Bill Clinton and the economy is more about timing than skill.
He had the luck to be president when the internet bubble was going strong and left about 6 months after it began to crumble.  The effective is the false assumption that Bill was good with the economy when in reality he just happened to be there during an upswing time with the internet.
However, because my party is so gullible they actually believe the myth it was all Bill.
And even though this economic problem now is totally different and the times are totally different, they will falsely believe that the Clintons will fix it.
I have become very frustrated with my party and their continued fantasies regarding the Clintons.

Based on what we've seen so far this campaign season, which is worse - Obama's hands off or Clinton's hands on?

Okay, I'll admit it. That's a silly question, because its rooted in assumptions that aren't true about how the presidency works. Assumptions Clinton knows aren't true but is pushing anyway, because she thinks she sees political advantage.

I could only catch a minute or two of Morning Joe today, but from what I saw, I thought Joe and Mika were hilarious trying to defend Chris Matthews.

"It's the GOP Economy, Stupid!!", "It's the GOP War, Stupid!", it's the GOP Everything, and we watch the GOP Candidates act like 'Stay the Course' is Smart?  One of these Bozos will get the GOP pick. You'd think it would be the one who's the farthest away from Dubya's Disasters. But it might just be the one who's the closest. Go figure, huh?

You'd think after 16 years of experience being married to a governor and a president, she'd know how government should be run by a President.  Presidents don't organize their own filing drawers.  Presidents don't micromanage each cabinet position.  Presidents shouldn't lie and distort the truth.

Hillary just doesn't seem to understand that.  A President's job is to be leader, to set goals for the nation, and to direct policy achievements toward those goals.  The President is like a chairman of the board.  The members of the board, the chief operating officer, the chief financial officer, all those other sub-number-one positions are the ones responsible for doing what the chairman directs.

The one big policy she ever tried to pass, health care, fell flat on its face.  She failed.  Her "micromanagement skills" are largely credited with a big percentage of the blame.  While she was failing at health care, Bill was fighting with the Republicans.  What should lead me to believe it will be any different this time?

Her continual distorting and attacking of Barack Obama with ludicrous and blatantly false statements is making me more and more disgusted by the day.  People ask why Barack Obama fans always attack Hillary, it's because we are sick and tired of her lies and downright evil politics.  One Karl Rove is plenty.  We don't need another one.

Time for George Allen to step back into the mix. If the race baiters on the left, and in the media want to complain just point to the Hill and Bill Show and tell em to shut the hell up.  Spice it up more, and make Michael Steele his VP choice.  Get er done :-)  

Hillary is a intelligent person, but it has become frighteningly clear that she is just not electable in the general election.  Already 47% of the electorate have said they will not cast their vote for Mrs. Clinton.  That is higher than at any time during the campaigns of Gore and Kerry.

I know a lot of women want to see the first woman president and I sympathize with that movement.  I also know that a lot of African Americans would like to see the first African American president and I can also sympathize with that movement.

However, at this point in time, I just want a Democrat to be president.  This country has been absolutely devasted by the Republicans and we can't afford even 4 more years.  Therefore, as Democrats, we need to take the responsibility to nominate the most electable candidate, so that we have someone in the White House representing the ideals of the Democratic Party.  At this point in time, that person appears to be Obama.  

I understand that there is a lot of emotion in this race, with good reason.  But, at some point, we need to put the emotions behind us and coalesce around a candidate that will help us take the White House.

Huck probably has plenty of reason to play up expectations in SC, especially with "neutral parties" smearing McCain all over the place.  Of course Huckabee says he doesn't approve and wants them to stop.  Don't be surprised if that goes just like the Romney email smear campaign of last summer.  Supposedly he knew nothing of it and didn't approve, but it all came right out of a handful of Southern Baptist churches.

This Nevada lawsuit by the Clintons is so obvious and transparent. How many of these underhanded  tactics must we endure? This is a new low.

The term "Clintonian" will now replace "Nixonian" to describe any campaign that specializes in dirty tricks.

We Democrats must distance ourselves from everything Clinton! Barack Obama will make a fantastic president.

