The Seattle Times Company

NWjobs | NWautos | NWhomes | NWsource | Free Classifieds |

Politics & Government

Our network sites | Advanced

Postman on Politics

Chief political reporter David Postman explores state, regional and national politics.

E-mail| About the blog | From the archive| RSS feeds Subscribe | Blog Home

May 7, 2008 7:33 AM

Clinton's win last night means little this morning

Posted by David Postman

When I stopped live-blogging last night Hillary Clinton had just won Indiana and declared:

“It's full-speed on to the White House."

But this morning’s headlines tell a far different story.

Clinton won Indiana, but she lost the punditocracy. She’s even lost Drudge, who the Clinton campaign has been working hard to massage. He says simply under a photo of Obama and his wife, Michelle, walking hand-in-hand,


But she’ll always have Rush. Given the close finish in Indiana, it is certainly possible that Limbaugh’s Operation Chaos helped Clinton eke out her win.

Operation Chaos Field Reports: Chaos Reigns Across Fruited Plain!

I have also been receiving field reports via e-mail today, both at my website e-mail address and the address, from people, commandos, operatives reporting that they have followed orders and fulfilled their duty. Nobody's been challenged. In fact, the Indiana voters all say that they have not been challenged, and they were hoping to be. They had themselves steeled and ready for it, many of them have shown up in tie-dyes, flip-flops, holding their heads up, looking down at their noses like they're liberals, effete snobs, showing up in battered pickup trucks and this sort of thing.

Operation chaos is also a great marketing tool for Rush. I'm not sure what those T-shirts will be worth if Clinton drops out.

Digg Digg | Newsvine Newsvine

Submit a comment

*Required Field

Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Posted by Jim Guthrie

9:09 AM, May 07, 2008

I've not listened to Limbaugh in years, so maybe I'm missing out on some grand, strategic concept that it's a good idea to support a Clinton. But from the outside this whole Operation Chaos thing seems childish.

Let them have their own circular firing squad.

Posted by Perecorp

9:17 AM, May 07, 2008

What last night's primary's showed is that Democrats are choosing to lose in November with a candidate that simply cannot beat John McCain. Let them start dealing with the November hang over that Obama's nomination will bring. This Democrat as well as many like simply cannot vote for a candidate we do not support, who does not speak to us and who we feel is so under qualified that we fear for our country's safety. The Deomcratic National Committee will only have themselves to blame come November when we have four more years of Republican drearyness.

Posted by Chad (The Left) Shue

10:17 AM, May 07, 2008

Now if she would just wander over to the a href="">Independent LIEberman Party where she belongs....

Chad (The Left) Shue

Posted by Sebastian

10:17 AM, May 07, 2008

Mr. Postman, in your opinion, what validity is there to the belief that the tougher the primary race is, the easier the presidential race will seem to Obama?
Best wishes,

Posted by JimD

11:39 AM, May 07, 2008

I think Rush indulges himself in undeserved grandeur if he thinks his attempt to subvert the democratic process had any significant influence. In addition - his plan was hatched back when the conventional wisdom among republicans saw Clinton as easier to defeat. The Wright stuff since, now splits republican pundits on this prediction.
Despite the downsides of temporary party division caused by Clinton's extended campaign, it's fueled exponential growth of new democratic voters and activists that will care a lot more about electing a democrat than which one - by November.
If you helped do that, Rush, thank you.
Now if you can get back to trashing McCain as the two-faced idiot even YOU realize he is, your mission of helping discredit and bury the post-conservative movement will be complete.

Posted by Bothsides

11:51 AM, May 07, 2008

Of course it means nothing this morning, a two point win, what a joke. Problem is, even with Obama's crushing blow in Carolina, he has no chance of winning that state in the general election. I'm sure Billary still has plenty of tricks up her/his sleeve, they'll pull out all the stops to get the nomination.

Geez JimD, you sound like you could be a left wing radio talk show host, oh wait, they don't have any because there's no audience........

Posted by JimD

11:55 AM, May 07, 2008

Regarding Clinton's lackluster results last night:
I think we'll start seeing super delegates slowing moving to Obama.
I, personally, still have faith that Clinton is a bit ahead of the hand-wringing, knows when to fold and will do so in a manner that transfers most of her support to Obama - perhaps more than anyone's currently predicting due to a number of factors.
If in fact it looks like Obama can't carry the battle to completion in November, he can hold his nose and select Clinton as his VP.
This would be what the top/bottom tickets democrats want anyway, in part because it puts Bill third in command and across the street, instead of sandwiched between the two.
It also positions Clinton where her policy exprtise and influence could do perhaps even more good than at the top of the ticket. Without the official responsibilities of President, she could work her buns off and accomplish a whole lot in the background...
One way or another, this is all going to work out, folks :-) It reall is.

Posted by Jesse Hart

12:01 PM, May 07, 2008

Prerecorp, it is exactly that kind of thinking that got us a second term of George W. Bush instead of John Kerry. I wonder how many people who thought Kerry wasn't worth voting for would have acted differently in light of the last four years.

I for one will vote for Barack Obama in the general, although I would also have voted for Hillary Clinton. But Obama has proven to be the stronger candidate. That is why he is winning the nomination. I hope you will realize that before November.

Posted by JimD

12:09 PM, May 07, 2008

Yes...well.... the "left wing" isn't as dependent on ex-disc jockeys telling them what to think, Bothsides. The crude, simplistic one-liners are fine for folks too ignorant and lazy to create their own intellectual idendity. I'd say life must be bliss for the single-digit percent of Americans who let these entertainers do the heavy lifting for them, but the perpetually frustrated and angry dogma you'all post suggests there's a downside to surrendering your soul to the manipulations of hacks and screamers.

