Had to clear up a huge misconception that some Clinton supporters are under.  I've noticed a common thread of "the smart states (like California), which are the big states see through Obama and vote for Hillary."  Sorry to burst your bubble but Obama won the San Francisco Bay Area in California (the most highly educated demographic in the country) by almost 10 percentage points.   And it was women, men, everyone who voted for him.    

" As president, I will continue to stand up for New Mexico and will hit the ground running on day one to bring about real change." "
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
How does she get so many campaign buzz words in such a short sentence? AMAZING! :)

P.S. The people have spoken . . . and the superdelegates are listening . . .

Regarding Strickland's comments yesterday, I think most people missed the point.  The Clinton campaign has realized their best chance of winning is to solidify the women vote.  That's what Strickland was doing; classic divide and conquer pander-politics.

That's GARBAGE! As long as super-delegates are in the rules, their votes are, and should-be 'free standing.' They should be able to vote for whoever they want, without being 'representative' of any electorate.
If we're going to play the "way things ought to be" game, then the people of Michigan and Florida OUGHT TO HAVE THEIR VOTES COUNTED, AND THEIR DELEGATES SEATED!

HILLARY FOR PRESIDENT 2008,
SHE'S THE ONE!

THIS IS WHY AMERICANS ARE VOTING FOR SEN. OBAMA, AND NOT SEN. CLINTON.  SOME PEOPLE ARE COMMENTING THAT SEN. OBAMA DOESN'T HAVE EXPERIENCE, AND THAT HE HASN'T DONE HIS JOB IN CONGRESS, WELL HERE ARE THE FACTS.  

-Senator Clinton, who has served only one full term - 6yrs. - and another year campaigning, has managed to author and pass into law - 20 - twenty pieces of legislation in her first six years.

These bills can be found on the website of the Library of Congress www.thomas.loc.gov, but to save you trouble, I'll post them here for you.

1. Establish the Kate Mullany National Historic Site.

2. Support the goals and ideals of Better Hearing and Speech Month.

3. Recognize the Ellis Island Medal of Honor.

4. Name courthouse after Thurgood Marshall.

5. Name courthouse after James L. Watson.

6. Name post office after Jonn A. O'Shea.

7. Designate Aug. 7, 2003, as National Purple Heart Recognition Day.

8. Support the goals and ideals of National Purple Heart Recognition Day.

9. Honor the life and legacy of Alexander Hamilton on the bicentennial of his death.

10. Congratulate the Syracuse Univ. Orange Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.

11. Congratulate the Le Moyne College Dolphins Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.

12. Establish the 225th Anniversary of the American Revolution Commemorative Program.

13. Name post office after Sergeant Riayan A. Tejeda.

14. Honor Shirley Chisholm for her service to the nation and express condolences on her death.

15. Honor John J. Downing, Brian Fahey, and Harry Ford, firefighters who lost their lives on duty. Only five of Clinton's bills are, more substantive. 16. Extend period of unemployment assistance to victims of 9/11.

17. Pay for city projects in response to 9/11 18. Assist landmine victims in other countries.

19. Assist family caregivers in accessing affordable respite care.

20. Designate part of the National Forest System in Puerto Rico as protected in the wilderness preservation system.



There you have it, the fact's straight from the Senate Record.


Sen. Obama's Record- During the first (8)eight years of his elected service he sponsored over 820 bills. He introduced...

233 regarding healthcare reform,

125 on poverty and public assistance,

112 crime fighting bills,

97 economic bills,

60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,

21 ethics reform bills,

15 gun control,

6 veterans affairs and many others.



His first year in the U.S. Senate, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427. These inculded **the Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 - became law, **The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act, - became law, **The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, passed the Senate, **The 2007 Government Ethics Bill, - became law, **The Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill, In committee, and many more.



In all, since entering the U.S. Senate, Senator Obama has written 890 bills and co-sponsored another 1096.

An impressive record, for someone who supposedly has no record according to some who would prefer that this comparison not be made public.

He's not just a talker.

He's a doer.



Pass it on....It's impressive

It's another example of not ready on Day 1.   They assumed they'd win huge and not have to worry about "those little states that don't matter."  They assumed they could spend $140 million from lobbyists in ONE MONTH and not have to worry about anything after February 5.

Is this the kind of leadership we would get from the leader who's ready on Day 1?

