Get ready because an apology along with 40 acres and a mule will only be a down payment. OBAMA '08 IS COMING!

Has anyone else noticed the number of Hillary supporters that are obviously illiterate?  That alone should tell you something.

So the National Journal labeled a Democratic Presidential candidate as "liberal" in an effort to sway us Independents away from that candidate? Sorry, but we Independents have no interest in reading your propaganda, and even if we did, we would likely be tempted to do just the opposite of what you would like us to do, based on your past recommendations. What else you got?

the National Journal wrag is nothing but right wing republican version of Pravda.  
pat huntington ny (Sent Thursday, January 31, 2008 1:34 PM)

The NATION (Most liberal magazine) supports Obama so I believe the National Journal isn't bias on this one.  San Francisco loves Obama!

We need Hillary, she's the easiest to beat in November.

Monica, travelgate, whitewater, perjury, impeached.  Fish in a barrel.

After what Duhbya has done to this country in 8 years of "conservative" misrule, maybe voters won't be so easily convinced that "liberal" is a dirty word any more.

All of our great presidents were pretty liberal (including Republican Teddy Roosevelt, who wouldn't be nominate for dog catcher in the modern Republican party).

On the conservative side we've got Calvin Coolidge, Herbert Hoover, and Ronnie Reagan, who's legendary greatness is just that: a legend in the same sense that Big Foot is a legend. The difference is that Ronnie has better PR people than Big Foot.

First read,

Sorry. I'm sorry that anytime you put out a story criticizing a candidate that the canditate's supporters call you biased and unfair. I mean, really, it's laghable!! Just today, you had an article about Hillary ducking questions. Her people came out in droves calling you Hillary haters. Move forward an hour, you release this piece, and look at Obama's people come out in droves, saying the SAME thing.

I understand passion in your candidate, and wanting them to be treated fairly, but all the spin..... It's not just the media, I spend alot of time on these boards and the posters are in the biggest spin cycle I've seen since the corner laundry mat!!!

Some of the things that are said here, are just absolutly UNTRUE. I urge everyone to make their own decisions, with the NEEDS of this country in mind.

And just to let it be known. I am a young independent. I remember very fondly the success of the Clinton Administration. I have done my research, and find that, while i beleive Hillary would do a fine job, I beleive Obama will EXCEL in the position.  

Is there such a thing as an unbiased news network? I don't think there is. MSNBC may be slanted toward Obama, just like CNN is slanted toward Clinton, so if you have a problem with the way MSNBC covers politics, then get your news somewhere else and quit complaining. And if you really want to get a well rounded view of the political scene, then you should probably be reading from many news sources and not just one. News is entertainment these days, and if you haven't realized that then it's about time you wake up.

Speaking of entertainment, reading some of these outrageous, biased, uninformed, and often mean spirited comments gives me something to do during the day. Keep up the good work.

What is National Journal trying to do?

Oh, please don't tell me you cared so much about informing the public before you actually issue!

Like msnbc asks, I'd love to find out why now when you know that the information is quite misleading!

Obama’s African Hubris
By Larry Johnson on January 31, 2008 at 10:57 AM in Barack Obama, Current Affairs

I suppose it is too much to ask of Obama supporters to read the following material and appreciate the arrogance and ignorance displayed by Senator Barack Obama, but folks, it appears he is going to do for Africa what George Bush has done for Iraq. Only worse. He is taking sides in a tribal war in Kenya that is on the verge of becoming a Rwanda-like genocide.



Really? Let’s start with this uncomfortable fact. The leader of the Kenyan Orange Democratic Movement opposition leader, Raila Odinga, is Barack Obama’s cousin. Barack may not put much stock in the relationship, but tribal allegiances are still strong in Kenya and Barack is clearly viewed as a Luo by his fellow tribesmen. Robert Ethan reported recently that:

Barack Obama has had a major impact on the recent disputed Kenyan election. He spoke in support of Orange Democratic Movement opposition leader Raila Odinga when in Kenya in 2006. The two men met last fall when Odinga visited America as each was preparing an “insurgency” campaign in their respective countries. In a recent BBC interview, Raila Odinga, averred that he and Obama were “old friends who spoke often on the telephone”. Odinga also said that he and Obama were cousins, a claim that the Obama campaign was unwilling to acknowledge, (given Odinga’s current difficulties) but did not deny.

