Russert: It's over for Hillary. She just lost the nomination.

Obama and Wright will put all the white people in concentration camps. Our children will soon all sing "God Damn America" in classrooms across the 50 states.

lol

No probably the reason so many black people are voting for a black guy is because:

1) Obama is a Democrat and most black people are democrats.
2) Obama is NOT a radical like Jesse Jackson was. I've talked to several black people about this (have you?) and they say that guys like Wright are common, but it's expected from the older generation (about one generation older than Obama's) and while they don't agree with his approach, they agree with Wright and Obama both that the Washington establishment needs a spring cleaning. I hear just as silly rhetoric from white guys about black people, but I won't automatically dismiss all their views. One of them happens to be my uncle, who complains all the time about the "dirty Mexicans". Despite this flaw, he's still a fairly decent guy.
3) This will be the FIRST black President. That's a huge deal and why would black people not vote for him, given my other two points?

And hopefully you don't take such an inflammatory perspective just to increase your article views! Thanks for the link :P

If Barack Obama had received ANYTHING LESS THAN 77% of the black vote in NC, Hillary Clinton would have won the state. I did the calculation.

You know, if Hillary had any opinions of her own, or made just a few good moves during this entire thing, she could have won. Stop trying to blame her loss on race rather than her horrible politics. Obama is white, Jesus Christ.

This election is completely racialized, much of it based on a smear campaign conducted against Hillary and Bill Clinton by Obama supporters.

LOL!!! Why are you so scared of a HALF black candidate? Not everyone shares your racial beliefs.

No probably the reason so many black people are voting for a black guy is because:
1) Obama is a Democrat and most black people are democrats.

So is Hillary Clinton

2) Obama is NOT a radical like Jesse Jackson was. I've talked to several black people about this (have you?) and they say that guys like Wright are common, but it's expected from the older generation (about one generation older than Obama's) and while they don't agree with his approach, they agree with Wright and Obama both that the Washington establishment needs a spring cleaning. I hear just as silly rhetoric from white guys about black people, but I won't automatically dismiss all their views. One of them happens to be my uncle, who complains all the time about the "dirty Mexicans". Despite this flaw, he's still a fairly decent guy.

I know more about black people than most of the whites on Newsvine do, without a doubt.

3) This will be the FIRST black President. That's a huge deal and why would black people not vote for him, given my other two points?

I agree that it is a valid reason for a black to vote for him. What is not valid is the extrapolation that his margin in state's like NC translates into a victory in Nov. Besides that, Obama has not answered legitimate questions about his church and his pastor, the bitterness comments and other things that alienate him from the 'white' working class vote.
People are wallowing in fool's gold here.

I know more about black people than most of the whites on Newsvine do, without a doubt.

LOL

let's see what makes you so qualified. Can you provide a link? Or maybe an award you won from black people? LMAO.

Apparently the great majority of blacks in NC agree with Rev Wright. These are tragic conclusions for race relations in this country.

And great majority of whites and none other than whites on the Supreme court voted for George Bush. Great Majority of the whites manipulated the election in Florida to favor King George. A great Majority of the whites agrees with George Bush. George Bush only appointed one Black Female to his cabinet who is basically been used by Bush on foreign policy issues to pay a debt he owes to people in this country with Dual Citizenship

Get over it man. I don't think this election is a bout race, as far as I am concern, it is about change in the American Politic. Time for this country to see what it is like to have a real American who will serve my beloved country with dedication.

I don't know anything about article views, and don't care about it other than if people post at my article I can control the discussion.

I don't know anything about article views, and don't care about it other than if people post at my article I can control the discussion.

Big fan of censorship and spin?

I

know more about black people than most of the whites on Newsvine do, without a doubt.
LOL

let's see what makes you so qualified. Can you provide a link? Or maybe an award you won from black people? LMAO.

I have lived all my life in neighborhoods that are majority black. Where I live now, Morgan Park in Chicago, is 65% black.

I do talk with my black neighbors about racial issues.

I participated in hundreds if not thousands of discussions about race in an online race relations forum over the course of 6 years. I have heard just about every argument there is back and forth about 'race relations' in the United states.

I have lived all my life in neighborhoods that are majority black. Where I live now, Morgan Park in Chicago, is 65% black.

As have I. Until 3 years ago I spent all of my life in Section 8 housing in Montgomery Alabama, where the entire city is 50% black.

I do talk with my black neighbors about racial issues.

That doesn't mean you know more about black people. That's ridiculous. I talk to black people about all kinds of things every day, that doesn't make more educated to the likes and dislikes of black people.

I participated in hundreds if not thousands of discussions about race in an online race relations forum over the course of 6 years. I have heard just about every argument there is back and forth about 'race relations' in the United states.

I've done the same, offline, in person with black friends, co-workers, and enemies. Still, this doesn't give you any kind of authority on "black people-knowledge"

Whatever. What people write speaks for itself. Most of the people who post about race on this forum have no idea what they are talking about.

Yeah, you're the only one who has ever encountered people of other races. You have no idea what you are talking about. You are claiming that a white guy is black. Oh, maybe you're just "color blind" from all those words you spoke at black people.

This election is completely racialized, much of it based on a smear campaign conducted against Hillary and Bill Clinton by Obama supporters.

I know more about black people than most of the whites on Newsvine do, without a doubt.

JohnR-- These kinds of assertions are making you appear foolish. They are distracting from the relevant and important point that you've made about electability.

What is not valid is the extrapolation that his margin in state's like NC translates into a victory in Nov.

That point is quite valid. Blacks represent 12% of the population. 79% of voters are white. The majority of voters in states like NC are both conservative and White.While this election may not be about race, race bias will have everything to do with the outcome. That's not to say that the importance of race in this or any election is fair or just, it is, however, the inescapable reality of the country we live in.

