Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

JT, Texas — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:35:33 GMT

If Senator Kennedy succeeds in shoving Senator Obama down the throat of the Democratic party, he can rest assured his endorsement of Obama will have the same effect in the general election that it did for Senator Kerry the last time around. He can add me to the ever growing list of people that will be a crossover vote for the Republican candidate. I want someone that actually deliver more than platitudes.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

j fl — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:39:01 GMT

An endorsement from Teddy can be a double edged sword. He will definitely have to retire when Hillary becomes president. Big old windbag.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Nashville_fan — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:45:15 GMT

*Still basking in the glow of South Carolina and the Kennedy endorsements*

I know change isn't easy, but I want to enjoy this moment just a little while longer before all the ugliness starts up again . . . *sigh*

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

MN mom — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:47:15 GMT

ONCE AGAIN we see that you at first read cannot put a positive post for Hillary Clinton without taking on something negative. Whereas your sickeningly sweet bum-kissing for O'bama has totally driven me off the fence to Hillary's side.
I would just like someone to explain...it's right there in black and white, look back at your postings. (and everyone else look too) I've found a whole 1 posting that was positive for Clinton without something nasty or negative tacked on(and that was 2 lines). while you wax poetic about O'bama, rarely write anything negative about O'bama. (Rezko, and that was again only a couple lines--and you didn't have much choice because it is so big).
I can only hope you have some alturistic reason for this...maybe you want to keep the race interesting so our young people stay involved. Or maybe you work under the table for his campaign since you've all but endorsed the man. That and the fact that the Clinton's and media have never had a great relationship, but I hope it's not something that petty. This is our lives on the lines here! We need to know and understand the issues that effect them and how each candidate plans to get things done, but slanted reporting does nothing for us, there's no real substance. Someone please add a post that explains your actions.
And try to be objective when you're playing with our lives.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Ron, California — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:47:28 GMT

Now which Kennedy do you believe???????????? Ted or the Kids?

Kennedys for Clinton
She stands for Democrats and for the nation, these family members say.
By Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Kerry Kennedy
January 29, 2008

This is a wonderful year for Democrats. Our party is blessed with the most impressive array of primary candidates in modern history. All would make superb presidents.

By now you may have read or heard that our cousin, Caroline Kennedy, and our uncle, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, have come out in favor of Sen. Barack Obama. We, however, are supporting Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton because we believe that she is the strongest candidate for our party and our country.

While talk of unity and compromise are inspiring to a nation wary of divisiveness, America stands at a historic crossroads where real issues divide our political landscapes. Democrats believe that America should not be torturing people, eavesdropping on our citizens or imprisoning them without habeas corpus or other constitutional rights. We should not be an imperial power. We need healthcare for all and a clean, safe environment.

The loftiest poetry will not solve these issues. We need a president willing to engage in a fistfight to safeguard and restore our national virtues.

We have worked with Hillary Clinton for 15 years (and in Kathleen's case, 25 years) and witnessed the power and depth of her convictions firsthand. We've seen her formidable work ethic, courage in the face of adversity and her dignity and clear head in crisis. We've also seen her two-fisted willingness to enter the brawl when America's principles are challenged. Her measured rhetoric, political savvy and pragmatism shield the heart of our nation's most determined and most democratic warrior.

She has been an uncompromising and loyal ally for each of us in our battles to protect the environment and to promote human rights around the world and juvenile justice in America. Hillary is a problem-solver, listening to people and then achieving solutions by changing attitudes.

Her transformational leadership was on display when she ran for the Senate seat in New York that had been held by our father, Sen. Robert F. Kennedy. She faced rabid, heavily funded attacks from the far right and the challenge of prevailing in traditionally Republican upstate New York. Traveling with her, we watched admiringly as she persuasively articulated an inspiring and unifying vision rooted in American values and history. Then, through patience, hard work, leadership and political acumen, she transformed many of those rock-solid conservative counties into solid Democratic strongholds.

We look forward to working beside her in the general election as she uses those same talents to change once rigid opinions and political affiliations across the nation.

Like our father, Hillary has devoted her life to embracing and including those on the bottom rung of society's ladder -- giving voice to the alienated and disenfranchised and working to alleviate poverty and injustice, while urging that we cannot advance ourselves as a nation by leaving our poorer brothers and sisters behind.

She's been an equally effective champion for human rights and for women's rights, a worldwide cause that will profit enormously by her elevation to the presidency. She has worked for peace in Northern Ireland and fought to bridge religious, racial and ethnic divides from Bosnia to the Middle East to South Africa. She has shown a rare understanding that American values can only be exported by moral leadership, by a strong home economy and by a detailed understanding of the history and cultural backdrops of the nations we engage.

She understands, as our current administration does not, the uses of power. The world, she says, is hungry for U.S. leadership but will not accept our bullying. She knows the difference and will reestablish America's lost prestige and moral authority.

Hillary Clinton's political career has been centered in comforting the afflicted, afflicting the comfortable and reminding Americans what it means to be American. As a young lawyer, she focused on children's issues and legal aid. As first lady of Arkansas, she brought healthcare to rural areas and helped reform the state's lagging education system.

As first lady, she courageously took on healthcare reform. When a massive propaganda campaign by Big Pharma and the radical right derailed her efforts, she didn't give up. She helped create the nationally acclaimed Children's Health Insurance Program. That kind of persistence in pursuit of our highest ideals is the brand of leadership America now requires. Inspirational leadership comes in many forms.

