Against Big Losses and a Pro-Obama Crowd, Hillary Stands Her Ground
RICHMOND, Va., Feb. 10 — If the receptions Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton respectively received at a gathering of influential Democrats last night in Richmond is any indication, Clinton is in for another tough result when Virginia holds its primary on Tuesday.
The stark difference in enthusiasm was noticeable even in passing. Outside the Stuart C. Siegel Center, which played host to the Jefferson-Jackson dinner, a couple hundred of Obama supporters beating drums, wearing paper Obama masks and holding giant white letters spelling Obama’s name urged passing cars to honk. Many of them did.
A quieter group of Hillary supporters had less success.
Inside, there was more of that. The same giant cardboard Obama letters flanked the dozens of crowded tables on the floor, and dwarfed the “Hillary” signs lined up between the A, the M and the A. From the stage, past and current governors of Virginia boasted about their endorsements for Obama. Chants of O-ba-ma broke out intermittently from the rafters.
Clinton, her hair flatter than usual and her chances sinking in Washington and Nebraska, soldiered through.
Taking the podium under an enormous Jumbo screen, Clinton struck positive and even sweeping notes that received solid, if not ecstatic, applause from the crowd.
”Hello, Virginian Democrats—that sounds so good,” said Clinton. “I am delighted and honored to be here with you this evening.”
Clinton thanked Virginians for electing Senator Jim Webb and expressed her hope for the election to the Senate of Mark Warner, who ran for president last year as a moderate Democrat, but was essentially forced out of the race by his inability to compete with Clinton for that space.
As Clinton spoke about how the next president would be inaugurated with “his or her hand on the Bible” and talked about mortgages and tuitions voters couldn’t afford, a television anchor stood up on a riser and told his camera about Obama’s overwhelming victories in Nebraska and Washington as they became official.
Clinton had only pleasant words for her rival, though she draw the usual contrast with Obama (and John McCain) by saying that she is the “only candidate left in this race, Democrat or Republican, with a health care plan that will cover every single man woman and child.”
Other than that, her sights fell on President George Bush and the likely Republican nominee, John McCain.
Bush’s way, said Clinton, was to “shred the constitution,” and “smear dissenters” and said that with “Senator McCain as the likely Republican nominee, Republicans have chosen more of the same.”
In perhaps her best-received line of the night, Clinton said “President Bush has already put his stamp of approval on Senator McCain’s conservative credentials”—she waited a beat, then smiled—“and I’m sure that will help.” Addressing her opponent’s criticism that she had too much in common with Bush, Clinton argued “I will be among those most happy to see the moving van leaving the White House” and announced herself “ready to go toe-to-toe with Senator McCain whenever and wherever he desires.”
With Mr Inspiration and Hope due to take the stage later in the evening, Clinton did her best to make remarks with some historic and narrative sweep. Judging from the audience’s reaction, it wasn’t a bad effort.
Her “I see an America” refrain (in which the country she envisions stands up to oil companies, employs the unemployed, builds schools, makes college affordable) was followed by her taking a step back to appreciate the historic scope of the election. “Neither Senator Obama, nor I, nor many of you in this room were included in that original vision,” she said, but evoked “a movement of men and women”—the abolitionists, suffragists, progressives and civil rights activists—who made the voting rights shared by the diverse group of people in the room something everyone now took “for granted.”
She folded herself into a narrative that seems most closely associated now with Obama, that the next generation would “take it for granted that a woman or an African-American can be president of the United States.”
