HILLARY CLINTON THE FIRST WOMEN PRESIDENT IN THIS "UNITED" STATES. COME SEE WHY..hillaryclinton.com

All the "leadership" endorsements in terms of moving votes are paper thin. It won't matter. The congregation is what matters most.

Amend to that brother. hillaryclinton.com

Not good news for all the MSNBC pundits who have suddenly decided Hillary’s campaign is in trouble.  More bad news – yesterday’s Gallup poll showing Hillary beating all GOP candidates and performing better against the GOP candidates than Obama or Edwards.  Did not see any mention of this poll on MSNBC as this would interfere with and contradict their current “Hillary in Trouble” storyline.  

This is because Hillary is married to the first black President.

I don't think this endorsement is a blow to Senator Obama. I think the media will be surprised to find that black people can think for themselves. I am sure that Senator Obama will get his share of votes from black Americans who share his vision for America - people like me.

Hillary paid for legislative endorsements in S.C.  I wonder how much these "supporters" cost her.

Barack is Beautiful

Dean had lots of endorsements, too bad endorsements don't reflect what the PEOPLE actually think.  60 black ministers in South Carolina, how many other black ministers are there? Maybe 1,000?  5,000?  Probably a touch more... Wow!  That means Hillary convinced somewhere around 1% of all black ministers in South Carolina to back her.

She's still either tied or dropping in the polls that matter most right now- Iowa and New Hampshire.  Clinton voters will undoubtedly try to say "still winning national polls! blah blah!"

Well guess what, Hillary isn't attacking Obama because he's black.  Hillary is attacking Obama because he's ahead.  She knows that she is in deep trouble in the early states.

Hillary is not married to the first black President..as a black man I find this phrase very insulting to black men that a cheating white man is called black...what is black about him?

Quite frankly, I'm disappointed in the those endorsements.  What will they say to MLK jr. when and if they get to heaven about how they didn't support the dream he preached of. Shame, shame shame!

But these endorsements will mean little if Hillary tanks in Iowa.
She's the FRONT RUNNER'
If she stumbles in Iowa, it'll affect her in NH

... and it she loses in Iowa and NH, WATCH OUT !
She's no longer inevitable...
So, what will she have to sell ?
'Experience' ?
Barbara Bush has more 'experience' than Hillary
She was the VP's wife for 8 years, gaining valuable 'experience to be First Lady
She was First Lady for 4 years
More importantly, she 'hit the ground running' as First Lady having had all the 'Second Lady experience'

Pretty thin selling points for Hillary

And she's looking more desparate every day...
For and against IDs for aliens (even flip flopping during the Phila debate)
The boys are picking on me ?
Working with Robert Novack on 'scandal' ?
Now this fund raising charge.....

Must of been some extra cash in the donation jar on Sunday morning.

csh, IL, I believe you are incorrect, the Zogby poll shows the opposite.
Released: November 26, 2007

Zogby Poll: Obama, Edwards Strong but Clinton Slips Against GOPers

General election match-ups show the New York Senator would lose against every top Republican

UTICA, New York – A new Zogby Interactive survey shows Democrat Hillary Clinton of New York would lose to every one of the top five Republican presidential contenders, representing a reversal of fortune for the national Democratic front–runner who had led against all prospective GOP opponents earlier this year.

Meanwhile, fellow Democrats Barack Obama of Illinois and John Edwards of North Carolina would defeat or tie every one of the Republicans, this latest survey shows.

   Obama 45% McCain 38%

   Obama 46% Giuliani 41%

   Obama 46% Romney 40%

   Obama 46% Huckabee 40%

   Obama 47% Thompson 40%

Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, loses to all five major Republican candidates:

   Clinton 38% McCain 42%

   Clinton 40% Giuliani 43%

   Clinton 40% Romney 43%

   Clinton 39% Huckabee 44%

   Clinton 40% Thompson 44%

Another whack at Obama.

First Susan Lynch of NH , now the Black minister of Carolina, even after Obama did his homophobe routine.

You Barkites ought to very Concerned.

Yes it is obvious that Chris Matthews wants badly for Hilary to lose.  However Keith Olbermann is definitely in Hilary's corner.  I do think Matthews skews the news regarding polls to a negative position against Hilary.  That is very strange to me.
He seems to play up any that are unfavorable but fails to mention the favorable ones.  
One thing I don't think will happen is the Democratic party to nominate a 45 year old guy who really is wet behind the ears and only has foreign policy exp. from the age of 6-10 -  Not gonna happen!! You think we got problems now!

