End-of-Week Thoughts

Obama's ad campaign is fueled by millions of donations from the American people.

Clinton is fueled by free pandering from the Saturday Night Live TV show.

Obama wins 11 primaries in a row, the media reports these facts, and that is called media bias.

So what will we call these SNL skits?

Well, it looks official. Apparently Clinton backers have concluded they can no longer win this election on the issues, so are resorting to slander, innuendo, and half truths. Right out of the Republican playbook.

So sad, they have lost all credibility.

To Ying:
You made the exact comment that has Americans in the position that they are in right now, when you use the word "ROYAL" to describe McCain. If you know anything about American History, then you would know that the Revolutionary War was fought to declare dependency for the Royal Empire of England. The Democracy was formed to give Power to the People. (Which has been on a steady decline) Another fact of History is World War I, and the Great Depression. The people of this country loss HOPE and FEAR reigned. The old statements of if you believe that thing are bad, more than likely it will get worse.
It is amazing that the one thing that is consistent is the perception of "Credibility", for instance Hillary in her last debate stated, "I've always been against NAFTA, and she lied. Obama on the other hand has stood strong on all issues that he has supported, but you and others still question his Credibility, I truly hope that this is not a result of bias and unconscious racism. The last thing America needs is another LIAR in the White House. We need the truth; America is strong enough to handle the TRUTH.
OBAMA for PRESIDENT.

Janet from NH post: "stock_craft...that's fine. I guess you wouldn't have voted for Abraham Lincoln either. He had 8 years experience as an Illinois senator and was a first term congressman when he was elected president."
Actually, I don't know what I should do because I was not born at Abraham Lincoln century. In similarly, I wonder what should Mr. Obama do and say when U.S invaded Iraq in early of year 2003 if he was US Senator at that time and had the same faulty information as Senator Hillary Clinton had.

Ring,Ring,Ring it's 3 am and the red phone is ringing in the White house and has been ringing now for over 12 months,it's the American troops in Afganistan trying to find the chairman of the senate commitee in charge of the combined European forces defending against the spread of Al Qaida and the Taliban in Afganistan.Seems to me the great and oh so awsome Obama has grown deaf to the ringing of this phone.HIS RED PHONE MOMENT MISSED BECAUSE HE WAS JUST TO BUSY...

To Edward Strange:
I am from China, and I know perfectly well how foreigners loved America and liked Americans back in 1990s when Clinton was in the office. I also remember how U.S. Economy was booming when Clinton was the president. I wish Americans might not miss the opportunity to have another good time. America stands for Freedom and Democracy, and we do not want to see it gets into another difficult time.

Obama is too much like American Idol kind of politician. Meanwhile, Obama is too much like Chairman Mao half century ago in China, charming, inspiring, and promised for a better change. However, the outcome turned out to be very scary and devastating.

You guys could learn this part of Chinese History for yourself to see if I was lying. Being a bilingual, I also read some bad rumors about Obama that makes me uncomfortable about him being our president. Americans may need some time to learn more about Obama’s secret soul before they allow him to lead America’s future.

On the other hand, I think it will be a good thing if Clinton and Obama could run together as president/vice president, so Obama will be tested for a few years before he leads. Otherwise, John McCain would be a much better choice since McCain is much more experienced, reliable, and royal to this country.

How is Hillary going to fix the Country? She can't even fix her campaign.

Clinton has really been pushing the gender thing lately, and it is apparently succeeding. People, particularly women, seem to see her campaign as a personal one, a way to rectify every bad thing that has ever happened to any woman anywhere. Well, I am a woman, I have paid attention to the campaign, and I can tell you that I find Hillary Clinton to be the worst possible role-model for women. From the way she messed up her health reform efforts in the 90s to the way she let her husband run wild in the south in January, with a mismanaged campaign in between, she has been the poster child for women run amok. You can't tell what face she is going to present from one day to the next (or from one minute to the next, in some cases). Her combativeness on the last debate, when she refused to move on to the next topic, is undoubtedly viewed by her supporters as a woman making a stand; I found it harsh, strident, rude, and another example of Clinton having to have it her way.
She touts her experience: come on, people, she doesn't have that much to begin with. She was a wife of a president and the one thing she was given the task to do she blew. She is a senator but has introduced almost no successful, meaningful legistlation. She never read the NIE and yet voted to allow the president to take this country to war. Experience? I simply don't see it.
And now this new ad: what is her vast experience gives her more credibility to answer that blasted phone--which, by the way, she allows to ring several hundred times before she answers: the world could be blow to smithereens before she bothers to pick up. Worse that that, since she knows she has lost the male vote, she is shamelessly trying to trade on the worst fears of women: the bogey man is coming to take them away if you don't elect me.
Sorry, if I vote for Obama it is not because he is the perfect candidate, it will be because almost anyone has to be better than Hillary Clinton.