“That is the genius of our Constitution” she said. “It was crafted to expand as our hearts do.” Next Page >
- Poll
- Obama (D)
- McCain(R)
- Spread
- RCP Average
- 46.4
- 41.6
- Obama +4.8
- Candidate
- Favorable
- Unfavorable
- Spread
- Obama
- 55.7
- 32.7
- +23.0
- McCain
- 52.4
- 34.7
- +17.7
Inserting herself INTO Barack's NARRATIVE and then blatently co-opting it as if it were/is her own, is standing operating procedure for Hillary, who has done this with the talented Bill her entire career. She KNOWS a WINNER when she sees one! I like your insight. She went from dismissing Barack to now constantly saying..."Barack and I" -- piggy-backing HIS message (CHANGE) and success...though she doesn't understand either. No, Hill...CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN does not mean a change in GENDER or RACE. It means turning out the LOBBYISTS, SPECIAL INTERESTS AND POLITICIANS WHO GAIN WEALTH BY BARTERING THE INTERESTS OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AWAY as the Bush/Clinton/Bush dynasties and their governments-in-waiting have done for 30 years. Sorry. Saying "Barack and I" as if they are intimates or share the same values, etc. is a distortion and Americans should watch her closely as she does this...and think about how she has made a career out of piggy-backing Bill Clinton's career and relationships. She could have separated from Bill in 2000, after becoming Senator...and run for President w/out the dangerous, dysfunctional, illegal and toxic "two-fer" setup. She CAN'T. She also CAN'T win unless she piggy-backs Barack Obama. A woman will come on the scene and run soon. She will not resort to these machinations which ANYONE can see through now that Hillary has to somewhat come out from behind Bill and be accountable for what she says/does. She is a weak and uninspiring candidate. She is not collegial and CANNOT stand on her own two feet w/out Bill and the bubble. Turn the page.
Hillary Clinton is the most divisive, polarizing, mean spirited, nasty politician our country has seen since Richard Nixon. If you want revenge against the Republicans and bitter partisanship in Congress, vote for her. Revenge and bitterness will take you only so far and will not solve any of the problems our nation faces. However, if you want a candidate who will reach across the aisle and get meaningful legislation passed to solve our nations problems with health care, the environment, the economy, immigration, and restore our nations values by improving our foreign policy and no longer making America a pariah in the world you have but one choice: Barack Obama. It's very simple: if you want divisiveness and polarization choose Hillary Clinton, if you prefer our leadership working together to solve our nations problems choose Barack Obama.
Hopefully, white women will STOP seeing their own experiences reflected in Hillary to the extent they will continue to vote for her. This gaming of women is also part of Hillary's currency, to the detriment of ALL women. If you want to know HOW Hillary treats other women under her "management" or auspicies -- look at how she led the charge to character-assisinate the women she KNEW were telling the truth about Bill. As First Lady, one would think she would be in charge of the safety and security of the young White House INTERNS -- and ensure what goes on in the home of your child is correct at all times. Making sure the home is managed correctly doesn't mean "...baking cookies." It does mean remaining FOCUSED on what is your business and not trying to run the Nation via association with your husband. America's healthcare chance was BLOWN by a backroom deal between this dysfunctional pair whereby Hillary would get to act as some kind of uber-broker w/out portfolio or election -- as First Lady. This deal was dysfunctional and Al Gore, a former Senator and emminently superior to Hillary Clinton in every way, would have been a better choice. Putting the inexperienced Hillary Clinton in charge guaranteed FAILURE and the Nation has paid an additional 15 years and countless millions more uninsured as a result. Women should hold Hillary Clinton to the same standards of success/failure and stop giving her a pass. Anything she has attempted to manage has FAILED. She is no EXECUTIVE. Think of your children. YOU are not Hillary, who hasn't done too badly during her 15 year First Lady turns if she can write a $5mil check last week. Can you??? Turn the page.
When Hillary speaks of 35 years of experience I get sick to my stomach. I have lived with my husband and discussed intimate details of his work with him and even ghelped him as a sounding board when he has had hard decisions to make but this in no way would enable me to run his business on a 24 hour schedule or no how to run it . It only means that I as most wives know what his job entails and who he meets and what the company does but the minute details needed to do the job are lacking because I do not get the day in day out responsibility that he does .
The same for Hillary and her position with Bill. From what I have seen she did not do such a good job keeping him in line in the White House or after . She lives in one home he in another , She has kept him around and defended him all these years because it was expedient and fullfilled her career goals.I volunteered for children and country to but that does not make me qualified to run it and I as a nurse have seen some of her health care plans put into action and they stink!