All of these remarks by Mrs. Clinton add up to her challenging, once again, Mr. Obama over experience, with her arguing that she is better equipped.”

Better equipped??????

So was the German army when they invaded Russia.....
A lot of good that did......

“U.S. District Judge James Mahan is scheduled to determine this morning whether it is unconstitutional for the Democratic Party to accommodate shift workers on the Strip and not afford the same convenience to non-Strip voters who must work during the caucus.

If the casino's tell people that they can take off from work to go talk but not get paid, I can imagine Obama will win by a landslide....This is just another dirty trick from the Clinton's.  Bill can flap his gums all he wants to, but he is not getting that third term as President of the United States....

While it does appear the campaign is hesitant to overly use Bill as a surrogate these days, having him stump on the economy may now be the best way to use him.

As long as he doesn't get into fights with reporters and makes remarks that makes him look like a cracker, he'll do just fine in destroying his wife's campaign.

Obama camp plays the race card hard.  If you are black you better vote for Obama, or as the Rev. Lowery, an Obama supporter puts it, you have a "slave mentality."

As reported by the Atlanta Journal Constitution:

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/shared-blogs/ajc/politicalinsider/entries/2008/01/16/says_joe_lowery_obamas_black_d.html

Politico also has an interesting article on similar goings on with the Congressional Black Caucus.  Member who support Edwards, or Clinton, are being accused by others as being cowards.

GREEN BAY PACKERS WIN 08 SUPER BOWL

A question from Eugene Robinson:

'...Is it possible that accusing Obama and his
campaign of playing the race card might create doubt
in the minds of the moderate, independent white voters
who now seem so enamored of the young black senator?
Might that be the idea?

Yes, that's a cynical view. But history is
history....'



eugenerobinson@washpost.com
January 15, 2008
Did Clintons Play the Race Card?
By Eugene Robinson

WASHINGTON -- It turns out that Toni Morrison's famous
line about Bill Clinton as "our first black president"
was just a bon mot. If the Clintons took it as a sign
of African-Americans' unconditional fealty, they were
mistaken.

A new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows that black
Democrats nationwide now support Barack Obama over
Hillary Clinton for the presidential nomination by
nearly 2 to 1. This striking reversal -- a month ago,
Clinton held a big lead among African-Americans -- is
perhaps why race has suddenly become such a hot issue
in a campaign that previously had dodged the subject.

It was never realistic to think that race -- or
gender, for that matter -- would stay out of a contest
starring the first woman and the first
African-American with realistic hopes of becoming
president. From the Democrats' point of view, it's
probably better to hash all this out now rather than
wait until the general election campaign, when the
Republican Swift-boat machine would set the parameters
and tone for the discussion.

Still, it's surprising that the Clinton campaign has
been so aggressive in keeping the race issue alive. On
"Meet the Press," Clinton didn't just seek to explain
her remarks about the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.'s
role in landmark civil rights legislation (she said it
took a president to bring about real action) or Bill's
"fairy tale" crack about Obama's record on the Iraq
War (which some African-Americans took as a dismissal
of Obama's candidacy as mere fantasy). Instead, she
went on the attack, accusing the Obama campaign of
"deliberately distorting" her words in a way that was
"unfair and unwarranted."

That seemed a curious tactic to employ just two weeks
before the South Carolina Democratic primary, in which
African-Americans are expected to cast about half the
total vote. It seemed especially curious after the
most powerful black politician in the state, House
Majority Whip James Clyburn, indicated he was so
"bothered" by the Clintons' remarks that he might
rethink his decision not to endorse any candidate
before the primary.

With most polls showing Clinton well behind in South
Carolina, it was unclear how this approach would do
anything but put her further behind.

The charitable explanation would be that the Clintons
are, in terms of their political position, simply
disoriented. They are accustomed to Bill Clinton's
campaigns, in which African-American support was
pretty much assumed. Backing for Hillary Clinton from
prominent friends and allies such as Andrew Young,
Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., Vernon Jordan, Magic Johnson,
Quincy Jones and others didn't manage to keep Obama
out of the race -- and, according to the polls, won't
keep black voters from supporting him. It would be
understandable if the Clintons were frustrated at
seeing such an important Democratic constituency lured
away, and if they were doubly frustrated at the
difficulty of finding a way to criticize Obama without
further alienating African-Americans.

