For those wondering how the Democratic Party could be engaged in the circus we’ve seen the past few weeks, what we’re witnessing is an epic behind-the-scenes battle by 250 of the most senior and most powerful individuals in the Democratic Establishment (the superdelegates for Senator Clinton).

Senator Clinton’s superdelegates are largely individuals who don’t hold public office now but who have held significant positions within the party over the past 3 decades.  They all signed on early, figuring that they would secure plum jobs in a new Clinton Administration or nice Ambassadorships.  It’s also well-known within the party that Bill and Hillary were not shy with the “you’re either with us or with the terrorist” threats.  

So, we’re now witnessing some very powerful people who don’t often get told “No” doing whatever they can to resurrect what they consider their “RIGHT.”  These people have been on the sidelines for 8 years and fully expected that their meal ticket to a gold-plated government job would have a Clinton stamp on it.  That’s why despite his overwhelming lead in delegates and popular vote, Senator Obama has not yet been given what he has earned.  These are powerful individuals with strong voices behind the scenes.   And, if they can’t win this time around, it’s becoming increasingly clear that Hillary Clinton will attempt to sabotage Obama’s chances so that she can run again in 2012.

Finally.  discussing something other than race and Wright.  geez.  it's getting old.
Anyway, this does need to be discussed.  How much was Clinton involved and for the voters to take into account.
This is issue oriented and serious.

Her older white supporters don't care.  They're going to vote for her no matter what she says.  They've been duped into believing she has "experience" and that's what they want in a candidate, whether it's real or manufactured by PR.

Why does the media keep letting Clinton get away with blaming Obama for whispering to the Canadian government when SHE was the one who did it?

More importantly, Senator Clinton RELEASE your brackets.

Hillary Clinton is no longer relevant in this election.  It's Obama vs. McCain now.

Prediction:  The next Mark Penn memo will be on how Senator Clinton can't release her NCAA brackets until April 15 because she's too busy doing the people's work.

Wow! I'll bet you people from Ohio feel pretty dumb now:  Lessons learned:  Don't believe Clinton.  She lies!

To:   Madam Speaker Nancy Pelosi
       Senator Ted Kennedy
       Senator John Kerry

From:  An American Voter

RE:  Repetitive Pattern of Inconsistency of Sen. Barack Obama


Dear Madame Speaker, et al:

Sen. Obama is 100% ‘UNELECTABLE’ (very sad). His consistency of the inconsistency has left many voters to question his Judgment, Character and Leadership abilities to steer this country through very serious times!

TRUST IS GONE, period ! Once you no longer have trust (especially with the working class of this country), it is very very difficult to regain, if at all. In the remaining states, the voters are going to come out in huge numbers and crack this election wide open in favor of Sen. Clinton as many are finally realizing the inconsistencies of Sen. Obama is a repetitive pattern that leaves us all to question if this is “Change we can really believe in.”

The Superdeligates need to wake up and realize the scandals involving Sen. Obama will NOT soon be forgotten by the voters, nor will the scandals be swept quietly under the carpet and go away (as many in the media are hoping).

Especially, when Sen. Obama is willing to disenfranchise millions of voters to suit his specific needs when he stands at podium and claims he wants to “UNITE” America ! How is disenfranchising millions of voters ‘uniting’ America?

Makes absolutely no sense – again, we see a repetitive pattern of the consistency of the inconsistencies.  

Trust me, come November ---voters will remember and as such, MI and FL will go to McCain if Senator Clinton is not the democratic nominee.  

Are you all willing to gamble the White House?

"Instead of attacking Senator Clinton, Senator Obama should explain to the American people why his top economic policy advisor was telling the Canadians that his promise to fix NAFTA shouldn’t be taken seriously," Clinton spokesman Phil Singer said in an email. "The fact is that independent accounts make clear that Senator Clinton did not support NAFTA and that she is the candidate Americans can trust to fix it."
___________________________________

Because it can't be "just words" when they hurt someone and then be "JUST WORDS????????" when they uplift someone...



Is Barack Obama lecturing all Americans about America's history? Over 600 thousands of soldiers died during American Civil War that led to end black slavery, not worth it? Every country had history of slaving people. The root of black slavery was African traders themselves from Africa that their economy depended solely on the trade with the Europeans to sell prisoners from warring bands. America has many accomplishments and failures in their history. For better or worst, America had strived and became a stronger country that many people around the world would like to come and live in America because of the opportunity. I believe African-Americans are given alot of opportunity that many are educated and successful. Those who are not lucky and blame the Americans or the Whites in America of racism has entirely absurd accusations. Maybe Barack Obama should address the black communities, parental responsibilities so every African-Americans can go to school then finish college than many blacks left uneducated and end up in streets becoming criminals.