It's been decided. Obama IS the nominee, but I wouldn't pop the corks on the champagne bottles yet. Obama has real challenges ahead with regard to white voters, especially in the South, Mid-West and West.

Finally, for those Hillary-haters out there, you need to change your shrill tone. You're quite-likely alienating the moderate Democrats whose support wil be needed to win the general election.

Finally, for those Hillary-haters out there, you need to change your shrill tone. You're quite-likely alienating the moderate Democrats whose support wil be needed to win the general election.

It's way too late for that. Sure some will go back, but the disgraceful behavior by legions of Obamaites on forums such as this have already done irreversible damage to Obama. It's just a matter of how much.

Finally, for those Hillary-haters out there, you need to change your shrill tone. You're quite-likely alienating the moderate Democrats whose support wil be needed to win the general election.

Good thing us Hillary-Haters aren't running for office then, I guess.

For the Hillary supporters: Stop being so willing to turn your back on your party and vote Republican (or threatening to do so) just because your mediocre candidate couldn't hold her own.

...just because your mediocre candidate couldn't hold her own.

I rest my case.

I rest my case.

and what are going to do? Not vote, or vote republican because you backed the worst Democratic candidate? If Kamp Klinton wants to vote GOP because they don't like what Obama SUPPORTERS say about Hillary, then let them. They are borderline Republican anyway.

"I'm not going to vote for your guy becuase you hurt my feelings" boo @!$%#ing hoo.

Why don't you just ask your black neighbors why they voted for Obama then? You think they voted for him just because he's black?

My points were that it's because he's black, democrat, and not a radical. That's why neither Hillary nor Jesse Jackson ever became the nominee.

and what are going to do? Not vote, or vote republican because you backed the worst Democratic candidate?

Mars-- you really need to calm down dude and please, don't put words in my mouth.

I said nothing about not voting or voting Republican. Hillary-hating is ubiquitous on Newsvine and while feeling intensely about a given subject is good, I was simply pointing out the potential divisiveness of your antagonistic tone. As an example:

If Kamp Klinton wants to vote GOP because they don't like what Obama SUPPORTERS say about Hillary, then let them. They are borderline Republican anyway.

"I'm not going to vote for your guy becuase you hurt my feelings" boo @!$%#ing hoo.

For the record, I'm far more distressed by the thought of another 4 years of a conservative-controlled, Whitehouse. I was a HC supporter until yesterday, but I WILL be voting for Obama and hopefully a Democratic Congress. It is, however, unclear just how much damage has been done in this heated race. The continued angry Rhetoric, at best, is not helpful.

That having been said Mars, I love your spirit. Don't worry, everything will be ok. Now go take your medicine…

And I was never asking if you're an "expert on race relations", I was just wondering if you've actually talked to a few black Obama supporters why they support him, rather than just assuming it's all about race to them. The only aspect of race involved here is that if Obama is elected, it will be historical. I doubt Colin Powel, had he ran, would've been supported by a majority of blacks, and neither was Jesse Jackson so it ISN'T about race -- the policies obviously matter to them.

Nah man, I feel you. I mostly just @!$%#ing with you. I know the Hillary supporters are going to come home in November, emotions are just high because of this stupid primary race. I still haven't decided between Obama (just to vote against the GOP) or Nader (my real choice) and I probably won't know what my vote is until I get my ballot.

That having been said Mars, I love your spirit. Don't worry, everything will be ok. Now go take your medicine…

Thanks man. I'd love to take my meds, but unless you got a dime-sack, I'm @!$%# out of luck.

LMAO!

Nader just might be a stretch. A platform of "I'm not a Rep or Dem" could be problematic. :)

We're on the same side. I'll do anything, anything but please, not another Republican! I even feel a little better today (depressed last night) about the potential to get some good things done with Obama and a Democratic Congress.

Thanks man. I'd love to take my meds, but unless you got a dime-sack, I'm @!$%# out of luck.

Ain't it the truth!

If Kamp Klinton wants to vote

hey! didn't you guys get the memo

Using transplanted "K"s is verbotten.

Oh, I saw the memo. And I decided I'll put a K where I want. Also, it is only forbidden to type "Amerika" not "Klinton".

So, once again, Kamp Klinton Kan't win.

Get over it man. I don't think this election is a bout race, as far as I am concern, it is about change in the American Politic. Time for this country to see what it is like to have a real American who will serve my beloved country with dedication.

You got to be kidding, the meaning of 0 changing the American politic is that he plans to sit down in the Oval Office, that's all. The rest is history.

I think the point JR is trying to make is simple: there is no rational, political explanation for numbers like 91%, 92% of blacks voting for Obama. It all comes down to politics of identity - that he is "{the black candidate", people see a black face. This isn't rocket science.

Some in the black community are noting the issues with that; article I seeded here from Black Agenda Report speaks to the very real problem that Obama has so far promised not one thing to the black community yet he is getting all this turn out - suggesting that blacks would be better served with another candidate.

The bigger issue for the democrats is that once more they seem to have grabbed defeat from the jaws of victory by choosing a candidate who can not win a general election - who in fact is only a senator because his republican opponent had to withdraw. In his first campaign for State Senator he challenged all his opponents candidacy application signatures and got them off the ballot.

This election is looking very much like the last time someone from Illinois was the Democratic candidate - Adlai Stevenson vs Dwight Eisenhower, and it is likely to have the same results - the democrats have put themselves in this position with Howard Dean's horribly set up primary system now destroying the party, giving us a guaranteed losing candidate for November. Thank you Howard.

Finally, for those Hillary-haters out there, you need to change your shrill tone. You're quite-likely alienating the moderate Democrats whose support wil be needed to win the general election.
Good thing us Hillary-Haters aren't running for office then, I guess.

For the Hillary supporters: Stop being so willing to turn your back on your party and vote Republican (or threatening to do so) just because your mediocre candidate couldn't hold her own.

