Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Joe — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 14:33:47 GMT

Just curious why didn't you mention the the Hill article says the same thing about Clinton AND EDWARDS. They all have/had former not current lobbyist working for them. Of course in all cases including Obama they resigned their current jobs to do it.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

OHBrother — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 14:40:10 GMT

Hillary, maybe the best way to support women is to get your brother to pay his child support:

December 20, 2007 -- Owe, brother!
Hillary Rodham Clinton's youngest sibling is a deadbeat dad who owes tens of thousands of dollars in child support to his politically connected ex, The Post has learned.
In a disclosure that could prove embarrassing for his sister, Anthony Rodham has stiffed his former wife, Nicole Boxer, out of $75,000 in child support, as well as $55,000 in alimony, a source close to the case said.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/12202007/news/nationalnews/hills_brother_a_deadbeat_514395.htm

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Bee, NH — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 14:46:44 GMT

How many apology have we seen from Clinton's campaign? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out. Before we know it, Bill Clinton will be sending an apology is way also.

It seems the Clinton's campaign doesn't get it; Obama is not someone you can use as a punching bag. David Brooks sealed it in his last article and make a compelling argument on why he is so different. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/18/opinion/18brooks.html

As you may all know, politicians are good at telling lies and covering their past. Reverse is the case when it comes to Obama. He made his past public and tells the truth even if you don't agree with him.

I hope the Democratic Party count themselves as being lucky to have someone with that kind of candor in their party. If Obama were to be a Republican, Democrats can kiss this upcoming election good bye.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Dot, Illinois — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 14:51:00 GMT

Mark Murray

Thanks for the nice story on Senator Biden's campaign worker. I enjoyed reading it.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Cancun Albertson, Miami Florida — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 14:58:30 GMT

Hillary doesn't do the real dirty work. She has "people" that do that for her. When you're flush with Chinese money, it's easy to buy your hatchet men.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Doles, Miami, FL — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:15:32 GMT

Bee wrote, "How many apology have we seen from Clinton's campaign? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out. Before we know it, Bill Clinton will be sending an apology is way also."
---I guesss it depends on different perspectives. I would imagine it works for some people. I have to admit that wouldn't work for me. I believe these people are very smart individuals. I do not believe those accusations are random. I have a feeling there is a strategy at work here. I think it is about doing the damage and apologize after. It's probably done on the notion that most will accept the apologies and eventually forget about the accuser but not the accusation itself. You may forget who made the accusation but if it creates doubt in someone's mind, the work is done. I just base my opinion on the fact that these individuals certainly know better. They are very accomplished and calculated people. Is it a coincidence that it's mostly coming from folks who pretty much have nothing to lose? I would like to see that coming from someone whose career is on the line. Perhaps if it was Jeanne Shaheen referring to past drug use, I would interpret it as a mistake.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Sean — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:18:20 GMT

Obama is a talker, not a doer. He can talk honesty all he wants - but does jack.

Some make good
Some make bad
Obama makes excuses

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Hillary is no good4America — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:19:01 GMT

This is typical Clinton, make up lies about people, have them audited, Call them Musliums, then say I know nothing about this. Her "people" are low lifes

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Sean — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:19:07 GMT

Cancun Albertson, Miami Florida: Of course she doesn't do the dirty work - that is how all campaigns work.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Rick,ky — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:19:23 GMT

This ia a quote from Sen. Kerrey's letter to Barack.Kerrey told Obama in the letter that was not his intent.

"I answered a question about your qualifications to be president in a way that has been interpreted as a backhanded insult of you. I assure you I meant to do just the opposite," Kerrey wrote.

He went on to say he considers Obama one of the most talented people he's met in politics and "exceptionally qualified by experience and judgment to be president of the United States." He expanded on Obama's potential to bring peace to the world and his capacity to inspire hope - high praise for someone backing Obama's top rival.

So much for Hillary saying Barack has No experience.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

diane — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:21:21 GMT

The story says and people in Illinois know, that voting present is used many times for party tactical reasons.
It is more of a tool to use to defeat something that the other party is trying to do to set the other party up. It is used as a protest and it is used alot.
You have to understand Illinois politics and how Present is a tool in the arsenal.
It is not like voting present elsewhere.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Rick,ky — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:28:24 GMT

Then, we have Hillary & Bill saying she was involved in every aspect of his Presidency, but in a NYtimes article today, this is what her spokesman has to say concerning donations to the Clinton Foundation."In a separate written response from Mrs. Clinton’s campaign, a spokesman, Phil Singer, said, “Senator Clinton is not involved in the fund-raising or operations of the Clinton Foundation."

" DELUSIONAL THINKING BY COMMON SENSE AMERICAN'S IS OVER "

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Rick,ky — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:33:55 GMT

As a side note, if Hillary had been endorsed by the Porthsmouth Herald in New hampshire instead of Barack, the headline for this thread would have been something like this. HILLARY GARNER'S ANOTHER HIGH PROFILE ENDORSEMENT. Nice of you 1st read to put Barack's endorsement at the bottom of this thread. Pro Hillary indeed.

" DELUSIONAL THINKING BY COMMON SENSE AMERICAN'S IS OVER"

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

jerry/corpus christi texas — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:34:37 GMT

Two pledged $1 million each while they or their companies were under investigation by the Justice Department.”

