First thoughts: Back to square one

jaycee, Ventura,California — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:29:31 GMT

I know we’re Democrats and all, but really, this isn’t just stupid; it’s crazy stupid. We’re deadlocked in the primaries now; hopelessly stuck with neither side able to win enough delegates outright before the convention. That’s just a fact, and it’s going to be up to the superdelegates to break the tie. We know this right now, today.

There are something like three hundred uncommitted superdelegates left at this point. We will be throwing all our resources into tearing each other down for months on end, and all for no better reason than to try and sway a few hundred votes. Can any of you on either side tell me how this makes one speck of sense? We’re talking about financing entire new elections in two states just to convince a few hundred individuals to choose between two candidates. Unbelievable.

If we behave like rational people I’m pretty sure we could find a much less costly way to help the handful of remaining fence-sitters fall off on one side or the other. A win by one superdelegate vote tomorrow for either candidate would be far better for all of us than to continue down the road we’re on. We’re just doing McCain’s job for him now.

One side will be bitterly disappointed, we already know that. It’s pretty clear now that the “honored to be on the same stage” moment was only a fleeting glimpse of what might have been. Would it be better to wait until August to start repairing the damage or to start now? Gee, let me think. We have nothing to gain and everything to lose by letting this divisive primary process play out. Both our candidates have started dropping in national polls while McCain is going up. It only gets worse from here on out.

Nobody likes the smoke-filled room scenario, but I don’t see any reason why we can’t do this out in the open. We know what the arguments are on both sides already. Let’s just have the debate, make a choice and direct our energy where it belongs. I’ve seen this happen three times before, people, and believe me when I say that this is no way to win an election. We don’t have to do this.

Superdelegates, what’s up? How about a little leadership here? Responsibility doesn’t come without personal risk, and your decision will only become more difficult the longer you procrastinate. You are now responsible for the future of the party and the nation. What the #@!$%&$# are you waiting for? MOVE!!!!!!

First thoughts: Back to square one

Pat, Boston, MA — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:30:57 GMT

Geraldine Ferraro,

You don’t want to be honest as to why Hillary is going to lose? Well, I will be.

If Barack Obama had supported us going into Iraq, he would NOT be where he is today. That is only one of the reasons why he is going to be the democratic nominee. We don’t need more experienced people in DC. What we need is more intelligent people.

You, Hillary & Bill Clinton need to look into the mirror. We can’t stand you anymore. That’s the issue. The color of Barack’s skin is not. Hillary Clinton has never shown any courage. Never. Just bitchiness and now racism more and more.

You & Hillary and most of your female supporters are obnoxious.

Get used to this fact. WE LIKE SENATOR BARACK OBAMA. That is why he’s going to win.

He's smarter than your candidate.

First thoughts: Back to square one

adam/Brooklyn New York City — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:31:00 GMT

Hillary Clinton and Geraldine Ferrero are racist pigs. The choice for Superdelegates couldn't be more clear.

Go with Obama who is actively trying to unify the party or go with Clinton who is actively trying to destroy the party along racial lines.

Personally, I would rather see the party destroyed that become the racist entity that Hillary is making it. I won't ever be voting for her or any one of her super selegates here in NY. Bank on it.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Jaime, Lantana, FL — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:31:47 GMT

I can't believe it's come down to this. One candidate is trying to unify democrats, republicans, and independents...all states and all stereotyped categorical divides. The other candidate is ruthlessly dividing the Democratic party.

It's a shame that, with so many aces in their favor, the Democrats have let it come to this. Hillary is a divider and will not win a general election against McCain. She has played dirty politics from Day One...Travelgate, Paul v. Clinton, hidden tax returns and White House records, just to name a minor few.

Please, PLEASE, let's insist she get out!

First thoughts: Back to square one

A white thirty-something voter — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:34:14 GMT

Re: Ms Ferraro: If anyone DARED suggest that Hillary was where she is because she’s a woman and Bill’s wife – even though it’s TRUE -- Ms. Ferraro would explode.

But, moving on to a bigger question for Ms. Ferraro: rather than singling out African Americans, why not highlight another interest group that has voted in stunning numbers for Mr. Obama? That’s right--the “educated white vote under 40.” You could have just as easily pointed out that Obama would not be where he is except for that group. If you look at the demographics, there’s almost as significant a split for him in that group as there has been among African Americans.

I’ll tell you why Ms Ferraro didn’t choose that group. It’s because the Clinton campaign has made a conscious choice to appeal to the worst of our natures. They’re now looking at Pennsylvania and hoping that they can stir up enough of a race storm to lock in a huge white vote win in the state.

Bringing up the “educated white vote under 40” block just wouldn’t work the same way. In fact, it might cause some people to stop and think: “maybe there really is something to this Obama guy other than the lies the Clintons spread.”

Ms Ferraro, I’d guess there are thousands of us educated white folk under 40 who would LEAP at the chance to debate you anywhere and anytime about why Obama is an INFINITELY better choice for the future of our nation than your candidate. Of course we’d have to wade through a bunch of your condescending “you kids just don’t understand” before we actually got to the facts—the facts that say your candidate has virtually NO foreign policy experience and a disastrous domestic policy record, despite her protestations to the contrary.

Sadly, Ms. Ferraro couldn’t debate on the facts. She knows she’d lose. And lose big.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Russ, Connecticut — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:34:24 GMT

Guys the popular vote totals don't include Obama's huge lead in the popular vote during the caucuses. It is a false statistic.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Bill, Santa Fe — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:35:32 GMT

Wow. The reaction to Ferraro’s comments by the Obama side have pretty much sealed the deal for me. Obama accuses Clinton of “dirty tricks” but she didn’t send his advisor to speak with the Canadiens. Nor did she make Samantha Powers tell the BBC that Obama doesn’t mean what he says about Iraq. Now the Obama folks don’t want the voters in Florida or Michigan to count, effectively turning those states over to the other side.

Now the Obama camp has reaction to Clinton’s response is that she didn’t go far enough in denouncing Ferraro’s comments?? By doing that the Obama camp is accusing the Hillary Clinton of being a racist and have done what I really hoped they wouldn’t do which is to play the race card.

If Clinton is not the nominee, I want to know from the Obama people why I should accept him as my nominee? Given the campaign he has waged and the vitriol of his supporters as documented on these pages, I think a lot of Clinton supporters are leaning towards McCain and it’s not clear to me why they shouldn’t. I voted Democrat since the 1976 election but this might be the year I make a change I can believe in.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Mary, Florida Democrat — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:37:53 GMT

1.7 million Florida democrats voted for a property tax referendum.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Just Wondering — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:38:56 GMT

Mrs. Ferraro should have EVERY right to say what she wants to say.

HOWEVER, the Clinton campaign is clearly continuing their track record of living by a double standard. How is that leadership, Hillary?

First thoughts: Back to square one

Lisa in New Britain, CT — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:39:44 GMT

So many things to comment on...one at a time.

Regarding the white vote in Mississippi, its becoming clear (and I think some of this played out in OH and TX), that there are some Republican votes "suddenly" going to Clinton. Might this be a Rush Limbaugh-type effect? Its been pretty publicized that certain Conservative Republicans are being swayed to vote for Hillary in open primary to help assure that she is the Dem nominee who they'd rather see run against McCain (considering her more easily beatable). I do think any discussion of white vote in these states has to at least talk about this. The apparent high negatives on Obama in Mississippi were undoubtedly affected by this (how much we don't know). What we do know is SUDDENLY Obama's negatives are higher than Clinton. Seems fishy to me.

I also think that generalizing about what Southern whites might do in a general election is dangerous ground in that it doesn't say anything about whites will do in general in the country in a general election. Obama is about unity and has shown a tendency to get a lot of white votes all over the country. Any discussion of race in this primary season needs to talk about that too (and not to mention the major inroads he makes with youth, indy, and Republican (the genuine cross-overs as opposed to the Rush Limbaugh responders) in the contests to-date.

He has a tendency to cut into her "base". She has not shown much tendency to cut into his ever-widening base.

Obama 08

First thoughts: Back to square one

Chuck K, Buffalo, NY — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:42:07 GMT

The Clinton campaign and it's supporters are dividing the party as much as possible. There is no way she can win the general election now because too many African Americans will not vote for her now. Especially after all the racially insensitive remarks. She can't win without the African American vote in the general election. But Hillary doesn't care... if she can't win the general election, she'll make sure Obama can't either.... because she's more about her own ambitions than the Democratic party.

First thoughts: Back to square one

SL, NJ — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:42:48 GMT

Obama should give Hillary the delegates from FL and MI and save the states and DNC money. The catch is the popular votes are void.

He doesn't need the delegates, and it keeps her from claiming victory in a valid election. A generous gesture that hamstrings Clinton.

