Posted By: Jeff Magee on Thursday, May 15, 2008
I am a "middle aged white guy" and long before the pundits started alluding to the fact that there was a double standard in this race between Obama and Hillary, my wife and I had discussed what we preceived as inequities in how the two candidates were treated by the mainstream press. Any thing negative from the Hillary camp was racist, while Obama had free rein to say anything he wanted. The whole process has been infuriating. Were it not for the fact that the blacks voted in mass for Obama because he is black, Hillary would be the next president of our country. Is that a racist statement? No it si a fact. But when Bill clinton siad so in as many of words concerning South Carolina Obama's folks went nuts cry race. Now I absolutly do not blame blacks for voting so, but will it serve the best interst of our party? I am a factory worker in middle America. 95% of my co-workers are white. A significant percentage of them will not vote for Obama because he is black and many who do not care what his color is, will not vote for him because they feel this whole treatment of Hillary has been unfair. Obama will lose because he is black. Do I like that fact? Of course not, I am embarassed by it, but believe it is fact. That is the elephant in the room no one wants to acknowledge. Hillary was our chance to unseat the republicans. Due to the way she has been treated by both the press and the Obama camp, I plan to vote republican, for the first time in the 10 presidential elections in which I have voted.
Posted By: Paula S on Sunday, May 18, 2008
I am a college educated American Indian (or Native American, as the PC people prefer, whatever). When I resided in Detroit, I voted four times for Coleman Young as mayor (the four times he ran, and won), so don't anyone dare call me racist. And I lived in Detroit after moving back to Michigan from Mississippi, when my civil rights activities got me targeted.I'm not a big fan of Sen. Clinton, but - next after Bill Richardson - she was the most highly qualified candidate running in the Democratic primaries. I consider myself an independent - I've voted split tickets far more often than not. I canNOT vote for Sen. Obama. He's unqualified and inexperienced. I hope and pray that Sen. McCain will make a good president, and that he picks a really good running mate, because it certainly looks as though I'll be voting for him.
Posted By: Bruce on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
That will teach Obama a lesson....let's vote for McCain so that we can bring home more of our son's and daughters in body bags in the next four years, not to mention the additional thousands who will come home with physical and mental injuries from the war in Iraq. Yeah, that will teach Obama.......... Or, maybe we should vote for the person that will move the country forward.......I'm a middle aged white male and I would have voted for either Hillary or Obama because either of them will do a far better job than McCain.That's still my plan.
Posted By: Wayne Gossett on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
I would prefer Hillary to Barck but it seems as if Obama will be the Dem nominee. I will vote for either as I think most Democrats will.I think that most racist types would be voting Republican anyway so I think little is lost there. McCain is so much a flip-flopper that all the DNC will have to do is run the Republican's as of 2004 and insert McCain's name for Kerry's.McCain is the Bob Dole of 2008. There has to be a Republican candidates but he is little more than a sacrificial lamb.
Posted By: david johnson on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Before we Democrats get all worked up and consider voting for McCain, let's not forget that the President appoints Supreme Court Justices who will affect or lives DRASTICALLY for the next generation. Do we want more Scalias or Alitos? Think about it ! !
Posted By: J.D. Davis on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
I supported Senator Clinton right up to just before the Texas primary when the numbers became clear to me that she could not win outright. Since joining the Obama camp, I have become more than happy with my decision. I now truly believe that he is the better candidate and can do far more for down-ticket Democrats across the country.I have listened to people rationalize racism all my life and I fully expect it to be rampant by people who will not recognize it within themselves. Even so, I expect Obama to win and to carry significant majorities of Democrats into the House and Senate.The truth is that I would have happily voted for any of the outstanding group of Democratic candidates before I would have supported four more years of Bush-Cheney policies from anyone within the GOP.Just getting American troops out of their stupid quagmire in Iraq would be more than reason enough.Dauntless
Posted By: J.D. DAVIS on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Posted By: Dennis Brown on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
For me, the most observant point in the article is, "Can anybody name two states Obama can win that John Kerry lost in 2004"? Not only can I not do that, but I can name 2 states that went for Kerry that McCain is likely to win - PA and MI. The author is absolutely correct, Clinton would have a good shot at winning, Obama has almost no chance.