This is politics, however, which means that less
charitable explanations have to be considered as well.

Race is just one of the fights that the Clinton
campaign is pressing with Obama at the moment; the
other is an attempt to discredit Obama's opposition to
the war. It could be that the idea is to engage Obama
in so much tit-for-tat combat that his image as a new
kind of post-partisan politician is tarnished.

Or the strategy could be more subtle. I can't help but
recall a certain piece of history.

In 1992, when Bill Clinton was running for president,
a controversial hip-hop artist named Sister Souljah
made an ugly comment about the Los Angeles riots: "If
black people kill black people every day, why not have
a week and kill white people?" Candidate Clinton
highlighted the remark in a speech to the Rev. Jesse
Jackson's Rainbow Coalition, comparing Souljah to Ku
Klux Klan member David Duke. The episode demonstrated
that Clinton was not only tough on lawlessness but
also willing to challenge "special interests" -- in
this case, black activists.

The Clintons are reading the polls, too; they might
well be resigned to the possibility that most black
Democrats will vote for Obama. This would mean that
South Carolina is probably already lost, and that the
campaign's focus now has to be on Florida and the many
states whose delegates are up for grabs on "Tsunami
Tuesday."

Is it possible that accusing Obama and his campaign of
playing the race card might create doubt in the minds
of the moderate, independent white voters who now seem
so enamored of the young black senator? Might that be
the idea?

Yes, that's a cynical view. But history is history....'

So the Clinton's are deliberatly playing the race car
They're trying to raise doubts in white voters minds
History IS History (or Her Story)

Do we want THIS for the next 4 years ?

The Clintons are very nasty people.  Just look at how they has distorted everything that comes out of the other candidates mouths.  How transparent!

Come join this Blog if you belive that Mitt Romney is a Flip Flopper please come on over and post your thoughts, this Blog is Only for comments on Mitt Romney being a Flip Flopper.

http://www.mittromneyflipflopper.blogspot.com/

Hillary Clinton said: 'Now the FUN PART begins'...
She meant 'dirty ticks' and her smear campaign....

Here's an example of her 'dirty tricks'.....
Trying to prevent union workers from voting in Nevada

Remember Iowa when she complained about shift workers NOT being able to caucus ?

The Clintons are attempting 'voter suppression'

'Now the FUN part begins'.......

THANK YOU, Hillary...
HAVE FUN

Do you want 4 more years of THIS ?

Hillary Clinton, cold, calculating, dishonest, unethical, divisive

Come join this Blog if you belive that Mitt Romney is a Flip Flopper please come on over and post your thoughts, this Blog is Only for comments on Mitt Romney being a Flip Flopper.

http://www.mittromneyflipflopper.blogspot.com/

Student of political science, institutions and bureaucracy will be familiar with this phrase:

"Sometimes we focus so much on the trees that we forget that we are in a forrest."

Sen. Obama said clearly he would hold his subordinates accountable, bring in the best minds, get them to work together, and lay out clear objectives.  Bush was a great "CEO" that ran a tight ship of ideologues who did not care about the American people but only their buddies.

If Clinton thinks she can "run" the bureaucracy (the executive branc) as if she was some CEO and be president, she has no clue what is in store for her.

Btw, CEO's do not run day-to-day operations of companies.  They probably don't interact with anyone other than those right below them.  Hillary is selling a bunch of goods when she herself has ABSOLUTELY NO management or executive experience.  I have never seen such resume inflation in my life.

