Instead of going on the attack early, Obama and Edwards sent their wives out to fight for them early. When that didn't work, they started sending out E-mails and such from the staff to attack Clinton.  Now that didn't work either and both of them are falling further and further behind, despite all the crowds and money flowing in.

If you two idiots hadn't sat on your hands and let Hillary dictate the race early, this might be a fight to the end.  Instead you two let her go ahead and stay ahead.  Anybody who donates money to your campaigns from here on should be considered morons.  I think we already have our battle set; Hillary V Rudy.

The only stagnant one is Hillary.  Another example of Hillary's rhetoric not matching her record.  Another example of the Clinton campaign's arrogance in thinking they've got the nomination sewn up...so they start running a general election campaign.  Clearly, she knows that she messed up on her vote and now she's trying to spin the story.  Despite what Hillary's corporate friends tell her...this race is far from over.

Politics of hope does not mean that one cannot question Hillary's policy positions.  Whenever, Hillary displays poor judgment, and is called out on it- she resorts to playing the "politics of hope" card.
Hillary...how about playing the "telling-the-truth card" for a change?

This is stupid. For clarification on the Iran vote issue and Obama please read:

From:

http://thinkonthesethings.wordpress.com/2007/10/11/did-obama-skip-the-iran-vote/

1. The dictionary defines “skip” as “to avoid attendance at.”
This is a question of motives. Just because he was absent, it doesn’t mean that he avoided attending it. Liberal bloggers need to come up with some proof that he avoided voting if they are going to throw around this argument.
The congressional record clearly states that senators were informed that the Kyl-Lieberman amendment would not be coming up for a vote in the near future.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. REID. Mr. Chairman, there will be no more votes tonight. We have tried to work something out on the Kyl-Lieberman amendment and the Biden amendment. We have been unable to do that.
We have been very close a few times, but we have just been informed that Senator Biden will not have a vote anytime in the near future. There will not be a vote on the other one anytime in the near future. We hope tonight will bring more clearness on the issue.
But right now, I think it is fair to say there will be no votes tonight.
Does the Senator from South Dakota have any comments?
Mr. THUNE. No, I do not. I would say to the leader, that is good for our Members to know. We have Members who have been inquiring whether they will be able to vote.
2. Barack Obama took a position on the issue.
Now, if Obama had missed the vote and not taken a position on the issue, then I’d see where you can go after him. However, I don’t quite understand the logic of attacking him when he took a position on it!
3. Many other progressive leaders plus Chuck Hagel and Dick Lugar voted against the Iran bill.
If the bill was not as potentially harmful as Hillary and her blogger friends are implying then why did the following people also oppose it?
Chuck Hagel, Jim Webb, Tom Harkin, John Kerry, Joe Biden, Barbara Boxer, Sherrod Brown, Robert Byrd, Christopher Dodd, Russ Feingold, Ted Kennedy, Richard Lugar, Claire McCaskill, Jon Tester, Patrick Leahy, John Edwards, Bill Richardson, and Mike Gravel.
Jim Webb said:
“At worst, it could be read as a backdoor method of gaining Congressional validation for military action, without one hearing and without serious debate.”
Chris Dodd said:
“I cannot support the Kyl-Lieberman amendment on Iran. To do so could give this President a green light to act recklessly and endanger US national security. We learned in the run up to the Iraq war that seemingly nonbinding language passed by this Senate can have profound consequences.”
4. Barack Obama missing the Petraeus-Moveon vote is not the same as this.
Taylor Marsh tries to link the Iran vote to Obama also missing the Petraeus-Moveon vote. They aren’t the same. Obama missed the Moveon vote and called it a distraction. He didn’t take a position on it (and said in campaign speeches that he chose not to vote on it) because he thought the whole point of the vote was ridiculous, as it was. Let’s face it progressives, Moveon did more harm than good with that ad.
The Iran vote though is a vote he missed, but took a position on. That’s a big difference.
I think some people need to think through their logic. If Obama were afraid that Republicans would blast him for voting a particular way on the amendment and that’s why he missed it, then why would he take a position? They still get what they want, his position on it, which they still can use against him. As long as they have your position on it and how you would have voted, then politically you’re in the same place.
5. The vote wasn’t even close.
Obama’s missed vote from not being able to get back for the vote that was moved up, was not a tiebreaker at all.
6. Taylor Marsh misuses Obama’s co-sponsorship of the Counter-Proliferation Act of 2007.
The Counter-Proliferation Act of 2007 that Obama voted for had language that specifically stated:
Nothing in this Act shall be construed as authorizing the use of force or the use of the United States Armed Forces against Iran.
This act was about economic sanctions rather than military action, something that Obama has long advocated. It specifically checks any potential use to go to war. It also does not connect Iran with Iraq as does the Kyl-Lieberman bill.
7. Clinton’s Co-Sponsorship of the Webb Bill Came After She Took Heat From The Preceding Kyl-Lieberman Vote
Clinton is using in her defense of the Kyl-Lieberman amendment vote that she co-sponsored the Jim Webb bill. However, let’s not get the chronology twisted. She became a co-sponsor of the Jim Webb bill after she took heat for her Kyl-Lieberman vote.
8. Having Iran as “His Issue”
Marsh wonders– if preventing an Iran war was so important to Obama, why didn’t he show up and have it as “his issue”? This is even more interesting because before this Kyl-Lieberman vote, Barack Obama was already out there talking about the need for economic sanctions and diplomacy, not military action, and Crooks and Liars went after him! You can’t have it both ways. He has made numerous statements before the vote about this issue. See:
• 9/12/07: Obama to Bush: You Don’t Have Our Authorization for War with Iran