Great. Obama’s cousin wants to be president. Is there a familial gene? If you are like most Americans you are blissfully unaware that two of Kenya’s tribes–the Luo and Kikuyu–are killing each other over a disputed election that Odinga, Obama’s cousin, claims was stolen from him. This dispute has been accompanied by violence:

A mob torched a church where hundreds had sought refuge Tuesday, and witnesses said dozens of people — including children — were burned alive or hacked to death with machetes in ethnic violence that followed Kenya’s disputed election.

The killing of up to 50 ethnic Kikuyus in the Rift Valley city of Eldoret brought the death toll from four days of rioting to more than 275, raising fears of further unrest in what has been one of Africa’s most stable democracies. . . .

President Mwai Kibaki, who was swiftly inaugurated for a second term Sunday after a vote that critics said was rigged, called for a meeting with his political opponents — a significant softening of tone for a man who rarely speaks to the press and who vowed to crack down on rioters.

But opposition candidate Raila Odinga refused, saying he would meet Kibaki only “if he announces that he was not elected.” Odinga accused the government of stoking the chaos, telling The Associated Press in an interview that Kibaki’s administration “is guilty, directly, of genocide.”

Obama is not responsible for the killings in Kenya. But he has shown shocking naivete in supporting his cousin, who in turn has been quite eager to exploit the familial/tribal tie with Obama. Worse, members of Obama’s foreign policy team have helped fan the flames of this mess. How? Are you sitting down? They got Dick Morris involved in the election.



Former Clinton aides currently working for Obama were the “mutual acquaintances” who directed Dick Morris to Kenya to advise the Odinga campaign in November of 2007, shortly after Odinga visited with Obama in America. Morris was an extremely divisive factor in the Kenyan elections, as a foreigner, a white man, and the creator of an antagonistic “have vs. have nots” campaign platform for Odinga’s ODM. He also suggested the current campaign of civil disobedience to protest the election result, including a “Million Person March”, a la Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam.

When things got out of hand following the election, Obama called Odinga repeatedly, but Mwai Kibaki, the leader of the Government would not return his calls as he perceives Obama to be biased toward his Luo relative Odinga in the conflict. Obama is featured prominently in ODM campaign posters, slogans, and songs in Kenya, and the plaintive phrase “A Luo will become President in America before a Luo will become President in Kenya” is often heard.



Obama also is providing the Republicans with the equivalent of an ammunition dump for destroying his candidacy should he become the nominee. The following articles are a preview of shit storm that will be unleashed on Obama.

Jerusalem Post:

But even in this atmosphere Obama stands out - for not only does he theoretically support appeasement, he is actively advancing the interests of Islamists seeking to take control over a state allied with the US.

Kenya currently teeters at the edge of political chaos and civil war in the wake of the disputed Dec. 27 presidential elections. Those elections pitted incumbent President Mwai Kibaki against Raila Odinga who leads the Orange Democratic Movement. While the polls showed the public favoring Odinga, Kibaki was declared the winner. Odinga rejected the results and his supporters have gone on rampages throughout the country that have killed some 700 people so far. Fifty people were murdered when a pro-Odinga mob set ablaze a church in which they were hiding.

Kibaki is close ally of the US in the war against Islamic terror. In stark contrast, Odinga is an ally of Islamic extremists. On August 29 Odinga wrote a letter to Kenya’s pro-jihadist National Muslim Leaders Forum. There he pledged that if elected he would establish Sharia courts throughout the country; enact Islamic dress codes for women; ban alcohol and pork; indoctrinate schoolchildren in the tenets of Islam; ban Christian missionary activities, and dismiss the police commissioner, “Who has allowed himself to be used by heathens and Zionists.”