Ahhh......
Buying pardons again.....
One Million dollars?
Must have been their asking price....

“Other donations came from supporters who had been ensnared in campaign finance scandals surrounding Mr. Clinton’s 1996 re-election campaign.

Bill must have held the files over their heads to make them kick in a little more money for Hillary's campaign.....

“Clinton predicted that when she mentions in her inaugural address, ‘particularly the oil-producing countries, “We’re not going to be taken for a ride any longer. We’re going to stand up and say enough,” ... when I say that, those countries will know because they follow our elections, they follow what we do in our politics as closely as we do, they’ll know that I always try to do what I say.’” Clinton predicted those words would cause the price of oil to suddenly drop, to $60 or $70 a barrel.

Fox news likes to play a clip of a campaign rally in 2006, where Hillary tells people "If you want lower gas prices, vote for a democrat". Of course Gas prices surged 57% higher since January 07, so it begs the question; Is Hillary saying that if you vote for me, you will have lower gas prices? That is quite a statement considering prices are based on an open market. Hillary learned a few things about lying from her husband; remember the tax cuts for the middle class back in the 90's? Still waiting for those, it took President Bush to enact those promises.

“When I stand up in my inaugural address and say to the entire world, particularly the oil-producing countries, ‘We’re not going to be taken for a ride any longer. We’re going to stand up and say enough,’ ... when I say that, those countries will know because they follow our elections, they follow what we do in our politics as closely as we do, they’ll know that I always try to do what I say.”

Sounds like she has her own war plans ready and waiting.....

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

blair, NY — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:41:00 GMT

I would hope that most of us on this blog are intelligent people. If your brother does not pay child support is it your duty to pay? Answer that question! Why is this a Hillary Clinton issue. I find that the political process causes peolple not to think clearly and that is the reason why we are in the position that we are in. Unfortunately, things will not change because anger and bitterness will ruin our system. Wake up people stick to the issues.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Cancun Albertson, Miami Florida — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:42:38 GMT

Sean

Agreed. But usually you have low level nameless stooges do the dirty work. Hillary has husbands of governors and ex US Senators that are war heros doing her smears. It's amazing what money can buy you.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Bee, NH — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:46:16 GMT

Folks,

The verdict is out, check it for yourself

http://www.allamericanpatriots.com/48739838_over-60-foreign-policy-experts-endorse-barack-obama-president

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Charlie — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 16:28:48 GMT

sean, the whole pot calling the kettle thing is getting annoying. Who are you talk? Obama has done way more for this country than you have. All politicians are talkers you half wit, that's kinda what politics is all about. The difference being both sides need to compromise on solutions, now none of us are really sure of the circumstances for Obama's present votes because we weren't there and we don't know fiirst hand, we can specualte all we want but the fact is we haven't a clue to why he voted that.
Judging by the man's intelligence, his integrity and character thus far through his life, I would say I bet he had a good reason to vote the way he did.
He may not have as much traditional washington experience but then again if you read at all you would know that some of our most beloved presidents had the same kinds of experience as Obama. Perhaps that's why famed historian Ken Burns is endorsing Obama. Because Ken obviously sees the same greatness in Obama that we all see in the likes of Lincoln or FDR or JFK.

I for one would welcome a historical great over another historical worst any day of the week. And Hillary would clearly be the same thing as Bush on the other side of the aisle. That's not what we need right now.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Derek Fricks, Greenville, SC — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 16:29:28 GMT

Obama does not have the experience and is not poilished enough to be the President of the United States. His speeches and platforms are very superficial and scripted. He can speak of the changes needed in our country, but what is his plan? When asked an intense question, his faavorite response is "uh-uh" and then addresses the importance of the question without answering the question. Hilary, on the other hand, is determined to make a difference and bring about the changes needed for our Country. I think all running for office have deep roots in grass roots politics but this is a National Office, of course, that extends beyond then needs of local constituents. We have experienced eight years of revitalization of our economy and national debt under a Clinton and we need them again!

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Virginia — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 16:40:33 GMT

Blair, I could not agree with you more. Obama does not seem to stand up for the issues as illustrated in Illinois and the current Senate position by skipping the vote that Hillary had to make. This was for the best for our troops whether one support the war or not. Please people be fair. We are in agreement that we want the best person in the White House and that is Hillary. Until, someone can point out facts on issues why he/she hates Hillary, I will vote for her or Edwards.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Atlanta Fan — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 16:40:39 GMT

Obama resonates throughout the early states and is better in the later stages of his campaigning. SC is going to be interesting. If Obma wins there the rest may fall his way in the South. There is real anxiety here on weather he is the real deal. I think the old guard is in for a real shocker !
GO OBAMA !

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Focused — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 16:48:05 GMT

Everyone who has posted a comment in this forum (myself included) should be thankful for the right and ability to commit verbal homicide on anyone they want when ever they see fit. Shall we cut to the chase and all the negative nonsense that I read here please?

