such person, who identifies as "We in small town America" described his interpretation of Obama's remarks:

"NOW WE HAVE BITTER SMALL TOWN LAZY WHITE FOLK WHO ARE GUN TOTEN RELIGION LOVING RACISTS"

Another example:

"My problem with Obama's statements is that he just described a Bush-supporting red-neck, a cartoon character really, who wants to be lied to by Republicans and is willfully ignorant. He has generalized the Democrats (!) in PA as backwards and racist.

And another:

It will yield him a bigger loss in Pennsylvania because he has revealed an elitist view of working class citizens

Another:

... of all the vile sermons I"ve watched emanating from your church, and for
all the ridiculous and narrow minded ideas you"ve espoused on national
defense, nothing offends me more than this comment about small town
America"s reasons for worshiping God. How dare you!

The rest of what Obama says equates approximately to an explanation to SF backers, that the reason he is having a hard time with the working class /middle America voters in Pennsylvania is that while "working-class lunch-pail folks" who are of mixed races in the "worst neighborhoods" are 'Obama enthusiasts", the other kind of working class people are hard to convince because "it’s true that when it’s delivered by a 46-year-old black man named Barack Obama, then that adds another layer of skepticism".

The statement equates approximately to: working class inner city people of color in the worst neighborhoods are for Obama but others are not because they are white racists, or at best, put off by black men. There exists a context related to his earlier comment following the "race speech" in which he described the 'typical white person' - like his grandmother who Obama described spouts racial slurs and fears the black man.

What he later claims he said (trying to morph it just enough to make it sound a little more palatable):
http://essence.typepad.com/news/2008/04/obamas-bitter-c.html
[this link is one from an Obama supporter site, chosen out of attempted fairness]

Later, morphed version said in Indiana:
"So people end up, you know, voting on issues like guns, and are they going to have the right to bear arms. They vote on issues like gay marriage. And they take refuge in their faith and their community and their families and things they can count on. "

Note that Obama attempts to tone down the implication that middle America is racist, and to change his characterization regarding religion to something positive, in this second version.

However, this later revision adds that they/we are also homophobic, i.e. 'gun toting + religious nut + racists + gay-haters' , or perhaps just 'gun toting + gay-haters', due to the morphing of the original religious nut + racists component.

Obama's Hope appears to be to have erased or overwritten the SF remarks with the later recounting that is possibly more palatable and yet still divisive along useful lines, the 'gun toting + gay-haters' lines. Note the repeated use of "they"; an 'us versus them' component in his words, analogous to referring to a group - American working class - as "you people".

In addition, Obama is being given yet another comfy pillow; the media apparently choosing to focus only on the word 'bitter' as if the issue is only the use of the word bitter and whether or not the word "bitter" is condescending.

If the true statement in full, and in context, isn't condescending - I don't know what is; its also divisive and polarizing. As Hillary correctly states, it is elitist and demeaning; its not reflective of America's values.

Obama's a Uniter all right; A Uniter, a la George W. Bush.

And talk about judgment; try this thought experiment:
Even if you are the kind of person who agrees with Obama's statements about what working class middle America is, or you think its acceptable for a presidential nominee candidate to believe that - would you prefer your candidate choose to say it out loud while running? Is it good for the democrat party? Will it win us the White House? If you see elements of truth in what Obama says, ask yourself, is it for the good of the party and the country that he causes a hailstorm of division by harping on everything wrong with America? And if so - does it have to be now, when so many American's are earnestly trying to find a way to keep a roof over there heads and see their loved ones return safely from an horrific war? Even if you are still an Obama supporter, ask yourself, is it a sign of really good judgment to once again antagonize most of working-class America - most of the real 'us'?

Obama morphs San Francisco statements in his Indiana "response" to his latest disparagement of working-class middle America.

Huffington Post article:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mayhill-fowler/obama-no-surprise-that-ha_b_96188.html?page=3

What he really said:
http://thepage.time.com/transcript-of-obamas-remarks-at-san-francisco-fundraiser-sunday/

Said in SF - snippet:
"And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

This (with or without the rest of the comments as context) equates approximately to: its not surprising that they are 'gun toting + religious nut + racists' because they don't have jobs and a lot of bad things have happened to them. There are people out there in working class middle America smart enough to notice this; they are voicing it.

As an example, one such person, who identifies as "We in small town America" described his interpretation of Obama's remarks:

"NOW WE HAVE BITTER SMALL TOWN LAZY WHITE FOLK WHO ARE GUN TOTEN RELIGION LOVING RACISTS"

Another example:

"My problem with Obama's statements is that he just described a Bush-supporting red-neck, a cartoon character really, who wants to be lied to by Republicans and is willfully ignorant. He has generalized the Democrats (!) in PA as backwards and racist.

And another:

It will yield him a bigger loss in Pennsylvania because he has revealed an elitist view of working class citizens

Another:

... of all the vile sermons I"ve watched emanating from your church, and for
all the ridiculous and narrow minded ideas you"ve espoused on national
defense, nothing offends me more than this comment about small town
America"s reasons for worshiping God. How dare you!

The rest of what Obama says equates approximately to an explanation to SF backers, that the reason he is having a hard time with the working class /middle America voters in Pennsylvania is that while "working-class lunch-pail folks" who are of mixed races in the "worst neighborhoods" are 'Obama enthusiasts", the other kind of working class people are hard to convince because "it’s true that when it’s delivered by a 46-year-old black man named Barack Obama, then that adds another layer of skepticism".

