It’s pretty sad that a substanceless candidate will win simply because he had more money and the press gave him a free ride.

I cannot wait until John McCain swiftboats him right back to Illinois.

It is quite repugnant that two candidate’s , with almost identical voting records and so very similar agaenda’s would in the end, have one succeed the other due to media coverage. Let us be both logical and reasonable in relying on the candidate who possesses both the experience and the planning needed to stitch this nation back together. Clinton far outweighs Obama in both these categories.

Check out http://www.hillarydivides.com

clinton may have the 35 yrs experience, but Obama also has the same kind of experience (fast learner) and some unique god given talents…too late for hillary to start thinking like him…she is trying to copy him a lot…cannot beat’em so copy ‘em! is that unethical?

When they quote Obama in the article, they should add all of the “umms and ahhhs” that he says while completing his thoughts.

As far as winner vs underdog? He seems to be talking from both sides of his mouth. Not impressed. He can’t be both. Slight underdog now? C’mon…

Hillary Clinton has been trying to push the same Health Care and Immigration issues for years, long before Obama was ever granted public office,,,, so ,,,, copy him , i think not. Rather, i see Obama following in many of Clintons old footsteps. I was amazed when i actually took the time to ask friends and associates of their support in Obama’s campaign. So very few could even tell me exactly where he stood in the arena of liberal issues. Let us not be too idealistic for our own good and gamble away the health and well being of our children in this ever challenging world on a candidate who has not as of yet proven himself in the world of politics, even to the point where we would be assured that he is a man of character and unshifting values.

KB:
Since when does one’s speaking ability determine who is better suited to be President? If I was to go on your logic then one would wonder why Senator Byrd is still in the Senate.

I think a president should have the ability to speak well off the cuff. I’m not asking you to go off my logic, please use your own logic when making your decisions and I’ll rely on mine.

Obama wants it both ways (the way people view him) he wants to be the winner AND the underdog. He is showing more and more he wants to be all things to all people. My opinion is that that’s not possible.

so I am new to intranet and wanting to get informed to vote. all I see is arguing and noone has good reasons to pick one person or another person. just people wanting to look smarter. like i siad before I voted for democrafts in the pass but no more. they only promise and do nothing about it. black people have the same sitation for years. this time its my vote to republicanns. why not.

L’Aquisha,

I think the best way to get informed on the internet is to first not read blogs, at least for getting your information. They are definitely all opinion and mixed up facts. I would try looking at each candidates web pages and though I haven’t looked, I’m sure there are government pages for how each has voted in the past. So hard to learn anything from news organizations anymore, I’m learning they all say something slightly different.

I will try that KB then may be come back to hear other poeples ideas. but I think its important for places like this to hear what other poeple think to. my idea should count like other ideas.

KB:
No one can be all to everyone but they can be most to everyone. There is nobody running that can guarantee that everyone will be happy with the policy or actions they make. At least he is willing to make the effort to make changes to the way we have been operating for years now. We must be willing to change what is not working and find ways to improve those that are. Simply playing the same old game is not improving a thing or making anything better; it’s just running around in circles and chasing our own tails.

Jim, what changes?

My name is Giovanni, I know the lover of Mrs Clinton, it calls savior it is an Italian boy, he is seen at the end of this video on the I bring of genova in
Italy, http://it.youtube.com/watch?v=21XZ7wcu_j4

VOTE - “MY AMERICAN MAMA” - HILLARY CLINTON - PRESIDENT!!!
America’s True Presidential Leader - President!!!

HILLARY CLINTON will produce the DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL WIN for AMERICA!!!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA is a PHONY.

Time will tell more about Barack Hussein Obama…..when the Rezko case begin soon.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

YOU GO GIRL—–DO IT FOR AMERICA!!!!
YOU GO GIRL—–DO IT FOR AMERICA!!!!

~~~~~Who Let The Dogs Out~~~~~
~~~~~Who Let The Dogs Out~~~~~

The fact of the matter is that Clinton’s plans for change are far more decisive and well thought out. If you have two candidate’s that push the same issues yet only one can fully explain what he or she plans to do in order to accomplish these agendas,,,,,, who would you vote for……. Clinton is never left standing speechless or stammering on just how she would handle any as of yet discussed topic.

