well,well well,when things dont go your way it's time to pull the dirty trix out of the bag.shame on the clintons.

Caucuses are very undemocratic because it disenfranchises so many voters who can't be available for several hours during a specific time - the elderly, young parents, shift workers, etc.

But college students with fewer responsibilities can caucus anytime.

Hillary Huckabee should bow out now.

Only the Clinton Rove-like dirty tricks can save her, and that's not what the country needs.

We don't need more status quo, we need REAL change.

Buh-bye, Hillary Huckabee!

The democrats are just TOO SCREWED UP.

Actually calling Hillary Clinton a MONSTER IS TOO NICE.  She's a TWO FACED, TWO TOUNGED, LIAR, HYPOCRITE MONSTER, how's that for the whole truth & nothing but the truth.  She's sooooo full of herself, she stoop soooo low as to make Obama less qualified than the Republican nominee.  Now, that's LOW even for the republicans. The Clintons would rather see their party torn apart, than having somebody else be the nominee.  She has made Obama's supporters so disgusted & appalled that the thought of voting for her on any ticket would make them hurl!!!

My republican friends, WITH OUR CANDIDATE ALREADY SELECTED, LET'S MAKE SURE WE VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON!
She has screwed up her party so much, there's no way the Obama supporters would vote for her come general election, those Obama republicans certainly won't. But, there's NOTHING MORE ENERGIZING FOR US TO VOTE AGAINST HER IN NOVEMBER.  She's done a perfect job FOR US, LET'S REPAY HER “KINDNESS” & GIVE HER WHAT SHE WANT. Obama's movement would be GONE (Thanks to her), and WE'LL BE THE ONE REAPING THE BENEFIT. WHAT A GREAT FEELING THAT WOULD BE, VOTING AGAINST HILLARY.
You gotta stomach it republicans, but it is worth the outcome.

We should NEVER let democrats win the White House & Hillary can help us do it.  Even after George Bush screwing up, with Billary help we can still keep the White House in 2009.  There's still HOPE for us afterall.  Ooooh the irony is just too much.  One DEMOCRAT is A MONSTER (waay too nice), and the OTHER is A LOOSER (HOPE NEVER WORKS!! DREAMER IS EVEN WORST!!)

THANK GOD FOR MCCAIN..., he looks BETTER & BETTER BY THE DAY! My fellow republicans let's MAKE SURE WE VOTE FOR HILLARY.  This is WAY...TOO EASY to keep the White House. NO WONDER DEMOCRATS NEVER WIN.  

Democrats, if you think Republicans isn't gonna WIN in 2009, THINK AGAIN!! Hillary has given us OBAMA in a SILVER PLATER, & SHE WILL BE ON THE CHOPPING BLOCK when SHE'S THE NOMINEE.  EITHER WAY, REPUBLICAN WILL WIN!!! How beautiful is that!!

When Hilary Clinton decided to run for nomination, Obama was exploring the idea of running. At the time, she had already amassed a huge war chest, built an organization and hired staff who annointed her the "inevitable" candidate. She was aware of all the rules and nuances governing the campaign laying ahead. She never complained about cacuses deomcracy then. She just assumed she was going to hack it and profit from it. Then comes Obama, a rookie, untested, one who has not passed the "threshold of commander in chief". LOL. He upsets he tidy world, creates friction between her adoring staff forcing them to address each other's grievances with expletives, and nearly sends her campaign to bankruptcy. It is understandable that now she has to cherry pick which of the initial rules should apply to the candidacy of Hilary Clinton. Hey, it is owed to her. She is the inevitable candidate. It is her divine right to be the presidential nominee.

Sounds a familiar and pathetic cry of a desperate loser. I have grown weary and tired of her dirty play, whinning and the canniving win-by-any-means-necessary-or-otherwise ways. Hillary is not good for the Democratic Party. Come convention time, it will be payback time. I hope those super delegates are paying attention to her dirty play. They will be called to pronouce a judgement on her erranty ways that are eroding a great deal of public goodwill to rid the Repulbicans. They will be required to put down her candidacy the way a vet euthanizes a hopelessly cancer-ridden dog.