Posted by Perecorp

1:34 PM, May 07, 2008

Jesse Hart: Unfortunate isn't it. Sorry that my convictions will not allow me to simply place partisan vote for "Nobama". Maybe I could vote for him if he showed just one ounce of concern for protecting our country and punishing our enemies. It is a matter of where not when we will be atatcked. I am for protecting Americans before the fact. The US cannot simply afford to elect a weak President after the last 8 years of the Bsuh regime. At least Hillary would defend our country. I do not think "Nobama" is a bad person or Senator, I just think hes way under qualified to deal with the world. Perhaps if he pushes an isolationist policy then I would vote for him. I had no problem voting for John Kerry. I blame Ohio for that debacle.

Posted by bill

3:35 PM, May 07, 2008

Untold, but very relevant, is the fact that John McCain only drew 77% of the Republican vote in Indiana. Before Democrats start jumping off bridges, they might want to reflect on how soft the Republican candidate's support is.

As far as Clinton staying in the race, I think she should stick through all remaining primaries. Each state contest has spurred tens or hundreds of thousands of first-time voters to register as Democrats. Why would the Democratic Party want to put a damper on this phenomenal growth of its ranks?

Posted by ChicoV

4:14 PM, May 07, 2008

When you can loan your own campaign over 11 million dollars so that you can become the next president there is NO WAY you can feel my pain EVER!

Clintons please go away already you are part of the problem so you cannot be part of the solution.

Posted by Particle Man

8:51 AM, May 08, 2008

It is striking how alike Hillary and our own Dino are as candidates. The do anything, say anything, pandering and the use of false reality as a political tool.
Soon, both will be silenced politically. Dino for ever and Hillary for eight years nationally.

Posted by Brian

10:56 AM, May 08, 2008

If Hillary Clinton drops out of the race, and Senator Obama is the Democratic Nominee, then the Democratic Party will have given Senator McCain the presidency as a presnt.

Seven million voters have not yet even had a chance to vote. If we are truly a Democracy the primary must continue, and all must be given a chance to vote.

I am appalled at the efforts of our media to stop the democratic process that is the basis of our American government.

Posted by Cyn

11:05 AM, May 08, 2008

I am incredulous of the media trying to manipulate this election. Hillary is the strongest candidate we have. Obama is nothing but an inexperienced empty suit that will be unable to beat McCain in the GE.

Let this process work as it was intended. Why not let the balance of the primary states vote? Is Obama afraid of her?

Posted by bevvyjean

11:28 AM, May 08, 2008

I don't think Rush Limbaugh has had anything to do with this race. No candidate has received the required number of delegates to be the chosen one as yet and Hillary should not withdraw until then. The pubdits are afraid their "apple dumpling" is getting tired and can't take the heat any longer. Instead of encouraging Hillary to withdraw they should be encouraging another debate to see if he can close the deal and shut their pie holes.

Posted by Judith Lonnquist

11:39 AM, May 08, 2008

I am frankly tired of the pundits demanding that this superbly qualified woman drop out of the presidental race. As long as there are voters who have not voted, and States whose delegates have not been seated (Florida and Michigan), she should continue to run. Who knows what might be the next Waterloo for Sen. Obama? We need to put up the best and strongest candidate against Sen. McCain. We should not give up on Sen. Clinton. -Judith Lonnquist, Seattle

Posted by Collea-Devi Goetz

12:12 PM, May 08, 2008

I am disappointed to say that the last primary/caucus coverage Iíve heard/seen was so far away from objective, fair, accurate, and balanced I canít call it journalism. The slimy, jaundiced, biased, spun, hegemonic coverage I have heard/seen has blown me away - Any coverage about Clinton has been negative, the poorest possible coverage while Obama has been descending from heaven surrounded by angels. I sincerely hope the twisting, jaundiced, unprofessional reporting and virtual campaigning for Obama will move back to real news journalism - OBJECTIVE, BALANCED, ACCURATE, UNBIASED AND WITHOUT SPIN. The facts appear to be Fla and Mich haven't been counted YET - with those states counted - they DID decide the DNC hasn't made a decision - Clinton has been a winner all along. It's time for media to stop trying hegemonic, jaundiced reporting and let the people decide - It is unlikely neither Clinton nor Obama will get what is needed to cinch the nomination or it will be way too close to call without the people who attend the DNC in Aug - I certainly wouldn't vote for Bam-Bam - way too immature, etc. Many people feel that way - Ever think of a third party? Republican / ex-Republican-wanna be Democrats / and New-old Democrats - Be looking for it.


Posted by regenbogen

12:14 PM, May 08, 2008

If Obama is the eventual nominee, as a die-hard Hillary supporter I will not vote for him. I cannot stand to have yet another dumb man in the White House. That is hardly "change we can believe in".

Posted by myopinion

12:14 PM, May 08, 2008

Clinton Democrats-
If HRC is out, then McCain has already won.
Why? Clinton Democrats. These are the people who are largely not in the state of WA that gave the Whitehouse back to the Dem's twice for the first time since Carter won one term on the back of Nixon's impeachment and they don't feel comfortable with Obama in state after battleground state.
Go ahead, nominate another loser like McGovern (kids liked him too), Dukakis, Gore, Kerry, Obama.
Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result.

How about after the DNC, RNC, Air America,, Rush Limbaugh disrespecting both Clinton and McCain- they both go independent on a national unity ticket?
Or- Hillary go independent and offer Michael Bloomberg the VP?
That would be getting past party politics and represent real CHANGE!
Hillary must stay in.
Obama can't win- you'll see.
Hillary '08
Sincerely, a Clinton Democrat

Posted by michelina

12:42 PM, May 08, 2008

You guys are something else. BO loses an anticipated win, and he comes out in the media with all this trash (typical for his campaign).