[edit] Criminal and Civil Prosecutions
Two provisions of the MCA

First, the MCA changed the definition of war crimes for which US government defendants can be prosecuted. Under the War Crimes Act of 1996, any violation of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions was considered a war crime and could be criminally prosecuted. Section 6 of the Military Commissions Act amended the War Crimes Act so that only actions specifically defined as “grave breaches” of Common Article 3 could be the basis for a prosecution, and it made that definition retroactive to November 26, 1997. The specific actions defined in section 6 of the Military Commissions Act include torture, cruel or inhumane treatment, murder, mutilation or maiming, intentionally causing serious bodily harm, rape, sexual assault or abuse, and the taking of hostages. According to Mariner of Human Rights Watch, the effect is “that perpetrators of several categories of what were war crimes at the time they were committed, can no longer be punished under U.S. law.”[32] The Center for Constitutional Rights adds:

The MCA’s restricted definitions arguably would exempt certain U.S. officials who have implemented or had command responsibility for coercive interrogation techniques from war crimes prosecutions.
. . . .
This amendment is designed to protect U.S. government perpetrators of abuses during the “war on terror” from prosecution.[33]

CLINTON HELP GET THIS PASS UNDER COVER, SIGN INTO LAW IN A CLOSED ROOM ONLY WITH BUSH..PARDONS HIMSELF. AND OTHERS IN THE GOVERMENT FOR ANYTHING ABOUT THIS WAR AND BACK DATED IT ALL THE WAY TO 1997…WHILE PRES/CLINTON WAS IN OFFICE.. WHY WHAT IS SHE HIDDING??????????????????

Jay;
The change he is speaking of is to stop the same old rat race of politics that we continue to follow. He wants people to look at the issues in a different way because quite frankly the way we have been doing things in this country is the same old things done in different approaches.
You cannot really tell me that anything these candidates promise is going to actually happen without the cooperation of congress. If they don’t share your ideas then that’s all they are ideas. What he is stating that even though he is a Democrat he is willing to listen to those on other side because no parties ideas are going to make everyone happy. So if he can instill the ideas of both parties to work for most of the people then we could come to a common ground that at least satisfies all. He knows that regardless of what he states that it will be the decision of congress to bring those ideas to fruition.

I certainly agree with that L”Aquisha. Your opinion should be heard like everyone elses and I agree with you about the fighting. Sure is a lot of that! People should be able to disagree, but still be respectful.

CLINTON IS AND ALWAYS WILL BE A BIG FAT PIGLET……………………….

SMILE, SHAKE YOUR HAND, THEN HAVE YOU KILLED LATER, UNDER COVER..

35 YEARS GIVENING HAND JOBS, THATS ABOUT ALL SHE HAS BEEN DOING..AND WILL KEEP DOING

Jim, I’m sorry, but no candidate is more about the rat race than Obama. He’s throwing money around like a drunk at a strip club. He’s picking up and publicly flaunting every single endorsement. He’s accepting money from anyone who will give, and he only recently started shedding more Rezko dollars.

If he’s going to listen to every party’s ideas, why does he put forward Clinton’s ideas but with minor changes? Because he knows he can’t run with “I’ll work with Democrats and Republicans”.

The reality is that Obama is a politician, like any other. He won’t promise anything of substance, but he does something worse — he promises anything considered change. What if I consider more waterboarding change? He promises me that.

Clinton is specific because she knows that vague doesn’t work for our country.

And they’re both equally willing to work with Republicans — that is very little. Because Republicans want nothing to do with what they want. Working with Republicans is a two-way street, not just a one-way one. Obama cannot walk up and say “Let’s work together to throw away Bush’s tax cuts!”

The largest falsity in this election has been that Obama is going to change everything. The reality is that unless Democrats win more seats, he won’t be able to change too much because Congress is still pretty much 50/50.

Jim, you are right about needing change. I don’t think anyone would dispute that. I think what some dispute is the road we take to make the change. Honestly, Obama talks a really good game but, he seems more reminiscent of a civil rights activist than a president. Maybe that is what he should be doing. When I listen to him speak I swear I keep expecting his next line to be “I have a dream…” and thats all good, we all want a better America, but what I want in the White House is someone who has political saavy, someone who has been in the trenches and knows how to counteract the old school corruption, someone who truly lives the idea of unity…not just says it.

Obama says Change…okay, how will he play the game he’s going to have to in order to acheive it? He can’t breeze in and just start a new game. It’s not going to be easy and it’s not going to be instant and I think the folks who are mesmerized by him would be terribly dissapointed. It’s going to take a generation (I believe) to make headway through the already established corruption.

I want someone realistic. Not “yes we can”, cause “we” can’t do more than get him into office. I would need to know what “he” can do once he gets there and how long he needs to do it. Dreams are great, but we need reality.