• 8/30/07: Barack Obama Editorial: Hit Iran Where It Hurts
• 8/29/07: Alabama Senator Blocking Obama’s Iran Divestment Bill
• 7/31/07: Obama Urges Swift Passage of Iran Divestment Bill
• 5/17/07: Barack Obama Introduces Iran Divestment Bill
Therefore, Obama is not a Johnny-come-lately on this issue. He has the right to speak out about it since he has been a public voice on it prior to the Kyl-Lieberman vote in late September.
9. Priorities?
The interesting thing to me is that some bloggers are more concerned about a candidate who couldn’t get back in time for a vote, but took a clear position on it rather than with the possibility that Clinton’s vote could potentially be used by Bush to take us into war with Iran.

....here comes Van with some "poll" numbers.  Hillary's supporters must really like her if their willing to lie for her!

A blogger wrote...

Mrs. Clinton, whatever happened to the “Politics of Hope?”.
There you go again, trying to blame other people for your votes. First it was that George Bush ‘fooled’ you into voting “YES” on the Iraq War. Now, you are blaming Obama for not being there to vote on the Kyl/Lieberman amendment (so you could follow his lead once again like on the war funding vote).... But, once again, you voted “YES” on that bill, that everyone, including Sen. Jim Webb, says that it was giving Bush a ‘green light’ to bomb Iran. You could have voted ‘No’.

Hillary, it’s all about your BAD judgment. Just like when you voted ‘NO’ on the Levin amendment, that could have prevented Bush from invading Iraq.
You NEVER explained that vote either..Let’s face it, if George Bush bombs Iran, you are ‘TOAST.’

It’s all about judgment, not about blame.

I agree...it seems when you have to make a decision on your own, its always wrong.  As President who should we expect to "Make" your decisions for you?

Senator Clinton continues to tout insignificant popularity polls as a sign of strength in a campaign that is more about the triangulation and divisiveness of the past than the future of America.

While Senator Clinton may be popular among Democrats, her astronomically high negatives nationwide, due in part to her huge 'baggage' and the kind of politics she's been associated with since the 90s, is a significant electability concern for Democrats who badly want to win in 2008.

Every time Americans think about the casualties of the Iraq war and the heavy price America is paying, they should remember that Senator Clinton wholeheartedly gave George Bush the authority to wage that war. The Iraq war is Hillary Clinton's war too. She can try to hide from it, but she can't run away from it.

For those of you who keep harping on why he wasn't there  ( I know you could go to the congressional record on your own...if you chose)  But you would rather continue with the only "talking point" the Hillary campaign gave you..