Has the Hillary camp given up on the lame line about "that's audacious but not hopeful"?

A little context on the last point please.  As you've reported, the Canadians admitted that their report was a distortion, and suspicion is it was intended to sway the election.

How do Clinton supporters spin this!!! I mean she did wag her finger at Obama and act all hihg and mighty like he was lying about her record. How can you trust someone who can lie so easily and blame someone else for her short-comings.  I also noticed this article mentioned nothing about the story that it was the Clinton's givin the wink and the nod to the Canadians not the Obama team! Wussup w/ that FR!?

CLINTON told Canada to take her words on NAFTA "with a grain of salt."  Man!  These people are delusional!

Even though Senator Clinton has clearly been dishonest about NAFTA, I don't expect her to pay much of a price for it. Sadly, that is what America has come to expect from "the Clintons", and for many of Senator Clinton's supporters, apparently this brazen ability to "fight" her way through any crisis, even if it is of her own making, is a positive.

I am really glad that all of this Reverend Wright stuff is coming out right now. Because I think it shows how Senator Obama responds to a crisis.

When you  contrast the way Senator Obama responds to a crisis to the way Senator Clinton does, it speaks VOLUMES about their very different leadership styles.

Senator Obama recognizes differences, seeks common ground, and takes the high road. Senator Clinton recognizes differences, seeks to exploit them, and plays the victim.

I don't know about the rest of America, but I've had enough of the low road.

Obama '08

A Younger White Voter - ditto.

I think her supporters do know her experience claims are bogus; they just don't care.

But for the rest of us, it is funny to see her "shame on you" turned back at her. Not that it will matter, either, because obviously the monster isn't capable of shame.

Nice try obama but you're twisting the facts again!! ....mrs clinton was NOT there at that meeting as an advisor,  and she wasn't there as an advocate...she was there  gathering facts and information (as any good future senator should) and she was gathering information on the ins and outs of the plan and how it would  effect the people of her perspective future state- New York....so,  as usual you got it wrong again and the good people of pennsylvania are too smart and not as simple minded as YOU make them out to be.....you should be concentrating on repairing your Rev Wright damage at this point!!!

H.R. Clinton, the most devisive Democrat ever.

The Democratic with the highest "unlikeables".

When will she realize that America needs a visionary leader, one who is willing to LEAD rather than play ball.  When will she realize she is damaging the Democratic party with her tactics.  When will she realize its time to withdraw rather than continiuing to act un-Presidential just like W?

Obama is the only candidate that embodies the President that we've all waited for watching the West Wing, The American President, Dave.

All Clinton reminds us of is Reese Witherspoons dispicable and slimy candidate in "Election"

Integrity trumps skin color, people, every time.

It's time to get real.

Obama '08

Hey "Consistency of Obama's Inconsistencies,"

Just because you put your blather into an official-looking memo doesn't mean it has any basis in the facts.  You just wrote 10 paragraphs on utter conjecture and slander.   What a crock.

The Canadians claimed that Hillary informed them with a wink and nod on NAFTA.  It is confirmed that they sought out Obama's advisor and confirmed that Obama's advisors comment was consistent with his NAFTA position.

Also clear is Hillary's experience in the White House in supporting NAFTA.  Where is the attack when the facts support the NAFTA position of both parties?  

 

Dear patty, sd:

It is not going to work. America is on to the "divide and conquer" routine. It's not about black versus white. It's about the "haves" versus the "have nots". Always has been.

First read:
Can you please put an editorial after Singer's continued misrepresentation of the truth?  You let him say it as if it's true when the Canadian Government has officially said it is not.

Hillary lied. It's proven. It's proven again, and again, and again, and again.

Is this the same Sen. Obama who stated that no one from his campaign met with Canadian officials regarding NAFTA prior to his debate with Sen. Clinton...

Only to CHANGE his story to 'We did in fact meet, but it was at their request"

IS THIS THE SAME OBAMA??

Ummm, sure is "Change" we can believe in!

Independent accounts??!!!  You mean the First Lady's own records of her actions whhile in the White House are not to be believed?

patty, sd, ca

You are amazing!

I don't bother reading anything else in these posts, I only search to find you and marvel at your stupidity.
Thankfully you have not failed us yet with any of your sad postings.

We have found Baghdad Bob ladies and gentleman! He now posts under the name of patty,sd,ca.

Nothing you have said before or after this matters, but go ahead and knock yourself out.

Why would this surprise anyone?  The Clintons have always been liars, always will be liars, and have no respect for anything but themselves and their quest for power.  RIP Democratic Party....