WHEN WILL ALL YOU SO CALL AMERICANS GET A CLUE ABOUT THIS WITCH..?????

IF WE THE PEOPLE DONT DO SOMETHING TO CHANGE WASHINGTON NOW , THEY WILL SELL THE REST OF AMERICA DOWN THE ROAD..

CANT YOU ALL SEE THIS?????????????????????

David in Shirley, go away. Just plain go away.

KB, Obama’s a symbolic movement. People are tired of Bush, and they know they want one thing — not Bush. Obama’s wholly aware of that, which is why he’s running on a platform that is pretty much “I’ll win because I say so, and then we’ll change things.” That resonates right now because this country is just so darn tired of Bush.

One of the hardest things to do is to break a fanatic movement like Obama has managed to become a symbol for. Clinton is having a hard time despite, in almost every single way, being a superior candidate. Why? Obama’s a symbol. We Americans LOVE symbols.

The real question is — for how long? It took a couple years for George W. Bush to come down from the symbol status. He was the symbol of us at the time.

One thing is always clear, though. When you accept a symbol, eventually you will become jaded by that symbol. It will do something and not live up to the expectation. After a while, you begin to dislike that symbol, and eventually it turns to hate. Look at some of those most fanatic against Christianity — a symbol of hope for many, but of something worse for many as well.

Obama’s challenge, right now, is keeping the illusion going. Keep the people chanting, and hope no one sees that the symbol is held on the wall with a stick of chewed gum.

Jay;
Continued

To stop the special interest groups and big business from dictating policy to benefit them and their bottom lines To hold government accountable for their actions and disclose those members who insist on dropping earmarks into bills and raising our spending and to have those members exposed to the American people so they can see what is more important to them. We have way to many government programs now and continue to add to them and a lot of those programs serve no purpose or for what they were intended for. We spend way too much time arguing over getting things done in place of actually getting them done. One program that comes to mind is the one to put 100,000 cops on the streets to combat crime and drugs and yet what do we have to show for it. Drugs continue to come into this country on a regular basis and we can’t stop it, but no one seems to do anything about it other then to turn a blind eye. As long as nobody complains about anything we just stay the course as if nothing is wrong. We need to put more emphasis on what is working and what isn’t and do away with it but no one seems to want to make that decision because of what flack they might receive. We have put ourselves into this situation and continue to not address what is really wrong as long as things keep going the same old way. All I hear from the other candidates is how we are going to try another approach to the same old failed policies and ideas.

Jim, come on now. You really think Obama is going to be able, despite the entire Congress, to completely eliminate all special interests? That would include, note you, the NRA, NAACP, and the black caucus.

Earmarks will always exist because there needs to be funding for programs.

Barack Obama is listed as the #1 liberal — he’s not cutting any programs. He’s going to expand many of the domestic programs.

Have you been on the streets? I have. I’ve seen meth houses shut down. I’ve personally witnessed a house drive down property values because it was not shut down until it was too late. Just because you don’t see benefit, doesn’t mean there’s none. Drugs will always come in, but it’s not a waste.

Through that whole rant, though Jim…not one Obama plan. Not one true, pragmatic plan. I read a bunch of rhetoric, and vague ideas that something needs to be done…but where’s the beef?

I can rant on the things that need fixing too, that doesn’t mean that any candidate will do a thing about them. Obama certainly won’t do a lot that you have said he will. He simply cannot logistically. He cannot get the votes to remove all lobbies, and he certainly cannot get the votes to completely destroy earmarks.

Jay;
And who will benefit from having more Democrats in congress? That is exactly the point I am making. How does having a larger majority benefit most when it will only benefit those who have the same beliefs? There is more to this country than Democrats and Republicans and the sooner we realize this nothing will change and people will feel slighted. What is needed is common ground for all party lines and those who are not part of either party. You make it sound as though Democrats are the only ones who can make decisions for all of America and that’s exactly why we need to change our ways of thinking. Everyone wants to see how they can be better then everyone else in place of how we can be equals.

Jim, then we’re discussing two different points. I am discussing Obama as a candidate, not Democrats as a whole.

Personally, I leave the vote there up to the states. I would rather have a much more moderate, but not one-party system.

I don’t presume to know who would benefit from Democrats in Congress, but I don’t know who would be hurt either. That’s a decision left to the various states, but I would personally like to see a centrist Congress. These extremes that are represented by Obama, Romney, and Huckabee are tiring. Even Clinton is more centrist than these three.

