Smearing John McCain

We’ll be voting for Hillary in NOvember. Many Hillary supporters will vote for John McCain if the Democratic? Party of FDR commits suicide and selects the unqualified, race-baiting, and gay-bashing, and woman hating, Barack Obama.

We’ve made the case that Hillary supporters thinking about voting for McCain in NOvember should demand that McCain defend Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton against ugly charges, such as racism, made by Obama’s Chicago thugs. The McCain campaign did in fact defend Bill Clinton as part of the McCain defense against the “racism” charge by Obama’s race-baiting campaign.

History is a teacher. The Obama campaign will do everything it can to slime John McCain. The Obama Hope fiends strung out on the temporary, but ultimately toxic, high that comes from injecting Hopium will likewise slime John McCain.

The increasingly smart McCain campaign knows the slime on racism was merely a harbringer of things to come. The McCain campaign is taking steps now to prevent the sliming of John McCain.

The long term Obama campaign thugs will go with their tried and true methods for getting Obama underserved promotions – slime opponents, plant anonymous memos, investigate opponents for personal dirt (John Edwards, can you hear us now?), and slime as liars or racists anyone who dares say the Emperor has no values, decency, scruples, morals, or veracity.

The Obama campaign will repeat the message in as many subtle and not so subtle ways that McCain is too old, too experienced, too unhip. It is McCain though that will continue to work next week while the Emperor goes on a Hawaiian vacation to bookend his European Vacation, after the island vacation, and the days off the campaign trail presumably for fresh Hopium injections.

We have also received several reports of Obama Hopium dealers sliming McCain by attacking his period of captivity in the Hanoi Hilton. McCain spent years suffering in the prisoner of war camp nicknamed the “Hanoi Hilton”. Not the Paris Hilton, not the Berlin Ritz-Carlton. The Hanoi Hilton. The Obama Hopium dealers are putting out slimy reports making wild charges against McCain which a simply review of the video record will dispositively demonstrate are indeed lies.

Calling opponents or mere truth-tellers “liars” is an Obama specialty. Obama charged “It’s like these guys take pride in being ignorant.” This week Obama called those telling the truth “liars” once again:

At a town hall meeting in Berea , Ohio, today, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, pushed back against the GOP attack on his advice to a voter last week that having a tuned up car and fully inflated tires would help save energy.

“Let me make a point about efficiency, because my Republican opponents – they don’t like to talk about efficiency,” Obama said.

“You know the other day I was in a town hall meeting and I laid out my plans for investing $15 billion a year in energy efficient cars and a new electricity grid and somebody said, ‘well, what can I do? what can individuals do?’ Obama recalled.

“So I told them something simple,” Obama said. “I said, ‘You know what? You can inflate your tires to the proper levels and that if everybody in America inflated their tires to the proper level, we would actually probably save more oil than all the oil we’d get from John McCain drilling right below his feet there, or wherever he was going to drill.'”

(Note: that’s not accurate, as we fact-checked last week. But the larger point about energy savings is correct.)

“So now the Republicans are going around – this is the kind of thing they do. I don’t understand it! They’re going around, they’re sending like little tire gauges, making fun of this idea as if this is ‘Barack Obama’s energy plan.’

“Now two points, one, they know they’re lying about what my energy plan is, but the other thing is they’re making fun of a step that every expert says would absolutely reduce our oil consumption by 3 to 4 percent. It’s like these guys take pride in being ignorant.

“You know, they think it is funny that they are making fun of something that is actually true. They need to do their homework. Because this is serious business. Instead of running ads about Paris Hilton and Britney Spears they should go talk to some energy experts and actually make a difference.”

Obama tried to once again cover up something stupid he said by yelling “liar”. Obama lied about his factually incorrect statement by saying he said something he did not say and by then changing what he said. It’s typical Obama. The faculty lounge egghead does not want to admit he is in over his head and does not know what he is talking about. Instead of admitting he does not know what he is talking about Obama yells “liar”.

Obama did not merely say inflating tires properly and getting tune-ups would help save fuel. Obama said something else quite extraordinary:

There are things that you can do individually though to save energy,” Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, said. “Making sure your tires are properly inflated, simple thing, but we could save all the oil that they’re talking about getting off drilling, if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could actually save just as much.”

Obama’s bizarre claims are simply not true. Whatever one thinks about drilling for oil, conserving, not wasting resources, Obama is simply wrong. The United States cannot save the equivalent amount of oil it gets from drilling by properly inflating tires and tuning up cars. Obama’s assertions are simply not true. It is Obama who is so proud he will not admit he is being ignorant. Yes, Obama is ignorant yet has the audacity to smear the ones with the facts as “ignorant. Obama lies then smears the truth-tellers as “liars”.

However, since estimates of significant tire underinflation affect only about a quarter of the cars on road — as we noted above with the NHTSA statistics — and it’s highly unlikely that 100% of the cars are in need of tune- ups at any given time, the maximum savings amount is probably closer to 10%, Verrastro says.

“So the production offset is more likely to approach 800 thousand barrels per day – a tidy sum and a worthwhile target for savings, but not equal to OCS output,” he rules. “Finally, without knowing what production volumes could be expected from lifting the ban on OCS drilling moratoria, it’s impossible to assert that taking these fuel savings actions would exceed future offshore oil volumes, and in fact, one might argue that the combination of achieving these savings AND developing new supply would doubly enhance US energy security.”

Got that? We are all for conservation – one of the big reasons we are Democrats. But Obama’s hot air proposal is ignorant. We wish that utilizing Obama’s windbag speeches to inflate tires would solve the energy needs of the United States. But Obama’s hot air will not solve the energy problems of the United States. Ignorant or deceptive Obama refuses to acknowledge the facts. But Obama does love smearing as “ignorant” or “racist” or “liars” those who point out his ignorance, race-baiting, lying ways.

Obama has done this before. Obama called Chris Dodd a liar when Dodd quoted Obama accurately regarding Pakistan.

Keith Olberman used to tell the truth about Obama:

OLBERMANN: The last time a politician claimed to be a uniter and not a divider, it was George W. Bush. Better luck next time. Our fourth story tonight, our “Countdown” to 2008, and since the uniter title is available, Barack Obama is picking up the theme. The Illinois senator saying one of the reasons he decided to run for president because Hillary Clinton is too divisive to get the country out of what he calls our ideological gridlock.

Senator Obama telling the “Washington Post”: “I think it is fair to say that I believe I can bring the country together more effectively than she can. That is not entirely a problem of her making. So of those battles in the ‘90s that she went through were the result of some pretty unfair attacks on the Clintons. But that history exists, and so, yes, I believe I can bring the country together in a way she cannot do.”

Ironically, it is the same line of attack on Senator Clinton used by the White House after a new campaign ad said the middle class and even the troops are invisible to President Bush. [snip]

OLBERMANN: Senator Obama, with this interview with your colleagues at “The Post,” seems to a split a very fine hair. He says that Hillary Clinton is too divisive to win, he is not. He is willing to be divisive enough to attack another Democrat for being divisive. It‘s like an M.C. Escher drawing.

Obama and John Edwards attacked Hillary personally and on her character. Obama and Edwards (how does it feel Johnny?) smeared Hillary to hide their own dark souls. The relentless wheels of truth are ginding down the character-less Edwards and are filing down the not-to-be-trusted Obama.

Now the not-to-be-trusted Obama will attack John McCain on age, character issues and his experience.

Obama attacked Hillary on her gender, character issues and her experience.

Obama will slime and slime again.


249 thoughts on “Smearing John McCain

  1. Obama: “America is no longer what it once was”

  2. Admin,

    Waffles would appoint a Ministry of Tire Inflation.
    Anyone who doesn’t carry a government-issued tire gauge will be ticketed
    and fined.


  3. Maybe the best way to think about this is in the family context.

    If you and your spouse had a fundamental disagreement over things would you be inclined to fight it out in front of the world (and kids) or wold you resolve it behind closed doors, like Hillary is doing now. If your every public move was being scrutinized and misinterpreted by a hostile, deranged and totally evil media would you show any signs of anxt. Stepford wives it a good analogy but I doubt it was anything like this. Like the Bible says unto whom much is given much is expected–or was that Palmerston?

  4. wwboei: I doubt the Stepford wife, but this unity crap reminds me of that. Smile, put on a good face, and be a loyal party person, even, when the party is treating you like dirt. I don’t like it.

  5. Admin: The faculty lounge egghead does not want to admit he is in over his head and does not know what he is talking about. Instead of admitting he does not know what he is talking about Obama yells “liar”.
    Well put. Time was when he was calling them racists-but McCain called the coward out on that one and he will be hardpressed to pursue it.

  6. admin,

    now dont be so hard on obama, he isnt exactly a rockett scientist
    you know?

    he does what he can…. poor guy….

    but look here, this could be good for everyone with a car, if he gets
    in office, he can make it mandatory for car owners to inflate tires
    and do quarterly tune-ups.

    oh wait… that wouldnt be right to ‘force’ people to inflate their tires,
    some may not be able to afford it.
    okay, we will only make it mandatory for children to get their tires
    inflated and cars tuned up…
    he can give an incentive tax check, to help pay for this service
    for all adults instead.

  7. Ministry of Hot Air! hehehehe

    Everyone, here is Geeklove’s new video.

    Let’s Help Donna Brazille keep her promise to leave the party.

    D@mn! Still can’t paste with the laptop. Go to youtube and search geeklove.

  8. The three stooges: BO, Brazile, and Coward:


    Geez, he one arrogant son of a bitch. 🙄

  10. Check out the quips in the AP article linked in Idunn’s post, see above. I can’t believe his terrifically thoughtless words. Still snubbing… obviously learning impaired. He’ll regret it on November 5.

    * * * * * *
    As is true in all conventions, we’re still working out the mechanics, the coordination,” Obama said. One such issue is whether there will be a convention roll call on Clinton’s nomination, he said.

    “I’m letting our respective teams work out details,” he said. Asked if that meant he wouldn’t object to her name being placed in nomination and a vote taken, Obama said: “I didn’t say that. I said that they’re working it out.” [SNIP]

    Obama was asked whether allowing Clinton’s name to be placed in nomination might lead to a catharsis for the party, an emotional coming together that relieves pent-up stress.

    “I don’t think we’re looking for catharsis. I think what we’re looking for is energy and excitement,” he said. [SNIP]

    As to those avid Clinton supporters who still haven’t warmed up to him and may even resent him, Obama said, “We’re not talking to those people, we’re talking directly to the Clinton campaign people and staff.”

  11. Her name fricking BETTER be put into nomination. This was the closest primary in Democratic party history, and it still isn’t even over yet, because neither candidate has clinched and the superdelegates haven’t voted yet. So to pretend that her name somehow doesn’t deserve to be put into nomination — or, as Obama says, that there’s even any DOUBT about the issue and that the parties need to “work it out” — is asinine.

  12. Meiyingsu, Obama’s statement that “America is no longer what it once was” shows how inartful he is when it comes to public speaking. Sure, his CADENCE is great, and his finger-wagging and frowning looks great on television, and the throngs of adoring Obama-bots makes for good TV visuals (this is why Big Media loves him — he brings high ratings), but the actual CONTENT of what he says — the actual words — are cringe-inducing.

    Bill Clinton faced a similar political climate back in ’92: the country was headed in the wrong direction and voters were feeling down in the dumps. Rather than criticizing America, like Obama and his advisors do (“God Damn America!” etc), Clinton’s mantra was simply, “We – Can – Do – BETTER” and it worked wonders.

    It’s amazing to me that the press isn’t reporting on what a BAD general election candidate Obama is. He ran very hard to the left during the primary, and now he’s trying to move to the middle, but he can’t do it without looking hypocritical, all because he has no track record of accomplishments to rebut his critics. When Clinton cut the center during the ’92 general, and Republicans accused him of flip-flopping, he could point to his thorough, 12-year record as governor of Arkansas to prove that he could craft bi-partisan solutions that worked. Obama doesn’t have any voting record that can do the same thing. This is why he’s getting killed in the polls. There’s no “there” there.

  13. As to those avid Clinton supporters who still haven’t warmed up to him and may even resent him, Obama said, “We’re not talking to those people, we’re talking directly to the Clinton campaign people and staff.”

    Obama is an arrogant fool, he continues to snub the voters and he wonders why John McCain is leading or tied in some polls…geesh.

    Sorry Hillary can’t do it, won’t do it. Will not knowingly put our country in risk by voting for Obama in NOvember. It’s Hillary or McCain.

  14. Meiyingsu, Obama’s statement that “America is no longer what it once was” shows how inartful he is when it comes to public speaking. Sure, his CADENCE is great, and his finger-wagging and frowning looks great on television, and the throngs of adoring Obama-bots makes for good TV visuals (this is why Big Media loves him — he brings high ratings), but the actual CONTENT of what he says — the actual words — are cringe-inducing.
    Actually, Obama is average in the Black Community…we have babies in Sunday School that can speak better then Barack.

  15. I am a million miles from that behind the scenes bargaining table where the real drama is being played out. But Bambi’s problem is not winning the nomination–but to prove to the world that he can unite the party behind him which is a dubious proposition on the merits, and amid the drumbeat by the media that he cannot close the deal. Hillary can make him or break him on this issue but not at the expense of destroying the party. She has a right to receive full recognition for what she achieved and an expanded power base. Given his ego, he is probably fighting her on both issues but time is working against him. The pressuer now is on him. I do not normally advocate a game of chicken in negotiations but in these unique circumstances I belive I would. The other chip Hillary has to play is the availability of Bill and even her to be fully available to campaign for him in the fall, they do have day jobs as well. But in order to play that negotiation out she needs to be as sacraine as she is now. I have no idea what is really happening but this is not an implausible scenarion and it is why I think she is doing it right. Leverage.

  16. Actually, Obama is average in the Black Community…we have babies in Sunday School that can speak better then Barack.

    Thank you!

  17. carbynew Says:
    August 7th, 2008 at 4:33 pm

    As to those avid Clinton supporters who still haven’t warmed up to him and may even resent him, Obama said, “We’re not talking to those people, we’re talking directly to the Clinton campaign people and staff.”

    It appears Mr. Obama has it completely backwards. A candidate talks “directly to the voters”. He’s saying they’d prefer to talk directly to the Clinton campaign people, who then would tell us what to think and how to vote. In other words, they don’t want to talk directly to Us.

    Because they know what they’d hear: “You can shove your arrogant candidacy where the sun don’t shine”.

  18. What pisses me off more than ANYTHING is this bullshit “I’m the King!” attitude. Regardless of what he THINKS, he does get to “allow” or “not allow” her name to be put into nomination. That is NOT how the process works!

    Seriously, who the FUCK does this guy think he IS??!!

    (pardon the french)

  19. Definition: the paradigmatic game of chicken is two hot rods on who speed toward eachother at 100 mph to see who will turn away first. If neither turns away then, well, ya know . .. . . But if you are billing yourself as the guy who can unite the party then you need to show a little of that flexibliity you are famous for when it comes to represnting the needs of your (poor) constituents against the demands of your big business patrons

  20. Obama is going to bankrupt this country and his plan is “The Legacy of Retribution that he has mentioned so many times in his propaganda feeds to his cult followers.Now he is buying their votes with his call for $1000 to be paid all americans.Bribery is about all he has for solutions for all the country’s problems.MSM have become the Leper Colonies of support for this misguided,self loving and serving threat to our Nation.Hillary is the one we need so urgently at this perilous time in our history and our lives.

    “IT WILL TAKE THIS WOMAN TO SAVE OUR VILLAGE”.Today.Tomorrow and for the next Eight Years.

    By ABM90 Full of hope and confidence that she will prevail.

  21. idunn,

    what the hell?

    okay lets stick to ‘hello world’ for now, until basil can figure it out…
    also i will paste what was on other so you can see it okay.

    so agreed we will stay on hello…. 🙄

  22. John Edwards love child rumours threaten the Barack Obama presidential campaign

    By Annette Witheridge
    Last updated at 5:37 PM on 07th August 2008

    Barack Obama is being ordered to distance himself from John Edwards amid allegations his one-time rival has fathered a love child.

    Mr Edwards had been touted as a possible vice president, but yesterday leading Democrats told the former North Carolina senator to come clean about the rumours of his affair with a campaign aide or stay away from the party convention.

    Party organisers are furious that Mr Edwards has refused to deny that he’s the father of Rielle Hunter’s baby daughter Frances and fear he is taking attention away from Mr Obama.

    Affair: John Edwards with his children Jack and Emma Claire. The former North Carolina senator has not denied rumours of a love child

    Mr Edwards, 55, dropped his own bid for the presidency in January after coming a distant third behind Mr Obama and Hillary Clinton, but he had been expected to make a rousing speech at the Denver convention later this month.

    Rumours that Mr Edwards, whose wife Elizabeth is battling breast cancer, fathered the child were ignored by the mainstream media until yesterday when the National Enquirer printed a grainy photograph allegedly showing Mr Edwards cradling the baby in a Los Angeles hotel room last month.

    Mr Edwards dismissed earlier Enquirer stories about his affair with Miss Hunter, a 44-year-old campaign videographer, as “tabloid trash.”

    The magazine released the “spy-cam” photo supposedly showing Mr Edwards inside the hotel room on July 21 as proof. When reporters confronted him in the lobby he fled into the men’s toilets and refused to come out until he was rescued by security guards.

    Last night it was not clear how the Enquirer had obtained a photo that appeared to have been taken inside the room when the curtains were closed. But Mr Edwards’ supporters are sure to paint him as a victim of dirty tricks.

    Until the photograph emerged Mr Edwards, who was John Kerry’s running mate in the 2004 presidential election, had managed to avoid questions about the affair. But by yesterday afternoon newspapers, television stations and websites across America were running the story – infuriating Democratic leaders who want the focus to remain on Mr Obama, the 47-year-old Illinois senator who will square off against Republican John McCain in the November 4 election.

    By last night even Mr Edwards’ biggest supporters were demanding he come clean with the public, as well as his wife of 30 years and their three children.

    ‘If it’s not true, he has to issue a stronger denial. It’s very damaging,’ said Gary Pearce, who ran Mr Edwards 1998 senate campaign.

    ‘He’s got to stand up and say, ‘This is not my child and I’m going to take legal action against the people who are spreading these lies.’ It’s not enough to say it’s tabloid trash.’