'...Just asking…Is Bill Clinton now the Bobby Knight of politics? “A riled-up Bill Clinton got in the face of a tenacious San Francisco TV reporter who pressed him about lawsuits by Hillary Clinton's Nevada supporters seeking to ban Las Vegas casinos from serving as caucus sites on Saturday -- a perceived boon to union-backed rival Barack Obama,” the New York Daily News writes. ‘You have asked the question in an accusatory way,’ Clinton fumed, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. ‘If you want to take that position, get on the television and take it. Don't be accusatory with me. I had nothing to do with this lawsuit,’ he added, just inches from the reporter's face.”...'

LIAR ! LIAR !
YOU ARE BEHIND THE LAWSUIT !!
Trying to INTIMIDATE reporters Bill ?
A YouTube moment !!
Bill's macaca !

Ever wonder why the Republicans were SO INSISTENT about impeachment ?

The Clintons created the partisan atmosphere for impeachment with these kind of tactics

Do you want 4 more years of THIS ?

Behold 'Bad Actor Hillary'...
A Con Job for America
Don't let them see the real 'Crooked, Special Interest, Unethical Hillary'

From First Read:

'...CLINTON: The New York Times’ Healy writes about the various campaign personas Clinton has taken on. “There has been Commander in Chief Hillary Rodham Clinton, the steely leader who, voters were assured, would ‘destroy’ terrorists and be Thatcher-like tough. There has been Strong-and-Experienced Hillary Clinton, but that proved to be so uninspiring that Change-Agent Hillary and Likable-Since-I-Was-a-Kid Hillary were rolled out. And Teary-Eyed Hillary, of course, won the New Hampshire primary last week, after the candidate choked up describing the rigors of the race.”

“But as her advisers said after New Hampshire, Mrs. Clinton cannot cry her way to the Democratic nomination....'

Not that she won't try....
Hillary, better not let America see 'gutter fighting, Special Interest, Unethical Hillary'

Do we want 4 more years of THIS ?

You guys need to lay off Hillary. It's in her blood. She can't help it. She will always distort what the other guy said. Always drag the rest of us down to her level. Never talk about what she would do...just how bad the other guy is. This is getting so boring. Let's vote for a candidate that wants to lift us up...not tear us down.

If you think that you can get any objective reporting out of NBC,MSNBC or Newsweek you will be mistaken.Now to the Hillary haters. Most of you are republicans and not Obama supporters. You use Obama to spew your hatred and act like you going to vote for him. I am a democrat and I want a democrat to win the general election. I support Hillary, but would be satisfied eith any of the candidates.

sadly the reasons for the good economic conditions the clinton administration enjoyed were all put in place by ronald reagan, the disappearance of the middle class that we are seeing today is the clinton economic legacy, he is the one that sided with the corporate interests and signed nafta into law, which is widely known to be the beginning of the end of decent paying jobs with benefits here in america, after nafta reagan's trickle down economics could no longer work, instead of corporate profits being used to create jobs in the u.s. those profits were and are today being used to move jobs to countries with lower wage structures, and the profits from slave wages gets stuck in a few wealthy pockets doing absolutely no good for the american worker, so when the clintons rave about their economic savvy people that know they were the originators of the destruction of middle class america will have to silently swallow a little vomit, again  

Eugene Robinson is an in the tank Obama supporter.

Listen to the guy.  He is in love with Obama and has lost all objectivity, just like 75% of the national media (local media seems to be doing a great job in the various states).

Obama started this whole race war with comments made by his surrogates the very day after he lost New Hampshire.  He sent Jessie Jackson Jr. out to attack Clinton and tie Katrina into the mix.  What does Katrina have to do with Obama losing New Hampshire?

The Today show did a very informative segment on Obama this morning that I initially feared was going to be a hit piece but turned out to be quite positive on his record and ability to bring about change. Since he has held public office for a relatively short period, I wouldn't expect him to have alot of earth shattering legislation under his belt.

Personally, I would now like NBC to do a similar piece on Clinton to see how substantive her 35 years of experience have actually been. Somehow I doubt the facts equal the rhetoric there.

I agree with Obama on his perception of what it takes to be a good president. Basically it takes having the brains to know what needs to be done. Obviously no problem there. Then, certainly one's personality would weigh heavily in either the success or failure of moving one's policies through to completion.

