awww he actually mentioned ron paul, bonus for obama, if i wasn't pulling for paul i'd go obama. that guy is one smooth talker.

Goodluck Barrack Hussein Obama

www.rprradio.com

What, exactly does Obama mean when he says "They don't poll Ron Paul, but I can beat him too."
What does he mean by that? They aren't including Ron Paul in the phone polls or what?
Can anyone illuminate this for me? Thanks

He can't beat Ron Paul.

In an earlier interview Obama said he could be beat Romney, but when he was asked about Paul, he said he would know better later.  He must have gotten some queries about that and was prepared to mention Paul.  

Several of Obama's lines are liberal variations of things Paul has said, so it seems he is watching Paul.  

Some people have said that if Ron Paul is nominated then no Democrat can beat him.  That might explain the intense progressive blogging against Paul.  

So we're supposed to like the fact that he's proud of his cursing, and he's making a point of it while stumping in Iowa?

And to john doe in Seattle: did you realize that Ron Paul and Barack Obama are polar opposites on just about every issue besides Iraq?

obama, the insurance companies' first pick

Well that's quite interesting.  They quote POLLS all the time and try to convince you that PAUL has no numbers.....but they are not even polling for him.

What experience, Hillary?

Vote for Hillary's experience, only if you think you will vote for Nancy Reagan or Laura Bush.

This is from an independents point of view. The Dems are just toying right now. After the primaries are over, it looks like they are going to put together a 1-2 All-Star punch that the Repubs will have great difficulty beating. It will be Goliath (Dems) vs. David (Repubs).

The Dems are skillfully getting the Republicans to fight and tear one another down to divide and conquer. Right now, they are helping to instigate deep divisions in the GOP party, and will benefit with a relatively easy victory after the primaries if the GOP does not unify now. Its looking a lot like the popular kids (Dem All-Stars) in school will get the victory. Too bad for the nerd herd GOPs.

Please note, I tried to couch the above in the least bias manner as possible. I just call it like I see it. If it changes and I am wrong, I will 'fess up.

darla, i think that it means that many of ron paul's supporters are not registered republicans, so when they do the polls of registered republicans, his support does not show.  i really hope obama wins. we need him NOW.

So Ron Paul supporters need to focus on the fact that Obama openly and publicly admitted that Dr. Paul isn't being included in the polls in Iowa?
If this is true THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!!!!!
Something must be done.

I believe obama is refering to the fact that ron paul is never included in the"hypothetical" matchups between leading republicans and leading democrats.

Apparently the socialist democrats are starting to ride on Ron Paul's popularity - they are even talking about the Constitution in debates now. But all that talk now is cheap. No one in the field can even begin to compare with Ron Paul's rock-solid record.

Obama thinks he can beat Ron Paul? Now that's "audacity of hope" :) You've got spunk, but dream on, man. The only hope for America is Ron Paul.

Barry Hussein Obama should switch parties.   Theyll just luv him in the GOP.  

What a phoney Obama is.   He is a fraud.

WHOA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is the same "holier than thou" Barack Obama who has been so "innocent" and has claimed over and over that he has not been negative like the other candidates?

Obama lies and twists the facts.  

Just wait until the Republicans get ahold of him and his less than honest books.

Swift boaters, meet Barack Hussien Obama!!!!!!!!!

Can't wait!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Uh oh, more dangerous confessions of normalcy by Obama. Watch for certain figures on both sides to get their knickers all twisted about this. They think that America isn't ready for a president who's just like the people he's offering to lead. They think America wants shemales with asbestos pantsuits and expensive haircuts.

Wrong. America wants a guy whose not afraid of using his elbows when playing a game of pickup, but can then sit down and discuss the longterm upsides and downsides of complex foreign and domestic policy issues. A guy who can disagree with someone without necessarily declaring them "the enemy." A guy, in other words, who represents the best of what we, as a people have to offer.

Iowa, the ball's in your court. Don't stick the rest of us with a loser who appeals to your fears or a smooth talking trial attorney who'd be willing to argue that God himself bore financial liability for every child born with a defect, if that was the only defendant he could find. Vote for the candidate who can win in November.

I am for Bill before I am against Bill.

Thank you Joe.

If they are not polling Ron Paul, that means that the public will have to Google "Ron Paul" if they want to find out more about his campaign.

Obama, you are delusional.  Ron Paul polled higher than you in a head to head.

Not another CFR puppet. Anyone but another CFR!!! Kucinich, Gravel or Ron Paul, are the only 3 choices in this race.

Obama will just build on Bushes' legacy, will withdraw some troops from Iraq but wants to move them into Afghanistan. He can't completely withdraw us from Iraq since its the CFR's policy that got us in there in the first place, and Obama works for them.

Wake UP!!!! google "obama cfr" or "hillary cfr" or "edwards cfr" and compare with "kucinich cfr" or "Ron Paul cfr" big difference.

Huckabee is not officially CFR member (got his training wheels though) but his campaign manager is Richard Haas CFR's current director. So now all of the sudden, Huckabee now offers advice how to take care of Pakinstan, its perpetual war with any CFR candidate.