Daniel Johnson, NY Sun:

Who is behind these massacres? The opposition leader, Raila Odinga, has had a good press in the West, after he accused the president, Mwai Kibaki, of rigging the election. But the victims of the recent violence have mostly been members of Mr. Kibaki’s tribe, the Kikuyu, while those who have gone berserk are supporters of Mr. Odinga’s Orange Democratic Movement, which is dominated by the rival Luo tribe.

Whether Mr. Odinga has ordered his men to commit murder and arson is unclear. But his own background does not exactly suggest enthusiasm for democracy and the rule of law. Mr. Odinga’s father, Oginga Odinga, led the Communist opposition during the Cold War and Raila Odinga was educated in Communist East Germany.

I can see the headline now, Obama’s Commie Uncle. Democrats banking on Obama to bring a new Camelot to Washington need to pause and ask some tough questions. Their refusal to ask Obama about his familial ties in Kenya, about his foreign policy inexperience, and about his meddling in the Kenyan election, will eventually come up.

There may be an innocent explanation for all of this. But sticking one’s head in the sand and hoping these uncomfortable issues go away is not a strategy for victory in November.

jaycee, Ventura, California:'...So what is Hillary’s snappy comeback to McCain when he points out that Hillary was for the war in Iraq before she was against it, and once the polling turned negative she decided she wanted to cut and run?...'

Jaycee, Hillary can say she FLIP FLOPPED !!

She can say she 'transitioned' between her 'general election' mode Foreign policy to her 'primary mode' Foreign policy.....

.... and don't worry, hse'll change her position AFTER Obama's inaugaration  !

And the Conservative Republicans think John McCain is the most liberal senator....LOL

Dear Ron from TX, I will join you!

Being a Liberal is not wrong.  Being a Conserative in not wrong either.  calling either one wrong is.  Does it matter what Obama label's himself?  I don't think so.  Even Nixon and other Republicans in the 1960's called themselves Liberal.  Most people who describe themselves as Liberal see that the government can step into help the society where there is no help.  

What does Conservatism stand for?  Well, what I see is that business should not be bothered with regulations that protect workers and their wages as well as the enviroment among other things.  The Conservatives seem to believe that if you work hard enough, then you can do anything.  That doesn't always work because businesses are always looking for a cheaper way to do things.  

The other side from you is always looking to make how you look or your perspective (and what it is called) something evil that people should not like.  Look at titles that have come out by Ann Coulter -- If Democrats had Brains they would be Republicans.  Titles like that need to stop because that puts Americans into "us" or "them" catagories.  We can't have that any more!

Last week Obama was being compared to Reagan.  Now Clinton lovers are bashing him for being too liberal.  At least he isn't a give a $5,000 baby bond to every teen pregant girl.  I guess that was Clinton's socialistic plan to beg forgiveness for Bill's welfare reform.  I could see teens getting pregant every 18 months just to get the cash.  Any way, McCain already has Hillary number.  He said in the SC debate, that he was a true leader-didn't vote for the war and turn against it once the polls indicated Americans were no longer supportive.  So the Republicans can peg her as a flip flopper (just like Kerry), a socialist, a person of no moral character (Hill/Bill).  Plus, Democrats don't act like Bill has been depriving himself all these years. the NYTimes ran a story about how many times Hillary visited her home in up state New York.  Not many.  The Republicans are waiting with baited breath for Ms. Clinton.

good point ron jeffers

Well Said Sierra from SF, couldn't have stated it better.

I have a question to Obama supporters...is it true that if elected president, one of his first executive orders will be to impose monetary reparations against all white americans to be paid to all black americans of slavery decent as payback for slavery?  

Full disclosure: This reporter worked and wrote for National Journal from 1997 to 2003.