I find it sad that politically that these ministers would make a decision before giving the process a chance to fully unfold. The history of the black culture has been to allow it self to bought or promised. Instead of waiting patiently to see if Obama,Edwards,Richardson or others maybe better for their future they sell out to who they may think is the best chance at selecting a winner instead creating a winner that may serve the best intersets. They are still inclined to be persuaded with glitter and trappings instead of leading with the knowledge (educational), life experiences and history that is ample enough for them to review. The black culture has always been able to be divided and conquered. The accomplishments of overcoming slavery and the civil rights movement have not enlightened these leaders one bit. The are politically motivated. Martin Luther would be so disappointed at the impatience that these leaders are displaying in making their choice. I hope and trust their congregations prove to be wiser than they are. I am not saying they should not support the Clinton's. I am saying that to declare so early reaks of the promise for political windfall. What truly is amazing is supposed Hillary doesn't win. Why do black leaders such as these and Al Sharpton pretend to represents so many blacks yet they jump on a bandwagon jus to win instead of possibly blazing a new trail. Al Sharpton supports Hillary not because of a true belief in Hillary, but because if Obama wins his perception as one of the most prominenet black leaders in America is diminished (crabs in a pot pull each other down). This is sad because it could be Dr. Martin Luther King and Dr. Abernathy blazing a historic trail all over again. It could be former senator Edwards is the best selection or Gov. Richardson with his outstanding qualities. Black leaders could learn one thing from history. That is patience and discernment are true qualiies of leadership not just political gain at all costs. I ray that the so called black leaders put aside their ego's, self-interest and field to the big house kitchen mentality and become true leaders. Ther imortance will change as younger African Americans grow older (who are watching all of these leaders)and begin to look for true leaders and not be willing to say that is my pastor, minister or supposed leader and I will follow him blindly. I am not looking at his from a racial point of view. I am lookin at how every other culture in this country has found some form of unity based on a strong foundation of leadership and guidance. Italians, Irish, Asians, Hispanics and Jews stand for the most part united in values and desires. Black leaders are gropers of recognition and self procalimed importance instead of actual leadership. How sad. America benefits from diversity of culture,race and religion. That benefit is realized when cultural issues are well represented through strong leadership, truthful and strong convictions of what is best for the people they represen. Not because leaders wnat to be seen smiling in a picture next to a potential winner or for local and national political gain as well as importance of one self. No wonder the Afro-American culture has not progresed any faster than it has. The black leaders are still sellng out the field hands so they can work in the kitchen. There are consequences for every action. If one of the other candidates win and these so called leaders have made a selection based upon polls and false promises that was wrong instead of waiting to see the true desires and wishes of the black national constituency then how much weaker will their leadership be perceived. They will look foolish locally, nationally and in Washington,D.C. Black leaders need to stop looking to go from the field to the big house kitchen and start blazing a trail that will lead them and those they represent to owning their own plantation (in other words a true strong voice and political base). No matter democrat, republican or independent. Unite your people, Stop following Al Sharpton's sellout bid of his people. Make MLK proud again.      

Must of been some extra cash in the donation jar on Sunday morning.
jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Tuesday, November 27, 2007 11:02 AM)

--------
Don't you mean "Must have"...ah, the Texas education system!

The claims that Hillary buys endorsements are baseless...show me concrete proof!

csl,il your facts are wrong. advise that you check them again

another example of how cash can buy anything, vote for edwards the only dem looking out for someone besides themselfs

Black people think themselves and not just vote because a minister or pastor say so. The Clinton attack machine is in full blown mudslinging undercove attack mode just like the republicans in previous elections. She won't bring change. She will bring more of the same. She will just redifine the same old game.

Mr. Obama, I have Hillary on the line and she is awaiting your answer is it a yes or no ?