So we're supposed to like the fact that he's proud of his cursing, and he's making a point of it while stumping in Iowa? - Chris

I guess so!  Why he figures being shorter and more foul-mouthed than Romney is an asset and will get people to vote for him is a weird angle but everybody has their thing I guess.

Obama is decent enough, but Ron Paul would school him.  The Dems better hope the Repukes are too stupid and reject Paul.  Every Repuke would vote for Paul because they would have to...but Paul would pull independents and even Democrats like mad because he is dead serious about ending the Iraq war and has the voting record to back it up.

Is there no end to Obama's arrogance? Bragging about cursing while claiming he can even beat Ron Paul, he is just making himself look silly and immature. We need an experienced grown-up in the White House...that would be HILLARY! Also, Obama's comment about not running again if he loses this time made him look like a spoiled child. He would be destroyed by the republican attack machine...HILLARY '08!

Could somebody double check ... I could have sworn that Barack Obama said "I probably could beat him, too." ... You know what I mean?

Obama is voted #8 on the top ten list of "Most Corrupt Politicians of 2007" by Judicial Watch.  Do we really want to vote in another crook???  Go RP.

What a marvelous quote...  
"If you believe Hillary Clinton has 'experience' based on being first lady, then why not vote for Nancy Reagan?"

I certainly would

Wow. Obama should be scared of Ron Paul. Ron Paul is the substance to Obama's rhetoric. Obama says he wants to "change" government. But his "change" is nothing compared to what Ron Paul wants to do. Ron Paul has never voted to fund the Iraq War. Obama has. Ron Paul actually voted and preached in Congress about the horrors of going into Iraq before the war started. Where was Obama? Obama wants to get interest groups out of government, but Ron Paul has beat Obama in this category as well. Furthermore Ron Paul has had a much better record in Congress this year than Obama. Obama has been very noticeably absent. Ron Paul has actually made the effort to do his job as a congressman. How many years has Obama been in office? Very little, and we should not count this year as being one of the years either. Ron Paul beats Obama in foreign policy as well. Ron Paul has much more experience in Congress making foreign policy votes and arguments. Again Ron Paul is the only candidate who actually wants to CHANGE foreign policy besides Kucinich. Obama's and the leading democrats just sound like the neo-cons if not worse.

The main difference between Ron Paul and Obama is that Obama believes in the government "fixing" everything. Ron Paul believes the free market ought to have that role. Most economists would side with Ron Paul on this aspect compared to Obama. Obama wants to implement a national "living wage" where the minimum wage will increase with inflation. Just watch the job market completely tumble with that. Employment is the only upside in the economy today. If Obama's elected it will probably join the current housing market.

I would love to see Ron Paul debate Barak Obama. Ron Paul would tear Obama to pieces.

oNE TRIP TO THE uk DOES'NT make Obama worldly, and I'd put Paul over Jrboy anyday on any Issue, so bring it CFR newby!

I like Obama, I really do. But as a junior senator I just can't convince myself he's had enough experience to be the leader of the free world.
He's got at least as much experience as that other junior senator from NY but I'm just not personally comfortable with the depth of resume.
I think Obama could make an incredible run in '12.

Biden is a good man with great credentials and I'm not sure why more dems aren't looking in his direction.

Hillary - let's face it, if she hadn't married Bill she couldn't get elected dog catcher. And for clarity on her 'vast experience' she had no security clearance during Bill admin and was not allowed in any of the NSC meetings. What input she had on Bill's presidency is locked away in the Clinton Library until after the election.

Locked away until after the election......think long and hard about that.

Long and hard.

this is'nt even funny, how it has to take a slam from another contender for Ron Paul to get mentioned, I hate Old Media and how they pander to the Corperations, how can you sleep knowing that you are standing in line to your doom.

Wayne, wake up, boith hilary and obama are unelectable. That is how most people see it. If either one leads the ticket, the dems lose by default. Nobody wants either of them except fringe progressives

i think Obama has ideas of granduer re: being ready to be president.I think it would be a disaster if he were elected with the world stage being in such turmoil. He is a dreamer. After more experience maybe in 4 more years of public service, 2012, he maybe ready. It feels rather scary if he were elected this time around.

Obama is Bilderberg scum, look it up.  He is working for the elite rich, and he won't be ending the Iraq war, something he should do, but won't because he is a Bilderberg group puppet (the same people who own all the candidates except Ron Paul, which is why they won't poll Ron Paul, because they're all deathly afraid of him)

RON PAUL 2008!!!!  Obama is a closet criminal with an agenda.

What Ron Paul is still running... Dems have Ralph Nader and Repub has Ron Paul

Obama's arrogance rivals that of George Bush, he jokingly talks about his experiments with cocaine and how he has been known to use four letter words frequently yet says he wil make a great president."Not in his life time"! Obama is not the kind of man I want my children to look up to, the use of cocaine, pot and vulgar language is not something to joke about or be proud of. Jokingly admitting to such things tells me Obama has no class and has been prone to poor judgement and disrespect in the past, and will be in the future. "Not in your lifetime Obama!"