Posted By: Wolfgang on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Give me a break. It isn't misogyny that is scuppering Hillary's plans - it is the simple fact that a MAJORITY of the people voting hate her and her politics and don't want her anywhere near the Oval Office. For the aging Boomer feminist crowd to take the attitude that "it is her turn" and anyone standing in their way is a woman-hater illustrates perfectly the bankruptcy of the feminist position all these years. End of the day: You really AN'T compete unless the deck is stacked in your favor and the rules get change in mid-game every time someone else bests you. Understand this: NO ONE is entitled to the office of POTUS. If the aging feminists and the blue collar/rural goobers want to sit out the election or vote for McCain to show their adolescent temper tantrum - go right ahead. You are not indispensable AND your interests will not be given serious attention come next January. GET USED TO IT.
Posted By: Mike McGee on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
I will not vote for McCain, or McBush as I've heard him referred as. I would much prefer Senator Clinton over Senator Obama. Here in Illinois there is no one that can tell you anything that he has done for the state. talking to friends in NY they tell me plenty of good that she has done for them. Most of Sen. Obabma's tenure as Illinois Senator has been spent campaigning. I do not understand how a true Democrat could truthfully say that they would switch parties if their candidate of choice isn't nominated. I don't understand how anyone could vote for a war mongering, hateful man like Senator McBush. This country is in enough trouble as it is without having to pay for another 10 years in Iraq. And what exactly is wrong with trying to TALK to the other side? I will gladly vote for either of the Democratic candidates. I will never switch my vote to McBush. Things will be much much worse if he wins.
Posted By: ellis on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
from the comments to this blog it would appear thatthere will again be voters who for whatever reason will vote against their own self interest they will use excuses as ; can't vote for a muslim, can't vote for that race-don't trust them, can't vote for obama for his middle name is hussein, can't vote for obama because he dissed hillary, etc etc.if this is the intellectual level of our voters than i guess we all deserved george bush, an elf of a president.of course this sountry is racially biased. no one should have any doubts. we have a chance to overcome this and show the world a new and different USA, but the jeff mcgees and paula s.es will be with us for a long time, unable to get over their hate.
Posted By: Alan on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
But Obama is running as a black and everyone who does not support him is a racist. But Hillary's candidacy if furst and foremost about running as a woman, and everyone who does not support her is a mysoganist?Hard to see why the Clinton supporters are so bent out of shape if Obama wins that they will refuse to vote Democrat and switch to McCain. They're the ones who have been searching for months to find any sort of mud to throw and any sort of slip to get shocked and horrified about.The pundits have not reduced Clinton's chances to win the nomination to zero any more than they managed to make it a done deal way back at the beginning. She has lost ... OK, inevitably will lose at some point in the next weeks ... but for her own political calculations (I mean, selfless sense of duty to the American people) will not yet acknowledge it. Maybe needs the time to gather another $25 million in donations. Feel free to step up and write her a check.
Posted By: Louise Archibald on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Excuse me for interjecting a serious point in this childish conversation....The Democratic Party is another name for Socialism coming your way and the Republican Party is another name for Capitalism which is why we compete (or at least used to) worldwide.I think ideology should be addressed.
Posted By: Annie B. on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Senator Clinton is in second place and has been for several months in spite of her having won Pennsylvania, Ohio, Texas, West Virginia, etc. We know that she probably would govern well if she were the nominee; however, thousands of us do not want to hand over the government for four to eight years to the Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton dynasty!!Obama '08
Posted By: Dr. Pete on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
I voted for Bill Clinton based on his promises to:1. mend the country's broken health care system2. push for tort reform in health careThe first thing Bill did was put Hillary in charge of mending the health care system. Hillary appointed a commission which consisted of lawyers, insurance executives and bureaucrats, and which specifically excluded physicians, nurses and other health care workers.The second thing Bill did was to never again mention tort reform.As a result of these experiences, I will never again trust the Clintons.