The latest poll from South Carolina out 4 days ago has Clinton and Obama completely tied among African-Americans, which allows Clinton to take a double-digit over lead: http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2007/11/quick-rundown-of-thanksgiving-polls.html

Black minister endorsements carry the same weight as white ones...they are all a bunch of hypocritical liars so it doesn't matter what they say

Hillary & Chuck's Woodstock Earmark
By Robert Novak

WASHINGTON -- Sen. Charles Schumer denied it, but word seeped out of the Democratic cloakroom that he was steaming over being rejected by the Senate on his earmark for a Woodstock museum -- in particular, the lack of help from his New York colleague, Sen. Hillary Clinton.

Schumer and Clinton co-sponsored a $1 million earmark for the museum in Bethel, N.Y., at the site of the drug-laden 1969 Woodstock music festival. But Clinton did not go to the Senate floor to help out her fellow senator, and one of her aides said this was mainly Schumer's project. Schumer told me that he was not upset with Clinton and that he telephoned Republican Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma to say there were no hard feelings.

Earmarks are routinely approved for powerful legislators such as Schumer, a member of the Senate Democratic leadership. The Woodstock million lost, 52 to 42, after it was revealed that the museum's principal donor was a big contributor to Schumer and Clinton.

There is your proof Pat.

Why would a billionaire ask for a federal earmark????
then he makes a contribution to her campaign????

did she give the money back to him when the earmark was spent on the elderly instead????????

Why won't Hillary answer truthfully about that?????

a buy for a vote if i have ever seen one in my life.

First, who are these ministers?  Is this some coalition of all of SC ministers or just a select 60 who like Clinton?  And why would a minister ever endorse anyone and is it really appropriate or relevant?  Will they preach for Hillary?  What about the Republicans?  I'm sure it is a disappointment for Obama, as any candidate would want every endorsement.


I cannot understand the black community not voting for a black candidate because they don't think he can win.  It's comical when so many white males support Obama for the nomination and many more white Democratic women would support him in the general--I think that shows he is electable with whites, and all the black community would have to do is vote.  If that is the black community's rational for not voting for Obama, then I lose a lot of empathy for them.  The black community should not blame white America for their ills like not having people of color in poweful positions, being stuck in a rut with high poverty and high crime rates.  They have the power to change their situation, and all they would have to do is vote for starters, pretty simple.  I'm not saying vote for Obama because he's black, I'm saying don't not vote for Obama because he's black.  That's just plain stupid, like smoking.

//Hillary is not married to the first black President..as a black man I find this phrase very insulting to black men that a cheating white man is called black...what is black about him?

larry , fort wayne , Indiana //

His . . . , oh, nevermind . . .

Mr. Obama, I have Hillary on the line and she is awaiting your answer is it a yes or no ?
Willie Answer (Sent Tuesday, November 27, 2007 11:22 AM)


I'm not sure what part of Obama's response the Hillary-camp seems to not understand when Obama says it is "completely false".  Hillary is just digging herself into a hole.  Notice her campaign stopped talking about the [fictitious] story?  The Hillary-lackies ought to follow suit if they know what's good for them.  Campaign finance is the last battle you want to bring up given Hillary's record.  

Earmarks are not vote buying my dear, Jerry.  If that was the case, every single man and woman in elected office would be considered to have bought votes.  I am talking about Hillary going up to these people she gets endorsements from, saying, here's some money, can I have your endorsement?  She gets endorsements like this because people like her positions on the issues that matter to them...plain and simple.  Too bad people like this Jerry who always posts everyday seem head strong on rhetoric with no basis...just lies lies and lies...typical republican.

How about an endorsement that actually count. Check this out

http://campaignsandelections.com/nh/releases/index.cfm?ID=6993

60 black ministers in South Carolina, how many other black ministers are there? Maybe 1,000?  5,000?  Probably a touch more... Wow!  That means Hillary convinced somewhere around 1% of all black ministers in South Carolina to back her.

Good point....

Hillary is not married to the first black President..as a black man I find this phrase very insulting to black men that a cheating white man is called black...what is black about him?
larry , fort wayne , Indiana (Sent Tuesday, November 27, 2007 10:58 AM)

Larry...as a Black woman I agree with you.  I have always found it offensive.

Someone cited here the zogby poll but forgot to mention the said survey is an ONLINE poll. I've participated in a lot of online poll done by zogby. The only time I would pay attention to the polls done by zogby if its thru phone calls. Hillary is way much ahead compared to other democratic candidates for nomination; in fact 4 states Bush have won against Kerry in 2004 is now all for Hillary.

