NYT----"But during those two terms in the White House, Mrs. Clinton did not hold a security clearance. She did not attend National Security Council meetings. She was not given a copy of the president's daily intelligence briefing. She did not assert herself on the crises in Somalia, Haiti and Rwanda.

"And during one of President Bill Clinton's major tests on terrorism, whether to bomb Afghanistan and Sudan in 1998, Mrs. Clinton was barely speaking to her husband, let alone advising him, as the Lewinsky scandal sizzled."
----------------------

When Bill Clinton ran in 1992, he was a governor of a small state in the south running against a sitting president George Herbert Walker Bush. Before his presidency, George Bush Sr. happened to be a World War II veteran, who flew into combat. He was the Vice President of the United States in the administration of Ronald Reagan (1980 -1988). He has also served as the member of the United States House of Representatives for the 7th district of Texas (1967–1971), the United States Ambassador to the United Nations (1971–1973), Chairman of the Republican National Committee (1973–1974), Chief of the United States Liaison Office in the People’s Republic of China (1974–1976), and Director of Central Intelligence (1976–1977).
---------------
---Bill Clinton legacy 1992-2000---
Republicans gained control of both houses of Congress for the first time in more than 40 years after the 1994 elections.
Democrats lost control of the U.S. House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years, along with control of the Senate and 10 gubernatorial seats-
Keep in mind that there were also party switches from 1992 to 1996 election(1994 was bad for Dems):
Democratic # of senators went from 56 to 47 to 45. Republican # of senators went 44-53-55.
House of Rep. went 258-198-206 for Dems.
House of Rep went 176-236-228 for Repubs.
House of Rep had 1 Ind.
Governors were Dem 21/Repub 14 then changed in 1994 to Dem 11/Repub 24.(no real shift..+-one.. in gov party control in 1996).

She(HRC in '93) was put in charge of health care with a democratic president, democratic congress, and with polls showing 80%(??) support for universal health care. Yet she managed to fail.

I can't beleive how the people have changed since Oprah indorsed Obama. Americans can no longer think for them self.  The media is controlling this election like the last one. All the attention is given on Obama when better qualified canidates have droped out. If Obama wins we will have another Bush execpt he is a Democrate. GO McCain!

Where is Van since HRC lost, I didn't see a posting from VAN.



Obama 08

It seems the younger voters have finally decided to get involved, I guess they aren't afraid of registering to vote and then being drafted to Iraq anymore. Bottom line is Obama is a good guy, but he is VERY, and I mean VERY green and far too young and inexperienced to lead this nation in the crisis we are now in. Hillary is the steak dinner we have all waited for and Obama is a chicken frank. Come on people give me a break, the Clintons are awesome, they will turn this country around IMMEDIATELY. Obama is all talk and a HUGE risk we seriously do not need after the disaster that is 8 years of Bush. With Hillary you get someone VERY passionate about America with excellent experience to get to work on day one. With Obama it will take the guy the entire 4 years of a first term to just figure out what to do! are you kidding me? and then what? he gets nothing done and then he is voted out and we end up with another idiot like Bush! yeah JUST what America needs. You Obama people are not using your heads. Talk is CHEAP and so far that is ALL Obama has shown us, Hillary and Bill Clinton both have the creds to get the real work of change done. I am voting for Hillary all the way.

excuse me!  stop with the oprah refrence already.  honestly, people -- read the newspapers; get informed; take a course to understand politics and public policy.  
barack obama's surge in the polls has been about his organization and their ability to turn out voters.  i personally don't know anyone who watches oprah at harvard university where we i belong to a (large) group students who support obama because we want a better future and we don't care what oprah thinks.

Five years ago, Christianity Today, the evangelical journal founded by Billy Graham, approvingly described Oprah as “an icon of church-free spirituality” whose convictions “cannot simply be dismissed as superficial civil religion or so much New Age psychobabble.”
----Yes Oprah was right...HE IS THE ONE

Anyone from New England?  Join us in Concord, NH.  Sen. Barack Obama will be speaking at a rally Mon., Jan 7 at 10 PM.

If you look at the demographics of the Obama voter they do not line up with the Oprah watcher. And to assume that we are just falling in line like robots is rediculous! Many are young independent voters are looking at someone that wants change and listens to what is most importnant to them. I know I do! The future of this country is too importnant to leave things status quo.