That is why I’m pulling for Clinton or McCain, both are much more centrist in their views than people would like to admit. I want a president who isn’t so far left or right that they have few people near them.

Hey David,
Enough of your trashy mudslinging please! It’s the day after the election and we already voted. You can take a break now. Stop the obscene name calling. Also if you choose to reply, please turn off your CAP lock. You don’t have to shout to be heard and we already know that you are angry that the majority of us don’t agree with you. bye bye

David does need to just chill out a bit. I think he’s obsessed.

I still have to vote, I’m in Washington State. I think this is the first year we had a primary that actually mattered! Very exciting.

Jay;
And unless we as people stand up to make changes to congress and eliminate those who don’t want to follow the rules then we will not make change, but we need to start somewhere and this is just the start.
Now taking Hillary’s approach to how she is going to get things done is no different then his, right now those are just words and ideas until they are implemented. Unproven strategy doesn’t equal results. Just as you and I could sit here and make promises and outline our plans on issues, does that mean that they will work? No one person’s plans are thought up alone or carried out by a single person. The people you have around you are just as important as the person making speeches. Yet no one seems to want to give him a chance or are they afraid that he will succeed and prove those skeptics wrong?
I have yet to find a single person who has all of the qualifications or back round to run the government by themselves.

KB, it’s exciting isn’t it? I was so happy that Arkansas had a voice this year. Usually we are skipped over, but we actually got a minute or two when Clinton and Huckabee won. It was absolutely awesome to hear CNN say that Arkansas was influential in anything.

Jim, no one can run our country by themselves, but it takes much more than vague visions that you will dictate to everyone. Hillary will do that too, she’ll dictate visions and people will follow. That is not special. The presidency is about what you will bring that is special, and that is Hillary’s planning. She’s clearly great at planning, no matter the outcome. I do not, nor will I ever, consider passage of something to be the only thing to matter. I am not that one-dimensional.

Hillary Clinton has the best plans that match up with what I want to see. Obama has nothing that he’s presented to me. Getting out of Iraq is vital, but Hillary’s plan is more careful and more full. Health care is important, but Hillary goes further and at least attempts to aim large. Education is important, but Hillary wants to try to target all races in all areas.

Obama simply says he wants change. Well, Bush is leaving office. That’s a ton of change.

Can she run the government on her own? No. However, she will stand for my views. When I ask Obama fans why they support him, though, I don’t hear that. I simply hear “He’ll change things.”

I think a lot of people want to give him a chance, just look at the chanting masses. Look at how well he’s done in this race.

I’m not afraid he will succeed, I just am not sure he can deliver the change he’s promised. If he is elected and he does succeed, I will think its great. I just don’t think what he’s promising everyone is realistic. He tells people what they want to hear and has a very talented speech writer.

If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

Jay;
Though I have truly enjoyed this debate my only point is that people should look at doing things differently and at least be willing to try. Now I am not saying who to vote for or that I support either candidate, I just want people to have a much broader vision and vote with what they believe.
Unfortunately I live In Maryland and I am an Independent and not allowed to vote in primaries. Yes I could register as a democrat or Republican but I choose to remain neutral because I have beliefs that both parties offer and just wish that they could come to together and do what’s right for us.
Now having said that I must leave now and get ready for work so I will say goodnight and wish you well.

KB, I’m not afraid he’ll win, and I hope he can deliver. I just don’t think he can, in any way. It’s too abstract. It’s a nebulous thing to promise, and it’ll be impossible to deliver for all people. Change is different for every one of us. Change for me is free education, but change for another person may simply be to eat. Change isn’t singular in meaning.

I, however, am absolutely turned off by the chanting crowds and disturbing supporters that all repeat the same lines. Some of them go and copy his speeches to boards. It reminds me of the support of George W. Bush. They may be excited, and that’s great, but I cannot help but think “This is the presidency, not American Idol.”

Jim, I’m sorry you cannot vote. I truly am, regardless of your choice. I know, as an Independent in Arkansas, that they allowed me to choose my ballot. Maybe you should see if they would allow that.

I appreciate, however, your attempts to broaden understanding. It’s something to be absolutely celebrated, regardless of candidate, affiliation, or belief. We need more voters that will consider things as in-depthly as you clearly have.

And much like you, I have beliefs that cross both parties. I think that’s what makes us unique in this race — we don’t have to paste talking points to have a discussion.

Good luck, and thank you for the discussion. I, too, appreciated it.

I couldn’t agree more, Jay. What turned me off was the way people seemed hypnotized by him. I too, am for Hillary. She simply seems more practical to me. I’ve watched her for many years and I’m impressed with the way she just keeps right on fighting for people, despite all the bad press.

