Key Obama Adviser Mocks Clinton's Tears

McPeak sounds a bit too cranky. Glad Obama got him back in line - which is pretty impressive, considering that McPeak is older and "more experienced" than Obama.

I am a republican and was going to vote for Obama. I had voted for Bush twice, but ever since the debate, he reminds me too much of George Bush. So I am voting for Hillary Clinton.

Better see the front page of the NY times Obama's closet door is opening

Better see the front page of the new york times..
The closet door is opening..

And why is Obama camp angry when people say his middle name Hussein?

I see articles where they say Hillary Rodham Clinton and she does not complain.

No one should be ashamed of their birth name.

The arrogance of this BO camp is to be pitied. I look at this bunch of fools--Oprah, Caroline, and Teddy--and revolt at the sight. Now, driver's licenses to illegals? Insanity. God Help us from this mindless pack.

Obama-President
Edwards-Vice President
As an "Independent" that's a ticket I could support. If Clinton is on a ticket with Obama I will vote Republican. I'm clear on this!....

FULL DISCLOSURE: I'm an 'Independent' who is voting for Obama. For the life of me, one cannot understand why 'some' are thinking of putting Hillary and Bill Clinton back in the White House is mind numbing to me. These are [two] people who have so much negative baggage they could fill a cargo hull at JFK airport in New York City. Never mind the personal [vendettas] they will try to score with people that opposed them during this race. They played the race card with African Americans who stood by them thru thick and then. When one of their own tried to run against them, the wondered, "How dare you? Stay in your place." African Americans don't have to be beholden to the Clinton's for the rest of their lives. Gimme a break! These two are unbelievable at what they will do to those that oppose them.

EJ

"Hillary might be loved by the left." Are you kidding? Ted Kennedy and MoveOn.org endorsed Obama.

2009 Where Are You?, your "It was promised, yes. It just wasn't delivered" was direct towards Sen. Obama. But it just as easily defines the Democratic Party in general. For example, over the past 60 years--the vast majority of which Democrats had control over Congress; control of many state legislatures; and control of most urban city governments--the Democrats have been elected and re-elected, time and time again, on curing the ailments of education.

Now as for universal health care, during the debate the other night Sen. Clinton made a remark that seems to have gone unnoticed. She mentioned that those individuals who are pleased with their current medical insurance can keep that medical insurance..."for now." Clearly, despite claims to the contrary, the Democrats want the federal government to eventually take over the entire health care system and do away with private medical insurance. Their argument will be it is unfair for some people to have better medical insurance plans than others. So everyone should have the same plan.

Be careful what you wish for! When the federal government takes full control of universal health care, then they will mandate: what foods are healthier for us to eat; what beverages are healthier for us to drink; what automobiles are safer for us to drive; and eventually how many children parents can have (over population is unhealthy). We are already seeing signs of this type of control. The Mississippi State Legislature just introduced a bill that would make it illegal for state-licensed restaurants to serve obese patrons. In New Mexico groups, like the Sierra Club, are lobbying for a sin tax to be levied on televisions and video games to fight childhood obesity. Imagine what it will be like when the federal bureaucrats can withold medical benefits based on an individual's failure to comply with the mandates!

General McPeak was apparently speaking for himself and not Senator Obama. Fair enough. When he is representing Senator Obama, the General should most definitely reflect the man he represents. He did not here.

That said, General McPeak, said what nearly everyone I know is thinking. I thought exactly the same thing when I heard her say she 'found her voice'. You all know, you did too.

Okay, so how come the media is not bringing up Denise Rich contributing 100,000 to Bill Clinton and Marc Rich gets pardoned?

Hillary's brothers asked for some people to be pardoned (and they were) and Hillary says she did not know about it!! Give me a break.

What about Hillary's indicted campaign treasurer in 2005? (For failing to disclose contributions)

What about the Middle Easst being huge (millions of dollars)contributors to the Clinton library (which won't disclose a comprehensive list of donors)?

And the Kazakhstan billionaire who donated to the Clinton library?

How are you going to get energy reform when the Clintons are in bed with OPEC?

The Clinton administration gave the big oil companies a pass because of their contributions!!

Obama 08

I worked for Bill's campaign in the nineties, but even I see the writing on the wall. Hillary may be loved by the left . . .but she can't turn around the momentum of hatred that she stokes on the right. Take off the blinders and realize that Obama will increase voter turnout. He has the coat tails we need as DEMS!!

Typical OBAMA DIRTY TRICKS AND DIVISIVNESS -

NOBAMA'S CAMPAIGN IS A SLOGAN-CAMPAIGN AND PHONY!

HE LOST MY ENTIRE FAMILY'S SUPPORT...

WE ARE VOTING FOR SENATOR CLINTON!!