Seldom has history confronted America with such daunting challenges: a catastrophic foreign policy that has cost us our international leadership and aggravated the threat of terror; a misbegotten war that is squandering precious American lives and treasure; a healthcare system that leaves millions of Americans without coverage; irresponsible corporate power that is corroding our democracy and outsourcing our jobs, aggravating global warming and other environmental crises and reducing our economy to shambles.

We need a leader who is battle-tested, resilient and sure-footed on the shifting landscapes of domestic and foreign policy. Hillary Clinton will move our country forward while promoting its noblest ideals.

Kathleen Kennedy Townsend is the former lieutenant governor of Maryland, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is an environmental advocate and Kerry Kennedy is a human rights activist.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Hillary 08 — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:53:33 GMT

Did you know Barak O'bama started out comparing himself to Bobby Kennedy rather than JFK. Then he found out Bobby's kids (Kathleen, Bobby Jr...) had already been comparing HILLARY to their father (as they did in their wonderful article). Suddenly O'bama is comparing himself to JFK (can you say contrived?) and even gets Teddy to fall for it (was he sober?)
So MSNBC can stop saying the Kennedy "family" is supporting O'bama because I don't think its right to eject Bobby's children from the family for standing up for who they believe in. The right candidate, by the way, for all the reasons in their article and more.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

kenn — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:54:44 GMT

Too bad that part of the family carries no clout He was just the guy who had a profound change of personality and wanted to leave the KENNEDY crap behind.He wanted to solve poverty the guy most like the Kennedys is actually the guy Ted and Everyone didnt endorse JOHN EDWARDS

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Al, KS — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:03:15 GMT

My take on the day is that it was a stunning day for Obama.
First the rousing indorsement by Ted Kennedy, almost as much a rebuke of the Clintons as an endorsement of Obama. It was truely inspiring for those of us who are a little older, and may have forgotten the oratory abilities of the Kennedy clan. Obama graciuosly held back his substantial speaking abilities to let Ted's message through with it's considerable force. That message by Kennedy was played over and over again throughout the day and evening.
Then came the state of the union speach. Obama entered the hall, leading the senators, like a hero returing to Rome. Head and shoulders above the rest of the crowd, looking every bit presidential, followed by the former head of the legions (Ted Kennedy). The only thing that was lacking was an entrance announcement by the sargent at arms and a shower of flower petals from the adoring crowd. Clinton, who had been shamed earlier in the day, was somewhere in his shadow, at the back of the pack.
Then came the "President's" speech. History would have a hard time finding a starker difference between these two leaders. One with a crowning oratory, and the other with a dull witted droll. One preaching to the unity of the future, and one scaring us with visions the past. The only conclusion one could take away was, "I hope this gets better next year". What a difference that year might make.
To top off the day, Kathleen Sebilius gave another message of hope and unity in the Democratic response. The same Kansas Govenor who will almost certainly endorse Obama at his campaign stops in Kansas today. The same Govenor who has won twice in this overwhelming red state. Who won in a backlash against intelligent design in textbooks and religious rhetoric. A Democrat that is almost never critisized in a state crowded with Republicans.
I don't know what today will bring, or even the rest of the week leading up to super Tuesday, and maybe we will find out just how long a week is in politics, but Monday was a very good day for Obama.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

kenn — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:05:31 GMT

AL SHARPTON TELLING SOMEONE TO TONE IT DOWN PRICELESS

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Jim Tampa,FL — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:07:46 GMT

Realism! Obama is not qualified to be the leader of our country. If he were'nt black, he wouldn't be as prominamt as he is. He highlites a problem in the country. When questions arise that would require a true answer that would be adverse, often times the answer is a claim of racism.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

kenn — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:08:38 GMT

JFK ??????? STARTED VIETNAM <SLEPT WITH MARYLN MONROE<BAY OF PIGS <NO CIVIL RIGHTS LEGESLATION<JUST the guy to compare yourself to.NEXT YOUR GONNA TELL ME REAGUN WAS GREAT,sorry I was there.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

kenn — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:10:53 GMT

LET OBAMA QUESTION HER INTEGRITY,HE SOUNDS LIKE NEWTIE AND THE CREW then again thats the "party of IDEAS the last 15 years"BARACK OBAMA.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Worried, Tennessee — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:11:37 GMT

The press are distorting the message coming from the Clinton camp. Yet they are on the band wagon to go back and let B.H. Obama have do overs and tell what he "was really saying". It's so unfair that the media will determine our president. They know the GOP will come in again, like they want. If this happens you'll wish the working people would have had more of a say. It takes us to keep the economy going and we are at the end. You got W. Now play fair.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Jen, Tampa — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:15:19 GMT

You are 100% correct Ron. Me, my husband, two kids, and all four of my siblings will be voting for Hillary because she has the strongest democratic ideals and values and is highly intelligent and tough as nails. We don't need another "nice" guy like John Kerry, who cannot beat the republicans. Who is Barack Obama anyway? This guy is hot air.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Ron, California — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:16:03 GMT

CNN
January 29, 2008
Women's group slams Kennedy for 'betrayal'

WASHINGTON (CNN) – Massachusetts Sen. Ted Kennedy is under heavy fire from a state chapter of the National Organization for Women for his decision to back Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton.