• First, let us dispense with yet another Clinton fallacy, i.e. the erroneous assertion that Obama was ducking the vote on Lieberman-Kyl. The official transcript is below (can’t seem to get a link to work, but search for it at http://thomas.loc/gov):

• The congressional record clearly states that senators were informed that the Kyl-Lieberman amendment would not be coming up for a vote in the near future.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. REID. Mr. Chairman, there will be no more votes tonight. We have tried to work something out on the Kyl-Lieberman amendment and the Biden amendment. We have been unable to do that.
We have been very close a few times, but we have just been informed that Senator Biden will not have a vote anytime in the near future. There will not be a vote on the other one anytime in the near future. We hope tonight will bring more clearness on the issue.
But right now, I think it is fair to say there will be no votes tonight.
Does the Senator from South Dakota have any comments?
Mr. THUNE. No, I do not. I would say to the leader, that is good for our Members to know. We have Members who have been inquiring whether they will be able to vote.

obama and clinton both are owned by the corporate war machine,it is a fact, vote for edwards not business as usual

My wife and I sat 6 (me) and 5 (her) seats away from the Clintons at her 60th B-Day bash! We were in the 10th row and they were in the 7th row. My wife gave Hillary a birthday card that said, "Best Birthday ever, Best Year Ever", to which we added, "best campaign ever, best inauguration ever!" and, "here's a little something for the campaign", with a dollar bill in the card. I am sure some will want to contact the FEC about this contribution...

Crystal was hilarious, ribbing Bush and Rudy, calling Clinton 60th birthday parties and "annual event". He said that Bill had a dozen parties last year for his sixtieth, so now he's "technically 72 years old."

The Wallflowers were terrific, Jakob Dylan intimating that, "This isn't out typical audience." Elvis Costello did an acoustic set and finished up BACKED by the Wallflowers. More later.



Van

Lyn and Crystal... the Senate was in session, why wasn't he there? Its okay for him to skip work if he's out raisng money?

And why doesn't he support the amendment by Sens Webb and Clinton that would stop bush from attacking?

hey, how would obama feel if edwards had a racist speak but then also had a non-racist speak?

it's the same thing that obama's doing to gays!

By now we all know what Mrs Clinton is capable of. She doesn't like to admit mistake and she like to blame other people for her flaw.

Another Clinton is not good for America. What is good for CLinton is not good for America. They will try to blur the line whenever they are wrong. That is what they do best. She is so dishonest about her vote.

When it comes to Clinton, she is as good as George Bush. See, Bush-Chenney lyte is what i am afraid of.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0icVblxh2dI&NR=1

Jessica,

You are right in the money. Bush war = Clinton war. We've not forgotten, she voted for the war. Democrats have turn George Bush to a punching bag - most especially Senator Clinton.

After looking at every foreign policy in the last 5 yrs, i realized Hillary is totally equivalent to George Bush. There is no difference. She is the new-neo con of the democratic party. Bush-Chenney Lyte.

She voted for the war in Iraq and now Iran. She cannot be trusted

Bee, Obama has the highest missed votes in the senate (democrats).

Maybe he should concentrate on the job he has, instead of the job he isn't qualified for.

Here is an interesting link on "war with Iran". Check out the PBS documentary. Please, take time to watch the whole thing, if you truly care about this country.  This documentary will give you a better overview of the region.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/showdown/etc/synopsis.html

If you think Kyl-Liberman amendement is not for real. Think again. This documentary shows why you can't give George Bush another blank check against Iran. I wonder when Senator Clinton is going to learn.

My wife and I sat 6 (me) and 5 (her) seats away from the Clintons at her 60th B-Day bash! We were in the 10th row and they were in the 7th row.

The 7th ROW???????

Thought this was her birthday party......

I wonder who was in the front row??????

Obama's vote doesn't give HRC the right to vote for another war. Please cut your "talking point" out.

CLinton should be a leader but her vote demonstrate otherwise.

A new low in shallowness has been hit by the Vanster. Counting seats and giving the play by play of the card. Wow! What a shallow dink you are.

Obama has jumped on the pander-wagon full blown. No pun intended. And a 'openly gay minister'?? Sorry bub, but the two don't mix. If God is up there, he has not changed his mind on your sexual choices.

hey, how would obama feel if edwards had a racist speak but then also had a non-racist speak?

it's the same thing that obama's doing to gays!
Trace, Scranton


When a Rev Mayberry who called gays "THIEVES" endorsed Hillary and she "CELEBRATED" the endorsement.  How did you feel?