That was a knockout blow. Can she take it if came from that mythical "vast right-wing conspiracy"?

Alright, coffee done, cigarette ignored, fat as hell and still stuffing in snacks - I am no prize!!!

Back to the hammer and grindstone for another few hours. Will check back and see if anyone has found some new insights to back up or refute. And I don't mean one example please.

There is an evidential law and it goes like this: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

I know that Obama is not responsible for the reconstruction, from the ground up, of an entire state.

But he is also not capable of a reconstruction, from the ground up, of an entire nation, like he seems to be claiming each day before the press.

2009 Where Are You

Thank you so much for your insight. Your comments comparing President Bush and Obama are so accurate.

We can all agree that Obama draws huge crowds, inspires his supporters, and speaks like MLK. However, for me that is the weakness of his campaign. Because he attracts such frenzied followers, it almost seems like hero worship. If you look closely, he has a very sketchy resume.

His decision about Iraq from Day One is being touted as a sign of great presidential judgment. Folks, Obama wasn't in the Senate at the time to make that historic vote. Once elected, he voted consistently for Senate war funding.

I want to judge all the candidates fairly. But, if you follow the blog comments there is a pattern of attacking Hillary and less time on how Obama is going to govern.

One more thing, I remember the mood of the country at the time of the Iraq War. If you trace the media coverage, they did not challenge or check the facts about the case for war. It seems, they are doing it again by promoting an Obama Presidency.

2009 where are you, i continue to appreciate the info you put out there. i do get sick of the credit he claims for stuff he didn't do, like the ethics bill. or when he claims in a debate that he sponsored an illinois bill he voted present on, but he did NOT sponsor the bill - a matter of public record, then later, in a much less public forum and when pressed on it comes up with something about oh it was a similar bill. . anyway, i find it so tiresome when i see obamaites say oh yes he did whatever, he said so, just see his website or listen to his speeches....i do believe we all know that just because someone says something doesn't make it true. (by the way, i'm an old hippie (female) who grew up and turned into a lawyer, which as a young hippie i would never have believed i would do, but that's what happens when we grow up, we learn a few things and realize doing is more important than talking)

well, work calls. yes, I still have a job. And no, I don't think Obama is going to wreck my job.

I just think a little back-down-to-earth reality would make it easier to support him.

A handsome, funny, friendly, well-spoken, but unchallengeable know-it-all (I know, I fit the last part, don't tell me :) makes it hard for me to support.

A little more humility and a lot less 'I am never wrong' might make it a simple jump from one side of the same ship to the other.

:)
Ciao for now - and if you look at writing styles, you can tell who is changing their name, and who is not.

I don't know who you were out there that supported me, but I thank you nonetheless.

and for anyone that cares, the Chicago Tribune will gladly explain the truth about the 130 Present votes that Obama didn't have the nerve to vote Up or Down on.

It wasn't about not wanting to vote yes on an imperfect bill. You can simply vote no, change an 'a' to an 'e' in one of the lines of the bill and resubmit it.

He didn't vote Up or Down because he couldn't face the consequences of his actions.

That is a problem the press outside of Chicago has not even begun to question. But let that be McCain, or Clinton who failed to vote a hundred times out of political expediency and see the screaming and outcry you would get for the Obamathon.

Distract, divert, dodge, and duck. But never answer the question. He has taught us well, already.

TomJ,

great comments. I never said he didn't accomplish things.

He is just never wrong. Not one reporter who brings up a negative has it right. You misrepresent me. You are distorting the facts. I never said that. That is not what I meant. You weren't there. I never voted that way. I don't know about those things.

Not one media source. Not one reporter. Not one blogger. Not one politician. Not one candidate. Not his hometown newspapers, radio shows, or talk shows other than Oprah.

He has a 100% accuracy rate, unchallengeable by anyone, anywhere, at anytime.

So I am sorry if I hold him to a high standard, one in which he sets for himself.

His resume is light. His effect on Chicago and Illinois, as evidenced by what it was like before and after his dash through the state house, is light. He promises things that FDR, JFK, Regan, and others couldn't deliver and he promises them as if they are already a given, simply because they are thoughts in his head.

He has the arrogance of having done little without being questioned on its merits.

He has the confidence afforded to someone that is above question despite the realities of the results.

Clinton is not perfect. I am not saying that at all.

But again, distracting the debate away from what he HAS done is the only way to avoid the conclusion that all those pretty words are what they are - words in a vaccum of results.

A few bills here and there. Fine. But this universal, tectonic shift he is promising in everything from the air we breath to wages we earn, deserves more than pretty sentence devoid of facts and examples.

Miracle workers should have the miracles they performed set out front, for all the world to see. And Chicago and Illinois 'ain't them'.