    Former Democratic National Committee chairman Don Fowler said Mr Edwards’ political standing was slipping by the day because he refused to address the story.

    ‘If there is not an explanation that’s satisfactory, acceptable and meets high moral standards, the answer is no, he would not be a prime candidate to make a major address at the convention,’ Mr Fowler added.
    Will Obama’s coronation be upseated by the John Edwards babymama & baby scandal?

  23. Tattle: Time for ‘Daddy’ John Edwards to fess up?
    By Howard Gensler
    Philadelphia Daily News

    Daily News Tattle Columnist

    THE NATIONAL Enquirer inches closer to a Frances Quinn Hunter blood test – taken with a 200-foot needle aimed from a very steady helicopter.

    For those of you who haven’t been paying attention to Tattle or the (growing) handful of outlets who’ve picked up on the Enquirer’s story, Frances is reportedly John Edwards’ love child.

    Love child. Lust child. Whatever.

    Ramping up its story from a mere hotel sighting to large hush-money payoffs, the Enquirer is now running a photo of Edwards, wearing a “baby” blue T-shirt, holding Frances in a hotel room at the Beverly Hilton.

    Tattle can’t figure out where the photographer was to get the photo – in a potted plant? Coiled up in the mini-fridge? – but it’s clearly Edwards and he’s holding a baby.

    Tattle has held many babies we had not fathered – at least not to our knowledge – and it remains a possibility, albeit an ever-diminishing one, that Edwards and Rielle Hunter are just campaign buddies and his old paternal instinct kicked in when he saw the toddler.

    But come on.

    With the photo and the hush-money allegations and the dwindling chance of a role in a possible Obama administration, it’s time for Edwards to either publicly and unequivocally deny the whole thing and sue the Enquirer, tell a Clinton-esque lie – “I did not . . . impregnate . . . that woman” or make a YouTube video in which he kneels before Elizabeth and she beats the sanctimonious Ken doll stuffing out of him.
    The Democratic? Taliban Party and Team Obama needs to start thinking about…DNA testing done by the National Enquirer.

    It’s not hard to do…CSI is always having shows where they get DNA off of anything and since tabloids LOVE to throw money around or dig into trash cans…I’m just thinking that it would not be a big deal to get samples and pay for your own DNA tests.

    I’m just thinking out loud….but it is plausible.

  24. My heart truly goes out to Elizabeth. But other than that, I still just don’t feel like this is any of my business, apart from how it effects the convention.

  25. should have written “affects”.

    (sigh) let me go get dinner started, since I obviously can’t write.

  26. Informed In Illinois, replying to your comment :

    The Obama interview is a direct slap at Hillary from Obama. In the videotape we posted a few days ago, Hillary said there was a need for a catharsis and a roll call vote.

    In today’s interview Obama says: “I don’t think we’re looking for catharsis. I think what we’re looking for is energy and excitement,” he said.

  27. Anyone who wants to participate in the Admin Tribute please go to

    Berkeley Vox!!!!!

  28. this is a joke but I put BHO’s name in it

    Ms. Pringle was teachig her 3rd grade class english and asked her students

    Who knows how to spell “before”?

    Susie raised her hand and said I do.. it’s “befor”. Sorry said the teacher thats not right Susie.

    Then Eddie raised his hand and spelled it “bfore”, Sorry Eddie said the teacher thats not right either.

    Then Barack raised his hand and said it’s spelled “before”. Thats right Barack you are so very smart said the teacher.

    Then Ms. Pringle asked Barack to tell the class how to use “before” in a sentence and Barack said thats easy 2 and 2 B4

  29. Thanks, Admin and all: Yes, I do get the direct slap from that arrogant fool.

    And if our representatives don’t slap him right back at the convention, 18 million of us will slap him on Nov. 4.

    Got my Clinton Dems Action memo yesterday. Working like there’s no tomorrow and hoping against all hope. Keep the faith – Hillary is 44!

  30. Glodis to vote for O’ReillyBy Jeremy P. Jacobs

    Guy Glodis, the Worcester County Sheriff who holds significant political sway in central Massachusetts, threw a wrench into the Massachusetts Democratic machine Wednesday, voicing his intention to vote for Ed O’Reilly, the Democrat challenging U.S. Sen. John Kerry.

    Jim O’Sullivan of the State House News Service first reported Wednesday that Glodis has chosen to support O’Reilly (D-Gloucester) over Kerry (D-Boston), becoming the first major Democratic politician in the state to do so.

    Asked to confirm the report, Glodis told, “Absolutely. I am looking forward to voting for him.”

    Glodis emphasized, however, that he is not endorsing O’Reilly. “Let me just say this,” he said, “I have not endorsed him and do not plan on endorsing him…I don’t endorse many statewide candidates.”

    The sheriff, a former state legislator, also stressed that he is not mobilizing his central Massachusetts political organization for O’Reilly. “I think he’s doing quite a good job on his own,” he added. “I would say he’s made some strong inroads into central Massachusetts.”

    Glodis is the first major political player in the state to voice his support for O’Reilly, who is running an insurgent candidacy against Kerry from the left. In particular, O’Reilly has criticized Kerry for his 2002 vote to authorize the use of force in Iraq.

    Glodis said he doesn’t “sway easily” but that he has met O’Reilly seven or eight times in the last month and has been moved by O’Reilly’s “tenacity and work ethic.” “He’s earned my vote,” he said. “He’s very pleasant, very personable. I think he’d make a great U.S. senator.”

    “Furthermore,” he added. “I always like the underdog.”

  31. Kerry shouldn’t shy away from debates

    August 07, 2008 03:40 am

    Is U.S. Senator John Kerry really feeling that threatened by a first-time, relatively unknown, challenger?

    First it was an allegedly torrid Senate summer schedule that Kerry said made it impossible for him even to think about debating his Democratic primary opponent, Edward O’Reilly, before the Sept. 16 election.

    O’Reilly, a Gloucester attorney, had asked Kerry for a series of 23 debates in public forums and television appearances. That’s obviously excessive, but wouldn’t one or two be a good compromise?

    Apparently not. Roger Lau, Kerry’s campaign manager, said on July 28 that Kerry couldn’t even discuss debates until he knew when the Senate would recess.

    That rang hollow on its face, of course — very hollow. Yes, it was a long four years ago, but surely voters recall how eager Kerry was to debate when he was running to unseat President George W. Bush, and it didn’t matter whether the Senate was in session or not. When Kerry was just the presumptive Democratic nominee, in March 2004, he called for monthly debates with Bush. By August of that year, he was demanding weekly debates.

    But this year, just a couple of days after claiming his Senate duties were too pressing even to discuss debates with O’Reilly, the senator famously found time to have dinner on Nantucket, where he posed with a number of tipsy coeds for photos, which made it to the entertainment-gossip Web site The day after that, he spoke at Yale University, in New Haven, Conn.

    And the Senate has now been in recess for more than a week. But according to the O’Reilly campaign, the only thing they have heard from the Kerry camp is, “We’ll get back to you.”

    Kerry press secretary Brigid O’Rourke said this week that discussions with the O’Reilly campaign, “continue,” adding that, “people in Massachusetts are looking for a full-time senator, not a full-time candidate.”

    Kerry and O’Reilly are, of course, merely playing the parts that all incumbents and challengers play. It is in the interests of the challenger to debate as often as possible — the incumbent has a record that can be attacked; it is always possible the incumbent could stumble or say something silly that would end up on YouTube, and the challenger needs the publicity, since he or she almost always lacks the name recognition of the incumbent.

    The incumbent, meanwhile, has everything to gain by keeping the challenger as invisible as possible, all while looking “senatorial” — delivering speeches, posing with enlarged checks, attending major fundraisers — to project an aura of inevitability.

    Nobody expects Kerry to debate O’Reilly 23 times. But it would do the senator’s own reputation some good to agree to a debate or two. He owes that much not to O’Reilly but to the voters. According to recent polling, the Kerry act — claiming to be vigorously serving the state while being largely invisible except when it benefits him — is wearing thin.

    Kerry never tires of saying how proud he is of his record. So, let him defend it to someone other than campaign contributors.

  32. Bad Economy May Hurt Obama

    Thursday, August 7, 2008 10:07 AM

    By: Dick Morris & Eileen McGann Article Font Size

    The conventional wisdom has it down pat: A bad economy works against the candidate from the party in power as voters take out their rage and fear on the president’s party and back the challenger, just like they did in 1992. But this is not a normal economic slowdown (or recession) and Obama is not a normal challenger.

    I think the conventional wisdom may be dead wrong.

    It is not so much that unemployment is so high (5.7 percent) or that the economy is in the tank (1 percent growth this quarter) as that everything seems to be falling apart. Banks are under assault, mortgages are in default, and quasi-government agencies like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac need bailouts, financial institutions go hat in had to foreign sovereign wealth funds peddling shares of their equity in return for desperately needed cash, the cost of filling a gas tank has tripled.

    It is not the present circumstances that have voters freaked, it is the threats that seem to loom on the horizon.

    And Obama is no ordinary challenger. Not like Bill Clinton, for example. In 1992, from the first moment the campaign started, Clinton billed himself as the expert who could solve the economy’s problems. His promise to “focus like a laser beam” on the recession won him big points throughout the campaign.

    His 10-year record as a governor and his chairmanship of the National Governors’ Association all bolstered his credentials. But we first met Barack Obama as an advocate of racial and partisan healing and then as an opponent of the war in Iraq. When he tried to morph into an economic expert in time for the Ohio and Pennsylvania primaries, voters didn’t buy it and voted for Hillary.

    So the question that hangs over the election is, Are we prepared to trust a new candidate with almost no experience and no claim to economic expertise in the middle of one of the most threatening economic situations we have ever faced?

    Add to this backdrop, Obama’s pledge to raise taxes, and you have a combustible situation which could frighten American voters en masse. When, amid relative prosperity, Obama said he would restore fairness by raising taxes on the rich, it was well received, particularly in the Democratic primary.

    Raising the top bracket to 40 percent seemed a no-brainer. Applying the Social Security tax to more earned income, not just to the first $100,000, seemed like elemental fairness and a good way to save the pension system. Restoring the capital gains tax to 28 percent appeared to comport with the notion that those whose income comes from investment should pay a tax closer to that paid on earned income (despite the argument that it is after tax money that they invested in the first place).

    But now, with massive capital outflows crippling the public and private sectors, doubling the tax on capital seems like a very, very bad idea. And a sharp increase in taxes on the entrepreneurial class seems like a risky proposition.

    And, besides, when a candidate starts raising taxes, who knows where he will stop once he is in office.

    McCain can put economist after economist on the air to prophesy depression if Obama’s plan for taxes is enacted. And the public will not be reassured by the Democrat’s claims that his tax hikes are only on the rich.

    It almost doesn’t matter that McCain is not an economist and avows ignorance of what Thomas Carlyle called the “dismal science.” We know McCain. We know he will surround himself with some pretty capable people and, above all, we know that he won’t raise taxes.

    Were these calmer times, with less of a threat from abroad and less economic danger, we might indulge our penchant for change and elect an ingénue in the hope that he will offer something different. We might be more easily captivated by his charisma. But, in these times, we may want to stay with the safer candidate

  33. Bambi: there is a blizzard coming on and you have no idea what is coming at you. They have had you in mind for over a year, and even as your mama gogzilla was hobnobbing with hannibal lector and plotting against Hillary, Mr. Rove was also plotting and scheming your demise. If you knew anyhing about the game of pool you would know what a bank shot is and that is what happened here. No its not a new kind of politics at all it is the tried and true method of the left wing of the party called snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. I feel like the little kid in the closing scene of the Western Shane starring Allen Ladd. ” Hillary . . . .come back . . . .we need you! And how.

  34. ADMIN,

    thank you for your patience, we have alot to do for OUR day…
    again thank you for this opportunity to have our say…

    we have alot to do, we will be in touch though, when
    we can give you a solid date to publish our work…
    no need to respond,


    ’44nitas’ 😛 🙄 😆

  35. Yep, wbboei. Obama is shaping up to be the weakest general election candidate the Democrats have nominated in at least a generation. He simply DOES. NOT. HAVE. THE. RESUME. to be believable. He has no track record of success or accomplishments. That is a recipe for disaster, given that the country is in economic turmoil.

  36. ROTFL!!

    Story #1: Pelosi Can’t Sell Books; Anti-Obama Books Top Lists

    RUSH: Have you seen how few books Nancy Pelosi has sold? Two thousand seven hundred thirty seven copies of her book. She did all of the appearances last week. She did The View, she did Good Morning America, she did a whole bunch of things, and her office is saying, (paraphrasing) “Well, you know, she really wasn’t trying to sell the book last week, too much going on. There will be an up-tick this week.” I’m sure her publisher likes hearing that, that she wasn’t trying to sell the book the first week that it came out. (Of course, the unions will take care of this. They’ll buy up boxes of books in bulk that nobody will ever read.)

    But the bottom line is that the Democrats have this arrogance, they have this assumption that everybody lives and breathes for them, that hangs on every word that they say.

    In the meantime, Jerome Corsi has The Obama Nation, whatever the title of his book is out there, and with hardly any publicity it’s going to be number one on the New York Times list. There’s a book by David Freddoso, works at National Review also, The Case Against Barack, and it, too, is selling well. Even Dick Morris has a book out there that has some critical things of Obama in it, and it is selling well. Yet the Democrats think they have The Messiah as their nominee. They think they’ve got a landslide just waiting to happen. All we have to do is let the calendar play out.

    In the meantime, Nancy Pelosi, the most powerful woman in Washington, DC, the speaker of the House, a historical figure herself since there’s never been a female speaker before, 2,000 books.

    You want to know the real America? I think this is it. I don’t think that there’s all this love and adoration and desire for change with the Democrats. They think there is, they live inside their own little alternative universe, their own little bubble, where they think that everybody else believes what they believe. They get fawning puff piece press coverage, they’re never challenged, and so they have a warped view of the people in this country. They look at presidential polls, they see Bush at 29, 30%, and they say, “A-ha! Everybody hates Bush!” But they don’t see themselves at 7% in the polls and say, “A-ha! Everybody hates us!”, because they don’t think it matters. Polls of Congress are of an institution, not an individual, and presidential poll is a poll of a man, an individual, not an institution, so they think they’re home free. They do think that the country hates Bush, hates the war in Iraq, they think people hate the country as much as they do. So they act as though that’s the case, with arrogance, smugness, and condescension.

    You have to know that Pelosi is shocked, stunned. And I guarantee her publisher is just stunned and shocked. Two thousand books. Wonder what her advance was? I’ll bet it was huge. I’ll tell you, if Newt Gingrich’s book, when he was speaker, had opened this poorly, that’s all we would be hearing about. But Pelosi and her office have to be shocked. And then you look at what’s number one on the list, and it’s an anti-Obama book? And another anti-Obama book’s right behind it? Be confident, my friends. The Drive-By Media does not reflect majority opinion in the United States anymore.
    I hate to say this but I agree with Rush’s points. As a Hillary Clinton/PUMA supporter “I can see clearly now” and I not liking what I see.

  37. Check out this piece from the Washington Post, of all places. It refers to Clinton supporters as “Clintonistas,” which is a flat-out slur. The derogatory term was coined by Republicans back in the 90’s, as a play on “Sandinista,” which was a militant socialist regime in Nicaragua.

    THIS is what counts for “unbiased” analysis? And America wonders why we say Hillary gets a raw deal and is held to a higher standard….

    The Clinton Question
    By Dan Balz

    Hillary Clinton hits the campaign trail for Barack Obama on Friday, dutifully playing the role of cheerleader for the presumptive nominee. What role her husband has decided to play is far less obvious. It is not that of cheerleader.

    Clinton’s outing in Nevada marks her first on behalf of Obama since the two campaigned together in the aptly named hamlet of Unity, N.H., shortly after the primaries ended. The Obama campaign has already announced that she will campaign for him in Florida next week and there is talk that she will undertake another swing just before the Democratic convention opens in Denver.

    She is doing this in spite of obvious pain, disappointment and regrets after losing the nomination battle by the narrowest of margins. She is doing it in spite of the fact that the Obama forces have done little to help her retire the enormous debt she piled up during her bid for the nomination — a fact that deeply rankles Clinton loyalists who believe that the most prodigious money-raiser in the history of the Democratic Party could do at least a little bit more to persuade his supporters to make a small contribution.

    Clinton’s pledge made during the primaries to do everything she could to elect a Democrat to the presidency in November, regardless of how the nomination battle turned out, holds. There is no sign that she is deliberately trying to make things difficult for Obama and when called upon she has delivered his signature “Yes we can!” exhortation with seemingly genuine enthusiasm.

    Still, there are difficult issues yet to be resolved, most obviously how convention week in Denver plays out. Clinton has earned a prominent role at the convention. Just how prominent is still under negotiation. She will have a prime time speaking slot, but the question of whether her name will be put in nomination and whether there will be a roll call of the states — a time-consuming process that nonetheless would highlight just how close she came to winning and give her delegates a moment to savor — have been under discussion.

    Beyond that, there is the not insignificant question of how much of the oxygen she and her husband may soak up in Denver. With cable channels prepared to mine beyond reason every speck of drama from an event notably short of that commodity, the Clintons are irresistible — and there are plenty of Clintonistas to help fill the hours before and during the prime-time speeches. One off-message line from one prominent Clinton loyalist will be enough to disrupt what the Obama campaign hopes will be a placid narrative of a party that is unified and enthusiastic about winning back the White House.

    Which raises the question of what Bill Clinton may be up to. His first venture back into the public domain should be a warning to the Obama people that if there is a contingent of bitter enders still licking their wounds after the primaries, the former president is at the head of that line.

    Certainly he has good reason to feel aggrieved. When he volunteered to ABC’s Kate Snow in an interview during his recent Africa trip, “I am not a racist,” it was clear that he came out of the primaries wounded, angry and resentful. That may be understandable and he appears anxious to talk more about that at some appropriate time — well after the election is over.

    What he said about Obama, however, was more mystifying. He was asked whether Obama was ready to be president. For a politician who twice won the presidency, that was a slow pitch that should have been hit with ease. Instead, Clinton inexplicably responded with a version of “that depends on what the definition of ‘is’ is.”

    “You can argue that nobody is ready to be president,” he said. “You can argue that, even if you’ve been vice president for eight years, that no one can be fully ready for the pressures of the office.”