I am talking about Hillary going up to these people she gets endorsements from, saying, here's some money, can I have your endorsement?  She gets endorsements like this because people like her positions on the issues that matter to them...plain and simple.

Then pat, the question begs......

Why did the Billionaire give her a contribution shortly after the earmark showed up on the bill being considered??????

Sure looks like a vote buy to me......
very illegal by the way.......

But I think the bigger question is.....
why did the Billionaire need an earmark when he has all that money??????

Is this the guy who gave Norman Hsu all that money????

mmmmmm  very strange indeed....

Quite frankly, I'm disappointed in the those endorsements.  What will they say to MLK jr. when and if they get to heaven about how they didn't support the dream he preached of. Shame, shame shame!
RAH (Sent Tuesday, November 27, 2007 11:00 AM)


Actually, King spoke of a dream where people would not be judged by the color of their skin.  To support Obama simply because he is black is doing just that, and defying the dream that King had.

NSMSNBC:

Perhaps some black people don't support Obama because they don't think he is the best candidate, regardless of the color of his skin.  It is possible for people to not be all gaga over his supposed star quality.

This is good news for all the parties involved.  A society where everybody thinks alike is an anomaly that has place only in a closed society.  If African American votes are very competitive between Obama and Hilary, that is a good thing in favor of Obama and here is why.

Black votes alone in a disproportionate fashion in favor of Obama will not play to his advantage if he were to win nomination.  It would be read as victory that is race biased and will provoke backlash during the general election.  If majority of whites vote against Obama he is not going to win in the general election.  It is in Obama’s interest if the votes are cast based on merit rather than race polarity.

If Obama were to win Iowa, he has better chance of winning SC.  The resistance Blacks have towards Obama is the cynical view that whites are not going to elect a Blackman US president.  The test for such over-sweeping assumption will be laid to rest by Iowa results.  African American power establishment favors Hilary due to self-interests but same cannot be said about the grass-root.  Because the critical mass vote based on sentiments of the heart rather than the head, Obama stands to win substantial African Americans grass-root votes.  Another dynamic for success for Obama depends on if Edward stays in the race during SC election.  If Edward were to remain competitive among SC white votes, then it will be split between him and Hilary and thereby giving edge to Obama on the aggregate

How about an endorsement that actually count. Check this out

http://campaignsandelections.com/nh/releases/index.cfm?ID=6993
Bee (Sent Tuesday, November 27, 2007 12:20 PM)

===

Wow Bee, Great post!  Obama sees Hillary's 60, and raises her 1000.

Hillary has no chance of winning the general election unless she hides all the other candidates in a Park in Washington.  Obama is the man to beat now.  And frankly speaking I am tired of Clinton and Bushes in the White House.  I don't care what policies they make up.

Just where are all these idiotic "Hillary buys endorsements" comments coming from?  60+ black ministers accepting money for them?--ridiculous, inane and asinine propositions!!  [I'd say the same if such imbecilic accusations were to be leveled at any other candidate].  DUMB, DUMB, DUMB.

For goodness sakes folks, get off your stupid, partisan, chauvanistic and politically jingoistic stances regarding your personal preferences and get real--no candidate PAYS money for endorsements!!!

It's impossible for me to believe that any of you would HONESTLY believe otherwise [except for those who have their political beliefs (and brains) set in iconoclastic concrete].

To nsmsnbc. Thank you. Our so called leaders lack the will to lead. I wish they would. Then the plight of black america can be changed dramatically over time. A lot of black americans do vote. Because of the self indulgance of the black leaders to profit and benefit personally instead of truly leading so many positive opportunities and results lost. There are a lot of educated black men and women that desire more for their culture, but the leadership has been so misrepresentative of the african american needs, wants and desires. They have become so politically motivated instead of being eaders that are servants to the public. Mind you blacks aren't the only culyure with problems. There is so much misinformation in the media about black culture and life style. Blacks can do a lot better by refusing to follow these bought and sold sel-appointed leaders.  