Messy Campaign. Messy White House. Staffers as fall-guys/gals. Revolving door. Disorganization. Disfunctional. Sound familiar??? Fire Bill, too. At least NOW we know the source of this DRAMA was always Hillary, who is a divisive presence even w/her own staff. Imagine THIS returning to The White House at this moment in time? Turn the page from this neverending Clinton DRAMA and blame game (of everyone else)!
So, today it is back to MOCKERY! Ha! Hillary is mocking Barack's "rhetorical flourishes" -- but NOT releasing the Clinton Library DONOR list, her tax returns or the Clinton White House RECORDS (made available by the National Archives last month - journalists -- are you home???). She just hired Maggie Williams, her African-American Exec Asst. who had to leave The White House under duress during the scandels - as Campaign Manager -- today. Patti will be "advisor." Maggie was an innocent fall-gal last time around. This doesn't bode well for her. Hill, it will take more than Maggie to save this Campaign and, we noted you didn't hire Maggie when you thought things were a slam-dunk. Interesting. Maggie, be careful.
The mention of the "flatness" of HC's hair in this article is totally offensive. It is amazing what an easy pass BO gets in the media.
As I remember, Maggie Williams was instrumental in clearing out Vince Foster's office.....the day after...... yeah, she's
perfect for the task at hand
It will be interesting to see if tomorrow's coverage of Hillary's staff shake-up and appointment of Maggie Williams as campaign manager in includes a bio of Ms. Williams.
It was just ten years ago that Ms. Williams fled Washington DC--and the Clinton White House -- for Paris. Readers may recall she was then Hillary's right hand woman, and was caught up in various Clinton White House troubles, including making sure shady fundraiser Johnny Chung was given intimate access to the White House -- 51 visits, for starters.
Ms. Williams also turned up in the case of Vincent Foster's suicide--she was seen removing boxes of files from his office in the immediate aftermath of his suicide, before the Clintons allowed the Secret Service and police to examine Mr. Foster's office. The files were never seen again, despite being sought by investigators into Mr. Foster's suicide.
After such first-hand knowledge of how the Clintons run a White House, Ms. Williams whisked herself off to France, well out of reach of any subpoeanas, etc.
Just a brief recap of the person Hillary has now put front and center in her campaign, and who would surely be returning to a Hillary White House, along with several other "interesting" characters.
I agree- what was the point in bringing up her HAIR?
And to the two Obama campaign operatives who posted, please provide some links showing evidence of Clinton's mean-spritedness?
If Obama wins the nomination, this old lady lifelong Dem is voting for McCain, because at least he's been around the block a few times. Hope schmope. He's brilliant, but not yet ready for prime time.
I support Hillary Clinton with all ;my heart. Why do Obama supporters find it necessary to adopt the lies and smears of the GOP slime machine against Hillary and spout them as gospel truth. The truth is that Hillary Clinton raised money and campaigned for Obama when he ran for the senate. Afer his election he sought her out for advice and guidance, whcih she generously provided. She ordere3d her staff to be available to Obama's staff, and for almost a year the two staffs were intertwined. He doesn't deny this, it's part of the historical record. Obama was advised to run in 2008 by Dick Durbin, Ted Kennedy and Tome Daschle. Everyone knew that Hillary would run in 2008. They had to know that by pushing Obama now the party would be split along racial, gender, class, and age lines. The press has been vicious to Hillary while giving Oama a free pass.
I'm another old lady who will not vote for Obama if he is the nominee. In spite of the spin the press puts on everything, I think Obama has run a nasty campaign, using Michelle as an attack dog. The press has given her a free pass too.
Let I remind everyone of the vast experience that BO has as a Senator and his career. Wasn't it in 200 when he lost a an election BID to become a congressman and the legitimacy behind his Senate BID is questionable as the incumbent Republican candidate from Illinois dropped out due to scandal.
Hence the Senatorial seat was practically handed to him. Do you want to have a President who will be looked a by the world as 'who is this'?
Think about it America, do you really know who you are voting for?
Take a quick look at the link below.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/candidates/barack.obama.html
Virginia is going to be a swing state this year, and trust is going to be a big issue in deciding both the nomination and the finals. Lorna Brett Howard commented on this aspect of politics ...
http://acropolisreview.com/2008/02/lorna-brett-howard-barack-obama-loyal...