This explains the anti-Hillary post that come from First Read.  I don't know how you get someone who was a Far Right Wing player, to come in an be objective about Hillary Clinton.  This explains alot.  

From Campaign Diaries:

'...Update: Gallup's latest national tracking poll numbers are out, and they show Obama continuing to gain ground. He is now trailing 43% to 39%, a stunning come back as Barack trailed by double-digits just three days ago....'

STUNNING !
Can you say MOMENTUM ?

Obama '08
Honesty, Integrity, Character
It ALL COUNTS

Obama was getting blasted not too long ago by Clinton supporters for supposedly being an admirer of  Reagan, and therefore presumably too conservative and out of touch with his own party.  Now those same supporters are blasting Obama for being too liberal, and voting too often for his own party.  Makes me think some of the pro-Clinton faction are fashioned in her own image, and will "say anything" to help her get elected.

From Campaign Diaries:

In Georgia, Insider Advantage shows Obama ahead 52% to 36%. John Edwards was not included here either...'

'...PPP also has a Georgia survey out, and it confirms Obama's lead. In a survey taken after Edwards's withdrawal, Obama is ahead 51% to 41%....'

Has anyone else noticed the number of Hillary supporters that are obviously illiterate?  That alone should tell you something.
Billy, Normal, IL (Sent Thursday, January 31, 2008 3:03 PM)

Tells me why a Democratic Congress can't get anything done.

It's not such a big deal that they're releasing the record.  Obama has his record posted on his website, as do many other senators.  I'm tired of hearing experience v. inexperience, something that Clinton shouts at the top of her lungs every chance she gets.  All of them are senators, so they all have political experience.  The difference between the amount of time that Clinton has been a senator as opposed to Obama is not that significant (5 yrs) when you consider it in proportion to their ages.
I do think it reflects poorly on McCain that he has missed so many votes.  It bothers me when politicians use certain positions merely as a launching pad to their next political position (I don't think McCain is doing this, but it is a valid criticism of Obama, and perhaps Clinton to some extent).

My first time to comment on all the comments I've been reading for several months now.  Are you people Democrats?  I can't always tell from the vitriole spewed against our Democratic candidates.  I've been a Democrat for 40 years and have never been prouder of the candidates we have before us.  While I may vote for Hillary, I will certainly support Obama if he wins our party's nomination.  The choice is tough, but it's a win-win for the Democratic Party regardless of the final outcome.  Unless, of course, we so thoroughly trash our own party's candidates that we convince not only Democrats, but Republicans and Independents, as well, to vote for McCain out of some misguided fear that either Hillary or Obama would not be suitable as President.  Please.  I don't think I could handle another 4 years of a Republican President - nor could our country.  Let's talk subtantive issues - not trash.  Thanks.

The key phrase  "Obama missed a third of those votes".  Too busy trying to be president to have time to be senator, eh?

I don't understand the Obama crowd. Obama goes around and says he's the one that can work with Republicans and compromise on legislation and yet his voting record is one of being far left, uncompromising and divisive. I like how he says he has such and such a program reform (like his Social Security Reform by raising payroll taxes) and says and "I'll work to get it passed." As if the Congress and Senate would approve a tax hike on the working class of this country. He says one thing and has shown to do another. He talks about unity and attacks President Clinton and the New Democrats. He says the campaign isn't about race but is quick to point out on Oprah that he's the only black senator. He says he won't take money from lobbyists but in fact takes money from PACs and companies and lobbyists and slum lords. When he loses an primary, he accuses the otherside of cheating. When Edwards left the race, he mentioned Edwards three times and talked about himself and the campaign. He claimed in that speech he would help the poor, but actually while working with Rezko as client participated in evicting poor people from their rental properties.

"Has anyone else noticed the number of Hillary supporters that are obviously illiterate?  That alone should tell you something."

Of course, the true nature of an Obama supporter is to attack the messenger and not the message.