Why doesn't First Read list all the 'white' endorsements that Sen. Obama has received?  I bet that is a blow to Hillary's electability?  Once again, First Read plays the race card.  Those AA ministers don't speak for the community and AA people are more than capable of deciding on a candidate on their own.

to Les M. Billingham from Washington, I would suggest that you trust no poll. Polls are media driven and the media through ownership (depending on who owns the parent company) is ery biased. Liberal, conservative and centrists. There are enough vehicles to research independently to form an opinion without being overly influenced by someone else's opinion, speak points or mudslinging. Also, the polls are based on such a small percentage of the population that even the margin of error is questionable. If you were to do a little research you would be suprised that all national poll results are done on such a small percentageof actual voters and is very unscientific.

come on americans. You are all smarter than to make a decision based upon color, gender, speak points, mudslinging and inuendo. We have got to get this right this time. No matter wether you are of different races, religions, political affilations, states or counties, don't let your intelligence be insulted by just what you read from the media, hear from others or emotions. Don't vote because someone is woman, man, white, black or hispanic. Vote because you have taken the time to really dig to find wo is best for the country. We have the same bull in Washington, D.C. for to long. Vote right. Vote with an politically educated mind. Study and learn. Let the process unfold with time and then make a decision for AMERICA. Thank You my fellow Americans.

Jerry, you don't seem to know the difference between Jack Abramoff and Norman Hsu.
Norman Hsu is a rich man who has been indicted for fraud, fraud having absolutely nothing to do with any campaign, Clinton's or otherwise.
No charges have yet even been adjudicated.

Jack Abramoff, in contrast, bribed Republicans in exchange for favorable legislation.
Jack Abramoff is currently sitting in prison, having been tried and convicted for bribing Republicans. Some of those Republicans accepted those bribes, and those Republicans are ALSO sitting in prison right now.

In addition, both Jack Abramoff and some of those Republicans sitting in prison right now are still SINGING about the bribes they offered REPUBLICANS.  There will be further indictments against REPUBLICAN lawmakers during the 2008 elections because those REPUBLICANS took BRIBES in exchange for favorable legislation.

See the difference?
Now, why do you bring up Hsu? He didn't bribe any Democrats.
And why don't you bring up Abramoff? He bribed LOTS of Republicans.
-------
As far as being offended that Bill Clinton has been called the first Black President -- Maya Angelou said it.

If you're Black and you have a problem with Maya saying it, fine. But the Clintons are not the ones who started it.
-------
I, too, am amazed at how the Zogby interactive poll got headline after headline after headline, yet the Gallup poll got no press whatsoever.  

Is MSNBC able to explain that?
It is even more curious in that all of us agree that the methodology Zogby is using is suspect, and Gallup is the oldest pollster in the business.

But, anyway, I'm fairly sure the Zogby poll won't hold up, but Clinton Haters are quoting it over and over and over again anyway...

So, Clinton Haters, since you're now quoting the Zogby poll ad nauseum, does this mean that polls now officially count?
GOOD! Bring 'em on.

To Lynne D,  I could not agree with you more about crackpot, multimillionaire, woman hating, closeted Republican Chris Matthews.

If he dealt with issues as Keith Obermann does with respect, it would be one thing.  However, Matthews has gone over the edge.  Clearly he needs help or meds. He deals nightly in such things as Hillary's laugh, clapping, and other very "important" issues to our country just as he did when Al Gore was a candidate against Bush. We allowed this nutcase to tell us such drival as Bush is just likeable.  He's just the kind of guy you'd like to have a beer with.
And shockingly, America listened to his nightly horrible rants against Gore and voted for the man's man who'd be fun in a bar.  Now look where that got us.  AND Crackpot Matt5he3ws is up to the SAME OLD STUFF AGAIN.  And as Democrats, we are letting him get away with it once again.  What's the matter with us?

Remember when Matthews said that Gore was stiff, scripted, a liar, and even questioned Gore's manhood!

The sadest thing is that Matthews has continued his psycotic rhetoric or years and years and not onbe...not one Democrat in media has
taken him to task or profiled his crazy, bully, sophmoric, "mean girl' rants.  

And when Democratic leaning pundits get on his program they roll over and play dead and suck up to his rantings.  WHY?

WHY?  WHY?  WHY?

Do we have a lot of news media wannabees out there who would rather be multimillionaires like crackpot Chris than be honest journalist who report the truth?

To Lynne D,  I could not agree with you more about crackpot, multimillionaire, woman hating, closeted Republican Chris Matthews.