I cannot forgive Clinton her vote for the Iraq war, nor for the changing excuses and justifications that she has given for it. At the time of the vote, she claimed her experience at the White House gave her inside information on how dangerous Saddam was. As the war slowly turned into the mess that it is today, Clinton said that she had been personally reassured by the White House before the vote that the new law would be used to pressure Saddam into negotiations and not to go to war. Either Clinton is lying or she has less political acumen than the thousands who were protesting in the streets. Now she says that if she knew then what she knows now, she would not have voted to authorize the war. I guess this makes her smarter than John Kerry, but I'm not satisfied. There should have been an admission that she was wrong and major apologies long before now. We've had eight years of a president who cannot admit that he's made a mistake, do we want four more? And now Clinton has voted for the Kyl-Lieberman measure that threatens Iran!
I am dismayed at the cowardliness of most democratic politicians in Congress. The Bush Administration has gotten much of what it wants through fear mongering, and the democrats do not stand up to him for fear of being labeled "soft on terror" or "not supporting our troops". I am disgusted. I came to support Obama principally because he could beat Clinton. I became excited about him when I learned that he wants to have direct talks with Iran and Syria without preconditions. Excellent! Someone who has the courage not to saber-rattle. And he has introduced a resolution stating that no act of Congress, including Kyl-Lieberman, should be viewed as authorizing an attack on Iran. No doubt he will be called naive and soft on defense, but I agree with him and admire the fact that he has the courage to say these things.
ha, ha...let the fear mongering begin!! Put a fork in her, she's done. Hope she can repay the 5 million she lent herself.
OOOh put a fork in her. Ah that's a litle violent, what's wrong with you? ahm isn't OObahhhhma for peace?
And I do not think that hair comment was called for, very sexist!!!!
Hillary for president. The smart choice!!!!
What is referred to as the Clinton’s machine can be summarized as democrats party cronies and caciques who formed the so-called Clinton’s machine, who coalesced around Bill Clinton during his two terms of US’ presidency. The machine became stuck as well as spent in the defense of Bill Clinton against a potential impeachment, through maneuverings in the covering-up of the multiple Bill’s anti-moral behaviors, etc. and by so doing losing the very sense of the Democratic Party’s raison-d être: the defense of the interests and well-being of US’ citizens and democracy. The caciques of the machine were so exhausted that during Bill Clinton terms, their party lost the House, the Senate, and several governorships and others. Barack Obama comes just in time to contribute to the American Renaissance. The opportunity must never be squandered. Otherwise, Democrats will for the next 8 years lose the Congress, both the House and the Senate
The Clintons will now go to the mats against American voters. Their Campaign is now for the so-called Superdelegates and the shakeup is to put forth a Harold Ickes/Maggie Williams ground war for these usurpers to overturn (aka Bush v. Gore and the Supreme Court) the clear choice of the voters. The code language used by Hillary speaks volumes -- to these Delegates her husband/daughter have been pressuring since SC. She repeatedly states SHE can go up against the Republican attack machine and WIN. She wants there to be a brokered DEAL between her family and the Superdelegates. The voters are not her target, as if we didn't know by the canned speeches and Bob Johnson mistrel floor show in SC. Al Gore, WE NEED YOU to help voters DEAL with the CLINTON ATTACK MACHINE! We have no 3rd Terms, Bill. We are a Democracy, Hill. Every speech voters should THINK about the machinations in the smoke filled rooms of the Clinton Family. Hill can't win w/out Democratic, Independent voters -- and that means YOU! Stop these dynasties and petulant aggression against VOTERS and our Democracy! TURN THE PAGE!