Na!....If you win over Hillary ...God bless you....but you will do it without my vote.
In fact, you'll do it ...against my vote.
Good luck

Why don't you just ask your black neighbors why they voted for Obama then? You think they voted for him just because he's black?

My points were that it's because he's black, democrat, and not a radical. That's why neither Hillary nor Jesse Jackson ever became the nominee.

It is simply not possible to have such a discrepancy 91-8 (NC) or 92-7 (IND) between two evenly matched candidates without an ulterior motive explanation. If you want to delude yourself into believing that 92% of blacks only voted for Obama because he is the better candidate, no one can stop you. But it is a fairy tale. And I'm not Geraldine Ferraro. I don't have to grovel and apologize for telling the truth.

Here is an interesting quote from today, which shows how delusional some Democrats are.

"Clinton had a lot of momentum behind her in the last few weeks, and North Carolina was a reality check that it's still his race to lose,'' said Jennifer Palmieri, who served as spokeswoman for former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards and was deputy press secretary in Bill Clinton's White House.

The spin is that NC was a momentous game changer for Obama, a clincher if you will, because the margin was so large. As we see at this thread and others, that large margin derived completely from a grossly outsized black vote. In fact, Obama needed an outsized black vote to win North Carolina AT ALL! This was not a clinching vote that slammed the door on the rebounding Clinton, this was a forgone conclusion, given the monolithic nature of the race based black vote, particularly in the southern states.

JohnRussell's post is mainly worthy of being ignored so my response is for those who may read his racist drivel.

Please remember everyone that Hillary HAD the support of black voters all the way up to Utah. Also remember how Bill was the honorary "first black president". Then Obama won in Utah, the Clinton's started race baiting and by South Carolina, that voting block had pretty much moved over to Obama. For those thinking persons: why is it racist for blacks to vote for Obama and not for whites (uneducated blue collar at that) to vote for Hillary? People who use the Rev. Wright as an excuse not to vote for Obama should have been listening to all those Bosnia sniper stories. I'm personally much more concerned about what comes out of the CANDIDATE's mouth than the mouth of those they know.

I've talked to several black people about this (have you?) and they say that guys like Wright are common, but it's expected from the older generation (about one generation older than Obama's)

Whylt, I get that this is how it is too. It kind of reminds me of Spike Lee's Malcolm X movie, which portrays the underlying sentiments in the black communities, and tracks it back to not only slavery, but fierce systemic racism. Which is why it was the more important that Obama distanced himself from those remarks, because it is important that people - of all races - know for certain that it is not a vindictive "Yes We Can".

The whole "black president factor" is about breaking a monopoly of power, not establishing one.

Using transplanted "K"s is verbotten.

Aw, fucc.

John Russell
but the disgraceful behavior by legions of Obamaites on forums such as this have already done irreversible damage to Obama. It's just a matter of how much.

LOL
I'm proud to be an Obama supporter, I guess that makes me an "Obamaite". If anything, the tremendous support for Obama online and offline is what's helping him win this election. Because, most certainly it's not that his name is well-known. That title belongs to Hillary Clinton and John McCain.

Stop being so willing to turn your back on your party and vote Republican (or threatening to do so) just because your mediocre candidate couldn't hold her own.

I'm a Hillary supporter but what on Earth makes you think I'm a Democrat? And if she's so mediocre, how come Obama didn't sew this thing up long ago? I hate to break it to you - Hillary could still be the nominee. Is it likely? Hell no - it's almost an impossibility. But it could happen. And she knows it. And there's plenty of time between now and the convention for another "Wright" to pop up - and then who gets to say "I told you so" and play the White Knight? Maybe her. Maybe Edwards. Either way, it's politics, and sometimes you just have to play the cards that are dealt you.

The spin is that NC was a momentous game changer for Obama, a clincher if you will, because the margin was so large.

Yeah, it's funny how, just a few weeks ago, Clinton was expected to lose both, and NC by as much as 25 points or so - neither of which happened. She won one (by however small a margin), and halved the difference in the other. And yet suddenly it's supposed to be all over for her - especially when the upcoming primaries look to mostly trend her way? I mean, come on now, the lady is still in the race, and still has the support (and the votes) of nearly half the Democratic electorate! And yet people feel no compulsion in deriding her at every opportunity (no wonder so many of her voters say they won't vote for Obama, talk about coming home to roost). So much for party unity, eh? Everyone says Clinton's at fault for it - because, why, she's exercising her right to run? Right. At least she's keeping McCain out of the headlines. And it isn't as though she might not still (if my some miracle) end up the nominee.

I hate to break it to you, but those Superdelegates, no matter who they're pledged to today, can still vote for whomever they want. There's still time for an Obama meltdown. And Texas still hasn't had it's final convention - and I wouldn't be surprised if his delegate victory there gets whittled down, thanks to the whole "guns/religion" debate. Game changers still abound.

Do I expect Obama to be the nominee? Yes. But don't count your chickens before they've hatched. And stop gloating, for heaven's sake, it's unbecoming.

Hillary Clinton has basically the same platform as Obama does. The main difference between the two is their fighting style, charisma, campaign tactics, social skills, etc. One candidate is viewed as "old" and the other "new" politics. it speaks in the numbers that they're both essentially the same - voters are practically split between the two.

My beef, as an Obama supporter is that Clinton and McCain have more skeletons in her closet than Obama does. I'm ready for something new and support the Dem platforms more than the Rep/Neocon platform - so my vote goes to Obama. Originally, my vote was exclusively for a non-party indidvidual that dropped out early. Then it was for Edwards... and well now I'm just frustrated. haha

Also, both McCain and Clinton have made my decision to support Obama rather easy with all of the negative actions and words that have come from those two. The controversy on both of their plates in no way compares to that of Obama. The man has what? Rezko.. Wright.... Um... Wright...