    You can argue a lot of things, or discuss or debate them into the wee hours of the night, but a brief television interview is not the time or place to do so. When he was asked as a follow up, well, whether Obama was qualified, he went off track again. The Constitution, he said, determines qualifications. Then it’s up to the voters. “I think we have two choices,” he said. “I think he should win and I think he will win.”

    Nothing in that answer offered the least bit of praise for Obama. To say “I think he should win” might be nothing more than a cold-blooded analysis that, in a year when President Bush’s approval ratings are hovering around 30 percent and the Republican Party’s image is badly tarnished, any Democratic nominee should be able to prevail. It was a clinical answer, not the kind of embrace one should expect a former president to give a potential successor.

    The Post’s Anne Kornblut, who traveled to Africa with the former president, asked him during a lengthy interview whether he thought Obama could win. He said he did, but the reasons he offered had little to do with Obama. He mentioned nothing unique about Obama’s message, style, biography, campaign team or anything of the sort. The key line was as follows:

    “I think that the fundamental circumstances at home and abroad [that] work in his favor would work in any Democrat’s favor,” he said. “And I also think the demographics of the country have been moving steadily, after moving away from us from 1968 to about 1996, they’ve been moving back toward us for more than a decade now.”

    After much analysis, he added, “Plus he’s smart, he’s a good politician.” But he quickly added, “Now McCain is a very formidable man…”

    All of his analysis is dead on, reminding people that Clinton remains a premier political strategist in his own party. But that is not the role he is being asked to play right now. Perhaps it is an impossible role — that of loyal spouse to a losing candidate who must suddenly shift allegiance, as well as that ex-president who is seeing his party taken over by a young and talented politician (as he was 16 years ago when he won the presidency) and who must be as gracious as possible.

    Whatever Obama supporters may think of the Clintons, the two still represent a powerful force within the Democratic coalition — and will almost regardless of the outcome of the election in November. They are both adjusting to new circumstances after one of the biggest disappointments of their lives. Hillary, whatever pain she still feels, has decided to soldier on. Her husband has not quite decided what to do.

    Posted at 12:09 PM ET on Aug 7, 2008 | Category: Barack Obama

  38. clintonistas?

    i believe we adopted that term ourselves, and dont think of it as a

    as a matter of fact, we are proud to be 44istas as well… 😛

    GO 44…

  39. Obama cannot be trusted. Superdelegates beware. America beware.

    Breaking from

    Obama Welshes on Hillary Promise

    Hillary and Bill Clinton are privately fuming about the second-class treatment they have received from Democratic presumptive nominee Barack Obama.

    When Obama and Hillary “kissed” and made up during their unity rally in June, both made a private pledge to each other to help raise $500,000 from their donors for the other’s campaign.

    Though deep in debt, Hillary quickly fulfilled her promise. But cash-rich Obama has yet to cough up the dough from his backers.

    “Hillary has done her part in that regard,” a Hillary adviser told Time. “Obama has not.”

    Then there was the warm and fuzzy call between Bill Clinton and Obama. Obama told Clinton he wanted to sit down with the popular former president, the most successful Democratic president since FDR. But Clinton aides say Obama has never folowed up on the verbal invitation.

    These and other details on the deteriorating Clinton-Obama relationship are laid out in a Time magazine report.

    Bill Clinton’s comments to ABC News are symptomatic of his and Hillary’s icy relationship with Obama. Asked during his trip to Africa if Obama was qualified to be president, Clinton stubbornly refused to answer affirmatively.

    A Hillary adviser told TIme, “It’s not a great relationship, and it’s probably not going to become one.”

    Reportedly, Hillary seriously doubts that Obama can beat McCain come November. And she is thinking of keeping her name in nomination and demand a vote at the party’s Denver Convention.

    Hillary wants to remind voters and the media that she was the alternative to Obama, a important point that

  40. Comments have been closed at CNN for Roland Martin’s op-ed “Poor Bill”. Here is his contact info

    h t t p : / /

    Mailing Address


    1000 E. 87th St.
    Chicago, IL 60619
    Phone: (773) 247-6200

    TV One Cable Network

    Creators Syndicate

    5777 W. Century Blvd., Suite 700
    Los Angeles, Calif. 90045
    (310) 337-7003, main
    (310) 337-7625, fax

    If you would like a copy of Roland S. Martin’s television tape or CD, call, write or email:

    Marc Watts, CEO
    Signature Management Group
    1327 W. Washington, Suite 2H
    Chicago, Ill. 60607
    (312) 226-5552, main

    The op-ed itself is at
    h t t p : / /

  41. carby,

    2700 books. That’s really pathetic, I sold over 700 copies of my
    pod book and no one knows who i am!

  42. Viva Clintonistas, Hillaristas!

    I first saw ‘Clintonistas’ during the impeachment of 98, used by a strong Clinton supporter. Being a strong Clinton supporter, I’ve been proudly using it ever since!


  43. Rush Limbaugh was the one who popularized “Clintonista,” back in the early 90’s, and then it spread like wildfire among right-wing talk radio and conservative circles.

  44. It astounds me, the arrogance of the press, to presume that BC should be fawning over someone, who castigated, demeaned, and damaged his credibility and standing in the black community and his legacy. If BC, has not one iota of respect for BO, I don’t blame him. As a former president, BC has been treated like crap by the BO campaign. Why should BC speak of BO in glowing terms? BO has not earned the respect of the former president. Not only, did BO treat Hillary like dirt, but he tried to destroy BC’s legacy during the process. BO does not deserve BC’s respect.

  45. BTW, since when, does a former president not have a prominent role during the party’s convention?? Bush will be speaking at the Republican convention. This all about BO, is sickening and revolting. He does not want ANYONE else to receive any attention or accolades. He does not deserve to be president. Excuse my ranting, but the clips of Limbaugh and the interviews have been very insulting to the Clintons. They do not deserve this abuse.

  46. correction: Limbaugh was not insulting of the Clintons, but his points about BO’s comments to that 7 y/o girl, were right on.

  47. Despite Obama’s Efforts, Clinton Supporters Won’t Fade Away
    Obama and Clinton released a statement of unity, but some Clinton supporters are still angry

    By Kenneth T. Walsh
    Posted August 7, 2008

    Hillary Clinton’s die-hard supporters are causing another stir in the run-up to the Democratic National Convention.

    Barack Obama and party leaders have been trying to foster a sense of unity as the Illinois senator moves toward formally securing the Democratic presidential nomination at the convention, which starts August 25 in Denver. But Clinton’s supporters refuse to fade away, and some think she could still win the party’s nod with a last-minute campaign to elbow Obama aside.

    Clinton backers are planning a demonstration in Denver on the second night of the gathering, when she is expected to speak. That’s also the 88th anniversary of women’s suffrage. But the Clinton movement doesn’t stop there. Some of her backers want a roll-call vote to demonstrate her support; she got 18 million votes in the primaries but fell short of overtaking Obama in the delegate race. Hillary loyalists, including those at PUMA (Party Unity My Ass), hope they can persuade a few hundred Obama delegates to switch and turn the tide.

    This isn’t likely, because Obama’s supporters seem just as committed to him as Clinton’s are to her. But party leaders are concerned that the Hillary rebels will reopen old wounds and reignite the debate over whether she was treated fairly by Obama and the media as the first woman to be a serious presidential contender. Such a split could lead to an embarrassing mess in Denver just when Obama needs all the positive vibrations he can generate. He holds a slim lead over Republican John McCain nationally in the opinion polls.

    While her loyalists continue to beat the war drums, Clinton appears to be making peace. She has agreed to participate in a rally for Obama in Nevada Friday and to appear at another event for him in Florida August 21. They held two joint fundraisers in New York last month.

    Shortly after conceding the race, Clinton endorsed Obama, and last night they issued a joint statement again pledging unity. “We are working together to make sure the fall campaign and the convention are a success,” they said in their announcement. “At the Democratic convention, we will ensure that the voices of everyone who participated in this historic process are respected and our party will be fully unified heading into the November election.”

    But the statement did little to diminish the ardor of the Hillary die-hards. They argue that she hasn’t been given the respect she deserves even though Obama has apparently agreed to give her a coveted primetime speaking slot August 26 and he has been quite conciliatory. On Sunday, he endorsed the seating of the full delegations from Florida and Michigan, which had violated party rules by holding their primaries too early. Party leaders had penalized them, but Obama is now asking that the penalties be lifted. Clinton won both contests, although neither she nor Obama campaigned actively in the two states.

    For their part, some Obama backers consider the hard-line Hillary supporters to be sore losers. “What usually happens is, if you lose, you go silent for a while,” says an Obama strategist. “But Hillary’s supporters haven’t gone silent. They’re still out there in the news.”

    “They went negative on us (in the primaries),” he adds. “But we didn’t fight fire with fire. It could’ve been scorched earth, but that’s not where our guy is.”

    Now, the Obama team’s patience is being tested again, Obama advisers say. One particular problem is Bill Clinton’s apparent reluctance to campaign publicly for Obama. The former president’s role at the convention remains unclear.

  48. ((((((((((((((((((((((((( DANG !!!!!! ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))


    Man held in Fla. for threatening Obama’s life
    Suspect held without bail Thursday after a brief court hearing

    CIA says man threatened Obama
    Aug. 7: A Florida man is being held on charges for allegedly threatening to assassinate Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.
    36 minutes ago
    MIAMI – A man who authorities said was keeping weapons and military-style gear in his hotel room and car appeared in court Thursday on charges he threatened to assassinate Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.

    Raymond Hunter Geisel, 22, was arrested by the Secret Service on Saturday in Miami and was ordered held at Miami’s downtown detention center without bail Thursday by a federal magistrate.

    A Secret Service affidavit charges that Geisel made the threat during a training class for bail bondsmen in Miami in late July. According to someone else in the 48-member class, Geisel allegedly referred to Obama with a racial epithet and continued, “If he gets elected, I’ll assassinate him myself.”

    Obama was most recently in Florida on Aug. 1-2 but did not visit the South Florida area.

    Another person in the class quoted Geisel as saying that “he hated George W. Bush and that he wanted to put a bullet in the president’s head,” according to the Secret Service.

    Geisel denied in a written statement to a Secret Service agent that he ever made those threats, and the documents don’t indicate that he ever took steps to carry out any assassination. He was charged only with threatening Obama, the presumptive Democratic nominee, but not for any threat against President Bush.

    Geisel’s court-appointed attorney declined comment.

    In the interview with a Secret Service agent, Geisel said “if he wanted to kill Senator Obama he simply would shoot him with a sniper rifle, but then he claimed that he was just joking,” according to court documents.

    A search of Geisel’s 1998 Ford Explorer and hotel room in Miami uncovered a loaded 9mm handgun, knives, dozens of rounds of ammunition including armor-piercing types, body armor, military-style fatigues and a machete. The SUV was wired with flashing red and yellow emergency lights.

    Geisel told the Secret Service he was originally from Bangor, Maine, and had been living recently in a houseboat in the Florida Keys town of Marathon, according to court documents. He said he used the handgun for training for the bail bondsman class, had the knives for protection and used the machete to cut brush in Maine.

    In the affidavit, the Secret Service said Geisel told agents that he suffered from psychiatric problems including post-traumatic stress disorder, but he couldn’t provide the names of any facilities where he sought treatment.

  49. “They went negative on us (in the primaries),” he adds. “But we didn’t fight fire with fire. It could’ve been scorched earth, but that’s not where our guy is.”

    That is an outright LIE. The BO campaign did have a scorched earth policy. They played the race card, denigrated a former 2 term president, fed lies, and distortions to the media, and the RFK debacle was one of the most obscene moves on their part. The BO people ENCOURAGED news outlets to write negative stories about the Clintons. And the bloggers? That is another scorched earth tactic. I haven’t even discussed the sexism, gender bias, and misogyny, which were encouraged by his campaign.

    As far as BC’s reluctance to campaign for BO, I wonder, if he has even been asked. Since when, does a former president, not have a role, in the party convention?

  50. RGK44, It’s not that Obama is talking to us, we are nothing to him, he want to talk to the Clinton campaign, in otherwards the money folks!
    OUr votes did not count during the primary and they don’t count now, he is only interested in the money folks!
    Is this IDIOT for real!! I guess he thinks the rest of us white females are worth a crap, votes or not!

  51. NYT article on Hillary’s role at the convention:

    Senator Hillary Clinton asked the question herself on the night of the last primaries in early June: “What does Hillary want?”

    That’s still a bit of a mystery, particularly as she and Senator Barack Obama negotiate over her role, and possibly that of her husband, at the Democratic convention in Denver and beyond.

    Mr. Obama has given Mrs. Clinton a speaking role on the Tuesday night of the convention. But she made it clear in a recent chat with supporters — which is now on YouTube — that she is steeped in negotiations over how to salve the wounds of her disappointed supporters so that they don’t stray in November. She suggested she may allow her name to be placed in nomination, and also that her supporters don’t need her permission to do that on their own.

    It is not clear whether Mrs. Clinton is also bargaining for her husband and what role he may play at the convention or in the fall campaign; Mr. Clinton has talked with Mr. Obama since the end of the primaries.

    There is no new news so far today, as Mrs. Clinton wrote in a live Web chat on her personal blog.

    “While no decisions have been made yet, I will make sure that we keep you up to date and involved with all of the Convention activity,” she wrote.

    Mr. Obama also told reporters today that some matters were unresolved. “As is true in all conventions, we’re still working out the mechanics, the coordination,” he said while flying to his home in Chicago.

    In the video, taken July 31 at a unity event in Palo Alto, Mrs. Clinton described her bargaining position at the table:

    “We will come out stronger if people feel that their voices were heard and their views were respected,” she said. “I think that is a very big part of how we actually come out unified.”

    Whatever she is asking for, she described the process aptly:

    “It’s as old as Greek drama,” she said.

    She was referring to the “catharsis” that her supporters are seeking after enduring her roller-coaster ride through the primaries.

    But she could have been referring to the Clintons themselves, the leading lady and erstwhile leading man of Democratic politics, and their knack for remaining at the center of the drama even if they do not hold center stage. That is evident in the outpouring of comments on The Caucus and elsewhere in the blogosphere.

    The Clintons are entering an extremely sensitive stage of the election cycle _ and of their ongoing process to shape their legacies. It is not just about their roles at the convention or the campaign but about how history will treat them both and will in turn influence her future.

    While the video of Mrs. Clinton plays across cable TV and the Internet, a new video of her husband, in an interview with ABC News, is also playing in its own endless loop. He was not quite able to say that Senator Barack Obama, the party’s all-but-certain nominee, is qualified to be president.

    Mr. Clinton appears and reappears, swatting at the same furies he has tried to bat back all year _ that he used race in subtle and not-so-subtle ways during the primaries. “I am not a racist,” he says. He makes clear that any friendship with Representative James Clyburn of South Carolina, a leading black politician who despaired of the Clintons during the primary, is over.

    Mrs. Clinton came very close to winning the nomination, of course. She won eight of the last 13 primaries, back when she was warning in a full-throated voice that she would be a better general-election candidate than Mr. Obama.

    Interestingly, as she surely knows, she remains just as popular among Democrats these days as Mr. Obama, despite his having been campaigning for two months as the party nominee. The most recent New York Times poll puts her favorability rating among Democrats at 70 percent and Mr. Obama’s at 66 percent.

    Now Mr. Obama is struggling in the polls to maintain parity with Senator John McCain. In the video, she calls for the party to unify behind Mr. Obama, even as she nurses the disappointment of her supporters _ and carefully shields any feelings of vindication.

    At one point, a woman asks Mrs. Clinton what happens if her name is placed in nomination at the convention and she actually wins.

    “That’s not going to happen,” Mrs. Clinton replies. “What we want to have happen is for Senator Obama to be nominated by a unified convention of Democrats. And as I have said, the best way I think _ and I could be wrong, but the best way I think _ to do that is to have a strategy so that my delegates feel like they’ve had a role and that their legitimacy has been validated. It’s as old as Greek drama. There is a catharsis. I mean, everybody comes and they want to yell and scream and have their opportunity, and I think that’s all to the good. Because then, everybody can then go (whew), great, now, let’s go out and win. That’s what we want people to feel.”

    Her goal, she says, is this: “We do not want any Democrat in the hall or in the stadium or at home walking away saying, ‘I’m just not satisfied, I’m not happy.’ That’s what I’m trying to avoid.”

    Her supporters in the video seem a bit puzzled by this process. Is it normal, one asks, for all of this to be negotiated back and forth?

    Mrs. Clinton responds:

    “If you look at recent history, I have moved more quickly and done more on behalf of my opponent than comparable candidates have. Most of them didn’t endorse until the convention, Teddy Kennedy, or Gary Hart, Jerry Brown, just a lot of people held out until the convention, kept their delegates, often waged platform or rules or credentials fights.”

    But then she seems to give a green light to her supporters to go ahead and make whatever mischief they might:

    “I’ve made it very clear that I’m supporting Senator Obama and we’re working cooperatively on a lot of different matters,” she says. “But delegates can decide to do this on their own, they don’t need permission.”

    Still, she concludes, “it would be better if we had a plan and we put it in place and executed it.”

  52. Did anyone see Donna Brazilla on the abc evening news? She did not look happy! LOL!! When Gibson asked her if it would be too horrible to have Clinton’s name on the ballot, she answered that Obama also has delegates that want to hollar and scream for him too. Gibson then asked if it would really embarass Obama that much to let the Clinton supporters have their fun and support, she looked sick at her stomack. Folks I think the PUMA’s have done an amazing job forcing this issue! When I saw Puma’s, I mean all of us who refuse to support the corrupt DNC and its nominee. I think for the first time that things are moving and moving for the better!!!

  53. saw=say
    Also if Obama keeps looking his elitest nose down at the regular voters out there, he might as well kiss his winning the presidency goodbye. He does look his nose down at us bitter, gun toting HRC supporters, but he wants the money from those who have the cash to supporter her. Her bank rollers in otherwards.

  54. confloyd: What is wrong with having an open process? Conventions are meant for cheering for one’s selected candidate. BO was not the only candidate in this process, and he did not receive 100% of the votes. Another candidate, garnered 18 million votes. The voices of her supporters deserve to be heard, as well as his.

  55. from realclearpolitics

    Hillary’s Growing Shadow
    By Victor Davis Hanson

    Barack Obama and John McCain are running neck and neck.