Clinton talks alot (way too much really) about "Day One" but I don't want to fast forward to day 101 and find out we are still gridlocked and accomplishing nothing because half the county can't stand her and 51% of the Congress won't cooperate with her. That's whats been going on since 1994 and that's what needs to be fixed.

I've read a number of articles suggesting that Obama is probably the most pragmatic and successful negotiator to ever run for office. His skills were honed as a community organizer and have served him very well throughout his career. He is the one with the most potential to make the fundamental changes that this country needs. I hope people wake up to that before it's too late.  

Interestingly,

Romney, who played Michigan like a fiddle,
playing up False Loyalties to Michiganders,
and portraying himself as having Michigan DNA,
and Cars in his blood,

the great savior of Michigan's Economics...

now goes into South Carolina,

portraying himself as being,
foremost,
South Carolina's
Great economical savior,

now, non-chalantly quips

he (Mitt romney) hasn't been in Michigan since 1965!

Yagitwhadyapayfur! Please, voters, do your research! Haven't we learned, politicians will promise voters the moon while selling-out our own mothers, to gain more political power?

If Romney cared so much about America's Ecomomic Survival, he would Not be making his own Millions of Dollars (invested in foreign markets and stashed off-shore to avoid paying into America's tax economics), by Forcing The Buy-Outs of American-grown Companies--Forcing Thousands of Americans Out of Our Jobs, and Thousands more Americans to take cuts in pay just to keep a job with new owners--Due to the Forced Buy-Outs of Romney and his (so successful) Buy-Out Firm.

While Romney is Forcing the Buy-Outs of America's Jobs, analysts who track Buy-Out Firms' compensation, estimate Romney to exceed $$$500Million of our American Dollars (NYTimes, 03/11/07), while Selling Us Out!

Wake up, America!
We Must Not take Any of our candidates at face value. We Must research our candidates and Make Educated Votes.
AND VOTE!
This presidential election is the most important (and war-time) election in decades!
This election-outcome will change the lives of Americans for generations to come.

Please,
Do Not fall for political rhetoric,
written by speech writers and memorized--
Hook, Line and Sinker--
All geared toward gaining their candidates more political/military/monetary powers Over America, The People (and now, in the world).

Research until our eyes cross from reading so much!
Make Educated Votes!

(oh. I found, for a quick leap into Romney's disastrous, short, 4-yr. term in politics,
as Massachusetts' governor: http://www.massresistance.org
This is a Conservative group in Massachusetts--the last time I visited the site, their well-documented report was under: "The Romney Deception"--no, this is not my own site).

(now, Romney Supporters, go ahead and trash me, ranting your vile name-calling, attempting to Coerce America's Voters From Speaking Out the truth. THIS is what is Very "Un-American!" Asking our candidates  questions, demanding answers from politicians, is Very "American")!--

Go ahead, voters! We MUST ask our presidential candidates our questions and demand our answers NOW. Any politician who refuses our questions, now, in our campaign process, cannot be trusted to accept our questions if we put them in political position over us!

Any presidential candidate who cannot maintain his/her composure over simple things like voters' questions, Cannot be trusted with international tyrants--to whom Mitt Romney has already shown his underbelly--in his tyrades against America's voters, getting red-faced, spitting out vile name-calling against voters in attempted Coercion to stop America's voters from asking questions--Very rudely walking away, leaving voters standing mid-sentence...we can expect no better as President of the United States dealing with world-bullies and dictators, if Romney were elected.

Take a closer look at Romney's empty promises, in his presidential-candidate-speeches to different groups, different states, as candidate for governorship of Massachusetts, candidate against Ted Kennedy. See for yourselves why this man is labeled a 'flip-flopper'--another word for 'fickle.'

 

rudy911 has lived in Florida fro six months and now 2nd is good enough?

Macacca Allen really does need to come back on the scene and show us all what a real republican is like...

Hucklemania has about run its course..or will we rewrite the constitution in his gods eyes?

Flipper is well, you know flipping on some issue somewhere...

John Mcbush will be bob jonesed by huckster or fred flintstone...