Keep on posting, I’ve been reading your posts for days now and I enjoy them.

Thank you, KB. In other news, apparently Obama’s released a new memo unintentionally. This one projects delegates, and it is most likely the best senerio:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/ahvrn9haldqg

It states: By the time the last primary is held June 7, Obama’s advisers project he will have 1,806 delegates to 1,789 for New York Senator Hillary Clinton, according to a document outlining the scenario that was inadvertently attached to a release on delegate counts from yesterday’s Super Tuesday primaries.

The interesting part, for me, is how they can forecast this. Though they may have many internal numbers, it would be nearly impossible to come up with such a specific number. It’ll be interesting to see the end result.

Also telling is that he doesn’t really predict a decisive win. Florida and Michigan are excluded, as well. So Obama’s camp seems to be setting up for an end in which no one wins.

I’m sure the Obama camp is working hard to pump up it’s volunteers. They really expected to walk away with it all last night.

I have no idea how they could forecast delegates not yet voted on, very interesting indeed.

I have a feeling that the voters of Florida and Michigan will have their delegates counted one way or another by the end of this.

Well, the DNC is already attempting a caucus. That, however, would favor Obama. He does extremely well in caucuses as they are held at night, one time vote. Clinton’s supporters are working class, usually with children.

A new primary will favor Clinton, she does extremely well in large primaries and large votes in general.

I really think the best way to do this is to split Michigan Undecided for Obama/Edwards, and half those delegates. Then, in Florida, fraction 1/4th to a half off and award them according to vote. Everyone gets their delegates, the original vote is honored, the states don’t spend MORE money on voting, and Democrats get to have their cake and eat it too. They punish the states, and recognize their vote.

The only people who will be mad are probably already faking outrage at the “broken rule”.

Of course Senator Obama will attempt to avoid any debates with Senator Clinton because his lack of substance and experience will become glaringly evident. He understands that he can lead his followers to believe whatever he says without question, which is why he prefers to meet with them on the ground. They, as well as the media, follow him around like love-sick teenagers. If we Republicans are going to lose the White House this year, I’d like to know that somebody who has some experience will be leading our country.

KB and Jay,
Thank you for your intelligent observations. I have enjoyed reading (and agree with all) of your comments.
Hillary and McCain are definitely two candidates who are willing to work across party lines and actually *accomplish* something, unlike the current Congress which seems to be paralyzed. Heaven forbid either party give in to the other! I honestly believe they forget they’re supposed to be working “for the people.”
I’m tired of listening to the bickering and would love to have a truly “United” States.

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA is a PHONY!!!

Does Barack Obama have a problem with a debate with Hillary Clinton on FOX NEWS?

Wonder why…………………..could it be that he has nothing to say….lack of experience……ONLY PRESENT.

Sooner or later…..the Rezko matter will present itself. Maybe, Obama will speak soon or later.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If the debate develops I am going to watch it.

VOTE - HILLARY CLINTON - “MY AMERICAN MAMA” - PRESIDENT!!!!
America’s True Presidential Leader - President!!!!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

YOU GO GIRL……DO IT FOR AMERICA!!!
YOU GO GIRL……DO IT FOR AMERICA!!!

Voters should educate themselves beyond the pretty speeches, TV commercials and endorsements when selecting the best candidate. Mr. Obama’s hands are already dirty from his South-side of Chicago political and business deals with Tony Rezko and other supporters. It is a shame, Mr Rezko’s trial will not start until the primary elections are over. Senator Obama has known this man for l5 years and had so many favors and contributions from him, some sources stated over $l68,000 from him. And thanks to Mr. Rezko, the Obama’s can live in a mansion they could not have afforded othrwise. WAKE UP, VOTERS.

I know that Obama said the republicans have a “dump truck load” of dirt for Hillary. That doesn’t concern me at all, her dirt seems to be right out in the open for us by now. I think he might want to worry about his own dirt. He won’t be able to hide it forever. We know about Rezko and we know about his past drug use, both of which the republican candidate will crucify him for. But what about what we don’t know? I’m sure it will come to light.

Obama never been tested or was under the microscope. Hillary was . He could have lots of hidden baggages which are yet to be discovered such as Rezkos and more. The largest most influential Islamic weathy organizations are all situated in Chicago. No one knows where his fund raising money came from. His speach mimic the style of Martin King, but in reality he is not the man. He is full of talk we do not know if can deliver on what he says. He looks cool because he can hide very well his emotions, but no one really knows what is inside this man.