We are a Democracy -- or supposed to be. Loyalty oaths from cronies should not make a mockery of the droves of voters who came out in frigid temperatures to participate in THEIR Democracy. The price for a return of the Clinton cabal is not worth it. SAME players. SAME movie. The economic challenges we face were rooted in the Clinton's era. Deregulation of entire industries for friends/deals the RECORDS they refuse to produce from their DONORS, had its nexus in our current banking/finance DRAMA. The Republicans KNOW this. Mr. Obama will recruit the best and brightest (as the Clintons did and will do). We need to decide on LEADERSHIP. The first step would be the Clintons to RELEASE THEIR DONOR RECORDS FOR THE LIBRARY, the RECORDS from their White House tenure now available despite their cronie running the NATIONAL Archives -- and, TAX RETURNS. "Super Delegates" instead of making backroom deals to sell us out, how about GETTING THE RECORDS AS A CONDITION OF YOUR ALLEGIENCE, so we can make this decision with all available information.
News the NYT and Paul Krugman don't seem to have a problem with:
HuffingtonPost.com - Ariana Huffington
Who Is Maggie Williams?
Posted February 10, 2008 | 05:49 PM (EST)
The announcement that Maggie Williams just became Hillary Clinton's new campaign manager sent me back to a column I wrote about her over ten years ago:
Fallen Angels In Clinton's Rogues' Gallery
November 17, 1997
One of the most distressing features of our current political system and the Clinton White House in particular, is the way they turn otherwise honest, caring, idealistic individuals into spinning, rationalizing, truth-twisting defendants desperately trying to stay out of jail. Last week, we saw the results of this transformation in Hillary Clinton's former Chief of Staff Maggie Williams and in Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt, whose testimony to Congress is now under investigation by the Justice Department.
Maggie Williams' case is particularly poignant. Last week, she testified at the House Government Oversight Committee hearings about her relationship with serial donor Johnny Chung. After spending the afternoon mesmerized by her contortionist testimony, I watched an actress in Anna Deavere Smith's new play "House Arrest" portray Williams and express her hopes that she would really make a difference in the lives of children and those in need. And I have no doubt that is what Williams originally believed her tenure at the White House would be about. Instead, it turned out to be about lie detector tests, racking up over $300,000 in legal bills, and spinning -- the committee, the press and perhaps even herself.
You can see at once the toll this has taken on her. I remember meeting Williams at the start of the first Clinton term and being impressed by her presence, her passion and her sense of humor. And here she is now, having chosen to leave the White House to live in Paris, looking tired, heavy -- defeated.
Ever since her days as a student at a parochial school in Kansas City, loyalty has been a Williams trademark. The French nuns at her school divided the class into groups with their own distinct dress colors. "We all learned to develop this incredible loyalty to our color," Williams once explained. This loyalty was transferred to her bosses. The Washington Post described her working motto as "let them set the mission, let me get it done." But at some moment during Clinton's first term, the mission shifted from saving the country to saving the first couple.
For an idealist like Maggie Williams, maybe the first lady was the embodiment of the mission, the only means at hand through which the ends she believed in could be achieved. But one thing led to another. And allegations that she removed Vince Foster's files were followed by allegations that she sold access to Johnny Chung -- until this past week, she found herself trying to jerry-fit her fund-raising involvement into the nobility of her once-worthy hopes. Back in 1993, Williams said: "Everybody hates the big injustices. ... But I hate even the little injustices, even the way a sales clerk treats somebody who is shabbily dressed and happens to go into a nice store."
What made last week's testimony sad and laughable at the same time is her pretense that that same hatred of injustice toward the little guy explains her relentlessly solicitous behavior toward Chung. "As an African American," she told the committee, "I know what it means to be different in politics in America and be on the outside of things and struggle mightily for insider status and recognition, and so I perhaps had an especially high tolerance for Mr. Chung."
Williams wants us to believe that she helped Chung get what he asked for in his typed wish list because he was "not given overall the kind of respect" extended in the White House to white males. "We are going to treat him as well as we would treat any other irritable jerk who would show up," Williams explained in her deposition last May. Tired of seeing white, rich, irritable jerks being the only ones allowed to subvert the democratic process, Williams had a dream that, one day, all rich, irritable jerks would be equally allowed to subvert the democratic process.