I for one, don't want to hear Liberal and Conservative anymore.  As far as I can tell, the words have lost their original meaning.
Liberal now means someone who disagrees with Rush.
Conservative means someone who agrees with Rush.

Depending on his mood, or the ability for him to reason out the damage of a no government society, both words have become a moving target.

Obama is now the most liberal because he decided to run for President of the US, and they're still using the same old labels that Reagan coined.

the only place for real new is talk radio. MSNBC has lost all reputation during this election process. even fox would have tried to diguise there point of view better. chris mathews, from here on is nothing but a self righteous loud mouth that lies about being objective and taking politicians to task. i wonder if bill gates is pushing them to endorse Obama like the owner of fox pushes its anchors. the only good thing on msnbc is keith obaman and the absolute worse is loud mouthed ignoramous high school graduate, Tucker. i have never witnessed a more biased reporting and shameless and limitless promotion of a person than what msnbc does for obama. there is reason to believe in a bill gates conspiracy since bill is a hippy product of the 60s. i mean cnn, the most mediocre news provider on planet earth has proven more jonalistic credibility during this election period. if hillarry was to loose fair and square, i would be fine by it. but not like this. bill clinton must be the most hated man in the news media as nothing he says reported fairly. he is often spun to say something more sinister than what he actually says. he answers a reporter's question and hes answer is mis interpreted. yes, i will say it, THIS WHOLE THING IS A FAIRY TALE!! It is similar to a running back thats being helped to more yardage from 3 of his 'O' linemen pushing him forward, when he would have otherwise being stopped short 10 yards before. i'm going back to the way i used to get my news before, on AIR AMERICA radio. i am so disgusted!!!!

Sierra,

You have to be the MOST annoying poster I have ever come across. Individuals like you lessen the case for Obama. Although you are entitled to your own opinions, comments, etc., it would be wiser to use your time volunteering for Obama rather than "cut & paste" articles that have NOTHING to do with the subject. The subject being that Obama is the most liberal voting senator (when he does show up to vote) than any other. An attack that will be used in the general election.

If Obama struggles with the heat given to him by Hillary, he will fail when the full rank and file Republican party goes after him. Like Edwards said on his exit speech, the candidate must have a "backbone." Something I don't see Obama having.

The young people are for obama.but the baby bommers and the senior citizens are not.The is no way in hell will we have a black president or a black first lady.Michelle Obama has said that they are ready to take over Washington.Since when he has no experience.He has not been up in washington Two years and even said that he never got into Washington but he knew it needed a change.If he never got onto washington how would he know it needed a change.It has been said Obama is like a bun with no filling.

I am a black female and consider myself an independent.  I don't like the conservative politics of the repubs., or the liberal politics of the dems. in general.  What I want to know is how can I make an intelligent decision on who to vote for during the upcoming "Super Tuesday" primary.  I don't know enough about Obama, McCain, Romney or Huckabee to vote for any of them.  These days its hard to know who to trust anymore.  Where can I get honest and not biased facts on these candidates and their voting record.

Cathy from Upstate NY,

I'm sick of your patronizing supercilious comments about anyone who dares not think like you.  I am a mid-30s male who could run circles around you and your crowd in any intelligence test you choose and who has never had a Facebook account.  But, I'm smart enough to realize a lying phony when I see her.   Too bad that with all your "experience," you still can't.

There's one thing worse than a liberal to Indpendents & Republicans.  A Clinton.  The fact that Barack ON THE ISSUES is more of a Democrat is hilarious given all the chatter about women who say they "vote on the issues."  De-nial.