First Read,

You need to talk about the Nafta thing better.

It was verified that the Clinton Camp first contacted the Canadians. Bill had been hanging around a Canadian official for a few days (some woman).  Then the Canadian embassy started hounding Obama's campaign to meet. The Canadian offical during the budget meeting said the Clinton's called them.  Then released this story and memo against Obama, right before voting, but that was later refuted.  

It was a huge set up by the Clinton's right before Texas and Ohio.

"A little context on the last point please.  As you've reported, the Canadians admitted that their report was a distortion"

I too would like followup on the Canadian storyline.  I remember that the source of the Canadian leak, the chief of staff of a bigshot, reportedly said the "wink and a nod" came from the Clinton campaign and not Obama.  What ever happened to that information?  Was it forgotten in the fuss over the Obama economic advisor's role?  I know this was big news in Canada for awhile, but barely covered a news cycle in the US.

Clearly, this storyline changed the dynamics in Ohio.  Since it was that important, I would hope we would get to the bottom of it.

Obama supporters:

There is no question that Senator Clinton has lied, is lying, and will continue to lie to get votes.

The question is: do you think voters really care?

Take a look at who is in office right now. It's clear that many voters don't want an honest person in office. If the majority of the Democratic electorate indicates that they would rather have the liar they know than an honest person that they do not know, then this is the "wisdom" of the crowd.

HRC is a liar, and will never be my president.

ABC (Anyone But Clinton) '08!

Obama Camp goes after Clinton on NAFTA.  It's about time!  She will do anything to win. How about going after Clinton on Mr. Peter Paul?

Vote Obama 08!

Why does the media keep letting Clinton get away with blaming Obama for whispering to the Canadian government when SHE was the one who did it?

More importantly, Senator Clinton RELEASE your brackets.
We want transparency (Sent Thursday, March 20, 2008 1:24 PM)

LMAO at that post about the brackets!!

Define independent sources.  Are these the same kind of independent sources that wanted to buy a primary in Michigan?

First read:
Can you please put an editorial after Singer's continued misrepresentation of the truth?  You let him say it as if it's true when the Canadian Government has officially said it is not.
Get it right please (Sent Thursday, March 20, 2008 1:35 PM)

I agree firstread, you need to at least report the facts as they had been presented and say that the canadian embassy said it was not true and that Clinton camp actually called them.

Here's what David Gergen, who was present at the meeting in question, has to say about then First Lady Hillary Clinton's view.

"I was actually there in the Clinton White House during the NAFTA fight and I must tell you Hillary Clinton was extremely unenthusiastic about NAFTA. And I think that’s putting it mildly. I’m not sure she objected to all the provisions of it but she just didn’t see why her husband and that White House had to go and do that fight. She was very unhappy about it and wanted to move on to health care. So I do think there’s some justification for her camp saying, you know, she’s never been a great backer for NAFTA."

Once again, Chuck Todd is trying to clobber Clinton with a whole lot of nothing.  Now why don't we get back to talking about how Barack Obama is unelectable in November because he is a duplicitous lying fraud who has surrounded himself with racist and anti-semitic ne'er do wells.

NOTE that the CLinton team's response statement re-iterates the lie that she "did not support NAFTA."  Well, the ABCnews story quotes several who were at the mtg references int he schedule docs as saying she STRONGLY supported it.  Someone is lying.  Gee, I wonder who.

These are all mote points. The race is over. And if the Clintons try and do something underhanded to try and steal this nomination the you know what will hit the fan. There will be chaos at the convention, thousands will walk out and Hillary can forget getting any votes from Obama supporters. There will be a backlash like nothing you have seen before from the "majority" of people who will have voted for Obama.  

To all voters in States yet to hold primaries and to all yet uncommitted superdelegates:

It is time to get behind a single candidate so that we can get out of this war in Iraq: give those deserving a tax break: improve our public school system; work towards national health care at least initially for all children and seniors; provide help to those wishing to attend college; eliminate the influence of special interest as those who support and fund Hillary; and move forward with a progressive agenda for this country including improved race relations.

It is time to get behind Obama and give the guy some time to prepare his battle against McCain which he can win.

Special Note: I see that the Obama camp has proposed a plan to seat the delegates in Michigan and just splitting the Michigan delegate vote. The Clinton camp has declined. So now tell me all you Hillary supporters that she is more concerned for the rights of voters then she is for her own gain. Now that is unAmercian.  

no , the Canadians didn't say anything about a distortion, They instigated a full investigation into who leaked the memo show

OBAMA CONDEMNED NAFTA THEN TOLD THE CANADIANS IT WAS JUST CAMPAIGN RHETORIC

obama, he cant' be trusted.