P.S. The people have spoken . . . and the superdelegates are listening . . .
Nashville_fan (Sent Friday, February 15, 2008 9:29 AM)

The people of Michigan and Florida spoke too.
But, their voices are being stifled by Obamaniacs who want them to be disenfranchised.
Nice huh? The "change" candidate wants to take votes away from people who don't support him.
Didn't we already get that kind of 'change' in 2000?Is that really the kind of change we want...YOU decide!

J. Merle,
Stop it.  Nobody, other than desparate Clinton-maniacs, is buying the transparent calls for the Florida and Michigan delegates to be seated.  Every time you, and the Clinton camp, make these claims, the rest of the country (including a ton of Michigan and Florida residents) laugh.  

I am not ready for Hillary Clinton. P-E-R-I-O-D
Who am I? One of the people who choose their president.

but Obama won the San Francisco Bay Area in California (the most highly educated demographic in the country) by almost 10 percentage points.

I find that argument pretty laughable...
Not about Obama winning....
But having the most highly educated demographic in the country...
Not a bunch of bright people when they are spitting on the Marines like they did in Berkeley the other day...

I wonder if the billionaire who paid for that earmark from The Clinton's is going to want his money back when she concedes the race to Obama?

Merle:  The game is over....
The Clinton's lost.....
But don't worry.....
She will still be your Senator.....
And you people really deserve everything you have coming......

As president, I will continue to stand up for New Mexico and will hit the ground running on day one to bring about real change."

What a Liar....
She woke this morning and thought "New Mexico"?
and the state vanished from her mind like a cold beer on a hot day....

P.S. The people have spoken . . . and the superdelegates are listening . . .
Nashville_fan (Sent Friday, February 15, 2008 9:29 AM)

The people of Michigan and Florida spoke too.
But, their voices are being stifled by Obamaniacs who want them to be disenfranchised.
Nice huh? The "change" candidate wants to take votes away from people who don't support him.
Didn't we already get that kind of 'change' in 2000?Is that really the kind of change we want...YOU decide!

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Friday, February 15, 2008 9:37 AM)

Have you forgotten that Clinton agreed to those rules too? I think someone slipped something into your kool-aid. Even with Florida's vote and Michigan's vote, she is STILL behind. And Obama's name wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan!!!

Here's a good question... How many people DIDN'T go out and vote because the DNC already stripped their delegates?  I'm all for the delegates of Florida and Michigan to be counted but how about we ALL play by the rules for a change, rather than changing them mid game?  Also if Clinton believed the delegates of Michigan and Florida should count then why did she wait until after South Carolina to bring it up.  If she had said something in Iowa, she would have lost more than by 10 points probably lost New Hampshire

i think its very unfair that my voice isnt being heard. as a michigan resident i want obama in the white house and he wasnt even on the primary ticket. now sen. clinton wants the michigan delagates? the only fair way to allow michigan delagates (and florida) is to hold some sort of re-do. but unfortunatly i can see this scanario getting way out of hand and we will have another paper president like bush after he won over gore.
 
another issue is our youth...if you go to both obamas website and clintons then look at their education plans you can definitly see that obama's is superior! if you cant see it in black and white then maybe new glasses are in order. the youth of this generation will be our leaders in the future, lets educate them the right way.

The rules regarding Florida and Michigan were known WELL in advance by all of the candidates.  Both states broke democratic party rules and need to face the consequences.  All of the candidates agreed not to campaign in either state, and they all understood that delegates wouldn't be seated from either state.  Clinton didn't start even talking about this until right before the blowout in South Carolina.  The national democratic party can't seat delegates from those states now.  You can't change the rules in the middle of the game.  Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan!  And of course Hillary Clinton won in Florida -- she was much more well known.  Once voters get to know Obama his support has tended to go up.  If he had been allowed to campaign there it would have been a much closer race.

I have enormous respect for John Lewis but isn't endorsing one candidate and voting for another a classic "Clintonian" move?

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY:

I think people need to understand what the process was and is before Hillary "spins" the FL MI issue in a way that puts Democrat against Democrat. Lets start by looking at why these states lost their delegates. Under party rules only a few states were allowed to hold their primaries before Feb 5th. Two states decided that they wanted to hold their primaries before Feb 5th. The reason a state would want to do this is because it gives them more attention and a larger say in the nomination process (or so they thought). The DNC (a private organization) decided to punish the two states by stripping them of their delegates. The Democratic candidates knew that any votes received in those states wouldn't count. The voters who voted in those primaries also knew their votes didn't count when they placed them.