Besides BO supportes and hillary haters (all same), The GOP is the last group of people who will vote for her.

What a bunch of sore losers, and her best is yet to come.

Posted by PA Said No Obama

12:43 PM, May 08, 2008

My open letter to the DNC and Chair Howard Dean --
Chairman Dean. I respectfully submit to you that the Democratic Party needs to take a long hard look at the way their candidates for President are chosen. Right now, there is a very great chance that the Party is going to put a candidate forward who cannot win the November election against the moderate Republican candidate, Senator John McCain. The biggest reason is that the moderate democrats of this country have very, very real and serious concerns that Senator Obama has had one too many anti-American philosophers and even domestic terrorist associates and friends over the past 20 years. This issue raises every real doubt in the votersí minds about what exactly Senator Obama does feel or believe about this great nation of ours. Itís a question of judgment on his part. And those types of questions should not be in the minds of Democratic voters when they are choosing our next President.

Furthermore, exit poll after exit poll has shown that Senator Obama just is not connecting with the white, middle class, blue collar, Asian, Jewish, Catholic, Hispanic, and white women voters who've consistently been the base and support of the Democratic Party over the years. Many of these voters are now feeling like the DNC and the Party as a whole is abandoning them for the minority constituencies of black, upper income, and the youth. They are asking the very real question - where is the Party's loyalty to the real base of the Party? This is a very real problem for the DNC and the Party as a whole if Senator Obama actually wins this nomination. But then I'm sure I do not have to remind you of that fact.

To save this Party and to actually unite this Party and this great nation, Chairman Dean, the Party needs to take a stand now and make the votes of both FL and MI count for something. And Senator Obama should not be allowed to block those efforts to just continue to run out the clock on this election. The millions of voters in these two states want and need to have their votes counted. They are intelligent and insightful voters who refuse to be told how and when they should vote. Their states held an election and these voters came out to do their civic duty and cast their ballots in the millions. There is no true justification for the DNC and the Party to totally ignore these voters that came out in record numbers to vote for both Obama and Clinton. To not count them is plain and simple another reason why the Democratic Party is heading for disaster come November.

And finally, I am writing to let you know that Senator Hillary Clintonís support among the middle class, hard-working, blue collar people who are and always have been the back bone of this great nation is strong! We will not back down, and we will be heard loud and clear. If not now, we will be heard in November in record numbers. This is not a threat Charmin Dean; this is likely to be the reality. We believe very strongly that a vote for Senator Obama is a bad vote for America. We also believe very strongly that a vote for Senator Clinton is the right vote for America and without a doubt the only hope for a Democratic Party victory in November!

Posted by eesu

12:44 PM, May 08, 2008

Mr. Postman:
With all due respect to you, we the supporters of Sen Clinton viewed her win in Indiana as a win because a win is a win. There are millions of voters whose voices are yet to be heard and we want this democratic process to continue otherwise we cannot say that the nominee is the legitimate winner of this process. Please be all professionals and write something positive about our democratic process. It seems that the media would rather write every thing that they see as negative side of every event and put the winner down. Sen Clinton is a candidate who is fighting for every American and she deserves acknowledgment for her feat of winning Ind.

Posted by Grace

12:50 PM, May 08, 2008

Be kind to my candidate Hillary.


Posted by Ryan

12:58 PM, May 08, 2008

A win is a win. Besides, NC was set up for Obama, however, Indiana was a split down the middle - and she won. That is big. Plus, it bordered his state. That too is relevant.

Posted by JimD

1:04 PM, May 08, 2008

As much as I truly believe that HRC would make a better POTUS and has the better chance of beating McCain in the fall.... I'm afraid WE need to be ralistic here and start getting comfortable with the inevitable:
Obama will be the nominee.
and although his fortunes will surely diminish a bit running up to November as folks start taking a sober look at him and mcCain, we clearly wqin the election if we get focused on wht our fundamental objective is.
We simply cannot afford four more years of virtually identical policies and beliefs that got us into this mess. For all his inherent flaws in lack of exprience or national political accomplishment, Obama offers a a non-Bush/McCain mindset. If we truly believe that Bush/McCain couldn't be worse, then Obama will certainly be better.
Experience is too often the act of repeating the same mistakes over and over again.
Better judgement trumps experience every time, and if Obama's extremely effective campaign is any indicator of the kind of judgement he'd bring to the white house, it's obviously incumbent on us to put our personal disappointment aside and work for the greater good.

Posted by truthseeker

1:30 PM, May 08, 2008

BO's support is based on platitudes of "hope and change", all McCain has to do is "pop" this imaginary bubble, and BO's support will collapse.

Hillary is the only candidate that is tough enough, and has the tenacity and political savvy to beat McCain.

McCain would love to go against OB, for him and the neocon spin machine, it would be an easy win.

Posted by kat in your hat

1:36 PM, May 08, 2008

Hillary wins all the states needed to get win in the general. Obama wins republican states by caucus. He's the number 1 most liberal US Senator.

Only a fool would think Obama is a viable candidate for the general.

I would never dare vote for him.

Posted by Sherry Perdue

1:40 PM, May 08, 2008

I thought I was still living in the USA. Since when does the Chicago Tribune or any other media outlet decide who our President is ?

The Democratic Party will choose their nominee - not you. The nominee will be chosen by the delegates - ALL of them ! Your newspaper is doing a great dis-service to the American Political System and our

Barack Oboma should have the "judgement" to drop out and stop the racially divisive campaign that will ultimately cause John McCain to be our next President .