I used to be a staunch supporter of the Clintons. Well, sans the questionable bombing during Bill's tenure as president and how he appears to be in China's pocket. Otherwise, they received a lot of donations from me and my family. Over the years, Hillary has just been wowing me left and right, especially with the Peter Paul fiasco. I'm pretty disgruntled about it.

My beef, as an Obama supporter is that Clinton and McCain have more skeletons in her closet than Obama does.

I'm pretty sure most of Clinton and McCain's skeletons are well in the open by now. It's Obama's potential skeletons in the closet that should be worrisome.

There's another important factor to keep in mind. The Clinton's inhabited the Whitehouse for 8 years. It can be argued that it's the toughest place to live in the world! You're under constant scrutiny from all quarters and, while your enemies despising and resisting you at every turn is a given, having to make difficult, imperfect choices means that alienating your supporters is a real possibility as well.

Clearly Bill Clinton was the president, but his wife, who was politically active during that time, was subject to the same scrutiny and types of forces that he was. Look at the current president. After 8 years in office the man is essentially hated by the country and is increasingly disrespected and ignored by his own party.

Obama doesn't have similar negatives because he's never been subjected to the kind of ongoing, aggressive scrutiny or controversy that comes from having been in the Whitehouse.

I'm a Hillary supporter but what on Earth makes you think I'm a Democrat? And if she's so mediocre, how come Obama didn't sew this thing up long ago? I hate to break it to you - Hillary could still be the nominee.

What makes you think I care what you are? What makes you think I was talking to you directly? Obama didn't "sew it up" because he didn't get the votes, that doesn't mean Hillary isn't mediocre. If she's not mediocre, then why couldn't she, as an ex First Lady and current Senator, not "sew it up"? And no, she can't still be the nominee, if you don't believe me, watch.

Chasing
I'm pretty sure most of Clinton and McCain's skeletons are well in the open by now.

Yet new issues with those two have been surfacing recently as well! Not to mention that just because they're "well in the open by now" does not make their scandals irrelevant today.

Chasing
It's Obama's potential skeletons in the closet that should be worrisome.

I agree with this sentiment.

If anything, the tremendous support for Obama online and offline is what's helping him win this election. Because, most certainly it's not that his name is well-known.

That's the issue. 0 is trying to fly under the radar of "distractions". He is not well-known but his friends are.

Opening several accounts in the internet and the same person can contribute.

Look at the current president. After 8 years in office the man is essentially hated by the country and is increasingly disrespected and ignored by his own party.

He was disrespected and ignored long before he even got to the White House by those who paid attention to his actions when he held political office in Texas. Unfortunately half of the American populace thought his history up to his campaign run were positive... For whatever reason that still to this day I can not fathom.

He was disrespected and ignored long before he even got to the White House by those who paid attention to his actions when he held political office in Texas. Unfortunately half of the American populace thought his history up to his campaign run were positive... For whatever reason that still to this day I can not fathom.

Because the types of people who voted with him aren't concerned with such liberal ideals like "facts" or "intelligence"

determined0a1
That's the issue. O is trying to fly under the radar of "distractions". He is not well-known but his friends are.

Really? Because I could have sworn he has been right smack on the front pages for most of the campaign. He's a media star, there has been no "flying under the radar" for this man. Unless you're referring to previous to his campaign run. In which case, it's not like he tried to be hidden - he's TRYING to be well known - get his voice heard. If you know anything about his life's goals and actions throughout schooling you'd know this. And well, running for senator and then president isn't exactly a great way to stay under the radar.

I will be more careful.

Determined, I just noticed something and, looking over your comments, you've been doing it for a while.

I note the following, excerpted from your post here

0 is trying to fly under the radar of "distractions". He is not well-known but his friends are.

Opening several accounts in the internet and the same person can contribute.

You're seriously referring to Senator Barack Obama with the numerical character for Zero aren't you?

That is at once the most sad, pathetic, and contemptable thing I think I've ever seen on Newsvine. What the hell is wrong with people like you who think that calling the Democratic Party the "Democrat Party" and making up vapid "kindergarten cut-down" style nicknames for political figures constitutes a worthwhile point of discussion?

Just call him Senator Poopy-Head while you're at it; before long you'll probably post something that starts with Barack and Michelle sittin' in a tree...

You started a thread calling Clinton a 'psycho girlfriend'. You have no room to talk.

I have lived all my life in neighborhoods that are majority black. Where I live now, Morgan Park in Chicago, is 65% black.
As have I. Until 3 years ago I spent all of my life in Section 8 housing in Montgomery Alabama, where the entire city is 50% black.

I do talk with my black neighbors about racial issues.
That doesn't mean you know more about black people. That's ridiculous. I talk to black people about all kinds of things every day, that doesn't make more educated to the likes and dislikes of black people.

I participated in hundreds if not thousands of discussions about race in an online race relations forum over the course of 6 years. I have heard just about every argument there is back and forth about 'race relations' in the United states.
I've done the same, offline, in person with black friends, co-workers, and enemies. Still, this doesn't give you any kind of authority on "black people-knowledge"I have lived all my life in neighborhoods that are majority black. Where I live now, Morgan Park in Chicago, is 65% black.
As have I. Until 3 years ago I spent all of my life in Section 8 housing in Montgomery Alabama, where the entire city is 50% black.

I do talk with my black neighbors about racial issues.
That doesn't mean you know more about black people. That's ridiculous. I talk to black people about all kinds of things every day, that doesn't make [me] more educated to the likes and dislikes of black people.

I participated in hundreds if not thousands of discussions about race in an online race relations forum over the course of 6 years. I have heard just about every argument there is back and forth about 'race relations' in the United states.