    It would seem so. Republican President Bush still has less than a 30 percent approval rating. Headlines blare that unemployment and inflation are up — even if we aren’t, technically, in a recession. Gas is around $4 a gallon. Housing prices have nosedived. Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, has been indicted — another in a line of congressional Republicans caught in financial or sexual scandal.

    Meanwhile, the GOP’s presumptive candidate, John McCain, is 71 years old. The Republican base thinks he’s lackluster and too liberal.

    So, everyone is puzzled why the Democratic candidate isn’t at least 10 points ahead. It seems the more Americans get used to Barack Obama, the less they want him as president — and the more Democrats will soon regret not nominating Hillary Clinton.

    First, Obama was billed as a post-racial healer. His half-African ancestry, exotic background and soothing rhetoric were supposed to have been novel and to have reassured the public he was no race-monger like Al Sharpton. On the other hand, his 20-year career in the cauldron of Chicago racial politics also guaranteed to his liberal base that he wasn’t just a moderate Colin Powell, either.

    Yet within weeks of the first primary, the outraged Clintons were accusing Obama of playing “the race card” — and vice-versa. Blacks soon were voting heavily against Hillary Clinton. In turn, Hillary, the elite Ivy League progressive, turned into a blue-denim working gal — and won nearly all the final big-state Democratic primaries on the strength of working-class whites.

    Americans also learned to their regret how exactly a Hawaiian-born Barack Obama — raised, in part, by his white grandparents and without African-American heritage — had managed to win credibility in what would become his legislative district in Chicago. That discovery of racial chauvinism wasn’t hard once his former associate, his pastor for over 20 years, the racist Rev. Jeremiah Wright, spewed his venom.

    Obama himself didn’t help things as he taught the nation that his dutiful grandmother was at times a small-minded bigot — no different from a “typical white person.” And in an impromptu riff, Obama ridiculed small-town working-class Pennsylvanians’ supposed racial insularity.

    The primary season ended with a narrow Obama victory — and a wounded, but supposedly wiser, Democratic candidate.

    Not quite. Without evidence, he unwisely has claimed his opponents (“they”) will play the race card against poor him. In contrast, on the hot-button issue of racial reparations, he recently played to cheering minority audiences by cryptically suggesting that the government must “not just . . . offer words, but offer deeds.” He later clarified that he didn’t mean cash grants, but his initial words were awfully vague.

    Second, many are beginning to notice how a Saint Obama talks down to them. We American yokels can’t speak French or Spanish. We eat too much. Our cars are too big, our houses either overheated or overcooled. And we don’t even put enough air in our car tires. In contrast, a lean, hip Obama promises to still the rising seas and cool down the planet, assuring adoring Germans that he is a citizen of the world.

    Third, Obama knows that all doctrinaire liberals must tack rightward in the general election. But due to his inexperience, he’s doing it in far clumsier fashion than any triangulating candidate in memory. Do we know — does Obama even know? — what he really feels about drilling off our coasts, tapping the strategic petroleum reserve, NAFTA, faith-based initiatives, campaign financing, the FISA surveillance laws, town-hall debates with McCain, Iran, the surge, timetables for Iraq pullouts, gun control or capital punishment?

    Fourth, Obama is proving as inept an extemporaneous speaker as he is gifted with the Teleprompter. Like most rookie senators, in news conferences and interviews, he stumbles and then makes serial gaffes — from the insignificant, like getting the number of states wrong, to the downright worrisome, such as calling for a shadow civilian aid bureaucracy to be funded like the Pentagon (which would mean $500 billion per annum).

    If the polls are right, a public tired of Republicans is beginning to think an increasingly bothersome Obama would be no better — and maybe a lot worse. It is one thing to suggest to voters that they should shed their prejudices, eat less and be more cosmopolitan. But it is quite another when the sermonizer himself too easily evokes race, weekly changes his mind and often sounds like he doesn’t have a clue what he’s talking about.

    In a tough year like this, Democrats could probably have defeated Republican John McCain with a flawed, but seasoned candidate like Hillary Clinton. But long-suffering liberals convinced their party to go with a messiah rather than a dependable nominee — and thereby they probably will get neither.

  56. skmf12, I dont but it was the abc nightly news with Charles Gibson. Folks its finaly on national news how Obama and the DNC is blocking her name being on the ballot and the roll call. This is the first time I have had hope!
    The look on Donna’s face was just wonderful to see! 🙂

  57. texan,

    I’m torn about the JE coverage. On the one hand it serves him right but on the other hand I really feel for Elizabeth and their kids.
    I wonder if coping with his wife’s illness hasn’t affected him. It’s very difficult to deal with a loved one’s health problems.
    It’s just so sad. I picked up the Enquirer today to check the story and the pics. What a tragedy.

    BTW, I was referring to the freerepublic article upthread.

  58. At some point doesn’t it come down to a simple question of experiece vs inexperience? competence vs incompetence? and moral courage vs waffeling?

    If the Democratic Party cannot figure that much out, how can they lead us throught these perilous times. I know the world loves him the same way that you would like a rube who sauntered up to your poker game wiht wads of money in his pocket an said mind if I sit in?

  59. the local news here had a hole thing on why hillary doesnt have a nom vote! ill try and pull it.

  60. I wrote this back in January and circulated it at the Washington causcus. It is as true now as it was then only more so.


    POSITION SOUGHT: PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES (Note: always start at the top)
    JOB DESCRIPTION: the successful candidate must have the ability to effectively manage and resolve a wide range of complex problems which significantly affect the welfare of 300 million Americans and billions of human beings in other countries around the world including but not limited to: national security, terrorism, economic recession, Iraq War, spiraling national debt, heath care crisis, shrinking job base, endangered middle class, educational deficit, immigration mess, global warming, loss of international prestige, competition for resources, etc.
    It is essential for the candidate to have job related experience for two reasons: i) past experience is the most accurate predictor of future performance, and ii) the nature and urgency of our problems are such that the next president must be capable of addressing them on day 1.

    In addition, the candidate must be a strong decisive leader who can provide a new sense of direction and overcome the institutional resistance which exists within the system. This means she or he must have the proper management philosophy, style, message, character, judgment, and moral courage. Why? Because in the immortal words of Harry Truman: “The buck stops here”.
    QUALIFICATIONS: here are the job related qualifications of Barack Obama, as I perceive them:

    PRIOR EXPERIENCE: Freshman Senator (D-Il). Illinois State Legislator, Community Organizer, President of Harvard Law Review. Lived and travelled abroad. Close ties to Daley Machine. He has written two books about his life which have inspired people. No significant legislative accomplishments. He is married, 2 children.

    MANAGEMENT PHILOSOPHY: Insists he is not a Chief Operating Officer. Instead, he believes his role is to set the direction for the country, and hire other people (as yet unidentified) to actually run the government. Yet, the evidence to date from the campaign trail suggests he does not hold subordinates accountable for their actions (i.e. South Carolina campaign staff, Jessie Jackson Jr., General Mc Peak, Axelrod, etc.)

    MANAGEMENT STYLE: In public, he favors huge meetings, inspirational speeches, and mass movement politics tilted toward young people and the media. But, behind the scenes he is the exact opposite, i.e. very deferential to powerful interests, and willing to concede a publicly held position as long as he can get a positive headline. Sometimes he gets political contributions too, i.e. Excelon. Uses consultants and lobbyists to steer his campaign and spread false stories about opponents. Plays the race card– offensively and defensively, with plausible deniability.

    POLITICAL MESSAGE: Decries the old politics, i.e. clash of interests, baby boomer conflicts, lobbyist control, and claims to offer a new kind of politics, i.e. transcendence, common purpose, rule by the people. But this is an utterly utopian construct. You cannot govern without politics. Our country is too complicated for that. This approach has been tried before by people like Adlai Stevenson, Bill Bradley, Deval Patrick. It leads to political gridlock and nothing gets done.

    PSYCHOLOGICAL PROFILE: He is a narcissistic personality. He preaches themes of empowerment and unity. But when challenged, he becomes very defensive, pouts and tends to demonize opponents, i.e. Wal Mart charge. And when he does not get his way threatens to pick up his marbles and go home, i.e. the veiled threat that he may not support the nominee if it is not him. Finally, his attitude toward women is suspect, i.e. the snub, likeable enough, turning his back, not feeling well, etc.

    JUDGMENT: He claims that he is always right on day 1. He cites a speech in Illinois legislature opposing Iraq War as proof–but concedes that he does not know what he would have voted if he had been in the Senate at the time. He dismisses his 17 year political and financial entanglement with an indicted political fixer as a “bone headed mistake”. He leaves hard decisions to others and critiques them later.

    MORAL COURAGE: He failed to show up for Kyle Lieberman, but criticized the votes of others who did. He voted “pass” 129 times on various pieces of legislation, on controversial issues. Says he pushed the wrong button six times. When he lost the Nevada primary, he left town without thanking supporters, delivering a concession speech and congratulating his opponent per customary practice. This has caused some to say that he is never there when you need him.

    REFERENCES: Oprah, Ted Kennedy, Daley Machine, Rezko, Media Whores, Big Blogs, Limousine Liberals and Political Opportunists who know as well as we do that that he is unqualified for the job but seek to exploit that fact for their own personal gain.
    CONCLUSION: if you set aside all the hype about the first black president, and the one-sided media coverage which has defined his candidacy, it is becomes obvious that Barack Obama is not qualified for the job of President of the United States of America.

    It is unreasonable to expect that he could deliver the kind of leadership which the country needs at this watershed moment in history. We do not need hope, and utopian rhetoric. We need a realistic vision, moral courage, coalition building, and the adroit use of the levers of power, if we are to succeed and prosper as a nation in the 21st Century.

  61. I think the blog today served two purposes.

    1. To show that she is still there, and can blog

    2. and to connect with her most faithful followers.

    She cannot say anything right now, but she can let us know she is there.

  62. Here’s the Brazile interview with Charlie Gibson.

    Confloyd, i didn’t pick up that she was unhappy.



    That’s the Brazile-Gibson interview.

    i didn’t pick up that she was unhappy. ❓

  64. Poll: Nearly half hearing too much about Obama

    Wed Aug 6, 10:47 AM ET

    WASHINGTON – Barack Obama may be the fresh face in this year’s presidential election, but nearly half say they’re already tired of hearing about him, a poll says.

    With Election Day still three months away, 48 percent said they’re hearing too much about the Democratic candidate, according to a poll released Wednesday by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center. Just 26 percent said the same about his Republican rival, John McCain.

    Obama, the 47-year-old Illinois senator who would become the first black president, has dominated political news coverage much of the year. According to an ongoing Pew study, Obama has appeared in more news stories this year and more people say they have heard more about him than McCain, the longtime Arizona senator who also ran for president in 2000.

    Two-thirds of Republicans and about half of independents said they’ve heard too much about Obama, as did a third of Democrats, a significant number.

    At the same time, nearly four in 10 said they’ve been hearing too little about McCain — about four times the number who said so about Obama. About half of Republicans, four in 10 independents and even a quarter of Democrats said they’ve not heard enough about the GOP candidate.

    The poll was conducted from Aug. 1-4 and involved telephone interviews with 1,004 adults. It had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.

  65. That Kenneth Walsh article in U.S. News is one-sided bullshit. Waffles’ campaign has done virtually nothing to woo Hillary supporters, and has broken promises to Hillary herself (to raise money for her, for example). Also, there’s zero evidence they’ve even asked Bill to campaign for him.

    Because he “vanquished” Hillary during the primaries he thinks he can win without the Clintons. Just another example of his arrogance. As Dan Balz said, they’re still a major force in the Dem party and will be for years to come.

  66. Paula, Obama doesn’t want Hillarys voters or her input, he only wants her money people. He doesn’t care about her platform, us or anything else that American needs at this time. He did not help with her campaign debt and now he wants to make nice, forget Obama!

  67. Hi, all! It certainly has been awhile. 🙂

    Here is a link to a video I wanted to steer people to:

    This video was made by a delegate whom both wbboei and I know, and we’re very pleased that this person’s work was posted by our brothers and sisters over at Just Say No Deal.

    I hope everyone’s doing great. When I stepped away from the site I thought it would be for about 2 weeks but that became around 4 weeks.

    There are still some other things I have going on right now which are occupying my time, but the fight for Hillary and against Barack goes on. And you know I am and will be there to stand with all of you wonderful people as we take on the Obaman Coupists.

    Take care and see you soon. I’ve put up a few more videos at my YouTube (I think my name is still the link for that) that you guys will like. Some more grist for the mill and spreading the word about BaJoke’s malfeasance as far and as wide as possible.

    We’re just going to keep working to defeat this guy until ours and the nation’s nightmare is over.


  68. McCain vs Obama: it reminds me of the old saying better the devil you know than the devil you may get. Fortunately there is still an alternative and we know what her name is. She has experience, judgment and moral courage. She is about solutions and the country. Obama is about himself and he will put the county in the tank. But he will give beautiful speeches every step of the way.

  69. Basil9, I just noticed the looks on her face during the question about Obama not wanting Hillary’s name on the ballot!

  70. Haven’t had a chance yet, skmf. I’m just trying to play alittle catch up right now on Confluence, Pumapac , TN Guerilla Women, etc. etc. Plus, sometime tonight I need to get off a few more emails to pollsters.

    I’ll definitely try to check over at hawkes before I go to bed, but if I don’t, I’ll do it forst thing in the am. 🙂

  71. Amazing the people have said that they are hearing too much of :mrgreen:. I don’t think the media felt this would happen. They felt if they just pounded people with their choice, they would come around, even thought the popular votes started saying otherwise.

    Recently when asked at a fund raiser in D.C, :mrgreen: stated that the reason he was going down in the polls is that people just don’t know him.

    Well, people are saying they know him, and they are tired of him. In addition that explanation only works if you are standing still and below the other candidate. It does not make sense if you re going down.

    So is this thing about to unravel or what.

  72. Come on :mrgreen: we would like to to spend some more money in every state to that people get to know you.

    I wonder what they will think of his Olympic Ads. Some might not think that politics should be in that venue.

  73. I need to start proof reading better. Oh well. That is what blogs are, an outpouring of what we are thinking. Unfortunately, my fingers do not always get it right.

  74. Yep! Donna Brazile is lying and worried about Hillary Clinton…they don’t want her on the roll call at all.

    Like I said, Obama is a WEAK and AFRAID of Hillary Clinton. I can’t wait for the O’DNC to take the Democratic? Taliban Party over the clift because that is when the fantasy is over.

    Obama will tank big time in the polls.

  75. SKMF…screw it, I eeked out alittle time to visit over there and post some thoughts. Couldn’t resist. 🙂

    And now…off to play catch-up elsewhere.

  76. If he is over exposed already, what do you think the stadium show will do for him????

    I guess over expose him some more. If you believe in polls, I would say that is not a wise move.

    But the DNC only believe in their polls.

  77. h t t p : / /
    Commetns and box at the bottom of hte page, no login.

    Obama on Clinton: No Catharsis Needed at Convention

  78. Pretty unbelievable direct quote from Obama in MSNBC story saying President Clinton has agreed to speak at convention.

    Obama said they were working out “logistics” and when he was asked if that meant he didn’t object to a roll call for Hillary, he said
    “I didn’t say that.”

    What a total fucking little bitch!

    Unreal, surreal, just like the entire campaign.

  79. Not that I give a flying fig whom he picks, but why hasn’t Waffles picked his VP yet? The convention starts immediately after the Olympics, so when’s he planning to announce it? Does the delay strike anyone else as weird?

    BTW, riverdaughter says the reason Hillary did the Web chat was because the Dem powers that be told her she had to try to get a grip on the PUMAs. That’s as good an explanation as I’ve heard.

  80. Paula, HRC had plenty of opportunity to just come out and say, “Knock it off guys”. She didn’t and she hasn’t. And even if she did, I own my vote. And I’m saying, NO DEAL.

  81. Paula, that sounds like them. But what they fail to realize is that Hillary supporters are not different than the culinary workers in Nevada, who were told who they should vote for.

    They valued their Demcracy and understood it more than the DNC does. So much more they defied their Union.

    In addition, people don’t just have one social group, and the blogs on the computer are providing a haven for those who don’t take the party line.


  82. Idunn, You’re absolutely right. riverdaughter says it’s not hard to read between the lines of what she said.

  83. Texas
    Pelosi says she wants anti-gay Texas lawmaker as Obama’s running mate
    By John Wright – News Editor
    Aug 7, 2008 – 8:19:56 PM

    Chet Edwards scored 15 out of 100 on HRC’s Congressional Scorecard

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, arguably the LGBT community’s most powerful straight political ally, is supporting an anti-gay Texas congressman in the Democratic presidential veepstakes, The Associated Press reports.

    Pelosi says she wants Chet Edwards, a Democrat from Waco who’s been in the House since 1990, to be Sen. Barack Obama’s running mate.

    “I hope he will be the nominee,” Pelosi said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.”

    Edwards scored a 15 out of 100 on the Human Rights Campaign’s most recent Congressional Scorecard, putting him in a three-way tie for least gay-friendly among 11 Democratic House members from Texas. Among other things, Edwards, a Southern Baptist, supported the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2006.

    “As a husband and a father, I believe that marriage is a sacred union between a man and a woman and I will support efforts in Congress to protect the sanctity of this union,” Edwards said in a press release posted on his Web site.

    The press release notes that Edwards also supported the Marriage Protection Act in 2004 and the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996.

    Pelosi’s office didn’t return a phone call seeking comment
    Just threw the LGBT vote over the bus, Nancy Pelosi is worthless. I guess the DNC and Democratic leadership think people are stupid and don’t see thru this crap.

    What does the Democratic Party STAND for? I know Obama is no true friend, I was raised among these guys and with Obama background no way his he open on this issue.

    My guess is his pretty conservative on this, if Obama couldn’t walk in a Gay Pride Parade in Chicago…parade city.

    Then I’m thinking he’s not feeling this issue.

  84. Nader to file in Iowa Friday

    Ralph Nader’s campaign has gathered twice the required signatures and plans to file for a place on the Iowa ballot Friday. Democrats are still seething at Nader over his “spoiler” role in Florida in 2000, but a look at election returns show that he has not made the difference in Iowa between Democrats and Republicans in his three previous races.