Posted By: outsider on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Lyons is clearly a Clinton supporter, so his rhetoric is anything but impartial. Contrary to what he says, I have found the media to be frustratingly on Hillary's side for most of this campaign. Even when she lost primary after primary and caucus after caucus, she got more coverage. It was as if she were somehow entitlted to be President; it was her turn now. My state Democratic Party has a picture of Bill Clinton on its brochure, a significant advantage for her (yet she was defeated here by a wide margin in both the caucuses and the primary). Somehow her experience as unelected First Lady was seen as more significant than Obama's somewhat longer career in elected office. (and never mind that some of our worst presidents, like James Buchanan, had the most "experience"). Somehow her inflexibility (my way or no way) in the only policy matter she took on directly while her husband was in office — health care — wasn't a sign of what kind of president she would be. Somehow her compromise on her Senate vote to allow the Iraq war, and her not changing her mind about it until this campaign, was not a sign of bad leadership. Somehow the way she has actually run her campaign — all the grandstanding, "finding her voice" and pandering to working class voters (many of whom would probably vote Republican anyway, as West Viginia did twice for George W. Bush — and certainly not for a black man) has been largely ignored until it has become apparent to everyone that there is simply no way she can win now.I used to think that all the Hillary hatred out there (as well as the hatred for her smooth -talking husband) was undeserved. This campaign has proved to me that there are definite reasons for it. And poll after poll has shown that she would lose to McCain in the general election. Were Obama to pick Richardson as a running mate, as I hope he does, he will win.
Posted By: educated ron on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
I think when peoples true reason for not voting for a candidate is because what his church pastor said, an ambiguous statement his wife made, or the I just don't like him. That instead of calling them racist, I will call them unintelligent which is very close.Voting this year should be the easiest decision an american makes.Vote for 1 of the 2 following topics and I would respect your decision.1. If you like the direction of the country, don't care about foreclosures bringing your property value down, don't care about losing your home since its already paid off, support the war, oil investments and defense contract investments have made you rich like many of Bush's piers. Vote for McCain2. If you don't support the war, didn't make a killing investing in oil, care about those who aresick but don't have healthcare, ,don't have health care yourself, don't like that illegal wiretap decision was made in an undemocratic way. Don't like how your civil liberties are almost gone, Your investments have gone down, you don't work for haliburton. Vote fore Hilary or ObamaSeriously. vote for one of those 2 reasons.Making the excuse of pastor said this in church in the past, I just don't trust him, I think he's Muslim, 90% of blacks voted for him so he must be for the blacks are for the uneducated stupid americans.Imagine if 4 years from now after 10000 more troops have died, your property value has gone down 50%, you're unemployed to jobs oveseas and someone asks you.Why did you vote for McBush knowing what his policies would be be, knowing that these negative things would happen, knowing all these deaths would happen?Imagine if your answer to this question was. "I didn't like Obamas pastor, so I didn't care about anything else, not even my well being or the countries well being, I showed him, he can't fool this proud american"uneducation of america.
Posted By: Tim on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Louise, you said:"The Democratic Party is another name for Socialism coming your way and the Republican Party is another name for Capitalism which is why we compete (or at least used to) worldwide. I think ideology should be addressed."If the GOP are for capitalism, why are they tossing trillions away on wars, sending young men to their deaths, and running up the largest deficits ever? There may be a few people and companies that profit from war (ask Dick Cheney; his stock in Halliburton just made him $35 million in war profits), but overall it is a lousy method of growing an economy and being a capitalist. And if it's about ideology, why are people fleeing the GOP at an astonishing rate? I think the Repugs are in for a nasty surprise this fall, no matter which Dem is running against McBush.
Posted By: Rook on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Jeff McGee, and anyone else who thinks this way, - "Hillary was our chance to unseat the republicans. Due to the way she has been treated by both the press and the Obama camp, I plan to vote republican, for the first time in the 10 presidential elections in which I have voted.So instead of attempting to unseat the Republicans via Obama you are going to help keep them in power instead. That makes sense. You want Hillary to become POTUS because you believe she may be able to bring our country back on track, but instead of taking a chance on Obama, you will intentionally vote for a minimum of four more years of the devastating policies that you were hoping Hillary would oppose.Have you seriously thought this through?I understand that many Hillary supporters are going to be disappointed if/when Obama gets the nomination. You need to look at the fact that Obama and Hillary have very similar platforms, diametrically opposed to many of McCain's.You want to vote for Hillary for POTUS because you respect her accomplishments, her political savvy, her experience; you want her for POTUS because you trust her to try to do what is right for the country. If she loses the primary, that is no reason to stop trusting her. She knows that a McCain presidency will be very bad for us.Hillary is going to ask you to vote for Obama.