His good judgment and experience are winning over party stalwarts.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-brooks31jan31,0,783039.column

Las Cruces Mayor Ken Miyagishima announced during the ceremony that he is supporting Obama, a democratic candidate for president. Other Obama supporters include Texas State Rep. Norma Chavez of El Paso, Sunland Park Mayor Ruben Segura, New Mexico State Reps. Antonio Lujan, Joseph Cervantes, Jeff Steinborn and Nathan Cote.

http://www.lcsun-news.com/news/ci_8112357

The Nation--- The Choice  
by Christopher Hayes

... But the candidacy of Barack Obama represents by far the left's best chance to, in Buchanan's immortal phrasing, take back the bigger half of the country. It's a chance we can't pass up.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080218/hayes

Ok. Lets put aside all of the mud-slinging, name calling and offenses!

There is one thing I have to say about Obama; when you look at the REFORMS (consisting of a number of bills) he DID push through legislature, I think he did a wonderful job supporting what he is telling us today.  Kirk Dillard, a Republican also in the senate agreed that Obama definately shows strong character to lead this country was one of those that Obama "united" in order to have one of the toughest bills move from a long time stationary position.

Lets talk experience: above any other senator that could not be as effective, Obama came in with a view that strength is in numbers and chose those that were most effective at addressing the Ethics Reform.

What happened here?  Do you people not realize that he was able to step RIGHT in to an environment and immediately identify one of the biggest problems this nation has had for many presidencies over and over again?  Strong holds by lobbyist..  Lets see, the oil industry is SO large in the united states that those who make their millions cannot afford to be challenged by environmental issues therefore, the oil lobbyist step in and pay billions of dollars to "politicians" and their "deficits" to gain priority over other more important  bills.  This is how EASY it is to be sold out by the President.  And I will assure you, Bush is NOT leaving office without making sure there is a VERY big I.O.U.  Ahead of his departure, Barack Obama has already pushed a bill through legislature that exposes lobbyist, how much and their intent of use of their contributions as to provide a sense of "control" to under the table negotiations with these guys.

And I commend Obama for not just identifying with this but, the manner of which he addressed it.  He pulled together resources from both Democrat and Republican parties and they ALL did their piece to help with this reform.

People, look at the writing on the wall!  Even Bill Clinton when HE was president did NOT have an effective method to deal with this issue!  This is the "experience" Hillary brings with her!  The "Fairy Tale" syndrome because HE failed is why it is such a fairy tale.  Problem is, Obama has ALREADY started contradicting it by carrying out part of his plan during his residence in the senate!!  Don't you people see?  As long as Hillary down-play Obama's SERIOUS accomplishments and Americans are foolish enough NOT to look into it, this makes Obama appear as though he is tossing hot air.  This is NOT true!  Obama has already STARTED using his methodologies!  They are already proven absolutely EFFECTIVE!!  He's pushed at some tough bills and unlike many before him, have been able to get them moved; that is more than ANYONE can say for Bills Presidency AND Hillary's so called experience!

That is more than what can be said for even some VETERAN senators!  I think Barack Obama is on to something with his methods of Unite and Conquer; he has ALREADY proven by his accomplishments and HOW he's accomplished them that his methods WORK, they are EFFECTIVE and there is true positive RESULTS!!

Putting aside all of the unnecessary garbage slinging, it is even more amazing that he got these things done and stood by his word of keeping the lobbyist away!  He has demonstrated that things CAN be done without selling out the White House and its political power!  He has already demonstrated with these reforms that it ISN'T so far fetched to bring people from every background; Democrat and Republican alike to actually PUSH THOSE REFORMS FOR POSITIVE CHANGE!  Not only did he think it or, stand behind it but, he brought people together, believed in it and GOT THE JOB DONE!!!!  Now we can't get ANY better than having real life examples before us to be a witness to and I think Barack Obama has done a far better than average job demonstrating that it can be done by the reality of attacking some of the toughest bills!  And he wasn't even considering being the American President when he DID do this!

Wake up and smell the coffee America; your BEST candidate; proof positive by examples of his ability and experience has already been performed FOR you!  What is left to question accept the words of a lying, failed President and his wife?  They couldn't do it so no one can!  Right!  Obama did it and he wasn't President!  Now imagine what he CAN do for the rest of our issues when he DOES become President.