Ha - nice try JD, feeble comment at best. If your line of reasoning is carried through to all the candidates, then ppl really changed since Magic Johnson endorsed (plz note spelling) Hillary. Hillary supporters no longer think for themselves (again note spelling). Obama is standing on his own two feet and ppl are voting for him and his message and his vision.

Well, let's talk about Hillary's Ethics reform bill....
What's that.....?

Oh...Hillary doesn't have one?
Oh...okay then.

And just what substance does HIllary have? Seriously. Here she is so critical of others experience and touting 35 years, but really where is the beef? She was not governor, nor was she president - those do not count as experience, otherwise Laura Bush might as well throw her hat into the race as well. OK she has been a senator, so has Edwards and Obama. OK she has a few more years on the senate floor, so that makes her more presidential? Hardly. Is there some magical quotient of senate votes that make you more experienced? How about votes that you got wrong - that Iraq vote of hers should actually go into the minus column. She was centurist and right leaning while on the senate floor, shouldnt that count against her now that she is touting herself as the change candidate? Her candidacy simply does not ring true, from her experience, to her husband, to her ads, to her changing personality, to her Rovian campaign strategies.

I just can't believe that the Clinton camp still don't get it! too polarizing, too caustic, unscrupulously ambitious -- not likable. Well, lets show them what we mean again on tuesday. Fired up...Ready to go. Obama 08.

Hillary will not be nominated for one reason only:

Today, most of the American people feel as if they have just gone through a social obstacle course and are panting for breath. We look behind our shoulders at 15 years or so of dark times, littered with scandals, greed, investigations, and outlandish hypocrisy. In 2008, we can no longer tolerate the filth. It feels grimy and we desperately want to shower off.

Hillary may be a terrible candidate, or she may be an excellent one. Regardless, she does not possess the ability to divorce herself from the "filth" that contaminated the past 15 years. She was a prominent figure-head of an era that leaves most Americans with a bad taste in their mouths. This logical association: "Clinton" and "Grime"- is precisely why I think she will not be nominated.

It's no secret that American's want something new. And regardless of Obama or Edward's politics, they can speak to change far more convincingly than a candidate with the unfortunate surname Clinton.

Say what you want about Obama’s lack of experience, but he does possess a fresh face and a promise that seems iron clad. The Clintons and the Republicans can not attack him at any practical or meaningful level; instead they are forced to focus on his position—that is, his inexperience and age.

Hillary speaks of Change: for the reason above, the American people don’t trust her.

Hillary speaks of doing versus talking: Her record of public service although extensive is relatively not astounding.

Go Obama 08 - the polls are showing his surge!!!

The American Public is proving too smart for the old Clinton smear tactic.  It's is the person than any one single issue that matters.  Integrity, character, conviction, and judgment matter most.  We're not electing a mechanic who is expected to fix the same type of problems everyday, in which case experience may matter most.  But when faced with new problems around the world, what the president needs is intellect to analyze the information and good judgment.  On that score, the candidates have all been tested with the Iraq war and all failed with the exception of Obama.

Andrew Sullivan's brilliant article in the Atlantic is worth reading for everyone.  Supporters of Obama will be moved and non-supporters will understand why we are moved.  
Goodbye to All That(4 pages)
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200712/obama

Thanks to Marbw for the link.

This Obama thing (for those of you who don't understand it) is so much more than just about Obama and he realizes it.  Without sounding religious (and I am not - although I believe in a higher power) he is just the right vessel to carry this movement forth.  

It's about entering the next phase of development of the American democracy and this phase may be the actual mechanism by which we can truly spread democracy to the rest of the world (by acting as the moral compass and not through the use of military might).  

We find ourselves at a nexus, politically and economically and as a result there has been a mass action of events that calls for an 'urgency of now' that will propel us from this point in our development, a quantum leap.  A true leader in a democratic society must have the political skills to inspire while at the same time not be tempted to step into the realm of demagoguery and this person must be strong enough to harness the powerful forces that are about to launch this ship of state.