Posted By: Carol, Long Valley NJ on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
I am a white woman, over 50, but also college educated with a high IQ.At one point, I backed Richardson, then Biden, then Edwards. BHO and HRC along with Dennis K were in my bottom three. But I'll take any one of those over the any of the Republican nominees -- any day, any time, any place. BHO won me over with the Jefferson Jackson speech. I voted for him in my primary and I've been rooting for him ever since. If he wins the nomination, it will be the first time in a long time that I will vote FOR some one as opposed to voting AGAINST the lesser of two evils. If HRC manages to defy math and win the nomination, I would vote AGAINST McCain, but I would never vote against HRC in order to spite the Obama fans, that, to me is juvenile and NOT in the best interests of anyone, let alone our country. McCain is a moron, he graduated in the bottom five of his class at the Naval Academy.McCain is an adulterer, he regularly cheated on his first wife, Carol up until the divorce -- she gained weight and walked with crutches after a horrible car accident. McCain married his trophy wife, 17 years his junior, two months after the divorce was final. Vote for McCain if ~ you want to add to the $3 trillion 'mortgage' that Bush has signed away to Chinese billionaires that your grandchildren will have to pay ~ you like adding daily to the dead and wounded tallies in Iraq ~ you believe that corporations should run this country (by the way, that's called fascism) ~ you like the oil companies making record profits while you are struggling to fill your gas tank. ~ you like having the jobs that pay a living wage shipped over seas ~ you like making minimum wage and you don't ever want it raised ~ you don't ever want unemployment benefits extended after your plant closes ~ you want to lose your health care ~ you want to lose your pension ~ you want to lose Social Security ~ you want some one who admits that he doesn't understand the economy (his words) ~ you want some one who will always shoot first and talk later ~ you want some one who embraces the right wing hate preacher -- Hagee and Parsley ~ you want some one who still has about 50 lobbyists running his campaign -- they are not pulling for you but in some cases they are representing foreign governments -- like Myanmar. So go ahead, spite Obama, spite yourself and vote for McCain or this time do something smart and vote for your wallet, vote for the economy, vote for the environment, vote for jobs. Vote Democratic 2008 -- don't let the corporations and their Republican stooges win again.
Posted By: Linda H on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
I realize it's an unpopular opinion to be pro Hilary, but I am. The media has been unfair, they dig up what they can to cause trouble on both sides, but I don't think it is because they care-it's because the more garbage they dig up, the more discord they can foment. That is what makes headlines. Right now Obama is the draw-so he gets the headlines. If Obama had run in Michigan and Florida and won-they would have seated those delgates immediately! Even if Hilary hadn't ran in them, but because it was she who ran and won, they don't want to. It sounds like the boys in men's club don't want to let the ladies in. I got news for them, they are going to loose anyway. So many people that would have voted Democrat will vote Repulican if Obama is the choice, that we will essentially have another 4 years of Bush polictics. If you wanted change you should email the DNC and tell them to count the votes from Florida and Michagan as they stand!
Posted By: Dwayne A. McClellan on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Attention: Democrats, ESSPECIALLY WOMEN OF AMERICA! don't let a bunch of spoiled elistist WASP's with delusions of entittlement keep the republican's in powre. Don't let a buch of spoiled Femi-nazi's keep the best chance for change and hope die beacuse of Hillary's entittlement obession.
Posted By: JimR on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
"Can anybody name two states Obama can win that John Kerry lost in 2004"? Sure. Kerry lost both Ohio and Colorado in 2004, but not by much. There's two. He's also got a shot at Iowa. But, that's all things being equal to the way they were in 2004, which is not the case. African-Americans and young people are turning out in big numbers. That could put other states into play. There's also the factor of Bush fatigue and war fatigue.Geez, you didn't try very hard to answer your own question.