All in all a pretty lame bunch actually...matched by the go back to the socialist 60's change agents in the dim party...we are so screwed america

Rich Flatts, how is that the Obama camp playing the race card? First, what the good minister says in the article isn't really playing the race card. Secondly, I don't think that minister is officially apart of the "Obama camp"  Your post is extremely misleading.  We have all moved on from that issue---I think it's time you do as well!!

First Read:  I believe that you have a responsibility to the American people to disclose some of the false mailings that are being sent by the Clinton campaign in the early States.  While volunteering in NH, I saw mailings that the Clinton campaign sent out which were misleading (outright lies) related to Barack Obama's position and history on a woman's right to choose.  We received several calls into the Nashua Headquarters which questioned Senator Obama's record on this (truth= consistent 100% ratings from Planned Parenthood).  Now in Nevada, there is the mailing that claims Obama will increase taxes by a trillion dollars.

I am infuriated that people who have no time to research for themselves are falling prey to these deplorable tactics.  Please do a fact check on these mailings and report the truth.

I am so angry with the Clinton's and I know that I am not alone.  They have crossed the line and the damage to them is irreversible.  If she manages to manipulate the public with her lies, she will never win a general election.  I will never vote for a Clinton under any circumstances.

It's time we stand up for what is right in this country.  It's time we send a strong message that we have had enough of these kinds of politics.  Don't let democracy slip away.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/91755

*** Courthouse watch: I don't understand how denying the rights of everybody is more fair than giving voting rights to a group of people who actually planned for 10 months in advance.  Absolutely ridiculous!  And yes, W.J. Clinton made the opposite argument that I just made, so the Clinton's have taken sides to disenfranchise voters--pretty sad.


*** Hands on, hands off:
B.H. Obama ~ G.W. Bush
H.R. Clinton ~ R. Cheney
--She's put the RAT in bureaucrat.
(Seriously, who runs for a government position on a bureaucracy platform, seriously!)
H.R. Clinton's politics ~ K. Rove


Finally on a scale of Sen. H.R. Clinton to Sen. B.H. Obama, where was Fmr. Pres. W.J. Clinton's governing style?  Was he a manager or a leader?  Hands on or hands off--save the obvious joke?

This Nevada lawsuit by the Clintons is so obvious and transparent. How many of these underhanded  tactics must we endure? This is a new low.

Posted by Jane, Cary, NC (Sent Thursday, January 17, 2008 10:09 AM)
-------
GET A CLUE JANE!  Clinton did not file the lawsuit, she has nothing to do with the lawsuit, the lawsuit was filed by disgruntled Nevada residents, and she has no power or authority to stop the lawsuit. It's someone else's lawsuit.  You are making speculative baseless assumptions.  And we all know what happens
when you ASSume!

HILLARY CLINTON FOR CHIEF of STAFF....

I am getting very tired of the racist insults to all those that do not back Obama.If he and his campaign do not stop pointing fingers and whining about ---you don't like me because I am black----can you imagine how the republicans will go crazy with unknown sources going after Obama?I believe it because as usual voters are listening to Karl Roves demeaning remarks about Hillary ClintoniT SEEMS bUSH WAS RIGHT ON WHEN HE SAID HE COULD FOOL US TWICE.