Hillary Clinton is waiting for Pennsylvania, when, just before the day of voting, when the media will not have time to verify and analyze, she will put out a significant lie about Barack Obama that causes doubt about his character. When the media gets to verify the Clinton story as false, Barach Obama will have lost the state.

This is what she did in Ohio and Texas using the Canadian consulate story.

Hillary Clinton has spent 14 years of her life campaigning. Six years campaigning for Bill Clinton's gubernatorial races, four years campaigning for Bill Clinton's Presidential races, four years campaigning for her own Senatorial races. SHe knows how to manipulate the media for votes and will stop at nothing to win.

She is frighteningly Machiavellian.

Shillery, the big cry baby. She doesn't like caucuses and she doesn't like the idea of Barack Obama taking away her birthright to be President.

Oh too bad, oh so sad. Maybe the Clinton dynasty will come to an end and then she will have more time to explain about her tax records, Whitewater, Travelgate and a host of other shady activities.

For the good of the party, Shrillery, surrender to the person who has the most delegates, the most national votes and the most states.

Give it up

She's a lady, talking about the first lady!  Soon to be Madame President, coming to a White House near you!
Starring Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton!

So political activism isn't good? That is what a caucus system preserves.

Dear Friends,

I have just read and signed the online petition:

 "Obama Supporters Who Will Not Vote For Clinton in November"

hosted on the web by PetitionOnline.com, the free online petition
service, at:

 http://www.PetitionOnline.com/obama725/

I personally agree with what this petition says, and I think you might
agree, too.  If you can spare a moment, please take a look, and consider
signing yourself.

Best wishes,

Mike Willette

Clinton fans say "this is our '68" as though that's a good thing.

What a thoughtless, despicable thing to say.

Yes, we are on a similar course as we were in 1968, and if the convention ends with her stealing the nomination like '68, this will be exactly like 1968, and it might take another 40 years to heal the wounds.

    In any successful business, it is required that the CEO appoints the right people for the company’s board. The board needs to have people with various talents. The board needs to have at least one intelligent person who does not necessarily always agree with the CEO. This person needs to have intelligent answers for why he/she does not agree with the CEO.
    Apparently, the President of the United States starts each day with intelligence meetings with his/her advisers. The president of the United States appoints his/her advisers. Some would say President Bush got bad advice when it came to whether or not to invade Iraq. The question I have is whom will the next President of the United States, will pick to have as their closest advisers? If the next president of the United States does get a pressing call at 3AM, whom will they consult with as their advisers?
     I believe when it comes to many of the pressing international and domestic problems, the first 100 days of the next president administration will be the most important to solve. Or the window of opportunity will be forever lost. He/she needs to mend many international relationships.
     He/she needs to stabilize the falling dollar. Is it true that oil is bought with the euro and no longer the dollar? Is it true the Chinese dollar no longer is tide to the US dollar? These may be the two reasons for the high oil prices; it is due to the falling dollar. He/she needs to mend many international relationships to change these two reasons for the falling dollar.
     He/she needs to create new momentum to find answers to our energy needs. He/she needs to stabilize the excess rise in the cost of health care. He/she needs to show the world that the United Sates is above all the dictators in the world. We believe in basic human rights and not perform torture. Again, many plates on a stick will have to be attended to the first 100 days of the next president’s administration.
     This country cannot afford any more presidential mud slinging. They need to stick to the issues.

The caucus process does screen out most potential voters.  With only 60k or so democratis in Wyoming, I wonder how many people will vote.  Can't change the rules now, but I hope that more states go to primaries in the future.  Caucuses marginalize working voters and the elderly.  