Posted By: Leroy on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
I lived in Arkansas for 25 years, all through the Clinton years. Gene Lyons has been sucking at the Clinton teat for 30 years and apologizing for anything they did, no matter how bad. It was always someone else's fault. There are many reasons to detest both Hillary and Bill.I wouldn't vote for either for dogcatcher. I wouldn't vote for Obama, either. It has nothing to do with color. It hasto do with a man who was raised by a Muslim father and step-father and has no true loyalty to MY country. It has to do with the fact that I don't want him appointing U.S. Supreme Court and other Federal Court Judges. He says we can talk to radicals. Israel has let American Presidents and State Department people make them believe you can make peace with radical terrorists, and all it has gotten them is more rockets coming from areas closer than ever. They need another Moshe Dayan who will take care of business and make believers of them as he did Egypt in the Six Day War. John McCain was not my choice,but is the better of three not-so-greats, who has the background and experience to do the job.
Posted By: Hogtrashhd on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
I vote for none of the above. These three are the lamest bunch of potential presidents ever. There is not one amongst them with integrity, wanting the best for OUR country, honesty. Nothing. Their negative qualities far outweigh any good qualities they might have. Lord just get us through till 2012 without too much damage from these lamebrains. Hopefully, we'll find a hero.. I'm an optimist. We will get a good president one of these days but not this year. That is a foregone conclusion.
"The Democratic Party is another name for Socialism coming your way and the Republican Party is another name for Capitalism which is why we compete (or at least used to) worldwide. I think ideology should be addressed."Ok Louise, lets address it.I will stipulate that the US used to be on top of the game. Best, or near best in science, education, innovation, economics, engineering, etc. I will further stipulate that the US has lost its edge in many, if not all of these areas in the last three decades or so.In return, you agree to stipulate to the fact that the Republicans have been in control of the White House for 20 of the last 28 years. You also agree to stipulate that during the brief 8 years that the Dems were in control, the deficits run up by Reagan and Bush, the former, were brought under control and the budget balanced. - Darn those socialists.Thankfully we were able to get a "capitalist" back in office and run the deficit back up to record levels.Wake up!
Posted By: maria on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
So sorry to burst your bubble but true Capitalism does not require subsidies and protectionism. Therefore, it cannot be said that America or Republicans promote Capitalism. America's idea of Capitalism is to support corporations. Thus corporations manage to receive and enjoy the benefits of "welfare" more than any single mother and her dependent children will ever realize. As always, the middle class will continue to be saddled with taxation to support "corporate welfare". This financial obligation will continue until the middle class coalesces into a political group and changes the policy of "corporations first" or becomes bankrupt. I hope the latter does not occur first because then we will all need welfare and there will be no one left to tax. So middle class taxpayers unite behind the candicate who is going to let you keep your green and here is a hint, it isn't McCain.
Posted By: bach ave on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
"The Democratic Party is another name for Socialism coming your way and the Republican Party is another name for CAPITALISM..." Sorry, no. We were looking for fascism. Fascism completes this laughable comparison.---Dear Mr./Mrs. President please refund my civil liberties. Enclosed is $900.00
Posted By: edgar hoffpauir on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Does anyone on this site use spell check? I fought my way through all these comments and at times thought only 7-8 year olds was posting. As far as oil profits, what about drilling for oil in the US? What about getting the taxes, State, Local, and Federal lowered? They make more money from oil than any oil company. BTW, I vote and do not like any of the ones running. I will have to vote McCain even though he is not my first choice. I have voted in the past for JFK and Carter. Buddy
Does anyone on this post use spell check? I fought my way through most of these posts and at times thought they were written by 7-8 year olds.
Posted By: Steve R on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
The white males your article speaks of would never vote for Clinton either !
Posted By: Grumpy. on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Don't know which newspapers or TV-Radio Outsider has been listening to.Obama has been a MediaSuper Star since the Keynote Speech At The Convention.