Used to have respect for hillary , Which is why i reframe from personal attacks on her . But too use Obama's missed vote when she was diffenatly aware off her friend and campain supporter (harry reid ) intenionaly misleading obama during campain season so he would miss the vote , is just too sleazy.

"Lyn and Crystal... the Senate was in session, why wasn't he there? Its okay for him to skip work if he's out raisng money?"

I'm willing to venture a guess that you are the exact type of person that would ask why he wasn't out talking to voters if he were in the Senate everyday.

EVERY presidential candidate has to campaign. Duh. And when you are told one day that the legislation is not going to come up for a vote soon, and yet it does THE NEXT DAY, you blame him for not being there.

I don't want to make any excuses for him. It is not good that he didn't vote. But that shouldn't be a reason that other Senators (Clinton) use to justify their vote.

"...who's typin' a memo 'round here?" - Scene from 'e-mail deliverance'

Lyn and Crystal... the Senate was in session, why wasn't he there? Its okay for him to skip work if he's out raisng money?

And why doesn't he support the amendment by Sens Webb and Clinton that would stop bush from attacking?




Trace, Scranton (Sent Friday, October 26, 2007 9:54 AM)

Same reason that "NONE" of the Senators are there "everyday"...including Hillary...that they are in session ( be careful if you live in a glass house)

Do you know he doesn't support it?

"And a 'openly gay minister'?? Sorry bub, but the two don't mix. If God is up there, he has not changed his mind on your sexual choices."

How dare he believe in God. And not only that, to preach about it to other people! Gasp! What is this world coming to?!? I can just imagine God speaking down to us from above: "Don't listen to him!! He's gay! He's gay! Quick, Georgie, someone ban him from getting married! If he keeps spreading my word about love and peace, I will smote him!!"

It's a non-binding resolution. 75 other senators voted for it, so you're impugning all 75. When it comes to judgment, do you really think that this is an important issue to the electorate? That senator Clinton was one of the vast majority voting for a non-binding resolution is a much an issue as it was binding.
Every day there is some other, "hail-Mary", pass that Obama supporters are SURE will turn the campaign around, but it doesn't. Instead another week goes by and we're another week closer to the primaries.

Still miles behind in the polls, they're,   "insignificant popularity polls", because Clinton is so popular? The willingness to suspend disbelief and deny the objective model of reality that the rest of the world agrees on isn't very realistic and makes it impossible to correct your mistakes and change.

When I have asked Obama supporters how they feel the campaign is going and what they think the Obama campaign has to do to turn things around, they attack Clinton, deny that being so far behind in the polls means anything and allude to a conspiracy involving everything from the MSM to the Senate majority leader as obscuring their truth.

If you folks really think everything is going great and there's nothing to change, thank you, because you should run a campaign like you're behind even when you're way ahead. Running a campaign like you're ahead when you are trailing by the equivalent of your total support (20-22%) and focusing on non-binding resolutions with 10 weeks to the first caucus is like giving your opponent a gift.


Van

The Wallflowers were terrific, Jakob Dylan intimating that, "This isn't out typical audience." Elvis Costello did an acoustic set and finished up BACKED by the Wallflowers. More later.



Van
vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Friday, October 26, 2007 9:51 AM)

VAn...I am happy that you had a good time and that you were seated close to Hillary...but as to the more info later... Thanks, but no thanks

BTW didn't I read from you a couple of weeks ago that this whole B'day bash  (LA & NY)would bring in 3-5 million dollars.  By my count the two only brought in about 2.5 million.  That won't have her out raise Obama by 100% this quarter as you predicted.  Maybe you should have put more than $1 in the card.

Glad you had a good time though

I wonder who was in the front row??????

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Friday, October 26, 2007 10:07 AM)

With The Governors of NY and NJ, both senators from NY, the entire NY congressional delegation and a hundred dignitaries in attendance, there were a couple of security people on the scene.

Crystal told about being at game 2 of the 2001 WS when Bush threw out the first pitch. He called out to Crystal, "BILLY C!, BILLY C!, what'd you think of my fastball?" Crystal: "And I'm thinking, where the hell's Bin Laden?" He said that Bush sounded more the the president of the "Dukes of Hazzard", than the US.
Everyone laughed and laughed...