Thank You,

Sherry Perdue
Austin TX

Posted by Mary O'Bryan

1:41 PM, May 08, 2008

Of course Hillary should stay in the race. She can win in November. Voter fraud and election day cheating has occurred out of the Obama camp throughout this entire campaign. The blacks are so biased toward Obama that this occurs everywhere throughout the country since the beginning. How else do you think Sen. Obama got his start being such a rookie? He could have been a good President, (maybe), if he would have waited. Now, the arrogance of Obama and his supporters cheating is still yet, another set of reasons why Obama cannot win the general election come this November. In fact, I know Hillary is going to get the nomination when Obama goes out in shame. Hillary knows more really bad stuff on him and she is counting on someone bringing it out before it is too late. She wonít because she is too good of a Democrat to do so. However, it will come out and Mr. Teflon himself will not be able to lie his way out of this next one. Hide and watch!!! Stay, Hillary, stay America needs you not this more than questionable ďempty suit.Ē Also, I will never vote for Obama. I will, if I have too, write her name in on the ballot and submit. Incidently, she will probably win then, without the bias of all parties, the media and Obama. Rise, Hillary, Rise!!!

Posted by Kimberlie Sharp

1:41 PM, May 08, 2008

Oh my goodness! Let Hillary have her win. If Obama had won by 1% in Indiana it would have been considered a slam dunk. Remember Obama was suppose to win in Indiana by a large percentage. Why does Obama never answer a straight question. Nor does Michelle Obama. They deflect and redirect. What happen to the day when the candiate was decided at the convention. Remember Reagan was decided at the Convention. Let the process work and remember Obama has the lead unfairly anyways. Florida both on ballot and neither campaigned however Hillary won and cant get the count.

Posted by Jarrett and Judy Brock

2:25 PM, May 08, 2008

But, what is the will of the people?

About the pundits declaring the race is over, we think they are ignoring the fatal flaw in the Democratic nominating process. We have not read one article or heard one pundit talk about why caucuses do not necessarily reflect the will of the people. Obama owes his lead in pledged delegates to the twelve caucuses.

So, what is the problem? Caucuses disenfranchise Hillary's main voter base: older voters, working people who cannot afford baby sitters or take time off to participate in the lengthy caucus process, and, last but not least, the many women who are intimidated or feel pressured by the public aspect of caucuses. Many of these voters use absentee ballots in primary states. To prove to yourself that the caucus results do not represent the voting population of a state, compare the results of caucuses to the results of primaries (see the Map on the website, for example).

We call on the superdelegates to study the caucus issue and what it means in this election before the media makes the decision for them. Hillary Rodham Clinton has shown that she is the most electable Democrat based on the results in primary states.

Posted by efoster

2:32 PM, May 08, 2008

My Dear Mr. Postman, Why wouldn't Hillary Clinton have the right to go to the primary convention. Isn't that what it is for? To decide who the party nominee will be? What are you worried about ? Why not let it play out? Just take a deep breath.

Posted by kathy

3:01 PM, May 08, 2008

In response to the editorial today, let's keep in mind that it was Obama himself who put him in the position of answering about Rev. Wright -- it was not Hillary Clinton who told him to sit in the pew of a church where the Pastor spewed hatred of America, and lies about America giving black people the Aids virus. My pastor is black as well, and the only thing he preaches is the word of God -- from the Bible.

Hillary is not a race baiter, and I resent the allegation. In fact, when she could have run with the issues that Obama faces with Rev. Wright, she never did.

There are more issues than just Rev. Wright, although he is enough for me -- I can't support someone whose spiritual advisor hates America; What about Bill Ayers -- the unreprentent terrorist who Obama launched his Senate campaign in HIS LIVING ROOM.

I can't believe that a candidate for the President of the United States has "friends" likes this. And he says about Ayers, "oh, they are friendly." What about the two boards they sat on together? What about the board that Obama sat on with Ayers father and Ayers brother?

Ayers and Rev. Wright alone should be reason not to vote for Obama. BUT that's not even the tip of the ice berg -- an even bigger issue is the fact that Obama has little experience -- he's just 4 years into a Senate seat, and he has spent the past 2 years running for President. Most CEO's of America have more experience than Obama -- he is NOT QUALIFIED TO LEAD THE UNITED STATES. Forget about Wright, forget about race, forget about Ayers, forget about his shady dealings with Tony Rezko -- his lack of experience alone is reason he should not be president.

The other issue is that the biggest reason he even has as many votes as he does is because he knew how to do grassroots -- new voter registration. That coupled with the Myspace founder whose on loan to his campaign, and through his advantage with technology (for fundraising, rallying and getting out the vote), is why he is ahead. Kudos for the great technology -- but does that mean he should be President.

I think not.

I, like 40% of all Hillary supporters, will be voting for McCain in the fall if Obama is the Presidential nominee.....

Posted by Yankee Sue

3:03 PM, May 08, 2008

Critics of Hillary's Rovian-Atwater-attack dog campaign initially merely asked her to stop the negativity and divisiveness that's hurting the party. It's only when she refused--or proved herself incapable of running a campaign any other way--that Democrats start asking her to end her campaign. It's a tragedy that Hillary has become everything she viewed as despicable when she first went to Washington. Now her allies are faxing journalists attacks against Obama by Rightwing hate mongers. She has become part of the vast Rightwing conspiracy.