It's an old adage but it still is true to this day: The objective of the presidential election is to choose who we hope to be an individual whose ideas/ideals line up with our own politically as well as psychologically and morally. What it really is for us is choosing who we hope to be is the one who screws us over the least. Every candidate running right now has done it to someone else already... now we get to pick the one who does it to 260 million all at the same time.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

--NSMSNBC — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 16:50:48 GMT

[Also in Independence, Clinton said foreign nations who sell America oil will drop the price if she is elected President.
" ...Because they'll try to lull us once again into a false sense of security."
"They'll expect Americans and the oil companies to say, okay, fine, we got our prices down."]
--How can she possibly get away with saying something so baseless. The Mideast countries or OPEC or whoever controls oil prices now aren't going to reduce gas prices simply as a result of Hillary Clinton, whoop ... That is ridiculous. She invented a conspiracy theory of the oil-producing region, and is simply playing on folks' fears of high gas prices, or trying to buy votes with a promise of lower gas prices. These countries don't care about our administration, they care about the money. They are not going to bow down for Clinton, they can always sell to China. The high prices are not a result of our lazy energy policy. A bill was just passed by Congress, did the oil cost plummet, no! The high prices are because of the instability of the Middle East and increasing WORLD demand and any economist can add other reasons, but these are the main ones I know of. It is a ridiculous statement, she should be taken to task by the media. Why won't she quite making mistakes so that the media can focus on somebody else?! Britney Spears of the political arena I say!
--Other conspiracies about gas prices Clinton has invented, price gouging. And here she is doing such again. Once again, offering no workable solutions.
--Two things are making us 'go green': Al Gore's influence and higher energy costs. So, she is partially correct that reducing the cost burden would also likely reduce the American concern for climate change, maybe. But I think we would still care.

I thought Bill was the Clinton spouting hot air, but Hillary seems to just as much. Outrages! But neither this nor Bill's promise that G.H.W. Bush would help him tell the world about a new foreign policy, in the face of his son, while his son is still in office--which is just bad politics or rude, she can wait until she's inaugurated. Even more Outrages!! And yet, I seem to be the only one fuming over these Outrages statements. Am I in the wrong?

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Sittin Bull, Dallas, Texas — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 16:50:50 GMT

"present"

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:01:47 GMT

I read the article on Obama's present votes. I'm still uncertain why the man who claims to be so firm in his convictions and always stands up for what he believes in chose to not take a stand on so many occasions.

In some instances, the legislation under consideration (such as the juvenile crime bill) would have presented a very tricky situation for Obama in which either a yes or no vote could put his state senate seat on the line. So he voted present. How is this standing up for what he believes in? How is this not playing the political game?

In other cases, as with the abortion bills, there was a strategy in place by pro choice organizations such as Planned Parenthood, and his present vote was in compliance with that strategy. How is this standing up for what he believes in? How is this not playing the political game?

Still other present votes were made to safeguard other Democrats in the IL State Senate who were in tight races or largely Republican districts. The Democrats voted present, rather than no, defeating the Republican-sponsored bills without having to put their necks on the line. How is this standing up for what he believes in? How is this not playing the political game?

I have no problem with employing these sorts of strategies at all. The problem I see is that this makes Obama a political game player as much as any of the other candidates. His entire campaign is based on the notion of change...particularly changing the way things are done in Washington. But yet throughout his career, he has played the game just like everyone else.

When did he decide to stop playing? It seems to me, that was about the same time he started to run for president.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

BIGOLDTEXAN — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:12:21 GMT

A Piece from the Charlie Rose Show.

Bill Clinton’s performance on the Charlie Rose Show on Friday night showed a defensive, angry, and off message former president trying desperately to sell his wife’s faltering candidacy. Throughout the interview, Clinton repeatedly tried to disparage Obama’s experience, and, in the process, distorted some important aspects of American presidential history (including his own) while conveniently forgetting about others.
First, he brazenly claimed that he hadn’t run for president in 1988 because "in my bones I did not feel I was ready" to be president. Noting that "I had several governors urging me to run," the former president tried to leave the impression that it was his wisdom in recognizing his own inexperience that led him to take himself out of the race. While this version of history may be convenient for the husband of a candidate falling behind Barack Obama in the early primaries, it is simply not true. It’s another Clinton rewrite on history.
Those who were there when Governor Clinton suddenly decided not to run in 1988 will clearly recall that it was solely because of the serious threat of his extra-marital affairs seeing the light of day. It had nothing to do with experience.
He had seen what happened to Gary Hart and knew that he could not risk the same outing. After running a strong but losing race against Walter Mondale in 1984, Hart was heavily favored for the 1988 nomination until he dared reporters to follow him after they raised questions about extra-marital affairs. They took him up on his offer and ran right into his tryst with Donna Rice. The resulting publicity knocked Hart out of the presidential running. This was not the time for Bill Clinton to venture into a presidential race with the formidable baggage he was carrying.
To make Bill Clinton understand this, his former chief of staff Betsey Wright sat down with him and made him list the names of all of the women with whom he had been involved. Through this exercise, she forced him to confront the political peril they posed. Sobered, Clinton decided not to run.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

BIGOLDTEXAN — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:13:14 GMT

Heres another piece:
The former president's memory of history was equally faulty when he rhetorically questioned whether America had ever elected a president as inexperienced as Obama. The answer is: yes, we have -- and they turned out to be the two greatest presidents of the 20th Century. Woodrow Wilson was first elected to public office in 1908 when he was chosen to be governor of New Jersey. Four years later, he was in the White House. Franklin Delano Roosevelt was first elected governor of New York State in 1928 and became president four years later.
If Obama, elected to the U.S. Senate in 2004, becomes president in 2008, he will have exactly duplicated the experience in statewide elected office of Wilson and FDR. Wilson's previous experience as president of Princeton and FDR's as a one term State Senator and defeated VP candidate, presumably are not far from Obama's six year tenure in the Illinois State Senate as far as experience goes.
But it was not his failure to recall history accurately that led his apparently panicked aides -- as reported on air by Rose -- to push for an end to the embarrassing interview. It was that Bill had taken off the gloves by implying that electing Obama was risk for the American people. And he appeared to agree when Rose characterized the former president's views as suggesting that electing Obama would be "a roll of the dice."