Van

I must admit Hillary’s ability to have her shills infiltrate the media (TV, print, internet) and control the message has been amazing.  For those of you who wonder why their candidates weren’t getting the coverage, or only bad coverage, and wonder why all these fluff articles on Hillary keep appearing it’s because the Clinton mob has their backers placed in all the top media outlets.  You don’t even to have to look farther than First Read and MSNBC to see that there are a number of the Clinton shills deliberately pushing or hold information in support of Hillary.

jerry --> I wonder who was in the front row??????


What, is this hard to figure out?  All of her Chinese money launders, ehh, donors.  They think Elvis Costello is Elvis Presley.

Hillary did not go on the attack with Obama's missed vote...rather, she's used it as a response to Obama's basless attack against her vote.  Therefore, Obama opened the door on this one.

I feel she showed courage and good judgment on her vote.  After all, the overwhelming majority of the Senate approved it.  Why wouldn't we call the Iranian Guard [whatever they're called] terrorists?  And if anyone thinks that but for this resolution we're not heading for a military confrontation with Iran, you're pretty naive.  It's going to happen one way or another.  Don't get me wrong. I'd much prefer we stay out of Iran.

I think that the Dems are your best bet for giving diplomacy every possible chance.  It seems the Republicans only give that lip service.

And lets talk about judgment. Bush thought Putin would be behing the US on the Iran problem. He must have done some more of that look into my eyes soul searching with his Russian lover.  But, we now know Putin doesn't think Iran poses a threat.

Last thought on this issue.  I think Hillary demonstrated good judgment on voting for the resolution at issue.  It was meant to facilitate diplomacy over war, by providing the basis for US imposed sanctions on top of those from the UN.  It clearly does not give Bush a blank check to go into Iran on his own, whenever he wants.  If I am wrong, then I invite anyone to quote me the resolution provision that gives Bush explicit authority to invade Iran when he wishes.

Oh, and a belated happy birthday to the Future Madam President.

This is really re-arranging deck-chairs day. Clinton voted for it. Obama missed the vote. Obama has a gay problem, well, Clinton was endorsed by a gay-bashing reverend. Tiny issues, marking time towards the primaries.

The question in my mind is why, if Obama is so inspiring, has his support been pretty much stagnant or declining since his entry into the race by every objective measure that we have?
Sure, attack the methods, call them insignificant, but why is there no metric that points to anything other than a DECLINE in Obama's fortunes?

He's lost his fundraising edge, he's dropped below 20% in many of the national polls and trails by more in every state poll than he did this time last month.
Can anyone explain this?

Seriously, can anyone explain this without bashing the polls the Clintons or the dreaded MSM?


Van

Trace, you and other gay americans need to weigh your options here.  Obama is the best thing that gay americans have to helping advance your cause. Now you are willing to throw him overboard because he is making good on his campaign rhetoric to reach out to all sides, even if the point of views differ from his own. Where was your outrage when a minister who raged against gays endorsed the Clinton campaign?  Once again it seems because gays cannot have everything their way, they are willing to shoot themselves in the foot.  Go ahead and research the other candidates records and see if you can find another that has done more for the gay community.

Van if I'm not mistaken the Iraq vote was nonbinding as well, and now we are engaged in a lengthy and costly war with Iraq.

I saw Obama at a rally in Madison on 10/15.  I was pretty close to him.  I couldn't tell you how many seats away I was because there really wasn't any room for chairs.  The room was packed.  But Obama did take time to come over and talk to & hold my son.  It was amazing how comfortable he was with my son.  You can really tell that he love kids.  Now there really weren't any famous people there, but you know what I'll take what I had with Obama over some big huge expensive Hillary fundraiser anyday.  If you'd like to see a video of Obama with my son click the link. (It's near the end of the video).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQv9oUntTf8

Last thought on this issue.  I think Hillary demonstrated good judgment on voting for the resolution at issue.  It was meant to facilitate diplomacy over war, by providing the basis for US imposed sanctions on top of those from the UN.  It clearly does not give Bush a blank check to go into Iran on his own, whenever he wants.  If I am wrong, then I invite anyone to quote me the resolution provision that gives Bush explicit authority to invade Iran when he wishes

Pat...exactly her excuse ater the Iraq war vote.  Same song different country.  It won't be the last word...not by a long shot

BTW if she didn't think it was a problem why is she responding...afterall isn't she inevitable.  The tephlon queen.  Nevermind that Fox poll this week has her dropping in their poll in "One week" by 8% points cutting her lead on Obama in half

"It's a non-binding resolution. 75 other senators voted for it, so you're impugning all 75. When it comes to judgment, do you really think that this is an important issue to the electorate? That senator Clinton was one of the vast majority voting for a non-binding resolution is a much an issue as it was binding."