He/she must be in touch with people in all walks of life and embrace them all, rich and poor, white and those of color, men and women etc. etc. etc., in order to bring about a movement that will result in the common good.  This nexus, this 'urgency of now' has provided the mass effect of money, power and population that converts the potential energy to the kinetic, it is a catalyst that makes all of this both possible and necessary; it is logical for this to occur at this time.

Fasten your seatbelts everyone, it's going to be quite a ride!
Obama '08

Hope is a very powerful word. I am glad obama has this word as his central team. Change that would restore hope to Americans. This world is save, happy and more prosperous once the politics of fear ends in your country. The whole world admires obama.

History has already been made. Illinois Senator Barack Obama won the Iowa Caucuses. New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson placed fourth. But did they really earn their finishing positions? The answer may be surprising. In the now past ABC New Hampshire debate before the January 8th first-in-the-nation primary, the rules were that only the candidates who finish in the top four slots in Iowa could participate, meaning that second-tier candidates who placed fourth could live on to continue their campaign another day. In the last hours before the Iowa caucuses Obama, who wanted to pad his victory and hedge his bets, approached Joe Biden with this proposal:
In precincts where Biden had a local official loyal to him, and if Biden wasn't viable, then Senator Biden would tell his organizers to move his supporters over to Obama en mass. Conversely, in precincts where Obama had more than enough supporters, he would lend people to Biden to ensure Biden a fourth place finish so that he could continue on.
Joe Biden actually considered the proposal. An anonymous source close to Biden told the Washington Post that the strategy could be "viability for victory."When the media found out, Obama's camp admitted that the conversation took place. Biden, who when asked about the proposal at a campaign event said that the deal could "probably" help both campaigns; however he later rejected the deal on "moral grounds," a source in Biden's Iowa organization told the Rev. Rob Times on condition of anonymity. History recorded that Joe Biden placed fifth in Iowa, and subsequently dropped out of the race.
On January 4, the day after the caucus, the New York Times reported strong rumors that Obama made the same deal to Bill Richardson that he previously offered to Biden, only this time the deal was accepted.The Times article describes not only the rumors, but gives an eye-witness account and confession of an Obama official telling Richardson supporters that a pact had indeed been made between the two candidates. "That's what the leadership has said," admitted Deb Copeland, an Obama volunteer as reported by the New York Times. "What we're concerned about is we heard of a few people going to Hillary. And we want to keep you together," she told the Richardson supporters at the 64th precinct. Volunteers for the Biden campaign told the Rev. Rob Times that Obama organizers used the same speech about a "pact" to lure supporters in at least two precincts where Biden was only a few supporters shy of viability.Representatives from both the Obama and Richardson campaigns deny that such a deal was ever struck, yet first hand testimonies clearly paint a far different picture. The Effect in the end, the effect of backdoor wheeling and dealing between campaigns is that Richardson's fourth place finish could be artificial, and Obama's victory margin is larger than it would have been in a democratic system. Our democracy is based, in part, on the concept of "one man, one vote," and a vote by a secret ballot, free from the judging eyes of neighbors and the media, free from bribery, and free from the influence of political activists. Had the Iowa contest been based on a ballot, and had caucus voters cast a single vote for the candidate of their choice as is the most fair method of picking a president, then Obama may have come in second and Richardson in fifth. If Obama's victory margin had been smaller, or if he placed second, then the dynamic of the race would have changed drastically. Edwards, Clinton, and even Biden may have all come out of Iowa in stronger positions than any of them have.In part, the system is to blame, but those who took advantage of it and exploited it for their own purposes, namely Barack Obama and Bill Richardson, are not without culpability and their misdeeds should be remembered in the minds of voters.