I've done the same, offline, in person with black friends, co-workers, and enemies. Still, this doesn't give you any kind of authority on "black people-knowledge"

I learn something new every day here......So from the "above" we can assume that any interacial dialogue is purely a waste of time..?
We cannot ever understand each other?
Why? Because we can't "be each other"
But "Is it critical" or even necessary?
The only way for a Black person to understand a White person ..is to be a White person
and White person must be a Black person.

Can I really feel what it's like to be Mars313 ?
I've spoken to him many times?
Can he feel what it's like to be gp?
Would we get along better? Maybe.. we'd agree......but there were times we did that without being "each other".
Can either of us feel what it's like to be determined0a1 and female? Na!

But I don't think either of us will lose any sleep over these unlikelihood's.

You started a thread calling Clinton a 'psycho girlfriend'. You have no room to talk.

Mr. Russell, the double standards in Newsvine is notorious.

The lsota violate more the CoH than 6 of the rsota and this is why I see the future Presidency of USSenO very gloomy and exercising absolute control over others.

I think the point JR is trying to make is simple: there is no rational, political explanation for numbers like 91%, 92% of blacks voting for Obama. It all comes down to politics of identity - that he is "{the black candidate", people see a black face. This isn't rocket science.

And......after 4 or 8 years the black and very poor in New Orleans will be living w/the same piling of trash. Dems look for the black vote to be elected and later on.....they drop them.

Killfile

"Psycho ex-girlfriend" thankyouverymuch and if you can't see the difference between the seed and Determined's comments then we've nothing more to discuss here.

Agreed, this is a serious article - yours was comedic and meant to be taken that way. I'm rather upset that some Viners can not tell the difference.

I really wonder about the double standards from the Viners.

The "distinguish" Double Demon posted this to me. However, his comment did not collapse or got banned. My Oops Oops and 0 got "irritated" the lsota. Furthermore this is FYI and your eyes "only".

Ok Bush lover, you can defend a criminal all you want, our Maker will judge you the same way She will judge Bush.

Al Gore needed the lawyers because the Criminal Bush Family owned that state and he saw the writing on the wall, especially when African-American voters were being diverted to the wrong polling place, ballots were being tossed out, and the state's election official was a Bush campaign chair. It doesn't take a genius to figure out what went on, any idiot saw it for what it was: The Royal Bush Family returning to their Palace. He's the one that said "He tried to Kill my Dad" about Sadam insane in the rush to war, VENGEANCE, that is what The Bushy's are all about and they got it in Florida in 2000, and then in Iraq in 2003.

HEY EVERYBODY: I FOUND ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE THAT STILL LIKES CRIMINAL BUSH: DETERMINED0A1!

I rest my case of what's the meaning of the Funnel Syndrome.

Now, Mr. Killfile, be my guest of deleting or whatever w/this post.

I wanted to make a point about the difference of ysota and I.

The lsota violate more the CoH than 6 of the rsota and this is why I see the future Presidency of USSenO very gloomy and exercising absolute control over others.

I can't understand who or what the hell you are talking about.

My lsota (left side of the aisle) translator left the NV.

It will take a while to understand what I post. ESL (English is my Second Language).

My lsota (left side of the aisle) translator left the NV.

It will take a while to understand what I post. ESL (English is my Second Language).

I've seen plenty of your writing, determined. You and I know this is a load of crap.

You and I know this is a load of crap.

I try to give the very best of myself in the NV.

You're seriously referring to Senator Barack Obama with the numerical character for Zero aren't you?

Determined, do you do it because he is black? Does that make him nothing to you? I guess it's a good thing Americans don't think of immigrants that way, huh?

Mars.

I don't see many black faces in O's speeches, some fainting ladies, of course.

I believe you have mistaken Barack Obama for Bill Clinton...
;]

I don't see many black faces in O's speeches

deter 3.61---I don't either....why is that do you think?

Lisa, is it because speeches don't have faces in them?

I think I won! What do I get?

I agree with "Patriot"....enough slop about the poor Clintons being picked on once more....this time it's some whacky "smear campaign". I suppose it's yet another "vast right-wing conspiracy". These people have gotten a 'pass' from this country for far too long, yet they and their loyal minions never stop crying about the way they are treated by the press, by the voters, by the Republicans, and by anyone else who doesn't happen to buy their act.

And speaking of 'free passes'...maybe once this is over Bill Clinton can explain why he never said one single word 'in defense' or 'in anger' after he was accused on "60 Minutes" (during his presidency) of raping a political supporter (Juanita Broderick) back while he served as the governor of Arkansas. He was a sitting President of the United States and a woman goes on a major national news show and discusses her past sexual assault in detail....and the man has not one word to say in response. Amazing !!! And that entire matter was pretty much totally dropped by the press....oh that's right....that woman's account was probably just another 'smear campaign' against those poor Clintons.

Ooops....I guess now I'm just smearing them too. Poor Mr. & Mrs. Clinton...will the unfairness ever end ???

Life's so unfair. I'm not going to get to live in the White House (again) neither.

tony-268769I agree with "Patriot"....enough slop about the poor Clintons being picked on once more....this time it's some whacky "smear campaign". I suppose it's yet another "vast right-wing conspiracy". These people have gotten a 'pass' from this country for far too long, yet they and their loyal minions never stop crying about the way they are treated by the press, by the voters, by the Republicans, and by anyone else who doesn't happen to buy their act.

And speaking of 'free passes'...maybe once this is over Bill Clinton can explain why he never said one single word 'in defense' or 'in anger' after he was accused on "60 Minutes" (during his presidency) of raping a political supporter (Juanita Broderick) back while he served as the governor of Arkansas. He was a sitting President of the United States and a woman goes on a major national news show and discusses her past sexual assault in detail....and the man has not one word to say in response. Amazing !!! And that entire matter was pretty much totally dropped by the press....oh that's right....that woman's account was probably just another 'smear campaign' against those poor Clintons.

Ooops....I guess now I'm just smearing them too. Poor Mr. & Mrs. Clinton...will the unfairness ever end ???