The money can be saved to use where it can do the party the most good... the general election.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Lisa in New Britain, CT — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:43:25 GMT

In terms of the popular vote, I really think that we need to stop including FL and Mich. Those states votes in January do not and should not count. A do-over is another thing but to include the January numbers is completely pointless. Michigan especially is problematic as doesn't Obama get zero. Ask yourself, does he really NOT have one supporter in Michigan. That's the most ridiculous assumption in this whole primary season. And FL is problematic too, we don't really know what the difference (in popular vote) would be in FL if people knew there votes were being counted and voted accordingly.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Mike, Ohio — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:44:52 GMT

While Hillary Clinton and her surrogates continue to fan the flames of racism in this country (and thus assuring defeat of the dems in November), Sen Obama continues to talk to the American people about the issues.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Diane of Illinois — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:45:05 GMT

Thank you Mississippi! You did your job!

First thoughts: Back to square one

Don, PA — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:45:39 GMT

When most of asians voted Cinton in CA, media called asians racists. When most of white working people in Ohio voted Clinton, they called them racists. When latinos voted Clinton in Nevada, they called them racists. When 90% of black voters voted Obama, liberal medias say nothing.

If white people are as racist as blacks, Obama would be out in Iowa.

African americans are most racist in this country.

First thoughts: Back to square one

SL, NJ — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:47:46 GMT

Re: Ms. Ferraro

Isn't that the pot calling the kettle...?

First thoughts: Back to square one

julie, austin, texas — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:49:33 GMT

OK, enough already with Geraldine Ferraro. By Ferraro coming out a SECOND time this morning, it shows this for what it is - a PLOY by the Clinton camp to get the race issue back on the front burner. Hillary could put a stop to this, but she hasn't. And the sychophantic Clinton-leaning media are loving every minute of it. As someone pointed out this morning, we have heard more from Ferraro in the past 24 hours than we have in the past 24 YEARS! Can we PLEASE get back to the campaign? And it is rich that some in the media say the Obama people raised this by denouncing it - yet this same media says he must get tough and fight back! Double standard?

First thoughts: Back to square one

Brian — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:49:42 GMT

Clinton's wins are more narrow because they are in larger states. She does have a lot of work to do to win the popular vote and make her case to the superdelegates. If Obama can keep the voters in FL and MI from being heard, he should be able to win. That victory, however, would be hollow when those states go GOP in the general. Why punish the voters for something that party leaders did?

First thoughts: Back to square one

nuanced — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:53:39 GMT

Geraldine Ferraro is acting like the Bush administration; never admit you are wrong, never admit a mistake, never apologize, it's someone elses fault. She is a paid consultant for Fox news and appeared on Fox news to defend herself -- that says a lot. Will she be on Rush Limbaugh next? Really, whos side is she on?

First thoughts: Back to square one

Lyn, MD — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:53:39 GMT

I thought Hillary had to win huge in Ohio and Texas, or she would have to leave the race. Well, they tied in delegates in the Texas primaries and Hillary only netted 9 delegates over Barack in Ohio which were erased by his win in the Texas caucuses. Why didn't Hillary concede?

Whatever few delegates she wins will eventually be erased by Barack, so what is the point of continuing this farce? Barack is ahead in the popular vote, in delegates, and in winning the most states. Plus he is well liked, more respected, more presidential, and has integrity.

Barack Obama is where he is today, contrary to what Geraldine Ferraro thinks, because of a lot of things, but most importantly, because of the content of his character, not because of his skin color or race.

OBAMA 08

First thoughts: Back to square one

Nina H, Connecticut — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:56:30 GMT

Chuck Todd is so cute with his facts. Hillary once again going for the hate vote. Thank god for young voters who are beyond the racist divide in this country. The old guard way of politics is on it's way out.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Lisa in New Britain, CT — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:57:33 GMT

I have no idea what a prevent defense is LOL, but as an Obama supporter, I can be OK with a revote in FL. That is better than having the existing votes count because it will provide a truer issue of what the actual vote is there. I don't have a major objection to it in terms of not disenfranchising people.

My major objection to it is that it is a rules change in the middle of the game. How do we prevent this in the future? How will the DNC ever regain credibility (assuming they had it to begin with). Maybe by penalizing the state of FL in some way, Like making them pay for the new primary as a major "fine" for breaking the rules? And how do you do a revote fairly. If it smacks of unfairness (to either side), there are going to be problems in Nov.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Rohn Jay Miller — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:58:52 GMT

Late last night I worked out the remaining primaries on one of the "delegate calculators" around the Web. I'll make a point you're beginning to hear elsewhere: even if you assume Hillary Clinton will do better than expected, it will come down to the final 350 unpledged superdelegates.

But here's another point: Obama needs only 40% of the 350 unpledged superdelegates to win. And just playing practical politics, if he gets only 20% of those, can the Clintons possibly hold off the remaining 50 or 60 from jumping on board?

First thoughts: Back to square one

Lyn, MD — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:58:59 GMT

First thoughts: Back to square one

wapitig8r Gainesville, FL — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:59:15 GMT

If Imus was fired for his racist comments, and he was, then GF should be fired also.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:59:36 GMT

The Maggi Williams message to the Obama campaign is telling.

"Accept the delegate count or call for a do-over."

It reflects the Clinton campaign deep-rooted notion that the campaigns can dictate and manipulate rules.

The Obama campaign seems more oriented toward the notion, "give us the playing field, we'll figure out how to play it." The Clinton campaign seems more oriented toward the notion, "here's how we want the playing field to be."

First thoughts: Back to square one

Dante — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:00:09 GMT

Ferraro needs to step down. Her comments were inappropriate and frankly did not make any sense.

First thoughts: Back to square one

JB, NC — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:00:27 GMT

It is clear now that Hillary cannot win this nomination unless she convinces the Superdelegates to overturn the will of the voters expressed by his lead in Pledged Delegates, Popular Vote, and Number of States Won. Obama has an insurmountable lead of 160 plus Pledged Delegates, a 700,000 lead in the Popular vote, and a two-to-one lead in states won. I ask you - if this were REVERSED and it were Hillary with all of these leads, would not the media be calling Obama the "Democratic Huckabee?" It is HILLARY who HAS NOT - and CANNOT - CLOSE THE SALE! The ONLY way she will be able to is by tearing the Party apart by convincing enough Superdelegates to go against the will of all of the record turnouts of this Primary Season. IT IS TIME FOR AL GORE AND JOHN EDWARDS AND NANCY PELOSI TO STEP UP AND SAY "ENOUGH!" They should throw their support behind Obama and just watch how fast others will follow. If they don't put an end to this, I will lose ALL RESPECT for the Party.

First thoughts: Back to square one

mSSR, Pennsylvania — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:00:33 GMT

For Hillary Clinton and Maggie Williams to say that the Obama campaign has to accept the Florida and Michigan results or join their call for a re-vote is ridiculous. I wish the media would call them on it. Everyone agreed with the same rules, and now it seems as if we are being forced to accept something that has no real validity. It's sad that the delegates from MICH and FLA won't be seated, but to go back on the rules now, just doesn't make sense. The same old bait and switch tricks from Clinton's people. MSNBC, good job not holding them accountable. If you keep it up, Hillary may have a shot at winning this thing!

First thoughts: Back to square one

Jack - MO — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:02:15 GMT

Ferraro is keeping the race issue in the fore front of the media and public. She is doing it better than Bill was able to. The Clintons are supporting this because it helps them with the white vote. You will see another suragate (non staff member) do the same the week prior to PA voting because it is helping Hillary and the media likes the story.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Houston — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:02:17 GMT

Ferraro's whining about being called a racist is dishonest. Nobody knows if she's a racist but her. But what she _clearly_ is doing is race-baiting, just like Bill Clinton was doing when he tried to paint Obama as the black candidate when he compared Obama's win in South Carolina to Jesse Jackson's win there in the 80s. The Clinton campaign is shamelessly exploiting racial tensions to undermine Obama with their "rule or ruin" strategy. And all it will buy them is "ruin" for the Democratic party.

Clinton has no chance of winning the presidency now. Even if her dirty tactics and arm-twisting super delegates gets her the nomination, she has no chance of winning against McCain. Having alienated a large proportion of black voters, many of them will just sit the election out, or maybe even vote for McCain. And having scared white southerners about a black man becoming president, Obama's chances of winning any southern states are greatly diminished should he get the nomination.

And I say this not as a big Obama fan but as someone who would have gladly voted for her back up til January before her campaign started its race-baiting strategy.

First thoughts: Back to square one

jerry/corpus christi texas — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:02:42 GMT

It's bad enough when The clinton's play the race card on Obama, but when you have a total loser like Geraldine Ferraro making statements like that, one has to wonder if all the racism that the democrats swear has gone from the roles in the 1950's and 60's is still foaming at the top. Bad enough you have a woman who was part of the worst whipping in presidential history trying to keep her name in the news, but for her to say something like that shows she can be as mean and nasty as the other woman running for President.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Greg, New York, NY — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:03:06 GMT

I guess leading in delegates, leading in the popular vote, and leading in states won is "square one". I didn't realize that the inevitable candidate being in 2nd place was the starting line.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Marie — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:03:31 GMT

Question: Can you please let me know how many women senators there are versus black senators...how many women govenors there are versus black govenors. Is gender really more restrictive?