    The Nader campaign planned to submit 3,000 signatures to the Iowa Secretary of State’s office, twice the required 1,500. In 2004 Nader’s petitions were challenged in many states, including Iowa. “Any challenge would be doomed to failure,” said Scott Knight of the Iowa Nader campaign.

    The campaign had planned to file on Thursday and hold a morning news conference, but a delay in a FedEx package carrying documents with Nader’s signature led to the rescheduling.

    As the Green Party nominee, Nader drew 0.5 percent of the Iowa vote in 1996, when Bill Clinton easily beat Bob Dole. But despite the widespread spoiler argument (are you listening, Leonard Boswell?), Nader’s 29,374 Iowa votes as a Green in 2000 weren’t enough to keep Democrat Al Gore from winning Iowa by 4,000 votes.

    Further undercutting the spoiler argument, Nader’s percentage in 2004 collapsed to 0.4 percent, yet Iowa flipped from blue to red. Nader’s 5,973 votes were less than George Bush’s 10,000 vote margin over John Kerry.

    Nader ran in Iowa as an independent candidate in 2004, and some of his 2000 support shifted to Green nominee David Cobb. This year, the competition for the Nader niche may be fiercer, as the Greens have nominated a higher profile candidate, former congresswoman Cynthia McKinney.

    A four-way Associated Press-Ipsos Poll released Tuesday showed Nader at 3 percent and Libertarian Bob Barr with 2 percent. McKinney was not included in the survey, which had Democrat Barack Obama ahead of Republican John McCain, 47 percent to 41 percent.

    Nader will file in Iowa as the “Peace and Freedom Party” candidate. That ballot label has been used for 40 years as a catch-all left party in California, dating back to the 1968 Eldridge Cleaver campaign. In other states, Nader is running as an independent or as the candidate of the “Independent Party.”

    “Our chances in the fall really depend on our ability to get into the debates,” Knight told Iowa Independent. “If Nader is allowed in the debates the sky is the limit on how well we could do in November.” Only two third party candidates have participated in fall debates. Ross Perot debated Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush in 1992. John Anderson debated Ronald Reagan in 1980, but Jimmy Carter boycotted the debate.

    “If Nader is not in the debates, then we are hoping to get the Peace and Freedom Party permanent ballot status in Iowa,” said Knight. That would require Nader to reach 2 percent in Iowa, the level he reached in 2000.

    Nader joins Gloria LaRiva of the Party for Socialism and Liberation on the Iowa ballot. The filing deadline is August 15.

  85. Barrack Obama – Whiffs a pitch from a 7 year old girl
    Posted by: Rational_Thinker

    A Truly Pathetic Response you MUST hear for yourself
    Today, during a campaign stop, a 7 year old girl asked Barrack Obama why he was running for President.

    His answer?

    “America is …, uh, is no longer, uh … what it could be, what it once was. And I say to myself, I don’t want that future for my children.”


    Almost frighteningly imbecilic in nature, you have to wonder what he would say if asked how to solve a major crisis.

    Stumbling. Bumbling. Without a script, he comes up with an answer that was not “America is great and I want to make it greater”…but rather, the above.

    Am I making this up? See the video at

    No wonder Bill and Hillary are not throwing in the towel yet. They think this guy is one off-the-cuff answer away from blowing it big time.

    On the same day, John McCain went to Marshall University and addressed their football team. Marshall was the school that tragically lost their entire football team and yet regained their composure to return to the field. He discussed the loyalty of a fellow prisoner in Vietnam who sewed a US flag to the inside of his shirt, only to be beaten when it was discovered, and then sewed a new one. A hugely inspirational speech.

    Lets face it, as much as McCain has some warts, he is at least 4-5 times more qualified to hold the office of president than Obama. I hate to say it because I really do not like McCain because he is too willing to compromise with the Democrats, and too willing to allow illegals into our country, but Obama is demonstrating a total incapacity to even answer a 7 year old.

  86. Obama’s response to that 7 year old, was in, incrediblity bad taste. Everyday, it gets easier and easier to vote for McCain.

    I wonder, what Ms. Pelosi’s constituents think of her wanting anti-gay Chet Edwards for VP? Especially, when one considers, her congressional district encompasses San Francisco. Hmmm……

  87. Follow-up with Rush Limbaugh on Obama hating on America to a 7 year old.

    LIMBAUGH: Alright, now here’s he’s brought it home. He had trashed his country in Germany, he has seen the result of that in his plummeting poll numbers. And now he does it again in Elkhart, IN. A 7 year old little girl. You’re running for President Sen. Obama, a little girl asks you a question, “Why did you start running for President?”

    It’s a 7 year old Senator. Ya tell her because you love the country. You tell her because this is the greatest place on Earth. That we’ve got challenges, but you want to help the country through it. You don’t tell a 7 year old that her country isn’t what it once was. You do not lie to 7 year olds and tell them that your country sucks. You just don’t do it Senator.

    America’s no longer what it could be? What it once was? How the Hell would you know Sir? Your experience has only been in one part of America. Elite, leftist academia.
    It’s a sad day when a life long Democrat agree with Rush Limbaugh….Just Pathetic!

  88. paul aka universal;

    yeah we are sweet, come to think of it!
    yeah thats right…

    you are really welcome now!!!!! 😆

    this trip is almost over, soon the convention will be done,
    and we will ‘finish this thing’ as some wise man said…
    and we will all do it together…

    hopefully admin will stay for the ‘NEW DIRECTION’…


  89. Obama tells 7-year-old America not so great
    Responds haltingly to girl who asked why he wants to be president August 07, 2008

    Sen. Barack Obama explains why he’s running for president to an audience in Elkhart, Ind., yesterday

    It’s the question every presidential candidate must be prepared to answer, but when it was posed to Barack Obama by a 7-year-old yesterday, the Democratic senator seemed at a loss for words.

    Appearing before a packed high school gym in Elkhart, Ind., the young girl asked Obama why he is running for the White House.

    “America is, is no longer, uh, what it could be, what it, it once was,” Obama said haltingly. “And I say to myself, I don’t want that future for my children.”

    Talk-radio superstar Rush Limbaugh, who featured the clip on his show today, marveled that Obama didn’t immediately speak of running because he loves America.

    “You’re running for president of the U.S., and you run down the country to a 7-year-old?” said an incredulous Limbaugh.

    Limbaugh suggested someone should ask Obama to name the period when, in his opinion, America was as it should be.


  90. McCain trumpeted his reputation in a town hall meeting today in Lima, Ohio.

    “I have been called a maverick,” he said. “Sometimes it is meant as a compliment and sometimes it is meant as a criticism. But what it really means is I understand who I work for. I don’t work for a party. I don’t work for a president. I don’t work for a special interest. I don’t work for myself. I work for you and for the country we love.”

    Then, McCain contrasted his political persona with what he described as Obama’s profile

    “For his part, Senator Obama is an impressive orator,” McCain said. “I applaud his talent and success. All Americans should be proud of his accomplishment.… But Washington is full of talented talkers.

    “The bottom line is that Senator Obama’s words, for all their eloquence and passion, don’t mean all that much,” McCain added. “And that’s the problem with Washington. It is not just the Bush Administration, and it’s not just the Democratic Congress. It’s that everyone in Washington says whatever it takes to get elected or to score the political point of the day….We don’t need another politician in Washington who puts self-interest and political expediency ahead of problem solving.”

  91. “The bottom line is that Senator Obama’s words, for all their eloquence and passion, don’t mean all that much,” McCain added. “And that’s the problem with Washington. It is not just the Bush Administration, and it’s not just the Democratic Congress. It’s that everyone in Washington says whatever it takes to get elected or to score the political point of the day….We don’t need another politician in Washington who puts self-interest and political expediency ahead of problem solving.”
    well said john. then i guess its nobama

  92. uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

    “America is, is no longer, uh, what it could be, what it, it once was,” Obama said haltingly. “And I say to myself, I don’t want that future for my children.”–bwak


    “First time I ever been proud of my county. (Aint gonna kiss his ass)”–mish (me either)

  93. One thing is for sure. For a guy with no sense of humor about himself Barack is really a very funny guy once he stops playing the race card, calling everybody a liar and giving fellow sentators the finger. Another uniter not divider.

  94. Leno, Letterman and Obrien might as well take the summer off. The best comedy lines are coming from the presumptive nominee. You wont find a better stand-up comic. McCain’s people are having a wonderful time watching Bwack hoist himself on his own petard. Never interupt a enemy in the middle of a mistake.

  95. I am starting to get pissed. It was a simple question from an innocent young child and obama cant evern play it straight with that audience. If you put all the pieces togther its almost like he hates this country that has given so much to him.

  96. Axelrod has just clarified what obama meant to say when he said this country is no longer what it could be. What he meant was we were a better country until the Dodgers moved from Brooklyn.

  97. By TOM RAUM and NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writers
    5 minutes ago

    CHICAGO – Former President Clinton will have a role at the Democratic convention in Denver later this month.


    Democratic officials said Thursday that Clinton will give a speech on the third night of the convention, before an address by the as-yet-to-be-named running mate for Barack Obama, the party’s likely presidential nominee. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity before the details were formally announced.

    Exactly what role the former president would play at the gathering Aug. 25-28 has been the subject of speculation since his wife, New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, ended her bid for the Democratic presidential nomination in early June and endorsed Obama.

    Obama clinched the nomination after a sometimes bitter primary contest with Clinton.

    Sen. Clinton is expected to speak on the convention’s second night.

    Earlier Thursday, Obama dismissed suggestions that tension between his supporters and hers could upset the gathering.

    Obama told reporters that their staffs were working out mutually agreeable convention logistics. At the same time, Clinton was assuring her supporters during an online chat that she and Obama were “working together to make sure it’s a big success.”

    Neither answered questions about whether Clinton’s name should be placed in nomination so that her backers could record their votes.

    Amid reports that some Clinton backers hope to raise her profile at the convention or even continue to push her candidacy, Clinton and Obama were publicly trying to ease the strained relations that exist between some of their supporters.

    Flying home to Chicago, Obama told reporters that he had talked separately this week to Clinton and her husband, and that they were enthusiastic about having a smooth convention.

    “As is true in all conventions, we’re still working out the mechanics, the coordination,” Obama said. One such issue is whether there will be a convention roll call on Clinton’s nomination, he said.

    “I’m letting our respective teams work out details,” he said. Asked if that meant he wouldn’t object to her name being placed in nomination and a vote taken, Obama said: “I didn’t say that. I said that they’re working it out.”

    Clinton has not said whether she will seek a formal vote on her bid for the nomination.

    During the online chat on her Web site, she wrote that she and Obama will ensure Democrats are “fully unified.”

    Clinton was expected to deliver a prime-time address to delegates on Aug. 26, the second night of the convention. With the delegate roll call planned for the next evening, Obama was set to accept the nomination with a speech on the convention’s fourth and final night.

    “We will ensure that the voices of everyone who participated in this historic process are respected and our party is fully unified heading into the November election,” Clinton wrote. “While no decisions have been made yet, I will make sure that we keep you up to date and involved with all of the convention activity.”

    Obama was asked whether allowing Clinton’s name to be placed in nomination might lead to a catharsis for the party.

    “I don’t think we’re looking for catharsis. I think what we’re looking for is energy and excitement,” he said.

    Clinton insisted during the Web chat that she was sincerely behind Obama after someone asked whether she truly was supporting him or was “just saying what you have to?”

    Another questioner wanted to know if there was any possibility her name would be placed in nomination, arguing that doing so “would at least give your supporters a voice in the choice for the party’s nominee.” She was noncommittal.

    Someone else posted a note saying he hopes Clinton becomes Obama’s running mate. In her response, Clinton repeated that she will do whatever Obama asks of her but it is his decision “and I am going to respect the privacy of that process by not discussing it.”

    The Clintons’ stance toward Obama’s candidacy is being closely scrutinized as the convention nears — particularly after remarks by Bill Clinton earlier this week during a trip to Africa. Asked whether Obama was prepared to become president, the former president replied, “You can argue that nobody is ready to be president,” and said he himself learned a lot in his first year on the job.

    The remark was widely viewed as tepid and unenthusiastic, particularly in light of Republican candidate John McCain’s frequent criticism that Obama is not ready to be president.


  98. No wonder Bill and Hillary are not throwing in the towel yet. They think this guy is one off-the-cuff answer away from blowing it big time.
    John should keep pressing barack for a debate. Tell him if he is afaid to debate just say so. We do not want a president who is afraid to confront and deal with tough issues. Stop hiding Barack!

  99. If that report comes from AP it is not credible. They have been in the tank for bambi all along and their reporting was heavily biased that way.

    As you may recall Beth Fouhy is an AP reporter and she is the one who promulagated the false story that Hillary would concede on the night of the South Dakota primary in order to suppress voter turnout, and she was apparently embedded with Clinton campaign but slipping info to BO. Now she is saying the race is boring and she wishes Hillary was still in it.

  100. Hillary will always be my “First Lady” no matter where she goes or what she does, even if she’s president.

  101. My guess is that if Bill truly will be speaking at the convention just before the VP NOMINEE, then my guess is the veep is Hillary!!! That way Bill can introduce her and we all will be unified!!
    What do you guys think of my prediction??

  102. Does the first women in history who was a viable presidential candidate deserve to have her name put in nomination and given a roll call vote.


    Even if all the cards are stacked against her she has earned that position in our nations history!

  103. This is a great op-ed written in many Jewish newspapers this week by Dr. Edward Alexander from Washignton Univ.The historian asks the fundemental question-why does Obama run to Europe for their approval. A stirring piece that reminds us that Europe does not only stand for Beethoven but for other things…..
    texan4hillary :: Historian Asks: Why Does Obama Need Europe’s Acclaim?

    Obama’s European constituency
    Sen. Barack Obama may be the first candidate for the American presidency to run a European campaign as – to quote his own words before a huge German crowd of 200,000 people on July 24 – a “citizen of the world” (though also, he hastened to add, “a proud citizen of the United States”) and an ardent advocate of “global citizenship.” He even told the Germans that his father had been inspired by the “dream” of freedom and opportunity in “the West” (as if he had aspired to Germany, rather than America).

    What are we to make of Obama’s tremendous popularity on a continent where, unless we make an exception for one undersecretary in France, not a single high government position is held by a black person? What shall we make of the fact that Obama’s European popularity is being held up by his supporters as an important reason why Americans should vote for him in November? Why should the United States, a nation that was built up by immigrants, many of whom had fled from Europe’s religious and political persecution, grinding poverty and fiercely competitive nationalisms, now look to Europe as a model of wisdom in facing up to the major crises of our time? Why should we emulate the values of a continent whose current rate of emigration among its native population is at an all-time high?

    European civilization has bequeathed to Americans Homer and Sophocles, Shakespeare and Milton, Beethoven, Bach and Mozart, Chartres and Mont-Saint-Michel, but also Hitler and Stalin, Nazism and communism, Auschwitz and the gulag. At its pinnacle a mere century ago, by 1942-’44, European civilization itself seemed to have reached its end in the ashes of Auschwitz and Maidanek. But now, or so we are told by our enlightened classes, the Europeans have [gotten rid] of their old nationalism and joined together in the European Union, a kind of United States of Europe to provide an exemplary model of multiculturalism, the welfare state, and (to quote Obama again) “global citizenship.”

    American Europhiles conveniently overlook several crucial facts. Europe could not rescue herself from either Nazism or Communism without massive help from (and sacrifice by) Americans. If America had not taken over from the hapless Europeans their defense against the Soviet Union, they would not have been able to afford the luxury of building up their welfare states. More recently, it was America, not the European Union, that stepped in to prevent genocide in Bosnia and Kosovo.

    Far from being a continent worthy of emulation, Europe is in steep decline. If “to be or not to be” is indeed the compelling question, then Europe has chosen not to be. Its fertility rate of 1.37 is the lowest in the world; in such traditionally Catholic countries as Italy and Spain, it is lower still. If, as the French philosopher Auguste Comte said, “demography is fate,” then Europe has lost the will to live.

    He has also ignored Europeans’ desperate measures to appease forces they (once again) feel helpless to repel. Several European churchmen (among them the Dutch Catholic Bishop of Breda) have urged Christians to replace the word “G-d” with “Allah,” and an Anglican bishop has urged adoption of Islamic sharia law in several areas of jurisprudence. In Scotland, the arrest of several Muslim doctors who were planning to blow up Glasgow Airport led to the banning of pork products in the hospital where they worked. In Holland, a Somali-born Liberal member of parliament who wrote the screenplay for a film about the plight of Muslim women called “Submission” (whose director was murdered by an Islamist fanatic), was forced out of parliament – and then out of Holland. In deference to the violence of Israel-hatred among Muslims, numerous Europeans (especially among the “progressive” classes) have reverted to their “default” ideology of anti-Semitism, so virulent in England that it has been the subject of parliamentary investigation. Contrived Muslim “outrage” over – to name but a few examples – the Danish cartoons, the knighting of Salman Rushdie, the pope’s condemnation of religious fanaticism, the teddy-bear episode, has brought widespread European condemnation, not of Muslim rioters, but of those who offended them.

    European acclaim is not an endorsement that a candidate pledged to protect American democracy against its newest enemies should relish.

    Edward Alexander is professor emeritus, University of Washington.

  104. Obama’s European constituency
    Sen. Barack Obama may be the first candidate for the American presidency to run a European campaign as – to quote his own words before a huge German crowd of 200,000 people on July 24 – a “citizen of the world” (though also, he hastened to add, “a proud citizen of the United States”) and an ardent advocate of “global citizenship.” He even told the Germans that his father had been inspired by the “dream” of freedom and opportunity in “the West” (as if he had aspired to Germany, rather than America). What are we to make of Obama’s tremendous popularity on a continent where, unless we make an exception for one undersecretary in France, not a single high government position is held by a black person? What shall we make of the fact that Obama’s European popularity is being held up by his supporters as an important reason why Americans should vote for him in November? Why should the United States, a nation that was built up by immigrants, many of whom had fled from Europe’s religious and political persecution, grinding poverty and fiercely competitive nationalisms, now look to Europe as a model of wisdom in facing up to the major crises of our time? Why should we emulate the values of a continent whose current rate of emigration among its native population is at an all-time high?