In a sharply critical statement, the New York state chapter of NOW took aim at Kennedy Monday for what it called an "ultimate betrayal," and suggested the Massachusetts Democrat "can't or won't" handle the idea of Clinton becoming President of the United States.

"Sen. Kennedy’s endorsement of Hillary Clinton’s opponent in the Democratic presidential primary campaign has really hit women hard," said the statement. "Women have forgiven Kennedy, stuck up for him, stood by him, hushed the fact that he was late in his support of Title IX, the ERA, the Family Leave and Medical Act to name a few."

"And now the greatest betrayal! We are repaid with his abandonment!" the statement continues. "He’s picked the new guy over us. He’s joined the list of progressive white men who can’t or won’t handle the prospect of a woman president who is Hillary Clinton."

After months on the sidelines, Kennedy formally endorsed Obama Monday during a speech at American University, despite reported pleas from the Clinton campaign that he remain neutral. He hailed the Illinois senator for his potential to be a “president who appeals to the hopes of those who still believe in the American dream."

Kennedy also praised Clinton and John Edwards in his speech, saying that “whoever is our nominee will have my enthusiastic support."

But the NOW state chapter suggested Monday Kennedy's decision was a larger representation of society’s ongoing disrespect for women's rights.

"This latest move by Kennedy is so telling about the status of and respect for women’s rights, women’s voices, women’s equality, women’s authority and our ability – indeed, our obligation — to promote and earn and deserve and elect, unabashedly, a president that is the first woman after centuries of men who ‘know what’s best for us.’”

Meanwhile, the national chapter of NOW sought to distance itself from the state chapter’s comments, issuing a statement Monday evening that praised Kennedy's record with respect to women's rights.

"Though the National Organization for Women Political Action Committee has proudly endorsed Sen. Hillary Clinton for president, we respect Sen. Kennedy's endorsement," NOW President Kim Gandy said. "We continue to encourage women everywhere to express their opinions and exercise their right to vote."

Kennedy's office has not returned CNN's request for comment.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Michele Zinn, Morro Bay, CA — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:17:16 GMT

The endorsement of the Kennedy family is another political ploy of the Obama camp. I was on the fence, but I am now casting my vote for Clinton. I was a strong supporter of the Kennedy's, John and Bobbie, but I feel this is a ganging up of Hillery. The Kennedy clot died when John, Bobbie and John-John died. Camelot is no more. The voters are sophisticated and will see through this latest political farce and will do the right thing for us and our country.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Sam — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:21:50 GMT

Clinton supporters pointing to Rezko, trying to tarnish Obama's ethics?!?! Really? You honestly want to open the ethics can and dig up Hsu, the Lincoln Bedroom, Monica, and on and on and on? Good God, Clinton supporters must be absolutely desperate. How brainless do you have to be to want to trod down that road?

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Amazed, Atlanta — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:23:06 GMT

JT in Texas is right!

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

lyn, MD — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:25:20 GMT

Kathleen Kennedy Townsend is the former lieutenant governor of Maryland, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is an environmental advocate and Kerry Kennedy is a human rights activist.

Kathleen was a sitting LT Gov in a "Navy Blue" state MD running for Gov and got beat BAD by a republican...who cares what she thinks. Definitely not people in MD. She ran possibly the worst campaign in MD history. Her names is a dirty word in MD

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Mark S, NC — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:29:30 GMT

Wow, lots of Hillary apologists today.

I would just point out in regard to the well-written endorsement printed above (on which I congratulate Senator Clinton): their major argument for Clinton can be summed up by the sentence, "We need a president willing to engage in a fistfight to safeguard and restore our national virtues."

For those of you who wonder what Obama wants to change, start with that sentiment. I and a lot of other people are truly tired of the "fistfighting". I want someone who can bring people along with them, not beat the other side down. I admit that I am an idealist. And that seems to be the great divide among the democrats this year, between idealists who believe that we actually can change the fabric of politics (and policy!) in this country, and those pessimists who believe that the politics we've had for the last 30 years or so is the way it has to be and the way it always will be. Or maybe they're not pessimists, maybe they really enjoy feeling superior to their fellow Americans and waging internecine warfare and not actually accomplishing anything. I don't know and frankly I don't care anymore.

Bottom line: if Democrats want to win in November, and by a potentially large margin, and if Americans of any stripe want a truly transformational presidency starting a year from now, then Obama is the clear candidate of choice. If these things aren't important to you, then by all means keep shilling for Hillary.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Steve, Hartford, CT — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:32:26 GMT

The op-ed piece for Clinton wasn't half as Caroline's, for Obama. Hers was much more heartfelt and conveyed more than just a set of campaign talking points; it was personal, not political like the op-ed for Clinton. That's the difference between the two campaigns, really. This is about who we are, not what we want to do. These candidates have nearly the exact same plans, so the choice is about which of them best represents America as a nation.

Obama '08!

(It doesn't hurt that Obama has an enormous amount of experience at consensus-building, from community organizing to bringing together liberals and conservatives at the Harvard Law Review to passing reforms in the Illinois Senate, and, to the extent he's been able to do so in such a short time, working across the aisle in the US Senate. Barack Obama has the political and personal experience necessary to act on the plans he puts forth as a candidate now.)