To Lauren:
The experience that Hillary will bring is another 4 years of conflict and division on the HILL. The Republicans would love to have Hillary as the nominee, (sure win for John McCain). White Men will not vote for her, and I am willing to bet that they will come out in wheel chairs and emergency beds to vote against her in the General Election. It appears that what you want is someone that is going to led you like a sheep, instead of someone like Obama that will put "We the people" back in charge of this country. The candidates are our Public Servants, not our dictators. If you want to live under a dictatorship go to China, Cuba or many other countries. AMERICA NEEDS OBAMA NOW.

Barack is the easier sell, but he is not truly the most qualified candidate. And he is not truly what our country needs right now. After two terms of and inexperienced President, the last thing we need is another one at this time.

But many in the media have played Barack up, and Hillary down.

Too many play Barack positive and Hillary negative, for superficial reasons.

The same reasons why they played Bush more positively than Gore and Kerry. Likeability, charm.

But we need proven competence.

Could you imagine how hard they would have been on Hillary if she had used someone else's speech word, for word, cadence for cadence?

They would still be talking about it.

Although the fact that we are obsessed with all things superficial at precious risk to all things truly substantial, the media, like most of our pop-culture,
prefer the superficiality of style to the depth and comprehension of substance, and therefore, elevate style, and devalue substance.

Hillary's experience and accomplishments all become part of the past, while Barack's inexperience is a blank projection screen for the future. Hope? Change? Unity? It's all there - you play it out. The truth is, reality will be a lot more complicated, and full of mistakes.

I'm hiring our next President, and I want the most knowledgeable, qualified applicant. Someone who has made mistakes and learned from there. Someone who was highly involved in one of the most successful Presidential Administrations we have ever had.

And that person is Hillary. And if she were black and male, and the other candidate was an inexperienced eloquent young white woman, I would still want the most qualified candidate.

She is the one who would run our country most efficiently and effectively at this time - she is the one who would do the most to help our economy.

I like and want her health care and economic plans. They are the best plans.

Barack has the whole future ahead of him. I am glad he is in national politics, but he is truly not qualified at this time.

I don't want a president who's going to be trying to 'pull this off' as he said in his 60 Minutes interview.

The best course for our country would be to have Hillary be our next President, and Barack after that - after she fixes everything.

Then he can experiment.

The house deal was much worse.

The realtor told Obamas the house they wanted was on package deal, you took the lot with the house or no sale, they had to be sold at the same time.

Magically appeared Rezko and his wife to save the day!

Then Rezko was so nice and sold them the portion of the lot they wanted. hmmm

Now that is a kick back, a bribe or payment on something.

----------

Mr Obama has used the perfect sales pitch. Tell them they are surpessed, they are hungry, poor and struggling, that they deserve better....

Tell them "we" can change all that,
Government need changed, this need changed.

Then sale them hope.......

Always bringing religion and beliefs in

Tell them you are going to feed the hungry, give to the poor, raise the min wage, give them jobs, everything you tell them you want.

Then add your escape clause... it won't be easy, it will be hard, it will take time. We may stumble etc

Then turn around and say, "I" will take your voice to Washington........

Building on the facade .... stronger and stronger
-----------

Catchy slogans, elegant speeches, intense spreading of your Doctrine to reach all. Telling them & playing on peoples needs and religion and fears. Incorporating them into the big fix, winning them over to win them and get them to do what you want.

That is the Identical way Hitler gained power and control the people.

Since when has reporting facts become media bias?
Barak Obama has won eleven contest's in a row, some by blowouts. I think it's fair to say The events surrounding BO have been favorable.
So when the media reports these favorable "facts", they are
not showing bias, they are reporting facts, a novel idea.
If the media was biased againt Clinton they would be clamoring for her to get out of the race. Instead, some in the media has been willing to play right along with this game, echoing that the media has shown favortism.

Now HC is using this idea of media bias as the anchor of her sympathy strategy
to rally the womans vote.
She kicked of this strategy when the SNL skit enabled her to claim media bias to a national audience.
Next came the "3AM phone call" add followed by the "Its hard" interview on Nightline.

It is obvious to anyone who is not biased that Barak Obama
has run the better campaign, and it's not even close. However the sympathy strategy may give Hillary Clinton the boost she needs to go on. The question is, if Hillary Clinton does becomes president, and when she does get that
call at 3am, how will she use the sympathy card to get her out of that one.

Hillary hang in there. Your gonna do it girl! WIth this Rezko trial coming up there's gonna be alot of deals being made.