Posted By: John Crowder on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Unfortunately, in November, we will get the leader that we deserve. Out of 300 million American citizens (I won't mention the 10-15 million illegal aliens who swam the Rio Grande) we have a choice of three individuals - all with very specific political baggage.Many groups in the US will have spent MILLIONS of dollars promoting their specific candidate, none of which is my first choice - and I've heard from many other voters that their first choice didn't make the final cut either.But let's face it, who in their right mind would REALLY want the job of President??? It is hard work. No matter what you do, some SOB somewhere is writing an op-ed piece about what a dunce your are (or something similar). The job does require a certain degree of intelligence (yes, even G.W.B. managed to graduate from college). But having THICK skin and the ability to recognize talent (potential or proven) and surrounding yourself with able assistants is a key. The President doesn't really run the country. If you are familiar with bull riding at the rodeo...it;s like a 8 second ride that last 4-8 years.In the long run, we have only three choices because many good & talented people don't want to live under the microscope of public opinion and scrunity (I sure wouldn't)so we're stuck with 3 extroverts who love the spotlight.Since we have to select one, I say used we use the time tested method of picking the prettiest of the three ugly sisters.......John McCain
Posted By: Folkwolf101 on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
So very appreciative of this article. Finally, someone is telling it the way it is. Almost as bad as individual acts of racism are false accusations of racism. Remember the naive young men on the Duke LaCross team whose lives were changed and ruined by false cries of rape. Originally, I was fully supportive of Obama but eventually began leaning toward Hillary only because her policies, plans, and qualifications were winning me over. I said then, Obama will do great so long as he doesn't make race part of his campaign. So, you can imagine my disappointment when every slightly ambiguous thing Hillary would say would be attacked by Axelrod and Barack as being racist or "ill advised." What bothers me as much is how the mainstream media as been fully complicitous in encouraging the race baiting. Here, Keith Olberman comes to mind in his repeated scathing attacks against Hillary and Geraldine Ferraro. As for who I will vote for, I really truly do want a democrat in the white house, and again I was originally thrilled by Obama's candidacy. But, how do I allow myself to reward such despicable acts from both the media and Obama's campaign staff! No, I can't do that and yet I can't vote for McCain. I will stay at home instead.
Posted By: Robert Lucien on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
This debate as always misses the real point, neither Hilary or Obama are really any good. Someone has to tell the Democrats the truth. Last time the party put Kerry into the nominee position, a man with zero charisma and almost an anti-candidate, it was like they were voting for Bush. Well both the front runners here are equally bad - Hillary has so much baggage and she looks old and tired, and Obama just comes across as slimy and untrustworthy somehow, its not because he’s black he has something of the Blair about him. (the nice face the salesman shows you and the real one? ??) In terms of actual votes Hillary is actually apparently in the lead, even if its pretty clear that in delegates she’s lost. What the Dems really need though is a system that actually picks the best candidates right at the beginning, not just those with the most party connections or loyalty or money or PC kudos.
Posted By: LarsBBertelsen BscF. on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
The president is mostly a figure head. The power lies in Congress which will be democratic. Obama will make a far more attractive states man and a good ambassador for the US to the rest of the world who laughs at and despises Bush and his ilk. Remember him groping the Chancellor of Germany. Wow what dignity!!! Americans have resorted to wearing Canadian flags to avoid the ridicule and even harrassment. How sad for a once proud nation. McCain is another Bushite ignorant of economics and World culture and Geography. Do we want that?If New york, San Francisco and many other urban metropoli can accept Black Mayors why do you think Americans will not accept a black or almost black President?Besides It may not come to that Obama is likely to be assasinated if elected and his white running mate will become president.One other point unless Democrats win by a landslide, the Republicans will rig the vote again with their electronic wizardry. Remember a Bush is Governor of florida and a Bush Licker named Swartzenegger is governor of California. Michael Moore was right in calling for UN monitoring of US elections. We are so close to fascism its not funny.
Posted By: Concerned on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Voters in Florida and Michigain are not to blame because their states decided to vote out of turn. But those state leaders are to blame and the voters will suffer their wrong doing. A lot of people think it's wrong to punish the voters and that's where they are wrong. As a country we have rules and laws to obey and when you decide to go your own way there can be consequences for your actions.I wonder why Hillary can't see this problem? maybe it's because she only cares about her own self interests and not the laws of the party.