Yes, Van, we are impugning all 75. I don't give Obama a free pass for missing the vote, but the fact that 74 others besides Clinton voted for it doesn't mean she made the right choice. I don't care if it was non-binding. When dealing with the rouge Bible boy in the White House, you ALWAYS have to err on the side of caution.

Maybe she only read a summary of the legislation, kind of like in 2002 when she only read the summary of the intelligence report. I don't know, but personally, I would rather her not vote than vote for it.

Am i suppose to take seriously words from Clinton's supporter. The answer is No.

Experience without judgement is an empty head. Perhaps, another talking head like George Bush.

Hillary Clinton cannot be trusted.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0icVblxh2dI&NR=1

Anyone who is thinking of voting for Hillary should think for a moment about her pro-war record. She is so afraid of looking “weak on defense” that we’ll be mired in Iraq many more years if she is elected

That’s even leaving aside the question of starting a war with Iran, which she seems perfectly willing to do even though U.S. troops are at or past the breaking point from over-extension already.

Let’s not follow the disastrous Bush Presidency with a disastrous Clinton one. Hillary is just not competent to be President, and wouldn’t even be in the running if people weren’t assuming Bill would be backing her up. There is no evidence that she would listen to him about anything important.

Vote for Edwards, Obama (or, please, Al Gore, run), but not Hillary.

VAn...I am happy that you had a good time and that you were seated close to Hillary...but as to the more info later... Thanks, but no thanks

BTW didn't I read from you a couple of weeks ago that this whole B'day bash  (LA & NY)would bring in 3-5 million dollars.  By my count the two only brought in about 2.5 million.  That won't have her out raise Obama by 100% this quarter as you predicted.  Maybe you should have put more than $1 in the card.

Glad you had a good time though

Lyn, MD (Sent Friday, October 26, 2007 10:35 AM)


Thanks, but if I decide that I want to post a transcript of the whole evening, I will.

Last night brought in 2 1/2 MILLION dollars, today's part at Rob Reiner's will bring more.

Lyn- common sense should tell you that the candidate 20-30 points up in the polls would probably be out raising the others, if not that, being out raised by over SEVEN MILLION last quarter would indicate a trend, and the candidate's name doesn't matter.

Clinton is outraising Obama, and now by a large margin. This isn't some hope, or dream, it's reality.
She'll raise between 30-40 MILLION this quarter and Terry McAuliffe stated that the campaign had raised over NINETY-TWO million as of yesterday. Add that 10 mil she had to begin with and we're over a hundred million dollars.

And forgive me but for all the great Obama fundraising, it hasn't meant squat in his ability to persuade anything beyond his beginning core constituency of about 20% of voters.
She has more funds, but what's more important is that she has more votes.

I had a great time. Those here who demonize Hillary and her family like they are somehow less than human, should have been there to see how absolutely wrong they are, and how many people truly see her as the future of our nation.

Van

am blown away by Clinton’s e-mail. As someone who has been following this race closely, relying on a variety of sources to keep a balanced perspective, it is pretty alarming to see the way she has manipulated facts, created spin, and mislead her own supporters.

There was a time when I was open to her candidacy. Now, the idea makes me cringe. She’s lost my trust. Her leadership is the number one reason we need the new politics of hope.

There is some wonderful discussion in this blog. Take a look at it. A campaign that is stagnant can’t generate support like that! Obama is on the right track. His movement is stronger than ever. This is Obama’s moment.

And Hillary knows it

Hillary totally can NOT be trusted on literally ANY issue that she takes. I sure hope Obama is the Democratic nominee

Two days ago, HRC admitted that she was not the inevitable nominee. Looking at internal polling, she also admitted that Iowa was a steep hill for her. She followed it with a mail-out and now an attack on senator Obama? Guys, her house of Cards is collapsing and she knows it. The only way she can stand is to soil Obama and obscure her records.