BUt thanks for the link showing CLinton has more exectutive experience, and obamamama has none

Looks like the chickens have come home to roost for Obama. Down in every poll. He's more unpopular then Bush, and is just ahead of Charles Manson. And Manson is giving a speech on race relations later today, you know, a gift from himself to all of us.

The writing is on the wall and the light at the end of the tunnel is making it clear to read.

It looks like this: Obama Versus McCain

Well done Obama !!!

You can count on this 53 year old Irish/Swedish male's vote !!!

About time the main stream media points out the facts on Hillary and NAFTA.  

Other media outlets have quotes from people attending the meeting.

1) Hillary was responsible for deciding who would attend the November 1993 meeting and who would not.
2) Hillary was in charge of swinging women to vote for NAFTA.
3) These attendees have said they are shocked that Hillary is saying she strongly opposed NAFTA all along. They would never have voted for NAFTA had she not persuaded them.

Does anyone else notice that the Clinton campaign NEVER answers a question?  Instead they change the question and say ask Obama this or that.  When they asked why Clinton hasn't released her tax records yet, they said ask Obama to release his Illinois records??  Answer the questions already!!!  And why doesn't the media remind everyone that it was the Clinton campaign that contacted Canada NOT Obama?

Just like with the Iraq war, Hillary has changed her position on NAFTA. If Hillary manages to steal the nomination, Republicans will tear her down. She does not have a consistent policy on Iraq and now it's clear that she lied to the voters in Ohio on her position on NAFTA.

In addition, these 11,000 documents give no proof of the foreign policy "experience" that she claims to have. Republicans will call out Hillary for padding her resume.

I have New Independent! I keep writing reporters and asking them: why don't you stick with your question until either Clinton herself, that horrible Howard character, or Mark Penn ANSWER the question asked. It's frustrating for us out here because we don't have any power to ask and force answere to the questions and we are desperate just to hear them answer one, just one directly. And we don't want some "around April 15" kind of answer!

Patty sd: sweetheart, you seriously need to 1) go back to school or 2) stay in school. The errors in your post are so glaring, you are giving a bad name to Hillary supporters? For example, it is ENslaving; it's "her" history (America's) and on and on. You show your true colors in these two lines: totally blaming the African slave traders for the trade (sorry there was WHITE market for them) and accusing blacks for not pulling themselves up by their bootstrings with all the generous, white help! That is Bush 101, not the democratic way! Wake up and try and attend 1) A US civil rights history course and 2)get some help with your grammar. it's painful for the rest of us. Of course, if your texting from your cell phone while in 10th grade English, I understand the errors!

The Wright Stand
Judgment, character and Barack Obama.

By Peter Wehner


Several years ago my wife and children attended a Presbyterian church in Washington, D.C. We liked and respected the senior pastor, we had close friends in the congregation, and we felt spiritually nourished by the congregants and the worship. Two of our children were baptized there.

Not long after the attacks of September 11, my wife and I heard two different visitors — one in remarks during a church service, the other while teaching an adult Sunday-school class — that were derogatory of and inflammatory toward Israel.

Upon hearing the words of these two people — which I found both shocking and disquieting — I immediately raised concerns with the senior pastor. He tried to reassure me and then put me in touch with an associate pastor who was in charge of a ministry to Palestinian Christians (one I had been previously unaware of). I engaged in conversations and written correspondence with the associate pastor and the head of the board of elders over this issue; in the process, I discovered that our church hosted an annual conference which featured only speakers who were highly critical of the state of Israel. For the first time it became clear to me that the church we attended was deeply biased against the Jewish state. When what we deemed to be adequate counter steps were not taken, we left the church, in good measure because of this matter and how it was handled.

I thought of this episode in our lives in the aftermath of learning about the bigoted and vicious anti-American statements by Barack Obama’s pastor, friend, and spiritual adviser, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright Jr. of United Trinity Church of Christ.

I don’t for a moment believe that Senator Obama shares Wright’s manifold and manifest hatreds. What bothers me — particularly as one who has had good things to say about Obama in the past — is why Obama apparently never raised any concerns with Wright about his rhetoric or the black liberation theology being practiced at United Trinity. This was the obvious and appropriate thing to do.

Reverend Wright clearly preaches from a particular cast of mind, one with which Obama was surely familiar. If Obama isn’t willing to voice his concerns and objections with Wright and stand up for his country as it is being slandered by his pastor, what can we expect from Obama when he is asked to stand up against some of the world’s worst dictators?