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

pam, los angeles, ca — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:18:04 GMT

Everyone is talking about Sen's. Obama and Clinton as being the Dem. candidate, when the person with the most experience, the one they are all copying is Sen. Biden. Wake up people, he is the one.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Steve, Hartford, CT — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:30:31 GMT

It comes down to this: Do we want to continue fighting against "the other side" (either "the liberals" or "the conservatives")? If we do, the country is SCREWED. Nothing will get done, and each side will force through whatever little bits of useless ideological agenda they can. Meanwhile, the real problems will be left for another day, as is happening now.

Take a good hard look at the candidates, on both sides of the aisle. Who do you think will actually be able to end the partisan war? Who will actually manage to keep the focus on getting things done instead of stopping the other guy?

Personally, I think Obama and McCain have the best chance of uniting people, and Obama more than McCain.

Why? Well, Obama over Clinton mostly because her rhetoric points to a Clinton presidency much like the last one, steeped in partisan rancor. She talks a lot about "beating the Republicans," which has me convinced she's planning on a lot of 50% + 1 victories.

See, I absolutely HATE 50% + 1 victories. Those aren't victories at all--they'll be undone the minute your side loses the balance of power. I am sick of seesaw Congresses and threats of filibuster (if they're so against withdrawing the troops, then MAKE THEM FILIBUSTER IT YOU COWARDS). I'm sick of seeing the little, near-useless guestures (like the piddly increase in the minimum wage, which has been STAGNANT for a DECADE) passed while the real work collects dust because "the other side" refuses to let it through.

We need someone who wants REAL victories for America. We need someone with the vision to fix our education, healthcare, immigration, and spending systems. We need someone who won't just capitulate the minute someone threatens to filibuster. If they want to filibuster, they had better go get a friggin' dictionary and a phone book, because the THREAT of FILIBUSTER SHOULD NOT KILL LEGISLATION. Only a REAL FILIBUSTER should ever even have a CHANCE at doing that.

I'm sorry, but everything Obama has said about Clinton is absolutely true: she is running a textbook campaign and she'll say anything to win. Find that interview where she was asked about what the risk in electing Obama was, and see how she tried to pull a Slick Willy--too bad she's not as slick as he was, and she came off looking LAME AS HELL.

And to you Clinton supporters who will probably denounce me as angry and unfair to Clinton: I gave her a chance and honestly wanted to be able to support her if she won the nomination, but now I just can't. I just don't like her or the way she's running. Her policy positions are fine, but she's just a shrewd, cold politician, like Kerry was. I am SICK of that. My vote will be for Obama (and no, it probably won't matter, since I live in CT).

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Focused — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:31:10 GMT

Stability or lack thereof in the Middle East is only partially (but a good portion) to blame for oil prices out of control. Surely someone has taken note that there are people and businesses here in the states invested in oil? Surely they have enjoyed the ride of the price per barrel of oil skyrocketing out of control? By way of them buying more and more into the oil stocks, it also hikes the price of the barrel.

I bet those dividend checks look pretty good.

On the flip side of that... guess who gets the sticker shock?

hmmm?

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Kristian O — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:34:31 GMT

With all this so-called experience, why are Clinton folk consistently having to apologize to Obama for unfounded remarks? Frankly speaking if I were Barack I'd tell them to keep their apologies and shove it. It's game time and they know exactly what they're doing. Time to fight fire with fire. Now they're using Edwards' opinion to try to attack Barack. What a pathetic display of supposed "experience".

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

BIGOLDTEXAN — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:37:28 GMT

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

jay — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:37:50 GMT

Hey Sean, don't get your ass whipped!

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

BIGOLDTEXAN — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:38:20 GMT

Another Piece from the show.

He had seen what happened to Gary Hart and knew that he could not risk the same outing. After running a strong but losing race against Walter Mondale in 1984, Hart was heavily favored for the 1988 nomination until he dared reporters to follow him after they raised questions about extra-marital affairs. They took him up on his offer and ran right into his tryst with Donna Rice. The resulting publicity knocked Hart out of the presidential running. This was not the time for Bill Clinton to venture into a presidential race with the formidable baggage he was carrying.
To make Bill Clinton understand this, his former chief of staff Betsey Wright sat down with him and made him list the names of all of the women with whom he had been involved. Through this exercise, she forced him to confront the political peril they posed. Sobered, Clinton decided not to run.
The former president's memory of history was equally faulty when he rhetorically questioned whether America had ever elected a president as inexperienced as Obama. The answer is: yes, we have -- and they turned out to be the two greatest presidents of the 20th Century. Woodrow Wilson was first elected to public office in 1908 when he was chosen to be governor of New Jersey. Four years later, he was in the White House. Franklin Delano Roosevelt was first elected governor of New York State in 1928 and became president four years later.
If Obama, elected to the U.S. Senate in 2004, becomes president in 2008, he will have exactly duplicated the experience in statewide elected office of Wilson and FDR. Wilson's previous experience as president of Princeton and FDR's as a one term State Senator and defeated VP candidate, presumably are not far from Obama's six year tenure in the Illinois State Senate as far as experience goes.
But it was not his failure to recall history accurately that led his apparently panicked aides -- as reported on air by Rose -- to push for an end to the embarrassing interview. It was that Bill had taken off the gloves by implying that electing Obama was risk for the American people. And he appeared to agree when Rose characterized the former president's views as suggesting that electing Obama would be "a roll of the dice."
When Hillary or Bill attack Obama, they only antagonize voters. Particularly at risk are the black voters who make up the bulk of the Democratic electorate in South Carolina and who will heavily influence the Florida primary vote as well. Reeling from a week of ill considered personal attacks on Obama, the Clinton campaign sought to recover its footing only to stumble badly once again when an out-of-control spouse, who happens to have been president, put them back in the doghouse with Democratic voters.
Sometimes even a loyal husband does more harm.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Young Democrat — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:46:06 GMT