First thoughts: Back to square one

V. Sheldon, Portage IN — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:04:41 GMT

"I will stand my ground … and I won’t back down"?
Geri Ferraro is throwing more gasoline on a controversy that threatens to burn down the Democratic house.
The simple fact is that Hillary and her operatives will stoop to anything, no matter how repulsive to get her in the door of the White House. The comments of Gerri Ferraro just amplify the point. This is a calculated political move on the part of the Clintonistas to take the debate far away from the substance of this campaign and focus the Party on issues that will do it no good and possibly irreparable harm. It further underscores what i believe about Hillary and her surrogates- that she believes that this election is hers by Divine Right and in their minds should have been just a coronation from the first. These statements are just more proof that HRC is the most divisive and polarizing issue we have to face. I am sorry for the fact that in 1984 i worked so hard to get Mondale and Ferraro elected. This sort of inflammatory rhetoric is frankly nauseating. I had decided that if HRC won out i would simply hold my nose, take a deep breath and vote for her, for the good of the Party. I have decided that Ms Ferraro's statement, has unfortunately- made this impossible. I will not vote for HRC now- under any circumstaces- she has proven herself unfit.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Ken Capers, Atlanta, GA — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:04:49 GMT

Ferraro is Hillary's attack dog. Her obstinance and the timing are designed by Hillary to MAKE race an issue to make people reduce thier view of Obama as just a Black man, hoping to elicit racist fears and translate that to votes for herself. Shameful and shameless -- at the end of the day Hillary has become all she supposedly despised. It's like a Faustian tale, and she is selling her soul. Too bad, she won't win, and she'll divide the party, the nation, and sully herself irrevocably. Who would think a Clinton, any Clinton would show herself to be a racist? Lamentable and infuriating. And after all this, she WILL NOT WIN!

First thoughts: Back to square one

kenn — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:06:19 GMT

How great is it to see how mean spirited Obamma is after all that crap about being the new thing ,get down and dirty thats the only way and how will he be working and getting republicans when he bashes them about wrecking the economy and the war all those repuckers are going to vote for him? NADER 08 real change what are you scared of .

First thoughts: Back to square one

HP Boston — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:06:22 GMT

Obama did poorly among whites, winning only 30%, according to exit polls. While this split was visible in Alabama and the border state of Tennessee earlier this year, it was visible in Ohio's primary last week, too.
HILLARY PA is yours!

First thoughts: Back to square one

moderate dem — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:06:30 GMT

I hope Hillary drags it all the way to the convention. Then maybe we will find out who the REAL Obama is...a slimey, lying phoney both he and his wife. I think there is a whole lot in this guys closet and we better find it now, rather than let the repubs do it.This Obama is a huge con-artist. Don't like him, and not sure if I will be voting democratic this year if he gets in.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Sarah - OH — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:06:43 GMT

I have to agree with Ferraro on this one. David Axelrod has single-handedly made this contest about race. I believe that's the job he was hired to do...and he's done it well. I firmly believe that Obama will win the nomination....and, yes, it will be because he is black. I also believe that he will not win the Presidency....once again, because he is black. It's a sad, but cold, hard fact that racism still exists in this country, and it's not going away any time soon. I also believe that the racism that is rampant in this country is not just white against black. Black against white has taken a front seat in the arena and, unfortunately, political correctness mandates that we put up with it. It is a sad time for our country, and, like it or not, I see at least 4-more years of a Republicans in the Whitehouse.

First thoughts: Back to square one

HP Boston — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:07:05 GMT

First thoughts: Back to square one

John - PA — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:07:11 GMT

Hillary not agreeing with Ferraro and stating it once does not matter. The media doesn't talk about that in their coverage or does in an after thought. The Clinton campaign is turning this into a race discussion and getting the media to play. Bill was not able to do it as well. The only true way for Hillary to not agree is to remove Ferraro from her team like she removed Spitzer's name from her web site. Hillary still has not said that she will ask Spitzer to resign as her national co-chair.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Joan chicago — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:07:20 GMT

It is so sad to see how racist is this country and we can see that this election is showing that AA are as racist as white people. Just look this:
Obama first is a product of the media. He has nothing to show, Nothing to talk about Just giving nice speech (by the way, I found, when analyzing both candidates speech, that Clinton's speech is more substantial and strong, maybe less inspirational)
Obama was pushed so strongly by the media beginning in November
African American are so racist 90-95% of them that they are not interested on the best interest of this country but their personal racist agenda, to support a black candidate even when he has no experience and not background to fight against McCain.

Now everybody is attacking Ferraro for her comment, it is insane and abusive and the media should also put attention to this matter and do not let Obama and his people to destroy everybody who bring this issue up.
Lets face it, Obama is where he is because the racist issue, nothing else. I wish to be on TV too, I will talk about it day and night.

Joan
Chicago, IL

ps. sorry my spelling, English is not my first language

First thoughts: Back to square one

Joe — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:08:35 GMT

Seems Ms Ferraro has said this before:

On Politico, there is a short quote from Ferraro that originally appeared in the Washington Post on April 15, 1988.

Placid of demeanor but pointed in his rhetoric, Jackson struck out repeatedly today against those who suggest his race has been an asset in the campaign. President Reagan suggested Tuesday that people don't ask Jackson tough questions because of his race. And former representative Geraldine A. Ferraro (D-N.Y.) said Wednesday that because of his "radical" views, "if Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race."

Asked about this at a campaign stop in Buffalo, Jackson at first seemed ready to pounce fiercely on his critics. But then he stopped, took a breath, and said quietly, "Millions of Americans have a point of view different from" Ferraro's.

Discussing the same point in Washington, Jackson said, "We campaigned across the South . . . without a single catcall or boo. It was not until we got North to New York that we began to hear this from Koch, President Reagan and then Mrs. Ferraro . . . . Some people are making hysteria while I'm making history."

First thoughts: Back to square one

JeanneGA — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:09:18 GMT

There seems to be a large group of sexist pigs in the Obama camp. Thats the US for you...think we are sooo progessive...so much more than other countries. NOT!!

First thoughts: Back to square one

Bunker Hill, Spearfish, SD — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:09:52 GMT

Here's my solution for Florida and Michigan.

It's cheap, and it's fair, and it's decisive.

Apportion their delegates according to the number of delegates each candidate wins in the remaining primaries.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Rick,Ky — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:10:44 GMT

Only in the MSM's convoluted thinking is Barack a black man running for President.Back in the last part of 2007, Hillary had such a commanding national lead, that No One could Possibly stop the coranation.Steadily the little engine that could, Barack has whittled away at every voting block & built a Coalition of Conductor's, engineer's, Trackman, Signalman(women are these also)& rebuilt a traintrack that stretches the Entire Continent of America.This train has only a few more miles of Track to run, before it reaches the Station at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue on Janurary 20-2009.

Now we have the Hillary campaign sending out the Black woman to atttack the Black man Hopeing to somehow get the Sista vote back on her side.However the damage is irreversible as African American's have seen Hillary for what she is, a Racist White Woman trying to scare up votes.

Democratic Leader's (if we have any)had better put a stop to this Nonsense before there is No more Democratic party to Lead!

For all of you who still insist on posting If Hillary get's the nomination, if Hillary steals the nomanation, if hillary does this, If Hillary does That.Hillary Clinton is Never( I Repeat Never)gonna be President of the United States of America!

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

First thoughts: Back to square one

Lyn, MD — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:11:06 GMT

First thoughts: Back to square one

Robert — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:12:16 GMT

Senator Clinton helped to create this problem and did it intentionally. That should be part of the discussion. No one has pointed out that the voters in Florida who didn't vote, did the right thing and are the real victims here.
If Florida voters had waited for a resolution to the problem, cost wouldn't be an issue. Senator Clinton also left her name on the ballot in Michigan again encouraging voters to go ahead and vote rather than wait for a resolution. Now she wants to pretend she did it for the voters. I hope they are smarter than that.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Philadelphia,PA — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:12:23 GMT

Have people forgot that Obama is half white. Have people forgot that he is not the first African American to run for president. Have people forgot that African Americans are less than 12% of the population. If every African American from new borns to the ederly voted for Obama, he still could not win. Obama is winning because a lot of white voters have decided to vote for a candidate of substance and character regardless of race.