Hillary 08  

I believe  the caucus system leaves out too many working americans. If you work 8-12 hours, have to pick up and feed your children, do all your daily chores, and be ready to do it again the next day, there is no time to spend 2 hours at a caucus. Being able to stop and vote over an all day primary benefits all americans, not just those who can afford another babysitter in the evening. Since the better educated, affluent dems support Obama it explains why he does better.

Dandy......some of her arguments have a little validity. But here's the thing.  You could use the same arguments in terms of balloting. I work a double. I'm too frail to get to the poll.  I'll be out of town.  You need to work the situation you are given, or "fight" as she puts it.  Does it have o be a "fight"?  IF she gets the nomination, who does she fight then?  Should it be a "fight" at all?  How 'bout---let's come together folks, and let's join in a movement to change how things are done as a WHOLE.  OBAMA 08

On the subject of Obama and caucuses generally, it'd be nice, wouldn't it, if instead of lazily reciting the inaccurate phrase, "caucuses favor Obama," as though this has happened through luck or happenstance, the media made it clear that Obama and his people have EARNED that status through a "from the ground up" organizational model, a candidate/message-inspired mass of supporters in each caucus state, and a willingness on the part of volunteers to sacrifice to whatever extent is necessary to ensuring the success of the man they believe in.

And as long as they're at it--being accurate, that is--they might as well also explain that the end results in these caucuses have had their roots in smart planning begun many months in advance and, like most all important successes, have come about the old fashioned way, through commitment, hard work and perseverance.

They could even go on to say that all the candidates knew the rules and the schedule and had the same opportunities to organize to compete long before the Iowa caucuses. That is, no one began with any advantage; the playing field was level for all.

And if they really wanted to be fair, they might point out that Senator Clinton had $100M back then--a time when Obama was scrounging for lunch money--and a husband who'd campaigned for president twice, including in all the caucus states, and was the titular head of the democratic party.

Against that background, a fair reporter might then conclude by saying that in the end, Obama's credibility and his message of change carried far greater resonance with many more voters, which in turn elicited inspiration, focused and sustained action, and finally caucus victories.

And if some reporter/talking head really wanted to nail it down, he/she might say, "you know what, Senator Clinton is out of line complaining about losing these caucuses. The fact is she's gotten out hustled. The fact is she made a choice early on not to TRY very hard in caucus states, maybe because she knew she'd be out hustled, and certainly because she thought she'd have the nomination sewn up by Tsunami Tuesday. An Obama supporter might look at this picture and say that that flawed strategy is strong evidence of very bad judgment--even of hubris, the very thing most Americans despise in George Bush--which makes very dubious Senator Clinton's claim that she and only she is ready to lead on Day One."

Obama's message is one of unity/ending divisiveness, and change. Aren't his caucus successes tangible proof of the power of that message, illustrating as they do what can be accomplished when diverse people with limited resources come together to work toward a common goal?

I'm not optimistic, but the ultimate fair analysis might even suggest that the way in which Obama has earned his caucus victories gives a preview of how he would lead if elected, and what the result of his leadership would be.

“‘Dancing is hard. Caucusing is easy,’ went one line.”

Looks like another slight miscalculation for the Clinton campaign -- Turns out Obama knows how to dance and, if Iowa and Texas proved anything, caucusing is not all that easy.  

Ready on "day one"?  Apparently not.

The rules of the game are just so unfair to you aren't they Hillary. Is that what we can expect of a Hillary Clinton Presidency? Whining and Sniveling to get congress to be fair?

Look who are supporting Senator Clinton - people (mostly women) who want JUST a woman for President and low-educated misinformed people who just believe everything she declares. And nearly all her declarations contradict facts. Yes she has experience - of 35 years but most results were negative. Yes now she is against the NAFTA but earlier she praised it. Yes she traveled a lot but as a wife who did not have clearance and did not participate in anything. Yes she is a fighter but a downtown street no-rules fighter. And her illegitimate wish to use Michigan and Florida where other candidates practically withdrew following the rules and she had no competition. Yes she did some legislative work during her 7 years in Senate but Obama did nearly four times more in just 8 months! And her accusations of Obama are false.