I think that whole "present" thing is pretty cool. I like learning of cool strategies politicians sometimes use. I find it very interesting

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

tom — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:53:19 GMT

Obama pastor is a racist. Tucker carlson talk about this. Why is Obama running away from his pastor. What judgement did he make to be associate with a pastor people believe is a racist. I am a white quy from Iowa.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

KEN, DETROIT, MICHIGAN — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:59:30 GMT

IOWA SHOULD KNOW THAT IF OBAMA IS NOMINATED AS DEMOCTRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE IN 2008 BUT HE WILL NOT WILL GENERAL ELECTION IN 2008 WITH REPUBLICAN CADIDATE FOR SURE THEREFORE IOWAIN PEOPLE CHOOSE RIGHT DEMOCRATIC CADIDATE WHO CAN BEAT REPUBLICAN IN GENERAL ELECTION 2008

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Ron, TX — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 18:02:18 GMT

The TRUTH on "present" votes in Illinois. Hillary Clinton just doesn't understand the legislative process in Illinois, but can you blame her? She only has 6 years of experience in elected office. Obama has 11. She still has some learning to do.

http://www.barackobama.com/factcheck/2007/12/20/fact_check_present_votes_are_a.php

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Dot, Illinois — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 18:07:10 GMT

NSMSNBC

I also thought that Senator Clinton's comments on how her election and inaugural address would cause oil prices to come down was a bit of a stretch. For some one who doesn't want to be pinned down to specifics promises, I was very surprised that she made those comments-- unless she has been in contact with leaders of oil producing countries and has some information not commonly known. Possible, I guess.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

TheDonald — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 18:10:19 GMT

Seems to me that Hillary and her people have used up all their attack lines against Obama and her now descended to another low.....Only two week to go before another 'Howard Dean scream'.....

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

kenn — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 18:11:29 GMT

Get your minds back in the gutter where they belong .Quit living with what bill did and aceppt that Bush has ruined your country and soon even the richest of us will reap what he has sown.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

kenn — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 18:14:19 GMT

Lets face it Obama is the republicans best chance and that is why they all back his effort and help him any way possible ask Scarmymindboro or rush or any right winger they will start gushing over Obama right Chris Mattews

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Sean — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 18:59:17 GMT

Cancun Albertson, Miami Florida: Hey, if she can get people that high up doing her smears, the more power to her.

thanks for your comment, it truly shows you are intelligent and not filled with vitriol like some of the others here.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Francine Modderno, Leesburg, Virginia — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:00:41 GMT

The Hill's headline is deceptive, and shamefully biased against Obama. The article says that all the major campaigns have lobbyists on their payrolls, so why create a headline that makes it look like this is an Obama scandal brewing? I'm offended by the headlinw. The article is labled a news item, but the title is an editorial comment. Shame on the Hill, and shame on Mike for repeating and perpetuating such a biased, soundbite headline. It's the same thing Hilary's surrogates have been doing lately.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Kirstin, Los Angeles, CA — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:05:29 GMT

Perhaps if Hillary (6 yrs in US Senate) had the LEGISLATIVE experience that Obama has (8 yrs in State Senate, 3 yrs in US Senate and a Professor in Constitutional Law), she would know why he responded "present."

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Shotti Kawlra, Potomac, MD. — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:05:42 GMT

Mark: First of all thanks for a balanced and unbiased article. Naturally none of us agree with everthing anyone else says all the time. To be able to disagree is part of this wonderful democratoc process. Of course all candidates have strengths and weaknesses. I support HILLARY because of her experience and she benefits from Bill Clinton's successful presidency. That is why 80% of democtats approve of him.

We all dislike negative campaigning, but the person who introduced that in this campaign is Edwards, which later was followed by Obama. At least Bob Kerry had the decency to appologize. During Edwards 6 years in the senate, he should state what he accomplished other than apologizing for his earlier votes and mistakes.

Obama"s numerous "present" votes in Illinois and skipping the important votes in the senate is an illustration of avoiding sensitive/controversial issues. There is a pattern here.