    European civilization has bequeathed to Americans Homer and Sophocles, Shakespeare and Milton, Beethoven, Bach and Mozart, Chartres and Mont-Saint-Michel, but also Hitler and Stalin, Nazism and communism, Auschwitz and the gulag. At its pinnacle a mere century ago, by 1942–’44, European civilization itself seemed to have reached its end in the ashes of Auschwitz and Maidanek. But now, or so we are told by our enlightened classes, the Europeans have [gotten rid] of their old nationalism and joined together in the European Union, a kind of United States of Europe to provide an exemplary model of multiculturalism, the welfare state, and (to quote Obama again) “global citizenship.”

    American Europhiles conveniently overlook several crucial facts. Europe could not rescue herself from either Nazism or Communism without massive help from (and sacrifice by) Americans. If America had not taken over from the hapless Europeans their defense against the Soviet Union, they would not have been able to afford the luxury of building up their welfare states. More recently, it was America, not the European Union, that stepped in to prevent genocide in Bosnia and Kosovo.

    Far from being a continent worthy of emulation, Europe is in steep decline. If “to be or not to be” is indeed the compelling question, then Europe has chosen not to be. Its fertility rate of 1.37 is the lowest in the world; in such traditionally Catholic countries as Italy and Spain, it is lower still. If, as the French philosopher Auguste Comte said, “demography is fate,” then Europe has lost the will to live. Its depleted work force has had to be replaced by immigrants, most of them Muslims, who now number 20 million in west and central Europe (and another 20 million in Russia). Such cities as Rotterdam, Lille, Bradford and Antwerp are on the verge of having Muslim majorities. It is this pattern that led the Egyptian-born writer Bat Ye’or to coin the term “Eurabia” for the new Europe. The same alarm bells have been sounded by a number of writers, among them Mark Steyn (“America Alone”), Walter Laqueur (“Last Days of Europe”) and Bruce Bawer (“While Europe Slept”). But these have apparently gone unheard by Senator Obama and his acolytes.

    He has also ignored Europeans’ desperate measures to appease forces they (once again) feel helpless to repel. Several European churchmen (among them the Dutch Catholic Bishop of Breda) have urged Christians to replace the word “G-d” with “Allah,” and an Anglican bishop has urged adoption of Islamic sharia law in several areas of jurisprudence. In Scotland, the arrest of several Muslim doctors who were planning to blow up Glasgow Airport led to the banning of pork products in the hospital where they worked. In Holland, a Somali-born Liberal member of parliament who wrote the screenplay for a film about the plight of Muslim women called “Submission” (whose director was murdered by an Islamist fanatic), was forced out of parliament – and then out of Holland. In deference to the violence of Israel-hatred among Muslims, numerous Europeans (especially among the “progressive” classes) have reverted to their “default” ideology of anti-Semitism, so virulent in England that it has been the subject of parliamentary investigation. Contrived Muslim “outrage” over – to name but a few examples – the Danish cartoons, the knighting of Salman Rushdie, the pope’s condemnation of religious fanaticism, the teddy-bear episode, has brought widespread European condemnation, not of Muslim rioters, but of those who offended them.

    European acclaim is not an endorsement that a candidate pledged to protect American democracy against its newest enemies should relish.

    Edward Alexander is professor emeritus, University of Washington.

  105. Most of these have been vetted for easy posting, or we’ve had several previous stories from the site so you’re probably registered already.

    For more detailed alerts as they come out, subscribe by emailing 1950democrat/at/gmail/com.

    No Crisis Is Immune From Exploitation Under Bush


    Obama hasn’t closed the deal yet,0,6970038.column


    The Note: Obama vs. Clinton: The Battle Continues


    < div>

    My point exactly…

    Obama-Clinton Relationship Stands In Way of Party Unity By RICK KLEIN with HOPE DITTO, ALEXA AINSWORTH and JASON VOLACK

    *****ARTICLE *****

    These is why we need BHO to keep talking!!!
    This is the kind of talk that 1. separates us and 2. will continue to self destruct him!

    Obama on Clinton: No Catharsis Needed at Convention


    Good one…

    Batchelor: The Clintons vs. the Obamas


    Good read…

    What Does Hillary Want?

  106. The growing msm attention on hillary and a nom vote was on the local news tonight in houston tx. a good piece-not condescending towards hillary or puma. and it has Rice univ’s bob stein, one of the top polisci profs in the country, back up what we are trying to do-have a fair vote. more below

    PUMAs want delegates to back Hillary
    09:00 PM CDT on Thursday, August 7, 2008

    By Lee McGuire / 11 News

    PUMAs want delegates to back Hillary
    August 7, 2008 View larger E-mail Clip More Video HOUSTON — Democratic Party delegate Roger Harris has heard the cheers for presumptive presidential nominee Barack Obama. He has also heard the silent message coming in his e-mail box.

    “The first round I got 99 (e-mails). The second round I got 50 and the next round I got 60. All in the same day,” said Harris, who will be an Obama delegate to the party’s national convention.

    The messages are from the PUMA political action committee. A PAC that is urging delegates to stick by Hillary Clinton and cast their votes for her at the party’s nominating convention.

    “I think it would ratchet up the intensity of people who feel passionately about their particular candidate to see that one or the other makes the final cut,” said Harris.

    The PUMA PAC is an independent group and is not associated with Hillary Clinton. In fact, on Thursday she said she hopes the party will be fully unified at the convention in Denver later this month.

    Still, she has yet to resolve whether she is going to put her name in for a vote during the convention.

    The PUMA PAC hopes she does. The group told 11 News that it’s also urging Clinton to challenge Obama to a vote at the convention.

    A vote the political group said would heal the party, not divide it.

    “You can’t achieve unity by telling one side to shut up,” the PAC said in a statement to 11 News. “You have to let the delegates vote for their candidate on the first ballot.

    “The fact is, (the party is) extremely split.”

    So, despite bowing out of the race and throwing her support behind Obama, does this mean the race is not over?

    “I wouldn’t call it mischief. I’d call it good intentions. Hillary Clinton not only ran a good race, but also like Barack Obama, was a first,” said 11 News political expert Bob Stein.

    A competition many thought was over is now being waged one delegate at a time.

    “There are people who would say, ‘well it’s mudslinging,'” said Harris. “But you know competition is part of what this country is all about.”

  107. the ground shifts

    Political Cycles
    August 8, 2008

    There’s a thing that’s out there and it’s big, and latent, and somehow always taken into account and always ignored, and political professionals always assume they understand it. It has been called many things the past 50 years, “the silent center,” “the silent majority,” “the coalition,” “the base.” The idea of it has evolved as its composition has evolved, but the fact that it’s big, and relatively silent, and somehow always latent, maintains. And watching that McCain event—vroom vroom—one got the sense it is perhaps beginning to pay attention to the campaign. I see it as the old America, and if and when it reasserts itself, the campaign will shift indeed, and in ways you can even see from 10,000 feet.

  108. The criticism that BHO leveled at the american people about not learning a second language,really has made many of us angry who had immigrant parents and spent so much time learning the English language to better qualify for the citizenship that gave us such a new and glorious way of life.Barack Hussein Obama and his cult DO speak a second language .It is called trash talk,hip hop and has become a different means of communicating.Just listen to athletes.pundits,entertainers,actors,politicians,men of the cloth,school kids,and yes even college professors.Now we must ask Obama,If you God forbid are to be our next president,which one will you choose to get your message out to all the world? As CIC you must be more than “Walking Eagle”.Clean up your act oh great one and become “Talking Eagle “using the language that we are proud of and is understood by just about all of the countries in the world.You sir with your rude and hasty injection into our political system have created a world wide fear of you and your phony agenda.You and your race card supporters have caused the reversal of almost all yhe progress that MLK and his many black and white followers have fought so hard to achieve.Time to move on Obama and I will be first in line volunteering to hold the door open for your swift and safe EXIT.Bye BYE Oh Great “Walking Eagle”.

    Now I feel better.There is no better feeling these days than a refreshing VERBAL Laxative.

    By ABM90 Still around and still fighting for our HILLARY.


  109. Democratic officials said Thursday that Clinton will give a speech on the third night of the convention

    Uh oh, are they SURE they want to do that? 😉


    Remind anyone alittle of “Sig heil!” ?

  111. Alcina, I’d be furious if he did, but you know what? I’m way beyond that kind of game now. I will not vote for any ticket that has Obama at the top. Period. If they want to force me to vote against a ticket with HRC in the #2 spot, that’s fine. I’ll live with my choice.

    As I’ve said numerous times, here and elsewhere , how I will vote depends LARGELY upon the DNC and Obama. If Hillary is put on the roll call, if Florida and Michigan are restored to full voter status, and if the DNC comes out publicly and denounces the rampant misogyny that was allowed during the primary…I won’t vote for McCain. Put Hillary on the ticket in the #2 spot, and I’m back to working against the Dem ticket.

    It’s as simple as that.

  112. hello everyone! I have been here daily, but being on dial up for a couple months i don’t surf so much anymore (too busy painting and unpacking anyways) Admin Great articles!!! love the idea of “guest posts” 😀

    I have been intrigued with how the media is all of a suddenon the band wagon of “what does hillary want?”
    i can’t help but think about this and wanted to share a few thoughts…

    why now? is there all this chatter about how HRC could still be our nominee and BHO could loose the nomination by the MSM??? Hmmmmmmm? what do they know? what do they want to happen? is this there way to condition the minds of voters to a clinton nomination?? did the DNC secretly want this narrative out so they could test the waters so to speak?? are they finally seeing the light? are they looking for a way to dump “princess obama”???

    it has to do with that BC will be speaking on the third night of the convention the same night there is a roll call vote!!!!!
    could it be that BC will be a “cheerleader” at the convention for HRC being apart of that roll call vote??
    think about it…….BC could really get the crowd going in his speech couldn’t he! forcing a “FAIR” roll call vote based on what the people want ……..this thought sure amuses me! 😀

    Johnathan Alter writes in this article
    A week ago, Hillary spoke at a closed-door fund-raiser in California. When video of the event eventually surfaced (natch), it made news. Hillary said there would be no attempt to get the nomination (“That is not going to happen”) but she talked vaguely of a “strategy” for Denver and left the door wide open for what would be an extremely close roll-call vote on the third night of the convention.

  113. idunn

    i agree with you on not being able to support BHO regardless of who his vp pick is. it would just hurt like hell to see (HRC-vp) and have to vote against it.

    i made up my mind june 7, 2008 that i would be voting for john McCain. every day that passes confirms my choice. unless McCain does something insane, i am at peace with my choice.

  114. alcina Says:

    August 8th, 2008 at 9:15 am
    i am a nervous wreck at the thought of B-HOle dragging our girl out as his VP pick.

    Hillary has too much experience to be VP It is SAD when the VP in all cases have more experience than the nominee

    If this happens anyone looking for a job with no experience should be able to get any job they want. Use O as an example.

    This better not happen. I still want vote for the ticket

  115. I really don’t know what is going on here. But there is no crest to this double digit wave that they thought they would have going into the convention.

    There has been a few developments:

    3 books publish, two against O and they are on the top of the sales list, and one positive on the DNC or Pelosi’s book which is tanking.

    There has been a survey conducted on who they think is over exposed, and O leads that list. People are beggin for more exposure of McCain (what a great position for McCain to be in).

    One of the primary strategies of Os campaign is to flood the air waves. He does not like to get his hands dirty. The above survey (even though he told people at a fund raiser that the public did not know him, which is why he was not doing well) the public says, we know you too well O and we are tired of you.

    This is information I would not like to have. How do you go forward. People are tired of hearing about you, but want more information and exposure on McCain.

    I think the campaign is really in a bad situation right now. Some of this is due to the overseas Trip. That was a bad idea.

  116. NMF

    regarding the over-exposure thing. i don’t know about the general public, but i find it extremely annoying (and creepy) to find the BHO logo and face pop-up on every freaking page i pull up on the Internet. you can’t get away from it!!!!

  117. Alcina, you are so right it would hurt like hell to have to vote against a ticket with Obama/Hillary on it.
    It’s just not right for the person with the most experience and the one that actually won something, like 18 million votes to be in the #2 position just to placate the NOI.
    This is something I have thinking about the last couple of days.
    1. The two methods that have been used in the past to decide the winner of the nomination is delegates.
    2. popular vote and popular vote has been used to decide the nomination in all but one contest in the history of the DNC.
    So I want you all to think about this for one minute, who actually won at least one of so-called methods of evaluation. It’s Hillary because she actually did win the popular vote, BO did not win enough delegates to unseat her and he did not win the popular vote, so I as who REALLY is the winner here??

  118. basil

    love the utube. appears johnny-got-his-groove back. can’t wait for the video splash of BHOle on vacation in hawaii while folks suffer at home. strike one, BHO in europe, strike two, BHO frolicking on the beaches, strike three,…..??

  119. If you look at the vp thing for Hillary symbolically it is one thing, but if you look at it practically it is something else.

    From a practical standpoint it would silence her voice.

  120. alcina

    One has to wonder how effective those ads are. They are very passive, and don’t tell you a thing about him.


    I like that ad, and it is effective with the Reps as they are always worried about Taxes, and the crowd chanting is very scare. But it will not get the hits the Hilton one did. I think this one was to target the Rep Base.

  121. One of our newer carriers is in port and I ran into the family of the captain yesterday quite by accident. I did not know them before. We talked about the fact that Hillary is endorsed by 35 flag officers. Hillary is commander in chief material but Obama is not. I do not wish to attribute these views to active service personnel but the sentiments do seem to run along that line.

  122. He has thrown away a lot of ad money, first with Hillary and now with McCain.

    If he says at a fund raiser in DC that people don’t know him yet, then he should start questioning his ads. With the money he has thrown at the ads media, you have to wonder who does not know him. (The fund raisers hearing that should be rolling thier eyes, and closing their check books).

    The media is in an interesting positon, when the survey says they want to know more about McCain, and they keep giving them O. People are going to and probably already started turning them off.

    It is amazing how the utube stuff has really been effective in this campaign. In addition, the comics and Saturday Night Life (when they were allowed to), have given us more of a true picture of what has gone on here than the people that should be telling us.

    When you have a debate, and the media is foaming at the mouth at how well O did, and the focus group say you have got to be kidding, you are dead wrong, you need to start replacing people.

    You might tell the talking heads what to say, but the voters OWN THEIR VOTE.

  123. I’ve been reading on the Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick jailing and his close relationship with Barack Obama, would his removal from office have any impact to Obama if he is the nominee, regarding GOTV in detroit?

  124. If Americans are tired of hearing about Obama and think he is over-exposed already, what the heck do they think is going to happen if they vote for him in the G.E.?

    Obama’s silence on the V.P. issue is getting very loud. The longer he waits to choose, if he indeed chooses Hillary (which I have my doubts) it is almost as if he is saying he has no choice. It is a slap in the face to her.

  125. This is ridicoulous. Those of us who have been paying attention are reasonably certain that Hillary will not be his vp. We have reason to believe she was offered the positon and turned it down. We also know she has made some public noises about accepting it if it was offered. Finally we know she has said it is his decision. But the bottom line is it aint gonna happen. That is the baseline.

    Now along comes cnn and speculates that it may happen. They invent this meme out of thin air and marshall the evidence selectively. Why? So what we know will not happen, does not happen, they can do a story on why it did not happen. See how it feeds on itself.

    But it gives that little suckling pig Martin, that chuckie cheese todd something to bullshit about.

  126. The Real Barack Obama
    August 8, 2008

    Obama supporter Kwame Kilpatrick jailed
    Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: bamboozle, Barack Obama, corruption, culture of corruption, General Mediterranean Holding, Jeremiah Wright, Kwame Kilpatrick, Nadhmi Auchi, Obama, politics, RBO, Real Barack Obama, The Real Barack Obama, Tony Rezko — bmerry7 @ 9:15 am
    Kilpatrick, Obama, May 7, 2007 (AP)

    On March 24, 2008, RezkoWatch wrote about Obama superdelegate, Detroit mayor, Kwame Kilpatrick, who had been indicted for perjury, obstruction, conspiracy and misconduct (article follows).

    On August 7, 2008, Kilpatrick was put in jail. Gateway Pundit has the details and more. Also see Allahpundit at Hot Air: Kilpatrick’s fate? Under the Obama bus. Did you have any doubts?

    Obama supporter Kwame Kilpatrick indicted

    On March 21, 2008, RezkoWatch updated an article about the April 3, 2004, reception dinner held at the Four Seasons hotel in Chicago in honor of Iraqi-British billionaire businessman Nadhmi Auchi. The function, arranged by indicted political fixer Antoin “Tony” Rezko, who, at the time, was in hopes of attracting Auchi to invest in a 62-acre Chicago development, was hosted by Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich.

    It is unknown whether Kilpatrick was present at the Chicago event. However, according to Nadhmi Auchi’s General Mediterranean Holding website, the above photograph was taken at a reception for Nadhmi Auchi (left rear) that was hosted by Kwame Kilpatrick (right rear).

    On March 24, 2008, the Detroit Free Press reported that “Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy charged Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick and former chief of staff Christine Beatty today with perjury, obstruction, conspiracy and misconduct.”

    Kilpatrick is an uncommitted Michigan superdelegate. Like Sen. Barack Obama, his photograph recently graced the cover of Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ magazine, The Trumpet. (h/t Gateway Pundit)
    Why is this man still a Michigan superdelegate? Is it only Hillary’s delegates that get forced out by the DNC?

  127. The Obama/Kwame Connection
    Want some mud slinging? Okay, here goes. As many of you know, Kwame Kilpatrick, the mayor of Detroit and a man who has made the late Coleman Young look like the model of propriety and efficiency, has been tossed into jail (although this quote from one of his hacks is priceless: “DeDan Milton, one of the mayor’s appointees [said] ‘He is still running the city. It is no different than if he is out of town on vacation.’). It looks like he may be subjected to additional charges today, namely assault for an incident earlier this year when the Mayor attacked a cop.

    Okay, so what is the Obama connection? Last year, the Messiah had this to say about Kilpatrick:

    I want to first of all acknowledge your great mayor…who has been on the front lines doing an outstanding job of gathering together the leadership at every level in Detroit to bring about the kind of Renaissance that all of us anticipate for this great city he is a leader not just here in Detroit, not just in Michigan, but all across the country people look to him we know that he is going to be doing astounding things for many years to come…I’m grateful to call him a friend and colleague and I’m looking forward to a lengthy collaboration…

    Now, to be fair, when this statement was made, Kilpatrick had not yet be indicted on any criminal counts (although he was already subject to a civil suit, ultimately decided against him, and had been demonstrated to have conducted himself in office in a question manner, at best). By May 2007, it was obvious that Kilpatrick’s administration was both incompetent and corrupt.