So as part of her outreach to overlooked minorities, she gave Chung, among other things, signed photographs with the first lady, the privilege to eat on her tab at the White House Mess as often as he wanted, and access to the president's radio address for him and his "little guy" friends -- the head of China's petrochemical monopoly among them. Perhaps next time, Williams should launch a broader outreach to include minorities who have not given $366,000 to the Democratic National Committee. Or maybe she should just join a Big Sister program.
Chung ended up visiting the White House 51 times, many of these visits taking place after the National Security Council had described him as a "hustler" who should be treated with "suspicion." But to hear Maggie Williams tell it, Johnny Chung was a poor, innocent waif, a sort of diamond in the rough, an Eliza Doolittle grossly in need of expert counseling in the finer points of fund-raising etiquette from Mrs. Clinton's staff -- who, after all, are responsible for the social niceties at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. "A prime example of his ... misguided behavior," Williams testified, "was his persistent request to give money directly to Mrs. Clinton. On more than one occasion, I told Mr. Chung this was not possible, although his offer was much appreciated."
At the same time, Williams' aide, Evan Ryan, was telling Chung -- according to both Chung and Ryan -- that the DNC owed the White House $80,000 for a Christmas party and that any contribution would help pay off the debt. So it's no wonder that despite his charming cluelessness about fund-raising protocol, Chung was pretty clued in to how the White House worked: "The White House is like a subway -- you have to put in coins to open the gates."
Maggie Williams' story is a "Pilgrim's Progress" in reverse. She started out trying to do good and has ended up in the City of Destruction, trying to spin her way out of the rogues' gallery.
Email Print Comment
Maggie Williams has been working for the Clinton Foundation, where the DONOR RECORDS LIST or the White House Records OK'd by the National Archives (run by another Clinton crony) have not been released. Where is the NYT? Conflicts-of-interests carried over from their last White House run??? Calling LOU DOBBS???
The vitriol and hate spewed by Obama supporters while he talks about unity don't help his cause. The right wing must be loving the sport of the supporters of democrats with similar positions tearing each other apart.
Obama's efforts to connect to the Republican Party, specifically Bush, and Dick Chaney, of the Halliburton Company, dates back to the Presidents Grandfather, Prescott Bush, and indeed Chaney was once an executive officer of Halliburton.
The American military pounds Iraq with Artillary, bombs, and the like, destroying large sections of cities, and infra-structures, then Halliburton comes in to rebuild. Halliburton and Halliburton associated companies have raked in ten's of billions.
Obama is just like the BIG HALIBURTAN. Haliburton has contracted to build detention centers in the U.S. similiar to the one in Quantanammo Bay, Cuba. Halliburton does nothing to earn the Two Dollors for each meal an American Serviceman in Iraq eats.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/151342/a_new_chapter_in_the_ong...
Halliburton was scheduled to take control of the Dubai Ports in The United Arab Emiirate. The deal was cancelled when Bush was unable to affect the transfer of the American Ports.
Now we see what some might suspect as similiar financial escapading from the Democrats.
Two years ago, Iraq's Ministry of Electricity gave a $50 million contract to a start-up security company - Companion- owned by now-indicted businessman (TONY REZKO) Tony Rezko and a onetime Chicago cop, Daniel T. Frawley, to train Iraqi power-plant guards in the United States. An Iraqi leadership change left the deal in limbo. Now the company, Companion Security, is working to revive its contract.
Involved along with Antoin "Tony" Rezco, long time friend and neighbor of Democratic Presidential hopeful Barack Obama, and former cop Daniel T. Frawley, is Aiham Alsammarae. Alsammarae was accused of financial corruption by Iraqi authorities and jailed in Iraq last year before escaping and returning here.
Obama should be vetted and disclose his connection to the criminal money generating underworld. Besides, his connections to the REZCO MAFIA types, his up-coming tax fruad charges -- Obama needs to disclose why he is a muslim and stop suppoting our intervension in IRAQ. It's time to shove an introduction to this fake rip-off Obama and invite the theif pipsqueke to meet the Chesapeake Police Department.
Tsk, Tsk. Political machinations? Obama a muslim??? Spare me.
I am not interested in circular arguments or vitriolic attacks. I prefer to make reasonable, informed choices based on defined agenda rather than prosaic rhetoric.