Besides general election is not going to be a cake walk. Be ready for more negative and ugly campaigning from the Republicans.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Kelly (from Pittsburgh) — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:12:27 GMT

The present votes that Obama cast were 130 out of 4000 votes. He used that tactic for a variety of reasons. Sometimes it was a strategic plan of the Illinois Democratic party. Some were for a strategy endorsed by the pro-choice lobby, to protect the seats of loyal supporters like Barrack from being backed into a corner by the Republican controlled leadership. A few times he did so because he as an expert he knew the law might be worthwhile, but was unconstitutional.

Obama has a lot of accomplishments that he can site from his many years of elected service. More than Hillary or Edwards has. None of the candidates have much foreign policy experience that relates to being president. Richardson comes the closest. It's not about experience, but about making good decisions and surrounding yourself with quality people. Hillary has a bad track record on both counts. These reasons are why Bush has been such a failure not inexperience.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Shane, Roswell GA — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:17:46 GMT

Obama has my vote! Even if he or Edwards doesn't win the nomination, 2008 will be the first year I vote Republican.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Jennifer Hunt, Spokane, Washington — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:17:54 GMT

....Can't you just picture it.....I bet EVEN bin laden likes Obama. You talk about world peace tactics. I bet for the first time even he might put down his hatred towards America and VOTE!

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Jason, Ca — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:33:41 GMT

All three latest Iowa polls show Clinton in the lead.
How about MSNBC talk about those for a change?
Check out realclearpolitics.com.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Nashville_fan — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:43:03 GMT

"I have no problem with employing these sorts of strategies at all. The problem I see is that this makes Obama a political game player as much as any of the other candidates. His entire campaign is based on the notion of change...particularly changing the way things are done in Washington. But yet throughout his career, he has played the game just like everyone else."

Carrie,

The present vote thing is a red herring in my opinion. Senator Obama has proven himself to be a savvy politician and a worthy opponent. He wouldn't be where he is today without some political skill. I don't see that as a liability.

It is ironic that the primary tactic being used by Senator Obama's opponents is basically "See he is just as bad as us." What a commentary on modern politics.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

ace p washington, d.c. — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:45:06 GMT

if a bill comes to a vote and it has aspects of it that need to be worked on, made more in line with the constitution or needs amendments saying present or abstaining is a strategic tactic to hold that bill for further review.

in some cases it is the best thing to do rather than let a bill that is not all bad, nor all good be killed. a bill may just need adjustments or have language in it that is hurtful to who a representative reresents. in such a case it would be best to try and hold that bill for negotiations rather than vote no and kill it.

if anyone is interested they can research what each candidate has done on a bill and why. i have found that hillary, edwards (in his 4 years in the senate), biden, dodd and others have a long list of present or abstains. the reasoning for this is the bills need further work.

in politics a campaign can twist it because people don't know how the rules work just the same as some people play checkers and some people play chess. it isn't as simple as it is being put out there.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

CintiKid — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:53:28 GMT

Go down to $60 a barrel. Try go up to $120 a barrel.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Mr. Unite Us — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 20:08:55 GMT

Barack Obama voted present less than 4% of the time
while serving in Illinois. That's pretty low.

Now moving up to 2007.

Do you agree with Obama's proposed U.S. Senate legislation regarding contractors.

Friday, December 14, 2007
Printable FormatFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Jesse Broder Van Dyke (Akaka), Michael Ortiz (Obama), or Aaron Murphy (Tester)

Washington, DC – U.S. Senators Daniel K. Akaka (D-HI), Barack Obama (D-IL), and Jon Tester (D-MT) today sent letters to the Attorney General, and the Inspector Generals of the Defense and State Departments, seeking information about their apparent failure to investigate allegations made by former Halliburton/KBR administrative assistant Jamie Leigh Jones that she was drugged and raped by several co-workers while employed at Camp Hope in Baghdad, Iraq.

The alleged assault occurred in July 2005, three days after KBR had transferred Ms. Jones to work in Iraq. Ms. Jones was treated at a U.S. Army Hospital in Iraq after reporting that she was raped. According to recent news reports, no criminal charges have been filed in the matter and reporters have been unable to confirm that any federal agency is investigating.

“With tens of thousands of American contractors operating in Iraq, we will not tolerate abuse and misconduct, and these contractors must be held accountable to American criminal law,” said Senator Obama. “I first introduced legislation nearly 10 months ago to hold contractors accountable, and I will continue to work to develop a solution that closes the legal loopholes, protects our troops and civilians, and promotes America’s values.”

http://obama.senate.gov/press/071214-obama_akaka_tes/

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Bee, NH — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 20:09:29 GMT

Carrie,

I thought you are a lawyer? I guess you don't know the difference between a political strategy that get things done and a strategy that is polarizing.

I wish the current democratic congress can learn from Obama; perhaps, they would have done a lot rather than been useless. I'd rather stick with the Obama's strategy rather than Clinton's strategy of polarization.

Obama's strategy will win independent and Republican over. He is more pragmatic than your candidate who thinks the post of President should be ascribed to her.

Quit your talking point and focus on how to help Democratic Party win election next year. As for me and my house we've decided to cast our votes against the Clintons in both Primary and General election if need be.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Bee, NH — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 20:16:36 GMT

I also thought that Senator Clinton's comments on how her election and inaugural address would cause oil prices to come down was a bit of a stretch. For some one who doesn't want to be pinned down to specifics promises, I was very surprised that she made those comments-- unless she has been in contact with leaders of oil producing countries and has some information not commonly known. Possible, I guess.
Dot, Illinois
----------------------------------------------

The comment was not a stretch. We all know how the Clintons dine and whine with the Saudis.