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Amy B Portland, ME — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:33:32 GMT

Caroline's endorsement of Obama sent a tingle up my spine. She has her mother's ability to see into the future. JFK's kids: typical Irish politicians, useful in their own way, but they don't have that Bouvier power.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Hen Martindale, Texas — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:35:40 GMT

[An endorsement from Teddy can be a double edged sword. He will definitely have to retire when Hillary becomes president. Big old windbag.]

Who's the windbag? Ted? Hillary? Or both?

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Steve, Hartford, CT — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:38:50 GMT

Mark S has it absolutely right. This is between the idealists and the cynics now.

YES WE CAN! OBAMA '08!

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

techinvestor — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:39:31 GMT

This was written by one of the sharpest legal minds in North America -- and he was head of the FCC during part of the Bill Clinton Administration...Yet, Reed Hundt realizes we must seriously consider a new generation of leadership...fyi..

The Clintons, Atwater, Rove, and the Future

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2008/jan/27/the_clintons_atwater_rove_and_the_future

By Reed Hundt*

Jan 27, 2008 -- 09:27 AM EST |

It is certain that the Clintons' thousands of friends are cringing, turning away their attention out of sheer shame, grimacing, as they read the former President's derogatory dismissal of Obama's landslide victory as no different than Jesse Jackson's win there. But it's important to scrutinize what the Clintons are doing and how it might work out.

Most notable about the South Carolina results was that Hillary did not get a majority (based on exits) of any racial or gender-based demographic. She is famous; obviously she has a great deal of money and support from the old guard of the party, such as it is; and she is very well-prepared on policy. But she is not tremendously popular. She was wrong on Iraq; she has little personal record of fighting for a cause; she offers a management-style Presidency as opposed to visionary change.

Most of Hillary's votes appear to come from women, seniors, and lower income voters. These demographic groups could turn to Obama. She has not aroused passionate commitment by them.

Hillary has a tenuous status as the alleged front-runner. This is of course the reason she and her husband are taking the low road in terms of tactics. (Not for a second should anyone think she has not approved her husband's tactics, or that he has run amok.)

The former President's repeated injections of racial references are unacceptable in modern politics, or even modern society. If he were a commentator on the Golf Channel, he would be asked to resign. We know he is doing this because he believes that there is a racist strain in the groups that Hillary is counting on. In particular he believes he can encourage Latinos in California, New York, and New Jersey to come out to vote against Barack, simply because Barack is African-American. He does not believe he can persuade them to want to vote for Hillary, but hopes they will either not vote, or will vote for anyone but Barack.

Yet the Clintons cannot make the case against Barack based on any policy. This frustrates them. There is not one aspect of Barack's policy arguments that can arouse much desire among any Democrats to vote against him. He was right on Iraq; he is progressive on virtually everything, despite Paul Krugman's irritation that not every economic policy prescription fits Dr. Krugman's preferences.

In effect, the Clintons want people to dislike Obama the same way that some dislike the Clintons: irrationally, with groundless preconceptions, passionately. They both feel stigmatized for no good reason. To them it probably seems fair, or at least simply part of the process, if Barack is also unfairly hated.

Pehaps too the Clintons feel that the Republicans would attack Barack on racial grounds, so it makes no difference if they beat McCain or Romney to this tactic. In any case, the Clintons are going negative because they do not believe they can with a positive message attract more voters to Hillary. They want to drive voters away from Barack; they want his negatives to be as high as theirs.

The Clintons are thus running their own version of the Republican Southern Strategy that worked so well to elect conservatives from Nixon through to the current Bush. Ironically, the Clintons themselves spent their political careers battling against that strategy. Defeating it in the border states in 1992 was central to Bill Clinton's election.

There's no crying in baseball or politics, so let's not shed a tear over the completely unprincipled use of race-baiting language by the former President. He knows his Presidency was marred terribly by the impeachment, and that his record of accomplishment was much less than he hoped it would be. He wants this return to the White House to give him, and Hillary, a chance to rewrite the history book entry on the Clintons. He does not believe his repugnant tactic will be part of that history; he is sure that if and when they get back in power they will accomplish so much that the way they got elected again won't matter.

Indeed, they suppose that in the general election all will be forgotten. Barack will be campaigning with them. Everyone will have a good laugh about the tricks they all pulled to win the primaries. If such amity does not come to exist, still the Clintons believe they can count on blacks to vote for them in the fall no matter what. After all, Bill Clinton has the chutzpah to think of himself as the "black President" so taking that demographic's votes for granted is no stretch of the imagination for him.

But the Clintons' use of the tactics of Lee Atwater and Karl Rove inevitably contributes to the perception that Hillary Clinton is running a campaign that is trapped in the past, where race has always mattered much in elections. That was true in the 80's and 90's. But in the 00's it may not be so. Harold Ford barely lost the Tennessee general election; affirmative action is not one of the big issues of this election cycle; nor is welfare; while race has been the history of America it may not be the future. In any event, even if Obama defeats the Clintons, it is possible that the Clintons' use of the race tactic now will inoculate Obama in the fall. It is possible that the public will see him, may indeed already see him, they way people see Oprah or Denzel Washington or Tiger Woods -- public figures whose race and personal history is certainly well-known, but is not a reason for disapproval, hostility, or even disagreement. (Exit polls in South Carolina reported that about 70% of white voters said they would be satisfied if Obama were the nominee.) If by surviving the Clintons' tactics Obama became that sort of public figure, then he would give Democrats at the top of the ticket a candidate who could produce a landslide not only in the South Carolina primary but also across the country in the general.