Uhhhhhm, Norma Hsu?

Some of you must not be doing the necessary readings required to make informative decisions. Is there any candidate more dirty and more corrupt than Hillary? lol, you must be kidding me. Do you not know Hillary campaign is also involved with Rezko?

Have you seen this : foxnews.com/story/0,2933,305485,00.html and let’s not forget this : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aEPIGL0_pg

You don’t want this fight.

And by the way here are the Clintons and Rezko…:
redstate.com/stories/elections/2008/hillarys_rezko_humiliation_photo

Please check your facts and don’t look silly.

Franklin, do you have proof of involvement between Clinton and Rezko other than one photo? No. Because they only have one photo together. Be realistic. As for Hsu, he was busted on something unrelated to Clinton. He gave money to Clinton, but that is the extent of the relationship as it’s known so far.

I realize you want to champion Obama, but be realistic. This campaign has been nothing but over-inflated non-issues by both sides. The fact that you pretend one picture makes Clinton a Rezko friend makes you look silly.

Jay,

The worst thing that ever happen to politicians is information technology.
Now because you seem to know how to use the web, I assume you will do this search yourself: Clinton+Rezko
And do you know who heads Hillary Clinton’s campaign in California? If you don’t, then….

and what do you say to this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aEPIGL0_pg

Look, there is no doubt Hillary could be president. Barack Obama is just cleaner with lesser baggage. Now, if you want to make it about issues, we can. But make sure you check your facts so you do not look silly once again.

I say that you didn’t answer my question. Also, please show me the guilty verdict in the referenced youtube video clip. If you show me the guilty verdict, I will gladly condemn her.

The only one looking silly here is the person who constantly references scandals that haven’t resulted in a guilty verdict. You present nothing but dirty laundry, just like those who accuse Obama of corruption due to Rezko.

You’re no better than they are.

Look

My post was a reply to the Hilary supporter who mentioned Rezko with Obama not knowing the Clintons were involved with him and her current campaign manager in CA is also involved with Rezko. I was just informing the uninformed. I am not in the business of dirt and gotcha kinda tricks…Again if anyone wants to make it about issues, lets go. But I stress check your facts before making a statement otherwise you will look silly.

Tell us why we should vote Hilary and we’ll tell you why Obama is a better choice. I believe we can keep it civil.

Dont we all remember when former pres. Bill Clinton was attacked daily for smoking a joint in college. Let’s be realistic here, the republicans are being quiet now but i firmly believe that they are praying for Obama to get the democratic nomination. They feel confident that they will be able to crucify him with whatever skeletons he has hiding in his closet. Which in turn could tear him away from the upper middle class where i might remind you he gets most of his support. Though all the media conglomerates are touting about the ” youth vote ” it only accounts for 12 - 14 percent on both sides of this race,, ,,, thats right,,, alot of the youth is voting republican too.

Do you know what happens if you declare a variable without initializing it and then try to access it? You get a compiler error.

The Clintons, Foxnews, and and the other opposing organizations did their investigations, but returned clean.

I know it hurts when you can’t hold him down something dirty. Yes, Barack Obama is clean. No, he is not your typical politician , and this is what resonates with the people.

See, you’re looking for dirt, instead of investigation the position on issues.

Here is the code:

private string InvestigateObama (string subject)
{
string result;
if (subject.ToString() == “Corrupt”)
result = “Corrupt”;
else result = “Clean”;
return result;
} //end method InvestigateObama

This is the method. and when they add the Main and execute the code, the following happens.

Output: Clean
press any key to continue…

Franklin, ironic, that you chastise someone looking for dirt when you are looking for any sleaze on Clinton.

LOOK WHAT THE NEW YORK TIMES HAD TO SAY ABOUT MIKE THIS MORNING!!!!!!!!!!!!

Operating on a shoestring budget, Mr. Huckabee has spent far less lining up his 156 delegates than any other candidate, Democratic or Republican, when measured by cost per delegate.

The calculation is based on end-of-year figures and does not take into account fund-raising in 2008 or the spending since the nominating process began in Iowa on Jan. 3.

By those figures, Mr. Huckabee, a former Arkansas governor, ran the most frugal campaign, spending $$45,000 a delegate, according to The New York Times delegate count. That was far less than the $654,000 a delegate spent by Mitt Romney.

“It’s clear that Mr. Romney’s money can’t buy him love,” said Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan group that collects and analyzes campaign finance data. “He’s spent so much more than Huckabee, yet Huckabee got a lot more bang for his buck.”