"This" is what is running the Democratic Party!....What a joke!
They are losers...they just don't realize it yet. They're too busy drinking champagne on Red state victories for Obama. ..but they and their "grand ideas" will come to a "bitter" end before the year is out.

"This" is what is running the Democratic Party!....What a joke! They are losers...they just don't realize it yet. They're too busy drinking champagne on Red state victories for Obama. ..but they and their "grand ideas" will come to a "bitter" end before the year is out.

yet you shamelessly apologize for a party that @!$%#s up wars, domestic politics, the budget, the economy, can't keep their hands off little boys, commits war crimes, etc etc. Maybe you're confused about who the real loser is.

Blame the Congress, the Dems signed also.

What makes you think I care what you are? What makes you think I was talking to you directly? Obama didn't "sew it up" because he didn't get the votes, that doesn't mean Hillary isn't mediocre. If she's not mediocre, then why couldn't she, as an ex First Lady and current Senator, not "sew it up"? And no, she can't still be the nominee, if you don't believe me, watch.

My my, Mars, but aren't you an angry young man. You're talking in a public forum. So I replied. Publicly. Don't like it? Tough. And if Obama's lack of "sewing it up" doesn't making him mediocre, then how does it make Hillary's mediocre? Your opinion? Pardon me for differing with you on that count.

And yes, she can still be the nominee. Will she? Most likely not. As I've said, many times.

But angry young men...they sure do like to cherry-pick, don't they.

yet you shamelessly apologize for a party that @!$%#s up wars, domestic politics, the budget, the economy, can't keep their hands off little boys, commits war crimes, etc etc. Maybe you're confused about who the real loser is.

Mars.. I'm sure I'm your senior...So there's no excuse for dementia....What party have you see me apologizing for? Who's a bit confused?
I'm a registered Democrat....I can't stand Bush or Cheney or Papa Bush. But I'm still voting as I see fit...not because the "Party" diluted with Independent voters tosses me a candidate.

I'll gladly vote Republican again once a real Republican runs on something like a conservative platform. I will not support the neoliberal (or neocon apparently is the popular term though the former is the appropriate political science term) views of globalization and this shortsighted crusade to "spread democracy" through invasion.

You could argue that the Democrats were the ones on the crusade though in the 50's and 60's with Korea and Vietnam. Not to mention that the Clintons' embargo on Iraq killed far more civilians than either Bush's wars ever did. However, ultimately, we don't have an obligation to trade with them, and I take a "blame Saddam first" attitude. I blame America second.

we need to restore the civility and hope for which this nation used to be known.

Good joke.

Then start for sending Mrs. O to a charm school before her husband is elected.

http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=63532

Winning democratic primaries has nothing to do with winning a National election. Just ask Stevenson, McGovern, Dukakis, Mondale, Gore, Kerry; Obama can win caucuses (see Texas, Washington; states where there was a primary and a caucus which did NOT statistically agree) and states with large numbers of black voters; he could not win Massachusetts, California, Ohio, Texas, Pennsylvania; etc. the states that a democrat needs to carry to win in November.

eriq --I guess you haven't heard the news.....Obama plans to win the White House not by winning big swing states but by winning in Utah and Colorado....tee hee.

If he can't win why does he keep on winning?

He wins only Democrats ...in mostly Red States...and only 60% or so of them.
What the heck is wrong with you people?
LoL What a bunch of amateurs!

He wins only Democrats ...in mostly Red States...and only 60% or so of them.
What the heck is wrong with you people?
LoL What a bunch of amateurs!

Ummmm yeah, it's the primaries. No @!$%#, Sherlock.

He wins only Democrats ...in mostly Red States...and only 60% or so of them.
What the heck is wrong with you people?
LoL What a bunch of amateurs!
Ummmm yeah, it's the primaries. No @!$%#, Sherlock.

Red states rarely make a Blue President , it's elementary, Watson.

I suspect that Hill wants check mate Senator 0 that she can run again 2012, after all, the third age is popular now.

If she doesn't drop out this week, I'll be very surprised and annoyed.

Should that cause concern in any quarter?

But wait! She still hasn't exercised the nuclear option!

But wait! She still hasn't exercised the nuclear option!

Nor has any President since Truman...but none have taken it off the table...because it would not be a smart thing to do.

You are obviously not a Poker player.You don't show your hand ...unless you like losing.
Or you're foolish enough to think everyone else wants you to win.

"

Yes, we can" was not an idle or empty chant, but a real possibility.

Yes, we can what?

I would vote for Dr Rice, a really intellectual, three languages speaker, very diplomatic, in a 1,2,3.

I would think statistics like 92% of the black vote speak for themselves. Of course you do have to listen with an open mind ...

Yes we can win. Yes we can support change.

Odd that readers who are skeptical about so many things believe without question the statistics regarding the percentage of Black votes Sen. Obama won. Who's looking at the ethnicities that supported Sen. McCain, G.W. and G.H.W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, et alia? It's not as though blocks of ethnic votes never went overwhelmingly to any prior candidate. It's not as though Gov. Mitt Romney didn't also rely on the overwhelming support of his co-religionists.

When Black Americans threw their enthusiastic support behind Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, how many complained then?

Don't believe everything you read, folks. This Black American voted against Bill Clinton twice (I supported Bob Dole in '96), voted for Ralph Nader over Al Gore, and never once regretted those decisions.

Greek Americans were never blamed for backing Michael Dukakis the way Black Americans have been for supporting Jesse Jackson and Sen. Obama. There is a double standard in American politics regarding Black people and the franchise. Sen. Obama surprised his critics with his tenacity and showed that, "Yes, we can" was not an idle or empty chant, but a real possibility.
Congratulations to Senator Obama on his hard-fought, inevitable victory.

"Congratulations" on being elected the "King of the Democrats"

A throne is in order for his "Seat in the Senate" in January.