This is not a reason to applaud the Clintons' tactic. The Clintons' admirers, of whom I have long been one, still should be consumed with regret that the election has brought Bill and Hillary to make this choice. Howard Dean and others who have been silent should still speak out against what they are doing. The New York Times editorial page should have inveighed against this tactic instead of endorsing Hillary. The Los Angeles Times should speak up. But if Obama overcomes what the Clintons are doing, he may have turned a page in American history and he will certainly be the dream candidate for Democrats this fall.
______________________________

*Reed Hundt graduated from Yale College and Yale Law School, practiced law for 18 years, and served as chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, 1993-97. Since that date, he has written and lectured about information sector politics, as well as served on various technology company boards.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

JT, Texas — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:47:25 GMT

You go Craig Crawford! If you were watching morning joe you just saw him say it best, the media hates Clinton and loves Obama. Wake up Democrats, MSNBC and the rest of the media are trying to steal this election from you by shoving a stuffed shirt full of nothing but platitudes down your throat.

Look at how Obama behaved last night, would he snubb foreign dignitaries that didn't agree with him or see him as the next coming of JFK? Get a grip, he offers no change, Ted Kennedy couldn't win the presidency on his own, so he tries to get someone in that he can control. Kennedy is exactly what is wrong with Washington and what Obama was supposedly going to change. WHEN PIGS FLY

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

kenn — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:50:01 GMT

I love hearing fake democrats talk about working with the republicans who have kicked the shit out of them for 7 years.Lets stop acting like we are going along to get along that has got to stop tell the republicans to get in the back of the bus and SHUT UP we are driving.WE will shut off their mics like sensenburger did to us they can hold meetings in the basement HAVE YOU FORGOTTEN SO QUICKLY OR WERE YOU ONE OF THEM.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

JT, Texas — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:50:52 GMT

Did anyone give any weight to the endorsement of Robert Kennedy's children, whose father held the senate seat that is now held by Senator Clinton?
I have often heard that Robert Kennedy was really the more visionary of the brothers.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

kenn — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:57:27 GMT

That is the craziest statement of all time JACKIE O seeing into the future,um she missed something as far as caroline and obama its only right that a woman who has been taken care of her whole life should want a strong young man instead of an old woman,by the way idealist hows mogovern macarthy and ted kennedy and gary hart GEORGE BUSH come back to reality that will make you a cynic, child.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Mary, Decatur, Ga — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:02:57 GMT

Look at the number of words MSNBC wrote about each candidate in First Read. It's like watching an infommercial trying to sell me on something over and over and over. Since they couldn't manufacture or twist something so that it would be anti-Clinton in today's headlines -they don't report much. Even Edwards got some play today - amazing! The Obama love fest is not going over well with a large portion of the democratic constituency. Even those of us who liked him back in December have had enough. I have yet to see a truly investigative piece or interview about or with Obama where he talks specifics. He always says "look at my record", - come on Obama, I want you (and the media) to tell me about your record and your proposals. Don't just point me in a direction that goes nowhere. In the last two debates he couldn't coherently discuss his economic plan, his healthcare plan, or his energy plan. I like details when my childrens' futures are at stake.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Ella, NYC, NY — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:03:52 GMT

I agree with JT from Texas. So much so, that I have nothing further to add.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Leah Pismo Beach Ca — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:06:19 GMT

TO RON IN CALIFORNIA- And then we join hands and sing kumbya!!!! THat woman is dangerous- and anyone that has crossed her during this campaign will be remembered. I will even vote for McCain over her--anyone would be better.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

NY — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:07:49 GMT

If Obama is so good at consensus building then why hasnt he built a CONSENSUS with the REPUBLICANS on GETTING THE TROOPS HOME, HEALTH CARE etc???
WHAT will change so much that Republicans will start listening to him after he becomes president?

All this bi-partisan ..Consesus is load of crap.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Al, KS — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:11:53 GMT

"Fist fight"
"two-fisted"
"Brawl"
"rabid attacks from the far right"
Hardly an inspiring endorsement....isn't this what we are trying to get away from?

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Nashville_fan — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:32:57 GMT

A question for MN mom:

Is the problem the media or the candidate? Seems to me, that at some point, the candidate (not her husband) has to be accountable for her actions. Getting mad because it is reported is not the solution.

Is the media supposed to make up something negative to say about another candidate everytime Hillary Clinton (and her surrogates) bump their heads, in the name of fairness?

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Pacheck, Huntington Beach, Ca. — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:40:07 GMT

The extremes of government. On the right you have bush and his cadre of corporate criminals. On left you have Obama and the spineless idealists. It looks like the pendullem will always swing past the center where compromise of both formats could produce a situation that would be best for all. Unfortunatly for us the corporate media will only illistrate a situation it has a good chance of controlling. And the majority of people are goats and can only follow. "We have found the enemy and it is us."

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Nashville_fan — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:41:23 GMT

Jim, Tampa, FL wrote:
"Realism! Obama is not qualified to be the leader of our country. If he were'nt black, he wouldn't be as prominamt as he is. "

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Um, Jim, so let me get this straight:

First the argument was that Senator Obama was not electible because he was black.