Federal records show that Mr. Romney, a Harvard Business School graduate who has made his business skills a campaign centerpiece, spent $87 million in 2007 and ended Feb. 5 with 133 delegates. By comparison, Senator John McCain of Arizona, leading in delegates with 683, spent $39 million, or $57,000 a delegate.

Mr. McCain and Mr. Huckabee’s campaigns defy the conventional wisdom that says it takes money — a lot of it — for a candidate to get out his message. While the presidential hopefuls are on track to raise $1 billion — and spend it — Mr. McCain and Mr. Huckabee made the most of “free media,” taking virtually every opportunity to participate in televised debates, appear on late-night talk shows and turn up regularly on cable news programs.

“They say that the most dangerous place to be is between Huckabee and a cable news show,” said Scott Reed, a Republican strategist. “He went on every free outlet to get his message out. He was living off cable television. And he did exceptionally well in each of the 15 Republican debates.”

Mr. McCain, who was down to his last $1 million in late 2007 and took out a $3 million bank loan, ended up spending $8.5 million to date on television commercials. Mr. Huckabee spent $3 million on television commercials, according to CMAG, a firm that tracks political spending.

By contrast, Mr. Romney spent $30 million on a nationwide television blitz, representing half the spending by all Republican candidates combined. To help support this spending, Mr. Romney also lent his campaign $35 million, or $263,000 a delegate.

Representative Ron Paul, Republican of Texas, also spent heavily, with little return, $20 million with an estimated five delegates, or $4 million a delegate.

Former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani of New York, who spent $48 million, did not line up a single delegate.

On the Democratic side, the neck-and-neck race between Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama continues in the financial arena. Mrs. Clinton, of New York, has spent nearly $90,000 for each of the 892 delegates she has lined up. Mr. Obama, of Illinois, spent $119,000 for each of his 716 .

At the end of 2007, Mrs. Clinton had $37 million in cash, with $18.5 million for the primary and the remaining $19 million earmarked for the general election. Mr. Obama had $18.6 million on hand, of which $13.5 million could be used for the primary race and the remaining $5 million for the general election.

More Articles in National »

THERE-IN LIES THE RUBE.

ALL THINGS CHANGE, SOME BETTER, SOME WORSE. BUT CHANGE THEY DO.
TIME MARCHES ON, YOU CAN’T GO HOME AGAIN.
IT WOULDN’T BE THE SAME EVEN IF YOU COULD TURN BACK THE CLOCK.
WE, YOU AND I HAVE CHANGED TOO. EVERY DAY, EVERY HOUR, IN EVERY WAY.
ENTROPY AND AGE STILLS THE UNIVERSE. EXPANDING AND OR CONTRACTING, GALAXIES
WILL COLLIDE AND NEW STARS ARE BORN EVERY EPOCH.

WHAT IS THE POINT A HUNDRED YEARS FROM NOW? OR 4 YEARS, FOR THAT MATTER?

WHAT ABOUT LIFE, LIBERTY AND PERSUITE OF HAPPINESS? ARE WE ALL REALLY EQUAL?
OR ONLY SOME MORE THAN OTHERS? EXPENDABLE CHILDREN, AT WILL, BECAUSE THERE IS A RISK TO THE MOTHERS LIFE? IS THE REASON THEY NOW KILL AT WILL? THIS MAKES THEM HAPPY?
IS THIS, THE CONSTITUTION AS IT WAS INTENDED?

WHO ARE THE GUARDIANS OF THE TRUTH? IS JUSTICE A FACTOR IN OUR EVERY DECISION?
WHO ARE THOSE, RESPONSIBLE TO TAKE THE TORCH OF LIBERTY AND PASS IT ON?

THOSE WE ELECT TO REPRESENT US DO NOT. THE SPECIAL INTEREST AND SECULAR PROGRESSIVES
AND PC LIBERALS HAVE INDOCTRINATED, REALLY BRAINWASHED THE PEOPLE IN OUR SCHOOLS FROM:
THE COMMUNIST NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF BERKLEY SINCE THE 60’S. NOW THEY WANT TO RETURN TO:
THE WHITE HOUSE FOR MORE OF THE SAME CONDUCT, THEY SHOW IN CONGRESS?
WITH MALICE AFORETHOUGHT AND CONTEMPT FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, THEIR CONCERNS AND THEIR WILL?

WHY ISN’T LIFE FAIR? CAN’T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG?
ARE THERE, TOO MANY QUESTIONS? THERE ARE, NOT ENOUGH ANSWERS?