Btw Dukakis lost ...didn't he?...Even with all those Greek Democrats behind him....and that was cause for concern.

Yes, we can what?

Yes, we can unite the nation, even though half of them cling to guns and religion, and the presumptive nominee is anathema to the right. But nevermind the details - we can!

we can!

Funny, very funny.

The 0's camp is getting nervous about Hill because she is showing having more thicker skin than their candidate.

Determined ----Hillary (even though she very likely has lost nomination) is seen by white blue collar voters as a "fighter"----and Obama is seen as (new word from my last seeded article I picked up to describe obama and I just love it) "effete."

The Hillary story theme was irresistable for the media, it kept viewers tuning in so that they could keep on selling ads. It's like the OJ trial, only using politicians. At least they're being honest about it now:

This is it. The media finally turned on her. It's over. It's finally freaking over. I say this because the race was over 2 months ago. But the media kept it alive by pretending as though Hillary had a chance, when they knew she didn't. But, their pretending permitted her to keep going with a straight face.

But it's sickening that they would use the American people to keep on giving themselves attention for attention's sake. I am glad that this is over.

I think what some saw, rather cynically, was that the Reverend Wright story was no longer selling Cialis commercials and they were told to move on to some new distraction to sell people things that they don't need.

Killfile - for sure until the recent end of the writer's strike - in my humble opinion, this election cycle was indeed the best thing on television. Nevertheless---if the media was insisting that Hillary was still in this thing---I believe that was because up until last night it was apparent that Barack had yet to close the deal.....and also because the candidate herself was insisting she would continue to fight and I understand she is still saying such today.

lisa,

Isn't that precious the patting on the back for 0?

Hill is finishing with the US Senator from Illinois.

Media bad. Bad, bad media, bad, bad people: We didn't coronate Hill & Bill!!

This is it. The media finally turned on her. It's over. It's finally freaking over.

I basically agree with you all that it was over 2 months ago, and kept artificially alive to rotate papers, but why is it that it is all of a sudden over? What is the defining action by the media that makes it so?

The blog post states:

But knowing the Clintons, the fact that there's no way for them to win won't step them from sabotaging Obama's race against McCain. If Hillary can continue to damage Obama, maybe she can make Obama lose in the fall, and then she can run again in 2012. Don't think that this isn't what her senior advisers, including her husband, are thinking. These people aren't Democrats, they're Clintons. They aren't interested in the party

So, Clinton can put her campaign on life support, but how is that going to damage Obama or make him lose in the fall?

Media bad. Bad, bad media, bad, bad people

And.....? We are saddled with John and have to make a lemonade from lemons, no with limes.

Determined ---if the media is responsible for coronating anyone as President---it is barack obama their charismatic rock star or messiah....you pick.

I don't think Obama's lead is as wide open as his campaign would like to imagine

This is why I posted that success or failure is in the eyes of the beholders.

No Pablito. Either 0 or Hill are bright enough not to pick the other for V.P,

If Obama was a white candidate, this would have been over with months ago. But poor little Hillary, she should be allowed to stay in just case she can somehow steal the election. It's like they are holding on with both hands to the nomination, slowly letting go of the nomination to Obama, but looking around to see if someone else can grab it.

Now they are talking about forcing Obama to pick Hillary as VP? Has any other candidate been required to choose their opponent as a running mate? What makes anyone think she wouldn't undermine him every chance she got so she could run in 2012? Unbelievable!

What's unbelievable is what you're saying.
If Obama were Edwards he would not be getting 75% of the Black vote and he would not be getting the Black women's votes and he would be dead in the water.
You are not the sharpest stick with politics ...if you can't see that.
And as far as Hillary as VP to Obama....don't worry ...a waste of time ...it won't get her supporters back.

And it's probably already sold to JudasRichardson...to woo the Hispanic vote. That is ...If they bite.

Richardson for V.P? I don't know. The V.P. is more qualified than the President.

Lol....it might be hard to find one who isn't more experienced.[than Obama]
But, if he [Obama] gets the nod ...I hope Hillary doesn't get a VP slot...she would be worthless there
.....and I would hate to have to vote against her as well.

Richardson for V.P? I don't know. The V.P. is more qualified than the President.

Well, according to you, it "worked" for Bush/Cheney. If by "work" you mean "@!$%#ed up everything and went down in history as the most failed administration to date"

If by "work" you mean "@!$%#ed up everything and went down in history as the most failed administration to date"

Well, thank our lazy Congress. And.....Jimmy Carter is #1 in failure.

We are still waiting for the .......Congress to give a green light for building oil refineries and drilling in our own backyard, but......the "inconvenience is that will obstruct the view" is more important.

Everything Congress has tried to get done has been shut down by the Republicans and the President.

Show me how Jimmy Carter failed worse than the Bush administration. At best he only failed half as much, because he only had one term.

I can't take your word on it, because you are a guest to our system, so you know very little.

I am not a crook!

steal the election

Can we please retire this phrase? She could win the nomination a number of ways - all of which would be by the very rules of the Democratic party. Hardly a "theft".

Who better to judge the success or failure of a President than the American people themselves?

Success or failure is in the eyes of the beholders.

Success or failure is in the eyes of the beholders

I'm not interested in your little sandpit team tiddlywink wankfest but I will step in when I see logic being seriously abused.
The above statement is to put it mildly, extensively brain damaged. It rests on the disney principle that if you believe in something strongly it becomes real and that perspective=reality.

not so, sadly, otherwise everyone would actually be as important as they think they are.

If you can't make sense of reality in recognising that just because you disagree with a quantified consensus it doesn't simply disappear then you have no right to be upset when the only people who bother encouraging you are similarly rationally handicapped, co-demented.

Most of this pathetic, woeful, embarrasing excuse for a political discussion involves nothing more than childish little sub intelligent last word sandpit snark and is the main reason America is where it is and sinking daily.