First thoughts: Back to square one

no obama — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:12:53 GMT

Yes Guys the popular vote totals don't include Obama's huge lead in the popular vote during the caucuses. It is a false statistic.
Russ, Connecticut (Sent Wednesday, March 12, 2008 9:34 AM)

----------------------
Yes Russ, the caucuses got him this far, but they will doom him. The popular vote is skewed by little voter count on caucuses.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Brenda in Michigan — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:13:51 GMT

What the Clintons are doing is dispicable !!!!!
I never would have thought that I'd be so upset regarding the Clintons', whom I've been so fond of over the years. . . I am astonished !!!!! Can it be that the 'Right' was right all along ???? She will Do, and Say anything, and allow her surrogates to do the same. . to win this election ???? If she can't be the nominee, than the Dems will lose in November, and they're OK with that !!! The GOP . . WOW !! The Dems are playing right into their hands.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Independent Voter, Stuart, FL — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:14:48 GMT

As a Floridian I say No REDO, No Mail Campaign. No Delegates counted. The DNC stated the rules and everyone knew them and agreed to them prior to the primary.

I am an Independent. However if the Democrats want to attract my vote they had better abide by the rules they set down.

This is just another case of the Clinton Campaign trying to set the rules.

Clinton rules for Clintons
Clinton rules for everyone else.

If you do not believe it. Think about the Clinton outrage at Samantha calling Hillary a Monster.
Yet Hillary does not dismiss Ms. Ferraro for her remarks about Mr. Obama

As a woman I would like to see woman get ahead but the Clinton tactics certainly do not help women at all.

As a Senior Citizen who was in the work force for almost 50 years I have first hand knowledge of how difficult it was for women to succeed.

However Hillary's tactics and those of her campaign will not help women at all!!

First thoughts: Back to square one

Jim, Santa Cruz — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:15:05 GMT

If Ms. Ferraro had 1/10 of the brains or charisma that Obama has, Mondale and her may have won more states against Reagan. And one more thing I find interesting: isn't Obama the "family values" candidate when compared to Hillary? Doesn't his family portray more of a stable and functional relationship? Isn't that going to resonate more with the Americans in the heartland?

First thoughts: Back to square one

HP Boston — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:16:31 GMT

First thoughts: Back to square one

ANON,Philadelphia,PA — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:17:27 GMT

Admiral Fallon's resignation or termination eight months prior to the 2008 election, sets in motion Bush/Cheney's plans for attacking Iran.

It will start with another 9/11-like false-flag attack on the US (a la Operation Northwoods), followed by the blaming of the Iranians for the attack, and then our subsequent attack on them for allegedly doing it.

This will either allow Bush/Cheney to stay in power by declaring Martial Law (if McCain is somehow not assured of winning the election), or to get McCain elected by an American public longing for security and revenge much like in the wake of 9/11.

By attacking Iran prior to the election the Republican party will benefit as well by gaining Senate and House seats in the 2008 election instead of losing them which is expected to occur if nothing happens between now and November.

As for Admiral Fallon, you were a true patriot and thanks for your long service to our country.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Susan — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:18:20 GMT

How can anyone argue that causcas votes don't count, but that two states who held primaries outside of party rules should count? Does anyone not see the hypocrisy in that?

First thoughts: Back to square one

David Hennessy, Plantation, FL — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:18:33 GMT

How is it that Chuck Todd and others are calculating a combined "popular vote?" There is no accurate way of calculating this, since caucus states such as Iowa and Washington state only count state delegates won. There is, in fact, no record of popular vote in these caucus contests.

Doesn't this little snafu (i.e the impossibility of actually adding up a combined popular vote) invalidate the argument about popular vote?

First thoughts: Back to square one

Jane, Raleigh — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:18:38 GMT

This is looking more and more like an orchestrated effort by the Clinton camp to reinsert race into this race. Why do I think this? Because Ferraro, after having Hillary call her original remarks regrettable, came out swinging AGAIN this morning. If this were NOT sanctioned by the Clinton camp, Ferraro would not have DARED come out the second time. Very transparent. Very OLD-STYLE politics. Can we please move on? Obama denounced it yesterday - Hillary said it was regrettable - Ferraro, like any bully, came out again - well Hillary should COMPLETELY DISASSOCIATE HERSELF TODAY. And that should be it. Just ignore it. This is Geraldine Ferraro - someone we haven't heard much from in 24 years! Just stop talking about it and get back to REAL issues, please!!

First thoughts: Back to square one

evie — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:18:47 GMT

Out of curiosity, if politicians are expected to say, "Oh, no, I'd never presume to want to be VP," then why do you reporters continue to ask? Are you admitting this is simply a gotcha question where you can ridicule a politician who lets an honest moment slip?

First thoughts: Back to square one

JohnnyU, WA State — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:18:52 GMT

Senator Barack Obama has arrived to his current status due to hard work, brains and good judgement. For Hillary and her sidekick Ferraro to suggest otherwise is just one more dirty dish being flung from that kitchen sink. Pathetic and for once...very transparent Hillary, thanks.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Mary in AL — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:20:08 GMT

Wow! Great arguments and comments for Barack Obama! I decided back in 2004 that I would vote for him for President some day. I am a 50 year old white woman in the South who has supported him since day one and will continue to support him. I'm so glad there are smart people out there that see what I have seen for a long time. No, he isn't perfect, but he does have the leadership style and ability to take this nation forward.

OBAMA only 08

First thoughts: Back to square one

Starchild, Mo — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:20:36 GMT

One thing I don't get is why the Democratic Party is letting this type of stuff happen. These surrogates are supposed to be our leaders, the people who pave the way for the younger generations. As it looks to me, these people (Old Guards)and people who have been around since Moses was a corporal are complete lunatics.

This is a new day, these are not the days of street fights and bar room brawls at the cost of gaining power. I was thinking they would pave the way for peace and diplomacy, but am I ever disappointed.

There is so much double talk going on. I am wondering who in the hell left the gate open and let these people out.

It clear, majority of America wants something new and are tired of divisions based on culture, religion, and race. It's history from the earlier centuries repeating itself.

To me, Clinton and her surrogates don't get it. Why didn't she outright "denounce and reject" the comments, why not get rid of these people who are not standard bearers for America?

As each day passes, I want a Democrat in the WH this year, but she makes is very hard for me to cross the aisle if she is the nominee.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Obama The Hoodwinker, MI — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:27:16 GMT

Some of you right on politically correct patronising middle class liberals who are the worst. You mouth platitudes of the worst kind - it is guilt-trip tokenism.

If you were so concerned why didn't you back a real ghetto candidate when you could instead of another middle-class liberal candidate.

Take colour out of the equation and Obama is not much different from most of you. He does not share the same experiences as the majority of working-class blacks. He had a relatively priveleged background that most working-class blacks (and whites) would die for.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Dan, Upstate, NY — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:27:23 GMT

Finally Jaycee writes something that isn't idiotic!!! We are caught in a self destructing loop. End it now before it destroys the party. Where are Gore and Edwards? Obama, you can't lose but you can't win either. Clinton, you can't win but you can't lose either. So, Obama / Clinton. It plays to both of their strengths. Obama talks about Hope and Unity, ect. and Clinton gets to tear apart McCain. Win/Win!!!!

First thoughts: Back to square one

Noel, Hot Springs, AR — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:28:09 GMT

Obama started running for president as a guy who just so happened to be black. The Clinton campaign has cast him as the black guy running for president and injected race. I don't think that the Clinton's are racists but understand the power of race and are trying to use it to win. They threw the black vote under the bus to stir the racist feelings of those who may be disposed to feeling that way.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Nj — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:28:42 GMT

The Clintons = Bush/Cheney/Rove

Divide everyone so they can get what they want. They will not win and we all know she cant so why are The Supers and the Big people not stepping in especially after Ferrarros DUMB remarks??? Is this The Democratic party???
Clinton thinks its just Her and thats it.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Dan, Vancouver — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:29:03 GMT

Obama and EDWARDS.

Obama should choose Edwards as VP. It's a logical pairing: young, progressive; and Edwards has the solid platform that Obama only suggests, and delegates that would put them well beyond her range. Such a pairing would satisfy Nader's demands for genuine change, and he might pull out and support them.

Her behavior and the PR hacks that run her campaign leave her entirely undeserving of any place. Nor do Americans, or the rest of the world, deserve her.

So yes:

OBAMA AND EDWARDS. the logical choice.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Chris, NYC, New York — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:29:14 GMT

In order to win this election Hillary HAS to win the popular vote; this is the only legitimate argument that she could pitch to supers at the convention to overturn the delegate vote. Obama currently has +700K lead after last nights +100K (Obama's lead is +400K if you include FL). Also, current popular vote totals do not include IA, NV, ME, or WA as these states don't release the results of popular vote (why not?). Two things have to happen for her to eliminate this margin: 1) she needs a large victory in PA (>15% popular vote) and 2) She'll have to win >50% of popular votes in remaining states to eliminate the residual that she didn't elimniate in PA and to maintain her lead going in to the convention.

Can she do it? I certainly hope not.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Amy Andersen, Eden Prairie, MN — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:29:39 GMT

“My concern is how I’ve been treated. I am absolutely offended… And to take it out on Hillary, because they can’t talk about the issues.”