Posted by BJWL

3:34 PM, May 08, 2008

Before Texas and Ohio, the media, and even Bill Clinton, said Hillary Clinton should get out if she lost. She won both primaries, Ohio by 10 points plus Rhode Island. Then the calls got louder saying she HAS TO get out. She wins Pennsylvania decisively by nearly 10 points on record Democratic turnout. Then the media goes crazy, demanding she leave the race. Then within less than 10 days, Clinton reverses Obama's double digit lead in Indiana to win the primary and cuts his victory in North Carolina by double digits as well, the overwhelming choice of voters deciding in the last few days. By Wednesday, the media was in full-fledged hissy fit. And now it seems that a resolution on Michigan, in Clinton's favor, is well-along. Florida is in the works as well, where record turnout supported Clinton. She is also favored in West Virginia next week. It seems as though the more Clinton keeps winning (and Obama loses core Democratic voters and swing states) the media seems even more hell-bent on protecting their Chosen One.

The voters could have ended this race at any point and they have decided that they want it to continue. They want to be heard. The media should get back to their job of reporting the news instead of trying to create it.

Posted by Gloria Cordova, Ph.D.

3:41 PM, May 08, 2008

When Senator Obama won Guam by 7 votes did you also print that the Guam win meant little? The bias of your article is so blatant. Give us readers a break that we can discern bias when it is there!!! That Senator Clinton won a state that was supposedly Senator Obama's (by his own statement) is VERY meaningful.
Check your bias; it' blatantly showing.

Posted by James

4:22 PM, May 08, 2008

The do anything, say anything, pandering and the use of false reality as a political tool.
Soon, both will be silenced politically. Dino for ever and Hillary for eight years nationally.


All of the candidates are guilty of this, including Obama. He, like the others, makes a lot of campaign promises that will be tested. The cost of Obama's various programs far exceed the various revenue sources he proposes to pay for them (as do Clinton's and McCain's), and that will have to be dealt with down the road.

Obama is very much an unknown despite all the hype, and the notion he will hold office for 8 years is blind faith - what else could it be?

Posted by Sandra Terreberry

4:27 PM, May 08, 2008

If the Press had been more responsible and exposed Obama earlier he would NEVER have won as many states as he did. The media suppressed the information for months and let voters be decieved. They attacked Hillary and puffed up Obama trying to run this election. Voters deserved to be informed of Obama's associations with Anti American, racist, white hating, criminals and terrorists. It goes to the man's judgement of who he chooses to be in the company with.

We raise our children and especially when they become teenagers to choose their friends wisely. We encourage them to associate with families who have the same morals and values we raise them with. We teach them you can and may be judged by the company you keep. If they are in the company of gangs, drug dealers, dishonest, irresponsible people they too will be judged along side them. It is basic common sense.

We choose our church and spiritual guides and mentors because we see in them what we ourselves are looking for and already believe. We introduce our children at the earliest ages to our beliefs by bringing them to our church and allow them to be taught our religion and faith. We surround them with our church community by going to functions, services and even bible studies so they can see what our faith is. So when Obama says he attended Trinity for 20 yrs and didn't hear those hate filled sermons and that he doesn't share the same beliefs as Rev Wright it is hard for me as a Christian religious person to understand WHY keep attending that church? In all my years attending church for over 50 yrs I have never ever heard my priest, pastor or deacon spew hatred or Anti American remarks in the name of Christianity or in the name of scripture or in the name of Jesus Christ. For me... to spend one second spewing hatred to bring home a message of love is counter reactive.

It would be like us tearing our children down just to build them up. Where is the common sense in this? Where is the trust we would want them to have in us? What is the message? Jesus taught.. to love thy neighbor. Jesus taught... to forgive thy tresspassers. According to Rev WRight he is teaching his congregation to avenge the white people and the Americans for the wrong they did against their race hundreds of years ago. He is promoting hatred for oppression. I hear HATE and AVENGE in his attitude. How can Obama ask us to believe in him when we can't even understand his explanation of "WHY" he stayed in Trinity for 20 yrs and allowed his children to be exposed to this hatred? Michelle Obama has expressed her unpatriotic feelings, and how does one chose a spouse with feelings counter to your own?

Obama has more to come, the media has more and are sitting on it. The media didn't mind attacking Hillary or John McCain with very little to go on, yet with facts they chose to suppress exposing Obama.

If Obama loses this nomination the blacks have NO ONE to be upset with and blame but OBAMA himself. He did a good job going around promising NEW, HOPE and CHANGE when all along he has been your "TYPICAL" politician. He gave Americans false hope. He is NOT strong enough to weather a vetted debate how could he expect Americans to trust he could handle even more difficult situations if he were President. He faltered, stammered, stuttered and literally fell flat on his face in that last debate. He showed if he does not have a speech written by some great writer and a teleprompter to read it from he can NOT deliver intellible words on his own. He fumbled explaining his tax cuts.

Obama whined the next day and went out making jokes and mocked Hillary. He blamed Charlie and George two of the most respected Newsmen in the country of being too hard on him. He accused them of setting him up with a "gottcha" strategy. Blaming others is Obama's game plan. To blame Charlie and George just showed America that he is never willing to take any responsiblity for his own words and actions.

Obama said early on, "Words matter." Well we have heard his words and in Pennsylvania, Ohio, California, Texas, Florida, Michigan, and all the other states he has heard "their words" NO Obama and YES Hillary. This race is far from over and those out there yelling for Hillary to step down because she is hurting the democratic party.....Shhhhhhh because she is NOT going anywhere. The Americans WANT her to stay in and there are 9 more states who deserve to have their words heard. Obama is not viable, he is not electable and he has hurt his ownself. Don't blame anyone but Obama if he is not the nominee. If anyone wants to vent their anger as the newsmen and politic wolves suggest if he does not make it there will be rioting in the streets..........just turn your anger toward the person who deserves it..Obama. He is the one who lied to America, he is the one who caused the American people to mistrust him, he is the one who in the last debate showed he is weak and undecisive. NO ONE is stealing this nomination from him...........HE IS THE ONE TO matter how much fear the media is trying to inflict on Americans if he is not handed over this nomination.