Why did the Clinton Administration in the 1990s , not insist on provisions in the WTO Trade agreements they signed America to for over 10 years of Tariff Free Imports by Multi-National Corporation that ended in 2005 , amendments that sure could have been realized by the time Bill Clinton renewed the Agreements in 1999-2000 , that would have insisted that the Importing Corporations would pay fees to SS and Medicare Funds to the Government programs , so that in order to continue to import duty free , the duty of sustaining the loss of revenue to the SS and Medicare systems were being met , to counter the los that Out Sourcing product manufacturing has caused in overall Jobs Incomes Ratios of the way BIG BOX Stores have reduced the way in which the cash flows of supplying goods and services through a larger frame work of interaction of society participating in the delivery of the goods and services helps to spread an equal amount of the wealth throughout the society , which is in turn a larger income and therefore able to provide higher wages and tax revenues throughout the great part of Society ??
This is why I say that if the Clintons have the Experience they claim then why didn't these issues of SS and Medicare be a part of the WTO Trade policies to counter the effect of this consolidating an loss of overall wealth redistribution and revenue reimbursement to the SS and Medicare funding programs , and why now is Hillary more qualified to lead what is essentially her Husbands miss judgment in the first place ???
There is no reason for this to have happened , because the Largest Generation of Wealth from goods and services production , coupled with the greatest advancements in science and technologies has happened over the past 20-25 years , and if there ever was a time in History to have had the resources to battle the loss of funding in any area of economic systems functions , it would have been during these last 20-25 years , so where does the buck stop here is my questions , and who can we trust to lead the country forward to take care of these issues ?????
 Barack Obama , the candidate for Peace and Prosperity can get the job done with Dignity and class , to restore the hope for the future of all .
Thanks for your time and have a Great day in the USA .  

All morning (January 17), I've been watching MSNBC and it's been all Hillary all the time.  Talk about bias.  I am so sick of this.  For years, I supported the Clintons and now I nearly despise them.  Calculating.  Poll-driven.  Mean to the bone.  Ruthless.  Anything to win.  Power at all costs.  I did my part by caucusing for Obama in Iowa.  I hope others will do likewise.  We've got to stop the Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton revolving door and get a fresh start.

http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/ObamaBlueprintForChange.pdf

Obama's plan for America. Know the facts.

Obama '08!

The best thing about being President you will get all the money back you invested to get there and more when you leave...Dont make <cents} to me havent seen a brinks truck at a funeral yet...

You know what none of them have a clue, one of bigest problems facing the american public or should I say the our bigest overhead expence is of course our goverment, get rid of them problem solved

Pat Huntington NY / the nevada lawsuit has 'clinton' written all over it, it's their style. who's paying for the attorneys representing those disgruntled nevada residents? probably don't want to discuss that do you pat? the clintons have a long legacy of dishonest politics, why should people assume the clintons had nothing to do with this when it matches their m.o.

Since when did sleeping with the President qualify you for being President?

Actually though I'm not sure she was sleeping with the former President, given he was monkeying around with Monica Lewinsky... so there might not even be that...

I saw an interview of Greenspan on 60 minutes recently.  He said that Bill Clinton was the best "Republican" president he had known because of his economic policies.  He actually became Clinton's economic mentor and dropped by the White House often.
He said he was good at keeping spending down,and good at keeper government smaller.
I am amazed at the stupidity of the people who say the present economy is because of Clinton.  Its because for 7 years this administration has babied corporations and given them the green light to do what ever they want.  Are you better off now than in the 90's?  I'm not.  Corporate profits were at a 6o year high 2 years ago.  I recieved good raises at my Fortune 200 company until a year after Bush took office.  The company was growing by 30%, and what raise did my entire department get? A 1% raise, and its been like that ever since.  Wake-up.  Corporations are no longer sharing the wealth with their employees.  That's the reason the economy is going to hell. With high gas prices, and high taxes and stagnant wages who can afford to go out and buy big ticket items?  Only the wealthy!  Sub prime loans in some cases were sold on the premise that each year your economic situation will improve because you'll make more money thru raises etc.  OOPS!
The economy is much worse than we are being told.  This is going to be a rough year for the country.

since the recent discovery of mrs. clintons multiple personality disorder I assume she will soon drop out of the race, I am sure you will all agree that it is our sincerest wishes that she gets the psychiatric care that she so desperately needs

Presidents are "managers."
They don't sit around on the asses spouting off rhetoric all day long.
That's Obama's problem, he thinks the Presidency is a nice cushy job, and that "advisors" will run the country for him.
Haven't we had that find of leadership the last 8 years, and isn't that what we're trying to get away from?
How can Obama offer hope and change, when he wants to do the same thing Bush has been doing for the last 7 years?
It doesn't make sense.

This is from Cindy Sheehan's blog......