How did we ever consider Mrs. Ferraro to be qualified to run for vice president? Would we would have wanted her to answer the red telephone at 3 a.m.? Talk about thin-skinned. She makes offensive remarks and then paints herself as the victim. Not to mention that SHE is the one who is not talking about “the issues” and has, by her own actions, created the latest diversion that keeps both candidates’ eyes off the prize.

As a voter who really would like to hear the important issues discussed, I’m the one who’s offended.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Jamie j., boston ma — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:29:49 GMT

jaycee - I know we’re Democrats and all, but really, this isn’t just stupid . . .

Truer words are have never been spoken. Democrats are really stupid.

First thoughts: Back to square one

bill, okla — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:51:24 GMT

Noel in Hot Springs. I don't want to think the Clintons are racist either, but what do we really know about the hearts of people so hungry for power. I voted once for Bill but wouldn't vote for his wife under any circumstances. Hillary seems capable of any deceit to me. The more I see the less I believe.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Linida. Boston, MA — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:52:18 GMT

So, that Latino surrogate of Clinton's says:
"He won't get the latino vote because he's black"

Ed Rendell says:
"Some people aren't ready to vote for a black candidate"

Ferraro says:
"Everyone is voting for him because he is black"

Well, which is it? The Clinton's are the ONLY ones bringing up race! Obama's camp would rather not even talk about it, but the Clinton camp keeps bringing it up, and always with some negativity or controversy. Why can't the Clinton camp just get beyond race?

First thoughts: Back to square one

KYObserver — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:52:22 GMT

Geraldine: What you said about Obama getting where he is because he's black can be construed as the same as what others like Limbaugh saying about the black athletes, particularly that quarterback a few years ago (sorry I don't recall his name....I'm not into sports) for whom the media had high expectations and they wanted him to do well because he was black. This is racist pandering, not even subtle!!! Shame on you, shame on you, Geraldine. Obama is a running as a candidate for president of the USA who happens to be African American; he is able to transcend race in America and unite people. He isn't just a black candidate. Hillary wise up.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Linida. Boston, MA — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:52:25 GMT

First thoughts: Back to square one

Sierra, SF — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:53:14 GMT

Bill, Santa Fe: '... think a lot of Clinton supporters are leaning towards McCain and it’s not clear to me why they shouldn’t. I voted Democrat since the 1976 election but this might be the year I make a change I can believe in....'

Mr. Bill YOU'RE dividing the Democratic party !!
Since you're probably a paid Clinton staffer we can see the drift tof the campaign

The Clinton campaign KNOWS IT CAN'T WIN !!
Sorry Hillary, you can't catch up in delegates or the popular vote

Hillary Clinton is trying to blackmail herslef on the ticket

NO DICE

Byb, bye Hillary
Why don't you and Bill crawl under that rock....

Or maybe Bill can 'double date' with Eliot Spitzer

First thoughts: Back to square one

Feisty Redhead IL — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:53:22 GMT

What these so called 'Super Delegates' need to keep in mind is that if they go ahead and overturn the will of the people - there will be ALOT of us who sit home come Nov (myself included who is a 46 yr old educated white woman and wouldn't vote for that bitch to be our county's dog catcher!).

Now if I'm not mistaken there are an awful lot of Senate & House seats up for grabs as well this fall... Think VERY seriously about this as there is a whole lot more to loose than just the White House!

Time to WAKE UP & take some action!

Obama 08

First thoughts: Back to square one

CJ — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:53:51 GMT

I say if Obama is still ahead even if the unofficial votes in FL and MI are seated then go ahead and do it at it after the final states. Truth is until Clinton is mathematically eliminated she won't drop but her campaign needs to stop the negative attacks....superdelegates should threaten any primary candidate who does so. Pelosi atleast got the ball rolling yesterday.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Perry, NYC — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:54:26 GMT

The amazing thing is - if a prediction had been made a year ago that Bill & Hillary Clinton & Geraldine Ferraro, longtime progressive lions of the zeitgeist that they are, would be broadly perceived today as racist pigs ... it probably would've been laughed out of town. But here we are. And whose fault is this? Not the media's. Not Barack Obama's. Not even Al Sharpton's.

The fault lies solely with those who have created this impression - Bill & Hillary & Geraldine themselves. Even though all three have been champions of civil rights and racial unity in the past, even though the bulk of their collective careers has stood for this ... unfortunately in the recent past they have NOT listened to the better angels of their natures, they have NOT respected the bedrock values of their political identities.

They have, in effect, squandered their own good hard work in this area. The demon of Greed, or lust for more & continued power, got 'em. Bamboozled 'em. Convinced 'em that appealing to white privilege was a smart strategy, given the dynamics of this race.

They sold their souls. And we the people, have watched in horror. We used to love Geraldine Ferraro. We used to love the Clintons. We used to be PROUD of what they stood for, in contrast to the nastiness of the GOP. Now we are ashamed of them. Now we can hardly tell "the first black president" from some racist yeehaw waving a Confederate flag.

It's sad. But only for our former heroes, not for us. We the people are moving on. We are choosing a better path.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Character still counts, too bad Hillary doesn't have any. — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:55:43 GMT

Quite simply, Hillary is all talk and no action. If she had any character, which apparently she doesn't, she would make Ferraro step down. The "monster" comment pales in comparison to Ferraro's comments and all Hillary does is say she doesn't agree. It is time for Hillary to show some backbone and repudiate these ignorant comments. Ferraro thinks people are picking on her because she is white, just goes to show you how stupid she is.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Phred, NH — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:56:23 GMT

Why does anyone give a fat rats behind what Geraldine Ferarro has to say anyway? Shouldn't she be playing shuffleboard in a rest home someplace? Someone always ends up shooting their campaign in the foot. Give both sides time and ammo and we'll have our moments.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Jaime, Lantana, FL — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:57:04 GMT

Joan, Chicago:

You are so wrong, that I could go on forever. But, I'll start here with these three points:

First of all, there is a HUGE difference between voting FOR someone because of race and voting AGAINST someone because of race. The first is supportive, the second is racist...regardless of whether you are talking about a black candidate, white candidate, Latino candidate, or a candidate of any other race, religion, ethnic background, gender, etc...

Secondly, Hillary started with a very large lead amongst African Americans. The reason Barack is doing so well with this group now is two-fold: 1) He has earned their respect, and 2) Hillary has lost it.

Thirdly, Barack Obama is a candidate filled with not only inspiration, hope, integrity, and character (ALL qualities I would perfer in a candidate--though I don't know about you) but he has also gained a lot of experience. He did not just walk in off the streets. If you look at the Library of Congress' website, you will find that Barack authored and co-sponsored hundreds more SUBSTANTIVE bills during his first eight months of US Senate Service than Hillary has in her six years!

Please, educate yourself.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Megan Medica — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:57:47 GMT

She is no racist she thinks it's and advantage to be black. There was no reason for Ferrarow to bring this up. She should be ashamed but unfortuantley she is not. The dems have given this election to McCain.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Doles, Miami, FL — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:00:27 GMT

As far as I can tell, some of you are very passionate about the candidate of your choice. I have a suggestion-for those of you who haven't done so, why don't you start getting on your democratic representatives, the democratic national committee, and other known superdelegates who haven't yet chosen to endorse? At this point I could understand if a superdelegate comes out for Hillary, but I cannot for the life of me understand why one would not endorse Obama now if you're going to at a later date. For the superdelegates who might endorse Obama, they need to do so now and put an end to this. Why let it drag on any further? It seems that Hillary will not have the numbers necessary to catch him.

First thoughts: Back to square one

fairness — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:01:42 GMT

The Maggi Williams message to the Obama campaign is telling.

"Accept the delegate count or call for a do-over."
********
Ok Paul Miller why doesn't Obama agree to something? The people in these states want a vote. The DNC has said the candidates have to agree. So why he is dragging his feet?

First thoughts: Back to square one

KATHLEEN, SAN JUAN, PUERTO RICO — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:25:45 GMT

THEY ARE NOT DEADLOCKED. OBAMA HAS BEEN AHED SINCE IOWA. HE IS AHEAD BY 160 DELEGATES. THE SUPERDELEGATES DONT COUNT UNTIL THE CONVENTION. HILLARY CANNOT EARN ENOUGH DELEGATES TO CATCH UP. PLEASE TELL THE TRUTH, I BEG YOU.

I KNOW CHRIS WANTS A BIG SHOW IN PENN, BUT GET A SOUL.
SHE IS HELL-BENT ON STEALING THIS.

ONCE THESE IDEALISTIC KIDS REALIZE THAT ALL THESE ELECTIONS HAVE BEEN OVERTURNED BY HEDGEFUND CHELSEA, BILLIONAIRE BILL, SCORPION HILL, THEY WILL CRAWL AWAY IN SHAME. THE BLACK PEOPLE WILL STAY HOME.