    So, what does the Messiah have to say about his friend now? “These are very serious charges. Sen. Obama believes that the legal process will resolve them appropriately.” He had not even addressed this issue before, even though it was clear some time ago that Kilpatrick was using the city to enrich himself and his family.

    Obama does have a history of hanging on to repulsive friends (see Wright, Ayers, etc) but this is going to cost him. This isn’t some obscure terrorist or Chicago area political operator; this is a mayor who has been facing calls for his resignation for over a year. Obama really didn’t need to be seen praising a man who is all but convicted of being a felon.

    This latest in a series of poor choices of friends makes one wonder what Obama looks for in his companions.

  128. carbynew

    You are absolutely right.

    They took away the rights of women for Hillary who said she was voting for McCain (what crime is this in a Democracy).

    Yet someone in Jail is still a superdelegate?

    The crimes and judgement that the DNC is exhibiting are embarassing.

  129. carbynew

    So how many wrong judgement, in fact the only track record we have on O, does this man have to make before you begin to ask, who is this person really, and IS HE READY TO LEAD.

    I would not want him to be commander in chief, and his staff effort sucks right now.

  130. House speaker calls for Kilpatrick’s resignation
    Gordon Trowbridge / Detroit News Washington Bureau
    House Speaker Andy Dillon, the Michigan Legislature’s highest-ranking Democrat, called Thursday for the jailed mayor’s resignation.

    “Unfortunately, Mayor Kilpatrick’s legal issues have escalated to a point where it is impacting not only the city of Detroit but also the state,” Dillon, D-Redford Township, said in a prepared statement.

    “As I said last April, it would be untenable to have the mayor’s legal issues take months to resolve. The recent events demonstrate why a swift resolution was necessary for the good of the city as well as the state.

    “Mayor Kilpatrick needs to step down so the city, the region and the state can begin to move forward,” Dillon said. “If the mayor is exonerated in court, I am confident he will be rewarded by the public for putting the people first during these challenging times.”

    Kilpatrick was House speaker, like Dillon, when he was a member of the legislature.

    Dillon’s call for Kilpatrick’s resignation was the strongest sign that once-hesitant Michigan Democrats are becoming more willing to speak out on the mayor’s legal problems.

    Presidential candidate Barack Obama’s Michigan campaign organization released a statement on the issue — a statement newsworthy mostly for the fact that Obama had yet to directly address the issue. Likewise, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Detroit, issued a written statement calling for quick resolution of the issue but stopping short of pushing the mayor to step down, as some top Republicans did Thursday.

    Other top Democrats, including Sen. Debbie Stabenow and senior U.S. Reps. John Dingell and John Conyers, did not comment. But Thursday’s decision by a Wayne County judge to send Kilpatrick to jail for violating terms of his bond makes it increasingly difficult for the mayor’s fellow Democrats to avoid the issue.

    “The pressure now is enormous and undeniable,” said Bob Kolt, a Democratic political and public relations consultant in Lansing. “We are at the point where rather than run away, people are forced to engage on this topic.”

    “When the man’s in jail, it’s disturbing,” said Debbie Dingell, an influential member of the Democratic National Committee and the wife of Rep. John Dingell, D-Dearborn.

    Wayne County Executive Robert Ficano, a Democrat, suggested that Kilpatrick should at least take a leave from office.

    Republicans such as Rep. Candice Miller of Harrison Township and Oakland County Executive L. Brooks Patterson were less hesitant, pointedly declaring it’s time for Kilpatrick to step down. Miller, widely considered a possible candidate for governor in 2010, issued a statement calling on Gov. Jennifer Granholm to oust Kilpatrick immediately, without waiting for a hearing Granholm has scheduled next month on a request to remove Kilpatrick from office.

    While the political battle over Kilpatrick’s future has raged inside the city, Democrats from the rest of the state have hesitated to publicly criticize the mayor, let alone call for him to step down, for a variety of reasons. Publicly, Levin and others have said they do not want to interfere in the legal process — a consideration especially for Granholm.

    Privately, some Democrats say that even if they believe Kilpatrick should step aside, they fear that public criticism from white politicians would only harden African-American support for the mayor in Detroit. There was also hesitation to speak out while the mayor’s mother, Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, faced a tough primary election fight, one she narrowly won on Tuesday.

    But Kolt, the Lansing consultant, said the cost of silence may now outweigh the risk of speaking out.

    “The tide has turned, both in Detroit and outstate,” Kolt said, pointing to Kilpatrick’s near-defeat as evidence. The controversy could damage the Obama campaign, Kolt said, making it more difficult for the Democratic candidate to campaign in the city.

    “Before, there were questions about whether they’d get their pictures taken together or share a podium,” Kolt said. “But now I don’t think Barack Obama can even set foot in the city until this is resolved.”

    A spokesman for Obama called Kilpatrick’s jailing “a sad day for Detroit.”

    “These are very serious charges,” said Brent Colburn, a Michigan spokesman for the Obama campaign. “Senator Obama believes that the legal process will resolve them appropriately and has confidence in the judgment of the people of Detroit and the people of Michigan.”

    “These are deeply troubling times for the people of Detroit,” Levin said in a statement released by his Senate office. “A prompt resolution of the legal issues surrounding the mayor is essential so the city can focus on its future without this distraction.”

    You can reach Gordon Trowbridge at (202) 662-8738 or

  131. Several CBC members anxiously wait on Obama
    By Aaron Blake and Jordan Fabian
    Posted: 07/14/08 08:08 PM [ET]

    Barack Obama’s endorsement of a white incumbent facing a black primary challenger has disappointed some members of the Congressional Black Caucus, who are wondering whether he will support them in their primaries.

    Last month, the Illinois senator surprised many political observers by endorsing centrist Rep. John Barrow (D-Ga.) in Tuesday’s primary against state Sen. Regina Thomas.

    Three members of the CBC are facing difficult primaries of their own in the coming weeks.

    Barrow’s endorsement has some in the Black Caucus wondering whether Obama will lift a finger for them after issuing such a harmful blow to a black candidate’s campaign.

    CBC Chairwoman Carolyn Kilpatrick (D-Mich.) said that some members were “a bit disappointed” in the endorsement and that she is still waiting to hear back from Obama’s campaign about her primary. She said Monday that she asked for his endorsement long enough ago “so that he should’ve gotten back to me by now.” “I would have liked to have heard back from him by now,” Kilpatrick said. “I’m 22 days out of my election.” But she also said she understands that the presidential candidate is busy with many other things and downplayed the importance of the endorsement.

    While Obama’s support will likely help Barrow, several Democrats say it was the X-factor in Rep. Bill Foster’s (D-Ill.) special-election win in March.

    As it did in Obama’s state, members of the CBC agree that Obama’s support carries added weight with majority-black electorates. “I think his coattails are long and strong,” said Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.).

    Asked whether Obama is using those coattails enough, Cummings said: “The jury is still out on that. I think he’s looking at races on a case-by-case basis. I’m not sure what goes into that calculus.”

    Cummings specifically urged that Obama get involved in Rep. Edolphus Towns’s (D-N.Y.) primary. Towns endorsed his New York colleague Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D) for president, and opponent Kevin Powell, a former star of MTV’s “Real World,” has tried to tie himself to Obama.

    Towns survived last cycle with 47 percent of the vote, thanks to a crowded primary field, but he faces just one opponent this time.

    He said Obama’s support for Barrow indeed raised eyebrows at the CBC: “Some members were surprised that he endorsed Barrow. Most thought he would remain neutral.”

    As for his own race, Towns made it clear he’s angling for Obama’s help. “I hope he would. I’ll make the request myself,” he said. “I feel like his endorsement would be extremely helpful. … There are a lot of colleges and universities in my district. I’ve never seen this kind of excitement from young people.”

    The situation is a bit harrier with Kilpatrick and CBC Rep. William Jefferson (D-La.). It’s pretty clear the indicted Jefferson is off-limits for Obama’s public support, but Kilpatrick presents him perhaps his biggest quandary. As chairwoman of the CBC, she is an important political figure, and her state is vital to Obama’s presidential aspirations. But she has also egged on a primary challenge by sticking up for her indicted son, Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick (D). Endorsing her risks ties to her son amid Obama’s promises of a new kind of politics, while not endorsing her risks a big symbolic stiff for the CBC and could jeopardize Obama’s standing in a swing state. Kilpatrick faces former state Rep. Mary Waters and state Sen. Martha Scott.

    Adolph Mongo, a political analyst and former consultant to Mayor Kilpatrick, said that Obama’s support would be a “tremendous endorsement” for Carolyn Kilpatrick in terms of the good perception it would generate amongst voters. But he suggested it might be more important for Obama.

    “Barack Obama cannot afford to snub the congresswoman and the mayor,” Mongo said. “The mayor is the only one in Detroit that has the machine to turn out the vote.”

    David Bositis, a senior research associate at the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, suggested that Obama’s endorsements could score points for him with the CBC, “especially because Rep. Kilpatrick isn’t accused of anything.”

    But he dismissed the notion that Michigan, historically a swing state, would be in play this year. “Michigan is going to be an easy win for Obama,” he said. “The idea of Michigan being a swing state is ridiculous.”

    The case for Obama endorsing Towns is clearer, and it would seem unlikely that Obama would hold a grudge against the Brooklyn congressman for endorsing his home-state candidate, which most every member does.

    Jerry Skurnik, a partner at a New York political consulting firm that has done research for Towns, said “Obama endorsing Towns would be an enormous help.”

    “Powell has made a linchpin of his campaign a criticism of Towns for endorsing Clinton,” Skurnik said. Brooklyn state Sen. Eric Adams (D) said “it would send a strong message to the voters,” most of whom supported Obama.

    The case is not the same in Louisiana, where Jefferson faces federal indictments on 16 corruption-related charges. Shreveport-based political consultant Elliott Stonecipher said Jefferson’s ability to fundraise has been hampered by his ethical problems.

    “Obama’s endorsement can make a big difference in that concern,” Stonecipher said. “That’s where it matters.” But Stonecipher said he would be “stunned” if Obama decided to publicly back Jefferson: “It would be a questionable decision at best or raw hypocrisy at worst if Obama, who stands for new politics in America, would stand for the kind of problems Bill Jefferson has.”

    Obama spokesman Nick Shapiro said: “Sen. Obama looks forward to continuing to work closely with the CBC. We were unaware of any concern. In the weeks ahead, we expect to have discussions with our Democratic allies, including leaders in the House and Senate to talk about other races and what role Senator Obama might play in them.”

    An Obama aide said there were no plans at this time to endorse any of the three.

    Another white incumbent facing a situation similar to Barrow’s could also line up for Obama’s coattails. Freshman Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), a white man representing a majority-black district, faces an African-American woman, Nikki Tinker, in his primary in early August.

    Cohen likened his campaign to Obama’s, pointing out that both are minorities among their electorates but are getting people to vote on issues other than race. He said the endorsement would “certainly be helpful.”
    Is Obama a sexist?

    Their seems to be a pattern with Obama NOT supporting women politicians when they need his help. While Obama has no problem asking for women support.

    Just asking the question but is a pattern emerging?

  132. carbynew

    BHOle’s sexism emerged (to me) during the philidelphia and new hampshire debates when he and john edwards took turns gang-banging her.

    it will all come back to bite them both in the ass november 4th.

  133. I agree that’s why I have no syphanthy for Edwards problems. This man could have been the nominee and then babymamagate would have happened and the Dems would have been toast.

    I don’t care about his presonal life but what I do care is his public life and your judgement, behavior and choices does matter. It bothers me on how Edwards is handling this issue from the lying, roping in friends for a massive cover-up, and squirting around the law.

    Behavior not becoming President or senior level cabinet position of dog catcher.

  134. Wbboei,
    LOL!! THe little ratfink chucky?? ROTFLMAO!! That is such a great description of the jerk.
    What a good descripton of what Edwards and Obama and for that matter the rest of jerks during the debates did to Hillary. “They took turns gangbanging her”, WHEW, they hits the nail on the head.
    I sure felt like that is what I saw happening
    to Hillary!

  135. From’s Tom Curry

    Rep. Steve Cohen — an early Obama endorser — told me in June (right after Emily’s List endorsed his primary foe Nikki Tinker) that he was disappointed that Obama was not helping him.

    The primary is today in Memphis.

    Cohen said then that he’d asked the Obama campaign staff if Obama would come to Memphis to campaign for him, but they rejected the idea, saying Obama wouldn’t get involved in congressional primaries. Yet Obama did do a radio ad in June endorsing Rep. John Barrow of Georgia, another white Democrat who faced an African-American primary opponent.

    Cohen said in June he was disappointed that Obama wouldn’t go to bat for him.

    As a white candidate running in a congressional district with a black majority population, Cohen likens himself to Obama, a mixed-race man running for president of a mostly white country. “I’m asking people to judge me just as [Obama] is asking people to judge him,” Cohen said.

    When I called Cohen’s campaign manager Jerry Austin a few minutes ago, he had not yet heard of the Obama statement denouncing the inflammatory ads being aired by Nikki Tinker.

    Referring to Obama, Austin noted that this statement was not an endorsement. He said sourly, “We’re going to win without his endorsement.”

    As for today’s statement from Obama condemning the Tinker ads (although not Tinker by name) Austin said, “The ads started last Friday. He could have said this earlier rather than on election day. Better late than never
    Obama can’t be trusted….Obama’s big LIE has been his ability to HELP downline Democrats but the REALITY is different. Many early Obama downline Democrats are asking the question:



    While the Obama fundraising machine gobble up all money it can find.

  136. Thre 18 cracks video, and the speech she gave will go down in History.

    His race speech has been forgotten.

    You could really feel that she had hit the emotions of what went on in 2008.

  137. If people are donating to him, they need to start asking performance questions. Some give in blind faith. But the big doners give for influence.

    You have to win to make that deal work.



  138. Pro Obama Group Threatens GOP Donors

    A new left-wing organization that wants to help elect Barack Obama president is sending letters to nearly 10,000 major donors who contribute to Republican causes, threatening them with potential legal problems if they finance conservative groups.The nonprofit organization, Accountable America, is even offering a $100,000 reward for information that leads to the criminal conviction or fines of at least $10,000 for violations of campaign finance laws or other statutes by a conservative group, according to The New York Times.Accountable America is led by Tom Matzzie, former Washington director of the liberal activist group, and its research director is Judd Legum, who served that role in Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

  139. That is going to piss off the republican party. This is not in house fighting where you’re not suppose to cross the line…although Obama didn’t have any problems doing it.

  140. is it just me or is Obama becoming so overexposed that people really can’t stand the sight of him anymore, i’m noticing it everywhere.

  141. Labor leaders back Obama, but will members?
    Fri Aug 8, 2008 1:49pm EDT
    By Andrew Stern

    CHICAGO (Reuters) – American labor leaders are urging their white working class members to put aside racial biases that could undermine Barack Obama’s union-backed bid to become the United States’ first black president.

    Recent elections have shown Democrats with a populist message could rely on strong support from union households.

    But Obama’s late-season primary losses to Hillary Clinton in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Indiana revealed a chink in his support among the white working class — some believing rumors that he is a Muslim or betrays a lack of patriotism.

    The primary defeats also may have exposed a vein of racism that could figure in the November contest against Republican John McCain who, like Clinton, is white.

    Of the 10 million members of the AFL-CIO, the largest U.S. labor federation, one quarter are said to be undecided about Obama. The union is going all-out to bring them into the fold.

    “There’s not a single good reason for any worker — especially any union member — to vote against Barack Obama,” labor leader Richard Trumka told a Steel Workers convention in Las Vegas last month.

    “There’s only one really bad reason to vote against him: because he’s not white,” he said.

    In spite of the protracted decline in union density to the point where labor unions represent only one in eight U.S. workers, high turnout rates among union members and their families gives them disproportionate weight in elections.

    Union households are expected to account for as many as one in four votes cast in November — and one in three votes in key states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and Michigan that could determine the outcome in a close presidential contest.

    Voters from households with at least one union member overwhelmingly backed Democrats in some U.S. Senate races in 2006, said Robert Bruno, a labor expert at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

    In 2004, the unions backed Democrat John Kerry but nearly one-third of their members bucked the endorsement in favor of George W. Bush, who appealed to them on “moral” issues such as the right to gun ownership and opposition to gay rights.

    Leaders of the AFL-CIO met this week in Chicago to decide how to deploy some 250,000 volunteers and more than $250 million for its grass-roots campaign on behalf of Obama and 500 Democratic candidates vying for other posts.

    The fast-growing Service Employees International Union, which has successfully organized lower-wage workers, has $85 million to spend. The AFL-CIO said it has set aside its rivalry with the SEIU and other unions that left to form their own labor federation in 2005.


    Unions pride themselves on their racial diversity and plan to confront members about any biases they have.

    “You go straight at our people and talk about the difference between McCain and Obama and the fact that race could be an issue — you go straight at it,” said Gerald McEntee, head of the AFL-CIO’s political committee.

    “Once people get in the booth, if they won’t vote for a black man …,” he said with a shrug.

    According to the Pew Research Center, 77 percent of registered U.S. voters are white.

    Union leaders hope for a Democratic sweep that adds to the party’s majorities in Congress. They will bank on favorable tax policies, steps toward universal health care, reconsideration of trade agreements and other efforts to slow the outsourcing of their jobs.

    The unions have already announced a post-election program aimed at holding the victors accountable.

    Especially vital to the union agenda is passage of the Employee Free Choice Act, a law that favors union organizing efforts over employers’ options to block them. Obama supports the legislation while McCain opposes it.

    The proposal has companies like Wal-Mart Stores Inc nervous, and the giant retailer that is a coveted target of union organizers has warned its store managers about the possible consequences, while stressing it was not telling its 1.4 million employees how to vote.

    Surveys have shown one-third of eligible U.S. workers would like to join a union. In the 1980s and early 1990s, the proportion of union workers declined by an average of about 4 percent a year though unions have stabilized in recent years, according to the Bureau of National Affairs, a nonpartisan think tank.

    Union leaders believe the outcome of the election may be a harbinger for organized labor, which is in decline globally.