The statement equates approximately to: working class inner city people of color in the worst neighborhoods are for Obama but others are not because they are white racists. There exists a context related to his earlier comment following the "race speech" in which he described the 'typical white person' - like his grandmother who Obama described spouts racial slurs and fears the black man.

What he later claims he said (trying to morph it just enough to make it sound a little more palatable):
http://essence.typepad.com/news/2008/04/obamas-bitter-c.html
[this link is one from an Obama supporter site, chosen out of attempted fairness]

Later, morphed version said in Indiana:
"So people end up, you know, voting on issues like guns, and are they going to have the right to bear arms. They vote on issues like gay marriage. And they take refuge in their faith and their community and their families and things they can count on. "

Note that Obama attempts to tone down the implication that middle America is racist, and to change his characterization regarding religion to something positive, in this second version.

However, this later revision adds that they/we are also homophobic, i.e. 'gun toting + religious nut + racists + gay-haters' , or perhaps just 'gun toting + gay-haters', due to the morphing of the original religious nut + racists component.

Obama's hope appears to be to have erased or overwritten the SF remarks with the later recounting that is possibly more palatable and yet still divisive along useful lines, the 'gun toting + gay-haters' lines.

In addition, Obama is being given yet another comfy pillow; the media apparently choosing to focus only on the word 'bitter' as if the issue is only the use of the word bitter and whether or not the word "bitter" is condescending.

If the true statement in full, and in context, isn't condescending - I don't know what is; its also divisive and polarizing. As Hillary correctly states, it is elitist and demeaning; its not reflective of America's values.

Obama's a Uniter all right; A Uniter, a la George W. Bush.

And talk about judgment; try this thought experiment:
Even if you are the kind of person who agrees with Obama's statements about what working class middle America is, or you think its acceptable for a presidential nominee candidate to believe that - would you prefer your candidate choose to say it out loud while running? Is it good for the democrat party? Will it win us the White House? Even if you are still an Obama supporter, ask yourself, is it a sign of really good judgment to once again antagonize most of working-class America - most of us?

Disclosure: I am a supporter of Senator Hillary Clinton. I do not work for her campaign or any campaign office. I have a middle America heritage; I'm not one of the wealthy elite; I'm educated, professional, not considered poor. I am loyal to the party, a lifelong democrat from generations of democrats.

Obama is the Uniter (Bush deja vu?) dividing us along racial lines.
His latest co-opting wordplay: the S-word; wants a 'diplomatic surge'.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20080411/NATION01/167553031/0/NATION

What next?

-Voice-O-Reason

Folks,

Re: All the recent posts on subjects such as Race matters, racism is wrong, Obama and race, 'typical white person' spouting racial slurs who make us cringe, etc.

It is divisive, ethically and morally bankrupt, and futile if one cares to fight racism, or any form of injustice to view people as fundamentally defined in terms of their category of racial injustice as perpetrators or victims.

Viewing everyone through a polarizing lense of racial injustice is extremely racist!

We are human beings; a beautiful tapestry of multi-hued threads of our characters, our hopes, our interests, our hobbies, our friends, our educational pursuits, our spiritual beliefs, our professions, our arts, sports, lifestyles, and every other category that defines us.

The point isn't whether or not race and racism is an issue deserving attention and solutions - I think we're all beyond the kindergarten level of understanding that there are social issue regarding racism that have yet to be addressed.

The point is - it is deeply racist and defeating to any cause against racism, to allow any one to define us primarily in terms of our status as perpetrators or victims.

To refuse to be primarily defined in terms of racial injustice is not sweeping anything under the rug - its refusing to take part in a self defeating and racist focus on only race.

So can we get off that train - please?! Lets at least try to transcend where society was in its thinking a century to 1/2 century ago already, and approach this with the enlightened level of reason we like to think we have.

Anger and hate justified by someone else's anger and hate is morally absurd and unacceptable in any circumstance by anyone - no matter what compassion they may be due as a victim.

Anger and hate justified by someone else's anger and hate promoted as understandable and justified by a community leader like a pastor or candidate for President is ethically and morally repulsive, reprehensible, and totally inexcusable.

It is even racist to complement someone or decide to support them based on race.

-Voice-O-Reason

Folks, 

Right now, (am hearing it on TV and seeing it in the news etc.) the media is trying to use their presumption that Hillary supporters are not mostly rich elite - to claim that we don't support Hillary! Please, right now, or today asap, contribute to Hillary to make our voice heard!

Its critical that we all do this now! 

I am a HillRaiser. You can be too.

 Please go to:

<a href="http://www.hillaryclinton.com/contribute/PBCC">http://www.hillaryclinton.com/contribute
/PBCC</a>

Please - Contribute whatever you can, even if its only a couple of dollars, or as much as you can. Thank you! -Voice-O-Reason

 

Folks,

Both the attempts to steal the votes of citizens in two states, and the attempts to force our candidate to cut short the normal nomination process are subversions of our democrat party process and of democracy in general.

Any democrat candidate has the right to go to the convention as our candidate and the people see fit - its what the full process and convention were originally intended for.

When a small number of individual, regardless of their official role, can steal the voting rights of a state of citizens - then we already no longer live in a democracy.

Please sign this petition to stop the disenfranchising of the MI and FL voters. This is important to all democrats no matter who you support. This is a candidate independent petition.

http://emilyslist.org/news/florida_michigan_petition2

Feel free to use my point(s) above in the message box when you sign, if you see fit and it makes it easier for you.