We have had 7 years of an administration holding us hostage out of their scare tactics and fear tactics. We are NOT willing to be victims any longer out of FEAR. I have a whole lot more faith in Americans whether they are black, white, red, yellow of accept who ever is the nominee and to join together to get the republicans OUT of the white house and as Hillary put it, "Take back this country."
YES WE WILL, Words will be solutions and hope will be reality!!! YES WE WILL!!!!
Hillary 2008

Posted by F. Steele

5:18 PM, May 08, 2008

Means little to whom? For months Obama and others have been saying Indiana would be a tie-breaker, and Hillary had no chance to win it. Hillary won this tie-breaker -- so suddenly the same people are saying it means nothing.

Obama had some good GOTV and WRight may have helped bring out more of his AAs. But when you look at demographics, Hillary iis ahead and gaining with her white supporters, Obama is losing ground with that group. The AA power is past now: no more big AA states in the primary, and their states always go red in November anyway; the AAs can deliver delegates but not electoral votes.

Project Tuesdays' updated demographics appeals over a map of November swing states -- and Hillary's lead has grown.

That's the sort of thing that means something to the undecided Superdelegates.

Posted by Paula Wiley

5:21 PM, May 08, 2008

Your article makes as much sense as my weird daughter-in-law from your suicidal town!

Hillary Clinton 2008

Posted by Ross Nicholson

5:38 PM, May 08, 2008

God is with Hillary Clinton, always.

The press fails to question the cheated will of millions of voters in Washington, Texas, Michigan, and Florida. The press fails again to ask "Why is it that a republican anti-Hillary vote in Alaska is worth 30 true-blue Democratic votes in Pennsylvania?"
This is the Democratic Party, not the Dean's Brand New Rules Against Hillary Only Party. By the old rules Hillary is the nominee. Dean does not choose the nominee, the People do. Get used to it!

Posted by Jesse Hart

7:45 PM, May 08, 2008

Man, most of the comments here look like a lot of sour grapes to me. Obama and Hillary are virtually the same on every major policy position, especially when you compare them both to McCain. As for whether Obama is a viable candidate, let us not forget that he has managed to overcome a truly formidible opponent and position himself to win the nomination. To say he is not viable is to belittle both his campaign, and Hillary Clinton's.

Also if you are a Clinton supporter, and Obama is not your first choice, do not let that cloud your judgment in the general election. You may be disappointed when Obama wins the nomination, which he almost certainly will (yes Hillary should remain in the race in case of a miracle). I was disappointed when my first choice dropped out. But deal with it.

I have not seen one compelling argument that would make me want to vote for John McCain over any of the Democrats who ran in the primaries. Maybe if this were pre-2004 I'd have something different to say. But John McCain has embraced virtually every Bush policy position since then. Do you really want more what Bush has given us?

Posted by Anastasia

7:56 PM, May 08, 2008

Excuse me, but Hillary is a fighter! I want someone fighting for me in Washington as hard as Hillary is fighting for this nomination. She is one of the strongest people I have ever met. She has been up against a candidate who has outspent her three to one but she keeps coming back and winning with negligible resources. McCain wouldn't stand a chance against Hillary. This woman is as tough as my mother was!

Posted by Anastasia

8:12 PM, May 08, 2008

You media guys should just give Hilary the chance to campaign. The last time I looked this was a democracy.She keeps bouncing back against insurmountable odds yet you never say anything positive about her (except for Tucker Carlson). News should be reported with fairness. It is obvious to everyone whom you have chosen for "your" candidate but there ARE states that haven't yet voted. You guys should save your spins and negative comments for after hours away from the public camera or else share some of your steamrolling for Obama. I want someone who can fight for America and it certainly looks like Hillary can do that. Go Hillary! Yes she will!!!

Posted by Anastasia

8:30 PM, May 08, 2008

Those of you who think Obama feels your pain should peek into HIS checkbook. I don't think he has felt any monetary pain for a LONG time...and I don't even know what an arugala is... and he likes to eat those. Now I ask you, who is the elitist?. It's VERY easy to forget where you came from for some people. BTW, he runs as a black candidate but he's half white. Ever notice how his speech flows more "ebonically" when he's talking to certain audiences, yet when you hear him interviewed on television, he sounds like a white Harvard educated lawyer?

Posted by anne white

8:33 PM, May 08, 2008

Well then thanks Rush, but also Obama should thank the independents that voted for him. In the end ( and Hillary is staying until the end, no doubt about it) if Obama thinks he can win with the AA and liberal vote only he is sadly mistaken. Just ask Dukakis and Kerry, maybe that's Obama's destiny. The democratic white working class will vote for McCain if Hillary is not the nominee, because he is someone we can respect.

Posted by Anastasia

8:35 PM, May 08, 2008

For PA Said No... Here, Here!! Hillary 2008.

Posted by Anastasia

8:38 PM, May 08, 2008

Last time I looked the backbone of the Democratic party was: white, middle class, blue collar, Asian, Jewish, Catholic, Hispanic, and white women voters...and Obama can't connect with these people??? That should be saying something. Hillary 2008!!

Posted by Anastasia

8:41 PM, May 08, 2008

Can you imagine what would happen to Obama if he only spent as much as Hillary does campaigning???