Now Hillary and others like you are saying those two states should have those votes counted and delegates seated or that they should be given a second chance to hold another caucus or primary in order to have delegates seated from those states. The argument is that the voters in those states will be disenfranchised if they are not allowed to have any delegates seated at the convention. The first problem with this is that this is not a "voters rights" issue. The DNC is a private organization and can nominate whomever they want and however they want. No laws dictate that the Democrats must nominate someone or how they nominate someone. It's the party rules, not law, that dictate the process. Every party in this country has their own process for how they nominate a person to represent their party. For example, independents don't go through any nomination process. They simply file the paperwork that is needed to get on the ballot.

So you can see this is not a true disenfranchisement issue. The voters have no right under the law to vote for a the presidential nominee. Only in the general election do the voters have a right to vote. What about the states with closed primaries? Are independents being disenfranchised if they are not being allowed to vote for a nominee in the primaries? NO because party rules in those states say you have to be a registered Democrat to vote. Just like party rules dictate when a state can hold it's primary and how many delegates will be assigned to the candidates.

So why not change the rules now? Well there is a problem there that I think any parent can relate too. These two states had their delegates stripped because they moved their primary up so they can have greater influence the nomination process. If you allow them now to seat their delegates, what is that saying to other states that wanted to move up their primaries but followed the rules? Because you would be rewarding those states that broke the rules by giving them an even greater say. And what will the result be? You could have every state moving their primaries up to the earliest possible date knowing there will be no consequences in the end. A total disrespect of the party rules. Is this what you want to happen to the Democratic party?

Jerry from Corpus Christi,
I'll save us all the easy slams on Texas.  I actually love Texas.  

Come visit Northern California some time.   You'll be able to return to Texas without your silly charicatures and prejudices.  By the way, I think the tiny crew that gets the press in Berkeley is full of wackos too.  But you're way off the mark with your comments.  Sorry pardner.  The Bay Area is responsible for precisely what you're using to spread your prejudices--this blog and the Internet.  I think there are a few people here smarter than your average bear.  Or, to borrow a Texas phrase, there's a lot of cattle here.  We don't worry about the hats.

Oh J Merle,

Another laughable diatribe by you.  Two things.  First of all you mention that Superdelegates should be able to vote for whomever they want without being representative of any electorate.  That is exactly what they are doing.  They are free to make their own choice and that freedom includes the freedom to choose how to arrive at that vote.  If a superdelegate chooses to vote according to the way their district votes, they are free to do that.  Nobody is making them vote according to their district.

Secondly, Clinton agreed to the rules before hand regarding stripping FL and MI of their delegates.  Now she wants to change the rules because she lost?  How can those states be representative of the electorate when Obama wasn't even on the ballot in MI and didn't even campaign in FL.  If the tables were turned I'm quite sure you would be adamently opposed to seating the delegations.

But keep the hilarious diatribes coming.  I need a good laugh during the day!

I want Florida and Michigan votes to count if they hold a legitimate election.  Yes it will cost the Florida and Michigan Democratic party money but that can be the cost of moving their primary up. Any other solution will unfairly disenfranchise someone.

Obama is just another loser pick for the dems..just like John Kerry. Nice man but a weak loser.

In Texas I want the "Clintons" to know that there is no way in hell that I will vote another Clinton in the White House.  It was Bill Clinton that "killed" the Super-Colider Project in Texas.  This project supported thousands of jobs, and not just any jobs but those skilled, long term, support your entire family type of jobs.  The Super Colider was to become the worlds largest.  It would spawn critical research in particle and quantum physics.  The spin-offs represented a change not only in the local universities in Physics but would support the new emerging Texas Silicon Corredor in Dallas.  This cutting edge technology would have maintained America's preiminent technological advantage in the world.  When Bill Clinton got into office, one of his first orders was to cancel the program and all its research, perhaps because his native state of Arkansas lost the bid to build it in that state.  WE DON'T NEED THIS KIND OF GOOD 'OL BOY POLITICS.  He actually has hurt Americas advantage because he could not see beyond his own vanity.  No more Clintons in the White House.

Mr. Lewis is just reacting as any politician would. He has constituents yet he is a supporter of the Clintons. He likely thought originally that Clinton was the best candidate for his party, knowing Obama was up and coming but untested. Now Obama has shown he is evolving faster than anyone expected, he is energizing the electorate, and is the candidate of choice, so it's logical Lewis follow his constituents' wishes and cast his delegate vote for Obama, yet exercise his democratic right to still personally support Clinton.