History has already been made. Illinois Senator Barack Obama won the Iowa Caucuses. New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson placed fourth. But did they really earn their finishing positions? The answer may be surprising. In the now past ABC New Hampshire debate before the January 8th first-in-the-nation primary, the rules were that only the candidates who finish in the top four slots in Iowa could participate, meaning that second-tier candidates who placed fourth could live on to continue their campaign another day. In the last hours before the Iowa caucuses Obama, who wanted to pad his victory and hedge his bets, approached Joe Biden with this proposal:
In precincts where Biden had a local official loyal to him, and if Biden wasn't viable, then Senator Biden would tell his organizers to move his supporters over to Obama en mass. Conversely, in precincts where Obama had more than enough supporters, he would lend people to Biden to ensure Biden a fourth place finish so that he could continue on.
Joe Biden actually considered the proposal. An anonymous source close to Biden told the Washington Post that the strategy could be "viability for victory."When the media found out, Obama's camp admitted that the conversation took place. Biden, who when asked about the proposal at a campaign event said that the deal could "probably" help both campaigns; however he later rejected the deal on "moral grounds," a source in Biden's Iowa organization told the Rev. Rob Times on condition of anonymity. History recorded that Joe Biden placed fifth in Iowa, and subsequently dropped out of the race.
On January 4, the day after the caucus, the New York Times reported strong rumors that Obama made the same deal to Bill Richardson that he previously offered to Biden, only this time the deal was accepted.The Times article describes not only the rumors, but gives an eye-witness account and confession of an Obama official telling Richardson supporters that a pact had indeed been made between the two candidates. "That's what the leadership has said," admitted Deb Copeland, an Obama volunteer as reported by the New York Times. "What we're concerned about is we heard of a few people going to Hillary. And we want to keep you together," she told the Richardson supporters at the 64th precinct. Volunteers for the Biden campaign told the Rev. Rob Times that Obama organizers used the same speech about a "pact" to lure supporters in at least two precincts where Biden was only a few supporters shy of viability.Representatives from both the Obama and Richardson campaigns deny that such a deal was ever struck, yet first hand testimonies clearly paint a far different picture. The Effect in the end, the effect of backdoor wheeling and dealing between campaigns is that Richardson's fourth place finish could be artificial, and Obama's victory margin is larger than it would have been in a democratic system. Our democracy is based, in part, on the concept of "one man, one vote," and a vote by a secret ballot, free from the judging eyes of neighbors and the media, free from bribery, and free from the influence of political activists. Had the Iowa contest been based on a ballot, and had caucus voters cast a single vote for the candidate of their choice as is the most fair method of picking a president, then Obama may have come in second and Richardson in fifth. If Obama's victory margin had been smaller, or if he placed second, then the dynamic of the race would have changed drastically. Edwards, Clinton, and even Biden may have all come out of Iowa in stronger positions than any of them have.In part, the system is to blame, but those who took advantage of it and exploited it for their own purposes, namely Barack Obama and Bill Richardson, are not without culpability and their misdeeds should be remembered in the minds of voters.

MANCHESTER, N.H. -- Obama campaign violating state law by placing automated phone calls to numbers on the Do Not Call list. Former State Rep. Sandy Keans, a Clinton supporter from Rochester, said she received a call.“This afternoon, I received a pre-recorded phone message from the Obama campaign attacking Senator Clinton even though I am on the Do-Not-Call List," Keans said.