Posted By: Wendy on Tuesday, May 20, 2008
This s-mail is for Bruce-You say you are voting for Obama because he will "move the country foward". Forward to what I ask? When he gets through disarming our proud nation, hugging the thugs, extracting blood from the workers of Ameica to "eradicate poverty worldwide" perhaps you will see the folly of your position. Like most of his supporters I suspect you can't even articulate any of policies or plans. Rhetoric alone does not a leader make. You are all fools and I am truly ashamed of this dumbing down of America which no longer asks why, how or at what consequence? An arrogant imposter is almost but not quite as bad as an ignorant citizen voting viserally and without any depth of thought or consequence. Take another look...a CLOSE look.
Posted By: James on Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Could it be that many of us don't like Hillary because we know her and Bill well enough to not trust either of them? She had a reputation in Arkansas as an attorney with very few scruples, and Bill is a perfect match for her. She has shown that she will do or say anything, literally, to get elected.
Posted By: Louis Copman on Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Here are the indisputable facts about Barack Obama. He clinched the nomination in February, before anyone knew anything about him. Since February, he has won only TWO competitive primaries (NC and OR.) Hillary has won OH, TX, PA, IN, WV, and KY, (all but IN) convincingly. Most of the states BHO has won are steadfast red states, most of which will not even be in play for the Dems. How many Idahos is California worth? The Obama supporters are the ones wrecking the Democrats' otherwise certain victory in November. I must admit the Obama campaign has played the DNC's idiotic nominating rules like a violin, brilliantly, Unfortunately for the Democrats, the DNC's rules do not apply to the general election.
Posted By: Pam Scantalides on Wednesday, May 21, 2008
I am a life long Democrat. I've been voting for President since the very early 70's. My plan this year is to change my party affiliation to Independent after the Democratic Convention, if Hillary Clinton is not the nominee. Further, I will be writing Hillary Clinton on my ballot if she is not the Democratic nominee. Barack Obama will NEVER represent my interests. He is a pretender with no experience, and he, more than anyone, is 'playing the race card' with his whining and complaining. I do not fear John McCain as president, and am comfortable with 4 more years of Republican 'rule' in Washington. If Hillary doesn't win this time around, I pray she will run in 2012. Maybe then the Democrats will have learned something. As to the Supreme Court nominee comment -- it's impossible to tell who John McCain will appoint to the Supreme Court. How about the stupidity of NARAL in its' endorsement of Barack Obama?
Posted By: Jean on Wednesday, May 21, 2008
It appears from his column that Lyons wants to engage the elephant that Jeff Magee sees in the room, and that will surely get voters riled and racially divided. Then, if voters cannot see through their misguided anger, John McCain will ride this very same elephant right into the White House. Traditionally, I vote Democratic, but I try to cast my ballot for the person and not the party. This means that I vote for whoever I think will do the best job (not for the "lesser of two evils," or against one party or the other, or against a person I do not find likeable). Nor do I stay home and complain later about who got elected.At one time, I might have cast my vote for either of the Democratic nominees because I considered both good candidates. I followed Obama's rise after I was moved to learn about him following the DNC in 2000, and I was also a Clinton admirer--until they got into trouble in this campaign. A letter to the Washington Post earlier this week from Kathleen in FL might have summed it up best: "...It's not misogyny that sunk Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign, unless you mean her own assumption that she would have to play dirty, like the boys, to win...I started out very excited about HRC's candidacy. It was the dozens of times she took the low road, the dozens of times she stabbed me in the heart using plays right out of Karl Rove's playbook, the shameless twisting of the truth, the times she hinted that she'd prefer Republican John McCain to Barack Obama for president, that turned my stomach and my vote. And finally the last straw: copying Mr. McCain's call for a gas tax holiday--pointless pandering that I expect from Republicans but not from someone as smart as Ms. Clinton. No, she shot herself in the foot with many people who really wanted to support her...she left that high road to Mr. Obama. She has no one to blame for that but herself." Over time, it appears that many have come to see the Clintons in a different light and have not liked what they have seen or what has been brought to their attention.Rook's first posting, and Carol's right after, say a lot. Obama is not perfect (no one is), but he may do the best job because he expects to listen to the people (us), he expects to gather expert advisors and capable supporters, and he expects to be bi-partisan and inclusive. What I expect is a more democratic government than we have had in some time, or at least a move towards this CHANGE--which I do not expect from the other two in question.