Now the argument is the only reason that people are voting for him is because he is black.

I've heard of sour grapes, but you are straight up moving into sour raisin territory now! lol

I suppose Senator Clinton is more qualified because she married well, right?

The problem you have is that Senator Obama is presenting his agenda to the American people, and the American people like it. "The Clintons" present a retouched photo of the past and fear about the future. Not quite as appealing.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Nashville_fan — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:46:19 GMT

The Clinton campaign had the media eating out of the palm of their hands for two solid weeks with all that bull about being the underdogs in Nevada and all that talk about "the black vote" in South Carolina. The media sung the exact song they were given by the Clinton campaign, right down to declaring that Bill Clinton was "in Obama's head".

Now after getting their a##es handed to them in South Carolina and being rebuked by the Ted Kennedy, they are back to whining about the media. That trick only works once a campaign folks. You played the "poor me" card in New Hampshire, remember?

It's time to play ball or go home. Working the referees won't work this time.

Obama '08

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

juan,ft lauderdale,fl — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:46:47 GMT

David Brooks well known conservative taking about widespread revulsion at the Clinton's by using words like-brass-knuckle brawling, demonizing of foes.....etc!Did he have such contempt towards Bush 1 when he used the Horton ad? I think not. How about when Bush 2 became president? Any talk about co-presidency? I do not remember such anger and wait till 2012 when Jeb throws his hat in the ring. I for one am sick of the corp run media who will always side with the GOP. It is only the apologists and kool-aid drinkers who believe that the media is liberal bias.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Billy, Normal, IL — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:46:52 GMT

I love all these lying Billary supporters saying "I was on the fence, but now I'm going with Clinton." Yeah, right. As if there's anything that happened in the last week that would cause that kind of movement.

Making stuff up to create the illusion of support gains won't begin to cover the reality of mass momentum change the opposite direction.

Oh, here... let me try this, too. Looks like fun. Here goes: I was supporting Hillary for years, but I couldn't stand for her distortions, Bill's antics, and dirty tricks like in Florida today, so I'm switching to Obama.

Not bad. Totally believable, I think.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Mark S, NC — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:51:10 GMT

"tell the republicans to get in the back of the bus and SHUT UP we are driving."

"All this bi-partisan ..Consesus is load of crap."

Kenn and NY, you support my argument above more eloquently than I could have.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Republican Forever — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:02:21 GMT

It sure is fun to hear the Democrats tell Bill the same thing the Republicans have been telling him for 16 years. Welcome!!

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Chip — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:26:48 GMT

LOL...most of this is hysterical. If Teddy, Caroline, Patrick had backed Hillary it would have been gleeful among the Hillary camp. They "actively sought" i. e. begged Teddy to endorse them or to at least remain neutral. He intended to remain neutral. However, the campaign activities of Senator Clinton and her husband were repugnant even to a hard scrapper like Teddy Kennedy. He made calls and asked them to stop. He was told to buzz off. Bill was going to do it his way. So, he made his choice to show that he, too, had had enough. Say what you will because it is all sour grapes. Had Teddy endorsed Hillary, Obama supporters would have tasted the same sourness. The Kennedy support will help some and hurt some but it is what it is and that is a MAJOR endorsement by a life long public servant saying that he likes what Obama is bringing to the contest. Nothing more or less....

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Terri — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:41:19 GMT

Looks like the Obama media term as a ROCK STAR is fading as quickly as Brittney Spear's career Thank God Americans are waking up. He hasnt had one original idea from day one and he quickly assumed the ideas from Hillary and Edwards. The media even gave him a free pass when he called John Edwards the White man in the last debate (what a racist remark. I am glad voters are stopping his free ride. He was too lazy to pay full-price for his house like his voters in IL. had to do and he keeps saying "it was a Mistake" America we cant afford mistakes on voting (saying present), misvoting (over 5 times) and laziness.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Chip, IL — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:07:00 GMT

Yeah, Terri...he said it was a mistake. Something that you will never hear coming from the mouth of Hillary Clinton....she voted to make war on Iraq, yet won't admit she made a mistake. All in all, I would rather a fellow make a mistake and own it as send us to war on lies and defend it. As to voting "present", in Illinois that is a legitimate tool to show you have questions or problems with a bill. In OVER 4000 bills, he voted present about 130 times. As to being lazy...is that because he is black or because you are just misinformed? You can try to hang many inaccurate and unpleasant adjectives on Senator Obama, but if you knew one thing about him, you would know that lazy is not one that is applicable. Maybe you really aren't Terri and you real name is William Jefferson....

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Chuck K, Buffalo, NY — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:07:14 GMT

I wonder if Clinton supporters would be talking so much garbage about Ted Kennedy if the Clintons got their wish and he endorsed them.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Nashville_fan — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:08:26 GMT

Terri wrote:

"He was too lazy to pay full-price for his house like his voters in IL. had to do and he keeps saying "it was a Mistake" America we cant afford mistakes on voting (saying present), misvoting (over 5 times) and laziness. "

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
lol

Not the "lazy" card! OH NO!

P.S. You forgot shiftless. I heard he likes fried chicken too! :)

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Pauline — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:12:07 GMT

Do you really believe one man talking about consensus and being nice will change Washington??? That's the motto Bush ran under, remember: "I am a uniter not a divider" And how well did that go?