THAT IS BECAUSE THER IS NO ONE HOLDING THEM ACCOUNTABLE.
WITH THE WORLD, OUR BORDERS AND
THE SECURITY OF THIS NATION AT STAKE, IT IS PAST TIME TO DO SO.

IT ISN’T ABOUT WHICH PARTY ANYMORE, IT IS ABOUT THE SURVIVAL OF THE REPUBLIC.
IE:
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, OR WE CAN JUST CONCEED AND LET THE ILLEGAL ALIEN’S
DRUG LORDS AND WHATEVER TERRORIST ORGINAZATION FREE PASSAGE AND ACCESS TO THE COUNTRY.
THEN HAND EVERYTHING OVER TO THE RECONQUISTADORES MOVEMENT, LET CALIFORNIA GET BACK TO MEXICO, AND THE JUANTA CAN BE COMPLETE FOR THE WHITE HOUSE TOO. VIVA! PONCHO VIA! AND VIVA! SANTA ANNA AND FORGET THE ALAMO!
IT OBVIOUSLY, WAS ALL A MISTAKE WHILE WE REWRITE HISTORY!

WHOMEVER YOU VOTE FOR, IT IS MY BEST GUESS, IT WON’T BE THE ONE FOR YOU THAT GETS ELECTED.
THE MEDIA HAVE ALREADY SEWN UP THIS WITH THEIR CHOICE, NOT OURS. THANK YOU RUPERT MURDOCH, GEORGE SOROS, AND MOVE-ON.ORG! DON’T FOR GET MARK RICH AND THE HOLLOWOOD ENTERTAINERS AND CELB’S FOR THIER “OPRA” IEDA, ARIA AND OPERA, TOO. SIT BACK ON YOUR COUCH AND WATCH REALITY TV!

SICK AND TIRED? THEN MAKE YOUR VOICE LOUD AND YOUR VOTE COUNT. WHILE YOU ARE AT IT CALL AND WRITE YOUR STATE REPRESENTATIVE AND CONGRESS MAN OR WOMAN, AND TELL THEM TOO!

END TRANS: MARV!

If some of you can just pay attention, When she out of money she thinks that obama should have time to debate with her. Every person doesn’t have a TV to watch these kind of debates. Obama is better off talking to the people himself. Clinton if you are trying to suppress obama because you don’t have money to compaign. you should have stayed home instead of entering the race.

Obama is a dog alright!!

Obama has three years in the Senate and his word. THATS IT! Its amazing how dumb down america has gotten. The defense for obama is he says he will be good and help us and people believe it no questions asked. Or at least hard questions. How the heck do we know for sure. His connections to to many sleazy people are starting to make the rounds in the internet world. MSM is still hiding it for one not to be called racist and two as backlash to Clinton. But facts are facts and any hint to his supporters that he is dirty or associated with dirt they can’t deny but sling back mud on other candidates. How can Obama the second coming to christ be a typical sleazy politican? geez wake up america.

The not denying these people by Obama himself is making him guilty by association. His campaign is going to keep a low profile on this so not to rock the boat until they think they come close to the nomination. Just research a little on Tony Rezko/Obama connection. By the way Rezko is going to trial Feb 26. Unfortunately for obama this will hit newspapers pretty often over the next few months. Whats is his kenyan connection? What about the group (Jeremiah Wright) he pledged allegence too?

What he is running on is his character not experience. He knows he doesn’t have the years in. So what about his character? We need to know all the facts not a watered down version his campiagn is spinning. What about his statement he has good judgment, yeah judgement to have friends getting arrested. If he can’t pick good friends how can he judge if Iran is bluffing or sincere.

What about Iran? he is willing to meet and talk with Iran. Well first you can’t charm your way into negotiations. You need leverage when talking with Iran. Right now we have leverage because we are in iraq and Iran is stalling on their end with nuclear talks. If we leave Iraq iran has the advantage and leverage. His lack of judgment and experience again shines.

Its funny Huckabee will never win but I bet if you check his past he doesn’t hang out with sleazy friends.

Obama is very rude, corrupt, shameless person. He is a divider rather than uniter .

He has been playing race card(Now he got he wanted, almost all African-Americans vote for him in every state), and playing games of JFK, MLK, Regan, now Ted Kennedy..

What next? Bush? YES.

Indeed He is another inexperienced, divisive BUSH, we American should block the his way to White House!

Talk about dividing. Check out his spiritual pastor.

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/a-message-of-hate-from-obamas-pastor-via-youtube