    “You get somebody like Obama in there … I think it’s a different side of the coin,” McEntee said.
    Everytime the Dems and Supporters keep using race as the reason people won’t vote for Obama, it widens the gap of electability. Obama need to address the voters issues and needs but to continue to use the race card against legitimate questions and criticism is only going to harden people against Obama

  142. Well, I don’t see HRC as the vp either. Although I have to admit they did look and sound good together whenever they’ve made joint appearances. Still BO doesn’t want to share the spotlight with anyone else. Which is not very smart. Good politicians know when to put their egos aside and do what it takes to win. My money is on Bayh or someone else who is unknown nationally and not very charismatic. But the thing is the McCain team have hit on something- he & his campaign are arrogant. They really believe they’ve got it all locked up. To me it looks like another 50/50 election.

  143. Edwards Admits Affair
    ABC News ^ | 08-08-08 | ABC News

    Posted on Friday, August 08, 2008 2:57:31 PM by JennysCool

    ABC Radio news just announced Sen. John Edwards will admit to the affair with Rielle Hunter in an interview with the network, but insists the child is not his.

  144. Obama strategist criticizes the media
    Aug. 8: Robert Gibbs, Obama senior strategist, shocks Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski when he blames the media for the Bill Clinton controversy, calling it “a nice little cable drama” rather than a legitimate concern.

  145. Breaking: Edwards Admits Sexual Affair; Lied as Presidential Candidate
    h t t p : / /

    John Edwards repeatedly lied during his Presidential campaign about an extra-marital affair with a novice film-maker, the former Senator admitted to ABC News today.

    In an interview for broadcast tonight on Nightline, Edwards told ABC News correspondent Bob Woodruff he did have an affair with 42-year old Rielle Hunter, but said that he did not love her.

    Edwards also denied he was the father of Hunter’s baby girl, Frances Quinn, although the one-time Democratic Presidential candidate said he has not taken a paternity test.

    Edwards said he knew he was not the father based on timing of the baby’s birth on February 27, 2008. He said his affair ended too soon for him to have been the father.

    A former campaign aide, Andrew Young, has said he was the father of the child.

    According to friends of Hunter, Edwards met her at a New York city bar in 2006. His political action committee later paid her $114,000 to produce campaign website documentaries despite her lack of experience.

    Edwards said the affair began during the campaign after she was hired. Hunter traveled with Edwards around the country and to Africa.

    Edwards said his wife, Elizabeth, and others in his family became aware of the affair in 2006.

  146. What a bastard, Edwards stood there and ran on a holier than thou campaign and was nothing more than a lying 2 faced git. Seems the only one who has been honest and true is Hillary.

    If that idiot Edwards had stayed out of the Presidential race, I bet Hillary would have been the nominee, it would have made a big difference in Iowa and in South Carolina and Florida and New Hampshire.

    What a bastard.

  147. I just hope to god it comes out that Obama’s lot threatened Edwards with the affair expose to get his endorsement. That would just be perfect.

  148. so the press held off on this so not to damage edwards durign the primary. hillary would have won ioa without edwards and won s too

  149. This sucks! I actually started to like Edwards before he endorsed Obama. Feel sorry for Elizabeth though.

  150. In corn country, McCain admits to ethanol disdain
    By MIKE GLOVER – 26 minutes ago

    DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — Republican presidential candidate John McCain didn’t mince words Friday at the Iowa State Fair, telling corn producers he didn’t want to subsidize their ethanol but was eager to help market farm products around the world.

    “My friends, we will disagree on a specific issue and that’s healthy,” McCain said as he stood near bales of straw at one of the nation’s premiere farming showcases. “I believe in renewable fuels. I don’t believe in ethanol subsidies, but I believe in renewable fuels.”

    McCain has never been shy about speaking against subsidizing ethanol when he is in farm country, though that stand helped to make him unpopular enough in Iowa that he skipped participating in its leadoff presidential caucuses in 2000 and again in 2008.

    In a brief speech at the fairgrounds — where he viewed a 1,253-pound boar named Freight Train and looked for pork chop on a stick, a fair delicacy — McCain pledged to negotiate trade deals favorable to farm commodities.

    “My mission and my job as president of the United States will be to make sure every market in the world is open to your products,” he said.

    McCain met with Iowa Agriculture Secretary Bill Northey during his fairgrounds tour and promoted expanded pork exports as a boon to the nation’s leading hog-producing state. He said a free-trade deal with South Korea could boost profits by $10 a hog.

    “Agriculture products here in the state of Iowa can feed the world and we’re not afraid to compete with anybody,” he said.

    McCain said his visit gave him a chance to “meet and greet the real America.”

    “This is the heartland of America, this is what America is all about, this is the people I want to know and meet,” he said.

    Democrats in the state said McCain’s opposition to ethanol subsidies and the $300 billion farm bill would make it difficult for the Republican to win Iowa’s seven electoral votes and would hurt him throughout the Midwest. McCain called the bipartisan farm bill “bloated” and an example of the kind of spending measure he would veto as president.

    “He voted against ethanol subsidies, he’s opposed to the farm bill,” Iowa Democratic Chairman Scott Brennan said. “What it proves is he doesn’t care about what’s important to Iowa.”

    On energy policy, McCain reiterated his disagreements with Democratic candidate Barack Obama. McCain favors immediately lifting a ban on offshore drilling while Obama opposes more drilling unless it’s part of a larger package of energy proposals.

    “America is hurting right now. We’ve got a lot of work to do,” McCain said.

    The McCain campaign released a new TV ad for battleground states that contends Obama would raise taxes on the middle class as well as families, small businesses and the elderly. It repeats the Republican campaign’s assertion that Obama would raise taxes on those making $42,000 a year, a figure linked to allowing the Bush administration’s tax cuts to expire on schedule in 2010.

    Obama maintains that his budget plan is aimed at raising taxes only on those making more than $200,000 a year individually and $250,000 a year as a couple.

    The Obama campaign called the new McCain spot “a lie” and “part of the old, tired politics of a party in Washington that has run out of ideas and run out of steam.”

    A new radio ad aimed at Spanish-speaking voters repeats many of the same charges in the TV spot and states: “It’s not that you’re not ready. Barak Obama is not ready yet. Because when it comes to the economy, experience matters, and he just doesn’t have it. He says he’ll give you change, but that’s what he’ll leave you with.”

    Aides to McCain confirmed that the Arizona senator will take a short vacation before the Democratic National Convention, scheduled for Aug. 25-28. He was to head to his Arizona ranch for three or four days the week before Democrats convene in Denver.

    As part of preparations for the Republican National Convention, set for Sept. 1-4 in St. Paul., Minn., senior adviser Mark Salter circulated a first draft of McCain’s convention speech among top aides before McCain begins his review of it.
    I have to give it to McCain..he does not pander. I agree with him on this issue compare to Obama plan,There is too much bloat and not enougn lean in the budget. Most of those farm subsidies are going to corporations, when in fact it was originally for the family farmers.

    The government should be pushing our products and opening doors for fair competion.

  151. Here we go, you watch the MSM try and link this in any possible to the democratic party and Obama’s campaign. This is going to be whirlwind folks and mega messy, the obamabots are shitting themselves on every blog.

  152. This goes to prove the more holier than thou a candidate the more likely he is to be a total douchebag. I never ever got a good vibe from JE, he always came across too smug and yet again proved right. Watch bambi distance himself further than an olympic 100m sprinter.

  153. If the affair was over long ago and he’s not the baby’s father, that doesn’t explain why he was in that hotel visiting the woman and her baby. I think the child’s his, and if he refuses to get a paternity test, he’s got a problem. The Dems should not let him speak at the convention.

    I also agree that if he had been out of the race before Iowa, Hillary might be the nominee.

  154. If this has been going on , why did he run, didn’t this idiot know this would come out? or was he in on trying not to have Hillary be the nominee. I can’t stand him

  155. Neetabug, something stinks, sounds like a DNC plot to me, they tried to take her down with IOWA, in a straight fight between Obama and Hillary in the first 4 contests, I have no doubt she wipes the floor with Obama.

    They knew SC would look stellar with HRC and JE splitting the white folk while Obama took all the mass AA vote there.

  156. Well at least we wont have to listen to his whiney I’m the son of a mill worker ever ever again. Thank god for small mercies.

  157. Attention, please, 44s. Have you contributed your ideas about what this tribute should say? Have you shared your pt of view on the Outline thread? Am still weaving all your comments into the fabric of this tribute — good stuff, good memories and history…ummm,the lipstick kiss on the bare butt works better in video than words — Idunn’s answer to the bots and maybe the O himself?

    Oh, and hey, have you seen the O salute? –whoa, now there’s a poster! The Empty O!

  158. This thing is going to dominate the news cycles for weeks.

    What influence did Edwards peddle for Obama, did he cost Hillary the nomination, what part did Obama play , what did he know and when, you watch the msm knock themselves out on this one.

    This just put NC squarely in the mcCain column, i can see the ads now.

  159. Good old boys networks…the media did a blacklist on this story that first came out last year.

    But went rabid on SEXISM and MYSOGINY 24/7 on Hillary Clinton and still with all the stuff coming out of the National Enquirer it wasn’t until that one baby photo came out.

    The the O’DNC and the Democratic? Taliban Party tossed this faker off the bus and only then did Obama call President Clinton and now all this blaming the media b.s.

    Hillary Clinton was SWIFTBOATED by her own damn party. The same party that PROTECTED John Edwards. It’s a dirty shame that John Edwards took votes and opportunity away from Hillary Clinton when he knew this was going to come out since LAST year.

  160. at least now we know, Carbynew, why JE folded like a cheap deck of cards the day after Florida. Certainly looks like Obama dropped the hatchet on him because Edwards was going to take a lot of votes away on Super Tuesday.

  161. Obama’s vacation timing reeks of cowardice. When the going gets tough, time and time again he is never around. His voting record is proof of this. Some president he would make…not!!!

  162. Interesting question comes to mind about the fate of the thousands of impressive and talented AA actors,commentaters,pundits,political advisers,entertainers and religious mentors if Obama by hook or by crook manages to complete the theft of a political system that has served us so well? I am certain the “legacy of Retributions ‘will be well on its way to implementation and job security in place.The question then will be.”Who gets laid off first? and it will be printed in large letters on an extra large RACE CARD.The Walking Eagle will have landed. Now you can see the urgency of our need to elect Hillary as the First and 44th Woman president of these United States. I want to be around to help pick up the pieces of the shattered glass ceiling hear the sigh of relief from her 18 million voters.

    By ABM90

  163. JE may have been hoping for a high cabinet spot. I wonder, if this is why, he stayed in the race. If he had stayed in, past ST, wouldn’t he have taken more votes from Hillary?

  164. I’m curious to hear just what exactly was leaked in the HRC internal memos that would some folks in such a tither.

    Bet it had something to do with Patti. 😉

  165. It’s also no coincidence Edwards announced this the day the opening ceremonies start in the Olympics, hoping it gets overwhelmed by the Beijing coverage.

    BTW, anyone else here doubt his denial of being the baby’s dad?

  166. The thing I am laughing at “I have not had a dna test” thats the first thing that will have happened but its called plausible deniability, you see there is a get out clause in that ” I might be, but I might not” At least at the moment he can play that he didnt know.

    Anyway you look at it, this is dreadful the democratic party, just dreadful and is bad for Obama, the DNC and all of them.

  167. yuck- hill in nv saying the priamry is over unite behind obama an dshe is working for him. sad days

  168. Idunn

    today, rush limbaugh discussed the “leaked” memos and had three excerpts. i am paraphrasing here – one discussed how “unelectable” BHO is, one discussed BHO’s “lack of US roots/nationality” and one said “unless you were Attila the Hun, anyone could beat BHO in the GE”.

    rush’s intent was to pin HRC and BC for the leaks.

  169. Unfortunately Hill has to play the mantra at present, you never play your aces until you need too and she’ll know when to deal them out.

  170. It is dreadful. I know if Hillary were the nominee I’d be furious to have this overshadow everything with the convention upcoming. I’m also curious, though, about how Waffles is implicated in this. His campaign certainly has known about this for many months and probably used it to force an endorsement out of Edwards.

  171. Those emails were written when they were fighting for the nomination, of course they are going to put him in a bad light, this is not kindergarten.

    Anyway, the more negative spin they put on bambi, the better. The more they say these things, the more the public will get it.

  172. Everyone probably knew about the affair, except for the voters. Apparently, the media didn’t release it. Family has known, since 2006. Why did he run, except to be a spoiler for Hillary, and to angle for a high position in the administration, if Waffles should happen to win?

  173. Like I said before, National Enquirer could have done their own DNA test since Edward ran out of the Beverly Hills Hotel maybe he left his sweaty t-shirt and they dug in the trash and got the baby’s dirty diaper….whatever.

    But you know that National Enquirer has videos and more photos and their threat to release it during the Democratic? Taliban Party convention might still happen.

    Interesting isn’t it? Obama is on vacation and Hillary is working in Nevada, who looks more Presidential…Obama or Hillary?

  174. moononpluto, I was about to say the same thing. I just doubt they were leaked by the Clintons. Josh Green probably got them from a staffer. They don’t even sound that bad anyway. We’ve always known the Clintons believe Waffles will lose, which is a big reason they’ve known Hillary’s the better candidate. In comparison, one can only imagine what internal Waffles memos said about Hillary.

  175. The MSM is going to have a major mess on its hands when the axe will fall on those thousands of jobs it created as background influences for its constant beating of the drums for Barack Hussein OBAMA.John Edwards and the Birth Certificate are the first threads being unraveled in the hunt for “Who is OBAMA”? As he as in the past when situations arise that he does not want to face,he is off to Hawaii to bury his head in the sand,rather than face reality.

    By ABM90 THANKS FOR HANGING IN THERE HILLARY.Your patience and courage wil pay off BIG TIME

  176. Interesting story about Edwards. But what would be even more interesting if there is a follow-up to a couple of National Enquirer stories of Obama and wifey having screaming matches of Obama having an affair while on the campaign trail. Anyone hear anything about this? Hmmmm…….. Obama thinks that he’s all that, but he’s not my cup of tea.

    Also, while does the media insist on comparing Michelle to Jackie O? Michelle says that she will remain as Mommy-in-chief to her little girls. She said that Jackie did manage to raise two sane kids.

    So, what do she consider Chelsea, chop liver? Since the Kennedys, Chelsea has been sane and upstanding human being. The Clintons did a great job with her and you can certainly see the love. Just because Hillary wasn’t the typical stay-at-home mom doesn’t make her bad.

    I refuse to watch any airing or the Democratic convention for that matter in which Hillary is “pimping” herself for Obama. That is ridiculous. It’s not good for her and almost make it seem like she herself will do anything to get a Democrat in the white house. Sad to say. How can she just fold under like that. The last straw for me will be when she accepts the vp position and/or publicly disnounce the PUMA group.

    I think that she should have just went back to the senate, continue doing a fabulous job and just not say anything negative about Obama out of “unity” for the party, but certainly don’t appear with him and praise. Luckily, I am not in politics. I couldn’t stand to be and will not be that phony. It’s hard to see and understand why she will back someone who has treated her horribly, never apologized to her and her supporters, and unelectable. It makes her look less credible. I just don’t get it and I don’t believe her being a “hostage” or “threatened”. Hillary and Bill handled themselves fine while in the white house, so I don’t understand what is going on now. Why does Hillary have to continue “keeping her word”. Obama hasn’t done the same!

  177. Independent2008
    I refuse to watch any airing or the Democratic convention for that matter in which Hillary is “pimping” herself for Obama. That is ridiculous. It’s not good for her and almost make it seem like she herself will do anything to get a Democrat in the white house. Sad to say. How can she just fold under like that. The last straw for me will be when she accepts the vp position and/or publicly disnounce the PUMA group.

    I think that she should have just went back to the senate, continue doing a fabulous job and just not say anything negative about Obama out of “unity” for the party, but certainly don’t appear with him and praise. Luckily, I am not in politics. I couldn’t stand to be and will not be that phony. It’s hard to see and understand why she will back someone who has treated her horribly, never apologized to her and her supporters, and unelectable. It makes her look less credible. I just don’t get it and I don’t believe her being a “hostage” or “threatened”. Hillary and Bill handled themselves fine while in the white house, so I don’t understand what is going on now. Why does Hillary have to continue “keeping her word”. Obama hasn’t done the same!

    I agree this is very puzzling and fascinating to speculate on!

    As to VP, she has said she doesn’t want it, and Bill sure isn’t acting like she wants it. He is acting very cool to Obama, refused to say he was qualified for pres or to praise him in a positive way (see his comments in Africa).

    Even in her ‘support’ appearances for Obama, Hillary may smile and repeat slogans, but what she actually says is about Democrats and causes, so far as I’ve seen.

    She has had plenty of chances to denounce PUMA but has not done it! She has encouraged the ‘on the ballot’ movement, endorsed it (though with the figleaf of ‘party unity’.) She has said more or less, that she can’t stop her suppoters from putting her in nomination so she and BO are working on a way for this to happen ‘smoothly.’ I take that to mean that we are givign her a good bargaining chip and she is using it well.

    I see her as keeping her options open. On the ballot but without fighting, puts her in position in case BO goes to jail this month! Or something else big happens that would cause a large number of Supers to switch, or even cause Pelosoi /Dean etc to dump him.

    Some kowtowing to the DNC clique — but she’s the one forced to do that, not Bill! So the threat if any must apply to her alone.

    Hillary is very good at sendng different messages to different people at the same time. Us strong PUMAs are getting the message that she’s more or less forced to say things she doesn’t believe. Other people probabaly don’t know or care. I expect there are very few who are going to actually vote agaisnt her if she does get the nomination now or later, just because she seems to have ‘sold out’ now. Me, I avoid the tv, look at her actual words, and give her the benefit of the doubt.

    I hope she’s bargaining for more power in the Senate, where she wants to be anyway. A Pres McCain and Sen Maj Leader Hillary could make a good start on cleaning up after Bush, then she can come in 2012. This might be a very good strategy, rather than making more enemies with an unlikely fight at the convention etc. At some point, this Nov or 2012, she will need some former bot votes too.
    She and Bill have said BO is unlikely to win in November. Maybe they are PUMAs at heart (one media story didi say that about Bill!). So rather than a big fight now for the nomination, maybe they plan to let BO become the McGovern of 2008 and get him and the DNC clique both discredited, have a good years withMcC, then pick up the pieces in 2012 without too many bots mad at her.

Comments are closed.