I agree with the Kennedy editorial in the LATimes: we do need a fighter to take back the environment, health care, the economy, etc. do you really think all those special interests destroying our environment, milking our economy, etc. are just going to "roll over" because Obama is president?

Come on now; face reality--Hillary has the gumption and the personality to do both: fight and compromise. Plus if I had to choose which Kennedy endorsement to value, it would be the one coming from Bobby's children; after all he was the real fighter in the family for social and racial justice, etc.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

jaycee, Ventura, California — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:13:41 GMT

Nice post, Mark S, NC. It is possible to make a forceful argument without adopting an totally insulting tone toward fellow Democrats who will need to pull it together when the warfare is over. I would urge my fellow Obama backers to try and keep it civil. We play into the hands of the Repub attack dogs when we stoop to their level. There is no winning that game. We all lose.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Tere, New York, NY — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:23:54 GMT

Why is David Brooks in Obama's camp? Is he endorsing Obama?

Kennedy an asset? For change? .....
Obama wants to go back to things "as they used to be"...when is that?
He scorns the excesses of the sixties and seventies; does he want to go back to the early sixties, fifties....? at that time Obama could not have used the White House bathroom; there were signs all over "for colored people"....And if you go a little further back in history, you will remember there was a time when there were signs "No Irish or dogs allowed" Is this the past Kennedy talks about?
Obama's father, and his African ancestors did not suffer from the horrors of slavery. It is obvious, he does not understand that experience since he did not share it. It makes it easier to understand why he wants to go back to a period in the past that was horrific for black America, and he expresses some disdain for the excesses of the sixties and seventies that brought the civil rights legislation and the struggle to implement it.
Obama, as a child, lived in Indonesia, not Mississippi; lived in Hawaii not quite Alabama....He lived with his mother and grandmother in white neighborhoods. What does he know about black American struggles?
At times, he seems to show discomfort with civil rights leaders like Jesse Jackson (was part of the civil rights movement) or, heaven forbid, Al Sharpton. What about Kenya? Is he bringing his family out of harms way?
He endeavors to distance himself from black issues, unless he is asking for their votes.
I did not hear Obama express outrage that there is today in the US a tree where black kids cannot sit under. And when they did, nooses hung from its branches. He certainly does not speak for the black families that stood on roofs during Katrina. Yet, he expects their votes; why? they share the color of his skin. Should that be the test?
I think not.
Go Edwards. John knows the only thing color blind in America is poverty, injustice for those who have no voice because they have no power; they have no power because they have no money....They belong to all races, religions, genders.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Martin — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:26:39 GMT

Hillary will win anyway, Teds endorsement is wastet. Obama is just empty rhetoric, nobody knows his politics - if he has any.

Hillary 08!!!

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Martin — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:26:58 GMT

Hillary will win anyway, Teds endorsement is wastet. Obama is just empty rhetoric, nobody knows his politics - if he has any.

Hillary 08!!!

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Who cares, Carmel, IN — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 19:39:14 GMT

This primary cycle has been one of the most disenchanting, disillusioning political events I have ever been through. Since race has been of such sensitivity and importance lately let me offer that I am a brown, naturalized citizen - a Democrat.

The cruelty with which Media has slammed the Clintons for their strong but valid criticisms of Obama has disappointed me greatly. That a person who has nothing - NOTHING - to show for achievements except for some anti-war speech he could easily make outside the jingoistic, pressure cooker that the congress of 2002/3 was, should now be considered such an inspiring, revolutionary figure, mystifies me. It really does.

The manner in which we Democrats have gone about hounding and maligning the one good thing - Bill Clinton - that happened to us in the last 40 years is disheartening. The manner of it looks almost cannibalistic. This person who was once Blacker than Black is now a confirmed racist. For what? How did this start? Bill Clinton tried to say Obama's claim as the guy with sound judgment (with respect to Iraq war) is one big fairy tale. Donna Brazile construed this to be a racist statement. Then Hillary Clinton says: MLK had to get LBJ's assistance to pass the Civil Rights Law. The Obama camp - The New Politician camp - The Change Politician camp - insinuated this statement had racist tones. Afterwards, Hillary angrily claimed during Meet the Press that Obama's camp had very successfully precipitated the perception that Clintons were playing the race card. In the following Nevada debate, Tim Russert, our well-meaning political accountant/bookkeeper, confronted Obama with a four-page document, put together by his camp, that talked about synthesizing different Clinton statements to suggest they were playing the race card. What did Obama do? He did not deny the charge. He accepted responsibility for it. In full view. Yet, somehow, today, Clintons who were the darlings of the Black community are now racist.

Obama regales us with talk of bringing the country together. This is naivety befitting one who has no experience. Either that, or mildly shrewd politicking from one who knows it makes the public tingle. Does any political leader go in thinking I am going to pick a fight with everyone and make my life miserable?

I pity the Clintons. They got skewered by the Republicans over 8 years for having the audacity to be in the white house. Look what they did to Hillary for trying to get us Universal Healthcare. Instead of standing by her for that, we have found her too tainted by such fights to lead us. Isn't that an encouragement for politicians to avoid anything that might politically damage them?! To try and persuade the other party, but on failing, to give up rather than pick a fight? Aren't we saying - fight for us but not too badly because we might find you divisive?! Isn't the cyclical/ironical stupidity of all this apparent? Do we know what we want? Do we want someone who will stand their ground and fight for our rights or do we want someone who will compromise? Because that will be the choice we will be faced with. Don't hope, star-struck people, that Republicans will, with loving generosity, line up behind a Democratic president. Political parties, remember, are, after all, in the business of being in power.