AND ALL THESE FAIR-MINDED REPUBLICANS LIKE BUCHANAN AND TUCKER AND FRIENDLY MCCAIN WILL BEGIN INSISTING ON TAX RETURNS, WHITEHOUSE TRANSCRIPTS AND COMMUNIST DONORS. FOX AND RUSH AND LOU DOBBS, ALL ALLIES NOW, WILL CHIME IN.

EVERY ONE OF THESE SUPER DELEGATES HAS WATCHED HER BLOW A 25 POINT LEAD, AND THEY HAVE SEEN A NOBODY COME FROM BEHIND TO MAKE UP A 25 POINT DEFICIT ONCE HE BEGAN CAMPAIGNING.

THIS WILL HAPPEN AGAIN. OBAMA/WEBB WILL WIN EVERY STATE. WEBB CAN GET THE MCCAIN VOTERS.

STOPSTOPSTOP WITH THE EMPHASIS ON THE BLACK VOTE. YOU DIDNT KEEP TALKING ABOUT THE WHITE VOTE IN IOWA.
HILLARY CANNOT GET THE NOMINATION UNLESS SHE OVERRIDES THE POPULAR VOTE. WE KNOW THAT NOW FOR A FACT. ONCE THE VOTERS KNOW THAT, SHE CANNOT WIN THE ELECTION IN NOV. AND HER SUPERDELEGATES ARE IN PERIL.

First thoughts: Back to square one

fairness — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:26:22 GMT

"That is better than having the existing votes count because it will provide a truer issue of what the actual vote is there."

And how would it be "truer"? 1.7 million people voted already. It was a large turnout for several reasons but they had have a property tax vote there at same time. FL probably won't get that many on a revote. The larger the vote the more representative of the population.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Sick of corruption, sick of the Clintons — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:27:07 GMT

Welcome, Mississippi to the every growing list of states that do not count.

Hey, Geraldine, thanks for your input on Obama. You can crawl back under your rock now. The more I listen to you, the more I understand how you and Mondale managed to take 1 out of 50 states in 84.

Of course, I am sure that Mondale picked you because of your qualifications and experience. It had nothing to do with you being a woman, right?

Whatever.

Obama in 2008. If he wins the election, I am confident that he will not steal everything not nailed down in the White House when his term ends. Can the Hillary supporters say the same about their candidate?

First thoughts: Back to square one

Jenny, Pensacola — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:29:45 GMT

I wonder if Ferraro believes that the black people stuck on a bridge in New Orleans, who faced a police blockade that kept them from walking to the neighboring city (which was dry, felt their advantage.

Anyhow, it's stupid to dignify her comments with any response, when she already admits that she became a V.P. candidate because she is a woman.
Hillary's campaign is over, but it seems that she's become a head-case and refuses to admit reality, and she's evil & would rather see McCain beat the man who beats her.

First thoughts: Back to square one

CJ — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:30:16 GMT

fairness...they haven't even settled on a voting method. Why are you putting the onus on Obama. Doesn't sound fair to me...fyi he has already said he supports the delegates to be seated. Some of you need to start truly being fair and stop judging the candidates based on your own bias.

First thoughts: Back to square one

MJ — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:32:07 GMT

I think it's time for the leaders in the Democratic Party to call for Hillary to pack it in. She can't win at this point and is just burning resources that could and should go to the defeat of John McCain. She did not do nearly well enough in TX (a loss in delegate count) and OH to warrant continuing this fight. Her campaign is losing more and more respect everyday. No way she wins in November. You have to wonder why they are doing this. I know that Hillary spent the past 10 years gaming things to get to this, but it did not work out. Why destroy everything because of it? While this is going on, the party leaders are huddling like kids in a dysfunctional home during a fight. It's time to put a stop to this, before it gets any uglier that it already is.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Class Warrior, D.C. — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:34:58 GMT

1.) Ferraro is a nitwit and should shut up and step down from the Clinton fampaign, as should Spitzer. If Gerry doesn't we'll all know Clinton is trying to distract the country and win white voters with the race card.
2.) Some guy on Morning Joe---I didn't catch the name---said it best; this is the liberal Democratic Party on the cusp of making history either way they nominate, and we're STILL bogged down with race and gender!" How unfortuately true.
3.) I believe Hil will manipulate things, with the help of the GOP, who badly want her as the nominee because they KNOW they can beat her, so that she steals the nomination from Obama. In which case, I will join millions who will leave the Dem party and become disgruntled independents.
4.) One again, just so she understands: FERRARO---SHUT UP AND STEP DOWN!!!

First thoughts: Back to square one

A Charles, LA, CA — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:36:04 GMT

Dems have to see what's going on: Divide & Conquer. Going into PA, it is very advantageous for Hillary to have Whites feeling victimized, in an effort to alienate Obama. Obama is walking right into an old school political trap. He will be the "Black candidate" not the candidate who happens to be Black. Nice work Hillary.

First thoughts: Back to square one

twocanpete — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:37:46 GMT

http://twocanpete.blogspot.com
Okay, Gerry it’s time begin the rehab process. We’ve schedueled slots on Lettermen and Leno where you can publicly humilate yourself. Also, Al Sharpton will be discussing this on Larry King Live tonight. It’s not going away Gerry. Your friends will do an intervention later this afternoon and you WILL admit that you are a rascist.Admit it Gerry. Let the healing begin. Oh, by the way, the Reverend Jesse Jackson is on the line.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Lisa, Florida — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:37:54 GMT

DEAR FAIRNESS

Maybe Obama is "dragging his feet" as you put it because he believes in playing by the rules. I live in Florida and did it for two reasons, to cast my "symbolic" vote for Obama and vote on the property tax amendment. Everyone who went to vote, that I know, knew it was a beauty contest. The property tax amendment was what bought people to the polls in Florida on Jan 29.

So now that Clinton is losing, we should change the rules in the middle of the game and let Florida count. What kind of lesson are we teaching our children? If you don't get what you want, beg and cry for a rule change. That is not how life works and that is not how our politics should work.

If Clinton was so concerned about Florida and Michigan why didn't she lobby her Democratic croonies here in Florida and Michigan to make the states count BEFORE the primary process started. I will tell you why, BEFORE SHE GOT HER ASS KICKED ON FEB 5 she could have care less about what Florida and Michigan had to say.

She is the most disgusting, vile politician of our time. Its unfortunate that she is a woman and a democrat.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Brenna, Amherst, MA — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:37:55 GMT

Hey, Bill in Santa Fe - If you dig a little you will find the well-hidden fact (from the horse's mouth itself aka the Canadian government) that it was CLINTON's campaign that contacted them to tell them to take Hillary's anti-Nafta remarks with "a grain of salt." Obama's campaign did in fact meet with them but not about anything to do with Nafta. It was HILLARY's campaign that intimated she was "fudging the truth" and that the Canadians shouldn't worry about the Nafta issue. Hillary is a master of duplicity and manipulation. I thought we all knew that already

First thoughts: Back to square one

SMC, Towson, MD — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:38:27 GMT

Mississippi clarified the Clinton racist/sexist strategy: Vote for Me, I’m White! They have embraced the white racist voters and infuriated females (”Hell hath no fury…”) Their strategy is clearly demonstrated by refusals to reject and repudiate Rush Limbaugh’s involvement, Ferraro’s racist/sexist comments, and the results of the exit polls that prove this is how voters are thinking. They have found their niche in racial fear and hatred and sexism of the vilest and most destructive variety. This campaign is being fueled by psychopathic rage. It doesn’t make a bit of difference if Ferraro’s statements contain one iota of truth. What matters is that they are being used to enrage and foment attitudes that only serve to rip and shred the fabric of American society and culture. The Clintons may as well paint swastikas on their faces and distribute white hoods at their rallies. These are the tactics being used by terrorists to keep radical factions actively destructive througout the world. It’s time for wiser and stronger voices to speak up and shed the light on this horror story.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Cheryl — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:39:52 GMT

Obama is equally White as he is Black. How does she deal with that?

First thoughts: Back to square one

Linda Ellis Ocala, Florida — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:40:37 GMT

It seems as if people in Obama's camp are just chomping at the bit to find anything to construe as being the "race" card. I believe Ferraaro meant because of his lack of experience-not because he is black or mixed or whatever one is called when born of two different race of parents. I do believe people have gotten caught of in the second coming of a "dream".
Well dreams don't always compute into reality.
For any adult who has ever looked back and said, I wish I had listened to my elders.--they know now--experience count!

First thoughts: Back to square one

Sierra, SF — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:43:24 GMT

Lisa in New Britain, CT: '... What we do know is SUDDENLY Obama's negatives are higher than Clinton. Seems fishy to me....'

Lisa, do you think GERALDINE FERRARO had anything to do with this ?
Is it possible that the Clinton campaign wanted to polarize Miss. ?
And Geraldine just happened to make her comments before the Miss. primary ?