ALot of people do not want to go to jail for a long time...so believe me there's gonna be alot of pointing of fingers at alot of persons connected with Rezko.

Obama is nothing but a liar. Read the article on this site" Obama Silent on Cesspool" of Illinois Allies". Read the bloggers comments, you will see how disgusted people are getting of mr. Obama's lies and antics.

In one of his debates he said he wasn't that close with Rezko, just a house dealing.

Well Mr. Rezko and Mr. Obama have been friends for 12 years, and now the Government is looking into his dealings here and abroad. And the question that is still unanswered is....who got Mr. Rezko his visa to come here?

So you are condemning Obama by association? How very American of you. Haven't you heard of innocent until proven guilty? We don't even know the extent--if any--of Rezko's crimes and yet you are already trying to allege that Obama was somehow complicent? And you see nothing wrong in this? No wonder you see nothing wrong in voting for Clinton.

Kitty: Haven't you read the articles about the government revoking Mr. Rezko's bail because of his shady ties to Syria and possibly Iraq.

How would you feel if his ties to these countries became known that there was some militant connections with him and al queda, and Mr. Obama got in the mess of all of the shady dealings of Rezko.

He should of distant himself from Rezko when he had a chance to.

Georgia,

You sure couldn't prove any of this by examining the way she has run her campaign. And if she can't run a decent campaign and manage her money properly and develop and implement a successful drive to the top strategic approach, why do you want me to believe that all of a sudden she has the ability to run the country?

My, my, alison, the primaries are not finished, yet, and we still have a few quarters to go. Did someone not tell you the rules of the game? You want your opponent to throw in the towel, because you do not want to sit on pins and needles thinking your candidate may lose.

We live in the most dangerous times, and the American people need to think long and hard about who has the strongest intelligence and the strongest understanding of the solutions we need to fix the problems. With the three candidates, Obama is the weakest and most inexperienced on all the issues. There are many Republicans who do not fall into the starry-eyed, hynotized youth vote.

Hopefully, the voters of Ohio, Texas, Rhode Island and Vermont will believe, as I do, that Hillary Rodham Clinton is the strongest, most knowledgeable, most experienced, most hard-working, and the most prepared to be President.

Hi,

I am a highly educated person who will support Senator Clinton. Senator Clinton has been bullied by the press and the democrats big wigs for whom before this election I had a great respect. The ad by Senator Clinton is not a fear ad as being said. It is the true fact. Truth always hurts. In the same way former President's remarks were misinterpreted prior to the South Carolina primary. One must also not forget that President Clinton is the only President (that I know of) who opened his office in Harlem. If anyone tells me there is no racial divide I am not the one buying it. Just look at who is switching votes as superdelegate. You don't have to be a genius in mathematcis to understand that one cannot garner 85 to 90 % of vote of a single group and say it does not have a racial divide. Mrs. Obama is now advocating younger generation not to take a career as corporate lawyer and hedge fund manager. I am not sure what to make of it. I am always for the persons who have been bullied by the large segement of the society. If I were to ask, I would advise Senator Clinton to go all the way to the convention even if it means breaking up the democratic party. Maybe it is time to have three parties competing in an election. Senator Obama copied the major portions of the ad from Senator Clinton and came up with his own ad. This is no different than him saying in the debate "I agree with Senator Clinton" when Senator Clinton had always been the first to answer tough questions. Mr. Brian Williams of NBC did not give Senator Clinton enough time. In contrast, Senator Obama added in his response, information which had no relation to the question being asked. And he went on and on and on. Senator Obama with his comfortable wins in the primaries could not find few hours to attend Black State of the Union in New Orleans. I watched it. Senator Clinton was already loosing African-American votes. Her appearnace at the conference would not have had any impact on how African-Americans would vote. Yet she did attend the conference and answered tough questions from a known group who has shown hostility towards her and towards former President Clinton during the primary season. The press has labeled Senator Clinton as a polarizing figure. The press does this without providing any concrete examples. Senator Clinton is not the person who divides the people. It is the people who wrongly interprete anything uttered by Senator Clinton or President Clinton to satisfy political correctness which has taken deep roots in current political and social structure within the United States.
In summary, Senator Clinton is the best qualified person to lead the United States at this time. I hope she goes to Pennsylvania primary even if she looses Texas and Ohio and make her voice heard in Denver. She should not be intimidated by Democratic big wigs and should not be afraid to run as an independent candidate in the upcoming election. After all she has backing of her supporters all the way.

Thank for allowing me to express my thoughts.

Just in from the campaign trail: Hillary has invited the fine folks of Texas (apparently all women) to pick up their brooms and turn on their vacuums to help her clean up the the White House. Talk about gender pandering, anyone?