The issue of the delegates not being seated in the National Convention (Michigan and Florida) has always been an issue. The focus is only on Hillary because she "won" those states (even though no other Dem candidate had his name put on the Michigan ballot). This isn't really about Hillary. It's about the power-wielding Democratic national party who really flubbed up by "punishing" those two states, without realizing they were "punishing" the voters of those states. I'm surprised we haven't heard more from Michigan and Flordia voters, whose votes don't count. It's a travesty of justice.

If they want to count Florida votes, than they should be a re-vote. The two states need to be calling their local govenors for making their votes not count as it was their doings that got them into the fix that their in.

WHY CHANGE THE RULES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE GAME!
SHE IS SO DESPARATE! SHE IS A CHEATER & LIAR!

H.Clinton signed on the dotted line along with J. Edwards & B. Obama that these votes would not count because they were the ones that tried to push the dates up and when they were warned that their states would not count if they did the went ahead and did it anyway. Blame the local governments for this and not Obama.

Nice try H. Clinton your losing and now you want to change the rules, leave it just the way it is.
LIAR, LIAR,LIAR..........

Obama '08

Florida and Michigan should caucus last that's it....it's that simple. And Obama would have more delegates STILL..actually gain. You won't hear Clinton saying that..even though that would be entirely fair...she'd lose her self claimed votes.

J. Merle have you been chastised enough now?

Recently there is heated debate about demo's superdelegates rules. I think there is no issue there. Media is steering it to favor Obama again. I give it my reason:

When rules were ceated before two opponents start to race, these rules shall not ba changed, debated, or questioned, because they were equally at beginning to both parties.

If rules have deficient, they shall be revised afterwards. Then what ever they may be, they are still equal for next contesters.

That's why winner-take-all or allocating-by-proportion are both fare rules. They don't bias one or the other at the beginning of race.

Please don't forget, G. Bush was not a popular President. Al Gore won more votes than Bush.

If Obama people are crying the superdelegate rule because he is getting less than Clinton, media shall not promote that efforts.

If they think is not fare, why they are not asking to have Michigan and Florida voting counted.

If superdelegates are not democratic, this rule shall be abolished before or after race. To void the delegete count for Florida was also determined by DNC, not by democratic voting of demo party. So why one can be determined by a small group of people, while the other can not.

The rules
Sen. Clinton wants to follow the "rules" re the superdelegates. "That's the way it works," she said in an interview with Jack Fink of CBS 11 News, Feb. 14th. Saw an interview with a fellow called Thurmand (I think that's his name) who, it was indicated, is a superdelegate from Georgia supporting Clinton. He proffered the, let's call it, independent judgement line as the appropriate one for the superdelegates. The "rules" per Clinton, right?

Sen. Clinton wants to forget about the rules re Florida and Michigan. [See, "Easy answers elude Mich., Fla. delegates" by Nedra Pickler, Associated Press writer, Feb 15]

 the last thing this country needs is another inexperienced  president.   from an old down scaled, undereducatedwhite woman,a demographic from the pundits at msnbc  and yes a hillary supporter.