Posted by SonalifromTexas

8:43 PM, May 08, 2008

The Reason Hillary shouldn't step down is because none of the candidate have the required number of delegates. She has won the swing states and is leading McCain in Florida which is most likely to cost democrats the vicotry if Obama is the nominee. I will not vote for Obama because his delegate count is based on undemocratic process called caucus. I am from Texas where we had both primary and caucus and I am also a delegate at Precinct level. I served on the rules committee and I know how the rules were changed after the fact to seat all Obama delegates. It is so fraudulent that I am not going to ever vote for Obama. I am disgusted with democratic party. Committee chair who was Obama supporter like most local party workers delivered a caucus victory by fraud, voter disenfrnachisment and breaking each and every rule. Why don't you reporters report that instead of giving opinions? You all are corrupt and in tank with Obama. Go Hillary! Run as independent. Ditch the corrupt party.

Posted by A

8:50 PM, May 08, 2008

Remember when Obama said he could no more denounce Rev. Wright than he could denounce a family member, since he was the man who married him and his wife, baptized his children and helped him promote his book...and yet he did denounce him--publicly. I'm glad I don't have fair weather friends like that!! Go Hillary 2008!

Posted by JerryDTX

9:36 PM, May 08, 2008

Senator Clinton is the wise choice for President of the US. She also was counted out after Iowa....millions of votes and hundreds of delegates ago. Hillary is the right choice for America.

If she loses the nomination.......her followers may vote for Obama over a Republican....but then when Obama proves himself to be a novice and fails in office....assuming he even wins...since he will definitely lose Florida if their votes aren't counted..and Michigan...then after his failure...mid-stream Democrats will leave the Democratic party either to start a 3rd "educate and liberalize" the corrupt Republican party. Either way...America loses if Senator Clinton loses. She is the true "hope that we can believe in..." backed by experience...not American Idol plastic popularity.

Posted by Anastasia

9:36 PM, May 08, 2008

Way to go Terreberry!!! The press should NOT be allowed to elect our candidates. We ARE smarter than that!! Go Hillary 2008!

Posted by jerrydtx

9:43 PM, May 08, 2008


The reason Obama and Clinton's policy positions are so close is that he has been copying Senator Clnton's positions since he started running for President. The only one he didn't copy was Iraq. He is not the real deal. Hillary is and she created these policies/position years ago. I do give Senator Obama credit for being a terrific mime.

Posted by m.miller

10:11 PM, May 08, 2008

Senator Hillary Clinton staying in the race is the only chance that the DNC has of saving the general election and the democratic party. Anybody who has read Obama's books and Website knows he is mostly about himself. It is not about this country he only pretends to love. He offers nothing more than academic rhetoric relating to the hope of change with vague solutions at best on how he will accomplish anything concrete. Any proposed policies that have substance Obama stole from Sen. Clinton. He is not ready to be president and if anything he is hurting his opportunities for a future presidential bid. If Obama does get the nomination this time he will lose to McCain unless Sen. Clinton does all of his campaigning and literally/expressly begs her supporters to vote for him. Even then, every Democrat I know will either write in Sen. Clinton in November or not vote at all. At this critical time in our history America does not need a unqualified media created fake and arrogant wimp for a president. Obama's supporters' (including the media's) blinding unwillingness to seriously scrutinize his real qualifications and obvious weaknesses as a candidate makes him is too dangerous to get my vote. The only thing that gives me hope for this country is that Sen. Hillary Clinton has not given up on us.

Respectfully submitted (although your article is far from being respectful to a great American woman who has devoted her public life to this country)
M. Miller

Posted by Jesse Hart

10:36 PM, May 08, 2008

jerrydtx, I would certainly debate who is copying whom here. Everybody, including Clinton jumped on the "change" bandwagon after Obama successfully made it a central theme of his campaign. Hillary's, "yes we will" slogan looks to me like the sincerest form of flattery.

On more substantive matters, Obama and Clinton have debated policy, in which the reasons for their differences were very clear, while the central policy approach was very similar. Case in point, they both favor offering universal health insurance, but Clinton's approach is to mandate coverage, while Obama's focuses more on ensuring affordability. McCain on the other hand thinks that the market should dictate, which is essentially the same thing that we have now. Iraq, as you already mentioned, is certainly another case in point.

Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that Obama has modeled his approach after Clinton (personally I think that belies the facts, but I doubt you agree with that assessment so...). Would you rather that our next president has modeled their policy on Clintonian ideas or the ideas of George W. Bush? If you were to vote for McCain in the general, you would be picking a president who has conformed his policy with Bush.

Posted by Josepha Mochulski

11:25 PM, May 08, 2008

Hillary is the most prepared presidental candidate and can win over McCain. Though I like Obama, he needs to mature politcally and gain experience. A Clinton - Obama ticket would be great. Then he could take over in 8 years and I think our country would have a chance to turn around and once again solve some of our problems at home and take our place as a respected member of the world governments.

Posted by Mark F. Traupman

12:11 AM, May 09, 2008

Hillary should drop out after the final primary or else, in the future, they will say: "If Hillary would not have dropped out she would be a better president."

Posted by Denise

1:53 AM, May 09, 2008

Would you hire someone with one years experience to lead your corporation? We are hiring someone to lead the most powerful country in the world. This person isn't just going to have to make sure that the shareholders are happy. This person has to grapple with some of the most important questions that face us now and for future generations. A message of hope and "yes we can" is not enough. Obama is fooling himself and worst of all the American people. He should be scared to death if he gets the Presidency, I am. That is why Hillary should not drop out. Experience does matter and will matter. How that has been lost on the electorate is the most surprising event of this Campaign.