Obama 08!  Get on the RIGHT wagon people....

This country deserves the leaders we choose, the policies they put forth and the embedded, self-interested media that portrays the leaders and the policies. We deserved Bush, we deserved Clinton, we deserved Bush (again) and we will deserve Clinton (again) if that is who we choose. Look around the world and ask yourself if anyone does democracy better? And with all that in mind, now that we have a narrow field of viable candidates, let us choose a leader who best recognizes (and emphasizes) the concept of government by, of and for THE PEOPLE. How that concept is interpreted is up to you/us because, after all, by November, we will get who we deserve.  
 

If that is the case how can he reach across aisles like he's campaigning. That's odd, here's the question:

Can Barack Obama reach across aisles while being the most Liberal Senator in 2007?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1668

.

The Minnesota Daily

"A real voice for change"

"The editorial board endorses Barack Obama for President of the United States"

On Tuesday, Feb. 5, Minnesota voters will gather to choose nominees for the next president of the United States. On Tuesday, the Editorial Board urges you to make your voice heard and to consider Sen. Barack Obama for your vote.

http://www.mndaily.com/articles/2008/01/31/72165262

Where is the ranking for most 11th century conservative?

Liberal, adj.  1. Generous  2. Abundant, ample  5. Respectful of the ideas or behavior of others: tolerant.

Yep, I'm happy to say that Sen. Barack Obama is a Liberal.  

<<To: Sierra, SF (Sent Thursday, January 31, 2008 1:33 PM)

Where did you get that other data from, thin air?????????????
udontknowcrap, California (Sent Thursday, January 31, 2008 2:46 PM)>>

You need to know just to scroll past the Sierra screech.....spends all day as the cut & paste hatchet queen with nary an original thought in that petty little head....

Can't wait till next Tuesday.....Obama-man can never overtake the early voters who have already given Hillary her double digit lead in most of the 22 states - can you say - California???!!!

HILLARY '08

Has anyone else noticed the number of Hillary supporters that are obviously illiterate?  That alone should tell you something.

Billy, Normal, IL (Sent Thursday, January 31, 2008 3:03 PM)
_________________________________________________________

Well now Billy, Being a degreed , very successful business professional who is supporting Hillary, I find your comment offensive, condescending and obviously biased in many ways.
Why don't you try to just stick the the relevant facts of this election. Oh wait, that's right you're an Obama supporter, you can't.

The Santa Fe New Mexican
--
Our nation needs a Democrat; Obama's a better choice-

On the other side of this weekend lies Super Tuesday — or Super Duper Tuesday in its new, 24-state form that could well determine both parties' presidential nominees.
New Mexico is part of it — a small part, given our big state's small population, but there's enough of a role that the two remaining Democratic challengers are mounting campaigns for the 26 of our 38 convention delegates to be chosen that day — out of 2,000 nationwide — in what's being called a party caucus.
--
http://www.santafenewmexican.com/Opinion/Editorial_Nation_needs_a_Democrat__Obama_s_a_better_choice

I am shocked by the nastiness of the HRC supporters.. As an Independent there is a clear distinction b/t the Obama ppl and the Clinton ppl. Optimism vs pessimism..

May the best Dem win. My vote is w/ OBAMA ON TUESDAY

NO ON CLINTONS whatever happens.

-maybe McPain will be smart and select a running mate-like Romney-with a brain.

Why is everyone missing the obvious here:

Hillary was able to vote more because her house-hold name allowed her to attend relatively few fundraisers and rallies early on. Obama, on the other hand, was a prohibitive underdog at the start and had to dedicate more of his time to getting his campaign going. The same logic more than applies to Macain, who had to essentially recessitate his campaign from scratch over the summer.

As for the content of the votes, if you would actually see how Obama and Clinton specifically differed, you'll notice that the difference betweem are incredibly minute: to ascribe some significance to the actual rankings is pretty unscientific.

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