FYI: The Clinton's presidential library contain some donors that have business dealing in Saudi Arabia, and other Oil producing states. I am pretty sure Bill Clinton is among the "Click" that price gauge oil market. That is the reason why he won't release his tax return.

A vote for Clinton is a vote for George Bush and his cronies. It is a vote to destroy the Democratic Party.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Lee Holmes — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 20:46:50 GMT

Kenn: yeah. Our nation is so ''ruined''that its GDP shot up to 4.9% this year. One of the best performances of the decade. Then we find out that CO2 under Bush [despite all of the hot air from DC],has been diminishing despite not having signed KYOTO,[while EU carbon releases head north,despite having signed KYOTO],330,000 fewer Americans in a period usually marked by layoffs were on unemployment,creating a solid 4.4-4.5% national unemployment rate which has never been bested even by Democrats this side of WWII,Iraq is doing well enough that it was dropped from American ''key concerns'' in the top slot to be replaced by domestic issues,nobody talks ''Iran''anymore,[let alone ''invasion''],gas prices are falling[Iraqs first new oil tanker in 27 years sets sail this week],Bush signs the most comprehensive fuel-efficiency bill in decades,displaying firm bi-partisanship in at least this area,while the media either at turns ignores or agonizes over Edwards alleged infidelity,Hillarys deadbeat brother,Spears The Youngers pregnancy,Bills off-go-the-wheels-on-the-wagon performance recently on Charlie Rose,and Obama-As-Muslim.[such bromides invented not by the GOP,but the ''tolerant''faces of the Democrat Party lead by Bob Kerry].

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

truthinclintonact — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 21:03:44 GMT

clinton campaign launches two websites solely for the purpose of smearing barack obama using words such as cowardly.

dirty politics-dirty politicians

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Shannon, Scottsdale, Ariz. — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 21:05:03 GMT

As a black person living in America, I am very aware of a fact that all of you "pie in the sky", pipe-dreaming liberals seem to want to ignore: The U.S. electorate is not moved by the power of your good intentions! While Obama is polling very well, the simple truth is this: A majority of the people who agree to vote for Obama on a phone call from a pollster will NOT actually vote for him in the private confines of the voting booth. I don't know if that's racism or what, but I think you people need to wake up and smell the coffee.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Rick,ky — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 21:14:15 GMT

There you go again J. Merle, dissing the Independent's at every opportunity you get. Experience matter's you & Hillary & her supporter's have said all along. well here's a quote from the latest Hillary endorser. Sen Kerrey said yesterday""I answered a question about your qualifications to be president in a way that has been interpreted as a backhanded insult of you. I assure you I meant to do just the opposite," Kerrey wrote.

He went on to say he considers Obama one of the most talented people he's met in politics and "exceptionally qualified by experience and judgment to be president of the United States." He expanded on Obama's potential to bring peace to the world and his capacity to inspire hope - high praise for someone backing Obama's top rival.
In case you want to scroll past this line, i'll put in caps for you.EXCEPTIONLY QUALIFIED BY EXPERIENCE AND JUDGEMENT TO BE POTUS. No doubt all you hillary supporter's can find something wrong with this statement, so be it.

" DELUSIONAL THINKING BY COMMON SENSE AMERICAN'S IS OVER "

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Shannon, Scottsdale, Ariz. — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 21:19:54 GMT

No matter how you slice it, Obama's "present" votes are tantamount to him playing the same game of "triangulation" that he claims is being played by Hillary. I don't understand how when she makes votes based on principle and on her formidable political acumen she is characterized as being "disingenuous". But when he does it, somehow it becomes an example of his somehow rising above politics. You've all had your heads in the ground for far too long. Hillary is the only mainstream candidate in the democratic field who is being attacked for actually showing some GUTS. For example, all you liberal far left-wingers spent the entire summer trying to get her to call her Iraq vote a mistake, and attacking her because she wouldn't. This is exactly what is wrong with the democratic party. Instead of attacking the republicans and the white house for LYING TO US TO GET US TO GO TO IRAQ, you decide to attack Hillary for being misled. Instead of realizing that an Obama candidacy GUARANTEES a republican presidency for at least another 4 years, you people claim to want to vote for "change". Tell me: exactly how many right-wingers do you think will cross the line and vote for Obama? Definitely not enough to beat the spread by which the republicans continue to steal our elections. So, here we go again. Looks like their gonna steal it in '08 again.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Elizabeth Sullivan, San Diego, CA — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 21:38:08 GMT

BIDEN.
BIDEN.
BIDEN.

I am tired of arguing and pulling my hair out but can't and won't give up on Joe so ...

BIDEN.
BIDEN.
BIDEN. Just listen to him.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 21:55:34 GMT

Kelly:

Those are the arguments that Bush used to get elected in 2000. Are you sure you want to go there?

Aside from which, the present votes illustrate that he is willing to sacrifice his beliefs to vote in accordance with the strategy of an interest group. That defines exactly what he claims he wants to change. I really don't understand why Obama supporters have such a difficult time seeing the inherent contradiction that lies between his votes in the IL senate and his campaign message of changing the way politics works.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Danielle Clarke Phila Pa — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 22:16:59 GMT

When Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., voted "present," rather than "yes" or "no" on a handful of controversial abortion votes in the Illinois state senate, he did so with the explicit support of the president and CEO of Illinois Planned Parenthood Council.