Most of the population has been rendered by their culture into being too dramatically stupid to even pity.

And.....Jimmy Carter is #1 in failure.

Wasn't Carter the "Washington outsider", the "candidate of change" who was going to do away the old DC paradigms?

Wasn't Carter the man whose character and motives were absolutely above reproach? Wasn't he the penultimate non-liar? Geez, I wonder what could've possibly gone wrong?

Wasn't he the penultimate non-liar? Geez, I wonder what could've possibly gone wrong?

Carter increased the thermostat of the WH and the staff and himself could not deal with tough situations. Instead of started the drilling and building of refineries he was desperate and let our Americans 444 days in Iran, and of course the rest is history.......

Determined ---people who think (mistakenly) that we are in recession now don't remember what a recession really is---the Carter years were disastrous from an economic and foreign policy perspective. Who can forget his little talks to us wearing his sweaters---trying to send us a signal that we should all just put on sweaters, turn down our thermostats because of the energy crisis, and keep our mouths shut.....and those interest rates!!! Wow....it was a very painful time.

lisa

And....I am irked every time that the Dems said about "dependency in foreign oil". Well we buy more from Canada and Venezuela than from the ME. Still the gasoline will be $10/gallon and we are crossing our arms doing nothing.

Killfile - you misunderstood Determined's post---I believe what she is doing is blaming the dem party for the fact that we are still dependent on foreign sources of oil---she is saying we have tried to buy more from other NON-Middle East countries but it doesn't matter (particularly with Chavez in the mix)....the price still goes up because the dem party aligned with environmental extremists have tied our hands and stood in the way of our developing additional sources of energy (oil and otherwise) in this country. I think that's what Determined is saying. And PS there are plenty of intellectuals in the GOP ---they just don't run around telling the masses that we can make decisions better for them with MORE GOVERNMENT like your precious Barack Obama.

And.....Jimmy Carter is #1 in failure.
Wasn't Carter the "Washington outsider", the "candidate of change" who was going to do away the old DC paradigms?

Wasn't Carter the man whose character and motives were absolutely above reproach? Wasn't he the penultimate non-liar? Geez, I wonder what could've possibly gone wrong?

Clean out the Petri dish!

The "FarFromReal Democratic Wing" are about to give it another try. With just a little "fine tuning"

If only the rest of the country will just let them back in the Lab in November.

As for nuclear, that's no picnic either and until the GOP can show me someone who wants to put radioactive waste in their back-yard they've still not solved the very serious problem of what to do with this stuff when it's spent.

My hubby couldn't write it better:

Nuclear power is O.K. for the French who get over 50% of their power
from that source of energy. But nukes are definitely not for us. Ralph
Nader and his allies have already alerted us to its dangers. Forget
about coal and natural gas generated power, those are contributors to
global warming. Do not bother us with those pesky laws of chemistry
and thermodynamics and supply and demand theory. We just want cheap gasoline
and power with no environmental cost or consequences and we will punish
those candidates who have the audacity to tell us that there are not
going to get them. Too many of us are convinced that there is a vast
global auto industry conspiracy to keep more efficient engine underwraps
Similarly we have been told and we believe that the established power
industry keeps preventing the development of photocells and fuel cells,
and that only more government funded research will produce a breakthrough
in these fields. We hear some politicians telling us about the bright
future of fuel cells and nobody mentions that they run on pure hydrogen
and oxygen and the cost, and hazards involved in producing and storing
them safely. The electric cars promoted for use in California are now
being affected by the power blackouts when there is no power to keep
their massive batteries recharged. No environmentalist ever mentioned
the increased power demand if every household bought an electric car.
We are so gullible as a nation!. We do not want favor the science background
needed to understand these issues.
Science is for the nerds after all,

Even if Anwar is all they say it is, it's not a long term solution to the problem and thus blame for the Democrats there is misplaced. At best it buys us time and at worst it doesn't even do that.

It's ANWR not Anwar.

And the longer we go without drilling it the more valuable it becomes.

Well, don't cry when we reach $10+/gal. and blame the oil companies.

Determined, has a pretty big anti-intellectual component, but we "elitist" Democrats would at least know that Canada and Venezuela are... well... foreign and thus so is the oil we buy from them.

But you know very well of what "foreign oil" the politicians are babbling about.

At best it buys us time

Killfile - 12.7---I bet there are a lot of motorists out there wishing the dems/environmental extremists had allowed us to do that drilling that would have at least bought us more time before we arrived at today's gas prices.

We're far better off feeling the pinch now, as we come off of the top of the global-oil-production-bell-curve then when the sides get steeper and production starts falling faster. Now we have the time and the resources to find out how to be an industrial civilization in the post-oil-age. Then we are just left behind, a relic of a bygone era.

Well said! Actually would've been far better off anticipating the pinch 5-7 years ago, but if we react intelligently now, there's still time to get it right and avoid the pending and growing crisis.

I just imagine the sight of disruption of 60% riding bikes in roads and many in the third age plus that can't hear or see the danger to be hit by the rest of the motorists.

It's ANWR and not ANWAR

sue-242407

Russert needs to retire, or take a laxative!

The media has been against Hillary since after Iowa, who his he trying to kid?

LoL....Maybe he [ Russert] just got out of the bathroom.That what happens when you clean your ears with waxstool softner.

....Maybe he [ Russert] just got out of the bathroom.That what happens when you clean your ears with waxstool softner.

gpnavonod-- You've got to get off the fence and take a stand already.

Don't hold back man-- tell us what you really think!

:)

....Maybe he [ Russert] just got out of the bathroom.That what happens when you clean your ears with waxstool softner.

gpnavonod-- You've got to get off the fence and take a stand already.

Don't hold back man-- tell us what you really think!

:)

I hate this fence sitting...it's such a pain in the a$$! ;-)