According to another poster, Ferraro made similar comments about Jessie Jackson during his Presidential run

Apparently, Gerry doesn't like black men running for President

'...I also think that generalizing about what Southern whites might do in a general election is dangerous ground in that it doesn't say anything about whites will do in general in the country in a general election....'

I don't think Republicans will be as BRAZEN in their racial comments as the Clintons have been.

Obama HAS to start talking about 'pocket book' issues
Leave 'change;' and 'hope' aside for a while

Start talking about taxes, health care, jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs.......

Obama 08

First thoughts: Back to square one

fairness — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:44:41 GMT

Doles in Miami: The problem with having the superdelegates declare now is that while they can endorse whomever they want at this point, they have no official role until the convention after all voting is done. it is funny to me that so many Obama people are complaining about what the superdelegates might do AT the convention but it's ok for them to influence the election now? More doublespeak.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Marsha, Columbia, SC — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:45:50 GMT

To Bill of Santa Fe. I think you are just a bit off base here when you accuse Obama of playing the race card since Ferraro is the one who brought it up. Why wouldn't he be offended? He has worked hard in his appeal to America to come together and move beyond our devisiveness. Wouldn't Clinton feel that way if someone said she has only gotten where she is because of her gender or her husband?

Regarding the Iraq comments, clear distortions by Clinton are in play. Powers simply said that he would have to be open to making adjustments to his plan to get the troops out if any unexpected crisis or disaster would occur. Would Clinton not feel the same way or would she be willing to exacerbate the situation and put people in danger just to keep to a campaign promise? Regarding NAFTA Hillary's version has been discredited quite clearly but of course, her truth plays better to her audience.

I am so bothered by your negativity towards Obama and I really can't understand it. I do know though that a majority of people felt quite good about him until Clinton's campaign got so far behind and decided to employ the kitchen sink method. Ever since Clinton began to set the tone of this election, it got quite negative.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Carol, Missouri — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:45:54 GMT

Geraldine Ferraro needs to answer these questions:
Would Hillary be where she is if not for Bill Clinton?
Would George W. Bush be president if not for his father?
Would John Edwards have risen to national prominence if not for his speaking ability (certainly not experience)?

Barack Obama has earned his current status. When I saw him speak nearly a year ago it was a crowd of 80% white people. White, young and educated people helped Obama get where he is (remember Iowa).

The Clintons have made this a race campaign, not Obama.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Gerry — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:49:59 GMT

This a contest to decide who we should all be supporting as Democrats in November. Each of us needs to tone down the anger, remember that policy wise these two individuals are identical and - if our candidate loses - hold our noses and pull the lever for the Winner. Not doing so will mean potentially eight years of Conservative Supreme Court Nominees, eight years of a protracted occupation of Iraq and eight years of Neo Con foreign and domestic policies. I still love my two choices. Don't get wrapped up in the campaign rhetoric.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Eric, Fairfaxk, Va — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:50:44 GMT

I seem to have some recollection of Geraldine Ferraro and her husband running afoul of the law in regards to some financial dealings several years back. hmmm... birds of a feather...

First thoughts: Back to square one

fairness — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:51:42 GMT

"Well, which is it? The Clinton's are the ONLY ones bringing up race! Obama's camp would rather not even talk about it, but the Clinton camp keeps bringing it up, and always with some negativity or controversy. Why can't the Clinton camp just get beyond race? "
Linida, every time Obama cries "racist" when the topic isn't about race, what is that? When Hilary said it took a President to get the civil rights act passed, Obama et al took that comment and made into a racial issue by saying she denigrated MLK's role. She didn't say that at all. She was saying that it took a president to take the hope of the people and convert it into legislation. And who played the race card yesterday? A couple weeks ago in debate Obama said he accepted Clinton's word that her campaign had nothing to do with the release of the Somali picture of him in native atttire. yet, yesterday out on the stump, he flat out said the Clinton campaign did and that she was fear-mongering because he was "different." So, while people want to say Clinton will "do anything" to get elected, don't believe for one second Obama won't do the same. It's called politics!

First thoughts: Back to square one

Amy, West Burlington, IA — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:52:40 GMT

What do you mean "back to square one"? We are just on the same path to choosing Barack Obama as the nominee of the Democratic Party. We only now have a few distractions to keep the news cycle going. I'm a white, older woman from Iowa and we knew a good thing when we saw him - Obama 08.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Bruce, Madison, Wis. — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:53:04 GMT

The Media wants this to go on as long as possible, so they will do what they can to keep the heat on the front-runner, in this case, Sen. Obama. If the campaigning ends, all those talking heads have nothing to talk about until the conventions - and thus, their ratings will sag. They want to drag this out as long as possible, and will do whatever it takes to do so.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Sierra, SF — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:55:36 GMT

'...Obama leads Clinton 1,610-1,496. That includes the NBC News pledged delegate total of Obama 1,394, Clinton 1,242 and the NBC superdelegate total of Clinton 254, Obama 216...'

Last night I saw Clinton's Super Delegate count at 238 !! NOT 254
I think the Super Delegate total is pretty imprecise
But 238.....
It would mean Obama was only 22 Super Delegates behind Clinton.

Saw on Huff Post, Nancy Pelosi saying that Clinton's criticism of Obama's ability to be CinC made it 'impossible' for Obama to put her on the ticket !!

Guess which way Nancy is leaning ?
She's the Majority Leader !!!
She might bring a few other Representatives wiht her
Especially in California

Obama/Edwards '08

First thoughts: Back to square one

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:56:19 GMT

Mr. "fairness" - I think you missed the point of my message.

In response to your last question: because he can. If it drives you and Maggi Williams nuts in the process, that's just an added benefit.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Ravine Force, Kissimmee, FL — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:58:20 GMT

There has been a huge divide based on race that will tear the democratic party apart. The continuous attacks against each other will give plenty of fodder for McCain to use againdt whomever the nominee is for the Democrats. The race card was used by someone who was deeply admired by the very same race that now has turned its back on the Clintons. Their own doing. I believe that Mrs. Clinton will not choose Mr. Obama and vice-versa. Too deep a rift divides them. I strongly suggest Mr. Edwards on either ticket. There is a need to unite the party before it implodes.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Beware The GOP — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:59:18 GMT

What's quite sad is that so many of you have swallowed the GOP's bull on Hillary hook, line and sinker.

Carl Rove must be loving this.

If Obama wins they will destroy him.

They have a lot of unpublished material that will bring Obama's career down - it will make Mondale and McGovern look like a tea-party.

First thoughts: Back to square one

mark, anytown, usa — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:00:09 GMT

This discussion of "including" the Michigan popular vote is a total joke and a "math" guy like Chuck Todd should know better. If Obama is not on the ballot, then you're comparing apples and oranges...which not statistician worth his/her salt would do.

http://infogiant.wordpress.com/

First thoughts: Back to square one

The Big O, Seattle,WA — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:00:29 GMT

Congratulations democrats!!!

All of your bickering and indecisiveness has ensured that come convention time, all you will be deciding is who will lose in November's general election.

You have the heartfelt thanks of every Republican in the union, and we look forward to your party's next meltdown in 2012.

First thoughts: Back to square one

jim — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:00:48 GMT

These racist idiots that repeat how the 'black vote' is Obama's only solid constituency are so blinded by their own narrow thinking. Please explain the results in Iowa, Wyoming, Wisconsin, Maine, Vermont, Washington, Colorado...and more...HUGE VICTORIES IN ALL OF THESE LILLY WHITE STATES.
Get real, you racist idiots!

First thoughts: Back to square one

Independent Voter, Stuart, FL — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:01:19 GMT

To Fairness,

Many Floridians DO NOT want a REVOTE. Just read some of the comments on First Read. We knew our votes would not be counted when we went to the polls. We had an Amendment on property taxes to vote on.

So please DO NOT SPEAK FOR ME!!

First thoughts: Back to square one

Not a Minority, Chicago, IL — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:03:17 GMT

Obama and Clinton agree on all 10 of the nation's top priorities. Their policies are identical except in the way they plan to achieve them. That's why Clinton doesn't discuss the issues and wants to make this more about race, electoral process and other distractions. She wants to drag this out until the DNC and then use coercion to rally super-delegates behind closed doors. Obama's message is to unite everyone - Dems & GOP - for the greater good of the UNITED States of America. Clinton's message is that..Obama can't do it. "If one candidate is trying to scare you and the other one is trying to get you to think, if one candidate is appealing to your fears and the other one is appealing to your hopes, you better vote for the person who wants you to think and hope." -Bill Clinton

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGW38Zy4bJo

First thoughts: Back to square one

Michael, Bloomington IN — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:03:21 GMT

Hillary Clinton should now be required to publically denounce AND reject Geraldine Ferraro... using EXACTLY those two words.

Of course it won't happen because her own rules never apply to her.