"We at Planned Parenthood view those as leadership votes," Pam Sutherland, the president and CEO of the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council, told ABC News. "We worked with him specifically on his strategy. The Republicans were in control of the Illinois Senate at the time. They loved to hold votes on 'partial birth' and 'born alive'. They put these bills out all the time . . . because they wanted to pigeonhole Democrats."

Sutherland said Obama approached her in the late 1990s and worked with her and others in crafting the strategy of voting "present." She remembers meeting with Obama outside of the Illinois Senate chambers on the Democratic side of the aisle. She and Obama finished their conversation in his office.

"He came to me and said: 'My members are being attacked. We need to figure out a way to protect members and to protect women,'" said Sutherland in recounting her conversation with Obama. "A 'present' vote was hard to pigeonhole which is exactly what Obama wanted."

"What it did," she continued, "was give cover to moderate Democrats who wanted to vote with us but were afraid to do so" because of how their votes would be used against them electorally. "A 'present' vote would protect them. Your senator voted 'present.' Most of the electorate is not going to know what that means."

Unlike Senator Clinton who could care less about fellow Democrats, or "down ticket" candidates (and for those that don't know what "down ticket" means, it is candidates for office that are running for state legislative positions, or Governor, or Senator, not for President, thereby being "down ticket") Senator Obama was seeking to protect other Democratic state legislators from being boxed into corners the Republicans wanted to force them. The "Present" votes were just that.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Rick,ky — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 23:45:47 GMT

Carrie from Iowa, we're still waiting on all these thing's that make you caucus for Joe Biden.You're nothing but a shill for Hillary, saying you're for biden. We've seen thru you. BTW, take Extra-strength Midol the next time. Good lord.

" DELUSIONAL THINKING BY COMMON SENSE AMERICAN'S IS OVER"

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Christopher Stewart, Buffalo,NY — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 00:24:00 GMT

I don't have a problem with Hillary raising the issue. In fact, I have not had a problem with any of her attacks in theory. The problem is THEY DON'T STICK!

Obama's present votes, as told by himself, other Illinois politicians flat out were NOT a sign of weakness.

I charge Hillary's campaign to present a compelling example where Obama did waffle. A case where there wasn't good reason to vote present other than ducking an issue. I hope people are smart enough to do their research on this. If Obama loose then fine, but not because of this.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Christopher Stewart, Buffalo,NY — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 00:26:34 GMT

Honestly, this is what upsets me the most about Hillary's campaign. Their attacks never stick, and it makes them look like political rookies. I want to support Hillary, but she has to give me reason to.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

katharine, oslo norway — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 09:09:37 GMT

Obama not a doer? 4000 votes in the Illinois senate= not a doer? As usual, the Clinton attempt to make Obama look bad just gives the electorate more information about his experience and his intelligent politics.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Reggie Boykins, St. Louis, MO — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 10:11:48 GMT

"Tricks of the trade" ,AKA, Washington EXPERIENCE. Notice how often Hillary boasts of experience and she usually clarifies her meaning by saying, "I know how to win!" Witness her camp's tactics against Obama.

Politics is a sport and Barack is my Tiger Woods; he knows this game,(his game). The Clinton camp certainly knows how to place "traps" and they will place them as prolifically as possible to take this man off of his game.

If Barack is as prepared as I believe he is to; manage his campaign, withstand the torrential bombardment of distorted facts, fight back when he must, and continue to present himself as presidential as he did in the last debate, he will have met my test as a leader of substance. In fact, as he overcomes these "Clintonian" obstacles it should provide, to all of us, insight to this mans ability to, like Tiger Woods, remain focused, get to his goal, and with grace, smile and continue on to the next victory!

Essentially, the more the Clinton camp comes after him, the stronger they will make him; they will be the impetus for his continued rise because their attacks remind us of how (experienced) Washington politicians do their dirt and filth; they will remind us that if we elect them, we give them a mandate to continue the, "crap." Witness how from day-one, the republican presidential candidates and yes, the media, have been chanting, "we want hillary" they too are thristy for the "mud-slinging" to begin.

I suggest that, for the good of our country and this process, we put an end to this way of choosing our leader. We must raise our capacity to do better and show some civility in our process to the rest of the world.

We need a change and that,in the person of someone we can believe in. Barack inspires me to believe in a better America and I trust he IS the Change we call all believe in.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Jim Lowery — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:18:01 GMT

Every acts like Obama is the second coming of Jesus Christ: Yo, people, he is flawed.

And trust me, if he does lose the demo nomination, it wouldn't surprise me to see him run as an Independent.

Why? Because he lacks the essence of the presidency: loyalty.

Oh-eight (D): Clinton Inc. v. 'present'

Darlene Brewer Imperial,MO — Thu, 27 Dec 2007 03:04:39 GMT

Why is everyone so shook up at MRS Clinton?She is only doing what all canidates do.She is no worse than the rest wanting to run for President.I for one will vote for her.We have had men Presidents for the last 200 yrs.Surely A women can do as good or better.I think it's time to find out.I am 70 yrs old and have seen lots of Presidents come and go and not one Republican President has done to much for our Country.The Rich get Richer and the Poor get Poorer.