In traveling all over the country, I have NEVER seen any bumper stickers or signs for anyone but RON PAUL.
His signs and stickers are EVERYWHERE. The mainstream(OLD) media is LYING. They know they have control over the voting machines so they can skew the vote to match their BOGUS polls.

You can never trust polls as more than just a general guideline and so many are engineered to create a predefined winner they are all but useless.  I mean really, why would I care what 40 other people in a small sample think about the candidates?  All I care about is what I think about them.  Frank Luntz can make any poll have any results he wishes, and he's just one of many biased pollsters out there.

So here is what Obama basically said about Ron Paul:
"They don't poll him so I don't know who would win, but I'll just assume I would..."

Those are famous last words of a desperate loser if/when Ron Paul wins the GOP nomination. Never underestimate your opponent. Ron Paul is the Rocky Balboa of this Presidential race, and we've already seen Rocky I in 1988...

Joe Franklin, I agree wholeheartedly that we need Obama now. He is the first in years that speaks for all the people. I believe his stratagies can save our nation. I pray for his victory daily.

Darla, Joe Franklin is right. But they also dont always include Ron Paul in the telephone polls.

Only one question a voter must ask and be concerned about, is the Presidential Candidate for Isreal/AIPAC or is he going to put American CITIZENS 1st, 2nd and 3rd???  Ask each candidate this Yes or No question...    

Hey Darla, you say: "What does he mean by that? They aren't including Ron Paul in the phone polls or what?"

Well, yeah, it is pretty much of an open secret, and there are even audio recordings available on the web of telephone polls were Ron Paul is not included as a chioce. Other polls terminate as soon as you choose anything other than the acceptable MSM choices.

Seriously, think about it. If Ron Paul were really being supported in the low single digits as the paper and broadcast media would have you believe, would he have raised more dollars and more individual donations than the other Republicans?

Google the words - Ron Paul biased poll - and see what you find.

Hillary the intern?  lol  (Romney quote)

I really can't see how Obama is better because he uses "the juicy, bad words", but maybe it is the crowd?

Attention people of America!  This is what I've been trying to tell you on this blog repeatedly!!!  I was polled and I said I wanted to vote for Ron Paul and the pollster told me that wasn't an option.  She put my vote in the "Other/Undecided" category.  Naturally I went crazy and asked for her supervisor and we went around about this for a half and hour but to no avail.  When you see that there is a large "Undecided" percentage, it might all be for Ron Paul.  Also, please know that they can't poll anyone not using a land line phone or anyone that has never voted in an election before, this eliminates any college kids who only have cell phones and anyone who has just decided that this is the first time there is finally someone worth voting for (both represent a large percentage of his voting base).  Please just ignore the polls!!!    

"They don't poll Ron Paul, but I can beat him too."


Hahahahahahahaha!!!!!!


The White Elephant in the living room is Ron Paul.


 

the Associated Press takes a look at Barack Obama's record to judge the extent to which his currently-expressed views are different from those he has espoused in the past. The results are eye-opening, as Obama has shifted ground across a broad range of issues. But the AP is quick to assure us that these changes are nuanced and evolutionary:

The Democratic senator from Illinois hasn't made any fundamental policy shifts, such as changing his view on whether abortion should be legal.
The contrast with Romney, who has been officially dubbed a flip-flopper by the mainstream media, is explicit:

Political analysts don't see much danger for Obama in the changes. They aren't major shifts akin to Republican Mitt Romney's changes on abortion and gun control, so voters aren't likely to see the senator as indecisive or calculating.
But the AP's own recitation shows that Obama has changed his position on far more issues than Romney: the death penalty, a ban on handguns, the Patriot Act, socialized ("single payer") medicine, and repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act. As for the AP's assertion that Obama's flip-flops haven't been "major shifts," why not? He used to be in favor of socialized medicine, but now isn't. He called the Patriot Act a "shoddy and dangerous law," then voted to renew it. He opposed a federal ban on same-sex marriage, then supported it. By what standard are these not "major shifts"?

Further, the AP's investigation raises serious issues about Obama's credibility. Obama now seeks to distance himself from positions he took in 1996; he claims that a staffer filled out a form for him and "misrepresented" Obama's views on a number of issues:

Obama's presidential campaign contends that voters can't learn anything about his views from the 1996 questionnaire, which was for an Illinois good-government group known as the IVI-IPO. Aides say Obama did not fill out the questionnaire and instead it was handled by a staffer who misrepresented his views on gun control, the death penalty and more.
That claim, however, is dubious at best:

IVI-IPO officials say it's inconceivable that Obama would have let a staffer turn in a questionnaire with incorrect answers. The group interviewed Obama in person about his answers before endorsing him in that 1996 legislative race, and he didn't suggest then, or anytime since, that the questionnaire needed to be corrected, they said.
It is deeply ironic that, at a time when Mitt Romney's credibility is being questioned by the AP and others, based on trivial and irrelevant discrepancies in Romney's account of events that happened 44 years ago, evidence that Obama is lying about positions that he himself took in 1996 is dismissed with a shrug.

Why the disparate treatment? It's hard to avoid the conclusion that the Associated Press covers candidates based on their party affiliation.

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