She showed no emotion when I met with her along with another Gold Star Mother: Lynn Braddach from Oregon, whose son Travis Nall was also KIA in Iraq. We poured our hearts and souls out to her and she hardly even blinked, let alone shed a tear for our heartbreak that she had been a major neo-connette chearleader for.

That meeting happened in September of 2005, just a few short weeks after we left Camp Casey in Crawford, Tx on August 31, 2005. Anti-war sentiment was high and the apex was a mass march and rally that hundreds of thousands of like-minded (many for the first time) attended in the belly of the evil empire on September 24th. Since then, the motivation and energy of the anti-war movement has ebbed and flowed with each subsequent fresh assault on peace and democracy by BushCo with the help, support and justification of “Democrats” like Hillary Clinton.

Guess Cindy didn't go for Hillary's tears either LOL.

YAY!!! Sierra is back to her cut and paste project. Is this how you got throught college too?

Pat in Huntington NY-

Please wake up.  Of course the Clinton's are behind the lawsuit in Nevada.  Several of the members of the group filing the suit voted for the Culinary Workers Union folks right to caucus in their place of employment.  It wasn't until they endorsed Obama did they oppose this rule.

Support your candidate, but don't be blind to the truth.

Why do the Republicans want war? Because war is profitable.  

Why regime change in Iraq but not in Somalia?  Because Iraq has oil.

Why are oil profits and war profits so important to Republicans?  Because the people paying for their elections profit from oil and war.

Why do the Republicans surround themselves with secrecy and lies?  Because they could not stay in power if average, working-class people knew that the Republican policies benefit the wealthy and not the average working class person.

What will happen if Republicans stay in power?

Visit www.republicanswar.com to find out more.

Remember, Iraq is not America's war, it is the Republicans' War.

Thank you.

John Rosengarten
Free Thinking American

Why did the Clinton Administration in the 1990s , not insist on provisions in the WTO Trade agreements they signed America to for over 10 years of Tariff Free Imports by Multi-National Corporation that ended in 2005 , amendments that sure could have been realized by the time Bill Clinton renewed the Agreements in 1999-2000 , that would have insisted that the Importing Corporations would pay fees to SS and Medicare Funds to the Government programs , so that in order to continue to import duty free , the duty of sustaining the loss of revenue to the SS and Medicare systems were being met , to counter the los that Out Sourcing product manufacturing has caused in overall Jobs Incomes Ratios of the way BIG BOX Stores have reduced the way in which the cash flows of supplying goods and services through a larger frame work of interaction of society participating in the delivery of the goods and services helps to spread an equal amount of the wealth throughout the society , which is in turn a larger income and therefore able to provide higher wages and tax revenues throughout the great part of Society ??
This is why I say that if the Clintons have the Experience they claim then why didn't these issues of SS and Medicare be a part of the WTO Trade policies to counter the effect of this consolidating an loss of overall wealth redistribution and revenue reimbursement to the SS and Medicare funding programs , and why now is Hillary more qualified to lead what is essentially her Husbands miss judgment in the first place ???
There is no reason for this to have happened , because the Largest Generation of Wealth from goods and services production , coupled with the greatest advancements in science and technologies has happened over the past 20-25 years , and if there ever was a time in History to have had the resources to battle the loss of funding in any area of economic systems functions , it would have been during these last 20-25 years , so where does the buck stop here is my questions , and who can we trust to lead the country forward to take care of these issues ?????
 Barack Obama , the candidate for Peace and Prosperity can get the job done with Dignity and class , to restore the hope for the future of all .
Thanks for your time and have a Great day in the USA .  Tony in Wickenburg, AZ

WOW! The republicans are out in full force today.

Democrats, independents, republicans, and whoever else wants our country back on track;.... If you're reading this thread, just remember to vote for whoever the democratic nominee is. Clinton, Edwards, or Obama. We won't survive 4 more years of Bush type leadership.
But if you must vote republican; vote Ron Paul.

"Any presidential candidate who cannot maintain his/her composure over simple things like voters' questions, Cannot be trusted with international tyrants..."

Right- like McCain, who has a worse temper than all of them combined.

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