Count me in as another potential disenfranchised voter if Obama wins the democratic nomination. I, too, will be supporting McCain if Hillary fails to secure the nomination.
Here comes the Clinton ATTACK MACHINE spreading bile and misinformation/disinformation, not to be confused with the BUSHES. If the Clintons would release their DONOR RECORDS LIST and tax returns, you would KNOW Bill Clinton "consulted" on the Dubai Port Deal and has closer ties to Bush Sr. in the past -- and wanted to travel w/Bush Sr. around the world (as if the world wants to see/hear from another Bush) to repair our relationships. Bush Sr., to his credit, said he had not agreed to this. Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton? DEALS in/out of Office? Turn the page.
The left here sounds as crazy as the right does. The right here sounds as crazy and misinformed as the left. The left sounds as dysfunctional as they claim HRC is.
Yet underneath all these gas bags is the one true fact, misogyny is alive and well in the little minds and twisted hearts of our "fellow Americans."
HILLARY’S GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE ADVANTAGE
Whitewater, Cattle Futuregate, Travelgate, Gennifer Flowersgate, Filegate, Vince Fostergate, Whitewater Billing Recordsgate, Paula Jonesgate, Federal Building Campaign Phone Callgate, Lincoln Bedroomgate, Donations from Convicted Drug and Weapons Dealersgate, Buddhist Templegate, Lippogate, Chinagate, Lewinsky Affair, Perjury and Jobs for Lewinskygate, Willeygate, Web Hubbel Prison Phone Callgate, Selling Military Technology to the Chinesegate, Wag the Doggate, Juanita Broaddrickgate, Vandalgate, Lootergate, Pardongate; and the many deaths, including suicide, murder, and mysterious gun shots to the head, all allegedly linked to Clinton.
Israel for military protection, China for military secrets, and Mexico for amnesty most desperately need Hillary for president.
Google: “boycott liberalism Clinton Legacy”; “Danneymeyer deaths linked to President Clinton”; “Hsu Hillary”; “Mearsheimer Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy”; Stricherz “Why the Democrats are Blue”; “Who Would the World Elect”.
One thing i will say about Obama supporters, they are very rude, if this is the kind of people the cult like leader attracts to him, then who would want THAT as a president. Those who down Hillary as they are, try cleaning your own back yards before trying to clean someone elses. What have you done for your community? What have you done for homeless people? Have you donated to the red cross? What makes you better than Hillary? Do you know Hillary and Obama personally? No you dont. You only know what the media hype says and the rest you make it up and twist it. Until you step up and do something worth anything as in helping people, you have no right opening your big mouths.
Well people this explains why Obama has been winning so much, and in surprising states known for high Rep. voters... The GOP's have been hammering the Dems. since this primary started. They have dispatched Rep. voters to vote for Obama in heavy numbers. It explains alot now, oh well, guess he isnt so good after all.
The primary system is messy and awkward and favors some small homogeneous states more than others, allowing an active minority to make decisions for an increasingly frustrated majority. But not this year. This year, Florida, you would've mattered even (and only) without jumping the gun. Now that states other than New Hampshire and Iowa are integral in determining the Democratic candidate, we must revisit the open primary debate. Do you hear that, Virginia?
In an open system you can choose to vote in either primary regardless of party affiliation. Thirteen states have open primaries, but until now I haven't read an influential Republican write about (and applaud) his degradation of the process by voting for who he thinks is weakest. Robert Bluey of the Heritage Foundation today came out and said he voted for Obama because he thinks Barack will be the easiest candidate for McCain to defeat.
This not only offends me as a Hillary supporter (I imagine it offends Obama supporters as well), but as a small 'd' democrat. In Virginia's system each individual is allowed to degrade the process by voting for who they think will be the worst, the slowest, oldest, most inexperienced, the least qualified, etc. They are not voting with the good of that party or the good of the country in mind, and that is a uncondonable practice.