Why I hate Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama:
Actually, I hate neither Clinton nor Obama. After all, they are fellow Americans and both have contributed greatly to this country.
But why would I want Obama to be the next leader of our beloved country and the free world? Lets not demean any candidate and be fair to all candidates.
1. Hillary Clinton's trademark campaign theme is "35 years of experience". Barack Obama's themes revolve around hope, change, and unity.
2. Hillary has 7 years of legislative experiences as a U.S. Senator, while Obama has 12 years of lawmaking experiences as an Illinios legislator and a U.S. Senator.
3. Both senators hold law degrees, Obama from Harvard and Clinton from Yale.
4. Clinton has worked full time for over 15 years (1977 - 1993) as a corporate lawyer at Rose Law Firm. The only real legislative experience she has accumulated over the years is her seven years in Congress as a U.S. Senator from New York. She may be referring the rest of her 15 years of experience to her status as First Lady of Arkansas during Bill's governorship as well as First Lady of the U.S. during his presidency (if you think the years she was crowned the First Lady title should count as political experience, then you may also argue that Laura Bush (whose husband was also a governor of Texas) has the same experience as Hillary Clinton as First Lady).
5. Obama was doing community organizing work in Chicago during the years Hillary Clinton was working as a corporate lawyer/corporate board member (the notion that he was representing what Clinton termed a "slum lord" is inaccurate, for Obama only did legal paper work for a nonprofit organization working with Tony Rekzo).
6. Many of you argued that Clinton does not currently have the credentials to lead the nation (her campaign has repeatedly undergone shake-ups and she has fired 2 of her campaign managers following the February 5 nominating contests and her campaign money woes, as evidenced by the $5 million personal loan she transferred from her own pocket and Obama's 32% million fundraising for the month of January alone). This may tell voters something about our future president's management ability (some will blame the media for bringing this issue up, but you have to remember that Obama's own campaign has been far more better managed).
7. There is a lot voters need to know about the two remarkable candidates, so I'll list a few links I have carefully verified to contain factual information. Educated minds make wise choices, so it is important to stop attacking each candidate with no facts to back up most of the posts. As voters, it is our responsibility to educate ourselves and not be influenced by the media and the candidates themselves unless what they say is factually accurate (Obama has made a couple of inaccurate statements, but most of the inaccurate statements are coming from the Clinton campaign). I urge voters to do some fact-checking before attacking any of the candidates or their supporters.
To learn about your candidate's voting record in Congress, please do a little research or visit www.votesmart.org
To do political fact checking, you can go to one of the following sites (there are many others out there):
www.factcheck.org
www.mediamatters.org
www.politifact.com
www.washingtonpost.com/factchecker
Don't let yourself be deceived! You have got to be the judge by voting for the candidate with the qualities you feel best suits the presidency.
Please also take the time to do a little more research by going to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama. Don't look up to the Clinton Chronices in making your judgment about America's next president!
One last thing... You can track Hillary's "35 years of experience" at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18391632 to give you a sense of why Hillary Clinton continues to stick to her campaign theme of "experience".
I hope voters will now wise up and stop acting like children. In a civil society, we are supposed to engage in lively and frank discussions, not vicious attacks as if our candidates were engaged in warfare. Some of the posts seem to be filled with hateful remarks, better suited for bigots and those who prefer to live a life of ignorance than educated and compassionate citizens.

I know the object is to cause division in Hillary camp and defection but dont you think people see through this?Obama-White and rich background when necessary than Black like you lets stick togeather ok?To the Latinos We are all minorities lets stick togeather.He has no idea what everyone here went through while in Hawaii and Indonesia. Isnt that the most Muslim country there is?Clintons have done and do more for civil rights than he ever did or will do. This is about Obama not the masses. Now he wants working class before it was , we have the rich and educated. Double standard Lou its called.

is it not a fact that the delegate vote has been in effect for 30 years and revamped 20 years ago...and wasn't it done for jessie jackson a black man....and now they want to change it because maybe a black man might ...and i say might have a bad verdict...lets change it in the middle of the race....RIGHT...

What concerns me out of everything..are the scorched earth methods the Clintons are willing to do in order to win. They are perfectly fine with throwing the party under the bus to get an advantage. Trying to seat MI and FL without a re-do would decimate future primaries. Using identity/race politics to marginalize a candidate and voters(in the Democratic party!). Falsely claiming experience and not upon your own merit and rhetoric that is easily exploitable by the GOP. The Clintons' are a political machine that only serves themselves and their agenda. They are Democrats yes...but their policies and approach is detrimental to the party.

This is laughable...You Obama people can ACTUALLY maintain that this campaign isn't about playing the "race card", when NOW you even have black Superdelegates being strong-armed into changing their votes because King Obama is BLACK?! It is as plain as the nose on your face...or the nearest headline: "BLACK ELECTED OFFICIALS SWITCH SIDES TO GET A BLACK MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE!" They are actually saying it OUT LOUD now, and all of you blind followers keep on chanting that "it's not about "RACE", it's about "HOPE" and "CHANGE". There are now even quotes from one black to another stating: "you better not be the one to keep a BLACK MAN out of the Oval Office, you'll BETRAY  your race, and no blacks will ever vote for you again". Yet each and every one of you have no problem ripping Hillary to shreds because she's a woman. I have never witnessed such unbelievable hypocrisy. This was Oprah's agenda all along, remember? You people need a serious reality check! Hillary 08

LIKE PROMISE HERES BORACK OBAMA EXPERINCE:

Now, I would post those of Obama’s, but the list is too substantive, so I’ll mainly categorize.