Van, other than Chris Matthews I don't know anyone who likes to toot their horn more than you.  I guess it's that Long Island thing.

It's a non-binding resolution. 75 other senators voted for it, so you're impugning all 75. When it comes to judgment, do you really think that this is an important issue to the electorate? That senator Clinton was one of the vast majority voting for a non-binding resolution is a much an issue as it was binding.

Van


Well Van a majority of them were wrong before...some have had the courage and strength of character to admit it.

Posted by Pam:
• If the bill was not as potentially harmful as Hillary and her blogger friends are implying then why did the following people also oppose it?
Chuck Hagel, Jim Webb, Tom Harkin, John Kerry, Joe Biden, Barbara Boxer, Sherrod Brown, Robert Byrd, Christopher Dodd, Russ Feingold, Ted Kennedy, Richard Lugar, Claire McCaskill, Jon Tester, Patrick Leahy, John Edwards, Bill Richardson, and Mike Gravel.
Jim Webb said:
“At worst, it could be read as a backdoor method of gaining Congressional validation for military action, without one hearing and without serious debate.”
Chris Dodd said:
“I cannot support the Kyl-Lieberman amendment on Iran. To do so could give this President a green light to act recklessly and endanger US national security. We learned in the run up to the Iraq war that seemingly nonbinding language passed by this Senate can have profound consequences.”
— Posted by Pam

Well, lyn, if obama is so easily out-manned on missing a vote, imagine what the gop and the world will do to him if he's the nominee or , heaven forbid, the president.

Your version of Obama's missed vote show his inexperience... we already have a president who is lost + floundering, we certainly don't need another.

now, why doesn't Obama support the Webb and Clinton amendment?

Because Clinton is attacthed to it?

The Clintons are incredibly intelligent.  What you consider arrogance by them assuming the nomination is simply brilliant marketing.  In the US perception equals reality.  They realize that if they make it appear that they ARE THE CANDIDATE, they will be the candidate because people will stop supporting the other candidates, jump on their team and continue to gain strength.  It's a smart political move and for one I'm ready for a little intelligence in the white house.  I feel like this country is currently being run by a bunch of mindless drones who look at each issues as:  Can we make money off of this?  Can our friends make money off of this?  If not, it's going to get vetoed!!!  

i.e.  The childrens health bill that would have given 10 million uninsured American children healthcare.  It failed the first time with the republican excuse that it allowed too many adults to enter the program (which states determined for themselves and was not included in the bill) and that illegal immigrants might get benefits (the bill stated that only legal immigrants who had been in country 5 years or more would be eligible) but it gave them an easy out and a reason to gain support from their constituats.  So the bill was re-written with broad republican and democratic support to address those two specific concerns and yet Bush and his core republican cronies have pledged to keep it from passing.  WHY?  Because it would add to the deficit?  NO, it would be paid for with a .61 cent cigarette tax (which aligns with a priority of better health as increased cigarette taxes have led to more people quitting smoking).  It won't pass because the insurance companies don't want this bill to pass.  The republicans are in so thick with the insurance companies and Bush showed his hand when he said that he was afraid too many people might cancel their private insurance and use the SCHIP insurance.  The SCHIP insurance isn't free......it's just affordable insurance for families that work but can't afford private insurance (which costs $1000 to $1500 per month for a family of 4......who could afford it?).  If private insurance didn't try to make billions of dollars in profits off of lower and middle class citizens and offered affordable insurance there would be no reason to switch from private insurance.  The republicans are afraid of insurance company retaliation in the form of not supporting their upcoming elections and which they KNOW THEY ARE GOING TO NEED!!!!  

If the American people are smart and the democrats control all three branches we'll finally start see things getting done that benefit the citizens of this country.  It's kind of absurd to think that a child in Iraq can get medical attention at a facility paid for by the citizens of the US but an American child in the lower class can't get medical attention without insurance.

Trace why do you support Clinton?

van are you forgeting money and donnors the most inportant  metric , because obama is ahead in both , although you and the msm will gladly leave that out . Because Obama beats her in both . And his fund raising is getting stronger 1mil in one day on the net. Not to mention the huge crowds he attracts ,which clinton cant come close to. Seems like the only thing she does lead in is the polls ,And who's doing these polls . It wouldnt be her friends over there at ras. could it . Van you are becoming a joke with these blatently false statments.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):