Anyway, if we have to go in a different direction, if we must turn the page on Clintons, then fine. But let's not destroy our own. Let's understand, it is natural for Bill Clinton to get ticked off when Obama goes to an editorial board and dismisses the Clinton years. Let's not call one, who was called Blacker than Black by someone who knows a thing or two about Blackness, a racist now.

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

Sabagio Mauraeno, Decatur, Georgia — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 19:41:05 GMT

Ah, the Kennedys, the Kennedys! Once again, Headliners. David Brooks had a column today about the "Kennedy Mystique." My question is why, with so many more interesting families out there, is the Kennedy Mystique sustained so regularly? The mystery may be as simple as "it pays the bills." Ever since Honey Fitz and the Boston Machine, the Kennedy Clan has worked the voters and people worldwide with a public relations strategy yet to be equaled. Donald Trump tries, but he's nonpolitical and only one person. I get the feeling sometimes that the Kennedy Mystique is still with us as a faux political force for perhaps one or two prevailing reasons: Media Talking Heads Group I and Group II.

Group I fear and loath the Kennedys and feel compelled to express their contempt every time a Clan member makes a public appearance about anything; Group II love and worship the Kennedys, and don't seem to have a reason to say so any time they have the chance to do so. Objectivity does not play a part in either event.

My observation is, like so many of prominent celebrity no longer in power or on the front pages, is that they have to try to make a comeback anytime the opportunity affords it. Mohammad Ali kept coming back and back, not because he needed the money, so much as he needed the life. Does anyone still remember Harold Stassen of the Eisenhower Era?

The Kennedys also suffer from the disease of never-ending unrequited need for public attention. Since they can no longer produce family members who are electable presidential candidates to represent the Clan in the 21st Century, they still feel compelled to go public to let us know who their candidate should be, in the absence a Kennedy heir. Are there any other families of Former Presidents out there who possess similar conceits?

Republicans want another Reagan, and now Caroline Kennedy wants someone like her father. Many of us may agree that we need such men today. But weren't they Presidents for their times? Things are much more complicated now. Yeah, the Soviet Union is gone, Jimmy Hoffa can't be found, and who remembers the local Savings & Loan offering low interest loans at fixed rates for families who want to move on up to a more politically/socially correct neighborhood. Life now should be uncomplicated, right? But if we believe the stories ripped from today's headlines, we now live in the worst of times.

Now it's Caroline Kennedy who wants a President like her father. An admirable statement by an admirable woman. She writes that her father changed peoples lives, inspired them to enter public service. I was one of those who did so. I dont regret it. If my experience of the civil rights movement, the War on Poverty and the Viet Nam War, the sexual revolution and anti-war crusades interspersed by scary days of the Bay of Pigs, the Berlin Wall, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the political assassinations of our Best taught me anything it was dont look back, something might be gaining on you. I dont want a President like John Kennedy. Ronald Reagan wannabes should Rest In Peace. I want a President who wont repeat mistakes of the past, whose leadership focuses on the Public Good and the Public Interest; whose accomplishments will be immune from the penchants of future leaders who believe in the good old days that never were and the eradication of the memory of a successful opposition.

The Reagan Days of Reform and Revolution are now Legend, a product of Republican MythMakers and their fellow travelers of Print and Electronic Media. The Days of Camelot are over, they too never were, despite the claims by authorized (and unauthorized) "historians." I know that to be true, as do most of you. Like so many of us, for good or bad, I was there, at the Creation of the Myth.

Sabagio Mauraeno, Home alone in Decatur Georgia

Oh-eight (D): RFK’s kids step it up

NinaK — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 02:57:08 GMT

Wow, Clintonistas, how much are Hillary and Bill paying you to post such race-based comments filled with hatred and untruths? You sure are out in droves today. Your hateful, racist comments tell us just what kind of people you are! BIGOTS!!

Hillary and Bill are corrupt: GOOGLE "THE CLINTON CHRONICLES" audio on the net. Their years in the White House brought us scandal after scandal, they lied, spinned, distorted, and coveredup. They do NOT belong in the White House, maybe they want to go back there to finish stealing what they were unable to take when they left White House? Maybe they have a longer list this time? The Clintons are contemptible and corrupt!

If Mr. Obama wasn't running for President, we would not have the huge number of voter turnouts; he has energized the democratic field and there is no question about that, period!

Hillary is down in Florida giving a rally, guess she's down there to thank her supporters. She gets NO delegates from Florida. Watch, she is going to do everything she can to get the DNC to reverse its ruling. I can only hope the DNC doesn't cave in to her!!! She is a power hungry troll and has used and continues to use any dirty trick to try to win the Presidency. I am saddened and ashamed to see how many smart Americans continue to support her inspite of her corruption. Makes me wonder if we the people have become so corrupt that we do not recognize corruption in full bloom when we see it. Very sad, indeed.

"THE CLINTON CHRONICLES" AUDIO
IS FREE ON THE INTERNET