During the first - 8 - eight years of his elected service he sponsored over 820 bills. He introduced

233 regarding healthcare reform,

125 on poverty and public assistance,

112 crime fighting bills,

97 economic bills,

60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,

21 ethics reform bills,

15 gun control,

6 veterans affairs and many others.

His first year in the U.S. Senate, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427. These inculded **the Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 - became law, **The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act, - became law, **The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, passed the Senate, **The 2007 Government Ethics Bill, - became law, **The Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill, In committee, and many more.

In all, since entering the U.S. Senate, Senator Obama has written 890 bills and co-sponsored another 1096.

An impressive record, for someone who supposedly has no record according to some who would prefer that this comparison not be made public.

He’s not just a talker.

He’s a doer.

Pass it on….It’s impressive

Re: J. Merle (again)

Once again you have not been able to bring yourself to think clearly.  I am not certain why you have such hatred for Obama or people who support him, but that is not the issue.  The delegates from Florida and Michigan will not be seated at the Convention because those were the rules that all of the candidates agreed to prior to entering into the race.  Furthermore, I have relatives in Florida who would have went out and voted if they knew there was any chance that their votes would count.  Assumming that there are more people like them in the state then we are really not telling the true story of the people.  Finally, in Michigan Obama was not even on the ballot.  It is clear to me that Clinton will do whatever it takes to become President, even if it means breaking the rules or winning through Superdelegates (as you want).  This is supposed to be the party of honesty, the party for the people (the exact opposite of the Republican machine).  If it was up to Hillary it would be the party of the Clintons, for the Clintons.  Give me a break.  I supported President Clinton and at one time would have voted for Hillary if she won the Democratic nomination.  Now, however, I only have memories of what President Clinton did for us and I will NOT vote for Hillary, unless she is nominated fairly (i.e., MI and FL revote or the votes are NOT counted, and the Clintons don't win by overturning the populay vote or pledged delegates using superdelegates).  Anyways, that's my two cents.

Peace

"I have enormous respect for John Lewis but isn't endorsing one candidate and voting for another a classic "Clintonian" move?" -- mkb, Vienna, VA

No, it's called representative democracy.
Voting your personal feelings instead of your constituent wishes is a "Lieberamanian" move.

What's laughable is that Obama's lead after the results in early March are in will STILL be Michigan/Florida-proof.  Let J.Merle, Lynette, Obamarama (now AWOL)and the others whine all they want... it makes no difference now.

I will waste my time to submit this, even though it probably will not be posted. It is beyond contempt for black super delegates to jump ship because of race, or because they were paid to.
It has been reported Obama has contributed over 300,000 dollars to various super delegates campaigns over a 2 year period. This also means he was planning a run for the White House much earlier than previously stated. Doesn't this appear to be a conflict in the message his campaign has been running on - change and hope. It sounds like hedging your bets and playing the race card - brothers needing to stick together.
Just as I thought - Obama is a Snake Oil Salesman. Go away, I am not buying.
Just say Nobama.
Either McCain or Clinton for President. From a moderate Independent.

It is amazing that the Obama supporters don't want to change the rules as it relates to Michigan and Florida, but they insist on changing the rules of the Superdelegates!  How convenient!

Feeling Disinfrancised in Michigan

Why are the Clinton supporters so vitriolic?  Lanny Davis wouldn'tlet Andrea Mitchell get a word in on Morning Joe, this morning.  He talked all over her and was a syllable away from foaming at the mouth.  They are not an attractive bunch, Bill, Hillary and their rabidly angry supporters.  The Billary Bunch have a sense a entitlement that is slowly but surely being stripped away from them and as someone pointed out, they were just so certain of the nomination, they never entertain a Plan B.  And, here we are.  I am confident that the will of the people will win in the end despite the shenanigans of the Billary Bunch.

Interesting how both Florida and Michigan vote counting posters are from New York.

I want those states counted too, but they have to revote.  It's not a fair ballot when only one candidate is on it (Michigan) and when there's no campaigning (so the name-recognition candidate wins - Florida).  

GREAT POST KJ from Dallas!!!  Very imformative and important.  Clinton obviously went into the Senate to eventually run for president.  She hasn't done a thing in there.  

You always hear that your vote counts. Michigan and Florida deserve to have their votes counted. Candidates that took their names off the ballot, do not have anything to say about it. They didn't have to But they chose to.We need to have their voices heard as well as anyones.GIVE THEM BACK THEIR VOTES!