If he dealt with issues as Keith Obermann does with respect, it would be one thing.  However, Matthews has gone over the edge.  Clearly he needs help or meds. He deals nightly in such things as Hillary's laugh, clapping, and other very "important" issues to our country just as he did when Al Gore was a candidate against Bush. We allowed this nutcase to tell us such drival as Bush is just likeable.  He's just the kind of guy you'd like to have a beer with.
And shockingly, America listened to his nightly horrible rants against Gore and voted for the man's man who'd be fun in a bar.  Now look where that got us.  AND Crackpot Matt5he3ws is up to the SAME OLD STUFF AGAIN.  And as Democrats, we are letting him get away with it once again.  What's the matter with us?

Remember when Matthews said that Gore was stiff, scripted, a liar, and even questioned Gore's manhood!

The sadest thing is that Matthews has continued his psycotic rhetoric or years and years and not onbe...not one Democrat in media has
taken him to task or profiled his crazy, bully, sophmoric, "mean girl' rants.  

And when Democratic leaning pundits get on his program they roll over and play dead and suck up to his rantings.  WHY?

WHY?  WHY?  WHY?

Do we have a lot of news media wannabees out there who would rather be multimillionaires like crackpot Chris than be honest journalist who report the truth?

Carrie--I think you missed my point.  If someone doesn't want to vote for Obama for whatever reason, that's fine, that's their right.  Heck, it's even their right to not support him based on the color of his skin, although perhaps a tad morally defunct.  I SAID that people should not disregard him based on the color of his skin.  Now, that's something I'm sure you and most people worth knowing would agree.

What an insult to black ministers.  You disparage their support and endorsement of Hillary Clinton while praising the supportt of a TV person for Obama.

ALso, I resent the suggestion that we should vote for Obama just because our skin happens to be the same color.

Personally, in this time after the disaster of the George Bush presidency, I will be voting for a strong, experienced smart leader who can lead us out of the mess the Republicans have made.

Also, I'm insulted as a baby boomer that Obama keeps saying that I'm too divisive and our generation cannot bring the country together.    That sounds like the immature talk back when we were young and they said you couldn't trust anyone over 30.   We all held hands and sang "Kumbaya". As adults, we now know that does not make a leader.

Thank goodness for experience.  

To Lynne D,  I could not agree with you more about crackpot, multimillionaire, woman hating, closeted Republican Chris Matthews.

And when Democratic leaning pundits get on his program they roll over and play dead and suck up to his rantings.  WHY?

WHY?  WHY?  WHY?

Do we have a lot of news media wannabees out there who would rather be multimillionaires like crackpot Chris than be honest journalist who report the truth?

You are right, Lynne and Sam.

Chris Matthews is a crackpot and he get away with it.

Where are Democratic magazines, newspapers andf blogs like THE NATION, PROGRESSIVE POPULIST, THE Huffington Post, PROGRESSIVE, The Wahington Spectator among others who NEVER profile an obvious Republican fruit cake like Matthews?  If he were at Fox News we could understand, but he is on MNBC who considers he and Russert to be stars. Keith Obermann has become adult voice of reason at that  network.

Why as Democrats do we keep taking this?  Please...some magazine...profile Matthews.  Please,
Democrats, don't let this crackpot keep getting away with his crazy rants.

You are right, Lynne and Sam.

Chris Matthews is a crackpot and he get away with it.

Where are Democratic magazines, newspapers andf blogs like THE NATION, PROGRESSIVE POPULIST, THE Huffington Post, PROGRESSIVE, The Wahington Spectator among others who NEVER profile an obvious Republican fruit cake like Matthews?  If he were at Fox News we could understand, but he is on MNBC who considers he and Russert to be stars. Keith Obermann has become adult voice of reason at that  network.

Why as Democrats do we keep taking this?  Please...some magazine...profile Matthews.  Please,
Democrats, don't let this crackpot keep getting away with his crazy rants.

To Lynne D,  I could not agree with you more about crackpot, multimillionaire, woman hating, closeted Republican Chris Matthews.

And when Democratic leaning pundits get on his program they roll over and play dead and suck up to his rantings.  WHY?

WHY?  WHY?  WHY?

Do we have a lot of news media wannabees out there who would rather be multimillionaires like crackpot Chris than be honest journalist who report the truth?

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