Using all these unethical methods directed by Clinton's clan (I call them "Clinton nostra") discredits the Democratic Party, smears its reputation. You know - pure purposes are not achieved by dirty methods. Being allowed it also disreputes the very political struggle in US. You know - pure purposes are not achieved by dirty methods.

So the term MONSTER is pretty close to reality. It’s a pity that it is not a diplomatic term. And definitely it is not the real basis for resignation.

Why people take all the declarations at face value and do not want to compare them with facts???

Of course she downplays Wyoming!  It's not important to her.  This just plays to the strategy of going to Denver and claiming she won all the BIG(re:important) states like CA and NY.  Why is a vote in CA more important than a vote in WI or ID?  It's still a citizen that came out to vote in a primary.  I admire that Obama works just as hard to campaign in Nebraska as he does in Virginia.  All people are equal to him.  As a person who would have been ok with either candidate until recently, I have leaned toward his more positive style in the last week or so.  Clinton just brushes off states like Idaho and Alabama as if they don't matter.  ALL American votes matter - from every state.

Chuck Todd,
While I don't condone Power's reference to Hillary as a monster, I think she is trying to draw attention to the fact that Hillary almost always sails into Obama when she has nothing else to uncover as Obama's flaws. For instance, if she questioned his Iraq war stance or credentials to resolve that conflict, it is she who helped create that conflict and, as a self-proclaimed fighter, she will probably create even more mess with the war. She can try to convince you that many army generals support (and probably will assist her with) her plan for resolving the conflict but that is more of a political maneuvering, just as she has won Ohio and Texas in part by misleading (like President Bush) voters on the NAFTA (readers, refer to http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/06/738264.aspx for details).
She seems to overreact like a reactionary. She throws in an outlandish accusation of misdeed at Obama even if the allegation is groundless, such as in the NAFTA furor.
Rather than explaining why they believe she is a better candidate and what her 35-year experience is all about, Hillary's supporters treat her like a sacred cow or a prophet. They seem to condone her outright lies and outlandish deeds, while they overreact against Obama and his supporters. I think they need to treat all candidates on an equal basis; otherwise, they are ardent advocates of the double standard and will seize on anything Obama says or does and nitpick like crazy, while they selfishly turn their other cheeeks at Hillary's outrageous actions. Frankly, everyone needs to stop kowtowing the candidate and act like a real and concerned voter.
Hillary is, to be honest, a hypocrite, a liar, and an absolutely self-centered politician. It only takes an intelligent mind to agree, and those who disagree need to go to places like www.factcheck.org and render their own judgment.
Also, a politician who wants to transform politics cannot do so in the face of relentless and nonsensical attacks from an old school politician who exactly symbolizes politics of hopelessness and fear. To succeed in transforming politics, Obama needs to aggressively but sincerely defeat the status quo of Clinton symbolizes.

Hey MSNBC...when are you going to actually report the news instead of being on the Billary Train with your unfair reporting? You guys are so biased it's pathetic. I'm still trying to figure out how she has you on her payroll but something will come out eventually. Sen. Obama will win today and you guys will pout probably until the Pennsylvania primary. Sen. Obama will beat her in Michigan. The come back kid is Sen. Obama. It shows in the delegates and the popular vote which you refuse to admit. You won't report her lies...but you will report everything else. Again...you are pathetic.

Where are the Clinton's '06 tax returns? What are they hiding? Are they going to try to just give their '07 tax returns on April 15th? Are they trying to hide all of the money Bill Clinton has made by selling favors to foreign interests in '06? What are they hiding? The CA law suit against her is going to trial in October '08, she could go to jail. Do we want to risk that in a future president? Just some things to give serious consideration to when voting for the most important job in the world. Who you hire a person for a job with a pending lawsuit that could send them to jail?

Well... how many people showed up at the Obama rally at the University of Wyoming yesterday?

Keep on track.

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