History has already been made. Illinois Senator Barack Obama won the Iowa Caucuses. New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson placed fourth. But did they really earn their finishing positions? The answer may be surprising. In the now past ABC New Hampshire debate before the January 8th first-in-the-nation primary, the rules were that only the candidates who finish in the top four slots in Iowa could participate, meaning that second-tier candidates who placed fourth could live on to continue their campaign another day. In the last hours before the Iowa caucuses Obama, who wanted to pad his victory and hedge his bets, approached Joe Biden with this proposal:
In precincts where Biden had a local official loyal to him, and if Biden wasn't viable, then Senator Biden would tell his organizers to move his supporters over to Obama en mass. Conversely, in precincts where Obama had more than enough supporters, he would lend people to Biden to ensure Biden a fourth place finish so that he could continue on.
Joe Biden actually considered the proposal. An anonymous source close to Biden told the Washington Post that the strategy could be "viability for victory."When the media found out, Obama's camp admitted that the conversation took place. Biden, who when asked about the proposal at a campaign event said that the deal could "probably" help both campaigns; however he later rejected the deal on "moral grounds," a source in Biden's Iowa organization told the Rev. Rob Times on condition of anonymity. History recorded that Joe Biden placed fifth in Iowa, and subsequently dropped out of the race.
On January 4, the day after the caucus, the New York Times reported strong rumors that Obama made the same deal to Bill Richardson that he previously offered to Biden, only this time the deal was accepted.The Times article describes not only the rumors, but gives an eye-witness account and confession of an Obama official telling Richardson supporters that a pact had indeed been made between the two candidates. "That's what the leadership has said," admitted Deb Copeland, an Obama volunteer as reported by the New York Times. "What we're concerned about is we heard of a few people going to Hillary. And we want to keep you together," she told the Richardson supporters at the 64th precinct. Volunteers for the Biden campaign told the Rev. Rob Times that Obama organizers used the same speech about a "pact" to lure supporters in at least two precincts where Biden was only a few supporters shy of viability.Representatives from both the Obama and Richardson campaigns deny that such a deal was ever struck, yet first hand testimonies clearly paint a far different picture. The Effect in the end, the effect of backdoor wheeling and dealing between campaigns is that Richardson's fourth place finish could be artificial, and Obama's victory margin is larger than it would have been in a democratic system. Our democracy is based, in part, on the concept of "one man, one vote," and a vote by a secret ballot, free from the judging eyes of neighbors and the media, free from bribery, and free from the influence of political activists. Had the Iowa contest been based on a ballot, and had caucus voters cast a single vote for the candidate of their choice as is the most fair method of picking a president, then Obama may have come in second and Richardson in fifth. If Obama's victory margin had been smaller, or if he placed second, then the dynamic of the race would have changed drastically. Edwards, Clinton, and even Biden may have all come out of Iowa in stronger positions than any of them have.In part, the system is to blame, but those who took advantage of it and exploited it for their own purposes, namely Barack Obama and Bill Richardson, are not without culpability and their misdeeds should be remembered in the minds of voters.

Attention Obama Haters:
We have stood by for too long and allowed the Washington "so called" moguls to tell us when the sun rises and when it sets.  
Hope is for all those who has lost hope in a failed system and tells us there is no "hope" is ludacris.  Well the future of this country was founded upon "hope" that we are and would be a better nation.  
In your posts, you have been all, but out and out racist in your comments.  Why don't you say what you really mean, so we can move on.  
A vote for Obama tells me, dreams are not limited and maybe, just maybe, your children and my children may have a real chance.  Guess what...if you weren't brought up with money, evidently played reindeer games in Washington,, you can't compete!  
The word "can't" is a prison of your mind that tells you what you can't do and sets the tone for all who you will become or NOT!  
Not telling you vote for Obama, but don't let negatives delay your thoughts of what you can do and how you can set the groundwork for your children and grandchildren.  

Many of you want us to cast our dreams into the sea of the lost, because you dare to dream and realize our country need a uniter, not a divider.

Falsehoods tell us, a vote for Obama, ensures a '08 Republican.  Not true...it seems Obama started change and even the republicans are desperate to use the word change when it was many of them that stood by while countless lives have been lost.  Asked by Romney, how his sons were helping America, he told us by working on his campaign.  I listen to both sides carefully, but this is a insult.  Pat Tillman  is a hero, his sons are not...come on!  

Not sure who I am voting for, but dare not tell us not to have hope and dreams, been there, done that, IT GETS YOU KNOW WHERE!  DREAM THE IMPOSSIBLE!      

Dale, that's bologne!  You meant to tell me, intelligent politicians Biden and especially Richardon, both with tremendous ideals to make this country better would be involved in this.
Come on, vote for something new and stop this nonsense!  If you don't like them, don't vote for them.

You guys should be eating humble pie right now.
You have consistently been biased and partisan towards Clinton and consistently failed to understand this election. You do not deserve your positions as national pundits.

Tony...Clintons...turn the page.  Anyone else, but them!  On both aisles, not too many care for them and many republicans despise her.  Maybe your candidate, but I respect the right to not go hither with the Clintons again!

as a EUROPEAN, i need to keep informed as the USA has such a major impact on our lives here.
i am AMAZED that the America that i know is in a position to vote either:
* a woman constantly spewing applause grabbing soundbites, coming across as naggy, citycentric, and flashing her "in the club" credentials,
* a creationist (!!!!!!!) "i dont think that knowing whether we evolved would make me a better person" (wtf?? can someone like this run a country??)
* a coloured "muslimesque" man,

i have listened to all candidates (@google are very good btw) and i find Obama well spoken, thoughtful and the clear choice.
but this is a very very strange time for the USA.

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