I would never say that people don't have a right to voice their opinions, however, those opinions should be as informed as possible.  I've seen a lot of people buying in to Hillary's spin about superdelegates.  They were NOT designed to be "independent" or "free-thinkers" or to "vote their conscience."  Do some research!  They were created to help break a deadlock in the event that one should happen, by voting for the winner of the popular vote, thereby putting that candidate over the top.  The system was NOT created to keep non-establishment populists from getting in.  Hillary is spinning the "independent" idea so they can overturn our votes.  Why complain about Michigan and Florida when she wants to disenfranchise the ENTIRE COUNTRY?

I am a black female voter in Texas.  All Obama followers should go to Black Agenda and read the following:  I think EVERYONE NEEDS TO START HOLDING Mr. Obama accountable.  This man is nothing but a snake in the grass trying to get in the white house.  He will not get pass McCain and the Republician.  So, if you vote for him you all will be crying during the general election when the Republicians take the white house again.

The presidential campaign of Barack Obama has become a media parade on its way to a coronation.  Journalists and leading Democrats have done shockingly little to pin Obama down, to hold him specifically responsible for anything beyond his slogans of "yes we can" and "change we can believe in".  Prominent Black Democrats, many ministers and the traditional Black leadership class are doing less than anybody to hold Obama accountable, peddling instead a supposed racial obligation among African Americans to support this second coming of Joshua and his campaign as "the movement" itself.  What would holding Barack Obama accountable on war and peace, on social security, health care and other issues look like, and is it possible to hold a political "rock star" accountable at all?

Maybe some of us that want those michigan votes to count so bad, don't realize how many of those votes went uncommited( i don't want u), because Obama's name wasn't on the ballots. take a look at the poles and see how many people already new they didn't want Clinton to be president. and believe it or not, if Obama's name was on those ballots a lot of the people that voted for Clinton, would have voted for him instead. they only voted for her because she is already known and they didn't have a second choice (obama,) they voted for her.  
the people of Michigan have already spoken and they don't want Clinton.

We in MI were told that once the nominee was picked that nominee would ask for the votes and delegates to be counted.That is what we were told.Uncommited votes went to edwards and Obama---Hillary Clinton was not the only name on the ballot(like you like to scream)Kucinich,Gravel Clinton and Dodd were also on the ballot.There was a line  that you could have written in but that candidate had to ok this.They had until the friday before the election but did not contact Mi because they had not campaigned here.Neither did Clinton or anybody else---just Kucinich and the republicans.---so it is time to quit squawking if Obama had won you would be screaming for these votes like you scream about everything else.If my vote should not count neither should yours.You people are a pain in the a--s.You could care less if we have lost the right to vote---is that the change you want and scream for?I have already decided if my vote was not wanted in the primary it is not needed in the regular.I will just write in Hillary Clinton and urge others to do the same.

Cathy from Upstate NY,
Think again. Obbama's campaign is simply going after ANY superdelegate. To accuse his campaign or  his supporters of race baiting (who actually was started by Bill Clinton), you are simply half informed, with the other half of your brain asleep. Do a thorough evaluation of each candidate and visit their respective websites before you WHINE. You also have to go to fact checking websites like FactCheck.org

You can not change the rule of the game at the middle of the play. Rule is just a rule until the game is over. Super delegates have to think for themselves.They are not told to change the rule. Those who voted for them are simplying tell them to respect their votes, period. They can forget it if they wish. If some body over turn my vote, i will never and ever vote for him any more. Because i voted for him just not to hurt me.
As to Florida nad  Mich is concerned, the DNC rule should keep working. Only because HIllary is missing the game, she should not even make an apeal. It is a big shame for them. It makes people angry rather. Hillary can change her position just to get elected. why? By the way, is n't the Hillary family that injected race into the race and struggeling now to undo it? They would have rather played a more matured and instructive role in the history of USA. They would have played a great role to unit people all over the world. They would have said in strong terms race has no place in USA any more. They would have said sorry for folk and realse their tax card. They would have said let people decide rather than working hard a the smoking yard to make an influence using thier long established political machine. They would have said it is time for usa to start writing a new chapter. Unfortunately, they are not saying it as you all know the reason pretty well

A vote for Obama is like voting for Bush. Obama can not be a leader for all of america he will be a leader for black america he will have no choice.

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