But Bluey applauds it:
"One of the best parts of living in Virginia is the ability to cast a vote in either primary -- Republican or Democrat. I've often found the Democrat races in Northern Virginia far more interesting. Take the contest between Jim Webb and Harris Miller in June 2006. I cast my vote for Miller, even though he was far to the left of Webb. A race between then-Sen. George Allen and Miller would have been far easier for the Republican. Allen might still be a senator had it played out the way I envisioned."
Ahh, wonderful, if it had worked out Bluey's way his conniving would've kept a racist, anti-Semitic, xenophobe in office by voting to his extreme left. Awesome. Yes, this system allows those who's candidate has already been decided to aide in the choosing of his opponent. It allows the best interest of the party, and country to be undermined. This is not just a practice of Republicans, Democrats have similarly corrupted the process in the past. In 2007, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled that the Virginia open primary statute was unconstitutional after a group of GOPers complained that Dems were meddling in their nominating process. Go figure. Apparently, when given the power to choose an opponent, none of us can be trusted. That is why the open primary system must be abolished. It does not serve any of us to be voting in each others worst interest.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alex-leo/the-problem-with-open-pri_b_86224...
Democrats, 2008, Obama visits the VFW
In his address to the VFW today, Obama spoke on the theme of "sacred trust," using the phrase seven times in his 26-minute speech. He defined "sacred trust" simply: "America will be there for you just as you have been there for America" -- "from the moment you put on that uniform." Obama recognized he is running to become commander-in-chief "to safeguard this nation's security and to keep that sacred trust."
Obama brought up the Iraq War in the beginning of the speech, and then spoke about veterans' issues -- the opposite order of Hillary Clinton's own speech yesterday to the organization. He also criticized the Iraq war much more bluntly than Clinton did. After praising the troops' performance, he very clearly stated, "all of our top military commanders recognize that there is no military solution to the problems in Iraq."
"No matter how brilliantly and bravely our troops and their commanders perform -- and they have performed brilliantly and bravely -- they cannot and should not bear the responsibility of resolving grievances at the heart of Iraq's civil war," he said. "No military surge no matter how brilliantly performed can succeed without political reconciliation and a surge of diplomacy in Iraq and the region.
Like Clinton did, Obama called for a GI Bill for the 21st Century that expands educational opportunities and benefits. Yet he did not go into much detail as Clinton did, on what that would entail. He did promise veterans affairs would be a top priority in an Obama Administration.
Politics Of War: Barack Obama tells the VFW there's no military solution in Iraq while Gen. David Petraeus proves him wrong.
Like many other Democrats, Barack Obama grudgingly acknowledged at the VFW convention, that the surge was working.
But like other Democrats, he wants us to declare victory and leave because Iraq is not yet an Athenian democracy or Switzerland.
Obama, whose foreign policy includes talking to our enemies while invading our allies, told the assembled veterans, "All our top military commanders recognize that there is no military solution in Iraq."
Maybe Wesley Clark believes that. But Petraeus, our surgin' general, knows that defeating al-Qaida in Iraq, is not talking to Iran and Syria, as Obama prefers, is the prerequisite of a free, secure and independent Iraqi democracy.
The surge already has accomplished a great deal — reducing violence in Baghdad, pacifying Anbar and Diyala provinces, and uniting Sunni and Shiite tribes in opposition to al-Qaida in Iraq. At full strength, it will accomplish more.
This success, acknowledged even by Sen. Hillary Clinton, has caused Democrats like Obama to lapse into incoherence: We are winning, but we can't win; the surge is working, but Iraq is the biggest foreign policy mistake we've ever made.
No, that dubious distinction, as President Bush has pointed out, was when another Democratic Congress, the Watergate babies of 1974, cut off aid to South Vietnam, spawning the communist killing fields in Cambodia and Vietnam.
We're thankful the French didn't follow Obama's philosophy before helping us win our independence from King George. Our desire for independence was not unanimous. Many wanted to stay part of the British empire.
More is at stake here than Iraqi democracy. As the president said, cutting off Iraq, would lead not to peace but to another 9/11.
Barack Obama is an inspiring speaker. But the only ones he would be inspiring are our enemies.
He prefers the Neville Chamberlain approach. We prefer that used by generals such as Petraeus and Patton.