What a (dare I say it?)... monster.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Stewart, Bethesda, MD — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:06:02 GMT

I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR MSNBC ...... WHY ARE THEY ALLOWING CHRIS MATTHEWS TO CONTINUE WITHOUT MERIT TO PUSH THE RACE WAR BETWEEN OBAMA AND HILLARY IN SUGGESTING THAT HILLARY 3am PHONE AD IS A RACIST SLUR AGAINST OBAMA..... Why Why

First thoughts: Back to square one

Nancy Burt, Canton, Michigan — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:06:17 GMT

Hillary,
Once again you have shown what a devisive person you are. If you are willing to destroy the democratic party in this way, why should we think that you will not divide our country as well.
PS - Those of us in Michigan that didn't vote would "love" a revote. Beware of what you wish for.

First thoughts: Back to square one

John and Kate — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:08:56 GMT

Geraldine Ferraro is correct. As for those calling for her to be "fired" from the Clinton campaign, newsflash, she is not employed by the Clinton campaign.

Barack Obama made this campaign about race. David Axelrod has continually interjected race into the execution of this campaign. I believe that was a very serious mistake. They did it to win over the black vote, which it has done, but at great expense of losing the white vote. The very tragic part of this is the division of the Dem party and the unwarranted villification of Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Follow the money trail, who is funding Obama and why?????? Why would Obama deride a past Dem President and seek to divide the Dem party?????

As for the campaign, it's GAME OVER. Last night in Mississippi, Obama won only 21% of the white vote. Mississippi has the largest black population in the nation and they voted 91% for Obama. Obama made race an issue and now he's paying the political price.

If you can't win in states like Ohio, where Obama outspent Hillary 3 to 1 yet won only 5 out of 88 counties in Ohio, you cannot win the Presidency. It's that simple.

Obama is unelectable.

Hillary Clinton has proven she can win big in the big states that are the must wins for the Dems in November. Hillary clearly is the strongest, most electable candidate.

Obama should exit the race now and Dems should rally behind Hillary. Obama has done enough damage to the Dem party. It's OVER.

First thoughts: Back to square one

jim — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:10:54 GMT

Why can not the media report the FACTS about who really won the Texas and Nevada Democratic election contests? Are the media so obsessed with the 'horserace' that basic standards of journalism are ignored?
Cable news colorful Election Maps should depict that Nevada was a 'split decision' -- Clinton won more votes, BUT Obama won more delegates.
Who WON Texas? Clinton won step 1, the Primary; Obama won step 2, the Caucus; Obama won more delegates in Texas! By any objective measure, Obama WON TEXAS!
Why can not the media just report the FACTS insteasd of spinning the results to favor their 'horserace' obsession? If Obama did NOT WIN Texas, then John Wayne is NOT the Man Who Shot Liberty Valence!!

First thoughts: Back to square one

tglas....roanoke, VA — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:11:18 GMT

I am trying to look at this objectively (although politics oftentimes makes this difficult), we don't know for sure if Hillary is behind the geraldine blunder. But what is pretty obvious is ms ferraro brought race into the picture. That is not a good thing for anyone. Not for the Dems, not for the Republicans.....not for America. In her zeal for her candidate it appears she is seeking to "win at all costs". This would appear to be the "politics as usual" and definitely not "change".

That being said, I have voted since 1988. I voted republican in that election, independent in '92 and '96 and liberatian in '00 and'04. I have never voted for a democrat.....until now. I find mr. obama to be a special individual. He is young, he is charismatic and he has fresh ideas. At this time in american history, these are the things I believe we need (in this man's humble opinion). Regarding FL and MI....lets have the do-over and let the delegates fall where they may and may the best person (man/woman/black/white or whatever) win. I dont believe the people of those states should lose their voice because their party leaders made very bad decisions. Its the voice of the people that matters most. If Mr. Obama is the best choice to lead the dem ticket (and I believe he is), it will be made plain. If Ms Clinton had at this point the delegate lead, the most states won and the overall popular vote lead, no doubt all the party faithful would be asking Mr. Obama to drop. But with the shoe on the other foot, well, we are seeing what is happening. Even if Ms. Clinton wins both FL and MI in a re-vote, she will be very hard pressed to make any significant delegate gains. Her big blow was supposed to come from TX and OH.....it didnt. If she really cared about her party at all, she would drop after PA. She may win that state, but again, I cannot see her making any headway in the delagate count or even the popular vote. Lets get the thing over with so the real battle (Obama vs McCain) can begin.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Robert, South Bound Brook NJ — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:11:57 GMT

Don from PA is so out of touch with reality that it is almost laughable. Who exactly is out there calling Asains and Latino's racist for supporting Senator Clinton? The media is hyping the race aspect to boost ratings and create tension. But the fact of the matter is that Senator Obama has won plenty of states that had a white majority. He appeals across every demographic group. Don from PA, you sound like a bitter uninformed individual who has trouble processing information presented to them.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Laura, Boston, MA — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:12:34 GMT

All you bloggers for Obama need to look at the results of Mississippi. 8% of the black vote for her and 91% of the black vote for him. With that said take a look at the other states that do have a large black population. Then if you do that the comments Ms. Ferraro made make perfect sense. If it wasn't for women and poorer whites than Hillary wouldn't have won the states she won. So yes his being black gave the advantage to him. The unfortunate part in this whole thing is that the "issues" are being overlooked. Doesn't everybody who is blogging either for Hillary or Obama want to see the Republican gone. Well then even those blogging need to be more unified. If you are on the web bashing Hillary how can you be for a candidate who says he wants to unify all Americans. If you are on the web bashing Obama remember Hillary feels that he would be part of a "dream-ticket". So its easy to do, just look for the good in each of the candidates and let there campaigns and the voters of each of the states left decide who is the more electable candidate.

First thoughts: Back to square one

David Powell, Ocean City, New Jersey — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:14:32 GMT

WHat i don't get is why so many women continue to support Hillary Clinton and make up her big following. Don't they realize how many women the Clintons have destroyed over the years? Bill would cheat on them (or try to force himself on them using his office) and then after he was done he'd have the press and his people destroy them publically. Hillary Clinton was in chanrge of destroying these women after Bill was done using them and she did it with gusto. They destroyed so many women, and Hillary at the very least enabled Bill while he did it. I see no reason why so many women want to enable her.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Pacheck, Huntington Beach, Ca. — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:16:20 GMT

The democratic leadership made the rule. No early primary's for Michigan and Florida. The candidates agreed not to campaign and the primary votes would not count. Sad tale indeed when a political party and the candidates userp the rights of those citizens to vote. Never the less, you can't change the rules once the race has started. Florida and Michigan should sue the dem.leadership right out of existance and move on. This is just the Primary Election. Fix the problem before the General Election. Bad calls in every facit of life happen every day. You can't fix them all in progress. We need to learn from them.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Jing Li — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:17:22 GMT

I hate to see a people divided again on racial lines, we workd for generations for this to go away.

Please stop tearing each other apart. Barack Obama is not black, he's not white, he's American just like you and me.

It is time for us to let go that hatred that we hold so arrogantly in the past, and embrace a new ideal that's echoed time and time again... unity

If you agree then vote for the future, not the past.

Vote for your hope and aspirtion, not your fears.

Vote colorblind, sex blind.

It's time for us to step back and see what's realy going on among us, we are walking down a dangerous path.

First thoughts: Back to square one

SadStateOfAffairs — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:17:27 GMT

Quote from the Trinity United Church of Christ.....(Barack's place of worship for the last 20 years)

"We are an African people, and remain "true to our native land," the mother continent, the cradle of civilization".

Members are encourage to "Pledge Allegiance" to the BVS. Not our flag, not our country, not our government, not our countrymen and women. Allegiance to themselves. How selfish!

www.tucc.org.

First thoughts: Back to square one

Sierra, Madison, WI — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 00:02:41 GMT

Wow... between Rush Limbaugh pushing 24% of Mississippi REPUBLICANS to vote for Clinton, Clinton promoting McCain over the democratic front runner (who is Obama, let's be honest) and the dirty Clinton camp finally giving Obama no choice but to fight fire with fire (which seems to be turning those Clinton supporters who would have voted for Obama if he turns out to be the Democratic nominee into Nader or McCain voters)... I am really worried. The Republicans may just keep the White House after all. I am a Democrat who will vote for Hillary if she is the nominee because I don't want 4 more years of this Republican nightmare. But I am disheartened and dismayed at how she is going about winning it. To those above who called Obama a con man and a snake and finally showing his true colors... take a good look at your Hillary Clinton... Karl Rove in Democrats clothing. Very sad taking all the hope, the awesome turnout, the youth participation, the chance to turn the page ...and just flushing it down the toilet. For what? The Clintons' blind ambition? Huckabee, Romney and McCain have shown so much more concern for their party's unity than the Clintons over this past month. I agree with the first commenter: this is in the hands of the super delegates. You can end this now, or keep hedging your bets while the party goes down in flames. With responsibility comes risk, absolutely. Show us you are worthy of the responsibility we have given you or watch us all walk away from this dysfunctional party.