Posted by Susan Lorinsky

5:38 AM, May 09, 2008

The very thought that a campaign should be halted and Senator Clinton quit is the opposite of what this country stands for. We are a nation of 50 states, not 48, and the people of Floirda and Michigan deserve to have their votes and delegates counted. Senator Obama who has ignored them, wants the remaining primaries not to happen, denying those voters their right to choose because the election process is going on too long and he is bored. Candidates in the past haven't been decided until June, so what's the rush? Could it be the voters will see the light and stop drinking the Kool-Aid. Speeches do not move me if there is no substance or experience to back it up. Senator Hillary Clinton has solutions with details to back up the how to tackle the issues facing this country. She has been the voice for children, senior citizens, families, our military and others here and abroad She is a Patriot who loves her country so much that she works non-stop talking to the people; doing her Senate work at the same time. Being President will require multi-tasking and long hours. It isn't glamorous.
Senator Obama's association with Rev. Wright for 20 years, and not opposing him until now when it's a problem, Voting Present on most of his Senate votes, not yes or no, does not work as President. The Buck stops at the Oval Office. Michelle Obama saying she finally is proud to be an American is a problem for me.
Senator Clinton, keep on going and let all the voters of this country have their voices heard and don't let the media or the DNC decide who will be the next candidate. This is from a small-town woman, originally from Philly who is not bitter, doesn't own a gun, not a religous fanatic and has dignity. That was the last straw. No one talks down to me. Go Hillary!!

Posted by val sommerviile

8:28 AM, May 09, 2008

It is a shame that reporters make opinionated statements instead of reporting facts. Hillary Clinton would make a stronger candidate against John McCain in Nov. John McCain is running a campaign that slightly resembles Hillary's positions. Some say she is more of a Republican candidate then Democrat. Taking that into consideration McCain is talking to Hillary supporters across the country sharing his beliefs. If you connect the dots that spells trouble for Obama. Hillary supporters as many as 50% have already said they will vote for McCain. Looking at the numbers if the large voter turnout of Democrats go to the polls in Nov and say at least 33% of independents, and 33% of Hillary supporters along with Republicans go to the polls McCain will when in a landslide. So if you are a McCain backer as a reporter it is in your own self interest to report Hillary's defeat. That puts McCain in an advantage to beat Obama. On the other hand Democrats are so blinded by the hero worship of Obama that they are foolishly believing they can win and that Hillary voters will go ahead and not cross party lines. But in a short history lesson look at Regan. He easily captured the democrats "Regan Democrats". Are we about to engage in a new area of "McCain Democrats". Polls suggest that this is very plausible. So if you are a Super Delegate what are you going to do in the best interest of keeping all these Hillary supporters with the Democrats? Hillary could put the Mayor of Philadelphia as her VP. That would bring a lot of Obama supporters to her side. I really believe that there has been a conspiracy to keep the Clinton name out of the Whitehouse. It all starts with the double standards of Kennedy and Kerry and Dean. Those three men are of the old party that did not reach the Whitehouse in their runs and used the Florida and Michigan to their advantage to quell gender biased opinions of their own. They have done everything in their power to not count these votes until the last minute. They have not fully considered the ramification of these disenfranchised voters who stated their preference of Hillary Clinton in record setting numbers in Florida. If a poll of Florida women were conducted reviewing voter registration party affiliation switching from Republican to Democrats it would be mind boggling. Those voters and many others who have been silenced by a Party that claims to represent all people of all classes and equality for all is disgusting. We are a nation of 48 states now in the Democratic Party. This tatic will not go unnoticed by the people of Michigan and Florida. The super delegates have been put in a very bad position because logic and polls tell them Hillary has the better support from the most crucial states but the medias biased reports have made a bad situation look worse. The media is stirring up black democrats and liberals to cry foul- she stealing the election. The party elders need to take a stand to quell this disenfranchisement and not be afraid to endorse the stronger candidate. Anyone who has been following the Chicago politics know it is very possible that the Governor of Illinois may get indited. Rezko may cooperate in exchange for information that will connect Obama to these problems. That is not good in an Election where Democrats can make a come back.

Posted by blklikeme

1:47 AM, May 10, 2008

Should Clinton quit? Absolutely not! Although much of the media is apparently under the misapprehension that it, not the voters, should decide which candidate should be elected, regardless of qualifications, and has strenuously tried to force Clinton from the race, she'll win. She's smart, tough, experienced, & far better prepared for the job and responsibilities of the oval office.

We know she'll steer us back to a sound economy without wars, with good employment, the same health care plan that Congress members enjoy, gas & electricity we can afford, increased employment, no more out-sourcing, & an income tax that's fair to us--the working class--instead of favoring the wealthy. We trust Clinton. For my family it's Clinton all the way & we're supporting her every way we can, including campaign contributions whenever we can--it's our investment in our future.

We watched Bill Clinton pull us out of the morass left by his predecessor, and we know that as president Hillary will do the same for us now. Were Barack Obama to become president, we know no such thing; his history, basic philosophy per his autobiography, his "selective" memory, and close friendships with questionables like Rezko, Faraquan, el-slsl, and Wright make us apprehensive about his qualifications, who he would choose as his cabinet, advisers, and chiefs of staff, and where he would lead us. He promises change but so did George Bush. Hillary promises change, and we know we can trust that her changes will be for the better.

Posted by peakarack

1:13 AM, May 11, 2008

Fuck yourself David.

Hillary all the way!

Recent entries

May 9, 08 - 04:50 PM
State GOP won't share take from McCain fundraiser

May 9, 08 - 11:37 AM
Why some Clinton voters may not back Obama come fall

May 9, 08 - 10:11 AM
Where's Tom Foley?

May 9, 08 - 09:57 AM
State Republicans make nominating conventions optional

May 8, 08 - 01:49 PM
Larsen throws superdelegate support to Obama







Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Browse the archives

May 2008

April 2008

March 2008

February 2008

January 2008

December 2007


Buy a link here