The options aren’t particularly good for Senator Obama. He either agreed with the views and core beliefs of Reverend Wright, which would essentially disqualify him as a serious candidate for the presidency; or he didn’t agree with Wright but for decades sat passively by and accepted Wright’s teaching and rants. Didn’t Obama consider, even once, pulling Wright aside and pointing out — as any true friend would, in a civil but forceful way — that hailstones of hate simply have no place in a church and that the “social gospel” is not synonymous with preaching bigotry and anti-Americanism?

Beyond that, Senator Obama’s speech on Tuesday, for all the praise it has garnered in many quarters, created additional doubts about Obama’s candor and his willingness to speak up and speak out against a charismatic, forceful, and pernicious figure.

ABC News reports that earlier this month Obama, at a community meeting in Nelsonville, Ohio, said, “I don’t think my church is actually particularly controversial.” Obama went on to say, “[Wright] has said some things that are considered controversial because he’s considered that part of his social gospel; so he was one of the leaders in calling for divestment from South Africa and some other issues like that.”

Last Friday, as Senator Obama was making the round on cable TV trying to explain Wright’s remarks that were being replayed over and over again, Obama indicated that he had never heard his pastor of 20 years make any comments that were anti-American until last week. But in his Philadelphia speech two days ago, Senator Obama seemed to change his explanation:

I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy. For some, nagging questions remain. Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely — just as I’m sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.

But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren’t simply controversial. They weren’t simply a religious leader’s effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country.

This is where things begin to get sticky for Obama. In half-a-month we’ve gone from Wright and his church being essentially non-controversial; to Obama implying that the venomous statements by Wright came as news to him; to admitting that he was in the pews when Wright spoke as a “an occasionally fierce critic” of American domestic and foreign policy. Those remarks were so fierce that even Obama, himself an orthodox liberal who has scorched the Bush administration, was clearly made uncomfortable by what Wright said.

It also begs the question: What exactly did Wright say that Obama strongly disagreed with? Was Wright in fact presenting a “profoundly distorted view of this country”? The odds are a good deal better than even that he was. But Obama has yet to answer those questions — and he probably won’t, at least with any specificity, unless he’s forced to do so. This story, which seemingly changes in every re-telling, is beginning to resemble nothing so much as Bill Clinton’s evolving explanation about his draft notice. It was then that most of America was introduced to “Slick Willie.”

Senator Obama’s speech on Tuesday was a brilliant effort to deflect attention away from what remains the core issue: what did Obama hear, when did he hear it, and what did he do about it? The answers, as best we can tell at this stage, is that Obama heard some very harsh things said from the pulpit of Trinity United Church of Christ; that Obama heard them said a long time ago and probably repeatedly; and that he did little or nothing about it. This from a man who tells us at almost every stop along the campaign trail that he has the “judgment to lead.”

One always wants to be careful about making sweeping conclusions about any individual, particularly one as interesting and compelling as Senator Obama. All of us, in replaying our lives, would change certain things. We would all hope to show more integrity, more courage, more honor. Nevertheless, in a presidential campaign we have to judge based on the available evidence. And given his deep and long-standing association with Reverend Wright, it is fair to ask whether Senator Obama — a gifted writer and speaker and a man of obvious intelligence and appeal — has the appropriate judgment and character to lead this nation. Spending 20 years at Trinity United Church of Christ under the leadership of Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. doesn’t tell us everything we need to know about Barack Obama — but it may well tell us enough.

— Peter Wehner, former deputy assistant to the president, is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center

What's the big deal?

So Hillary was for NAFTA before she was against it?

That's the kind of tactic that always leads to victory!

Oh wai...

Dear ME,CA -- I think you are drinking too much spiked Koolaid....You are hallucinating.

LMAO at the brackets comment.  We all needed that.

I do agree with several of the posters that the media has a responsibility to report the official stance of the government which is that Obama did NOT "wink" them on NAFTA talk.  Of course, what would the trolls and haters have if it wasn't for that?  oh yeah, the Wright issue.

You'd think the most honest and brave speech on race relations in our generation would quell them, but it is never good enough.  Oh well let them carry their baggage of hate around with them.

I am an Ohio voter and I voted Obama.  Why? I didn't trust Hillary on NAFTA and I was right.  Penn. voters have the luxury of forsight that most Ohio voters did not have.  Don't make the mistake many Democrats made here by believing her spin.

Someone posted that their wife lost 20 pounds going to Mark Penn's spin class.  Another great post and true.

Really, is anyone not sick of hearing what patty,sd,ca has to say? MSNBC should ban her so we have have a productive conversation, without her spewing her nonsense.

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